Seattle Schools Board Meeting Sept. 16, 2026

Alright, good afternoon folks.

Again, I apologize that we are starting a little bit later than our 4.30 start time, but we will call the meeting to order here at 4.54 and SPS TV will begin broadcasting.

The September 16th regular board meeting is called to order.

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

Roll call please.

Vice President Briggs.

Here.

Director Lavallee.

Here.

Director Mizrahi.

Here.

Director Rankin.

Director Smith.

Here.

Director Song.

Here.

Student Representative Founce.

Here.

Founce.

Excuse me.

Student Representative Mangelson.

Here.

Student Representative Michael.

Here.

Student Representative Segazob.

Here.

Thank you.

President Topp.

Perfect.

All right.

Well, we as I said, we were going to start public testimony directly at five.

So but we'll start, I guess, superintendent comments here.

Well, good afternoon, everyone.

I'm really excited to be here, as always, but there's some really important things that are on the agenda that I look forward to witnessing, and I really just want to thank everybody who's been so thoughtful around the labor negotiations and I really want to once again thank SEA for their true partnership in working mainly in this room for many, many, many hours to get something that we can bring to this board.

I'm sure we're going to discuss it more in depth, so I don't want to go too much into it.

but just again to give real thanks to SCA, to their bargaining team, to everybody who really spent so many, so many hours discussing it.

But I also want to thank 302, another wonderful union that we've negotiated with as well.

I want to thank the Teamsters.

I want to thank Building Trades.

I'm really proud of the labor work that we're doing to really get on the same page centering children but also making sure that our staff and our faculty are really being supported as well.

On the notes it says recess so you know why not.

I really do want to thank everybody who has reached out to discuss some of the things that came up in my last week's newsletter and I'm happy to certainly pontificate on this a lot.

I had a really wonderful meeting in Magnolia.

We packed the house last night at a community meeting and really what I want to make sure people understand is that Our job is to make sure that our children are getting a holistic education and part of that is certainly recess, part of that is PE, part of that is lunch, but it's also of course English and math and science and social studies.

And what we did was we looked at the schedules that were already in existence.

About 75% of our schools had a structure around three, around two recesses.

25% of the schools had a structure around two recesses, sorry, around three recesses.

And we just wanted to make sure that we had some sort of codification.

And we also have to be cognizant about some of the state laws.

You know, there is a law that says you have to have 100 minutes of P.E.

every week.

I'll be honest, I'm really not sure we're hitting all of that and we gotta make sure that we focus on that.

We also have requirements in terms of ELA and math and even though we don't have a particular full social studies curriculum, there are standards within the state of Washington as well as of course the time immemorial structure.

And so what we wanted to do was present a a schedule that we thought made a lot of sense.

But we also know that each school has its own individual needs.

And so by creating a waiver system, all we wanted to say to the principals and the schools was, look, if you want three recesses, hey, if you want four recesses, if you want to change it from this kind of like draft expected schedule.

We just need to know, are you in fact meeting the requirements?

That's it.

That's really what we want to do.

And so what we've been able to see is some thoughtful conversations already with some principals, where instead of having science five days a week and social studies five days a week for 45 minutes and 30 minutes, there was a conversation with one of the schools was, hey, could we do a three and two where we do science for three days a week and social studies for two days a week as long as we can prove that we're hitting the Amplify curriculum and the state standards for social studies.

Sounds great.

And so we just want to make sure that as a district we are really focusing on getting the kids what they need in a holistic manner.

But what I don't want to see happen is 106 schools doing 106 different things and some of them not even meeting the state requirements or the curricular requirements that this board has passed.

We did collectively pass a ELA curriculum adoption from K-5 and it is 120 minutes a day.

That's the deal, and that was what was approved.

I, as the shepherd of the district in some respects, have to make sure that we're saying within the structure of the day, we're gonna do that.

But please don't think that this is fifth graders sitting in a chair for 120 minutes.

The reason why this curriculum was adopted was because it is a panoply of different activities.

Hands on, small group, independent, there's all sorts of things that go on in 120 minutes.

It's not like a kid is just sitting in a chair, you know, listening to a teacher lecture.

So, you know, again, I know there's a lot of people that care deeply about this and they want to be very clear about what they think is best for their child.

I think that's wonderful.

please just reach out to your principal and make sure that they are aware of and that they work with you on creating a waiver and it's possible that the waiver might want to include more time for music those are things too but as a district we need to be very clear about trying to have some sort of expectation that we can then modify from But the thing that worried me the most was that the district didn't even have a standardized set of expectations of what English, math, history, science, art, music looked like.

And that's where this all came from.

And the last thing I'll say, I know it's 501, but the last thing I'll say is it's not like this was done in a vacuum what was happening was large conversations with multiple schools around their current structure and trying to find a kind of best fit that would say look this seems like a pretty good baseline and if we want to do a change let's work off of this baseline rather than some other baseline.

So I'm happy again to answer any questions.

I know a lot of people have emailed me and trying to get back to you.

But really please know that with the recess conversation, it's really not about recess per se.

It's about making sure that the child, especially our K-5 children, are getting a holistic education in a way that we deem that we're hitting the state rules, the district rules, and what's great for kids.

So thank you.

All right.

Thank you.

And then we will pick back up at the introduction of our new student board representatives after public testimony.

But since it is 5 p.m., we're going to move into public testimony.

Board policy 1-400 provides our rules.

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

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

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

I'll now pass it off to staff to summarize a few additional points and read off the testimony speakers.

Thank you President Topp.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

For those joining by phone, the beep will be the indication that time has been exhausted.

Moving into our list now, for those joining by phone, please press star six to unmute on the conference line.

And for everyone, please do reintroduce yourself when called, as I may miss some pronunciations as we move through today's list.

The first speaker is Diane Tiao.

My name is Diane Tiao.

I teach second grade at Wing Luke Elementary and this is my 14th year as a classroom teacher.

I'm also a parent to a second grader and kindergartner.

I wanted to address two things today.

First, the value I bring as an educator is not easily quantifiable.

There are lots of numbers going around attached to my worth and absent from much of the conversations is what we hold every day.

I carry joy, but I also carry trauma, gun violence, abuse, instability, and it is heavy.

but I carry it well because all my students know they're safe, seen, heard and through it all they grow and learn.

And I don't do this alone which brings me to my second point.

There's this idea of doing what's right by children and these are words I've heard the superintendent say often but that feels very different from where you and I stand.

You need to balance a budget which is your job but it is misleading to say that any of it will be right for kids.

Making cuts to the most vulnerable populations is not to the benefit of kids.

Special education has been talked about a lot and for good reason, but I wanted to highlight multilingual supports today.

It has become increasingly more difficult to even qualify for ML supports because families are swayed by a central office to declare their children speak English even if they speak another language at home.

Under the new TA, 534 elementary students would lose ML services altogether.

With new ratios, if you have 32 students or less, you get no ML support in your building, all to save on paying for insurance for staff.

So positions are only funded at 0.5 and 1.0.

I heard from ML Certs that the long-term plan is for the district to get rid of IAs altogether.

The cornerstone of many school communities and families access points to the building.

This is not equitable.

Kids don't get what they need.

I urge folks at the district to keep visiting schools more than once to better understand the repercussions of these cuts because behind every number and ratio of every real lives making do with what we have, which already isn't enough.

I also urge folks in the district to rally in Olympia alongside educators to demand for more funds.

Thank you.

The next speaker is Matt Bertness.

Good afternoon.

My name is Matt Burtness and I'm a second and third grade teacher at Dunlap Elementary where I've been teaching since 2011. I want to start by saying thank you to Superintendent Schuldiner for his email from September 6th.

It is rare to hear an apology from an SPS superintendent but it is greatly appreciated when someone in a position of power can realize they made a mistake and attempt to make amends.

I'm here to speak today about another mistake that has been made during recent bargaining and for numerous years in the district.

When SEA was bargaining with the district during the proposal on multilingual services for our recently ratified CBA, SEA was advocating for current contract language in regards to supports for our multilingual learners.

While I personally feel like this was still insufficient, I could tolerate maintaining our current service model and staffing ratios.

However, the districts pushed to compress FTE and completely remove partial staffing allocations for IAs while at the same time reducing the partial staffing FTE of certificated staff to only 0.5 or 1.0 means that we will have hundreds of students across the district losing the multilingual staffing that they're currently receiving.

While I am thankful it was clarified that there will be no rifts this year or next year, school staff know all too well that displacements are a very unfortunate reality of this change.

I also want to draw attention to another change that was implemented in the recently ratified multilingual CBA, which states that a task force will research and recommend digital English language development online tools for new to country emergent English learners K through 12. This is a far cry from our former bilingual orientation center and newcomer services that were previously offered and then systematically dismantled by the district.

And while I'm also a big believer in inclusion I have to reference Superintendent Schuldiner's recent sound side interview on KUOW where he stated doing everything on a screen is too much.

Kids need to engage with each other.

They need to read.

They need to talk to each other.

They need to write.

I couldn't agree more.

please support our multilingual learners not just with words but with concrete actions.

Thank you.

Speaker is Chris Jackins.

My name is Chris Jackins Box 84063 Seattle 98124 on the John Marshall School Project.

Seven points.

Number one the project would demolish district history and big chunks of the historic school.

Number two the district's own review has been inadequate with no public meetings and the district is refusing to allow outside review.

Number three, the district's own environmental review states, quote, John Marshall School Building has been determined eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places and appears to meet the criteria for Seattle landmark designation.

except that Seattle Public Schools as the property owner has not consented to a formal landmark designation and the building cannot accordingly be designated as a Seattle landmark, unquote.

Number four, I wrote a letter to the superintendent asking that district staff resume public meetings for district projects.

I never received a response.

Number five.

The project architect Bassetti is the same company that located the new Rainier Beach High School on a sinking bog.

It is the same company that appeared to have a conflict of interest when it tore out the landmark Roosevelt Auditorium.

Number six.

Bluntly there are times when addressing the board and superintendent is like trying to address a group of dried up house flies on a windowsill.

Number seven instead please display your caring and talents and quickly address these issues.

Also agenda items include apparent expenditures prior to board approval.

Please cancel Eckstein field lighting.

Thank you very much.

The next speaker is Sabrina Burr.

Kocera Njerra, school board director, superintendent, consider what happens when we remove and weaken the language that tells the institution who they are responsible for and who and how they must act.

SPS previously made an intentional commitment to black boys and teens, students furthest from educational justice.

Today our board goals continue to identify black students and students with disabilities.

But I ask you, There is intentional accountability for black students with disabilities.

Black students with IEPs and 504s do not experience racism and disability and equities separately.

These systems intersect.

Our accountability must intersect too.

We cannot allow data to be invisible.

That is why policy 0030 matters.

why its equity language must remain connected in our strategic plan, board guardrails, policies, and collective bargaining agreements.

The CBA demonstrates that equity is not just in words.

It includes dedicated racial equity training days, special education protections, additional psychologists, nurses, multilingual learning supports, behavioral response training, safety protocols and stronger accountability around investigations.

This is what implementation looks like.

So my request is straightforward.

Do not erase, weaken or dilute equity language that connects our policies to practice.

Measure outcomes for black students with IEPs.

Measure discipline, safety, attendance, access, graduation and instructional opportunities and publicly report the results because the cost is not only financial It is losing learning, opportunities, trust, potential, and the loss of life even.

Our children are not balance sheet lines.

Equity and accountability is not optional.

Show us the answer not just in your words, but in your policies, contracts, budgets, data collection, and your actions.

How are the children?

The next speaker is Krista Schert.

Good afternoon, my name is Krista Schert and I am a multilingual teacher at Dunlap.

Two first graders who didn't know their letter names and weren't receiving intervention because they weren't approaching standard.

A fourth grader who didn't have the English skills to even make friends in her class.

A second grader who cried coming to school every day because school in only English was too overwhelming on top of moving to a new country.

These are just a few examples of multilingual students in our district.

Seattle Public Schools says that we are working to close the gap for our students furthest from educational justice.

Those students are who we are talking about.

When we change staffing allocations that affect multilingual support in our buildings, we not only hurt those students academically, but socially and emotionally as well.

OSPI recommends an ideal student to ML teacher ratio of 25 to one.

Adequate staffing would be a ratio of 50 to one.

And yet we are looking at entirely removing consistent multilingual teacher support from schools for at least 650 students across the district.

Diane mentioned 500 something, 100 of what I'm mentioning 650 students are just in our K-8s alone.

When we don't have multilingual staff in our buildings we hurt our most vulnerable students by removing their most supportive staff.

We need to do better and keep multilingual staff in all buildings.

Thank you.

The next speaker is Starley Chinon.

Hello, my name is Starlee Chenin.

I've previously been the Skill Center Careers and Education teacher and I currently serve as an interventionist for the Seattle Skill Center.

I'm here today to showcase the EdQuest Summer Internship Program that was put together in partnership with Lisa Clayton of Summer Learning, Kat York of the CTE Department, and myself from the Seattle Skill Center.

This internship program hired 57 high school students to work in five elementary summer learning sites.

Interns were paid for supporting classrooms for four hours a day and received four hours of weekly unpaid professional learning that earned them a 0.5 CTE credit.

When we admitted students to the internship, we had two requirements.

They would be at least 18 at the start of the summer, and they were able to navigate to their assigned school on their own.

We hired our 57 interns without looking at indicators like attendance or grades.

After we hired them, we looked at data from their 25-26 school year.

We found that 55% of our interns were chronically absent during the school year, with an average number of full-day absences of 23. On average, our interns missed 13% of the 25-26 school year.

It feels notable that this summer, only five interns were chronically absent, missing three or more days, representing only 10% of that cohort.

Our conversations with those families who didn't make it through the program were conversations of understanding and acknowledgement that holding students to these expectations were valuable learning experiences for their children.

Before and during the program, our expectations were clear.

More than three issues with attendance, tardies or absences for any reason would result in removal from the program.

This message was communicated early and often to ensure families and interns clearly understood the expectations laid before them.

And in addition to clear communication, we provided interns with a system of supports to ensure changes in behavior were possible.

When an intern was later absent, we engaged in a one-on-one conversation with them to avoid future issues.

For example, one student shared she was late because she had a broken finger.

We acknowledged that challenge and asked her what was a reasonable plan to make sure she was on time the next day.

That student made a plan to set an alarm ten minutes earlier.

We emailed the plan to the student, their family, the summer learning principal, coach, and teacher.

This student had excellent attendance for the rest of the summer.

This same student had 80 full-day absences during the 25-26 school year.

Other key aspects was we had a multilingual coach.

Okay bye.

If you want the report I have it for you.

And if you do have any materials if you wouldn't mind getting into the board office there and they will make sure they're distributed.

Thank you.

The next speaker is Captain Marie Hunt.

Good evening members of the Seattle School Board, Seattle community members.

Thank you for the opportunity to speak here tonight.

My name is Captain Marie Hunt and I serve as the commander of the Seattle Army Recruiting Company.

I'm grateful to be here once again to continue our conversation about how the Army can support Seattle students.

I want to begin by reiterating my respect for the structure of superintendent policy excuse me, procedure 4200SP.B.

I understand the importance of this policy because it ensures fairness for all organizations wishing to share post-graduation pathways with your high school students.

My purpose tonight is to build on our ongoing dialogue and explore whether there are mutually beneficial ways to expand campus access for Army recruiters beyond the current two visits per campus per year.

While the Army is traditionally viewed solely as a path of military service, it unlocks profound developmental opportunities, from access to the GI Bill, comprehensive healthcare and training in over 150 different fields.

For students who are still defining their post-graduation plans, the Army provides immediate stability and a path for upward mobility.

A strict limit of two visits per year makes it difficult to establish meaningful connections with students, especially in a district as large, vibrant and diverse as Seattle.

Our intent is never to distract students from college, but to ensure they learn about viable parallel pathways to success through enlisting, serving in the reserves or commissioning as an officer through ROTC.

I firmly believe the Army can be an active partner in helping Seattle Public Schools achieve its core mission, preparing every student for long-term success.

I respectfully ask the board to consider opening a dialogue on how we might achieve increased yet balanced campus access.

Thank you for your time.

The next speaker is Sheila Api.

Press star six to unmute.

Good evening, my name is Sheila and I am here today to testify about Seattle Public School Transportation.

My child receives special education services and relies on district transportation to get to school.

Within the beginning of the school year, my child has been late to school close to an hour in both directions.

I reported what happened and reached out to transportation, but I did not hear back from them in a timely manner.

If this was just an isolated incident to my child, I would not accept it, but I would kind of understand.

But this is not an isolated incident.

I reached out and tried to understand other parents.

All across the district, lots of parents are having a hard time with transportation, with the transportation looping around the same neighborhood, with stops, with three buses coming to the same stop to pick up.

and I particularly want to not only highlight my challenges, but a particular parent, her name is Deanna Macken, and she told me to report her story in this testimony.

The driver transporting her child needs multiple stops dropped and drove away several miles from the assigned route and then marked the child as dropped off when the child was not dropped off and then finally dropped off the child at a different stop and the child had to walk back to their house.

And this is just one story other than my own, of course, that I want to highlight.

This is not acceptable transportation standards for young students, for kindergarteners or even for any of the students and these issues need to be addressed.

I have more to say, but this is the big deal of the matter.

Thank you.

The next speaker is Sherry Vahey.

My name is Sherry Vehe and I live approximately 30 feet behind the eastern goal of the Eckstein Middle School field.

It is a backyard that I happily chose and still do.

I love being part of a school community.

But the proposal to install 80-foot LED stadium light poles that shine from dusk until 10 p.m.

is not one I want enacted in my backyard because I would not want them in anyone's backyard.

This is not a NIMBY issue.

So, to the issues.

because there's a difference between a field used by middle school students versus one refitted for rental to private school youth and adult sports activities until 10 p.m.

every night, because ambient building and street lights for safety versus multi-headed LED stadium lights set on 80-foot poles but would really be 90 feet above the ground because the Eckstein property rises 10 feet above most of the surrounding houses, because there's a difference between two, four, six, eight, who do we appreciate, little kickers?

And Jason, what the fudge kind of shippy pass was that where the fudge was your head?

I was totally open.

because there's a difference between a soccer ball kicked over the goal into your yard by a 12-year-old versus a lacrosse ball sent flying by the 20-year-old at close to 100 miles per hour over the blackberry hedge that hits the house and breaks the window.

Or worse, the unprotected head of the next door neighbor's toddler.

Do you want to see the weapon?

Dad, can you help me with a homework question?

There's a difference between I can't even focus on all the screaming that's in the field because it's the final countdown or Mommy, I can't sleep because the lights are so bright in my window.

What time is it?

Oh, don't worry, sweetheart.

It's only 830 and the lights will go off in an hour and a half.

So I implore the school board to have a spine and reject the school district's capital projects and planning team's proposal for the lights.

Thank you.

The next speaker is Ellen Lundgren.

Ellen Lundgren.

Thank you.

Okay, we're gonna move on.

Emily Carpenter, press star six to unmute.

Hello, this is Emily Carpenter and I'm here with Ellen.

Can you hear me?

We can.

Thank you.

I just want to say we would like to second everything that Sherry mentioned in her proposal to stop the building of the lights on the play field.

The light pollution, the neighborhood disturbance, the increased traffic, the carbon footprint, none of it bodes well for our neighborhood or for our schools.

I understand that some people want to play games late at night, but we don't.

Imagine these 80-foot poles in your backyard because that's what these literally are.

They are in our backyard.

Ellen?

Yeah, I'm sorry I didn't get unmuted earlier, but I was there two weeks ago.

My feelings are the same.

And Emily here and Sherry, there is a bunch of us in this neighborhood and we will become more active against this.

It's pretty outrageous.

This is a small playfield, you guys.

Have you been up there?

It's very small.

An 80-foot pole on something that's already at nearly a 50-foot elevation?

It's crazy.

And what I don't understand is whose idea was it?

Is it to make money?

You're going to spend $1,025,000 and no money that we know of to replace or maintain it?

I don't know.

I don't understand what the school board is thinking.

And I volunteered at the school.

So it isn't that I don't love Eckstein and don't love the kids.

On the contrary, I do.

Thank you.

The next speaker is Perry Erickson Brown.

I can see it.

Chris is there and Sherry is there.

Thank you for doing it.

Sorry.

Perry Erickson-Brown.

Okay, we're going to move on.

Laura Minter.

Press star six to unmute.

Hi, my name is Laura Minter and I'm a Queen Anne parent.

I'm here to formally call out the Transportation Department's ongoing violation of board policy 6,600 by creating arbitrary safety thresholds that compromise student safety and defies city vetted routing data.

Currently, the department denies my child access to an active bus stop at Queen Anne Avenue North and West Harrison Street.

They claim that the city sanctioned safe route to school crossing, which features an always activated pedestrian signal, is too dangerous to cross.

The authority is twofold.

First, the district automatically assigned to my daughter to this exact Harrison stop last year.

Second, to prevent her from using this controlled signal to board a bus, already opening its doors on our corner for another student, the department forces us to a redundant stop two blocks away.

Meanwhile, that secondary stop allows out-of-boundary families to cross wider, busier arterials to get there.

these uneven thresholds directly break policy 6600 which explicitly mandates that the district provides safe transportation aligned with the city's traffic safety committee map the board policies haven't changed the city maps haven't changed and Queen Anne Avenue hasn't changed yet the staff is unilaterally overriding your official infrastructure rules with personal subjective choices The systemic failure repeats down the line, where in order to avoid a similar official crossing, the current route forces the school bus onto the highway for two blocks, requiring an unprotected left turn across multiple lanes of oncoming traffic.

The NHTSA explicitly warns against these high-risk maneuvers, and yet the Department deems them safe.

On top of this, the transportation director refuses to explain why the district is not following the safe routes map.

We ask that the board enforce policy 6600 and direct the department to follow official safe routes designations and mandate an immediate review of this route to eliminate hazardous highway detours and wasteful backtracking.

Thank you.

The next speaker is Juliana Rigg-Hillard.

Good evening, my name is Juliana Rigg-Hillard.

I don't do this very often.

You're faced with a difficult decision.

On the one hand, we really want school to start on time and on the other hand, I'd like you to take into consideration about some concerns.

I spend time with a special group of parents who work hard to help families and students feel safe at schools.

When families and students encounter a tricky teacher, sometimes they reach out to me.

I work with this cohort of parents who maintain a set of public records on educators in this district, and I know how powerful and important those records are for student safety.

When records are deleted from personnel files, it is harder to feel like student safety is prioritized.

Why is this a choice that we make?

Other districts do not do this and we have seen the impact.

I have personal experience with this.

My own son was harmed in the classroom by a teacher whose repeated behaviors were suppressed and administration at my building did not know of his history.

When parents don't have access to information and when principals don't have access to information and when HR doesn't have access to information, can we really say we're protecting our students?

When students must share information with each other to keep each other safe, as a community we are failing.

They are risking sharing inaccurate information or bad advice.

The CBA overrides your policies.

It is important to make sure your CBA does not interfere with, undermine, or make impossible compliance with access to personnel files.

Thank you.

And that was our final speaker.

That concludes our public testimony for the evening.

I want to thank everyone for coming here this evening and sharing with us and taking time out of your busy lives.

We'll backtrack a little bit here and go back to the introduction of our new student new school board student representatives.

So at each of our meetings, we try to begin with a focus on students.

Today that focuses on our student representatives.

We want to welcome our new student representatives to their first meeting and welcome back Representative Mangelson for her second year.

We will hear their comments in a moment, but first I want to give each of them a chance to introduce themselves, tell us a little bit about who they are, and share what brings them to this work.

So I don't know which way we want to start.

Hi, my name is Josephine Mangelson.

I'm a senior at West Seattle High School.

I'm really, really excited to be back for my second year as a student representative.

I learned so much last year.

It was a really amazing experience and I can't believe I get to do it all over again and do a bunch of new stuff this year.

Over the past couple of weeks, I've gone to to meet the other new student reps, and they're amazing, and I'm really excited for all of us to start working on new projects together, start asking questions and making comments during board meetings together.

It's a really great group, and I think we're gonna have a really great year.

I think this year, last year, we were able to accomplish a lot with Policy 1250 which is the student rep policy so we were able to change that so this year we have four instead of three student reps which I think is amazing and I think this year we have plans and it's going to be great.

Thank you Representative Mangelson.

Others?

Hi everyone, my name is Eliana Fonce and I am a current junior at Chief South International High School.

This is my first year serving as a student representative for the Seattle Public School District and I'm really excited to work with my fellow student representatives as well as the school board and the superintendent to help improve educational experiences for all students.

Thank you.

Hello everyone, school board and superintendent.

My name's Johanna Michael and I'm a senior at Franklin High School and this is my first year serving as a student representative and I'm very excited and honored to have this position and I cannot wait to work with my fellow student representatives here to hopefully make lasting and very impactful positive changes through our Seattle Public Schools district, thank you.

Alright, so now we go into comments.

So do any student representatives have additional comments on material for tonight?

Representative Mangelson?

We originally planned for our comments to just kind of be our introduction, so I think we already did that, but so no further comments.

Perfect.

Then we will move right on to board committee and liaison reports.

So just I want to preview a few items that will be on our 923 board special meeting agenda.

We will have a safety and security update.

We're going to have a Roberts Rules of Order training from WASDA.

Something we talked about having as a board as well as having our council and board office come and do a little policy training on what some of our policies say.

of how we work as a board.

We will also the board will also be taking positions on ballot initiatives through resolution.

So just we will have a next meeting next month and those are kind of the topics.

So with that, do other board committee chairs or liaisons have any reports?

Director Lavallee Yeah in the Operations Committee in our last meeting we discussed the facilities master plan the creation of it and what that looks like as well as where we think we can continue to improve you know both with the direction that the board is giving to the superintendent and then the superintendent staff as well as how we develop some of our ed specs that feed into that process of developing a facility master plan as a new one comes up in the future we discussed as well the relationship between the facilities master plan and the strategic plan and kind of the need for updates to both of those coming up that need to be done kind of in parallel because they feed in one feeds into the other so that was the bulk of the discussion in our last committee meeting Thank You director Lavallee other board chairs or liaisons director Mizrahi

I'll just say POCO Policy Committee has not met.

We're meeting on the 23rd so I don't have an update but we'll have one at the meeting on the 23rd or the next regular meeting.

Director Song.

The finance and audit committee met on September 1st.

This committee we're tasked with four things.

We're looking at our large categories of deficit spending.

So what are we spending?

What is the process for budgeting for that category of spending?

How do we track against our budget?

And what are some board actions that we can take to improve either the budgeting process or hopefully reduce that deficit spending?

So at our September 1st meeting, we looked at purchase services.

Those are largely our contracts.

We went through them line by line.

It was a very stimulating conversation.

After that, we did go through some of the board action reports that you see on this evening's consent agenda.

the committee's recommendation was to indeed recommend these for approval and put them on the consent agenda.

Our next meeting is September 22nd and that is a audit themed committee meeting.

We will be going over some completed audits.

We are also going to be talking about a board initiated HR audit.

We have identified a contractor and we're going to be starting that process.

So I look forward to meeting with my committee members.

Thank you.

Oh, and it is WASDA General Assembly this Saturday.

So I look forward to representing our board.

Thank you.

All right.

Other board directors.

All right.

We will move right on then to their consent portion of today's agenda.

As always, directors may pull items from the consent agenda for discussion if they wish.

May I have a motion for the consent agenda?

I move approval of the consent agenda.

Second.

Approval of the consent agenda has been moved by Vice President Briggs and seconded by Director Mizrahi.

Do directors have any items they'd like to remove from the consent agenda?

All right seeing none do student representatives do you have an advisory vote for the consent agenda?

On behalf of the student representatives we advise yes.

Okay, perfect.

Seeing no items removed from the consent agenda, all those in favor of the consent agenda signify by saying aye.

Aye.

Yes, aye.

those opposed.

All right.

This consent agenda passes unanimously and we are going to move right along.

I'll look at board directors here.

We have our action item.

We have one action item.

Do you want to take a quick 10 minute break or do we want to keep a quick 10 minute break?

So we will reconvene here at five.

It's going to be 11 minutes.

Everyone we will.

550. Alright, it's 5.51, I don't have a phone.

All right.

So we have approval of the collective bargaining agreements with Seattle Education Association.

Can I have a motion on the item?

Yes, you can.

I move that the school board authorize the superintendent to execute the 2026-2029 collective bargaining agreements with the Seattle Education Association that are consistent with the tentative agreements ratified by the Seattle Education Association membership on September 15, 2026. The superintendent is further authorized to make any additions deletions and modifications deemed necessary and to take any necessary actions to implement the terms of these agreements.

Immediate action is in the best interest of the district.

Second.

Motion from.

Director Rankin, second from Director Mizrahi.

All right, and I'm just going to pass it over to Superintendent Schuldner to present on this item.

Sure.

Well, good evening again, everyone.

It is really with a lot of happiness and pride and thanks and gratitude and all sorts of other adjectives that I could probably come up with that I am able to present this presentation.

There are documents that are online.

The board, of course, have been given a lot of things.

But what today is is a culmination of months and months and months of incredible hard work from SCA, from SPS, from the community, from all staff, and from every single person who wanted to make sure that not only did our schools open on time, which they did, but that we are able to move forward for the next three years.

This contract includes raises for staff.

It includes longevity for a group of SCA members who deserve it.

We have certain things in the previous contract where after your 10th year, your contract really wasn't moving.

We love our staff and we want to incentivize people to stick around and we're really proud about that.

We also, as I'm sure anybody who's been reading any media knows that special education is a very big deal for us and we really, I think, got to a place that serves our children and our staff well.

I do want to point out, just to anybody listening, that the way negotiations work is that You start at two very, very different places with the idea that you're going to come to the middle.

And I'm really, really happy to be able to present this to the board around where we ended up with special education.

of course we need to study it, of course we need time, of course we need a runway to figure things out.

But what's in this tentative contract is the idea that we're not just gonna study it, is that we're actually gonna act on it.

And that's really important.

I think Seattle, for better or worse, is known as a process city and not necessarily an outcome-based city.

and I think that it is really important that we were able to in this contract, and I wanna thank SEA for this, to really say by year three we're gonna have something and that what's really awesome about this is that whatever that is, it can only stop if both sides agree.

That's really powerful because what that is saying is that SEA and SPS now really trust each other.

and that trust only came from the hours and hours and hours that we spent in this building, that we spent on that patio over there, that we spent wandering around to the deep recesses of this building, really just coming up with some really thoughtful things.

and there's little stuff that might not seem like a big deal but really is.

There's protections around LGBTQIA+, there's protections around immigration, there's protections just around safety and security.

A CBA with a large union, it's hundreds of pages long and it really does touch so many different topics.

Now is it perfect?

No.

Did the district get everything it wanted?

Of course not.

But what I think what we saw was real collaboration between a union that put the students first, put the staff, in front and center but also understood this kind of the reality in which we live in and so I welcome all of your questions.

I really do want to thank SCA again for their thoughtfulness in the late nights and the deep care that everybody took to get this here and I was thrilled to hear that SCA ratified it.

yesterday and I want to thank this board for being able to turn around this so quickly that, you know, the ratification from SEA was yesterday and now we're putting it on the agenda for today.

That is not normal.

The fact that we were able to do this so quickly I think is a testament to the desire to really move forward and make sure that our district is on a great path for our children.

However, I appreciate that it is not perfect.

I appreciate that there's probably lots of questions from the board, and I'm happy to answer them.

And some of the questions that you ask, I might defer to our incredible staff that's sitting over there.

So with that, I turn it back over to President Topp and await your questions.

Questions or discussion from the board directors?

Great.

Director Song.

Thank you.

Can you help us kind of understand the financial implications of this contract?

And then like a year one, year two, year three, this board passed a resolution in May kind of encouraging us to come up a contract that was going to be financially sustainable for this district.

And I'd love to hear what your take is.

Absolutely, and first of all, I want to thank this board for being very clear with directions for a superintendent.

I've been a superintendent for a long time.

You don't always get clarity from a board, and so it was made clear that we were going to do whatever we could to support our staff and our students, but within the reality of the budget crisis we're in.

we are broke, we have an $87 million deficit, depending on how you look at it, and we're gonna have about $40 million left in the bank after this year.

You, as a wonderful board, passed the budget, and that budget that you passed included COLA.

So we were already kind of thinking that that was gonna be coming.

So the good news is that this contract that you will vote on, one way or the other, already kind of takes into account what that is.

Now, we're still dipping into our savings, right?

But we were very clear about that when we presented to you.

And so what I was really thankful around from SCA was a reality and an understanding of our current situation.

the cola that's in the contract allows us to catch our breath.

Now there are some additions, things like the longevity, but those met out to not that much.

There's this wonderful part that is in the contract around VEBA, but that doesn't start until the second year.

So what I feel very comfortable about with this contract is that it gives us a year of breathing room.

Now, I've been very clear, this year, starting now, the 26, 27 school year, is going to involve a lot of cuts.

We're gonna have to save money, we're gonna have to do that, but this contract actually allows us that breathing room.

If we had agreed to a lot more, we weren't gonna be at that 40 million, we were gonna be at negative, and then that means binding conditions.

Now, in year two, It certainly does add more money.

So it's COLA plus 0.5 or COLA plus 0.75, depending.

And it does add some other FTEs.

But the hope is that through the hard work and determination of the entire district, over the course of this current year, we're gonna be able to save money so that we will be able to kind of be okay.

And again, some of the things that are in here, like in addition of six psychs, is something that we wanted to do anyway, because there's new laws that are coming down the pike that's gonna actually make the timelines tighter for the evaluation process.

So we're happy to be clear to SCA saying, look, we will add these folks, it's right for kids, it's right for the union, but adding six people is, it's about a mil, depending on the salaries.

but that's one million that's gonna actually serve us so that we can serve our special ed kids.

There's an addition of five nurses over the course of these years.

We can figure out how to do that but the large, large, large piece of the puzzle is that salary and going to COLA, COLA plus .5, COLA plus .5 for the for the certificated, it keeps us well within that kind of dollar range we were thinking.

And so I feel very comfortable that certainly for the 26, 27 school year, unless something crazy happens, which it could, right, like a huge lawsuit that we have to pay out, yeah, that's money that we're not counting on.

some huge expense that we have to dip into our savings.

But as of now, the way that this CBA is being presented gives us kind of a year of breathing room and then allows us to do some really thoughtful cuts.

Now again, it's gonna happen, right?

But what was nice about this CBA is it gives us the year to really do that thoughtfully.

In year two, yes, there are some things that will add some expenses, but it's not a large expense.

COLA plus 0.5, we think we can afford if we've tightened our belts this year.

I think over the course of this process I learned something new that for example about the effect of IPD so I think it would be interesting for us as we're developing the subsequent budgets to really understand what is funded by the prototypical formula and what is above and beyond so for example I can see immediately the prototypical formula does not fund these additional nurses and psychologists and what I think is interesting is like at the same time the state is requiring us to do increase work that would require increased staffing but then we're also not funded so as we're developing the budget it would be helpful to understand the limitations

Yeah, I would be thrilled to point out all of the unfunded mandates that we have from the state, and I think our wonderful partners in SEA would be very happy to join us in pointing that out as well.

One of the problems with being a superintendent, and there are many, is that you can only play the hand that's dealt to you.

And we have been dealt a hand that includes lots of rules and regulations and not a funding formula that comes anywhere close to that.

And so my hope is that We get through this wonderful process, and we all hold hands and link arms and say to Olympia, you need to fund us appropriately.

This contract, I think, gets us to a place that we can have some breathing room.

But if we don't fix the systemic problems that are hitting us as well as many other school districts, then it almost doesn't matter what the CBA is because the mandates, the expectations, the funding, it's just not going.

I mean, the big one that certainly SEA has nothing to do with, transportation.

We spend 77% more than what we're given because the formulas they use for Seattle are the same formulas for Walla Walla.

And the last time I checked, going across the Ship Canal is a little bit different than driving some back road somewhere.

And so we as a district have to be very thoughtful around where the real problem is.

And the real problem is the way that we are funded.

So I'm thankful that I can present you a contract I feel comfortable presenting.

I think anybody who knows me knows that I will be very blunt and say I wouldn't support something if I was going to give it to you.

This allows us, especially that first year of COLA and not doing a lot of the big changes, allows us to get our feet back underneath us.

And then by year two, hopefully we've structured the district in a way that some of our really out of step formula we can address.

And then my hope is that over the course of the three years, we all as a city of Seattle go to Olympia and say, hey, you know, you gotta fund us correctly.

And that I think will be a really big change.

and will hopefully help.

Director Mizrahi?

Yeah, we can go around to you.

Yeah, so I appreciate you referencing the direction that we gave you and I actually have the resolution.

I was looking at it and I was thinking, you know, we have these resolutions and we call for you to bargain with transparency and good faith to honor our labor partners.

but also to help achieve fiscal stability and to take a collaborative approach.

There's a lot of instruction and a lot of things that on paper could seem like they conflict.

And I think if you look at just the document of what is in the CVA, I think it could raise fears of people that what we're doing is we are, especially around the special education issue, which causes a lot of that structural deficit kicking the can down the road and adding positions so we're also making the can heavier while we do it.

But, and maybe this is going to be what in law school they would call a leading question.

It seems to me like what you were going for was solving for fiscal stability but with a collaborative approach and finding a way to do that with our labor partners and with the union.

Absolutely, and I appreciate the leading question, seeing how you were leading me to a positive answer, not tripping me up that I stole $10 million from the district or something, which I didn't, just want to be clear, is absolutely.

The direction this board gave was to be thoughtful, respectful, a true partner with labor, but also have a reality.

And sometimes friends have to have hard conversations.

And I think, if anything, this district hasn't been used to having those hard conversations in a transparent way.

And I really want to thank SEA for being willing to have those conversations, be it early in the morning or late at night.

1.30 in the morning, I rarely stay up that late, but I did it for all of you.

Not that I deserve any credit, but I just want to tell you that it was powerful to know that you had partners that were willing to stay up that late to do it.

and I think what we're able to present is a very thoughtful program.

So special ed, you talked about that.

It gives us about 18 months to really study the issue, to really look at what's possible And then to everybody's credit, what we got to by the third year is a true pilot program.

And one of the things that people have talked about is the ratios.

But all that it says in the CBA is we'll suspend the ratios.

Not that we're going to increase or decrease, but at least we're going to have a kind of tabula rasa of here is this idea of let's start from putting the kids first.

Let's rethink everything, right?

SCA and SPS inherited this contract.

It's not like we all wrote this just yesterday.

It's a contract that is additive.

Every paragraph, every page is one more thing and one more thing.

And sometimes you need to just step back and go, wait a second.

Let's be friends here.

Let's be thought partners here.

Let's start and say what's best for kids.

And I'm so thrilled that by year three, we're going to be able to do the thing.

And then I think not only will it really help our children, but it'll allow our district to be structured in a way that allows us to stay solvent.

Yeah, I guess that's what I'm getting at.

I think that anyone who's been around Seattle politics, and definitely I think school politics, Hearing the terms study group, pilots, it triggers a generational trauma response.

But this is not that, right?

These are definite things with teeth, defined terms, that both the union and and SPS have to agree to.

So I want to highlight that when I was looking at this, it was clear to me that this is different than what we hear often when we hear about study groups.

That's right.

I mean, there is a specific timeline, there's a specific outcome, and there's a specific way that the only way the pilots stop is if it's mutually agreed to.

That's really powerful.

That is a sense of trust that I hope people really recognize.

Usually you do pilots and you go, if either side doesn't want to do this anymore, you can walk away.

But what we said is the only way this stops is if both sides say it's not OK.

That's a real testament to labor being thoughtful and caring and trusting.

There's a lot of, to use your words, there's a lot of generational trauma here.

There's a lot of history between SPS and unions and just the community in general.

And I think what you see in this contract over and over and over again is we're going to trust each other.

We're going to trust each other.

And I think that's a big answer.

Now, look, is it perfect?

No.

Is there a reason to say, Ben, you could have done better?

Sure, absolutely.

But I think it really shows a true desire to make this district better within the deck that we were handed.

Director Rankin?

Thank you.

I want to start with just deep appreciation for the time, especially those last few days that the bargaining teams from SPS and SEA dedicated to coming to agreement and getting schools to open.

I think it was a tiny bit of a hiccup for people not to know until last minute, but having It's rough and it's hard on everybody and I'm really grateful for the work that everyone did to come together and get school open.

I'm especially excited to see some of the I would say equitable application of the salary increases, especially for certificated.

That's something that actually in 2022 I was really hoping to see as some kind of a graduated application of raises to support the lowest paid who are so critical in our buildings.

So I'm excited about that.

Also the career longevity, that's something that going back to at least six years, I remember Director Hampson talking about Everybody needs a career pathway and we can't just have people stop.

So that's really exciting.

That's also not really our business in a way, as the board.

But the concerns that I have are much bigger picture.

And I'm not concerned about whether educators deserve the protections and compensation.

And I'm also not concerned about, I mean, I am concerned about our financial.

condition, but I feel confident in that you have a plan, which is in contrast to just hoping that it all works out, which we have experienced before, and the plan being we'll get more money from the state, that's not a plan.

fantasy and so I'm not concerned about that with the approval of this contract.

The protections, the compensation, all of the things that educators fought for and were agreed on, not concerned about that.

What I am concerned about is what I have seen that predates everybody up here and I think and most people out here as well.

The cards we've been dealt, as you say.

What we have is, so my concern is around provisions in this contract that are big outliers from other systems, even in Washington state, that really conflict with the ability of the board to set direction on behalf of the community and the superintendent to be able to implement that direction and then be held accountable for results.

there has been a lot of confusion in Seattle about who's in charge of what, who gets to decide, and a lot of what would be funny if it didn't impact kids in our community so much is that a lot of the consternation around having a governance framework based on best practices was worry that the board was giving away its power.

if you know board governance and if you know policy and if you've read this agreement, 25 years ago the board gave away all its power.

It's all in the CBA.

Governance authority on behalf of the community who elects us is actually not available to us in a lot of ways.

And it makes it very, very hard to provide direction that's not performative, that's actually actionable, because when it goes to be acted upon, It is in conflict with what may be in the CBA and I'm not I'm not that's nobody's fault Nobody's trying to do that, but I have to point out this tension that exists that You know having been through as a community member contract negotiation cycles 2015 2018 2022 is the one I had an opportunity to vote on.

And now, and this might be the last time I have the opportunity to vote on a contract.

2022, I wanted to vote no because the plan of solvency didn't make any sense and I was really concerned about special education.

and I was sold a bill of goods and am embarrassed that I agreed to look collegial and vote yes so that it would look good for everybody because one no vote wouldn't make a difference anyway is what I allowed myself to be convinced and I don't care about that as much anymore and it has nothing to do with you Ben and it has nothing to do with you SEA leadership, it has to do with my experience being through this cycle and being I just won't believe it till I see it.

So in 2022, recommits to a joint special education task force with members from the Seattle Education Association, special education central office staff, and family representatives to plan for the transition to more inclusive practices throughout the system.

That was four years ago, and now we're talking like that never happened.

and that's really frustrating and sad and what was really, really hard was to see the same weaponization and othering of students with disabilities being used for leverage in a bargaining that's about adult working conditions.

It is so hurtful for, and the emails that we got about people concerned with special education, those were not parents of children in those programs.

They were parents who are afraid of those children and teachers who are afraid of those children and parents like me who have those children and know that you don't want us there.

That is rough.

That is really rough.

A specific example where policy conflicts with what's in this contract, that again is not something that was discussed this cycle, I don't believe, is isolation and restraint.

Our policy on isolation and restraint is centered around providing safe environments for children and says that physical intervention is a last resort when there is a serious risk of eminent harm.

that means you do not grab children unless there's something really serious about to happen and there's no other option.

We set that policy.

That policy was supported by the broader community and by a lot of educators.

The contract says teachers can grab kids if they feel like it.

Not in those words, but So our policy doesn't matter.

The policy that we adopted based on the values of our community is unable to be implemented because the contract says actually you're allowed to do that.

That's just one example.

There are broader conflicts or conflicting pieces about who's in charge of what but from a You talked about trauma.

I...

can't sit here representing the people who voted for me and the communities that I have been intimately involved with for so many years and my own kids.

And it's hard because I don't want anyone else to feel bad for approving this because it's important.

We have to have a contract.

Teachers have to have protections.

But my vote's going to be no because I can't, with full knowledge, say yes to violating our policies that are intended to protect our students.

and I would love to talk more about how between now and year three, can we have some collaborative conversations about where the CBA and policy and management pieces might conflict.

It would be so nice to have real honest, and I think we have leadership in SEA that would like to do that as well and would be willing to do that.

how can we talk about pieces of that to work on so that it's not the week before school starts in 2029 where then this comes up because I think we all want to do better by our children and if there's any policy, contract, anything that makes it harder for us to do that If we're serious about children, and I believe that we all are, we have to be willing to take another look at that, and we shouldn't have to wait three years.

And I look forward to hearing a lot more about special education.

I have a lot more to say about that, but I won't right now.

All duly noted.

I don't think there was a question, so I can't answer it.

But I do want to thank you for not only expressing your very deep felt beliefs and experiences, but putting this into context of not just this year, not just this contract, but this history that I think this district has had.

And so that's why I really take your words to heart.

And I think it's important that we continue not only the dialogue, but the work in terms of really getting our district to be better for all of our children, especially our special education students.

I don't think I actually have a question but I just want to acknowledge Ben that like it was fantastic that you were coming in to a new very different culture and with less than a year under your belt and willing and able to have those hard conversations that is something that we haven't had around here for a long time and I know from talking to a lot of my fellow and SPS parent friends that it was really appreciated and I appreciate it.

I also really appreciate how hard I know you and SEA worked to make sure that we had those hard conversations and schools still opened on time, like phenomenal.

That's really seemed to be a Herculean task and I'm very grateful to all parties for making that happen.

I share a lot of Director Rankin's concerns and I appreciate how articulately she laid them out so I won't belabor the point but I do think it is very critical that we do think about what the larger context of where do we go from here and what would a contract look like that we could all feel really good about voting an enthusiastic yes on?

What does that look like?

And maybe that's for 2029.

Yeah.

Well, thank you.

And I really want to not only continue praising SCA for their thoughtfulness, but when I say the district, the district is made of a people.

Many of the incredible people that spent those nights with me here are in that banquette over there.

And I just really want to thank all the great staff of SPS who were eating whatever snacks we had till very late at night, going through the notes.

In fact, some of the documents that we sent, you could see the sticky notes that were on the TAs, and the way it worked is that three people had to read it and sign off on it, and you could see everybody's signature and how hard they were working by going through each document.

So I really cannot thank the staff enough and the one person who's not here was outside counsel for us as well who we really enjoyed working with and it was a great team, it really was and we had wonderful partners in SEA and wonderful staff here in the district, so thank you.

Thanks Chris.

OK I guess I want to open with some questions around some things that we heard in public testimony around the multilingual learners.

and I think I actually noted down some things that that were brought up and that I do wonder if there are things that we address outside of the contract like the difference between having the language programming that's online that families and students have access to versus a bilingual orientation center that that wouldn't necessarily if it's not staffed by employees under the CBA, that's something that the district could still do completely and the CBA wouldn't have, wouldn't be a blocker in what's in there.

And that kind of follows the theme of Liza's comments about what district policy is and then what's in the CBA and if they're in conflict.

And so there's a benefit to taking some things out of the CBA if we can trust the district to be doing what's best for students.

And so serving our multilingual learners Anyway, I want to give you a chance to respond on that, just in case you, because I don't have all the answers.

No, and I mean not to get into kind of what was happening in negotiations, but both sides felt really deeply about having at least a curriculum.

there had been some conversation about not having curriculum for certain populations, especially in the ML world, through different classes and different grades.

And so there was a very thoughtful discussion that SEA brought up was saying, hey, can you at least get us some curriculum?

Can you do something with us?

And so I think there was a mutual understanding of saying, look, there has to be some sort of baseline.

We need to make sure that teachers have access to certain things that they weren't necessarily having, and so by putting it in the CBA, it was helpful because it's now gonna force us to do the right thing anyway.

We should be doing it, we were working on it, but now by putting it in the CBA, it's important.

Now, in terms of the other ML discussion, what is in the CBA is that we actually reduced the ratios.

We went from 35 to 1 to 33 to 1 for paraprofessionals, for ML.

But what we are doing and moving forward to over the course of three years is to say we really want to fund these as full FTEs.

One of the things, and this gets real insider baseball, is when you have partials of certain types of positions, it's very hard to find people to take partials.

And then what ends up happening is that people are moving over the place and they're always looking for that full FTE, that full job.

And so we've had lots of vacancies in positions because they're partial.

and what we really wanted to say was, we want to support our kids, that's why we're lowering the ratios, but we want to make sure that the way that we're supporting them is with full-time folks.

The other thing, and again, I would defer to Michelle Oda, who was a great thought partner and a director and a head of our ML program with all of the SEA folks, was saying, hey look, if you're not gonna get support, then Central has to support you.

Now, to be clear, that already happens.

There are many schools that have a handful of ML students that don't have paraprofessionals.

The district is already providing that support, so there's already this kind of built-in system.

but what we really wanted to make sure of is that if we had these positions, we would be able to staff them, that we'd be able to have people stay in the same building.

It goes back to this kind of sense of longevity of saying, look, we want to invest in our people to stay in the same buildings with the same kids for an extended period of time and I think that we were able to do that in a thoughtful way, but I do wanna give credit to the three people that we heard from in terms of our ML conversation.

I think it's an iterative process, but to your comment, Director Smith, is this is not, it's not the end game, it's just the beginning.

So if we feel like we need to support more kids, we can do that.

There's nothing in the CBA that says, Ben, you can't spend more money, right?

I mean, or have more staff.

So I think that we're going to be very thoughtful about that.

But what I like about what's in the CBA is it's an actual real understanding of how staffing truly works so that we can get full-time folks into classrooms with our children in our schools and they can stay there to create those relationships.

Because anybody who's ever been in the classroom, the old adage of culture eats strategy for breakfast, relationships eats everything for breakfast.

And if you can create those relationships between the adults and the children, that's worth so much more.

I just want to comment a thought that I just landed on.

But that in, I think, typical union management negotiations, it would be foolish of the union to expect management to do anything beyond what's in the CBA, but this is not a typical union management relationship because on the management side, we aren't negotiating for profit.

We're negotiating for what's best for students.

And so the financial side of it is definitely a constraint, but we want to find all the ways that we can serve kids on both sides.

So hopefully that is a distinction worth making.

I also was wanting to know more about the AI agreements.

Sure.

That's my day job, so I have a lot of opinions, so I am very curious about what we're committing to.

Sure.

I can speak to a little bit of it.

And again, I don't ever want to speak for the union, but I think the union had a really, really strong and important position, which was We believe in humans.

We believe that teachers as people, paras, secretaries, support staff, SEOPs, every human that's in a school matters.

And what we wanted to say was to basically signal to the world that this district believes that too.

And we really tried to find the appropriate language because on the flip side, you don't want to hamper a district from being thoughtful around using technology to make things more efficient.

We have smart boards, not chalk boards.

I don't want anybody to be like, well, chalk, you gotta worry about the chalk industry.

No, you wanna make sure that we have the best technology possible so everybody can use it.

But what I am appreciative of our partners with SEA was to really make sure that we were saying we're supporting the people with technology, not supporting the technology with people.

And so there are good things that AI can do.

There's good things that technology can do.

And you don't want to throw out the baby with the bath water, but you want to say that it's in service to the adults who are having the relationships with the children, not the other way around.

How much does the agreement speak to student access to AI?

Because it's a CBA with the adults, it doesn't really speak to that.

Now that is a other good, very important topic that I would love this board to take up, because that is definitely your purview, and certainly something that the district is looking at, but this is really about how we're dealing with our staff, not necessarily our students.

and our informational study session on technology and that topic comes up in December.

So I think the mission- November, November.

Thank you.

Even sooner.

Okay.

Well, just given the context around things being in the CBA that could conflict with the policy, I'm very glad to hear that this is not one of those cases.

It's very, the part in the CBA is very much what it should be for the CBA and then we will

Yeah, and one piece that you kind of, it's not artificial intelligence per se, but the other thing that we were really thoughtful about was the kind of use of technology for surveillance, right, which again is about our relationship with our staff, is that we have good language, strong language that says, look, the district's intent is never to surveil its staff.

Like, we are not out there running drones through the hallway, following people.

And I will say, in this bleak midwinter that we live in these days, you could imagine school districts doing things like that.

And so I'm very happy that we got some language in there that says, look, the district's not in the business of surveillance.

And that's important, because that's a use of technology, too.

Director Lavallee.

As you kicked off negotiations months and months ago, we as a board had asked you to make sure that whatever we were coming out with, we were financially solvent at the end of this.

And as everybody knows, we are teetering on the brink of that in very profound ways.

I am very nervous as we approve this as the last contract had so much optimistic thinking and as Liza mentioned previous contracts have given away so much authority that should reside either within the district or within the board that our avenues at some times are relatively limited in what we can and can't do.

So we put you very much in a rock and a hard place and the contracts in the past have put you in a rock and a hard place where some avenues are not available to you or to us as a board as well as We want students to learn at a better rate than they have, especially students who have been left behind historically by our system and are being left behind today by our system.

So we really want to see better impact students with less money.

So we put you in that position and put you in that position while asking you to negotiate this contract.

So I want to kind of honor that setup that you had for this where we have a pretty hard line here that we're trying to tread and we're trying to balance and not a great setup for you going into this.

So with that, I really kind of want to know, you answered Vivian's previous question that you do think that this will start to align with us becoming more financially solvent.

I'm a little bit worried that some of that is very optimistic thinking in a way that the district has been overly optimistic in the past.

But are we still going to be able to move students forward with this?

Yeah, no, it's a great question.

So I appreciate that I think I am being a bit optimistic, but that's part of my charm.

No, is that it allows us to fight another year.

What this CBA really allows us to do is buy us a year to do the cuts we need to cut.

Last year, in the first six months that I was superintendent with this wonderful team, we were able to save about $50 million.

but we were dealing with, at the same time, spending much more than we were taking in.

This CBA, along with the other CBAs that are coming to the board, would allow us to buy the year and then the savings that we create actually would add to and not take away from.

So we lost $20, $30 million this year, fund balance going from 70-ish to 40-ish.

and I know that's 30 million, but we kept eating away.

My hope is that this coming year with this budget, it allows us to stop the bleeding and then it allows us to fight another day.

I'm not saying that at the end of the three years we're gonna be in this amazing rosy shape.

I think that we can keep our head above water.

But that's in acknowledgment of still more very difficult decisions that we are going to have to make.

And to your point, the CBA that we all inherited really tied our hands to some of the ways to save money.

The way that ratios work, the way that schools work, we just can't do it.

And that's one of those issues, is once you have ratios in a contract, it's very hard to change them and I will say that I was very thankful that the SEA and the district came to a conclusion around some positions that we looked more towards just a flat FTE rate rather than a ratio rate because the ratio rate is actually what ends up hurting us in the long run.

So, you know, look, I don't want to be Pollyanna-ish.

I'm not saying that, my God, the CBA solves everything and now we're all good, but it allows us to keep fighting.

If we had a different CBA, if we had something else, we were going to cross that line of demarcation at the end of the year and the game would have been up.

And now I think this buys us one more year.

I've got two more for you.

We heard a lot from our community.

We heard a lot from our labor partners about SPED services within our schools.

We're going to be doing a trial in three years of rearranging some things.

how in your mind at this point how not having it fully figured out but how does that start to better service students that right now are struggling to access all the services that they need?

Yeah, I mean, I think one of the great things that, again, with negotiations, one side starts on Pluto, and the other side starts on Neptune, and then they start to get closer.

The unfortunate thing is that an idea that we had on August 11th, which was different than the idea that we had on August 12th, became this kind of like clarion call of, oh my god, the district's trying to hurt people.

never was the case.

You just, in negotiations, you start at ends and you start to say, hey, let's figure out where we're gonna go.

What I appreciated about where we ended up was on three different things.

One is is a belief system.

And the belief system, and again, I would never want to speak for the union, but they've been very public about this, is we all believe that we want kids to be served in the closest neighborhood school that they want to go to.

And that what I believe is that with that pedagogy, in the third year, that's gonna be driving the pedagogy.

The second thing was that we wanted to make sure that individual kids were served with the things that they need, not just being treated as one of a classification.

That's something SCA's been public about, it's something we've been public about, and I think that that pilot is going to speak to that.

And the third is a very deep understanding of the way that we spend money for children might not be the most effective, I won't even say efficient, but effective way of doing it.

And there was an agreement there, too.

So I think that those three tranches of ideas allows me to have a lot of faith in that pilot program.

But because I am one of many important voices, it gives us that 18-month kind of trajectory to get something done, because to Director Rankin's point, in the last CBA in 2022, there was a conversation about a conversation, and it was a conversation, and it didn't actually lead to the outcomes.

With this one, we actually are tying it to an actual pilot with actual actions.

My final question for you within this is in the Audit Committee there had been some review that came out from an audit where it covered some truly bizarre stuff with some substitute policies that seemed to really cost the district a whole lot of money.

and this is just stuff that is not really how ideally we should be operating.

Was there any movement on trying to get some reforms there so that we can be doing the right things?

Yes.

Yeah, no, and thank you for the question.

And thank you for the Audit Committee for highlighting one of the more kind of bizarre parts of our CBA.

And again, this is no knock on SEA.

I understand deeply the idea that if somebody is absent, that impacts the school and there is a cost to that.

but the way that it was metastasized in our day-to-day operations was bizarre at best.

And so I wanna thank the SEA for being thoughtful about putting in some more rational rules around how substitute monies are paid, how substitute monies are actually allocated.

So yes, I think we made some good steps, but I will say that because the substitute reimbursement is so complicated and is so out there.

We didn't, I think, address all of the facets that we could have, but the good news is we addressed some of the most serious ones in terms of people getting paid for different things and other people not getting paid and it not being necessarily tied to the actual work that was being done.

And ASEA and the district really came to a conclusion that we can figure that part out.

There's some other things that were really long-time history stuff that we didn't get to, but my hope is that we can continue those conversations because there was very much a willingness on both sides to recognize, hey, we both inherited this.

This is here because of probably 30 years of additive negotiations without a real step back, so I'm proud of where we got to.

Excuse me, I hope the union is as well.

But is it all solved?

No.

But I do think that it puts us in a much better position than we were previously.

Thank you.

So I think this is one of the more important votes we take as board directors.

And I just want to thank my fellow board directors.

This was a quick turnaround for materials.

I know there was a lot of reading and questions that board directors got through in the last less than 24 hours.

So thank you from me for being willing to do that.

And fundamentally, I think that Education is a people-driven service.

Our educators are the people doing the work every single day and we need to make sure that they are supported and compensated so they can do their work well while doing our primary duty of delivering our services to students, educating kids, making sure to provide them access for what they're going to do next all at the same time of being fiscally responsible.

So I think all of those things are happening at once and that is a tight rope to walk and I don't think that this agreement is 100% perfect but I think it takes a lot of steps in positive directions and I appreciate both SCA and SPS Ben, Superintendent Shuldner, you and your staff getting us to this point.

It is an enormous amount of work to get us this agreement and I look forward to supporting it tonight.

And I want to look at our student representatives to see if they have any comments.

And then I'll ask for the advisory opinion or vote in just a second.

But any comments?

No further comments?

Then I'll go to Director Mizorahi.

I just wanted to also give a special thanks to the bargaining teams, the member bargainers, because I know that's a lot of hours, a lot of waiting, and a lot of time spent, and these are people who were giving up big chunks of their summer because they care about their contract, they care about their coworkers, they care about students.

I know from being part of many bargaining teams how hard that work is so really appreciate that and also appreciate Ben you and your staff because I think folks will notice there's not a lot of technical questions up here and that's because you did a really good job of keeping us up to date throughout the process so there aren't we're not asking about this paragraph and this thing here because we we know all about it so appreciate how much you've kept us in the loop and appreciate all the hard work of the unions and our other labor partners at operating engineers and building trades as well of course

Yes, Representative Mangelson.

I actually do have a comment.

I just want to kind of reiterate what other people were saying about I'm very appreciative that we were able to get to school on time from a student perspective.

I was actually in my high school.

I was in West Seattle High School the day before school was supposed to start on the 1st, so working on a project.

And I was talking to a couple teachers, and I was like, what do you think is going to happen?

What do you want to happen?

All of them were like, we really, really want to be here tomorrow.

And I really wanted to be there tomorrow.

And I'm really glad that I was, even if it happened at 11 p.m.

And on behalf of my mom, I'll say that she was, you know, last time there was a strike, I was in eighth grade.

And so I probably I don't think I had an Instagram to check.

to see it for updates.

But I will say that my mom was very appreciative of the two-hour updates.

I was very appreciative.

I was texting my friends.

We were like, what's going to happen?

And overall, I think that I'm really glad that we started School on Time.

I know from my perspective, planning and homecoming and whatnot, it would have really messed up a lot.

So I'm glad that everyone came to an agreement.

And I think that, yeah.

And so I'm just grateful.

Thank you, Representative Mangelson.

So I'm going to call on the student representatives for their advisory position.

Sorry we would not like to provide a position.

Sorry we would not like to provide a position on this item.

Perfect.

Thank you so much.

Then I will ask staff for the vote please.

Director Mizrahi.

Yes.

Director Rankin.

No.

Director Smith.

Aye.

Director Song.

Yes.

Vice President Briggs No Director Lavallee Aye President Topp Yes.

This item passes with a vote of five yeses and two no's.

Thank you.

Thank you board directors and that was the last item on our agenda so again we have meeting coming up on the 23rd but there being no further business to come before the board the regular board meeting is now adjourned at 6 48 p.m.

Have a wonderful evening everyone.