2026-08-24 - School Committee

00:00Uh,

00:03good morning. I call this meeting of the

00:05Westboro Cook Committee to order and the

00:09time is 10:00 a.m. on Monday, August

00:1224th. Uh, this meeting is not recorded

00:15live. It will be posted later uh on the

00:19Westboro TV website and will be

00:20available uh for residents to see at

00:23that point.

00:26And we're going to start with the

00:27agenda. I'm want to say this is an uh

00:31rather ad hoc meeting to address uh

00:35specifically one one pressing issue with

00:37the with the correction that needs to be

00:39made to the 2627 calendar and we're

00:43going to start with the first agenda

00:45item which is the superintendence

00:47update.

00:48>> Great. Um I thought I would do two

00:50things. wanted is to share one little

00:52tidbit of good news and then um that

00:54will take me about 20 seconds which is

00:57um Anita got back from a a meeting of

01:00the bus company and uh our our uh buses

01:04are fully um staffed and ready to roll

01:07for the start of school which puts us in

01:10a a very good position. um not every

01:12district can say that and so we're very

01:15excited for that. I think um especially

01:17given the challenges of some new routes

01:19and redistricting, having everybody up

01:21and ready to run is great. So I wanted

01:23to share that bit of information with

01:25you. Um the real reason for today's

01:27meeting is we discovered an error in our

01:29calendar that needs to be corrected.

01:32When we created the calendar, um, we had

01:36done so operating on the assumption that

01:38if Junth fell on the weekend that it was

01:42going to be observed on the weekend. Um,

01:44and in fact came to find out not too

01:47long ago that that is not true. Um,

01:50interestingly, we did actually research

01:51it at the time, but did not find the

01:53information on the state website that

01:55were that

01:57uh that suggested it. Now, Friday, uh,

02:01June 18th will need to be a holiday

02:04because it's a federal holiday. And that

02:06does bump out the last day of school one

02:09day from, uh, Monday the 22nd to Tuesday

02:12the 23rd. So, that's really the only

02:14vote I'm asking for today uh, for

02:17approval. And, um, that was the reason

02:20for the meeting. And that's it from me

02:23today.

02:24>> Yeah. Allison, could you could you click

02:26on that on that link to the calendar

02:28just uh

02:29>> Sure. Yeah. So you can visualize it

02:31>> just to show it. Yes.

02:32>> Yeah. So the the the difference really

02:35is when you come down to June here uh

02:38originally on that calendar the 18th

02:41would have been uh a school day which

02:44would have made the final day I I

02:46misspoke earlier the final day of school

02:47would have been this Monday and it now

02:50bumps to Tuesday. Um, we also always

02:53reflect on the calendar uh the impact of

02:56up to five snow days and so that shows

02:59on the 29th. It does, you know,

03:01hopefully, you know, fingers crossed we

03:02won't need those days this year, but

03:04they are there and we do that to make

03:07sure that that educators and families

03:10are sort of thinking about setting that

03:12side of time just that time aside just

03:15in case.

03:18>> Okay, thank you for the presentation.

03:20Um, before we start a discussion, I I'd

03:23like to ask if there is a motion. Do I

03:26have a motion?

03:27>> So move.

03:29>> Is there a second?

03:30>> Second.

03:32>> Thank you. Uh, is there a discussion?

03:38>> Yeah, I just had a comment.

03:40[clears throat]

03:41Um,

03:42Yahoo, can I go?

03:44>> Yes, absolutely. Yes, go ahead.

03:46Um, so, uh, this is unfortunate. I'm

03:50glad that it was, uh, caught, but I just

03:53wanted to kind of understand what the

03:55process is behind, um, you know,

04:00actually identifying, um, the calendar

04:02dates because I think that this is now

04:05our third, I want to say, revote on the

04:09calendar. Um, it's concerning to me. I

04:12just want to make sure that these types

04:13of things don't happen again. I know I

04:17know that, you know, there's some stuff

04:18is unavoidable that comes up, but um you

04:21know, I'm just concerned about how many

04:22revisions we've had to make to the

04:24calendar. So, I wanted to understand

04:25what the process is, who's involved in

04:27that, and how you know, we go about it.

04:29So, maybe we can make sure that we don't

04:31come across this again.

04:33>> Absolutely. So, um I think just in

04:36thinking about the history of this

04:37particular calendar, uh this um this

04:41particular error was something um that

04:47caught caught us by surprise. Um, I

04:49think when we were putting the calendar

04:51together essentially I look at it uh,

04:56uh, Lynn looks at it who's the both the

04:59she's my administrative assistant but

05:00she also serves as the role of secretary

05:03for the school committee. Um, uh, Dr.

05:06Mailor looked at it. Um, the HR

05:09department looked at it, the union

05:11looked at it. Everybody kind of who was

05:13supposed to look at it this time looked

05:14at it and we all missed it this time

05:16this time through. And in fact, um,

05:19Lynn, Matt, and myself all actually

05:22looked this up to try and verify, and

05:25our verification suggested that it was

05:28not supposed to be a day off. And so, we

05:31went with that um, at that point. Um,

05:34and we just it I I'm trying to remember

05:38how I discovered it. I think I saw

05:40another school calendar that reflected

05:42it as a day off and was caught by

05:45surprise. went back, looked in further

05:48information, and found it somewhere

05:49else. So, I think we ran into a problem

05:52where the listing was inconsistent

05:54between the state and federal um

05:56websites for this one. Uh so, we will

05:59not make this mistake again. Uh for

06:00sure, Sarah.

06:02>> Um but I think the earlier issue that

06:04came up came because we had not vetted

06:07the calendar carefully with the teachers

06:09union. So those are steps in the process

06:12that we're going to make sure to

06:13incorporate before so that not only are

06:15we looking at it internally but also

06:17with um uh the teachers as well so that

06:20we don't run into that mistake.

06:22>> Okay, that's great. No, thank you so

06:24much for catching this. Uh just wanted

06:26to throw that out.

06:27>> No problem.

06:28>> Yeah, I think I think that was great

06:30point uh Sarah and to have this comment

06:33in the public uh for anyone who wants to

06:35understand how we arrived at this

06:36correction.

06:37>> Yes. Uh is there any other uh discussion

06:41questions?

06:45Okay, seeing none, um we're going to

06:48vote. So I guess given that we're doing

06:51this remotely, I suggest we do it by by

06:54a roll call. Uh so we're going to start

06:58with first in my line, Sarah. Uh I'm

07:01sorry. All those in favor, we're going

07:04to start with Sarah.

07:05>> James Student. Yes.

07:08Okay. Jane

07:09>> Owens. Yes.

07:11>> Steve

07:12>> Durant. Yes.

07:14>> Tim

07:15>> ask you. Yes.

07:17>> Okay. And Moscow. Yes. The motion passes

07:21uh at 500.

07:23Thank you very much. And next on the

07:26agenda is the Hastings parking lot

07:28discussion. And I'll let Allison present

07:32this.

07:32>> Great. I'll I'll just frame up a couple

07:34things. I think we originally put this

07:36on this agenda thinking we might have um

07:40something that we were ready to vote

07:42upon. I would say at this point what I

07:45have heard from um uh from folks is we

07:49we probably need some time with the

07:52facility subcommittee to understand the

07:55options and take a vote. What we do have

07:58is a proposal in hand and I forwarded

08:00that to you um from HSH. It's an

08:04engineering firm um that is currently

08:07working with the town on the East Main

08:10Street um some redesign work that's

08:14happening there um that I believe has to

08:16do with traffic flow and mitigation and

08:20uh we approached them basically saying

08:23we have this issue with the Hastings

08:25parking lot and provided them some

08:27history. Um, and just to recap for

08:30people here, um, the history is that we

08:33have had a number of complaints and

08:35concerns raised about safety in our

08:38parking lot. Um, in part because it's

08:41crowded and the traffic flow is awkward,

08:44but also in part because we have

08:46different drop off and pickup times at

08:48Wack and at Hastings and we're trying to

08:51move buses, cars, little children, you

08:56know, less little children, um, all

08:58around that same area at the same time.

09:01Um so a subcommittee was meeting

09:04periodically last year to look at this

09:06as a safety issue and that committee

09:09actually provided recommendations that

09:11we have implemented that I think have

09:13had some effect but not the complete

09:16effect that we're looking for in that we

09:18still have work to do in order to really

09:21um have a a lasting and permanent

09:24solution to some of the traffic flow

09:26issues. uh in a nutshell because also

09:30there's no light uh at the safety at the

09:34egress for Hastings there's a a a

09:37phenomenon where Hastings cars back up

09:39in that parking lot which makes even

09:42more congestion and so if you recall uh

09:45last spring we got town meeting to vote

09:47to approve the transfer of the property

09:50at 115 East Main Street and that will

09:53allow us to add a second egress um

09:56approaching the engineer. The idea

09:59behind that was to try and get someone

10:01with some background in this type of

10:04engineering work in order to give us um

10:07some options for thinking about what do

10:09we do and how do we do it. Um so that's

10:12a little bit of the information from me

10:14and the context for that proposal that

10:17you received. But I think my what I

10:20would say my recommendation moving

10:22forward is before the full committee

10:24considers that that really the facility

10:26subcommittee needs a chance to sort of

10:28dig into it, have some conversation and

10:31come forward with their recommendation

10:33to the full committee. Um if that makes

10:35sense to the subcommittee members.

10:39I guess I'd like to speak to the issue

10:42at this point which uh a reminder to the

10:45committee as well as everybody else that

10:47our um subcommittee studying the traffic

10:52flow at Hastings did uh come up with a

10:55with a uh resolution as to what we

10:58should do and Tim and I were members of

11:01the school committee on that committee.

11:04Um the proposal as offered by this

11:07engineer uh goes way beyond what uh I

11:11feel is necessary. Uh therefore it's

11:14more expensive than it needs to be. Uh

11:16some of the ideas that they have in

11:19there uh in regards to um things that

11:22they would do um go beyond what's

11:25necessary in regards to they made

11:28comments about traffic studies on East

11:30Main Street. uh survey requirements, uh

11:34zoning requirements, etc. And u you know

11:37over time most of those have been

11:39resolved. Uh Anita and Tony and I sat

11:42down last week uh to discuss those

11:46points which I felt were beyond what was

11:48necessary to conclude this. So my

11:51suggestion to Anita and Tony as well as

11:54now to the committee is simply that we

11:56reassemble that study committee with Tim

12:00and I and the other players and go over

12:03what was recommended at that time which

12:05is now six nine months ago. Uh and then

12:09come to a conclusion of what the scope

12:11of work by the engineer is uh and should

12:15be. Um, and I think it'll be

12:18substantially less than what was in the

12:20proposal of the engineer and more

12:22specific to the solution to the problem

12:25rather than studying things that the

12:27town already should have asked for,

12:28which is traffic flows on East Main

12:30Street and the like. So, uh, I think uh,

12:34we slow down a little bit, but we do a

12:36better job than, uh, than what has been

12:40supplied by this engineer. And um you

12:43know given the amount of money that

12:45we're talking about um you know whether

12:47whether just because there this

12:49particular engineer is associated with

12:52other work i.e. a traffic light at

12:54Fllanders Road um makes them qualified

12:58to deal with what we're talking about

13:00inside the parking lot. Uh I think the

13:03committee that uh was created spent a

13:06lot of time figuring out what what would

13:08work and what wouldn't work and um and I

13:12would like to go beyond that um by

13:15reassembling that study committee and

13:17making a recommendation to the full

13:20school committee and and thereby getting

13:23a a proposal that deals with the

13:26specifics of what's needed, the time

13:28necessary, um the deliverables

13:31deliverables by the engineer and other

13:34things that are normal in this process.

13:37So, thank you for the time.

13:42>> Okay, Allison, do you want to chime in?

13:45>> Sure. I mean, I I think that makes a lot

13:47of sense. That uh group um has uh did a

13:53a lot of work and we were able to um

13:56install signage, speed bumps um just

13:59this summer. We got the flashing traffic

14:01light moved um as as a result of that

14:04initial committee uh or study group's

14:06work and pulling that group back

14:08together um and uh having them assess

14:12this information from um and this is a

14:16quote from one source just to understand

14:19you know what the scope of what we need

14:21is. Um my only um request is that we get

14:25moving quickly. Ideally, we're hoping to

14:28move on this in part because we think it

14:32makes sense to coordinate it with the

14:35playground project. Um and the reason

14:39for that is just that if the um if the

14:43way we do traffic flow uh needs to um

14:48impacts the location of a new

14:49playground, you know, we we don't want

14:51to build a new playground and then have

14:53to work around it or build a new traffic

14:55flow and then have to relocate the

14:56playground. We want those things sort of

14:58coordinated together. Um and uh that

15:03project we want to move on. um hastily

15:07because we have some funding through the

15:09community preservation

15:12folks and there's an expectation that

15:15that will get used sooner rather than

15:16later. So

15:18>> I guess to that point um certainly we

15:21should be discussing that before the

15:23school committee.

15:24>> Yes. Uh, so in fact what you just said

15:27is possible because at this point I've

15:29heard nothing

15:31about the playground, the schedule for

15:33it, the amount of money we got, where it

15:36came from, what restrictions there are

15:37on it, etc.

15:39So I I would hope and in a very soon um

15:44school committee meeting that we can

15:46start that process of becoming informed

15:48as to where uh that particular um

15:52project and information um um brought up

15:57to date on on that information as well.

15:59>> Thank you.

16:00>> Of course.

16:03>> Yes, sir.

16:06You're on mute.

16:07>> Yep. Um, quick question for whomever can

16:10answer it. It may not be a quick answer,

16:12but I'd like to know what um, Steve is

16:15referring to in terms of the scope being

16:17much larger um, and what the cost

16:20differential actually is, you know, and

16:23I can either from you Steve or from

16:25Allison if somebody can just highlight.

16:28>> Well, the proposal that you received has

16:31the cost in there. It was estimated to

16:34be $62,000.

16:37The um survey piece of that is half of

16:40it.

16:41>> And what provides the information for

16:44survey is the um information we filed

16:48with the town clerk for the development

16:51of the wet center which is all of the

16:53survey information meets and bounds. It

16:56also becomes the zoning map for the use

16:58of the property which is um another

17:01point that was raised by um this

17:04particular engineer that that would have

17:06to be done. Uh and so in my opinion that

17:10proposal has so many flaws in it that we

17:13need to sit down and do what I suggested

17:16which is come together with the with the

17:18committee the study committee outline

17:22what it is we want which they didn't and

17:25the work product for the $62,000 that

17:27they were offering was information to

17:30start a second study i.e. the

17:32engineering for the project. So it

17:34didn't even include anything that would

17:36get us somewhere where there were uh and

17:39so without the knowledge if you let's

17:41call it the historical knowledge of the

17:43town being being included uh in

17:46discussions with engineers for the work

17:48we want uh it's a proposal that is too

17:52expensive and doesn't deliver and that's

17:55my concern about it. You're welcome to

17:56read it because it was provided to you

17:58last week. Um, and with the points, you

18:01know, the points of what should be in in

18:04the um in the work product, if you will,

18:08what it is they're doing, uh, what's

18:10their schedule to do it, what are the

18:13deliverables, and when will we get them,

18:16and what does that compose? If you do

18:18that analysis on that proposal, you'll

18:20find that the information needed to do

18:23that and and to know what the product is

18:25going to be is not in their proposal

18:28because it's the beginning of the work,

18:30not all of the work.

18:31>> Right. Um Steve, can I reflect back just

18:35to make sure I'm understanding you

18:36correctly? I think what I what I hear

18:39from you is that this proposal not only

18:42sort of duplicates work that's already

18:44done in terms of some of the survey work

18:46that's been completed in the past

18:48historically and we may be able to put

18:49our hands on separately, but also

18:51doesn't actually get us to a design. It

18:54what it does is it gets us to design

18:55concepts um and in a couple design

18:58options. So you're saying it's both um

19:02repetitive and insufficient. So I I

19:05think um

19:06>> well specifically the stuff that's

19:09included in this thing is uh traffic

19:12studies on East Main Street

19:15>> for which the town is responsible for

19:17that. The school department is not and

19:19certainly whatever they would recommend

19:21to us would have to be uh and it

19:23probably already is included in the work

19:26that you mentioned relative to the

19:27town's work on East Main Street. Um the

19:30the the issue here simply is, you know,

19:33it doesn't have to take long. As I had

19:36mentioned when I sat down with Tony and

19:38Anita, what it takes is what do we want

19:41to do and what do we want to tell them

19:43to deliver to us. What we need to know

19:46is there's two things that are basically

19:49the deliverables is where to put the

19:51extension of the road on the um on the

19:55Route 9 side of uh Hastings in order to

19:58get that second curb cut. Um and also uh

20:03the potential for adding additional

20:05parking on the right side when you come

20:07in uh to the driveway because there's

20:10roughly 50 ft of property um that we

20:15could add another row of parking there.

20:17And those are the two deliverables that

20:19I think are necessary with that would be

20:21the the drawings and the application to

20:23the town for the curb cut, which really

20:25is why why we stopped um

20:29last spring um because we needed to get

20:32an engineer on board.

20:34>> We also need to get the property,

20:35[laughter] right?

20:37>> No, we don't.

20:37>> Yeah.

20:38>> No, we don't. And that's why that

20:40drawing that I mentioned and presented

20:42to Anita and Tony were important because

20:45there is enough land for us without

20:47having to go on to the the uh 115 I

20:50think it is East Main Street, but it's

20:53there and it gives us a little more

20:54freedom, right? Um but the zoning to do

20:57it to do anything on that property

21:00doesn't exist. And that's the reason why

21:03if we want to have a design and get it

21:04done, we have to use the the town's

21:07approved zoning for the property as it

21:10stands right now.

21:11>> And as I said, there is enough land um

21:14on what we already have zoned uh with

21:17zero setbacks to do the job. And so it's

21:21important that the history of the town's

21:23information be included in this rather

21:26than hiring somebody that's going to

21:28charge you twice for the same work.

21:30>> I have a quick question on

21:31[clears throat] that. If if we had the

21:33space, then how come we pursued the

21:35additional

21:37>> um piece?

21:39Do you just property?

21:42>> Yeah. Well, first of all, it was a

21:43donation from the town to us. when it

21:46was originally requested to be purchased

21:48by the town, it wasn't designated

21:51specifically school property,

21:53>> right?

21:53>> Correct.

21:54>> Okay. Which means it was town property.

21:57Uh that doesn't mean they can't allow us

22:00with an easement to put let's say five

22:02feet worth of of the edge of a new road

22:04along that. But given the current zoning

22:08right now, we can do what is approvable

22:12by the town uh with zero setbacks,

22:17which is right up to the property.

22:20From what I understand, when the town

22:22was was was donating this property to

22:24us, there was there was no stipulation

22:26as to how we would use this property. It

22:28was it was just our own discretion.

22:31>> Nope. Nope. It was given to the school

22:34department, which means the school

22:35department decides what has to happen to

22:37it.

22:38>> Well, that's what I Yeah, that's what

22:39that's what I meant.

22:40>> I mean, this is a different story. the

22:42town didn't didn't give stipulations

22:45because once it was donated to the

22:47school committee uh under school

22:49committee jurisdiction

22:51then then there are no uh issues

22:54associated with town other town there's

22:57a difference thing and of course when

22:58the town purchased the property we

23:00didn't have a need for it to be quote

23:02school property

23:04>> but certainly with the access to that

23:07property um you know but we don't have

23:11have moved the road very far. If you

23:14look at the drawing that I had submitted

23:16to uh not only to the study committee

23:19last year but also which exists relative

23:21to the development of the wet.

23:25>> Okay, that's good to know. I I actually

23:27was under the impression that we needed

23:28that piece in order to do what we have

23:31to do with the road. So I I I

23:33misunderstood that. I thought that

23:35that's the whole purpose of us trying to

23:37either get an easement or we were trying

23:39to figure out the property rights there

23:40so that we could um do what it is that

23:43we're trying to do. But I guess I'm

23:46>> well, you know, my feeling at the time

23:49that this the town was u requested to

23:52purchase the property

23:54was that it was going to be a two-step

23:56story. Uh there was reasons for the town

23:58to buy it um um or or acquire it, let's

24:02put it that way, uh on day one, which

24:04was what, two, three years ago. Um but

24:07the idea is it's now surrounded by

24:09school property. Uh so why shouldn't it

24:12be donated to the schools,

24:15>> particularly since since we don't don't

24:17know the true outcome, but one of the

24:19things it doesn't have is the same

24:21zoning right now that the school

24:23property does.

24:25Well, I think I think when we pursued it

24:28last year, Sarah, it was with the idea

24:30of giving us maximal flexibility, right?

24:35>> And that's still true.

24:36>> Yes. Yeah. So, we now have that. Yeah.

24:41>> Uh I guess Steve, uh if you could answer

24:44to this. So, so the zoning for the

24:47zoning to be changed, uh does it need

24:48the approval of the town meeting?

24:50>> Absolutely.

24:52>> Okay. which means it couldn't be changed

24:54until the fall town meeting if need be.

24:58>> But the idea here is to be able to go to

25:01town meeting in the fall with a plan uh

25:05and wherever the money comes from we

25:07provide that. But uh certainly um uh you

25:11know at this point transparency of the

25:14whole process needs to be performed

25:17as we always do.

25:19So I think you know as we open

25:21discussion for this item uh Allison uh

25:24stated that this has to be still worked

25:26through the subcommittee and you know

25:28this is a an update and clearly work

25:31needs to be done. There's a lot of

25:33questions um like my own comment to the

25:37to the documents from the engineer would

25:39be like I agree with you Steve on you

25:41know I was also surprised that half of

25:42the quote uh covered the survey. Um but

25:45the other the other uh thing I noticed

25:48was that there was no mention of the

25:49playground at all. Uh and I I I believe

25:52these two projects should be considered

25:54together. Uh so that you know so that we

25:58don't do something that we're going to

26:00regret later.

26:02>> Well, I guess in that case then we we

26:05start over with current information on

26:08the playground, current information from

26:10the study committee. the the the the

26:13study committee be reformed, perhaps

26:15even redefined. Uh since Tim and I were

26:19the ones that that participated in the

26:22the one that dealt with the traffic on u

26:25>> right

26:26>> on the school property um to to catch up

26:29as to wherever wherever the playground

26:32story is. uh put it all together and

26:35then if an engineer hasn't already

26:37started work and I don't believe there

26:38is anybody engineering the playground um

26:43but catch up to to date in terms of what

26:45the playground u submitt was relative to

26:49the grant

26:51I'm not aware of that either um so um

26:55but the bottom line I think for schedule

26:58is if we want to get something done by

27:00the fall town meeting then the

27:01subcommittee be uh defined to deal with

27:05it perhaps with a larger scope that you

27:08suggested, Yakub, as we in effect put a

27:11schedule together to to have a

27:13deliverable in time for the fall town

27:17meeting.

27:20>> I think that would be appropriate.

27:23Okay. Um how about Tim? And

27:25>> Tim, can you comment on [clears throat]

27:26that since you were the other member of

27:29it?

27:30Yeah, I mean happy to come in overall um

27:32in just general agreement here, Steve.

27:34Um you know, like Yakub was saying, like

27:36looking over the pricing. Um something

27:38else I noticed is that like there were

27:39things that would leave it incomplete,

27:40you know, like they didn't include like

27:41a drainage study. Um and um especially

27:44they said that there was essentially no

27:46like public meetings that they would

27:47attend, which surprised me as well. And

27:48so like I agree that I think that we got

27:51it to a place where like we can have

27:52additional conversation and be able to

27:54lay that out and then hopefully have a

27:55plan going forward. we can just, you

27:56know, get the pricing for what it would

27:58do to actually, you know, accomplish

27:59that physically and then actually do

28:01that. So, um, you know, obviously we

28:03want this done. Certainly understand the

28:04timeliness, but I think that this is the

28:06right way to go in terms of cost

28:07effectiveness. Um, and I more than happy

28:09to, you know, figure out, uh, this time

28:11that we can get that on the schedule to,

28:12uh, you know, meet and get that work

28:13going. So,

28:15>> excellent. Yeah. Thank you.

28:17>> Okay.

28:18>> Thank you. And Jane, any comments,

28:20questions from you?

28:22>> No, no comments or questions.

28:25Thank you. Uh, okay. Is there any other

28:28discussion on this topic?

28:31>> May I just say, so I think I'm hearing

28:32we'll reconvene the study group. That

28:35group will kind of work in concert with

28:37the facilities subcommittee to look at

28:39the um kind of bundling of the projects

28:42and we'll move forward from there. Um I

28:45will say we are really you know focused

28:47on spring annual town meeting not the

28:50fall meeting um primarily but we'll we

28:53can talk through that in the

28:54subcommittees um at this point I I think

28:58the ship has sailed for fall but uh but

29:01we'll have to kind of set our sights on

29:02the next milestone.

29:06I think that's fair and you know and I

29:08think we're better off doing so doing

29:11doing this right than doing this too

29:13fast and then regret the decision.

29:14>> I agree.

29:17>> Okay. Thank you. Um the next item on the

29:21agenda is citizen request. I don't see

29:23anybody other than the school committee

29:25and this and administration members. So

29:28we'll skip that part and we'll we'll

29:31adjourn. Do I have a motion to adjourn?

29:34So move.

29:35>> Is there a second?

29:37>> Second.

29:39>> Okay. Um

29:41Tim is not on video, so I cannot see you

29:43raise hands. So let's let's do a roll

29:45call again. Um Sarah

29:48>> Tim Sudan. Yes.

29:51>> Jane

29:52>> Owens. Yes.

29:54>> Tim

29:55>> ask. Yes.

29:56>> Steve

29:58>> Durant. Yes.

30:00>> Moscow. Yes. Thank you very much. The

30:02meeting is adjourned. Thank you all. I

30:04appreciate your time.

30:06>> Thank you. Bye.