Regular Meeting

No content available.

[0] SPEAKER_33: You You . you do

[5537] SPEAKER_36: We're going to reconvene our open session. Can we please stand for the Pledge of Allegiance?

[5547] SPEAKER_33: I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the republic for which it stands, one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

[5564] SPEAKER_36: Thank you ladies and gentlemen for attending the June 20th Board of Education meeting of the Newark Unified School District. Members of the public who wish to address the board are asked to fill out a speaker request form located at the rear of the room. Please state your name clearly for the record when you come up to speak. Speakers are limited to three minutes and once per item and the board cannot respond to items not on the agenda. In closed session, the board took action on item 2.4. in regards to a special education and by a vote of five to zero accepted the revised settlement agreement for a special education student and their placement. No further action was taken. We'll move on to 5.1. I need approval of the agenda as currently composed or if there are alterations.

[5624] SPEAKER_28: We do have an amendment, is that correct?

[5626] SPEAKER_36: Yeah. So I believe the amendment was related to last night, where it's a continuance of the public hearing on the budget and the LCAP. What we're going to do is, within the public hearing category of 8.1, which is currently 8.1, which is the disclosure of the tentative agreement with Newark Teachers Association, we're going to add to that the LCAP and then the budget public hearing. And so the new order in which that category will be comprised now is in 8.1 is going to be the LCAP, 8.2 is the budget, and then 8.3 is the NTA TA. And then with that, we're being confident of the public's time and what we mentioned last night, we're going to move 8.1, 8.2, and 8.3 above 7. So it's going to come right after the superintendent's report, which is 6.1. So right after the superintendent's update, we're going to go to the public hearing. Again, 8.1, 8.2, and 8.3. So with that, superintendent, is there an update?

[5705] SPEAKER_28: A very brief update this evening. One we'll be talking about more later, which is, uh, you're looking at the FICMAT report that has been completed. Um, so that's an update we've been waiting for. Okay.

[5718] SPEAKER_36: Oh, I apologize.

[5719] Ray Rodriguez: That's my fault. I'm sorry. My emotion is that based on your information present with that approval of the agenda.

[5726] SPEAKER_35: Thank you. So, um, okay.

[5733] SPEAKER_36: Please vote. Great, five ayes, thank you very much.

[5746] SPEAKER_28: Sorry, Superintendent, go ahead. Sorry for that, I wasn't. So just wanted to say that we'll be looking at the FCMAT report that we were provided. which would help additionally provide some information as we look at our budget and as we're going forward. And we'll be asking FCMAT for additional resources relative to next steps in communication. So those things are on the horizon and we'll be looking at those items. Other than that, I just want to say again for the record that it's important that we had a great series of promotions throughout the district not only at our elementary and junior high but our high schools, Crossroads, adult school and Bridgepoint and just great to see kids in cap and gowns and just remind ourselves why we're here. I think sometimes it's just good to have that reminder and I'm glad to see that we are reaching some TAs with our union groups. I think that's really important. So that's all I wanted to report on.

[5813] SPEAKER_36: Thank you. Thank you. And let me take one step backwards again. I'm sorry. So I'm going through the public comments. There are a few members who wish to speak on item 11.1, which is the adoption of the budget for 2017-2018. I believe we can't do that tonight. We have to do that next week, right?

[5831] SPEAKER_28: Monday. Yes, item 11.1 and item

[5836] SPEAKER_31: 11.3. Yeah.

[5839] SPEAKER_27: Need to be pulled to next Monday's correct because the public hearing is held tonight and then we have to vote on that at a later time.

[5854] SPEAKER_36: Can we do that? Yes. Okay. So just so that the members they can say they can still stay and speak to it or You can come back when the vote will be taken, which is next... Monday. Monday. Okay. But we will allow you to speak on that. Okay.

[5870] Ray Rodriguez: So we'll leave on... I'm sorry. I object to that one. Normally when you have something on the agenda, it flows. You know, the public gets to fill out the card and then the board discusses it. I have a whole break for a week. It just, I don't know, to me it's just...

[5894] SPEAKER_31: I would recommend that any speaker cards for 11.1 be applied to the new item 8.2 and any speaker cards for 11.3 be applied to 8.1 during the public hearing sections so that they would have their opportunity to speak.

[5912] Nancy Thomas: I think that works because those two items are on the public hearing but I think in general We often have agenda items for discussion at one meeting and action at the other. That gives us a time to get input at both meetings. It gives the public a time and us a time to kind of think about the issue. And maybe as a general practice, we should think about that in the future.

[5936] SPEAKER_27: So that's why I'm saying, I think, leave it on there as a discussion item. And you can still discuss it. You just don't have to adopt it.

[5943] SPEAKER_36: I think I like Mr. Richard's idea, though. Just move it to 8.1, because they're speaking on that subject.

[5949] Nancy Thomas: anyway.

[5950] SPEAKER_27: Because that's what the public hearing is at. But is that going to give everyone enough time to actually discuss it? Like, are we going to be able to discuss?

[5958] SPEAKER_36: No, we're not adopting it till next Monday. The vote's not going to happen for adoption. The discussion can happen. The discussion can happen. Yeah, that's my point, yeah. Right, that's going to happen now in 8.1.

[5966] SPEAKER_28: In the study session.

[5968] Nancy Thomas: The point, I think one of the points is that people could have two, three minute

[5977] SPEAKER_27: I agree with member Thomas in terms of keeping on the agenda for the future as a discussion item and then also it forces us to plan ahead in terms of not having to pull things all the time and then just making it really confusing for us and the community members of figuring out what's being discussed.

[5997] SPEAKER_36: So essentially all the 11.1's cards, I've just changed to 8.1. So when we discuss 8.1, we'll call you up and speak and, and I'm sure that's good news because you get to go home earlier if you so choose, right? So with that, Superintendent, the, the report session is, is done. We can go on to 8.1 now? Okay. Yes. So we now open the public hearing on 8.1 which is the, actually this is the LCAP. The LCAP is first and then 8.2 is the budget. So, Ms. Salinas.

[6034] SPEAKER_43: Good evening. Good evening, President Nguyen, members of the board. and our community. For this evening's LCAP, it is an opportunity to share with the members of the community and with our Board of Education the work that has come to date in terms of our LCAP. This public hearing will also be an opportunity for members of the community to ask questions and so we can have the discussion. At the next board meeting, we will bring it forward for approval. So what I wanted to first start with was highlighting what some of the changes are in terms of the LCAP. This PowerPoint may look very familiar, so what we did is that we actually highlighted some of the changes since the last time that we came forward to share the progress of the LCAP. In terms of goal one in student achievement, we have highlighted, as we shared the previous time we met with you, was the contract with Silicon Valley Math Initiative, which will be a time for our school's K-12 to look on working with this enhancement. And what this really speaks to is a contract with Silicon Valley Math Initiative, but then it's also an opportunity for our district to build capacity of our teacher leaders. the intent is to not continue to bring in outside folks but to actually have funds that are set aside to pay for teacher time, teacher training, and then let our teachers be the trainers and the coaches within our school community. Additionally, We look at resources and training for our parents, and we also looking at some of the LCAP funds to look to supporting the funding of our library clerk positions. As we shared before, we have our after school math homework centers, which would be a district-wide support, two satellite centers for any student in the district to have a drop-in opportunity to get help with homework from a certificated staff member. This summer we're initiating our math academy and it's continuing our work with our math academy moving forward and that's at the elementary level. We also looked at working with our tech TOSAs. We did end up eliminating the two tech TOSAs. We were looking at bringing forth a data TOSA but at the end of this we ended up deleting that position. We feel that we've got some internal capacity to do this training in-house as we all move forward with our new program Illuminate. We're going to continue to build on the RTI model and continue after school interventions as an ongoing support for our Title I schools and also looking at partially funding the academic deans positions at the junior high and the high school. In terms of English language arts, as we shared the previous time, it's providing iReady online instruction. This will be an area of language arts as we start to build our balanced literacy approach. So this will be a station at our schools for students to do within the classroom time, not solely working on iReady, but it'll be one of the stations for our teachers to do as they build their balanced literacy programs at the elementary schools. There will also be some baseline assessments that will come out of iReady in math and in language arts, and so that's a continuing program. In terms of forming our common formative assessments district-wide, that work continues, aligning instructional practices and assessments, and looking at our board policies that are updated in terms of our grading policy, looking at our content standards, and looking at our graduation requirements. And finally, we're going to focus on developing a summer bridge program for our incoming freshmen. Continuing with literacy in the content areas, we're looking at purchasing some secondary enhancement materials that are aligned with the next generation science standards. In August, I will be coming forward with science teachers and our teams to actually share with you science pathways. Our secondary science teachers have been working on this for the last two years, and we're gonna be coming forward to share some of their work and also look at the adoption of a science pathway for our secondary schools. And we're also going to look at something that has not happened in a while here. We're actually going to develop a textbook adoption cycle across the district so that schools can see when to truly expect that we will go through a formal process of adoption of textbooks. But that will be built first and we will have the input of our assessment council and our elementary curriculum council along with our site administrators to develop this. In the area of serving our students that are underserved, we're looking at providing training to our staff on the ELD standards. This is going to be something that we do in-house and develop as we also look at evaluating the current ELD program that we have and how to build on the successes of that. We're looking at providing very limited support for the two elementary sites that were remaining with accelerated English. At the same time, we're looking at evaluating how we will transition to enhancing this program. It's just too soon to just pull away from it, so we're looking to see how we can build on it in terms of work for newcomer students and also our long-term English language learners. With that, it's not noted here, but we're also looking at revising our English language learner master plan, which will really be the underpinning of all of this work. So that has not yet been completed, but it is one of our first tasks in the fall. We had our special education teachers working with our special education department on implementing time to teach behavior management system. We actually had a group of folks that were here last week after school was out trying to get professional development while school's not in session and start to work on those skills and support for our students. implementing the Sonday program to support student academics for our special education students, and again noting the after-school drop-in centers at two locations. I want to highlight that in terms of student engagement, we are continuing with the next level for all of our schools that have been working on positive behavior intervention system. And also looking at continuing mental health services at targeted sites. We have eliminated the district behavior health consulting, which was an administrative position. So that has come out of the LCAP. In terms of basic services, continue to provide current textbooks to students, maintaining staffing with teachers holding appropriate credentials, and also continuing to maintain facilities in accordance with the FIT criteria. A new item that was added is working to contribute towards a negotiated retention fund for our teachers and staff. Surrounding districts have done this practice. I think as we've heard at several of our board meetings, we were in a very unusual position where we had a significant number of teachers and teachers that were leaving the school district. But as we look at maintaining teachers who we have invested a significant amount of money in professional development in, we want to keep these folks. And so there is a contribution towards a negotiated retention fund in the LCAP. In terms of parent involvement, we are building on what we started this year, which was supporting school staff with translation services. What we did this year was allow elementary sites to have a certain number of hours, but it really was hit and miss because we were dependent on having different folks to support our school sites. So what we're going to do instead is have one district translator who will actually support our elementary sites and will be on a rotation basis supporting them so that the same person will be translating. This will ensure uniformity of Spanish translation so that it's true academic Spanish language translation, but at the same time it is going to be one person that will be reliable to support the school staff on a rotating basis. Again, continuing to offer multiple training opportunities in both Spanish and English for our parents. We've already built a district symbol for parents and children to access math resources. And if you recall when Ms. Janet Hanley was here, who has since retired, but when Ms. Janet Hanley was here, she did share how during our LCAP input sessions, parents were really clear that they wanted to have access what all school sites had so at one school site we had a staff that was really gung-ho and providing a lot of online support for students they said well we want that for all sites so we see that that is really a district work that has to be done in terms of supporting all school sites and not having individual staff or principals having to provide it so that will be coming forward district wide And again, continuing to increase parent participation in workshops by our parent partners. In terms of advanced placement courses, continue to increase the level of participation in AP classes and increase students taking and passing AP tests and meeting with our students in grades 10 and 11 to promote participation. We heard that, not just from our board, but also from our parents and community, that they want more information as it relates to advanced placement. So we anticipate having a board presentation in the early fall on this. If you recall, the California School Dashboard relies very heavily on the college and career readiness indicator. We don't yet know what the state's going to say what is part of that, but we know AP is a part of it. So we hope to bring that presentation forward to you all in terms of how we're getting more students into the classes participating, but then taking the test. It's one thing to participate. It's another thing to actually take the test and get credit for it. So we will be bringing that information forward. Again, this graphic you've seen before, but sharing with you again the stakeholder and the timeline and input process. We started with the first draft, started working on this back in August and January. We're able to come and bring forward a lot of input from our stakeholders and also having our meetings with our LCAP group. And then finally coming forward to this public hearing today and also with our final presentation and adoption at the next board meeting. So next steps include, you know, we were able to include the revisions and additions based on student surveys. We had input from our school site council and ELACs, our district ELAC, our LCAP advisory, our labor partners. We waited for some of the governor revise and district budget revisions and then we also met with the Alameda County Office of Education in May and were able to sit with their team as we looked through the draft of the LCAP and they also gave us some input that had already been incorporated. So for today we're looking forward and these dates are a little bit off because as you know where this is the continuance of last night's meeting and so this evening this is the public hearing and then we will hear from the business public hearing and on our Monday board meeting we will come forward for board approval. Then this will all be submitted to the Alameda County Office of Education for their final approval. And want to thank everyone for all of their work and time on this, and we'll let you open up your public hearing.

[6764] SPEAKER_36: Great, thank you. Miss Thomas.

[6768] Nancy Thomas: Oh, that is old.

[6770] SPEAKER_36: That's old, okay. We do not have any members of public who wish to speak on this item. So, board members, if we're not going to speak, then we're going to close. You didn't submit, are we out of cards or?

[6786] SPEAKER_35: Go ahead.

[6795] SPEAKER_38: I'm sorry, I missed the whole card thing. I'm Terry Marzano, and I am one of the library clerks at Graham School on Cherry Street. And I've been there for 21 years. And I was just curious, this was, in the LCAP you presented 40% of library clerks. as part of the LCAP, and I'm not quite sure what that means. Is that an additional 40%? Library clerks are generally, in most of the elementary and at the junior high, already at 50%. So I wasn't sure if that meant that you were reducing it by 10% or increasing it by 40%. Go ahead.

[6833] SPEAKER_43: So that speaks to the funding of the position. So 40 percent of the position is funded out of the LCAP, but it's not an additional time that's added.

[6842] SPEAKER_38: So the payment structure will go from general fund to LCAP fund?

[6846] SPEAKER_43: Forty percent of it will be funded out of the LCAP.

[6848] SPEAKER_38: Forty percent will be from that. And then I also noticed since I was at the meeting last night and saw the possible revenue sources of a parcel tax that library clerks were again included in the revenue possibility of a parcel tax, which would be the second or third time library clerks have been included in the parcel tax proposals in the 21 years I've been here. So I would just like to point out that library clerks are very important. They serve every single student every single week. They serve every single staff member every single week. Any parents that come in, any students that are struggling, and that it would be really nice if we would have a steady stream of funding and be considered as an important part of the school funding source instead of being shifted around and potentially sourced out for parcel taxes, et cetera, as they come along. So that would be something that I would like to see happen for all of our library clerks at all of our schools. Thank you.

[6908] SPEAKER_35: Great. Thank you very much.

[6913] SPEAKER_36: So with that, we'll close the public hearing on 8.1, which is the LCAP. at 8 p.m. We're going to open the public hearing on the budget or continue, excuse me, on the budget, which is 8.2. We do have some speakers. Mr. Rich, do you want the speakers first or are you going to, what's happening?

[6933] SPEAKER_31: It's a pleasure of the board.

[6934] SPEAKER_36: Do you want to do the presentation again first or if they want to have the speakers first? Let's do the presentations first in case that changes what they speak about.

[6945] SPEAKER_31: Don't completely tune out, but this is the same presentation that we had last night. So if you're here for the second night in a row, you are not going to learn anything new or different than you saw during last night's presentation with regard to the budget. But if you were not here last night and you are new, or if you're watching from home tonight and you weren't watching last night, we'll quickly go through the key budget assumptions and the information with regard to the budget. The budget is built on the May revise from the governor's office because the budget has not yet been signed, although the legislature has passed a budget. The projected COLA for next year, actually now it is the official COLA for next year is 1.56%. COLA stands for cost of living adjustment for those who aren't familiar with the term. The funding bridge, as we're implementing the local control funding formula each year The state calculates a percentage of the remaining gap that it will take to get us back to our 2007-2008 funding level. And so next year's closes the 43.9% of the remaining gap. So each year they reset it based on what's left in the gap. It's still projected at this time that in 2021 the gap will fully close. And so we're inching our way closer and closer. we're at about 96% total funding level coming up from 95 going forward. The routine restricted maintenance fund rules, the second tier of the three tiers of restoring routine restricted maintenance back to its old 3% rule that goes back to 2007, 2008, has now kicked in. So now the new minimum is 2% moving forward. And it will go to 3% in 2020-21. So we've implemented a change to make sure we meet that 2%. Nothing in the budget addresses STRS and PERS, and we'll get to STRS and PERS in a moment to see what the cost increase is happening with our two retirement systems. But combined, our cost of living adjustment and our funding bridge still don't fully offset our declining enrollment because last year's enrollment to this year's enrollment, or the decline that we had between last October two Octobers ago and last October, sets our funding model for next school year. So unless next year's enrollment in October is higher, and then our ADA starts moving upward, in which case then if next year's is higher, then that will be our generating factor. But we won't know that until April of next year. So we build everything based on where we are in the current school year, knowing that that's generally going to govern we're not going to be able to do that. We're not going to be able to do that next year so that's built into our revenue assumptions for next year. we mentioned and as you may have seen on the agenda tonight our negotiated agreement with your teachers Association is on the agenda. We have also reached a tentative agreement with California school employees Association but they will not have the ratification vote until the fall when they return since many of their members have already ended their school ended their into our budget assumptions. But we talked a little bit about the state teachers retirement system and our public employee retirement system, our certificated and classified retirements. They have been growing rather dramatically over the past few years because the state is working through a multi-year plan of getting them up to a projection where they're fully funding or fully covered on their projected liabilities. because the financial downturn that was taken with their investments back when everything kind of went downward in 08-09, they're still in the process of recovering from. So they've set some rates after STRS had been locked at eight and a quarter for decades and decades and decades. They implemented a multi-year plan to raise it to 19.1%. This year, going into next year, we're going to go from 12.5% to 14.4%, about a 14% increase in costs to make that index of about 1.85%. That's the third year. We've got three more years to go of large increases until we hit the 19.1%. And then thereafter, STRS gains the right to do what PERS can do with some limits that have been set by the legislature to continue to adjust as needed in their actuarial valuation. So it may go up even higher than 19.1, but we won't know that until after 2021. The California Public Employee Retirement System, their rate is also going up from 13.888 to 15.53, about an 11.8% increase in dollar cost for the same amount of payroll. So that's also a significant increase. And their increased rates are projected to gain up through the 24-25 school year, at which point they believe they will be at a rate that can then over the long term, get them to full funding. So what that means for us for the 17-18 school year as we're looking moving forward, our local control funding formula revenue is about $50,100,000 of which About $7.3 million gets transferred into the restricted general fund. And so that net of $42 million is the large blue piece of the pie that you see there. It's 88% of our revenue in the unrestricted general fund net. We do have some additional state revenue of about $1 million and about $400,000 of local, which is various donations and other funding sources, and then About $4.3 million projected inter-fund transfer from Fund 17, which we'll talk about further on a future slide. Our unrestricted expenditures projected for the year, about $48.7 million, of which 88% of them are classified and certificated salaries and benefits. That is not surprising for a school district. It's a little on the high side for statewide average, however. It is pretty normal to be within the 80 to 90% range. 85 is about the average and we're at about 88 for next year. Our books and supplies budget is about 1%, services and operating about 10, about $4.6 million. and then about half a million dollars of other outgo, less the indirect cost. So indirect costs are money to come back into the general fund from other funds and from other resources for providing general services like taking care of their HR and their payroll and all the other central services. So we have other outgo that goes out to pay to the ROP and then we have others that comes back in and it nets out to about a half a million dollars. The ROP is about 900,000. The next slide. Unrestricted general fund net in the end. We're basically flat slight decrease in projected fund balance. That 67,000 is particularly because we had to index up just a little bit the amount to the However, it is balanced by that $4.3 million Interfund transfer in from Fund 17. We know that that's one-time money, and we know that because we've been in a multi-year process, we're working on eliminating the deficit that that is covering. Our projected component spending balance of about $2 million total. The majority of that's our 3% reserve. We have a small amount for revolving cash, that's the various petty cash accounts throughout the district, as well as stores inventory. Because inventory is an asset, it shows up as part of the fund balance, but it's not like we can go out and sell what's in the warehouse and turn around and pay payroll with it. We've already spent the money on the stores, so we have to show that as a reservation of fund balance. On the restricted side, this is our categorical programs. The largest piece of the funding, as I mentioned, is that contribution from the restricted general fund. They get a small piece of LCFF directly into special ed. That's passed through property taxes from the SELPA. Property taxes are considered part of the LCFF, but it's a direct pass-through from the SELPA. So it's actually over and above our normal local control funding formula calculation as a district. That contribution from the Restricted General Fund primarily is to special education and to the Routine Restricted Maintenance Fund. We do have other federal revenue. Most of our, actually right now all of our projected federal revenue is restricted $2.1 million and our other state about $3.7 million. A big piece of that other state is the what I like to call the phantom money. This is the state's contribution to the retirement system, which they now allocate out to all of the school districts in the state. And we have to record our percentage of it. And when we get to our expenditures on the next slide, you're going to see a big increase from, if you haven't watched a budget presentation in the past three years, and your last one was four years ago, you're going to think things went really, really haywire on the restricted general fund. But we'll explain why in just a moment. The local restricted dollars is about $2.7 million dollars and then with regard to our expenditures, you'll notice employee benefits has shot up to 32% on the restricted side. Of that 5.1 million, over 2 million dollars of that money is that extra state revenue that we got going directly into employee benefits. Again, that is the state's portion of STRS allocated to all of the districts in the state based on our total percentage of STRS subject salaries in the state. So each district now records it as money coming in from the state and money going out from the state. But in reality, it's never money the district ever saw. It's just a direct deposit from the state into STRS. Then when you combine that with our certificated salaries, we're at about 82% of the restricted general fund. And then we have our books and supply budget and our services and other operating expenses combined to make about 16% of the budget, very small amount of capital outlay projected. The indirect costs have to be paid back to the unrestricted general fund of about $290,000. So total restricted expenditures are about $16.16 million. And that puts us with a slight net decrease in funds. That's some one-time carryover balance that's projected to be expended in the next year. Each year the categoricals end with some ending balance because our federal programs run on an October to September year. They always end up with a little bit of carryover. And actually, in the fund balance side, there's also some state programs that we get awarded in one year, but it's a multi-year grant. So we end up with some extra fund balance at the end. The federal is actually not in the fund balance. The federal is deferred revenue. The adult ed, these are the other funds of the district. They are the remaining parts of the budget book as we get out of the general fund now. The adult education. is actually projected now because of the influx of funds from the consortium and the new changes that have happened in adult education. It's actually projecting a slight net surplus because we've left the inner fund transfer in at the amount that it's always been of $100,000. The board did have some discussion about that last night. We have not modified anything yet because we haven't actually had an action on it. But if the board chose to make an adjustment, they would have an opportunity to do that to the extent that we are contributing now about $44,000 more than is needed to balance that budget. Child Development Fund, their contribution is actually down by about a third, and that's in line with what Nitya had proposed when she proposed her three-year rate increase structure. Because over the course of three years, she's looking to eliminate the inter-fund transfer into the Child Development Fund. And that number's down from 60,042, so she's working her way downward. Child Nutrition Fund is projected to basically be flat as far as its revenue and its expenditures. That fund has done very good at staying in balance. Mary does a very nice job in making sure that she keeps the Child Nutrition Fund running well. We mentioned earlier Fund 17, our special reserve for non-capital outlay, which is additional reserves that the board has put aside. We do project utilizing a piece of that to keep the general fund in balance. Do we anticipate it will be the full 4.3? Likely not. However, there isn't a lot of other outside funding source out there. There's a big question mark right now with the state budget as the legislature has proposed undoing what the governor did in May revise with regard to deferring the money to May of 2019. A portion of it they've proposed putting back into 17-18 and we're waiting to see if the governor will approve it or blue pencil it. That will give us some additional flexibility but also we you might remember if you were here a year ago for the budget presentation we had projected needing three and a half million out of fund 17 to balance fund one and we only ended up having to transfer one million dollars this year. We have been extremely tight with our spending. We're projecting to try to continue to do that as we try to move ahead. And we have reduced many of the expenditure budgets accordingly. Moving on to Fund 21. It doesn't look like we're doing much yet in Fund 21, but that is because the current year is where the purchase orders are for the summer's work, and until we close, we receive the June bills, accrue and close, and roll the purchase orders to the new year. It doesn't look like we're spending anything yet. We do have some projected projects on the slate that haven't issued POs yet, so those are showing up there. But we'll be adjusting those numbers rather dramatically as soon as the books are closed on the current year and they roll over. Capital Facilities Fund. We do project to gain some additional revenue in capital facilities related to the developments that are going on in the district. We don't have huge expenditure plans yet for that. We do have some money set aside potentially to look at a couple of items that we'll be talking about, but they are not yet anything major that's moving forward. We do have a couple of studies we need to update continually with regard to those. And so we will be doing those updates in the upcoming year. Fund 40, which is our special reserve for capital outlay. That is where the proceeds from Rushan Elementary are, and there are some pending items that have not yet hit, and they're for the current school year. They begin in the current school year, but then roll forward. It's on the agenda tonight, actually, with regard to the playgrounds. I'm sorry, playgrounds are Fund 21. I'm getting myself, I'm talking too fast. Playgrounds are part of Fund 21. Fund 40 also is the wishlist projects, some of which are in process, and some of which are still pending because they're still in design. Fund 51, the Bond Interest Redemption Fund, is controlled by Alameda County Treasurer's Office for the repayment of the bonds. And so they set the rate of the taxation, the projected revenue, and the expenditures, and they tie it to project it to basically break even on an annual basis. Our self-insurance funds take care of our post-retirement non-STRS and PERS as far as retirement system benefits. It's post-retirement health. We do have a small amount of post-retirement health for all of the units that are in the CalPERS system. There's what's called the CalPERS minimum. The classified bargaining unit, they actually do have post-retirement health benefits that vary in tier depending on when they were hired. And so we do have to allocate a portion. We have an actuarial study that's done every other year. Actually, it's currently in progress. We'll be resetting the ARC based on the new actuarial study as soon as it is received. The property liability, Second, self-insurance fund is where we take care of all of our property and liability claims, as well as where we pay our premiums through for our insurance program for our property insurance and our liability insurance. But basically, these funds roll flat because we put in just enough revenue to cover the expenditures in them, and they maintain a balance. And now we get to an area that's been of concern for many, many years in the district. As you take a look at this, It is our enrollment and our average daily attendance. The blue line at the top is our enrollment based on the count that's taken on the first Wednesday of every school year, the month of October. And then the yellow line is our average daily attendance. And you might notice that back in 2000, 2001, there was quite a wide gap. We had a pretty low attendance rate in that particular school year. And the gap got narrower and narrower and Although enrollment started really sliding on a rather consistent basis starting in 09-10 moving down, our attendance rate was actually improving and we were getting very, very tight. This past year, we had a reversal of that. We had a really bad winter, as everyone recalls. Our attendance rate did dip some, about three quarters of a percent from what it had been averaging to 96.24%, still better than the statewide average, but not as good as the Newark average has been. So we're hopeful that we can work on keeping everyone healthy so we can have a better attendance rate going forward. Anytime we have a 1% change of our attendance rate, that's about a half a million dollars for our district at our current size as a district. There we go. So our multi-year projection reveals a problem we've been talking about now for about a year, a little over a year, with regard to the fact that the one-time funding that has been sustaining us from year to year and the other one-time funding that we've had through Fund 17 eventually would run out. And so if we were to continue spending on our current trajectory in 2020, we would have an undesignated fund balance of negative $6.6 million. And so the board has made a commitment that it's looking to reverse its deficit spending and get things in balance for the 18-19 school year after we get through the current upcoming year. So if we take that $832,000 from the fourth line item, Interfund Transfers, and add it to the 6.6, we're at about 7.4, almost 7.5 in remaining over two years. So about three and three quarters of a million per year to get to our projection from our prior meeting where we talked about we initially had about five million dollars of projected needed adjustment to balance our expenditures to the size of the district that we have become over the course of time as we've watched the enrollment go down. With regard to the remaining forms that are part of the budget, there are some supplemental forms that look at our district and look at all districts, actually, in relation to how much money as a district do we spend on minimum classroom compensation. It's a calculation that the state looks at for all districts. And they set a bar of 55% for unified districts. It's 60% for elementary districts and 50% for high school districts. And we get the rate that's in the middle because we have both grade levels. For a district, we're actually 5.61% ahead of our minimum requirement. We're at 60.61, and we're projected next year to be at 61.73%. There are actually many districts under the LCFF that are failing this test and actually having to look at making adjustments or seeking waivers from the state. We are not in that situation in this district. Form L is our lottery expenditure report. For the most part, our unrestricted lottery is just supporting our cost of instruction. in the form of teacher salaries, and our restricted lottery is for instructional materials, and that's the only thing it's allowed to be spent on anyway. No Child Left Behind, although it has been replaced in federal nomenclature with new names and new laws, the calculation is still the same, and it's still called the No Child Left Behind Maintenance of Effort Report, and we are in compliance with it. We have met our MOE for the year and for the budget year, and then we have two schedules that show all of our projected inter-fund transfers. and a 27-page criteria and standards report that the county uses as they review our budget. As I mentioned earlier, the legislature has passed the budget. It's on Governor Brown's desk. He's still reviewing it. And if there are significant changes that he makes or if the net change is significant from the revised, we'll bring it back for discussion in August. We'll highlight anything else in a budget update at that time. And then at the closing of the books in September, we'll also have a further update with regard to the budget. I want to thank Kim, Carol, and Sarah on my staff. I want to thank Maria for her help yesterday in getting us all the books printed. And she actually printed another batch today for the back of the room for anyone that wasn't here last night that would like a copy tonight. We've got extra ones that were printed up today for that purpose. And now we can open up the public hearing and then any other board questions or comments.

[8188] SPEAKER_36: Thank you, Mr. Richards. Our first speaker is Noelle Doote.

[8191] SPEAKER_35: 8.2. This is 8.2, yes.

[8199] SPEAKER_17: So in reviewing last night's meeting, I was a little bit confused and I haven't had a chance to review Robert's rules. Robert's Rules of Orders, but I'm not sure how you can continue a public hearing that was never really held because it was pulled and then last night's meeting was adjourned rather than recessed. So just might sound a little picky, but just thought maybe we might want to think about Or if we're really having a public hearing, was that really a public hearing? Is this really a continuation of the public hearing? Because that meeting was adjourned, not continued, slash recessed. So just to, just a little something to think about.

[8245] SPEAKER_36: Thank you for the concern. We recognize that this is a unique scenario and we have run through all of its ramifications and implications and scenarios with the legal counsel and they have advised us in writing that we are well within our or Brown Act rights and Robert's Rules of Order, so thank you. Mr. Chris Ball. I'm sorry, this is for 8.2. Okay, because you have two in here. No? All right. Thank you. Megan McMillan.

[8286] Megan McMillan: Good evening. My name is Megan McMillan. Tonight I wanted to talk about a couple of the things in the budget that I saw that affect me as a parent, not necessarily as a teacher. One of the things up for consideration is increasing class size. If one of the goals of the district is to increase enrollment, one of the ways not to do that is to increase class size. As a special education teacher, you know, I've learned to handle my classroom, but I've always stood in awe of general education classroom teachers who are in there by themselves. And I have one child going into fourth grade, one child going into fifth, and I have an incoming kinder. And the ones going into fourth and fifth, they're going into classrooms that are already going to have at snow 31. It was a big jump for my fourth grader this year. She really felt the difference. and the lack of specific attention that could be paid to individual students. I know my five-year-old really well and I know that her in a room with 28 other students and one teacher We better really pray that teacher is a strong person. So children that age, I can't picture that many of them with one teacher and anything of real meaning being accomplished. Anything that would make a family say, you know what, this is where I want to keep my child. I mean, I'm a Fremont resident, so I always have the option, if I wanted to, of saying, you know what, maybe this isn't exactly where we needed to be. And, you know, I could always pull them back. But for people that live in Newark, I mean, they could go private schools, they could try interdisciplinary transfers other places, and really just hope people aren't going to be considering those options. So, as we're making these decisions in terms of attracting and holding and keeping students, increasing class size, probably not the best way to go. Thank you.

[8416] SPEAKER_35: Thank you.

[8418] SPEAKER_36: This is Michelle Patia.

[8427] SPEAKER_46: Good evening. As a parent of four kids in the Newark School District, I just wanted to express my extreme displeasure with any talk of enlarging classroom sizes. It's really not what parents are looking for. I would take a smaller classroom over a new playground any day. I also wanted to mention, just because of the slideshow earlier, that the AP courses at the high school, they do a pretty good presentation there. I know that was one of your guys' goals, but I've attended it twice, and the high school does a really good job of explaining to parents the AP classroom testing courses. And I also wanted to say that the pooled agenda items are very discouraging, and I wanted to applaud Member Preciado for stepping in and allowing us to speak on the items today. Thank you.

[8480] SPEAKER_35: Thank you. Nikolai Zemp.

[8484] Nicole Izant: Hi. So as a parent of a recently graduated second grader, now third grader, I'm also here to speak about my concern for any increasing class size and or I think it was consolidation or something of school sites. But before I say that, I want to say thank you for including the FAQ in the documents that somebody photocopied back there. I'm very excited to see that you're going to be starting up or planning on doing something like a regular town hall to have some two-way communication on more sensitive topics that affect our students in a relaxed form rather than a one-way as the board meetings are. It's a great way to engage the community. And a big thanks to the website designer, updater. I don't know if they're here in the room, but it's really much more clear and user-friendly, so it's easier for parents to find the information that they need without having to sift through a lot of unnecessary information. So thank you for that. So I think with Brianna, was it Brianna? Megan, sorry. And also a couple other people have already alluded to this. As we approach an era of possibly having school choice with whatever comes down from our federal government, something that parents are looking for, And especially in a district or demographic like Newark where we have a lot of people that work in tech and that have fairly good salaries, having school choice is going to be a serious option for many people. I'll be one of those if that ever happens. And being a different, like having smaller class sizes as a differentiator and having that not one to one but very, very small ratio between teacher to students. is going to be something that sets us apart from other districts like in San Jose or other areas. And so I think it's important that we differentiate ourselves from other programs by maintaining a small classroom size and having a really good ratio between students and teachers. And I can't stress enough that one of the things that Newark has always had is really great teachers and I'm really excited that we passed whatever it is that they needed so that they could stay. So thank you very much.

[8619] SPEAKER_35: Robin Calabara.

[8626] SPEAKER_48: Hi there. I'm here on behalf as being a parent. I have three children that are in Newark Unified School District. My youngest is going into fourth grade, so he's going to fill the class sizes next year, which I warned him about. My daughter is going into sixth grade, and my son is in eighth grade at the junior high. And I am a Also a kindergarten teacher in Newark Unified. And I am so proud that my kids are going here. And I advocate every day, like Superintendent Sanchez, about being positive. I try, when I'm selling Girl Scout cookies with my daughter, oh, you should not be at Challenger. You should be at Stratford. You need to be in Newark Unified. The teachers that I work with and that my kids have had are amazing. And the families that are here, they stay here because they keep going, oh, These teachers are great. These teachers are great. My family's bonding with the teachers, with the staff. And they continue to stay here because of the staff, but also because the teachers are able to teach in a small classroom setting. When I first student taught back in 1996, yeah, I taught 32 kids in first grade. But you do not have the one-on-one attention with them when you go up to those kind of class sizes. You cannot meet with parents on a regular basis after school to go over those kids that need that extra support. I cannot meet with five parents every day, you know, just to keep up talking about Johnny and they need this and they need that. So it's so important to keep our class sizes down so that parents want to stay in Newark and also that they want to come and move into Newark and not choose a private school as a choice. You want them here because their kids are in a small class, they have great teachers, and we want to keep them here. I'm staying here because I know that the board is going to make the best choice for our kids and the best choice is to have also happy teachers that want to come here and that don't want to leave because they have decent salaries to live here and stay here and that they have decent sized classes to be able to teach and want to come to work every day like I do. So thank you for listening to a parent and a teacher. Thank you.

[8769] SPEAKER_36: Thank you. Stanley Kaiser, excuse me if I pronounced that wrong.

[8777] SPEAKER_00: I just want to point out some things that I saw in the budget for 2017-18. You're talking about cutting things all the time, cut this, cut that. And it seems like all the cutting is going on in the schools themselves. The people actually facing the kids. And I was looking at this and, you know, I see supervisors for both certified and classified getting large amount of raises this year. I mean, if we're cutting then, you know, if I worked in the private sector, And my company was losing money. There'd be no raises for management at all. You'd be lucky to keep your salary where it was. And I think you guys need to look at that also. And I see the major cuts are coming from school books and materials for the classrooms. That's not the place to cut it. You know, we already have enough trouble keeping our kids up to date on what's going on. And I think that's just a very bad spot to do it.

[8834] SPEAKER_36: Thank you. Sam Matsumoto.

[8842] SPEAKER_22: Hi, good evening. Yes, I'm Sam Matsumoto. I'm a teacher here at Newark Memorial High School. I teach visual art. Just finished year five. Very exciting. And it's the first week of summer vacation. Drove down here from Berkeley just to Start my summer vacation off, you know, talking at a school board meeting. I do want to thank member Preciado, yeah, for bringing up the issue of pulling items and actually giving people a chance to speak because just the optics of the continuously pushing back the budget hearing until the academic year is over after the teachers have left the classrooms and maybe the parents, you know, are on summer vacation just is a little concerning. Just the timing of it, even if it is within But my most, couple of things, you know, I, that are concerning to me, received Superintendent Sanchez reminding us to remain focused on our three goals, academic excellence, increase our enrollment, and remain fiscally solvent. And since we're talking about the budget, and we are constantly throughout the year, it's been very clear to our site administrators and to the teachers, you know, yeah, we need to increase enrollment. That's where the money comes from. And as speakers before me have stated, The items in the budget study session number six document where items under consideration of increasing class sizes both for K3 and at the secondary level are very concerning. Those two things don't really seem to match even to someone who's not trained in finance. So if you want to, yeah, as people have said, Bring families here. If you mathematically figure it out, you know, you have 35 students in a, so you want to bring up the class sizes in math and English and language, you know, 35. And class time is, you know, maybe an hour long. Okay, how much face time is your kid actually getting? So maybe a couple minutes. Maybe a couple minutes of that. And also to meet these really ambitious LCAP goals of making our students meet standards. Thank you.

[8961] SPEAKER_35: Okay, thank you.

[8964] SPEAKER_36: Rachel Bloom.

[8973] Rachel Bloom: Hi, me again, Rachel Bloom at Graham. I've been talking a lot about money this year, so I'm going to just keep going with that theme since we're talking about the budget today. I mentioned before about one problem we have is not enough and attracting people to come. And I'm just kind of reminding you that one possibility is to try to get more money. And I'm just hoping that people on the school board or somewhere in the district are looking into alternate funding sources so we don't have to keep cutting. Another way to kind of save money is to not waste it. So for example, like not getting sued in the first place and losing money in that sort of stuff. So for example, when we work with students with special needs, sometimes we don't meet their needs and then we're held accountable for that. So if we have really strong programs like an inclusion program at an elementary site, It's really great to make sure that those teachers are properly trained and that the students are in the right placement so that we're not sued, so that we can save money. And so, again, I know I came earlier and I was talking to everyone, make sure that somewhere, somehow, the training for those teachers is in place. And I'm not talking just about the time to teach training on behavior management, because that's behavior management. That's not building a whole inclusion program and what that is. Think about making sure that that is in place. If we spend a little money now, we're going to get, we're going to reap those benefits later on by doing things right the first time. Last but not least, another great way to get people to come to the district is for them to know that we have excellent academic performance. And right now, I think overall the district is performing in the yellow on the dashboard. And I'm looking here and our students with special needs, the students with disabilities are in the orange for graduation rate. And they're performing in the red for ELA and math performance. And so when we're thinking about budget and putting money where it's most needed, we should think about the resources for students with special needs because that's clearly an area of need. We are, we do have programs in Sonday and Apex and different programs, but also consider that we need people to help students and it's the people and the teachers and the paras that do that meaningful work. It's not a program. Thank you.

[9132] SPEAKER_36: Thank you. Timothy Merritt.

[9138] SPEAKER_32: Thank you and good evening. I apologize if my thoughts are a little disjointed, but I guess you'll forgive me because I'm a little confused tonight. I think this is the third time that I've come to a meeting where the budget was an item on the agenda and it got removed. Customer service. I have 21 years. Mr. Rodriguez, you have 21 years on the school board. I have 21 years of experience with customer service as in the retail industry. I sold women's shoes. I sold men's shoes. I sold men's tailored clothing. I worked as a travel manager for a corporation managed a $17.5 million budget. I know about customer service. If a customer came to my shoe floor, and said, this sale is on today. And I said, well, we put it off till tomorrow. That wouldn't fly. Our customers wouldn't come back. We want to differentiate our experience here at Newark Unified with our students and our parents. We need to have a clear agenda. We need to know where we're going. It is a difficult process. I have a good friend, and sometimes I look like him, about, oh, I would say probably December in the year, Albert Einstein. I start looking a little frazzled. He said, if you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough. And I use that thought in my teaching as well. I'm not the best teacher. I'm a pretty good teacher. But if I can't explain it to my students, and they can't explain it back to me, then they don't understand it. As I said, I have five years of experience working with a $17.5 million budget. I read, because I am on vacation, I read the 128-page FCMAT, and one of the recommendations was to present the budget in a layperson's manner. I don't know what a layperson is. I'm not a layperson, and I don't understand the budget, so we're not there. in my opinion. Test scores. Now let's go ADA. Why do students miss school? Sometimes it's the weather. At Macy's we calculated the weather, we kept a very discreet forecast of the weather and we knew what our sales were going to be based on the weather. We know what the attendance, we should know what the attendance is going to be based on the weather conditions and why not make a bigger push on those days to get kids to school, figure out a way to make them come to school. They come because they have friends at school. PBIS is a very important initiative, which we've talked about in the LCAP. I am on the PBIS committee for my school site. And teachers, if we don't have enough teachers for our I understand that. I understand that. And I respectfully want to finish my sentence. If we have too many students in the classroom, that student isn't going to feel like they need to come to school. My students know that I miss them when they don't come to school.

[9339] SPEAKER_35: Thank you. Thank you. Angela.

[9341] SPEAKER_24: Good evening, Angela. I hate to say this but you're broke. I prefer that you not use reserves. I'd like to see cuts now to cover entire deficit. There must be other cuts you haven't yet identified. Having more money enables you to make wiser choices under pressure. I grew up in poverty and believe me, people make stupid choices when they don't have money. I don't envy your job, and I appreciate your service. I really do. I support a parcel tax. How about a three-year parcel tax ASAP? How about no selling of land during that time? I'd like to see one that generates 2 million. Actually, I'd like to see one that generates 6 million, but Union Cities didn't pass it 2 million. Sad when you consider how much we spend to imprison youth. What's $900? I'll cut you a check tonight, really. Either way, I'm still going to, if the polls don't show that people will support $900, I'm still going to cut a check to my schools through donorschoose.org. I want to thank the superintendent for union negotiations. It's not a fun job. When you look at the tiny salary increase, also look at the accelerating pension payments, additional 1 million this year alone, climbing, compounding, year after year for decades. That's not insignificant. You have to look at that in addition to salary. By the way, increasing class sizes is just a salary reduction. Tonight, you'll be talking about this fund and that fund. There's only one fund, and it's the taxpayer. It's my pocket. It's your pocket. It's your neighbor's pocket. My child and your grandchildren did not issue pension IOUs. Adults created this problem. Youth did not invest in the stock market. Unborn youth as well, decades, right? You did not call a pension holiday. You did not promise unrealistic benefits and returns. We own it. We got to cut the check. Both employer and employee. And it hurts. It fucking hurts. We're not entitled to pass the buck to future generations. Thank you.

[9531] SPEAKER_35: Please wrap it up. Thank you.

[9535] SPEAKER_36: So that concludes our public speakers for item 8.2, which is the public hearing. Board members, are there any comments prior to closing this? Member Preciado?

[9548] SPEAKER_27: So I had a question for Mr. Richards. So I can clarify this. So we've been having the budget forums and the discussions regarding that we have $5 million in cuts to make over the next three years. So based on your presentation that I saw, is it now $6.6 million by 19-20?

[9581] SPEAKER_31: That's over the course of the multi-year projection, so you're looking over two more additional years beyond the upcoming year, the combined net total of the 6.6, and then if you add the 800,000, it's about 7.5, which works out to be about 3.75 per year on top of the 1.25 that was incorporated into the budget based on the information from budget study session four, which gets us to the five million. We're still at the same place that we were.

[9612] SPEAKER_27: So it's still 5 million, so I just misread that in terms of the 6.6, or maybe that's 6.

[9618] SPEAKER_31: You're talking about the difference between the amount of the deficit versus the net unrestricted balance at the end of the third year. You're looking at two different numbers that are calculated differently.

[9631] SPEAKER_27: OK, so maybe just so you're clear. So we have a deficit of 5 million that we have to address by 19-20? 18-19. 18-19. And you're saying if we don't make any cuts, then by 2021, then we would be at the 6.6.

[9651] SPEAKER_31: No, no. OK. Let me go back and kind of walk you through where a deficit is versus where the imbalances. Patty, can you go back to slide show format, please? The net decrease in fund balance, which is the third line from the bottom that we're projecting for next year, is about $67,800. It's only at that number because we have the inter-fund transfer in of $4.3 million. So if you add the 4-3 and the $67,000 on the natural, we would have had a deficit going into next year of $4,385,000. So if we didn't have the money from Fund 17, It would be $4.3 million in cuts immediately above what we've already identified and incorporated into the budget. Going into the multi-year projection slide. Sorry, folks. It lets me go one slide at a time with this clicker. If you look at the revenues versus the expenditures and kind of ignore inter-fund transfer for a moment, projection for 18-19, the difference of the revenue of 45.8 versus the expenditures of 49.5, that is a difference of about $3.7 million projected. for that year for that year's deficit. The following year it's the difference between the 47.6 and the 51.3 million. So it again is about 3.7, 3.8 million dollars projected deficit in each of those two years. That number is getting slightly smaller from the 4.3 because we do have a small amount of growth projected into each of those years from the developments as based on the last demographic study that we had. And yes, we do have an updated one coming. I got an email from them today. They actually finally got the updates from the city of Newark on some of the stuff related to development. So they're working on crunching the numbers. And we should have it in a few weeks. We'll be bringing it to the board in August.

[9796] SPEAKER_36: So in layman's terms, using Mr. Merritt's terminology, if we don't do anything, we've already identified the 1.2 from the study sessions. If we do nothing else moving forward, Don't budge. Things stay as forecasted, static. What happens after next year? What happens the year after that? When does the state come in and take over? When does the contract get resolved? Et cetera, et cetera.

[9822] SPEAKER_31: OK. Well, we'll begin that discussion. Part of the element of what will be acted upon with the budget is something the county is requiring the board to take with regard to a resolution committing to taking care of the deficit. as required, so that by the first interim report, we will be able to project what those changes will be. If we cannot certify, we make no more changes at all, and if we, based on the way the current numbers are, we would go from qualified to negative at first interim in December. At that point, the county goes into action to step in. If we run out of cash, that's the point at which the state steps in to appoint an administrator. That would occur midway through, well, towards the end of, actually, the 18-19 school year, if we were to do absolutely nothing.

[9878] SPEAKER_36: We don't do anything. We run out of cash in a year and a half.

[9882] SPEAKER_31: Yeah, it's closer to almost two years. It'd be like the last month of the year.

[9886] SPEAKER_36: And that's when the state comes in, dissolves the board, rips up all contracts, right?

[9891] SPEAKER_31: Well, not rips up all contracts at that point. What happens is the district goes under state administrator and then the state administrator has a rescind authority over anything that costs money and it actually starts before that because once the county appoints a fiscal advisor They don't have, the board keeps its authority, but they have stay and rescind authority over any decisions that the board makes. So they could, if anything costs more money, they could overturn it. But then when you go under a state trustee, as there have been several districts both in this county and throughout the state that have, They actually then basically take complete control of the district with one mission from the superintendent of public instruction. And that is balance the budget and get out. Because the way state law works is the district ends up immediately taking a loan from the state to cover the shortfall. Once the district takes the loan from the state, it then has to pay it back with interest to the state development bank. And that then becomes part of the operating expenses of the district, the paying back of the loan out of the general fund.

[9957] Nancy Thomas: current contracts are contracts and we would have, they won't rescind the contracts. Yeah, they can. We have to pay it with the loan.

[9967] SPEAKER_31: The contracts don't get rescinded as they exist. However, once the reopeners occur, then at that point adjustments can be made.

[9978] Nancy Thomas: But the current contracts have to be honored.

[9982] SPEAKER_31: So it would be during that reopener Under the current agreement, for example, we have a contract coming before the board tonight. The salary for the current school year, 16, 17, and 17, 18, are established, and there's a reopen in 18, 19. So depending on where we were in negotiations in 18, 19, potentially. But then 19 is the end of the contract period anyway. So that would be an issue going into 19, 20.

[10005] SPEAKER_27: So I have some more comments or questions, but I'll let other board members, and then I'll come back.

[10009] SPEAKER_36: Go ahead, Ms.

[10010] SPEAKER_16: Crocker. Just to summarize things. We said a while back that we wanted to have this taken care of in three years. The first year we would take care of a million, or a million and some, and then we're going to be taking care of four million this year. So we have a plan to go ahead and cut that. It's a question statement. So we are talking about where the cuts can be within the parameters of our contracts. and what we can do legally. So we had said that it is possible for us to do that. There are a number of things that we have lists that we have not discussed, but that is our job for next year, is to find $4 million that can be cut out so that we are not tapping into Fund 17. Hopefully, things will change on the state level so that the ending balance will be larger than we anticipate at this point. But we can't depend upon that. And Fund 17 is giving us the breathing room to be able to cut where we need to cut. And so that's next year's job. We could have said, we cut this year. And that was one of the options that we had. And had we made that choice, there would have been pandemonium to cut that much in the three month period of time. Because that's what we had left in our school year. So we are looking to look at it in a metered way to take care of situations, to take care of the fats gone. There's no more fat in the budget. It hasn't been there for a while. So our job is to make the difficult decisions with the help of people in the community and the staff to make those cuts. But we can't tell you now what those cuts are because we don't know. That's our job for next year. That's the job we have to do.

[10136] SPEAKER_35: Superintendent?

[10138] SPEAKER_28: Thank you. I wanted to put it in plain terms. I spent some time with the financial person from the county recently, and actually at the will of the board, I've tentatively scheduled him to provide a study session on August 1 on this theme. And he said the title of that session would be, you're at a crossroads. And you have an opportunity now to utilize some of your reserves to soften the blow and do it over the next two years, as has been described, and have a say in how it's reduced and how it's done, or we will decide for you. So that's really as simple as I can put it. And I think that we have a say. And I think that the Newark pride calls for, OK, we have an opportunity to have a say here. And I think it's wise, even though generally you don't want to use one-time funds for this, but in this situation, I think it's appropriate to, you have to consider that, because we are impacting people. And I think that that is something that's important. And I think that some people might say, well, you know, why are you giving any raises to anyone if you're cutting? because we still need to try to keep teachers. It's hard to find teachers. It's hard to find employees. And I think that's something that's of value. But I think just plain and simple, either we can have a say of how it gets cut, or it can be decided for us. I think that's pretty straightforward.

[10228] SPEAKER_36: Thank you. Member Preciado? I was going to let people. Is that right? Nobody else? And I'll speak after you, though.

[10235] SPEAKER_27: OK. So I think as part of this conversation, I think it's important for us to then I know this is kind of jumping ahead a little bit, but in terms of as we potentially have like a resolution of moving forward that we incorporate in that resolution that we will have budget forums or town halls as part of the process in terms of making sure it's concrete. If we have, I think the biggest issue that we have is that it's not just the amount that needs to be cut, it's the communication that has gone to our community in terms of just in terms of what we've said or not said. And I think having a forum or structure for that input, it's hard decisions that we have to make. These approximately $4 million, the $3.7 million that we're talking about, it's going to the community and saying, this is where we're at. We need ideas in order for us to raise revenue and make cuts. So it's just having that conversation. So I think that's the important piece. So just my thoughts in terms of the actual moving forward with the potential budget resolution would be to have the INIT language that specifically maps out that we will have some budget forms for town halls as part of that process before December because we have to be hopefully positive if not qualified so that we're not negative. So that piece, the other piece. that I wanted to outline as we have this discussion for the board moving forward. I think we should have some concrete proposals about different examples. So we've had more soft kind of here's the main ideas of where we could cut. We need to have concrete proposals of like this is what this would look like and then for revenue, this is what a partial tax would look like. Combined together so that we have those discussions as well because when we put topics like consolidate schools, like I think about as a parent, you're just like, wait, so is my school next? Without having that discussion, it just makes it seem like we're trying to cut everything. So I think it's just for us to have that conversation and then for us to open that conversation to the community. So that's what I wanted to say in terms of my thoughts.

[10398] SPEAKER_36: Thank you. Mr. Richards, I think for the sake of the audience and perhaps members who are watching at home, I know as you're going through your PowerPoint, it shows several different funds, you know, SIP Fund 21, 25, etc. Inevitably, people are going to wonder, hey, there's money there. Why can't we just take that and put it into our general fund to offset our deficit? So maybe we can make it, why can't we not buy playground equipment and just pay for the deficit? Can we state that very clearly why we can or cannot do that?

[10427] SPEAKER_31: Yes, we can do that. Actually, on the FAQ, that, those are two of the questions that were asked, particularly with regard to developer fees and with regard to the bond funds and with regard to the capital, special reserve capital outlay fund. And even one of the questions, I believe, had to be if we were to sell another site, could we use that to save off general fund expenditures? And the answer is no, we cannot in each of those funds cases. They're all restricted, particularly to additional capital expenses. That one time transfer that the board was able to do with the $4 million a year ago, a year and a half ago now. The window for doing that, that was a special exemption in the law that expired the end of the month in which the board took the action. We did it at the very last possible meeting at which it was allowed. So that window has now closed. There is a current bill traveling around in the legislature to potentially change that. However, that bill has a second spike to it in that it would require offering any property that is not currently in use to a charter school, and then if it were then subsequently sold, then it would potentially be able to be used for any one-time purpose. However, that has not passed the legislature at this time, and it's still under consideration.

[10507] SPEAKER_28: May I just chime in? What I've been hearing, though, is really more of a simple here's the type of funds we have, here's the definitions of how those dollars can be used, and here's kind of the restrictions around those dollars. That's kind of what I'm, maybe something that would be a supplement to the FAQ that would say, here's the definitions, fund 17 means this, title one, title nine, those kind of, is that what I understand?

[10532] SPEAKER_36: Yeah, there's a lot of acronyms that may allude.

[10535] SPEAKER_27: We can work on that. And it's opening up to the community, so maybe we figure out a way to mail it home or if that costs too much money, we will divide it up and we're good at walking. We can walk it to people's houses and deliver this is what's happening. The whole point is the communication. That's the piece that we have to, I think, get or work with the city and their newsletter to advocate for this information. Just people need to know.

[10562] SPEAKER_36: Member Thomas?

[10563] Nancy Thomas: Well, speaking to that last point, I think the city has offered in the past to put an insert in their quarterly newsletter, and we've never taken them up on that, and that's a minimum cost item. So I think these are all good suggestions. I wanted to play a little bit off Member Preciado's comments about communication to emphasize that I don't think the county's going to want us to just say, we're going to save $880 by consolidating schools. I think they're going to want to say, what is the plan? And the state of California has a that we all received from a member of the community, a process that we should follow for, and that's a huge budget item. That's our $888,000. Is that what it is? That's huge. If we can't do that, I don't see how we're going to get to the $4 million because that, with other things. So that means we have to really start working on that with a concrete plan that has a timeline The other couple big items that we haven't discussed that staff has recommended are increasing the class size at the high school and furlough days. Those are things that have to be negotiated. And so I think it's very, very important if we can begin negotiating and, and getting those decided before we have to go to the state at the first interim, or the county I mean. So that we can say, you know, this, these aren't just numbers we're throwing at a at the wall and hoping they stick. So I think the process that we're going to follow, and that means I think that we need to communicate among ourselves as a board and we need to make the time, and we haven't always done that in the past, to make the time to meet on a Saturday morning or to meet at other times so that we can hear from the public. So I just hope that we will all take the time that this is going to take to properly communicate with the community.

[10693] SPEAKER_36: OK, Member Crocker, let's make this be the last one, because you will have an opportunity to speak more on Monday.

[10698] SPEAKER_16: Just on something that Ms. Thomas said, I think we're looking at a marathon. It should be a nonstop kind of thing. We need to do it, we need to grind it out, and we need to act on it. Because we've been doing a lot of talking for a long time, and we need to move on it because the sooner we get the cuts in place, the more effective they will be.

[10722] SPEAKER_36: I think the communication to 8.3, public hearing on the Newark Teachers Association tentative agreement. Is there any information or do we just entertain guest speakers? Ms. Benson, how would you like to deal with it?

[10737] SPEAKER_09: No presentation.

[10743] SPEAKER_03: Good evening board, yes this evening we are bringing forward a tentative agreement with our teachers association. This is a result of nearly a year of negotiation and discussion so we are requesting that the board approve the tentative agreement that is being submitted to you this evening.

[10762] SPEAKER_36: Okay so that part will come later on when it is on the agenda so we will address it This is the public hearing portion of it. And so we do have a member of public who wishes to speak with it on this. Mr. Chris Ball.

[10781] SPEAKER_25: This is incredibly hard for me and I should probably address one of the elephants in the room before I begin my comments. I have chosen to resign my position with Newark Unified School District. It's one of the hardest decisions that I've made and that was as of about four o'clock yesterday. And it's for one very simple reason that the board needs to understand in spite of these conversations, Newark has lost its competitiveness with surrounding districts in terms of salary and benefits. The working conditions aside, People take a look at that. And if you're talking about raising class sizes and making cuts to schools and making life harder for teachers, our members are wondering why are they're being asked to work harder for less. It just doesn't make sense. If you were in any other position and your boss said, I'm going to give you more work, but I'm going to cut your salary or take away your benefits, you're more likely to quit. I think that's what's happening. Our teachers are being overworked. and undervalued, and I know that we have difficult conversations to make. The good news is this contract is a Band-Aid on it, and I urge the board to vote yes on it tonight. It starts the process. It's a fair agreement, very hardly worked by both bargaining teams. I want to report that our members voted 125 to 16 to ratify it on our end. This has to be the beginning of the conversation. And what you need to understand is you can ask Washington, DC if cuts alone will solve a deficit problem. They do not. What is Washington talking about? I don't care what side of the aisle you're on. If you're a Republican or Democrat, this is not a political speech. They're talking about a combination of cuts, but also tax reform. This community here tonight gets the problem. And we have not asked them to help. We have not gone hand out, hard on our sleeve, and said, we need your help. Because it should not be up to the five of you to decide this alone. And I think that's what the community is trying to communicate to you. If we make the communication clear enough, our community has shown that they will support us. They voted yes on the bond. Was it a controversial vote? Yes, because bond money. For facility maintenance, you never know where the money's going, right, if you're not involved in those discussions. But when you're talking about closing schools, increasing class sizes up to 34, 35, whatever the number is, you're talking about losing 25% of your staff because we're not competitive anymore. That resonates with people. That really resonates with people. You have to take immediate action to solve this. Yes, you have to solve the deficit, but you also have to keep people here. I don't envy your position at all, and I haven't for 12 years, but I would urge you to vote yes on our contract, and let's start that conversation. Thank you.

[10984] SPEAKER_35: Thank you.

[10987] SPEAKER_36: There are no additional speakers on 8.3. Board members, I'm not seeing any requests for speaking either. And so therefore, we will close this public hearing on the NTA tentative agreement at 9.08 PM. With that, we jump to 7.1, which is the update. We have two staff reports, and hopefully these are short.

[11010] SPEAKER_35: Yes.

[11015] SPEAKER_36: update on LEAP with energy and water efficiency savings and free goods and services.

[11023] SPEAKER_31: So tonight we have with us Yvonne Tom from Beacon Consulting and Doug Amanta who are going to be speaking with regard to this item. This is an item the board had requested to come forward with regard to the energy program that we've been doing over the past few years and kind of bring us up to speed on where we are. So I'll turn it over to Yvonne. Yvonne, if we could have you speak into the mic because you're also being televised.

[11053] SPEAKER_20: Thank you. I've been working with your school district for about five years. I came out of Alameda County Office of Ed. And my goal is always to save you money, to find money, to find resources, and to use them effectively, and to train your staff. So at the high school, which uses most of your energy costs, we do the parking lot lights. We got free pool covers for you. Well, you had to pay taxes. We just recently did the pool lights We are in the process of working on the exterior lights. And those all came out of the Prop 39 funds. And we receive incentives from PG&E. And for your EMS, which is a bond project, we were able to get a payment from PG&E of $40,000. So overall, what it says is that we will save you $127,000 for our work. And within less than three years, you will get your money back. You didn't even pay for it. You got it from Prop 39. So it's not like you paid out the money. But if you had paid out the money, you would have gotten free money, basically, after three years. So this is what we do. We look for work. How can we continue to reduce costs? And in one of our analysis, which I will do, which is actually I will not spend more time than I have to, is that we will now start to look at where we can lower the rates. Because right now, for summer months, you pay really high cost. PG&E is not lowering the cost. So then we are going to work on shaving off those costs to, again, not only save the amount of energy that you use, but the cost of energy. And so when we do it on a bar chart, your energy usage went up a little bit in the middle. because we're now using HVAC. You didn't have a lot of HVAC that was working, so it bumped up. But then working with the EMS system and our engineer, who's over there, we, again, continue to drive down your energy usage. If we go to the junior high school, I was chasing leaks. You have more leaks than is unbelievable. And so I was able to knock out five of them. I got you another free pool cover. We did exterior lights, and again, the EMS. And so, again, not using any of the funds that you have, okay, we bring these in from somewhere else. We spent $230,000. We got incentives of $23,000. We have savings of $60,000 a year. And over a four-year period, those funds are paid back, and you have more free money. This is to free up your operating costs, okay, because I come out of corporate. How do you free up operating costs by spending your capital properly? And there, you can clearly see the usage going down. Okay. But again, we're going to shave off the summer expense of months. So your leak, you can see, it was kind of really up there. And then after we did the leak repair in 2014, then we can see the water usage has gone down. I understand from your facilities person that you sprung more leaks at the pool and I will be investigating your pool. So it's an ongoing issue because your buildings are old and you need people to be constantly honing in on where the problem is. So I continue to look at what you're using. Your MOT building, exterior lights were done recently. I managed to get you free garden equipment from Bay Area Air Quality. There you traded in your old gas powered equipment and you got free No taxes, no freight. Okay free battery operated equipment I just finished doing another half million dollars for Bay Area air quality to give to the city of Fremont to give to UC Berkeley to give to others Schools to in cities and so these are the kinds of things I'm always looking for so I you get $44,000, and you didn't pay for any of this. At McGregor Park, I know it is being occupied and used by the city, and they were not managing the water very well. And my chart got all screwed up. They didn't have to pay for it, right? Well, yeah. So anyway, my chart got all screwed up when I went from Excel to PowerPoint. So that high green bar is when the leaks were really going out of, I mean, their usage was going out of control, and we were getting demands to reduce water because of the drought. And so after Tanya, who used to be your supervisor of facilities, and Gabe went over, we managed to talk him down into using less. So basically, you're saving $9,000 a year. I'm planning to do irrigation controllers, which would really drive it down. Again, I will have Prop 39 pay for that.

[11389] Nancy Thomas: What is the total cost per year for McGregor Park?

[11393] SPEAKER_20: How much is it? I don't have that with me. I could give it to you later, I'm sorry. I mean, I don't have it on the top of my head.

[11399] Nancy Thomas: Well, if it's a 10% drop. Let's have a finish. Okay.

[11402] SPEAKER_20: Go ahead. Okay. Sorry. But anyway, I intend to drive it down more when I put in the controllers. So the total work we've done is we spent $575,000, most of which is none of your money. We have gotten incentives of $132,000 from various sources. And we have savings of $200,000 a year. So basically, after three years, if it were your money, you would be saving all the future savings. So we are planning to work on the summer pool at the high school, that's summer this year, and to save energy again. And we are going to work on reducing your summer rates, especially at your high school and your junior high. I'm going to chase those new leaks. And I'm going to put the irrigation controllers at Newark High, Junior High, McGregor Park, and Music. But I want to work on an overall plan of irrigation at the high school because it's really screwed up. And we have exterior lights. And I have been chasing this grant, the last one, Schilling Interior Lights, for about four years. I will eventually be successful. I'm meeting with Wells Fargo next week. And I'm going to try and get you some more money. And my most loved thing is I would like to work with your high school students. I've been after this also for years. So we do high school internships and college internships. And currently, Puck is working with the students at Albany High where we're doing a lot of similar work, Prop 39, where we ask the kids, would you consider a STEM major? Would you consider a green knowledge worker career? And we also work with college students. Because you don't have to go to a whole four-year and take all that calculus. Who wants to take all that calculus? So what you do instead, you say, well, how about if you're an air conditioner control person and Siemens will hire you after you finish the program at Laney? OK? And we had two high college interns from Laney who got a job right away for $60,000. OK? Those are the, you know, just, how about thinking about it and seeing women OK, I have a PhD. I'm not a scientist, and I'm not a STEM worker, but see people, women, people of color, any kind. I really don't care. My son was a special ed student. He is finishing at Washington State University. So people, just give me your students, and we will love to have them in our program. And that's it.

[11571] SPEAKER_33: Was that fair enough? Thank you.

[11574] SPEAKER_36: So we do have a couple of questions and or comments. Let's start with Ms. Crocker.

[11579] SPEAKER_16: Yes. We throw around Prop 39 money. Can you explain just really briefly what that is so people understand?

[11587] SPEAKER_20: So about three years ago, the state of California voted, the voters voted to go ahead and tax multinationals who don't pay a tax in California. for five years, and they will share half of that, which is estimated at $2.5 billion, with schools. And so as long as the school spent that money on saving energy, okay, and then I managed to get a water project inside there too, then they would pay for those projects, and that is a source of funding for you.

[11622] SPEAKER_16: So we don't have to pay that money back?

[11624] SPEAKER_20: No, it's a grant. And then what we were able to do is, because I come out of corporate and I'm always searching for alternatives, is to leverage that fund through the utility companies, which is PG&E and the water utilities. And then also, like, my Earth Day Network in Wells Fargo project is, again, another effort to leverage it.

[11649] SPEAKER_16: We are looking at solar. Is this something that you do?

[11652] SPEAKER_20: We are looking at solar. Yes, we do do solar. We actually are offering one of our school districts a whole solar system. And they haven't decided if they want it yet. But I have been working with Brian. He's been sending me lots of people to work on, to think about it, to really evaluate things and whether it makes sense and what is the most appropriate. Because you do not get the discount that people get. You're a government agency. If you're an individual, you get a 30% credit off your taxes. You don't pay taxes. So then where does that credit go? And that's, I always am following the money. Where is the money going? How is it flowing? What are the guarantees? And the one that I'm having a problem with, the school district where we are saying, yes, Prop 39 will pay in its entirety for your solar program. They're concerned, where is the solar company going to be 20, 25 years from now? I mean, it is an issue. Okay?

[11714] SPEAKER_36: Ms. Thomas.

[11715] Nancy Thomas: Yeah. I guess this is directed at Mr. Richards as well as to you. It's about the fact that out of the Russian, sale of Russian school money, we set aside, oh, I think $4 million total for painting and landscaping. And the painting is probably going to be a million and a half of that. So we have over 2 million. Yeah, we have over 2 million probably that we can spend on landscaping. And we did approve an architectural study that ended up getting dropped by the architectural firm, right? They dropped that. But it seems to me you're leveraging prop 39 money and all sorts of other money and in here We're sitting with that money. Is there any way that that part of that landscaping is to get To get water management systems in all our sites Is there any way to leverage that and what are your plans going forward for? For getting another architect to say how we're going to do the landscaping here

[11799] SPEAKER_20: Brian, do you want me to answer it? Because I actually haven't been able to meet with you. Because I had surgery, and I've been sort of out under the weather. But I've been working with Vince on a plan.

[11812] SPEAKER_31: You go ahead and broach a little bit of the plan, and then we're actually going to address your specific question with regard to the landscaping in the next item in the facilities update. But we can talk about it now or then. OK. Go ahead.

[11825] SPEAKER_20: So anyway, I have been trying to use Prop 39 funds, so I managed to get the state to agree to pay for the irrigation controllers. And I also taught your water district to pay for some of them too. So that will be a big chunk. And because I'm working at Sunol, and I managed to get them a huge water grant, which is not available to you because you're in the wrong water district. But we are working on a whole irrigation plan for them. And I have had that irrigation designer visit your site at Newark High School already. And we need to discuss what we're going to do about those huge fields and the courtyards and all that sort of stuff. And I think I can do it fairly cheaply. And then that person could do how things should be laid out, etc. so that we know what we're doing. And I will pay for that under Prop 39.

[11879] SPEAKER_31: And then with regard to the specific question, yes we do have work in progress with regard to moving forward with the landscape projects. We'll talk about that in the next item as far as where we're going with that amongst all the other summer projects and things that are still in process. But we'll wait and

[11899] Nancy Thomas: Okay, I'll wait.

[11901] SPEAKER_36: So it looks like after the efficiency, the McGregor site is using as much water as the entirety of the junior high school. I'm sorry, say that again. It looks like the water usage at McGregor alone is equivalent to what's being used at the junior high school.

[11919] SPEAKER_20: Yes. In the top three users of water are those three sites, the high school, the junior high school, and McGregor. And that's why I focus my effort in water.

[11929] SPEAKER_36: So can we get a number on how much we're paying for zero, well, what I think is zero use or almost zero use of our students?

[11936] Nancy Thomas: Yeah, that's right.

[11937] SPEAKER_36: To pay for the water at McGregor?

[11940] SPEAKER_31: Yes, we can. Do we know? We actually, well, we track it by site code so we can pull that information up from the water bills. How much do we think it's, I mean,

[11948] SPEAKER_36: Probably 70, 80, 90, 100. I don't know. I'm not even trying to guess.

[11951] SPEAKER_31: Give me a few minutes and I'll look into the system and pull a number up.

[11953] SPEAKER_36: Oh, you can do that. Awesome. OK. And how hard would it be for us to just turn off the spigot?

[11958] Nancy Thomas: Yeah. Yeah. Yeah, I think that's a good. It's easy. That's a partly rhetorical question, I'm sorry.

[11965] SPEAKER_28: I think it's easy, but OK.

[11966] SPEAKER_16: I won't answer it. I have a yard that I did that to. I'm paying for it now. Yeah. We do have a guest speaker, Ms. Cindy Parks.

[11981] Cindy Parks: Wow, wow, wow. Positive news. That was great. We're all back there chattering about how wonderful that was. Woohoo! So that was very nice to hear all of the savings. I do have a couple of questions on page 2, I guess it would be, where it says Newark Memorial High School Energy Efficiency under the EMS, which of course was a bond project. There is an incentive kickback that was $40,000, which was mentioned, $40,836. It was a kickback from PG&E. And I'd like to know where that money went to. Does that not come back to the bond? Because it was a bond-funded program.

[12022] SPEAKER_31: I can answer that question. And the answer to that question is it does not go into the bond. However, it is reserved for the purpose of additional energy reduction is how it came back to us. It's a incentive back that's restricted for the use of additional energy rejection in the district. So it's actually sitting in a categorical program within the general fund on the restricted side of the general fund.

[12050] Cindy Parks: Okay, so that it's illegal for it to go into the bond?

[12055] SPEAKER_31: It came back to us specifically with ties to additional energy reduction. As far as which fund carries the dollars. Generally, whenever the district receives something of additional outside funding source that is restricted in that way, it's carried in the restricted general fund. The Fund 21 is specifically to account for the bond dollars themselves as opposed to outside other funding sources coming back in.

[12083] Cindy Parks: And two plus million was expended for the EMS system, so if they got $40,000 back, I mean, that would be my whole point. I mean, we can discuss it at the next meeting. Okay. To move on, I only have a minute left now. On the junior high, the junior high water efficiency, well, let me, I'm sorry. Never mind. The water efficiency, it talks about the five leaks that are at the junior high. And when we went on the Tuthuvan tour, we were told that there is no functioning pump at the junior high pool. and that in order for them to add chemicals, the water level has to be reduced on the pool. They pour in the chemicals, the chlorine, and then they fill it back up. First of all, you're talking about draining water that's got chemicals in it. Then you're talking about just pouring chemicals in, no pump again to siphon it around, and you're putting more water in. So you're wasting water on a pool that's not functioning and hasn't functioned from what I understand from almost two years. You don't have money. to be doing that, wasting. I don't understand. You don't drain it, drill the holes in it you need to do, do what you need to do, fill it with dirt, and you're done. That is a waste of money. You're draining chemicals and refilling with water. How are you saving water? Thank you.

[12161] SPEAKER_35: Thank you.

[12167] SPEAKER_36: On to item 7.2, Facilities Projects Update, Summer of 2017.

[12173] SPEAKER_31: Mr. Richards. Patty, if we could get the presentation with the brown and orange striped cup. Robert Sands is also here from Banner this evening for part of this item. And I asked Vince to be here in case questions are related to M, O, and T with relation to this item. There was also a handout that was given to all the board members. It's the one with a lot of purple on it. And there was one that was attached to the agenda. It did have an error in it. So the ones in the back are revision to that item. Because there was one item that was listed as a bond project that is not So I had them fix that and we distributed corrected copies out today. But with regard to the summer projects and things that we have going on, we've got quite a bit going on in Measure G as we anticipated. It's the continuation of the roofing and HVAC project at Newark Memorial High School, which is the remaining buildings that haven't already been roofed, 100, 500, and 600. Part of 100 has been done, it was done last year, and part of it is, the rest of it is being done this year, as well as the metal roofing. And then playground structures throughout the district. There are already some play structures that are up, some of which were out of measure G and some of which were out of the proceeds from Russian with relation to the birch groves. The remaining ones are the ones that are on the agenda item for tonight. And although some of the sites, you might look at them and think, oh, they already got all their playgrounds done, the smaller dollar item schools that are on that item when we get to it, it's related to their swings and some of the other things that are not part of the giant playground structures that were part of the overall list of projects that are still coming forward tonight. With regard to projects going on from the proceeds from Russian, this is Fund 40 for those that are following along from the budget presentation earlier. We do have painting going on at the schools that didn't get painted last summer. And if you've driven by McGregor today or any time over the weekend, because they got started over the process of the weekend, they are moving like lightning on that campus. It's going quite fast and it looks quite good. So that one got underway the minute school got out. They were out there and they were Johnny on the spot. With regard to Newark Memorial, you might be wondering where the roofing contractor was. They're actually starting next Monday. So they've got their work cut out for them. The landscaping you mentioned earlier, the design firm did withdraw after the award that the board had awarded it. They ran into some issues with regard to things that we require in contracts that they were not able to comply with. And so we were not able to complete the award of that. There has been process moving forward to identify our placement. We're going a bit of a different route that will be less expensive with regard to the design side to preserve money to do the actual work with regard to the landscaping. With regard to your question earlier as far as Could we also incorporate so that things are going beyond just the fronts of the schools? The original proposal was just related to everything that was on the front, sort of the curb appeal side of the schools and dealing with the front edges. We can certainly take a look at that and add that as part of the general scope we're looking at, but we would then dovetail it with what Yvonne's been working with with ACWD and with regard to the grants for the controllers. So we can certainly take a look at putting that together. As she mentioned, we've got a pending meeting coming up as we're that we're going to be looking at. We're going to be trying to look at all of our water usage issues. We did have the wish list that have come to the board the first one there Newark junior high school is actually already in process. There was a large. Planter for lack of a better definition that had benches around it that were the benches were and the concrete pad replacement is moving forward as a project with regard to there. Some of the other items we I found out today actually because I happen to be walking sites with Vince that he's got price quotes for me to review at our next meeting with regard to the marquees. So we are looking at for the schools that had marquees is their interest we're going to be reviewing those at our meeting later this week. We've also, we're looking at some things with regard to some sites that requested shade structures. I had some concerns about the initial shade structures that I saw with regard to durability because they're that, it's not cloth but it's a really, it's sort of a bending material and I'm very concerned that it's not going to last the way that we need it to. So we're out looking for alternatives at this point. Then Lincoln Fencing, we're still working on getting quotations regarding the request that they've had. It was mentioned earlier. No, we didn't mention it yet earlier tonight. But Newark Memorial Scoreboard's been a discussion point for a while now because we've run into some question marks with regard to DSA and the default settings of the peers because it does not appear that the original scoreboard went through the DSA process. They don't have a record of it. We don't have a record of a DSA stamped set of drawings. It was evidently funded by an outside agency and so we're dealing with some challenges there that will be coming forward eventually but we need to take care of the state first. So the capital facilities fund, that's fund 25. When it's related to growth of the program we're utilizing some of those funds with regard to setting music up for the integration of the preschool onto music elementary's campus and the removal of some unusable portables that the board directed us to remove previously. We're also looking potential, well, let's go to potential projects first. Some of these are items related to the bond that the board has discussed in the past but haven't really moved forward, largely because we were still waiting to see how the final round of HVAC and roofing went before we looked at any additional spending. Now that we're in the final phase of roofing and HVAC, with regard to the original set, of HVAC units. Now we're starting to look at things that could be the remainder of the Measure G funds, and as well as the other funds that we have in the district, taking a look at sort of our district-wide universe of identified needs. And as we discussed at a previous meeting, as we move forward in developing the multi-year plan for the district, we're going to be incorporating both the facilities and the operations side with regard to that as we discuss our district I can't think of the word I'm trying to blank on the master plan.

[12615] Jodi Croce: Strategic plan.

[12618] SPEAKER_31: Strategic plan, thank you. As we incorporate all of those together coming forward in the fall. Some of the items that we've identified, of course the Newark Memorial High School science slash STEAM discussion that we've had a couple times in the past. Additional HVAC. When the Kitchell study was done six years ago now, and they identified the units that needed to be replaced that have been the sort of structure of the roofing and HVAC projects, well, six more years of time have gone by, and so more of our units have started to have issues. we're going to talk a little bit more about that. Most noticeably you perhaps notice that the one over the boardroom has some significant issues yesterday. They did do it for a refrigerant charge on it sort of a band-aid is making a halfway pleasant tonight, but we'll we'll talk about that at a future meeting as well. But with regard to the sites we have several other HBC units. A few at the high school in a couple of a couple of the 15 years ago, I think, give or take. I don't know exactly what year that was. But we've had some issues at Lincoln. And we've done some further study at some other sites throughout the district. We do have an issue at several of the campuses, but not all of them, with regard to where that seam is that runs around the middle of the multipurpose rooms, that it is not proper from there down. We're having issues with water getting into the building. It has to do with the way the bottom actually was done with it, not the seat poles not being set right. Vince might be able to explain it a whole lot better than I'm doing right now. But we do have an issue district wide with that. And so we're evaluating the extent of the work that may need to be done on those NPR buildings. We have an issue with our door hardware. The hardware that we use with our doors that allow us to use our key cards to get in. is now obsolete, so we're sort of cannibalizing and living off of what we have because we can no longer get it.

[12746] SPEAKER_36: So, Richard, I think we're investing way too much time on potential projects because I think that's going to lend itself when we do the strategic plan. That's fine.

[12752] SPEAKER_31: Yeah. Well, we can move off of that. Thank you. So, we can look at the rest of those as we move ahead to the strategic plan, recognizing that we have a limited time. That was the end of that. that you have has additional information with regard to potential costs or scope sizes, and they are, for the potential projects especially, have very high-level estimates. And we'll open it up for questions from the board.

[12779] SPEAKER_36: Comments? Okay, great, thank you. On to item 9.1, which is public comment on non-agenda items. First one is Nakisha Lopes.

[12808] SPEAKER_47: Hi, my name is Nakisha Lopes and I'm a teacher in this district and I'm a parent as well. I came to you because I'm very disappointed in this district right now. And we have been receiving harassment and discrimination with our two kids at this district. To go back, I have an older son here who has a chronic condition that limits his daily living skills. And one of it is going to a regular school. So we decided to put him in Crossroads Independent Study. And we decided to bring his brother-in-law as well for support for him. So my son graduated this year on Tuesday, June 13th, I believe, from Crossroads. And before that, we got a call that he was determined that he wouldn't graduate. He only had 30 credits to graduate. And the reason being that we didn't have a note, a doctor's note for Holman Hospital. So we got the note, and then we got a call from the superintendent saying that he needs to review his work. What's going on? Why is my son being targeted? If you're going to review his work, everyone else in the school's work needs to be reviewed. There is no reason. So my other son, his goal is to graduate early. So he's been working really hard to get his work done. So it's come back to us that his credits have been changed without notifying us. They are, we have asked for transcripts. We've been denied, they won't give us the transcripts. And we've known that my son's teachers, they are going around pressuring them to change their grades, their credits, and they are feeling uncomfortable about that. I sent an email to Leticia and the superintendent, Mr. Sanchez, on June 15th, asking them to stop the harassment and discrimination against my kids. And I said, my next step will go to the board, which I am here. And I haven't received any response. So my questions today are, does the superintendent have the right to change students' grades without parent notification as well? Does the district have, is it moral or ethical to bully teachers to change students' credits? And if you're going to investigate my kids, you need to investigate the whole school. And my last question is, why are my kids being targeted out of everyone in the school? We also know that some kids graduated that same day, they needed 12 credits or whatever, and they completed all 12 credits in one day, which is really crazy. So those type of kids need to be investigated too. My kids work really hard to get where they are. And I feel that they have the right to enjoy their success like everyone else in this district.

[12992] SPEAKER_35: Thank you. Tony Doot.

[12994] SPEAKER_54: Good evening. As a realtor in the area, I hear buyers concerned about schools. And now they're also looking for a safe place to live, a place to move to. For years, it had been. The mission area schools and those who couldn't afford the mission area, it was Irvington. Those were the key spots. Everybody had to be. My focus with clients are usually the first time buyers. They just want to get into something, anything. I've had three clients this year that are mission graduates that have told me flat out they would not allow their children to go to mission school, mission high school. simply because of the intense pressure that was put on them. That shiny little palace is starting to get tarnished. My point is that there are many, many people looking at more affordable areas like Newark. There are currently five new developments being built in the city with over 2,000 units being sold. Let's say only half of them have children. Let's say the other half They only have one kid that's going into the school system. Where are we going to put 1,000 more students? These are going into developments that are being built right now. And somehow, I don't think everyone is just going to have one kid going into school. How many seats do we have available right now? And once these developments get built up, how many kids are going to be showing up? The point that I want to bring is that if you sell a school site, you don't get a second chance at that. That property is gone. I've heard talk about using the portables and bringing those in. But from what I understand, just the initial installation is $40,000 to $50,000. That's not including the building itself. We definitely need to do something, but selling a site that will be needed in the coming years is not the solution. We do need to start making some cuts, but you're working just like Congress. Stop cutting from the bottom. An army does not win the war with generals, but the enlisted men and women, they are the ones that are in the trenches, or in this case, in the classrooms. My wife was seriously injured in a classroom that was supposedly properly staffed. This past year, many of the aides did not even get any defense training until months after the school year had started. Now just imagine if you only have one aide in that class that's not been given any defense training.

[13181] SPEAKER_36: Please wrap it up.

[13183] SPEAKER_54: Yeah, go ahead, finish your sentence. A couple more sentences here. One. Another staff member gets another broken collar bone or even worse, a child gets injured because there was not enough supervision in the classroom, I can assure you that the lawsuit would eat up any money that you'd be saving. Think long and hard about what you are preparing to do. Look at where the city is going to be in the next five years or ten years.

[13211] SPEAKER_35: Thank you.

[13221] SPEAKER_17: So I wanted to piggyback on a couple of things we all talked about last night. First of all, talking about a town hall, aka a budget, a community budget committee. Superintendent Sanchez mentioned that he would desire to have a parent representing each site, at least a parent. I would urge you to open that up a little bit and encourage grandparents to apply for also said position. I'm a grandparent with children in this district. My children, our children are done, but we have grandchildren now. So also I would encourage you to include a staff person as well to give staff feedback, not just parents. Okay, so that's just a little bit. There was a lot of talk last night about special education services. And we in special education understand the amount of money that comes from general fund to special education. And we understand how a community might question the payoff. Please understand folks that many special education students by law must be educated for 22 school years. Not a lot of people understand that. Yesterday Ms. Salinas mentioned trainings for special ed teachers. I have worked in special education for 23 years and I can assure you however valuable trainings may be, I don't know a special ed teacher that would choose a training over the kind of support or tools, as Ms. Salinas mentioned yesterday, in their aides. That is the tool, that is the support that special ed teachers crave in order to stretch themselves and give the services to those special needs children who may be your masseuse, may be your courtesy clerk at Safeway, may be graduating from Washington State University, or may be a CEO with dyslexia who fakes their contracts because they couldn't read them and has someone else do that. That is the special ed community. We are their community. They are our community. We no longer institutionalize them. And in a time when we have such divisiveness nationally and internationally, it is a mistake to treat special needs students, and we all have special needs, as us and them. We need to make sure that they are all one. I don't care what it costs. That's what we need to do. Thank you.

[13386] SPEAKER_36: Lastly, Angela?

[13387] SPEAKER_35: Okay.

[13392] SPEAKER_36: Thank you. That concludes the public comment on non-agenda items. We move on to all business items, but before that, it is approaching 10 PM. So do you have a motion to extend the board meeting? Motion to extend to 11. Till 11, you said?

[13407] SPEAKER_35: Okay. Till 11.

[13409] SPEAKER_16: Okay. Till second then.

[13410] SPEAKER_36: So there's a motion by Member Rodriguez to extend the meeting to 11. Seconded by Member Crocker. Please vote.

[13425] SPEAKER_35: Five ayes. Thank you.

[13427] SPEAKER_36: To Old Business 10.1, do I have a motion to approve?

[13432] SPEAKER_16: So moved.

[13433] SPEAKER_36: Moved by Member Rodriguez. Seconded by Crocker. Okay. Please vote.

[13445] SPEAKER_35: Five ayes, thank you.

[13448] SPEAKER_36: 10.2, old business, purchase of Chrome cards. I'm sorry, there was a guest speaker for 10.1. Mr. Merritt, would you like to speak? I know we've already voted, but please speak if you wish.

[13460] SPEAKER_32: Thank you. The only thing that I wanted to talk about the playground equipment is that $800,000 for new playground equipment and another $400,000 for future Fixes, I guess. If you come to Birch Grove Intermediate and just walk around the field, you will find, I'm guessing, 100 gopher holes. And these are super gophers. They build holes like this. And we have daily accidents with our students. I've tripped in them because I run with my class as well. So in prioritizing, I'm wondering if new equipment is the priority or fixing those fields. And I believe that if I'm understanding Prop G, that those would both be flexible items.

[13514] SPEAKER_36: Thank you.

[13514] SPEAKER_35: Thank you.

[13515] SPEAKER_36: You're also on the docket for 10.2. Would you like to put your comments now?

[13519] SPEAKER_32: Sure. Does my time start over? Yes, it does.

[13521] SPEAKER_16: I don't need to. It does. It starts over.

[13530] SPEAKER_32: 10.2, Chromebooks, purchase of Chromebooks. I have a master's degree in technology education, which I was fortunate enough to achieve after being laid off from Macy's with a $17 million budget. Yes, yes, the budget. They cut 7,000 positions in one day, and I was one of those lucky people to be cut. So I know about making hard decisions. But I was able to go back and get my master's degree in technology education. And I use the Chromebooks in my class. The Chromebooks sit on my students' desk. It's not their only learning tool, but they do use it more than they would a spiral notebook and a pencil. And the successes that I've had by using technology in the classroom are measurable. I had students, granted in a sixth grade class you have students that range academically from a grade level K to, in my case, up to a grade level nine by the end of the year. So spread is huge. And being able to differentiate that instruction by using Chromebooks is a huge advantage to my students. I mentioned, and I'll do it again, that 13 of my students were able to qualify to skip seventh grade math and move into algebra. And that's because they had the opportunity to use technology. And they didn't have to sit through my boring lesson about teaching what a ratio is, because they already knew that. And so they could move on and do their own thing. So thank you.

[13626] SPEAKER_36: Thanks, John. So on 10.2, do we have a motion to approve?

[13631] Nancy Thomas: I move that we approve that.

[13633] SPEAKER_36: Member Thomas, is there a second? By Member Preciado, please vote.

[13644] SPEAKER_35: Five ayes, thank you.

[13646] SPEAKER_36: 10.3, swimming pool repairs at Memorial. Is there a move to approve?

[13650] SPEAKER_16: Move to accept.

[13651] SPEAKER_36: By Member Crocker, seconded by Member Rodriguez. Please vote.

[13661] SPEAKER_35: Five ayes. Thank you.

[13664] SPEAKER_36: 10.4, an old business item. Certificate athletic trainer dedicated to Newark Memorial High School. By member Rodriguez. Is there a second?

[13676] SPEAKER_16: I'll second.

[13677] SPEAKER_36: Second by member Crocker.

[13678] Nancy Thomas: I'd like to speak to this. Well, before you ask.

[13684] SPEAKER_36: Yeah. So member Prestia. Okay, so, Member Thomas, I'm just going by the order on the screen, but go ahead.

[13690] Nancy Thomas: Oh, I'm sorry. Okay, I thought you were going to ask for someone to vote. I have a problem with spending money when we are in such dire straits on a position that is not absolutely required. And I know it's beneficial, but I don't think it's absolutely required. So that's my concern.

[13713] SPEAKER_35: Member Presnado?

[13716] SPEAKER_27: My thoughts were a little different, but I guess I'd like that question answered, too, if it is required or not. But I was just going to ask, I don't know how this works in terms of, I know an idea that was mentioned as part of this process is, and this is part of our communication efforts, that things like this cost money. And is there a way for us to ask student participates, I know you can't require, but is there a way that we could approach this as part of this that we make the ask for supporting this?

[13748] SPEAKER_36: So to answer both your first question, parts of it is required. So for your home football games, the athletic trainer is a requirement. Whether all $8,700 is required as far as the services, Probably not the total amount because it doesn't cost that much to get athletic trainers for those six home football games, et cetera. But I think the last time that this item came forward, it was on a three-year plan that escalated each and every year thereafter. And we had mentioned that, you know, the first year, if we just had a one-year agreement as this agreement is, that would be more palatable. And I think that's where it kind of stood, and that's where it currently stands now, where this is a one-year, the amount of $8,700. If we didn't have this contract, and we had to hire out our athletic trainers to cover the football games that we have, I believe it would probably cost about $4,000. Is that about right, Mr. Richards, or am I underselling that?

[13815] SPEAKER_16: This proposal is just for one year?

[13817] SPEAKER_36: Just for one year.

[13819] SPEAKER_28: That was the direction the board gave me, was to work with them to bring it back as a one-year. Maintaining the three-year option, but only voting on a one-year.

[13828] SPEAKER_36: Yeah. Member Thomas.

[13833] Nancy Thomas: I forgot my train of thought.

[13835] Ray Rodriguez: How much? What's the total cost? $8,700. $8,900. No, no, I mean, that's what we're making. The total cost would be, I thought this was approximately 10%, 15%.

[13849] SPEAKER_28: If you look down in the actual agenda item, I can, let me read that to the audience. Year one, as is on the table now, our cost would be 8,796. Washington Hospital would pay 26,385. So it is a, they do carry the lion's share of the cost, but it kind of works in a gradual release where they would pay more upfront, with the hope that we'd go more later, but we just halted it at a one year for now, to try to find other solutions or other funding streams.

[13885] SPEAKER_36: I feel good about the one year, and maybe take member Prezado's idea about finding alternative funding sources for years two and three, if we decide to go four years.

[13896] SPEAKER_27: I guess my question is, as part of us moving forward with approving this, could we say that we are going to make the ask? I think we should ask the board, yeah.

[13911] Nancy Thomas: What other funding source were you thinking of? Cupcake sales.

[13915] SPEAKER_28: Athletic fees.

[13917] Nancy Thomas: Oh, cupcake sales.

[13918] SPEAKER_28: Well, it could be athletic fees.

[13920] SPEAKER_16: Rotary.

[13921] SPEAKER_28: Sport fees.

[13923] SPEAKER_31: can't do sports fees. In California, those would have to take the form of voluntary donations. They can be done. We did them in a previous district that I worked in. We worked extensively with legal counsel in making sure that we got it right on how we did that. But I can pull that information from my previous district if we want to have a future discussion on that.

[13943] SPEAKER_27: We can ask for donations. But not. But I think it's just important for us to, because one of the things that we just say, like, cuts, cuts are cuts in big revenue. But if we're not communicating of, like, This is what it costs you willing to commit, but then we need the support in this manner. So it's just more of that.

[13961] Nancy Thomas: The point I was going to make was similar to E3 where we accepted a grant, and then the grant goes away. Well, the program's a great program. If we accept this support from Washington Hospital, yeah, it's a great program. And next year, it's going to be very difficult for us to not support it and then where we have to pay more money. And so I just think I'd rather be very conservative in terms of us going forward and not adding any positions that we don't have now that we don't need to add for legal reasons.

[13999] SPEAKER_36: So Ms. Sandoval, we're on the discussion right now.

[14004] SPEAKER_16: I requested to speak.

[14005] SPEAKER_36: Right.

[14006] SPEAKER_27: No, but we're trying to come to that.

[14007] SPEAKER_36: I'm addressing the screen because it shows that

[14009] SPEAKER_16: We voted on this, and we haven't. No, we haven't. Where does it show that? Right in front of us. Oh, at the bottom?

[14017] SPEAKER_36: So please ignore that. We'll continue discussions with Member Crocker.

[14024] SPEAKER_27: Interesting. I just want to clarify, that is not correct. Is that the time?

[14030] SPEAKER_16: Maybe the vote for the last one got stuck on this one. Yeah. We'll correct that.

[14036] SPEAKER_36: All right, let's continue.

[14037] SPEAKER_16: Member Crocker. My comment is that if you're going to have contact sports, you have to have medical people there during the time. And if you look at concussions, the concussions happens during practice as well as during the thing. I have a granddaughter that plays water polo. It is a contact sport. Whether you believe it or not, it is a contact sport. Basketball is a contact sport. We have had a free ride. because we've had someone who donated their time for the last 20 years. He's no longer doing that. And so this is part of the expense of having co-curricular activities. It's a safety expense. It's an insurance expense. So I don't think that the way they have set it up, it looks like they are going to be doing a lot of involvement in terms of work with the students during practice as well as during the games. Legally, the games are the only time I think we have to have them. So my feeling is that we need to at least pass this and then see about alternative spending. But we certainly, for the year, for $8,760. Yeah. It's a great deal for one year.

[14109] SPEAKER_36: Pardon me? It's a great deal for this first year.

[14110] SPEAKER_16: Right. And so let's take it. And let's see what we can do about finding to fund the rest. There may well be people out there that are interested in doing that. Or they're, you know, whatever. But I think that. There's an awful lot of information now about concussions in children and how long-term they are. So if we're going to put the kids at risk and have the support, then we need to have someone there to support them.

[14136] SPEAKER_36: Member Rodriguez.

[14138] Ray Rodriguez: And I just watched the movie Concussion. It's been played on time and time again. But this is a great way to do it. We basically direct the staff to you know, come back, and Washington Hospital decided to pull back and have it in one year. But I agree with Member Preciado. We have to look at alternatives. Years ago, we investigated the, you know, pay to play, and a parent talked about Cupertino Unified telling their student, their parent base, that they have to give $1,000 each. I, maybe Mr. Richards can, you know, you know, come with something on that. My understanding is we can't do that. So for now, next year, if we need to, we don't continue it. Years ago, we were thinking about cutting the pointer program at the high school because they were shifting a lot of the expenses to us. And it would have been cut at the time. The high school and the district got together with UC Berkeley and we were able to get more money and here it is five, six years later and Puente is still there. So, this would kind of encourage the high school to work together with Washington Hospital and look at alternative funding so we can continue because if you don't have a program like this, it's, we've been very, very fortunate but we can talk about having liability issues. you know this this helps us a whole bunch so I'm all for it for now and with the understanding that I don't see where we can go past that we can do the second year based on the cost there so there's gonna have to be a lot of to and fro from the high school to Washington Hospital coming up with an alternative funding to continue to pass the first year. Thank you. Member Thomas.

[14261] Nancy Thomas: Well I can't argue with with Member Crocker and Member Rodriguez and their comments because this is a good thing for $8,000. I just felt compelled to have to say, you know, this is how it starts. And then it just escalates. And if you want to look at our deficit spending over all these years, just look at all the programs that we've started and how few we have ever stopped. and without measuring their effectiveness. So I'm just saying we really need to question every little bit of spending, even if it's only $8,000. Thank you.

[14296] SPEAKER_35: Member Pristado?

[14297] SPEAKER_27: Yes, I did. I just want to echo Member Thomas in terms of I think this is vitally important, but it is also indicative of what's been happening over the last 12 years in terms of not having a plan for spending, even where it's It's unfortunate, I mean, I support it, but the budget search, question mark, and that just shows of this whole process. So, I mean, just, you know, I'm inclined to support and will support it, but it's time now to have that conversation for every aspect of the budget moving forward.

[14332] SPEAKER_36: Great. So, no more, we don't have any more requests for comments. There is a motion and a second on the floor.

[14340] SPEAKER_35: Kim, we have a vote, please. Five ayes, thank you.

[14351] SPEAKER_36: On to new business, we have removed 11.1 and 11.3 off of that item, and so we're at 11.2. Is there a motion to approve?

[14365] Nancy Thomas: I move we approve.

[14366] SPEAKER_36: Member Thomas, is there a second? by Member Rodriguez. Please vote. Five ayes. 11.4, the FCMAC report. This is merely accepting the FCMAC report.

[14385] SPEAKER_16: Moved to accept.

[14387] SPEAKER_36: Moved to accept by Member Crocker. Second by Member Rodriguez. Please vote. Excuse me. We have a requested speaker.

[14399] SPEAKER_27: Yeah, I just wanted to know I think it's important After reviewing in terms of helps us with this discussion so maybe we can incorporate some of its findings as part of a future budget discussion or forum because it has some broad topics and then some specific examples of how we can Start this conversation, right?

[14426] SPEAKER_35: Okay, five ayes, thank you.

[14429] SPEAKER_36: 11.5, ratifying the collective bargaining agreement within the teacher association. Motion by member Rodriguez, second by member Preciado. We do have a requested comment. Member Thomas.

[14444] Nancy Thomas: Yes, I thought long and hard about this and so I wrote my comments down so I could be clear. So I hope you'll indulge me. I have very serious concerns about the tentative agreement. Clearly, the NTA and their bargaining team did a good job for their members. I'm not sure the public interest, in my opinion, was as well represented in this agreement. In the past negotiations, The board has given direction and guidance on issues such as coaching stipends and non-monetary adjustments. We gave direction and received pro forma costs associated with salary and benefits this time around, but we were given very little other information. In fact, we received no written documentation of the agreement prior to the agenda being posted for this meeting. So some of the changes came as a complete surprise to me as I read it. For example, there's a new item 6.9. It's kind of confusing. It says, unit members who are required by the district to attend trainings outside of the school year shall be compensated at the per diem rate. So I'm wondering what constitutes required. So at a time when we have a severe budget shortfall, I would be very concerned if we scheduled required professional development during the summer and paid per diem. rather than adjunct duty pay. The problem is it's probably voluntary, and we don't have to pay adjunct duty pay. But because it wasn't brought to our attention, I wasn't able to ask the question. I don't know what our current practice is. So we just haven't had the opportunity as a board to address something that we weren't told about ahead of time. There's another major changes in teacher preparation days. That's days when the instructional day is 240 minutes. We must now provide two of these days for teacher participation directed, teacher directed planning. In effect, an extra time for teachers for which the principal cannot direct their activities. Of the other preparation days during the month, only 90 minutes can be used as determined by the principal and must be done in consultation with site leadership. So this is precious time for us to be able to, because we're in a budget crunch to be able to have professional development and be able to collaborate. But there's another 40 minutes on those other days that are teacher-directed preparation time. So to my reckoning, this gives teachers the equivalent of seven or eight extra prep periods if they were 40-minute prep periods, for example. So we didn't get a chance to talk about it as a board. The board has provided a staff recommendation for the last iteration of the contract by individual phone calls. I objected on the grounds that we could not afford a further increase over what we had already given our bargaining team direction to offer. At that time, we had been made aware that one of the staff recommended budget cuts was to increase standard context for core subjects in secondary from 155 to 175 by increasing class sizes to 35 for core subjects. I voiced my strong opinion that this was a time to negotiate that change because we were still in negotiations. Now, so I fully anticipated there would be a board meeting or a conference call for the entire board to discuss this, but much to my surprise, I learned via social media that we had a tentative agreement. And then when I asked about it, I was said, well, it was a majority vote. Well, it was a majority vote by individually phone calling the board members. I don't think that's a way to elicit direction from the board. And then there's a whole question of at a time when we said we're freezing positions and not adding new positions, we have made, oh, we were also told because I asked Is there anything in the board contract or the NTA contract tentative agreement that we should be made aware of? And I was told that, yeah, there were some changes, but there were no monetary changes. Well, then in reading the contract, I'm, and because things I had heard, I, I, I realized that we had changed the athletic director position from a teaching position to two days or two periods of a day to a management position, put on a management scale that provided more money, given extra days in the year for work. So this definitely added what I consider enough money to the cost of the contract that it should have been discussed with the board before it was agreed to. So these are the things that have concerned me about the way this contract was handled primarily by our side. And we are in a terrible budget situation. I don't think, I think more than ever, the board needs to ask questions. We need to know what's happening when money is involved, and we need to have every opportunity to speak up. So that's what I wanted to say.

[14797] SPEAKER_36: Thank you. Member Rodriguez.

[14802] Ray Rodriguez: You know, It's difficult when you're in education. I've been running my own business for 40 years. And I'm in an industry where if we're losing money, we ask the Department of Insurance and we put in for an increase. And then they give us anywhere from 6% to 10%. And that normally takes care of the issues you have. You can't do that in education. I mean, we can lobby the state and we can ask for more money. I'm from Newark originally. You go back east, some of the eastern states where they're, what they pay for every student is twice as much as we do in California. But yet, I moved to California for my kids to have a better education. Having this increase which, I mean, technically we should be giving our employees, you know, Probably two or three times what we give them, but we just can't afford it. But to look at, here we are deficit spending and we're trying to make cuts and yet we're giving a raise that over three years comes up to $2.5 million approximately. Sounds like we're crazy, but yet it's very evident from the fact that we've been losing a lot of our teachers that are going somewhere else because of money, we're never going to be I mean, we're lucky if we can, you know, be at the 50 percentile. And our teachers and employees will stay here because of that. And in time, over the next three years after we get through this issue that we have, I think we'll, in time, be able to replenish. Ten years ago, we lost a lot of our teachers because of the fact of the budget cuts, and we're able to, over the last years, over the last 10 years, been able to replenish. But not to do this, in my opinion, it's just not the right way to go. You know, we really need to do this. It's, I mean, it's adding on to our deficit, and we've finished the SEA, And it's going to make it even worse, but it's something we need to do. I'm not happy with the fact that we're losing, you know, 20, 25% of our teacher force, and especially in special ed, which is very, you know, that's, you know, what I'm all about. And, you know, growing up in a special ed family, and it's just, but we need to say yes to this, and hopefully, working together with the employee groups, we can come up with a way to come up with alternative financing, ways that we can, and maybe the parcel tax is something that we shied away from so long ago because we thought we could never get it. Well, maybe it's time that we really aggressively go after it and see And maybe that'll help us. But to me, it's just a no-brainer. And I apologize. I mean, not apologize. Well, maybe I do. The way it was done, you want an open forum. You want to be able to engage your board members at a board meeting. But when you deal with negotiations, it's hard. And our staff and our district office, I think, did a wonderful job. And we always have in working together with the teachers and also with the classified group in putting together a deal. And so I'm just, you know, to me, it's, again, it's a no-brainer and wish we'd do more, but I'm glad we're able to do this, even though it is going to add to our deficit, which is going to make things even more difficult.

[15039] SPEAKER_36: So there is a motion on the floor. I believe it was by member Crocker. Rodriguez. And a second by member Crocker. Preciado. Thank you. There are no more comments so please vote.

[15066] SPEAKER_35: Five ayes. Thank you.

[15072] SPEAKER_36: On to employee organizations.

[15084] SPEAKER_25: This is the last time at the mic. If you had asked me last week, I wouldn't have thought I would be leaving Newark. I don't think any of you begrudge me my decision. There's certainly. It's the right thing for me, I feel, personally and professionally. I just wanted to say I owe Newark Unified School District a great deal of gratitude for taking a chance on me 12 years ago, and to my members and my colleagues for electing me as president for six years over a 10-year period. It's a wonderful learning experience for me, and it will allow me to grow. And I think that what I'm most proud about during my time with you all is our ability to have those difficult conversations. When I first started in 2008, the sky was falling. And the situation, I think we can all understand, was actually worse at that time than it is now. We're not talking about laying off our staff. I haven't seen that anywhere on your budget reports. I don't know if that's coming. I hope not. I know the superintendent wants to take in every effort not to make that happen. And I think you all are taking every effort not to make that happen. It was way worse then. We got through it. You will get through this, too. And I hope that the professional relationship, that cordial relationship that exists between Teachers Association and the district continues to foster and grow. And I think by, you know, I think two-thirds of our executive board is here tonight. They're committed to seeing that happen as well. So thank you. I'm sorry that that kind of came as a shock yesterday. I didn't plan on it like that. I'm trying to bow out very gracefully. And I apologize for how that was communicated also. I did communicate to several members that I was, to several board members and to staff that I was looking. And I didn't think that in the last four days it would happen as quickly as it did. But thank you. I am still a Newark resident. I care about Newark schools. You'll still see me around. This isn't a goodbye. It's a see you later. So thank you. Thanks, sir.

[15230] SPEAKER_36: NEWMA, CSCA, once, twice. All right. To consent item personnel, the 13.2, the employment contract for the assistance to percent of human resources. Although, Ms. Benson, it feels like you've been it permanently, right? Is there a motion to approve?

[15250] SPEAKER_16: So moved.

[15250] SPEAKER_36: By Member Crocker. Second? I second. Second by Member Thomas.

[15257] SPEAKER_35: Please vote.

[15264] SPEAKER_36: Five ayes. Thank you. 13.3, the personnel report. Is there a move to approve? So moved. By Member Rodriguez. Is there a second? I'll second. Second by Member Preciado.

[15276] SPEAKER_35: Please vote. Five ayes. Thank you.

[15291] SPEAKER_36: And we do have a special announcement. Superintendent, would you like to do the honors?

[15298] SPEAKER_28: If I get Mr. Wasser to step to the podium, I want to introduce Mr. Wasser, who is now officially Interim Superintendent at Birch Grove. I'm sorry. Wow. Here's the keys Ellie. Here's the keys. As Interim Principal at Birch Grove Primary. Welcome and we know you'll do a great job but if you want to say a few things I know you've been patiently waiting there and it's been a long agenda, but we would love to hear any comments you have about your new challenge.

[15339] SPEAKER_09: Well, first off, very much thank you for the opportunity. I'm hardworking. I'll do my best. And looking on the current cover of the student handbook for that site, it says, today I pledge to do my best at reading, writing, and all the rest. So I'll take the time to also give a similar pledge to say that I'll be doing my best. And thank you again. And for sake of time, I'll stop there. Thank you.

[15372] SPEAKER_36: The consent item block, 14.1 through 14.23. Third, go ahead. I'd like to pull an item. Go ahead. Which item?

[15382] Nancy Thomas: I'd like to pull 14.3. 14.3, OK. 14.23. No, three, 14.3. And then anyone else? I'd like to pull 14.23. 14.23, OK.

[15399] SPEAKER_36: We have a poll for 14.23, 14.3, and I'd actually like to poll 14.6. So can I have a move for approval of the entire block minus 14.3, 14.6. I move approval of 14.2.

[15420] SPEAKER_18: If I could just restate that. So item 14.3, 14.23, and 14.6.

[15430] SPEAKER_36: Correct. Correct. So is that a move for approval?

[15436] SPEAKER_16: For 14.1 through 14.23 with the exception of 14.3, 14.6, and 14.23. Okay.

[15447] SPEAKER_36: So motion by Member Crocker. Is there a second? I'll second. By Member Thomas. Please vote. It is 4-0 with member Rodriguez stepping out momentarily. So let's get to 14.3. Ms.

[15467] Nancy Thomas: Thomas. I pulled this because I wanted to make a few comments about stage 1 and the fantastic job they do for our city, our community, and our students that participate in the productions they put on. I'd like to invite Ms. Otterstedter to say a few words about the program for us, if you don't mind indulging in that. And I would also like to say, I know you have, with all the changes at the high school and the construction, you've had to make do and on short notice with changes that you've handled very graciously. Let us know what you think about Stage 1 and why we should support this.

[15526] SPEAKER_11: Thank you. I wasn't planning on speaking. I was going to be a quiet little mouse in the corner. The Stage 1 theater has partnered with the Newark School District for the last 18 years now. So we moved in in the year 2000. We're just going on our 18th year. We put on local community theater productions and we invite people from the community to participate and often these do include children from the district. So that's always an additional bonus for us. We try and put together programs to help teach the students how to build sets, how to design lights, how to do sound. It brings a lot of a lot of talents to a child that doesn't necessarily learn it from school. So they're going to learn presentation skills, they're going to learn teamwork, they're going to learn a lot of additional things by performing in our productions. This year we did have to cancel our youth production which is normally in the summer because the schools weren't available and that was kind of upsetting. So what we did is we changed our September show to Annie to include as many children as we could. And actually the reason I'm the only one here tonight is because we had auditions going on at one of the other schools. So I encourage people in the district to come support local theater to get involved with local theater. We're always looking for volunteers. We are an all volunteer nonprofit organization. And I think there's a lot of opportunities and a way to express yourself in a different way by attending theater. So, thank you very much for your support over the last 17 years. We really do appreciate the partnership.

[15620] Nancy Thomas: Thank you. With that, I move approval.

[15625] SPEAKER_36: I do have a comment on that. So, I did request further information and as far as, you know, the number of memorial students who were involved in the program. and who have actually participated. And I think the information hopefully will come soon. I know Stage 1 has been around for 17 plus years, and I was at the high school when Stage 1 moved from its Fremont location and to Newark, and I believe you're the mom of David Othersetter? No, wrong one, I'm sorry. There's more Kevin. Was it Kevin? Kevin. Oh, there it is. So...

[15672] SPEAKER_11: On the general productions that we do we usually have at least one or two kids from the school who attend. So it's not a huge number. But in addition to performing and participating in the events we also share all of our props, all of our costumes, all of our sets that we build with the high school. So we work very closely with Kim Moss and with Joanne Hong at the school. to share resources. We also help with grant writing with the group. So we bring a lot more benefits than just the activities that the kids can get involved with to keep the overall theater program going. Thank you.

[15708] SPEAKER_36: Thank you. And then I have a question on a fiscal perspective and that's Mr. Bittre's domain. Looks like the fiscal dollar amount is $28.96, and half of that comes from, yeah, half of it is, not half, but a portion of that pays for the theater manager. So that's, so just to kind of, that's the amount that stage one pays. to their theater manager to run the operation?

[15743] SPEAKER_31: That's part of what they pay to the district. We have a theater manager. He is part-time. Mr. Bible coordinates with them and orchestrates the stage theater. Debbie can probably tell us a lot more about what he does on a day-to-day production basis, because I'm not actually there at the productions. But he's been a Temcard employee at the district for many years running the program over there, and they cover his costs for their productions. All right. Thank you.

[15771] SPEAKER_16: The district pays for that?

[15775] SPEAKER_31: They pay us, and we pay Mr. Bible. He's a district employee, yes. We charge him for his time for that.

[15785] SPEAKER_36: Okay, there are no further comments. Do we have a motion on the floor?

[15787] SPEAKER_27: I move to accept. Okay. Member Thomas moves to accept.

[15790] SPEAKER_36: Member Thomas moved and seconded by Member Crocker. Please vote. Four ayes with Member Rodriguez absent. He is feeling ill for the record. Then 14.6, again, just additional information as far as, I know this program's been operated at two school sites and it is money that we're getting from the state to run an after school program. And it looks like we're opting to use it on a contractor, right? And in previous conversations, There is an opportunity for us, if we wanted to, to run this in-house. Is that?

[15845] SPEAKER_43: Yes. So, my understanding is that since 2013, we've had this contractor, which provides an after-school program for Schilling Graham and Newark Junior High School. It's a very effective, positive, waiting list kind of program. For this incoming year, my recommendation is we continue working with them as a contract. What I would like to do this year is really to see if we have the infrastructure to really support this. Many surrounding districts do provide their own after school program, but with that certainly comes an infrastructure of employees that would work from 3 to 6 p.m. every day. There would have to be direct oversight and supervision of those employees. And certainly working with food services, that's kind of already part of it. So that wouldn't be an additional cost. But there would have to be a plan of an infrastructure to do that. Currently looking at what we have, we have, you know, Mr. Whitten. And so that certainly would not be enough of an infrastructure now. But I think looking at this grant funding and doing some planning for moving out for the next year, we could certainly come forward with a plan to really do this. But at this time, my recommendation is to go forward with this very popular effective program and I also want to see if we can have them come forward in the fall and do an update presentation so we can learn more about it.

[15931] SPEAKER_36: Okay. I, I think moving forward in, in light of the, the impending budget cuts and layoffs, I think there's an opportunity here and perhaps in other aspects that. If we in-house provided services of in-house and used $273,000, if we were to lay off a staff member from a position, we can have easily shifted that position or that person over to this particular position, therefore not placing them out of a job. At least they have a job, a check, right?

[15965] SPEAKER_43: Absolutely, and I would want to do it right in the sense of creating job descriptions, creating a whole structure for support. What they provide for us is also the security of mind that there's actually someone there that's actually supervising the employees to do this. I currently would not have that yet to move out, but I think coming forward with a plan and so that we can use these funds for our own. I think we could definitely do that moving forward.

[15992] SPEAKER_36: So I'm okay with it for this year, but I think for next year we need to really, really be cognizant about trying to deploy this in-house, at least to alleviate the layoffs. Is there a motion to approve to 14.6? By Member Crocker. I'll second. Please vote. That's four ayes, thank you. And then 14.23, Member Crocker.

[16030] SPEAKER_16: I pulled that because I was not hearing a need to abstain. So I move acceptance of 14.23.

[16037] SPEAKER_36: Okay. I'll second. Second by, moved by Member Crocker, second by Member Thomas. Please vote. Three ayes and abstention. Thank you. Items 15.1, student expulsion. Is there a move to approve?

[16060] Nancy Thomas: I move that we accept the staff recommendation.

[16063] SPEAKER_36: OK. Moved by member Thomas. Second by member Preciado. Please vote. Four ayes. Thank you. 15.2. Move acceptance of staff. Recommendation. Thank you, Member Crocker. Is there a second? I'll second. Second, Member Preciado. Please vote.

[16094] SPEAKER_35: Four ayes.

[16099] SPEAKER_36: 16.1. I know this feels like deja vu, because we just had this last night. So, Member Preciado, is there something changed in 24 hours? Okay.

[16107] SPEAKER_27: Yeah, no. Oh, he's cut off. Tommy, yes. So one, I just want to note that I think that we got to figure out a way for us to be able to communicate some of the successes and the enhancements that we're engaged with. So for example, like thinking about the math homework centers district-wide or the summer bridge program, and then capital improvements that are happening by site. So we need to get better at communicating some of those positives and successes. And we also need to get better on communicating the financial situation. So kind of mapping out that budget, FAQ is really good as a starting point in terms of explaining where the sources of funding and how they're tied to specific capital projects. But I think we need to communicate that better with the rest of the community, and specifically the deficit that's looming the next year. As a next step, I would ask that we Maybe do some community forum that we have in August where we can open it up. Another piece that I, and this is from yesterday, that I just mentioned in terms of the adult education conversation that we had yesterday that my thoughts are if there's a way that for the budget that we remove our contribution completely as I think that it's noted at $100,000 for that piece in light of where we're at and trying to stay away from the kids as much as we can. This would be a way to do that. I know it's hard and it's difficult and it hurts, but as a way to then have that extra resources that will not be taken away from a teacher or staff member. in that way that's impacting the kids. The last piece that I wanted to mention was strategic planning again. So I know we talked a little bit about facilities, but maybe we can map out some sort of schedule just so that we can map, like say, hey, this is our projected timeline for starting those strategic planning meetings and incorporating the facilities master plan as part of that. That's it.

[16252] Nancy Thomas: I have nothing to add.

[16254] SPEAKER_36: Thank you. Member Thomas.

[16256] Nancy Thomas: I had a question about SBAC scores. I know some districts have gotten them, and I know that. Really? Yes, and I know that they are embargoed from the public, but in the past, the board members have been, the information has been shared with the board.

[16273] SPEAKER_43: So we, because it's online, we do have about, my understanding it's about 90% of the raw scores are in, but we have not gotten word that this is completely certified and these are the scores. So we're very hesitant to share scores that may change and that are incomplete at this time. But what we are doing is preparing as soon as we can. We're shooting for August. If it comes sooner than that, we're working this July and be able to get that into your hands. Certainly it would be embargoed, as you shared, but at this time, the scores are raw. We've got about 90% in from what we've seen from SBAC, and we don't want to give partial information. That might change.

[16317] Nancy Thomas: You know, we're very interested in that.

[16318] SPEAKER_43: Absolutely. We are too. We will get that into your hands.

[16322] Nancy Thomas: Right. And I didn't catch what Mr. Richards, what you said about the Davis demographic report. Did you say they have all the information now that they need? Did they give you a time when we might be able to get that?

[16336] SPEAKER_31: They indicated that I should have the report in a couple of weeks time. So I anticipate that we'll be bringing it to the board at the August board meeting.

[16343] Nancy Thomas: So they did get information on the development that are going on in the city that they needed?

[16349] SPEAKER_31: Yes, I understand from an email I received from them today, they actually spent a couple of hours with Mr. Grandel and his staff reviewing all of their numbers, so we should have pretty good updated information for their report.

[16358] Nancy Thomas: And the reason I bring that up is, you know, David, their last demographic report said in the next five years we'd increase by 200 students and the developer justification study, developer feed justification study said we'd increase by 500 students. So, you know, that's a real big gap between two studies that, you know, and then you, Mr. Richards, have done a good job of predicting just based on cohort studies from year to year. But it would really be nice to kind of get that report and know how we can target meeting the superintendents and the boards goal of adding 600 students in the next few years. That's all I have.

[16409] SPEAKER_36: And I don't have anything further. Superintendent?

[16412] SPEAKER_28: Just a few items. I am working on a community engagement process. I'm still processing a lot of what that might look like. I like the town hall idea. But more to come on that very soon. I would like to get some direction. Jeff Potter from ACOE is willing to come to either do a study session with the board to talk about this idea of where are we currently, just to kind of have a transparent way to put that out in the public arena. It could either be part of superintendent report, and you have a report there, so we could have more Q&A. We could do it as a study session, whichever you prefer. But he's already held the time. The subject is just the status of the budget and this idea of... How about we invite him to one of our town hall meetings that we're going to hold? We could, we could, but I think that... I was thinking of something more personal at the site level and having kind of splitting, dividing and conquering and going to the school sites and having a larger series. But the only reason is I got him to commit to that date. Just because I was anticipating that just to get his time to come out, he says he can do a pretty good just overview of, it's kind of a 101 on budget in California, and what are districts like ours doing that are in this situation, and just some recommendations to us. And it's also potentially, and maybe it is the town hall configuration that we can do before the meeting, because I think part of the desire is to be able to field the questions from the audience. So we can make it a little different and not call it a board meeting, but maybe it's superintendent town hall and if board members come and attend that it's different and people can ask questions. I don't want to lose the time is all.

[16517] SPEAKER_36: Right, so we can do it as a board study session and then advertise it to the public as a board study session slash town hall format.

[16525] SPEAKER_28: So they'll be able to ask questions. Yeah. That's what I'm after.

[16527] SPEAKER_18: Okay, I'll work on it.

[16530] SPEAKER_28: That gives me a little bit of an idea. So just so we have some back and forth in a less formal setting. Yeah. Okay. I will be sending you, I found, I feel, a really good example of a facility, long-term facility revitalization plan. I've kind of been sorting through them. You'll have that in the Friday update. So please look that over. And I think that's going to be something that I want to bring back to fold into this larger strategic planning process. But take a look at it. I think you'll like the example. It has a lot of things we've all been talking about. And this example stands out, because it has a really detailed six-month to one-year community process. So it's not something quick and fast, but it does have a stronger grassroots support. That's all I have at this time.

[16582] SPEAKER_18: Mr. Brunton, do you want to gain agreement on Monday's support meeting?

[16586] SPEAKER_28: Oh, yeah. The time, you mean? get some indication from the board, what time would you like to meet? I know the members that are able to be here could potentially come during the day. If you wanted to meet at noon or 1 on Monday to do the final budget and LCAP approval. I know some board members are not available at that time and aren't here. So I don't know what time we think would work for a meeting on Monday.

[16615] Nancy Thomas: I'm busy until about 2 p.m.

[16620] SPEAKER_28: You want to say 3 PM or 2.30 or what?

[16623] Nancy Thomas: 3 PM.

[16623] SPEAKER_28: 3 PM?

[16625] Michael Milliken: OK.

[16626] SPEAKER_27: Well, I can't make it any time until after 6 and also in line if we're going to be approving the budget in terms of getting community input. I think that it'd be important for us to have it in the evening like we've been having the other.

[16640] Nancy Thomas: Did you say you can you make it?

[16642] SPEAKER_27: Yeah, I can make it on Monday.

[16645] SPEAKER_28: I thought you were able that day, but I must have confused in my mind.

[16648] SPEAKER_27: Yeah, no, I mean, that's good.

[16650] Nancy Thomas: Okay, let's do it.

[16651] SPEAKER_27: Of course.

[16652] SPEAKER_28: Okay. Yeah, that's fine. 6pm.

[16657] SPEAKER_36: Then we'll have four people. Do we know if member Rodriguez can make it at 6pm?

[16660] SPEAKER_28: I'll have to check. Okay.

[16663] SPEAKER_36: I'll have to check with him. I know he was up. I'm currently out of the country at that time. So if I can, I'll try to call in. knowing that it'll be 8 a.m. at that time. Oh boy.

[16676] SPEAKER_28: And I will check with Member Rodriguez.

[16677] SPEAKER_36: Depends on where I would be at at that time.

[16682] Bowen Zhang: Okay.

[16683] SPEAKER_28: Patty and I will work on that. Okay. Anything else, Patty?

[16690] Michael Milliken: No. Okay.

[16691] SPEAKER_36: Thank you. 1043, meeting is adjourned.

No minutes available.