School Board Meeting April 19th, 2017 Pt.3

The action portion of the agenda.

Okay item number one amend policy 4200 visitors to schools repeal policy F44.00 unauthorized persons on school property and procedure F44.01.

I move that the board amend policy 4200 visitors to schools as attached and repeal policy F44.00 and board procedures F44.01 unauthorized persons on school property.

Can I second the motion?

Thank you.

May I hear from the chair of the operations committee on the actually the next five items are all.

Sure.

The first two were heard on the 16th of March move forward for consideration.

The third was moved forward for approval also on the 16th of March as was the fourth item as was the fifth item.

So we'll move efficiently through this.

All right.

Have there been any changes since introduction to this item?

Ronald Boyes senior assistant general counsel.

I believe that in response to board comments that introduction that the title has been changed saying that's more descriptive and I think that it is a good change.

Yes it has.

Now read school visitations and maintaining safe and orderly environments.

Are there any questions or comments about this item?

Seeing none Ms. Shek or Ms. Ritchie the roll call please.

Director Blanford?

Aye.

Director Burke?

Aye.

Director Geary?

Aye.

Director Harris?

Aye.

Director Patu?

Aye.

Director Pinkham?

Director Peters This motion has passed unanimously.

Thank you.

Item 2 BTA 4 Magnolia Elementary School renovation and addition project constructability review report and implementation.

I move that the school board accept and approve the constructability review report and implementation plan dated February 17 2017 by Rowan associates as complete for the Magnolia Elementary School renovation and addition project.

I second the motion.

The only change that has been made to this action bar is we reference that it is for OSPI form D-9.

Did you want to give us a sentence or two about what D-9 form is?

Yes and I probably should start with introducing myself Richard Best director of capital projects and planning for Seattle Public Schools.

OSPI has a D form process in which we submit odd form D number D forms so all the odd number D forms are ones that Seattle Public Schools submits to OSPI and then OSPI responds with an even number D form.

D 9 is our permission to enter into a contract with the low bid contractor.

These documents are required for our submission to OSPI so that we when we finally bid this project we'll be able to get their approval to sign the contract.

Any other questions or comments about this item?

Ms. Shek the roll call please.

Director Pinkham?

Aye.

Director Harris?

Aye.

Director Burke?

Aye.

Director Blanford?

Aye.

Director Geary.

Aye.

Director Patu.

Aye.

Director Peters.

Aye.

This motion has passed unanimously.

Item 3 PTA 4 Magnolia Elementary School renovation and addition project resolution 2016-17-14 of intent to construct project.

I move that the school board approve resolution 2016 slash 17 hyphen 14 which certifies the intent of the Seattle Public Schools to construct the Magnolia Elementary School renovation and addition project.

Second the motion.

And again the only modification made to this bar was the reference to OSPI form D-9.

Are there any other questions or comments about this item?

Ms. Shek the roll call please.

Director Patu?

Aye.

Director Harris?

Aye.

Director Burke?

Aye.

Director Blanford?

Aye.

Director Geary.

Aye.

Director Pinkman.

Aye.

Director Peters.

Aye.

This motion has passed unanimously.

Item 4 BTA 4 Magnolia Elementary School renovation and addition project resolution 2016-17-15 5 year use 30 year building life.

I move the school board approve resolution 2016 17-15 which certifies the five year use 30 year building life for the Magnolia elementary school renovation renovation and addition project as attached to the board action report.

I second the motion.

And again the only change made to this bar is the reference to OSPI form D9.

I do have a follow-up question to that.

Was that form the one that was brought up in public testimony at the last board meeting or is that something different?

Pardon me.

Can you repeat the question?

Oh the form the D9 form is that one that was brought up in public testimony at the last board meeting or is that something different?

No that was OSPI form D5 submission in which we have received form D6 back from OSPI.

Okay.

Does anybody feel the need for clarification on that?

We're just going to keep it in code.

The question that came up the last board meeting I was concerned the district's racial imbalance resolution that was approved by OSPI and we have subsequently received OSPI form D-6 we have put our D-7 form submission together and have submitted that to OSPI.

We anticipate receiving OSPI D-8 which allows us to receive bids and open them and then we submit D-9 to OSPI to allow us to sign the contract when we receive their form D-10.

So that's kind of the D form process.

Any questions?

In shorthand is that checks and balances?

It is.

It is that we are implementing our projects in a manner that the state has decreed.

All right thank you.

Well if there are not any other questions or comments on this item check the roll call please.

Director Geary.

Director Pinkham.

Director Patu.

Aye.

Director Harris.

Aye.

Director Blanford.

Aye.

Director Burke.

Aye.

Director Peters.

Aye.

This motion has passed unanimously.

Okay our fifth and final action item is BEX IV and BTA III final acceptance of contract P5062 with Mike Warlick Construction Incorporated for the Broadview Thompson K-8 Laurelhurst Elementary Sacagawea Elementary and Whitman Middle Schools project.

I move that the school board accept the work performed under contract P 5062 with Mike Werlich Construction Inc. the Broadview Thompson K-8 Laurelhurst Elementary Sacajawea Elementary and Whitman Middle School's project as final.

I second the motion.

So your approval again is required for us to final submit final closeout documents to the three state agencies Department of Revenue, Employment Securities and Labor and Industries.

Any questions or comments about this item?

Seeing none Ms. Shek the roll call please.

Director Harris.

Aye.

Director Patu.

Aye.

Director Pinkham.

Aye.

Director Burke aye Director Geary aye Director Blanford aye Director Peters aye This motion has passed unanimously.

Thank you so we now move on to the introduction portion of the agenda.

We have eight items tonight.

The first one is amending policy 1240 committees.

approval of this item would amend board policy number 1240 committees.

May I hear from myself.

Okay this came to the executive committee on April 6th and it was advance to the full board for approval.

Good evening.

I am happy to speak to this item.

This is a this item proposes two procedural type revisions to the board's committee policies.

The first is a clarification that only the formal or the regular monthly committee meetings will be held as formal public meetings.

As you know the open public meetings act allows less than a quorum of directors to have communications outside formal public meetings and this part of the revision just clarifies the ambiguity that exists in our current policy.

The second revision would allow greater flexibility in setting and amending agendas for your regular board meetings.

as the current policies are structured we can't amend a regular board meeting agenda in advance of this meeting unless the executive committee actually comes together and votes on amending that agenda.

So this revision would allow the superintendent and board president to agree to either add urgent items or to postpone an item if it weren't going to be ready for the regular board meeting.

The advantage of that of course is that's something we can do even if we can't pull the committee together in time and it also gives us a better opportunity to provide public notice for what will actually be on the agenda or not on an agenda on a given regular board meeting.

Director Harris and then Director Blatter.

This does not squelch transparency does it?

The agenda part no I think it actually might help improve it because if for instance something's not going to be heard on a given night or something needs to be added urgently this would actually allow us to do that and get public notice out before the meeting starts here.

The board as a whole you can always come into a meeting and amend the agenda here at this meeting but if we know about a change that needs to be made before the meeting the change can be made and notice can be put out to the public in advance.

So I think actually it might help with transparency and help the public know what to expect at a meeting.

Can you speak to the impetus behind both of these changes?

Yeah so for the first one the clarification about executive committee meetings there's a potential ambiguity in the way the policy is currently written where it says that executive committee or committee meetings will be held as special meetings under the open public meetings act.

but if you you know committees of course are three directors but you can under the open public meetings that have communications between three directors outside of formal meetings.

So the potential ambiguity is that that provision as written could be read to mean under our policy not under state law at least you won't have communication between those three members except in a publicly noticed formal committee meeting and that wasn't the intent of the policy when it was originally adopted so we're just cleaning that up.

And then the second piece on agenda items we ran into a few items in the last year where we knew an item wasn't going to be ready or we needed to add something and we had to scramble to get the executive committee together or the board at the beginning of the meeting had to actually go through the formal process of having a motion to amend the agenda.

So this is just to address that and have a little more flexibility.

I will just say when I saw the first part I was really excited because I remember one time in my I think it was at the start of my second year on the board where in a social occasion there were four board members that came together.

and we looked at each other like can we actually be meeting can we be in conversation with one another and I don't believe in my heart of hearts that the intent of the open public meetings act was at all to squelch our ability to have conversation with one another.

as a matter of fact I believe that it is essential in some cases and their configurations that come together planned and sometimes unplanned that you know I think we are better public servants if we have those opportunities to have communications.

I understand completely the rationale behind having this but I'm grateful that this change has been put into or will soon be put into our policies so that that level of ambiguity does not happen in future meetings.

So thank you for that.

I do I still want to emphasize though even with this change discussions with four members outside of a public meeting are not allowed under the Open Public Meetings Act.

So this doesn't alter that.

It just makes clear that committee members can have interactions outside of those public meetings.

Any other questions or comments on this item?

Thank you.

So next item amending policy 3121 attendance.

May I hear from the chair of this curriculum instruction committee meeting.

This was brought to CNI on March 13th and moved forward for approval.

Pat Sander executive director coordinated school health.

I'm going to have Brad Fulkerson our program manager for attendance present this policy.

Good evening Brad Fulkerson program manager for attendance.

Before you is an amendment to policy 3121 dealing with attendance.

This is a pretty straightforward update largely dealing with updating language of the policy in response to current district initiatives and messaging as well as aligning it with our procedure which had to change due to changes in state law and our ongoing focus on providing earlier intervention and supports to students.

I'll bite whenever I hear the word messaging I want to know what you mean.

That is a good question.

So just bringing in line I think talking about academic excellence instead of academic achievement.

Talking more about supports and interventions instead of just interventions.

Items like that.

One of the things I'd like to share with my colleagues that some of the conversation that came up in committee around this in addition to making sure that it's compliant and cleaning up some of the language.

The superintendent procedure is a nine page document and includes a lot of good meaty stuff.

but it used to have the interventions and supports as near the end of the document and when we had the conversation we said well that's the first thing we should be doing therefore we should front load the document with it and so staff reordered some of the content to just to make it clear that that's the first thing we're looking to do is to find the interventions and supports before we go to a punitive response.

Director Pinkham.

In reading just the first paragraph here and how it's changed where it says students who miss critical instruction and key concepts quickly fall behind in school and are less likely to achieve academic success.

Accordingly school attendance is mandatory and unexcused absences and truancy are prohibited.

I see this in an excuse absence yes but then we still have that challenge with the new bus schedules and new bell times that some of our athletes are going to miss a lot more school time.

can we see this as again missing critical instruction and key concepts.

Those student athletes were going to excuse them but they are still missing school.

I hear that and I believe that that is something that we are looking at in terms of the bell time shifts and how that if that has been a change either positive or negatively to some of those absences our procedure does outline ways for students to make up that work but in a perfect world we would allow them to both participate in their athletics while not missing any of that instruction time.

I think also that where our conundrum is that while we all know the chronic absenteeism takes both into account the state law still has us identifying excused versus unexcused as we're looking at the Becca bill and what we have to do there.

so I think we're trying to be under that umbrella that any absence is an absence that's going to take away from that and I think part of the policy statements are due to the law requiring certain for us to do certain things when they're unexcused according to the BECCA bill.

I know this is taking a policy change and maybe making it a little bit bigger but I think every time something like this comes before us it gives us an opportunity to reflect and one of the things I saw an article that in Washington 193,000 students miss 18 days of school or more that this was in the times April 14th and they're talking about one in six students in Washington were chronically absent.

and so I'm curious if where Seattle is on that in that statistic and recognizing how important attendance is are there specific strategies that we should be building into our MTSS model the PBIS work that you're doing just I just see this as an opportunity to kind of elevate that in the discussion in our awareness.

Do you want to answer the first part, the data?

Yes.

So I believe the state average is between 16 and 17 percent of students are chronically absent.

Our most recent data that came out put us between 12 and 13 percent.

Looking at specific subgroups we do have some larger issues there that need to be addressed.

And then I would say that that is one of the things we're looking at with the MTSS model on that support.

We've been meeting with the Casey Foundation who's interested in looking at chronic absenteeism that way through a case management wraparound service model which actually gets the families in and working together closely with the schools and and it's that support in this case management wrapping around that makes it more personalized.

So I think those are the strategies that we're moving towards and looking at different ways that we can come about in the MTSS delivery of what that support looks like and then what it looks like to develop those plans and support not only the students but the families in that achievement.

We also have a very robust partnership with Seattle Housing Authority and they serve 6000 of our students and they know where they live.

So they have been very much at the forefront of thinking about this with us and about how actually we sent joint letters between the Housing Authority and myself to those students at the start of the school year.

and so there I suppose not exactly a pilot program because it's 6,000 students but they're very much an incubator for us in terms of working together on some ideas that we may translate into something that's bigger across the district.

Dr. Harris.

alluded to some subgroups can you enlighten us as to which groups are out of the norm I guess for lack of a better way to put it.

I would probably have to pull it up again.

I don't know if I could quote off the top of my head but I believe our African American students are disproportionately missing school compared to our white students.

Our native students as well fall into that and I believe there's one or two other groups but I would want to look again at the data to be sure.

And specifically for Seattle Housing Authority it was 29%.

And another follow up question if I might where are we on the continuum working with the Casey foundation and does that potentially come with grant funding?

Yesterday we met with Casey Foundation and the city of Seattle and we have a go ahead to approach three elementary schools in a feeder pattern to take a look at doing the case management service with some funding that will go with that.

And then we're looking to see whether or not there are other partners that will be interested in scaling that up with us.

Thank you very much.

Thank you.

Item 3 renewal of Microsoft software agreement approval of this item would authorize the superintendent to execute a three-year contract for the Microsoft software license agreement with software reseller school scholar buys in the amount of $380,000.

$380,876.78 paid annually for a total amount of 1.142,630 million dollars and 34 cents with a not to exceed clause of 1.5 million dollars to cover increases during the three year period.

May I please hear from the chair of the operations committee.

This item was heard by the operations committee on the 16th of March and move forward for consideration.

Good evening, John Krull, chief information officer.

Jim Young, interim director of technology infrastructure.

We are presenting this item tonight.

It is an item that we have been using in the district for at least 15 years.

We have been using the Microsoft what is it called?

It's a site license.

Microsoft Education Enterprise Agreement, EES, thank you.

We have been using that for quite a few years.

It provides our core production software with Microsoft Office.

It provides all of our server software, all of our client licensing for connecting.

and that's a brief overview of it.

The rest is in the bar.

Do I have any questions?

Can anyone speak to why this was advanced for consideration only?

Did we have the final dollar amounts?

No, the RFP was still out so we did not have the actual vendor, the reseller or the actual dollar amount but we had a good estimate which it came under.

Are there any other questions or comments about this item?

All right thank you.

So next item 4 waiver of two school days at John Muir elementary school due to a norovirus outbreak.

Approval of this item would approve the superintendent's application to the office of superintendent of public instruction requesting permission for John Muir elementary school to not make up two days of missed school.

May we please hear from the chair of the curriculum and instruction policy committee.

This came before CNI on April 3rd and was moved forward with a recommendation for approval.

Ronald Boy, senior assistant general counsel and this has been the year of waivers for us.

I know you guys are familiar as you know the waivers have to be requested through the state by the superintendent and that request has to be to come with a notice that it was approved by the board of directors.

And in this particular case it's an unusual request for a waiver for us.

that is based on illness and under the law an unforeseen natural event can include an epidemic and at John Muir Elementary in March we had an epidemic of the neurovirus.

We saw a dramatic increase in absences on March beginning of March 7th and then dramatically increased on to March 8th.

to over 60 students being out of the school in addition to a number of staff members and throughout the day staff members and students continued to indicate that they had symptoms of the neuro virus and were very ill.

The decision was made in order to control the outbreak to close the school on Thursday and Friday that week.

and we went through an extensive cleaning of the school and the results were actually pretty dramatic in that we quickly resumed to normal absence rates the following week.

So it was a successful kind of closure to control the outbreak and as a result we missed two days of school and have to request the waiver.

Any questions or comments about this item?

Director Burke?

This is a question related to some of the public testimony from today and I was wondering if you could inform us sort of how the from a funding perspective what is what do our expenses look like and what do our what is our reimbursement from the state look like under this type of a model.

Do we continue to pay salaries do we have and then therefore we have to be compensated.

Yes so for the again we would by requesting a waiver we would still and if it were approved we'd still receive our full funding from the state.

However if it were not approved we would find that we would have sort of an imbalance of expenses upon the district because our staff members were still paid for those days except for the ones that were sick.

They used separate funding for that.

So we'd be looking at transportation costs and then additional payment and it's estimated like conservatively that the two days would cost the district about $22,000 if the waiver were not approved.

Thank you.

Item 5, contract for new library collections for Edmund S. Meaney Middle, Robert Eagle Staff Middle, Cedar Park Elementary, Olympic Hills Elementary School, Decatur Elementary and Licton Springs K-8.

Approval of this item would authorize the superintendent to execute a contract with somebody in the amount not to exceed $1.1 million for new library collections.

May we please hear from the Chair of CNI.

This was heard by CNI on April 3rd and moved forward for consideration and it was for consideration due to some some timing challenges which I'm expecting we will hear about now.

My name is Eric Caldwell.

I'm the manager of library services and instructional technology.

This motion is similar to motions we've had in the past.

We've done this whenever we've opened new schools.

We opened five new schools last year.

We have six scheduled for this next fall that we'll get libraries.

We have seven total.

The process is fairly compressed and there's a lot of work that has to be done even after the contract is approved.

We have to actually do the selection of the material once we've got a vendor.

So this year because we had to be really careful about budgets we were really up against the timeline to be able to start the RFP and the RFP process actually does not close until this Friday.

We'll have a selection committee that will take care of the qualitative measures which I'll talk about in just a second on Tuesday with a recommendation.

So we'll have a vendor selected next week.

but unfortunately we weren't able to get it done in time and if we had waited to come to the board we wouldn't have been able to get libraries in place by the fall so we're just kind of trying to work those two schedules.

This item as stated in the bar is adding new libraries to six new libraries.

Libraries are really important part of our schools not only because they're seen as being the heart of the school by many families and communities but they're an important part of the academic success for our students.

And so it's really important that we have strong vibrant collections and collections that represent the kids that are in the school.

They see themselves in the materials that are there.

So we want to make sure that we actually have collections that are representative of what we see in the other collections in the district in terms of size and what we see in national norms.

So that's why the size of the libraries were selected as noted in the bar.

A couple of things to note about the changes, some things that are different this year from last year.

In doing the community engagement and standard process after we go through one of these adoptions I'll go back and talk with the librarians, actually it's a continuous process I talk to them all the time.

about the new collections that come in.

There's a strong comment that in last year's process we considered was in this two-step phase as we go through this process we select a vendor that vendor helps our librarians and library services build the collection so that it's appropriate for the school that takes about a month and a half.

This year we'll do that from May until the 15th of June.

Same schedule as we had last year.

But if the vendor does not have an adequate selection for that as librarians to make a good diverse collection we have to get outside resources.

Last year it was a struggle.

We were able to still get good resources so the libraries had a diverse collection but we had to work at finding other resources to ask that vendor to fulfill and they were able to do that.

So this time around we've changed the RFP process.

so that we did two things.

One we want to make sure that they're having an actual disbursement so we've asked them to benchmark against the national standard.

And then we've also asked that they give us a clear indication of how many authors, subjects and characters in their stories represent diverse cultures, ethnicities and backgrounds.

And then we'll take a look at that segment as part of the evaluation with librarians and folks from the content specialist group.

to evaluate whether or not that vendor can really provide us with diversity in the initial collection development phase.

And that's part of the reason why this is taking a bit longer too so we'll go through that process on Tuesday.

The other thing that's different is last year we had five schools but not all of them got complete collections because some of them were existing programs and we augmented those collections because they were larger schools.

This year we have four new programs they'll get four new collections.

We have two existing programs Licton Springs and Olympic Hills.

They have really old and pretty tarnished collections.

Both schools average age of their collection is over 20 years.

They have less than 8% of the total of their books having been purchased with copyright dates after 2010. They especially when they moved to Cedar Park had to really downsize their library in order to fit in this tiny space and actually Licton Springs had to do the same thing.

So looking at their collections now there's very little that's truly moving all that over and integrating it with a new collection would be more difficult than just getting a new collection.

So we will make sure that the books that are there are either the ones of value so ones that are just recently purchased will be coming with the school or that they find a good place to go if they're still useful or if not we'll use our surplus process as we normally do.

I raised my hand to ask a question before your presentation started to move towards not only the quality of the collection but is it culturally responsive and anti-biased.

and so I am pleased to hear you say that before I ask the question and I am curious as to what weight is given to the culturally responsive anti-bias as opposed to other factors that would

So we're giving 30% to that quality factor and 70% to price.

There are also some initial barriers for folks to pass and I'm very confident in looking at the vendors that we have and some of the vendors just after they looked at what they would have to qualify to be able to present dropped out that we'll have vendors that are actually able to provide that breadth.

then it'll be up to us to make sure that we get a collection that's appropriate for each school and reflects every kid and family that is in that school so they see themselves in that collection.

And that's a core part of the charge I've given to the librarians and talking about what this looks like so that you know if they're coming into a new library some of them these are they're a new librarian in that situation that I'm expecting them in the prelude of coming up to this contract that they gather that information and they really know who their kids are going to be and make sure that that collection represents them not just in terms of subject matter which is fairly easy but also that we're looking at authors and content beyond just the subject.

Are there other factors in the quality category that you consider beyond being culturally responsive and anti-bias?

So we're looking at also making sure that they have all of the local award winners.

So there are a number of local library associations that look at not only local authors and subjects but subjects that are of interest to folks here in the Northwest.

and so those aren't necessarily the same winners or the books you would see in other collections.

But we've asked that they have five years of those winners in their collection availability across the category and that's both fiction and nonfiction.

And then the benchmark that we're using HW Wilson collections is a nationally known collection librarians get together every couple of years to create a core collection for elementary, middle and high school.

and that elementary collection is about 12,000 volume.

So we're asking that they have at least 90% of that but then we'll also look to see if they go beyond that and what do they have in those kind of critical pieces.

My last question would be around where did you get the feedback that it was that the prior adoption was too heavily weighted towards price as opposed to cost.

Well there were two prices opposed to quality.

Well there were two factors.

One is I saw that in setting up the requisites for the actual RFP last year I went out and talked to the librarians who we had gone through this experience with before and it worked out fine.

So we essentially went with the same process we had before because it worked out well.

and then when we started into it pretty early all the librarians who were working with the contractor were running into problems getting the selection that they needed to start with and so we had to work through a lot of problems to get there.

So after that process ended I talked with all of the librarians who had to go through that selection process with us and what were their struggles and that's where that came out.

What was clear to me is that once we put together this process because before we really had more of a gatekeeper for quality and said you need to have these factors and if you had that that's fine then we're just going to look at price.

And then I didn't have any input into it after that it was a contracting process.

And so that I noticed is just an error and are not being able to come back and look.

and really have a second look at the vendors who are coming to make sure that we're going to get that quality because otherwise it was just aggregated to saying whatever the best price is is what you get as long as they met those gatekeeping pieces.

Thank you.

Director Harris.

This might not be a question for you but a question for Dr. Kanoshita and recalling that we're setting up new schools Cedar Park especially and that with the ELA K through 5 adoption we are using capital funds to do that.

There is a Friday memo a bit back that said something about readers and writers workshop and frankly I'm confused.

We actually researched that today and that was actually an error.

That should not have been in the PowerPoint that was presented to parents or any information.

They will be getting center for collective classroom in terms of their when we get if and when hopefully when we get the adoption they'll get the full complement.

And that's the case for all the new elementary schools is that correct?

That is correct.

I think that one of the things that might have led to the confusion is that some of the strategies that were used you know from you know some of the old materials might be used with some of the new materials but they are getting the new materials for sure.

Thank you.

Director Pinkham.

So again for this list it doesn't list all the new schools on it as far as getting new books for the library such as Cascadia isn't on this list is that because you feel that their current library is sufficient or not even have a current library in a sense you know where is Cascadia getting their books from?

So Cascadia was a new school two years ago three years ago and at that time we bought them a whole new library.

and they fit within that one criteria that you had before the Wilson or whatever as far as being good representation diverse.

So at that time when we built that library with the librarian that was there we also worked with a committee of parents that were pretty active and wanted to be having their voice in selection.

I was pretty confident that we had a good selection and we were working with a different vendor that didn't have the same kinds of issues of selection.

We did not use the HW Wilson benchmark at that time because we weren't really running into problems.

But it was clear that this time around price was if it's the sole determination could lead to not being able to really control the quality as well as I would have liked.

Could there be a way for us to run the HW Wilson on Cascadia's Curtin library to see if there is a need for any additions even though it was two years ago.

Absolutely we could.

In fact the collection development tools that are used by the vendor at that time include using the HW Wilson selection criteria.

It's one of the tools they use when they build the collection.

It's pretty standard for large companies to do that.

That's why it's not really difficult for them to say that they have that.

It's smaller vendors who don't have a really well developed collection or collection development department that may run into problems.

Thank you.

Any other questions on this item?

Thank you.

Item 6. BTA3 and BTA4 award contract K5074 bid number B11631 to Field Turf USA Incorporated for the synthetic turf replacement track resurfacing and field lighting infrastructure at Roosevelt High School project.

Approval of this item would authorize a superintendent to execute contract K 5074 bid number B 11631 with field turf USA incorporated for the synthetic turf replacement track resurfacing and field lighting infrastructure at Roosevelt High School project in the amount of $904,166.

May we please hear from the chair of the operations committee.

This item was heard by the operations committee on March 16th and moved forward for consideration as was the next item.

again Richard Best director of capital projects and planning and the reasons that this item and the next item were moved forward for consideration is because we did not have numbers when we went to the operations committee.

This project bid on April 12th and so we wanted to bring it forward to tonight's for introduction so we could get the contractor issued a notice to proceed in May so he could begin assembling the materials that he needs to perform this work this summer.

The work at this includes the replacement of the synthetic turf.

It includes resurfacing the track and then we are making provisions and that's what the field lighting infrastructure we are making provisions so that we can erect field lighting there at the school next year.

We have to go through a SEPA process for the field lighting and we are currently engaged in that process so so that we don't have to make revisions to the synthetic turf.

We're providing the infrastructure there this year and then we'll be able to provide the lights next year at the completion of the SEPA process.

So I open it up to questions.

I have one question.

I'm looking at the different bids and there's quite a difference in the bids.

There's quite a range.

so I can tell you that we have generally three of these four bidders bid a substantial amount of our work.

The one bidder that I cannot comment on is A1 Landscaping.

Sprint Turf, Field Turf and Hellas bid a lot of our synthetic turf replacement projects.

So I don't know why they're the outlier.

They clearly were looking at this project different than the other three companies.

It's a shame because they're the only ones based in Washington.

Every other one is out of state.

Are there any other questions or comments about this item?

All right thank you.

Item 6 BTA 4 award contract K5077.

Yeah K5077 bid number B11642 to Western Ventures construction for the Garfield High School roof replacement project.

What?

You're not the one that's online?

Yeah.

You said item six.

It's item six.

Okay.

Right.

I think okay.

I said six but I was reading seven.

Correct.

It was going on.

All right.

Okay.

Correct.

Item seven.

We'll take it from the top.

BTA IV award contract K5077 bid number B11642 to Western Ventures construction for the Garfield High School roof replacement project.

Approval of this item would authorize the superintendent to execute construction contract K5077 bid number B11642 to the Western Ventures construction for the Garfield High School roof replacement project in the amount of $1,030,000 plus Washington state sales tax.

And we did already hear from the operations committee chair on this item.

So again we had four bidders on this project.

This project the bids opened on March 29th.

Western Ventures is the low bidder.

We are replacing the roofing system on the historic portion of Garfield High School that was not replaced in 2006 when we implemented that project when we implemented a major renovation of that project.

at the operations committee were asked to go back and look at what when the last date the work was done on that roof.

We could not determine that from the records that we had as to when we had last replaced or that roof.

We know that it was not a part of the project in 2006. so we're replacing the roof with a new three ply SPS modified C PLAS roofing system and that is the approval of the alternate that is in this bid package.

So is this actually seem like I've seen this roof replacement more than once going through here.

So how many times are we replacing this roof?

So you approved a budget increase.

you approved an architect's increase and now you are actually approving the contractor the superintendent to enter into a contract with the construction company who will actually replace the roof.

And yes I agree you have seen this several times in the past several months.

Different nuances.

Thank you.

Any other questions, comments about this item?

Okay we'll move on to item 8. PTA 4 award contract K 5088 to Wayne's Roofing Incorporated for the Ballard and West Seattle high school roof replacement project.

Approval of this item would authorize the superintendent to execute construction of the aforementioned contract in the amount of $9,361,358 plus Washington state sales tax.

I'm not sure if we heard from the chair of ops on this.

No this item was heard by the operations committee also on the 16th of March and moved forward for approval.

Yes and we did have numbers at the operations committee to review on this project.

I can share with you that our project is within budget and the increased budget and Wayne's roofing is a very high performing contractor We are utilizing the E&I cooperative purchasing services agreement to have Wayne's Roofing do this.

They participated in the investigation phase.

They participated in the design meetings and it should produce a high quality roofing installation with actually minimal change orders.

They did several investigative cuts at both Ballard High School and West Seattle so they know the underlying substrate conditions that they're going to be encountering when they implement this work.

Are there any questions or comments about this item?

Director Geary.

So much about the underlying item but I do note under the equity analysis you state this motion was not put through the process of a full racial equity analysis and then go on to mention how the BTA projects were selected originally and I appreciate you acknowledging that language.

That's something that I have mentioned in the past so I just want to call out that I recognize that that is now happening and I think that that is good for transparency.

and I would like to see that happen on any of our bars that if that is the case whatever considerations were made are fine to list after that but just so that we're being transparent in terms of what analysis was done.

So thank you for that.

Any other questions or comments about this item?

Seeing none I believe we are now finished so there being no further business to come before the board the regular board meeting is now adjourned at 7.59 p.m.

Thank you everyone.