Special Meeting

No content available.

[12] Nancy Thomas: We discussed public employee discipline dismissal release, conference with labor negotiators for NTA and CSCA, conference with labor negotiator for NEWMA, unrepresented supervisors, and contracted management. And we discussed the superintendent's contract and his performance evaluation. No action was taken. Please join me for the pledge. of the United States of America, and to the republic for which it stands, one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. I would ask for someone to make a motion to approve the agenda. I'll move to approve. Second. Member Preciado moves. Rodriguez seconds. Please vote. Five ayes. Thank you. Superintendent's report.

[89] SPEAKER_19: Thank you President Thomas, members of the board, ladies and gentlemen. I have a few items just to remind everyone on the board. The first item is the CSBA conference will be November 29th to December 1st in San Francisco. I was just curious if anyone from the board's wanting to attend that. I know Char and I are planning to attend, and I think this is the first year Char is able to attend and get the training specific to her role, which is very unique. So you don't have to answer now, but just let us know if you're planning on attending. Let Char know so we can make those arrangements if you're planning.

[126] SPEAKER_26: because it's in San Francisco, it's a good conference to go to because there's no additional cost in terms of lodgings, that type of thing. And regardless of who's on the board, I think we want to encourage the whole board to go. So I would think that we would put down the fives for whoever, as we have an election coming up, we would make sure that those people on the board go. So rather than identifying as being an individual name.

[160] Nancy Thomas: I think we decided not to approve any travel or conferences for the board because of the budget situation. So unless board members are willing to pay their own way, I don't think we can go.

[177] SPEAKER_26: What is the cost?

[180] Nancy Thomas: The cost is usually about $400 or $500. The person?

[184] SPEAKER_28: Yeah, we said in line with what was happening that we were not going to pay for travel or lodging unless we paid for it ourselves for the time being.

[196] SPEAKER_26: You can also go one day. It can be a one day thing. You don't have to go all three days.

[202] SPEAKER_19: We can share the information with the board and you guys can also go.

[204] Nancy Thomas: But I mean, we cannot charge. The district cannot pay for our conference attendance. Although I think if we find any extra money and we want to adjust the agenda, I mean the budget, that's something we can talk about in the future.

[222] SPEAKER_26: When does the reduction of price go away?

[227] SPEAKER_19: This Friday, August. OK. The next item is, unless there's more questions about that, I'm sorry to interrupt. We will be having a follow-up FCMAT visit at no cost to us because we actually paid for it already. On September 7th, it's no cost to the district and they're going to come back and assess our progress on implementing the recommendations that were included in the last report. So I just wanted you to be aware of that. I know there was something that the board member Thomas had brought forth to us and we took advantage of it. So they're coming. A couple more updates and then I'll come to a couple of things I want to discuss with you. I have scheduled a meeting with the Cadango leadership. So that's in the works and I should be coming back soon with just how that partnership is going and how we can strengthen that partnership. A couple of things coming. The district leadership team retreat is on Friday. from 8 to 10.30 that we invited the board to attend if you're able to attend any portion of that. That's really going to be the portion where I share with the principals and management the change model, continuous improvement model and just some leadership research and definitely welcome to have the board there and certainly the board president or if one of you wants to speak on behalf of the board we would welcome that. And again on August 20th we're gonna have a short welcome for all teachers. And I'd also like either the president or one board member to make some comments on behalf of the board as a welcome to teachers at that. We'll send you those dates as well. But I know there was a, one of the, we had to make a correction on the invite that was sent to you, so it is on the 10th, not on the 9th. So just a clarification. And on the horizon, I'm starting this new section in my report is really on the horizon, upcoming board meetings and what's kind of in the ingredients for that next board meeting. On the 21st, we'll have a board workshop. I would like to do a board workshop relative to updating the strategic plan. We've added more information into section in the strategic imperative two around FCMAT. We might have more information about that, as well as imperative number three, which is communication and trying to beef that up, including enrollment strategy, enrollment committee that we have with our bargaining units. And we're also looking for some additional staff reports from finance relative to this progress monitoring idea that the board wants to see, kind of the percentage of budget. Are we on track, off track, behind? So Lowell's been working with me on that. And underneath that kind of imperative three, I am looking closely now at of how we enroll students in our district. I've asked, I'm trying to assemble a team right now, Amy Black, Letty, Bill Witten, a few other folks to help us really look at how, first of all, can we improve our online enrollment and get away from paper, pencil? Also, can we make it easier for returning parents to enroll and stay enrolled instead of having to fill out a giant packet? Is there just updates we could provide? And studying how can we improve it overall. I know that it's come to my attention there's several people that wait a long time to hear back from us. And I worry that any delay in getting back to people we end up losing enrollment. So those are some things we're looking at. So we're going to be looking at kind of a deep analysis of how's it working and what's the best way to look at that. And just looking at other models of how it's done so it's more consistent and customer friendly. Those are all the things I wanted to share with you. I don't know if you have any comments or direction for me on anything.

[481] Nancy Thomas: OK.

[482] SPEAKER_19: That concludes my report.

[484] Nancy Thomas: OK, next we move on to public comment on non-agenda items. Ms. Parks.

[497] Cindy Parks: Hi, I was just kind of wondering where the June warrants were. They weren't a part of the packet.

[506] SPEAKER_38: Yeah.

[511] SPEAKER_28: So I thought, so we don't go back and forth. We give the community their three minutes to speak, and then, and that's it, because then we're interrupting. Yeah, I'm just asking why the chair is there.

[520] SPEAKER_26: OK, that's it. That's it. OK, thank you.

[523] SPEAKER_28: So then, and then it's up to staff to decide whether or not they want to respond.

[526] Nancy Thomas: The board president's prerogative is to ask direct staff to respond to the employee. I would suggest that you get back to Ms. Parks by email. Thank you. Okay. Next we'll move on to Old Business 8.1, the MOU with Ohlone for teens, kids and teens.

[559] SPEAKER_40: Yes, good evening. I wanted to note that I do have an amended copy. We had some questions that were, there was some confusing language in the published MOU, so we've got copies in the back of the room and also at the dais for you. The amount hasn't changed, but I do want to clarify that there was a couple of typos about the number of Title I schools, so there are five. and not four, and so that change wasn't made, and it is now made. And also some clarity around item number nine on the MOU that speaks to the total amount for the Title I schools, which is 88,000, and that's the total with 44,000 for each semester. A little bit about this item. If you recall, in our LCAP last year, we wanted to provide some after-school services for our students, so we're doing a hybrid part this year. So that we're having a straightening our partnership with Ohlone College and providing some after school support in intervention for our students in mathematics and language arts and some drop in tutoring. But additionally, we want to also in accordance with providing something for all of our students in the area of science. and some of the wonderful work that they do with STEAM. And so that will be for all sixth grade students at all of our elementary schools. So it's a two part where this is outlined in the LCAP. And there will also be additional opportunities for our teachers to provide after school targeted intervention also. But we wanted to get an early start. So we heard you. And this would be slated to start right at the beginning of the school year.

[652] Nancy Thomas: Any questions by board members? Ms. Crocker.

[658] SPEAKER_26: We noticed that there was some money that was not spent last year in terms of the after-school so this will take care of that problem.

[666] SPEAKER_40: Yes that's our expectation. I think I'm speaking going back to what the superintendent's mentioned earlier about some more targeted progress monitoring. This is part of the plan and so we're starting early. There's still some monies in this LCAP. This is not all of the monies that are targeted to in after-school support for students, but this is part of it. We're going to do a hybrid of teacher-directed, but also contracting with an organization such as Ohlone College for our students.

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

[700] SPEAKER_28: I was going to say thank you. I think this is great. This is one of the pieces that we're pushing, and I'd like to move to approve.

[707] Nancy Thomas: I'll second. The motion's been made by Mr. Preciado. Ms. Crocker has seconded. Please vote. Five ayes. Thank you. Next big idea is math. I believe we have a speaker on this. I'll request to speak. Ms. Parks.

[738] Cindy Parks: I didn't see any invoice or contract for this $42,000. And it did say that this was the reason for this increase over the $793,000 that you approved in June was due to an increased enrollment. And without seeing that invoice, I don't even know what targeted age or what you're using. There wasn't any specification as far as where you're expecting to have that increased enrollment. And then one of the caveats in that original purchase was you were only charged a 4% shipping cost. And so not seeing any of this, I don't know whether that 4 percent carried through. And again, have no idea of what is even being purchased here.

[784] Nancy Thomas: Thank you. Does anyone have a comment before I ask a question? Go ahead and ask a question if you want, whatever you want to. Yeah, I'm wondering. two about that, where the extra came from and why.

[810] SPEAKER_40: When we did the ordering and brought the item to the board, as you know, there are shifts throughout the district of students. And so K-12, we did see a change in the nature of the student population across the district. And so this speaks to it. Additionally, there's also the need to adjust for tax. And so that also speaks to it. But we could not just go ahead and do the added cost to this. We needed to come back to the board as you had already approved a ceiling. I do want to say that in terms of consumables, this is year one of eight years of consumables and access to the online. Certainly we have the whole packet, the whole invoice that we can certainly share with the board, but this is basically the difference to close the gap of the shift in students. At our upper grade, at our high school, we have textbooks. At the lower grades, we have the consumables, and so it was a K-12 in addition to tax. We did also have the break on the shipping, and so that did continue. That was something that our department did really a nice job with brokering with the publisher and giving us the break on shipping as well.

[886] Nancy Thomas: So you've negotiated, since we had approved the budget, there has been a in the number of students that we expect to enroll? How is that working?

[898] SPEAKER_40: The types of students. So textbooks were a little bit more expensive at the high school versus a child who's just going to have the consumable. And then also there was a shift in the tax. So there's also a difference in taxes and tax. But the shipping, we did get a break on the shipping. So we have the complete

[918] Nancy Thomas: I think in case like this, we should really have an adjusted proposal that shows the adjustments in each piece, if it's a tax piece or if it's more expensive books. And so it's like a, so the board has information, because there's no information other than, well, we need to approve $44,000 more, but part of it is tax, part of it is a change in enrollment. I think we are not kind of handling this agenda item like we should.

[958] SPEAKER_26: Member Crocker. I also checked with Ms. Silliness concerning the cost of that versus getting the right to do our own printing. It indicated to me that it's a lot cheaper for them to do the printing than for us, which is counterintuitive for me. I always thought it was cheaper for us, but even with the shipping cost. So my concern has always been consumables, because having been a teacher in a classroom, when the money is short, you don't have the ability to print out. So these are consumables that are paid for for eight years, this contract. And so it will be the one expense for eight years, which I'm excited to see some sort of a coordinated math program K through 12. I think it's marvelous. So, thank you.

[1013] Nancy Thomas: I will move to accept. Ms. Corker moves. Mr. Rodriguez seconds. Please vote. Five ayes. Thank you. Next, we move on to for a district wide facilities master plan and deferred maintenance plan and we have a speaker on this miss parks.

[1063] Cindy Parks: I would hope that the plan would be to do an assessment, to forecast enrollment, look at traffic patterns, the utilization of the current facilities, and the student capture rate. I think that that was quite surprising when you saw that earlier this year. I'm sure that we will see different models. I would hope we would see different models when the plans come forward. But once you have that assessment, then that's when you should be kicking in the community engagement component. Some issues the community will be looking at, school. Is there a true need for a new school in area 3. Since cherry is a traffic thoroughfare in the morning. What would be the additional impact of that school were to be built. With this drive a closure of another school. But the district consider another. Restructuring of the Which team building exercise, which is the way I took, the way those PowerPoint presentations were presented, that's what they reminded me of, was team building exercises, not true input sessions. Shown in the PowerPoint, aren't going to be addressed. Are these meetings going to be like the financial input meetings, touted as input but truly just informational? Or are these community engagement meetings being used to manipulate the community into supporting another bond measure? I hope ADIS is going into this endeavor to provide the best master facilities plan and deferred maintenance plans without being unduly influenced.

[1162] Nancy Thomas: Thank you. Board?

[1166] SPEAKER_26: Can someone speak to?

[1167] SPEAKER_19: We do have ADIS here to present. Oh, good. Please. Ann, would you please introduce yourself and your team that's with you? And I know you have a short presentation. That will be short.

[1180] SPEAKER_17: Thank you, Superintendent Sanchez and Board of Trustees. I'm Anna Harrison. I'm with ADIS Architects. I'm the Senior Design Strategist in charge of stakeholder engagement. And I brought with me my colleague, Shoray. And she is our Assistant Project Manager.

[1195] SPEAKER_19: Is her microphone on?

[1201] SPEAKER_17: Maybe I need to get closer?

[1202] SPEAKER_19: I just want to make sure it's on.

[1212] SPEAKER_17: So I have a short presentation for you. I'm going to use my notes so that it keeps me on task and going quickly. So the stakeholder engagement does focus on the quality, the qualitative data that feeds into a facility's master plan. the quality of the educational experience. In addition to that, we are collecting quantitative data. So we look at every site, we do site assessments, we look at the demographers reports, we look at site usage, all of the quantitative data. So both of these pieces, qualitative and quantitative, come together to form your facility's master plan. The focus of my presentation today actually is on the stakeholder engagement piece, not the facility's assessment piece. Is this my clicker?

[1260] SPEAKER_19: Let's see. But facilities assessment is part of the work, correct?

[1263] SPEAKER_17: Absolutely. And it actually goes on concurrently. And it actually comes in right before every meeting with a campus. We meet, we are on site. So we're very literate about what the campus is when we're doing our engagement. Let me see if I can do this. Okay. So the goals of stakeholder engagement are both universal and customized, and we use the three E's, engage, explore, and envision. Engaging with a diverse group of stakeholders, teachers, students, administrators, leaders, staff, gives us a diverse viewpoint, and we hear all voices. And then together, we explore the intersection between facilities, district facilities, and the district educational vision. So we're looking at your district as a STEAM district. We know you want socio-emotional learning to be very prominent. And facilities do play a role in these, so we explore those intersections. And then together we envision the transformation of the district based on a set of guiding principles that the stakeholders develop through our interactive workshops. One of the workshops that we propose starting with is a district facilities visioning session. This is the stakeholders from the entire district. An example of this is a stakeholder engagement facilities visioning that we did for the Eastside Union High School District. This is a little sample of some of the workshop materials and the preparation. And yes, it is like planning a wedding. Here's some images of a student, and maybe you recognize the gentleman in the right, in the lower right, working on one of our activities, which is what is, what are the qualities of an ideal learning environment to you? Here you see cross-functional teams working on filling out their vision statements. Here you see cross-functional teams presenting their vision boards that they've developed to describe the physical attributes of the ideal learning environment. And then here you see a visual representation of our data crunching. So you can imagine hundreds of post-it notes, lots and lots of data, lots of presentations. The wordle on the left gives you an idea of kind of what are the emerging themes that the district has, that the district stakeholders find important. And then we distilled all that information into 10 statements. And these are the statements that guide the facility's master plan. We took those 10 statements to each campus site and had the campus develop strategies on how they were, their campus was going to meet these guiding principles. We turned those strategies into some conceptual site plans for the master plan. And of course, a little quantitative data, some cost estimating obviously goes along with it. And there's two, there's levels of cost estimating down to how many, you know, roofing repairs and ADA accessibility and, you know, aging buildings getting modernized all the way up to how to meet those guiding principles. We also work on project phasing, so we make some literate recommendations on how things might be phased to be most cost effective. One of our favorite engagement strategies is design thinking, and this is one that we use to find those intersections between educational vision and physical facilities. So we start by coming to an understanding, a shared understanding of what the educational vision is, a description of it. So everyone in the district, whether you're a teacher and you're really familiar with all these terms, or maybe you're a parent or a community member not so familiar, so we kind of create and establish an understanding. Of course, STEAM is a big component of the Newark Unified School District. We take them through a short explanation of design thinking based on the Stanford d.school model and we actually go through all five phases of design thinking with our workshop participants. Empathy, define, ideate, prototype and test. So, design thinking begins with empathy. Workshop participants are put in cross-functional pairs, so a teacher might be with a staff member, a student might be with an administrator, and they interview each other after they're given a prompt question. And the idea, the focus of empathy is about listening, asking questions, keeping an open mind, and letting go of assumptions. Once they've established empathy, the pairs move into the define and ideate stage. So the prompt for this particular workshop that you're seeing some samples of was improve the learning experience for your partner. So the interviews were about focused on what do you need to learn, what do you need to have the ideal learning experience and why, why, why. So we asked why three times, to dig deep, Then they came up with pictures, the images that describe the ideal learning environment. And then those images are turned into three-dimensional prototypes. And they present the prototypes to the partner asking, did I get it? Does this describe an ideal learning environment for you? At the end of this workshop, there is an aha moments. There are aha moments all during it, listening to another person's point of view, understanding the impact of space on learning, physical environment on learning and how learning affects physical environment, physical environment affects learning. And of course, that's our job as facilities professionals. We then take it to the campus master planning level. site transformation based on guiding principles that were established by the district facilities visioning workshop. And here you see the Gilroy Unified School District, Brownell Middle School Campus. They're working on conceptual site planning. They worked in cross-functional teams again and they prepared their site plans and then they had to present and defend them to their peers in terms of the guiding principles. We took their site plans back to the office. We worked with the landscape architect, the civil engineer. We look at parking access, security. We look at site constraints. And there's a voila. This is the conceptual master plan for the Gilroy Middle School. So it's based on learning communities with a verdant central quad, lots of outdoor learning. And of course it meets all of the site requirements and the budget very importantly. And then we take these concepts down to the individual learning environments themselves. So we transform environments based on what we, guiding principles and we use something called the primordial spaces. Have you heard, has anybody heard of the primordial spaces before? So this is a really easy way for anybody to access space in terms of learning. So we use caves, campfires, watering holes, mountaintops, sand pits, and then life, which is the context for everything that we do. And we explain what these crazy primordial spaces are. Caves, for instance, are places where you have learning for introspection, so quiet places. We have a lot of collaborative team environments, and we find that If they don't have cave spaces, kids don't have a chance to self-regulate and do focus quiet work. So we talk about the importance of learning in caves and, for instance, also sand pits. It's kind of the other end of the spectrum, learning by experimentation. Think of maker spaces, fab labs, even an outdoor environment that has manipulatives where kids can build forts, they can make art. These would be sand pits. We show our our workshop participants some examples, so they have some images in their mind of what these spaces might look like. And then we show them spaces for adults as well, because we all need these spaces, too, to access our best learning. We give the workshop participants game pieces and we ask them to create learning environments. This particular exercise, they were tasked with creating a learning community for 150 kids and six teachers approximately. And here they are presenting their learning communities and they had to defend them in terms of meeting all of the primordial spaces, all of the educational vision requirements and all of the guiding principles. So keep, try to keep that picture in your mind and I'll give you another aha, another big reveal. So that turned into this. And this is the model, the prototype for a learning community for a middle school. And as you can see it's very indoor outdoor and if you, I don't know if you can see the connection but we can see it and that's our job is to interpret. And I think I'm pretty good here. So that's a snapshot of stakeholder engagement. And it is the qualitative aspect. The quantitative goes along with it. And we are really delighted to have the opportunity to bring these strategies to Newark Unified School District. And I look forward to your questions.

[1857] Nancy Thomas: Questions?

[1862] SPEAKER_38: I'll move to approve.

[1863] Nancy Thomas: I'd like to. Ms. Corker.

[1872] SPEAKER_26: The proposal that you have listed only talks about these engagement workshops. What are the items that are going to come out of this that we can expect for the $407,000 we're talking about? In other words, we're talking about workshops, but what's beyond that? What kind of items are going to be presented to us so that we know When we are ready to start doing the facilities, we can give this to a construction company and say, this is what we want. Is it going to be ready architecturally for that kind of thing?

[1906] SPEAKER_17: So a facilities master plan is just that. It's setting the vision for how facilities are going to be developed over a long period of time. So we're looking at Vision 2025, Vision 2030. The ideal, we kind of approach it from the aspect of the architect that's receiving the facilities master plan. We want it to be absolutely clear on what the site current conditions are, what we need to fix, and what is the vision moving forward. So as an architect, I get this master plan. and I can really design and transform a campus that's meeting the district's needs. So all of the quantitative data, the assessments of traffic, the assessments of what's working on the campus, what's not working on the campus, where is it flooding, where are things going wrong? That is the existing facilities analysis, and we do that with our engineering partner, which is in our contract. And if you look at the, we have a timeline that we've developed that's pre-developed that you will see. You'll see that they're, they run in parallel. So I'm only here to talk about a short piece of it because.

[1974] SPEAKER_26: I don't see that in the information that we have.

[1979] SPEAKER_19: If you look at the, there is some information in the attachment that is the proposal breakdown option ABC. Right. And maybe that's kind of getting to member Crocker's question is what is the foundational piece that's in each of those options and what are some of the difference in those options that are in front of the boards? I think if I look at the first page of the letter it lists things like master planning, site plan background, cost and phasing, review enrollment information. There was one that I wanted to share that was here. Site planning options. So there's kind of that numerical aspect of what has to happen, and I'm assuming that's in each of the options, but could you kind of expand on that a little bit?

[2036] SPEAKER_17: Sure. You're referring to what we would call boilerplate facilities master plan activities. These are the kinds of things that go into every master facilities master plan that we do, so they're very comprehensive. The stakeholder engagement piece is something that's kind of at the district's, what the district wants it to be, how deep and how broad they want it to be. So we were asked to come up with a sort of a best and final proposal, and all of the basic facilities master plan functions are in the proposal. So you will get the cost analysis, you'll get the site plan layouts, you'll get the detail about facilities. In addition to that, you'll get a very robust stakeholder engagement process where we provide all kinds of data. We document the process. It's in the master plan and we show the connection. So again, this is where we're trying to make the case that when you have a vision and you also have good data, that together that's a facility's master plan. So what you're looking at are our first proposal to you, which was the number of engagements with the campuses that the superintendent had requested. We were asked to go back and take another look. And we actually discovered that we've been asked to do different, to do individual stakeholder engagements with each of the elementary school campuses because we want each campus to have a voice once the guiding principles come down. We were able to propose a cost savings by combining some of those early elementary school engagements. And we actually think that we can leverage cross-pollination that way, and it would be of a benefit. So, you know, personally, I like, I love our first, our first proposal that we gave you. It's great. But thank you for having us go back and look again, because we were able to come up with a cost-saving idea. So that would be option B. Option C gets a little bit where we're actually cutting cutting some of the some of the real meat of the engagement process. So I'm a former teacher. I taught at the community college level. I'm a curriculum developer. And all of these workshops, they ladder and they scaffold each other. So when we take a workshop out, I have to be very careful that I'm still getting the data and still getting the engagement that we need to make good facilities master plan recommendations. So, we look to cut a little bit deeper. We've cut out some one each at the junior high and high school and district level in order to cut it a little bit more. But there's a, you know, there's a cost to that. It won't be, we won't be able to do one of the workshops that we would really love to do.

[2225] SPEAKER_26: This is the total price for everything. Correct. It's not just for the workshops. So it's for everything that you're doing. Yes. What is the total amount of money that we have to spend on facilities? Just looking to see the proportion of this as compared to our total budget for facilities. Do we have that?

[2245] SPEAKER_20: Well, in terms of the, actually there are three funding sources for this project. There's the bond fund, there's a certain amount that can be paid from Fund 40, which is the Russian money. And then there's also a portion of this project that can be paid with government funds. So you have those three sources of funds. And I don't know the exact total of those offhand, but it should be in the $15 million range for the current balance for those three sources of funds.

[2289] Nancy Thomas: believe measure G has about 12 million and then developer fees has is okay so anyway there that's the amount we have but there's more than that

[2326] SPEAKER_20: Yeah, it's over $10 million in the Russian funds, as you were saying. Developer fees is approximately close to $10 million as well. So it's been over $20 million.

[2351] SPEAKER_28: Go ahead. I was going to say, so in terms of are you trying to figure out

[2356] SPEAKER_26: What percentage are we paying for this compared to what we have money spent, to be spent? In other words, if we've got a budget of $20 million, if that's what we have for facilities, then is this a reasonable amount to spend for it, is my comment. Just looking at rule of thumb, we're talking about half a million, so half a million goes, is what percentage of $20 million? Quick math, I was not doing it right in front of me.

[2382] Nancy Thomas: I think also, though, it's a $24 million Sure. It's a long-term visioning piece which, you know, our current funds certainly won't cover everything that we come up with as a vision for the future. Mr. Nguyen?

[2403] SPEAKER_38: I'm not necessarily certain that we should equate services or contracted services with a ratio of the budget. And back to what President Thomas was saying, it doesn't speak for the future of possible funding. But I think we're paying for the service, a set service, not necessarily a sliding scale based on our budget. I think that would be.

[2430] SPEAKER_26: But if we have $5 million, it's a lot different in terms of what we would need versus if we have more money.

[2434] SPEAKER_38: Well, no, the need still exists. Whether we have $5 million or $500 million, the need still exists, and the need to create a master strategic plan for facilities still exists regardless of our budget size. Now what we're able to do and execute would be different, but the need doesn't change.

[2452] Nancy Thomas: Mr. Nguyen, would you be willing to share with the board your experience in both the master plan itself that your district received as well as the engagement piece that you participated in?

[2468] SPEAKER_38: Overall it was very positive and that's why I made the recommendation to approve. We've discussed this previously and I think at the previous meeting it was down to fine-tuning and this presentation is the fine-tuning aspect of it. But overall it was a positive experience. The scatter, the word scatter is what I call it, is actually very reflective of where our district is headed towards and what we wanted. And so it produced a very positive outcome.

[2505] Nancy Thomas: I'm hearing you sort of recommending option B because this cross-pollinization and that you can combine several sites together, that would save us almost $19,000. I feel comfortable with option B. Mr. Rodriguez, and then, oh, sorry, Mr. Preciado, and then Mr. Rodriguez.

[2537] SPEAKER_28: I was just going to go to that point of member Nguyen made a motion, but I wanted to clarify two things. Which option, and then if anyone's going to second it.

[2546] Nancy Thomas: Oh, I didn't hear you make a motion. He said move to approve. I moved to approve.

[2549] SPEAKER_38: I didn't specify the option, but I'm OK with option B as well.

[2552] Nancy Thomas: Oh, I'm sorry. I didn't hear that. There was no second to it.

[2558] SPEAKER_28: But we let member Rodriguez speak and then we can bring it back.

[2564] Ray Rodriguez: I don't mind seconding the motion because we're in discussion stage anyway. I agree with member Nguyen. Whether we have a million dollars or whether we have $10 million, the fact is that we're looking at approving a half million dollars worth of expenditures for a master plan and that's a lot of money. So when I look at your proposal here, it shows campus visits and it's about one-fourth of the total. And can you take me through that a little bit so I have a better understanding on how that works as far as campus visits?

[2612] SPEAKER_17: In terms of stakeholder engagement visits or site assessment visits? Because both will happen.

[2619] Ray Rodriguez: Okay, well, you have your campus visits, so, you know, just. For instance, elementary, you have two per site for a total of 65. I just need a better understanding of what that entails.

[2631] SPEAKER_17: Sure, so.

[2632] SPEAKER_28: I was just going to say, I think. Oh, can we go to. The presentation you just outlined, I think. I did. Yeah, it just.

[2639] SPEAKER_17: It's in there. Yes.

[2640] Ray Rodriguez: Right, yeah. Do you want to? It didn't really clear it up for me, so if you don't mind.

[2644] SPEAKER_17: I was going very fast. Yeah. If you look at the Eastside Union High School District, that first, yeah, the first couple slides. Back. So we have presented, we will do something slightly different from this for you, but this is a good idea. Sorry, I'm going backwards. So, we have this district visioning workshop and it's at the district level because we want to create an idea of what the whole district vision is. And then the very first campus visit, we would take that district vision to the campus and we do, A variety of things. For Eastside Union High School District, we did what's called a SWOT analysis, strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, threats, you may be familiar with that. We took all the 10 statements. We had every, we had the campus committee rate their, how they thought the campus was doing in terms of the 10 statements. The campus is welcoming and has a clear identity. The campus encourages supportive social interaction. The campus is eco-friendly. And we had them rate the campus in terms of meeting these guiding principles that came from the district facilities workshop. And as you can imagine, when we talk about how to make a campus welcoming and with a clear identity, there are physical facilities solutions to that. If we're just trying to, you know, replace an aging paint on the front of a building, that is like a vision-less facilities fix. But if we have a vision of creating an identity and creating a welcoming environment, We would approach it differently. We would create seating outside so that people can come in and greet each other. We would create transparency so that you can see through the campus possibly. So it just brings a different level of understanding to what we can do with facilities. So our campus committees get an opportunity to tell us where they think their campus is currently and what they think the opportunities are. We document their opportunities and then turn them into conceptual site plans. Second meeting, we bring those site plans back. Did we get it? Can you see it? Are you feeling it? Is this what you meant? What else can we do? And it makes them campus committees and all of our stakeholders very good consumers of design information. They understand why we're putting certain facility enhancements in place, why we're making recommendations, because they come directly from their own strategies.

[2816] Ray Rodriguez: And that was really my point, not to interrupt you, but the engaging the stakeholders at each campus, and then it becomes our vision as opposed to just you telling us what needs to be done.

[2827] SPEAKER_17: I wish I'd said that. Yes, exactly.

[2830] Ray Rodriguez: Thank you.

[2831] Nancy Thomas: Okay, I'd like to, oh, Mr. Preciado?

[2834] SPEAKER_28: Go ahead and make the motion and then I'll have one last piece.

[2837] Nancy Thomas: Okay, well, I would honor Mr. Nguyen's original motion.

[2846] SPEAKER_28: If you can just do it again, the motion for option B. I'd like to move for option B. Pardon?

[2851] SPEAKER_38: I'd like to move for option B, please.

[2853] Nancy Thomas: Okay, I would second that. I already had seconded.

[2856] SPEAKER_28: Oh, okay. And my question to staff would be, there's three funding sources that if we can narrow down because from I think the conversation we had last time I think or maybe it's just me that was leaning towards the developer fees because it was a direct correlation between new development and how we're moving forward but I don't know if there's some sort of requirements that we that would limit us if we just there's that yes there are our requirements

[2891] SPEAKER_20: limiting requirements in terms of how the developer fees are used. That's probably the most restrictive of the three sources. So what's on my agenda is to work with ATIS once a plan is approved and explaining the three sources to them and working with them on how they would invoice the district for the three funding sources that we have. So I can't give you a percentage right now. I'd have to work with them on developing that.

[2927] SPEAKER_28: Well, I don't know if we could do this, or if this is just my personal opinion, but if we could do the Fund 250 would be the first that you would get out of, then the second would be Fund 210 Measure G, and then the third would be the Russian sale, which is probably the reverse order of restrictive, but that would be

[2947] Nancy Thomas: Well, I agree. I think that as much as we can get charged to developer fees, we should. Oh, absolutely. And then secondly, if it fits within Measure G and the budget and the work that still remains, which I think our staff has to discuss that with you, there's work that probably takes precedent for Measure G that's kind of unfinished, like HVAC units, then, you know, the percentage that we might be able to charge to measure G would be impacted by any kind of requirements or kind of... By the language of the ballot. Yeah, but then the Russian money I think should be the last that we tap into.

[2994] SPEAKER_20: Thank you for that.

[2997] SPEAKER_28: What's that priority order?

[3006] SPEAKER_26: Is that something that we're including in the motion? I don't know that we need to include that in the motion.

[3010] Nancy Thomas: It's just direction to staff on parsing out. Okay, please vote.

[3012] SPEAKER_16: Five ayes. Thank you very much. Thank you so much.

[3035] Nancy Thomas: Yeah, congratulations to us.

[3039] SPEAKER_19: We'll come back with the actual breakdown once we know it. Report that to the board. OK.

[3046] Nancy Thomas: Thank you. Next, we have the wish list for Birch Grove Primary Elementary. And do we have anyone to speak on that?

[3056] SPEAKER_28: No. I'll second.

[3060] Nancy Thomas: Who made the motion?

[3062] SPEAKER_28: Member Witt.

[3063] Nancy Thomas: Member Nguyen moved approval. Member Preciado seconded it.

[3070] SPEAKER_26: I have a request. Ms. Crocker. Looking at the map for that, I'm wondering, there's a distance of probably 15 feet, 20 feet between the end of the building and the fence. Does that offer the protection that the fence, I assume the fence only comes from the right hand, as you look at the building, the right hand corner and goes around to the office. It's a very limited spot. So there's that whole distance on the backside of the multipurpose room and I want to make sure that that maintains the integrity of the campus being closed. Yes, there are two gates that are there actually.

[3119] Nancy Thomas: Ms. Condon, do you mind coming forward and answering that question at the podium?

[3130] SPEAKER_42: There's a gate that surrounds the multipurpose room that would block the entrance into the schoolyard from that side. So if you go around the campus, if you go around the back of the multipurpose room, it immediately is closed off by a gate that goes into. I mean, if somebody's going to get in, they're going to get in, period. They're going to cut the gate or whatever. Agreed. They'll do the same thing in the front.

[3152] SPEAKER_26: Is there a reason why this fence was not included across that 15 feet? Does it cost?

[3160] SPEAKER_42: I don't think that that was, there's already a gate there. I don't think it was necessary to put in another. We can check, but I don't believe that.

[3168] SPEAKER_26: In terms of the appearance of the school.

[3170] SPEAKER_42: You don't see that gate from the appearance of the school.

[3173] SPEAKER_26: From the back. Right. But if you want, if you want the whole campus to be surrounded in a visual kind of thing.

[3183] SPEAKER_42: They're not behind that. They shouldn't, there shouldn't be anything on that side of the. Agreed. Okay, so. visually what they'll see is the gate that's being put in. And it will block.

[3196] SPEAKER_26: I know the area you're talking about, yeah.

[3198] SPEAKER_42: Am I saying that right?

[3200] Nancy Thomas: Yeah.

[3201] SPEAKER_42: Okay.

[3201] Nancy Thomas: I have a question about access on the weekends. Will these gates automatically lock and therefore groups that are used to using the fields on the weekends, would they be able to get access to the fields?

[3217] SPEAKER_42: Anyone that uses these facilities during the weekend should be going through the Facilitron program and custodians will be opening gates. It should not be open so anybody has access in and out. Or what is the purpose of spending the money on a gate in the first place?

[3232] Nancy Thomas: Well, I think the gate is for security, but when we had the Lincoln proposal, the community wanted access to the Lincoln fields. families, anyone without having to go through Facilitron to just get in and be using the play structures or whatever is there.

[3253] SPEAKER_42: I understand that but personally I think that they have parks to do that and our facilities should be done through the school district. You have a Facilitron for usage in there. Certain people can use facilities as long as the district knows what's going on. Having anyone go in I think you know opens other issues.

[3275] SPEAKER_19: If I may. What I recall was the issue was going to be to create some more positive signage at each school. I think that my sense from the board is we want community that lives near schools to be able to access the school at least just using the yard or walking your dog or whatever. And when I had a conversation with the Lincoln community and some of the teachers there and some of the parents there, they actually were asking for, can you help us with just a stronger signage that says, you know, certainly we have all the standard no tobacco, but just things like if you use our campus, just pick up after yourself and, you know, close the gate behind you type of a thing. So we can bring that back to the board for further discussion. But that was my impression from the board kind of majority was at no point was Facilitron designed to not let people use a playground at a school in their backyard.

[3336] Nancy Thomas: Yeah, I think we should be consistent at all of our campuses about access on the weekends.

[3342] SPEAKER_28: So maybe that's something we bring back, but it's not part of this.

[3345] SPEAKER_19: Not part of this. Let me bring that back in more of a formal agreement or something.

[3350] Nancy Thomas: It's been moved and seconded. Did you get that? OK, please vote. Oh, wait a minute. You need to clear it.

[3367] SPEAKER_19: Five ayes, thank you.

[3371] Nancy Thomas: Next we move on to new business, item 9.1.

[3385] SPEAKER_19: Lowell has a presentation.

[3396] SPEAKER_20: Well, we have our 45-day budget revision for you, which has had some discussion over the past few days. And as just a conceptual piece in terms of what the state budget did to all school districts, I think from a legislative or the governor's perspective, they'd say, well, we gave you a little less money up front on the first year, but we made up for that. by giving you ongoing money over the future. So by the time three years is up, you're more than made whole for the amount of funds that were taken away the first year. So just conceptually, that's what the state did. And we'll go through the details here so you can see exactly how that impacts the district. So I don't want you to think that you've got less money overall from the state than they were originally promising. They just gave you less the first year and made up for it with the ongoing money in the out years. So here we go in terms of the presentation. This 45-day budget update is a requirement in the education code. More than 45 days after the governor signs the budget, we are required to show the public what that state budget did to our budget. So that's what this presentation is all about. And so the major changes were two things. One is they gave us a little increase in ongoing money, from a 3% increase to a 3.7% increase. So that was good. On the downside, they took away some of our one-time discretionary money. They reduced it. They were going to give us $344 per student, but they reduced it down to $184 per student. So that's the one-time money they reduced. So how does that impact Newark Unified? Well, on the increase side, going from 3% to 3.7, increases our ongoing money by $361 $1,000 a year. That's good. But on the downside, that decrease in one-time money reduced our revenue by $921,000 for this year. So the net reduction for this year is about $560,000. Remember, we're going to make that up over the next two years. But for this year, we're showing $560,000 less revenue than what we thought we were going to be getting. So go on here. We show, you know, specifically what that does to our adopted budget where we do have an increase in our bottom line by $155,000. We were showing a positive. you know, no deficit spending. But instead, we're having deficit spending of $404,000 for this year. So that's the net result in terms of our reserves. Our reserves ending balance is still well above the 3% requirement. At 4 points, you know, went from 4.2 million to 3.7 million. And just so you know that in terms of the unrestricted ending balance, We ended up with about, just a little over three million in our ending balance. And if you have any questions along the line.

[3637] Nancy Thomas: Yeah, I kind of had a question if you go back to the previous slide. Yes. Okay, the $404,000 is primarily one-time money. Yes. Okay. What is your thought about, how is that money going to be spent because it's one time, number one? And number two, to say we're going to spread it over three years, go into deficit spending next year or this year, and then spread it over three years is kind of depriving us of the ongoing money portion that we might be able to use for negotiations, for example, salaries. So you're taking one-time money and saying, Okay, well, we'll spread that over three years, but it's really the ongoing money that we should be trying to protect.

[3693] SPEAKER_20: Yeah, well, in terms of how the district responds to this reduction in one-time money, you know, there are a couple options. One of the things we've talked about in cabinet today was, you know, are there some large one-time expenditures that we can delay? for a year or two. So that was one of the things that we were focusing on in cabinet today in terms of trying to come up with, you know, see if that's a possibility rather than trying to cut ongoing expenses.

[3731] Nancy Thomas: I mean, I think that the board should be able to weigh in on how we're going to handle this $400,000 deficit, especially since we've been promising the community that we are removing the structural deficit. Now we have to say, well, yeah, we're going to remove it over three years. But we don't know what's going to happen the second, third year out, especially with STRS and PERS, the $700,000 you told me we're going to have to pay in 19-20 for just the increase in STRS and PERS. So it just doesn't seem to me that we should look at that 400,000 as something that we're just going to spend over three years.

[3774] SPEAKER_20: We're looking seriously at what, at, uh, are there some one-time expenditures that are possible to delay? Um, also, uh, the superintendent pointed out, you know, one of his, his major goals is to increase enrollment. And, and certainly if, if we get some increased enrollment with increased ADA that goes along with it, that will go a long way toward reducing that negative as well. And not just in a one-time, but in a long-term.

[3805] Nancy Thomas: I don't know.

[3808] SPEAKER_19: So, but Lowell, what I'm hearing is the board wants to see a plan for how are we going to approach that, and they want to weigh in on the plan.

[3815] Nancy Thomas: Yeah, that's how I feel.

[3816] SPEAKER_20: Is that kind of what I'm sensing? Yeah, we can bring that back.

[3819] SPEAKER_26: I got it. Are you pleased to speak? Sorry. I'm sorry. Are you pleased to speak?

[3824] Nancy Thomas: Oh, Ms. Crocker.

[3826] SPEAKER_26: Yeah, I think that this happens every year. when we try to do a budget before we have the amount of money we're getting, there's always that flex. And so, the statement made by the board is there will be no structural deficit. Now, I voted for the 4 million to allow us flexibility. If there's a time where you have a cash flow problem, then you need to have that to move around, but you have to pay it back. And I don't see it being paid back because it looks like the balance is going down. We want to have a budget that is twice the amount of the required amount. That was our goal. And we're going the other direction. So I think that this is for staff to mess with. I don't think it's for us to mess with. I think this is, you need to look at the programs and what we have. And if the one-time money was there as special stuff, well then we need to postpone special stuff until the money comes in. And then we can spend it on the special stuff. But at this point, we need to maintain the structural budget as being within the amount of money we get from the state. If we get more kids coming in, we get more money coming in, that's wonderful. We can spend it next year. We don't have to spend it this year. And so that was my concern. I object to the $4 million being eaten and being eroded away. And I understand the problem that comes when setting up a budget when we don't know what our income is. I truly understand that. But we have to have a plan to make sure that it doesn't go into the balance that we have. That four million is there as flexibility, but not there to be used. And that was my reason for voting for it years ago.

[3932] SPEAKER_20: Thank you. Next, we show a three-year look at what happens over the next three years with that one-time decrease of the $921,000 this year, and then the increases that would occur from 18-19 through 2021 in terms of the ongoing increase to LCMF. And you can see that by the end of three years, you actually come out about $200,000 to the good. But like you say, that doesn't help you.

[3973] SPEAKER_26: We've lost almost 800,000 in the two years before. So it's not, it turns out to be a negative. In terms of the legalities or what happens, we have to have a budget and there's a time frame which we have to put the revised budget. We haven't spent this money yet, is that correct? So that we have the ability to I hate to accept this because I don't think it goes with what we want to do as a board in terms of the budget. What is the deadline in terms of this going to the state? I'm not sure. You're asking for approval of the budget. No. We're not accepting the report.

[4023] SPEAKER_28: It's an information item. Accepting the report.

[4026] SPEAKER_26: No action. No action? Okay, accepting, I can accept the report, just we disagree. That's all we're doing. That's it. Yeah, okay, that's good. Thank you.

[4036] SPEAKER_28: And then to Member Thomas' point then would be to then have that discussion.

[4039] Nancy Thomas: Yes, during board requests we can ask that that we get a revised budget plan.

[4048] Michael Milliken: Thank you.

[4053] SPEAKER_20: Okay, and below we show the resulting reserves above the 3% although as you point out Other budget considerations enrollment in the ADA need to be carefully monitored. You know if it goes up, that's a good thing But if it goes down you're on current year ADA for this budget year. So if your ADA goes down this year, your projected revenues will go down this year. It's not like the district has had in previous years where you could always rely on the prior year's ADA. That's a floor for you, but right now your budget is based on having more ADA this year. So that needs to be monitored as well. Staffing and other expenditures need to be carefully monitored. guarding against further deficit spending. The LCFF COLA increase also increases the estimated supplemental concentration allocation by about $38,000. And there is a low-performing student block grant and other one-time funding that was approved by the state budget. We still don't have guidance from the Department of Education exactly how that money will be distributed to schools, but that will provide some additional funding for special programs.

[4147] Nancy Thomas: What plans are there for budget development and the beginning of budget development for next year, starting early on that, especially since we will be negotiating a full contract It's not just a one-year. It may be a multiple-year contract. But anyway, the whole contract with our teachers is coming up. You told me there was something like $700,000 in increased STRS and PERS, which is pretty hard to carve out without impacting staffing, salaries, and things like that. So I would just like to. to see what your suggestion is in terms of the need to start negotiations, contract negotiations, as well as the budget development process.

[4200] SPEAKER_20: The superintendent and I actually discussed that today. And he's tasked me with putting together some improved reporting formats for the board for tracking expenditures. And then once your new CBO comes on board, starting right away in terms of budget development for next year.

[4224] Nancy Thomas: Yeah, and I hope that includes a budget advisory committee. I hope that includes a budget advisory committee. Great, thank you.

[4237] SPEAKER_20: Next steps, we have the unaudited actuals coming to you in September. Hopefully that will result in a little bit of an increase to your ending balance. It usually does. First interim then in December on actuals and the second interim budget report in March. And if you would, if you, it sounds like you may want some additional budget presentations during the year in terms of budget planning, that could also be added to those next steps for the district's budget.

[4278] Nancy Thomas: kind of spells out a monthly budget update that we really haven't gotten what they recommended over the past so hopefully with the new CBO we'll be able to do that. Mrs. Crocker?

[4294] SPEAKER_26: I just want to thank you for stepping in. When we had the vacancy it's really good to have someone that's got past experience and that you can hit the ground running and I do appreciate Lowell for for all the work that you're doing.

[4308] SPEAKER_20: So thank you very much. You have wonderful staff here, and they've been extremely helpful. Perfect. In doing as much as I can for the district.

[4316] SPEAKER_26: Right. Thank you so much. Thank you.

[4323] Nancy Thomas: OK, do we have to vote to accept that report or just move on?

[4327] Rachel Bloom: It says we need to accept the report as presented.

[4330] Nancy Thomas: OK. I move to accept. Ms. Crocker moves to accept. Second. Rodriguez seconds. Please vote. Five ayes. Thank you. 9.2 agreement with Zoom services for district wide special ed transportation.

[4362] SPEAKER_40: Yes, this evening we have our Director of Special Education, Jennifer Willis, and we also have the contractor we're bringing forward after a process of an RFP process. So if you have any questions, she's here to answer and we also have the contractor here as well.

[4381] SPEAKER_28: Move to approve. I'll second. Member Nguyen moves to approve.

[4387] Nancy Thomas: Member Nguyen moves to approve. Preciado seconds. Next we can have the discussion. I would like to ask a question. This is a very substantial increase. Is this the same kind of increase other districts are experiencing? Is it because we have more special ed needs or Could we explain the increase?

[4415] SPEAKER_39: It's actually not an increase when you look at all of the transportation costs across all of our vendors. It's just that it's looking like an increase because they're all together. So when you look at what we were spending with Go Green and Orange Cab, it actually came to almost the same amount.

[4434] Nancy Thomas: Oh, so Orange Cab and Go Green combined. OK, I didn't understand that. I thought we were comparing Zoom with go green and.

[4446] SPEAKER_39: Right. It's actually about a lateral.

[4450] Nancy Thomas: And what about the amount of transportation compared to last year.

[4459] SPEAKER_39: It's just a little bit up and it's commensurate with the number of students in special ed that we have.

[4464] Nancy Thomas: So yeah at some point we really need to get a handle on how much we're spending on special ed. Thank you. Does anyone else have any comment or question?

[4477] Ray Rodriguez: I do.

[4478] Nancy Thomas: Yeah, Mr. Rodriguez.

[4480] Ray Rodriguez: Thank you, Ms. Wallace, for bringing this forward. Thank you for coming. Special education, as we all know, encompasses the amount of money that we spend. And we have the SELPA. In the past, we've had Durham, and I know we had to go green, and so this would be a completely new venture for us with the partnership. So I'm sure, Ms. Willis, that you've gone through this thoroughly, and you feel this is a good fit for us. My only question, are they, is Zoom doing other services, like with the SELPA that we have, or with similar SELPAs?

[4532] SPEAKER_10: My name is Eric McAfee. So I'm in charge of the East Bay school partnerships, district partnerships for Zoom. Came to the company about five months ago, nearly six. So it sounds like you're asking are we doing business? Right. Sure. So in the East Bay we transport special ed and have contracts with Arenda, Martinez, Moraga is coming on this year as of today, Oakland Unified School District. Last month we signed a vendor agreement with San Juan Valley Unified for their SPED transportation. The short answer, yes, lots of clients, lots of banners that we could show you, San Jose Unified, lots of big banner names. And it's gone great so far. One of the reasons I think I'm standing here today is because of the endorsements offered from various schools around the Peninsula and Bay Area. So we come to you with a lot of confidence for the year that our service will be something you haven't experienced before to this level. The person I brought with me is actually on the operations side, Noel Yang. So we do very different things at Zoom, but Noel is part of a team that works directly with districts and parents and makes sure that everything in the day-to-day operations, especially transportation, works smoothly. It is a little bit different from what you're used to. We're not a bus company. We are able to do things on the fly. We reach out to the parents of all the fed students, make sure that they have a comfort level with Zoom and how their children are going to be transported. So just a lot of different things. There's a technology piece that makes this a lot different. So I hope that answers.

[4645] Ray Rodriguez: No, it doesn't. Thank you for bringing up the parents. And I was going to just piggyback on that. As everybody knows, special needs parents are very, very engaged in their children's, whether it's transportation, what happens in a classroom. So my question is, if we do have a grievance or a parent is not happy with something, can you kind of take me through that on how you would handle something like that?

[4671] SPEAKER_10: Sure. From the aspect of?

[4675] Ray Rodriguez: Engaging the parent and working with our special ed department, stuff like that.

[4679] SPEAKER_10: OK. Sure. We don't have a lot of that. That's good. And that's true. So do you want to speak to what happens in this? So I'm going to bring Noel over because, again, she's a data ops person, so she could probably answer that.

[4695] SPEAKER_21: So I'm the person that works directly with the parents to arrange the transportation for their children. And I am in constant communication with them. Any time there's an issue with transportation, they are welcome to text me or call me. So I get calls almost every morning dealing with different issues. Basically, if there was an issue, I don't know what kind of issue you'd be talking about, but let's say Yeah, if they don't like the driver, that's fine. We have a huge pool of drivers in the East Bay. We would just happily not assign that driver. We would tell the driver assignment team, never assign this driver to this account or this student. And then we would just assign a new driver. I would work with the parent to ask them for, well, even before the ride start, I work with every parent to see what the needs are for that child to make sure that the child is getting the best transportation they can get without any issues arising or trying to nip everything.

[4763] Ray Rodriguez: So what I was thinking of, it's not really lacking the driver as much as it is the discipline that happens in, because I drove a church bus for a long time and having all the kids. It's just basically the discipline that happens on kids getting along with each other and if there's an issue of discipline on a bus, stuff like that.

[4783] SPEAKER_21: So most of these cars would be their personal vehicles. So it's not like a bus or a van with multiple children. The max would probably be three students. Many of these children are getting transported individually. So if there was an issue with discipline, we would work with parents.

[4805] Ray Rodriguez: Thank you for that. I appreciate it.

[4808] SPEAKER_39: to add something I found really remarkable. When I did the lengthy reference checks and called the other districts that work with them, the very first thing out of the mouths of every single district was, parents love them. It was really quite amazing. And it was because they said things like, parents say they're responsive. When we call and we say there's a concern, they immediately respond in a very positive and professional way.

[4834] Nancy Thomas: Mr. Preciado? I'd just like to call the question. I have a question first, if you don't mind. When you mention Oakland, all of a sudden my ears perked up because Oakland is much, much larger than we are. And if they're newly on board, do you have the vehicles? Do you have the drivers? Are you all set to go at the beginning of the school year?

[4857] SPEAKER_10: Yes. We start with them in a week. One of the neat things about Zoom is that we are not a finite resource. Think of a bus fleet. But we are also not trying to take over Oakland's transportation system. So in many districts, larger districts, San Ramon, Oakland's a great example because, yes, they're giant. We are augmenting something that's in place. We finalize our routes recently because they need to finalize their their busing system first. So then we sort of go in if you think of it sort of like filling in the cracks where children are not able to ride with other children where you know there are. certain needs particular to those students, those sort of are what filters down to Zoom. And so we are not coming and saying, sell all your buses, Zoom is here, this is gonna be, so we can do a lot for them. Oakland, I think we're starting with just about a dozen routes. So we responded to an RFP for Oakland Unified as well, so we were awarded that. I'm sure that will grow as our relationship with OUSD grows, but that's where we are right now.

[4937] Nancy Thomas: Okay, thank you. Please vote. Oh, Ms. Crocker, I'm sorry. Would it be fair to call you the Uber?

[4943] SPEAKER_10: I would prefer you not.

[4946] SPEAKER_26: I don't know, because it sounds like it has that flexibility.

[4949] SPEAKER_10: Yeah, so we always say the easy way to explain us is we're like an Uber for kids, but there's really a thin similarity. The way that we do our background checks, the way that we vet our drivers, we're inspecting vehicles, we're interviewing all of our drivers personally. About one in five people that come to us and say we want to drive for Zoom actually becomes a Zoom driver. So very, very heavy vetting process. So in terms of that alone, we're much different than Uber. The other thing that makes us different, so you know, is Our special ed drivers, the folks that are going to be servicing Newark, are dedicated to special ed transportation. They're not going to drop a student and then go take somebody to the airport. So that's the difference between us and a Newark driver.

[4997] SPEAKER_26: The other question I have is, is this the total cost? Or will it change depending upon the number of students?

[5004] SPEAKER_39: So we never know for sure. This is our best guess. OK. Thank you.

[5009] Nancy Thomas: Please vote.

[5012] Ray Rodriguez: Thank you.

[5015] Nancy Thomas: Five ayes, thank you. 9.3, do we have anyone to speak on that? This is the draft agreement with the city of Newark and McGregor Fields. I have a question or comment, unless one of you wants to speak first.

[5035] Ray Rodriguez: No, but I do want to.

[5039] Nancy Thomas: What I notice, this is different from the last contract that we had for McGregor Fields in that we had priority to use the fields for our students. This says nothing about our use of the field, so it's fully in the city's bailiwick to have this program on our McGregor Fields. They pay a lease of $1 a year, so it's theirs. But the thing that concerns me is that we are sharing in the liability and I'm wondering why we need to share in the liability if we have no skin in the game or whatever you want to call it.

[5088] SPEAKER_19: Okay. If I may make a comment. That's part of why we wanted to bring this to the board for discussion and it's not on for action. We wanted to collect some input from the board Myself and Char, as well as the city liaison committee, would take that input and try to craft and negotiate a new version with some of the board input. So that's why we're here. So that's good feedback.

[5116] Nancy Thomas: So then I do have a question of staff. Is there a need for us to be able to use the fields for any of our needs, as was written into the last

[5131] SPEAKER_19: There may need to be, if we look at the second page which is exhibit A map. I don't know if we need the whole, where the lettering is there, say McGregor fields off to the left as you look at the screen. But the area that's directly behind McGregor campus might be an area I'd like to reserve during the day, during school hours. Where we might need it for an evacuation drill or We want to have a field day. I think a portion of it we could kind of say we want access to during the school day. I don't know if we need access to the full field yet. The other part of the question I have is how long is the term of this MOU? Are we looking at a three year, a five year? I'd recommend we keep it somewhat shorter cycle. The last time this was revisited was I think 87 or something. Those are some of the factors we wanted to talk about with the board.

[5189] SPEAKER_26: When we talk, I'm sorry. No, I'm sorry. When Frankie and I go and talk with them next, we wanted to get your input in terms of what your comments might be.

[5200] Ray Rodriguez: Mr. Rodriguez? There's two different things. Thank you, superintendent and everyone for working on this because it's something that we just keep kicking along. You know, that whole area is I consider it surplus area, and it's something that we might want to do something in the future. And to tie it in for that many years, you know, I'd like to see it on a one-year lease or no more than three. In the area of insurance, this is our property, and we shouldn't be part, I mean, it's granted that we have insurance on all our properties, so that shouldn't really be part of that. We don't share any insurance exposure. We're renting this property to them. It's up to them to have the $2 million policy. And so we don't need to put anything about, in my opinion, about each one maintaining the insurance, because we already have that. And so they are, in essence, leasing this property from us. And they need to meet our requirements. And so that's the two areas. And I like the fact that the water is going to be taken care of from them. And we all like that. So that's something. And I agree with Member Thomas as far as the usage. It's like the event center at the high school. That was a joint agreement. But we basically have primary usage on it. And so again, this is our property. And we should have as much control on it. And if there's a way to do a one year renewable lease, that we at least have a discussion after a year to make sure everything's going OK. And I know you have the agreement in there as far as terminating it.

[5311] SPEAKER_19: Just to be clear for the board, this is totally the first draft as received from the city. So we have not edited this document at all. I did talk with the city manager, let him know that we were going to post this. He said that's fine. It's just a draft form. So we haven't modified it yet.

[5333] SPEAKER_28: Mr. Preciado? So one of the points I wanted to kind of just put in there would be, because I don't know if we get charged for Newark days to have a free booth for the district as part of a promotion, because if it's our land and Newark days is part of it, we should not be getting charged. We do get one. And then the other piece, just as a question, does the city make any money off of the fields? So if you take the total of what they rent, subtract it for the maintenance and any other costs, are they making any money off of it? Because if they are, then we should share in the entity profits.

[5374] Nancy Thomas: Just a point, I have asked that question in the past and they say that they do not make a profit. They lose money.

[5383] SPEAKER_28: that the service yeah that they really do they don't make a profit break even then that's that's fine yeah make sure that it's written the language should the case arise that like Newark days 2.0 is like coming on board and they make like a million dollars for that one okay miss Crocker oh I just I

[5410] SPEAKER_26: We will be discussing it. And I think because we've got 180 day notification, that gives everyone a chance to do it. We are probably not going to have a dramatic change in the school bridge point usage of it. But I think that it needs to be guaranteed to be used during school day. Because I think it is property. They're going to probably balk a little bit and say, well, you need to pay some of the water or some of the maintenance. And so I think that's part of the back and forth.

[5436] Nancy Thomas: Well, yeah. I don't think we've ever used it.

[5440] SPEAKER_26: But if we are looking to increase the footprint of the school and the number of kids in the school, then we have to have fields for them. They have to have that available.

[5450] Nancy Thomas: I don't have a problem because we can have a 180-day notice. I have no problem with giving them a substantial amount of years to lease it.

[5467] SPEAKER_26: OK, thank you. If you have any other ideas, you know, either let Frankie or me know before the meeting. It's in October, I think, so you've got time to think about it and see what the community thinks and what your feelings are.

[5480] Nancy Thomas: Okay. Moving on then to 9.4, the IREDI services. Oh, Mr. Nguyen moves. I'll second. Mr. Preciado seconds. I just had a comment about the fact that it, the purpose and background state that this is diagnostics and yet, and assessment and really it's almost half instruction. So I think that, you know, when we write these things up we should clarify that even though I know 1.8.1 talks about after school learning and other activities. I just think we should try to be precise in our write-ups on the agenda items so the public knows. Call for the question. I'm just getting ready. Please vote. Five ayes. Thank you. 9.5, MOU between Hayward Unified School District and Newark. I move to approve. Mr. Preciado moves.

[5558] SPEAKER_38: I'll second.

[5559] Nancy Thomas: Mr. Nguyen seconds. Please vote. Five ayes. Thank you. 9.6, Declaration of Surplus Instructional Materials.

[5575] SPEAKER_38: Move to approve. Second.

[5576] Nancy Thomas: Mr. Nguyen moves. Mr. Preciado seconds. I just have one question. [Translated] Mr. Nguyen moves. Mr. Precise seconds. I just have one question. [End]

[5582] SPEAKER_28: I have a question in terms of the process. It says let's use a surplus that's obsolete. Does it just get recycled or does it get thrown away?

[5590] SPEAKER_40: First we try to see if there's a way that we can donate. I know we had a lead of an organization that we could possibly donate and I know in years past we've also done that so before we recycle.

[5602] Nancy Thomas: Please vote. Five ayes, thank you. Wait a minute, close and display. Five ayes, thank you. 9.8, change of order. Oh, I'm sorry, resolute. Before you move on.

[5621] Ray Rodriguez: Yes. On the prior item, I thought I seconded. Did you second it?

[5631] SPEAKER_28: I, which one? On the 96.

[5635] SPEAKER_38: On the surplus.

[5640] Nancy Thomas: Sure, do you know who seconded that? OK, could you correct that, please? OK. OK, 9.7. Move to approve. Declaration of Surplus Equipment.

[5660] SPEAKER_36: I move.

[5661] Nancy Thomas: I second. OK, Mr. Nguyen moves. Ms. Crocker seconds. Please vote. Five ayes, thank you. 9.8, change order number six to the contract between NUSD and DL Falk. And we do have a speaker on this, Ms.

[5686] Jodi Croce: Parks. DL Falk, DL Falk, DL Falk.

[5700] Cindy Parks: How many change orders is Newark Unified going to have to experience before they can bid DL Folk goodbye. I'm sure Mr. Wynne was not too happy when he saw this, based on previous comments. 7.7% increase in change orders is absolutely ludicrous. Remember the leak at the high school experience last year in the mat room? The mats were destroyed, and you had to replace them. Well, get ready, because my understanding from the CBOC site tour in April and from the June meeting, our June meeting, that the roof wasn't the only problem. The windows are compromised, so unless you replace them prior to our first big rainstorm, you'll probably be back in the same situation with a flooded mat room. Hopefully, Banner will provide you with this information and there will be plans to address this concern. And I can't wait to bid DL Folk goodbye the sooner the better. What a mistake.

[5751] Nancy Thomas: Thank you. Do we have a motion? Oh, Mr. Nguyen.

[5756] SPEAKER_38: So a few months ago, I thought we we're completely finished with any change orders for T.L. Falk and so that was my understanding of it. I will not vote for any kind of change order for T.L. Falk ever, including this one. So can we move this to another time for discussion or whatnot because this is not, I read Ms. Park, this is not acceptable.

[5783] Nancy Thomas: Yeah, I'd like to see staff weigh in also. I'm very concerned that this is one more, one after another after another, and the boards, you know, it's kind of like, gee, do we have any choice but to vote yes? And if we do vote no, what happens?

[5803] SPEAKER_20: I don't know. Susan will comment or?

[5806] SPEAKER_42: You really don't want to hear me comment. I have no clue about change orders. I have Bill Roberts here. Quite frankly, I'm concerned about a couple things with the roofing. I don't know which, I'm still learning which buildings are supposed to be there. You know I'm fairly new in some of this stuff. There's a building at the high school that I'm concerned about that has a brand new roof. And we're looking at putting spouts, draining spouts, what the hell are you calling them? Downspouts. Downspouts, thank you. that were put on our wall, not by anybody new, they're old, were not even attached to a stud. And we have to put them on, we have to pay extra to get these pieces on. Well, in retrospect, there's no floor in that building. How do you put a roof on a building because it's part of a contract with HVAC that has no floor that you can walk on? I really think that everybody should look at any change orders that come in regarding that roofing and HVAC. So I would just ask for more information and visually go out and see what is being fixed, changed, or used for change orders.

[5895] SPEAKER_20: That's all I can say. So the downspouts, as Susan was saying, were incorrectly installed many, many years ago. And so the contractor was responsible for putting in part of the system, which was supposed to connect to these downspouts. And the downspouts are not attached, correct? Not the contractor's fault. But I think your question is, can we not approve the change order? But the work needs to be done. Can we have it done by a contractor that you have more confidence in? Absolutely, sir. There's nothing about the contract that would require this contractor to do it. I would want to ask about any warranty issues that might occur if we have another contractor do these two pieces. It doesn't appear to be. result in a warranty issue, but I would research that before I would say yes, we're contracted with another contractor. Do you want to not prove this tonight while we do that research?

[5980] SPEAKER_38: Yeah, let's do that and I would be very surprised if it's attached to warranty because if that would lend that one contractor holds a monopoly on services for that particular item. So this change order is not necessarily about the downspouts, it's about the pitch pockets?

[5994] SPEAKER_42: No, we did reject one for the downspouts that we felt we can do internally and not pay another $2,500 just to put three... It was about $5,000-$6,000 for something that could be done by one of our staff in a day, I think. Hence, when I found out there was no flooring in there, it made me concerned too.

[6017] Nancy Thomas: There's just other things, so I would definitely. What was your comment, I'm sorry, about the flooring? I didn't understand.

[6021] SPEAKER_42: The flooring needs to be replaced. I don't know if it's the whole floor or what, but you walk on the floor and the floor is rotted. So how do you, my concern, I don't know where common sense comes into placing orders, but we seem to have a lack of it. I'm sorry, I've always been vocal, I'm sorry.

[6040] SPEAKER_19: You're part of the we. I'm sorry.

[6042] SPEAKER_42: Welcome aboard. Right, and it will be fixed with common sense. Yes, we will. Thank you. Thank you. So when we were looking into the downspouts and I found out about the roof being changed, actually, Robert, was the roof changed or did they put HVAC on that roof over 900 feet?

[6061] SPEAKER_28: So I think we're digressing because we're talking about the change order. If we can figure a way to be like, the question I have is, in terms of the deadline and how it's going to affect the kids. Because we can wait for someone else, but then does that mean that they're not going to, like, how is this going to affect the students, the schools, and like?

[6081] SPEAKER_26: No impact. No impact. Until the rain.

[6087] SPEAKER_28: Can you bring it back with a full further discussion with answers to these questions?

[6091] Nancy Thomas: Maybe other contractors. Or look for another contractor. Mr. Rodriguez and then Ms. Crocker.

[6098] Ray Rodriguez: I don't think you have to bring it back. I think that if staff feels that it can be something that they can handle and we just vote no on the change order and we move on.

[6109] Nancy Thomas: That's true. It's a small enough amount that you don't need to bring it back to us for approval.

[6114] SPEAKER_38: Is that true?

[6116] SPEAKER_18: I don't know where I've heard a discussion about the downspouts, but I don't believe this change order 6 is about the downspouts. Right, it's not.

[6128] Ray Rodriguez: It's about the pitch. Right, the pitch.

[6131] SPEAKER_18: That and the pockets, and then the vents that are also. Yes, we did look at the vents going to the next contractor that's got to do the air conditioning units that you're going to do next summer, I think. We did look at that. That is still a possibility. The problem is that you've got a roof that there's so much compression of air underneath it, it floats. It does this. That's why the architect some months ago decided that we need to put the vents in so it'll keep that roof from from floating, and that's part of that six. The pitch pockets that are in there is in the contract, you had to put in a boot, as you would say, when you got pipe coming out of the roof and going somewhere else, you got to put a boot in there, and it's got to be eight inches. There's several of them in your house. As a matter of fact, there's probably 12 to 15 of them in this change order where you can't put an eight-inch booth, so you got to come in there, and you got to put a pitch pocket in there. So you wrap it, put the pitch in it, and all that. So that's part of it, which wasn't part of that contract. The vents are not part of that contract either. It's just that the guy happened to be on site. His price was better than our first estimate. And that's the only reason that change order six is out there. I will tell you, though, that they're going to power wash all the roofs this week before school starts. So they've got like a half a page of punch list that's left to do as far as I know. the only one. I'd like to say in three years, this is the sixth changeover you've gotten.

[6225] Nancy Thomas: Ms.

[6225] SPEAKER_26: Crocker and then Mr. Wynn, is there another contractor that can do this?

[6232] SPEAKER_18: Yes. You can get it. The issue with the vents is that you're going to have to use Andy's roofing, who actually roofed that roof, or you void your warranty. You're talking about capture. That is a capture. When you start, when you put a roof on, That warranty is tied to that product, and it's also really tied to that contractor. So it's historic.

[6258] SPEAKER_26: But the pitch pockets, someone else can do that?

[6261] SPEAKER_18: Pitch pockets, and my personal opinion, can be done by whomever. The problem is that if you get a leak, the contractor who put that roof in is not going to be able to tell him that it's his issue. Because you're going to mess with the warranty. It's another warranty issue.

[6282] SPEAKER_26: So you're talking about the roof contractor is connected with Falk? I'm sorry? Is the roof contractor?

[6289] SPEAKER_18: The roofing contractor is Andy's Roofing who works under Falk.

[6294] SPEAKER_38: He's the subcontractor. Can you tell me how this pitch pocket, is it unforeseen?

[6303] SPEAKER_18: It should have been. If I remember looking at that, there was a drawing of it. And what it is, it's like you'll have a A piece of conduit that comes up, maybe it's four inches. Right. With an LB on it.

[6313] SPEAKER_38: So when they did the scope walk and sidewalk, how was that not seen? How is it unforeseen?

[6320] SPEAKER_26: I'm sorry? Why is it a surprise?

[6323] SPEAKER_38: I'm sorry.

[6327] SPEAKER_26: I'm sorry.

[6327] SPEAKER_38: No, it's not your fault. When they did the initial scope walk, why wasn't that seen? How is this an unforeseen addition?

[6339] SPEAKER_18: That's really never been an unforeseen condition.

[6341] SPEAKER_38: But that's what it states in the change order.

[6343] SPEAKER_18: Yeah, there's about 12 of those out of probably 200 of them that's on your roofs that could not fit in the 8-inch standard cup. Yeah, it's a cup.

[6357] SPEAKER_38: So it sounds like the contractor missed 8 of the 200 elements, right?

[6362] SPEAKER_18: We discovered there were 8 to 12 of them.

[6365] SPEAKER_38: It sounds like they missed eight out of the 12 or whatnot. It needs to get fixed.

[6370] SPEAKER_18: The one piece that I'm most concerned about is your vents in your roof. And that's, I mean, we pitched them all together, we made a negotiated deal with them, and that's kind of where we are. I mean, whatever you guys ladies want to do, it's just, I'm just telling you that somewhere down the line, you're going to have to do both of those things or you lose your warranty. And then when you do them, you got to have it with the contractor that put that roof in.

[6399] Nancy Thomas: Well, I recommend that staff look into these issues and come back with a plan. And if we don't have to approve it, and it's within the scope of what you can approve, let's just get it done. So, thank you. With the understanding.

[6417] SPEAKER_38: With another subcontractor slash contractor. Somebody not doing another work order.

[6421] Nancy Thomas: Well, hopefully with a contractor that maintains the warranty. Okay. Next, 9.9. This first reading on board policy 13 and AR 1312.3 uniform complaint procedures. It seems like there's changes to the uniform complaint procedures pretty regularly. recommended. Is there any comments from the board? So we'll bring it back for the second reading. 9.10, classified layoffs.

[6465] SPEAKER_38: I move to approve.

[6467] Nancy Thomas: Mr. Nguyen moves to approve. I'll second. Ms. Crocker seconds. I have a question on this one. I assume this is an adult education. Do we have adult education programs in the summer? And if not, or if we do, do we need to offer adult education in the summer? Thus, why is this an 11.5-month position? And can it be, can we save money by making it a less? Oh, gee, there's a lot of people asking to speak on this. Or is that from before? You did? It's been four.

[6511] Ray Rodriguez: Me too.

[6512] Nancy Thomas: I want to speak on this one. OK, well, that's my question. I'm sorry I didn't see everyone's request. Can I have my question answered? Sure.

[6525] SPEAKER_19: So my understanding is this was catching up with some of the changes we made in adult ed from last year.

[6532] SPEAKER_20: Actually, yeah. One of the things the board tasked us with a month ago was to come up with some ways of cutting that deficit in real debt. And so in working with the administration there, this individual who's subject to this item had requested to go to fewer hours and or days of work, in which technically becomes a layoff. And so this is part of the, that request from the board to do some things to cut expenses in adult ed. So that's, that's what brings this item to you. But in terms of questions about can this be done even further, I guess that's your. We can explore that. We could explore that as well.

[6591] Nancy Thomas: Yeah, and my question is pretty clear in terms of do we have Do we have any classes in the summer? And why is that person an 11.5-month employee if we don't have any classes? Are they preparing the schedule for the next year? I mean, there may be reasons for that. So it's the question.

[6610] Ray Rodriguez: Mr. Rodriguez. Thank you, President Thomas. Going from 12 months to 11.5 months, who's going to decide when that happens. Would that, I mean, it sounds to me like naturally be during the summer. That's one of my questions. Or if we go from 12 to 11, it would be during the time that, but that doesn't necessarily mean that we're going to save any money because if their workload is still the same and maybe they're averaging over 11.5, they'll do it in 11 months. So that's one of my questions. The other thing is in studying adult education, I thought we had agreed that we would have staff look into possibly increasing the fees or coming up with other classes, like a lot of school districts have a DMV class that they offer, and we did that years ago, and that brings in a lot of money, and that money's going somewhere else now. So other ways, other than just to make a cut, to look at ways to bring in additional income, because adult education should be self-sufficient if we've already agreed.

[6686] SPEAKER_20: And we are approaching them, the adult and staff.

[6689] Ray Rodriguez: Right. And we brought this up over the years, not with our superintendent Sanchez, but before with the prior administration. And it seems like it just wasn't dealt with the way we felt it should have. And if we can increase fees or bring in other things that the community likes and needs that would generate income, It's always easy to reduce, you know, somebody's, you know, reduce an employer or anything. It's more constructive, I feel, to try to find another way to bring the funds in so we don't have to do that.

[6725] Nancy Thomas: That's my point of view.

[6727] SPEAKER_28: Mr. Preciado. I don't think it is easy because it's someone's livelihood. However, to your point, You said that this person wanted this? Yes. OK, so that clears up a little bit or eases me a little more. But I did want to know or ask, why is it only classified and not management? It should be a shared impact, especially if management's the one who didn't budget correctly. So it seems like the impact is all on the classified when they had no, unless they're the ones who created the budget, but it should be managed. So it should be like a shared impact for that piece. But if this person is requesting this, then that eases me. I'm OK for that. I wouldn't be OK for the 11 just because of cutting costs. In terms of the cutting costs, that's why it should be a shared impact.

[6783] Nancy Thomas: Ms. Crocker? It was an old request. Mr. Nguyen, did you have anything?

[6791] Ray Rodriguez: I just had something quickly. I didn't mean it was easy, OK, Member Bracialdo. Actually, it's very difficult. What I mean is a lot of times when this happens, the first thing we look at is reducing FTE instead of looking at alternative ways to bring in additional funds. So we don't have to do that. That's what I meant.

[6813] Nancy Thomas: It's not easy at all. But this does bring up a point. I think, is it true that there are only four days where classes are given so that one day a week there are no classes? So then I think Mr. Preciado's point about prorating the amount we charge for oversight by the principal and any other office support should be prorated and reduced. So that means that the McGregor's budget would have to go up that amount. Okay.

[6855] SPEAKER_28: There's a motion and a second.

[6857] Nancy Thomas: There's a motion and a second. Do you have those? Okay, please vote. Five ayes, thank you. A request for use of bond funds for contemporary controls router at Schilling Elementary. Step one. Rodriguez moves, Mr. Nguyen seconds. I have a question about that. Is this something that we didn't plan ahead for that we missed or what happened with that?

[6899] SPEAKER_42: This is kind of fun. Actually, in a lot of cases, what was quoted for new product, I hope I say this right, replaced the pool system over there. We moved over the new heater, we got a whole new system over there, but they used the existing piping.

[6923] Nancy Thomas: We're not on that item yet. This is Schilling. Okay, so Schilling.

[6926] SPEAKER_42: Schilling. Schilling we did. This is the control. Same sort of thing. What happened is they went in and we did the HVAC planner quoted for replacement of HVAC. Well when they did the program and I do not I do believe that when you're quoting you don't go in and say I'm going to replace all the electrical. I think it's customary that they use what is there. So in retrospect our buildings are old our material the equipment is old and it starts to break down. Well with the volume of the upgrade our system deteriorated, I guess, faster. So what we spent all the money in for the new system, we're not getting the benefit of it because the electrical that has been used and is deteriorating needs to be replaced. It's very costly to go in and replace all of that. So we chose to go to bypass that and go for a router so that we can get the benefit of the new system. without replacing all the old electrical. And we can do it cheaper to do through the router. So it wasn't overlooked. It was quoted with the existing parallel. But what happened is over the time it couldn't withstand the change.

[7017] Kat Jones: So there's a motion and a second.

[7020] Nancy Thomas: Please vote. Five ayes.

[7025] SPEAKER_28: Yeah Right now now we're going to talk about swimming pool 9.12

[7045] SPEAKER_42: Okay, so same thing. Their swimming pool, we spent a lot of money on the replacement for the swimming pool. And again, they use the existing plumbing. Well, this past year, we've had continuous issues with leaking from this plumbing. So they put a new system on top of the plumbing that was there, which is smaller, eventually could not handle the pressure of the new system. So it's a direct result of what we changed to upgrade for the new system. But again, deteriorating the existing. It's like changing a pipe for plumbing and you only change this one little piece, you're going to have breaks throughout the whole system. So they're using the old system. In order for us to fix this, this is the most cost effective. If we were to go underground and redo all the piping, it probably would have cost us three or four times more. But again, it's a direct hit because of our upgrade.

[7109] Nancy Thomas: So we have 3% of our budget, which is a big chunk, for routine restricted maintenance. To me, this sounds like a $10,000 maintenance bill. wondering why you're asking that it be taken out of the Russian money because it's not part of the Russian budget. And so we're kind of going after our capital budgets piecemeal.

[7138] SPEAKER_42: So if you had done it properly from the beginning and used the piping to fix it, you wouldn't have this issue today. It's a direct hit because of what you've accepted from the Russian money originally. So what were, with that replacement on the pooling, the pool, the new heater, the new system, it all came out of one-time Russian money, I believe, did it not?

[7161] Nancy Thomas: I don't believe so.

[7162] SPEAKER_42: Their swimming pool was never part of the Russian... It's not a swimming pool, it's the heater and the project.

[7169] SPEAKER_38: Where was it from? I think it's Prop 39 energy efficiency.

[7172] Nancy Thomas: Yeah, it says it's Prop 39. Do we have Prop 39 funds to pay for?

[7176] SPEAKER_42: No, because it's not the Prop 39 energy. It's based on the fact, because of what you put into there, we're asking for it to come out of a different fund. It's not a maintenance fund. It's based on the direct improvement that we've accepted for a change. So unless we start looking at changes to improve our district that include the existing electrical or the existing plumbing to find out whether it's going to save us money and do the right thing for us, then we're going to have those constant breakdowns. It should not be a maintenance, it's not a maintenance issue for that pipe to break down because you put better equipment on top of it. is what I'm trying to say. The money and the maintenance, although I know you think there's a lot there, it's not going to be a lot. Not when it's costing me $10,000 and $15,000 to clean trees in the school district or to do the plumbing that are breaking down because of the backflow issues. That money will not last. You have money sitting that can be used as a one-time. I know where you're going, Nancy. You know, and I'm not trying to drain it. I'm trying to use it properly, okay. You're have, it's just the way it needs to be. So I'm asking that it helps to assist in the dollar amounts that are coming forward.

[7261] Nancy Thomas: Well, I just want to finish up by saying that I feel very strongly that we don't have a budget for the remainder of the Russian funds and that anything that comes to us should be part of an approved budget change.

[7276] SPEAKER_28: Mr. Preciado, so I didn't want to echo that is there I guess the question would be Is there other any other source of funding that we can use to make us to remember?

[7289] SPEAKER_20: I think the Russian funds is one possible source you could to the 3% routine restricted maintenance account although as Susan said that's That's a pretty thin budget, very thin budget.

[7306] SPEAKER_28: But so is the Russian funding when you keep on spending and you don't have a plan for it of how it's going to be outlined. Even though it seems like a lot, it's one time, the property sold, it's gone. And then every time we chip at it without a plan, then this is why we're in the situation where we are with the other budget pieces.

[7323] SPEAKER_20: Well, you have a lot of one time facility issues with old schools. So it would be a legitimate expense for either Fund 40 or for routine restricted maintenance.

[7343] SPEAKER_38: What about our facilities use fees that we've collected? Can we use that?

[7349] SPEAKER_20: No. For developer fees?

[7352] SPEAKER_38: No, no, no. Facilities use. Oh, facility use fees.

[7355] SPEAKER_20: Yeah. That would be allowable if the district maintained those Revenues, we have a separate fund to fix the facilities, but to my knowledge the district has not been doing that.

[7373] SPEAKER_38: Where's that money? It goes into the general fund.

[7376] Nancy Thomas: Ms.

[7376] SPEAKER_26: Crocker? This is something that's necessary for something that was upgraded because there was not the transition from one to another. It needs to be there. It needs to be part of the original budget. So I think that it's something that we no longer have cogeneration. And that was designed when it was put in to save money and to be able to see what happens. But apparently, the district had not identified the money that was saved. And so there's no way we can prove that it actually saved money. So we went to... We actually didn't.

[7409] SPEAKER_42: We were never hooked up. They never hooked it up to PG&E. So we just found out recently that the money we were supposed to be making for all those years, we never received, which is another issue that needs to be brought forward. So when you talk about spending money and doing the right thing, no one follows up on what happens. So we end up in situations like this. Or we could have saved that money and put it towards replacement.

[7432] Nancy Thomas: Right. Well, I hope you're noticing those things.

[7436] SPEAKER_42: Well, that's why I'm here. And I'm saying that we're trying to do the best we can. There's a lot of changes that need to be done at this district. I mean, down to changing carpets that I'm getting $35,000 bills to change a floor in one room and classrooms. And that's why I said, if you start thinking about what's going to be spent out of that budget, That's not going to last. And as many years as we have not got a 3% deficit deferred maintenance money. There's going to be a lot that needs to be done. So everything's piled up.

[7467] SPEAKER_26: This is not deferred maintenance.

[7469] SPEAKER_19: We are way behind.

[7470] SPEAKER_42: This is not deferred maintenance. So we're trying to make things work with what we can. Our manpower. Thank you. So listen to me. We need the money coming from someplace else. I'm only asking so we can make it better for our kids. We need more employees, too. And that's another thing we can do with our deficits.

[7488] Nancy Thomas: Well, my vote is going to be a vote about the need for the board to be involved in the budgeting process for... So, did we have a motion and a second? I move acceptance. Second. Okay, member Crocker moves, member Rodriguez seconds. Please vote. Four ayes and member Thomas votes no. 9.13. Move to approve.

[7525] SPEAKER_38: Second.

[7530] SPEAKER_19: Is there a comment on this one?

[7532] Nancy Thomas: Oh, I'm sorry. Ms. Parks

[7543] Cindy Parks: At this point right now, well, first of all, I'd like to say that I'm sorry to see Ms. Clinton resign. She was such a short timer on our committee. However, I do understand she is seeking a position on the board and felt that it would be a conflict should she be elected. However, as it stands right now, the bond committee only has one member, Olga Bjorn. Adam Mozaletsky and Merrick Yarbrough's term ended June 30th. along with Cary Knoop, myself, and Jack Dane, who are termed out. Even if you extend the term, because it should have been extended before it lapsed, there would only be three members. Can you imagine this board having only three members? You couldn't speak to a colleague without violating the Brown Act. When the Bond Oversight Committee presented the annual report in June, I reminded all three of you that the three of us were leaving. And I mentioned the need to solicit new members. There have been no advertisements in the newspaper, at least that I've seen, nor is there any posting on the district homepage. It seems to have fallen on deaf ears. Plus, the committee did not receive any of the information that it requested at the June meeting, nor in the follow-up email on June 18th. They need in five weeks. This committee has been failed by this district, I feel. They've been left hanging without a proper number of committee members, which is seven by law, nor have they been provided the tools and information that they need to be a properly functioning committee. Shame on you.

[7659] Nancy Thomas: Thank you. Do we have a motion and a second, please? Mr. Wynn made the motion. Mr. Rodriguez seconded. Please vote. Four ayes. Member Preciado had to leave. Next we have 9.14. CTC credential recommendation waiver for Rachel.

[7700] Bowen Zhang: Move to approve.

[7701] Nancy Thomas: Mr. Nguyen moves, member Crocker seconds. Please vote. Four ayes. Thank you. 9.15, CTC credential recommendation for waiver for Gregory Matawaran.

[7722] SPEAKER_36: Move to approve.

[7722] Nancy Thomas: Second. Mr. Nguyen moves, Mr. Rodriguez seconds. Please vote. Four ayes. Thank you. Next agreement with West Coast Literacy Workshop.

[7749] Aiden Hill: Move to approve.

[7750] Nancy Thomas: Mr. Nguyen moves to approve.

[7753] SPEAKER_26: I'll second.

[7754] Nancy Thomas: Ms. Crocker seconds. Please vote.

[7763] Ray Rodriguez: I apologize. I have to leave my, I'm getting real bad spasms and you still got three board members.

[7769] SPEAKER_38: Okay. I hope one of us doesn't vote no on something. No, you won't.

[7777] Nancy Thomas: Okay, three ayes. Okay, employee organizations. Do we have anyone from our employee organizations that wish to speak? Seeing none, we move on to the consent agenda, personnel items. Do we take these one at a time? I'm trying to recall. Yeah, okay. That's right, we want to do that anyway. 11.1 appointment of the principal for Snow Elementary School. Move to approve. Superintendent. Second. Mr. Wynn moves, Ms. Crocker seconds. Please vote. Three ayes.

[7834] SPEAKER_19: If I may, at this time I'd like Ms. Cheryl Owsley, I almost said Owsley, but Owsley Comes to us from Oakland Unified with several years of teaching and leadership experience, bachelor's degree of science and a master's degree in education. Please share what you've been doing and how you wound up here in two minutes or less.

[7860] SPEAKER_16: Two minutes or less. First I want to thank you Mr. Sanchez and Ms. Saavedra and the board and Newark Unified School District. for this opportunity to share my experience and expertise and to become a part of Newark Unified School District. My goal is to work diligently to meet the diverse needs of the students and staff that I will partnership with. So I've been in education for over 20 years. I've worked at many different schools in Oakland Unified School District. I also worked in the Catholic school system for a number of years and taught middle school. And then I went back to Oakland Unified School District and I taught elementary fifth grade. fourth and fifth grade, and then I've moved around to several schools. I've taught in the hills as well as the flatlands, so I bring to you a wealth of experience, and that's what I've been doing. And I've also been an assistant principal, an interim principal, and about three weeks ago now, I was the principal of Oakland Fine Arts Summer School. I want to thank you, and I am so excited. Can't you tell? Oh, well, welcome. Thank you. Thank you so much. Thank you, Cheryl. Thank you.

[7951] SPEAKER_19: Thank you for being here.

[7952] Nancy Thomas: Sorry for having you hang on so long. Oh, no, no.

[7956] SPEAKER_19: It was your first test, and you passed. Did I pass? You passed.

[7960] SPEAKER_16: But you can go home now. I can go home? You can go home now. Thank you so much. OK. Good night.

[7965] Nancy Thomas: Good night. 11.2, appointment of the assistant principal of Newark Junior High. I'll second. Mr. Nguyen moves. Ms. Crocker seconds. Please vote. Three ayes. Thank you. Next personnel report. Move to approve. Mr. Nguyen moves. Second. Ms. Crocker seconds. Please vote. Three ayes. Thank you. 11.4, Santa Clara University Memorandum of Understanding. Would you accept?

[8003] SPEAKER_38: I'll second.

[8004] Nancy Thomas: Ms. Crocker moves. Mr. Nguyen seconds. Please vote. Three ayes. Thank you. Next, we move on to the consent agenda, items 12.1 through 12.14. Does anyone wish to pull any of those items?

[8030] SPEAKER_38: Move to approve the aging.

[8032] Nancy Thomas: Just a minute. I believe there's someone that wishes to speak. Please come forward. I wanted to speak on 12.1.

[8046] Cindy Parks: Oh, 12.1, yes. So my concern is on the Title II fiscal year expenditures for 12 months. It shows that there's $142,000 that was allocated last year with a remaining balance of $78,400. On the English, on the Title III English learner expenditure for 12 months, it shows that $134,400 was the revenue and it shows $84,800 was left, $84,800. And for the Title III immigrant 12 months, It shows an allocation of 16-2 with $6,800 left. My question is, first of all, is that money allowed to roll over? And secondly, again, whether it's allowed to roll over or not, why didn't the students that were entitled to receive funding with this money last year receive the funding? And why didn't the teachers who were supposed to get professional development with Title II money didn't get the money spent on them at the time? Thank you.

[8118] Nancy Thomas: So I would entertain a motion.

[8121] Cindy Parks: Am I entitled to an answer, whether it be now or later? I mean, I don't understand. I get up here and ask questions, and I'm ignored, so.

[8127] Nancy Thomas: Well, I do believe that it would be appropriate for Ms. Salinas to get back to you via email.

[8132] Cindy Parks: I just want to make sure that I will get a response. Thank you.

[8137] Nancy Thomas: OK, Ms. Salinas. Is that OK? Thank you. OK.

[8143] SPEAKER_38: I move to approve. 12.1 through 12.14.

[8149] Nancy Thomas: Mr. Nguyen moves to approve 12.1 to 12.14. Please vote. Three ayes, thank you. Okay, next we move on to Board of Education Committee Reports, Announcements, Requests, Debrief and Discussion. Can we begin with you, Mr. Nguyen? I'll pass. Thank you. Ms. Crocker? I have nothing to report. OK. I have a couple of things. I have been asked to draft a letter for the board to consider putting in our draft strategic plan. And so that's kind of the letter I drafted. I shared it with the superintendent earlier. I'll take a copy if you don't mind. Do you want to pass them down? So I'm not the most articulate person, so I would really love it. I can send you copies via email. I would love it for you to make edits and suggestions. So I'll send them to you via email, and then you can send them back to me, and I will create the final draft for the superintendent to include. Is that all right? Tushar. OK. Thank you. The, let's see, oh the other thing I, I forgot now what, I didn't write it down so I forgot, but I think it probably has to do with the funding sources and with having bond and Russian budgets And when we do have expenditures from the Russian budget, even if it's something that we've already approved, I think it would be helpful for the board to have an updated spreadsheet that shows us where we are with that budget. And I think because the comment was made that we have to spend a certain amount of the Measure G money within an 18-month period of whatever it is, If we could look into that to make sure that we are on track with projects for next summer that we're going to be spending the Measure G money within the allocated time. And along with that would go having a bond budget update for board approval. Okay, superintendent?

[8316] SPEAKER_19: I do have a little bit of an update. Relative to the question earlier about summer school, the only thing that I'm aware of is summer school adult ed is ESL and high school diploma, which is paid for by a state grant.

[8332] Nancy Thomas: Oh, so we do have work in the summer?

[8334] SPEAKER_19: Those are the only two that I'm aware of.

[8336] Nancy Thomas: No, that's fine. I was just thinking that maybe there was no classes in the summer, but it sounds like there are. Okay.

[8343] SPEAKER_26: We had graduation. We had people that graduated from summer school.

[8347] SPEAKER_19: I just wanted to clarify that. Other than that, I have nothing.

[8349] Nancy Thomas: This is adult ed. Oh, yeah. We had. That's right. But I don't know if they had classes in summer.

[8354] SPEAKER_19: I have nothing further on my comments. OK.

[8360] Nancy Thomas: OK. Thank you. Meeting adjourned.

[8365] SPEAKER_19: All right. Thank you, guys.

No minutes available.