Regular Meeting

No content available.

[272] SPEAKER_21: Thank you.

[325] SPEAKER_32: Check, check, check.

[358] Bowen Zhang: I would just want to remember. I'm so curious about this light.

[651] SPEAKER_35: Duke, if you can hear me, we're about to start.

[655] Olivia Rangel: I'm not sure how I do that.

[657] SPEAKER_32: OK.

[692] Bowen Zhang: Okay. Hello, everybody. Good evening. Welcome to the August 18th regular meeting of the New World Board of Education. As you can see, meeting is quarter order at 5.01. As you can see, we're transitioning back to normal in-person meeting. This is our first in-person meeting with live audience. And throughout this meeting, if we experience any technical difficulties, please bear with us. this is we haven't done open meeting in person since March of 2020. Okay. Ms. Gutierrez, roll call, please.

[731] SPEAKER_35: Yes, thank you. Member Hill.

[737] SPEAKER_18: Here.

[739] SPEAKER_35: Member Grindel. Here. Vice President Nguyen. Here. And President Jean.

[745] Bowen Zhang: Here. Thank you. Yeah, all present. Next will be approval of the agenda. And may I get a motion to approve the agenda as it is, or any modifications?

[760] Mark Triplett: President Chen, we'd like to pull two items, both the minutes, which is item 14.7 and 14.8.

[767] Bowen Zhang: Yes. OK. I move that we approve the agenda without item 14.7 and item 14.8. Can I get a second? I'll second. Seconded by Member Grundahl. Member Grundahl, how do you vote? Yes. Member Hill, how do you vote? Member Hill, how do you vote?

[802] Aiden Hill: Yeah, that, yes.

[805] Bowen Zhang: Okay. Member Nguyen, how do you vote?

[807] SPEAKER_32: Yes.

[808] Bowen Zhang: My vote is yes as well. Motion carries with four ayes. Next, we'll be opening up our study session, APAC's credit recovery. Any public comment for this item? Ms. Gutierrez?

[827] SPEAKER_35: Yes, President Zhang, we do have three speakers on this item. The first speaker is going to be Brian Foster. Give me a second while I unmute the microphone. Brian Foster you may begin.

[845] SPEAKER_17: Thank you President Chung and members of the board. Before I before the timer starts I would like to seek. You may begin. Can you hear me. Hello.

[858] SPEAKER_35: Hello. Hello. Brian Foster you may begin.

[861] SPEAKER_41: Can you hear me. Can you hear me? I am not muted.

[868] SPEAKER_32: Hello?

[869] SPEAKER_41: I am here. I am not muted.

[874] SPEAKER_35: Brian Foster, can you hear us?

[878] SPEAKER_41: I can hear you.

[888] SPEAKER_32: I can.

[890] Aiden Hill: So this is a member of Yale, so I'm I'm watching through YouTube. I can hear Brian Foster through YouTube, but apparently you guys can't hear him.

[959] SPEAKER_35: Okay, Mr. Foster, may I ask you to try again?

[964] SPEAKER_41: Can you hear me now?

[968] SPEAKER_35: We apologize. Hold on one more second. Sorry for the inconvenience.

[1003] SPEAKER_18: Okay. Okay, can you hear me now? Yes, we can hear you. I'm hearing you. Sorry.

[1012] SPEAKER_21: Are we good now? We begin. Okay, so you can hear me, yes?

[1035] SPEAKER_18: Yes. Okay. Thank you, President Zhang and members of the board. Before the timer starts, I'd like to seek the indulgence of the president of the board, because my words tonight were crafted with the support of NTA leadership, including our NTA president. And given our NT leadership's involvement, I would like to extend beyond the three minutes because that's really the only way that our union, this in public comments, our union is able to opine into this discussion. If that would be okay with you? Okay, I heard an echo. I hope that you said go. All right, so I will just commence. We originally thought that the administration would join NTA in recommending the discontinuance of the APEC system. And then we saw the administration slide presentation that you were about to see tonight. We teachers want to believe in and follow our district leaders. We want to know that decisions and policies are grounded in truth, honesty, and academic integrity in the same manner that we teachers are responsible for imbuing those same principles in our students. The slide presentation you are about to see is based on Apex's marketing, PR, and quite frankly, snake oil. We teachers don't want sparkles, bows, and happy, happy, joy, joy. We are adults, not kindergartners, and we simply want the truth. Give us that, and we will follow. Our lies that we are spreading about Apex prevent us from even acknowledging problems that we need to address. Here are a couple of truths pulled from our high school's website. We have a 93% graduation rate, but only 61% English proficiency, and only 27% math proficiency. How and why do we graduate so many seniors who are insufficiently prepared for college and careers? We all know that surrounding school districts are ranked higher than we are in Newark, but we do not acknowledge the honest reasons as to why. There is no reason, really, why we cannot have national merit scholars in the steady stream of students accepted into the top colleges across the nation. Well, there's one reason. Our school culture does not place as its highest academic priority, academic achievement. I asked my students last year why a simple freeway lowers our students' academic performance. Two students who had previously attended Fremont schools simply stated that Fremont's parents and teachers demand that their students study more. When I asked my students two years ago why we don't celebrate college acceptances, My seniors told me that it was in bad form to brag and embarrass those who were not accepted into college. Despite everything you're about to hear from the Apex marketing materials, our students cheat to earn credits. How do I know that? I ask my students and they tell me. Just last week, a student who went through Apex said he learned nothing and that the students freely copied answers from the internet. Our students are not unique in this regard. It is not just Newark. It is universal. Just do an internet search and you will find it. The Alameda County Grand Jury exposed Apex's cheating within the Oakland Unified School District. But for some reason, we want to continue Oakland's practices. Just ask yourself the simple question, how is it possible for a student to truly learn an entire semester's worth of material in one week or even a half a day as one of my students did? It is a lie, it is fraud, and it is unfair to our students who honestly earn their grades. It tarnishes not only our school's reputation, but all of our other students' diplomas. It limits our ability to push students up to Fremont's standards. So who wins with APEX? Our students gain unearned credits, so they and their families win hollow and fraudulent short-term happiness. Our district wins unearned graduation rates that do not translate into student learning and higher rankings. Our district actually loses money because we pay for not only the promised credentialed teacher, but also enrollment fees to Admentum, which is Apex Learning's profit-based parent company. We are unnecessarily spending precious public funds to temporarily look good while misleading our families and leaving our students unprepared. For those familiar with Diane Ravitch's work, APEX provides another example of how profit-making enterprises suck scarce taxpayer resources out of our classrooms. Administration slide presentations includes a variety of alternatives for credit recovery. Those choices omit the most obvious and most appropriate course of action. Discontinue online credit courses at Newark Memorial and reinstate traditional teacher-led credit recovery classes. Those few students who truly benefit from online, independent, self-paced learning should flock to Crossroads. All the others should learn in traditional classes. It is so demoralizing to students who work very hard over a semester during passing grades only to see their fellow students choose Apex in the last few days or weeks of the school year to receive the same diploma. Online courses also completely undermine teachers' authority and standing among our students. I cannot tell you how uncomfortable it is to appeal to our leadership on moral grounds, but there comes a point in time when one is compelled to draw a line in the sand, or as John Lewis said, to get into good trouble. We hope that by doing so, we are inspiring our own students to become honest leaders in the good fight. You tonight have a chance to make an honest moral choice or to pretend reality away and sing happy, happy, joy, joy. I'm available to answer your questions if you want to grab me more time to discount the arguments that are presented in tonight's presentation. And it is our sincere hope that our leadership will take a moment, lean into the truth, develop cooperative partnerships with our teachers, put our students' honest academic achievement first, and withdraw their presentation as a first step in restoring academic integrity within the Newark Unified School District. Thank you.

[1402] Maria Huffer: Thank you.

[1461] Cindy Parks: I got the prompt to speak. Can you hear me? Because your feedback is unbearable. Can you hear me? Well, first of all, let me start off by saying your agenda says that this is that these meetings will be held virtually until further notice. That's the first paragraph on this agenda, so I'm a little confused on the in-person comments. While Vivian Larson was the counselor at Newark Memorial, we had a conversation about student struggles, and one thing she mentioned was how most freshmen were ill-prepared, unorganized for high school classes, and we also discussed the number of credit-deficient students. In 2012, a request was made for the number of enrolled students grades 10 through 12, and of that number, how many were credit deficient, broken down in 10-unit increments. This request highlighted a need, and then-Superintendent Dave Markin put Bridgepoint principal Tom Corp put in charge of finding a program which would provide those students an opportunity to make up those credits. This is how Apex wound up in this district. Honestly, I don't remember a board presentation or adoption. Like many things in this district, it was just implemented without any checks and balances. Nothing has changed over the years. The district still needs to figure out a way to remedy the credit deficient issues. but not with APICS. I hope you will continue the process to defund the program until you can put the proper protocols, and I hope you will limit the credit recovery program to the Bridgepoint Campus or as Mr. Foster just mentioned, to Crossroads, which he had a very eloquent speech. I truly appreciated everything he had to say. Thank you very much, and I hope that you will address whether this is really an in-person meeting or not. Thank you.

[1587] Chery Villa: Hey!

[1631] Nancy Thomas: The reverberation is almost unbearable, but I will go ahead, assuming that you can hear me also. Dear members of the board, I will be repeating some of the things that Brian Foster said earlier, so please bear with me. I would like to begin by reminding you of what Newark Memorial teacher Brian Foster told you on June 3rd. Quote, Apex does not help our students to learn, but instead teaches them to cheat and abuse systems. How else can you explain why, for multiple years, otherwise non-graduating seniors requested and our counselors assigned to them Apex classes in the last weeks of the school year? In a week or even just a day, students copy and paste answers from the internet to earn an entire semester's credit in Apex. Newark appears to have many of the same issues as Castle Mount High School in Oakland. The grand jury investigated their Apex program and here's what they had to say. This school and the district that runs it are failing our students. There is no excuse for giving a high school diploma to those who do not earn it. The practice of promoting failing students deprives those students of the education that they deserve and that they need to succeed in the world today. It cheapens the accomplishments of students who do work hard. It deprives the community of an educated and productive workforce. It compromises academic equity. It undermines a fair system of scholastic evaluation. It produces a disincentive for intellectual honesty. And it undermines the civic fabric of the entire city. It is profoundly unfair to most students who work hard to qualify for a high school diploma. Please, board, call for an independent investigation into what appears to be many, many years of district abuse of ABEX. You need to find out how this happened and how to make sure it never happens again. Thank you.

[1842] SPEAKER_18: Ha ha ha!

[1873] SPEAKER_21: OK, here we go.

[1927] Penny DeLeon: I can't hear it. Yes. Okay, here we go.

[1937] Bowen Zhang: So, I guess we have to go. One second. Oh, yeah, that's right.

[1973] Mark Triplett: All right, good evening everyone, board members, staff, and distinguished guests. So this evening, the board asked us in the spring to bring forth APEX as a study session to discuss and better understand APEX and the purpose of it and how it works and really to begin to think about if it is an appropriate program that we have or is it more, whether or not it's more appropriate to discontinue or to create a different option for students in need of credit recovery. So with that in mind, we're coming tonight. Ms. Pierce is going to lead the presentation, and we anticipate that this might generate some questions, obviously some discussion, and no doubt we might need to have more discussion about this. Ms. Pierce.

[2047] Nicole Pierce-Davis: Yes and again I just want to reiterate that even before we begin this really is a lot of the early materials in this presentation is just designed to give us an idea of what APEX is before we start getting into decision-making. I felt like it was important that we kind of understand what it is and how it's implemented. So APEX is... is there any way we can move that? I didn't hear it. Just in case it gets in the way later. But it has been Let's see if we can move that person.

[2086] Toni Stone: If we can't, that's okay. Perfect, there we go.

[2090] Nicole Pierce-Davis: Thank you. They do offer, they've offered 3.7 million students enrollments for last year. It has been a digital curriculum provider since 1997. It actually was originated to support with AP coursework. So originally, Apex only offered AP courses. And it was designed to do that, to offer students AP courses, especially if they were in a smaller school and didn't have access to those courses. And eventually, they actually expanded to meet the needs of credit recovery.

[2124] SPEAKER_21: Thank you.

[2136] Nicole Pierce-Davis: Oh, there we go. Thank you. Oh, wait, did you just click it? Oh, thank you. We have some key partners here. I won't go into too many of them, but they do partner with groups like College Board and NCAA to provide the services and the platform that they do. Currently, NUSD is using APEX, and I just want to be clear for a second, there are different types of online programming, so I don't want us to get confused. APEX and Edgenuity. we are using in different ways. They both offer sort of virtual instruction, they both offer credit recovery, but currently we are using Apex as a credit recovery program, and we are using Edgenuity as a independent virtual instruction option. So I don't want us to confuse the two because they offer very different services currently in the way that they're being used. So for APEX, we're using it as credit recovery, which essentially means that students have taken the traditional course and they did not pass the course, so now they're taking it a second time. They either received a low grade or they didn't earn the credit the first time around, and so they are now taking that course a second time. When we do that, we think about what it would take to do that as a teacher. If you're taking the course a second time, should it take you as long as it took you the first time? Generally, the answer is no. A solid teacher, right, would differentiate their program. So they would think about what does the student know, what does the student not know, and target the learning that maybe was missed the first time around. And so that's something for us to also keep in mind. What teachers teach APEX, right? Currently, teachers support in completing the required material. We have credentialed teachers within the area to support in filling those gaps. And again, APEC supports with the challenge of differentiating for students within the same content, but different coursework. So we could have an English teacher that's supporting a group of students taking English, but they may be retaking English 9 versus 10 versus 11 versus 12. And they can support them with the support of technology. So that intentional support looks like remediation. They have literacy supports built into the program. They have language development supports also built in. There are all kinds of learning supports such as things, academic vocabulary, where you click and you can immediately get it. It can read. It's self-paced. There is a link there that talks about the strategies for English language learners that are built in and the studies that support with those students as well. is they attempt to make it as engaging as possible, unlike some of our more traditional textbooks that maybe get updated every 10 years or so. With online curriculum, you can update materials so that you can start to see real-world programs that are a little bit more relevant for our students. And they also try to make them engaging. So oftentimes, we hear things like, well, they get on the computer, they walk away, and then all of a sudden, they pass the course. In this case, that's not true. Students do have to do something, see something, move something, say something, explain something about every 15 to 20 seconds in order to progress along in each course. In terms of kind of the breadth and depth of the content, this is kind of an example of what a student might see in US government politics. On the right, you might see each unit. And then on the left, you can see how each unit is broken down into things like pre-assessments, checkups, or reviews for skills, study sessions, quiz, and practice. Now, in NUSD, we are currently running a blended model, and so there's kind of apex to fidelity, which means students have to go through every single one of these units, they have to pass every single one of these units, and they have to do every single unit within it. A blended model actually uses the teacher of record to say, as the teacher of the course, if a student, let's say, passes out of a particular unit, they can choose to say, I don't want you to do the practice assignment that's a part of APEX. Instead, I want you to do this other thing. And they can assign other practice materials or other written assignments as needed. Just because a student is not on Apex doing those hours of work doesn't mean that they couldn't be doing other hours of work for the teacher of record. Again, depending on what the teacher is asking of the students in the class. There have been some results, and again, I am not an Apex seller, if you will, but it's important that if we're going to ask about efficacy in case studies, that we ask them to produce some of that work, and that's exactly what I did in preparation for this. We called up Apex and said, let's give us some proof. Give me some proof of efficacy of your program. And so what they did is they shared quite a bit with us. I've added two of those here, and then an additional link for additional efficacy studies. The first one comes out of Texas, and they really looked at the assessment of academic readiness, and specifically looking at struggling students using the Apex courses, and how they achieved similar average scores as students not identified as struggling on those same tests. And these are end of course exams in algebra, English, English 2, and so on. A similar study happened with Accelerated Learning Solutions, which is essentially a charter program that really looks at credit remediation. And so what they did is they looked at how many students took geometry after Algebra 1 Apex. So you would imagine a test as to whether or not something is really working is how well do they do on the course after the Apex course they took, right? Because you imagine that content is going to spiral and it's going to build on each other. If you took an APEX class English 9, if that English 9 APEX course didn't do what it was supposed to do, you would imagine that in English 10, the student would very much struggle. In this case, they showed that at this particular group with the study that they did, students did quite well in the coursework after. So taking English 12 after being enrolled in APEX English 11, taking English 11 after being enrolled in APEX English 10, and so on.

[2523] Terrence Grindall: Just to clarify, I want to be clear that when you're saying English 10, that is a normal classroom environment, not APEX English 10, right? The progression isn't APEX to APEX, it's in a normal environment.

[2535] Nicole Pierce-Davis: Yeah, so it's how do they do in the traditional setting after the APEX setting. Thank you for clarifying. One of the biggest pieces here, and again, this is something that we could start to track for NUSD. So that is something we can look at as well. So just overview of our current programming. And again, this is really meant to be as transparent as possible and open up a discussion about how we are using Apex here in NUSD. So what this chart shows is the average time spent per student. Again, an initial course, you would expect around 100 hours. The full fidelity model of APEX, meaning there's no teacher that's switching out assignments or doing anything differently, would normally take anywhere between 60 and 80 hours. A blended model, however, could take anywhere from 20 to 30 or even far less, depending on how much the teacher is giving additional assignments. So it really depends on two factors. One, how did the student do in the course the first time around? So let's say a student did 50 percent of their course the first time around, that's still a failing grade. They're still going to have to retake that course. But if I took that course the first time around and got 50 percent, that's 50 percent more now that in credit recovery, I need to master all those skills or clarify misconceptions that I had the first time around. So in this model, it's showing you the average time spent. It's showing you the total time spent. It's saying how many students accessed different courses. So for instance, here at Newark Memorial High School, you'll see 300 students accessed a total of 511 enrollments. Enrollments are like courses. So that means 300 students took 511 courses. So some of those students were enrolled in multiple courses. Does that make sense? Students completed were 141. Completed enrollments were 256. So it means out of the 300 students that accessed their APEX, only 141 earned credit. So it speaks to the fact that you're not just going through and completing. Again, if you have a high quality teacher in the classroom, you've got a student who's going through the appropriate benchmarks along the way, then it speaks to the fact that students still need to do their part to pass that class, or we may see that that number was a little bit higher. In this case, it's not. It's less than 50% of the students enrolled are actually completing the courses that they've been enrolled in. And here, 141 of those students completed 256 enrollments. Again, that speaks to the fact that you may have a few students who have taken multiple enrollments. Out of that, the average quality of work was around 83%, with 100% passing. Again, that 100% is a little bit misleading because if you didn't pass, then you didn't get 100%. If you pass, you got 100%, so it's a little bit misleading. And then again, you can see Bridgepoint and Crossroads there in adult education. In those cases, they use a much further blended model. Unfortunately, we won't have Ms. Calderon here to speak about Bridgepoint and Crossroads, because she's working very hard on independent study right now with all of the changes, but we will have Ms. Merengel here, so she can speak a little bit more about Newark Memorial. All right, so this shows a little bit of summer school options, thinking through especially this past summer. And so you can see there was definitely a spike in 2021. You'll notice there's also kind of a spike in usage during 2019-20. Again, this is during COVID, this is shelter in place. Obviously, we were encouraged by our state to really think about what it meant for those graduating students and how we can support them. I think Apex is one way that we attempted to do that from home. So you might see an increase in enrollments for those two years. But you can see the majority of our enrollments actually happened during the summer school for this last year, with 68 students completing 117 enrollments. And again, we actually funded additional periods this past summer to allow for that credit recovery to happen because that was what was guided to us from the state. in terms of helping specifically graduating seniors from 2021 and 2020 in terms of getting their degrees. Here we have since 2014 is when Newark Unified first started using Apex. So there's a total of 2,330 students accessing 5,540 enrollments. And you can see year to year how many students accessed a certain number of enrollments. And again, here you can see kind of the spike during the last couple years, although we've been pretty steady before that as well. Here we have year-to-year. It just gives us a little bit more information again on year-to-year, how many students assessed a certain amount of enrollments, how many students completed those enrollments, and what were the passing rates. I figured that was a lot of information to just flow through. Some other data that we were able to pull and I want to give a quick thank you to our Newark Memorial High School counselors who really worked to unpack not only the historical element of how we've been using Apex, but also just how we're using it in day-to-day. And I just appreciated their candor and honesty with me as a new employee of Newark Unified, relatively new of Newark Unified. So again, through our conversations, we noted that more credits were completed last year due to distance learning and to COVID-19. The average Newark Memorial High School who enrolls in APEX recovers 1.8 courses. So again, that speaks to students kind of recovering. Generally, once they recover one, they may recover a second course. The average student is around that two courses. It's important to note that the credits recovered in APEX are a very small percentage of the total credits taken at Newark Memorial. So just last year alone, only 1% of the total amount of credits taken at Newark Memorial High School were earned through APEX. The specific question from the board, I believe, at one of our sessions was, how many current students use Apex for multiple courses? And if so, what is that? And so I was able to recover this chart for you today as well. So just for the class of 2019, we chose this class because they at least had almost a full year, although that was one of our higher usage years, so please keep that in mind. 39 students recovered one course, 30 students 30 students recovered 2 courses, 12 students recovered 3, 7 recovered 4, 7 recovered 5, and 7 went on to recover 6 or more. And then for grade improvement, occasionally a student will take a course for grade improvement. Let's say they pass the course with a D, but they are trying to build up their transcript for colleges, and they may decide, I actually want to take a course that I've already taken and try to improve my grade. And so at that point, 18 students took one course to do that, four students took two, and one student took three courses. Zero students took more than that.

[3012] Bowen Zhang: Any questions about this? I mean, your credit recovery itself is only around 100 people. And grade improvement is around 23 people. But you got 339 students from that class that did it in the four-year period. I would imagine each category, one course by grade, two course by grade, we'll have a lot more people there. So yeah, I mean in class of 2019, that graduating cohort.

[3045] Nicole Pierce-Davis: There was 300, oh I'm sorry.

[3046] Bowen Zhang: You had 339 students from that cohort that at some point accessed APACS for multiple courses. No.

[3053] Nicole Pierce-Davis: Sorry, if that's the clarity. So there was 339 students from the class of 2019, not all of those students, those graduating students that we could account for four years of work for graduated. So those are not 339 students that took APEX. There was a 339 students that as a group with our counselors, we could pull from the class of 2019 full four years.

[3076] Bowen Zhang: Thank you for that clarity. So the entire graduation class of 2019 has a total of 339 graduates?

[3082] Nicole Pierce-Davis: No, we could account for four years. Okay, we'll account for all four years. I should have clarified that. Thank you.

[3091] SPEAKER_41: Great. Improvement students, they don't get credit twice, they get credit one time. Yes.

[3103] Nicole Pierce-Davis: So when we think about Apex being in the news, we heard about the grand jury report. We sort of want to know what went wrong there. And I think that's important. It's important that we are transparently looking at what went wrong. It's important that we really look in depth at our practices and make sure that we don't follow in those same footsteps. When you read those grand jury reports and when you read news articles and so on, it really does point to poor implementation of APEX. It talks about sort of lack of student and teacher oversight and accountability. It really kind of asks about rigor level or hours of completion. And we recognize that this is absolutely something that we need to focus on. We also recognize that this could be a possibility in any classroom, right? where in one, maybe in one history class, a student is being asked to do essays every night, spending hours, and in another history class, maybe their teacher is doing project-based learning, and it looks very different. And so it's important that we kind of understand, you know, is this how we are implementing, or not us, but is this implementation, or is this the platform itself? And I want to make sure that we think about that as we make the decision moving forward. The other big piece that has popped up is the documentation of blended implementation. So if I'm a teacher, I'm assigning you other material, how am I documenting that if that's not documented in APEX? So if APEX doesn't show that I spent five hours writing an essay, you know, how do, what are some checks that we can include within APEX to show that blending implementation in order to kind of demonstrate knowledge that the student is being asked to do? And how does that hold then the student accountable as well as the teacher, as well as the district, as well as the school? So there are some proactive things. I want to make sure, is this right now available? Okay. There are some proactive things that NUSD administrators have already done. to try to address whatever community concerns. And I want to give them the chance to speak about that because I think not only shows that they've been trying to be responsive. It also shows that, again, we're trying to work together with our community to see how we can improve the process of credit recovery. So some things that I know were implemented include ensuring that there is an NUSD teacher credential matches the coursework that they're taking to support the student enrolled in the Apex course. There's been some adjustment of master settings. So there's things you can do like lock assessments. So students can't take assessments at home. They can only take assessments in front of a teacher or in a classroom or something like that. There's limits on pacing and assessment. So you could say you need to have a certain minimum of weekly hour requirements. And what does that look like? There is minimum requirements for passing and aligning that across the school site. And then there's also been sort of online accounting of practice assignments, things like you must submit your journal entries online so that we have a record of that work. And at this time, I'd like to open it up to Ms. Rangel from North Memorial High School to give us a little bit more if that's possible.

[3307] Michael Milliken: It doesn't bode well when you see that tunnel. Would it be easier if I just hold it?

[3348] Penny DeLeon: Ms. Rangel, you may unmute yourself.

[3424] SPEAKER_37: Okay, I assume you can hear me. Can you hear me now? Good evening board and executive cabinet. Thank you for having me here today. When I became the principal of Newark Memorial High School, this is one of the first things that was leveraged to me as a concern. It was after what happened in Oakland became public and we were utilizing Apex. We took those concerns very seriously and made some adjustments. I do want to address the broad statements talking about the outliers that happened at Newark Memorial. I was also there this summer seeing students work for over 40 hours just to try to pass these courses. They needed the support of their teachers, their counselors, and even myself. So again, I just Hearing how our students are being referenced is not always the case. This is a need for our students who were unable to pass for various circumstances, especially during the pandemic. So thank you again. We have done a lot of work around this. Both Ms. Calderon and I met together with our counselors, put some more restrictive practices in place to ensure fidelity, and would like to continue to do so with your help, depending on the decision. Thank you.

[3514] Jodi Croce: Thank you.

[3520] Nicole Pierce-Davis: Okay, so this might be a good time to pause and ask any questions, although we do, once the presentation gets up, we have a couple more slides and then it'll be sort of open for additional questions, sort of thinking around what our next steps would be, and really just kind of open up that discussion. Um, so I do want to, one of the questions that popped up was, um, without credit recovery, you know, what can we do? And I know one of the, um, one of the, the comments from, um, public comment was thinking, well, we could do more traditional classes. And I just want to talk about what the implications of that would be, at least so that you guys are aware of what those implications would be. And then we can always answer any additional questions you may have. So if we did that more traditional sort of credit recovery, what you would notice is that we would need to create additional sections for each course requiring recovery. So many of those would not be full classes, right? Currently, we may have an Apex class with students that are recovering English 9, 10, 11, and 12, all with the same teacher, who may teach those different courses throughout the day, but not necessarily all together. So in order to do that, we would have to create different sections for each of those. Those would need to be staffed. We would also need to fit those into our master schedule, which would be quite a complicating task depending on how many students required that credit recovery. It would be a significant amount of FTE that we would need to add into our budget, just thinking through accommodating each of those additional courses. And it's my understanding from the history and from the research that I've done with just the people in our community, that this actually was attempted a few years ago. And it did, which is kind of what sort of prompted this more universal sort of technology as a support in order to kind of make the process a little bit more easier for both students and teachers to implement across different coursework and different subjects. And then again, with the lack of room and sort of a six period day for students, students would also need to figure out how we're embedding these credit recovery options within the sort of typical school day. And we would need to either consider changing the bell schedule, thinking about some extended periods, or thinking about some other ways that we could fit that kind of credit recovery into their standard day. And then most likely we would see a short-term reduction in students who graduate. And that's just, again, I just want to be honest about kind of what the implications of this might be. Just a note, a quick note on summer school, the direction from board was to pause Apex for the completion of 2021. pending this discussion, and I imagine we might have some further discussion as well. The cost for purchasing the summer school licenses mirrored the cost for renewing licenses. Essentially, licenses can be reused by students once they complete a course. They can be used successively, but not concurrently. So not at the same time, but if I finish my course, then that license becomes available for somebody else. And so because we had and were directed by the state to offer more options for credit for recovery from summer school last year, given COVID and the impacts of COVID. What we saw is that we use more licenses this summer than we typically do. And so those licenses, unfortunately, because it's an annual license are remaining open and they're just sort of unused. So current license are active until June 30th, 2022. And that will not cover summer school 2022. So I want to make that clear as well. We should really consider what are our options for summer school 2022, because if we wait too late, you know, our students will suffer. So I just want to make this point. Again, technology can make differentiated and equitable credit recovery easier for students, teachers, and schools, but it doesn't replace, it does not replace high quality teaching from educators who set high expectations and make curriculum come alive. And I would say that regardless of what platform we use, regardless of what curriculum we buy, we cannot replace our teachers. So thinking about next steps, we have a couple different options. We have quite a few options. And yes, these are six options. I'm sure we've got many between these, but these are the ones that sort of popped out. We could continue with Apex and decrease the administrative adjustments. So we could really say, you know what, we now understand kind of the purpose of credit recovery is not necessarily to ask the student to go through what they did the first time they took the course. Rather, instead, we want to differentiate and we want to really target content that the students missed the first time around. So in this case, we're talking more about mastery, right, than we are about Well, if it took me 100 hours the first time, it should take me 100 hours again. It's more of what content did you get the first time around, and how can we make sure that you've mastered that content the second time around? So less about numbers, more about content mastery. However, that may not be good enough, right? So we can continue APEX and maintain the current administrative adjustments, which Ms. Maringale spoke briefly about and so did I, we can continue APACs and we can increase those adjustments for accountability. So we could say we want students to repeat content, we want them to spend this amount of hours on each unit, we want them to make sure that they're only taking assessments in front of a teacher so that we can make sure that those tests are accurate and show student mastery. We can think about what those adjustments are for accountability and start to increase those. We can continue APEX and research and compare alternatives. If this is more of an issue with APEX, I will say I did a little bit of that. Most credit recovery programs mirror each other, to be honest. They kind of offer similar services. We could decide to discontinue APEX altogether, complete our existing contract and find a summer school alternative. We could discontinue APEX altogether and remove most of the credit recovery options for our high school students. Because again, I think that the The impact on the master schedule and our budget, if we were to create singleton courses for each of those credit recoveries, is a little bit more, it's a lot more complicated than it appears on face value. So at this point, again, tried to get as much information as Apex, maybe I overdid it a little bit, hopefully I didn't, but I know that there's probably still questions, and so I wanted to offer the opportunity to ask questions, ask me to go get more information, or data, just kind of open this up for a little bit more discussion. And I apologize, this wasn't more interactive. I normally try to do second sessions that have a little bit more discussion.

[3942] Bowen Zhang: Can we go back to the slide where you showed the 5%, 90% passing opportunity in the next driver class? Yep, this one. So yeah, I mean, So first of all, this study session was sort of meant to be the initial study session. If board members want to have additional information, want to ask additional questions, there will be a follow-up study session on APAC. So the information I actually want to see more, which is similar to this slide, but I want to see the passing rate between geometry and algebra 2 and algebra 2 and trigonometry slash trigonometry. The reason I'm actually asking for this is geometry and L2L1 in certain ways are quite distinct subject area at that point. But L2L2 probably does have a lot of foundation that need to be built on geometry. And pre-calc slash trigonometry, definitely you need to master L2L2 to do pre-calc and geometry. And based on one of your presentation slides, I realized There's this one little video about APEC where it's doing sine 30 degree, right? I don't know whether that's geometry or trigonometry, but apparently students are using that for geometry and trigonometry. So that kind of course, the continuity, the strong foundation for those courses, geometry, algebra 2, and pre-calc, those are the things I'm really, I will be really curious to see the number.

[4042] Phuong Nguyen: So also based on this slide too, I'm curious to see using our student data to really distinguish whether or not we do have any, any, sorry, basically for English and all of the classes that they're taking, if there is growth in between using our own data, district data.

[4071] Mark Triplett: You mean for students who took APEX?

[4072] Phuong Nguyen: Yeah, for students who took APEX.

[4080] Terrence Grindall: I have a question about, you may be able to address this, this discussion about assessments as a part of the activity. Of course, in my mind, the goal here is not grades, but college readiness, right? So, So it sounds like within APEX there's some assessments, but is there a way to do, is there thought of doing maybe an independent assessment as a way of assuring that the independents are not enmeshed within APEX, which they could have a conflict of interest, as you say? Is there a way to do an independent assessment that assures that the students are mastering the content? It makes sense to me if someone has has done well in half the class, making them do that whole class again when they really just need to focus on the last doesn't make sense. But at the end, if there's an assessment that shows they've mastered the content, I think that's the goal. So maybe I didn't ask a question. Maybe that was more of a statement. But that's where my interest is.

[4151] Penny DeLeon: Yeah.

[4152] Bowen Zhang: So follow up on that. For the 100, a little bit 100 plus students in the past four years that actually did all these credit recovery, can we get a data to see how many of them are actually college ready?

[4163] Jodi Croce: Yeah, I think so.

[4167] Chery Villa: Can you repeat that?

[4168] Bowen Zhang: So you remember there's a slide I asked you the question about. So the graduating cohort of 2019, they have 339 students, right? Among them, roughly 102 students actually took APEX for credit recovery. For those 102, how many of those are actually considered college ready when they were gone in 2018? If you have a higher percentage of people over there that are considered college ready, then APAS probably didn't impact the performance. If you have a very low percentage of students that used APAS and did multiple course recovery and happened to have very low college readiness rate, then that's probably not achieving the desire we want to see, not achieving the effect that we want to see.

[4208] Nicole Pierce-Davis: Yeah, and I will point out that you will see somewhat of a correlation just naturally, right? Like you're basically taking a group of students who struggled, who struggled for whatever reason. The content was hard. They had something going on in their home where it was hard to focus. They just lacked the academic motivation. That particular semester, it's happened to all of us, right? So it will skew the data slightly just because you've got a group of students who are struggling. And the whole purpose of APEX is to figure out you're struggling. How do we support you? So just keep that in mind. But I still think that's data that we could pull.

[4244] Terrence Grindall: Back to my assessment idea, if the assessment's sort of focused on the content that they've taken, that's a better test. That same student that's needed to do credit recovery may be struggling in other areas, or not struggling, maybe they're getting C's in other areas. And so that it could skew it down. But if we look at what happens within that subject area, that should tell us whether it's working.

[4270] Phuong Nguyen: So my other question I have is that, why isn't there intervention before credit recovery within the class from the teacher? So is there a way for, I mean, if we do decide to move away from APICS, should there be an intervention program where the student is able to recover credits by working with their teachers on a work plan and then have the assessment so that they are capable of passing the class the first time?

[4301] Aiden Hill: member hill yes um can i um is it okay for me to provide some input yeah okay perfect so um so yeah i appreciate the um the presentation and just wanted to kind of respond to it from a teacher's perspective. So as you guys know, I'm a recent graduate of San Jose State, went through their whole methodology which conforms to the state's methodology to the California Commission on Teaching Credentialing. And then also I experienced as a teacher trying to teach kids from an online remote standpoint all of last year. I actually have one class where I didn't need to use an online tool. It was a computer applications class. And so it was similar in nature to APEX where we're trying to deliver instruction using a tool. But the difference was it was in combination with my live instructions. And my strong feeling is that I really don't think that these online platforms really conform to what the state is expecting when it comes to really instructing kids. And we as teachers, in order to meet our initial credential, and then also in order to, as we're going through induction, we're regularly measured on these metrics. There's a set of metrics that are called teacher performance expectations. And anybody can go out and Google them and get more and see what they are. But I'm going to read you a couple of these and talk to you about kind of the inherent challenges that an online platform has in meeting them. So one, the first category is called TPE1, Engaging and Supporting All Students in Learning. If you were going to go look at P1.1, the first thing that it says is, well actually I'm not going to go through all of them, I'm just going to go through one of the key ones. So we're talking about engaging and supporting all students in learning. One of the critical things that we're trying to promote right now is what we call critical thinking. So TA 8.1.5 says we promote students' critical and creative thinking and analysis through activities that provide opportunities for inquiry, problem solving, responding to, and framing meaningful questions and reflection. What that really means is, is that a dialogue is required between the teacher and student, and also between all the students in the class. And that's really the best practice. The problem that we have here is that we have kids in front of computer screens and they're really interacting with the computer and not with other human beings. And best practice in terms of educational theory states that it's not an effective model, but there needs to be a dialogue. And these programs are not robust enough until we have some very advanced artificial intelligence capability. You can't have that kind of dialogue, and you can't, and the students really, it's gonna be somewhat static learning. And I saw that live when I was teaching computer applications, Kids could watch videos and videos could force them to go click on certain things. They would have to go write certain, you know, answer certain things. But when it came to assessments, the answers to a lot of those assessments were out on the internet. So I didn't catch people cheating. I had to actually go back and actually develop offline assessments so that really tested their knowledge. And what I saw was that many of the kids, they, for kids that, really had challenges. And again, I think that many of the kids that are going through this type of program do have challenges. They have to have some type of interaction. And the kids that I saw where we couldn't get the interaction, they would literally just stall in front of the videos, or they would cheat to get around them. And one other thing that I think is important to understand, and this was something that was raised earlier in the presentation, there was an assumption that was made that if you've taken a course the first time, that you probably learned some percentage of it, so therefore you don't need to take the course the same number of hours a second time. I believe that that's a false statement. It really depends on the kids. And I can tell you that in many situations, The kids were stuck and they just couldn't move forward. And so a number of kids who I had to fail in my class, it was literally like they couldn't get past even simple things remotely. And then by the time I brought them back into the class, it was too late for them to recover. And so there are maybe some unique people that absorb some, But I think that for many, sometimes they really need to repeat the whole class. So, you know, that's an example of one area where I think it's deficient. There was a question, I think that Member Grigal raised it, about assessments. So there's actually in teacher performance expectations, a whole section on assessments. It's section five, and I'm going to read you one of the key bullet points in expectations from section five. So Section 5, Assessing Student Learning. According to Section 5.1, what you're supposed to really do as a teacher is apply knowledge of purposes, characteristics, appropriate uses, different types of assessments, diagnostic, informal, formal, progress monitoring, formative, summative, and performance to design and administer classroom assessments, including use of scoring rubrics. Assessments are not a simple test, oftentimes, with the right or wrong. And there are different levels that you use. And quite frankly, there's no computer program that is sophisticated enough to really use these. But what we've been learning in, as we've been studying education in society, is that there's many different assessment tools that you have to use. And they come in different circumstances. And again, there's no computer that's smarter enough to figure out when and where it's appropriate. It really is a dialogue between the teacher and the student and other students. And then we talk about rubrics here. You know, that's something where it's super subjective. The computer can't score effectively things that are on a rubric. Very, very difficult. And so I think that these programs are inherently flawed. And it's, I think that, I understand that we've got to offer something on an interim basis at crossroads given that we still need to do remote learning and we're using edgenuity and it's a mandate of the state. But I think long term the assumption that kids will sit in class for almost a year and then ultimately fail out and then somehow we're going to give them this magic computer pill and they're going to be able to learn everything they need to do in less time No interaction with the teacher, no interaction with other students, and that they really learn. I don't think it's correct. And so I think if we really want to investigate this, we ought to have really an independent and equal in and audit our program. the same way that, you know, that they would have been open to get really a full, you know, understanding of this. But I suspect that if we do an independent audit, they're going to tell you exactly the same things that I'm telling you right now. So thank you. I'm sorry to take up so much time.

[4793] Bowen Zhang: Hey, Member Hill, there's this one statement I want to understand, but I think I missed that statement. You said there was that one statement in one of the presentations that you think is not necessarily true, but I thought that's a key thing, but I was not following that part. Did you still remember?

[4811] Aiden Hill: Sure, sure, no problem, President Chong. So the assumption was that if you take a whole year of, okay, let's say geometry, the assumption is that if you fail geometry, that maybe you retain 20% of it or 50% of it, and so therefore you can do a more accelerated credit recovery in less time. But I think that what we're oftentimes seeing as teachers is that the kids that are failing, right, that they're stalling out in the early stages. And so, and oftentimes, and then at the point where they would start to fail, You're trying to... They're trying to figure out how to respond. They're frustrated. If there aren't appropriate interventions, and this goes to remember Gwen's point, if there aren't appropriate interventions with the teacher and then with other staff at the school, at some point the kid gives up and they basically tune out. And so they're tuned out from that point forward and there's no learning going on. There's no retention going on. And in fact, because they're not using the knowledge that they maybe gained in the early part of the course, they've forgotten it by that time. And so in reality, we probably have to oftentimes have to do it all over again. I see, I see. Yeah, yeah, I got it. So how do they retain 5 or 0 percent? So that's what I meant.

[4898] Nicole Pierce-Davis: Yeah, yeah, yeah. And that almost speaks to a certain degree to the fact that if we just repeat that same process, we're not doing the students any good either, right? Like, if we just do the same thing over and over again expecting a different result, we know that's the definition of insanity. So we do have to deliver the instruction in a different kind of way. And I think you really spoke to some things there, things like rubrics and dialogue are what classes, what makes classes come alive. And I think what I'm hearing today is we need to figure out what is that balance of live teacher support in an Apex course that allows for that interaction and that sort of value to surface in a way that it's not just going through models, you know, going through.

[4941] Bowen Zhang: So given that, I guess, I remember, yeah, I remember how. are requesting for additional, I'm watching the time, 6 o'clock. But I guess we all requesting additional information based on the feedback from the board. So I guess a follow-up study session on this topic will probably be needed, and probably will be needed as soon as possible. And then in that study session, we may very well, after gathering the data we want, we may very well need to make a decision how we're going to deal with the event. But as of now, this is paused, right? Because that's the board's direction from the last vote on the LCAP. Okay, that's correct.

[4977] Nicole Pierce-Davis: Can I read out the things that I should? Just so I have clarity. So number one, we want data on what the passing rates are, specifically looking at math.

[4986] Bowen Zhang: Yes, I got it. Actually, if I'm not wrong, it's primarily used by our students on the subject area of math and reading in English.

[4995] Nicole Pierce-Davis: So maybe I'll focus on English.

[4997] Bowen Zhang: Yeah, because you already gave us the data on English. So I will say, Because you have English, 9 English, 10 English, 11 there.

[5003] Nicole Pierce-Davis: That's not our data. But that's not from NUSD, so maybe I'll try to see.

[5007] Bowen Zhang: Oh, I see. Oh yeah, that's not, yeah. Then probably what we need is the NUSD data from, what do you call that, from geometry to algebra 2, from algebra 2 and from algebra 2 to pre-calc. Got it. Because that's probably will give us, NUSD will give us a lot better indication about whether our Apex mass recovery is really working on us.

[5027] Nicole Pierce-Davis: So I'll definitely pull that together.

[5028] Bowen Zhang: So that'll... Yeah, and obviously, what memory did not mean follow up is that what is the college readiness rate for those 102 students that in the past four years took multiple courses? Obviously, we know that number is going to be low, but I still want to see how low the number really is.

[5045] Nicole Pierce-Davis: And when you say college readiness, you would like SPAC data?

[5048] Mark Triplett: Are you talking about A through G?

[5051] Bowen Zhang: Yeah, I'm talking about A through G completion. Thank you.

[5057] Nicole Pierce-Davis: So yeah, so I've got the NUSD data around each course to course and how they do after an APEX course and a traditional course. We want to look at how students do an APEX by the time they graduate with A to G completion. We want to look at Whether or not there could be an option for kind of an independent assessment that's maybe based on our traditional model that can then be administered at the end, which I do believe that is possible. But I will still take it back to our sites. Three, we want to look at what kinds of embedded intervention do we already have at our school sites in order to prevent the need for credit recovery to begin with. And then, yeah, that's what I have.

[5104] Phuong Nguyen: Like I know when I graduated from North Memorial, like all of the classes that we're taking through elementary and junior high, we've always had prerequisites to be able to go into the next course. And then so we're coming in somewhat prepared into our next course. I don't know if that's currently happening at the high school or not, but I think that would kind of also fit into the whole intervention and another way of intervention.

[5135] Penny DeLeon: I actually think that's pretty insightful.

[5136] Jodi Croce: Yeah.

[5139] Bowen Zhang: Okay. Okay. I guess that concludes our study session, and we'll be heading to, before, I think before we have a closed session, Ms. Gutierrez, any public comments? Yes. Yeah, but I, I guess I still need to read out what we're going to discuss. Okay. So, Yeah, so with the conclusion of our study session, we'll move on to closed session. In closed session, we'll be discussing 4.2, Public Employee Discipline Dismissal Release. 4.3, Conference with Labor Negotiator, NTA and CSCA. 4.4, Conference with Labor Negotiator, Employee Grooming Law, Unrepresented Supervisor and Contractor Management. 4.5, Conference with Legal Counsel, Anticipated Litigation. 4.6 conference with legal counsel existing litigation, and we'll be back to open session around 7 p.m. We'll see you in a bit. We're coming back to open session. And just like what we said in the last meeting, this is the first meeting we will have live audience. And we indeed might not have a couple of live audience. So for first item, Flag of Allegiance for the people in the boardroom, please stand up. And we'll have a flag over there. And Ms. Gutierrez, for those online, please turn on the banner for those online. Ready? Begin. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Thank you. Next item is report of closed session items. There is no reportable action that's been taken during closed session. employee organizations. Ms. Gutierrez, please welcome our speakers.

[7981] SPEAKER_35: Our first speaker is going to be Mr. Abruzzi from NTA.

[8003] Sean Abruzzi: Thank you. Welcome back board and school members to a new school year. NTA update. NTA has questions about a course called TA slash peer tutors. How is this course being offered at a high school when it does not have an A through G requirements? NTA thought all courses had to have an A3 requirements. This course gives students credits for helping teachers do grading, cleaning up classrooms, or whatever the teacher requires. NTSY, this is being offered, and the response was to capture ADA money for 30 students. If this is how the district saves money by not offering a 0.2 FTE course to these 30 students, that is very upsetting for NTA. NTA asked the district, is this course board approved? NTA is waiting on the district for that answer. The other thing that NTA would like to update on is the director of SPED. Special education students are NUSD's most vulnerable students. These teachers and staffs take care of these students, have been working without leadership since November 2019. when the present director was hired. Her lack of communications, actions, attention to detail, and all to have created a stressful and hostile work environment, caused the loss of dedicated and excellent educators, created chaos where there doesn't need to be. Many parents rethink whether or not their child should be enrolled in NUSD. Lack of communication. On April 13th, 2021, And now the office message stated that the director would be out of the office starting on April 13th. There was no end date and no one to contact in her absence. Members working, classified members that work with the director, didn't even know about the absence and how long the director would be out. The district said the director was just going to be out for a day, and there was no need for coverage. The one day turned into the director not returning until April 26, 2020. There was never any communication that she was on leave or how long she would be back, she would be out. All the team members found out was by email in her or reading it in her out of the office message. The out of the office message did not list due to contact in her absence. At that time, with the director out of office, there was only contact there was no communication from the director regarding. There was no other leadership. During the 2021 school year when it was a merger was being planned there was no communication from the director regarding the spread special education classes at Graham or snow. Being a leader in this situation the director only held be at which school was made. This only caused stress for NTA and classified members about where they would be teaching. This was also stressful for parents that do not know whether their student would be going to which school. Last year, the director moved students onto and off of caseloads without notifying the case manager. One student was moved onto a caseload, and the IP was ever we do. The director reached out to the NTA member. The NTA member was blamed for the IEP being late. Some of the IEPs that were taken off the NTA member's cases were then put back on. Hello? Oh, sorry. Why isn't that meeting? Can you hear me now? Yeah. Okay. Yes. Okay. Let me pick up where I left off. Oh caseloads. Dante members cases were then put back on and those IEPs were now late as well. The director reached out to the Dante member again and asked how she can assist a member with all of their late IEPs. Many INTA members have complained about the countless emails that they have sent to the director that required a response and that she has not responded to. After mediation meetings, case managers are not committed on changes.

[8305] Bowen Zhang: Mr. Abruzzi, mentioning of individual personnel in your comment is probably not the best case in this occasion.

[8316] Sean Abruzzi: We are just updating the district on what we have dealt with. And that is something that needs to be brought up for that. But board member Bowen, I respect you. That's fine. We will be moving in a direction of a vote of no confidence for the director on that issue. We will be bringing this to the district of our complaints with this person. Next thing that NTA has is safety. NTA would like to know what the district's protocol is for NTA members testing positive for COVID. Do NTA members have to use their sick days? Why doesn't the district or school board address this before the staff and students came on campus? COVID isn't going away. Why isn't there a quarantine protocol in place before the start of the school year? Would the district have a quarantine protocol? Why isn't the district providing a safe working environment for all employees by having a protocol in place which could have been presented to staff on August 9th PDs? If an HVAC unit doesn't work, then does it matter if it has a HEPA filter? NTA has sent multiple work orders for HVAC units and some of these work orders were sent to MIT before June. The district said that HVAC units were working last school year. Were they all working? This is why NTA voted on a hybrid MOU with a yes and no confidence. District had all summer to go around and check these HVAC units. NTA members have sent multiple work orders to MOT. Some of these HVAC units haven't been working for over two years. NTA asked us to approve. And that's it. So thank you for letting me to bring up this update and thank you and have a good night.

[8441] Bowen Zhang: Thank you. Next speaker.

[8449] SPEAKER_35: The next speaker is our president of Pneuma which currently is not on the list. Maybe they may log on a little bit later but at this point We can move on to the next item.

[8467] Bowen Zhang: Okay, moving on to public comment on non-agenda item. We have a live public speaker, Mr. Knoop.

[8479] Cary Knoop: It's so wonderful to be back here. It's like a year and a half, I think. I think the last meeting was in March 2020, an emergency meeting, and we're finally back. So, wonderful that The board and staff was able to organize this and hopefully we continue doing this. I understand that the president announced this in the previous meeting. I'm not sure whether everybody, you know, always watches the end of the meeting. So, you know, that could have been some people who didn't know that we have this live meeting. The item I want to bring up is having a COVID prevention and action plan. And I'm sure that the district internally has papers. I'm sure of it. But when you have something that's critical, it's so important to publish it, to make sure that every employee in our organization knows what to do when something happens. It would avoid finger pointing. Or like, I thought that somebody else was going to do this, and, well, I thought I had another version of the document. And it may be wise for the board to ratify a document like that. Now, obviously, the implementation and the setting up of the document is an executive function. It's an operational function, so it's not something that the board should be involved in. But by ratifying it, they assert that the document exists, it goes on the agenda, everybody knows about it, there's no buts and ifs. So I would really urge the board and the organization to have a published plan that is, you know, ratified by the board and to make clear, not approved but ratified by the board so that we know we have a plan. We got to keep educating people because, you know, these are very trying times where some people have certain thoughts about COVID and, you know, not everybody is informed at the same level. So it's very important to educate, to explain if something happens, what are the steps we're going to do. It gains trust. It shows like we know what we're doing. We write it down and, you know, you can trust us because we have a procedure here. So I urge the board to get a document in the next meeting to be ratified. And of course, needless to say, you know, when you have things like air conditioning problems or, you know, fresh air, air circulation, these are critical items. I would say anything else is less important. So we, you know, when the NTA mentioned this, put all hands on deck to make sure everything is fine because this is very critical. Thank you very much.

[8668] Bowen Zhang: Thank you. Can we bring in the online speakers?

[8679] SPEAKER_35: Yes, our first speaker is going to be Eric Tam.

[8693] SPEAKER_05: Hello, can you hear me?

[8698] Julienne Sumodobila: Yes.

[8699] SPEAKER_05: Hi, I'm going to start. Good evening board, Dr. Triplett and staff. Tonight I want to start off with some thank yous. Dr. Triplett and NUSD, thank you for committing to a COVID dashboard by the end of next week. I know many NUSD parents are anxiously waiting to understand the risk their children are facing. Second, thank you to the board last session in voicing reason against spending additional landscaping money for a school that is already closed. So I wanted to follow up on my comment about HVAC from last time. Member Hill asked from the last meeting if the HVAC project was over budget and are delayed. And it was not clear from Mr. Caputo's answer if we were already over budget. Mr. Caputo listed several factors that led to the time impact like DAS exceptions and new cost impacts like adding rust protection. However, if I look at the differences in units between August 5th and June 3rd, phase 1A elementary schools, now we have 99 versus 104 units, a difference of five less units. Phase 1B, junior high and high school, 177 versus 214 respectively, a difference of 37 units less. So there's a total of 42 units less. So 42 of 318 is roughly 13%. So my question for Mr. Caputo and the board is, are those still end of life and need to be replaced or we do not need to replace them anymore? If we don't need to replace them, do we get an additional 13% savings back? And if we still need to, does that mean we are over budget? Board, 13% of a $10 million project is roughly $1.3 million. That is not a trivial amount. Board, I hope you will dig in and request for a full phase one project plan, cost, and site schedule. Third, board, in your strategic plan and goals for the superintendent this last year, focus area two states, develop an interactive website to engage and inform the parents. Specifically, implement a customer management system. Let's talk, the website was launched last week. However, I was unable to find a forum or a CMS ticket system as part of the final delivery to submit a ticket. In the May 20th superintendent report, Dr. Triplett presented and gave a July 21st target delivery date to move up the post-delivery phase. The website came online last week. Board, would you be able to share about your performance review criteria that you warranted a $4,400 bonus? From my personal experience, bonuses are given for employees demonstrating above and beyond performance and results. So based on last week's delivery, a key goal set by the board was late and missed the acceptance criteria. As an outsider, the vote really confuses me. So why do I care about $4,400? Board, did you hear about the Shilling Parent Association posted on Nextdoor app for families to donate money for picnic tables? Board and Dr. Triplett, I hope you can see from the shoes of community members, it's really confusing why our district is asking for donations, yet you can give out bonuses. Board, just as you've voiced concern about landscaping costs at snow and voted to change the proposal, I hope you can apply the same critical nature to small amounts and or share more of your thoughts on the justification of your votes. Thank you.

[8888] Bowen Zhang: Thank you. Thank you. Thank you.

[8892] SPEAKER_35: Thank you. The next speaker is Cindy Parks.

[8904] Cindy Parks: Hello, good evening. You would think Eric Tam and I met up for coffee and discussed our speeches. I can honestly say I was looking forward to the district's new website. The old website had a lot of outdated information, including documents which were updated annually but had been uploaded to various sites in years and links that didn't work. I'm going to ask the question many parents and community members are asking. Why would you take a new website live two days before school starts? Especially since it had so many bugs, errors, and omissions. Better to wait until a team of users evaluates and provides feedback. While the new site has some nice features, it was originally missing Coyote Hills Elementary. The homepage calendar still doesn't have the correct date. There are department tabs with no content. There are issues with documents transferring. For example, the 2017 governance handbook is on the new site, even though the 2021 version was on the old site. But most importantly, there isn't a direct link to the agenda, which is a Brown Act violation. Again, another violation. And don't get me started on the new NUSD logo that doesn't mention Newark Unified School District. Only Newark, California, as though it was the city of Newark logo. I have not heard anyone with a positive comment about the logo. One of Superintendent Triplett's goals for the last year was meaningful community engagement and two-way communication. He was charged with developing an interactive website to inform and engage the community. It is now mid-August, and while the website is up, it is far from meeting the goal as demonstrated by the few examples I've cited. I hope all the bugs, errors, and omissions are corrected soon. For many families, the website is the first impression of Newark Unified. Since I have a bit more time, I would like to ask once again why President Zhang said at the beginning of the meeting that you were transitioning back to normal in-person meeting when this is, and this is your first in-person meeting with a live audience. Since your agenda clearly says in the first paragraph, board meetings will be held virtually until further notice. These meetings will be accessible to the public by internet or telephone. No physical meeting place will be provided. How many community members didn't know that they would be able to attend this meeting in person? Thank you.

[9044] Bowen Zhang: Thank you. I believe our NEWMA representative is on. So can we bring in the NEWMA representative?

[9061] SPEAKER_32: Ms. Ditto, you may begin.

[9068] SPEAKER_29: Good evening. Good evening, President Jun, Board of Trustees, and Executive Cabinet members. This is Vicenta Ditto, the Principal of Birch Grove Primary, and voted in as the NEWMA President for the 2021-2022. The Student Management Association is thrilled to have been part of bringing our NUSD students back to campus. The halls are once again filled with the voices of children and teenagers. Classrooms are occupied by dedicated teachers, enthusiastic support staff, and excited scholars. It has been challenging, but once again, NEWMA members have stepped up to the plate to do what is right for our kids. From our child nutrition management team ensuring communication of meals for all children at no cost to families, to business services working to get supplies and materials into every classroom. It has been really great to see members that don't work from school sites on campuses for the first days of school, so we could all be reminded of why we have stepped into these challenging and worthwhile management positions. Students are back. It is fantastic. Just to give some introductions, we will be doing highlights of our staff, our NEWMA members again this year. But first, I'd like to introduce our NEWMA board for this year. Our vice president is Dr. Wendy Castaneda-Leal, principal of Schilling Elementary. Our secretary is Amanda Gallaher, principal of Music Elementary and Preschool. Treasurer this year is Ashley Acosta, the manager of Community Engagement, and our member at large, Olivia Rangel, principal of Newark Memorial High School. On behalf of NEWMA, we want to wish everyone in NUSD a fantastic 21-22 school year and continued good health. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you.

[9189] Bowen Zhang: Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you.

[9196] Bowen Zhang: Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you.

[9200] Bowen Zhang: Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank

[9205] Mark Triplett: Thank you president John. Everyone hear me OK. Great. So good evening again board members staff and public. It's great to be here in person have have the public here in the same room. I'm Superintendent Triplett and we'll be starting a superintendent report for this evening. And Miss Gutierrez do you have. There it is. Thank you. Okay, so I wanted to share a couple things that have been transpiring in the last week to two weeks. So, first of all, we had our professional development on August 9th for all teachers and NTA members. It was a really fantastic day. We had a keynote speaker, Lasana Hotep, who spoke in the morning. And then we had a session for both secondary and elementary schools with character strong as you recall. The board approved character strong as a curriculum for for all of the district. And so we've been we've been supporting professional development and training for teachers and that will be ongoing to implement that curriculum. And then we had workshops in the following areas. We have a number of different engaging online platforms, iReady, RazKids, Nearpod, Illuminate, some of which we were already using before the pandemic, some of which we began using during the pandemic. And we want to make sure that we're not just throwing some of these out that have been really useful and helpful. And so we're continuing to support teachers to utilize these resources and also be thinking about how to integrate them into in-person learning, not just online learning. And then we also had some fantastic sessions that what we call Teachers Teaching Teachers, or the TTT model. And that's our own, our very own teachers teaching each other around different effective strategies, including English language learner strategies, special education, and in particular, imagined learning, the math language routines, and also relationship-centered approaches. So, these were all different sessions. Some of these were whole group, and then some of them, teachers had the option to select which one was most relevant to them. I just want to dive in a little bit about the first days of school. So, really, really excited. Everyone has been really, really excited to be back in person. Students, teachers, parents, we've gotten so much enthusiasm from everyone. And of course, we greatly appreciate everyone's patience because we are, as we go back to, I'm having trouble here, there we go. As we go back to in-person, of course, there's plenty of kinks that we're working out. And even on the first day, we had things that we needed to retool as we moved forward. And so we've been doing that, but it's been very, very positive. So just to recap, we are instruction five days a week. We have regular in-person learning, full day, bell schedules in all our grades. We're doing our standard inclusion of lunch and recess with outdoor equipment. And we do have after school and extracurricular activities available with updated safety guidelines, of course. And just wanted to show some of the photos from the first day, just so you can see the level of engagement. Students were already jumping right in and just so delighted to be there. Students eager to to be reading books, to be engaging with each other, and just really, really positive. I wanted to just give an update on enrollment. So this is a moving target, of course, because for these first, really, month of school, enrollment's going to fluctuate. But as of yesterday, so we had in-person, our enrollment was 5,156 students. And we have 124 students that have enrolled in the virtual learning program, independent study. So that's approximately 2% of our population that has opted for the virtual option. Just in talking with other superintendents, there's some districts that that number is very similar. And then there's other districts where the number is considerably higher. So it really just depends. I wanted to go over some of the safety guidelines and some of the things that we are really working hard to address. And so, three in particular, and then I'll go over some of the other guidelines that we have been implementing from the very first day. So, lunchtime has been something that we've been really conscious of, given that the cafeteria could be a very crowded space. per the guidelines, although the cafeterias are usable per the state and county guidelines, but they've also advised that we utilize other spaces, including outdoor spaces, and so that's what we've been doing, and we've really been trying to do, to think outside the box in terms of seating and shade in the outdoor spaces to sort of diffuse or spread out students during lunchtime a little more. So we'll continue to work through different options for that, but we really appreciated the support of families and also the creativity of our school staff as we do these kind of things that weren't done before COVID. Arrival and dismissal. So we did notice on the first day, because families were asking families not to enter campus, that did create some bottlenecks at the main entrances where families in the past were able to bring their students all the way to classrooms. Because of COVID guidelines, we're now requiring that families leave their students at the gate, and that then staff assist students to get to classrooms. So, some initial bottlenecks, but we've been figuring out the kinks there, and families have been really cooperative and patient. And I'm pleased to announce that since the first day, the flow of both arrival and dismissal has gotten significantly better. We still want to continue to improve our systems, but it's gotten much better. And then in terms of positive cases, I know everyone across the country is really concerned about the COVID case rates. And so I wanted to just share a few things about that. Number one is we do have our protocols that we are utilizing, which are directly from the state and the county with regard to how positive cases or potential exposures are reported. And so we follow those guidelines. Those are posted. on county and state websites, and we are intending to have those up on our new website within the week. We did have the protocols on our former site from prior year, and so we're planning on having those back up within the week. To date, we've had, just to share a little bit about some of the cases, so we've had, as of yesterday, we've had two cases, positive corona cases from students on our school campuses, and then a single case, a positive case of a staff member at one of our campuses. And in all those situations, staff, students, families have responded exactly like they should, reporting the case and then following through with all the contact tracing. And then the appropriate quarantining and communication out to both those who may have come in contact and then also with the community at large. So there is communication that goes out after contact tracing is done. directly to the individuals who had come in contact with any positive case and may have been potentially exposed. And then there's also communication that goes out to the school community with regard to any case. I'm glad that to this point, we have only had two student cases and one staff case. And the reality is, this is going to come up. And we just all have to make sure that we are following the protocols and doing the proper things to mitigate that kind of exposure. So to that point, just wanted to go over really quickly the guidelines that are so important to making sure that we are minimizing exposure and keeping kids safe, kids and parents and staff. Key is the masks. So all of the guidelines, national, state, and local, indicate the requirement for masks to be worn by students, both students and adults, K-12 at all school settings. And I will say that almost 100% we've had just fantastic cooperation around this. And I think that's really a credit to how we've been able to keep students and adults safe. Physical distancing, as you know, is no longer, there's no longer a six foot nor three foot physical distance requirement. It's distance as much as possible while making sure that you are implementing other strategies such as masking. So that's what we're doing. We're creating as much physical distance as possible, but also recognizing that masks are critical. And then practicing and teaching proper hand hygiene, washing hands, avoiding touching of eyes, nose, mouth, and all of that. And I did already talk about the cafeteria and utilizing outdoor spaces. So we're continuing to order more tables for outdoors. That's become an issue. And as well as really thinking through the best options for shade and weather. weather protection outside. And likewise, cleaning, that we are cleaning and disinfecting high-use surfaces daily, using our disinfecting misting system in all our schools. And then we, as you know, we have installed air purifiers with HEPA filters in all our classrooms and offices. And we're having frequent changes of HVAC filters and have conducted air balancing that we are hoping to be concluding in the next week or so, all of the air balancing and mitigation. And then I did mention contact tracing as key to keeping everybody safe, as well as vaccinations. So, I will say that while the rate of vaccinations in Newark is the most recent data I've seen is individuals 12, ages 12 and above, that Newark has approximately 74% of the population vaccinated with full doses. However, our young people, ages 12 to 17, our rate is actually pretty low. It's 42%, 42.6, I believe, that have had two doses. And so I just want to continue to really encourage all of us to encourage our young people that are within the proper age requirement to be vaccinated. We have lots of vaccination opportunities both on campuses, we'll be providing some this fall, but also in the county, making an appointment for a vaccination is extremely easy and there's opportunities throughout our area. So it's a little bit of a call to action for all of us to continue to really encourage our families to get their children vaccinated. And let's see here. So I did want to just touch upon the Crossroads Independent Study Program as well. So that is up and running. It is, we have had a lot of challenges, as have other districts across the state, given the late timeline with which the state let us informed us of the requirements and then the need to to engage with our labor partners and make sure that we had come to agreement with them before proceeding. But we are excited that we do have the program up. The folks over at Crossroads are doing an amazing job. The office staff principal the teachers and and we are continuing to support that program district wide. to make sure that we provide the very best option for our students who are opting for virtual. And you all have seen these, but these are just the requirements in the virtual setting. Grades, actually, TK6 is to require daily synchronous instruction for all students. Grades 7 and 8, daily live virtual interaction and at least weekly synchronous instruction for all students. And then grades 9, 12, at least weekly synchronous instruction for all students throughout the school year. And I believe I'm going to, just in the interest of time, those are the different programs. And that concludes the report for this evening.

[10120] Bowen Zhang: Thank you. Thank you Superintendent. Any clarifying any clarifying questions from the board. Is Member Hill on there.

[10134] Aiden Hill: OK. There's no questions. Seeing none.

[10137] Bowen Zhang: Oh yeah.

[10146] Penny DeLeon: Maybe.

[10155] SPEAKER_35: And then do you have any questions?

[10157] Aiden Hill: No, thank you.

[10165] Bowen Zhang: Okay. Moving on to the public hearing on Interfront Borrowing. So the purpose for this Interfront Borrowing is item 10.1 is the 2020-21 State Inactive Budget. increase in the interim borrowing limits from 75% to 85% for the 2020 to 2021 and 2021 to 2022 fiscal years. This increase allows school districts to borrow more in the face of uncertain financial exposure and funding challenges as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic, including cash deferral from the state. So with that, I will open up the public hearing. Any public comments on this? Okay, with that, I will close the public hearing. Moving on to the next item of business, determination to fill board vacancy and timeline. So the purpose of this item, we actually briefly discussed this in our last meeting, Today, as the agenda for us is to appoint, to form the board subcommittee, and then the whole board will be discussing the process and what's the expectation from the subcommittee to regarding the appointment process. And I did review some of the board bylaw policies. I think the bylaw policies stated that the president can appoint a subcommittee, but with the board consent. So that doesn't need to be a formal vote, But obviously, well, the whole board will agree with the formation and the member on the subcommittee. And with that, I remember in the previous two rounds of appointment that I personally went through, one of the subcommittee members was going to be the board president. And yes, if you remember correctly, two weeks ago, we were discussing members of subcommittee. I know member Grindel and member Nguyen both raised their hands, even though member Nguyen was a little bit quicker. So given that she did have experience going through one round of appointment process, so I ask member Grindel that would you be okay with member Nguyen who went through this once before who had experience to be on this subcommittee?

[10316] Terrence Grindall: The answer is yes. That's fine with me, although I do want to discuss the role of the subcommittee when you get to the agenda.

[10322] Bowen Zhang: Yes, well, this is the agenda. Once we form a subcommittee, the entire board will give direction to the subcommittee. Member Hill, any objections?

[10331] Aiden Hill: No, but echoing Member Greendell, I just want to clarify what the subcommittee is going to do, but no objections.

[10338] Bowen Zhang: Yeah, that's what we're going to discuss, what will be the expectation for the subcommittee. So the subcommittee will be Member Nguyen and myself. So then we'll open up for the entire board to discuss what this process will look like. And we have September 23rd as the deadline to fill this board vacancies. And we determined we're going to use the appointment process. Obviously, that will be some application process, some filtering, checking eligibility. And obviously, the board, every board member will need to submit their questions on the both. There will be two sets of questions. One, obviously, is the question on the application itself. Number two is more importantly will be the question that will be asked during the interview process. So I think we can overlap discussion for what the rest of the board want us in this process. Member Grindel.

[10387] Terrence Grindall: Yes, I'm not entirely, I understand the bylaws require the subcommittee. I'm not entirely comfortable with it, but if it's required it is. I really believe that this decision needs to be made very transparently. So I'd like to see as much of the decisions that are made occur in, you know, as a whole board in public. And I'd like to see the subcommittee's role to be fairly limited. I want to, you know, I'd like to know that the discussion isn't going to be hampered in any way. Any question that we want to ask is we're going to have the opportunity to ask it and that all the candidates who apply aren't going to be weeded out or by the subcommittee. So, that's really my concern. The subcommittee, again, gives me some pause just in terms of the perception of transparency. However, I do understand it's required. So, as long as it's fairly limited, I'm okay with it.

[10453] Bowen Zhang: Yeah, there are two responsible questions. So I believe in the previous three appointment process, the subcommittee have never filtered out any candidates, any eligible candidates. And this subcommittee will not do that. Anybody who submitted an application online, I mean on time, who is eligible to apply for this form, meaning registered voter, 18 years old, living in Newark, and no financial conflict injury will be interviewed. And yeah, so that's all. So that's the, I guess, that answer member Grindel's concern. And the other thing I want to mention is for the subcommittee, my thinking, I think what we did in the past is that every board member submit one question on the application because on allocation, we generally ask four to five questions. So we have four board members. Everyone submit one question to ask on the application. In addition, obviously, to that obvious question, why do you want to be on the board? And then we put that onto the application and every other board member will also need to submit four to five questions that you want to be asked in an interview. And the subcommittee in a certain way just merge or combine questions together. And one of the roles in the subcommittee when it comes to reading the application is obviously making sure this is an eligible candidate. And on the application, there's no derogatory comments, no regulation, no secret or closed session confidential information. That's the beer sanity chaff on something. We're not there to rank Canada ourselves. They will need to go through the public interview process.

[10554] Aiden Hill: Member Hill. Thank you, President Chong. So yes, just echoing member Grindel, I think we really want to focus on how we can make this as transparent as possible. And kind of I believe what you're saying and my understanding and how things have been conducted in the past is that really the role of the subcommittee is pretty limited. and that really all they're doing, as you're describing, is pretty much just confirming that the basic criteria are there, meaning that you have to be a citizen in order to be appointed to the board, and you also have to be a resident of Newark, and just confirming those. And then, as you say, make sure that there aren't any derogatory remarks or something like that. But other than that, there's not really any you know, additional filtering. And then, so that was my understanding. And I don't, and it wasn't my recollection that in the past, the subcommittee was involved in also putting the questions together. I thought that the subcommittee's role was really just limited to the screening, the very basic screening of the candidates. But I just want to confirm that.

[10639] Bowen Zhang: Yeah, I asked, speaking of questions, I mean, obviously, when we finalize the question, we can communicate with the superintendent to merge questions, because before, I remember submitting a question, and then most likely, your question will be determined, will be showing up in the final interview. But there are two different ways that we did. I think during my appointment, also, Member Nguyen's appointment. The difference is when I was appointed, the questions were actually not revealed to the public, to the candidate beforehand. So there will be just, you don't know, you don't know any question coming in. And then there are five questions, I believe five or six questions being asked during the interview. And I believe when Member Nguyen was appointed, So then I guess, is there any occasion where we review 20 questions and so the public knows we picked five of them during the, okay. So never review, okay. Never review any question, okay. So then I guess we can discuss how we want to finalize. Let's say if each board member submits four or five questions, we have 20 questions. During the actual interview, we'll be asking only six or seven questions. How do we finalize and make the final selection of the questions we want to ask during the interview? That we can discuss in this meeting. Member Hill?

[10731] Aiden Hill: Thank you for the clarification, President John. board meeting. Maybe it may be a suggestion. I mean it hurt kind of member grandel suggestion that making the process as transparent as possible could we put in our schedule. We come up with our we each come up with their draft questions. Maybe we share those questions and they're published on the agenda. Everybody can see it. And then we as a board could maybe go through a process of voting or winnowing those down. And I don't think there's a problem, actually, with the candidates seeing the questions. I actually think it would be a good thing, because I think we want them to be as prepared as possible coming in. So would it be possible to follow that process as it relates to questions?

[10790] Bowen Zhang: Well, for me, I think my thinking is, given my appointment process and also Member Nguyen's appointment process, generally, I don't think the questions are noon beforehand. So in that case, that sort of limited our ability to really talk about that in public.

[10815] Aiden Hill: Do we have this process documented anywhere? This appointment process?

[10827] Bowen Zhang: I don't think so. Okay, any, or anybody can chime in?

[10836] SPEAKER_35: President Zhang, if you'd like me to just provide some feedback in regards to previous years. Yeah. So in previous years, what the subcommittee and the board have done is that it's an interview process. What the board has, should recommend is the number of candidates that would be interviewed. In this case, you guys are saying you're gonna interview everybody that applies. The other option is how the interview will take place, which means the candidates would be interviewed on their own, or they would all be interviewed in the same room. Previously, what was done is that the candidates were interviewed on their own, while everybody else was in a silent room. And then at that point, there was a selection made based on point or selection, which the board may discuss right now. In regards to the application process and what that looks like, the bare minimum would be a name, location, address, birthdate. However, the board has the discretion to say how many questions you guys want to include in that application. What I would recommend in this situation is set the limit, 5, 6, 10, whatever your limit of question is, Again, this is the discretion of the board, but everybody could submit three questions as suggestions for the subcommittee. However, if there's a particular question that the board members want, they could say, this is my one question that I want in the application for sure. However, there's, again, depending on the number of questions you guys select for the application, you can make suggestions. That's for the application process in itself. Moving on to the interview. the board would have to make the decision as to how many questions would be asked. Typically in previous interviews, all the candidates had the same questions. And again, the board would decide how many questions are gonna be asked, and then you have the discretion to submit questions. Or this is where the board will make the decision. Submit suggested questions, again, that may be two, three, five, etc. Or you can say, I'm gonna submit, one question each and all those are going to be in there. So this is the discussion that you guys may have and some of the guidelines that you would be providing to the board and to the subcommittee. I hope that clarifies some of that.

[10985] Bowen Zhang: Yeah, I guess still the key point is that how do we finalize the question on the application and during the interview? If we don't want the candidate to know beforehand, then I guess the board obviously cannot go to a closed room with four of us there and discuss, right? Because that would be a violation of Brown Act.

[11002] SPEAKER_35: In the past, the questions and suggestions were provided to the subcommittee, and the subcommittee diselected.

[11014] Terrence Grindall: Excuse me, President. There's a couple alternatives. One would be that each member simply asks a question, and as long as that question is asked identically of all the candidates, it doesn't have to be disclosed ahead of time. Each member gets to ask a question or two that they desire. The only challenge with that is the potential duplication of questions, but I think we're bright enough to, you know, think on our feet in regards to that. The other alternative would be to, as Member Hill suggested, maybe it's not that critical that these questions be unknown to the candidates. In fact, it might make the interviews a little faster if people had a chance to be aware of the questions. So I'm not sure that that history, the tradition of keeping it secret is necessarily so essential. But those are two ways around it.

[11078] Bowen Zhang: You know, I have to say, actually, thinking about this, I actually don't mind if the question is really known beforehand, just like you said. I mean, but in the actual interview class, I still hope that we just like what we've been through before, like I did. Yeah, go ahead.

[11095] Mark Triplett: If I may, President Chen, just bring up a potential challenge of having the questions beforehand. I know we just had a study session around APEX the concerns around cheating. I think that if people know the questions in advance, then I think there's a real potential for the responses that they give not to be their own, but to be those of other people that are actually not applying to be on the board.

[11130] Bowen Zhang: Yeah, Member Nguyen.

[11140] Phuong Nguyen: I'm also not in favor of revealing questions because I want to see candidates, you know, think on their feet and give me answers that are genuine and thoughtful and see how they're reacting to it. And it's kind of like an engaging process for us to be able to interview them. For me, if you know the questions beforehand, and I know that I've sat on a lot of interview panels, and people can prepare, and they're very good at preparing and selling you on the answers. But are they really going to be acting in that role and in that capacity once they're appointed? So for me, I wouldn't want to go through that process. But I understand both situations. But I would prefer us not reveal the questions ahead of time.

[11205] Bowen Zhang: Thank you. Member Hill.

[11211] Aiden Hill: As Member Nguyen says, I think we can see both sides to the equation. The reason I'm leaning a little bit more towards having the questions available is certainly people can get prepped and coached, but that happens in politics all the time, right? You've got people writing candidates, campaign speeches. But once the questions really start to come in and get into a little bit more detail, you can sense whether the candidate really understands or knows it or believes it. So I think you see some genuineness come out. The only concern that I have is I've seen situations where there are people that are maybe a little bit more studious and thoughtful about stuff that don't always you know, aren't able to just quickly come up with something in response. But in reality, when they truly are operating in the role, they actually do a very good job, and they're very thoughtful. So I don't want to penalize those people over people that maybe are a little bit more glib or a little bit more articulate, but maybe not as thoughtful. So that's kind of my viewpoint, but again, I think we just figure out what we want to do.

[11291] Bowen Zhang: I mean, obviously a data point is, remember when I myself, when we went into an interview, we didn't really know the question beforehand. I think it turned out both of our pretty solid picks for the board.

[11303] Terrence Grindall: If you do say so yourself. Yeah, I can go either way. I see both sides of the equation. What I don't want is for The questions that I want to ask have to go through a filter of the subcommittee, and then the subcommittee can decide not to ask my question. So, I want a method, and it should be done. I want a method to, and I think all the members should be able to ask whatever questions they think are most relevant. Again, the challenge with that is the potential duplicated questions, but it seems to me that maybe the subcommittee could filter that. Maybe we submit our questions in advance that we want to ask, and the subcommittee can say, well, Member Hill and Member Grundahl asked exactly the same question, communicate back to us, and we can do that. So, I'm sorry to get into the weeds, but that's what I was thinking, maybe.

[11367] Bowen Zhang: Yeah. So, giving you my experience, when we had a vacancy, and before we appoint Member Nguyen, So I submitted my question to the subcommittee. My question was accepted in the final round of interview. And obviously, in front of the data, I see all the questions there, right? So I see my question, I saw my question there. And the other question, I obviously do not know who submitted those questions. But I know my question was there. So that's what happened.

[11397] SPEAKER_35: If I may, with the permission of the board.

[11398] Bowen Zhang: Go ahead.

[11399] SPEAKER_35: Just a little bit on the administrative and back end of what happens during that interview process is that I print out. sheets for you guys to write on and grade the questions. So ultimately I would be having those questions available for so that I would be able to print out. So if a suggestion could also be that the superintendent would be seeing those questions and if anything any question becomes double then there could be some some discussion with the superintendent. However, the day of, like I said, I do have to prepare paperwork for everyone, which is going to be your questions and places for you to make your notes, the scale that's going to be used, et cetera.

[11443] Terrence Grindall: President Chen. Yeah, go ahead. That approach is acceptable to me. I was just trying to give the subcommittee something to do.

[11453] Bowen Zhang: So actually, can we finalize the process that it will be We'll be asking the two of you and obviously ourselves will be submitting questions for both the application and the interview itself. Because application probably limited to four or five questions. And interview, on the day of interview, we'll probably have six to seven questions per candidate. So do we want to go with the approach that every board member submit only one or two, one or two final interview questions. And then we really just add everybody's question together if there's no duplicate. Or every woman wants to submit five to six, and we have 20 of them, and then we filter out. Then that will be up to the subcommittee to finalize the six or seven questions to ask during the interview. So which way does the board want to go?

[11508] Phuong Nguyen: I think we should each submit two questions. to the subcommittee for. To use. So that will give us 8 questions each for the interview on the interview day. And then if there are any duplicates. It will will have either the superintendent or the executive assistant miss Gutierrez notify us that there's a duplicate and then we can resubmit an additional question. And then for the application process, just one each?

[11545] Bowen Zhang: I mean, the application process, I guess, because since we're going to be asking six or seven questions, and obviously there will be one opening statement and one closing statement. And yeah, I mean, one question I think is fine.

[11558] Terrence Grindall: Member Zhang, yeah, I was particularly since, and I believe there's a consensus on the board that we want to interview all the applications that apply. the actual application can be very straightforward to addressing the critical questions that we need to assess whether someone's qualified, you know. And actually, I don't think you even want to ask their birthday. I think you just want to ask if they're over 18. So, the we're actually 18. So I think the application itself is something that could be very, very simple, straightforward, and focus on those relatively limited qualifications, whereas the real meat of this discussion is at the public, transparent interview of the candidates.

[11610] Bowen Zhang: Yeah, and then we can move on to the second part, which is actual interviewing and the ranking system, how we select. So historically at our district, what happened is We had a, on the day of the interview, we have a lottery for all the people, and they have a number. So, whoever go first, the rest of them will be sitting in our training room. Obviously, because right now we have live streaming, so we'll have people to look on whether anybody's watching the live stream in the training room. And once we complete the interview for one candidate, and then that candidate can be resting in the audience, and we'll bring in, based on the number that's been drawn, we'll be asking the second and all the way to the last one. Unlike some of the other annual process, like I recently saw on the Ohlone College, where everybody was sitting there, but whoever went first for a particular question will be pretty random. So one candidate doesn't always go first for a question. And after that, speaking of the ranking system, let's say we have more than three candidates applying What happened before is that the board, each board member will first select top three without ranking just your top three. And then, and we look at the top three, and then the people that got the three, the three people that got the highest top three choice will advance into the second round. But no more questioning done. We advance into the second round, and we have three finalists. And then after that, the board will rank each candidate, one, two, three. And in our case, having a three is actually the highest rank. instead of having one being the highest rank, which is a bit different than the Ohlone College Board process. So, obviously, three is the highest and one is the lowest. Whoever accumulated against the highest point will be the one that we make a motion to appoint as our newest board trustee. So, is everybody comfortable with this process?

[11732] Terrence Grindall: Member Zheng, the first part of your discussion, I agree, where I think the candidates could be in the closed session room or the training room and be brought in for their time period. I have some unease about setting up a structure where you're creating a top rank when you're creating a ranking the number one candidate, the ultimate candidate who reaches consensus of the board may not make it in that first cut. They might end up being removed. There are scenarios where that can happen. So I'm a little concerned about anything that limits our ability to simply reach a consensus on the candidate.

[11782] Bowen Zhang: Well, I think the first round of cutting that if you look at them mathematically, I think I think nobody can actually make it into the second round if you don't have more than one board member selecting you in the final round. So if you have less than two, only one board member thinks you are the best one in the top three, you probably won't be the consensus candidate at the end. So I think historically that the first round selecting top three and see whoever are the three people that got the most thumbs up from the four board member and then advance into the second round, I don't see that as having excluding a consensus candidate from that first round, right? Because is it possible that you have two or three? Because remember, you need three votes for anybody. I don't think it's possible for anybody to get to be picked by three out of the four board members in the first round and not end up advancing to the second round.

[11836] Terrence Grindall: Yes, well, I have personal experience with situations where a consensus, there were 15 candidates And a consensus, they weren't able to get three votes for any of them. And they ended up discussing somebody who didn't make their original cut. And the original board thought the person didn't have enough experience. But as it came down to the fact that they couldn't reach a consensus, they reached that person. That person ended up being a really great council member. So there's that.

[11874] Bowen Zhang: So, I mean, I do want to add one thing because we're using that one, two, three ranking, right? So, in the very small possibility in the last round, final round of ranking, you're going to have two people tied with time because that didn't happen with former member, I guess, when member Gutierrez was first appointed. It didn't happen with me and it didn't happen with member Wynn. So, that likelihood that we have a stalemate And I think once we have a stalemate, the board can continue to elaborate and deliver it during the open session. But I still think anybody that didn't really make to the first round to like not, meaning not being picked by two or three board members are likely to be the consensus candidate if we have a stalemate at the end.

[11920] Terrence Grindall: Member Zhang, if you don't mind, sorry to monopolize the time. You could actually have the same effect happen with each member simply suggesting their top candidate, and then if there's at least two that have chosen that top candidate, you put it to a vote of the board. You may not have to go down the list if each member simply puts up their top candidate.

[11953] Aiden Hill: I'm not sure I understand but so member Grindell are you saying that basically we would just have one round we wouldn't have like a first cut in a second cut is that what you're proposing?

[11972] Terrence Grindall: If the number one choice of the members, if none of them reached consensus, then you'd go to another round. You'd have to, people have to make more and more suggestions, but you wouldn't necessarily have to have a listing. And, you know, in some ways it's six of one, half dozen of another, but I do, I don't think it's that transparent as transparent if we if we have this sort of listing and ranking and and you know maybe everybody's number 4 gets get is is actually the best consensus candidate, but that person isn't being discussed further.

[12016] SPEAKER_35: Yeah, I make a suggestion. I believe if I'm hearing the board correctly. For example, we have 10 candidates all are interviewed If all board members or four board members were to pick one and nobody were to match, you'd have four candidates to pick from. Then you could either have another question or just vote from the four members. Would that not be sufficient for the board?

[12042] Bowen Zhang: No, I think member Grunell was not even talking about ranking these four. He was just talking about somebody make a motion.

[12047] SPEAKER_35: No, I understand what I'm saying. This is a suggestion that might, would that help?

[12052] Terrence Grindall: with the exception of asking further questions I don't think we want to do that. But yes that's what that's that would be perfectly fine is is if we we simply just we just said the person you know we you know with this could be a public discussion the person that I think should be appointed is is you know X. And member Nguyen says Y. And maybe there's four different letters, then we got to, you know, then we have to, then somebody makes a motion for one person to see if they can get three votes. If not, we have to go down the list. But it's very open.

[12086] SPEAKER_35: So if four candidates are selected, at that point, you don't want to provide any additional ranking? You want to have a discussion amongst the board?

[12094] Jodi Croce: Yes.

[12097] Bowen Zhang: I mean, so I think the process before where you actually rank the candidate. I think that's turned out to work out well because oftentimes you give the candidate that receive a two rather than three a chance to succeed. That means you ended up having people who are not the first choice of some other board member, but it's also acceptable to them. In that case, about using motion, a person can vote no just because that person is not his top choice. But oftentimes what we ended up is we did end up with a board member who two of the board members think is the best. The other two things, not the best, but acceptable. And I mean, given in my appointment, two out of the four board members gave me the highest score. So for that, two of them think that I was the best choice. But there are two other members that think I was acceptable. But even though not great, but acceptable. Well, in that case, I think member win was sort of the only person that got three from every single board member. And that doesn't happen very often.

[12156] SPEAKER_35: the board if I may also just a word of caution is when you are going to be discussing every candidate. Again, just we limit ourselves to personnel matters. So that discussion would also have to be limited to procedure and maybe You'd have to be careful.

[12177] Bowen Zhang: Yeah, you know, I'm not really a big fan about openly discussing each candidate's strengths or weakness, you know, in a public meeting. I think the ranking system should work out. Because I think the interview process before and first top three member and ranking of top three, no drama, no comment, no discussion on certain candidate. We thank all of them for participating. I would pick the highest ranked one. Like, oftentimes it will be somebody that's picked as top candidate by some board member and being picked as second choice accepted by other board members. So.

[12210] Terrence Grindall: I remember saying this is it's not a battle I'm going to I'm going to die on. But the the it's even less drama if it's a single if it's if each member suggests a single person rather than ranking more that's there's less drama. It's the member has has reviewed all the applicants and that and the member thinks that person is the best. There's even less drama.

[12235] Bowen Zhang: What happens if four of us picks, end up having three candidates, one get two votes, the other one only get one vote, what will happen next? I mean, it's easier if three of us, three out of the four have the same top candidate, then it's easy, motion, just motion. What if two out of the four have the same candidate, and the other two have different candidates, so we end up have three finalists, but one get extra vote, what will happen next? If you make a motion, that's only two votes. That's not passing. So that means that person, even though picked, got a highest ranking, but doesn't get a chance to get appointed.

[12272] SPEAKER_35: If I may also, the candidate has to be selected by the majority of the board. So at that point, they have to have a minimum of three board members have to select the same candidate.

[12283] Bowen Zhang: Yeah, but like I said, the ranking system, let's say the ranking system gives that one, gives somebody who is the second choice of other board member, a chance to prevail, which oftentimes ended up being a consensus candidate that's accepted by every board member. That motion like that, because you need three votes, and we just, everybody's pick only one candidate instead of ranking that, you may end up really having a scenario where all the finalists are being passed out. Every motion fails.

[12315] Terrence Grindall: You know, like I said, in some ways it doesn't matter. Six of one, half of another. But one exception I'm going to make to what you just stated is, ultimately, you need three votes. No system or ranking is going to dictate which member is selected. Ultimately, you need three votes for any candidate. Hopefully four. I'm okay with your approach, but I just want to be clear that ultimately it comes down to each member needs to exercise their judgment. And if there isn't three to support a particular person openly, transparently, then we keep going down the road.

[12362] Bowen Zhang: Like I said, I think the good thing about ranking system is you end up having one person having the highest rank. Like I said, top choice by some board member, second choice by other board member.

[12371] Phuong Nguyen: What happened?

[12373] Bowen Zhang: Mr. Egan.

[12376] Aiden Hill: OK. Yeah, so just to clarify, is what member Grudel is what you're saying, that if we were to go with President Zhang's ranking approach, that in the end, we could have a candidate that maybe is achieving an overall higher ranking But at the same time, the board individually has to approve, each member has to approve that. And if we can't achieve a consensus, we've got to go back and take a second look. Is that what you're saying? Yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes.

[12414] Bowen Zhang: Thank you. So what happened during the past appointment, like my appointment, just like I said, I got the highest ranking, but two board members didn't give me the three. But because they see the overall ranking and they rank me, when they rank me, they rank me as acceptable. So when they made the motion to appoint me to the board, all of the former board voted yes because they saw the ranking. So yeah, you're right, you need three votes. But in a ranking system like that, you give the person who didn't get highest vote for every board member who is being ranked as second choice by other board member a chance to prevail because he emerged as the consensus candidate.

[12458] Phuong Nguyen: And also during the ranking system, it does display the transparency across the board and the board members and also for the candidates to see. If we do just pick our top vote, I don't think that the other candidates would know where they stood in terms of how well they did on the interview. So I think that gives a good gauge and also it shows the public, the community that, you know, we, I mean, obviously when we're up here ranking, I mean, we wouldn't try and take someone or anything like that, you know, and I hope that all of us have integrity enough to, to follow the process in a fair way and not do that. And, and it does, it gives us, you know, transparency and like, and like President Zhang said, it does allow I think that's that's that's that's that's that's that's that's what allows us to when we see the ranking allows us to hey yeah that that candidate did make a a statement that I do kind of like in and I could possibly you know work with that person, you know it gives you kind of. An insight to what your other board members are thinking so

[12550] Aiden Hill: Since we do have some time, we don't have a lot of time, and there are some things I think we have to decide in this meeting, but there are some things where we maybe have a chance to decide a little bit later. Could we maybe have you, President Chong, draft up, you know, an approach that you think would be good and have member Grindell draft up an approach. And then we could we could look at both of those in the next meeting and we could vote on as a board which one we want to take. we want to adopt. And even if we need to have a special meeting, I mean, I'm okay with attending a special meeting, but I think it would be good just to be able to actually see it written down and visualized and then make sure that we really feel comfortable and make an informed decision on which one. Because I don't think we need to make this decision yet. We need to make it before we do the interviews, but we don't need to make it right now. Would it be okay for us to have each of you draft up the approach and then we can vote on it

[12612] Bowen Zhang: So I guess we do have an application deadline, I believe.

[12615] SPEAKER_35: If I may, President Zhang, the timeline that we were trying to strive was for applications to go out on Monday, be out in the public for a week. Then they would come back in the following week. It would be a week of review. So then it would be available sooner than later.

[12633] Bowen Zhang: Yeah, I thought generally we give two weeks preparation for the interview because by the time The deadline passed. If nobody applies, we will extend that one-week deadline. And September 23rd is our absolute deadline to fill that vacancy. So speaking of that, going back to that ranking, like I said, my experience is if the candidate I get three get a highest ranking, great for me. If my second choice got a highest ranking, I accept that. If it happens to be the candidate that received one from me, the lowest ranking, get a highest ranking, I will go with the board. So as a result, I go with the consensus candidate. But if using the way of just make a motion, then should I, if the first motion being put on is somebody that's my second or third choice, should I vote yes or should I vote no? I probably will be voting no, because that's not my top choice.

[12681] Aiden Hill: So that's the problem with that approach.

[12686] Terrence Grindall: First of all, when it comes to the point that Ms. Gutierrez just brought up, I think there's very little debate about the application itself. I think we're talking about the, I think as member Hill indicated, I keep pointing at the screen. As member Hill indicated, we have time to work out what we do on the actual interview day, but I think we will, the time pressure we have is to get that application out. And I don't think this is really any controversy and I could be wrong. Well, you should, we should hear from the rest back to, And I understand your thought process, President Zhang, the way you would approach it. What I don't want, and that's perfectly fine, and it may not be that far from my approach. However, what I don't want is the process that you're setting up to dictate that others follow your process. You're going to make your process to make your decision on who should be the candidate, and others are going to use their own approach. So, as long as, and so if you can write down what you're thinking, as long as that, that there's no dictation of how, what process, what thought process is used individually, then I'm not going to have a major problem with it. So, I don't need to provide an alternate approach. I'm happy to review your approach. and make sure that my concerns are addressed.

[12774] Bowen Zhang: Yeah, I mean, just a data point. I think in the past three appointment process, there's not a single board member that descended away from the majority highest ranking member. So it's always 4-0, 4-0, even though there will always be a board member whose second or even third choice candidate became the highest ranking, but it's always 4-0. So this process turned out, I don't think we antagonize any individual board members realizing that maybe his first choice was not being on the highest rank. Member Hill.

[12806] Aiden Hill: Yeah, thank you. And yeah, I mean, I think that just the, you know, the issue, and maybe you feel more comfortable with it, President Chong, because you've been through the process, and maybe Member Grinnell and I just feel a little bit less comfortable because we haven't, and so we're having a problem visualizing. And since there isn't, you know, a process prior that was written down that we could go read through, you know, I think it creates a little bit of apprehension. You know, if there's a way that we could at least have you write down and articulate so we could clearly see how it works. And then if everything looks good, I mean, we could vote for it in the next meeting. But in the meantime, I think making the key decisions that we need to make today, because from what I understand, so member Martinez resigned effective July 28th. We have 60 days from that date. When I went out and looked at the calendar and identified what would be the absolute drop-dead date, I believe it's the 29th of September that would be the drop-dead date, but it sounds like... I think she resigned the 26th, not the 28th.

[12866] Bowen Zhang: 28th, and then what would be the 60th? I'm sorry, the 26th. I think given July and August have 31 days, so that would be... Hold on a second. July 28, yeah. Yeah, she resigned July 28. That will be September 29. September 26.

[12888] Aiden Hill: I'm not as good at math as you are, President Chong, so I took a calendar and manually counted it with my fingers.

[12894] Phuong Nguyen: It expires on the 26th.

[12899] Bowen Zhang: Yes, September 26 will be the absolute drop down. OK. Yeah, so we have two more regular board meetings before we can fill the vacancy. Obviously, that interview will have to be a special board meeting, but yeah, we don't really have that much time to deliberate around. But I can agree, concur with Member Grindel right on my thought process, which is the same process I used to appoint me and Member Nguyen and then make it very clear.

[12927] Maria Huffer: Great.

[12927] Aiden Hill: And then the other things that I'm understanding that we need to do is that we need to identify a window for when we're going to basically accept applications. And obviously, if we're going to have a simple application or if we're going to have anything other than a very simple application, you know, there will be some prep time into the application. And so I think if we could just set some dates here, some milestones to say, okay, application needs to be finalized by X date. We're going to open the window by Y date. The window, my understanding is, is it's a minimum of 10 days, but it could be longer. We can decide what that is. We can say when the window's going to close, when subcommittee is going to evaluate, have their things, you know, have the filtering, based on those very basic things, the dates for when we need to submit questions in, if we could just put a calendar together quickly or if we want to, you know, identify the milestones and then come back the next meeting. But I think we kind of have to decide the milestones now. So that's my suggestion is let's start with the things we've got to do now and then go forward and figure out step by step what we need to do.

[13001] Bowen Zhang: Yes. So I guess the goal is next Monday the application is open, is that right?

[13007] SPEAKER_35: That was the expected timeline for applications to be released Monday.

[13011] Bowen Zhang: That's the 23rd, right? Is that the 23rd?

[13014] Julienne Sumodobila: Yes.

[13015] Bowen Zhang: That's the 23rd. So if the application is going to be open by the 23rd, then the application question will need to be finalized before that, right?

[13026] SPEAKER_35: It is at the board discretion, but the idea was that today the board would decide what the application would look like. And whether, again, whether it be questions, no questions, if so, how many questions, so that it allows me time tomorrow, over the weekend, get everything ready by Monday.

[13044] Bowen Zhang: So do we need to determine the questions on the application today?

[13047] SPEAKER_35: Right now, I would appreciate if you guys give me the number of questions that would be on the application. And then just let me know how you would, how are you going to make your suggestion, whether it's suggesting, whether it's making suggestions to the subcommittee, whether it's submitting one question each, two questions each. That's what I would need.

[13066] Terrence Grindall: Right. We're talking apples and apples. The questions for the application, which in my mind are uncontroversial, versus the questions that are going to be asked at the meeting. We have time to develop the questions that are going to be asked at the meeting. We don't need to know that now, but to have the application, or the subcommittee could work tomorrow with you to develop that application. that's also acceptable. I've given my broad parameters. I think it should be pretty simple and focused on the very limited criteria, but it's up to the subcommittee to decide, and off we go. Or we can do it right here, right now, if we want, but we've probably gone over the time limit you intended.

[13114] SPEAKER_35: Yeah, I think that's fine. The direction that you have given, Member Grindel, would be perfect for me, and it would allow us to move forward.

[13121] Bowen Zhang: Yeah, I'll say it's starting. Each one submit one application question tomorrow.

[13125] Phuong Nguyen: And by the end, one. We already have an application.

[13134] Bowen Zhang: Oh, that does. So you were suggesting using the same application that when you applied.

[13139] Phuong Nguyen: Yeah. OK. I mean, we have those standard application templates.

[13144] SPEAKER_35: We do have standard application templates. Again, I just need the discretion, which from what I'm hearing, Member Grindle, is it sounds like I have the discretion to move forward to generate that application. And then additional discussion would be given from the board regarding the actual interview date.

[13161] Terrence Grindall: Well, I think work with the subcommittee. And I like the idea of starting with the previous one.

[13168] SPEAKER_35: And for the sake of moving forward, as long as I get a head nod or agreement from the majority of the board, then we can move forward with that aspect. Okay, okay. Thank you.

[13180] Bowen Zhang: Okay, I think that we're over the 30-minute limit for our discussion.

[13185] SPEAKER_35: And just to get clarity, so is the board asking for this item to come back to discuss the interview day, or what is the next steps for the board?

[13196] Bowen Zhang: I think the next, we can determine the interview day and the day for the special meeting to interview the candidate at the next regular board meeting, right? Because by that point, applicants will be submitting their application by that time, right? Okay. Moving on to 11.2 resolution 2021 to 2021.22. 2021.22.03, NUSD board member vacancy.

[13224] Aiden Hill: Sorry, President Chong, just one last clarification. Sorry, President Chong, just one last clarification. So, we're going to open the window for accepting applications on Monday, which is the 23rd, and then are we going to use the standard 10 days? Is that going to be the approach?

[13248] Bowen Zhang: I guess the standard is that 10 day or a week with the buffer. If nobody applies, you extend that for one more week.

[13254] SPEAKER_35: We've done a week in the past. So again, the board, if you guys can provide me.

[13258] Bowen Zhang: Yeah, so I would say 10 day for me feels comfortable. 10 days. Yep, by the end of the 10 day, nobody applies. We just need to extend that to 14 days.

[13266] SPEAKER_35: 10 calendar days, 10 work days.

[13267] Bowen Zhang: 10 calendar days.

[13271] Terrence Grindall: Because. You just need head nods for that. You don't need a motion.

[13279] Aiden Hill: Thank you.

[13281] Bowen Zhang: I don't think there's any, so we just nodded that we don't need to take a formal vote. Okay. Moving on to 11.2, resolution 2021.22.03 NUSD board member vacancy. So may I get a motion to approve our resolution to fill our vacancy by September 26th? I will move approval. Member Grindel, how do you vote? Yes. Oh, actually, you know, I made a wrong motion. So, the motion is actually to fill the vacancy by September 23rd. The expiry date is actually the 26th. So, because the resolution says the vacancy is by September 23rd. So, I would remake the motion that I move that we approve the resolution to approve, to fill our vacancy by September the 23rd. May I get a second?

[13335] SPEAKER_32: I'll second.

[13337] Bowen Zhang: Seconded by Member Nguyen. Member Grundahl, how do you vote?

[13341] Julienne Sumodobila: Yes. Yes.

[13342] Bowen Zhang: Member Hill?

[13344] Julienne Sumodobila: Yes.

[13347] SPEAKER_35: Member Hill, can you repeat your vote?

[13351] Bowen Zhang: Thank you, that was a yes. Okay. Member Nguyen?

[13355] SPEAKER_32: Yes.

[13356] Bowen Zhang: My vote is yes as well. Motion carries with four ayes. Moving on to new business resolution 2021.22.02 Interim Fund Borrowing. And that's sort of the public hearing we just went through. And any questions and discussions with this, given this is sort of a formality item that happens every year? I'm ready to move approval. OK. May I get a, I guess, member Hill? Bill, Bill, Bill, Bill, Bill, Bill, Bill, Bill, Bill.

[13388] Aiden Hill: Yes, so I don't think this resolution is a formality. because it's actually asking to increase the borrowing limits for the inner fund. And even though that was, you know, essentially passed, you know, at the state level, we don't necessarily have to pass it here. And I feel a little bit uncomfortable with this. Why do we need to be borrowing more money? And so I guess that's that's my question. Why do we need to increase these borrowing limits?

[13431] Bowen Zhang: Can you answer the question?

[13437] Marie dela Cruz: Member Hill, the reason why the state increased the limit from 75 to 85 percent was because of the deferrals that were being implemented. The state had used the state budget and it allows the school districts to borrow up to 85% and transfer temporarily between funds. Fortunately, our district hasn't had to use the 85% limit because our cash flow has been sufficient, but this does give us the ability to do it just in case we need it. It is something that's already in EdCode for this year and it was also available last year. So this is the last year that we have the 85% limit. And again, it's temporary borrowing for cash flow purposes.

[13498] Bowen Zhang: And I guess, just I want to add one point. By the end of every year, by law, we need to return that, right?

[13503] Marie dela Cruz: Right. So it's borrowing for the year and it has to be, transferred back within the year, unless the transfer happens the last 120 days of the year, then you have the following year to transfer the funds back. It's temporary transferring between, for example, the general fund if there's a need for cash flow because the state has deferred our cash apportionment, then we're able to borrow, let's say, from Fund 40. The only fund that we can't borrow from is the bond fund. But all the other funds, for example, if we needed money to make payroll, then we could transfer and then we would transfer it back as soon as we get our apportionment.

[13556] Terrence Grindall: So are we anticipating the temporary nature of this and the just the flexibility for cash flow is the reason I moved approval of this item. So so I appreciate that. Appreciate the further clarification. But that's that's the reason why I'm in support of it.

[13573] Marie dela Cruz: Yes. That's the main reason why the governor had implemented this change temporarily.

[13579] Aiden Hill: So question. Are we anticipating that we're going to be having a deficit in certain funds that are going to require borrowing from other funds?

[13593] Marie dela Cruz: We have a need. For example, in Fund 11, which is our adult education program, sometimes the cash flow, the timing is maybe a month. behind of what we're anticipating. So, I mean, very little. And it's only been maybe a couple hundred thousand dollars that we had to borrow between funds. And then as soon as the cash comes in for that fund, then we transfer it back.

[13628] Aiden Hill: Are there any other funds?

[13632] Bowen Zhang: Motion made by Member Grundahl. Seconded by Member Nguyen, I believe.

[13637] Aiden Hill: I still have questions.

[13640] Jodi Croce: Hello?

[13640] Aiden Hill: Yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes,

[13671] Marie dela Cruz: It's not so much the timing that we get cash from the state.

[13679] Aiden Hill: OK. And do we know whether our existing 75% limit is sufficient to meet those projected cash flow needs?

[13690] Marie dela Cruz: Well, at this time, our cash flow projections does show that we would be able to meet our cash flow and may not need temporary borrowing.

[13702] Aiden Hill: So we need to increase to 85%.

[13706] Marie dela Cruz: Well, the 85% is the max that we are allowed, and it just gives us that ability to do it.

[13714] Aiden Hill: But we could do it with 75%.

[13717] Marie dela Cruz: At this time, based on our projections, yes.

[13722] Aiden Hill: So I mean, I'd like to move to reauthorize the existing Interfund borrowing at the same level of 75% Since we're projecting we're going to meet We're not going to exceed that and I just think that we need to be fiscally prudent And and so if we're going to be able to do that I would like to move that if we keep it at the 75% I think that that should be sufficient

[13748] Bowen Zhang: Well, one thing about this restaurant, the reason I said this is formality is because this is not about before several years ago when somebody transferred a one-time fund to fund a general expenditure and never gave it back. This is actually, this is just moving around on a temporary basis. And by law, you're going to be returned, transfer that money back. There's no using one fund to balance the deficit of the other fund that's happening. So that's why I call this a formality that, this will be the third time I will be voting on this resolution so I don't see any I think that if this is for flexibility just in case for the fund that I'll be yeah I'll be moving forward with this because this is the third time voting on this.

[13790] SPEAKER_35: Just a point of order is there a second on this motion?

[13794] Bowen Zhang: I'll second it.

[13797] SPEAKER_35: No is there a second motion?

[13798] Bowen Zhang: No the motion is made by member Goodell.

[13800] SPEAKER_35: So we have two motions on the table so we just for clarifying so Again, for point of order, we just need to make sure that we have clarity on which motion we're going to be voting on.

[13807] Phuong Nguyen: We're voting on the first motion.

[13809] SPEAKER_35: Member Grindel's. Is there a second for Member Grindel's motion?

[13814] Bowen Zhang: I second that motion. Thank you. Member Grindel, how do you vote?

[13822] Terrence Grindall: I vote in favor.

[13825] Bowen Zhang: Member Hill? I vote no. Member Nguyen? Yes. My vote is yes. Motion carries with three ayes. Moving on to 12.2, Board Policy and Administrative Regulation 4112.42, 4212.42, 4312.42, Drug and Alcohol Testing for School Bus Drivers. Superintendent Triplett.

[13856] Mark Triplett: Thank you, President Chen. So this is a board policy. It's just being updated based on recommendation from the California School Board Association. and in regard to drug and alcohol testing for school bus drivers. And Ms. Del Cruz, did you have anything you wanted to add or? Oh, sorry, Ms. Ingham-Watters.

[13883] SPEAKER_13: Good evening, board. This board policy and administrative regulation are being submitted tonight based on updated language and clarifications regarding drug and alcohol testing for school bus drivers. You will see clarifications around types of substances, requirements for pre-employment testing and post-accident testing, and federal regulations which include the use of a clearinghouse database for all drivers.

[13916] Bowen Zhang: Given this is, I guess, a CSBA sanctioned language, any discussion on this? Or we'll move to approve the board policy and AR? Anybody want to make a motion? I move to approve item 12.2. May I get a second? I'll second. Seconded by Member Grundahl. Member Grundahl, how do you vote?

[13943] Julienne Sumodobila: Yes.

[13944] Bowen Zhang: Member Hill? Yes. Member Nguyen?

[13950] SPEAKER_32: Yes.

[13951] Bowen Zhang: My vote is yes as well. Motion carries with four ayes. Moving on to 12.3, Citizens Bond Oversight Committee 2019 to 2020 Annual Report. Do we have public comment on this item?

[13963] SPEAKER_35: No public comment, but we do have a guest speaker.

[13966] Bowen Zhang: Okay. Mr. Waters, welcome.

[13971] SPEAKER_20: Thank you, members of the board, administration. I am Richard Waters, I'm chair of the CBOC and I've come before you tonight to present the annual report for the 2019-2020 fiscal academic year. Hopefully you've all had the time to review the report. The most important thing on here is that the CBOC finds that the district is in compliance with spending of bond funds as it was related into the bond language. there are a few things I'd like to point out under our kind of our facts findings and concerns. Just a few things that I want to highlight for the board that the CBOC would like to make sure that you're aware of. One, some of the items are related to the fact that the bond obviously this last fiscal year there wasn't that much activity in the bonds and that there is the district. There's a lot of confusion around. Laws around when the bond funds need to be spent so 85% of the one needs to be. Series C fund should have been spent by July 2019. In some cases there could be a fine. To the district if it's not spent that's a fact to be aware of. The other thing too that the CBOC would like to point out is there's district. The CBOC has a master plan, but it was never approved or accepted by the board. And there's confusion on what is actually deferred maintenance versus preventative maintenance versus new construction, etcetera. So the CBOC would just like a little bit more clarity on what the deferred maintenance plan is for the district. During our visits to the school to the playgrounds. There was also some issues around nonconforming to 80 a compliance. For accessing any aggressive the playgrounds. The last item bring to your attention is the security and we look commend the district for doing that. But we noticed that each school site does not have the ability to access the software to be able to lock down the school the school sites or the doors at their site would have to be done by communicating to someone in facilities. Assuming they even knew that person is and that just takes a delay in time. So if an active shooter were to compromise the site or get the teacher's card they'd be able to access And they'd have to wait for someone from another department to get into the system to change it. So we just thought that might be a concern that the district should look at. The other thing, at the junior high school, we noticed that the new gates were installed. And there were no weaved iron on the surrounding panels of the gates, which means you can just literally put your arm around and open the gate. So that compromises the ability to keep the facility secured. And that was on all of the new gate locations. Just some other reminders for the public who are watching. Hopefully there's thousands of people and families watching that the bond funds that were spent in 2019-2020 is about $1.6 million. And the remaining bond funds as of June 30th, 2021 is $8.4 million. So that's the report that I'm presenting to you tonight.

[14212] Bowen Zhang: Thank you, Dr. Waters. Bringing it back to the board.

[14218] Terrence Grindall: I just want to thank you for this excellent report. Thank you. I want to thank you for this excellent report and the work that the committee put into it and also just to point out that this is very helpful to us. In the last few months, we've really made a lot of progress in expending those funds. So I know that this fiscal year that you're covering, there isn't as much spent. But you'll see in the next year that we've accomplished a lot. But again, thank you for your hard work on this.

[14255] Bowen Zhang: Any other board members?

[14258] Phuong Nguyen: I too would just like to echo member Grindel's comments and thank you to you Dr. Waters and also to the members of the CBOC for putting together a comprehensive annual report for us. And it's very detailed and we very much appreciate it. Thank you.

[14279] Bowen Zhang: Thank you Dr. Waters. Any comment from member Hill?

[14285] Aiden Hill: Yes. Echoing my fellow board members, thank you, Dr. Waters, for your work and, you know, your commitment to Newark. So, thank you.

[14298] Bowen Zhang: I move that we accept the 2019-2020 Citizens' Bond Oversight Committee Annual Report as presented. May I get a second? I second. Seconded by Member Nguyen. Member Grundahl, how do you vote?

[14309] Terrence Grindall: I vote yes.

[14311] Bowen Zhang: Member Hill?

[14312] Aiden Hill: Yes.

[14315] Bowen Zhang: Member Lueb?

[14320] Aiden Hill: Yeah, yes.

[14322] SPEAKER_21: Can you repeat the question?

[14330] Aiden Hill: I said yes.

[14333] Bowen Zhang: Member Nguyen.

[14335] SPEAKER_32: Yes.

[14336] Bowen Zhang: My vote is this as well. Motion carries with four ayes. Thank you, Dr. Waters. Have a great rest of the day.

[14342] Marie dela Cruz: Thank you.

[14345] Bowen Zhang: Moving on to 12.4, authorized project and budget for Coyote Hills security fence and gate project. Do we have any public speakers on this one? Please bring in the speakers.

[14359] SPEAKER_35: We have one speaker on this item, and it's Cindy Parks.

[14367] Cindy Parks: Good evening. Many of the sites in the- That's echoing. Are you hearing me clearly or not? Yes, you may begin. Many of the sites in this district have chain link fencing and have experienced the same vandalism from people climbing the fence to tamper with mechanical units. Is this the only way to eliminate students exiting the cafeteria into the parking lot? And I would love to hear the explanation of why the swing arm gate is necessary for the parking lot exit. I am also left to wonder whether the video surveillance camera with the doorbell will just create another situation like the CBOC witnessed at the junior high on their July 14th bond tour. The audio system was not working, the video works intermittently, and the gate could not be opened remotely. The software application the office staff uses to monitor the door frequently kicks them off the application. Now let me address the funding source. As I've mentioned before, each December this board approves a resolution which details the accounting of the developer's fees for the previous fiscal year. On page two of that document that you approved last December, under findings regarding the fund, item C indicates in reference to government code section 6601, and with respect only to the portion of the funding remaining unexpended at the end of the 2019-2020 fiscal year, the purpose of the fees is to finance the construction or reconstruction of school facilities necessary to reduce overcrowding caused by the development on which the fees were levied. which facilities are more specifically identified in Exhibit B. The next item on the resolution references 66001D1B and indicates the findings and evidence demonstrate that there is a reasonable relationship between the fees and the purpose for which it is charged. and exhibit B mentioned a moment ago states the purpose of the fees is to finance the construction or reconstruction of school facilities necessary to reduce overcrowding caused by the development on which the fees were levied. Time will not permit me to list the five areas, but suffice it to say those areas do not negate the reduced overcrowding caused by the development on which the fees were levied language. As a board answerable to the community, you owe it to get sound legal advice before expending developer fees on this project. If you feel you need to approve this item now, I hope you will use Fund 40, the Russian money instead. Additionally, I believe to keep all students safe on campus and provide an equitable solution to this district wide problem, you need to remove all chain link fencing throughout the district, replacing it with ornamental fencing. Thank you.

[14536] Bowen Zhang: Thank you. I believe that's all the public speakers. I'll bring it back to the superintendent.

[14543] Mark Triplett: Thank you, President Jun. So I'll have Ms.dela Cruz speak a little bit more on this particular project.

[14553] Marie dela Cruz: Thank you, Dr. Triplett. I believe I have a couple of guests, Mr. Caputo and Ms. Denny, for this item. So the purpose of this item is to for safety and security purposes and also the preliminary budget. The preliminary budget includes architect fees as well as the construction budget and the management. The project scope, I will have Ms. Denny or Ms. Caputo review that in a little bit more detail if you could please. Could you bring both of them in or no? this project. But I can have miss Denny miss Denny's been working closely with this project.

[14604] SPEAKER_26: Good evening. So the scope of work for this project is to include some iron ornamental fencing that would cover. We suspect that people are currently climbing over the existing chain link fence and we plan on making the fence either taller or providing some kind of screening to keep people from climbing over the fence. And also there will also be fencing around the other side of the cafeteria over to the entrance of the school. There will be some egress gates with panic hardware on them as required by the fire marshal. And we will also be designing it to meet all the accessible standards as required by the division of the state architect. There will be an entry near the office with a doorbell and video camera. We're also including a parking arm in the parking lot that will be manually opened and closed each day. And the reason for that is because there are people in the community that are coming onto the site and dumping garbage in the trash dumpsters that are in the parking lot.

[14708] Cindy Parks: And you need to do it at every school site

[14712] Bowen Zhang: Okay. I think, please remove the public speaker. Any other guest speakers? Ms. Dela Cruz?

[14728] Marie dela Cruz: No. Ms. Denny is the only one that will be presenting. But if you have any questions, I have both.

[14736] Bowen Zhang: My question has been answered before the meeting because I had that question regarding the architect. Any other questions from the rest of the board?

[14745] SPEAKER_21: Member Hill?

[14749] Aiden Hill: Yeah, per the comments that were made by Ms. Parks, I'm concerned that we're really, given the language that's surrounding Fund 25, that This is not really the proper use of that money. That money is used for overcrowding. And so I don't think in good conscience we can approve this since it violates essentially the guidelines around that. And then the other concern that I have is when I hear the term ornamental, it starts to make me nervous. And it seems like it's similar to the proposal that was brought to us in the last meeting, where we were looking at doing landscaping for a school that we've just closed. So we're trying to make things look nice, but much of it is a cosmetic thing. And I think as Ms. Barks had also indicated, these issues apply to lots of other schools. And so I don't think it's appropriate that we approve this at this point, But primarily because I don't think that this is a proper use of fund 25 funds, so that's my input Mr.. Can you address that question sure?

[14831] Marie dela Cruz: Yes, before we determined and specified this funding source. We did get legal opinion, and we do have legal opinion that states we have the Legal compliance to use the funds for this project

[14845] Bowen Zhang: Yes, because this is a merger of the school and you have increased capacity in the school and that's why Fund 25 is eligible for this, right?

[14853] Marie dela Cruz: Yes, that's one of the reasons and there's also a nexus in the use of the funds for construction and modernizing and improvement of the facilities.

[14865] Bowen Zhang: Any other questions on the rest of the board? Or we're ready to move to make motions?

[14870] Aiden Hill: I'd like to move. that we postpone the voting on this item. I'd like to move that we postpone the voting on this item until the next meeting because I'd like for staff to provide the legal opinion so that we can make sure that we've all seen it and we feel that we're on firm ground before we authorize the use of fund 25 disbursements.

[14896] Bowen Zhang: Any second for that motion? No second, motion dies. Anybody want to propose alternative motion?

[14907] Terrence Grindall: I'll move approval of this item as presented by staff.

[14912] Bowen Zhang: Motion made by Member Grundahl. Seconded by Member Nguyen. Member Grundahl, how do you vote?

[14920] Jodi Croce: Yes.

[14921] Bowen Zhang: Member Hill, how do you vote? Vote no. Member Nguyen, how do you vote?

[14928] SPEAKER_32: Yes.

[14929] Bowen Zhang: My vote is yes as well. Motion carries with three ayes and member Hill dissented. Thank you. What's the guest speaker's name? Thank you, Ms. Denny. Have a great rest of the night. Moving on to consent calendar personnel report. I move that we ratify the personnel report as presented. May I get a second? I'll second. Seconded by member Nguyen. Member Grundahl, how do you vote? I vote yes. Member Hill, how do you vote?

[14959] Aiden Hill: Sorry. I was taking a note. What's the motion?

[14964] Bowen Zhang: I vote yes. Member Nguyen, how do you vote?

[14971] SPEAKER_32: Yes.

[14972] Bowen Zhang: My vote is yes. Motion carries with four ayes. Moving on to consent calendar, non-personnel items. I believe we have public speaker on 14.5 and 14.6, so I will move that we approve Item 14.2, 2021 to 2022, revised school and classified work calendars. 14.3, contract with Shalom Staffing for special education teacher. 14.4, master contract with Aspect Solutions, Inc. for special education services. May I get a second for these three items? I'll second. Second is by Member Nguyen. Member Grindel, how do you vote? I vote yes. Member Hill?

[15017] Aiden Hill: I'm sorry, President Zhang, can you restate the motion?

[15022] Bowen Zhang: So approving consent calendar item 14.2 to 14.4, the three items on there.

[15031] Aiden Hill: Okay, because the other ones have been pulled?

[15033] Bowen Zhang: No, because we have public comments. So the minutes has been pulled, but 14.5 and 14.6 are public comments.

[15041] Aiden Hill: Okay, all right, yes, so you're saying 14.2 to 14.5?

[15046] Bowen Zhang: No, 14.2 to 14.4. Okay, yes, I approve. Member Nguyen?

[15052] SPEAKER_32: Yes.

[15052] Bowen Zhang: My vote is as well. Motion carries with four ayes. 14.4, Warren Report. Ms. Gutierrez, can you bring in the public speaker?

[15076] SPEAKER_35: Okay, 14.5, the speaker is Eric Tam.

[15086] SPEAKER_37: Eric Tam, you may begin.

[15091] SPEAKER_05: Hi, board members. Earlier tonight, I spoke about kind of just fiscal expenditures and how to continue to just be critical of our spend. I was looking over the warrants. I wanted to highlight just several items of interest. First, we paid a Jeff review, $9900 for a videography contract for District Y. First, I would love that we could maybe leverage some of our talented students at Memorial High and how we could, you know, create a project around that versus spending around $10,000. I do not know the specific scope of work, but I have filed a CPRA to learn more. Second, this is related to NBPI, our bipolar needlepoint installation technology. Western Alliance showed three line items on page eight. which described MBBI installation. The three line items totaled another 79,335. Ms. Delacruz, I'm not sure if this is part of the existing old $360,000 and we're just paying off the open invoices. But if these are new charges, this would bring us up to $439,280 from this district. I hope these are just old charges and not new charges. we're not going to be able to do that. So I don't know if Miss Stella Cruz could clarify, but that would Third, consulting payments. On page 21, we had PEP consulting for another implicit bias training, $30,624. Janet Hernandez, which was our tail end and part of our contract, another $6,500 for our facilitation. And Dr. Tripa's coaching, which is another $450. I know these are all part of final contracts, but I hope that the board can continue to save costs by deferring these consulting contracts or not using consultants in general. And finally, on page 26, R. Jim Kramer for commissioning testing air balance project management. Ms. Delacruz, is this by any chance related to the alpha air testing contract that was brought to the board on June 17th? You know, I've been just trying to track that one down. It was brought back on June 17th. And for the PO order of April 19th, I have not been able to see any alpha air testing warrants related in the past couple months. And I maybe was asking if this is related. Board, I hope these line items can help you in your planning. Thank you.

[15252] Bowen Zhang: Thank you. Any other public speakers for this item? Okay, bringing back to the board, I move that we approve the Warren report as presented. Can I get a second? I'll second. Okay, seconded by Member Grindel. Member Grindel, how do you vote?

[15272] Julienne Sumodobila: Yes.

[15274] SPEAKER_21: Member Hill?

[15278] Aiden Hill: No, and the reason why is I share some of the concerns around the contracts that the speaker had just outlined.

[15287] Bowen Zhang: member going to a member win. My vote is yes. Motion carries with 3 ayes. Member Hill descended. Voting no. Moving on to 14.6 quarterly report on contracts fiscal year 2020-21 fourth quarter. May I get a do we have public speaker?

[15309] SPEAKER_35: Yes, President Zhang we do have a public speaker on this item. It is Cindy Parks.

[15324] Cindy Parks: Good evening. The background for this item says that the board has requested a report of all contracts for services over $10,000 be reviewed by the board on a quarterly basis. This report only includes contracts that have not been previously approved by the board. This report lists contracts from the fourth quarter of fiscal year 2020 through 21, which is April, May, June of 2021. It's nice to see these contracts were actually for the quarter indicated. For some reason, other contracts were made for these reports or for the correct quarter or never made the report like the web design contract. I had to get the web design contract through a CPRA request. As I mentioned to you two weeks ago, I've only received two of the five records I requested on May 31st, 2021. The website design contract is one of those items that I received. Had it been, either an agenda item for your approval or placed on the October 2020 quarterly report, that is one less item I would have had to request. And yes, I said October 2020. The contract was signed by Ms. Dela Cruz on August 31st, 2020, and Mr. Moser, the CEO of FinalSight, aka Active Internet Technology on September 1st, 2020. The $35,000 base amount was paid one month later on 10-2 of 20. and you have yet to ratify that contract, or at least that is the way it appears to me. One of the three remaining CPRA items I requested is the minutes from the board meeting where that contract was approved or ratified. So let me ask you, how long will you continue to turn a blind eye to your own process, procedures, or policies being ignored by the staff? Thank you.

[15435] Bowen Zhang: Any other public comments?

[15437] SPEAKER_18: Okay.

[15441] Bowen Zhang: Bring back to the board, anybody ready to make motions? I'll move approval. Motion made by Member Grindel, seconded by Member Nguyen. Member Grindel, how do you vote? Yes. Member Hill?

[15459] Aiden Hill: I vote no because I share the speaker's concern about the visibility. We should be seeing all contracts, not just the most recent ones. We should see a whole report. And also, I share concern around not only the visibility, but the transparency of our contracting process, and especially if there are situations where the board is needing to ratify contracts and we're not being involved. So I vote no. Okay.

[15486] Bowen Zhang: Member Nguyen?

[15489] SPEAKER_32: Yes.

[15490] Bowen Zhang: My vote is yes. Motion carries three years. Member Hill voted no. Board of Education Committee reports. Mission Valley ROP. Actually, interesting thing is, given Member Martins is not here, remind me to have a future. I'm deciding how to fill this. Nothing for SELVA. Anything for the Liaison Committee?

[15517] Penny DeLeon: Not at this time.

[15520] Bowen Zhang: I guess nothing for EBIC. Anything for the Audit Committee?

[15525] Aiden Hill: No reports.

[15528] Bowen Zhang: Anything for the Audit Committee? No report. I guess there's no report. Okay. I guess nothing for Tax Committee either. Moving on to Board of Education Recognition and Announcement. Member Grindel.

[15547] Terrence Grindall: I just want to congratulate everybody for the start of school. It's been, you know, there's been some bumps, but it's great to see the happy children. And I know, I know that our, our, our teachers and certified employees and staff and executive staff are, have worked really hard to make all this happen. So just happy to see the schools, the schools open and the, and the students so happy. Also want to, really recognize the tragedy that occurred in Afghanistan and how that's affected our community. We have a large Afghan community in our city, in our area. So I just wanted to express my sadness at what's happened there. So thank you.

[15599] Bowen Zhang: Member Hill.

[15604] Aiden Hill: Yeah, I just want to echo and I think that. Member comments again I'm being thankful that we're back at school and that we're trying to get back to some level of you know, bumps in the road that I think people, kids are happy to be back, teachers are happy to be back. And so that's a good thing. And then I also share member Grindel's or want to echo his condolences to our Afghan community. And I actually recently met with a member of the Afghan community. And he this is prior to the fall of Kabul. and he had been back to Afghanistan. It was showing me some of the videos of what's been going on with the Taliban and it's very frightening. And so I think we should pray for the Afghan people and hopefully we can help them see better times. So, but yeah, that's my input. Thank you.

[15672] Bowen Zhang: Member Nguyen.

[15674] Phuong Nguyen: Thank you, President Hong. I just wanted to I want to thank staff and all the teachers and all the families for. Participating in our back to school opening last week and it's been amazing to see I've been able to. Be able to go on all the sites actually. Last when I dropped off my daughter for seventh grade. And it was wonderful to see all the students. They were a little timid, shy, quiet, realizing that it was the first time that both classes, both seventh and eighth grade classes, were on campus at the same time. And I was able to help them locate their classes and pass out some campus maps. So that was a wonderful experience. And then also visiting Lincoln and and Coyote Hills and seeing the staff there and all the students, it was really heartwarming. And then last Friday, I was able to attend the high school assembly, which was amazing, a lot of energy, and it was great to see the students come together. They had been working on their performances for the first week so that they can share with their students the leadership team at the high school, so congrats to the ASB students and the leadership students at the high school for putting on a wonderful job with Ms. Canales. So congratulations to you guys. You guys did an amazing job. And then today I was able to visit the remaining sites and it was wonderful to see staff back and to see the classes. I actually was able to visit one of the dual immersion classes today with Dr. Wendy at Schilling and the kids are having a wonderful time and they're transitioning to both their Spanish class and English class. And it was wonderful to see that. So I just wanted to thank staff for making it all possible. I know the transition has been difficult, but you guys have persevered and have done an amazing job. So I wanted to really express deep appreciation for all the hard work and effort that has gone back into reopening our schools this year. So thank you for that. And then lastly, my heart does go out to, also goes out to Afghanistan and all the people there. It is very tragic and it's very hard to talk about the subject and not be emotional, but I am thinking about all the people that have been impacted and what it's going to be like for them to be able to recover. and in the years to come. So condolences and prayers for sure. Thank you.

[15862] Bowen Zhang: Yeah I want to echo all my fellow board members comments and just in addition I want to again thank staff for their hard work to make the first week back to school as smooth as possible. So thank you everyone. Moving on to moving on to the board request. Member Grundahl, any request?

[15884] Terrence Grindall: Yes, and hopefully this isn't too amorphous, but I would really like to see us starting a discussion of marketing our district better to attract students. We really have to, you know, Now that we're getting past these burden, these challenges of getting back in school, but I would really like to see a coherent strategic plan for how we're going to market, how we're going to market our district. The Ohlone College sent a postcard to every resident in their district talking about how people, how people should be enrolling in schools. And obviously community colleges are different than our district. But there's no reason we can't be out there in a very coherent message telling people why they should be putting their children in our schools. And so I would I don't know I don't know again my request is kind of amorphous but I would like to see maybe a study session on our report on what we have been doing and a plan for how we're going to get to the point where We're able to tell the best kept secret in the Tri-Cities is our fantastic school district, and we need to tell that story. So that's where I'm at right now.

[15970] Bowen Zhang: I guess that can be a superintendent report. I will echo that. I was in support of that, at least starting with a superintendent report to see how we're going forward with communicating, particularly reaching out to the new members of our community, of our school district. And any other board member in support of this?

[15990] Phuong Nguyen: I'm also in support of it, but I just also wanted to recognize that the superintendent and his team have been starting that process. And one of the examples have been the dual immersion videos that have been posted throughout our social media sites. So that is definitely a wonderful start. And I just wanted to, just to put it out there that, you know, that we are starting those kind of marketing campaigns. So, thank you so much.

[16018] Bowen Zhang: Okay. So, that will be, I guess, a further future item on the superintendent report. Member Hill.

[16031] Aiden Hill: Thank you, President. And Sean. So, I have two requests. So, the first request is, in our closed sessions, I think that we have a lack of clarity right now around as we go through different items in the agenda, the closed session agenda, who actually needs to be in attendance in those meetings. And this is a Brown Act issue and I want to make sure that we're complying with the law And so I would like to request that we as a board engage legal counsel to come to our next closed session and to advise us on proper representation on a topic by topic basis in the closed session. So that's my first request.

[16080] Bowen Zhang: Okay, I think I can support that one. I think we briefly talked about it with the superintendent. Hopefully, can we show for next closed session?

[16089] SPEAKER_35: Can I get a second? A third?

[16091] Bowen Zhang: Yeah, can I get a third? That next closed session that Superintendent will work with the legal counsel to clarify matters on that.

[16100] Terrence Grindall: My only question is whether that discussion is actually something we can talk about in closed session, but I'm fine with a report on that.

[16113] Bowen Zhang: You know, I think that item might need to be talked about in an open session. Yeah, I think that will be an open session. Yeah, so can we try to shoot for next meeting?

[16124] Mark Triplett: Yes, and we can get clarity on whether it's more appropriate and closed or open as well.

[16132] Bowen Zhang: Okay.

[16133] Aiden Hill: And my request is that we have legal counsel present so that they can articulate the rules, basically the guidelines, and we have an opportunity to discuss and clarify with them.

[16147] Bowen Zhang: Yeah, would that be possible that we ask the legal counsel to show up in one of the agenda items in our open session to discuss this? Because I believe this is the open session item.

[16158] Mark Triplett: Yes, again, we can review with legal counsel, and they can be present. they can help us to determine whether it's appropriate in closed session or whether it's appropriate in open session. Okay, okay.

[16171] SPEAKER_35: And just a reminder to the board, when it comes to financial matters, you need a majority of the board, so do we have a majority in agreement with the legal counsel coming forward?

[16182] Bowen Zhang: Yes. Yes, we do, we do. Thank you, board. Okay, Member Hill, second request?

[16186] Aiden Hill: Okay, and the second request is we just had an item on the agenda talking about using fund 25 funds to fund the ornamental fencing, and we've been informed that we do have a legal opinion that supports that, and so I would like to request that staff produce that legal opinion for the board and for the public to review.

[16223] Terrence Grindall: It's my understanding, not a lawyer, but that there's a fair amount of leeway in these funds. So I would not want to see a lot of expenditures on this, but if there can be a simple report presented to the board, I would support that.

[16244] SPEAKER_35: I just want to provide, I think I need some clarity. Are we making a public records request? or are we asking for direction for the superintendent?

[16258] Terrence Grindall: My understanding of Mr. Hill's request is to have this to direct the superintendent to produce a report or the report that's already in existence, but whatever, produce a report that supports the use of Fund 25 for that project. That's my understanding of his request. Maybe I heard him wrong.

[16281] Aiden Hill: Let me clarify since I was the one that made the motion. So I want to see the legal opinion from a lawyer, so not some secondhand report. I want to see a legal opinion from a lawyer on legal stationary that lays out the analysis that was done so that we can feel confident that this was done properly.

[16310] Mark Triplett: If the board wishes for us to provide the legal opinion, I think that's something that we can do for the board.

[16320] Bowen Zhang: Yeah, then sure, let's just provide the legal opinion to the board, then good. Okay. Member Nguyen.

[16330] Phuong Nguyen: I have no request at this time.

[16335] Bowen Zhang: No request for me either, and just look forward to our our website going live, our COVID dashboard going live. I think our members of our committee are very concerned about the presence of a dashboard for COVID cases, and I think we promised them by the end of next week. Is that right?

[16353] Mark Triplett: That's correct. Although tonight I did basically state the number of cases that we have, and that would be what would be on the COVID dashboard.

[16366] Bowen Zhang: Superintendent, conclusion remark?

[16369] Mark Triplett: Thank you president John just want to send out a special appreciation to our principals who have been caring so much as as as we start school and really their their dedication and their care and their attention to detail is just tremendous and so really really appreciate everything that they've done to make sure that our to start really well and in such a wonderful manner.

[16406] Bowen Zhang: Thank you. I move that we adjourn the meeting. May I get a second? Second. Seconded by Member Nguyen. Member Guendel, how do you vote? Yes. Member Hicks? Yes. Member Nguyen? Yes. My vote is yes as well. Motion carries with four ayes. Meeting is adjourned at 9.23 p.m. Everybody have a great night. Five ayes.

1. CALL TO ORDER

Virtual Meeting Practices and Information

Type Information, Procedural VIRTUAL MEETING INFORMATION The district boardroom will be closed to the public, and in accordance with the Governor's Executive Order N-29-20, Board meetings will be held "virtually" until further notice. These meetings will be accessible to the public by internet or telephone. No physical meeting place will be provided. The Governor of California's Executive Order N-29-20 of March 17th, 2020.

OBSERVE THE BOARD OF EDUCATION MEETING Members of the public may observe the meeting via the NUSD YouTube Channel, and public comments will be accepted via a Zoom Webinar with advance notice requested by email. Spanish translation will be available via Zoom.

PUBLIC COMMENT The public will have the opportunity to address the Board of Education regarding non-agendized matters and agendized items with a LIVE comment or a WRITTEN comment by submitting a speaking card via email at PUBLICCOMMENT@newarkunified.org. Live comments will be transmitted via Zoom with audio-only.

Roll Call

Type Procedural TRUSTEES President Bowen Zhang Vice President/Clerk Phuong Nguyen Member Elisa Martinez Member Terrence Grindall Member Aiden Hill

STUDENT BOARD MEMBER Member Estaina Resendiz Ortiz

2. APPROVAL OF AGENDA

Approval of the Agenda

Type Action

Recommended It is recommended that the Board of Education approve the agenda for this meeting. Action PURPOSE: Members of the Governance Team may request that the agenda be amended or approved as presented.

Motion & Voting It is recommended that the Board of Education approve the agenda for this meeting.

Motion by Bowen Zhang, second by Terrence Grindall.
Final Resolution: Motion Carries
Yea: Bowen Zhang, Phuong Nguyen, Terrence Grindall, Aiden Hill

3. STUDY SESSION

APEX Credit Recovery

Type Discussion, Information

PURPOSE:

To provide information to the Board of Trustees about the background of NUSD's current credit recovery program delivered through APEX. Through this study session, the Board of Trustees will have an opportunity to learn more about how APEX is currently utilized in NUSD and what shifts/changes our secondary schools have made to program implementation in response to recent community input.

BACKGROUND:

This study session is presented upon request. As we continue to explore the benefits and challenges of how to utilize technology in support of student achievement, the Board of Trustees has requested information regarding current APEX implementation

File Attachments Credit Recovery (APEX) Board Presentation 8.18.21 (1).pdf (1,607 KB)

4. CLOSED SESSION

Public Comment on Closed Session Items

Type Information, Procedural PURPOSE: The Board of Education encourages the community's participation in its deliberations and has tried to make it convenient to express their views to the Board. If a constituent wishes to address the Board on any agenda item, please fill out a virtual speaker card via email at PUBLICCOMMENT@newarkunified.org.

PUBLIC EMPLOYEE DISCIPLINE/DISMISSAL/RELEASE (Gov. Code, � 54957, subd. (b)(1))

Type Action, Discussion, Information, Procedural PURPOSE: Information will be provided by the Superintendent and Executive Director of Human Resources.

CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATORS (Gov. Code, � 54957.6, subd. (a): Employee Organizations - NTA and CSEA

Type Action, Discussion, Information, Procedural PURPOSE: Information may be provided by the agency negotiator, Executive Director of Human Resources. Assistance from the legal firm Dannis, Woliver, Kelley, Attorneys at Law may be provided.

The employee organizations include NTA & CSEA.

CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATORS (Gov. Code, � 54957.6, subd. (a)): Employee Group - NEWMA, Unrepresented Supervisors, and Contracted Management

Type Action, Discussion, Information, Procedural PURPOSE: Information may be provided by the agency negotiator, the Executive Director of Human Resources, and the Superintendent. Assistance from legal firm Dannis, Woliver, Kelley, Attorneys at Law may be provided.

The employee organizations include NEWMA, Unrepresented Supervisors, and Contracted Management

CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL � ANTICIPATED LITIGATION Significant exposure to litigation pursuant to Gov. Code, � 54956.9, subd. (d)[(2) or (3)]

Type Action, Discussion, Information, Procedural PURPOSE: Information may be provided regarding significant exposure to litigation pursuant to paragraph (2) of subdivision (d) of Section 54956.9: One

CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL � EXISTING LITIGATION (Gov. Code, � 54956.9, subd. (d)(1))

Type Action, Discussion, Information, Procedural PURPOSE: To discuss the following case(s): Christine Clinton v. Newark Unified School District: HG21103262

Recess to Closed Session

Type Procedural PURPOSE: The Board will recess to Closed Session, and reconvene to Open Session on or about 7:00 p.m.

5. RECONVENE TO OPEN SESSION

Pledge of Allegiance

Type Procedural PURPOSE: The Governance Team will recite the Pledge of Allegiance

6. REPORT OF CLOSED SESSION ACTIONS

Report of Closed Session Actions

Type Action, Procedural PURPOSE: If available, a report of the closed session will be provided by the Board President.

7. EMPLOYEE ORGANIZATIONS

Employee Organizations

Type Information PURPOSE: At regular Board meetings, a single spokesperson of each recognized employee organization (NTA, CSEA, NEWMA) may make a brief presentation.

BACKGROUND: Discussion items are limited to updates, celebrations, and upcoming events.

1. NTA: Sean Abruzzi

2. CSEA: Sue Eustice

3. NEWMA: Vicenta Ditto

8. PUBLIC COMMENT ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS

Public Comment on Non-Agenda Items

Type Procedural PURPOSE: The Board of Education encourages the community's participation in its deliberations and has tried to make it convenient to express their views to the Board.

BACKGROUND: Please see the instructions on the link below for public comment information on non-agenda items and agenda items.

http://go.boarddocs.com/ca/nusd/Board.nsf/goto?open&id=C4Q2D4019F40

9. SUPERINTENDENT REPORT

Superintendent Report

Type Information PURPOSE: The superintendent will provide the Board of Education with district information, updates, news, or anything in the jurisdiction of the board or the superintendent.

BACKGROUND: The presentation and information will be provided by the Superintendent

10. PUBLIC HEARINGS

Public Hearing on Interfund Borrowing

Type Discussion, Information, Procedural PURPOSE: Hold a public hearing on inter-fund borrowing. The 2020-21 state-enacted budget included an increase in the inter- fund borrowing limits from 75% to 85% for the 2020-21 and 2021-22 fiscal years. This increase allows school districts to borrow more, in the face of uncertain financial exposure and funding challenges, as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic, including cash deferrals from the State.

The staff will recommend passing the attached Resolution 2021.22-002, Temporary Borrowing Between Funds, later in this meeting.

BACKGROUND: In accordance with Education Code Section 42603, the governing board of any school district may direct that moneys held in any fund or account may be temporarily transferred to another fund or account of the district for payment of obligations. This temporary transfer of funds will be accounted for as temporary borrowing between funds and will not be available for appropriation or be considered revenue to the borrowing fund or account. Amounts transferred must be repaid either in the same fiscal year or in the following fiscal year if the transfer occurs within the final 120 calendar days of a fiscal year. Borrowing will occur only when the fund or account receiving the money will earn sufficient revenue, during the current fiscal year, to repay the amount transferred. Normally, no more than 75% of the maximum of moneys held in any fund or account during a fiscal year may be transferred; however, for fiscal years 2020-21 and 2021-22, the State has increased this limit to 85% (per Education Code section 42603.1).

File Attachments 21-22 Interfund Borrowing Public Hearing Notice_Eng & Sp Posting in Windows.pdf (40 KB) Resolution No. 2021.22.02_Temporary Borrowing Between Funds.pdf (66 KB)

11. OLD BUSINESS

Determination to Fill Board Vacancy and Timeline

Type Action, Discussion PURPOSE: The purpose is to provide the Board of Education the opportunity to provide input and suggestions to the subcommittee regarding the appointment process to fill the Trustee vacancy.

BACKGROUND: Member Martinez has accepted an appointed position on the Ohlone Community College Board and has resigned from the NUSD Board of Education. Her resignation took effect on July 28. The Education Code provides that the Board can decide whether the vacancy is filled by a special election or through an appointment made by the Board. On August 5, 2021, the Board decided to proceed with the appointment process.

Resolution 2021.22.03 - NUSD Board Member Vacancy

Type Action, Discussion, Information

Absolute Date Aug 18, 2021

Recommended The recommendation is that the Board of Education approves the Resolution 2021.22.03 - Action NUSD Board Member Vacancy Purpose: The purpose is for the Board to review and approve Resolution 2021.22.03 - NUSD Board Member Vacancy

BACKGROUND: Member Martinez has accepted an appointed position on the Ohlone Community College Board and has resigned from the NUSD Board of Education. Her resignation took effect on July 28. The Education Code provides that the Board can decide whether the vacancy is filled by a special election or through an appointment made by the Board. On August 5, 2021, the Board decided to proceed with the appointment process. As requested, this resolution is being brought forward regarding the Board decision to proceed with the appointment process.

File Attachments Resolution 2021.22.003 - NUSD Board Member Vacancy.pdf (99 KB)

Motion & Voting The recommendation is that the Board of Education approves the Resolution 2021.22.03 - NUSD Board Member Vacancy by Sept 23

Motion by Bowen Zhang, second by Phuong Nguyen.
Final Resolution: Motion Carries
Yea: Bowen Zhang, Phuong Nguyen, Terrence Grindall, Aiden Hill

12. NEW BUSINESS

Resolution 2021.22.02 Interfund Borrowing

Type Action, Discussion

Fiscal Impact No

Recommended The recommendation is that the Board of Education adopts Resolution No. 2021.22.02 Action Interfund Borrowing PURPOSE: To adopt this Resolution allowing temporary borrowing between funds (a.k.a., Interfund Borrowing).

BACKGROUND: In accordance with Education Code Section 42603, the governing board of any school district may direct that moneys held in any fund or account may be temporarily transferred to another fund or account of the district for payment of obligations. This temporary transfer of funds will be accounted for as temporary borrowing between funds and will not be available for appropriation or be considered revenue to the borrowing fund or account. Amounts transferred must be repaid either in the same fiscal year or in the following fiscal year if the transfer occurs within the final 120 calendar days of a fiscal year. Borrowing will occur only when the fund or account receiving the money will earn sufficient revenue, during the current fiscal year, to repay the amount transferred. Normally, no more than 75% of the maximum of moneys held in any fund or account during a fiscal year may be transferred; however, for fiscal years 2020-21 and 2021-22, the State has increased this limit to 85% (per Education Code 42603.1).

File Attachments

Resolution No. 2021.22.02_Temporary Borrowing Between Funds.pdf (66 KB)

Motion & Voting The recommendation is that the Board of Education adopts Resolution No. 2021.22.02 Interfund Borrowing

Motion by Terrence Grindall, second by Bowen Zhang.
Final Resolution: Motion Carries
Yea: Bowen Zhang, Phuong Nguyen, Terrence Grindall
Nay: Aiden Hill

Board Policy and Administrative Regulation 4112.42, 4212.42, 4312.42 - Drug and Alcohol Testing for School Bus Drivers

Type Action, Discussion

Preferred Date Aug 19, 2021

Recommended The recommendation is that the Board of Education approves the updated board policies Action and administrative regulations: 4112.42, 4212.42, 4312.42 - Drug and Alcohol Testing for School Bus Drivers PURPOSE: For the board to review the updates to the board policy and administrative regulations provided by CSBA.

BACKGROUND: This is the first reading for the attached BP & AR (4112.42, 4212.42, 4312.42 Drug and Alcohol Testing for School Bus Drivers). The language is sanctioned by the California School Board Association. The administration has reviewed this document for accuracy and made revisions to reflect district practice.

If any revisions are recommended, the document will be brought back to the Board of Education for a second reading.

File Attachments BP 4112 Drug and Alcohol Testing.pdf (406 KB) AR 4112 Drug and Alcohol Testing.pdf (409 KB)

Motion & Voting The recommendation is that the Board of Education approves the updated board policies and administrative regulations: 4112.42, 4212.42, 4312.42 - Drug and Alcohol Testing for School Bus Drivers

Motion by Phuong Nguyen, second by Terrence Grindall.
Final Resolution: Motion Carries
Yea: Bowen Zhang, Phuong Nguyen, Terrence Grindall, Aiden Hill

Citizens' Bond Oversight Committee (CBOC) 2019-20 Annual Report

Type Action, Discussion

Recommended The recommendation is that the Board of Education accepts the 2019-20 Citizens' Bond Action Oversight Committee Annual Report as presented. PURPOSE: The Citizens' Bond Oversight Committee (CBOC) Chair, Richard Watters will present the Annual Report for the 2019-20 school year.

BACKGROUND: Measure G requires an annual report from the Citizens' Bond Oversight Committee.

File Attachments CBOC Annual Report 2019-2020.pdf (717 KB)

Motion & Voting The recommendation is that the Board of Education accepts the 2019-20 Citizens' Bond Oversight Committee Annual Report as presented.

Motion by Bowen Zhang, second by Phuong Nguyen.
Final Resolution: Motion Carries
Yea: Bowen Zhang, Phuong Nguyen, Terrence Grindall, Aiden Hill

Authorize Project and Budget for Coyote Hills Security Fence and Gate Project

Type Action, Discussion

Fiscal Impact Yes

Dollar Amount $277,625.00

Budget Source Fund 25 Capital Facilities Fund

Recommended The recommendation is that the Board of Education approve the Coyote Hills Fence and Action Gate Project, preliminary project budget, and architect contract to provide safety and security for the campus, as presented. PURPOSE: To approve the Coyote Hills fencing project and preliminary budget to provide safety and security for the campus and authorize staff to proceed with consulting agreements, planning, design, and DSA approval. Construction bids will be brought back to the board.

BACKGROUND: It is the District's responsibility to keep all students safe on campus. The site has been experiencing vandalism from people climbing existing chain link fencing to tamper with mechanical units. Currently, students sometimes exit the cafeteria and access the parking lot. This project will remedy these issues. The scope of work for this project is the design and installation of an ornamental fence with gates, including a designated entry onto the campus. The entry gate will provide a single point of entry to the campus during school hours and will include a video surveillance camera with a doorbell, so an office attendant can admit visitors.

The project is required to have the Division of the State Architect review for Access Compliance and therefore architectural services are needed to provide design and DSA regulatory approval. The project will be publicly bid upon DSA review. Planning and appurtenant costs include architectural fees, DSA fees, testing and inspection, and contingency allowances for design and

construction.

A Request for Proposal was issued for architectural services for the project. We received two (2) proposals. Gelfand Partners provided the best value and staff requests approval of their contract in the amount of $40,309 which is within the project budget.

File Attachments 2021-07.20 NUSD Coyote Hills ES_Fence Project Gelfand Proposal.pdf (849 KB) Coyote Hills ES_Fence Project diagram 08 10 2021 R3.pdf (212 KB) Preliminary Budget - Coyote Hills Fence Project 8-12-2021.pdf (57 KB)

Motion & Voting The recommendation is that the Board of Education approve the Coyote Hills Fence and Gate Project, preliminary project budget, and architect contract to provide safety and security for the campus, as presented.

Motion by Terrence Grindall, second by Phuong Nguyen.
Final Resolution: Motion Carries
Yea: Bowen Zhang, Phuong Nguyen, Terrence Grindall
Nay: Aiden Hill

13. CONSENT AGENDA: PERSONNEL ITEMS

PLACEHOLDER - One Consented Vote

Type Action

Recommended It is recommended that the Board of Education approve, under one consented vote, the Action agenda items under Consent-Personnel, except for agenda items: PURPOSE: (This is specifically a placeholder, and will only be used if multiple agenda items are approved under a consented vote.)

BACKGROUND: Items within the Consent Agenda are considered routine and will be approved, adopted, or ratified by a single motion and action. There will not be a separate discussion of these items; however, any item may be pulled from the Consent Agenda upon the request of any member of the Board and acted upon separately.

Personnel Report

Type Action, Discussion

Absolute Date Aug 19, 2021

Recommended The recommendation is that the Board of Education ratify the personnel report as Action presented. All personnel activities including new hires, changes in status, resignation, leaves, and retirements are routinely submitted to the Board for ratification.

File Attachments HR PAL 08-18-2021.pdf (153 KB)

Motion & Voting The recommendation is that the Board of Education ratify the personnel report as presented.

Motion by Bowen Zhang, second by Phuong Nguyen.
Final Resolution: Motion Carries
Yea: Bowen Zhang, Phuong Nguyen, Terrence Grindall, Aiden Hill

14. CONSENT AGENDA: NON-PERSONNEL ITEMS

PLACEHOLDER - One Consented Vote

Type Action

Recommended It is recommended that the Board of Education approve, under one consented vote, the Action agenda items under Consent Non-Personnel, except for agenda items: PURPOSE: (This is specifically a placeholder, and will only be used if multiple agenda items are approved under a consented vote.)

BACKGROUND: Items within the Consent Agenda are considered routine and will be approved, adopted, or ratified by a single motion and action. There will not be a separate discussion of these items; however, any item may be pulled from the Consent Agenda upon the request of any member of the Board and acted upon separately.

Motion & Voting It is recommended that the Board of Education approve, under one consented vote, the agenda items under Consent Non-Personnel, except for agenda items: approve 14.2, 14.3, 14.4

Motion by Bowen Zhang, second by Phuong Nguyen.
Final Resolution: Motion Fails
Not Present at Vote: Bowen Zhang, Phuong Nguyen, Terrence Grindall, Aiden Hill

2021-2022 Revised School and Classified Work Calendars

Type Action, Discussion

Absolute Date Aug 18, 2021

Recommended The recommendation is that the Board of Education approves the revised 2021-2022 school Action and classified work calendars. PURPOSE: The purpose of this item is for the Board of Education to approve the 2021-2022 revised school and classified work calendars.

BACKGROUND: The Board of Education approved the 2019-2020, 2020-2021, 2021-2022 calendars on June 19, 2018. President Biden signed legislation to make Juneteenth a federal holiday, enshrining June 19 as the national day to commemorate the end of slavery in the United States. The 2021-2022 school and classified work calendars have been revised to add June 20 as a holiday in observance of Juneteenth.

File Attachments NUSD School Calendar 2021-2022 Revised.pdf (60 KB) CSEA Calendar 2021-22 Revised.pdf (61 KB)

Contract with Shalom Staffing for Special Education Teacher

Type Action, Discussion

Absolute Date Aug 18, 2021

Fiscal Impact Yes

Dollar Amount $126,480.00

Budgeted Yes

Budget Source Resource 6500 - Special Education

Recommended The recommendation is that the Board of Education ratifies a contract with Shalom Staffing. Action

Goals 1. To provide academic excellence via equity and opportunities for all students.

PURPOSE: For the Board of Education to approve a contract agreement with Shalom Staffing to provide 1.0 FTE RSP Teacher at Newark Memorial High School required for an unfilled position for the 2021-2022 school year.

BACKGROUND: Despite intensive efforts, the District has not been able to hire for this unfilled position. This contracted teacher is intended to fill the RSP position for the 2021-2022 school year only. Although there is a national shortage of Special Education Teachers, School Psychologists, and Speech and Language Therapists, the District will continue to look at more effective ways to recruit and retain Special Education teachers.

File Attachments ICA 21-22 Shalom Staffing RSP Teacher NMHS.pdf (95 KB)

Master Contract with Ed Sped Solutions Inc. for Special Education Services

Type Action, Discussion

Absolute Date Aug 18, 2021

Fiscal Impact Yes

Dollar Amount $987,640.00

Budgeted Yes

Budget Source Resource 6500 - Special Education

Recommended The recommendation is that the Board of Education ratifies a master contract with Ed Sped Action Solutions Inc.

Goals 1. To provide academic excellence via equity and opportunities for all students.

PURPOSE: For the Board of Education to approve the master contract for Ed Sped Solutions, Inc. contract in the amount of $987,640.00 for the 2021/2022 school year.

BACKGROUND: Related services and assessments are legally mandated per Individual Disability Education Act (IDEA). Without Ed Sped Solutions Inc. services Newark Unified School District would be out of compliance. Ed Sped Solutions Inc. will provide a variety of related services and assessments to ensure compliant practices in supporting students' Individual Education Program (IEP). The services provided to Newark Unified School District are as follows:

Mental Health Therapist Ed Sped Solutions Inc. will provide therapeutic support to students per their IEP. Ed Sped Solutions Inc. will provide fully credentialed mental health therapists with a PPS Counseling license. The mental health therapists will have acquired the expertise to provide individual, group, and family therapy. The total cost for two Mental Health Therapists will be in the amount of $264,600.

Assistive Technology Professional (ATP) Ed Sped Solutions Inc. will provide assistive technology assessments and services for students with disabilities. A service provider will assess the needs of the students with disabilities, assist in the selection of appropriate assistive technology for the student, and provide training in the use of the selected device(s). The total cost for ATP services will be in the amount of $50,000.

Instructional Assistants Ed Sped Solutions Inc. will provide Instructional Assistants (IA) to support students with disabilities. Instructional Assistants provide both program support within the classroom setting and one-to-one support for high-needs students per students' IEPs. A total of seven Instructional Assistants are required to support special education programs throughout the District for unfilled positions. The total cost for the seven Instructional Assistants is $291,600. Additionally, two 1:1 Instructional Assistants are needed for two students that require 1:1 support per their IEP. The total cost for the two 1:1 Instructional Assistants is $118,800. The total cost of nine Instructional Assistants including the 1:1 Instructional Assistants will be in the amount of $410,400.

Board Certified Behavior Analyst (BCBA) Ed Sped Solutions Inc. will provide a licensed Board Certified Behavior Analyst (BCBA) to provide services and program support at school sites as needed for an unfilled position. The total cost for one BCBA will be in the amount of $132,300.

Credentialed Preschool Teacher Ed Sped Solutions Inc. will provide a fully credentialed preschool teacher to provide assessments and support to the preschool assessment team as needed for an unfilled position. The total cost for one Credentialed Preschool Teacher will be in the amount of $130,340.

File Attachments Ed Sped Solutions Master Contract 2021-22 (4).pdf (352 KB)

Warrant Report for July 2021

Type Action, Discussion

Fiscal Impact No

Recommended The recommendation is that the Board of Education approves the Warrant Report as Action presented. Purpose: The purpose of this item is to present warrants, for the total amount of $1,598,022.51 made from District funds for July 2021.

Background: The warrant registers represent a complete listing of all payments made from District funds for a month. Because Newark Unified School District is a fiscally dependent District, each warrant must pass through two separate audits; first by the District's Fiscal Services department, and second by the County Office of Education. No warrant can be paid until such time as it is examined and approved by the County Office of Education.

File Attachments Warrant Report_July 2021.pdf (388 KB)

Motion & Voting The recommendation is that the Board of Education approves the Warrant Report as presented.

Motion by Bowen Zhang, second by Terrence Grindall.
Final Resolution: Motion Carries
Yea: Bowen Zhang, Phuong Nguyen, Terrence Grindall
Nay: Aiden Hill

Quarterly Report on Contracts - FY 2020-21, 4th Quarter

Type Action, Discussion

Fiscal Impact Yes

Dollar Amount $92,347.00

Budgeted Yes

Budget Source General Fund

Recommended The recommendation is that the Board of Education receives the Quarterly Report on Action Contracts. PURPOSE: These quarterly reports on contracts are submitted to the Board for review.

BACKGROUND:

The Board has requested a report of all contracts for services over $10,000 be reviewed by the Board on a quarterly basis. This report only includes contracts that have not been previously approved by the Board.

This report lists contracts from the 4th Quarter of FY 2020-21 (April, May, June 2021).

Contracts are on file in the Business Office.

File Attachments FY20-21.PDF (10 KB) SCHOOL1.PDF (8,196 KB) THERAP~2.PDF (175 KB) Miri Center (SpEd MC)_2020-21_fully executed.pdf (480 KB)

Motion & Voting The recommendation is that the Board of Education receives the Quarterly Report on Contracts.

Motion by Terrence Grindall, second by Phuong Nguyen.
Final Resolution: Motion Carries
Yea: Bowen Zhang, Phuong Nguyen, Terrence Grindall
Nay: Aiden Hill

Minutes of the August 5, 2021 Regular Meeting of the Board of Education

Type Action, Minutes

Recommended The recommendation is that the Board of Education approve the minutes of June 29, 2021, Action Special Meeting of the Board of Education PURPOSE: For the board to review and approve the minutes

BACKGROUND: The attached minutes are reflective of the August 5, 2021, Regular Meeting of the Board of Education. The exact language is available for viewing on the NUSD YouTube Channel.

Minutes of the August 5, 2021 Special Meeting of the Board of Education

Type Action, Minutes

Recommended The recommendation is that the Board of Education approve the minutes of June 29, 2021, Action Special Meeting of the Board of Education PURPOSE: For the board to review and approve the minutes

BACKGROUND: The attached minutes are reflective of the August 5, 2021 Special Meeting of the Board of Education. The exact language is available for viewing on the NUSD YouTube Channel.

15. BOARD OF EDUCATION: COMMITTEE REPORTS, REQUESTS, AND ANNOUNCEMENTS

Board of Education Committee Reports

Type Information PURPOSE:

The Trustees will provide an update, if available, on the committees of which they are members.

BACKGROUND: Each year the Board of Education members liaise with schools and committees in order to build relationships, hear from staff, students, and families, and act as a conduit for information to and from the schools.

Mission Valley ROP - Elisa Martinez SELPA - Bowen Zhang Newark & NUSD Liaison Committee - Phuong Nguyen & Terrence Grindall Newark Teacher Induction Advisory Council (Formally EBBIC) - Elisa Martinez Audit Committee - Phuong Nguyen & Aiden Hill Bond/Parcel Tax Committee - Elisa Martinez & Terrence Grindall

Board of Education Recognitions and Announcements

Type Information PURPOSE: The Trustees may acknowledge or recognize specific programs, activities, or personnel at this time.

Board of Education Requests

Type Action, Discussion, Information PURPOSE: This is an opportunity for the Board of Education to suggest items for placement on future agendas and to review Board requests.

Approval from the majority of the Board will be required for direction to be provided to the Superintendent.

BACKGROUND: The following derives directly from the Board approved "Governance Team Handbook"

Authority is Collective, Not Individual: The only authority to direct action rests with the Board as a whole when seated at a regular or special board meeting. Outside of this meeting, there is no authority.

    A majority Board vote provides direction to the Superintendent. Board members will not undermine the ability of staff
    to carry out Board direction.

Bringing New Ideas Forward The Board will be open to having "brainstorming" discussions, or study sessions, around any idea that a Trustee may feel merits exploratory consideration. "New Ideas" are defined as any proposal brought forward by a Trustee, at their initiative or at the request of a constituent, which was previously discussed during a board meeting. Trustees will first notify the Board President and Superintendent of their interest in bringing forward a new idea at a board meeting. When initially agendized, the preliminary discussion of a new idea will not require staff research time. Initially, staff will be expected to respond to new ideas based on current knowledge. Only a majority of the Board may direct the Superintendent to conduct research regarding the exploration of a new idea. The Superintendent will decide on the delegation of assignments to District staff. The new idea may be agendized for discussion only. The Board majority will decide if the new idea should be further developed and studied by staff. The Board majority will decide if staff time should be invested in the "fleshing out" of new ideas. Individual Trustees, in the course of interactions with constituents, will be careful not to make or imply the commitment of the full Board to explore or proceed with implementing new ideas.

16. SUPERINTENDENT'S CONCLUDING COMMENTS, UPDATES FOR THE BOARD AND FUTURE AGENDA REQUESTS

Superintendent's Concluding Comments, Updates, and Future Agenda Items

                       FUTURE AGENDA REQUESTS

Type Information PURPOSE: This is an opportunity for the Superintendent to make any concluding comments, updates, agenda requests, or provide information of future meetings.

17. ADJOURNMENT

PLACEHOLDER - Extend Meeting

Type Action

Recommended The recommendation is that the Board of Education extends the meeting to ____P.M. Action PURPOSE:

This is a placeholder, only to be used if the Board adds a motion and action to extend the meeting.

Adjournment

Type Action, Procedural

Recommended The recommendation is that the Board of Education adjourns this meeting. Action PURPOSE: No items will be considered after 10:00 p.m. unless it is determined by a majority of the Board to extend to a specific time.

This action will conclude the meeting.

Motion & Voting The recommendation is that the Board of Education adjourns this meeting.

Motion by Bowen Zhang, second by Phuong Nguyen.
Final Resolution: Motion Fails
Not Present at Vote: Bowen Zhang, Phuong Nguyen, Terrence Grindall, Aiden Hill

No minutes available.