Regular Meeting

No content available.

[26] Nancy Thomas: We have just returned from closed session, where we had conference with our labor negotiator, conference regarding the superintendent's contract, a conference with legal counsel regarding existing litigation, and no action was taken. Roll call, please. Oh, we did that earlier. So the next item is approval of the agenda. I would like to suggest a change. We have an agenda item that has, I have to find it, where we're approving new courses. 12.8, courses of study. There's biology, chemistry, physics, math transitions, and introduction to visual arts. I would like those to be separated out into separate agenda items, 12.8A for biology, B for chemistry, et cetera. Is that something that?

[121] SPEAKER_39: So from my understanding of NGSS, I think those three courses are kind of like sequential or they're looping or integrated.

[130] Nancy Thomas: There's five courses. Right. Only three of them are NGSS.

[134] SPEAKER_39: Right. So you want to take that as one and the other math and?

[138] Nancy Thomas: I'd like to just vote on them individually rather than as a group, they're listed as one agenda item, so.

[146] SPEAKER_39: I can see, you know, the visual arts being separate, the math transition being separate, but I think for the NGSS biology, physics, and chemistry, I think those have to be, by the nature of the courses, have to be clustered together.

[157] Nancy Thomas: Okay, then I will amend my request and make a motion that it be put down as A for the three NGSS courses and then B and C for the other two.

[172] SPEAKER_26: And where do you want to put those?

[181] Ray Rodriguez: But it's still in 12?

[183] Nancy Thomas: It's 12.8A, 12.8B, and 12.8C.

[188] Ray Rodriguez: But are you moving up to the beginning of new business? No, no. OK, you're just breaking them down.

[192] Nancy Thomas: We're just voting on them separately.

[194] SPEAKER_35: Can we do that when we reach that? Does it have to be changed in the agenda?

[199] Ray Rodriguez: Right, it should be changed now.

[201] Nancy Thomas: So I made the motion.

[203] Ray Rodriguez: I'll second it.

[204] Nancy Thomas: OK. I have to log on. Excuse me. OK. Please vote.

[226] SPEAKER_35: I'm trying to get my vote up here.

[234] SPEAKER_35: Just do the hand thing. You made Larry work. I love it. Thank you.

[265] Nancy Thomas: OK. And Mr. Pezziero, would you go?

[282] Ray Rodriguez: That coming up?

[284] Nancy Thomas: I have. It's not coming up.

[287] SPEAKER_35: Yeah, I've got the same thing here. So should I close the display?

[291] Nancy Thomas: Yeah. You have that? You have it?

[293] SPEAKER_35: I have it, too, because I took over one year. Remember, I took over four years. We're not here.

[297] Nancy Thomas: Why don't we do hands? Well, we can't do that all evening.

[302] Ray Rodriguez: Oh, no, just for right now, when we're doing the agenda.

[306] SPEAKER_35: Let's do it now, and then.

[307] Nancy Thomas: OK, let's vote by hand now, and then Larry can work on it. Yeah. Five ayes. Thank you.

[316] Ray Rodriguez: I have a request, if you don't mind, for the agenda, when you're. Yeah.

[324] Ray Rodriguez: Just in case my back doesn't hold up and I have to leave early, I wanted to vote on the consent agenda. Is it? Is it?

[333] SPEAKER_39: That should have been done before we voted to approve the agenda.

[336] Ray Rodriguez: Correct. No. I thought we just voted to change it. OK. That's fine. I just thought we were voting to make your change and not the whole thing. OK. That's fine. My fault.

[348] SPEAKER_35: Could Larry come in and do this so that it would not

[352] SPEAKER_27: Would you step up and help clear this voting mechanism, please?

[358] SPEAKER_35: We have two people in charge of the voting.

[367] SPEAKER_35: So can you get rid of that? OK, thank you.

[371] Nancy Thomas: OK, next we move on to item 7, public hearing. Superintendent, would you like to? Yes.

[378] SPEAKER_27: I'd like to introduce Terry Ryland, who is stepping in as interim CBO. and her organization. Terri, welcome.

[385] SPEAKER_48: Thank you very much. Good evening, board members. I'm pleased to be here. So what we're going to do tonight is just open the public hearing, discuss the budget, present the budget as it stands tonight, and then take comment, of course. And then in two weeks, we'll bring the whole final budget packet for action by the board. But tonight, no action. Show us your microphone. I just want to make sure. Thank you. I'll stand closer. OK, so tonight we'll talk about the state budget process briefly, the key assumptions in the budget, LCFF funding, the budget and the NYP, STRS and PERS, because we have to talk about that. and then our next steps. So this is just a slide that I like to start a budget presentation with just as a quick overview of the entire cyclical budget process in the state of California. So it starts in January, the governor's proposed budget comes out, and we spend our springtime planning and using those assumptions. February, the legislative analyst office weighs in with comments. This is going to work. It's not going to work, kind of pluses and minuses. April, the COLA is recalculated. And the big thing that happens in April, of course, is taxes. And so at that point, Department of Finance and all the number crunchers at the state level come up with how is the state budget looking and what might things look like for the following year. And so then in May, the May revise or the revision to the governor's budget proposal comes out. And the May revise numbers are what we all build our budgets on. That's going to be our most recent data. June 15, of course, remember it used to be August, September, October, but now pretty much June 15, the state adopts the final budget. And we get the final COLAs and the final gap funding amounts and any new programs, any one-time money. And it all becomes final then. If there are any material changes between what the state enacts and the May revise and what we used in our budget assumptions, then we have 45 days to bring those changes to the board. But if everything's pretty much what we adopted, then the next time that you would see the budget would be at first interim. November, again, Ledge Analyst weighs in on what the enacted state budget looks like. And then there we are, January, it all starts over again. So we're right at that just post May revise before state budget is adopted phase. So what came out of the May revise that is of interest to us, the governor continues his commitment to fully fund the local control funding formula, which is our new funding mechanism for school districts. The COLA was increased to 2.71% statutorily, but there was a little bit of additional money added to that to just increase the base of LCFF by 3% instead of 2.71. So the COLA is not 3, but the increase to LCFF is just a little bit higher than the COLA. $2 billion in one-time discretionary funds were still identified as being available. It's about $345 per ADA. Some amount of that is likely to be available when the budget is enacted. But right now, that's the chunk that was out there on a one-time basis. The governor's May revise continued the ongoing $200 million statewide for CareerTech, and then some one-time pots of money for special ed teacher recruitment, early math initiative, and community engagement initiative. So here's just some basic revenue assumptions. A couple of these have even changed since this was prepared a week or two, but they're updated later in the document. But we just have to start with some key assumptions to start putting numbers together. The enrollment assumptions that are being used in the LCFF calculator and throughout this budget are the same enrollment assumptions that were used at second interim. They are based on the demographer study, but a little bit slower growth, a little bit less growth, because I guess we've been finding out that That was a little bit too aggressive, and so we don't want to overpredict on the revenue side primarily. So I'm hoping that it comes in a little bit higher, but you can see between 17-18 and 18-19 on that top row of the chart that we are showing a growth of about 50 enrollment for next year. Now ADA is, so while that enrollment line is the same as second interim, the ADA is a little bit higher because once the P2 ADA calculations were made, which, and we looked at the ADA yield out of the certain amount of enrollment, it went up about a half a percent. And so the same enrollment using a little bit higher yield and looking back at the history will generate a little bit more ADA for the same enrollment. So that's a beautiful thing. And that's just, you know, that's, it's good attendance or it's better tracking or it's good incentives. But we always want to see that ADA yield go up and have more students in school every day. Most of the rest of those assumptions we'll touch on later in this presentation. Well, as you know, or may not know, we had seven days to prepare the budget. And you guys have an amazing business office. And without a couple of folks, both of whom are sitting in the second row, but I won't name names, this would have never happened. And so it was amazing. We just dove in and carved it up and everybody took a part and made all the legal deadlines. We didn't have a lot of time for slicing and dicing and analyzing, which I'll get to in a second. We've been doing that the last two days. required public hearing documents. Remember, we're not adopting the budget tonight, but we just had to have all the budget documents available. And actually, I talked to the folks at the County Office of Education, and they are quite pleased that we were able to meet that requirement, and everything that was needed for the public hearing night is there. There will be a few more state forms that are kind of ancillary, and those will all be part of the packet of the adopted budget. So now that we've had time to look at prior reports, we looked at second interim, we've looked at, you know, just kind of taken a few different glances at the budget. We've made some changes that are all reflected in the additional pages that were handed out tonight. We wanted you to have our best thinking, the most knowledge that we have today. And so the one area that was probably the most off, if you will, was special ed. We needed to add some additional costs to special ed as we just kind of looked at the history and how things. A couple of years ago, transportation was added to our special ed umbrella, our resource of special education. So it kind of threw off some of those comparisons when we were just kind of doing our quick run through the first time. So when we studied it some more, we had to add some more costs. We found some areas that were double, double counted some of your specialists, your psychs, and your speech. We've had trouble filling those positions, and so we've had to hire independent contractors. And in one of those chunks, we found a budget in both places. So we were able to reduce in one area. We had to add some, so it did increase our contribution. We looked at the salary budgets between second interim and the proposed budget. and noted that while we had expected to have eight fewer teachers, as of today, we had initially identified, yeah, we could still have five fewer teachers and keep some vacancies vacant. And since this was prepared and actually just in the last hour talking to HR, we actually may be able to reach that 8% just based on scheduling. And so we're gonna slowly look at filling any of those positions. And so right now, the revised budget document does reflect five fewer teachers. We did have to add in $700,000 for the textbook adoptions, which were mentioned in the narrative and discussed in everything, but there wasn't a line that was actually added, so we added that. We actually took some, identified some areas that we think will be budget savings in the current year. You know, we always have You know, it might just be budget dust, but it might be budget rocks and boulders. But we looked, there's not a lot, but we did revise the estimated actual column a little bit to reflect more accurately where we think we'll end the year. And that helped with our fund balance as well. But as you know, the budget is continually reviewed and updated, actually on a daily basis, literally on a daily basis, as we get more information, as you get contracts, as you get revisions, as people change. They leave positions. We hire different people. So the budget is changing all the time. But as of today, you're seeing the best numbers that we have for next year and the following two years.

[927] SPEAKER_27: Would you hold for a moment? There might be board questions on that last slide. Is there any questions on this slide from the board? OK. Proceed.

[938] SPEAKER_48: On the expenditure side, as I mentioned, most of the board approved reductions were made. I talked about the 5.2 FTE reduction that we've already budgeted here to realize through attrition. And pension, I'm going to speak more about that at the end of the presentation. But yes, the increasing, the ever increasing, the escalating pension rates are reflected in the budget year as well as the following two years. And a couple of these numbers may change between now and the enacted budget, but just in the out years. We have everything in the current year are the statutory rates that we're supposed to be using. Oops, sorry, I didn't know this was doing that. So revenue assumptions for 17-18. Our LCFF funding for, oh, that should be 18-19. Sorry about that. I'll make that change before we post this. The revenue assumptions for 18-19. LCFF funding of $54.2 million, which is $2.9 million of gap money. So we closed the gap, right? This year we got 100% gap funding, which means we just got everything that was left. And so that additional bump was a nice chunk at 2.9 million. Of the LCFF funding, 5.7 million of it is designated as supplemental and concentration, was created based on our unduplicated pupil count to be used to increase or improve services to the identified students per the LCAP, which you'll hear about next. Lottery is estimated to be funded at $146 for the original unrestricted lottery and $48 for restricted lottery. The restricted lottery, Prop 20, can only be used for instructional materials. It's highly restrictive. They're very strict. You can only spend it on X, Y, and Z. The mandated block grant amount is estimated to be $31 per K-8 ADA and almost $60 per 9-12 ADA. So that's what we have included as revenue in the budget. And then the one-time money. In the past, I'm not even sure if this year they're calling it one-time mandated cost reimbursement, but that's what they've been calling it the last few years. But that one-time pot of money of $345 is in the budget at almost $2 million. And then we pulled out all the programs or categoricals, if you will, that are ending. We're not going to be receiving additional revenue. We're just going to be spending the carryover. So educator effectiveness, college and career readiness, The Prop 39 energy monies, those we don't have budgeted. We'll go ahead and put the carryover in once the books are closed. But those are not going to be ongoing programs. And in fact, the final report on educator effectiveness is due to the state on June 30th. So no spending the last few days of June, and we won't have the report right. But it's 100% penalty. You lose all your funding if you don't get it in. So we know that. We're on it. It'll happen. And then on the revenue side, we had to increase the contribution of unrestricted revenue and sliding it over to cover increased special ed costs and an increase to the routine restricted maintenance account. So EPA, that's Education Protection Account, is what was created with Prop 30. And the pitch at the state level, before people voted on it, was that all this new money was going to go to schools. But what it did is it took the $54 million of LCFF money and just put it into two pots. It's not new money, it's the same money, we just get to track it twice as hard. And then we just, and it can only be used for instructional costs, and so we charge teachers there. So it's not additional, but might it not be there? Might our LCFF be less without Prop 30? Who knows? Probably not, because we have the protection of Prop 98, but in any event, If you hear the Prop 30, didn't that save you, right? And didn't you get that new EPA money? No, not so much. It's new if you're a basic aid district, but for us, it's just part of the rent money we were going to get anyway. This is just a chart I created to show the concept of gap funding and how we're funded under LCFF. So the red area is the amount of funding that we get in our base entitlement, our base calculation you know, $8,000 per kid at one grade level or $10,000 per student at another. The green and ever increasing is the portion of our funds that are supplemental concentration. The blue line was our target in each of those years. And you can see actually our target went down the first few years because of declining enrollment. but then is going up in the future as we project those increases. And where I've circled it is 18-19, which is the year that our funding equals our targeted entitlement. So that's full funding. The gap I looked up today and wrote it on a different piece of paper. The gap at the very beginning here was about $12.9 million. So we've closed that gap. Got the last $2.9 million this year. And now pretty much our increases in funding from now on will really just be COLA increases to the base. So the largesse of prior years, the catching up, a good year with some nice gap funding, there's no more gap. And so the way the law is currently written, unless they change those targets, we'll just be getting COLA increases. Contributions to restricted programs. We're really only contributing in the general fund to two programs and then making one transfer outside the general fund, which I'll speak to. Special ed contribution did go up, which is not a surprise. It always does between salaries and benefits and just increasing costs of operating a special ed program in general. The routine restricted maintenance account, this went up, I believe you're aware the direction was, let's go ahead and get to that 3%. We're one year early on going to the 3%, but I think there's a lot of routine needs that we have in the maintenance area. We were able to transfer the maintenance portion of our maintenance custodians to that account, and we'll be able to complete a few projects. But so that, the 1,782,000 gets us to a 3% contribution. which was the historical level that we were required to contribute. There's been some leeway during the downtimes. But once LCFF is fully implemented, which is the end of 18-19, the 3% requirement returns. So we have built that into the budget as well. And then the contribution to adult education, again, just with the increase, it's a very small program in that fund. And so by the time you increase salaries and benefits We didn't have a lot of guidance on what, so we kind of rolled a lot of those costs forward. We did require a contribution to balance it. Otherwise, we were going to have a negative fund balance in a fund, which the state software will like scream and blow whistles and everything. You can't do that. So that doesn't mean that's how we'll end the year. We have time, of course, to go in and look at that program and see, hey, maybe we can make this self-sufficient and pull back that contribution. But as of today, to get the numbers to work, we did need to make that contribution to make sure that we had some fund balance in that fund.

[1395] SPEAKER_35: Could I ask a question? Yes. The special education, this is above and beyond that's added to the money that come in for special ed, or is this the total cost?

[1407] SPEAKER_48: That's above and beyond. That's the portion of the program that our revenue does not cover.

[1412] SPEAKER_35: And do you have the amount of revenue that we are spending in the special ed plus the $6 million

[1421] SPEAKER_48: I'm thinking it's about three, but I'm not sure. I'm not sure. Well, I'll be able to tell you. I don't quite own these numbers yet. I know most of them. Any other questions? I'm sorry. On the contributions?

[1437] Nancy Thomas: The Cal Development Fund is projected to break even next year. It doesn't need. Correct. And the reason is because we increased fees.

[1447] SPEAKER_48: I will take your word for that.

[1450] Nancy Thomas: Yeah, so I think it's going to be important that we verify that that's a real number. Because if you increase fees too much, it's a market-driven situation. And if we get fewer children in our child development, we might end up, again, having to see a deficit there or having to not serve as many children as we'd like to.

[1477] SPEAKER_48: Just a comment. No, I appreciate that. Thank you. And we can, you know, we can spend a little bit more time and just maybe give you a little bit more information on a couple of those programs if you'd like. And just, you know, we could do comparisons over a longer period of time or whatever would be helpful to make some of those decisions going forward.

[1495] SPEAKER_26: So my understanding for the contribution to adult education that we, moving forward, we were not going to be contributing?

[1500] SPEAKER_48: I just saw the piece that... I understood that. However, I couldn't not contribute because the increasing costs, I mean, Somebody from adult ed can let us know where to cut those. The board can direct, hey, let's reduce the costs in this area. But just putting it together with the same program as this year with the ongoing cost increases, we needed to make the contribution. But like I said, we can reduce the expenditures in that fund to make that go away. We just need to be told which expenditures to make go away.

[1533] SPEAKER_26: Sure. So from our end, I know this was the board directive was that it zeroes out. Whether that's through fee increases or cuts, that's the program and management to outline. However, from our perspective in terms of the macro level would be that there would be no contribution. So from my perspective, whether it's increasing fees or decreasing costs, as long as it zeroes out that we're not contributing.

[1562] SPEAKER_48: And we could do that and commit to do that by first interim, right? Work with the department or work with the appropriate department heads and and figure out what's going to, you know, still be able to provide the most robust program but keep it at breakeven.

[1574] Nancy Thomas: But if we wait till first syndrome and they're already offering courses at certain. No, no, no.

[1578] SPEAKER_48: But that would be the next time we would report out the budget.

[1580] Nancy Thomas: Oh, but you would adjust it before then. Yeah.

[1582] SPEAKER_48: Okay. We could, we could, we'll make those changes before the money's spent. Good. Absolutely. Sorry, I wasn't clear on that. So revenue summary by far our biggest chunk is our local control funding formula. You know, the amount that replaced our revenue limit. A little sliver of federal funds, state revenue is about 10%, and that includes lottery, mandated cost, the ACES program. And then local revenue is about 5%, local grants, interest, and funds that are raised locally don't come from the state. So on the expenditure side, so all the salary increases are reflected per the financial system position control system. We have step increases that are averaging about 1.7% on the certificated side and less than a percent, which is really low on the classified side. What you can surmise from a very low classified step increase on average is that you have a lot of classified folks that have been here a long time and they're at the top of the salary schedule, which really reflects very favorably on the district that you've kept your employees here.

[1650] Nancy Thomas: I recently asked that question, what was it, and I was told it was 1.3 percent from the former CBO. But you say it's 1.7?

[1661] SPEAKER_48: Now, and as time goes on, it's going to go down if people don't leave because you're going to have fewer and fewer folks that are moving. So this is probably, you know, this is based on moving into the 18-19 year as opposed to what it was.

[1672] Nancy Thomas: But that's a big change from 1.3 that I was told just weeks ago to 1.7. That's a substantial increase, average increase, for our certificated employees.

[1685] SPEAKER_48: Oh, you're talking about the certificated, the 1.7? Yeah. I thought you were talking about the classified.

[1688] Nancy Thomas: No, the 1.7, I was told, was 1.3 when I asked. So.

[1695] SPEAKER_39: I think stepping column, though, most districts set a range for a stepping column increase of 1.5% to 2%, depending on where they're at. So I think that's.

[1704] Nancy Thomas: Okay. Well, then I was given information that.

[1706] SPEAKER_48: I mean, I think that both of those actually are fairly low. I've seen a chart. And usually actually a certificated cost is a smaller percent than the classified. And that's what struck me. The certificated, the 1.7 was right where I would expect to see it. Okay. Anywhere from 1.5 to 2 on the certificate. But yeah, classified can even be 2 and 3 percent in some districts if they have, you know, a younger staff that still has to move over. So I thought that was a real positive. Reflected well on your staff. The recent tentative agreement with the Teachers Association is included in the budget. For the other groups that I understand have a Me Too, because we don't have the tentative agreement yet, I didn't put it in the budget, but I set it aside in fund balance so that the funds are tied up until we're ready to put it in the budget with an agreement.

[1758] Nancy Thomas: We don't have a Me Too, but we have historically matched.

[1762] SPEAKER_48: Assuming that something similar happens, then we have set it aside. And that's why we didn't budget it, because we don't have any details specifically.

[1773] Nancy Thomas: So if you did put that in for the other two groups, how would that change? Those numbers change?

[1781] SPEAKER_48: It wouldn't change your fund balance. It would basically take it from being part of fund balance to being an expenditure, but the bottom line fund balance, that's why I did it, would not change. So I've reflected it each year. Once it's in the budget, it'll flow through all the years. STRS and PERS are pension employer rates. I mean, the employee side is also increasing, not to the extent that the employer side is. STIRS in the current year is at 14.43% employer contribution. It is going up to 16.28%, which is an additional $608,000 just for 18-19, as opposed to that rate staying flat.

[1822] Nancy Thomas: That's like about 1.5%? I'm not sure.

[1828] SPEAKER_48: Oh, the actual increase is 1.85%. OK. Yeah. And then PERS is going up more than that. It's going up 2.5% from 15.5% to $18.06 with an additional cost of $220,000. So right there, I mean, $830,000 just of all else being equal of additional pension costs in 18-19 compared to 17-18.

[1852] Nancy Thomas: So that's money we're not getting from the state that we have to pay? Correct.

[1857] SPEAKER_48: Toward our employees' retirement, yes. And I know, especially when we first had the shock of this, right, a few years ago, and a lot of boards that I talked to said, well, what's the state going to do about it? And the state actually has a bigger problem with their own PERS employees. They have a lot more PERS employees than school districts as a whole do. And these are our employees. We hired them. This is their system. We owe these contributions on their behalf. And I don't think that anybody else is going to help us out. We need to find a way to make this work in our budgets with our funding. And it is a struggle in every single district that we work with, whether they're community funded or state funded. Nobody's getting enough money on the natural to really cover these and do everything that they want to do programmatically. So there's a lot of discussion. I mentioned the $700,000 in the current year in the 18-19 budget for textbooks. The EPA account I talked about, the $5.9 million has equal amount of expenditures as revenue. The LCAP will discuss the supplemental concentration spending of $5.7 million, and that is in the budget. And then again, we removed all the one-time costs and expenditures for those programs that we're not going to be receiving any more revenue for. Here's all the other, nope, this is just the general fund divided between unrestricted and restricted in just a summary format. And we're leading up to the one page that has all the numbers, which I try to only have one ugly page with lots of little numbers, but I feel like you need to see it. So here's a summary of just by what we call our object codes, our classification of the type of expenditure, unrestricted, restricted, and combined for a $66.7 million general fund budget. which is a chunk of change. There's the breakout of expenditures. This is combined. So this is unrestricted and restricted. And so you have 83% here as far as salaries and benefits. But the other thing that we want to point out is in that lighter teal blue triangle of 12% of other services and operations. About half of that is like non-public schools, non-public agencies, independent contractors that are providing special education services. And so those are people. They're not our employees. They're someone's employees, but they're people. And so we are a people business. We aren't just spending the 83% on our own people, but we're spending another maybe 5% or 6% on services from people for our students.

[2027] Nancy Thomas: If those were our employees, what would our percentage of salaries and benefits be?

[2035] SPEAKER_48: Usually, that's about half of that is special ed and people stuff. But I can get you that number. I don't know specifically, but I can get it.

[2041] Nancy Thomas: So when we tell people, we have 75% or what is the number? 73% of the cost. It's probably 6% more than that. It could be.

[2054] SPEAKER_48: But we'll let you know.

[2055] Nancy Thomas: The other districts, when they show their numbers, do they have as much in other services and salaries? Yes, they do.

[2064] SPEAKER_48: Yeah, they do. Because there are a number of services we can't provide. The non-public schools, non-public agencies, and that. Every district has those. And that's a very fast-growing segment of special education.

[2077] Nancy Thomas: But we have a lot of contracting for special ed aides. And that is not unusual either.

[2084] SPEAKER_48: Finding the speech and psychologist is very difficult. And when you can hire those to fill an employee slot, yeah, people grab them, which is why there's just not enough of them to go around. So summary budget.

[2104] Nancy Thomas: Mr. Wynn wanted to ask a question. Oh, I'm sorry. Yes.

[2108] SPEAKER_39: Yeah, maybe you're getting, so I have the multi-year projection, is that coming up or did you?

[2113] SPEAKER_48: It's still coming.

[2114] SPEAKER_39: It's still coming? Yes. Okay, I'm sorry, maybe when we get there that I can, go ahead, I'm sorry.

[2121] SPEAKER_48: Okay, so summary for the current year budget, unrestricted and restricted, revenues, expenditures, the contributions between the two. And basically, that is about as close to a break-even budget as anybody's ever seen. So we're basically break-even and unrestricted and restricted. It's a positive. It is a surplus. It doesn't help build fund balance, but it is a break-even budget.

[2146] SPEAKER_35: Are there restrictions on the fund balance? Is that both restricted and unrestricted?

[2150] SPEAKER_48: Only on the restricted side. Pardon me? But categoricals and legal restrictions only apply to the restricted column.

[2161] SPEAKER_35: Gotcha.

[2162] SPEAKER_16: OK.

[2162] SPEAKER_35: So that's money that's not earmarked for anything?

[2166] SPEAKER_48: Right. Some of the fund balance there may be the energy money that we haven't spent yet. We've gotten the revenue, but we haven't spent the money, for instance.

[2176] SPEAKER_35: So some of it isn't coming.

[2178] SPEAKER_48: Yeah, everything unrestricted will carry over to the next year to be spent. And that's what my NYP will show. Maybe I don't know what's going to get spent in 19-20, but we assume that over a two year period, you're going to spend all of your categorical money. So if it's left this year, we'll spend it next year kind of thing. So we've talked about the assumptions on the 18-19 budget year. But as far as the multi-year projections, so we continue to project that we will receive full LCFF target funding. In the current year, the district received one-time money of $147 per student, which gets reversed out in the next year. But we get to replace it, luckily, with this estimated $345 per student. So those dollars are in 18-19, but then they come out in 19-20. So you'll see a big drop. in state revenue in 19-20 when we don't, when we're not expecting to receive those, quote, one time for the fifth time dollars.

[2237] Nancy Thomas: I think the public probably doesn't know that those mandated costs were incurred during a time when to cover them we were doing deficit spending. So now we're, now we, you know, use them ongoing for one time expenses, but we haven't used them to build back our reserve Just a thought.

[2258] SPEAKER_48: Right. And we haven't, to the extent that we don't tag anything to them, they do, in a one-time manner, fall to fund balance. But you can see in the current, in the 18-19 budget, not much is left to fall. And they are linking it to prior outstanding mandated cost claims because the state owed so many billions of dollars to school districts in mandated cost claims that they couldn't afford to pay them back. So they're like, oh, we have this one-time money. We're going to pretend that it's mandated cost and wipe all of these debts that we have off the books. But everybody gets that money whether you ever had outstanding mandated cost claims or not. But that's what they're calling it. And we're going to take it because it's still money. All the future years also include the step movement. Half of the salary increase because half of it, at least for the teachers, is one time. So we back out the off-schedule portion in 19-20 and later. All the continuing increases for STRS and PERS are reflected into the future. The additional contributions each year are primarily related to increasing salary and benefit costs in special education. To the extent that that program increases for other reasons we don't have budgeted, that may be something that is not conservative enough in here, but lacking any evidence of what those increases in the future might be, we've just covered any known increases to salaries and benefits. And then we add an additional $300,000 for textbooks in 19-20 to do two more adoptions and then which would bring it to a million dollars and then in 2021 take the whole million out. So 2021 looks a lot better than 19-20 that which includes a million dollars of textbook money. So here's your summary MYP and there's that middle column that doesn't look Great. But remember, it's got a million dollars of textbook money in it. And remember, we had to reverse out the $2 million of one-time money that's in 18-19. So 19-20 is not going to look good. By the time we get to 20-21, after two years of LCFF additional funding and everything else increasing on the natural, we're back to what I would basically call a balanced budget. I mean, negative $30,000, this is not accurate to within $30,000 two years out. So that's pretty much a balanced budget. Okay, so here's the one that I have to apologize for, but feel like I need to show you. So this is just the NYP. And all I would, what I would point out, I don't think this works. I focus on the first of the three columns in each of those sets of years. That's the unrestricted. So, because remember, if you don't spend the restricted in one year, We're going to plan on spending it in the following year. And it is restricted. We don't have choices on how we spend it. So I would focus you on the first, the unrestricted column in each of those years, and then look at the two lines that are shaded green. The one that's two-thirds of the way down the page, that is your surplus or deficit, your change between revenues and expenditures. So the second set of three columns is the budget that we're talking about. That's 18-19. And there's your $99,000 surplus in unrestricted for a total for the general fund next year of $132,000. There's the big deficit in 19-20. And the restricted, that's just spending down 18-19's remaining fund balance. So we're not concerned about that middle deficit column. We're deficit spending the 1.2 because of the million dollars of textbooks. And then in that third year out, looking pretty Pretty balanced.

[2490] Nancy Thomas: And that money will come out of Fund 17. Which? The textbooks? The balance. The negative. We'd have to make a contribution from Fund 17.

[2499] SPEAKER_48: This does not reflect a contribution coming in from Fund 17. This is just the general fund.

[2506] SPEAKER_27: one-time dollars from general fund is my understanding.

[2509] SPEAKER_48: In 17-18, yes, we do have a transfer coming in.

[2511] Nancy Thomas: Oh, it's one-time dollars that we're using for textbooks, which is a one-time purchase. Yes. Good. OK.

[2516] SPEAKER_48: All right, so that's what the $3 million this year was? OK, to feed that over the years.

[2520] SPEAKER_39: But it's still going to reduce our overall fund, our overall balance, though. So I did have a three-part question you answered. You addressed one of them, which was the textbook. OK. Looking at 19-20 as far as projection-wise. Can you clarify the state revenue line third one from the top, you know, general, federal, and state, from this budget of $3 million, or excuse me, $6.7 million. I'm going to get the combined total, $6.7 million, and then it's retreated or will retreat to $4.7 million.

[2550] SPEAKER_48: That's removing the one-time mandated cost of money, the $1.9 million.

[2554] SPEAKER_39: Okay, so that state revenue is one-time. And then it stays flat after that. And then you've addressed the textbook adoption of the additional $300,000 for books and supplies. Yes. Clarify the 8.4, so an additional $600,000 in operational and other services. What does that entail for 19-20?

[2576] SPEAKER_48: That is spending.

[2580] SPEAKER_39: Because we're going from 7.8.

[2582] SPEAKER_48: Right. And that is, if you look in 18-19, there's a little over $500,000 of restricted fund balance. Yeah. I add that in up in the $5,000 of the following year to show it getting spent. which you can then see it falling down to the deficit line as using up fund balance from the prior year.

[2604] SPEAKER_39: But you're still projecting an additional $600,000 in additional expenditures. And then for the 2021, it's gone back down to $7.9 million. So again, that's at one time.

[2620] SPEAKER_48: Right, because we spend the 18-19 fund balance once in 1920 and then we have to pull it out so we're not spending it again in 2021 because we don't have that much in fund balance to spend again.

[2634] SPEAKER_39: So if that's a one-time expansion can we put that towards the textbook adoption?

[2638] SPEAKER_48: No it's unrestricted and it's not restricted in structural materials. It's other restricted programs primarily energy.

[2644] SPEAKER_39: So what is that restricted program? What is $600,000 buying us additionally? I can I mean, you probably don't have the answer right now, but if you can or staff can find out.

[2655] SPEAKER_48: It was printed out in the SACS forms, but I don't have it in front of me. But yeah, we can tell you what that is exactly.

[2661] SPEAKER_39: I mean, regardless of where you're placing it and how you're moving columns and whatnot, basically what it comes down to is 19-20, we're expending $16,000 more for other services and other expenses. What does that equate, basically, is the question.

[2676] SPEAKER_48: It is likely to be your contracts for energy. to hire folks to spend your energy money, which is going to be a lot of what's remaining.

[2685] SPEAKER_39: We're paying money to spend money?

[2687] SPEAKER_48: No, we're paying money to save money.

[2689] SPEAKER_39: OK, keep on going. What else? What are we getting for 600,000? Well, once I know, I don't know off the top of my head. If we can get that information, maybe it is. Sure.

[2697] SPEAKER_48: Thank you. And if it weren't in the 5,000s, it would have been in a different object code. I just keep it together because then you can track it through. Once we get to 1920 and we know exactly what's left from 1819, we'll know. exactly what we have left to spend and what we want to spend it. And then I guess the other line I would point you to, and the top green line doesn't concern me a lot. Because like I said, those are fairly balanced budgets. But the bottom green line shows the amount of unappropriated fund balance. So the amount of fund balance that's left after your non-spendable fund balance, your reserve for economic uncertainty at the meager 3% state required level. your restricted fund balances and then the amount that I've set aside for the other groups salary settlement. In 18-19 we have an additional 2.2 above the 3% but then it goes down to less than a half a percent above that and so that to me is a real concern because there's not a lot of flexibility or capacity to handle an unexpected drop in enrollment, or some unexpected change in these assumptions. And these assumptions are good today, but tomorrow's assumptions may be different. And we don't have a lot of flexibility. So we're not going to solve that tonight. Probably not going to discuss it tonight. But I'd like you to just be thinking about, what are we going to do? When are we going to talk about that? And how do we get there?

[2785] SPEAKER_35: So Fund 17 is in addition to this amount, these amounts. Yes. So the balance that we have in Fund 17 In 2019-20, do we have a projected use for it? No.

[2801] SPEAKER_39: I think that's already included.

[2804] SPEAKER_48: I could tell you how much is budgeted to be there at the end of 19. And I can get you that. And again, it's in your packet. We can point it out and show you where to see that.

[2818] SPEAKER_35: This has traditionally been the buffer.

[2824] SPEAKER_48: Right. But again, it's one time. I mean, we still would like to. It's definitely one time. Yes. And I think we have less than $3 million. So we can't do the $3 million again.

[2833] SPEAKER_39: I think that's already reflected here, right? On the bottom green line as a measure?

[2836] SPEAKER_48: For current year. Right now, Fund 17, at the end of 18-19, is projected to have $1.9 million for ever and ever. I mean, that's it. Once it's spent, it's spent.

[2851] Nancy Thomas: Mr. Bustiato has a question.

[2853] SPEAKER_26: Yes, I wanted to make sure for the 2018-2019, where it says transfers in and out, that $34,000, that is the adult education transfer from 2017? Right.

[2864] SPEAKER_48: So that's what we will make go away that we needed to do to get the budget adopted.

[2868] SPEAKER_26: So would that mean that then the net increase instead of $99,000, you would add the $34,000 to that?

[2873] SPEAKER_48: Yes. Exactly what that means. Thank you. Other questions? OK. They're easier slides now. So just a few slides on STRS and PERS. Again, we need to talk about it. So just a little bit of history going back to 2013. All the rates were recalculated. That was with PEPRA, the Pension Reform Act, Public Employee Pension Reform Act. And that's when the rates started going up. Right now for PERS, the projection is that the employer share will top out at around 28%. And that's just one of our benefits, right? workers' comp and unemployment and STRS, I mean STRS and PERS, but social security for our classified is on top of that. And so the benefit load starts getting very, very difficult. The STRS rates can only be changed through legislation, so they're actually in the code. So that's not to say that the legislature won't change them, but we'll certainly have warning that it's coming. Right now, we get a letter from PERS that says, oh, by the way, next year, here's your new PERS rate. And we actually have had two in this calendar year. So in January, we thought we had one PERS rate, and it's different by now. So yeah. But STRS at least is predictable at this point.

[2955] SPEAKER_39: Was there something new that came down? Because I thought the increase in PERS and STRS stopped at 2021. Oh, no. OK.

[2963] SPEAKER_48: It does not. And so here right now is kind of the best information available on the PERS and STRS rates over time. I'm not even going back to 13-14 just because I want it to be readable on the slide. So 18-19, there's your PERS rate of 18.06 and your STRS rate of 16.28, but then go out to the right. So in 23-24, we're looking at PERS at 25.8 and STRS at 20.25. By the time we get to 22-23, so another five years, we will be adding $2.1 million more to our budget for those pension costs than the 18-19 budget. And then even more dramatically, If you look back to 13-14, the red line on each of those charts shows what our PERS and STRS contributions would have been had the rates not increased after 13-14. And the blue bars show what we're actually expecting to pay. And so between 13-14 and the 18-19 budget, our budget has gone up over $3 million a year to cover those increases in rates.

[3040] Nancy Thomas: So when we had to cut $3 million from our budget, that was after we already had been cutting things. This really put a lot of pressure on us.

[3049] SPEAKER_48: It is. It is putting pressure. It is.

[3051] Ray Rodriguez: I have a request.

[3056] Nancy Thomas: Oh, Mr. Rodriguez and then Mr. Winnigan. I'm sorry. OK.

[3061] Ray Rodriguez: This part kind of It's a hard, it's like a moving target when you talk about STRS and PERS. The California retirement system is, when I move from Newark and when I talk to people from back east, it's far and above the best. So, when you put a figure of 25.3 for 2022 and then, is that never ending or is there, because the state can't put a level on it, right? They can't just say, you know, or can't.

[3102] SPEAKER_48: Well, no, I would say, yes, it will stop. I mean, there will be a time at which actuarially we are contributing enough that over the future 30 years, the system will be funded. A lot of that's the stock market, right, and how the investments do. I mean, you've got contributions coming in and investments being made. The worse the investments do, the more contributions you need to fund the system going out. And one of the things that PEPRA did, the Reform Act did, is it changed the actual benefit program to folks hired after 2013 or whatever the year was, to a less robust retirement system and a higher employee contribution. So, again, part of the whole formula, it didn't go retroactively to, you know, current employees that had been hired under a different retirement plan. But there was that change made at the state level to try and start slowing down the rate of increase of the unfunded liability.

[3162] Ray Rodriguez: So, if we're talking about them investing in the stock market, would the, naturally with the understanding that they're going to make more money, so it's supposed to go the other way around. Do we, does that affect us negatively? If they decide to invest, like what happened 10 years ago? you know, where people were losing money and making bad investments and stuff. So would that be the case or are we protected in case their investments don't turn out?

[3193] SPEAKER_48: We are not protected. There are, these are, so these are I actually kind of wrote a paper on this, which I would be glad to share with you, just kind of with some of the history and what's really happening behind the scenes. But we have what's called a defined benefit plan that says if you retire and meet these certain criteria, you will receive this much. There's also a defined contribution plan where you pay in a certain amount and it's worth what it's worth. And then you're protected. If there's market tanks, you don't get as much at retirement. But what we have is that the state and the employers have to do whatever it takes to have enough money in the pot when each employee retires, whatever that is, because they know exactly what that amount needs to be for the retirement payments. And so it's kind of a zero-sum game, right? So if the investment income goes down, then the contributions have to go up. to get to that certain dollar amount.

[3246] Ray Rodriguez: Yeah, but I'm sure there's some safeguards in place in order to prevent them from.

[3250] SPEAKER_48: And that would be at the investment policy level with those two agencies, with PERS and STRS.

[3254] Ray Rodriguez: Got it. Thank you.

[3255] SPEAKER_48: I mean, and I know they've made changes in where in the world they invest and what type of investment vehicles that, you know, in which they'll invest just to provide those safeguards to the system.

[3266] SPEAKER_39: So the percent of STRS that you've outlined here for 2021 and beyond, is that from school services that they've issued those numbers? Or where are those numbers coming from?

[3274] SPEAKER_48: Actually, yes. And the STRS rates are actually in code. They're in the law. OK. But the PERS rates were actually changed in May. But I'd agree to the PERS. I think one of those in the out years might be off like 3 tenths. But it'll be different when we get there anyway. But the current year amount is what's built into the system. automatically tracks off of payroll.

[3302] SPEAKER_39: Because from my understanding it's only from 1920s is there's a set rate and then beyond that it's still kind of in play as far as whether it's an increase or decrease unless something has come down recently.

[3312] SPEAKER_48: Well, yeah, those are the current rates that they're projecting. Not that they're set.

[3316] SPEAKER_39: But nothing has been projected for 2021 and beyond. The law is that there's a static number up to that point and then each subsequent year after that the board would determine whether it either increases or decreases. And so that's why I'm surprised to see that number, because I've never seen those numbers before.

[3334] SPEAKER_48: They were projected earlier. Yeah. And now I think, yeah, they're coming out and saying, this is our best guess on these. The others are just kind of floating at a lower than what they originally came in at.

[3345] SPEAKER_39: So those aren't official state STIRS board numbers then?

[3349] SPEAKER_48: No.

[3349] SPEAKER_39: No. OK.

[3350] SPEAKER_48: No. Well, and like I said, I mean, they may change 1819 again. This is just, yeah. So tonight, the public hearing on the LCAP and on the proposed budget, both will be hopefully adopted and approved in two weeks. Then once the state budget's enacted, as I mentioned, if there's any significant budget changes between what we have in our budget and what the state finally enacts, then those changes will come to the board. And audited actuals will be coming to the board on or before September 15th. first interim as of October 31 will come to the board on or before December 15th. And so while the budget is presented over a three year period is balanced in that we meet our 3 percent. It's as I said the smallest of margins. And so we you know we need to think about how are we going to go forward. What kind of discussions are we going to have. What kind of process. How are we going to identify what you know. And I think I mean starting with some of those other funds and making sure that that they're running in the black is certainly, let's take that off the table. And then we can worry about other things. But I am concerned that 3%, I mean, I like to actually see a board policy of something greater than 3% in a district. Okay. And it probably says if we fall below, we come up with a plan to get back. I mean, that's what most of them say, and so we need that plan. Any other questions of me?

[3449] Nancy Thomas: Thank you. I mean, I can't thank you enough for coming in in the last 10 days and making this happen. It's amazing that you were able to do this.

[3459] SPEAKER_48: Thank you.

[3460] Nancy Thomas: And like I said, I didn't do it alone. Yeah, and we have to acknowledge the staff. I know they spent a lot of extra hours, and you spent a lot of extra hours to bring this information to us, and it looks like a fantastic The amount, the information you're giving the board is extremely helpful, thank you. Anyone else want to make a comment before we?

[3482] SPEAKER_26: I do appreciate the detailed data and the way that it's presented in a way that's digestible to the public, so it's not just spreadsheets with 50 lines of numbers, that it's actually. We have those if you want to see them. But I mean in terms of being digestible, so I appreciate that.

[3503] SPEAKER_27: I just want to reiterate, just to give the public another number, like 2.30 in the morning, how late you guys have worked here over the weekend and over the last seven days, as you said, and specifically the finance team and Kim Lola for their effort and work. And I know that every time I see Kim, she's at the coffee pot with me. But I know you've done an outstanding job of just really stepping in as a lead employee on this. and Terry's group for stepping in to assist us in this transition. So thank you.

[3540] Nancy Thomas: Before I open the public hearing, and there's several people that want to speak, board, may I suspend the rule so that we can have our student report so they can go home and do their homework? Yes. So next, let's move on to the student.

[3557] SPEAKER_27: 8.1?

[3557] Nancy Thomas: Yeah, please.

[3558] SPEAKER_27: OK. Can we have students from Newark Junior High School please step forward? You guys have been patiently waiting.

[3566] SPEAKER_44: Hi, I'm Tad Calabada, the ASB president at Newark Junior High School.

[3570] SPEAKER_43: And I am Joshua Lantiago, the ASB vice president at NJHS.

[3574] SPEAKER_44: So much is happening at Newark Junior High School as we close the school year.

[3578] SPEAKER_43: We're about to finish preparing for the Newark Junior High School 8th grade farewell dance.

[3583] SPEAKER_44: Next week, many of the 8th graders at Newark Junior High School will be going to Great America for a class field trip.

[3589] SPEAKER_43: Now recently, multiple students from Newark Junior High School's leadership class spoke at Kennedy Elementary to teach the incoming 7th graders that students need to be respectful all the time, especially when they come into NJHS.

[3601] SPEAKER_44: Both Josh and I have had a great year presenting news from Newark Junior High School to you all.

[3606] SPEAKER_43: We recently had our NJHS Rewards Night last Friday on June 1st, where many students were recognized for improvement, academic excellence in sports.

[3616] SPEAKER_44: Thank you, executive board and board members, and thank you for your time and patience. And I hope you all have a great summer. Thank you.

[3623] Nancy Thomas: Thank you, and you too. Good luck at the high school.

[3629] SPEAKER_27: Thank you. Any questions for these young men?

[3633] Nancy Thomas: Just thanks for all of your presentations all year long. This has been very informative, and you've become excellent speakers. Well, you started out that way too, though.

[3643] Ray Rodriguez: Can I ask them something, if you don't mind? So you went over to the different elementary schools and talked to the sixth graders that are going to be. Now, has someone from the high school come over and talk to you about being an incoming freshman?

[3660] SPEAKER_43: No, not in the recent couple of weeks or months. But I think there was said that there was, but there wasn't.

[3665] Ray Rodriguez: Right, right. Because the leadership team has a team of students that do nothing but doing your first couple of weeks to walk you through. So you're going to get plenty of support as freshmen, as you've given. to sixth graders. So we appreciate and wish you all the luck in high school. Thank you. Thank you.

[3684] SPEAKER_27: OK. At this time, I'd like to invite the representatives from McGregor campus, if anyone from McGregor campus is here, to provide a student report. Looks like Diamond is coming.

[3700] SPEAKER_11: Good evening, Superintendent Sanchez, cabinet members, and board members. My name is Diamond Gatson. I'm a graduating senior at Bridgepoint. I will be serving as your board representative this evening. We had four early grads fourth quarter. Congratulations to Pratik Chan, Jonathan Gamino, Julian Reyes, and Rachel Schert. During our third quarter award assemblies, we gave many awards. Eight students received perfect attendance. 14 students got awards for earning more than 17.5 credits in a quarter. 18 students made the honor roll. Our last visit ended on May 2nd. It went well, and we hope to find out how our school did. Crossroads and Newark Adult Education graduate on the 12th. Our graduation is on Wednesday the 13th. Thank you. Thank you.

[3752] SPEAKER_27: And representatives from Newark Memorial High School. Anyone here from Newark Memorial? OK. I know. We'll get that in my report. We have another group of students here for rocketry. I don't know if you wanted to have them go and suspend or come back with that.

[3772] Nancy Thomas: Please let's have them so they can go to school.

[3775] SPEAKER_27: Because I know they have stuff to do.

[3777] SPEAKER_26: And in the future if we can just make sure that we have the student reports and all the pieces first. Especially if we're going to have a public hearing. I agree.

[3790] SPEAKER_27: Let me introduce the Newark Memorial High School Rocketry team to give us an update on how they did. So, welcome.

[3798] SPEAKER_31: Okay. Okay, so recently we went to Nationals and... Okay, I'm Kaylee Taylor. I'm co-VP.

[3811] SPEAKER_58: I'm Chase Adams. I'm Vice President now of the Rocketry Club.

[3816] SPEAKER_56: I'm Alina Sarmiento. I'm co-VP. [Translated] I'm Alina Sarmiento. I'm co-VP. [End] [Translated] I'm Alina Sarmiento. I'm co-VP. [Translated] I'm Alina Sarmiento. I'm co-VP. [End] [End]

[3820] SPEAKER_31: Recently we were in nationals, and we were able to place top 50 this year. And we were only... We were only less than two points away from qualifying for second rounds. And that was very impressive for us. And we were also right away from placing in every other competition we did. And they had competitions like gliders and costumes and... Oh, we also had the presentation contest. And we did really well on those with your funding. And we were able to do very well this year. And thank you for all the funding we've gotten.

[3865] SPEAKER_58: Another thing that we've done this year in the past couple years is we've gone to the science nights at the elementary schools and presented to them our club, our rock tree club. So we've actually. We've launched rockets at the Science Nights, the smaller model rockets, and we've engaged the younger students in STEM-oriented activities. So to keep the STEM, keep interest in it for our school district.

[3901] SPEAKER_56: Besides both being successful at a national level and reaching out to our community through Science Nights, Another more long-lasting effect of Rocketry is how this is a good opportunity for prospective engineering students to treat Rocketry as a stepping stone toward their future careers. For example, just from this year, Ayush Jain and Abhiya Pal, who are two seniors at our school, were able to get into MET at UC Berkeley with a 3% acceptance rate and a double major at Claremont McKenna with a 4% to 9% acceptance rate, respectively. Rocketry is a good opportunity for engineering students to apply their skills out of the classroom, and it's a good opportunity for them to kind of test out the fields that they want to be in.

[3949] SPEAKER_31: A lot of what they learned that they were able to apply to these applications was problem-solving skills, which we also applied while we were in DC this year. And so part of that Part of that is we need the software to, when we have mistakes and everything, we're able to use the software to figure out what we did wrong and also where we would have been if the mistake hadn't have happened. And so we're hoping to get a little more funding, maybe about four computers. We need that for the software we're needing to program because we were unable to use it in the, upcoming years due to schedule changes. So we're really hoping to get some more of that computer funding. And we've been really thankful for all you guys' support emotionally and with financially. And we're very grateful for it. But we're hoping to get a little more support this year. And yeah, we're very thankful.

[4009] Nancy Thomas: Thank you. Thank you.

[4018] SPEAKER_27: I'd like to get some detail, maybe with the sponsors, to talk about what exactly is needed. We can do that out of this forum. OK?

[4026] SPEAKER_35: Yeah. There are sources of funding, too, in terms of organizations, Rotary being one, where you might be able to get funding also. So we might look to see what's happening in the community to support it. Because this is the kind of thing that Rotary has been very supportive in the past. It might be a good funding need. So let them know what you need and we'll talk. There's a lot of different options.

[4050] Ray Rodriguez: I had a question. How do you enjoyed your time in DC?

[4056] SPEAKER_31: I loved every minute of it. I was the only one out of this group that went. I was the only freshman that went with a bunch of upperclassmen. And I loved absolutely every minute of it. And it's like all I've been talking about. And I really loved the experience.

[4070] Ray Rodriguez: And it's just insanely fun. Glad you enjoyed yourself.

[4074] Nancy Thomas: Thanks for your update and your presentation. Good luck to you next year, hopefully with some increased funding. Since it is close to 8.30 before we open the public hearings, let's take public comment on non-agenda items. That would be 10.1. Ms. Parks?

[4116] Cindy Parks: You have my sympathy, dear, for trying to keep track of the minutes tonight, the way you're bopping all over the agenda. 10.1, my discussion this evening pertains to the dean position. As I spoke the last time, my concern that you're eliminating that position from the high school and the junior high. My concern revolves, again, around the fact that the deans are responsible for the in-house suspensions and your in-house detentions. Who's going to oversee those students and still provide an academic day so that you can collect ADA? Way back a long time ago, as I reminded you at the last meeting, that position didn't exist and you had a classified employee overseeing those students. That does not comply with the education code. You must still present those students with a certificated or you must supply them with a certificated teacher so that they still receive instruction. Them sitting out in front of the principal's office or whoever, Just sitting there looking at the four walls is not acceptable. In order for you to collect ADA, they must be provided in education. I want to, I'm just asking what you intend to do to still provide education since you've stricken those positions from the junior high and the high school. Thank you. Thank you.

[4196] Nancy Thomas: So we have two public hearings, no more presentations prior to the public hearings?

[4203] SPEAKER_27: We do have a presentation on LCAP.

[4205] Nancy Thomas: OK, so we'll take the two presentations, and then we will open each public hearing.

[4211] SPEAKER_26: We should go back to the public hearing, 7.1, because then we're, yeah, we should go back to the 7.1.

[4219] Nancy Thomas: OK, I stand corrected. We should go back to 7.1. So I will open up the public hearing on the budget. And there are two people that have put in cards, Ms. Parks

[4244] Cindy Parks: While I sympathize with the loss of your CBO, this date is not something that just came to your attention recently. I applaud the business office that was able to compile the business plan for the next three years. I, too, am concerned about the $34,000 being transferred into adult ed, that you were very specific about the fact that no more money was to be transferred in. They were to be self-funded. Child care shows this year's revenue of $744,000. Next year, it's increasing to $807,000, $60,000 increase. Whether you raise fees or not, 50% of this district is free and reduced lunch, which means they also receive those services at a reduced rate. When those fees go up, how many students do you lose to the program? I'm concerned that those are inflated numbers. This year, you forecasted a $42,000 deficit in that program. Next year, they're showing almost a $55,000 revenue. However, the budget that is before you this evening does not show that $42,000 deficit. Fund 17 shows a $22,000 in interest. Yet last year Brian did not show any interest. I'm just wondering why the difference. You have revisions that came to you this evening. So as you mentioned earlier questioning some of these things and was mentioned maybe the first interim things could change. This is a public hearing. Your own document says that this public hearing is for comments and recommendations can be put in writing. If you're here to listen to comments and recommendations, that allows you to have revisions. Education code 42103 states that the public hearing shall be held. It's not to be held within three working days following the availability of the proposed budget for the public inspection. At the hearing, any resident in the school district may appear and object to the proposed budget or any item on the budget. 42126 says that each budget shall be made on the number of forms and upon the blanks or in the format prescribed by the superintendent of public instruction. 42127 says that hold a public hearing conducted in accordance with section 42103 on the budget to be adopted for the subsequent fiscal year. The budget shall be adopted, shall be prepared in accordance with section 42126. 42126 says that all of those forms are to be attached. You don't have a full budget. Your budget ends after Fund 67. You don't have, you're missing almost a third of your budget. And I did speak with the CDE today and they told me that you have to have all of the forms. So I do object to the fact that this is not a complete budget and would ask you to supply the, to comply with the education code, supply the full budget for this community and the parents to be able to view what you're actually dealing with financially. Thank you. Thank you.

[4454] Nancy Thomas: Mr. Nook?

[4459] Cary Knoop: Good evening. So from yesterday to today, we made a change from about $600,000. And hopefully, that's the last minute change. It's a little bit of a Perry Mason situation. You know, I think some people actually told the board that it might be better to take it easy and ask for a delay in presentation of the budget. Because if you do things haphazard and you make mistakes, that's very costly. And, you know, I, you know that many people in Newark are concerned about the board's fiscal responsibility. And here is another situation where it's just not going the right way. We're changing $600,000 from one day to the other. Hopefully, in two weeks, we're not going to get any other bigger surprises because there wasn't enough time. And of course, I don't blame the consulting firm for that. But if you can't do it in time orderly, you need to extend and do that. So let's hope there's no more changes. So one concern I have about the budget is the services and operating expenses. That's cut over a million dollars versus this year. Brian Richard's second interim forecast showed 8.4. So that's, since Brian Richard's forecast in the second interim to now, there's a cut of $900,000 in service and operation. That's wonderful if you can achieve that. But I would have some serious questions. What is cut? How can you cut service and operations more? When we had the town hall meetings, it was clear that the public wanted to cut service and operations. When the board had to do their checklist where they had their preferences, they also selected service and operations. But we understood that the maximum was already taken. I can understand that. You can't, you know, your buildings and so, things need to be going on. So the question is, How did you get a $900,000 cut? Because if we don't have that cut, we are deficit spending again. So I think it's very important that we get the answer. How does you cut $1.1 million versus this year and $900,000 versus the second interim forecast in April? And I think that's a very important question to ask. Thanks. Thank you.

[4620] Nancy Thomas: Do we have any other members of the public that would like to speak during this public hearing? Seeing none, the hearing is closed. So next, we move on to the presentation on the LCAP.

[4640] SPEAKER_27: OK. Ms. Saavedra and Ms. Salinas are going to facilitate this. She got a little PowerPoint. We'll take a five-minute, a three-minute break, a two-minute bio break.

[4655] Nancy Thomas: Okay, we'll take a three-minute break while you set up.

[5042] SPEAKER_46: and people in the community. I'd like to start by giving a little, a quick background on the 2013 history of the LCFF formula. As we all know that this became a law change which changed the way that budgets were allocated to districts. This allowed districts to pretty much make their own decisions on how funding was to be made in order to increase student achievement. This also presented an excellent opportunity for partners and families, community members, stakeholders to provide input on how we were going to accomplish this goal together. And with every law, we know that comes a new system of accountability and this is where the LCAP comes into play. LCAP is the plan that describes the way that our district will be supporting specifically students that are English language learners, socioeconomic disadvantage, foster youth, and homeless students. The process of our LCAP included special attention on eight state priorities that you see here on our screens. The new accountability rules by requiring districts to set specific actions related to a required goals. These goals have to do with student achievement, student engagement, student outcomes, school climate, parental involvement, basic services, implementation of common core standards, and course access. In addition to these eight state priorities, we have also taken into account, and we have to take into account, are all local priorities. And this is where our strategic imperatives come into play. As we studying, as we got familiar with the eight state priorities as a committee, we also needed to keep in mind our strategic imperatives that help us make decisions about our district. Why is this important? Because tied to this local strategic imperative is how our five goals for our LCAP were born two years ago. Each of these goals includes multiple actions specific to each goal. So for goal number one, we have district will support all students to achieve high levels of core academic subjects. This specific goal is one of the biggest goals that you will find in our LCAP. It refers strictly to academics and the actions and services that we will provide our students in order to achieve graduate, in order to achieve high levels of academics. Our LCAP goal number two is our goal to increase student engagement as evidenced by increased attendance, greater access to mental health, behavioral and social supports, and decreasing suspension and expulsions. So in goal number two, some of the actions that were approved by the board in past years have to do with PBIS, positive behavior preventions. And another one is our cost process, which is cost coordination of services team that has been a huge impact to our population. For goal number three, we have continued to provide classrooms and schools that are conducive to learning as evidenced by highly qualified teachers, tech sufficiency, and safe schools. Our goal number four is connected to the level of parent involvement by sustaining level volunteers and supporting the different types of parent involvement activities going on within the district, but also at each of our schools. And last but not least, our goal number five is our effort to increase the level of participation in advanced placement or AP courses in our high school. in the document of LCAP, which we are not going to review today because it's 198 pages, but that everybody is welcome to see in our website. It's available on our website. Each one of these goals have multiple actions that go connected to each one of these goals. So the process of developing our LCAP or our district LCAP for this new year, I was very proud to work collaboratively along the side of many parents that were committed Although we have challenges, we, at the end, we were able to have a lot of conversations. We were able to look at data. As we see here, we were able to review annual goals and actions from the current plan, the 2017, I'm sorry, the 2017-2018 plan. We were able to review data for metrics that gave us an idea or how we were doing in our goal and accomplishing our goals. We also had an opportunity to talk about changes in actions and services and expenditures as a result of this data analysis. And we were able to recommend changes and modifications for the current plan that you have in front of you or that you have access to for this year. The current plan being 2018-2019. So here's a quick outline of the annual process. As you can see, we have multiple meetings throughout the 2018 school year, the half of the year. We started out with two community events. January 11 and 18 that included, that was open to the public. We wanted to hear from anybody that wanted to be part of the meeting. And in the following meetings, we worked specifically with our LCAP advisory committee that was composed of parents, mostly school personnel, and other stakeholders from our community. We decided to change the dynamics a little bit this year in order to provide more and in-depth data and to be able to answer specific questions. So as you can see here, on January 24, we started out by talking about engagement and all of the state priorities that were involved within engagement. We talked about attendance. We talked about positive behaviors. We talked about ways to make sure our students are feeling safe and want to come to school, therefore. February 1st, during our second LCAP advisory committee, we talked about conditions of learning. In this case, we discussed the number of employees working with our students, the percentage of, we used the word highly qualified teacher, and this was a learning experience for me, as we don't use that terminology anymore, I learned. But it was a rich conversation in regards to what are some of those things that need to be present other than the students engagement in order for our students to be successful. Our third LCAP meeting actually expanded to our fourth. Our third committee meeting and our fourth committee meeting had to do with student outcomes. This being the largest part of our LCAP plan, which would be goal number one that talks about student, academic achievement. In here, goal number one, within goal number one is embedded our math goals, our ELA goals, and our other subject areas, and the way that we describe what we're going to be accomplishing those outcomes. As you can see here, and by request and by actually by need of the conversations that were taking place during our LCAP advisory committees, we added three more meetings in order to be able to provide you with a more complete draft that came to your hands. We met April 26th, May 17th, and May 30th. With addition, we wanted to make sure that we included people's feedback. We wanted to make sure that we answered questions that weren't clear before we were able to provide you with a draft tonight. So, a little bit more about our process. We have four, I'd like to invite you to look at our puzzle. This puzzle were four of our agreements as we studied the data that was a little bit, it was a little bit rocky at first, but that we came together and I think eventually we came together with their feedback. I was able to provide a tool that allowed us to see more clearly the actions and the goals and the actions that were being taken for each one of our NUSD plan. But within the PASL, our process included educating ourselves. Before making any recommendations, we really needed to get to the depth and understand what each of the goals meant and what was embedded within each goal. We also asked that we listen to each other's feedback. We know as in many groups, you know, more people had a little bit more experience with certain services and actions and we were able to, have conversations about the feedback and services provided by our districts. We also ask committee members to get as many opinions as possible in providing the input. We wanted to hear what sort of conversations they were hearing in their schools, within their own meetings, and with the people that they were talking. And also we discuss strategies to make the district's plan unique to Newark. So we know we have a very unique district and we're very proud to share a lot of the experiences within our district. So we want to make sure that as we discuss and review goals and actions, we were able to also talk about strategies of how to improve certain services. So the process also consisted of four steps as we were having these conversations. We consulted with each other. We reviewed the previous year's plan with the stakeholders to evaluate the necessary changes. We reviewed and revised a draft new to LCAP. With the input that was available to us, we were able to I'm sorry, we were able to draft what you have in front of you. And all with the intention of bringing, again, a more complete plan to your hands by tonight. So the LCAP document is very, it's very challenging to read for some people. So what I created here is an LCAP document walkthrough that I want the stakeholders to understand. So as I mentioned, it's a very large document, but I pretty much worked it out in this way where it's divided into three main areas. The first area in your plan or in the plan is called the plan summary. And here we will see a little bit of the story, background story of how New Work got started as a district. And why is this important to know is because as a district we have a lot of the things have changed ever since we were established as a school district. And it's important to know because in the LCAP we want to make sure that we're servicing the students with the highest needs. Also, during the section of the plan, during our LCAP highlights, you will see all of the celebrations, I call them celebrations, of the things that were accomplished during the previous year, the 2016-2017 plan. The second part of our document walkthrough has to do with the reviewing of the performance And in here, there are different narratives of all of the greatest progress that we made. So where we are just highlighting and listing things in the previous section of the plan. In the review of the performance portion, we will see things with more detail. We see data, we see levels of growth, we see levels of needs also. And we discuss performance gaps between priorities that haven't been met yet. In here is also the first time that we're discussing how to increase and improve services for students and also a budget summary of how the funding that was allocated for those actions was actually accomplished and whether it was accomplished or not. The third and last part of the act is called the annual update. And this is where we are reporting what did we do, what did we say we were going to do, and did we accomplish those goals. So here, for the goals, metric, indicators, portions, and the actions, we talk about is, again, another way of reviewing the previous plan that was created two years ago. And just for the... as a piece of information, the goals that were set up a couple of years ago exist because this is a three-year cycle. And one of the things that we learned together as a community while we were learning about how to improve our services as a district is that this plan was created, it's a three-year cycle, and the goals cannot be changed until the year 2020. However, like I said, we learned together that actions can be adjusted in order to provide, in order to get to those outcomes faster and better. And going back to the stakeholder engagement part, which is one of the most important portions, and that's the part that I'm reporting here today. Starting with the stakeholder engagement, when we start having these conversations on how are we going to improve, given everything that we had, all the data and information, given the questions that we still had, we were able to meet together as a group and start discussions about the impact on goals and actions and services that have to be included for next year's plan. So in this part is where you will see what we're planning to do or what we're recommending to do as a group. moving forward for the year 2018-2019. Again, this is important because in here we're talking about expected annual measurable outcomes that include amount or budget allocated specifically for actions and sources and the budget reference for that. So here's a list of some of the recommendations that we gathered this year for changes in actions for the upcoming 2018-2019 LCAP year. I don't want to read the whole list so I just like to mention a couple of them as being really important to to share with a community and that's being that is action 137 where stakeholders recommended embedding within this goal support for five counseling positions at secondary sites. So we knew that previously we heard about our our state of our budget, and we knew that these were positions that were at stake. Immediately our LCAP committee got together the different parts of stakeholder conversations, provided input on how to protect these positions so that our children didn't have to to deal with the fact that 5 counselors will be missing in the schools. Another one of the actions that I'd like to share with you is action 316, where stakeholders recommended an increase in the daily compensation of guest teachers in order to ensure classroom teachers can attend professional development opportunities during the school day. As you know, our district faced a lot of challenges in keeping guest teachers and trying to recruit them as well. We had a lot of competition in our surrounding areas. So this recommendation, by making this recommendation to the board, we feel that it will give us a fair chance to bring quality guest teachers to our district and also be able to finally provide the quality professional development that we work very hard in providing for our teachers. With those recommendations we had other comments, we had questions, we have other types of recommendations that some people had but we didn't really had any final outcomes in order to put them into the actual LCAP recommendations for next year. So I have listed them here. And also, as I mentioned, there were some questions that were submitted in writing to us. And I wanted to make sure that the audience knew that by going into our website, the LCAP portion of the website, can I click in here? The stakeholders can find the information that I just shared with everybody, but also there's a portion where we're answering questions that we're receiving, whether we're receiving it in the mail or receiving them during the meetings. We have a list of questions that can be reviewed by the community, and as we get them, we'll do our best to answer them so that everybody has access to the same information that we have. And before I conclude, I couldn't have done this job without the help of all the wonderful parents and community members that were coming to the meetings. And as you saw, we had a number of meetings. So I really want to appreciate every single one of them. I feel very honored that you guys have given me this opportunity to work with them. I've learned a lot about LCAP. I've learned a lot about actions and services that will ensure that our students are successful. And with that, I just want to conclude this presentation and I'll take any questions at this time. Oh, sorry.

[6221] SPEAKER_26: Some questions and then thoughts. So one of the things overall in terms of thinking about the recommendations, if you decide to move forward with some of the recommendations or all the recommendations, I want to make sure that it's in collaboration or works with the budget so it doesn't create a deficit spending situation, which kind of the oversight is what's been an issue kind of systemically. So as part of the process for recommendations that it aligns with the budget. And then I had a question for, as an example for that would be like 1.6.1 increased partnership with ROP. To me I hear increased partnership, that means increased funds or what does that look like? This one's on page, if it's easier on your presentation page type.

[6284] SPEAKER_46: Yes. So one of the things that was discussed, but we didn't really go into depth, was what is the partnership with ROP looks like. So moving forward for next year, I think these are things that we need to get better metrics, better information, and even invite our ROP personnel to support us in coming to talk to the LCAP committee, because there was still the understanding that we didn't have enough partnership with them. But I knew that we are working closely with ROP. And after conversations, we decided we would like to increase and seeing the opportunity or seeing if we can improve the services that ROP is already servicing our students or providing for our students.

[6336] SPEAKER_26: And I guess that maybe it makes me think that maybe it should be recommendation to consider for next year's planning, as opposed to an action, because then the action, or at least for me, it implies that there's specific steps that are going to be taken, unless you say the expectation is to engage in conversations with ROP. You know what I mean? I just want to make sure that that's clear. Another question I had for goal number five. Sorry for jumping around. This is as you were presenting and looking at the different pieces. Goal number five. It says the numbers are expected to come out in July 2018. So does that mean are you expecting us to approve this before we have those numbers?

[6381] SPEAKER_46: Yes, unfortunately because we don't have the final data numbers on those things. The recommendation was to put to be determined because this is a metric that was chosen two years ago prior to I don't know if you guys were here, but prior to us being here, the metric that was chosen to measure the success of that specific goal is what's written on the document. And we won't have those results until July, yes.

[6410] SPEAKER_26: So I guess my thought would be if it was written two years ago, then we can look at that data to see. I guess this is where I'm coming from, is that if we have a specific program that we're outlining that these are the expectations to increase advanced placement, attendance, and passage rates, What's the program in place that we're doing? Because if our numbers haven't increased, then maybe we need to rethink what program we're doing, because obviously it's not working. If it is working, then let's say, okay, then I guess for me, I would be more comfortable with not having the data for the July 2018, because I see that there's an increase. If I see a decrease or I see that it's flat, then I think what we're doing is not working. So that would be my comment for that.

[6456] SPEAKER_46: And just as a point of reference, we use EOS services to provide that sort of data. But I definitely took notes on that.

[6466] SPEAKER_26: Yeah, because we could look back two years ago, right, and then see the program that we're doing and see the evaluation. Another thought, so it's on page 12 of the actual LCAP draft. In line with this would be, Looking at the goal one, so page 12, goal one, the expected is overall of math performance at 49%. Obviously, I know I mentioned this before for me, it's really low and it's unfortunate that we're at the situation, but that's where we're at. Then the actual is 37%, so I'm curious to see then if we're expecting a 12% increase for math and It'll be 14% if you go to page 13, 14% for English language arts. What are the programs that are gonna accomplish this? How are they gonna be evaluated? And how do we know that we're actually moving forward on accomplishing these targets? Cuz it could be pie in the sky. For me, it's like making sure that we're doing what we say we're doing in terms of the numbers. So think about that. I don't know if that's outlined in your actual action items. because one of the, and bring me to the next piece, sorry for, you gotta bear with me here. So action 1.1.4, for example, what page is that at? That is on page 18 of the draft LCAP. So it says, align instructional practice, report cards, grading, and assessments for district-wide continuity. The results of 1.1.4 says that next year we will convene a district-wide report card committee to take a closer look at standard-based grading. So for me, I guess there's no measurable outcome that says we will have the new report cards by fall of 2019 or whenever the, to me it's just we're going to be meeting or convene a committee. Are we gonna be three years down the line and being like, we still don't have an updated report card? Cuz as we know, it's not aligning, our report card does not align. And that's a key measure for as a parent, as a community member to say, where is my child relative to the state standards and we need to prioritize that. Because every year that goes by, that means that what I think my child or as a parent is doing is not aligning with the state standards, so there's going to be that disconnect. So if we can look at more results-oriented measurable outcomes for the different pieces. And that was an example of that. Thank you.

[6633] Nancy Thomas: Those are my thoughts. Mr. Rodriguez.

[6637] Ray Rodriguez: Thank you, President Thomas. Thank you for your presentation. I know when we do this, because we have to do the budget and the LCAP at the same time, it makes for a long beginning of the meeting. And so I appreciate the way it's broken down. I can kind of hit the little icons and get all kind of information on inter-district transfers and all that stuff. So what I wanted to ask you is, do you Do we make presentations to our largest ESL group, the Hispanic group, or do we just provide them the LCAP in Spanish?

[6686] SPEAKER_46: I haven't seen a Spanish LCAP copy yet. That's definitely a conversation that we've had, and we will have it.

[6697] Ray Rodriguez: So once we get that, we can?

[6699] SPEAKER_46: Yes, once the plan gets approved. But I just wanted to say that throughout this process, that it wasn't included in the timeline that I presented to you. We've also had multiple opportunities, I think, since we started in January, I presented the information that came out of the LCAP committee meetings with DLAC, and DLAC was able to provide that information to their ELACs as well. And this is how we, they were also able to provide information.

[6725] Ray Rodriguez: And if someone wants a copy that doesn't speak English or Spanish, speak another language like, you know, Mandarin or, How do they, do we provide a copy of that or, or we have it translated or?

[6738] SPEAKER_48: So we can certainly work with that and I think we should add that information to our website while we're not obligated to provide a translation. It's not mandated. It's not mandated but we can certainly work to see if we can at least have an oral translation or have some of the highlights translated depending upon request. So what I'm actually picturing now that you're saying that we could add that to our website perhaps.

[6761] Ray Rodriguez: And then I had a request. I know you alluded to the individuals that helped you. Just so their names are on the record, is there a way, is it possible to just read their names and then ask them to, if they're here, to stand up so we can acknowledge them?

[6781] SPEAKER_46: Oh, absolutely. And actually, we were planning on doing a little celebration ourselves. Oh, OK. Yeah, but definitely, I can do that for you if you

[6789] Ray Rodriguez: Would that be possible?

[6791] SPEAKER_46: Yes. Michelle Padilla, Nicole Lizant. If you're here, please stand up. Nicole, Elizabeth Huffmaster, Daphne McIntosh, Maria de Jesus Quesada Garcia, Diane Bonbright, Marek Yarbrough, Veronica Medina, Juan Sin Genie, Sonia Brooks, Lydia Arroyo, Amelia de la Rosa, Teresa Beltran, Thomas Martin Edwards, Pam Hughes, and the other three people were not in the committee, but they were supporting, which I like to call Adriana Lopez, Maria Perez, and Diana Farias, who are parent partners that were there supporting the meetings, even though they weren't committee.

[6841] Ray Rodriguez: Is it okay if we just give them a hand?

[6849] Nancy Thomas: Thank you very much. I had a few comments. The LCAP is very dense and I guess it's, it was difficult for me to see the plans behind the activities. In other words, the activities really need to depend on plans being developed. And then when I went through the CPSAs, there were a lot of dollar amounts and activities, but there were no indications that there were, you know, plans and measurable objectives behind them. So, I think that's really important that we have success measures and that we produce those measures. So, for example, in our Smarter Balanced Math and English Language Arts, we really are test scores were 10% below what we predicted or wanted them to be. And I know there's going to be a lot of emphasis on that, but a lot of the emphasis in this document and in the single plans for student achievement from the sites require that there's time for collaboration on the sites. Well, we only have three staff development days. You've increased the amount for teachers, that Friday afternoon for the elementaries and the two early release days for the high school were originally times for collaboration. But our contract with NTA really has reduced the flexibility because most of that time is teacher-directed time. So, you know, I mean, is it something we can actually accomplish setting aside that time for teacher collaboration? Or does it have to happen grade level during the day bringing in guest teachers? Have you given any thought to that?

[6971] SPEAKER_48: So I believe we can, because at the end of the day, our teachers want the same thing, which is improved student achievement. And so our principals have been working with staff around those Fridays. And if you come by any of our sites on those afternoons, you'll see teachers engaged. using data and working to the end of improved student achievement. So we are looking at supporting sites more next year with having offerings district-wide for those Fridays. That has been a request that's come from the site. So that's internal staff, that's us doing that and supporting the sites. So that will be happening next year. In addition, we are looking at some opportunities where if you see the augmenting the pay for our guest teachers, we had, and I think you even heard some of the folks come in here forward, that we had a lot of our teachers who had spent the night doing lesson plans, getting ready to go, only to be called back. And they were missing the opportunity. So we're getting this uneven implementation of professional development. So yes and yes. Also, I want to highlight that as we've shown at the study sessions, we're also looking at building our strategic plan. So, what I'm hearing is maybe putting more of that language into the LCAP so we start to see that where we're setting the targets in our strategic imperative one of the strategic plan, but also seeing some of the same measurable outcomes in the LCAP and we can certainly make those adjustments for the June adoption.

[7053] Nancy Thomas: Then finally, an area that we are spending a whole lot of money on. and especially at our Title I schools, is intervention teachers, primarily focused on English language arts. We have had this over the last four years of our LCAP. And yet, if you look at our English language learner progress, it's been flat or even going down in some areas. So I don't see the return on that investment. You know, are there other ways that we can raise all boats by doing more services for all of our students that will help our English learners? Have we cut back? Superstars Literacy went away. Have we cut back on after-school programs? We didn't implement some of them because we couldn't find teachers that were willing to do it. I mean, it seems to me that extending the day through after-school intervention would have a bigger payoff than a English language aid or an intervention teacher. I don't see any measures that are measuring whether those positions are having an impact. And if they're not, why are we doing them?

[7130] SPEAKER_48: So we'll certainly highlight some of that. I mean, when you reference superstars literacy, that was an action that I think districts across California for our Title I schools had to have that set aside money. to target the students who are most at risk, or our English learners. And those funds are set prescribed for those students. What we found this year was that teachers are tired, and rightly so. It's been a lot of rigorous first teaching during the day, and then to ask them to come in after school was difficult. We had some schools that were able to provide some of it, but it wasn't to the degree across the district. So in our plan, what we're looking at, and tonight you're going to see a draft MOU. is to see how we can strengthen our partnership with Ohlone Community College to see how we can engage with some support classes that we can do district-wide, targeting a little bit more for our Title I schools because that's what those Title I funds are for. But then having a combination of having some teachers who do want to teach. So we're looking at hybrid for that. And I think what we could do is perhaps spell out more of a plan within our strategic imperative one. But in short, we're gonna look at a hybrid. We're going to look at continuing to have our teachers have the opportunity because we also do have some of those teachers because you can have a smaller group after school to really target for an amount of time. But we're gonna bring in this partnership with Ohlone Community College to support our after school programs.

[7218] Nancy Thomas: Good. Did you have another?

[7221] SPEAKER_26: Yeah, I have one last comment. So, my last comment in terms of where I'm at for moving forward with the LCAP would be to make sure that we, or if you can propose a scheduled status report for each of the goal based off of the, so that we can do a program evaluation based on the data metrics as outlined, like by pages 12 through 17 for goal one, for example, like the completion of A through G requirements, right? So, and I would say that That should be based on testing results data. So whenever you get the data plus some months to be able to evaluate so that the board is updated. So we're not only during the LCAP time every year seeing like, wow, why are our scores at this level when they should be here? It's being able to do it in the middle of the school year to say, how can we adapt to make sure if a program is working, Hey, now we know, are there extra resources that we can do to expand this to make sure more folks get it to increase our scores? If the program is not working, we need to rethink about that, rethink that, and then either, like Member Thomas mentioned, or either stop the funds for that program or change it or tweak it so that the programs are actually working.

[7303] SPEAKER_46: And I can tell you, Mr. Preciado, that that's also the conversation that the committee and I were having. throughout this whole few months or weeks, how do we improve? And we definitely want to connect results to data in order to, you know, to make those decisions, to continue growing as a district. So we, moving forward for next year, not only are we Are we planning already on how we're going to report within each goal and action? We want to make sure that it makes sense for everybody so that we can make those kinds of decisions and really evaluate if an action is actually working or not.

[7344] Nancy Thomas: One other area that I'd like to see in the future more measures on, and that is our year-to-date expenditures. 90% of the budgeted amounts for this year's LCAP are the same as the estimated actuals. And I have to believe that if we are tracking the programs, we should also be tracking, are we spending the money on the programs? So it's almost as if it puts a question in one's mind, are we even tracking these things because At this point in time, in May, we don't even know how much money's been spent or not spent on all of these activities that we put money toward.

[7395] SPEAKER_48: Yes, absolutely. And I think that's why it's conceived that we have the budget carrying at the same time as the LCAP's coming forward. So I think we can certainly take that in mind, looking over at the superintendent as we have our new CBO who comes on board, to really see how we can connect that, because I think that's really these two departments go hand in hand. We also will need up-to-date financial data to do it. We get it. We internally are tracking it, but it's not the same thing. I don't have an accountant in my department, but that doesn't mean we can't work closer together with the budget department.

[7432] Ray Rodriguez: Thank you. If we're going to be evaluating programs, especially as they apply to Title I schools, would it be possible to get the guidelines for Title I schools as far as how limited we are on where we could spend the monies so that we have a better idea.

[7452] SPEAKER_48: Yes, absolutely. And actually, we're promising to do a more robust recruitment for next year. So what Jessica Saavedra did this year was she did have a training for our school site councils. And that's kind of where that lives, where we talk about Title I for our school site councils. and what are the restrictions with that. But oftentimes, it's only whoever was at that training or it's only the principal that kind of lives with that information. So, we can certainly bring that forward.

[7480] Ray Rodriguez: Thank you. Thank you.

[7482] Nancy Thomas: Thank you. Okay. Seeing no further comments from the board, I will open the public hearing on the LCAP. We have several people that wish to speak to the LCAP. Michelle Padilla.

[7511] SPEAKER_41: Hi, everyone. I thought Jessica did a really good job of trying to herd the kittens this year for this LCAP. I'm Michelle Padilla, by the way. I do think that since we didn't have a quorum and we didn't vote on this LCAP budget, that we have some more work to do. So I hope that it's not approved tonight and that we have another opportunity to meet and really vet through the plan before it's approved. And I agree with Jessica's comment about getting more parents involved. I know that's going to be Nicole's comment. Sorry, Nicole. But we do need to get more parents involved. I think people need to understand what this is more. And I know there was a couple dates that she had already talked about where there was conflicts with school activities because the same parents that are involved in PTA and school site council are the same parents coming to this stuff. If there was a different kind of communication for this meeting, I don't know if that would help, but maybe that's a suggestion. My main point was, though, I hope that this doesn't get approved until we get to vet some of this out. And Mr. Preciado and Ms. Thomas, I think your points were very valid. We need to figure out where the funds were spent, what the outcomes were. Do we want to do that again next year? Should more funds be going towards this? So I know at the high school, when we had the site council, We had teachers come in and tell us what they wanted to spend the money on. They did like a proposal kind of presentation. They said, this is what we want to spend the money on. Here's what it's going towards. Here's how much it costs and had all their backup. And then internally, our school site council voted on whether the fund should go there or not. And then the next year, they were supposed to come back and report on how that affected or how that aligned to the goals like they planned for it to. for it to be spent. So I think something like that is what we need to maybe try to implement here. That's all.

[7635] Nancy Thomas: Thank you. Ms. Parks?

[7653] Cindy Parks: At the May 17th board meeting workshop, there was an LCAP presentation and at that time I had suggested that the money from the LCAP be spent on guest teachers so that the teachers could attend professional development and I'm very excited that that suggestion is reflected in the LCAP. There were some other questions that I did ask at that meeting that Ms. Crocker had asked that I write down and I did hand them in and even though I've reached out I have not heard the answers to those questions. And they centered around the SVMI program and how successful the trainings have been. I think that everyone recognizes the Herculean effort that it takes to put this document together. This is a document that has been labeled your strategic plan. Yet each and every year it seems to be compiled and disseminated to the community, the committee itself, and the board at the last minute. There are program after program listed in this document that aren't evaluated, yet you continually to financially support them. Here are a few examples. Well, there's a new program called TES, Transcription Evaluation Services, yet I could not find anything listed in the actions or expenditures for that program. Where there is required, where is the data that's to show where the $705,000 of the supplemental and concentration money spent on the CSCA and NTA retention bonuses that was to improve student services for the unduplicated students. PBIS, a reduction of suspensions and expulsions does not correlate behavior improvement if administrative staff isn't enforcing policies and students are still unruly, hence the fights at the high school. Why wasn't there an increase in funding to the Newark Junior High ACES program? The document states that there were 90 students that were on a wait list. That's 10% of the population. Why wasn't there an increase in funding? On page 35, which is explaining what they did this year, that's in the beginning of the document, it showed 0.4 TOSA. And it says in that area that it was to be eliminated. Yet in the back, where it's talking about this year and the next two years, It says that it's reduced to a 0.2, so it wasn't completely eliminated. And that's 1.8.3. 1.8.4 says an after-school program was supposed to change from reading to math. However, in the back document, where it's relating the next three years, it still shows the reading. On page 36, it says that the implementation of the readers and writers workshop model says that it's only going to be at three elementary schools, although that program was district-wide. And then on page 41, it says the stakeholders recommend a 0.5 FTE for the SDC position at Bridgepoint and a 1.0 FTE psychologist to support the secondary. You're eliminating dean positions and yet you seem to be creating new positions.

[7848] Nancy Thomas: Thank you. Next, we have three individuals. I don't know if you want to speak together. Maria? Together. OK. and Lidia Amayo, and Teresa Beltran. And I understand you have a translator? Yes, I'll be translating. OK, and so you do get six minutes.

[7880] SPEAKER_47: Thank you. Buenas tardes, estimados miembros de la mesa directiva, superintendente, ejecutivos de nuestro distrito. Good afternoon, dear members of the board, superintendent, and executive of our district. We are here, Lydia Arroyo, Maria Quesada, [Translated] Thank you. Good afternoon, dear board members, superintendent, executives of our district. Good afternoon, dear members of the board, superintendent, and executive of our district. We are here, Lydia Arroyo, Maria Quesada, [End]

[7916] SPEAKER_38: Teresa Beltran and we are members of LCAP committee and we have and we are here to represent all the members of the DLAC committee.

[7930] SPEAKER_47: Tenemos tres puntos que creemos que han pasado en este año. El primer punto es que creemos que hemos mejorado este año. Este año hemos visto que el proceso para involucrarnos como padres ha sido más transparente. Hemos tenido la oportunidad para trabajar con la señora Saavedra para los dos grupos de padres más importantes de nuestro distrito. Somos parte del comité de LCAP y de DILAC. Y nos ha gustado mucho la información. Ha sido mucho más compartida y mucho más transparente. y clara que en años anteriores. Entendemos que como padres tenemos la responsabilidad de seguir educandonos para entender y mejorar nuestras recomendaciones cuanto al éxito y la educación de nuestros hijos. [Translated] We have three points that we believe have passed this year. The first point is that we think we've improved this year. This year we have seen that the process of getting involved as parents has been more transparent. We have had the opportunity to work with Mrs. Saavedra for the two most important parent groups in our district. We are part of the LCAP and DILAC committee. And we really liked the information. It has been much more shared and much more transparent and clear than in previous years. We understand that as parents we have the responsibility to continue to educate ourselves to understand and improve our recommendations on the success and education of our children. [End] [Translated] We have three points that we believe have passed this year. The first point is that we think we've improved this year. This year we have seen that the process of getting involved as parents has been more transparent. We have had the opportunity to work with Mrs. Saavedra for the two most important parent groups in our district. We are part of the LCAP and DILAC committee. And we really liked the information. It has been much more shared and much more transparent and clear than in previous years. We understand that as parents we have the responsibility to continue to educate ourselves to understand and improve our recommendations on the success and education of our children. [Translated] We have three points that we believe have passed this year. The first point is that we think we've improved this year. This year we have seen that the process of getting involved as parents has been more transparent. We have had the opportunity to work with Mrs. Saavedra for the two most important parent groups in our district. We are part of the LCAP and DILAC committee. And we really liked the information. It has been much more shared and much more transparent and clear than in previous years. We understand that as parents we have the responsibility to continue to educate ourselves to understand and improve our recommendations on the success and education of our children. [End] [End]

[7997] SPEAKER_38: They have three points, she mentions they have three points to talk about and the first one is what we believe we improved this year. This year we have seen that the process to get involved as parents has been more transparent. We have had the opportunity to work with Ms. Saavedra for two of the most important parent groups in our district. We are part of LCAP and DILA committees and we have been very pleased with the information which has been much more transparent and clear than previous years. We understand that as parents, we have the responsibility of continuing to educate ourselves to understand and improve our recommendations regarding the success and education of our children.

[8044] SPEAKER_02: ¿Qué nos gustaría mejorar para el siguiente año? Teniendo en cuenta que el 59% del total de los estudiantes de nuestro distrito son de habla hispana, sabemos que hay mucho trabajo por hacer y de mejorar como comunidad en nuestras escuelas. Por lo tanto, traer recomendaciones realistas y positivas sería de mucha ayuda y crecimiento. Nos gustaría para el próximo año que estos dos grupos se sigan enfocando en acciones y metas positivas y no en escarbar y continuar mencionando los errores del pasado. Que se organice un comité más pequeño y una mejor selección de los padres que representen el comité y que se realice una orientación previa para informarles de la importancia de estas juntas. [Translated] What would we like to improve for the next year? Given that 59% of the total students in our district are Hispanic-speaking, we know that there is a lot of work to do and improve as a community in our schools. Therefore, bringing realistic and positive recommendations would be of great help and growth. We would like next year that these two groups will continue to focus on positive actions and goals and not to rub and continue to mention the mistakes of the past. To organize a smaller committee and a better selection of parents representing the committee and to provide a prior guidance to inform them of the importance of these boards. [End] [Translated] What would we like to improve for the next year? Given that 59% of the total students in our district are Hispanic-speaking, we know that there is a lot of work to do and improve as a community in our schools. Therefore, bringing realistic and positive recommendations would be of great help and growth. We would like next year that these two groups will continue to focus on positive actions and goals and not to rub and continue to mention the mistakes of the past. To organize a smaller committee and a better selection of parents representing the committee and to provide a prior guidance to inform them of the importance of these boards. [Translated] What would we like to improve for the next year? Given that 59% of the total students in our district are Hispanic-speaking, we know that there is a lot of work to do and improve as a community in our schools. Therefore, bringing realistic and positive recommendations would be of great help and growth. We would like next year that these two groups will continue to focus on positive actions and goals and not to rub and continue to mention the mistakes of the past. To organize a smaller committee and a better selection of parents representing the committee and to provide a prior guidance to inform them of the importance of these boards. [End] [End]

[8101] SPEAKER_38: Point number two, what would we like to improve for the next year? Considering that 59% of the total students in our district are Latinos, we know that there is a lot of work to do and improve as a community within our schools. Therefore, bringing realistic and positive recommendation is of much help and means growth. We would like for the next year that these two groups focus on positive actions and goals, and more positive actions and goals, and not on digging and continuing to say and to mention mistakes from the past. We also would like to organize a smaller committee and a better selection of the parent leaders that represent the schools. And also to bring a previous orientation for them to inform them of the importance of these meetings.

[8161] SPEAKER_09: Tercer punto. ¿Cómo la mesa directiva puede apoyarnos en cuanto al mejoramiento de aprendices de inglés? Como parte del comité de LCAP y DILOC, nuestros intereses tienen que ver con el mejoramiento y reestructuración del programa de aprendices de inglés. Aunque sabemos que hay mucha gente en el público, que tiene opiniones diferentes sobre este programa. Nuestros hijos son parte del 23% del total de los estudiantes del distrito. Pensamos que cualquier tema que afecte a nuestros hijos tiene que ser discutido entre nosotros y no por personas que desconocen lo que significa aprender, aprender otro idioma. Los invitamos a que nos contacten para solicitar opiniones, comentarios, [Translated] Third point. How can the board of directors support us in improving English apprentices? As part of the LCAP and DILOC committee, our interests have to do with improving and restructuring the English apprenticeship program. Although we know that there are many people in the public, who have different opinions about this program. Our children are part of 23% of the total students in the district. We think that any topic that affects our children has to be discussed between us and not by people who do not know what it means to learn, to learn another language. We invite you to contact us to request opinions, comments, [End] [Translated] Third point. How can the board of directors support us in improving English apprentices? As part of the LCAP and DILOC committee, our interests have to do with improving and restructuring the English apprenticeship program. Although we know that there are many people in the public, who have different opinions about this program. Our children are part of 23% of the total students in the district. We think that any topic that affects our children has to be discussed between us and not by people who do not know what it means to learn, to learn another language. We invite you to contact us to request opinions, comments, [Translated] Third point. How can the board of directors support us in improving English apprentices? As part of the LCAP and DILOC committee, our interests have to do with improving and restructuring the English apprenticeship program. Although we know that there are many people in the public, who have different opinions about this program. Our children are part of 23% of the total students in the district. We think that any topic that affects our children has to be discussed between us and not by people who do not know what it means to learn, to learn another language. We invite you to contact us to request opinions, comments, [End] [End]

[8209] SPEAKER_38: As board members, what can you do to help us to improve our community of English learners? As part of the El Capandela committee, our interests have to do with the improvement and restructure of the English learners program. Although we know there are many people in our district who have different opinions about this program, our children are part of a 23% of the total number of students in the district. We think that any issue that affects these children had to be discussed between their parents and not by people who do not know what it means to learn another language. We invite you to contact us to consult our thoughts or our opinions and our comments to help our kids to improve our district student achievement overall.

[8265] Nancy Thomas: Thank you very much. Your time is expired.

[8270] SPEAKER_09: Thank you very much for giving us the time of breath of self. I hope all you guys have an excellent summer.

[8277] SPEAKER_38: Thank you very much. We have the reclassification ceremony tomorrow for all the reclassified students. We hope to see you all there. Thank you very much. Tomorrow at the junior high, 6 PM. Thank you.

[8288] Nancy Thomas: Thank you. OK, Mr. Newk.

[8303] Cary Knoop: Good evening again. I don't know how to say it else. I thought the LCAP process was a disaster. We had a committee of 42 people. That committee never had quorum. There were a lot of rules not follows. It was a Brown Act committee. People were, public speakers were cut off rudely. The minutes, they were offensive, in my opinion, offensive comments in the minutes. When the district was called on it, they didn't even reply. They just took all the comments out. I think that's very shameful. What I've heard is that parents were assigned by principals without the parents even knowing about it. I asked a question about that. I didn't get a straight answer. I got an answer saying, well, the principal selected it and the board approved it. That's not an answer to my question. I want to know if that happened or not. I also heard that the district spent money on legal advice to try to get working documents out of documents removed that were published in meetings. Anyway, here's my concern about this process. It's a zero-sum game. And I think if we have schools, the most important thing in schools is to educate our kids. If we're spending too much on auxiliary services, to put it this way, we're going to cannibalize our core instruction. We're going to cannibalize math. We're going to cannibalize English. And that will be a problem for all students. If we keep our math and English education high and we spend funds to it that will help all students, including English learners or good students or bad students. If we are becoming top-heavy by spending auxiliary services, I'm worried for this district. This district will all over go down. We are playing tag with Union City, and if we're going this way, we're going playing tag with Hayward. We need to focus on the core education. And I'm not talking about Title I money. I'm talking about the rest of the money. There are actions in LCAP that goes for all kids and that will benefit all kids. We also need to make sure we keep, we get English learners off when they are no longer English learners. It's first of all not good for the kids. They stay labeled. And second, it's not fair. If you have two students who are B students and one is an English learner and the other one is not, they deserve the same attention. That's called equity. It's not equity to say, well, this B student is the same as the other B student, but it used to be an English learner. We want to give that student access. That's not equity. Thank you.

[8490] SPEAKER_39: Can I respond to that? Or is that not appropriate?

[8492] SPEAKER_26: No, we've got to wait for that, and then. Oh, I'm sorry. Yeah, I wanted to clear up a little. Let the public speak, and then we can have our discussion.

[8503] Nancy Thomas: Nicole Eisen.

[8513] Nicole Izant: Ready? Yes. OK. So hello. My name is Nicole Isant. I've addressed the board in past sessions on my concerns about the LCAP and the communication from the community, the parents involved, et cetera, et cetera. And I think a lot of my colleagues on the committee already mentioned some of the concerns. Although many names were cited in the presentation tonight, not all of the members were there on a consistent basis. I think that going forward, Really emphasizing the commitment of time and energy on your volunteers is important so that when people do accept this advisory committee role, they actually commit and show up. On the same side, from our, and Jessica's done a pretty good job of being a program manager for this group, but I also want to emphasize that we're in a, we're in an area where a lot of people commute to work. A lot of us work across the bay and the commute times are pretty bad. I voted on that measure to improve commute stuff today, and I hope everyone else voted too. But because of that, a lot of us can't get to meetings at 5, and not all of us can afford to take time off work, especially if we're working parents. And so I would like to encourage, in this case Jessica or the board, to either do video conferencing, allow other ways for us to communicate. I also think we should hold more town halls. A lot of the communication is one-sided. A lot of, even on the advisory committee, we were missing information. I was pleased to hear some of the board members mention there's no, like, checks and balances. There's funds allotted. It seems like the same funds are allotted. And I think a really simple budget practice of having a project code where you can track if you're using LCAP funds for this, put it in the budget code in your spreadsheet, and then tally it up at the end of the year. And that way, we'll be able to track the metrics easier. But then also offering your council and advisory committee members that data. We were kind of a little bit blind because we had very generic budget allocations. And a lot of us, Michelle, Elise out there, all of us do program management and budgeting in our day jobs. And we have a lot of experience shared amongst us. And I'm sure the other members who I know less well have that. If you could actually lean on us as volunteers to help provide better approaches to managing this process, I'm sure we could help advance it and make it better like that. I mean, you're asking for parents. We're there. We're trying to commit to this and lean on us a little bit more, rather than having it be a one-sided, tops-down kind of management system. So yeah, I think that's it. And I have comments on another item. I know I have to hold off. I can't combine them into this one, a future agenda item. I'm just trying to get home. OK. Thanks. Thank you.

[8678] Nancy Thomas: Mr. Nguyen.

[8680] SPEAKER_39: I just want to clarify for the record that I don't think the district determines whether we reclassify students as EL or not. And that's determined by what's now the ELPAC examination from the state. So it's not like we choose to reclassify students wantonly. It's based on guidelines that are set forth by the CDE.

[8702] Nancy Thomas: Thank you. Mr. Preciado.

[8708] SPEAKER_26: So I wanted to respond in terms of, just for the record, in terms of my stance, my personal stance, that I believe that developing students and supporting English language learners is not an auxiliary service. It's a core service as part of our academics. So that's where I stand. And yeah.

[8727] Nancy Thomas: Thank you. Seeing no further comments, this public hearing is closed. Thank you all who participated. So we have already had our student reports, so we move on to the superintendent's report.

[8747] SPEAKER_27: I'd like to move on to the, well, let me do the Certificated and Classified Employee of the Year, if I may. And we recognize our Certificated Employee earlier tonight and in our reception as he was not able to come back, who was Coach Hess. And we want to congratulate him. But at this time, I would like to ask Mr. Ron Huerta to please come to the podium. Ron. I know you've been sitting a while so thank you.

[8783] SPEAKER_28: The 2017-18 Classified Employee of the Year is Ron Huerta.

[8794] SPEAKER_27: Ron has been a custodian at Newark Unified since 1992. He has worked at Music Elementary and Birch Grove Primary. His nominee writes, in 25 years of working for NUSD, Ron has kept a positive attitude and always says yes when asked to do something. He's very dependable and thorough with his work and makes sure that the school is clean and secure. Thank you, Ron, for providing excellent service to our students, families, employees, and employees. We value your hard work and positive attitude. And I'd like to present you with something. I'm going to ask the board to join me on the floor to present this. Come on up here.

[8840] SPEAKER_33: You can show on TV.

[8855] SPEAKER_27: It's right here at the middle.

[8856] Ray Rodriguez: You sit here with the pad. In charge, you get a picture with everybody.

[8890] SPEAKER_28: 25 years. I would like to thank the district for receiving this award and also working with the staff at music and at Birch Grove Primary, you know, they're great staff to work with. As long as they keep them happy, they're off my back. That's my motto. And also I would like to thank Chief Lucifer for nominating me for this award.

[8926] Richelle Piechowski: Congratulations. Thank you.

[8928] SPEAKER_28: All right.

[8935] SPEAKER_27: And now to move on to my report. We did that earlier with Coach Hess, remember? And we already talked with the Rocketry team. So I have provided a couple of updates quickly. The committee has identified ATIS architects to be the architect to move forward on June 19th. I will be meeting with ADIS in the coming weeks to refine the focus of work and get really a more specific contract to what we need based on what the committee asked me to do. So we plan to bring that back to vote for the board on June 19th, and that's an update on the architect firm. And we did interview a couple of firms, and I was the one that was unanimous from the committee. Member Thomas, do you want to add anything to that committee's recommendation?

[8987] Nancy Thomas: No, I think it was a very good process. We appreciate that we had several members of the community helping us out. Mr. Knoop and Mr. Grindell from the city, and also Larry. Sorry for using your first name, but I can't remember your last name.

[9008] SPEAKER_33: Simon.

[9008] Nancy Thomas: Simon. And so anyway, I think it was a very good process and I think we're going to have an excellent process of community input and a great five to ten year facilities master plan.

[9025] SPEAKER_27: Thank you. And the last thing I want to report on is that I'm going to be bringing back the strategic plan on June 19th. I need some more time to finalize an updated draft. I hope to have something tonight, but as I started working on it, I realized I wanted to make sure that we were linking the measurables as we've been discussing, as well as I've submitted a significant proposal to the CCEE for funding that we might get that'll help with the writing of the document. But either way, I've already submitted some additional work to CCEE to help us refine Strategic Comparative 2 and 3. Mrs. Salinas and I are going to continue to work to update imperative one and we hope to bring back a much more refined plan on June 19th. Um, and in addition to that, uh, the budget had to take my largely my full attention in the last seven days and I wasn't able to, to really get as far as I wanted. So there's more to come on that and I'll be providing a timeline of what we've been through, where we've gotten and where we are and how we might be going forward. So you'll see a more specific, uh, revised draft on the 19th.

[9098] Ray Rodriguez: Superintendent, I know we already celebrated the certificate, but since we're on TV, could you mention his name for us, please?

[9106] SPEAKER_26: For the TV? He did already. He did as part of that. He said Coach has.

[9112] Ray Rodriguez: Oh, no, but during the TV time? Yeah. OK. OK. I just, it's just so important when we have a, you know, the more times we mention him, the better it is.

[9124] SPEAKER_27: No, and Coach Hess has done a great job, and I think that everyone knows him, and everyone really appreciates what he's done, especially when it comes to the character education of our young people at high school. But happy to say it again. And Ron, again, just glad that he was able to stay.

[9141] Ray Rodriguez: And then I have a motion that we extend the time until 11 o'clock.

[9148] Nancy Thomas: I'll second that. Five ayes, the meeting has been extended.

[9168] SPEAKER_27: My report's concluded at that point, unless there's questions for me or direction.

[9173] SPEAKER_26: And if it's at this time, don't you want it at the end, or do you want? I'll just wait, yeah.

[9180] SPEAKER_27: No, yeah, please. That concludes my report, but I'll take any questions or direction from the board.

[9187] SPEAKER_26: I was going to mention, in terms of the strategic plan or the planning process, if you can incorporate a Q&A town hall process for the community as part of that.

[9199] SPEAKER_27: Okay. Thank you.

[9208] Nancy Thomas: Okay, next we move on to old business 11.1 board policy 3300 expenditures and purchases. This is the second reading. Member Rodriguez moves. I'll second. Member Preciado seconds. Please vote. Five ayes, thank you. 11.2, Board Policy 3310, Purchasing Procedures. Second reading. Ms. Crocker moves. Second. Mr. Rodriguez seconds. Please vote. Mr. Rodriguez? Five ayes, thank you. 11.3, Board Policy 3452, Student Activity Fund, second reading. I'll move to approve. Mr. Preciado moves. I'll second. Ms. Crocker seconds. Please vote. Five ayes. Thank you. 11.4, technology purchase for STEAM labs, maker spaces. We have several speakers that would like to address this. Ms. Aizen. I don't see, I only see yours, but that's fine. That's fine.

[9321] Nicole Izant: Even better. Yeah. Okay. So I had to leave early, so I missed the first time when this was brought up as new business. So if this is repeat, sorry for people in the audience. So earlier, again, I was pleased to hear that, you know, I think Mr. Preciado and some other folks were kind of asking about what's the big plan, like what's the program when they were talking about LCAP. And so I kind of want to bring up the same concerns here. I see that we have like 115K asked to buy a bunch of iPads and some Apple ITV thingies, which in itself is not a bad idea. My concerns is that there's no program plan for STEAM. In the May 1st STEAM memo, it said that there was going to be a STEAM council composed of several different types of people, and it's my thought that it should be the STEAM council that's kind of providing guidance and a program for how money used to buy steam stuff is used, especially money over $100,000. And so since I don't think that committee or council has already been formed, I find it curious that we're going to be using this for steam planning. Anyway, so going back to my notes that actually I've written down, what are these iPads going to be used for? Are you going to be teaching kids how to develop apps? If so, Should you also get some Android-based technology, because people need to develop apps in two types of, or even Kindle stuff, or whatever the one is for Windows. And then I saw that the updated document was that it's supposed to be used for inspiring creativity. And why I understand you can do a limited amount of creative stuff on an iPad if you're in kindergarten through sixth grade or eighth grade. I think with that kind of cash, you can buy a lot of other creative elements like maybe a 3D printer, some sort of art supplies, musical instruments to really robustly provide creative elements for the full range of age appropriate items for kids in maker spaces at elementary school level. What is the plan for getting 128 gig tablets? I think everyone here has cloud storage. So I find it, even if you did move forward with this purchase, that 128 gigs is excessive. You get free cloud storage. We should use it. And if you're not using it now, that is the next generation technology. So we should get on that. Let's see what else do I have to say. And again, I think it was mentioned by some other people or maybe even on the board. It's just concerning that this might be a haphazard way of making expenditures. So I would like to see how this purchase ties back into some sort of STEAM program plan. We want to not be haphazard because we've been that way in the past. And so really developing some sort of STEAM makerspace plan for elementary schools would be great. And then I think you should also encourage your staff and teachers to visit other elementary schools in the area. I know there's a really nice one in Oakland called Roses in Concrete that has a very robust STEAM program. Maybe you should check out with them how they're using their stuff before making large purchases of this kind of money. Okay, thanks. Thank you.

[9507] Cary Knoop: Mr. Newk. I would like to continue what the previous speaker said because I think there's a lot of things that I find agreement in. There's no point in buying hardware if you don't have a curriculum for it. And I hope that STEM or STEAM is not just going to be an acronym where we just have a bottomless pit and we throw money in. And if the board says no, we'll just show the resolution one more time and remind them that they agreed with this resolution, so they should approve it. That's not the way it should be, I think. We need to have a curriculum for that. We don't want the kids to just give them these lab tablets and then mess around for an hour, be creative. I don't think that's the idea of education. That may work in kindergarten, it may even work in first grade, but for the higher grades you want to have a program. And the way I look at it is you get a program first and then you find what you need. I like the idea of 3D printers. I like the idea of getting some desktops, some high quality desktops. If we want to do video processing, here in Fremont we have Black Magic Design. They offer video processing software that Hollywood uses for free with some limitations, but if the kids get through these limitations, they're ready for the next step. There's a lot of software out there that's free, that's very good. Get some desktops, get some high quality stuff. Apple marketing is really good, and I'm sure they're telling everybody that And, you know, it gets in a little bit of a point of Apple versus Windows, I have to admit. But, again, it's still a big purchase. And I think for the board, they should approve this if there is a program behind it. Not like we just want to buy them and trust that, you know, the kids will just have a lot of fun with it. It's really we need to do the other way around. We need to have a curriculum first and then go for it. But, again, think about 3D printers. For the high school, Think about NVIDIA CPUs. You know, there's a lot of artificial intelligence. If you look at coding right now, it's all about artificial intelligence. Get the high school kids, get some NVIDIA GPUs. Maybe we can even, you know, they're local. Maybe we can even make a deal with them, that they want to sponsor things. That's the kind of thing we need to look at. Just giving people iPads, I know they're really cool and so, I'm just worried we're going to say maker space is for the kids. That's a lot of fun. And we're going to have to be creative. But remember, if we want to get kids into technology, that's a serious business. And that means a lot of math as well. You need to have a foundation in math if you want to get into technical areas. Thanks.

[9682] Nancy Thomas: Thank you. So Borden.

[9693] SPEAKER_39: So this is the second reading. The first reading, we sent it back upon request that we ask staff to solicit input from the site administration to see if that's indeed the devices that they want. And I'm assuming that's been done.

[9708] SPEAKER_48: Yes, it was. I had the opportunity to meet with our district leadership team, all of our principals. They're here in the audience. They're holding strong because we still have our success later on this evening. And what I can say is this, is that This is in addition and to augment the Chromebooks and a lot of the stuff that we're doing already. This is a very small targeted use for our maker spaces. Yes, absolutely. We do have to follow up and have our committee going. And I'm happy to get that work together soon. What we saw here was an opportunity to start to engage with students. And it's more than just creativity or buying programs. What this is, is giving our students and our teachers tools that will give them another outlet. The story I shared with some of my colleagues was that I was sitting at a parent meeting. I happen to be using an Apple product and I'm agnostic. I don't care whatever gets the work done. But I will say this, that as students were coming forward, they were able to talk to me about how they can use Apple products. And honestly, a lot of our families don't have the means to have this at home. And so what this was is also an opportunity for us to provide with these supplemental concentration funds, another access point for students and teachers to have another way to be creative. What we stressed was that Chromebooks will continue for the productivity side of the house. This was another tool for classroom teachers and for maker spaces. We do have to align it. We do have some professional development that is tied to it. So it's not just kind of go forth and here's your iPad. The nice thing was that we had that built in to do this with our teachers and our staff. So after speaking with our principals and looking at what some of the work that we want to continue with in terms of building our maker spaces, we felt that this was a step that we wanted to send forward.

[9829] Nancy Thomas: Ms.

[9829] SPEAKER_35: Crocker? First of all, where is the money coming from?

[9835] SPEAKER_48: So this is out of supplemental concentration, so this is within the LCAP. Okay. And these were all, excuse me, and these were funds that we also had that had to be expended for the, for this year, school year.

[9848] SPEAKER_35: So if we don't spend it, it's gone, is that correct?

[9851] SPEAKER_48: Well correct, because it's all.

[9852] SPEAKER_35: Gotcha. Okay. It's just for this year. Second question. Makerspace has a different connotation to me than just purely electronic or computer. And so if you're talking about this, so you're talking about expanding it beyond the technology thing into other areas also?

[9895] SPEAKER_48: she's been messaging me this evening as well, is saying that as we do a tour of what are the possibilities, we want this to come from our teachers. I think what might also be important is that we augment teachers to this committee. I'm glad that we have parents who are willing to lend their expertise, that candidly they have strong expertise that we can benefit from as a district.

[9919] SPEAKER_35: So as I see it, then it's a beginning process of what is going to be a good creative source or space for the kids, which means that you need to have something there. Having the four walls is not necessarily going to do it. This may not be the end of the equipment that's necessary. But if it's a place that allows the teachers to use their creativity to expand, then I think it's a really positive thing. I don't know what should be basically there until people figure out what it is they need. But there's something more than paper and pencil. Is this something Mr. Simon suggested in terms of basics?

[9959] SPEAKER_48: He didn't, well, we worked closely together. It's not that he said, hey, let's do this. It was more we looked at what options are. We wanted to ensure that every school site had the same thing. So we saw this as kind of a base to augment the Chromebooks that we already have at our school sites. And then also, I will say this, due to the creativity of our principals and our teachers, what exists at current Makerspaces have been basically GoFundMe stuff. that also can't be fair. That if a school doesn't have someone who is willing to put in the time for a GoFundMe, then they just don't get it. So we wanted to be able to have a base, but then certainly lean on a committee or if it's a council that looks at STEAM across the district, we can augment and go from there. And we do have some funds that are set aside for next year in the LCAP to do some more work and to build on that.

[10012] SPEAKER_35: I was going to say that it would be nice to have a base that's there, but also to have the ability for a site to decide, we really would like a 3D printer, or we really feel we need to have three apples versus one, or whatever it is that you might need. So I think maybe Mr. Simon can talk about what the basics is going to be involved at each school site.

[10035] SPEAKER_17: Yeah, there were a few things brought up that I think I can maybe help clarify or talk about. Just a real quick technical one was about the size of them. They are the larger models that just It's a limitation, by the way, Apple has the design. Normally your iPad, your 32 gig iPad is fine for one kid, but 10, 15, 20 kids are going to log on to these, and each kid takes a chunk of space. And if they're going to use them for video or whatnot, it's going to be difficult. 3D printers, we've heard a lot about. To use 3D printers, you still need something to print to them. You need a computer or whatever it is. I have four myself. I'm really into 3D printing. That's a big surprise, right? Honestly, the easiest thing to print to a 3D printer and design, which is more important than the printing. The printing is whatever. For kids to design on is the iPad app. I've done it on PC. I've done it on Mac. The iPad app is easy. Kids, there's not a big learning curve. That's the biggest thing we see when we implement new software. If we don't throw a PB at it and we don't give a lot of training to teachers, it doesn't get picked up very well. A lot of the iPad apps, frankly, are just From a purely self-serving perspective, iPads are going to be more work for technology. But I think in this case, where they're for art and for the creation apps, they're just better on the iPads. They really are. The 3D printing apps, the 3D creation apps, they work better. They're just better designed. I think especially a lot of the built-in apps, iMovie clips. They work really well. And one of the good things Apple does with the iPads and with their curriculum in general is they create a curriculum. They have a predefined curriculum. And it's actually really nice. I've used it. And obviously, I'm not the target audience for it. But it's pretty well designed. And I think it's sort of an easy way to ease teachers into a new piece of technology and students. I think it's pretty intuitive. I do think it's going to have a lot of great uses. So that would be what I'd say about it. Are there any other questions directly from you?

[10162] Nancy Thomas: Yeah, I have.

[10166] Ray Rodriguez: It's good to see a Newark Memorial High School graduate that's in charge of IT department. So I think you basically answered most of my question. And basically, it's why Apple as opposed to?

[10183] SPEAKER_17: So I would reference back to something we said back in 2013 when we were starting the whole big deployment of computers. We didn't call it a one-to-one Chromebook deployment. We called it a one-to-any. And when we said that, what we were talking about was the fact that we were standardizing mostly on Google Apps and on cloud services. And the idea was kids could get their work, their docs, whatever, on any device, their phone, the Chromebooks, which is what we've predominantly gone with because they made the most sense, or iPads, Macs, Windows. And that's still the case. The iPads still work with everything else we do. They just have a few apps that are iPad-specific that also, I think, really make a lot of sense in the spaces they're going into. This isn't something that I think we came up with on our own. Principals have been pretty excited about this. And the teachers we've talked to who are using them are pretty happy with what they've done.

[10236] Ray Rodriguez: So since the principals, I remember when alluded to it as far as, And you work together with the principals, and I'm sure it goes on with the teachers. Is there any way that we can get one of the principals to kind of share their experience at the site when it comes to?

[10254] SPEAKER_39: They don't have the device yet, so there's nothing.

[10259] Ray Rodriguez: Oh, OK. OK, because you talked about the fact that you wanted to hear.

[10268] SPEAKER_39: Well, I just need assurance from Ms. Salinas that this went back to the site admin for vetting and approval. And I believe her when she says it has.

[10277] Ray Rodriguez: Right, right. We met. So all the principals, they're all excited about it?

[10280] SPEAKER_48: Yes. They're a little sleepy right now, but I think they're excited.

[10284] Ray Rodriguez: OK, that's fine.

[10285] Nancy Thomas: Thank you. Mr. Preciado?

[10287] SPEAKER_26: So I have a question and then my comment. Question, I see there's Glendale USD and EDU. I'm assuming that those were

[10296] SPEAKER_17: Yeah, that's the pre-bid contract for Glenn. It's the contract that will be piggybacked off of this and actually purchased them. It's been pre-bid through the state.

[10306] SPEAKER_26: OK, and then my comment. So where I'm at, I think it's great. I know I'm one of the people who have been pushing for us to kind of engage and start supporting our students with the tools that we have. However, I do think that, you know, We need to have a program plan for STEAM first, and then I would be comfortable with approving this and seeing how this fits in. So for example, as an example, for me, the software, the iReady, I never bring this up, but the software, the iReady software, and then we changed after we had invested in it. I wanna make sure that we have a plan that outlines how this fits in. I like the STEAM Council idea, but in terms of timing, it might not be feasible to do it now, but I think that we should at the very least, or I can't support it unless there's a program plan for STEAM and how this fits in within that program.

[10369] Nancy Thomas: You mentioned the curriculum. I think it's really important and that kind of goes along with what Mr. Preciado said about a plan. If there is a curriculum, how does it correlate with the various subject areas, because I assume this crosses subject areas. And if it does correlate, how does it fit in with time, classroom time, to use this equipment in a maker space at an elementary school where there's many classrooms? I think, I know you want to talk to it, but I really feel strongly that there needs to be a plan, or there needs to be something coming from the bottom up. In other words, if we could say to every site, we have this suite of products that we will grant you, but you have to apply for it and produce a plan that comes to the board for approval, and then we will approve it for your site, I'd feel a lot better knowing that they're just not saying, oh, yeah, We want that equipment, and we'll make use of it. I want a specific plan that says, here's how we'll use it, here's who will use it, here's when they will use it, here's how it will fit in with the curriculum, and so forth.

[10455] SPEAKER_48: What I can offer is that there is curriculum. Apple, going back to the ease of use, there is curriculum. There's curriculum for creativity. There's curriculum for coding. And they have all these modules that are ready to roll out. In terms of the plan, once we get to our CPSAs, you will see that our principals have highlighted the area of steam within each of the site plans. Is it as robust as it needs to be? Perhaps not yet, because we are also embarking on this new area ourselves. What I will say this is, you know, we do have a smaller amount that's set aside for next year to look at steam. I don't, we currently do not have this amount for next year, so it will not be to this level. I just felt that speaking with our principals who are already working with some of our first implementers, rockstar teachers who want to do this work, they're ready to go and we saw this as an opportunity to use these funds before we lose them before next year. So that's really the spirit of how this came forward and perhaps it's a little backwards, but I think going back to the 2013 when the board took action to have kids have access to any device It's kind of in that spirit that we bring this forward.

[10530] Nancy Thomas: So you're saying this is a, this current fiscal year purchase, not next fiscal year. The money will be lost if it's not used.

[10548] Catheerine Ingham-Watters: Hi everybody. So let me just talk a little off the cuff on behalf of the elementary principals. So Leti did bring this to DLT to get some of our feedback. And we did provide support and excitement around the opportunity. And so I think many of us are creating makerspace spaces, but exactly what that looks like will have to be developed over time. Is it something that the kids can go in and kind of do arts and crafts and build something that complements something that they're learning in the curriculum? Can they do a design thinking challenge and really just create and invent? But to have technology that allows students so many things to do and have it equal at all of the sites is really exciting for us. So a little bit, yes, if we get it, We will have to kind of unpack, literally unpack it, and really see what they can do. But I'm telling you that teachers at my site are doing green screen technology. But they're doing it with their personal cell phones. They're doing it with the camcorders that we have for the teacher evaluation system. They're doing it in all sorts of ways. In our school plan, I'd like to purchase dash and dot robots to extend our robotics. And that's something that I can do at my level, but to have those work they need to work with iPads. And so to know that the district can support that is perfect for our site next year. So I think there's a lot of excitement. Is there a plan exactly of who will do what when? No, but I know the teachers are already doing it and to have that in all of our newly created spaces as the foundational technology tools I think will be a wonderful starting point and I don't want to miss this opportunity.

[10663] Nancy Thomas: Would you be willing to come back in December and your colleague, the other principals, and give us a complete report on the usage of this equipment?

[10674] Catheerine Ingham-Watters: I absolutely would and I would invite our parent community members too. We just had a volunteer work day this last Saturday. Some of the parents that spoke tonight were a part of that to create a maker space. And so that is big on our agenda. And I would be happy to be on a STEAM committee with parents and really focus on this work. I know Graham Elementary has purchased some of the Apple products. And she is a great leader for how to utilize these.

[10713] SPEAKER_20: Sorry, I'm sleeping with my eyes open. It's been a long day at Graham. So Akilah Byrd here, principal of Graham. I'm just looking at some of my notes, and bear with me. So you know my science resource teacher, Miss Rachel Bloom. We've been in collaboration. So some of the notes from our piloting year of trying to create our maker space on campus at Graham, and some of the things that we have done thus far. are, and I'll give you just some of the initial observations as well. Why is my computer freezing? This is perfect. In any case, I can tell you that with science concepts, application and engineering, our fourth graders have made electronic math games for our first and second graders to play. Our second graders have worked with balancing toys. We have STEM kits. Our first graders have created bug catchers and went outside and actually attempted to catch bugs if you follow us on Twitter, that's a plug. You can see some of the things that are being tweeted. Technology use, our sixth graders have also, I was actually tapped into my computer in my office, so it timed out. So our sixth graders have also worked with energy resources, created a puppet show commercials. Our fifth graders have worked with the earth system interactions. So our science teacher has really taken the lead Our teachers are thinking about what they can do by watching Rachel. We have also used our Makerspace in different competitions that we've had on campus to reward students with behavior and academics and some of those things to promote it as well. So we are really excited about it and we hope to continue with receiving more items. We have received lots of things through DonorsChoose. as well as I have set aside some site funds that we used this year and you will also see in the SPSA tonight.

[10826] SPEAKER_35: So we hope that continues. Ms. Crocker, I'm just thinking you were talking about $122,000, $124,000 divided by 8 would be about $15,000 per school. So if the school had that money and it has to be spent this year, then I would say let the school decide what they need. Because every school may have had different sources of things that are there. That means it's something that would have to be relatively fast in terms of doing it. But part of the nature of creativity is you can't plan it. You're creating something that's new, a new kind of thing. And if you've got staff that have one way of looking at things, they're going to have different ideas about what's needed. And it may be the end result for the kid is going to be wonderful, whether it's one teacher's approach or another teacher's approach. But everyone has to have their own supplies that feed the need that they have with the staff and the personnel that's there. And I don't think that's my decision as a board member. My decision is to make things available for the site to do things that are creative and create excitement. But it means it's something that would have to be done relatively fast. I certainly trust my principles. Mr. Nguyen.

[10899] SPEAKER_39: I'm a little disappointed that this is taking so long because this is the second reading. It's been vetted by our assistant superintendent, our principals are wanting it. It's $120,000. What's the holdup? What's the debate? So let's make a motion.

[10912] Nancy Thomas: Let's call a vote. I'd like to make a motion. Mr. Nguyen, do you want to make a motion? Do you want to make the motion?

[10916] Ray Rodriguez: Please. I'll second it.

[10918] Nancy Thomas: OK. It's been made and seconded.

[10921] SPEAKER_14: Go ahead, Mr. I was just going to say, I love the idea that school sites can come up with their own plans, but it won't end up equitable. Because Title I schools are going to be buying the basics. And other schools who have PTAs that can purchase those basics are going to get the iPads. So you're going to have inequities at the school. So I would hope that if we're going to make a purchase like this, it's equitable amongst all the schools.

[10951] Nancy Thomas: Thank you. Please vote. Oh, sorry. Can you please vote again? We have four ayes with member Preciado voting no.

[10977] SPEAKER_26: Thank you. And I can explain. I think I've already outlined it, but I wanted to just. Again, I support it. I support the idea. And I would have been on board if we would have, at the next meeting, because we could have brought it in one more. We have one more meeting before the year is out with kind of an outline This is how it's going to be used so that it fits because not having a plan, I know I guess it ends up being on this, but not having a plan is, for me, is indicative of why our scores haven't changed or improved and where we're at. So it's really, that's why. So I support the idea and I would have voted yes if we would have moved it one more time to have the conversation of, this is outlined, the curriculum would have been great to have it on this kind of agenda item. to be like, this is what we're moving forward. This is how it supports. And then I would have been OK supporting it. Thank you.

[11034] Nancy Thomas: And I think if we have reports from the principals, like in the December time frame, and they can show us that we did the right thing by trusting them. OK, next we move on to new business, alternative world language.

[11054] SPEAKER_48: It's a busy night for Leticia Salinas. Good evening. This evening I come forward with asking the board to approve a new pathway for Newark Unified School District. As you know, our school district only offers for world language, French and Spanish. And there is provisions within the California Educational Code that we can go ahead and accept transcripts from a private or alternative setting for students. And so this actually came from some of our parents here in Newark Unified. And they came forward to share what they had done in Fremont Unified and what they're about to do with New Haven Unified. And that's essentially have some of our students are taking classes at this private school that offers Arabic and attach all of our courses of study for this Arabic world language class that they would offer at the private school for students who so desired to continue if it's for heritage language or for the units. By the board taking action on this this evening, it allows for us to recognize it on their transcripts and give them the units or the credit for world language. We also were able to vet this with University of California at Berkeley to be able to review the rigor and also if it had met all of the Ed Code provisions. And I come forward, I know some of them are joining us this evening and I thank them. I know we are in the middle of Ramadan, so I do thank them for joining us this evening. But we come forward with this for your approval.

[11154] Nancy Thomas: We do have a member of the public that would like to speak to it, Ms. Janouk.

[11164] Cary Knoop: Yes, good evening again. I think it's wonderful that we offer other languages and be able to be recognized on the credentials. Every language has intrinsic value. You know, I think that's wonderful. However, as a board, and I'm not well versed in this, I think once you say we recognize this as a valid option, does the board then have a responsibility to make sure that you know, the teaching is of a certain standard, of a standard that is accepted by Newark. And so my question would be what kind of inspections are you going to do? I would assume like a biannual inspection perhaps together with Fremont. I understand Fremont has been doing it since 2015. But I think there's some diligence, some important things that we do need to follow up. The second thing I would also find personally very important is that the district make sure that, you know, there's equal accessibility, you know, equal rights between genders or sexual orientation or creed so that we make sure that the school does basically adhere to our standards, if you will. And so I think, again, that the board should be diligent in following up or have a plan in the coming years, if they were going to accept this, that there is inspection and to make sure that these things are guaranteed. Thank you.

[11264] Nancy Thomas: Thank you. Ms. Crocker, and then Mr. Rodriguez, and then Mr. Nguyen.

[11273] SPEAKER_35: I'm curious in terms of what is the history in terms of what the district has done in terms of getting credit. for education that is outside of the boundaries of our school. I know that there are a number of ethnic groups that do teach language related to their religious organization or their cultural organization. And I'm wondering, what is the history in terms of that? I don't doubt the fact that having another language is a positive thing. I think anyone that has a second language is enriched. I'm not sure in terms of getting high school credit or course credit is what we need to be doing.

[11318] SPEAKER_48: So to share, it is, although I referenced heritage language, this is actually part of the UCCSU requirement to have a world language. and currently our district only offers two languages. So at no cost to us, students can, this allows students whose parents have decided to enroll them in this private school setting and our educational code allows us to accept those units. So essentially, if I could shorten it, this action would allow students to take the world language option at a private school setting, which is this school right here, and then would allow us to recognize the units on the transcript so that they can then apply to UCCSU.

[11361] SPEAKER_35: I think there may be some history in terms of that. I know in terms of physical education, there are times when students have gotten credit for being involved in developing a skill in terms of skating or whatever it might be. and they have been given credit for replacement. I'm wondering if there's any other examples.

[11382] SPEAKER_48: And I will say, as I shared with the board, I'm still in fact-finding mode and looking at updating board policy. So I can certainly take that back. I know that we also had had another request for recognition of Spanish taken at a private school setting. So I am in the middle of trying to kind of do an overhaul of all pending board policies that need revision. So I will definitely look into it. And you're correct, from my previous district, we had students who were semi-pro or professional athletes or training to be, I think it was figure skaters for us. And we were able to recognize, to fulfill PE requirements. So yes, this is part of the work for next year as well.

[11424] SPEAKER_35: So this particular situation then, it is essentially accredited. by the University of California, in terms of the quality.

[11430] SPEAKER_48: And this action will be specific to just this school for this language.

[11440] Nancy Thomas: Mr. Rodriguez?

[11443] Ray Rodriguez: The more languages, the better. I think years ago, students could take three or four languages. And I didn't realize that we just just off of the two. So my question is, once we approve this, then do we, our obligation would be to fill the class naturally.

[11468] SPEAKER_48: No, so this would not be one of our classes. This is just allowing students to enroll in this private school setting and then bring us their transcripts and then we would recognize these courses on their transcripts and then they don't have, I mean they can still.

[11482] Ray Rodriguez: So this is aside from, but this would meet their requirement though, right? Correct. Okay. Thank you.

[11489] SPEAKER_33: Mr. Nguyen.

[11492] SPEAKER_39: So, I would agree with the previous statements that language is rich and powerful and useful. On the surface of this, this looks good, however, this is a huge Pandora's box that we're potentially opening. Because the Ed Code for allowance is that, yeah, we can grant credit onto our transcripts. But then we have to ensure that the education that the students are receiving at the private institution is equivalent to what we're offering. So in reading the course syllabus that was submitted, there's only three and a half hours of instruction per week on this. And typically, our students receive five hours of instruction, right? So just on that very minimal minutes allocation, it doesn't pass muster. Secondly, if we do this to Arabic, we have to then enable us to do it for Spanish. for German, for Chinese, for any other language that has been approved by the State Board of Education. When we do that, are we then prepared to potentially have our foreign language department essentially be abolished, right?

[11568] SPEAKER_48: I would say that because this is not, it's not that we're allowing one and that we're not allowing others.

[11573] SPEAKER_39: Well, I'm not saying that, but what I'm saying is we haven't, historically, haven't allowed it From what my knowledge, we haven't allowed this type of credit for a private institution before, right? Other than transferring from a private high school, et cetera.

[11587] SPEAKER_02: Yes.

[11588] SPEAKER_39: But to take a course of this nature, we haven't really allowed it to be transferred onto a transfer.

[11594] SPEAKER_48: And it could be because we have not had the need previously. What we have now is that we have current NUSD students who are in the midst of either enrolling or they have enrolled. And as we're coming on board to really give our students some more options, opening up their schedule so that they have other options, it is not that because they take the foreign language or the world language requirement through this private institution that then they won't have classes with us. They will continue. It will open up their schedule and in fact let them have a more rigorous transcript.

[11627] SPEAKER_39: Right. And I get that. So excuse me. But again, the assumption is once we allow Arabic, then we have to allow all the other languages that have been approved by CDE. And any organization or private entity can then submit a petition to accept their course to be allowed onto the transcript. Now, beyond that portion, beyond the Pandora's box potential and, you know, our teaching staff, right, the course that's submitted, is it A through G approved? Is that an A to G course and through what institution?

[11665] SPEAKER_48: That is my understanding and it's through University of California at Berkeley who did the overview of the whole course. And our petitioners are actually, I call them petitioners, but the folks who are currently working at the school, they are here this evening.

[11678] SPEAKER_39: Okay. And maybe they can respond or answer because in their initial petition letter, it states that Fremont has been doing it, but Fremont doesn't have any Arabic classes in the UC doorways catalog. And the closest high school that has Arabic that's been approved by UC A through G is Patterson High School. And in the state of California, there's only nine public high schools that have approved Arabic classes that are approved through the A through G. And so again, my whole stance for many years now is if we're going to approve new courses, it should be A through G CSU. And the course that's currently presented is not on the UC doorways.

[11723] SPEAKER_48: Would you like the petitioner to come forward?

[11725] SPEAKER_39: Yeah, if there's something, if there's more information.

[11730] SPEAKER_10: Good evening. Thank you for giving us the opportunity after such a long day. My name is Ashfaq Rashid. I am one of the founders of this program at Fremont. To address the first question in terms of the hours per week, one of the requirements that we were given by the Fremont Unified at that time was 108 hours for the whole year. And if you look at the total sum numbers of hours that are there, it comes beyond 108 hours that was there. So I believe in terms of the cumulative number of hours that are needed for the overall academic year, even though per week, it may not be the requirement. Overall, we meet. This is the reason why it has been accommodated that way. It is because of the traffic conditions that we currently have in the area. And the parents are bringing the students after school hours and just trying to minimize the weekday traffic to to reduce some of the burden, but make sure that the rigor and the necessity of the rigor of the program is fully met for the local schools that are there.

[11815] SPEAKER_48: And may I add, I am trying to pull up the policy right now. We do have board policy 6146.11, where we do have an AR with alternative credits towards graduation. So I'm trying to pull it up so I can give you the language that would allow this as well.

[11833] SPEAKER_39: your work in Fremont Unified, what school has submitted the, so you have students who are taking the course.

[11842] SPEAKER_10: Today we have 60 students, 55 students that were registered in the last, this academic year that just currently ended with us. Out of that, I do not have the number, I should have had the number, there are close to about 10 students that are already from the Newark school district that are being registered with us.

[11870] SPEAKER_39: How does it appear on the Fremont Unified School transcript for the students?

[11874] SPEAKER_10: It appears as the Arabic language 1, 2, and 3, whichever student that they are in, it appears on their transcript. And if I am speaking out of my bounds here, but When I was talking to the director of secondary education in Fremont, Mr. Maxwell, at the time of the approval, it is under the authority of the superintendent of the school district who can certify a coursework that is AG approved. And it is under that ruling that a school district approved certifies and approves the But like I said, I know I'm speaking outside and I can I can I wish it were that easy if the superintendent or the principal approves a the g-course

[11931] SPEAKER_39: No, the HEG course has to be submitted to UC doorways, and that gets approved. It's not that simple. I wish it was.

[11938] SPEAKER_10: Believe me. It has been accepted for last year. When the transcripts of the students that completed second year and went through it, it was accepted in every UC and state that the student applied and got it.

[11953] SPEAKER_39: So the Arabic course, you're correct. It does exist in the CSU doorways. So that does exist. Fremont Unified does not have anything listed within their official documents that state that it's, and it's all public information. You can just go to UC doorways and find it.

[11972] SPEAKER_48: Because they're, probably also through their port of policy, and I'm looking at RAR, so we can accept it. It just basically says the district shall accept the credit of foreign language courses successfully completed in a private school, and it has the provisions, which is essentially what we have as the attachment. So we are able to do it through our own board policy. So I'm going to imagine that Fremont Unified probably did the same as well.

[11998] SPEAKER_39: So they can accept it, and they can accept it as elective non-A-G course credit, and it'll appear on their transcripts. But what I'm saying is that, officially, for Fremont Unified, and therefore any high school in Fremont, they don't have Arabic as their approved A-G course.

[12014] SPEAKER_48: Right, and I'm going to guess that we're going back to where they can't probably offer it because they're not paying for that private school setting and what they're probably, if they were to list it, then there would probably be other liabilities, I would say, to be able to offer it.

[12029] SPEAKER_39: But if they don't list it and it's not on the official site, then it doesn't count when the students apply. The course has to exist officially on UC Doorways or else it doesn't count.

[12044] SPEAKER_26: Could I offer a potential maybe resolution in terms of the timing on this? Would anything be interrupted if we brought it at the next board meeting?

[12054] SPEAKER_48: Yeah, that's what I was thinking. We can have time to do that. In the meantime, I can speak with Fremont Unified as to the acceptance of the credits. So my understanding was speaking with them, they had been accepted.

[12065] SPEAKER_39: Just find out more information, yeah.

[12066] Nancy Thomas: Sure. Yeah, given the hour, I agree that we table this until the next meeting. I hope in the meantime you will talk about auditing the course, about the need for us to oversee and audit the course, because that's what Fremont does. They have a biannual audit or something.

[12089] SPEAKER_48: We would follow the same procedures, yes.

[12091] SPEAKER_26: Where I stand, if it increases opportunities, it's no cost to us. Assuming it's A through G, which the way it's framed, it is, I'm on board with it. So that's the piece of it.

[12102] Nancy Thomas: But the thing I'd like to know is that we already have courses, like with Ohlone, that we haven't audited ourselves, even though they're our course. If we could come back with a joint agreement with Fremont and Union City, if they start, or New Haven, if they also adopt this, so that we jointly have some kind of independent audit of it every year or two, I would feel more comfortable, too. Can I comment on that?

[12132] SPEAKER_10: I know it's too late. We have an open door policy with Fremont. That is a requirement. So anytime we are expected to have a visitation and we are open for that and we have never in three years that we are operating had had any issues with it.

[12151] Nancy Thomas: I'm sure it's fine. I just want the process to include it.

[12155] SPEAKER_39: That's all. Before the next meeting though We need to think about the implications as far as FTEs and staff are concerned. Right? OK.

[12162] Ray Rodriguez: Thank you. When we bring it back, can we bring it so that if they come again, they don't have to wait so long?

[12170] Nancy Thomas: I'm sorry for the late hour. Plus, we have a lot of principals that are waiting for the CIPSAs. So let's move on. Thank you. Thank you. OK. Next, we have a speaker on big ideas in math, if you would like to introduce it. And then we can ask the speaker to come up.

[12188] SPEAKER_48: As promised, the last time we met regarding our textbook adoption process for mathematics, we had a presentation that basically spoke to the process, the stakeholders that took part in that, and also that we would be coming back with the contract to purchase the materials.

[12206] Nancy Thomas: Ms. Parks?

[12215] Cindy Parks: Hi, yes. Before you spent your $794,000, there was one item that I forgot to ask when it was on the agenda to approve for adoption. When you adopt something that is not a textbook that's been adopted by the state of California, you have to complete what is called the social content sheet. So that as those piloting the textbook, whatever it is, that they have to meet certain criteria. And as they're working their way through it, there's an actual checkoff sheet where they have to list certain letters and numbers to say that it met those qualifications. Because Big Ideas is a new, they're in the process of being published, I understand you're not going to have it until next month based on previous presentations. I just was wanting to make sure before you spent the money that was taken care of, that those content standards were checked off as it was being evaluated and met the criteria.

[12287] Nancy Thomas: Let's see, I have a lot of speakers. That's it.

[12289] SPEAKER_44: I'm just waiting for the answer to make sure that it did meet that.

[12296] Nancy Thomas: So we don't have another speaker on this. So, yeah, we'll open it up for our discussion. So, my question would be to Ms. Salinas regarding Ms. Park's comment about that sheet.

[12316] SPEAKER_48: So, yes, we went through the process and it's difficult because, of course, you know, we had this presentation a bit ago. So, what I can say is that we went through the thorough process. We worked with the Alameda County Office of Education. and fulfilled the requirements that needed to be done.

[12333] Nancy Thomas: Any board member want to speak to this?

[12335] SPEAKER_39: No, at the previous meeting we lauded staff about the process of the new math adoption, right? And this is the textbook and the support materials that needs to go with it.

[12347] SPEAKER_26: Okay, Mr. Preciado. I was going to make the motion to approve.

[12351] Nancy Thomas: Is there anyone that wants Do we have a second? I'll second. Second. Is there anyone else that would like to speak to this? Okay. Please vote. Five ayes. Thank you.

[12369] Ray Rodriguez: I have a point of order, if you don't mind. Because we're running out of time, is there anything on new business that we can bring back at the next meeting?

[12381] Nancy Thomas: That's a good point. I would like to see us maybe bring all of it back next meeting if we can and move to the... Is there anything that is time sensitive?

[12397] SPEAKER_26: I think we just have to move forward and then at the point where we have five minutes left, then we have the conversation. We did it once and we shouldn't do it at a regular thing, but it would be a motion to suspend the rules to add it one more time. I agree.

[12413] Nancy Thomas: Let's move on.

[12414] SPEAKER_39: Can we approve the 15 consent item so that our principals can get some rest?

[12420] Nancy Thomas: Yeah. I would like to suspend the rules and move to 15 consent agenda items.

[12430] SPEAKER_27: We have, I'd like to move to, I'd suggest 14.1 at least.

[12434] SPEAKER_26: That's another principal that's waiting. I think we've already, if we're going to Suspend the rules we need to add at the time. So I don't know if we do it now, or can we just move to the next one? Let's just move. OK, let's move, and then we get closer. 14.1.1 will get you there. OK, so 12.3. For this one, I know we talked about interpret the update from last time. So I'll move to approve. I'll second.

[12462] SPEAKER_13: Second.

[12465] SPEAKER_27: 12.3.

[12465] SPEAKER_39: We're going in order.

[12466] SPEAKER_27: 12.3. We're going to quickly go in order.

[12471] SPEAKER_26: Please make a motion. I did.

[12472] Nancy Thomas: Oh, I'm sorry.

[12473] SPEAKER_27: Frank, you moved. Ray seconded it. No, no. I seconded it. OK, I had it wrong.

[12477] Nancy Thomas: OK.

[12478] SPEAKER_27: We'll track.

[12479] SPEAKER_35: OK. I would like to move to accept 14. Wait, wait.

[12487] Nancy Thomas: I have to close. Five ayes.

[12493] SPEAKER_35: OK, that's 12.4. 12.4 I move to accept.

[12496] Ray Rodriguez: Second.

[12500] Nancy Thomas: Please vote.

[12505] SPEAKER_35: Member Crocker. Crocker, Rodriguez.

[12512] Nancy Thomas: Five ayes. 12.5.

[12516] Ray Rodriguez: I'd like to bring this one back.

[12519] SPEAKER_26: So this is the first reading. That's fine. So we'll bring it for a second reading.

[12524] SPEAKER_35: OK. 12.6. I'll move to approve. I'll second.

[12528] Nancy Thomas: Berciotta moves. Ms. Crocker seconds. Five ayes.

[12541] SPEAKER_39: Can we bring 12.7 back, please, and 12.8 as well? Because that's going to warrant discussion, in my opinion.

[12547] Nancy Thomas: OK. So 12 point, did we do 12.7 yet?

[12553] SPEAKER_39: No. I want to bring that back. It's a first reading still.

[12556] SPEAKER_48: I apologize. This has to be first reading for 12.7. Yeah. OK. So 12.8, is it?

[12562] SPEAKER_39: I remember 12.8, we broke into 12.8.

[12564] Nancy Thomas: Yeah, 12.8, we have the biology, physics, and chemistry are a group. Do I have a motion?

[12575] SPEAKER_35: Move to accept.

[12577] Nancy Thomas: Ms. Crocker moves to accept.

[12579] SPEAKER_39: Wait, can we bring this one back, the 12.8? Because like I said, the course approval, I'd like to be able to discuss it further.

[12591] SPEAKER_48: Our hope was to bring it forward. We have a teacher in the audience that wanted to speak to some of this and the next meeting. And we also have a purchase that's tied to one of these as well. That would be my only fear of not being able to purchase in time to receive the materials.

[12609] SPEAKER_39: OK. So we're talking the first part, which is the NGSS?

[12612] Nancy Thomas: Which is the NGSS courses.

[12615] SPEAKER_26: Member Crocker moved. I'll second.

[12618] Nancy Thomas: OK. and moved in second. Let me see. Voting, please vote. Five ayes. The introduction to visual media arts. Math transactions, math transitions.

[12638] SPEAKER_39: No, that's one. Arts is first, right?

[12645] Nancy Thomas: The inter, which one's first? Based off of this, it was.

[12648] SPEAKER_26: Oh, OK. Then it's math, transitions, and then visual arts. OK. If you look at the 12.8, the headers.

[12658] Nancy Thomas: OK. In terms of the math transitions, I wanted these separated out because this is a remedial class. I think we should be working to prepare our students to take rigorous courses. And I'm just not in favor of. adding yet another senior course because we have many of our seniors' classes are not even full and have it be a remedial class. So that's my input on that.

[12686] SPEAKER_39: So I wanted to discuss this class as well because it's a fourth year class target for students who've already received a C in Algebra 2. So those are already either G approved or either G eligible students. if we allow them to take this class or have that available for them. It may put them at a competitive disadvantage, where when they apply for their universities and colleges, the first test is, what's your GPA? Second test, what's your SAT scores? Third test is, what is your GPA in relation to, did you take the hardest classes available? And if these students are taking this class versus calculus, pre-cal, stats AP, computer science AP, for example, in the math wing, it may put them in a tight spot. And I would agree with Member Thomas that, I mean, on the surface level, it reads well, it looks good, but I don't know if I can support this course.

[12749] SPEAKER_48: I do have our math department chair here, and also Ms. Black, if they wanted to add anything to this item.

[12760] SPEAKER_37: Yeah, and I appreciate what you're saying. And it's really addressing students who would not be taking calculus in college. But they want, and so we have students who don't take math their senior year because they don't want to take calculus or pre-calculus, math analysis. Because it's not, if they don't intend to take calculus in college, the math analysis course is not suited for them. It doesn't, it isn't, there's no reason for them to take them. And the math analysis class is designed to prepare students for two years of calculus. It's a very broad and rigorous course.

[12798] SPEAKER_16: I just want to mention that with the new dashboard and indicators, so one of the state requirements is that they look at their 11th grade SBAC scores. And so if students don't perform or meet the standards of that test, they receive a conditionally ready. That means that they're conditionally ready for college. And so then it puts them at a disadvantage in terms of their application and being officially ready to go to college. So this course, that if they were to take this course and pass it with a C or better, it eliminates the conditionally ready criteria that's listed and puts them into ready status for college and career when they go on to university. I think it's, I like, I hear you say the word remedial, and I just also, I hesitate on that a little bit, because I think that there's also an opportunity for kids to have, continue with math. It's an A to G course. It goes into a deeper level of mathematics, but doesn't require the rigor of a math analysis class for a student that wouldn't necessarily go on to take science or STEM or engineering related classes when they go on to college. I can even think about from my own personal experience as a poli-sci major, the only math class I had to take was statistics. However, having an opportunity to have a fourth year math class I think could benefit a lot of students. Also, the math analysis teacher spoke at our curriculum council, and he expressed his concern about a number of students feeling required to take that fourth course and go into math analysis and then fail in the first quarter and are dropped from the class. no other math class or no other math option for them. So it gives our students more pathways and options in math.

[12910] Nancy Thomas: Well, I just wanted to say that it was a teacher that used that term. And also, it was one of the administrators that said, this is a class for students that can't pass math analysis.

[12931] SPEAKER_39: So you do bring up a good point about the conditionally and how that leverages that. But why aren't we using the official math and MRWC course for that?

[12941] SPEAKER_16: The what?

[12943] SPEAKER_39: The math course? The MRWC course that's adopted. It's the equivalent to ERWC, which is the English. We have no MRWC course.

[12951] SPEAKER_37: This would be the MRWC course. We have no math MRWC course. We have English.

[12955] SPEAKER_39: But there's an official MRWC math course that we can adopt that deals with the conditionally accepted students. that has curriculum and framework that has been piloted and tested. I guess the rationale is, why didn't we go in that route? Because if you're familiar with ERWC, that's the English equivalent for students who are conditioned to accept, et cetera. But there's a math version now of MRWC.

[12985] SPEAKER_37: I know that they had the Department of Ed put out a grant and six schools applied for the grants and this is how I learned of it. I looked at one of the schools and one of the curriculum that they were using to address the conditionally ready.

[13004] SPEAKER_39: Maybe we ought to take a look at MRWC, especially now that you're aware of it, to see if that's a better fit for what we're trying to do.

[13015] SPEAKER_48: So again, the only caution would be that we would need to go redo the process, because as you know, per our board policy, it's actually our curriculum council that does the recommendation and the member, and then they actually accept or decline it. So this is coming forward under having gone through that process.

[13036] SPEAKER_39: So if they've gone through this process, this is the first time I've heard of this course, right? Unless I missed something.

[13043] SPEAKER_48: Oh, no, no. I'm saying that through Curriculum Council, they go through the process.

[13047] SPEAKER_39: OK.

[13050] Nancy Thomas: Mr. Preciado and Ms. Crocker?

[13051] SPEAKER_26: Well, I was going to note that for this piece, I just want to make sure folks aren't being tracked. At least the conversation, it makes you think of certain types of students are tracked. And the vibe that I'm getting from other board members is that this could have that potential. So I just wanted to say that's my concerns. It's also how counselors encourage people to take courses and how it's like, you are on the college track, you are not on the college track. Here, take this class. I mean, I like the fact that it's A through G certified. It just kind of, I get this feeling of that that's, I want to make sure that that's, or it's clear for us that that's not the intention.

[13101] SPEAKER_37: There's a population of students who either aren't taking math analysis or start off on math analysis and then drop and are left with their senior year without any math course. And we have a handful, maybe two or three this year, that were in math analysis. And because they need that third year of math, are taking Algebra 1, dropped out of math analysis and are taking Algebra 1 as seniors. So it would be nice to at least have this for them.

[13129] SPEAKER_39: But this is a target for students who've already passed Algebra 2. with the C. So what you were referencing earlier in regards to a cohort of CSU universities getting a grant to write a curriculum for this math course is MRWC. And tell me if I'm off topic. The reason why I kind of speak about this passionately is my school was one of the schools that was going to pilot it among this cohort to teach, to implement MRWC. But in discussion with my math department, we felt we weren't ready for it yet. And that it just came too fast, and so Although we planned for four months to kind of offer it and and you know get ready for for next year We thought that even as a pilot we we weren't quite there and so we turned down that opportunity to our district office and We're gonna try to launch it for next year after a full year of development and and test through so if we're gonna Look at transition math. I would recommend Looking at I'm here to see because that's the equipment. That's that's being piloted I would like to

[13193] Nancy Thomas: Entertain a motion to suspend the rules and extend the time to midnight.

[13199] SPEAKER_35: I'll second. Or I'll move. I'll move. I'll second.

[13205] Nancy Thomas: OK. Please vote on suspending the rules and extending the meeting to midnight. Oh, I missed. I hit the wrong button. Please vote again. Mr. Nguyen? Five ayes. Thank you. OK, we can continue the discussion.

[13230] SPEAKER_39: So is this something that has to happen now, or can we bring it back with additional research?

[13236] SPEAKER_48: We would have to bring it back, I think, next year. Candidly, folks are, they've been through their internal process as teachers with the support of educational services. We're coming forward to offer another option for students that is A through G. I hear the suggestion you're making and I think certainly we can certainly look at that for next year and perhaps go through that process. I just hesitate because we're so close now to the end of the school year.

[13268] SPEAKER_39: So has it been submitted for A through G approval already? Yes. And what's the status on that submission?

[13274] Diego Torres: 25 students currently.

[13278] Bowen Zhang: No, no.

[13280] SPEAKER_37: I think it's just submitted recently, right?

[13282] SPEAKER_16: Yeah, so it's Mr. Holmes is the coordinator of AGG's submission, and he just returned to the site. So we were recently on the phone that he was going through and putting in this.

[13293] SPEAKER_39: Who wrote the curriculum to submit it? My group. OK. And then, so did we model it after another school that offered it, and that course was approved? So it's pretty much a slam dunk to get approved then?

[13310] SPEAKER_26: So I'm trying to think in terms of easier concerns, will we be able to make a motion to approve pending A through G approval? Or is that to?

[13321] SPEAKER_35: Or it could be a pilot. It could be as a pilot for this year, since it's the first year it's happening, too.

[13327] SPEAKER_26: So then it would be moved to approve with the understanding that this process will be brought back next year.

[13339] SPEAKER_39: If we don't incorporate it into... I would be, I would feel comfortable with knowing that it's, it's, it's been submitted to A through G. The fact that it's, um, that was modeled after a previous school that has that course. I'm assuming that, you know, you contacted the previous, the teacher at the other school and got the curriculum and whatnot. Um, I would be comfortable with approving this as a pilot and then bringing it back next year as an evaluative year and then from there but not have this be approved to prove.

[13369] SPEAKER_26: So if you can make that motion, and then, yeah.

[13373] Nancy Thomas: I have another question before you do that, though. You said you developed the course. How involved was the math department teachers in developing the course and bringing forward?

[13390] SPEAKER_37: I read it through by my teachers. I did the writing, and then I wrote

[13397] Nancy Thomas: But they weren't part of the process of helping you write it, or?

[13404] SPEAKER_48: They reviewed and gave a comment. As the chair, that's really her role to certainly take it through the vetting of her department, and that's what she did.

[13417] SPEAKER_35: I'd just like to make a statement, if I might, about this whole business. I know that people are in disagreement with me in terms of my approach, but people have different learning skills and different learning abilities. And not everyone in the world can handle calculus. And it's not a matter of tracking. It's a matter of looking in terms of how people think. If this is a class that will enable them to understand math concepts on a college level that's acceptable by A through G, I'm all for it as being an option. Because I think that we have different skills. And sometimes we get so tied up. with everyone taking calculus and everyone taking four years of language and everyone learning how to play the violin or whatever it might be. We are not all able to do all things. And as a comprehensive high school, we need to address what we are doing for all of our kids. College is one important piece. It is not the only thing in the world. Sorry. So that being said, I would love to see a pilot.

[13489] SPEAKER_39: I move to approve as a pilot, a one-year pilot to be revisited next year.

[13498] Bowen Zhang: I'll second.

[13501] Ray Rodriguez: Please vote. Member Pershia, I will second.

[13507] Nancy Thomas: Member Rodriguez, please vote. Ayes, 1, no. Nancy Thomas. Next, we move on to 12.9, Kodango, Lisa Green.

[13529] SPEAKER_39: Visual Media Arts.

[13531] Nancy Thomas: Oh, Visual Media Arts. Does anyone want to make a motion? I'll move to approve.

[13540] Ray Rodriguez: Second.

[13541] Nancy Thomas: It's been moved by Mr. Preciado, seconded by Mr. Rodriguez. Please vote. Five ayes. So next we move on to 12.9, Cadango lease agreements. I move acceptance.

[13562] SPEAKER_39: Second.

[13563] Nancy Thomas: Member Crockford moves. Member Nguyen seconds. Please vote. Five ayes. 12.10, Dennis Wolliver-Kelley Agreement for Professional Services.

[13593] SPEAKER_35: This is an open contract that stipulates what, if we choose to use them, stipulates the parameters of it. So I move acceptance.

[13601] Nancy Thomas: Member Crocker moves. I'll second. Member Nguyen seconds. Please vote.

[13616] Ray Rodriguez: I have an issue with this. On this one and the next one, they're proposing an increase. And I'd just like to have more time to really look at it. So I'll have to vote no on it, because it's an increase. But if we can bring it back in two weeks, that'll give me more time to do some more research on it.

[13650] SPEAKER_26: Well, I would say there's a motion to second, and then depending on what happens on the outcome, too, I have to bring it back or not.

[13657] Nancy Thomas: Yeah, so please vote. For ayes, member Rodriguez, no. Next, 12.11, door dome law agreement.

[13686] SPEAKER_35: I move acceptance.

[13688] Nancy Thomas: Member Crocker moves acceptance.

[13695] SPEAKER_33: I'll second.

[13696] Nancy Thomas: Member Nguyen seconds. Please vote.

[13703] SPEAKER_26: Sorry, as an attorney, I wanted to stay away from... Member Rodriguez votes no.

[13710] Nancy Thomas: Everyone else votes yes. [Translated] Everyone else cast votes. [End]

[13711] Ray Rodriguez: So can I just quickly... I know that at some point we need to look at all our attorney firms, but we're, you know, superintendent is there. Did they explain why they're increasing their rates other than just a regular increase?

[13734] SPEAKER_27: I think they just have enough demand to charge more. And I think that if we say we don't want to do it, they'll say, then pick somebody else. I don't think they care.

[13741] Bowen Zhang: And we have other firms that we can.

[13743] SPEAKER_27: We have plenty of business in the Bay Area. We do. Right. We do. But I do think we need to look at what we spent on legal in the last couple of years and maybe look at that in more of a study session format to see, you know, Just a broader conversation. Right. OK.

[13759] SPEAKER_26: My point about having an internal person is that it would be cheaper at this point.

[13763] Nancy Thomas: Right. You know, something to be said for that.

[13766] Ray Rodriguez: Can you be a board member and an internal person too? No.

[13770] Nancy Thomas: OK. Next we move on to 13.1, employee organizations. Do we have anyone from NTA? Anyone from CSCA? Anyone from NEWMA? We'll move on to 14.1. I don't believe we have any. 14.1, appointment of Newark Memorial High School principal. I would entertain a motion. I'll move to approve. Second. For Seattle Moves, Mr. Rodriguez seconds. Let me clear and close this first. OK, please vote. Five ayes. Mr. Sanchez.

[13833] SPEAKER_27: Thank you, President Thomas, members of the board, ladies and gentlemen, largely principals in the audience. I'd like to introduce Paul Bretz. He comes to us from Tracy High School. Paul, if you'd please step to the podium. I know you've been waiting there patiently. Comes to us from Tracey High School, 23 years of experience as an educator and administrator, has participated in several WASC accreditation cycles. His credentials in special education and physical education is part of his background. He's also a rugby referee in the Bay Area. Paul also served our country in the Marine Corps. Thank you for your service. And we'd like to welcome him as the new principal of Newark Memorial High School.

[13885] SPEAKER_07: I was actually hoping we could wait 50 more minutes so I could say good morning and say good morning. Right, you're done. Careful what you wish for. It's an honor to take this position. This has been an accumulation of five years of work, and I've enjoyed that. I've been fortunate to work with two phenomenal principals that have really taken me under their wing to develop my skills and I'm looking forward to utilizing them. My first task and ultimately my primary task is to drive instructional practice of our teachers and to ensure that our students meet the requirements that are set forth. And I'm looking forward to the challenge. So I want to thank you and appreciate your confidence in me. So thank you very much.

[13939] Ray Rodriguez: Can you share your special ed experiences briefly?

[13943] SPEAKER_07: Absolutely. So when I got out of the Marine Corps, By chance, I had a friend who also exited out of the Marine Corps that got me involved in education in a gang intervention program. And that gang intervention program kind of put me on that pathway to working with our special education students, but also with our struggling students. At every vehicle, at every opportunity, I've worked with at-risk students. So I started my career. Just down the road in Fremont for a couple years at one of the middle schools, I transitioned to high school and was a resource specialist at James Logan for three years. I moved to Pleasanton and was a 13-year resource specialist there. I started getting bored and ultimately decided to take the administrative credential. I had the opportunity to work at Amador, excuse me, within Pleasanton, within two school sites, and I chose not to, and ultimately took a position in Antioch, where I was assistant principal for three years. And it was a steep learning curve going from Pleasanton to Antioch. to Antioch, but one of the benefits of having that experience is that I really, truly got to see what exceptional teachers are. And I took those skills to Tracy. We were able to develop several initiatives working with PBIS and trauma-informed training, particularly at Antioch, and so I'll bring that experience to the high school here. So I'm looking forward to that. Again, because of my background in special education and my desire to work with our at-risk students, I will champion those once again at this school site. So I'm looking forward to that.

[14055] Nancy Thomas: Thank you.

[14056] SPEAKER_07: Thank you. You're welcome. Thank you. Welcome aboard. You're welcome.

[14061] Nancy Thomas: OK. Next, we move on to 14.2, personnel report. And I believe, Mr. Woodnoop, you wish to address this.

[14077] Cary Knoop: Good evening. I know I spent so much time here. Sorry. I just want to say a few words. I've been a chairperson of the CBOC for about five years and then six years on the CBOC. And being on the CBOC, we interacted a lot with Mr. Richards. And I must say that the relationship was always very professional and very good. And you know, He was definitely a great numbers guy. So I just wanted to say a couple of words and hope he finds interesting things for his retirements to do. So.

[14119] Nancy Thomas: Thank you. I would entertain a motion.

[14125] SPEAKER_26: I'll move to approve.

[14126] Nancy Thomas: I'll second. Bresciata moves. Ms. Crocker seconds. Please vote. Four ayes. Member Rodriguez is not here. Next, we move on to the consent agenda. And we have several people that want to speak to various items on the consent agenda. And we will entertain, let them speak now. And then we will ask the board if they want to pull any items. So Ms. Parks, you have two. You wanted to speak on 15.9 and 15.14, the Schilling CPSA and the Newark Memorial High School CPSA.

[14187] Cindy Parks: I was hoping when the agenda was pulled that you would pull the Schilling. Since you don't have the CPSA, it's kind of hard to approve something that you don't have. So I would hope that you would remove that. since you don't have the plan. Regarding the Newark Memorial, first of all, well, let me just say that I have seen a complete overhaul of the whole system, or whatever you want to call it. I mean, the memberships have been a lot better. They've complied with what the law says as far as how they're supposed to be formulated at most of the sites. I pulled Newark Memorials this evening because of the, Membership, they have only two parents. And it's supposed to be an equal number of parents and students that represent that half of the membership of the board. And unfortunately, the principal's left, unfortunately. So that's my concern, that it doesn't have the correct membership. And if you'll recall previously that the integrity of the plan, part of the CDE, they had said previously that that plays into the integrity of the plan.

[14262] Nancy Thomas: Thank you. Thank you. Mr. Nook, you have two items that you wanted to address.

[14274] Cary Knoop: It's only one item and it's basically, you know, I can talk for any CPSA, but it's basically generic. So I went through all the CPSAs and It's pretty much the same as last year and the year before, and I know every time you're saying, no, now we're going to focus on math, now we're going to focus on the core, now we're going to focus on English. But basically every year it's the same thing. If we look at goal one and two, it's almost empty. There are sites that have zero dollar to improving math for all students, zero dollar to improve English for other students. Again, however we want to call it, we have our core education and other things. We run the risk of cannibalizing our core education. 90% of the CPSAS is for AIDS. I think we need to think about what is the best thing for all our kids. And having $0 to math and $0 to English or, oh, we'll just put in $1,000. Is that going to help our kids getting to a higher education? The other thing is that We also want to put funds in to help our kids understand that education is not just fun. It's hard work. And to create this sense of you have to work, this sense of we have to push our kids, not to extremes, but we have to tell our kids, you've got to do good in school. And I think we need to spend time on that to make sure that happens. And so again, but, you know, look at the, Goal one and two, I made graphs of it and it's, you know, it's just the same every year and it really bothers me when the district tells people like, you know, we spend, you know, or we spend time and we focus on math, we focus on English, and every year you see the same thing in the CPSAS. Hardly anything is spent on math and English. It's on other things. And some of these things are definitely worthwhile to spend on, but again, don't, cannibalize your core education, because then everything goes down. That's my concern. Thank you. Thank you.

[14413] Nancy Thomas: Thank you. Would any board member like to pull any of these items?

[14418] SPEAKER_35: I see 1510 is not there. Is that correct? No, it's here. For Schilling?

[14424] SPEAKER_26: No, 15.9 in Schilling.

[14427] SPEAKER_48: 15.9, sorry. Yes, if you read under the purpose and the recommendation, what's coming forward is for you to accept that we will bring the plan in September. It's not to accept the plan. So this decision was made with the school site council at Schilling to ensure that they have time to meet with their new principal to do this work. I do want to add the caveat that definitely the sentiment and the consensus of the school site council was that they wanted to continue with two of the positions that they had in there and I think you've heard some of the folks from school site council coming forward and so that is in place and then that will be ratified at the September by you at the September 18th board meeting but yes the plan will be coming forward in September so I would like to pull 1510 then so we can treat that separately 15.9 it's it's listed as 10

[14481] SPEAKER_35: And our calendar, or our thing. It's 15.9. 15.10 agenda, because they had number one. I think they're off one number, because number one is comments. So I think everything is numbered off one then. 15.7 is for Graham, and 15.7 there is for Graham. If you look on the agenda. So you want to pull shilling? I want to pull shilling. Whatever number it might be, pull shilling. 15.9. So it's treated separately.

[14515] Nancy Thomas: OK. I would like to pull 15.3 and 15.4. I'll move to approve 15.4.

[14535] SPEAKER_26: So 15.2 through 15.21, with the exceptions of 15.9, 15.3, and 15.4. I will second that. OK. Please vote. I have a comment, though.

[14562] SPEAKER_39: Pardon? In regards to Memorial SPSA, they are in compliance. Because as a secondary school, they're allowed to have students. And so they have five students and two parents. So they're for at seven, which is 50% of their school site council.

[14574] Nancy Thomas: OK, thank you. Five ayes. OK, I pulled 15.3 and 15.4. And now I can't pull them up for some reason. I think our requirement is that these have to be put, you know, these requests have to come eight, I forget how many weeks before, but these came within a month before. I think it's more than four weeks. I think it's, you know.

[14615] SPEAKER_35: Is that for us or is it starting the process?

[14619] Nancy Thomas: That's when it was, dated 5-10, and it's less than a month. That's not the biggest issue, though. The biggest issue is that for non-curricular trips, the new approval for field trips that we're being asked to do has wording in it that says that fundraising cannot commence for these trips until after it's been approved by the board. So there's kind of a dichotomy there. But I just wanted to point out that we really need to make sure that the lead time that we require is followed. And we do have exceptions when we have an athletic event, tournament that we have to go to in short notice. That can be approved even by the superintendent. I think when we have a lead time, that should be followed when they put in their trip request form. And I'm also very concerned that we won't be able to have fundraising start after the approval of these trip requests. Or how do we implement that or force it?

[14704] SPEAKER_35: There's a listing down there in the background. According to board policy 6153, all trips in excess of 100 miles. Santa Clara is not 100 miles from here. In excess of 100 miles, non-curricular trips and over, okay, non-curricular trips are any mileage then, right?

[14720] Nancy Thomas: No, yeah. So the issue is if we're going to enforce the lead time for when these have to be brought to us, and is there going to be a problem? And maybe you can speak to it. Mr. Whitten.

[14737] SPEAKER_13: Thank you. I appreciate that. It helps me and my department if we could maintain that. However, there are extenuating circumstances. It's been a tough year, honestly, for a lot of the school sites, a lot of the principals. There have been a lot of issues. And it's understandable, I think, that they're doing the best they can to comply to the best of their ability. And we do try to get it to the board two or three board meetings prior to the trip, that's the reason, the logic behind the 8 to 12 week request if it needs to go to the board. But under the current circumstances, we couldn't get all the documents and everything together in a format ready to come to the board until very recently.

[14783] Nancy Thomas: What about the requirement that the fundraising not start until the board approves it? That seems unreasonable.

[14791] SPEAKER_13: this district's board policy more than the ten and a half years that I've been here.

[14795] Nancy Thomas: So we've kind of ignored it. Well, let's bring back that board policy. Yeah, let's fix that because I think that's an unreasonable demand. I mean, I think fundraising starts at the beginning of the year.

[14809] SPEAKER_48: Yes, we can and in fact, I know we had a first reading on field trips and there might be a way to put that in in there for second reading.

[14816] Nancy Thomas: Okay, thank you. With that, I I move that we approve 15.2 and 15.3. Actually, 3 and 4. Oh, 15.3 and 15.4. I'll second. Please vote.

[14822] SPEAKER_35: Five ayes. What do we have on the second on that? You seconded it?

[14824] Nancy Thomas: Thank you, Mr. Whitten. Okay, congratulations principals and... Can we do 15.9? Oh, I'm sorry. 15.9. Oh, 15.9. I can still say congratulations because... I'll move to approve based on Ms.

[14864] SPEAKER_39: Salinas' comments.

[14865] SPEAKER_35: I'll second. Okay, good. Second. Frankie was the first one I think that got in there.

[14873] Nancy Thomas: I'd like to comment on that. Mr. Sanchez, before we vote, Or after we vote? OK. Either way. Well, Mr. Rodriguez hasn't voted yet, but go ahead.

[14885] SPEAKER_27: Just a quick comment was this is largely a measure we took after meeting with the Schilling parents, the Schilling staff, and several meetings with Salinas that I had with the Schilling parents. They wanted assurances that the principal would be weighing in on this plan. And I think this was a nice compromise that we came to in collaboration with that site.

[14909] SPEAKER_48: And we also communicated with some staff members this morning about it so they could understand it. But yes, the item is pretty clear in the recommendation that the attachment wasn't there for a reason. And I do want to thank publicly our principals and our school site councils. This is not a process that happens overnight. These folks work really hard to get this forward to you. And so I thank them for their time this evening as well.

[14936] Nancy Thomas: OK. Five ayes. Thank you.

[14954] Nancy Thomas: Just to wake him up. Thank you.

[14956] SPEAKER_27: Thank you, guys. See you at school tomorrow.

[14970] SPEAKER_35: I lost my... Just look at mine, 16.1. 16, expulsion. Okay.

[14976] SPEAKER_26: So we're at 16.1. 16.1.

[14977] Nancy Thomas: Move for staff recommendation.

[14983] Sean Abruzzi: Second.

[14984] SPEAKER_26: So there was a motion by Member Nguyen, a second by Member Rodriguez.

[14989] SPEAKER_35: Is there anyone?

[14994] Nancy Thomas: When I asked you to be able to... I called you up For both?

[15000] SPEAKER_26: Yeah, for the consent, and you said you only had one item to speak of.

[15003] Nancy Thomas: You said you only had one, because.

[15005] Cary Knoop: Oh, oh, I'm sorry. I thought it was about the success.

[15009] SPEAKER_26: Because it was 15-1 to the whole consent calendar.

[15013] SPEAKER_35: Yeah.

[15015] SPEAKER_26: Did you make a motion? Yeah, no, member Nguyen made a motion. Member Rodriguez seconded. Second.

[15022] Cary Knoop: Anyone want to call the vote?

[15023] SPEAKER_27: Do you want me to help you? Yeah, yeah. I'll just put it over here. Oops. Now I did it.

[15029] Nancy Thomas: Mr. Nguyen? Oh, OK.

[15034] Ray Rodriguez: Yeah, I think. Hot mic. 16.2. Move to accept staff recommendation.

[15042] Nancy Thomas: I'll second. 16.2. OK, I'd entertain a motion on 16.2.

[15056] Diego Torres: I make the motion.

[15057] Nancy Thomas: And I second it. Member Cracker seconded it. OK. Please vote.

[15078] SPEAKER_35: All right, so the Board of Education Committee.

[15087] Nancy Thomas: I'll begin with Mr. Nguyen.

[15096] Ray Rodriguez: I just had a couple.

[15098] Nancy Thomas: Did he pass? Did Mr. Nguyen pass? I'm sorry, I didn't see you pass. Mr. Rodriguez.

[15104] Ray Rodriguez: So I know in the past we've attended some promotions or graduations and others haven't, but my hope is that the actual graduations that we try our best to attend those. Because those are students that are actually graduating from either high school or, I mean, from high school or adult school. So we voted yes on the donations, but we didn't read the names. So if you could do that at the next board meeting, that would be nice. I have a request. Well, on the Arabic class, we're going to bring that back. So we'll have some discussion as to how it affects other languages and other things. And then the last thing is the agenda as a whole. To ask to move it up one hour and then we break the rules, it just makes us look dysfunctional a little bit. So maybe we can talk about the agenda and bring it back. And I've always suggested that if we're going to move it, that we do it at midnight. Whether we need 10 minutes or whether we need an hour this way, we're covered. And if we do go over, then it becomes the next day thing. And you can continue the meeting. So that's all I have. Thank you.

[15194] Nancy Thomas: Thank you. Ms. Crocker?

[15196] SPEAKER_35: Yeah. Just wanted to let you know that we are having a liaison meeting on June 18th with the city. And they sent an example of the MOU for the use of the McGregor fields that looks very good. So we will talk with them about it and bring it back to you. I think it takes care of our concerns that we've had. I don't know if you have a chance to see it or not. Yeah. So if there's anything that you want us to discuss with the city, let us know. The agenda has not been made yet, to my knowledge. So I assume we'll be coming through.

[15232] Ray Rodriguez: So on the MOU, do we call you or?

[15236] SPEAKER_35: If you have some thoughts on it. If you have some thoughts, sure, sure. Because I think it's the whole point of the meeting is towards discussing concerns. And I think they have taken care of all of our concerns from the looks of what they suggested. But that doesn't mean that we can't approve it. We would be bringing it back to you to approve. It's just a matter of if you have any thoughts that we have that we need to do. The other thing is that I would appreciate a listing of a chart of all the various activities, promotions, graduations, and stuff, and maybe just a simple chart so that I have a week and I know what times things are so that we're not going to be able to make all the promotions. All the end-of-the-year events. Right, all the end-of-the-year events. That's good. Tomorrow, we have the awards for the sports at the high school, the commons at 7 o'clock. So if you are interested in coming, it's all the special awards for scholar athletes, scholarships that are given to the kids. So I'll be there presenting. And if you're interested, it's really kind of fun to see what all the kids are doing there.

[15305] Nancy Thomas: Thank you for a scholarship in your husband's name. It's my pleasure. I think that's very nice.

[15313] SPEAKER_26: So I wanted to bring up adult education, make sure that if we have the kind of board direction for this to make sure that we don't, you know, deficit spend specifically on an item that we said that we had to fund itself. Newsletter idea, my thoughts are if there's maybe a way that this summer we can kind of work on developing a newsletter highlighting the successes of Newark Unified. So for example, our spelling bees winners, Rocketry club all the positive things that are happening if we can work on that in the summer and then publish in the fall as folks get back And I'd be willing to kind of help on that and then Want to do a graduation so I'm gonna I just want to let folks know I'm gonna try but work many times requires late meetings and some weekends so like this I'm not sure if I'll be able to make all the or at this point I can't commit to any until my work schedule plays out. And then on that note, I wanted to update the board that the next meeting I'll be late because I have a meeting that runs until around 6.30, so I will get here and as soon as traffic allows me, I will be here in the evening.

[15391] Nancy Thomas: Okay. I would like to have staff maybe look into some of the others besides the adult education program where we are providing service to other than our own students or staff. And that would be the induction program. We have said that we don't want our programs to subsidize non-students, non-employees. And I'd like to see that the budget reflects that we're not doing that for that program. I'd also like to ask about the summer swim program. It was in the budget, but there was no revenue attached to it in the past. The revenue has not equaled the expenses for that program. Well, OK, well, OK, well, I'd like to ensure that it does pay for itself, number one. Number two, I'd like to know if the schedule for the certificated people running the program is somehow, what that is. Is it some kind of, is it their per diem rate? And if so, how do you justify that? It seems awful expensive in terms of the salaries that we're paying for the summer program. So just to make sure that that program is not costing the district any money. So that's it. Thank you. OK. Superintendent? I have nothing at this time. OK. Thank you all. Meeting adjourned.

No minutes available.