Regular Meeting

No content available.

[266] SPEAKER_32: What we're going to be doing this week is... ...principal to use as they roll this out with their school teams, with their ELACs, their PTAs, and their school site councils. We are, and if we have the time, I'm going to show you a video that the Alameda County Office of Education put forward. We have it posted on our website so that parents can start to learn more about what the dashboard really is. and so we will be doing presentations with local groups and we've got some next steps and hopefully getting on an agenda with our local groups so we can get this information out. Again with the focus on that data is not just one single data point but it's multiple measures with how a school is rated and how the school is working through areas of academic focus, climate and also meeting the needs of their teachers and staff. The next thing will be determining which current strategic actions are actually improving areas of need and then sustaining current work or progress. For me, I mean, as a team within services this week, I'm meeting with Mr. Witten and Ms. Hanley, and we're actually going to go through what are our current initiatives that we have, looking at the data and looking at what the impact was. We'll be sharing that with our principals as we start to build our LCAP, and then bringing in the information that we're receiving from our parent group to inform the writing of it. We're also going to then look at doing an upcoming presentation for all of you. I think in the area of special education and really because we see that there's some performance gaps there and having our special education director Ms. Willis come forward and share some of her learnings and also some of the next steps that she's put in place. But then also I would like to do a formal presentation around PBIS, the Positive Behavior Intervention System, just to see how school sites are actually rolling that out. We have some sites that are in year three of the implementation and showing how it is making a difference with our students. But I want to be able to bring that forward so you all are actually up to date on what currently has been taking place with that. And with that, I'm going to see if I can play the video, which is very short, and then you all can have a better picture of it. And I also want to be able to play it for the audience who may be watching from home. I think it's very important to really get this information out. What we've learned is that Oakland Unified is actually being a very good partner. They're in the midst of translating the video into Spanish, Punjabi, Farsi. Mandarin, and I believe Cantonese. And so we're able to bring that forward and share those resources with other school districts. And so, I'm gonna, there we go, thank you.

[436] SPEAKER_36: Did you know that California has a new way to look at how your school and your district are performing? It's called the California School Dashboard. And it's basically a report card for your school and your district. The dashboard is used to take a deep look into the many performance areas that are key to preparing students for college and career after graduation. Ideally, your child attends a school that is clean and has the latest textbooks. A school that is a safe place to learn where parents are an active and supportive part of the community. A place where your child is engaged, motivated to learn, and taught to think critically so that they can graduate well prepared for college and career. The California School Dashboard was put in place to make sure this is a story for every child, in every school, in every district throughout California. So, how do we know how well schools and districts are doing? The dashboard measures progress by looking at 10 different areas known as indicators. Four of the indicators are measured by the local school district, and six of the indicators are measured by the state. The dashboard combines the local and state information to give a complete picture of how individual schools and districts are performing. So how are the indicators used to tell a school and district story? Let's take a look at the 10 performance areas. Local indicators. These are the four indicators that measure the performance of a school district as a group of schools. They are measured by the local school district. Basic conditions. Students have access to the latest learning materials, such as textbooks, in a safe and clean environment.

[531] Leonor Rebosura: Parent engagement.

[532] SPEAKER_36: Parents provide input and are involved in all school activities. Implementation of academic standards. Teachers are participating in professional development and using innovative strategies in the classroom. School climate. Students and parents feel connected to and safe in their schools. For each of these local indicators, the district will assess their progress using met, not met, or not met for two or more years. These are the six indicators that measure the performance of schools and school districts. These indicators are measured by the state of California. College and career. This is the percentage of students prepared for college and career after graduation. Graduation rate. This is the percentage of students who graduate with a high school diploma. Academics. This measures the academic progress of students in 3rd through 8th grade in literacy and math. English learner progress. This is the percentage of English language learners who improve each year in their English language proficiency. Chronic absenteeism. This is the percentage of students absent for more than 10% of the school year. Suspension rates. This is the percentage of students who are suspended at least once from school during the academic year. For each of these indicators, the state rates them on a color scale, ranging from blue to red, with blue being the highest performance and red being the lowest. Let's take a look at how all this could apply to a school district. For example, in this district, schools overall are meeting their basic needs, implementation of academic standards, and parent engagement. However, they are not meeting the school climate. Students are thriving where it is blue and green for academics, English learner progress, graduation rate, and college and career. However, this issue needs to improve where there is yellow and orange for chronic absenteeism and suspension rate. The new California dashboard provides a more transparent and detailed look at local schools and districts. The ultimate goal is to help schools to continuously improve and be more equipped to address the specific needs of all students and prepare them to be college and career ready. The new California Dashboard moves past looking only at a test score and allows you to have access to a more holistic view of your child's school and district. To learn more about the California Dashboard, visit aclu.org and search Dashboard.

[686] SPEAKER_32: So that concludes this evening's update. My hope and my work is that I expect to be coming forward with a lot more data. You all received also your data packet last weekend as soon as this was now live but I think with data comes more questions, comes more planning, comes more work and that's really what we intend to do so if there are any questions or direction.

[716] SPEAKER_25: First of all, I want to say thank you for that and I really appreciate the fact that you're going to be working with your team to sit down and digest the data and then be able to do the planning because that's the most important thing in terms of being able to then implement it. If you don't have a plan, you can't implement it. I do have a question in terms of I've seen the packet that he gave us at the first page. It said that Bunker and Milani, because they're with the merger and transverse growth primary from the data, was kind of put together instead of kind of separated out. Are you going to be working with the principals to kind of segregate that data? Is that possible? Or is it just going to be like they have to figure it out

[762] SPEAKER_32: yes as I share in the memo so when the schools were merged At that time, a new CDS code, excuse me, a county district school code was not part of the process. And so what's essentially happened is that we're using the same code as before. So what the two principals are doing are actually working together to look at the data. The county office has been wonderful. And in fact, I'm meeting with them on Friday. So they actually have disaggregated the data for me and have now put it into sets by individual students. so we're going to be able to manipulate that data to give them now more their student level data.

[798] SPEAKER_25: Perfect yeah because in that you can actually map out the plan and then provide it. Thank you.

[805] SPEAKER_30: Croner. Thank you very much. I think we all are sort of struggling with this because it's a new system and it's been a very quote easy unquote system we had in the past with a single number of people who say good or bad and I think that this is perhaps more realistic in terms of being able to look at what a school does and how it compares to students and then allowing us to address the situations and so I'm kind of excited that we're getting to this. It's going to take a year or two before we actually see the results of what we're doing. That's part of the nature of education is that we make our changes today and we don't see the results for a year or two or three or five. So we are in the business for long-term changes and long-term improvements. And I'm hoping that the public is interested in really finding out specifics rather than looking for an easy number, because it's been too easy to have a number and then make a decision quickly on that. So I'm delighted we're going this way. It's just going to take a while before we see the actual results of using a baseline, results of our change.

[880] SPEAKER_37: Thank you. Mr. Rodriguez?

[884] Ray Rodriguez: Thank you Mrs. Salinas for an excellent presentation. You know how long it's going to be before we, you know, I know we're in a catch-up mode and 2015 before we have something a little more current. Is there going to be another report next year where it's going to be the last two years? Can you share with that?

[912] SPEAKER_32: So we're continually getting updates from the Department of Education. I think what they really want school districts to do is also to focus on their local indicators. So that's more of the real-time data, more of our internal data that we can look to. nothing updated yet on how soon we will get the more current data, but I will say that every month we get a new email from the department saying that they've done some changes, for example, with English learner data. That's actually been the one that's been changing the most, where it appears that now they have a group that's EL, and then that includes our reclassified students that are now fluent English proficient. for a certain time. And then there's another group that can be looked at as EL only, which are current English learners. So they're still kind of tweaking that to, I think, be responsive to school districts. But the short answer is not yet, don't know. But I think the long-term answer is for school districts to have more of a focus on your local indicators and ensuring that we're actually inputting data and that we're talking about our data. on an ongoing basis at the school site level and the district level.

[983] Ray Rodriguez: And I just have one more question. You know, when you look at different ethnic groups, it's kind of like a moving target. It's very difficult to... On the other hand, you know, we're very fortunate in living in this community where we have so many different groups that get along very well. Everybody knows the economic issues where A lot of people can't live here and that's going to change our demographics and the building that we're having right now. You mentioned the Polynesian group and we've had a long history, positive history, of working with that population. we had some setbacks a few years ago and I don't know if that had anything to do with, I think you were talking about the suspension rate or if I'm not mistaken.

[1039] SPEAKER_32: Yes and the data that's in here is actually is about three years old and so that and as I start to work with Mr. Witten who has more of a historical context we can also be able to address it that way.

[1053] Ray Rodriguez: Yeah I think you'll find that the last few years, it's a lot more positive. But we did have some issues years ago, not with them specifically, but just the Mexican gangs were targeting our Polynesian kids. And the high school, I feel, did an excellent job of taking care of that. But when you have a small population, it only takes one. really change the numbers I mean change the percentage and everything so it's exciting to have this information and hopefully we'll get some updates real quick thank you.

[1090] SPEAKER_32: Thank you and I do look forward to bringing that I think the high school in particular has done some really great work around PBIS and so I know they look forward to bringing that forward.

[1099] SPEAKER_37: Thank you and a little to the high school so Thank you for the report and the pack and the data. And for school guys, it's only in our high school because that's our capstone school, right? Every student channels through that system. Also, the middle school. and just the three metrics that have been released so far. Memorial compares very favorably to our other high schools, not ours, but other high schools in the area from San Lorenzo all the way up to Mopedas, so I think it is something that they should be very proud of. But there are three other metrics coming, so let's not get blindsided by that, and we have to be prepared to address those three metrics that are coming down the pipeline. Thank you. So with that we move on to Item 7.1, which is public comment on non-adjunct items. We have one speaker, Mr. Chris Moynihan.

[1162] SPEAKER_38: Yes, thank you. A live mic is always very dangerous for me because I get an irresistible urge to sing Valaria and I only know the first word. I'm here to introduce myself to you, Chris Moylan. I'm Congressman Ro Khanna's district director, and three months ago I was a high school teacher teaching Honors Chem, International Baccalaureate Chem, and Drama at San Jose High School, a PBIS school. We were doing all of that stuff. Congressman Khanna obviously cares a lot about education, which is why he hired a teacher to be his district director. And I wanted to introduce myself tonight. I passed my business cards out. Hopefully you have them. And talk about some of the things we can do together. There's a congressional art competition every year that's open to high schools in the area. And you'll be getting an email on that soon. There's a congressional app competition. So people want to design applications for smartphones. There are, of course, service academies. And any of your seniors who might want to go to a service academy, they look for a congressional recommendation. I'll be managing that process personally. And of course, we have interns. In our district, I actually have some high school interns. Some of the other members of Congress have only college interns, but I've got some high school interns in the district. I limit them to six hours a week during the school year because I don't want to add to the academic pressure that some of the kids in our district are already feeling. But in the summer, of course, the hours are longer, so if any of your students are interested in learning what government looks like as opposed to politics, Working as an intern in an office is very educational. You know, politics is what happens up to election day. Government is what happens after that. So we're in the government business. We help people, especially in our district, people with immigration issues, stuff like that. And we have a wall of fame for grateful emails from citizens we've managed to help, people who thought they're about to be deported, stuff like that. We were able to intervene, take care of them, and we're gradually filling up the whole wall with that stuff, which we need to because the office was completely bare when we moved in. So those are all things in which we hope to involve your district and your students. If there are any events going on here that you think should be more widely known, I would love it if you would let me know. If you would like us to have one of our many town hall meetings here, if you have a venue, you know, maybe the school that's big enough, my plan is to rotate these town hall meetings around the district. Congressman wants to do one a month. We're doing one on Saturday at my kids' high school, Homestead High School in Cupertino. First one we did was in Ohlone College in Fremont. You might have read about the thousand people who showed up for a room with a capacity of 200. So this time I've got a high school gym. So I am looking to move around. I definitely want to do one in Newark while we're here. So if you would like to invite a congressman in to talk to your people, that would be great. So I'm hoping that as we go forward, we can find ways to help each other and work together on things that will benefit your students.

[1349] SPEAKER_37: Thank you very much, sir. Next up is Comp Title 8.1. We just discussed procedures, protocols, and practices relating to board requests and board-staff interactions. This was brought on, placed on the agenda at the request of a board member, but do you want to speak to it? Are there any speakers before I chime in? Or should I go first? Okay. So I wanted to speak in general terms about we're heading into a climate where FITMAC is coming to the district to examine our financials. We're in a negotiations climate with both of our unions, or actually all three, and we need to be more careful with how we interact with are not just our constituents, but our staff members in our district and at our schools. And I'm going to pass on two items that are also available at the back of the room. The first one is sort of just a reminder. I know it's a recurring wound, potentially, but it is a reminder of the grand jury findings report that was issued to the school district as a result of what happened, I believe, three years ago. And that's just for us to peruse, and also two policies that we have adopted as a result of those grand jury findings. So again, to remind us, this is a conversation about us on the dais, about what we should and shouldn't do. Sometimes we get caught up in the moment. we find it difficult to catch ourselves, right? And so I think it's important that we remind ourselves and each other that, OK, let's reference this. Let's reference these findings. Let's go back and examine what got us to the point where we went three years ago. And let's not have any repeats of those type of scenarios. And then the other item I'm passing out is the board agenda item information request. This was a board docs that I've brought up a few times now. And it's essentially also located at the end of our agenda items, where members of the public can see the requests that are coming forward by certain board members and when they will be addressed. And so it is a working document that the superintendent and Ms. Sandoval interacts with in regards to placing particular items, you know, on the agenda at particular times. And so I'm passing this out so that for members who have not had an opportunity to use the Google Docs, because I understand, you know, whether it's a comfort level or just, you know, no time. that they can fill it in now and then we'll give it to them at the end of the meeting so that we can update that form and also update our board docs so that the public can see items that are coming forward. That way it's about transparency so that our constituents know when particular items are being discussed or brought up potentially so that they can plan to attend various meetings. So with that, I wanted to again just remind our entire board that, you know, be careful and, you know, just be, again, to reiterate that we do have board policies and protocols and actions that we have to follow and abide by and let's, you know, let's stick to that. Ms. Crocker.

[1578] SPEAKER_30: Yeah, I was present when we went through the whole process with the concerns about prior board members. And I think it's sort of a slippery slope. It's very easy to be involved and want to know immediately about things. There is a time that is needed for getting something on the agenda. And to expect immediate placement of an item on the agenda that is not time sensitive is not realistic. And I think that's part of the reason we have a president. And the president and superintendent takes care of scheduling. when those things will be agendized. Some of the things that might help is knowing what is going to be offered and presented later on because I don't think any of us want to lose any item and so I think we are working, trying to work out a process so that we know what is coming up so we'll know when something is going to be addressed and we'll be able to feel comfortable that it will not disappear. That's in terms of the agenda. The second thing has to do with wording when we talk to the staff. I think it's very important that when we talk to staff, we understand that we have a different kind of power than a person in the community has. And so if we ask or request something, there's an immediacy that sort of gets into their mind. It's got to be done immediately. And it may not work out with their programmed time for doing things. We are hiring professional people. They should be able to schedule their own time. They should be able to decide when things are going to be set up. That's what we're paying the money to, our superintendent and to the people that are in the district office to make those decisions. If we disagree with them, we certainly have a responsibility and right to address that. But I think in terms of planning their own schedule, If we start second-guessing when they're going to do things, I think it gets in the way and it sort of destroys their ability to function. So things like, I need things immediately or I've got to have this fixed, you know, I want this information now, I think are things that we have to be careful to use. Save those for things that are really emergency situations.

[1723] SPEAKER_37: Thank you. Member Rodriguez.

[1729] Ray Rodriguez: Thank you, President Wynne. You know, when we went through the whole process with the grand jury, it was very draining and it was kind of difficult because we had to kind of look at ourselves inward and figure out what is it that we're doing and can we improve on it. And we responded to all the allegations. Prior administrations have been back and forth on how the board interacts with employees and especially with administrators. And then we get our new superintendent who's very, very lenient and he's all about team as far as the board and the superintendent working together. What happens sometimes is when there is some relaxing of the rules based by the superintendent where he doesn't take it as an affront when a board member might interact with an administrator or an employee and then it puts it on us to make sure that we are very prudent in how we interact. And we're right in the midst right now of talking about budget cuts. We've had deficit spending for years and our new superintendent has been given the mantle or the challenge of getting us through this very, very tough stage. And it would behoove board members that any communication, if we have questions, go through the superintendent in spite of the fact that he's very lenient and as far as interaction, still any communication between the board and staff should really go through the superintendent. Because when you're talking about budget cuts, it kind of puts everybody on edge. And some employees might think that they're not going to be here next year. And so it's important, especially when we're talking about that, that we're very prudent and we respect the fact that everything should go to the superintendent and any suggestions that we have. And I think that's going to help us with the whole process as we look at budget cuts as a whole unit with the board and the superintendent, with the engaging the community on that. So again, it's just, it puts the onus on us as board members to make sure that we limit any communication that we have with staff and make sure that the superintendent is abreast of everything.

[1928] SPEAKER_37: Thank you. Member Crocker.

[1930] SPEAKER_30: We're going to be going to Masters in Governance this weekend and the first module has to do with the board's roles and responsibilities as board members and what the parameters are and I think we can have ourselves a really good discussion and bring up again what is considered appropriate and what is considered not and what is overstepping our bounds as board members and we need to do our due diligence, there's no doubt about that, but There are some districts in the area that are still suffering from board members that are overstepping their bound. And they were fighting some of the same problems we were fighting because I guess with an election, I guess they felt they had power. And their idea was perhaps stronger. They felt it was stronger and more important than anybody else's. And so they were there flexing their muscles. And I know that my children go to school in Miss Drake where they've had two board members that they've had to have cease and desist orders for going to schools. And so I think we want to be very careful. It's very easy for us to get to that. And even though we are coming from a good place, how we do it is really important. So I'm looking forward to Friday being the time when we can do this kind of discussion be really clear about what the expectations are. And then what do we do as board members if we see something happening or feel someone's stepping over, what do we do? I mean, how do you approach people?

[2022] SPEAKER_37: Thank you. Member Rodriguez?

[2026] SPEAKER_25: Oh. Just to answer your question, I think we can review the governance team handbook in terms of kind of refresher of what board meeting roles and responsibilities are. And then we actually have outlined a process for moving forward for actually having board policy on it.

[2049] SPEAKER_21: So we can just, yeah. I just wanted to comment. This is kind of a normal part of the process of building a new team. I think that we have two new things that we're trying to utilize more effectively. One is the Google Docs. so we can track all board requests and make sure that we get them somewhere in the queue in the future and ultimately I like to get to the place where I start coding those as to whether you can expect to see it on an agenda so that's very helpful to get those specifics there and helps Patty and I track the progress of how agenda items are coming forth and it's actually a useful tool when we sit and do agenda building to have that in front of us and I think the other one is just board docs getting used to BoardDocs and some of the tools there as a team I think that it's a tool for communication and I think that right now our district is in a change I think changing and trying to move away from deficit spending and trying to rebrand ourselves and trying to increase enrollment requires change and when you're in the system of change it requires additional communication and input and structure and order. And I really think that's what this is about is how do we get through the change. And one of the key ways to get effectively through change is to really be solid on how we communicate and how we interact. And I think it's just healthy. So I'm really glad to see just some agreement around how we go forward. And this is going to help us be more successful. I really appreciate the conversation. Thank you.

[2153] Ray Rodriguez: I wanted to ask the board when years ago when we had an issue with a board member, the board decided to appoint a committee of the board and I was the board member and then Mr. Dennis and then we're the ones that met with the board member and subsequently reported back to the board. things have changed a little bit so it would be up to the board if the makeup of the subcommittee would be maybe two board members. I think it's, even though we have policy and everything, I think how everything rolls, it's important. I think it makes it easier for our superintendent because if there is an allegation by an employee and they go to the superintendent, how does the superintendent deal with it because we're basically So my understanding is the superintendent would approach the board president, and then the board president would agendize it. If we're going to be talking about an employee that's making the allegations, then naturally, my understanding is that would be closed session because you're talking about, you're mentioning an individual, and then we would report back in open session. I just want to make sure the board makes it makes it easy that everything flows for the superintendent so that he feels that if something does come up and he gets some complaints that it would go to the board president. That's my understanding and I just want to see if the other board members feel basically the same way.

[2263] SPEAKER_37: I think I'll echo what President Soto mentioned previously where let's defer to what's listed in our government's handbook and as far as procedures moving forward to address the issues that you brought up on record, you guys said that we can defer to that and then take further action if needed based upon what's prescribed in our handbook. Fair? So with that, we move on to 9.1, which is employee organizations. Any speakers? I'm going to call, oh, sorry. This is NTA.

[2306] Rachel Bloom: I have handouts in case you're a visual learner. So hello everyone. My name is Rachel Bloom. I'm the elementary director of NTA. Currently I am the SRT science resource teacher at Graham and at Kennedy. I've been with the district for about six years, and I love it very much, and I love Newark, and I love working here, and that is one of the reasons, that's the main reason why I'm here today to speak to you. So last year, as we were adopting NGSS standards, there were science professional developments that I wasn't allowed to go to, even though I'm a science resource teacher, because I was told that there was a guest teacher shortage. So it upset me a lot because I want to be the best teacher I can be for my students as I'm sure you want me to be and I started kind of looking around the campus and the district and seeing is this only happening to me or is this common for other newer teachers. So this year the NTA sent out a survey about the guest teacher shortage and I'm going to share some of that data with you right now. So we surveyed classified staff, or certificated staff, excuse me, and 92% of the people that responded believed that NUSD has a guest teacher shortage. One of the questions we asked was, has the guest teacher shortage had a negative impact on students' learning? Do you agree or disagree? You can see on the handout here, 66% of secondary teachers said they agreed or strongly disagreed with that statement. When elementary school teachers were faced with a statement, the guest teacher shortage has had a negative impact on my students' learning, 84% of the elementary school teachers in the district that responded to this survey said that the guest teacher shortage here has had a negative impact on student learning. 84%. So, I wanted to look more closely at how is this negative impact. And if you turn the page over, there are three main points I'd like to share with you. One, over half of the elementary school teachers in the district have missed professional development because there weren't enough guest teachers to cover all the classes. Half. 39% of the respondents said they've had to leave professional development and go back to their site because they were called back because there weren't enough guest teachers to cover their classroom. Sixty-three percent of the teachers responded and said that students have missed intervention because intervention teachers were pulled into the classroom to be guest teachers. I, like I said, Newark is very important to me and NUSD is very important to me. In fact, Ms. Prescigato, when I saw you at Family Science Night, At Birch Grove the other day, I told you that I usually watch the stream online at home. And I remember at the last meeting, Mr. Rodriguez, you said that Newark is second to none. And I agree with that. And I think part of being second to none and part of being the best is not just automatically achieving the best, but it's putting it in effort to identify the problem putting in effort to come up with some solutions and implementing change to make that happen. So being the best is the effort and the work that we're going to put in to make that happen. So part of us being second to none is making that happen and putting in this effort to make this a priority. And Mr. Nguyen, you said that 51% of Newark students are not at grade level.

[2567] SPEAKER_37: No, I didn't say that. I said 51% of our students, according to the last CASP data, that does not meet the state standards.

[2576] Rachel Bloom: Okay, 51% of Newark students do not meet state standards. 50% of elementary school teachers have missed professional development. We've had NGSS standards professional development. We've had Kevin Clark Professional Development. We've had Reader's Workshop, Writer's Workshop, PBIS meetings. So if we're really serious about doing this and we really want to see that data change, we need to have the best, best, best trained teachers in the Bay Area. That's just a fact because we know that it starts with us and we need to have that knowledge. So thank you very much for your time. I appreciate it, and we look forward, the NTA, we look forward to working with you and helping you try to figure this out. And we just really look forward to going to professional development. We look forward to helping meet the implementation of academic standards as one of the indicators on the dashboard. We know that we're a big part of that, and we need to go to those meetings. So we're looking forward to that, and I thank you for your time. Thank you.

[2650] SPEAKER_37: Would you entertain an inquiry? Pardon? Can I ask a question? Absolutely. So the professional development that you mentioned, when you named out NGSS, the academic department, et cetera, Among all of them, I believe most of those are locally controlled PD opportunities, right? Other than NGSS. Maybe there's someone else coming in to provide, but for the most part we do those PD internally. Is that correct? Okay, so with that being correct, one, I find it I mean, disturbing is too hard of a word, but 39% of elementary teachers have to have to leave a professional development session because of the lack of guest teachers or associate teachers, which is a statewide issue. It's not a newer thing. I can tell you that. But we're in school for 180 days, right? And the teacher calendar is 186 days. What's happening with those six days? that students are not in session. Are those just simply work days? Or is PD actually being done on those days?

[2722] SPEAKER_32: Anyone? So of those six days, three are teacher work days, and three are actually professional development days.

[2729] SPEAKER_37: OK. And they're four-day PD days. They are. And these PD sessions that Ms. Bloom brought up are not four-day type of PD opportunities.

[2741] SPEAKER_32: Some of these are, but these are in addition to those days. So it's a variety of, depending on if it's the NGSS or if it's the accelerated ELD, it really depends. But those are in addition to the three professional development days.

[2757] SPEAKER_37: So maybe we can be more strategic with our PD calendar and end date so that it can mitigate some of the time loss and potential for our students, for our teachers to be able to attend.

[2768] SPEAKER_32: I think so and I think it's looking at going back to the LCAP and looking if there's other venues it could be after school we could look at negotiating Saturdays or some other things when schools not in session perhaps or but I think it's another front it's also working with our human resources department to recruit more guest teachers there's a shortage countywide the other thing is perhaps looking at creatively how we're paying we some of our neighbors are paying a bit more for guest teachers. And so that's the other rub where we sometimes get trumped by some of our neighbors who may pay a little bit more.

[2808] SPEAKER_37: And then with the PD piece of it, I believe our elementary, I know our high school have collaboration days. I believe that's Wednesday and Thursday. It's during that block schedule. And then our elementary, I believe, get out early a day a week. Is that correct? Friday.

[2825] SPEAKER_32: Correct. And there's also some time that's built in there.

[2828] SPEAKER_37: Okay. And I see a lot of opportunities for PD and maybe it's just a matter of us being more efficient with where we place it and how we, you know, implement it. Okay. Ms. Crock.

[2842] SPEAKER_30: Thank you. Yeah, I just have a wonder whether this is a good time for this discussion that's not agendized because I think there are some suggestions that can be done and I think during negotiations that something has happened, I find it unconscionable that intervention teachers are pulled to sub. I think that's not acceptable. It doesn't click with me. But I think this discussion needs to be agendized if we're going to have it.

[2871] SPEAKER_37: Okay. Thank you. I appreciate that. so that was NCA, NEWMA, so I'm going to call it audible because I think we have our Director of Elementary Education here and there's no one on the agenda so maybe if we can introduce her through NEWMA then that can, we can set a year 5.1 yeah I'm happy to do that I was going to do it out of consent but that's okay Amy Black would you please step to the podium I'd like to welcome Amy Black our new Director of Elementary Education

[2903] SPEAKER_21: hailing most recently from Moraga School District want to welcome you to Newark and we did notice you sitting over there even though we were engrossed in our paperwork but just want to welcome you to the district and anything you want to say or

[2918] SPEAKER_33: I just want to say members of the board and superintendent thank you so much for this opportunity I'm really looking forward to wrapping up my time well not looking forward to wrapping up my time actually it's been kind of bittersweet but looking forward to joining the Newark Unified School District team I'm really excited about some of the work that we've already started and getting right into it and this is an exciting time looking at testing and having an opportunity to take a closer look at your scores it makes me right wheels turning about getting in there and getting to work so I'm really excited to be a part.

[2953] SPEAKER_21: And I want to just add some of the attributes that Amy brings to us is has a deep background in some of the training that we've been discussing professional development specific that she's aware of in our district that she's got a deep wealth of knowledge how many years as a principal? It's my ninth year as a principal. Ninth year as a principal which in itself is like dog years sometimes but just strong elementary background. That's certainly not my background but it's good to have you added to our team and bring that balance and expertise that you bring in professional development. As long as you introduce the board to it.

[2991] Ray Rodriguez: Thank you Mr. Mayor. I wanted to just on behalf of the board actually to welcome you to Newark and superintendent's been talking about another member of his team and it seems like you're gonna fit very well. I don't know if you were told that one of the first things that we were hoping you would do is a substitute pool and

[3016] SPEAKER_33: I have some ideas, actually, yeah.

[3019] Ray Rodriguez: Bring all the teachers from around here over here. Yeah, no problem.

[3024] Richelle Piechowski: April 10.

[3025] SPEAKER_37: Thank you. We have a guest member with you. Do you want to introduce who he is?

[3031] SPEAKER_33: Oh, yeah. So this is Ron Kyle, my boyfriend and partner in life. Welcome. Thank you. Thanks for coming. Welcome to Newark. Welcome. Thank you. All right. Thank you, Tom.

[3046] SPEAKER_37: Moving on to 10.1, which is the consent item. Personnel, there are none. On to item 11, which is the consent item. Do I have a motion to approve all consent? 11.1 through 11.8. I so move. I'm sorry, I'll second. Seconded by Member Crocker, seconded by Member Rodriguez. Please vote.

[3074] SPEAKER_30: There was some typo things in terms of the minutes, in terms of clarification. I probably should have mentioned that before we voted. It had to do with identifying an organization in the minutes. It was not identified as it was. So it doesn't change the essence of the minutes, but it does change the actual structure. So I'm not sure how we go back and do it.

[3097] SPEAKER_37: So can we just note that and make those changes?

[3099] SPEAKER_30: Yeah, she already has the changes. Oh, OK. Okay, so with that in mind, the vote. So is that for every single? No, it's just for the minutes of February 7th.

[3114] SPEAKER_25: Can we just make a clearer, can we do it again and then as a motion and have that?

[3119] Diego Torres: Sure. Thank you.

[3121] SPEAKER_30: So you want vote 1 through 7? Yeah, sure.

[3130] SPEAKER_37: I'll second the 1 through 7. Moving one through, I guess we're going to do eight separate with the changes. So moved by Member Rodriguez, seconded by Member Crocker. Please vote to approve items 11.1 through 11.7.

[3153] SPEAKER_29: I thought it was moved by Crocker, seconded by Rodriguez. Correct.

[3157] Ray Rodriguez: Okay, I'm sorry. Okay, as a point of order, and I know, Frank, you know, I'm not a big fan of Brazil, I don't know who does it, but we did have a motion and a second, and we voted on it. Shouldn't we first retract that? And how do we do that? I don't know if I have that in this. And normally what we would have, and it's not on here, and maybe you can have it in the future, would be board comments on agenda items where member Crocker would be able to rather than having to... Well, at this point we could use that.

[3194] SPEAKER_25: So I guess there's a difference, because first you said there was just typos, but then you said it changed the format, and then that might, that's different.

[3201] SPEAKER_30: It doesn't change. It changed, it identified the organization more completely in minutes, because going back and reading it, it seemed like the committee that I was reporting on, it was incomplete in terms of the information. And so instead of calling it the Redevelopment Committee, it's actually the City of Newark Oversight Committee. So it's changing the name of the committee that I reported on.

[3221] SPEAKER_25: So, but is that, so then that would just be clarifying. Clarifying. So it's not a typo. It's just clarifying the actual formal name. Correct. Okay. Okay, so that's different than I think.

[3235] SPEAKER_30: So we need to redo it. Yeah. Well, we voted twice.

[3244] Nancy Thomas: So we could bring it back next time as a correction to what we voted on.

[3247] SPEAKER_25: Okay, yeah, that's great. Let's do that. So we essentially approved it as it is right now, but the next meeting those corrections will have to bring it back and then say we're approving this as the correction.

[3266] SPEAKER_25: We couldn't at this point. Because then you'd have to map out on the actual minutes that you have to go to the minutes and point to it and then say this is the exact place you want. At the next meeting. At the next meeting you find out. Yeah, I mean if you did it now, I think you'd have to take a lot more time. Yeah.

[3288] SPEAKER_30: You know, we can leave without a chair, right? So I guess, here's an example.

[3297] SPEAKER_25: Since we already approved it as it is, if you want to make that correction, then you can ask at the end to bring back those particular minutes to make that adjustment. And then at the next meeting we can do that.

[3317] SPEAKER_30: I'm sorry, we blew it. And then you ask for comments from the board. So we actually already approved all of it. Right, okay. I would like to make a comment on 11-8, the minutes for February 7th. There's in the board comments there's a reference to a redevelopment committee, it actually is the City of Newark Oversight Committee. So I guess we're asking for it to be brought back so that it can be added to it at the next meeting.

[3359] SPEAKER_37: Thank you. 12.1, do I have a motion to approve the expulsion case E16-1707? So by Member Rodriguez, is there a second? I'll second. Member Thomas, please vote. next move on to 13.1 which is the NUSD budget work study session and I believe we're going to migrate and we have provided the handouts of the slides just so you have somewhere to catch notes

[3401] SPEAKER_25: because there's a difference in the title. That's my best. That's all right. That's what your job is.

[3430] SPEAKER_30: I just want to make sure we're consistent.

[3458] SPEAKER_25: Is it like a couple of degrees?

[3459] SPEAKER_37: Yeah. One and down. Oh, yes. Oh, yes.

[3462] SPEAKER_30: Thank you for watching. We were at the CNN today, and we were having these hearing problems, and we heard Justin. They've been talking about sex office, non-stop apparently. And one of the members of the committee that was asking questions at the candidate said, I want to read to you what my wife wrote to the text. What is happening? He's had no time to pee all that time. And everyone got hysterical because they had kept him there for so long. Yeah, poor guy is right.

[3550] SPEAKER_21: You want to come over here, Grace? Because you're going to not be able to see the screen. Come out this side. Oh, I wanted to see Brian.

[3556] Ray Rodriguez: You want to see Brian? You've seen Brian. Yeah, I already know what he looks like. Thanks for the choice.

[3564] SPEAKER_31: OK. To begin, this presentation kind of morphed. Initially it was sort of an initial sort of steps in the processes about building the budget and after talking with Mr. Sanchez and kind of looking at what our goals were for this meeting We've sort of adjusted it so it starts off as sort of a very general building the budget process and then very quickly goes into much more specifics with regard to some unique challenges that we are going to face as a district going into 17-18. The numbers and the detail are unique to us, but the overall problem is actually not unique to us. As we get into this, you will see that we are not alone. But some changes at the state level are having some significant ripple effects across districts all over the state. But in general, as we're going into budget development, what we look at as a district are, what are our goals for the upcoming year? What resources have we got to help us to meet those goals? what do we lack or what do we need to help us get towards those goals or to utilize those resources most effectively and then try to match everything and then in a year like this year we have to add the sort of bonus question of how do we modify the plan if our resources and are not sufficient to cover the rising expenses and that is the challenge that we face now going into the upcoming school year. At its board level work session with regard to establishing goals. This board recently put forward some primary new goals for the district. The first of which, dealing with providing academic excellence via equity and opportunities for all of our students. The second goal with regard to increasing our enrollment from our present 6,000, which we're a little under that right now in the 5,800s now, to 7,000 students by 2021.

[3712] SPEAKER_21: These are draft goals.

[3714] SPEAKER_37: These are not finalized. I remember the 6,000 but 7,000 seems a lot. These are draft goals. These are not finalized.

[3720] SPEAKER_21: Well it is, but when you look at where we came from several years ago. 72-23.

[3735] SPEAKER_37: Yeah, but we can't look at where we came from. We've got to look at how many houses are being built, multiplied by the national multiplier, then you get the wrong numbers.

[3743] SPEAKER_31: And then finally, the third one, which is really the one that we're having to focus on tonight, establishing financial stability and fiscal solvency, so that we can drive continuous improvement. And that's the one where we look at, then, our resources. So the resources we have as a district, one of our largest resources that we have, of course, are our people. Our teachers, our site and district support staff that are providing all the services for our students are one of our most significant resources. We do have all the properties that we have as a district, our schools, our offices, our kitchen, our M.O. and T. yard, the locations that we have, all the equipment, tools, and supplies that we have in those locations, the contractors that we hire for additional support in areas where we don't have staff, and then of course our funds. And the funds are what we use to acquire all the various resources that we have and that we have had. And the challenge that we're facing going forward, of course, is that the funds are beginning to decline, and that reduces our access to resources. Now, over the past few years, the time that I've been here and at least a couple years prior to that the priority really in budget development has been preserving program for as many students for as long as we can trying not to have to go back to the days when there was very little student variety of choice there was a period of time a couple of administrations ago where there was no electives at the junior high school level very limited at the senior high school level and A lot of things got added back over time in trying to protect those programs and keep them going forward, minimizing or not having layoffs to the extent possible. And as base funding came forward, we had a longstanding commitment because of a prior negotiated agreement with Newark Teachers Association that we had to go through that settle-up process where many contracts ago there had been language that about the COLA that wasn't funded that year that created sort of a domino problem that rolled forward and so we were tied to a commitment that we had made to the teachers and then comparably to the other bargaining units with regard to getting that prior agreement paid out now last year in the 15-16 school year we actually did finish that process and we got through the last year of implementation with regard to paying back that previous agreement so that we are now in a caught-up period as we headed into the current school year into 16-17. This is a revisit of the priorities and values slide from before just as a refresher which we got through a lot quicker than I anticipated. But with regard to our funding sources, we're going to talk a little bit just about the basics of what we have. When I speak with some of my staff, I use this little acronym, UPRO. When we're dividing up information and I'm pulling FTE data or dollar data, I'm usually asking for it from my staff in these four categories. The first one is the unrestricted general fund. That is where the overwhelming majority of our funding is. That's where the local control funding formula lives as well as unrestricted lottery. There are very few restrictions other than that in general as a school district we can't utilize all of our funding to do something that's unrelated to school district business with regard to money. So we can't give it away to other entities and create a gift of public fund situation. But basically we use that funding for classroom teachers, administrative support, our pupil services and operations. It's generally what is funded out of the unrestricted general fund. Then we have a term you won't see anywhere really written in the law, but we point it in the past districts I've worked in. We call it the partially restricted programs in the restricted general fund or the partially restricted general fund. These funds are restricted categoricals that aren't fully funded. primarily the special education resources, as well as the routine restricted maintenance fund. The routine restricted maintenance fund is actually funded 100% with unrestricted dollars, but the state says you must use, in a normal year, 3% of your total unrestricted and restricted combined expenditures 3% of that dollar amount has to be contributed from the Unrestricted General Fund to the Routine Restricted Maintenance Fund to deal with building maintenance. And that 3% normally is hard-coded into the code. Now, in 2008, when everything went haywire with the state's finances, they dropped it to 1%. It stayed 1% for a few years, gradually has been moving up, going into next year, the new... this is the third year, currently, of After several years at 1%, they implemented a, you must have a maintenance of effort. So you had to at least do whatever you had done in the prior year, which was three years ago's number. That maintenance of effort requirement has been in play. Now, this is the third year. Next year, that rule changes. And it's the greater of 2% of your total general fund expenditures or your maintenance of effort number. Then in 2020, 2021, it goes back to the old 3%. So that's going to be a gradual implementation over the next few years. Now currently in this district, we transfer into routine restrictive maintenance fund a number that is greater than 2% of general fund expenditures. So we will not see an immediate sort of snapback where we have to all of a sudden start doing a huge amount into routine restrictive maintenance. However, we do transfer less than 3%. So in 2021, when we get back to, in theory, full implementation of LCFF funding, we will have to go back to the full 3%. but we won't have that immediate snapback with regard to the routine restricted maintenance fund. And of course, special education, although it is funded with restricted money, that money is largely calculated based on our ADA. It is not calculated based on the number of special education students that we're serving or the types of services that they require. It's just a per ADA amount. So if our enrollment goes down, and our special education enrollment goes up at the same time, which it has now for the past couple of years, we run into a significant challenge because that causes the costs to go up while the revenue to pay for them is going in a downward direction. Third, we have the restricted general fund. Now when you look at the financial statements that come when you submit the interim report, what we call partially restricted and restricted are one column together called restricted. But when I look at just restricted, that's a fully paying categorical. Title I, Title II, Title III, the after school program, we do not do district contributions into those restricted categoricals. Those restricted categoricals also have specific rules about how they can be spent. And in some cases, at which schools they can be spent, because Title I, not all of our schools qualify for it. We have California Partnership Academy and Restricted Lottery are the rest of the ones that are sizable. There are some small local ones as well that are restricting categoricals. But those are just some sample programs. And then we have the other funds that are not part of the general fund. So when you get the big book at the interim report, these are all the funds that come after the general fund in the report. Adult education, child development, child nutrition, our special reserves, and then funds 21 through 40 are our building funds. As far as capital improvements, so we have the Building Fund, which is Measure G and what's a little bit left of the two prior measure. The Capital Facilities Fund is developer fees, and Fund 40 is the proceeds from the sale of Orson Elementary and some other older capital outlay reserves. And then we have our self-insurance funds, which take care of our property and liability insurance and our post-employment benefits. But in general, we focus a lot of our attention on the Unrestricted General Fund for good reasons. Because if we have a shortfall, this is where it's going to happen for the most part. Because we will make the restricted categoricals balance themselves out. If they have increases in one type of expense, they have to cut somewhere else and just stay in balance with whatever size federal program or state program they are given. But with the Unrestricted General Fund, the overwhelming majority of it, 90% plus of the Unrestricted General Fund, is the local control funding formula. and it is generated in seven pieces. Five of them combine to what we call in general terminology the base and the other two are what we call supplemental and concentration. The base level funding, the pieces to it are the per pupil or per ADA grade level finance amounts that are generally set as targets based on the numbers from 07-08 with augmentations for K-3 class size reduction and the 9 through 12 grade span adjustment. Then there's two old programs, TIG and homeschool transportation, that were fixed at their reduced categorical level from the year of conversion in 12-13. So that 499, 293, and 311, 131, forever in the LCFF, those are locked at that number, unless a future legislature ever decides to index them. But they do not index for a COLA ever. They just stay flat. And then the supplemental and concentration piece, as the board is aware, we've talked about before. There's students that we have on CBEDS day who are either homeless, English language learners, low-income students, or foster youth. They get calculated as a percentage of our total enrollment on CBEDS day, and that then becomes our supplemental and concentration factor. And if we exceed 55%, we qualify for concentration funding, but we only qualify for it on the number of students that we are above the 55%. that percentage is calculated on a three-year rolling average and right hold on a second that is FRL what is that that is a combination so FRL free and reduced lunch is the low-income portion of that calculation so in addition to our low-income students Our English language learners who are not low-income students count as one toward that number. A homeless student most likely, unless paperwork somehow didn't get processed in food services, is going to be a low-income student. But if they're for whatever reason they're not and they are homeless, they count as one. Foster youth automatically count as one. Now if a student is all four, they count as one in counting that number. So it's what's called an unduplicated count. So a student could be a low-income English language learner, they would count as one student toward that number. earlier we saw some numbers in Ms. Salinas' slides that indicated we're about 50% on low-income on the free and reduced lunch and about a third on English learners but overall as a district for all those when we add all those together and we unduplicate the count we're at 55.15% so we're just barely over the 55% we do qualify for concentration funding but we get a very small dollar amount of concentration funding because we're just barely over the 55%

[4426] Nancy Thomas: Could you explain the 10.4% and the 2.6%, what those mean?

[4430] SPEAKER_31: So what those mean, the per pupil funding amounts that are set as the target numbers per student, and they vary by grade level, K3, 4, 6, 7, 8, 9, 12. I didn't go into that granular level detail on here. That K3 base number is augmented by 10.4%, which was a number that was just coded in that you will get this additional percentage. the stick that comes with that is you must have grades K through 3 implementing towards getting to 24 to 1 by the time LCFF is fully implemented and we're already at 24 to 1 in our teachers contract with grades K through 3 so we're already there we got ahead of the LCFF funding factor and And we've used some supplemental and concentration money to help pay for that because we wanted to get there early. And so that's been part of what we've done in the LCAP for the past few years. The 2.6% originally was called the CPE Adjustment or the Career Technical Education Adjustment. the legislature removed that name and removed the requirement that funds be particularly dedicated in that area they just said here's a 2.6% bump on the original target number so we only get augmentations on K-3 and 9-12 and so when we go through the rather complicated calculation of getting our LCFF number the targets for those grade level are increased by that amount then we're going to get to the calculation of targets in a minute. If I get too far ahead of the slides I'm going to confuse everybody. We'll get there. Target. So in 2013-14, which was the very first year of the local control funding formula, the state looked back at the prior year, which was 12-13, that last year of our old revenue limit we were in a funding deficit you might remember under the old revenue limit the state would calculate what it's supposed to be with the cola and then say oh we don't have enough money so across the state we're going to deficit it And it started out with really small deficits, and then they got big. First it was a deferral, then it was a real deficit, and then the deficits started compounding. And by the time we got to the LCFF passing, we were at 22.25% of the deficit factor across the state on the revenue limit. Additionally, all the state categorical funds had been deficited 20%. And so, The state looked back to 2007-2008, so that was the last year when there was no deficit. If we took 07-08, we took all these programs, the categoricals and the revenue limit based on their 07-08 funding, rolled them forward with a COLA all the way out into the future or up to the present, that would be what a full funding model would look like. Now, that's not to say that California education was in stellar condition in 07-08. If you'll recall, I believe that year we hit 44th out of the 50 states in funding. And then we proceeded to drop to 49 during the financial crash. But that became sort of the new target number would be what would the world look like if we had the level of funding of 07-08 indexed forward for a COLA all the way to the present? That's how the target number is set. statewide and then they divided it up by the grade levels to set the grade level funding. Now in the so every year since then the target or where we need to go gets adjusted upward by the amount of the COLA. This year was a zero COLA so it stayed flat. so the place where we would go didn't move at all on a per-pupil funding amount so there was a zero COLA this year and for next year right now they're projecting just shy of one and a half percent we say projecting because COLA does not get set until the May revise and it's based on data statewide data that is through the period ending March 31 that gets released in April and then they use it to index the May revise so we'll get the official COLA number when the May revise comes out for next year So in the meantime, because again, just like when it was deficiting the revenue limit, the state didn't have enough money to implement the local control funding formula, they said every year we'll take the money that we are going to give to education and we will build a bridge from here to full funding and we'll take you a percentage of the way across the bridge each year. And so some years, it's been a fairly high percentage. This year was 54% of what remained of the gap. But they re-bench it annually. So for example, if we start at a target of, I'm just going to use a round number here, $50 million was a target. $60 million was a target number. And we don't have enough currently. Your base or your floor number is at about $48,000. You've got a $12,000 gap.

[4740] SPEAKER_31: They would take the $54,000 from the $60,000, take that $16,000, and say we're going to give you, or take that $48,000 from the $60,000, get the $12,000, take half of it, give you $6,000, and say we're going to give you $54,000. Those aren't real numbers. Those are just very rough numbers. That's like crossing multiple years of gap at once. We're getting very close to the end of full implementation, and in the final year, whatever the final year ends up being of the implementation process, we will go 100% across the way to the bridge, because that means we've hit the target and implementation is over, and from that point forward, everything just rolls on a COLA basis. For next year, in the original numbers that we had had prior to the Governor releasing the January budget, the projection for 17-18 was that we were going to have a COLA of about 2.5% and we were going to go 75% of the way across the remaining gap in the bridge. Then, the January budget came out and, surprise, the COLA was down to 1.48% and the travel across the bridge was down 23%. So the amount of funding went down rather dramatically. And that number gets manipulated based on what the state feels it has to do to meet the Prop 98 floor. So if Proposition 98 had gone up to a higher required amount, we might have gone farther across the bridge. But Prop 98 actually came down a little bit from the prior projections, and so they ratcheted things back accordingly. They still say that the gap will be closed in 2021, they still have that built into the multi-year calculator right now, but it's interesting to note, just a little tidbit to have when you're talking to people, the current eighth grade class that we'll promote out of Newark Junior High at the end of this school year has never seen a year of full school funding and neither have any of their younger siblings all the way back to kindergarten. If we get fully implemented in 2021 on time, Their senior year will be the first time that the districts have full funding in their entire educational career. They will have made it all the way through school not having seen one until the year they're about to graduate. That's rather remarkable. And right now, there's a possibility, if the economy slows down much, that we could be pushing that target further up. They could actually make it all the way through school and never see a year of full school funding.

[4877] SPEAKER_37: But there's only 4% left on that gap anyway, so even if it's full funding, we're not talking about much more dollars.

[4882] SPEAKER_31: No, we're not talking about a huge amount of more dollars. In fact, we're going to talk about the bridge now. I don't know if any of you have ever been to Appalachia but I lived there for 12 years and in rural Appalachia we have what we call swinging bridges. Swinging bridges are kind of interesting because they move a lot. Well, the LCFF funding bridge is kind of like a swinging bridge in that it moves and it moves in ways that are somewhat counterintuitive. The goal can go higher but because of decreased enrollment your target number, even though the dollars per pupil is going up, your total dollar of your target can actually go down if the total number of students you're serving goes down. The other piece that gets calculated into that, the floor, which originally was set at a hard number based on funding of 1213, the floor also can be ratcheted down if your number of students is going down. So we've been declining in enrollment in each year since the implementation of LCFF. So we went away across the bridge, and then the target and the bridge both went down. Then we went a little way across the bridge, and then both the target and the bridge and the floor both went down. So we've been moving towards a goal that's been a lower number each year, and the baseline has also been a lower number each year. So as they throw the funding forward, yes, we get a percentage away across that gap on a per-pupil basis, but if the number of pupils goes down enough, to pass the COLA and or the bridge factor or both, we end up in a year of a negative change in the base. And that's what happened in the current school year. We declined enough that even though we had a COLA and a 55% across the bridge funding model, our base funding actually went down. It was only about .15 of a percent, but it went down in real dollars year over year. Next year, it goes down, as you can see, by about $700,000. on the overall funding model. So, yeah. Do you have a question?

[5006] Nancy Thomas: Yeah, the Prop 98 guarantee, what I'm understanding is that there's going to be a, that they give us too much money this year so there's going to be a deferral into next year. Is that Is this a time to ask that question or what that means?

[5022] SPEAKER_31: You can stop for a second and answer a question about deferrals. Deferrals are a little bit of a different animal. They're a bit unique to California. They're actually not really good gaps, so I won't get totally on my accounting high horse about why the state really shouldn't do what they do from an accounting standpoint because they have us treat it one way and they treat it a different way. The state actually, yes, they determined that and There is no such thing technically as an over-appropriation of Prop 98, because Prop 98 is a floor, the way it's written into the code. Frequently, administrations treat it as both a floor and a ceiling, and will say, oh look, the floor is a lower number, therefore we should take money away. Because once Prop 98 closes for a year, that then becomes the new floor. So in an effort not to let the floor get higher than the absolute minimum, it sometimes gets treated like a ceiling. But there's actually no cap on Prop 98 in the code other than the pushing into what's called a type 3 year, which gets determined at the budget level on the front end when there's not enough money to pay for calculation 2. That gets kind of into a really deep conversation of how Prop 98 is calculated, but yes, in the current year, the floor is a little bit lower than what they calculated at budget. And so not to set that floor rolling forward at the number that it would be in the current year, the governor's office has proposed a deferral of about 25% of the June state apportionment to come in July. That is the same tactic that was used several administrations ago when we had the very first, we're gonna move it from June 30 to July 5th. deferral for the month of June payment that launched the process of multiple deferrals and then after the multiple deferrals, some of which went as far as seven or eight months into the new fiscal year, then it became deficits to the revenue limit. So they're starting down that path again, yes, and technically they're doing it because they don't want to call it an appropriation in the current year. Technically, if they haven't appropriated it, we shouldn't be counting it as revenue. It really should fall out of the revenue calculation and actually be a cut. But if they did that, then they'd be announcing to the university we're cutting education each year, and they've been trying not to say that, so they defer it. We book a receivable. They don't book the payable on the state's books. They just appropriate it and pay it in the next school year.

[5174] SPEAKER_27: Thank you.

[5174] SPEAKER_31: A little tricky accounting that goes on at the state level for that. So then with regard to supplemental and concentration, again, the target's moving up, but our population is going down on the concentration piece that our rolling three-year average is dropping. So we're picking up a little bit of supplemental dollars. We're losing some concentration dollars as the number rolls forward. So overall, the LCFF is going down to the tune of about two-thirds of a million dollars next year. Meanwhile, doing absolutely nothing else, our cost of educating students is going up on the natural by about $600,000 just for the change of the rate in STRS. And STRS, as we know, for many, many, many, many, many years was 8.25% on the employer side and 8% on the teacher side. And STRS continued to have significant financial issues coming out of the Great Recession. and began to at last look at whether or not it needed to, and then did in fact begin, start upping the STRS rate. It began a few years ago with a small increment, and then it's been building at 1.85% increase each year on the total payroll. So STRS, which would have been about $2.5 million this year under the old methodology, is almost $4 million in the current year. Next year, instead of $2.5 million, it's going to be about $4.5 million. The following year, instead of $2.6 million, it's going to be $5.1. And the following year, instead of $2.6 million, it's going to be $5.8. That number will increase again to 19.1% in 2020-21. At that point, the SERS Board gains authority to begin indexing the number as needed based on their actuarial study. Up until this legislation passed, that 8.25% was hard-coded into the education code and never changed. Meanwhile, PERS, which has always had flexibility, also ran into some of the same similar issues with regard to the financial crisis. But there's a little-known secret with regard to PERS that's known very well in the school business community, but not in a lot of other places, and that is back in the late 90s and 2000s. when the economy and the dot-com boom, the first huge dot-com boom was going on, PERS actually ended up in a situation where their investments substantially were more than what they needed for the pensions. They were in an overfunded situation, and they actually cut the PERS rate to zero. And so, people were getting benefits, but the state was paying nothing into PERS. Well, when the state figured out that code printing at a rate of zero might give them an opportunity to claw back Prop 98, they came up with the idea of revenue limit recapture. And what they said to the schools is, this actually goes all the way back to the 80s, your rate was 13.02%. We are going to treat you as if the rate is always 13.02%. And as the rate goes down, because PERS is having such a good time, We're going to recapture that savings at the state level and take it away from the revenue limit. We're not going to let you utilize it for other educational purposes. We're going to keep it at the state level. So they built the revenue limit recapture calculation. And the number went gradually from 13, went down, hit zero, then started bouncing back up again. And in 07-08, that last year of full funding, quote unquote, for schools, the rate was at 9.3%. And so the state was still recapturing the remaining 3.7% of the revenue limit on the PERS salaries at that point in time. But that's where the LCFF targets got set. Meanwhile, under the old revenue limit, if the PERS rate had ever crossed back over 13.02%, part of the original legislation that let them take the revenue limit away, made it basically a cost they had to add back to the revenue limit if it ever went back over. They locked it at 13.02. Well, they undid that with the local control funding formula, and conveniently, two years after that, the rate crossed 13.02%. And so now this year, we're at 13.888. So against the 13% number, it's only an increase of about $73,000. But if you look back against the 9% number, it's actually about a $473,000 increase. And then the number is rolling forward. Now, PERS is actually projecting increases that will top out in the 25% range in 2024. So that number is increasing at over 200,000 a year, or 160,000 next year, and then 260,000 the following year, and then continuing at that rate of increase going forward, because it's going up almost 2% next year, and then 2.9% each year thereafter of an increase. So, doing absolutely nothing, our cost to serve the salary schedule, even if we froze step and column for everybody in the district, the cost of every person certificated would go up by 1.85% and every classified person would go up 1.9% next year and then 2.9 every year thereafter that. Those are going to rise on the natural before step and column and before anything else gets calculated and before any other increases are calculated. We've got all those costs rising on the natural and as you saw our revenue to pay for it going down. So that's creating a monster of a problem not just for us but for every district in the state because now that we're starting to project out into these further out years and the rates are starting to compound on top of each other with no revenue on the other side to pay for it, Everyone this year is really beginning to see as they build that third year out that numbers are looking really, really stark across all the districts. And we've had a history in the district of basically flying really, really close to the edge on some budget decisions. In 12-13, the original board approved budget had a million dollar transfer from Fund 17 in it to balance the general fund. And in the end, in that year, the district was really tight in its spending, only transferred $100,000, that was all it was needed to balance the fund, and so the other $900,000 stayed in Fund 17. And things looked good. And then in 13-14, the budget was approved with a million and a quarter transfer in Fund 17. We had settlements in that 13-14 school year that included a retroactive increase to July 1 and an additional increase in April of that year. combined it was about five a little over five and a half percent across all the bargaining units and again spending was held tight in a lot of other areas and so even with the increase we only ended up having to transfer a half a million of that one and a quarter million that was initially budgeted at the beginning of the year and then 14-15 came and 14-15 that was my first year in the district the budget had just been done by Elaine and right before the budget came to the board, or right after the budget, I'm sorry, we had a $3 million budget transfer built into 14-15 and we did give raises that year only to CSCA. It was actually part of the prior agreement. It was already built in and already happened on July 1st, but we also got one time mandated cost money of about $400,000. We didn't use that to augment spending. We used it to help plug and not have to do that $3 million transfer. And in the end, we transferred $2.3 million in 14-15. And then in 15-16, as we were going into budget development, we didn't have to show a transfer from Fund 17 because we got $3.1 million worth of one-time money. So we were basically able to do what we had said Back during that time period, we were keeping all the programs running long enough to see if growth would carry us out of this. And so we utilized the one-time funds. We kept all the holes plugged. We didn't transfer anything out of Fund 17 at all. And we also were able to, with the increase that we also had that year in the LCFF, on top of the one-time money, we were able to utilize that to finish off The NTA agreement, that was when the 4.775 increase was given, 4.45 to CSCA, and we got out of that year and we no longer had the NTA contract, the old contract language, carrying forward. However, when the state released its budget for the following year, mid-year, we had our first warning shot sort of fired across the bow from the state that our LCFF base was going to go down for the first time in 16-17. And then in the May revise, it actually went up slightly, and it looked like we weren't going to go down. And then when the final numbers came out, it turned out it did go down, and indeed it has. But we improved the budget. We had that huge transfer built into the budget because it was replacing all that one-time money that went away. And the board had said at budget adoption, we don't want to do this. We want to minimize as much as possible how much we have to transfer out of this. We did end up getting some one-time additional mandated cost money of about 1.2 million. So we're utilizing that to help plug the hole. And as of today, we've transferred only a million out of Fund 17, just over a million. And right now, and we've kept spending very, very slow, it does not project in the cash flow right now that we need to pull anything out of Fund 17 for the rest of the year. Hopefully, that will continue to make it run true through June. But as of right now, that's how the projections in the cash flow are looking. So it looks like we'll be able to hold on to the rest of that to, going into next year, but we are utilizing up all of the other one-time money and making sure that we can minimize what we have to do out of Fund 17. So now we get to Fund 17-18, where we suddenly have, well not suddenly, we've had a building sort of rolling issue for a while, where next year the mandate money is projected to drop by another million dollars to $270,000. So that one-time sort of life support that we've had is going away for the most part. And so even with the reduced spending that we have had in the current year and projecting that to continue going forward, we have the decrease in our base funding, the decrease in the mandated cost reimbursements, the additions in STRS and PERS, we are creating a wider and wider gap that we're having to fill as we go into next year's budget, which We've now projected forward by rolling 18-19 into 19-20 based on where we were at the second interim report to see what that number looks like going forward. Now, in this projection, there are no transfers from Fund 17 so that we can sort of get our arms around the enormity of what does our deficit spending problem look like if we do nothing with Fund 17 going forward. And so, we project a deficit at this time averaging $4.3 million each year for the next three years. It's about 4.3, then 4.6, and then drops to 4.0 in 19-20. The reason 19-20 drops in the amount of the deficit is because revenue starts to pick up because we're actually projected to gain students in 19-20 over 18-19, and there is actually a COLA and a funding target in the current DOF project, Department of Finance projection, that shows us gaining positive revenue to the tune of a couple million dollars. So enough to cover the big jump in STRS and PERS and leave a few hundred thousand dollars left. It would decrease that deficit. But in the end, doing absolutely nothing and transferring nothing from Fund 17, the third year out, not for the second interim but going forward into the new budget year, the new third year out, we'd be at about negative 12.5 million in comparison to where we need to be. We need to be at at least 2.1 million to cover the 3% minimum reserve. So to figure out what is the deficit we take a look at our next three years projected deficits with no contributions coming in from Fund 17 and we see it averages out to be about 4.31 million or 4.32 million. Now, we do have money in Fund 17, so I'm not coming to you saying we need to identify $4.3 million cuts right this second going forward for the rest of time ongoing, but we have to have it on our radar because we no longer can rely on money from the state to be what's going to potentially help us to rebalance everything. We've had a a projection of the $3 million plus deficit that goes back several years now, and we've found ways to creatively get ourselves out of it, utilizing one-time money, minimizing other spending, and transferring things around. But we did transfer $2.3 million a few years ago, and we're back in a situation where large transfers would be needed if we don't do more to identify ways that we can rein in spending, because the statutory increases in our expenses are growing faster than we can keep up with them because revenue isn't going up to cover them. And we just don't have any other mechanism out there at this time that allows us to say, yeah, we can index forward and we can cover all the STRS and PERS increases because we just don't have that built into our budget. And we don't have additional one-time funding other than that $272,000 that we're projecting that we can use. So then we think of the question, okay, well, we know we transferred some of the money from Russia in defense 17. We could have used that as a backstop. That was true for that very limited window of time. If you'll recall, the board meeting where we approved the transfer was the last board meeting where we could do it to get the paperwork in time to the state allocation board to get to their last board meeting before the window closed. We were actually one of four districts that got approved on the last day of the state allocation board. to do any of those kinds of transfers. So that window is now closed, unless the state ever reopens it. Even if we were to do something else and decide we were going to sell a property, that money would go into Fund 40, the special reserve for capital outlay, but it would not be available to go into Fund 17, which allows us to transfer to cover operating tech expenses. So the next several slides are various different kinds, and no, none of these are things that I'm bringing forward and saying I recommend that we do these things, but these are all different things. I wanted to look at how do we cover the deficit with as many different possible ways to look at it to help people kind of understand the scope of what it would look like, and then we can lead into a conversation about what we actually can do going forward. So one cost that I had Carol from position control work with me on helping us develop is, what does a one-day work year reduction look like across all of the unrestricted and partially restricted general funds? Because savings in unrestricted or partially restricted fall to the unrestricted bottom line and help us cover the deficit. It's about $265,000 a day. So to cover the shortfall, we'd have to reduce Everybody gets paid out of any part of the unrestricted general fund by 16 and a third days per year. Now we just had a conversation earlier about the fact that we have 186 teacher days and 180 student days and those 180 days are in the statute. So getting minus 16.3 is impossible for the overwhelming majority of our employees because we would not be able to serve students 180 days. But it helps us see the scope of the problem. It's almost 10% of the school year. So it's not surprising to see the next slide when we say, okay, what if it was a 1% reduction in salary across the board? What would that look like? In the unrestricted and partially restricted general funds, it's $469,000. It would take the equivalent of a 9.2% salary reduction to plug that average hold for the next three years. Now, keep in mind, going on forward out of that, you'd expect that that number to jump another 1.85 for Certificated and 2.9 for Classified, because the serves and purse increases go on beyond the three years of the current multi-year projection. So then the next question was, well, what if we pass a parcel tax? A lot of districts up in Contra Costa County, where I used to live, several of the districts up there in the central part of the county have rather large parcel taxes. just to cover our average shortfall and continue operating as we've been would require a $334 per parcel, parcel tax to cover that 4.3 million. And that is just taking, if it was a flat per parcel, I didn't try recalculating it as a per square foot or any of the other kind of creative ways that other districts have done their parcel taxes. I just called the county and said, I need to know exactly how many parcels we have in the city of Newark right now so that I can do a calculation. to see what that would look like to raise $4.3 million, how much would I need. So they gave me the breakdown by type of taxable parcel, gave me the total number of parcels that we have currently, it's 12,933, and that's how much it works out to per parcel. And then I looked at the question, it's been the third rail question since before I got here, but I got asked about it shortly after I arrived, and that's we'll let them close the school because we're down in enrollment. And people think close the school, I get all the savings of the cost of that school, and I can apply it to the bottom line. That's what I like to call the myth of school closure, because it doesn't work that way, because the students don't evaporate, and they still need to be served. So while people might think you close your two schools, and you've got $5.07 million in savings. You've just covered the $4.93 million, or $4.3 million. You've got $700,000 left, and things look really good. The problem is the costs don't go away. When you actually close a school, you lose very little in comparison to the cost of running that school. You, if you don't have to move the copier over to follow the students to the other school because it has enough capacity with its existing system, you can save the utilities for running the school, the copier lease for that school. You can save the cost of an administrator, the cost of the office staff, the cost of the day and night custodian. And that's basically it. Everything else that the schools spend in the Unrestricted General Fund is stuff that's directly going to students. And the cost of serving those students will follow those students to their new home school and continue to be operating. The teachers, the instructional assistants, all of the other instructional supplies and other instructional things are all done on a per-pupil basis. They will follow the students to the new school. So what you end up saving in a school closure is between $400,000 and $500,000. That number, interestingly enough, It's about the same number it was when we did this projection when I was at West Contra Costa Unified at the very beginning of my education career. The number was about $400,000 a campus and it's now between 430 and 450. It hasn't gone up that much. But we actually looked at that when we did close the school in that district several years ago. But does it do nothing? No, it doesn't do nothing. It does do something. It covers about 10% of the deficit per school. But in today's environment in California, it comes with an extra risk. And the risk is what the charter school risk. And not just charter schools though, but there's other entities as well. The code has always required that we make vacant sites available to other governmental entities first. Then when charter schools came into being, the code was amended and basically we had to offer them to any charter schools that were operating within the district that are serving at least 80 students. district students. And what then began to happen is charters that didn't exist yet started laying claim or parents began creating conversion charters during a school's last year of operations if it was slated to close and then laying claim to the site and operating it as a charter school there and then exacerbating the district's decline in enrollment. We do know that the City of Newark staff has actually been in contact with the Charter School in Hayward about adding a location in Newark, specifically in Area 3, and I got wind of this because I happened to find out from a consultant who was working with us that also happens to work with the Charter School, who was surprised to hear about it. We now know, and so we're realizing that we may very well be dealing with some competition right here in Newark with regard to charter schools that we've not had to deal with up until now, but we need to think about the potential for that as we're looking at how we're utilizing our sites. Additionally, if charters were to get into one of our sites, we're very limited on what we can charge them with regard to use of sites because, again, if they have at least 80 district students, then we're required by the code to provide what they call comparable facilities to what we provide to our students so it can create a snowball effect with regard to potential issues. Another area that we were asked to look at was consulting contracts and what do we spend money on for consultants in the district and so I pulled them by major type and put them in descending dollar amount order for the purposes of this slide because and for unrestricted I included the partially restricted in this because again savings there generate savings to the unrestricted general fund Not surprising, the largest number is the non-public school costs. Now, it's a big number for us. It's $800,000. We actually don't have that high of an NPS cost. We have very few NPS students in this district. It's just that they are our most difficult cases, and they generate very expensive placements. Otherwise, we really try hard not to place in NPSs because the cost is just so high. It's a special ed group. Yeah, special education, non-public school. The next largest contract is the special ed transportation piece. Now you'll recall back in an earlier slide you saw that transportation funding was locked at $311,000 permanently going forward. Our current special ed transportation contract is about $497,000. And even though that's more than the amount of the transportation revenue in the district, all in all it's stayed far more competitive than some of our neighboring districts that were in that JPA that we used to be in for transportation. they're finding costs are spiking much more dramatically. We were actually transporting very few in the agency that dissolved, and we've managed to keep fairly flat with our other provider. We do have contracts for speech and ideology because we have a very difficult time filling our speech therapist positions. We have some other special education specialized contracts for areas where we don't have staff. Ed Services has a couple hundred thousand contracts. We have about 208,000 in legal. Now that is just legal in the Unrestricted and Partially Restricted General Fund. It does not include legal expenses related to the other funds of the district, which all bear their own costs.

[6617] SPEAKER_30: So we're talking about that's legal related to Special Ed?

[6622] SPEAKER_31: Yes, it would include general education, special education, personnel, anything that's part of the Unrestricted General Fund or Special Ed or Routine Restricted Maintenance. Things that are not included are legal expenses related to the construction funds, because those are borne by the construction funds, or the capital facilities fund, because that's borne by that fund. The sites have some educational consulting contracts combined, about $101,000. We have the attention to attendance contracts, about $38,000. We have contract service for home and hospital students, $19,000. Medi-Cal contract, which I believe is for $19,000. Our mandated cost contract with SINA for $16,000. Our videographer is about $8,000. Our vision screening consultant is $7,500. We paid the county $5,000 for the pony and we got a bunch of little ones that add up to another $137,000. So then we looked at what would additional across-the-board cuts look like. We've already built into the multi-year projection.

[6684] SPEAKER_25: Sorry, I want to go back. You said the pony? What is that?

[6687] SPEAKER_31: That's the county inter-office mail service. The county office of Ed runs an inter-office mail service. In my last project. The county runs an inter-district, inter-county office mail service and they charge all the districts in the county. And so we looked at, what about everything that isn't people? We did an across the board cut. What would things look like? So overall, this is inclusive of what you saw on the previous screen as far as, but the one thing I did subtract out was utilities. Because I can't just say I'm going to cut 10% of utilities because I can't control PG&E. And I can't control Alameda County Water District. I can do what I can to conserve. And we've been doing a lot of work with Prop 39 funds to cut electric and water usage. But I can't say that I can get them to cut their rates by 10%. I don't have that kind of negotiating power. But when we look at the rest, our operating budget for those was about $6.3 million. We're projected in the current year to spend about $5.3 million. So we aren't fully spending what the operating budgets are. And we project our spending, and we've found what it's been, in the current year rolling forward. So we've already shaved almost a million dollars a year out of those in the projections going forward. However, we could still, I mean, we can tighten, tighten, tighten, but eventually we're going to get to a point where we're going to run into some issues with Williams if we don't have enough instructional supplies. And that's actually a challenge that we're having now, is we're starting to meet challenges with regards to making sure we have adequate textbooks and or electronic equipment for the purposes of instruction, because we've been really tight for several years, ever since the state categorical for textbooks went away. Yes, Jan?

[6800] SPEAKER_30: You didn't put utilities down there, but I'd be interested to know what the total is versus what could be done with solar. Because we do have capital money, and this is one way of cutting down the running expenses using capital money as a source. There are many school districts that have taken capital money and put covers over all the parking area.

[6821] SPEAKER_31: I actually have some information with regard to solar that I just received. We actually had some estimations done. It wasn't with regard to the district issuing its own capital dollars to do it because we're, the bond funds are being spent now already and not anticipating that we'd be running out for another bond necessarily, but I do have some information on that that we'll be bringing forward at a future board meeting. I just got it from the consultants a couple days ago, so it's not part of this presentation tonight, but I do have some information to share with the board on that, and yes, it is something that we are looking into. So when you're looking at the interim report, there's the original budget, which was the one that came in June. There's the revised budget or the current operating budget. That's column two. Projected totals is where we adjust column two. And I look at, how is our spending pattern going? What do I project we're actually going to spend for the year? That's the projected totals number.

[6881] Nancy Thomas: Are those dollars that we're saving to do a, you know, you know doing some kind of a adoption in math or language arts.

[6894] SPEAKER_31: It's not related to one of those specific things but it could be something that some of the sites may be doing with their own because this is looking over the entire district both site level and central funds with regard to where expenditure projections are coming in compared to where the budgets are set in those account code types. This is a very high level number across all of unrestricted We have to drill into individual numbers to be able, and by site, to be able to answer that question. So we're getting now toward the end of the presentation portion of this, as we talk about things to talk about going forward. We've got some significant challenges, and we want to talk about strategies to help address our growing deficit. because our STRS and PERS rates, as I mentioned earlier on in the presentation, are going to continue to rise at about a million dollar a year clip through 21, and thereafter are going to continue to rise at a number we just don't know, because we know PERS is going to continue through 24, but when the STRS Board gains its authority to raise rates in 21, we don't know what will happen, because it'll depend on how successful they've been on managing their investments between now and then and what their new actual growth schedule looks like. Of course, growth will help us, but At this point, I don't see us growing fast enough to fill a hole that's 9% of the budget. So that's going to be the big challenges. We don't have that kind of growth at that pace to just say, oh, we can rely on growth and just tweak some numbers in the third year out on the revenue side and we'll be OK. It just isn't realistic. But we're not alone. Los Angeles Unified, and I don't know what my counterpart in Los Angeles is doing right now with a $1.6 billion negative ending balance in the third year of their projection. They sent 1,600 layoff notices out to their administration, 300 to the central office staff. I haven't seen the number with regard to other types of staff. Those are the only two numbers I've seen published so far in the Times. Montebello Unified, much smaller than LA but still much bigger than us, has a $17 million shortfall, and they're cutting 333 positions. because they're in a very, very tight cash situation in Montebello. Fremont, Ralph came out with his presentation recently. Originally, his number was about $28 million. He's now ratcheted it down to $23 million that they need to cut next door. And Hayward just cut $28.25 FTE and still has a $4 million shortfall that they're dealing with as well. And what's interesting with Hayward, Hayward is 80% plus free and reduced lunch and English learners. So they have a huge amount of supplemental concentration. And even with that, they're still finding themselves dealing with a rather significant shortfall. So moving forward, I don't think we're going to resolve everything tonight. If someone's got a magic wand, I can't wait to see it. It's probably really cool. But I have a feeling we're going to need to talk more. I'd like to hear from the board about additional data points, whatever other analysis you'd like Kim and I to put together that we can other ways you'd like us to look at things in the budget bringing things forward so we can have additional discussions and what types of things you'd like to see crafted into new budget scenarios so that we can roll those forward and see what the multi-year projection looks like with them and I'm gonna stop talking for a while because it sounds like I'm about to lose my voice anyway and let the board start asking questions. I've got a water bottle with me.

[7103] SPEAKER_30: under edge on page 29 by 29 talking about unrestricted consulting contracts what are the ed services of 214,000 what particular what specific kinds of things are there I'm going to grab my laptop to drill down into that information to give you that little detail let us let us capture that

[7129] SPEAKER_21: and then we'll provide it and bring it to the next study session so we don't miss anything. Because I don't want to just say it here and then we lose it. So, Ken, were you capturing that?

[7139] SPEAKER_37: You know, slide 30, when you have the 4.2 for the non-utility services and other operating expenses, if we can break that out also, that's a huge. Break out slide 30? I mean, what constitutes that 4.2 of 95 million dollars. And then also, maybe for continued conversation, because I think if, let's say we don't do anything, right, and the projections hold true, what's the certification come next, first interim?

[7175] SPEAKER_31: Negative? Next first interim, we would be, well, we'd definitely be qualified. Whether or not we're negative looks at something different. It looks at when we're going to run out of cash. of right now I would say it's possible that we would very well be negative but it could be right on the edge depending on where things are looking between Fund 1 and Fund 17 we might still be qualified and then by second we could actually be negative just depending on how the projections are rolling out.

[7204] SPEAKER_37: And then from a macro level I think from your interim report we're at 86 or 87% of our total expenditures are in salaries and benefits. That's correct. So really when it comes down to what you can really cut without negotiating at the table is that 13 to 14%, right? And then we're facing a 9% total cut of our budget to make good, so to speak. So yeah, it's going to be difficult.

[7242] Nancy Thomas: Or just to add a corollary, if we were to cut, we would cut without negotiating, but we'd be devastated if we had to cut our non-bargaining unit positions. We're already kind of slim, I think, at the district level with staffing.

[7266] SPEAKER_37: I think also maybe to bring back for the next discussion is the revenue sources that are coming in. Whether it's the intraditional or potential. Whether it's service use. I'm not talking about what we're getting, but potentially what we can get through that. Facility use agreements. If And I know we discussed the potential early retirement incentive programs, whether that would net me kind of savings. And I mean, I think altering the, every board, and I'll speak for myself on this, is that we want to stay away from layoffs. If at all possible, that should be the absolute last resort. And I think in the slides that you mentioned as far as the number of work days and the percent cut and how we need the 9.2% cut and all that, I think there's got to be a wide-ranging type of approach where we're taking, you know, one aspect of each component and not necessarily do a total you know, tackle on a particular area. And then hopefully we can get there that way. We're kind of, you know, adding a little bit of revenue, taking a little bit from here and negotiating a little bit from here and try and make a whole. And then with that, I know there's been some staffing efficiencies. with our new FTE model this year as well. And so if we can reflect that on the next conversation as far as, because that's going to impact, you know, the multi-year projections and how much we're going to spend. I don't know if that was reflected on your presentation or not.

[7369] SPEAKER_31: Maybe it's already incorporated in the multi-year projections. It was in there.

[7374] Nancy Thomas: What are the FTE efficiencies?

[7377] SPEAKER_31: As far as adjusting the staffing to deal with the declining enrollment. Okay. That was already built into the multi-year projection and then adding back as students increase over the out years it's also already built into the multi-year projection.

[7391] Nancy Thomas: Can you share the data you know in terms of the growth? One of the things that I learned today is that Fremont is experiencing 700 students per year over the next four years increase each year. They have a lot of development, we do too, but they're about five times our size so if you take their 700 and you transfer that to our size of a district you know we could say okay we're about 140 or 150 students maybe that we could count on growth with all of our development.

[7430] SPEAKER_31: Based on the information in the last demographic study which we are having updated For the upcoming school year, based on houses that are currently finalizing and people actually moving into now, it's projected about 55. That number is projected to go up this school year from last year with only nine. So it is jumping, but it lags. So it usually lags by a full school year from when people, almost a full school year from when people move in. So it is starting and it is in the projection, but It's not the clip, because as you know, Fremont's been building for years and years and years, so we're not quite to that clip yet.

[7466] Nancy Thomas: So maybe trying to get those numbers more solid based on our demographic study that we're going to be doing?

[7473] SPEAKER_37: We're in the process of updating it now. So just to clarify, I know there, and you said the efficiency and staffing, and we're talking specifically about Grader, that was probably the most important, right? Through that reorganization that we would save 10 FTEs. Has that already been applied? or is that not yet applied into the multi-year?

[7493] SPEAKER_31: No, it's in the multi-year for next year as far as the reductions of some of those positions are already incorporated. Yes, it's not.

[7500] SPEAKER_37: Okay, fine. So there's no more savings through that strategy or any other staffing formula strategy at this point, right?

[7511] SPEAKER_31: Not based on our current projection of number of students and our current staffing model numbers that are in the contract on per class size.

[7519] Ray Rodriguez: are we at the maximum when it comes to you know how many students you know per classroom?

[7527] SPEAKER_31: That's what we're talking about with the staffing ratio we're we benchmarked next year's projected staffing levels based on maximizing to the extent that we can the classrooms based on the numbers that are in the contract by type of section it varies in the contract by grade level for the lower grades and then by subject matter in the upper grades.

[7549] Ray Rodriguez: And I know that when we decided to reduce class size to K-3, that was something that we were excited about at that time. Is that a negotiated piece if we were to have to change that?

[7566] SPEAKER_31: Everything with regard to class sizes is a negotiable item.

[7569] Ray Rodriguez: So where are we with K-3 right now?

[7572] SPEAKER_31: We've been at 24 to 1 for a couple of years now.

[7576] SPEAKER_30: How much do we pay additionally for that we're not reimbursed? What cost is that reduced class size for K-3? What does it cost the district?

[7590] SPEAKER_31: It's in the vicinity of three quarters of a million dollars a year. we're paying for that with supplemental concentration dollars because we go right into the LCAP and we would utilize that to cover with the grade K-3 class size adjustment because it's not fully a target what it doesn't cover we backfill with supplemental concentration for the implementation. So that's a push. So if we were out with 30 and that's when we lose the funding? Yes and no. I mean if we went above we could potentially lose the funding yes however if you negotiate different number with your bargaining unit then you gain additional flexibility but right now our negotiated agreement already has us at 24 to 1 so if we were to go higher one we would have to negotiate anything which we would have to do anyway but two it would free up funding but the funding it would free up first would be the supplemental concentration funding which we could still use for other goals of the district that can meet the needs of our students It just would be yet another one of those goals.

[7647] SPEAKER_30: So the state requirement then is based on your contract. It's not based on a set formula.

[7651] SPEAKER_31: It's based on a set formula unless you've negotiated something different in your contract. So the state formula says you must get a certain percentage of the way to 24 to 1. Right. The district actually negotiated something different in the contract but it didn't negotiate taking longer to implement. It actually negotiated going shorter to implementation and we negotiated actual numbers that went from 27 to 6 to 5 to 4 in four consecutive years and now we've been at 24.

[7678] SPEAKER_30: We can't go back on that, does it? Again, it's negotiable, we would have to go back.

[7684] SPEAKER_31: So it is negotiable. Yeah, we have to negotiate something. Now, once we go to full implementation, then it becomes a flat-out 24 anyway under the LCFF. When is the full implementation? It's estimated to be in 2020, 2021.

[7699] SPEAKER_25: I also want to make sure in terms of just noting philosophically that as we just had the academic presentation in terms of the data, that that's also important. If we want to improve as a district in terms of test scores and those types of things, that's important because we can't lose sight of our mission, which is to serve the students. So I think that I know it's hard discussions. I just want to make sure that we don't jump to automatically increasing student or classroom size. as a way because then we are affecting, we're directly affecting the students in that way. So we just have to think, so my thoughts are in terms of the scenarios is, I think I kind of explained this last time, but I just want to reiterate that it would be providing two or three or however many scenarios you want, but it would be kind of providing different options of like, more aggressive cuts versus less aggressive cuts and then kind of mapping it out to, so we can start the discussion based off of that. But I also think it would be good, and I don't know if this runs parallel to negotiations piece, but it's important to connect with the bargaining units to make sure that it's not just this is what we're doing just because the board wants to, but we're engaging the community as well.

[7787] Ray Rodriguez: So, thank you. Because when we decided to reduce class size, especially in K-3, it was because of that, the academic thing on it. There was also a piece for 9th grade at that particular time. Is that gone, or?

[7808] SPEAKER_31: Morgan Hart's been gone for a long time. It was gone even before things were rolled into the LCFF.

[7814] Ray Rodriguez: That's too bad because we can use it. Great. So you said that it's going to be fully implemented around 2021 and it's going to be 24 to 1 at that point?

[7826] SPEAKER_31: For K-3, that's what's built into the LCFF on the natural. What's unclear is whether or not you can still negotiate a higher number after full implementation of the LCFF.

[7834] Ray Rodriguez: So when are we going to lose all the money where the state doesn't give us any money at all? Or is that something for having, you know, lower class size K-3?

[7844] SPEAKER_31: Okay, so the way that the law works currently is if you are above the rate of implementation to get to 24 to 1. It's not actually 24 to 1 right now for anybody. It was based on wherever you were in the first year of LCFF, based on the percentage of the funding gap that gets funded each year, you had to make progressive implementation towards 24 to 1. It's measured at a school site by school site level. If a school goes over, the district can lose all of its class size reduction portion of the LCFF funding formula for the entire district. So that's the way the penalty is built. It's a rather draconian penalty. Currently, we're well under because we're capped at 24 itself, and our grade level combinations are two students below that, so they're at 22. So we're well under the 24 to 1 currently, so we're not really at risk losing that funding unless we were to up it pretty sizably, because we're averaging between 22 and 23 at most campuses right now. There's a few that are over 23, but nobody's over 24.

[7918] SPEAKER_21: So part of what our intent was tonight was to set the foundation and have these foundational pieces understood before we go into the next phase, which will be crafting scenarios. And I really do agree with what has been said, especially relative to it's going to be a combination of things and I think what I'm kind of getting the sense from the board is let's look at everything and exhaust everything away from classroom support and I think the other part that we did talk about that is something that you did bring into the scenarios is the question of the reserves and is that that's part of the solution as well that we have to look at over time over three years, over four years, whatever that's going to look like as we begin building scenarios. I'm hoping that we can, I'm shooting for no more than three scenarios, at least to bring initially, to have you guys look at, react, kind of process. And we definitely will capture what you guys have asked for, at least for additional information for that next session. But we need more time on this, and I think that's kind of where I want to go next is and I don't know if now's the time to talk about it but I think if we could set another date I would love to see some time with you guys on this topic before April 4th so we can go deeper into scenarios but given us still a little bit of time to build some scenarios I know Brian and I haven't had time to really sit down and you know I'm sitting here taking notes and building somewhat of a framework of what are all the elements that we can adjust and squeeze and how does it look like over 3-4 years I think that's kind of what I'm hoping to put in front of you guys and you know how do we tweak a little bit from everything instead of attacking a couple areas heavily. But is there a time or a date or a half a day that we can commit to if we could have full staff here and we could still have at least a couple hours. In my wish list if we could have four hours together just to go on budget study and go to that next steps that we described here, it would be very helpful, but it's really up to the board when and how we can do that.

[8064] Ray Rodriguez: You decided that we might get together with the people that are really going to be affected by it, our bargaining employees, where we brainstorm. And so the community has an idea of what's going on. It just makes it easier if people understand what's happening.

[8089] SPEAKER_21: We've been in close communication with our unions. I know that some of it we can't do in this forum. I've had close conversations with both union leaderships, all three union leadership. I really think that what I'm taking away tonight that is really the big thing we need all employees to understand is that increasing enrollment is a really critical goal that the board has identified. I mean, no matter what happens, I think You know, I heard today that some districts just by doing some advertising had a bump in enrollment. And that helps. How we promote ourselves and how we have some brochures for developers helps. I mean, yes, projections are going to stay true unless we do something additionally. I think marketing, rebranding, some of those pieces are really critical. Telling the story about what's right in our data is going to be critical. So I think it's going to be a combination of things. But I really believe that Once we have an idea of what scenarios could be like, I think that, again, we would invite all of our units to participate or certainly attend our next study session. I think it's really important right now, as superintendent, it feels like we've kind of kicked this can down the road. the last few years and I think now we're getting to a place where we have to do something about it but we don't have to do everything in this year so we still have some room and it's not my favorite plan to say we might have to touch reserves but if we have a plan to get off of that I think that's better than saying we're not going to touch it at all because those numbers are really scary to me and I think they're scary to our employees so that's about as much as I could talk about in this forum but I could tell you that I've shared the same kind of philosophy with union leadership, and I think that no one's really interested in impacting classes until its last possible resort. So I think two things that we leave for the end, after we exhaust all the other categories, all the other areas where we can tighten, the last thing to look at is class size and reserves. I think that's kind of how a triage, in my mind, how we'd approach this problem. Well that's yeah at this point I don't even know if I want that on the table. Hopefully we don't have to get to that.

[8246] Ray Rodriguez: You know at the workshop that we had we talked about the district promoting being a district of choice and also open borders. You know as far as you know we have a process for people to transfer their students from let's say another school district to here you know maybe they just like the MCA program at the high school or whatever so I was hoping that at some point you can kind of bring that forward so that we have a better idea on how to do that.

[8285] SPEAKER_21: Yeah we are I've been talking and asking around and you know willing to run a bus to Fremont and shuttle kids over but now we do need to look at some real creative ways to one of my conversations with staff today at Lincoln Elementary was there's concern about creating competition between schools and people just go where they want and I kind of said to them it's already happening this is already happening our new clientele has means they have opportunity of resources they'll drive their kids to the school they want so school choice is kind of happening anyway but we have to figure out you know do we centralize registration so families have one-stop shop and We register them all in one spot. But those are all, I think those are all secondary. I think those are other pieces that we're going to have to do after we kind of get some of these things settled.

[8342] SPEAKER_37: We shouldn't rely on those. We should just count those as bonuses.

[8345] SPEAKER_21: Yeah, if we can beat the clock, we plan for the worst, we hope for the best. And if we can beat the projections, I really want to beat those projections. even if it's by 20 kids or 30 kids I think that's just something worthwhile and I think that my sense from union leadership who's here and they can speak for themselves is they also are understanding the urgency around enrollment and I think that's something we need that's the part I think we really can partner on how do we go forward how do we all talk as employees about how great our district is and how do we get on the same page about how we do customer service and you know I still believe that and it was mentioned earlier that first best instruction is the best thing we can do for everything that raises all votes and having teachers I'd like to look at reducing the number of days that teachers have to be out for training and if they do get to go out they get to go and there's also some solutions within how do we look at the next calendar how do we build it into the calendar so maybe there's a full day once a month That's a training day for all employees. I currently don't have time to train classified or other employee groups that need additional training. So I think those are some things we've got to work on for next year.

[8425] Nancy Thomas: If we are actually a district of choice, you know, for example, we have up to 23% of students in one attendance area going outside of that attendance area. Can we do some kind of an analysis of the capacity in our schools? And which schools are magnets, especially for new development?

[8447] SPEAKER_37: Yeah, yes. But I think that's going down a different path, right? Because District of Choice, with just our kids migrating within our territories, doesn't increase our funding in any way or decrease our funding in any way. So we're kind of shuffling cards from that perspective.

[8464] Nancy Thomas: But I would say that if we get our capture rates from the New Demographic Study, maybe we could get some kind of an indication of the new developments and where children in those new developments might, where they might make a choice outside of school, which would be losing kids.

[8483] SPEAKER_21: Let me just say this before I forget it. I think we really, district of choice, the intent that I think behind it is, yes, a kid, a family doesn't want to go to school A, but doesn't want to go to school B, should be able to do that, because I'd rather them stay within the district than have them choose out. So that's one piece. But we need more study. We need the demographer to come in and give us a little more data on what that is. But we are getting out of the budget realm back into strategy.

[8518] SPEAKER_25: But I think that's a parallel track in terms of, so you do work focused on the budget, but parallel, you do that piece in terms of, so maybe that is something if you want to tie it, would be then the marketing plan essentially of how you're doing that to show Newark is the one-stop shop to be in terms of the school district. So identifying, highlighting things like the small classroom size is a huge positive. It's just we just need to market it. But that would be parallel, I think, because it's not going to It's more for the long term for the future. And I also want to know, because I'm one of the board members who are always talking about in terms of not dipping into reserves and having a... fiscally sound budget so that we sustain. So I'm okay with, I'm going to put that, I'm okay with dipping into reserves. I just want to make sure that because it's reserves, we understand that it's not sustainable so that, like you said, if we kick the can down the road, we can't use reserves as a way to just like supplement the funds. We have to actually decrease the amount and then use the reserves so that it has a smaller impact.

[8597] SPEAKER_37: I think if you use the reserves, we're going to exhaust the reserves.

[8601] SPEAKER_25: Exactly. That's my point. That's my point.

[8606] SPEAKER_37: I think your point about the parallel tracks is correct where, you know, whether it's open choice district, hope for enrollment, hope for one-time money from the state, hope for, et cetera, et cetera. We operate that with that hope, but we can't plan and operate our district based on that hope, right? If that hope comes to fruition, then great. That's a bonus. And we can add service, et cetera, with that goal.

[8629] Terrence Grindall: Yeah, we still have to make tough choices now.

[8631] SPEAKER_37: Yeah, we need to work also on this track as far as what can we do to bring in additional revenue. Right. What can we do to reduce costs and create savings, right? So we're going to operate as if we're not going to get any of that other element.

[8646] SPEAKER_21: And I really think the marketing track, if you will, is exactly where we partner with our association. I think that's when we can have a common, like, ad hoc committee to work on, let's come up with some strategies, some ideas, how we can work with those groups to really partner. And including, you know, the city and other partners that we work with. I just, I think I'm preparing to drop off a bunch of brochures to each of the developers. of when the standing school tours are, how to call to make tours, principals tell me they're getting more tour requests. So that's kind of, we got to do that anyway. But I think for now, I think we have a pretty good feel for what the scenarios are. I think I'd like to get us back to, can we get a date or a time for our next study session? That would be very helpful.

[8697] SPEAKER_25: I did want to make, sorry, one last thing, and then we'll get to that. So we just, as part of this, we need to have part of the discussion in terms of the Area 3-4 school because that's moving forward and I know it might not be a three-year plan but it could affect whether or not in terms of the long-term piece of the budget because we don't want to forget that because that could be potential enrollment or increasing enrollment by having a new school there and the people in the new development go into that particular school. So that, but that is long-term planning. Five, seven years. I just don't want to.

[8736] SPEAKER_37: So our next board meeting is the fourth. And so you want it to be the week before that, prior to that. It's possible if you can find some time. The 28th is that Tuesday before that.

[8746] Ray Rodriguez: What is the?

[8746] SPEAKER_37: You mean the Tuesdays?

[8748] Ray Rodriguez: Yeah. Yeah, I can't do the week before that. That would be next week. Basically, yeah.

[8752] SPEAKER_30: Yeah. We've got measures this weekend.

[8757] SPEAKER_21: Do you want to maybe do one for the day of the 4th? I don't know if that helps.

[8762] SPEAKER_37: You mean extend the 4th meeting?

[8765] SPEAKER_21: Maybe start sooner? Either start sooner and publish it. If we could start like, I don't know if any, I know some of you can't get out that early, but if that, if you know soon enough that you could be here like, I don't know, 3 or 2 or 4, that helps.

[8779] SPEAKER_25: No pressures, Frankie. What the hell are you talking about?

[8786] SPEAKER_37: I could be flexible at that time, yeah.

[8790] Ray Rodriguez: Maybe four.

[8790] SPEAKER_21: And if you want to just process this tonight and let Patty know in the morning. We're so close.

[8795] SPEAKER_37: We're waiting on your discount. Keep the pressure on.

[8798] SPEAKER_25: Keep the pressure on. Patty. So I could do four. I'm OK with four. I could do four. I don't know if I could do two on that particular date.

[8808] SPEAKER_37: I mean, four is good, because it's two hours, right? OK. Normally we start at six. So let's start at four. OK. And then when we review the agenda for next time, we'll make sure that just the essentials are on there and things that can wait, we can push it away a little bit.

[8823] Nancy Thomas: We're going to wait until 4 in the afternoon to do this? No, no, no. Oh, I'm sorry. On the next meeting, on the 4th. On the 4th. April 4th. We'll start earlier in the day.

[8832] SPEAKER_21: We'll start at 4 o'clock. We'll do business earlier and then have a longer study session after the business. Kind of what I'm hearing. Start at 4.

[8839] SPEAKER_30: How much time do we figure we need?

[8842] SPEAKER_21: I'd like at least a couple more hours. That gives us time to put together a series.

[8845] SPEAKER_37: Four to six would get us. So do you guys want to do the study session at the very beginning then? Yeah, sure. And then do the regular board meeting.

[8852] SPEAKER_30: That's fine too. I think the board meeting needs to start.

[8854] SPEAKER_21: I'd like to not contaminate the study session with anything else if possible. Okay.

[8860] SPEAKER_25: Let's try it that way and see how it works. I could do the 31st, which is next Friday. Yeah, I can. 31st? Is it coming Friday?

[8868] SPEAKER_30: I have to work.

[8873] Ray Rodriguez: If we do the fourth, can we do closed session 6.30 to 7, so then we'll have from 4 to 6.30.

[8883] SPEAKER_37: And then regular at 7.

[8888] Ray Rodriguez: Nancy's going to have a heart attack because when she was president if she mentioned 4 o'clock everybody would just...

[8895] SPEAKER_21: So let me just be clear, I'm hearing study session starting at 4, to about 6, 6.30, okay that gives us good time, good time to put things together.

[8907] SPEAKER_37: You have the rest? Okay. And just for discussion's sake also if you can bring back a slide with the cost savings for class size increase. Okay. By increase by 1, increase by 2, increase by 3, etc. Okay.

[8922] Nancy Thomas: And then also, can you kind of take a look at the various programs that are encroaching and what it would look like if they didn't encroach, you know, or if we're matching more than we need to match in a program, you know, what kind of savings can we get there?

[8940] SPEAKER_37: I think that 4.2 million, a lot of it's going to show there, right, that other, not utilities, other operating funds,

[8948] SPEAKER_30: Yeah, those are the... The utilities too. Right. Utilities is on the request. Yeah. Okay.

[8955] SPEAKER_37: But that $4.298 million, you know, the others, when we break that down, that's going to have the, you know, transfers to ROP and other type of expenditures on there.

[8970] SPEAKER_31: Yeah, it is. I'm sorry.

[8972] SPEAKER_37: Transfer to ROP. That would be in there. Yeah, it's $57 million.

[8980] SPEAKER_21: Okay. All right. Thank you, Brian. I know that was- Thank you. Yes, thank you.

[8985] SPEAKER_30: Good report.

[9010] SPEAKER_30: Okay, thank you very much for the great study session. We're going to move on to 14.1, which is board

[9037] SPEAKER_37: Reports, announcements, requests, debriefing, discussion. Please fill out the form that I left for the adding items to the future agendas. So we'll start with Member Garcia.

[9054] Nancy Thomas: I already took some things off my list that have already been taken care of. And of course, a lot of those are not legit. They're just things I don't want to forget that I've asked for. Like I mentioned today, Jan and I, or what was mentioned, Jan and I went, Ms. Crocker, excuse me, and I went to the Alameda County School Board Facilitation, very interesting presentation. I haven't heard yet if I have been elected to the Delegate Assembly, but I'm pretty optimistic given that there were four openings and four But one thing I would like to, as we're building the budget, one of the things we have not done as a board is we've never developed our own budget. And so I think to have an agenda item where we, or a work study, where we go over our own agenda. So, for example, I've been paying for all of my CSB related travel. when we go to the AHC, I think we need to acknowledge that our professional development is important. And, you know, I'm the only person that I know of that ends up paying my own way to some of these things. Other districts encourage professional development and pay for the attending ed. So if we can build a budget that that allowed all of us to plan our own professional development for next year. I think that would be important.

[9159] SPEAKER_37: Thank you. My first time, you ready now or? Yes. You said you just wanted me to fill out.

[9165] SPEAKER_25: Yeah, just give it to me and I can put it into the Google Docs. OK, perfect. So I don't have the idea?

[9170] SPEAKER_30: No. I just want to say that Ms. Thomas and I also were at the Ohlone Advisory Committee meeting with Dr. Carrie, what's?

[9181] Mark Triplett: Browning.

[9182] SPEAKER_30: Browning, from Ohlone, yeah. And it was a very good place for connecting up with people that are interested in education in the area. And I'm hoping that we're going to be able to get some more connections with Ohlone so that we can have the students be double enrollment. And I think that can be a savings, too, if it's worked right. It's like ROP, in that you have less of a need in a class. So I think that that might be someplace where we might look for. a way of maximizing the academic challenges for the kids and saving money too. So I don't know if that's a factor or not, but keeping that thing open. The other thing is that we had a crab feed this weekend. It was very successful for the high school. It was just clubbed. A lot of people that were there. The crab was wonderful. The prizes were wonderful. And just to remind everybody, Masters of Governance is this Friday. I assume that we're all going to be there Friday and Saturday. If we're not, I think we were talking about Friday for sure and Saturday we weren't sure how many were going. But it's at Burlingame, is that correct?

[9253] SPEAKER_21: Yes, I have that.

[9254] SPEAKER_30: So we might want to do some carpooling to go over. So I think we need to know who's going and who's not going.

[9264] SPEAKER_29: I only heard back from three of you. So it'll be yourself, Member Thomas, and Member Nguyen going on Friday, and yourself and Member Thomas going on Saturday. OK. And also Superintendent will be going on Friday. Friday, right. And I was scheduled to go on Friday, but they've canceled me. They canceled you? They're not going to do that. I have attendants. Oh, that's true. So I go to my next one on April 4th. Yeah, this was a Brown Act training, and they canceled it.

[9292] SPEAKER_37: So I have a conflict that came up with Friday. So that's why you need everybody's best hesitant to volunteer for that. Things can pop up for me.

[9303] SPEAKER_30: My concern is that the number of us have taken masters in governance. And so we're going as a group for the new people. So the new people have to, I think, to be there to get the maximum amount of what we're doing. Because we have been, I think Nancy, excuse me, Mr. Thomas and myself have been through this twice. And we learn something new every time, there's no doubt about it, but part of the power of it is working together as a group. So I think that we need to be really careful in terms of if we're going to spend money for it, make sure that we're going to be going. That's it.

[9349] Ray Rodriguez: Months ago, before the last election, I had, and before our superintendent got here, to be honest with you, I had talked to Dr. Marken, who was here, and Superintendent Dr. Morris, about having, inviting our congressman to talk about special ed, because we're so impacted by that. And what can we do to try to increase the funding, which is probably going to be more to do with the new administration. But still, the gentleman that came up, Mr. Moylan, I think that'll be something maybe we can talk to him about. And I think the three school districts that make up the SELPA would probably be very interested. Now that Congressman Roe, I think with his history of his mother being a special ed teacher, I think I was hesitant to ask him before the election, but now might be a good time to see if we can. So I'd like to put that on there. As far as the meeting dates, and I know that from time to time they change, I also would like to keep the open session that we start at 7. I want to make sure we continue that, because it's just something we've always done. I like the idea of occasionally, if we can change our schedules in the meeting, a couple hours early so we can do the workshop. And I had the opportunity with Superintendent Sanchez to visit Snow Elementary and they had a debate, chocolate milk or white milk or regular milk. And there was three kids on one panel on one side and then three students on the other side. They were just tremendous, and I really enjoyed being there. And we did have our meeting with the consortium, BITSA, what do we call that now? Induction. Induction. And Donora does an excellent job with her group. And at some point, I guess they'll do a board, a staff report on that. It's a very important piece of what we do. And then one more request on the problem we're having with coming together, I mean getting substitutes. Maybe we can either have it as an agenda item so we can kind of talk about it or maybe get a staff report and see if the board can do something to move that forward so it'd make it easier for staff to to increase that pool.

[9550] SPEAKER_21: And I know HR is working on that. So let's ask HR about that. OK.

[9554] SPEAKER_37: That's all I have. Thank you. Thank you. And thank you for the two reports and the study session today. And suffice to say, we're headed to some challenging times ahead. But I don't think it's insurmountable. And I think in those challenging times, it could be easy to point fingers and say, any aspect, right? And I think we have to be careful not to do that, and that the notion of where we are today, and it's not an issue of Newark unifying, and that it's pervasive throughout our area, throughout the state, and so it's... It comes down to a fundamental flaw either in the basic formula, a funding formula, or with special education contributions, getting out of control, and the person disturbs. And that's something that impacts essentially every district that I'm aware of. So let's take a step back and look at how we can move forward and positively resolve this and get ourselves out of this situation versus you know, pointing fingers or blaming, you know, this, that, et cetera, et cetera. Okay. Thank you, John. 15.1, Superintendents, concluding comments.

[9638] SPEAKER_21: Thank you, President Nguyen, members of the Board, ladies and gentlemen. I just want to remind the Board of an opportunity we have for free, which I know we like free. LifeTouch has offered to provide free headshots for the board, or glamour shots, if you will. And the reason we would like some new ones, refreshed ones, is we're getting ready to launch the new website. I want to make sure the board is put in the best light. And there are some dates that we're considering to get those done. And you always can provide one that you like for yourself if you can't make it. But April 5, April 6, or April 7, between 1 and 3 p.m. because they're going to be here taking photos somewhere else, but they've offered to come over. So if you can make it for one of those windows, let Patty know. We'll make sure that we get your photo taken. Wear a nice tie. You know, Mr. Rodriguez usually has his warriors tie.

[9700] Ray Rodriguez: But I'm not going to do it unless there's a touch-up where they can take back 20 years.

[9704] SPEAKER_21: We can get the Barbara Walters filter, whatever you want. Right. So just 5th, 6th, or 7th of April, 1 to 3, if those dates are possible. We could get the pictures taken of you. Otherwise, if you have a picture you like and you can't make it, send it to Patty and we'll get that up on our new website launch. Next reminder is the time of year for 700 forms. If you haven't done those, please, we're happy to send that to you. Patty's got the forms. When are those due, Patty?

[9737] SPEAKER_30: They were due Friday.

[9738] SPEAKER_21: They were due Friday. Alright, we have some.

[9742] Nicole Pierce-Davis: I think we're complete. Okay, thank you.

[9745] SPEAKER_21: And again, this Friday I will be attending CSBA. And Saturday, this weekend, I will be trying to recruit a 7th grader to consider Newark Memorial High School. Next, when she hits high school, my kids are both coming to California. Trying to recruit my daughter and get her to think about high school in California maybe. she's not saying no which is a good start and finally I did send you some of the homework that you assigned yourself for values and goals I know the draft goals we used tonight and those are draft they haven't been finalized by the board but if you have a chance to look at that document and just if you want to mark it up or you want to respond electronically get that feedback to me and Patty If you want to get a red pen and print it out and write on it, I don't care how you give us feedback. I'll start paring it down. It's kind of a long letter. I hope we can make it a shorter letter. But I tried to include as much as I could remember and think of and give you some ideas. And I'm also looking at what are some mental models and what else can we do to help with the marketing. So if you have a chance, please give us some feedback on that so I can formally put in front of the board so you guys can finalize, especially the goals, how do you want to phrase it, how are you going to measure it, those things are helpful, and just consolidation of values if you want to consolidate. So any edits on that would be very helpful. Other than that, that concludes my report, and thank you.

[9845] SPEAKER_37: Thank you. With that, we adjourn the meeting at 9.43 p.m.

No minutes available.