WEBVTT

METADATA
Video-Count: 1
Video-1: youtube.com/watch?v=LMUSHNiU8HA

NOTE
MEETING SECTIONS:

Part 1 (Video ID: LMUSHNiU8HA):
- 00:00:20: Board Roll Call and Labor Partner Meeting Introduction
- 00:01:45: CSEA Public Comment: Rescind the Proposed Riffs
- 00:07:12: SEIU Public Comment: Hypocrisy and Subcontracting Concerns
- 00:12:53: Presentation of Fiscal Stabilization Plan 2026-2027
- 00:18:51: Recap of the May Revision and Budget Projections
- 00:28:01: Historical Financial Challenges and Multi-Year Projection
- 00:35:15: Proposed Fiscal Stabilization Plan Actions and Impacts
- 00:45:02: Consequences for Budget Disapproval and Next Steps
- 00:48:15: Maria Palma Public Comment: Questioning Budget Decisions
- 00:51:18: Dian Guen Public Comment: Resignations Needed on the Board
- 00:54:02: David Tokovski Public Comment: Criticizing Labor Negotiations
- 00:56:34: Alexis Hill Public Comment: Protect High-Need Schools
- 00:59:03: Christian Flag Public Comment: Cinei and BAP Elimination
- 01:01:28: Jan Williams Public Comment: Protect Black Student Program
- 01:04:03: Tiffany Quarlles Public Comment: Supporting BSAP Funding
- 01:05:54: Day Sun Public Comment: Equity Investments for Highest Need
- 01:08:42: Michael Gwyn Public Comment: Extracurriculars are Important
- 01:10:10: Channing Martinez Public Comment: Have Some Guts!
- 01:12:08: Board Discussion; Ortiz Questions Per Pupil Spending
- 01:22:51: Board Discussion; Rivas Questions Methodology in Selecting Items
- 01:26:40: Board Discussion; Gomez Emphasizes Severe Cuts and Implores Aid
- 01:50:25: Diving into School Support Staff and Funding Transparency
- 01:52:19: Fund 17 Explanation, OPED Discussion, and Future Costs
- 01:54:26: Furlough Days, County Budget Approval, and Intervention
- 01:56:54: Public Comment: Appealing County Decisions and Fighting Budget Cuts
- 01:59:24: Public Comment: Superintendent Collaboration and Sacramento Advocacy
- 02:01:15: Public Comment: Budget Transparency and Funding History
- 02:14:11: Public Comment: Addressing Budget Concerns and Granularity
- 02:26:53: Public Comment: Transparency, Collaboration, and Tough Decisions
- 02:29:14: Public Comment: Continued Collaboration and Advocacy for Solutions
- 02:32:50: Round Two: Ongoing Collaboration and Revenue Task Force
- 02:35:08: Round Two: Impact of Fiscal Advisor and Maintaining Power
- 02:36:43: Round Two: Fiscal Stabilization Plan Revenue Breakdown
- 02:47:48: Round Two: Implementing Reductions and District Choices
- 02:55:15: Round Two: Importance of Public Education and Fighting Cuts
- 02:57:56: Round Two: Enrollment Strategies and District Intervention
- 02:59:22: Public Comment: Against Layoffs, Focusing on School Staff
- 03:02:03: Public Comment: Lack of Transparency and Budget Choices
- 03:05:06: Motion to Approve Classified Reductions, Workforce Adjustments
- 03:31:45: Forming Ad Hoc Committee on Artificial Intelligence (AI)


Part: 1

1
00:00:20.800 --> 00:00:36.880
Good morning. >> Welcome. The time is now 10:03 a.m. on May 21st, 2026. I'm going to go ahead. >> I'm going to take role. Miss Newell >> present. >> Dr. Rivas, >> present.

2
00:00:36.880 --> 00:00:59.840
>> Mr. Melvin, >> here. >> Miss Grigo >> here. Miss Gomez, uh, Miss Ortiz Franklin, >> present. >> Board President Schmeurlson, >> present. >> That is a quorum. Good morning everyone. Today is a special meeting and normally

3
00:00:59.840 --> 00:01:16.960
we do not have labor partners, but we are going to have them today. And I'm hoping that our labor partners will stick to the fivem minute rule per group and we can start with our first group and that would be who would like to be first?

4
00:01:16.960 --> 00:01:45.600
How about SEIU? >> Uh is SEIU going to give comment? >> Okay. Is there any other labor union here who would like to take the five minutes? I see CSEA. I see you. >> Come on up. CSA, you'll have five

5
00:01:45.600 --> 00:02:13.080
minutes to speak. Why don't you begin? Thank you guys for having us, for allowing us to speak. My name is Kristen Williams. I am the communications officer for CSEA and we have some of our uh IT workers who would like to speak.

6
00:02:22.080 --> 00:02:40.000
>> Right. Uh name's Ruben. Um I'll be speaking on behalf of the I CSR team. Uh with that said, good morning board members. I I stand before you today urging this board to resend the proposed riffs. At previous at the

7
00:02:40.000 --> 00:02:55.120
previous board meeting, uh the budget crisis was repeatedly attributed primarily to the declining student enrollment. While enrollment decline is certainly a factor, what has not been fully acknowledged are

8
00:02:55.120 --> 00:03:12.239
the millions of dollars lost through through mismanagement, failed initiatives, and ongoing investigations involving district leadership and vendors. The community deserves transparency. The community deserves

9
00:03:12.239 --> 00:03:29.040
uh transp transparency regarding the financial decisions that contributed to the to this crisis. For example, the for example, a former Luc employee and vendor o owner were charged in an in an

10
00:03:29.040 --> 00:03:47.200
alleged 22 million uh fraud scheme. Uh, Lu, I'm sorry. Luc invested in AI chatbot in initiative that ultimately shut down when the developer went out of business. There is now an ongoing FBI

11
00:03:47.200 --> 00:04:03.599
investigation involving Superintendent Alberto Carvalo himself. These are not minor issues. These are multi- multi-million dollar failures that have directly impacted district

12
00:04:03.599 --> 00:04:19.519
finances. Yet, despite all of this, the employees who had absolutely nothing to do with with the uh with creating these problems are the ones being asked to suffer the

13
00:04:19.519 --> 00:04:36.880
consequences. Why are the essential workers the people who support students, teachers, school sites, technology operations, transportation, nutrition services, special education, and daily campus operations being

14
00:04:36.880 --> 00:04:58.240
treated as expendable. These employees are not the cause of the crisis. They are the reason our schools continue functioning despite the crisis. I understand that CFO Saman Bravo and the finance division have a

15
00:04:58.240 --> 00:05:14.560
responsibility to present budget recommendations but recommendations are not final decisions. The ultimate responsibility rests with the board and the logical moral and educational decision is to resend these

16
00:05:14.560 --> 00:05:31.440
riffs. Board member Carla uh Grego made an important point when she stated that we are not investing enough education. This is the second largest school district in the country. We should not

17
00:05:31.440 --> 00:05:48.560
be balancing budgets on the backs of frontline employees and students. Declining enrollment did not suddenly appear overnight. Enrollment declines have been happening since CO. This has been known for years.

18
00:05:48.560 --> 00:06:05.080
The district should have been proactively developing long-term solutions instead of continuing the uh instead of continuing to use enrollment as justification for cuts. Now, let's be honest,

19
00:06:05.199 --> 00:06:22.400
fewer students fewer students does not mean fewer needs. In many ways, students need needs today are greater than ever before. Students are are dealing with academic recovery, mental health struggles, housing instability, technology

20
00:06:22.400 --> 00:06:38.720
dependence, safety concerns, fear within immigration communities. Families are afraid. ICE rates and immigration enforcement actions have contributed to declining attendance and enrollment because many families no

21
00:06:38.720 --> 00:06:56.319
longer feels safe. The answer to these challenge challenges is not fewer staff. The answer is more support. Schools are already understaffed. Parents consist consistently speak out about the lack of staffing on campuses. Teachers are

22
00:06:56.319 --> 00:07:12.880
overwhelmed. support staff are stretched thin. Eliminating even more positions will only worsen condition for students and families. Thank you. >> Thank you, CSA. Thank you very much. >> All right, SEIU, are you here to make

23
00:07:12.880 --> 00:08:11.759
five minutes worth of comment? Morning. >> Morning. Good morning everybody. All right. Good morning, uh, board members, uh, superintendent. Uh, I want to start on a

24
00:08:11.759 --> 00:08:29.199
good note first, then, uh, we have some, uh, concerns, put it lightly. Good note is we appreciate you took the you had the courage to uh reach an agreement that lifts that starts to lift workers uh your workers our members starts to

25
00:08:29.199 --> 00:08:44.480
lift that's the key word out of poverty but it starts it took the eve of a strike to do so but it took courage and we know that and acknowledge that um however uh you know I'd like I would not like to put a however because yesterday

26
00:08:44.480 --> 00:09:00.000
we were some of us here >> were lobbing in in coordination with you to get more money from the state as we agreed we would do and we continue commit to be committed to that. But today, LUSD, you are preparing to vote on layoffs that would directly hurt

27
00:09:00.000 --> 00:09:16.320
students, families, and the frontline workers who keep this district functioning every single day. Layoffs that are not going to resolve uh your financial problem that we disagree, you know, but whether we disagree or not, you feel you have a financial problem, it's even that would not resolve it.

28
00:09:16.320 --> 00:09:32.080
Let's be very clear. Just weeks ago, you praised SEU Local 99 members as essential workers after we reached a historic agreement. You celebrated our members publicly. You acknowledge the sacrifices they made during the pandemic, the fires, and every crisis

29
00:09:32.080 --> 00:09:48.640
the district has faced. Yet now, this district is preparing to vote for layoffs targeting the very workers you call essential. Our members and members from other unions, they are all essential. uh you know we feel that that's that's hypocrisy and our members

30
00:09:48.640 --> 00:10:04.480
see it clearly. Um we we need to let go of any perceived um any perceived offense, any perceived uh anger, any anything. If we want to move forward, we need to move pragmatically as adults, not with

31
00:10:04.480 --> 00:10:19.839
emotions. These layoffs are not just numbers on a spreadsheet. These are cafeteria workers feeding students. Busyard workers making sure buses are clean, fueled, maintained, and ready to safely transport student every day. Community representatives that are supporting families. Gardeners

32
00:10:19.839 --> 00:10:36.160
maintaining safe, clean, and welcoming campuses for students every single day. The work needs to get done. It's unlawful to use subcontractors. Truck drivers delivering supplies, instructional aids, helping students succeed. You can't claim to support students while you eliminate these

33
00:10:36.160 --> 00:10:53.360
workers. We reject your continued use and expansion of subcontracting while laying off union workers. We reach an agreement. We need to get rid of subcontracting. That's going to bring in hundreds of millions of dollars that should be used on on students through the employees that support them. A newly

34
00:10:53.360 --> 00:11:09.760
ratified agreement made it clear the work performed by SEU Local 999 members belongs to SEAU Local 99 members. If LUSD has money for outside contractors to do that work, then LUD has money to keep workers employed. We're not going to allow this district to balance its budget on the backs of low-wage

35
00:11:09.760 --> 00:11:26.640
education workers. And let's talk about the workers the district continues to label as restricted employees. >> Many of these workers have dedicated years of service to LUSD and should already be recognized as permanent employees. There are hundreds of workers that have been issued layoff notices that are not

36
00:11:26.640 --> 00:11:42.320
on the layoff list. That is that is a problem. That is unlawful as well. Uh there is there's unrestricted workers that you're refusing that have been working for years. >> That's right. >> And you use you exploit that's how you exploit them by keeping them unrestricted. You need to make them

37
00:11:42.320 --> 00:11:59.519
restricted. All of this is part of this. We have made an agreement to work in partnership. But it's difficult to work in a partnership where there's no respect. Rescend these layoffs right now. If we're going to face some massive cliff as your plan says next year, we're probably going to have conflict. But to

38
00:11:59.519 --> 00:12:15.200
avoid the best way to avoid that conflict is to have right now right now a real partnership. Let's work from now and continue to work through the budget cycle and until we we can we will continue to work forever to get that funding that we need as we continue to

39
00:12:15.200 --> 00:12:30.800
build trust because we still don't trust your budget. We still don't trust that you say that your deficit will disappear. But that trust needs space to be built. Give it space. Resin the layoffs and let's get to work. That's what we say >> because when WE FIGHT, >> WE WIN.

40
00:12:30.800 --> 00:12:53.920
>> THANK YOU. >> Are there any other labor partners present? No. Okay. So, the order of operations, I'll just lay it out for everybody. Uh there's going to be a presentation under the superintendent report of the draft 2627

41
00:12:53.920 --> 00:13:08.959
fiscal stabilization plan. And then there will be public comment on that item and then potential board discussion. And then after that there is one item for action. Uh for the item for action we will take public comment prior to the item being acted upon. Uh and

42
00:13:08.959 --> 00:14:18.639
then the board will vote. So uh We're going to pause briefly as folks make their way out of the room. Good morning all. Good morning board. Uh good morning to folks that are joining us here in person and and also o over Zoom.

43
00:14:18.639 --> 00:14:34.399
Los Angeles Unified, like many school districts across California, is facing significant structural financial pressures driven by declining enrollment, attendance challenges, the expiration of one-time pandemic funding, rising operational costs, and increasing

44
00:14:34.399 --> 00:14:49.839
long-term obligations. Today, we will present the draft fiscal stabilization plan for 2627 and ask the board to approve the reduction in force included in last year's FSP. Together, these actions reflect our

45
00:14:49.839 --> 00:15:04.959
district's commitment to manage today's challenges while ensuring a strong and stable schoolhouse for our students. As part of this process, we are required to plan across a three-year outlook and take difficult, responsible, and

46
00:15:04.959 --> 00:15:21.440
necessary actions to maintain long-term financial health. I do want to mark that in many cases, we are asked to create a three-year prospectus with one year's worth of data, which is certainly challenging. Our fiscal stabilization efforts are

47
00:15:21.440 --> 00:15:38.000
designed to protect the district's ability to serve students today and in the years ahead. Cost reduction measures are being implemented to maintain stability through at least fiscal year 2829. Now, every decision we make has to balance two realities.

48
00:15:38.000 --> 00:15:54.560
Continuing to invest in students and staff while preparing for ongoing fiscal uncertainty. Schools do and will remain at the center of our decision-making and we will continue to prioritize direct support for students in schools.

49
00:15:54.560 --> 00:16:11.600
The size of the deficit though requires us to re-evaluate major expenditure areas across the district and eliminate redundancies to the extent possible. This includes proposed reductions in central office contracts,

50
00:16:11.600 --> 00:16:28.639
non- labor spending, operational structures and staffing models. We recognize and I recognize I want to speak for myself and for the board that some reductions involve programs deeply valued by our communities like Seni and

51
00:16:28.639 --> 00:16:43.920
BSAP. We understand that these are difficult decisions. However, delaying difficult decisions will increase long-term instability and reduce future flexibility. Now, as we go through this and and so

52
00:16:43.920 --> 00:17:01.360
that folks know, we we sent a a letter to the community just about 20 minutes ago that captured uh much of the same information. And so I want to echo the commitments that we made in that communication. We will maintain transparent and open communication throughout this process.

53
00:17:01.360 --> 00:17:18.079
As an example, we are sharing the FSP weeks in advance of final board action so that our community has time to review and understand the plan. We will continue to do everything possible to minimize the impact to schools. The schoolhouse will always be

54
00:17:18.079 --> 00:17:35.440
our priority and every reduction we make will begin from that principle. We will to the maximum extent possible prioritize equity- based instruction services and strategies. We remain committed to meeting the real and diverse needs of our students

55
00:17:35.440 --> 00:17:51.679
particularly in communities that have been historically underserved. And we will make every effort to work collaboratively with our entire district community, including our labor partners to advocate fiercely for the funding our students deserve.

56
00:17:51.679 --> 00:18:06.799
As recently as yesterday, as as Max marked, we were in Sacramento in coalition with SEIU, with UTLA to do exactly that. I firmly believe that our recent collective advocacy in Sacramento impacted the governor's recent May

57
00:18:06.799 --> 00:18:21.840
revise positively. But we know there's more work ahead. Now, as someone who's been with the district for the better part of my life, almost 30 years, I know for a fact that we have successfully navigated challenges before by staying focused on

58
00:18:21.840 --> 00:18:37.120
students, working collaboratively, and planning responsibly. We remain confident in our ability to meet this moment with transparency, discipline, and a shared commitment to the students and communities that we serve.

59
00:18:37.120 --> 00:18:51.360
With that said, I'd now like to invite Mr. San Bravo Karimi, chief financial officer, to the podium to provide you with a presentation around the FSP and answer any questions that you may have. >> Thank you, acting superintendent and

60
00:18:51.360 --> 00:19:08.240
good morning uh board. So, in this presentation, we're going to start with a a recap of the May revision and its impact on LUSD's revenues and our multi-year projection. A lot of this information was shared on Tuesday, but it's very relevant for uh the

61
00:19:08.240 --> 00:19:25.039
information we're going to share uh today. We're going to review the previous fiscal stabilization plan that was adopted by the board last June and has been implemented over the last several months. And then of course importantly we're going to cover the proposed new fiscal stabilization plan

62
00:19:25.039 --> 00:19:41.200
uh to address the district's financial outlook. And then finally we're going to end with uh next steps in the coming weeks. So first as we discussed uh a bit on Tuesday at the committee of the whole uh there's a preliminary multi-year

63
00:19:41.200 --> 00:19:57.280
projection. This is the multi-year projection that will be part of the June adopted budget for next school year's budget. And as acting superintendent Chait mentioned, we are required to produce a three-year projection. That's what we call the multi-year projection. And in June, that's going to include the

64
00:19:57.280 --> 00:20:14.080
2829 school year for the first time. The projections are based on current year estimated actuals. And what that refers to are updated revenues and expenditure projections for the current school year. So after second interm in March, we continue to update projections

65
00:20:14.080 --> 00:20:30.480
with new information. uh and those updated projections are the basis for the multi-year projection. Uh other notable factors included are the estimated cost of the recent uh tenative agreements with our labor partners as well as previously approved

66
00:20:30.480 --> 00:20:46.799
labor agreements. At full implementation, the ongoing annual cost from all funds of those agreements is approximately $1.5 billion per year. As we've discussed many times over the last several months and years, many

67
00:20:46.799 --> 00:21:03.200
long-term factors contribute to our annual deficits. Deficits meaning spending more than we bring in. Declining enrollment, the expiration of those very substantial $5.6 $6 billion worth of COVID relief funds and the rising cost that uh acting

68
00:21:03.200 --> 00:21:21.760
superintendent mentioned. The collective bargaining agreements themselves represent a very important investment in our workforce and in our schools, providing significant salary increases to our valued employees and additional supports to students and

69
00:21:21.760 --> 00:21:37.200
families. These recent labor agreements include important investments that results in additional psychiatric social workers, centrally funded community representatives, additional pupil services and attendance counselors, additional school psychologist,

70
00:21:37.200 --> 00:21:56.880
additional secondary counselors, and reduced class sizes. These are some of the highlights of many of the important investments to support our students and schools. There are many statutory requirements that school districts must follow in

71
00:21:56.880 --> 00:22:13.840
connection with labor agreements and their finances. And so here are are some of the important ones. The first one is AB1200. This is uh an assembly bill that folks are probably very familiar with because whenever a school district enters into a labor agreement uh they

72
00:22:13.840 --> 00:22:30.960
are required to submit a a form and it's called the AB1200 form because it's in connection with this this law. And so it's created to ensure that local educational agencies or school districts throughout California are adequately prepared to meet their financial obligations. and it expanded the

73
00:22:30.960 --> 00:22:45.919
reporting requirements and the role of county offices of education, ours being LEO, in monitoring school districts. And as I mentioned, there's a form, the AB1200, that districts are required to submit to their county offices of education that demonstrate the financial

74
00:22:45.919 --> 00:23:02.240
cost and impact of each labor agreement. There's additionally AB2756 passed in 2004. This tightened the fiscal oversight for school districts in response to past significant financial failures of school districts. It

75
00:23:02.240 --> 00:23:18.880
enhanced the authority of con county offices of education in monitoring our finances requires very rigorous and written certification of financial stability for collective bargaining agreements. And then finally in California government code it's section 3547.5.

76
00:23:18.880 --> 00:23:33.760
It mandates that costs incurred by public school employers under collective bargaining agreements for current and subsequent fiscal years must be disclosed at a public meeting. And that's going to happen later in June. The superintendent and the chief

77
00:23:33.760 --> 00:23:49.520
business official must certify in writing that the cost associated with the agreement can be met by the district during the term of the agreement. So, we're going to discuss a little bit more about what that means uh later in the presentation.

78
00:23:49.520 --> 00:24:05.360
So, we covered this a bit on Tuesday. Uh, the governor's May revision included some substantial additional revenues that are going to go uh a long way to partially addressing the financial challenges that we're facing. So, first is a very substantial increase to the

79
00:24:05.360 --> 00:24:21.760
cost of living adjustment for LCF and special education. Uh the ongoing revenue impact of that higher cola in 2627 it's 4.31% is about $112 million per year. These revenues will be reflected in the

80
00:24:21.760 --> 00:24:39.520
district's multi-year projection. There are additional revenues that will instead be reflected in the district's fiscal stabilization plan. That includes a substantial increase from January to May in the discretionary block grant of $328 million. That's our share of the

81
00:24:39.520 --> 00:24:56.480
statewide total of $5 billion. There's also a one-time grant for learning recovery emergency block grant of $68 million. A very substantial increase in the special education base rate. This is the revenues that the state provides for special education of between 187 and

82
00:24:56.480 --> 00:25:12.880
$190 million per year. And then finally, there's home to school transportation, an ongoing allocation of between 19 and $20 million per year. and then a one-time grant for home to school transportation of $26 million. And so these represent very substantial

83
00:25:12.880 --> 00:25:30.559
increases to revenues beyond what was already included in the January proposed budget. These are not this is not the final state budget. It's still a proposal. Uh there will still be a lot of negotiations between the state legislators and the governor as Martha Alvarez described on Tuesday. Um, we are

84
00:25:30.559 --> 00:25:46.559
going to again, as acting superintendent mentioned, continue to fiercely advocate for additional revenues, in particular the release of the $3.9 billion of Prop 98 funds that have still not been released to school districts across the state. But these revenues still

85
00:25:46.559 --> 00:26:03.440
represent a very material improvement in the district's outlook. But I'm going to talk a little bit later about how significant uh these revenues are given our our our multi-year projection. So, as we showed on Tuesday, here is the

86
00:26:03.440 --> 00:26:18.880
preliminary multi-year projection. These are our general fund unrestricted unassigned ending balances. And as we shared on Tuesday, the orange bar represents the updated multi-year projection. So, the blue was where we were at first interim. The green is where we were at second interim in

87
00:26:18.880 --> 00:26:35.200
March. And the orange is where we are preliminarily today for the multi-year projection that will come before the board in June. And so you'll see from left to right uh balances of almost $1.7 billion at the end of the current school year. Balances of just over $150 million

88
00:26:35.200 --> 00:26:53.120
at the end of the 2627 school year. A projected negative ending balance of $1.35 billion at the end of the 2728 school year. And then finally by the end of the 2829 school year a projected negative unassigned ending balance of approximately $3.6 billion. And so

89
00:26:53.120 --> 00:27:11.760
what's included here are the revenues from the higher cola that super cola of 4.31%. What's not included are these additional proposed revenues from the prior slide but I will demonstrate the fiscal impact of those additional revenues uh shortly.

90
00:27:11.760 --> 00:27:28.960
So when we look at this, we additional actions are going to be required on the part of of the district. And I should note that even the blue and the green bars, those projected negative ending balances um included uh rely on the

91
00:27:28.960 --> 00:27:45.679
previous fiscal stabilization plan that was approved by the board back in June. So a little bit of information about fiscal stabilization plans. Um, fiscal stabilization plans are often required by county offices of education when districts like ours are facing the very

92
00:27:45.679 --> 00:28:01.600
challenging financial outlook that we are facing and we had one that was approved last June. Uh, we are now required to submit a new fiscal stabilization plan this upcoming June and the district has been required to submit fiscal stabilization plans in the past and I'm going to talk a little bit

93
00:28:01.600 --> 00:28:17.360
about some of that history a little bit later. So the fiscal stabilization plan is a board approved plan that specifies steps that the district will take to address its structural deficit and further to address its projected negative ending unassigned balances. The fiscal stabilization plan must be

94
00:28:17.360 --> 00:28:32.880
designed to meet the current fiscal year financial obligations to fulfill multi-year financial commitments and to maintain minimum reserve requirements or put another way to not have projected negative ending balances. The proposed actions are clearly defined

95
00:28:32.880 --> 00:28:48.960
and based on practical practical detailed measures rather than general objectives. So next I just want to give a quick overview of our general fund unrestricted budget because it's relevant before we look at the proposed

96
00:28:48.960 --> 00:29:06.640
new fiscal stabilization plan. So here you'll see a bunch of different categories of spending within our general fund unrestricted. Um, and what it demonstrates is, and I'm not going to go through every single category of spending, but what it demonstrates is after mandates required and legally required spending or essential spending,

97
00:29:06.640 --> 00:29:22.960
uh, as well as lab the cost of labor agreements, the options for reductions within general fund unrestricted are very limited. So as one example in that dark blue kind of the first in the legend there on the kind of top middle norm positions that are provided as part of our collective bargaining agreements.

98
00:29:22.960 --> 00:29:37.840
Examples being classroom teachers, counselors, librarians, PSAs, PSWs, school psychologists represent a little bit over a third of the total general fund unrestricted budget. There are additional norm positions. The norm positions mean positions that are

99
00:29:37.840 --> 00:29:53.039
allocated by rule or by formula to schools. And typically the the rule or the formula is based on the school's enrollment. So additional norm positions that are not within individual collective bargaining agreements are another about 16.4%.

100
00:29:53.039 --> 00:30:09.840
These includes this category includes principles, clerical staff, uh school administrative assistants, financial managers, building and grounds workers, plant managers as some of the important examples. And so combined the norm positions both those that are in

101
00:30:09.840 --> 00:30:25.200
collective bargaining agreements and those that are not in collective bargaining agreements represent half of the costs within our general fund unrestricted budget. And so you'll see other substantial investments in in SENI. These are all current school year that SENI total of about 12% of the

102
00:30:25.200 --> 00:30:41.440
budget. That includes uh the allocations for the current school year as well as pre prior year carryovers. you'll see the Black Student Achievement Plan of $175 million in the current year and several other categories of of spending on on behalf of the district. So again to repeat

103
00:30:41.440 --> 00:30:58.799
the the reason why the proposed fiscal stabilization plan includes the proposed reductions that it does is because much of our budget is tied into areas that are either required by labor contract, required by law or spent on essential

104
00:30:58.799 --> 00:31:19.919
services such as utilities and insurance for uh like uh for a general liability. So, here's a a quick look. Over the last 12 years, the district has faced negative projected ending balances many times. Um, as I mentioned on Tuesday, as

105
00:31:19.919 --> 00:31:36.640
the state budget goes, so goes education funding and that means that there's quite a bit of volatility in funding levels for education and that can result in times like we are facing today where we are projecting a very substantial negative ending balance. So first I think you'll notice you know here are

106
00:31:36.640 --> 00:31:53.600
the fiscal years over the last 12 years where we did face very substantial negative ending balances. So some important takeaways are that one we have faced challenging fiscal outlooks before. But what we're facing now the projected negative ending balance we must solve for is over twice the size of

107
00:31:53.600 --> 00:32:09.279
past shortfalls. What you should not conclude from this is that the shortfall will resolve itself. As in the past, the district must take urgent action to ensure its solveny and

108
00:32:09.279 --> 00:32:24.480
to protect our current and future students. It's also important to note that those future students are with us now. Our transitional kindergarten students, our kindergarten students are with us for more than a decade more. So

109
00:32:24.480 --> 00:32:45.200
those future students are not some abstract. The current fiscal stabilization plan approved by the board last June. You'll see highlighted here. Um the update from second interim showed that for 2627 and 2728 the savings were about $1.36

110
00:32:45.200 --> 00:33:03.080
billion. As I mentioned before, those savings are fully reflected already in the multi-year projection. So any new fiscal stabilization plan, the new fiscal stabilization plan must identify savings above and beyond these savings.

111
00:33:06.720 --> 00:33:22.399
So here's another multi-year projection that we shared on Tuesday. The orange bar, that last series of bar graphs, shows the benefit from the May revise of those additional proposed revenues. So if you look kind of going all the way to the right hand side for the 2829 school

112
00:33:22.399 --> 00:33:37.519
year with those additional proposed revenues, uh the projected negative ending balance goes from $3.6 billion to a little bit over $2.5 billion. And so those additional revenues, as I mentioned before, will be included in the fiscal stabilization plan. They're

113
00:33:37.519 --> 00:33:52.880
very material over the this multi-year projection period. Cumulatively, they do total about a billion dollars. And so that is a billion dollars of cuts that we don't have to identify for this period of time. And so but for those

114
00:33:52.880 --> 00:34:07.919
very substantial proposed revenues, we would need to identify even more cuts than what you will see on the proposed multi uh uh fiscal stabilization plan. But what you'll also see is that those revenues are insufficient to address our

115
00:34:07.919 --> 00:34:26.960
shortfall and very very difficult reductions are needed. So even though before you today is uh a board action uh to include includes a proposed final action on a reduction in force the completion of a statutory

116
00:34:26.960 --> 00:34:43.040
process that started back in February and is part of the implementation of the previous fiscal stabilization plan. Specifically that action included central office classified positions that were part of the previous fiscal stabilization plan.

117
00:34:43.040 --> 00:34:58.400
So where we started during budget development because there were substantial reductions in allocations already as part of the last fiscal stabilization plan, substantial reductions in central office supports. We started with a little bit over 3,500 positions that were closed during budget

118
00:34:58.400 --> 00:35:15.040
development for next school year. But 20 over 2,800 of those positions were were not part of the reduction in force authorization that received its first approval back in February. We reduce potential layoffs by restoring school-based positions and using

119
00:35:15.040 --> 00:35:30.720
vacancies and attrition to absorb as many of the impacted employees as possible. What that resulted in in terms of position closures was 657 filled positions that were proposed for closure in that RIFF authorization.

120
00:35:30.720 --> 00:35:50.160
Today's board action is the final action as part of that process again that started in February. So here you will see the proposed fiscal stabilization plan uh to be voted on by the board in June. As I mentioned

121
00:35:50.160 --> 00:36:06.720
before, these are all reductions that are above and beyond the previous fiscal stabilization plan. And I should note that these reductions are not cumulative. They are all figures that are reductions against the current post

122
00:36:06.720 --> 00:36:24.000
previous FSP baseline of spending in each of these fiscal years. So first I want to start with the revenue item one. There are those about $1 billion cumulatively of additional proposed revenues from the May revision. Well, we're also on item number two. We are

123
00:36:24.000 --> 00:36:40.400
assuming an increase in the district's attendance or specifically our 88 percentage from the current rate of 92% up to 93% starting in 2627 and being 93% every year thereafter. There are several important strategies

124
00:36:40.400 --> 00:36:56.960
in place now to boost attendance and obviously principally that has a very very substantial academic instructional benefit but it also has a a revenue impact as well. In terms of the expenditures proposed to be included in the fiscal stabilization

125
00:36:56.960 --> 00:37:14.079
plan, first item three are central office reductions to contracts and non- labor. So this is one of the few reductions that you'll see have a value in the 2627 school year. Uh we will have already begun working on identifying reductions in the 2627 school year and

126
00:37:14.079 --> 00:37:29.680
eventually it increases to an ongoing reduction of $200 million. the that is a very aggressive target. Item number four are additional reductions to central office positions. As you know, the previous fiscal

127
00:37:29.680 --> 00:37:44.640
stabilization plan reduced central office budgets by about $150 million. That represented nearly a 20% reduction in central office supports and resources for our schools. These two additional central office strategies totaling at full

128
00:37:44.640 --> 00:38:00.560
implementation $250 million represents an additional reduction of over 25% on top of the reductions that were made as part of the last fiscal stabilization plan. Item number five is the district's contribution to our oped trust

129
00:38:00.560 --> 00:38:16.240
contribution. OPED being other post-employment benefits or more specifically the contributions that we make to pay for the future costs of retirey health benefits. As you know, we upon eligibility employees receive lifetime medical benefits for them and

130
00:38:16.240 --> 00:38:31.599
one dependent and the cost of those benefits increases each year. The size of the population that earns those benefits grows each year. and the district has over the last several years contributed into our irrevocable trust funds to cover the

131
00:38:31.599 --> 00:38:48.560
future cost of that growing liability. Under the current financial circumstances, that contribution towards those future costs is going to be zero starting in the 2627 school year. So what that means in the long run is that we will not be contributing to those

132
00:38:48.560 --> 00:39:04.079
future costs. As those costs continue to escalate, the full cost of those will be borne by our operating budgets and mostly our our general fund unrestricted. Number six, the board last year committed $46 million set aside

133
00:39:04.079 --> 00:39:19.760
earmarked to offset the potential cost the potential impact of reductions in federal funding. Under the current financial circumstances, those funds the board is going to be asked in June to uncommit those funds to release that commitment so that they can be used instead instead

134
00:39:19.760 --> 00:39:35.119
to offset the need for potential cuts elsewhere. But what that also means is there is not that that that safety net that as if, god forbid, there are reductions in federal funding, uh there will not be the $46 million to offset those potential reductions, the full

135
00:39:35.119 --> 00:39:50.560
impact of any reductions in federal funding will need to be borne by the programs that are funded by those federal grants. Next are a series of very difficult reductions to allocations directly to schools.

136
00:39:50.560 --> 00:40:06.880
Number seven is the student equity needs index or SENI allocation. The old the previous fiscal stabilization plan already assumed that SENI would be allocated in the amount of $500 million starting in the 2728 school year. And so any reductions that you see

137
00:40:06.880 --> 00:40:21.920
here are from that baseline of $500 million. And so for the 2728 school year, Senny would be reduced by $400 million, leaving a $100 million allocation for SENI in the 2728 school year. In the following school year, the

138
00:40:21.920 --> 00:40:38.800
remaining $500 million allocation would be fully eliminated. Item number eight is the Black Student Achievement Plan. The current allocation ongoing is $125 million. What you see in this proposed plan is a reduction of hund00 million ongoing.

139
00:40:38.800 --> 00:40:55.680
That would relieve $25 million in 2728 and 2829 for the black student achievement plan. Item number nine is HEAT. Uh the current allocation is ongoing $10 million. The reduction of $10 million here ongoing

140
00:40:55.680 --> 00:41:10.880
represents a full elimination of that allocation and program. Item number 10 is the affiliated charter block grant. The net cost of that allocation is $7 million per year. So the reduction of the $7 million represents a complete elimination of

141
00:41:10.880 --> 00:41:27.440
that program. Item number 11 are norm position reductions. As I mentioned before on that pie chart, there are a number of positions that are allocated through the norm that are not part of our collective bargaining agreements. The $25 million reduction there is an ongoing reduction

142
00:41:27.440 --> 00:41:44.480
to those norm positions that are not part of collective bargaining agreements. Item number 12, furlow days. When all employees take a furlow day or are are have a furlow day, that represents a savings of

143
00:41:44.480 --> 00:41:59.839
$25 million to general fund unrestricted for each furlow day taken. That for 2728, what we're assuming here is two furlow days. So $50 million, $25 million per day. And in the 2829 school

144
00:41:59.839 --> 00:42:17.040
year, $125 million, which is five furlow days for all employees. Item number 13 is school consolidation, efficiencies, and repurposing of vacant campuses. This is a strategy that you'll remember was on the previous fiscal stabilization

145
00:42:17.040 --> 00:42:34.079
plan. This $30 million of savings in the 2829 school years represents additional consolidations beyond those targeted in the previous fiscal stabilization plan. And finally, item 14 is health insurance

146
00:42:34.079 --> 00:42:50.240
premium sharing. Currently, for eligible employees, the school district covers the full cost of health benefits for employees and all of their dependents irrespective of the the health plan that they choose. Here the district would cover 90% of the

147
00:42:50.240 --> 00:43:07.119
cost and the employees would cover 10% of those premium costs and that would generate in terms of savings to general fund unrestricted $50 million in the 2728 school year and then $100 million per year starting in 2829 school year and beyond.

148
00:43:07.119 --> 00:43:22.960
You'll see that there's a column at the end indicating whether which of these items have a layoff impact or a reduction in force impact. And so, of course, number four, central office position reductions have a layoff impact.

149
00:43:22.960 --> 00:43:37.839
Number seven, student equity needs index, given that the vast majority of those funds are used on positions, has a layoff impact. Number eight, the Blackston Achievement Plan, given that the vast majority of those resources are in positions, that has a layoff impact.

150
00:43:37.839 --> 00:43:53.280
The reduction to heat has a layoff impact. The elimination of the affiliated charter block grant has a layoff impact. The reduction of norm positions has a layoff impact and school consolidation has a layoff impact.

151
00:43:53.280 --> 00:44:09.280
You'll see the totals for each year. Um the grand total is just under $3.6 billion. These are $3.6 billion of general fund unrestricted revenues and expenditure reductions to address the

152
00:44:09.280 --> 00:44:24.240
projected negative ending balance that we're facing. The proposed fiscal stabilization plan that you see here assumes that the reduction in force final authorization before you today is approved. If it's not approved, more reductions

153
00:44:24.240 --> 00:44:40.960
will need to be identified. The value of the RIFF in terms of the cost of the positions is approximately $90 million. If the final authorization is not provided today, we will have to identify approximately $90 million of additional

154
00:44:40.960 --> 00:45:02.000
reductions. So it's very important to be transparent not just with the board but with the public on the potential consequences of the very difficult financial outlook that we're facing. So based on the current financial outlook, it is possible that our budget that is before

155
00:45:02.000 --> 00:45:18.319
the board in June could either be conditionally approved or disapproved by November 8th. The dis if the budget is disapproved and continues to be disapproved, the county superintendent from LEO is authorized to call for the formation of a budget review committee

156
00:45:18.319 --> 00:45:35.599
or with state approval wave that requirement and exercise that authority that would otherwise have been assigned to a committee. Continued disapproval can result in increasing levels of county oversight and intervention, including the development of a budget plan to guide the district through the fiscal year. Under education code, the

157
00:45:35.599 --> 00:45:50.880
county superintendent may take actions including the staying or rescending board actions inconsistent with the adopted plan, the cancellation of purchase orders, and the prohibition of non- salary warrants, the requirement to encumber contracts and cash flow analyses,

158
00:45:50.880 --> 00:46:09.040
as well as withholding compensation of board members and the superintendent for failure to provide requested financial information. Additional potential consequences include the appointment of a fiscal expert. A fiscal expert is providing only technical assistance, has no veto

159
00:46:09.040 --> 00:46:24.160
power over the board. A higher level of intervention could be the appointment of a fiscal adviser that acts on behalf of the county superintendent. This does include veto power. It includes the ability to stay and resend authority over board actions in consistent with the district's

160
00:46:24.160 --> 00:46:41.200
ability to meet its obligations. So an important thing to note is an adopted fiscal stabilization plan is the basis by which the district the superintendent and myself can authorize and certify excuse me certify that the district can meet its financial

161
00:46:41.200 --> 00:46:56.160
obligations under the collective bargaining agreements that are going to be before the board in June. So the basis on which we are going to certify are able to certify that we can meet those financial obligations is due to the approval of a fiscal

162
00:46:56.160 --> 00:47:13.800
stabilization plan. Approval does not approval of a fiscal stabilization plan does not guarantee that the county or state will not initiate these interventions. But approval is necessary to demonstrate the path to maintaining solveny.

163
00:47:17.119 --> 00:47:33.520
next steps. So as I mentioned today, this is the first presentation as the as acting superintendent chain mentioned we are presenting this publicly weeks in advance of the board vote. Uh additionally today is the uh the board is going to be asked to approve the proposed final action on the reduction

164
00:47:33.520 --> 00:47:48.319
in force. On June 16th, there's the budget and LCAP hearing, but also the approval of the collective bargaining agreements and the fiscal stabilization plan. And then finally, on June 23rd, the board would vote on the budget and the

165
00:47:48.319 --> 00:48:15.359
LCAP for next school year. >> Okay. Okay. So, as we mentioned before, after the presentation, we'll take the public comment and then and then the the board will will jump in after that. So, um you can rest your legs for just a moment, Mr. Mr. Simon, and we'll we'll call up the the Oh, I'm sorry, Mr.

166
00:48:15.359 --> 00:48:31.440
Karimi. Um Maria Louisa Palma, I thought I saw you out there. You're you're listed as a call-in, but I think you I see you there. Come on up. You'll have two minutes to speak once you begin. And then after Miss Palma is uh Danna Guen and then David Tokovski. Uh, Miss Ken's going to speak in Spanish, so if you'd

167
00:48:31.440 --> 00:49:03.200
like to hear what she's saying in English, please put your hands up and we will get you these translation headsets. All right, Miss Palma, the microphone is on and the two minutes is yours. I woke up this morning and read the presentation

168
00:49:03.200 --> 00:49:18.160
and I don't know if I should start by laughing or crying. I I don't know what's been going on here. So, what was the whole um bargaining negotiation about? I feel my conclusion is whoever

169
00:49:18.160 --> 00:49:35.280
bargained said, "Well, unions, if you can get the money from Sacramento, you can have it. But if you can't, well, you're there's just going to be layoffs. So to me, that just sounds like gambling with our students, with our staff, and with the taxpayers pocketbooks.

170
00:49:35.280 --> 00:49:51.920
And I don't really understand how we get to this point. Did you not have these projections with you when you were bargaining? Anybody? Did Mr. Saman not bring this up to you? Because I just don't understand how you can come to this point and we still have to have 3.6

171
00:49:51.920 --> 00:50:10.400
six billion in cuts. I see about 1.3 billion in the layoff number affected impacted. I know the total isn't going to be layoffs, but most of it is. So, I just don't understand. But I did see in the um administrative hearing attachment

172
00:50:10.400 --> 00:50:28.000
B that there were cited by Mr. Saman in his testimony there that you've been receiving some comments. I don't know a specific letter, some comments from Leo. Where are those letters? Are they not published to us? We would like to see them. I think we need to see what LEO's been telling you throughout all this at

173
00:50:28.000 --> 00:50:45.280
the last FSP, at the first interim. We want to see it. So, if it's true that the children need all these services that you all keep saying that are absolutely necessary, then why aren't you consolidating campuses and creating some economies of scale? because the children in the schools that do not have

174
00:50:45.280 --> 00:51:01.200
enough staff that have super low enrollment, you are not providing those services to these students. So the appropriate prudent thing to do for those students is to consolidate those campuses. When I grew up in this district, we didn't have this many schools and somehow we got by. You have

175
00:51:01.200 --> 00:51:18.559
overbuilt this district and you have huge overhead and fixed costs and I don't really see that that 30 million in there isn't enough to cover that. So, I don't know what in the world you've been doing here. >> Thank you for your time. Uh, Dian Guen, come on up. You'll have two minutes to speak once you begin.

176
00:51:18.559 --> 00:51:49.520
>> Any other need for translation headsets? Please put your hands up, please. >> Okay, Listo. Gracias. Every single time we come to the board of education, we're always hearing that you bring a bunch of policies

177
00:51:49.520 --> 00:52:07.520
for you, those who finance you, but you don't bring numbers. You don't bring the funding. The only that has spoken a little bit about it was Miss Ortiz, but everybody else, you're not interested. You just like politics. You are not here for this. You are here to avoid that we

178
00:52:07.520 --> 00:52:24.160
are in the red. You are in this position so that you can support our students. We are seeing all of this and you are uh making a fool of the community saying that you made a deal with the unions to help the workers.

179
00:52:24.160 --> 00:52:40.559
You asked for the money in Sacramento. They did not give you enough because Miss Grigo, you want the money as if you were in CO. you have less students. There are schools that have 50 or 60 students. Those schools need to be closed. You

180
00:52:40.559 --> 00:52:56.160
cannot have all of the employees and then uh continue to uh waste money. That's why we're in this place. The employees merit respect but also the parents and also the students. We as parents have come here to advocate. You

181
00:52:56.160 --> 00:53:13.359
are saying that you support imi im immigrants and that's just something you say because everything affects us as immigrants. It affects us that you give uh raises to so many people but our children are failing and you are not putting the money where you need to and

182
00:53:13.359 --> 00:53:29.599
you're purchasing all these programs that are no use and millions and millions going in for mental health that doesn't work and doing all these other things to uh assign the funds. And we've told you as parents, mental health right now is not a priority. The priority

183
00:53:29.599 --> 00:53:46.319
right now is academic stuff for our students. Yes, we need that support, but not like the way you're doing it in the way just uh putting that money towards that. And you as a board need to uh resign because how is it that the district can be in this situation and

184
00:53:46.319 --> 00:54:02.720
the ones to blame are only you, no one else. >> All right, David Tokovski, come on up. you'll have two minutes to speak once you begin. >> Thank you very much for presenting the fiscal destabilization plan early. Uh that's a good idea. Let me just say that

185
00:54:02.720 --> 00:54:18.480
if you have a labor negotiator who only gets four votes out of seven, you ought to find a different position for that person. You should never have a labor negotiator or a general counsel who works on a 4 to3 vote. That should be unanimous. And that affects a lot of things. Number two, today you're

186
00:54:18.480 --> 00:54:33.520
handling the SEIU and other CSEA employees. That document and the accompanying testimony of your labor negotiator and your CFO include

187
00:54:33.520 --> 00:54:50.960
under oath statements to the office of the negotiator. You need to read those statements because they are inconsistent with what you are hearing now. What the judge heard was something different. Next, is this presentation telling you

188
00:54:50.960 --> 00:55:06.800
to vote against the labor agreements? Is that what's really happening here? Okay, because if you're if you're asking that, then say it out loud, those letters from the county that previous speaker, where are those letters? Next board member asked, "What are we doing, Miss Ggo, to

189
00:55:06.800 --> 00:55:22.960
keep the COVID funds? Don't you think we're going to win the Congress in November? Don't you think we're going to win the House and the Senate? Because if you don't, then resign because we are going to win both houses and we ought to have a plan just like Miss Grigo asked to get that COVID money in ways that

190
00:55:22.960 --> 00:55:39.680
help us in our schools. Then we'll take care of the president two more years later next. Are you proposing a negative in June? If you're proposing a negative, then we are headed for a takeover. Okay? It's not

191
00:55:39.680 --> 00:55:55.920
going to happen because he's going to fix the second year and it'll just be the third year as always. And finally, stop saying if we get the 3.9 billion back. You're going to get the three billion,4 billion back and it's going to be larger cuz more tax revenues coming in. It's mandated by law. And if you

192
00:55:55.920 --> 00:56:12.079
don't think so, then sue the governor. Have some guts. Don't just mow me. The governor will bring that money back. It'll be on his timeline, not our timeline, but the money will still go in the budget for that year. >> Thank you for your time. >> Thank you.

193
00:56:12.079 --> 00:56:29.880
>> Alexis Hill, come on up. You'll have two minutes to speak once you begin. Alexis Hill. >> And lastly, the CBHI. If you don't apply for it, the people who are involved with it should be fired. >> Alexis Hill, come on down. You'll have two minutes to speak once you begin.

194
00:56:34.559 --> 00:56:50.160
Hi, good morning. My name is Alexis Hill. I'm the manager of advocacy and leadership for partnership for Los Angeles schools. Last June, this board unanimously adopted a resolution committing to protecting high need schools through sources like Cine and BAP and committed to minimizing harm to

195
00:56:50.160 --> 00:57:06.559
students in those schools when reductions are necessary. This commit this commitment mattered deeply to these communities because for a lot of marginalized communities promises from the system have often been have often been broken. That's why your pro that's why your promise mattered and our and

196
00:57:06.559 --> 00:57:22.480
our families and students believed it because they could see those investments made possible. We know those investments are making real progress. Just days ago, LA USD highlighted being one of the highest performing districts in the community for academic growth with strong gains in math and reading for

197
00:57:22.480 --> 00:57:39.760
black, Latino, and lowincome students. Gains that many of you have linked directly to investments and equities and student supports for high needs communities. So, families are reading this plan and asking a simple question. How will a district compensate schools for their losses? We understand the need

198
00:57:39.760 --> 00:57:56.640
for stabilization, but budget reveals priorities. They reveal though they reveal whose needs are protected and who whose needs are negotiable. And right now 40% of this proposal falls on equity centered investments in high need communities asking the students with the greatest needs to absorb some of the

199
00:57:56.640 --> 00:58:12.559
deepest losses. Cine is being eliminated by 2029. BAP is all but being eliminated during the same time frame. The the same investments being credited for student gains are the same ones being reduced disproportionately. When budgets get tight, why are these children asked to

200
00:58:12.559 --> 00:58:29.280
sacrifice first? Equity is not something we are we are we protect only when times are are easy. Equity matters most in moments of sac um scarce scarcity. This is the moment when districts must decide whether its commitment to black and brown students are foundational values

201
00:58:29.280 --> 00:58:44.400
or temporary priorities. We urge you to establish a workable real floor for equity. Do not balance these cuts on the backs of the same communities that have already carried disproportionate harm for generations. Our communities are ready to work with you for solutions.

202
00:58:44.400 --> 00:59:01.480
>> Thank you for your time. Uh it looks like the remainder of folks are calling in. Uh Christian Flag, I see you're on the line. Christian, please press star six to unmute yourself and you'll have two minutes to speak once you begin. Christian flag.

203
00:59:03.599 --> 00:59:19.920
>> Uh, greetings folks. I represent community coalition, the equity alliance, and police free LUSD coalition. Uh, and more specifically, black and brown students and families in South LA. Uh, this new plan proposes a complete elimination of SNI allocations

204
00:59:19.920 --> 00:59:36.960
and a reduction of BAP by over by 80%. This will represent a destruction of long and hard-fought battles driven by the community to actually reduce the racial harms in LUSD. A return to the status quo operations of

205
00:59:36.960 --> 00:59:52.799
providing statemandated minimums never effectively served the majority of black and brown students in the district. It may not feel like it or folks may be forgetting, but there is an active crisis when it comes to academic and social emotional outcomes for black and

206
00:59:52.799 --> 01:00:09.920
brown students. Understand that before Cinei and before BP, LUSD either instituted policies that worsened student outcomes or ignored them or just implemented things that were ineffective. We look at all these terrible things

207
01:00:09.920 --> 01:00:24.880
that are happening in the country outside of the district where racial injustice is spiking. But these cuts would represent a similar thing in our own district. We have concrete data that shows us that equal

208
01:00:24.880 --> 01:00:42.319
per pupil spending does not lead to equal outcomes. There are schools with higher concentrations of black students that have worse facilities, less programs, less lesser quality support. Some schools serve higher concentrations of black and brown students that face a

209
01:00:42.319 --> 01:00:58.559
myriad of obstacles on the day-to-day. We have to find a way to preserve Cinei and BAP or we will be complicit in returning to the systemic racial injustice that existed in our education system. Cinei is a tool. Cine is a

210
01:00:58.559 --> 01:01:14.240
framework and it must be rooted in all the decision-making. So all of these cuts have to be guided by an understanding that equity is necessary. It is not an option. Thank you. >> Thank you for your time. Uh Day Son, I

211
01:01:14.240 --> 01:01:28.640
see you're signed up to speak remotely. Are you in the room, Dave? Not in the room. I'm going to double check online. Uh not online either. Jan Williams, I see you are online. Jan Williams, please press star six to unmute yourself. And you'll have two minutes to speak once

212
01:01:28.640 --> 01:01:50.480
you begin. Jan Williams. Hi. Um, can you hear me? >> We sure can. Please go ahead. >> This is Okay, this is Dan. Hi, this is Dan Williams. I'm calling on behalf of Black Lives Matter Los Angeles. Um, and I'm calling to uh implore the district

213
01:01:50.480 --> 01:02:07.040
to protect the Black Student Achievement Program at all costs. Um, the Black Student Achievement Program was founded on the basis of LU USD historic um, criminalization of black students and what you've done over the past five

214
01:02:07.040 --> 01:02:24.079
years. It has just scratched the surface of uh, beginning to uh, repair that harm. uh the current status of $175 million is not even enough of what we need to protect our black students and see them begin to achieve uh their full

215
01:02:24.079 --> 01:02:39.520
potential. Uh black students are still performing below um their uh non-black peers uh even with these extra resources. So um I uh echo everything that Christian Flag just said about

216
01:02:39.520 --> 01:02:54.319
Cinei as well. Uh these are tools that are supposed to protect our most marginalized students, but particularly we know that black students uh have been criminalized and pushed out of L USD, which is I believe now we're only about

217
01:02:54.319 --> 01:03:11.680
7% of the L USD population. And that's not by accident. It was by design. Um, and so, uh, I just want to double down on protect VASAP, protect our students, protect our staff that are, um, actually

218
01:03:11.680 --> 01:03:28.640
doing the work on the ground, protect our mental health counselors that are currently in this proposal. Uh, they're they respond to the epidemic of anti-black racial crisis and terrorism that's happening in our schools. And so we need to keep those mental health

219
01:03:28.640 --> 01:03:45.599
provider mental health advisors doing the work that they're currently doing as well as our um ESAP counselors that are working on temporary contracts. They've been de developing trust and relationships in the schools that they're in now and it was disservice to put them on temporary contracts in the

220
01:03:45.599 --> 01:04:03.680
first place. So we want to make sure that those folks who are doing the work at school sites uh still have those positions at those schools. Thank you. >> Thank you for your time. All right, Tiffany Quarlles, I see you're on the line. Tiffany Quarlles, please press star six to unmute yourself

221
01:04:03.680 --> 01:04:18.720
and you'll have two minutes to speak once you begin. Tiffany Quarlles. >> Okay, can you hear me? >> We can. Please go ahead. Yes. >> Okay. Good morning, uh, board members. My name is Tiffany Corals and I'm speaking on behalf of the Lineage Equity and Advancement Project in strong

222
01:04:18.720 --> 01:04:33.760
support of the Black Student Achievement Plan or BSAT uh being fully funded, protected from budget cuts, and expanded. This issue is also personal for me. My mother is a retired LA USD special education teacher. So, I grew up seeing firsthand both the potential of

223
01:04:33.760 --> 01:04:49.760
our students and the inequities that many black students continue to face inside the education system. The data already shows that BAP is producing positive outcomes for black students. But despite that progress, black students at LSD are still underperforming compared to their

224
01:04:49.760 --> 01:05:04.880
non-black peers because of generations of systemic disenfranchisement tied directly to the legacy of American child slavery, segregation, and unequal access to educational resources. At a time when programs supporting black students are being politically attacked across the

225
01:05:04.880 --> 01:05:21.280
nation, LUSD has an opportunity opportunity to lead with courage and continue investing investing in equity and academic achievement. I also want you uh I also want to encourage the board to consider grounding this work not only in race but in lineage. specifically prior prioritizing

226
01:05:21.280 --> 01:05:37.520
descendants of US child slavery whose communities experienced the direct harms these programs were designed to address. By framing this as lineagebased redress tied to historical harms, LUSD can strengthen the legal and moral foundation for sustaining these investments while ensuring resources

227
01:05:37.520 --> 01:05:54.160
reached to communities most impacted by multi-generational educational inequities. Please continue fully funding BSAP. No budget cuts. Uh please protect it from any proposed cuts in this budget. Thank you. >> Thank you for your time. Desan, I see you have joined us. Please press star

228
01:05:54.160 --> 01:06:16.400
six to unmute yourself and you have two minutes to speak once you begin. Day, please go ahead. >> Hello. Good morning. My name is Day Sun with Catalyst California and Equity Alliance for LA's Kids. >> Looks like you just remuted. So, if you

229
01:06:16.400 --> 01:06:32.160
could um unmute yourself and we'll we'll start the timer over once we hear your voice. Day. >> Hi. Good afternoon. Can or good morning. Can you hear me? >> Yes, we can. Please go ahead. Sounded like you were muted, so just go ahead and go for it. >> Perfect. Thank you. Hello. Good morning.

230
01:06:32.160 --> 01:06:49.440
My name is Dave Sun with Catalyst California and the Equity Alliance for LA's Kids. We call on LUSD to protect and fully fund the student equity needs index or SENI, BAP, and other equity investments that are critical for our highest need schools. It is telling when

231
01:06:49.440 --> 01:07:06.400
the district chooses to decimate the primary equity measures that LUSD has. And it really begs the question of what is left then as we see the federal administration taking attack after attack on our communities of color on our immigrant um friends and neighbors

232
01:07:06.400 --> 01:07:21.599
and families. We say and from the district we call those attacks inhumane and cruel. Yet, when we perpetuate the same harm effectively in outcome and in dollars by taking us backwards into the exact place we were before we chose to

233
01:07:21.599 --> 01:07:37.839
take bold stances on repairing the generational harm our communities have experienced through um critical investments again like Sunny and BAP, we are again perpetuating that same type of harm on our communities and our students and our families. And so we call on the

234
01:07:37.839 --> 01:07:53.839
district to protect these funds. Um otherwise it is again telling uh what makes the bulk of cuts is the only equity measures that lust has. We also urge the district to use seni as the framework through which all of these reductions and investments are

235
01:07:53.839 --> 01:08:10.720
considered um and how to use seni beyond a line item. We know that SENI is the best equity tool and framework that the district has that was created in partnership with communities over a decade ago and has even been acknowledged across the state and across

236
01:08:10.720 --> 01:08:26.000
state leaders. So, we call on the district to protect Benny, BAP, and these equity investments. And we urge you all to not be the leadership in L USU's history that completely guts our students, educators, and families of

237
01:08:26.000 --> 01:08:42.080
lifesaving equity measures. Um, and so with that, I'll end. Thank you all. >> Thank you for your time. >> Michael Anthony Gen, I see you're on the line. Please press star six to unmute yourself. And you have two minutes to speak once you begin. Michael Anthony G.

238
01:08:42.080 --> 01:08:57.679
Uh yes, good morning. Greetings and salutations to the board and all present. My name is Michael A. Gwyn and I'm uh chief consultant of Gwyn Community Advocates. And so I would like to provide commentary on BAP and I have

239
01:08:57.679 --> 01:09:14.319
uh four main points. One that BAP continues to be sustained as is as designed and as projected and planned for. through fully funded, no cuts, and that we would try to extend extend

240
01:09:14.319 --> 01:09:31.440
expand uh uh and protect it from budget cuts. That's the primary goal. Third, the program is showing positive outcomes for black students and black but black students are still underperforming compared to the non-black peers. Number four, lastly, we need to protect

241
01:09:31.440 --> 01:09:49.120
investments in extracurricular cultural experiences like the H.B.CU GCU tours, board trip, field trips, mentoring, and pipeline that recruits black educators. Uh, with that said, I can't impress upon the fact and those that have spoke before how important this program is. Um, we're looking for

242
01:09:49.120 --> 01:10:06.520
equity and balance and transparency and I thank you for your time and I yield back. >> Thank you for your time. All right, the final speaker is Channing Martinez. I see you're online. Uh, Mr. Martinez, please press star six to unmute yourself and you have two minutes to speak once you begin. Channing Martinez.

243
01:10:10.000 --> 01:10:26.320
Hello. Can you hear me? >> Yes, we can. >> Uh, good morning. This is Channing Martinez, co-director of the strategy center. I wasn't planning to speak today, but um it I find myself in an

244
01:10:26.320 --> 01:10:43.040
awkward position where for the first time in about 25 years, I actually agree with at least one thing Mr. Towski has said in his public comment. Um and that is have some guts. Telling the board to

245
01:10:43.040 --> 01:10:58.400
have some guts. Um, and I agree with that comment because in a time where, you know, the federal government is already coming down on our communities, I'm finding myself in a weird place where I'm saying, who needs Trump when

246
01:10:58.400 --> 01:11:14.400
you have your own school district right here in Los Angeles creating the very cuts to programs and creating the oppression the black and Latino students are already. Notice how there's not one cut to the LA school police department's

247
01:11:14.400 --> 01:11:31.679
budget. Over the last six years, we defunded the LA School Police Department to create the Black Student Achievement Program, the only program inside of the Los Angeles Unified School District that has actually driven to the raise of enrollment. And yet, the district

248
01:11:31.679 --> 01:11:49.199
continues to fund school police and not only fund them, but refund them from the cuts. Not one cut to the LA school police department that actually serves to oppress and target and arrest and basically harass students, but every

249
01:11:49.199 --> 01:12:08.400
single cut you have in this budget is to the actual equity needs of students. Have some guts is the real word of the day. Thanks so much. >> Thank you for your time. >> That uh concludes the public comment. on

250
01:12:08.400 --> 01:12:45.040
the superintendent reports >> board members who'd like to speak first. >> Hi, good morning. I believe I was skipp technical difficulty. We had everyone who signed up to speak of the 10 has has spoken. Appreciate it. Ortiz, >> thanks. I can start. Uh, this is hard

251
01:12:45.040 --> 01:13:01.520
for all of us, which is probably why the pause. Um, uh, maybe I'll start with just, um, helping us understand, um, the current context. Uh, we have really big numbers. I wonder if we could talk about it on a per pupil basis and and bring it down to the student level. Do we have an

252
01:13:01.520 --> 01:13:22.719
estimate of how much money comes in from the state per student and how much we spend per student? I think that helps um kind of frame this ongoing structural challenge. Even if it's approximate, I I think that could help the that slide I shared before on the

253
01:13:22.719 --> 01:13:38.400
just looking at general fund unrestricted uh because that's kind of the main focus of the the fiscal stabilization plan. Um it's about $19,000 per student looking at this general fund unrestricted budget. >> That is uh what we're spending or what

254
01:13:38.400 --> 01:13:53.280
we're receiving? >> What we're spending. >> Okay. And so we're receiving less than that from the state. >> That's right. >> Do you have approximately like what's the gap? Is it $3,000 per student, 5,000 per student? And if we don't have it today, I do think that's helpful to talk about in the per pupil. So just you know

255
01:13:53.280 --> 01:14:08.320
feedback for the team. Sure. >> Um and I actually do really like this slide. it um this doughnut graph is is helpful to see and would love to see it on the budget transparency tool that we've been trying to promote. Um looking at this, what percentage do we need to

256
01:14:08.320 --> 01:14:23.840
cut this by? And I know it's it depends on the year and if you know everything goes into effect from this year's FSP versus next year's, but my estimate sounds like about 20% of this needs to be cut in each of the next three years. >> Yeah. So after the revenue uh it's about

257
01:14:23.840 --> 01:14:40.880
$2.5 billion dollars over three years that needs to be reduced. That represents um um yeah almost over 12% per year. >> Say 12 or 20 >> 12 per year. So uh the three bill the

258
01:14:40.880 --> 01:14:58.080
2.5 billion is um almost a third of one year's budget. Over a third of one year's budget. >> Yeah. And and that's sobering. um and and helpful to contextualize. Um we are going to have to figure out how to do that while also maintaining our

259
01:14:58.080 --> 01:15:14.239
commitments. Um there's a couple specific questions I have. I don't think it's in the coming fiscal stabilization plan, but in the first one, um transportation. This is an area where I know we're going to dig into more soon. Um but in the current fiscal stabilization plan, we said we were

260
01:15:14.239 --> 01:15:30.480
going to save about 15 million per year. From what I understand, um about only what less than 20,000 students take advantage of this. Like 5% of our students uh use transportation, but we spend nearly 16,000 per student on it.

261
01:15:30.480 --> 01:15:46.880
This is why I'm trying to use the per pupil numbers, right? So almost double for kids who use transportation than those who don't use transportation. So this feels like a a miss. This feels like something we have to change. And I wonder if we um have a plan for for getting to that 15,000 or sorry 15

262
01:15:46.880 --> 01:16:03.600
million. >> And so there are a number of strategies that we intend to employ over the next two to three years. Um when you look at potential transportation efficiencies, I think ultimately what we're trying to do is leverage the fleet and the workforce that we currently have to provide better

263
01:16:03.600 --> 01:16:20.640
service, quality service for our students and families while trying to realize savings in that environment. Historically, the district um made everyone eligible. That was part of our magnet programs as well as through our special ed. And what we would generally

264
01:16:20.640 --> 01:16:37.040
do is we would identify upwards of 42,000 writers in the district uh through just automatic eligibility in a program. What we have shifted to is an opt-in model where families are eligible but they have to exercise opt-in and and

265
01:16:37.040 --> 01:16:53.040
inform the district that they want to use our transportation services. And so our eligibility universe has actually shrank. Um we have upwards of about 25,000 um families students opting into our transportation and on a daily basis

266
01:16:53.040 --> 01:17:09.679
about 17,000 actually take advantage of our transportation network. And so when we're talking about opportunity, it's more about how do we ensure that we have 50 50,000 plus seats available through all of our buses in the system. How do we

267
01:17:09.679 --> 01:17:24.080
make sure that students are actually using what's available in the network so that we can drive down that per pupil cost and expenditure? Um at the same time, it's like how do we actually create access points that are more reliable and of better quality for

268
01:17:24.080 --> 01:17:41.199
families. And so what we currently focus on is creating access across the district rather than looking at how do we improve programs so that families don't have to enroll their student across the district for a specialized program. It's like how do we actually invest in schools in their backyard so

269
01:17:41.199 --> 01:17:58.159
that transportation can be more reliable and shorter time for families and create that access for families. And so there's there's opportunities in the magnet program, opportunities in our special ed program, as well as thinking about how we work with uh the strategy office

270
01:17:58.159 --> 01:18:14.960
around the landscape analysis to really think about how we bring programs closer to families so that I said we leverage our transportation in a different way. >> I really appreciate that and it and it sounds like we we have a plan for where we're headed. Um because on its surface it feels really inequitable to say we

271
01:18:14.960 --> 01:18:30.080
spend almost double per student who takes the bus than students who don't take the bus when we're contemplating cutting other programs that should be more equitable like SENI and BSAP you know decimating those. So I appreciate this. I realize it's a small part of the budget, but I hope you can hear how I'm

272
01:18:30.080 --> 01:18:47.199
kind of expressing um the the inequities with transportation versus, you know, Seni and BAP, which remain a priority for me and and my schools benefit greatly from that. And I I hope we can figure out something there. Um I I'll dig into one more and then pass it to my colleagues on the current um fiscal stabilization plan, the the contracts

273
01:18:47.199 --> 01:19:04.480
and the non- labor. Um 200 million seems like quite a lot. What is the total universe that we could um cut from? Um is it a billion dollars in non- labor >> approximately? Um so this is a very to your point a very aggressive target. Um

274
01:19:04.480 --> 01:19:20.000
every dollar that's spent whether in the central office or at schools whether on people or non- labor is providing some benefit to our students. And so it's not possible to make reductions of any size without having some either operational

275
01:19:20.000 --> 01:19:35.920
or structural impact. Um we can follow up with more specificity on kind of the share of the not just the total non- labor because this is central office or centrally administered non- labor. Uh but it is a very very significant

276
01:19:35.920 --> 01:19:51.440
reduction. Um we've made some presentations over the last few months that provided some information about what these funds are used for. Um a lot of the things that those funds are used for Thank you. are um

277
01:19:51.440 --> 01:20:08.800
for utilities, for insurance, for mandated services for special education, for technology licenses that are used uh but as instructional material. So, um for next school year, the overall

278
01:20:08.800 --> 01:20:26.239
non- labor budget is um is billion dollars. and and I heard a few areas where it makes sense we might easily cut from technology. For example, we just passed a resolution to eliminate techn one to one devices particularly for our youngest students. Um but I I am having a hard time uh wondering if we're going

279
01:20:26.239 --> 01:20:42.159
to get to that $200 million or if it feels like more of a wish than a a plan. And so um it would be helpful, I think, to kind of break that down more of um >> where that's really going to be coming from. Um there are some other really awful things on here. We haven't talked about furloss for a long time. we

280
01:20:42.159 --> 01:20:58.400
haven't talked about cost sharing um for health care and so you know as we're looking at these really large numbers I think this board is um I'll speak for myself just having a hard time uh and and we have seen this we've known for a while that we were going to have to make some of these big decisions but as we

281
01:20:58.400 --> 01:21:14.480
present this to LEO and we really look at what's available for us what's possible what's not in this year going forward what requires and you know should include our our labor partners and our community and making decisions Um the sorry I said last but maybe not

282
01:21:14.480 --> 01:21:30.800
because the the other big one that this all connects to for me as well is the consolidation and the footprint. And so you mentioned utilities for example and though that might feel small if we closed 30 schools I think we hear a million dollars per school. Um you know to what degree would that reduce our utilities costs or other kind of plant

283
01:21:30.800 --> 01:21:46.880
um investments that are not about people. So um this is a lot to take in. Appreciate again the timing so that we can process this together. Um, I do know the consolidation conversation will be challenging. Um, but I hope some of this helps our community understand that it

284
01:21:46.880 --> 01:22:02.239
is uh necessary and maybe even better for students to be able to get things like SENI and BAP if we had fewer campuses um uh on which to operate, you know, the the high quality and also equitable programs that we know our kids really need. So, um, thanks for this and

285
01:22:02.239 --> 01:22:19.840
I I know we'll have lots more discussion >> and I know it wasn't a question, but but you're you're right. the the identified reduction is a is an aggressive target. To the extent we fall short anywhere in the fiscal stabilization plan from what you see here, it will need to be made up

286
01:22:19.840 --> 01:22:35.679
for by a corresponding amount somewhere else. And so we have to come up with enough savings. There's some revenue here, obviously substantial revenues, but substantial reductions, very painful reductions. It has to add up to the same amount. Obviously, we're going to continue to

287
01:22:35.679 --> 01:22:51.480
update this. LEO is going to require us to continue to update it at first interm and second interimm uh to provide updates on how it's being implemented to what extent it's being implemented. Um and so if we fall short anywhere we'll need to make up the difference somewhere else.

288
01:22:51.760 --> 01:23:08.800
>> Thank you Dr. Rivas. >> Yes. Can you walk us through um for this fiscal the proposed fiscal stabilization plan what was your methodology in selecting these areas all of these line items what was and who was part of that decision-making how did

289
01:23:08.800 --> 01:23:24.159
you land here >> so as I mentioned before uh given how many of our resources in general fund and restricted are in norm positions that are either required to be allocated per our labor contracts or allocated by formula even if they're not in our labor

290
01:23:24.159 --> 01:23:40.800
contracts it very substantially limits the the options for what to reduce elsewhere. Um there are also required services as you know there's a very substantial contribution from the unrestricted general fund to the restricted general fund to to to cover the cost of the very important but also

291
01:23:40.800 --> 01:23:56.719
legally required supports for our students with disabilities. And so it leaves very few options for what we can cut. And so that's why what you see in the fiscal stabilization plan includes almost everything that isn't already required in our in our in our

292
01:23:56.719 --> 01:24:13.840
contracts or by law. So there are very substantial reductions to central office be above and beyond those that were already implemented as part of the last fiscal stabilization plan. There are very substantial reductions that normally we would consider to be a last resort uh last resort reductions to

293
01:24:13.840 --> 01:24:30.560
allocations that impact schools. But the outlook that we're facing necessitates some of those last resort options. Um we wish that it could be avoided. Um but but that's why you see the reductions

294
01:24:30.560 --> 01:24:47.679
here is there are very limited options. Um it was the result of course as as always of a collaboration with with senior leadership um with the relevant uh leaders for these different programs. Um, now this is the first look at the the plan. Obviously, there's a lot of work to come

295
01:24:47.679 --> 01:25:02.800
in the coming months to implement this. Um, so obviously that is going to necessitate an all hands-on deck approach with all the relevant program staff and leaders uh to ensure that it's implemented. >> Were there other areas that you analyzed

296
01:25:02.800 --> 01:25:19.040
or contemplated of adding here that you didn't? >> This is kind of a includes everything. I mean, I think if if you look at kind of the that pie chart that we showed, this includes really everything that's possible to be cut, it's just barely

297
01:25:19.040 --> 01:25:35.120
enough. Um, even after these very dramatic reductions and painful reductions and so it really does include a little bit of or a lot of everything, >> including contracts. >> Yeah, it's I mean it's >> why why don't we see contracts here? >> Well, it's target of $200 million per

298
01:25:35.120 --> 01:25:52.800
year ongoing. Um, it's non- labor, so that encompasses more than contracts. that includes equipment and supplies, but but largely it's it's going to be contracts. And so even with that very aggressive target of $200 million per year, um it's just barely enough to to

299
01:25:52.800 --> 01:26:07.520
address our projected shortfall. >> And in terms of the furlows and the health insurance, isn't that something that needs to be discussed with with our labor partners? Is that contractual? >> Yes, both of those require negotiations with our labor partners. Very much so.

300
01:26:07.520 --> 01:26:25.280
you added them there prior to even so they speaking to labor partners. >> Yeah, this is the proposed plan. Uh we we had trouble finding enough solutions to get to the $3.6 billion just to be frank. Even after the very very dramatic

301
01:26:25.280 --> 01:26:40.639
reductions to school allocations, those were not enough. And so it's in what's included as a result of those very painful solutions not being enough is including things that do require labor negotiations.

302
01:26:40.639 --> 01:26:56.400
>> Bill for now >> Gomez. >> Yes. a very difficult conversation and you know I think for me having been on the board you know this is a moment that we knew we were headed towards and I and I think it's important that we that we

303
01:26:56.400 --> 01:27:13.199
just note that you know when the pandemic funds were received um we knew that they were time limited in nature they expired in September of 2024 and since then we have reverted back to more normals normal levels of revenue

304
01:27:13.199 --> 01:27:28.480
even though student needs haven't gone gone down. They've increased if anything given what we are seeing in our communities. And even though costs have continued to increase, we know cost of living remains extremely high, especially in a place like Los Angeles.

305
01:27:28.480 --> 01:27:45.679
And also the costs of of goods, whether that's food that we use to provide school meals um or other supplies, those continue to rise. um and yet we do not see the the comparable continued e increases in revenue that we would need to sustain the supports that we have on

306
01:27:45.679 --> 01:28:01.760
our school campuses. Um I also just want to narrow in on declining enrollment which we know is is a driving factor of our state revenues. We talked about this on Tuesday. Um you know there's declining enrollment in many places in the state of California. We know that

307
01:28:01.760 --> 01:28:18.080
there has been an acceleration here in LA for a number of different reasons. Um, one, we know the immigration rates are having a direct impact on the number of students enrolled in attending our schools. Um, we also know that cost of

308
01:28:18.080 --> 01:28:34.719
li like just cost of living in Los Angeles is driving families out of our communities. And I wish that those who um had greater ability to adjust cost of living and affordability in Los Angeles could be in the room because they are they also need to be part of a solution.

309
01:28:34.719 --> 01:28:51.679
Unless our city and county leaders take that seriously, we are going to continue having fewer children in Los Angeles, which means we have less less funds to run our public schools. Like that is just the way that schools are funded in California. So, I just I think that

310
01:28:51.679 --> 01:29:06.560
we're running into very severe structural problems and um and I'm super alarmed by by this and and I hope that the drastic nature of what we're being considered can also be conveyed to those other decision makers because we need

311
01:29:06.560 --> 01:29:23.760
their help. And we also know that schools are more than reading and math and science and history. They are safe spaces for our kids. we're providing health services, mental health supports, um caring adults for our kids, and that it has a greater impact than just are we

312
01:29:23.760 --> 01:29:41.120
learning, but is really what empowers our entire economy and society to work. And just to the to the public commenters, you know, like no, we should not be in a place in our state, in our city, and our country where public schools have to fight for crumbs when we have billions of dollars for oligarchs.

313
01:29:41.120 --> 01:29:55.760
Um, we have billions of dollars for wars abroad that literally kill and harm children and innocent people. So, I I don't want to at all undermine it is extremely backwards. It is extremely and

314
01:29:55.760 --> 01:30:11.679
it's not right. Um, and this is and this is the place we're in. So, and and I just want to emphasize that as Miss Ortiz Franklin said, you know, this particular picture is not new information for us. We we know that

315
01:30:11.679 --> 01:30:27.440
there have been reductions in LUSD over the last several years, not just the existing fiscal stabilization plan, but there were moves made before to try to make reductions in ways that would least directly harm students and families at schools. Um, and now what we're left

316
01:30:27.440 --> 01:30:44.480
with is extremely harmful cuts, a very severe, drastic budget picture. I in my mind think of it as like a doomsday scenario almost. Um, because it it is it is it is severe and we know it's going to hurt students, families, and

317
01:30:44.480 --> 01:31:00.880
employees. Um, so I just want to make it clear that I am committed to doing everything possible to ensuring that the most severe of this is not needed. That is why we've been in Sacramento. You know, for me, I'm continuing this advocacy. I'm meeting with some of our East Valley representatives tomorrow

318
01:31:00.880 --> 01:31:17.199
with our labor partners to continue the advocacy. That being said, the the gap, the magnitude of the gap needs to be highlighted. Three $3.6 billion, that's not a small amount. That is a significant portion of our budget. And I

319
01:31:17.199 --> 01:31:33.920
think we we have to be honest about about what we can realistically expect from our advocacy. We can continue and we should push as hard as we can. I was glad to see um the contracts, the non- labor expenditures put into this fiscal stabilization plan. I think that's

320
01:31:33.920 --> 01:31:50.000
something we've been hearing and I appreciate that the team is reflecting that now in an expectation that we will be cutting contracts and we will do so on a regular basis. and that, you know, $450 million that has a material impact on fewer staff reductions. It is saving

321
01:31:50.000 --> 01:32:06.320
our employees and it is saving services for students that wouldn't otherwise be there. I also appreciate that we're including revenue estimates, ones that we think that we can realistically achieve because if we were to put other revenue estimates in, we also have the element of LEO reviewing this plan and

322
01:32:06.320 --> 01:32:21.440
if it does not meet their scrutiny, then there could be consequences that we could foresee as a school district. So, I think it's great that we have increasing attendance. Every opportunity that we have to grow our revenue within our power, we should be looking at all of those options. And between now and

323
01:32:21.440 --> 01:32:37.120
June, I I will be continuing to take a hard look at those things. Um because again, any dollar that we can get on the revenue side saves us from a reduction um in terms of the expenditures that we make and we know those are investments in people. Um, okay. Last thing I want

324
01:32:37.120 --> 01:32:52.719
to say is well actually I have a bunch of questions so never never mind to that but just I I I think it's I think it's just important to note that we have only difficult choices that are left to us. That that is the reality and I appreciate that you u Mr. Bravo and

325
01:32:52.719 --> 01:33:09.199
superintendent are making this public conversation um transparent and understandable because some of the issues that I had last year was that we were speaking in euphemisms. we were not clear about what that plan would mean in terms of reductions at school sites, in terms of job losses here centrally and

326
01:33:09.199 --> 01:33:24.800
in the regions. So, it's it's important that at every step of the way, this board and the leadership of the district is very very clear about what each and every single one of these things will mean. Um, okay, I'm going to pivot to questions. So, um

327
01:33:24.800 --> 01:33:39.679
I want to turn to the central office component because I think when we talk about reductions, um it is sometimes highlighted that like we should make cuts centrally as much as possible to avoid impacts at school sites. Can you share just how much we've reduced

328
01:33:39.679 --> 01:33:55.679
central office staffing and budgets over the last several years? >> So, we can follow up with a more precise kind of more historical reductions. Uh the most recent reduction was from last year from this year into next year which I which I you know from past

329
01:33:55.679 --> 01:34:11.840
presentations was about $150 million of ongoing reductions. Those reductions were principally positions but it also included substantial reductions to contracts and supplies and equipment as well um and was the basis for the reduction in force that process that

330
01:34:11.840 --> 01:34:27.120
began back back in February. So we'll follow with the precise figures from from past reductions, but some examples of of of the strategies that were implemented in the past were of course substantial reductions to region uh supports uh region offices, the

331
01:34:27.120 --> 01:34:43.600
consolidation of the regions >> uh throughout the last couple years, the regular closure of vacancies that are vacant for a certain period of time. uh the consistent review of the filling of positions of uh you know of of a process

332
01:34:43.600 --> 01:35:00.320
to make sure that we're reviewing whenever a position is created or filled even if even with existing funds. Um and then substantial reductions in non- labor over the last few years as well. Um so processes that reviewed not just budgets but purchase orders and the

333
01:35:00.320 --> 01:35:17.280
ability to either close or reduce those purchase orders. So there are many strategies and again we we can follow up with the the kind of the scope of those reductions but um this has been an effort that has been not to your point not just from this year into next year but but has included the last several

334
01:35:17.280 --> 01:35:31.199
several years >> 2122 I think we started making those. >> That's right. And so these additional reductions are are you know even the reductions that were implemented from this year into next year included as noted by by many board members some very important supports for for schools and

335
01:35:31.199 --> 01:35:47.360
students and and no doubt to to to be as transparent and as you're asking us to be clear uh further reductions will also be um be just as as difficult if not more so um in terms of how how uh the district will be able to support our our schools and our students.

336
01:35:47.360 --> 01:36:03.600
>> Okay, that's helpful. I it would be it would be great if we could get a full estimate of what all of those reductions have been. Let's say going back to the 2122 school year so that it it's clear again what efforts we've made to try to make reductions centrally. And then important to assume relevant today that

337
01:36:03.600 --> 01:36:20.080
central spending is also people who support schools and who do work that's important in our school district and make an impact for students. Um, with regard to the additional 50 million that's included for central office reductions, how much further would we need to reduce central office staff to

338
01:36:20.080 --> 01:36:36.800
be able to achieve that level of savings? >> Approximately 450 employees. Um, depends obviously on which employees are identified and um, and the cost associated with them, but but it is approximately 450.

339
01:36:36.800 --> 01:36:51.520
>> Okay. And then just to the point of transparency and I appreciate that we've highlighted because again this was not done last year but where there would be a layoff impact of the because you know I think again in some conversations Senny has talked about like a program senny is people providing services at

340
01:36:51.520 --> 01:37:08.159
school sites mostly. Um, so as far as the layoff impacts, can you give us a ballpark figure of what of what that might mean in terms of FTES? >> The layoff impact just associated with

341
01:37:08.159 --> 01:37:24.480
the strategies that you see here are likely to result in excess of 6,000 uh layoffs. Um the number grows when we consider that the layoffs that were at least you know the final authorization

342
01:37:24.480 --> 01:37:40.719
is today but back in February we moved forward with only the central office classified positions that were reduced. Um it resulted in the restoration of many many positions um school-based positions. Um the

343
01:37:40.719 --> 01:37:56.159
assumption is that those positions are restored for one year only, meaning that those restorations are for next school year only and the associated layoffs would be added to that 6,000 plus figure that I mentioned. >> Mhm.

344
01:37:56.159 --> 01:38:12.159
>> Third, the previous fiscal stabilization plan already assumed additional reductions beyond what was implemented for 2627. >> For example, SNI from 601 to 500. Now obviously reduced much further here. Those also have a corresponding layoff

345
01:38:12.159 --> 01:38:28.719
impact. And so while it's a little too soon to give you a very precise figure on the combined impact of those layoffs, they are um they are going to be very very very substantial as a share of our current workforce. Um probably in excess

346
01:38:28.719 --> 01:38:45.840
of 10% of our current workforce. I think one thing that I want to clarify it's it's a reflection of position closures how it results in layoffs and total number of layoffs is very much dependent in attrition and mobility of staff into other programs that may have open

347
01:38:45.840 --> 01:39:02.560
positions and so those final numbers that's right >> may not reflect the 6,000 >> closures of positions that are reflected in that senate reduction. Okay, that's helpful. And obviously I would expect and demand that we do everything we can to help employees find another open

348
01:39:02.560 --> 01:39:20.400
position support in areas where we have vacancies and and I know that that's work. I mean even in in this year of riffs we there were numbers that were reduced because because of those efforts. Okay. >> Um and just to to clarify the 6,000 figure is that over the life of the FSP

349
01:39:20.400 --> 01:39:36.639
or is that annually that we would be looking at? So given that the vast majority of the reductions are happening starting in the 2728 school year and those savings are ongoing meaning the that's why you see the figures in both columns >> the vast vast majority of those impacts

350
01:39:36.639 --> 01:39:53.280
would be employee impacts riff and thank you uh Mr. Salceto for kind of differentiating between the number of positions that are closed is different than the number of employees who might be uh permanently separated from the district. Um but the vast majority would be beginning in the 2728 school year

351
01:39:53.280 --> 01:40:09.199
with some still impacts for additional reductions that are here for 2829 but but the vast majority would be in 2728. So it wouldn't be each year that same figure of position closures um principally in in 2728.

352
01:40:09.199 --> 01:40:25.760
>> Okay, that's helpful. Um and then with regard to uh the norm position reductions um can you give us some examples of what those positions might be? >> Sure. So examples of positions that are allocated in the norm or kind of based

353
01:40:25.760 --> 01:40:42.400
on a formula based on enrollment that are not in our collective baring agreements. There's many are as we noted earlier, but examples of positions that are not in our collective bargaining agreements are uh school administrators, um clerical staff, certain coordinator

354
01:40:42.400 --> 01:40:59.440
positions, certain out of the classroom supports, um and so while this too is uh a target, I mean there the numbers aren't random, we we've we've begun to develop options uh for consideration, but Um but there

355
01:40:59.440 --> 01:41:15.119
are those types of positions that are not um allocated because of our collective bargaining agreements. >> Okay. Um and then you know I obviously am extremely concerned about the SENI and BAP reductions. Those are programs that I have advocated and fought for

356
01:41:15.119 --> 01:41:31.760
over the years and we know that that would have a a serious impact on some of our highest need schools and communities. Another area that brings me great concern is the furlow days. The last time that we that we instituted furlows was that during the great recession. Um, and what's the I I can

357
01:41:31.760 --> 01:41:47.119
see that the the savings if you want to put it that way is 25 million a day. So this plan contemplates uh 2 days in 2728 and 5 days and 2829. >> What would the what would the impact be

358
01:41:47.119 --> 01:42:03.280
to employees um in terms of wage reductions? So, it is in a sense a pay reduction. >> It's a pay cut. >> It's a pay cut. Um, >> the way that it generates savings, even though it's maybe not the the most apt

359
01:42:03.280 --> 01:42:18.719
term, >> is because employees on those days would not be working nor paid. And so depending on the number of days whether you're a basis or basis, you know, 12 month or an 11month uh work calendar, uh

360
01:42:18.719 --> 01:42:36.239
the percentage reduction would would vary. Um but but you're exactly right. It it is a reduction in pay. >> Okay. Yeah. And I I mean obviously, you know, we we've just concluded hard-fought conversations um over our latest agreements and to our employees

361
01:42:36.239 --> 01:42:51.040
would then, you know, be facing immediate cuts to to those wages that were won. So I I just think that's worth uplifting. I and in terms of areas where we want to work to reduce um and find alternatives, I think that that is a

362
01:42:51.040 --> 01:43:08.719
major area we need to be looking at. >> Yes, absolutely. Okay. Sorry, I'm done. Thank you. No, they were great questions. Now we're going to do you in round two. Go ahead, Carla. I know you were next. >> Yeah, thank you, Scott. I'm just going to stick to questions for right now. Um,

363
01:43:08.719 --> 01:43:27.520
on slide seven, where is the reserve reflected? Is it this year, next year, the our ending balance reserve? >> Yeah. So, so each of these bars are are the reserves. They're specifically our

364
01:43:27.520 --> 01:43:43.440
general fund unrestricted unassigned reserves. Another term for reserves is what you just noted is our ending balance. So, this represents what we project to end each of these fiscal years. What the ending balance of that kind of bank account would be in each of

365
01:43:43.440 --> 01:43:58.400
these years starting from the end of the current school year all the way to the end of the 2829 school year. >> So, this year we expect to end at 1.6. >> That's right. That's going to be our reserve. >> So we've gone from 5.6 to 1.6.

366
01:43:58.400 --> 01:44:14.560
>> So this is our general fund unrestricted unassigned ending balance. It's the component of our reserves that can be used for any educational purpose. And I know I mentioned this a little bit on Tuesday, but I I'll just mention again that these are the ending balances that are the indication of a district's

367
01:44:14.560 --> 01:44:30.880
fiscal health that not only do districts themselves look most closely at, but also of course state, county, and state oversight bodies because they're again the the funds that can be used for any educational purpose. They're not, for example, restricted by law for a very specific purpose. They're not in a separate operating fund like the

368
01:44:30.880 --> 01:44:46.080
cafeteria fund that can only be used for a specific purpose. And so that is why we pay such close attention to them. Um so that that's what you're seeing here on this slide. >> Okay. And um let me see here. So you mentioned

369
01:44:46.080 --> 01:45:00.960
restricted categories, right? Those are not reflected here because LEO does not accept them as or I I don't know who else doesn't accept them as as revenues to uh to be included in your projections, your multi-year

370
01:45:00.960 --> 01:45:16.880
projections. So yes, they're not included in this multi-year projection because they're they're separate. They're restricted as you noted. It doesn't mean though that the projections on the restricted side are aren't also extremely important. And so they're very important.

371
01:45:16.880 --> 01:45:32.320
>> Well, they do pay for salaries as well. >> Exactly. Exactly. And and that's exactly why they're so important, especially when uh the district is incorporating the cost of new labor agreements, for example. And so they're very important. Now, they're also an indication of a

372
01:45:32.320 --> 01:45:48.159
district's fiscal health. This just happens to be the one that's the most important and the one that is uh most heavily scrutinized. >> Is it I'm sorry to interrupt, but is it heavily scrutinized or is it that they're not accept will not accept both funds to be

373
01:45:48.159 --> 01:46:04.239
reflected in our multi-year uh projections? I'm trying to understand why we don't do it. >> We wouldn't be able to put, for example, restricted balances into our unrestricted general fund. So yeah, I'm not sure if that's what what your question is, but yeah, that that is not allowed. >> Okay. >> Um just like we can't put money from the

374
01:46:04.239 --> 01:46:21.040
adult education fund into the general fund. The opposite can happen. The general fund because it can be used for an educational purpose. There's more flexibility. But you can't put any from any of the restricted funds into general fund unrestricted. But the reason why the restricted grant the funds are also very important is because as you noted

375
01:46:21.040 --> 01:46:36.719
there are many positions that are paid for with unreed funds. So, Title One for example, uh, ELOP for example, even in the other operating funds like adult education fund for for example, uh, the cafeteria fund is another example, their

376
01:46:36.719 --> 01:46:52.960
child development fund. And so we also have to ensure that we can absorb the cost of these new labor agreements in those funds as well. And we will be working on those projections and share them with the board. And it is possible,

377
01:46:52.960 --> 01:47:09.119
if not likely, that we will need to identify reductions in those other funds as well. So it may be possible, if not likely, that we'll need to identify reductions in some of those other operating funds in order to accommodate the growing costs uh in each of those

378
01:47:09.119 --> 01:47:25.679
funds. And so by focusing so much on general fund unrestricted, I don't mean to minimize the importance of the other funds. They're very very important. They pay for extremely important services. But the same rules that apply in unrestricted apply elsewhere. When we have a certain amount of revenue, but our costs are substantially increasing,

379
01:47:25.679 --> 01:47:40.480
we do have to make corresponding reductions to the extent our reserves are insufficient over this three-year period to fully absorb those costs. >> Does the board have any say so on what is restricted and what is not? Can we >> No, unfortunately, no. The the schools

380
01:47:40.480 --> 01:47:56.000
have no discretion on what is recognized as restricted or unrestricted is completely governed by by state law. So for example, title one, we have no discretion on on the fact that that is recognized and reported as a restricted revenue and that the expenditures are

381
01:47:56.000 --> 01:48:13.920
restricted. So everything is is determined by is governed by state law or federal law. We have no discretion whatsoever on what is determined to be restricted. >> Okay. Um, I'm just wondering if we were to include both restricted and

382
01:48:13.920 --> 01:48:29.920
unrestricted, would the outlook look just as bad? >> Well, we can certainly provide those uh kind of combined ending balances as we have in the past. We are still working on the projections for some of those other funds, but we can certainly include them. But >> would it look that bad though?

383
01:48:29.920 --> 01:48:44.960
>> Well, they would be shown separately. So, you would still have the negative 3.6 and unrestricted. And then we would stack on top of it let's say the cafeteria fund which may or may not be positive by 2829. >> I mean I would like that's our overall budget. Our overall budget includes both

384
01:48:44.960 --> 01:49:02.320
restricted and unrestricted. >> Yes. Our overall I mean I would love to see that >> together cuz I don't know what it would look like. Um on slide um I believe it's slide nine the donut. >> Yes. So I see um SENI whole student

385
01:49:02.320 --> 01:49:20.400
health wellness and BAP are those and I see some amounts are those school funded is that money that we send to the schools and that's why it's not included in the norm based in the norm positions >> yes Senny and BAP are both discretionary

386
01:49:20.400 --> 01:49:36.880
allocation no sorry seni is a discretionary allocation that is provided to to schools >> and so there's a formula that you're familiar with where we determine uh the ascendi ranking for the school and that determines the per unduplicated student rate that they receive. But then once the dollars are allocated to the schools

387
01:49:36.880 --> 01:49:53.760
based on that methodology then the schools have you know broad not unlimited but broad discretion on how to use those resources. So whether to the they might fund psychiatric social workers or or attendance counselors etc or class size reduction teachers >> positions >> principally principally it's used for

388
01:49:53.760 --> 01:50:10.239
positions but it is important to note that funds are also used by schools on supplies um on u contracted services on equipment and so though the majority the vast majority is definitely spent on positions the the schools do also use it

389
01:50:10.239 --> 01:50:25.600
to supplement the the more limited funding they receive. leave for supplies. >> What about whole student health, wellness, and safety? >> So, that includes mental health staff, nurses, school safety officers. These are the categories that we've we thought

390
01:50:25.600 --> 01:50:41.600
were the most transparent for the for the benefit of the public. Um, but those are are our school support staff >> are and they are purchased by the school. >> Uh, no. So, every well everything that's in Sani is reflected in Sani. So like there is >> but you have a separate categor or

391
01:50:41.600 --> 01:50:59.119
separate color for so you have seni yes and then you have whole student health wellness and safety so I'm just wondering is this like a where does that fund come from is that >> there are allocations uh centrally administered often okay >> um but but to your point for sure within

392
01:50:59.119 --> 01:51:15.760
seni there are investments or or school funds used for supports that also would be considered to be for student health wellness and safety The point here was to identify specific allocations. There's a lot of overlap, no doubt. I mean, there's a lot of overlap. Obviously, within BAP, the

393
01:51:15.760 --> 01:51:32.080
allocation also includes important supports for, you know, student wellness, etc. And so, while there's a lot of overlap, these are kind of the broad categories that I think are important for for for the public to be aware of. And the point overall of this slide was just to demonstrate why it's

394
01:51:32.080 --> 01:51:48.880
so difficult to find options for reductions when we're looking at not only a shortfall of $3.6 billion, but also when so many of the resources are are in positions that are in either labor contracts or or allocated per by enrollment.

395
01:51:48.880 --> 01:52:04.320
>> I think what would be helpful because I think what Miss Grego Grego was getting at is the expenditure side because this is the budgeted side. >> That's right. And so thinking about maybe for as we are providing more information is providing a very similar chart but tied to the expenditure element.

396
01:52:04.320 --> 01:52:19.119
>> Okay. >> Okay. Um on fund I noticed on let's see 14 is now the FSP. So I noticed that in the new proposed FSP fund 17 doesn't show up anymore. Why?

397
01:52:19.119 --> 01:52:34.719
>> Yeah. Fund 17 was already authorized by the board uh back in uh December at first interim uh to be fully released into the general fund under >> so it's already included in the multi-year. >> It is >> okay. Um and then let's see here. Um so

398
01:52:34.719 --> 01:52:51.360
you mentioned OPED. >> Yes. >> Right. And that is for the trust, >> correct? >> Right. That's like a money that is sitting there for the future. >> That's right. >> And but we do fund as as people retire. That's right. >> We already have that budgeted. That's

399
01:52:51.360 --> 01:53:08.000
been part of our budget forever. Right. That's right. We have to pay for them. >> Yeah. We refer to that that annual expenditure for the people that are actually already retired and drawing benefits. We call it kind of the the pay as you go portion. >> And you're exactly right. That expense is already built into our multi-year

400
01:53:08.000 --> 01:53:23.360
projection. The the challenge that the district, not only our district, but many districts and municipalities are facing is that the cost of those benefits is increasing substantially over time. And some of it's for good reasons. people are living a lot longer, so they're drawing benefits for a longer period of time. But also the cost, the

401
01:53:23.360 --> 01:53:39.840
annual increase in cost of the health benefits is very substantial. So 8% plus per year, which is much higher than the annual increase we're getting from the state in terms of revenue. And so that's why many districts are and municipalities do try to put money aside

402
01:53:39.840 --> 01:53:56.080
for the future costs so that the payo the portion that you're referring to doesn't take up a larger and larger share of our total budget each year because that's money that otherwise can be spent on on our students. >> Yeah. And the reason why we're pulling it out right now is because that would

403
01:53:56.080 --> 01:54:11.920
we're in this state that we're in right now. It would be that we would be paying as you go and then putting some money aside for the future. Right. And when we are cutting >> That's right. >> We don't don't necessarily want to be storing money for the future. We want to use it now.

404
01:54:11.920 --> 01:54:26.880
>> Correct. >> Yeah. The current fiscal circumstances I think uh don't don't allow don't allow for for that that contribution. >> Okay. And then um I've heard you know the the furlow days.

405
01:54:26.880 --> 01:54:43.440
Um my understanding is that SEIU employees because they're hourly, they don't work the unassigned days, right? So essentially it's like they're already taking like a furlow day. >> So when you're making projections for furlow days for all, does that mean that

406
01:54:43.440 --> 01:54:58.480
employees who are hourly and it's not just SEU, I'm sure there's other bargaining units who have hourly employees, >> um are they going to have to take extra? Does that mean that those folks are now going to have to take extra furlows

407
01:54:58.480 --> 01:55:15.760
>> to generate this level of savings specified here? It would require all employees to take those number of days. >> So some folks will actually be getting like their regular, you know, days that they don't get paid and then on top of that some other days. Okay. Um the other

408
01:55:15.760 --> 01:55:34.400
question I have is um um let me see here. Oh, the slide on the county, right? Uh 15 and 16. >> So, let's just say we present our

409
01:55:34.400 --> 01:55:51.840
budget, our fiscal stabilization plan, and they're like negative. >> We don't approve it. What are we going to do? So they in the event let's say that they either conditionally approve or uh

410
01:55:51.840 --> 01:56:07.760
disapprove our budget or designate the district as a lack of going concern um that would trigger at least from the county's level the county level intervention typically precedes any state level intervention. >> And so the likely outcome based on

411
01:56:07.760 --> 01:56:23.440
conversations with with the county is the appointment of a fiscal adviser. Um >> but what are we going to do? I understand that that's what they're going to do, >> but what are we going to do? How are we going to respond to them? >> Well, I mean, they have statutory authority to

412
01:56:23.440 --> 01:56:38.080
>> So, we're just going to accept it. There's no appeal process. >> In some cases, I believe there are appeal processes processes. In other cases, there aren't. We could certainly provide more detailed information on the difference. want us to appeal anything that the county says that is not

413
01:56:38.080 --> 01:56:54.560
acceptable. I would want us to appeal whether it's allowed or not. We should fight this because this fiscal stabilization plan is atrocious and it is hurting our most vulnerable students. And I know Simon, I'm not, you know, you

414
01:56:54.560 --> 01:57:09.520
and I know that it's not you personally doing this, but Senny cuts to zero BAP to $25 million, that is unacceptable.

415
01:57:09.520 --> 01:57:25.920
I do not accept that as a normal way of doing our budget. So, we must we must appeal anything that comes back. And on top of that, we must continue to fight at the at the state level and at the federal level because

416
01:57:25.920 --> 01:57:42.159
this is not acceptable. I don't accept this as a normal way of doing schooling when we are decimating programs. Our students who are going to be impacted are already impacted by low enrollment.

417
01:57:42.159 --> 01:57:58.639
>> The past few years they're getting less money, right? Because their enrollment is going down. they're already getting less money and then on top of that we're taking more money away from them. This is not the kind of district that we want. This is not what a the largest

418
01:57:58.639 --> 01:58:16.560
public school district does. We lead and we fight for our most vulnerable students which is practically what 90% of our population in our district. So, I want us to make sure that one, we we appeal anything whether they say we are

419
01:58:16.560 --> 01:58:32.800
allowed to or not, we still appeal. Um, I you know, I'm going to stop the comments right now, but thank you for answering my questions. And one last thing, thank you for being transparent in and being very explicit on what the

420
01:58:32.800 --> 01:58:48.400
plan is. I still don't see anything about consolid the consolidation of schools in terms of the plan for that and that concerns me because historically consolidation of schools has impacted black and brown students the most because their enrollment has been suffering. So I am concerned about

421
01:58:48.400 --> 01:59:04.480
that and I want to have a detailed plan about that. I want to make sure that those schools are protected, those students are protected. But I'll stop there. So, thank you um Andreas and thank you Simon for really pushing that we have this conversation now, giving our communities an opportunity to see

422
01:59:04.480 --> 01:59:24.239
and to advocate as hard as they can for the things that our students deserve. >> Thank you, Carla. >> Okay, Charlotte. >> Yes. Um, as we know, this is not uh the conversation, not the easy conversations

423
01:59:24.239 --> 01:59:40.800
even in the times that we in today. And so, um, I do want to highlight and applaud the fact that our superintendent and our labor are working together at state to be able to come to solutions because this is

424
01:59:40.800 --> 01:59:56.960
unprecedented. It's it hasn't been done to this uh magnitude. And I I want to elevate that because it's important work that we're doing because it needs to be it needs to be documented that this is not how we run schools and we as being

425
01:59:56.960 --> 02:00:12.880
one of the largest school district obviously see see it on a grander scale. We're seeing things, you know, projected and and we're experiencing it because we live in Los Angeles County where other counties within California it's very

426
02:00:12.880 --> 02:00:28.239
different. the cost of living in other places we know is very different. And so it they respond differently. And so because we are in a state in a county where our dollars don't go as far and we

427
02:00:28.239 --> 02:00:42.880
get the same dollars that they give every county and we have to figure that out at the state level, how that changes. And so it's going to require for us to continue to work together to be able to do that work. So it doesn't stop. And I just wanted to highlight

428
02:00:42.880 --> 02:00:59.440
that because as we make trips back to Sacramento, as we educate folks as to why trips to Sacramento are important, that they as lawmakers and as folks that give us statutories that we're looking at right now that we have to follow that

429
02:00:59.440 --> 02:01:15.599
they need to understand that they put us in a position where we do harm our communities as a result of statutories. So, um I do have some questions, but I do want to um say thank you for what you have given us because something that I

430
02:01:15.599 --> 02:01:29.679
saw, I'm not sure exactly what page this is, um where you adopted the budget with negative outear balances. You shared with us the budget year, the second year and the third year multi-year projections

431
02:01:29.679 --> 02:01:47.119
and you showed fiscal year 15, 16, 17, and then we jumped to 26 and 27. Is there a reason why it was done that way? I know it says the last 12 years. Can you really elaborate on why it was done this way? Yeah. So, what we wanted to

432
02:01:47.119 --> 02:02:03.199
highlight here were the different fiscal years where the budget included a multi-year projection that was negative. And so, because if they weren't projected to be negative in every year, then that's why they're not included. So, for example, they were projected to be negative in in the budget that was

433
02:02:03.199 --> 02:02:20.400
adopted for 2015, for 2016, fiscal years 2017, but then not again until fiscal year 26. So that gap between 2017 and 2026 represent a period in time where we were not projecting to be negative by the second or third year in that multi-year projection. So each of these

434
02:02:20.400 --> 02:02:36.560
represents what the three-year projection was at the time of the budget adoption for each of those fiscal years. And so it demonstrates that while we've not it's not unprecedented that we face a projected negative ending balance when we're at June adopting the budget. Um

435
02:02:36.560 --> 02:02:52.560
what's what is unprecedented is just the the the size of the projected negative ending balance as compared to to past times where where that was the case. >> And would it be helpful? I mean obviously the years that are omitted here just to show how we were not in a

436
02:02:52.560 --> 02:03:09.119
greater because for us to see the whole picture. This is us being transparent. This is probably new, I think, for our district to be able to help really educate our communities of what's happening, how it's happening, and it's

437
02:03:09.119 --> 02:03:24.719
not just happening to us, but we're a part of it. We're part of the solution. We're a part of this whole ecosystem. It's not, you know, so we want to know the steps because I don't think it's been to that degree where people have been able to really digest. I mean, we I

438
02:03:24.719 --> 02:03:39.920
mean, we're the district of acronyms, right? We throw stuff out all the time and then we expect lay people to understand and then we have to go back and help them understand and then we have to go back and teach what we were trying to help them understand. And so we're in this and we need to continue to

439
02:03:39.920 --> 02:03:55.760
do the transparency so people really walk alongside with us and not just told where to go. >> I think that's a great idea because it also demonstrates that it's not every multi-year projection where it's negative. that's not always that it's

440
02:03:55.760 --> 02:04:11.599
negative and that we are always facing the same outlook. So that thank you for that suggestion. >> Well, the narrative in this district and folks would say we're always going to fiscal cliff. That's the narrative. So if we don't show that that has not been the case, >> that is the narrative that will continue to live.

441
02:04:11.599 --> 02:04:26.560
>> Thank you. >> So I wanted to ask that. And then on the fiscal proposed plans, um there are some things that are here that may many may not know. the affiliated charter block grant reduction. When you hear grant,

442
02:04:26.560 --> 02:04:43.280
you hear obviously this is given to us, right? How how does this fit into this proposal? >> Yeah. So, the word it's a district allocation. It's not a it's not a like a state or federal grant. It's a grant that the district has for many years provided to affiliated charter schools

443
02:04:43.280 --> 02:04:58.960
in addition to the other allocations and positions that they receive. And so the word grant maybe is a little bit of a misnomer because it's an internal allocation determined by the district. >> So the district has set aside funds for affiliated charters. >> That's right. >> Okay.

444
02:04:58.960 --> 02:05:14.719
>> And so this will be eliminated. >> Yes. >> Now are there grants or waiverss that we could get from the state on funds that are existing? Um yeah, I mean we we always need to explore additional grants from the

445
02:05:14.719 --> 02:05:31.280
state, not just through advocacy, but from applying for some grants that are more competitive. So I think Martha Alvarez on Tuesday highlighted some examples of those kinds of grants that we will almost certainly be be applying for. And certainly also waiverss that uh exempt us from certain rules or

446
02:05:31.280 --> 02:05:47.840
restrictions are always things that as a district we we pursue to increase the flexibility that that we have. What are some of the waiverss that would be able to offset? Because as we think about things to to rescend or to cut, we always got to figure out how do we how do we generate revenue? We're the

447
02:05:47.840 --> 02:06:02.639
largest school district and so I'm thinking what is it that we need to ask as the largest school district that we don't compare to others? So, are there waiverss that we would qualify for that yet a smaller district would not?

448
02:06:02.639 --> 02:06:19.040
>> Let me do some research and follow up with you. I think there are some waiverss that may provide revenues, but typically there are waivers that allow for more flexibility in how dollars are spent or waivers that allow the district

449
02:06:19.040 --> 02:06:35.280
to not pay a penalty in some cases. Okay? >> And so both are extremely important under any circumstances. The value of avoiding a penalty is just as important as reducing costs or increasing revenues. has the same fiscal impact.

450
02:06:35.280 --> 02:06:50.639
And so more information to come on on what types of waiverss we may be >> that'd be helpful because I think even knowing the point you just made about being able to avoid a penalty because we've had examples of penalties where

451
02:06:50.639 --> 02:07:06.159
we've had to pay >> right >> state violations. We violated state law and we had to pay as a district which is a cost that we can't avoid, right? Um, but it's taken away from what fund? Is it restricted funds or is it

452
02:07:06.159 --> 02:07:21.199
unrestricted funds? Where does that money come when we have to pay a penalty? >> It depends on on where the penalty is assessed. So, in some cases, if it's due to like an audit, it could be an either. Um, but typically penalties by the

453
02:07:21.199 --> 02:07:37.040
district are typically paid out of general fund unrestricted. >> Got it. So, then again, that takes away from That's right. our students. >> Okay. on here. You mentioned our furlow days, which I know no one wants to talk about. I've been around the district long enough to know. The thing that we

454
02:07:37.040 --> 02:07:52.639
didn't mention here, we say per day, all employees. Do we equate or look at our ADA? Do we get funding for those days? How does that work? Would our students not come? I mean, >> well, I mean, we would have to there is a legal requirement, as you know, for

455
02:07:52.639 --> 02:08:09.280
the instructional days and minutes. And so this would we would have to implement this in a way that has no impact on instructional days uh because there are legal requirements and of course the how important they are of course just for student learning. And

456
02:08:09.280 --> 02:08:23.840
so that would mean that we would keep it within the 182 days and people would have to because in times before people were taking days throughout the year that were >> as noted before this does require negotiations. So um but those details

457
02:08:23.840 --> 02:08:39.840
will be worked out um in terms of which impact which employees would be impacted and um and in which ways. I'll repeat again what I said earlier is to the extent that we are unable to achieve those savings, we would have to

458
02:08:39.840 --> 02:08:59.440
find corresponding reductions somewhere else. >> Got it. Uh and when you mention our um it was opeds and I know she mentioned a little bit. Can can you explain to us if the

459
02:08:59.440 --> 02:09:16.800
risk of obviously not contributing is there a risk? >> The the consequence of not contributing is that we are not putting aside money for future costs that will allow us to address the the rapid growth of those costs. There's no legal requirement for

460
02:09:16.800 --> 02:09:33.440
us to make these contributions. Um they are uh discret at the discretion of the district. We so but but the the the consequence is that we won't have those funds in the irrevocable trust to pay for future benefit costs making more of

461
02:09:33.440 --> 02:09:48.239
the costs that we pay in the in the pay as you go portion as it grows by 8 10% per year it would be fully borne by by our operating budget. >> Got it. And then with our school consolidations I too want to know what that looks like. I mean 30 million is

462
02:09:48.239 --> 02:10:05.440
that enough to even say that's real? But I appreciate on line 13 we say school consolidation, efficiencies, and repurposing. If we repurposed a school and it brought about revenue, how would we justify or place that within our

463
02:10:05.440 --> 02:10:22.560
budget? Because now we we see that we need to cut it here, but if it generates a revenue before year three, I don't know how that does. I don't know what we repurposed it the space for. You know, how does that look? any revenue earned would be part of the

464
02:10:22.560 --> 02:10:40.079
fiscal impact of that process. Um so I mean more to come. I mean right now the focus is really on on programs and students with respect to that process. Uh it is not principally a financial strategy. It just happens to have a financial impact. And so a little more

465
02:10:40.079 --> 02:10:55.440
information to come on on on how that will play out in the coming months. >> And specific to that and I know that board member Grigo brought this up. You're bringing up board member handy new bill as have others. Please anticipate that we will obviously provide much more detail both to the

466
02:10:55.440 --> 02:11:13.520
board and to the community. Again, we're whatever happens throughout this process, it will always come in the spirit of trans not spirit because spirit just makes it sound like ausive I in the actual intent of transparency. So that will capture what we will do around consolidation in very very broad

467
02:11:13.520 --> 02:11:29.119
strokes. Again, it's looking at our campuses, looking at our offices, seeing where we can achieve some efficiencies around things that in scale are pretty small like around utilities and so on. The the true savings and and I hate

468
02:11:29.119 --> 02:11:45.520
using that word in this context is around the staffing that we have at each campus, right? When you have fewer uh fewer campuses, uh potentially you have uh fewer staff members. We would also look at again the other side of the coin. where are there opportunities to use those campuses that are now

469
02:11:45.520 --> 02:12:02.079
shuttered to generate ongoing revenue for the district? >> Appreciate that clarification. And I mean a as we look at this and I think I appreciate uh my colleague Ortiz Franklin kind of framing what has happened as well as Kelly because we

470
02:12:02.079 --> 02:12:20.159
were not on the board. I was not here but I was part of the district to know that we have seen high amount of revenue at one point. Um, however, we're not at that place today. And can you I know over time and we've

471
02:12:20.159 --> 02:12:38.000
had other spaces where we've shared the total amount of employees that our district has and where we have been over the years. Can we see that in real time and what that looks like? And if we reduce, what

472
02:12:38.000 --> 02:12:53.280
do we reduce from? What did the denominator look like when we made that reduction? Because just to say we made a cut and we don't know what a cut, what was the denominator? What was the number in which we cut from and how close are we getting that one to one to where it's

473
02:12:53.280 --> 02:13:09.920
zero. So if we could see that that will help us understand and because we know at a time when we did have additional revenue, we purchased additional personnel, >> right? However, we can't sustain that, right?

474
02:13:09.920 --> 02:13:23.920
Is no is there a possible way to sustain at the same level when revenues were high, can you continue at the same level? And that's I think is something that we actually truly have to see because it's the truth of the matter is

475
02:13:23.920 --> 02:13:40.239
that if I had a large influx and I purchased something, but yet I want to sustain that, but I don't have the same revenue. And we talk about decline enrollment, which is real. It's not something that is just being fabricated.

476
02:13:40.239 --> 02:13:55.760
This is real. But we need to see it. We need to be able to go step by step how this happened, how we got here so that we can actually take ownership collectively. As I mentioned and I opened up, this is the first time we're going to work collectively for the

477
02:13:55.760 --> 02:14:11.679
students of this district, but we need to know what we're working with in order to do that. So, I just would appreciate that. So, thank you. >> So, Melvine, >> yes, thank you. I'll start with some questions. Um, many of which have been touched on, but thank you for this the

478
02:14:11.679 --> 02:14:27.599
donut as we're calling it on slide nine. It's a a helpful way of um breaking things down functionally and hope we can see more of that. Um, can you explain I know I asked this repeatedly, but like we talk about our budget or our budget is reported on as $18 billion and yet

479
02:14:27.599 --> 02:14:42.880
this is 6.8 billion. So can you talk about what's not included here and why we focus on certain funds and not others? >> Sure. So the main operating funds are of course the general fund which has the unrestricted portion that you see here but also includes a restricted portion

480
02:14:42.880 --> 02:14:59.040
which the biggest components of a general fund restricted are special education program where we receive revenues from both the state and federal government. It includes after school programs that are funded with ELOP or ASUS or 21st century grants. It includes

481
02:14:59.040 --> 02:15:15.760
federal federal programs like title one, title two, ex title three, title four um and um and other kind of some smaller restricted programs. And so as we mentioned before, of course, we don't decide what's restricted versus unrestricted. Um but that's a very

482
02:15:15.760 --> 02:15:31.280
important uh operating fund as well within the general fund. I think would be helpful because now we see things in different ways that are helpful given the context, but it would be nice to kind of have some calibration like when we do a slide like this have a like a

483
02:15:31.280 --> 02:15:47.920
little kind of key or a pull out that says like this is how the 6.8 fits into the 18 because I just I think sometimes to this idea of public trust we're told like oh well you're only showing one side of this. So I understand why and that's a helpful explanation but just visually to say like 6.8 is part of

484
02:15:47.920 --> 02:16:04.159
this. Um, I'd also like at a f and maybe you know knowing that we're not voting on this till next month like as we have these iterative conversations it would also be helpful to get a breakdown of this 6.8 centrally what's centrally funded versus what's school funded because that also goes to what's in our

485
02:16:04.159 --> 02:16:20.480
our discretion to look at reductions in and then also what's in a collective bargaining agreement versus what's not in a collective bargaining agreement. Um, you know, for example, then we do that with the norm positions. You know, we got 2.3 billion in normed uh through a collective bargaining agreement, but

486
02:16:20.480 --> 02:16:36.399
the 1.1 billion that are nonCBA, like does that just mean that it's the board's discretion to think differently about raising that norm or lowering that norm? Um, so that would be helpful. And then also again just that next level of granularity with the categories like

487
02:16:36.399 --> 02:16:53.439
other you know 178 million like what else is in there besid you know telecommunications is the one little pull out but can you one I'd like to see it kind of um in materials but just right now like what else is in that other bucket or what's another example or two? >> Okay.

488
02:16:53.439 --> 02:17:10.319
>> I don't know if you could say off the top of your head right now or >> uh within the utility software and hardware. No, just the other one. The uh final one on the bottom right. >> Oh, we can provide more information. >> Um and then I also think what would be helpful on this slide is um that with

489
02:17:10.319 --> 02:17:26.160
the direct student instruction and support. I know this board has been talking a lot about efficacy and research and evaluations and the ROI, but like really when it comes to instructional coaches and tutoring and curriculum, um we we want to understand like well we want to cut ones that you

490
02:17:26.160 --> 02:17:41.920
know there there might be lower hanging fruit I guess when it comes to these are ineffective programs anyways. We heard like with the tutoring you know bench we've been looking at trying to actually figure out the outcomes. It's not as much a question for you as it is the instructional team, but also Seni um which I'll get to in a second, but I

491
02:17:41.920 --> 02:17:58.240
know we've had reports or like we had gotten some presentations I think from um uh prior folks around the there were external evaluations of Seni, but I don't know if Pedro can speak to any of the um those reports, but like when we are looking at these cuts, it would be

492
02:17:58.240 --> 02:18:13.920
helpful to overlay that with the research on what's been effective and what's not. We we do uh board member Melvin uh Carolyn, we do have a um a report that just actually came to my desk, so we will be sending that to the board soon. >> Yeah, because I just think again I mean

493
02:18:13.920 --> 02:18:31.200
these are you know that bucket. Yeah, enough said. But I think it would be helpful as we're looking between programs uh as opposed to just saying we're going to cut 50 million here like let let's look at what's driving student achievement and what's not. Um on the proposed FSP going to slide 14 which I

494
02:18:31.200 --> 02:18:47.040
know has been understandably the subject of a lot of the conversation. Um on Tuesday at the cow we heard that there are a few buckets that are not included in our revenue because of uncertainty like the community schools grant and some of the other competitive grants. When will we have additional information

495
02:18:47.040 --> 02:19:03.280
about that and will it be before we end up having to vote on the FSP? >> So not for competitive grants where we need to submit applications. Um and even for those competitive grants largely they may come in the form of restricted funds and so they wouldn't most likely

496
02:19:03.280 --> 02:19:20.559
end up in a fiscal stabilization plan. Um but yeah we we there's for example there's a webinar today where a lot more information is being provided and our staff is attending to get more information on the details of some of those grants that were not included in on Tuesday's presentation. But they're largely restricted and again to the

497
02:19:20.559 --> 02:19:36.960
extent they're competitive grants we would not include any assumptions about whether we would win competitive grants. >> And this is kind of like Miss Any New's question but I guess then what is the mechanism by which we acknowledge increased revenue into this plan before we see it the next iteration of it?

498
02:19:36.960 --> 02:19:53.840
>> When would we see additional revenues? Like if if we hear in the next few weeks about the allocation method and we say this is how much we're going to get in community schools like where where does that live on this slide and what's the process by which like we have board and public input and and how to reduce the

499
02:19:53.840 --> 02:20:11.439
reductions? Well, if it's general fund unrestricted or if it can be used for an expense that is currently general fund unrestricted, then we would be able to increase for example the the numbers in item one and make a corresponding reduction all things being equal

500
02:20:11.439 --> 02:20:27.760
somewhere else. Um so that that is possible. The fiscal stabilization plan will be approved by the board on June 16th or asked to be approved by the board on June 16th. Um, but I also mentioned the multi-year projection itself is preliminary. And so to the

501
02:20:27.760 --> 02:20:43.760
extent that the multi-year projection worsens or improves should only be moderately given that we already have a lot of the information on the estimated costs of these labor agreements. Um, then there may be other changes as well necessary to to the grand total and the

502
02:20:43.760 --> 02:20:59.760
details of the fiscal stabilization plan. >> Um, got it. And then on that looking at that revenue uh two two uh rows attendance at 93% starting in 262 27 what attendance are we projecting? What is our attendance this year?

503
02:20:59.760 --> 02:21:17.200
>> The 88 percentage is currently 92% as of uh the for the current fiscal year and that is the assumption currently in the multi-year projection for future years. So this represents the revenue impact of it going up to 93% starting next school year. And besides the FSP, is that also

504
02:21:17.200 --> 02:21:34.160
reflected in the um ending balances like across? Do we take >> No, it's so it's it's either in the multi-year projection or the FSP can't be both. Um but um this one is a target for increased attendance. The multi-year projection itself, the official

505
02:21:34.160 --> 02:21:51.120
multi-year projection that we submit to the county uh is based on 92%. And then uh when we I've looked at FSPs from other districts, there's a lot more specificity to the actions and I understand that I think we have to submit that to LEO as well. You know um

506
02:21:51.120 --> 02:22:06.240
for example the 200 I mean this was asked about but 200 million uh in central office reductions they're going to be asking like what are you cutting? When does that take place and when does the public and the board have more insight into the specificity? So, LEO

507
02:22:06.240 --> 02:22:21.920
will require us to provide updates at first and second interim and basically as long as we continue to have these projected negative ending balances. Uh, for some of the strategies where the individual reductions have not yet been identified, what we would update LEO on

508
02:22:21.920 --> 02:22:36.720
is the process and timeline through which we would achieve or seek to achieve those reductions. In other cases where they're more specific and not targeted reductions, uh we would just provide any additional supporting information on on the way that we

509
02:22:36.720 --> 02:22:52.800
calculated the estimated savings. And so you're right that what we submit to LEO as part of this fiscal stabilization plan is not just this table. Uh they will require a lot of supporting information so that we can validate that

510
02:22:52.800 --> 02:23:10.240
these reductions are practical and feasible. um they're not going to just um take our word for it. And so that supporting material is meant to support how realistic these reductions are and they're and be used by by the county in

511
02:23:10.240 --> 02:23:25.280
their assessment of whether this is sufficient. >> And are those supporting materials part of the board report in June? >> Um I don't know. I I can check but we can certainly provide any supporting materials that that uh are being are going to be required to be developed in

512
02:23:25.280 --> 02:23:41.680
support and in defense of this plan. And I'll just say I mean you know to state the obvious this is shitty I think is the is the technical term for the situation we're in. Um you know kid like as as my colleagues have said our students need everything

513
02:23:41.680 --> 02:23:57.120
that's on this list. We know that um and we know that the effect will be felt by our employees but of course most importantly by our kids after years of historic achievement after years of really historic investment in equity. I mean Senny is is a national model for equitable distribution of resources. It

514
02:23:57.120 --> 02:24:13.439
also creates flexibility for our uh our schools um which has been important to me. You know, at the same time, um, we have now heard through multiple administrations, multiple CFOs, including one who is now the CFO of LEO, who is our statutory authorizer, you

515
02:24:13.439 --> 02:24:29.760
know, that if you do this, you have to do that. Um, and you know, if you invest in this, you have to do that. And and the this is very fun. That this is the investment, that this is the contracts, that this is the celebrations, but today is about the that. Um, and the that has been, you know, delayed because of some

516
02:24:29.760 --> 02:24:46.800
historic federal investments. It's delayed a little bit because of um of higher than expected state revenues. I mean, there's an irony I will say as as someone who's been an advocate for reducing tech and AI that our revenues are because of the AI boom in California. But I guess we'll take we'll

517
02:24:46.800 --> 02:25:03.040
reap the benefits even if we're trying to protect students from the effects. Um but uh you know but but there's a that and I I think the skepticism we hear uh is valid because of the fact that the third year hasn't come or because of the iterative conversation we've had about

518
02:25:03.040 --> 02:25:18.080
finding new sources of revenue. Um but I think it's a matter of degree and not kind. I mean that's where you know whether this FSP is not 3.5 billion but we get down to 2.5 billion. um you know we know the tough com uh conversations

519
02:25:18.080 --> 02:25:34.560
are coming and where I do appreciate the um the interaction with the public. We just want to be very honest about that and even and as much as I appreciate the optimism of winning back both houses of Congress in the fall uh even with difficulties in Virginia and some harder

520
02:25:34.560 --> 02:25:50.479
than expected races here in California. Like I I remember when we had control of both houses of we being the Democrats had control of both houses of Congress and the presidency and we didn't make any movement with IDA. We're still at maybe I think hovering around 10% of the 40% guarantee. And so there's a level of

521
02:25:50.479 --> 02:26:05.760
that that we can bank on and there's a level that we can't. But what I found and why I appreciate these public presentations and the iterative nature of this is like when we were leading up to labor negotiations, I think the conversation we had with labor partners in the public about what about this, what about OPED, what about fund 17

522
02:26:05.760 --> 02:26:20.720
really helped us get to a better place. And so that's why I really do welcome the advocacy and the conversations. And I know I will make myself available as will Mr. Mr. Simon as we're just calling you today. Um to folks to say to say within re within a realistic universe

523
02:26:20.720 --> 02:26:36.080
like here's another suggestion. I mean my colleagues are saying like what if we don't want to do the send reduction from this to this well then what's the what's the other alternative is it looking at other contracts um is it looking at uh elop is it looking at priority school I mean there are that iterative

524
02:26:36.080 --> 02:26:53.200
conversation is one we welcome but I think but but we can't put our heads in the sand and pretend the conversation doesn't exist and I really appreciate the superintendent for his framing of it and also the email that I know you sent out to the community just to be very transparent about what we're doing. I take issue with the idea that that guts

525
02:26:53.200 --> 02:27:08.399
somehow equates to putting your head in the sand. Cowardice is putting your head in the sand. And the board needs to make harder decisions today, I think, to protect students and communities down the line. And so, it's shitty again um but uh um but necessary uh and and it

526
02:27:08.399 --> 02:27:23.520
will be iterative as we continue to work with our partners. So, thanks. >> Okay, before we get to round two, I just want to make a couple of comments. The questions asked were pertinent and excellent, but I was thinking of a few things when we went to Sacramento. I

527
02:27:23.520 --> 02:27:40.240
went with Superintendent Chate and labor unions and other board members. And um I just wonder how important public education is to our California Senate and House people. I mean, I never

528
02:27:40.240 --> 02:27:55.600
hear on the news anybody talking about school and more funding for school. They're always talking about other things, but not about school funding. And it kind of I I got thinking over and over again. We have to pressure these people again. We have to pressure them

529
02:27:55.600 --> 02:28:10.960
when the next election comes about. What is your opinion about public education? Do you support public education in California? Yes or no? Are you willing to help us get more money for our kids? That's what we have to start asking. So, and I don't think we do that. We always

530
02:28:10.960 --> 02:28:27.439
talk about other things but nothing about education. So that that bothers me. Um I've always worked at a school. I've never worked at Bodri. I've never worked at a local office, district office. I've always worked at a school. And you know, our job is to educate the

531
02:28:27.439 --> 02:28:42.399
kids. But I just want to make sure that we understand that people who work in this building are our family, too. They are our family. And I really it came to mind on Monday when we had our classified appreciation day and I saw

532
02:28:42.399 --> 02:28:58.479
those hundreds of people coming down uh to to celebrate classified employees day and uh all the work that they do in the central office to make it happen at the school. So let's not forget that these are our family here at the central

533
02:28:58.479 --> 02:29:14.240
office and also at their local offices too. It's very very important that we know that. So um thank you very much. We're ready for round two. And I know Kelly, I said you were first. Go ahead. >> Thank you, uh, board president Charles Schmelson. I think a lot of my questions have been answered. I guess a question

534
02:29:14.240 --> 02:29:31.200
for the superintendent, and I appreciate your, um, commitment to an ongoing conversation and to collaboration with partners in the community about this document. Um, the reality is that the gap is real. Like, we all have to be 100% clear that we have a $3.6 billion

535
02:29:31.200 --> 02:29:47.359
gap to close in the next couple of years. But but there is an avenue for some other decisions to be made. We can't we can't erase some of these reductions. But what what do you foresee and what can we commit to in terms of ongoing collaborations with labor

536
02:29:47.359 --> 02:30:05.200
partners and um you know students, families, and school communities about the budget realities and how we get to solutions. >> First and foremost, it's about collective advocacy particularly in Sacramento. you know, board president Schmurson already highlighted that and

537
02:30:05.200 --> 02:30:19.359
and I will tell you, I've been up there myself three times over the last month plus in in different configurations. And I will say this to our labor colleagues and our labor leaders. The reception that we receive when we walk

538
02:30:19.359 --> 02:30:36.800
in myself with you all is a bit different than when we walk in by ourselves. And I'll leave it at that. Uh we are all smart folks in this room. Y'all can figure out what I mean. So my my commitment starts there is working to the maximum extent possible in collab

539
02:30:36.800 --> 02:30:53.280
collaboration with our labor leaders. Um as challenging as the negotiations were about a month and a half ago, I I think also sometimes you know you forged through fire. Uh and the relationships that I think we we built or rebuilt in some cases with with Cesaly, with Max,

540
02:30:53.280 --> 02:31:09.200
with Maria, I I think will serve us well. So, I think that's that's the first piece again is that advocacy and being very clear about what we're advocating for and the actual benefit. Uh, I'll give you an example of a a point that I think was really salient and actually landed with a lot of our

541
02:31:09.200 --> 02:31:24.080
legislators because one of the things that we heard a lot when we were up there is that there was a desire to to balance the budget writ large, right? That they wanted to take care of, you know, they they call us the the Prop 98 side of the house. So they wanted to take care of the Prop 98 side of the

542
02:31:24.080 --> 02:31:39.280
house, but they wanted to take care of everyone else. Other very legitimate needs, medical and so on. And one of the things that I pointed out both to the governor's office and other folks is that every time we have an employee who is working for us full-time or close to

543
02:31:39.280 --> 02:31:55.359
full-time and is gaining benefits as part of that employment, that is an individual, that is a Californian that is not availing themselves of medical, that is not taking resources from the other side of the house. And when we shared that with folks, there was an actual like reaction of like, oh wow,

544
02:31:55.359 --> 02:32:10.800
that actually makes sense because it does. So again, that's where we'll start specific to the community, parents, students. Again, you know, within some guard rails because we do have to be mindful of of our role as a public institution in terms of telling folks exactly what to advocate for, right?

545
02:32:10.800 --> 02:32:28.240
There are some some limits there. But my piece is engagement, communication, letting them understand what what the issues are and again encouraging them to reach out to the legislators. Even yesterday when I was again up in Sacramento, we filmed a quick video just to send out to families to let them know

546
02:32:28.240 --> 02:32:43.760
we're up here. We could use your voice. Again, it's the collective voice. I can go up there a hundred times and I might move the needle a bit. I go up there as one of many. It's going to move it a lot more. >> That makes sense. And um I appreciate

547
02:32:43.760 --> 02:32:59.359
you know all of your work um and also our labor partners who have been there by our sides advocating and I think that the level of drum beat needs to continue um at the same rate frequency intensity as it has over the last several weeks throughout the fall because to Mr.'s

548
02:32:59.359 --> 02:33:15.920
point the elections for our state legislators are in November. So there is actually a lever point to push on what is your what is your commitment level to public education and what can we count on you to do in support of our students and families. Um so appreciate that and

549
02:33:15.920 --> 02:33:30.800
I would just highlight you know based on our resolution last year around budgeting um with student needs and equity at the center. I think that there needs to be ongoing conversations in each of our communities so that our our families, our students, and our staff have the ability to weigh in on these

550
02:33:30.800 --> 02:33:48.560
cuts and um can work together with us, put our brains together around what are the what is the full range of solutions, what if any alternatives exist because I like my colleagues, you know, I don't want to do any of these things. uh but the but we have to do something and it

551
02:33:48.560 --> 02:34:03.920
has to be something real and if we put solutions on the table that are not based in reality that is being dishonest to our communities. So to the extent that selling property or waiverss from the state anything like that is a possibility let's work together with the

552
02:34:03.920 --> 02:34:19.760
community in a an ongoing conversation to get us there. Thank you >> Tanya. Uh well, just on that note, we passed a resolution just last month about a revenue task force. And so I know it doesn't call for a presentation to the board until the fall, but maybe if the team could share, you're doing

553
02:34:19.760 --> 02:34:35.040
some of the advocacy visits, but when can we expect that task force coming together to be very concrete about those action items >> over the next two weeks? Martha and I have already been again in discussions even again as recently as yesterday when we were up with with Max and Jen and the

554
02:34:35.040 --> 02:34:51.120
SEIU team. We already touched base there. We're obviously going to touch base with all of our other labor leaders around that. So, there's certainly an urgency there. >> Great. I really appreciate that and I would um encourage that task force to invite the legislators to our schools as well to see what it looks like in action because it's great when we can go to

555
02:34:51.120 --> 02:35:08.479
Sacramento and hit many legislator not hit but you know visit with many legislators at the same time. Um but they're right here in Los Angeles as well and they should be coming to our campuses and seeing the great things that have happened because of our deep investments and particularly our equity investments. Um just one question for me on this round. Um what happens if we get

556
02:35:08.479 --> 02:35:24.319
a fiscal adviser? What power does the superintendent andor the board maintain? What power do we lose? >> So the fiscal adviser can stay or rescend um certain board actions. Um put

557
02:35:24.319 --> 02:35:40.960
another way, veto certain board actions. Um that is the principal kind of that that it's an elevated level of intervention uh by the county. So, I've never worked in a district under a fiscal adviser, so I can't speak from experience, but but that is the most

558
02:35:40.960 --> 02:35:57.600
important change um that we would experience as a district if an adviser were to be appointed. >> And I I want to raise that in the context of Miss Ggo's questions about appealing because I want to make sure the board understands what are what options are available to us and that what options will no longer be available to us if we, you know, do get an

559
02:35:57.600 --> 02:36:13.040
appointment and and something that like that comes to fruition. Um, I am very interested in this board maintaining power in what decisions we need to make. I do not want someone else to be making decisions on behalf of our community. It is our community that should be making those decisions. And so, whatever we can do to make sure that that power stays

560
02:36:13.040 --> 02:36:28.479
here with our people, let's do that. >> Thanks. >> Can I ask a followup on that, Mr. Just um the fiscal adviser, is there an anticipated impact to collective bargaining agreements if a fiscal adviser is appointed? I don't believe

561
02:36:28.479 --> 02:36:43.760
so, but but I can follow up. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Round two, Carla. >> Um, so about fiscal advisor again, I just know that we can't appeal it and I just I mean to me what doesn't sit well

562
02:36:43.760 --> 02:36:58.800
is just accepting things as they are. And I feel like when we go into the details of what could happen, which is a reality, that is certainly the steps that could happen and just accept that it's not acceptable. Like we need to

563
02:36:58.800 --> 02:37:14.800
appeal things. And I just want to say that just like for example due process for people who are rifted, they if you just accept it, you're going to be rifted. But if you go and and follow the process of appeal, maybe you'll get your job back, right? So it's the same thing.

564
02:37:14.800 --> 02:37:31.439
I don't want to say that I and I don't think that's something that I'm just like wishing and hoping and something imaginary. I know for a fact that that is a right that we have as a district to appeal. So, um the other thing I want to ask is in the fiscal stabilization plan

565
02:37:31.439 --> 02:37:46.479
um you have the revenue part, right? You have um 628 for the first for 26 27 then 209. So why is it that it goes down again? Why do

566
02:37:46.479 --> 02:38:02.319
you have 628 for 2627 and then 209 210 for the >> the other years? >> So the >> sorry for uh page 14, >> right? So this is the detail behind that total value that you see in slide 14

567
02:38:02.319 --> 02:38:20.000
with one exception. the cola of 122 million per year is not included in the fiscal stabilization plan because it's instead included in our multi-year projection. And so, but below the row for COLA, everything else that you see there is the detail behind the figures

568
02:38:20.000 --> 02:38:37.760
you see on slide 14, the proposed new fiscal stabilization plan. So to answer your question, the reason why the amount is so much larger in 2627 than in the additional years is because so much of what we're receiving or we're proposed to receive, set to receive in 2627 is in

569
02:38:37.760 --> 02:38:53.359
the form of onetime grants. And so the discretionary block grant is $328 million. Uh the learning recovery emergency block grant is also onetime, $68 million. And then there's a smaller allocation, one time that last row, home and school transportation is one time.

570
02:38:53.359 --> 02:39:09.680
The others though are are ongoing and a very significant one that is ongoing is of course the very significant increase to the special education base rates which are ongoing. So that's why you see again just a large number in in the first 26 27 year. Why it's so much larger than the additional years is because of that one-time funding.

571
02:39:09.680 --> 02:39:25.200
>> And we don't do it because is that like a legal rule that you can't include one-time funds in your multi-year um projections or in the fiscal stabilization plan or why is it that we can We can incorporate in the fiscal

572
02:39:25.200 --> 02:39:41.040
stabilization planet one-time funds that are in the May revi revision. So because these are in the May revision their actual proposals from the state, we can include them fiscal in the fiscal stabilization plan >> and that's like a rule. Is that something that LEO says you can do or

573
02:39:41.040 --> 02:39:57.840
can't do or why is it or are we just >> LEO does include guidance about what we can include in the multi-year projection which is our official projection and what we cannot include in the official multi-year projection. And so for example, the cola be based on LEGO's

574
02:39:57.840 --> 02:40:12.960
guidance, we can include in the official multi-year projection, but the other proposed revenues, while they're not in our official multi-year projection, LEGO does allow for us to include them in the fiscal stabilization plan. And in terms of the fiscal stabilization plan, it has

575
02:40:12.960 --> 02:40:27.760
the same impact because it's still able to offset cuts that we other additional cuts than we otherwise would have need to identify whether these funds were in the multi-year projection or the fiscal stabilization plan. They have the same impact but but that's kind of the

576
02:40:27.760 --> 02:40:44.000
distinction uh that that is based on the guidance from from LEO. >> I ask because we do have the attendance at 93% included in there, right? and where these are numbers that we're hoping for 21 million 41 million right

577
02:40:44.000 --> 02:41:00.560
and these are the it's based on what these projections it's based on the assumption that the very important strategies that we have in place for boosting student attendance will be su will continue to be successful and result in a 1 percentage

578
02:41:00.560 --> 02:41:15.439
point increase starting next school year. So then that's the reason why I'm wondering why we can't include at least an average of one-time funds that we've received in the past three years. Why couldn't we add that to FY2728

579
02:41:15.439 --> 02:41:31.120
and FY2829? >> So I I I know it's probably seems somewhat subjective why certain things might be acceptable and others not. And I and I don't want to give the impression that this even this fiscal stabilization plan including that

580
02:41:31.120 --> 02:41:48.080
assumption of higher attendance will meet LEGO's requirements. It does need to be even though we've had ongoing conversations with them so that they understand where things are headed um and that we understand what the consequences are of certain things either happening or not happening. Um it's not guaranteed that this would meet

581
02:41:48.080 --> 02:42:05.760
their requirements. that I but I just don't understand why we're choosing not to include at least an average of potential one-time funds when we know we have been receiving them. So, I mean to make that choice makes this the the outlook, you know, worse. And I don't

582
02:42:05.760 --> 02:42:21.840
see how you don't do it for the for the May revision, but you do, you know, for the attendance like these goals that hopefully we will meet, which I'm projections because I, you know, I'm actually worried if we're going to meet

583
02:42:21.840 --> 02:42:38.240
them, if we're we're funding less staffing, that means our, you know, our schools are going to suffer, right? So we know kids come to school because they feel safe, because they feel included, because they feel welcomed. And if there's a lot of staff that's going to be cut that supports that environment for them, I don't know how we're going

584
02:42:38.240 --> 02:42:54.720
to achieve it. So, I just don't understand the decision to exclude funds that we have a track record of receiving. Even though they're onetime funds, we have evidence and a track record that we have been receiving them. And if we don't want to include the

585
02:42:54.720 --> 02:43:10.479
exact number, at least an average of that. So to the extent we do receive additional onetime funds for example for the 2728 school year beyond you know what we're reflecting here uh that would allow all things being equal assuming

586
02:43:10.479 --> 02:43:26.479
that this projection doesn't worsen for other reasons it would allow us to make modifications for example to the even deeper reductions proposed here for the 2829 school year. So whether we we we either will or won't receive those revenues in the future, right? We don't

587
02:43:26.479 --> 02:43:42.640
have a crystal ball. We don't know what they might be. Even though you're right that there's been many years where we've received one-time grants. Um but when we if we do receive those grants, and obviously we're going to continue to advocate not just for next year's budget, but every year thereafter, then we would be able to make modifications

588
02:43:42.640 --> 02:43:59.840
to additional reductions in the 2029 school year. So because it'll at that point it'll be real. But I also need to note that 12 months from now, we're going to add the 2930 school year for the first time. And this fiscal stabilization plan does not eliminate

589
02:43:59.840 --> 02:44:15.439
our annual operating deficit. It does not eliminate the fact that we're spending more than we're bringing in. All it does, it does a lot and it's very, very painful. It addresses the projected negative ending balance. it projected it prevents the district

590
02:44:15.439 --> 02:44:32.800
>> from going negative and going insolvent. But once we add a new fiscal year, then we are still going to have a projected negative ending balance unless something very materially changes. And so, um, the attendance at 1% higher, while it's not a very significant amount of revenue, we

591
02:44:32.800 --> 02:44:49.920
will have to submit kind of in in line with with board member Mulvo's questions before, a rationale for how we would even achieve this. Uh, it's not going to be accepted at face value. um we don't necessarily we don't really you know we could provide information on historical uh onetime grants that we've

592
02:44:49.920 --> 02:45:06.160
received in the past but we wouldn't really be able to submit a plan >> that would demonstrate how we're going to ensure that we get those revenues if that makes sense or >> is that what that's what you're saying is the difference we it's in our power >> somewhat >> somewhat that's >> to to make it happen.

593
02:45:06.160 --> 02:45:22.399
>> Yes. Um, all right. Um I just want to I just have a comment because it's come up about the CBAs the CBAs and um >> you know when we make agree when we reach agreements with

594
02:45:22.399 --> 02:45:38.080
our unions around anything I want us to point out the direct correlation and connection between the agreements and our students because I feel like sometimes people talk about unions as if they're just

595
02:45:38.080 --> 02:45:55.600
this entity all on its own and they're just like demanding all these things when they in fact are the ones that are doing the services for our students. So we when we're talking about these CBAs, we're talking about the very specific people who are providing the education

596
02:45:55.600 --> 02:46:10.880
and the care and the everything that our schools need and our students need. So, I'm I'm saying this aloud because I keep hearing it from many different places when they talk about the agreements as if they're separate from everything that

597
02:46:10.880 --> 02:46:27.279
our students need. And so, for that reason, I think these collective bargaining agreements are very critical and I'm and I'm glad personally I'm glad that we reached these agreements because I know that in reaching these our students are gaining more, right? And

598
02:46:27.279 --> 02:46:43.120
and they're we're meeting the needs that they have. So that to me is very important um to say aloud. Um the other thing I want to say is that um between now and June, we really and I know that Martha's going to be on top of it. I'm

599
02:46:43.120 --> 02:46:59.040
grateful that um that we are collaborating with um our labor partners on advocating. I'm grateful that our own, you know, my colleagues are doing one-on- ones with electeds about this because we need to remind folks that our students and their families are

600
02:46:59.040 --> 02:47:14.640
constituents of these folks. And so, the more that we go in there and we tell the stories, the more that they will prioritize not just meeting the basic Prop 98 requirement, but to even increase it. like so I'm glad that at

601
02:47:14.640 --> 02:47:30.479
least we have that um agreement as a board that we do see the need to to demand of our of our electeds at the state level but also at the federal level to to invest more in our students.

602
02:47:30.479 --> 02:47:48.080
Um so I am looking forward to I have not been able to attend any of these um uh events at the state level or even but I have met with folks locally but I am looking forward to engaging that more and more as we um it's the work doesn't

603
02:47:48.080 --> 02:48:04.640
stop. In fact, the work I think increases between now and June to ensure that we get that 390 um billion dollars um to us uh well to all of our public schools. >> Thank you. Thank you, Carla. Rosio,

604
02:48:04.640 --> 02:48:21.520
>> one quick question. Um even after implementing the 3.6 billion in reductions, um the district still projects um negative balances, right? Moving forward. So, what evidence shows that this plan um actually stabilizes

605
02:48:21.520 --> 02:48:39.200
the district long term? >> It addresses only the projected negative ending balance. Um you're Yeah. And I'm kind of just repeating what what you're pointing out. Um unless revenues significantly increase

606
02:48:39.200 --> 02:48:55.680
or the decline in enrollment significantly slows, most likely we will need to identify additional reductions in the future and and I just want to be honest about that. Um it's not guaranteed that that will be the outcome. Um certainly things can

607
02:48:55.680 --> 02:49:11.120
change between now and and the future. Um, but I think it's important to be honest that that that you're right that this these actions as dramatic and large and painful as they are alone may not

608
02:49:11.120 --> 02:49:27.600
provide sustainability in in perpetuity in the future. And it's understood as was you know uh mentioned by my colleagues um external factors that are out of our control right this one time money

609
02:49:27.600 --> 02:49:45.359
um the state just um our society overall saying they care for students but yet here we are with these sort of structural um inequities and inefficiencies that are plaguing not only LUSD but you know

610
02:49:45.359 --> 02:50:02.080
so many school districts around California. So unfortunately we are or the district is reacting right rather than responding long term. So unfortunately that is what we're facing. Um

611
02:50:02.080 --> 02:50:18.640
but apart from that I you know the presentation repeatedly acknowledges that even after aggressive cuts the district is still going to face these deficits moving forward. Um, so for me it doesn't seem like this is actually a

612
02:50:18.640 --> 02:50:34.000
a stabilization plan. It's more like a deficit mitigation plan without demonstrating long-term stabilization. Um, and so the district is basically asking this board in June to approve

613
02:50:34.000 --> 02:50:50.000
painful cuts uh while admitting the crisis unfortunately remains unsolved. And yes, we've done every effort and we continue to do everything that we can to really push, you know, our assembly and

614
02:50:50.000 --> 02:51:06.240
state senators to, you know, do right by our children. Um, and I know that we when we met with them, they they understand that, right? They they they feel that they definitely want to be able to support our, you know, our children, our school districts. But you

615
02:51:06.240 --> 02:51:23.200
know such is the case at at the state level with what they have to also face right. Um and I know that um our you know my colleagues has also mentioned that we all have to go to the state. We all have

616
02:51:23.200 --> 02:51:40.399
to put pressure on our state legislators. And I remember our passport president Jackie Goldberg who was in the assembly said um Fridays your representatives are in their offices and nobody's visiting them. So I want to

617
02:51:40.399 --> 02:51:55.840
restate that. Um and she said it repeatedly. go on Fridays and talk to them um to assembly members to your state senators and and you know let them know all of us right exactly what we're

618
02:51:55.840 --> 02:52:11.840
facing where your children are facing what how vulnerable your positions are because of layoffs and and they need to hear more and more and more and then hopefully we'll see some change but you know that remains to be seen so you know

619
02:52:11.840 --> 02:52:26.479
more on that so it's a structural deficit, you know, cannot be solved with temporary money. And this is the message that we need to send to to Sacramento um and all our representatives. But above all that, the choices that this district

620
02:52:26.479 --> 02:52:43.359
is making um is is is very contradictory. Um it's I can't seem to grasp how the district can justify reducing SNI by basically to zero. um you know up to 500 million while

621
02:52:43.359 --> 02:53:00.240
claiming to prioritize high need students in high need schools. Um this fiscal stabilization plan is asking for massive program reductions that contradict equity claims. Uh the you know as we all know proposing SNI

622
02:53:00.240 --> 02:53:15.680
reductions, BAP HEAT school consolidations uh norm position reductions. This is deeply concerning and and we've heard it here from from um this day is from my colleagues and I share that sentiment as well. Um you

623
02:53:15.680 --> 02:53:32.800
know, Seni is there to support high need schools. BAP is there to directly support our uh black student achievement, our black students. Position reductions inevitably impact services to students and our families. Um yet the presentation simultaneously

624
02:53:32.800 --> 02:53:49.359
frames the plan as equity centered. There is a contradiction between claiming to prioritize vulnerable students while proposing some of the largest reductions in to target equity investments. That's what we're grappling with.

625
02:53:49.359 --> 02:54:06.560
Unfortunately, the plan also relies heavily on the fear of the county intervention which I excuse me. share the sentiments of board member Greggo. Several slides focus extensively on possibly LEO oversight, fiscal advisors,

626
02:54:06.560 --> 02:54:24.560
rescending board authority. That framing may be factually accurate maybe, but it also functions rhetorically. Um, approve this plan or lose control. That is a fear tactic that many board members across this state have heard

627
02:54:24.560 --> 02:54:39.920
time and time again. When I speak to my other other colleagues throughout this this um this state, it's almost as if we're sharing the same experience at the same time. We're hearing the same sort of script over and over again. Um so this board should be careful not to

628
02:54:39.920 --> 02:54:58.640
confuse urgency with adequacy. a flawed plan does not become a good plan simply because the alternatives are worse. Um, so I know there's more to come because this is just a presentation and we will be voting on this in June. Um, so I will

629
02:54:58.640 --> 02:55:15.120
reserve some more comments until that time. So, thank you. >> Thank you, Rosio. Uh, round two. Well, I know we spent a lot of time, you know, obviously elevating the importance

630
02:55:15.120 --> 02:55:32.399
of public education and I think it's not taken for granted in this room. Um, the importance of public education and the importance of the items that we have to put on a fiscal stabilization plan which is obviously inadequate for many of us. And as we've seen the benefits, we've

631
02:55:32.399 --> 02:55:48.640
seen the district uh increase uh achievement over the last years uh because of these investments and to have to minimize those. I think one thing has come evident and I appreciate the president saying that do we really

632
02:55:48.640 --> 02:56:04.160
believe in public education? Who believes in public education? Who believes in public education? And are we willing to fight for public education? and is a state of California going to really put their money where

633
02:56:04.160 --> 02:56:19.920
their mouth is. If they say they believe in public education, let's call them on it. And I think that is the time I think it has never been more important than now that we collectively bring it to their attention. I mean, and again, Los Angeles County is different than every

634
02:56:19.920 --> 02:56:35.279
other county. And I just want to reiterate that comment because to live here is not the same as to live in Fresno, as to live in Hemet as to live in, you know, I could go on. Bakersfield. Um, and until they change

635
02:56:35.279 --> 02:56:51.760
that, we're going to continue to see that. And LUSD cannot be able to fund what the state should be funding because that is what we're doing now. And so it is very important for us to continue to advocate together and I appreciate uh Rivas uh bringing it publicly that meet

636
02:56:51.760 --> 02:57:08.240
with our legislators. That is something that I do on a regular basis. We have to have these conversations. Encourage our families to have these conversations. Encourage our teachers to have these conversations because it is important that we are sharing our stories here in

637
02:57:08.240 --> 02:57:24.479
Los Angeles County. This is LA Unified School District. I don't work for no other place, but we need to make sure that we are representing us. And so, I appreciate you being there to bring this today. And I know we have to, you know, look at this information with um with

638
02:57:24.479 --> 02:57:40.080
unbiased lens. We got to look at this information to be able to make decisions and appreciate the statutories, but they too can be changed. And hopefully that with enough advocacy, we can be able to see different for the largest school district on the west side. And I say the

639
02:57:40.080 --> 02:57:56.160
largest school district in the country because we're the only school district in the country that has elected officials that I'm looking at right now at this size because in this country there is no other like us. So hopefully we can lead the way in this in our state as well. So thank you for presenting. >> Thank you. Thank you Charlotte Nick.

640
02:57:56.160 --> 02:58:13.040
Round two. No le let me just add something positive because everything we've been talking about is out of our hands and there's nothing we can do about it but there are things we can do. So, um, Mr. Karimi, to get more money into the district, we

641
02:58:13.040 --> 02:58:29.840
need to increase enrollment. Correct. That that that's a big factor. >> Enrollment and attendance are >> and attendance. Well, you know, as I said before, I've only worked at a school and I know that if we can make our schools work, when parents walk through that front door and the staff is

642
02:58:29.840 --> 02:58:47.279
nice to them and polite and say hello, what's that's one way to do it. That's one way to do it. When people working at the school, everybody working the school in the cafeteria, our plant managers, our custodians, long as they're nice to parents say, "Hey, how you doing? How you people like that school, they will

643
02:58:47.279 --> 02:59:07.840
recommend that school to their friends and neighbors." And that's how we can try to increase enrollment. And that's in our hands, not out of our hands. So, I just wanted to say that. Thank you. All right. This brings us to the one item for action. Uh there is public

644
02:59:07.840 --> 02:59:22.800
comment on the item. Uh we'll take the public comment first and then uh we'll go on to the item itself. So uh let's see. We have Mr. Juan Mandi. Are you in the audience? You're signed up to speak. >> I don't see you here. You're also not

645
02:59:22.800 --> 02:59:44.560
online. The rest are uh remote. Uh Enor Patel, I see you're on the line. Please press star six to unmute yourself and you'll have two minutes to speak once you begin. Enor Patel. Hello. >> Can you hear me? >> Yes, we can.

646
02:59:44.560 --> 03:00:06.960
>> Great. Thank you. I'm Encore Patel. Uh yeah, I'm against these layoffs, these riffs, and it's nice that uh 38 of these classified employees are getting a hearing, but hundreds, if not thousands

647
03:00:06.960 --> 03:00:22.800
of folks across the district are not getting this chance, right? Earlier it was says because of these dramatic reductions to school allocations, but it's really the district has been strangling the school site budgets

648
03:00:22.800 --> 03:00:39.760
and it's really the staff at the school site that matters. We talk about it that we care, we worry about these essential workers, we want to support them, but now we're relying on this administrative law judge's decision is covered to

649
03:00:39.760 --> 03:00:56.560
justify or uh accept these layoffs. And earlier it was pointed out that the law judge actually got different information than what was presented to you, the board. So, how can we build trust and

650
03:00:56.560 --> 03:01:13.359
respect when we're balancing the budget on the backs of low-wage workers? And at the same time, we're continuing to not look at the subcontracting, the outsourcing that's going on. Um it's

651
03:01:13.359 --> 03:01:29.520
amazing that the the the two items, right, the fiscal stabilization plan and now these layoffs have put us in this dramatic situation. But it really does take us courage, right, to do what's

652
03:01:29.520 --> 03:01:46.479
necessary to defend public education, to care about public education. and these dramatic reductions to school allocations strangling school site budgets. It just shows that the district, the board members are not prioritizing

653
03:01:46.479 --> 03:02:03.200
>> the people at the school site, at least not enough. And there's a lot more that we could be doing and we should be doing to make sure that the resources are going to the school site staff at the campus. >> Thank you for your time. All right, the next speaker is Maria Daisy Ortiz.

654
03:02:03.200 --> 03:02:22.080
You're signed up to speak remotely, but you are not online. Are you in the room? Not have you online right now. Marcela Garcia, not online or in the room. Uh Karina Lopez,

655
03:02:22.080 --> 03:02:39.000
also not online or in the room, but it looks like Maria Daisy Ortiz just showed up. Maria Daisy Ortiz, please press star six to unmute yourself, and you'll have two minutes to speak once you begin. Maria Daisy Ortiz and she's going to be speaking Spanish. So if you have those translation headsets,

656
03:02:44.319 --> 03:02:59.520
>> good afternoon everybody. My name is Maria Desi Ortiz and I am here first of all to say to each one of you and especially to the superintendent that the word transparency in your mouth is

657
03:02:59.520 --> 03:03:14.399
way too big because to be able to have transparency. You have to open up opportunities for our information and that which you have presented today before you to the committees the pack committee DLAC and CAC it has not even

658
03:03:14.399 --> 03:03:28.479
been presented let's not even talk about the schools so that is not transparency or I don't know what meaning it has for you uh the word transparency also stop using the vulnerability

659
03:03:28.479 --> 03:03:46.399
of our immigrant uh people saying words, cheap words and corrupt words to be able to have the positions that you have because you just like power but you don't do anything about it because right now we're paying for a superintendent

660
03:03:46.399 --> 03:04:01.680
that is not working and one that is an interim. So double there. How embarrassing. And apart from that 250 millions that was set aside for people for other uh sexes and that is

661
03:04:01.680 --> 03:04:18.640
the way that you want us to support you. Stop doing things that are corrupt uh politically. You are just there to serve for those that pay for your campaigns. We truly need that each one

662
03:04:18.640 --> 03:04:35.040
of you are responsible, accountable, and all of you should be out because you are inefficient in our system. You have the student in debt because you are the ones that make these decisions and you have always been in uh the wrong decision

663
03:04:35.040 --> 03:04:51.040
because you don't want to listen to parents. you went to Sacramento with the board and they you guys didn't even think of taking parents because the voice of the parents is not in Sacramento and that is not equity Mr. Chairperson. So we need to make changes effective changes and do the right thing

664
03:04:51.040 --> 03:05:06.960
for academic achievement of our students evaluate all the programs that many of them do not work. Thank you >> on the single action item. May I have a motion and a second? >> Move it. Moved by board president Schmelson.

665
03:05:06.960 --> 03:05:28.240
>> I'll second. >> Seconded by Mr. Melvoyne. >> Superintendent Shake. >> Thank you, board president. Just some very brief remarks. All of us recognize that a reduction in force creates significant uncertainty and personal hardships for employees,

666
03:05:28.240 --> 03:05:44.399
families, and school communities. I want to be very clear that this action is not in any way a reflection of employee performance or dedication, but rather a difficult and necessary response to structural fiscal conditions. The number of final notices being

667
03:05:44.399 --> 03:05:59.439
proposed is the same as what the board authorized in February. However, it's important to keep in mind that these numbers do not represent the ultimate number of employees that will be released from district service and placed on a reemployment list. Pending board ratification of the tenative

668
03:05:59.439 --> 03:06:15.359
agreement between SEIU and the district tenatively planned for June 16th, we will take appropriate action including restoration of the IT support technician positions. Employees who are laid off will be placed on a reemployment list by classification for a period of 39 months

669
03:06:15.359 --> 03:06:31.040
from the date of separation. During this period, they will be offered reemployment in order of seniority within their classification. Additionally, it is anticipated that employees rights to employment in other classes and the use of vacancies generated by annual attrition will

670
03:06:31.040 --> 03:06:47.120
result in a significant difference between the number of authorized reductions and the number of employees actually being released from district service. And again, I I will reiterate once more that we will continue to advocate at every level possible to

671
03:06:47.120 --> 03:07:05.520
ensure that we bring in additional revenue for our district to ameliate further cuts. >> Mr. McLean, let me just add that I I am hoping that when we get to the point where we have people who are being released that um district staff and

672
03:07:05.520 --> 03:07:22.240
district personnel and directors and managers and supervisors all assist these employees in updating their resumes, helping them to write letters of recommendation and perhaps most importantly meeting their emotional needs. We meet the needs of the children

673
03:07:22.240 --> 03:07:37.520
but we have to meet the needs of our employees too. So thank you. Thank you. Uh, thank you. And and um, board president, the personnel commission will be working with employees on exactly those skills. Résumés, interviewing um,

674
03:07:37.520 --> 03:07:57.040
as well as sending the list of all of the classified vacancies to all classified employees each week to provide opportunities to apply for other jobs that are open. >> There board discussion. Yeah, just along those lines, I had a

675
03:07:57.040 --> 03:08:12.160
couple of questions um around what what support are we providing to put to help affected employees find possess positions that we have staff shortages in for example um if you could speak in more detail Dr. Murphy about that. I'm

676
03:08:12.160 --> 03:08:27.520
just I can't see from back here if if uh the our personnel director is here. David Greco. Okay. So, the the personnel commission is, like I said, they're sending out uh lists of vacancies of all

677
03:08:27.520 --> 03:08:44.160
vacancies every week to our classified employees. They are going to be holding workshops and uh resume writing, interview skills, uh how to job search skills for employees who are potentially

678
03:08:44.160 --> 03:09:01.040
being uh laid off at the end of the year. They're also working every single day to provide to look at our retirements, resignations, and separations and how we may be able to move employees with rights to those jobs

679
03:09:01.040 --> 03:09:17.840
into those assignments. Um I'm sorry. Did that answer your question? >> It did. Um another question is the item before us looks at classified reductions. Um so how are we working to ensure that central office reductions do

680
03:09:17.840 --> 03:09:34.960
not disproportionately impact the lowest paid staff? How how does this contemplate reductions at the senior management and certificated administrator levels um in addition to to classified staff? So we we did have as part of the original action that you

681
03:09:34.960 --> 03:09:51.600
authorized um letters were sent to all of our certificated administrators indicating and uh senior management indicating that they may also be subject to um reductions. And as a matter of

682
03:09:51.600 --> 03:10:08.319
fact, there are a number of our administrators who have um will be returning will be leaving the central office and will be returning to school site positions as well. Uh those positions are not the same as a riff

683
03:10:08.319 --> 03:10:25.120
because administrators, certificated administrators are not entitled to assignments other than teacher. uh we will be ensuring that all of our current uh administrator and certificated staff will be filling any vacancies by

684
03:10:25.120 --> 03:10:42.399
attrition as well. But there has been a reduction at central office of certificated uh administrator positions as well. >> That's helpful. And if at some point that can be quantified so we can have a sense of how those numbers compare

685
03:10:42.399 --> 03:10:58.800
certificate versus classified. Another another piece of the resolution was ensuring that um the value of all employees is recognized and that there are not disparities between certain types of employees compared to others as we are looking at these reductions. >> Tanya,

686
03:10:58.800 --> 03:11:17.040
>> uh maybe along those lines, why were members of UTLA or LA school police not affected by layoffs this year? >> Can you ask the question again? >> Yeah. Why were members of UTLA and LA school police not affected by the riff's early layoffs? >> So when

687
03:11:17.040 --> 03:11:34.960
>> Oh, so for UTLA um we are able to uh use the attrition for employees who are retiring uh and resigning to be able to move teachers into those vacancies.

688
03:11:34.960 --> 03:11:51.600
Uh we also had a number of temporary contract teachers who we were able to uh release to ensure that our permanent employees who had rights to ongoing employment were able to move into those assignments. Um as far as school police

689
03:11:51.600 --> 03:12:07.200
goes, I believe that they were able to make the budget reductions, the 20% budget reductions um without impacting staff because of existing vacancies. But I'll I'll hand that to Pedro. We also made a number of reductions at the um

690
03:12:07.200 --> 03:12:23.120
management and clerical level as well as um we eliminated certain um management positions. And ideally what we did is we eliminated two lieutenant positions and opened up a sergeant position. And so

691
03:12:23.120 --> 03:12:38.960
we've been able to kind of I would say flatten the management level there and invest in those that are actually supporting kind of our community enforcement, community support. Um especially as we're talking about some of the ICE activity and and uh other

692
03:12:38.960 --> 03:12:54.640
community supports that have been desired at school sites. >> Um that makes sense. But I'm I'm with Miss Gonz that I I do want to make sure we are not disproportionately impacting um certain uh employees and schools um

693
03:12:54.640 --> 03:13:09.840
particularly who have chosen to have employees who like work near their schools. Some of these positions I think we call them restricted positions um whether it's the role or that they need to live within a certain radius. the um community rubs, healthy start navigators, you know, there are all

694
03:13:09.840 --> 03:13:26.160
these folks who uh serve our students and families that I I fear um you know, the the loss of service will be felt. Um and then at the same time, we're going to be growing some other positions. Um and I'll just you know, call it out like we're growing at UTLA and then we're

695
03:13:26.160 --> 03:13:42.479
laying off SEIU and that is a very difficult decision before this board. Um, and so it helps us when we know that staff has really contemplated all of the limitations and possibilities here. And so I I guess that's ultimately my question is like did we have to lay off

696
03:13:42.479 --> 03:14:00.160
certain positions because they were not already protected by collective bargaining agreements and there was more, you know, quote unquote discretion or flexibility with those positions versus others that were, you know, locked in because of bargaining agreements. >> Uh, yes. So, uh, yes, there are certain

697
03:14:00.160 --> 03:14:15.760
things such as class size or counseling ratios, PSA, PSW, school psychologist ratios for UTLA that are in the contract. And, uh, we would not be able to lay off the employees needed to

698
03:14:15.760 --> 03:14:33.760
fulfill those ratios uh, unless we renegotiated those ratios and increased the the student to employee ratio. So, that is uh, one reason. But again, due the the decreases due to declining enrollment um we are able to absorb this

699
03:14:33.760 --> 03:14:50.960
year through attrition and retirements. >> And I'll note Mr. Greco is here to answer questions pre previously asked if if still needed. >> Right. Any other board comments before we ask Mr. Greco to come up to the podium? >> Just one final thought before I don't know if Sony wanted to say something.

700
03:14:50.960 --> 03:15:06.640
>> Yeah. I just wanted to provide a little bit more information on the process that that resulted in the central office reductions. So as as we shared previously and you know starting in February the the RIFF authorization was for central office positions and the central office reductions included

701
03:15:06.640 --> 03:15:23.600
classified reductions and certificated reductions and uh as as uh Dr. Dr. Murphy mentioned a little bit about how, you know, there's some differences in how it works uh process-wise for certificate versus classified, but there were reductions from the central office reductions that impacted both

702
03:15:23.600 --> 03:15:38.800
certificated employees and and classified employees. Uh when division, >> sorry, were those ALA and UTLA members or just ALA members? >> Um I Kristen, can you help me with that one? >> I'm so sorry. Could you repeat the question? The central office positions

703
03:15:38.800 --> 03:15:56.080
were those both util and alla members or just alla members. >> Uh it was both. I >> I will get the numbers for you. >> And each division's reductions were you know a little bit different but uh the instructions were certainly to eliminate

704
03:15:56.080 --> 03:16:10.880
uh to you know consider eliminating senior management level positions, middle management level positions. Uh but divisions had to meet a certain targeted reduction. And while every division didn't re didn't ultimately wasn't ultimately reduced by the same amount because we had to consider the

705
03:16:10.880 --> 03:16:27.439
impact on on students on operations of the district on vital services. Um there were substantial reductions in uh senior management level positions and and middle management level positions but just there are fewer of those positions than there are kind of in terms of our

706
03:16:27.439 --> 03:16:42.960
overall uh employee population. But but there were reductions kind of and but because of the size of the reduction, it did need to encompass a substantial number of positions at all levels. >> Yeah. And I'll just share before it goes into the next board member, you know, I am concerned about forced placements. Um

707
03:16:42.960 --> 03:16:59.359
we have a a history of uh trying to have mutual consent between the school and the employee and I hope that we'll do that to the best of our ability this year. I do know also that we have had a history of having to force uh people at schools and that has been challenging. Yeah. Mustplace positions. Thank you. Um

708
03:16:59.359 --> 03:17:15.120
so to the extent possible I want to make sure we are avoiding that where schools cannot absorb um the challenges that might arise when there is not mutual consent. And so um you know I I uh I know we'll be talking more about that next month. Um but just to flag high and

709
03:17:15.120 --> 03:17:30.960
highest need schools really need as much mutual consent to make sure that their schools are uh running collectively um to meet the extreme needs that um we know our students are going to be facing even more so with these budget cuts. So, thanks Mr. Schelton. >> Okay, I'll ask Mr. Greco to come up to

710
03:17:30.960 --> 03:17:46.319
the podium. Kelly, we have Mr. Greco here for further questions about uh people who may be released. >> Yes. Um my question was just, you know, we know that uh a number of our classified employees will be impacted by today's action. What supports are we

711
03:17:46.319 --> 03:18:02.800
providing to them to help them to help move them into positions that where we have openings where we have staff shortages and ensure that those services are provided to students as well as ensuring that those folks can continue working with the school district. >> So the classified uh system is dictated

712
03:18:02.800 --> 03:18:20.319
by the merit system. So we cannot just move people into classifications. Uh every week anytime that there are vacancies and openings, we send out to all employees a job bulletin that tells them everything that is open so that they can apply so long as they meet the EQs, they will then uh test for the job

713
03:18:20.319 --> 03:18:37.840
and if they get on the eligibility list in the top three ranks, they can be chosen. So we are sending out the job bulletins to make sure that people know about the the openings that there are. Um, the other thing that we're also doing is our organizational excellence branch is holding a career uh workshop

714
03:18:37.840 --> 03:18:52.960
where they'll help uh fine-tune skills of resume building, interview skills, and testing skills, whether that be within the district or outside of the district. >> And does that include direct outreach to the to the individuals who are impacted

715
03:18:52.960 --> 03:19:09.439
or who are likely to be impacted today? So it is it is widely publicized on our websites and also sent out to all classified employees through email. >> Does the PC have the capacity to provide individual outreach and guidance to to to these individuals?

716
03:19:09.439 --> 03:19:26.960
>> We can have we have the capacity to to reach out with emails and or letters and have them reach back out to us in contact. We do not have resources to make individual phone calls to every employee. >> Okay. Well, I would ask that you do whatever you you are able to within your your staffing capacity. Um because we

717
03:19:26.960 --> 03:19:42.319
want to ensure that it it publicizing, you know, putting it publicly is helpful, but direct outreach, I think, is is necessary for for these impacted employees. >> And board member Gonz will make sure that the resources are available to make phone calls to the employees who may

718
03:19:42.319 --> 03:20:00.800
ultimately be uh laid off or or released from district service because that's a much a much smaller number. Any other comments? Okay, Mr. McClean. >> All right, I'm going to take the vote on tab one. >> We're done. >> Oh, you >> that was clear.

719
03:20:00.800 --> 03:20:17.040
>> I'm sorry. You said I thought you said call the vote. Do >> Yeah. >> Yeah. >> Are there more more discussion? There's more discussion. >> Sorry. I was like, whoa. um uh regarding the recision the process

720
03:20:17.040 --> 03:20:31.920
for people to get their their jobs back and is it based on attrition um that positions will be open and people can apply for their positions? >> Uh yes. So uh and I see the personnel

721
03:20:31.920 --> 03:20:49.359
director Mr. Greco coming up again. But um as far as people who have been either uh bumped down to a lower classification or who may be laid off, they have a uh right to those assignments by seniority

722
03:20:49.359 --> 03:21:05.600
and will be called back by seniority. I if you want to add to that. >> Yeah. So there's a 39 39month reemployment list for each classification. So if an individual is bumped down from one class to a lower class and let's assume that maybe

723
03:21:05.600 --> 03:21:21.279
they're bumped down three classes, they maintain uh 3913 employment list for every classification that they bumped out of. So as soon as there's a vacancy, we go straight to the reemployment list. We are not permitted to hire from the outside. We go straight to the

724
03:21:21.279 --> 03:21:37.439
reemployment list in order of seniority. And those individuals have three opportunities to reject or accept a job. If they reject it three times, then they are taken off of the reemployment list. Uh if they if they reject the first time, we go to the second person in

725
03:21:37.439 --> 03:21:53.520
seniority and so forth. >> Do you know the average attrition rate for classified positions for any of the folks who are on this list? >> Any positions on this list, I should say? >> I I would have to get back to you and look at each individual >> just in general. We do we have because I

726
03:21:53.520 --> 03:22:09.600
know we were able to predict for uh certificated staff, right? That we we made an assumption that there were going to be enough people retiring and leaving that we wouldn't have to do any layoffs for those um at least riffs for those

727
03:22:09.600 --> 03:22:26.239
positions. Um so I'm wondering if we have the same information for classified. >> So we did look at the numbers initially to determine what numbers we typically have in a year. Um and that kind of helped uh the deciding factors of of

728
03:22:26.239 --> 03:22:41.600
what the the request was from the district to authorize layoff. Um every single time that we get a resignation or retirement from an impacted classification, we then go to the seniority list and we resin those

729
03:22:41.600 --> 03:22:57.520
layoffs. So it in real time we are currently rescending layoffs or or lower classification bumps and we will be doing so all the way through June 30th and thereafter. >> Okay. And then um let's see here. So,

730
03:22:57.520 --> 03:23:14.319
the vote, just clarification on the vote um that we're taking today, um is the vote to accept the layoffs and to give authority to resend any any

731
03:23:14.319 --> 03:23:31.520
uh positions, any any rift notices. Uh yes, if you look at page three of the board report, the second paragraph, uh it does say that by adopting the proposed decision, the board will author will authorize the implementation of

732
03:23:31.520 --> 03:23:45.760
recisions identified during the hearing process reflecting the proposed decision. And in addition, the district may identify additional employees whose layoff notices should be rescended based on further review of staffing uh and attrition.

733
03:23:45.760 --> 03:24:03.040
>> Okay. Um, so that's um that's all the questions I have. Um, but I just want to point out that you know the the positions that we're voting on today

734
03:24:03.040 --> 03:24:20.479
um are the very positions that even before the pandemic um were already reduced right at our schools. So our schools were already destabilized

735
03:24:20.479 --> 03:24:38.399
um because these positions were already being reduced. Um and we have seen an increase in academic performance and that is a result of having fully funded schools and that includes having

736
03:24:38.399 --> 03:24:54.399
campus aids, healthy start navigators, PSA aids, gardeners who keep our our our gardens well cuz who else is going to do it, right? the, you know, if you don't have the gardener doing it, then you're putting it on the other staff, and

737
03:24:54.399 --> 03:25:12.319
that's when schools start to feel not welcoming. That's when they start to feel and they look and appear not the kind of place where you want to be at. So, I just want to point out that these all of these positions um have been at risk for a while and now it's um by

738
03:25:12.319 --> 03:25:29.120
putting them on this final uh vote, we are making a reality. We're making it a reality that our schools are now going to be very much more destabilized than they have been. Um you know, in the previous conversation, we talked about

739
03:25:29.120 --> 03:25:44.800
Senny. Those are the highest need schools. there's a big uh correlation between Sunny and BAP schools, these are the schools that are going to be impacted by these riffs. So, um you know that I want to also point out

740
03:25:44.800 --> 03:25:59.760
that these positions and I know people here are empathetic and they and they feel sympathy um you know for for what's going to happen, but you know these folks they're not a title, they're not just a position. They're not a line

741
03:25:59.760 --> 03:26:14.720
item. it really they represent a person's livelihood right and for a lot of them already they have been struggling to make ends meet and I received letters

742
03:26:14.720 --> 03:26:32.399
today where somebody in all caps said I am begging you to vote no on these rifts this is what we're voting on these are you know our students parents in any cases

743
03:26:32.399 --> 03:26:48.319
>> our students, family members >> that we are doing this and um and it concerns me that we're making such a huge decision that is going to impact people so significantly

744
03:26:48.319 --> 03:27:04.640
in a time when our state budget has not been fully fleshed out. We still don't know what the uh final outcome will be >> on our budget. And yet, you know, maybe some folks might be

745
03:27:04.640 --> 03:27:19.359
rescended, but the impact that we're putting people through right now is tremendous. And I've been at a school for 20 years where there was historic destabilization. So, I know what it's like. I know what it's like to be at a

746
03:27:19.359 --> 03:27:35.439
school that has staff that is constantly moving. We're losing folks, colleagues who are losing their jobs. Um, and I mean everyone, special education assistants,

747
03:27:35.439 --> 03:27:53.120
um, office techs, SAAS, what all the positions, um, I know what that's like when my colleagues have had to lose their jobs. So, it's not just a line item. It's not just a number, it's not the end, you

748
03:27:53.120 --> 03:28:08.399
know, the number at the end of year 1, two, or three. it is real human beings and um back in February I voted no for this because I didn't have enough information. I still feel the same way

749
03:28:08.399 --> 03:28:25.279
because the budget has not been fully fleshed out and this is a huge decision, huge decision that to me it's something that we need to take our time and I know that legally we have to make these decisions because you know whatever but

750
03:28:25.279 --> 03:28:42.000
um I still I I I still feel that the the there's lots of questions about what our budget will look like the the final amount of money that will be coming in.

751
03:28:42.000 --> 03:28:59.439
And so I just want to one I want to you know send a message to anybody who is on this list that you know we I I'm not going to speak for everybody else but I I respect your

752
03:28:59.439 --> 03:29:16.160
work. I value your work and um and I'm gonna fight hard because I when I understand that there's an an economic outlook that is not positive and that there are hard decisions to be made, but

753
03:29:16.160 --> 03:29:33.200
I still believe that layoffs should be the the last thing that we should be considering because because of the individuals who are impacted, but also how that directly impacts our students because they're connected and so um so

754
03:29:33.200 --> 03:29:50.239
anyway I'm I'm I just want to say that and I'm by me saying I respect you and I value you that is not to say that my colleagues don't. I want to be clear because I know that they also feel the same way. Um but I just want to be clear that um to me this this still feels like

755
03:29:50.239 --> 03:30:12.720
it's it's too much too soon and um that's where I stand right now. Any other comments? Okay, Mr. McClean. >> All right. Having been moved by board president Schmilson, seconded by Mr. Melvinne,

756
03:30:12.720 --> 03:30:31.040
I believe Miss Newell will be back with us shortly, uh, Dr. Rivas. >> No. >> M. Mr. Meline. Yes. Miss GGO. >> No,

757
03:30:31.040 --> 03:30:45.680
>> Miss Donz. >> Yes, >> Miss Ortiz Franklin. >> Yes. >> Board President for you again. >> Board President Schmurson. >> Yes. >> All right. That's uh

758
03:30:45.680 --> 03:31:03.279
>> four yeses, two nos, and waiting on Miss Newell. So, it passes, but we will wait on that one vote. >> I got it. Noice, no peace, no peace. No justice, no peace, no justice, no peace.

759
03:31:03.279 --> 03:31:42.680
No justice, no peace. No justice, no peace. Okay, we have one more vote to record. That is Miss Newell. >> Yes. >> All right, that is uh five eyes and two nos. The item passes.

760
03:31:45.359 --> 03:32:01.200
>> Okay. So before we go, I'd like to proceed with the idea that we discussed on Tuesday at our ad hoc uh at our sorry at our whole uh committee the whole meeting and we're going to form an ad hoc committee for AI and technology

761
03:32:01.200 --> 03:32:17.200
in the district. So this committee will be formed by some board members and industry experts who will listen to how artificial intelligence and technology are implemented in our district and assess their impact on student safety

762
03:32:17.200 --> 03:32:33.760
and learning. So only three members can be on the ad hoc committee and I would like to appoint if they agree uh Miss Ortiz Franklin, Mr. Melvoine and Miss Gomez. Okay. >> Yes. Thank you.

763
03:32:33.760 --> 03:32:50.319
>> That works for me. Thank you. >> Okay. Thank you. Thank you. >> All right. Just going to repeat uh Mr. Meloinne uh Miss Gomez and Mr. Ortiz Franklin on the ad hoc committee as per the resolution. >> Good. Okay. Thank you. Um business is done. Would anyone care

764
03:32:50.319 --> 03:33:04.520
to adjourn or object to an adjournment? We're good. The meeting is adjourned at 1:36.