SPEAKER_99

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

Ms.

Liza Rankin

Wilson-Jones, would you please?

Director Briggs?

Here.

Director Clark?

Present.

Director Hersey?

Here.

Director Mizrahi?

Present.

Vice President Sarju?

Present.

SPEAKER_36

President Rankin, here.

Student member Bregg?

Here.

Student member Yoon?

Present.

Okay.

Sorry, this is very challenging for someone with ADHD.

Brent Jones

oh i will turn it over now to good evening everyone as we gather here today i want to start by acknowledging a tremendous launch of our school year just two weeks ago i've had the privilege of visiting about 10 schools experiencing firsthand the energy and enthusiasm of our students as they engage in meaningful learning i've started today with students on their bus ride to school visiting their lunch times and i saw great teaching and learning happening in their classrooms i deeply appreciate our dedicated teachers administrators and staff who have welcomed our board members and me into their schools your hard work has not gone unnoticed buses were on time meals were served hot and we continue to prioritize fully staffing our schools with excellent teachers administrators and instructional assistants and safety personnel this strong start has So I just want to say thanks to our dedicated staff, engaged students, and supportive families.

SPEAKER_99

Opportunities are alive here at Seattle Public Schools.

And just yesterday I was inspired by the students at Skills Center diving into advanced manufacturing, auto body work, and construction.

These access points don't exist by chance.

Brent Jones

Your partnership as we work towards creating the best possible future for our students, families, and communities.

Today we'll provide an update on well-resourced schools.

We'll discuss the two proposed options under consideration, summarize stakeholder feedback, and outline our engagement opportunities and the next steps.

I appreciate your involvement in this process, and it's your engagement that makes our school system special.

I want to thank the board for their courageous steps towards fiscal and program stabilization.

It is indeed hard, generational work, This discussion can be challenging and emotional, and especially as we talk about schools that hold a special place in many of our hearts, including mine.

However, I want to believe that amidst these challenges, we can uncover new opportunities.

Last Wednesday, we launched a public web hub that includes a detailed analysis of our elementary school buildings and insights into what these changes might mean for our families.

We put our best thinking forward and are eager to listen to your feedback.

Civil and constructive disagreement is a vital part of how we democratically govern our schools.

This evening offers us yet another set of important feedback opportunities along so much of what we've already been hearing as a start of this engagement process.

We welcome the comments and we have our ombuds team here with us to take notes and ensure we have comments logged and follow up with speakers by email as appropriate.

Ombuds office, can y'all give us a wave?

All right, they're over there.

So if folks have special comments and information they want to provide, our unbuzz office is there.

So I want to really emphasize a commitment to services.

We understand that discussions about potential school closures and consolidations can create uncertainty.

I want to reassure you Special education, multilingual services, and programs for highly capable students will not be diminished.

I'm going to say that again.

I want to assure you, special education, multilingual services, and programs for highly capable services will not be diminished.

Our commitment to providing these essential services and programs remains steadfast.

In fact, our goal is to make sure that these programs and services more consistently provide access across our district.

We want to bring what works to more locally accessible neighborhood schools so that all students can thrive and learn along with their peers.

We also will provide an overview of our budget process today, outlining the challenges we face and the proposals that we're considering.

We've utilized our savings, our rainy day funds, and continue to advocate with the legislature.

While we've had to make difficult reductions to staff and services, we are committed to avoiding further cuts to our schools.

Thank you for your attention tonight, and back to you, President Rankin.

Liza Rankin

Thank you.

Sorry, this is like sensory overload because I'm getting a message from Steph.

Okay.

Thank you, Superintendent.

I have a few things to share here and then I will pass it over to our student members who are joining us for their first meeting.

All the other meetings are gonna.

SPEAKER_41

Yes, thank you.

Liza Rankin

And I told them that this is how they all are.

Just kidding, just kidding.

OK, so public testimony is scheduled to begin at 5 PM.

Depending on what business is happening, it's possible that we will start that after 5 PM, but we will not start it prior to 5 PM so that anyone who's planning on that is here.

Okay, I know that a lot of people are here to provide comments on well-resourced schools and I I believe that you all probably have a lot of questions and concerns that we also have and so i definitely encourage you to stay for a budget update and also we will be getting an update from staff i think it's later on the agenda on the current state of the plan that's being proposed there's no action happening this evening and also the the board only has the ability to make decisions when we're here together in public.

So a lot of the things that you are wondering about we are also wondering about as we don't decide things.

We're actually by state law not allowed to.

It's part of the transparency to the public is that decisions that are made by the board happen in public.

So we look forward to seeing a presentation from staff and asking questions and to hearing your comments and again encourage you to stay for that conversation so that you can see what questions we are asking and what questions you might still have that you can share with us after the meeting.

So Given that, also, even though we have this very sort of performative stance and an audience, this is actually a meeting of the board, a business meeting of the board that's held in public, as opposed to a presentation or performance for the public.

And so as much as possible, we're going to try to make sure to get through the conversations and do the important work that we need to do on behalf of our community here.

And of course, and as you are experiencing, that is open to the public to watch.

So given that, during the public testimony period, as with other governing bodies, that's your opportunity to have some time to share thoughts here.

We don't respond, it's not a two-way conversation.

and we can't take questions.

As Dr. Jones indicated, the ombuds folks are here to answer things that may be more staff connected.

I, and I'm sure my fellow directors will be really paying attention to think on what is being said for considerations we might wanna think about in terms of how we give our direction to the superintendent about what happens next.

So like vision and values, that's our role.

So yeah, buckle up.

I will now pass it over to Director Bragg to provide the first student member comments, if you have some.

SPEAKER_11

All right.

All right.

It's crazy being called that.

Thank you all for the welcome to be here.

We only have a couple of comments, of course, you know, we're starting.

The start of the year was great for us and we did just want to mention the fact that, so yes, students are definitely feeling the tension in the district.

The trickle down effect of both the tension of budget cuts and what is currently happening with decisions and what will be happening over the coming months is something students have felt.

We, there has been rising tension, a bit of antsy within student groups, but it is, we, figuring it out.

So just making the board and the community aware of that, because student opinions are what we should be hearing and thinking about every effect on decisions that are made, how they affect the students, no matter what that might look like.

The student board members have not, our current work has not led to anything concrete yet, but our ideas are currently on educating students and connecting with the community to make sure that students are educated on what is happening, which is the most important fact in reducing any stress of tension.

And I think that's it for my comments, if Sabi has any.

SPEAKER_27

Sorry.

The well-resourced schools proposal has sparked concern among many students.

At Ballard High School, where I'm a student, the potential closure of Salmon Bay K-8 has raised particular alarm.

Many of my peers attended Salmon Bay from K-8 and have siblings currently enrolled or planning to attend.

With over 600 students enrolled and considering that it's impacted so many generations, students have expressed that its closures would not only displace students, but also dismember the community that has been built over the years.

A classmate asked me a couple days ago, WHERE WILL MY BROTHER GO?

THAT WAS THE QUESTION I'VE BEEN ASKING MYSELF AND WONDERING HOW I SHOULD ANSWER IT AS A SCHOOL BOARD MEMBER.

THANK YOU.

Liza Rankin

THANK YOU.

DO WE HAVE ADDITIONAL REPORTS OR UPDATES FROM BOARD LIAISONS OR ANY OTHER Any other issue any director needs to bring up.

All right.

We have next on our agenda progress monitoring materials were added to today I think and It's not quite what I expected.

So I guess I don't know, directors, if you have all had a chance to review the materials.

I am inclined to...

It's sort of a description of progress monitoring, which progress monitoring is something that the board has directed.

So I don't know that we need to take the time to do that as a presentation.

But actually, I'm going to defer to Director Briggs, who is our...

is going to take the lead on progress monitoring sessions.

So if you have anything else to add or share, please do.

Evan Briggs

Yeah, I just wanted to read this.

It's just a couple sentences on effective goal monitoring from the Council for Great City Schools, because this is really the heart of student outcomes-focused governance, and this is why we're doing it.

So it says, goal monitoring is a conversation between the board and superintendent that provides boards the opportunity to evaluate the alignment between the community's vision for student outcomes the goals, and current student performance and growth, the reality.

While goals and reality may not match perfectly, it only becomes problematic when there is no evidence of student growth.

And even if students aren't yet growing and making progress, that's only catastrophic if the superintendent doesn't have sufficiently aggressive strategies in place for helping students make progress.

So that is why we progress monitor, and that is literally the heart of student outcomes focused governance.

So if we're not monitoring our goals, then I don't think we need to have the presentation.

Liza Rankin

Any board directors have any comments or concerns about letting the materials speak for themselves and people can read them and moving on?

GO AHEAD.

OKAY.

WELL, ACTUALLY, OKAY.

SO WE'RE NOT GOING TO DO, WELL, I'M JUST GOING TO ADD TO THAT THAT WE SET OUR JOB IS TO SET GOALS FOR THE SYSTEM BASED ON WHAT ARE THE PRIORITIES ARE OF OUR COMMUNITY.

THAT'S ONE OF THE MAIN RULES OF THE SCHOOL BOARD.

And there's metrics connected to that of how do we know if students are learning?

How do we know if what the district is providing is successful?

And so it's a monthly exercise to evaluate whether the things that are said are manifesting into reality for students.

And we're in the process now as a board of determining the goals and guardrails for the next strategic plan.

And we've just done intensive series of last spring engagements with different community stakeholder groups and representations from around the city.

INCLUDING THREE PUBLIC MEETINGS ON WHAT THE BIGGEST PRIORITIES ARE FOR THE SEATTLE COMMUNITY THAT WE'RE ELECTED TO REPRESENT, WHICH IS, AGAIN, ANYONE LIVING INSIDE THE BOUNDARIES OF THE SCHOOL DISTRICT, WHETHER OR NOT YOU HAVE KIDS IN THE DISTRICT, WORK FOR THE DISTRICT, WHATEVER THAT MAY BE, WE REALLY ARE REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ENTIRE COMMUNITY ABOUT WHAT WE EXPECT FOR KIDS.

PROGRESS MONITORING IS HOW WE EVALUATE WHETHER OR NOT WE'RE SEEING OUTCOMES THAT ARE ALIGNED WITH OUR EXPECTATIONS.

BUT IF YOU WANT TO READ MORE ABOUT IT, YOU CAN READ THE PRESENTATION.

SO LET'S SEE.

IT IS 4.40.

WE WILL NOT START PUBLIC TESTIMONY EARLIER THAN 5. BUT MICHELLE, YOU HAD A QUESTION?

OR EXCUSE ME, VICE PRESIDENT SERGIO.

Michelle Sarju

I DON'T NEED THE TITLE.

um so i have i have two things um it is yes it's it's difficult to sit up here and try to hear each other um when there's noise in the lobby and i am a hundred percent in support of the noise in the lobby i think it represents what it looks like to actually model a democratic way of engaging with one another.

What our kids need right now more than any time, we are seeing in our nation what it looks like when adults don't behave in a way that is a role model for our children.

So yes, is it hard to hear?

Absolutely.

And it is part of our democracy to have constructive democratic protest.

so that's what we have in the lobby and we welcome it and we'll just deal with not being able to hear each other so that's i just want the kids i'm talking to the kids this is what it looks like and if adults around you are not modeling proper behavior you need to feel free to call us out okay so that's thing number one thing number two is um One of the things that we need to be 100% committed to is access for people who have access needs.

And we have had the sign language community consistently ask for sign language interpretation at our meetings.

And it has not happened.

And so I'm on behalf of the board going to apologize that we have not been able to broker that and that we will broker it.

The seven of us will figure out how we, because I've seen people in the audience have their family members interpret.

Children should not be interpreting for their parents.

that's not why we exist.

And so on behalf of the community member that reached out to me asking why, I apologize that we haven't gotten it done and I'm making a public commitment on recording.

I'm sure the media is here and I just hope they quote me accurately.

I am making a public commitment that we are going to do our best to provide access to the people who deserve to participate in these meetings and should not be excluded because they can't hear.

So that's my commitment.

We don't want a hot mic here.

I might say something that'll get me in trouble with the FCC.

Liza Rankin

I haven't sworn yet in five years, but I almost did a couple weeks ago.

Thank you, Director Sarju.

And I want to add to that also that it's a problem here, and it's a problem in our classrooms that I don't know how else we, well progress monitoring is actually one of those things.

Are we making things accessible?

It is so unacceptable that we have students in our schools that don't have access to the learning that's taking place or that their parents can't participate in things like IEP meetings because they don't have access.

And yeah, so just to add to that, We're not playing around.

It's got to happen.

OK, so it is 444. Rather than let 15 minutes go by unused because we haven't yet reached public testimony time, I'm going to ask that we juggle the agenda a tiny bit.

And sorry, there's a lot of pages here.

Yes, we have a budget development preview that I have been told shouldn't be too extensively long.

So I would like to ask Dr. Buttleman to come to the podium.

I think the tables were set up for us to do those at the tables.

Let's just go for it here.

Ellie's passing out materials.

And if that's OK, is everybody cool with that adjustment to the agenda?

OK.

Dr. Bundleman, if you please.

Kurt Buttleman

Dr. Jones, you want to introduce, or you want me to just go for it?

Thank you.

I try to be cognizant of time.

I know lots of people are spending their precious time here tonight to make their voices heard.

I appreciate that.

And so I'll try to keep within the time constraint.

I want to thank directors Bragg and Yoon for volunteering your time.

I have two kids who recently graduated from Seattle Public Schools and I know it's a lot to be a student and to do something like this.

So thank you for stepping up to do that.

There's a presentation that goes with this.

My main objective tonight is just to introduce a resolution that's part of the board packet.

And this resolution will provide direction to the superintendent for a budget proposal that will be coming forward in January of 2025 for the 25-26 school year.

So I wanted to provide a little more context.

for the board on what that proposal will look like and how the well-resourced schools discussion may fit into that as that moves forward.

We can go to the next slide.

Just a quick recap of what the district has been doing the last few years related to this budget challenge.

Significant decreases in the budget the last few years, trying to be more conservative with the fiscal practices, ongoing reductions in the neighborhood of $90 million the last few years, and as Dr. Jones said earlier, The last two years has utilized the rainy day fund or savings account of the Seattle Public Schools and then last year borrowed some funding from its capital fund to supplement its operating fund so that it had a balanced budget for the school year that's just begun.

And so there's a lot of information.

I've seen a lot of questions in the discourse around the Seattle Public Schools recently.

There's a FAQ that's linked there.

It's part of the World Resource Schools.

Many of those questions are answered.

There's details in the budget book that's available for folks to review.

And if people are really into the budget and nerdy about that, There's a purple book, which gives a lot of detail on specific school funding challenges and how the schools are funded.

And so I just wanted to highlight those pieces of information for folks.

I know there's a lot of questions.

There's a lot of complex information out there.

Next slide, please.

You all have seen this before multiple times as board members.

This is the budget for the year that we're in.

And you'll see that the district is about two thirds funded by the state.

And about 16% or 15.6 is from the local levy.

The district is capped for what it can raise from the local levy.

And so that's just a point of information to keep in mind as these conversations progress.

And you'll see the $1.23 billion is the amount of resources the district has.

Next slide.

This is a way of looking at what the district is spending, and you'll see that it's $1.25 million there, and that's because the loan is not considered a resource.

It's a one-time resource that's gonna be paid back in the coming year, and so it doesn't technically count as a resource.

So it's not a mistake, it's just the way that the system requires this to be accounted for.

You'll see on this slide the majority of the large majority 60 percent and 12 percent is around teaching and teaching support at the school.

So that's what the business of Seattle Public Schools is teaching.

And so the large majority in the neighborhood of 75 percent is spent on direct teaching and teaching support at the schools.

And then the other way of looking at this, again, it's a teaching organization.

83% of the costs of Seattle Public Schools come in salaries and benefits of the people who work here.

And so any reductions that happen are going to impact salaries or benefits or numbers of employees at Seattle Public Schools is kind of the takeaway there.

Next slide.

Some of you have seen this before.

This is sort of the history of the deficits, and the red indicates the one-time solutions that were enacted.

You'll see that there's less and less of that in the few years that have happened since 23-24.

And then you'll see on the right there, the $94 million is the projection for what the deficit is that needs to be solved for the 25-26 year.

And there are minimal, if any, one-time solutions remaining.

There is no more opportunity for loan.

There is no more rainy day fund.

And so we're talking about ongoing solutions to help sustain the Seattle Public Schools and make it more stable going forward.

Next slide.

Questions rightly have come up around how $94 million would be closed by saving approximately $30 million with school consolidations, and it's just a part of the The solution here, so proposed school consolidations, if happening, would be a part of a solution.

And the remaining $64 million, as an estimate, would need to come from the legislature, referring back to that original slide, 63% of the funding come from the legislature.

It's a state-funded school system.

So more funding from the legislature to help bridge that gap.

Some potential one time savings from this year that's about to that just ended in August could be carried forward as a one time basis to bridge that gap temporarily and then changes in transportation staffing reductions again 83 percent of staffing costs here increasing class sizes which has happened last year into a small amount in the secondary schools.

Ratios went from 30 to 31 last year.

Has an impact on kids in those programs.

Program restructuring closures fees this year there's a voluntary athletic fee.

Make that mandatory in the future as a consideration and salary reductions are potential tools here.

This next page is just a more formal list of that with some estimates of what the ranges of savings might be from some of those types of issues.

The resolution is sort of directs the superintendent to consider these things in its current form.

We can go to the next slide.

Legislature, it's a very important year for the legislature, not only for Seattle Public Schools, but for many districts.

There are six districts now.

I think the last time we met on the budget, there were five districts in binding conditions in the state of Washington, now there are six.

So Seattle Public Schools is not alone in this current challenge.

So the district will be asking along with other school districts for increased and more appropriate funding for special education.

The operating costs of the school district and pupil transportation are the main asks for this coming legislative session.

And at the bottom there you can see last year the net impact of Seattle Public Schools in the legislative session was an increase of seven point six million dollars.

The year before there was a significant change in the multiplier for special ed funding and that resulted in twenty four million dollars which was a pretty high watermark in terms of legislative funding.

Liza Rankin

That was the largest increase in special education funding in state history.

It took a lot of cross state cross district advocacy.

Kurt Buttleman

And I know a lot of that is transpiring this year in anticipation of the session.

Next slide is a way of looking at some potential ways of getting to bridging that 94 million dollar gap and it's really difficult to see at least for me on the screen here.

Hope it's better for those watching on teams or at home.

But you'll see the blue is an estimate for what the school consolidations in each of the Options that have been presented on the website are $31 million in option A and $25.5 million in option B.

Both of these graphics anticipate changes in transportation, which could save around $11 million, going from two bell times to three bell times.

And then just to that high water mark, if the legislature came back with $25 million in legislative funding, that would...

be about $25 million and then the rest would have to come from other reductions within the district, that list that we just looked at earlier.

If there were no closures for the 25 26 year that blue segment has become purple and the largest again back to the original information the largest portion of spending is a school staffing and so school staffing would be changing in some ways in terms of how to balance the budget for the 25 26 and going forward.

There's a board policy, so for the main objective today is to introduce this resolution, new board policy from about a year ago, requires the superintendent to present a reduced educational program resolution, and this is new language for what the superintendent and his team had been doing previously, which was a fiscal stabilization plan resolution, which is in effect the board giving the superintendent direction to consider these things, don't consider these things, and come back to us with a plan by a date.

I'll get into a little more details on that in the next couple slides.

Again the list of potential solutions that are in the resolution that's in your packet are listed there and the resolution is drafted to direct the superintendent to prioritize those.

So it's just not here's a list of things that you should consider in the budget proposal but prioritize them which ones are furthest away from impacting student learning and the student experience.

Next slide.

There's a lot of moving parts this year at Seattle Public Schools around school consolidation legislative session some other things.

This resolution anticipates the superintendent bringing that back in January his proposal.

and anticipates the board voting on this resolution directing him to bring back his proposal in January in November.

All of those dates are subject to how the board manages the board agenda going forward.

And then the former board member who called this the chutes and ladders or the snake.

Here's a graphic of what the timeline looks in terms of the budget development process.

So we're again very at the beginning of this anticipating hopefully get some more direction over the course of the next few months and then it all culminates in a budget proposal in a book something like this in June of 2025. And I think I'm at the time.

And there's the next steps.

Any questions or clarifications?

Liza Rankin

I have a question, but do other directors have questions?

You want to go after me?

Okay.

Can somebody help me?

Because I don't know.

So is there a...

Okay, so we have the intermediate materials are the is a draft of the educational program Resolution yeah, and then what can you remind me again when oh?

December okay, so it's being introduced, but there's a significant question of time to because here's my biggest concern is that We have directed the superintendent to focus everything on the impact to children and how we do or don't meet or make progress on our goals.

And I don't see that anywhere.

I don't see how we can talk about like I understand that this is like the mechanics of the budget.

But I what I need to see and what the board has directed what we all need to see is how are we making these decisions based on improving outcomes for students and I don't see it.

So I don't know how to I mean I mean we're going to have hard decisions to make regardless but this is just completely absent of And when I said somebody help me because I feel like I've been saying this for like several years and I don't know how else to say it but a budget is not like the budget is whatever we say it is barring like required you know required allocations from the state and stuff or from the from federal government but but we We don't have to take the budget from last year and just up or down the line items.

What I'm not seeing is the refocusing and rethinking about how we use our resources, whether or not they're more limited than we want them to be, but how we use our resources to provide the best service and make the best decisions for children.

That's what we really need to see.

Director Begg.

Go for it.

This is our opportunity to ask questions so go for it.

SPEAKER_11

I mean, my one thing was going to be a very similar question.

Because this is so many just numbers.

This is so much just seeing the up or down of it.

But it wasn't considering the students.

Because this isn't just budget cuts and getting rid of a deficit.

Doesn't feel like it is just about lowering a number.

It's about lowering that number while still remembering these numbers affect the students in our day-to-day life.

Liza Rankin

Director Hersey.

SPEAKER_09

Can we go back to the slide with the pie chart that had no blue on it?

That had what?

No blue, that's it.

No blue.

No, yeah.

So what's rolling around in my head is that even if we were to go forth with plan A or B, we would still need to do some combination of everything that we see on this pie chart, correct?

Kurt Buttleman

Potentially, yes.

SPEAKER_09

What do you mean by potentially?

Kurt Buttleman

The legislature has a big say.

SPEAKER_09

Oh, OK.

Outstanding the legislature.

That makes sense.

So what that says to me, and I just want to confirm that, Per math that y'all have done, y'all are anticipating that by closing somewhere between 17, 21 schools, there will be a savings of 30 million immediately?

Kurt Buttleman

That's at 25 to 30 million.

SPEAKER_09

25 to 30?

Yeah.

Here's my question.

if we're still going to have to do some combination barring the legislature of all of these things anyway, do we have to have the same intensity of footprint of augmenting learning environments for students that we have proposed.

What is the decision between 21, 17?

Why could that number not be potentially less if it yields for less disruptive I would say transition for students and families, give folks more time to prepare.

And in some cases, barring whatever the legislature might do, and I just wanna say that we have received several calls from the legislators, especially in the Seattle delegation that are interested in helping.

how do we take all those things into account and not unnecessarily potentially disrupt a student's learning environment if we have more than option A or B available at our disposal?

And that could be a question for anybody who feels like to have a substantive answer, whether it be Superintendent, Mr. Buttleman.

Brent Jones

A couple things.

I'm in agreement that we always need to be focusing on student outcomes.

One of the challenges here is we want to be able to make sure that we provide essential services, special education, highly capable, multilingual services.

We want to continue to provide programs, dual language immersion, all those things where we think are essential to the learning experiences for our students.

We have to have resources to be able to do those.

And so as we think about moving from a number that's going to yield $30 million, $25 million, something less, it's just a matter of how do we precisely preserve our programs, preserve our services?

How do we not impact those in a negative way?

We can collaboratively, we can get there.

We can think about that.

It's going to be a daunting challenge with less resources.

But our bottom line is how do we preserve the services that are essential for students and those programs that are really essential for students to thrive.

And so we can figure that out as a collective.

It's just going to be a harder challenge.

SPEAKER_09

Yeah, and that makes perfect sense to me.

Just really quickly, I just remember having several conversations specifically with Fred Podesta about the fact that sitting right in those seats that it took us decades to get to this problem.

And to me, it seems challenging to think that we would expect the students who are in those buildings right now and the way that they are to shoulder the brunt of those decades of problems in this very short period of time, what I have also always been an advocate for is only financially, if it makes sense.

And this is just Brandon's headcanon.

But if there is the opportunity, to potentially do a more phased approach where it gives us an opportunity to do more community engagement, to learn from experience in some of our schools that we know structurally need, our students deserve to learn in better spaces.

It is surprising to me that we would not also be looking at a plan that gives us some runway to make sure that we do this well in a sense to where if we are closing 20 schools, 17 schools all at once, then we have no opportunity to do better as opposed to a situation to where we do maybe a lesser number, learn, replicate, learn, replicate, so that we are doing as little harm as possible Like, I spend a lot of time thinking about that.

And what I hear you saying, Superintendent Jones, is that there potentially could be a pathway forward for that.

And I just want to express before we get too far down this path that I am very interested in having a conversation about that.

So I'll leave it at that.

Liza Rankin

I would say that probably more relevant for the well-resourced, we're going to have another conversation about well-resourced schools.

So let's not, I mean, yeah.

I would also argue that the whole reason consolidation is being considered is not just a budget exercise.

It's because we have fewer students than we've had in a very long time.

And we have students right now in buildings that are not sufficiently staffed or resourced that we would be telling those students, because we don't want to disrupt you, you will continue to have a less than good education.

But that's why we need to see that the connection between, like, we can't make choices about the budget irrespective of what we're going to provide students.

And so, like...

And the plan of roll up or whatever, that could very well be.

But what we haven't seen that we need to see is how it will actually impact students, how we actually can address the inequities that we have.

SPEAKER_04

Go for it.

But President Rankin, I think one of the reasons why this is a relevant question to this topic is, Your point is that even with the school closures, even with the option A, you may still end up with staff reduction.

Right.

So we're in this cycle where even with the largest footprint approach, we may not be providing a school that has more resources because we actually may be providing schools that have fewer resources.

Right.

SPEAKER_09

And...

To dovetail with that, I think, and I know I say this a lot, but many things can be true at the same time, right?

Like, there is a real need and we have a commitment to our students to make sure that they are learning in the best physical spaces possible and No matter how you slice it, closing a school is vehemently disruptive.

And so if all I'm saying is making sure, and I know that this is a topic best served for later on in the presentation, because I'm really excited to hear from the folks who have come out tonight.

the essence of the question is just really assessing on are the two options that we have in front of us, regardless of if there's a plan or not, because the two issues are actually separate.

There needs to be a plan, and there also may need to be a third option.

So that's what I'm trying to get at.

Liza Rankin

Director Clark, and then I'll go to Director Topp, and then we will go to public testimony unless anyone else has something.

Director Clark.

SPEAKER_24

Okay, thank you for the time, and I'll try to be brief because I know there's a lot of people waiting to share with us tonight.

Could we go back to the slide that showed option A and option B and had the pie charts?

Okay, so when I'm looking at the blue section, school consolidations, the 31.5 million with option A and the 25.5 million with option B, are those like projected savings?

Is that a net savings or...

Like, have we factored in some of the potential costs to close schools into these numbers?

Or is this, yeah, that's my question.

Brent Jones

Dr. Bodleman, will you answer that question?

I believe it is a net savings.

Kurt Buttleman

Some of our costs of maintaining closed or differently used buildings going forward, yes.

SPEAKER_24

I'm sorry, could you repeat that?

I did not hear that.

Kurt Buttleman

Yes, it's a net estimated savings.

SPEAKER_24

Thank you.

Liza Rankin

Director Topp.

SPEAKER_30

Just on the slide, Dr. Fuddleman, the difference between the two general fund balances on the 21 closing the 17th?

Kurt Buttleman

It's just making up the difference in terms of the 25 is different than the 31 on the other.

SPEAKER_30

Please use your microphone.

I think and then so okay and so this doesn't also include any carry forward that there may be.

Kurt Buttleman

In the yellow slide slide up in the upper left that would potentially include whatever carry forward is yes.

SPEAKER_30

And then I guess my next question would be for Dr. Jones kind of along the lines of Brandon and sorry direct director Hersey and director Mizorahi is do you think do you feel like it is possible to close this budget with a smaller footprint of school closures.

Do you think you can you you would be able to bring a budget to the board that did that.

Brent Jones

Our money challenges are very real.

And it would be very difficult to find those resources.

But nothing's impossible.

And we could figure it out.

There would be more sacrifices in other areas.

But we could propose a scenario where it's possible.

It depends on how far we would go.

But yes.

Liza Rankin

All right, seeing no further questions, thank you, Dr. Bottoman.

We will hear from you again.

When's the next time on the snake, the chutes and ladders?

Kurt Buttleman

Next month on the levy conversation.

Liza Rankin

I need glasses.

Kurt Buttleman

October 9th.

Liza Rankin

Oh, okay.

So October 9th kind of sounds far away, but it's like three weeks from now.

All right.

Thank you.

So let's see.

So we have now reached the public testimony part of our agenda.

Sorry, I've got too many things here.

Okay.

Yes, okay.

Board procedure 1430BP provides rules for public testimony.

We ask that speakers are respectful of these rules.

I will summarize some parts of this procedure.

Testimony will be taken today from those individuals called for our public testimony list, and if applicable, it's applicable, the waiting list, which are included on today's agenda posting on the school board website.

Only those who are called by name should unmute their phones or step forward to the podium, and only one person should speak at a time.

Listed speakers may cede their time to another person when the listed speaker's name is called.

The total amount of time allowed will not exceed two minutes for the combined number of speakers.

Time will not be restarted after the new speaker begins, and the new speaker will not be called again later if they are on the testimony list or waiting list.

Those who do not wish to have time seated to them may decline and retain their place on the list This majority of the speaker's time should be spent on the topic.

They have indicated they are speaking about and Lastly the board I hate the sentence the board EXPECTS THE SAME STANDARD OF CIVILITY AS IT EXPECTS OF ITSELF.

AND AS BOARD PRESIDENT, I HAVE THE RIGHT TO AND WILL INTERRUPT ANY SPEAKER WHO FAILS TO OBSERVE THE STANDARD OF CIVILITY, WHICH, AS I ALWAYS SAY, I REALLY HATE DOING.

HOWEVER, AS I SAID, WE'VE GOT A LOT TO GET THROUGH, AND WE WANT TO GET TO BOARD BUSINESS And so I ask please that you keep your remarks to two minutes so that we can get through the list and hear from those who have signed up.

Staff will read off the testimony speakers.

SPEAKER_36

Thank you, President Rankin.

For those who are joining us remotely for testimony today, in a moment you will be able to unmute once your name is called on the conference line by pressing star six.

Please also make sure to unmute on your device.

We only had a couple of people sign up to provide remote testimony.

for our main testimony list.

So it might take me a moment to get through all these additional mics and sift out the people who are indeed, or callers, and sift out the people who are on the list.

When I call you up, please do reintroduce yourself.

Apologies in advance.

I will not get all of your name pronunciations correct.

First on today's testimony list is Liat Reif, followed by Janice White, and then Chris Jackins.

And if you are not in the room and you are providing testimony, I will come back to you if you're not able to get into the room by the time we move to the next speaker.

So do not worry.

SPEAKER_23

My name is Liat Raif and I'm here today to implore you to reconsider your proposal on school closures and elimination of option school programs.

I'm a seventh grader at Hamilton International Middle School and an alum of John Stanford International School where I studied in the Spanish track.

My parents are both Venezuelan immigrants and we live in Ballard.

In other words, outside of the geo zone for John Stanford International School.

Next to me are my friends and alums from JSIS whose families are also immigrants and heritage speakers.

We all live outside of the JSIS Geo Zone.

We all grew up in families with two working parents who raised us going out of their way looking for opportunities for us to maintain our language and culture.

For example, I can't tell you how many times my parents interrupted me at the dinner table to remind me to talk to them in Spanish.

When my grandparents visit or I visit them, I talk to them in Spanish and that is the best way to communicate and connect with them.

Without spending half our school day at JSI's learning and practicing Spanish, I don't think I would be able to have the connection I have with my family.

Maybe my parents could have paid for private lessons or something or maybe that would have been unaffordable to us.

I don't know.

I am a kid and don't fully understand all that is going on, but what I do understand is that your plan will make it harder for kids like us to maintain our culture, reducing our connection to our ancestors and inhibiting the communication with our relatives.

I understand that SPS needs money and is looking for opportunities to save, but there has to be a better way.

As kids, we look to adults to set an example of how to be inclusive and foster equity.

Please, as leaders of education in Seattle, set that example.

Don't close schools and eliminate our access to remain connected to our heritage.

And John Stanford International School students wrote cards for the SPS board as a way to show how much they love our school.

SPEAKER_36

The next speaker is Janice White.

After Janice White will be Chris Jackins and then Ben Gittenstein.

If any of our speakers do have handouts, you can leave them on the back table and we'll ensure that they are provided to the board.

Janice, it looks like you're unmuted on the conference line.

We should be able to hear you if you're unmuted on your device.

SPEAKER_25

Great.

I'm here.

Can you hear me?

I'm out of town and I wasn't sure of my connection.

SPEAKER_36

Yes, we can hear you.

SPEAKER_99

Great.

SPEAKER_25

Thank you.

My name is Janice White.

I'm the parent of three SPS graduates and president of a new nonprofit, All Youth Belong, with the mission of working to end systems and barriers that prevent disabled youth from fully participating in community life.

I was planning to testify today and ask you that ask that you remove policy 2190 from the consent agenda and not vote in favor of the proposed amendments.

Why?

Because the amendments originally removed language that specifically required the district to use processes that would not result in under identification of students of color, students who receive special education services, and students who are English language learners.

And our concern was that by adopting these amendments, you'd be removing policy language that enables families to advocate on behalf of their children and hold the district accountable if, for example, a student is told, as my autistic son was told for many years, that until their behavior improves, they're not entitled to access highly capable services.

On Monday, though, another parent, Cliff Meyer, and I sent President Rankin some suggested edits to Policy 2190. and i'm really thrilled and want to thank president rankin for adding back in some language to address our concerns i do want to say however that there is a continuing concern that's really not addressed in the policy and that's about how the services will be delivered to these particular groups of students in the new neighborhood model as just one example Families were previously told by the Advanced Learning Department that once the transition to the neighborhood model took place, they understood that there would need to be alternative placements or a cohort model for 2E twice exceptional students.

And for those who don't know the term, twice exceptional refers to students who have high cognitive abilities as well as learning disabilities.

And we've had no information forthcoming about how services in the neighborhood model will actually be delivered to these students who have very significant needs.

And so we hope that as staff develop any additional new procedures, and I know, thank President Rankin again for sending other suggestions we sent her on Monday to staff to consider in connection with development of the procedure.

ALSO, I DO WANT TO REMIND YOU OF THE TESTIMONY I GAVE BEFORE THE BOARD IN JULY.

WHEN I ASKED YOU TO MAKE SURE THAT WHEN THE DISTRICT ANNOUNCED ITS WELL RESOURCED SCHOOL PLAN.

I'M SO SORRY.

Liza Rankin

I HAVE TO CUT YOU OFF.

I'M SO SORRY.

THE TWO MINUTES HAVE BEEN EXHAUSTED.

BUT WE WOULD LOVE TO RECEIVE ANYTHING ELSE YOU HAVE TO SAY BY E-MAIL.

SPEAKER_36

The next speaker is Chris Jackins.

Chris will be followed by Ben Gittenstein and then Stephanie Gov-Yin.

SPEAKER_34

My name is Chris Jackins box 8 4 0 6 3 Seattle 9 8 1 2 4 on selecting schools for the proposed February 2025 capital levy.

Four points number one at the presentation on facility planning only two board directors attended in person.

Number two building mega schools is causing a massive loss of playground space.

Number three the district failed to make any mention of environmental review.

Number four the board plans to vote on which schools to put in the levy before the board votes on school closures.

Please vote no.

On school closures six points number one.

The district insists on using the self-serving term well-resourced schools.

George Orwell would be proud.

Number two, the district is pitting schools against each other.

Number three, the claimed savings from closing schools has shrunk from $75 million to $30 million.

Number four, but tens of millions of other dollars are available.

The district can use the interest on capital funds to cover operations costs per RCW 28A320320.

Number five, it is not just about money.

The district wants to close schools no matter what.

Number six, it is not just that the district has picked the wrong schools.

It is that the district has picked the wrong thing to do.

Please do not close schools.

There are lots of people on the testimony list today, including the waiting list.

Please allow everyone to testify.

Thank you very much.

SPEAKER_36

The next speaker is Ben Gittenstein, followed by Stephanie Govian, and then Candice Kasparian.

SPEAKER_12

Hi everybody, my name is Ben Gittenstein and I am a proud SPS parent, a former school board candidate, and a frustrated voter.

I'm here today to oppose both the renaming of HCC services to programs and school closures.

Sadly, I believe these two issues are deeply related.

The amendment before you does more than simply rename advanced learning offerings.

The new policy specifically removes the following line.

The school board recognizes consistent with the definition of basic education under state law, that students capable of performing at significantly advanced academic levels require specialized services in order to meet their basic educational needs.

In other words, with this amendment, we no longer believe advanced learning is our responsibility.

As a result of this change, what little advanced learning support will be offered inside of neighborhood schools will be done by already overburdened teachers with too little support.

This is by any definition arbitrary and capricious.

Vote no.

This move is not only a failure to meet the responsibility placed on us by the state, it is part of a disastrous strategy that future board members will spend decades repairing.

At the heart of that is school closures.

The heart of both school closure plans is a wholesale shift to uniformly sized, massive buildings.

This is founded on the misguided belief that you'll get more leverage by serving each of those kids at lower cost.

This approach is deeply flawed.

First and most importantly, our students are not widgets or cookie cutters, they are different and unique.

They are not to be mass produced at the lowest price.

Second, you are falling into the Rosh Hashanah trap.

You don't build the temple for High Holy Days, you build it for the folks that you know will be there on a regular Friday night.

The reality is, if we continue to end the services like HCC and dual language learning that bring families into our district, fewer kids will stay.

Don't do it.

Don't close schools.

Don't fall into the trap.

One last point.

The Northeast Regional Community Meeting on School Closures, which is home, by the way, to one of the largest Jewish communities in Seattle, is scheduled for Rosh Hashanah.

Please consider moving the date.

Liza Rankin

It is being rescheduled.

That was definitely brought to staff's attention.

SPEAKER_36

The next speaker is Stephanie Gov-Yin, followed by Candace Kasparian, and then Chao-Fo Tung.

SPEAKER_21

My name is Stephanie Govian.

I'm the parent of a second grader at Cascadia Elementary and two future SPS students.

Since the board approved a policy in 2021 to move highly capable services out of the cohort schools and back to the neighborhoods, the district has not provided parents with any comprehensive plan for making it happen.

Instead, we have watched the elimination of existing neighborhood advanced learning services and heard only whispers of pilot programs with no details, no outcomes data, no impact on students.

Parents are watching and this year Cascadia welcomed 300 new students despite not having an incoming first grade class.

Many are families who had previously chosen to stay in their neighborhood schools, looked at this backwards progress and gave the district's plan a vote of no confidence.

Tonight, amidst the chaos of a school closure plan to which this is integral, the district has not come to present the data on how this expands rather than reduces access but supposedly costs no money.

They have not come to show us how well-resourced schools will be implemented to ensure that all or even any students will be given opportunities for more challenging work when they need it.

Instead, they have come requesting an amendment to the policy that eliminates even the vaguest details of what this policy is and what this plan looks like.

Instead of showing how they will make it happen, they have shown us over the past three years that they cannot, and they have come to ask for no accountability.

I am asking you the board to reject the proposal and further to send it back to the district and demand public concrete plans with demonstrable feasibility and measurable outcomes that are student focused before any more changes are made to this program.

And I am asking you to learn this lesson that what they could not do to move one program to the whole district in the last three years, they cannot do for every program in the district in one year.

We need to be demanding the same concrete plans and measurable outcomes for every single program that would be disrupted by this closure plan.

Please reject this amendment and reject this closure plan.

Thank you.

Next is Candice Kasparian.

SPEAKER_45

Hi, my name is Candice Kazbarian and I am a proud option school parent.

Under these proposals, Thornton Creek and schools like it would become neighborhood schools.

Option schools like Thornton Creek who focus on social, emotional and expeditionary learning offer a choice for parents who want something a little different for their kids.

Expeditionary learning offers children a hands-on learning experience and deepens a child's wonder and engagement as these lessons move into the real world.

After one year in an agricultural and environment-based expedition, my son is passionate about where his food is grown, composting, and preserving the environment for future generations.

That's an important lesson that he probably wouldn't have gotten at another school.

My son is a highly sensitive boy.

I believe there are men in this room who could speak to what it's like growing up in a time when that was not acceptable in our society.

Thornton Creek is a place that specializes in supporting my son and students like him where they can safely have those feelings while also being given the tools to regulate as well as advocate for themselves and where their peers are helped to understand them.

This helps to set them up for success in life in a world that still doesn't fully embrace those who feel deeply.

Having a highly sensitive child, I don't want the generational trauma caused by being in classrooms where it's not accepted.

The goal in the past was to get people to know things and shove knowledge in our heads.

We had to memorize facts, which we often all forgot when the tests were over.

Now information's everywhere, and we must embrace learning to learn.

Going into the future, our children need to learn creativity and problem solving and innovation for the future.

Thornton Creek does just that.

Seattle Public Schools is a $1 billion organization, and you're looking to get rid of the research arm of that organization in Seattle, the birthplace of innovation.

No organization would ever think to eliminate its research and experimentation, especially an organization whose sole purpose is to educate the children of our city.

While the core of education should be consistent, we also need to allow for experimentation that can give us data and better our children's learning.

It's true that option schools serve a small portion of elementary learners, but the teachings can be extrapolated to the whole district.

We the people elect the school board look around.

We're saying our beliefs do not align with these plans and there is a desire in the city for alternative educating choices.

Homogenous learning models are not actually equitable.

Families know better than anyone what their individual children need to thrive in learning and taking away options from families means that only the wealthiest in the city get to meet their child's needs via private and charter schools.

Comes at our option schools, you'll see that they shouldn't be eliminated, they should be expanded.

Thank you for your time.

SPEAKER_36

The next speaker is Chaofeng Tang.

Chaofeng Tang.

Outside?

OK.

Does anybody know if she is on the way?

We will come back if she arrives after the next speaker.

Is Janelle Larda-Isabel in the room.

Oh here we go.

SPEAKER_01

Good afternoon.

My name is Chou Fo Tung a proud West Seattle High School parent and I cede my time to Renee Phelps.

SPEAKER_33

Hello, I am a West Seattle High School teacher where I teach social studies.

West Seattle High School is facing unique challenges compared to what you've already heard this evening.

Our high school is over-enrolled.

We were estimated to have 1,400 students.

We, on the first day of school, had 1,560.

29 out of 64 of our teaching staff have overages of over 150 students against our contractual limits.

And one of my colleagues has 187 students.

He is not alone, a significant number of our teachers have 170 students or more.

This is a history of inaccurate predictions from the school district and we have had three years of no additional FTE released after the October 1st dates.

This, as you might imagine, is having an incalculable effect on teachers.

Since we are overwhelmed, we are unable to practice the equitable teaching practices that we all know benefit our students, especially our students furthest from educational justice.

We are unable to offer retakes.

It makes inclusion more difficult for our IEP and MLL students.

Some classes are 42, and we have struggled to fit desks into them so that our students are not sitting on the floor.

We are unable to advise our clubs that we have supported and maintained for years because we are overwhelmed.

We are unable to attend sporting events, concerts, and IEP meetings.

We are not able to offer the electives that our students demand and deserve.

We are unable to educate them in the best way that we know how.

If we are providing well-resourced schools for our students, but we are unable to teach, are we even a school?

Thank you.

SPEAKER_36

The next speaker is Janelle Lardisbal.

After Janelle will be Sophia Conley and then Dustin Cole.

SPEAKER_17

Good evening, I yield my time to Ainsley Orway, the 12th grade student at West Seattle High School.

SPEAKER_10

As a senior at West Seattle High School who has aspirations to go to a top college and study in a STEM field, I wanted to take AP science classes this year to continue that track, but I wasn't able to because the lower grades are so packed and have to get their science and math classes that I wasn't able to take the classes I wanted.

And it's decreased the number of elective classes that I now have to be a TA for my math teacher to fill that time that I didn't want to have to be.

I wanted to take the AP science, but I wasn't able to.

So I think it would be beneficial to have more teachers to be able to teach our classes.

And it would help so much with the college application process for so many of our seniors to be able to take the classes they asked for and deserved.

Thank you.

SPEAKER_36

THE NEXT SPEAKER IS SOPHIA CONLEY.

AFTER SOPHIA CONLEY WILL BE DUSTIN COLE AND THEN CHRISTIE METHAY.

SPEAKER_39

I'M MAYLA ERICKSON.

SOPHIA WAS GOING TO SEAT HER TIME.

SPEAKER_36

WE ARE UNABLE TO DO SEATED TIME UNLESS THE SPEAKER IS HERE OR ONLINE.

Oh, Sophia, if you press star six, you should be able to unmute.

SPEAKER_39

Does this count as my two minutes?

SPEAKER_99

Yeah.

SPEAKER_43

Sorry, the directions told me star five.

This is Sophia.

I see my time, Amelia Erickson.

SPEAKER_38

I am a parent of two IEP students at TOPS, one of whom is in the DHH program.

I want to implore you to keep TOPS open.

TOPS K-8 is the only school in the entire district that offers a DHH program for students in elementary and middle school.

The benefits that these students get from being in a school with many other DHH peers and deaf staff cannot be replicated in neighborhood schools.

Even splitting our DHH program up into an elementary cohort at one school and a middle school cohort at another would have a huge negative impact on our DHH students and staff.

They need access to as many deaf people and people fluent in ASL as possible.

For many of these students, TOPS is the only place where they have access to multiple adults and peers who sign.

Imagine not being able to communicate with anyone in your community almost everywhere you go.

That is my daughter's experience of the world.

Having an interpreter present doesn't come close to the benefits of being a part of the TOPS community, even if we didn't have a major shortage of interpreters in Washington.

Our DHH population is also majority students of color, and many are from low income families.

Many, like my daughter, have multiple disabilities.

These are literally the students furthest from educational justice that SPS claims to care so deeply about.

Ignoring the needs of this vulnerable population is highly unethical and inequitable.

Equity and equality are not the same thing.

Our students are not all the same and making every school as similar as possible doesn't improve equity.

Equity is about meeting needs.

It is about prioritizing and lifting up the most vulnerable so that they have an equal chance of success in life.

The overall number of students impacted by closing and redrawing boundaries for this many schools is too high, and this plan does not increase equity for our most vulnerable students in the district.

Calling the bigger schools well-resourced schools doesn't magically make it true.

We can do better.

SPEAKER_36

The next speaker is Dustin Cole.

After Dustin will be Christy Mathey, and then Caitlin Murdock.

SPEAKER_46

Hello, my name is Dustin Cole, and I'm a special education teacher at Graham Hill Elementary, and I'm also on the board of Seattle Special Education, PTSA.

Our school provides inclusion for our students with significant disabilities.

We support our students in developing life skills and long-term friendships.

October is Disability History Month.

Our families have fought hard for these critical services, and they won't go back.

Our teachers who have spent their life advocating for these children won't go back.

The district has no plan for our disabled students furthest from educational justice and we refuse to go back.

I yield the rest of my time to this mother, Tavia McCullough.

SPEAKER_41

Hello.

So one of my main concerns are with the remaining schools, I feel like and from the looks of it in the information that the schools will still be underfunded, it's gonna cause a lot of confusion, a lot of instability, And it's going to drive our families away.

And that's my biggest concern.

There's only a few schools that offer focused and distinct program.

Actually, I don't even know any other school that has a distinct program.

So I'm just wondering what that look like for parents like mine, for my son, his friends in the distinct and focused programs.

And finally, what's the plan?

What is that going to look like?

the classes are already overpopulated so they're already over capacity so i just i'm here to advocate for my son because he's not able to and yeah thank you next is chris christie mathai and then caitlyn murdoch followed by michelle campbell

SPEAKER_28

I'm here to talk about Thornton Creek and expeditionary learning that's long been associated with social and emotional learning, learning to learn and not just memorize, and other now widely accepted educational standards.

Thornton Creek is continuing to innovate in ways big and small.

One small way is that we tried out having recess before lunch and found that kids were eating better.

They were fueled and they were focused.

Other bigger ways are that we have really innovative special ed programs and we've been teaching without screens for a long time, which we're now seeing in the news is associated with really big educational benefits.

Other good thing is that it's not costing Seattle Public Schools anything more.

We're close to average in terms of the cost for allocation per student, but we have a really high special education population, and we're getting results.

Our test scores are higher than the average Seattle Public Schools, and Washington State awarded us an award last June for outstanding achievement for the whole school for closing the opportunity gap for students' growth and academic achievement.

In my view, option schools are significantly more equitable than neighborhood schools.

You don't have to buy an expensive home to be able to go to a good school.

Anyone in the city of Seattle can come to Thornton Creek and that's reflected in our diversity.

Our racial makeup mirrors Seattle almost identically.

We also have 15% low income and 21% of our students are classified as disabled.

With schools being properly enrolled and taking away schools that were unsafe or under enrolled, Thornton Creek won't pose a threat to those schools in terms of enrollment and taking away resources.

And so we would encourage you to keep Thornton Creek as an option school.

I understand Seattle Public Schools wants to get everything into one school.

They want to have expeditionary learning and dual language and STEM all in one school.

But there just aren't enough hours in the day to do that.

And even if it could be done, it would take a really long time to implement.

And in the meantime, we should be keeping the award-winning schools like Thornton Creek that are currently meeting the standards of well-resourced schools.

My one last thing, because I know I'm out of time, is that if we do move forward, I would really encourage the district to allow students to stay where they are if their school remains open.

Thank you.

SPEAKER_36

Next is Caitlin Murdoch, followed by Michelle Campbell, and then Liz Berry.

SPEAKER_18

I'm Caitlin Murdock and I'll be sending you my full testimony on Friday via email.

I'm a proud SPS alum, former middle school teacher, and a parent to two SPS elementary students.

I have spent the majority of my professional career advocating for students furthest from educational justice.

I am deeply committed to the public school model.

If option schools are closed, I am concerned about the decline and eventual collapse of public education in Seattle.

Multiple studies show that when students move to a middle school, their academic achievement falls substantially compared to those who stay in a K-8 school.

98% of private schools use a K-8 model.

Those furthest from educational justice benefit most from the K-8 model.

Black students suffer larger drops in math during and following the transition to middle school, as do those already with lower levels of academic achievement.

As Eleanor, a sixth grader here today says, as a kid with a disability, I need a calm, quiet, and safe place to learn.

Pathfinder is amazing at creating an environment where students with different types of disabilities can thrive.

When done well, option schools provide more opportunity for diversity and equity than geographically limited neighborhood schools that de facto segregate due to the continued historic ramifications of housing discrimination in Seattle.

Keeping option schools will keep predictable and consistent operational systems, as there is nearly no decline in projected enrollment at option schools.

These programs are wanted in our communities.

Option schools serve 17% of our population and finish each year with waiting lists.

Option schools keep per-student funding in public education.

We should interpret the 22% of K-12 age students attending private school and the more than 1,200 students in South Seattle charter schools as a clear indication that families want choice, including low-income BIPOC families and families with disabilities.

Families are willing to leave when their only option is a neighborhood school that does not meet their needs.

Families are willing to stay when there are options that serve them.

Jovi, a seventh grader at Pathfinder says, we have built a community because we've known each other for years.

I had the opportunity to go to a private school that I turned down because in big schools you can get missed.

All students have the right to apply to option schools.

Equality and equity are not the same.

You propose a system of neighborhood schools based on equality while ignoring your imperative to provide multiple pathways to success and a meaningful variety of opportunities to all students.

We the community and your constituents ask that the school board examine all available options to close the budget deficit before closing schools that provide proven benefits and choice to all students in the district.

SPEAKER_36

Thank you.

The next speaker is Michelle Campbell.

After Michelle will be Liz Berry and then Nicole Salisbury.

Michelle, if you're online, you'll need to press start.

Oh, I think I can see you.

Unmute online.

We can hear you.

SPEAKER_32

Can you hear me?

SPEAKER_36

Yes, we can.

OK.

SPEAKER_32

hi my name is michelle campbell and i'm feeding my time to samantha fogg she's also on hello hello my name is samantha fogg co-president of seattle council ptsa speaking on behalf of our board with a mission to make every child's potential a reality from the first time school consolidation was mentioned we had been sharing with superintendent jones that our families need to be partners fully engaged in part of the process While dual capacity framework was not implemented, it was still our expectation that any plan presented would elevate and improve the experiences of our students, putting into practice the policies of our school board.

Our communities are tired of just being told they're cared about, thought about, and considered.

Performative language means nothing without implementation.

Policies must be put into practice.

Our students need a plan that honors the full range of our community of learners by providing an education that prepares each student for their plans for college career life.

We need an education that our children do not need to heal from.

We need a plan that centers student outcomes.

Staff has not even given us a website that is in a format that is accessible to all of our families.

Two years ago, we asked that whatever was brought forward by staff be done so in a timely manner.

It was our expectation that district staff, in trying to meet the challenge, would use all existing resources, including all district staff, principals, educators, working with our families, our partners, and our city.

We ask our volunteer advocates to connect with their full communities.

It is not too much to ask that our superintendent work with his full staff and that he values success over secrecy.

The concept of a plan that has been laid out on the web hub prioritizes facilities over families with an untenable timeline and no evidence of how the needs of our full range of learners will be supported.

We see none of the information we have shared with our superintendent reflected in anything other than platitudes.

To our school board, we honor and respect the vision and values put forward in your consistent and longstanding direction to center the outcomes of students.

We do not see this vision reflected in the actions of our district, and we are out of time.

Thank you.

SPEAKER_36

The next speaker is Liz Berry.

After Liz will be Nicole Salisbury, and then I will get to it next.

SPEAKER_00

Hello, I'm Liz Berry.

I'm a Seattle Council PTSA executive board member, a long-time SPS dual language teacher at Denny, and an SPS parent of two children at Concord.

The Well-Resourced Schools proposals mention expanding the dual language program, and I'm here to offer to help.

Expanding DL is a shared goal of many dual language educators and families.

It is a critical strategy for multilingual students especially.

There is increasing interest in DL as more and more bilingual preschools open across our city.

The amazing dual language educators across our district have built and sustained programs.

The incredible families that are part of our dual language communities want their children to continue on the pathway to biliteracy.

There are obstacles, but we can find solutions.

Like Highline, we could have one DL school in each region with specific enrollment policies that prioritize access for multilingual learners.

Like Bellevue, transportation could be provided from the neighborhood elementary schools to decrease costs.

Naming specific future DL schools now is critical so that staff and families can begin to prepare.

By sponsoring visas, we can recruit teachers from across the world.

OSPI wants to support districts in developing their dual language programs.

We can do this for our students.

Dual language programs are the epitome of equity, a core value of SPS.

They reach students from many different backgrounds, cultural experiences, Multilingual students continue to develop their home language skills, and non-multilingual students are immersed in a new culture and language.

For our multilingual heritage and native speakers, DL classes are a space where their needs, interests, and assets are at the forefront of the classroom.

By centering their experiences, every student in the room benefits, and our world benefits from more multiliterate citizens.

The dual language model can provide advanced learning opportunities for our HG students, IEP supports for our students in special education, and critical learning in the home languages of many of our multilingual students.

Our students deserve a clear path for their language acquisition journey, and let's help them find that place in our Seattle schools.

I also brought a small gift for you to share as one of the ways that dual language supports students' bi-literacy journey.

This is the 2024 bilingual poetry anthology, La Vida Latina, written by Denny Diehl eighth graders last year in collaboration with Jack Straw Cultural Center.

Thank you.

SPEAKER_36

Next is Nicole Salisbury, after Nicole is Adam Mollis, and then Matisse Berthiamu.

SPEAKER_35

I'm Nicole Salisbury.

I cede my time to Cecily Smith Stovall.

SPEAKER_14

Hello, I'm Cecily.

I come to you as a parent of five-year-old Alula at John Stanford, also the deputy managing director of Seattle Children's Theater, and a dual citizen and international DEI consultant.

I present myself at the intersection of parent advocate for Seattle youth and citizen, voicing my concerns about equity, access, and inclusion considerations in the school choice policy as it's currently laid out.

I can't help but question how the district is defining racist and equity, anti-racism and equity, and the risk appetite for the amount of harm and impact this shift will make.

I define equity not as systems to create equal processes, but instead a set of considerations, evaluations, decision-making, and processes that are created to elicit equal outcomes.

Outcomes like growth, community, good humans, cultural celebration, representation, and an authentic consideration of the needs of a very unique setting.

of young people.

As I currently see this issue, drawing staunch boundary lines and assuming that the same policies can apply to all of the schools and processes leaves a massive gap in equity, not only for students in dual language programs like mine, those who are heritage speakers, but also socioeconomic standing, students who have been more impacted by COVID closures, those who are currently behind the learning curve and will continue to experience shifts for their last years of elementary school, those in need of additional support, those who thrive in smaller spaces, learning opportunities, and those who are geographically and financially excluded from particular neighborhoods, neighborhoods like mine.

If we shift our measuring to equity instead of equality, I would love to see us recentering the needs of the children over our processes.

What percentage of students is it okay to interrupt?

What are the benefits and challenges of moving these students?

How are we prioritizing the anti-racist impact of these decisions?

In 2022, only 38% of homeowners in Seattle were not white.

The impact of school zoning has a direct correlation on our housing prices.

What is the cost to community that we are willing to bear?

Okay, thank you.

More data tells us that children who frequently change schools tend to share certain background characteristics that are markers of disadvantage.

Why are we putting our students in the same bucket?

Students who have low income status, racial ethnicity, ethnically diverse, inner city residents, single parent households, migrant status, speaking English as a second language, stressful life events like death and divorce, grade repetition, behavioral difficulties, all of that we are putting our students at risk of by these changes that we're proposing.

And lastly, I ask how are we determining the true cost of this?

What is the cost of tearing apart best friends?

What is the cost of dreams deferred, displaced, and destroyed?

What is the cost of removing heritage speakers from language programs?

What is the cost of further segregation of our city with no end in sight?

What is the cost of these essential services becoming essentially depleted services?

I don't know the cost, but I know my child shouldn't pay it.

Thank you.

SPEAKER_36

The next speaker is Adam Mollis.

After Adam will be Matisse Rothermue.

And then Chris Longhurst.

Is Adam in the room?

Do we have Adam?

Oh, Adam is remote.

SPEAKER_06

This is Adam Marlis.

I cede my time to sign off Bolden.

SPEAKER_36

Is the speaker who time was ceded to on the phone?

SPEAKER_06

I cede my time to Leslie Harris.

SPEAKER_17

Surprise.

As am I.

I was here in June, and I said I didn't want to be correct.

And this plan fails on any number of metrics.

And we're a data-driven district.

This fails.

It fails in communication.

It fails in respect.

IT FAILS IN THE RECOGNITION THAT OUR CHILDREN ARE NOT COOKIE CUTTER CHILDREN.

ALTERNATIVE EDUCATION HAS BROUGHT FORTH GOOD IDEAS THAT HAVE BEEN EXPANDED THROUGHOUT THE DISTRICT.

I WAS QUOTED IN THE PAPER, ARE SOME OF OUR ALTERNATIVE, I HATE THE WORD OPTION BECAUSE ALTERNATIVE IS MORE APPROPRIATE.

Didn't like it then, don't like it now.

Are they too white?

Yes, they are.

But his brother, Blanford, former school board director of renown said, what is your problem statement?

If it's too white, then fix it.

Do not kill it.

It is a shame and it is It is absolutely malpractice.

Thank you.

SPEAKER_36

The next speaker is Matisse Berthoum, followed by Chris Longhurst and then Laura Marie Rivera.

SPEAKER_31

Hello.

Can you hear me?

Is this Matisse?

This is Chyna Bolden.

Adam ceded his time to me and I unmuted.

SPEAKER_36

That time was already utilized by another speaker who time was ceded to them.

We are to Matisse, who I believe is at the podium.

No, she's online.

Oh, online.

Matisse, if you're able to unmute on the conference line, we should be able to hear you.

SPEAKER_10

Hello, this is the chief.

I'd like to feed my time to Corinne Bangaro.

SPEAKER_37

I'm Corinne Bangero.

I'm a product of Texas public schools.

While I was exceptional at memorizing and taking tests, my brother struggled and was labeled a bad, disruptive kid.

He was not a bad kid.

He was a neurodivergent and unsupported.

Both my sons now are twice exceptional, gifted in some areas, but also with learning disabilities.

Both boys have IEPs and receive specialty and special education services at Thornton Creek.

My oldest started at a traditional school and experienced total burnout in a single semester.

We are part of the 66% of IEP families that can't stay at our neighborhood school, but that's okay because we found our perfect fit in community in Thornton Creek where my sons are not viewed as problematic, but rather valued members of the community.

Equal is not equity in education.

Homogenized schools take away a child's ability to learn how they learn best.

Cooper does best by moving his body.

Unlike a traditional school, it's Thornton Creek's expeditionary learning style that couples with his extended resource team that powerfully allows Cooper to learn at his pace with the right level of support.

While our neighborhood school View Ridge is a perfect fit for Cooper's good friend, it follows a traditional model and does not offer the extended resource program.

It simply is not possible for Cooper to sit still for six hours with a single break.

But he contributes to and benefits from being in a general education classroom most of the day.

As one of the most educated and wealthy cities in America, it's unbelievable that we're having this conversation.

Are we really going to take away special education pathway schools?

Are we really going to make kids like my son fit standard models and believe that they're bad kids when they just simply can't?

Option schools break generational trauma, and Seattle can and should do better for my children than was done for my brother 30 years ago in Texas.

Option schools pool resources for students who, like my child, has been historically underserved.

It's mathematically impossible to replicate all of the specialized programs we currently have at all neighborhood schools.

It's an admirable goal, but not fiscally reality.

The budget already can't extend to hire the specialists needed in every school.

Our highest goal must be for schools to be a safe space for children to thrive in, to believe that they are good kids, and for them to have the confidence that they know how to learn.

I expect the school board to operate in good faith towards that goal.

Both options under SPS's current plan are a step in the wrong direction, a step away from equity for children like mine.

Options are equity in education and we cannot destroy the progress made.

Thank you.

SPEAKER_36

Next is Chris Longhurst followed by Laura Marie Rivera and then Sam Gutierrez.

Kurt Buttleman

Chris Longhurst, I see my time to Taryn Longhurst.

SPEAKER_02

Hi, first I want to call attention to the fact that there's no ASL interpreter tonight.

Despite the fact that TOPS K-8 deaf and hard of hearing program is on the agenda, this is just a symptom of the greater problem that the well-resourced school proposal would exacerbate.

Deaf and hard of hearing families and children are consistently overlooked.

My son is eight years old and hard of hearing.

He has finally found a home at TOPS.

We spent the last few years in our neighborhood school, a well-resourced 500-plus new building in a beautiful neighborhood school, and I spent eight months fighting to get out of it and come to TOPS.

And now I'm there and facing the reality that it might close, that I finally found a school for my son where he is not the only person with a hearing aid in his school, where he doesn't feel ostracized and othered and made fun of and bullied.

where he is now advocating for himself at school, where he asked to hook his hearing aids up to the microphone in the room on his own because other people in the classroom do, where he's not spending his entire day, almost his entire day, in the extended access program at his neighborhood school where he needed more special education services, but now he's at tops where he spends almost his entire day in the general education program because he has the right resources and the right teachers in the right building that is already prepared for these students.

We cannot close option schools that are already prepared for the right to serve these children.

ASL interpreter is not here tonight because it's difficult to get an ASL interpreter.

We already have a program in a school that is set up for that and it's taken time to get it that way.

So you can't pick up this program and just move it somewhere else.

66% of children don't have their services in their neighborhood school.

That's what it says on the well-resourced school proposal.

Who says we want them in our neighborhood school?

I want my kid in a centralized program with other deaf and hard of hearing kids.

I was at my neighborhood school.

So would love to tell you more about it if anyone would ever like to listen, because I've been in both.

Thank you.

SPEAKER_36

The next speaker is Laura Marie Rivera.

Laura Marie Rivera will be followed by Sam Gutierrez and then Lily Aiken.

SPEAKER_19

Good afternoon, my name is Laura Marie Rivera and I'm the parent of four SPS students, two recent grads and two in elementary school.

We've lived in Seattle for eight years now and one of the things that drew us to the city was Seattle Public Schools.

Unfortunately, SPS has been dismantling the best parts of the system and attempting to repackage them as excellence and well-resourced schools.

Let's be clear, the current proposals are neither.

They are simply a concept of a plan and we know from SPS past concept plans that they simply do not work.

SPS is a system with around 50,000 students and each of them is an individual.

They bring different strengths and challenges and hopes and dreams and it is absurd to treat them as if they're all the same.

One of the district goals is equity, but the current plan to make all of the schools equal is not the same thing.

Eliminating the most successful and sought after programs in the district and pretending that those services will then be offered in the neighborhood schools is a joke.

We need option schools.

K through eight, dual language immersion, highly capable, deaf and hard of hearing, medically fragile and neurodivergent affirming.

By removing these options, you are removing choice, widening the equity gap and losing more enrollment to other districts, charters and independent schools.

And the ableism abounds.

The list of closures disproportionately affects our students with disabilities who already have a lower graduation rate than other marginalized groups.

These are our students furthest from educational justice.

By destroying their communities and support systems, you're setting their education back years and will likely result in significant student civil rights violations.

And about accessibility, where are the interpreters?

ASL was specifically requested for the meeting and the well-resourced school plan was not communicated or translated in a clear and timely manner.

There have been no meaningful community engagement and now with only one meeting a month, families are left unheard.

Over 100 people signed up to testify and over 300 showed up here today.

When will you listen?

This concept of a plan is shameful and in no way, shape, or form does it result in a well-resourced school.

Thank you.

SPEAKER_36

The next speaker is Sam Gutierrez.

After Sam will be Lily Akin and then Sarah Polanco.

SPEAKER_22

Hi, I'm Gutierrez.

I'm a mom to two kiddos.

Making sure that your child is well adapted to their English environment without assimilating is a tricky balance to find.

But we were able to find such a balance at their dual language immersion option school.

A few years ago, I attended a meeting with SPS for the first time.

The topic was what makes our schools feel safe.

And our answer was having access to a school with a kind of diversity that makes my child be proud of speaking Spanish when she can help her monolingual peers.

I was grateful to be a part of a district that I thought understood and valued diversity.

But it made my family and me, a brown Mexican immigrant, a minority that you claim you want to pay attention to, feel unseen and unwelcome.

Frequently asked questions for your proposals say, dual Enbridge will be a neighborhood school model with potential to expand access to more schools, serving multilingual students where they live.

Great, that makes sense.

What is your plan for the rest of us that can only access these programs via option schools though?

You go on to say, option schools disproportionately serve students who have access to additional educational resources and they take resources away from neighborhood schools, so you're doing away with them.

I ask you, have you met every one of us that are serving these schools today?

Because what about us in the middle?

There are many of us who don't qualify for free on Rideau's lunch, but also cannot afford private school or tutors who are renters with a limited budget and happen to live in areas where their new cities are less concentrated.

Do our kids not matter?

This idea that members of specific communities, be it native or heritage speakers, deaf or hard of hearing, nor are diverse or medically fragile, should only be able to access the programs and services their children need if they live in an area with a high concentration of similar children is segregation.

Trust is earned, and you've been unsuccessful in your promise of serving kids in the highly capable program at every neighborhood school.

So I am more than a little skeptical of this new promise of offering DLI programs and services for neurodiverse and medical fragile kids and programs for highly capable kids and, and, and at every school during a time of budget issues, even if it's a wonderful vision.

If you truly care about equity, instead of restricting access based on residence, I ask that you work on increasing equitable access.

Make sure that a child that is monolingual or deaf or hard of hearing or medically fragile or neurodiverse has a spot at the school that can best serve them regardless of where they live.

Please retain the option school model until you can actually offer these programs more widely and equitably throughout the district.

Thank you.

SPEAKER_36

The next speaker is Lily Aiken.

After Lily will be Sarah Polanco and then Paul Bugala.

SPEAKER_29

Good afternoon.

First, I want to thank our board for your dedication and service, especially during these challenging times.

Thank you.

My name is Lily Eakin.

I'm a mother to three children in Seattle Public Schools, ranging from a senior in high school to a second grader.

I've served on PTA as a community leader for years, and my advocacy goes beyond the schools and reaches across country borders.

However, I am here today to talk about well-resourced schools.

The well-resourced school proposal has raised significant concerns in our district and our communities.

While we appreciate the information provided so far, many key details are still missing, which is causing confusion and anxiety.

Without clear communication, people are filling in the gaps with alarming and likely incorrect assumptions.

Communities need to know details of how you plan to offer access to the deaf and hard of hearing, special education, HCC pathways, and DLI programs, just to name a few.

Communities need to know how these two current proposals are centered around student outcomes because right now without key details it feels as though these proposals are centered around closing buildings and not around children's needs.

For example, Seattle Public Schools acknowledges the superpower of DLI language immersion and plans to expand DLI.

Even so, there are widespread fears that with options schools becoming neighborhood schools or DLI boundary lines changing, DLI will be eliminated in students who are native speakers who have attended DLI schools for several years and don't live in the neighborhood will be forced to return to their local schools.

This narrative fosters a sense of inequity and exclusion and will result in the complete collapse of your existing models.

Communities desperately need clarity and detailed information on the proposals as soon as possible to prevent these fears from taking root.

If the specifics are not available yet, I would like to offer you just a few suggestions.

Number one, retain special education programs in option schools transitioning to neighborhood schools.

Two, keep current students in their programs regardless of whether they live in the designated neighborhood area.

Three, for DLI programs, create and set aside as many spaces as possible for native speakers outside the neighborhood zone.

Dr. Jones, please take this pivotal moment to challenge yourself and your district staff to center your plans around accessibility, equity, and student outcomes.

Collaborate with communities who want to be partner in this process.

We are hopeful that with more transparency, we can work together to create a better future for all students in Seattle Public Schools.

Thank you for your time and consideration.

SPEAKER_36

Next is Sarah Polenko followed by Paul Bugala and then Nelson Conley.

SPEAKER_25

Hi there we can hear you Sarah.

SPEAKER_36

You can or can't we can't hear you?

Sarah could I think we should be able to hear you now.

SPEAKER_16

You can hear me.

OK, I'd like to speak my 10 to Zoe Bryant.

SPEAKER_03

Hello, my name is Zoe Bryant and I am a new freshman in West Seattle High School.

I'm speaking here today about an issue that arose at the start of the new school year.

I was very excited about this new school year as I wanted to start a new club for mock trials in law.

I did all my research into how to start a club in the school and made a plan of how to contact everyone including the YMCA for guidance in starting such a club.

But first I needed a classroom and a teacher.

But all of this planning came to a halt because of one huge problem.

Teachers can't run any clubs.

This is because of all the extra students they have been put with.

I spoke to a teacher on my first day, and they had to deny the use of their room because they have 28 students over what their max is.

This means they don't even have enough desks for all of them, and they aren't the only one.

This is concerning, as none of them can even run the clubs that they already created before this year.

This teacher I spoke to runs a model UN club, which I was thinking of joining as well as starting my own club, and now I can't do either.

I'm concerned about this, as now people cannot create clubs that could possibly help them get into good colleges and schools.

I am sure that I'm not the only student who wants to start a club or run one, either to learn more or to be able to get into good schools because of it.

What I'm requesting is a fix to this overpopulation of classes by possibly getting more teachers for subjects that are crowded.

without hassling the teachers with extra workloads.

Although I could run the club during lunch because of the shortened lunch time and the extra workload on these teachers, the teachers have to use their own lunch time to catch up on all the students just because there are too many.

This also halts not just me but others as well.

There are many clubs at West Seattle High School and now many cannot run which halts other students in joining and exploring their interests.

Many people come to clubs to learn, have a good time or to have good things on their college application, like I am doing.

And now they can't.

So as I just stated, this impacts not just me, but everybody in the school.

I call for a resolve to this issue so that clubs can continue, so that people can join and explore their interests, and be able to learn new items from such clubs.

Thank you for your time.

SPEAKER_36

The next speaker is Paul Begala, followed by Nelson Conley, and then Joe Mangan.

SPEAKER_07

Hi, my name is Paul Begala.

I'm a West Seattle High School student, or parent, rather.

And I see my time.

I cede my time to Holly Rickoff.

SPEAKER_16

Thank you.

Hi, West Seattle High School parent and PTSA president.

Listening to Zoe's testimony is heartbreaking to me and in the zone of a well-resourced school plan, we're feeling it on both ends of the spectrum.

West Seattle High is under-resourced While other communities are concerned about closures, we are in desperate need of FTEs.

We need support, staffing support.

The principal has a clear plan of how to allocate so that we can reduce class loads.

The teachers are at a breaking point.

The students are suffering mightily.

It cannot stand.

Preferably before October 1st.

when enrollment numbers are locked in.

We are asking for at least two full FTEs to be assigned and to align with our student enrollment.

The compounding factor of budget cuts over years has meant that our FTE allocations have not been met over the last easily two years, probably three.

So we are over just the two FTEs required, thank you.

SPEAKER_36

The next speaker is Nelson Conley.

After Nelson will be Joe Mangan.

And if they are both here, that will conclude testimony.

SPEAKER_06

Hi.

This is Nelson Conley.

I cede my time to Wes Osedna, who is in person.

SPEAKER_05

Hi there, everybody.

I'm a TOPS parent.

Sorry about that.

I have something to say about facilities and about how they interact with our kids' lives.

So TOPS has the DHH program.

There have been facility modifications to the building to support that.

It has a unique audio setup that's really key for a lot of the students and the staff.

I don't think it's gonna be that feasible to just disperse that across every building where we're going to have kids with DHH needs.

But above and beyond that, one of the other parents said something about the centralization of the program and how it creates kind of a community.

And I want to talk a little bit about my child.

He has an incredibly rare DNA repair disorder called xeroderma pigmentosum that causes him to get radiation burns from sunlight.

So the building has had UV blocking film applied on the entire structure to keep all of this light from getting in and just giving him burns and instant cancer.

He also has neurological symptoms, which is why he's been losing his hearing.

In second grade, we found out that he was starting to have hearing loss, which another thing means that I had to talk with my child about how he was going to go deaf.

That was not an easy conversation to have.

It has taken him, it took a year to get TOPS films that he could start going there after transferring from Lowell where he had been before.

And then it took him another two years in school at TOPS for the program there to do something for him that I could not do for him.

Being at TOPS helped him to adjust to this new normal, to accept this change in himself, and to be OK with it and to be able to move forward.

Because the steps that he takes to do that help his brain to develop and keep his auditory deterioration from spreading, the TOPS DHH community program may literally be extending his life.

I cannot tell you how important this is for us and for all the people that we've met there.

Please, please, please give that some consideration.

Thank you.

SPEAKER_36

The final speaker is Joe Mangin.

SPEAKER_47

Hi, all.

Thank you for the work you put into this plan.

It's never a fun conversation when school closures, cuts are on the topic.

So thank you.

I also want to say that I appreciate the transparency of the site and the interactive resources.

They're definitely helpful in getting informed.

I'm a new parent to SPS.

I have a kindergartener that started eight days ago.

It's going great.

Shout out to Mrs. Smith.

Thank you so much.

But this plan and this rollout are giving me pause.

As parents, we want to plant the future of our kids in the best garden possible.

This process is causing my wife and I to have conversations about which garden we think is best to grow our child's future in.

Is SPS the right patch?

Do we consider options outside of the public school system, like home school?

I love my kids, but I don't know if I'd let them homeschool that much.

I'm not homeschooling them with them.

That'd be tough.

And I also understand there's families out there that don't have the privilege of making a decision.

They're going to be stuck and locked into whatever plan you all decide.

So I'm thinking, is this turmoil an early warning sign of things to come?

If continued confidence in enrolling in SPS is a priority, I just want you to know what it feels like as a new parent.

I have concerns.

We all want the same thing, equitable, sustainable, challenging environments for a diverse set of students.

We all want diversified, stable gardens for our kids to flourish in.

The options that are being presented seem disproportionately chaotic to the benefit they're hoping to achieve.

Closing 21 schools to save $30 million when the shortfall is $100 million, that's a gap.

The balance between how these newly burdened schools would actually be well-resourced as another $70 million needs to be cut, That's a gap.

The impact analysis on the most vulnerable students in special education that depend on stability, that's a gap.

I have to believe that you members of the board wouldn't sign up for these unpaid positions unless you are passionate about creating positive, stable, flourishing environments for our children.

With what I've been able to digest, there seems to be a lot of chaos introduced in these solutions with benefits that still fall short of the stated need.

My ask is that we please take a breath, work together, answer the unanswered questions, and lean into a plan that the majority can understand and rally behind.

Thank you for your time.

SPEAKER_36

President Rankin, that was the 25th speaker to conclude testimony.

Thank you.

Liza Rankin

Do directors need a pause before we move into the other?

Do we need to take a short recess?

Well, we have the agenda left.

OK, we're going to take a five minute recess.

I'm just going to say.

We're going to take a five minute recess.

We will reconvene at 625. To the dais.

Folks in the audience, if you have conversations you want to continue, please take them into the lobby and then rejoin us.

Yes, yes, yes.

There was a spider.

A big spider suddenly ran across the thing.

SPEAKER_18

All right.

Liza Rankin

We are in the action, do we have, wait, sorry, do we have, yes.

We are in the action item section of our agenda, starting with the CONSENT AGENDA.

I HAVE A MOTION FOR THE CONSENT AGENDA, PLEASE.

Michelle Sarju

I MOVE FOR APPROVAL OF THE CONSENT AGENDA.

Liza Rankin

I SECOND.

DO DIRECTORS HAVE ANY QUESTIONS?

SPEAKER_30

I'M GOING TO REMOVE NUMBER 5 FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA.

Liza Rankin

OKAY.

ANY OTHER ITEMS OR QUESTIONS?

SPEAKER_99

NO.

Liza Rankin

OKAY.

SO I DON'T KNOW IF BOARD OFFICE STAFF HEARD THAT ITEM 5 IS BEING PULLED.

MAY I PLEASE OH, SORRY.

THE APPROVAL OF THE CONSENT AGENDA HAS BEEN MOVED BY DIRECTOR SARGIO, SECOND BY DIRECTOR BRiggs.

And now I would ask for a motion to approve the consent agenda as amended.

Michelle Sarju

I move for approval of the consent agenda as amended.

Liza Rankin

I second.

All those in favor of approval of the consent agenda as amended, please signify it by saying aye.

Aye.

Michelle Sarju

Aye.

Liza Rankin

Aye.

Aye.

Oh, I think that's passed unanimously.

Yeah, the motion has passed unanimously.

Sorry, I mixed up my pages.

Well, I'll go to Director Topp now for the item that was removed.

Yeah, I think that I gave staff- Wait, sorry, do we need to make a motion first and then talk about it?

Okay, may I please have a motion to consider and vote on the item that was pulled?

Michelle Sarju

Okay, point of clarification.

I moved for approval of the agenda, amended agenda, and we all voted on that.

Now I'm moving to discuss.

Liza Rankin

We pulled one item off the consent agenda, and so we have to make a motion for that by itself to consider.

Michelle Sarju

Okay, where am I reading?

I move that the school board amend Board Policy Number 2190, Highly Capable Services, and rename as Board Policy 2190, Highly Capable Program, as attached to the Board Action Report.

SPEAKER_99

And now do we vote?

Michelle Sarju

We need a second.

Liza Rankin

Director Briggs.

SPEAKER_30

right i second as the puller of the item yeah i i i think notified staff i was going to pull this item just because i had a quick question really or i i need help in understanding what the practical effects or on the ground impacts are of changing the name or changing the name from program to service from services to program thank you director sarju

Liza Rankin

Well, as the board sponsor, I will just say there are some notes that explain that it's in the bar on the item, and that also just that the, that this was introduced last month.

Yeah, and I see Dr. Strausky at the podium.

SPEAKER_48

Good evening, Mike Strosky, Assistant Superintendent of Academics.

So on the ground implications of this, really from the classroom, for parents, for students, for staff, for central office staff, for community, is just the consistency of language, aligning it.

And so what we're trying to do, and I think what this really gets to is, that the program piece of it will help us come back to the board on a consistent basis and when we're reporting back to you on a yearly basis beyond what's required for the RCW and the WAC to be speaking the same language or similar language and trying to get out the confusion about when we're talking about services versus programs and seeing that consistency be aligned in our language and reflected in board policy.

Liza Rankin

And I want to add to that that after it was introduced, discussions that I had with staff and the legal department looking at what it says in the state statute, program is something that's required, like a special education program.

No.

Do I have it backwards?

Sorry.

Whatever it says in the thing.

But it's the difference between what's required by the state and what a student actually receives in the classroom.

And so also the reason that some language that someone else mentioned is that it was a direct copy and paste from state law.

And the policy says that you must follow state law.

So it doesn't change our belief that students should have a required service.

It just doesn't duplicate state language.

SPEAKER_48

Yeah it's the duplication and then also in the bar on the bottom of page three very succinctly calls it out at the very end it says the models are referred to Seattle Public Schools highly capable program with the ways in which students are served referred to as services and so it's trying to I think this bar clearly lays out that we're not losing anything.

What we're trying to gain is clarification for the public and for our students and staff.

Liza Rankin

And the other thing is that I just have to say is that it was not brought forward by staff.

It was brought forward by me because staff hadn't brought it forward in over a year since asking to align it with state law.

And the requirements in there are that we receive an annual report in alignment with what is in state law about what the services are for students in Seattle Public Schools.

And I'm not sure if I should, well, I'll direct this to the board's employee.

The commitment that I heard was 30 to 45 days to receive an actual plan.

Is that still something we can expect?

SPEAKER_48

I can speak to that.

Yes, we've had a couple of personnel issues where we have key people missing in key leadership positions, but we are going to deliver on that timeline that you and Dr. Jones agreed upon.

We will have something for you.

Liza Rankin

Great.

Thank you.

Do directors have other questions?

Yeah.

SPEAKER_04

So I just, before we vote on this, I want to understand, is this more of a semantic change or like a substantive change?

Let's put it a different way.

Is anything going to change tomorrow if we vote for this?

SPEAKER_48

No, it's the semantics being aligned with the RCW and WAC.

Michelle Sarju

OK.

Vice President Sarju.

I think I just heard you say you're going to deliver something.

And I'm not, did you say what the something was?

SPEAKER_48

Yes, the highly capable plan that Dr. Jones agreed to with President Rankin is what will be given to Dr. Jones to give to the board.

Michelle Sarju

Thank you.

There was a lot said, so I needed to clarify.

SPEAKER_48

No, I appreciate it.

SPEAKER_30

Can I put in a request for, I guess, when we have that plan, that we have a work session to discuss it and look at it and learn from it?

Liza Rankin

We do have in the working on the well I'll say TBD but we had already considered setting aside time for academic programs and services generally and that would be included in that.

SPEAKER_48

Yes.

President Rankin exactly what you spoke about where we're already planning and talking about special education multilingual services and highly capable of doing a work session with the board.

That will be a part of it.

Liza Rankin

Thank you, I have no more questions.

Any other questions?

All right, the roll call, please.

Director Hersey.

Thank you, Director Strausky.

SPEAKER_09

Aye.

SPEAKER_36

Director Mizrahi.

SPEAKER_09

Aye.

SPEAKER_36

Vice President Sarju.

Aye.

Director Topp.

Aye.

Director Briggs.

Aye.

Director Clark.

Abstain.

President Rankin?

Aye.

This motion has passed with a vote of six yes and one abstention.

Liza Rankin

Thank you.

Moving on to our, oh, we don't have an action item.

We have introduction items.

We did, wait, we did the budget, okay, so you mentioned in the budget session the educational program resolution, but it was not yet introduced and we're introducing that now, is that correct?

All right, so lost my place again.

INTRODUCTION ITEM ONE IS APPROVAL OF BOARD RESOLUTION 2024-25-9, EDUCATIONAL PROGRAM REDUCTION PER BOARD POLICY 0060. APPROVAL OF THIS ITEM WOULD ADOPT BOARD RESOLUTION NUMBER 2425-9, EDUCATIONAL PROGRAM REDUCTION AS ATTACHED TO THIS BOARD ACTION REPORT.

BY WHOM IS THIS BEING INTRODUCED?

Kurt Buttleman

I thought we did this earlier.

This is the introduction of the resolution that we presented on earlier in the meeting.

Liza Rankin

Well, we didn't introduce the actual resolution.

We introduced the introduction of the resolution.

I mean, it was mentioned, but we didn't actually introduce it as an item.

Kurt Buttleman

So I'm Dr. Kurt Puddleman, Assistant Superintendent for Finance, and this is the resolution directing the superintendent to present a reduced educational program resolution plan in January of 2025 to balance the budget for 25-26.

Sorry.

Liza Rankin

Do we have the item to look at?

That's what I was just asking The resolution And Dr. Buttleman, if you don't mind, could you just kind of overview it for us and point out anything that might not have been in that packet that we went through?

Is there anything demonstrably different?

I mean, we all have plenty of time to do our work and read it and study it and recommend changes.

Kurt Buttleman

I think the most substantive part of...

You could scroll to the result yes there.

The list of solutions that the superintendent would be directed to contemplate in presenting that budget proposal.

That's number two.

And I think number four is pertinent which contemplates if there are no school consolidations or other large scale reductions moving forward by the board that there'd be a proposal around that.

And number five is to ensure that the proposals caused by this resolution take student outcomes first in mind.

Liza Rankin

Do we need further clarification from the board about what that actually means.

What expectations we may have based on that direction.

Kurt Buttleman

I THINK IF THERE'S THINGS THAT YOU THINK NEED TO BE CLARIFIED, THAT WOULD BE GREAT TO HEAR THOSE.

Liza Rankin

DOES ANYONE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT THIS NOW?

SPEAKER_30

ARE WE APPROVING THIS?

Liza Rankin

NO.

SPEAKER_30

NOT TONIGHT.

Liza Rankin

DECEMBER.

SPEAKER_30

THANK YOU.

Liza Rankin

IT'S BEING INTRODUCED EARLY, WHICH WE APPRECIATE.

THANK YOU.

All right.

Sounds like we're all going to study it and come back.

Great.

Kurt Buttleman

Sorry for the misunderstanding.

Liza Rankin

No, that's OK.

Thank you.

OK, we did the budget development preview.

OK, I believe we're moving on to the tables for an update on well-resourced schools.

Please take your microphone with you.

SPEAKER_99

Amen.

SPEAKER_00

Okay.

Liza Rankin

So everybody else's mic, we should only, one mic at a time.

All right, Dr. Jones.

Brent Jones

Good evening, once again, board members.

Thank you for this opportunity to share an update on Well-Resourced Schools.

I'm joined by Well-Resourced Schools Officer Dr. Marnie Campbell, Chief Operations Officer Fred Podesta, and Chief of Staff Bev Redmond.

This team has worked diligently and put a tremendous amount of effort into getting us to this point, and I want to thank them for their expertise throughout this process.

I also want to reiterate and acknowledge that this is not an easy conversation.

We all care deeply about our schools across our city because we value and treasure the schools in our community.

This is a gift that I personally benefited from and I want to extend it across the city.

So our goal for today's update on well-resourced schools is to ground us in where we've been and provide an update of where we are and where we're going with this initiative.

As we all agree, our primary responsibility as a school system is to create the conditions for academic success for students.

We risk compromising this goal when we cannot fully staff our kindergarten through fifth grade fundamental starting place for our scholars.

One choice in front of us is focusing on fewer schools, spending less on operating buildings, and in order to make sure that we're providing stable and consistent support to our students, these things are necessary as we go forward.

So today, I'm here to talk about how we might pursue that choice.

As I said earlier, we are in a listening phase.

As I prepare to make preliminary recommendations, I'm listening to the board, our community, our staff, and about how we can balance our interest in carving this path forward.

So this is not a done deal, and we're trying to make sure that we're focused on listening and actively listening and responding accordingly.

And so what we'll cover today is the big picture, like I mentioned, where we've been and vision, where we are, information and option sharing, and then the next steps of where we're going.

Next slide, please.

Well-resourced schools is a critical effort, but it does not exist in isolation.

This fits into the bigger picture of what we're seeking to do for our entire system.

As we look at fiscal stabilization, as Dr. Buttleman mentioned, we're working hard to balance our budget and overcome a $94 million deficit.

We're also designing Seattle Public Schools for long-term sustainability.

And as we look at part of our year zero work plan, we'll dive more into that in a minute, but that's around also stabilization.

We're trying to make sure that we're working in a targeted and strategic direction.

Also critical to our year zero efforts is moving in the targeted and strategic direction that we discussed in the last presentation by Dr. Bottleman.

So to reiterate, we're working with the board to set goals and guardrails based on our district vision and values of the community.

Then we're pursuing those with a set of evidence-based strategies and investments over the next five years.

And that's the strategic planning process.

Next slide, please.

So let's revisit the year zero vision that we've been discussing.

Year zero, as I mentioned, is about sustainability.

This is about creating stable structures upon which we can execute our next strategic plan and build for our future.

And we can see in the operation arm of this Pentagon, well-resourced schools is one part of our quest as a sustainable school system.

It's necessary but far from sufficient to achieve the stability that our system needs and deserves.

Next slide, please.

We are here not to reiterate the rationale for why school consolidation and transition to a system of well-resourced schools are necessary, but I do want to remind us that the plan grows out of our opportunity to address a series of compounding challenges that our school system is facing.

Steadily declining enrollment with 29 of our elementary schools serving fewer than 300 students.

As I mentioned, a $94 million budget deficit that well-resourced schools can ideally help us to close.

And then we have the inequitable resources that result in uneven access to staffing, programs, services, and academic offerings.

Next slide, please.

So as we address these challenges by transitioning to a system of well-resourced schools, our goal is to create conditions for better academic outcomes through creating systems where schools are home to stable budgets and staffing, consistency in programs and services, multiple teachers per grade level, allowing for the type of collaboration that makes teaching effective, art, music, PE, and more.

And we want to ground all of this in schools that are intimately connected to our community.

We know this is a big challenge to do this.

We know that there's a lot of opportunities here, lots of ways that we can connect, but we have to be diligent about our efforts to make sure that all these things are working on behalf of student outcomes.

So if we go to the next slide, we didn't come up with this vision on our own.

We engaged with community over the last year.

We listened deeply to their vision of a well-resourced school, and that became the basis how we defined a well-resourced school.

And as you can see from this graphic that we've looked at before, multiple teachers per grade level, full-time support staff, inclusive learning, SEL supports, art, music, and PE opportunities.

stable operational budgets, safe, healthy, beautiful schools and grounds and connections to the community.

So this is what we interpreted from what the community told us and it's the vision for a well-resourced school.

Next slide, please.

So this slide really talks about the means to the end.

And if you look across the bottom of this slide, you see the tools that we're using are trying to create fiscal stabilization.

We're doing racial equity analysis.

We're looking at our special education programming.

We're looking at our capacity of our buildings and our demographic analysis, building conditions, learning environment, and regional distribution.

All this is going into our planning for our next strategic plan.

So see our focus across the top and what we're trying to achieve at the end of this.

Next slide, please.

So I'm going to turn it over to Dr. Campbell here.

But this is a timeline of where we are.

To walk through this, we identified the challenges in terms of the significant budget gap related to our portfolio of schools.

This opportunity emerged with us looking at the vision for well-resourced schools.

We started to meet with community and gather a well-resourced school definition.

Then we had the board charge to develop models to be responsive to this.

We've had community meetings and then we've developed models with the racial and educational equity and excellence focus.

And then we've recently launched our, we have our web hub launched.

And today we're doing an update and we'll be moving shortly into regional gatherings, affinity group gatherings to gain more information from community and perspective.

I'll present ultimately a superintendent's recommendation.

From that, we have to do public review and hearings and then the superintendent will bring a final recommendation for board action.

So this is the timeline and we're at this point today, we're in September and we're moving forward.

So Dr. Campbell, I want you to start here and talk about where we are and do the balance of the presentation, thank you.

SPEAKER_20

Thank you, thank you, Superintendent Jones, and board directors, thank you so much.

I appreciate your time and your attention and your commitment to all of this.

If we can go to the next slide, I wanna just reiterate, actually, if you can go back for one minute, those first two segments, the challenge identified and the opportunity emerging, I think that we always have to be attentive to these moments where we see a challenge and then see within that challenge what is possible and widening our gaze a little bit and seeing what we can accomplish.

And I think you all as board directors have really opened up that conversation for us to really come to what we see as our vision for Seattle Public Schools.

I've been a school leader for a long time, a parent in Seattle Public Schools.

I'm deeply involved in the community.

And so, first of all, grounding everything that we do in student outcomes is absolutely imperative.

One of the things we've been able to do, and we can go to the next slide, is on the team that has been working.

Yeah, it's weirdly displaying.

Most of us that have been working on this well-resourced schools, this final iteration that you now have are...

Sorry.

Hello, Georgia Clark.

SPEAKER_24

Hi, everyone.

I'm eating my dinner.

SPEAKER_06

That's good.

SPEAKER_20

Most of us are educators, have worked in schools, and I think that makes a big difference.

I've seen a lot of comments that have said that it's like we're looking at spreadsheets and numbers.

I want to assure you, every one of us has visited these schools.

We've visited with teachers.

We've visited with school leaders.

We've been school leaders that have confronted these issues, and we have very much brought that ethos to this work.

So we took a big leap last week on September 11th in launching our web hub.

And we aimed for more information rather than less.

So I want to just applaud everybody.

It has been an enormous, I believe, a resource to our community.

with our scenarios.

These two scenarios were developed with some parameters that were requested in a variety of ways by our instructional staff, asking us to look at option schools, some of the demographics, some of the impacts, some of the role that option schools have, some of our programming like dual language immersion.

So those scenarios were developed with some of those parameters.

and then looking at some logistics around what our suite or what our system of schools looks like.

Our amazing team in enrollment planning actually created, that was an in-house created interactive map.

I wanna just speak the name of Tim Dooland, who's our GIS specialist, who did a lot of work in getting that up and running.

We believe that in providing that opportunity for families to actually look at what could come next, we were concerned, is it going to look like it's absolutely going to happen next?

But I said, you know, any parent, guardian, grandma, auntie who sees the name of a school closing, their first question is going to be, where can my kid go?

And we didn't want that to be a blank space.

We wanted that to be something you could look at.

The analysis document that you have has school by school data, every single one of our schools that serves students K through five that's elementary and K schools.

It has our demographic analyses of plan A and plan B.

It has boundary maps.

Again, some people have said, why didn't you engage us in the boundary map planning?

Well, we couldn't have done that without telling you which schools we were looking at.

So we have not wanted to be sort of hidden about the process, but we also wanted to be sure that we were releasing information in a way that was respectful to everyone's roles in what we're doing and that we wanted our families to be able to have access as soon as possible.

But we used some tried and true sort of principles for boundary maps which are basically looking at geographical and roadway barriers and also just looking at boundaries that would create the right number of students.

You can also see maps and methods for regional analysis.

We are dynamically updating frequently asked questions so I will hopefully get pretty quickly to those so that some of them do speak to some of the questions that were raised tonight.

I want to be clear, the numbers that we've used to make our decisions are the numbers that the public now has access to.

There's nothing hidden.

I also want to be clear that those numbers are based on our best projections of enrollment and that they're based in most cases on residents, so current residents.

There are some variables to that, but that was in consulting with a number of other districts the best proxy we could use to anticipate what these schools could and would look like.

SO WE'LL CONTINUE TO UPDATE OUR RESPONSES IN OUR FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS.

WE RECEIVE THEM THROUGH LET'S TALK AND WE RESPOND TO THOSE.

SO AGAIN, YOU'RE FAMILIAR, I BELIEVE, PROPOSED OPTION A. AGAIN, THIS IS JUST A MODEL FOR CONSIDERATION.

21 CLOSING SCHOOLS, 52 WELL-RESOURCED SCHOOLS.

OPTION B AND NO OPTION OR K-8 SCHOOLS.

OPTION B HAS 56 SCHOOLS AND 17 CLOSING.

THAT INCLUDES A K-8 OPTION SCHOOL IN EVERY REGION.

WE REFLECT HERE THAT THIS IS REFLECTIVE OF OUR COMMUNITY'S INPUT.

THAT WHEN WE WENT OUT IN THE There was some sort of sense that option schools or K-8 schools might be under consideration.

We heard that concern.

We also heard from some of our families who said, actually, when we have multiple kids in middle and elementary school, it actually is important to our family ecosystem to be able to have a K-8 school where the older kids can take care of the younger kids, bring them home from school.

So we really wanted to be responsive and reflective and incorporate that as well.

The Well-Resourced Schools Options webpage has received, I just wanted, 48,000 views within the first 48 hours.

48,000 views within the first 48 hours.

Our interactive web map received 50,000 interactions within the first day.

So that tells us that what we're providing is being utilized and seen and valued by our community.

So just to share that those are the things that we made public.

This is just a little bit of a spotlight.

Yeah, 58,000 actually in the first two days.

We saw a very option, we had 30,000 views.

So again, we're looking for that input that tells us that we're having, that these tools are meeting, or at least their families, people in the community are engaging with it.

And I want to thank our community for taking time to make meaning out of our proposals, to take that time to look at it, to think about it.

It's complex.

There's a lot to think about it, but I also know that, again, as a parent, I would have gone straight to, where's my kid going to go?

What's changing?

Is that friend going to be in that school?

Fully recognize that that's also the way we might interact with this information.

To the next slide, just our Let's Talk platform.

We're monitoring that every single day.

This is just a snapshot as of Friday, yeah, September the 13th.

We see some key topic areas, boundaries and assignments was the largest one.

Enrollment projections was one, K-8 school, option schools, and dual language immersion.

You can kind of see the scale of those questions and interactions.

So again, it's really important for us to know what our community, rather, the questions that they have and how they're engaging with us.

Any questions about this before I move on?

SPEAKER_99

No microphone.

Liza Rankin

Director Hersey.

SPEAKER_09

Thank you.

Okay, cool.

So before I get started, there's just a characterization that I'm struggling with because when I talk to parents, the first thing that they ask me is not necessarily where is their kid going to go as opposed to why is my school closing?

So, like, that's one.

And I have a very, I have two very simple questions.

The first one, and I wrote them down.

So can you tell me the potential difference in impact on our third grade literacy goal between option A and option B?

SPEAKER_20

The potential impact on the third.

I want to make sure I'm responding to that.

Liza Rankin

I'm going to wait.

Sorry.

And I hate to do this because we get such negative feedback so much that it is nice to hear applause.

But I am going to ask that folks please silently observe because it does have the impact on influencing what directors feel comfortable saying and asking.

So if you could please, even though I don't really like asking that, but I want to make sure that directors are making comments BASED ON WHAT WE NEED TO HEAR, NOT BASED ON, OOH, THEY CLAPPED FOR THAT.

SPEAKER_20

THANK YOU.

THANK YOU.

I THINK IT IS THE QUESTION.

AND I WOULD ALSO ADD THAT, AND I'VE BEEN MEETING REGULARLY BOTH WITH OUR DIRECTORS OF EDUCATION K-5 AND SECONDARY AS WELL TO TALK ABOUT THIS VERY THING, BECAUSE NONE OF THIS MATTERS IF WE DON'T HAVE AN ALIGNED PLAN FOR HOW THIS WILL ACTUALLY IMPACT LEARNING.

SO I WOULD ALSO HAVE US THINK ABOUT THAT GRADUATING COLLEGE AND CAREER READY HAVING TAKEN ADVANCED COURSES, SO WHERE THAT THIRD GRADE TAKES US.

SO OUR WORKING BELIEF THAT'S BASED ON RESEARCH AND EVIDENCE IS THAT IN HAVING MULTIPLE TEACHERS PER GRADE LEVEL, THERE ARE MORE OPPORTUNITIES.

for differentiation and extension which can sound like random words but really means teachers can be matched to kids for one thing that where they can meet their needs.

It means that we have more opportunities for inclusion.

We have more opportunities for staff and teachers to actually collaborate and work on their curriculum and get stronger.

So option B, I would say we have fewer schools where we can say we have multiple teachers per grade level.

Option A is the one that gets us closer to meeting those things that we feel like are components of well-resourced schools.

Both are possible.

We will absolutely do it.

But option B, people have talked about we're not creating cookie cutter models.

My metaphor is some of our schools only have butter and the other one only has flour.

When things get too spread out, we can't even make the cookies.

We don't even have all that we need.

We'll do it.

So option A has more promising if we think that having multiple teachers per grade level that creates and supports the professional efficacy of our staff gets us closer to that.

SPEAKER_09

Totally get that.

And I think that that is headed in the direction of what people are looking for and what the board is expecting.

in terms of like, because here's my thing.

As an educator, I have to deal with specifics.

And this goes on both sides.

This is coming from the board.

This is coming from the answers that we receive.

This is coming from the questions that we receive from the public.

it really does kind of diminish the quality of the conversation.

If we focus on the idea of where's a plan, where's a plan, where's a plan, if we are not really getting into the specifics of, okay, when you say plan, what do you mean?

What I mean is that we have three very clear goals.

And especially given the fact that only one of those goals is inextricably linked to elementary school, in my opinion, there should be some real clarity linked to all of the things that y'all have brought forward to us within progress monitoring into how either plan A or B is going to get us closer to those student outcomes.

The other piece of that is understanding what is the differential in impact between the plans that you bring forward.

Like I said, I think you're headed in the right direction.

But what I am really looking for in order to have confidence in giving my vote to either of these plans or something else that might come later is that level of specificity.

The other piece that I really want to bring home is can you say whether or not schools that are currently on the list are doing a better job of reaching our goals in third grade literacy as opposed to the ones that are not?

SPEAKER_20

That's a really great question and one we considered a lot.

One thing that we do know is that when districts have used that as a deciding factor, that is academic outcomes, to close schools in other districts, that has not led to good outcomes in terms of anti-racism.

It has led to the preponderance of closures of certain schools.

So I would say that this work, this primary work is not the full plan, it is the technical piece that we then immediately bridge into and what is that promise going to look like in these schools.

SPEAKER_09

Totally get that, appreciate that.

Here's where I'm really trying to go.

As I have said from the beginning of this process, this is going to be incredibly complex.

I cannot support anything that is a wholesale removal for the sake of wholesale removal.

We cannot approach this as a highlighter method.

And I know that's not what y'all are doing.

But that is how it feels to a lot of folks.

And perception is reality in many cases.

What I am trying to get at is that in order for me to full-throatedly support whatever you put in front of me, I need to see how, from your vantage point, and it does not have to be perfect.

I'm not seeking perfection.

But I am seeking clarity, right?

What I am looking for is a very clear, articulated thesis about how moving from status quo to whatever is on the other side of this decision is going to get us closer to achieving the goals that we have.

In addition, a justification that even though the schools that are on the list may or may not be doing a great job of getting us in terms of our third grade literacy goal, to the end where we are desired to be, how do we make sure that through this process, all of that learning, all of those relationships, all of those special things that make that possible that are largely latent in community are not lost with the closing of a physical space?

So I am really just trying to drive home the point It has to all come back to the goals.

And I will be a full-throated supporter if y'all can come to me with a plan that shows how we are going to be closer to our student outcomes goals on the other side of this.

And it can't just be the fact that there will be more teachers per grade band.

It has to be...

intertwined with the strategies that y'all have presented to us or tell us that this is one of the critical changes that needs to happen in order for us to get closer to our goals.

So I just wanted to make that super clear.

Liza Rankin

Yeah.

And I see that a couple of directors have hands up.

There's actually not that many slides left.

I would like to recommend that we move right past the initial assumptions and concerns, because to be quite honest, that feels a lot like gaslighting.

They have these concerns.

Oh, it's not a concern, because this is this.

Looking through it, it is a concern.

So don't tell us it's not a concern.

And please, can we skip through that, because we can read that on our own, and go to the final slide, and then open it up for discussion.

SPEAKER_20

OK, so you don't want us to clarify some of these things that we've clarified here?

Liza Rankin

If there's something that seems like it can't be understood by us reading it, but I'm not really interested in justification of things that people are feeling, that they shouldn't feel it.

SPEAKER_24

President Rankin, I just had a follow up to Brandon's question.

Is it appropriate for me to do that now, or would you like me to wait?

Liza Rankin

Would you mind holding, and I'll come to you first, just to get to this last slide, and then I'll come to you first.

Is that okay?

Okay.

Okay, thanks.

SPEAKER_20

Thank you.

Thank you, and I just, very sensitive to the gaslighting comment.

The clarification was intended to be just that, that where we were not clear, when we get a question, we try to answer that question.

Not saying those concerns matter, don't matter rather.

We're saying that we recognize that we did not address everything.

So I just want to be sure that I'm clear that I'm not trying to discount or disregard anyone's concerns.

So you're moving to the where do we go from here ongoing work?

I would like to, yes please.

All right.

So where we go from here is an additional round of community gatherings.

We have those scheduled one per region.

Those will be regionally focused.

Many of our leaders will be there.

They will be intended as authentic opportunities to hear more from our communities, recognizing that as many people who have been tuned in to all of this, we know that there are many, there are many, many more for whom we're still not reaching them.

And so our goal is to get as many people as possible hearing about this.

And again, some people say, you've told me this already, don't go over it again.

I'm sorry about that.

And I can guarantee you that for some people, this is new.

So we are going to take every opportunity to engage again and to listen at a deep level to what did we miss.

And I hear that we miss what we're missing in part is what is the academic tie-in to this work.

Again, bearing in mind that this is largely structural.

But yes, without that academic emphasis, it's not going to feel complete.

What are we experiencing right now in terms of our response to what we're seeing?

These are two possibilities.

We had to put something out there for people to react to.

And then the third would be, how do we move forward?

Do we move forward?

And if so, what would it take?

What assurances would we want to have?

Is it third grade reading?

Is it we're going to actually focus on STEM in every school in a meaningful way?

Is it that we're going to make sure that we have, we obviously will, but we want to think about what would make this work for you?

What kind of transition would make sense?

Maybe it's no transition at all.

So those will be, and we will be gathering that information every single time that we meet and processing that and feeding it to you and to our superintendent.

Superintendent will be there.

But making sure that we're keeping track of that.

We don't have this listed here, but it's very, very important to me and to all of us.

We are also planning affinity group meetings in people's primary language so that they're not sitting in an English meeting having interpreters speak to them.

We're actually going to the community where our community is already gathering.

We have staff members who speak those languages who are going to be also introducing, and that is very important to me.

I want us to think about who we have heard from thus far, even tonight, and who we have not heard from.

So we are very intentionally engaging in that way.

We have one online engagement that's our first one, the 24th planned, and then we have a spot open for, depending on our need, a follow-up online engagement.

Another thing that we are doing and have been doing, but looking at service and program placement.

So we heard tonight some concern, a very deeply felt concern about where our services are going to be.

We have mapped out our city and looked at where we don't have a lot of access.

We have some schools that, for a variety of reasons, have quite a few, what we might think of as a service delivery model for IEPs, for example.

We are looking at how we do that so that it is working for our students and our families.

We are validating our work through the various third-party mechanisms, including an analysis from a professor, University of Texas at Austin, who worked with San Antonio Public Schools, Dr. Green, and also partners in New York City Public Schools, and also Education Northwest is doing a desk review of our planning so that we have others looking at our work We're modeling scenarios for staffing.

So that's also a question that comes up.

We want to make sure that we have an idea of what it would take to implement it however we move forward.

assembling transition teams.

So we've been doing that work since September, meeting with various departments centrally here to say, what is the work that needs to happen?

If we were to make these transitions, we need to scope it out.

We're not going to be able to do it overnight.

So we actually have lined up our calendars to know what are critical points that we have to meet and then what are ones where we're going to have to flex.

We have a past advisory team that is beginning to meet that is our school leaders and we hope to also be then we will assemble teams however we go with our schools that are closing and the schools that are going to be receiving them so that we can make sure that that we're creating that space for that transition that caring transition work to happen.

setting future school level curricular foci.

So we heard tonight about expeditionary learning, which is phenomenal.

Innovative creative learning is happening in many, many of our schools.

But we have some schools that have sort of identified themselves as an expeditionary learning school, which is phenomenal.

We would like to seed some resources with all of our schools, whatever suite of schools we finalize with to actually take a pause so that this is an opportunity to reset and rethink what is our instructional focus.

I will add, no elementary school should have students sitting still for six hours a day.

I think that that would never be acceptable.

So if that needs to be corrected, then that needs to be corrected.

But we need to make sure that all of our schools are engaging in that innovation work.

And then conducting that learning needs and resource equity analyses.

So all of this is work that we are partnering with our instructional colleagues, our colleagues in coordinated school health, and that is where we are going next.

I will say finally, all of Seattle Public Schools coming together is not something that happens naturally.

We can easily work within our own departments, but a big part of my work, even prior to this being my primary work, was bringing together folks from different areas in the organization because we do share common goals.

We just don't always have an opportunity to recognize them.

So all of us working together to make this primary initial school experience the best it can be is something that we will continue to work on.

Thank you.

Liza Rankin

Thank you.

As promised, Director Clark.

SPEAKER_24

Thank you, President Rankin, for letting me skip the line there, if I did.

I've Um, wanted to follow up how I had a follow up question from some of Brandon's question earlier.

So I'm, you know, I've heard from a number of community members who I think are a little confused about how we could have as like, how there could be a scenario in which the number of, like, we're closing, that's option A or option B, how we could end up with the remaining schools having more teacher, like, multiple teachers per grade, as you said.

Could you just explain a little bit like how we would be able to do that and how that balances with the staffing changes that would occur as we potentially transition to fewer schools?

SPEAKER_20

Yes, thank you for that question.

I think it's a great question.

Essentially, our student-teacher ratios are what they are.

So as more students and any school leader will tell you, the more students you get, the more staff you get.

So right now, our capacity, it's a combination of utilizing our buildings where there is empty space, where we have classrooms available, and then as students perhaps consolidate into one school, those staff will follow those students.

So you will then have a larger number of students in each grade level so that you can have those additional teachers within those grade levels.

So staff follows students is kind of a basic way to think about it.

And I have talked to people who said, so now we're just going to have 40 kids in every classroom?

No.

We have identified quite carefully where the space is in buildings, this classroom space, and made sure then that those staff members will be there.

Does that make sense?

SPEAKER_24

That's really helpful.

And so I'm assuming that that is a part of the calculation that went into the current proposed, like how we ended up with the current proposed list of schools that would remain open.

That calculation was a piece of that, how you came up with this list.

SPEAKER_20

Absolutely.

And if you look, there's a sort of a regional analysis section.

Of course, I won't be able to find it.

But basically, that says in individual regions, well, if you look at page 31 of your analysis document.

So for option A, the southwest region has the maximum students projected.

So we're talking the max over the next 10 years would be 4,564.

That's residents.

If we want to have schools at about 456, so a lot of our time was spent initially saying, so what's the right, it is a little bit of a numbers exercise, although we're aware that these numbers are all children, but you have to say, so but how many schools do you need?

Well, that's about 10 schools.

We then proceeded to say, okay, well, we've got 13 schools in the southwest region.

So given these other factors, building condition, how many kids can a school hold?

Can it even hold that many kids?

What's the regional?

And there's some heat maps also where you can see we did that density of population analysis.

What's the best then 10 schools to serve and support that region?

So you'll see in the southeast region similarly, 4,129 over the next 10 years.

That's the maximum projected.

That would be about nine schools.

So that kind of gives you an idea of how we said, and we looked at those schools then that had the capacity to house those students.

That was a really critical piece of it.

There's an early on graphic that shows a well-resourced school, and you have buildings, students, and then services and programs and staff.

Those are the three things that go into deciding how we create that school model.

So if that's helpful, that's there for option A and option B.

SPEAKER_24

That's very helpful.

Thank you.

I've been hearing a lot about how this process had a lot to do with building specifications and other things.

And so I just wanted to get some clarity on how you all approached the decision of making the proposed list.

And thank you for taking the time to explain that for me.

And everyone else in the room.

SPEAKER_20

Thank you so much for the question.

It's an excellent question.

And again, thinking about the Southwest region, one of our amazing, dear schools there, Sanislo, as we looked at, OK, so what are the 10 schools that can create this sort of well-resourced model?

SANISLOA IS A BUILDING THAT IS IN NEED OF A LOT OF REPAIR.

IT'S AN OPEN CONCEPT SCHOOL, SO IT DID NOT HAVE THE QUALITIES OF HAVING THAT LEARNING ENVIRONMENT THAT THE EXTERNAL TEAM THOUGHT WAS OPTIMAL, AND ALSO IT JUST WASN'T GOING TO MEET THOSE CRITERIA IN A COUPLE OF WAYS.

SO IT WAS NOT SO MUCH ABOUT WE WANT TO CLOSE THE SCHOOL, BUT IT WAS ABOUT SAYING WHAT ARE THE 10 SCHOOLS, BUILDINGS THAT EXIST THAT WE THINK ARE GOING TO BEST SERVE THIS COMMUNITY.

Liza Rankin

Director Sarju and then Director Mizrahi.

Michelle Sarju

I wanna track back to what Director Hersey, the original question and then the restatement.

And the reason why I wanna track back is because when we started this in December of 2023, I really thought we were clear about the expectations that would track to the result of this process.

And so what I mean by that is we are concerned about the outcomes of the goals we set.

And I'm gonna be honest is I'm frustrated because I don't see the connection and I don't hear it.

when I hear, you know, when I hear answers, for example, to Director Hersey's question.

And so I'm gonna, I'm standing here, like what are these people hearing, right?

This presentation, Everybody should be able to understand it.

It should make sense to them that, so first of all, parents, we have to close schools.

There is no, I'm not going to play a game with you and do a pretend like, well, maybe.

No, we have to close schools.

But as Director Hersey said, I'm not voting for anything that actually doesn't, deliberately connect to the goals, which is outcomes for students.

I will not vote for anything.

And right now, it's September 18th.

I don't see how we can get to where we need to be and be able to reassure parents.

Yes, it is a loss when your child's school closes.

This is not the first round and it's definitely not my first rodeo of school closures in this district for 37 years.

I have been through the painful experience of a school closing, opening, opening, closing, like whatever, right?

It doesn't feel good, and it's concerning to parents, but I'm gonna tell you, we're not inspiring confidence in the people in our audience that we're actually making decisions focused on student outcomes.

We as a board are talking about student outcomes, but it's really hard to convince.

It's hard for me as an elected official to convince anybody when even I don't understand it.

I need to get to a place where when I'm having a conversation with the mom from Broadview Thompson, that I can say, no, here's why your school was on the list.

I had to tell her, I have no idea.

because I actually haven't seen why your school is on the list.

And so I don't wanna keep going around and around the mulberry bush.

We're in September.

I'm not confident we can get this done.

I feel like I'm being backed in a corner.

I'm gonna be honest, because I want the parents to hear this.

I feel like I'm being backed in a corner to vote yes or vote no.

And I'm taking a stand right here.

I'm not doing either.

if I don't have a justifiable plan that I can actually engage with parents about.

Parents, if your school closes, you're not gonna be happy.

But what I want for you to understand is why, and then what for your child.

That's where we need to go.

Okay, my school needs to close, then how am I gonna meet the need of my deaf and hard of hearing student in a building that's already been retrofitted to serve deaf and hard of hearing students?

We're not gonna move them to another school where we have to do retrofit.

That's the level I'm frustrated.

And so I'm gonna stop here because I think I've said, over and over again what my expectations are.

And this is not directed at any staff.

I feel like I'm crazy.

I'm gonna be honest.

I feel like am I missing, did I not hear it right?

Oh, maybe I'm losing my mind.

Oh, maybe I shouldn't be an elected official because I need to go back to school and get a PhD so I can understand this stuff.

No, I got a master's degree.

That should be enough.

And you shouldn't have to have one.

Like, I don't need a master's degree to understand this.

And the parents shouldn't either.

And we have got to present to them a plan that they can understand.

They may not like it, because we're not going for popularity votes here.

They may not like it.

But if we can't answer, if the plan doesn't answer Brandon's question, then, then.

SPEAKER_20

Can I just, one quick question.

Liza Rankin

No, and I'm going to say that's not the first time.

We've been saying this for like since May at the latest.

Director Mizrahi.

SPEAKER_04

So I have a few questions.

So I'm going to also, I'm going to ask one of my questions, but then I'm going to get back in the queue for one of my second questions.

I'm looking at the slide, the feedback received in messaging platform, and I think it's quite telling that the number one piece of feedback was on boundaries and assignments.

And I guess I would ask real quick, percentage-wise, when I look at the school closures and combine that with the change to the option program, and combine that with what seemed to me to be pretty massive boundary changes, do you have, have you modeled like a percent of the number of students that are impacted by all the changes?

And that's not my question, that's like a- And that's in your report.

SPEAKER_20

So you can find that, yeah.

I can tell you what page it's on.

SPEAKER_99

Thank you.

SPEAKER_04

So then, thinking about this, I went back, I don't know if, I'm happy to be fact-checked if I'm wrong, but I could not find a single example of when a boundary has changed and students have not been granted grandparenting or continuing assignments to stay at their current school.

And when I read the what it said was it said, whether students will be granted continuing assignments will depend on the specific scenario adopted by the school board.

It sort of makes it seem like it's our decision.

So I would say for me, if it's our decision, I think that there absolutely should be continuing enrollment for students.

And if it's about the two scenarios, we've only been presented with two different scenarios.

So I guess I wanna ask very directly in either of the scenarios, what is the continuing assignment that students will be offered?

SPEAKER_20

So let me first of all point you to page 18, which actually quite clearly spells out for option A, and there's also one for option B, the number of students that are impacted by boundary changes.

Bear in mind, again, these are scenarios presented as models that could work.

So what that will depend on is if we go for scenario A, where we have a closer to an 85% building utilization, That would impact, we would have to look at whether or not continuing, we don't say grandfathering, that has roots in voting rights and racism in our country, so we say continuing assignments, would depend very much on what the capacity looks like for those buildings.

So it's not up to you, we would just have to run that scenario and say how possible is it so that we're not going to overtax the capacity of our schools.

SPEAKER_04

So have those scenarios been run?

I mean, do we know the answer to that yet?

SPEAKER_20

So it would just depend on how many schools were closing.

SPEAKER_04

Let's say that we were going with option A.

How many people get continuing enrollment under option A?

SPEAKER_20

So again, I don't want to say the answer is no.

I'm not trying to be evasive.

Is it every fifth grader and their subsequent siblings?

Is it every fifth grader?

Is it everyone?

I mean, I think we would just have to determine what would that look like.

SPEAKER_04

But you all are the ones running the numbers.

Correct.

So if we pick option A, because you're saying that depending on the scenario that we pick is how much continuing enrollment is going to be offered.

So if we pick option A, I need to know how many students are going to be offered continuing enrollment under that.

I don't know the answer to those questions.

And I appreciate being grounded in our goals.

I also want to be grounded in our guardrails.

And the first guardrail is around engagement.

I don't think people can meaningfully engage if they don't have the answers to that question.

Liza Rankin

Can I ask for clarification from probably board office staff?

Am I right in my understanding that board approval is required for building closures, for boundary change, and...

SPEAKER_20

Assignment changes.

Assignment changes.

So actually would be a board decision.

So we cannot say grant people continuing assignment.

That is part of our assignment.

We have procedures and protocols that we follow.

So it would actually need to come from the board.

Thank you.

Liza Rankin

I mean, the recommendation is made to us.

We don't have to develop the continuing enrollment plan.

But it cannot be implemented without board approval.

SPEAKER_40

Thank you.

SPEAKER_09

In order for us to know what we would be approving, we would need to give that guidance and let them know what we want.

Liza Rankin

Right.

I'm just making clear that it can't just appear, that it has to be brought to the board for approval to be enacted.

SPEAKER_04

But I guess I just want to say, I still don't feel like I have an answer to my question.

So if we were to pick scenario A, how many students will have continuing enrollment?

SPEAKER_20

I can't tell you that right now, but I could.

Yeah.

SPEAKER_04

I mean, so we have engagements planned with the public in the next two weeks.

So will we know by then?

SPEAKER_20

So what I would say is the intent of that engagement is if our community said, like, how could we move forward?

And the answer would be just what you're saying.

We only think we can move forward if we have the option for continuing assignments.

That absolutely would be something that we would then take into consideration.

I'm hearing right now as a suggestion.

SPEAKER_04

I'm going to give you, like, a spoiler.

I guarantee the community is not going to say we don't want continuing enrollment.

They're going to say they want it, right?

So, I mean, so I think we should map out the scenarios to be able to honestly tell people and engage with them with how many people are going to get continuing enrollment.

Liza Rankin

I'm going to go to other, I'm going to put you in the queue.

I'm going to go to Director Top.

Director Top and then Director Bragg and then Director Briggs.

SPEAKER_09

Oh, okay, okay, go ahead.

Yeah, sorry.

So my thing is like, can we look at, as y'all are coming back to us at other major districts, because a lot of folks are going through this in the country, and see what accommodations they have provided to their families.

And maybe we could get a suite of things.

Because here's my worry, that you're going to go and do these engagements, and it's not going to go well.

Because people don't have anything to respond to.

Like, if you go to a family and say, hey, how can we make this, like, really hard choice, like, better without giving them options to choose from, they're going to say, don't make the choice.

So it's just, like, I want to set y'all up for success.

And I think having something to expose families to would be a really, really helpful tool.

Liza Rankin

Thank you.

Director Thompson.

SPEAKER_30

So I think, is that me?

Liza Rankin

Hello?

Yes, but while it is me, I just want to do a quick time check that it is 7.40 and I do want to make sure that every director has at least one opportunity to provide questions or comments.

SPEAKER_30

I said at least one.

So see if I can gain my train of thought here again.

I think we've seen today and we've seen through public testimony, there are no easy choices here.

We have a budget deficit and there are there there are no decisions that we get to make here that are going to be easy whether it's school closures or not and or school closures plus really as we work to balance our budget and or try to get more funding from the state I think Brandon's question is key in how these models get to or better serve getting to our goals.

And I think we've also given an impossible task to staff to say, hey, we have to cut the budget by $100 million but get better outcomes for our kids.

Let's just be fair.

That's what we're saying.

like cut 100 million, but get better outcomes for our kids.

That's really hard.

And I am not convinced.

scenario A or B gets us better outcomes for our kids, specifically hearing from the community these past week.

I think to make large changes like this, we have to all be in it together.

We have to work as a city.

And I'm not sure we're there.

We have to bring the community with us.

And I don't think we've brought the community with us at this point.

So with all of that being said, and I think that the last part of that is there are a lot of unanswered questions, whether it is continuing assignments, whether it's dual language immersion, whether it's some special education questions, deaf of hard of hearing programs that we can't answer yet.

Not that I'm saying we don't have answers, but we are not, we don't have answers yet.

What I'm going to do tonight is I'm gonna make a motion.

Yep.

And I'm gonna make a motion.

Liza Rankin

Can I ask that everybody gets the chance to speak at least once first?

SPEAKER_30

I'm gonna make a motion, Liza.

Liza Rankin

I see legal coming.

SPEAKER_30

No, I can't.

When can I make a motion?

It's gonna be about well-resourced schools.

Liza Rankin

Everybody needs to have the opportunity to respond to this first.

SPEAKER_30

After everyone has an opportunity to speak, can I make my motion?

Liza Rankin

As it pertains to well-resourced schools, which is on the agenda.

SPEAKER_30

Sure.

I move that we direct the superintendent to draft a school closure plan C that has a smaller number of closures from four to six schools and it be presented at the upcoming engagement sessions.

The plan should prioritize minimizing disruption to students, limiting programmatic and boundary changes.

Liza Rankin

I actually don't believe it's necessary because we've already given direction that we have a plan provided to us that meets the needs of students and this one doesn't.

SPEAKER_30

I still would like to move forward with that motion if possible.

Liza Rankin

I think recommending the number of schools is not, we need to see what the actual impact is to students for whatever the number is and I don't have, I don't want us to place that limitation on it but also.

SPEAKER_42

Then you should vote no on the motion.

Liza Rankin

Can I address this?

Yeah.

SPEAKER_42

Individual directors, of course, can express anything they choose about what they would or wouldn't support or what they'd be inclined to entertain.

When you're putting a motion that is a collective directive to the superintendent about what may or may not be in his preliminary recommendation, which hasn't come yet.

That's collective board action.

And that item was not on the agenda.

The public wasn't given a chance to see it or comment on it.

The board has many options if it wants to take that directive action.

One would be to schedule a special meeting, for example, with that item specifically on the agenda.

And that can be done on 24 hours notice.

But to add an action item late in the game when it wasn't on the agenda, the public didn't have notice on it is gonna cause, I'm gonna stop there and say concern.

SPEAKER_30

Wasn't this on the agenda this evening?

But would I have to put my specific motion on the agenda in order for it to be considered or is it notice enough that the well-resourced schools is on the agenda and therefore the public is therefore noticed that board directors may make decisions about things collectively on something.

Liza Rankin

No, because it was actually explicitly stated there would not be decisions made today.

SPEAKER_42

Yeah, no, no, it is too late for the board to take collective action on a new motion.

That motion would have to be, have agreed by agreement, it could have been 24 hours agreement of the board president, superintendent, it could have gone on the agenda, on the posted agenda, but to call for a collective board action on when only the general topic was on, not as an action item, but as a discussion here, no, the answer's no.

SPEAKER_30

So if I had a motion in the future that the board president and the superintendent didn't want to put on the agenda, but I still wanted it to bring forward, what would be the pathway for that?

Liza Rankin

Well, first I'd like to say, if you bring it to me, I will put it on the agenda.

So that is a big theoretical.

SPEAKER_30

I hear that, but wondering what the process is there.

SPEAKER_42

I'm happy to answer it.

Under state law and policy 1400, a special meeting can be called either by the board president or by a majority of other board directors.

The word used is petition, but basically four directors would have to go on the record saying they wanted a special meeting and that could be identified as the agenda item and action item for that meeting.

SPEAKER_30

I'm not sure I agree with your legal counsel here.

I think I will go along with it, and I will not move forward.

But I am not sure I agree with it, because that stymies any board director from ever really making a motion, specifically a motion that the chair does not agree with.

SPEAKER_42

No, that's absolutely not correct.

SPEAKER_30

Without calling a special meeting.

Liza Rankin

Well, it can also be changed on the agenda, but right now, I am declaring, and actually, I had the same argument about something else that I tried to make a motion on for with the legal, but in this moment in time, I feel very strongly that every director needs a chance to speak before we would even consider something totally different.

Director Begg.

SPEAKER_11

All right, thank you.

I would like the chance to speak and get Sabi the chance to speak before it is 8, and we have to leave, or should leave, importantly.

We do.

We are students.

So I mean, there are points that Director Topps brings up and Director Hersey that I think are important to bring to the table, which is the fact that there is nothing I think the voting members of the board should consider unless you know more student outcome-based things.

especially with, you mentioned transition teams, both in the presentation and a handful of times on the Well-Resourced Schools page.

There is a little bit about what those are, but the transition between when schools close and the students going into that is honestly one of the biggest pieces of student outcomes.

Because sure, in five years, it might not feel like anything if and when these schools close.

At the moment that they close, these transition teams for both staff and students and families and siblings of those families are the most important because those will determine student outcomes that align with the goals set by the board that instant.

So what, there is not, I have not seen as clear defined plan.

It might be in the thing and you can direct me to a page here.

What is that transition plan?

Liza Rankin

Did you want me to respond or do you wanna?

But actually I'd love for the superintendent to have a chance to respond.

I saw you go for your microphone.

Thank you.

It's not.

And also if there's not one yet, please just say there's not one yet that's being developed.

Brent Jones

Dr. Campbell is perfectly capable of responding to the transition plan.

I'm gonna defer to Dr. Campbell, please.

SPEAKER_20

We have not yet fully developed that, but identified that as a really key thing to do.

Yes.

No.

Michelle Sarju

I'm going to.

You're cutting in line, Michelle.

I know, but the answer to the question was there is not a draft plan.

That's important.

That's the answer to your question.

Liza Rankin

Director Briggs, I'm going to actually let Director Yoon jump ahead of you, and then I'll come to you.

SPEAKER_27

Thank you.

Just a clarifying question.

Are the dual language immersion programs only being cut in K-8 schools or also high schools?

Because I believe that West Seattle High School testified in the previous board meeting regarding the Mandarin program being removed.

And if this will be implemented to all SPS schools, how will students take at least two years of world language as a graduation requirement by the Washington State Board of Education?

SPEAKER_20

So right now I think this current iteration of the work pertains to K through five.

But K through fifth graders.

So your question is, can you say the second part again?

SPEAKER_27

So the Washington State Board of Education requires high school students to take at least two years of word language.

And the previous board meeting, West Seattle High School testified for their Mandarin program possibly being cut.

If that is being implemented to more or maybe all SPS schools, how will students meet that requirement?

SPEAKER_20

So I think that's a great question.

I don't know that it, you're talking about language programs being cut at West Seattle High School?

Yes.

I'm not, I don't think that's really not in this area right now.

I think it's a great question, but that's not really what we're.

SPEAKER_27

Yeah, I just wanted to ask it to clarify, because when we're talking about the well-resourced school plans, I think it applies to all SPS schools in the future too.

SPEAKER_20

Thank you.

Evan Briggs

Director Briggs.

Thank you.

So one thing that strikes me is the slide, where do we go from here?

It feels very much to me like we should have started here, not where do we go.

We should have already determined service and program placement.

modeled scenarios for staffing, validated the work through a third party, assembled transition teams.

This is all the meat that should have been included in the plan because what we gave families instead was a shell of a plan of here's a building that your kid's gonna go to.

And none of this information was included in that.

And so if it had been, I think all of these initial assumptions and concerns, many of them could have been preemptively addressed because that information would have been included in a plan.

And I feel that it's really unfair for us to ask families to get on board with this when we have provided no meat.

to this.

It's literally a skeleton.

And it's a massive disruption.

It's a huge loss.

And we have, what are they even signing up for?

I mean, a lot of these answers, too, are just, they feel like words on a page.

And there's, you know, SPS will offer more inclusive learning environment for all students.

OK, great.

How?

What does that look like?

Services and programs will be equitably distributed across Seattle public schools, honoring historic placement and community populations.

Great, how?

We can't just say this stuff, and we can't just say we're centering student outcomes when we're clearly not.

We can't keep saying it and not doing it.

So that's just my big overarching issue with all of this.

I don't blame community for not trusting that these things, why would they trust?

And I am genuinely confused as to how this has gone unaddressed up until this point when we have been saying for months and months, we have to start with...

these things.

We don't make these decisions and then figure that out.

So I'm just very confused at why we're here right now at this place without these questions having been answered.

Liza Rankin

I'm going to me, and then I'm going to go back to Joe and anyone else who may have follow-up if they would like and if we all can stand it.

So I tried to write my things down, and I'm just going to go through them all.

The first thing, I went back and I watched our work sessions from May 8th and June 26th, and I took a whole bunch of notes about what was committed to, what board directors gave direction as, and what we heard as a commitment.

And...

I am echoing fellow directors, I don't see a change from what we saw in those meetings to now.

So one thing though also is that we actually, so historically there has been lots of, there's been other times where there's been boundary changes and it's been very hard.

In 2006, there literally were like physical threats in this room at this same type of meeting.

And so I'm very proud of all of us for not repeating that.

What I'm not proud of us for repeating is a scenario where we can't provide answers and can't bring our community along.

We all made that vote in May to provide direction to the superintendent to bring us a plan that included school consolidation.

We were behind it.

We understood it could be as many as 20 schools, and that was a scary big number, but also We believed in the commitments that we were making in those discussions and saw the vision and saw, OK, if we can lay this out, like enrollment is down.

Enrollment is down.

We know that.

We can't fully resource a building with only 100 and something kids.

They literally do not have access to the same things that a kid at a larger school does.

And that doesn't make it cookie cutter.

Because I actually find that our current neighborhood elementary schools are not cookie cutter schools.

They're all wildly individual.

What shouldn't be individual is the access to opportunity and resources.

That should be standard.

You shouldn't have to live in a certain neighborhood or try to get into a good school My kids went to neighborhood schools, still go to neighborhood schools.

All of our neighborhood schools should be good schools.

And we should also retain optional programs and other supports for kids who maybe that's not the best fit.

But I really kind of bristle at the cookie cutter comment because right now we have a wildly inequitable system based on what kids can and can't access and that is absolutely not okay.

So disruption isn't necessarily a bad thing.

Disruption without a reason or how the juice is going to be worth the squeeze is a totally different thing.

But what has been provided to community is pure disruption.

And the boundary stuff, like, I can understand that as a, this is theoretically what it looks like to better balance the students that we have with a more appropriate number of buildings.

Okay.

But that's not the same as what is the impact to this school community?

What is the impact on this child's education?

What is the impact on relationships?

And it's, as we said lots of times in May and June, and I think I wrote down, Joe specifically said, the how is as important, if not more important, than the what.

And I actually believe I said that the first time I ever gave testimony to the school board in 2015, that what you're doing is maybe going to be hard, and how you do it really, really matters when you're talking about people's children.

So yeah, don't necessarily believe disruption is bad.

But disruption just to disrupt is not OK.

Option A versus option B, I think, is a wildly false dichotomy.

I think there's a ton of different, like, why would we not, if we have the same number of students, so we've got the students that we have for K-5, right?

And we've maybe determined this is a more appropriate number of buildings.

I would really like to see an analysis of why couldn't we just, you know, if we determine the six through eight part of a K-8 is way too expensive and doesn't yield the results, make it a K-5.

We'd still have however many K-5 schools.

Some of them could be option schools.

I don't, like, I'm kind of baffled as to why that's not, and I know I asked that months ago.

In terms of the boundary decisions, Oh, god.

I don't think five community gatherings is at all sufficient.

I don't think it's what we believed we were all committing to in the spring in our understanding of what would happen between now and then.

THE COMMITMENTS THAT I HEARD FROM STAFF WERE TO USE EXTERNAL EXPERTISE, WHICH I'VE JUST HEARD A LITTLE BIT, BUT I WOULD LIKE TO KNOW MORE ABOUT THAT AND WHAT THE TIMELINE MIGHT LOOK LIKE.

WE WERE COMMITTED THAT THE DISTRICT WOULD BE DETAIL ORIENTED AROUND IMPLEMENTATION, THAT WE WOULD ASSESS THE PROCESS AS WE GO.

THERE WAS TALK ABOUT COMMUNITY WORKSHOPS OVER THE SUMMER ON DIFFERENT TOPICS TO ADDRESS, YOU KNOW, TO UNDERSTAND THE WANTS, WISHES, AND NEEDS OF FAMILIES.

It is with those commitments to building a stronger, more sustainable system that better aligns resources with students that I voted yes on the acceptance that consolidation is necessary.

The leap of faith, quite honestly, the absolute leap of faith that we took in support of our work together in voting yes on that was based on a number of things that have not materialized.

And I really just can't understand how we don't have the academic team at the table.

And I can't understand why the well-resourced system still includes our segregated models of special education.

Why are we worried about access, resource, focus, whatever?

Those are made up by Seattle Public Schools, and they're based on staffing ratios.

And we've been talking about this for over two years.

And I can't understand why a well-resourced system wouldn't create a better structure to serve students with disabilities.

Why we would plan a massive systemic change and still keep the, yeah, maybe now they'll be at every school, but the model itself, I can't.

We can't keep talking about it.

This was our opportunity to drastically change the trajectory of our school district.

So here's my question.

I am with Gina.

I don't believe 20 schools is possible between now and December.

Unless there's a whole bunch of other things happening that we haven't been informed about, I do not believe that our system is capable of delivering on a 20 school reduction that we can feel comfortable voting on in December.

And I want to tell you that now because I don't want it to be December 1st and have us go, oh no, I don't think we can vote on this.

So what direction do you need from the board?

What do we need to do?

And is our assessment completely wrong?

And you do have plans for all of these things and a timeline for how it can happen to meet?

I want to be really clear.

If we won't know in December, it won't be because we got nervous about 20 schools.

It will be because we can't see how it works.

So it's September.

What are we going to do?

Is it appropriate to respond?

I would love a response.

SPEAKER_20

So I just want to direct you first of all to page 13 of your document where we do have staffing structures for both options at a 300 student range, 400 student range, 500 student range.

So we are working on modeling scenarios for staffing.

We're working with our current weighted staffing standards formula, which Again, it's a little bit of a leap, so we've been trying to work with the best structures that we have.

We do have a program and services placement map, I hear you.

Our deepest, my personal deepest interest is in making sure that we do not have segregated services for students with IEPs.

What we have right now is schools that say, I cannot serve you here, we don't do that here, you need to go over there.

So the first step is to say, actually everyone's gonna be able to do that here.

Certainly, I hear you.

It sounds like we're creating more segregation.

What we're doing is we're saying, you don't get to say we don't have space for you.

We're saying, first of all, that we're going to make sure that that is possible.

And then we're also working with the special ed team to say, can we start eradicating these boundaries between these sort of fairly arbitrary titles.

Now, deaf, hard of hearing, medically fragile, I want to be really clear, those are specialized service models that we absolutely recognize the significance of having those served in a centralized spot.

That is very important.

But I just want to be really clear.

So we do, so most of these things are very much underway.

We will have by 1st of October to October 10th or so, some formal third party reviews.

We've been meeting all summer with colleagues from different districts, but we will have something to share with you.

So these things very much are underway.

But I agree we need the academic focus here.

We need the academic team here to fill in.

One thing I will say, and it's a broad statement, But what this does in part that I think is significant is we're focusing our resources on student-facing staff and pulling away from staff that it takes to run a building.

So what this does is it says we're actually going to keep our folks who actually teach kids.

And we're going to remove some of those other folks, principals and other folks that are running these buildings that aren't full so that we can double down and reinvest in actually having the folks that are in the classroom.

So that is a really significant operating assumption here.

Liza Rankin

Which is something I think we fully understood and why we wanted to approve, why we accepted the recommendation of consolidation.

Because given the trajectory of enrollment, that 100% makes sense.

What I question is whether we can see validation by December for 20 schools.

And I think it's just, I mean, and we've been talking about kids and families, which of course is the priority, but staff.

I mean, I know staff is saying, we're going to do what?

We're supposed to do what in one classroom?

What does that even look like?

And we can't take any more leaves of faith.

We need to see it.

Brent Jones

So President Wren, can you ask a very specific question?

Going into this, we knew that this was going to be a tremendously heavy lift.

We identified a lot of information that we need to produce, a lot of scenarios that we need to produce, and to deliver on student outcomes uh to do whole system design like we're talking about it does take time clearly there's not enough uh expectations met in terms of where we are right now to get to the level of confidence that this board needs to have and the community needs to have it's going to take more time these these are these are there's not been a district Anywhere that has gone through a whole system design change like this that didn't take a lot of effort It was it took years for many of the districts that have done this fully we look at the most recent one San Antonio Jefferson County those all took a a lot of time and so we need to take the time that it takes to get it right and so uh we knew this was a challenge when we started it uh and if we're not there yet we're not there yet i i it's disappointing but if we're not there yet we we still need to do more work We still have the budget challenge.

We still have a need to stabilize programs and services.

Those are critical.

We've set out on a course, Seattle Public Schools, which I'm very proud of, we lead with racial equity and that is important that we embody that in our services and our programs and access.

So we still have more work to do.

This is an honest rendering of what needs to happen.

And December is coming quickly.

And a lot of things need to happen in order for us to be able to flip the switch to make this go.

So that is the truth.

And that's where we are, current state.

So with that, for you all to be comfortable to bring a vote forward, there's a lot of work that this team has to do in order to get some of these things done.

And so it takes the amount of time that it takes.

And we don't have any muscle memory doing this level of change.

And so I just want to offer that up as a contextual understanding of of where we are right now.

I'm not discounting the work of this team.

We've done a lot of work.

The 285-page document, there's a lot of analysis in there.

But if there's more work that we need to do, we need to do it.

So I'll pause right there.

Liza Rankin

All right.

And then I've got Director Mizrahi.

Director Hersey.

SPEAKER_09

I just wanted to lift that up because I know that like for folks who are watching this, they're going to see a lot of fireworks on like how we are having this conversation.

But let me be super clear.

I have a complete confidence in our superintendent and this conversation building in this district has been this way for decades.

So to think that like over the course of three months that we were going to be able to do something like incredibly different than what the norm has been is a very high goal that our superintendent and his team have really tried to lift up and Before any of this, we would have not been having these types of conversations, especially not to this degree of certainty around how we are going to get this done.

I say that to say.

All of that plan is these folks that are sitting right here, while they are leading the work, are not the ones that are typing out the plan and are actually crunching the numbers and things like that.

So what I really want everybody, and I hope that there are folks who are working above us and out in our buildings to hear me on, is that we are in deep stuff.

This problem is not going to go away.

There are no black helicopters that are going to come save us.

And I want all of y'all's staff to hear us when we say, we're not changing our minds here.

These questions are not going to change.

And I know that y'all sit with us and y'all hear this, and y'all are all incredibly intelligent people.

So I know that between us communicating it to y'all and y'all communicating to the people that are actually going to make it go, There is a vehement and vast disconnect.

So the thing that needs to be addressed is that disconnect because we cannot afford to – our families that came out here tonight cannot afford to be spending that type of time advocating for something that they have an inalienable right to.

And I know everybody at this table understands that.

And I want to know from your perspective, Superintendent Jones, what do we as a board and community need to do to support you in delivering on the plan that I know that you understand coming from us?

Because if there is a disconnect that we can be effective in supporting you in making some type of change or getting some type of progress, we are willing to do that.

And you don't necessarily need to answer that question right now.

But what I want to vehemently say is that like, I am here and I support you and let us know what you need from us as a board to deliver on all the things that we asked for.

Liza Rankin

Director Mizrahi.

SPEAKER_04

Yeah.

Okay.

I have two comments and then a question, and then I'm going to be done for the night.

But I appreciate that this is going on, but as you said at the beginning, we don't get a chance to talk about it.

This is our time to ask these questions.

We cannot do that privately.

So first of all, I wanted to echo Director Topp's suggestion for a scale-back model.

I think it helps us make sure that we get it right.

It helps us be...

helps us build community trust, and it helps us see what Olympia does this session.

Because I think we have such a big problem, we're not just going to cut our way out of this problem.

So I think that having a scaled back plan that then allows us to, if we need to, do something in the future is great.

And I hope that we can get that without having to do an emergency meeting or whatever, that you've heard that at least a few directors want to see that plan.

I do want to ask a specific question on dual language.

And also, I think, echo what Director Sargi was saying about just how hard it is to understand some of these answers on this.

And I'm glad that you read this answer too, Director Briggs.

So services and programs will be equitably distributed across Seattle public schools honoring historic placement and community populations, which I think is a tough answer because it doesn't actually give an answer.

So I want to ask directly, there are five schools right now that are dual language immersion schools.

Will dual language stay at those schools, even if they shift to a neighborhood model?

SPEAKER_20

So I think what's on, thank you for the question.

Right now we have three, and just to contextualize it, maybe you all know this, maybe you don't.

Three neighborhood DLI schools where we have set aside seats for heritage speakers, for native speakers, so that they are able to access that.

We have two that are option schools.

Our goal would be to make all five of those current schools neighborhood schools with native speakers set aside and because we know that currently at John Stanford and we've done that and I'm happy to include the demographic analysis that their heritage speakers at John Stanford and McDonald currently don't necessarily live there.

We would add some services where they do live which is in a different part of the city.

So we're also looking at then expanding that.

SPEAKER_04

so that would be our recommendation is that they become neighborhood school models with heritage speakers set asides as well as adding some potentially to james baldwin and olympic hills so i think that's great i really appreciate that answer and i would just offer a friendly suggestion that in like answering questions you should say that you should say it will stay at the schools that it's at and we're expanding to these schools i think that language like honoring historic placement is not as committal as people want to hear.

So I think we can be more clear in our language and how we answer that to the public.

Liza Rankin

Thank you.

That brings up a wonder for me which is we heard pretty clearly in our board engagement with the community about vision and values how important it was to the community as a whole that kids have access to dual language and multilingual learning.

However there are some people that don't want that.

And so if those are neighborhood schools where the people who live in the neighborhood attendance area have the option to go to an English only track if they want to.

SPEAKER_20

Yes, that is the intention.

These are attendance area schools that everybody has access to.

And I think, just again to think about, and you all know this, but an attendance area school, that is the school that for many families, that is the school they could go to.

They're not gonna opt into something else.

So yes, they should be able to have access to an English track.

That is the design, yes.

So, okay.

Liza Rankin

Director Sarju.

Michelle Sarju

Is my microphone going in and out?

SPEAKER_04

Can I have yours?

Oh, yeah.

Go ahead.

Oh, yours is still on.

Michelle Sarju

Yeah.

Glad I didn't have a hot mic moment saying something stupid.

We're at September 18th.

Everybody has a watch or a phone.

And what we're leaving we're what we're doing is we're leaving here tonight without answers for families and that's to me profoundly disappointing.

I again I said I'm not in a popularity contest with any of these people like either like me or you don't like OK fine I'm not looking for new friends at my age but what I am committed to is outcomes for students.

And I may disagree with a parent.

We may not like each other, but I love your child.

I love your babies.

Because if we don't love all of our babies, we're going to end up in a worse situation that we're in in our country right now in real time.

The adults are not modeling for our children the society we want to live in.

We have been, we started this in December 2023. And now here we are in September and we are there is no way I'm speaking to the parents.

I don't see a way for us to get this done because the time between December 23rd and now a lot that should have happened didn't happen.

And that's just a fact.

It's not a criticism.

I know it doesn't feel good sometimes to articulate facts because it feels like criticism but one plus one is two.

And that doesn't change.

We started this in December and here we are now trying to crunch into three months what we've had nine months to actually do.

That doesn't build confidence for the community.

All it does is it create more anxiety.

This has been an anxiety producing exercise for parents and families caregivers and quite honestly board directors because I'm serious y'all when I say I have felt like I'm crazy.

I'm being on like I don't understand what's happening.

And so I cannot say to you with confidence that I can support this plan and I can say to you with confidence we have to close schools like there isn't another option.

There's no more money.

The Fed isn't going to cut the interest rate and then funnel that money to Seattle Public Schools.

Like we're out of money.

We're in the red, just like in your own household checking account.

If there's not money for vacation and you've mortgaged your house to the max, there's no more money.

And that's where we are.

We're actually mortgaging our children's future here.

And it's up to us to stop that cycle because that's what's been happening for 50 years here.

So I don't want to pretend but I'm also like not willing to settle for just five schools because I know how that works for black and brown kids.

I'm gonna be honest I know how it works.

is where Sabrina's over there shaking her head.

We've been down this road before.

So it's not about the number.

To me, it's about how are we improving outcomes for children?

And if that's with five schools, if that's with 25 schools, the number is not what's important.

It's the student and outcomes for the student.

And so here we are, what are we going to do, board of directors?

I don't want to pretend.

I don't want to just keep going on until December and trying to get in five community meetings, which I personally don't think is enough.

We didn't have sign language here tonight.

So that is a whole big group of people that didn't get to participate in our activities here.

And how many other?

I say them because they keep coming up.

They keep asking for sign language interpretation.

And somehow we can't.

We can't seem to find a sign language interpreter when I have one at my church every single Sunday.

And it's a different person every single Sunday.

We have sign language at my church every single Sunday.

So I don't believe we can't find sign language interpreters.

I just, the evidence is not compelling me to believe that.

So what are we gonna do?

Are we gonna pretend like we're gonna go through till December?

and we're gonna vote on a plan, because right now I'm saying I'm not voting.

I don't see how, Marnie, you can get me a plan that actually answers Brandon's question.

I don't see how you, Superintendent Jones, can get me a plan that answers Joe's questions, right?

Because we have less than three months, if we're being really honest, November is a wash, December is a wash.

We're active two weeks in November and two weeks in December.

We don't have three months.

What are we going to do?

I'm asking the question.

Is this appropriate?

Council Member Narver, am I stepping out of line here legally by saying what are we going to do because it's not on the agenda?

It's appropriate to ask that.

That was a joke.

You didn't have to come up.

I made you put your...

Yes.

SPEAKER_42

There we go.

I'm not the boss of the board.

I am here to give advice to try and keep things in line with the OPMA.

All I do is give advice, but I have been advising on it for 18 years.

I do it to protect the board because you're the ones who get sued if somebody thinks there's been a violation.

Board directors can express any opinion they like.

The concern is when we're looking for unified board action and that's when I raised the concern about it being on the agenda.

I will say I've worked for five board presidents and two superintendents and not once has any of them ever declined to put something on the agenda even if they're strongly opposed to it.

It's easy to get there.

We just need one day notice.

But in terms of expressing opinions, that's exactly what these sessions are for.

You're not out of line in any way.

And nor is any other member of this board for expressing their strong opinions.

Evan Briggs

So yeah, I don't know.

Can I answer Michelle's question with my opinion of what we're going to do?

I personally am freezing cold and very hungry right now.

And I've been here for over five hours.

And I think this is actually not our responsibility to come up with what we do from here.

We have given our feedback and our direction.

And I think we should be free to go home now and leave it to the people who are getting paid to do this job to figure out what the next step is.

Liza Rankin

And I'll add to that that what I have heard from the board consistently is that we understand the scale of this problem and we want to have a plan we can approve in December.

So i think what and we don't want to surprise anybody and we what the some uh brandon was talking about you know the historicalness of this building and you all know my favorite book is that report from 1990 that i read from like this is long standing and what has happened in far back history and in you know mine and brandon's time on the board definitely is the board being backed into a corner and being expected to vote to approve something that doesn't pass muster because WELL, THEN WHAT ARE WE GOING TO DO ABOUT THIS OR THAT'S THE STATE DEADLINE.

AND I WANT TO MAKE AS CLEAR AS POSSIBLE RIGHT NOW THAT I DON'T BELIEVE THIS BOARD WILL VOTE ON SOMETHING TO SAVE ANYBODY'S BUTT EXCEPT FOR CHILDREN.

SO WE NEED TO HAVE A PLAN WE CAN VOTE ON, NOT A PLAN WE'RE FORCED TO ACCEPT.

And if that means changing the scale of it or whatever it is.

I even said to Dr. Jones, if the plan is that the staff does an evaluation and the best way to get outcomes for students is to sell all of our buildings and have elementary school and T-Mobile Stadium, if staff can say, here's how, that would yield the best outcomes.

I mean, obviously, I'm exaggerating.

But if that was what was brought to us and they said, we ran all the scenarios, we ran all the costs, this is really going to serve students, That's what we wanna see.

Brent Jones

Respectfully, I categorically reject the notion that we would intentionally back the board into a corner.

I need to say that.

Liza Rankin

I'm saying that's a historical pattern.

Director Clark.

SPEAKER_24

Um, thank you.

I guess I'm gonna ask one last question.

First of all, I just, before I do that, I've just spent the last, I don't even know how many minutes looking at board policy 1400. And I, I really suggest that we might want to take a look at that and add some clarity around the difference between meetings and noticing and calling a motion during a meeting, which I think falls under the Roberts rule of order, which says that everyone has equal rights to do that.

But I don't want to get into a debate about it right now, but if we are forming an ad hoc policy committee, maybe we could look at it there.

Um, my, um, Dr. Campbell, I, um, really loved how specific you were.

about dual language programs and what the plan is to continue those under the proposals that you're developing right now.

And I guess I have some similar questions that I doubt you're going to be able to answer tonight about other programs um, in other buildings that are set to be closed.

Um, I know that many of our schools partner with the Seattle, Seattle parks and recreation.

They partner with, um, nonprofit early learning providers, um, to have K through our pre-K services and buildings.

And I would love to learn how, um, If it's possible to take a similar approach as you all have done with dual language to be able to get very specific about other programs and buildings that are set to be closed.

How we would maintain those and how students would be able to continue to participate in them.

SPEAKER_20

Thank you and one of the designs that's built into all of this is that expanding access to preschool and child care is something we absolutely heard from our families is critical.

So we have been meeting for several months now with our we have a new early learning director and with our partnerships office, and with our CBO partners, as well as the city of Seattle.

And so we have multiple pre-K models, including Head Start, developmental pre-K, SPP.

So we actually do have a map of what that could potentially look like.

So these things are underway, just weren't shared tonight, but we can absolutely bring that to you.

SPEAKER_24

Thank you.

I've been hearing from a lot of child care providers participating in that group who have concerns, and so it would be great to be able to see some of what you've been modeling so far.

SPEAKER_30

So I have a timeline question, President Rankin.

The October meeting is, we talk about the end of the year, but the October meeting is when the superintendent is supposed to give his preliminary recommendations, which is the actual kickoff to us doing hearings at the schools for close.

So really our deadline to answer all of these questions, to get all of this information, to do all of this, to figure out the outcomes, is our October meeting, which I think is on October 8th.

9th thank you someone I got one more day it is I it is it's just not possible in that in that time frame and I think we have to be realistic here that that it is not possible and that we want the best plan possible and we can't get it by October 8th or 9th or 9th

Liza Rankin

And no matter what the plan looks like, there's 100 million hole to solve.

That's not going to change, unfortunately.

I mean, I'm agreeing.

SPEAKER_30

And none of these decisions are easy.

SPEAKER_09

We've always solved 30% of the problem.

Liza Rankin

Yeah, is there, I guess I will request on behalf of the board, and it's not a motion, it's just a request, that we receive some more information maybe this week about a potential timeline or what, I just, I think, you know, I would just really hate for us to get to December and be like, oh my God, we can't do this now, what are we gonna do?

SPEAKER_30

And I would like to request then a plan C four to six schools.

Okay.

Liza Rankin

There being no further business on the agenda, this meeting stands adjourned.

Oh my God, it is cold in here, at 8.30 p.m.