►
From YouTube: 2022 Negotiations 06-14-2022
Description
No description was provided for this meeting.
If this is YOUR meeting, an easy way to fix this is to add a description to your video, wherever mtngs.io found it (probably YouTube).
A
C
Appreciations
continued
our
sentence
started
for
today
is
what
do
you
most
relate
to
and
why
bird
cat
dog
hamster
so
with
your
four
options
and
it
could
be
metaphoric
or
whatever
spin
you
want
to
take
on
it.
What
animal
do
you
most
associate
with
bird
cat
dog
stir
I'll,
give
you
42
47
seconds,
think
about
it.
We'll
get
crazy
today,.
B
C
A
E
I'm
gonna
say
cat,
but
for
before,
but
for
a
different
reason,
I
think
about
taking
care
of
cats
when
we
go
on
vacation
and
the
cat
is
the
one
that
we
I
feel,
needs
the
less
attention
because
they
can
do
things
on
their
own.
Like
you
know,
you
can
pour
a
bag
of
food
and
they're
not
going
to
gorge
into
it
and
they're
going
to
eat
it
little
by
little,
and
you
know
you
they
don't
need,
and
I
feel
like
I'm
like
that.
E
I
don't
need
people
to
take
a
lot
of
care
of
me
because
I
think
I
feel
like
I
am
busy
trying
to
take
care
of
other
people,
and
so
it's
like.
Okay,
don't
worry
about
me.
I'm
gonna
take
care
of
everybody
else,
and
so
and
and
when
I
think
about
vacations
with
birds
and
dogs
and
hamsters,
you
know
somebody
has
to
feed
them
at
the
time
and
clean
up
their
cage
and
you
know
same
thing
with
cat,
but
still
I
think
it's
the
cat.
That
is
the.
What
is
the
word?
E
E
Less
that
needs
to
be
taken
care
of
uh-huh
that
could
be
independent.
C
Despite
despite
losing.
C
Many
a
hamster
that
passed
away
in
my
classrooms
over
the
years,
one
of
which
got
out
over
a
christmas
break
and
this
custodian
later
found
in
the
basement
of
the
van
buren
quite
unfortunate.
I
would
I
met
up
with
the
old
man.
I
was
going
to
say
the
old
van
buren
right
basement.
I
know
it
was
how
many
years
later
I
would
say,
yeah
that's
what
I
was
going
to
ask
you
how.
F
C
But
then
he
shouldn't
have
got
out
like
this
is
so
full.
I
must
associate
with
the
hamster
because
I
feel
like
I'm
just
I'm
running
around
and
running
and
then
I'm
exhausted
and
I
curl
up
in
a
ball
and
I
sleep
and
then
I'm
back
up,
I'm
back
at
it
again.
F
You
guys
are
really
good.
I
just
I
think
I
identify
with
the
cat
as
well,
and
I
think
it's
because
of
the
independence
and
being
quite
finicky
and
not
just
loving
everybody,
picking
certain
people
that.
A
D
A
Friends
so
garbage
I
enjoy
being
around
and
talking
with
the
stuff,
but
I'm
perfectly
fine
being
by
myself
and
done
my
own
thing.
C
C
D
That's
true,
I
was
gonna,
say
bird
because
I
fly
away
at
danger,
but
no.
D
Probably
a
dog,
because
I
all
the
things
you
said
and
I
eat
all
my
meals
in
a
bowl.
D
A
C
Mr
davis,
last
time
we
met,
you
were
going
to
bring
forward
formalized
language
with
insurance.
Is
that
still
where
you
stand.
B
C
B
Us
to
caucus,
I'm
gonna
have
brian
hand
you
our
article
three
benefits
language
that
I'm
gonna
type.
B
And
it's
just
kind
of
going
over
given
language
to
what
we
talked
about
last
time
about
keeping
the
employee
home
the
same
as
the
year
before
and
then
using.
A
A
Yeah,
I
might,
we
might
have
to
caucus
just
to
make
sure.
Because
can
I
have
questions
about
six
and
seven,
but
I
think
that
just
we
need
to
make
sure
those
are
amounts
are
correct.
Yeah.
All
we
did
was
we
took
the
amounts
that
you
had
listed.
Okay,
we
added
the
171.72
cents
that
we
had
figured.
It
was
on
the
on
the
rough
rack
thing.
We
gave
you
right
and
we
just
added
it
to
those
those
two
rounds.
It's
too
high
to.
A
D
We
also
found
a
slight
mistake
on
our
offer
on
step,
seven
and
step
six,
and
so
we
fixed
that
okay.
So
I
wanted
to
hand
that,
back
to
you.
C
Okay,
thank
you,
mr
crow.
Did
you.
F
F
The
so
we
had
two
and
if
I
could
just
ask
for
clarifying
so
the
first
proposal,
and
then
we
found
an
error,
someone
found
an
error
and
there
was
a
second
proposal
and
this
is
correcting
the
last
proposal.
Right.
Yes,
okay,
I
just
want
to
be
sure
that
we're
yes,
that
we
yeah
and
truly
I
understand
and
feel
the
pain
and.
D
D
I
saw
the
language
about
the
the
resurface,
recertification
stipend,
a
fix
you
made
on
number
three.
There.
A
Yeah,
it's
been,
it's
been
a
bit
and
then
the
professional
endorsement,
which
is
just
what
the
state
has,
is
how
you
get
in
these
professional
endorsements
before
we
were
in
favor
of
that
part,
okay.
So
basically
the
last
three
pages.
Yes,
thank
you.
C
So
mr
davis
and
mr
kobe,
we'll
just
make
sure
to
add,
make
sure
that
language
is
included
when
we,
when
they
get
to
the
finish
line,
we'll
gratify
it
as
a
fact
or
not
ratify
it.
But
a
ta
is
a
package.
C
C
B
Yeah
yeah
we'll
change
that
to
different
colors
yeah.
C
B
A
C
A
B
C
C
Would
be
something
that
kind
of
came
through
the
back
door?
Is
our
employee
contribution,
employer
contribution
to
our
health
savings
account
so
well.
I
personally
view
that,
as
a
standalone
column,
what
I've
since
realized
is
that,
through
the
adjustments
of
the
dollars
which
which
we
saw
in
your
point
of
view
with
those
four
cohort
groups,
the
employee
plus
spouse
family,
for
both
the
health
savings
accounts
section
as
well
as
the
ppo
section.
C
What
we've
since
then
kind
of
done
some
numbers
about
is
that
the
employer
contribution
to
our
ppo
group
would
be
potentially
potentially
lower
than
the
contribution
we
would
make
to.
Our
health
savings
account
employees
for
a
difference
of
25,
meaning
that
the
employer
contribution
to
the
health
savings
account
for
the
employee.
Only.
C
Which
is
higher
than
the
amount
for
the
employee,
with
the
ppo
and
at
the
I
I'm
not
saying
it
very
eloquently,
and
I
apologize
for
that.
That's
okay,
I'm
just
trying
to
understand
making
sure
I
understand
our
general
concern
is
that
our
contribution
that
we
would
be
making
to
the
employee
in
the
health
savings
account
category
would
be
lower
because
of
the
higher.
C
Yes,
leaving
the
employee
in
the
health
savings
account
to
absorb
25
right.
F
F
What
does
the
district
need
to
contribute
to
their
health
savings
account
to
make
it
so
that
the
amount
contributes
for
the
employees
the
same
so
last
year
was
600,
and
so
let
me
just
give
an
example
for
last
year,
it's
easier
so
last
year
the
premium
for
the
employee-only
hsa
was
five
thirty
one,
twenty,
the
employee
paid
ten
dollars
of
that.
So
therefore,
the
district
paid
five
twenty
one.
F
Does
that
make
sense
we
make?
We
contribute
to
the
health
savings
account
an
amount
that
balances
to
what
we
are
providing
in
a
premium
contribution
for
the
ppo,
because
the
premiums
are
less
than
the
hsa.
They
are
definitely
less,
but
to
equalize
the
contribution
we've.
We
made
adjustments
as
we
go
along
to
what
that
hsa
contribution
would
be.
B
So
do
we
have
those
adjustments
or
I
guess
it
gets
confusing
because
like
when
I
originally
look
at
it
and
it
has
just
one
price
under
the
medical,
but
you
actually
go
to
break
it
down.
If
I
was
to
read
the
master
agreement
correctly,
then
I
would
think
that
every
employee
was
getting
just
that
amount.
F
So
we're
paying
so
you're
right.
So
what
it
does
not
say
it
says
the
district
is
contributing
582,
whatever
that
amount
is
per
medical
benefits.
That's
what
it
says.
What
it
doesn't
say
in
the
master
agreement
is
how
what
is
what
is
the
breakdown
of
the
employee,
who's
taking
an
hsa
or
taking
a
health
savings
account,
but
it
is
equal
amount,
however,
we're
giving
it
to
the
employee.
A
F
B
Have
that
and
that's
where
I
got
it:
the
insurance
options
from
6,
8
20
to
20
or
20
22
right
and
then,
if
you
look
at
like
the
district
paid
same
plan,
our
benefit
rates,
same
plan
with
increase
and
employee
only
is
listed
as
572,
correct,
50..
F
And
so
that's
where
we
obviously,
and
I
think
melissa
was-
was
absolutely
understood
right.
We
looked
at
that
and
we're
like
the
proposal.
You
know
looking
at
it
looking
at
the
dollar
values
right,
that's
what
we
started
looking
at
and
then,
as
she
said,
as
we
get
deeper
into
the
calculations
and
looking
at
things,
that's
when
it
rose
to
the
top
about
the
difference
and
that's
where
we're
just
at
a
not
a
standstill.
But
at
this
point
we
just
wanted
to
bring
to
you
the
concern
or
of
observation.
F
C
To
make
sure
that
it
was
equitable
with
the
other
employees,
yes,
but
the
other
employee
under
the
ppo
which
mr
davis,
mr
coe,
is
something
that
prior
to
two
hours
ago,
didn't
think
that
it
would
be
a
variable.
So
we
we
truly
went
to
caucus
for
15
minutes
thinking.
Let's
just
give
a
due
diligence
and
we'll
be
on
our
way.
C
So
so
again,
I
would
say,
prior
to
today
we
definitely
understood
your
philosophy
and
your
support
and
your
consciousness
of
providing
all
of
those
cohort
groups
who
are
experiencing
higher
deductible
higher
deductions
relative
to
a
mortgage.
We
get
it,
however,
for
me
I'll
speak
for
myself,
I
underestimated
the
impact.
The
contribution
to
our
health
savings
account
and
the
the
difference
between
the
two
and
how
it
would
have
a
ripple
effect
and
impact.
So
with
all
that
said
so,.
F
So
just
in
order
to
make
it
equitable
right
now,
so,
let's
just
let's,
let's
go
back,
I
think
your
the
proposal
based
on
the
dollar
amount
that
you're
proposing
and
again
it's
not
taking
into
consideration
that
83
right.
I
get
that,
but
but
you
have,
but
what
we
do
right
so
in
so
in
our
mind,
you're
looking
at
it,
maybe
you
didn't
realize
this
570
250,
plus
the
83.80,
the
employee
is
getting
the
benefit
of
655.80
from
the
district
as
opposed
to
the
employee.
C
They
would
we
would
also
they
would
also
do
that.
F
B
F
Like
because
what
we
said
is
we're
going
to
contribute
whatever
the
dollar
amount,
that
the
district
contributed
for
employee
only
would
be
adjusted
for
the
hsa
so
that
each
employee,
employee,
only
coverage
would
get
the
same
value
of
that
contribution
and
because
premiums
are
lower
on
the
hsa
we
made
up.
For
that
difference
right,
the
ppo
is
just
like
one
amount:
that's
your
that's
your
premium,
but
with
the
hsa
has
a
lower
premium,
and
so
in
order
to
make
that
equitable,
we
make
a
contribution
to
the
employees
hsa
plan,
so
that
has
been
the
history.
F
Okay.
Now,
where
it's
a
new
year,
it's
a
new!
You
know
it's
a
new
opportunity,
I'm
just
saying
that's
what
we're
looking
at
that
we
would
be
wanting
to
massage
the
numbers,
make
sure
that
everything
was
equitable.
So
so,
based
on
what
we're
just
saying
today,
based
on
your
proposal
of
the
640
or
the
572
right,
we
would
need
to
make
those
adjustments
we
would.
We
would
need
to
make
an
adjustment
of
the
8330
to
make
it
equitable
so
that
the
hsa
employee
would
have
to
receive
the
sixty
eight
dollars.
Yeah.
A
I
would
I'm
just
like
looking
at
this:
we'd
have
to
have
it's
the
572
50,
plus
the
a
contribution
to
the
savings
account,
because
the
570
250
doesn't
reflect
the
total
benefit
of
being
the
ppo
I
mean.
In
all
reality,
the
district
pays
640.
A
F
That
contribution
would
be
different,
I
think,
and
again-
and
I
and
I
think
melissa
said
and
so
we've
not
had.
I
know
it
seems
like
we've
had
a
lot
of
time.
We've
had
a
lot
of
we've,
been
discussing
the
options
and
discussing
what
it
looks
like.
So
we
haven't
come
back
and
said
what
does
that?
83.80
now
look
like
right,
because
because
I
think
your
proposal
was
that
the
employee-only
contribution
would
be
different
than
the
other
categories
right,
because
we're
saying
the
employee
only
is
the
would
be
paying
the
10
and
the
25.
F
F
C
So,
mr
davis,
mr
kobe,
knew.
C
D
C
D
C
C
A
I
thank
you.
Miss
lilly
does
not
want
a
math
in
summer
and
I'm
working
with
three
pages
and.
A
F
F
A
A
C
A
F
C
Something
submitted
with
that
in
mind,
since
we
we
have
the
opportunity
for
a
counter
proposal.
We
would
like
to
spend
the
rest
of
this
time
in
caucus
to
be
able
to
work
out
our
numbers.
No,
no.
We
do
not
want
to
do
that.
A
F
A
F
A
I
don't
think
we
can
do
it
in
a
45
minutes
correct
but
thursday.
Maybe
we
can
come
using
what
you've
proposed
looking
at
the
equitability
between
the
employee,
only
the
contribution,
the
district's
making
to
employee
only
to
make
sure
that's
the
same.
I'm
going
to
say
this
because
I
do
appreciate
the
payroll,
the
individuals
who
work
in
payroll
and
benefits
this
could
be.
A
B
F
We
would
have
well
so
okay,
could
we
do
that?
The
issue
I
think
we
have
to
come
to
an
agreement
on
is
what
is
the
district's
philosophy,
because,
really
to
me
this
is
a
philosophical
issue
and
a
monetary
issue,
so
I
think
we
have
to
really
you
know,
because,
as
we
were
going
through
the
issue,
we're
like
okay,
what
about
this
is
oh,
this
is
what
this
means,
and
so
I
think
we
would.
I
think
we
would
want
to
be
on
the
same
page
philosophically.
F
A
A
Some
employees
will
have
a
because
of
the
family
only
because
we
want
to
make
that
a
better
option
for
our
teachers
and
employees
that
benefit's
now
not
going
to
be
the
same
per
employee
right.
It
will
there's
some
that
will
have
a
the
district
will
pay
more
into
the
plan
for
them,
but
that
was
your
intent
right.
A
B
B
F
So
the
cost
of
the
plans-
yes
right,
because
I
look
at
the
overall
dollar
cost.
Yes,
is
very,
very,
very
close.
That's
what
I'm
saying
it's!
Not
it's,
not
a
dollar
issue
in
this
case
right,
it's
not
a
cost
differential,
it's
a
an
allocation
differential
which,
again
back
to
what
dr
french
said,
that
was
the
intent
right.
That
was
the
intent
to
have
the
district,
make
a
higher
contribution
to
the
family
and
employee
plus
spouse
right.
That
was
the
intent
of
your
proposal.
F
Yes,
and
with
that
proposal,
it
was
that
the
ppo
employee
would
continue
to
pay
their
25,
but
you
also
had
including
your
proposal
was
that
the
employee,
with
the
health
employee,
only
health
savings,
they
would
only
contribute
the
ten
dollars
right
towards
their
coverage
right,
but
the
way
the
makeup
is
right.
Now
we're
really
having
many
different
contributions
from
the
district
based
on
the
proposal.
B
C
F
F
F
A
F
We
that
is
an
option.
I
think
what
dr
french
was.
I
mean
was
alluding
to
not
that
that's
a
reason,
but
that
the
total
reason
is
having
one
employee
paying
700
people
and
600
being
on
benefits.
It's
always
a
challenge,
but
I'm
not
saying
it
can't
be
done.
That's
something!
I'm
just
trying
to
understand.
Sorry.
D
A
F
A
D
If
you
want
to
counter
it
and
then
we
could,
we
could
take
back
what
we
had
take
a
look
at
it
and
it
might
save
some
time
rather
than
us
just
giving
to
you
what
we
think
and
that
that
would
that
we
could
meet
at
where
we
where
we
meet
and
if
we
have
differences.
We
have
differences.
C
I
to
speak
for
myself.
I
would
prefer
to
be
a
little
more
sequential
just
so
we're
not
doing
double
duty.
So
maybe
would
you
would
you
say
that
a
different
way,
mr
co.
D
You're
you're
able
to
counter
that
is
what
I'm
saying,
and
I
would.
I
would
suggest
that
you
counter
it
with
what
you
think
the
numbers
are.
We
can
go
back
and
take
a
look
at
that
and
then
we
have
we'll
have
something
to
present.
Also
I
mean,
if
you
show
me
if
you
you're,
going
to
counter
something
that
we
have,
and
maybe
that
may
be
something
else
I
assume
so
I
mean
you're
able
to
counter
what
that.
D
C
D
A
Okay
and
I'm
gonna,
I'm
we
wanna,
we
will,
we
will
caucus
encounter
propose
with
the
intent,
because
we
do
appreciate
the
your
efforts
to
make
it
better
for
the
family,
employee
spouse.
So
we
need
to
go
back.
I
don't
and
I
feel
like
when
we
did.
I
agree
this
morning.
We
expected
to
go
back
15
minutes,
don't
look
it
over
make
sure
the
numbers
worked.
A
A
F
Doing
we're
basing
our
decision
on
what's
there
today,
but
I
mean
that's,
but
that
is
just
something
we
wanted
to
point.
A
E
I
mean
that's
what
we're
it's.
That's
the
point
that
we're
getting
to
right.
We
want
to
make
it
better,
so
people
will
join
the
insurance
plan
and
and
have
their
families
join,
and
so
then
that
would
you
know
that
would
change
our
numbers
in
a
sense
or
the
the
district's
numbers,
because
we
are
now
we're
pr.
We
are
working
with
the
numbers
that
we
have
actually
right
now
to
what
it
could
be,
but
and
and
we
want
we
do-
want
it
to
be
better
and
that's
why
we're
trying
to
change
all
this.
E
C
Mr
my
reference
to
being
a
sequential
what
I
was
referring
to
is:
we
will
look
forward
to
sharing
with
you
our
counter
proposal
next
time
when
we
meet
on
thursday.
But
I
just
didn't
want
there's
to
be
a
level
of
frustration
that
you
know
we
meet
in
the
middle
and
swap
language
and
then
need
to
take
a
look.
D
C
D
B
So
would
we
need
to
break
this
into
two
sections?
If
I
guess
I,
if
I'm
understanding
correctly
like
the
plan
with
the
health
savings
instead
of.
B
Applied
it
to
that
category,
and
then
we
did
the
same
for
the
ppo
and
took
the
25
and
broke
it
down
for
the
top
two
there.
I
don't
know
what
the
savings
would
be,
but
it
might
is
that
what
you're
saying,
because
we're
we're
using
money
from
both,
and
so
it's
changing,
because
we're
taking
the
10
and
we're
taking
the
25
and
we're
combining
them
right
and
then.
C
F
D
D
C
I
agree,
mr
davis,
another
thing
that
to
consider
and
perhaps
yeah
another
thing
to
consider
is
that
the
employee
plus
spouse
in
the
economy
plan
with
the
reduction
of
171
72
that
171.72
and
when
it's
applied
to
both
cohorts
up
top
with
the
what
the
economy
plan.
Yes
for
the
employee
plus
spouse.
It's
it's.
A
F
C
Mr
davis,
could
we
could
go
to
caucus
until
seven
o'clock
and
then
we'll
just
we'll,
come
back
and
put
it
back
in
bookend
on
this
meeting
and
see
where
we
are
look
forward
to
thursday.
All
right.
A
A
A
F
A
Sorry,
okay,
maybe
just
saying
the
hope,
is
that
we
can.
I
am
concerned
about
going
I'm
just
concerned
about
going
past.
You.
C
So
let's
convene
at
seven
o'clock
and
that
way
we
can
remind
the
public
that
we
will
be
meeting
again
on
thursday
and,
more
importantly,.
A
F
D
F
C
Is
the
staple
package
which
includes
public
benefit
rates
to
give
you
detail
and
perspective
of
out-of-pocket
cost
per
employee
and
the
investment
so
I'll?
Let
you
take
a
look
and
you
could
also
I
mean
this
could
just
be
documents.
C
Excuse
me,
mr
davis,
once
we
answer
any
clarifying
questions
or
kind
of
thought
behind
the
process,
then
you
know
we
could
just.
We
will
should
pick
this
back
up
on
thursday,
okay,.
F
I
would
like
to
make
one
clarifying
statement
is
the
sample
with
the
rates
and
the
employee
contributions,
the
two
employee
contributions
and
costs
might
be
different
again,
so
I
realized
that
I
probably
should
have
looked
at
that
just
one
closer
to
yourself.
C
Mr
davis,
mr
koh,
we
would
like
to
highlight
that
we
appreciated
the
language
that
you
proposed
specifically
to
employ
spouse,
which
had
a
higher
deduction
rate
as
well
as
under
ppo,
as
well
as
the
family
deduction
under
our
ppo
plan.
So
we
took
the
amount
of
171.72.
C
We
took
that
the
remaining
balance
to
put
toward
the
contributions
that
will
be
made
when
we
anticipate
some
not
a
lot,
but
some
employees
transfer
over
potentially
transfer
over
to
a
different
plan.
Given
the
reduction
in
contributions
made
by
the
employee
and
that
difference
we
anticipate
well,
we
don't.
We
can't,
we
can't
speak
to
who
might
adjust
their
plan
and
that
hypothetical.
C
And
then,
finally,
to
know,
as
we
discussed
prior
moving
to
caucus,
that
we
reconciled
the
balances
between
the
ppo
employee
and
the
health
savings
account
employee
and
that
is
manifested
in
the
60.
In
the
difference
of
the
68
30
contribution
going
into
their
health
savings
account
rather
than
the
other
accounts
which
reflect
in
830..