When will the board wise up and ditch their masks during board meetings? They are social-distanced and further protected by the plastic side shields. When they mumble through their masks, they are often hard to understand.
The May 11th Board meeting got off to a slow start with another long-winded introduction of the inspirational speaker and then a very long Inspiration Moment. McKie must be hitting all the Toastmasters' meetings to practice her introductions, which need to be much shorter. Who cares if the speaker's daughter is a "track star extraordinaire"? The speaker (assistant principal at Ridge View HS) should have been told that he had two-three minutes for an inspiration message. And McKie should be told that she has 30 seconds for the introduction!
Once the business of the board began, it was time for the Board to approve the Consent Agenda. Trustee Agostini requested that Item 7.4 be removed from the Consent Agenda and made the appropriate Motion. Trustee Scott seconded.
During the vote, trustee-elect Holmes said she was going to abstain, because she "really didn't understand the Motion."
How could Holmes sit on the Board for 2½ years and fail to learn enough about parliamentary procedure not to understand what pulling an item from the Consent Agenda means?
It's simple. The item is removed from the combined vote on the items in the Consent Agenda. The item removed is then discussed separately and voted on. Further, no explanation is needed to abstain from voting. You just don't vote. Period.
When the remainder of the Consent Agenda was voted on, it passed 5-0-2. That's five in favor; none against; two abstaining.
Then Item 7.4 was addressed. Trustee Agostini moved to postpone Item 7.4 to the May 25th board meeting. Trustee Scott seconded.
Discussion was opened, and trustee-elect McKie asked why. Mrs. Agostini explained that the proposal in Item 7.4 had just been delivered to the board yesterday (Monday) morning and she hadn't had time to evaluate it. She wanted the vote postponed to the May 25th meeting. No other questions arose, the Chair Manning called for the vote.
Holmes, attending by phone, voted No.
Agostini, Caution-Parker and McFadden voted Yes; i.e., to move the item to May 25.
McKie, Holmes, Manning and Scott voted No. In other words, jump now. Don't wait. Which of them really read and understood the proposal in Item 7.4, which never reached public view?
When the vote was tallied, it was 3-4; the motion to postpone Item 7.4 to May 25th failed.
What was the rush? Why didn't trustees get adequate time to evaluate Item 7.4? One has to wonder why that vote was buried in the Consent Agenda, instead of coming up as New Business.
Then McKie moved to approve Item 7.4, and Caution-Parker seconded. When discussion opened, Trustee Scott led off with her questions. That's plural. Ten (10) of them!
Listen to Trustee Scott's questions and the staff answers (starting at 33:38 in the recording) about a purchase of a forklift and a Volvo (XC-40?) electric car for the Innovative Course. State funds are going to be sucked up for some (most?) of the costs.
The staffer referred often to Special Ed students. It was a big smoke-and-mirrors act.
Hear about candy production and sales to staff and, later, outside the building. There must be a culinary arts program.
I checked out at 41 minutes into the 2 hr. 13 min. meeting. I didn't stick around for the vote.
