Special Meeting

No content available.

[23] Nancy Thomas: I would entertain a motion for approving the agenda. So moved. I second. OK. In view of the fact that our president isn't here and we can't manage both systems, we have decided that we will use a show of hands for voting. All those in favor, please signify by raising your hand. Three ayes. Member Crocker missing. Member Nguyen missing. Member Crocker's here. I'm sure she'll return momentarily.

[64] SPEAKER_25: I suppose I can try if you'd like.

[87] SPEAKER_16: Thank you.

[88] SPEAKER_03: I'm sorry, you have to approve the agenda.

[90] Nancy Thomas: Pardon? Oh, she approved it? We just approved the agenda.

[99] SPEAKER_16: Okay, so proceed. Member Thomas, members of the board, ladies and gentlemen. At this time, I just want to, there's a couple of housekeeping items I want to go through with the board. One is kind of in the way of a reminder. We're starting to get information already about CSBA December conference, so that'll be shared with you this week from Patty. So all the information on that is coming in. I know registration occurs early, so sooner we can register. If that's what you wish to do, that's fine. That's one item. The next item I wanted to have the board entertain is if we could find one or two days to do retreat slash strategic planning session, like a workshop with the board and cabinet. I'd like to get some ideas of what day or days might work in late August, early September to do that. That allows us time to pull documents and research and information so we can start working on a longer term strategic plan. So I don't know if there's any dates that you guys want to kind of look at or give us some ideas to kick around, because then Patty and I can start working on some of those dates

[174] SPEAKER_24: When does school start?

[175] SPEAKER_16: School starts, I believe, is it the 14th? 24th. 24th. Had it off.

[181] SPEAKER_25: Our meeting is the 1st and the 15th?

[184] SPEAKER_16: Yes. So if there's a day, or a part of a day, even a Saturday, or a part of a Friday and a Saturday, ideally two days would be great. But I'd be happy with one day. Two days would be better. I just think the more time we can go deep on strategic planning, the better. Or if you want to do a couple of Saturdays, I just want to know ahead of time to plan.

[207] SPEAKER_25: And our workshops are open to the public as well. I think.

[229] SPEAKER_16: Um, I want us to spend, uh, at least eight hours, um, studying and beginning to frame out a, uh, longterm strategic plan, but also have some elements of a short term strategic plan. And I believe, uh, I don't know if Patty sent out the example I sent you, um, to look at. So something like that is, is what I'd like to get to, but I think it's a conversation about, not only what's our plan academically, but how does the, um, facility revitalization and capital expenditures, how do those things align into a larger plan for the district?

[270] SPEAKER_24: So I think it's your process, right?

[273] SPEAKER_16: It takes, it takes time.

[274] SPEAKER_24: Yeah.

[276] SPEAKER_16: But just the beginning of, you know, what are the, how do we frame it out? How do we structure it with the community? Um, having some conversation, I think just time together as a team to really, um, get some ideas of what are the actions that we need to take during this year to begin that planning process. The example I gave you is a year-long planning process. But if I know that I have this time blocked with you, I was going to ask for some external people to help us for free to facilitate a process for us. And that's what I'm working on. But I want to, it all starts with what's the date. So that's all I'm asking for now is a date.

[311] Nancy Thomas: Is there a... I'll give you my dates when you're ready. Yeah, I'm gone the last week. of August, but.

[320] SPEAKER_16: September's fine, yeah.

[321] Nancy Thomas: Right, is there a reason, or can we meet on a Saturday? I found last time when we met on a Saturday, I felt refreshed, I felt we were all very engaged. When you do it after a full day of work, I don't know if that's as.

[336] SPEAKER_16: Yeah, I'm fine with whatever.

[338] SPEAKER_25: So I'm calling the 3rd through the 22nd, but then even September, like, my Saturday's for work.

[346] Nancy Thomas: Um, they are already booked for work.

[350] SPEAKER_25: Okay. So I could do the 29th of August. That's a Tuesday. Yeah, that's the fifth Tuesday.

[362] Nancy Thomas: So I'm I'm on the cruise.

[367] SPEAKER_16: Um, and we're still waiting for, you know, member when can't currently as now able to weigh in. But if you guys can start thinking about it, I don't think I have to have dates tonight. But as soon as you have one or two days that might work, if you just send those to me and Patty, and ask to send to both, because I know this is Patty's last meeting tonight. So send them to me. And then I'll try to find a common ground. And just so I can start planning towards it. And we will plan towards it. I think that as I start crafting an agenda, I'll let you guys start looking at it. Here's the contents. So you guys will know exactly what's in there. But I'm just trying to get a free facilitator to come. And I'm working on that. I'm going to report on that also. We're working on a plan for that. This is just, and we may want to look and then when you think about two days, maybe we do one in September, one in November. So we don't have to do them back to back, but I think the more we can get together and go deep on certain things, we just have to carve out the time because everybody's calendar fills up. I mean, Frankie's already filled up for September. So.

[447] SPEAKER_25: So generally for me, I mean, if we can do it on a board meeting date, then I can do it earlier. I can rearrange that.

[458] SPEAKER_16: I think the 16th is Newark days, right? Yeah, September 16th, I think, is Newark days.

[466] Nancy Thomas: OK.

[466] SPEAKER_16: So just think about that, and give me your possible dates, and we'll work on that. I will work on that. And just a reminder, we are going to, we are in summer hours, which is four tens for our employees, but the district office will be open five days out of the week. So we're planning that staggering that staffing. So there's always someone here during business hours during the week, even though some employee groups might, we'll have, we'll be trading coverage of the front phone and make sure that those people are here. Um, and um, I am working to develop, you might help me with the title, Brian. August 1st, I've invited Jeff Potter from ACOE. He's the chief, what's his title?

[509] SPEAKER_15: He's the chief business official for Alameda County Office of Education.

[512] SPEAKER_16: And tell me the slightly boring title for the budget workshop.

[518] SPEAKER_15: It is a, an AB 1200, uh, work study session basically for him to explain, uh, the County's role under AB 1200. If we are unable to make all of the adjustments we need to make in the budget to get ourselves back to positive, what the next steps look like if the County ends up having to get involved.

[539] SPEAKER_16: Um, so just so you know, that is underway and we're working on that. Um, and back to, uh, remember Rodriguez's question, um, The cabinet is working on some ideas of how to roll out some community engagement. Um, none of them are totally baked yet. I think that what I wanted a cabinet to do is to have a little bit of time off and come back and really think deeply about that. Um, I can tell you one thing that we did talk about is identifying several locations where a cabinet member and a board member can go into the community and have a structured process to hear input. Um, so we're, we're looking at how we could really maximize our presence in the community. So nothing ready yet, but I know, uh, let me have some strong ideas. Brian did as well. And I've had a few, but I think that if we just have a little bit of time to breathe and have some time to think about it, I hope you have something to see. I want you to see something probably at the, at the very latest, uh, probably mid-July. I'll have something that you can look at and react to. That'll be for all of next year, per your request. And the last item I have, I have a request. I'd like to have two board representatives to hopefully agree to a date at the last, probably towards the last week of July Like maybe a Thursday or Friday to do finalist interviews for the executive assistant position To the board and to the superintendent's office so last time we had two board reps like to do that again this year But if anyone's available, I would love you know who's interested Okay, so Thursday or Friday we'll try rain Jan and Probably during the day so we could have interviews during the day for the finalists

[657] Nancy Thomas: That'd be the 27th or 28th.

[660] SPEAKER_16: Yeah. And that once, uh, we do the first round, typically what I do is I have, uh, HR will kind of create a, um, a process for us to be able to follow up with that candidate and be able to have a deeper conversation based on, you know, how they did in the interview. So, but that'll, that, that helps me a lot. And I'm thinking it would be to give you some dates to hold temporarily. Um, July, a 27 28 tenant. Hold those for now. We'll, we'll let you know as we work that nail that down. Um, so Catherine, are you tracking that? 27 28 for finalist interviews. Okay. Uh, that concludes my, uh, report.

[705] Nancy Thomas: Thank you. Next we move on to public comment on non agenda items and we have one request. Mr. Carey new.

[718] Cary Knoop: Good evening. First of all, I would like to give my appreciation to Member Thomas and Member Rodriguez for speaking their mind on the result of the labor negotiations. I think it's very important that board members express their opinion, that discussions and deliberations happen. The Brown Act exceptions pertain to the negotiation. You don't want to show your hands. You don't want to say this is the maximum amount I want to go to. So therefore these sessions have to be closed. They're not designed to withheld public discourse and public, uh, deliberations from the public. So I think it's very important for elected officials to speak their mind about what they think about the contract before they vote. If you say it's all good, say it. If you say, I have reservations, please say as well. So again, I appreciate member Thomas member Rodriguez speaking out, uh, whatever side they on the contract they stand on, but they speak out and they inform the public as to where they stand. And in a broader sense, I think that's more important when we look at the, um, the cuts we have to make. So it's very subjective of course, but what I've seen so far is, hearing from the body a lot of concerns, and there are hard times, and there are difficulties, and let's have a study, and let's have another study, and let's do more studies. That's all great, but what I think the public wants to know is where the individual members stand, and this is the time where, in my opinion, you need to show leadership. Now, some members have done that. Some members have said, I like these items. I don't like these items, and I think we should have some other items. Now that's clear language. I think the citizens, you know, deserve that straight opinion. You cannot be a friend to everybody when you're doing these kind of cuts. When you're in politics, you're going to have a situation where some people don't like you or they like you, but you have to say, this is what I think is right and I want to speak that. So I think it's very important for this body to really express what they want to do. and that there's also a dialogue. So it's great when individual members say, well, I think this and that, but it's okay to have a dialogue as long as you have proper decorum and it obviously doesn't get into a shouting match. But if it's a proper discussion where you can learn from each other, that is beneficial. So with respect to the getting input from the public, of course it's important to get input from the public, but it should not be a means of taking dodging responsibility of basically saying like, I don't want to make the tough decision, so I'm going to side with the public and let them talk and have them make the hard decisions. The board of education needs to make the hard decisions. The district obligation is to provide proper information. All the details provide what they, thank you. Oh, I'm done. I'm sorry. Okay. Well anyway, thanks a lot for listening. Thank you.

[912] Nancy Thomas: Ms. Newt, doot.

[920] SPEAKER_03: I recently had an opportunity to review the job qualification descriptions for special ed aid 1 and 2 which have not been revised since 1995. So what I would like to ask and I know Mr. Rodriguez had mentioned, I believe that he was on the special ed committee. I know you have a lot going on but this is very near and dear to my heart because I grew up with a disabled person. as well as I represent special ed in the work that I do. I would love it if there would be some attention given to the language of the job descriptions. And I will give you a specific example. If you were to look at the job description for special education aid two, One of the job qualifications is to be able to work with mentally retarded individuals. I find this personally from my family history of my uncle, highly offensive. I have also been instructed since 1993 when I joined the district in special education never to use that term. It is not only personally offensive, It is highly outdated, very ungraceful and very inappropriate, incorrect and not acceptable in any world of the disabled. So I would love it if somebody, I'm not sure who to appeal to, would take a look at that and see if there isn't some way to adapt more acceptable language. When I brought it to the direction of the previous director, I was told You have no idea how difficult it is to change the language in a job description. I would say to you, I have several bottles of White Out, and I'm not afraid to use them. So just an aside from the more important issues that we're dealing with today. Thank you.

[1046] Nancy Thomas: Thank you. I'm not sure there are more important issues than that. Mr. Sanchez, would you please follow up?

[1052] SPEAKER_16: Absolutely agree. Thank you.

[1054] Nancy Thomas: OK, next, seeing no other. Individuals wanting to come forward, we move on to new business. 2017-18 local control accountability plan. Superintendent?

[1071] SPEAKER_16: There is no changes from prior. So the plan still remains as reported in the last meeting. I think that the plan looks at things in a way that allows us enough flexibility to adjust and try to meet the metrics that we're trying to continue to add in. I believe this version has met the requirements that we need to meet and allows us the flexibility to try to continue to close the achievement gap while still serving all students. So other than that, I don't have a lot of additional information to provide to you other than what Ms. Salinas had provided at our last meeting. She's not able to be with us here tonight, but I know that if there's specific questions or information you need, I can try to get that for you as well.

[1123] Nancy Thomas: Are there any comments? I guess I would have just a few comments and those are that I would, even though we don't have a lot of intermediate measures for some of the actions that we plan to take, I would hope that staff would develop some intermediate measures and then during the year as you are monitoring the progress, that you come back and tell us how you are doing on those intermediate measures. So for example, if it's a professional development, how many did you expect to come to the professional development? How many actually came? Then later on, how well are they doing if they are using a measure like I-Ready? What is I-Ready showing in terms of progress? I just think that we usually don't get any how we did until we get a written copy of the LCAP, and that's in May oftentimes. So a whole year goes by before we have any concrete, other than the SBAC scores, concrete ideas about or feedback on how we are doing in terms of monitoring the progress during the year.

[1205] SPEAKER_16: So increase progress monitoring. Okay.

[1209] Nancy Thomas: Um, I would call for the question. Please raise, raise your hand if you're in favor of accepting four eyes, no one dissenting. Okay. The adopt next.

[1223] SPEAKER_25: I just want to know that I really appreciate the first page in terms of the, I know, um, they called the graphic because we've been asking for in terms of as a, as a way to present some of the aspects. So it's a good start.

[1239] Nancy Thomas: That was the assistant to Letty's assistant. I understand they put that together. And I also appreciate it very much.

[1249] SPEAKER_16: Who helped with that, Patty? Do you recall? Who was the person that helped?

[1253] Nancy Thomas: Laura.

[1254] SPEAKER_16: Laura Forrest. So I just want to make sure we said her name in the record, because she did a great job with that. And she's an outstanding employee.

[1260] Nancy Thomas: Very nice job. Okay, next we move on to the adoption of the budget, and we do have a member of the public that would like to speak to this, Mr. Knoop.

[1275] Cary Knoop: I apologize for not watching the clock. I was watching that one, and I said it's not moving.

[1278] SPEAKER_16: Oh, we changed it over here. I'm sorry.

[1280] Cary Knoop: So I thought, well, now I know. Okay, so, you know, I realize that making a budget is a really tough job, and not only that. It happens more or less at the same time when you get into negotiations and you have to make cuts. So, you know, obviously it's appreciated that that work is done every year. But having said that, this is a process that's fixed. And I don't know, you know, there's probably people who have been longer around. They know the Ed codes much better than I do. You know, July 1st is the date when you have to have a budget and, you know, five days or three working days before and, you know, you need a public hearing and all these things are, it's not a surprise to anybody. Maybe that law is there for, I don't know, 30 years, 50 years. I don't know how long it's been in California. So it's not a surprise. So last year we had a similar situation. It's late, it's at the last moment, it's incomplete. Then members of the public have to bring this to attention to the board. And again, I think, you know, I think the board needs to see that as well. And again, it's not about blaming anybody. It happened, you know, when mistakes are made and everybody makes mistake. But it does need to be spoken. And what I miss is to hear the board express concern, express this is not proper. do that, in my opinion. The board ought to do that, even if the board knows, like, look, we understand it happened. There has been mistakes. Things have been late. That's OK. We have to move forward. We can't look into the past all the time. But we have to acknowledge things we've done. And, you know, as much as a student has to have their papers on time on a certain date, we also expect the board to address the budget and the LCAP in a timely fashion and make sure It's complete and it's done in a proper way. And again, this is no reflection on people who work hard on doing this because I realize it is a, it's a tremendous job. And if you have problems with, you know, we are in negotiations, we can't really make a budget. We don't know how the numbers will be. I understand that. But again, these dates are pretty much firm. We know these dates are there. So then You've got to move the negotiation forward. And if, you know, if it is used as a strategy to kind of push the district into a quarter, well, then eventually it's got to work against the people who do that. Because you want to be open book and say these are our drop deadlines and we'll stick to them. So please, as a board, express when things don't go well. It doesn't mean that, you know, you throw anybody under a bridge or something like that or under a bus, but it does need to be spoken, at least in my opinion. Thank you.

[1456] Nancy Thomas: Thank you very much. So we had this on our agenda for discussion and, um, can I go first? And you may go first.

[1468] Ray Rodriguez: Thank you. Thank you, Member Thomas, or Vice President Thomas. It's going to be tough for me to vote for this budget the way it is, other than a friendly amendment. And the same thing would apply to the resolution. We've been talking with the moving the Whiteford preschool, the special ed kids. for years, and I realized that we wanted it done sooner, and for whatever reason, the prior administrations haven't done it, so here we are. I just feel uncomfortable having the special ed aides be part of the cut. I just, if we're talking just about Whiteford, the teachers moving over to music. And I don't know what the dollar figure equals to for three special ed aides. But I just feel that, especially with the amount of special ed teachers that have left us, talking about special ed, that we really need experienced aides. And I think, you know, having family members and especially a teacher and aides, knowing that the aide a lot of times drives the classroom. So, I would hope like the board would consider pulling back on three of the aides. And the reason being that our new special ed teachers are going to need a good amount of experienced aides that are already with us. And then, naturally, when you talk about special ed, you're talking about mandates. And the last thing we need is not to do things Properly because we you know prior to Miss Watson been getting here. It's It's it's been difficult when it comes to special ed making sure that we have everything you know in the right order and we're finally getting that turned around and so my My friendly amendment would be that we would pull back on three three aids Not knowing what the cost is and change the amount to reflect that.

[1646] Nancy Thomas: And it's just discussion, so you don't have to amend anything.

[1649] Ray Rodriguez: OK. OK. So if I did make a motion, then, right. So if I did make the motion, it would be to, no, when I said amend, would be amend what's being presented to us. So if I did make the motion, it would be with what has been presented to us, less the amount of money that three special ed aides would come up to.

[1671] SPEAKER_16: Those are, just point of order, those are items 10.4.

[1675] Jodi Croce: in the agenda.

[1685] Ray Rodriguez: I thought it would be the general budget.

[1689] Nancy Thomas: Please clarify.

[1692] SPEAKER_21: The item that is speaking to reduction of hours for instructional aides is in a separate item than the budget. It is not It's not part of the budget adoption. So there's been no change in the budget adoption, and that's a separate one for discussion. I'm happy to give you the background on it, but do you want to do it now, or do you want to wait till the item comes up for a decision?

[1715] Nancy Thomas: Just for clarification, the current budget does not have those positions removed.

[1722] SPEAKER_21: No. No, it's a separate item.

[1724] Nancy Thomas: It's not an item on this budget. That's correct. OK. Ms. Corker? No, it would not affect this year's budget. Remember, we said we're going to be doing the majority of the cuts that were on the list are going to be effective next year, not this coming year.

[1750] SPEAKER_24: So these eight positions are not cut for this coming year then?

[1753] Nancy Thomas: That's right. That's exactly what we were just told.

[1756] Ray Rodriguez: My understanding is that it's the other way around.

[1761] SPEAKER_21: The item that's a separate item on your agenda tonight isn't reducing three instructional aides, it's reducing hours to meet, to match the program that the instructional aides are in. So we're not reducing anyone's position, I mean we're not eliminating anyone's position. It's a reduction of hours to match the ratios in the hours the students are in as an example. If the students are there for three hours a day and we have an instructional assistant that's there for nearly six hours, We need to match the aids with the program. And we've done the moving around and transferring around. And this is just the authority to match the instructional aid time with the students. But that's a different item.

[1807] SPEAKER_24: Can we wait and discuss that when the other three positions are vacant already, according to the list?

[1816] SPEAKER_21: The three positions that were listed were listed as being vacant that on the item at the set the other item Yeah, there are there are items that are there are FTE that are vacant that we're just asking to get that but there are two there's two point I think it's 2.04 FTE that is just a reduction of hours that is not an elimination of positions on that separate item which is

[1842] SPEAKER_25: So I guess the question is, so do those hours affect next year's budget?

[1849] SPEAKER_21: Yes, they will. But they are not included in this. There'll be additional reduction when we have the budget, when he does the actuals in the fall.

[1861] SPEAKER_15: A little more clarification. The vacant positions were reduced from the budget and pulled out of position control before we calculated the budget. The positions that are the reduction of hours that Ms. Benson is referring to and that specifically are at the school that Mr. Rodriguez mentioned in his opening comments, those positions are currently filled positions. They are in the budget at their current full amount. Those reductions of hours of the positions have not yet been put into the budget. The vacant positions have been pulled from the budget.

[1890] SPEAKER_16: So those positions would stay at Whiteford next year?

[1895] SPEAKER_15: They are.

[1896] SPEAKER_21: Like I said, the positions themselves are not going away. It's a reduction of hours to match the program and to do our ratio. We've been reviewing ratios throughout the district, and that's what that is. The positions themselves will be retained with the Whiteford Preschool.

[1912] Nancy Thomas: Thank you. OK, Ms. Cochran, did you want to speak?

[1917] SPEAKER_24: No, I just was responding to.

[1919] SPEAKER_25: Mr. Preciado? So I wanted to ask, and it's a little confusing in terms adopting the budget and then discussing the adult education piece. I know it's 8.4, but it just, cause if we adopt the budget, it just seems a little weird, counterintuitive to me and we adopt the budget with the way it is. But then if we adjust it, um, that would be an adjustment to the budget. Why couldn't we have that conversation now as part of that? I'm just confused why it was a separate agenda item instead of sequence.

[1949] SPEAKER_15: It's a separate agenda item because we've already held the public hearings on the budget as it currently exists. And so the board can take the action. The board could choose to flip the order of them if it wanted to do so. However, the board can take the action to reduce the contribution to adult education at any time. And if the board directs us to take this action, it becomes the first budget adjustment after the posting of the original budget as part of the adjustments that we send on a regular basis.

[1975] SPEAKER_24: Part of the problem, too, is that once you have the budget, there's a process you have to go through. And we have July 1st as doing it. So a budget is a plan. It's not an actual.

[1987] SPEAKER_15: Correct. And as mentioned, we would bring this forward as the first adjustment to the budget of the year.

[1991] Nancy Thomas: Mr. Rodriguez, and then I'd like to say something.

[1994] Ray Rodriguez: I'll wait on you.

[1996] Nancy Thomas: OK. I think it's really important, and I'm thinking about a member of the public that just spoke to us, I think it's really important that We have a lot of work to do next year if we're going to be solvent. And that means beginning not only negotiations early next year, but also bringing together a budget advisory committee and working on the budget and the cuts as soon as possible in the fall when school starts. I don't know. How does the rest of the board feel about that? Because if you don't agree, then We're not sending a coherent message to the superintendent.

[2037] SPEAKER_24: We don't have negotiations next year, do we?

[2041] Ray Rodriguez: Well, yeah. Open at the end of next year for 1920.

[2048] Nancy Thomas: But we have to negotiate some important parameters this year, this coming year, if we are going to be able to get concessions on class sizes, and that's what I'm talking about. Is there any reason we can't open negotiations in the fall to talk about class sizes?

[2071] SPEAKER_21: The way the tentative agreement is listed, it has us not opening until for the 19-20. So at the end of 18-19, we would open on compensation and class size. So we could certainly start to have that conversation earlier, but it would not be taking effect until the 19-20 year, right? Because this is for 16, 17, 17, 18, 18-19 year. I'm sorry, for the 18-19 year.

[2101] Nancy Thomas: Because I was thinking, you know, if it doesn't start, if it starts in 18-19, that means we can start now in the fall.

[2109] SPEAKER_21: We can start negotiations early. Certainly, you can. When you open it, you're opening for both compensation and class size.

[2118] Nancy Thomas: How do the rest of you feel about that?

[2120] SPEAKER_24: I think we need to get our act together before we start opening negotiations. Negotiations is not the beginning process, it's the end process. When we decide what is important, what our parameters are. Until we have an idea of what it is that we want to do, we have the plan. If we are not legally required to open up negotiations, I think it's foolish to start too early.

[2144] SPEAKER_25: OK. Mr. Preciado? So I have a suggestion in terms of, I was going to propose a little bit later, but since we're on there, for the resolution itself as a item in terms of to add, be it further resolved. So we can add, be it further resolved that we establish a budget advisory committee and then that the makeup will be outlined and designated by the superintendent or by the administration. However, we frame that as a as an addition to the resolution so that way the Budget Advisory Committee will be created as part of the resolution. And then another piece that I wanted to add for specifically the town hall, I wanted to have that be further resolved that the district will hold open town hall meetings to obtain input and answer questions related to the budget at least once a month beginning in September and going through February or right before we have the the, um, the decision, I think, uh, Mr. Richard said last time that we had to make the decision by March for the, for the 2018 19. Is that correct?

[2219] Ray Rodriguez: Not that I disagree, but I really like to, um, I think we've really need to finish a point to, I agree with you, member Priscilla, a hundred percent, but if we can finish a point two and then maybe that would be when we talk about the rest of it.

[2231] SPEAKER_25: That is a point two.

[2233] Ray Rodriguez: Okay. I thought you were talking about resolution is to me, it shows a point five.

[2236] Nancy Thomas: No, 8.2 says... The resolution is 8.5. We're on 8.2.

[2240] SPEAKER_15: There are two resolutions. There is one in 8.2 and one in 8.5.

[2244] SPEAKER_25: If you look at 8.2 adoption of the budget, resolution number 2063, budget adoption for 2017-18.

[2249] SPEAKER_24: Oh, okay. Sorry. There's a resolution 2.64 prior to that.

[2254] Ray Rodriguez: Yeah, I was looking at 8.5 with the resolution.

[2257] Nancy Thomas: I hardly agree with Member Preciado, but I would like to go back to my comment about the importance of moving quickly and decisively on a budget that will be balanced after next year. And in order to do that, we have to take the big-ticket items, and we can't shove them off too far. And one of the big-ticket items is going from, effectively, from 31 to 35, is it? What is it? class, increasing class sizes.

[2296] SPEAKER_21: Right now we're at 34, so it'd be taking, 35 is what electives and that kind of thing are, so it would be taking up that.

[2305] Nancy Thomas: I don't understand how it's 34 because it's limited to 155 contacts. 155 contacts equals 31.

[2317] SPEAKER_21: The way that it was changed to be total contacts rather than class size is an average over a day of 155, and we are authorized up to 170, which is at 34. 170 is 34. So what you're asking, I believe, is that you want to try for 35, which would be up to 175 total contacts. Is that what I'm, is that what I'm understanding?

[2345] Nancy Thomas: That's exactly what I understood that staff recommendation to be or the staff, one of the major cuts that we kind of rely on and going into our second resolution about things that we're going to be doing going forward to, to balance the budget and um, everything over 30. I mean, you're talking about, um, you're talking about,

[2368] SPEAKER_21: 155 contacts anything over that we have to pay a penalty and that I think it's I think the original Suggestion was 35, and that's what I'd like the board to consider Okay, I'm a little uncomfortable with this negotiation conversation right now, so we certainly have your direction So I think maybe we'll work on that as we move forward Okay, thank you Yeah

[2396] Ray Rodriguez: Getting back to 8.2, when you're talking about budget, you go back and forth. Are we going to not fill a position? And that might be good language when it comes to, in my opinion, maybe to a management group. But when it comes to special ed aides, to me, it's different. We need to have aides in the classroom. helping our, especially with the new amount of special ed teachers. That's why I brought that up. It's not about the fact that someone is leaving and we've decided not to fill that position. And to me, um, if, if we're talking about special ed aides, then we need to fill the position. Um, um, so that's the way I feel about, and the reason I brought it up on the budget is because It was my understanding that that's something that we were going to implement right away as far as Right this this coming year and that's something I didn't want now understood that You know, this is a three-year cycle we're talking about and I just want to make sure that if there's a way for us to make sure that we have sufficient special ed aides and especially with all the new teachers coming in, that we do that.

[2483] SPEAKER_21: And I will say the special, oh, I'm sorry.

[2485] SPEAKER_24: I just want to say that I think everyone has a case for having reduced class sizes, be it special ed, be it people that work with the AP kids, the ones that are working for the English learners. Everyone has a reason for doing it. We're in a situation where we have to go where we can go legally. And I don't know that one is more important than another. All of our kids are important. And so I think that that's part of the suggestion that was made by our new special ed director is the fact that we are not following, we are overstaffed. Now, no one ever feels like you're overstaffed, ever, no matter what you teach. You're never overstaffed. So I mean, that's a fact of life in terms of as a teacher. So if we're going to be, cutting out 4 million, we're going to have to go for all these pieces. And we're going to have to go about what is allowed with the law. And then maybe we figure out ways to work better and be more supportive. I mean, that's the pieces there, too. But I don't think we can make an exception at this point. We have to go with what's the laws. Mr. Preciado?

[2555] SPEAKER_25: I was going to say, I was thinking in terms of we discussed this framework of not laying people off, which is why we started there. And then we had four or five budget sessions with that framework. And that was kind of the understanding in terms of that's where we wanted to start with not laying people off, right? Knowing that we have to cut almost $4 million moving forward so that

[2582] Ray Rodriguez: My four million was was our target which is more now because of the negotiation piece But that's over three years. So We've got to do it next year

[2602] SPEAKER_25: 18-19. So which means we have to decide in March that, or I think that's always a question that I ask Mr. Richard, in terms of when we cut them off. So in March, I believe, by then we have to decide for 18-19 how we're going to cut the $4 million. That's exactly right. We're already cutting the bleeding by putting $4 million from the reserve, and we've only cut about $1.2 million, is my understanding, right? So then we still have

[2633] Ray Rodriguez: It was 2016, 2017. But anyway, it's a big task. It is. All I'm asking is that the board consider the fact that when it comes to special education, there are so many potholes and so many things. The last thing you want to do is, with the mandated part of it, is to be involved in you know, litigation where you lose a lot of money and because of the fact we haven't done things exactly the way it was supposed to. And I know we have a new special ed director who's going to make sure we don't do that. But bottom line is, if there's a way to put that aside, and I disagree with Member Crocker, even though, you know, All our children are, I mean, we all treat them the same. To me, there's a reason why they're called special ed. And there's very strict guidelines.

[2695] SPEAKER_24: That's the reason why we follow strict guidelines.

[2697] Ray Rodriguez: Right, exactly.

[2700] Nancy Thomas: I tend to agree with Ms. Crocker and Member Preciado's comment that we're not going to cut $4 million without cutting staff. It's a given. You know, as long as we're legally staffed and we're supportive with professional development of our teachers and doing everything we can to make sure we do things right, these cuts are going to be difficult and they're not going to be popular and there's going to be a lot of people that are going to be unhappy. But we have got to stay the course and I think we've already in effect, you know, told staff that the first list they gave us, we're going to work through that list. And I'd like to see some additions to the list. I hope the rest of you do, too, because we're cutting it right too close. We're cutting it way too close, especially if the negotiated item I shouldn't have been talking about earlier doesn't happen.

[2770] Ray Rodriguez: We didn't realize at that time that we would have such a amount of specialized teachers that we're going to be needing. And to me, that's something that has to be taken care of and making sure that we have the people in the classroom to make sure that that whole transition goes smoothly.

[2794] SPEAKER_25: Yes, we've got the budget yeah, and I would like to move on to mr. Preciado suggestions for the resolution Okay, then after then I'll make some of those Again, and then I had a question about it ties into the next piece, but I'll do this first So, let's see If I may you want to try it may take a stab at it tonight between your page and

[2822] SPEAKER_16: my notes. Um, I was just going to suggest a potential addition to the resolution. And I think that this comes from a place of being really clear, um, from a board direction. Um, cause what I don't want to get into is, um, a meeting with the community where it becomes us being lobbied to not make reductions. So I think the words matter. So I think maybe it's something along the lines of be it further resolved that the district will hold. Well, let's start with this. Let me back up. Be it further resolved that the Newark unified school district will number one, create a budget advisory committee to be determined and uh, planned by the superintendent or however you want to say that. And to develop a plan for the community budget reduction input meetings to obtain input and answer questions related to budget reductions. Um, and as far as the frequency I would, I would, you know, we were coming up with a plan, but I think that somehow if we can tighten up the language enough to say The purpose of this meeting is to hear input on what we need to reduce, because if not, I'm worried that we'll end up spending time spinning our wheels hearing about what we shouldn't cut, and it becomes a lobbying contest. So we want to hear about, okay, here's all the pots of money, here's the percentages we have. Where can we push and reduce and what's important to the community? I think that's a really structured conversation that we need to have. So that's kind of my two cents on how I would ask for some direction from the board. And it will help us really craft a process and a protocol so that when those groups do come together, they know you're coming in to help give advice on what to reduce, not try to talk us out of cutting money. So for what it's worth, that's kind of my opinion.

[2944] Nancy Thomas: So before we go on, a member of the public watching us on TV cannot hear you, Mr. Preciado. And could you use your mic too, please? So let's speak into the mic so folks at home can hear us.

[2960] SPEAKER_25: Sure. I've been trying to put it on and off so that you can't hear my heavy breathing. So apologies for not pushing the button. How much have I missed the last point in terms of how many times?

[2976] SPEAKER_16: Let me bring it to you in a plan and you guys can improve the plan instead of getting into the frequency of it tonight. Because depending on how intense they are, a one a month might be too much. Because part of what I was going to recommend is that board members go with cabinet members to these interactions. It's important from the survey that we heard. that the board is seen hand-in-hand with cabinet members. So one thing that I'd like to put in the plan is there might be a day where maybe Member Thomas and I go to handle this meeting. Member Rodriguez and Mr. Richards might go to this other meeting. We have the same protocol, but we're kind of walking in as a team. We're listening together. That's something that was a high frequency item in our community survey. And I'm trying to bring those two things to bear together. So that's kind of, without revealing too much more, that's one thing that I'm thinking about putting in the plan. and how we can do that throughout the district at the local level, at the school level. So that's just to give you kind of a foreshadowing. So I think I'd feel better about let me put together a plan, have you guys approve it, and then you have a clear way to not have to get into the... If maybe it isn't more than once a month, but I think that let me have a chance to craft a plan that you guys can approve Can I ask something?

[3057] Ray Rodriguez: The last time we had community meetings where we had them at the junior high I'm talking about the budget the Dominic you would have a up to two board members there. But it was my understanding that we were told that it was fine for other board members to be there as long as they were not participating and quiet. I just want to make sure, if you want to run it by Mr. Dennis.

[3090] SPEAKER_25: You can have all five, as long as we're not engaging in a decision-making process or discussing. Hey, that's a good reduction. What do you think?

[3099] Ray Rodriguez: Like, yeah, we can't do that. Just want to make sure we're open on that.

[3103] Nancy Thomas: So to come back to this, this item, Mr. Graciato.

[3106] SPEAKER_25: Um, so, so I was just going to say, so I'm okay with the plan, but just because, um, I know this is not to you cause brand new administration, but just, I mean, I've only been here two years, but I've already seen sometimes when we map these things out for me, I'd feel more comfortable if we had a timeline in terms of, um, that the plan be presented by, the first meeting in August, for example, or at least by, because then if we have an end date, then we know that because sometimes we have these discussions and this is what we're going to do with this, what's going to happen. And then, um, two years later, we're still at the same place.

[3142] SPEAKER_24: So we'd have a plan ready for the August one board meeting.

[3148] SPEAKER_16: That's fine.

[3148] SPEAKER_25: Yeah. So some like that, I just want, I don't, and I can, I'm okay with not having the frequency as long as we have the plan.

[3155] SPEAKER_16: And I have a pretty good sketch in my mind. I just know that it'll be better once I've had some time to really think. And I know Letty will have a better head around it. I think that what we're, the ideas we've kicked around are exciting. I don't want to reveal anything yet, but you'll be pleased with the plan. I think it'll, it'll get what you're after is a deep, um, uh, process for the broader community to have input, to try to get to people who haven't been able to come to board meetings, who have not just come, you know, uh, that are interested, but can't get there. So the plan is how do we get out to them? So, um, I think August 1st is a very reasonable deadline. We can meet that or exceed that.

[3206] Nancy Thomas: So can we put that, uh, can you add that sentence in the resolution so that it's in, uh, be resolved?

[3216] SPEAKER_24: For the result in you Can you SD okay? And you SD? Administration will design a plan for community forums to be present on budget community input on budget on budget to be Reduction please I think the word reduction should be in there all right.

[3240] SPEAKER_25: Have you got it patty community input on budget community input, community input on budget reductions.

[3247] SPEAKER_24: Okay. Reductions. Uh, we'll present a plan to the board by the, uh, at the, at the August 1st meeting or sooner.

[3253] Nancy Thomas: Okay. Okay. So, uh, that is one part of the motion I would assume. And would someone else like to make the rest of the motion for this item?

[3264] SPEAKER_24: I move acceptance of the budget with the, uh, noted, um, addition to the resolution number two Oh six three.

[3274] Nancy Thomas: Is there a second?

[3277] SPEAKER_25: I'll second and then have some discussion questions. Okay. Discussion? So I wanted to ask how this relates to the budget. I know it's the next item in terms of class size limits, but I want to know how it's mapped out in the current, in the adoption for 2017-2018. Is it already taken into account that it is 2931, the numbers?

[3302] SPEAKER_15: In the budget document. We are staffed for next school year at grades K-3 at 24-1 pursuant to what's in the LCAP. If you look at the explanation detail of the 29-1 item, we indicate that there. We have staffed for next year based on 24-1 as we designated within the LCAP. We are bringing this item forward to the board. I feel like we're jumping out of order, though. I feel like I'm talking on a... out of order because it's the next agenda item.

[3329] SPEAKER_25: I'm just asking if it relates to the budget, so you're answering that question.

[3333] SPEAKER_15: Okay, so it does in that if we were to, for example, if the board takes action and then we get student number 25 at a grade level, rather than being forced to add a new section of a grade level combination or route a child to another school, or face a penalty for class size overage, we'll be able to just absorb that student until such time as we were to get over 29 across all the classrooms and we would absolutely have to add another FTE. But it will give us some flexibility and not have to reroute students away from their home campuses.

[3367] Nancy Thomas: OK. Are we ready to vote? All those in favor of 8.2 adoption of the budget, please raise your hand with the amended resolution Resolve. Four ayes. Thank you. So 8.3, superintendent.

[3393] SPEAKER_15: So as I was just mentioning, this item we bring forward to the board exercising the board's authority under section 8.2 with regard to class size limitations. As we look forward down the road, as the board knows, as we've talked about in our several budget study sessions, looking at invoking this current section of our existing contract requires board action prior to the beginning of the new school year. And so looking ahead rather than looking at it for the purposes of the upcoming school year as a new staffing model, we're looking at it as using that as an opportunity to minimize the number of grade level combinations that we have to create as well as to avoid displacing students away from their home school to the extent possible rather than creating immediate overflow situations that we usually scramble at the very beginning of the year to try and take care of.

[3440] Nancy Thomas: Board discussion?

[3442] SPEAKER_25: So I definitely get the rationale and I think it makes perfect sense. However, I know we also have a bad history of messaging and presenting this. So in terms of that's what I asked previously about how this affected the budget and whether or not that would cause an issue. So from my perspective, I would be more, and I've mentioned this before, in terms of having like a staggered of 26 to one for next year. And as we have the conversations with the community, we will say. it will move to 29 slash 31 as a way for us to cost-saving measures unless you have other ideas, community, and provide the input and have a staggered 26 to one and then 29 to one knowing that from my previous question that it's not going to affect the budget is my understanding. And then the reason is really because we really do have a bad history of messaging. So as soon as we adopt this, we were to adopt it 29 to 31, it would be like Newark just adopted 29 to 1, even though the actual staffing would be 24 to 1. And we don't have a plan that we've outlined where, when we're in the summer, but also that we're communicating to parents. Because all they're going to hear is 29 to 1, K-3 class size, the board adopted this without any community input. So for me, I understand the rationale. However, as a way, because we haven't done the messaging And knowing that it's not going to have an impact on the budget, and for my last question, I would be more open to having a staggered 26 to 1, and then it goes to 29 slash 31.

[3549] SPEAKER_24: Ms. Crocker? Are you concerned because there was not input in terms of the K through 3 going up? Or the community is not realizing that that's going to change? Is that your biggest concern? Yeah.

[3563] SPEAKER_25: I think it's better to look at what we have 2020 vision when you're thinking about it from the past. If we would have discussed with the community at the sites and said, hey, you know what, this is actually going to eliminate those those combo classes, this is what it's going to do. It's still going to be generally 24 to 1, but it will eliminate those combo classes. This is how it's going to play out. And we control the messaging. And that would be a lot better than saying that one of the only draws or that people have said for Newark over Fremont or other districts is the 24 to 1 ratio. If we then change it all the way to 29, the framework is going to be like Newark is now 29. to one and we didn't. Having a conversation community members saying well, there's a technical. Answer here, let's really break this down that that's really hard to to have with people because we didn't do it up front.

[3626] Nancy Thomas: That's not Mr. Rodriguez.

[3630] SPEAKER_24: Yes, we are going to be stepping in 24 to one. That's what the setup is going to be and from my perspective, I would hate to lose that period. I think this is one of the most important things we do, is having a low class size in K-3. I think these are the most important years. However, because of the money constraints, that may have to disappear unless the state comes through with more money to allow us to do that. But we're not changing the staffing, but we are allowing flexibility within a site. So I think most parents would rather have 26 in a classroom if it meant their child could stay at the same school with the brother and sister. And I think this allows the staff the flexibility which they did not have before.

[3677] SPEAKER_25: And I'm okay with having that at 26, but I just think because we didn't do the messaging piece, I really have, and that's why my previous question was, is this a budget relying on the fact that it's women? He said no. Exactly.

[3690] Nancy Thomas: He said no. So we're fine. Mr. Rodriguez.

[3693] Ray Rodriguez: You can add the word flexibility to it. The tough part is, how do you do it the other way? Do you do 24 to 29 slash 31? You know, so that, which is, I mean, sometimes you have to explain what you're actually doing. And I know we understand, but, you know, You know, our community comes in and they look at what's happening at a board meeting and what was approved. So we can definitely communicate that to our community when we have the community forums. But if you want to have it as part of this piece, then we come up with a way where we put that in there. And I just don't know how to do that.

[3745] Nancy Thomas: I would hate to hamstring this by going to 26, because it's clear if we're going to be able to meet our objectives, this is one of the biggest items in terms of cost savings. So I would like to be able to spend the year describing that this is allowing flexibility this year and explaining to them why we have to go to 29 to 1, because we have to do it next year anyway. So Mr. Sanchez, do you have any ideas on how you would message this?

[3779] SPEAKER_16: Yes, I think that certainly this needs to be on the agenda discussion for the community engagement process. So that's easy to do. But I do want to be clear that there is some savings in this for the coming year. What we've done for the coming year where there are savings is this actually has set a new cap. it's raised the cap for existing classes. So not that it would be widespread, but the fact that we could go to that ratio next year in the handful of instances where that happens, it might affect about, you know, hopefully we have the problem where we're increasing enough enrollment. in certain grade levels, in certain areas where we would be able to add kids in and eliminate combos without having to incur other expense. So there is some savings there for this coming year. But the larger impact of this 29 to 1 ratio is that for the following year, after we conclude next year, we will staff at this ratio going forward from there. And that's a larger amount of savings because we will have staffed buildings at that ratio. So I just wanted to be really clear about that. Did I say that correctly, Brian? Did you want to add something?

[3850] SPEAKER_21: Katherine? I think just to echo what Brian said is we're already staffed at 24 to 1 for this coming up year. So the only classes that would be over the 24 would be new students coming in. It would just allow us that flexibility for the new students coming in. But it also gives us direction as we're filling positions for 18-19. Yeah, for 18-19. If we have the board's direction, At 29, we'll hire accordingly when we're filling positions moving forward. So it's not going to have a very big impact, probably, financially on this coming up year. But it will in the subsequent year. It will have a significant impact in the subsequent year.

[3897] SPEAKER_25: Mr. Preciado. So two things. So that's actually, so exactly, I think we probably do have to move to that. And as much as it pains me and I hate it, we probably wouldn't, I would be okay with that, but it's more of the communication and having those discussions. And that's why I say a staggered. And then the other point I wanted to make is that's why then I asked the question before I voted for the budget in terms of whether or not we would, it would really affect, um, that budget because then that would have a determination of how I analyze this piece.

[3928] SPEAKER_24: So I just wanted to point that, you know, I'm wondering, we're doing two things here. We're setting what we're going to be doing next year and then for the following year, No, we're not. We're doing for 17-18. Yeah, okay.

[3943] Ray Rodriguez: Okay, Mr. Rodriguez. I don't mind having the word flexibility put in there somewhere. I think getting back to the community forums that we're going to have, I think having a list of all our K-3 classes throughout the district and how many kids are in each one of the class that we can Percentage of people so they they know that some of them are 26 to 1 some of them are 25 to 1 so that they know that this is something that's You know moving forward, but it's not actually the case as we start out to 217 school year just a thought Can I ask for a motion? So is there a way to put, before I make the motion, is there a way to put flexibility in here? Which is what we've been talking about and Mr. Richards has mentioned, I think that's what he just mentioned.

[4013] SPEAKER_24: How about in the second sentence, to allow flexibility in the determination of the class size limitation.

[4019] Diego Torres: Okay.

[4022] SPEAKER_24: So second row, halfway through. to allow flexibility in the determination of the class size limitation and class size maximum in grades K through 3.

[4033] Ray Rodriguez: Okay, you want to make that motion?

[4036] SPEAKER_24: You've made the motion.

[4037] Ray Rodriguez: Well, no, I haven't yet. I wanted to get that.

[4041] SPEAKER_24: I would suggest that as an amendment or a change. Right.

[4048] Ray Rodriguez: So that would be the motion based on the Verbiage that member Crocker adding that flexibility clause in there to to approve this this item Okay, is that clear?

[4078] Nancy Thomas: And then I think we all feel strong about the messaging and rather than later and ongoing. Okay, please vote. Do we have a second? I thought you seconded it.

[4092] Ray Rodriguez: No, I made the motion, but nobody seconded it yet.

[4098] Nancy Thomas: Do we have a second?

[4100] Ray Rodriguez: This is a tough one to second. It's tough enough making the motion.

[4104] Nancy Thomas: I'll second it. Member Crocker seconds it. Please vote. Ayes, three ayes. I'm voting against. Please vote. Oh, you're voting against, and Member Preciado against. So three ayes and one nay. Member Preciado voting against.

[4127] Ray Rodriguez: Now, as has been our custom, I know he's already spoken on it, Member Preciado. When you vote no, and then you'll be given the opportunity to explain again what you're.

[4138] SPEAKER_25: Well, I mean, I think I've already explained my rationale in terms of the basis. have my questions asked and answered, so it's that same rationale.

[4146] Nancy Thomas: And I appreciate your rationale, I do. 8.4, adjustment to the contribution to adult education.

[4158] SPEAKER_15: At the last two budget study sessions that we had, the two different board members at two different points in time made suggestions with regard to making a reduction to the contribution of adult education. One of the suggestions was to reduce it by the amount of the projected ending balance. Then an alternate suggestion came forward about reducing the entire contribution of $100,000 immediately. There was not a consensus kind of given at the study sessions on either of those two items. It was just kind of left hanging out there. And so as the first potential amendment to the budget for the 17-18 school year, we put this item on to get additional clarity from the board with regard to the fact that we didn't have enough discussion to get to a consent. Was that because the majority of the board would like to leave things as they are for a year? Would they like to make the reduction that was suggested as far as just giving them enough to balance their budget for the year? Or did the board want to pursue making the entire reduction of $100,000 immediately? And so we put some additional information in the attachment to the board agenda item. with regard to adult ed's funding by source as well as its expenditures by source so that we can try to get a little bit of clarity from the board moving forward before the new principal begins establishing a program, making sure that we have clear direction to give her assistance as she's looking at building her program for the year.

[4246] SPEAKER_24: Member Crockett. I think we were pretty clear about the fact that we felt adult education should pay for itself. And so that any class that does not pay for itself should be eliminated. Because I don't think, I don't feel that we can take K through 12 money. The only time that there might be a difference in that has to do with a program that allows somebody to get the GED because they did not complete in high school. I think that should be something that we fund because that's part of the K through 12 process. And there are kids that that's where they get it for whatever reason they didn't make it before they were 18. And so that would be something that I think that we need to fund, if we need to fund it, the GED program. Aside from that, the adult education should be self-sustaining, and I think it should be done immediately. So for me, I don't know whether it's two positions, whatever it is, it depends upon the money.

[4304] Nancy Thomas: Member Fusciato?

[4305] SPEAKER_25: I was going to say, for me, it would be option three, which is similar to Ms. Crocker in terms of, I know we have to do Hardcuts and and this is not something that should be taken lightly And in light of the fact of where we're at like this is this would help a big chunk in terms of I mean 100,000 it's not it's not going to resolve the issue, but it's 100,000 more that we can then use towards Not laying someone else like so it's hard decisions right like these are the priorities that we have to make so I'm with option three member Rodriguez

[4345] Ray Rodriguez: I also feel that it's important that we make sure that we support our kids when they're looking for their GED because that's a natural process. And I've always been a proponent that if you're going to have special education classes, whether it's DMV driven or, you know, whatever it is, you know, an arts class that you should charge enough to the participants to cover the cost of the class and the teacher. So, so.

[4380] Nancy Thomas: It's my understanding that there is a lot of restricted money in there as well as revenue that's coming in. And so if you look at what's projected to be left in the ending balance anyway in this, this current budget, and then you take, if you go and say, okay, we're, That's $45,000, I think. If you say, OK, we'll take the additional $55,000 and say we're no longer going to be funding adult ed from the general fund through an inter-district fund transfer, then what you're really saying is, OK, you've got, still have a lot of money, more than you had a couple years ago because the consortium, Ohlone Consortium, has given us a big chunk of money. You know, design your program as best you can. knowing that we have a priority for GED. And so I fully think that, and then if you look at that reduction, additional reduction from the current budget, we've said we want to cut 20% from books and supplies. That cuts 20% at least from books and supplies and the Purchases that have been made because they had extra money that they could spend they did spend it they spent it on $10,000 on English as a second language curriculum if I'm not mistaken they spent it on 2016 $20,000 for for technology that we probably could have instead paid for out of Out of the Russian money So I mean, I, I think that gives them a lot of money and it gives them a little bit of a challenge in the adult ed department and the superintendent of course oversees everything to, um, to make that go with, with a hundred thousand less.

[4494] SPEAKER_24: Um, I, I think if I would not like to get in a situation where we're saying this is what we're saving. and therefore we can spend it someplace else. Oh, that's right.

[4504] Nancy Thomas: I agree.

[4505] SPEAKER_24: So, so we're not talking about putting in really fun. We're saying that we're cutting this out. Yeah, that's what we're saying.

[4510] Nancy Thomas: Okay. Do I have a motion?

[4513] SPEAKER_16: So I just want to clarify, I'm hearing that option three is the direction. Okay. Thank you.

[4518] SPEAKER_24: I don't know whether, whether we don't know whether to fill positions, which you need to cut. What we're saying is the program has to support itself with the exception of GED. So whatever that means in terms of, that's what we're saying.

[4534] SPEAKER_15: So the positions currently funded out of unrestricted is 3.3% of the salary of the administrator that administers McGregor. That's a certificated position. We're not going to be able to reduce that 3.3%. We will have to look at the overall programs that position is and reallocate the percentages accordingly. The other position is 33% of the adult ed office manager position.

[4564] Nancy Thomas: Well, there is money in there for books and supplies, and I think what I heard the board say is that the program can be designed with everything minus that $100,000. Is that?

[4577] SPEAKER_24: I think they need to take care of their own responsibility for the district office or for the office. Unless they accept as the GED, whatever it costs for the GED class, we figure it's part of our responsibility.

[4593] SPEAKER_15: The GED class is actually already part of the consortium, so that's funded within the categorical program.

[4598] SPEAKER_24: That's great. So they need to figure out a way of paying their salaries with the money they have. And that's part of the pricing that they have for a dual education.

[4606] Ray Rodriguez: We take care of the office. You do it by participation and making sure then when you start a class that that's enough participants to cover the cost. You have a formula. You're right. Yeah.

[4617] SPEAKER_16: You think you have enough clarification? I think so. Thank you. Okay.

[4621] Nancy Thomas: Okay. Um, so would you like Mr Preciado to make a motion?

[4627] SPEAKER_25: I'm okay to move that. I'm just trying to figure it out cause we had, we had a conversation in terms of like the overall direction. So I'm trying to formulate the, because it's not just option three, right? It's just the idea of removing that, um, inner district transfer.

[4645] SPEAKER_24: Um, how about a statement of policy that the board, um, feels that the adult education program should be self funding and that the only part that we, that the, from the general budget would be the 3.3% we're committed for the administration plus whatever cost there might be for the GED.

[4667] Nancy Thomas: No, there's already money in there for that.

[4670] SPEAKER_25: We already said for the GED. Right.

[4672] Nancy Thomas: But there's already money in for the 3.2%. It may change.

[4674] SPEAKER_24: It may change. And so we're committed to the fact that this is our responsibility. The rest is not ours. So however they find the money, whether they find it.

[4683] SPEAKER_25: So then you can make that motion, I think, and I'll second.

[4686] SPEAKER_24: Have you got it, Patty?

[4688] SPEAKER_16: I believe so. Hold on one second.

[4695] SPEAKER_24: That's all right.

[4713] SPEAKER_15: If you if you take a look at the slide just Catherine estrus from clarification I think it would be a good idea if you look at the attachment with regard to the side that has adulthood spending by fund spending by source Between the unrestricted versus the restricted yeah The only thing that is not salaries and benefits that unrestricted is currently paying for in next year's budget is their share of the utility costs The utility costs are divided up by the number of classrooms restricted versus unrestricted based on the programs. We currently have three teachers teaching courses that are out of the unrestricted adulthood fund, six that are in the restricted. So basically two-thirds of the utility goes to restricted, one-third goes to unrestricted. Additionally, two-thirds of the 10% of the salary of the administrator for McGregor 10% of that salary goes to adult ed. Of that, 2 3rds goes to restricted, 1 3rd goes to unrestricted in the same proportion as teachers. And in the same ratio, that's how the salary and benefits of the office manager is distributed as well. So that's all done, 2 3rds, 1 3rd, 2 3rds, 1 3rd, based on the number of classes. Now, if it is determined, and we will have to go back and take a look at those three courses and whether or not they're able to set rates at a level that would allow them to fully cover their costs plus their proportionate share of the administration of adult ed and whether or not they can generate enough revenue. to make themselves, as you describe it, self-supporting. So that will be an analysis we'll have to take a look at with the new principle. If it changes, and we're only offering two courses out of the unrestricted and seven out of the restricted because we're able to absorb one into the consortium, that'll change the ratios. Or if it just becomes two and six as opposed to three and six, it will change the percentages again. So we will have to look at all of that just depending on which ones can and cannot support themselves And I don't have enough revenue detail at my fingertips at the moment to tell you how much each individual course generates, because it's all in one fund. I'd have to have the site break it out by individual classroom for me.

[4833] SPEAKER_24: I have a question. What is restricted versus unrestricted?

[4837] SPEAKER_15: The restricted is the new Adult Ed Block Grant that comes in two pieces that are administered through the Ohlone Consortium. The majority of it goes, is the consortium's responsibility, and so it's based on the spending plan that we sent to the consortium. There's a small piece of it that is the old Newark Adult Ed direct allocation, which used to come to us straight from the state, but now comes straight to us, but it comes via the consortium. So we get the restricted in two pieces.

[4864] SPEAKER_24: Does the consortium determine what is offered?

[4867] SPEAKER_15: We determine what is offered, but we have to submit it as part of the plan to the consortium, and then they have to approve the plan.

[4872] SPEAKER_24: So if we were to get rid of all the unrestricted, is that what we're doing? $113,000 unrestricted?

[4880] SPEAKER_15: I think $13,000 is what the course fees were that were raised in the current school year, and then the $100,000 is the contribution that comes. So you're eliminating the $100,000 and basically saying you've got your $13,800, that you generated in course fees, either adjust the course fees or reduce the offerings one or the other.

[4898] Nancy Thomas: That's how I'm understanding the motion.

[4900] SPEAKER_24: OK. That's clear to me. Yeah, that's very good. OK, good. Do we have a second?

[4904] Nancy Thomas: Yeah, I'll second. OK, please vote. Thank you, Brian.

[4909] SPEAKER_15: I'm sorry, point of order. Mr. Preciado, you made the motion. You can't second it.

[4913] SPEAKER_25: No, because I was going to make the motion, and then we had the discussion. And then Member Crocker's the one saying this is the statement that we wanted to make.

[4921] SPEAKER_15: I have five. Oh, you do? OK, very good.

[4924] SPEAKER_24: So you have the wording. Would you read to us the wording?

[4927] Penny DeLeon: I don't have the wording fully.

[4929] Elisa Martinez: So you have said that the board felt adult ed should be self-funded. And the additional 3.33% would cover the cost of the salaries for this year.

[4955] Nancy Thomas: Okay.

[4955] SPEAKER_25: Please vote.

[4958] Nancy Thomas: Oh sure. I'm sorry.

[4959] SPEAKER_25: I thought this is also just part of the broader conversation that we need to have in terms of getting, um, having that administration say, cause this was kind of bored, um, created and prefer that it would be proposals would come from administration in terms of saying that these are ways in which we can

[4992] Nancy Thomas: Mr. Rodriguez?

[4994] Ray Rodriguez: I totally agree that we need to have a nice long discussion on adult education. One of the misconceptions from a person that's applying for a class is that it's a predetermined class, here's what it is, and here's the cost. That has to go away. We really need to to tailor the class based on what we feel the community wants and then make sure that when we find the instructor that the instructor is being given instructions or that they have to come up with the number of participants to cover the cost. And that's, we've never done that even though we've wanted to, we've never done that before. So I think it behooves us to make sure that that gets said.

[5048] SPEAKER_16: And just to give you some comfort, um, that is a common practice that is used, uh, typically in career technical education where you need to meet a certain threshold to be a law for the class and it's communicated as such upfront. And then, you know, when you hit that number, the classes ago, and, um, I think this is just a new practice that we've got to get used to. And, um, that's something we can do.

[5070] SPEAKER_24: And that doesn't mean that they can't have a variety of offerings. as long as they're self sustained. So there could be much greater variety if people understand. The other piece here and that is something they have to do with whether we have students that are taking adult ed as well as going to school.

[5087] SPEAKER_16: Right.

[5088] SPEAKER_24: And so in that case it might behoove us to take care of the fees for the students that are enrolled at the high school if they're doing concurrent things. But I think that maybe, maybe we should see if there's many that are doing that. And that might be an option for some of the kids as a way of getting units. And I think that would be our responsibility to take care of that.

[5111] SPEAKER_16: And you'll be, you know, I feel very good. Some information tomorrow on civil law change. Yeah. Go ahead.

[5119] Nancy Thomas: Tomorrow.

[5119] Ray Rodriguez: That's good. No, no.

[5120] Nancy Thomas: Just do it. Okay. Please vote for eyes. Thank you. Next, Resolution 2064, Budget Prioritization Guidelines for the 2017-18 school year. Perhaps staff can set the framework for this.

[5142] SPEAKER_15: This is a second resolution that Alameda County Office of Education had requested that we bring forward to the board. Sort of giving them a little more detail on the outworking of the framework so far with regard to budget reductions that have been implemented for 17-18 as well as the areas for potential continued discussion in 18-19 and a commitment to getting to the total amount that we need to get to with regard to solving the budget deficit by the 18-19 first interim. So they sent a sample language that they had gotten from Oakland Unified when they put Oakland in qualified status. That they worked on with Oakland's board. We didn't do everything the same as them We kind of pulled out Oakland specific things and put in more Newark specific things based on the item that we've already discussed at our previous budget study sessions And then send it over to the county and let them take a look at it to give us their input if they thought that it would meet their Requirements of what they were asking of us. They indicated that it would and so we were bringing it forward for the board to act upon

[5207] SPEAKER_25: I think this would be a good starting point in terms of us sharing to the community that this is a formal resolution of where we're at, the current financial situation. I know it's kind of dense in the form of a resolution, but at least as a way to say, here's like, this is where we're at. This is what we need support with is having that conversation for the $3.8 million reduction. And it says over the next two years, but I guess it would be the next year, 2018, 2019.

[5239] SPEAKER_15: Primarily yes for the 18-19 year. The next two being 17-18 and 18-19. Because the board could enact mid-year just as you just did. You enacted a $100,000 reduction for 17-18 by this action. So you could find more or we could identify more if we have additional position savings throughout the year that we want to recapture to the bottom line. We can make adjustments mid-year at first interim or at second interim. So meaning both the 17-18 and 18-19 school years.

[5267] SPEAKER_25: So that administration can make proposals in terms of this is where we're at that we think that we can cut mid-year and then we can move on that? Correct.

[5274] Nancy Thomas: Cool. I would hope that we would capture some of the other things that have been brought up from time to time in the list. Mr. Richards.

[5288] SPEAKER_15: I'm sorry, could you repeat your question?

[5290] Nancy Thomas: Well, we have a, be it further resolved, the last, be it further resolved, really you've put in of most of the things from the list that we had. But I would hope that we could add maybe something to that list.

[5306] SPEAKER_15: The board can continue to add items to the list and we are going to continue to call things throughout the course of the upcoming school year and as a result of all of the continued study sessions that we are looking ahead to having over the course of the year.

[5317] Nancy Thomas: Some of the things that have been brought up were never added to the list.

[5322] Ray Rodriguez: Why don't we just add a sentence to the last part of that that gives us, again, flexibility moving forward that this is a moving target and that we're going to be adding different things as we move forward in the budget process.

[5340] Nancy Thomas: Well, for example, Ms. Crocker said that, and I agree, that the adult education should be self-sustaining. I think the same should be said for child development. And I'd like us to feel strongly that that should be one of the things on the list. It's never been brought up. Those are the kinds of things. And I noticed some of the things that we worked on and were pretty strict about last time was, for example, not you have adult student ratios, but we were pretty clear that if a class was not full, an elective class was not full, the student had to take their second choice and we couldn't have that class. And there were things in there about food, limiting the amount of food that could be served at meetings or other than programmatic things. Those things You know, I just think that they've been mentioned.

[5400] SPEAKER_24: I don't know that we want to get to a laundry list. No, no, no, that's what I was. I think, but I think what we can say is not limited to these.

[5406] Ray Rodriguez: In general. We can make a general statement there without being, you know, because of that would be undeserved.

[5412] Nancy Thomas: I guess maybe I'm just trying to say, you know, that these were all things that we did last time or talked about last time. I don't want them to get lost because they don't seem to ever make a list that I've, when I brought them up before. I'll just make that point. You don't need to change. the resolution, but I really want to make that point. I feel strongly about that.

[5431] SPEAKER_24: I think if we said something, we're not limited to these as reductions to include, but it's not limited to the following, wherever you would put that in.

[5445] Nancy Thomas: No, it's okay. I think the resolution is fine. I just wish there had been other things added to it.

[5454] Ray Rodriguez: Well, we wouldn't have enough space, because we mentioned so many things.

[5457] SPEAKER_24: So I think we need to be, we need to determine, we're not saying how the books and supplies are going to be limited. I think that we need to say this is a category. So I think if we get into real strong specifics, we're going to be binding ourselves that we may not want to be bound by.

[5479] Ray Rodriguez: I like when statements say exactly what you're thinking. if you were to add something like, we will continue to have further budget meetings that could change or add to the items that have been mentioned in this list, or something to that effect.

[5502] SPEAKER_15: Given that the board just took that action with regard to the other resolution, and both resolutions are being presented to the county, while we certainly can amend this in any way the board desires, It may not be necessary to be redundant. Just keep it clean cut.

[5516] Ray Rodriguez: Sure. It's fine. I'm OK.

[5522] Nancy Thomas: OK. Good. I have a message for, I mean, a motion to.

[5529] Ray Rodriguez: I'll do that. I'll make the motion that we approve this. Resolution number 2064 as presented to the board.

[5538] SPEAKER_25: I can second.

[5539] Cary Knoop: OK.

[5540] Nancy Thomas: Please vote. 4 ayes. Next, we move on to employee organizations. Seeing no one from any employee organization here, we will then move on to the consent agenda. Is there anyone that would like to pull anything from the consent agenda?

[5565] Ray Rodriguez: 10.1.

[5565] Nancy Thomas: 10.1? No.

[5570] Ray Rodriguez: That's what I'm saying. We're at 10.1. You're talking about the whole agenda.

[5576] SPEAKER_24: OK. The whole consent.

[5579] Ray Rodriguez: The whole consent.

[5581] Nancy Thomas: Personnel items, I'm sorry.

[5583] Ray Rodriguez: Yeah, personnel. Personnel items for 2, 3, and 4. Personnel. I like to pull personnel. And 10.4.

[5591] Nancy Thomas: OK.

[5595] SPEAKER_24: Seeing no further. Move acceptance of the consent agenda. 10.2.

[5598] Nancy Thomas: Are you moving acceptance? 10.2. to 10.4. No, Mr. Rodriguez is already in 10.3 and 10.4.

[5609] SPEAKER_15: They're all individual items. They're all individual.

[5612] SPEAKER_24: Okay. Okay. Uh, 10.2. Okay.

[5616] Ray Rodriguez: Is there a second?

[5617] Nancy Thomas: Second. Second. Okay. Member Crocker motion member. Um, Rodriguez second. Please vote. Four ayes. Okay. Um, 10.3 Mr. Rodriguez.

[5633] Ray Rodriguez: I was hoping that, is this going to be your last meeting also? Yeah. Okay. Thank you. Okay. You've been great. Could you, do you mind kind of breaking this down for us?

[5652] Ray Rodriguez: And we're at a 10.2, right? 10.3.

[5665] SPEAKER_25: Sorry? What aspect do you want to break down? The HR pal?

[5667] Jodi Croce: The whole personality aspect?

[5672] Ray Rodriguez: Right, exactly. If you don't mind.

[5676] Nancy Thomas: Usually we don't discuss it.

[5679] Ray Rodriguez: No, no, no. It's not talking about names or anything. Just to give me a better feeling of

[5688] SPEAKER_21: So most of the things that are on this are new positions that have been hired since our last board meeting, or sometimes even before that. But by the time we get the paperwork, we need to make sure that they're properly authorized before we bring them to the board. So we have the first things on here are the reemployment of certificated. So we have some temporary teachers that, as you know, are automatically released at the end of the year. And then those that are eligible and we have spaces for and are recommended by their principals, we bring them back. And that's what the first section is on here, is re-employing them. The next section of employment of certificate and temporary status, most all of our new hires are hired in a temporary status. And then typically, we bring those back to you in the fall with what they call a change of status. And so we'll move some of those into probationary. positions, but that's an action that the board will take later on, I think usually about September, October, sometime in there. So we bring them all in in a temporary status. So the other ones are ones that have either resigned. You'll see there's a list of resignations for the certificated staff, and this has been just the ones that have recently resigned in June. As you know, they have to have the new resignations to us by June 30. or they're out of compliance at that point, they're considered to be contracted for the following school year. So we have another couple of days in this week, and we're hopeful to get more. But it's possible that we might by the end of the week. The classified staffing in this particular instance, where we have a technician that's coming in in a halftime position. It's a shared position. It's a 1.0 position in our payroll department. And we're going to share it between, two positions is the plan. So that classified one is, and then we have some resignations for classified moving forward in the next year. So the time frame of June 30th doesn't apply to classified, but a lot of them, they leave toward the end of the school year anyway, so that they can either accept positions in the next school year at a different location.

[5834] SPEAKER_24: You have any I wasn't sure I've not seen that before I Had a question, thank you mrs. Benson you've been great When I

[5859] Ray Rodriguez: The superintendent decides that he's going to move a employee. How much flexibility is there? I know we talk about management as far as superintendent moving a management employee. But when it comes to reassignment, for instance, is that normally done by meeting with the employee and then discussing options? Or is it basically, this is where I want you to go,

[5888] SPEAKER_21: Both of our CBAs, both the NTA and CSCA, have provisions in the bargaining agreement for doing transfers for our folks from one position to another. The primary need for us, if we're doing an involuntary transfer, is based on the program needs and the needs of the district. And this year, in this case, we were able to, we had to do some reductions in some place, but we had openings in others. able to move people from one position to another. Yeah, one position to another. In the case of the movement, though, we ask for volunteers first if we need to reduce positions. And those that are qualified for the new position, we'll take them if we have more than one volunteer. Then we select by seniority. But the movement for certificate is typically based on what their credential is. and what they're authorized to teach and what the needs of the district and another position are. They're classified. If they're an office manager, they're qualified to be an office manager anywhere in the district. So we have openings for transfers for our permanent folks. And they get first choice. And then if no one accepts those transfers, then we open it to the outside.

[5964] Ray Rodriguez: The reason I ask that is that. In my years, certain times, employees will contact board members, and then we put them back into the superintendent to talk to the superintendent or the principal at the site. I think it's important for employees to know that they, and I'm sure most of them do know, because it's HR makes sure that they do, that they have different rights. And if they're a union member, normally the union member would be able to be present and to try to make it volunteer, like you said, but push comes to shove. I think that the superintendent, if you can't agree on something, does he still have the right to move someone? That's my- The district has the right of assignment always, so- No, I meant the district when I talked about superintendent, not in person.

[6021] SPEAKER_21: They own a position within the district. They don't necessarily own a position with the site. So if the need of the district is to move somebody, we certainly make every effort to include them in that process and to make sure that they do process based on whatever their CBA agreement is. And not everyone is always happy if they have to move from one site to another. But if we're trying to cover open positions and we need to reduce from one place We always are in contact with our partners, our labor partners, so that they're aware of what we're doing before we're doing it. And then they're pretty good watchdogs. So they make sure that we follow up the process before we're able to make a change.

[6066] Ray Rodriguez: This is a tough time for all of us. And our employees are trying to figure out what's going on. So I think the more clarity you have, in my opinion, on what we're doing, the better it is for us all. So based on that, I'd like to move that we approve 10.3. Thank you, Mrs. Benson.

[6085] Nancy Thomas: Do we have a second? I'll second. Please vote. Four ayes. 10.4, Mr. Rodriguez.

[6102] Ray Rodriguez: Basically, it was similar. No. We're talking about education, special education 812, and then we have the different vacant positions. And this is a reduction in staff, or is it just not filling that position that's going to be vacant?

[6127] SPEAKER_21: The vacant positions. For the most part, I don't believe most of them have been filled all year. So what we're doing is we're preventing us from having to roll them over into next year's budget because they're vacant. We just truly need to remove the positions. It's more of a cleanup than a reduction at this point. The 2.06, as I said before, is a reduction of hours. This does not impact the AIDS time with the students. So we have this reduces them. to four hours, students are there for three hours. So it allows them still 30 minutes before the students get there and 30 minutes after the students leave to collaborate with the teachers and do some, you know, preliminary assessments that they might need to. And in this particular case, our special ed director spent a lot of time getting ratios from other districts and like programs and we're trying to mirror that. But we're also doing a new structure which she's worked with the teachers and the teachers are going to it's going to allow the teachers to have more time to do assessments and evaluation of these special needs preschool kids. And that's really what one of their one of their issues was the most of is that they needed that time because that assessment is very lengthy. So this does allow them. But then we had we had aides in there that were too, their days were just too long. So we've made an effort to move people and have them take positions and move four hour people into there. But we're, we've exhausted right now at this moment, we've exhausted our ability to transfer people in order to adjust the program. So we're requesting this flexibility from the board to reduce these hours. And then from now until the fall, When we actually have to make that reduction, our hope is that we're going to have more flexibility to move people around and still not have to actually do some reduction. But if we don't have that flexibility to do that now, we don't want to start the year with staff that's in there a couple hours after the children are gone. So we want to, we're trying to keep the children and the instructional aides, you know, partnered together for a time frame.

[6262] Ray Rodriguez: Right. So I had a, what's normally the rule of thumb since you're, you know, the HR expert that we have. You're the only one you got, right? No, I know. No, but I'm so happy that you decided to help us out. But the four-hour criteria, it seems to always be something for employees. I want to stay over four hours because then I'm full-time as opposed to part-time. What is your thinking on the hourly part?

[6293] SPEAKER_21: What we believe is going to happen is that the students that are in these classes, we start with a very small group. We might only have six students in a class. And the classes are staffed with a teacher and instructional aid for the entire time they're there. And then as the classes grow, we need to, we're opening PM classes. So there's a whole plan on that part. The issue that I would have if we do it less than four, Then you're talking about taking away benefits that these folks have?

[6324] Ray Rodriguez: Yeah, that's what I was getting to.

[6325] SPEAKER_21: Right. And so unless that's a need that we need to bring back to you in the future, I think our feeling was keep them as whole as we can, reduce the hours so they match the students. And then it gives us more flexibility to add hours toward the end of the year if we need to or not. But we haven't impacted the ability of these instructional folks Retain the benefits that they already have got it.

[6350] Ray Rodriguez: Thank you. Thank you for taking the time Normally I would but that's okay if you want to You're waiting I move acceptance of 10.4. It says I wasn't one to pull it Please vote

[6377] Nancy Thomas: Next, we move on to board committee reports, announcements, requests, debrief, and discussion. Mr. Preciado?

[6386] SPEAKER_25: Sure. I'm just going to leave with the theme of what I've been saying today in terms of making sure that we engage the community and we have the conversations because these are tough decisions that we just took and that we're going to take. This isn't easy for any of us to make. I think it's important to have as many perspectives as possible and dialogue so that when we make the decisions, we're doing it based off of a broader base and in an informed manner so that we can move forward in that way.

[6421] SPEAKER_24: Thank you. Ms. Crocker? Yeah, I think that we've done a lot of work in terms of giving direction to the staff. At this point, it's the staff's responsibility to figure out how you're going to manage it. And I certainly want to make sure that we let them manage it We can certainly give ideas, but I think it's very important that the experts be the ones that determine how this is going to come through. And if it doesn't work, then the consequences later on will address that. But I do not feel that, I think it's very important that the board keep the hands off in terms of how we're going to enforce or how they're going to fulfill what we've set out for them to do.

[6467] Ray Rodriguez: My turn? I wanted to thank our negotiating team that are, I mean, we've always had a history of our negotiating team working real well with NTA and CSCA and NEWMA, and it's continued. And you took that on, Mrs. Henson, right away with your team. And in spite of the difficulties, I think we did a pretty good job looking at it. We were able, we had to basically offer more than what we probably should have and could have. But yet, I think knowing that, you know, the effect that it had already on losing so many of our employees, that we needed to get that done and you did that. On the business side, Superintendent Sanchez and Mr. Richards have gone out of their way to add clarity And we need more of that when we're talking about all the things that we're trying to do. And I know Member Pichardo talks about the meetings and everything, and I think those are important. Although I understand that we want people to focus on budget cuts and not have a meeting where everybody goes off in different directions, I think the important thing is to have the meeting and to have dialogue. And similar to what we do here, where people come up and they kind of express their feelings on a certain subject. I think it's important that people feel that they can kind of vent a little bit. And this is time for venting, because nobody's happy with this whole thing. But overall, if we continue to do that and have the clarity and everything when we have our meetings, I think it's going to go a long way to at least whether anyone agrees, which I doubt if too many are going to agree, at least they can have a better understanding of why we're doing what we're doing. So thank you again. And then since I'm saying thank you, I wanted to say thank you to Ms. Sandoval for everything you've done the last year. And that website, there's a member here that's been complaining about the website for a long time, a community member. Who are you talking about? Nobody in particular. But Mrs. Zanova, you know, it's nice. It really is. I mean, I'm not saying that's the only thing you did in the last year, but I know that was a big piece of, and you took a lot of care in putting that together. And we had a brand new superintendent that came in and we needed him to have someone that can add some stability. So to have you come in as being part of our community and to help him through that first transition year means a whole lot to us. We wish you all the best in your future endeavors. And we thank you. Thank you for your service to Newark Unified. And that's all I have.

[6655] Nancy Thomas: Thank you. And I'd like to echo Ray's comments and thank Ms. Sandoval and Ms. Benson for the great job you've done this year. We're going to miss both of you. Best wishes in the future. Anyway, so and also to echo Mr. Preciado's comment about the need for us to communicate with our public. I think we've lived in town a long year, a lot of years, we on the board. We've gone through, some of us have gone through these schools or our kids or grandkids have gone through our schools and I think we have the pulse of the community and I'd like to echo what Mr. Newt said a while back about the importance of us speaking up and talking about how we feel about the various agenda items that come before us and whether we support them or not or fully or partially to be able to articulate and discuss among ourselves the reasons that we have and the direction we're giving to staff because I think it's not always clear I don't know that staff always knows what direction because one or the other of us may say something and no one else will respond. If two people say it, then it gets on the agenda. If one person says it, it doesn't seem to get on the agenda. Let's make sure we hear each other and we vet our ideas. is what we board members do. We talk about the policies. We set the direction. We should feel free to give our input. And it's the how that staff does. And that's where we have to be careful not to get involved in how. But we should be able to give input and ideas and opinions liberally, especially as we go into cuts. Because we've been through this. We had a big time in 2910, and those cuts did not stick. Many of them did not stick. So to just cut to the end of getting to the 5 million, we better give ourselves a cushion. That's all I've got to say. Anyway, I hope everyone has a good rest of the summer, and we'll be back August 1st. Superintendent?

[6817] SPEAKER_24: Yes, I had a chance, but I forgot to say thank you to Patty and Kathy. It's wonderful having people that come in and hit the ground running, which you both have done. And it's made all the difference in the world for the year. So I thank you very much, both of you. I'm going to miss you.

[6833] SPEAKER_25: I want to say thank you as well.

[6838] SPEAKER_16: I'll say thank you to Patty again. And there is fun things planned that she doesn't know about that I can't discuss. But I do appreciate her stepping into it. And what I can say is she has definitely left things better than she found them, and I appreciate her work. And Catherine, I won't say goodbye, because we'll be leaning on her going forward with her other projects in HR. So more fun with HR. But I hope you both have a great summer. I wanted to only share, in closing, Just a thank you to all of our employees and for all of our community and parents for allowing me to have the opportunity to serve this district, this community in these tough times, and concluding my first year as superintendent is always a milestone. getting excited about next year, but I know that after I've had a little bit of rest, my head will be clearer and be able to offer some more creative, outside-of-the-box, crazy ideas on how we can actually get some deeper input from community on the things that are weighing on all of us as we drive around every day. I know each of you, everyone behind this dais, is worried about the budget every day, and I think that I want to say thank you for the opportunity to serve, and even though it's hard, I know that character is revealed in the struggle. And I think we have a lot that we owe our kids that we're going to continue to work towards. And just thank you for the opportunity to serve. And we'll be back soon. And we're still listening. And I think that's kind of the new thing that I think we're trying to get the community adjusted to, that we really are listening. And sometimes it doesn't feel like it. And sometimes the old culture creeps up. And I think that cool heads will prevail. And we're going to make it. We're going to be OK. This is going to be some struggle, but we're going to be OK. So with that, I'll conclude my comments. Thank you.

[6971] Nancy Thomas: Meeting adjourned.

No minutes available.