[music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] Heat. Heat. [music] [music]
All right. [music] >> [music] >> Hey. >> [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] >> Yeah. >> [music] [music]
[music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] >> Hallelujah. Heat. [music] [music] Heat.
Yeah. Heat. [music] Heat. Heat. [music] [music] [music] Heat. [music] [music] Heat.
Heat. [music] [music] [music] Heat. Heat. Heat. >> [music] [music] [music] [music] >> Heat. Heat. Heat. Hey, Heat. [music]
This meeting to order at 5:00. Roll call, please. >> Jennifer >> here. >> Here. here. >> Is there any public comment for closed? >> No. Okay. Uh jouring or recessing to
close. >> Okay. Talk to you later. Bye. >> [music] [music] [music] [music] >> Come on. Come on. >> [music] >> Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat.
Heat. Heat. Come on. Heat. Hey. Hey. Hey. [music] Heat. Heat. you. I [music] Heat. Heat.
>> [music] [music] [music] >> Happy duck. Heat. Hey, Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. [music] >> [music]
[music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] >> Yeah,
you Hallelujah. Heat. Heat. [music] Heat. [music] [music] Heat. >> [music] >> Heat. Heat. Hallelujah. [music] Hallelujah.
>> [music] >> Oh, heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Hallelujah. Oh, Heat. Heat. >> [music]
[music] >> Heat. Heat. >> [music] [music] [music] >> Heat. Heat. >> [music] [music] >> Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Hey. Hey. Hey. >> [music] [music]
[music] >> Hey, hey, hey. >> [music] >> Let's go down. >> [music] >> Hey, hey, hey. Hallelujah. Yeah. >> [music] [music] [music]
[music] [music] [music] >> Heat. Heat. >> [music] >> Heat. Heat. >> [music] [music] >> everything. [music] See you. Oh,
[music] heat. >> [music] [music] [music] [music] >> be me. >> [music] [music] >> Heat. Heat. >> [music] [music] >> How?
>> [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] >> Hallelujah. Heat. Heat. >> [music] [music] >> Happy birthday.
[music] Heat. Hey. Hey. Hey. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. I don't know. Heat. [music] Hey, Heat. >> [music] >> Uh-huh. [music]
Heat. Heat. [music] Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Hey. [music] >> [music] >> Hello everyone. [music] Hello.
Hello. [music] Heat. Heat. Heat. [music] Heat. Heat. Heat. Come on. Heat. Heat. >> [music]
>> Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. N. [music] Heat. Heat. >> [music] >> Hey. [music] >> [music] [music] >> Jump. Doo doo doo doo doo doo.
>> [music] >> Heat. Heat. Hey. [music] Hey. Hey. Hey. Hey. Hey. Heat. Heat. >> [music] [music] [music] [music]
[music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] >> Hallelujah. Hallelujah. >> [music] [music] >> Hallelujah. Hallelujah.
[music] Oh la. Hallelujah. >> [music] [music] [music] >> Heat. Heat. Hallelujah. >> [music] >> Hallelujah.
[music] The board met in close session under agenda item C1. The the board approved initiating litigation to protect against interference on the district's school campuses and property and the approved and ongoing contaminated soil removal and remediation project. The vote in
close session was taken by roll call and the vote was the following. Yes, Tina Frederick's. Yes, Jarma Velasquez. Yes, Patrice Marshall McKenzie. Yes, Kimberly Kenny. Yes, Jennifer Holly. Yes, Michelle Richardson Bailey. Yes, Scott
Harden. No further action was taken. We are now in >> I'm sorry. I'm sorry. >> I'm sorry. Yeah. Thank you. Uh we are back from closed and uh is there any public comment?
>> Oh, roll call, please. Here >> are there any public comments? Yes. >> How many? >> Eight at the initial. >> So, three minutes. All right. All right.
Thank you. The board of education acknowledges receipt of public comments via email. These comments will be made part of the permanent record of this meeting. Moving on to speakers who are present in the room. Brian Fulture There we go. Uh, good evening. Um, my
name is Brian Folure. I'm a South Oak resident just on the street. I appreciate your time and the patience. It's the third time I've been here in a month talking about the same subject, trees and soil. We are professional engineers involved in construction, heavy civil. We know about ERS, EIS's,
SQUA, working smart, working within the code guidelines, but what we see with this tree removal to get to the soil is just inexcusable. We would never take out trees in my world just to get to the soil if there's alternate methods of handling the same reaching the same
goal. The soil remediation should be the primary focus, not just taking the trees out because they're there. They're sort of in the way. Even this PowerPoint we're hearing about tonight talks about the stumps being in the way. It's very unlikely that there's anything under the stump that needs remediation.
The areas for remediation for where trees are involved are somewhat misaligned. You've got trees that are fully paved around yet they're tagged for removal. You got places where kids never go outside this this building on Hudson. And right beside that there's
public space. So we'd like you to have a very hard and sensitive look at how you're approaching what trees for what purpose and how you're doing the soil remediation which I would submit is very very shallow and look at it from an engineering
quantitative analysis point of view where you're going to get the best bang for the buck minimum environmental damage and disruption and get the public behind you. I look at something like this. I look at your own hand who wrote this. There's
not nothing about trees in it. Nothing. Please do uh a little bit more on outreach and get public support. Thank you. Jessica Richards. Hello. Jessica Richards, Pasadena resident, um vice president of Bungalow.
neighborhood association and commissioner on uh urban forestry advisory commission. Although I'm speaking in my individual capacity tonight, I am tired. You probably are as well. I'm tired of hearing the same worn out
narrative that these trees must go, that there's no other choice, that you're mandated to do that. Yes, there is a mandate from DTSC to address the contamination. That is accurate. Yes, your contractor Verdantis
gave you a recommendation of one way to accomplish that. But it is false to continue to claim that DTSC is mandating you to do this and there's no other choice. Ben Stan Hill sat stood here a month ago and
said, "Yeah, if you want to do it a different way, you can submit a new repo proposal. If this summer isn't a good summer to do it, you could do it next summer. No, we're not going to put you into a land covenant in 60 days.
Work with us." And so that is what I heard with my own ears and it is recorded. You heard the same. So it is confusing to me why there's the continuous narrative of
there is no choice. You have a choice. Yes, we need to move quickly, but this is wasting time. We've had alternatives for over a month. Please, let's move forward together. you have
the support of um subject matter experts willing to donate their time and have donated their time and expertise. We want you to succeed. We want the soil remediated and we know that can be done safely and efficiently
while retaining the trees. Thank you, Nina Raj. Hi, my name is Nina Raj. I'm a Pasadena resident. Um, four weeks ago, your board sat in this very room and responded to your constituents widespread outcry by
saying that you would make a concerted effort to respect the city enforced tree protection ordinance. You now sit before us ready to pass a motion to exempt yourselves from this very same ordinance. Was this truly just a PR move to ingratiate yourself to concerned Pasadena residents? I sincerely hope
not. You have an opportunity to turn this around by working alongside both the city and the community rather than against us. We are eager to collaborate and help you find another path forward. I urge you to do the right thing. Thank you. Nicholas Harmon.
>> Hello, I'm Nicholas Harmon. Um, I find in a situation like this where we're all showing up under very specific pretenses and there's these desks and these chairs and it's all set up and there's a lot of formalities that
are required. I find it helpful to step away from that. So, in my three minutes for some of that, I'd like to just take some time to pause and just really be here as the people that are in this room because all part
of the same community and we're all caring about the community. It matters to us and it matters to our hearts and we care about the kids and we care about the future of the community. And in the end, we need to work together
and put away the side of me being here to speak up and you being here to listen and put away the sides of um how we see the problem or the situation and really just let ourselves be the human that's underneath.
And in that I think we can all work together and we can find a new way to approach this situation because it's not it's not unifying the community. And I really do believe that unification
of the community in love is what community is for and it's what school does and it's it's about bringing us all together and the trees are part of that community and all of the plants and animals have to be considered in the
future of that community. So with the rest of the time I'd like to just pause It is so easy to fall into routine, especially in these kinds of situations. So, I urge you to step out of your
routine and make an effort to see this from a new angle and find alternative means of remediation because I know that we're all willing to help and come together for it. So, thank you
>> Kathleen. Diner >> diner diner. That means servant. So, hi, I'm Kathleen Diner. Whoa. Um, I used to be a teacher at Madison Elementary from 1990 to 1997. I taught fifth grade. And
because of that, I brought flashcards for y'all. Um, I know that when I taught there, there were days where the principal would announce Gloria Delaney, she was the best principal ever. Um, rest her soul. um she would come on the
intercom and say um you know it's a smog day today so tell the kids they can't run. Try telling children they can't run at recess. Impossible. That's just you know children's nature. So um trees help
us um combat smog. So I was just wondering how about people every single day. >> Every single day. Can everybody hear me? >> Make sure you address the board. Actually, >> before the fire, Altadena had 28,000
trees. The fire took 14,000. And then to add insult to injury, the Army Corps came in and cut 4,000 of them. The oxygen from the 28,000 trees gave us 112,000 people fresh air every single
day. Can you believe it? One to four. We lost 64% of our trees. 72,000 people losing a daily source of oxygen. Mature trees are four times more
valuable than saplings. If you think that saplings are going to replace mature trees, it's not really the same. It's like saying that baby right there is the same as your great great great grandma. It's not the same. Mature trees reduce the need for AC. And
you know how expensive electricity is. M mature trees are vital for fighting climate change. They sequester carbon in their roots. Small replacement trees are inadequate com uh compensation. Older and larger trees store massive amounts of carbon in
their roots. Protecting them is crucial. Cutting them down releases centuries of carbon back into the atmosphere. [crying] Mature trees boost local property value. Sorry, I'm not used to using a mic. Trees reduce both air and noise
pollution. They foster community and neighborhood connections. Mature trees. Spending time near them lowers heart rates and reduces stress. Anybody who's Japanese knows that. Mature trees reduce community crime. I
just found that out. AI trees hold our history and are beautiful. And that's why Pasadena is beautiful. And I hope that you will think the same and take this into consideration when you decide on that resolution.
>> Thank you, Lisa Quinn. Hi, my name is Lisa Quinn. I've been a teacher in Pasadena for many, many years. Um, speaking to the item I, I feel that we as educators should be role models for the rules for going through
proper channels and for working collaborative collaboratively with other groups involved. Um, also I would strongly recommend to the board to consider methods that experts have recommended in order to keep the trees rather than while remediating the soil
rather than cutting them down. And uh I feel that everybody who's spoken so far has made excellent points and I agree with them. >> I have another card for Jessica Richard, but I believe that you already spoke. And then I als
>> at the item or right now I can do it right now. Do you have a preference? >> Please proceed. >> Okay. Thanks. >> Thank you. Regarding item I, I would like to strongly encourage this board to
work within the municipal code, not vote to make yourselves exempt to it. I can't make myself exempt from the municipal codes. Some of them I like, some of them I don't like. Sometimes they are a hassle, but they exist for a
reason. It's to keep the fabric of our community cohesive and safe and orderly. They can be a barrier at times, but it is the right thing to do to work within
the established codes. And if you don't like it, you can work with those authorities to make those changes over time. But that is the spirit of collaboration. That is what we need to model for students that we work within and with each other,
not opt out. And so I encourage you to uh vote in opposition of the resolution to exempt yourselves from municipal code. Thank you. >> Any further public comments?
>> I have a card. There were cards that were submitted to speak at the initial pro comment session and then there were cards that were checked to speak at this particular item when the item comes up >> and and mine was for initial comment
session respectfully. I crossed off the agenda portion. >> That's fine. just come up. >> Thank you. >> Julia Illy, >> Jennifer Lant. >> Good evening. My name is Jennifer Lelant. I'm a citizen of this great land
and a parent of two generations. Uh I've noticed some language in here about people who've lost their homes. My kid actually lost their home. My granddaughter who's going to this school lost her home. And uh I'm very concerned
about the actions going on. I was so heartened after Mr. Dunning actually presented an alternative to cutting these trees down. It really showed a tremendous amount of good faith. However, um what I'm seeing
now is a backwards motion of that. Instead of 50ome trees versus the 70 that were actually falling under the TPO and native status, it's now 47 trees and there's 88 trees left. There's, you know, what what trees are we talking
about here? I have no idea what trees you guys are even identifying as your your native and protected trees. I look at slide number number six and it says we've got two options. Option one,
we either restore the soil and option two, we we end up in a land use covenant. And I guess that's true, but there's nuance to this. You can actually clean this soil without ending up in a land use covenant. It is not the boogeyman that you guys are making it
out to be. Slide number seven. I guess it was slide six. Side number seven, the soil in some locations the roots are in contaminated soil, stumps, etc. And and the other truth to this is that they are
inconvenient. It is inconvenient. It might cost a little bit more money for you to actually remediate that soil in a natural way or Erica excavation or hydro excavation than actually cutting the tree down. Okay. So, you know, the
characterization of these options, the reality of the situation that you're facing, it is hard. It is a hard situation. You guys are faced with a difficult situation with the contamination of the soil, the school coming back in, some of the legal
balancing act that you have to take. But your characterization of this situation is not factual. it is being manipulated to support the outcome that you want. The last thing that I'm
going to say is in terms of if I could get to my file. It's the whereas the whereas the whereas as a board we choose to act with impunity. We choose to exempt ourselves
from the rules and regulations that the citizens of this city have supported by this council. I was going to read it to you. I find it shocking. I find it absolutely shocking that this board would vote to exempt themselves from the laws.
It may be legal, but elections happen. >> Any further comments? >> Um, there's a >> Is there another comment? >> Are you changing your mind to speak now or at the item? Everybody else, >> it's fine. What is What's your name?
>> I do. >> Okay, >> just we're on a roll with the comments here. Um, Amanda Elaf. I live on Oaknull near this administration building. I'm a licensed civil engineer in the state of California.
I understand why the school district is in a hurry to get the contaminated soil replaced as soon as possible. Everybody wants to go back to normal after the fires.
Unfortunately, it's it's not that easy. After the trees are cut down, we will not be back to normal for a very very very long time. So, you're trading a short period of time for a very long, painful period without trees. Many of
the speakers tonight have brought up all of the benefits of the trees. The shade is gone. The beauty is gone in a matter of days. But the mature trees will not go back grow back in my lifetime or the lifetime
of many of the students. The recovery from killing the trees to remove the soil will be far more painful than remediating remediating this soil before school starts. Once the trees are down, it'll be too late to make the right decision. So, I just want to
encourage you to make the right choice tonight and save the remaining trees. Thank you. All right, one more public comment. Kenneth Compton. >> Good evening. Um, it is our hope, most
of us here, to save the remaining trees and um, prevent the cutting of additional trees. These trees are decades old. They are a fabric and part of this community. They they need to be spared. We need to find another method
of remediation that would be equitable and fair for the trees, for the school, for the district, for the city, for the community, and and for the public. I think that's the best way around the current situation. Cutting the trees is
fast and easy, but in the long term, we will be replacing them with what? Small saplings that are going to take decades to grow. They're not going to provide the shade. They're not going to provide the u cooling of our warming atmosphere. There's so many things that
those trees provide habitat for uh birds and other nesting animals. They provide so much and the easy way is cutting them down and remediating the soil. The difficult maybe difficult a little bit more difficult but I think more
equitable way is to figure out how these other cities in the neighboring community are doing their job. Uh they don't seem to be clearcutting these trees on in other communities in other areas of the city and the county. So it would be it would behoove us to find out
how they're doing their work to remediate the soil problems and make sure that the soil is clean. I have a friend that works for Metro. They did bio remediation by planting crops and corn in areas that were contaminated with decades of oil and grease and
contaminants. And that took five years, but it worked. They have that kind of time. Maybe we don't have that kind of time. But what other avenues have we tried to follow before getting to this point? And you know, the fire has been that happened over a year and a half ago
now. And now we're at the point where it's an emergency when a year and a half ago after the fire we might have been able to try and figure out how the how the schools could be remediated in an equitable way and leave the trees. Thank you.
>> Thank you. Any further public comment? >> It's your choice. Okay. [crying] >> Can you say your name for the record, please? >> Julia. >> Hi, my name is Julia and I am a Aladina Pasadena resident and I'm also a college
student studying philosophy and hopefully wanting to get into law. And I am seeking great examples of good government in my community. And I am saddened to see the continued conflict and a lack of cooperation between two of our community's most important public
institutions, the city of Pasadena and PUSD. And it is unfortunate that this resolution has come before the board in a way that appears to deepen that divide. Both jurisdictions exist to serve the same communities and there
should be a healthy collaborative relationship between you both particularly as we recover from the eaten fire. And as an eaten fire victim or survivor myself, I know the profound impact it has had on our community. And
we all share the same goal of ensuring safe and healthy school environments for student staff. However, I believe this issue should not be framed as a false choice between protecting children and protecting trees. Trees are critical
infrastructure that support children's health and safety by providing shade, improving air quality, reducing extreme heat, managing storm water, and creating healthier learning environments. Protecting public health and preserving valuable trees should be an object
objective whenever possible. And also as a member of the disabled community, I would like to highlight that disproportionate in there's a disproportionate impact to heat and subpar bad air quality that has on disabled students and communities and community members with disabilities. And
12% of the student population in PUSD has disabilities, physical and cognitive, mental. So please don't forget about them while you're talking about this as well. And I would like to point out that out of the remaining trees, only six are in close proximity
to students. These trees need to be soil soil remediated either through bio- remediation or airspade, not removal. DTSC says we have time. Please don't make a short-term solution that causes long-term harm to public health of for
students and staff of all abilities. Thank you so much. >> Thank you. Thank you for your all your public comments. Uh with the support of the board, I'd like to
switch the order of the item due to a board member needing to leave early. So does anybody object? Okay. So we will go to item I then item H.
Am I supposed to Approval of resolution 2896. Resolution of the board of education of PSD rendering zoning ordinances of the city of Pasadena in in applicable to the school sites within the district
boundaries. Resolution authorizing the district to exercise its authority under government code section 5394 with respect to specified school properties. motion to approve.
>> Do we have to make the motion? Um, is there a second? >> Second. >> Okay. So, what is the how many public comment do we have? >> Just one. >> Okay. Three minutes. >> Lauren Seagull. I think it's interesting that you're
choosing to not do the local ordinances for the city of Pastina. I'm just curious if there's a crime at your school, are you going to call our police department to come? Are if there's a fire at your school,
are you going to call our fire department? So, you're just going to pick and choose what you want to use for Pasadena resources. That's your option. You don't want to do this, but you do want to use that. You want to use our
taxpayers for police and fire, but you don't want to use it for zoning and trees. That's what you're saying. I talked to the head of public and public health today, Manuel Carbana. He's reached out a number of times to you, Dr. Blanco about the soil
remediation plan so he can protect our residences for when you go and have air pollution and he has not gotten a call back. So you're not protecting our residences from your plan.
The city of Pasadena has tried to work with you and this is what it's come to. I think it is so embarrassing what you guys are doing, but I'm not the only one that thinks too. Pasadena Educational
Foundation, which provides funding and money. See, you're the chief business officer, are getting non-stop complaints and questions from their donors and sponsors as to this item because they don't trust you guys
anymore. So you're going to lose money and faith. Is that what you want? I was at MI when the police passion police was called the other day. You used our resources, but you don't want to use our resources. Our arborists, our
engineers, our zoning, our planning, all the people that can help you do a plan. Every single park in Pasadena was tested last April after the fire. These are posted on the Pasadena Public
Health Department website. Do you know how many of them were tested over 80 parts per million? Zero. By April, we were able to replace every
mulch and soil in every playground in the parks and parks and wreck. We replaced every infield at the baseball diamonds. We're here 18 months later. Something went wrong. South Pass, none
of their parts tested over 80 parts per million. There's something wrong here. You're choosing the wrong item. Any further public comments? Thank you. Are there any questions on the resolution?
Trusty Kenny. >> Well, because we haven't had the presentation, I guess there's a few questions maybe we should ask. So, um, one of the public comments we heard said parks. Um, well, it sounded like what I heard was that parks didn't have any
contamination found, but is there a reason that school districts are different than parks? If someone on staff or someone could address that, >> either Mr. Dunning or Mr. Saxs or Oh, sorry. So DTSC holds us to different standards
when it comes to school sites versus public parks uh because of the continuous exposure the kids have on a school site. >> DTSC as state agency is used for schools but not for city parks.
>> Uh DTSC is used for any any property in California. They just have different standards for school sites. >> Not true. The same standard. Not true. >> I'm sorry, we're out of order. >> Thank you. Are there any other
questions? >> Oh, yes. Just a >> Okay. I >> Yeah, go ahead. >> I guess I'll do advocacy. >> No. Well, I'm just making sure there's no more questions. No more questions. Um I have a question. Uh
there's a issue of the relationship between soil and trees. So if the soil is harmful, how is it the tree is harmful? >> And this falls under the the ordinance.
I believe >> um Mr. Dunning can talk more specifically about that. Um, but it's not we're not targeting trees specifically. It's not the trees don't contain the toxin. It's the roots within
the soil. Uh, and the soil has toxins in it. And generally the roots spread um anywhere from 15 to 30 feet from the trunk of the tree. So we're if you have a tree anywhere on campus that's within
a playground or within where students go, there's a considerable space that you kids can't access. So it's not necessarily the trees, it's the actual roots that go within the soil um that you know we can't extract without having
to work with the tree. That's that's the real issue. and trusty Kenny. Go ahead. Question. Yeah, go ahead. So, on June 18th, the board um approved
and committed to protecting trees that to certain trees. Are those the same trees that are protected under the Pasadena ordinance? In other words, have we are we already have we already by our
actions committed to saving where possible the same trees that the city are covered under the ordinance. >> So we we have done an analysis of all of the trees that are part of the uh remediation and we have identified which
trees fall within the city's ordinance. So, we do have that information and um it's part of the presentation tonight where we talk about specific numbers of those. Uh but yes, we've we've identified it. Uh we're getting um
information on alternative means of remediating around those trees as well. >> I guess what I'm saying though is so you would consider those trees that you've identified to be covered by our June 18th commitment to where feasible saving them.
>> Correct. Okay. Thank you. Trusty Harden >> I was going to also ask this uh question in the presentation but maybe you can summarize it here is sort of talk about the cost of inaction uh in this project um and you know what
it what does it mean uh to not make our end of summer uh goals uh that we had planned >> um the the cost so we cannot do this work when there's students on campus.
Um, that's one of the limitations to it. So, this work must occur when there's no students on campus. Um, if we're unable to complete this project in the summertime, then we'd have to cordon off those areas again during the school year
and then try try it again uh the following school year when in the summertime when there's no students on campus. and that's because we can't expose them. According to D the plan that we gave to DTSC kind of outlines
this. Um that's one of the costs that kids won't have access to parts of the campus. Uh the other cost is monetary. Uh the board did award a contract to a vendor for this project and that vendor's expectation is uh they're capable of completing it. If for
whatever reason we're unable to honor that or the circumstances don't allow us to have the vendor complete the project, uh we would still owe the vendor. Um they would still look to get the contract value from this project uh that
we awarded in June, which is about $6.6 million. Uh, and that's about um, if you put it in pounds, it's 23 million pounds of soil that they need to replace during the summertime.
>> Trusty Mackenzie, >> I have a couple of questions. um how many campuses would be restricted have restricted areas or play spaces for students um if this work does not move forward.
If you mentioned having if there was a delay and having to look at um proceeding the following summer when school's out. Uh ultimately it depends on how much work that we can get in the small windows that we have done. Uh as we move
forward following the board's direction, we are planning to move forward with other remediation oper operations around the trees. Those [clears throat] are large spaces. Uh typically as he said it's it can be up to about a 30 foot circle around the trunk of the tree, 15
feet out or so depending on the size. Um so if we haven't we do have trees in at campuses now that would interrupt some areas uh we would also have to cordon them off more of a in a permanent way from my understanding from uh our
current direction from DTSC. So [clears throat] yes, there are some areas uh mirrors one of them in the courtyard. Um we have a small area at San Raphael which is their near their sports field
part of um field would also have at least a small area closed down. Uh an fence would have to go up. Uh it's possible at Cleveland at one of our partner sites
Um, I'm sorry I don't have that the rest of that in front of me, but I can get it to us if we need to. I believe there's one more campus. >> That's helpful for now. Thank you. I guess my next question related to that is
if in fact that becomes a path or a consideration is their willingness from DTSC to provide us a waiver on the timeline to complete said work andor
um what flexibility do we have in our contract terms with the vendor to still honor the scope of work and have it completed. But are there opportunities to either extend the length of the contract? Um, do we
need to come back and expand capacity should the cost escalation necessitate that being the case, etc. What are our options from those standpoints? >> Yeah, I think from the contractor point of view, he's been a a real partner in this. Obviously, there's there's quite a
bit of movement. Uh, we're moving the goalposts. uh and they have definitely been willing to work with us. Um that's not to say that they don't expect to they allocated funds and started moving forward with a $6 million project. If
we're cutting a portion of that that there could have could be repercussions and they would have the right to do that for sure. Um I'm sorry, what was the other part of the question? Is DTSC willing to amend their timeline
for us to complete said work? >> They said they have said that they would work with us on timeline. Uh but that does have limits. Um [clears throat] we would have to propose something different uh than what we're doing now assuming that we are going to do something different now if we're not
removing the soil. So, in other words, if we're going to move forward with air escavation um or or water using water to remove the soil, as long as the soil is being removed, that's an approved method. Uh they don't necessarily seem
to um have any opinion on how it's removed. They just want it gone. uh to put it in simple terms the uh other methods the possible bio remediation or other methods that we're um have been investigating
um uh if it doesn't remove the soil uh it has to um if it doesn't remove the lead out of the soil completely it would have to be uh we we would still have to remove the soil. So ultimately if the lead is not coming out of the soil we
don't really have an option. Um if it can be pulled out somehow um and that method is approved by DTSC then it is possible. Um currently right now we're not aware of any. >> Thank you.
>> Trusty Bailey. >> Okay. Trusty Holly after Trusty Bailey. >> So um my question I just like to hear I have two. What part of the work will continue under this resolution and what part will not?
>> Uh ultimately ultimately at this point we have certain areas that are cleared uh and we are removing soil. Uh Octavia Butler Washington uh San Raphael. Now, there are sections of of San Raphael um
field and a few others that we can't remove all of the soil and we'll have to keep somehow closed off and if we can't get the rest of the soil out before our short window is to remove that soil um before the students come back. And how
how [clears throat] does that impact the issue with the trees? >> How does the resolution impact the the issue with >> ultimately right now? Um without clearance for either removal or to move
forward with um air escavation. Uh Scott might be able to speak more on this, but uh right now the stop work notices calls for no wounding of the of the tree as well. Um uh soil air even air excavation could
wound the roots of the tree. That's always a risk. Um ultimately you loosen the soil, suck it out with a vacuum and then it gets replaced and stabilized after they test to make sure all the lead has been removed. That's the method. During that method, it is
possible to move inventory. Uh so it is very possible that we we may not be able to move forward at all with at least under the current stop work notice. >> Correct. >> So are we currently honoring [clears throat] the stop work order for
removal of the tree? So that's what I'm saying. How does how does this resolution impact that? Uh we understand that the stop work work order notices are based upon uh the city's belief that uh the tree ordinance
is part of their zoning code. And so uh the government code allows school districts to exempt themselves from this. It was decided by the legislature a long time ago. And so by passing this resolution, you could decide to remove trees. You could decide to use
alternative methods like air knifing. You could decide to talk to the city and talk to people and come up with some other solution. But so long as you can't cut trees, you run the risk of having no solution having soil there and ending up
in a land use covenant. >> Okay. And then thank you for that. My second question was how does this impact the cost of this project? So I understand the original
cost was one amount and now it's been it's it's increased. So could you talk to us a little bit about that? It at this point uh we've already identified all the costs that we're aware of. Uh you received an estimate
for the additional air escavation that was around two two and a half million where so far is what we're estimating. Um so as this project goes along ultimately it's going to be delays. So if we have to delay and push things down the road uh costs are going to go up uh
ultimately regular escalation uh or any other methods. So in other words if we start down the road of the air esavation the tree ultimately still tests or at least not the tree the soil underneath the tree still tests uh with high lead
counts. We have to dig deeper at some point. the tree will still probably have to be removed if that's the case. Uh if we continue to uh get bad results back, we still have to test uh when we when we once we dig down the 1 foot everywhere we're removing soil, we still have to
test once we get there and make sure that that that area is also clean. Um if it does have to go deeper, then it could uh ultimately affect the tree and then we end up removing the tree as well. So when we initially [clears throat]
approved this project, the cost was around 6 million. >> So the original cost of this project was 6.6 million. >> And where are we now? >> Our estimate now is about 10.7 million. >> And this funding is coming out of
>> reimbursements from insurance for fire recovery. Uh but that was one time. So uh any cost incursion insurance will reimburse us what their estimate is for the remediation not what we actually
incur >> and we have we received all of that already from the insurance or there's more to come. >> Uh we're in negotiations with them at the moment but uh as far as how they pay us it's based off of estimates for
specific items. So they would have reimbursed the district for the remediation at a certain cost or rebuilding at a certain cost. So um to go back and ask them to increase the amount that they reimbured the district
for soil remediation u we'd have to go back and do that. So there's no guarantee that they would actually honor that. >> Okay. Thank you. Thank you. I have a question about possibly using
any bond max fund for this project. Is that possible for the contaminated soil >> uh for the actual soil remediation? Uh this project would not be qualifying project for the bond. uh down the line
if we decide to use uh the bond funds for increasing foilage or planting trees and irrigation is that would be uh eligible for bond funding. >> Thank you. >> My turn. >> My turn.
>> Oh, of course. >> Contamination levels in um residential areas. What can you please just explain the discrepancy um of the levels that of our test results?
>> As far as like specific outcomes of the test results, um I can't tell you exactly what the outcomes were for the test results. I know we did a thousand samples throughout the district. Our issue is that we we're held to a
different standard than residential or private property because we are a government entity with uh kids on campus. We are held to >> Excuse me. We're having a meeting right now. You had your turn,
>> Mr. Saxs. >> I I think I can help with some numbers here. Um so two for I'll give you two main contaminants that are in the soil. One is arsenic. The state level for removal of arsenic is 12. You have 256
at San Raphael. That's more than 10 times. For lead uh there's a courtyard uh at John at John Mureer. The state number for removal is 80. you have 2,490.
So there's significant that's hazardous waste. That's Rickrahazardous waste under classification. So there's significant levels of contamination. And when you're asking about the differences between residents and other people, I
don't know that residents are submitting their results to DTSC, paying DTSC to review them. DTSC has this very specific schools unit. That's what this board has entered a voluntary cleanup agreement with to make sure they're doing it correctly. So when you
think about um residential stuff, someone might have those numbers and they just might say, "I'm going to live with it." There's no there's nothing by DTSC saying go take it out. It's if you go to DTSC and you ask them for their help and they give
you that assistance, that's where you you've done that and you fall under their regulations as a school. If you want to get future funding to modernize your schools, state matching funds in the future, 15 years from now, DTSC has to say that your school property is
cleaned up to residential standards. So long as this contamination remains, you'll not be able to get state matching funds. It's another issue to think about with the contamination. >> Okay. I have another legal question. Um, how unique or non-unique is this
resolution as far as districts approving something like this? >> The resolution itself is uh we we've seen it frequently used with schools as they buy property. They exempt themselves from it. you have a situation where you have I think John Mir's 100
years old as a campus the the ability of a city to regulate a school didn't exist at that point and so um it's not unique to do that it's um it's not as prevalent most people don't have the situation where they have a school that's been
existence for years and then they end up doing it has been done there's case law supportive of this >> and lastly Um, this is a question for our staff. Were there any informal solutioning between the city and the
district staff in regard to soil remediation to limit tree removal? >> I'm sorry, can you repeat the question? >> Were there any informal solutioning between the city and district staff in regard to soil remediation to limit tree
removal? Not that I'm aware of. >> Okay. Thank you, Trusty Harden. >> I'm actually okay, but my questions for >> Okay. Any further questions? >> U we're not advocacy or is this
>> okay? Answer a question. Okay. So in terms of um working with the city when we were working with them we were working under a different understanding from um DTSC in terms of what they would
accept for alternative uh remediation. Once we found out that they would accept alternative remediation is when the board passed the um board report that said we would do the air knifing um with all protected trees. We are exploring um
with some of our community partners and DTSC some of the other alternatives but um we haven't gotten approval that that would be acceptable yet. >> Any further questions? Okay, now we're in advocacy.
Dr. Velasquez. >> Um when we are making decisions here on the board, our responsibility is starts with question number one, which is what best protects our students learning um
and safety. Uh we recognize that the community cares deeply about the trees. So do we. We see and value all of the characteristics of trees that you've listed including shade
environmental benefits, beauty, etc. We have passed multiple resolutions throughout the last couple of years um identifying the importance of canopies and playgrounds and we've adapted an
green ordinances or or green um initiatives that include m preserving trees as well as continue to expand our trees and any rebuild that we're doing forward right as we remodel
and renovate some of our campuses um whenever it's safe and practical and responsible to do so. We should uh preserve trees and that is why this board has already directed staff to
evaluate the alternatives to retain trees whenever feasible. That is a priority of us ours and we have done taken measures to do that. Um at the same time we have an
obligation. This is our primary job is to provide safe and healthy schools. The lens where that we use to work and evaluate our alternatives have to be student focused first. Right? Um our
responsibility is to ensure that students learn on campuses that are safe today and for generations to come. Um we also have a responsibility to be stewards of public resources. And so every dollar we spend on delays,
litigation, redesigns, it's money that we cannot use in teachers, in classrooms, in uh counselors, in health services, in programs that support directly our students. Um
these are real tradeoffs. These are the real decisions that we're making. real decisions that affect children, not just budgets, but our ability to provide services, right? Um,
it is important to understand what this resolution does and does not do. Tonight's resolution is not tonight resolution is not a vote on whether or not we value the trees. It's not a resolution to remove the trees. It is a
determination about jurisdiction. It's about which governmental agency has the authority to make the decision regarding the work that's taking place on school district during our postfire remediation and campus restoration efforts. So
again, it is not a decision about the value of trees or the removal of trees. It is a resolution about jurisdiction. This is not a choice between caring for trees and caring for children. It is about balancing our environmental
stewardship with our responsibility to provide safe schools and use of public safety and resource. If a tree can be preserved without compromising student safety, delaying essential remediation, or placing an unreasonable financial burden on the
educational mission of the district, then we should preserve it. But when those priorities and responsibilities come into conflict, our obligation is clear.
students. These are not easy decisions and they have never been made lightly. We carefully weigh the expert recommendations and long-term recommendations for schools and are guiding principles still domains which
is a rem the position to protect children, preserve opportunities for learning and ensure that children have a safe place to learn remain. We've already seen very tangible
very tangible consequences this last school year. Failing to complete some of these projects will mean have serious consequence on how students can access some of our campuses. This is
undeniable. This already happened. you whether or not you agree with it or not, it is true. You can ask the people in those school communities that have come here month after month after month for an entire year asking what is our long-term
plan to give their students back their spaces. You can go and look at a whole year of conversations about this. We owe it to those students to do something about it. Can we wait on some other campuses? Probably. But again, this
resolution is not about that. It is about jurisdiction. Thank you, >> Trusty Harden. >> So, um it's [clears throat] clear to me, um that the process of determining whether city jurisdiction is appropriate
in our district, doing what's right to preserve uh trees are two separate things. um deciding what to do or not to do for one uh does not dictate the same for the other. Um,
we have had recent rhetoric among our city elected representatives um that I think has served to conflate those two important issues and I think that's been counterproductive to focusing on what I think is most important which is our
students. Um, their learning environment and what we can do to preserve it. This much uh despite all the rhetoric this much is true. The board has made a commitment to save as many trees as we can. That's a commitment we are taking
seriously. Let us make that commitment. Um there's much talk in the community about partnership. But true partnership happens not when one side is willing to give up one thing at the expense of the other. Uh and it
shouldn't really require a compromise where both sides lose something either. I think we have a true partnership when both sides use their strengths and integrate them uh not through a lens of mandated compliance but because they
want it. And so the question is do we want a true partnership? Uh the city talks about partnerships but the aggression of some on this issue has made that outcome harder to be honest. Uh it's also uh obiscating any
discussion about students in all of this which I think we can all agree is why we are here to educate students. Um leading with presumed positive intent rather than with the intent to enforce obedience does not make for a power with
relationship. It feels like a power over relationship and that does not work. So all of that said and with the expressed desire to move us all forward, I want us to move forward in a healthy way. Um I will say I I believe not
approving this resolution does not forego our rights and actions reserved to us under the interpretation of the law which will continue to play out in due course. Not approving this resolution could have the unfortunate risk of some delay at
school sites. But given that risk, I am calling on our city colleagues to immediately realign their opposition to us in support of that true partnership uh where we both benefit and when that happens, the students benefit.
I'm not sure there's a lot left for me to say after my fellow board members have already spoken, but I just want to reiterate that we are already under state through DTSC
oversight for this. We don't feel that we are under the city's jurisdiction in this case and this is aligned with that. We have already made a commitment as a board to the tune of a reasonable amount
considerable amount of money to protect the same trees that the city is saying that they want to protect. So, we're already taking care of this. I don't know that this resolution impacts the work we have already committed to do and the the work that we
are trying to do with the different um community groups who are working with us to find alternate solutions. And then I think, you know, it's it's hard to say what is
behind the city's um change of heart about their jurisdiction over us, but I think they are unfortunately not taking into consideration that we have these obligations with DTC.
I I don't know that if they told us you can't take trees down, I don't know that they want to partner with us on the consequences that brings us or if they would just walk away. And so we are moving forward in the way that
protects our students and we are making all efforts to protect trees. >> Excuse me. Excuse me. You're disrupting our meeting. You have a warning now. Trusty McKenzie.
>> Thank you, Dr. Blasquez, for raising the point about um the issue central tonight being jurisdiction. And to the point about jurisdiction, the Pasadena Unified School District and the city of Passina are peer agencies. One is not
subordinate to the other or vice versa. So as peers um we should be operating in a spirit of collaboration in that way. And I think that we are obligated as Dr. V said to carry out our core mission which is to
serve and educate students. And we are taking the appropriate steps to ensure that we can do so in a way that will provide access to safe open space on our campuses. And we
want to make sure that as we proceed, we're doing so um cautiously, doing so with um our obligation to balance the desires of a serving our students first as well as
b being responsible stewards of public dollars and public funds. And it sounds like that there's an agreement in principle among all of our stakeholders who have been
vocal about the issue that protecting trees and being environmental stewards is important. We are having a difference in style and a difference in respect on how we get to that end goal. And I think that we need to focus on what the
ultimate end goal is, is just to provide a safe environment. And so I would ask our community partners, our constituents, and our city partners and peer leaders to understand that from the vantage point of an educational entity,
we have issues that may raise higher in our consideration list than they have in their jurisdiction for their obligations under their public
service delivery model. So, we are proceeding with providing and prioritizing the health and safety of our students and we ask that you come along with us. Even if you don't like the style in which we're going to do so, we're ultimately going to get to the
same place and the same goal in the end. >> Trusty Bailey. >> Yeah. I think um what is clear is that
The city government has jurisdiction over the city. And what is clear to the school board is that we have jurisdiction over the school district. And our number
one responsibility if if the community would do the exercise that the young man stood here and did earlier, which was very good by the way. Um,
but just close your eyes and try to see the school district and this matter through the lens of the folks who take care of this community's one of this community's most important commodities.
That's our children. That's our bottom line. It is important that they are safe and that they feel safe and that is our jobs to make sure that we create those spaces that those
spaces are created so that the students can feel safe. I grew up in Pasadena. I have a oak tree on my property that keeps me sick. Dare I cut it down? No. I could get it
removed, but that costs thousands. So, I have I'm living day in and day out with an oak tree that not only is making me sick, it's also impacting my house. So, I have remediation work that I need
to do. Okay. So, I understand how important these trees are. I was a commissioner. I understand how important treeline streets are. I understand how important
it is not to have the roots of the trees digging up our sidewalks and our streets. I get it about the trees. But when you have trees on the campuses that have been deemed unsafe,
when you >> Excuse me. Excuse me. Let her speak, please. >> When When we have anything, it can be a tree. It can be a PL. It can be anything that is on our campuses that is deemed a hazard
or a safety risk for our children. We as the adults, we have to make sure that those issues are removed so that our children are safe every
single day. And if you have ever ever worked on a school site with those precious children, and they are precious, it is so disheartening to think that anything could ever any harm could ever
come to them on our watch. One of the things that I would like to see happen between our city government and our school district is that we come together. We need to come together and
we need to come to an understanding so that what's happening today doesn't happen tomorrow. This is hard. Our children are watching. They're asking questions. Many of us
have children. I have grandchildren in this district. Okay. So, this is really important. So if I would like for you to think about how this conversation
changes, if you put the children first, if you put the children first in your discussion where you would say tree, say children, say students, just try that.
>> Why are you talking? >> I'm sorry. I'm sorry. Let's let's keep this within the >> you had the podium. >> Trusty Bailey, let's keep the conversation here. >> Yes. >> Yeah. >> But it's it's just hard to go. Every
morning I wake up and there's something in the paper. Um there's rude emails, there's we we should not be divided this way. We should all be able to go about what we need to go about. You express
your side. We do what we have to do. You should understand us. We should understand you. We should not get to where we are right now either with our city government or with our school board members. So, we've got to come together around
this and the district needs to be able to carry out its work. This is costing us time and money and we hear over and over from community that we're not good stewards of our budget.
We're trying to be and that's even being disrupted. So, we just need to be able to move forward and I am going to support this resolution because we need to move forward.
Thank you. I just want to point out that and I said this before um like we literally would not have this meeting if people didn't take action.
We normally would be in July dark. We don't normally have a meeting and the community did this. Okay. So, I just want to acknowledge that
people's action made a difference. Um the while, you know, we're not saving all trees. Again, I want to acknowledge that due to the community's action,
we had a new item on the agenda at the last minute at a recent meeting where we had an alternative. And it's not all trees, but I want to say we wouldn't have done that if the committee didn't
children weren't in trees and people weren't out there. So I want to that is the truth. Okay. So that is the impact that one person can have that a small
group of individuals can have and um that builds awareness that reminds us what our values are and again that wouldn't have happened this wouldn't have happened. Um,
what what kind of baffles me is that we obviously share the same values. We share the same values. yet, you know, I haven't been on the board for that long, you know, six years, but this has been the most
contentious issue and most broadly impactful uh issue I've ever encountered while beyond board. And I just want us to ponder how that could be, how it could be that
we share the same values. We we love trees. We all love trees, yet it came to this like boiling point. And
while I for the most part um agree with the principle of or the intent behind the resolution, I wish it didn't have to come to this
because it's continue to escalate. Once we get into legal, that's an escalation. And I want us to reflect on how we could do this better.
And my question about was there one single conversation between the city and the district informal conversation. You know, the board did not direct any conversation, but any informal conversation between
our body, our staff, there wasn't one. not one conversation. So, whatever the outcome of this, you know, we can talk about it and I hope we're not going to just move on and say, "Oh, we're done here."
you know, no, we're on vacation and we have this situation happening. Something went wrong and the question is how are we going to make it better? How are we going to do it differently? And I refuse to believe
that we have no responsibility in that that I don't have a responsibility that we don't have responsibility. You don't you don't you don't you know everybody okay all of us have some responsibility and I I refuse to say oh we're the
victim of crisis bada butter you know no this is us and I I'm so torn you know I've been so conflicted this whole time and you know there's you know yes the wonderful uh
moment of silence during public comment. You know, these are like wonderful people in our community, yet I feel like I'm betraying them through this whole thing. Uh, which is why I um
I'm going to vote no on this resolution because we can do better. Um, are there any further advocacy Okay, roll call for the vote. >> Yes. Yes. >> Yes.
>> Yes. >> No. >> Motion passes. Thank you. >> Item eight, staff presentation. Okay, good evening board. Uh we're going to present tonight about the restoring safe outdoor learning spaces. Uh the
progress we've made on the project, where we started, um kind of this whole what is this whole thing about. Uh I just want to give a little background. I am one of those kids that went to school in the 90s that um couldn't go to recess
because we couldn't see the St. Gabriel Valley Mountains. Uh I can't tell you how often that happened and I suffered from asthma because of that and thankfully at some point laws were passed for small checks that really helped with that. So I'm
thankful for the environment. I'm that's kind of my lens of um being a steward of the environment, doing what's right for everyone in the community. Uh but also we have a duty here as a school district for our students. So I just wanted to
give a little background on that. So [clears throat] we have a simple responsibility. If a student comes to our campus safe, there's an expectation that they will go home safe. Um, right now our campuses have elevated levels of
toxins. Continuous exposure to these toxins over a lifetime, especially for children, can create lifetime issues for that child. So, our immediate need is to rid these toxins of our campuses. That that is the basic principle of why this
project is occurring. So the fires caused five of our campuses to be destroyed. 1,000 of our students and 120 employees lost their homes. 10,430 students were evacuated and 1300
employees were evacuated. contaminants were found across the district on our campuses and that's based off of a thousand soil samples, a thousand plus soil samples throughout the district. Uh these samples were actually this whole process started
because of the city of Pasadena's public health encouraging us to do these samples. So this process was kicked off by that and what that came up with is that these campuses do have elevated levels of toxins. So 1,00 plus samples collected
uh lead arsenic other fire related contaminants throughout. So, it didn't shut down all campuses, but what what we have are section sections of campuses that kids cannot access. They're roped off and kids are
not allowed to go in those c those areas of a campus. 11 campuses required additional remediation. More than 8,000 cubic yards of impacted soil has been identified, which I mentioned earlier was 23 million
plant plus pounds of soil. So again, we have playgrounds that are closed, athletic fields that are closed, gardens are closed, and outdoor learning spaces that are unavailable. And this has been ongoing for the prior year.
The two options we had was either restore the campus to its original state with no toxins and completely open up the campuses to the kids to access every part of the campus or work with DTSC to eventually clean up
the toxins which would likely put us in a land use covenant which a land use covenant covers the entire campus. It's not just the area that is cordoned off. So the entire campus would be within DTS DTSC's
agreement which means that T testing goes on continuously. Uh we pay DTSC actually for services. So DTSC is not doing this out of some sort of state budget. We pay for every single step of
DTSC's process that they work with us. The issues with that, there's no telling when that would actually u when we could actually clean up the toxins from the the property and DTSC would sign off on it. Okay. So, why are trees part of this
process? The soil is the is the main culprit. Uh roots occupy contaminated soil. stumps prevent complete excavation and utilities and infrastructure limit alternatives.
Um so we had this summer to do this project when students weren't on campus. Um it's a matter of time to be honest and to get the soil out of the campuses. Unfortunately these trees were within the soil the roots stretched out within
the soil. It was part of the project scope that to remove to remove the soil, the trees had to be removed as well. So where we currently stand, we have 88 trees uh that are remaining that were
part of the original scope. Uh 42 of those have been identified as part of the city's um tree ordinance. 42 of them are not part of the ordinance and four of those trees were determined to be not in soil that
was in uh contaminated. And this was something we just recently did. We had an arborist go and check every single tree again. Uh we had this arborist check another arborist work. So this is where we stand right now. 88 trees that
we had identified. Uh 42 that are not part of the ordinance, 42 that are, and four of them that actually are not in the soil remediation area. As was brought up earlier, we are looking at alternatives. Uh the
alternative being air knifing. Uh the main one. Uh we are getting cost quotes from the vendor. Uh we're looking at about $2 million plus to air knife the existing trees that we have identified might know the number of trees for that
404 trees. >> Yeah. So for the 44 trees those would be about 2 million plus dollars. Uh in addition to that we've worked with numerous arborists. We work, we have
wildlife biologists on contract and we have a plan to replace trees. Uh, and it's not with saplings yet. What kind of trees? 36 to 48 inch boxes. >> What age are those? >> To be honest, I don't know the age and
depends on the species, but we're determining the species now. Sorry. I'm sorry. So, the trees that we're looking at replacing, I I understand that people, you know, you pull out a really big tree, you put something smaller in and it's and it's a shock and it's a change,
but uh what we are looking at is uh anywhere between a a 34 and a 48 inch box, which are quite large. Uh that is a a fairly significant cost to this project. [clears throat] These are not sap saplings. Some of these are 10, 20, and some are actually
30 feet tall depending on the species that we select. Uh we are working with multiple uh ar landscape architects um uh and and local partner groups even to determine which species we're bringing back. Um we do have uh new regulations
that require fire barriers for where these trees exactly go. Obviously we can't place place them in some cases exactly where they were uh due to any kind of maybe um new soil conditions around the stump that was there. Um, so we're [clears throat] working through all of that process and on the side of
all what's happening right now where we're removing everything else. Uh, but the uh the size of these trees are not um it's not like something you're buying at Home Depot. These are a little bit larger. >> Okay. And uh we have been working with community partners. We've been
facilitating meetings with DTSC with the community partners and we've identified areas of our campuses where they can work on bio remediation without impacting students on campus. So those conversations have occurred there. They've actually been productive
conversations. DTSC is involved in that process. So we have been engaging with community partners um throughout this time and this whole process took months of planning. Um planning and coordination
between multiple agencies. Uh it it didn't come overnight. Uh one of the issues is that any plan we have DTSC has to approve. So uh a lot of planning went behind this. It just happened we aligned it with the summertime to get this
project completed in the summer. So anything we did had to have been approved before we had proceeded. So uh lots of planning. Um I was not here for the planning but Mike was and I'm sure countless hours of planning for this
project. Uh so it wasn't done it wasn't a decision that was done overnight. uh we've done multiple meetings with all agencies involved and a lot of planning has been done. So I I can assure you this wasn't something that we decided
overnight. Uh we've had questions about this whole project. Uh can another method work? So one of these questions, can another method work? We've had community partners bring that up. We are working with them on areas that won't impact
students. So, we are trying to but in areas where students are uh going to access the campus uh will it work sometimes? But the the reality is these these methods need to be submitted to DTSC and they have to approve that that
process. Why not parks? because we have different regulatory uh standards compared to parks. Schools have a higher standard because children spend so much time there. Uh children are exposed to the environment on a school campus much more than they
would be elsewhere. And why now is because students are off campus and outdoor spaces can reopen before schools begin. So this whole pro project is our commitment to protect student health,
restore every affect affected area on our campuses. We we want kids to access the entire campus. We want to preserve as many trees as possible and we're looking into alternatives where we can. We will
replace removed trees and we are continuing communicating openly. We have a website on our page. Um, we hold meetings with community partners. We're trying as much as we can to communicate.
>> Uh, we could take any questions if you have any. >> Thank you, Dr. Evanian, and welcome to our school district. >> Thank you. >> As your maiden presentation,
yes. Uh, Trusty Kenny, then So, one of the questions was on timing and I think they were looking at the delay between when the testing happened and that we're doing the work this summer. Um, and I think maybe there was a perception that we didn't care and we just took a long
time. But can you address why it didn't happen sooner? >> Uh, yes. So when we started testing uh we were going across the entire district. Uh we had to eliminate u campuses based on u the regulations with DTSC and how much stepout testing we
were required to do. Um we didn't find we didn't find come to final agreements with DTSC until uh about two weeks before the bid went out. So, we didn't have schedules. Uh we didn't have the the ultimate final count of how much
soil needed to be pulled until two weeks prior. We did everything we could to prepare so that we could flip that quickly. Uh because we knew we had a timeline. Uh but ultimately, all of these came back right at the end of uh the school year. Uh just barely enough time for us to do a public bid.
and we couldn't do it the previous so in other words the earliest we could have done it was last summer when the kids were off campus but we weren't we didn't have all this in place >> so we did small removals at eight sites um I'm not sure if we remember it's been a while and lots h lot lots happened uh
but uh we did uh remove small areas at about eight campuses in the areas that we could during breaks uh that we clear uh the entire campus with of students >> okay um and One of the emails that we got said, district, why aren't you
subject to SQUA? And our response would be >> ultimately we have an exemption for this for this project. >> Okay. So that the board looked at an approved an exemption. Okay. So we were subject or sorry, we did do that process
and did an exemption. >> Yes. And so I just want to confirm. So we're looking at alternatives for mature trees because again a lot of the email was saying why are you cutting down all the
old large trees but those are the ones that we are looking at alternatives. Is that true? >> Yes. The ones we're looking at alternatives are the ones that are part of the tree ordinance for the city. the tree ordinances has a list of specific
species of trees and those are the ones we identified for alternative means >> and it's based on also them being large. >> Correct. >> Okay. And then I think you covered it a little bit but we do the alternatives that we're looking at. We do kind of have a protocol of steps that we're
following for each one of these trees that we're trying to look for a method of saving. Is that true? >> And it's it's multiple steps. It's not just we look at it say that looks hard and we walk away. It's we've got different experts. Is that true?
>> We have a lot of experts on on the payroll at the moment. Uh part of it will be airing is the primary method to be honest. Uh right now we're getting costs for doing that for those trees. So once we have a better idea, we could
start to see what the process will actually look like uh from the vendor and it will be the same vendor that we're currently using and likely be a change order. >> Trusty Harden, >> thank you uh for the presentation and the detail. Um when we talk about air
knifing or air blading, I've done some research on it. You there's some concerns about dust going up into the air and landing in other parts of campus or properties and things like that. What steps are we taking to sort of mitigate uh that kind of uh risk?
>> Yeah. So, um, one of the other agencies that we're working with is AQMD. Uh, they ultimately have monitors around every site when we're removing soil. Um, I've got several pictures of of this on a daily basis. Anytime we're touching the soil that's that's, uh, going to be
remediated. Uh, we have air monitors in all, uh, all the way around that area. So, if there's anything going past and our um, methods aren't keeping the dust down, those things start to sound and then we have to make adjustments. Um there are methods to keep the dust down
during this process. Um we do have uh we're currently talking with the experts that have done this many many many times and it is very controllable. >> And and and you said I just heard you say that you know as we do this if there are uh issues you know alarms go off and then we look at a we look at
alternatives. And so it sounds like you there's you have a process built in to sort of pivot uh before you just say this tree's got to go. like we have we have some backup plans that we can >> the process will it does have steps. Uh we're very careful. Um my understanding
of how it works is is we we are going to have an arborist there at the site as as we're going along uh to monitor and see what's going on and where the roots are, how they're going, if there are some that can be cut or if they can't. Uh all those types of things are going to be uh evaluated as you go. Um the air knifing
process is very delicate. Uh it does take a lot of time and and that's probably the biggest uh uh concern. Um we have three weeks or so um of testing uh soil removal. Uh plus we also have to
have uh the trucks move all the soil out, not to mention bring new soil back in. So we're running out of time very quickly uh to to deal with these areas. Um that's that's probably one of our biggest concerns. Yeah. And I and since we're sort of entering this preservation
phase, you know, that I would just my plug is that there's an opportunity to bring the community along on this so that they know I mean you're you're giving a good explanation in this meeting, but reaching, you know, reaching out to the community, making sure that here is here's how it's working, here's how we're pivoting, but
we're doing our best and and and how that's working. Yeah. >> Ultimately, there'll be daily reports following everything um that we do and those will go out. Any further questions? >> All right, thank you so much.
I think that's it.