5 31 and we are back in session and it is time for public testimony.
You will see on the big screen that in accordance with board policy 1 4 3 0 and corresponding procedure 1 4 3 0 BP.
One person speaks at a time.
The comments need to be addressed to the board.
Please adhere to the time limit.
You will get a 30 second yellow light and a red light thereafter.
Wrap your comments up please.
Please don't make me use the gavel or the no button.
The majority of the speaker's time must be spent on the topic that he or she is indicated and signed up to speak about no racial slurs personal insults ridicule or threats will be allowed and no comments regarding personnel matters.
That one sometimes is a little difficult but but I got to caution you we will rule you out of order and we will turn the microphone off and any signs brought to the meeting are subject to these ground rules.
Could we have the first three folks announced please.
First up Chris Jackins followed by Brian Terry and Edwin Martin.
My name is Chris Jackins box 8 4 0 6 3 Seattle 9 8 1 2 4 of the Northwest Center contract.
The agreement lists a question mark for the number of children served on board policy 30 to 22 points.
Number one the policy seems to exempt student publications from school board policy on commercial advertising.
Number two under the policy can student publications accept advertising for marijuana.
On final acceptance of Thornton Creek three points.
Number one this project shrunk the school's play field.
Now the district wants to demolish the Decatur Annex.
Number two the Decatur Annex building is the last connection at the site to its World War 2 history.
Number three please attach a condition to the final acceptance requiring that the district save the Decatur Annex.
On the wing Luke constructability report three points.
Number one the executive summary is inadequate.
There is no implementation information.
Number two a landmark nomination for the school was submitted by neighbors of the school including Josephine Rainwater.
The nomination notes that quote the school was named in honor of Wong Wing Chong Luke.
He was a pioneer in Asian-American politics.
He served in the United States military and received the Bronze Star and six combat stars.
He became the first Asian-American to hold elected office in the Pacific Northwest as well as the first person of color to hold a Seattle City Council seat unquote.
Number three the district touts its racial equity efforts but the district is hurrying to demolish the school.
On Native American education please quickly support a board action to reestablish a school in the tradition of the district's previous Indian heritage high school.
Thank you.
Good evening.
And welcome Superintendent Juneau.
Highly capable students come from all backgrounds.
However those who are privileged are more likely to get the support they need prior to entering advanced learning.
Their already advanced academics make these students easier to find and serve.
It's tempting to create advanced learning program that caters to their needs at the exclusion of their underprivileged peers.
Our legislators recognize this.
Back in 2013 they updated the WAC to mandate that districts find and serve students who show potential to perform advanced work relative to their circumstances.
We all care about equity but do we care enough to change our program to comply with the law when that might upset some privileged families.
Apparently not.
Our service model despite the mandate remains highly exclusive.
In fact the opportunity gap in advanced learning has grown every single year since 2013. Today a white student is 20 times more likely than a black student to be identified as highly capable.
This leads to highly segregated classrooms that send a clear message.
White students are more capable and more deserving.
It is our responsibility to meet the needs of all of our students equitably in compliance with state law and district policy.
Unfortunately our decision making process puts the needs of privileged students first even when that means breaking the law.
I ask everyone here today to please take a good look at your role in this process and how you can help finally put an end to more than three decades of racial exclusion.
Thank you.
Good evening school board members.
I am Dr. Edwin Martin with the student exploration program here in Seattle Washington.
We have an office actually about two miles to the south here and I'm here to speak about the ASVAB which is the armed services vocational aptitude battery test and its career exploration component for high school students.
Last year we provided free of charge to the school career guidance and counseling to over 4800 students from various schools in western Washington.
Our goal is to provide students with a sustainable and achievable personal and professional career path post high school that is free of charge to the student and the school.
Your tax dollars pays for this program.
There are 62 of us nationwide and we work with career guidance counselors and principals in schools in complement to career cruiser or Naviance.
We have a program that's free of charge and we like the idea of going into schools and speaking with students to give them an idea a snapshot of what they could do post high school post college.
It would be great to see the public the Seattle Public School students utilize our program to help them achieve their goals and succeeding in their educational pursuits.
We help students by providing a multiple aptitude test as well as an interest inventory and career exploration tools that utilize the OccuFind and several additional career tools.
Naviance and Career Cruiser are great programs for students to use and I believe your schools utilize the Naviance program.
The ASVAB career exploration program is at no cost to the high school because we are a federally funded program.
It lays a foundation for high school.
and beyond planning and it's the only program where instructors come into school and walks the students through a logical approach to career and college decision making.
Please consider using us for your schools but I also like to extend an invitation to the board members and the committee members to come out to our office to see those students that actually are using it and seeing how it works for and I'm here with my boss Christine Fletcher.
So thank you for the opportunity to allow us to come and speak with you today.
The next speaker is Cynthia Mejia Giudici followed by Josephine Rainwater.
The next speaker on the list is Cynthia Mejia Giudici followed by Josephine Rainwater.
OK if anybody else would like to testify please come sign in at the table to my right.
Otherwise we will hear from Director Patu her board comments and then any comments about public testimony that directors would like to address.
Then we're going to circle back around and catch up on the consent calendar.
Director Patu you are on.
Good evening.
It is great to be back.
I think I've enjoyed the summer too long but it's always good to rest up because being a part of the board is very important in terms of the decisions that we make on behalf of all of our students at Seattle Public Schools.
The weather has been great.
And I believe that hopefully that we're looking at a bigger and a better year for next year to make sure that all the what I was doing is going through my list where all the pluses and the minus in my minus I need to work harder and in my pluses I need to add to.
So I'm really happy to be here today and it's another great day.
Thank you.
OK.
Do any of our directors have any comments about what they heard at public testimony.
Seeing none.
Last but hopefully not least I just spoke with associate superintendent for teacher and teaching and learning Michael Tolley.
We heard from Mr. Martin via email earlier this month and I.
forwarded some concerns about previous policy stances taken by boards of director previously regarding military recruitment.
I am told that Caleb Perkins who is our director of college and career readiness is reaching out to you and will report back to the board to the extent that your program falls under that policy.
and or whether or not directors and potentially the C&I committee wants to take a look at it.
No offense intended but we have very strong feelings in Seattle Washington about recruitment and military and reciprocity for peace groups etc.
And those battles were well fought.
And thank you for coming down and introducing yourself and I hope we continue the conversation on that note.
Do I have a motion to pass the consent agenda.
I move approval of the consent agenda.
Second.
All those in favor.
Aye.
Hang on.
I got to do all those in favor and I need to find out whether anyone wants to remove anything from the consent agenda.
Does anyone wish to remove anything from the consent agenda.
Seeing none.
All those in favor please say aye.
Aye.
OK.
That brings us to the action portion of our agenda.
Who from staff will be presenting with the superintendent like to present.
Oh excuse me.
I did not appreciate Chief Jesse take it away.
Good evening board directors President Harris Superintendent Juneau Wyeth Jessee chief of student support services.
This evening I'm here for both intro and approval of a particular modification with Northwest Center.
This particular modification is for the 17 18 school year.
This is moving our contract with a birth to three provider.
That amount is moving from one million sixty nine thousand eight hundred and twenty one and we're adding another additional three hundred thousand dollars.
It's a modification.
I will up front apologize to the board.
There was a clerical error in part of the submitted paperwork.
We have updated the contract and the bar online as well as we have paper copies in the back.
There was a confusion about which fiscal year we were talking about because we also this past June had been talking about our upcoming contracts for the 18 19 school year.
So again my apologies to you.
So I'll repeat that.
This is again a recommendation for a three hundred thousand dollars modification to our contract with the Northwest Center.
It is a clearinghouse.
We are a clearinghouse for the monies that come from OSPI directly to the service providers.
Again as I said at C&I this will this next school year will be the last year where we will be the flow through dollars for that and those monies will go directly from OSPI.
to the Northwest Center and other birth to three providers.
Director Geary may I have a motion please.
I move that the school board authorize the superintendent to modify the contract with Northwest Center to increase the contract by the additional amount of three hundred thousand dollars to ensure the provision of early intervention services as defined in 34 CFR 303 in accordance with part C of the individuals with disability education act.
with any minor additions deletions and modifications deemed necessary by the superintendent and to take any necessary actions to implement the contract.
Immediate action is in the best interests of the district.
Second.
And this came before C&I for approval.
Thank you.
Director DeWolf comments questions concerns from my colleagues director Mack.
No.
OK.
I have a couple of questions.
You were here for the public testimony.
Can you respond to the concerns brought forth sir.
Yep the number.
I heard that.
So because their individual needs of students there's not just a one number fits all for the services that are provided.
You would know that out of all our conversations when we provide services to our students the continuum of services as we define it can range.
That being said just to give you a scope of that that cost averages eight thousand one hundred and sixteen dollars.
So if you were just to average the number of students that would be for 300000 that would be in the range of 36 students if they were all needing the exact same services on that average.
But our children don't come with equal and quantifiable needs.
My two kids don't either.
Indeed.
Next question.
You said this was the last year.
Could you elaborate on that some.
Yes.
This is part of the work within the state legislator.
There's been many years of debate actually on this particular topic because of the administrative cost of overseeing these services with birth to three.
And so they state legislator put a cap on it to be 5 percent.
Those costs for the oversight and administration of these services exceeds our costs at least here in Seattle Public Schools have exceeded over 5 percent.
So as part of that settlement that was the ability to take school districts out of it and then just simply do direct funding from OSPI to the service providers again for birth to three.
Thank you.
Any other comments questions concerns from my colleagues.
Director Patu.
I guess I just need clarification because I'm not very familiar with this program.
When we say birth to three can someone explain to me what we mean by birth to three because I know we don't serve birth.
I mean kids that young.
So I just you know I just need to understand what is this.
No problem Director Patu.
So as clear as I can make it students that are identified for special needs as early as birth all the way to the age of three it's it's categorized as birth and it is identified under the individuals with disability education act as part C.
So that particular services.
Like you were stating we don't directly provide those services but we contract for those services because they are so specialized and we have a number of service providers.
Northwest Center being one Boyer might be another one that you might be familiar with who provide these services.
And so we are mandated under the Individual Disability Education Act.
to help ensure that they are getting those services as early as birth to three.
Again especially if you just think about the research that says if students as early as possible receive additional supports they are likely as they come into our system into our schools then they are often like to make more progress.
Thank you.
Any other comments questions concerns from my colleagues.
Seeing none roll call please.
Director Geary aye Director Mack aye Director Patu aye Director DeWolf aye Director Harris aye.
This motion has passed unanimously.
Thank you.
We move to D introduction items number one approval of board policy number 3 2 2 0 student expression in school sponsored media.
This came before C&I August 21st for.
Consideration.
Approval of this item would adopt a new policy regarding student expression in school sponsored media.
I see Dr. Kyle Kinoshita at the podium.
Take it away sir.
Good evening Kyle Knofta chief of curriculum assessment instruction and introducing for your consideration a new policy that is in response to recent legislation.
The legislation was about requiring school districts.
Whoops.
This is not good for high challenge people.
So I kind of hold on to this.
In any case, the new legislation required public schools to adopt policies related to student expression in school-sponsored media.
School sponsored media is defined as that media that's under the supervision of a school media advisor and produced at the school.
Essentially what the policy does is first of all it you know makes clear what the First Amendment rights are of students in their work and publication.
And as well, it defines protections for editors, student editors, as well as faculty advisors, as well as administration and school boards in terms of that permissible expression.
It also defines the limitations of free speech in school settings.
The benefits of this policy basically is that it provides very clear guidance for all schools uniformly applied in terms of what are the rights and limitations of student expression.
So I'll take any questions.
Questions concerns from my colleagues.
Director Mack.
Very supportive of this policy in general.
I had a question.
I'm trying to remember what the conversation at C&I was and why it's up for consideration as opposed to approval.
And that's one question and maybe that's a board director that can help answer that because I'm not remembering off the top.
But my other question is I'd like a little bit of additional information on why.
It's one of the second last paragraph and I just have a question around the any decision by a principal or student media adviser to prohibit student expression under this policy is subject to immediate review.
So it has review within three business days a time by the executive director of schools one person.
And I'm curious to know why that one person is the one person that would.
be responsible for such a large decision about whether or not this student was being inappropriately prohibited or whatever and why we don't have a larger body or why is it the executive director of schools.
That's kind of my one policy question on on this policy.
Director DeWolf if you'd like to respond to that and then Dr. Kinoshita as well.
Sure.
We we decided to bring this up for consideration just to provide an opportunity for us to all have just some really rich discussion particularly because next week we hope that we can obviously vote to approve this.
So just wanted to open it up for conversation particularly if there's anything that comes from from these last open meetings that we need to consider.
Did you have any comment specifically to her question.
Director DeWolf.
I think yes.
So thank you for me.
I'm I'm particularly when we're looking at that paragraph I I guess I just err towards the side of trusting in those folks that are in leadership positions in our district and not trying to try to err on not trying to task force everything too much because I think particularly for some of these decisions that need to be made in a more streamlined manner that I think that it just made sense that that was kind of the structure of the process.
But Dr. Kinoshita please.
Well you know first of all it assumes that the principal has conducted a pretty thorough review as to whether you know the expression actually aligned with the policy.
And then as an executive director, as the next level of authority, you know, then conducting, you know, reviewing to see whether the principal actually did, you know, comply with the provisions of the policy.
I believe that, you know, the intent there was that if that was the case, then, you know, basically you have two reviews of that expression and that would be sufficient.
That's the best that I can you know surmise.
Other questions comments concerns.
I have a couple.
You heard the public testimony regarding whether or not student publications are held under the umbrella or ambit of our advertising policy.
Can you address that please.
That one I'd have to get back to you because I'm not as familiar with the advertising policy as I should be.
Number two a very specific example was brought up whether or not advertising for marijuana might be included in a student public publication.
And I see General Counsel moving to the podium and I'll give you another question to mull on while you're answering that because we know you can multitask.
Anytime we're dealing with the First Amendment freedom of speech rights does a two person escalation of appropriateness know it when we see it in quotes does that protect due process rights.
or does that open us up to risk of litigation?
Question.
Good evening Noel Treat general counsel let me first go to your question about advertising and I think we need to go back to the team and just make sure we all are clear on how this intersects with the advertising policy.
The language in the student expression policy that's being proposed that mentions advertising that language is pulled directly from the stat the new statute.
So that's sort of a mandate.
And I do understand that some of our student publications currently do have some level of advertising but I don't know the full degree.
So we need to look at that.
Our current advertising policy prohibits advertising, including tobacco, alcohol, or marijuana, even though it's legal now for people over 21. But we can get you a full answer on the exact relationship between those two policies as a follow-up.
And then in terms of the review the statute in the First Amendment don't necessarily require us to have any internal appeal process.
The new statute that the state adopted only provided for an appeal directly to superior court.
If a student is dissatisfied with a school level decision about content in student sponsored media we decided that it was a good idea to build an additional internal appeal in advance of that.
And that's why you see an appeal to the executive director here and I think.
Going along with what was mentioned previously the executive director was that's a policy decision.
What who and who or what body do you want to hear that internal appeal after the principal makes a decision.
I think the decision was we needed something that could be expeditious.
So you know multiple people or a panel would be could be more complicated and then in terms of who's the right person that is the direct chain of command from a principal.
So that seemed fitting.
I believe Director Geary and then Director Mack.
Thank you.
I do read in the policy itself that we can prohibit student expression that would incite students to violate federal or state laws rules or regulations.
So long as you know it seems to me that that would cover some of the specific problems raised fairly easily.
Director Mack.
I appreciate the clarification around that due process due process and appropriate level steps.
What you said that I think maybe is appropriate to add to the policy for clarification sake not for.
because it doesn't sound like it conflicts but that the next step for students would be to appeal to the Superior Court and that isn't in here.
So I'm wondering if it would be appropriate to say something about RCW but you have to dig into the RCW and and the appeal process being clear in policy.
of what that appeal process is that internally our appeal process is executive director of schools but then students have the right to appeal so that that's clear might for me make the policy just more clear and clean and in line with state law.
Yeah we we.
And excuse me Director Geary.
My concern with that is to the extent that state law changes it's just better to refer them to the law rather than trying to make sure that we are cross referencing our policies against any potential change in law that may occur.
Yeah what I was going to add is that the RCW chapter that's referenced in the policy is only about appeals of district decisions to superior court.
So if someone looks at that statutory site which you would assume someone would do if they wanted to go to court they'd actually need to do it to go to court that they would they could readily see that's a that's a chapter about appeals but we could.
We could potentially flesh that out just a little bit.
I wouldn't want to put a lot of detail because the statutes can change over time but we could flag that it's an appeal to Superior Court or something along that line.
Director DeWolf.
Thank you.
Just as a suggestion I think I lean towards kind of Jill not being too prescriptive but even just something along the lines of utilizing the appeal process as outlined in the RCW that way whatever whatever it ends up saying.
Okay we can work on that.
Director Mack and then I'd like to wrap this one up please.
I concur with that.
I think that just clarifying that there's a potential extra step in not being prescriptive.
Thank you.
Thank you so much.
Number two.
Amend approval of amending board policy number 3 1 1 6 students and out of home parens foster care came before C&I August 21st for.
Consideration.
Approval of this item would amend board policy number 3 1 1 6 students in foster care.
Who is presenting.
Chief Jessee take it away.
Again Wyatt Jessee chief of student support services.
I'm here to amend policy 3 1 1 6. This has come about from Governor Inslee's signature this last spring to revise this to better reflect the language of the true conditions for students.
No longer just a blanket statement of foster care but actually out of home care as you know there's different arrangements for students when they are.
no longer with their legal legal parents or their birth parents.
This particular policy was updated to reflect some of the language also in policy 0 0 3 0 specifically around discrimination.
And so there is a whole paragraph that was lifted from 0 0 3 0 into this particular policy.
And then also a as discussed at C&I around really reflecting the language to say hey we're not going to wait for you know the Department of Children Youth and Families to give us a call.
We need to be on it and actually that does reflect current practice as we are engaging of course with them on an ongoing basis to ensure services and just coordinating all those wraparound services that come for these particular students and their conditions of change as they.
as they evolve all the time.
Comments questions concerns from my colleagues.
Any time we can help.
Please go ahead.
Director Geary.
As a matter of practice when we have a student who's enrolled in one of our schools and placed in an out of home care outside of our district are they allowed to remain enrolled within the district even after the end of the year should the out of home care placement continue?
Yeah that's so that gets into McKinney Bento.
So that's that gets into that policy that where we go OK so if they're out they qualify if they're if they're not with their legal guardian they would be qualified to get transportation services and go to their current home school.
I mean a current school that they were at.
Again those situations evolve to within their own.
We have a you know anyway I can go in a lot of situations around that.
But yes they do have a right.
Simply to come back and we we do everything we can to make sure that that happens.
Yes we actually do a really good job.
We're actually working on that right now.
We have liaisons on all of those we have identified liaisons to go through all of the rostering for those students.
About seventeen hundred is what we're looking at right now.
to see who qualifies and what their conditions are in the families.
So that right now the family support workers are our main major central of that not only at the schools that they're located at but also students.
They expand that out and we're paying them right now to ensure what their conditions are because again they are fluid.
Do you have a round number of how many students are in for a way of that.
I want to get a percentage at some point.
Seventeen hundred students and out of home care seems like a large number to me and I am thrilled that we are reaching out and embracing and I appreciate that we do it with unfunded mandates at best.
If you could break down that seventeen hundred students how many are K through 5 6 through 8 high school.
That's an important number to me that we we need to share loud and often.
So that's seventeen hundred is on MKV.
I can get you the breakdown of the numbers between those who are with their guardians who the guardians are as best I can without over identification.
But then we can have the breakdown for you.
I'd love to get those numbers too.
I just don't even have those at my fingertips.
Let's paint a picture here of what what our needs are and the fact that they're unfunded mandates again I.
I want to be loud about it.
Yeah it's again really I would keep using this term fluid situations.
You know things can change really rapidly.
You know so if they're reconstructing some of our care centers safe houses for students and it moves somewhere else that changes the numbers.
Those are things that impact our community and I'll get that to the entire board.
Thank you sir.
Yep.
Moving on number three amending policy number 2 4 1 3 equivalency credit for career and technical education courses.
This came before C&I August 21 for approval.
Approval of this item would remove a sentence from policy number 2 4 1 3 in order to align with the change in state law.
That's correct.
Take it away please.
Thank you.
The sentence had to do with the requirement for the awarding of AP computer science credit in order to fulfill a math credit for high school graduation.
Previously it was required that the student be concurrently enrolled in Algebra 2 or had passed Algebra 2 in order to have that credit awarded.
The new legislation strikes that requirement such that you know student doesn't necessarily have to be enrolled in Algebra 2 or pass it in order to be awarded the AP computer science credit for a math credit for graduation.
Can you speak more directly into the microphone?
Thank you.
Sorry.
OK.
Is that better?
Thank you.
Basically, the benefit of that is that it creates more equitable access to AP computer science courses and basically expands the ability to have more students actually take a course that promotes the entry into the field of computer science.
So questions comments concerns from my colleagues.
I have a question for you Dr. Kinoshita.
Sure.
The legislature passed this.
Correct.
Did this go through OSPI or the State Board of Education or this was a standalone bill.
This appears to be a standalone bill.
Senate Bill 6 1 3 6. And I actually looked at the bill and literally they crossed that sentence out.
Fascinating.
OK moving on.
Number four amending policy number 3 2 4 4 prohibition of corporal punishment.
This came before Ops August 22nd for.
Approval of this item would remove one item from the list of exceptions to the prohibition of corporal punishment to align with recent changes to state law.
This was updated.
yesterday on August 28th and if you could call out the update I'd be grateful.
Yes I guess I can.
President Harris.
So this is again we're amending policy 3 2 4 4 to reflect current language in alignment to policy 3 2 4 6. This particular revision was to strike.
The biggest thing out of that was the last bullet number D in this particular policy as it relates to aversive therapy.
We no longer do aversive therapy so that would strike the entire — that entire section.
Can you define aversive therapy for us please.
And remember you're not just talking to us but you're talking to the universe here.
Yes I will.
I will put that in the most clear terms as I can.
So really is a design aversive therapy says it is a therapy to go hands on.
So if you are to hold a particular student against their will and so they cannot move their limbs or get somewhere that would be part of what used to be termed as therapy.
So you can just kind of.
Right.
Grab it.
Grab your hand to say that would be acceptable in some person that term to something therapeutic and that is actually no longer the case.
So this updates again around prohibition of corporal punishment and does not accept again that terminology or acceptance of around.
a restraint and a use of aversive therapy or behavior management programs that again go hands on to restrict the movement of students.
Questions comments concerns from my colleagues seeing none.
We are moving to number five.
We're in the capital and operations portion of the meeting teaching and learning.
Thanks so much for presenting tonight.
Much appreciate it.
Number five BEX IV Wing Luke elementary school replacement project phase 2 constructability review report and implementation.
This came before Ops August 22nd for.
Approval.
Approval of this item would accept and approve the constructability review report for the Wing Luke phase 2 elementary school project.
This review process.
provides quality assurance and is a requirement for state funding action helps to secure approximately two million dollars in state funding assistance for Wing Luke Elementary School project.
The professional service fee for this constructability.
That's a cool word.
Review report is thirty two thousand ninety eight dollars.
Take it away Dr. Herndon.
Flip Herndon associate superintendent for operations and facilities.
So yes this is the introduction for the constructability review report for Wing Luke.
You see these on each one of our major replacement or renovation projects and basically the report is a third party that says we're going to build we're building efficiently the building and the plans make sense.
So that's what this is.
And which one of the C forms that D forms that Mr. Best talks about that get us the money from the state.
This one is the D9 form.
OK.
Questions comments concerns.
Director Mack.
There were there was a question or a comment in public about that there's not sufficient information about implementation on the Wing Luke report.
So just for clarification this we are technically approving the report.
And in doing so we are also approving the implementation plan.
Because it says report an implementation I know this sounds really wonky but I do think this is if we're approving that we're accepting a report from a third party saying this is what's happening.
That's one thing.
But if we're approving an implementation plan that is a slightly different approval process.
I think that's just the name of the particular D9 which is constructability review report and implementation.
I can clarify that but I believe that's what that.
And can I ask you to double check that and at the end of our intro items come back and report to us.
I don't know if I'll be able to get back to you that quickly.
OK.
Any other comments questions concerns.
Thank you for raising that director Mack.
You have more.
I'm I am curious to know about.
Yeah.
I mean I guess the question that was raised in public comment and the title of this document didn't flag for me when we were committee and I would agree with the statement that.
I need to see what the full implementation plan is and if we're improving that I need to ensure that I've actually reviewed it and not just the report that is coming.
So.
Clarification on that.
And the clarification.
I'm sorry the clarification then would come out to the entirety of the board and any language changes would be called out.
With respect to we've got a tight turnaround on these because we're meeting a week from today.
We've got a what's the word condensed calendar rotation.
Is that correct sir.
Correct.
OK.
So with all due speed.
Indeed.
Thank you sir.
Number six recommendation to award contracts for furniture procurement 2019 20 bid number B 0 5 8 6 6 came before Ops August 22nd for approval approval.
This item would establish a competitively bid furniture catalog from which capital projects and schools can order furniture.
This would authorize superintendent to execute contracts for the furniture procurement for 2019 20 With the following two vendors Catalyst Work Place Activation Inc in the amount not to exceed four million two hundred and five thousand nine hundred sixty nine dollars and sixty five cents and Evergreen Furnishings LLC in the amount not to exceed three hundred sixty five thousand thirty dollars.
Can you address us on that sir.
Indeed.
So this is basically the secondary version of the contracts for vendors for furniture and procurement.
We brought to you a contract similar to this previously and that was for the elementary schools.
So this particular contract will be good for two years.
It's two vendors.
Basically it's the ability for us and for schools if they need to order furniture.
These are the two vendors that they would be ordering from.
This allows us one efficiency because we've got the two vendors on on hand and two consistency in repair and replacement of furniture.
So how did you come up with the numbers here.
This is a bid process.
So we went out to bid and this was the winning bids that came out.
Other questions comments concerns from my colleagues seeing none.
Number 7 BTA 3 final acceptance of public works contracts public works contract K 5 0 8 4 with CDK construction services for the Dearborn Park Elementary school mechanical upgrade project.
This came before Ops August 22nd for.
Approval and there goes my confetti.
Approval of this item would allow the district to submit required documents the state of Washington Department of Labor and Industries Department of Revenue and Employment Security Department in order to proceed with project closeout.
So this item along with the following four are all final acceptance projects.
And when we are completed when we have completed a capital project and we have assistance coming from OSPI this is the form that we have to submit at the end to close the entire project out.
General counsel guidance please.
May I batch these four together for comments questions or concerns sir or do I need to read each and every one of them including commas.
No particularly at intro you have the latitude to batch things in that manner.
I'm looking to my colleagues for some direction here.
OK.
We're going to take number 7 number 8 number 9 and number 10 and number 11. As a combo meal.
And if you have questions and concerns about these all of these came before Ops August 22nd.
There was rich conversation good discussion.
Questions had speak up now please.
Director Mack.
I just want to point out for the record and I appreciate batching them because I think that it's appropriate to do so.
All celebratory action.
So this is the end of long projects that have gone on for multiple years through multiple steps and ultimately at the service of our students.
So I just want to call out what they were so that we have a sense of.
The benefit of these and the fact that they're at final acceptance and they're in service and our students are benefiting from it.
So for example at Dearborn Park Elementary mechanical upgrade allows that building to be warm and students to be warm when they're learning.
Very important.
Gatewood Elementary School seismic improvements.
That means that if we have an earthquake hit then that school will likely withstand it and keep our students safe.
or at least be safer safer.
And thank you again for all of these to our taxpayers for their generous support of our levy dollars which support these projects.
Number nine is the athletic fields improvements at Franklin High School.
I believe those students are are greatly enjoying those improvements now.
The final acceptance of the Hazel Wolf K-8 Pinehurst replacement meaning that entire school building was redesigned and every year has a waitlist of some 300 and 400 students who want to get into that school.
And number 11 is the new Thornton Creek building which.
Additionally has a long wait list and great space and is serving our students well.
So I just want to give voice to all of those wonderful projects and thank staff for and previous boards and this board for shepherding all that work as well as all the construction workers and everyone that has participated in bringing these projects to fruition.
Thank you.
That was exceptionally appropriate.
I appreciate it.
Questions comments concerns seeing none.
I believe we have a land speed record of 620 and we are adjourned.
Thank you ever so much folks.
Much appreciate.