All right. So, we don't have a mic button. >> So, the mics are hot continuously, y'all, just so you're aware. >> Okay. So, it is um 6:30 exactly or is it 6:31 now?
>> 6:34. >> 6:34. So, we're going to call our meeting to order at 6:34. May I get a roll call, please? >> Hyle >> here. >> Olivia Wright >> here. >> Thompson >> here. >> Withers >> here. >> And you have to call Deb's name because she has resigned, right?
>> Okay. >> And not here with prior notice. >> Please stand and join us in the pledge of >> allegiance. 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. >> All right. And so with that, may I have a motion to approve the agenda, please? I move to approve the agenda as presented. >> Second. >> It's been moved and seconded. Any
discussion? >> Hearing none a vote. >> Kyle. >> Hi. >> Livia Wright. >> Hi. >> Schmidt. >> Absent. >> Thompson. Notice >> Thompson. >> Withers. >> Hi.
>> Motion carries. We're on to item 4.1. Um, acceptance of letter of resignation. May I get a motion for action item 4.1? >> I move to accept the resignation of director Schmidt. >> Second. It's moved and seconded. Any discussion?
Hearing a vote. >> Hy. >> I. >> Leia Wright. >> I. >> Thompson. >> I. >> Withers. >> I. >> Motion carries. We're on to item 4.2. Resolution to declare a vacancy for director district 2. May I get a motion, please? I move to approve the resolution
to declare a vacant vac vacancy in director district 2. Second. >> It's been moved and seconded. Any discussion? >> Hearing a vote. >> Hyle >> I. >> Olivia Wright >> I. >> Thompson >> I. >> Withers. >> I.
>> Motion carries. Now we're on to um item 5.1. And so we'll be able to agree to this these pieces by consensus. And I had Lynette pull what the prior application was previously and so we
should be able to get to those items. Um >> that's proposed. >> Yeah. So the proposed piece is just um >> I had her just show exactly what would be worded thus far and then we'll come
to consensus on the dates. Um the interview dates we won't set until we know how many candidates we have and when they're available as well. Um but what we do need to set um by consensus is looking at the
questions. Um I just included the candidate questionnaire the last board used the last time there was an opening. Um so folks kind of had an idea. I don't know that we need that many questions.
Um, you know, this is obviously discussion for all of us. Um, I would also say that some things like, um, question number two, I would think anyone who hasn't been in a board
position wouldn't necessarily know how to answer until they've received training. >> Most of us learned that by going to CASBY training or having the training presentation. So, I don't know that we've gained anything by asking that question. Um, my own individual personal
opinion. Um, obviously question four, if we chose to use something like that, we don't have a chief officer anymore. We have a superintendent >> also with that one. That's something that I think is you get trained on rather than >> the old one. If you go to the new one,
it says superintendent, the proposed application. >> Okay. Well, okay. Yeah. either way. Um, so but I think so I guess my question is do we want to include questions on here that really the person would be trained about once they were chosen or do we only want to include a few questions
that kind of get to skill set and intent for that initial review knowing we'd be able to interview and ask more questions. That's kind of the question in front of all of us. So >> actually other than question number two I think the other ones are pretty good.
So I was having the same thoughts for that you are for two and four that um these were not things that I knew coming forward and so I think it's unfair to expect a prospective candidate to know them ahead of time. I think these are the things that we teach them uh as they
start coming on board. >> What do you think colleague? I >> think that it should be more focused on like behavioral type questions also. Like a lot of these are phrases kind of in that in that regard like how well um
like how to make a decision like number five things like that along those lines. I think that that's a better use of our time than um like position specific. summary in line with your observations on two and four. I feel like number six
is similar as well. >> Even though that's something they could learn, I think it's a good question though. >> So what do you think we gain by having them? So because remember we'll also interview and be able to ask them some other questions on interview. What
specifically would help would we gain? So, because I'm also looking at it from the perspective of the longer you make the application, the longer it takes someone to fill it out, um, and the more discouraging it can be, right? So, getting it to the essentials
that let us think about what we then want to ask during an interview to me would be the goal of this phase. So, what do you feel that question adds that gives us additional information before an interview? on number on number six.
>> On six, what do you feel the individual board members role is among five >> if they haven't had board experience? >> It would identify people coming in who don't understand that they're one of five and that there has to be a quorum or a consensus. So, what we've seen over
the past few years is people who have come in who've wanted to run the show, so to speak. So, that's why I think it's a valid question is how how well do you play with the other children? I think we could probably cover that with um
a better question about like um you know something along the lines of uh this this is particular you know just imagine a hot button topic and you end up on the um on the minority vote. Um how do you move forward?
>> That is something though that is a training issue, right? Um because it's different than any other role you've ever been. Maybe it's about think about the question of something like can you provide an example of where you've been involved in a collaborative decision >> instead of question six. Do you think
that would be a better representation? >> And then I think just u when it comes to the interview time it would be really reasonable if we just even strip these out to use as questions to have the same set of questions for all of the interviewees.
I Oh, right. And I think that'll be we'll be able to discuss that at another time where we can figure out okay because I think we could also >> um there was a list of 30 questions from the last one. 30 questions during an interview process is
the person like that's way more than you would do for that's way more than we asked the superintendent when we interviewed him. Um and and the type of question matters in terms of what we're trying to get to as a subject. So I think once we get through this piece and have it out there and we see some of the
applications, my suggestion would be then that we each try to think of one or two questions and we ask the student board for a couple of questions and we have them sit between and then we can review them um to decide
that um and that would let us do exactly what you're saying because I do also think you have to make sure that you know in if you were doing an HR interview, you would essentially be asking the person the same set. Like when you sit on an interview panel, you have a set of questions you're asking each of the people so that you can make
fair comparison. Um, but what those questions might be and what we want to flesh out. >> We might have a different idea once we see see and read the applications than we do initially now. >> So I would suggest we do that part once we've received the applications. Does that make sense?
>> Can I ask a question about what the interview is going to be like? Like is is it going to be a public meeting? has to be a public meeting legally. >> That's what I thought. >> So, yep. Everything has to be done in public. Um, we all this is very very different than an election process. Um,
and I think Brad will cover some of kind of those pieces. So, remember this is this decision is a board business decision. So, all of the rules that cover the kinds of discussions you can have outside of a board meeting apply to this decision.
And one of the reasons why I wanted to to ask that question is so that anybody who's considering would know that you know you're going to be involved in essentially a public interview. >> Right. Exactly. Um
welcome to welcome to being publicly scrutinized when you have to sit up here. Um it gets to be interesting. Okay. So let's figure out if we have a consensus on these questions. So, I think number one, we all think we want to include
that one. Okay. Lori, are you a yes? Mike? >> Yeah. >> Okay. I'm a yes on it, too. Two, >> are we? Yeah. >> Three. Um, what do you think, Holly? Are you a yes on three? It's the why do you want the position of the board? >> Yes.
>> Yeah, I think that's important, >> Mike. Okay, I'm a yes. Four, describe the board's role as it relates. I'm obviously I said I'm a no on that one because I think that's a training issue. >> Holly. >> Yeah. Um no >> training issue.
>> Okay. So we're eliminating four is the agreement. >> Yes. >> Okay. >> Um five we're keeping. Correct. If you have a decision and then six we're changing to what I recommended. Correct. If can you provide an example of when
you've come to a decision through collaboration? >> I'm good with that. >> Yes. Okay. And then the last one I think is important too is what is your prior community involvement? >> Um >> fact I would even move that one up just because it seems
>> Yeah. >> a little bit more introductory. >> Yeah. Well, I would honestly to me the order of the questions if you decide by the time you get to the last question that you're not going to take very much time answering it and you treat the questions differently based on order,
that tells me a little bit of something about how you're going to work as a board member. Um, because if you don't pay the last item on our agenda as much attention as you do the earlier ones, we're going to have a problem with knowledge base. Um, like I just What do you guys think? Do
you think those are fair questions to start with? >> Yeah. Could I ask um just a clarifying question? Yeah. >> So, what Oh, sorry. >> What position is vacant currently? >> Direct director district 2. So, the one Deb Schmidt filled? >> Yeah. So, like does she have like a vice
president, secretary? What kind of like role are she just board member? >> She's board member. She does not have an officer position. Okay. Um, and when if if someone who did have an officer position resigned, the person who was appointed wouldn't automatically get that officer position
once the board was constituted with the five. That would be a board decision as to who takes that position, whether it's a currently seated one or the new person. Okay? >> Or if some and and it can shift. So you could have someone who's currently so like if the vice president resigned, the
secretary or treasurer could also end up the vice president and someone who didn't have a position taken. All of those positions can shift starting with who whoever decides to take the vacant one and whomever is chosen by the board to take the vacancy the vacant position.
If they vacate position then the board chooses who fills that one all the way through. Any other questions from you guys or comments? Okay. So, do you The other thing we needed to do is decide on a date we wanted this due.
Um I was thinking of suggesting March 18th. We are on break that week, but central office staff is not on break. Neither is school staff. Um, that
would mean that at the building level, building leaders, if they had someone involved in their school who they were interested in encouraging to apply, could continue to have conversations with them until they go on break on the
um 13th of March. And that would then give them a weekend after that to complete the application if they had those conversations. Um, we have 60 days, so that only puts us three weeks into the process. So, that should give us enough time to then set interviews.
What do you guys think? I mean, I don't think we need much longer than 3 weeks. I don't I don't I think you don't get necessarily larger rate of return, especially given we'll then be on a two week rate. >> Right. >> Yeah. We're just essentially asking for the um for the application to be turned
in. Correct. So, yeah, 3 weeks is plenty. >> Yes, I agree. What do you think, Lori? >> So, we're just talking about the 18th for the application process, >> correct? They'd have to submit the application by the 18th. >> Yeah. >> Okay.
>> So, that only uses up 21 days of our 60. >> All right. So, I think you have everything you need then. Is there anything else >> you need to move forward on that? >> No. >> Okay. Um, so our goal is for Lynette to be able to have that posted by the end of the day tomorrow. let's give her a
whole day. So, please don't contact her at 8:15 in the morning and say, "Hey, do you have the packet yet?" She will get it posted online and then you'll be able to find it on the board board of education website. >> Um, and then of course after tomorrow, feel free to reach out to her as well. Um, and I believe we should have them
turn it into you, >> right? >> So, um, all right. Then I believe we can adjourn this meeting. So, our special meeting is adjourned at 6:50 and we are now ready to work into our
work session. Okay. And give us two seconds to get to the right place in our diligent nightmare. >> We love this new product so much. I don't think I was there when we did the board. We did that
>> for duck was all the way through December. We switched to this in January. >> Yeah. I don't think I've seen this. >> So, he hasn't used the diligent yet. >> Yeah. >> Prepare to be underwhelmed.
>> Wow. >> Diller really loves our commentary. Well, >> especially that it's posted online. >> That's then then you know that should give them motivation to make it better because the majority of people who have to use it are
part-time unpaid volunteers who need to be able to access things and community members who also when things don't aren't super intuitive to access then >> feel like it's less transparent and so they contribute to problems rather than
solutions when they do this. In my personal opinion, >> no boardox was more intuitive than this one >> and way easier to access online for people and >> but they have no support for boards. So you have no technical support. Yeah.
>> What's that? >> Well, and board docs. Yeah, board docs also is not legally compliant with accessibility pieces. So under Colorado law, we couldn't use it. >> I'm hearing her out of that. Do we want to be hearing her out of the speakers?
>> Yes, please. Excellence. >> Can you talk really quick? Just >> Yeah. Can you hear me now? >> That's awesome. Thank you. >> Okay. >> Can you hear any of the board members? Murray, you want to say something? >> Yes, >> you can. Oh, perfect.
>> Welcome, Amy. >> All right. Good evening, Amy. Atwood, contract lobbyist for the district. Um, I have this beautiful background and I am actually still at the capital on the first floor and that is the governor's office right there. Not sure why the
doors open, but that's his office. So, we are halfway into not quite halfway. We are six weeks into session and we have 120 days in session. We're about six weeks in. So, we have about 10 weeks
to go. We've had 432 bills introduced. We'll probably see somewhere between 700 and 750. So, we're we're over halfway, at least now with the bill count, the overall bill count. The amount of education
bills is low for this time in the session. And really, that is primarily due to the budget situation. And I'd like to really just jump into the budget situation. >> Um,
last year we heard that we were a billion dollars down, the state was a billion dollars down, and this year again the state is about a billion dollars down. It's not that the state doesn't have more money coming in. It does. The state budget continues to
grow. The revenue continues to grow. The economy is still growing in Colorado, but the expenditures have far outweighed the revenues. And one of the major culprits for that is
Medicaid. And Colorado over the last decade, anytime there was an opportunity for Medicaid expansion, Colorado took that opportunity with the with the federal government. So we have
a higher Medicaid population. So what is the state doing to pull that back? They are not pulling the idea is not to pull people off of Medicaid, but it is to reduce the amount of services. So the joint budget committee and the legislature is working through that, but
that does not account for a billion dollars. Last year, the legislature moved all the money they could. They swept all the cash funds that they could. They refinanced everything that they could. So this year we are facing
cuts. And we had been told by budget committee members, there are only six of them. So by the budget committee members that they were not going to cut education, they were going to hold education. Um out of everything else in the budget, education wasn't going to be
cut. And then last week the projections show that the joint budget committee needs to find another $150 million which then that was on Thursday has put education on the table for cuts. So this is all really
new information. Um, I think for your budget planning purposes, we need to plan on being held flat. So for next year that we have the same
amount of money for next school year as we have now. No inflationary increase for next year. No increases period for next year. I think if we come out flat that we will have won the day. It is a
cut but um it's not a budget stabilization factor type of cut. Now that is on the table as well is to no new revenue coming in and then to put in place a budget stabilization factor. There's some other things on the table
with specific ownership tax and how that is accounted for in school finance. There's discussion about the new school finance formula and pausing the formula. Um, but even with all of those variables on the table, it really is if
we plan on just being held flat. That's wise thing to do. That's a conservative and and prudent thing to do. Um, we'll know more in the next, we aren't going to have really any any
type of real clarity until after the March revenue forecast, which will be March 20th, Friday, March 20th. So, from there, they're told, the budget committee and the legislature is told how big of a hole do they have to
um fill. >> So, how much do they have to cut overall? So that is a month out from now. We won't see the actual state budget introduced likely until
it probably March 30th. Once the budget is introduced, we will have an idea of how much money overall money there will be for K12 education. How it gets spent within the formula. um we won't have the exact numbers in
the formula yet, but we will know here is the amount of money that can go to K12 education and the bill will that that is the long bill will run the week of March 30th in the h in the house and
then the next week it will run in the senate. Um and then after that is when we will see the the school finance formula. Um, so we won't see the earliest that we would see the school finance formula is
April 13th. We may not see it until the 20th or 27th of April. Sessions started late this year, so we do go to May 13th. Um, this year we have an extra week on the back end. So it it really will be the
end of April when we have when we have really real when we have real clarity as to what is happening with the state budget. So that was a lot about the budget. I want to stop there and see if you have any questions on that.
>> Go ahead. >> Yeah. Um I'd heard that they were cutting back some of where they're paying family members to help take care of disabled people at home. Is that part of the Medicaid roll back that the state is looking into? >> Yep.
>> Yes. >> Yes. Yeah. Two of us are are very highly versed on that. >> Are they looking at um so schools also receive some funding through Medicaid for services currently
that they provide to students and then we portion that differently. Um, and in the past sometimes they have targeted that in some ways where they've called it double dipping for some things and and I've seen shifts over time. Um, as a
parent in that piece, is there any discussion about talking is there any discussion about hitting Medicaid where it intersects with schools at all right now or are they sticking to what they're doing to adults with disabilities and kids with disabilities
right now? I think uh that is a very good question. The the filter to look at services is is it health, life and safety
if if it falls within life and safety in Medicaid that that is primarily what is going to be protected. Um, provider rates are likely to be cut, not increased this
year. Um, certainly programs that are not that are not the basic Medicaid programs are certainly are certainly on the table. Um, I've spoke I spoke to one member this morning, Senator Bridges, and I said,
"How are you?" You know, I mean, just a morning. How are you? And he said, "Well, I haven't killed any babies today. and it was very shocking, but that is how >> hard it is >> the budget committee members are feeling. So when you when you put
anything up against that and K12 is one of those things, >> right? >> If it's in their minds taking a life for K12, >> right? Well, because there is a difference in I think and I'm not as
well represented as I used to be right now, but at one point if a kid was re receiving OT, speech, PT, or nursing services at a school and
they were Medicaid eligible, the school district during the IEP process has their Medicaid number and would bill Medicaid for some of those services provided, get partial reimbursement, and then that money has to go to whole school programs like for the school nurse or for other pieces. Um so there's
other rules on how we use that money. So does that mean in part they could start saying well life and safety is nursing but it's not speech OT and PT >> right? Okay. Okay. Just >> and then if they're going to renegotiate
provider rates you already have a restricted amount of providers who will take Medicaid patients. So if they cut the reimbursement further, they're going to be reducing access to medical, which will impact those three areas. But I don't think
it'll be seen that way. >> It the the the thought is, and this is coming from the governor and the budget committee members, is they don't want to cut people off of Medicaid. They want to pull back the amount of services that are available,
>> but they they want to make sure that those folks that need Medicaid can stay on Medicaid. >> And isn't there wasn't there legislation that was approved to move forward to to provide alternative medical insurance
ideas or for rural areas that I was hearing something about where it was a different type. It wasn't traditional Medicaid or traditional insurance, but a lowcost alternative when they don't have access to some of the Medicaid providers
in their in their community. I'll have to look it up for you. Let me get you the bill number. They're likely, they really likely could be because the rural hospitals and rural providers um are really struggling and there
aren't enough and particularly the rural hospitals will close if the reimbursements aren't there. They they just they don't have the economy scales to scale to stay open. >> I'm glad that decision isn't mine. Okay, other questions for Amy.
>> May I ask Amy to clarify something? >> Yes, sir. >> Amy Peter here. Um, can you clarify the budget stabilization factor which is essentially an addition of a debit or an addition of a negative? >> Yes. Yes. Okay. So for years since
really since 2000 I think it it went in place in 2009 was the first time there was a budget stabilization factor. So or a negative factor was another term it used to be called by. So you have the overall budget. This is you know
referendum C inflation and enrollment and then so you have that big number. Then on top of that they would put in this factor and the factor was a negative amount. So the factor is the
cut. So even though we're being funded for inflation and enrollment, um it's wiped away with a negative with a budget stabilization factor. And the legislature paid it down. I I mean at
one point it got up to a billion dollars in one year. $1.1 billion in one year was how big it was. That's not the stacking of it. That was one year. That's how big the BS factor. It is known as the BS factor. Um but that's
how big it was. So over the years it's been brought down, brought down, brought down, brought down. Two years ago it was eliminated. So in the 2425 budget was the first time it was eliminated and then la this current year we don't have
a budget stabilization factor. Well, making up the money that they bought it down or brought it to zero is about $350 million. That's where that was the last chunk that they bought down was 350. So if you think
we are being fully funded which is it doesn't mean we are adequately funded but we are fully funded with the formula that year overyear that's ongoing dollars. So inflation and enrollment are always
ongoing dollars. You don't you don't ratchet those back. You don't take back inflation and enrollment numbers. Um, and that's what a budget stabilization factor does, a negative factor. And it isn't just tied to inflation and
enrollment. It can be any number that the legislature chooses. And that's where it is. When you hear that the state budget is being balanced on the back of students, of kids, and families,
it's because the school finance act doesn't run until after the budget. So the total amount of money we're getting is is in is done in the budget. So when the school finance act comes
out, well here we go. Here's the amount of money we have. But if you're funding the formula where you should, then you have to put in a factor. You have to put in that budget stabilization factor. >> And it's worth pointing out
>> and they always run I'm sorry. They always run the school finance act after the budget. It would be great if they did it before the budget and school finance was passed on the front end and then everybody else they could they could um budget out everything else with
the remaining dollars, but that's never happened. >> Does she have a question? Yeah, I just wanted to point out too, it's it's worth commenting that last year they went in to um address a $1 billion shortfall and they came out saying that we protected
education and we fully funded it, but they also handed D49 a huge cut because part of that was identifying the MLO match fund and zeroing it out. Mhm. and and another you're not so you're not
really hurt by this but declining enrollment and the averaging of students and it used to be five years then it's four years it will go to three years um it may go to zero so that there is no
averaging and you are that is where the governor wants it many many legislators want it to be you are funded for the amount students you have this year. So that's hard that's hard to plan if you are either declining or growing.
>> Student board, do you have any questions? >> Not qualified to speak on this. >> None of us are. >> Yeah, you're certainly qualified to ask questions, right? That's the whole point is none of us are experts on this piece,
but this is the complexity that leads to the things like the fiscal exigency, right? >> Um that and and and we're hearing, well, gee, as much as we planned for what we think we had, get ready because there's going to be
more news depending on what that March forecast is. And this is part of why those decisions stay fluid. But that's really hard to understand if you're not living it every day. And um Amy has a really good grasp of it for all of us
because each of us only have a little bit of it in our heads. >> Well, and when she talked about the school finance act, if they would do that before they do the budget, then they had to find cuts elsewhere. >> How does that make you feel as a student? places where we knew they
needed. >> Well, I think it's hard because like it feels like as a general rule of thumb for the entire world, we all feel like we're being taxed too much, but we all feel like there's not enough money anywhere. And so, like that's not
something we can just like fix necessarily and it would be really nice if we could. Um, I actually did find a final question that's up there in my brain. It's kind of a a vague one, but based on the information that we've been talking about, are there specific things
you see in let's say the next we'll say this the rest of the school year into next that D49 needs to change or like think about addressing within this school year and next school year, I suppose. And maybe you've already
answered this, it just didn't process. So, >> so actually um Peter and I have had this conversation. We had it this morning that um not I I don't think we'll be hit
in the remainder of the school year. So to June 30th, we're okay. But there are specific programs that run outside of the formula like homeschooling. the homeschooling cutting homeschool funding is on the table. It's front and
center. Uh it has immediately ramped up since Thursday. And so we've activated um I've activated every district that has a lobbyist that has a homeschool program so that the joint budget committee is
hearing do not don't take from this. If you if you believe in school choice and you want school choice, homeschool is part of that. Uh online, full-time online, multi-dist online funding, it has also been discussed. That was
discussed yesterday. Um and and it's so immediate because they finally just got to figure setting in in K12. So they haven't done school finance figure setting. they have only done all the
other programs that are run outside of um the formula of which homeschooling is one of those redact they talked about redact last night about cutting redact dollars
so I mean every program's on the table is on the Thank you. >> I want to clarify in this case when Amy says PEK, she's talking about pathways in technology schools, not
>> not James Irwin PEK charter school. Um but but but to add to confusion, James Irwin is a pathways in tech. So PEK is a PEK, but she's talking about the state category of schools, not our charter
schools specifically. >> Any other questions for Amy right now? Thank you so much, Amy. >> I know it's fun when you have to be the bearer of the hard stuff. >> Yeah. Yeah, it it is. It's been it's
been terribly hard this year. This session out of all 15 years has been has been my hardest. And I I also want to say I'm always available. You have you have a build a bill link bill chart link. And the bills are on there. If you
have questions, just email, text, or call me. And I also wanted to say um Rebecca Brooks, she came up for the case day at the capital. She and I kind of were ships in the night. We didn't get to we didn't get to actually see each other in person, but I was able to
connect her with a legislator and um she and I have also spoken a couple times. So, that's it. >> Thank you. >> Thanks, Amy. >> Thank you. >> Great question, Kira. Thank you.
>> Smooth. Okay. And so now we're ready for Yuki's presentation on primary literacy. >> All right. Good evening members of the board. Uh my name is Yuki Rockwell. I'm the interim coordinator of literacy performance and here to just provide um
you know our primary literacy updates um here at middle of the year a little after middle of the year. One second. There we go. All right. So, um, the way I wanted to start is very similar to how we started
was kind of rooting, um, today's, uh, conversation really into the goals that kind of as a district we've we've set. Um, these goals are the same goals that are shared at our primary literacy meetings with district leadership. Um, three times at the year through
benchmarks. And so, one of the things, you know, primary literacy has really been focused over the last probably decade around K3 support. um because we know that K3 if students can get those foundational skills um at those early ages, if we can close the gaps, we know
that we can improve outcomes across all of their years of schooling. So, um you know, when you look at the goal right here, you know, our goal is 80% of more of our K3 students will be proficient as measured by Dibbles 8. Um over the years though, one of the things that we've done is we've been adding to this
because we want to see the impact of this work beyond beyond K3. So um you know um so as we kind of examine third through fifth just know that we have a very similar goal. 80% of students are proficient as measured by dibbles 8. And we have a couple other things that we
look at and these really can be applied to K32. But um in third through fifth we want to know that students are capable readers who are able to read any text you put in front of them with 96% accuracy. And the other thing we always want to look at is we know sometimes students will be behind for various
reasons. Um how are we closing that gap? we really want to reduce those students who are in the well below category by 50% and that's really across K5. So, um I figured today um that that was a great place to start. So, um looking at kind of our our Dills 8 data which really um
is an examination of those foundational literacy skills. Um this is kind of a snapshot of the past two years um and what that looks like here at middle of the year. Um so you know if you go back to the 2425 school year at the start of the year we you know uh of the 2425 year
um we were sitting at 29% of students who were well below benchmark. Um at middle of the year last year we brought that down to 19%. You can see that at the 2526 school year we started at 26% well below benchmark and we've reduced
that down to 18%. Um, you can also see in this graph just the increase from VOI to MOI across both years. Um, so, you know, when we kind of examine where we're where we're trying to go, um, this is this is kind of a nice visual of where we're at at middle of the year for
this year. Um, I also thought I I always think it's nice to show kind of the national user base comparison and we have this now live within Dibble's 8th and so you can kind of see um, you know, this test is taken by millions of students across the nation. Um and so you can see the top part portion um is
an indication of where uh where it stands nationally and then below that is is the district 49 comparison. So obviously um you know we we've made some great strides. I think we pride ourselves on the work we're doing. Um I think we still know that we have a lot of work to do in this area. Um there are
a lot of different challenges for students to learn how to read. Um but at the same time, you know, we are working towards towards that goal. The final snapshot that I wanted to give you tonight is just kind of um one of the transitions that happened in the
2324 school year is that we moved from Aadian reading to Dibble's 8th. And so that that has been a change. And so you know we were first learning the platform how to deliver the assessments. There was a lot in place. We weren't sure how how everything um was going to kind of roll out. So when you look at this this
particular slide, you can see in the 23 24 school year um at the at middle of the year we finished we were at 64% and you can see that over the past two years we are uh we are increasing those numbers. Um you know if projections from
the the past couple of years at end of the year are hold hold steady we've positioned oursel to be able to really hit to achieve that 80% at above and K3. Um, obviously we still have half a year. Um, lots of things could change, but like I said, um, I feel good that we
we've positioned oursel to be able to do that. Sorry, I feel like I just skipped a bunch of slides. Okay, so as far as foundational literacy skills, the other thing I Sorry, and I think there's one more slide.
Um, so this is just kind of the expansion of that primary literacy lens. So, this is looking at third, fourth, and fifth grade. Um, you know, one of the things that we've noticed since transitioning to Dibbles 8 is um we're still working on getting kids uh we're
still working on ensuring that kids can read text at an adequate rate with with the comprehension that goes alongside it. You know, we talk a lot about fluency. Fluency isn't just your ability to read quickly. It should be to read in a way that is at an appropriate rate that allows you to access the
information coming from text because that's going to serve students all the way through 12th grade and beyond. Um so I mean looking at third grade this is just kind of a snapshot. So one of you know right now when we're looking our at our at and above rates from BOI to MOI
um it's important to notice that one of the one of the first indicators for seeing more growth is going to be that accuracy measure. Um, so one of the things we talked about is we want students to be hitting that 90% 96% accuracy. And so you can see that from
BOI we started the year with only 60% of our students hitting that range, we are now currently at 82% in third grade. So even though we haven't seen the composite uh increase, it's stayed pretty pretty flat. Um, again, like I said, you have to be able to read the
words on the page accurately so that you can you can read with that procy that that fluency and expression in order to be able to fully comprehend that text. So, um, just kind of a, you know, it's pretty typical looking at the past two years that this is this is what we've seen um, in fourth grade. This is
actually um, you know, like I said, historically for the last two years since switching to nibbles 8, we've seen pretty flat growth in in in fourth and fifth. Um, so I'm actually really excited about this and you can't see everything within this slide. Um, but last year to give you some perspective
at middle of the year in 20 the 2425 school year um only 58% of our students were hitting at and above according to 8. This year we're sitting at 71%. Um you can see when you look down at that accuracy measure that that that that
kind of before measure um it we we started the year at 72% we're hitting 91% which means our students are able to accurately decode the words on the text. Um eventually that that that comes to the point where you you and I we can look at a page we can read the words.
Obviously depending on challenging text there will be some text that we we all struggle with um for for various reasons but this is this is a good sign. Um I'm really proud of some of the work that some of our fourth grade uh teams have been doing around this. There's been some great partnerships in buildings. Um
you know, different work we've been doing to write really try to hit the things that are important, which is to increase time and text because as is the case with anything that we pursue, we know that practice is what allows you to hit that mastery level. So whether it's sports, whether it's arts, anything like that, we know reading reading is the
same. Um I think the other thing uh that I wanted to say about this particular slide is that um we've seen an increase in K3 and I think we're also seeing the impact of that work across K3 here in fourth and we're hoping that that will continue to carry over as we move move
across grades. Um fifth grade right now is currently this is this is pretty typical of what we've seen over the past couple of years. We haven't seen the growth here yet. Not like in fourth grade. Um but again looking at that accuracy you know starting the year at
72% we're already hitting at 91% of our our students across the district at fifth grade level are reading with with that accuracy rate. Um the final kind of three pieces of data and this is these these three
particular slides um are changes from what we've we've done in years past. One of the things we've done is we began to include other additional measures to to the primary literacy meetings. And so the first one is start early literacy. The next one we're going to look at uh we're going to look at star reading. And
the final one is going to be looking at middle school uh the middle school perspective because um that is you know strategic objective this year. Um but what I wanted to say here is as we started to weave in these new elements which I think is uh a great place to be.
we should be having these conversations. Um I'm not sure the way I've represented it in these slides. Um I think there's room to really think about like what is it that we want to get from these slides. Um I think there there can be confusion and so one of the things I wanted to highlight specifically as you
look at the last two columns on growth because I think that's probably where the majority of questions are going to come. Um, yeah, is when I initially put this, so when we're looking at at fall, the fall growth, the fall growth is actually calculated slightly
differently. And, um, I went back today because I just I just had that nagging feeling that something's not looking correct to me. Um, so the fall growth for all three of these slides is going to be measured fall to fall. So, it's going to be a full school year. >> Okay. >> Um, whereas when we look at the winter
column, the winter column is benchmark to benchmark. So it was the test we took in the fall to the winter. And so we're going to see a little bit of variance and and so you know these are the numbers you know obviously across all grade levels when we look at the proficiency side we're we are seeing um
some gains in proficiency across almost every single grade level. Um some more pronounced than others. Um but when we look at fall growth so here's the one for uh elementary school for star reading. It looks like our students made better growth um you know from the end of last year to this year, but the fact
is this is actually a a full year comparison. Um >> so that's beginning of kindergarten to the beginning of first grade. So it's really a measure of how much they grew in kindergarten. >> Yeah. And it's a full year. So I think it's I I think one of the the things that we can look at when we look at this
particular column is that I mean obviously the way SGP is calculated and all that I I mean we could spend a lot of time talking about about that and I'm not sure this is the time to do that but I think one of the key things to take away from this is that over the course of the school year
you know close to 70% of our students in some cases more are performing uh are performing really well in holding they're compared to academ ademic peers across the nation who scored the same who started in the same spot as they did and who are you know who took that that
measure. So I think that that's good. Um you know like I said I think you know that's just one of the things to consider as you guys are reviewing the information on these slides. And then this is just the same snapshot but again um this is just looking at the middle school um this is looking at
middle school star reading. Um so I I do think we have a lot of opportunity. So, you know, when I think about like what's next, um, as far as the work we're doing, um, some of it's going to be making sure that we are continuing, you know, building the structures and
systems, um, to really make sure that we're teaching our tier one, uh, curriculum, we're teaching it well. Um, I think there's always going to be a lot of opportunities for that, but I think, you know, when we're thinking about like increasing fluency scores and younger grade levels, we have to create opportunities for students to read. So
again, focusing on tier one instruction and then also being really intentional about um you know for students who are falling behind, how are we aligning that support so that they're getting the exposures, the repetitions that they need to close those gaps. Um so I
actually to close off our time today before I I open it up to questions, the last slide I had um is kind of a nice segue into that. And so when I think about um read camp and ret tutoring um one of the things we've we've we've had Read Camp probably since I entered the
district a little over 10 years ago um and over the last couple years one of the things that we have been intentionally looking at is program effectiveness. Um that was one of the things we were asked to take a look at. Um so after some deliberation um we are
going to be revamping the summer reamp program and so it's going to be it's going to be divided in a couple ways. Obviously, I can't go into all the details, but if you do have questions, I'd be glad to answer those. But really, this year, what we're doing is we're going to start with um with uh Read Camp
for kindergarteners. And then we're going to offer another we're going to offer reutoring on a slightly different scale for our first through third graders to help with uh you know, the transition as we rebuild those programs. Um but one of the thing one there's a
number of reasons but one of the reasons for the focus is if we can catch the students at kindergarten in first grade if we can catch them earlier um we can intervene when we start to look at grades you know sixth seventh eighth grade and beyond really really we're not intervening anymore we're trying to remediate that work and so um this is a
really intentional way um there are going to be some key differences but like I said we're going to be doing some very intentional work to make sure that all instruction from what they're getting with their their read teacher teacher at tier one instruction is aligned with their intervention support
is aligned with a with an intensive and the goal is to make sure that we're looking at very specific data. So for this program we want kindergarteners to walk away with letter sound mastery because at this point kids on replans may not even know all their letter sounds by the time we finish the year. Um and we're going to look at that and
really see if we can impact that data even in a short 3we cycle. So, um, that's all I have for today and I'd love to go ahead and open it up to the board for questions. >> So, on this last slide, I see read amp, read camp, and read tutoring and those
the word read is all caps. Um, tying this in with the presentation we just had. Is that provided through read Act funding? >> Yes, it is. >> Yeah. All right, just a quick question and I
know you're not you can't answer this right away. If there are reductions in re um do you think we'll be able to adapt and overcome? >> I you know we've actually like I said that you know with this transition
um even looking at changing up the the reed program I mean like I said we have a budget set aside. I mean, I think there's I think there's there's possibilities not knowing all not knowing what what will come, but yes, I do I have no doubt that we we can still be able to provide high quality services
to our students and that will that would be the intent. >> Holly, >> um is the read camp and read tutoring kind of um is it set up like uh extended school year where they go for a few hours a day like every day or four days
a week? What is that? What does the time constraint look like for one? Two, how do they determine who goes? Is that like uh by parental suggestion, by the teachers suggestion? How does that work? >> Yeah, those are great questions. So, let
me start with your last question first about um how students are selected. So, um, legislation was passed in 2012, um, the Colorado Read Act, which basically is kind of, um, a way of ensuring that that that we are making sure that all
students who are behind in in early literacy skills, um, that a plan is created to support all students uh, with the acquisition of reading. So, what we have is we have a process um, I won't go into all of the details of identification, but they are all based
on on that legislation. um is that every kid who hits a a certain criteria on benchmark testing uh then qualifies for a read plan which schools are responsible for for creating. Um so every student who has an active read
plan at this time it it is open to all students who are on an active read plan kindergarten through third grade. >> Um >> sorry now I'm forgetting your first question which was probably dates and times. Okay. Um, so, so the time frame it it is this year we're actually
reducing the the duration. It's going to be a three-week program for the kindergarten reamp. It'll be only for 2 hours of student contact time. Um, again, very intentionally designed. Um, and then as far as tutoring, because we're restructuring the way we've previously done it for first through
third grade, um, we're going to offer two groups um that have have a cap. So, it's going to be about 12 students per grade level, per zone across the district. Um, those that that tutoring will be an hour long and really it's to to make sure that we have something in
place to help reduce summer slide while we're in this transitional phase. >> Thank you. >> Yeah, absolutely. >> So, just I have a clarifying question and and thank you for for going through that growth piece. I know my questions got nerdier and nerdier as we went back
and forth. Um so just clarifying so when we see a growth for example where it says 66%. That means that 50th if it said 50th that would mean our student population was growing a like their average typical
peers. Correct? And then anything over that means our students are growing more than their same comparator peers. So they're they're experiencing more growth than if we compared them Nash to the national average. Correct. Is that kind
of the way that works still? >> There there's a number of growth growth scores. So the one that I pulled specifically was SGP and we could have pulled some different ones. And so that's where I think we actually have an opportunity to have some conversation to see what data do we do we really want to SGP essentially um you know when it
relates to start is is um they're going to look at students who are making typical >> uh typical or higher growth and so that range is usually somewhere from 35 to 60% if they're hitting in that range um you know they're considered to be making
pretty adequate growth. So, so what this so the 66% represents that 66% of our students >> we're we're in that typical to to >> okay so it's not the one where it's the 50th percentile it's about because each
time we hear the word growth it it means something different depending on what data is so I was like okay I'm not trying to I'm trying to understand that yeah >> and I probably could have delineated that better on slide deck so thank thanks for that feedback I appreciate it >> it ultimately it just is like each time we hear the term we're not sure which
which version of growth it needs. And so then when I try to explain, hey, well that looks amazing. I don't know which standard I'm using in my head. Um, and just colloquially, my my year 13 transitions kid was one of the first kids in Read Camp. He was in second
grade when reamp started. They had a pilot program in the fall that he didn't qualify for because he wasn't in the pilot group, but he went to every single read camp after that for second and third grade. And I credit that in large part as to why even though he's pretty
dyslexic, his love of books is unparalleled. And that Kindle e-reader that he had has been his partner to this day. I I I I have eventually had to replace it, but they earned a Kindle e-reader if they had perfect attendance
and went to all read camps over the summer. And that was, >> I believe, six weeks of his summer back then. I think we did three two week ones. >> And he gave up >> six weeks of his summer, two summers in a row and earned those Kindles. And >> now still when all of his other stuff
gets shut off, there he is on his I keep a Kindle unlimited prescript subscription. And I'm allowed one book and he has nine. and and that is directly credited to the level of intervention he received as a second and third grader in comparison to his
profoundly dyslexic older sister where we didn't have any of these pieces available. Um and so I'm very grateful and I'm glad we're still able to do intentional things and that we're learning from the process too to see. So thank you. >> Y >> any further questions? Students, did you
have questions for the meeting on that data? >> I don't have jump. >> Oh, no. I was just curious because I have heard too with the amount of funding that they had for the read act, they weren't always getting the kind of results that they anticipated with it. I
don't know if you can if you if you can't speak to that, that's fine. That's something you can touch base on later, but I heard that's one of the reasons why they've been looking at the read act because for the amount of money that went into it, were they seeing the kind of results they hope to see from it? I
think it's excellent. I've seen some of the books that they have in within the readactive and recommendations. So, do you think it's been effective as far as how it's been implemented here? >> Yeah, obviously the program has has has gone through some shifts over the years.
Um I I do think um what we've provided has been beneficial for students, but there's there's a number of factors that are involved. So, for for one thing, they're transitioning grades. So when they enter the the following school year, you have to remember that the text level that they're going to be reading in the beginning of the year assessment
is going to be harder than what they exited. Um you know there's there's a number of pieces like that just things to consider. I think one of the things that we're really thinking about right now is is really narrowing the scope. So like in kindergarten, we know if you don't know your letters and sounds by the end of kindergarten, how much is
that going to impact you as you move to first grade when you have to start blending and now you're having to start learn different pieces like the diagraphs like the sounds that ch make together. All all of those things have an impact. So um I think one of the things we we were not seeing it in the larger scope of the data we were looking
at. And so right now what we're trying to do is we're trying to be really intentional with the data that we're going to look at and how are those pieces aligned because I mean when when a student finally figures that one piece out when they learn their letter sounds they can take off. We've seen kids who who literally finished the year without
those pieces who have come back. They got really intentional support and they never look back. So I think to answer your question, I don't I it we haven't seen the kind of growth that we expected to see and so what we're doing is we're trying to take a different look in a
different lens to see if we can really impact those small measures that will have the larger impact later. So, are you trying to look at with like the read camps and stuff to do kind of a segue where you try to lock in this piece and prepare them for what they're going to
be facing next to where it's a little bit more challenging to prepare them for the next grade level. >> Yeah. And we have very intentional ways that we're we're going to be collecting that data and information. And then the partnership between um the the the site leader and the teachers. um there's
going to be some some some really really meaningful partnerships there of how we're how we're working. So yes, the goal will be to actually see growth in the thing that we know the students have the capacity to be able to make some gains. So >> good. >> Thank you. >> Thank you.
>> So now we're waiting for our math update with Christina Tieran. there members of the board. Christina Tieran, coordinator of math. Tonight, we're going to talk about um star uh performance. We're um going to
look at our midyear data. So, when we're looking at this, we're looking at grades 1 through 11. We're looking at our percent of proficiency overall. I put the the snapshot from fall of 2425 to winter 2526. Um the last
time that I was talking to you about midyear, I said 43% proficient was the highest that that our proficiency has been since I've been here. And now I'm happy to say that 43.7% is the highest it's been since we've had
a math team in place. So um it it we can only get better from there. Um so it's still less than 50% but we are growing and um that's that it could be our greatest hope.
The next slide that we're looking at now is broken out over um our grades 1 through 11. Um is we're still looking at our STAR proficiency rate. Remember that our proficiency rate is has direct correlation to CAMASS for our students
in grades 3 through 8. And then for 9, 10, 11, PSAT, and SAT, there's also a correlation to that as well. Um, and so we may be wondering about 7th grade and what's happening there and um that MA middle school proficiency continues to
be a primary area for improvement for us. I also think about as being a former um seventh grade teacher remembering that it is the perfect storm. It is the social, it is um the cognitive where
students are really introduced to variables for the first time. um proportionality, which is a really large um leap in logic. And then also um the cognitive maybe their brains aren't working the way that they um should
because things are um happening up there within their brain. That is not an excuse, but I'm just saying it is the perfect storm um within seventh grade. So again, it is on um the math team. It is we have a pulse on what is going on
there. And so um I know our our middle school it it is it is something that we can only strive to be better there and support our teachers continue to support our teachers. However, if we look at last year um
compared to this year and if we look at our seventh grade cohort from last year when we called that a perfect storm last year and now if we fast forward and we look at the graph on the right now they're eighth graders. We can see that they are growing. Um they are becoming
more proficient. So, um there's just something about that seventh grade year and again it is all of those um things that I said put together that really um create um the perfect storm.
Um we're reporting out on Mission DNA 2.0. We're in year two of our five-year um grant and that is supporting teachers in um grades 3 through 12. We have approximately 120 teachers
participating and we are touching 5,000 students I think um thereabouts um maybe just over 5,000 students uh and so what I mean by that is that our teachers are coming to our professional development and then they are going to their
classrooms using these strategies and therefore they are um reaching the over 5,000 students. So within our mission DNA, we are um responsible to report to the Department of Defense. So when we
report with them, we're supposed to show a trend. Our growth is supposed to be at least 3% and this year it was 4.6%. So we've met our goal for this year with the Department of Defense. So we're we're pretty excited about that. And then my last slide is just this is
just this year and what we've been doing. And so um I on I'm thinking on Monday I sent an email to somebody and um they emailed me back and I said, "Oh my goodness, it feels like six o'clock on Friday. I think I made a typo on
that." And they just were laughing at me because of that because our math team is so incredibly busy. Um I just submitted on well I should say that the math team we wrote um the ninth grade success grant and submitted that on Monday and I
say that we wrote that because even though I do most of the writing I couldn't do without the math team. I have two coaches and um the fact that I won't necessarily have those coaches by my side next year is just a in my heart.
Um, so I'm going to continue to look for money to try to fund those because it has taken this amount of time for them to be able to build rapport and get in their classrooms. And I think if we were to put eyes on their calendars, you would see how very busy that they are.
>> They are. It takes I know that I've said this before, but it takes 49 hours. Research says it takes 49 hours of professional development for a teacher to change their instruction. Our coaches are the job embedded in um professional
development. So I can't say enough for um the two coaches that I have right now. I would even argue that we are the dream team. We are really making things happen um in our office. So on February 23rd, we had our second annual math
summit. We had Kevin Dikma, who is the former um president of NCTM, come and talk to our teachers about productive struggle. Um we've been trying to line calendars with him for maybe two or three years, but snow days and all different kinds of things. Anyways, he
finally came and spoke to us. What's makes him so cool is that even though he's the former president of NCTM, normally those um people will just travel the world and get for book signings. and he's actually back in his eighth grade classroom. And that to me I
think is really cool. We also have Juliana Tapper who um lives in Westminster and she is um a really a moving force with 6 through 12 intervention and had a lot of great things to say to our teachers. Even our teachers who weren't necessarily 6
through 12, she had a really a lot of great things to say about that. Um I'm sorry I can't see that without my glasses, so I have to scooch down. Oh yeah, our teachers um have were also presenting. That's what made that day so
wonderful. One of the things about taking our teachers to NCTM and NCSM last year is that we asked them to do a little presentation at the math summit. And so that's what we did. We r we ran I
think uh maybe about 18 sessions. And um so teachers that attended we started the day with Kevin. We went to the mini sessions ran by teachers. They were 25 minutes long. And then we finished with Juliana. And so um it was just a
fantastic day for us because we also had um members from Peak View leaders that is um uh members from all around um the Pikes Peak region that come together members like coordinators like myself
that they brought teams from their district to come and see what was happening in district 49. Um, so we had Harrison, we had Calhan, and um, we also had one more, and I'm sorry, I'm I'm drawing a blank on who that was. Um, and
so again, we h are in our cohort. I'm looking now at our next um, thing in the road. Um, we are running right now 3 through 5, 6 through 8, 9 through 12, and almost 5,000 students are being impacted. We're going to test on March 9th and
10th our algebra readiness. Um last year I show shared that data with you which was very distressing. My hope is that things are improving. Our teachers are working so so very hard. Um and we hope that we see the results on this algebra
readiness. Um so also our math pathways. Um we recently went to a math pathways meeting at the Peak View um at the Peak View leaders meeting. I think that that was at the beginning of this month. Dr. Raymond Johnson was there as well as uh
one of our colleagues from Fountain Fort Carson and they were talking about excuse me the high school standards are potentially going to change here. They're going to go from over 200 down to about a hundred or so.
Excuse me. And so with that Thank Thank you. And so with that with that change, there potentially will be new pathways. And so, um, once the board of education, the Colorado Board
of Education says yes to those new standards, districts have two years to implement those standards. And so, we are trying to have a pulse on what that looks like for our um for district 49. And we had representatives there from
um, Falcon High School, also Vista, and a full team from San Creek. So, thank you, Miss Sanchez, for that. Um, so everybody has an idea of what's what's coming ahead for us. So that was really nice because we had the largest team there to to listen to what he had to
say. Um, our coaches are coaching coaching and modeling consistently throughout the district. Um, one of the biggest things that they are showing is the three reads. problem solving is always the number one issue for our
teachers. And so our three reads taps into all of the things district initiatives that goes handinhand with um our seven steps and things like that. And so that's what our coaches are working along with that. We are planning
on running a summer camp uh for grades four through five and then uh 6 through 8 at um St. Creek High School would be 6 through 8. Um and then our coaches have run um a coach's PLC and they'll continue to do that so that our coaches
are not always um within silos. We are consistently trying to improve math math achievement here in district 49. What does that look like? What does that feel like? Um we will have a new cohort mission DNA next year and that
will be so we'll be in year three. um that will be for special education teachers 3 through 8. We will not have enough teachers to run a new cohort 9 through 12 and 6 through 8. So we're we
really need to pivot and think about what year four will look like as we get there. So maybe an extension year. So, and we're grant writing. As I said, I submitted one on Monday. And when I listen to our first speaker from
tonight, our lobbyist, I I am sweating because I, as a mathematician, I feel like 90% of my job has been writing grants since I've been here. So, um, we're just waiting for the next one to be dropped and we're already
brainstorming on what it could potentially do for our students and district. And that's what I have for you tonight. >> May I make a small clarification and correct my interpretation? You said we won't have enough teachers to form a cohort. That's because we've had so many
teachers already come through the training and we're retaining those teachers >> and so that we are ahead of where we anticipated being with getting more of our teachers trained. >> I think choking maybe that hurt my thought process so I apologize. Yes. So
we have the majority of our high school all of S Creek teachers are there. All of Horizon teachers there. We have um almost all of Falcon teachers there. We have a good chunk of Vista. We we have one teacher from Sky View. Um and so and
all of our teachers from Falcon Middle. So it's really just Sky View is the only group of teachers that we could potentially form a cohort with. And that just isn't enough because it's about collaboration and sharing and um
becoming a team and and sharing ideas, cross building as well. So Lauren Um, you said something about high school. You said going from 200 to 100, but I wasn't sure what you meant by that.
>> So, yes. I think that's when I was starting to um >> Yeah. I don't know. I think it might have been the pizza. I don't I'm not really sure. >> It's been going around. Yes. >> It's also just the area. >> I'm just kid I'm just kid. I'm teasing Lynette.
Um so right now the high school standards um they are not delineated in so far as these these math standards are for algebra. These ones are for geometry these are for L2. These are for pre-calc they are just high school
standards and there are almost 300 of them. And so um there is a team of people 15 people that were selected um by Dr. Raymond Johnson, our head of math for the state. Um, and they have
whittleled them down to be the most essential standards for high school. They are not necessarily now um delineated by this is algebra 1, this is geometry, but they are now um delineated in terms of this is an essential for
algebra and it may appear again in geometry, algebra 2, pre-calc, and calc. Um, and so having said that, when these standards are going to be rolled out and be voted on, and I'm pretty sure that they're going to be voted on within the
next month or so, then we will have two years to adopt those standards within our within our schools. So, my hope is that it will be a lighter lift for our teachers. Along with that, College Board SAT and PSAT will need to adjust to
those standards. and >> just a couple of acronyms. I just wanted a clarification. You said NCTM and NCF. >> Sure. Those are our national um uh teachers association. So um for mathematics
>> okay yes >> and so our cmass uh will also be changing right and so that'll make get difficult to project uh um >> these are the only the >> change over time >> these are only the high school standards
the K through eight are already pretty locked in stone and right now um I don't those are not on the horizon to change that I know of >> thank you other questions Students, do you have a question? How
I had some? So, could it possibly be something where we start looking at how to take if we don't have like year four, we don't have enough teachers to form a full cohort because we're doing a good job of getting everyone trained and keeping the people we train. So that turnurning that
we used to have way back in the day of um the number the turnover would mean that we'd lose kind of some of that professional development investment as they went to other places to work and we're not seeing that right now which is awesome. Um but as we look forward and we talk about things like um the amazing
coaches and how difficult that is to retain. Is there a way can is there a way to use the grant money to pivot to help train the teachers who've been really become really good at it to be mentors and co- coaches so that we we essentially create
a train the trainer um system that perpetuates by taking our best the people who are our best coming out of those cohorts and helping them become teacher leaders in the in the area to then shift some of that coaching load.
Is that an option? So I think for um myself and the project manager Desiree as well as um conversations with Lisa I think almost everything is on the table right now. However, um when we wrote the
grant, we had um conversations with our consultants where they were expecting money um almost uh I think approximately um almost a million dollars um just shy of a million dollars over five years.
And so what that means is that we now are taking away from their projected um salaries. And so, however, we have built a relationship with them where they have been more than willing to let us pull back from all of the professional
development and scale back on that. So, we know that something was potentially going to happen and could we use that money for something else? And so, to be honest with you, we haven't landed on what that money would be used for just yet. Um but we know that it is going to
be something special and something that will help um our teachers for sure retain um the professional development that they have um learned thus far. >> Cool. Other questions?
And I was just going to like when you pointed out kind of well there's lots going on in seventh grade. Um, and I taught high school chemistry way back in the day. And when I taught in Boston and I taught at a private school
and therefore didn't have to have follow when the state said we had to teach what, we were able to look at our students as a group and recognize that they were developmentally in different places. And we placed our kids in chemistry. I had kids in 10th, 11th, and
12th who took chem and we placed them in chemistry based on where we thought they were in abstract thought in math. And we did that by looking at their grades in algebra 2. And some of my kids who were like, they might have been taking algebra 2 but had a C, we'd be like, you
know, I think you need a year more. Give yourself another year. And literally, we would have 50% of my chemistry class with seniors and 50 with juniors. and the kids who were way ahead of the game took an honors chemistry as sophomores and
we had a much lower failure rate in chemistry than what I saw when I came here and I had to teach it and they were shifting to 10 all requiring all 10th graders. Um and so I think there's some validity to saying look um there's a diversity in development
that occurs in all of us and and we all know hormones are hitting different kids at different times and and there's all kinds of aspects that impact that and it doesn't mean a kid isn't eventually going to get there but we have to at some point start developing something
and and the state testing system doesn't let us do it. So figuring out how we get the state to also say how do we recognize the diversity in development and build a system that lets us match where kids are when they are so we can help them grow in the ways they can grow at that point and not essentially punish
them for not being quite there yet, right? Because then they're just in this cycle of I can't get there. Um and it worked. I mean it was we still had almost everybody who graduated from our high school take chemistry. we just didn't make them all take it in 10th grade >> so they didn't have to repeat it or
decide that was they were going to take the F and you know pass two other kinds of science so they got their science credits and um and that was directly related to where they were in math and whether they were quite ready yet so I'm with you on that
they're all over the place developmentally in that room >> as I as a high school teacher because I taught high school as well you could have someone as a freshman and then circle back and have them as a junior and you were not the same person. It's
not possible. You must be a younger sibling. So, just the change, right? So, um yes, I understand that. So, >> I'm with you on that. >> Y I feel the pain. So, thank you very much. >> Thank you. >> Okay. And now we're ready back to the
water. You're welcome. Hello. Hope everybody's doing good this evening. All right. So this is probably going to be the most um simple quarterly financials because a lot of this
information this ideally would have come at the same time as the budget amendment because since this is second quarter um this is through the end of December. So this in a lot of ways the reporting that I'm showing you here does not reflect
the amended budget. So it kind of informs what we amended the budget to based on expenditures and some additional things. So um I'll just and I I apologize for how small this is. I
don't I don't know a better way to to do this um where it's legible because it's a lot of numbers. Um the big change from the last time I presented quarterly because the first quarter is when first quarter first quarter is the same as year to date. So, we didn't have to have
the extra column. Now, we're reporting on the actual quarter and year-to- date. So, there is an extra column here from what I presented last time. Um, it's still in the same format where the top is the current 2526 um year and the bottom is the comparison
of the prior year 2425. Um, at this point in time, um, we were at approximately 67% of our revenue received. that will shift drastically by the time you guys get to third quarter because we've adjusted and increased the
revenue based on actual numbers we know we're going to get. Um, any questions on the general? Okay. And this one's even smaller. So, this is all salaries and benefits broken out by the different uh categories. Same
format as before. Also has the additional column in each of the years. So that made it a little smaller than usual. Um we are basically if you look at the total total overall we are just under 50%. We're right on track.
Everything here for salaries and benefits is trending well. Um any questions there? All right. So this is everything else as far as non non salary and benefit. Um I
remember that we spoke that purchase services were high even in the first quarter. They are still high in the second quarter. The big factor for that was at that time and um I'm pretty sure I said this at the last quarterly as
well. It was the ECEA payments that we pay to our charters were not factored in because we didn't have those numbers when we had the adopted budget. So, um, that is the big thing that's factored in here because the expense is now accounted for because we've already made
that transfer for the entire year. Um, but it was not factored into the budget. That will be that has been fixed in the amended budget and you'll see that reflected in the next quarterly. Um, other than that, we're pretty on track on all of these within within
reason. Um overall for everything non we're we're about 53ish% for everything else. Yes. >> ECEA. >> Yes. I'm sorry. That is our special education funding that comes it is a supplemental to our state formula
funding. So it's kind of it's part of it but separate at the same time. And we are the pass through for the charter. So that particular expense in our other purchase services segment is the piece that we record as a charter expense um to send that and pass that through to
them. All right. Now on to transfers allocations and total reserves. Nothing really huge difference here. These are all of the things that we transfer either externally to the charter schools or to other funds. Um and we're pretty much on
track here. Any questions there? Okay, that ends our fund 10 review. Now we're on to the um big highle summaries that talk about our fund balance. Um we have made an additional tweak here after the feedback from last quarterlys to
where it starts with the be beginning fund balance. You add your revenues, you subtract your sub your expenses and you get your your net. So it all flows. Um, so there is a little bit more information on here for all to flow properly. Um, the main ones on this
page, everything really looks well in line. Um, but our expenses on fund 12, um, they are higher and that is because of our Medicaid expenditures. Uh, we did not budget for those originally in fund 12 and those were moved to fund 12. Um,
and so that has been rectified in them into budget. Um, any questions on any of the funds on this page? Okay, moving on. This one, everything is in
line. We're well well within normal amounts for expenditures of what we budgeted. Nothing is way out of whack um in the current year. Um, so we're we're well on track on all of these so far. Any questions? Okay.
All right. So on this one, and I'm just kind of calling out the ones that are outliers that are trending high. So on this one, our fund 27, which is our um base 49, that one we just projected too low based on the information that we had
at adopted budget. So this has also been amended in the amended budget and will reflect a more appropriate proportion. And then I'll keep going. If you guys have any questions, you can holler, but I think this is my last
screen. So, fun 64 is the last one that has a big outlier for expenditures or expenses. Um, this one's at 91.4% and this is um due to it has to do with the transfers in and out of the fund. And so there's a lot of
we're actually talking with the auditors about this particular one because we report one way and then the auditors report another way without we include um like some chargeback in and outs um of
expenditures because it's between funds and the auditors don't and so it's causing a bit of a discrepancy. So we're working with the auditors to determine and be consistent across which way we're doing that. So in the meantime, that is a big part of the discrepancy between the budget but the budget piece versus
the actual expenditures and how we're reporting this. So more to come on that. Um, and that we did update, we made a change to increase our budget in the amended budget, but that may we may tweak that again at a supplemental
depending on how that all comes out with the auditors. So, working through that. Any questions? >> Questions? Sure. I got one. It's probably the same, but >> as far as like the percentages of uh
money spent, how do you determine like what's safe and what's not? Are we looking at 50% spent >> approximately? Yes. I mean, >> that's like a good healthy. >> So, it depends on the category that you're looking at. So, some things like
salary and benefits, you really want to stay really close to 50% because December is approximately halfway through the year. It's a little more complicated than that because of acrruals and things like that, but 50% we already have prior year a month acred
in and so that expense is already accounted for. So 50% is good. 48% is probably ideal. >> We're slightly above that. Um, but I also think that with the handful of
people that we may lose and not backfill through the year, we may see that percent grow to where we never quite hit the 100%. In other areas where it's things like either purchase services or um supplies, you typically want to see a
higher than 50% spend earlier in the year because you're purchasing either that professional development or those supplies earlier in the year for the use of the students in the current year for the funding that you're getting. But you also don't want to be so highly elevated
that you don't have money to finish spending out for the things you need through the year. So, a little higher tolerance on those other types of expenditures. And then there's going to be certain things like other funds that may have high expenses that are scheduled for lease payments or coop
payments or things like that that are very structured and they always hit at the same time every every year and they may hit 100% as soon as those hit. So, it depends is the answer. Sorry. Students questions. Anything else?
>> Okay, thank you. Thank you. >> Thanks, Rebecca. >> And now we are up for S Creek High School's curriculum adoption. >> Hello everyone. Thank you for having me here this evening. Uh I'm Amy Sanchez Martinez, principal at St. High School
and I am so glad to be talking with you this evening about a couple of discussion items that I would like for you to propose to for you to discuss and then to approve uh in your as an action item in your next meeting. So there's
two different items that I'm going to be talking about today. The first one is about English curriculum grades 9 through 12. The second one is a particular textbook in social studies for our sociology course.
Now, as I get started with our opening and our general information, I am really, really humbled and really blessed that two of my students are sitting up here tonight as leaders. >> Um, I tell you this all the time, but I think it's really important right now. First of all, I'm glad that you two are
sitting here tonight. You deserve to sit at this table and you're just getting this party started. You're just getting started. And so you're going to be sitting, you know, when you're sitting at a table like this at this age, you're going to be sitting at some that are much bigger than this as time goes on. And each and every one of us who are in
this room will be like, my best friend. And so we're really proud of you. And I think it's important that in that you deserve to have the best curriculum in front of you. You deserve it. You two know more than
anyone how hard your teachers work. You know that. And so I want to make sure that what we put in front of them so that they put it in front of you is of quality. And so that's why I'm here tonight. That's why I'm here tonight is because they deserve it. They deserve it
and so do our teachers. So I want to tell you, as I said before, a little bit of general information. First of all, when we started this process, um, our zone superintendent, Dustin Horus, informed me that there was an opportunity to purchase some
curriculum. I'm only presenting to you this evening English and then sociology because those are not a part of our current district approved curriculum. Science is a part of this. We're also going grades 9 through 12, but they have decided and they opted to go with the
curriculum that's already approved. Falcon High School uses the same product. Um, in addition, math, we did that a few years back where we approved some curriculum. Social studies also a few years back. Most of that curriculum was approved as well, but sociology wasn't a part of that. I'll get to that
here in a few minutes. So when we got to this, Dustin let me know there was an excess for uh curriculum and technology for the COP funding that Rebecca presented to you all a couple of meetings back that you all approved. So
this is part of that funding pool is that excess for curriculum and technology. We followed the board policy. We wanted to make sure that we were good stewards of that. We have had uh three different English curriculum on display as well as the social stud or
the sociology textbook. Um we timed it so that it would start the public display would start with family conferences or parent teacher conferences. We wanted to give families an opportunity to review all of the materials that were there without having to make a special trip over to the
school to do it. So it's been there for over a couple of weeks. we decided to go ahead and keep it on display just in case anybody else wanted to come and see it. Um, and so part of that as well, I wanted to thank uh Miss Lori particular.
She spent quite a bit of time uh the other day looking through everything and looking through our processes and I wanted to thank you for that. So I want to start with English curriculum in particular. So this is grades 9 through 12. We uh meaning our teachers in our
English department took a look at three different products. Three products. One is a product that we already use. That one we did not have a full uh package.
And so when you don't have the full package, you don't have all the licenses, that means that the imple implementation is going to be in that same space where you're not going to have the full benefits of it either. So implementation was spotty of it. You see
up here on the screen as well, our students are growing, but they're not yet achieving where they need to be. And that is what we wanted to make sure was front and center. So when I say that these two deserve the best and our teachers deserve the best to put it in
front of them, this is part of how we measure it. That's not all of it, but we know as a public entity that that's how we're measured. And so we wanted to make sure that that was out in front this evening. Our students are not yet all reading at grade level and we need to do
something about that. And this is part of that process is to make sure that we have a strong uh curriculum in front of them. So when we did that, I did tell the team this whatever we're going to go with, I want to support the
teachers and that they have a voice and they have a choice, which is some of our major values as a district in making sure that they are the ones that able to choose it according to some different standards. And it's my job to make sure that they use it afterwards. That's my
role. So they're choosing it. I'm going to make sure that they use it. They've got to implement this with fidelity. Everyone has to do it. So what we've done in the past with spotty implementation cannot be anymore. It's going to be my job to make sure
that they do it with fidelity as we move forward. So they used various criteria in order to make sure um that they were choosing a quality product. So, I'm just going to go over that very briefly. First of all, they wanted to talk about and they wanted to look for rigor and
text complexity. We wanted to make sure that the text is at grade level, that it is not below grade level. Sometimes, most especially when our students aren't reading at grade level yet, we have the tendency to put below grade level reading in front of them. And we don't want to do that. We want to make sure
that it's at grade level and it also prepares them for postsecary reading. Second, we wanted to make sure that they had diverse text within the curriculum. Not only is it honoring what we see with the classics and a lot of what we see in traditional high school experiences, but
it's also heavy in non-fiction. It's also heavy within some modern selections of reading so that there's diverse readings that are in front of them. Next, our teachers were looking for scaffolds and supports. So, not only would we have support for our students
who aren't reading at grade level yet, but we also have students we've got to remember that we don't neglect. And those are the students that are above grade level and we have to make sure that there's extensions for them as well. So, that's part of what we were looking for. We wanted to make sure that
there was a promotion of critical thinking. So, we've got to go beyond reading comprehension and into literary analysis, research skills, and argumentation. And finally, our teachers were looking for a curriculum where they could um
take a look at data in real time. So, you've heard from both Yuki as well as Christina tonight about some of the standardized assessments and exams that we utilize in order to determine how our students are growing and performing. and our teachers want more in the interim in
real time and so they're looking for a curriculum that will help them with that. So ultimately what they decided on out of their top three curriculum was HMH into literature because it hits all of
those. It checked all of the boxes. um they wanted to most especially highlight tonight um that there was embedded test preparation that was something that really resonated with them. High leverage vocabulary that was something that Miss Lori touched on too.
She said, "I can open this this book and take a look at some of the vocabulary within the margins, and I'm able to pull out what that means as a reader, automated intervention, and even some grammar support because when we take a
look at our PSAT and SAT uh performance, we are struggling that we're performing much higher in all of the other domains compared to that one, compared to that. So, at this time, I'm going to go ahead and open it up for questions about English curriculum.
>> Lori, >> yeah, just a few comments. And I think you guys would really like it. It would really be fun to start pulling it to maybe student word with curriculum review, but because I had roughly an hour and a half, hour and 15 minutes, when I looked at the literature book, I
would just randomly open it to different sections. And that's when I began to see the pull outs and how it tied in with the story. And I have to tell you, it was really, it was interesting. It was riveting. I thank you for helping me focus on the ones that were the best
choices instead of honestly wasting time on the other ones that weren't being re recommended. Correct. >> And uh I as I shared with you, I wanted to take it home. >> It was it was really interesting. And so as a an avid reader who loves to read, I
found this book really engaging. And um I sometime I would like a maybe a revision to our curriculum review process where board members could check it out and take it home because I wanted to go through the whole book and so even just randomly opening it at different
sections I found it very engaging. So I was very impressed with it. >> All right. Thank you. >> Thank you. I'm glad to hear that. So, I wanted to piggyback on that about the um change to um allow board directors to take the um materials home for a night
and that is because the the materials except for the nights where um you had parent teacher conferences um it was pretty much open available during the school day and uh yeah the nature of my employment is very much feast or famine
and we are in a feast mode right now and so it's been difficult to get way. So, um yeah, if we could make an arrangement um >> Sure. >> Uh offline, I I' I'd love to to have a look. >> Thank you. >> I just really I really just have a
comment. Um I think you should do TED talks. >> I am inspired as hell. So, thank you. I'm like I'm all about it. You guys are lucky. Thanks. Appreciate >> I agree with the TED talk.
I will watch it. I'm just curious um would this like curriculum change apply to um just like our high school specific classes or like how does that work with like the AP and concurrent classes because I know there's different requirements based on those. >> That is a good question. So this would be completely different than concurrent
enrollment. So concurrent enrollment has their own set of texts that are approved through Pikes State College. this could apply to some of our AP courses even though a lot of those texts
are already um dictated so to speak by college board. There are I know that there are some crosswalks between the AP curriculum and what is in the proposed curriculum that we're asking for this evening.
>> Thank you. Any other questions, >> members of the board? Not not a question. I just I want to make an observation that the the department did a really good job of communicating their rationale. And so if you if you dig in and so please pass my commendation on to the folks that wrote this. They they
were very intentional about about giving us just enough background to understand why a change was helpful but linking it to our district mission and and our strategic priorities or values. Um, I think this is a great example of
a a clearly good faith effort to take seriously the board's role in approving but to also link it to the larger district uh um priorities particularly strategic and academic priorities. So thank the team for that. Uh I think it's
a it's it models a strong curriculum recommendation and I think this is an area where our governance function has gotten a lot better over the last four or five adoption cycles from all three zones because we've had different models and so >> and until we can take it home I went
there after the end of the school day because that's when I was able to come by. I was there with the janitorial staff >> and you were gracious enough to get me a chair >> and the janitors were very gracious as they saw this strange woman sitting there reading >> and so it was a really good time without
the interruption with passing periods and everything else to really dig in. So that was just a fluke on time availability too but I agree with you as far as taking one home would be awesome. So, well, and just another comment kind
of piggybacking a little off of Peter's. Um, this is also where zone autonomy is important because based on what your school needs and your student population needs, you're making a different choice
than the other two zones did >> for all. >> Um, right. But ultimately, it's um that that's that's why I am am such a proponent of those decisions not being centralized.
>> Um and why that that zone and and school component is so important because you're the ones closest to the students. Your teachers are the ones teaching them who can see what their needs are and what will engage them, which is different in different populations. Um and there's
plenty of research on that, especially for reading. Um, you know, I I I had to let my son read things that um I was like, "That seems really goofy to me, but man, if it's going to get you in a book for a really long time, please go on ahead. I will I will let you use my
Kindle Unlimited membership as much as you want." Um, but you know, those those pieces are all tied into here and that is a strong reason to support the decentralized model and decision-making and so I think this is an excellent example on that. So, if no one has any
further questions, um, are we okay with moving this forward for approval at the next meeting? Holly? >> Yes. >> Lori? Yes. Mike? >> Yes. >> And I'm a Yes. >> Thank you. >> So, now we're ready for your social sociology textbook, >> right? So, that one's a little bit more straightforward because it is one
particular course. So, as I stated at the beginning of my time here this evening, uh a few years back, the majority of our social studies courses received new materials and textbooks a few years back, I think four years ago.
There were a few courses though that we decided to table at the time, including sociology, in order to make sure that we could maximize our funding for the amount of students that we have. So, sociology is one course. It's a popular course. I will say that it's a very
popular course, but at that time we decided if we only have x amount of dollars to spend, then we're going to make sure that those dollars go to as many students as possible within our larger courses. So, uh you see in the proposal,
our sociology book has not been updated since the early 2000s. It's been quite some time. and we want to make sure that with the popularity of this course, with the student passion for this course, that they're able to have some updated
materials. So, the proposed book that we have, which is a uh Pearson product, I believe, um the proposed book that we have is already a part of some products that are within our district. So, it's not a product or a company
that's new. It's something that's already approved within our district. It also includes and this is the part that speaks uh more to um what I value and see as important. It's what's in that book. So yes, the vendor is
important, but what is in the book is even more important. So it has many features in there that are of importance that will enhance student learning in that course. So it's got research, personal connections that align to learning. It has discussion prompts. It
has a world view of this subject area. That to me is of the utmost importance. So we talk a lot about our local view, but we want to expand out for all of our students to a world view as well. It also has some crosswalks with
technology in the area. However, it was important to our team that this textbook is something that we didn't have to rely on a subscription over and over and over again. They wanted to make sure that we had something hard copy that our students could take a look at and take
with them and that we wouldn't have to rely on a recurring cost. We do also have a couple of more textbooks that we're going to be acquiring um through this funding that are for AP courses, but those are part of uh products that are already approved for our district.
So, this is the only one that is not yet approved by our district. So, now I'll open it back up to all of you questions. Another quick comment because it talks about cultural diver diversity around the globe and cultural diversity in the
United States and u it this book tackled some controversial and sensitive topics and they did so in my opinion it was a very unbiased and factual way where it touched on a bunch of different areas.
It touched it touched on some of the controversy with those areas and um I was really impressed with the layout the structure of so I shared with you a few of them that I couldn't believe they covered that particular topic which is important for people to understand.
That's right. And so it was um this was another one that I was I understand why the team liked this book and the fact that it was more up to date as far as some of the older material that that doesn't even touch on some of the current events. That's right. So yes,
thank you for noting that. Any questions? Any questions? I was going to say I I didn't read the text, but I was researching like this specific >> um so I know which things you're talking about and yeah, I think that that would
be phenomenal for them to get some sort of it's weird not saying it out loud, but >> like perspectives. Yeah, it's it's great for um their exposure to such things because as they go on to secondary,
>> you know, and higher institutions, you will probably like it'll be good that you already have base knowledge of these things, I guess, is what I'm trying to say. >> Yep. >> Any other questions? >> Okay. So, are we okay with moving this forward? >> Yes. >> Yes.
>> And I All right. Thank you so much. Thank you. Thank you. >> And now Peter, you're up. >> All right. So, I'm going to I'm going to apologize in advance. I have not yet figured out I'm not going to blame Diligent. This is this is my issue. I have not figured out yet the workflow. I
think I I may have figured it out tonight, but when I upload a PowerPoint, strange strange things happen under Midnight Sun. And so the the text that is missing is visible on my computer,
but the background um there's actually an entire bullet that you can't see, but I have it pulled up here, so I'll speak it to you when it's time. Um the background on this is that we gathered at the annual planning summit. We reviewed the annual strategic objectives that we have worked on that we are
working on in the current school year and we asked you to um re we recommended to you and you seemed receptive to the recommendation that we retain both the writing objective and the middle school performance objective. I see I think you saw evidence in both of those
presentations why while we are making progress in the right direction, we are not satisfied and we're not we're not ready to take our eye off those those two uh focus areas. Um we asked to lay down the calibrating compensation
because we don't have the resources to implement what we might choose to calibrate and if we had to wait even a couple of cycles, we'd have to redo the calibration. So it just made practical sense not to retain that. And I reported to you and and you were receptive to this recommendation that we are we are
where we want to be in terms of optimizing our cyber presence and therefore we think it would be appropriate to sunset that after just one year. Then we had some discussion about the possibility of a family or community engagement. We are we are still planning to come to you with a
presentation. Um we had talked about doing it in March. The presenters have asked if we could consider moving that to April and we have to discuss that in the context of agenda setting. But I wanted to let you know as a board we are um we are receptive to that and we recognize you may yet add a annual
strategic objective related to some some kind of engagement. But the one that you you asked for a little bit more follow-up is the one that I have now on screen which is our uh our focus on charter school relations. And so it happens that between the planning summit
and and tonight or actually when I had to have this submitted online uh we had a principal meeting and at that principal meeting we had six of the charter school leaders and I asked them to sit with me right after the meeting and we talked for about half an hour specifically about this uh objective.
They appreciated it that it was a proposed annual strategic objective. They were very enthusiastic about the idea of a charter leaders summit. Um they asked if we could have that uh coordinated and and done in March and um
after some some back and forth I explained why I thought it made more sense to do it in the fall because we are going to see some turnover in leaders and in management organizations um between now and then. Um, nevertheless though, they they advocated
for having at least a first quarterly meeting this spring. And so on the content that you cannot see, there is an additional measure and it is related to that idea of getting u a rhythm or a
sequence of charter school collaboration going. You can kind of see the third bullet, further charter leader collaboration and charter district shared planning. It it's a little vague, but I asked them if they would specifically uh partner with us on developing metrics so that we would know
whether this was a good objective or not. They were quite positive. Um they helped me amplify some of the key activities. For example, I had talked about the priority being contracts, funding and reporting. They wanted to
add collaboration, communication, and decision making. And they're all related. It's kind of a web of collaboration. Um, and they also wanted to contemplate whether maybe they would select one or two charter leaders to
participate in some of our district decision-making processes. Uh, as an example of that, um, charter members are are key beneficiaries and could be key contributors to an MLO campaign. So it would make sense as we contemplate whether to pursue an MLO campaign that we would want to integrate collective
charter leadership. So uh generally speaking they were they were quite um quite positive. Their positivity had a tone of we're glad you recognize that you're not meeting our expectations. And uh my friends and and and I am one
of them. um uh one of the things you you have to do is speak plainly. So I appreciated that they spoke plainly uh and I think I reciprocated that because there are areas where where we think our charter schools need to uh meet higher standards of performance and communication and collaboration. And so I think there's there's a mutual
interest in making our working relationship meet a higher standard. And so I would invite you with that recommendation to move this forward. We will we will prepare um the the kind of the same
presentation that we have done in years past. We would bring you three annual strategic objectives for your adoption at the March regular meeting. And if the board decides that you after having a presentation about engagement that you
wanted to pursue that as an additional objective or something else, you really can task us at any time of the year. It's just that the earlier you do it, the more likely we are to have the lead t the lead time it takes to hit the ground running. We used to set strategic
objectives in July and then we were way behind the eightball and so this was a process improvement, a cycle of improvement to move it earlier into the year. So I'm very comfortable and confident about moving forward these three with acknowledgement that if the board wanted to add a fourth, we
probably have capacity to focus on a fourth thing. We also have capacity to focus on three things and really give them our our full attention. Are there any questions? >> Questions, Lori? >> I actually am kind of excited about the
idea of more collaboration because it's so unique. We have charter schools that have their own board. They have a separate board of education. They have separate things that they do within our framework that's separate from our framework. So I like the idea of more
collaboration and even input to you know like I said you've got a bunch of satellites so to get them in the same solar system and to have a better field of communication because during my time on the board there has been angst that arises from time to time and if you have
a better open communication line I can only see it benefiting all of us. So any >> that wasn't a question just for a comment. Yeah. >> Any other comments or questions? >> Students, do you have anything?
>> Okay, >> then I think we are ready for you to make that. >> Um, >> okay. So, we'll move that forward. Move that forward as an action item. >> You got it. >> Okay. Now, we are on to our board
when I upload. It's right on screen. >> Um, does everybody hold on one minute? Does everybody want like a couple minute board members? >> You can't see. >> So, we're going to just meditate. So,
that's weird. >> Okay. >> Yeah. We're going to take just a couple minute break and then come back so that everybody can give their full attention to this part. >> Oh, because we're about to >> because we're doing the training. >> May I sit down? >> You may certainly sit back there. Yes.
before you go for the executive. >> So, I don't have anything to throw on the screen. I'll just be talking with you. >> That's perfect. >> Um, I'm not sure Marie who was smart enough to put the boring lawyer at the end, but >> here I am. Um, it's good to be back with
you guys. It's been an interesting hiatus. I've, if you follow my trajectory at all, I've been in far less hospitable places recently, and it's really nice to be home and um, be with you. So, thanks for that. I am
I'm wanting to give a very sort of basic primary overview of of board things open meetings the way we interact with each other some of the intersection of our policies with the way that um you work on the dis I expect and would hope that
this might be somewhat um interactive as you as I go through each category I don't want to have you have to you know hold on to questions towards the end so engage with me at will as we're going through this and I will be pretty basic and I'll be pretty quick with the basic
and I know Marie allocated 30 minutes but if I can get through in 15 and we don't have a lot of questions then you can go home too but I do want to cover some things in particular just to be very clear that we've got those under our belt. First I want to say um we're
unlike any other elected um officials in this respect. I don't believe that you guys have the sort of normal constituent services obligation that a congress person or a legislator would have. Your interaction with your constituents is stilted in a different way and it's and
it's constrained in a different way. I'm going to be really clear if we can't take away if we can take away one point from me talking tonight it's going to be the sort of following dialogue here which is I want to admonish you to be really really careful with any
stakeholder staff constituent student that we're not as individuals coming away from interactions with them whether online or in person or however even up here um where they think that you as an individual ual have taken an issue off
their plate and you're going to work it for them. This is the primary way in which elected school boards undermine the system. I mean a you're the board of appeal for anything that turns into grievances and goes forward. And so we
want to be hands clean and not have been involved in the in the muck at an earlier stage because we have to have the right to be a voter on on appeals. And this happens as you've experienced with me even just recently with student discipline matters. It can happen with um teacher discipline matters and all
all manner of grievances. it frankly to to go to somebody talk with them whether it's at a baseball game or at at at you know the whatever event and have them feel that you've
heard them and without just returning them to the tools that are embedded in our policies and the way that we interact and and then just the basic human um programming that we have which is that we ought to be talking to the source first and if that isn't availing
then we talk to the boss of the source and to the boss of the boss and then we go to the board. If we don't do that we completely undermine the integrity of our system. It it undermines Peter. It undermines all the people that work for Peter. If we've gone around them and we've and and then that can lead to
frankly a lack of trust where if you know if if I'm a board member and I've done that then the next staff member thinks they can reach me and they they violate the process and and it could be super undermining and it it and it interrupts the the relationship we have properly with our staff. This is such a
big deal to me. I'm going to say probably at the end again, but this is the thing that we can't do. Oh, thank you for letting me know this. I'll look into it. That sort of just natural sort of engagement will turn into a disaster if we're not really really careful. So,
it needs to be thank you. I'm just a person. I work on the board. I'm not going to be able to handle this for you. If you look at policy GBK, if you're a staff member or JKE or what you the related policies, that's where we need
to start. We've got to do that. It's we've just got it every every time. Same with the social media inquiry. You you can you can you can acknowledge emails, you can acknowledge things on social media. Don't invite that you're going to participate and support the un you know
the unwinding of the issue. Any question about that? >> Well, and I would say there there's two components to that, right? There's one how you convey that to the individual you're communicating with, but also what you personally then do. So if you say to the person, "Oh, well, no, I can't
really." But then you still go and engage on it with staff. Um, you know, so you still come to Peter and say, "Wait a minute. I heard d and and imply to staff that you as an individual board member are taking up the cause, even if
you didn't imply that to the person, if you're then still acting on it with staff, does that undermine it in the same way?" >> Yes. and and and just this I mean we got to really be careful of our like our public personas expressed in social
media. If we express that we are an open door and all of this it it it's intended to invite dialogue and engagement but when it invites problem solving questions we got to be just super super scrupulous with this. It's just it's
really a hard you know line to walk but it's really an important one. We can all come up with a million. You know, those of you that are, you know, long time can come up with a million times, but this has come up. So, um, I'm confident in you guys. I mean, but I just want to make sure I made that one
clear. Wanted to ask what do you guys think is the notion of one voice when when when the board comes down on a decision? We've recently had, you know, sort of the revocation of a of a a Dash R and a
policy. Um, are all of you comfortable with the idea that once we've established those things that we need to continue to speak with one voice without inadvertently undermining, you know, the decisions of a majority, whatever that might be that and we might
not have been aligned, but we understand that that's now where we are and we move forward on that. This is the next important concept. I don't know if you have any thoughts around that. Yeah, >> I was around when that came about and I know why that came about. Um because even after decisions had been made, they
continued to be debated. It's not so much and I know people have said, "Well, I don't have to trade off my First Amendment rights." And you don't. You can definitely have your opinions. >> And I think the easiest way to clarify one voice, it doesn't mean you can't say
you disagree. It's just that a quorum was reached. >> This is the decision this quorum has has decided on. I disagree with it, but this is what's gone through. And so, you know, like I said, to have your personal opinions out there. They were out there
in September. They were out there recently. But it's just to me, the one voice means the quorum was reached. If I could varnish that even a little bit more, I think it's fine to say I didn't vote for that. >> And the board had a thoughtful discussion and and you know, the whole
board came together and that was the decision. try to support it in a in a broader sense even if if if you can't personally take ownership of it, we got to make sure that we understand that it was a fairly accomplished thing. That's an important way to project as well. Well, I I think there's another
component of that because the one voice concept, although it got re-emphasized during that struggle, in fact, is a concept that well predates that board because in fact it's been well predated in CASBY training. >> Absolutely.
>> Since well before I was on the board. Um, and you and I kind of talked a little on the So, legislators when there's a law that's passed that they voted against, they will continue to run on it and continue to make a big deal and they go back and
forth and and still continue to go out there publicly going on and on and on about it. But this elected position is incredibly different because legislators aren't in charge of of implementing the law.
>> We are. And so >> I like that new one. >> Um when once a board has made a decision whether or not you agreed with the decision, you have to be in fully you have to then moving forward fully support everything required to implement
that decision. Okay. And the controversial one, okay, the you had to file a lawsuit in June. regardless of how anybody violated voted on JVA, once that decision is made, everyone on the board has to fully support
everything necessary to be able to implement that policy. Um because your job is now to support the staff in operationalizing what the board's decision was. And that's very different than any other elected
position. And I think um that's a hard thing for everybody, but if we're gonna it's unfair to staff and it's and it ultimately undermines everybody if we can't do that.
>> Fissures in the system emerge if they feel like we've got some weaknesses and fractiousness. And let's face it, we, you know, every board's got fractiousness and and and there's places where you guys don't dis don't agree and so forth, but the the notion of making sure that our our leadership and and the
people below them are confident that we're steady on this because as soon as we look unsteady with this, um, it it can really undermine the way we >> enact these things and then and then you end up with all sorts of parent grievances on both sides of whatever the issue is. It's it's that's a big deal.
And I think right about staff when staff comes and they feel like okay you can talk to this person or you can talk to that person >> that's where it takes away the voice of the board. >> So I look at the one voice thing is
essentially I am one board member. I can speak my opinions and and make my arguments and then the board votes. It is a separate entity from any of us five. It is it is one separate thing that only speaks when all five of us
cast a vote and then when that vote has been made the board has made a decision and um I think we had a really good example of handling it right when it came to JBAA. So it was very controversial. It passed and then we had
to move on to the regulation. And at no point in the conversation about the regulation was there relitigating the policy. It's like that that decision has been made and now we are moved on to the conversation of how it will be
implemented. >> Y agreed. >> Um so going down my notes uh just because this has come up in my experience just recently in a couple other boards. Um, you are not out allowed to abstain from
votes unless you have a technical real conflict of interest. So just because you know somebody and you feel attuned to somebody or whatever, this has to do with whether you have a financial conflict of interest, you're going to make money or lose money based on a decision and pretty directly, not like
I'm invested in IBM and are we going to, you know, but but direct conflicts, that's the only time we get to abstain. So you know, think ahead on that. We can't suddenly try to abstain at a meeting because if I'm there, I'm going to say you can't do that. And if I'm not, Peter will probably say that or
Marie will. So, that's where we're at with that. I want to spend a little more time on our our policy BEC. It's executive sessions. It's confidentiality. It's open meetings. It's those sorts of things. And I just want to go through a
few high points. One, I I know you know I see four of you. So, I'm guessing you're going to go through an appointment process. In fact, I think you probably started that earlier today and and there's going to be this appetite to sort of coalesce and
work the the candidate or candidates or whoever's out there and start to have engagements there. And I want to caution you that that could be dangerous. It's it's not like the same as when we had a fall election and and candidates could talk to each other because they're pre-board members and all of this. Yes.
whoever the appointees might be are pre-board members, but you're board members. And so we've got to be attentive to building sort of coal coalitions around this. This is board business. And so this would be a place where outside of board meetings having
gatherings and and where serial discussions can be an issue and challenge. Anything on that? Um well, and the caveat on that is that includes conversations possibly with people interested in the
seat because >> although board members during an election, there wasn't a reason why you wouldn't. You could talk to all of the candidates and get to know them and help them understand what board roles are. We weren't the ones that wasn't >> subject to public election. This is your
business. That's why I didn't maybe say it clearly enough, but that's exactly what I'm doing here. >> It's so it isn't even just >> me talking to him and then me talking to her and then like that type of thing. It's also me talking to Joe Schmo and then Joe Schmo talking to Mike and then
Joe Schmo talking because that then is a third person being the serial meeting because unlike an election we're making the decision and so all of those conversations have to be in a public meeting >> which it's really really easy to not
realize how quickly that gets crossed because we don't have control over who someone else has coffee with. >> Right. And you won't necessarily know until it's too late in someone in the community. Way way way back in the day when it wasn't a board appointment and I wasn't on the board yet. The people who would be like, well, I saw them meet
with this person in the restaurant and then that person in the restaurant and that person in the restaurant and I heard part of the conversation and so I know they were talking about this, this, and this. And that haunted those members of that board for the remainder of their their tenure because
it undermined board transparency and this is a situation that can do the same thing. But um >> well I have one that's kind of and this was just before the election and it was like a sketched out game plan
>> that this person will win and this person will win and then we can drive this person out and we can appoint this person where they had already a designated appointee. >> Okay. Um, and so that's the other danger I see is that it was like a kind of a
game plan like a football X's and O's. And so it laid out what would happen and how to drive this person out and how to appoint this person. >> And that was something that I saw prior to the election. >> Okay. >> So, um,
>> I'm going to try to avoid commenting on particulars. Um, I want to make sure that I I I say this squarely too. Email amongst you guys. All all email that you use for board business is subject to the Open Records Act. Kora, Colorado Open Records Act. Corora request, everything,
you know, everything I ever write to anybody on any board gets asked for. A lot of times my stuff's privileged. Yours usually isn't. And so, a lot of the things that you um express in writing, make sure we're professional, that you know, we're not undermining of one another in particular. and and and
any of our key folks. Um, but also be cognizant that serial communications where we're trying to build consensus, let's say for the the appointment, you know, my sister Marie, I'm really like so and so. What do you think? She goes, I do too. Let me ask Holly. You know, and then all of a sudden that becomes a
meeting. And so, we got to be really careful there as well. There's a very conspicuous blow up that happened a little north of us related to serial meetings and that that ended up costing them over a million dollars to a district because of violations um that were later unearthed. So, we got to be
careful about that. We don't want to use our personal email addresses for board business. We don't want to use our board emails for personal business. Um, if you you were to use your board email for personal business, even if it's just talking to your daughter, son, whomever,
it actually is subject to Kora and and we just want to hold hold the line there. So, I sure you guys all have that practice. I I just want to make sure you heard me loud and clear on that because you're newer. Um >> well and and as an aside to that um
>> reminding staff to double check the email when they email a parent because when it starts with the same thing. Um, I had several situations my last board time where they would be emailing me as a parent and it would show up in my
board email because they typed the first three letters of my name in and the email addresses were similar and they weren't checking and I would be like on it hardcore and be like, "Hey, >> do not like you need to be paying attention to this." But um, so being
cognizant too. So if because it can happen inadvertently from a staff member and if it happens inadvertently just let them know right away so that they can flag it in their system to double check. Um it's a great reminder because it it yeah well because last thing I wanted
was my kids IEP stuff all over my brain. >> And just as a practical matter you guys are you know you're visible public figures. every email you send externally, somebody is >> forwarding to their buddy to and and you know, so there's no confidentiality
really. Just just be alert to that. And >> y >> and so that's that >> wanted to I'm I'm trying to move fast. I I really am. Um >> Robert's rules is kind of our standard thing. You know, that's how we operate. I want to pitch that philosophically
it's intended to even the playing field to make sure that the newest board member has the same rights and opportunities as the most sophisticated and seasoned board member. And so to that end, it's I got to tell you, I I've been around the block on a lot of boards and I think our board does
a really great job in terms of the timers and the way that we respect and and identify who's speaking next and the amount of times that we go around. All of that is great, but philosophically I want to just urge you to consider try not to you to wield Robert's rules as a
sword of you know, you know, technical superiority to try to get something done, you know, by a technicality. That's not fair. That's not what that's for. This is about just making sure that we all have a voice to talk. It's not about shutting somebody off or shutting
some down some thing down by technicality. And I just want I just want you ethically to think about it in that respect. >> Just a quick comment too is I wanted to point out that um in CASBY training as well as in our own policy on how we
conduct board meetings, it clearly spells out that Robert's rules are a guide. Um and so if where our practice is different from the text of Robert's rules, um generally presidents have wide
latitude and as long as those practices are being enforced consistently and fairly, then um that's perfectly um in line. >> Yeah. And I I just don't want that to be used to thwart somebody from getting
their voice in or or you know these sorts of things or to somehow cobble up emotion so they can't we're trying to unwind it. That's that's not what that's for. You know, we should just clearly make decisions. Um okay.
We have a we have a practice that we use that's a kind of a consensus to move things forward. Fine. It's good enough with me. I actually think it's a real good practical, you know, uh, thing. But I just want to make sure and remind you all nothing
compels staff or Peter that's less than a vote. He can reasonably say, "Yes, I got it. I will bring you this thing." But if you really, really need to enforce something, um, it needs to be by vote. That's the only way you guys actually express your voice. So, you
know, just nudging him through consensus is I I know him and I know he will respect it and go with it, but that doesn't necessarily always need to be the case. So, just be aware of that. And along that strand, I'm I'm going to say out loud, I don't think any board member
should ever be in the business of trying to give work to Peter or frankly to anybody in our system um without having it be a board thing. So individually you have some rights. You have some rights to obtain materials. You can ask for
documentation that's sort of easily accessible. But asking to devise a report or generate some sort of findings or something like that. No, that's the board has to do it, not you individually. All right, moving fast. Um,
just wanted to cover quickly. We do public comment. Well, I want to say we're a limited public forum. That means we really are not in the game of trying to conrain what is said as long as it's not obscene or threatening or you know these sorts of things. We can limit the time that's
legal. We can limit how many speakers that's legal. We can actually prioritize speakers in order based on you know students and and and all of those things. That's fine. We can and I I I've tested and and gone
through the whole legal analysis. If we wanted to use some sort of constraint like Raptor to bring people into our meetings um to make sure that we verify who's in um that is completely legal as well. Um I know that we've had some dialogue around that. There you go. Same
thing with uh pre-signups. Have somebody sign up before 1:00 on the day of the thing or before 5:00 on the day of the thing or the night before. Whatever we do, as long as we're non-discriminatory in the way we apply it, those things are all legal. I know we've bounced around a lot of these things. Just want to make sure I give
you clarity there. Any questions? >> Well, and our policy also limits when they can talk about what topic. And as long as we're consistent on that enforcement, we're good there, too. Right. So, our policy has two open forums. First one, your comments have to be on an agenda item. Second one, you
can comment on whatever you would like. We can do that still, correct? Or not as long as we're consistent. We might want to have a little bit of an executive session at some point to really explore the the the links to that and what our options are in the case there's a violation, but for the most part, yes.
>> Okay. Well, and I know when Rick and I worked on BEDH, we had had a second public forum that had never been codified into policy. So, we wanted to codify that. We wanted to expand the number of people who could speak. And that's why we came up with the two
public forums, two minutes each. And the goal was to get up to 30 speakers >> because sometimes, you know, and then we even rotated that we had some serial speakers, >> right? >> Um that if you were in the first batch last time, you would go to the second
batch the next time. And one of the modifications we recently were discussing was to keep the first batch to agenda or vote items. >> I think that's actually what's currently in the policy. That's why I explicitly asked because >> just so you know, it wasn't a specific
time limit. It was the number. >> And so that's what we came up with then was to try to get more community voice. >> Let me say this a little differently. As a blanket and as a rule, I'm all in for that. I think it's very defensible as long as it's non-discriminatory in in
application. The episodic violation is something that I'd want to talk to you about how we deal with that. >> Okay. Um, I'm just got a couple last things. I You
guys have a a code of conduct that is so robust. It's so much more than what our statutes mandate. And I think it's because of our cultural compass in part. We've we've sort of wrapped around this idea that we're going to be, you know, we're going to be emblematic of that,
that we're going to represent that in a in a good way. And and so there's this, you know, this high expectation of decorum amongst you, the way that you interact with one another, these expectations that you would preset before a presenter because it's hard to come up here and present. It's nice in
this little room, but you know, you get up there and you're live streamed and there's a million people and you're just you're you this isn't what you do for a living. It's hard. And so to to set the expectation that we ask the hard questions in advance, make sure that they're prepared for them. such that it sounds like, okay, yeah, I should do
that. Yeah, you really should do that. This is a big deal for someone who's maybe not so, you know, comfortable speaking in front of people. Make sure we don't sort of hijack their presentations. Ask the questions in advance. Um,
you have um your your I forgot which policy this is. I want to say it's PCA- E, but whatever it is, it says you shall do these things. I mean, you guys have bound yourselves to these standards, and I just want to make sure that you understand that.
>> Yeah. I was actually on the other end of that. Uh, at a recent DAC meeting, somebody showed up with a sort of an ambush question. I was like, well, here's the answer that I have for you, and it wasn't satisfactory. I was like, well, you'll have to reach out to the admin because I've had no opportunity to
research this, so I don't have anything better for you at this time. I'm going to skip to I think I've got three last sort of key things and then if we want to explore more we can. Um one I want to talk to you guys about what I've observed and what I think is
has been sort of practice in terms of service on committees and sort of our internal committees and working groups and those sorts of you know we have all these sub entities that work around the district. I think it's super awesome if we delegate and designate you guys as
appointees to various committees, DAC, you know, these sorts of things. I want that to be limited though to the places where the board really is supposed to be. I think there's certain working groups. I think there's certain, you know, I I don't know
I don't know the names of them, but but we have committees that are mostly administrative committees. And I just I want to urge you to think about I think it feels like an intrusion. It feels like people would be constrained and not be genuine if a board member walks into some of these
groups that are supposed to be sausage making in nature. So I want us to be really respectful about thinking about which of those groups we consider joining sort of informally like that we will participate in or or or even just sort of selfappoint to be a designate there.
I don't know enough about what I don't know to tell you which ones these are, but I I want you guys as a board to think about that a bit. >> Well, we have a list, right, that we go through on at our annual planning summit where we do official leaison. Those are the ones that are required by statute or
required by bylaws or something of the group. So like Falcon Foundation requires a board member in their bylaws. Um erosce by law you have to have someone on statutoily. um the student board of representatives bylaws I believe require a board member
liaison. So either we're required by statute or um the organization requires our participation or has requested our participation. Right? Those are those are the two that are official. Everything else in the district is
different. Right? So like >> for example even their school sacks, right? school sack. I was president of Falcon High School sack for the two years before I was on the board. But if I stayed on the sack, even though I'm a parent in the school,
>> the whole tenor of that meeting changes >> because they've got a board member present and there's two things that happen. A, all of a sudden the principal thinks he's got the board member's ear for whatever he's bringing up through his sack to the superintendent. So it can undermine the superintendent's relationship with the sack. But also the
fact that I'm a board member then, oh well, she's a board member. What do you think? And and it shuts down the other parents in the room because they think some that I have some other expertise when really I'm just trying to be a parent there. So >> like I self eliminated off of that. But
I think Sack is an example maybe of what you're talking about. or um >> I was also the parent designate from Falcon High on the ESCAC which is our safety and security and they go through and and that one like is super like only
certain people get invited and then you have to sign a confidentiality agreement all kinds of stuff on that. >> Okay. Second I was elected I was like I can't be Falcon High's parent rep anymore. Someone else has to take that seat. Um and but I self eliminated. But
I think those are some of the things you're talking about. So >> that's where I'm going down there. >> Or like the um VT um all kinds of different Peter has all kinds of superintendent groups that he meets with to get information. So I
think that's kind of where you're going. >> Well, I just had a question. It was a random question because during the APS, Holly had mentioned she was actually interested in the special education advisory committee. Would there be a prohibition like if she's not discussing her child's exact case needs or anything
else like that that would prohibit her from being that leaison or for attending those meetings if they're not >> explicitly she didn't want to >> well I thought you said you did >> I mean I like I had been part of it and obviously it would be nice but exactly
like what she just said about like when you are a parent but you're also a board member then it it brings a different stigma And they do I mean I haven't attended one or >> that's what I was going to get to is they changed the format and they have
presentations once a quarter. So they're not always specifically designated to discussing that. Now they are presentations that are once a quarter and they're actually not dedicated to individual cases. Sometimes a parent will ask the question, but they're more
resource driven and they're more educational in format right now than they were before. Well, I think well and waiting to hear I was just the one thing I would say on that is when it's a presentation thing even way back in the
day I still went as a parent and so I don't think that piece was the piece is if you're being the board piece but so >> my thing is if it's a working group your guys presence will somehow inhibit what
goes on in the working group and I'm not saying you shouldn't be at these things, but I think what we need to do is make sure that we have a sturdy process for doing it and not be sort of a self- selection sort of thing, which and and this will kind of circle me around to my last point um that I wanted to make sure
I got on. Um I think that we need to if we don't have this habit already um inculcate the idea that we need to we need to ideally ask our superintendent but minimally CC see our superintendent
if we're engaging with asking questions with seeking you know responses from anyone subordinate in the in the staff. I think that's something that I just want to make really clear on. So you might have a you might live in the Falcon zone and so Brian is a great guy and you're like hey I'm gonna ask Brian
a question. I would submit that I would prefer that you at least CC Peter Hilts >> when you're doing that sort of thing. Is that does that consistent with what your expectation would be >> and consistent with most of our history? >> Yeah. >> Yeah. um to the end of I what you were
kind of leaning in on. If there was if there was a committee, let's say Seak and and Holly made sense. Yeah, I get that she would make sense to be part of that. Um I'd like it to be a board conversation and and just, you know, and and figure that out.
I just I just know how the presence of of certain figures, you know, can just really change the tenor of of different things. And these are just sausage making groups in many respects. They really want to kind of get down to the nub and do deep stuff and and and >> we don't want to interfere with that.
>> Yeah. And like I said, Mike and I have both attended them recently and they're presentations. They're not, you know, >> so I mean, SEAKs are required by statute and so that's why we are um required to have a board liaison in them. And I understand the point that Marie was
making. If it is an accountability committee um then it may start to talk about things that directly affect your child and so it becomes a blend of you know you know it it's that boundary of am I here to represent my child versus
am I here to represent the board. So one of one of the things that we could do is I could be the liaison because that's who we selected while everybody else stepped back and I was all that was left. Um, and but you can still attend those as a parent.
>> But another thing we could do too is if we determine that these that that the risk is is not there that that you because I know it's an area of interest and you're very well educated and so
much more equipped to participate in the conversations than I am. Um, >> here's the three levels. Okay, so level one is when they're doing a presentation on, hey, here's the transition resources and our quarterly is going to be on these transitions things. 100% fine for
Holly and I to participate as a parent. >> 100% fine for us to go hear it, right? In fact, I've been to plenty of them. Um, but the other level is when you're the the board liaison position isn't just about your own child. It's about the fact that the seak the the staff
member team involved in that organization has decision makingaking power over things that impact our children directly and interactions with us at that level. if we are the board liaison component
>> can impact how that relationship is perceived in terms of how they supervise the people who service our kids and so that's why the liaison piece isn't a great fit attending the presentations 100%.
Becoming someone who's working with the parent co-chair on planning all that you're starting to get iffy because now you're doing the sausage making part. Um and so participation as a a parent like any other parent in the district who attends
the presentations that isn't the boundary issue boundary issue is the other presentation they do quarterly presentations on different topics. >> So again I'm not picking on a particular that they've just shifted the format particular and that was intentional with Samantha and some of the others that
they would make it quarterly and presentation style and before it was more of a working group >> and that shifted. So now it's just presentations. >> So if your audience I get if you're you know think about if you're audience okay great if you're participant then I think
we need to we need to engage and make sure that we've got proper sort of >> Yeah. Yeah. Because there's a level of difference once you're even in the yes they have quarterly but then there's also some other things that happen in the background with some of the parent leaders in the group and that's that's where the boundary becomes an issue.
>> So well I think >> and that's why we've got it. We know what we're doing. >> Yes. Yes. So, I don't think there's a reason for everybody else to make Holly and I know where we are. >> No, no. I was just talking about that. >> Marie, I could go down 101 things, but I reached my expiration date and I feel
like I've covered the main material, so I'm I'm good. >> Yeah, I think any questions. >> Any other questions on those pieces? >> Um, oh, one on policy piece I had been asked about. So, when we look at our policies, there are distinctions. So we
have um policy custodians and there are some policies that the board is custodian of and there are others that the director of operations is or this person. Um and there's a reason behind those designations and and that implies then kind of where
we should be digging in a whole bunch and maybe where we shouldn't so much. >> Do you know what I mean? Can you talk to that a little bit? Well, D49, just to be honest, has leaned on the side of more board engagement on admin what other
people would call purely administrative policies. Um, we tend to, you know, how many times have I watched you guys sort of redline in public, you know, big big old policies and um and we have had a tendency to be more engaged on that
level. Um other places there they have their sort of their you know the executive limitations and their governance policies and a few kind of categories and that's all they really deal with and administration you know just sort of does the operational policies but frankly what we've had is
this intersection of interests where a lot of operational policies have sort of different perspectives to them whether it's you know um opt in or opt out of something or whatever those sorts of things and So that's why the board
has has taken on some of that and I think it's appropriate. I don't think that's wrong. Um but I I I will say that I think we just need to be cognizant that we're not competent to understand what the teacher's world is like and how how
something like this will um affect the real classroom. And so we've got to lean on Peter as he presents it or his people as they present it. Okay, I could word smith. I can go from global to whatever you know some of those things fine but but if we're if we're going to
talk about operationally how they go this is the place where I want a whole bunch of questions issued based on the the thing in advance make sure that we have clarity about what they're the reason behind things and then let's not interrupt it unless we really really should >> you know things like HR policies or
there's a lot of things that are very technical legal components rather than cultural >> and I think sometimes that line is getting a little blurred. >> Yeah. I remember a particular case where we were word smithing a policy and I kind of pushed back and I said we should
be routing this through the um the leader that's in charge of that because she has a ton of um expertise uh on on the legal technicalities and implications that we could be waiting into um very foolishly. It's so fun for
me to be able to tell you guys that you're not competent to do some of this stuff. But I think it's true, you know. >> Well, and the other thing too that and we do have a policy for this when it comes to the board. We are there's one part of the exhortation we give prior to
a public forum in that we can have robust debates among ourselves about different policies but when it comes to the board talking about staff I think it's perfectly fine to say you did a great job thank you so much when it
comes to the board critiquing employees in a public manner that is actually outside of that policy where we have a policies that says we will not do that. We will not and I think it's it's it's really acceptable to praise staff in
public but not to critique staff in public that that either has to be discussed with Peter or somewhere else outside of a public format. >> So without knowing any particulars I would say generally speaking I say yes
to that. That's why I keep saying this protocol of making sure that we're managing hard questions in advance. the surprises and all that, but at the end of the day, if there's something, let's let's say it's uh, you know, we had a couple elegant curricular presentations today, but what if you disagreed with
them and and and you said, "Well, did you really do the data on this?" Let's say it was a math curriculum or, you know, I I think it's legitimate to push back on the on the conclusory stuff and all that. And and we never we don't I don't want to see you guys talking back and forth in a less than, you know,
professional manner. So certainly with with staff presenters and stuff too. >> Well, I think especially with the fiscal exigency, a lot of the staff felt like they were walking around on eggshells. A lot of different people were losing their jobs. Everybody was a little nervous looking over their shoulder. And
so it's really important to have people not feel targeted by any board member. >> Um especially when it comes to staff because we have two employees. >> Yep. >> There's one and the other one's back behind you somewhere, I think. And just to be fair, you can be as mean as you
want to me. It's it's he wouldn't be alone. So >> technically we employed him. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. >> Well, actually superend contract and his contract is super >> I can say whatever I want up here.
>> And then we'll talk about your contract. >> I'm saving you $36,000 this year. I promise you. Okay. Any other questions? Anything anyone else needs clarified? >> Okay, then I think we're good. Thank you. >> Thanks.
And >> I think that's it, guys. We're done. Can you sc