SPEAKER_11
Good afternoon, we will be calling the board meeting to order in a moment and SPS TV will begin broadcasting for those joining by phone.
Please remain muted until we reach the testimony period and your name is called.
Hello oh hi.
Cool.
All right.
This is President Hersey.
I am now calling the October 25th 2023 regular board meeting to order at 4 18 p.m..
This meeting is being recorded.
We would like to acknowledge that we are on the ancestral lands and traditional territories of the Puget Sound Coast Salish people.
Miss Wilson-Jones the roll call please.
SPEAKER_19
Director Harris.
SPEAKER_18
Director Hampson here.
Vice President Rankin.
Here.
Director Vandernute.
Director Hersey.
SPEAKER_11
Here.
SPEAKER_18
Director Sarchu.
Present.
Director Song.
Present.
And I am not seeing Director Rivera-Smith just yet.
SPEAKER_11
I'm sure she is on her way.
OK.
So Superintendent Jones is away so we will move directly to our next item.
I will now turn it over to Director Vandernute for student member comments.
SPEAKER_18
I have none at this time.
SPEAKER_11
Okay, perfect, thank you.
Okay, we have now come to the board comments section of the agenda.
I will lead it off today with a reminder to vote.
General election ballots have been mailed and need to be postmarked by Tuesday, November 7th, which is election day.
This year's ballot includes many important sets for our community including four of our seven school board director positions.
The school board will welcome any newly elected and any re-elected directors in an oath of office ceremonial November the 29th.
and we will now move into community reports for the Community Engagement Committee.
The Community Engagement Committee met today for our final meeting before the committee is officially sunsetted.
We spent our time today reviewing some final one-pagers that will be submitted, well, actually submitted to me, and I will shepherd those along with staff with any necessary edits or changes and inclusion of some infographics and things like that.
as well as just celebrating the work that we have done in collaboration with Ms. Wilson-Jones, but mostly on the part of Ms. Wilson-Jones around the work plan, and utilizing that as a basis in which to plan our community engagement meetings going forward.
as well as a significant amount of work around building out an engagement structure that will provide the board an ample opportunity to do two-way community engagement, among other types, but definitely want to make sure that we are centering those.
So a huge thank you to I think all the directors at this table have joined that committee in some way, shape, or form.
But to Director Harrison, Director Hampson, for imparting your wisdom and knowledge onto me, especially as you two will be moving on to greener pastures in just a little bit here.
So thank you to everyone.
With that being said, do we have an ad hoc policy manual review committee report?
SPEAKER_04
Yeah, we do.
Our committee met this week after finalizing our policy evaluation tool, and we are now using that tool to score.
So we've been scoring policies, but as a development exercise to develop our tool, And we've made some refinements and settled on a final, that doesn't mean that it can't be updated if we discover it needs to be, but essentially the final draft tool on how we're evaluating policies for whether or not they are policies related to goals, guardrails, governing, delegation, or administrative.
And so we're now using our developed tool to evaluate the 1000 series which is the board of directors series according to the numbering that we currently use and the numbering of WASDA the Washington State School Director Association.
And so the current policy manual and our current method has just.
1000 series numbered in sequence, and there's not a designation for the type of policy that they are within that.
They're just policies that apply to the board of directors.
So we're using our tool to identify those policies as to whether they fall under a goals policy, guardrail, governing, or delegation.
We haven't gone through all of them, but we're trying really hard not to say what we wish they were, not to get into editing the policies, but it's just identifying what is this policy, what's it for?
And so, yeah, that's where we are now.
We will be meeting again in a couple of weeks to continue that and get through the whole 1000 series.
SPEAKER_11
Stick, thank you very much.
Do we have a legislative report?
SPEAKER_04
We do, I will, I was just, I'll wait, I'm introducing legislative priorities this meeting, so do you want me to just hang on?
SPEAKER_11
Yeah, just hang on to that, yeah, if that's a major thing.
Perfect, thank you.
Do we have any additional liaison reports this evening?
Nope, go ahead.
SPEAKER_02
Just a reminder that the quarterly audit committee meeting is on Monday the 30th at 4 p.m.
and day before Halloween.
Scary audit stuff.
Yes.
SPEAKER_11
Spooky scary.
SPEAKER_02
And also just a note by policy for it.
There's kind of a education process that we as a district are going through in terms of the not just the.
Us as board and staff but also in making sure community folks know that when a audit review report that is done by agencies external to this organization is completed and requires follow up by policy that's meant to go through the internal audit committee.
So instead of what has historically happened is different reviews and reports just kind of.
All over the district shelved and not really any clear process for whether or not there's a corrective action plan.
So.
If folks know of things that are reports or reviews and audits that have that the district has had that aren't going through that process to please forward that on to our internal audit team so that they can get that teed up to to go through that process and look at whatever feedback that we have been given and whether it's from OSPI or the sorry Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction state auditor's office that we have a process for reviewing those reports and making sure that there is there are corrective action plans put in place and that is much of what we will cover in our agenda on Monday along with a report from our enterprise risk management internal enterprise risk management committee.
And if anybody wants more information on that we've now have a one pager on how internal audit relates to enterprise risk management and what role it serves with the district.
The internal auditor is the only other person who reports with a dotted line to the school board.
SPEAKER_11
Awesome.
Thank you Director Hampson.
Do we have any additional board engagement to discuss tonight.
Director Harris take it away.
SPEAKER_05
Thank you.
Had a district 6 community meeting on Saturday with lasagna.
Robust conversations.
A great many complaints about closures consolidation opportunities for community engagement.
I go there to listen.
The folks that attend those meetings know very well that I am but one of seven and any opinions expressed are my very own.
Next District 6 community engagement meeting will be on Sunday not a Saturday as per usual.
November 19th.
at the High Point library and that will be four days after the release of drafts to this board which could potentially not for sure address some of the proposals for school consolidation and closures.
I was pushed back pretty hard on Saturday about guiding principles.
Well Director Harris are you in favor or are you not.
Well I can't answer that question without understanding the details that would go into making that list.
And as of last Wednesday's board meeting we had a robust conversation about that.
I was asked and challenged in fact to put together Director Harris's guiding principles.
Which for me will be something along the lines of how small a school it is how close other schools might be whether or not those other close schools have room.
If there were a consolidation to take place how much money we are currently spending on transportation.
much additional money we would spend on transportation and whether there are unique programs and or populations in those schools.
Those are the criteria that I have tried very hard to think through and it's quite the chore to determine that information.
And it's my I don't want to say assumption because we know what that word means when you break it apart.
It is my presumption that the good folks staff are working through that presently and it's my hope that when it is presented it is presented very clearly and we dig deep for unintended consequences.
Thank you.
SPEAKER_11
Awesome, thank you.
Any other additional?
SPEAKER_05
Lasagna.
SPEAKER_99
Okay.
SPEAKER_11
Any other additional community engagement to discuss for this evening?
Okay.
Seeing none, I'm going to wait for 40 seconds so that we can go into public testimony because I don't think we're going to be able to handle anything other than that.
Actually, by the time I read this, we'll probably be at 430, so I'll go ahead and get started.
We will be taking public testimony by phone and in person as stated on the agenda.
Board procedure 1430BP provides the rules for public testimony, and I ask speakers are respectful of these rules.
I will summarize some important parts of this procedure.
First, testimony will be taken today from those individuals called from our public testimony list and, if 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.
Speakers from the list 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 ceded to them may decline and retain their place on the testimony or wait list.
The majority of the speaker's time should be spent on the topic they have indicated they wish to speak about.
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 will interrupt any speaker who fails to observe the standard of civility required by board procedure 1430 BP.
A speaker who refuses and fails to comply with these guidelines or who otherwise substantially disrupts the orderly operation of this meeting may be asked to leave the meeting.
Staff will read off the testimony speakers.
SPEAKER_18
Thank you, President Hersey.
Quick logistical note, if you are on the phone, please remain muted until you hear your name, and then you'll need to press star six to unmute on the conference line.
Also, as I call names, please, when you step up to the podium or unmute, feel free to correct me on the pronunciation of your name and reintroduce yourself.
The first speaker on today's list is Sumera Inayat.
SPEAKER_16
Can you hear me?
We can hear you.
Great.
So this is an appeal to the board members.
Please vote no on monthly construction budget increase.
Take it as an opportunity to review and revise this project.
As is, the project is not in compliance with Washington administrative code on outdoor school age program space, which requires at least 75 square feet of outdoor space per child.
And if that isn't possible to accommodate children on a rotating basis, With current plans, 75 square feet is impossible.
District claims this is an operational consideration, then ask them for an operational plan first.
As is, each child will get less than a third of the space that is required by law.
Code also requires that the outdoor space promote physical activities such as running, jumping, skipping, throwing, and so on.
But the only real open space will be occupied by a large play structure in the current design vision.
So activities like running and throwing are impossible or simply hazardous.
So the current plans are clearly not in compliance with the state law.
Please also review pages 8 through 10 of educational specifications and compare with the school plans before you vote.
The plans are not in compliance with ed specs.
Recess and adequate outdoor play space is a child's right.
Please don't take that away from them.
Do not consider children's best interest and to continue to allow plans in clear conflict with the Washington Code is malfeasance.
Please make informed decisions instead.
If you will, yes, you are enabling the school district in closing schools and cramming children onto practically the smallest site.
The school design team member under oath mentioned that this is the best they can do under the circumstances.
That is a small site and 500 student capacity.
I understand.
What I don't understand is why the school district gets to pick and choose which of the requirements they follow and which they ignore.
Chose to follow 500 model by violating actual law.
But chose to ignore the outdoor play space requirements.
The decisions the school district has made so far seem to benefit no one but the contractors.
Overcrowding of some schools while closure of other schools and possibly selling off school property is not a responsible or sustainable way to close budget shortfalls.
The choices we make define us.
So please make an informed choice.
Make an informed decision.
Make the right choice.
Thank you.
SPEAKER_18
The next speaker is Chris Jackins.
Chris Jackins will be followed by David Menz and then Chris Govella.
SPEAKER_00
My name is Chris Jackins box 8 4 0 6 3 Seattle 9 8 1 2 4. Thank you for pronouncing my name correctly as always.
On the personal services contracts with Seattle Parks and Recreation and university tutors five points.
Number one the parks contract is paid for by a city levy for learning and enrichment programs at five schools.
Number two the parks board report states a total cost while the contract itself on page five lists a different cost.
Number three the university tutors board report lists 17 sites 13 of which are funded by a city levy.
Number four has the district considered hiring its own staff for such programs.
Number five the reports did not attach any data to show results.
Please vote no until data is provided.
On the John Rogers project.
and the $5 million budget increase on the Montlake construction project.
Four points.
Number one, please scale back the projects and restore playground space.
Number two, under the crazy current plans, the Montlake playground would shrink to half its size.
And the Rogers Field would shrink by a third.
Number three, these oversized projects, along with Alki, would be used to wrongly consolidate and close schools.
Number four, the proposed tiny Montlake playground appears to violate WAC 1103010145, titled Outdoor School Age Program Space.
by providing a playground at half the current size and only 25 square feet per student.
Please do not close schools.
Please vote no.
Thank you very much.
SPEAKER_18
Next speaker is David Menz.
David Menz.
David if you're online please press.
Oh looks like you unmuted.
SPEAKER_14
Oh, so you can hear me?
SPEAKER_18
We can, yes.
SPEAKER_14
Yeah, thanks.
Hi, I'm Dave Menz, and I've been a teacher in Seattle Public Schools, and I'm Washington Certificated and Endorsed in Elementary Education, and I'm here on item seven, I think you might call it, respectfully requesting the board not approve an additional five million dollars for Montlake Elementary, and I hear that the prior two speakers talked about the same thing that I'm concerned about, and they said it so well.
It's about the bizarre absence of recess space.
And despite the perfect ethical legalese in the action report by Mr. Podesta for this item, what's actually happening at Montlake is actual community disapproval expressed in various appeals and SPS maneuvering over community objections to break nine zoning codes to push the boundaries toward the sky and toward the street because the project is oversized and doesn't fit there.
And nearly tripling the student body size while removing all recessed running space required for healthy schools.
So that's the focus again.
The new project removes all outdoor learning space basically in my view in favor of a token small shaped courtyard for 500 students amidst the tall buildings.
And an elementary school with no substantial recess running space is so obviously offensive that I measured the teardrop courtyard just over 6,000 square feet.
It violates Washington Administrative Code, as the other two speakers said.
It violates SPS's own published guidelines for elementary outdoor learning areas.
And SPS continues to tell the public that it's 12,000 square feet.
Well, they're doing that by counting street edge grass, second floor walkways and rooftops.
An SPS construction consultant recently testified that 12,000 square feet is okay because kids still have enough space to sit and play cards.
So this is not okay.
So please don't rubber stamp this.
Don't move more of our money to this misguided project.
Send a message.
Serve the children.
The design isn't set in stone.
It should be reduced.
Thank you.
SPEAKER_18
The next speaker is Chris Govella.
Chris will be followed by Elizabeth Reese and then Mark Fadool.
Chris Govella, if you're on the line, please press star six.
Oh, we can hear you.
SPEAKER_06
Oh, thank you.
My name is Chris Covella.
I work for the Seattle Chinatown International District Preservation and Development Authority.
Our mission is to preserve, promote, and develop the CID as a vibrant community.
I work with the real estate development department.
We serve our community, which includes families with children, by buying, building, rebuilding housing for low and moderate income families.
And I wanted to make the members of the board and the community aware that SKIPCA is applying for public funding for new affordable housing projects located at 10th and Jackson in the Little Saigon neighborhood.
We know that families with children are some of our likely residents, so we have some intersecting of our service provision.
We know our residents tend to have larger households, and we've got initial community input and research that supports this kind of programming.
So just to give a little preview, the Landmark Project is the name, and it's a joint effort by our organization and Friends of Little Saigon, which is another community-based organization in the neighborhood.
And it holds great promise for our community.
This project envisions development of a six-story apartment building that will offer approximately 71 affordable rental apartments for households earning 60% of the area median income or less.
And we're targeting the unit mix for more two and three bedroom apartments so that roughly half of those will be available for larger families.
And alongside this housing component, approximately 7,000 square feet of the ground floor will be dedicated to a cultural economic center, which would be owned and operated by Friends of Little Saigon.
And it would reflect their unique cultural, shopping, culinary interests of the Little Saigon and Vietnamese neighborhood.
So right now, we're waiting for a few important pieces to fall in place.
We're engaged with our partners, and we'd be expecting for our project to present more in 2023, 2024, later in the school year.
But I'm sure that there are many discussion items in front of the school board.
I'm just bringing this to the attention of the community at this point.
If this is something that's relevant to the board's interest, I'm happy to provide more information down the road as we've gone through further architectural design and refinements and invite members of the community to follow our website.
at www.scidpda.org for future development updates.
And the way I see it, we think this project aligns well with the educational community enrichment goals championed by Seattle Public Schools.
And by fostering global housing and cultural programming, we aim to create an environment that nurtures diverse and vibrant communities.
So thank you very much for your time this afternoon.
SPEAKER_18
The next speaker is Elizabeth Reese.
Elizabeth Reese.
SPEAKER_12
Hi.
Hi I'm Beth Reese.
I have four grown children three of whom attended Seattle Public Schools.
I have 15 grandchildren and 10 great grands all of whom are BIPOC and at least two of whom are non-binary.
I worked for 29 years for public health.
I guess taught in many hundreds of SPS classrooms maybe classrooms that you or your children were in and help train your teachers, principals, and other staff.
I have always been proud of the district's support of LGBTQIA plus two-spirit students, families, and staff.
I'm gonna use queer as shorthand for time's sake.
I use it affirmingly.
I was heartbroken listening to those who testified two meetings ago asking you to withhold your support from gender expansive and trans kiddos.
I spoke earlier today with Lisa Love, who's gotten reports of a dramatic uptick this week and last of anti-queer activism targeting your kids and staff.
I'm here to thank you for not caving and to push you, making two asks.
Show that you mean what you say by requiring professional development of every employee and contractor.
about queer issues in general and trans students in particular.
As far as I know, the only required training you have ever done was 30 plus years ago.
I conducted it of your principals.
I'm not even gonna get to the second, ah, keep going, okay.
I wanna ask you to make required training a high priority in contract negotiations.
because everyone knows that optional training just lets those who would disrespect your policies and kids like my grandkids opt out of training.
Second ask, put teeth behind your policies and posters by including queer students, especially BIPOC queer kids in your strategic plan.
Mixed race gender fluid kids like a couple of my babies are at greater risk of bullying and suicidality than almost any other group of students.
One of my grandkids is schooling online to avoid what happened at school.
Let's see measurable goals and plans to monitor your progress.
Thank you.
SPEAKER_18
The next speaker is Mark Fadool.
Mark Fadool, please press star six if you are on the phone.
I'm going to move to the next speaker, but I will come back around.
Alex Wakeman-Rouse.
Alex Wakeman-Rouse.
SPEAKER_09
Hi.
I'm Alex Wakeman-Rouse.
She, her, and white.
I'm a first grader at Dunlop Elementary in Rainier Beach and a proud SPS alum.
My mom also worked for the district for 15 years.
I'm here to talk about Dunlap's experience with the October staffing changes and to ask you and the district office to improve family engagement.
For these recent changes we have not been provided information on how many schools were affected and why.
I know there's an online FAQ but we still have unanswered questions.
We reached out to board directors and the superintendent but nobody's reached back to us.
And we know we aren't the only ones as you'll hear later today.
Dunlap's a Tier 1 school, 80% low-income, 95% BIPOC, 40% ELL.
We have many low-income housing buildings and a tiny home village in our zone.
We're a highly mobile population.
Our kids are resilient and amazing, and our school staff know the name of every child in our school.
But this type of mobility at our school is more the reason to have stable staffing.
We just lost two teachers because we had 25 fewer kids than projected this past October.
But we don't know why we were projected to have 20 more kids than last spring.
So half of our kids are now, or half of our classrooms are now split, and five teachers are having to build new lesson plans six weeks into the school year for a population that is furthest from educational justice.
Point in time enrollment counts don't work for schools like ours.
Since the shuffle announcement, we've had five kids enroll.
Please do what you can to make changes to this process, whether it be advocating to the legislature, or changing internal policies.
I share this story to implore you you and the district to provide timely and transparent two-way communication and authentic family engagement on this budget situation.
Information on websites or in board meetings are just not accessible to many including our families furthest from educational justice.
We're building a grassroots coalition of parents across the city.
We're setting aside our differences because we all agree we need more transparency and more authentic engagement.
We know you are working hard.
We want to center our families furthest from educational justice but many people are really confused.
They're worried we're going to be closed or consolidated.
We've told you what we believe are well-resourced schools but those conversations were not set within the constraints of this budget shortfall.
Please bring us into these conversations.
Build in time for family to truly engage and understand what the budget situation is and what options there are.
You might be surprised to hear what we prefer if we know we can't have it all.
Thank you.
SPEAKER_18
The next speaker is Jen Lovely.
SPEAKER_08
Hello, can you hear me on the phone?
We can hear you, yes.
Okay.
Thank you.
Sorry for that delay there.
I first want to thank Alex for that wonderful speech.
I am also a parent at Dunlap of a second grade student.
As she said, we have been really impacted by losing two teachers out of 12. We are a highly mobile population.
I dove pretty deep into the data to look and I do see how far we were from the projections and I do understand that There are schools that needed teachers so badly to get under certain ratios.
And I'm totally cognizant of that.
That being said, there was no mitigation.
There was just one week notice before teachers had to replan their entire curriculum.
They still sometimes don't necessarily have the resources or the books to now teach the new grades and new split level grades that they're teaching, which they were not prepared for.
All of our students right now are hurting.
With this, parents are scared that as we talk about closures, the decisions will be made in the same way, the same very opaque way that they just were in this past process.
There are ways to do this with community involvement which don't impact the community as harshly but still have the same outcome and results for the district.
Not including the communities and not including the teachers and the principals in this process to mitigate these effects is hurting our students.
Whether that was a decision from the district or the board and whether the next one is, I expect better.
I'm gonna go ahead and cede my time.
SPEAKER_18
The next speaker is Katie Routman.
Hi.
SPEAKER_17
Hello and good job you got it right.
My name is Katie Rotman.
I use she her pronouns.
I'm a graduate of the public school system and the parent of an SPS third grader and incoming kindergartner at Adams Elementary.
I know that my family and many others have faith in and value the public school system's commitment to do what is right for our students.
For us this meant we stuck with SPS through online COVID kindergarten and the ensuing cuts to teachers and administrators.
Now enrollment is beginning to increase in some areas.
Families are beginning to return to the public school system but that may change if we do not ensure class sizes at a minimum are aligned to the district standards.
It has come to light that there was a new unknown rule where schools are only eligible for resources if they need two or more teachers.
As an example, we were 24 students above the estimate and only needed one teacher, not enough impact to qualify.
What this math doesn't consider is the additional 79 second and third graders whose classes have been impacted by this decision.
This need is not about one teacher.
The need is about one hundred and three kids across five classrooms who are currently being underserved because of this rule.
I know that at Adams our teachers are superheroes who have navigated this change with the kids as their priority.
I know that our kids will be supported to the best of their abilities by the teachers the specialists and our principal.
What I also know is that when it comes to our kids this board knows how to make the next right choice.
I know that because we've been here before.
Two years ago when you rolled out a decision to change bell schedules that was met with a similar response.
When that happened you listened you reconsidered and you showed that students and families are the priority by deferring implementation by a year.
Does everyone like the new system a year later?
No.
But did everyone have an opportunity to contribute their thoughts?
Yes.
I am here today to ask you to continue to do the next right thing.
To delay implementation of this rule in order to hear from families who have been unable to get a clear answer to why or when this change was put into place.
How or if it was communicated to school administration and the community.
On the SPS website you can find the vision laid out by Superintendent Jones.
I found these words particularly meaningful.
High quality instructional time and highly favorable and welcoming conditions.
This vision will only be achieved if each school has the appropriate numbers of teachers for their actual enrollment when school begins.
The kids in the class of 2026 have worked harder and under more challenging circumstances than any of us can imagine.
Show that you are ready to turn those words from the vision into the action by staffing schools to meet SPS defined ratios.
Do the next right thing.
We can't solve anything everything but we can always do that.
Thank you.
SPEAKER_18
The next speaker is Laura Marie Rivera.
SPEAKER_03
Good afternoon.
My name is Laura Marie Rivera and I will start by acknowledging that we all know that there is a lot going on at Seattle Public Schools right now.
But it is incredibly disheartening that students and families are not getting what they need from the system and there is no successful route to even find the answers about what we need.
SPS has been working on communication and creating avenues reconfiguring platforms and websites for as long as I've been in the district.
You all tell us that you're going to do something but then you end up doing something else.
You reach out to the community build task forces survey the public and then just do whatever it is you were planning in the first place.
You said over and over and over that you are committed to more inclusive and equitable programs and then you go and discriminate against students with disabilities.
Even a school board director going so far as to say the words we are not worried about students like yours because but we keep we keep trying anyway.
And because for each time that you hear from me in a phone call in an email at an event testifying here at a school board meeting you need to know that there are 100 other parents that have not been able to get this far.
First, we try the Let's Talk app, and they're pretty good about replying, except their answers do not necessarily answer the questions.
Then we reach out to the ombuds office, who says they'll look into it.
They give us a date that they'll get back to us, and that date comes and goes.
And then we keep replying, and they stop responding.
So we reach out to the Office of Civil Rights, because surely discrimination against students with disabilities is something that they would put a stop to, right?
Well they said they would look into it.
They gave us a date.
The date came and went.
We follow up and they stop responding.
Does anyone see a pattern and does anyone even see a problem.
This district needs to treat families like partners in the education of our children.
And instead you treat us like average adversaries to be ignored and disrespected.
The worst part is it's our kids that are paying the price for this district's refusal to properly engage the community.
The only way to improve student outcomes is to work with us rather than sit there and decide for us.
Thank you.
SPEAKER_18
Going back to Mark Fadool Mark Fadool if you're on the line please press star 6 to unmute.
Do not believe Mark is on the phone.
So President Hersey that concludes today's testimony list.
SPEAKER_11
Thank you very much.
Thank you to all the speakers who allocated some time to speak with us today.
We greatly appreciate it.
All right.
That concludes our public testimony for the meeting.
Thank you for your comments.
We have now reached the consent portion of today's agenda may have a motion for the consent agenda.
SPEAKER_04
I move approval of the consent agenda.
SPEAKER_03
Sarju seconds.
SPEAKER_11
Approval of the consent agenda has been moved by Director Rankin and seconded by Director Sarju.
Do directors have any items they would like to remove from the consent agenda today.
Director Harris go ahead.
SPEAKER_05
I'd like to remove item number seven please.
SPEAKER_11
OK item number seven.
Is that the same one.
OK.
May I have a motion for the revised consent agenda as amended.
SPEAKER_04
I move approval of the consent agenda as amended.
Sarge you seconds.
SPEAKER_11
OK.
All those in favor of the consent agenda as amended please signify by saying aye.
SPEAKER_05
Aye.
Aye.
SPEAKER_11
Aye.
Any abstentions or opposition.
OK.
Thank you very much.
This is passed.
We will now turn our attention to the removed item which is number 7. Approval of the budget transfer and authorize and authorize the superintendent to execute a guaranteed maximum price amendment for the Montlake Elementary School modernization and addition project.
I believe we need.
Do we need a motion for this item or do we just go into it.
Yep.
So.
Director Rankin.
Need a motion.
You're good.
SPEAKER_04
I move that the school board approve a budget increase of five million fifty thousand dollars for the Montlake elementary school modernization and addition project revising the overall budget from seventy nine million eight hundred and twenty one thousand four hundred and forty seven to eighty four million.
871 thousand four hundred and forty seven additional funding for the budget increase will come from the building technology and academics otherwise known as BTA IV and building excellence also called BEX V capital levy program contingencies.
I further move that the school board authorize the superintendent to execute the GMP amendment for contract with P 5 1 9 9 for contract P 5 1 9 9 with Skanska Skanska USA building incorporated in the amount of sixty five million six hundred and twenty five thousand seven hundred and sixty three dollars plus Washington State sales tax with any minor additions deletions and modifications deemed necessary by the superintendent.
Immediate action is in the best interest of the district.
SPEAKER_12
Did you just was that a motion.
It was so long I got lost.
I second the motion.
SPEAKER_11
All right.
This has been moved and properly seconded.
We have staff at the podium.
Director Harris did you have any specific questions that you'd like to see answered.
Take it away.
SPEAKER_05
Thank you so much.
Having heard public testimony.
And having and I don't know if you were copied on a number of e-mails this board received from folks purporting to represent the Montlake Elementary School or Montlake community with respect to playground space with respect to parking with respect to apparently a sitting hearing examiners hearing for the nine different.
zone aberrations.
Can you tell us one where we are in the process.
Two where we are in the litigation or appeal process with the city.
Three whether or not we have any ADA parking and four what about the allegations of limited playground space.
Thank you.
SPEAKER_13
Thank you Director Harris for your questions.
I'm going to note that where I'm going to begin first with my name Richard Best I'm director of capital projects and planning for Seattle Public Schools suffering a little bit from a cold tonight.
But we'll note that Mott Lake Elementary School has completed the SEPA process and the SEPA process was appealed.
We went through a public hearing examiner that hearing examiner made a ruling supporting the district's decisions regarding the SEPA process.
We have completed the city of Seattle's departure process.
The departure process also was appealed.
And the director's decision from SDCI was supported by the hearing examiner.
So the public processes both in SEPA and departure process are complete.
I believe there was seven departures for the Montlake Elementary School project not nine as you alluded to that was actually for Alki Elementary School.
So.
Parking.
For the ADA we are not providing any parking on the Montlake Elementary School project site.
We had a traffic study conducted in which the traffic engineer noted that there was ample parking in the surrounding neighborhood for the.
parking needs of Montlake Elementary School at its expanded student size size of 500 kindergarten through fifth grade students.
We have also in our request tonight before you are one of the bid alternates that we are asking the board to approve is constructing a playground on top of the new gymnasium that's being proposed.
for Mott Lake Elementary School.
So similar to our BEX IV projects similar to our BEX V projects we'll have a gymnasium of approximately 7000 square feet.
And then on top of that gymnasium will be a soccer playground area with an artificial turf.
So and that has fencing around the perimeter so it will further expand the play opportunities for kids.
We'll give them the opportunity.
to run around, which was not consistent with the public testimony that was provided tonight.
SPEAKER_07
Hi Richard thank you for being here tonight.
I also I don't know if you were here for the public testimony but there are also some some accusations that that the plans for Montlake are in violation of WAC some WAC or some ed specs.
I don't have exactly the ones but do you know anything about that and can you confirm or deny what's going on there.
SPEAKER_13
I do not know that about that but I can note that we comply with all Washington administrative code and revised code of Washington.
We work closely with legal counsel both on land use and construction matters.
We work closely with staff here on the educational program to make sure that we are meeting both the physical education program needs and then also the play needs of our students.
So.
SPEAKER_07
OK so you haven't you haven't received any communications regarding specific ed specs or things that.
SPEAKER_13
I would need to go back and review the WAC reference that the public the person who testified in public testimony.
I have not reviewed that for quite some time but I do know that our project does comply.
We have to certify that to OSPI as part of our D form process.
SPEAKER_07
Thank you.
I will also if I can take a minute to congratulate you on your award.
I hear you've got the 2023 American Institute of Architects Seattle individual award.
So for your work with our schools as I understand to make our school environments more inspiring healthy and energy slash resource efficient.
So thank you Richard for all your work.
SPEAKER_13
Thank you.
SPEAKER_04
Go ahead.
I think a rooftop space is very cool.
Just saying.
But I have a question about the ADA parking.
So neighborhood parking like I knew this.
I mean I grew up less than a mile from where the school is.
So the neighborhood parking makes sense except for for disability for ADA.
So if if somebody who needs an ADA parking space and has that permit they might find a space that's close to the building but they might not.
So that's that's concerning to me is that And I don't think we can designate a spot on this, or actually no, I have seen a designated spot on the street for ADA.
So is that something that can be done?
Do we need to work with the city?
What would be the possibility of that?
SPEAKER_13
We do have ADA designated parking stalls on the street in which we've mapped the pathway to the entryway to the building, Director Rankin.
SPEAKER_04
Fantastic.
Thank you so much.
SPEAKER_15
Richard can you explain this particular bar is about increasing the budget by five million dollars.
Can you explain why that's necessary.
SPEAKER_13
Yes.
I will note that when we put together the BEX V capital levy back in 2018 it came before the board for those project approvals.
We utilized a escalation factor or inflation factor of 4 percent.
we have not seen that inflation factor come to realization.
It has been much higher in the Pacific Northwest than nationwide for construction.
And so we are currently experiencing somewhere between a six to 8% on an annual basis inflation factor, and that's why it's required for this project.
Also, I will note that the community was very clear that the play was very important to Montlake Elementary School.
The opportunity of the play and that's why we're asking for a budget transfer is there is a cost associated with that but there's cost associated also with the mechanical system and the building envelope system that our facilities operations department did not want to deviate from.
They have limited personnel and they want to standardize as much as possible the detailing for the building envelope for the mechanical system so they're not having to train personnel in a wide variety of systems.
So we have tried to remain true to keeping for the most part our buildings, masonry, and then our HVAC systems, a displacement heating and ventilation system with geothermal wells.
We're not using geothermal wells at Mount Lake, but we do have the heating and ventilation system that our facilities operations department has requested.
And that's just looking to longterm operational issues.
SPEAKER_15
Since we are using contingency reserves to cover the increased budget, what is the plan to rebuild the contingency reserve or does the capital projects view that as unnecessary at the moment?
SPEAKER_13
So as part of President Biden's Inflation Reduction Act there is incentives for utilizing green energy sources.
Geothermal wells is one of those systems that we have utilized that Northgate Kimball and Viewlands Elementary School.
We are working to get a tax rebate from the IRS to compensate approximately 30 percent of the design and the installation costs for those systems that will literally be in the neighborhood of two to three million per elementary school.
in the neighborhood of five million for Asa Mercer middle school and close to 10 million for Rainier Beach High School.
So we are pursuing that aggressively with staff and our general contractors.
SPEAKER_99
OK.
SPEAKER_11
Thank you Mr. Best.
Seeing no further questions I believe we are positioned for the vote.
Miss Wilson Jones roll call please.
SPEAKER_19
Director Rivera-Smith.
Aye.
Director Sargeau.
Aye.
Director Song.
Aye.
Director Hampson.
Aye.
Director Harris.
SPEAKER_18
Aye.
Vice President Rankin.
Aye.
President Hersey.
SPEAKER_11
Aye.
SPEAKER_18
This motion is passed unanimously.
SPEAKER_11
Thank you very much.
All right now taking a look to introduction items.
Resolution number one is resolution number 2324-5 signature of authorized personnel for state aid programs.
Approval of this item would adopt resolution number 2023-24-5.
superseding resolution number 2020 slash 21-29 to authorize Dr. Brent C. Jones, Superintendent, Fred Podesta, Chief of Operations Officer, Dr. Kurt Buttleman, Assistant Superintendent of Finance, and Richard Best, Director of Capital Projects and Planning to sign state funding assistance documents per WAC 392-344-120.
I see that we have Mr. Podesta at the podium to speak to this item should there be any questions.
Do you have any questions on this item.
All right.
Cool.
Thank you.
Next we've got item number two approval of the 20. You know what we say if you stay ready you don't have to get ready.
Approval of the 2024 state legislative agenda approval of this item would adopt the 2024 state legislative agenda as attached to this board action report.
I will turn it over to Vice President Rankin to answer any potential questions.
Do we have any.
Do you have a lead up.
SPEAKER_04
I yeah I'll just go for it.
Yeah just to intro this.
So I've been you know we've been talking about this in the public meeting about the process and getting feedback from folks.
And so now is the time where we have a document with our proposed priorities for introduction this evening.
And so there I don't think there's anything on it that should surprise anyone hopefully but.
I just want to thank our Seattle legislative delegation for its support of K-12 education and their commitment to our children and also their commitment to the work ahead.
Even though this is a supplemental budget year or as we call it sometimes a short session.
Are this agenda aims to make continued progress in areas that are important to for our students important to our community for our students.
So are the legislative agenda focuses on priorities of the district focused on addressing funding gaps and providing basic education.
We the Seattle delegation and we led the effort in the legislature last year to provide the over three hundred and seventy million dollars for funding special education services statewide.
Just great.
And we're very thankful.
And the special education funding gap is still very large and has to continuously be addressed by future legislatures.
So even though this is not a budget year we cannot go without calling out that gap.
Likewise transportation.
So in developing this set of priorities staff and I connected with a long list of community partners.
A couple of them reached out to have meetings and we had a lot of overlap in terms of what we were all bringing.
Planning to bring to the largest prioritize for the legislature.
We also collaborated and reached out to other school districts that we work with and OSPI the Office of Public Instruction at the state level before finalizing it.
And yeah I'd be happy to take any questions.
SPEAKER_11
Thank you for your work on this director Rankin.
Do we have any questions for director Rankin regarding.
Go ahead director Harris.
SPEAKER_05
Where in this legislative agenda is the concept of paying school board members so that we have truly representative school boards.
SPEAKER_04
So it's not in our Seattle legislative agenda this year.
It is in WSSDA's.
I don't.
Well we don't know yet what the top 10 priorities are going to be but there is a WSSDA position on it.
We did not make it a specific top SPS priority this year.
Harris.
SPEAKER_05
Might you consider a friendly amendment before this comes back for action.
SPEAKER_04
I mean that's up to you.
I personally do not think that this is the time to ask for that specifically from Seattle.
But anybody can make an amendment.
SPEAKER_05
And you don't believe it is the appropriate time to ask for it.
So my question to you then back would be if not now when.
SPEAKER_04
Well I think I this is again this is my personal.
I think it would be better to ask this in a budget year.
Previous legislation that has been brought forward most recently by Reuven Carlisle who is retired from the legislature proposed.
Allowing districts to elect to pay their school board directors.
I would like the state to allocate money for the purpose of paying school directors personally.
I think that the legislation was a fine step but given that we're looking at we just closed one hundred and thirty million dollar gap in our budget and we're looking at another hundred and five.
I don't want to put at the top of our list digging into that hole further by paying school board directors even though you know long term that's not what we you know that's not what we want.
But I think in terms of timing I you know I I don't think that our legislative advocacy should be focused on that over some other things right now.
SPEAKER_05
Okay, just a clarification.
SPEAKER_04
I didn't say put it at the top of our legislative agenda But I mean not that needs to be clear right, but that I mean our agenda are our our priorities, so okay Appreciate your feedback.
Thank you, but you know anybody can bring forward an amendment Any other questions on the side?
SPEAKER_15
I submitted my questions through the forum and I thought maybe we could have a discussion of them.
I think I'm surprised to learn that there hasn't been some fiscal analysis done on some of these asks because while this isn't quite a budget year, some of these are clearly financial asks and so I'm wondering when the timing of that fiscal analysis will happen and if it will change are asked at all based on the size.
In particular, I think the first set of priorities feel like specific financial asks, but after that, there are broader changes they say the word investment but I think it's hard to make it ask about knowing how much the ask is.
SPEAKER_04
Yeah.
So some of them.
So the the in previous legislative sessions the part of the feedback that we get from staff and putting together our priorities is where are our biggest financial gaps based on you know previous budget analysis.
And so I would have to ask staff what the timeline might be but in going through several legislative sessions generally.
During session, what we see is, or even before session, what bills drop and what funding might be connected with those, and then wrap those into what the impact would be for SPS.
So we because we're not specifically we're not asking for dollars we're asking for investments in these areas because that's what we want.
And so even like last year obviously the ask from OSPI and our support was for the full closure of the gap of special education.
And we didn't get that.
But so we don't put the amount so that we don't say we're asking for at least in there.
So it's not we're asking for this amount of money because then if there's not a proposal that that's that amount of money that kind of pigeonholes us.
Rather we ask for support in these areas that also gives us flexibility not necessarily knowing what bills will be brought forward.
in being able to say oh yes that that's the one that closest meets our needs.
And so we're going to advocate for that.
So it's a little bit of a chicken egg.
Does that does that make sense.
But I fully expect there will be financial analysis ongoing and we see it in our budget work sessions too as the session progresses what the guesses are on new revenue that we might get depending on how bills are moving.
SPEAKER_15
I asked I had a time was around roughly 10 million dollars of maintenance expenses that can be charged to our capital funds and I'm wondering why that would not be reflected in this legislative.
It is.
SPEAKER_04
It says allow transfer of funds to cover maintenance.
Can't remember the exact wording.
And I don't have it up on my screen, sorry.
SPEAKER_15
I would encourage us to make sure that it's in there because I think that is something that we have included in previous budgets and it's disappointing it's not available to us going forward.
And it is a significant amount of money.
SPEAKER_04
It is under stable and equitable operations under high quality and sustainable capital investments provide state capital funding for accessible high quality learning environments allow the use of capital funds to purchase electric vehicles to do allow for flexibility in the use of local capital funds to cover maintenance costs and purchase curriculum.
That's that's it.
SPEAKER_15
Is this numbered list intended to be a list of our priorities or is just a list of four items?
Or four categories?
SPEAKER_04
Oh you mean are they ranked?
I think we ranked them starting we just started with impact on students.
So basic education gaps.
Student learning.
Operations.
Sorry I missed that.
Oh student well-being.
Yeah.
SPEAKER_15
I think I just go back to like without this is a legislative ask and I think it would be helpful to ask for things ranked based on financial impact since this is a financial relationship that we have the state legislature and I just emphasize again like the ten million dollars of maintenance is in my opinion a fairly high priority because it is a large amount of money.
We've had it before so
SPEAKER_04
I'm sorry, I'm not following.
SPEAKER_15
It feels low priority when it shows up at the end of this list, but I think it's something that could be prioritized because it is a significant amount of money.
We've had it in the past.
It would go a long way to helping us close our budget deficit.
I'm keen to get that to be a prioritized ask.
SPEAKER_11
We're just talking about the placement on the list here.
Yeah.
So just bumping it up higher on the page.
Go ahead.
I was just clarifying.
Go ahead.
Director Hampson and then feel free to respond Director Rankin.
SPEAKER_02
So I. I think there's some confusion about the first of all how this is received.
Right.
And so I would I think that there's one of the things you're talking about is an important discussion that we should be having internally as we get into greater levels of transparency with our financial reporting and we are able to speak better to the impact that different pieces of funding has on our operations and our ability to close.
Instead we are generally looking in a very reactionary process as Director Rankin described where as things are being considered at the state level we may or may not benefit whether the state intended it to be a fiscal benefit or not.
And there because there are so many different interests interest groups that play into these things.
And I so I do think that there is a place for that.
I don't know if.
this document in terms of prioritizing it based on purely the the What we believe to be the fiscal impact I think if we actually did it you would probably see that the student related things are gonna end up being the highest fiscal impact things anyway, and this one would end up being relatively low on the list and the Because one of the things that I asked Director Rankin about which is I can't remember what you said about it now but that is included at some level is the nature of unfunded mandates.
And so I would I would actually I don't know if it's a disagreement but our relationship with the state is not just about money.
They set a huge number of pieces of legislation in place that are unfunded that direct us as to how we do our business whether as board directors or the superintendent and the district as a whole.
And it's not always clear who they're talking about when they write these laws.
And so there's our relationship with them is I think a bit more complex than that in terms of what we how we establish our priorities and the the thing I think is really important for us to always keep in mind is that as one of the districts that's able to raise the most funding through our levies on a per student basis in the state that we have to be really cognizant of how we kind of throw our weight around with the number of people that we have in the legislature relative to two other districts.
And so we work to really I think the extent to which we focus on the student result for me anyway is the appropriate way to.
to approach it, though I also think we need to have those deeper conversations that you're talking about relative to what is the fiscal impact.
SPEAKER_04
Um, I'll just add that this document too isn't necessarily, uh, a ranking so much as our authorization to staff and our lobbyist about here are the things that we want you to pay attention to and put your energy into.
So this doesn't go to- this as it is doesn't get handed as a wish list to the legislators.
This is saying staff, Legislative liaison and lobbyists, here are the areas that are the high priorities to address during legislative session.
And then in terms of the amount, the actual, the much bigger potential impact is the school construction formula modifications bullet that's in the addressing funding gaps in basic education.
The current school construction cost allocation program is antiquated and does not adequately reflect true cost of school construction with no meaningful increase in the funding formula in decades, etc., etc.
Even though we do get, we have levy dollars, there's some matching that comes through school construction assistance program, but the way that it works is everybody who Basically we end up paying a lot more in capital costs than we benefit from that state program.
And it really is harmful for small districts too, especially those that can't even pass a levy.
So the potential for the school constructionists or sorry for the Formula modifications is huge, and that's actually not in statute.
It's in rules at OSPI, and OSPI has been convinced by some legislators, including of the Seattle delegation, to push on that formula change because they can actually do that in rules, not in legislation, and that has the potential to have a pretty significant impact on our construction costs.
I don't know if that, yeah.
SPEAKER_07
Thank you.
I have a question aside from Director Song's question.
What did I hear you say that we don't actually give this to our legislators like this.
We do.
I mean we do.
SPEAKER_04
But this is not a this is not a here's our wish list.
This is our guidance to people advocating for like our staff to hear the areas of things as bills drop.
Here are the things that we want you to advocate for.
OK.
SPEAKER_07
I want to make sure it's OK.
If I want to give this to legislators I'm talking to any I can give them this document.
When it's done, when it's final.
Oh, yeah.
SPEAKER_04
Yeah.
Thank you.
Yeah, sorry.
SPEAKER_07
Yeah, of course.
SPEAKER_11
And so just for folks who care who might be listening at home, just because I could see how somebody might garner that.
The way that this works is Director Rankin has put in an immense amount of work along with staff to put together a one pager that does not encompass everything it possibly could about our legislative priorities.
gives a very clear track for what is the most important to us, that could be handed to a community member.
That could be handed primarily to a legislator.
But our lobbyist, Cliff Traceman, along with other staff that are relevant, will use that as kind of like a guide to inform their conversations and leave the legislator with something so that they remember what we asked for when it comes up.
Not saying that everybody always does or that it's effective in that way, but that's how the process goes.
So I wanted to make sure that if there are any other questions on this particular item that we get them.
Did you get everything?
SPEAKER_04
In addition to saying, hey, here are the things that are important to us right now, also in consulting with other districts and with OSPI and with legislators, it's also based on Like, what's likely to be up for discussion this session?
Like, we wouldn't bring in a whole new topic that's not really forefront on people's minds knowing that nobody else is going to talk about that.
So this is really about priorities that we've heard from partners, from our community, from, you know, previous legislative priorities.
and what we think is likely to be available but it has to be flexible enough so that if I mean I'm trying to think of an example like school safety invest in staff and systems to provide physically safe school buildings and learning environments for our students that's pretty wide open because You know a legislator that we haven't been in contact might bring forward something that we didn't know was going to come forward that we go Oh my gosh That's really critical for us and that definitely falls under the category of school safety and because we have that we can advocate for that bill You Have we
SPEAKER_05
Recently or are we contemplating in the near future putting out a request for proposals for our lobbyist services.
SPEAKER_11
We don't we don't.
That's not a question for me.
That's not a question for us.
That's a question for superintendent.
Superintendent hires lobbies.
OK.
Thank you.
Yeah.
All right.
Thank you Director Rankin.
We will now move on to Introduction Item 3, Resolution 2023-24-6, Certification for Excess Levies and Calculation of General Fund Levy Rollback for 2024. Approval of this item would approve the Resolution 2023-24-6, Certifying Excess Levies and Calculation of the General Fund Levy Rollback for 2024, as attached to the Board Action Report.
We have a doctor correct.
No.
Yes.
Dr. Dr. Buttleman who has approached the podium.
Do we have any questions for Dr. Buttleman on this item.
Hey.
Hey no no no no no no no.
I will I will alert him when he can no longer stand.
No that's fine.
Do we have any other.
Do we have any questions.
Director Rivera-Smith.
SPEAKER_07
Hi thank you.
Not to prolong this but I had a question I answered it in the online form and I got the answer but I don't really understand the answer so I'm not sure if you wrote the answer and can explain it better to me.
I'm trying to figure out which specific libraries we're talking about this is this is applies to because There's kind of we have our formal names are BEX VTA but they're also being called you know like general fund and capital levies because they are those two.
I was just trying to get clarity so that our constituents are voters who approve these levies know what we're talking about.
SPEAKER_01
Yeah this one's related to the operational levy and we'll update the language in the approval document for the November meeting.
SPEAKER_11
Any other questions for this time?
All right.
Thank you.
You may now be seated.
Just kidding.
OK.
That concludes all of our introduction items.
We will now move on to our board time use evaluation for September.
Can you remind me who conducted our time use evaluation for last month?
SPEAKER_04
Way.
Yeah.
And so the last time we talked about time evaluation we had some confusion about Like Lisa and I, we might have even done the same meeting.
I'm not sure.
But so I know.
So I kind of did a reset.
We were confused about who was next and how many meetings.
And so I did a reset, which I emailed to the whole board that we should be doing a month at a time and all the minutes from that month.
So we don't have to do.
one sheet per meeting.
So what is attached here is one time use evaluation sheet for all of the minutes of meetings that took place in September that were public meetings of the board.
And it's it's many minutes.
And I was really sad that the progress monitoring session got moved because we have no student outcome minutes for all of September.
Just really sad.
We have a lot of you know ad hoc committees.
created, you know, generated 645 non-student outcomes, and it's not that the work's not important, but those ad hoc committees are, you know, going to sunset, so it shouldn't be continuing, but that's just an example of something that's adding a lot of time.
One thing I can't remember if we discussed and I think I put an email at least to Lisa but I want to say to everybody is that and I'll double check with AJ but when I was part of the study for Council of Great City Schools we don't count public testimony minutes.
Those don't count for student outcomes or against us and other.
So however long the public because that's the public's time.
not our time use.
So however when you're doing a regular board meeting just subtract the number of minutes that are in public testimony.
Yeah.
SPEAKER_11
Awesome.
Thank you.
So who's.
SPEAKER_04
So I look forward to us making progress.
SPEAKER_11
Yes.
Same.
SPEAKER_07
Even though we're listening and taking it all in and using it to inform us it's still not our time.
SPEAKER_04
I mean it is but in terms of time use it's it's it's learning during that time.
SPEAKER_07
I don't know.
SPEAKER_04
It's just it's just it's just a separate category that in terms of.
Yeah it's not that it's not important.
Obviously it's important.
But in terms of time use and our planned agendas and time the time used during public testimony basically doesn't count against us in percentages for trying to trying to focus more time on student outcomes.
SPEAKER_07
Okay so like the total minutes of the meeting just those are like we don't count.
SPEAKER_04
They just don't get recorded yeah so like if you look at my little notations at the bottom here I did like I looked at the start of the meeting and I looked at the adjournment of the meeting and I said okay that was that many minutes.
then I subtracted Like on 927 we had we took a break for 14 minutes So that doesn't get recorded anywhere and then we had public testimony for 62 minutes so the actual minutes going into the time use evaluation sheet are 196 minutes minus 62 minus 14 Awesome great question
SPEAKER_11
Okay.
So who is in line to do it next?
You're October?
SPEAKER_04
So Lisa's doing October.
So part of the reset is we don't do time use evaluation every meeting.
We can just do it once a month for the minutes of the month previous.
And then we'll be able to track over time at the end of a year, see if there's been progress made over a year.
SPEAKER_11
Yep, that sounds good.
Thank you.
One thing that I also wanted to add to this particular item is just a quick lifting up about since it was mentioned that we did not do progress monitoring in the month of September.
One fix that I think has been recommended by a couple of people, but I'm in conversation with Dr. Jones about it, is moving the progress monitoring up before we actually get to our agenda items like consent agenda and things like that.
So that immediately after public testimony, we go into progress monitoring.
And then we handle the rest of our regular business.
I think that we should be leading with our students as much as possible anyway.
And it gives us, yeah, you can clap for me.
I'll take that.
Thank you.
I appreciate that.
And then, yeah, so I'm not going to belabor it with any more unnecessary words.
But know that that change may be coming.
And it might also be something for the next president to consider.
Or I might just do it myself.
I don't know yet.
With that being said the only other thing on tonight's agenda is a board director questions and staff responses for October 25th and 23 regular board meeting.
All that stuff is attached and then calendar reminders a complete list of upcoming board meetings and director community meetings can be found at the school board calendar website.
If you have any questions please contact the school board office at 206-252-0040.
If you have any other questions That's where to go.
There being no further business before the board this meeting stands adjourned at 5 38 p.m.
