Seattle Schools Board Meeting July 8, 2026

Good afternoon, we will call the meeting to order momentarily and SPS TV will begin broadcasting.

All right.

Good afternoon everyone.

The July 8th 2026 regular board meeting is called to order at 4 30 p.m.

We would like to acknowledge that we are on ancestral lands and the traditional territories of the Puget Sound Coast Salish people.

Staff for the roll call please.

Vice President Briggs.

here director Lavallee here director Mizrahi here director Rankin director Smith here director Song here and president top here all right we're gonna move right on to our superintendent comments and superintendent Schuldner is joining us virtually this evening so superintendent Schuldner I'll let you have the floor

Well, thank you so much.

Good afternoon, everyone.

I apologize for my physical absence, but I hope that my digital visage is enough.

I really appreciate the time and being here.

The reason why I'm not there is that I've been invited and I'm really, really honored to go to meet with a bunch of other education leaders from around the country to talk about the future of education.

And I will happily update everybody around the conference when I get back.

But again, You know, my heart and my time needs to be focused on Seattle.

And so I always want to make sure that I am present, even in a digital way, for that.

I want to also just thank everybody for being here.

It is the summer.

I do know that, you know, typically in school districts, people take some time off.

but we're really working very, very hard on the work that needs to be done for the district to make it solve and to put children first and to really reorganize in a way that is going for our students and centering our students.

and to that end, you know, I do want to acknowledge and we'll make much more public about this is that we have hired our seven executive directors for our leadership within our school's division, which I'm really proud of.

You've heard me say this which is in order for us to serve our children and our schools.

We need people who are able to support elementary, middle, high school.

And so we've been able to do that.

And so we're gonna be unveiling some more of our changes over the summer.

And I just wanna thank everybody who recognizes that change needs to happen.

and that sometimes change is hard, but that we're again always trying to put our children first and foremost and make the decisions around that.

I really just appreciate everybody that's been working over the summer.

We have summer school, we have programs, and really I'm here tonight to listen and then to hear the board's actions.

So with that, I really appreciate everybody's time.

I'll turn it back over to President Tom.

Thank you.

Perfect.

Thank you, Superintendent Schuldner.

We will move on to committee and liaison reports.

Just a few things to note for board directors.

There are a few conversations carryover still from our retreat, trying to spread them out over our meetings.

This evening we'll have an opportunity for our committee discussion that we didn't get to at our retreat.

And then in August at our special board meeting, we will have a board engagement conversation.

So just know that those are Those are in the works.

Do our board committee chairs or liaisons have any reports for us?

Director Lavallee.

Hi yeah speaking from the operations committee we reviewed potential changes to school board policy that we might recommend at some point hopefully in the next two to three months that looks like that looks at the student assignment transition plan as well as what our programs and what are various different attributes of what are each thing consisting of and what the board approves and wants to see updates on versus what is within the superintendent's scope and trying to get clarity around that.

So we will be bringing something to the committee this next month for review and then hopefully bringing it to the board at some point after that depending on how much review and revisions we want to do at that point in time.

I just say we saw that on our calendar as well because we will have then the timing wise hopefully works out for a vote on a student assignment plan.

Yes we are trying to get that in place for early fall is the goal in moving that so quickly on this because we want to get it in place by early fall so that the team here within the district knows what they're accountable to and it can build the timelines to the right cadence to be able to match the need for that as well as the timelines of when students apply to, you know, go to option schools.

So working on trying to get that policy in a timely manner so that staff has the time to show the board what is happening.

Thank you, Director Lavallee.

I know that's a huge bucket of work that the board sent to your committee, so I appreciate all the work you're doing on it.

Director Mizarahi.

I have two updates.

From the policy committee, we are continuing our work on the goals and guardrails and figuring out where those fit into our overall policy.

And I think it goes along with, if you want to talk about large scopes of work, really thinking about the entirety of our policy manual and kind of how where everything goes in a way that acknowledges the distinction between the work that we're doing as a board and how we structure ourselves versus the work that the district does that we sort of help inform through our policies.

So we are continuing to do that and we'll hopefully have something to bring to the board.

in a timely manner.

Probably after the next policy meeting, we'll have those goals and guardrails to bring forward.

Not different from what was presented, but at least now placed within where it should be within our policies.

So there's that.

I also have an update from the FEPP liaison position that I do.

Just so folks know, that $1.3 billion allocation has been transmitted from the mayor's office from Deal to the city council.

It is The FEP levy covers the pre-K work.

A lot of that does happen in our buildings.

The Seattle Promise, those are fairly well defined.

There's lots of work that goes into it, but the most squishy part of the FEP levy and how it gets spent is that K-12 money.

So that's what a lot of the conversation has been around.

I think in line with a lot of the advocacy that we heard, a lot of that money for this year is like viewed as a transition year where it's continuing and continuity with programs that existed in the previous version of the FEP levy then there'll be more conversation around what that looks like long term but there are some interesting things in there so like the health care the clinics that we have the free meals for students so right now the process-wise it's in the hands of City Council there are lots of amendments like there always are a council and then that will get worked on and be part of the overall budget I think there are definitely areas if folks go in and look where there are parts of it that are implemented by the school district and you know I think that thus far we've had a good collaborative approach with the city on trying to make sure that we're looped in to how stuff works and hopefully that continues perfect yeah and it was again another large body work the board sent to the committee to work through so thank you for that Director Song

The finance and audit committee met on June 8th and the bulk of our meeting was spent on doing a deep dive on transportation.

So there's thank you so much to the transportation team to coming to our committee and giving a detailed presentation on how transportation is funded and kind of the cost drivers for us.

I think what's important to know is that we spend in twenty four, twenty five sixty three million dollars on bus transportation and the state reimbursed us at 44 million.

So it's about a 20 million dollar gap.

And I think for us as board members, the thing to consider is if we're running transportation at a 20 million dollar deficit, that is there are trade offs.

That is money that could be spent directly in classrooms or in other investments that we want to make.

And so the directive that this committee gave to our transportation team is to take our feedback and our questions and come back to the committee and then to the board with some ideas on how we could reduce that deficit in the upcoming budget.

The kind of one of the roles that not only do we approve the overall budget, but one of our roles that we have is that we approve transportation service standards.

So there is an opportunity for us to think about what changes we can make to transportation.

Any other liaison reports?

Director Rankin I just have actually a quick reminder to add on to Joe's is that the policy committee has a draft for a resolution and taking a position on ballot initiatives in the fall so just a reminder to directors that that's been posted with the materials we talked about it in a previous meeting if you want to provide feedback amendments adjustments what have you to send them to the board office and then the committee can look at those and take those into consideration to develop the final version

Others?

All right, then I think we're gonna move on to, is it possible to do, because we have 20 minutes, our enrollment update?

If we stay at the dais?

I'm looking at Superintendent Schuldner.

He says yes, so, or a thumbs up.

So instead of moving to the U, I'm hoping staff can grab our paperwork from the U for the enrollment update, and then who is ever presenting?

I don't know who's presenting, Superintendent Schuldner.

Sure, since I can't see.

I want to make sure everybody's comfortable.

If it's easier to do it at the horseshoe, we can.

I just want to make sure that we're...

But you have to do public comment in 19 minutes, right?

Yeah, I think we're good.

We're good at the U.

Yeah, this is all good.

Oh, we're good at the dais, sorry.

Okay, so then it would be Director Fau Manu and I think Dr. Campbell is online as well.

So, Fau, I will defer to you and I'm also happy to help in any way I can.

I think she's online.

Ah, got it.

So we're missing a key staff person here.

All right, so that might not work as...

So close.

Well, then at this point, we may wait a few more minutes.

Yeah, they were not scheduled at this time, so it's no knock on them.

All right, so we're going to adjourn for 15 minutes and we will come back at 5 p.m.

for public testimony.

we are going to move into an enrollment update welcome well thank you everyone I really appreciate the time uh I welcome uh Thao Manu, our wonderful head of enrollment.

Thao, wherever you'd like to sit or stand, whatever you need, please do as you see fit, and I'll be here to support in any way I can.

Can everybody hear me?

Thank you.

Thank you, Superintendent.

Sorry for that.

I apologize.

No, no.

You were early.

You did nothing wrong.

You are in great stead.

Good evening everyone president school board superintendent and our community.

My name is Val Manu and I am the director of enrollment and I'm happy to be here to provide an update for all of you.

And so if we'll just get started that's OK.

So our 2025-26 enrollment, this is a enrollment year-over-year headcount and this is exactly what is shown also on our OSPI website.

So just to confirm that this is something that we look at on a monthly basis and it helps us look at our forecasts and how to project and anticipate for the following year.

So as you can see our May snapshot, I think, in April, we presented our March snapshot.

You can see the enrollment as it continues after October 1, we still are getting new registrations.

So we'd like to take a moment and just take a look and see how we're trending year over year.

and so as you can see from May 2023 to May 2024 there was a loss of about 50 students and then in 2025 you see that difference a lot larger and we focus on that to see what those variables were and what those trends are showing us to help us adjust and refine our forecast.

So the projected enrollment for the October one for the fall headcount is adjusted to 48,740.

What we're looking at is our October year over year based on what we projected in February.

and so in February we actually projected a little bit higher at 48,849.

We adjusted that just below 109 students as the major shifts that we were doing and working with our school choice lottery those major shifts we were reviewing showed that the applications were a little soft in some of our option schools that we anticipated more mobility that they were going to apply for more high demand schools didn't pan out.

So we just made those adjustments so that it was more based on what we saw after those shifts died down and those assignments were placed.

So for some good news our school choice worked really well this year as you can see we received 4,600 applications and we made 44,460 offers.

That's a 97% offering that we made which is unheard of.

We pivoted and looked at the way we did our business for our school choice lottery.

We listened to our families year over year and saying we want better options.

And so we also identified that and recognized that there was space as far as physical capacity and so in protecting neighboring schools with their enrollment we actually pivoted and opened up that capacity and levels beyond what we normally practice in the past and so we were able to make significant strides in that expansion and that 97% choice offering doesn't equate to placements but families were offered a choice of their one to five or whatever they selected on that choice application.

So on May 31st, there were 282 students that remained on all our wait lists and all programs, which is, if you look at the historical view, in 2025, we had 1,100 students that were left on the wait list as of August 31st.

and in 2024 there was even more over 2,000 were left on the wait list.

So these are significant strides in really making sure that families have access and to the schools that they want and feel that will benefit their children.

and so just wanted to make sure that as we continue to move forward with this expansion, as we fill our high demand schools, we may not see these numbers in future because it won't be because of an assignment limitation, it would be because of capacity, physical capacity in space.

I will add if you don't mind you know in my five months being in this district I know that there's this feeling of consternation from families where they say I applied to be at this school and they told me there's no space yet when I walk through the hallways I see empty classrooms and so clearly that can't be true and I want to really thank the enrollment department for really recognizing that issue with our families and now The time that a parent is going to be told, hey, look, there's no space is when there is physically no space, not because of some funding methodology or staffing methodology that says, oh, we don't want to add one more kid because we serve children and families.

And so the idea that if you want to go to one of our schools, we will do what we can.

The only thing we're not going to do is put more kids in the building than the building can handle and so I really again want to thank the enrollment department for making that dramatic shift and that's one of the reasons why we've gone from a thousand plus kids to less than 300 on waitlist.

Thank you, Superintendent Scholdiner.

I'd also like to add the collaboration and cooperation with the principals and our capital planning team in recognizing that, hey, we're going to look beyond some thresholds that we used to practice and really see if there is physical space.

And the principals were absolutely wonderful in being a part of that buy-in.

So some process change impacts I wanted just to daylight here is first our newly highly capable identification parameters and cohorts.

This had an impact on our school lottery as you can imagine we had moved it up a month early and then that was in parallel to the newly eligible HC cohort timeline for parents to make decisions to turn in their applications.

So we did identify or the HC department identified 840 newly eligible students for next year and also 45% of those newly eligible students did opt in for their pathway and were placed there.

Our total HC pathway applications were 1120 and again just 380 of those were were our newly identified students.

And then the 55% of those students were, the majority were our sixth grade and our ninth grade applications for those pathways.

So it was a tremendous, significant change from years past.

in 2025 we had 570 applications for highly capable and the year before that it was about 970. So that dip was because we paused on the decentralization of HC so that decision was made after the open enrollment lottery so that did have an impact on our families opting in.

we talked about the new enrollment timeline as well and you know families have just been sharing how wonderful the information was to identify early enrollment changes to their school choice for next year they got it about I think it was mid-February is when we announced the results of the lottery which is a huge improvement from April and so families were able to make decisions and figure out where they want to go for daycare and you know for all that wonderful stuff that they need to plan and so it was just giving them a helping hand to make sure that they were ready and available to not only accept the choice but to actually retain those students and and show up for school in the fall.

And so we're seeing that in a lot of our data that I'll share with you later, but it has been a great lift to change the new timeline a month early.

It also improved our efficiency for forecasting and initializing our budget and staffing and just being more flexible also to identify space and to offer as many seats as we can to families.

And in cooperation with the highly capable team, they provided some great news as well.

35 highly capable resident students returned from private schools, which is great.

They also have 25 newly registered to SPS that were newly identified as well, and 25 early entrance kindergartens are entering in the fall as well.

So strengthening our kindergarten cohort is probably our story here.

Our incoming cohort is looking stronger.

In the last three years we have improved that ratio from 53% to almost 55%.

So that is great as far as retaining those students and family choosing SPS.

Ten years ago we had a ratio of 66%, so we're not there yet, but we're making really good strides in that upward mobility of retaining our kindergarten eligible families to choose SPS.

In our sixth grade and ninth grade as well, we're seeing improvement in the last four years.

Our sixth grade, our rising fifth to sixth grade has shown also some marked improvements as well in our retention and year over year.

So to capitalize on that is building that momentum and really working towards growing our enrollment in the next five years as part of a superintendent's goal.

and our ninth grade has always been solid.

Students are returning from us and accessing their programs and extracurricular activities and you can see that at 100% and even beyond 100% so we're even retaining and also getting more students, new students to SPS in those grades.

Yeah, I just want to highlight this, you know, for the board and of course for the community.

So even though we are still losing students overall in the district, what you're starting to see is some green shoots, right?

We're retaining more of the kids that are born here.

Now it's a little bit, it's about 1%, but 1% is a big deal.

And we're retaining more of the kids that used to be leaving from fifth to sixth grade.

And we're actually getting more kids into ninth grade than we're in our eighth grade.

So we know that our high schools are a big draw.

We want to make sure that our high schools are open and that people can come back to us.

But you can see that the focus really needs to be on our middle schools, because even though the numbers have gotten a little bit better from 92 to 92.3, that still means that almost 8% of our fifth graders are leaving the district.

and so that's why a lot of focus is gonna be on middle schools in terms of what we're gonna do to support those programs.

And then what's not shown here is, of course, is we're still losing kids sixth to seventh, seventh to eighth.

And so it's great to see that we're actually gaining them back in high school, but it's not enough to make up for the difference.

But the good news is the metrics on all of these different parameters are increasing.

We just need to do better so that we're gonna see that dip but hopefully we're gonna start to kind of level out and then we're gonna start to go up.

So even though we can't grow our way out of the deficit, the more important thing is we're a school district and we should be the place that families want to send their children.

And we're seeing that that is more true now than it was last year.

And it's certainly our hope that next year it's even more true then.

okay all right any questions so we're going to start public comment in two minutes so we're going to finish we're going to come back to questions and discussion post public comment so i'm going to ask board directors to hold their comments until until after public comment, and we'll call you back up.

Thank you.

I promise I'll stay here.

Thank you.

A little disjointed, and I'm sorry about that, but it'll allow us to start public testimony on time at 5 o'clock.

And I will at least start reading the rules here, and then we'll start exactly at 5. So...

We have now reached the public testimony portion of the agenda.

Board policy 1400 provides our rules for testimony.

The board expects the same standard of civility for those participating in public comment as the board expects of itself.

As board president, I have the right to and I will interrupt any speaker who fails to observe the standard of civility required by our procedure.

A speaker who refuses or fails to comply with these guidelines or who otherwise substantially disrupts the orderly operation of this meeting may be asked to leave the meeting.

We'll pass it off to staff now to summarize a few additional points and then at 5 p.m.

we will call on the listed speakers.

Thank you President Hopp.

The board will take testimony from those on the testimony list and will go to the waiting list if we are missing speakers.

Please wait until called to approach the podium or unmute and only one person may speak at a time.

The board's procedure provides that most of your time should be spent on the topic you signed up to speak to.

Speakers may cede their time to another person, but this must be done when the listed speaker is called.

Time isn't restarted and the total time remains two minutes.

The timer at the podium will indicate the time remaining for speakers here in person.

When the light is red and a beep sounds, it means that your time has been exhausted and the next speaker will be called.

For those joining by phone the beep will be the indication that time has been exhausted Moving into our list now for those joining by phone Please press star six to unmute on the conference line and for everyone Please do you reintroduce yourself when called as I may miss some pronunciations as we move through today's list The first speaker is Ariel Wetzel

Hello, I'm Arielle Wetzel.

I'm speaking about special education.

I'm a single parent of three elementary-aged children.

I'm speaking about my middle child, my daughter, who has a disability.

My daughter just completed kindergarten in the extended resource program at Madrona Elementary.

She felt safe at this school and adored her amazing teachers and instructional aides.

Our family loved Madrona so much, we decided to send my youngest child there for kindergarten this fall, rather than the neighborhood school where my older child attends.

Families often ask why we're at Madrona rather than our neighborhood school and they are shocked to learn that special ed services are not offered at every school, that disabled children are bust and segregated and that we can't participate fully in school choice because there must be a special ed and gen ed seat open and that school must offer their special ed program.

Now I'm told my daughter isn't, because she isn't performing at grade level, she has to leave the extended resource program and move to the more restrictive focus pathway.

This would mean changing schools, leaving the community she knows and trusts, and busing to whichever school the district assigns.

This would also mean a huge reduction in time spent in general education.

The reasons that have been given to me have prioritized the adult staffing needs and not what's best for students.

Instead of being creative and ensuring that the school has appropriate resources to meet the needs of disabled children, the disabled children are just sent away.

I'm doing everything I can to fight for my daughter's right to a free and appropriate education in her least restrictive environment.

I've spent hundreds of hours and thousands of dollars on advocacy.

If I fail, I'm looking at the possibility of having three children in three different elementary schools and this is really untenable since there's just one of me and these schools have the same bell time.

Parents of disabled children already have extraordinary demands placed on our time and money by an ableist system that does not support or understand the gifts our children bring.

The next speaker is Manuel Eslai.

Hello, this is Manuela Sly and I cede my time to Cinta Cordova and she is in the building.

Manuela, can you say one more time who you ceded your time to?

I cede my time to Cinta Cordova.

Perfect.

Yes, come on up.

Oh, no.

Is it is that individual here?

Yeah.

Manuela, we have she is has her own spot.

Pardon?

I'm pretty sure that I'm the sixth slot, but I had someone sign up for me and another one, Ishani Gupta, because my message is kind of long, but I do have my own time slot, too.

I just wanted to clear that.

All right.

We so it's a two minute time slot.

We would love to have further if there's written comment, we would love to have that submitted to the board.

Also, there'll be a little bit of break.

We can have comment.

And would you like to go now or would you like to wait?

I could go during mine.

Perfect.

The next speaker is Chris Jackins.

Sabrina Burr let us know she will not be providing testimony tonight.

My name is Chris Jackins box 84063 Seattle 98124. On the 2026-2027 budget at tonight's budget hearing I will submit a 16 page memo on district budgets and against closing schools.

A preview of two funding ideas.

Number one take measures to increase attendance of already enrolled students and thereby increase state funding.

Number two, award a congratulations of one dollar to each student each day they attend school.

On the sale of a residential property across from Leshy Elementary, three points.

Number one, the money, perhaps a million dollars, would be, quote, exclusively to benefit Leshy Elementary, unquote.

Number two, funding one school exclusively separately from all other schools creates problems for a public school system.

It makes it more private.

Number three, what if it was a billion dollars exclusively for only one school?

The district needs to resolve issues about the proposal.

Please vote no.

On the 129 million dollar John Marshall School Project, three points.

Number one, big chunks of the 1926 historic school would be demolished including interiors.

Number two, the district has refused to cooperate with the city landmarks board despite the school being landmark eligible.

Number three, the district is refusing to hold an environmental review public meeting.

Please vote no.

I requested the checklist several weeks ago.

I haven't gotten it.

In a week the deadline comes up.

on gigantic technology spending.

There are two technology contracts which together amount to over 80 million dollars.

There should be a public discussion before spending 80 million dollars.

Please delay this vote.

Thank you very much.

The next speaker is Cinta Cordova.

Good evening Superintendent Scholdiner, esteemed school board members, distinguished guests, visitors, and fellow students.

My name is Cinta Cordova and I stand before you today as a sophomore student advocate with my peers and a Washington NAACP Youth Council member.

I'm here because the current states of our school demand urgent systemic change.

We are facing real crises regarding our safety, mental health, and overall well-being.

Students feel unsupported and safe, and we cannot afford passive leadership.

Repairing our school environments will take consistency, time, and structural changes, which is why we must start now.

I know it's summer, and I respect your schedules, of course, but our safety does not take a summer vacation.

I want to make it clear I am not just advocating for high school, middle school, and elementary as well.

I want to highlight the King County Youth Bill of Rights.

This isn't just a document, it's a solution to the crisis we are experiencing.

I'm curious to know if any of the school board members are aware of the King County Youth Bill of Rights.

While it's a county framework and not legally binding for SPS, it serves as a powerful advocacy tool and it helps shape SPS decision-making processes by offering a structured framework of what the broader community expects, aligning with the countywide equity goals that SBS should mirror.

This bill represents over 2,000 local youth voices passed into legislation in January 2025, declaring that we the children and youth of King County uphold the right to actively participate in civic life and contribute to decision-making processes that shape our future and present communities.

This isn't an abstract wish list.

It's a direct mandate from the very youth that you serve.

Historically, July board meetings are low turnout.

I will be going over my time, I apologize, but this message cannot be cut down.

Flexibility in any latitude you can provide is greatly appreciated.

Education and learning.

We the children and youth of King County uphold education as a pathway to progress, economic stability, and development.

Every young individual receives a quality education in a supportive learning environment where they feel emotionally, mentally, and physically able.

Every young individual receives unbiased education that expands their knowledge, trade, and skills and that addresses individual learning needs.

Every young individual is supported by their community in building their educational goals.

Every young individual receives training that prepares them for the next stages of life.

Safety and security.

We the children and youth of King County assert that all young people should feel safe and protected at home, at school, and in their communities.

Every young individual has a safe community that is free from violence.

Every young individual has a learning environment that is physically and emotionally safe, free from violence, judgment, and inequity.

Every young individual has safe spaces shielded from gun violence and resources.

They are impacted by gun violence.

I want to reiterate that.

Gun violence is is highlighted in this.

Every young individual safely travels routes, roads, and sidewalks within their communities.

Youth voice, we the children and youth of King County uphold the right, like I want to reiterate, to actively participate in civic life and contribute to decision-making processes that shape our future and present communities.

To show how relevant this bill is, I want to connect it to existing SPS frameworks for education and learning.

It aligns with SPS board policy number 0030 which ensures educational and racial equity and the SPS strategic plan 2025-2030 which focuses on high quality instruction and access for students furthest from justice.

For safety and security, it connects the SPS basic rules handbook on safety and welcoming environments requiring trauma-informed practices in SPS policy series 3000 which prohibits bullying and exclusionary discipline.

For community and belonging, it echoes SPS Student Rights and Responsibilities, WAC 392-400805, guaranteeing an inclusive and safe classroom culture and the SPS civic engagement and student voice policy, protecting students' rights to assemble and co-create their education.

We want King County Youth Bill of Rights to be a permanent foundational factor in how SPS makes decisions moving forward.

To achieve this, we need to move past public testimony and into real collaborative action.

We're calling for immediate creation of a youth well-being and safety action plan.

This plan cannot be drafted behind closed doors.

It must be co-created by district leadership, community members, and of course, student peers who are living the reality of school every day.

We need structures that guarantee youth guaranteeing youth are at the forefront of change, sitting at an actual table where budgeting and policy decisions happen, regardless of involvement.

This change won't happen overnight, but the timeline must begin today.

I am formally requesting a meeting between students, student leaders, community members, and those who testify at these meetings, along with the superintendent and members of this board.

before the upcoming school year begins and going into the upcoming school year.

Our goal is simple to establish the timeline and framework of our joint action plan.

We are ready to bring consistency solutions in our lived experience slash expertise towards it to the table.

The only question left is whether you will open the door and let us sit down.

Thank you for everyone's time and patience.

I'm sorry for going over my time.

The next speaker is Lajaya R. Oh, okay.

The next speaker is Ishani G. She was going to cede her time for me.

Okay.

Then the next speaker is Jason Montalvo.

Is Jason here or online?

Okay.

That concludes public testimony.

Thank you all for being here in July in those nice summer months.

And that concludes our public testimony.

To the students who spoke, if you wouldn't mind getting your contact information to our board office staff so we can make sure we can be in contact with you when we get a moment.

We're going to continue before the consent agenda.

We're going to continue with the enrollment discussion.

So Director Manu is there.

There she is.

If you wouldn't mind coming back up.

Alright and we can go into discussion and questions like normal I can just start off with I think it's I understand that we will not always get to 97% as we look at capacity issues but I think that is pretty incredible I know it was a lift from your office I know it was a lift from interim Superintendent Podesta as he was working through this and through the board as we we pushed for changes on enrollment so thank you for all of your work questions or comments from board directors

Director Mizrahi and then Director Enkin.

I wanted to ask about the timing.

You brought up the earlier timeframe, and I'm just curious.

I know that when we discussed that like a year ago, it was unclear whether that was going to be too early or were people going to know about this.

Is that too early for people to be thinking about the following year that early in the current year?

in now having this year of experience, do we think that this is the right timing?

Do we think that it's too early?

Were there a lot of folks who came in and said, oh my gosh, we didn't realize that the applications were due already, or did we get the word out well enough that people knew what was happening?

Yes, we got the word out that people knew it was happening, and enough people were able to change when they heard about it, even during the month of January, to get their enrollment in and register as well.

But we're finding that the operational efficiency from all this was wildly changed to the better, because my team, to be honest, was really dreading this lift to having it a month early.

and so you don't know because you practice something for so long that you just think that that's it that's how we do it and we had to come out of our box if you will and even the admissions team saw just incredible work done in a small amount of time that they thought they would never be able to meet and they did it with, I wouldn't say ease, because they'll be upset with me, but we sat there scratching our heads because we were all done, basically, by the end of March.

And so whereas that spring, nobody gets a spring break, we are hustling, trying to move all of these wait lists.

and you can imagine we had it through August the whole summer through August 31st and so that management of it to then complete it by May 31st I mean we didn't hear really any complaints from families because we expanded to the degree that they were actually turning us down and you know wanting to stay at their school or waiting for a foreign language, for example, so they wanted to remain on the wait list.

So it was amazing.

And I talked to my team about this every staff meeting, like scratching our heads and saying, is this the new normal?

And I think it is.

And I think the school board had a huge part in that.

And so thank you.

well well i think that that it's great to hear that it's working operationally and certainly finding out earlier is wonderful for families so as long as that third aspect of when the application is due is working for families which sounds like it is and that's it sounds like it's all positive so that's great and that out yeah the outreach that oh sorry superintendent no no no whatever you want though um the outreach that we did in november um was you know

short of magical.

I mean, we had a hustle through that and we just thought, oh my gosh, this is going to be whatever.

And so it was just all in our head.

I mean, families were absolutely, utterly grateful that they were able to hear and understand what was going on, what the transition looked like and what they needed to do to set themselves up for success as well.

And so we were there along with them to help guide them.

And so that was probably the most pinnacle, the most appreciative from our families.

Yeah, I mean, what we're really seeing is there's an old adage is kind of make your rules for your best people or make the rules that you want to have.

And by actually not worrying about fear, not worrying about, oh, what if, is these rules make a lot of sense.

And what we hope, I mean, knock on wood, is by having these things done early, by getting to 97%, which means we really don't have much wait list left and we really are not probably going to move a lot of those, is it means that quite possibly we won't have an October shuffle.

because if we have the kids where they are, we can then do the June adjustments in a really thoughtful way.

It will hopefully set us up so that when we start the school year, we won't have to have those dramatic changes because it's one thing to say to a teacher at the end of the school year, hey, you're going to go from this one building to another.

We're going to try to make things better, but this is where the kids are.

We need you to go to say in October, that class that has already gotten to know you, that class that's already part of your life, we're now gonna rip asunder and put you somewhere else.

That's really detrimental to children and to staff.

And so with Thao and the team, by moving so much quicker, we think this is setting us up so that we can do these China-June adjustments Get everything done and then hope by October really don't have to do an October shuffle, maybe one or two, but not the kind of overwhelming October shuffle that Seattle is used to.

Yeah, they thank you for those comments, Ben, and thank you for the reporting and all the work.

And this is kind of proof that we actually can do things differently.

You know, the the October shuffle Everything is of our own making, right?

Everything is of our own making.

And I wanna commend you and your team, Pfau, for being willing to do it because for so, and I think Fred and Ben definitely had a lot to do with this too, to be willing to say yes.

for so long the answer has been, well, that's not how we do it.

Nope, we don't do it that way.

Even hearing, well, families are used to the cadence of October Shuffle.

I'm like, no, that's not a cadence that we want to be used to.

Everybody sort of braces themselves for it.

This is I think a really good example of when we actually center the needs of our students and families and figure out how to meet those and say, we'll try it.

We can actually, things can actually change.

We actually can do hard things.

we can do it.

Thank you.

Thank you, Director Rankin.

The flip side of that, though, what I'm wondering is there are going to be implications for some of our neighborhood schools that are changing dramatically.

And so my, I guess, request or wonder is for us as a board and for staff and for the superintendent as we go into the fall, I'm just assuming there's going to be like, whoa, schools that are gonna say, whoa, we all of a sudden have one fewer classroom, one fewer this, one fewer that.

What can we do or what can we think about before that becomes an emergency to sort of support those communities?

And I don't know if that's something proactively to bring to the operations committee to discuss or just how can we think about that in a little bit more proactive and forward-thinking way, knowing that there are going to be impacts?

No, it's a great question.

And that's why we've already had those conversations with the principal of those schools to think about what it looks like, why we continue to have those conversations during the summer.

That's why the new executive directors of elementary, of middle school, of high school are going to mean that.

Because you're right, there is a impact but the good news and a lot of praise needs to be given to HR as well is by the end of the school year we were able to do the moves we thought we needed to do so people should know 99% where they're going to be next year and if we don't have to do an October shuffle then that impact that first day of school really wouldn't be felt as acutely Now, sure, you're going to miss the teacher that's been there for a couple of years, and that's very important, but the principals should know their staffing, the teachers should know where they are, and that's why moving this forward, both in terms of doing the student count quickly, as well as the teacher adjustments quickly, it should put us in a good position to start the school year without these kind of traumatic changes.

Great.

Do we anticipate any sort of, like, Readjustment August so a couple years ago I volunteered as a as a kindergarten IA for the first week of kindergarten because they had like 16 kids who showed up who hadn't registered ahead of time and that that that was an extreme example but that can happen so are we in a position are we thinking about if I know we don't want to completely set everything in stone because we do have the state count on October 1st that matters for funding.

But if we find in the fall that things don't go as we expected and there's a school that like, wow, could really use another kindergarten class, are we gonna be in a position to be able to address that when the kids show up instead of waiting till October?

Well, I mean, it will depend on how many kids show up on which days, of course.

But yeah, I mean, one of the promises that I had made in terms of the certificated staff for the district was with our changes, we weren't going to let go of the certificated teacher staff.

So we have some teachers in a pool.

that we're going to be holding onto to make sure that if there are extra kids onto places, we can actually move some of our staff.

We also know that those wonderful teachers can help us with long-term absences, people taking leave, things like that.

We appreciate that this is a big city With 800,000 people And lots of moving parts And it is quite possible that over the summer 20 families move in from Texas Because it's too hot there And they love the Pacific Northwest And we should be able to adjust accordingly to that But the good news is the structure I think is going to hold Because of what we've set up Over these last couple of months Great, that's great, thank you

And I'll just add that that mitigation process starts with enrollment and so you know with a guarantee assignment and then we have some options for them if they don't want to go to their neighborhood school.

So all that is done at the enrollment aspect of it before they even show up to to the school that they desire.

Great.

And then I just have one other quick technical question, which is about the early entrance kindergarten.

That is is where's the change in policy on that?

Because in the past, I think it's been sort of at principal discretion.

There's a there's a so in the 80s, I was an early entrance kindergarten, my birthday's on Halloween.

So I had to go and interview with the principal and the principal said, Yes, she can come to kindergarten.

doesn't it's not the best for every kid but for some kids that's you know it's time what was the change and where would we see that in any kind of policy is that a highly capable policy or is that an enrollment and what's the is there is there still a birth cutoff or who makes the decision about the early the early entrance now

So it is in our procedures for the 31-30 SP in the enrollment policy.

It also lives in the highly capable department as well in their policy.

And so the procedures is that students that are turn five by October 31st are eligible to apply to kindergarten early.

And so there's an application process, I believe in March,

and um and then uh the highly capable department will then um execute those applications and and and do all the interviewing and um testing that's that's children really wonderful i know it doesn't apply to a huge number of kids but ben you may think that's just a basic thing that districts have we had a it was a big question mark so just thank you for that that creating the pathway and clarity for me i appreciate it director song

Thank you.

I have two questions.

One, so 97% of the choice applicants did receive a choice offer.

Do we know what percentage of those that received a choice offer actually took their choice?

So we made 3,820 assignments of those placements that we offered.

So that was 83%.

and did we do any follow up as to like why a family did not take their their offer of a choice assignment.

So the 282 let me just explain the two buckets and so the 282 that remained on the wait list 140 of those students did not get an offer at all.

There was just no capacity or space.

The 142 that did get an offer, those were students that were waiting for a foreign language, preferred language, that didn't come about.

So they were able to decline the language that they didn't want and wait for space for the other language.

And then there were also sibling placements.

As you know, there's siblings that are applying for the same school at different grades, and so we're waiting for the capacities and levels for them to simultaneously offer at the same time.

We do offer those families, even though there's no space for other siblings, just so that they understand that there was a seat open for them and they can indicate that they can wait on the wait list or accept it.

It's just that balance of families trying to choose if one should go to one school and the other two should go to another.

So that's what you're seeing remaining on the wait list in that bucket of the 282.

I think a lot of this discourse has been kind of hinging on this idea that option schools draw students away from neighborhood schools and what I found interesting once we looked into the data was that about half of our applicants are actually for neighborhood schools.

Something that you mentioned in this presentation was that there were some option schools that didn't quite meet their demand like what what was the story there.

They just didn't have enough interest as far as applications.

than they did in years past.

So it may be probably a factor in that that we considered is that some of those students were also made eligible for HC and so they had another option to their pathway and they opted there.

So the applicants to those option schools were lower than they have been in the past.

That's right.

Director Lavallee.

Yeah, I've got a few questions for you.

And thank you so much, Director Song.

You asked one of mine already.

How many people try to register for an option school or in the choice process after the May timeline?

Just in the summer, as families are registering for schools, how many reach out and are like, no, no, I wanted this one and had no idea about the process?

Just for clarity, in the past, historically?

Yeah, in the past, historically.

And this doesn't have to do necessarily with the change.

This is just information that I don't know.

And I have talked to families that are like, oh, we had no idea this was happening at all, or had no idea that this was the process.

So new registered students probably wouldn't know about the process as they're coming in new to the SPS.

Yes.

And so they're afforded an option school alternative if they don't want their neighborhood schools.

So we give them an option to choose one of those available schools right upon enrollment.

As far as those who didn't get it and are coming back and saying, how come I didn't get in?

We see that through the transfer appeal process, actually.

So in the past, for example, we opened it up in June 1st to dispute your assignment for next year.

And so we would see nearly 300 to 400 of those in the month of June in the past.

This year we saw 50. so the more you give to them the less that they'll need to ask and say why they didn't get in and also remember we closed it early this year versus August 31st so yes we had a ton of more applications to manage through and the majority of that was because they didn't get on a wait list or get off the wait list.

Okay, my next two are just more requests that you're not gonna be able to answer now.

But I'd love to, within some of these, I'm looking at the HC pathway site enrollment and Rainier View has 27 students attending it next year, something that I was nervous about when we took the vote many months ago about that issue because the way that the area was constructed has less qualifying students in it than the other areas.

and it's a site that's kind of far away in the opposite direction of people going to work or going to wherever they're going at the same time.

So I'd love to know within looking at you know Alki has 125 out of how many qualifying students Rainier View has 27 out of how many qualifying students?

Because I don't have enough information to have any idea what these numbers actually mean within context of the system.

We have that data and I could provide that to you.

That would be wonderful.

And then the next one is kind of along similar lines.

I'd love to, in the conversation of all of these changes and how they impact the system as a whole.

I'd love to see it kind of if you have any sort of analysis already of what schools had more demand going into them that you know I know Cleveland STEM and got a lot of applications and a lot of kids moved into it in this next school year based on the change in this process, which is wonderful.

I'd love to know what you believe the impact is to those other schools on a systematic level.

Where are those kids coming from?

I know that's something that you publish on a regular basis once it has happened, but at this point I know you have a basic understanding of where those impacts are, and I'd love to know that on a systematic level.

level of like are there certain regions that this process really hasn't impacted and some places where you've seen huge impacts to neighborhood schools you know pairing along with what to what director song said is half of them you know aren't to are to different neighborhood schools so like how does how does this interplay and what on a systematic level should we be aware of within that

Yeah that's a great question and it's really important to have this conversation especially with the school board because there's some governance that needs to happen.

So school choice is a board policy.

We have it every year unless you decide not to we're going to continue to offer students what they want.

and we're going to continue to find the space so that we can maximize those opportunities for our families.

It's not okay to say, hey, we're going to hold to protect another school as far as unenrollment.

That was past practice.

And the equity piece is that every student deserves to go to where they want to go to feel successful, and so we can provide that.

We have plenty of schools to choose from, actually, and options.

What really is daylighting the concern I think you are raising is those demographic shifts that are already happening in those low enrollment schools.

They are already there.

The school choice expansion just daylighted that for us.

and so to inform all of you as far as my job is to say, hey, here's some of the regions that is below 60% of their capacity or whatever that threshold is and so it's a conversation about what do we do next because it's still not okay to continue to have them be depleted and it's not because of school choice, but it's a residual of maybe untimely governing, I don't know, right?

So I just want to make sure that we understand that school choice is access.

and if we're going to continue that, how do we come together as leadership to say where are these areas and regions and what do we do as far as investing in these strategies going forward in helping these neighboring regions?

I will say based off of that as well it's not just options either it's you know I know in my region in District 7 in South Seattle there's most of or you know all of the two both of the dual language schools are neighborhood schools and so anyone trying to go to a dual language school needs to apply to a different neighborhood school so it's not necessarily just what option schools are there that no one is assigned to but it's you know are people trying in mass to get into these programs where how far are they coming from what is that applicant so I'm looking for not just an option versus neighborhood but like what are people demanding more of and what are they avoiding on a systematic level so it's I I'm really trying to not shape it in the thing of an option school versus a neighborhood school, but what are people driving towards with some of their decision making here?

So I just want to highlight that Dr. Campbell put her hand up.

So if she is able to speak, I will defer it to her.

Oh, yeah.

Thank you.

Good evening, everybody.

Thank you for that question.

And I think I'm taking notes.

So this is definitely, I think, a study that we can do.

Director Rankin and I'm wondering if it might be something we want to consider bringing to the Ops Committee just, you know, to kind of bet through and just that we're clear on like, because I think you're raising some really good analytical questions.

We have some sort of initial insights, but I think, you know, you're going into depth, I think in a way that really makes sense.

So just want to, just want to verify that we will absolutely take this and, you know, develop something fairly nuanced.

Yeah.

Don't worry, Dr. Campbell, I'll continue to push you on it.

I also want to point out something that you that you mentioned that I think is really important is this district with the board and the community recognized that there was a real response and a real request to have HC sites.

throughout the city so that we can address the needs that the parents have so acutely said that they wanted.

But you are correct to highlight that one of the locations that was chosen seems to not be a place where folks are sending their kids, even if they live within that community and are eligible.

And I think that it is going to behoove us as leaders to really think critically about why that is and if possibly some other decisions need to be made to better serve our students and our families.

So I appreciate you pointing that out.

I also do appreciate that The way that those decisions were made might have felt rushed or might have felt that we didn't have enough time or enough information.

So I think now that we're able to look at the outcome, we can ideate around what might be best for our students.

Thank you, Director Manu.

Oh, we're going to wrap up the enrollment discussion and we're going to move on to the business action items of our agenda.

And we're going to try to get through those before we take a break.

So we have now that means reach the consent portion of today's agenda.

As always, directors may pull items from the consent agenda.

And I just want to note many of our items on the consent agenda.

our result of our recent policy changes made by the board in our oversight role these items were discussed I believe in committee prior to being brought before the full board may I have a motion for the consent agenda I move approval of the consent agenda second Okay, approval of the consent agenda has been moved by Vice President Briggs and seconded by Director Mizrahi.

Do directors have things they want to pull?

Director Rankin.

I do.

I asked some questions ahead of time.

I got answers back for some of them, but I would like to pull 10, 14, and 15.

okay 10 14 and 15 other directors okay may I have a revised motion for the consent agenda as amended I move approval of the consent agenda as amended second Okay, approval of the consent agenda as amended has been moved by Vice President Briggs and seconded by Director Mizrahi.

All those in favor?

Aye.

Opposed?

All right.

Yay.

The consent agenda has passed as amended.

We're going to move to items removed from the consent agenda.

So the first one is item number 10. I have a motion for item number 10.

I move that the school board authorize the superintendent to execute purchase orders through RFP number 260105 with Thornburg computer services for a total not to exceed amount of $73,118,479 including Washington state sales tax over fiscal years 2027, 2028 and 2029 with any minor additions, deletions and modifications deemed necessary by the superintendent and to take any necessary actions to implement the purchase orders.

Immediate action is in the best interest of the district.

Second.

We have a motion from Vice President Briggs, a second from Director Mizrahi.

Call on Director Rankin who removed the item and then other directors for additional questions and comments.

Thank you.

I'm actually, this might not be possible.

I wonder if we can discuss this item with action item three.

Because I have some similar questions.

Let's just do the questions and when we get to the action items we'll get to the questions the same questions or maybe you can answer well so one question I guess I have is the I didn't see so this went through a committee but I didn't see in the and maybe I missed it I didn't see in the materials what the committee's recommendation was sure we can go to the or a discussion so here well yeah the operations committee for their

yeah for this item the committee did recommend the approval of this item discussion on this item paralleled the discussion well it was slightly less than the discussion that's in action item number three

okay so I my question actually is for the the superintendent so I had a couple technical questions that I asked but my question for the superintendent is in the materials it says that the the use of educational technology learning standards from OSPI that were adopted in 2018 were used to support this contract that's pre-COVID that's pre pre our district deciding to do one-to-one not because we thought that was the best instructionally necessarily, but because of access and equity during remote learning.

And those learning standards are also, you know, pre any of that happening.

So my question is, do you superintendent recommend the approval of this contract and believe that it supports our expectations for teaching and learning and for our students today in 2026?

Sure, great question.

My understanding, and I want to defer to the team who discussed it in the committees and the people that brought it to the fore, is that this is allowing us to have the ability to purchase something.

I think that, and I've been pretty loud about this, is I do think that there's an over-reliance of technology and over-reliance of Screen time and over-reliance of all of these things.

But I do believe that the district should have the ability to purchase certain things.

So I'd defer.

I mean, I think COO Podesta is there.

I don't have my ability.

I only see the board.

So I don't know if the head of technology is there to speak on the specifics.

But I think from my understanding is as a superintendent- He is here.

Okay, great.

So I would defer to those folks who are the kind of, but if I speak as a pedagogical expert, what I would say is you want the board to allow the district to have the ability to have certain technologies and how we use it is really important about using the approved curriculum, using that to fidelity, making sure that we're going through the times that we've talked about in terms of 90 minutes here, 120 minutes there.

But I appreciate having the board not notice that if we're using something from 2018 as a rationale, we should probably think to amend that in the future.

So this brings me to the second part of the question, because the technical questions I understand and we're being asked to approve this contract because it's an expenditure.

It goes to a certain budget threshold.

It's an accountability measure for making sure that money is being spent as intended.

Previous experience tells me that when the board says, OK, the superintendent no longer pays attention.

And I know this is not you.

Superintendent no longer pays attention to it.

And the response is, well, the board approved it.

and everything gets purchased.

So what I'm wondering is, yes, this would allow up to that point, but at what point, when and who is actually deciding how many devices are being purchased and for what purpose?

Yeah, you know, it's a great question.

And I do wonder if there's a way for the committees to ask for updates, even the full board to ask for updates.

I mean, you know, the big thing, of course, is our wonderful assistant superintendent of the budget could certainly in his updates tell you about certain things that are purchased.

And this is a large contract, right?

Millions of dollars.

So certainly it would make sense for us to show you how things are being spent and how things are being purchased and for what reason.

I would think and I would hope that what the board is also going to hold me and vis-a-vis the district accountable to is are we actually teaching our curriculum to fidelity, which you approved, are we really kind of teaching the standards that we're supposed to and how would that work if the kids are only on screens all the time, right?

So, you know, I think we could work with both the budget team and the technology team to give you updates on how much of the allocation is being is being purchased and for what?

Not because we're mandated to, but because that could be best practice for the district in terms of giving the board and the community an update on how we're spending our money.

Well, and from the board perspective, what I want to know is like, sure, this is an oversight thing about money being spent, particularly levy money.

Right.

But what I care about is if it's going to support students' needs in the classroom.

So I don't want five three years from now like oh yeah we purchased all those devices and then we decided not to use them or we purchased all those devices and we gave them to classrooms and now teachers feel like they have to use them which again this is I'm speaking with from experience in this district so that's this is sort of a question I think that will probably come up again in our committee's discussion but I'm asking this because that's my expectation of you, Ben, really, is that you can tell us, yeah, I absolutely support this and recommend, and it's not signing a blank check for thousands and thousands of devices that we might not use, I just want to know that all the dots are being connected when I appreciate that.

I appreciate that.

And look, we know the history of this district.

We also, I mean, the most famous example of this is Los Angeles, you know, and, you know, their wonderful superintendent, John Deasy, like they bought a bunch of technology because they thought it was this new cool thing and it ended up, you know, being a lot of money for not a lot of, you know, good.

And so, you know, I appreciate the desire for the board to make sure that we're spending money appropriately.

And even though legally you're giving us the opportunity to purchase, I have no problem giving the board the updates on how we're using technology.

And in fact, I want to thank the community.

Many, many parents have reached out about how we're using technology and having real questions and working with us to start to set those standards.

And I think this is an ongoing conversation.

I agree that there was a kind of pre-COVID and then COVID kind of fascination with technology.

And in some respects, it was necessary.

If we're not going to have physical school, how are children going to learn if not through a screen, they can't come to school.

Well, now we're back in school.

And so can we start to wean ourselves off of this?

So I appreciate not only the questions, but the history here.

And I think that my read of the acknowledgement for the board is you're giving us the authority to purchase these things, which is important for us, but that now the follow up is, are we really going to use all of it?

And if we really need to, I need to stand in front of the board to say, I firmly believe that this is a the great use of money and taxpayer dollars.

All right, we're gonna go to Director Lavallee.

I was just gonna say thank you, that I feel supportive.

I also think that one of the great things we have is committees, Director Rankin, and this was greatly discussed in committee, and I think one of the ways we can better bring about.

So actually, though, this is $80 million, which we all are responsible for the expenditure of, and the committees can't do the work in place of the oversight of the full board.

Correct, but they can definitely have the conversations and the discussions.

Director LaValle.

I do actually think Director Song was first, but I'm not sure.

No, okay.

I wanted to kind of say that within, we did have a kind of deeper discussion on one of the items that will be on later within this.

So by the time we got to this one, it was a slight bit of a repeat thing.

So when you had asked what exactly we discussed within this, I will say that I am nervous to commit the operations committee to kind of going back and looking at every contract and how it was used because it's too much work.

The operations committee's scope is already quite large and to add review of past expenditures would be just an incredible amount of work both from the members of the committee as well as from the staff.

So I just want to push back on that concept and be like I'm not sure how realistic that is.

I know it's not realistic.

Yeah, and I think, I agree.

I mean, I think it would be very difficult for us to give updates on all the spending and all the things.

Please don't make us do that.

Yeah, right, exactly.

But I do think that from a district's perspective, there's nothing wrong with us giving updates on how we're doing our pedagogical stuff using technology or the lack thereof.

And that would be something that we as a district would take on, not necessarily the committees.

I do think one of the issues that we're seeing here and that we saw that we're going to discuss again later in this meeting so I'm trying to keep the comment on it short so that we can go over it later again is that some of these things were very much putting the cart before the horse and so we're doing we're approving this expenditure in a way that we have all seen the district go ahead and be like well the board approved it that means we buy all the things without knowing what our plan is for implementing technology in our classrooms at different levels into different so there's two different things that are at odds here that are making I know myself very uncomfortable and I believe other board members very uncomfortable as well of you know we don't know what the direction of the district is and we have not been able to have that discussion we have not been able to have that discussion in our committee at this point in time and we are being asked to go ahead and approve a very large expenditure of money on something that we don't know the implementation of.

Now, on its face value, doing that approval to what you were saying, Superintendent, of this is the amount of money that you can spend up to, and then having that discussion of what is our policy and having you be like, well, we're not going to do all of this.

an okay but uncomfortable direction to do this in.

So, you know, unfortunately we are in a point where this is the order that things are going in right now, but it is leading to uncomfort, which is why those questions are happening and why this discussion is happening.

And I want to acknowledge that.

And if I were in your shoes, I would feel the same way, right?

Like this is this is definitely a district that is kind of coming out of some past practices that might be, you know, let's just say problematic.

And I appreciate that the board is understanding of the uncomfortability in which it puts in.

And that's why I certainly look forward to the board always holding me accountable to making sure that we do this the right way.

I just think, certainly in this perspective, it's like we do need the ability to buy some things, and this seems to be the way to do it at this point.

The board always has the right to come back and say, you know what?

We want to amend this.

We want to change this, right?

You're the board.

You get to do all sorts of fun stuff.

So I think it's important that we move forward with the acknowledgement of the unease.

Director Song?

I kind of want to push back on the notion that this is the putting the cart before the horse because we actually were responsible for approving the capital budget and I don't think it's the appropriate role of the board to be approving individual contracts when these are things are budgeted for I think there is a opportunity for this board this configuration of board members to take more ownership of the capital budget and that is the proper role of for us to play.

But I think historically speaking, the board has kind of left operational decisions to the superintendent.

And if that's not something that we feel comfortable doing, then the proper way to have influence on that is really through the capital budget.

So I look forward in the next budget development process that we to take a deeper dive into our capital budget and have influence there.

Like something that Fred brought up in our committee meeting is that, you know, we've budgeted for these things and the contract is they've our team has already gone through the process of bidding out these contracts and writing them and negotiating.

And for board members at the 11th hour to kind of interfere with it is frustrating, but also I don't think it's good governance.

So I encourage us going forward that we use approval of the capital budget as our way to kind of have influence on what we think Our vision for the use of technology and the kind of purchases we want to make it versus voting yes or no on contracts So that's kind of a comment.

I wanted to make about the other action item But I appreciate that we're gonna move to staff for the vote on the item I

Yeah, I mean we have to vote on this and that does feel uncomfortable for all the reasons that Director Lavallee stated and so I just wanted to reiterate my request for that we have a work session for both the board and the public parents, families, students to gain a better understanding of how we're moving forward with technology.

And I don't think we've scheduled that yet.

I'm looking at staff, we've scheduled it for, it has been scheduled, we will find when it will shortly find the date.

Oh, okay, so it is scheduled?

Okay, great.

I think that would just be really, really helpful at this point.

I agree.

Yeah, okay, that's all right.

Okay vote Vice President Briggs aye Director Lavallee aye Director Mizrahi yes Director Rankin yes Director Smith aye Director Song yes President Topp yes this motion passes unanimously

Alright, we'll move on to item 14. May I have a motion for the item?

I move that the school board authorize the superintendent to execute a contract with hearing speech and deaf center in an amount not to exceed $1,172,400 in the services outlined in the draft agreement and scope of work attached to this board action report with any minor additions deletions and modifications deemed necessary by the superintendent and to take any actions necessary to implement this contract.

Immediate action is in the best interest of the district.

Second.

Director Mizrahi, do I have a second?

Second.

Alright I have a motion made by Vice President Briggs second by Director Mizrahil Director Rankin you pulled this item I'll give you a chance first and then we'll move into a full board discussion Thank you yes I just you know sent questions ahead of time like I said before and got some back and didn't get others so I was curious with these both these items if they were contract renewals or first time contracts I know they're in a different threshold than the previous requirement so I didn't know if we were seeing these because of the threshold change or because they were new agreements?

So I was just, I was curious about that.

And then if they are new, were other programs considered?

And if so, how were these ones chosen?

And then is there opportunity to expand if more than 10 students qualify to participate?

Because it says specifically that it's for 10 students.

I will defer to staff.

Again, I'm acting a little blind here, so anybody in the audience would like to answer that?

That would be great.

We do have a staff person here.

Hi, I'm Whitney Smith, Director of Early Learning.

These are not first-time contracts.

These are renewals that are coming forward because of the change in the threshold.

Your second question was about how they were selected.

So we're required to offer various modalities to deaf and hard of hearing students, which is the reason why these two providers were selected, because they offer modalities.

One is under Listen and Talk, which is spoken language.

They offer a spoken language modality option for deaf and hard of hearing students that we're required to offer.

HSDC offers an ASL which we need to offer.

So these are the two major providers in the area and so they offer like a cultural relevance to the deaf and hard of hearing community under both of these programs which is why they were selected.

Both of these programs are used by many other districts in the area to provide these two modalities that I mentioned.

So many other districts also contract in a similar way with these two providers.

There is one other modality that we don't have any students in right now that is not very popular.

So that's signing in exact English.

We do have previously had contracts with them, but right now families just aren't selecting that option.

So those are the three modalities that we're required to offer.

These cover two of those.

If we were to go above 10 students, that would require a contract amendment.

If we were to need to go above that.

but it's not limited, so it can expand as the...

Yeah, if we needed to.

If we needed to.

We hope not.

We are pretty careful about students who are qualifying for these programs because they are so expensive, but if it were to happen, if all of a sudden, and we also track these students from birth, so we basically know when students are coming down at Pike who would qualify, but it could happen and that would result in a contract amendment.

Okay, thank you.

Director Mizrahi?

I don't know.

Others?

Alright I'll call on staff for the vote please.

Director Lavallee.

Aye.

Wait wait which one is this?

No this is just 14. Okay thank you.

Director Mizrahi.

Yes.

Director Rankin.

Yes.

Director Smith.

Aye.

Director Song.

Yes.

Vice President Briggs.

Aye.

President Topp.

Yes.

This motion is passed unanimously.

Okay moving on to item number 15 approval of the listen and talk contract for 26 27 school year.

Can I have a motion to approve the item.

Excuse me.

I move that the school board authorize the superintendent to execute a contract with listen and talk in an amount not to exceed $959,236 for the services outlined in the draft agreement attached to this board action report.

with any minor additions, deletions and modifications deemed necessary by the superintendent and to take any actions necessary to implement this contract.

Immediate action is in the best interest of the district.

Second.

Okay.

Motion from Vice President Briggs.

Second from Director Mizrahi.

Director Rankin.

No.

The questions were answered sufficiently for both.

Thank you.

Perfect.

Any other directors?

All right.

Then I will call for a vote on the item.

Director Mizrahi Yes Director Rankin Yes Director Smith Yes Director Song Yes Vice President Briggs Aye Director Lavallee Aye President Topp Yes This motion is passed unanimously All right I'm looking at board directors do we want our quick break now or after action items

All right, let's keep going.

All right, so we are moving on to action items.

May I have a motion for the first item?

Yes, yes.

Or item number two, sorry.

Okay.

I move that the school board approve resolution 2025-26-15 am I reading the right thing yes okay as attached to the board action report certifying that new facilities identified in the project application OSPI form D3 for the John Marshall school interim site modernization and addition projects submitted to the office of superintendent of public instruction will be built in lieu of modernizing the existing facilities and that a portion of the existing building would be demolished.

Immediate action is in the best interest of the district.

Second.

Okay, I have a motion from Vice President Briggs and a second from Director Mizorahi and it looks like Superintendent Schultener, I'm calling up you and Director Podesta or COO Podesta.

I will defer to the great COO Podesta.

We'll see.

Chief Operating Officer Podesta.

Hello?

Fred Podesta, Chief Operations Officer, and I have to admit I have lost the thread, so where are we exactly?

Alright, and I'm going to ask Director Best to join me as well, since we talked about this in committee.

This is part of an overall process for state funding that we have to We ask for a board resolution to say that the state funding will support new construction, not a modernization.

This is not an approval of the overall project or the contract.

That's actually already been done.

This is an artifact of the state funding approach.

Overall, this project is to support John Marshall Building is a swing site.

Regardless of the scope of our capital program, we will need space to renovate schools.

We have dozens of schools.

We will need to look at middle schools and larger schools, and we really don't have the capacity to do those kinds of projects in the North End.

we have used John Marshall as an interim site for many years but the state of the building is and typically we relocate to these interim sites for major construction so students are often there for two years and they particularly for middle school students if they spend the majority of their middle school years in an interim site they deserve a school that meets our standards for middle school.

Mr. Best is there anything you'd want to add?

I don't know that I need to add anything.

I think Fred did a good job of explaining what this board action request is for.

And we had great conversations at the Operations Committee, so I'd open it up to questions.

Questions from directors?

Director Lavallee.

No one else wanted to go.

I've asked a lot of questions on this project, and I would first like to thank Richard Best for doing his best at answering all of my questions that have just kept coming at him continuously, especially on this project.

So my deep thanks for that.

You know, this is a project that was already in the Beck's levy that has been approved.

So there's some awkwardness where the thing that we're voting on right now is that OSPI form D3 to the John Marshall interim site.

And of course, my computer just went to sleep with the thing that I was going to read right on it.

There's a few weird things about this, especially as we talk about the number of sites that we have and that we have some declining enrollment and all of these things going on and we're looking at an interim site.

We have a number of middle school campuses up in the north end of Seattle that are in really rough condition.

And I hope that a lot of people here got the ability to go and see some of those school campuses that really need some updating.

and so this will allow them to do that without sacrificing any student learning it you know I've been very concerned that is this the best thing to do with the limited resources that we have as a district and within everything and the work that we need to do on the building to make it seismically safe for a building that we own.

I just want to highlight the fact that with adding the additional space onto it that will benefit our students, Richard Best's team have found a way to have about $8 million in savings in doing that from what was originally on the initial levy.

So I really want to thank the team for that work that they're doing.

Thank you for answering my questions as this is another one that feels very odd pairing with a bunch of the other conversations that are happening and have happened for the last few years.

in Seattle Public Schools.

So there's some weird feelings about it, and I appreciate the fact that the team has come back every single time and had the patience to answer these questions and give the numbers very willingly to show what's going on.

I hope that as we move forward as well that we can get a master facilities plan in place that really highlights who's going to be using those buildings and when so that we know the schedule for it and we can really show the demand for something like this going forward and I know that wasn't a question in there for you, but I just wanted to highlight some of the questions that I've already asked to you and the answers that you have been able to supply.

Thank you.

Other directors?

All right.

We will vote on this item then.

Director Rankin.

Yes.

Sorry.

Yes.

Director Smith.

Aye.

Director Song.

Yes.

Vice President Briggs.

Aye.

Director Lavallee.

Aye.

Director Mizrahi.

Yes.

President Topp.

Yes.

This motion is passed unanimously.

Alright moving on to action item number three and just so folks are tracking one was crossed out so the numbers are a little off if you're wondering three and and we're only on number two so this is the BEC 6 approval of Apple Computer Corporation device acquisition to refresh technology in support of teaching and learning command motion

I move that the school board authorize the superintendent to execute purchase orders with Apple Computer Corporation for a not to exceed amount of $6 million including Washington State sales tax over fiscal years 2027, 2028 and 2029 with any minor additions deletions and modifications deemed necessary by the superintendent and to take any necessary actions to implement the purchase orders.

Immediate action is in the best interest of the district.

I will defer to our wonderful head of technology

This is similar to the other contract on the computers.

It is just a renewal of the three-year contract.

It's our contract vehicle so we can purchase internally to whatever needs we have.

Either the iPads for the kiddos or we have labs that require some of the computers.

We have staff and engineers that use some of this equipment as well.

In the NCTE I believe there's some located too.

501 uses for adaptive technology.

It's just a contract vehicle similar to the other.

Director Lavallee, do you have anything to say since this went through Operations Committee?

Yeah, the operations committee declined to vote on this measure because it was presented a little bit more with iPads for K-2, with that being the primary focus of this.

And there was conversation and back and forth both within the committee members as well as with staff on what to do there.

and what this looked like and this is the one that we actually looked at this one first within the committee and then the other one that we already discussed second so we were just having these in converse directional conversations and so we ended up having a lot of conversation on kind of what this looks like when we don't know at this point what our technology focus is for the superintendent and for education in our classrooms.

And getting one-to-one devices for K to two was concerning without having a plan from the superintendent on how some of this is implemented.

That being said, as Director Song said previously, this is something that has already kind of been decided within the direction of the stuff.

And so we have a number of different things going on here that are hitting us right now in just awkward directions.

within that you know we do need to look at that direction I'm glad we're scheduling a meeting on technology usage in the classrooms within that as well and this will come up within our later conversation there's the you know conversation that we need to have of what does it look like when a committee does or does not recommend something and when should something go to the full board without a committee recommendation or does everything need to have a recommendation from the committee to go to the full board and so there's some procedural stuff as we ramp up the committees in here that gets wrapped into this too which is why it's within action items and not within the consent agenda at this point in time.

Perfect.

Other directors?

Director Rankin.

Yeah, just to sort of follow up on a thought that I wasn't able to share with the other item is that, like Jen and Vivian have mentioned, this is the type of contract to me that ideally should just be on the consent agenda.

It's something we've already budgeted.

It was approved in the plan.

it doesn't need to go through a committee because it's an expenditure on something we agreed to spend on what I the question that I had and when I heard from Ben that helps me be comfortable with this discomfort that we have of like the board directions not quite there and that the systemic trust is not there is that hearing very clearly from our superintendent the understanding that this is board authorization to do this expenditure we gave a talk to whether or not he needs that but that when it comes to actually the purchase and use, our superintendent still expects to be involved and engaged in directing what that looks like and reporting back to the board so just kind of to echo what you said like once we hope not only in committee well and once we hopefully get you know the cadence like a committee doesn't need to discuss this this contract that was for something we expected to pay for if we understood we were expecting to pay for it so anyway just to kind of like for me Ben's and and you know staff's providing of information and Ben's confirmation to us that he understands this is authorization of the expenditure still as determined by the superintendent and not just laptops and iPads for everybody is the proper direction for us to go in and how I feel assured in taking this appropriate approval of this expenditure.

No, I appreciate the point.

And I mean, not to be like all powerful superintendent, but like that's kind of the point of all of this, right, is the board authorizes the superintendent to actually make expenditures at a certain level.

and a good superintendent should have some understanding in how we're going to be spending the money.

And certainly with something this big and this important to pedagogical decisions, I will certainly be immersed in these decisions.

Yeah, Vice President Briggs this is a discussion time and then we're gonna move I think to Okay, yeah, I this is actually more of a governance thing and this is not the right time to talk about it, but it's come up enough times And maybe if we have like WASDA training on the books or something we can we can talk about this I am get I'm not clear at all around what the purpose of all of this is like it's like we have to approve these contracts but but it's like a total formality because we already authorized like it's just not clear to me it's really not clear to me like what what is the point of having these conversations if the expectation is that we've already authorized so so I'm just confused frankly to be perfectly honest

Yeah, no, and I really appreciate that.

And maybe I could try to answer it in part and then I would defer to anybody else is, you know, as a board whose job is to hold the superintendent accountable, but also to make sure the taxpayer money is being well spent, having the authority to say, look, we're allowing the superintendent to buy up to X amount of dollars of something is your stamp of saying, We've heard of this company.

It's been vetted.

It's not the superintendent's uncle.

It's not, you know, somebody on the board's brother.

Like this is a real thing with real money and we're authorizing the superintendent to kind of do this.

There's real importance to that because you want to make sure that you're the check to how taxpayer money is being spent.

at a certain threshold.

It's not appropriate, I don't think, for the board to say, well, here are the three pencils.

But it's certainly appropriate for the board to say, hey, look, here's where we need to go.

And so I think it's important that we're able to have these conversations about iPads and computers and things like that.

and then in terms of the buildings, which is not exactly what we're talking about now, but in terms of the buildings, it's always important that big time construction projects are being vetted because those are big ticket items and you wanna make sure that again, we're not like giving it to my uncle Peter.

So that's one way of thinking about it.

But I do appreciate the authority that a superintendent has, which is once the money is being allocated,

it's up to me vis-a-vis the staff to decide like what's best for kids etc does that help i mean yeah i i don't like yeah i appreciate that i that that's not i i think i did understand all of that none of that's new information but thank you anyway nonetheless um no no no it's fine it's fine i think it's just um I don't know, I guess it's that I feel, especially because these are now committee...

I guess I'm getting mixed messages about the extent to which we're supposed to be delving into these things and what the actual...

It feels like maybe it's like a continuum thing.

So are we talking...

is the level of detail that we are talking about, these things that are basically routine approvals that are coming up in Operations Committee, are we delving too deeply into them?

And really all we should be asking is, is this legit?

Is this going to a person, like a verified contractor?

And that's the extent of the conversation we should be having, because I feel like if that is the case, we're getting way off track and talking about way more, you know,

I appreciate that.

And I guess I would answer two ways.

Right.

So.

So, yes, part of it is making sure that these are legitimate companies and part of it is is making sure that it's a legitimate thing for a school district to do.

Right.

I mean, you know, the idea of saying we want computers to be bought mass for a district, that's a big enough thing that the board can have some say.

Now, some people would say, hey, that might be a little bit of an overreach that might delve into a little bit more of a pedagogical thing.

But other people would say, well, look, it's a big enough dollar figure that, in fact, that is a board thing.

And so I think this board needs to just kind of figure out where it wants to be.

As a superintendent, I want the board to feel very comfortable approving big ticket items.

And if that comfort leads to you wanting to know that it makes sense for us to use this money in a certain way, that's totally fine.

and I think where the interesting piece is happening here is because the initial, I think, approval was about something like iPads and there have been some conversation about us using iPads too much and something that the board is maybe questioning our use of technology, which is a much broader conversation that the board can certainly delve into, that's why this makes sense for it to come through committee because you're saying, hypothetically the board might say you know what we don't want to have iPads in all of the classrooms we think that that's a huge expenditure that's not really benefiting our children that's a legitimate conversation to have the and then starting it in a committee makes sense because you want to then say well maybe We want to push back and the district can go back and reauthorize or rethink or like, oh, you know, maybe $8 million is too much.

How about $4 million?

You'd feel more comfortable with that.

That's fine.

And that's why I think, and these are growing pains, right?

The board and the district is getting used to this new cadence, but I think that's where this conversation comes.

So, and I think we're gonna have a further, we do have a committee discussion later, which I think as we're growing through some of these growing pains with committees and understanding how we're best utilizing our committees and our board time, it would be nice, I think, if a lot of these things were just on the consent agenda and we could routinely move through them.

And I think we're seeing a few more of them now that we updated from Director Song's policy, we updated the threshold.

but we are seeing a few more than we normally would come through.

I'm gonna ask for any other questions on this item, specifically less on the overarching structure of things.

Nope, all right, okay.

Then I'm going to call on staff for the vote on this item.

Director Smith.

aye Director Song yes Vice President Briggs aye Director Lavallee aye Director Mizrahi yes Director Rankin yes President Topp yes yes this motion is passed unanimously

All right item number four acceptance of the Seattle Education Foundation mini grants program funding for the 26 27 school year I have a motion for that.

I move that the school board authorize the superintendent to accept grant funding from the Seattle Education Foundation mini grants program for the 2026 2027 school year in the amount of $391,040.

Immediate action is in the best interest of the district.

Second.

Motion from Vice President Briggs.

Second from Director Mizrahi.

I think I'm going to pass it over to Cashel Toner.

All right.

Yep.

Good evening.

Thank you.

I'm Cashel Toner, Executive Director, Curriculum Assessment and Instruction.

I'm excited to present this item for introduction and action.

This item would allow the district to accept funding from the Seattle Education Foundation to support instructional practices and enrichment opportunities for students across our schools.

The Seattle Education Foundation has been a great partner helping to support our schools in the past, and this year is contributing about $390,000 towards supporting our schools.

You can see all the different ways these funds are being utilized in our schools in the attachment, but I'll just name a few.

Support for preschool, equipment to support medically fragile classrooms, library books, ultimate Frisbee equipment, transportation for field trips, just to name a few.

This bar was written in collaboration with the grants department who informed us of this wonderful opportunity.

I do want to acknowledge that the timing of this item, realizing that when it became known that we needed a board action report, we're a little behind that timeline, but as we move forward in this partnership, we'll come to you a little bit sooner in the school year.

Thank you.

Questions?

Director Smith.

As we consider the board process of approving grants I think we want to be very welcoming of money coming in but also cognizant of if there are any attached obligations on how it's spent.

So are there obligations on how the grant money is spent that we should be aware of?

So from my understanding and teachers can apply directly to the Seattle Education Foundation and then they review the grants and then distribute the funds.

there's a process for individual application and then a little different process for a group application at a school and then there are different amounts of money if it's individual or group.

There are some constraints like they don't approve like travel or you know things like that it really needs to be a value add to the school community so there are you could do some professional development or equipment or something like that if anyone else wants to add anything I welcome it it says on the bar that the money has to be spent by next June so it's not an ongoing obligation and I think that the highest the largest grants they're all under $10,000

Other directors?

I just wanted to give a thank you to the generosity of the Seattle Education Foundation for supporting our educators across the district.

I encourage my colleagues to look at the list of requests.

I think they're very interesting and some creative ideas in there.

And I want to thank our educators for going through the grant application to get this funding and support of our students.

I had the opportunity to attend the board meeting for this foundation when they were reviewing the grant applications and making their decisions.

And the board members are mostly retired principals from Seattle Public Schools or retired educators.

And I just wanted to emphasize that each of these principals understood that it was a $250,000 cap and the reason this is coming to us now is because we have now communicated to the public that there isn't a $250,000 cap.

We want to bring money into our schools and so we encourage them to go above the $250,000 amount.

It is $390,000 and tremendous gratitude for their generosity.

Director Rankin.

uh thank you and to add to to that this is the type of grant that I think we can just authorize the superintendent to accept I really don't I don't think we need board approval um what I I mean I would love to unless we're gonna we want to acknowledge the generosity which is of course important but um you know to Vivian's point the the thinking out there that there was a cap that we wouldn't accept more money was wrong and really unfortunate and not the type of barriers that we want to have.

And this is very clearly directly supporting students at the behest of and request of their teachers.

I don't think that, I think we can think about authorizing the superintendent to be okay with accepting these grants without needing our permission.

Just putting that out there since I know we're gonna still probably look at that policy.

Alright we will call for the vote on this item item number four Director Song Yes Vice President Briggs Aye Director Lavallee Aye Director Mizrahi Yes Director Rankin Yes Director Smith Aye President Hopp Aye This motion is passed unanimously.

Okay, on to item number five, authorization for the district's application for waiver from the 180-day school year requirement.

Do I have a motion?

I move that the school board authorize the superintendent's emergency school closure waiver request to the office of the superintendent of public instruction for missed school days on October 23rd, 24th, 27th, and 28th, 2025 due to an emergency school closure.

at Emerson Elementary School.

Immediate action is in the best interest of the district.

Second.

Motion from Vice President Briggs, a second from Director Mizrahi and then I think I'm passing it off to Dr. Campbell.

Sure.

I also can say I think you all know what happened.

This is the kind of thing that we hopefully can use waivers for.

It's really important that we can collect and can be serviced by the state.

We did have an emergency.

These are the kinds of things that, you know, we're hopefully able to do.

We appreciate and respect, you know, Chris Reichdahl and his ability to waive this and I do hope certainly that the board approves this so that we can be made whole.

but I'm happy to defer it to anybody else who wants to talk about it.

At the podium you have Chief Operating Officer Podesta, but I'm going to see if there's any questions that we need to go on on this specific item before we can move forward.

All right.

And Tyler Hamilton is available as well.

Perfect.

Thank you.

All right, then we will move on to the vote on this item.

Vice President Briggs aye Director Lavallee aye Director Mizrahi yes Director Rankin sorry Fred you just standing there you were so convincing yes Director Smith aye Director Song yes President Topp yes this motion is passed unanimously

All right, we are on to item, excuse me, number six, approval amendments for WASDA positions.

I have a motion.

I move that the school board approve the amendments to the positions previously submitted to the Washington State School Directors Association for consideration as part of their permanent and legislative positions as attached to this board action report.

Immediate action is in the best interest of the district.

Do I have a second?

Second.

Okay, I have a motion from Vice President Briggs, a second from Director Mizorahi.

The sponsor of this is Director Rankin, so I will pass it over to her.

Thank you.

So these are the process Vivian submitted on our behalf, the positions that we previously approved, and depending on whether they're permanent or legislative, the resolutions committee of WASDA, and the legislative committee of WASDA review all the submissions and then make a recommendation pass to pass.

As Vivian, I think, mentioned before, there's an interesting dynamic happening right now in WASDA with some folks who are really focused on local control, local control, local control.

and there's a little bit of some shuffling happening.

We had one board that submitted like 200 different positions and amendments, most of which were to repeal existing positions.

So there's kind of a lot going on.

So anyway, of the recommendations on the positions that we submitted, I took some feedback from the different committees on two of them to make some slight adjustments to hopefully make is clear in the gun violence prevention one that talking about unauthorized youth access to firearms is not a community by community variable.

There was concern that, oh, this might prevent kids from going hunting with their parents or doing trap shooting at school.

And so I adjusted the language a little bit to make it really clear that it's unauthorized use, meaning possession inconsistent with what's legally allowed.

Like nowhere in the state of Washington is it legally allowable for a minor to have possession of a handgun at all, a handgun at all.

And then other firearms is only under the supervision of a licensed adult.

And so the kind of local control pushback was like, no, it's not that's not legal to do that anywhere in the state.

So I just wanted to kind of clarify that keeping youth from accessing firearms without supervision is hopefully something we can all consistently agree on.

doesn't infringe upon the ability for hunting, trap shooting, target practice, training, other things that are legally allowable.

So that's a slight adjustment in the hopes that the committee will look at the amendment and recommend a do pass.

Either way, these all go before the body to be voted on.

And so a do not pass recommendation doesn't mean that it won't be approved.

But I thought it would be nice to kind of get the approval of the committee if we could.

And then the other one was similarly with the cell phone policy in between the time we submitted our position and now the governor has come out very strongly with that there will be legislation about a cell phone policy so my recommendation is that we make clear in our in the amendment to this that a cell phone policy a cell phone law is happening and WASDA should have a position.

Some of the pushback from the committee on the reasons for do not pass was that lots of districts already have their own policy.

We don't need to have a position.

But that was before the governor made the very clear statement that there will be a law.

And so I just adjusted it slightly to make clear that our position is that there should be something that local control is protected for certain things but yeah so that's an update to that and so if we approve these amendments that will authorize Vivian to submit to WASDA during the amendment window which I think is the first first week in August I think it's not for a while but we don't have another regular board meeting so But then she'll be able to submit that and then these will show up in the amendment catalog that goes out to Everybody in WOSDA for preparation for voting in General Assembly Questions from board directors All right, we'll move to the vote on this item Director LaVallee aye Director Mizrahi yes Director Rankin yes Director Smith

Aye.

Director Song.

Yes.

Vice President Briggs.

Aye.

President Topp.

Yes.

This motion is passed unanimously.

All right.

Last action item item number seven approval of resolution 2025 26 regarding collective bargaining and the district's commitment to collaborative negotiations.

Do I have a motion.

I move that the school board approve resolution 2025-26 slash 16 regarding collective bargaining and the district's commitment to collaborative negotiations.

Immediate action is in the best interest of the district.

Do I have a second?

Second.

I have a motion from Vice President Briggs second from Director Mizrahi.

Director Mizrahi and I are co-sponsors on this particular resolution but I will let him speak to it.

Yeah, thank you, President Taub.

As many of you know, we're entering into negotiation with the unions that represent staff in our schools, not just the educators and instructional ladies, but the folks who do the janitorial work and the maintenance and the food service.

and it seemed like a good opportunity for this board to reiterate the expectation and direction that we have to our superintendent around bargaining and as someone in my day job who spends a lot of time thinking about collective bargaining, I think it's important to recognize that we want and expect a collaborative and positive relationship with the labor unions that to represent the folks that work in our schools.

One of the things that I think is really valuable about SPS is that we're about as wall-to-wall union as any organization can be, and that creates a lot of opportunities, especially around bargaining, to find collaborative solutions to problems.

So we wanted to, or I felt it, like it was important to lay out that directive that we don't have any reason to think that the superintendent would do anything other than have a good faith and collaborative relationship.

And also to reiterate the fact that we have a well-documented structural budget shortfall and that, as I said, bargaining presents an opportunity for us to have a good relationship with the unions that represent folks in our schools to find collaborative solutions to those problems.

It's important that we go into it with that same expectation for the superintendent to find constructive solutions with our unions to those structural deficit issues.

President Topp, I don't know if you want to add anything.

No, I think that you covered everything and I wholeheartedly agree.

Do other directors have items they like to add or questions they want to ask?

All right, then I'll look to staff for the vote.

Director Mizrahi.

Yes.

Director Rankin yes Director Smith aye Director Song yes Vice President Briggs aye Director Lavallee aye President Hopp yes this motion is passed unanimously great we are now moving on to introduction items so we're going to take a nine minute break so we will reconvene at 6.50

to board directors.

I'm just going to add that we will be we'll do the introduction.

We'll do the introduction item at the U.

So when we reconvene, we will be down at the tables.

I am sorry to the folks watching.

We are running five minutes behind here, but we're going to get started.

I think we have a quorum.

So, yay, we get to move on to the next item on our agenda, the introduction of our 2026. Let me make sure I'm in the right spot.

Yes, 2026, fixing and adopting the 2627 budget.

I'm going to, we have a presentation from, I believe, Superintendent Schuldner, who is online still, and Dr. Buddleman.

We'll pass it over to you both.

Wonderful.

Well, thank you.

It's always a pleasure to be here to discuss these things.

As we all know, we are structurally insolvent, which is not a great place to be, but at least we can explain what is going on, which at least is a good step in the right direction.

I'm going to defer to Dr. Buddleman because I assume he is sitting there in person, and he also probably has control over the PowerPoint.

so I will let Kurt run the show and I will chime in as necessary.

Dr. Budeman please take it away.

Thank you Ben.

They did give me the clicker so I will advance the clicker for us.

I do want to just remind the board that we started this process last fall.

I think it was in November we had I think all the cabinet members sitting here presenting parts of the budget and they've all left me now so I'm alone here sitting here presenting the final product and not because they weren't helpful and productive in trying to put this all together but because now we're to the point we're nearing the finish line in terms of presenting a proposed budget for the 26-27 school year the presentation tonight is not as detailed as what we talked about on May 6 when we got into some of the details around the schools and the central office changes that are proposed and this is more of a summary of the 191 page budget book that is online right now and if anybody wants copies of this just let the board staff know we can get you hard copies of that as well and you'll notice one of the the things the budget office enjoys the most of this process maybe the thing they enjoy the most is curating the art for the budget book so there's some interesting choices in there so see if you can see make some of the connections with the sections as you go through that Our agenda for this presentation is to go over some of the highlights or the significant changes or things in the budget.

The fund balance as you know one of the superintendents in the district's goals is around fund balance so providing an update on that.

The budget summary so some summary level information on what changes have transpired in this proposed budget compared to last year.

Director Manu provided some enrollment information so we'll provide a little bit of the budget information and how that flows into the budget and then some details on the general fund, MSOX, the Associated Student Body Fund, debt service, there's some good news in the debt service fund, spoiler alert, and capital fund and then the four-year forecast that's also a part of the resolution you'll see tonight.

Ben, anything you want to add?

You'll just jump in as you want.

Yeah, yeah, I mean, look, yeah, you can talk about the page three.

Okay, so this is the highlights.

This is also in the budget book in a format, and you'll see that the Seattle Public Schools has a lot of general fund resources, $1.34 billion, and, as Ben said, is structurally insolvent.

72% of the general fund is allocated for teaching and teaching support activities.

and if you think about that those are the activities and the positions that happen in the classroom outside of the principal's office and outside of maintaining the building so 72% of the budget is going towards the classroom is a shorthand way of thinking of that and then you'll see that we addressed next year so we have to have a balanced budget each year by state law but without additional changes going forward to how the district does its work the structural deficit will persist.

You see the list of changes that were made in this budget or the solutions to close the budget gap but just to sort of highlight that structural budget deficit the Finance and Audit Committee has started talking about some of the main drivers of that has gone into, Director Song talked about diving into transportation at the last meeting.

Some other areas they're gonna be talking about are special education.

just a few pieces of information that we've shared before but bringing up here because I think it's relevant that the prototypical models provides Seattle Public Schools 52 million dollars less than we spend in staffing for special education so staffing and special education just out of the gate is 52 million dollars less than we get in the prototypical model there's other costs associated with special education the total under deficit for special ed somewhere in the ballpark of a hundred million dollars the last few years anticipated that would continue similarly with multilingual services prototypical model doesn't fit what Seattle Public School is doing so There are no multilingual instructional assistants in the prototypical model.

Seattle Public Schools spend $17 million on instructional assistants and multilingual education.

So just another example of sort of the structural problem that we're continuing to have to deal with.

Similarly, transportation, there's about a $20 million gap in what we receive versus what we spend for transportation at schools.

We've talked a few times I know Director Song has keen interest in substitute costs.

So somewhere in the ballpark of 20 million dollars Seattle Public Schools spends more than was given to it by the state.

We've talked a lot a couple years ago about the number of schools.

There are more schools at Seattle Public Schools than the prototypical model assumes.

Staffing nearly across the board, all staffing categories, there are more of us in staff, myself included, with higher salaries than the prototypical model assumes.

And so all of these things contribute to sort of that structural issue that Superintendent Schildener

mentioned at the outset here.

Anything you want to add to that?

Not to make too fine a point, but we have an entire class of employees, ML assistants, that are not in the budget from the state.

That means by definition, all of those folks with that title are causing the structural deficit.

We are spending, to Kurt's point, almost $100 million, probably maybe even a little bit more, on special education, more than we are given.

Transportation.

So there are things that are in our budget that are basically we've agreed to, that we are basically saying we will spend more money than we have, that can't happen.

if we want to balance the budget.

Now, Kurt and the team have done some wonderful things in terms of like building around the edges, ways to kind of save some money, but these are one-time things or they're structural things, but it's not nearly enough.

And so we're going to go through this budget, but just keep in mind that we have entire roles of folks that are not funded by the state.

and that we have entire departments that are taking tens of millions of dollars more to spend than we're given.

So by definition, we are structurally spending more money than we have, which means we will be insolvent.

That has to change.

So on those wonderful Warm thoughts.

Go to it.

Thank you.

And one thing I'll add there, you've seen the solutions sort of listed there on the slide.

One that relates to this next slide is utilizing fund balance.

So this budget is balanced in part by projecting that we'll utilize about $21 million of the existing fund balance.

so I think we shared this updated graph at the board retreat a few weeks ago you'll see the blue line reflects what this budget and our four-year forecast demonstrates and some has been said some of the one-time solutions some of the reductions that have happened in this fiscal year 26 27 budget are reflected there but as Ben said if we don't make more structural changes that blue line then goes below the zero point and that's when there's a structurally an insolvency to the South Oak schools I've got the fund, this is the background to that chart.

You'll see the top line there, the highlighted number, the budget is what we're submitting to the state right now assumes that this year we'll end with about $61 million in that fund balance.

that number is going to not be exactly right by the time the end of the year comes.

Just over the last few weeks we've received some additional costs that were not anticipated when we made this first projection.

About $15 million in additional costs.

There's some additional sped costs, some additional legal costs, fuel costs went up for transportation.

And so that number is highlighted because that will change and we'll keep updating that as one of the goals.

I just wanted to make sure that people understood that that number we watched closely in the documents it's projected at this number but that will change similarly there's also a question some of the tax credit energy rebate rebate funding timing of that will impact this number so if we get it before the fiscal year end closes it'll add that it'll make that number higher than it would have otherwise if we get it after the fiscal year end closes that number will be lower.

So just sort of the timing of some of that is in play as well.

I do want to strengthen or reiterate what Kurt is saying.

Over the last couple of weeks, there have been some extra expenses that are new and that will take that $61 million down.

The big one, and Kurt, feel free to talk more about this, is our insurance.

Insurance to cover this district went up inexorably this year.

I mean, Kurt knows the real numbers, but we're talking about millions of extra dollars that the new insurance rates went up and this is the new normal and so this is adding yet even more pressure to the budget.

Yeah, next year's budget insurance goes up by 54% over what it was in the year that we're closing right now.

Yeah.

Do you want to take questions now?

I'll defer to the President.

We will do quick questions if it's like on the slide.

Yes.

Okay.

I just want to make sure I understand this status quo fund balance is what it would be if we didn't do the list of items.

That was the projection that was made this time last year assuming we weren't going to do anything for the 26-27 budget and just to further reiterate that point one of the things we're trying to do is get more as things get more and more tight get more and more precise on this and so when the district had 120 million dollar fund balance this was not as important to people it should have been but it wasn't and so we're trying to get more refined and what that number is going to be as we're tracking these things more closely yeah but Director Song I appreciate you pointing that out because last year at this time that was the projection if we didn't do a bunch of stuff

through the hard work of, I think, the district, we've done some things that are, you know, that $28 million to $61 million, that's the savings that we've been trying to work on.

Now, we thought we saved about $50 million, which would be about $78 million, but there have been all these extra costs in terms of you know gas prices and inflation and just extra things and so that's where that 61 comes from and now again there's even more costs that are coming down the pipe that we just got this week or last week which is going to impact us and this is why you know you'll get sick of me saying it We're structurally insolvent.

We have things that we are promising that is just not the money that we're given.

But the good news is, yeah, if we had done nothing, we'd be at 28 million fund balance.

Now, at least we're projecting at 61 as a print for this that we're submitting to the state.

There will be some adjustments probably to the down that we're speaking of in terms of the insurance and legal fees and things like that.

Director Rankin quick the figures that you mentioned at the beginning the we spend this much but we get this much that is a really powerful demonstration I think in a good community could be a good communication tool out to the community as I'm wondering how we're communicating this out to the broader public I mean seeing like I almost wanted to ask you to say them again but some kind of a visual for people to really understand this is what we're talking about we get this much from the state we actually spend this much and not only a tool for our own conversation with our community about the budget but there are a whole lot of seats in the legislature up for election right now and if we want to help support conversations with in the community with potential electeds having one-pager or just some kind of thing out there to understand what we mean when we talk about structural deficit and what different candidates might have to say about it.

I think that could be really helpful.

I agree wholeheartedly.

In fact, Kurt can tell you I said the exact same thing to him today about four hours ago.

So I think that we'll create a series of one pagers, one kind of main one being like, this is what we spend because of how we're structured.

This is what we get.

Here's the deficit.

And so To your point, you know, the folks in Olympia need to understand this.

Our community needs to understand it, too.

But, you know, we really need to lean on our power as an electorate to say, look, folks, you got to really fund us so that we can do our job.

next slide is just sort of a summary of the four different funds of sale public schools the general fund the ASB fund the capital fund and the debt service fund and I'll get into more detail on those you'll see the projection for the end of the year for the general fund which is one we're focusing on mostly here is that at the end of next year we'd instead of that 61 million it would be 40 million dollars.

Again those are still projected at this point and we'll get more refined as time goes on on that.

Enrollment in large part drives funding.

So this is a graphic for how the budget the yellow bars so in February we kind of start the budget process based on a number of anticipated annual annual annual it's a different word in the community college system AAFTE there are different words for the A's in community college so I'm stuck on that so then we compare that to what actually happened you'll see last year we budgeted more we thought we'd have more FTE than we did in the end so you'll see this year we've got a little bit of a decrease in the projected AFTE and then we'll know more in the fall what the blue bar will look like so there were other years where the enrollment was projected to be much worse than what actually ended up happening but the last year we were under what we had budgeted at this point if the projections we have now do come true for next year it's about a two million dollar reduction under funding from what we budgeted but again we don't have the real information until we get to the fall when we know what enrollment will actually be that two million dollars we factored into to make sure that we have this balanced budget so

Now I do want to highlight, and Kirk can kind of give more detail too, is I appreciate that on its surface, if we had more students, we would have more money, and one would think that that would in fact ease our burden of our deficit.

But that's not true.

and I know that is a hard thing to grapple with, but the issue again is the structural insolvency.

If we have formulas that say we get X amount of dollars for this, but we're spending Y amount of dollars to service those students, the more students we have, actually the more in deficit we go.

Now it depends on individual students and their individual needs, but when you're looking at the special ed being 100 million or ML being tens of millions, you know, the issue isn't enrollment.

The issue is how we serve our children being more than the money that we're given to serve our children.

So it is very important that we talk about enrollment and certainly I believe that enrollment is about the health of the district because i want to increase enrollment because that says to me and i think it says to all of us that families are choosing us because we know there's 20 000 students that are choosing to live in seattle but not go to seattle public schools um but please don't think that somehow all of our budget things go away if we increased enrollment by 500 kids or 1000 kids.

We have to address the structure that's causing us to be insolvent in the first place.

So to go into the general fund a little deeper here, the resources for next year, we're projecting at $1.3 billion.

You'll see that's grown since 24, 25 and that's in large part due to sort of inflationary increases from the state and also due to the fact that the levy the legislature allowed more collection of levy proceeds from Seattle and other districts in the last legislative session and so that is in part due to part explain the increase in revenue over that period of time.

Here's a sort of highlight around how we're spending the funding and this is we'll look at it those three different ways activity program and object code and so by state activity you'll see that this budget that's being proposed proposes teaching activities and teaching support to be about 72.4 percent that's up from what was in last year's budget.

and that's mainly caused by this reduction in the other support activities some of those reductions are the loan repayment was in the other sport activities last year and so now that we don't have to budget for that since we're repaying that per the board's direction that's gone down and there's also some reductions and some efficiencies and transportation there's some health benefit things that we assume last year that are not in there and on the flip side of that there's some increases in these activities around we already mentioned insurance legal we've built some capacity in case we expand food for kids across all the schools in line with the mayor's proposal so there's some capacity things built into that as well but the main point here is that we're continuing to focus the budget reduce the things that are outside of teaching activities and teaching support as much as possible to keep the focus on the teaching activities and the teaching support what's happening in the classroom.

Ben did you want to answer that?

Yeah I hope people really recognize how important and you know I've said since I got here right the three things we're gonna focus on kids you know I'm gonna show up and I'm gonna tell you stuff you probably are gonna disagree with or not like But the first piece is the big one, which is focusing on kids.

So if you notice, not only did the raw number of dollars go up for teaching activities, the percentage of our budget went up by almost a full percentage point.

And for teaching support, it went up by more than half a percentage point.

The principals went up by 0.2.

you know, still in the school.

And what have we been trying to cut?

The other support, the central administration.

So, you know, other support went down by 20-something million.

Central administration went down by 3 million.

But the important piece is that the percentage of the total went down.

So you can see that not only are we trying to cut so that we stay afloat, but where are we cutting?

Not as much from the classrooms.

And that's really important because we want to center our kids.

Now, I appreciate that it doesn't always feel that way, but what this slide really shows is that we have uh you know reduce the budget you know overall by 20 million or a little less than that about 15 and remember we did cuts of almost 50 million but because of increases of other things that are just caked into it the overall budget is going to go down a little bit but the cuts that we were making it's not in the classroom And you can see that, I mean there's some cuts, but the additions, actually we increased teaching activities, we increased teaching support, we increased the principal, and the outside of the classroom went down.

And I think that's something we can be proud of and it also just shows you what we're focusing on when we are doing our cuts.

Here's just a graph of that found in the budget book.

And then just in case this question comes up a lot.

What is included in teaching and teaching support principal's office, other support and central administration?

So providing that and as we said primarily the teaching and teaching support are what happens in the classroom or around the classroom.

the other sport is what happens in and around the building central administration is a lot of what happens in this building legal costs are in there as well and then principal's office just because of the way the state does the coding is its own separate coding there and it's the office staff at the schools.

So providing that are there any questions on that we try to present this in line so that we can make comparisons to other districts across the state.

the other way we're looking at it is by state program so some of those probably make a lot of sense to people regular instruction special ed instruction things like that I'll just highlight a few of the changes regular instruction you'll see looks like it's going down one of the things that that is happening there is the weighted staffing standards carry forward capacity was reduced a couple years ago so there was a practice at Seattle Public Schools at schools that underspent their budget some of that was carried forward into the school that practice stopped a couple years ago as part of the budget process and so the capacity we had to build into the budget no longer is needed so the reduction there is reflective of that change that happened I think it was about 18 months ago A couple other things there.

The other instructional programs is going up.

Is it going up?

Is going down.

Sorry.

So that's also some capacity.

We didn't build as much capacity for additional awards in next year's budget.

And then the big change in this one is support services.

And we talked about that a little bit on the previous page.

It's kind of parallel to this other sport activities.

The loan was in there.

Some of the capacity for capital transfers was in there.

Transportation health benefits that we assumed a couple years ago was in there and those are no longer in there in addition to some of the reductions that Ben was describing.

And on the flip side, there are some increases in there, sort of netting them out.

So the reduction is as much as we might want it to be because of increases in legal and insurance is about $6 million.

There's about $3 million in there anticipating some food service changes.

And so there's some moving parts to this one.

Ben, did you want to say something on that one?

Yeah.

I mean, just look, the real number is special ed.

Like, we just have to wrap ourselves around this reality.

You're talking about from over two years, an increase of, you know, 40 million plus.

That's real, real dollars.

Now, the good news also is if you look at the regular instruction, Though it went down by $3 million from one year to the other, the percentage actually is higher.

But if you compare from two years ago, we're up $39 million.

So again, we've been able to continue that extra $30 million, $40 million bucks in regular instruction, which is great.

I'm really glad that we were able to do that.

but the ballooning cost of special ed is what's happening.

So we still are trying to cut, right?

You know, you look at support services down by 20 million, a much lower percentage of the cost, the community services, you know, down by about 5 million.

You know, now, again, we love community and we want to support, but we're trying to make sure that we're protecting as much as we can the classroom.

But just remember, that we're structurally insolvent, so it's going to come a time where we have to start going into what these costs are.

But, you know, I'm proud of what we're doing because we're protecting the classroom as much as we possibly can, but you can see where we're going and that's into bankruptcy.

Yeah.

Director Song?

This may be too technical for right now, but what gets coded into special education instruction versus compensatory education instruction?

Because for some reason, after years of looking at this budget book, I'm kind of like, whoa, $100 million in compensatory education.

and then I think it would be helpful for us to do some of these numbers on a per student basis so in particular I'm trying to understand like this increase in special education spending seems pretty high but I don't know that that is the matches the pace of the number of special education students we have and so my question is like why has the pace of spending outstripped the number of students that are being out identified

Yeah, no, no, it's a really good point.

I mean, there have been changes to how we do special ed.

So you are 100 percent right that the number of students getting special ed services has not increased in the way that would show the 40 million plus.

So, Kurt, I think that's a really good request from the board in terms of breaking this out per capita.

But I also think the really important piece is, as we talked about this morning, these lines have to be explained.

And so I know if you go to the next slide, Yes, you don't have the explanations on these ones.

So I think it's really important that what is the difference between comp ed and special ed services as you code it or as the state codes it?

Because there are some things that struck me as like, why are we spending 100 million in comp ed?

But then when you look into it, it's actually all of these services that we do provide.

So, you know, I think that it would be very helpful to have a breakout of the individual things that are going into these lines.

Yeah.

Director Rankin, I think, has the answer and I can help as well.

So page 26 of the budget book has the details you're looking for.

And CompEd is not probably what you're thinking about it to be.

So it's title funding.

It's Head Start funding.

It's bilingual funding from the state.

And this is just the way the state has us coded.

learning assistance program and those are kind of the big ones that are in there.

And so the detail is there but it's not agree it's it's an odd way of characterizing it on sort of this level.

But that's what we're at right now.

And that's what we call comp ed in within the district is missed special education instruction.

So I have to say we have the same I had the same conversation with Kurt where I was like.

and it didn't make any sense.

The amount of missed instruction didn't make sense.

And so is what we call comp ed a title of our own making?

I wonder if there's a way.

So compensatory education instruction is essentially title funding.

from the federal government and others and other things and so Kurt I don't know if you can pull it up your your amendment or just I would say in the future let's make sure that the next slide then breaks down these things because I think the public and the board really need to understand the details of each of these lines and if I remember correctly what we call compensatory education which is for

missed or to be made up special education that is included in the special education budget right or is that another.

Yes correct.

And it yeah it's a to your point earlier about providing better information on what all this means this is in line with that as well.

This is just a graph of that and then object code so this is just a third way of looking at the information you'll notice that staffing, certificated, classified and employee benefits is about 81.3% of the budget, which is typical between 80 and 85%.

It's up slightly from last year.

And then the one that gets a lot of activity and questions is purchase services.

And so, um, in purchase services and back to the point of let's provide a little let's provide that next level of detail so Ben and I are working on how to best do that the bus contracts are in there at the running start we pay to the community colleges and purchase services legal costs are in purchase services some of the sped contracts insurance utilities and so there's a whole list of multi-million dollar things that end up in that purchase services category and we'd be well served.

How much is the bus contracts in total?

I'll have to phone a friend on that when I get back to you.

I don't want to misspeak on that because we just renegotiated them so I can't remember the specifics of that.

But it's tens of millions of dollars.

Yeah, and I think, you know, and this is really important, especially for the community that's listening.

I very much appreciate when you look at this slide and you're like $188 million for purchase services.

What are we doing?

Why can't we just have our staff do that stuff?

Well, that's a fair point.

It's like the bus contract, right?

It's legal services.

It's insurance.

Those are things that we just have to have.

And I think we just have to do a better job explaining what's in purchase services and where that money is going.

Because, hey, if I was looking at this budget, I'd say, yeah, Ben, you know, you want to save 100 million?

Just take 100 million out of the 188 and call it a day.

the problem is we can't because then that means there's no buses and it means that there's no legal and there's no insurance and there's no all the things that we actually need and I will say that I know that our team tries its absolute best to negotiate the best pricing we can but It is what it is.

And so my promise, certainly to the board and the community, is the next time you see these slides, you will be able to go to the next slide and see a breakdown, at least of the big ticket stuff, so that it doesn't look like, wait, we could just cut $100 million from purchase services and call it a day.

We really can't.

I think the board is familiar with the MSOC acronym and so this is just a required slide that we provide that shows how much we get in state funding and how much we spend.

So you'll see the first two columns anticipating seven eight million dollars in state funding anticipating spending 90 million dollars and so were underfunded, if you look at just those first three columns, by about $11 million on these very specific categories that are defined by MSOC and how these are calculated.

So these are not salaries, these are not people, these are not FTE, these are very specific things.

so public schools chooses to supplement the MSOC funding with its levies a lot of it's the tech levy and so we supplement it to about the 223 million dollars which looks like we have a surplus we don't really have a surplus in MSOC but we have the luxury of that levy that can offset some of those costs that we provide to students in our schools does that make sense yeah and and again to be really clear about this

we are structurally down 11.6 million.

we're able to use the levy to help support these things.

The problem is most of the levy money cannot be used to deal with our actual operational issues.

So though it looks like, oh, look, we kind of saved or we made 11 million, it really isn't.

We're just trying to do the best we can with the levy money that we have.

But structurally, we get 78 million, we spend 90 million, we're down 11.6 million.

And that's why it is always helpful for the olympia to increase msoc because it is specific funding to do these kinds of things which you know is helpful but it's certainly not nearly enough so we end up having to you know steal from peter to pay paul uh in in that way yeah we're using supplemental funding the levy to supplement basic services which is msoc so those are that's operating the district we're using our levy to supplement that

and the MSOC includes so it's a per pupil allocation from the state that we advocated for and successfully got an increase in MSOC in the last biennium but one example of just like the structural underfunding at the district level but also the state level is that insurance increase that the superintendent and Dr. Buddleman were talking about the state's allocation to districts for insurance costs is through MSOC.

and that has gone up just a teeny, teeny, tiny bit while insurance costs have just skyrocketed.

It did not go by 54%.

No, it certainly did not.

And it was behind already.

So it's all built into, this isn't just copy paper.

It's also insurance.

It's also some other basic things that are necessary.

So as they said, we supplement them, other districts supplement them where they can because it doesn't match what the actual costs are.

Oh, director's on.

I think I'm confused so the eleven point seven eight million dollars of surplus between from the capital transfer we can't use that money to apply to our general budget or we are able to we are it's built into the budget yeah okay yeah this is simply taking the codes that are listed below and saying here's what we're spending out of non levy funds versus what we're spending out of levy funds we're spending ninety million dollars in total

Yeah.

I only wish that, you know, because of the levy, which is wonderful and very appreciative that we have it, is that we could use it to offset all of the expenses.

We can't.

We're pretty limited.

And that's why, you know, it's helpful, but it's not going to clear the problem.

there are three other funds the first of which is the Associated Student Body Fund so we collect the information from each of the schools our ASB analyst Chris Johnson who's not funded by ASB but is funded by the general fund compiles that information and this is presented here you'll see it's been pretty stable the last few years and these funds are restricted and what they can be used spent on for the extracurricular benefit of students.

Nothing significantly changing in this category of funding.

Here's the good news.

In the big presentation, the debt service for the John Stanford Center building will be paid off next year.

We'll have one less slide in the presentation and one less debt to pay back going forward.

And this is how we'll be financing that in this coming year's budget.

And then finally...

Sorry, if you can go back to the ASB slide, I just want to highlight that this is the problem.

So, hey, look, we have $4.6 million.

That's wonderful.

but ASB is super restricted and it's restricted to extracurricular benefit for students.

Wonderful.

They deserve it.

But yet the district has to pay a salary for a person to do all of this work.

That's where we get into trouble and that's the problem with unfunded mandates and that's the problem with structural deficits is that It might look like we have $4.6 million, but we can only spend that money on certain things, yet we're still expending resources to get this money.

That's a problem.

And so when you multiply that by a hundred jobs, a thousand jobs, different programs, That's where you get to the point of where we are today, which is insolvency.

So it's super complicated because it looks like, oh, well, why couldn't we just pay the salary of that person in Kurt's office?

There's plenty of money.

You can't.

So now we're expending resources for these resources that can't be spent on operational stuff.

It's just yet another example of why we're in trouble.

And then the final so there was talk about this at the dais earlier in the meeting around the capital fund and so this is sort of next year's plan for how to spend the levy funding both the technology and the capital building fund you'll notice the transfers out that 69 million dollars that's funding that goes from the capital budget into the general budget to support things like major preventative maintenance there's a category of maintenance we do that happens in our general operations that's funded in large part about $14 million is what we're estimating next year out of the capital budget.

Things like software start in the operating budget are transferred over to the funds are transferred from the capital budget.

There's technology support, there's digital implementation and curriculum.

You talked a lot about that at previous board meetings and there's some other things that the interest of $5 million for instructional supplies that you approved a couple months ago and a resolution is part of that 69 million dollars so this is part of the capital fund you'll see the change in fund balance is 109 million dollars to the negative that's anticipated so you collect the levy funds you want to make sure you have the levy funds in order to start the building project and now we're doing the building projects and so that's not something to be alarmed about and then just the last page is our four year forecast which the first year is what we're talking about here and then the state mandates that we have projections going forward and these are reflected sort of in that blue line on that graph that we showed earlier.

all right thank you Dr. Buddleman I know that drafting a budget this size is not easy and I think this year is no exception and I think next year will be even more difficult I think but I do know that this budget reflects many many months of work from you and your staff so thank you for all of that as well as multiple sessions from board work sessions I really appreciate how we sort of you reference this kicked off the start of the work sessions with all the cabinet directors here I thought that was particularly impactful way we do have our budget hearing tonight that will start at 8 we're gonna wrap up this discussion at 8 we likely the last thing on our agenda is committees we will likely not get to that tonight we will likely have to punt on that one but please do take a look at both documents that were in there because those are i think critical as we are continuing to move forward so we have roughly 20 minutes which is like two to three minutes per director for comments so i'm not going to go around the you i'm going to try to have a little bit more organic conversation but I'm going to ask directors to be respectful to this idea that we want everyone to have an opportunity so think about that sort of two to three minute line so I will see if anyone wants to go first Director Song

Thank you for the four-year forecast.

Another line item in this I think would be helpful is to know what the enrollment assumption for each of these years that this budget is predicated on would be helpful.

in particular I am wondering what the district's thoughts are about outgoing years because looking at King County Public Health birth data there so 2017 just happens to stand out because that's when my youngest was born it was over 7,000 kids that were born that year and then if you look at 2021, 22, 23 we're going into the 5,000 births range and that that is a big difference in a relatively short amount of time and I worry that this forecast is kind of making an assumption around increase birth to K ratio.

It certainly looks like we've stabilized, but I don't know that we can really say that we're gonna return to more of a high 50, 60 range.

So it would just be helpful to know what is the enrollment assumption for each of these years and what is kind of the risk that we can kind of, that we're feeling comfortable around that assumption.

the resolution that you've got in the packet does include the enrollment assumptions at the top so we can look at that it for the 26 27 year that we're talking about it's 49,430 and in the fourth year it's 48,812 so the difference there is 600 ish reduction is what this is what the four-year forecast is built on

I just want to say thank you to your team for the last few months of budget presentations I'm feeling more confident about this budget than I have in previous years as a former director and as a community member so thank you very much for the hard work on that going Looking forward since we're going to immediately jump into budget planning for our subsequent years Like as we kind of just touched on earlier in our board meeting the capital fund Budget feels very nebulous to me.

It's not something that we have traditionally spent a lot of time on as a board but Important spending decisions are happening in that budget and I would love for us to have at least one budget work session that does a deep dive into the capital budget and also how the investments were planned over the six-year duration.

So I don't think it's like something that we can pull together for this budget per se, but just kind of going forward.

and I'll return to compliment the work you and the finance and audit committee have done has been really helpful in forming information that is useful for the board.

So thanks to the three of you who are on that committee.

So very helpful.

Director Rankin.

Yeah I'll just echo the gratitude the communication has been very a lot more meaningful I mean we had one year where we had like 11 budget work sessions but they were largely the same information being presented multiple times this feels much more not fluid because it's not like all the options are open to us but responsive and so I want to echo Vivian's compliments and also I think it's also a reflection of our superintendent's leadership that it's expected that these are meaningful conversations and not just dog and pony shows for the for the board that's been great the capital thing since we're not probably talking about committees today I do want to say that what you just said Vivian with the you know what's the life of the cap what's the life of the levy what does the budget look like on a life of the levy basis and then what are the planned expenditures within an annual basis is my view of a great opportunity for the operations committee is to align their work with the life of the levy and being able to provide proactive information to staff about whether or not proposals align with board policy and priorities.

And then when we have the approvals through the bar process, that context is being built in and being held against what voters approved, what's planned to happen over the life of the levy, and then year to year what actually happens.

I think that could develop a really healthy Cycle both for us to increase our oversight because as you said Vivian we're just kind of like I don't know buildings get built Communication tool for the public and also help support Approval of the board on on board actions when we like oh yeah this We knew this was coming.

We see that it's aligned to what was expected.

So I just wanted to since we're not going to talk about that that later and the window opened a little bit just kind of put that out there that I think that's a great kind of cadence of work and opportunity for the operations committee.

Director Mizrahi.

No just say noted it's half a billion dollars a year so we should be providing that on regular cadence.

And unlike the general fund that levy money is money that we the board specifically ask ask voters for and are directly responsible for.

So providing that ongoing oversight and transparency I think would be great.

So, to Director Song's question about the enrollment projections, I guess I'm also looking at page seven here.

So, if the blue line is higher than the yellow line, meaning we have better enrollment than we think we are going to have.

I'll wait for you to get to it, yeah.

Blue, yellow, okay, go, go, go, seven, almost there.

to clarify Superintendent Shoulderner's point.

Is that good for us or bad for us?

Does the budget get worse if we have more enrollment, or does it get better, or is it complicated?

I hate to say that it's complicated, but it's complicated.

It depends on the kid.

It depends on where they go.

It depends on which school.

It depends on all those things.

But the hope is that our projections are as close to the reality as possible because when you have projections, you're making assumptions and you're making decisions.

So, you know, it's very complicated in terms of, like, does increased enrollment actually increase our fund balance or does it actually decrease it?

It depends on the kid, it depends on where they go, it depends on what program.

But what is the hope is that what we project is what we get so that we can actually budget accordingly.

Now, it is always better that if we project that one number and we get a little bit more, that's helpful if the staffing for those kids are the same and the expectations of services are the same.

But if those extra students come with extra services, it actually might be a bad thing.

But Kurt, I don't know if you want to add any more to that.

No, I appreciate you saying it's complicated because when I say that to Ben, he doesn't let me get away with it.

So I appreciate that.

I gave you that out within my question.

But I guess so then within these projections, do you all have projections of what percent of the yellow bar are students that require transportation or special education services and what percent we think won't, because we're projecting that too.

I assume many of those things are known because they're existing students who maybe get those services now, so we'll assume they will next year, but for new students or whatever, that's probably...

Yeah, I mean Ben said this, it's like an airplane, right?

So if you've got an empty seat on the airplane, you may have some incremental costs and fuel if you're increasing the weight or some extra baggage handling costs, but until you need that new airplane, you're probably gonna make a little money on that airplane.

And so we don't have refined down to that.

but if you had all your schools filled to capacity and added some more kids then you're gonna cost more on each kid but if you have extra capacity in the kid you might not cost as much in those schools and so and it depends on what sort of seat the kid wants right first class seats are in higher lower demand than the coach class seats so but it's a good place to interrogate further

I will say if we can clean up the structural issues then having extra kids is actually really good And so, again, for us, the best thing is to project accurately so that when we're deciding about who the kids are...

Because the thing is, if we're projecting, we're projecting who those kids are.

So we'll know what school and then what bus they need and what services they need.

If we're off with the projections in terms of which kids, that might be a huge problem for us in terms of busing or in terms of staffing.

It might be a great thing for us because maybe they're all going to a place that has a half-empty bus and a half-empty classroom.

But if only we could be so lucky.

It's rarely like that.

Director Song.

The multilingual IAs is that as a consequence of our collective bargaining agreement?

It's in the agreement.

It is in the there is a staffing ratio for multilingual IAs in our CBA.

Is Sarah still here?

She's not.

I believe it's in the agreement.

Yeah.

Somebody's confirming back there, yes.

On one hand, as I said, I'm feeling good about this budget.

I think what we have to remember is that we have large categories of spending where we have made each choice to spend beyond what we are funded.

And some of the larger categories are, sure, transportation, but there's also, as you know, I'm kind of focused on it as substitutes.

I think it's okay to you know we're underfunded I just want to make sure that going forward in our budget that that kind of deficit spending is really intentional and we really believe that that is the very very best thing for our students.

I am wondering about our substitute spending kind of my curiosity about it was piqued within the finance and audit committee where there was an audit done in Franklin High School and it kind of highlighted some of are practices around substitute spending.

It sounds like sometimes, well, first of all, there's a software issue where we're not getting timely information about when we need the substitutes.

There's also a practice of when we don't have a substitute in place, the building gets to decide if they're going to keep the extra substitute pay or they're going to return it to the building.

complicated and yet I want us to get to a point of our budget that we have affirmatively approved that we do want to do deficit spending in this category because we actually do think it's the best thing for kids.

And so I'm glad that you highlighted some of the categories where we are spending beyond our means.

but it really I think that that is what I have observed is that we have reduced the number of classroom teachers for example because we have less students that can't be our only lever going forward I think we really need to prioritize money going into classrooms and I think that our superintendent and you have done a really nice job of highlighting where we have made cuts and where we have protected funding, but I think there's more work to be done.

Yeah, and I really appreciate the director's song.

I mean, there's a lot that we have to do so that we can start serving our children even better.

And there's just going to have to be decisions about where we're spending our money and how we're spending our money.

The problem is it's very difficult to spend money on things that we don't get money for.

because then that by definition means every dollar that we're spending on something that isn't in the formula that's taking away a dollar from something that is in the formula so it's you know we're going to do our best to be as detailed about it and as fine-tooth comb you know looking through everything but I just hope that people by seeing this presentation and seeing the documents It's not like there's this pot of $188 million that's contracted services that we can somehow just get rid of.

That's our buses.

That's our legal.

That's our insurance.

So, you know, it's tough.

It's a tough situation and a lot of school districts are in this position right now.

I guess I will just add on to Director Song's deficit spending issue a little bit of like we spend more than we get on special education services from the state that would be great if we had the like most amazing special education services in the entire state in the entire country I'd be like yes let's lean into it but we I don't think we do I think that I think instead we need to look at how we are spending those dollars and making sure that those services we provide follow the students and best support those students.

Not really a question, just a comment.

No, I appreciate that.

And, you know, a lot of people will hear me say this, right?

Special education is a service and not a place.

And we even had a parent come to the board to discuss that.

There's a lot of decisions that have been made by this district before I got here about special education is a place and not a service.

We got to stop thinking that way.

We've got to make sure that we're aligning the resources that we have to the IEPs of the students, to the actual services that are being written.

and not to things that are not there.

Because to your point, I think we have wonderful educators and wonderful folks that work with our kids.

But if we're not using the resources appropriately, we're not going to serve our kids as appropriately.

I'm going to go to Director Rankin unless other directors who have not spoken.

All right, Director Rankin.

I just wanted to appreciate the last several comments about special education.

This is, in my experience, the first time I've heard multiple board directors and the superintendent echo the same sentiment that it's not just about the money, it's about how we're doing for kids and we have to make decisions centered on kids.

Because earlier in the meeting I was starting to get a little bit nervous about, I've seen it play out other places where and what you just said Gina was exactly right, making the choice to spend more is not a problem if that's what we believe is necessary but something I'm a little bit nervous about that the more communication and more clear we can be is that we don't end up blaming students with disabilities for a deficit that that is something that can, well those kids are just too expensive and so I just wanted to kind of state that worry but also like appreciate that I had that worry a little bit more at the beginning of the meeting and just hearing my colleagues and the thoughtfulness of our superintendent I just kind of wanted to state my excitement about the alignment that's happening in the partnership and it's very hopeful.

I appreciate that, thank you.

All right well we are going to wrap up our budget discussion because at 8 we will move into our public testimony on the budget again thank you Dr. Buddleman this is not an easy feat in any regard so I appreciate that we will so tonight was our our last discussion as a board on the budget we will have public testimony and be able to hear from the public and then final action on our budget is scheduled for August 26th which gives the board and the community additional time to ask any other any further questions before adoption.

So with that the one housekeeping item I had is Vice President Briggs the informational study session on technology is scheduled for December 2nd.

I think that's the soonest we could we could do it.

Okay.

Okay.

um and then the other item again I will just echo we didn't get to committees uh some of the stuff from our retreat we're still trying to trying to tick off on the agenda I will try to see if it fits in where it fits in in August um but with that being said there being no further business to come before the board the regular board is now adjourned at 7 57 p.m we're gonna head back to the dais and we'll start the next meeting

you

Good evening, everyone.

This is President Topp, and I am now calling the board's special meeting to order at 8 p.m.

For the record, I'll call the roll.

Vice President Briggs, Director Lavallee.

It doesn't work.

It does.

Okay.

Sorry, I took the mic.

That wasn't working.

Perfect.

Director Mizrahi.

Present.

Director Rankin.

Here.

Director Smith.

Here.

Director Song.

Here.

And this is President Taup.

Welcome to the budget public hearing.

Again, this is our opportunity to hear from the public.

I just want to make one quick note on our board goals.

One of the goals is to about community engagement around the budget.

And I know that Director Lavallee, Director Smith and I are kind of working with recommendations that we've heard from the Finance and Audit Committee about what that could look like in some way.

And hopefully we'll be able to kind of have a conversation with the board here come August, if all works.

because I don't think this is always the most satisfying public hearing as the budget is mostly baked at this point.

So tonight we will hear from the public.

Final action is scheduled for August 26th, which again gives us some final time to ask questions that we need to ask.

um testimony signups have been accepted online for those testifying remotely we also have a sign up sheet in the back if anyone would like to sign up in person we'll begin with in-person testimony signups and then move through any testimony remotely We had a general public testimony section during our regular meeting earlier this hearing and will be This hearing will be for testimony related to the 2627 recommended budget Speakers will have a maximum of two minutes speaking time As a reminder, written testimony is also accepted as stated on the agenda.

And if you are unable to finish your comments, we invite you to provide those written testimony.

We have some wonderful written testimony provided to us.

Once your name is read, staff will begin a timer and a beep will sound when your time is exhausted.

With that, I'll have staff read off the speakers.

The first speaker is Chris Jackins.

We're not starting the time yet don't worry.

CHRIS JACKINS My name is Chris Jackins box 84063 Seattle 98124. I have some detailed written comments including a memo titled Some Discussion of District Budgets and Against Closing Schools.

it would cost about nine million dollars to award congratulations of one dollar to each student each day they attend school.

If attendance increased by 16 percent that would amount to about 87 million dollars.

The gap amount the district was originally trying to fill for 2026 2027. On the debt service fund, 10 points.

Number one, the district is finally paying off the debt for its headquarters.

Number two, I was there when the district went into debt to buy a new headquarters some 25 years ago.

Number three, the stated goal was to consolidate properties, improve efficiency, and save over $100 million in operating costs.

Number four, I publicly opposed the project.

The district had no detailed analysis.

Number five, the debt was supposed to be paid off by operating savings.

Number six, that never happened because as a previous district chief financial officer found, there were no savings.

only a net loss of many millions of dollars.

Number seven, I helped point out that the headquarters project violated city's industrial zoning.

Number eight, I filed appeals along with industrial users in the area.

The city then denied permits for the project.

The district then sued the city.

Number nine, the appeals delayed the project a couple of years during which time borrowing costs dropped.

Number ten, former school board director Michael Preston kindly publicly noted at a board meeting that because of my efforts the district coincidentally saved six million dollars in borrowing costs for the project.

Thank you very much.

Thank you, Mr. Jackins.

You are under your time, under your two minutes.

Appreciate your comments.

And that was our final speaker.

As there being no further business on the agenda, the meeting stands adjourned at 8.05 PM.

Thank you, everyone.

Have a wonderful evening.