►
From YouTube: Special School Board Meeting September 18, 2023
Description
Fargo Public Schools - Board of Education Special Meeting - Live Broadcast - September 18, 2023
B
B
C
B
Opposed
same
sign,
thank
you
so
much
the
the
motion
to
approve
the
agenda
has
passed
all
right.
We'll
move
on
to
item
number
four,
the
addressing
of
the
level
three
grievance.
What
I'm
going
to
propose
is
that
the
the
FEA
begins
and
you'll
start
and
present
your
grievance
Fargo
Public
Schools
will
have
an
opportunity
to
respond
to
respond
to
that.
E
D
Go
okay
kind
of
President
members
of
the
Florida
school
board.
My
name
is
Mike
geyerman
I'm
ndea
general
counsel,
I've
been
asked
by
the
Fargo
Education
Association.
To
present
this
grievance
to
you
to
my
understanding,
you
already
have
the
grievance
documents,
some
contract
documents
so
I'm
not
and
I'm
not
going
to
spend
a
lot
of
time.
Necessarily
on
that
I.
Don't
think.
That's
necessarily
what
the
issue
is.
D
Those
facts
are
not
in
dispute.
Like
I
said
I'm
not
going
to
spend
a
lot
of
time
talking
about
those.
So
what
I'd
like
to
do
is,
ironically,
start
at
the
beginning,
but
the
beginning
is
not
in
July
of
2023
when
this
contract
was
contemplated
and
issued
subsequently
in
August
of
2023..
The
start
of
this
entire
case
goes
back
to
1969.
D
1969
right
after
the
Minot
flood
and
the
Minot
teachers
went
out
on
strike.
The
legislature
just
happened
to
be
in
session
and
at
that
particular
time,
the
legislature,
seeing
that
the
Minot
School
District
had
fired
over
100
teachers
and
the
Minot
school
was
out
on
strike,
decided
that
it
was
time
and
the
time
and
the
place
presented
itself
where
state
of
North
Dakota,
then
through
the
legislature,
passed
a
negotiation
statute.
So
the
negotiation
statute,
the
entire
chapter
has
been
in
place
since
1969.
D
in
1969
when
they
passed
the
legis
passed
the
teacher
negotiations
law.
The
legislature
declared
that
it
was
essential
to
the
welfare
of
its
people
to
establish
a
policy
to
promote
the
Improvement
of
personnel
management
and
relations
between
school
boards
and
their
certificated
employees,
by
providing
a
uniform
basis
for
recognizing
the
right
of
public
certificated
employees
to
join
organizations
of
their
own
choice
and
be
represented
by
such
organizations
in
their
professional
employment
relationship
with
the
public,
with
the
public
school
districts
of
the
state
of
North
Dakota.
D
In
2001
the
statute
went
on,
went
through
a
rewrite
the
legislature
went
through
and
on
occasion
they
will
rewrite
the
statutes,
but
the
intent
of
that
was
formulated
in
1969
did
not
change.
It
was
the
same
intent,
even
though
some
of
the
words
may
have
changed
and
the
reason
we
know
that
is
because
the
Supreme
Court
said
so
in
a
case
called
kenmir
Education
Association
in
2006..
D
In
order
to
do
that,
in
order
to
be
recognized
as
a
Fargo,
Education,
Association
and
I
can't
give
you
a
number
as
to
how
many
times
you've
negotiated
with
the
Fargo
Education
Association,
because
there
have
been
a
couple
of
two-year
contracts
in
some
of
those.
But
let's
say,
there's
45
or
50
different
times
where
the
FEA
has
petitioned
to
be
recognized
as
the
exclusive
bargaining
representative
for
the
certificate
of
staff
and
the
teachers
in
the
in
the
Fargo
School
District,
and
that
has
always
been
approved
by
the
board.
D
D
In
contrast
to
that
now
this
summer,
The
F
the
school
district
got
into
a
contract
with
full
circle.
Pediatric
Services
full
circle
didn't
comply
with
any
of
the
statutory
requirements
to
petition
the
board
to
be
recognized
as
a
bargaining
unit
for
any
of
the
teachers,
and
the
importance
of
that
is
is
that
when
an
organization
such
as
the
FEA
gets
recognized
by
the
board
as
the
exclusive
representative.
D
They
are
recognized
that
the
statute
says
the
law
in
the
state
of
North.
Dakota
is
a
representative
organization
which
would
be
the
Fargo
Education
Association
that
enters
a
contract
with
the
board
of
a
school
district
to
represent
the
negotiating
unit
for
the
duration
of
the
contract
or
until
another
representative
organization
is
recognized
by
the
board
of
the
school
district.
D
Now
his
grievance
has
gone
through,
and
now
we
are
at
level
three
and
now
we're
in
front
of
the
board
and
it's
my
understanding.
I
I
received
late
Saturday
night
at
about
midnight,
a
copy
of
a
packet
which
was
given
to
you,
which
also
included
a
memorandum
from
superintendent,
Gandhi,
attorneys,
brandner
and
Thompson.
In
regards
to
this
level,
three
grievance.
D
D
D
And
in
doing
so,
we
talked
about
the
fact
that,
under
these
unique
circumstances,
the
FEA
would
agree
that
we
will
leave
this
contract,
because
by
this
time
the
bids
were
already
out.
There
was
a
contractual
relationship
going
to
happen
between
the
school
district
and
and
full
circle,
and
we
were
willing
to
let
that
go
for
this
year
for
this
year
and
the
premise
of
our
position
was:
we
don't
ever
want
to
do
this
again.
D
We
never
want
to
do
this
again.
You
will
issue
contracts.
Pursuant
to
that
negotiated
agreement,
you
now
issued
a
contract
off
of
the
negotiated
agreement.
You
individually
bargained
with
another
entity
and
you'll,
hear
that.
Well,
we
didn't
really
contract
with
the
teacher
we
contracted
with
a
company
to
get
a
teacher.
That's
a
hair
that
I'm
not
going
to
split
you
contracted
with
somebody
besides
the
FEA
who's,
the
exclusive
bargaining
unit
they're
it,
and
during
that
discussion
we
agreed
to
that.
But
the
premise
of
my
argument
to
your
to
your
school
administration
is
I.
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
Our
premise
is
this:
it's
very
simple:
since
1969,
the
legislature
created
a
system
whereby
school
boards
and
teachers
can
negotiate
and
your
school
board
has
gone
a
step
further,
because
there
are
some
arguments
about
exclusive.
There's,
no
argument
about
that
in
Fargo.
It's
in
the
negotiated
agreement.
The
word
is
used
is
exclusive,
so
the
issue
becomes
well.
We've
got
this
hard
position
to
fill
and
the
answer
by
the
Fargo
School
administration
is
we're
going
to
break
the
contract
to
the
FEA
and
we're
going
to
go
out
and
hire
an
independent
contractor.
D
D
The
law
is
created,
school
districts
and
and
education
associations
negotiate
and
there's
all
sorts
of
lawsuits
about
time
frames
and
all
the
rest
of
it.
They
were
down
in
Edgeley
and
they
were
on
Dickinson
and
all
the
rest
of
it
and
I
handled
a
couple
of
those.
But
most
of
those
were
way
before
my
time.
D
D
In
2002,
the
North
Dakota
Supreme
Court
ruled
in
favor
of
the
ndea
and
the
cea
and
the
individual
members
and
held
that
counselors
were
certificated
teachers
under
the
North
Dakota
Law
And,
since
Hilton
was
a
counselor
and
he
was
considered
a
teacher
under
the
law.
His
contract
had
to
be
issued
pursuant
to
the
negotiated
agreement.
D
They
had
one
through
a
special
ed
unit,
but
they
thought
it
was
costing
them
too
much
money.
So
they
wanted
to
do
it
and
they
proposed
language
in
their
negotiations
between
themselves
and
the
Kenmare
Education
Association.
They
proposed
language
which
would
allow
them
to
pay
off
of
the
schedule
and
the
Kea
fought
fought
them
with
that.
D
D
D
So,
as
I
was
researching
this
and
looking
at
it,
you
have
a
core
principle:
core
principal's
been
in
place
since
1969.,
you
negotiate
with
the
Education
Association
all
of
the
terms
and
conditions
of
employment
and
in
this
particular
case,
in
order
to
hire
a
special
education
teacher,
you
have
to
you,
have
to
comply
with
the
contract
and
you
have
to
negotiate
and
contact
the
FDA
to
do
it.
The
exception
to
that
is,
if
you've
got
an
unfillable
position,
so
the
legislature
passed
the
statute
to
deal
with
the
exact
situation
that
you
faced
this
summer.
D
D
D
They've
got
a
negotiations,
manual,
I'm
sure
you've,
you've
been
to
training
you
you
go,
you
used
to
go
to
listen
to
Gary
thune,
you
go
to
listen
to
maybe
Mr
Thompson.
Does
it
or
other
people
do
it
or
or
Amy
to
cook?
Does
it
now
or
whoever
it
happens
to
be,
but
there's
a
manual
they
give
you,
and
this
is
how
you
do
it:
Set
It
Right
Down,
the
Line.
D
According
to
this
right
out
of
your
negotiations,
manual
there
it
is
boards
should
be
cautious
and
compensating
teachers
above
or
beyond
what
is
provided
in
the
negotiated
agreement.
State
law,
according
to
your
School
Board
Association
state
law,
authorizes
certain
payments
to
teachers.
In
addition
to
the
salary
set
forth
in
the
negotiated
agreement
under
the
following
limited
circumstances,.
D
D
D
So
if
the
legislature
creates
this
situation
this
this
scheme,
that
has
worked
pretty
well
over
the
last
54
years
about
negotiations
and
then
all
of
a
sudden
in
2007,
they
tweak
it
to
allow
you
to
pay
off
of
the
schedule,
and
then
they
tweak
it
a
little
bit
more
in
2015
to
allow
you
to
pay
off
the
schedule.
Why
in
2023,
are
we
facing
a
situation
in
which
this,
the
the
core
principle
has
been
disregarded?
D
In
the
memo
that
was
given
to
you
by
your
superintendent
and
your
attorney,
they
come
up
with
different
options
and
one
of
the
options
was
well.
We
could
have
just
transferred
somebody
and
they
could
have
and
the
second
option
they
came
up
with
was
well.
We
could
have
complied
with
that
statute.
Now
I
got
this
fancy
PowerPoint,
but
I'm
not
going
to
use
most
of
it
because
of
the
fact
that
I
just
want
to
show
you
something
these
this
this.
What
I'm
going
through
here
you've
got
in
your
packet.
D
D
D
They
shall
notify
those
the
public,
the
superintendent
of
public
Construction.
Okay.
So
if
you've
been
reading
the
media-
and
you
know
this-
we're
in
it-
we're
in
a
teacher
hiring
crisis
right
now
and
I've-
been
I've
been
watching
this
for
a
long
time
and
I
knew
it
was
coming
and
now
it's
here
and
everybody's
wringing
their
hands
over
it.
We
can't
hire
teachers
well,
things
should
have
been
done
years
ago,
but
that's
another
discussion,
but
here's
the
point.
D
D
D
D
All
your
administration
had
to
do
was
to
contact
the
Department
of
Public
Construction
satisfy
their
criteria
and
they
could
have
paid
somebody
off
of
the
schedule
higher
amounts
to
get
into
that
classroom.
That
level
seek
classroom.
They
chose
not
to
do
it.
What
did
they
choose
to
do?
They
chose
to
violate
the
FEA
contract.
F
F
Indeed,
the
party's
nearly
resolved
this
grievance
at
that
point,
because
there
was
a
recognition
that
at
that
point,
the
school
year
is
right
around
the
corner
for
actually
starting.
These
are
federally
mandated
services
that
have
to
be
provided
and
simply
not
providing.
These
Services
was
not
an
option.
The
grievance
that
the
FEA
had
put
forth
had
requested
a
remedy
of
actually
rescinding
the
contract
with
full
circle,
which
is
not
a
viable
option.
So
what
the
parties
discussed
was.
Let's
do
this.
F
It
makes
sense
to
yes,
the
fea's
objection
to
this.
At
this
point
is
noted.
The
district
was
not
in
agreement
with
the
fact
that
whether
there
was
or
wasn't
the
authority
to
to
do
that
that
wasn't
something
that
needed
to
be
whether
it
had
the
Authority
or
didn't
have
the
authority
to
do
it.
That
wasn't
something
that
needed
to
have
a
dispute
over,
because
the
parties
had
discussed
and
in
discussion
with
Administration.
F
So
I
wanted
to
just
go
back
and
make
that
point
that
I
think
we
were
on
the
finish
line
of
this
and
I
think
you
know
having
further
discussions
on
it,
as
some
possible
options
may
make
this
a
situation
where
it
never
does
come
up
again
if
somebody
can
be
found,
but
moving
on
from
that
Mr
geiermann
is
right.
This
is
an
issue
of
authority.
F
This
is
an
issue
of
whether
or
not
the
district
has
the
authority
to
enter
into
the
agreement
that
it
did,
or
whether
Mr
geierman
has
said
is
whether
it's
something
that
has
to
be
bargained
I.
Think
it's
worth
pointing
out
at
this
point
that
what
this
is
not
a
fight
over
this
is
not
a
fight
over
whether
or
not
you
have
the
authority
to
pay
somebody
over
scale.
F
Those
statutes
and
cases
such
as
the
Hilton
case
that
Mr
guyerman
was
citing
the
kenmer
case
and
the
subsequent
statute
that
came
out
in
2007
those
cases
all
specifically
refer
to
and
deal
with
public
school
teachers,
public
employees
who
are
employed
by
the
district.
That's
not
the
situation
we're
in
here
right
now.
F
It's
not
uncommon,
and
it
has
happened
a
number
of
times
over
the
years,
I've
got
a
document
showing
me
at
least
five
separate
times
in
which
the
district
has
used
the
services
of
private
contractors
to
provide.
You
know
special
education
or
excuse
me
to
provide
OT
school
school
psychologist
Services,
you
know,
direct
service
provider
for
vacancy
due
to
Medical
leaves
and
different
things
like
that,
and
those
are
all
situations
that
are
a
contractor
being
used
to
provide
those
Services.
F
The
FEA
doesn't
negotiate
those
individuals
terms
and
conditions
of
employment
or
anything
like
that
and
their
their
in
instances
in
which
there
there
were
not
grievances
on
any
of
those
things.
I
I
do
expect
the
response
that
the
that
the
FEA
is
going
to
have
is
that
well,
if
we'd
have
known
about
those
situations,
we'd
have
probably
done
something
or
or
whatnot
I'll.
F
Let
Mr
geiderman
address
that,
but
the
point
is
that
there
are
other
options
that
the
district
has
for
filling
these
types
of
positions,
and
it's
worth
noting
really
when
you
get
down
to
the
core
of
it,
noting
that
this
is
a
situation
about
whether
or
not
the
authority
exists.
We
have
to
go
back
into
the
statute
to
see
what
Authority
the
legislature
has
actually
given
education
associations
in
North
Dakota
to
collectively
bargain
it's
it's
constrained.
It's
limited.
F
F
If
you
look
at
the
Authority
for
negotiating
coming
from
the
century
code
at
15.1-16-10,
a
group
of
teachers
or
group
of
Administrators
employed
by
the
board
of
a
public
school
district
may
form
a
negotiating
entity
that
does
not
give
a
broad
enough
reach
to
go
out
and
and
dictate
the
terms
and
conditions
of
employment
for
a
private
party
or
for
some
other
party
and
I.
Think
to
me,
when
I'm
thinking
about
this
there's
a
good
way
to
make
an
analogy
to
that.
F
In
those
situations,
those
special
education
units
will
provide
an
employee
hired
by
the
special
education
unit
to
provide
the
services
to
a
district,
for
example,
what
the
what
the
FEA
is
asking
for
in
this,
and
in
that
situation,
that's
using
a
private
contractor.
If
you
want
to
call
it
not
a
private
contractor
but
another
entity
to
provide
the
services
but
think
about
this.
F
If
the
FEA
is
saying
that
that's
something
that
needs
to
be
negotiated,
the
fea's
position,
then,
is
that
it
gets
to
negotiate
the
terms
and
conditions
of
employment
for
a
separate
entity
such
as
somebody
employed
by
that
special
education
unit,
who
may
have
their
own
collective
bargaining
rights
and
they
may
have
their
own
contract,
for
example,
or
an
individual
one.
There's
no
way
that
the
the
the
legislature's
grant
of
authority
goes
so
far
is
that
they
can
dictate
the
terms
and
conditions
of
employment
for
those
individuals,
and
the
same
thing
is
the
truth.
F
With
the
private
situation
we
have
here,
the
FEA
would
be
reaching
out
trying
to
set
the
terms
and
conditions
of
employment
for
a
private
sector,
employee
who
may
or
may
not
have
his
or
her
own
independent
contract,
who
may
actually
have
a
a
union
in
his
or
her
workplace
under
federal
law.
So
the
the
reaching
out
is
is
something
that
I
think
it's
it's
a
bridge
too
far.
You
know,
there's
a
principle
in
the
law
that
you
can't
do
indirectly
what
you
can't
you
can't
do
it
indirectly.
F
You
can't
do
it
indirectly,
if
you
can't
do
it
directly.
I
really
butchered
that
and
I
acknowledge
that
the
point
being
that,
if
you
don't
have
the
authority
to
do
something
directly,
you
can't
indirectly
get
to
the
same
result.
Well,
that's
really
what's
trying
to
go
on
here,
the
the
union
is
trying
to
actually
reach
out
and
control
the
district's
ability
to
contract
and
provide
services
with
other
entities
and
other
you
know,
providers
and
all
of
that
there's
nothing
in
the
Sentry
code
or
the
contract.
Respectfully.
F
That
says
that
the
district
does
not
have
the
authority
to
do
that.
I
understand
the
argument
on
being
the
exclusive
bargaining
agent
and
what
that's
saying
is
for
the
public
school
teachers.
That's
the
bargaining
agent.
It's
not
saying
that
for
some
other
group
that
the
district
decides
to
provide
services
with
that
it
has
to
bargain
there.
That's
a
big
stretch
for
for
what
the
actual
Authority
is.
F
So
at
the
end
of
the
day
in
a
contract
or
even
a
union
has
an
obligation
to
meet
its
burden
of
proof
to
show
where
the
contract
breach
is
and
to
also
show
a
viable
remedy.
I
think
we've
recognized
that
there's
really
no
viable
remedy
here
for
the
situation
we're
in
right
now,
the
remedy
that's
been
asked
is
to
rescind
the
contract.
That's
not
not
a
viable
option,
so,
at
the
end
of
the
day,
it
doesn't
make
sense
to
to
do
anything
other
than
you
know
recognize.
F
The
district
has
this
Authority
here
it
just
there's
no
good
option
to
for
the
FEA
in
this
situation
outside
of
what
has
already
been
offered
by
by
the
district.
To
let's
talk
about
this,
if
we
have
the
ability
to
fill
this
position
in
the
future,
if
you've
got
some
options
for
it,
we'd
love
to
hear
that,
and-
and
that
is
something
that
I
think
makes
sense,
but
to
find
or
to
determine
that
the
district
doesn't
have.
F
This
Authority
is
I,
think
one
handcuffing
it
in
a
way
that
is
detrimental,
but
two
I
also
think
it
expands
the
reach
of
the
collective
bargaining
statute
under
North,
Dakota
law
and
I.
Don't
think
that
that
that
that
is
appropriate
and
is
what
the
legislature
intended
so
that
that's
that's
kind
of
a
response
on
the
position,
the
authority
and
all
of
those
sorts
of
things
you
know
I
think
Mr
guyerman
is
most
certainly
going
to
have
some
rebuttal,
but
I
would
obviously
answer
questions
related
to
this.
D
Mr
Thompson
has
argued
to
you
that
there
is
no
real
remedy
in
this
situation.
I
respectfully
disagree
with
that.
If
you
go
into
the
contract,
it's
a
30-day
contract.
It's
not
193-day
contract.
It's
30
days
because
there's
a
provision
in
the
contract
that
says
either
party
can
cancel
the
contract
with
30
days
notice.
D
D
D
D
We
were
I
was
optimistic,
I
told
the
FEA
I
think
we're
in
pretty
good
shape
here
until
I
found
out
that
six
contracts
for
school
sites
got
issued
off
of
the
contract.
That's
a
deal
breaker
I
didn't
know
that
when
I
talked
to
Mr
Thompson
as
a
matter
of
fact
on
on
August
21st,
when
I
called
him
I
said,
what's
the
deal
with
these
School
psych
contracts,
because
that
throws
a
whole
bunch
of
cold
water
on
this
whole
thing,
he
indicated
to
me
that
he
didn't
do
it.
He
didn't
know
about
it
and
that's
fine.
D
The
North
Dakota
Supreme
Court
has
held
on
at
least
six
different
occasions,
not
necessarily
in
school
cases,
but
this
is
the.
This
is
the
premise
it
is
a
common
Maxim
that
the
law
does
not
permit
by
indirection
what
cannot
be
accomplished
directly
and
Mr
Thompson
told
you.
You
can't
do
something
indirectly,
that
you
can't
do
directly.
We
should
be
able
to
agree
on
this
point.
D
You
can't
go
and
contract
with
a
specific
teacher
today
without
going
through
the
FEA
and
without
going
through
that
negotiated
agreement
and
the
terms
and
conditions
and
the
benefits
and
everything
else
are
are
established
by
that
negotiated
agreement.
You
can't
do
that.
I
hope
we're
in
agreement
on
that,
because
Dale
Hilton
tried
to
do
that.
The
Center
School
District
tried
to
do
that
and
they
got
sued
and
they
lost.
D
So,
if
that's
the
direct
action,
you
can't
go
out
and
contract,
specifically
with
a
teacher
unless
you're
going
to
comply
with
the
FEA
agreement.
If
the
legal
Maxim
is
you
can't
do
indirectly
what
you
can't
do
directly,
then
you
can't
set
up
this
straw.
Man
of
we're
not
really
we're
not
really
Contracting.
With
a
teacher.
We're
content
Contracting
with
their
employer.
That's
the
indirection.
D
If
the
school
boards
Association
really
thought
that
you
could
subcontract
claims
out
data
put
it
in
their
negotiations
manual,
they
tell
you
to
be
careful
and
they
suggest
to
you
the
two
ways
you
get
to
do
it
or
really
the
third
way.
This
is
a
novel
concept.
Why
don't
you
negotiate
it
with
the
FEA?
D
Nobody
does
FDA
does
why.
Why
do
they
have
this?
Because
you
agreed
to
it
look
at
your
negotiated
agreement.
They
are
the
exclusive
bargaining
exclusive
bargaining
you
agreed
to
it
now.
Oh,
we
don't
like
that,
because
we've
got
to
comply
with
federal
law
or
we
can't
find
somebody
or
whatever.
There
are
all
sorts
of
mechanisms
for
you
to
deal
with
it
and
you
can
get
out
of
this
contract
in
30
days.
D
D
D
D
and
now
all
of
a
sudden
we're
coming
in
with
this.
Well
we're
not
really
Contracting
with
a
teacher.
It
kind
of
looks
like
that.
Well,
full
circle
is
not
providing
anything
except
management.
You
got
a
teacher
in
there
when
you
hire
teachers,
you
comply
with
the
FEA
agreement.
It's
that
simple
Madam
president.
Thank
you.
F
B
F
You
know
the
other
point.
I
would
ask
it's
more
of
a
rhetorical
question:
what
exactly
did
the
FEA
want?
Did
it
want
the
administration
to
sit
down
and
negotiate
over
the
terms
and
conditions
for
this
this
provider
here,
because
if
you
read
the
grievance,
it
isn't
the
fea's
grievance,
isn't
that
the
district
went
outside
and
used
what
it
deems
to
be
a
subcontractor,
and
all
of
that,
it's
that
it
didn't
pay
and
didn't
go
in
accordance
with
what
the
negotiated
agreement
was.
F
If
you
read
the
grievance,
that's
what
it's
saying
so
that's
telling
you
right
there
that
there's
an
agreement
that
they
have,
that
you
have
the
authority
to
do
this
sort
of
thing
it
just.
It
doesn't
make
sense
to
to
say
that
you
can't
do
this
here,
but
in
the
grievance
to
say
no
I
just
we
should
have
negotiated
over
the
amounts
because
it
was
different
than
what
the
pay
was.
F
You
know
the
also
the
point
of
you
know:
Mr
gearman,
showing
two
letters
of
folks
going
to
the
state
looking
to
pay
over
schedule
that
isn't
necessarily
an
acknowledgment
that
there
are
no
other
situations
like
you
have
going
on,
where
districts
have
gone
out
to
get
different,
Services
provided
through
a
different
method.
That's
an
acknowledgment
that
there
were
two
two
districts
that
used
the
process
in
the
statute.
B
H
F
I
I
think
that
is,
you
know,
a
large
part
of
the
dispute
right
there.
You
know,
because
again,
if
you
get
back
to
the
actual
grievance,
it's
the
FEA
is
making
the
point
that
the
terms
and
conditions
for
that
outside
group
or
whoever
that
was
should
have
been
negotiated
so
well.
I.
Think
the
FDA
has
a
rub
with
the
third
party.
Doing
that.
I.
F
Don't
think
that
that,
in
my
from
what
I
understand
is
their
deal,
breaker
I
think
they
believe
it
should
have
been
whatever
those
terms
and
conditions
for
full
circle
should
have
been
negotiated
through
the
FEA
is
how
I
understand
it,
which
causes
a
bigger
problem.
If
that's
a
you're
going
to
bid
that
out,
you
would
you
know
it
just
causes
a
an
unworkable
situation.
There.
I
I
have
a
question
and
I:
don't
know
if
I'm
sorry,
if
this
is
redundant
to
Robin's
point
or
if
there's
an
answer
within
our
packet,
that
I'm
not
reading
and
I
apologize,
if
that's
the
case
either
or
in
the
board
or
the
in
the
memo
from
the
18th
from
from
Dr
Gandhi
and
and
Tara
and
Seth
under
number.
Two
of
the
last
sentence
is
full
circle
will
employ
and
provide
qualified
full
circle
employee
to
provide
the
services
for
the
district.
F
I
F
D
D
D
What
happens
next
year
after
you
settle
your
contract
and
well
we
we
need
to
start
paying
Math
teachers
20
grand
above
the
schedule,
we're
just
going
to
go.
Do
that
and
we're
going
to
tell
those
20
teachers
go
out
and
create
your
own
little
Corporation
and
we'll
just
contract
with
your
corporation
and
then
we'll
pay
Math
teachers
20
grand
more
than
the
schedule
all
is
for.
D
D
The
reason.
The
reason
this
grievance
is
here
is
because
the
options
that
you
had
in
May
or
June,
or
actually
in
in
April,
May,
June,
July
or
August
could
have
been
could
have
been
taken.
Now.
It's
well
we're
sorry,
but
we
there's
nothing.
We
can
do
about
it.
This
is
the
old
permission.
Forgiveness
thing
right
that
everybody
jokes
about.
It's
a
lot
easier
to
come
and
ask
the
FEA
for
forgiveness
than
it
is
to
ask
them
for
permission.
D
Can
we
pay
somebody
off
your
schedule?
You
know
what
the
answer
would
have
been
sure
you
can
pay
somebody
off
our
schedule.
If
you
comply
with
the
statute
and
get
the
Department
of
Public
Instruction
involved,
there's
your
answer.
You
could
have
done
that
in
April.
You
could
have
done
that
in
May.
You
could
have
done
that
in
June.
D
D
They
want
you
to
respect
the
contract
that
you
agreed
to
all
its
terms.
All
its
conditions,
not
some
well,
let's
walk
around
it.
Let's,
let's,
let's
pull
a
there's,
a
there's,
a
word
I'm,
not
going
to
say
we're
going
to
get
some
technicality
and
we're
going
to
be
out
there
when
the
expectation
of
the
parties
for
the
last
54
years
was
you
negotiate
with
the
FEA?
D
L
L
The
policy
that's
distributed:
administrative
policy
5120
deals
with
the
reassignment
of
staff
and
to
Greg's
question
is:
is
there
a
way
that
the
district
could
have
filled
this
position?
The
answer
is
yes,
this
portion
of
the
policy.
My
understanding
is
that
Mr,
Marquardt
and
Ms
rigor,
the
former
FEA
president,
have
worked
together
with
Administration
on
drafting
this
language
to
provide
some
protection
to
teachers
who
were
going
for
the
all-for-one
certification
that
was
offered
by
the
district.
L
This
says
that
the
district
may
not
involuntarily
reassign
certified
staff
who
receive
additional
endorsements
in
the
All
For
One
to
a
full-time
position
in
their
new
endorsement
area,
without
completing
a
comprehensive
search
process
to
fill
the
position
and
failing
to
find
a
successful
candidate.
So
it
says
you
can't
reassign,
but
what
it
really
means
is
you
can
reassign
as
long
as
some
precautions
have
taken
place,
first,
a
comprehensive
search.
L
It
goes
on
to
say
this
provision
is
not
applicable
to
circumstances
that
warrant
a
reassignment
for
causes
other
than
filling
a
vacant
position
in
situations
after
August
15th.
The
district
must
also
demonstrate
one
of
the
following.
There
is
a
viable
candidate
pool
to
backfill
the
reassigned
staff
member's
current
assignment
or
two.
There
is
the
ability
to
distribute,
eliminate,
modify
or
reassign
the
transferred
staff
members
original
assignment
to
other
staff
members.
So
Mr
Clark
your
your
question.
The
answer
is
yes,
there
is
a
way
it's
the
reassignment
of
Staff
policy
and
I.
Think
FEA.
L
Our
position
was
pretty
clear
to
members
when
this
came
about,
because
there
was
a
concern
that
these
kinds
of
reassignments
might
become
necessary
down
the
road,
and
so
we
made
clear
to
members
at
the
time-
and
we
continue
to
make
clear
to
members
that
if
you
had
taken
the
All
For
One
stipend
to
gain
an
additional
endorsement,
this
is
a
distinct
possibility.
An
involuntary
reassignment
while
I
have
the
mic.
L
So
if
you
do
the
math
June
21st
to
the
dates
upon
which
you
accepted
the
the
award
of
the
bid
I
believe
that
was
July
11th,
we're
talking
about
20
some
days
that
the
sped
stipend
had
gone
into
effect
had
been
signed.
Of
course,
the
contract
is
not
finalized
today,
but
the
district
nonetheless
has
begun
advertising
that.
So
there
really
was
an
opportunity
here.
L
The
district
didn't
do
that.
They
didn't
take
advantage
of
that.
They
didn't
advertise
that
there
was
an
opportunity
to
say:
hey,
we've
already
negotiated
with
the
representative
organization
to
do
additional
pay
for
sped
teachers
over
the
course
of
the
next
two
years.
Let's
respect
that
and
understand
that
it's
working.
B
G
As
was
stated
and
I'm
sure,
viewable
on
the
record
is
our
goal
is
to
always
hire
internally
in
fps,
as
of
now
the
position's
been
open
for
144
days,
we
did
email
out
all
of
our
all
for
one
special
ed
qualified
staff
members
numerous
times
talking
about
all
of
our
special
ed
positions,
inclusive
of
this
one
we
did
do
a
social
media
blast
to
internal
external
I
was
on
two
radio
shows
talking
about
this.
Supplemental
pay
and
well.
Grant
is
right.
G
G
I
do
not
want
to
use
AP
5120
to
take
somebody
and
put
them
in
a
position
that
they're
certified
for,
but
maybe
not
qualified,
for
this
is
not
just
about
supporting
and
differentiating
instruction
doing
accommodations.
This
is
a
tough
gig,
and
so
we
have
been
trying.
Our
goal
is
to
continue
to
try.
We
are
going
to
be
at
a
job
fair
at
NDSU,
I
believe
on
Wednesday
we'll
be
there
again
in
force.
We
are
looking
I'm
going
to
meet
with
Lisa
Steiger
at
msum
tomorrow
at
11
30.
we're
trying
to
hire
for
these
positions.
G
B
Yeah
so
I
I
guess
I'll
just
offer.
I
I've
been
grappling
with
this
a
lot
I
I
think
that
we
could
find
that
the
contract
was
violated,
but
that
the
remedy
sought
aren't,
aren't
appropriate
remedies
and
I
guess
one
question
that
I
have,
if
so,
Dr
McCann.
If
you
could
walk
me
through,
why
we
didn't
do
the
unfillable
position
petition
to
DPI.
G
Yeah
I
don't
know
how
well
I'll
be
able
to
walk
you
through
that
I
talked
to
Shelby
and
Missy
about
it.
When
Dave
had
called
and
left
me
a
message,
I
called
him
right
back
when
it
was
on
the
the
board
agenda
when
I
talked
with
them.
It
was
an
item
that
was
on
the
agenda
as
well
the
year
before
and
approved
by
the
board
without
protest.
G
K
Yeah
I
can
provide
some
clarity
and,
if
there's
any
other
cabinet
members
I
want
to
chime
in
feel
free
to
do
so,
I
think
it's
there's
an
important
distinction
here.
That
needs
to
be
made
that
the
administration's
position
was
that
we
were
never
hiring
or
Outsourcing
a
teacher
that
we
could
employ
in-house.
The
uniqueness
of
this
position
is
not
only
that
it
is
a
contract
with
full
service
who
has
been
providing
services
for
our
students,
specifically
students
on
IEPs.
K
For
some
time,
this
service
provider
also
happens
to
be
certified
to
be
able
to
provide
academic
instruction.
It
is
not
the
district's
intention,
even
if
we
continue
and
are
able
to
employ
someone
and
hire
to
get
rid
of
the
contract,
because
we
need
that
set
of
services
from
full
service.
So
we
have
always
approached
this
as
a
continued
contract
service
provider
in
a
situation
that
full
circle
just
recently
has
also
certified
educator
Educators.
That
can
provide
instruction
they're
doing
that.
K
But
this
contract
is
not
we're,
not
viewing
this
as
Contracting
out
a
teaching
job
that
we
have
employed
in-house
I.
Think
to
Greg's
question
earlier
about.
Wouldn't
we
do
everything
we
could.
We
actually
would
to
the
reassignment
policy
that
was
passed
out.
We
have
actually
reassigned
staff
members
that
were
special
at
certification
and
then
they
left.
So
we
have
actual
examples
of
documentation
of
in
those
last
month
of
reassigning
to
fill
special
education
positions.
So
I
think
it's
important
to
know
that
this
wasn't
a
carte
blanche.
K
Go
get
teachers
for
every
sped
classroom
that
we
have
available
or
every
classroom
that
we
have
available.
It
was
the
uniqueness
of
this
program
and
the
set
of
services
that
the
students
require
full
server.
Full
circle.
Solutions
has
been
providing
those
services
for
a
with
our
district
in
Partnership
for
for
some
time
in
a
variety
of
ways,
and
the
reality
is
that,
as
we
continue
to
approach
cognitive
needs
for
students,
there
is
a
gray
area
in
what
is
an
academic
need
versus
what
is
a
medical
need?
A
Well,
I
I
think
we're
at
a
kind
of
a
Crossroads
here
where
we
have
an
Administration
with
legal
counsel
that
believes
they
have
the
right
to
hire
an
independent
contractor,
and
we
have
an
association
that
believes
hiring.
An
independent
contractor
is
the
same
thing
as
hiring
a
public,
employee
and
I.
Think
Mr
guyerman
said
it
right.
He
said
he's
not.
This
is
a
hair
he's
not
going
to
split,
perhaps
in
the
future.
I
I
K
I
So
my
next,
my
next
question
is
given
I'm,
gonna
and
I'm.
I'm
gonna,
assume
I,
know
the
answer
to
this.
But
if
it's
been,
this
position's
been
open
for
144
days.
We've
tried
everything
to
fulfill
it.
We
don't
think
as
a
district,
or
at
least
let's
see,
Jeff
or
Administration
doesn't
feel
that
we
may
have
certified
staff
to
take
care
of
this
position,
but
not
well
qualified
staff.
For
this
position,
my
and
and
I'm
not
trying
to
be
have
be,
have
a
rhetorical
question
here.
But
what
happens
to
that?
K
So
if
we
are,
if
this
individual
were
to
be
pulled
out
of
the
classroom,
students
would
be
lacking
those
services
and,
as
I
shared
before
it
has
always
been
administration's
intention
to
continue
to
try
to
find
a
permanent
teacher
that
we
can
employ
for
that
classroom.
And
should
we
do
that,
we
are
still
planning
to
continue
Contracting
with
full
service
to
provide
those
services
for
students
too.
N
G
B
Position,
thank
you
I,
because
I,
what's
all
been
said,
so
this
individual
in
the
classroom
right
now
is
providing
not
only
classroom
services
but
wraparound
care
that
a
a
like
that
would
violate
the
teacher's
contract
if
he
or
she
had
to
stay
for
I.
Don't
know
like
longer
than
the
contracted
day
or
like
this
person
is
not
just
a
classroom
teacher.
K
Madam
president,
that
is
correct.
We
hired
a
set
of
services
that
was
inclusive
of
academic
Services,
because
it's
being
provided
by
someone
that
is
licensed
to
do
that
in
the
state
of
North
Dakota
I
do
know
that
our
assistant
director
of
special
education
is
also
on
the
phone.
So
if
it's
okay
with
you,
she
could
provide
more
clarity,
because
I
know
I've
been
saying.
Services
I
know
that
she
can
go
granular
I.
O
So,
through
our
contract
with
full
circle
Pediatrics,
we
are
able
to
not
only
provide
academic
services,
but
through
that
contract.
It
also
allows
us
to
tap
into
their
resources,
which
include,
board
certified
Behavior
analysts
and
registered
Behavior
technicians
to
ensure
that
we
are
providing
the
services
as
outlined
on
the
students
IEPs
that
are
found
within
that
classroom
setting,
and
this
allows
us
to
ensure
that
we
are
providing
academic
Services
as
well
as
Behavioral
Services,
that
supports
the
students,
as
they
are
within
the
school
day
to
fulfill
those
needs.
J
J
However,
to
me,
this
problem,
this
entire
process
seems
to
be
kind
of
a
legal
gray
area
with
independent
contractors
versus
other
routes
that
could
be
used
to
fill
a
position
and
I'm
the
fully
willing
to
admit
that
I,
don't
think
I
should
be
the
person
to
render
a
legal
decision
on
this
instance.
So
I
would
politely
ask
to
be
able
to
not
vote
on
this
matter,
because
I
see
it
squarely
and
exclusively
a
legal
position
that
I'm
not
qualified
to
to
render
a
decision
on.
A
Don't
disagree
at
all
Greg
but
unfortunately
you
don't
have
a
job
Choice.
Here
we
have
to
respond
I
Believe
by
tomorrow,
under
the
20-day
requirements
that
we
have
and
hence
the
reason
I
said,
Mr
gearman
didn't
want
to
split
hairs.
I
believe
it'll
be
the
fda's
decision
to
decide
whether
or
not
a
court
will
decide
this
or
not.
A
C
P
I
know
this
might
be
redundant.
You
know,
I,
believe
that
every
situation
there's
always
a
cause
and
effect.
You
know
one
of
the
reason
why
districts
take
their
position
to
to
hire
somebody.
What
I
do
not
get
is
is
that
is
if
the
position
has
been
there
for
144
days
and
and
this
is
where
I
kind
of
got
confused
a
little
bit.
Forgive
me
who
was
supposed
to
be
responsible
to
hire
those
teachers?
P
Is
it
the
FEA
or
the
districts,
because
when
you
look
at
the
way
that
I'm
looking
at
it,
our
student
come
first
and
don't
get
me
wrong.
We
all
see
situation
difference
for
me
is
I'm
here
to
support
all
the
students
at
our
all
district
levels
and
the
fact
that
you
know
we
all
are
here
today
to
talk
about
who
should
be
doing
the
hiring
and
who
you
shouldn't
and
don't
get
me
wrong.
You
know
people
analyze
thing
difference,
because
to
me
this
is
not
where
we
should
be
arguing.
P
P
My
question
is,
as
I
said
earlier,
as
that
is
who's
supposed
to
be
in
charge,
because
there's
always
a
cause
and
effects
on
everything
that
we
do
in
life,
not
only
here
everywhere,
because
there
had
to
be
a
reason
why
the
district
took
whatever
they
did.
The
decision
that
they
took
for
us
to
be
in
this
position.
P
Is
it
the
fact
that
you
know
they
violate
they?
They
did
not
contact
the
DPI
or
is
it
the
fact
that
you
know
they
decided
they
want
to
go
out
of
their
way
to
find
somebody
to
to
fill
this
position,
because
this
to
me
does
not
make
sense,
because
at
the
end
of
the
day,
if
we
took
that
teacher
out
from
their
classroom
who's
going
to
teach
those
kids
who's
going
to
be
responsible
for
it,
are
we
just
going
to
let
them
be
just
because
we
disagree
on
the
contracts
here
because
keep
in
mind.
P
So
I
hope
we
make
UPS.
We
come
up
with
some
some
agreement
here,
because
I
don't
want
any
kids
to
be
left
behind
just
because
we
don't.
We
disagree
on
something
as
an
adult,
because
to
me
this
is
wrong.
I
understand
you
know,
Madam
president
said:
yes,
we
did
violate
some
stuff,
but
what
are
the
way?
What
are
our
way
to
move
forwards?.