SCAC Meeting

No content available.

[12] Elisa Martinez: Okay, so you, Paul, I think you mentioned we were live. We're missing quite a few folks still, huh? Just give it another minute.

[24] SPEAKER_40: Okay, well, we definitely

[37] SPEAKER_39: We definitely have a quorum. President Martinez, yeah, I think we should move forward. There are some parents that did notify us ahead of time that they had parent and teacher meetings.

[46] Elisa Martinez: Okay. Okay, very good. We'll go ahead and get started then. So welcome to the School Consolidation Advisory Committee meeting for Thursday, September 10th, 2020. And I will be, I call the meeting to order now. And before we proceed to the next item on the agenda, I did want to address the fact that I am continuing to serve as chair and member Wynn as co-chair. And this was, again, specified in the committee charged, which was reviewed and approved in April at the board meeting. And at that time, that's when it was defined that the two board members would serve as the chair and the co-chair. During, as you know, during the last meeting with this committee that was brought, that was asked, you know, was it, folks weren't in alignment with that. And so there was a vote taken. I agreed, or I said that I would bring this back to the board, which we did. And it was a topic that was discussed. And at this point, during the committee report section, and at this point, the majority of the board agreed to keep the charge as it is. I also, you know, personally, and maybe some of you as well, went back and reviewed probably four to five board meetings, starting back in November of 2019, all the way through April, where This document has been circulating basically for about six months, and nothing has changed with regard with the intent of the board members being the chair and co-chair. And at no point was there any discussion or any concern that was brought up. So I think that's probably one of the reasons. Sorry, some folks are telling me they don't have a link. That anyhow, I think that's why there was no concern. I think all alignment on the board. That's one of the reasons I believe that we all were comfortable with leaving the charge document as it is. So I definitely want to apologize on behalf of myself and the rest of the team for allowing this confusion to be created. We really should have never taken this item for a vote. It really wasn't a discussion item. Some additional procedural clarity is that member fun nor I are voting members of the committee. So I think that was a bit confusing, I think, to all of us. And again, a failure point on us as as the leadership of the committee to say, hey, wait a minute. You know, even though we were asked for a vote, we should have said, hey, we're non voting. And I think that was another point that was clarified during the last member, the last board meeting last week, there was full alignment and expect expectation from the rest of the board members that we are non-voting members, and really our role is to really, you know, help manage the process for every meeting, making sure agendas, making sure information is set, and just allowing and answering any procedural questions that surface. And just so you know, we all, obviously we did take a vote last week, so those items will be brought back further in the agenda, and we will We will ask for a revote with myself, Superintendent Triplett, and Member Nguyen being non-voting folks in the committee. Okay. Member Nguyen, is there anything that I left off that you'd like to add?

[279] Phuong Nguyen: No, but I just would like to comment to the committee that yes, you guys saw me vote no on us being chair and co-chair. last meeting. And that is because I did not agree with the fact that we were voting members of this committee. And we went back and reviewed all the stuff. And I am in alignment with the fact that I'm okay with us being chair and co-chair as long as we are non-voting members of this committee. So I just want to make that clarification. Thank you.

[317] Elisa Martinez: address some folks that were texting me here. Okay. Good. Um, okay. Well, thank thank you for that. Remember when? So with that, we will move item. I got some feedback there. Um, item B roll call Miss Gutierrez, please.

[338] SPEAKER_39: Thank you. Chairwoman Martinez. I'll start with you, Chairwoman Martinez. Here. Co-chair Nguyen.

[352] Richelle Piechowski: Here.

[354] SPEAKER_39: I apologize. Navarro, Selena, if you could please mute for now. I will be starting off, and I apologize if I do say the name wrong. Shea Marshall. Absent? No, here. I'm here. Thank you. Thank you, Ms. Marshall. Cristina Vilma-Mendoza. Absent. Rachel Bloom. Here. Thank you. Sue Eustis.

[389] Maria Huffer: Here.

[390] SPEAKER_39: Thank you. Janet Crocker.

[393] Nancy Thomas: Here.

[394] SPEAKER_39: Thank you. Hamilton Baylon.

[399] SPEAKER_30: Here.

[400] SPEAKER_39: Thank you. Veronica Medina. Here. Thank you. Selena Nevarez? Here. Thank you. Angela Ringland? Here. Thank you. Maria Ibarra? Here. Thank you. Catheerine Ingham-Watters? Here. Christine Dix? And she's absent. I'm here. Oh, you're here. Wonderful. Thank you. Got it. Mark it. Thank you, Michelle Padilla.

[441] Elisa Martinez: Hey, Miss Gutierrez, I just got a text that she's waiting to be promoted. She got the regular link, so she's out if you can.

[450] SPEAKER_39: OK, so I'll wait a couple of minutes for her to get promoted. Oh, actually, she's my last committee member.

[456] SPEAKER_20: So. Check.

[464] Mark Triplett: Miss Gutierrez, I am present as well.

[467] SPEAKER_39: Thank you. superintendent triplet just in case you're wondering it's really hard when i see you so uh but i will thank you for that um just checking making sure um miss padilla was moved forward if you uh if you guys just give me a I'm just checking on the back end. So just one second. I want to make sure that I do have Miss Padilla present.

[502] SPEAKER_20: Yes, I'm here. Oh, wonderful. Thank you. Although I didn't I didn't get a link for this meeting. I just joined through the Newark Unified School District.

[512] SPEAKER_39: OK, I can follow up with you later to make sure that this doesn't happen again. Thank you. And that's everybody, President Martinez. Thank you.

[526] Elisa Martinez: And next we move to public comments and you all have probably seen the agenda. I just want to do a quick review and then you're probably going to notice a change and I did want to get your feedback on this.

[540] SPEAKER_28: The agenda actually has Dr. Triplett, the superintendent.

[545] Elisa Martinez: Oh, I'm so sorry. I just skipped right over you. Superintendent Triplett.

[550] Mark Triplett: I apologize.

[556] SPEAKER_40: I apologize. I will. Yeah. So item item C, I had checked it off already. Superintendent Triplett, please. I apologize.

[564] Mark Triplett: Thanks, no worries. Good evening everybody so I am superintendent triplet For those of you I haven't met. And I just wanted to take the opportunity to welcome everybody to introduce myself and to appreciate this group. for taking on this charge. This is really difficult work, but really, really critical work. And you all have chosen to take time out of your day, your schedules, to commit to this because you're committed to the community. So I want to recognize and appreciate you for that. I also want to recognize that we started off last session pretty bumpy. We didn't, it wasn't as good as we really should have been, and I want to take full responsibility for that. And on behalf of the district I want to apologize for, we had some technical glitches we had some misunderstandings about process. and structure. And so I just wanted to own all that. And then I did want to be clear, Ms. Delacruz will speak more on it later on, but just following up on what the chairperson Martinez talked about, we did go back and do a really thorough review of the board directive to really make sure that we were following the proper procedures. And this is really almost like a restart, to be honest with you tonight. I am part of part of what it says on that board directive is I am a member of this committee as well. So I'll be here in the capacity of being a member of the committee but I'm a non-voting member just like Chairperson Martinez said. You'll also see that there's some staff members in the group that are not necessarily or that are not subcommittee members and that includes Ms. Gutierrez, Ms. Croce, Ms. Dela Cruz and Ms. Saavedra. So they are here not as committee members, but as support to support the process, to support the committee. And then you'll also, if you were here last time, you know that we have an outside facilitator, Ms. Garcia, who's going to continue to facilitate the process, guide the process throughout these sessions. I also just wanted to name how difficult this work is. This is probably some of the hardest things that we can do as a community is to make determinations around school consolidation. So I just want to name it. And then I also want to just name that I wish we didn't have to do it. I wish that we didn't have to be here right now because this is really, really hard and it's just not easy. But we do have to do it because if we don't make these decisions, then the ramifications are even more serious. And so I just wanted to make sure that all of us are clear about that. And then the public is as well. We currently continue to have a structural deficit. in our budget, which, as I'm sure you know, means that we are spending more money than we're getting. That's just like the simple version. We're spending more than we're getting. And because of that, over time, we were named by the county and identified as being in a serious fiscal situation. And the county appointed what's called FCMAT, which is the Fiscal Management, Fiscal Crisis, and oh no, now I'm going to forget the full acronym, but essentially an organization that comes in when a district has serious financial issues, and they come in, they do an evaluation, they make recommendations, and then those need to be followed. One of the recommendations is that in order to get our structural deficit in order, that we have more schools than we have students to fill those schools. And so the recommendation is that we do need to consolidate some schools in order to be fiscally solvent. So that's one of the, that's sort of the rationale for why we have to do this very difficult work. Failure to do it is going to result in a larger deficit. So I just want to be clear that if we don't, if the board is not able to vote on schools to consolidate, we'll enter the upcoming year with a $1.2 million deficit. And with that kind of a deficit, we will have to make really difficult cuts. Our budget is made up of 85% staff. We pay 85% of our budget is to pay for staff. And so $1.2 million cut is inevitably going to be result in a significant cuts in staff. I don't want that to happen. And that's why we're here, really. The other thing is eventually if we do not address a structural deficit. What happens to districts is they eventually end up in what's called state receivership. So the state comes in and takes over the district dissolves the school board. and it implements really draconian measures to get the fiscal picture in order. I worked previously in Oakland Unified School District. When I first became a principal there, my first year, the district was under state receivership. It's a really challenging situation to be in. It's unpleasant because we lose total local control. It's the state controls everything that we do. And they take measures that maybe we know are not the best, but they do them in the spirit of getting finances under control. So I say all that not to like come down on anybody, not to blame anybody, but just I think it's really important that we all know the gravity of the situation. And I'm committed to following through on this process. I'm committed to being in it with you, supporting you. And what I'm going to do after I stop talking right now is I'm mostly going to listen. But I also, I will engage in the dialogue, but I really want to listen because I think it's important that the voices of this group are honored. You all are the stakeholders that are that have stepped in to make these recommendations. So again, I want to appreciate you and I'm looking forward to being in this difficult work with you.

[975] Elisa Martinez: You, Superintendent Triplett. So with that, we move to item D, which is public comment, and I believe, Ms. Gutierrez, we do have public comment. Again, before I go there, again, just a reminder that all comments need to be submitted by 1 p.m. the day of the meeting. And there is an email on the agenda that you should send your public comment with the appropriate labeling. The main point that I wanted to bring up to you all in terms of the change you may have noticed, which was The limiting the comment to two minutes and then a maximum of 20 minutes. So part of the part of the debrief, if you will, with our facilitator, we were looking at, you know, basically all the work that needs to be done. The fact that this is a two hour meeting, I think we landed on the, you know, 30 minutes is probably a little too long for for public comment. You know, let's go to 20 minutes. And then the question became, okay, do we leave it at three minutes? In that instance, that really would only be 20 minutes, six people, or do we reduce the speak time to two minutes to allow for more speakers? So that's where we landed. And that's the difference that you see between the two and the three minutes, but I would like to kind of get maybe get a head nod consensus. Are you all okay with this change? Do you prefer to have, The three minutes, but maybe so potentially less speakers eventually. What's your reaction? If anybody has any strong feelings about it. Sue? You're on mute, Ms. Eustis. Ms. Eustace, you're still on mute.

[1097] SPEAKER_29: Yeah, I'm not on mute now, but I couldn't get to it. OK. My problem with this is I think the community itself really wants to feel as if they are the ones that are having the say. And so most people can't say very much in two minutes. I say say with three minutes. I believe you should get as much input as possible. I know that it was set that you are chair and that you are co-chair. The reason that I object to it is only for this simple reason you have someone there from school services that can lead the direction of the group. The public needs to feel as if they have total control over the input and the information that you're gathering, that they feel they have control. Right now, I know a lot of people do not feel as if their input is important. And I really want to, it's important that this community buys into the school closures. Not that I'm crazy about closing schools, because it means some of my people will lose jobs, but it's something that has to happen for the public to be solvent. And if you want the community to buy in, allow as much input from as many people, and you guys are making the final decision, whether you like what we do or not, you don't have to do it. but the community needs to really buy into this. And my fear is, is with the meeting that we had last week, it was not a good start. I just, sorry, I had to say that.

[1207] Elisa Martinez: Thank you, Ms. Eustace. And completely agree that we want to respect the opportunity for public input, but we also need to respect this committee's time, right? We have a two hour meeting and we have quite a bit of work to do. So absolutely, so I think what I heard you say is you'd rather it stay to three minutes. I believe Ms. Ringlin?

[1230] SPEAKER_42: Ringlin, yeah. I just kind of mirrored Sue's sentiments too, that it is the community's voice that we want to hear. Last time, I don't think we had more than five people from public comments, and that's certainly way under the 30 minutes that we've got allotted for it. So I think we're underneath that right now. Gosh, and I would venture to say we exceed that, then we've really got some strong worries from the community.

[1258] Elisa Martinez: No doubt. I'm sure there will be. And I think we'll participation will increase Miss Marshall. Thank you, Miss relay.

[1265] SPEAKER_31: I, I'm just curious. Um, so say if we were to run out of the allotted 20-minute time for public comments. Would we still see those in the minutes when they're printed?

[1276] Elisa Martinez: Yes, absolutely. Absolutely. All comments will be attached to the minutes, absolutely. Okay. President Martinez, Ms. Crocker? Oh, sorry. Go ahead, Ms.

[1285] SPEAKER_11: Crocker. I think the comment made by the speaker just before me is right. We need to hear from the people, but if you have a point of view, It can be stated if you're thinking about what you're stating in a very short time. Oftentimes, people that come and talk are talking about a lot of things. And I think it may force the people to be economical in terms of their wording. And if we get to a situation where there's a problem and people are not being heard, then I think we could revisit it. But if there's some way for them to record their point of view and we can see it, even see it before the meeting, For my perspective, that would be a good thing to do, to know what people's feelings are. Because this is the time when the community is speaking. But I don't know if it's during committee time that we need to spend a lot of time doing that.

[1347] Elisa Martinez: OK. So I think we had a couple for three minutes. Again, we're OK with that. Again, I just wanted you all to understand the trade-off. So are we looking to, I'm going to just look for consensus. I'm not going to ask for a vote. If we can kind of, if you can shake your head, if you're thinking, yeah, let's go to keep it at three minutes. Yeah. Okay. All right. All right. So let's, we will make that modification. We will allot for three minutes and we'll again, we'll make sure everyone gets informed of that.

[1387] Phuong Nguyen: Cara Martinez, I just want to make sure that Miss Ibarra, she had her hand up and she had a question.

[1395] Elisa Martinez: Sorry, I'm sorry, who? I didn't see. Ibarra.

[1399] SPEAKER_39: Sorry about that.

[1400] Elisa Martinez: Sorry, I totally missed you.

[1405] SPEAKER_30: Okay, does it have to be set in stone? The only reason is maybe the first couple of minutes or of meetings we have two people that maybe could just say their piece and have it still be under the 20 minutes but then as you all were saying maybe later on in future meetings we have way too many people can we then cut it down to the two minutes kind of see by meeting how many people we have and sort of decide that way?

[1431] Elisa Martinez: Yes, I think if we start to see that growing, we could do that. We just need to do it in advance because we need to post those instructions with the agenda. So we may have a miss over like maybe one week. We always have a little bit of flexibility. We could choose to do that. But I think just in terms of keeping some of the structure, but yes, I think we could do that. We can kind of modify it later if we all think that that's what we should do. All right, very good. Let's see. And with that, Ms. Gutierrez?

[1469] SPEAKER_39: Thank you, Chairperson Martinez. In this case, Ms. Jodi Croce has the comments, so she'll be reading them.

[1479] SPEAKER_08: Thank you. So we do have two comments this evening, and I will be able to get through both of them. Both of the commenters were right at the two minute mark. All right, comment, public comment number one. Can we trust our representatives if they say that they are fine having a non-board member as a chair of the School Consolidation Advisory Committee, provided the full board approves the change, and then do not bring it back to the full board as an action item?

[1513] Leonor Rebosura: They did.

[1513] SPEAKER_08: Can we trust our representatives if they, without proper process, unilaterally reduce the public speaking time from three to two minutes without having the full board and the school consolidation advisory committee involved. The standard of three minutes is across the board appointed committees, whether an LCAP or a CBOC committee. Why would our representatives unilaterally limit the meeting time to two hours and call on a board bylaw, which only applies to the general board meeting, limiting any extensions without involving the full board and the School Consolidation Advisory Committee. Why are our representatives trying to rush this committee into making a recommendation within two months of such an important matter? The purpose document lists a time frame which could be six to 12 months. How can you possibly analyze the closure of one or two schools, the impact to special ed students and services, and a move towards a middle school model in only nine weeks? While we should take serious look at closing one or two schools, There's absolutely no reason to rush things. Given our improved financial situation, we do not have to force a decision for the 21-22 school year. A committee this large needs time and a lot of discussion to evaluate the merits as well as the consequences for each school that considers foreclosure. Don't be used as a scapegoat. If you don't feel confident in making a recommendation due to the time pressure, or lack of proper evaluation and discussion, make no recommendation at all. The school board cannot force you to make a recommendation. Cary Knoop. And our second public comment for tonight. Good evening committee members. I would like to summarize the introduction of the closing of a school best practice guide from the California Department of Education last reviewed February, 2020. It is alleged It is a legislative intent, but not a mandate for a district to have and use a district advisory committee before decisions are made about school closure. But whether an intent or a mandate, the advice is good. It is best to have a membership mostly of volunteers, although a paid chairperson or facilitator is useful. The job of the superintendent and the board members is to evaluate facts, not gather them. and the purposes of gathering the facts must be as credible, transparent, and nonpolitical as possible. The superintendent and school board members should not be included on the district advisory committee. Why isn't Newark Unified following these recommended best practice? The decision to close the school must be based upon hard empirical evidence that leads to a broadly supported unquestionable conclusion the district cannot afford to keep a particular school open without cuts elsewhere. This conclusion must be program-based upon such factors as projections of declining enrollment, critical district financial circumstances, facility conditions, educational program quality, cost of keeping underutilized facilities open, feasible options to closing a school, anticipated fiscal relief from a school closure, Two of the four board members sit on this board advisory committee. You are being forced to accept the two board members as your chair and vice chair. Public comment has been reduced to two minutes. Birch Grove schools are overrepresented, and you are given nine weeks to make a critical decision that will impact this district and city for years to come. If the board wants to convey that much influence over the process, why don't they spare all of you the work this will entail and make the decision themselves? I have more to say, but my two minutes are up. Signed, Cindy Parks. And that is the conclusion of public comments.

[1765] Elisa Martinez: Thank you, Ms. Croce. OK. And with that, we move to item E, which is the approval of the last meeting minutes. Did everyone have the opportunity to review the minutes?

[1782] Phuong Nguyen: Okay. Yes. Actually, there needs to be a correction on the minutes. Okay. In the proposed timeline and next steps, the meeting dates for October 8th, it says October 8th, 2002. It needs to be modified to October 8th, 2020. And then the committee will be presenting the recommendations in the form of a report at the November, it's supposed to be November 5th, 2020 board meeting, not November 7th. If we can make that note for the change, then we can approve the minutes.

[1826] Elisa Martinez: Anybody else find any other recommended edits? Okay. So with that, I will entertain a motion and a second to approve the August 27th meeting minutes with the modifications that Vice Chair Nguyen mentioned, which is October 8th, 2020, November 5th, 2020. May I have a motion?

[1860] Catheerine Ingham-Watters: Motion to approve the minutes with the modifications mentioned.

[1865] Elisa Martinez: Thank you. May I have a second? I'll second. Marshall, thank you. So Ms. Ingham, water moves, and Ms. Marshall seconds. OK, and so with that, I will ask for a vote. And Ms. Gutierrez, you're going to manage the vote.

[1887] SPEAKER_39: Yes, so in this case, I'm going to ask the motion, but I'm going to ask everybody if you could please, on the bottom of your screen, select the raise hand option. And I will monitor the raise hands. And I will be asking for a yay and a no vote. So in this case, the motion is to approve the agenda with the recommended changes. If you vote yes, please raise the hand on Zoom.

[1925] Elisa Martinez: And does everybody know what we're talking about, where the raising of the hand is? No? Ms. Medina? I can't find mine either.

[1932] SPEAKER_20: I can't find mine either. I don't think it's enabled.

[1935] Phuong Nguyen: I can't find it. Hold on one second. Just click on the participants at the bottom. Go ahead and click on participant. It'll open the participant list panel. And on there at the bottom lower right hand corner, you will see a raised hand feature. And that's where you would go.

[1952] SPEAKER_42: Mine actually says a dot, dot, dot. And you have to click on that to go to the raised hands. I don't know how many others will have that.

[1957] Phuong Nguyen: OK. Thank you for pointing that out.

[1963] SPEAKER_39: Okay, if, one more minute, I still see hands. Okay, and I will be reading each raised hand for the record. I have these yes votes, Ms. Catheerine Ingham-Watters, Ms. Janet Crocker, Mr. Hamilton Balan, Ms. Rachel Bloom, Ms. Angela Ringland, Ms. Shea Marshall, Maria Ibarra, Chrissy Dix, Dina, Michelle Padilla, and Selena Navarez. I have a unanimous vote. No, I, yes, the rest are staffed, but I will ask for the record. So everybody, if you could please remove your hand raised from the, participant panelists section. And are there any no votes? Anybody who does not agree to approve this motion?

[2031] SPEAKER_28: I'm sorry, Miss Gutierrez. Sorry, Sue didn't take down her hand. So I just.

[2036] SPEAKER_39: Miss Eustis.

[2041] Elisa Martinez: And you just click on it to get rid of it.

[2044] SPEAKER_29: I clicked it just to get rid of it because I voted for it. Perfect.

[2051] SPEAKER_39: Okay, no nos, motion passes.

[2055] Elisa Martinez: Thank you. And so moving right along, we will go to item E, which is review of the committee charge document. And I believe that is Ms. Dela Cruz.

[2071] Marie dela Cruz: Yes, thank you, Ms. Martinez. Can I share my screen? Let's see if I have that. Oh, okay. Yes. I hope this works. I'm going to share.

[2091] Clarissa Kennedy: OK, let's see.

[2103] Marie dela Cruz: It's doing it to me again. OK, sorry. Is that better?

[2114] SPEAKER_39: Yes, perfect.

[2116] Marie dela Cruz: Okay. All right. Thank you. Good evening, everyone. So I am going to review the timeline, the committee composition, and the committee charge that was approved by the board. Okay, so back in December, the board approved the formation of this School Consolidation Advisory Committee. So it was presented to the board on December 5th, and it was approved. And at the following meeting, the December 19th, the board assigned two of the board members to the School Consolidation Advisory Committee. At that time, actually member Gutierrez was part of the the board subcommittee, but since she resigned, Ms. Martinez has replaced that position. So then on January 16th, the board had discussed and considered the hiring of a facilitator, which we have done, and School Services of California, Briana Garcia, is our facilitator for this committee. And then at the March 19th meeting, The board appointed the committee members. April 9, we presented the charge of the committee and established the meeting dates. At that time, though, they were all tentative, and we had established a first meeting date of May 27. But it got pushed back to August 27, which was our first meeting a couple of weeks ago. And we have our meeting scheduled on every second and fourth Thursday for the most part between now and October. Our goal is to have a report with recommendations to the board and have a first reading at the November 5th meeting and then the November 19th meeting to have action taken by the board. So the first thing in the committee compositions that the board was going to appoint all members of the committee, which we did, and the committee was going to be composed of two members of the board acting as a subcommittee of the board, serving as a chair and vice chair of the committee. We have community representatives, parents, one from each school and a representative from each of the following district committees. We had DELAC, ELAC, the Citizens Bond Oversight Committee, special education parents, and others as determined by the board, three at-large community members, and staff representatives, principals, and one representative from each employee group, and TA, CSCA, and NEWMA. And our superintendent or designee would be a non-voting member, which it was decided would be the superintendent. And in addition, we do have a demographer, our consultant, as a resource to the committee, and also the executive cabinet team, which includes myself and Ms. Saavedra, and other key district staff members as needed, as well as the facilitator. So the composition of this committee was approved by the board on December 19th, 2019. It was also discussed that if appointed committee members, well, appointed committee members would have to accept and commit to attending all of the meetings. And the member applicants who were not appointed would be placed in a pool for alternates so that in an event an appointed committee member was not able to accept or fulfill their duties, then an alternate would be selected by the board subcommittee from that pool. And if a committee member is not able to fulfill their duties after the second meeting, which is this meeting, then we would have no alternate. So what is the committee charge? This committee is acting as an advisory to the board and the superintendent. This committee is to be fully informed on the current district's financial situation as well as the future situation, any issues and challenges, and to consider strategies to maintain the district in its non-fiscal condition. The committee will be fully informed on the district's current and future demographics as they relate to enrollment. We will consider all schools for potential closure or consolidation and considering the positive and negative factors and any other variables in terms of location, capacity, programs, community impact for each school. The only school, just to make a note, that is not being considered for closure is the high school. The junior high is not considered for closure, is being considered in terms of consolidation and possibly changing it to a middle school. And then considering the potential of each school site to host educational programs that we would maintain or that could enhance enrollment and provide opportunities to meet the diverse needs of our students, families, and staff. And number six, The committee is to develop and utilize criteria and demographic data to base its recommendations on the most appropriate schools for closure or consolidation. Specific criteria to consider may be subject to review and approval by the board prior to or during the committee's work. So based on this criteria, the committee will provide the board and administration with recommendations on new school boundaries educational programs and other factors which could maintain or improve enrollment in the district and its schools. We would identify any grandfathering conditions or boundary reassignments, and we would identify school or schools the committee would recommend to the board for potential school closure, to develop specific transition support plans for any schools recommended for closure, and to provide the recommendations to the board no later than November 5th, 2020. And the reason why we're looking at November 5th is we need to complete this before our first interim report in order for us to support the assumptions that are built into our multi-year projections and also for budget development, which usually starts in December. So our 21-22 assumption right now in our budget assumes a $1 million reduction from school closures. Any questions? Comments?

[2612] SPEAKER_24: Go ahead. I had a question. It's supposed to be representing each campus, but I don't see that there's a bridge point or crossroads parent included. So I just wanted to make note of that, even though I work for those schools. Just curious.

[2640] Marie dela Cruz: Yeah, well, we made an effort to get applications and representations from each of our schools. And unfortunately, if there wasn't one or if there isn't one at Bridgepoint and Crossroads right now, we didn't receive an application.

[2662] Sean Abruzzi: Got it.

[2662] Marie dela Cruz: Thank you.

[2663] Elisa Martinez: Just to clarify, sorry, I apologize. There was a parent that was, I believe, Crossroads and BGI, and that person actually was I don't recall the name, to be honest. They were unable to fulfill, so they will call resign their position. So we went to the alternate process.

[2687] Marie dela Cruz: Oh, thank you, Ms. Martinez.

[2692] SPEAKER_39: If there are any other questions, if you raise your hand, I can call on you.

[2696] Elisa Martinez: I believe has a question. Sorry.

[2700] SPEAKER_30: Thank you. Everybody might already know, but what does identify grandfathering conditions for boundary reassignment mean?

[2710] Marie dela Cruz: If there are any conditions that have been grandfathered, I can't think of any right now, but in terms of boundaries, then we would honor that. So sometimes, I mean, there are conditions that are grandfathered in.

[2734] Elisa Martinez: Ms., where is Brianna? Ms. Garcia, do you have any examples of grandfathering?

[2740] SPEAKER_28: Yeah there are some school districts sometimes do because for example there's a major freeway running through a district and you want to make sure that the boundaries aren't set so the kids have to cross the freeway for example. So sometimes school districts have conditions that have to be taken into consideration in order to do those boundaries and so that's it just means grandfather because it was something that was already existing and as Miss de la Cruz mentioned you want to honor that as you're moving forward.

[2773] SPEAKER_39: Thank you. Chair Martinez, I have a raised hand by Ms.

[2777] Elisa Martinez: Bloom. Go ahead, Ms. Bloom.

[2783] Rachel Bloom: Thank God. Can we have like a consistent thing? Are we raising the hands or are we like jumping in? Because I've been really good about keeping my mouth shut and raising the hand. Can we keep our eye on that participant list? Because my concern was at the beginning of this, it's like we're moving at a snail's pace. We have an hour and 15 minutes left. We have a lot of important data to discuss. And now we've snail's paced it through this stuff so that the members are then later on going to feel pressure that they can't ask questions because now we're just moving through a snail's pace. So that I just wanted to say that about 10 minutes ago. So thank you.

[2823] Elisa Martinez: Okay, well, and thank you for sharing your thoughts. And I hope that, you know, part of the learning was that we wanted to make sure every we all had the opportunity to collectively review the document. So we wanted to make sure that there's enough time for that. But if there are no further questions, oops, sorry. Go ahead, Miss Medina.

[2848] SPEAKER_33: Quick question. I know you explained in the beginning about you and the vice chair not being voting members. Does that mean you're ex officio or no? I just didn't I'm not familiar with what that title means. So I know for Dr. Triplett, his like right next to him, it says ex officio. So I was wondering if that's a term or because I just wasn't familiar with it.

[2880] Elisa Martinez: You know, I, I believe and I'll let you answer, Ms. Dela Cruz, try not to get too much into content.

[2889] Marie dela Cruz: And actually, I'm going to defer to Ms. Garcia. Ex officio.

[2896] Rachel Bloom: Ex officio means that means by virtue of one's position or status. I just Googled it. So he's the superintendent. So of course, he's going to be on the committee. That's what that means.

[2909] SPEAKER_28: Yeah. And Chair and Vice Chair, while they are board members in another life. In this case, they're taking off that hat and putting on the hat of committee members as chair and vice chair. They're just not voting members. And so that's why the exit this year wasn't by their name, because it wasn't that they are on this committee in their roles as board members, but as the chair and vice chair of this committee.

[2939] SPEAKER_33: Okay, thank you so much for clarifying.

[2943] Elisa Martinez: Thank you for asking the question. Okay, so we'll agree that we will use the panelists. That's Ms. Bloom's recommendation. Everyone's okay with that? That's how we'll be monitoring who's requesting to speak. Okay, good. Thank you. Any additional questions? Okay. So with that, we move to you. Thank you. Item G Miss Garcia. The proposed criteria scoring methodology. We do require re vote that in this case excludes Vice chair when and myself.

[2990] SPEAKER_28: So last week, everyone and I'm going to share my screen so you guys can see these So we voted on the scoring methodology. We took two different votes. One vote was we asked if there were any objections to any particular item and there was an objection to criteria number three regarding the performance level of orange or red in two or more state priorities. And so we took a vote on that and the vote at that time was to Uh, keep that one in place. Uh, but again, now that, uh, chair Martinez and vice chair Nguyen are not voting members. We just want to take that vote again so that we have an official vote for the committee members without the chair and the vice chair. Uh, and so I will just reiterate in case anybody isn't looking at this. So item 10, again, was the criteria that we would be looking at performance level of orange or red and two or more state priorities. All right. And that was based on the California school dashboard. It has a range of performance levels, which consider status and change under suspension rates, math and English language arts tests, graduation rates, et cetera. And so the question now to the committee again is to ask for a motion as to either to a motion to delete the criteria number 10 from the total criteria.

[3096] Elisa Martinez: That's what I wanted to clarify, Ms. Garcia. So the motion, the vote we will be taking here is to remove item 10 from the criteria.

[3106] SPEAKER_28: So a yes vote would pull that item from the criteria, a no vote would keep it in place.

[3115] Elisa Martinez: So Ms. Gutierrez, do we require then a motion on this one?

[3119] SPEAKER_39: Yes, and I will repeat the motion or the recommendation. And hopefully someone can, if again, just so we can follow protocol, if you wanna make the motion, please raise your hand in the panelists panel. And the motion, the recommendation currently is to eliminate number 10 from the criteria, if somebody wants to make the motion. I have a raised hand for Maria Ibarra for a motion.

[3150] SPEAKER_30: I would like to make a motion of everything that Mrs. Gutierrez just said.

[3154] SPEAKER_39: Thank you. And I have a second hand from Ms. Ingham-Watters.

[3158] Catheerine Ingham-Watters: I second the motion.

[3161] SPEAKER_39: Thank you. And I have a waving of the hand from Ms. Crocker. I don't want to, she's on mute.

[3172] Elisa Martinez: Sorry, do you have a question, Ms. Crocker? Sorry. I'm trying to go between panelists. I only have one screen.

[3177] SPEAKER_11: Yeah, part of the problem is I can't raise my hand because it's not available on the screen as long as you're using your document there. I have a list of people, and I can scroll that down, but there's no place for me to raise my hand or to indicate that I would like to. There we go.

[3198] Elisa Martinez: No worries. We'll play it by ear. If you're waving and that's how you want it, we'll do that as well.

[3203] SPEAKER_11: Go ahead. I would like to have a comment on that, item number 10, if I could. Sure, go ahead. When you look at the scoring, part of the thing that you were going to determine whether there was an improvement, whether the school had worked on improving the situation. And I would like to leave it in just because I think that it gives us the ability to see whether you have a program that is doing great things for people that were we're very far behind and now they're improving. So if we take it out, then I'm not sure that that improvement is going to be factored into the decision as to whether or not our school should be closed or not.

[3248] Elisa Martinez: Thank you, Ms. Crocker. OK, so once again, just to reiterate before we call the repeat the motion, Ms. Gutierrez.

[3261] SPEAKER_39: OK. The motion currently is to eliminate number 10 from the criteria.

[3266] SPEAKER_28: We have a motion made by Ms. Ibarra, a second made by Ms. Ingham-Watters. Would you like me to take a vote?

[3270] SPEAKER_39: Yes, please. Before I take a vote, I have a raised hand from Ms. Navarez. I don't know if she has a question, but I don't wanna take a yes vote unless you want. Ms. Navarez, if you no longer have a question, you can remove your hand. Okay, perfect. So then if you, I'm taking the vote now. So if you vote yes to remove the criteria, please raise your hand on the panelists. Okay, I am going to be reading the yes votes. I have Ms. Ringling. Sorry, I apologize, Ringling. Ms. Ingham-Watters, Marshall, Padilla, Eustace, Ibarra, and Navarez. And please keep the hands up as I need to make sure that this is documented.

[3380] Michael Milliken: One, two, three, four, five, six.

[3384] SPEAKER_39: I have seven yeses. Okay, if you could please remove your hands. And I will be calling for a no vote. Okay, if you vote no, please raise your hand.

[3407] SPEAKER_28: I think Miss Navarro has left her hand up from the yes vote, because her hand is still there.

[3413] SPEAKER_39: Miss Navarro has voted yes, you're correct. So I have a no vote. I have Bloom, Bloom, Medina, let me have to, Bloom, Medina, Crocker, Dix and Bailon. And it's five, five no's. Number 10 will get eliminated, Chair Martinez.

[3459] Elisa Martinez: Okay, thank you. So the, so the motion to eliminate the question passed, so therefore we will remove question 10. Okay, so Ms.dela Cruz, I'm sorry, and Ms. Garcia, do we then have to do a second vote on the total on all of them? We had two votes last time, right? Okay, so this motion would be to approve the criteria minus item 10, And that's what the criteria that this group will be using going forward. May I have a motion and a second to approve the remaining criteria?

[3504] SPEAKER_39: I have a motion by Ms. Dix. Sorry, may I ask a question? Oh, I apologize. Yes? I didn't know how to differentiate that hand. Um, actually, actually, if you if I may, I'm just for for the sake of following process, if we can take the motion in the second, and then we'll take questions afterwards, if you don't mind. My question was actually about the voting.

[3527] Nicole Izant: Sorry.

[3528] Olivia Rangel: So if I'm voting to approve this, but I would like to keep 10 in, I just go ahead and approve, right? Because there's no way to write that.

[3537] Elisa Martinez: Yeah, that other was already unanimous. Yeah. By majority vote. It was already removed. Yeah. Please double check it, thanks. Sorry, go ahead. So then we were looking for a motion and a second? Correct.

[3554] SPEAKER_39: I have a raised hand motion by Ms. Dix. And I have a second from Ms. Padilla. Thank you. Okay.

[3567] SPEAKER_29: Do you want me to take it?

[3568] Elisa Martinez: Yeah, so with that, yep, I'll call in for just pulling the panelists up. So with that, if we could ask everyone to raise your hand to approve the criteria minus item 10.

[3580] SPEAKER_29: Yeah, I have a question.

[3585] Elisa Martinez: Sorry, who was that? Is that miss? Yeah.

[3589] SPEAKER_29: Can you can you explain to me where this criteria came from? Because I didn't ask that last time. And I would like to know, where did it come from? Where was it developed? Who developed it?

[3602] SPEAKER_28: Ms. Eustis, this is Brianna. So I developed it based on a, I think actually someone who wrote in a public comment mentioned that the California Department of Education has some guidelines with regards to things that you could look, you should look at for school closure. So I looked at the criteria that they had. And I have been in facilities with schools for 15 or 16 years. And so I've been through this process a couple of times. And so I also added and made some adjustments to just that broad guidance that CDE provided in order to come up with the scoring methodology, et cetera. So that criteria is based on CDE and based on the type of factors that one should be looking at when they're considering closing a school.

[3658] SPEAKER_29: Thank you very much. I appreciate that answer.

[3662] Elisa Martinez: Thank you, Ms. Garcia. And thank you, Ms. Eustis, for your question.

[3667] SPEAKER_39: Chair Martinez, I'm calling out the yes votes at this point. I have Maria Barra, Catheerine Ingham-Watters, Shane Marshall, Chrissy Dix, Janet Crocker, Angela Ringley, Michelle Padilla, Sue Eustis. If you could please remove the hand and I will be calling Chair Martinez if you wanna call the no vote.

[3693] Elisa Martinez: Okay, thank you. Those that do not approve the criteria, please raise your hand.

[3706] SPEAKER_39: Okay, I have a no vote from Rachel Bloom and Veronica Medina. Thank you. And actually, if I can get clarification from Ms. Lennon-Navarez, you did not vote in this item unless you want to abstain. And Mr. Hamilton-Bailyn, you do have your raised hand, but can you clarify your vote as well?

[3747] SPEAKER_24: Yeah, I vote yes. I'm sorry, I'm having a lot of internet issues. I vote yes.

[3752] SPEAKER_39: Thank you. Thank you. And I have a raised hand from Ms. Nevarez. So at this point, for clarification, Ms. Nevarez, this is a no vote. OK. So motion passes with nine yeses. Thank you.

[3781] Elisa Martinez: OK, Miss Bloom, do you have a question? Or is that just an old raised hand?

[3787] Rachel Bloom: No, I I have like a question kind of a thing. So the criteria is kind of set almost by the CDE. And every week we're going to have or every other week we're going to have different people coming and giving us the information. And so if we have the rubric, and we have all the information, like, why are we here? It seems like all the information to know what to do already exists in the world. Why aren't those people going into a room for three hours, figuring out the rubric and then reporting out? Like, I don't understand that. And so the other part of that is the people that are reporting on the information, I don't necessarily trust that we're gonna be getting all the data and all the accurate data. And I think that somewhere, somehow, maybe some people or someone, they maybe already have their mind made up about what they want. And I just wanted to say, I feel like if the board or other people in charge know what they want to do, when I found the criteria, I could just go to the dashboard and already have the answer to one of those criteria and figure out where they are in the rubric. if that's already figured out and can easily be figured out, the board could just like decide and own it. Like they could have everyone go into a room, they could make a two hour video, here's our criteria, here's how we scored it, that's the end. Then next week, join us for the, here's how we're redoing the boundaries video.

[3883] Elisa Martinez: Thank you, Ms. Bloom.

[3884] Rachel Bloom: And so I think like- So do you have a question? I'm sorry. So yeah, my question was like, kind of why are we here? And I just really hope that like, we get accurate information and like complete information.

[3900] Elisa Martinez: Absolutely. So I will address because I think it's really important. You know, I think you've made a couple of statements that that imply that there is an answer that's already been that's been for formed. And I will tell you that, that there isn't, we we don't have a a list of here's the top whatever sites. Absolutely not, right? When the board, again, if you go back to the meetings, you're absolutely right that theoretically the board can do that, right? We don't have to have an advisory committee. But if you go back to the history of these meetings, we actually wanted to follow the process of best practice that says get community input, right? So this is an advisory committee. And the idea is that you all are hearing from the different experts and asking questions that those folks may not know. Those of us in the, you know, it may just have specific questions that will bring information to light that we just don't know. That's why it's so important to hear that voice. So yes, theoretically, we could do that. I don't think anybody would think that that's best practice, right? Because that's why we're here. And I ask wholeheartedly that we allow the process to work, to be fair. If there's something that is suspect, just like the data that you all questioned last week, and we said, you know what? You're right. Let's go check it out. We're going to do that. So that's my ask. I hear you, and you clearly have your personal beliefs. So we will try to honor that and hear them. but we also, my ask is that we also honor the process and allow Ms. Brianna Garcia with her experience to walk us through the process and let's give the process a fair chance.

[4022] Phuong Nguyen: And I just wanted to also mention and piggyback on what Chair Martinez is saying is that also we do need to keep an open mind as we go through this process and It isn't easy. It's very emotional. It's taxing on all of us and it's stressful. And yes, she is absolutely right. We do not, as board members, we have the authority to say, hey, these are the schools that we're closing, but we don't want that. And I'm emotional right now just saying it, you know, because we do want community input on this and we wanna make sure that we honor that and do it right. And it is a very hard topic. to discuss. I don't think any one of us here would want to close schools or even consider it. But in light of everything, in light of the district's fiscal responsibilities to everyone and our structural deficit, we have to honor this process, like Chair Martinez said, and really just be mindful and have an open mind and actively listen through this whole process. Whether we have personal convictions and beliefs, we need to really look at all of the perspectives out there and make a solid consideration. So that's all I have.

[4112] Elisa Martinez: Thank you. Vice Chair Martinez? Yes. So moving on. Sorry, watching the clock here.

[4121] SPEAKER_39: I just wanted to point out that there is a raised hand by Ms. Crocker, but I do want you to proceed to follow the agenda if possible.

[4128] Elisa Martinez: Sorry, yes. So yes, Ms. Crocker, I apologize. I gotta keep this window open.

[4135] SPEAKER_11: Yeah, I just wanted to make a statement that it's important that the particular committee get all the information. It's very dense in terms of understanding, in terms of reading it on a timely basis. so that we have the time to go through and do it. There's a facilities report that I would like to get earlier rather than later, because I think a lot of my thoughts are going to be there in terms of what's happening to the buildings that are there. And I think this is going to be, in my mind, a bigger identification of school closure than anything, because our buildings are all old, and we have We have to be able to look at something beyond just the fact that this is the school my kids have gone to every year, and I want to maintain that, or I've always taught at that school. We have to look at the district as a whole. Newark is small. And if you look at the junior high and high school, there's support for the one school. But when it comes to elementary, for some reason, we get to be very close-minded and very much into just our own little group. And so I think that we need to be looking at it as a newer community rather than as a parent or a member of a particular school and looking at the things that are our facts in terms of what the structures are and what the structures are able to how long they're able to last and how much they can change as the needs in education will change as we're finding out right now. So I think that it's important that we get especially the dense the dense information, we get it early so that we can ask questions and we can see what it is before we actually come to our meetings.

[4243] Elisa Martinez: Absolutely. And that's our intent. And I'm sure Superintendent Triplett would agree with that. I mean, that is absolutely our intent. And we know we've got a lot, a lot, lot to get through. OK, so moving on to item eight. Ms. Blumenthal. OK, so Ms. Blumenthal, absolutely. If you can just keep it brief, though, because I'm just watching the clock. Go ahead.

[4264] Rachel Bloom: Yeah, thanks. So I think some people are misunderstanding what I'm saying. I will be glad to announce to the whole community which school is closing. Because I'm on the committee, I'm going to be a part of it. But if my name is on it, it has to be honest. It has to be transparent. So for me, it's not an emotional thing. This is y equals mx plus b. We have these criteria. We have a formula. It's a to b. To me, it's very simple. So it's not an emotional thing. Right, like it's it is what it is. And I'd be willing to say that the problem is, we need to make sure that the information we get and what we're basing our opinions or what we're basing the criteria off of what we're basing our points off of are 100% correct. That's what I'm saying. To me, it's not emotional.

[4311] Elisa Martinez: Thank you. Thanks for clarifying. Okay. So with that, I think this is back to Ms. Salacruz, the item H, which is presentation of district demographic data.

[4329] Marie dela Cruz: Thank you, Ms. Martinez. So tonight we have our consultant, our demographer, Mr. Ken Reynolds from School Works. He's the president and founder of School Works. He's going to present the enrollment information to you. We sent the information in advance, but he is going to review it in more detail and address any questions that you might have. So Mr. Reynolds, are you able to share your screen?

[4358] SPEAKER_21: I'm going to give it a try. I'll do my first time on Zoom sharing my screen. So let's see how this works.

[4363] Marie dela Cruz: Yes. And if you would like to take a moment to introduce yourself and give yourself a little bit more background, and I may have missed something.

[4375] SPEAKER_21: Yes, again, I'm the president of School Works. I've been in the school facility and enrollment business my whole life. And I was actually born in Fremont, so real close to Newark. And we help school districts do enrollment projections for both the purposes of understanding the future of enrollment for budget purposes, for facility needs, for opening schools, for closing schools, or for just realigning boundaries to better balance school enrollment. So a whole variety of efforts. Let me get to share my screen or full screen.

[4429] Aiden Hill: All right.

[4432] SPEAKER_21: So to do our calculations, one of the key most important factors we look at is what the enrollment trends are in the district. And to accomplish that, this map just shows you an example. All those red dots represent the students in the district from this past fall. But we have multiple years of data, so we're able to look at individual neighborhoods to understand the mobility and the movement of students over time as they progress from elementary school to middle school on to high school. And that analysis really leads to an accurate projection. It's one of the key, most important factors of the data that we analyze. But we're able to analyze it by individual schools. So as we get future meetings where we need to start studying, well, what happens if we close school A or school B, we're able to show what the impacts will be for the other schools. That'll probably be a follow-up analysis as we consider maybe boundary changes. But this chart here really shows the reason we're here. We're showing 10 years of historic enrollment. These numbers are from October each school year. We use a consistent reference point to improve accuracy of our projections. And then we're showing 10 years into the future. What you do see is this decline that the district's been facing is going to turn around. It does bounce back a little bit. It doesn't get us back to where we were. But it is likely that the enrollment should start growing again. Again, most of that's based on the fact that there is a fair amount of development planned in the community. And that's, again, one of the other factors we look at. The colors on this chart, at the bottom is the orange color. That's our elementary grades. In the middle, we have that green color is our junior high or middle school grades. And then the high school grades are shown in the top of each bar in the blue color. The next piece of data we have is from the December 2019 enrollment. It's probably a little bit fuzzy there, but it was just showing what the enrollment was on each campus at that point in time. And it only varied slightly from the October numbers. But again, it's just, there's different points in time when enrollment is taken for different purposes. And the rest of this chart will be presented later because it showed some of the additional statistics that we'll be considering. The other important factor we look at when trying to do a enrollment projection is how many children are being born each year and how many of those children end up in Newark schools five years later when they start school. So on this chart, the blue information, the blue bars, are showing the kindergarten enrollment over the last 10 years or so. And the yellow shows our projected kindergarten enrollment over the next four years. And that blue line across the top is representing those births from five years prior to those enrollments when the children were born. So we're projecting a drop in kindergarten enrollment this year just because there were fewer births. But then the following three years, the numbers should start increasing slightly. and I think we'll see some anomalies this year because of the pandemic, but that will be a short term adjustment. It won't be a new trend. It's just an adjustment for this year. We do our projections by school and of course by grade. So this chart here just shows, you know, if no changes were made, what each school enrollment looks like over the next six years. And we have lines for, every school in the district, even though of course our main focus as a part of this committee is mainly looking at the elementary schools. This is from the report we presented to the board this past school year. And next is our projection by grade. This was important to show simply because of the possible consideration the movement of the sixth graders from the elementaries to the middle so we could understand how many sixth graders are in the district. And it's a nice one place summary to show that information. And next is new development. There might've been some questions that popped up as people looked at this information. What we do is we track development activity. We work with the city, we work with developers to understand what the plans are for the future. We look at the different track maps for the different projects. And the track maps would typically identify how many units are planned in a master plan development. If that development's already started selling homes, of course, then we reduce that. And so what we're showing here is the remaining units in each of these planned development areas. And the other important factor, right, just because someone's planning development, it doesn't mean it's going to be completely built and sold and occupied during our six-year or 10-year projection analysis. And so the, on the chart at the bottom of the page here, when we show our six-year projection, we're trying to estimate to the best of our ability based on all the information available at that point in time, how many of those units would be occupied and would be generating students for the district within that six year window. And so that information is factored into our projections for each school. And you can see on this chart that where those red hatched areas are, that the majority of those developments are impacting really just two of the areas. Each of the colors on this map represents our elementary school district areas as they exist currently. And so we have the light blue area, which is Schilling, and then the greenish area, which represents both the Birch Grove Intermediate and Primary Schools. So that's where the developments will be impacting those two campuses based on our current boundaries. And so this part here just shows how many of those housing units we anticipate to be built each year over the next six years and which boundaries they impact. And of course, both the junior high and the high school represent the entire district. So all of those developments will impact the junior high and the high school. Some of the other questions that came up are, well, obviously not every child that lives in Newark is enrolled in Newark Unified Schools. And so the question comes up, well, is it possible our enrollment could increase if we were educating more of the students that live here? And so this just shows the ratio. Again, the best and most accurate source of this data was census data. And of course, that was 2010. The new 2020 census is being collected right now. And so we should have that information available hopefully next year. And so we can see if that trend has changed much, but based on our knowledge and working with districts across the state and all over the Bay Area, the ratio of about 13% of the population of children not attending Newark schools is pretty average. We usually have a 8 to 9% typically enrolled in private schools. And then, again, over the years, charter schools have also picked up a significant portion of the population. But back in 2010, about a 13% ratio is not uncommon. So I don't think there's a significant volume of students a district is losing. that could be captured to help fill the schools. And anyway, that information is just available as a district hall. I can't break it down by individual schools. And so we just do it by grade level. So we broke it down to elementary and high school. And that's the additional demographics from that 2019 December report. Enrollment is tallied by what we call the unduplicated count. Those are your English learners, students that are on the free or reduced lunch program and foster youth. And so that helps the local control funding formula for the district to get additional income to help service that portion of the population. But it just shows you what the ratios are by school. Now of course this is based on enrollment information and it can vary slightly compared to where students live because not every student goes to the school that they live in their attendance area. There are transfers between schools. So this is based on actual enrollment information as of December. And then finally we have For each individual school, you see our chart showing the information in a graphic. I like using the graphic simply because we can see four years of history here and six years into the future. But there's one additional piece of information these charts show. The red line again is showing our enrollment information as of October each school year. The blue line represents the number of students that actually live in that boundary. And so By looking at the difference between the blue and the red lines, we can see if there's a current transfer in or transfer out. And so for Birch Grove Primary, our red line was slightly below the blue line. So there were just a few students fewer attending than lived in their attendance area. And again, transfers happen for many reasons, whether it's where special ed programs are located. In some districts, it's where the TK programs are located. Sometimes a school might be overcrowded, so the answers to a neighboring school with space, sometimes just transportation issues with parents. So, but we again, we get to see the net impact when we look at each of these charts. So again, birch growth primary, relatively stable, some slight growth. Again, that's one of the areas that has a little bit of development occurring. At intermediate, again, it represents the same physical area, but a different set of grade levels. been relatively stable, maybe a slight decline in the last four years. But we're expecting some increases over the next six years, with most of those increases over the next three years. Next, we get to Graham Elementary. And again, relatively stable here. And again, our enrollment is slightly less compared to the number of students that actually live in that area. But again, very stable enrollment projection. Kennedy Elementary actually has increased slightly over the last four years, and in the next six years is really quite stable. And again, we can see on this chart, different than some of the previous ones, that our enrollment on this campus slightly exceeds the number of students that live in their boundary, so we have a net inflow. Again, sometimes those inflows could be just from neighboring school districts where we're bringing in inter-district students. Next school is Lincoln. Here we have, again, quite a variance between our red and blue lines. So again, a net transfer into this campus. And again, when we look at the enrollment, relatively stable, just dropped real slightly into the future. Next is Music Elementary. Here we've had a slight drop over the last four years, and we're projecting it to continue to decline slightly. And again, it drops down to about 225 students in five years. But the blue and the red lines are just about at the same level, so our net transfers is almost zero for this campus. Next is Schilling, again, another school where there's a lot of development planned, especially in the next six years. And so we're showing, even though they've declined a little bit over the last four years, some significant increases over the next six years. And then Snow Elementary has been declining the last four years, but we're projecting it should be pretty stable over the next six years. And then the junior high, it's been stable, but we're actually showing a drop the next two years. That's typically created from, again, graduating some larger classes compared to those that are entering. And we only serve two grade levels at a campus. Again, a bubble or a dip in a grade level can create some significant variances. But overall, those numbers bounce back as development occurs and it ends up relatively stable. overall in enrollment. And then finally, the high school, it saw a drop over the last two years, but over the next six years, it's gonna be relatively stable, just a slight decrease. And then again, a summary here of our projections by grade level. It helps you to notice that Obviously the Birch Grove Intermediate and Primary are serving different grade levels for that boundary area. And also helps to point out that some of the campuses do not serve the TK program. So those would be housed at one of the neighboring schools that do offer that program. And again, it's another summary of our sixth grade enrollment. And then finally, school capacity is one of the next topics we'll be presenting. All those charts that show you the projections by school with the graphic, we can add a line or multiple lines to those charts that will show what our school capacity is. Because it's great to know what our school enrollment is and what it's projected to be. But until we compare that to the capacity, we won't really know How much room do we have here? If we need to close the school, how many of those students can we house at each campus? That will be a critical factor. And the other thing we'll be able to show is we wanna look at our total elementary population, and we'll need to compare that to our total elementary capacity to determine, you know, is it feasible to close one school? Is it feasible to close two schools? where is reality once we understand what our true capacities are. And to calculate capacities, we look at our classroom counts in comparison to how many students on average we house in each of those classrooms based on the grades. And of course, we have to account for special ed also. So with that, I'd love to answer any questions you have.

[5487] Mark Triplett: And, Mr Reynolds, if I may interject thank thank you very much for the for the presentation. I did want to appreciate you lifting up at the end there the the next step around capacity, and so I did want to interject and just let the committee know that at the last meeting. Some of the committee members went saw just when seeing just some of the very preliminary general data around capacity had some questions about it thought it didn't seem accurate. So just wanted to let everybody know that we have gone back and actually done a school by school walkthrough of every single class. Every every school facility in the last two weeks, and just to verify that that information is accurate so that's actually why we're not showing that tonight is because we were going back and just wanted to make sure that all the information. was accurate. And what we have discovered is there have been, there does look like there is some inconsistencies. And so we, we didn't want to, um, to, you know, we didn't want to bring, um, data that wasn't accurate. And so, um, we're, we're reviewing that and we'll bring it up next time.

[5559] Elisa Martinez: Superintendent Triplett. Ms. Medina, looks like you have a question.

[5568] SPEAKER_33: Yes, my question was regarding slide number seven, where you mentioned the SDC population. And I was wondering if you had included the preschool. And I know that normally we talk about TK up through sixth grade when we're talking about elementary, but the reason I bring this up is not really a music issue. It's a special ed issue. The preschool that is run through our district serves the whole city, and it's really the first bit where students who have special needs, we start to service them as a district. And so it's a community wide preschool. And I don't see their numbers. And that's concerning because wherever we decide or determine if we have to consolidate, those kids are not going to go away. So I would really appreciate seeing their numbers and knowing like, what are the trends with our special needs students? Because if they're not included in that SDC count, then maybe they need to have another line item where we talk about the preschool enrollment and how it varies. And it's kind of done very differently than kindergarten and TK because it kind of rolls through as they're doing their assessments. So as a special ed parent, I'd really like better data around that. So I know what I'm recommending for special needs families. Thank you.

[5654] SPEAKER_21: Yeah, my understanding would be that our numbers do not include any preschool information. So that would need to be considered separately or augmented into our numbers.

[5665] Guadalupe Lopez: Thank you.

[5668] Mark Triplett: Thank you, Ms. Medina. Can I just add, just for the sake of everybody who might not be aware, so I really appreciate you lifting that up, Ms. Medina, because music, I believe, and someone can correct me if I'm wrong, because I'm still new, but I think that music is the only elementary school that does have a preschool program, and it is, I believe it is special ed, special education based. Is that right, Ms. Medina?

[5695] SPEAKER_33: Yes. So basically, the way it works, when you have a referral for a special needs student, they have to be assessed to see if they qualify to receive special education services. The preschool, which hasn't always been at MUSIC, it used to be housed at Whiteford. But that's where the students go, and they kind of go for their two-week assessment. If they qualify and an IEP is held, then they find where the best placement for that student is. Oftentimes, it's in the preschool at MUSIC. I mean, like I said, that preschool has been housed somewhere else before, and it could be in the future, but we just have to know that population. They're important little people.

[5734] Mark Triplett: Absolutely. Thank you.

[5738] Elisa Martinez: And again, please correct me. Ms. Ringlin, is it Ringlin?

[5742] SPEAKER_42: It's Ringline, like Calvin Klein. It's German. Thank you. Go ahead. I noticed it says these numbers are 2019 and I feel like we've had like definitely some of those developments are active and we should have some students already from there, not just in a projection. Do we have numbers of what we are have already gained from those new developments?

[5771] SPEAKER_21: Our data was from October of 2019 when we did this demographics report. And so we had information as of that point in time, we have not started an update for this school year. Normally, again, we collect the data in October, which will be really too late for the purpose of this process. But yes, we do. We can go in and look at how many students are housed in any location throughout the district. So if there was a particular development that you were wondering how many students did it generate, we can look at that level of detail information.

[5811] SPEAKER_30: Okay.

[5814] SPEAKER_28: I just wanted to know that October 7th is what they call, they used to call it Census Day, and now I believe they're calling it Information Day, and that's the day that districts once a year take, I guess, basically the enrollment, and that's what a lot of these numbers are based on, which is why they used October 2019 last year. And that'll be happening again October 7th of this year. And so they'll have new numbers that they'll use throughout the year. And so that happens once a year, just for everybody's information.

[5848] Elisa Martinez: Thank you. Mr. Bailon?

[5853] SPEAKER_24: Yes. I'm just going to assume, but I'm also curious. And thank you, Mr. Reynolds, for that presentation. fascinated to find out what all that information, where all that information is from, but regarding the alternative ed sites, and I'm going to be an advocate for them because they need it, I'm just assuming that that's a hard number to figure out because it's such a small number or it's kind of just combined with the... Yeah, so

[5887] SPEAKER_21: When we do projections for the alternative school programs, it's not really based on where you live like you do with one of the elementary school boundaries. The alternate programs are a choice or an assignment or a specific program for perhaps a special need. And so our projections for that simply take a look at the overall district projections and then do a proration if a program is currently servicing 0.37% of the ninth graders and 0.45% of the 10th graders, we ratio by grade for that program based on its current factors and multiply those factors against our projected enrollments after factoring in development and other criteria to come up with those numbers. So in a district that's relatively stable in the projections, those programs are anticipated to also be stable. Whereas reality is we know that those programs can change over time. They could be trying to expand their presence or in some districts are trying to reduce the need for certain programs. But yeah, we're based on assuming the current programs will still serve as the same type of demographic into the future.

[5975] SPEAKER_24: Thank you.

[5983] Phuong Nguyen: Any other questions?

[5989] SPEAKER_39: No more on the panel.

[5994] Elisa Martinez: Miss Delacruz. Any additional comments on your end?

[6001] Marie dela Cruz: No, I do not, Ms. Martinez, thank you. Thank you, Ken.

[6006] Elisa Martinez: Thank you, Mr. Reynolds. Okay, so Ms. Garcia, I'll hand this over to you as we move on to item I, which is the site analysis. And just checking, On time, we have about 20 minutes. And please, Ms. Garcia, as we're moving forward, if you feel we need to have a little bit of an extension, please advise and we'll accommodate.

[6041] SPEAKER_28: Thank you. I think since in this case, because we moved the capacity information to next week while staff was working to verify all of that data, there's really only one criteria that we can look at in the demographics and capacity section that we have the data for this week. And those other items will be moving to next week when we start the capacity conversation. And so I don't think I think we'll have enough time to get through this. I'm going to share my screen. And this, in some respects, um goes to oh miss bloom's point sorry my all the people's images moved to the wrong screen there we go um to miss bloom's point uh that this really we tried to i tried to create the criteria and part of the conversation we were having last week when looking at these is to try to develop criteria that really are objective to try as much as we can to take the subjectivity and emotion out of it. Again, to some extent, obviously, given we're talking about closing schools, there's always going to be a little bit of that involved. And there's the opportunity for some subjectivity or conversation once we have the scoring, because just because one school ends up at the top, there could be a very good reason why based on all the data that you've received or other information or input that the committee has, that it really doesn't make sense to close that school for X, Y, or Z reason. And so we wanna leave room for that, but the criteria itself really is set up to be objective and as Ms. Bloom noted, pretty black and white. And so what I did was try to set up, because I know you guys will have a lot of information that you'll be looking at and will be flipping through presentations, etc. I tried to set up this criteria with some information that we can build in as items are presented so that it's easier for you to see it all in one place and not have to try to flip back and forth between other documents. So really for this evening, as I mentioned, we would have been doing demographics of capacity, but three of the criteria really are focused and need information on capacity in order to make that determination. So we're going to leave one, two, excuse me, one, three, and four for next week. And the one that we'll be looking at today really is number two, which is whether or not the schools are demographically diverse based on the unduplicated pupil percentage. And so what I did, based on that presentation that Mr. Reynolds just provided to you, one of the slides that he provided included the unduplicated pupil percentage for each one of the school sites. And so I went ahead and filled those in under each one of the schools. And so what we want to look at is to make the determination, yes or no, whether or not that school site is what we feel is demographically diverse. And the weighted methodology is basically scoring them from the least diverse to the most diverse. And that, again, will be a simple count once all of them are, once we've determined a yes or no. So the first one, for example, we have Birch Grove Primary. The UPP is 41%. And just in case it hasn't been explained, the unduplicated pupil percentage looks at English learners, students that are foster youth, and those that are eligible for free and reduced-priced meals. So it's a proxy for the socioeconomic status. They're called unduplicated pupils because, as you can imagine, some of your students are more than one of those things. Some of them are English learners are and are also eligible for free and reduced price meals or might be foster youth. And so they don't count the student three times. They only count them once. So that's why it's unduplicated. And so what this what Mr. Reynolds showed on his is what they literally do is they take the count from that census day that I mentioned that October of every year of the number of students that qualify in those three buckets. And they divide that into the total number of students that are enrolled at the school on that day, and they come up with a percentage. And so that's where these numbers are coming from. It's those counts from October of 2019 of the students that met those three categories and then total enrollment at the school at that time. And that's the number that the state uses every year as it's moving forward. And so we're looking at this and we're basically want to go through each one of these schools, looking at that percentage and determine whether that's a yes or no. Does that make sense? Do I have any questions? I should probably open up the little participant tab.

[6365] SPEAKER_39: I can help. And as of now, no one has raised their hand.

[6368] Michael Milliken: Okay.

[6369] Elisa Martinez: Um, so what I'd like to do, um, and, uh, is to go through, sorry, actually, we do have miss Medina with a raised hand. Got it.

[6379] SPEAKER_33: Um, so I guess I just need clarification. What, what did we vote yes or no on when it's like a percentage number?

[6389] SPEAKER_28: So what we are trying to look at, um, is our, is your, um, uh, in some respects, it's part of judgment about whether that school site is what you would consider demographically diverse. And that number is a proxy for that. We don't, we can't go through and count, you know, there's five of these kids and two of those kids and the rest of them are, you know, African American, but these kids are white. So this provides us with that proxy to try to get an idea of what that demographic makeup is of that school sites. That's what that percentage is providing.

[6426] SPEAKER_33: So yes would be diverse and no would be not as diverse, right? Correct. Thank you so much.

[6436] SPEAKER_39: One more question from Shea Marshall.

[6441] SPEAKER_31: Yeah, so Miss Medina sort of talked about it. So what is the, do we have like a percentage of like where the cutoff would be of what we consider diverse? Or are you saying this is all up to us to decide subjectively?

[6454] SPEAKER_28: Um, I, well, I, what I'd like to do is just have a quick conversation about, um, of maybe what that range would be. Um, for example, and I'm going to go to the extreme. If I saw a UPP of 1%, um, that means, you know, 1% of the student body. I wouldn't consider that a very diverse school and the same thing on the opposite end of the spectrum. If it's at 89%, that's also not necessarily diverse, but on the other end of the spectrum. And so, you know, the, we could start with, you know, 50%, that's a diverse school. It's, you know, half and half, you have a good mix of kids. And so I would argue that, you know, as they start to diverge from that 50% is where we have to make that determination. And so in some respects, that's something that we can consider is, you know, where's that, Does anybody have a strong feeling about that sweet spot of 10% in either direction is what I would typically think of or see in that respect. But I'm open to anybody who feels strongly about going further out from that range.

[6541] SPEAKER_39: No hands. Ms. Marshall, do you have another question or is it the same hand from before? I think it's the same. It was the same hand, sorry. Thank you. No hands as of now. All right.

[6554] SPEAKER_28: So in that aspect, for example, if we go by that range of, you know, 10% on either side of 50 at 41%, we could argue that Birch Grove primary has a diverse population. And the same thing when we're looking since it's, I understand there are different schools, but the same site, Birch Grove Intermediate is about 43%. So again, with that 10% range, we can consider it a demographically diverse population.

[6590] Mark Triplett: Rihanna, is it possible, sorry to interrupt, could you scroll over so we can see more than just the three schools at one time?

[6597] SPEAKER_28: It's going to, because it's showing this, just so you know, it's going to scroll over. So we have Birch at 43, Graham at 46. I mean, excuse me, 66. Kennedy is 37. Lincoln is at 54. Music is at 64, Schilling at 73, and Snow at 52. So that's our universe. And what I can do just to, let me unmute. Since we know which one we're looking at, just so you can see more of the schools. And I could probably make it a tad bit. So there we have all of them. So we do have about nine minutes. And no, it's a lot to take in. But for example, again, if we go by that range at 41%, this would be a yes. I'm going to put them in, not set in stone, just so you kind of see what that looks like. So we determined that a two is a yes. Sorry. So a one is a yes, because if it's demographically diverse, this is something that we see as positive and we wouldn't want it higher up on the rank, for example. Birch Elementary, again, with that 10% range, you have a one. Graham is actually above that 10% range. It's at 65. So just sticking with that for right now, that would be a two. Same with Kennedy. It's far below that 10% range. So that's not demographically diverse. We have a two. Lincoln would be a one for a yes at 54. Music would be a no, not demographically diverse at 64% because it's higher. Schilling also a no with it being higher. And snow is a one for a yes because it's within that sweet spot or that range. So the question for you is looking at that, again, one is a yes, it's diverse. To is a no, it's not diverse. And again, it's an objective, you know, it's a not saying that there's not diversity there, but just on the scale. Does anybody have any objections to those rankings based on the criteria and what we've been discussing?

[6771] Elisa Martinez: Miss Bloom.

[6774] Rachel Bloom: So diversity means like equal amounts of the students in the UPP and students not in that. Is that correct?

[6787] SPEAKER_28: In this, that's the proxy that we're using. Yes. With that. Yes.

[6792] Rachel Bloom: All right. Because normally we think diversity, like a higher population is okay.

[6797] SPEAKER_28: Right. But then if you have a higher population, if you have a school with all students that are low income, on free and reduced price meals, English learners and foster youth, that's not a good. That is not diverse. Right. So you want to mix.

[6813] Rachel Bloom: So it like breaks up schools that have a high population of UPP. OK, thank you.

[6821] SPEAKER_39: There's a question from Miss Catheerine Ingham-Watters.

[6825] Catheerine Ingham-Watters: More of an observation or just have it explained a little bit more. just for us to be weary that diverse schools are different than demographically diverse schools or whatever, what is it? What's the acronym we're using? Yeah, demographically diverse schools. So that's two different things. So when we say use your judgment to see if it's a diverse school, oh, demographically diverse. I'm just also curious, with the categorizing here. So on some of these, like facilities, they're in good repair, certain points, you're in bad repair, certain points. With this one is like the good side, if you're closer to 50, and like the bad side is you're further away than 50, or if we can explain how this piece kind of compares to the other indicators.

[6887] SPEAKER_28: Well, some of the indicators, as you've noted, lend themselves to breaking it down, you know, on another level and others don't have as much. In this case, we were just looking at it. If we were to do that weighted score, it was just based on a ranking. So literally start starting from, you know, most diverse to least we're going to go eight through one. And the idea with this additional weighted scoring is simply that If when we get through the scores, if we have five schools that all scored 14 or whatever that high number is, we need to have something else to look at in order to kind of, you know, break that tiebreaker. And that's the idea with that extra piece of it of breaking it down in more detail than just the yes or no.

[6936] Elisa Martinez: Ms. Garcia, sorry, I'm going to interrupt here for a second because we are about five minutes. So I think we're going to need to extend here. So I will, what do you think, maybe 30 minutes max? We should be good in 30 minutes. Let me try to look at everybody on the grid. Can I get a motion and a second to extend the meeting for 30 minutes, please?

[6961] Rachel Bloom: I move to extend the meeting.

[6963] SPEAKER_11: I'll second.

[6966] SPEAKER_39: Who was the second? Crocker. Thank you.

[6971] Elisa Martinez: And can we just do a, well, Show of hands, the participants. Sorry, please vote.

[6981] SPEAKER_11: I can't move the hand thing.

[6983] SPEAKER_39: Ms. Crocker, can you tell me yes or no for now? Yes. OK, Jody, if you can help me please track the votes. I'll call them out. I have a yes from Rachel Bloom, Chrissy Dix, Veronica Medina, Ringling, and Padilla, Ingham-Watters. Ibarra, Navarez, Eustace, Marshall. And Crocker. And Crocker. Thank you.

[7013] Elisa Martinez: Motion passes. I think it was unanimous. Got it. Very good. Sorry about for that interruption. Go ahead, Ms. Garcia.

[7024] SPEAKER_28: Really, are there any other questions or did that answer your question?

[7029] Catheerine Ingham-Watters: I think that did answer my question. Just the other thing, and I know it's called demographically, that term diverse populations. I'm just curious because some of those are related to the race of a person. And so is there any consideration of not using race as an indicator?

[7052] SPEAKER_28: Those technically, and the reason we chose that is because the UPP is looking at English learners, foster youth, and those that are eligible for free and reduced price meals. So while the argument can be made and what you see is you usually see students of certain races and more cases than others that might account for those. I think when they came up with those is they were trying to look at other indicators that we're looking at more socioeconomic, etc. And not specifically race. And so those which is why we use that that demographically with this case, and not racial diversity when we were looking at these numbers. Or when we chose the UPP.

[7105] Mark Triplett: I have some wrong brown, but I believe that we whether we agree with it or not, we can't use race to make these kind of decisions. I know that in other districts, like for example, you can't base enrollment on race. I think it's illegal. And so I think that's really the basis for not having race as a factor here.

[7138] SPEAKER_39: I have some questions and raise hands, Miss Crocker.

[7143] SPEAKER_11: Yeah, what is the percentage of diversity or what is what is the percentage of diversity for the whole district? I don't have that information that around 50. Fifty three percent, three percent. So what we're doing is we're saying that because at this point, there are four above and four below. I mean, in terms of ranking, are more diverse or less diverse than the 53. So I don't know if that's a factor or what. Is that the reason why you chose 10% on each side?

[7186] SPEAKER_28: No, it wasn't because of the district's total diversity or that was a piece of it. But the other part of it really is just trying to look at you're standing in a room with 10 people in them. And really that 50% is that sweet spot and what that range is on either side. I'm open if the committee thinks that range should be slightly higher. But given the district's 53%, that 10 on either side is also a good range to look at.

[7226] SPEAKER_39: OK. Question. Okay, sorry.

[7230] Elisa Martinez: Sorry. So so there are additional questions. I'm not sure Miss Garcia if you wanted to try to kind of tighten in on that range, or should we go on to another question before you come back to it?

[7242] SPEAKER_28: Well, I guess I would ask it back to the question I asked previously, is there an objection or would somebody argue that that range should be broadened or tightens?

[7260] SPEAKER_39: If you want to narrow down that question, if I can ask the hands to please go down so we can focus on Ms. Garcia's current question, please.

[7272] SPEAKER_28: Ms. Bloom likes the plus or minus 10. Thanks for the visual.

[7280] SPEAKER_40: OK.

[7280] Elisa Martinez: So are we moving forward then with keep it at plus or minus 10 if we can kind of maybe a visual? All right, sorry. So Ms. Dix had a question.

[7295] Phuong Nguyen: All right, nope. I'll pull it down. It was an accident. Thanks. Question for Ms.

[7304] SPEAKER_39: Padilla. Oh, it went down as well. OK, no further questions.

[7315] Elisa Martinez: All right. Back to you, Ms. Garcia.

[7318] SPEAKER_28: All right, so we will keep that score. And then what I will do just in the interest of time is I can then since the and let me unhide this just so we can all see it.

[7333] Elisa Martinez: Since the weighted method, can you are you projecting again?

[7337] SPEAKER_28: Not anymore. I'm talking to myself apparently. Thank you, Chair Martinez. The weighted methodology is just scoring from most diverse to least diverse. And so I will rank these and fill in the one through eight, and then we can share that with you next week, because that's just a factor. It's not a subjective determination, if there's no objections to that.

[7371] SPEAKER_11: I don't see any. Are you planning to rank, or are you planning to have one or two?

[7375] SPEAKER_28: No. So these ones or twos are the ones that we just did together. And that is staying because we've all agreed on that ranking on those numbers. It's the weighted methodology. The weighted methodology is scoring the schools with the highest gets the eight down to one. And again, the idea with this weighted methodology is and it doesn't apply to all of them is just so that we have a more nuanced score. in the events that we come to a point at the end of this that the just simple scoring of one or two, we end up with various schools with the same total score.

[7418] SPEAKER_11: I'm looking at four that are going to get a one and four that are going to get a two, is that correct?

[7423] SPEAKER_28: Yes, there were four that were getting ones and four that were getting, so we have Birch, Birch Primary and Birch Intermediate Lincoln Elementary School and Snow Elementary School that received a one because we said they were within that plus or minus 10. So they're demographically diverse. And then we have Graham, Kennedy, Music, and Schilling, which are getting a two, which is no, they're not demographically diverse because they're outside of that range. Okay. All right. Thank you very much. So I'll send it back to you, Chair Martinez.

[7469] Elisa Martinez: Thank you. And actually, I believe Ms. Garcia, as we move to item J, which is our next meeting next week, September 15th, were you going to just remind us of what the target subject for that was?

[7486] SPEAKER_28: Yes. And let me just stick this back up real quick. So next week we are going to be looking at a combination of the original intent was to look at facilities. And so we'd be looking at these five criteria, but then because we also move the capacity conversation to the next meeting, we'll be looking at criterias one, three and four as well. And so the meeting next week will be focused on facilities and the capacity information. Somebody's laughing. Yeah, that's a lot. Yeah, it's a lot of dense information and what and what I am going to attempt to do and why I set these up is while that information is to try to fill in some of this data based on that information that's being provided and so that we'll have it at least in one place. So you'll have the presentation by staff, the demographer, architects, et cetera, who will be providing and being able to answer your questions. And then what I'm trying to do is take that information in advance and fill in some of the data points so that it makes it hopefully a little bit easier for all of you as you're trying to look at these and we go through scoring them, similar to what I did with these 41, 43, et cetera, here.

[7572] SPEAKER_39: Do you remember my name, miss? You have two raised hands. Oh, sorry. I go. Miss Ringling, ring, ring, ring, ring.

[7584] SPEAKER_28: I'm thinking Calvin Klein and that'll do.

[7587] SPEAKER_42: I'm wondering if, are we using the district facilities master plan, if that's accurate information? It's a really big and heavy document. I'm wondering if there's a way to get those out to the committee members ahead of time, more than just a couple of days ahead of time, so we can really sift through that and know our questions ahead of time. Is there a reason we can't do that?

[7606] SPEAKER_11: Might I ask for a hard copy from the district? Because in terms of printing things out, I am a paper person. So if I could pick up that from the school district, it's something that you should have available, right?

[7622] SPEAKER_39: Those specific questions, if you want to just email Jodi Croce or myself, Lucia Gutierrez, we can help you with that.

[7630] Elisa Martinez: I would ask, actually, Ms.dela Cruz to just respond to that. Okay, thank you. With regards to the question about the source. And then, yeah, the other, the how-to, we could certainly figure that, but in terms of the source, I think that's an important question.

[7645] Marie dela Cruz: Yeah, so some of the information will be coming from the facilities master plan, and with the combination of our own walkthroughs, as Dr. Triplett mentioned earlier, If the committee members are interested in getting a copy of the master plan, just remember it is still in draft form. We're still waiting for the final copy. We can provide the soft copy as well as make copies if you're interested in picking them up. So we could probably send a survey out to see who would like the printed copies, because what we could do is email the soft copy to the committee members, if that's the interest of the members. And then if anybody's interested in a hard copy, we can certainly make copies, just let us know.

[7700] Mark Triplett: The only caveat I will say is we do want to make sure that we are getting out the most up-to-date utilization data. And so that we've just completed that today. Sorry, no, we have one more school tomorrow. And so we probably won't be able to get that fully compiled until, when do you think, Ms.dela Cruz, maybe Monday?

[7725] Marie dela Cruz: By Monday, that's our target. Our goal is to have the capacity data by Monday. And in terms of what we're using the master plan for, there's information in there about what year the school was built, the acreage, the square footage, that type of information.

[7747] SPEAKER_28: And it also includes cost information, et cetera, correct, Ms. Delacruz? I'm sorry, what was that? It also includes the costs of potential improvements, et cetera, is in there as well.

[7760] Marie dela Cruz: Yes, there's estimates of.

[7766] Elisa Martinez: Sorry, Mr. La Cruz, I'm just thinking that just responding to a comment about, hey, how far in advance can we see it? Because it is quite a bit of information. I'm wondering if if we do make the soft copy available with Superintendent Triplett, with the understanding that the actual capacity numbers That in itself, we will send out by Monday with the revised number. But I think all the other information, folks can have as soon as possible so they can get a head start. Is that something we could do?

[7799] Marie dela Cruz: Yes. And we'll make that note and remind everyone that the information on the number of classrooms and portables is still being verified. OK.

[7811] SPEAKER_40: Very good.

[7813] SPEAKER_11: One more question. The board is already There, right?

[7818] Marie dela Cruz: Yeah, there was a link on the website. But last time I checked, the link isn't working anymore. But I do have a PDF that I can send out.

[7831] SPEAKER_39: OK, sorry, we have Chairmember Martinez, one question for Miss Medina.

[7835] Elisa Martinez: Yes, Miss Medina.

[7836] SPEAKER_33: Thank you. So to be clear, next week we will be scoring the capacity as well as the facilities? Correct. Then my next question or my next comment is does the preschool factor into any of this or no?

[7856] SPEAKER_28: We will make sure that the enrollment is there for the preschool at the one and the preschool is situated on one of the campuses and so it's part of the the capacity number will include their buildings as well. So we just need to make sure that the enrollment number that we have that Mr. Reynolds had provided is updated to include those preschool numbers as well.

[7878] SPEAKER_33: Okay, that would be great. Thank you so much.

[7881] SPEAKER_39: No further questions, Chairmember Martinez.

[7886] Elisa Martinez: Thank you. All right, Ms. Garcia, if there are no other comments? Okay, so again, just to reiterate, Ms.dela Cruz, will we make sure we send out whether it's the new link or the PDF by tomorrow, Ms. Delacruz? Yes, Ms. Martinez. Thank you. Once again, just clarifying, the revised capacity numbers will be coming to you Monday, okay? All right, and with that, we will go to item J, which is adjournment. So I would entertain a motion to, and a second to adjourn, please.

[7932] SPEAKER_39: I still motion. I got a motion by Ms. Christy Dix and a second by Ms. Padilla. Thank you. If everybody can raise their hand for a yes. For the record, I have Padilla, Medina, Ibarra, Dix, Eustace, Marshall, Bloom, Ingham-Watters, Crocker, Bailon, Navarez, and Ringling, unanimous.

[7968] Elisa Martinez: Okay, very good. Well, thank you. Meeting is adjourned, and we will see you next week. Please feel free to reach out via email if there's any additional questions. Okay, thank you so much. Thank you, everyone, and have a great night. Thank you so much, Five ayes.

[7985] Marie dela Cruz: Good night, everyone.

[7987] SPEAKER_29: Good night, everybody, thank you.

No minutes available.