Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. down down down down down down down down down Heat. Heat. N. Hey. Hey. Hey. Heat. Heat.
down. Down. Heat. Heat. Heat. Hey, Heat. down. I would like to call this meeting of August 21st, 2025 to order. Thank you to our live simultaneous Spanish
interpreters for joining us today. And we are also live streaming our meeting. Roll call please. Miss Harper. Miss Applegate here. Miss Kenworthy here. Miss Parker here. Miss Reed here. Dr. Varta
here. Please stand and join me 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. Is there a motion to approve the August 21, 2025 meeting agenda? I move to approve today's agenda as presented in board docs. Is there a second? Second. Any discussion? It has been moved and seconded to
approve the agenda for today's meeting of August 21st, 2025 is presented. Roll call, please. Miss Harper. Miss Applelegate? Yes. Miss Kenworthy? Yes. Miss Parker? Yes. Miss Reed? Yes. Dr. Varta? Yes.
The agenda is approved. I'd like to take this opportunity to welcome board members back from their summer break and welcome all Jeffco students, families, and staff to the 202526 school year. It's great to be back at work. I want to acknowledge at the start of tonight's
meeting that in addition to our study items, the board will be voting on the ratified agreement recently reached with the Jefferson County Education Association, JCEA. The agreement with the Jeffco Education Support Professional Association, JESPA,
is still pending ratification. The board is scheduled to vote on the ratified Jespa agreement at the September 3rd study session. Tonight, the board will also be voting to appoint a new designated election official. While the board typically takes action at its regular meetings, there are times when
action is noticed to occur during a study session. We'll vote tonight in a timely manner to honor the work completed by all participants in the negotions process. With that, let's turn to our first agenda item this evening. Board action on JCA negotiated
agreement. The district and the Jefferson County Education Association negotiating teams reached an agreement on compensation and benefits for licensed educators for the 2026 27 school year. Included in the agreement are two additional non-working
days for teachers which are reflected in the staff calendar posted with this agenda item. The terms of the agreement are provided in the materials presented in board docs. Is there a motion to approve the tenative agreement and revised contract language between Jefferson County Education Association
and the district? I move to approve the proposed contract as presented in board docs reflecting the tenative agreement negotiated between the Jefferson County Education Association and the district. Is there a second? Second. Is there any discussion?
It has been moved and seconded that the board will approve the contract as presented in board docs. Roll call, please. Miss Harper. Director Applegate. Yes. Director Kenworthy. Yes. Director Parker. Yes. Director Reed. Yes. Dr. Vera.
Yes. And that resolution passes. Next. State statute requires that an official be designated to represent the board of education in election matters. The board will now approve a resolution appointing Kristen Harper as the new
designated election official. Is there a motion to approve a resolution appointing Kristen Harper, executive assistant to the board of education, as the designated election official for the district? I move to approve a resolution appointing Kristen Harper, executive assistant to the board of education, as
the designated election official for the district. Is there a second? Second. Is there any discussion? It has been moved and seconded that the board will approve a resolution appointing Kristen Harper, executive assistant to the board of education, as
the designated election official for the district. Roll call, please. Miss Harper. Director Applegate. Yes. Director Kenworthy. Yes. Director Parker. Yes. Director Reed, yes. Dr. Va, yes. And that motion passes. So, we will now
move to our study session agenda. Our first study item of the evening is for the board to receive an update on the district's alternative education landscape work. This update will be presented by Dr. Drew Coleman, chief of schools, and Dr. Kim Leblanc Sparza,
deputy superintendent. They also have some guests with them tonight that they will introduce. We will have 35 minutes for this presentation. And before I turn this time over to our presenters, is there anything you'd like to share? Superintendent Dorland. Thank you, President Parker.
Welcome, Mr. Coleman. Dr. Kim, and I'm going to ask our guests to join you at the table. So, come on up. Yeah, I was going to say go ahead and come up there. Yeah, grab some chairs. Thank you, Justin.
We'll get we'll get them seated and very happy that they y'all could be here with us today. Many of whom are um school-based leaders and educators who are in their first week of school. So,
it's a big week for them and and um having them spend time here with us tonight is special. So, thank you very much for taking time in this important week to be here with us this evening. Um, I do want to express gratitude to this team uh for their facilitation of
listening sessions with AEC staff last spring. Uh, the you um did a great job of facilitating those sessions, listening to the feedback, and now creating a more structured collaboration process. And I'm really grateful for the effort that you all put in last spring
to do that work. I know this team looks forward to sharing about the progress and the upcoming plan for the important work around our AEC's. And so with that, I'm going to hand it over to Dr. Kim, who's going to introduce our guests.
Thank you, Superintendent Doran. Uh before we do get started, I'm going to ask all of the folks that are with us this afternoon to introduce themselves because they're all playing a really important part in helping us facilitate um the AEC work that we're going to do this year and it will be certainly a
labor of love for everyone up here and I know it is the first week of school. So, thank you all for being here and making the time. Hi everybody. Thank you for having us. My name is Wendy Dorne. I'm the community superintendent that has the honor of serving the AEC schools. I'm Aaron Linderman. I work at
Connections Learning Center and I'm the social emotional learning specialist. Hi, I'm Tamson Stokes. I'm the principal at Brady High School. Hi, I'm Kelly Hyatt. I'm one of the counselors at JVA. Good evening. Mike Freeman. I'm the
community superintendent for the Coline schools and tonight uh the option schools as well. So, thank you. Hello, John Baron. principal of MLAN Community High School. Thank you, Drew. So, I know I don't have to tell all of
you that this is incredibly important work. Um, I appreciate how much people care about this work. They care about our kids. Um, and our educators work incredibly hard to try to make a difference for our students who need an
alternative setting in Jeffco. Um, I know firsthand that there are students who need the educators who sit up here uh to make that difference for for their educational experience having a graduate from MLAN. Um, and I know that our our
faculty and our staff at each one of these schools go to extraordinary lengths to make connections with kids and to ensure that each of those kids can can succeed. You know, the past four or five months have been spicy. We we all own that. We know that. Um, we learned a lot from that work. And I go
back to kind of the why. And the why is because everyone involved in our AEC's cares deeply about the success of our kids in those schools. And so I do believe that this team has done some incredible work and our educators have done some incredible work around building
to make sure that folks voices are in the room. And this team up here has constantly asked the question, are we doing what we said we would do? are we making sure that everybody has a voice? And so I'm really proud to share with you sort of the progression of the work that's been done over the last four
months. I'll ground back to and I don't know where the clicker is. I'll ground back to AEC and let's start with what an alternative education campus is. It's a non-traditional school. Um the Colorado Department of Education gives us guidelines and and descriptors of what
that is. um they have a specialized mission, a non-traditional method of instruction. 90% of the students that they serve are meeting one or more identified high-risisk factors. Those are typically um students who are chronically truent, students who may
have been part of domestic violence in their lifetime, students who may be pregnant or parenting teens. There are about 15 different factors that the state of Colorado identifies um that really recognizes the risk factors in their life and how it influences their
educational experience. Uh 100% of IEP direct placement schools are also considered AEC's or schools with no primary enrollment. Um together Jeffco's AEC's provide an important route to ensuring all of our students graduate with the knowledge and skills they need for post-secary.
And you might recognize this slide. came from a presentation that was done in 2023 um that Wendy was able to share with the board of education at that time. So, I'm going to hand it over to Wendy to talk about the history and context because she's been a part of this work for a number of years in Jeffco and has
worked really closely building relationships with all of these schools in the work that they do on behalf of our kids. Thank you, Dr. Kim. So, the work began with a board resolution in May of 2023. Um, and at that time we we started that initial landscape analysis that was
presented to the board in 2023 and that was followed by a year-long collaboration with Colorado Education Initiative. Um, during that time we really dug into the schools individually. We did some school walks. We met with the principles. We engaged in various surveys with staff, talked
with some student panels and things of that nature. Um, CI was able to provide us some feedback based off of those that visit. um the various visits and the various engagements. Um as we walked through that, we noticed that we had
really strong partnerships in the strength of our AEC educators. They are so passionate. We found how committed and how knowledgeable they are about their students every day that are in their classroom and how they're able to navigate certain waters to make sure that it's a safe place and a thriving
place for them to explore options for career, military, or college opportunities. So we were really pleased with some of those findings that we did find um or that we we worked with CI to partner with. We also came across the um some struggles that we were facing as a
system. Um those school those struggles were within our systems of enrollment and how we got students to the schools. Um we were able to engage with that and also work with the schools to find various ways to improve those efforts. And we are really proud of some of the work that has already been done in that
that realm. But we we have a lot more work to do and we need to include our educators as we are doing that work and that's what we're excited to do forward. Thank you. Appreciate that. So as we as we continue through that um in December of 2024, the central leaders and
principles used some insights from that work to develop and draft plans from the feedback from the schoolbased staffs. Um, principles received that feedback from their staff and the district's negotiating team received feedback from JCA that it didn't feel good. We didn't include them enough in that authentic
feedback in the creation of the plan. And so, we immediately stopped what we were doing to stop and listen in those listening tours and hear from the staff themselves what they needed um to feel like it was a authentic. and we created this committee alongside of them and
theou to make sure that all voices were heard and considered and were meaningful in this process. And now I am going to hand it back to Dr. Kim. So as a part of the process um JCA advocated for anou and we agreed we felt
like that was a that was a great step forward so that we all thought about the work how we needed to do it together and what that could look like. Um it started out at negotiations as an interest and advocacy by the staff and it was worked on by staff on um our HR team and the
negotiations team as well as JCA staff. And I have to say a huge thank you to both Jennifer Kimson and Christine Wiggins because they work together even beyond some of the negotiation sessions to really think about and come back and forth and get feedback from our staff and feedback from our teams to make sure
we got it right. really thinking about how do we do this in a way that feels collaborative that the staff feels like they have some ownership in that and how do we set it up for success from the get-go. So what we agreed upon and what we've done thus far um each school has
representation on the committee that includes three licensed educators, two classified staff and an administrator. There is a co-f facilitator from the folks who um have expressed interest in being a part of the the over um overarching committee. Staff interest
was solicitated and um was solicited, excuse me. And basically if they had more than those three and those two and that one then they held an election. If it was only that many then the ALT went through the process and said okay you guys are going to are going to represent
us. Here's the scope of the work. Um, but I think we had elections in three, Justin, where are you? Three or four? Three. Um, of our schools because we had such interest in folks wanting to be part of this work.
So, what we agreed upon, we wanted to really be clear about what is the work we're going to all do together. And the committee is going to look at data from all of our schools, study current AEC programming, really look at what are we doing, what are we doing well, what do we know is succeeding, what's the data
telling us, where do we know we have gaps, where are we struggling with some of our programming. Um, we often call it mission creep in in the space and talk about how, you know, with the commitment and with the hard work of our staff throughout the year, we have students
that come to us and they might fit a program that we have, but then again, they might not. And schools do not turn kids away. And so, they try to find ways to serve those students needs. And as time goes on, we tend to find bigger and
bigger ways. And over time then we're trying to serve a lot of different purposes and we have to come back and ground to what is best practice. Let's look at the research on effective strategies and let's make sure that we're serving all of our students well and we're serving them in the most efficient way possible in our district.
And so we're going to really look at the research, look at grounding in what are our programs designed to do? Are we doing what we said we were going to do? And where are the needs that we have in the district that we maybe don't have programming for? And how do we address those things? and then explore models that support improving student outcomes
and then gather feedback from our stakeholders. That's our students, that's our parents, that's our staff. Really looking at um if you're a member of this committee, a sort of job description was put together to say we need you to commit to going back and
getting feedback from all the stakeholders in your school so that when we get together and do this work, we have those voices in the work. And so that's one of the critical pieces that will come as a part of this and then engage in collaborative planning so that we can look at the entire AEC landscape
and make sure we're serving all of our student needs and all of our geographic needs as well. Because one of the things we recognized in the presentation that you all received in 2023 was that we definitely have a centralized corridor of where our AEC's exist and capacity.
And so as we look at all of our students throughout our district, are we serving everyone we need to be serving and are we giving them access if they need it and providing opportunities for them to get there? So that's all part of this work. Finally, our decision-making process in
that spirit of collaboration, we both sides of of the discussion around how do we put this together agreed that we will make consensus decisions about school programming taking into consideration applicable constraints, board policy, funding, state regulations, all the
requirements, relevant laws. and we said if if we can't get to consensus, we're going to get together and figure out what does twothirds agreement look like from this committee so that we're confident that the group believes that this is the right work going forward. Thank you, Dr. Kim. Uh so thinking about
our meeting cadence and timeline, uh a kickoff meeting will launch the committee's work on August the 25th. Uh so that's next week. Um, and the group will meet for two hours bi-weekly uh bi-weekly through Thanksgiving. And the goal uh is for the group to confirm
the programming and specific uh student focus at each of our involved schools by December so that families have information prior uh to enroll Jeffco uh time frame. I think what is the most important for us is the collaboration is
authentic and that is really coming from from the group. Um if we find that the group needs more time uh to achieve these goals, the theou leaves room um for us to agree to continue the work into the spring. Um if it becomes clear that adjustment uh need is needed a
timeline of whatever is necessary, uh we will re-examine and we will stay the course to do what is right for our students and for our staff. I want to talk a little bit about um our principal retreat and uh I use the word retreat. It's just a fancy word for a
long strategic planning meeting. So, um but on June, um this summer, we were able to uh meet with our principal and central leaders together for a strategic planning meeting that was really focused on ensuring consistency uh coherence and
belonging in the implementation of theou um and how we're going to utilize that across all of our schools. Um the time allowed all of our leaders to uh deepen relationships to reflect on uh the challenges and the opportunities as well as to commit to working collectively um
so that our students and families um and staff experience a sense of stability uh experience a sense of clarity and that we have a shared purpose for the work that we are doing together. I think next we have uh we have a couple of our principles here. Um and we really
want you to hear from our principles and hear their voice um into how how this retreat went. Um so we have uh uh principal Tamson Stokes and we have uh principal John uh how do you say your last name? John.
Vernon Zone. I always mess that up. So I'm going to turn over to Tamson and then I'm let let John speak. All right. Sounds good. Thank you. Um, hello. My name is Tamson Stokes. I am the proud principal of Brady High School. I'm also a Jeffco graduate and I've spent the past 21 years as a Jeffco
educator. I spent the first 18 years at Golden High School as a teacher, dean, and administrator. Then I was a principal at Moore Middle School the year the last year that it remained open. And this is my second year at Brady. So, when I was interviewing for
my position as a principal at Brady High School, I was asked by Tracy Dorland, out of all the schools in Jefferson County, why Brady High School? And my answer that day is the exact same reason that I'm well sitting in front of you now. I want to be a school leader where I can lead a school that supports 200
plus atrisisk students and also be of service to the roughly 2,00 24,500 high school students in 17 schools throughout the district. Uh, I believe the AEC's are here to serve the entire district and in order for our district
to be as healthy as it can be, it needs all parts of the body to perform at its highest level. Comprehensive neighborhood high schools are able to serve a high percentage of our Jeffco high schoolers in ways that most can have a full student experience. However, there's some students that that style of
programming just doesn't work for them. and we as a district need some sort of healthy network of AEC's that offer various programs so that all students can have this high school experience. Uh this work that we're embarking on is not negotiable in my mind. There are ways
that we as an AEC network can improve our systems and our programs. In order for us to have a well functioning Brady High School, strong AEC network, and a thriving district, we have no other choice but to step into this work. Although this is my 21st year in the
district, this is the first time I've witnessed an initiative where six schools must collaborate and are reliant on each other to build strong programming for their own schools. Not often do you have a trust fall exercise where six teams must all fall at the
same time and believe that others will catch them. We as an AEC committee uh need to be mindful, wise, patient, and selfless as we make recommendations for AEC programming. And above all else, we must put their stu our students and their
needs first. We know we have our work cut out for ourselves, but I do genuinely believe at the end of this time, we'll have strong programming that supports all of our students in Jefferson County. Thank you. Hello, John Bern and Zonyie Mlan again. Um, thanks for that last site because it
reminded me that June 15th, my birthday, I got to spend with all of you. So, thanks for making that special. And then of course that special picture. I've been in uh alternative education schools for a long time. Um, Aaron, it's been to a few of our graduations. My former
school uh AEC's at Promise Youth. It's it's kind of been my life's work for the last 20 years. Um, and I don't think I need to explain to you why that's important, right? These are the students that probably need the most support or some of the most support of any students
in the district. And I remember uh when Jeff Co asked me about going to MLAN and I had the opportunity to sit towards the last interviews with Wendy and Tracy and um Todd and Wendy started talking about the AC landscape and I I really didn't
know uh in the charter world that that was going. I I knew I had been interviewed or surveyed by u a consultant a couple times about it, but that was really what interested me. It's like yes about time we are looking at
what are we doing as a whole district to serve these students because lately and you know I was in a charter so it's a little bit different right we're always counting our students we're competing for students etc but the pool of students just kept getting smaller and
smaller and I started to think okay is what we're doing here at this school much different than what Brady's doing or what MLAN's doing. And if it isn't, does it make sense to have this going on in three different schools? And I wasn't
a part of the discussions yet because I was, you know, a little bit of an outsider. Um, so that that's really what excited me about going to MLAN. One of the big things um was that here's an opportunity to think about what are the supports of students across the entire
district. Are we providing those supports for students? Then are we providing them equitably? And then are we allocating resources? That makes sense, right? Because if we have a bunch of little different programs going on in different
places, is it better to allocate more resources to one place to to to create more of a a body of expertise there with one program or another? Um, or does it make sense because of maybe transportation issues or other things that we need to have these separate
programs in different places? So, I think it's a great idea. I think it's long overdue um that this work's being done and be honest with you, I'm kind of looking forward to it. So, thanks for having me and all of us tonight.
All right, this is this is me. Uh again, Mike Freeman, thank you uh for what you do. First of all, uh I want to just help you understand what it's going to look like in terms of the committee work and how important collaboration is to that work. So, at our August 25th kickoff meeting, we're going to start by laying
the foundation of our work together by grounding in our common why. uh you're hearing some of that why already from people at the table and how much the work of our AEC's and partner schools like JRLP which is not an AEC but is an option school uh but that partners with
our AEC's and our comprehensive schools how much that work matters and so we know these schools do some incredible work in providing essential pathways for students who may not thrive in a traditional pathway but who the AEC's and in schools like JRLP provide
just an essential um path to to be able to successfully graduate and enter the workforce or the military. Uh we're going to make sure uh we cover our shared responsibility of how do we make sure that that happens and that we have that successful route to graduation for
all of our students. uh we're going to use theou as our gu our guard rail and as our guide really grounding our work in the deliverables that thatou outlines so that we can remain clear uh transparent and accountable to each other and to you as the board uh to
support strong collaboration. You're going to see that um we're going to really establish group norms for those of you who are familiar with adaptive schools. We're going to put those protocols on the table and other protocols so that the facilitators can really bring uh and and co-f facilitators can really bring their best
uh facilitation to the table. Uh we're going to be sharing that facilitation as you've heard as well as communication responsibilities. We'll be attending to future agendas together. That'll be the last thing that we do before we leave is having our co-f facilitators with input
from their schools really help craft that uh next agenda as well as crafting uh collectively agreed upon communications. Those of you familiar with negotiations and how we do that. We collaboratively write that and we kind of make sure that that's that's what
we're all saying and it's clear and and agreed upon before we send it out. And then again making sure that our agenda uh looks at the work ahead and reflects both our shared commitments uh that are found within theou and the emerging
needs as the committee continues to develop and progress through the work. So great example from today as we were planning Monday's meeting was the idea of research and the data that you heard Dr. Kim talk about and we talked about
well we you know as as we prepare for this first meeting we should probably make sure we ground some people in in the national research and then again Dr. Kim has challenged us to think about where is an opportunity uh to make sure that we're collaborating at every turn.
So we said you know what let's have everybody think about what research can everyone bring and put on the table so that we have our very best thinking and then we can make an appendex of that research right so that everyone's ideas and and the research that they bring can
be honored and and thoughtfully discussed. So again, collaboration, collaboration, collaboration. With that, it's my honor to turn it over to school-based uh committee members who will share their perspective on why the work matters to them from the school lens. I'm going to
let them introduce themselves and respond to the two questions. What compelled you to be part of the AEC uh committee, and what do you hope to accomplish through this work? And Kelly, am I starting with you? Sure. Yep. I'm not sure if that's on, but I don't
need the feedback. Um, good afternoon members of the board of education and the AEC landscape committee. My name is Kelly Hyatt and I serve as a counselor at Jeffco Virtual Academy. I'm here not today not just as a counselor but as a representative
voice of our entire JVA staff with whom I've collaborated to ensure our collective perspective is shared um for the two prompts what compelled you to be a part of the AEC committee um it's a
deep personal investment in our alternative education students I believe in the value of their unique paths and I am passionate about being a part of the team that supports them, ensuring they have a variety of options to graduate
and succeed. At JVA, we're incredibly proud to serve a diverse student population, meeting them precisely where they are. Our platform and supports allow us to provide a highquality education to students in unique situations. From athletes and aspiring
filmmakers to those with significant family responsibilities or health challenges, we are a free public option that allows students to pursue their dreams while still receiving an exceptional high school education. For many of our students, we are a
lifeline. We serve those who are working full-time to support their families, students who are caring for siblings or those who need a safe, bully-free environment due to mental health or physical health concerns. We are a crucial resource for students who cannot
attend their Jeffco school due to legal or behavioral issues, allowing them to continue their education while keeping other campuses safe. We have always rejected a one-sizefits-all approach. Instead, we work with each student
individually to personalize their educational experience and provide the specific support they need. This is possible because our dedicated and stable staff truly gets to know each other and the students story. The
relationships we build are not superficial. We delve into why each student is with us and how we can help them achieve their dreams. This level of indiv individualized support is what truly sets us apart. Over the last 17
years, the district has constantly look to JVA to solve problems and be innovative. We are a source of leadership and a team that is not afraid to proactively problem solve and embrace new ideas. We continuously evolve based on needs of our students and the needs
of the district. We were thinking about our policies on artificial intelligence long before it became a major topic and our teachers are using cutting edge technology to create a truly modern educational experience.
We are proud to report that JVA's 7-year completion rate reached 78% for the 2425 school year, which is seven percentage points higher than it was a year ago. We are rated as one of the top 10 performing AEC's and now have a green
report card from the state. When our students graduate, they are truly ready for modern workforce and collegiate environment. They have developed essential durable skills such as time management, self-directed learning, and self- advocacy in a way that few stu few
other students have because of our largely asynchronous structure. Ultimately, my motivation comes from knowing that we pick up all the outliers that students that have not found success in traditional programs and show
them their value helping them get to the next level, whatever that means for them. There is a misconception about students in AEC's, but I see their incredible strength and resilience every day, and I want others to better understand what our students are truly
capable of. and and what do I hope to accomplish? My primary goal is to help us better understand the bigger picture for our abilities. Each of our alternative education campuses offers unique
strengths and supports. My hope is that we can streamline our efforts so that each school has a clear niche. This collaboration would allow us to boost our programs within Jeffco rather than referring students to outside options. It's not about competing with the other
AEC's. It's about working together to provide the best holistic support for our students. And I believe that if we can create a system where students can transfer across schools more seamlessly based on their specific needs, for example, a student transferring to MLAN
for a GED program, we can ensure that they are successful as possible. By better defining our roles and working in partnership, we can collectively wrap the right supports around every student who needs us. Thanks for listening.
I am the social specialist at Connections Learning Center and I would like to say that the work that we do in the AEC's, it's not just professional for me, it's personal. I have um an a senior this year ready to graduate from
an AEC. So I firmly believe in what we do as as a group and our AEC's. Professionally I have been at Connections Learning Center. I just started my 18th school year there. Um so I have watched the program change and
evolve and grow in so many different ways. And there were a few years ago Wendy and I were having a conversation where she had talked a little bit about about what a what a system could look like through the AEC's. And I was really
excited by that. Took a while to, you know, put all those things in place, but I told her as soon as that happens, I'm there. I believe in our students. I believe in our systems. I believe in our district. And I want to make sure that we are meeting the needs of every
student. We serve the most vulnerable kids in our school district. They need a place where they know that someone cares about them and they are getting what they need. Just like Kelly said, we serve them all, right? And they come they come from everywhere. And we're unique at connections. We're a middle
school. So really looking at building that system for our students where they can go from middle school and continue to experience the success in an AEC into a high school seamlessly would be amazing for the students that choose
that. We like to keep their options open. I really hope that this committee and our work together does accomplish all of those goals that everyone has laid out there because I like I said, I do believe that this system is really
important for our students. Um, and and for them growing and becoming contributing members of society, we want we want to set them up to be successful and I think that the power of us together can really do that.
Thank you, Erin. To wrap us up, Mary, what the last piece I'd like to do is just thank other members who have been a part of this work throughout the summer that have helped us get ready to launch this into the fall. And so, thank you to Dawn, thank you to Kayla, thank you to Andrew, and thank you to Renee, all
leaders within the AEC's as well that will also be huge parts of this work. So, I want to thank them for being a part of this. And as an illustration of what Mike pointed out to you, um, we sent out this deck to all staff of all of their schools days before this
meeting to make sure they knew exactly what we would be presenting and invited them to come. And we're going to continue to do that so that we can continue to share with folks what's going on, opportunities for folks to give us feedback, and to make sure that we're honoring what we said we would do. So, with that, I'll turn it back over to
you guys for questions. Thank you very much. This is very helpful. Um, schoolboard members, do you have questions or comments for the presenters? Okay, Dr. Thanks for being here. Um, so last April
on the 21st, there was a round table with AEC um, primarily educators. I'm and Dr. Reid and I both attended that. Um, and I wanted to ask if any of the presenters from that round table have
have opted into working with this committee. Actually, I think if not everyone, almost everyone that was sitting at that table are a part of the steering committee. That's great news. Thank you. Um, I also
am noticing from theou language that Sebeski Academy is not listed. Um, can you help me understand why? When we when we look at the students at Sebeski serves, it isn't part of the network that these guys are going to do
interconnectedly. When we think about how the delivery model um, 6 through 12 is is these guys all are very connected in terms of their different programming. Sebeski has needs and we will get there, but capacity-wise, we're going to start here.
All right. Um, I just want to make sure the list that I had on theou that I was acknowledging those folks who I think were at the table but are not included in theou. So, that's the reasoning for that question. Can I add to that? I assume we've
communicated with Sebeski about that and they're they're in the loop and understandable. Thank you. Great. Um, I went back and was reooking at the slides and it it does sound like all of the schools listed on the MOU are going to be res represented on the
committee. How what is the what is the size then of that committee projected to be? We've got about between 35 and 40 people. When you think about our um school leadership folks, our principles, um our teachers, um our um support
staff, our ISPs, um and I think leadership, there's there's about 35 to 40 people that will be participating. And the way we we've looked at it, and we've kind of talked about it, I'm going to nerd out as a math nerd for just a moment. Um, there's this sort of geodeic
toy that you play with in geometry class that sort of pulls all the way out and then comes all the way back in and gets really tight. And the way we see it is there will be opportunities for each of the different schools subgroup to work on their own data, sort of building
their profile, looking at their student needs and all those things. and then come back together and really look at it together as an entire landscape and work on back and forth, back and forth so that folks can be productive when it makes sense for them to do some things that that they do together as a as a team, but we bring everybody together
and we're going to do it all together on the same meeting days just spread out into groups and coming back together. That way we stay one team but we also give uh everybody opportunities to work in smaller groups as it's appropriate for folks to do. That that kind of anticipated my next
question which was how do you take it back to touch point to individual schools because they all have slightly different you know services and and needs. Um so I appreciate that um that scale of moving and and back out again. Um has there for for my own context I
was not here in 2023 May of 2023 when the initial resolution from this from that board was passed. Um have there been mechanisms for the AEC's to have this level of conversation about their
programming in the past or is that are we addressing that with this work in the committee that we're building? we will absolutely be addressing it with this committee um in a very authentic way and I think it will be um really valuable for each of the staff members
to be involved in that and you know like I think what I'm the most grateful for is we're not just getting um we're getting the teacher voice in there but we're also getting the ESP voice in there um we have educators from the administration the ESPs to the the teachers that are just doing phenomenal
work across the in their across their various schools and we're going to bring that together we're going to be able to share share that information as one. Um, historically, I don't think it was done as well and that's something that that's one of the reasons we're here now doing that as a committee and so we're grateful for that.
Yeah, I am too. Um, it sounds like there's there was a need to have this conversation. Um, and I'm grateful that the district has provided some structure and some scaling for that to occur. Um, I want to just check my list here. Um, oh yeah, my last question is going to
be, um, where do committee dissenting opinions get received or captured? I noticed that the, you know, vote for decision-m is a twothirds um, number. And so I'm just curious what happens with dissenting opinions and
what is the plan for maintaining you know conversation and relationship as as you run into obstacles. you know, the principles and school leadership team. We we talked a lot about that in the the principal meeting that that Drew talked about and really looking at how do we make sure all of
those voices are at the table. And we've actually asked part of the professional learning team to help be facilitators for us to be a part of that so that we can manage those conversations so that we can establish norms and and talk about when we have differing opin opinions, how do we work through some of
those because we we recognize that's probably going to happen throughout this process and that's okay. I mean, if we're going to stay authentic and we're going to collaborate, that's going to happen. I want again just gratitude for stepping into this work. I think it's incredibly important and very needed and I'm very
um encouraged that we're doing this so that we can support our learners who have not been um traditionally successful in sort of our traditional high schools. That population is so so important. And everything that gets offered from our AECs is a security net. And I'm grateful for it. And I also want
a security net to not have holes where we're still having folks fall through. Um so thank you for engaging in the conversation. It'll be hard work but really necessary. Thanks. I want to thank you so much too. This I mean you've bitten off a lot um and with
so many people to um coordinate through it and yet you know all of those voices are super important. And so, you know, I'm looking at at the months ahead for you and meeting every two weeks and and taking on, I think, probably some
constructive conflict and and all of those pieces. Um, and some of you know and some of you may not know that this is something that is really dear to me because I taught ACE for 20 years. So, um, so it does mean a lot. Um, I I just
wanted to lift up and say that I read and very much appreciated the extensive notes from the listening tour because I know that a lot of this started off with a very deep sense of mistrust and a very
um a a very deep sense that ultimately voices were not going to be heard. People were not actually going to be allowed to talk. that authenticity was not going to happen. And so, um, being able to see
the unvarnished notes and the fact that people were able to express things that I think that they really needed to express before they could begin to um to take that leap of faith. And and that's what this is going to be. So, I just
wanted people to know that I did read all of those notes and that I appreciated the cander and the honesty that was reflected in that. I appreciated the um the leaders who understood that they needed to not gloss
it over and and to say, "Yep, this is where we're starting and and we're going to build from here." So, I'm very I'm excited to see what comes of it. I having, you know, being the the
board representative for the AEC's and having been to those campuses many times over the course of my years on the board. Um, I I just have complete faith that we have the people who can do the job. So, I'm very excited. Thank you
very much. Um, I also want to echo my appreciation. I know this is has been how do you say it? It's been a spicy I like that. We've had lots of spice. Um and so I truly appreciate the work that each and every one of you are doing and taking the time
out of the first week of school to come share with us. Um Kelly and Aaron, I think you explained this a bit, but I want to just make sure I understand. So the the goal is to look at our needs across the schools and align them all.
So there are maybe specialties. so that we're not overlapping but so it's more I like the system I think is what you said um how do we ensure that system stays relevant to the needs of our kids as we progress it is a great question and you know
honestly the 38 to 40 voices that look at data and look at um what are we doing well how do we know that the programming is meeting needs that means you have to listen to the stakeholders and find out. I mean, our students are not quiet. They
will tell us if we ask them. I mean, truly, they will tell us if we ask them and if they believe that we're going to authentically listen to their voices. And I think that's part of it. Our families, um, our students, and frankly, our staff in terms of are we setting them up for success? And so, if we're
going to do this, we got to do it right. And that means that everybody needs to come together and we have to keep asking the question, do we have it right? How do we know? What is the data telling us? what are the students telling us? What are the families telling us? And um as we look at are we meeting all the needs,
it has to be dynamic. You know, when we talk about mission creep, we talk about every about every five to eight years that happens. And you kind of got to go back and ground to what it, you know, what does the research say, what are the best practices, and how can we be sure that we're doing absolutely the best
work for all of our kids. And that's just a normal cycle of improvement that has to happen as a part of this. This is just the starting point. So, do you foresee that the the the leadership group, maybe the the principles and and with y'all's leadership, it's a you're going to look at this every couple
years? I mean, is there and maybe this is cart before the horse. We got to get to a solution first, but do you anticipate that there there will be a regular cadence of looking at that data? Is it something that we're going to consider on an annual basis as we're getting that? Go ahead. No, that's a good question. And we do
look at it on an annual basis. that's built into monitoring reports. And so I think that's um an important uh for us to continue to do as we report out to the board and our public. I would also say I would hope that this committee if it's done right um as Kim
was describing um not only goes back into their schools to do the work once we know what the work is going to look like, but then comes back together on a regular cadence to check in how's it going? look at the data together, make decisions together. I mean, hopefully
this um can be a structure where we continue to collaborate along the way and check in on how it's going even after we've made decisions about um some of the programming um that we want to have happen and maybe make changes around. One of the things we recognize is that
in education, I think far too often we forget to ask the question um did we get it right and how do we know? And I think part of the work in this space, we started out asking when we when we got the feedback, we asked the question, did we get it right? Um, you know, as we do
this, we have to ask the question of everyone on the committee. Are we getting this right? How do we know? And I think part of the cycle has to be us continually asking, did we get it right? How do we know? Is it serving all the students that we need to? And that's that's a typical cycle of improvement
that you have to do. But um by building all of the communication channels that we're being really intentional about it as a part of this work, like Tracy said, I hope that that means we can keep going back to ensuring that folks feel confident that there's voice still in the process of this work over years of
time. Awesome. That's great. I I app Oh, go please. I also um just want to add that my hope with the end results of this committee is that all the AEC's are partners in
what we're doing to support students. So in that partnership, I really see us continuing to evolve and it's not going to I mean we definitely need the checks coming back and re-evaluating every couple years. But I think as AEC's we'll
have a t um a tighter partnership and we'll be able to have students um surrounded and find out what's best for them because we're all going to be a different type of support. So I guess teamwork and I look at the AEC's as we
almost become our own school individual schools but yeah so that you know we're we're doing the right work for those kids that need it. Awesome. And I assume once you all have the programming sorted out then we'll start to talk about resources and
structure and all the other spicy things that come from that. Okay. Awesome. Um, I know we'll be updated, but we look forward to hearing those updates. I think that's that's really helpful for us to understand the progress y'all are making. Um, I had some technical issues accessing
some of the things, but I've got folks working on it, so I did not read all the things, but I am excited to do so. And I I just want to end by lifting up JVA. Um the there's also a way that you reach other students and that's when the schools the neighborhood schools that our kids are at don't necessarily offer
something. JVA steps in and I actually have a kiddo who is taking some accelerated math through JVA this year for our first experience. So I really appreciate that effort and that work um because it's allowed him to do something that he couldn't do at his neighborhood school. So um for those listening I
assume people still listen to us. Um, you know, JVA has a broader reach than just um and they do a tremendous amount for kids who really need, but there's also opportunities for for kiddos who just need something that their neighborhood school doesn't offer. So,
um, thank you so much. We really appreciate it. I know this has been something that's going to take a lot of effort. Um, but I think all of us believe that y'all are doing the good work. So, thank you, Dr. Varta. Thank you. Um I don't I won't repeat
everything everyone said, but um one thing that I wondered if you could just kind of update us on when we had all the public comment when all the schools came and some of the things they said that were proposed was like uh new staffing and moving people and new programs. What
is broken? Like what is it we're trying to fix through this work? Um why did this start? I don't know. I'm sorry if I've missed the that today, but yeah, I can speak to that. Absolutely. Um, so and it it was relational a little bit to
your your comment as well. Um, you know, when we started digging into this, we were just coming out of COVID and when the pandemic was here, um, what we saw is that all of our students were almost in an alternative setting, right, in a weird way. And when we came back to
school and were in person, we saw migration leave some of our AEC schools going back to traditional settings. And so we did see some some changes and when we saw those changes we started looking at data having conversations what's going on and we heard loud and clear
from our high school principles and our middle school principles at that time that they had a hard time getting kids into our AEC's. So they were just keeping up and so you know that is one of the things that we wanted to um problem solve. And we also saw some data that our district was losing students to
other districts um and other online providers across the the state. And so we know in Jeffco we can do it better and we wanted to hold on to those kids and we wanted to keep them here with us so that we we could get them across that finish line of whatever it meant for them. And so that is the why we really
started digging into it. And some of the other data pieces that we looked at was that geographic piece um that all of our AECs are on that central corridor. We had some transportation issues that were also a result of some of that pandemic. And so we were problem solving and it
was you know it came pretty clear that um data was also a struggle. One of the things we really want to solve and problem solve is how do we get clean data. We have a lot of students coming from a lot of places and we want to make sure that that data is something that is pure and we are really using accurate
data and that is what we heard from our educators as well when we did the listening tour. they want to be involved and have the voice in what that data will look like and what it is because they know what they're doing in their buildings really well and how to assess that. Um, and sometimes those big district measures or state measures
might not hit those unique pieces at each of the schools. We want to make sure that we're doing that as well. Did did that answer your question? Um, will this conversation about what needs to be fixed be part of the process? like are you starting as a collaborative
definition of what the problem is? I think where we're starting is really identifying what is current state, who offers what programming to what students, what's your student profile, who are you designed to serve, where do we have overlap? There are some places where we have duplicative programming
and there's some places where we have gaps and we don't have programming and we know kids need it. And so by creating the landscape first and really looking at who does what and what's our data telling us that sort of gives us that that broad sort of overview and then figure out okay if we're going to do
this work well and make sure that we identify all of the the needs of atrisisk students in Jeffco and and to to Wendy's point don't force families to make decisions to leave us because we feel like we can do this and we can do it well. Then how do we make sure that
each of our schools has that unique niche that Kelly talked about does it well and um that we're meeting as many needs as possible across all of our different um programming. We've got lots of alternative education programming. The question is are we serving all the needs that exist because what often
happens come spring is that we're pretty full in these spaces and so then the question becomes what's our capacity and and what's the demand and what's the need. So all of that is part of this is this committee getting together and working on that and figuring out who does what best, who should serve in what
programming. Um where do we need duplicative programming? Is it geographic? Is it you know between between pro and all of that there's never been a fully comprehensive look at that from what Wendy and I can see in at least in the last 10 years. And so I'm excited about this group getting in and
digging into that work and figuring it out. just a comment and then one more question. Um, I've I've mentioned this a lot, but as a researcher and professionally, I've been evaluating collaborative processes for 20 years. And the one question that has always
been the most telling of the authenticity of a process is when you ask the people involved, were the decisions made in advanced and just confirmed by the process. And I think when we heard public comment, that's what I heard that they were saying, well, the decisions were made in
advanced and just confirmed by a process. And so that's I would just advise like that's a thing that um we look for a lot when we're looking at collaborative processes to to make sure folks don't feel like that's the case. Um but my last thing and it's just a little bit of like a point of order when
you said um it will be consensus and I think you mean everyone a cons 100% consensus or well and then you said and if it can't be consensus it would be twothirds. I've just as part of these processes a lot that's a huge
difference. So like if there's I was trying to calculate at least 36 people sounds like six people from each whatever that's a lot. What's the difference between 36 people agreeing on something and 24? And at what point are you triggering twothirds when two people
don't have consensus and suddenly then it's okay because 28 do or 30 do or what 34 do or you know is it when you get closer to 24 are you going to pass the thing? And I'm I just know because there's been so much tension in this
process. If I were in the room and and you said consensus and then we passed something with 24 votes, I don't know. I would speak up about that. So, you might just clarify and just pick twothirds if that's going to be what needs to happen. our professional learning team. Um that
was one of the questions that they asked all of us when we got together and started to plan the first meeting was okay how do we we need a process that the whole group goes through to define so that we all agree what does it look like and and make sure that the whole
group has common understanding of how will we make decisions as and and honor thatou so that's got to be built into the first meeting. So you're you're you're bit spot on. Oh, um I want to add my thanks to you. Um my
work with CASA um means that I'm working with kids from traumatic uh situations and if we didn't have AEC's um they wouldn't go to school. They just wouldn't. So, thank you for the work that you're doing. I'm so proud that Jeffco has quite a variety of things. And just one thing to add to the
questions and comments already. I know from my um uh visit uh to JVA and also from the presentation we got in 2023 that the October count that you get at your schools is way different than the number of kids that you end up um uh you
know working with. So that's one of the concerns I have is how do we adequately fund all of the different sites knowing that you know you're starting from a number that's not at all what you're going to end up with. every place I've ever been, um, AEC's
have to be calculated differently than what would be your typical neighborhood SBB because it doesn't work that way to your point. So anyway, thank you so much. I'm very excited. This seems like a real robust study and I can't wait to keep seeing what you're doing. So, thank
you. Okay, for our next study agenda item, um we will receive an update on district policy related to library materials. SB 2563 required school districts adopt a policy that includes, among other things,
standards for the acquisition and reconsideration of library materials. Considerations for both must be consistent with the first amendment of the US Constitution and the Colorado Constitution. Um, they must not discriminate against authors or potential readers and must protect
against obscenity. Additionally, school staff complying with this policy is protected from retaliation and the resource is to remain available during the reconsideration process. The policy must be available to the public. Tonight, the board will receive an update presented by Renee Nicthotis,
chief academic officer, and Julie Tolson, chief legal counsel on the district's efforts to comply with SB2563. We will have 35 minutes for this presentation. And before I turn it over to our presenters, Superintendent Doran is not here.
Okay, sorry about that. Um, so we will go ahead, Miss Nicotus and U. Miss Tullson. Um, please get started. Hi. Um, good evening, President Parker, members of the board. My name is Renee Natis. I work as the chief academic officer here in Jeffco. Uh, happy to be
here with you tonight. I also, um, want to hand it over. We have an additional colleague here who will introduce herself. I'm Jill Weaver. Um, I am a TOSA for library services here at um, the Ed Center. Prior to this, I worked as a DTL
um, in Jeffco. I spent my first year as a split in a split role with Serest Elementary and Lawrence and then I was lucky to stay seven years at Lawrence Elementary as our DTL before stepping into this role. So I'm here to um as a voice for our DTLs.
Okay. All right. Nice to start. Y sign who's in charge here. So, um, one of the things we want to talk to all about, you're familiar with some legislation and this board has supported it in fact from last session regarding
library books. You know, these are very divisive and challenging times publicly and the wars of ideology and other things are manifesting in a lot of places. In some districts, it's been around challenges to or removal of and
selection of library materials. I will say that we've been blessed not to have as much of that turmoil here in Jeffco and I think a real credit to our both our DTLs and our building leaders relationships with families and the the process out of um our chief academic
officers department. But um the simple fact is the legislation was necessitated by lots of stories from elsewhere. And one of the things that it does that I think is going to be really helpful, first of all, it talks about what standards are you going to have for selection and what put those in a policy
so that there's a shared transparent place for agreement. But the biggest shift in a lot of places was to say we want every district to have a formal written policy that sets forth they use the phrase reconsideration. And I always think of it as a challenge because that's the terminology we've
historically heard challenge to library materials say you've got to have a process. Um one of the things I like about the constraints they put around that process is they specified things like um the challenges can come only from families or students enrolled in
the district. So we're not all dealing with sort of a national floodgate of what's gotten hot on social media. Um, it talks about you don't have to review or reprocess a challenge or reconsideration for a a particular resource uh more often than once every
two years. And if you want, you can set a longer time for that. So you don't just get, well, this parent challenged and lost, so we're now going to be doing it again and we're going to be doing it again. So um and obviously protecting staff from the the choices they've made either in selecting the resource or in
participating in a review of the resource. So a lot in the legislation's very helpful I think to systematizing this work. Um one of the challenges we have had is the legislation was effective in May. Um it
had a uh safety clause so and wanted a policy by September 1st. As you can imagine, many of our most important stakeholders in this kind of work are off contract for a significant chunk of that time. So, we are certainly honoring the intent of the legislation by getting
some proposed language out, socialized stakeholder feedback, and starting that process, including covering it with you. Um, but we're going to be running up right against it in terms of that timeline because we really didn't want to just unilaterally slap something up to meet obligations of legislation. This
is near and dear to the hearts of our DTLs um and of our families. So what we've done is develop some proposals and again these are truly proposals. Right now we'll be soliciting your input that of stakeholders of all kinds um to see
if we're sort of envisioning what folks think is going to work um both substantively and even procedurally. So, the the key things we're looking at again in the legislation is, you know, the policy is going to be available to the public. Um who who can file a
challenge, when can it be reconsidered? And you'll see in our draft, which we'll cover later, we're we proposed um a five-year not to reconsider window, but somebody may say that's too long. I mean, those all these pieces are out for feedback. um when we make a
determination both the determination decision and the basis for it is to be publicly available under kora and the resource remains on the shelf while the process is ongoing. So th those are the things that the statute required that have gotten us to this
place where we have some uh drafts that are going to be available to you in our community. So, um, we have had great processes in place, uh, for a really long time. So, these updates and this new legislation doesn't dramatically change things for
us. Um, it's really just some additional, uh, details that we're adding to our current policies and procedures. Um but it does um give us an opportunity to make sure that we are in legal compliance with the new legislation, but also a chance to reinforce with our community that we are
very much committed to transparency, intellectual freedom, and diverse literature uh for our students to choose from. Thank you. And this is the kind of the timeline that Julie was just talking about. Uh we did post these drafts uh publicly August
1st and we're looking at the feedback and input um that's coming in. And I think we've had what, three or three three come in so far um with um input around the policies or questions um and you can see August 21st we're here previewing this with you and and um looking forward to your feedback and
then we'll continue to work through um over the next few weeks with our school leaders and school teams so that they're aware of the updated policies and and with final implementation at the end of September is the hope. So here you'll find kind of a summary of
many of our policies um that relate to instructional resources and library materials. Um one thing you'll notice here is we have J that really talks about curriculum selection core resources or committees
to do that work. And then we had we had JL um that spoke specifically to the acquisition of library materials. And just I think over the last year or two maybe maybe it's been two years there was a little bit of confusion. Um you heard I think may have heard some of
that from our DLS in the spring that had concerns around where did our protocols go? Where did our processes goes? Where where did JL go? Um and so before I go forward anymore, I'm just going to ask Julie to kind of talk about what happened there. um because it it didn't exactly
disappear in the night. Um but I think it was difficult to locate because um as Julie will explain, there was a process happening. You all have probably had more exposure to our uh policy review process than you'd even like. But one of the things that I discovered when we got here is
many of our policies, the most recent round of review we had had was in 2013. Before that, a lot of them went back to 1997. So we started a process uh pretty early in about mid 2022 where we've been reviewing all of our processes for two
primary things. One's alignment with the CASBY framework unless we really think there's a reason to deviate from it and the other has been to take all of those sort of operational details and procedures and move them whether it's into a department practice whether it's
into the school procedure guide. We used to have things like the uh release forms for field trips were in a district policy with assigned policy numbers. So we pulled a lot of that back. So inj it's never been the attention when we've
removed policies to create the impression that practices are going away. But that's a you know the communication failure on us sometimes when we're moving too fast um because we've had those calls come why did this disappear or are we no longer doing I'm like no it's in wherever. So, specific
to the uh library acquisition use uh library materials acquisition policy that was in the old JL, a lot of the procedural pieces like here's what we prioritize when we're selecting, you know, professional reviews, things like that. All of that was still there. It
was just being operationalized out of curriculum and instruction. Um the part of J that said who has the authority to select library materials was relocated to J. So, that language was still there. Um but the rest went away. The CASBY model doesn't have an LL. We didn't find
anyone that did. And you remember these alpha sort of numerics are from a national system, right? Trickles all the way down from NSBA. So um when we removed that, but it plainly created some confusion and whatever we can do to correct that. But the nice thing is is we had this sort of pre-populated number
that the district had used before um when the legislature has now told us all, hey, you need to have a written policy that describes your criteria for selection of library materials. Mr. Well, we will resurrect the new and improved JL and that is out for comment as well. Thanks, Julie. So, yeah, you'll notice
on this slide any of these policies that have had updates or that we've got drafts for updates um out, you'll see that noted with the asterisk at the end of each one um and the word draft. Just a quick question right here. Um
because I'm I'm trying to resolve two things here. It seems like we're saying that a challenge has to be raised by someone who has a child in that school, but then we also have that a citizen can do this. So, how do those two things
work together? Who would like to start? We've the um the legislation it says that specific to the parent where the resource is being used is for library materials. our um in challenges to
instructional materials, which would be more challenges to curriculum, and I can't even tell you the last time Renee would probably know that we've seen them. That's where it's got sort of a broader Yeah. And we'll walk through some of these updates and talk about some of those. Yeah. Just while you're there on the um public
comment, sorry, I can't find the slide. Um period, when I can't find the timeline, when does it close? The one that started on August 1st. Um, we set it to close on September 12th. Usually we do 30 days, but for
this one, we wanted to allow both the written feedback period that we always do, but then even get past the board's regular meeting of September 11th in case anyone wants to address it in public comment. And um, sorry, is it should I wait? No. Uh, um, where does someone find that?
Like I can think of 10 people off the top of my head that probably would like to review that. Like how do I share that with them? Why don't I send everybody a link? I will say we went ahead and sent the link both to the memo that explains it and the policy proposals to all of our
associations to our um legislators for Jeff Co because we know that it's many of them were sponsors of the underlying legislation and any help we can get to sort of and I I know it's been circulated to our DTLs, but you bet anyone that would have uh insight and uh
wants to contribute something. Have we put it out? I'm sorry. What will we do when we get all that feedback? Especially if it's very different. How are we handling that? Well, Mike, yeah. Um,
like we mentioned up there, it we have to really be clear on what's policy and what's procedure. And I think that just clarifying, okay, you made that comment. Thank you for that. But it it may not fit into policy. I think just making those distinctions
and I think being able to accommodate um input from our community as much as possible, I think that there's a a desire to do that. So unless it's just completely off the charts, I think that we'll try to incorporate it as much as possible or if it belongs in more of a
procedure somewhere else, then it would live there. Thank you. How how was it shared with the public? Um, I love that it was sent to our um our negotiating groups and I love that it was sent to our librarians who are DTLS who are key stakeholders.
How is it shared with the broader community? To Dr. Vard's point, it's posted on our website. So, there is access there now. I don't know if it's somewhere else where people would see it. Is it elsewhere as well in our community brief? And this is something where we're still sort of improving, I think, the mouse trap a little bit for all of our policy
updates. there's a section of the website that's policy updates and every month there's a memo there and we have some sort of regular stakeholders that look and know but that's not high visibility admittedly right and so one of the questions is does it need to be
in a different place on the website does it need to be in a community update that we send out of comms for certain kind of policies you know some of the policy updates we've seen that you guys they're just very like inside baseball and no one cares right but then there are ones that these are real passion subjects for
people. So, um, and one of the things we've talked about is developing, do we need sort of a more a specific sort of policy council or if you follow rulemaking for the state board of education or or for environmental uh, organizations, you'll see you can be on the list that says anytime they're
considering a rule making, you just get on the email list and you get the blast. So, those are all things we're looking at right now and this has been a good place to think through it. Yeah. And I just I do want to clarify one thing. this policy in particular given that we know there's a lot of community interest in this topic. It is
in the community update that I think is going today. Um so the link to the website with the policy memo that this is a part of and where it all is is has gone out in the community update this month. Can I ask one more maybe group of people
that maybe get a direct hit? Um, anybody who's on any of our advisory committees, DAC, uh, Capital Asset, those are engaged volunteers who are not only parents, um, but also community members, business owners. Um, I think they'd be
really good people, uh, and also that they would be able to pass it along to other people who may not be getting our community update. Um, I'd like to suggest too that we do something on the front page of the jeffcochools.org. So anytime there is something like this
where community input is being asked you know for that we could have some kind of little um I don't know highlighted link that just is kind of like an alert you know there's a this time frame um we're open for public comment and then send
them to that page that has the detail. Great. Okay. Um one of the uh I'll come back to that. I think I'm going to hand it over to Joel and let her talk a little bit about um library resources and materials and some of the highlights from these two policies
or updates. So, in the draft um JL um and KECR2, we love that only a parent of a child at a school can ask for that library resource to be reconsidered. Um I think that really lets the DTL focus on the school
community, the school library, and build that up. um focus on that collection and how it supports them. Um we like also that our library services guidelines are now mandated in the policy. Our guidelines are that um each book that is
curated for the library has at least two positive scholarly reviews and is appropriate for at least two um grade levels in the building. So that'll now be um mandated. And again, it's a huge win that we don't we're not going to remove those materials from the shelf while it's going through the
reconsideration process. Um, we we know that all materials should support intellectual freedom and include a wide range of viewpoints. Um, we have had those library services guidelines in place for many years and that they
ensure that um, our librarians just want to know that they're making those decisions in good faith and aren't going there won't be any retribution for the decisions that they make. Um, it also speaks IG also speaks to the importance of selecting books that um, have value to the collection as well as collection
maintenance which we call weeding um, and details feel protected by this policy. Um and again they love that the books will stay on the shelf until a decision is made. Thanks Jill. Okay. So uh when we do have challenges
or we have concerns that come up uh we have several policies that support us in how we might respond to concerns. Um and the first of these is not something we've uh made any updates to except for um the linked document. the library conversation resource was just something
that was created to support our DTLs when they have concerns that come from community family members at the school. Um there's kind of some sentence starters um to support our DTLs and how they might um have a conversation and help families understand what their different options might be if they have
concerns about um some of the materials in our libraries. Uh this al this policy also comes into play with instructional materials and resources uh as well because it really talks about controversial and sensitive issues. So if we have any concerns they usually fall in kind of this bucket but we also
know that controversial issues are very subjective. What one person might find controversial another may not. And so we know that those are always going to be kind of a moving target but we have put uh this policy in place um so to help us uh make some choices. And I just I want to read a few of the experts that kind
of capture the gist of this policy. Um it says where controversial issues are taught, teachers should make materials available to students concerning the various aspects of the issues. Teachers may express their own viewpoints and opinions. However, they have the obligation to be objective and to
present the the several sides of an issue impartially. When controversial issues or controversial learning resources are used as part of the instructional program, alternative learning activities will be provided at the request of a student or a student's parents.
Controversial learning resources include learning resources which are not included in the approved learning resources of the district and which are subject to disagreement as to the appropriateness because they refer to or relate to controversial issues or present material in a manner or context
with which is itself controversial. Examples of such materials include explicit sexual conduct, graphic violence, profanities, drug use, or other socially undesirable behaviors, or materials that are likely to divide the community along racial, ethnic, or
religious lines. And then the policy further says if a teacher has a question as to whether a resource may be considered controversial, they should reach out and consult with their their principal. So, we do have this policy in place and I call that out because um
this covers a lot of the concerns that come from some of our community members and knowing this policy is in place. They have options. They have the option to request alternative materials or resources that is in place and it has been in place for quite a while. So, I think it's important just to lift back
that lift that back up and let folks know that that's available for guidance. Now when there's other concerns that come up um we have these are these are new kind of KEC KECR1 and R2 um talk about instructional resource resources
versus library materials and there's a difference that that becomes pretty important. Um instructional resources aren't considered choice. They are things that the teacher chooses to use in the classroom with students. Students don't necessarily have choice all the time around the instructional resources.
library materials are considered choice reading materials. So, we've separated those out and how we handle concerns around each of those. Um, I think I'm supposed to hand this to you, Julie, to talk through. Um, one of the questions that that I got
is why is this going to be over in in K? I know this this is going back to the inside baseball policym, but those of you that are familiar with the system we use, right? K is that section that describes um sort of school family relationships and um it's the place
where other kind of I'd call complaint policies exist and so it's a place when a family is wanting to engage I'm sure the our first team probably spends some time in our case section policies so whereas our eye is our in instructional kind of internal curricular and how do
we operate so what we've done is say okay we'll have one umbrella policy KEC um setting forth, hey, there are processes for complaints, challenges, reconsideration for instructional materials and library materials. And then each of those was turned into a separate regulation. Again, this is
really our best judgment about how to map it in a way that it would ultimately make sense to end users, but people may look at it and go, that's really confusing. Why don't you reconfigure it? That's what this whole process is for. But what you will see specific to library materials is that it also sets
out for lack of a better term kind of an appeal process right like first let's start out working with the school the teacher the DTL the principal but then when it starts to get a bit more formal the uh committee looking and considering and again it's remaining on the shelf
and then elevating to the chief academic officer if it has to um you know superintendent tiebreaker you'll see all that in there but ultimately the bottom line is if through that process either whether it's a family or a DTL or the committee is unhappy about where we've
landed. Um it does anticipate and this is not required by statute. So I'm asking if you're willing to raise your hand and volunteer. The proposal does anticipate that if it really is continuing to escalate that it would come to the board for decision.
So you don't have to decide that as you sit here, but that is how it's drafted. We felt like it was important to highlight this pathway. I know there's been concerns about who made the decision, how and all that. So, we feel like this hopefully will create some clarity around the process. No,
in the process it it seems to me um I I'm appreciate the process very much and um who is put in these positions in the committee will determine a lot about how they will view
like the word appropriate, right? Or I was I'm trying to remember all the things I've read and I I can't remember numbers or anything. So, um, but there's times when the it'll say like appropriate. Um, I can't even think of all the other words. So, what I think is appropriate and what director Kenworthy
thinks appropriate, obviously, like how are we like I guess that I'm going way back. How are people selected for that? Are we actually looking for like stratifying across thinking or do we not even screen people for what their thoughts are and do we actually Yeah.
who decides definitions of appropriate? Well, I think the the bill says that when you do get to to the reconsideration committee process that you have a the principal of the school, um the DTL of the school, um another
DTL, um and even a teacher and a community member, our DTLs, um if they ever have a qu question about an edgy book, we have a a really strong rubric. So, we evaluate on all those controversial pieces. We read the book
in its entirety and just see where does it fall in violence, where does it fall in drug use and we're able to just see, oh, you know, that pushes it maybe it pushes it out of elementary to middle school or maybe out of middle school to high school. But we do have criteria, selection criteria for that.
And and I think Jill touched on one of the keys that's another really nice thing about the way the legislation creates this synergy because it says first you're gonna explain what your standards are for selection and those are going to drive part of so yes you're right reasonable minds can differ about appropriate but if we say for example
we've got expectations regarding uh professional reviews and we've got something on the shelf that didn't meet it like we've got some things that are less subjective as well. Okay. And so here um public concerns um
defining uh library resources, learning resources, and the process for public complaints. We do have a form that we've developed um that uh people can fill out and submit when there is a concern. And we've kind of got a a central place like
a central email where those documents can be submitted for review. And we know this will happen at the school level sometimes as well. And we do hope that challenges can be handled at the local level as much as possible. However, we do ask all of we will ask all of our community members to fill this form out
so that we can track back to that timeline of five years before a book could be challenged again. We want to have record as these things happen at our across our schools because we don't want it to be challenged in one school and we don't know about it and then at another and it gets it stays on the shelf in another school there's a
challenge and it doesn't and so we want to be able to be very consistent and have a record of any even if it's just the principal and DTL resolving the issue with the family we still want that form um so that we can track and we'll also be held accountable to posting
anything that we do decide isn't going to be kept on our shelves or if there's a change made to I believe even the level of where the book is housed um we'll want to do that and one of the things that our DTLS was very DTLS were very appreciative of is that part of that form requires that the parent read the book in its entirety prior to
submitting the form because I do think there's been some this title sounds bad but maybe and once you look inside the book it's not so bad so they were really pleased to see that on the the form that we've created. So, can I I'm We've totally botched your
guys' presentation. I'm so sorry. Somebody's asking all of our questions. Um, so did I hear right that if a if a book is determined to be removed or change levels, let's say, at one school, it would automatically apply to the all the
so let's say one elementary school has this discussion, it would automatically be applied. Yes. Which which is good. We we like that because that just shows, wow, you know, we're looking at that whole book and we decide it isn't appropriate at that level. Let's let's move them all up if we're
going to make that choice. So, looking at the um the list of the people that were involved, you I pulled it up and you're reading it and you're spot on. Let's say that the principal and DTL at a different school have a different opinion. And at that point,
would they then come to you, Renee, and say, "Hey, we don't agree. Can we discuss it broader or how would how I don't think that would happen but I'm just curious in that scenario how that I just want to clarify that I'm understanding. So the principal in the DTL um decide the book should stay
or it should go. Sorry this is a total hypothetical and this is an awful way to ask a question but we can think about it before it happens then. Um so let's say that at an elementary school on one end of our district which is massive um the the form says that the committee is made up and this kind of
gets to Dr. VA's point a little bit. I think the it's made up of the principal, one of the DTL there, another DTL, the parent or a parent, a teacher, and a community member. So, let's say down south this happens, and there's a decision that a book should be elevated
to middle school. But let's say in Golden they disagree with that assessment. The principal, the DTL, the community member, a parent, and a teacher at that school. How is that or or is that really unlikely to happen?
Yeah, you know, it's pretty unlikely. We um we have a strong elementary book review committee as well as a strong secondary book review committee. And every year we put out titles that they've read that we've said, you know, you know, maybe not this one. Um we never say they have to pull it up, but
we say we recommend you don't have it. Um and they're really understanding about that because we have such a tight rubric. also um bec if one um parent challenges that resource then that resource can't be challenged again you know for the
next five five years I believe so um I don't think so it sounds like the rubric really grounds us in what all of our DTLs and all of our principles across the district are saying is accur is I hate to say right or wrong but what is
appropriate what is reasonable yeah I hope to never be involved in these conversations as much possible. Anyway, I've told the details that as well. I'm not in the business of saying no or overruling people's decisions, and I'm certainly not the expert. I told, you know, they are. Um, so please don't
put me in a position where I have to to decide to, you know, between two interests. So, I'm going to ask a followup on that. Um, I understand your hypothetical, uh, Dr.
director Applegate about um like the same book was challenged at two different schools, right? It's the hypothetical that we're speaking about. Um and so I wonder, it's just curiosity if there are public library policies or decisions that ever weigh in or inform
decisions at a school district level about things that get considered for being put on the shelves. Public library. Yeah. Uhhuh. We were we have a strong partnership with the public library, but um I think our we we
emphasize to our schools that they aren't public libraries. When you go to a public library, you're usually with your parent and their parents helping you select that book. And we need to make sure that the books in our school libraries can be self- selected and are as, you know, a strong collection. Um,
so certainly we we I mean we talk to JCPL every two weeks and we have a great partnership, but the books that we place in our libraries need to be um you of value and we need to be good stewards of Jeffco's money um when we're placing them in our collections.
I really appreciate that clarification. Thank you. Yeah, we talked about if if everyone does their job upfront when selecting materials and vetting them and saying, "Yes, this is great. We're going to have this on our shelves. we don't really need to worry about these challenges on the back end because we've done our work. I think some of the recent issues
have come up because um we've had DTLS kind of moving around different schools and inheriting collections they're not as familiar with or things that haven't been vetted or should have been weeded. Um it seems to those are the situations where some of these issues have come into play.
Okay. So for this one, um these are the highlights for KECR2. Um again, we mentioned that only a parent guardian can um ask for that resource to be reconsidered. We always encourage that if a parent or guardian has an issue with a book that they just
stop in and chat with the DTL, find out why that book was selected. Um and then they can meet with their principal as well um and have that discussion. And then if no resolution is reached, then we'll point them towards how to fill out that request for reconsideration and it
may remove like we said it may result in removing that book not only from that one school but um all the other schools which honestly happens very rarely. I think we've had three books in the past several years that were like not even for high school. It's adult material. um
and the the books stay on the shelf um and that we are going to post this information on a public facing library services website. Um I am in the process of building that. So um I'm meeting with um Sam Silver on Friday and we're getting that up and going and then we
have someone on the back end working on that reconsideration form um so that we can post that and any results of um decisions will be also on that public facing website. We have a a small but mighty library services team.
Um they've also created this tool to support our schools um and school teams to really understand what the process is uh for reconsidering um library materials. So just sharing this with you so that you can see that that's really more of an internal document that our schools use and our DTLS use to kind of
guide them in their thinking about how to resolve. Okay. What questions do you have? Any others? I have one more. It's more of a request. I'm curious um based on the list of
policies that are being adjusted um I think your first slide had like the list of I's and K's. Um can we cross reference in the policy notes um on those ones so if somebody goes looking and pulls one of those up that they're able to maybe easily chase down some of
those other ones even though they've been put in other places. That's a great idea and that's generally best practice in the policy space. Sometimes it's you know not not always honored or the minute we create a new version all of a sudden the link is broken. So it's a constant struggle to
manage but we try. Thanks. So just to clarify the only role the board has is potentially in an appeal. Otherwise we don't make any decisions about these things. not in the library book space, not in
the selection space, but you would be the final decision maker in the appeal process for challenges. And we are going to ask even though it's a district policy because there's been so much public interest and it's flowing from the legislation you supported, we are going to ask when we come back on
September 11th for you to 12th. Thank you. Uh that uh we're going to ask you to approve the model as it is in its final form. of of the the of the policy changes. Okay. And so is that right? The board
only makes decisions on it the appeal of the library resources. What about the other does the board have a role in that in Yes. Yes. Okay. Okay. So the only place they we don't have a role is at this local level of
library resources our unless it's an appeal. You mean in the original like selection of materials for libraries? No, for the um the reconsideration. A reconsideration. No, just the appeal. Yeah. So, if a reconsideration comes to
a school, we don't do anything. We just don't even know about it probably and then unless it gets appealed and then it will come to us. Yeah. We don't want That's the That's a suggestion that you're We don't want you working every week. Yeah. Well, also because people ask us um you
know, are you going to ban books? all the time. And really the answer is we don't actually. There's a policy and people other people ban, but I'm not trying to be funny. I just that is what I'm trying to clarify. Yeah.
Um just a a quick note on slide eight. The two links at the bottom just are not uh public. When you click on them, it sends you to a you need permission. At least me. I'm not logged in to something, so I'm figuring the public might not. Is it the slide with all the links? Uh
no it's so sorry keep going that the these two the movies and films and library conversation I just noticed it here. Um and the very last thing is is the where is the rubric that um you kept referring to. Can we that's kind of an I mean I can share it
with you. It's an internal um document that we have at our secondary and elementary view um committees. We have a um we have a library website and then we have the reviewed book committee website attached to that and that's where our rubrics live.
Can the rubric be made public? Why not say why not? I mean as a public person I would be interested as a board member too but like as a parent I'd be interested in what rubric we're using to make the decisions. would probably need cleaned up a little bit to make it more
public friendly. But but it may also help parents who are considering as filling out a reconsideration form if they know how it's going to be evaluated to know whether or not it's worth it. Worth it. Yeah.
Okay. It's a good idea. Uh thank you so much for this update. Um, I would just like to mention that maybe when you are making substantial changes to a policy, especially if you're going to eliminate a policy, that we make a extra effort to um alert
anybody who falls onto it. I know some policies is everybody, but like the DTL, the library, the resources, and there could be special ed policies that change, and just so everybody knows something's happening. President Parker, could I add to that?
And I I recognize this is a quadruple-edged sword. So maybe this relies other discussion, but if it is something that we know is going to be sensitive, can we also be could it be like in a board update or something? Because we and maybe it was and I missed
it. It's very possible. Um but knowing so when we look at the administrative policies, we don't follow those as closely, right? because there's board policies for those who don't know and there's administrative policies and really we don't get involved much and the administrative policies for good
reason but if if you guys are sensing the waters are getting icky and you that they might come to us I don't know how we even judge that um it's really really hard but it we kind of have a sometimes we have a good gut feeling about certain things
and quite honestly the caught us by surprise but there weren't really substantial procedural kinds of things in that and what we felt like was important to move got moved into J. So, but again, it's hindsight is much easier. I know. Um it's surprising to people.
So, I don't know, maybe we could think about that together. Well, and whenever we create one of those board policy memos, excuse me, district policy memos, um and we send those to, for example, the leadership of our associations. There's no reason not to have you all I think that would be helpful.
Thank you, Ken. Thank you so much, you guys. This is a also hard and really important. Thank you. Y thank you very much. Um the time is now 6:13 and before we move to our final study item of the evening, I'd like to call a 10m minute
break. Hi, I'm Mary Parker, a proud Jeffco school board member. Do you ever wonder what a school board does? We're a group of elected volunteers who help set the direction for our district. From shaping policies to approving
budgets, we ensure that every student in our community has access to a quality education. It's our job to listen to families, students, and educators to make informed decisions that benefit everyone in our school community. For more information about the work of our
board, including our meeting schedule on how to connect with us, please visit jeffcoubschools.org. oorgg/board. Down in the heat. Heat. Heat. As a school board, we're responsible for
overseeing the district's budget. Every dollar matters when it comes to providing the best education possible. We carefully allocate funds to support teachers, maintain facilities, and improve student programs. It's our job to ensure financial transparency and accountability while balancing the needs
of students, staff, and taxpayers. Heat. Heat. N. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Hey. Hey. Hey. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. N. Heat. Heat. N. Down. Heat.
Hey. Hey. Hey. Heat. Hey. Hey. Hey. Yeah, you Heat. Heat. Down. Down. All the
heat. Heat. Heat. N. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. N. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. N. Heat. Heat. N.
Heat. Heat. N. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. N. Our final study item for the evening is to hear a presentation on the budget reduction blueprint workshop. Jeffco public school staff are developing a
budget reduction blueprint for the 2627 school year to proactively respond to the financial realities facing public education locally in Colorado and across the nation. Declining enrollment, rising costs, and dwindling federal and state funding have
intensified financial pressures here in Jeffco. These challenges require decisive action to keep our schools strong and sustainable for students who rely on them now and in the future. for our viewing public. Uh I have moved to the presenter table along with
director Reid as I will we will be presenting on this topic tonight. Over the summer, Director Reed and I worked with the district staff as part of a board budget subcommittee. The information this evening will be presented to the board by Superintendent Doran Brena Copelan, chief financial
officer, and board budget subcommittee members myself, Mary Parker, and uh second vice president Paula Reid. This is a topic we are scheduled to study every month through November. Tonight, we will get a preview of the agendas for each of those study sessions, and we
have allotted 120 minutes, that would be two hours for tonight's presentation. Presenters, the time is now yours. Thank you, Mary. I'm happy to be here at the presenters table with you and and Paula and Brena Copeland. I want to uh
start today by sharing our purpose for this uh study session and this agenda item. We would like to um align on the scope and premise of the budget reduction blueprint, define the board and staff roles in the process for the blueprint and preview the work ahead
with the board. The uh back one slide please. Um thank you. The um budget subcommittee just as context um Mary and Paula served as the board budget subcommittee working with staff this summer on guiding principles and process
commitments. And so what you're about to see, what the board is about to see tonight um is work that this that um the cabinet team did with this board budget subcommittee. Miriam and Paula, appreciate the time and energy that you put in and thought with us this summer
um to create what we're presenting tonight. So we do have two hours as Mary mentioned for this part of our session tonight. We will begin with the process elements uh for what process we will go through to determine uh the budget
reduction blueprint. We will then engage in a dialogue about where we are, how we got here and then where we are going informed by a comparison analysis that was a recommendation from the district financial advisory committee. If we run
out of time, which we might, it's a very dense amount of content, then we will continue the workshop content on September 3rd, and at the time of two hours, we'll check back in with uh President Parker and allow her to
discuss with the board what your wishes are at that time. So, here's our agenda. We're going to first discuss the budget reduction blueprint um and the process and the project overview uh that was created this summer. We are going to then regground in this year's budget and
the multi-year projection and talk about where we are, how we got here, and the factors driving um our continued uncertainty. And then we're going to do a deep dive into our resource allocations and how they compare to other districts. 45 minutes for this first section is what we have. With that, I'm going to hand it over to uh
Mary Parker. So, I'm going to take you back to June um uh I think it was June 12th, our meeting then where the board uh voted on the budget for the 26 uh for 2526 school year. And we um
passed the resolution that you're not able to read there because it's so small, but in this resolution um it did indicate that we were authorizing the use of a portion of the beginning fund balances in the adopted budget. And then it lists the different um balances and
the amount of money that we would be um uh using. Um and you can see down there at the be it further resolved the last paragraph um the uh resolution says that we um the use the appropriation and
approval to use the fund balances will not lead to ongoing deficits in the in the uh funds in the future. And so we had enough funds to cover the budget for 2526 but looking towards the future we could not sustain uh using fund balance
that much. We would deplete our funds very quickly. So um in this resolution we identified planned actions to align revenues and expenditures. And so what we did define the revenue um expenditures, excuse me, the reduc
reduction. I don't like it on the side of the I have much more sympathy now for the presenters than I've ever had before, just to let you know. So what um we in our plan to reduce expenses in the future years, we have to adjust
programming or optional services. Um as we've said many times the um employees the staffing is um more than 80% close to 84% of our expenses. So we will definitely have to look at that and we want to also avoid or limit future cost
increases. So we have to look at the expenditure size side and um then we will um also be looking at increasing revenue. This is something else that we've talked about in the past um uh talking about a mill levy override. Uh you'll see in the presentation tonight
that we are quite below our peer groups certainly in the Front Range area and that would require seeking voter authorization um for either a general mill levy override or a special purpose mill levy override.
So, um, in order to start to even prioritize what it is that we are going to to cut and how we're going to trim this budget, we needed to have some guiding principles that would um would
help us, like I said, just even get that started. So, the first one that we chose was to keep students first and to center on our values as a district. We want to maintain the investments that we have made within available resources and that
is part of our governance statement that directly and positively impact student learning growth and experiences as articulated in district goals and the board's governing governing statement. So, um, as you know, we've invested a
lot over the past several years in curriculum and we're seeing really positive results from that and we don't want to have to put a stop to things that are working. So, as much as we can, we want to maintain those investments
and and keep that direction going and we want to prioritize the alignment to the district values. So, as we look at things and say, "How important is this really?" Then we're going to be looking at our values and we're going to say, "How do these support the things
that we value most as a district?" And we need to strengthen our fiscal sustainability. We have to focus on changes that will create recurring savings versus temporary changes that generate one-time savings to support the long-term financial stability of the
district in service to our students. And this was something that we talked about quite a bit over the summer that you know really communicating to people in the past when we've gone for mill levies. We've said you know we we want
to maintain doing these things and you know maybe we're going to take it away unless we get the funding for it and that kind of thing. And really, you know, even a mill levy override is going to be to sustain the most important
things that we do. A lot of the cuts that will happen are going to be permanent because our a lot of the decrease in our revenue is permanent decreases in students and therefore permanent decreases in revenue. And we
really have to keep that in mind. I just think there's sort of a past um paradigm of well this is just to get us through this bad economic time. Um you know that's what happened in 2009 2010. This is temporary to get us through. So some
of the fixes that we've used in the past we can't use furlow days. We can't use temporary freezes. We've got to figure out long-term solutions. So um in addition to guiding principles, we want to make some pretty solid
commitments to our community, to each other, and to our employees. We want to build understanding. We want to communicate clearly and accessibly about where money is spent and the key drivers of cost like how many people are
staffed, where they are staffed, and what they're assigned to do. These non-financial metrics aren't items that we purchase, but associated salaries and benefits significantly that significantly shape the budget. As
President Parker just pointed out, um so much of our budget is salary. So we really do need to look at how how are we allotting our our most important resource which is our our employees and
the people who do the work of the district. Um and we need to detail the expected impact of budget cuts on people program and progress especially how they affect district ends and board ends. So, um,
how and and so much of that is really student focused, which is as it should be. So, as we make these cuts, how are they going to impact students? And I can tell you right now, we're not going to be able to promise anybody that it's not going to touch kids. So much of what we
do in this district, even if people don't see it, really is in support of schools. And if it's in support of schools, it's in support of kids. So we have to be really clear with people about how these things sort of flow downstream.
Um we want to collect and use stakeholder input. We want to collect authentic input from students, staff and families to prioritize district investments and remain open to changes that may change the direction of the district. And again, this is one of those things where people need to
understand you're there's a good chance that there are things that are really important and really good for kids and that you're really committed to and we're just not going to be able to keep them up at the current level. Um, and an increase in funding might really help us with that.
But I think there's a tendency for people to be like, "Okay, but do not cut this thing and do not cut that thing." And they're they are all really important. And do we say, "Okay, well, we promise that we won't cut anything in the arts,
so we're going to cut reading." Like, these are going to be really tough choices. Um, so we do want to hear from stakeholders and we do need stakeholders to understand that everybody's going to have to give. That's just all there is to it. We want to meet a target with a
range of options. And so we we want to set a specific reduction target as a board, a target amount to guide the budgeting process on a timeline and build flexibility to adjust for unpredictable factors such as changes in
state or federal funding. so the district can respond effectively to future shifts. So, um we're as a board, we're not going to be the ones who say x amount from this thing, x amount from that thing. We're going to be the ones that say this
is the target total amount that we need to reduce and um and rely on the expertise of the people who manage the departments and the schools and the groups that that have to figure it out
from there. Um we do need to consider data outcomes and compliance. We need to analyze district spending using comparison data which we will look at tonight and assess how different investments impact student outcomes. At the same time, we need to recognize that
some expenditures such as those required for state or federal compliance cannot be reduced and must remain part of the budget. So um for example, Taber reserves um you know we talk a lot about reserves and can we reduce reserves and
you can we use reserves well we can't touch and that's required by law um you know sometimes people look at our overall um revenue sources and they don't take into account the amount that we have to
pass through to charters so we can't use that. So, um, so that's going to be part of it as well, really helping people understand those pieces of the puzzle. So, you're going to see tonight we distinguish between the board's roles
and responsibilities and the staff roles and responsibilities. So, for us, we have to assure that the um uh recommendations align with our executive limitations number 15, 16, and 17. 15 is
uh an executive limitation on budgeting and it has a lot of um uh detail on requirements for budgeting. 16 is for financial administration and 17 is asset protection. So those are our board ends
or excuse me our executive limitations on the superintendent and those are the ones that we have to ensure are in alignment with what we get um presented for um cost reductions. Um we also are responsible for oversight of the whole
process towards the budget deficit resolution. So we adopted the the June resolution. It has dates in it. Essentially it's this whole year um that we're going through the the plan and we have to monitor it um carefully and that's why every month we are going to
have a section and a um agenda item to do that. Um we will observe what the staff is doing their engagement process and it's our job to present um the constituency um our constituencies anything that we
get in emails phone calls conversations with um our community members certainly public comments that um will come up um at our board meetings. So we have to um be the ones that are always bringing us back to um uh addressing any concerns
from the community. And we will be conducting board discussions as I said at every board meeting. You'll see the kind of um plan for that. Every board meeting we'll look back um at the previous board me and any um outstanding questions if we can answer them and so
forth. So um that we are committed to be doing every month. And then um we'll have more information on a a subsequent slide on um board members meeting with municipal elected officials, national
effect um officials and other leader forums. And we'll be doing that from September to November. So again, we're going to have a slide that gives more detail on that coming up. Thanks Mary and Paula. In terms of staff roles and responsibilities, uh staff
will lead the development of the comprehensive plan for reductions, evaluate the trade-offs, identifying cost-saving opportunities and proposing solutions um for operational decision- making. We will lead the engagement process as we develop and then refine those options,
getting input from our stakeholders, supporting departments and schools to manage budgets to their targets, um managing the implementation of the reductions once they're decided upon, and then of course supporting our impacted staff.
When we look at the goals um across August to November for the board study sessions, uh we really want to make sure that as the board studies the blueprint, we want for district staff and the board to align on some key components. One is
the premise and scope of the work. The overall as as Paula mentioned, district level reduction target. What are we going after? How much do we want to reduce? Is it a one-year reduction plan? Is it a two-year reduction plan? What are what is the amount that we're trying
to hit? Um department and school-based reduction targets and department reduction plans. So, the current board will not obligate or cannot obligate action by the future board. And as we all know, the board will be changing in November. But the goal is for this board
to provide clear guidance to the future board grounded in your governance experience and the decision-making that's been made over the past four years that have as we've talked about annually kind of led to this need for us to level set and look at the um some
structural adjustments to the budget. So, here's what the board study schedule looks like um for the next as uh from August to November. And then, of course, we've included the June 11th vote on the fiscal year 27 budget adoption. Tonight is August 21st where we're
conducting this foundational workshop. In September, the board will study the overall district reduction target and and hopefully set that um in the month of September. In October, uh the board would study the department reduction
targets and the school-based reduction targets by level, elementary, middle, K8, high. And then in November, we would be sharing the department reduction plans with the board of education and solidifying those um school-based
reduction targets. We'll talk a little bit more about the in detail when we show you the timeline, but that's generally speaking the highle board study schedule. Uh as Mary mentioned there there's some interest by the board subcommittee and making sure that we
have some consistent structures in place at every board study session related to the blueprint. These are the three commitments that we would like to make for every board study session. We want to recap the last meeting and preview the next meeting so people know where
we've been and where we're going. We want to make sure we are answering questions from the last meeting and that we are talking about the feedback we've been hearing from our stakeholder engagement process at every meeting in a public way. Mary and Paula, do either of
you want to talk about number two? I know that was something you felt strongly about. Well, one of the things that we talked about it uh with it was being able to keep track of the questions that have been asked and answered and so that the
public can go back and and take a look at it and see the answers to their questions as they've been put up. Um and so that's the budget reduction blueprint website. So basically, I guess I would say some sort of almost an FAQ. Yeah,
like a transparency that so that people know that the questions that they're presenting to us are being presented and and they can find out what th those answers are. Director, you said um that the board's role is going to be
a target number but not um breaking that down. So like at October 8th to study cate I'm sorry in the slide before this study categorical department reduction targets and schoolbased reduction targets. We're just reviewing that but the board makes
no recommendations by department is what you're you're saying. I just want to be clear as we go into it. We're not going to be making recommendations on how the budget will be cut. We are the board is only the
board's only role is a target number. the yes, the board's role is a target number. The thing is that this early in the game, if we're talking about um you know, school-based reduction targets and and department reduction targets, this
would be the time that we could ask questions about that, that we can do the pushing back that our constituents might want us to do. So the these are not final like on October 8th. They're not going to come to us and say these will
be the final reductions. This the these are our targets. this is what we're thinking is going to work and this is our point that we get to um to put no I I I'm I hesitate to say input because I
don't really want to say that we're going to be making decisions but where we can perhaps challenge push question do those things that need to be done for the the due diligence on that and then on November 5th the district will present to us the actual cuts like
we're talking about like numbers of employees recommended to that we reduce in a department. I'm just trying to follow like how so the departments are like the the um central administration departments and
so well yeah the plans actually I I'm trying to remember we would if you we're getting to we will get to a more detailed um a timeline and it'll be clearer but yes the plan would be that in November we would be presenting and sharing department
reduction plans so that in December impacted staff would No. And we would also in November be identifying the targets for the school level reduction um amounts or percentages by level because not every school can handle the same level of percentage so that our
budget team can build the department budgets as well as the school budgets with those reduction targets built in. And the board won't vote on that. This board won't vote on that. So you'll on November 5th, you're just presenting
plans and then in ju uh June is the Oh, for vote on that budget. Yeah. So we don't make any votes. We're just listening, learning, and asking questions. Yeah. Okay, that seems appropriate. I got a little confused about what we our role was here.
Okay, great. So we we can talk more about that as we keep going. I think we'll get into more some more detail. Um, so again, these are the commitments for every board meeting. We'd recap the last meeting, answer questions from the last meeting, make sure we're tracking and monitoring that and making it public on the blueprint website, and sharing
feedback from stakeholder engagement, most likely, then previewing the next meeting at the end of the meeting. So those would be the commitments we're making every board study session. Um, and then so here's the agenda for tonight. I've already gone through this, but this would be the um agenda for this
is what we're doing this evening. The next slide shows you the September 3rd proposed agenda um where we would do that routine content of reviewing last meeting, reviewing questions and um then we would
go into the o overall target. Um and so in June 4th, Brena illustrated some scenarios um for the board. We would review those. We would look at how the district arrived at a proposed overall reduction target. um we would show you
the allocation of reductions and the impact of departments versus schools. So here's let's pretend like we're saying it's going to be 50 million. How is that broken out between different departments and schools? Um we would look at a future budget outlook. Um so I want to make sure that we repeat over and over
and remind ourselves and our general public that we can set a target in September or October. We can make reductions to meet those targets in November for departments and in January, February for
schools. Um, but whatever happens at the legislature in March is out of our hands. And so no matter what target we set, it could be a moving target in ways that we cannot control. Um, and so I just want to make sure we're constantly reminding ourselves of that. and that's this future budget outlook where we
would at the same time like we normally do be looking at um you know some some of the state forecasting and things like that. Um the Millvy override um exploration would also be part of that meeting so that we're looking at not just the reductions but also the
potential revenue generation. Um, and then we would be studying uh the process and engagement calendar in more detail where we would be previewing our district budget labs and our stakeholder engagement calendar and timeline. More on the budget labs in a minute.
on the on October 8th, the proposed um study schedule is to again go over the routine content and then study the reduction targets, the district-wide cost avoidance measures, department level target ranges and school-based target ranges by level and then share
with the board how we're preparing for the staff impact and how we plan to take care of of the staff who who will be impacted by this work. In November, we would then do the routine content again. We would look at
more in more detail the department reduction plans and include if for information for the board and our public what will the service level impacts be with these department reductions. What does that mean is going to change in terms of the support to schools. We
would look at the school level impacts and you know how much each level is reducing and what kind of per pupil impacts that might be. Um we would look at HR planning and the support strategies for impacted staff again and we would also be talking about next
steps with our stakeholder input. Um, one of the things we want to make sure the board is aware of this evening is how we have worked with um, Mary and Paula to build out how the staff will engage families, stakeholders, students, and staff in the development and
refinement of our options for reductions. So, let's look at that next. Here is here are on the left side, you'll see these blue boxes. These are the different structures that we are planning for engagement with various stakeholders or that already exist. So
we have our budget reduction um blueprint alliance which would be an advisory group to plan and co-present to the board. It would include representatives from the board committees JCEA JESPA and JCAA and other staff principles department
leaders parents and community members. So, we will be putting together a broad advisory group that will be working with us about five times over the course of the fall. They might be doing things like study the surveys that we've been that we send out for example and review the results. We might be sharing with
them some of the ideas that we're thinking about in terms of the reductions from the departments and they can react and give us feedback to those things. We also have association leader and committee touch points. So we want to regularly gather input and share updates with our associations. Um we
have monthly superintendent association meetings. We have an additional meeting with JCA and Jespa on Monday um this coming Monday actually to just update them on where we are with things. Um and we have um an additional group called a
budget owner workg group. So, as you know, every department, every school, um, some departments have many budget owners, and so we want to make sure those budget owners have the opportunity to work with us as the reduction plans are being built and give us input. So,
we have um contemplated a budget owner workg group to be meeting with regularly as well. We are planning for what we would call public budget labs for community and staff. They would be interactive labs for community staff and
students to come to a school site or district site um and go through different stations so to speak. One station might be come try to build this school budget with this type of reduction in it. Um another uh station might be talking to a board member about
this process or a cabinet member. Um a a third option might be here's the district budget. Um here's the target. what would you reduce? Um, another another station might just be a survey where we ask them some really targeted questions and they have an opportunity to do an online survey and give us some
feedback. Um, so th those are the budget labs, school community conversations. We will have principalled um staff and school accountability committee conversations to inform the school-based budget priorities. We're we're going to be working on materials that we can give
our principles that they can turnkey and use for common messaging, but also then tailor to the unique needs of their school community once they start talking about the impacts that might be um happening at their school and getting the input of the community that they serve. We have surveys planned to gather
input. Um and then I know we really want to do a community partner convening. Um we've been working with Colorado Gives Foundation to host and support us in a summit for community partners. People uh folks who are on our chambers, our
economic development council, other community partners who care deeply about the work we do and work with us on a regular basis would be part of that convening. So those are the staffled engagement pieces. Can I can I ask a quick question? Sure, Superintendent Derlin. Sure. Um
in the I'm going to say this right in the budget reduction blueprint alliance team. I know that is a working group. Um, and I know that those are on our board calendars. Um, which I think is awesome for us to observe, but since
they are not public meetings, I assume we have to go in twos. Is that correct? I think that's a good question. We can write it down and and double check on that. And I know you had asked that question earlier today because you got a question from a community member about that. I don't know that we've gotten that far. So, we'll track that question.
If if that is the case, I would love to recommend that we take turns attending those because I think it's invaluable for all of us to hear the feedback. So, that's that's just one suggestion. Great. Thanks. Yeah, we'll check in with that. Thank
you. Okay. So again, we want the alliance to serve as a sounding board advisor to the superintendent and staff and then we do want them to come and present um in I I guess October, Novemberish timeline with
uh district staff uh to the board. Um and it will include members from you know your committees, associations. I feel like we've talked about this already. So let's go to the next slide. Um here's some information about the budget labs. Um and I've talked quite a bit about that. We're going to keep
going. I want to get us to a place where you guys can also hear about the comparison data and it's it's pretty lengthy and and um meaty. Here's the timeline that that you can review um colorcoded by the different type of
opportunity for our community. We have public comments uh noted for your regular meetings. Um and then we have the alliance meetings, the budget labs, and um other opportunities for community input surveys. I'm sorry I'm going way
off into quorum today. Forgive me. Um, have we thought about if we need certain sections of public comment like we did for the negotiation process for budget or do we just want to let it be maybe this is for us to think about or do we just want to let it be as part of the
normal conversation? I'll throw that out for discussion. I think it's going to be on your agenda every month and so it's definitely something people will be able to sign up for and be first on the list because it's part of the agenda
based on your current protocol for public comment. But it we're happy to I don't know if it's necessary. I just throw it out for our subcommittee and board to think about. Great. Next slide, please. Um, so here's the
timeline for the personnel impacts. And I want to note the difference between department-based staff and school-based staff just given the difference in timing of budgeting processes. So in September, we'll be talking to you about 2526 cost-saving measures that we we'll
start implementing this year. Um and then in November and December because we will be um publishing and making decisions about the department-based reductions, the impacted department-based staff will be notified at the end of this calendar year. The
impacted school-based staff will be notified in January, February, or March. principles get their budgets in early January and they begin working on their budgets, working with their sachs, working with their school-based teams of staff to make decisions about where to
invest the dollars. Um, and so the the school-based process will not follow its normal timeline and we will be um able to notify impacted staff in that timeline there and then in time for internal hiring activities. We are working on internal hiring activities
and have learned a lot through the ROF's process where we had hiring fairs and hiring freezes where people internally were being hired first and had opportunity to have resume writing support or not even like you don't have to bring a resume you just have to fill
out this short form to tell us about your experience. Um and then you go to a place a gym at a middle school and you have the opportunity to meet five different school comm um committees at once. So, not only is it beneficial for the committees who are hiring, it's beneficial especially for the employees
who are looking for their new professional home. And so, that that will be similar to what we're thinking about for this internal hiring activities in February, March, and April. And then in June, the reductions would be effective, right? This is where I'm getting
confused. So what will happen in November between now and December is the review of all of this and then the dis and then there's no there's no vote. We're just the I understand why we have
to do this but the and and why the budgeting happens in the fall but the budget will not have been voted on or anything. So, it's all like we're doing all of this with the
idea that that's how it's going to go and be by next June when that board votes on it. So, we but the thing is I'm worried about is you you you said I agree with it. We should not be committing the future board to this budget, but by making
these reductions now, we are committing the next board to these reductions. So, I'm just trying to sort it out. I know it's so uh it's a little bit frustrating. Um technically though, the resolution you approved for 2526
um does approve reductions, right? The the phrase that Mary read from it said the district will um do these things, right? Reduce expenditures because that's the only way to get revenue and expense back in alignment. and and so we
have to both have a plan and then it has to sort of happen. So um but you're absolutely right uh as is true every year and we've talked some about this um if you really want to change what's going to happen next year um you have to start that change um in a timeline that
respects the the standard school year and our staff's hiring timeline. So um so yes what we will do this year is under the broad umbrella of the resolution for the current year and then the resolution that the board approves for next year will then provide that
broad umbrella for any activities the next year. The only thing I would add is um I think uh what we're contemplating is that by November we are putting on track
a fix to the deficit in the arena that we can control. But it is very likely that by the time June rolls around, it looks different than it does in November based on variables we cannot control or
based on variables that might change as we go through the reduction process. So if we find that in March, as an example, we have 25 teachers who we cannot find a spot for. we may want to make a
decision to keep them on board as substitute teachers, giving them another year to find a position. Um, which then would mean our target, we might hit less of a target. Um, but we may save in
substitute funds. So, so there that's just a small example of a little thing that could happen and this is just based on experience that I've had doing this before in several other districts. Another example is the state may bring back the negative factor. You know, we're going to do everything we can to
advocate against something like that, but if that were to happen, um, then this the budget in June is going to look very different than what we're looking at and talking about in November. The target might stay the same, but that's going to have a tremendous impact on the budget. So, there'll be many variables that impact the budget in June. What
what we need from this board is to align with us and give direction to a pathway to reductions in expenditures to help offset the deficit right now. And so that's what this timeline does. Can I add something?
Sure. This would not be best practice, but I don't get to make these decisions. Theoretically, the new board members could come in as a majority and blow the whole thing up.
They would have the power to do that. So, yes, we are going ahead and and moving forward because we have to because we can't ask the district to throw this all together starting with
the seating of the new board. um that would be unreasonable and and it would not be thoughtful because they wouldn't have time to think it through. But for to just give a small example, when we came on the board, the decision had already been made to pay for the Myers
pool, but we were the ones that ultimately approved the contract for it. We could have at that point said, "No, we don't approve this contract. we're not paying
for the Myers pool. It's not a good idea because it makes your district unreliable to community partners. So, we're going to hope that whoever comes onto the board in December is going to take all of those things into account is
going to take into account that blowing the whole thing up is going to create an untenable situation. But we are not making decisions. We are just saying right now we're the ones with the oversight. it looks good to us or it doesn't look good to us. We're trying to
create something so that the folks coming in can say, "Yeah, this looks really good to us." Or, you know, we've been watching you do this and here's our input and, you know, take it from there. That's all understood. I I just think what the public and our employees might
not understand is that we're implementing it in as soon as December and January. I understand that. Um, so folks will be told you you won't won't have this job or you'll have this opportunity to look for another job. I mean, this level we're talking about is
more probably than jobs we can backfill in, I would think. But so that's just going to be implemented long before we finalize this and long before the budget, the the state gives us their budget and long before all these things. So, and it could be that
we actually need we get more money in in the session and then we get less we have to reduce less or we get they cut more and the budget thing comes back and the reduction thing comes back and then we then have to do it again. We have to cut more people. I just think our employees
need to really understand that like even though this budget is in the works, we are going to be cutting jobs or notifying of cutting jobs now. And so that that's just like very that's like that's the trauma right there. And I
just want to make sure it's really upfront that we're all thinking about that because that's that's the hard part. So yeah, some other boards going to vote on this actual budget. My other question is um or hope is that we when we are talking about this that it we are
kind of always talking about like the whole budget because I think it would be difficult to break it up into parts without always knowing like the totals the big total. So that would be helpful. Thank you. That's that's helpful feedback. Um as I mentioned before the
school-based budgeting timeline remains pretty much the same um as it typically does. the um the November um targets for schools by level allows our budgeting team to keep on this timeline and not
push it later into the spring. Some of the feedback we got when we did this type of work, you know, when we closed the schools um through Roths, it really was a it it ended up being about an approximate $20 million ongoing savings.
And one some of the feedback we got from our staff was thank you for telling us early. Thank you for putting in structures so that we could explore jobs um early because other districts are also on the same timeline for staffing. And so if
we're late in telling people, they miss out not only on possible um time to get a job in Jeffco, they miss out on opportunities if they needed to to get a job in a different district because the the staffing timelines happen so quickly in the spring. Um and so this is the
timeline that is typical for school-based budgeting and staffing um for school-based staff and it will remain the same. I just want to clarify, I'm not suggesting that we do it differently. I wish we had done this for a budget last year as I've mentioned a thousand times now. So I I just I I understand that.
I'm definitely not suggesting that we uh do it any differently. It's I just don't know that people will understand that. Yeah. Thank you for that. I think too that's going to be important as as staff is listening that when we have our principles share and our department leaders share information with their
staff that we're clear about these timelines. Um so that staff do know this is when this is happening. Um and and so we'll take note that we should clearly communicate that. Okay, Mary, I think you have this next slide.
Yes. So um this is getting back to um the board holding some um forums with elected officials and other leaders. So if we go to the next slide, I think it has the detail of it. Okay. So, some of the things we're going to do, um, and it
really depends on what district we're in. Um, I, for instance, down in district five, I don't have any city council or county executive. Well, I do have the county executives, but anyway, each one of us has different um elected
entities that we could um could uh communicate with. And um, some of the suggestions we have, the the legislators have town halls all the time. And so those of us who have um our state reps or our state senators, I know that they
would be more than willing to let us present um the state of the the um school district. So we should look for opportunities to do that. Then u those of us who have the city councils um can can go for that. Um they are having
their own priorities, I know. So, um we may or may not be able to present anything at one of their meetings, but we can at least be there for um the uh community members to come talk to us and um you know, we'll work with them. Then
one-on-one meetings with elected officials is really good, too. Those of us, you know, who have a certainly the good relationship with our um reps and our senators, um they are very interested. We've already heard from them. They want to know what's happening. So, um, we want to make sure
that we have a good purpose for the meetings. Is it just, um, informational or are we asking for their input? Um, or or both. So, these are things that I'd like the board to start thinking about so that we can, um, uh, be on the same
page there. Um, and then we can set a norm about which electeds we want to meet with. So, it could be that um, there's overlap. Two people could go. I could go up to Arvvada um and Michelle could come down to um Littleton and uh I
think it's personally very helpful when we have more than one schoolboard member there and um we are going to be giving input to the district because Paul and I talked about it. We would really like them to have a presentation for us that they can put together so we can have everybody start from the same place. You
know, how do we get where we are and where are we and then what are our plans? So, if we had a a a good um short presentation, informational one, we could start out with that and then we could um tailor it to whoever we're talking to. So, these are just things,
these next steps for all of us to start thinking about. So, we have the discussion slide here. Um but I know several of you jumped in and asked questions, which is great. Um if there are questions, we're happy to take them. If not, I might suggest that we keep going because we're right on
time almost. And I do want us to get to some of the comparative um data. Oh, she's no. So, how are you guys feeling about that? Or do you need time to discuss?
I like that as we're going it's helpful, especially with some of the meatiness. Okay. And the next piece is still review. Um, so we can go pretty quickly before we jump into this revenue comparison and expenditure comparison, but I do think it's important both for all of us here, even though we're more
steeped in this than a lot of people, it's also, I think, important for a listening public to just have the like where are we and how did we get here? So, that's the next piece. It'll be um um information that board members have seen before, but I think it's important.
So, um, we have made values-driven decisions over the last several years to invest in our students and in the people who serve them, and it's the right thing to do. Um, we because of that, we have made gains in the market for our employees in terms of how they compare
um, both locally and nationally. Um, and our students are making gains in math and reading, and they're graduating more ready for college and career. Our teams are stronger, more aligned, and more rep responsive thanks to the people, systems, and leadership that we've built. Um, we had I it just came out
today. It's not embargoed, so there's no embargo police coming. Um, a 1 to6 percentage point increase in all but one of the SEMASS tests. Um, and for the last three years, Jeffco was greater than the 50th percentile MGP for both
English language arts and math three years in a row. Um, I got an a nice message from Commissioner Cordova today congratulating me for the work that we've done in Jeffco to to have three years of um median growth percentiles over the 50th percent in both content
areas. And it just feels like we have the data now, the aggregate data um that is giving us an indication that we're moving in the right direction. So that's great. and the the decisions we've made to invest in our employees and in the programming um that we've continued for
example since the esser funds went away but we knew these things were working and necessary for our kids have made a difference and so we at the same time we need to reduce our budget expenditures we all know that we've talked about it our
priority right now is protecting the resources as close as possible in the classroom where students are learning and growing every today. I want to also be really clear, this does not diminish the value of our central teams or school
supports or the individuals who work in our central support systems. Um because they do, as Paula said, um any support for our schools impacts kids and the people who work in our central services teams take their jobs seriously. They do
great work for kids every day. Um but but working to make sure that the majority of our cuts or a bigger percentage of our cuts are further away from our classrooms does reflect our financial reality and our responsibility to preserve studentf facing roles.
By the way, the other thing I just want to make sure everybody understands is we are not alone. This is not Jeffco um all by itself needing to address a deficit budget. Um, school districts across the state and the country are really dealing and grappling with the same things we've
been grappling with. Enrollment declines year-over-year. There are fewer school age children being born. Um, it's just a reality and um, a lot of districts are struggling with that and enrollment leads to re enrollment declines lead to revenue declines. Um, we also are
struggling with the increase in the number of staff andor the increase in staff compensation. The needs of our students are great. We want the right amount of staff and the high quality staff to serve them. And so we have invested in those areas. Um, and we're proud of that work. We also have the end
of the pandemic era relief funds for all school districts across the nation. And we use those funds to do good work for kids and m much of that is is remaining even after the funds are gone. So you can see St. Louis, Adams 12, our neighbors to the north, Chicago public
schools, LAUSD, all dealing with looming budget cuts. and we're going to continue to face a federal funding uncertainty. We were grateful that um for the advocacy of many of our state leaders uh to release
the 3 million of federal funding in July. Um it's allowing us one more year of of not having to impact people's jobs immediately. uh and we are uh being told there's every indication that these
funds will not be coming back next fiscal year. We are waiting to see what the impacts will be uh of on Medicaid funds for school districts and and other title funds like title one. We are hoping that they are minimal or not
nothing as we move towards the future, but um we all know that there's a lot of uncertainty at the federal level right now and we may end up having to grapple with that as well. And then of course there's the state funding uncertainty. We all know that they're in session right now um dealing
with uh the impacts of the federal changes on the state budget and we anticipate that those challenges will continue into the regular session um as we round out into the 2026 fiscal or 2026 um calendar year.
So the truth is there's going to be reductions. Reductions are going to impact all of us. They will result in fewer services for students, schools, and employees. State and federal decisions are moving targets and will also impact us. We may need to make cuts
more than one year. And we don't have all the answers yet. But we also have the hope, right? That we can take the right next step by planning for the reductions. That we can monitor and adjust as
federal and state policy evolve. That we can raise additional local funds and really focus our energies towards a mill levy override in hopefully the next year to three. And our choices now will help to sustain the district and serve
generations for or students for generations to come. we have proven in Jeffco um that we can do hard things um and so that to me is also part of the hope. I want to talk for just a minute about the potential local ballot measures um
as we begin to think about um some of the investments and reductions. We know that we could raise approximately 64 million in a general purpose Milvie override which is basically um an increase for programming. It it might go
to great educators, compensation for employees, safe schools, bright futures, curriculum, um those kinds of things. And and that would take us to our limit in state statute of general purpose mil levy override. We also know that the
state allows for specialurpose mevy override above and beyond the limit for general purpose milly override. We're continuing to calculate that dollar amount. We don't have it yet, but it's a TBD. It it is something we can add on top of the 64 million for the purpose of
cap capital and technology. I think there's also something for transportation. But so it these are the two options that eventually the board can talk about and consider one or both of them for a potential ballot measure in the next one to three years.
Okay. So every day that a child walks into a Jeffco school is a day that matters. When we reviewed some of this information with our school leaders about a week and a half ago, we told them, "We know that this is big work. We know this is difficult work and we know this is a hard message to share right
before school starts. We want you to now just remember that this is not your work right now. We've given you general talking points and your goal going into next week or the week after, I can't remember if this was a week or two ago, is to make sure that every kindergartner who walks through your door on Tuesday
has a great day, right? Because you only get to be a kindergartener for the first day one time. And I am so proud of our school principles and our educators. As I was in five different schools on Tuesday, the joy, the commitment, not
only of our classroom teachers, but all the wraparound supports and the educators who were taking care of backpacks and lunches and saying goodbye to parents with tears in their eyes because I saw some of those, too. And I get it. I've had a kindergartener. Um,
I've had a first day of first grade. It was a special day in Jeffco and I'm really proud of our educators and our school leaders for making it a special day. Um, and so this year we've got to do two things, right? We've got to acknowledge that we're going to have a disruptive process of trying to deal
with these budget cuts and we have to work on staying positive and committed to the work that's in front of us that impacts kids every day. We have indication that we are moving in the right direction and we need to continue to do that work, but we also have to make sure that we have a structurally
sound budget and that work's going to be hard. So, we're asking everybody to join with us, leaders, staff members, and partner with us to help move forward with clarity, unity, and care. And now I'm handing it over to Brena. We get to share um budget cuts on
microphones. Okay. Um, good evening. I am going to pick up uh the baton here and share a little bit more detailed information about the current year budget and a little bit more background about um the financial piece of how we
got here. I'm good. Um, okay. So, one um way to envision uh the district's kind of financial both revenue growth and then some of our compensation growth is to plot it all on one chart. That's looking
at a cumulative percentage over time. Um note that a cumulative percentage over time is not simply a sum of percentages each year. it um continues to look at a starting value and then says by the third year what's the cumulative percentage growth by comparing back to
the first year. So um folks who are looking at this graph and wondering wait that wasn't my memory of the sum of percentages is because we're continuing to measure back in time on this graph. Um over the last four years cumulative increases in compensation for returning staff have outpaced revenue and
inflation. You see um inflation down there, the cumulative percentage was 20% and revenue the cumulative percentage was 22% and then you see by employee group the cumulative percentage increase. Yes,
just for clarity, that does not include step and lane changes for people over that time period from the starting year to this um I'm sorry, why would it not include step changes that those are increases that an employee gets?
It does include that. Yeah, it does. Okay, the question does Okay, sorry. Um, great. Please would I don't I don't think this is right but I'm asking would it like if
I looked at the JCA line for example 40% would you interpret that to say um a teacher salary since 20 FY22 has increased by 40%. That yes the average teacher who has
stayed with the district over that time period has received a 40% increase in their salary. Yeah. Um, okay. Account type. Um, so this is the current year budgeted expenditures. We talk a
lot about the budget and I know that um, sometimes that's inclusive of revenue, sometimes not. We're going to focus a little bit on expense for the moment. Uh, this is the general fund only. uh given the fund consolidation project now more than ever the general fund includes almost all of um our recurring
operational programming etc. Um our general fund expenses are budgeted nearly the same as the prior year meaning 2526 looks really similar to 2425. Um and as per usual um most of that is
salary and benefits. So 84% is the combo of that um magenta wedge and the orange wedge. Um you can also see that service accounts account for 8% of our budget, materials and supplies 3%, capital outlay 1% and transfers 4%. Transfers at
the moment are to um capital reserve fund at a lower level, the insurance reserve fund which is what pays for our risk insurance and liability insurance etc. um the food nutrition services fund and tiny little amounts to a couple
other funds. Can I ask a question there? Um help me relate the two and I know you've done this before, Miss Copeland, so thank you for your patience. Salary accounts here Oh, I think I just answered it. Are 64% and benefits are
20%, which is how we get to the 85%. Never mind. I can do math. We're good. Awesome. You're the the charts are working. I love it. Yes, please. Sorry, because I I'm still on that last slide. Can I just clarify one more thing, please? Yes. Okay. Like a Jesuspa employee. Yes.
That was making $10 an hour has now almost is now should or let's say $20 an hour is now making $30 an hour almost minus 4%. So 46% raise in an hourly.
Yes, that is how to do the Yes, absolutely. Okay, can you just do you can you rattle off the beginning the lowest wage when we got here and the and uh No, but if that's a curiosity, I will say
we can take a couple of employees and filled out a scenario. Oh, totally. I did pressure test this one day when I was tired and so I just went into people's soft and pulled up a bunch of employee records and was like, "What was their salary in this year? What's their salary in this year?" I was like, "Oh, huh. This seems to be right." And that's non-scientific, but
nonetheless, yes. Okay. Um, program type. So, this is again the same dollar amounts for the general fund budgeted expense. Um, this time broken out by program type. So, a program is simply
like in service of what, right? Like what are we trying to achieve by spending money on something? Now, important to note in this analysis, um, a program such as general instruction now includes salary, supplies and materials, purchase services. It
includes all those things that you just saw in the prior slide. It is not limited to salary and benefits. So, general instruction here budgeted at um 475 million for the current year um includes a whole bunch of stuff including our curricular materials etc.
Right? So the program can apply to any s any account type you and and all account types show up in each of these programs. I just want to be clear they kind of overlap with each other. Um so we uh the way that we were able to hold um overall
budgeted expenditures flat while increasing um expenses in general instruction, special education instruction operations and instructional support um was by decreasing our contribution to the capital reserve fund. And that was a
decision that the board made in the spring. Um recognizing that uh there there is a certain amount of capital maintenance that needs to happen every year and um we have to sort of track that, right? We have to track what a reasonable amount is to spend, etc. And
so by not making that contribution, we're going to draw a little bit more from the capital reserve fund balance that exists today. Um and we're going to continue to track the need over time for what do we expect to invest in the future in our facilities. Okay,
this is just a summary of both budgets last year and the current year. Um the difference here is you've got revenue and therefore you've got um how much of our reserves are we deploying towards the budgeted expenses for the year. Um last year's budget we budgeted for about
um 38 millionish in reserves to help us achieve our our budget expenses. Uh this year we budgeted for about 39. I'm going to talk a little bit more about those numbers on this slide which is our multi-year forecast. So we always present uh when we're presenting a
budget for adoption, we present that year plus two. Um that is um a statutory thing that we do and it's also just good practice. So, I'm a fan. Um, and we indicated that we had done our best to anticipate future revenue increases. Um,
we do well, as of last May, we were projecting a revenue increase based on the information we were receiving from the state. The state was giving us two things that made us think that was possible. One was an estimate of CPI. Two was an estimate of their rollout
plan of the new school finance formula. um everybody's operating from the best information they have at the time. This is what we had. Um so we expected that for 2627 we would have about 20 million more in revenue. Um we also then forecast out expenditures and to be
realistic we do increase the expenditures slightly year-over-year. Um so that we don't kind of skew one thing or the other. We kind of try to increase expense at a rate similar to that of revenue. Um so you can see kind of
matched increases a little bit um slight divergence. Um and so that produces the source and use of fund balance or um I prefer to call it reserves that seems to make more sense to people. So um reserves in future years. Now um we have certain
required reserves. We spoke about that earlier. Taber reserves uh which is supposed to be 3% of your annual spend. Um easy math. I love this billion dollar budget because I just sort of round down and then say 3% is 30 million. Um, school carry forward is not a required
reserve. That's a um that's a management and district decision um to provide an opportunity for schools to access the district reserves in a subsequent year based on their prior year under spend. um operational reserves. You know, when
we pivoted to the budgeting methodology we currently have where the budget figure itself is simply a cost estimate. It's not the full permission to spend, but it's lowered by expected vacancy savings, expected underspend, um
expected turnover savings, all those things that we talk quite a bit with um the board about, we talk with our bargaining units about. So, we do make those assumptions about those savings and we apply it to the total um amount to get down to a budget number that's
actually lower than um what we're ultimately approved to do as a district in that scenario because um we don't want to break appropriation. We um appropriate a portion of our reserves just for timing um certain expenses that
come up. Maybe we don't have the vacancy we thought, maybe we don't have the turnover we thought, um etc., etc. because that's those are all just at that point estimates. Um multi-year commitments very small 2 million um designated for next fiscal
year fund use. So each time um we're getting to the end of a fiscal year and we're looking to the next fiscal year. If that next fiscal year requires a use of reserve, we have to assign it in the the current year. Right? So here we are
June 30 of 25 24 25 and we're like oh next year we're going to use 39 so we have to assign it as of June 30. So that's why you see that number it should match it's exactly what the subsequent year use of fund balance is and that's um a state law.
Okay. Yes. If uh if our scenario was a $60 million reduction like you presented I think and yep it was that was the scenario. Yep. So what that would do is for this forecast for the 2627 year it could just as a scenario
like get us to not be using 46 million in reserves and then put 14 more million in the fund balance. No, I think uh the the scenario I tried to illustrate with the
60 um was built off this 46 number recognizing that um 40 45 to 46 approximately um would be used towards the remaining recurring expenses in the general fund and the additional 15 would represent the recurring capital expenses
that we had deferred. So it would reinstate that contribution. So it would make us even. That's correct. Yes. I know it's a little counterintuitive. Why is it we cut 60 and we're even with one million off? Because you said 15 and 14. It's It
doesn't matter. I'm sorry. I round um just No. No. Yeah. To keep it simple. Okay. And then for the future years, then we would not be dipping into that. That wouldn't be a $56 million use of
fund balance because we would have eliminated that. um for the future years it gets a little more complicated but in short um it certainly would not be 56. Okay. Who knows? Well, I'm sorry. Yeah.
Um and and I do want to comment um I think there's been multiple folks who have acknowledged that which we can control and that which we can't. Um we can set a target for budget reductions and we can achieve a target for budget reductions. What we can't do is know
what that will mean in terms of our use of reserves because the use of reserves depends not just on the budgeted expense but also on actual revenue and we don't we can't control it and so that's why um I feel confident and optimistic that
when we talk about things that are achievable a budget reduction is achievable um what I can't promise or prognosticate on is um what might that mean for a future use of reserves Cool. That's it.
Except not really. Oh. Oh, yes. Thank you so much. Um I had meant to say on this previous slide, um I'm so excited tonight. Also a little nervous. Um that these are all budget figures. They are not forecasted
figures, right? um as we're closing out last year and um particularly now that we have like May's actuals we get by the end of June really it takes a month for everything to hit and payroll to post and bills and so forth and so on. May
came in pretty high um in terms of expense and then June came in pretty high in terms of expense. Um our emerging forecast, we're not done booking all the entries to close the year. Um is that revenues pretty close
to spot-on um expenditures are coming in about one to one and a half% higher um than the budget. And again, since the budget was just an estimate, um overspending that estimate is just simply um we had fewer vacancies. we had
an expense that went up beyond our control, but we knew we needed to do that thing, whatever that thing is. Um, so I suspect that the use of reserves last year um is going to be higher than that budget figure. And what that also
means for the current year um because these are expenses that are recurring, these are realities that are recurring. Vacancies are going down and um certain uncontrollable costs are going up. It means that by the time we get to January and revise the budget for the current
year, uh the use of uh reserves will be higher. Yes. That higher spend towards the end of the year, May, June, and maybe even a little before then, is any of that attributable to the tariffs and some of the other
increased costs that we've talked about in the past? Um, you know, that's a great question. if I can take that and maybe do some detailed research. Um, most of what I was seeing um was in contracted services
for our students and salaries. Okay. Thanks. Um there is if I'm if I can add at CAC this morning um Barry and team and Mark have some pretty good summaries of the increases that we've seen attributed to
tariffs broken out even into like copper, steel, concrete. Um so there's a resource that might be supportive. Yeah. And that will be helpful as we look at the capital reserve fund and what we're able to afford in terms of capital investments with the budget
that's been um approved for the current year. It's probably not going to go as far as we would have hoped. Yeah. Thank you. Okay, Mary Paula.
Okay, we're ready. Thank you. So, board members, um, we started approximately 30 minutes late on this section. I do know your meeting is currently set to potentially end at 8, which is in 16 minutes. Um, do you want I I just want to understand before I
attempt to go really fast through something. Would you prefer that I aim for 8 8:30 some other figure? Anyone have strong feelings? How about going to 8:30?
Okay. So, I should aim for 8:30. Great. Thank you very much. Okay. Um, so what I'm about to share, uh, you can tell by the slides and the and the colors and the logo. Um, this is not work product of my team directly.
Um, this is work product of a nonprofit, um, group out of Boston called Education Resource Strategies. Um, this is a local district revenue comparison. Um, which is now a sort of separate slide deck and separate report from an
expense comparison. Um back in the early spring uh the financial advisory committee after looking at the multi-year forecast and other types of things after thinking through okay what needs to happen in Jeffco they had recommended that we um do some analysis
and some comparisons of both revenue and expense and that we do those locally and nationally. Um they brought that recommendation to the board. Um you all seem to think that was also a good idea. um my staff didn't have the capacity to do this and it's really hopefully just
one-time work. I hope we don't do this every year. Um and and so this is the outcome of that. All right. So the publicly available data we're going to use for the local comparisons are kind of adjacent districts of Denver, Doug, Adams,
Arapjo, which is Aurora, Pter, and Boulder. And then uh the rest of this table gives you data about enrollment counts um student demographics etc to try to help you understand um how comparable is data across these
districts. Now the bulk of this deck the bulk of this um report is going to talk about per student dollar amounts. Now a per student dollar amount starts to help us um adjust for size, right? It's not perfect. Um, is Boulder and Jeffco a
great comparison? If Boulder's less than half our size, you know, not great, but still that's what we got, right? Um, and so everything will be stated largely in terms of per student amounts and that helps us kind of get down to more of an apples to apples as compared to the
gross figures. In this revenue comparison, um, there's sort of three key takeaways. One is we have lower overall per pupil revenue. Uh two is that we have not used our full mill levy override capacity and other
districts generally have. Um three is that uh a greater share of our general fund is currently transferred to our capital reserve fund. Um, and from what we can tell, that's because some of our neighboring districts have a specialurpose mill levy override that
deposits directly into their um, capital fund and so they don't need to transfer into that. So, this is total total revenue including capital, including all sources. All right. um our per student revenue um and this
is looking at FY25 was about 19,700 I'm rounding um compared to a median across the five comparison districts of about 25,850. Now you see some variation, right? We've got a couple districts pretty close to
us at about 20 a little over 20,000 and then you got three districts a little bit higher. Um, we are just using uh letters of the alphabet to refer to the districts through the rest of the deck. When it comes to Yes. Yes.
really quick. I assume do we know what those districts are? Yes. In the background data. Okay. That's all on slide two. Um, it actually tells you. Slide two has the legends. Got it. Thank you. Thank you. for um Perfect. Yeah, it does.
earlier in the deck. It does though. Yep. Yeah. Thank you. Um so portion of total revenue from local, state, and federal sources. Um you know, one thing that often the media
actually is curious about is how much money do we get from federal sources? Um, good news, bad news, I don't know, 5%. Right. Um, not a huge dollar amount and and that is by design, right? Um, that the federal government's funding is
really special purpose in nature and um, not designed to supplant um, states and local jurisdictions funding their own public education. That's the system we have. Um for us, the state provides about 35% of our revenue and local
sources across all contributions. So whether that's um the taxes that our taxpayers pay towards um base funding or total program funding, that's the 27 mills, or the overrides or um additional
taxes to either service debt. Um that all of that is considered local. Even our um SOT, which is our Oh goodness, I shouldn't have attempted with my late brain. It's some about transport. No, specific ownership tax. I knew I was
going to get it. Okay, that's the thing I pay every year on the car. Yeah. And new cars. Every car. All right. Um similar breakout to the peer medium, but there is some variance across districts. Um, interestingly, District Z um, their
local taxpayers um, pay 86% of their total revenue. And so the state only has to come up with 11%. Um, so in the state of Colorado, the state adjusts what they fund based on how much you
receive locally. And um so taxpayers in district Z are funding almost the entirety of their entire public education and the state doesn't have to contribute as much. Okay. Now we're going to talk just about total programs. You can see um this
number right here was about 19,700 total total revenue across all sources including federal, including grants, including capital, etc. This is now a subset of general fund revenue.
All right, general fund is just one of the funds. It doesn't include the grant fund, etc., etc. Um, and this is looking at for total program, which is a state term. The reason it's in quotes is it's not really our total. Um, it's the
formula funding that's determined in the school finance act. that formula funding represents about 75%ish of our general fund revenue. So, not shown here is like 25% of our general fund revenue approximately.
Um, in Jefferson County, when it comes to just the formula funding, the state provides about 51% and local taxpayers pay the equivalent of about 49%. So, it's almost a 50/50 split when it comes
to formula funding here. And again, you see some variance across other localities where their local taxpayers are paying the same mill rate, which is 27 mills, but that produces a larger portion of their um public education
costs for this part. Okay. Now, this is just a numeric sum of the mills themselves. And mills are simply a rate. It's 1/ one 10,000th of um a net assessed value,
right? So rates I think of as like decimals, but because it's 1 10,000, I have no idea how many zeros are after the decimal and before the one, but it's one of those things. So you apply that rate times your assessed value. And this
is a count of how many times you do this. So in Jeffco towards education, um 44 mills are assessed. 27 of those are those base mills that are required by state law. 11 are voter approved overrides and six are um additional
overrides. They're still overrides um that help us service our debt, right? Um and then you can see across these other districts um how variable mill rates are. So when you think about a mill rate as a tax rate, you know, I think about
like just taxes as my personal income taxes or whatever and that's a rate I understand because it's not 1/ 1000th. Um these voters are effectively paying and agreeing to pay because everything above the dark blue is approved by the local voters um a higher rate. So it
would be like me saying I want to move from my current tax bracket up to a 35% tax bracket. That that's what um some of these folks are doing. So, does that does that make sense in terms of how these things are different heights? Okay.
Now, yes, ma'am. Nope. So, um when we looked at some of the slides like slide five for example, district Z had 86% of its funding provided locally. But when we look at
this one, district Z arguably doesn't have that much more in the mills. It's not the highest mill there. So, how does how does that math work? The next slide. So good, Brena.
This is we this we work so well together. Um, so net district Z has net property value per pupil property value of $354,000. So their 46
48 mills applied to that amount per pupil produces more money. Does that make sense? Yep. Um so when we look at just net assessed property value and this is getting a
little esoteric but still very interesting because it helps us understand um questions just like that we have in millions which basically means these are billions I just read the first number 13.5 billion dollars of net assessed
property value now that represents approximately 7% of actual residential and 29% of actual ual commercial, right? Like this is nowhere close to the actual property value in Jeffco. Um but it is
the net assessed amount. It's that you know you the thing is worth this but we only really tax on this. Um so we got we have the second most amount of property value. So if we added one mill, right,
we would collect more money than four out of five districts because of that. Now on a per pupil basis when you adjust for our size, right, we still actually are above the median and above most districts except two. Um and so our
property value could work in service of students pretty efficiently if we chose to, right? We wouldn't have to add a lot of taxes um to generate some more money. That's what this means. Okie dos. Um,
Jeffco could have raised approximately 66 million in additional revenue in FY25 and that would have been um split between the district and its charters, the district share would have been about 57 million. Um, if we had fully utilized
our override capacity on just the general purpose overrides, not all these other overrides. Um and so here you see in terms of mill levy override utilization um not every district has fully maxed out theirs right and this is why it's important that we see this data
um you know sometimes I think we simplify and we say everybody has well no not everybody has um and you can go back to this if you want to call them out I don't wish to call them out um but there are some districts who are in a similar spot to us okay
and then finally this is just this the point I had made at the beginning about um you know what are our general fund transfers and then what portion of them are going to the capital reserve fund. So the dark blue um is what's going to
the capital reserve fund and the green is what's going to other funds. Now this this was last year right? So prefund consolidation I think right? No no no no wait I'm doing something wrong. Nope. Um, this does include when we had the 26
million transportation fund, um, etc. So, sorry, this was before that because we had to do it on the uniform budget summaries because that was the applesto apples comparison and when we adopted our uniform budget summary, we hadn't yet done the fund consolidation. So, we did it afterwards, but we did actually do it last year. So all of which to say
these other districts are not um as a percentage of total general fund they are not transferring as much to capital reserve as we were back when we were doing the 30 million and that is generally because they have other sources of dedicated revenue um to fund
facility and technology investments. All right. Uh before we move on to expense, any questions on revenue? Wonderful. Okay, let's toggle to the sec the second third deck. Yeah, one of
those. Why was there why? Because there was a Y on I think every slide. It wasn't in the right spot. I'm sorry. I'll fix that. I did want to get them in the same order.
Um, all right. We are switching gears. Uh, this is the money going out expense. Okay. 29 and a half minutes. All right. Project approach. So ERS conducted two
separate analyses for us. One is a highle comparison of publicly available FY25 budgeted revenue and expense data. By the way, the revenue was in the prior deck. Um as stated in a uniform budget summary. So uniform budget summaries are
posted to every district's website. It's based on their adopted budget. Again, it was our amended budget that did our fund consolidation. So that's why we're um that's why it still had all those transfers to other funds. Uh but we want to do apples to apples. So we pull
everyone's uniform budget summary. Second and separate um they did a detailed comparison analysis of standardized budget budgeted expenses and staffing data. The uniform budget summary has zero staffing information whatsoever. Um there are a couple other
sources of some staffing data but not great and not reliable. um always some of them are good. Um but this detailed comparison of standardized budgeted expense and staffing data kind of puts everything coded similarly, right? A
chart of accounts which is what we have. Um we have a statewide one, then we have one in Jeffco that roughly maps to it. Um it all in involves subjectivity and how you apply it. You you have to use judgment about where to put things. um
to the best of our ability, we try and follow guidance and put things in the right spot. But, you know, I called um four different CFOs and I got four different answers for where folks code, for example, instructional superintendent. Which program is it in? And each of them gave me a different
answer. No one's necessarily wrong, right? No one's breaking the law. Everyone's saying, "This is how we structure that role and this is how we read CDE guidance and this is where we put it." and CDE knows that and they're not calling anyone up and saying put it
somewhere else, right? Um so to standardize, ERS has worked with a number of districts over the years um in some pretty intensive project based work funded by other things um and built this database that has this standardized apples to apples. They they code
everything um the right way. So sped always shows up in the same place, pair of professionals always show up in the same place, etc. It's really helpful. Um, and it has more staffing data. So, that's the second part is this detailed comparison of standardized budgeted
expense and staffing data. And you'll hear me kind of signpost which one are we talking about? Is it local? Is it national? Is it not standardized? Is it standardized? Right. same uh set of Colorado comparison
districts um district name and uh their alphabet code letter is listed here. This is the list of national comparison districts. Um, ERS is showing you in what year did they do a project funded by either that
district or who knows? Um, and was it of budget or actuals, right? Um, most of these are budget, a couple are actuals, you know, hopefully those things are never too far apart. That's certainly
our philosophy. We try and establish our budget based on our actuals. uh you can see enrollment uh percentage of students with disabilities, percentage of students eligible for free and reduced price priced lunch um and percentage of students who are English
language learners. So we're looking for rough comparability across some of these metrics to understand whether um these districts are similarish to Jeffco. Yes, I have lots of questions about this
comparison, but the first um the year of data, like some of this is precoid data. Yes, I know when I publish in peerreview journals, they don't let me use data this old. Okay. I'll get rejected. Wow. Um because what the budget was in
2020 and how they were spending, if we had their 2020 five data like we have for ours, it would probably be remarkably different. So now we're comparing this to a 2020 budget. I mean, we should be comparing
our 2020 budget then. like I'm I'm unclear how especially these really old ones are comparable to a current funding environment. Yeah. How do you
what do you make of that? Um yeah, didn't you say that um you use the CPI or the inflation to adjust? I mean the dollars themselves are brought forward to an inflationadjusted comparable amount. However, I don't think that's your point. Your point is that um things in
general were very different. Is that right? Are like are these enrollment numbers 2020 numbers? Was there enrollment 94,000 in 2020? The uh enrollment figure is not adjusted. The dollars in the budget or the actuals
are brought forward and adjusted for um inflation. so that you know we're um comparing the R25 numbers to what would be their 25 numbers
um just the only adjustment is inflation. So if they had um a big change in their state finance calculations in the last five years, we don't know that. That's correct. But we're comparing to whatever it was
in 2020. That's right. Do we know if any of the like 2022 numbers especially for DPS um if those included some of the COVID dollars like that we also got. Is there any distinction as to like if these are federal like came from the
federal funds or anything like that? That's a great question. Do you mind if I take that one and try and come back to you? Absolutely. Thanks. Sure. As we get further along here, I think what you're going to see is that
um what what a lot of the comparison in is is not how much money people get, but the percentage that they spend on particular aspects of running their district, which is, you know, a little different.
Sure. I just I think back to our and that's a valid point. we should let Miss Copeland go, I think is what you're um rightly suggesting. Um I just think about we had esser funds and we had funds that we allocated because we had
that money. And so when I think about how we allocate funding, some of I mean we've said it earlier, right? Some of the reason that we are now short is because we believe in the work that that supported and we've continued it. So that was the only reason I asked about the co funding and sorry I
if we compared our per pupil spending to 2020 levels it would probably be very different. Right. So that's what I'm No. um if we took it back in time um
right so what you're saying is what if we took our 25 figure and went the other way on the CPI and ratcheted it down it would show the same relationship to their 2020 so that relationship that comparison of a dollar figure stated in
the same time period dollars um is going to be the same the percentage difference is going to be the same etc. So when you show like for example how much we pay people, right? That's a comparison. How much we pay in 2025, are we comparing that to how much, say, like
Shelby County Schools paid in 2020? Um, adjusted by inflation. Okay. To be stated in $25. Okay. Anyways, that's one concern I have. And then just the like the difference and the variance and
differences in here. Mhm. Um, this is just an unusual data set to compare to because there's multiple variances in differences. So, it's the validity of
the comparison I think is questionable. Ju justifically, yeah, totally. Did you feel the same way about our local comparisons that are different sized and different students with dis disabilities, different FRL, different ELLL?
Yes. Okay. Okay. So, generally in your opinion the comparisons are that one is easier because we are in the same kind of at least state funding environment. So like there's a constant variable there
that is probably weighted higher right than almost any other variable. Per perhaps there's the mills and other things but that even that in these we don't have a constant variable that could be weighted very high to even make this comparison
very valid. So unless we can find one that makes them similar enough to even say these are comparable. So, I just I'm having a really hard time with the comparison and Okay. be Thank you.
All right. Um Okay. So, let's look uh let's go back to the local comparisons um which is working from the uniform budget summary um which is stated in a common set of codes, program codes, account codes. However, those are
applied a little bit differently across districts and um you'll start to see some of that. So, key takeaways for the local comparison of expenses. Um the first is uh that locally we have lower per pupil spending overall.
Um we have lower per pupil instructional spending though higher proportion on salaries and higher average teacher salaries. We have higher per pupil spending on supporting student services and school administration. I'm going to walk through each of these in greater detail, so I'm not going to
spend too much time on the summary. So, Jeffco spends approximately 13.5% less than um the peer median of um our local comparison districts on what's called non- capital expenditures. I'm going to define that in just a second.
um and less overall than all five peer districts. Now, because we just at the revenue presentation, you're also familiar with the fact that our revenue is lower. So, it does stand to reason um that if we have less revenue, we probably should and will be spending
less per student. Oh, and and sorry, non- capital is simply teasing out there handful of funds that run our capital activity. Ours are the capital reserve fund and a couple building funds. Um, ditto for these guys, right? You can see on their
uniform budget summaries what's capital, what's not capital. So, we've taken capital out because there's noise in that data because of the timing. And you can see that on this slide. So, for example, um, district Z was in the midst of spending quite a bit per pupil on capital. Now, that's probably because
they were doing something akin to um, a bond program. And in fact, um I believe their voters had passed, hypothetically, if I knew which district, um a fairly large bond that they were really ramping up relatively quickly at this moment.
And so to to tease out this noise, um they are able to back that out so long as they're reporting everything in the same way. So in subcategories um also you know we refer to these largely as programs although some of them are consolidating
some programs so that um we're just making this a little bit simpler to digest to be perfectly honest. Um here's how our spending per pupil compares to these districts some of which are quite a bit smaller than we are but the per pupil amounts hopefully
adjust for that. Um overall instructional spend is lower. We would expect that because overall spend is lower uh approximately 15% lower than peer median though salaries and benefits are a greater proportion of instructional spending. So that's saying
that um the blue part which is salary and benefits that are coded to the program of instruction represent a larger percentage of the stack. the stack is the full amount coded to that same program um than the peer median
and I think we had talked a little bit about this before about the fact that the program of instruction is not just salary and benefits it's other things too okay but we really prioritize um spending on people
so what what does that represent does that represent um how many people we have does it represent um how much we pay them. Um what we see when we try to look at FTE teachers per 500 students and average teacher
salaries. Now at this point we're switching data sets. Um and you see the data um noted on the bottom. Um this is education staffing data and paired with some school finance funding. Um we do an annual submission
as does every district our HR team um on staffing. They basically export our payroll data from December and try to code things into semicconsistent codes um and then report it to CDE. And these are all Excel files. I'm happy to um
send you links to them. It's all available. You can download it yourself. Um and so that's where we're getting these counts from. The problem is um again people sometimes call things different things and we can't adjust for
that. we just have to sort of go with um this reporting. So from this reporting that every district does every year at approximately December and now it's actuals, it's not budget, it's how which people do you actually have on your payroll. Um and how many positions do
you have per 500 students? We have 30.5 teachers per 500 students. That says nothing about classroom size. That says nothing about what are these roles. That's just saying in the CDE reported data, what does that ratio look like? And everyone's sort of trying to follow
the same classifications and you see that that's roughly in line with the peer median, right? So staffing of teachers per f for 500 student is roughly in line with the peer median. Um and our average teacher salary at that
moment in time, an actual figure, um not a budgeted figure, uh was slightly higher than the peer median. Right? You can see there's a higher outlier towards the far right. Um but there's there's some of us are kind of clumped in that
medianish range. Okay. Um so now we're switching to a different category, a different program, which means working in service of a different objective and this is supporting student services
per the CDE chart of accounts. Um basically in a nutshell uh we can think of this as a lot of our um special education supports and wraparound supports. So across supporting student services we
actually spend more than our peer median per pupil. So 1700 versus 1500. And you see that um the biggest chunk of that or the seeming reason why um is purchase services. So we are purchasing
quite a few services on behalf of our students um more than it would seem other districts are doing. Um X is a little bit fascinating. I would honestly say again some of the
outliers I can understand some I can't explain and I sometimes think it has more to do with coding but I don't know so because I I we we can't sort of call the district and have them walk every all of us through all the things. Yes.
So would our para educators like standard para educators in the classroom be in this one or would they be in the teacher one? Um they're not in this this data set by the way is just the personnel data as reported by human capital
instruction as a category of spending is going to include our parah educators sorry paraprofessionals that are non-sped sped is probably in this Okay, now we're going to switch to another category. Um, operations and
maintenance. Um, Jeffco spends comparably to peers, though appears to code more of our utilities to purchase services instead of supplies. And so per the CDE chart of accounts, supplies and materials can include energy purchases such as natural
gas and electricity. Other utilities like water, sewage, telephone, internet are typically included in purchase services. Jeffco had a standing tradition of always including the full amount in purchase services. I'm totally open to changing that if folks would prefer that we code stuff to supplies
and materials. It'll throw off a little bit of our year-over-year comparisons, but I'm a fan if it means I could spend a little bit less time talking about purchase services. So, um, District V, um, has no salaries in
operations and maintenance. um don't really want to speculate suspect that they're moving quite a few of their um facilities maintenance and other operations staff to a special purpose fund um that's supposed to be
invested in capitalized um investments. Okay. within within a combined category again you working a little bit with the CDE chart of accounts of general admin business services central and other support Jeffco spends less overall
driven by lower spending in purchase services so here you see um Jeffco's per pupil spend on these categories is 1,600 and the peer median is 2800 we are both lower than the peer median by approximately 50% and we are lower than
every district questions. Yes. Is that a nature of the utility aspect or No, this excludes utilities. Utilities is here. Um, this is general admin, business services, central and other support. So,
this is what's often referred to as central office plus on some level. Um, it represents our business and operations functions. as well as um this is where it shows up primarily, although there's certain
parts of it that get coded to um instruction when we're talking about supplies and materials that are technology related that are in the classroom, right? It's never perfect. Um but nonetheless, uh we spend quite a bit less per student on general admin, business services, central and other
support. And no, this is not including utilities. Thank you. This is and I mean I'm just going to make the point that we often and this is not just in Jeffco. It's in any district I've ever worked in. You know the narrative about you know the central
office just cut the central office. There's too much at the central office. It's um it's where all the bloat is so to speak. I do think this is interesting because most districts don't want to put to code things into this category
because there is that criticism out there which I think is a fair criticism. We should run a lean and mean central services team. Um but I will tell you that anecdotally maybe not so mean maybe not so mean maybe lean and kind but um we we sh we uh we know also
anecdotally just through interactions with peer districts that we are lean so when we when CFO talks to the CFO the financial team in districts that are smaller or similar in size to us are
much larger HR is much larger and so I do I think it's data that shows that we are an efficient central office and that we have tried hard to push most of our funding into um as close as possible to
students. And I just also want to highlight that because when we start looking at targets, if we set targets higher for operations departments than we do for things that are closer to students, which I'm not arguing against, I'm just saying this is
we're going to be even leaner in terms of the services that we're going to be able to provide for our schools from the central team. So that's just a point I think it's I think it's an important point to make related to data that is showing something different than I think
some of the feedback we always get. So yesterday in the FAC um one of our members asked you know could we get just get the numbers so the story can have numbers on it. How many in these other districts how many people are we
staffing in each of these areas? Um so there's sort of a yes and no answer to can we get that. Um the publicly available and reported data does not break out FTEES by these
functions to any level of detail whatsoever. Um, and so we scoured um those reports to try and get to the teacher stuff, which is the point of the report. The the if you go look on the CDE's
website, that's really what they're trying to address mostly. And they say this is teacher data. Um, so it's not there. It's not in the uniform budget summary. Could we call and ask for all that? We could. Um it
we then have to figure out are they calling things the same thing we're calling things. Um and we want to make sure we're doing the right moment in time comparisons and we want to make sure we're doing actuals versus budget or budget versus actuals. Which one are we talking about? Um it starts to take
quite a bit of time and so uh we have not attempted to call each of the districts. would be time for them and time for us to both collect it and analyze it, then ask the questions, then reclassify, then try to make it apples to apples. So, in short, um what Tracy's
referring to is a little bit more generalized. Um we do sometimes touch base. So, I I touch base regularly with other CFOs and I do ask them, hey, will you send me your org chart? Will you show me this? And so, I have that type
of data. Um but it wouldn't um pass I think your standards for data collection. I was wondering like like when Superintendent Dorland says Denver has a much bigger finance department and that we've heard that well it would
just be nice to know what the numbers are. My expectations pretty low and like a count. Yeah, that's all I'm asking for. And it even if we just did it at like broad levels just so if instead of saying anecdotally we've heard that our finance department is much smaller than
others, it would just be helpful to be like and ours is 10 and theirs is 25. Yeah. Because it's and I understand they might not code it that way. I'm just saying it's Yeah, it's a it's a it's a it's a powerful story that doesn't have data. So it's hard to
It does. We we can keep trying. I mean, I've done that a few times over my four years here and generally I'm just discouraged and so I I don't always do it every year. Um but yes, it means um I'm happy to call Chuck um and say, "Hey, can you send me your ORC chart and
your FTE report and make sure I know which things like in DPS I have to back out their data submissions team um as part of financial services. Our data submissions team is somewhere else." Consultant do that. Huh? Couldn't the firm that we paid all this money to do this do that for you?
And um we wanted to you know what? Let me um I'm sorry. I'm I'm trying to stay on task and I'm I I enjoy the dialogue. Thank you for the questions. Um I'm going to go back to this slide and does
anyone have any more questions on this? Okay. Okay. Within school administration as a category of expenses, Jeffco spends more than our peer median um driven by higher spending on salaries and benefits. You
see the dark blue is bigger than the dark blue and the peer median. Um and so the question becomes what is that? Is that more people? Is that we pay our people more? Which is it? Um and so at least for principles and assistant principles
switching data sets now to um an FTE report that has actual salaries. It's an actual proforma. Um, we do have 2.4 principles and assistant principles per 500 students. The peer median is 2.2.
You see folks kind of congregating around that 2.2. Um, district V has 3.1. Um, W and Z or, you know, a little bit lower. So, uh, so again, we have slightly more. It doesn't seem to be super substantial. uh when you look at
the average principal and assistant principal salary and that's combining that whole group into one which is the way CDE looks at it um our uh salary is higher at 125 compared to the peer median of 112 but again you see um a
district that's substantially taller and some that are aggregated a little bit lower etc. So here we see the this the sort of takeaway is we both have slightly more of them and we pay them more. Okay.
Okay. Can we pause? We can pause. Yeah. I just want to ask me I want to check in. And so Mary, can you just help us decide? It's 8 it's almost 8:30. It's heavy content. It's complicated data. Um I think we should stop the presentation now and just see if anyone has a
question you want answered right now and then continue in September is what you're thinking. Yeah. And then we can also send in more questions um you know through the regular format. Yeah. Any questions? More questions.
I just have um one quick comment. I think um I appreciate the data that is Colorado specific especially because I know it's calibrated by year. So, it's saying FY25 and we're I feel like it's
clear that we're um deriving a story based on data from the from those numbers. I like Dr. Varta am struggling with the national peer data. There's there for me there's too many variables um to feel confident that what the story
that we're driving is something that is accurate and not um experiencing a lot of play because of the variables in year um and and all of the things that come with just different years in different states that that
story data story is harder for me to follow. So, I would actually dissuade if we're going to use this information in other settings that I I might not want to use that information. Um, but I do appreciate the Colorado based information. It feels more
straightforward and um easier to rely on. I feel like there's less variables uh with that. And so I just wanted to lift that up that the national peer data is difficult for me and it's not to the point that I would want to invest more money in trying to get different
numbers. I think I wouldn't want to I wouldn't want to invest anymore in trying to tell that particular story. I think the Colorado story is compelling enough because we are the funding situation in Colorado is unique compared
to any other state in the nation. And um so I think it's helpful for us to focus in on what is happening in Colorado. I have one shameless request. Is it possible to move these up to the beginning of our study sessions? And I
recognize that might be difficult, but it is it is really heavy and it's such good content and I find myself getting really tired. So, yeah, we we've um tried to make sure we're putting budget and finance things at the front of your meeting agendas.
This evening, we had requests from staff, teachers, and principles who were in their first week of school to go earlier in the agenda, which we wanted to respect just especially because they're just starting. Yeah. But I thank you for reminding us and we do know that that's a request been a request of the board.
The other thing I will say is um I mean you guys can talk and let us know if you want us to keep going in September or or not. Um this a as just as a reminder was a request of the financial advisory committee to look at some comparisons. Um and so the ERS group is the group
nationally that has data across the nation and if we continued to go there's some explanation about how they code certain things to make it more apples to apples versus some of the um I would say accounting coding um errors that are in
the Colorado data. So there are two very different stories, different data sets. I don't think this was ever intended to sort of be something we were using to just drive a decision. It's I think even in the memo um that's loaded into board
docs um definitely just a piece of a puzzle and frankly as I've reflected on the reports I don't think it has sort of like identified something glaring that we're doing super differently than
anybody else. Um, and I actually think that in in in some way in and of itself is helpful um to just confirm that yeah, we're investing in in the areas that generally speaking our our peer districts both
nationally and locally invest in. And there might be some a couple of outlier areas that we could take a look at, but it also doesn't mean that we don't want to value those areas more than other people. We might still want to. And so, um, I I do think it's interesting data
and I think it, um, we can continue to study it with you. You can give us some guidance on that over the course of the next couple weeks here. And, um, appreciate the time of evening. Well, I just want to say out loud I agree with you and I would also
recommend not pursuing that because of all the reasons. Okay. So, I am actually going to turn it over to Director Applegate to close us out. That brings us to the end of today's agenda, and we will stand adjourned. Our next scheduled meeting of the board is the board retreat scheduled
for tomorrow, 9:30 a.m. August 22nd at the Ed Center. Good night. Heat.