J Fahn asked when the contract has to be signed by and how much was allocated for this current school year.  It was clarified that the school allocated $510,000 and with additional costs $756,000 due to special education, additional buses and price increase from vendor.  Relief funds were used to cover the additional cost of transportation for this current school year.  Asking whether the students were making up the price difference from this year to next.  She asked whether the cost savings came from competition buses and late buses.  D Williams clarified that this is the direction the Board needs to give B&F and the Administration.  J Fahn also stated that the reduced funding to the transportation program seemed to indicate that the school is gearing the busing program to the local Palisades kids who don't need the busing.  JP clarified that 363 students ride the bus (15%) so D Williams clarified that this was not being limited to the Palisades students.  B Clarke expressed concern about signing a contract the school is committing to a large amount of money especially if the cost sharing doesn't come to fruition.  She also discussed the moral at the school is also important citing the 9% "raise" to busing company vs. raises given to faculty/staff.  Noting that diversity is important but so is the moral of the school.  She stated that she didn't see any cost reduction at the last Board meeting when this was presented.  M Nance is concerned because the Board has a fiduciary responsibility to the school as Board members noting that we have a finite amount of money and that the rising cost of transportation is unsustainable.  She did not that she would have voted to approve the transportation presented if she thought she could.  She didn't agree with cost sharing for competition buses but agreed that costs needed to be shared.  She also noted that world language served thousands of students in the Language Arts Dept. and they were given $2500 to meet all of the needs of those students.  L Saxon said she voted no because Board has a fiduciary responsibility for the school.  She also stated that current busing program which is supposed to provide diversity but doesn't feel that this is doing what is intended.  She noted that the cost of busing is not supporting students whose parents cannot afford it so it is not supporting our students with lower socio-economic status.  She is in favor of purchasing TAP cards for all students.  M Batts-King thinks that the Administration should look for other funding sources for Special Ed.  She also asked whether the school had been able to get new busing bids.  She noted that the reason some students are taking public transportation because it isn't convenient.  She stressed that students from far away need transportation and this always needs to be at the top of the list.  She stated that for diversity we need to be able to get these students to school and this should be our top priority.  She said that she voted no because all aspects of Transportation were lumped together and voted no because she was against charging students for the late buses.  She said that if you need minority kids from far away who are trying to go to a better school they need to be able to get here.  D Williams clarified that budgeting a dollar amount was race neutral also noting that there were white students also rode the buses.  She also noted that she believed everyone on the Board was in support of diversity, equity and inclusion and that this discussion was simply a monetary one.  S Margiotta stated that the what is being proposed now is approximately $57,000 of additional funding than what was proposed at the last meeting.  This is a funding issue and breaking down each item is to be discussed under the next item.  She also noted that there was textbook ask for next year of approximately $300,000 because we have currently been funding this at $50,000.  Some textbooks are over 20 years old, they are falling apart and the content is outdated.  She noted that we have a fiduciary responsibility to the education of students when they get to school.  She noted transportation in its current form is not sustainable and that the goal of the Administrative Transportation Committee was to find a way to preserve our busing transportation.  She also clarified that there is not separate funding for Special Ed transportation and it has to be funded from the General Fund.  She also addressed B Clarke's concern that costs were increasing and clarified that we were actually able to reduce costs significantly.  B Clarke also noted that there are additional requests for faculty positions, VAPA needs clarifying that we just need to make some decisions.  She also asked what happens if students back out, etc. and JP Herrera noted that we are going to be monitoring vacancy rates very closely to ensure the school doesn't absorb additional costs, noting our costs is related to the number of buses PCHS runs.  Inflationary costs being passed along to other companies but not being passed along to our faculty.  D Williams noted that we need to provide diversity, equity and inclusion with the education of our students once they are at the school.  She further said that we cannot continue to fund this in its current state or we will bankrupt the school.  Dr. Magee invited M Rodman and D Gronich to the meeting as a panelist and asked them to limit any comments that were advocate on behalf of the proposal that they limit their comments to 2 minutes.  M Rodman introduced himself noting that as part of the Administrative Transportation Committee that the group worked really hard to save transportation at PCHS while providing equity to the school.  He described the process the committee went through, noting that if there were changes to any piece of this transportation it proposal won't work.  He stressed importance of various transportation components noting that 2/3 of ridership pays full fare.  He highlighted scholarship dollars for to/from buses as well as late buses.  He also noted that this will be monitored and evaluated as the changes in the program begin.  D Gronich also noted that the goal was to save transportation noting that other schools do not provide student transportation.  D Williams clarified that the $450,000 is for the private busing.  B King noted that we are in year 2 of a 3 year contract and it was clarified that we are able to reduce the number of buses.  She asked committee to be mindful that if more money was funded for transportation it will come out of the classroom.  She noted that technology and money for the classroom have been underfunded noting that we have a fiduciary responsibility.  L Saxon thanked the Transportation Committee for all of their hard work.  

A discussion about the Board's place to make recommendations to the Administration occurred.  M Rodman noted that it might not be appropriate to reallocate this monies immediately because we don't have confirmation from Boosters re: their donation, we don't know what the actual CPI will be and suggested that it is allocated once we know that $57,000 is in fact additional money.  D Williams noted that the point of the meeting was for the Board to provide direction to the Administration as to how they want transportation monies to be allocated.  B King noted that she recommends that it goes back to the Transportation Committee.  D Williams argues that the Board had the information at the last Board meeting and it was voted down.  She noted that the Board can't go back and approve something that was not previously approved.  S Margiotta noted that there were parts of the Transportation Plan that need to be approved so that D Parcell can begin scholarship offers, etc.  She also noted that the Transportation Committee put together the plan that the Board didn't vote to approve the plan with no clear direction as to why so the Transportation Committee and B&F is looking for direction as to why the Transportation Plan was not approved.  There were discussions that Administration stick with the original plan as presented at the last meeting and setting aside the additional monies until all of the unknowns are in place.  M Batts-King feels like this discussion should be tabled as members have dropped off and others need to leave.  D Parcell suggested that the approved $450,000 be taken back to the Transportation Committee for further discussion regarding how to allocate the additional monies.  JP Herrera also agreed with D Parcell's suggestion.  He also noted that since the actual CPI is unknown he would recommend not to allocate any additional monies until this value is known.  S Margiotta expressed frustration because the Administrative Transportation Committee and B&F needs direction since the Board did not approve the plan as presented and was looking for Board consensus on Transportation vs. trying to understand why various members voted one way or another.  B King feels like that feedback has been given by various Board members.  The need to approve scholarship amounts today was discussed.  It was noted that the group no longer had quorum and therefore it was decided that the Board should not continue the discussion and the approved $450,000 will be taken back to the Administrative Transportation Committee.  D Parcell noted that the committee could set the scholarship amount because the dollar amount has been approved by the Board.  L Saxon did voice that she voted no at the last meeting because of the additional costs associated with Competition Buses noting that running the transportation in the manner currently being done is not sustainable.  She is also in favor of tap cards.  D Williams noted that in her opinion it is not necessary for the Board to approve the allocations of Transportation costs she just wanted to go on record as noting that she didn't want this discussion look like it was working around the "no" vote at the last meeting.  She also noted that she believes that this approved amount can now go back to the Administration Transportation Committee for further discussion/allocations.

J Roepel reviewed Konica contract.  S Margiotta noted that B&F has reviewed this and voted to approve the contract.

It was noted that this has no financial impact on the school