School Board Meeting Date January 20th, 2016 Pt.3

We're missing Stefan.

That's it.

Is our 10 minute over?

Is our 10 minute over?

Okay.

Well we have to, we can go ahead and get started.

Okay we are going to get started.

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

I will note that action item number one was delayed to the February 3 board meeting by an early vote.

No I don't think so.

That's my agenda.

We will now go on to item number two.

the annual approval of schools.

Good evening Directors.

Michael Stone Interim Director of Grants and Fiscal Compliance.

I just wanted to provide some quick updates from when this was first introduced in December and the board meeting two weeks ago where it was delayed to tonight.

Some steps that have taken place to ensure that the plans are up to date, that they have additional requirements that some board members recommended and to address some questions that have taken place.

As of yesterday, well let me back up sorry.

After the previous school board meeting on the 6th we reached out to schools to make sure that they reviewed what was currently online to make sure that was what their BLT had voted on.

They then checked in with their executive and this was done through the executive directors.

Executive directors then received confirmation from the schools that they have updated it or what changes need to take place.

that those schools then went in and were making changes.

We uploaded all of those changes yesterday so that they were live to the public.

With the holidays staff was off, yesterday was the upload day so that we weren't doing them one at a time we could get them all up at the same time.

Some questions that have come up were the links at schools.

Each school webpage now has a link to their CSIP.

So that piece was being worked on by DOTS and was supposed to be fixed as of today and I can confirm that later.

We did add budget pages to all of the non-Title I schools so those are up so that they can view what baseline dollars they have, what grant dollars they may have, what levy dollars they may have if they are not the Title I schools because that is the Title I requirement for that.

So that piece has been added.

Again we are working to fix the bugs.

The technical issues that were happening was a link problem within the server so we know the principals were having issues accessing the document.

That piece was fixed on Thursday so that the documents were working or the tool was working faster for the schools to go in and work on them and make the updates.

like to call on the committee chair the state committee's recommendation C&I.

So you want to make a motion to

I move that the school board approve each school within the district as having a school improvement plan that is data-driven, promotes a positive impact on school learning and includes a continuous improvement process pursuant to WAC 180 16220. I second the motion.

Okay I would like to go back to the committee chair for his recommendation.

This I believe came through C&I before I was on the board and so I can't really speak to its approval per se by the committee.

It was for introduction last month or last meeting.

Thank you that you are correct in that.

We heard it on November 9. I believe I wasn't actually in the country at that time but it was moved forward with a recommendation for approval.

Thank you.

Is there any questions Director Harris?

Is this comments and questions or just questions?

Comments and questions on this item.

Mr. Stone congratulations.

I know that this has been an extremely heavy lift and I know you changed the culture of Seattle Public Schools and the CSIPs.

And I know that you have gone ragged chasing people down and talking to principals and others that think that this is just a process to cross a T and to dot an I just to make folks happy.

And The qualitative difference between these CSIPs and the ones that have come before boards previously is huge.

Is there room for improvement?

Yes.

However the qualitative difference is amazing and I think when we talk to schools about having more autonomy this is one of the ways that they can drive that conversation.

Thank you and thank you to your team I know it's been a heavy lift.

Thank you.

Director Burke.

I echo that, thanks.

For those who are not following the normal lingo, the edgespeak that we've got here, a CSIP, a continuous school improvement plan is, I see it as a strategic plan for a school at the building level.

They are mandated by state law.

They are intended to be a guiding tool for building-based improvements.

And in the legislation it specifically states that it should include active participation and input by building staff, students, families, parents and community members.

So this is really a foundational tool.

It summarizes the budget breakdown and just as a reference of how important it is the Seattle Education Association collective bargaining agreement references a CSIP 21 times.

So this is a document that shapes class and program decisions, hiring, professional development.

It's referred to throughout district policies.

So this is a really really important document and I appreciate the renewed focus on it and the improvement that they've seen in the last year.

Because that's kind of a passion of mine I reviewed all of the District 3 CSIPs and I'm fortunate to only have 13 schools in District 3. So I really want to commend you and your staff and the principals for the work that's been done responding to the concerns that I and my colleagues have raised.

One of the points I want to make that I've been discussing with Michael Tolley is the idea of improving the efficacy of the tool.

the culture around the tool and to support that I'm proposing that we incorporate a CSIP policy and procedure into the C&I the curriculum and instruction committee's annual work plan and that can help provide guidance for all principals to have a level of consistency that they recognize and that the board approves of.

that highlights that importance and so I'm looking forward to actually hearing from principals and community and staff on how to keep making the CSIP a really high-value tool for transparency and building success.

Director Pinkham.

I want to definitely share the appreciation of having to go through collecting all the CSIPs and I do like the addition that there will be a peer review process now in this to analyze how schools are doing.

That they are not just making goals just to make goals but we will have a follow-up to make sure that they are following what they say they are doing.

to do and having that peer review I see it also build upon the successes of one school can be shared with another.

So I appreciate that I just wanted to share my appreciation thank you.

Any more comments questions?

Director Geary.

Thank you so much for being responsive to my pointing out that there were issues with the CSIP that I reviewed.

I have to say I was hesitant about this particular motion just because when I went in and checked for myself I wasn't able to find online what I thought should be there.

But that I do appreciate and understand and how difficult it is to make sure that all these systems are working.

and that you were so responsive and that the principal of the school was so responsive.

So I thank you, I thank everybody who works on these for all their hard work and that it needs to continue to be a collaborative effort to make sure that they are complete and that they are informing the public accurately of the work that is being done in our schools.

So thank you.

No more questions?

Thank you very much.

We are going on to our number three capacity management.

Oh I'm sorry.

Ms. Foley could you please call the vote.

Director Blanford.

Aye.

Director Burke.

Aye.

Director Geary.

Aye.

Director Harris.

Aye.

Director Peters.

Aye.

Director Pinkham.

Aye.

Director Patu.

Aye.

This motion is passed unanimously.

Now we are going into number three capacity management 2016-2017 school year.

I move that the board authorize allocation of up to $2,500,000 from the BTA III and BEX IV capital funds.

and $4 million in OSPI class size reduction capital gain, sorry capital grant monies to implement annual capacity management actions in spring semester 2015-16 and summer 2016 to support projected district homeroom capacity needs for 2016-17 and authorize the superintendent to take the necessary steps to implement the above actions.

I second the motion.

This came to ops and it was recommended by the committee actually to move it forward for full board consideration.

By the full board.

I will note that there is an amendment for this item.

We will discuss the amendment prior to the original motion.

I will also note that there have been changes to the original motion since introduction.

So I will ask Dr. Herndon to come up and briefly speak to the changes and we will discuss the amendment.

Good evening.

The changes to the original bar are fairly minimal.

They are actually under section 5 of the background information down onto the third bullet.

around the capacity management actions and this was changing from conversion of 19 childcare classrooms to 19 new homerooms.

Having that change to preliminary approval of potential conversion of 19 childcare classrooms to 19 new K5 homerooms.

So that was the change to the original BAR.

Now to the amendment is there a motion for this amendment?

Director Geary.

I move that the motion language for the capacity management 2016-17 school year action item be amended to include the following provisions.

One, the district may reclaim Seattle public school classrooms for dedicated K-5 instructional use and shall identify these classrooms as soon as possible but no later than February 3, 2016. Two, the district shall create and act on a timeline for engagement with communities affected by the reclaiming of any Seattle Public Schools classrooms currently occupied by community-based organizations, CBOs or other childcare providers to help find creative solutions if possible that will preserve the service provided for the Seattle Public Schools families within the school building or located nearby.

And three, to direct the superintendent to bring forward for board review collaborative community input options for future capacity management decisions including the option of establishing a community advisory committee or task force.

I second the amendment.

Okay the director is making the amendment to speak to the amendment and why it is being

There's been a lot of discussion on why such an amendment should be offered.

I will start by saying that this amendment of course isn't going to answer everybody's questions.

It's not going to necessarily make sure that every single daycare is preserved just as we know it today.

But there were comments that were made that were very important to me.

And I want everybody to know here that in our mind, this board's mind, that the closing of the daycares is not a done deal.

and that when we say creative solutions we mean creative solutions and bringing to bear all the resources available in any given community because each of you comes from a different community that has different needs and different options and different resources and we need to bring the parents, the district, the people in the building and the city in on these meetings so that we can look at the whole community and see what we can do.

Because we are growing, we have many kids, we need to make sure that their whole day is being provided for.

before after and during their instructional time in K-5 elementary.

So we're doing this.

We understand that you need to know these things before enrollment.

So February 3rd we will all know and then some can then start actively working within their community once you have that knowledge.

We need a timeline.

that will be produced so that parents and communities know what decisions are going to be when, what channels of input are going to be most effective.

And so that you can go into your buildings, your buildings can have the kind of meetings that are necessary to invite everybody in and I encourage you to invite the city in.

They have written to us, they have said they are willing to work with us and work with you to find these solutions.

Make sure they know when these meetings are being held so that they too can bring to bear their expertise on this.

And then the third point is getting back to the issue that I stated earlier that if we knew in the fall that this was coming down the road then we should have had an advisory committee set up that invited input throughout our city to help us figure out if we needed to get here like we have today, causing so much anxiety.

So call it FACMAC, call it a task force, but we need to have a vehicle that you know you can have input, you can send representatives to, and these are the amendments that they're not perfect, they're not going to solve this, but this is the art of compromise.

That is the basis for this amendment.

Any directors have questions?

Comments?

Director Blanford.

This question is for Dr. Herndon.

I'm wondering, I'm assuming that you've had the opportunity to look at the amendment ahead of time and I'm curious about the implications of it.

My understanding is part of the reason that the schools weren't identified, that the communications didn't actually happen is because we need additional information about enrollment before we can make those announcements.

And so I'm wondering Does this complicate matters for your department?

Make it easier?

What do we need to know about the implications of it?

To start with yes I was able to review this particular amendment before the meeting started.

So I appreciate definitely being able to take a look at that and consider and speak a little bit to my departments about how this might impact our ability to continue to progress.

I think that the initial projections that will be coming out in the beginning of February do help to identify those conversations to get started.

Knowing that there are a couple of other milestones that happen that can also have an implication on space that we need.

So one of those is open enrollment.

We know that doesn't end until the beginning of March so there is another set of analyses.

With that I think we would continue to follow the community alignment initiative guidelines which annually happen between principals and community providers anyway in April.

So I think this really helps to enhance that.

I am confident that our departments can continue to work well.

continue to work with the city on finding good solutions, continue to work with our community development and community partnerships office.

I think it's a good step to continue to hold our departments accountable for what we need to do.

So I'm comfortable with the language that's in here and confident that we can do so in as timely a manner as possible.

Part of my reason for asking that question has to do with what I perceive is one of the large challenges of this which is communicating the list of schools that potentially could have to evict their partners.

before we know for sure invites a huge amount of churn and upset parents and concern out in the community and so I want to be sure and it sounds like you are telling me, giving me assurance that you will know the things that you need to know around the time that we are making that announcement so we don't we won't create another fire in trying to put this current one out.

Correct and I just needed to make sure when I first saw this amendment I double checked with our director of enrollment planning Ashley Davies to make sure those projections are coming in in the time that we said they were coming in and she assured me that is the case so that allows us to get information to principals and then they can start being part of that communication with the providers in their particular buildings.

Director Geary.

I appreciate the idea of not wanting to create fires where they don't exist.

or where they don't have to exist.

But the truth of the matter is that I think a lot of these parents already feel the pressure within their schools and they have been feeling that pressure.

And that if they rather than having been kept out of this conversation for so long had been included much earlier in this conversation.

They would have had more time to digest, more time to help in the process of creatively looking at their spaces, talking with their principals and that is why I think the development of a task force as quickly as possible will not only help us finish out this year in the hard work we have to do.

But there's no assurances that even if the parents in these schools are able to get through this year if they have incredibly if they continue to grow at these paces in these identified areas then we will be back here next year.

And so they will be back in that conversation come fall when we send out a letter to another set of schools saying We may be looking at reclaiming your space.

And we need to just have this system set up now so that we can help them if it's not this year, the next year, and the year after.

And so I thank you very much for your openness to this suggestion.

You are talking with me last Friday, earlier today, and considering these ideas.

I appreciate that very much and really want us to consider our parents our partners.

Director Burke.

A quick point of protocol, are we voting just on the amendment or the package deal?

We are voting on the amendment first.

I have a comment which I think addresses the amendment and somewhat the base motion.

We received a lot of input on this issue and as you've heard I think we all recognize that the potential for disruption is pretty huge so I have, I was going to quote what I thought was a very succinct and spot on input that I got from the community.

We rely on two incomes and are holding on in our city where exponential growth is constantly trying to push working families out.

We don't have backup childcare.

It took two and a half years on the waitlist to get into the program for our soon-to-be kindergartner.

And so what that spoke to for me is that our city is We have an environment where our parents have to be proactive to the point of two to three sometimes more years to get into a program.

And so it definitely gives me pause and I have to be really thoughtful about how as a board director we can look at something that's same year or even one year out.

How do we get to that same level?

Understanding that We have 98 buildings and we have almost 53,000 students so a lot more families and bigger challenges but I just wanted to speak to that as a as a supporting thing for the longer term planning and how important that is and for the board for the staff for any sort of advisory committee.

Dr. Harris.

during this meeting previously about capacity management specifically daycare and we had quite a bit of commentary at the last meeting on January 6. I would suggest that the folks on this dais and the folks and the talent along the line of the walls here are not in this alone.

I would suggest that we have an opportunity with district elections in the city of Seattle to hold hands, make a bigger circle and to contact those city council members and to contact Mayor Ed Murray and suggest that this be capacity blow-ups and services part of the unknown agenda for the educational summit.

It makes sense doesn't it?

Anyway props to you and your team.

Thanks for being open.

Again I apologize for harassing you but my constituency is harassing me.

Dr. Peters.

As a co-sponsor of this amendment I would just like to read into the record the background information about this amendment.

For a number of years the Seattle school district has provided school building space to private childcare providers, community-based organizations free of rental fees.

District families have availed themselves of and relied upon these convenient and often less expensive services.

In recent years district enrollment has steadily increased growing at a rate of nearly 1000 students per year.

And the district is now facing many capacity challenges resulting in crowded schools and large class sizes in some buildings.

The district is also required by state law to reduce class sizes in kindergarten through third grade.

In October 2015 a letter was sent by the facilities and enrollment department to all before and after school childcare providers located in Seattle school buildings notifying them of the possibility that the district may need to reclaim classroom space for K5 homeroom use in the 2016-17 school year.

The district has and continues to engage with the school buildings and CBOs to transition these programs out of designated classrooms needed for K5 instruction.

However, Seattle Public Schools families also should be granted an opportunity to understand and participate in the transition process.

Thank you.

Director Pink.

Yes this is definitely a challenge especially when we try to combine it with the new bell times as well and bus routes and bus schedules it is a very difficult decision.

when we look at you know saying we need the 65 new classroom spaces just want to assure that when we look at this at 19 childcare classrooms being potentially repurposed that that is hopefully the least invasive that there isn't any possibilities of finding other space through yes portables but that's going to take up valuable space on the sites or in the repurposing other rooms and a lot of this I know has to deal with where that capacity issue is at.

And so it is going to be a very difficult decision and how can we handle this?

When we are saying we are going to probably ask that this be a preliminary approval, I am even kind of worried about that.

What does that provide?

Preliminary approval.

Do we need to say let's strike this from this right now?

And that this can be looked at you know we can still move forward with the other claiming the space back but you know this is a huge issue to me and something that I need to again get that more information before we can really truly feel like I'm getting an informed vote.

Is there any more Director Blanford?

So I don't know if I heard a question in Director Pinkham's comment but it prompts in my mind a question which is what would be the implications of what he is proposing to do?

So again part of this is our lead planning time about what we are trying to accomplish.

any permitting, any planning, any architectural designs or modifications if we need to do that in particular locations.

This is kind of the, it's not moving on the particular sites, this is the potential of 19 particular spots but that's why we are waiting until the actual identification of our first enrollment projections that will be coming out in February.

So this is basically an allocation of resources to begin that planning.

We won't be moving on any of that action.

There are no leases or agreements that are being terminated as a result of this.

This is the beginning of the conversation for our planning stage.

So this allows us the resources to start to move forward so that we can have classrooms ready to go at the beginning of September.

That's the whole purpose of this.

So to follow your thought, if we were not to approve the original motion or the amendment and some have characterized that as kicking the can down the road, the implication of that for the start of the school year next year would be what?

Well again it is a challenge that we know sometimes when we file applications for either permits or processes that have to be done by the city.

they can take time.

Now we do have an agreement with the city where they expedite most of our items and put them at the top of the list and if we have an appeal for something they put that at the top of the list too.

But these are all still months out which is why we do the preparation about this time.

And this, the timing of this is pretty consistent.

We come around about this time for a capacity management then when we get the more information we sharpen that focus on the particular schools.

There are some times and locations for instance when we start to do portable placement that we might open up a permit to place a portable because the process takes so long at more sites than we might actually need.

Because it gives us the flexibility after open enrollment when we have more information we are not behind and we have no shot at getting that permit approved.

So it is a sequence of all of those.

So these particular locations if there is a classroom that does need to be repurposed sometimes it requires modification, sometimes it doesn't.

So the planning of the modifications we would have to know by those particular buildings.

That is why again this is basically the resources to allow us to move forward with the planning.

It is not the termination of anybody's lease.

It is not saying you are out and it has to happen now.

This is the sequencing of what we're trying to do.

I just want to make sure that we've got enough lead time so that we have everything ready in September when our students start day one.

Part of this sequencing will also be once we know if there is something moving from one spot to another we're trying to be very mindful of the fact that some locations have a summer program that are going so we want to have the conversations with them about What are the programs that are happening for the rest of the year and then what's happening for the summer.

Obviously that would be after we are saying okay I think we have identified a new space that's going to work for you.

We are working with the city on licensure that was brought up previously as well.

So we are trying to work with the city and the Department of Early Learning at the state level to help expedite and identify the spots that can be licensed so that they will be approved to be able to do that.

meeting on January 8 there were representatives both from the state and the city and they heard that very clearly from providers as well.

So again all of these things just take time so we are trying to get ahead of what we can do knowing that once we have the resources we can continue to solve some challenges because we will have the resources to be able to do so.

So that's our biggest reason for coming at this particular time.

Any more questions?

And I just want to iterate that that is the whole reason why we are actually voting on this tonight is to make sure that staff has enough time to actually order the things that they need to order, the permits that they need to move forward so that way things will be on time to get our kids ready for school next year.

It is not a done deal, this is not a vote to actually say we are going to close any schools, any afterschool programs down.

It is just to move things a little bit forward.

So right now we are going to call for a vote.

We are voting on an amendment right now.

Director Burke.

Aye.

Director Geary.

Aye.

Director Harris.

Aye.

Director Peters.

Aye.

Director Pinkham.

Nay.

Director Blanford.

Aye.

Director Patu.

Aye.

This motion has passed by a vote of 6-1.

Okay so I am now going to read in the motion as amended.

So I move.

that the board authorize allocation of up to $2,500,000 from the BTA III and the BEX IV capital funds and $4 million in OSPI class size reduction capital grant monies to implement annual capacity management actions in spring semester 2015-16 and summer 2016 to support projected district homeroom capacity needs for 2016-17 and authorize the superintendent to take the necessary steps to implement the above actions as amended by amendment 1. I second the motion as amended.

Okay motion passed we now move on to our next.

I know we are going to move on to the vote for that one.

Is there any questions, discussion on this before we move on to the next one?

Yes.

I just want to make sure that again it's just I can't see this or myself personally I have to speak for myself I voted on something that just seems a little bit too open right now and I'm aware that we do need to have the space issue addressed that we have this timeline but parents have timelines as well so this seems like this should have been something done two years to address this but I know just the situation we are in and I just want to share my reason why I said nay that voting on something that just seems too unclear right now.

Any other questions or comments?

Okay Ms. Foley.

Call the vote.

Director Geary.

Aye.

Director Harris.

Aye.

Director Peters.

Aye.

Director Pinkham.

Director Blanford.

Aye.

Director Burke.

Aye.

Director Patu.

Aye.

This motion has passed by a vote of 6-1.

So we are now going to our next item.

Recommendation to award contract for furniture procurement 2016 projects.

Did you read all that?

I don't have it.

Recommendation to award contracts for furniture procurement for 2016 bid number B09501.

recommended motion.

I move that the school board authorize the superintendent to execute contracts for the furniture procurement for 2016 with the following eight vendors.

Business interiors Northwest incorporated in the amount of $1,479,654.50, DOF incorporated DBA Ducky's office furniture in the amount of $507,180.70.

McDowell Craig Office Systems Incorporated in the amount of $361,300.

Office Depot Incorporated in the amount of $299,590.30.

Bragg Investments DBA Saxton Bradley in the amount of $600,000.

$600,600 and school specialty incorporated in the amount of $1,444,263.70.

Verco incorporated in the amount of $553,793.50 and diversification incorporated DBA work point in the amount of $790,350.

plus Washington state sales tax in the form of the agreements attached to the board action report with any minor additions, deletions and modifications deemed necessary by the superintendent and to take any necessary actions to implement the contract.

I second the motion.

This also came to ops and it was recommended by the committee to move it forward for full board approval.

Is there any questions, comments, discussions on this item?

Okay Ms. Foley can we get the vote?

Director Harris.

Aye.

Director Peters.

Aye.

Director Pinkham.

Aye.

Director Blanford.

Aye.

Director Burke.

Aye.

Director Geary.

Aye.

Director Patu.

Aye.

This motion is passed unanimously.

Okay we are into our introduction items.

We only have one tonight.

Contract for middle school and high school yearbooks.

And I'm actually looking at C&I I think Director Blanford.

This item was considered by the curriculum and instruction committee on December 14 and recommended to the board for approval.

Okay.

Good evening my name is Kristen Nichols I am from curriculum and instruction and I am here this evening to present the middle school and high school yearbook contract.

So this evening I move that the school board authorize the superintendent to execute a contract with Herff Jones in the amount not to exceed $400,000 including three optional annual extensions for the management and classroom support in the preparation and printing of middle school and high school yearbooks.

in the form of a draft agreement presented to the school board with any minor additions, deletions and modifications deemed necessary by the superintendent and to take any necessary actions to implement the contract.

I am going to basically go over the review process that we led a group of middle school and high school yearbook advisors through.

and then open it up for any questions that you might have.

We worked very closely, this is a process that has been a joint process between contracting services and operations and curriculum instruction.

The reason it sits in our department now partially has to do with the fact that many of our courses titled yearbooks follow under the ELA catalog if you will.

And so it sits between us and contracting services.

It was a closely collaborative process.

In early, actually late September we began the process of looking toward the RFP for a new contract.

Herff Jones has currently had the contract and has had annual renewals of that successfully but that contract is over and so we are looking forward to a new contract.

In late September we began the process of getting some feedback from yearbook advisors in terms of whether the current specifications that we had used on the previous yearbook RFP were relevant or whether any modifications needed to be added.

to the request.

And then we also at that time invited middle school and high school yearbook advisors to serve on a review committee.

In early October it was posted in the Daily Journal of Commerce, Builders Exchange and on the Seattle Public Schools website.

The RFP notification was emailed directly to Balfour, Entourage, Herff Jones, Jostens and Walsworth.

On October 29 the RFP due date we had four companies Balfour, Herff Jones, Jostens and Walsworth submit proposals and products for review.

In early November the review committee conducted an initial review and scoring of the proposals and the product qualifications.

Based on the committee's collective points the qualifications section only there were two frontrunners that kind of surfaced at that point and those two vendors were Herff Jones and Jostens.

Part of the initial review process for these proposals are that the reviewers do not see the pricing points that are set by contracting services based on their quote.

Just so that that is not clouding in any way their review of the product.

And so at that point contracting services took those initial scoring points and added to that the pricing points.

At that point a third vendor surfaced because of their strong pricing points that were awarded based on their contract or on their proposal excuse me. and that was Balfour.

Walsworth scored last place in qualifications and third place in price at that point excluding them from further consideration.

We had an additional meeting with the reviewers because when they left they had a strong sense of the two frontrunners but this new addition of the price points brought a vendor into the picture that they hadn't seen at that time.

We had the additional meeting and updated the team as to that.

and they felt comfortable as a team moving three forward, Balfour, Herff, Jones and Jostens into the finalists.

At that point they had some clarifying questions that they were asking of vendors that surfaced during the review mainly based on workshop services and services provided to schools.

And they wanted more assurances and information that these vendors would be able to fulfill the needs of schools.

They were able to get those clarifying questions and information and in late November the team then reviewed that additional information and conducted their final scores.

At that time as well contracting services had asked for clarification and the best and final pricing which is what we ended up with.

Herff Jones ranked first in qualifications for the product and tied for first place with Balfour for pricing.

A final calculation review of pricing points conducted by contracting services surfaced a wider discrepancy between Balfour and Herff Jones.

There was a 15% discount Now if the contract was awarded to all middle school and high schools it could have been offered to either or both and that then created a clear frontrunner.

Jostens had strengths in products and expertise but their price was double which eliminated them from consideration.

The committee's recommendation was consistent with individual advisors.

And at that point the recommendation for the contract with Herff Jones is being brought forth and I can answer any questions that you might have.

Directors have any questions or comments?

Director Peters.

When we discussed this in the curriculum and instruction committee meeting I asked the question, I'm just going to reiterate it, that are schools generally happy with the yearbooks that are published by Herb Jones?

As part of the renewal, the annual renewal process for the additional years on the contract there is a renewal process that we ask the yearbook advisors for their feedback in terms of whether or not they are happy with the product, the service that they receive throughout the year and in the delivery and services.

And they have consistently come back as strong feedback in favor of the company.

statements such as they are easy to work with, they have very prompt service when we need them, that type of.

Thank you.

Any more questions or comments?

Thank you very much.

Thank you.

And it is 810 our meeting is adjourned.

the the you