Julie. I just wanted to let everyone know that I am unfortunately not feeling particularly well, so we'll be camera off for this meeting.

So there's no disrespect intended, and I'm very much looking forward to both the discussion and presentations.

Thanks, Dad. So, hello.

So tonight, before we start public comments, as always, the public can say what they would like on these comments, but it would be very helpful to us if we could try to save any comments that aren't directly related to tonight's budget discussion for Wednesday, which is two days from now, because we have a lot to get through, and I want to make sure we give it the time that we need.

Okay. Jeremy, did you have a question?

Yeah. So piggybacking off that statement to the public on public comment, I noticed a separate item on the agenda regarding the history of funding for full-day kindergarten and kindergarten fees. While this topic impacts me directly, I have a kid entering kindergarten in the fall. We've already talked about this, and I want to keep us moving forward.

I don't see any new significant information in the packet, and I don't think separating it out in a separate discussion is warranted.

I'd rather focus on developing the budget. Okay. I have one chat about all fees together.

We have a tight tideline.

Jeremy, you're actually out of order right now. We're doing public comment, so you can say that later, like when we start our discussion.

It's okay.

All right.

Hopefully we can focus.

Okay.

Mira Balenke.

Thank you so much for letting us speak.

So I have two quick comments.

So I was very disappointed to see that the administrative budget went up from February 12th to today.

It's absolutely appalling that at a time when we have such problems with the budget that instead of cutting any fat that we can, we instead are increasing our administrative budget. Like even if it's not 40,000, which is how much it's gone up, it's, we just saved 10,000. That 10,000 will mean a lot to parents when it's, whether it's reducing fees for the bus or reducing fees for athletics, or even maybe just running one more elective at the high school that you've had to cancel. That's one thing. The other thing is I've noticed that due to the budget cuts, the middle school will now have only two teams. And I'm concerned that basically we're going to have a math, accelerated math team and the everybody else team. And I would like to propose that we use this as an opportunity to actually create an accelerated math team and an accelerated humanities team so that students have an opportunity to show their diverse talents and could say, you know, this is the year I will lean into math or this is the year I will lean into humanities.

And then we should continue with this idea that we've, for some reason, eliminated honors English and honors history at the high school at the ninth grade level. And so kids who want to, who are motivated, who want to work hard, have only one option, which is math, which just might not be their thing. By giving kids more options, we could recognize their diverse talents, their diverse interests, and honestly make Sharon a better school.

Thank you. Thanks.

Thanks, Mira. And I appreciate you staying pretty close to two minutes.

And Alan is now going to keep the time.

So next up, I see Katie Conroy.

Hello, my name is Katie Conroy. Two years ago, our town offered free full day kindergarten to all students entering kindergarten.

Our school committee, superintendent and town as a whole supported and voted to have free full day kindergarten as we all agreed how necessary and beneficial it is for our children. It was supposed to be free full day kindergarten going forward funded by our school budget. As we all know, this was rescinded for the current academic year. If the town superintendent and the school committee all agreed and supported free full day kindergarten, what exactly happened between 2023 and today? Can we trust and rely on the school committee to follow through with their promises or just expect them to change their minds on a whim during a hard budget year? Currently, Sharon is only one out of 14 towns in all of Massachusetts that is still charging for full day kindergarten.

We should be embarrassed to be included in the statistic.

This past week, I learned that in fiscal year 2023, the finance committee gave a one time allocation of $500,000 from free cash to the school budget to fund free full day kindergarten.

In fiscal year 2024, the $500,000 expected from the state was not provided, but the baseline for the school budget went up $500,000 with a town increase.

The original $500,000 was still in fact included in the budget. In fiscal year 2025, the school budget bump was 3.1%, the same as the town budget. The $500,000 that was added to the budget in fiscal year 2023 was never taken out of the school budget. This money that was originally earmarked to fund free full day kindergarten is still included in our current school budget from our taxes and being used to fund other budget items. With the current fee of $3,635 per child for full day kindergarten, parents of kindergartners are being double charged to make up for a short while in the budget. Targeting young families to pay for kindergarten is an easy way to add money to the budget, but it is a financial hardship for some families and unethical.

Our school budget is more than $52 million per year, and the inflated kindergarten fee is $600,000.

The entire kindergarten fee is about 1% of the total budget. Aren't our kindergartners worth 1% of our school budget? I certainly believe that they are. Tonight, the school committee will be discussing free full day kindergarten.

I am thankful to have had the opportunity to speak with each school committee member individually about free full day kindergarten.

And I learned that six out of seven members said in theory they are supportive of free full day kindergarten if we can find them in the budget. I am looking forward to the kindergarten discussion, and I am hopeful that the school committee and superintendent can work together to do what is right for our youngest learners.

Thank you. Thank you. And next we have Hannah Moore.

Hi there. My name is Hannah Moore. I'm one of the Spanish teachers at the elementary level at Sharon.

I'd like to speak on behalf of the entire elementary Spanish team. So in a world that is increasingly interconnected, the ability to speak multiple languages is a crucial skill. Cutting back on Spanish education would be such a disservice to our students' future.

I strongly urge you to consider the long-term impact of the Spanish in elementary schools and ensure that our children continue to benefit from this valuable opportunity.

It is important to think about the long-term impact these decisions will have on our school community.

The Spanish language program does more than just teach a language.

It fosters a sense of inclusion, cultural appreciation, and global awareness among our students.

These qualities are what make our school district unique and prepare students to thrive in an increasingly diverse world. This program has strong support from the community and for good reason. And over the past 10 years, our community has found ways to preserve it. Data from the upper grades reveals that far more Spanish students are earning the Massachusetts state seal of bioliteracy than any other language.

And we believe that is due to our work that we're building those blocks in the elementary school.

Just a couple of ways in which the elementary Spanish teachers are integrated in each of the schools.

We recently created a presentation for teachers and staff that includes a welcome video for newcomer students whose first language is Spanish. We provide a master list of Spanish phrases for teachers to use with Spanish-speaking students.

We always try to be as helpful and flexible as possible.

We're often asked to translate documents or interpret in meetings in each of the elementary schools.

We have planned events that's a Spanish Aviation Day happening this month, which is a presentation with the Latin professionals in aerospace.

We have also planned interdisciplinary lessons with Anna Smith, the Cottage Street School librarian, to highlight Hispanic authors.

And in addition to that, we've worked in conjunction with the PTO to host an all-school assembly in June, happening this June, to highlight some Hispanic culture through music and dance. So let's just continue to uphold the mission of Sharon to nurture the students to be caring and engaged citizens of our world by keeping the elementary Spanish-speaking language program. Thank you. Okay.

Thanks, Ms. Moore.

And next we have Ms. Rutecki.

Hannah did really well speaking on behalf of our elementary school team, so I just want to second everything that she said, but I'll yield time to others in the open forum. Oh, there is, we don't yield time, so you still have the rest of your time.

I'm done.

Okay.

Well, thank you very much.

Okay, next, Benjamin Wolfe.

Hi, I'm Ben Wolfe.

I'm currently a senior at the high school, and I'm a member of the of Trium, which is the Music Honors Society at the high school.

And I understand that the budget, that the elementary instrumental education has been theoretically preserved on the budget, but that it is still on the table to be removed if the Finance Committee gets its way in the 3.56% budget increase, as opposed to the 4%. And I just wanted to advocate for keeping it on there.

If we have to make cuts elsewhere, I think that it's, I think that, pardon the pun, it's instrumental to keep instrumented education within our schools.

Studies have shown that instrumented education improves math, math scores on standardized tests, reading scores, it helps improve, it helps improve cooperation between students that, it helps improve cooperation skills, because you have to work together with your, with other, with your other play, musicians to create that music. And I think that it's, it would be doing a disservice to our community to take that out of the budget.

Thank you.

Oh, I said, sorry, I said, thank you to Benjamin, and that we always appreciate from hearing from our students.

And we appreciate that you took the time to come to this meeting. So thank you very much.

Ms. Crosby.

Thanks.

So last Wednesday, we saw a presentation that many of you praised, but I remain incredibly concerned.

There were inconsistencies throughout it. The enrollment data showed we're dropping by 112 kids, I believe, from this year to next.

But then the very next slide said we're losing 52 at the elementary, like nine or something at the high school, and we're going up at the middle school. And let me assure you, those three numbers do not add to what was on the slide before it, which showed we were going down by 112 kids. Your slides variously showed that the athletic cost coming from the budget was 704,000 and 822,000.

Please pick one. Your line item budget was 822. So I'm guessing that's more accurate.

Between the line item budget of 822 plus your proposed fee increase for athletics, which would take it from 288,000, you would be adding 43,000.

Your total athletic cost for next year is projected to be 18% over this year's adjusted athletic budget, which has already been increased by 70,000.

Not once has this committee or this superintendent presented what it costs to run each sport, what the participation is in each sport, and never in the history of ever have you all had a conversation about burgeoning athletic costs that just can't be controlled.

I also noted in your enrollment that you are running class sizes of 16 and 17 in two schools in first grade. That's bonkers.

Your other school has 22. You should be cutting two teachers.

You're also running a really small class size in second grade at East, while the other schools have larger. You could cut a section there. Look, I found you three teachers.

You could cut right away. You should cut flesh.

You said it's not effective.

We have spent millions of dollars on it over the past 10 years, and the program has literally never been shown to accomplish anything.

And you said it. So please make better decisions.

And Dr. Dr.

Dr.

Okay, that was, we're going over time. Please, please try to keep to the time and listen to what Alan says. I believe this is Richard Kramer.

Two minutes.

Yes, it is Richard Kramer.

Every year seems to be an annual tradition to look into administrative cuts in the school budget, as it should be. This year is no different.

But as been mentioned by a previous speaker, I noticed that the administrative budget has increased 40,000 since the previous version from last month.

It's ridiculous.

I believe that the dean of academic affairs, a position that we've been looking to cut for several years and was on the block for this year, has been protected again.

And I don't know why. I understand that would be about a $40,000 cut, which could be redeployed in any number of ways. You know, this dean of academic affairs, he's like that trick birthday candle that never goes out.

Well, the party's over and it's time to put that candle out. That cut needs to be sustained.

The only other point I'd make is that there's been a federal executive order that's targeted DEI and threatens to cut off recipients of federal funding if they persist with DEI. As I've mentioned in the past, I think DEI is highly discriminatory.

I find it offensive and anti-Semitic.

It needs to be purged off of our town school website.

It's still there.

I think it makes us vulnerable to federal cuts.

Let's get it off of there before we lose some serious money. Thank you.

Sorry.

Can you guys hear me?

Hello? Yes, we can hear you. Sorry, I couldn't see or hear. I'm hopefully I didn't count me time there. So tonight, the school committee, I'm George Ann Lewis, by the way. Tonight, the school committee is considering a budget that exceeds the sustainable level set by the finance committee, a group that has kept our town financially stable and affordable for decades. Their careful stewardship has made our community a great value balancing strong schools with responsible fiscal management.

For the second year in a row, next year we'll make the third, the school committee is pushing for higher spending, requiring tax increases, risking our town's credit rating. They have repeatedly sought excessive funding without serious cost management, relied on one-time payments for routine expenses like curriculum, made short-sighted financial decisions like out-of-cycle increases for the superintendent, and signing a contract that continues to result in staff reductions in the whole workforce, and misunderstood state funding promising free kindergarten only to revoke it after the first year. None of this is in the best interest of our students, our teachers, or our instructional assistants.

Our town's financial stability didn't happen by accident.

It must not be undermined by unchecked spending.

The school committee must take responsibility for making tough but necessary budget decisions, not simply ask taxpayers to foot the bill at town meeting.

This is an attempt to guilt us in town meeting at doing it for the kids when nothing in the past or present budget is for the students, teachers, or instructional assistants.

I need everybody in the community to listen to this because I'm speaking to you as much as I am.

The school committee, our taxes are 15 percent of our per capita income, placing us 21st in the state.

At the last financial committee member meeting, members voted on an amount that protects and recognizes the reality of our tax hardship hardships as we're in the middle of high school, library, and now water plant overrides.

The school committee is fractured and needs to regroup and collaborate with the select board and financial committee as is afforded to them under Massachusetts law so that we can engage in better and best practices and collaborate as a community to continue to have great value in our property and strong schools.

Thank you.

Thank you, Ms.

Lewis.

All right, Ms.

Fogoda.

Ms. Fogoda.

Hi there.

Thank you for the opportunity to speak today.

And I wanted to begin by acknowledging the tremendous work and dedication that's gone into developing this year's school budget. I know that balancing a budget is always a challenge, particularly with rising salaries, increasing retirement costs, and the need to maintain the high standards we've come to expect from our schools.

As the mother of a high school sophomore, I have a deep personal interest in the decisions we make today as they will affect my daughter and all the students who follow.

Over the years, I've heard many discussions about potential cuts to critical programs, eliminating middle school teaching cohorts this year, removing AP courses at the high school level, and discontinuing the foreign language in the elementary schools program.

Each year, we seem to find ourselves in a similar situation.

We're forced to make difficult choices that have a lasting impact on the quality of education we provide.

I want to acknowledge that the financial challenges we face are real, and I understand that difficult decisions must be made. However, I also believe that these issues keep resurfacing because we're not taking the long-term sustainable actions needed to avoid them. Every year, we continue to ask ourselves which programs will be cut next, and each year, we seem to be asking this question more urgently as we face a growing need for cuts. This cycle of annual cuts cannot be allowed to continue indefinitely.

We cannot keep finding ourselves in the same situation, only worse year after year. We need to find a sustainable solution, a long-term strategy that allows us to maintain the excellence of our school system without continually trimming the programs that are essential for our children's success. One of the main reasons I chose to raise my daughter and Sharon was the strength of its public education system.

I wanted a school district that would challenge students at all levels, expose them to diverse subjects, and prepare them for college and beyond. Sharon has earned a reputation as one of the top school districts in the state, and that would be a great deal.

Okay, thanks, Valerie.

Thank you very much.

Miriam Martin.

Hi, good evening. My name is Miriam Martin. I have one kid in the middle school and one in elementary school.

I recently read the proposal reductions to close the gap of over $7,000, and the cuts that I have seen are targeting teachers in Sharon Middle School, such as the science teachers, four core teachers, and other math teachers that focus on what to me is fundamental to academic education.

I do understand that balancing the budget is extremely difficult, but I would like to ask the school committee to review those cuts and find other creative ways that bridge this gap without affecting or impacting core academic subjects in Sharon Middle Schools or international languages in elementary school.

Thank you.

Thank you, Ms. Martin.

And next, we have Michelle Thaler.

Yeah, I just wanted to briefly speak about something that has, I know, bubbled up in the most recent budget season.

I have two young children, one of whom is in first grade at East, and just from those interactions, I can see firsthand the importance of keeping class sizes at a reasonable level and as small as humanly possible.

I recognize this year is an absolutely wild year for budgeting, but the prospect of cutting a first and a second grade classroom at East definitely alarms me and I know alarms a number of other parents as first and second grade are prime years for identifying and beginning to address social, emotional, and learning disabilities in children.

I also know for a fact that East's rising second grade class includes a large number of 504 plans as well as IEPs that are primarily managed by the teachers.

Increasing class numbers for first and second graders would be a recipe for disaster.

Doing so would limit already squeezed teachers from serving and observing children at a vital developmental stage where problems are either identified and addressed or overlooked and left to grow into bigger, more challenging learning-related problems later. Teacher attention would be disproportionately focused on only the highest needs children, leading to inadequate attention for children with more modest or less obvious needs. It would also impede learning and create an unnecessarily chaotic environment for all students in these classrooms, not only those with special needs. I urge the committee to reconsider making a cut that would adversely impact some of the district's youngest students in a potentially major way. Thank you.

Thank you.

And next we have Mr.

O'Brien.

Hi, good evening.

I will piggyback on what Benjamin Wolfe said about music. First off, good job young man. Public speaking isn't easy, so good for you on that. I want to throw my support behind Miss Gilman, the music teacher at Cottage.

Both my daughters love music and my third grader, she practices her recorder every single day. She absolutely loves it. Both my daughters also love library time and having gym twice a week. I hear that these items may be on the chopping block at the elementary school level. Music is language.

These things need to stay, and the thing that I would cut would be Spanish.

I can speak Spanish above an intermediate level, and I didn't learn Spanish until the sixth grade. Many families, like mine in town, my kids are half Japanese.

Many families in town are teaching their kids Japanese, Chinese, Arabic, Hebrew, Russian, and other languages.

It would be easier for parents like me to teach my kids Japanese if they weren't also learning Spanish at the same time. So please keep the elementary schedule as it is. That's all I have for tonight, and I'll talk about what I want to talk about on Wednesday.

Thank you. Thank you.

Thank you.

Um, so Craig, you can you please state your full name, please?

Yeah, Craig Sherman.

Sherman.

Okay, thank you. Um, forgive me. I, at the beginning, I heard somebody say something about please limit your comments to something.

I couldn't hear it. There's some noise. I've got a couple of kids in the house. So, um, it was a little chaotic.

Forgive me if what I'm about to say doesn't fit into what you want us to talk about tonight.

But, um, in terms of, you know, budgeting and then people are again talking about not, uh, you know, allowing full day free kindergarten, not cutting teachers at first or second grade at East. The budgeting here in this town, it does seem a little like the school committee doesn't have a full handle the way they should.

And, and, you know, that might be a blanket statement, but I understand from things I've, I've read that like superintendent was given a raise outside of his contractual, you know, the schedule for yearly pay. Like if we're having a hard time keeping all of our teachers, keeping all of our programming, why are you guys authorizing a raise outside of the superintendent's already contracted schedule of salary year over year? Like that just does not make sense. And I just think, you know, as, as, as much as we have expectations on the schools and what we want from the schools, we have expectations that the school committee is going to be fiscally responsible with our tax dollars and like things like that. And I realize it might only be 10,000 from what I read, but that's 10,000 you could put towards any of these other things that we're talking about.

You guys got to do, I think a better job of being stewards of our dollars.

Thank you, Mr. Sherman.

And finally, our last speaker, Phil Carmody.

Hello, good afternoon.

Good evening.

Can you hear me okay? Yes.

My camera's not working.

Sorry.

I am here.

Four quick things to do with the budget.

I'm concerned that the administration savings have been reduced since last time the budget was presented.

I'm concerned with the reduction of team sizes for the middle school with a consequent increase in class sizes.

I'm delighted to see the savings coming forward for PE and wellness in 11th and 12th grade.

It fully supports waivers for students that are active in sports in other ways. So that's a great saving.

And as a parent of a now 10th grader, my son was first year through the FLAS program in first grade. I can say firsthand it's been a phenomenal program with phenomenal success, inspired a huge love of learning for language, which spreads throughout his love of learning for school more generally too. So despite what other speakers may have said, firsthand, two thumbs up for FLAS. Thank you.

Thanks, Mr. Carmody.

And so, so Jen, you got your hand in like, just as I said, Phil was last.

So I'm going to let you go. Ms.

Weiner.

Sorry, thank you. I don't have a big speech or long speech.

I just wanted to say, I'm going to lower my hand here, that I really want to support all of the teachers and all the programs.

I have kids in the middle school to sixth grade and eighth grader.

And every year, sort of this idea of, you know, ending the FLAS program or the music program, or now it's one of the teams in middle school. And I just, I feel like it is so hard, of course, on the kids, but on the teachers themselves, who they might have a job and then they don't have a job. And then now they might have to teach, you know, two teams have to have to teach, you know, three different class. I don't know all the details. I just know, I just really feel for the teachers in this town who it's kind of always up and down. And I really support them. I guess that's all I want to say. I don't really have budget, big budget ideas or my own pet project.

But I just think it's, it's, it's really unfortunate for them. That's it. Thanks.

I was trying to say thank you for your comments.

And thanks.

Thank you to the community for being kind and staying on topic.

So tonight, we're next going to move to our fiscal year operating budget discussion.

So let me, if I may take a moment.

So what we're doing is we're going to do like two levels of assessment.

So the priorities committee, which is a combination of the select board, the finance committee and the school committee, okayed a 4% increase in the budget over last year. When the finance committee met, they disagreed with that number.

They had voted no, but the select board had voted yes. So that's why the select board and the school committee voted for the 4%.

The finance committee said that basically that they did not want to dip into our excess levy capacity.

And one of the commenters said it nicely, because there's other things, the library, the high school, several other different expenses that are hitting families at the same time, and they did not want to dip into excess levy capacity.

So they gave us a 3.56%

increase.

So with the 4% increase, we need to cut about $800,000 out of the budget.

With a 3.56%

increase, we need to cut out an additional like $250,000.

After that, we'll be discussing fees.

And we, I'm not sure how that's going to go right now. But I think, Peter, did you want to say anything before the school committee has a discussion?

Peter Robinson I'm happy to share the, again, my, the initial proposal to get to 4.0 again, if people want to review it before they discuss, but it's up to them. Peter Robinson Okay.

Jane, do we have the, I forget what the document was called.

Do we have like the the list of the- Peter Robinson Yep, she's got it. Peter Robinson The superintendent's recommendations?

Peter Robinson Yep. Peter Robinson Okay, because I have it too, but yours is probably better. Okay. Peter Robinson So these are the reductions that I'm recommending in order to reach the 4% target set by the priorities committee.

So it would include the district restructuring, which I spoke about last week, Peter Robinson Elementary specials reconfiguration, and .1 elementary art teacher reduction.

Those are all part of that reconfiguration.

Peter Robinson The four middle school teachers resulting in the joint team at the middle school.

Peter Robinson There was a visual arts teacher.

There was a correction from last week. Last week, we were using a figure that was based upon the person that was lowest in seniority, but we had a resignation that came in just like last week during the meeting, or that we learned about right before that meeting.

So that number was changed.

And then I shifted because of some of the concern around Peter Robinson The physical education waivers and the fact that the Department of Education really is not forthcoming in kind of coming forth with an official statement saying that they support the waivers, regardless of the fact that there are numerous districts, including Oliver Ames and Easton and others that have used it regularly for some time. Peter Robinson I took the reduction right below that district wide technology integration Peter Robinson And substituted that for the physical education.

We still will continue to explore the physical education possibility and do it for and offer it for small groups of kids if we can get some kind of validation from the state. But the state that we've asked for that in the past, and they have been Peter Robinson Noncommittal in their support.

Then there's the 15% athletic and transportation fee. Peter Robinson The dumpster charge, which is wrapping the dumpster into our budget, but what would cost us in that comes up with enough reductions to meet the 4.0 target.

So those are the only reductions, though they all are painful, obviously.

And I was trying to, you know, to advocate for a little bit greater funding this year, but understand that that was not the case. But all these are the reductions that I have recommended.

Peter Robinson The dumpster charge, I have recommended this time to meet that gap. Peter Robinson Anything else on this list is not being currently proposed by me. Peter Robinson But if the 3 point, I'm sorry, I had the wrong number 3.54%,

this would get us to 3.54%,

where it says the FinCom cut list?

Peter Robinson Yes, I put those in there.

My understanding of the priorities committee should be the one who sets the target.

But, you know, but if this is what would be necessary to meet the FinCom's desire to lower the target that was voted at priorities committee.

Peter Robinson Thank you, Peter. Peter Robinson Okay, scrolling down. Should I keep scrolling down or stop here? Peter Robinson Can you make it like just try and wish it to be a little bit smaller, but also readable, so we can see more. I think we should start looking at the actual initial proposal.

So, Jeremy, would you like to kick off the discussion?

Peter Robinson Yeah, I have a point of order. So, it was appropriate for me to speak then as I was proposing an amendment to the agenda.

So, I know that you have different rules for different people, but I'm allowed to propose an amendment to the agenda.

Peter Robinson Okay, I'm sorry, Jeremy, I'm sorry.

I didn't realize that you could do that. Peter Robinson That's what you should do to be polite. I know that you have a lot of members talk. So, thank you. Peter Robinson Okay, okay. Peter Robinson I noticed that there is a separate discussion to discuss kindergarten fee history on the agenda. I know that it's important.

It impacts me personally, but I prefer to focus fully on developing the budget. We have a tight timeline.

We have three meetings in one week. And I don't think it makes sense to talk about the kindergarten fees separate from the overall budget. Like we need to be balancing all these things. Peter Robinson So, as a result, I'd like to make the following motion. I move to amend tonight's agenda by striking the proposed discussion about the history of kindergarten fees. I'm fine with discussing the fees within the broader context of the budget. But given that we've already discussed this in January, I don't think we need a separate overview of how we got to where we are. We can spend the budget however we want. Peter Robinson Is there a second on that? Is there a second on that motion?

Peter Robinson I'll second the motion.

Peter Robinson Good. Thank you, Dan. Is there a discussion?

Dan I can kick off. If something has changed since when we voted on the kindergarten fee, that might warrant a new discussion about it. My position on it hasn't changed.

I voted yes on it. I would still vote yes. If other people's positions have changed.

That might warrant it. But if nothing has changed, I agree. It's I'm generally not in favor of informational only topics.

I did see somebody did a nice job preparing an informational presentation on it. So I would love to be able to include that in the packet for the public if it's for the public's purposes.

But I don't see the need to relitigate anything unless something's changed.

Peter Robinson Okay, thanks, Dan. And Shauna, you are next. Shauna You are next.

Shauna All right.

Thank you. Can you hear me? SPEAKER_UNKNOWN: Peter Robinson Oh, yes. Shauna All right.

Jane, would you mind just scrolling up a little bit? Just so we see the whole 4.0. Please?

And thank you. Thank you. All right.

Peter Robinson Sorry, Shauna to cut you off. Julie, we have a motion on the table that's been seconded.

Shauna Yes, we're discussing the motion, Shauna.

Shauna My bad. Shauna To table that or to to not discuss to take the to amend the agenda to remove the conversation about kindergarten fees. So is that Shauna I'm a no. I'm a no. Shauna No, you don't want to talk about the kindergarten or yes, you do want to talk about kindergarten.

Shauna No, I don't agree with the amendment.

Yes, I do want to talk about kindergarten.

Shauna Okay.

Okay.

Adam, do you have a comment on this motion?

Peter Robinson I do in last Wednesday's meeting, we deferred this conversation and said explicitly that we would talk about it tonight.

So I don't like the idea of telling the public, we're going to defer a conversation.

And then we get to that night and say, well, we just don't feel like talking about it tonight.

So I would be in favor of maintaining that conversation.

If it so happens that we have kind of the meaningful bulk of that conversation within the context of the budget more broadly.

So that there isn't as much to discuss.

I think by the time we get to that agenda item, we can just note that there is less to discuss and it'll wrap quickly.

Thanks, Adam.

Avi.

Avi Avi Avi Avi Avi Avi Avi Avi Avi Avi Avi Avi Avi Avi Avi Avi Avi Avi Avi Avi Avi Avi But that is the only reason why it's on the agenda. It's not a my understanding, to be clear, as the person asked for this to be agended, was not to make a plea that we make change here or to relitigate the situation.

Hey, thank you, Avi.

Jeremy, you can clarify the motion.

We can discuss kindergarten fees in the context of the budget, but there's a prepared presentation on the history of kindergarten fees that I don't think is particularly relevant to that discussion.

And I agree with Dan. If people want to read about it, we should include it in the packet.

Okay, so what's the motion?

To strike the agenda item discussing the history of kindergarten fees and move the discussion of kindergarten fees to the discussion of the rest of the budget.

Okay, I will take a vote.

Jeremy?

Yes.

Avi?

Yes, I agree that conversation can happen within the scope of the rest of the budget.

Adam?

No.

Shauna?

No.

Dan?

Yes.

Oh, boy.

I think I'm going to say no just because the member of the public did request it. So I think that's fair.

So I believe the motion fails.

Alan? Did you get Alan? Did you get Alan? Oh, Alan. Oh, Alan. Where are you?

Sorry, Alan.

I'm a no.

You're a no. Okay. So the motion passes at four to three, correct?

So we won't be... No. The motion does not carry.

The motion does not carry.

SPEAKER_UNKNOWN: Okay.

So the motion does...

Sorry, I got confused with the motion.

So it does not carry.

So we will continue on.

All right. Thank you. So I would like to begin by talking about the proposed budget, the 4% budget.

So if...

Can we have a conversation about this, what we have before us?

Is there anyone who would like to kick us off?

Shana?

Okay.

Thanks.

Can you hear me?

Yes.

All right.

So I am concerned now that we are eliminating the 1.2 PE teacher from elementary schools.

And we have put back PE in the high school, first and foremost.

Our youngest kids need to move their bodies and need to have physical education as much as possible.

Second, we have class sizes in some schools that are at 16 and other schools that are at 22.

I understand.

I, of all people, understand the impact of small class sizes in the elementary school setting, especially in our most formative years of first K1 and 2.

However, the reality is, is that we are not able to sustain a public school with class sizes of 16.

It's just not able to be done.

I can tell you in Cottage, we have had teachers bumping back and forth between grades because enrollment changes.

That's just part of the deal. And I think right now we have to look to see where, where do we have excess teachers and how do we restructure?

Either riff them, unfortunately, or move them to another position.

Next, we have targeted the middle school, an entire team.

Yet, we were sent a copy of the course description guide for the high school in which we've added, added more courses for our kids.

I am not pinning one against the other. However, I cannot agree to have one school adding additional courses while we're decimating an entire team.

Not only is it a team, but the entire experience of our kids is going to be changed if we go to a split team.

I understand that the projected levels are decreasing.

Great.

We're not there yet.

Within the next two years, yes, but not at this time.

Not, we do, we're not in a place right now that we can do this.

We don't even know the impact of this.

Our superintendent wasn't able to explain it to us.

How are we adding classes, adding more choices at one school?

How are we having class sizes of 16 at one school?

Yet, the disproportionality of what our kids are experiencing amongst the schools is so variable.

And it's not okay.

It's not okay.

So, I will start off with that.

Okay. So, let me just clarify.

So, I understand I'm taking here. So, you're saying we should add back the PE teacher, cut the two elementary school teachers at East that was in the 2.76%

plan.

And you would like to add back the middle school team.

So, that's four teachers, about a little over 300,000.

And then, do you have anything you'd like to trade off for it?

Yes.

If we go back to FinCom, FinCom said a Spanish teacher or a world language teacher.

And what was the second thing? It was all the way down on the bottom.

Oh, Jane, can you move it down just a little bit? Jane, sorry.

Yep. So, a Spanish teacher, a science teacher, and leave instrumental music. But for right now, we have a Spanish teacher, a science teacher, and if we create an effective school schedule at the high school, I am sure that we can look at reductions in other places.

Again, it's going to cost our kids to have maybe less electives, but the core of the program is still going to be targeted.

We have to work inside to make sure that we are being as effective and efficient as possible.

Okay.

Thank you, Shana.

Okay.

So, okay.

I think what she proposed was actually kind of balanced.

Okay.

Just on the back of my envelope.

Thank you.

Dan.

Yeah, thanks.

I'm eager to get to yes on a budget proposal tonight.

So, things I've brought up in the past, I'm not bringing it up now. That implies that I'm willing to make concessions on there.

This proposal has changed since the last time we saw it.

We all expected that. That's fine and normal.

Unfortunately, it's changed in certain respects that have pushed me further away from getting to yes than bringing me closer to yes. So, I just wanted to speak to those in the interest of maybe getting to yes. So, the first was already just raised by another member.

There were three elementary grades that we identified as having unusually low class sizes.

I think there were two at East and one at Heights. I am very sensitive to correspondence from the public and the topic of class sizes.

I want to keep class sizes small in general as much as we can and prioritize teacher positions.

But my perspective is we can't have these wide disparities where certain grades at certain schools have unusually low class sizes.

And we're telling other schools it's okay for you to have 22 or 23 kids in class.

I can't justify that.

And those are, to me, logical places to start in terms of smoothing the disparities between our three elementary buildings and what our district can bear in terms of class sizes.

I would agree once you start getting up to 25, 26 kids, that's way too many. But, you know, when a class size has 16 or 17 kids and the other buildings have for the same grade 22 or 23 kids already, we know we can run class sizes at that level because we already are.

And that's only fair to me. So, I would like to start there, get those cuts back in, maybe get other things off the chopping block. I have deep concerns about cutting gym and library in order to offer Spanish twice.

So, I love the creative thinking around if there were a way to offer flask Spanish twice, maybe that we could test it out and get reinforced language more. But doing it at the expense of library and gym, which I think are two specials or blocks that kids just look forward to and add so much to our district.

And kids come home with books from library and the learning continues at home.

I just think kids get so much value from those periods and they break up the day.

They make kids active.

In the case of gym, I'm really reluctant to go to that kind of a model.

So, again, love the creative thinking around offering Spanish twice, but I don't think that's the way to do it. I would be willing to consider something like, for example, using a wind block if that's possible to do it. Not against the interventions and enrichment, things that go on wind, but maybe doing that during flask instead as necessary.