Seattle School Board Meeting Sept. 5, 2018 Part 2

Action items number one approval of board policy 3 2 2 0 student expression in school sponsored media.

This came before C&I August 21st for.

For.

Hang on.

Hold that thought for consideration.

No.

Yes consideration.

I might add that this item has been updated since introduction.

May I have the motion please kind sir.

I move that the school board approve policy number 3 2 2 0 student expression in school sponsored media as attached to the board action report.

I second the motion.

Dr. Kinoshita could you briefly.

Talk to this as well as the update.

Yes.

Thank you sir.

Good evening.

I did give you know a synopsis of what this particular policy was about.

I just wanted to take note in regard to the question regards to appeal.

General Counsel Treat did add some language on page 2 of 2 noting that the decision could be appealed based on the RCW that pertains to appeals of decisions by school officials and school boards.

Comments questions concerns from my colleagues.

We had a rich and robust and a little bit rowdy discussion during intro.

Director Mack.

I just want to say thank you for being responsive to the clarification in the policy.

I think that that you know addresses the concerns that I had that it just creates clarity in the policy and I appreciate.

Other comments questions concerns director Burke.

I was just wondering if we could hear if there's any feedback available on the point that was raised in public testimony around advertising specifically around potential advertising for marijuana.

And we did this as well during intro.

And please do so again.

Yes.

Good evening Noel Treat general counsel.

Yes.

After that issue was raised at intro I went back and talked with staff that have worked on the advertising policy in the past and there's been a recognized need to update that policy to better address student publications.

So that's some work that will be coming to you.

With that said I think we as a district would be even with the adoption of this policy within our rights to still continue to prohibit as we have done advertising regarding tobacco alcohol or marijuana in student publications and I don't think that changes with the adoption of this policy.

It does raise some other questions though.

And so that's why I think we need to get to the advertising policy itself and probably do some revisions there.

The other thing I'd point out about this policy just to be clear we're not adopting anything that's not already already in state law.

We're pretty much just reiterating the statute that was adopted by the legislature.

That statute says we have to adopt a policy reflecting the statute.

So that's part of why we're doing what we're doing.

Other comments questions concerns from my colleagues.

Seeing none roll call please.

Director Burke aye Director DeWolf aye Director Mack aye Director Patu aye Director Pinkham aye Director Geary aye Director Harris aye.

This motion has passed unanimously.

Number two approval of amending board policy 3 1 1 6 students in out of home foster care.

This came before C&I August 21st for.

Also for consideration.

Please make the motion kind sir.

I move that the school board amend policy number 3 1 1 6 students in out of home foster care as attached to the board action report.

Motion.

Comments questions and concerns.

I have one for Chief Jessee if I might.

We had a good conversation during intro.

We asked about numbers and how we send those numbers out to the larger world to emphasize our needs.

And so we're still working on that request.

It's the holiday weekend and the start of school just backs up just just a little bit.

I want to make sure kids are getting there safe.

We had an excellent start by the way.

I just want to say within especially student support services.

So but we'll get those numbers to you as we talked about identification of students.

And specifically the breakdown as we were talking about the differences between literally students who are homeless and also the difference between those students who are in foster care.

And so what are that was the request and so we'll get you that data.

I'm going to try my best by next week.

Outstanding.

Director Pinkham.

Did you have a question comment.

Yeah.

Sorry that I wasn't here when this was introduced but I appreciate the definitely change of language in here because we do have a lot of children that may not be in the foster care system but may be being watched after by aunts uncles grandparents and they may have that shifting of home from one to the next.

So I think with this we pick up those students as well so that they can be acknowledged.

Hey even though you're not in the foster care system You don't have a permanent home sometimes and we need to address those needs.

Please.

I just had one today a school visit and we were working on that situation.

I was right there just helping a family because he didn't show up in the registry so we were helping it because their family situation just changed.

That happens.

Been there done that.

Other comments questions concerns from my colleagues.

Seeing none roll call please.

Thank you.

Director DeWolf.

aye Director Geary aye Director Mack aye Director Patu aye Director Pinkham aye Director Burke aye Director Harris aye.

This motion is passed unanimously.

Number three amending policy number 2 4 1 3 equivalency credit for career and technical education courses came before C&I August 21st for.

For approval.

Motion please kind sir.

I move that the school board amend policy number 2 4 1 3 equivalency credit for career and technical education courses.

I second the motion.

And it's my understanding that this was a legislative mandate.

Is that correct.

That is correct.

But I did notice in the bill that it was done at the request of the superintendent of public instruction.

And in two sentences what are we voting on for the viewing public.

Thank you.

What we are voting on is the removal of the requirement that in order to give credit for AP computer science removal of the requirement that you either have to take concurrently Algebra 2 or have passed that course.

Thank you.

Questions comments concerns from my colleagues.

Seeing none roll call please.

Director Geary aye Director Mack aye Director Patu aye Director Pinkham aye Director Burke aye Director DeWolf aye Director Harris aye.

This motion is passed unanimously.

Number four amending policy number 3 2 4 4 prohib prohibition of corporal punishment.

This came before Ops August 22nd for.

For approval.

Could you read the motion please.

Kind sir.

I move that the school board amend policy number 3 2 4 4 prohibition of corporal punishment as attached to the board action report.

In the motion.

Chief Jessee can you come up and give us three sentences.

Again we had a good discussion during introduction all of which can be found on YouTube.

Absolutely.

So again our conversation was just to simply say this is doing a clerical update to this particular policy 3 2 4 4 also to be in alignment with 3 2 4 6 which is around restraint isolation and other uses of physical intervention.

We no longer have.

Aversive therapy plans.

So that's one.

That's the reason why this particular policy was updated to reflect the more detailed policy of 3 2 4 6.

Thank you.

Comments questions concerns from my colleagues.

Seeing none roll call please.

Director Patu aye Director Pinkham aye.

aye Dir.

Burke aye Dir.

DeWolf aye Dir.

Geary aye Dir.

Mack aye Dir.

Harris aye.

This motion is passed unanimously.

OK now we're going back to the consent agenda.

Item number three BEX IV Wing Luke elementary school replacement project phase two constructability review report and implementation.

This came before Ops August 22nd for.

Approval.

Motion please.

I move that the school board accept and approve the constructability review report dated August 8th 2018 by LRC Consultants Incorporated for the Wing Luke Elementary School Phase 2 project.

I second the motion.

Associate Superintendent Dr. Herndon.

Did you hear the public comment earlier this evening.

Can you reference that in.

your succinct information for this BAR.

Yes I believe I did.

Same comment from the last board meeting and I believe I sent a response to that to the entire board last week.

So basically is the nomenclature for constructability and implementation constructability meaning the review talks about is this an efficient use?

Can it be constructed?

That's the constructability portion.

Implementation refers to the schedule of the construction project.

And I appreciate receiving that email and I wonder Mr. General Counsel whether or not when we get emails that further clarify bars that are on our agenda whether those could or should be transparently attached or how do we handle that so that we do our transparency and the public has the same information as we do.

It's a systemic.

Question.

I think that's a good question.

Why don't we spend some time looking at that and then we can talk with you about a recommendation on how we might handle that going forward.

OK.

Comments questions concerns from my colleagues director Mack.

This may seem a little pedantic but I'm wondering if the title is what's been throwing things off because this the actual motion is accepting the report and the last word in the title the last two words in the title says and implementation but that's not really what it's related to.

So would it create clarity if we struck that title those two words on the title.

I believe the implementation actually if you look in the executive summary there is a sentence in there that talks about the outline schedule for the construction project to happen.

So that's what the report does.

It's both it's both segments.

It is the constructability which is again the actual construction and the implementation is just the schedule for the construction project.

We have that for every capital project that we move forward.

Thank you.

Director Pinkham comment question concern sir.

Do we know generally how long it takes the city or whoever the landmark board is to respond and how much if we held up and said well let's see what they're going to say that would impact this project.

Landmarks does not consider a landmark application after a demolition permit has been issued which has already happened.

So there will be no landmark consideration for this.

Director Geary.

No.

Go ahead Director Pinkham.

And you know they're just just my concern has been about this project is that it seems like we just can't put some lovely funds toward this in 2006 and now we're tearing something down to build up again.

So hopefully we'll be a little more frugal with our money to look oh what do we need to build and what's I know we're growing fast but it seems like when we build something not too long ago that we're bringing it back down it's.

Director Geary.

Could you give a brief statement in terms of current projects what process you use to sort of do long term envisioning in light of our known capacity projections.

Do we in other words do are we looking at how potentially our projects can be added on to or modified over time?

Somewhat yes that's I believe that's the intent of the long range facility master plan is really take a look at all of the assets that we have try and figure out where the growth is happening.

Again on top of the capacity issues we just have building condition issues and we really have to tackle both.

So that's the intent of the long range facility master plan.

It looks out you know it's basically a 20 year look looking at capacity.

Issues going beyond kind of the projections of five years or so gets definitely a little bit more murky.

The advantage of something like a facility condition assessment which is what we're having done right now is that it gives you building condition.

That's not really going to change.

So that's going to remain the same.

The buildings will continue to kind of fall apart at different rates of speed depending on our budget for maintenance.

But other than that.

The capacity issues are really just projections about enrollment and what we're trying to do and I think a lot of that work's being handled by the work that we're doing with the city to try and work hand in hand and get development information from them and population information.

Thank you.

Other comments questions concerns from my colleagues.

Seeing none roll call please.

Director Burke aye Director DeWolf aye.

Director Geary aye Director Mack aye Director Patu aye Director Pinkham aye Director Harris aye.

This motion is passed with a vote of 6 to 1.

Number nine from the consent calendar BEX IV final acceptance of public works contract P 5 0 4 6 with Forma Construction Company for the new Thornton Creek building project.

This came before Ops August 22nd 4. Motion please.

I move that the school board accept the work performed under contract P 5 0 4 6 with former construction company for the new Thornton Creek building project as final.

I second the motion.

Comments questions concerns from my colleagues.

Director Pinkham.

And again I go back to public testimony earlier about two points about the Thornton Creek last connection World War II history site.

So has a demolition been already put in for the Decatur building for this one as well.

We have not.

However we did have a conversation with landmarks board.

They did not believe that this building would probably be landmarked and the buildings in pretty bad condition.

So during the process of constructing the new Thornton Creek building that was some of the public comment during that time was to make sure that we demolished that particular building.

But we're we're current.

We haven't started demolition on that particular building yet.

Director Mack.

And for my own clarification and for the public's clarification this annex building is adjacent to the Decatur elementary school building.

Correct.

Correct.

Right.

And it's in really poor condition moldy not really good at learning environment for students.

Correct.

And students are not currently using that building.

I do not believe so.

And the school that is now Decatur which is directly adjacent to Thornton Creek because there's two schools on what was one site previously known as Decatur.

We have that in a lot of places confusion over building names and building sites but the Decatur school is the original school site minus the annex and the annex not being used because it is in such poor condition and it's been planned the beginning of the project to be demolished.

That's correct.

I have a question if I might.

Is there a way to honor the history at Decatur murals plaques in some fashion recognize our history because history is a terrible thing to lose.

Yes I have an answer for you on that.

This project was subject to a SEPA appeal and one of the things that came out of that hearing we had the hearing examiner recommend that we put up some kind of historic site marker or reader board and capital is looking at doing that as part of the construction project.

So there will be something on site that talks about the history of that site.

And can we make it something big and bold and yummy as opposed to some little plaque and tiny little letters affixed in a back hallway.

We will certainly do the best that we can.

Thank you.

Director Pinkham.

Yeah.

That's thank you Director Harris.

So what a suggestion I was going to bring up if the condition of the building if there's mold and stuff in there you know to try to save it but again to acknowledge the history of the site and If we proceed with that let's watch what words we use because when I read history about this site they talk about the hostile Indians that were attacking that site.

So as we proceed with that let's watch the language that we use.

Seeing no further comments questions or concerns from my colleagues roll call please.

Director Burke aye Director DeWolf aye Director Geary aye Director Mack aye Director Patu aye Director Pinkham aye Director Harris aye.

This motion is passed unanimously.

We are now on D intro items number one approval of the 2018 19 superintendent evaluation goals and instrument and adoption of board procedure 16 30 BP for board procedure.

This came before exec August 27th for approval approval of this item would accept.

the 2018 19 superintendent goals and evaluation instrument and adopt board procedure number 16 30 BP evaluation of the superintendent as attached to the board action report.

Comments questions concerns from my colleagues rich thoughtful discussion both in executive and in intro.

Speaks for itself.

Number two annual approval of schools per Washington administrative code 1 8 0 dash 16 dash 2 2 0. This came before C&I August 21st for.

Approval of this item would approve each school within the district as having a school improvement plan that is data driven promotes a positive impact on school learning and includes a continuous improvement process.

pursuant to Washington Administrative Code 1 8 0 dash 16 dash 2 2 0. Chief Starosky front and center please.

Yes.

Mike Starosky chief of schools.

I'm bringing before you our annual approval that our schools have began actually our school leaders in January of 2018 for our continuous school improvement plans.

Our school leaders have engaged with each other in a peer to peer review process that we put in process last two years.

And so principals and schools are giving peer to peer reviews on the continuous school improvement plans.

We do this so that people number one are deprivatizing what it is that they're doing and also to learn from one another.

In addition to the peer to peer reviews that happened in April and May of this year we also had our principal learning networks which are EDS's lead with our principals to do further reviews and input.

These are brought by their BLT's.

BLT's approve these and they're brought back to their school communities.

And one of the things that we're really proud of under Director Burke's direction and also co-sponsorship and leadership with Director Harris is really making these living breathing documents and not just compliance driven.

And so when I heard directors going to schools today which I love.

And I want you to continue to do that is if you don't read the school's school improvement plan what you can do is you should be able to ask the principal and ask their staff members what are your focus goals this year.

And one of the things that we've done as an improvement this year is that we've included the formula for success key performance indicators are now into our CSIPs this year.

Our data dashboard with dots and technology and REA our research and evaluation assessment is now aligning to that we're getting actual clear quick.

updated information and data for schools to be able to build their CSIPs on and those of you who attended our SLI in June with our school leaders got to see that in action where we had people looking at data and being able to see in our atlas and our data warehouse for schools to be able to see how an actual SMART goal was created.

into specific subgroups.

And so I think our CSIP process is a robust one.

There's not anyone in our state that's doing what it is that we're doing.

I can guarantee you that with the amount of detail and transparency in these documents.

And also making them just not being a compliance document that just not an executive director of schools looks at.

But anyone that's going into our schools and is providing support to our schools is using the CSIP to number one see what types of supports do they need to be able to achieve these SMART goals.

that our professional development system is now becoming aligned and I think Dr. Kinoshita would agree with that.

It's been a pain point for us because in the past our CSIPs were developed after staffing had happened after budget had happened.

And we were just catching up as a system to try to figure out what were schools doing and trying to provide professional development to support what schools are wanting to do.

And so now we're starting to not only align what we're trying to do for our schools and our schools being very clear about what their focuses focus areas are but we have central offices supports to be able to help them do that.

So one of the things I also want to mention was that in addition to all of our executive directors of schools reading these and looking at these they've been also incorporated this year that the ESSA schools every student succeeds act was also incorporated.

We just took that which was in years past would have been a huge lift for our system.

We just took those and put those requirements directly into CSIPs.

Our MTSS teams and our leads Director Geary was out and seeing our MTSS our promise schools and seeing that in action as well.

And people consistently saying there's a format for success or superintendent smart goals and also your CSIP goals and your CSIP goals should be directing what your focus priorities are in your schools.

And so with that being said we have 102 CSIPs that are on time updated and have been on public view for over six weeks now.

On June 15th we had 85 percent of all of our CSIPs turned in July 1 and we had 90 percent of those turned in and by August 1 we had 100 percent of all of our CSIPs turned in of which we're very proud.

Director Mack please.

I am very appreciative of the additional attachments to the bar especially the detail of the CSIP guidebook.

I guess I'm not sure what it's titled but it's a manual the manual.

Yes it's you know it's really great to see that in depth and that that's a really great tool for schools and educators at our schools and even parents that can access that and see it.

So I think there's some just really great thorough work around the CSIP so.

Gratitude there.

I also want to extend my gratitude for the clarity around listing the school names and their OSPI school code number as well as their address and what level they are.

That basic information I think is really helpful to create fidelity across all of our systems because we have these list of schools and we are technically approving each school that's what we're doing here as a board.

Our schools also show that list shows up in our budget it shows up in our facilities master plan it shows up in all these other places and so having a very clear list of these are our schools and where they are this year and their proper name creates a record of fidelity that is you know I'm really appreciative of.

So thank you for for adding that one in.

My question.

and still comes from some of the confusion that happens with some of our buildings and schools that have moved.

And there's a couple examples that come to mind.

One is Van Asselt an old Van Asselt original original Van Asselt and the Roxhill and E.C.

Hughes.

So Roxhill as the elementary school moved into the E.C.

Hughes building we had a wonderful opening yesterday.

But my question is around what happens to the original building Roxhill.

Does it get a different OSPI code number if we're continuing to operate it as a school in the sense it has programs within it.

Van Asselt and original Van Asselt is another example of that where I think we have programs within the building maybe SPP programs and we're operating as a school but it's not.

So I'm curious to know whether or not those buildings that are operating with built with programs in them actually become schools and in what situations they do and when they don't.

Well I would say just on for my definition of what we're using for the purposes of the CSIP and the approval process is that we have one hundred and two sites one hundred and two principals and that's what we're approving here.

The question that you're asking Director Mack around programs and facilities are beyond the scope of what this is asking for us to do.

And for us right now I don't have the answers to that question.

I appreciate that.

I do think it's helpful that we have these school codes and the names and then that that helps will help feed back to the facilities master plan and as we move forward creating more clarity.

So thank you.

Director Burke.

I will I will go on record as a fan of this work and definitely please share my gratitude for how far we've come.

So I just want to share a compare and contrast story around the conversation that we could have been having or probably were having three years ago.

In as a as a director you know we could spend a lot of time reading every one we could we could go at the complete trust or we could do a spot audit and I typically do a spot audit.

And what I had found my first year on the board that kind of got me riled up was you could look in a CSIP and there would be things there'd be content that was clearly from prior year or before there was content that would say things like We you know in terms of how a school operates and what is its you know what is its methodology to get students to grade level or to you know to get them to a certain to to essentially to achievement.

We apply the district's curriculum and use differentiated instruction strategies.

So things like that would be in there along with sometimes sentences that just stop.

And it was a little bit disheartening to think well this is not something that really has value.

But clearly people you know we have to go through the process and so there is a sort of a decision point of well OK do we just minimize it and accept that it's a compliance document.

And then when I looked through the collective bargaining agreement and I think it occurred like 19 times or something in the CBA it made me realize well this is a compliance document but it is so much more.

And so I'm really grateful for how that has has sort of taken traction.

And when you look through them now you find things about rather than just X percent of third graders are meeting standard in reading.

You see disaggregated data by African-Americans.

You see disaggregated data by special ed.

When you look at instructional strategies you find things that say Tier 1 strategies.

Boom boom boom boom boom.

Tier 2 boom boom boom.

Very concrete very explicit and not just we use the district's adoption.

It actually reads like people stating what they actually do.

Instead of feeling like if they put out in the public if they put into the wild that they might be doing something outside the box that they'll get their hands slapped.

Now it seems like people are actually being candid truthful about the resources and tools that they're using to support their kids.

And I think that's brilliant because that really helps us consolidate and find the ones that are you know that are at our outlier schools that are.

High performing innovative and find ways to leverage them.

So again a fan.

Thank you.

Kudos.

Other comments questions concerns from my colleagues.

Last but certainly not least on this particular topic.

I can remember and I believe that Director Patu can recall When board directors when they were faced with criticism some from this person standing at that podium and probably far too acerbic and cynical said it doesn't matter what's in the CSEP all that matters is that we do them.

No qualitative measure.

No accountability measure.

And I spent two days of my life back in the day looking at every one of them and putting together a spreadsheet and if you knew me better you'd know that spreadsheets are not my forte.

Unlike Director Burke I can remember reading Extremely hostile criticism on a regular and continuing basis from respected critics that we were not meeting our mission.

We meaning the big team the SPS team.

So today when I'm at West Seattle Elementary and at Chief Sealth International High School I heard the CSIP mentioned no fewer than 10 times.

We have come a very long way and I will admit that I have voted no from this dais for the CSIPs and it is my extraordinary pleasure to vote yes tonight.

Thank you all very much.

This is a big darn lift.

Well OK we're not voting tonight but if we were voting tonight I would vote for it.

I am predisposed.

There you go.

All right.

I'll be unless something really bad happens in the next two weeks.

We'll be good.

We'll be good.

That's right.

Under the wire.

Yeah.

OK.

Thank you.

Thanks very much y'all.

Number three and last and I believe I win a bet gentlemen on the two million dollar wall revised board policy number 2 1 5 1 interscholastic activities.

This came before Ops August 22nd for.

Consideration.

Approval of this item would amend board policy 21 51 interscholastic activities to confirm that Seattle Public Schools is a member of the Washington Interscholastic Activities Association also known as WIAA and that its schools are members of the Metro Athletic League also known as Metro League.

A second purpose for the policy update is to confirm board approval of any new or reopened comprehensive district high schools will be members of the Metro League.

Dr. Herndon take it away.

Yes you are seeing this policy and the reason why this policy is coming to you is that there was a document presented to I believe the superintendent and board president be signed on behalf of the district to the WIAA stating membership in the WIAA.

When legal then reviewed that document cross referenced it with our policies.

They did discover that previously this policy 21 51 had the language in there that talked about membership over time.

However some of that language in a previous revision was taken out.

I don't think it was the intent to say we no longer want to be a member of the WIAA.

But presenting a document for you to sign on behalf of the rest of the district without having that clear policy guidance in here was something that we just want to make sure that language is was in here.

In addition during operations committee we did talk about there is a difference between the WIAA student athletic eligibility and what Seattle Public Schools has as an eligibility piece as well.

and Director Harris pointed that piece out.

So part of what we have in the superintendent procedures is that ability to waive that difference so that students then would meet the minimum requirements for WIAA participation.

Director Geary please.

Well I understand that this policy is coming before us as a matter of cleanup.

When I read it it brings up an issue for me and that it states the board recognizes the value of a program of interscholastic athletic activities as an integral part of the total school experience to all students of the district and to the community.

And yet I don't think that we act in a way that recognizes that in that we are not providing funds towards our unified program and towards athletic activities that support our children our students with disabilities.

As a matter of Title 9 we do that for our female students.

And that is something that the WIAA recognizes and it is my understanding that the WIAA rules and regulations do not recognize the unified program.

But I don't think we are bound as a board to recognize or to limit what we value by the WIAA rules.

And so there's something that rings very false about this in terms of our actions.

And is it that we as a district are violating this policy or we as a board are not guaranteeing that our budget provides for this important work.

And that needs to change in my opinion and I won't vote for another budget that doesn't recognize that as an integral value for all of our students.

I do also note that the bar just quickly over the equity analysis says says that the tool is not applied and it's because again this is legal requirements.

with regard to our membership for the WIAA as if the WIAA is going to drive what we as a district are going to do around equity.

And I find that to be unacceptable.

And so I hope we will change that as well because I while it says a racial equity analysis tool is not applied I believe an equity analysis should be applied.

And that's what it says and that we should also be looking at this issue under our student benefit.

Because we do recognize that our students are students with disabilities do benefit by participating in athletics through the unified program.

It's something that we try to support but we put that upon our families and I don't believe it should be looked at as simply a club sport.

It needs to we need to take responsibility for that as the athletic opportunity that is appropriate for our students with disabilities for all of our students to participate in because all of our students can.

And we need to also recognize that even students without disabilities it is sometimes their only opportunity to play in some of our sports because of the competitiveness of some of the sports that we offer.

So I throw that out I know that's not.

The drive behind this policy that's coming before us but it's something that we as a district really need to come to.

We need to face and fix.

So.

Director Mack.

There are two things tagging on to Director Geary's point here.

This specifically calls out to leagues or associations that we're belonging to.

But I don't do we do we actually put into policy association with unified or any of the other potential leagues.

Or it's just these are just the only two that the district formally recognizes in policy.

As far as I know the WIA is the statewide and the Metro League is our specific league that we're a member to.

And we're not as far as I know a member of any other league.

But unified is another league or it's not the same the similar kind of thing.

OK.

Just clarifying what we're talking about here then.

So.

Moving on to my other question then is the part of the reason why we put this up for consideration was that just to touch on the issue around the grade point average and the I believe it's there's some conflict between our existing policy and the WIAA.

Can you explain that a little bit as to what the conflict is and whether or not we are resolving it here or whether or not we need future steps to resolve that conflict.

Sure I'll try my best.

The WIA policy actually is not a GPA policy.

The guidance is that students pass three out of four classes four out of five classes five out of six.

It's basically they can fail one class in their schedule but they have to be passing the remaining classes.

For our particular board policy we have a GPA requirement not a number of classes passed.

So there is a discrepancy between the two.

Technically you can be passing a class with a D grade.

If you were to take that extreme of passing three out of four or four out of five DDD and failing one class you could actually have less than a 1.0.

So what we're looking at is the consideration of that ability to waive that particular requirement.

It doesn't mean that every student who applies or wants to or has a GPA below 2.0 is going to be waived and then allowed to participate in sports.

It's just you would look at each situation as it arose and make a determination.

So that's the discrepancy between the two policies.

So do we need to fix that in this policy or is the conflict OK.

So it's a policy question like does it.

Does it matter to us that their standard is different than ours.

Because our standards from what I'm hearing is a little bit higher.

Essentially that requiring a 2.0 is a higher standard than.

Passing and failing.

The answer to that.

That's correct.

Yes we do have a higher standard than what the WIAA standard.

Does it need to be incorporated in the policy or by incorporating it in the procedure and attached to this intro item you'll see the red lines or the track changes.

And I appreciate those track changes being included so that it's really wonderfully transparent.

Right.

Director Pinkham and then Director DeWolf.

So this rang a bell about actually what we discussed and one of the things in Audit and Finance court report yesterday about online credit and possibly moving from grading online credit to going to pass fail.

So then how may that then impact this if now students don't get grades for online classes or get in the pass fail then it's not going to impact their GPA.

They can still remain ineligible.

Would that then be a waiver that we'd probably see about going for that.

It talks about.

I think again each situation you'd have to take a look at.

And to Director Harris's point and Director Mack I think if you have those items outlined in a procedure rather than the policy the policy would give you the broader range of what you're considering the procedure would get into the actual what are you doing the machinations to take a look at what that discrepancy might look like.

to Director Pinkham's question.

Yes I mean in the pass fail situation it could have an impact on your particular GPA which is why you would want to maybe take a look at this waiver piece because you could have you know a pass pass and then only a few letter grades that are giving you a GPA that might be lower than what you're looking at for the 2.0 but still be passing something.

So that's where you'd want to take a look at each one of these.

But you know with future classes I think that's one we'd have to continue to take a look at and see how that develops for our students.

Director DeWolf please.

Thank you President Harris.

I just was looking at the first page of the policy and I think to Director Mack's question the second paragraph states the board shall require that all schools who participate in the WIAA approved activities follow the rules and regulations established by the WIAA.

And I think this is the part that answers it is the board retains the right to establish eligibility standards that meet or exceed the rules and regulations of the WIAA.

So I think it's kind of within our purview that we do have that kind of inconsistency that that's kind of just one of our rights here in this policy.

Seeing no other comments questions concerns I have a few.

I could not endorse Director Geary's position more heartily.

We talk an awful lot about equity in this building and throughout our schools and that's not equity.

I would very much like to see a fiscal note attached to incorporating unified and I'd also like to take it one step further.

Ultimate is a club sport.

Lacrosse is a club sport.

Some of these club sports are available to our students that wouldn't be superstars on the basketball team or the football team or haven't attended camps since they were four or five years old and it gives them a richness of participation.

And frankly some of them are very different kinds of kids.

And I thought that in this district we celebrate all kinds of students so how I haven't difficulty watching us walk or talk.

So I'd like I'd like some fiscal notes attached to what it would cost.

And during the operations meeting we some of us adjourned into the boardroom and argued up a storm and talked about this and thank you to our athletic director McCurdy who absolutely agrees.

But he looks at me and he said Yo Leslie where's the money.

Well I don't even know how much money that is.

I'd like to know how much money that is and I'd like to know a plan for attaining that goal.

Should God forbid McCleary not be fake news in any event.

Thank you very much.

And this meeting is adjourned at 645. Thank you.