School Board Meeting January 8, 2020 Part 3

So we have Clover Codd up today so I'll let you give us the update.

Sure.

Chief of Human Resources Clover Codd for the record.

We are fortunate to have 16 talented carpenters in Seattle Public Schools and also one very talented chief negotiator for us our director of labor relations Tom Polis so.

Thank you Tom.

What you have before you is a three year collective bargaining agreement that started on September 1 2019 and ends on August 31st 2022. This CBA provides for across the board wage increases an increase in the swing shift differential increase in the summer work incentive bonus new hourly premium for temporary employees who are ineligible for SEB which is a state mandated health care.

Language changes to comply with Janus which is the Supreme Court case that basically says you cannot compel employees to be part of a union.

Washington state requirements around sick leave utilization transition to SEB improvements in the swing shift volunteer request process new bumpers around bereavement leave ability to create an apprenticeship program and transitioning employees to paperless pay information.

So the wage increases for the 2019-20 school year are 5.4 percent across the board.

In the 2021 school year beginning on September 1st general wage increase of 2.1 percent or the state authorized and funded inflationary increase whichever is higher.

And in the 21-22 school year general wage increase of 2 percent or the state authorized and funded inflationary increase whichever is higher.

You will note the fiscal impact for the three years of this agreement is three hundred ninety one thousand two hundred and forty two dollars.

We did break that down between capital funded versus the general fund.

And with that I will open it up for questions.

All right.

Thank you.

Are there any directors with comments questions or concerns.

Director Rivera-Smith and Director Rankin.

Oh OK.

Your hand.

Yeah.

I'm trying to understand something so under the fiscal impact revenue source the finance office estimates that the total new cost of this agreement in 2019 20 is approximately ninety five thousand two hundred fifty three dollars of which approximately sixty eight thousand six hundred eighty is funded by a combination of the state inflationary increase.

How is something funded by a state inflationary increase.

Is that really a fund.

Chief Financial Officer JoLynn Berge is coming up to the podium.

OK.

Good evening again JoLynn Berge Chief Financial Officer.

The state funds an inflationary increase based on the implicit price deflator and that is mandated in law.

So there is an automatic inflationary increase or a raise that does occur.

That is a source of money.

It's a source of funding from the state legislature.

OK.

That was.

Any more director comments questions or concerns about this item.

All right.

Seeing none Ms Shek roll call please.

Director Hersey aye Director Mack aye Director Rankin aye Director Harris aye Director Hampson aye Director Rivera-Smith aye Director DeWolf aye.

This motion is passed unanimously.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Wow.

We got to our action item so quick tonight.

No no no.

Holy cow.

It's only 636 p.m..

All right.

Now I should have not said that.

OK.

All right.

We will now move to the introduction portion of the agenda.

So we will start with intro item number one which is approval of a joint operating agreement JOA between Seattle Public Schools SPS and Technology Access Foundation TAF TAF partial waiver of board policy number 2 1 9 0 with respect to Washington Middle School and amendment to the student assignment transition plan for 2020 2021. The exec moved this forward on December 18th for approval.

So I'll let.

For consideration.

Oh I have approval on my thing here which is what I thought too but I'm just reading my script.

So I'll invite Sherry to take us away.

Thank you Director DeWolf Sherry Cox senior advisor to superintendent and Happy New Year to the directors.

First I want to start by thanking the mayor's office who is here today and Seattle Colleges as well as SHA and the Urban League and all of the folks who came out and spoke tonight on behalf I know this is a super passionate topic as a parent of a Seattle Public School student.

I understand our fierceness that comes out as a parent so I appreciate everybody coming out to talk tonight.

I'd also especially like to thank our TAF partners who continuously keep showing up and are I'm so thankful for their support to our Seattle Public School students and to Seattle excellence and Trish is here tonight should some questions come up.

I'm going to walk us through a very similar format as we use during the COW or the Committee of the Whole.

And here's the agenda that I want to use with us.

I first want to just start with our mission and vision.

I know that what every parent and constituent of Seattle Public Schools wants is for their son or daughters and our students in Seattle to have a high quality world class education.

that is challenging and that they leave our system college career and community ready.

Excuse me.

I full heartedly believe that TAF at Washington Middle School can help us make this happen.

Our theory of action.

I ask you to recall our bold theory of action Each of you up on that dais participated in creating this theory of action at some level, and we are all being held accountable to this theory of action and the strategic plan.

This is our work, and it's what our team is committed to, to bringing this theory of action to life.

So to start, just a quick overview of TAF.

We know and TAF knows that there are no silver bullets in education.

The work is hard.

It involves undoing hundreds of years of systemic racism and that this is a system that is getting the exact outcomes it was intended to do.

We need to change that.

Our students cannot wait.

So what is TAF.

TAF is a partnership.

This is about TAF working with the staff at Seattle Public Schools specifically at Washington Middle School to become a stronger system.

I'm not going to read the slides to you.

Many questions have come in as to why.

Why Washington Middle School.

Why did we pick Washington Middle School.

And I first just want to say that this conversation started back.

If I go back to the bar here I think we started the conversation back in March of 2019 in executive committee.

So if we take a look at the student data and the staff climate data I think you can see some noticeable differences in the TAF student response data and the Washington Middle School student response data.

If we take a look at academic data.

TAF is the first one to admit and Trish can come up and tell if you had questions regarding the data.

They are making great progress in their academic data but they're not done.

It's a journey.

It's a marathon it's not a sprint.

When we take a look at the Washington Middle School data this is just some enrollment data.

There's been questions about the projections for the upcoming school year.

They're very similar.

They're still projecting around 600 students about half of those students will be in the HC cohort and approximately half of them will not be in the HC cohort.

You will hear or you may have heard that this is the most diverse HC cohort in the city.

That is in fact not true.

Both Jane Addams Middle School and Madison Middle School have similar diverse cohorts and I've provided you with that data.

As far as academic performance data let me be clear.

When you take a look at Washington Middle School data as a whole they're performing well.

But when you really dig into the data this top chart talks about it's from the OSPI Washington School Improvement Framework.

It looks at three years worth of data across the state and then it ranks schools based on their ELA and math scores.

Again through the lens of all students out of 10 Washington Middle School is a 7.65.

But when you dig in and look at how they are serving African-Americans and low income students they are the second worst middle school in our district when it comes to serving those two populations.

Denny Mercer and Aki far outperform Washington Middle School in serving African-Americans and low income students according to this index.

They are on a positive trajectory and when you take a look at the bottom set of data you can see the stark difference in academic performance of our HC students versus our non HC students at Washington Middle School.

The other thing that you will see if you follow a 6th grade cohort into 7th and 8th grade in both groups the academic performance on the ESPA declines.

There is one other piece of data that I think is important for us to consider today.

When you take a look at average math and ELA scores for our HC students who are being served in the cohort versus not in the cohort across the system there is less than a three percentile point difference in performance on average.

Let me restate that students in our HC cohort versus in our non HC cohort who are all qualified to receive highly capable services.

There's very little difference in their academic performance question if I might.

Is that how you want to do it.

Are you ready to go for questions now.

I wanted to elucidate what the statement that was just made Which HCC students are we talking about district wide K through 12.

Sorry.

Great.

Yeah it's ESPA and so it's grades 3 through 8 because that's our only self-contained cohort is is in grades 1 through 8 but it's the ESPA test so it's grades 3 through 8. Good question.

Thank you Director Harris.

I want us to then think about that that less than three percentile points difference and be thinking about does this justify the segregated system that we have.

We've heard tonight testimony about the psychological damage and I just want us to keep that in mind.

I'm going to jump now to engagement and misspend a little bit of time here because there were many public testimony comments tonight about engagement and I just want to be super clear especially as we're talking about the educators at Washington Middle School.

So we've heard over and over again.

that we didn't do the best at engagement that we should have.

We did the best that we could at the time but it was not good enough.

And I think the place where we fell down the hardest was in working with our educators at Washington Middle School.

We have been out to Washington Middle School on three different occasions and on our last occasion which was at the end of November.

We I think had a robust and more positive conversation with that team.

We heard from some of the teachers who had visited TAF Academy and they shared some of the powerful observations that happened during that visit.

But still we know there's work to do and you heard about it tonight and I just want to clear something up.

So we've been in consultation with SEA leadership throughout this process at different junctures throughout SEA leaders so leaders from the teacher and paraprofessional union have been out to Washington Middle School since we visited at the end of November.

They conducted one on one conversations and they think they probably spoke to about 80 percent of the Washington Middle School staff in one on one conversations.

They report back to us.

They meaning the SEA leaders that the majority of their staff support TAF.

However they're still frustrated with the district and I'll be that district today and have questions about how TAF will be implemented which is which is great.

That's exactly where they should be because they are going to be engaged in the process of implementation with TAF should this move forward.

SEA leaders have told us that they will support their members.

SPS the district we're committed to supporting Washington Middle School teachers.

We've invested a lot of time and energy TAF has been with us through this process.

We want nothing more than for TAF to launch and be successful.

So we're committed to support this work.

I also want to call out one other thing I think one of the directors wants us to ensure is that TAF I believe and Trish could speak more to this but TAF is really about serving students of color furthest from educational justice.

And we're committed to growing that student population at Washington Middle School in any way that we can.

And that's why we after meeting with some community members took their advice and invited the Leschi and the Madrona families to our last rounds of engagement.

And we want to continue to have those conversations with the families because it would be a choice school for them.

And so the families who would be interested in that we brought out paperwork on how to go through the process of open enrollment.

So we are committed to continue to try to grow the families that one should be going to Washington Middle School and are not for a variety of reasons and to invite families of color furthest from educational justice to through the open choice process to come to Washington should there continue to be seats available which there are at this point.

The next thing is the financial implications.

There is a cost to this and we heard a few of our commenters tonight speak about this.

These dollars would come from mitigation fund which is a fund that.

Some of you from previous boards have had us hold dollars for intentionally for different reasons but we do plan to have a mitigation fund again and so this cost would come from that.

The result is a three year total of a little over a million dollars and this is in addition to the staffing allocations that we give out through the weighted staffing standards.

I want to just call out that yeah this this comes with a cost but in a second I'm going to show you what TAF brings to the table in this partnership to help with this.

This assumptions because we had to make some assumptions here is the first thing is that this cost does include a smaller class size of 1 to 25. And we've talked with TAF and if we needed to do the 1 to 28 or 1 to 30. We could make that work but right now this cost does include the 1 to 25. This cost includes sending staff to the STEM by TAF Summer Institute and providing an additional 24 hours of professional development for each teacher who attends.

At the current time the above estimates do not include any costs associated with the ratio or changing the 1 to 80 and we don't believe at this time that there would be any additional cost to that.

So in thinking about that what does TAF comes with resources as well and their resources come one in their valuable partnership and some of the trainings that they will be providing to our teachers.

They will come with a director.

College and Career Readiness Program, STEM by TAF coach, student support specialists and program coordinators, student support and enrichment.

And you can see the cost there is approximately six hundred thousand dollars per year for the first five years.

Director DeWolf do you want me to keep going into this.

Yes please.

OK.

I want to talk and I really appreciate directors comments tonight about we're not dismantling.

We're not removing services from highly capable at Washington Middle School.

We are looking at the possibility of a blended model.

We're required by law.

TAF in federal ways required by law to provide highly capable services special education services to students who qualify for those services.

I want to acknowledge that our advanced learning team and our special education teams have been a partner in this process.

They've been to some of the community engagement sessions with us.

I believe Dr. Pedroza is in the back here tonight with us.

They are going to continue and are excited about partnering in this work to learn how does TAF serve students who qualify for both special education services and highly capable services in a blended general education model.

That is something that they want to really understand and and learn from.

Again we're not ending HC or special education services at Washington or anywhere in the district.

We're asking tonight to waive the cohort model at Washington.

We're going to continue to support students who require 2E access resource room services whatever services they may need in the least restrictive environment for IEP students will continue to follow and monitor their IEPs and adjust the current social emotional supports that they may need so that they can remain not just remain in the general education but thrive in the general education classroom.

I also want to point out that the law does not require that we serve students qualified for HC services in a cohort model.

Currently we don't serve HC students in a cohort model in our high schools.

The law does however call on us our strat plan calls on us and I dare say it's a moral imperative That we provide services to students through our MTSS model and every year we have to report how we're providing services to our HC students to OSPI.

So we're going to continue to do that.

We do it now.

We have HC students across our system and I bet every 104 of our schools and every year we report to OSPI how we're serving students.

I want to call out this list here that you see this list is from OSPI and they talk about how we can go about serving or how TAF goes about serving in partnership with us.

Our students who qualify for HC services in the general education classroom.

I also want to point out that these are just good instructional practices.

It's how we serve students who may be qualified for ELL.

It's how we serve students who may need special education services.

These in other words these are just broad categories of best instructional practices.

I'm not going to go through the whole list with you tonight but I am going to go through the first three of them.

And if you need more information again I'm open to sending you more information.

This comes again from an OSPI presentation.

The first one here is what's called curriculum compacting and TAF will utilize the pre-assessment work They get to know their students stories strengths and needs so that the teachers can plan and design meaningful rigorous lessons for students including students who require highly capable services.

The next one is differentiated and I think this is a pretty common phrase but when you dig into what it actually means the most instruction for highly capable students based on their general education characteristics needs to be more advanced sometimes.

And what does that mean though what does advanced mean.

How is it more rigorous.

And this is a model by Kaplan that identifies four ways that teachers can advance.

or differentiate instruction for highly capable learners special education learners English language learners.

These four things they can design the teachers can design learning activities that are novel accelerated and go more in depth and have more complexity.

And this is the project based model that TAF uses.

They go deep into the concepts the concepts that kids oftentimes choose on their own.

so that they are interested they are engaged in this.

This next one here is about enrichment and enrichment is a broad name for instruction that's not normally covered in the students required curriculum.

Enrichment may take place both in class after class on weekends after school in special programs in a variety of settings.

Basically this model is is. is what TAF is I think mostly about and it's probably one of the most known researched and the broadest implication and application for schools serving highly capable students.

One question that has come up a number of times.

It didn't come up tonight.

Interestingly is around the math.

Math has been the big concern and I said it at the committee of the whole and I want to state it again tonight that math classes after consulting with TAF staff.

We realized that it is a stretch to take a student who is performing at a 6th grade math level and then some at 7th grade some at 8th grade some at Algebra 1 that's That's probably while our teachers are fantastic that might be a stretch as far as making sure that the students master the content of each of those levels.

And so we've committed in partnership with TAF that each math group would have.

Two different no more than two different groups.

So we might have some students who require sixth grade math and it might have some students that require eighth grade math in it or maybe it would have sixth grade math and geometry students in it.

However that gets structured is a decision that the school in partnership with TAF would make.

So tonight what we're asking is for three things in this for consideration approving the joint operating agreement a waiver with respect to policy 21 90 and only to Washington Middle School that the highly capable are highly capable services and learning programs basically removing the self-contained cohort and then amendment to the student assignment transition plan that includes that language.

And with that these are future Washington Middle School students at Bailey Gatzert in this picture.

Thank you Sherry.

Really appreciate that.

I'm going to ask directors to if they have any questions or comments concerns to elevate those now but really keep those focused on the underlying bar which is the current intro.

We will.

And after we're done having conversation about that then we'll move to the amendment.

So if there's anything particularly focused on this underlying bar this would be the time to ask those questions.

I see Director Mack first.

Thank you for the comprehensive presentation as well as answering to us directly a lot of the questions that were asked during the committee of the whole.

So a lot of the questions that I had previously asked have been answered and I don't have quite as many at this point.

But one that actually I sent some of my questions in advance around capital and ownership and I'll get into those questions in a second.

to try to get clarification on that.

But I wanted to ask really quick you had mentioned that outreach was done to Leschi and Madrona schools to encourage them to option in to Washington potentially.

And I'm wondering whether or not they were provided or told they would be provided transportation because under our current option system if you opt into a not not your attendance area you actually don't get transportation.

That is correct.

We did not promise transportation.

It seems to me like it would be a nice thing to do for those students because if we're trying to benefit them they are students furthest away from educational justice.

We're wanting to bring them into TAF.

The fact that they don't get transportation is going to be a barrier.

I agree.

And I guess we didn't go out because that would require board approval to for you to approve that.

Maybe a director can make an amendment.

A director could always make an amendment Director Mack.

Okay great.

Well so I just clarifying that that you know from a perspective I think that.

Being able to serve our students furthest away from educational justice in the TAF model being able to allow those students in through the choice process that are not directly in the attendance area I think is important that we we remove the barriers that exist.

So I'm supportive.

I think another concern that was brought up by a parent was actually I mean we have to be careful we can't decimate Meany Middle School in the in the hopes to grow Washington Middle School and as you know that's always a consideration and a balancing act for our enrollment team.

which we'll talk more about I think under the amendment concept.

But my questions around the dollars and board approval and the investments that are going to be made in Washington Middle School.

The first of all is the one to one laptops that are being provided by the district.

Are those already included in the BAR that's going to be introduced tonight.

They're included in the BAR before you.

Yes.

The one that this one or the one that is talking about technology that we're approving.

This one right here.

So the dollars for that are included.

OK great.

I think it's just fifty thousand dollars.

OK.

I think it wasn't it wasn't in the technology one that we are.

I think the one you're considering tonight is a one to two model and this would increase a one to one at Washington.

OK.

So it's additional to that one.

Yes.

And then there was reference in the joint operating agreement about smart panel document cameras tables and individual chairs and specialized labs that those would be provided by the district.

And I'm curious to know first on where the where is the expenditure for that included in our our process so that we have capacity management bars coming for us.

to improve any kind of capacity management changes that need to be made.

Is that where those are.

Yes.

So those have they been built in already because I don't remember discussing those.

According to my friends down in that department.

Yes they have been built into that bar not not because Washington Middle School is special but as just part of what's in that bar already would include this type of technology and whatnot.

OK so we'll be talking about that BAR in introduction tonight too.

So OK so there's the tie in.

But I just want to make sure though that I'm clear that they did not specifically add anything for TAF at Washington Middle School.

It's just part of the.

It's overall capacity management across the district.

Part of the overall capacity management and it would look similar at Washington Middle School as it would at Jane Addams Middle School for example.

OK.

OK so then my other question is around the joint operating agreement language and the response about the SBI building and building out the infrastructure there and who leases the building.

I'm not questioning whether or not this is something we should do.

My questions are around.

How is that going to be managed from a district organizational partnership standpoint.

The the answer that I was we were given about the SBI building is that at this point it still isn't owned by the Urban League but that it will be and that there will be two floors that TAF will lease that's TAF would be leasing those.

And in the JOA it says that any infrastructure investments become the districts the ownership of the district.

So I'm wanting to understand how we're going to manage those things if for example we build out two floors of a building that we don't that we're not leasing.

And are we going to have a partnership agreement or how does how are we going to.

We would not be building out those two.

My understanding and Trish if you have more information is that that would be taken care of by TAF or the Urban League and that would not be our capital projects.

It says in the JOA and maybe this is a question for Mr. Narver but it says specifically in the JOA that infrastructure capital will be property of the district.

So I'm a little concerned about the language there.

That's within the school building and if that's not clear we can certainly.

So while you're looking for that Director Rankin do you have something specific to that comment.

Yeah I just wanted to clarify about the SVI building that what came up at committee of the whole was that.

That also is not contingent upon that.

That's not contingent upon this agreement.

This agreement is separate from that building and if that building if the use of that building doesn't come to fruition TAF at Washington Middle School can still.

be as intended.

Yes.

That that's kind of a bonus possibility.

Right.

Yes.

That's my understanding as well.

I just want to understand how the Director Mack how the legal arrangement would be set up and who owns what.

And to the extent that the JOA states that or I'm sorry it was in the in the answer to us that this would actually be.

a building where students would be during the school day.

I'm wondering if I would assume that we would have a partnership sort of like agreement in terms of utilizing that site if we are not leasing it.

Correct.

Yes we have these types of situations happening across the district and the one that is comes to mind most quickly for me is that we utilize.

Seattle Fire Department's firehouse near Garfield and we have a skill center course that's taught in that space.

And so this would be a similar I don't know the specifics of.

The names of the agreements but we'll make sure we do all of the right policies and procedures to.

But but we have this happening throughout the district.

The other thing our bridges students for example go off to work study programs and so we have these types of arrangements in other places through the district so we would follow those same policies and procedures.

OK I just wanted to publicly daylight that and also just make sure that we had that on our radar for the future knowing that it's not happening today but that's something that we need to make sure we consider.

My last question is around in the JOA that the eleven point two point six.

This was a confusing section for me to read because.

The way that this is organized is that we are putting dollars in directly.

We're committing to those and then everything else is in kind except for in that section it says specifically because Washington Middle School will be receiving funds from two entities and that to me is a mingling of funds and I'm very confused because Washington Middle School doesn't our schools don't receive funds.

The district receives funds and we distribute to.

So I'm very confused about how this works and what that.

And I'm wondering if maybe that language needs to be cleaned up a little bit because.

I can tell you what it means and then we can I can work with our friends at TAF and Chief Narver over there.

What it means is that if TAF buys that all of the staff that I'd mentioned up there computers those are TAF staff's computers they go with TAF staff.

If TAF mounts.

Following our ed specs and all specifications a gigantic whiteboard smart screen of some sort that becomes ours when they if they were to leave.

They would follow all of the same processes and procedures.

We have this happening in our schools.

I know some of you this is near and dear to your hearts but PTA is a great example of they're going to.

We don't support Macs as a district.

We don't support them but that doesn't stop PTAs from coming in and giving schools 50 Macintosh maybe 10 10 Macs for staff to use.

So those are in kind donations and we don't require.

The board any sort of board approval on that.

But we don't support some of the stuff either that those folks.

So we've got technology out in our schools that is not being supported by SPS because of the donations.

Thank you.

Director Rankin.

Just last last clarification on that is that so we're just this section is only referring to materials and supplies.

The eleven point two point six.

And that the district is going to come up with a process and procedure for making sure that it's clear who owns what.

I just I and then maybe that's it.

That's a further question to go back to Mr. Narver in the future if we can't.

We've marked it and I will work because this is a joint operating agreement I'll have to work with the TAF team as well.

Thank you Director Mack Director Rankin and Director Rivera-Smith.

Thank you.

I I have questions about that.

It sort of relates to the amendment but also just generally.

enrollment projections for each and people optioning in and how we're if we have different scenarios or how we're planning for where students are to be going.

One of my concerns so I like the idea of offering transportation to encourage people to go there but at the same time if their assignment school is Meany and Meany is under enrolled then we're actually going to tell those same families that they don't get to choose it.

So that and that I know is really frustrating and disappointing for people to be told everybody can option wherever.

And then you know we limit or cap enrollment certain places to balance.

Balance enrollment other places and then so I don't I just don't want to end up like really disappointing and misleading families by saying oh it's going to be so great and you can option in and then oh actually your school is going to be too small so you don't get to how like.

I think you were at the meeting when we had that conversation with some of the Leschi families at John Muir because they were the ones who first brought that up about well but what if Meany and we did say it and we would say it again that it is we can't empty.

I guess so I was at that meeting but the the response and the and in the FAQ to some of our other questions that we have to the response that.

We'll follow the...

option school procedures is.

I think it's the choice process not option schools but go ahead.

Yeah the choice process still seems like like punting.

I don't know.

I just want to.

I don't know if we have a way to realistically realistically predict who will go where.

And in terms of staffing and just to think about it if we're offering an option that's really not an option.

Yeah I mean we have our enrollment projections so we have our projections for next school year for each both Meany as well as Washington and the other middle schools throughout the district and so we would utilize that information to make decisions about who we allow to choice in and who does not get to choice in.

So.

I mean I guess if it's possible I would just ask if there's any way we could say that there are this many slots from this school or something like that.

Just just.

I guess I mean that would require you to have an amendment to the student assignment transition plan.

No it would be in the waitlist process.

Like how many people are going to be it.

Yeah.

Thank you.

So this conversation is ongoing for a really long time and part of the reason why we had an advisory committee setting up and we've been having a conversation around what is space available mean in this district because it means two things.

It means actual physical space available and it means how many students we project and assign staffing to.

And that would be considered staffing capacity and those two things are real constraints and we have a complicated and long process to get to the start of school.

So it makes it difficult for the district to accurately assign the number of staff to schools.

perfectly every time.

And one of the challenges is if we're using projections and guesses that we have before open enrollment and not really using the data of like these are the people that have signed up to the schools and said they're coming then we won't match our staffing appropriately.

And in this case with Washington Middle School and having a new program going in.

And because and HCC going away there's a whole bunch of unknowns of like how many people will not choose at this time and how many people will want to.

And so I would encourage us to find a way to actually use post open enrollment numbers to be more accurate at that time as opposed to trying to lock in and assume.

But having the assumption of we are expecting and wanting one hundred and fifty sixth graders And that's what we're wanting and therefore we will move the waitlist so that the less shy students can move in.

I think it would make a lot of sense.

Thank you.

Director Rankin.

I guess I would just ask that as much as possible because I've seen the waitlist process happen several times and it's frustrating and but I understand the constraints.

In this case specifically we're asking people to apply or letting them know that they were trying to pull them in.

And so I just want to make sure that we're super transparent about the fact that there are these constraints and that if we can at all possibly kind of set expectations.

Thank you.

We will I will continue to work with the principals in fact we're going out to Leschi this week to make sure that we're super clear with the expectations and the other thing I want to note is that there were not many families from either of those two schools who chose to attend the community engagement sessions and so I don't I don't know the interest and we won't know the interest.

Those families some of them are actually slotted to go to Mercer and as you all know Mercer is well overcapacity and so those would be students that we would absolutely take off the the overcapacity issues at Mercer to bring them to Washington.

So thank you for that.

Thank you Director Harris.

Actually I believe — Director Rivera-Smith then Director Harris.

Hi thank you.

I just wanted to clarify.

So I was looking when I was obviously read through the JOA trying to figure out where exactly do we see.

And I'm trying to find it right now.

I couldn't locate it here.

I saw something about like a set timetable for evaluating the success of TAF at Washington Middle School.

I saw something about three or four year I can't find on the top of my head here but if there is a timeline and if there are specific metrics for how it's going to be evaluated for its success because 10 years is a long time to go without having a chance to evaluate and.

So if you could flesh it out and clarify that.

Sure.

I just wanted to confer with my partner here.

We do.

There is an evaluation every year of the TAF program that occurs.

It's not between.

It's not necessarily with you all it's with the TAF team and the SPS leadership team to evaluate you know set the goals.

Trish you want to come.

Every year we do an annual review.

And we view everything from student achievement to climate surveys to our own staff's performance.

Each of them in their roles write an end of year report in partnership with whoever their school partner is.

So it's jointly written and then from there there's also a plan developed for the next year.

So who's coming into the school.

What do the teachers want to do each year.

How do we support the work.

What does TAF have to do in terms of any fundraising or any other resource allocation to make sure that the school gets what they need.

And then you know of course you already have your own interim assessments.

I believe you use the MAP test.

We use iReady and Tacoma and Federal Way.

So all of those are in play.

Everything that you normally do we would do as well.

We use iReady.

So does Tacoma so federal way to call me is I ready.

So all those things don't go away.

They continue and we work with teachers as they're evaluating the data and because they have common planning time every day as a house team they can spend more time diving into those interim assessments and any of the work that they're doing in the classroom.

to kind of catch things early instead of waiting for that January test or that spring test of the map.

So then maybe I'll go back to Sherry here.

How does how they do that.

There's the assessment of their own.

How is the district then evaluating the program and then where is our oversight role come into that.

That's a great question and we would have we have not had that level of a conversation yet about.

I mean we would use the CSIP process just I mean like we are currently using in all of our other schools and looking to see if that school.

is meeting its goals and in both climate as well as academic performance.

Besides the CSIP and the process that TAF uses we have not discussed any other processes to evaluate the effectiveness.

Yeah.

So I just wanted to also mention the fact that a lot of.

what TAF is providing.

Also you cannot measure.

It's the presence the understanding the expertise the people and the directive from these fantastic educators and leaders in our community.

So.

I just want to make sure that we are holding that and giving that space that there are a lot of innate benefits that will come hopefully from this partnership that cannot be quantified.

And we also need to think about.

where we are headed with the communities that we are trying to support.

We have not done a great job in the past of quantifying our results with those and in the instances where we have quantified those results they haven't been great.

So I want to make sure that we are giving that space in the way that we have this conversation.

Thank you Director Hersey I just want to add one other thing to to what Director Hersey just said is we heard testimony tonight about why don't you just give that one million dollars to Washington Middle School.

Why don't you just reduce their class sizes etc etc.

The research shows that just reducing class sizes without changing instructional practices does nothing for academic performance.

So on top of the things that Director Hersey said that are hard to measure but you can feel it if you walk into a TAF school you can feel it.

And so there's that but there's also the professional development that's grounded in equity racial equity in particular.

That TAF can provide that.

I'll be honest we at Seattle Public Schools don't have the capacity to provide to Washington Middle School at this time and so this partnership is an opportunity to lift Washington Middle School which has been struggling.

There's no question about it and there's a variety of reasons for its struggle.

But we have an opportunity here with a partner who's willing to do the hard work with us to change that and to change outcomes for students at Washington Middle School directors.

I appreciate that and I'm going to be going tomorrow actually going down to visit the TAF school there.

Two more quick questions here.

I and I couldn't find this either but I heard that there's some sort of orientation that the incoming sixth graders will do before school actually starts.

That is correct.

So how are we doing that because we can't are we illegally allowed bring make kids come in early.

We have kids.

Is it required or not required.

It's not required.

It's optional for sixth grade incoming sixth graders which is the only class by the way that we're looking to impact next year.

It's not required of students.

It's encouraged.

It's highly encouraged.

It's a great team building opportunity.

We have students Director Rivera-Smith across the district in our schools throughout the summer.

In fact our custodial crew wishes we wouldn't sometimes but this would just be another just like our jumpstart program.

I think actually they call this jumpstart which we may have to give a different name to because that's for our kindergarten students but that happens across the district.

And then I also maybe I'll have to call Greg for this because I was speaking to him in this past week or so about some concerns in regards to the JOA that I don't know if you guys have already ironed out or not.

So maybe he can address that.

They're just there were some areas of potential exposure that could be tightened up and I don't know if that's happened or because the current one we have right now.

I don't know what she's referring to.

So yeah.

Do you want to tell us.

I can't speak I'll have him.

The version of the JOA that's before you now incorporates the changes that I was recommending.

It was on three matters the incorporation of the five specific or the specific excuse me specific positions that TAF would be providing.

I'm sorry that.

TAF would be providing.

That's now in the agreement.

Same with more information about highly capable services and then a reference to the H.R.

policy that TAF employees on site at Washington would be bound to.

Those are the recommendations I made.

They were all agreed to by TAF and they are now all incorporated in the JOA.

Into the current one that was posted today.

That's now.

OK.

So you're good.

OK.

They're in the one that was sent to you yesterday.

Yeah I got there was a frequently asked questions and some financials.

That was this morning I sent you a updated JOA yesterday that called out the three specific changes that I made to it.

OK because of Chief Narver.

Perfect.

Thank you.

You're welcome.

Thank you.

Director Harris and then Director Hampson.

Real quickly one.

Can we put the concept that this is a charter school to bed and kill it.

Because.

Yes.

Thank you.

You have an elected board of directors that is accountable to the public and Lord knows if people are.

Upset or angry if we pass this and they will vote us out of office.

No such mechanism exists for charter schools.

Thank you Director Harris it was on slide 5 which I'm happy to go back to that TAF is not a privatization it's not charter schools it's not a one size fits all.

It's not a silver bullet.

It's not a panacea.

It's about a partnership and hard work with the educators at Washington Middle School the families from Washington Middle School the staff here in central office.

You up there on the dais all of us.

Should this move forward.

Our.

Commitment.

Another couple of questions and comments if I might.

Yes ma'am.

With respect to Director Hersey's comments of the intangibles I respectfully suggest to you that the student staff and family satisfaction surveys will capture that kind of information and those changes.

And can we do a better job of soliciting that input.

Absolutely.

But I do believe it can be measured by those surveys how we measure other schools by surveys and we all know how much I dislike The snapshot SBAC culturally inappropriate tests and we've got to do them because of the federal money that comes with them otherwise one would hope we would shoot those as well.

I'm sorry for the militaristic reference.

I could see it coming.

President DeWolf but but I'm having trouble measuring with instruments that are hugely inappropriate.

And and the feedback evaluation instruments make a whole lot more sense to me just on that note.

Then when we talk about really full schools like Mercer because our workload was so robust this last year we put off the conversation of moving a feeder school from Mercer to Washington.

Now why don't we change the student assignment plan and give everybody a year's notice that we're going to do it the next round.

Director Harris that's a great idea and that is between you and your board members.

Well actually no it's not.

And we would engage community.

Respectfully I emphatically disagree.

We talked about this a long time and it didn't happen.

And this board has two staff members that we're killing.

And we have bandwidth issues.

So that's a bit of a flippant answer when we've been working really really really hard.

I did not mean it to be flippant all to say we are it's on Ashley's agenda and like you all she was overtaxed with things to do and boundaries to change quickly in some cases.

And I know it's on the agenda as we especially look to building a new Mercer middle school to really figuring out which feeder schools remain at Mercer and which may move into Washington to make it a bigger heartier middle school.

And I'll pass now.

Thank you.

Director Harris Director Hampson.

So just to kind of say I want to say thank you to staff for working hard over holidays and whatnot to get responses to some pretty major questions and questions.

Many things have been answered.

A few things are still in process.

Many of us are going to a federal way tomorrow.

And I'm excited about that visit.

I'll also be meeting separately with you Trish on on financials because I'm chair of the Audit and Finance Committee and also have deep interest in making sure that this is supported by sustainability and capacity of our partner organization and so I want to feel reassured.

that we've asked the hard questions and that we know how to enter into a supportive relationship so that this is sustainable because it will.

This is not the only scenario where we rely on outside funds to create a much higher quote unquote cost per student in order to actually close gaps or however we want to want to talk about that.

So it's it's not as if it's a new idea.

But any time that we do enter into this I think it's really important.

I appreciated the note that we got that this is approximately a 10 to 12 percent increase in your budget which gives me some reassurance because that's you know those are the kinds of capacity questions that I'm I'm very interested in because overtaxing you with with an additional program we don't want that to blow up your organization and and have negative consequences for your other programs in federal way.

So I appreciate that those conversations are ongoing.

I do think that it would be important though it makes sense to me that this evaluation would be as any other school in terms of the metrics but that we need to be prepared through the joint operating agreement to ensure that there's an evaluation of the partnership and the effectiveness of that partnership in getting those results or not.

So that's something that I would ask for to to bolster the joint operating agreement.

And then I think we still have work to do as everyone has brought up around pathways that ensure that this program is going to be available to students furthest from educational justice particularly African-American students.

from other feeder schools and it's a complex discussion.

My concern as I expressed to Superintendent Juneau about it is that if we aren't really proactive about Having that conversation in the process of entering into this agreement is that two years down the line when there's a lot of different people involved and we have different board members and different staff we're going to say oh yeah we meant to make sure that there was a pathway and here you know the neighborhoods gentrified even more and we're not actually meeting the needs of the students that that we had we're not doing what we said we were going to do because we we didn't deal with that pathway issue.

So unfortunately we don't have the race opportunity that that we would have had if that that referendum had passed with our voters.

And I'm really sorry about that because it does make our job much more difficult.

But I don't think that means we give up.

We have to.

It's really imperative that this program is accessible do students for this from educational justice.

And then I think my last comment would just be that the way that I view this program and all the conversations I've had and continue to have with community members with staff from TAF with staff from SPS.

is this is about learning for our district.

Really important learning.

It's also about reciprocity and some reconciliation and reparation and reclamation.

And I to Director Rankin's point about trying not to approach this from a deficit mindset.

The notion of reciprocity is that we all have something something to gain.

It's you know as as a native person who spent much of her career working with tribes to help them reclaim ceded lands.

One time a somebody who worked in the same field and an adjacent organization said to me well you can't have all the land back.

And it was sort of like there's times when I have felt that way in this conversation about the sort of enormity of the thing being taken away as you know like oh yeah this tiny percentage of us that are left are going to come take you know we're literally just talking about some acreage of culturally and historically significant lands that we need to survive culturally.

And so there's just an imbalance.

in terms of this and so I hope that that as Liza said that we will work hard to focus on that notion of reciprocity and what this brings the opportunity that this brings for our entire community by putting our focus and thank you so much to all these folks who've come to talk about the work of TAF.

I know how much you're all given up to be here.

and to speak on behalf of this organization.

And I think a lot of you know that I appreciate you and you taking your time and I'll leave it at that.

Thanks Director Hampson.

Thank you Director Hampson.

Directors other directors have any questions or comments.

Director Harris.

I was getting on a roll there I figured I should take the time.

No please please.

I like I like seeing in this line of sight so you're right there.

Perfect.

Very odd.

And I like it a lot.

Instructional aides that are hired by TAF are members of SEA.

They will not be members of SEA.

We have read the job description put forth by TAF.

I'm looking over at my chief H.R.

and we do not believe that we currently have a position in our system that will be doing the type of work that the TAF employees will be asked to do.

And have we had transparent robust and thoughtful.

Yes.

I think that conversation with SCA about that issue.

Yes I want to work this hard and have it too because of.

Dr. Codd had a conversation with SEA leaders in that same conversation that I shared the information about the one on one conversations that those folks had with the Washington Middle School staff.

The direct question was asked about this particular position and the answer was at this time there are no concerns ish Clover Codd.

Sorry I'll just add we have full time positions all over this district that are funded by nonprofits community based organizations are working full time in our schools are not represented by SEA Seneca Vietnamese Friendship Association City Year communities and schools just like four off the top of my head.

This is happening all over the place.

So this is not unique to have staff that are funded by another organization working in our schools.

These are support staff.

These are not the classroom teacher of record they are support staff.

And so this is not a unique situation.

And that is going to be crystal clear and whatever JOA we sign is that correct.

The JOA I don't think this JOA spells out.

I mean it spells out the job description in the bulleted list that I included that was not on there previously.

So I'm not I guess I'm not sure I understand what you're asking.

We are very clear that all the teachers at Washington Middle School certificated staff are members of SEA correct.

That is correct.

OK.

Could we also make it clear that.

are whatever job description we call it are not represented and make it very.

It's not our job description it's TAF's job description.

So they will be hiring all of these folks and they will not be SPS employees.

And so there would should not be and TAF will also be paying them so there should not be any confusion that they are SPS employees because they're hired by TAF and they're paid by TAF.

And a paragraph that says exactly that would be most appreciated for clarity purposes.

Thank you.

Thanks Director.

Director Hampson.

This is probably a note for future conversation Mr. Narver around.

I'm still struggling around the response to the questions about this being a grant.

that not being a grant because there's no funds exchanging hands.

But the way that I read policies 6220 and 6114 tells me something otherwise.

And I know that there's this intersection this strange intersection of the legal nature of the policy and the fact that there's actually a fiscal implication and we don't have to solve it now.

But I I need to get more clear.

And maybe the problem is that policy is not clear is I think probably what it comes down to.

But I need to understand how do we get that clear and how do I work with Audit and Finance to make sure that it is.

We will we'll talk together and get back to you on that.

I think there may be some disconnect with some definitions in the policy and we just want to make you know obviously the board needs to be clear on what it is it's approving whether that lines up exactly with an accounting standard versus how our policy happens to be written is something we need to.

get on the same page about.

I did want to make it clear what is being provided by TAF.

That's why I wanted more detail in the contract about the positions that are being funded.

So the board's clear on what it's approving whether or not that's a quote grant either within the definition of the policy or how an accountant or budget person would view it.

We'll we'll need to get that straight.

But at least the contract is clear about what positions TAF is providing.

and the value to the district of those whether whether 61 14 is implicated by that we'll need to get some more clarity on.

Right.

Yeah about the kids.

There is a commitment of it requires a commitment of time and resources on our behalf and by that definition I feel like it.

So it's clearly something the board needs to consider and approve the information has to be there.

Which of our policies exactly are implicated by it and which box ought to be checked.

Maybe something we need a little bit more clarity on but I mostly want to make clear that.

The board has in the document in front of it all the information about what it is we're getting from TAF and the value of it.

And I think that concern has been addressed by what's in terms of what's been added to the contract.

Got it.

Thank you.

Thanks Director Hampson.

Any final questions.

Director Mack.

Yeah I mean to that actually Mr. Narver please don't go away because to that question it did remind me and I appreciate Director Hampson bringing up that and daylighting that question.

So now that it is in the JOA and it very clearly stays out what the in-kind donation will be and whether or not we need to approve that in future years or not that's another policy question that we'll have to be wrestling with.

However is there a place in the GAOA or what is our recourse if for some reason TAF doesn't provide that they don't do that they don't manage to get their funding that year and they can't they can no longer support that.

So what happens if that because it's a nonprofit organization organizations you know this is based on fundraising.

So I'm wondering like what sort of recourse if something were to happen with the nonprofit and they didn't get their funding.

What happens.

So well one right the board has I believe it's section 16.2 of the JOA talks about the right of the district to terminate the contract if one TAF isn't able to live up to its obligations or two the board considers in its sole discretion that continuing with the TAF arrangement isn't in the best interest of the district.

Notice has to be given to TAF there has to be public discussion of that.

The agreement has to stay in place through the end of the academic year where that decision is made.

But the board does have the discretion to as the 10 year agreement rolls out to consider whether or not the obligations are being complied with and whether or not continuing under this arrangement is in the best interest of the district.

Thank you.

Any final questions comments or concerns.

I just have a couple of comments.

I think it was in December the board or September December the board participated in a board retreat and at that board retreat Dr. Pedroza invited us all to participate in a process to really explore white supremacy and work culture just the theory and the work in that.

And I think at least one thing I want to elevate now is particularly white supremacy in work culture can show up in quantity over quality.

And I think just to add to that conversation particularly around our evaluation I think it would be really it'd be smart of us to either work with Dr. Williams or Dr. Scarlett to think about ways that we could be thinking about our quality goals in our planning because quantity you know you need 10 apples.

OK.

When you get 10 apples you have to check.

But I think there's a different way that we think about our goals for quality.

Those are those apples good.

Right.

So we want to I think that we could work together to really create some better quality goals and metrics as opposed to quantity because I think that really tends to not be in our favor.

The other thing I wanted to make a comment on was during the public comment a couple of times people made a point to say that teachers at Washington Middle School X Y Z and I do disagree with that.

I talk to teachers and it would be easy for me to think you know listen to 10 teachers and assume that they are speaking for them all.

But I want to be at least really clear from Director Rivera-Smith's and I's opportunity to speak with teachers that it wasn't a consensus among the group.

It felt pretty even folks that supported it folks that were frankly mad at the district and feeling distrust which I think is certainly something we should continue to engage and heal that trust.

And then some folks that weren't really sure about and didn't like it.

So I think that the monolith that those teachers are being pinned with is not true that there were a lot of teachers that were supportive.

And the last thing about money.

I heard some certainly public comment to people brought up the amount of dollars we're putting into this.

I appreciate your clarification around the mitigation funds but for me I believe investing what works to serve our students from furthest from educational justice.

That is a number that we should not be worrying about right.

If that is what this is calling for then I think we should do what we have to do to rise to that challenge.

and meet the need to serve those students furthest from educational justice.

So for me yes the dollars are important.

We are fiscally responsible for this district but it is an investment we should be making students and students from furthest from educational justice.

I am really excited about this BAR.

I'm going to invite since there's no final.

Director DeWolf can I just follow up on one of the things I want to make sure that I was super clear that the SEA leaders had those similar one on one conversations with approximately 85 percent of the staff at Washington Middle School and they heard in those one on ones exactly what you and Director Rivera-Smith heard is that they're not they're actually pretty much in favor of TAF.

They're very hurt by the process that we went through and we are committed to continuing to work on that.

So thank you for that.

Any final comments Director Harris.

Yeah.

And I want to talk about this slide here and I believe that CFO Berge will elucidate that actually this this money doesn't go very far in terms of hiring staff to bring down class sizes in and of itself.

So it is not a dollar for dollar exchange.

This is an investment and it's a leverage right.

Is that correct.

I got a thumbs up from CFO Berge.

I want that on the record.

That's something new and different.

Thank you.

Thank you Director Harris and I do trust the great work of Trish and Taff and I do imagine that if there is a challenge about funding you will rise to that challenge.

Thank you.

I'm going to invite Director Rivera-Smith to read into our next portion to present Amendment 1 for our consideration.

Amendment 1 to the board action report approval of a joint operating agreement between Seattle Public Schools and Technology Access Foundation partial waiver of board policy number 21 90 with respect to Washington Middle School and amendment to the student assignment transition plan for 2020 21. Thank you.

Director Mack.

Did you want to make any comments questions or concerns.

Oh yeah.

I want to kind of present the amendment you all hopefully have had a chance to read it.

And I thank Director Rivera-Smith for joining me in this thought process around.

What I hope is a attempt to have a win win solution in a challenging situation where as Director Hampson just said we haven't actually laid out like how are we going to have this be in the long term sustainable for serving the students and have our assignment match that.

I have those concerns as well and obviously the the amendment is to the point of the current concern.

Just to set the stage for context.

The amendment is only giving the option.

It's not requiring anyone it's only giving the option to a limited number of students that already have that option.

They just don't have a guaranteed option.

So that is the sixth grade students that are H.C.

identified in the pathway that is Washington which covers five different middle school areas it's the southeast and.

We already have this in the student assignment plan where you can apply just like we were talking about the other elementary schools applying to TAF they can apply.

It all depends on space available.

The space that is that does exist is at Robert Eagle Staff and it is in the north which is inherently Not equitable.

It's far away.

However that is still the HCC cohort site and there are four others and there may be space elsewhere as well.

But my understanding is that's where the primary space would exist.

This amendment would not change the pathway to Washington.

It would leave it.

So the students that we're expecting to come they can come or not.

We got data earlier today from Concie that.

Currently in the 6th grade 6th graders at Washington 71 percent of the HC eligible students are are at Washington from the pathway.

So not all students actually choose to come into the pathway in the first place and they we may have students that choose not to come and go elsewhere.

But they it's not going to change the pathway it's going to continue having those students be initially assigned there.

And in the long run that will give a if our highly capable identification doesn't become more proportionate it will give more access to TAF than other students.

So in considering to make this for in considering this amendment one of the ideas that came forward was moving the entire cohort to Meany and there seemed to be a lot of support for that.

However at this point I disagree.

All right.

So the well it's community support and non community support and at this point that's not I'm not I'm not putting I just wanted to clarify I'm not putting forward that amendment because I think it would be way too disruptive and we are not at a place where that would would would work for a variety of reasons.

However the advanced learning task force just recently came out with recommendations one of which was Don't remove the access that currently exists in the way that it is before we set the plan and do pilot things.

And I think that this solution here actually provides both of those options because TAF will go into a blended model and it will be provided and the pathway is not changing.

The only thing that this amendment is doing is allowing those students that are in that pathway with the that they'll want to choose they have to take an action to choose it that they would have a guarantee to another highly capable cohort site.

In doing so we also don't have to waive 21 90. So we don't have to actually waive just a portion of our own policy.

That's the other piece that that is there.

And so that's kind of the underlying basis of the why on the amendment.

And I am open to questions and conversation.

Thank you Director Mack.

Director Rivera-Smith do you have comments or.

Yeah I would love to hear more about your how you got to this.

I'm actually really excited about this.

The potential this allows our families to have because as Director Mack was saying this still leaves them the option to go to TAF and to do experience that and to experience the blended model there.

But it still keeps us to our our commitment we made to these families when they began this program when they started what was then the APP and is now HCC program to give them that continuum of services in that cohort model.

And this isn't even speaking to whether or not that's that's our path going forward as a whole district because that is still something that we will be discussing and looking at in conjunction with the advanced learning task force recommendations which We have not even been presented yet but are floating out there which we can see we can pull nuggets from.

They are unofficial as of now but we can see what their intents were and what they're hoping as far as don't just don't eliminate the model.

Now make sure we have a piloted and entrusted program that shows that shows the potential for serving the students in the neighborhood or blended schools.

So and I know and I'm speaking to the board here now that you know I want us to really think about this because in regard it's just even the same vein as what Director Hampson was saying about the reciprocity that we don't have to be we don't have to be removed from the idea that we can work together to find kind of a common ground where we do want to have this TAF program come in because it does.

I mean it sounds like an amazing opportunity and I can't wait to go down to see it tomorrow.

I really appreciate all the work that's been done to bring this to us to our as a potential program here at our district.

And I still again though we have to look at you know where we where we are now with the students and families who are in the HCC program who.

You know some of them a lot of them you know aren't even against TAF.

It's just it's a fear of unknown of not hearing a definite plan of how they will be served.

And those are things I understand can't be answered right now.

I respect that TAF model is a lot is about bringing students in and building things together building plans and curriculums and.

and doing that with the students.

So I respect that completely.

I also just want to feel like we are we are being true to the program we already have going and to just you know our obligations we've presented in our policies and in the state law requirement of a continuum of services there.

So I look forward I know we're not deciding tonight.

We have two more weeks before we decide any of this.

So definitely I'm interested in having conversations with each of you about this.

Looks like Dr. Hampson's ready for that right now.

Sorry Rankin.

Directors have questions and comments about this amendment.

Director Rankin first.

Director Hersey.

Well so my understanding about moving a cohort to Meany is that it would increase racial segregation which I know we have a policy about creating new schools can't create racial segregation that wouldn't technically create a new school but so.

Yeah no but I'm just saying that for anybody that might have thought why did they why did they talk about meeting.

Yeah.

This proposal proposed amendment.

I'm wondering about how it would how it matches or whatever with the greater timeline for H.C.

services that are yet to be determined.

That's the six year timeline or whatever it might be.

How this how this fits in with that the greater or if it needs to reflect that there will be changes or that who knows what the cohort model will look like at the end of that process.

And then how does this match match with that.

Does that make sense.

I know we've talked about a six year timeline but I don't think we haven't seen it.

I don't know just whatever it is.

Well that's the thing we don't we don't have a comprehensive plan going forward as to this is you know in this year we're going to start doing these things and so there's still like that all of that.

So I guess my question really is is this for just the next year's incoming sixth graders.

Yes.

Or does it is it ongoing.

I don't believe it's ongoing.

This this amendment is only for next year.

Thank you.

Sorry that was my.

That was yeah.

Yeah.

This this amendment is only for next year's sixth graders whether or not we would want to continue it in a future year is another question for later.

But I actually do feel like being that targeted is that this is just for this is just for this transition year and the maintaining the access for the students especially the mother of color who was talking about wanting the cohort and that what that program is the programs are different.

Value judgment aside whether or not they're going to provide services I believe that yes they're going to be providing services.

It's just different and different what you know than what was expected and so continuing.

to provide access to that I think is fair.

It was mainly the timeline that I was like is this just forever or is this what you're talking about just next year's.

The amendment is just to next year's sixth graders.

Yeah.

And then the other question I have is if there's capacity at Robert Eagle Staff now what does that capacity look like compared to who might option it.

Is this even necessary if there's capacity.

And then the second part of that is there's not access without transportation.

But are we prepared to provide transportation.

I mean I.

Yeah.

Standing from my understanding is that.

Director Mack just one moment.

I just wanted to thank Director Hampson for being here and happy birthday to your daughter.

Thanks Director Hampson.

All right.

Thanks Director Mack for the pause there.

Go ahead.

Yeah no problem.

So my understanding is that transportation would be provided.

That was part of what's in the fiscal impact because this is continuing the policy 21 90 with an option to the self-contained cohort and that transportation goes along with that.

So there would be a fiscal impact depending on how many students selected it.

It's also like.

Just clarify that HC students get transportation to any school they want.

over other students.

No they do not.

So how would that be tied into this.

So that's why that's why OK student assignment plan and this whole thing is actually quite complicated.

So well you know this already but so a Leschi student that options into Washington doesn't get transportation because they're outside of that boundary.

OK.

A highly capable student that options into not their pathway school in the current setting.

also does not get transportation if there's space available.

So A they don't have a guarantee.

So let's say somebody in the Washington area wanted to go to Jean Adams just picking first they have to get over the hurdle of is there space available and is a waitlist move.

And second they would not have transportation.

What this amendment is trying to do is saying that since there will be no cohort model in your pathway you'll have access.

Spot and transportation and the transportation goes along with it.

Yes.

No just for the six.

Well it would be for it would be for those sixth graders.

It would continue for that.

Just like when we grandfather that same band in the future year.

So it would be it would be transportation over a few years.

Yes.

But just just to clarify the numbers we're talking about actually I think it's really important to think about the number of each of qualified students in the pathway is only 115. So we are we actually only talking about 150 people that might even consider it and the likelihood of them picking it is actually relatively low because there is a lot of support for Washington.

So it's an unknown but I just want to say that you know it's not.

We're not talking about moving 600 kids or 600 kids moving.

It's just what do we know what the space available right now already is at Robert Eagle Staff.

Yes we know that.

And because Licton Springs is moving out.

I know that there is space for this hundred students should all one hundred or one hundred and fifty.

The project the five year projections for the non the the attendatory students is projected over the next five years to decline slightly.

So I just want to clarify that what we're actually talking about is transportation for primarily white students away from a school that a new model is being brought into.

Just so we're super duper clear because there's space available so they could opt into it now.

The waitlist on highly capable last year did not move at all.

No one moved from their pathway so that that doesn't happen.

That hasn't been happening.

That's why the guarantee would be helpful.

Hasn't happened because there is no space currently at Robert Eagle Staff.

So that is why the waitlist and none of our other.

Schools that have HC none of our other middle schools that have HC have space available in them at this time.

None of them have space right now except for Washington Middle School and so yes.

Director Rankin what you're saying is that we would be providing transportation.

As an option when we're we were just talking a second ago about not providing transportation to our Leschi and Madrona families.

I just I guess I just want to state my discomfort with the fact that we've conflated unfortunately the conversation about TAF with HCC that because of the location it's forced it has forced a thing and then and then this is saying that if you don't think it's good enough for your kid you can leave.

I'm just sort of uncomfortable with that.

I'm just really uncomfortable with what this is setting up.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Director Hersey.

Yes I have many questions.

I guess my first question is in the community engagement because even looking at this right like looking at this on surface it seems like a really good idea.

We are giving the opportunity for families that are already that we promised them something that they can continue to have that thing.

But I do have some questions around the community engagement portion.

Like what was it.

Like what.

Because because I'm reading it here and to me off top it seems much more that.

We're leaning really heavily.

On the feedback that we got.

At.

The meetings that we had for TAF.

From a lot of our HC families.

One.

But then second.

Also when I think about.

The call out to the advanced learning task force again thank you for all of their work.

There wasn't a whole lot of representation from general education families too.

So.

So I'm just really wondering.

How.

Did you arrive at this place from the community engagement piece and then I have more follow up questions after that.

I think listening to the testimony from Yvonne and the other families of color that I've spoken to directly has actually risen above in my mind because I ask the question directly of.

If this is happening what do you want.

Of those students of the ones that have the intersectionality of.

Being of color and having.

their children in the program and wanting to still maintain that.

And their answer was wanting to still have the option.

So that in my mind actually is part of why I feel like this has risen further.

I understand there's a lot of differing perspectives from various folks but that that is part of where I feel like the that voice is speaking loudly to me.

Yeah.

Thank you for that feedback Emijah.

Thank you.

I really appreciate that because then to me it just doesn't seem as though this especially from the community engagement portion is meeting the bar that we're setting for ourselves.

And I think that with this new board starting in a place to where if we're setting these expectations for ourselves for proper community engagement.

Then we need to meet that bar and I don't know necessarily if this amendment at this moment does.

The next question that I have.

Well.

Yeah absolutely.

This is a decision.

This is an option for DHC families from Washington.

Who should we have spoken to because the ones we spoke to were families from there from that community.

Did you talk to the families at Robert Eagle Staff.

No OK.

So that's that's as I'm asking you who else was just who.

My question was genuine who shall she be spoken to.

OK.

I would say the families at Robert Eagle Staff.

Yeah.

And I think another piece for me and just the way that I'm thinking about this is that we have an opportunity to look at this from the perspective of you know when we're and I appreciate that this is coming from a win win perspective but a win win for who.

Right.

Because looking at the numbers that were sent over to us today there are still seven African-American students that would potentially have access to this as opposed to much higher numbers and other breakdowns when we're looking at race.

And then to me this feels a lot like OK well we're providing this option to the people who have the resources to take it and.

Mostly even if we're providing you know transportation which has its own problems in itself.

Thinking about who's actually going to take that option.

I don't know if that necessarily reflects the folks that we're trying to serve in our strategic plan.

And again I appreciate.

The fact that we're trying to find a win win here but I don't I don't really feel in my gut that this is a win win which takes us back to.

The surface of this right if we bring all of these things up out of policy and we really ask ourselves are is this move is this amendment.

Perpetuating racial inequity.

Or eliminating or mitigating racial inequity.

I think it's more the prior because we're again giving more choice.

To a lot of students.

That already have a lot of opportunity.

And then it's like do you want to opt out of equity.

Do you want to opt out of this opportunity to do something different that is going to impact hopefully our students furthest away from educational justice.

And for me as an educator and as a man of color and as a Southeast resident I don't necessarily know if this is heading in the direction that we want to head in and sending a message that we want to send.

Because again I believe that this.

Doesn't meet the community engagement standard.

It doesn't meet the equity analysis portion for me to like really get behind this.

And I don't I don't feel as though at this moment that this is really.

Providing the opportunity and the option that we want for every student.

I think it's providing it to the students that have traditionally always had options and opportunities.

And I think that.

This isn't I.

I'm just not seeing it.

I'm just not seeing it from my perspective.

Thank you Director Hersey Director Rankin.

My my sense from emails that I've gotten and from comments is that.

It's less.

Well.

Is that the real issue is the optics and the feeling of the cohort being removed.

At a school where these students already attend.

Less so that like I mean I would be really interested anybody who's maybe watching online.

If you have a student at.

in the highly capable cohort at Washington Middle School particularly if your student is a student of color I would be really interested to know by email if this is something that you would avail yourself of if you would like the option to go there.

My sense and I'm happy to be corrected but my sense is that.

It's the really like bad kind of brushed aside feeling of having it taken away from one spot is the bigger issue than here will provide this opportunity.

Does that make sense.

Like because it still is it's still far away like the issue isn't so much like well I want access at another place.

It's that everybody else is keeping the cohort except for us.

Why.

And so this kind of mitigates that but it doesn't really address like the initial hurt.

If that makes sense.

But I would be really curious to know like if there are.

Who would who would be able to do it or want to do it.

Would they want to go all the way up to.

I don't know.

And I think it would be helpful to help to hear from those folks.

I'm glad you made that shout out.

I fundamentally agree with you that this is not this.

This does not fix the problem that we are actually removing something.

Because the actual first part of the inequity is that part that how do you.

And then and that it is inequitable to make them go across the city.

I mean it's it'll be a ridiculous commute for folks if that was an option.

The only benefit is that if they feel like that is still the right program with the right level of acceleration etc.

And I hear all of your points.

I think the the intent is to.

continue to provide provide access and to not take away the access to a cohort from that entire region all this all the students in that region and all the HC qualified students there.

Thank you Director Mack.

Do I have.

That's what I heard.

It's just for the sixth graders for next year.

Yes.

So mindful of the fact that a few minutes ago the lights did go out on us.

I want to be thoughtful about time.

So if there are any other comments or questions or concerns about this amendment elevate those now.

OK.

OK so seeing none.

I'm going to move on to item number two.

Everybody cool with that.

OK so item number two for introduction is approval of Department of Education school climate transportation grant.

This was brought forward through Audit and Finance Committee on December 9th for approval.

I'll invite our staff to come up and speak.

Good evening.

Good evening.

Wyeth Jessee chief of schools and continuous improvement.

I am really excited to get in front of you this evening for the board action report for introduction and hopefully approval for us to accept a grant from the Department of Education.

That grant is called the school climate transformation grant in the amount of three million seven hundred nineteen thousand nine hundred thirty six dollars over across five years.

This particular award by the Department of Ed to Seattle Public Schools.

Was around really centered exactly aligned to our work that we have been doing around safe and welcoming schools specifically positive behavioral supports.

And so under this grant it really is just awarding us these dollars to further enhance.

Some of the work that we've been doing at select sites so that we can actually be.

The term we use is demonstration sites.

Which is really exciting because then you have out of our 104 schools we have our staff that would come and be able to see how positive supports work.

How do you really.

Support.

Having teaching social emotional learning skills.

And then.

There's a lot of other technical things to it.

But it's again really exciting around this work over the next five years.

It would start with four schools one elementary one K-8 one middle and one high school over the first two years and then we would move after that to a.

Four more schools also by those grade level bands.

And then it would also be a we would also be a regional site.

So literally the whole Puget Sound probably across the state.

That's why we get emails for like Senator Cantwell congratulating us getting this award.

Also the University of Washington OSPI reaching out to us to partner further around this.

UW is written at the grant.

They co-wrote the grant with us.

So I would just like to take this moment to recognize Stephanie King.

Erin Romanek.

Pat Sander.

Some of the folks at the UW Smart Center.

As they.

We co-wrote this grant.

Thank you.

So this came through Audit and Finance and I think this was the first one in December which might have been.

Director Harris and Director Mack and Director Rivera-Smith were also there.

So.

Anything else that.

You feel like.

Came up that we should.

Ever of taking money for these reasons.

Thank you.

So when this was moved forward it was approved with amendments and I don't see on here what if those were they were the amendments were adding clarification regarding the research opt in opt out process you're going to check with legal.

I do see a table of costs was added and I think that one there was a bulleted list which is supposed to be the deliverables we're asking for.

But correct me if I'm wrong here guys wanted to see if those.

The outcomes are on.

Yep.

So the outcomes are on page 2 where it says outcomes for this period.

Those are the same KPIs that we we use under safe and welcoming schools.

So that's discipline attendance and climate survey data.

And then also we would add the adult practices that we're expecting to see around positive behavioral intervention supports.

Then like you said Director Rivera-Smith on page 3 we did add the more detailed budget so that you did did notice that.

And then on page 4 if you'll allow me the second paragraph under collaboration this is this sorry this particular items.

I know I added it.

I'll have to get back to you on that one.

I know I just went through this job training.

Oh sorry.

Another highlighted item so that would be back on page 3 the second paragraph where it does state specifically that we would be following the district's line.

For the work that directly connects the intervention service and surveys that will supply and obtain all required parent guardian notifications consent.

So we did add that and that's legal did provide us with that language.

But again this is really about professional development directly related to staff.

It's a training module.

Sorry about that.

OK.

Thank you.

Thanks Director Rivera-Smith.

Other directors.

OK seeing none.

Item number three approval of courses with new content as defined by superintendent procedure number 2 0 2 6. This came through C&I on December 10th for approval.

Chief DeBacker.

Thank you President DeWolf for that introduction.

This is.

A bar that comes before the board every year at this time and it is a bar where we are adding or suggesting to you that we add courses to the high school course catalog.

The process for how this happens is if a teacher has a desire to teach a new course that isn't currently being offered in the high school catalog they can put in a request that request then goes to the appropriate program manager.

So if it was a science course it would go to Mary Margaret Welch if it's a language arts course this goes to Kathleen Vasquez etc.

Once that is then reviewed by the program manager and if it is determined to be an appropriate class we have them.

submit their descriptions and you've seen some of those in your packet tonight.

And then if it is approved by you as a board then it goes into the offerings of a course catalog.

High school principals and counselors then look through that catalog and say do we want to offer these courses.

What do we want to offer at our specific high school.

And then if students enroll then that class is taught.

So that just kind of gives you an idea of the process that it goes through.

What we're bringing forward to you tonight are eight new classes as you've seen there.

Eight is about the amount that you get each year.

It just it varies depending on who wants to offer what.

But you have eight tonight and those eight consist of a career in tech ed class in virtual reality.

It consists of a pre-apprenticeship class and that connects with our community workforce.

There are there's a class with Asian-American literature and another class Latin American literature and then four courses in visual and performing arts.

So a few other things about this.

When we took this to the December curriculum and instruction committee we were asked to add in the equity analysis that we asked the teachers to do or the program manager that brought that forth and.

three of you were at that meeting and you remember that.

So that is a little bit of a different thing than what you saw at C&I.

We put that into the bar that you have in front of you tonight.

A couple other things I think is important to remember is that.

We had a question that came about just today as to how this may or may not relate to ethnic studies.

So I think I want to address that at least with those two courses the Latin American and the Asian-American lit classes.

Keep in mind that in Seattle Public Schools we don't have a credit for ethnic studies.

So the courses.

Yet.

Yet.

Thank you.

Thank you Director Harris.

So the courses that you have in front of you they are the two courses in question are courses that under our current system would qualify for language arts credits.

We are in the process with ethnic studies in trying to do some cross crediting work.

So once a course is in the course catalog for example we have an African-American literature class already in our course catalog.

We have a Native American literature class already in our course catalog.

Once they're in the course catalog then we can do a cross crediting where it will allow us to give credit for a course that has an ethnic studies genre or you've heard us talk about the ethnic studies framework and then we could give credit in different areas.

So there is a distinction but there is also is a little bit of a connection here but I wanted to clear up that any confusion that may be with that.

So I'll open it up for questions and comments direct to Hersey.

Yeah.

So in respect to that question about how this intersects with ethnic studies I just want to be super clear with this.

It seems as though the program manager for ethnic studies is not cool with this.

Can you explain to me why that is because I want to make sure.

I mean it's you could laugh but also we need to respect the work of Tracy Cashel Gill and all the teachers who have put effort into this.

And it's concerning to me that those individuals are not cool with this.

So I want to know why.

I can only speak on behalf of the process that we use here.

I have not spoken to Tracy about her concern with this.

I was made aware of that tonight during the board meeting.

So I I can only speak on behalf of the process.

The process that we currently have is a teacher can request a course that aligns with anything that we give credit in currently and that is what has been done there.

There is no nothing in these course descriptions that say that this is all about ethnic studies ethnic studies advisory group has not reviewed these courses and quite honestly the only people who approve a new course coming through are the seven board members.

Sure and my I think where I'm coming from is that with how potentially contentious this ethnic studies adoption has already been we've already gotten feedback from our community meetings.

There's a lot of misinformation about what is and isn't.

We need to be completely clear in our own house before we put anything forward.

So I hope before we are asked to act on this that there is a conversation with.

Tracy Castro Gil about this so that we can be all on the same page because I want to make sure that moving forward that we are not necessarily in lockstep but at least walking in the same direction with this.

Thank you Director Hersey.

Chief DeBacker to be clear the conversation tonight about item number three is specifically about these six courses.

Excuse me eight.

The conversation we're thinking about with Director Hersey is in addition to which is not captured here in this BAR but it is something I think.

So just so I'm clear this is just for the eight.

This is not for the cross crediting.

Correct.

You're just giving us kind of.

I was just additional information to give context.

I was trying to connect some dots that have been made apparent.

Just today.

Thank you.

Director Harris and Director Rankin.

OK I I share Director Hersey's concerns and you and I have had some pretty thoughtful conversations about this as well.

I guess my concern is that we haven't availed ourselves to members of the advisory committee it A system can't be just one person and and we have to be more robust than that.

And I'm not sure I understand why we haven't availed ourselves to the advisory committee in this good work especially why folks are out on leave because this is a high priority of this board.

It's been a high priority of this board.

And it's been high centered several times and I'm I'm very frustrated and obviously I'm not very patient.

I will own that.

But why can't we do a better job of using the advisory committee and developing a better system.

So that money doesn't disappear from last March to now da da da da da da.

We've been having the same kind of conversations now for for too long.

And I'm I'm I'm concerned and I'm distressed by it.

And I'm concerned and distressed when we have.

Publicly.

Facebook.

That says content about and from ethnic groups can be taught through a colonized white supremacy lens.

Even in other languages assuming content about ethnic groups is by default.

Ethnic studies is.

Hashtag rewhiting or whitewashing ethnic studies curriculum.

I am a privileged white woman.

I don't claim.

To understand a lot of this continuum.

I'm working really hard at learning it.

Because it matters to our 53000 students.

But this this is problematic to me and I'm I'm concerned and distressed.

Thank you Director Harris Director Rankin.

As the newly appointed chair of the curriculum and instruction policy committee I just I want to make sure that I'm all the way up to.

in the loop up to speed understanding what's happening.

So can I I'm just going to state my understanding of something.

And if any members of the ethnic studies advisory team happen to be watching please let me know if I have this or not.

And then Mr. Becker please also the same.

My Dr. DeBacker my understanding is that there's confusion between an ethics studies course and ethics studies framework.

I just want to be really thoughtful.

I'm certainly gonna let you finish.

That feels like it's going beyond the scope of the BAR.

So I'm gonna let you finish.

But.

About the eight courses we're thinking about approving.

It is definitely outside of that scope.

I do want you to finish.

It's related.

Yes.

In which they are approved I think.

So my understanding is that the confusion is well and so I don't know.

So that.

These courses.

The cross crediting.

Is that.

Is that.

Traditionally there would be a certain number of courses that count as 11th grade English and where the cross crediting would allow someone to take one of these courses and have that count towards 11th grade English instead of as an elective.

Is that correct.

Correct.

OK.

So that opens us up to other options for in this case literature.

But I think where we're getting stuck on is it's still the ethnic studies framework would then be laid on top of everything and it's the lens through which we're viewing everything.

And I mean in that context having Asian-American literature would not be.

separate because it would be everything would be incorporated.

But I I think that the confusion is around the cross crediting and then what's an ethics studies course and then the ethics studies framework and who is deciding that and how we're that's that's that's where I am understanding the conflict.

Correct.

And and there's some of everything that you said.

We have an ethnic studies course.

in the current course catalog and that is a course that gets an elective credit.

OK so there is a course a little bit of history on the ethnic studies is that the task force when it was formed a few years ago came out with some recommendations and one of their recommendations is that there not be that that we integrate that we push in ethnic studies into courses thus the idea and the concept How we're moving forward with the frameworks so that you can take the themes of ethnic studies and you can lay that into any class whether that be a kindergarten class or a fourth grade class or a another high school math class as we saw in some discussions earlier this spring.

So so there's yes there can be a class we have it.

There can be frameworks that can be laid into or pushed into current curriculum.

We have that happening now in Seattle Public Schools and then we can also look at do we ever want to ethnic studies graduation requirement that may come before the board or we can look also or and we can look also at can we cross credit some classes and the cross crediting as process is something we have not done yet.

We are in the process of doing that.

I met with the ethnic studies advisory group last month to discuss the process for doing it.

And the discussion really is around where does it start.

So if we have a teacher in this example a teacher who wants to teach Latin American literature or Asian American literature.

Where does where do we start that cross crediting process.

Does that teacher hand that course into where it would traditionally lay and hand it into language arts program manager to say what do you think.

Do they hand it into the ethnic studies program manager.

Say what do you think.

Do we do it simultaneously.

Does one group do it first and the other group do it next.

We have not answered that question yet.

We are discussing that right now with the ethnic studies advisory group leading that discussion and the other program managers.

If it was science if it was math it was language arts also having input.

There is a meeting tomorrow of the ethnic studies advisory group.

I would hope that this is a discussion on their agenda.

because we need to get this done soon in order to be in the course catalog.

Bringing us back to the BAR President DeWolf of that we have to we would like to know what we put in our course catalogs that our principals can look at to decide what they offer to their students so that when students go to pre-enroll in a few months They will know if I'm taking a class what it counts for.

It is really it gets down to that.

We have not done the cross crediting process yet.

It is brand new for us.

We're this close to getting it done.

Thank you.

So the course catalog is happening and I spoke a little bit about the work that had gone into removing some of the prerequisites earlier.

We and Dr. DeBacker has been working with the Ethnic Studies Advisory Council and has been to a couple of their meetings and it will be going tomorrow as well.

One meeting and it's going again tomorrow and I'm hoping as well that this is an agenda item that they are having conversations about because if we're going to take an Asian-American literature course and make it a cross credit with ethnic studies that approval has to happen.

this month otherwise it doesn't happen for next year's students.

So we've had some staffing leave some.

We have some staff that are currently on medical leave and when they're on medical leave we can't talk to them because they're on medical leave.

And so that also throws some challenges I guess in conversations that need to happen.

However there is an advisory council that I hope Teachers on there will really take this seriously because the only people that will lose out if this does not happen are students.

And so that's my message to the ethnic at Ethnic Studies Advisory Council.

Please come together.

Look at these courses decide whether they can be approved for ethnic studies for cross credit because we really want our students to be able to have access to that next year.

Wait sorry that actually just made me get more confused because I think that the cross crediting is not to make it an ethnic studies course but the cross crediting is to make non white European focused course count as 11th grade English the other way around.

Right.

But they would be and ethnic studies.

Is that.

I mean it's cross crediting so you're getting credit for your English language your language arts and you're getting an ethnic studies credit when you're cross crediting you're getting it for both.

But I think that's where the problem is is that ethnic studies.

The task force the advisory group is saying.

That that's the that's that's in everything ethnic studies as part of.

Everything.

And that making it an ethnic studies course.

Is.

Yes Chief DeBacker I know you'll have C&I next week.

I want to be thoughtful that that might be an opportunity to really dive into this so we can bring it back for action on the 22nd just to be mindful of time.

So I'm going to.

Just add one more thing.

I will go to the ethnic studies group tomorrow to see what is up.

Thanks Superintendent Juneau.

All right.

Item number four purchase of student and staff technology for new BEX IV schools.

This came through Ops Committee on December 5th for approval and welcome Chief Berge.

I'll be brief if I might.

This is the authority to purchase computers and technology.

This bar covers the three schools that will be opening next year Webster Begley and Wing Luke as well as our normal capacity that we asked for.

The bar covers standard technology packages to outfit new schools and classrooms including teacher student and classroom technology.

It also includes IT infrastructure such as switches and wireless access points.

There were no changes requested in Ops.

Comments questions concerns from my colleagues I'm back at it.

Boomerang.

No.

Bad penny.

Comments questions concerns from my colleagues.

Seeing none we move to number five BTA IV approval of capacity management actions for the 2020 21 school year this came before Ops December 5th for approval I see.

Chief of Operations Fred Podesta.

Take it away kind sir.

The information in this BAR is required by policy H 13 an annual capacity management report.

It also authorizes us to begin planning capacity changes as needed across the district there.

You know across the district.

We have adequate capacity but of course at a site specific level there's always needs here and there.

So this authorizes the addition of nine classrooms across elementary and middle schools.

and a contingency that would allow us to add another six classrooms on an annual basis.

Things change a lot from the time this report is brought to the board and the contracts are finally let.

This is not awarding those contracts we would be back when we actually decided this is what we're going to do and we need to place portables.

But this kind of authorizes the overall plan.

At a pretty high level.

Comments questions concerns from my colleagues.

We're working on number five now.

President DeWolf.

Director Harris.

I was going to say that actually this is just checking in on this overall plan a little bit further is on the agenda for Ops Tomorrow with more recent information that may be coming through.

And but but we did move it forward for approval as it was because it is a high level plan knowing that things can change depending on what the needs in the buildings are.

Any other comments concerns.

Director Rivera-Smith.

It was approved move for approval as amended.

So where were the amendments in this one.

When when it was moved out of Ops there was.

Was there.

I actually don't recall.

Yeah well that's what we had spoken and that's why my notes don't actually say what the amendments were but.

I could pull up my notes but I believe it was with relation to.

The fact that was brought up that Robert Eagle Staff regardless of whether or not the amendment on H.C.

goes through.

Is.

Going to need to move the elementary classrooms that were built for.

Licton Springs back into middle school spaces in order to utilize it.

So there's a transition back for those spaces and I think that's not spelled out here.

And so I think that's part I think that was there was supposed to be an amendment to put Robert Eagle Staff in here maybe.

You know I think again since that's not a capacity issue at Robert Eagle Staff it wasn't addressed in that fashion.

We may need to make changes because of the school but.

that that at that point wasn't it hadn't been improved it wasn't yet a capacity issue.

Would it be OK to touch base on this tomorrow kind of get the staff perspective and between now and then we would be able to come back and staff can make those changes appropriately based on that conversation tomorrow.

And shouldn't shouldn't our agenda say.

Approved as amended.

I mean isn't that the standard chief counsel.

I think it is but they didn't actually put any they didn't change anything in it.

This is exactly as it came to committee.

So.

Oh there is.

Should there should it have been on today's agenda showing with amendments or with updates since committee.

I don't know if that's usually on the regular.

It's not usually on.

Are there any additional comments questions or concerns about this BAR.

Did you do number five.

That's what I thought.

Thank you.

All right.

Introduction item number six BEX IV and BTA IV approval of construction change order number 24 for the Lincoln High School modernization and addition project.

This came through Ops on December 5th for approval.

This represents what we expect to be the last set of change orders for the Lincoln High School project.

It's a myriad of things that are attached to the BAR was reviewed with Director Geary as are all our change orders.

And I think we're we're about done.

All right.

Questions or concerns from directors.

OK we'll move to our final introduction item number 7 BTA IV final acceptance of contract K 5 1 0 5 with AccuSet Construction Inc. for the relocate and set up portable classrooms at multiple school sites project.

This came through Ops on December 5th for approval.

Take it away chief.

So this close out a contract.

This is the back end of the process of the capacity management BAR that we did award multiple contracts to move portables that were accomplished in 2019. This was one of them called for the relocation of 10 or placement of portables at 10 different locations.

The work has been complete.

It was the buildings are in service and this just closes the contract out.

Thank you.

Do we have any questions or concerns from directors.

All right.

Thank you.

Do I have a second.

All right.

Being no further business for the board the regular board meeting is now adjourned at 841 p.m..