Seattle School Board Meeting January 3, 2018 Part 2

named staff.

I would also like to note that each speaker has a two minute speaking time when the two minutes have ended.

Please conclude your remarks.

Ms. Shek will read off the testimony speakers.

First up for public testimony this evening we have Larry Pope followed by Daniel Palau Jerome and Patrick D'Amelio.

And these are our students from South Lake High School.

Welcome.

Thank you for being here.

How are you guys doing today?

And since there's two of you, y'all get four minutes.

Okay cool.

Okay so I'm Larry Pope from South Lake High School.

I'm a student and I'm with the program standing tall.

And I've been in the program for about a year and a half now.

And it's helped me in a lot of ways, you know, just becoming a man, you know.

I've got a lot of self-affirmation from it within my history.

Just growing as a person, really.

You know, it's like...

You guys have any questions?

It's kind of hard for me to...

Okay I'm director Jill Geary and I just had a question for you about can you tell us a little bit more about what standing tall is.

You know how do you become a member or who is it for what is its mission.

So standing tall is a mentoring program.

It's ran by Dion and Lewis Lewis Guy and Dion Schill.

And so really what we do is anybody can really join.

But what we do is we go back and look at our African histories.

We talk about becoming men and just growing like...

So what we do is...

Oh my God.

It means a lot to you.

Sorry about this but so they help us grow as men by we have a so it's called pact.

Harris What kind of activities do you participate in?

How?

How many?

What's it mean to you?

What have you learned from it?

Paint us a picture.

We went on, well like just last week we went to a Seattle University basketball game versus Grambling and it was just cool to get out there and really like you know those are some things I've never done before so it was just cool to get on that campus and really just see the opportunities that I could actually have as a student you know because a lot of times it's hard to see what you can really do you know if nobody's really helping you or telling you where you can go in life you know sometimes it's hard to really recognize the opportunities that you have but these guys have helped me a lot you know.

Last year I didn't really know where I was headed but you know just talking to these guys sitting down and just figuring out where my future could be headed you know it's helped me so much.

Would they recognize if you weren't at school and come find you and say you can do it?

Oh yeah, definitely.

They stay on my case.

I get personal texts throughout the week, days, year.

They stay consistent with everything.

Right now we're just looking into colleges, trying to figure out what available options I have, what I need to do to get Going you know applying for scholarships.

Yeah just really just like I said self-affirmation.

Let me know what's out there for myself.

You know because there's a lot of people that won't tell you those opportunities or let you know you know you can actually do this.

You know it's sometimes it's just a thought.

Sometimes all you really need to do is hear that you can do it and then you start moving.

So yeah.

Belief.

Thank you.

My name is Daniel, I go to Southlake, I'm a senior.

I'm in this program, mentoring program called Stand Tall.

It's a class, if you want to be in that class you've got to talk to Ms. Luster, she do what she do.

Basically we got two coaches, Coach Lou, he teaches about life, family.

For one thing, my favorite thing is staying out of the box.

So staying out of the box is like, for example, me coming in class, my hoodie on, got earphones in, basically just pushing everybody away.

Basically opening up to people, to my teachers and students to learn.

Let me get Coach D right there.

Coach D just talks about like school, African history.

He's a college recruiter.

Recruiter?

My fault.

So before coming to that class, I had a lot of hate and regret.

And Coach Lou, man, he just, he taught me a lot.

staying out of the box.

Just just like a family thing.

Does anyone have any questions.

Sorry.

Go ahead please.

Director Patu.

So when you're saying staying out of the box what does that really mean.

Larry said.

Seeing people as like a person instead of an object.

Director Mack please.

I just really appreciate you coming and talking with today and sharing this program and how it's impacted your life.

And I also know how standing.

There and here in front of a microphone is a lot more nerve wracking than you expect it to be.

You know you take a take a lot of courage to come and stand here today and talk about your experience and I really appreciate that.

No problem.

Can you come up and tell us about your program for a couple of minutes and why this matters so very greatly to our 54000 students.

Okay so my name is Deon Shell thank you everybody.

These guys they just really create an opportunity and platform for us to really do what we feel like in the community should translate into the school system.

A lot of times you know the lack of consistency the lack of encouragement you know sometimes with teachers you go into the classroom you just facilitate curriculum.

And they don't look at you like people.

And we felt like if students learn how to look at teachers like people, then maybe teachers could be more effective in the way that they build relationships with the students.

So what we did was we created a program to where we go into the school and in the classroom, we call ourselves coaches, we're classroom coaches.

So we're motivating them, we're educating them, we're instructing them, we're You know, we're doing everything that it needs to actually help them in the education environment, whether it's getting a class on time, showing the school on time, completing homework assignments, getting their grades up, checking their transcript.

We're trying to coach them to finish line.

To finish line for education is when we get them to graduation.

And the next step for us is once we get them to graduation okay let's talk about what's after.

Let's talk about college.

Let's talk about getting into the career field.

So just working with these guys has been a great opportunity for us.

It's something that we do eventually would like to support other schools in the district with.

South Lake gave us an opportunity so we're just taking full advantage of it.

Thank you very very much.

Thank you guys.

To Ms. Mack right there I just want to say for like not only like impacting my life but like that class it changed the way I think.

There's so much more out there in life.

I just want to say thanks.

So will you come back a year from now and tell us where you're at and how you got there.

Thank you ever so much.

Next up for public testimony we have Patrick D'Amelio followed by Chris Jackins Melissa Westbrook and James Wagger.

Good evening.

My name is Patrick D'Amelio.

I am the proud parent of two Seattle Public School children and the CEO of the Washington State Charter Schools Association.

I'm here this evening to offer testimony for your consideration regarding proposed resolution 2017 18 dash 9. The Southeast Economic Opportunity Center is a vital community driven project.

The center will be a culturally relevant welcoming place that adds to the economic growth of the Rainier Valley and helps protect against additional displacement of the community.

A technical glitch is threatening to delay the start of this exciting new project after eight years of community design, planning, visioning and input.

Designed to help stabilize a community already at risk for displacement as Seattle's rapid growth and gentrification threaten historically diverse communities the center is being developed by a wide range of partners including Homesite Community Development, the Seattle Housing Authority, the Rainier Valley Community Development Fund, the multicultural community center, the stem pass innovation network, the Odessa Brown health clinic, the Rainier Valley Chamber of Commerce and sound care solutions as well as Green Dot public schools.

A public charter committed to closing the opportunity gap for systemically underserved students.

WHA charters and Seattle Public Schools certainly share this commitment to closing the opportunity gap.

To this end, charter public schools are serving higher percentages of systemically underserved student populations.

In fact, compared with Seattle Public Schools, King County charter public schools serve higher percentages of at-risk youth including 22% more low-income students, 23% higher percentage of students of color, 5% more transitional bilingual students, and the same percentage of special ed students.

We urge the school board not to oppose the revision of the code that would allow public schools the same flexibility afforded to Seattle School District.

Denying the Rainier Valley Leadership Academy High School a legally constituted public school recognized by the voters courts and legislature threatens the viability of the entire project.

Thank you very much for your consideration.

My name is Chris Jackins Box 8 4 0 6 3 Seattle 9 8 1 2 4 on the resolution opposing changes to city code that would allow charter schools to seek departures from zoning standards.

Four points.

Number one the board report does not mention that the city has already approved zoning departures for a charter school.

Number two the school district has set a poor example.

The district's own use of zoning departures continues to harm many schools and neighborhoods.

One result is the tiny playground for Loyal Heights.

Number three I do not want charter schools to get in on the same act.

Number four the district needs to set a better example including by reopening the African-American Academy and Indian Heritage High School to restore these options for families.

On the resolution pledging that the Wing Luke elementary construction project will not create or aggravate racial imbalance.

Five points.

Number one this is a condition for receiving state matching funds for the project.

Number two the board operations committee recommended approval of this resolution without being provided any hard data.

Number three at Magnolia Elementary where data was made publicly available it became obvious that the district was bending the rules.

Number four the board report states that the school will be racially imbalanced.

Number five the plans at Wing Luke include demolishing a six million dollar 12 year old building.

Why should voters approve the next capital levy when their tax money will be flushed down the toilet after only 12 years in order to build segregated schools.

Please vote no.

Thank you.

Good evening.

On the high school boundaries and HC pathways a couple of things.

One the last board meeting one of you expressed concern over HC students getting preference over neighborhood students.

If you do decide to enact HC students receiving services at their region school then some schools might be quite surprised at the number of HC students coming in and that some students just over the boundaries who might previously have gotten in won't get in.

Number two at the last board meeting I heard over and over the need to come to you sooner and the need for more and better data and information from staff.

Lastly go ahead and vote in all HC pathways.

I'll publicly guarantee you it won't work.

Number one because the staff has no plan.

Number two principals clearly don't want and resent HC students and the money it will cost in providing enough AP classes whether full or not will not make the budget office happy.

On green dot a couple of points, number one the city says it wants to be a partner with you.

What kind of partner directly undermines your core work by allowing a new school right next to two of your schools that are already making great strides, Aki Kurose and Rainier Beach high school.

Number two, I called city council offices today and it is clear that many of them did not know a charter school was part of this plan.

In fact in the letter the council signed to the executive director of the Seattle Housing Authority the wording said nothing about a school but just about classes and a program.

In fact as I tweeted about this yesterday with representative Pramila Jayapal she expressed surprise over the charter school because she does not support them.

It looks to me like someone was trying to hide the charter school element in this project from elected officials.

I would just point out that the Supreme Court noted the difference between a public school and a common school.

The schools in this district are common schools that get their funding from state education dollars.

Charter schools do not.

If you would like to explain that to the city Council in your reasoning as to why you should be considered The true public schools you could use that because the state does.

Lastly you have a big carrot the renovation of the memorial stadium in conjunction with Seattle Center.

I urge President Harris to meet with President Harrell and ask what a true partnership looks like.

After James Wagger we will have David Shepard followed by Eric Blumenhagen and Brad Halverson.

Good evening directors and Superintendent Nyland I hope you all enjoyed the holidays.

I'm James Wagger I'm a parent of three SPS students including a freshman at Ballard High School Avery who spoke at the last board meeting.

I'm back this evening to speak to you about high school boundaries.

I'd like to thank in particular Ashley Davies and Flip Herndon for their hard work on this issue.

As we've unpacked it we realize it is no easy task and probably much harder than we ever understood.

At the same time I must express concern that we found ourselves in a situation that has pitted neighborhoods against one another in a tug of war over which students who would currently attend Ballard high school will get to stay there.

Also to the students and parents living between Northwest 80th and 85th and those living on or just south of Northwest 65th some of whom I know are here tonight we understand how you feel about the most recent boundary scenarios.

We felt the same way about scenario H2 when it was first announced.

As thankful as we are that SPS staff has heard our concerns about transportation and formulated five new scenarios that keep Magnolia students at Ballard as up to an hour plus commute each way was simply not reasonable.

As you continue your work as a board I would urge you to also consider boundary scenarios that disrupt the current boundaries as little as possible such as scenarios E, F or G.

To those families concerned about the most recent maps I'd also like to extend an invitation to explore if we can work together to jointly endorse one or more boundary scenarios that meet all of our objectives.

Our group Magnolia for BHS is reachable through our Facebook page and we would also welcome speaking with you in person this evening.

Thank you.

Good evening.

I'm the parent of a seventh grader at McClure middle school and a ninth grader at Ballard high school.

I'd like to begin by thanking the members of the board Dr. Nyland and the central office staff for responding to concerns from Magnolia families about the proposed high school boundary changes.

We appreciate your willingness to extend the decision making timeline in order to allow for additional analysis and community feedback.

As you are aware map HV2 required students from Magnolia to travel to Lincoln High School.

For my own kids as well as many others in Magnolia the commute on Seattle Metro would take well over an hour in each direction.

This is beyond the maximum time outlined in the district's transportation plan.

The dramatic increase in travel time is in part due to increased distance to Lincoln.

A much more critical factor is the challenge of an east west commute in a city built built on north south corridors.

If you look at the neighborhoods under consideration for inclusion within Lincoln's boundaries Magnolia is the only neighborhood that is not designated as either an urban village or urban center.

This means that our neighborhood does not have access to frequent transit.

This is why our students would experience a disproportionate increase in travel time.

In other words our students will spend more time waiting at bus transfer points due to the infrequency of transit service.

As shown in the map handout that I provided Ballard is the only north end high school that lacks the capacity to serve all of the students living closest to it.

This is why you'll be hearing from both residents of Magnolia and residents of neighborhoods north of Ballard High School.

With that in mind I would encourage the board to seriously reconsider plans to place an interim or permanent H.C.

pathway at Ballard.

This H.C.

pathway at Ballard will exacerbate the overcrowding and will push out neighborhood kids in order to serve those pulled into the H.C.

pathway.

In conclusion I have three requests.

Number one please prioritize allowing students to attend their closest neighborhood high school.

Number two please do not adopt boundaries that put an undue transportation burden on students from Magnolia.

And number three please provide clarity on grandfathering for students already at Ballard High School.

Thank you for your time.

Hello my name is Eric Blumhagen and I appreciate the opportunity to speak with you again.

There's two main issues I want to talk about on the high school boundaries.

The first is that in high schools Garfield and Northward there is no extra space in 2021 2022. If any school isn't full another one will be over capacity.

As you know HCC service models and boundary maps are inextricably linked.

If you make choices for one you're making or eliminating choices for the others.

Let's be clear if you select the decentralized or four school models for HCC you are choosing to have Ballard high school's north boundary at 80th.

There is simply not enough students at Ingram and too many at Ballard to have any other boundary.

On the other hand if you choose to move the boundary to 85th you are choosing another HCC model.

There are other unpopular boundary moves just like what we've been hearing about with Magnolia but that's the area I'm familiar with.

Number two, I was just talking about 2021-2022.

Next year there will be an enrollment crisis at Ballard, Garfield and Roosevelt.

Those schools are full to bursting and will add 400 odd students between them.

At the end of the open enrollment process next year there should be no students assigned to those schools on a waiting list at any other school.

If anything this doesn't cost any money if anything it will save mitigation in the fall.

The board should make that clear to staff and should put it in a formal policy if needed.

Thank you.

Next up we have Brad Halverson followed by Brian Terry, Denny Cabeltzas and Natalie Ward.

Good evening my name is Brad Halverson I am a Magnolia parent of a Ballard high school ninth grader and a Blaine K-8 sixth grader planning to attend Ballard high school.

My request to you tonight is to elevate the criteria and importance of transportation and neighborhood proximity in your boundary map planning.

More specifically, ensure all kids attending our high schools are closer in proximity and travel times.

Currently Magnolia kids attend Ballard High School the closest at which four miles away and we want to remain there.

In some maps presented in the past Magnolia attending Lincoln High School would mean an increase of two more miles to six miles across two major roads and a waterway which by the way is the only scenario in Seattle holding this distinction.

By car it's 25 minutes while bus it's one hour with two stops.

On a rainy Thursday rush hour increase these by 45 percent.

So my question is do we really want our kids on a Metro bus for an hour and 20 minutes during rainy rush hours.

This is approximately three times the commute currently in place at other high schools.

With the city of Seattle increasing density and with our population boom we all know we're going to face longer times.

And so I appeal to you with this.

Let's reduce the crossing of Seattle neighborhoods to get to school for better proximity.

It means fewer kids on long bus rides and waiting at stops.

Fewer cars and buses on packed corridors idling during rush hour.

Closer proximity means single parents and dual income families may pick up their kids from school or sports.

It means kids and parents find time for after school activities.

It means more time for homework and the family union.

And it means closer proximity means a better sense of neighborhood.

So I ask you with this in mind in your boundary map planning to improve proximity as you can.

We know this is complicated.

We know you're doing hard work.

We appreciate the time that you're putting into it.

Getting HD pathways and boundaries aligned.

Thank you for your work.

Thank you for taking care of our kids.

Good evening.

The Seattle Public Schools race and equity analysis tool defines institutional racism as when organizational programs or policies work to the benefit of certain racial groups and to the detriment of people of color usually unintentionally or inadvertently.

In our schools a white student is 20 times more likely than a black student to be identified as highly capable.

To any student who looks into one of our highly segregated HCC classrooms we are sending a clear message.

White students are more capable and more deserving.

This is institutional racism.

State law and district policy mandate that we address this inequity.

District staff are eager to comply but they look to you for leadership.

I appreciate that all of you have expressed support for increasing equity in advanced learning.

I do not purport to understand the complexity in your decision making process.

However the results are easy to measure.

Year after year our advanced learning program grows more segregated less equitable and more unjust.

I ask that you please take the time to consider how you can change the decision making process to better represent the interests of all of our students especially students of color.

It is time to put an end to more than three decades of institutional racism.

Thank you.

Hello my name is Denny Kibelstis I'm here to comment on the new proposals to move the northern boundary for Ballard High School even further south to Northwest 80th Street.

I am the parent of a current Ballard High freshman and I have twins who will enter high school in 2020 when their brother is a senior.

Our family lives on Northwest 83rd Street less than one mile and a 15 minute walk from Ballard High.

My freshman son walks to school and extracurricular activities.

I walk to a school to volunteer in their library each week and as a family we walk there to attend many school events.

This walk is safe, easy and convenient.

According to the results of the high school boundaries community survey the number one priority of survey respondents is proximity of students to schools, safe walk zones and transportation time.

The new F proposals from the district disregard this important priority.

If enacted these boundaries would take away safe and easy walk zones for many families in Ballard.

These kids would be put on buses to take them to a school five times farther away than Ballard High.

Even under the best of circumstances this bus ride will be significantly longer than the walk to Ballard.

Active kids who participate in before and after school activities will need to be in cars.

The roundtrip drive from my neighborhood to Ingraham at 5 PM on a weeknight easily takes one hour.

The 80th boundary will put families in cars at rush hour to pick up kids who could be easily walking home from Ballard High and not adding to traffic congestion.

The second guiding principle of the high school boundary task force is to align school boundaries with elementary middle school feeder patterns.

According to the community survey this alignment is also a significant priority to parents.

The new F proposals ignore this priority and guideline.

A school boundary at Northwest 80th will separate Whittier and Loyal Heights elementary school cohorts and continue the division of the Whitman middle school cohort.

Many kids will be forced to leave classmates they've been with since kindergarten.

Excluding kids from walkable neighborhood schools in favor of long bus and car rides and separating siblings and longtime classmates will be the unfortunate byproducts of the F proposals.

Thank you for your time.

After Natalie Ward we will have Alicia Giancola followed by Liz Bernardo and Anne Sheran.

Hi I'm Natalie Ward I am an educator, a parent and also a PTA board member.

I'd like to address the proposed boundary changes for Ballard high school.

Currently both of the proposed options break Ballard up sending students who live within walking distance of the school much further away to schools outside of their communities and where the majority of their elementary, middle and middle school classmates will not attend.

There is a body of educational research to suggest that strong communities, communities like the ones dotted across our city that define our city like Ballard have strong positive impacts on student success.

In a 2004 article published by the association for the supervision and curriculum development John Holloway in summary of this research said Current research paints a persuasive picture of the community's impact on child development and student learning.

The research suggests that improvements to student achievement will be limited if efforts focus solely on students in the classroom.

Instead policymakers must also look at the broader picture.

They must consider how to increase the community's capacity to support its youth.

This decision is more than just where to draw a line, which I know you know.

I know there are many factors that you have to consider when drawing the boundaries.

I know it's an arduous process and that there's so many different things putting pressure on where they go.

I also know that the committee in charge of putting these has not taken this lightly.

However I urge the board to look at the maps and to ask yourself is this truly what is in the best interest of the children it impacts?

Is moving children away from their communities really in the best interest?

Strong communities help build strong schools, strong communities help increase student performance, engagement and involvement.

As often as possible children should move through our schools in cohort.

Students from reference schools should advance together.

Thank you.

Hi my name is Alicia Giancola and I'm here to talk about the high school boundary changes.

I live in Ballard between 80th and 85th Street.

I have a daughter at Loyal Heights and I have a son at Cascadia.

I liked the H2 scenario that was initially recommended by the task force because my daughter remained in our neighborhood.

H2 created a feeder pattern that no longer split Loyal Heights Elementary when they got to high school.

H2 brought North Beach Elementary back to Ballard High which made sense because they could walk and bike to school again.

It would strengthen our community involvement by keeping children in their community.

I'm disappointed with the new F scenarios.

My daughter and over 400 others from Ballard and North Beach will have a less safe commute busing four and a half miles on average to Ingraham High School when they could be walking or biking to Ballard.

I'm also disappointed by the new scenarios because it looks like they were created to allow Magnolia students to remain at Ballard High busing them into Ballard and busing Ballard students out.

I do feel like we've been pitted against each other and that's really unfortunate.

It doesn't make sense to me though to have two sets of students busing when you could and should have only one.

I also want to comment on the HC pathways.

Two years ago my son was trying to escape from school because he really hated it that much.

Going to school was a struggle for him every day.

Now he is receiving HC services at Cascadia, he is thriving emotionally and academically, he looks forward to school and he comes home in a good mood.

I'm concerned about a jump from having HC services at one high school to having services at five high schools.

I'm worried that the quality of the services will suffer if it is spread too thin with too few HC students at each high school.

I'm more concerned with the quality of the service than I am with having it in our neighborhood school.

For my daughter's sake I hope that you do the right thing and support safe routes to school, create feeder patterns that work, strengthen our community schools by keeping our children in their community.

And for my son's sake please continue to help our HC children receive the quality of services they deserve.

Thank you.

Hello my name is Liz Fortunato.

I have two kids in Seattle Public Schools.

I have a second grader at Loyal Heights Elementary and a fifth grader at Loyal Heights Elementary.

I live nine houses from 80th so obviously I'm here to talk about the boundary changes for Ballard High School and I drafted my speech with frustration and anger and I'm going to scrap that speech because I think there's compromise in here.

I know that there is an option F that that details more of an east-west trade versus a northwest trade.

It seems with a northwest trade we have kids that are going on buses up to Ingram when now they could be walking to Ballard.

It's a 15 minute walk from my house and it's a four and a half mile multiple bus ride up to Ingram.

I found online this is the walking map for Ballard that is posted through the district's website and this is the small stretch that's being impacted by the change in the boundary all within walking distance probably from everyone's roofs they could probably see Ballard High School.

So I'm asking as part also of the transportation program that's listed this year it says in quote student health and wellness in addition to reducing the district's carbon footprint shall be encouraged.

And clearly having our kids walk to school versus being bused and driven is advantageous both to the children and to the district.

Today as I was driving home from work as I do every day I hit Ballard High School at the exact same moment exact same time the kids are exiting.

And it's a mass exodus.

It's tons of kids and they're all running to the Metro bus to get out of Ballard.

And I don't want my kids to have to get out of Ballard.

I would like them to stay in Ballard and I would like them to have the opportunity to attend their neighborhood school.

And I would also like to say that I completely empathize and sympathize with my neighbors in Magnolia and in Queen Anne.

This has not been an easy process for any of us and I'm just hoping that somewhere in between all of this there's compromise so that our kids can go to school closest to where they live.

Thank you.

And and she ran after and we will have Gail Cooper followed by Rebecca Andrews and Shaleen Rathkoff.

Hi I'm Ann Sheeran, parent of a student with a disability in ninth grade at West Seattle high school.

My son is both highly capable and neurologically different.

I want to read an excerpt from a blog by one of his honors teachers which was posted publicly.

He writes, since we do really heavy mainstreaming of students with IEPs, I am effectively teaching two classes in the same period.

I have to have a fairly rigorous conceptual load for the regular students and a lighter load for the students with IEPs.

That's what he says.

I wish that the ignorance or the narrow conception of our students with disabilities that this teacher is expressing were a complete exception to the rule.

My experience with other teachers at this school honors and regular teachers and talking to parents with other bright students with disabilities across the district tells me that this mindset is actually very pervasive in Seattle Public Schools.

Across the board we see no accountability for teachers having a basic understanding of bright students with disabilities and pretty limited interest in learning about even the most conventional differentiation strategies.

In her son's experience this results in non-implementation of the IEP and second-class citizenship as an accelerated learner.

I am requesting that you investigate what mechanisms are in place or should be in place to make sure that Gen Ed teachers including those providing accelerated curriculum are prepared to cooperate with IEP teams in differentiating instruction for our students without the attitude of disdain that we have encountered in the outright bigotry.

It seems to me that if we could not count on building leaders to detect and address these skill deficits and biases among our kids teachers then it should have fallen to the executive directors of schools to do that.

Instead it has fallen to me a mere parent We need to put the heavy lift back onto the principals and onto the executive directors of schools.

I hope you will demand evidence of a system for bringing this about.

I find that without their active involvement and interest which I have not been able to garner the special ed department which is which is pretty much on top of this situation has very little traction.

Thank you.

I would just remind you that there's no such thing as a mere parent in this district.

Thank you.

Hello I'm Gail Cooper I'm the parent of a child who is currently assigned to Ballard high school who would be assigned to Ingram under the boundary marked F.

I've been given two minutes to speak.

That's exactly the amount of time it takes to drive from my home in Ballard to Ballard high school.

It is less than a mile from our home.

My daughter can easily and safely walk or bike there.

If she pedals once she can coast the rest of the way.

But because we live a block and a half north of 80th Street she may be forbidden from attending her walking distance neighborhood high school.

Only scenario H includes Ballard's own kids within the assigned area for Ballard high school.

Scenario F would be a disaster for Ballard residents which is why 2000 of them have signed a petition protesting it.

It puts my daughter in Ingram high school which is neither walkable nor bikeable from Ballard, it is 10 times as far from home, would require two public buses and a transfer on the busiest and most dangerous street in the area.

Walking there even if it weren't across busy pedestrian unfriendly streets would take 90 minutes.

90. This is not her neighborhood school.

Seattle has worked hard to become one of the nation's most environmentally conscious cities.

This decision would break up a close-knit neighborhood and force our children to slog through a twice daily commute before they are even teens.

We as parents understand a boundary line has to be drawn somewhere but such a line cannot be drawn through the heart of the very neighborhood for which the high school is named.

The two blocks between 80th and 85th Street are undeniably in Ballard and have never been assigned to another high school.

What's worse is we have literally no way out.

As you know there is a housing crisis in the city of Seattle.

Most residents are barely hanging on to the homes they have.

Right now there is one single family home for sale under a million dollars in the Ballard high attendance area.

There are none under half a million dollars.

Simply put we cannot afford to move to keep our children in our neighborhood school.

This can be prevented by choosing scenario H or going back to one of the parent supported plans submitted earlier.

You will not split up Loyal Heights Elementary and not throw a longtime Ballard families out of their neighborhood school.

Include all Ballard students in the school that's literally named for their neighborhood.

By two minutes are up I would be pulling into Ballard high school right now.

Good evening my name is Rebecca Andrews and I have a second grader at Loyal Heights and an incoming kindergartner at Loyal Heights and I too live between 80th and 85th and Ballard.

Our commute I work full-time on the east side so does my husband driving our kids to school to avoid a double transfer to Ingraham is not an option for us and I worry about two things that have been mentioned that I wanted to emphasize one is the safety of kids.

coming home from Ingraham to Ballard after school activities in the dark with a transfer on Aurora.

I'm also concerned deeply concerned about splitting up Loyal Heights and splitting up Whittier which would happen under the proposed scenario.

We too live within walking distance of Ballard and I woke up in the middle of the day last week last month and learned that all of a sudden We our students would not be assigned to Ballard High School but instead would be having to commute four and a half miles away to Ingraham.

And I would ask you to reconsider this.

It seems absurd to me to have one group of students busing into Ballard and another group of students who live in Ballard busing somewhere else.

It doesn't seem to make sense.

And while I sympathize with the families from Magnolia we actually live in Ballard and our kids can walk there.

So I'd ask you to reconsider the decision to split up Ballard and have some Ballard students having to travel to Ingraham.

Thank you very much.

Good afternoon.

My name is Chalene Rathkopf and I have two kids in Seattle Public Schools.

My son Arden is in seventh grade at Whitman and my daughter Grace is in third grade at Loyal Heights.

We are a Ballard family and I'm here today to address the high school boundary plan that's being proposed that would send the kids in the community above Golden Gardens Park to Ingram high school instead of Ballard.

We are a Ballard community.

We bank at the Ballard branch.

We work out at Ballard studios and shop at Ballard grocery stores.

We meet our friends at Ballard coffee shops and we eat out at Ballard restaurants.

When our pets need care we take them to Ballard clinics and we walk them at Ballard parks.

We use the Ballard post office.

We swim at the Ballard pool.

and we see concerts and plays at Ballard high school.

When there is a medical emergency we go to Ballard Swedish and we play soccer on Ballard youth soccer teams.

We live and many of us work in Ballard therefore it just stands to reason that our kids would go to Ballard high school.

This boundary creates a division between a community of kids that have been going to school in Ballard together since kindergarten.

Splitting these kids up is not fair to them and it's not fair to ask parents to leave their Ballard community to support a different neighborhood high school.

I recognize that this decision is based on making accommodations for Queen Anne and Magnolia families.

I love those neighborhoods.

But just as I can't claim that Queen Anne and Magnolia are my communities they can't claim that Ballard is theirs.

I'd like to ask the board to reconsider the proposed boundary plan that sends many Ballard kids to Ingram.

Ballard is our community and the kids in Ballard should attend Ballard High School.

Thank you so much for your time and consideration.

Next up the public testimony we have Catherine Lee followed by Christine Cranek and JoLynn Mason.

Lee.

Thank you so much to all the members of the board for being here and taking this time to hear.

I have a daughter at Loyal Heights Elementary.

About a year and a half ago my husband and I we we moved to Ballard which is no easy feat.

I do know that there's not much inventory and it is very costly to live in Seattle.

But we made sacrifices and we found a very small home in Ballard so that our daughter can attend neighborhood schools.

So.

To focus on a solution rather than just a problem I support scenario 8 version 2 as the task force recommends.

This scenario keeps Ballard students at their neighborhood high school which is called Ballard high school.

In the HB2 scenario most Ballard students live within one mile of the Ballard high school and can walk or bike to school.

If the boundary line is drawn at 80th or otherwise other boundaries that cut through the neighborhood students would be forced to travel four to five miles across Aurora Avenue to get to Ingram.

If taking the bus my student would have to travel between two buses and wait on Aurora and in Seattle for most of the school year she would be waiting in the dark after school if she's got any after school activities just to get home.

Students and their families in the Ballard neighborhood intentionally foster strong communities and lifelong friendships.

In our case we moved to the Ballard neighborhood again so that our child can attend the neighborhood schools.

Families make sacrifices the pay to housing costs and the property taxes in Ballard in order for our children to attend our neighborhood schools.

So the proposed scenarios such as F and E I don't know which ones they are.

They would push Ballard students to Ingram and it would break up our children's friendships and our neighborhood communities.

So I urge you to please not that I want to take schooling options away from Queen Anne or Magnolia but.

We live in the Ballard neighborhood.

Again my child could walk one mile.

It's 15 20 minutes rather than take two buses.

I believe that really poses a safety issue for us and that's unacceptable.

Thank you.

Hello I'm Christine Kranich and I'm going to be talking about something that's going to be introduced to you tonight as a topic and it's the West Seattle boundary changes that are going to affect Genesee Hill and Lafayette elementary schools.

I have a first and third grader at Genesee Hill and I'm a the PTA president and I live in the change area that's being proposed.

We understand as a community that this is needed.

Our enrollment has grown.

I'm huge from 2008 our enrollment was 316 students and as of today we have 719 students.

So we are outgrowing our space we're in a brand new building it's beautiful.

But we had last year five kindergarten classes this year six kindergarten classes and you start to picture that growing through the school and we know it's not sustainable.

So I want to thank both Flip Herndon and Ashley Davies.

They've done a really great job of collaborating with our community with solutions and I fully support what they're going to be proposing today which is scenario F.

Surprise you know we like it.

Yay.

And it's and it's hopefully the proposal is going to include grandfathering.

That's what I think is in the proposal.

Transportation I think is still we're not sure.

I think as of yet I'm hoping that is included as well.

And what else do I want to say.

The drawing of the boundaries has been redrawn several times and I think that's one thing to note is that there's some complexity and uniqueness to our area.

We have four elementary schools within 1.7 miles and so drawing these boundaries has been complicated.

I think that there is a potential to look at creating a gray zone so that depending on enrollment If you live in this area we're not sure what school you're going to go to in the future.

For now I know we have to do this F but I think there's some opportunity to look at some differences.

So thank you and I hope that you support their proposal.

Mason and like many other folks here tonight I would like to talk about the Ballard boundary issue.

I also live in the magical zone between 80th and 85th that has historically been considered Ballard and under the F proposals will no longer be considered Ballard.

I have to say I was really excited when I first saw the original H proposals because those really included the idea of Ballard as a community and looked at who we are as a whole keeping cohorts together, kids who have been not just in elementary school but in preschools and co-op, people who have relationships that go back to being infants together.

There is power in that and there is something really important.

And they've taken that, the F scenarios have taken that really great story and turned the boundaries into a hunger games issue where it feels very us and them right?

We've got Ballard over here and Magnolia over here and I don't think it should be a never the twain shall meet issue.

I think there has to be room.

I commute by bus pretty regularly I work in the university district and I take the 45. It would be easier for kids in the boundary strip that's being proposed for Ingram to get to Roosevelt high school or Garfield high school than it would be for them to get to Ingram.

We can walk to school.

I love that.

I have watched my son grow in responsibility and watched his relationships with friends blossom as they test their sea legs getting independence walking to school spending more time together actually walking and talking not sitting on a bus looking at a phone.

I think it's important to think about how we get our kids to school what it means to have them sitting literally for 45 minutes to an hour.

I encourage you to try.

the Ingram commute if you're curious and find a middle ground that accommodates the needs of all the communities both in Ballard and Magnolia and really find a plan that will make this work.

concludes the sign up list for public testimony this evening.

OK so then we go to another round of board comments that have been brought up by public testimony.

If you so choose.

Director Geary.

Always first to go.

I wanted to give a special shout out to the South Lake High School students that came and spoke with us.

I really appreciated it.

One of the things that Larry Pope said really struck a chord with me and it is creating a vision for these students for after high school.

It is our charge of course to prepare them during their time in high school.

but without a clear vision as to where they're going to go.

And so what would appear to us to be something as accessible as going to a basketball game on a college campus for him apparently he spoke to that as something that made college accessible.

And we have to remember that that vision beyond high school is so important to keep kids motivated.

And I'm I'm thinking about that more and more in terms of how do we.

spark the imagination of every student as to their own personal possibility.

And I'm glad you're here Mr. Pope to hear this because sometimes students leave afterwards.

So thank you for staying.

Thank you for coming and talking.

Your words will stay with me a long time.

And you too Daniel.

Thank you you too.

And Sharon thank you for coming and expressing your concern about the need for us to be aware that as we talk about equity we have to remember that students with disability have to be included in that equity lens that no every student is an individual.

And when our high school teachers are talking about students with disabilities as if though they all share one common characteristic and have to be treated in one way it defeats the whole purpose behind the IDEA which is the individualization of education for our students with disabilities recognizing that they have something that is impeding their ability to access general ed.

And that something is to be ameliorated with the help of a special ed teacher that that special ed teacher is available to every high school teacher to help that high school teacher and for a high school teacher to say that he or she alone bears that burden and it is a burden because all of these students have one unique characteristic that have to be treated in one way maybe potentially to the detriment of other students in the classroom is absolutely.

unacceptable just as it would be unacceptable that somebody brings their biases around race or around poverty into the classroom and faces our children that way.

So I thank you for bringing that to our attention.

It is work that we need to continue to do in terms of changing the mindset of the adults that our children need to work with in order to gain access to their very bright futures.

As for the boundaries I look forward to further discussion on that.

It is.

You can see from this room alone how hard it is when you have two groups that come before us and very rationally bring all of the emotional passion about their children's future to us and.

Boy it would be nice if doing everything for everybody in one building the building that they wanted at a cost neutral you know endgame would be awesome.

But it isn't.

So thank you for coming and speaking.

Thank you for acknowledging the hardship that the other group may be facing because it is hard.

And thank you for acknowledging the hard work of Flip Herndon and Ashley Davies.

They've been doing this work and it is it's hard on them too.

And they try to crunch the scenarios and and meet the needs of our families the best they can.

So if there is possibility if there is a way to make it work they are looking hard for it.

But at some point a decision has to be made.

And then it is upon us to reassure our students that they're going to get a great education and do great things and they're going to have what they need for a bright future.

So onward.

Thank you.

Director Mack then Director Burke.

Thank you Director Geary for those comments.

I echo a lot of what you just said and I.

We got to have our comments before you guys all showed up and I felt a little empty when I was talking.

Hearing all of this testimony and.

passion commitment to your kids to our kids to the community and to.

Coming up with a solution that will meet the needs of the most people that we can and our students and families.

I'm so heartened to hear that being the thread throughout a lot of the testimony tonight and I'm so appreciative of that because I know that that is where I personally come from and I believe that our board directors are also working for that as well as the staff.

We're going to be having a longer conversation about boundaries later.

So I don't want to dive into that but I do want to express my gratitude thanks and absolute glee for the testimony around the loyal I'm sorry not the loyal heights the Genesee Hill boundaries and.

A big shout out thank you to Ashley and Flip for the work to run that process to come up with a compromise that both manages the capacity of those buildings and also meets the needs of the students and families.

So I'm really appreciative and I am hopeful going into conversation later that we are going to be able to do that with high school boundaries as well.

Thank you.

Director Burke.

Thank you Director Geary Director Mack for for starting us off there.

I won't repeat that.

I just wanted to share a couple of personal vignettes around the boundaries pathways thing.

So I was born in Seattle and raised on Wallingford.

So I attended Hamilton.

At the time I went to high school Lincoln was closed so I was not able to attend Lincoln.

But I was a Ballard high school I was a beaver.

So I grew up.

Living in Wallingford attending Ballard.

And then for the last three years of my high school I moved to a house that was three houses north of 80th and continue to attend Ballard High School.

So I understand the neighborhood the community what it's like to be just a couple of houses north in that between 80th and 85th.

So there's a there's a personal element of that to me.

The other foot is that I have three children who have attended Ingram high school and they've experienced the travel time from 72nd Avenue to Ingram and it involves three buses or two buses depending on the timing or one bus and two long walks.

And all three of them have come out great.

Ingram has been an amazing school.

I would never have done anything different.

So I want people to have an open mind and the enthusiasm around wherever you go wherever your students go.

Make it your community.

Make it amazing.

Help it be brilliant.

Encourage your kids to be supportive of it as well because that's what's going to make it successful.

Not whether.

Whether they can walk there that's a convenience but creating that environment creating that culture at the school.

is what's truly going to make it amazing.

And so I just wanted to put that out there and I hope you'll stay for the conversation around boundaries.

And thank you for the folks who testified sharing your stories and for the spirit of compromise that I heard in so many of your voices because I think that's what we're trying to do is to find that that ideal compromise that that gets us the.

The best capacity balance the best family experience the best.

Best best results in our school.

So thank you again.

Other board directors wanting to make comments.

Director Pinkham.

I want to thank all the people that came and shared their comments tonight because this is an issue that is going to impact you know families and communities and the stories that I'm hearing up here just makes me actually flashback to compare that a lot of what I'm seeing families and communities going through.

Almost identical to what the Native Americans went to when they were taken from their homes to boarding schools and which was very tough on that community.

It does impact community when you take students out of that community to send them to another school.

So you know how can we address this.

Maybe we can.

help students and help families see that the community is bigger than maybe what Ballard is.

We can see how we can expand that to make some feel like hey this is home wherever I'm at.

And it's difficult and choices are going to make.

But as a conversation we're going to have later tonight.

Hope we can get some of that out.

How can we keep our communities together.

But how can we also make sure that we're aware that we have to expand our communities at some point so that we can include everyone.

I also want to thank the standing tall people that came here and shared your perspectives.

At the University of Washington I've been working on a men of color in engineering programs to let our male students know that yes they do have value and not to fill out this masculinity identity should direct their lives and who they are is who they are and not to try to live up to certain ideals of what it means to be a man.

I think you're standing tall you let them know who you are.

We'll get you where you need to be.

Then as a male you choose what you want to be.

Don't let societal pressure direct you.

Let your own mind and heart direct who you are.

So thank you for bringing your students here and sharing what they had to.

Qeˀciyéẁyéẁ.

Director Patu.

Patu I also would like to thank everyone for coming tonight and sharing with us what's in your mind and also your passion about the various boundaries and the movements and hopefully that we as board directors really want to make sure that we work together and make sure what's the best for all your kids.

Well I'd say all our kids.

And also I would like to thank the group that came out and really appreciate the story behind standing tall.

I believe that all our young men deserve to be able to have the opportunity to stand tall and be able to learn about themselves and what is it they can actually be able to get in order for them to really be the best that they can be.

Hopefully that that will continue on and like to see that program in a lot of our other schools in the southeast for our kids that really they really can benefit from it.

So I really appreciate everyone that came tonight and hopefully that we can continue to do the best that we can to make sure that we provide the best opportunity that we can for all our kids.

Director DeWolf.

Yes I just wanted to echo and even if it feels like it's continuing to say the same thing really just express gratitude to Larry and Daniel for coming tonight and what I am taking with me tonight because it was so profound and as someone who is committed to identity safety and how we're promoting that and committing to that in our schools.

Really appreciate what you said Daniel around seeing people as persons and not as an object as a queer person as a native person myself.

I really appreciate your perspective and I hope that we can work together to support you.

But also seeing how we can work to make sure that this program and the ideals and the things that you're talking about are embedded within a lot of our program.

So thank you for being here tonight.

I don't have anything more to say but thank you to the parents for speaking up too.

OK that leaves me.

Couple of things that hit home for me.

I appreciate the testimony we heard tonight in opposition to our resolution regarding charter schools.

I appreciate the elegance with which that testimony was delivered.

Certainly far more elegant than some of the barbs that have been thrown our way and in particular mine.

I have difficulties with charter schools when they want the money.

but not the rules that go with.

I have difficulty with charter schools when their teachers do not have the benefit of collective bargaining agreements or protection.

I have difficulty with folks suggesting that the entire program with all of the terrific organizations there would go down should the city council choose not to give the zoning and developmental variances for one portion of that program.

And again we go back to no voter accountability.

If you've had enough of us you vote us out.

That's what public education is about.

And those three schools that will be harmed are doing phenomenal work.

And I cannot tell you how much I appreciate the teachers and the staff of all three of those schools.

The gentleman that came from South Lake High School.

Way to go.

Again I will hold you to it.

I want to see you here in a year.

And for those of those folks that know me well they know that my dream for this school district is that every middle and high school student has a mentor or a coach.

Somebody that gives a darn.

Somebody that can open doors.

Somebody that can connect them.

with folks that matter.

And I believe in my heart that this city is full of people that would be willing to volunteer and do that.

And I also believe it does not need to be a three million dollar program.

And it's my hope this next year we figure out a way to in fact make that happen so that we can hold hands and open a whole lot of doors.

Thank you very much.

Moving on to the action portion of the agenda.

Adopting resolution number 2017 slash 18 19 opposing changes in the city of Seattle municipal code to allow charter schools to seek departures from building development and zoning standards.

Mr. Vice President.

I move that the board adopt resolution number 2017 slash 18 dash 19 opposing changes to the city of Seattle municipal code SMC 23 dot 7 9 to allow charter schools to seek departures from building development standards.

Geary I second the motion.

Thank you.

Mr. DeWolf excuse me Director DeWolf.

Thank you.

Thank you.

I just wanted to make sure that I stated this early on in the process.

As a commissioner with Seattle Housing Authority currently I have not actually retired from that role and that will be coming at the end of March.

I need to make a statement for the record to about this agenda item even though I'm very passionate and frankly sorry for the under 18 years but I'm fairly pissed that I have to do this.

But I am recusing myself from this agenda item because as a Seattle Housing Authority commissioner we sold property to Homesite and that is the conversation in question.

And so I'm recusing myself from this participating on this item.

But I do want to say that I hope that.

other board directors look at the resolution and ensure that we are not focusing solely on the financial burdens that this development will cause but in fact include more information about how our work will be affected when particularly looking at the African-American male advisory committee and the progress and the potential that we have there.

And so if we could figure out a way to make sure that we're including language that supports that.

But other than that I'm recusing myself.

I think I've probably said too much.

Thank you Director DeWolf.

I'm sorry you have to do that.

Board members questions comments concerns this motion has been moved and seconded.

And yes indeed the camel's cameras are running.

Questions comments and concerns.

Well I've already spoken.

So in that event Ms Shek the roll call please.

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

This motion has passed 6 to 0 to 1.

Thank you very much.

Now we will move to the introduction portion of the agenda.

Number one amend board policy number 5 2 5 0 reporting improper governmental actions and protecting whistleblowers against retaliation and adopt board procedure 5 2 5 0 BP.

Reporting improper governmental actions and protecting whistleblowers against retaliation and repeal superintendent procedure 5 2 5 0 S P. Approval of this item would amend board policy 5 2 5 0 in Perren's reporting improper governmental action and protecting whistleblowers against retaliation and Perren adopt board procedure 5 2 5 0 BP and repeal superintendent procedures 5 2 5 0 SP.

With the chair of Audit and Finance please tell us what they did.

This item was heard at the December 11th audit and finance committee and move forward for approval as was the next item number two.

Okay I see Andrew Medina who is our internal auditor at the podium.

Andrew Medina internal auditor and ethics officer.

And this item is primarily to bring greater oversight to the ethics officer position by converting the 50 to 50 procedure from a superintendent procedure to a board procedure.

Since the ethics office reports directly to the school board it makes more sense to have it be a board procedure.

There are a couple other language changes to the procedure but these are not necessarily new changes.

These were shared with the directors around October when you were going through the process of updating the other investigation policies.

50 10 non-discrimination and affirmative action 52 0 7 prohibition of harassment intimidation and bullying and 52 45 anti-retaliation.

Those were all approved on.

November 1st and during that process the language changes were shared with the board at those time even though there was a superintendent procedure.

But for the record the two main changes are one is the change in definition to an improper governmental action to bring the definition in line with state law.

And then the second change is just the identification of the ethics officer updating that since we no longer use the city of Seattle as the ethics office.

But again the main purpose of the agenda item is to change the procedure from a superintendent procedure to a board procedure.

Harris.

Fellow directors questions comments or concerns.

Director Burke please.

Can you confirm that this the changes to this policy do not affect the the roles or authority of the internal audit office?

Yes that's true.

The only change in the definition really.

Basically it really changes the definition of whistleblower.

So certain complaints may not qualify as whistleblower status going forward but it certainly doesn't change my authority to follow up on items and certainly doesn't diminish our commitment to follow up on any complaints we receive.

Thank you.

Other questions comments concerns.

Well I personally want to thank you.

I want to thank the folks in legal.

I want to thank the folks in H.R.

for working this through because again it's a transparency and accountability piece that everyone cooperated in making happen.

Is that correct?

Yes.

Legal and H.R.

deserve more credit than I do on this one.

OK.

Number two amend superintendent 2017 18 smart goal.

Approval of this item would change language and smart goal number three from program review to program summary.

And we heard from the chair of Audit and Finance that this went through December 11 for approval.

We see Erin Bennett.

Good evening.

Thank you.

Erin Bennett government relations and strategic initiatives.

I'm standing in for JoLynn Berge who had another commitment on behalf of the district that she is attending.

This motion would change one word in the 17 18 superintendent SMART goals and that's changing from program review to program summary as it is a better representation of the work that is being done.

And I'm happy to answer any questions.

Questions comments or concerns from my colleagues.

Director Patu.

So can you tell me what's the difference between the review and the summary statement.

What difference between the two.

So my understanding and I might actually look to the Audit and Finance Committee to speak to it a little bit more because I believe they went into it a little bit more in depth than and I wasn't in attendance at the Audit and Finance Committee.

But if you look at the rubric for goal three which was an attachment to the board action report.

There is actually a row titled program review and that's where the word change is going to be the program summary.

And then as you move from unsatisfactory over to distinguished the word the work that is described in that row is program summary not program review.

If that makes sense.

Thank you.

Questions comments concerns.

By changing this word we are not getting rid of the more robust program reviews is that correct?

Can you say that in a different way.

My understanding is that the 30 to 40 snapshots snapshots reports that assistant superintendent JoLynn Berge is working on fall under the program summary definition in terms of a larger program review.

That Eric Anderson and teaching and learning and other departments do that focus on.

measurables.

So for example the ones that they presented recently in work sessions around I believe it was dual language.

And so no it doesn't replace those.

But it wouldn't be those would not be part of this SMART goal.

Is my understanding.

So how do we evaluate the program reviews if they're not part of the SMART goal.

So.

And I appreciate that you're pinch hitting for.

Assistant Superintendent Berge.

I'm not trying to put you on the spot but these are questions that I've been getting.

Fair enough.

So the best that I can answer but I probably will have to do a little bit of research and get back to you is that Dr. Anderson has a smaller number of topics in which they are doing that deeper dive in terms of the program review.

I actually don't know what sort of up next and so I'd have to find out.

But in terms of this SMART goal and again I would love for an audit and finance committee member to speak to this a little bit.

My understanding is that the discussion of what JoLynn assistant superintendent Berge was being asked to do under this goal and under this rubric row fell under this definition.

Harris Director Burke please.

And did you want to speak as well Deputy Nielsen.

I'll just highlight the conversation that stimulated this as we were going through the program review slash summaries and saying wow there's not much review here it's really a summary it's more of an inventory of what the programs are it's a collation of information.

The idea that there's actually a review taking place might actually be a misrepresentation of the work.

And when you look across as you indicated what is basic what is proficient what is distinguished.

It's not that a lot of programs are reviewed.

It's that a lot of programs are documented and summarized and it's essentially providing us more insight into the work that's going on so that we can help identify ones for the deeper program reviews that research and assessment is doing.

Deputy Superintendent you're fine with that explanation are you sir?

I am.

And I would just add that sometimes people think of a review as a performance review.

So JoLynn was concerned in reference to what Director Burke just said that this the financials are not in-depth performance reviews of a specific program.

There is a difference.

OK.

Director Geary please.

So when I think back to what this goal came up why this goal came up it was to give the board an understanding of the distribution of programs for equitable purposes.

But then as I recall one of the concerns the director Burke had was that how would we know the quality of it.

So that we would know in making decisions about where to place what to fund what was being effective.

Were we you know using our dollars wisely that it did have sort of something more than a summary element.

It was to contain a review element to some degree.

So I do understand that in implementing the goal the reviews are very.

They're very costly in terms of the amount of time and effort that goes into into doing a thorough and reliable review of the program.

I mean I have I have learned that I have heard that as we have gone through this process.

And so it's not so much that I'm.

against this change as much as I now don't understand what is driving the deeper reviews.

If it's no longer under this goal and how will we get the information necessary when the time comes that the district in reviewing what we are doing throughout the district and our budget and the effectiveness of programs.

What needs to change?

How will we have the information necessary as a board?

Because all of these changes as you know will bring the people for whom that program is very dear to them for whatever reason to us.

So that's what there's a disconnect in terms of the original purpose.

And what why we need the information.

Director Burke.

I'll give that a try and I think that one of the challenges that we face as directors is we see a line on a budget or something in a list of programs we say wow what is that?

How many students are served?

What is the financial implication?

And ultimately what is the effectiveness?

What is the return on that investment?

Are we are we efficiently and effectively serving our students with that?

with the funds that are entrusted to us.

And so there's a sort of a multilevel process.

First of all does it exist.

Second of all what's in it.

And third of all is it working is it delivering.

And I think this takes us from oh here's a name to that second level of what is it.

What is the magnitude of it?

Is it something that serves two students or is it something that serves 20,000 students?

And that helps us you know get a deeper understanding of where we should be targeting our more in-depth reviews.

Does that resonate?

Harris Deputy Nielsen did you wish to speak to this?

I'm not sure I wish to speak to it because I'm not sure that we will help people understand but let me try.

If you recall back to the discussion that we had now almost two years ago speaking about the difference between the performance review and a summary of what the various functions of the district accomplish.

That was what this is all predicated upon.

And when we first looked that was when we had extra spending dollars and the board said let's put some dollars into some reviews.

It was to do these high level reviews not a very in-depth review that I would consider to be.

say an audit performance review that kind of thing.

There's a big difference in terms and I'll just pick a topic if we wanted to come in as has been done and did a performance review on our special ed program which has been accomplished recently.

That is a very timely very in-depth review that gets into the weeds on what's working what is not what issues need to be resolved it's time intensive it's labor intensive.

That's not what a program summary does.

That's why we're looking for these words.

What we're looking for there is if you think about the work session that JoLynn just provided to you a couple of weeks ago on various parts of the budget what we're spending it on how many FTE are involved.

So it's a much higher level.

It doesn't get into the detail of the effectiveness of every single aspect of that particular program it provides a A summary from a budget perspective of how much we're spending whether it's a balance or not it does not get into is this the best use of every single dollar.

Harris That kind sir would be my objection to this.

The reason being that when we came up with this smart goal we had a rich conversation and we talked about knowing what we have out there and how it is distributed both geographically and with our different populations.

It had a much deeper thoughtful element to it not a financial one page snapshot.

That was to be done by the finance department.

It was more a qualitative kind of review.

As I recall that very rich and thoughtful discussion and I believe that director Geary and I.

were paying off of each other and it was the best brainstorming I think I've had in many many years.

I have significant concern and frankly fear given the history of this district that if we put one pagers together those will be used as tools to dismantle some of our more expensive.

less popular programs.

And I want to know when we talk about finances I want to know how much a child's life is worth.

and how we are going to determine that factor because it's not just about dollars and cents.

Do I object to having snapshots?

I think that's a terrific idea but that's not what this SMART goal started with.

And with extraordinary respect to Assistant Superintendent Berge who I think walks on water and performs miracles here every day.

She wasn't here at that conversation.

I see Associate Superintendent Michael Tolley at the dais.

Yes I thought I would speak to this for a minute.

As you know we have completed two program reviews of sorts.

We did one for the dual language immersion and that was presented by Eric Anderson and his team as well as one on the advanced learning spectrum component of the advanced learning program.

I have actually met with Eric Anderson Dr. Anderson recently regarding continuing that particular type of work.

But as you know the depth of that work and as was mentioned by Deputy Superintendent Nielsen the time it involves from our research and evaluation department is extensive so it is limited in capacity of that department to do that work.

So we are currently in a process of listing all the programs that need to go through and evaluate a review like this and then go through a process of identifying which ones are next.

So that's where we are right now.

We would continue that work but identifying which one which one or two a year that can be done and then be able to provide that information to the board is in process.

Director Geary and then Deputy Nielsen.

So getting back to one of the questions that sort of that was a big prelude to the one question.

What is now driving the review work if it's not going to be smart goal three.

Under what.

That's that's I guess I lose that connection if we're going to continue to do that work.

Who has called for that work under under what rubric is that work being done?

Technically it is under one of the school board policies.

I forgot the program review and assessment at 20. I believe the school board policy 2090 that we have had challenges in the past and fulfilling the expectations of that policy due primarily to the limitation of staff within the research and evaluation department.

But as we've added been able to rebuild the capacity of that department it actually has increased our ability to be responsive to that school board policy.

Harris.

Excuse me I have a question.

Then shouldn't we change the policy.

That that has been discussed with board members in the past that we really do need to take a look at that policy to be able to align it with the capacity of our research and evaluation department.

Director Geary I didn't mean to interrupt you I apologize for that.

You then Rick Burke then Deputy Nielsen.

I guess then before we move forward in changing the SMART goal if we have a policy then I want to see somehow how they're being wed together because now I'm confused like we have two bodies of work going under two different authorities and I don't understand how they're coming together.

So one should reference the other and explain how holistically these two coexist and what function they serve to each other and to us as the board.

It would be my request.

Director Burke and then Deputy Nielsen.

So I think while this is a rich discussion I want to reemphasize what Erin Bennett started with which is that when we look at the description of the goal the actual work of the goal it indicates for each program and information one pager is developed that includes basic information about the program including FTEs total expenditures locations etc.

This is a smart goal under budget and these are really program budget factors to help us quantify the size and scope of any given program.

And so I think when we look back to our previous smart goal for program evaluation program review.

We didn't renew that SMART goal if I get that correctly.

So we had a larger SMART goal last year for more comprehensive reviews.

And this year we said wow how do we identify what to do subsequent reviews on.

We need a shallower view of all of the activities all of the the candidates that would help us as a board better identify what to do in future years.

And so the conversation around changing this one word was really wow we're using program review for last year's SMART goal and program review for this year's SMART goal.

And last year's was this comprehensive involved thing that we call the program review.

And this one we're trying to do 40 of these in one year.

And so it's really not the same magnitude.

And so calling it the same thing was creating this confusion.

So that's that was the change in this one word was just to make that description clear.

But it doesn't change the actual body of work.

And if I may I between intro and action I will follow up with Assistant Superintendent Berge as well as Dr. Anderson to determine what the plan is on how to use the one pagers that are described in the rubric in order to determine the plan moving forward.

Deputy Nielsen you had something to answer.

Director Burke thank you for that clarification.

I would suggest similar to the comments that Aaron just made that we would try to be careful and we can do this between now and and bring this back for action to understand that we're talking about we're still talking about two different kinds of reviews and I want to make sure the board isn't confused that We are trying to take all of our program review work and munch it into this category.

That is not what we're doing here.

It is to do exactly what Director Burke described.

Thank you.

Harris.

OK.

I think we beat this one to death.

Appreciate it very much.

Thank you Ms. Bennett for pitching in.

Number three.

Approval of agreements adding an adaptive cycling and pedestrian component to the SD SDOT let's go bike and pedestrian safety education program.

Approval of this item would expand the district's contract from 240 thousand one hundred and eighty nine dollars to three hundred thirty seven thousand seven hundred seventy four dollars with the Seattle Department of Transportation SDOT and Cascade bike club to add an adaptive cycling and pedestrian component to existing Let's Go cycling and pedestrian safety education program.

This came before C&I on the 12th and.

It's moved forward for approval.

Thank you.

You have the floor.

Thank you.

Good evening directors and deputy superintendent.

My name is Lori Dunn the pre K-12 physical education and health literacy program manager here in Seattle Public Schools.

I'm here to ask for your approval of an addendum adding an adaptive cycling and pedestrian component to the Seattle Department of Transportation Cascade bike club and Seattle Public Schools let's go bike and pedestrian safety education program.

As the addendum carried additional funding that put the total above the 250,000 amount requiring your approval.

By providing additional resources to the learning program of Seattle's physical education classrooms this program supports the formula for success, high-quality teachers and leaders, student focused collaboration and a commitment to racial equity.

The Let's Go program provides physical education teachers with resources to implement an in school bicycle and pedestrian safety program for students grades 3 through 5 in their physical education classrooms.

The curriculum is a result of collaboration.

between bicycle and pedestrian safety educators, transportation professionals, neighborhood safe street advocates, teachers, adapted fiscal education specialists and school administrators.

This is a true example of community coming together to eliminate opportunity gaps.

The program focuses on skills and knowledge necessary to prevent the most common causes of collisions and errors of the upper elementary age group as they navigate the environment.

This last school year the Seattle Department of Transportation, Cascade Bicycle Club and the Seattle Public Schools brought the let's go walking and biking education program to every third, fourth and fifth grade student in physical education in Seattle Public Schools as part of the vision zero city initiative.

The city addendum added service to bump the funding up over $250,000 for a total of $337.74 through 7-1-2021 and now includes the supports needed for students that have individual education plans or students that need extra supports to be successful in the Let's Go program in our schools.

Approval of the addendum to the program and increase in funding from Seattle Department of Transportation will allow Cascade Bike Club to serve all students with adaptive needs through the Let's Go program.

This work.

Are you about there?

I'm there.

We have a very long agenda.

Thank you so much for your consideration.

And we have an hour conversation on the boundaries right smack dab in the middle of it.

Directors comments questions concerns.

Director Geary.

Director Mack Director Geary.

I just had a very quick question about how many students and what schools are these.

Will this impact.

Every single child in grade 3 4 and 5 in every single elementary school in our system.

Wow.

Director Geary.

When I read through the documentation I just I couldn't get entirely a sense of all the different kinds of adaptive cycles and stuff that were going to be provided and who the breadth of the service and I just sort of wanted a visual.

Is there a video or a link or something that that we could look at to just give us a better idea of what this looks like.

It was just schedules with sort of money and and right.

It was a pretty dry presentation in terms of of what it was that we would be getting.

Actually, in partnership with Outdoors for All which is another nonprofit with Cascade Bike Club works very closely with, those individuals will come into our schools and ahead of time the schools are scheduled to have the bikes and receive the program.

We will make sure every student in collaboration with the teacher and the other teachers in the system to make sure those students are successful with whatever tools they need to be successful with, with each individual student.

And do you know if on these organizations websites if they have any videos or any promotional material that would give the greater public an idea of what it is that we're talking about just for our own information and education?

Yes a basic we actually put a video up last year on our website eliminating the opportunity gap when we rolled out and we had the introduction with the city.

We totally anticipate once we have this up and going to have an informational video on our own website and along with cascade because this is a model program for the rest of the country we are We're here.

So definitely.

OK that's great.

And if possible perhaps we can amend the bar to include a link so our families can also in reading this have an opportunity to look at it.

Just a suggestion not a necessity because this is great.

Thank you.

Thank you very much.

Rockstar as always.

Number four extending the contract for middle school and high school yearbooks with Herff Jones for an additional year.

Approval of this item would extend the district's contract with its current yearbook vendor for one year in an amount not to exceed four hundred thousand dollars.

Mr. C&I.

This came before curriculum instruction policy committee on December 12th and was moved forward with a recommendation for approval.

Thank you.

Kyle Kinoshita chief of curriculum assessment instruction and as.

And do any board directors have questions comments or concerns.

I don't mean to cut you off.

That's OK.

But it's going to be a long night.

Not a problem.

No comments questions or concerns.

OK.

Thank you.

Thank you very much.

OK.

We're going to take a 10 minute break because then we're going into an hour long discussion.

regarding growth boundaries and highly capable pathways.

That discussion will be led by our operations chair Director Eden Mack.

Flip Herndon Deputy Nielsen with some input with potentially C&I chair Mr. Burke.

This is what we hope to be a new distributive model where the folks that own the portfolio and the subject matter lead the discussion.

So 10 minutes and we'll have you back here at 7 20 and we have Thirteen more intro items most all capital after that hour.

Thank you.