Seattle School Board Meeting March 21,, 2018 Part 3

to give your director comments as yet.

Could you please sir.

I sure can and Qeˀciyéẁyéẁ thank you.

Definitely want to thank all of our community partners and the ones that we're recognizing tonight for what they do for our students and getting more and more involved as our community does with our students and Cedric here tonight you know really does lay that groundwork that for me that's why I feel is still that we're here for the students and making sure that we're developing future leaders for our community and that they'll be strong and acknowledge that we are a very diverse community.

Listening to some of the testimony here about the black lives matter that we have a curriculum week for that.

As we progress with C&I and looking at adopting ethnic studies civil rights that is that each and every week is going to be something like black lives matter work Native American lives matter week.

Hispanic Asian Pacific Islanders week every different ethnic racial group political group students that are underserved or feel marginalized that they feel hey I am part of this school each and every day not just one week out of the year one month out of the year.

So I hear unfortunately some people excuse me as they talk about you know what are you doing for me the majority student.

While the school is already designed for you the majority student and we're trying to make sure we're being more inclusive so that everyone can succeed and be advanced.

So thank you to the students from Garfield and Rainier Beach as well to come up here tonight and share your words.

Again thank you Cedric appreciate you being here.

For me the comments keep it short so I'm sure people want to go out and enjoy the news now that we're in spring.

I actually also have to go and do a car repair as soon as I can.

I want to announce that the Urban Native Education Alliance is holding their fifth annual conference.

They held it during the Seattle School District spring break April 13th and 14th this year at Robert Eagle Staff Middle School.

Keynote speakers this year will include Makita Wilber a photographer and I was also surprised to see for those of you out there remember this person's name Slick Watts will also be there as one of their speakers.

So encourage students from the Seattle School District as you're taking time off especially targeting the native students come out and enjoy some workshops on leadership.

They have a finding Bigfoot expedition fitness and health.

Nutrition building launch rockets with the Northwest Indian College.

So they are definitely trying to show our students that they can be successful here.

So if you're going to be around the Seattle School District please do so.

You can email me SS Pinkham at Seattle schools dot org if you want more information or go to the Urban Education Alliance website which is actually just that Urban Native Education Alliance dot org.

April 13th and 14th from 10 a.m.

to 3 p.m.

both days.

And they do want advanced registration so if people are going to attend because they plan to give out T-shirts to all the people that attend so they want to make sure they get the proper headcount.

I also want to kind of comment too that I heard on I think it was NPR today of just the direction that we're going.

National Geographic is issuing an apology.

Other directors like Jill heard heard this or not.

But as far as how they were unfortunately perpetuating stereotypes when they go out and want to do you know hey some of the people what you know of other countries is what National Geographic showed.

And they said that some of their writers and photographers actually intentionally went out and found those underdeveloped people didn't show their advancements.

They just want to show hey look at how these people that are less than us still living in the third world lifestyle but didn't share that they're advancing as well.

And I appreciate this.

You know someone as large as National Geographic is stepping up taking ownership.

I contributed to this situation where people see others as less than.

that you know.

And so I asked my daughter the other day to you what do you think this country would have been like if you know Europeans didn't settle here.

Would people still think that American Indians Native Americans would still be living in teepees or living you know the lifestyle that was depicted you know of them so much in history books.

I would say no we probably would be flying around in cars right now.

We'd have the flying cars that run on biofuels and being really.

But just the advancements that we know we're not any people stuck in the past we're always advancing and making good advancements.

So thank you National Geographic for admitting that hey we need to help move everyone forward instead of saying hey this is how people used to be and that's who you are if you want to be a real So and so because I do get that comment and I know a lot of our native students.

I don't know if this is brought up in your meeting that some of the students say you're not a real Indian because you know you're here dressed in modern clothes.

You're not riding horseback bareback.

You don't have this or that.

Then again it attacks persons.

idea of self.

So again I just want to I guess I can get off of that but I think it's an issue we do need to address.

My next community meeting will be this Saturday after I'll do my best to be out there to join the walk but it will be at Northgate.

library from 3 o'clock to 430. Anybody that wants to stop by please come by and share the issues that you want to present.

And I did have one family member reach out to me and hopefully she'll be there because she did have some issues you want to discuss about their child feeling some racial targeting at their school.

And it was about her native side so hopefully we can get some issues addressed and let our school districts know we're serving all students.

Qeˀciyéẁyéẁ Thank you.

Last but hopefully not least my community meetings April 7th High Point library 3 to 5 April 28 Delridge library 3 to 5 May 26 Delridge library 3 to 5 one in three chance of lasagna.

Busy couple of weeks in addition to the superintendent search meetings etc.

We hosted Mayor Durkan for a town hall on school safety a week and a half ago and.

It was streamed live.

It's on the Seattle Channel and I I cannot be more proud of our young people in taking the leadership on and how articulate they are.

It was more than extraordinary.

Some of these same young folks leaders of the March for Life were on Saturday with Congressman commerce woman excuse me Pramila Jayapal at another town hall and they could not have been more articulate.

It makes me proud.

And to that end we expect to see everyone in this building and in our schools at Cal Anderson Park at 10 a.m.

To march for school safety.

If not now when.

Couple of other announcements.

April 15th the Mariners are giving board certified teachers special tickets.

They're playing the Oakland A's www.mariners.com slash NBCT.

And I hope we'll see a huge group at that Mariners game.

With respect to Rainier Beach High School first Gian Rosario I cannot agree with you more with respect to the city's circumventing the city code with respect to not inviting the Seattle school district to the table.

That happened about a year ago.

As you know our resolution for the high school was heard and changes were made.

But we can't really sue the city if we're looking to cooperate with families and education levies.

We can't pick one pocket and then expect to get returned in the other.

We can in fact and will continue to lose use it as leverage.

We'll continue to remind the city that we weren't part of the discussion on HALA or the MHA zoning changes.

And again that's what that memorandum of understanding is about.

It's increasing cooperation collaboration and assistance.

We've all got the same students and children in mind.

I read something on Facebook last night that made me cry.

Fourth grader.

In my district.

Native.

Female.

Was in class.

Playing a pioneer.

And we talked about scalping and burning.

That is not social emotional learning.

That is not responsible curriculum.

That is not acceptable.

And I would go back to the concept of professional development and the concept of training and the concept of awareness.

And I would ask again how many of our teachers have taken the statutorily required mandated since time immemorial training.

And if we haven't coughed up the dollars to pay our teachers to do professional development then we need to do that.

It is unacceptable to me. that our students are treated in this fashion.

It's not my story to tell but I suggest we can and should and must do better.

It's my honor and my privilege.

Let's move to action items.

Number one.

Approval of four separate successor collective bargaining agreements between Seattle Public Schools and International Union of Operating Engineers Local 609 for September 1 2017 through August 31st 2020. This came before the executive committee on March 15th for consideration.

Approval of this item would initiate approval of four successor collective bargaining agreements negotiated between representatives of the International Union of Operating Engineers Local 609 and Seattle School District number one.

May I hear a motion please.

Vice President Burke.

I move that the school board authorize the superintendent to execute a contract with each of the four collective bargaining agreements identified as unit A custodial engineers and gardeners unit B nutrition services unit C school security specialists and the fourth unit alarm monitors and security response specialists with the wage schedules and other attachments in the form of the draft agreements for the period September 1 2017 through August 31 2020 as attached to the school board action report with any minor additions deletions and modifications deemed necessary by the superintendent and to take the necessary actions to implement the contracts.

Immediate action is in the best interest of the district.

We have a second.

Second the motion.

Mr. Damas the floor is yours.

Thank you.

As indicated in the.

Brief words on the screen and the introduction.

We have four contracts which provide wages, hours, and working conditions for several groups of employees that provide important services to our students in the way of nutrition, a healthy, clean workplace, and security.

I think the board action report outlines the key features.

I'm available to answer any questions.

Questions comments concerns from my colleagues please.

Mr. Damas this was ratified by the members of I 609 correct?

I have been informed that it was ratified by the union.

Yes.

Thank you.

Questions comments concerns.

Director Pinkham.

I just want to give a shout out and thank you for all the work that you've done and all the staff and doing this and making sure that people that are living here in Seattle do have those affordable wages and able to live here because it is a challenge.

Seattle is a very expensive place to live in.

And going through and making sure that our everyone's doing the best they can to assure that they feel that they're welcome here.

I just want to again say Qeˀciyéẁyéẁ.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Other questions comments concerns.

Singh none.

Roll call please.

Director Burke.

Aye.

Director DeWolf.

Aye.

Director Geary.

Aye.

Director Mack.

Aye.

Director Patu.

Aye.

Director Pinkham.

Aye.

Director Harris.

Aye.

This motion has passed unanimously.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Introduction items.

Number one Satterberg Foundation elementary feeder school grant came before C&I March 13th for.

This came before C&I and was moved forward to the board for approval.

Approval of the item would authorize the superintendent to accept the Satterberg Foundation elementary feeder school grant funds in the amount of nine hundred fifty thousand dollars.

May we hear the motion please sir.

Boy that's three for three.

My apologies.

Who will be speaking to this.

Good evening board members.

My name is Sharon Stone and I'm the Satterberg literacy administrator.

I'm excited to share with you our Satterberg work and ask you to allow us to continue this partnership by approving the nine hundred and fifty thousand dollar grant that they are providing us.

This grant focuses on the superintendent's third pillar of success eliminating the achievement and opportunity gaps in literacy for 10 of our elementary feeder schools into three of our middle schools Aki Denny and Mercer.

In a nutshell this grant provides us the opportunity to provide these schools to build teacher capacity school leadership capacity around literacy provide coaching professional development some extra resources in the way of materials.

We have provided a number of professional development opportunities provided opportunities for our students to become joyful readers capable lifelong readers.

And I ask that we can continue this with the Satterberg grant.

Thank you.

Questions comments concerns from my colleagues.

Director Burke.

I just want to also thank you for bringing this before us and the work that you do and emphasize we had a great discussion around this at the curriculum instruction committee and heard you know a lot more about the You know the philosophy behind it and the how it's integrating with the other district initiatives.

You know our ELA adoption is weaving into this as is our smart goals our EOG work.

And so I just wanted to share that as well.

And thank you for the report.

Superintendent Nyland you had some comments sir.

Likewise it's definitely arrow alignment work.

And you've heard the reports earlier on the Nesholm family foundation and how instrumental they have been to get our arrows lined up at our three middle schools over a number of years.

And they were the ones that helped recruit the Chatterbergs to extend that to the feeder schools that feed into those three middle schools.

So and Sherry is one of ours.

So she has been in the district and knows us well.

And so it's just a nice partnership all the way around.

Thank you.

Seeing no further comments questions or concerns.

We move to number two.

Thank you.

Revision to school board policy 2 1 9 5 kindergarten.

This came before C&I March 13th.

And was brought forward to the board for approval.

Approval of the item would amend board policy 2 1 9 5 kindergarten in order to align the policy with state law requiring free full day kindergarten in all public schools.

Ms. Toner the floor is yours.

Thank you.

Cashel Toner executive director for curriculum and instruction.

Briefly this was discussed at March C&I We asked the committee for their direction around revising the policy how big or how narrow they'd like to see us do that work.

The recommendation was to just amend the last sentence of the policy and leave the rest intact.

So we did that.

And this policy alignment would just bring us to really align with our practice that's happening in schools.

I remember the battle days.

Me too.

Any comments questions concerns.

OK.

Seeing none.

We move to number three Seattle teacher residency program funding.

This came before the executive committee March 15th for approval.

Approval of this item would provide authority for the superintendent to dedicate $251,000 for the purposes of the Seattle teacher residency also known as STR program in the 2018 19 school year.

Assistant Superintendent Dr. Clover Codd the floor is yours and Michael Tamayo the vice president of the Seattle Education Association.

Thank you.

Good evening.

So as you know I'm joined here today with Michael Tamayo I'm also joined by Chris Strape the manager of the STAR program and supports our Seattle teacher residency work and also Norma Andrade and James Dixon two teacher educators that are graduates of the Seattle teacher residency program.

Codd could you please explain what STAR means please.

Chris Drate will explain what STAR is because I know what it is.

I actually don't know what it stands for anymore.

It's the staff training assistance and review.

It's our induction program for new to profession teachers.

Thank you.

Thank you.

All right.

So the outline of our presentation tonight I will give a summary of the BAR kind of walk through it.

Michael will then say a few words and we'll invite our teacher educators to come up for one to two minutes each just to tell you about their experience and then we'll open it up for any questions that you might have.

All right.

So in the bar you've got some attachments.

There is a link to a research brief.

There is a draft scope of work of the four partners the four partners being Seattle Public Schools the Alliance for Education the Seattle Education Association and the University of Washington.

There's also a graphic depiction of the statistics and demographics that are outlined in this bar so it's a little bit more visual representation.

There's also a draft budget that shows the total cost of the Seattle teacher residency program of which our contribution would be the $251,000 if you should approve this motion.

So as you're aware HR human resources has centered our departmental strategic plan on making sure there's a high quality teacher in every classroom on the very first day of school.

We are also focused on recruiting and retaining a diverse teaching core one that reflects the diversity of our students.

Despite our very best efforts we had 75 open positions on the first day of school this past fall.

While 29 percent of our schools are considered Title 1 or higher poverty 41 percent of our openings were in those Title 1 schools.

This creates and adds to our opportunity gap in a disproportionate way.

Two our teaching core is 80 percent white while only 20 percent of our teachers identify as people of color.

40 percent of the Seattle teacher residents and grads identify as people of color which is double our current teacher core population.

Additionally Seattle teacher residents commit to teach for five years in Seattle public school Title 1 schools.

So our theory of change rests on the assumption that teacher preparation can no longer just be a university endeavor but instead requires the partnership and collaboration of all aspects in recruitment preparation and retention.

All four partners have aligned goals to recruit a diverse workforce to ensure preparation is integrated is rigorous and context specific.

We know that research asserts that the high quality teacher who is well prepared is the single most important in school factor to improving student educational outcomes because our STR grads are better prepared to take on the lead role of teaching on the very first day of school.

We know this will have a huge impact on eliminating the opportunity yet.

The Seattle teacher residency is one of our most promising practices.

Seattle teacher residents are trained in culturally responsive teaching trauma informed practices.

They work intentionally with families in the very communities in which they serve.

They receive explicit teaching on race and equity and the intersections with poverty.

They specifically explore and experience what it means to be in a classroom and beyond.

One example is that resident training includes visit to the Monroe correctional complex to engage in conversations with the black prisoners caucus and reflect on the school to prison pipeline with men who have not so good experiences in school when they were in school.

STR is an equity focused initiative.

It has a direct impact in the number of high quality teachers that serve in our Title 1 schools and it has a direct impact in the number of classrooms we are able to fill on the very first day.

The Seattle teacher residency pipeline makes up between one quarter and a little over one third of all of our new to profession hires in Title 1 elementary schools.

It's a large percentage of our pipeline.

With a five year commitment commitment you will see a dramatic reduction in teacher turnover in these schools.

They are retained at the three year mark compared to 60 percent of other teachers that come in at the same time in our Title 1 schools.

STR proves to mitigate the cost of teacher turnover teacher turnover in our high need schools.

So today we're asking the board to consider providing the superintendent the authority to set aside two hundred and fifty one thousand dollars in the 2018 19 budget for this program.

There is no action that the district meet a certain percentage of the overall cost of the entire program but that we do make a contribution of two hundred fifty one thousand dollars for next year.

In outgoing years the ideal cost structure would have the Seattle Public Schools contribution be one third the total cost of the program with the alliance for education working with us to fundraise for the remaining two thirds.

The assumption is that the cohort size remains the same.

This BAR however is requesting one time funding for next year and any conversations regarding out years.

We will come back to the board for approval.

I'd like to turn over to Michael Tamayo the vice president of the Seattle Education Association who would have some words of wisdom.

Thanks.

Good evening.

I just want to come out and say that SEA 100 percent supports the Seattle teacher residency program.

I was actually a mentor teacher in cohorts 1 and 2 at John Muir Elementary so I have some intimate knowledge about the positive impacts that the residency program provides.

Not just students but for experienced educators like myself.

And so while Clover detailed the impacts SDR has had on student achievement and the clear pipeline that SDR provides to recruit and retain high quality educators in our Title 1 schools.

I'd like to speak a little bit about the impact it has on our mentor teachers and our experienced teacher core.

Like I was a mentor in my sixth and seventh year teaching.

And if you talk to any any any any educator they'll tell you it takes you about five years to figure out what you're really doing in the classroom.

So in the sixth and seventh year in my teaching I had the opportunity to have a resident teacher in my classroom and the benefits that it provided me were monthly professional high quality professional development that wasn't afforded to me to my colleagues who weren't mentor teachers.

One thing that stood out was learning how to leverage the strengths of having a full time resident teacher in your classroom for the entire school year.

Supercharged my own my own practice as a 6th and 7th year educator just at a time when I felt like I was finally settling into my role.

I'm having a resident to daily bounce new ideas off of to ask critical questions about what I was doing in my practice and the effect that the effect that our teaching together had on our students is the kind of reflective kind of reflective professional development and reflective practice that I think all educators and administrators find that's at the core of strong professional development.

STR provided this provided this consistently over the course of those two years.

Recently as a leader in SEA I've come across in my travels across all the buildings graduates of the SEA program and these graduates of the SEA program are popping up where you naturally will find teacher leaders popping up.

You have first, second, third year resident graduates serving on BLTs in their buildings.

Being committee leaders instructional instructional leaders in their buildings and also being elected union leaders in their buildings.

And that's kind of the testament to the fact that resident residents who graduated for the program work in Title 1 schools hit the ground running at a far faster rate than any other than than many of the other first year teachers that I've come across and mentored in my career.

You know these aren't novice educators.

These are educators that are ready to go on day one.

One thing in closing I just wanted to reiterate having worked in Title 1 schools my entire tenure career in Seattle.

Our schools need consistency.

Title 1 schools need consistent teacher leadership.

Teachers in the classroom for the benefit of our students.

SGR provides that right off the bat.

And I would just like to encourage the board to consider sustaining funding for this program as it continues to build and as it continues to grow throughout our district.

Thank you Michael.

And now I'd like to call up our two teacher educators to just speak quickly on their experience in the program and beyond.

Hello my name is James Dixon.

I currently teach at Mercer middle school special education 6th 7th and 8th grade.

I so first off I'm a former student of Seattle Public Schools.

I've basically been here my whole life.

And SPS I mean.

You have to shout out which schools.

You can't you can't just.

There's a lot of them.

Martin Luther King Elementary.

Madrona Denny and then Garfield.

So SGR provided me the opportunity to get into grad school.

I was an IA so I did the class to serve program.

And if I wasn't able to go through that pathway I'm more than likely it would have been a harder path for me to become a teacher.

I was a student that was on free and reduced lunch.

So I really needed that extra income to be able to go through school and be successful.

So without that opportunity the SGR provided I would not have It would have been a longer path for me to become a teacher.

And then also one thing that I noticed is being a teacher the skills that I have learned are really translatable to what I do and work every day.

I was I did my residency year at Broadview Thompson and that teacher he was a.

psychologist and he really taught me how to do data collection and I got to see from day one to the end how everything started and ended and set up classroom routines and everything.

So it really helped me build my foundation from my first year and into my second year which is now I feel much really grounded into my work and really successful and SGR helped me get that.

Hello I am Norma Andrade.

I teach fourth grade.

This is my fourth year teaching but I was in STR five years ago so really fifth year.

And I teach at Viewlands Elementary up near Carkeek Park.

So what I wanted to let you know is by funding STR you are standing up for and you're advocating for all the children who are most impacted by poverty systemic racism war and opioid addiction.

STR is very dear to my heart in so many different ways.

You as a board, every one of you, Ms. Geary, Patu, Perk, Mr. Nyland, Harris, Pinkham, Mack, and DeWolf, all of you will be standing just like I do and the rest of the teachers as well here.

You as a board will be sending a very clear message that these children who are most impacted by all of these factors by the poverty by the opioid addiction by war and systemic racism you're standing up and showing that you actually that every single child is worthy.

You're sending a clear message that they are all worthy of every cent and sweat that we have.

You're standing up with the teachers who stand up every single day because every single day I want to go to school.

Every single day I want to be in the classroom.

I chose to be in a title one school to work with children who are very similar to my own background.

I work with them because I love them.

They are my children.

They were me growing up to believe and to have a clear message that my life was worth it and I translate that every day in the work that I do as a teacher.

So you're sending although maybe just for this year that we're asking for $251,000 I really am thinking I'm hoping that you think about it for the next couple of years as well.

That you're standing up and sending a clear message even if you fund it just this year for the many years that come that you are standing up for these children who are worth every single penny and every single love that we can give to every single child who deserve it.

Thank you.

Thank you.

I'll open it up for questions from the board if you have some comments questions concerns.

Director DeWolf.

Thank you.

Can I know you said it in the intro part or kind of in the background.

Can you just be explicit one more time around.

I guess in an ideal world what would it actually take to provide this program at the level that would be kind of equitable to our partners if we're at two hundred fifty one thousand.

Where would it where would a third actually be.

You said we should if it would be ideal for providing a third of the cost.

What is that actual number.

About four hundred thousand dollars would be ideal.

So we're only off $150,000 for.

OK.

And then my second thing I was going to say was I just read in the American Educational Research Association journal about the importance of minority teachers report that was just come out and it said that students of all races white black API Latinx and native appreciate and benefited more from teachers of color.

So.

I thank you for this work and I'm really grateful for you.

And I'm excited to I'm very supportive of this.

So thanks for bringing this to us today.

Director Geary.

Thank you so much for bringing this this to us to vote for on.

I had the great opportunity to go visit a school with the STR program in my first year on the board and fell in love with it and would do anything I could to support it this year next year any year.

And but beyond that I just want to I want to hear I heard James Dixon that you said you're doing special ed in the title one middle school for 6th 7th and 8th graders.

And.

That's fantastic.

I mean I just wanted to just take a moment for everybody to think about that job.

And that is really I am.

I'm so thankful to you for taking that on.

I'm thankful to you both for loving those children and those students and knowing because I know that they come to school knowing that you love them.

So thank you so much.

Director Pinkham.

Thank you for bringing this forward and I recall to first year being on the school board that we went to Broadview Thompson's I believe to see some of the STR students are.

I think this is a fantastic program.

And James Dixon mentioned that he was looking to make smart — for education and the recruiter — Encourage our students to actually think about hey if I want to become a teacher here's this program at the University of Washington that I can go through and pursue that dream and knowing that I can give back maybe to my own community where I grew up.

I think that'd be a good strong message.

I know that it is a master's program.

What about like at Seattle University with maybe other schools where it's just bachelor's program for teacher certification or does this look like something we would be able to expand or right now just looking at University of Washington.

We do have other partners where we specifically focus on classified employees becoming teacher educators.

This Seattle teacher residency program is not specifically tailored for classified employees that work in Seattle Public Schools although we do typically each year have four to five I think nine at one point in any given cohort.

So those are sort of separate programs really really dedicated to taking our classified employees.

This is a graduate program where we recruit from our classified employee ranks but also external in the community far and wide to find the best candidates that we can.

Are there questions comments or concerns?

First of all let me say thank you.

Michael one of the things that you mentioned during the executive committee was how much STR cohort grads change the culture in our schools.

And do not accept low expectations.

Can you expand a little more on that because that leverage point to me is huge.

Sure.

And I think what's what's something to note is.

When residents entered in the buildings I mean they've had a year long residency experience and so they're already grounded in what it takes to you know to be a successful teacher to be a successful school.

And so wherever that wherever they are placed after the residency there they recognize automatically the challenge and they are cultivated to challenge the status quo in an education period.

And I think that when we say that we're trying to cultivate you know a culture where we're challenging all expectations from students to our own educators.

A lot of the residents that I've come come across and I think what the residency program is trying to cultivate is that framework entering into what's quite frankly sometimes challenging challenging school situation.

So that's that's where that's coming from.

Thank you for that.

My only comment would be it's not a surprise that Seattle Public Schools and the Alliance have had an interesting history.

There has been a significant management change and philosophical change at the Alliance for education.

There's also been a restructuring of the financing of this program.

Extreme concerns in the past that it was far too expensive for us and and that it's a balancing act.

Do we pay in the front end?

Do we pay on the back end?

Where do we use that two hundred and fifty thousand dollars in terms of being out there and recruiting.

I am very pleased to be able to support this.

And if you had asked me five years ago pretty sure I wouldn't have.

So thank you both.

And thank you for our cohort members.

for being here to speak your truth and your buddies that came to the executive committee as well and the principals.

Thank you very much.

May I just also give a personal thank you to Chris Rape who is the quiet leader behind the scenes constantly working between the four partnerships to make sure that the Seattle teacher residency is moving smoothly from us from the Seattle Public Schools end of the spectrum.

Thank you ever so much.

Thanks.

OK.

Number four Seattle Education Association memorandum of understanding regarding implementation of initiative 1 4 3 3 paid sick leave law.

This came before executive committee March 15th for approval.

Approval of this item would authorize the superintendent to execute The memorandum of understanding regarding the implementation of initiative 1433 the paid sick leave law.

Cheryl the floor is yours.

Thank you.

Good evening President Harris members of the board Dr. Nyland members of our public.

I'm Cheryl Anderson Moore your chief negotiator for Seattle Public Schools.

This evening we are presenting for introduction the memorandum of agreement between the Seattle Education Association and SPS Seattle Public Schools that bridges the implementation of the new paid sick leave law under initiative 1433 into the current collective bargaining agreement.

Of course by state law we're obligated to follow the law and implement that law as quickly as possible.

It took effect January 1st 2018 and we are rapidly doing that.

This memorandum addresses certain operational details with regard to accounting of the sick leave usages sick leave and guidelines for employees.

Harris questions comments concerns from my colleagues.

Seeing none we move on.

Thank you so much.

Number five approval of information technology advisory committee.

This came before exec March 15th for consideration.

Approval of this item would authorize and approve the change of the information technology advisory committee at which time now I will hand the mic to.

Director Burke and I see John Krull our chief information officer in the box.

Thank you.

I will defer on the details to John Krull and thank him and his team for helping put this together.

This is a topic which has been conversed about for the last year plus around how do we weave our technology into our learning.

How do we prioritize voter allocated funds.

How do we.

build the most safe scalable student data system student security.

Security and data privacy components.

So there's a lot of aspects to our technology.

that we as directors only get a chance to sample and and a place where John Crowell and his team live.

And so trying to find something that somewhere in between that where we can get visibility into the work and a broader appreciation for the work and also an oversight component and an advisory component.

So this is a.

The compilation of a lot of those things and I defer to John to describe it in more detail.

Thank you.

Thank you Director Burke.

John Kroll chief information officer.

I'm excited to bring this forward with Director Burke.

Director Burke brought this up several months ago and he and I have been going back and forth working on the on the idea for the charge.

The exciting thing about this committee is it's it's a little different than other board committees we've had in the district.

This committee is going to be made up of.

nine community members and nine staff members because staff are some of our real experts in how to use technology in classrooms.

And one of the community members I want to mention will also be a student and that will be an active member of this ongoing committee.

It's an advisory committee that will be ongoing.

I want to emphasize that.

It's really going to be a great venue.

We'll be meeting monthly.

third Monday of every month.

All the items that come before the board or were planning to bring before the board will go before this advisory committee.

So we will get their input on existing board items.

But it will also be two way.

I'm hoping that the community members and the and the District members will bring ideas.

For instance, for the community members, we're hoping to get community members who have experience in technology that might bring some ideas.

Same with the district members.

It's also exciting that the district members are going to be from a wide range of stakeholders.

We have reached out to the different employee groups.

We've since the last committee meeting we've reached out to the employee groups.

We've reached out to community based organizations I attended.

the monthly community based organization meeting.

I believe it was last week and talked about the committee really trying to respond to the executive committee's input that we had to really have a lot of fingerprints on this to get a lot of input.

We're hoping we can bring this forward.

and start the committee the third week in April.

This committee is going to have a big input on BEX.

So a large part of the technology budget, as a matter of fact, 85 percent of the technology budget comes from capital funds.

So we really need to have that engagement as we bring that forward.

We also made sure that it's addressing policy concerns.

It is written to follow policy 41 10 which is how board committees are made.

And then also we added since the last committee meeting that it will follow policy 10 10 which means that the.

committee will serve to help the board have oversight over technology.

As a matter of fact a the first agenda item for every over every technology advisory committee meeting will be to go over the budget.

One thing that my department has started is a quarterly program report that talks about all the projects we're doing and how we're doing against the budget for that.

That comes out quarterly the most recent one just got published to the website and the board will be getting copies of that.

But the advisory committee will get a monthly update on how we're doing on our budget.

Much like the BEX oversight committee.

We were really trying to make sure that we like all board committees have a have an equity lens in the selection of of the members.

Director Burke with my help is going to be leading the selection of the committee.

We straighten that out since the committee meeting.

So so with that I'll take any questions.

I'm pretty excited about having another opportunity to get engagement about technology.

Harris Comments questions concerns director Mack.

Mack I'm excited about this committee and the oversight an engagement opportunity that it provides.

We have the BEX committee which is also a board the BEX oversight committee which has been recently expanded to be BEX and BTA but excluding the technology pieces of capital from those level levies.

So from my perspective I'm incredibly supportive of having this committee formed to to provide that function of oversight around technology both the planning forward and how the dollars are going to be spent from the levies and providing that oversight.

So I'm grateful to all of you for crafting this and moving it forward so thoughtfully.

I have a couple of questions.

One is the I haven't read the entire charge word for word I glanced over it.

Who is going to be designated the chair of this committee?

Is that something that's already designed in the charge or is that an open ended?

I can address that.

The charge calls for the committee to vote for a chair and then I would be acting as an ex officio non-voting chair to help run the meetings.

Excellent.

OK so then my other question is that.

And I'm swimming in policies and trying to remember which one this is but in one of our policies I think it's under committees.

The 1240 which designates the board committees and says what their roles are.

And as chair of operations committee I I'm wrapping my arms around all the work that I'm supposed to be taking care of.

And I believe in their states that.

Nope it's in 10 10 that the operations committee is responsible for reviewing general technology plans policies and key technology strategies and receiving and considering the recommendations the operations committee with respect to these matters so that the.

I think that's that's.

The intention of that policy I think is around the capital oversight.

Budget side of things because we also are tasked with making recommendations around capital levies and.

So I'm wondering how this committee will interface with the operations committee and the full board especially around that budget piece.

If that's a piece that's been worked out or if we need to figure out how that kind of interfaces.

So that did come up in the executive committee.

One reason we brought it to exec is technology transcends all all the committees.

There's there's a finance part to it.

There's an operations part.

But really the biggest chunk is on the educational the C&I side.

So we debated back and forth.

We thought we left it in the charge that it would report to the executive committee but we talked informally about the technology advisory committee to also visit the other committees as appropriate.

to keep them abreast of what's going on.

Director Burke.

I think the way John described it is true that we we could have put it in a variety of places and the the ultimate recognition is wow this touches on so many areas.

We need to just keep the conversation going.

I think we're trying to be really thoughtful about Managing committee time most effectively and managing staff time most effectively.

And so I guess this is an open invite to my colleagues to kind of stay in the loop on this.

And if we think that we have a misalignment we can make a course correction because that's how we roll.

Follow up.

Go ahead Dr. Director Mack.

I am fully OK with having the exec committee be the main committee operations already has such a huge body of work that I'm certainly not asking for more work to have this this assigned to us.

So don't get me wrong on that on the questions the questions is only around.

Ensuring that when the time comes for various decision points around.

Reviewing the technology plans when in turn you know just those pieces that are that are appropriate to come through ops to the board that they do so.

And that's you know just want to make sure we have those intersections.

Director Geary.

So I have two things that I want to comment on and one I brought up in exact and I want to just bring it up again that I think it's.

We need to be very careful in this committee making sure that not only are we inviting a breadth of people but that we are protecting the space around different voices because I think people who work in technology would have a lot of authority around what is and isn't but they may not have had the exposure around the EOG work and around cultural competency to be able to reflect upon their comments and and how their voice may be Taking up more space and more authority than the other voices in the room.

And so making sure that we are mindful of that in the creation in the charge and and perhaps in the training of the of the members if necessary in terms of.

our goals and what it means to make these decisions and provide input around these goals.

I know having been to the BEX oversight that sometimes it's important to remind the room that we at Seattle Public Schools have a very unique group of people that we are serving and working with and a different lens than sometimes professionals bring.

So that's the first.

The second piece.

Not totally distinct but one I didn't raise before is that nowhere in this charge is there a single mention of assistive technology and what that means.

And it is my experience that when we talk about technology and we talk about curriculum and we talk about special education and we talk about assistive technology for some reason there is never any overlap.

They aren't considered a unified body of work.

And I think that has a negative impact ultimately on the people who are trying to get the right technology to the right people.

And so I would ask that you consider reviewing this charge and working in something very specifically about.

incorporating thoughts and review of assistive technology how it's working with our greater technology.

Are they compatible?

Is a student in a special education class going to be able to smoothly transition into the general education technology that's being used by all of the kids there?

And so that's a really important piece in terms of access to the general education curriculum.

So I'd ask that that be considered.

I appreciate that and I think likewise we should probably be mentioning accessibility which as we know is an issue we need to address.

I was surprised in doing a search of the just a search of the document assistive technology is not mentioned and it should be.

And then thinking about what we need to do to support it in terms of the members and special education professionals.

Thank you.

Other questions comments concerns.

Director Pinkham.

Just looking at this timeline your approval is going to be April 4th and then you have a deadline of April 11th to apply.

Is that you think going to be enough time to get a good candidate poll to apply for this committee?

And are you relying on those committees that are applied that have the technology to apply to this in such a short timeline?

It just seems like it's a very short timeline to approve it and then want the applications by one week later.

Director Burke.

I will I will take that one in the crossfire.

This was a this was one of the topics that came as part of our discussion in exec is that we have a body of work in BEX that we would love to get committee feedback on and it's coming on a very fixed timeline and the sooner we can get that feedback the better.

The flip side of that is if we rush the committee then we might not get representative or engaged community applying.

So the middle ground which This is a board so we get to decide if it's the right middle ground is well let's put the draft application in with the bar so that it's public.

Talk about it here.

Highlight that those are the dates.

We can't officially go out for applicants until it's approved by the board.

But we can share with our CBO's we can have a communication plan in place and we can we could put some announcements in place around that.

Is that sufficient?

I guess that's the relevant question.

And the answer from this board member is no.

And your failure to plan is not our emergency.

I'm sorry I'm offended by this BAR.

It does not incorporate a great many things that we discussed in executive committee.

We asked for a communication plan.

I do not see one.

Having a couple of meetings is not a community engagement plan.

The community engagement task force did not meet for a year and come up with a model.

to have a box checking.

The race and equity tool has not been used.

This is I'm sorry.

I think that we need one.

I've thought for a long time that we need one.

I don't think this is it.

I think we have to slow down.

We have to have a community engagement plan with the assistance of the comms team.

Not from DOTS.

They're the experts.

We need to reach out to our race and equity professionals.

We need to talk about not making this an inside job.

Having a weak turnaround and putting a geographic community representation on it.

I don't have enough time to go into that.

I I strongly object to the fact that we are box checking here.

We can do so much better.

We need to do so much better.

We don't have a policy on blended or upside down learning.

Yet we just took in an extraordinary grant from Sacajawea.

What are we going to do with those computers?

That's awfully darn important to the future of this district.

And I want to take it as seriously as it deserves.

And to the extent that that I'm frustrated it is so not personal.

I know you're working your backside off.

I get it.

I know that Director Burke My colleague who I respect immensely is working his backside off.

But we're missing big pieces of this and I'm very frustrated and distressed by it.

And the timeline is it's a big no for me.

Now.

Do I think that it should go out in a word document and people need to add their comments etc.

And we can collaborate because we are capable of doing great work in collaboration.

Yeah I think we should do that.

I thought that's what we were going to do when it left exec committee.

Thank you.

Director Burke.

Point of clarification.

With your.

Impassioned objection.

No no not that with with your permission or pacing.

I would like to hear your concerns about the regional selection of committee because I think there's so many ways to take.

And I think that's where the art comes in.

I think that's where the equity piece comes in.

Say you have four Microsoft.

Whomever high tech Amazonia and they all live.

In one district.

So we leave the other.

three on the street say you end up with a bunch of white males in the tech sector.

So so from a.

District perspective.

That's the balancing piece here.

We tried we tried to reword it after the committee meeting to not be hard and fast about getting somebody from each district again.

But that would be that's the balance just to have that running it through the tools etc.

The district's piece to me is very arbitrary.

If districts want representation they have representation up here.

Right.

That's is there another task force or standing committee that has district representation or or people chosen that way.

I don't think so.

So I you know I think that it's it's the balancing piece exactly.

And I don't think districts is it.

But again my personal passionate opinion.

Director Mack.

Mack The organization of a committee There's it's it's this is challenging to try to get a representation across and set up committees that can work effectively.

I think we've had spotty results around committees in.

the district and I think all institutions have the same challenge of of how do you set up a group of people to do decision making effectively having the right people at the table etc.

So.

The formation of this is is incredibly important to get right.

I also feel impassioned that it's incredibly important that we get this committee going because we need this oversight and we need to be able to do this work to help support BEX.

So I'd like to make a suggestion that if possible there could be some kind of further conversation between now and when the vote would happen to adjust potentially some of these.

Issues internal to the charge with board members that are concerned about such things so that we can potentially vote on this in a couple of weeks.

But have those kind of issues worked out.

Is that do we think that's maybe possible.

President Harris Director Burke.

Director Burke is the author of this together with CIO Krull.

Please.

So I think the conversation that we're having I don't think there's any disagreement about intent as far as having a committee which has representation of those that haven't typically been represented.

And I think Jill was pretty eloquent in not only forming a committee that invites people who haven't been on these committees before but also providing a safe place where they can contribute at parity or even above parity but at a level where that collaboration can take place.

So it sounds to me like there's some some language things that maybe we could do.

And I look through the charge.

And the charge calls out a regional but I want to just emphasize in the bar and maybe this is a place where we can braid some language.

There is the statement that says in the formation of the charge the selection of members and in the committee meetings themselves.

Oh sorry wrong one.

Final selection of the committee members by superintendent or designee will consider these community members and employees who have not historically been active or represented in district engagement.

As well as represented representation by individuals of differing gender ethnicity race age geography and stakeholder interest group.

So the bar states.

Sort of a cross section that's broader than regional.

And maybe there's a way we can weave that together or maybe that's sufficient and I'm looking for feedback.

I think John can send out the word document to directors and if you have specific comments please we welcome them.

Other comments concerns or questions from my colleagues.

Director Pinkham.

Director.

Gary stepped out but just want to see if you can reach out definitely to the University of Washington high school where a student is soon as Ph.D. is looking at touch screen and how.

Yes those that are able to have just one finger in point but those that have either mortar controls that they can't do that he's working on technology that allows them to use touchscreens as well.

So I think there are definitely people out there if we can start hey let's get the word out contact these people.

Hey we're looking to form a community.

a committee on this so they they're aware and versus if it does April 4th.

Hey do we have don't have enough time.

So I may then reach out to this PhD candidate and say hey just let you know the school district is looking at forming a committee on technology and I see what you're doing and I think you would possibly be a good candidate.

Other questions comments or concerns.

OK.

So go ahead.

Director DeWolf please.

OK so you will be sending out the word document to SPS directors for input.

Correct.

Yes.

Sweet.

Thank you so much.

OK.

Next item.

Number six amending board policy 1 4 1 0 executive or closed sessions and board procedure number 1 4 3 0 BP audience participation.

This came before the executive committee March 15th for consideration.

Approval of this item would amend board policy number 1 4 1 0 executive or closed sessions and board procedure number 1 4 3 0 Board procedure audience participation.

Mr. Van Duzer the floor is yours.

Thank you.

Good evening I'm Nate Van Duzer director of policy and board relations.

The board action report in front of you makes clarifying changes to to the two documents that director Harris just referenced.

These changes are not intended to change practice at all but more to provide clarity.

So I'll give a very brief review of each.

In policy 1410 executive or closed sessions, the changes which you can see in track changes down in your bar, make a better distinction between executive and closed sessions.

Those are two different categories of meetings that you can hold that are each not open to the public.

But the difference is executive sessions are noticed, closed sessions do not have to be.

although we have put in this policy that they may be to promote transparency purposes.

We've also added the common subject areas that fall under each type to help people understand that a little better.

And then the other one is board procedure 1430 which is our audience participation procedure.

Essentially we wanted to put in a little bit more granularity around how the board office prioritizes public testimony.

Again this is what we have been doing and what we think the policy has structured us to do.

But I think by having a little more detail on the policy it will just be more clear for everyone.

Thank you.

Questions comments concerns from my colleagues and Please feel free.

Well I was.

Oh that was loud.

I was.

Wondering exactly since I don't have it in front of me unfortunately what are you doing to policy 1 4 0 3. I'm sorry 3 0. I think that's the number.

Yeah there's some language changes to the board procedure there and we are essentially making it clear how the board office prioritizes public testimony.

So we have we prioritize speakers who are speaking to the items that are on the list of items for action first and then the second category prioritization is folks who are speaking to introduction items and then everyone else is in the third category.

So if there is a final vote being taken on a matter we want to make sure those people have a chance to speak.

Thank you.

Other comments questions concerns from my colleagues.

Director Mack.

I just want to read the language really quick.

That's the change.

And.

So at noon on the day before the board meeting public testimony slots will be filled according to the following priority levels on a first come first serve basis within each level.

Number one is individual speaking to an action item on the agenda.

Number two is individual speaking to introduction items on the agenda.

And number three is individuals giving comment of a general nature.

And that sign ups received afternoon on the day before the meeting will be added to the end of the list on a first come first serve basis.

That was that prioritization existed below but it's been stricken and it's clarifying the timing of you know if you come in afternoon then you're going to be added to the end regardless of whether or not it's an action item.

I do think that creates some clarity about the practice and.

Is the waitlist process on here as well because the practice up to 20 it is here it says up to 25 current district students who sign up.

I don't see it on here.

I'm sorry.

Do you do you know if the waitlist process of if you hit if you have more than what 30 people calling in then you bump the list to 25?

In the second paragraph.

It's in the second paragraph.

So that's not changing at all.

No.

OK.

Any other comments questions concerns from my colleagues?

Seeing none.

We move on.

Number seven termination of ground lease at the Lake City School.

This came before Ops March 8th.

This came before March ops March 8th for consideration.

Thank you.

Approval of the item would approve early termination of the lease with Lake City professional building LLC in the payment of the amount of six million one hundred ninety three thousand dollars for the Lake City school to provide for increased flexibility to meet capacity needs of the Seattle Public Schools.

I see Bruce Skowra at the box.

Please the floor is yours.

Good evening Bruce Skowra director of facilities.

So I'm here tonight to request board approval to execute an early termination of the lease for the Lake City professional building.

We are in our 10 year renewal period for the lease and the leasee has offered us a one-time purchase option with a payment of $6,193,000.

The current lease for the property runs through 2076 and the purchase option offers us a substantial savings over the buyout language that's currently contained in the lease.

We currently receive about $7000 a month in revenue from the lease.

Based on the current rent roll revenue would increase to approximately $62,000 per month after we execute the purchase.

That's based on keeping the current property management structure in place so we're going to leave everything in place.

Mr. Skowron.

Instead of giving us the numbers here can you talk about why we're doing this, what the history is, what's in it for Seattle Public Schools, pros and cons.

Well the pros and cons, the pros are it's not really a great lease for us.

This lease was negotiated back in 1986 and it hasn't been a real strong lease.

I think the leasee, the general partner is slowing down, he's getting older, wanting to retire, wanting to liquidate.

I think it just offers us some flexibility in the future.

If we do need the building for capacity, currently we don't, but we would see an increase in revenue over the current lease.

So are we essentially land banking then with with the option to if we need it.

to rebuild emergency etc etc with some notice.

And then we have flexibility.

Then we have flexibility.

You know we could also lease the building.

Can you please speak up.

Sure.

Talking really low.

Thank you.

We could also lease the building to somebody else with better lease terms because the current lease really isn't a great lease for us.

And it runs through 2076. OK.

I get that part.

Now.

Would it need to be completely redone or rebuilt on the land and or how many students would it fit?

It's a small site.

It's a small school.

We're probably talking 350 students or less.

We did a feasibility study a few years ago to get the building back to a school and we were looking at that time about 16 million dollars to make it a school again.

Director Mack.

And then director DeWolf.

Hi thank you.

I actually have a I have a series of questions I hope you don't mind going through them just for clarification and background.

Sure.

Just to clarify what you just said from a from a revenue standpoint we currently receive seven thousand a month by buying this back for over six million.

6 6 1 9 3. Yes.

Spending the six.

Million.

We would take over the current leases which would yield us sixty two thousand a year.

A month a month.

And.

The cost would be paid back within.

10 years.

But there's a possibility that we could need this in six to seven years based on what the bar says.

So there's a couple I'm wondering what and maybe we don't need this now but I'm wondering what the net loss ends up being over that time.

So that's one question I have is what that what that net loss is of the buyback and the exchange of revenue.

And also I think you know that the answer to this off the top.

There was an offer made to the district some years ago and the board at that time refused it.

And what was that offer.

I believe it was 1.8 million.

And that was I think in 2012.

Right.

So at this point we're.

Real estate is far more expensive than it was 10 years ago so we missed out on an opportunity years ago.

However we have to be responsible now with whether or not this is a good deal as well.

So has there been an assessment of the property condition and whether or not there are any major systems or renovation to the building that would need to be done under our dime after we took it over.

Specifically I see that there was some sort of drainage system corrective action mentioned.

Yeah there is a current drainage condition corrective action.

It's a fairly minor condition that the drain system needs to be basically pumped out cleaned out and they haven't done that work.

Everything else has been updated.

Part of the deal with 2012 was there some major work that needed to be done to the building and he also didn't have the building fully rented at the time.

Because we didn't execute on that he was forced to put a roof on the building and upgrade the HVAC systems.

So we have done a tour of the building.

There also was an appraisal done that lists that the building is in good condition currently.

And the cost of fixing the drainage system is that something that will fall under his dime or ours?

That would be negotiated.

It would need to be done prior to closing.

So if he couldn't do it then we would.

OK.

So along with this bar I think is it appropriate to request that we actually get a copy of the assessment and the cost of this drainage system.

Sure.

Because that should be factored into.

The cost.

Another question I have is around it says the capital fund is where the dollars are coming from but we have several capital funds so specifically which capital fund is this expected to be coming from?

The CEP fund.

And the CEP fund is the fund which stands for?

Capital eligible projects.

It's also where the money from the revenue would go to that we would receive from the from the building.

Excellent.

So to that end as well we have a couple of reports that come periodically to the board related to the use of school facilities and rental rental lease and sale.

One is 4260 and there's a report an annual report for the use of school facilities and activities and rental rates.

When was the last report provided to the board?

I believe it was last June.

We normally do that one in the spring.

I know we're working on that one now.

OK so June and so then can you follow up with a link to that past report to the board?

Sure.

And then the rental lease and sale report of inventory and non-essential properties that's due every three years I understand that's due this year from 6 8 8 2. It is.

Do we have a estimated time when that will be coming to the board?

I believe it's going to go to Ops in May.

OK.

Great.

Thank you.

Director DeWolf and then Director Geary.

I just have some process questions here.

My first one is why was this only moved for consideration not approval.

We moved it for consideration because there's a lot to consider.

All of the questions I just asked.

You know this is six million dollars is that's a lot of money to be making a decision on whether and whether or not we actually need this property whether or not this is a wise investment choice is important for the entire board to do its due diligence.

Understood.

My second question is follow up to that which is many of these questions were these not answered in committee.

Were there still hanging questions after that?

Some of these questions were answered and they are answered in the bar.

I think for transparency it's helpful to daylight that here for the entire board to hear.

And so we also in operations still ran an hour over.

We had 14 items and so sometimes in committee we actually don't have the time to go as deep as may need to be done.

So I hope that answers your question.

Thank you.

Director Geary and then Director Burke.

So looking at this property on Google Maps I see that it is right next to the Virgil Flame Park.

It is.

I do know that some of our some of our smaller schools that about parks we end up being able to use that land.

Do you know has there been any discussion with parks around that and the historical relationship between the school and that land?

Used to be ours we sold it to parks.

And we have not had any conversations with parks specifically about this property but we would assume that would fall under the joint use agreement.

Thank you.

Director Burke.

I have questions which maybe this isn't the place to answer because it's related to the the negotiation but it seems like we're paying more than appraised value for something with an essentially a nine to 10 year payoff.

And so that's just.

Without asking you to reply I just wanted to share that that's my point of concern.

I can respond to that briefly.

We did an appraisal about a year and a half ago because the lease was open for the 10 year period.

I'm fairly confident that the appraisal would come in higher now but we didn't want to spend the money to do another appraisal.

And the other thing to consider is that this wouldn't come open again for another 10 years potentially.

And with the general partner retiring we would probably be looking at 10 years before we have another opportunity to purchase the lease.

I've waited months to be able to use the phrase opportunity cost.

I just wanted to say thanks for the clarification on that.

That's really helpful.

Sure.

Last question at least from this person.

Landmark building.

No I don't believe it is.

No.

OK.

Social media says it is.

OK.

I'd have to check but I wasn't.

Other questions.

Landmark means that it's a whole heck of a lot more experience expensive.

Other comments questions concerns director Pinkham.

Yes I was looking over the list of the current tenants that are in there too and looks like there possibly could be someone that has that would also be in there until like 2027. Is that the latest that we possibly see currently see getting extended that far.

And then if we hey we need this building by 2022. Are we then going to have to buy out all those other leases as well and how much is that going to cost?

So we would have to buy out the current leases.

The longest lease that's currently in the building is five years.

There's two suites that are currently available that we've told everybody to go ahead and lease if they can.

But they would be five year leases.

We don't really see a need for the building in the next five years.

But if we did have a need then we would have to buy out those leases.

Director Mack.

OK.

Thank you very much.

Next up number eight creation of playground redevelopment fund.

This came before Ops March 8th for.

Consideration.

Approval of this item would request the funding of a playground redevelopment project to pay for playground installations and improvements in the amount of one million dollars.

Can you please speak to the BAR please.

Sure this money would also come from the CEP budget and would be a million dollars that would be set aside for Title 1 schools for schools that didn't have playgrounds that were to current standards and it would give the ability to give funding to those schools that need help.

The most recent example that we had was Highland Park.

And can you speak to the condition of Highland Park and the troubles we have had?

Sure.

Well Highland Park didn't have a playground.

And so they came up with a plan to put in a playground.

Didn't come up with the money that they needed to complete the playground as designed.

So they had to do a redesign.

And they got money from the city and they got money from the county and we had no money to give them.

Right.

Hence the folks in the city and in the county think we don't have our stuff together.

Yes and the million dollars would be money that would be used in addition to Department of Neighborhoods grants and playground grants and we wouldn't help the people that are applying for these dollars through that process.

Director DeWolf then Director Geary please.

Thank you.

Are there any other community partners that would that would be either potentially or that we are currently working on kind of a collaboration.

It sounds like the city and the county were some partners or there are many to characterize that.

But are there any other folks are doing that business.

We do have some vendors.

I can't recall the names off the top of my head that do work with us and do donate some play equipment.

But our main partners are City of Seattle Department of Neighborhoods and King County Parks.

Director Geary then Director Mack.

If I'm reading this document correctly this was designated a landmark on April 1st 2009. April Fool's.

And I'll give you the number that's LPB 1 6 3 dash 0 9. So we may want to update any background on that.

Thank you.

Excuse me.

You're talking about professional building.

Oh yes I'm sorry.

OK.

Sorry I thought you were talking about the playgrounds.

I was like playgrounds.

That playground is not a landmark.

Let me assure you.

Director Mack thank you for looking that up.

I want to clarify the record before we moved on.

I should have prefaced it.

I appreciate that.

Thank you very much for looking that up.

Director Mack.

So for clarification around how we fund playground development.

How it's been going for some time.

We haven't been funding playground development out of our levies.

Correct.

Have there been any playgrounds that have actually been paid for by levies in the past 10 years.

So all of our new schools get new playground and play equipment.

OK so sometimes it's built into the levy.

In other cases where there are playgrounds that need to be revitalized then the community steps forward does all the work goes to the city asked for the matching grant does all the fundraising.

So you have PTAs PTOs whatever organizations doing that.

And for the Title 1 schools where fundraising is difficult they can be left.

In the lurch.

Correct.

Yes.

So one of my questions that we had about this fund is kind of a more logistic question of how it works inside of the district because we have a number of separate funds.

for capital that are related to the levies or the CEP.

And just for clarification the request here if I'm understanding it correctly and correct me if I'm wrong is to actually set up a specific account separate from the levy accounts from the CEP fund that would be dedicated only to playground funds.

That is correct.

Do we have a history of setting up other funds for any specific capital category?

The only one that I'm aware of is our self-help fund which gets thirty thousand dollars a year from capital to kind of work as seed money for some of our self-help projects.

And this would be this would be similar to that.

So it would be a self-help fund that we could tap into to assist these schools in their upgrade process.

Go ahead.

I think I asked this question in committee as well and I'm just trying to wrap my brain around and forgive me for being a little personal here but everybody manages their bank accounts differently and have different accounting processes.

So here we are as a board managing a district bank account.

And my husband likes to every time we have another big something or other he he wants to open up an account and segregate the funds.

Me I'm like we don't need to do we don't need a separate fund.

We just need to account for it.

So I guess I'm kind of I wanting to understand the justification for why we need a separate fund and can't do this through the funds that already exist that we can actually.

Dedicate the money state that we're dedicating the money towards this use.

Why do we need a separate fund in order to make that happen?

Associate Superintendent Herndon please.

Flip Herndon associate superintendent of operations and facilities.

So I believe the impetus for setting this fund up currently is a jumpstart to hopefully in capital levies in the future making sure that there are dollars associated with playgrounds that would be developed not at new schools.

So this is essentially a million dollars to get that started until BEX V. We have playgrounds on BEX V. A million dollars out of BEX V if it's approved would pay back the CEP fund.

So then you wouldn't have to necessarily segregate that line item.

This is a temporary segregation of dollars until they're paid back and then in the regular cycle of improvements for future capital levies.

Does it strike anyone here rhetorical question that we talk a lot about fresh air.

and physical education and movement and brain breaks.

But that we've never included playground renovations in our BEX funding.

And just to be sure they have been included in previous BEX proposals but then have been taken out as the prioritization has gone towards other projects on capital.

Hence my rhetorical question.

Yes.

Yes.

Director Burke.

I want to I'm reading through the bar and as I understand that this fund is not for construction it is purely for planning and administration.

Is that appropriate?

No I believe it can be used in conjunction with any other funds like a Department of Neighborhood grants or a county grant for playgrounds so it's not limited to just planning planning it could be used for the actual construction.

Because the the bar states this action allows school communities to participate in the design process of self-help projects without committing general resources of their own.

So it feels like it's targeted towards the planning which is great if it's a way to launch it.

But if we launch it without you know the idea of how does this braid in with other you know.

Which is the Highland Park story.

We're three years behind.

So I just want to be cognizant that if maybe this is part of what we want to do but not all of what we want to do or an incremental step.

I love the idea though.

Yeah we can try to make that more clear because it is for everything.

Director Pinkham.

And then how long do we expect this fund to exist until it's been all awarded out and you're not putting any limits limit 50 thousand hundred fifty thousand per grant or something to say I want to apply for a million dollar grant and it could go out to one person or one school or one self-help group.

And then also it seems like we can find money for this but then Rainier Beach continues to suffer and saying we need to be renovated.

So I would have a question about that.

Then we can put this money up.

Why couldn't we do something for Rainier Beach when they've been asking.

It's one million dollars and seventy five million dollars.

OK.

Thank up.

Excuse me.

Director Geary please.

I just want to note the responsiveness of this bar to an issue that you've raised President Harris and I appreciate that.

And I want to say personally thank you and Associate Superintendent Herndon is probably really glad not to be getting my and council member Herbold's phone calls on a regular basis because when there is a will there is a way.

Director Mack.

I want to follow back up on.

Thank you.

I wanted to follow back on Director Pinkham's question about the grant and how the grants would be decided.

Did I miss it that it's actually defined in here how those grants will be administered or is that something that we should actually be clear about before we're because in effect if I understand this BAR which I'm supportive of the intent.

We are making before we actually consider all of BEX V we are making a commitment.

That a million dollars will be.

Included in the BEX V and all the other prioritization lists there that we're not talking about this million dollars in that context right now.

If we approve this we will be approving a million dollars essentially and a grant program that I would think needs some definition that would be helpful of how that's going to be administered.

So is there a way to get that grant program a little more defined?

So this wouldn't be a grant program we would follow the grant program we'd follow the guidelines of the neighborhood matching funds for playgrounds.

But this that would be separate money.

So this would be the district's portion of the city of Seattle Department of Neighborhoods and King County.

Grants.

and it would go through our normal kind of self-help approval process for a project with helping them through that grant process as well.

Another portion of this is as you've seen over the years many of the self-help projects come to the board for approval because typically the total dollar amount exceeds $250,000.

In that breakout you would see where these dollars are being used in that grant.

You're right it's not an unlimited pot and we're hoping again that this is a temporary measure and that we can include renewal of playgrounds on a regular basis into the capital levy cycles.

But in this case when a self-help program or a self-help project would come your way and you're receiving as the school board you are approving a grant from the city or from the county for this.

We would talk about how the matching portion or whatever portion the school needs to provide is being used out of this particular fund.

So you would have a heads up whenever that money is being used.

Go ahead please.

I think I'm a little concerned about the community engagement and access and schools knowing that they have access to this fund and how do they learn about it and how do they.

I mean there's there's a bunch of pieces.

This is a really exciting thing to do to be able to support our schools.

And.

I'm the community engagement aspect of how you know who in the self-help projects that we've got going now it's a there's an organization behind it.

There's some nonprofit that's sponsoring it.

So then for these Title 1 schools who's the nonprofit that is sponsoring it to go after the grant funding.

Is it the district?

Yes we would assist them in getting grant dollars.

I think that the plan would be once the board approved the money in the fund that we would make an announcement work through our communications team.

Let the schools know that this money is available and the help for them to apply for these grants is available and that they can apply through the self-help process.

I apologize for being a pest on this but the who is important here because all of the self-help projects right now are sponsored by another nonprofit organization.

So who is it that is going what nonprofit is going to be the ones at Title 1 schools if they don't have a PTA or I mean how are we identifying the actual entity that is going to be.

Isn't that part of building leadership and the principals.

So if again taking Highland Park as an example.

Highland Park and their building based leadership Chris Cronus went out work with community members work with Seattle City Council members work with King County Council members to get that funding.

And in that case was it the school itself.

It is the school itself.

Absolutely.

It is a school itself.

OK.

That's the answer is my question that if the school can be the entity.

Under which.

And it's the BLT that's the representation or whoever it is.

I think it needs to be clear as to who the entity is that is.

Accepting the funds and that to get them two thirds of the way there.

And then to leave them high and dry.

Seems.

Ironic.

and irresponsible.

And again I appreciate the creativity and I feel completely fine about taking a million dollars off the top for BEX V because a million dollars in the context of BEX V frankly isn't very darn much money.

So I'm I'm good with it.

Am I biased?

You bet I am.

But I find it highly ironic that we talk about recess and brain breaks.

And we treat our Title 1 schools very differently.

Director Geary.

My gut is that our voting population would be in a line with using this money and a million dollars is just nothing towards something that is so visible.

from anybody who goes by our schools and so to treat our schools and to treat our city with at least this is something that I think is good if not needing more.

Director Burke and then I want to time check.

It is 745. We are presently on number eight of 18 introduction items.

Take the hint.

I want to be cognizant of the conversation here that a million dollars what's its meaning in the context of the BEX but also in the context of the projects that we have to do.

Can you share Approximately or exactly whatever you have.

What's the cost of an Ed spec playground.

Just so we can.

Million dollars divided by what.

So that's going to depend.

So I think your typical playground probably is about two hundred fifty thousand dollars.

But this portion doesn't mean that we could only fund four playgrounds.

So the cost share.

Sure there's other sources depending on the additional grants or private donors.

It might be forty thousand dollars that the school is trying to come up with.

So this is really to assist not to be the only necessarily the only source of.

income to be able to purchase a new playground.

Thanks.

Please.

So I was wondering what other things are.

end up paying for playgrounds since I hear that you're talking about several state and city grants from what I can tell and I'm sorry I don't have that.

Yeah well our playgrounds are very much a neighborhood resource.

You know our students use the play toys during school hours but The community and the neighborhoods use them after hours on weekends over the summer.

So that's why we get money from the Department of Neighborhoods and also from King County because they're very much a community resource as well as a district resource.

And how much of the cost comes from those outside resources?

Typically 60 to 70 percent.

Thank you very much.

OK we are on number nine recommendation to award contracts for furniture procurement for 2018 to 2020 bid number B 0 1 8 3 4. This came to Ops March 8th for.

Consideration.

Approval of this item would establish a competitively bid furniture catalog from which capital projects and schools can order furniture.

Take it away.

Yes Richard Best director of capital projects and planning for Seattle Public Schools.

We competitively bid the furniture you might remember we had brought a bar to you earlier this year.

Our hope with our furniture selection process is that we could limit the amount of contracts that we enter into.

We have been successful on cutting that number almost in half.

We will have one additional contract to bring forth to you.

We did not have a responsive bidder for our secondary schools and they would also be providing the office furniture so we are rebidding that portion of this contract.

You are awarding four contracts greater than $250,000 and that we did note a contract amount in there.

There will be a fifth contract that is under $250,000.

The contract period is for a duration of three years and it we highlighted the furniture that we'd be purchasing for our BEX and BTA IV projects.

We did an extrapolation for those project schools in which we anticipate will have.

enrollment needs over the next three years.

And then we also allowed a contingency of 10 percent in the contract amount because we know that schools will also utilize this and they will not come through the capital projects office they will just reach out directly to our purchasing office to purchase a file cabinet to replace you know a desk chair to replace a broken table.

So we've put an allotment in there.

We can use.

We are not bound to use the amounts stipulated but we can use up to those amounts stipulated and then we'd have to revise those amounts by change or at a future date if we were to exceed those contract amounts.

So would open this up to your questions.

Any questions or comments from directors.

Seeing none I have a quick one.

The bidders that are responsive to this are they current.

We have current subcontracts with them and do we have feedback on the furniture they're providing the quality of that you know through Do we do we feel good about that?

Several of these suppliers that are listed here for the manufacturers we do have current contracts with.

Yes.

And we had a very lengthy vetting process with staff to make sure that we were happy with the furniture.

Director Burke that we are providing.

Thank you very much.

Next item item number 10 purchase of student and staff computers for the new BEX IV schools BTA projects K-3 class size reduction and enrollment growth capacity classrooms opening summer 2018 came to Ops March 8th.

For consideration the committee noted that there is a need for clarification on the numbers of students and why what what specifically is being.

It was funding we had the wrong we had BTA III cited and it was actually BTA IV funding.

Director Mack.

For the record approval of this item would approve the purchase of student and staff computers for a total amount not to exceed a $1,200,000 for levy projects and the needed enrollment growth classrooms in K-3 class size reduction classrooms opening summer 2018.

Best So correct this will fund our technology purchase for Loyal Heights elementary school, E.C.

Hughes elementary school, then our enrollment capacity projects and then also our K-3 class size reduction projects.

At the bottom, well excuse me you have your bars electronically, what this will provide on a classroom model basis is a teacher laptop.

a desktop computer for the presentation cart in the classroom and then an allotment of 16 computer student laptops for use in that classroom and then the cart in which the student computers get plugged into each night.

Director Mack.

I greatly appreciate the chart now that has the school the number of desktops carts laptops etc.

I appreciate that information.

The enrollment growth capacity is TBD.

Can you explain that a little bit more.

Well I would note that we're not through our full open enrollment period but we do have projections in here based upon the current capacity planning that we're doing.

We'll get those final numbers.

Director Mack 1st of April.

So.

And they'll be in this bar in the TBD of the number of.

I'll make sure that we get those.

I see.

OK.

So OK.

I'm just wondering that that we know the range.

OK.

Thank you.

Cedric.

So I was wondering what are what's the actual class size since I know that you said that there were 16 laptops I believe per class.

Well that has been historically what we have provided.

Our class sizes vary.

Kindergarten through third grade are going down to 17 to 1 for high poverty schools 20 to 1 for non high poverty schools next year.

And then our secondary school fourth and fifth grade I believe are at 25 to one and then our secondary schools are at 30 to one.

We provide one additional because we know that sometimes we have more than 30 kids in a classroom.

But it is 16 computers per class correct?

Correct.

And are those being shared among the entire school or is it just in that classroom?

These are for that classroom and I would have to go back and ask Department of Technology services because we've just reduced the class sizes next year if that would continue to be their model.

Because it's K through 3. I don't know what that model if that model has been adjusted.

That historically has been the model we purchased through for last year.

Because having 16 computers for more than 16 students doesn't seem helpful for a class.

That's all.

Thank you.

Yeah point of point of clarification just to share we have a an educational specification that determines sort of by ratio or by size of size of building size of class.

what the allocation is.

But then at the building level they have the flexibility to to reallocate and deploy in different ways depending on what their programs are.

That's helpful.

Thank you.

And I will get that clarified.

We'll note a ratio for the students.

Any other questions or comments on this item.

Hearing none.

Next item number 11 BEX IV Authorization of settlement change order number 25 to contract P 5 0 3 4 with Leidig construction company for the Cascadia elementary school Licton Springs K-8 school and Robert Eagle Staff middle school formerly Wilson Pacific project.

This came before Ops on March 8th for consideration.

Approval of this item would allow the efficient and timely payment of completed work to most of the subcontractors thereby decreasing the risk of potential future claims against the district.

Change order number 25 is in the amount of nine hundred and thirty three thousand seven hundred and eighty eight dollars plus Washington state sales tax.

So I will just note that change order number 25 represents 113 change order proposals.

We are incorporating those into this one change order.

As the bar indicates and as the attached memo from SOJ indicates it has been difficult to get subcontractor pricing on change order proposals.

I know that Leidig sent a letter to the subcontractors giving them until the end of August of 2017 to provide change order proposal pricing.

I know that for many of these change order proposals they did not receive complete change order proposal pricing from the subcontractors.

Our contract does allow for the district to unilaterally determine a cost.

We did not implement that approach.

We sat down with Leidig, negotiated an amount and then took a discount which is articulated in the memo and the background information.

This will be the next to last change order for this project we have one outstanding issue with the electrical contractor that we are working on to resolve.

Initial construction contingency was $7,522,270 for Wilson Pacific.

All three schools both buildings on this campus.

And we are.

We have not come anywhere near close to spending that.

Thank you.

Questions comments.

Director Geary.

This is not a change order that I.

No you have not seen this change order Director Geary.

I made mention of it at our meeting last week when we reviewed change order or when we last met when we reviewed change order 24 that this one would be coming to the to the school board.

OK.

OK.

Our next item.

is item 12.

Bex IV award construction contract P 5 0 9 5 to Coast to Coast Turf Inc. for the Eckstein Middle School athletic field and jogging track improvements.

This came to Ops March 8th for.

Approval.

Approval of this item would provide authorization for the superintendent to enter into a construction contract for seven hundred fifty two thousand nine hundred twenty two dollars for the replacement of the synthetic turf and resurfacing of the jogging track at Eckstein Middle School.

So we had we'd be replacing the synthetic turf.

We would be resurfacing the jogging track.

This work would be performed during the summer.

This was a competitively bid project and we're recommending this be awarded.

We have utilized the cork infill.

Thank you.

For those of you all who are new to the board.

We had quite the dust up about rubberized tracks and Cork and our staff went back to the drawing board and found a great alternative.

Director Geary.

I'm going to thank you for that.

And in part because that is one of the fields that does some of the heavy lifting for the little kids soccer and just seeing all those little kids and all their little siblings crawling around on the crumb rubber given the concerns.

I know this this this will be appreciated and the visuals really important.

So thank you.

Director Burke.

I don't see it here but can you describe the differential for the cork infill material.

I think that we all recognize that it's a good thing but I think for the record we should understand the value of that good thing that we're committing to.

So we bid three different infills.

Cork was the base bid.

We also bid TPE thermal polyethylene that actually would add for the low bidder that would add to this contract amount $106,618 plus Washington state sales tax.

The SBR infill on this field on the low bidder would save $109,765 plus Washington sales tax.

Thank you for always being on the spot with numbers.

Director Geary.

This is not a field that has nighttime lighting correct?

Correct.

And is that something that we should be looking at to expand field usage?

It was raised a point was raised to me that I think is good one is that when Lincoln opens Woodland Park is going to become even more congested which is going to have a pretty strong negative impact on Roosevelt high schools use of fields.

And while Roosevelt has the one field it's a lot of a lot of users for that one field.

So I am I am wondering has there been consideration to putting lights onto the external field so that we would have more fields to use in the northeast?

Best I will check to see if we've provided the conduit.

I think we've provided the pathway but we haven't gone through the cities.

departure or process for providing the lights there.

But I will I'll need to confirm that and get back to you.

And to follow up on her question in other renovation scenarios we've laid that conduit to set it up for the future is that correct?

Correct.

We've done that at Whitman we've done that at Robert Eagle staff and we're actually erecting the field lights at Robert Eagle staff.

We're currently going through a departure process at Robert Eagle staff because one of the lights is in the property set back.

But we have set up those contracts and I just want to make sure we've done that here too.

Terrific.

Director Mack and Director DeWolf did you have your hand up.

Oh got it.

Thank you sir.

I wanted to note that we had suggested this from committee for approval and to the consent agenda.

However one of the things that we did ask for that I'm not sure happened in the editing was to really clarify that cork is the selected material in the way that this bar is written is still a little confusing to me when I read it because it talks about the base bid and bids numbers three and four and I'm just.

If we could be loud and proud about this.

I want to be loud and proud about the fact that it's cork and we are stating that.

Well it's in there it's just a little.

Yeah.

Maybe in the paragraph that is public facing.

OK I will revise this.

I want you to know that the Edmonds school district passed their resolution because of us.

And I got friends there and I really was proud of us.

So I will.

Thank you.

Make that more clear.

OK.

Number 13 and we have a time check it's 8 0 5 BTA 3 and BEX 4 award construction contract K 5 0 9 5 to Bailey construction for the Leschi and Lowell elementary schools seismic improvement and exterior door replacement project came to Ops March 8th for.

Consideration approval of this item would provide authorization for the superintendent to enter into a construction contract for the construction of seismic improvements at Leschi and Lowell elementary schools and replacement of exterior doors at Lowell elementary in the amount of three hundred fifty one thousand dollars plus Washington state sales tax questions comments concerns.

Director DeWolf.

Thank you President Harris.

My first question actually yes it is a question.

Can you briefly just share what the earthquake retrofit improvements are going to look like.

So that at these schools we are pinning the existing masonry on the exterior of the building to the structure.

So around doorways.

so that if you're exiting the building, that masonry would not collapse in a seismic event.

It would actually be pinned to the structure.

And you do that by using a helical anchor through the mortar joint.

I'm going to try to use that in a sentence next tomorrow.

I love that phrase.

And my second question is what will this work mean for the normal operations of these two schools or is it going to take place during the school year?

It's going to take place this summer.

I'm not familiar but I imagine the project manager has engaged in the conversations with the building principals to make sure there are not summer construction activities or if there are summer construction activities that are summer excuse me summer school activities that it's highlighted in the work plan so it's drawn to the contractors attention during bidding so they're aware that they cannot impact school.

But I haven't had that level of conversation with our project manager but our project managers are very sensitive to the fact that we're an educational institution.

So that comes first.

Other questions comments concerns.

Seeing none we move on.

Number 14 BTA 3 BTA 4 award contract K 5 0 9 7 for the Chief Sealth International High School needs to be added to the bar here.

on the public facing piece.

Southwest athletic complex track and field improvement project ops March 8th for.

Consideration.

Correct.

Approval of this item would award a contract to the King County Directors Association KCDA to support the Southwest athletic complex track and field improvement project in the scheduled value amount of one million four hundred eighty five thousand seven hundred fourteen dollars plus Washington state sales tax.

So this is a project that we did not competitively bid.

We utilized our relationship with KCDA and the purchasing cooperative.

This is a project that the principal at Chief Sealth International High School Asked that we work around graduation.

We were originally thinking of relocating their graduation.

She said no.

Graduation is a significant event for these students.

They need to have it there.

It created some timing issues for us.

So we brought the contractor on board to figure out how to sequence this project generally when you do Field and track replacements you want to do the field first and then do the track Working your way out so that folks when they're doing the track aren't on the field We are actually sequencing this project differently in May we intend and I'm going to highlight this weather pending in May we intend to resurface the track and In June we will have the graduation ceremony as soon as the graduation ceremony is over we will then go into replacing the turf and be ready for football mid-August.

I am going to answer Director Burke's question on the previous and just note on this project we also bid that the three infill materials TPE had an added cost of $81,000.

Cork and this is a larger field had just had a excuse me.

TPE had an added added cost of $81,000.

The SBR had a credit of $54,034.

So this is slightly different than what you saw in the competitively bid.

But there was a and this is a much larger field than Eckstein's.

So.

District 6 thanks you.

OK.

Not seeing any questions comments or concerns.

We move to number 15 BTA for approval of the project budget increase modification to the architectural and engineering services A slash E contract P 1 4 1 6 with TCF architecture an amendment to the general contractor slash construction manager GC slash GM CM contract K 5 0 7 3 would be in builders for the Webster school modernization and addition project ops.

March 8th for.

Consideration.

Approval of this item would approve a transfer of six million dollars in the buildings technology and academics athletics BTA IV capital levy program contingency and the BTA IV Webster school modernization and addition project budget.

In addition this motion would authorize the superintendent to execute a contract modification for six hundred forty three thousand five hundred sixty seven dollars with TCF architecture for additional design and construction administration fees and a contract amendment with BN builders to increase the guaranteed maximum price GMP to twenty three million nine hundred thousand dollars.

The floor is yours.

Best.

Thank you.

So this was a school that was initially built in 1908. The architect is Frederick Sexton.

It was part of our BTA IV capital levy.

And when we went out to the public to advise the public as to how we were going to utilize this school we indicated that we would be utilizing it as an elementary school.

At this moment in time the school the existing school does not have a gym.

It has two I'm going to call it two large covered play areas on the north side of the building.

When sitting down with our architect and GCCM construction managers they have indicated that this project with the gym will exceed the allocated project budget.

The allocated project budget in capital levy BTA IV was $31,737,094.

They've indicated it will exceed the budget by approximately $6 million when you look at additional architects fees additional permit costs and the ramifications of that.

This board action as director Harris read will actually do three three things that will increase the project budget.

It will increase the amount that we will be compensating the architect and that it will increase the amount.

that we will be compensating the GCCM contractor.

What we will get for this increase is a gymnasium on the west side of this building.

If you were not to approve this bar we would not have a gymnasium.

We would be able to go through Go forth with the project but we would not have a gymnasium on the west side of the building.

So quick question.

Why didn't we include the gymnasium in earlier?

We did include the gymnasium.

Construction costs have just increased.

Director Harris such that this would this project as defined would require an infusion of capital of six million dollars.

Director Mack.

Can you elaborate a little bit on the current public engagement process around the departures.

Community engagement.

What meetings have been going on where we are in the process.

I'm hearing from community members rumbling of discontent around the process and various issues.

So if you could tell me kind of what's happened so far and what meetings are upcoming.

So I know that we had a departure meeting on.

Monday for Webster.

Just let me just.

Monday.

Yeah.

We had a departure meeting on Monday for Webster.

We had several departure meetings this week.

That's why I wanted to clarify.

But we had a departure meeting on Monday.

I can't comment.

I did not attend that meeting so I can't comment on the tone or of that meeting.

I do know that this is a meeting that the city of Seattle puts on.

It's not a meeting that Seattle Public Schools.

leads.

So.

This is Director Patu.

So when you say the several you've had several departure meetings is that our meetings or is that the city's meetings?

No departure meetings are the city of Seattle's meetings.

When they invite us.

We have also had some public outreach meetings but that was long ago.

As we were in the schematic design phase.

I know I'm going to look.

Let me invite Eric Becker up to talk about the public engagement process.

So are we part of the city actually invite us to those meetings.

Correct.

The city and the city coordinates with us to attend those meetings.

Except the Green Dot Middle School.

Yes they did not invite us to that.

Thank you.

Director Mack go ahead.

Yeah and just for clarification departures are things that the district is asking for.

These are there's code around the buildings when we're building that says you can only have so much parking or you can't have school buses here you can't do lot coverage whatever.

So we're making the request for the departure from code.

And it's the surrounding community that's you know likely to say no we don't like that or whatever and that and it's the city's jurisdiction and responsibility to hold those meetings.

But the genesis of the meetings is our request for departures.

So they're not our meetings but they're meetings that are happening because of.

Our work and our requests.

So I'd amplify your comment Director Mack and say that the city of Seattle does not have a school zone.

And most of our schools are located in single family residential neighborhoods or low rise low rise one low rise two.

And so.

To build a school in those zones almost I can't can't think of a project in which we're building a school in which we haven't had departure requests with maybe the exception of Ingram high school.

Mack.

You just actually highlighted something that I'm not sure I had really clicked in my brain before.

And it makes me excited that we have this new partnership agreement with the city.

Because the fact that there is no school zone in zoning is actually really interesting.

So we're like not even on the map in terms of the perception.

And it's not surprising they didn't invite us to holla at MHA.

There are four departures that we almost routinely request that our schools building height parking bus bus offloading in public right away and lock coverage.

Thank you.

Oh you said lock coverage.

Yeah.

OK.

So I'm going to allow Eric Becker to talk about the public engagement process.

Good evening Eric Becker with Capital Projects.

I believe if I recall properly we had one community meeting with the with the community for Webster prior to our departure process.

So at that point we shared the project We also had a our state environmental policy act meeting for Webster school.

So the environmental study and sharing that information and receiving public comment for that portion of the project.

Harris Director Pinkham were you next?

What is the lot size?

Do we own the whole block that the school's on or do we cut off at Webster Park?

Or what is our footprint on this lot?

And where would the outdoor play space go for this if we turn it to elementary school and how big of an elementary school are we looking at?

So as Bruce Scour indicated for the Lake City property, we at one time owned Webster Park.

We sold that to the parks district.

We have had conversations and I've participated in the conversations with park district about our plans surrounding Webster elementary school.

They're very much aware our joint use agreement will be amended to include Webster Park by definition when we bring the school online.

And the lot size I believe is 1.9 1.5 acres.

The gymnasium is going to be located to the west of the historic structure with a connection in between.

Pinkham And what size of elementary school are we looking at?

We're looking at a elementary school that would house roughly 350 to 400 kids depending on class size and grade levels.

OK.

Director Mack and then Director DeWolf.

Okay.

Thank you.

Yeah to clarify it's 17 classrooms correct?

There's I believe 19. 19 okay.

So it's relatively small.

There's 17 general ed classrooms then there's two special education classrooms and then we have an art science classroom and a music platform so there's actually 20 classrooms.

That information we did add to the bar.

Director Harris.

No I'm sorry I was just clarifying that last thing and then my go ahead.

I actually wanted to.

Last comment and thank you for the work on all of this because it's so much.

One thing that I realize has been a gap in communication is around.

Making sure folks know that these community meetings are happening or these departure meetings.

And so a request that I'm going to be making is that we're going to be slotting these meetings onto ops agendas as upcoming meetings of interest for operation related things and also making sure that they show up on my personal calendar so I'm aware of them.

Just want to let people know that logistically we're going to help close the gap on folks knowing these meetings are happening.

Director Burke and then Director DeWolf.

The elephant that is either in the room or in my brain is that the bar states this you know the intent through the BEX plan for this to be open as an elementary school There have been conversations about other uses and it doesn't feel like we have formally converged on how capacity and long term planning leverage this building and yet timeline for implementation construction documents April through August of 2018. That's next month.

And so that's my concern.

Something that's going to open in 2020. And we don't have a clear I don't think we have a clear seven person like we know what this is going to be used and we can communicate to our community what that is.

So Director Burke let me highlight two items for you on that.

One is we had a conversation with the design architect as to if this building could be potentially utilized for a secondary school.

His recommendation was strongly that it be utilized for an elementary school.

Second item I'm going to highlight is and when I say elementary school I mean elementary school potentially K-8 school as well.

That's why we're designing the art classroom so they can also be utilized for a science classroom.

He strongly recommended against utilizing it for a secondary school.

Second thing I would note is and you are going to receive this information in the work session package that you receive on Friday for the work session on March 28. We have significant needs in the Whitman middle school service area for elementary schools.

Students.

We need space for those students.

This is just part of the solution.

It will by no means resolve.

our elementary student population needs in Whitman service area.

So this is only part of the mosaic of the solution for that area that we are going to have to come up with.

So.

Director DeWolf is next and then Director Mack.

Go ahead Director Mack.

I appreciate Director Burke for bringing that very question up and for the response.

There's a lot of stuff happening in 2019 and three more buildings opening people moving back into their buildings.

And in 2020 there's another three buildings and so there's a lot going on that's in the works that some things that the board is going to have to make decision on around boundaries.

You know for Webster it's going to need a boundary or it's going to be need to designate an option school and it's.

So my hope is that we can get ahead of our kind of short term and intermediate term.

capacity issues that we already know about.

And I've requested to have a work session specifically to daylight for 2019 school year which we'll need to vote on in November.

Here are the things that are coming down the pike and here are the processes we're going to be going through in order to make those decisions.

For example Magnolia Elementary will be opening.

And Webster also for the 2020 there's a number of buildings there that I think we need to start looking forward and having this conversation.

So hopefully at the end of April or beginning of May we will have that work session and get some more clarity and board conversation around those issues.

Were you wishing to speak to this?

Yeah please.

Maybe it's just a conspiracy theory person in my head.

Not an elephant.

But when I heard K through 8 option school I immediately thought of Licton Springs and then you talk about the capacity at Robert Eagle Staff.

I hope this is going to be let's move Licton Springs to Webster.

And then to allow then Robert Eagle Staff to grow because then moving that school once again.

I think it's going to do disservice to Licton Springs.

Again I'm not saying this is going to happen but that's what clicked in my mind.

It would also be directly oppositional to what the board asked for and it would break trust.

And I think folks are more sophisticated and smarter than that.

OK.

Number 16. Resolution 2017 18 dash 15 acceptance of the building commissioning report for the Olympic Hills elementary school replacement project ops.

March 8th for.

Consideration.

Approval of this item would accept the building commission report for the Olympic Hills elementary school replacement project.

Yes so as part of the closeout process for our large projects we need to get board approval that on the commissioning aspects have been complete.

We need to report to you that it has been complete.

I can tell you we have two mechanical electrical coordinators Mike McBee and Mike Kennedy.

They oversee our commissioning process.

They work with a third party to implement commissioning of our building systems such that these systems work in the manner in which they were designed when they were engineered and confirmed that the contractor and the various subcontractors involved have these systems working as designed.

And so we're recommending this be approved by you so that we can move this forward for completion.

Questions comments concerns director Mack.

I actually wanted to point out I think this got put into the minutes incorrectly and then on the agenda incorrectly.

We have I have it noted as a recommendation for approval and then to go straight to the consent agenda.

This is one of those kind of celebratory sorts of things.

This is an amazing building brought online successfully and

But we don't need to spend much more time on it I don't think.

Other questions comments concerns taking her guidance into consideration.

And if Mike McBee approves of it I probably do too.

Yeah.

He's a tough guy.

He is.

He's very and rightly so.

Yes he is very thorough.

Number 17 BEX IV resolution 2017 slash 18 16 intent to construct Wing Luke elementary school replacement project ops March 8th for.

Approval.

Approval of this item would approve resolution 2017 18 dash 16 which certifies the intent of the Seattle Public Schools to construct the Wing Luke elementary school replacement project.

Yes this again is a requirement by OSPI.

It's primarily a formality but it is that we do intend to construct Wing Luke elementary school.

OK not seeing any questions comments or concerns.

We are at the last agenda item number 18 BTA 3 BEX 4 final acceptance of contract K 5 0 6 4 Bates roofing LLC for the Leschi elementary school re-roof project ops March 8th for.

Approval of this item would approve final acceptance of contract K 5 0 6 4 with Bates roofing LLC for the Leschi elementary school re-roof project.

So this work was implemented in the summer of 2016. All closeout activities are complete and we are recommending your acceptance so we can submit our final paperwork to the three state agencies in which we need to submit final paperwork in order to release retainage.

Seeing no questions comments and concerns this meeting is adjourned at 830. Thanks all very much.