[music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] Hey, hey, hey. >> [music] [music] >> Heat. Heat. >> [music] >> Heat.
[music] Heat. >> [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] >> Hey. [music]
>> [music] [music] [music] >> Heat. Heat. >> [music] [music] [music] >> Where are you? Heat. [music] [music]
[music] Hey, Heat. [music] >> [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music]
[music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] >> Hallelujah. Heat. [music] [music] Heat.
[music] Heat. [music] Heat. [music] Heat. Heat. [music] [music] [music] Heat. Heat. [music] [music]
[music] Heat. Heat. [music] [music] >> [music] [music] [music] >> Heat. Heat. [music] >> [music] >> Heat. Hey. Hey. Hey. Yeah. [music]
>> [music] [music] >> Heat. Heat. [music] >> [music] [music] >> Heat. Heat. [music] >> [music] >> Heat. [music] [music] Heat. Heat. [music] Heat.
>> [music] >> Heat. Heat. [music] [music] >> [music] >> Heat. Heat. [music] Request [music] [music] from board member Marshall McKenzie to
part. No, she said to roll call after. Oh, calling the meeting to order at 70:06. We have received a request from board member Marshall McKenzie to participate in this meeting remotely. Board member Marshall McKenzie is requesting remote
participation due to traveling while on official business of the board or another state or local agency which according to legal counsel qualifies as quote just cause under government code section 54953. The board need not take action on this
request, but board member Marshall McKenzie is required to state on the record prior to any action at this meeting whether any other individuals 18 years of age or older are present in the room at the remote location with the board member and the general nature of the board member's
relationship with any such individuals. Uh when she is in attendance, she will uh state um the required disclosure at that time. Roll call, please. >> Here.
>> Here. >> Here. >> Here. >> Thank you. Here. >> Is there any public comment on close session items? Yes, I have four public comment cards.
>> Okay, we'll have two minutes. >> Okay, before I call up the cards, I'd just like to state that the board of education acknowledges receipt of public comments via email. These comments will be made part of the permanent record of
this meeting. And the four speakers are in this order. Kristen, Jessica, Janeir, or Jennifer, I'm not sure. Jennifer and Jensen,
you may approach the podium. Uh Kristen, >> Miss Montoya, two minutes. Okay, good afternoon, early evening. My name is Christristen Noah. Um, I'm a physician and professor of medicine at UCLA, a resident of Pasadena. Um, I
wanted to be able to speak with you uh before you consult with your attorneys, which I understand will happen shortly. Um, I represent the friends of PUSD trees, which is a new organization. Um,
our temporary restraining order, um, if granted, you might want to share this with your council, will temporarily stop the whole project because under SQA, we can only ask that the exemptions for the entire project be
vacated. Um, this is not our fault. uh DTSC elected to bundle tree removal into the soil remediation project um even though it wasn't required. They have the power to eliminate the tree removal from the project, but
they've chosen not to do that. And so our suit places the onus directly on DTSC to do so. Ideally, we hope this causes you to seek a quick settlement allowing DTSC and PUSD to stop the tree removal and proceed with soil remediation without needlessly harming
the trees. Our petition or complaint, as you will see, will explain how and why DTSC and PUSD violated the law, including SQA and the California Fish and Game Code. As the representative of friends of PUSD
trees, I look forward to working with you to protect the trees. Thank you, [applause] Jessica Richards, followed by Jenner Law. Jennifer. >> Hello. My name is Jessica Richards. I'm
a Pasadena resident. I am a commissioner on the urban and forestry advisory committee in Pasadena, but I'm speaking in my individual capacity and a member of the friends of the PUSD trees. Just because you didn't do the right thing 18 months ago doesn't mean you
have to do the wrong thing now. And I hope that you will sincerely revisit the plan and listen to the experts that have vast amounts of expertise in this area who absolutely want the children to be safe, the soil to be remediated, but
that task can be accomplished while preserving the trees. This is crucial. We share a lot in common in terms of our goals of making these campuses safe and our exception is to the insistence that the tree removal total tree removal is
required to do that. That is categorically false. Um I hope that you have some solid legal counsel to uh guide in some of the missteps and and so that there can be appropriate course correction specifically in the areas of public notification
um and communication. Um it was rather alarming to hear that the board um members were not aware of the full list of 193 trees. Um so the communication issues extend
pretty deep and have created quite a few problems that I am optimistic can be remedied should you decide to change course so that we can move forward to remediate soil in a safe way that protects our necessary ecology. Thank you so much.
>> [applause] >> Good evening. [clears throat] My name is Jennifer Lelant. I'm a taxpayer within this district for over 32 years supporting this unified school district. I've sent two kids here and my granddaughter is currently a student in
this uh district. Um I represent myself and I also represent the executive board of California Native Plant Society. San Gabriel Mountains chapter which serves this community. Uh I'm here tonight to talk on behalf of the performance review
of Dr. Blanco. Dr. Blanco, you are a highly educated individual beyond what I could even comprehend achieving myself. Um I think you've probably done amazing amazing work in your lifetime. Um,
however, I want to recommend to you and to, you know, the folks that actually evaluate your performance, um, some things that underpin my life as a private sector employee. I run an
organization of 14 direct reports and over 40 uh, individuals who are indirect reports to me. The satisfaction of the community that I serve is of the utmost interest uh in terms of how I evaluate their performance. Uh part of that comes
to ensuring the satisfaction of the community, the transparency in which uh they execute their work and I execute my work and uh the satisfaction of that community. In my opinion, and I really haven't been involved tremendously with
the school board until this issue, but in my opinion, there is opportunity for great improvement in terms of that transparency, the community outreach, and I would like to see the board consider that in the performance
evaluation or perhaps in the restructuring of the requirements of the position. This should have been an issue that was reached outreached had more outreach. Sorry. >> Thank you. [applause]
>> Jensen Halstrom. >> Good evening. I'd like to start off my comment by thanking all of the passionate and dedicated community members who saw such valuable integral parts of
their community being threatened to be cut down. The old growth trees that have been protected by these community members, their value can cannot be overstated.
The habitat value as seen by the active bird nest in the mature coastlive oak at this property is um just a testament to the ecological value that these old growth trees hold. And I would like to
see that value recognized by a pause and thorough review of all the trees threatened by the removal plan. there um has even been um a very uh notable figure uh Julia
Butterfly Hill who um is very well known for having saved an ancient seoia tree and um she had commented on this matter. the the the the young people Paloma and
Jasper and and um expert arborist Sabine and their efforts to protect these trees. Th this is this current generation's inspiration, this current generation's Julia Butterfly moment and
that should be respected. as an educational institution, you just want to foster the creativity and the inspiration and the community connectivity that you are witnessing here. So, I hope that there is very um
great reconsiderations made. [applause] >> Thank you. Is there any further public comment? >> Excuse me. >> No further comment. >> Sorry, I think I filled out my card wrong. I wanted to Okay,
>> I can make it quick. There are a couple of us here. >> Okay, why don't you just say your name? >> We'll find your card. >> Oh, whatever. >> Hi, my name is Tony. >> Can you say your full name? >> Tony Poli. Anthony Poli, for the record.
>> Um, I'm just a guy. I'm not an expert on trees or botney or the environment. Um, and I took a what is cursory glance at the plan and nothing
in it struck me as irrational or crazy. I understand uh getting poison away from children and I understand why the direction that you chose to take was chosen. Um, what the plan struck me as though was relatively shortsighted and
without much consideration to the value of trees in general, but centuries old trees specifically. And I would just like to say I think it should be reconsidered
and that there should be an attempt to not take the quickest and easiest route um but potentially spend more time and money uh preserving what clearly the community would like preserved. Thank you,
[applause] Dean Fang. Hi, my name is Lynn Fang. I'm a community soil scientist. I have a small business soilwise and we've been doing a lot of uh soil contaminant testing and biomediation work in this area since the
fires. Um and we understand uh from the research in this field that trees can help take up heavy metals and they can help sequester them and they're a benefit to bio remediation. They also have a lot of other benefits um to our
environment and ecology. Um you've probably heard about the nesting birds. Um, this community has suffered so much tree loss since the fire and has made this area very vulnerable to heat um and heat island effects and heat illness.
And there's a real need for shade. And it's important to preserve the trees to be able to maintain um habitat and e ecological health as well as shade. Um it's not really easy to replace mature trees. Um and they also are supporting
us with water infiltration and water conservation and soil health. Um and I from the test results I've seen online um the lead levels are mo they're high but um definitely treatable with bio
remediation techniques using natural minerals beneficial microbes using federal remediation plants um and I understand the decision to remove the soil um as a safety precaution for the young students in the school district um
but I just wanted to offer that there are alternative ecological techniques that work well. We've seen lead levels go down about 70 parts per million in less than six months. Um so it's entirely possible. Um so I just encourage you to um be open to these
other types of ideas that can be better for um the soil, the environment, our birds, our wildlife, and our community well-being as well. Thank you, [applause] Parker Davis. Hello everybody. Thanks for having me.
My name is Parker Davis. I'm here representing Plant Community Los Angeles, a local 501c3. Uh we stand in opposition to the removal of these trees. Um we've been doing a lot of work uh in soil remediation throughout Los Angeles for the last uh 5
years and have seen incredible results and not once have we removed a tree from a property that we remediated. Uh we brought those properties down from similar results to what you guys have here. I ran soil tests myself through a local lab yesterday on on this property
and found lead levels that were around 150 parts per million. We brought those same numbers down to below the the California state EPA levels in six months on properties using bio remediation practices. And there's no reason why we couldn't repeat that here.
Uh in addition to that, you can remove soil without removing the trees. The contamination levels that are present here are probably only present in the top layers of the soil. And you can totally scrape three to six inches off the soil around these oak trees without removing the trees themselves. There's
no reason to remove these trees whatsoever. It's completely illogical. So, I don't know what the real motivation is here, but I'm highly skeptical that it's for soil remediation, frankly, because there's not a logical uh connection between soil remediation and the removal of these trees. Uh, you
guys are going to catch hell from the community. There's a serious movement building online. So, I think we got to turn this ship around at this point and correct course because this isn't going to work out for anybody. Thanks very much. [applause]
>> Lauren Seagull. >> Hi, my name is Lauren Seagull. I'm the chair of the Environmental Advisory Commission for the city of Pasadena. I've been working with council and city staff attorney looking at removing these native trees and violating our local
city um tree ordinances, which worries me because I think you're setting a precedent for private and other campuses to use same tactics to avoid our local native tree ordinances, which is really,
really worrying me. But I think the real issue here is you guys are educators. You're not sustainability or environmental sciences. And you were present a huge document from Verdantis that was very technical. I've written these documents. I've seen these
documents. And then you had a facilities manager that doesn't have that background with no sustainability background weighing all the environmental policies that go into a decision of taking out trees. taking out your task is very narrow
right now of looking just at the soil and not looking at all the public health impacts of taking out trees. I was at Blair today with the Ottabon person. The trees you're taking out along the Royal Syway Parkway across from the Glenn Ar
Glenn Arm Power Plant are the only things keeping these students from air pollution and and extreme heat. And Blair couldn't be farther from Eaten Canyon. So I feel like the predicament you guys chose and as educators you're solving for one
problem instead of balancing all the impacts for all. The California county put up a heat illness tracker this past month. You won't be surprised that the most illnesses and deaths are in the San
Gabriel Valley are Hispanic of seniors and children. And this will add to that. So don't do it. Thank you. [applause] >> Anna River. Hello. I've written letters to a couple
of you over the last year uh including when you were going to demolish some of the schools. So I've emailed you regarding adaptive reuse. I want to take a step back. Adaptive reuse buildings. All these buildings were created by trees, by concrete, by materials that
Earth gave us. So, not only are you thinking of demolishing schools, but you're also thinking of taking trees down, the same trees that allow you to have the schools that you have. Um, as Lauren said, I understand you're not environmentalist, but one can walk
through Green Street to feel how the trees cool everything down. The air quality feels better. Um, I I'm really discouraged by the communication because like I said, I've tried to communicate with you guys before regarding the
environmental impact of the milit. So, I would like for you to take a step back. I don't know if you've ever been to a place like or if you've ever been to a place like the Amazon in South America, but biodiversity is essential.
We're also running out of water and trees help us with water retention. Um, as a country, we're broke. We owe over 30 trillion. So, to think that we're going to demolish buildings and to think that we're going to take trees down when we really be should should be
incorporating a circular economy that allows us to reuse. How can we have classrooms where we talk about science, environmental stuff, sustainability when we don't live by that? Children do not learn from what we tell them. children learn by the example that we set by how
we choose to live our lives. Maybe it's not for everyone to be plant-based, but maybe everyone should have meatless Monday. We have an impact on everything that's going on on Earth. We've had horrible fires. The Colorado River is running dry because there wasn't the same amount of snow. And you're still thinking of taking those trees down.
You're still thinking of demolishing schools. Does that make sense? [applause] Is there any any public comments? Nope. All right, let's recess to closed. >> [music] [music]
>> Hey everybody. >> [music] >> Hello. [music] >> [music] >> Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Come on. Heat. Heat.
[music] [music] [music] Hey. Hey. Hey. >> [music] [music] >> Hey. Hey. Hey. >> [music] >> Hey, hey, hey. Are you cool?
>> [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] >> Come on. Fire. Yeah. Hey, [music] hey, hey. >> [music]
>> How? >> [music] [music] [music] >> Heat. [music] Heat. >> [music] [music] [music] >> Heat. Heat. >> [music] >> Come on.
>> [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] >> Heat. Heat.
[music] Heat. Heat. [music] >> [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] >> Hey y'all. >> [music] [music] [music]
>> Goodbye. >> [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] >> Heat. Heat. [music] >> [music] [music] [music]
[music] [music] >> Heat. Heat. [music] >> [music] >> Heat. Heat. >> [music] [music] [music] >> Heat. Heat. [music] [music] Heat.
[music] [music] Heat. [music] Heat. Heat. [music] >> [music] [music] [music] >> Heat. [music] Heat.
[music] Heat. Heat. [music] Heat. Heat. Oh, [music] [music] heat. >> [music] [music] >> Heat.
[music] [music] Heat. Heat. [music] [music] Heat. >> [music] [music] >> Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. [music]
>> [music] >> Heat. [music] Heat. Heat. [music] Heat. [music] Heat. Heat. [music] [music] [music]
>> [music] [music] >> Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. [music] [music] [music] Heat. Heat. [music] [music] Hello. Heat. [music]
>> [music] >> Heat. Heat. >> [music] >> Heat. Heat. >> [music] [music] >> Heat. Heat. [music] [music] Heat. Heat. >> [music]
[music] >> Heat. Heat. [music] [music] >> [music] >> Heat. Heat. [music] [music] Heat. [music] [music] [music] Heat. >> [music] [music]
>> Heat. Heat. Hey, [music] [music] [music] heat. Hey. >> [music] [music] >> Heat. Heat. >> [music] >> 9.
Yeah. >> [music] [music] [music] [music] >> Oh, [music] [music] hey. >> [music] [music] [music] [music] >> Daddy.
[music] Hey. Hey. >> [music] >> Heat. Heat. [music] >> [music] >> Heat. Heat. N. >> [music] [music] >> Heat. Heat. Heat. [music]
Heat. [music] >> [music] >> Heat. Heat. [music] >> [music] >> Heat. Heat. [music] Heat. Heat. [music] [music] Heat. Heat. [music] [music]
[music] [music] >> [music] >> Heat. Heat. [music] >> [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music]
[music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] >> Heat. Heat. [music] [music] >> [music] [music] [music] [music] [music]
[music] [music] [music] [music] >> Hallelujah. [music] Heat. Heat. [music] [music] >> [music] [music] >> Heat. Heat. [music]
>> [music] [music] [music] >> Heat. Heat. Yeah. [music] Heat. >> [music] >> Heat. Heat. [music] >> [music] >> Hello.
Hallelujah. [music] >> [music] >> Heat. Heat. >> [music] [music] >> Heat. Heat. [music] [music] Oh, heat, [music] heat.
>> [music] [music] [music] >> Heat. [music] Heat. [music] Heat. Heat. [music] [music] [music] [music] >> [music] [music] [music]
>> Heat. Heat. [music] [music] >> [music] [music] >> Heat. Heat. [music] Heat. [music] [music] Heat.
Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. [music] [music] >> [music] [music] >> Heat. Heat. [music] Heat. Heat. [music] [music] [music] [music] Heat.
[music] Heat. [music] >> [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] >> Heat. [music] Heat. [music] [music] >> [music]
[music] [music] [music] [music] [music] >> Heat. Heat. [music] >> [music] [music] [music] [music] >> Heat. [music] Heat.
>> [music] >> Heat. Heat. >> [music] >> Heat. Hey. Hey. Hey. Heat. Heat. N. Heat. Heat. N. >> [music] [music] [music] [music] >> Heat. Hey, Heat. [music]
Heat. Heat. [music] [music] [music] >> [music] >> Heat. Heat. >> [music] >> go. >> [music] >> back down. >> [music] [music]
>> Oh, hey. Heat. Heat. [music] Heat. Heat. Oh, [music] hey. [music] >> [music]
>> Heat. Heat. [music] Heat. Heat. Heat. [music] [music] Heat. >> [music] [music] [music] [music] >> Heat. [music] [music]
[music] Heat. [music] Heat. Heat. [music] [music] >> [music] [music] [music] >> Heat. Heat. >> [music] [music]
[music] >> Heat. Heat. [music] [music] >> [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] >> Heat. Heat. [music] Heat.
[music] [music] Heat. [music] >> [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] >> Heat. Heat. [music]
Heat. Heat. >> [music] >> Heat. [music] Heat. [music] Heat. Heat. [music] [music] Oh, [music] [music] [music] be me.
>> [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music and bell] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music]
[music] [music] [music] [music] >> Heat. Heat. >> [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music]
>> Heat. Heat. >> [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] >> You're >> [music] [music] [music]
[music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] >> Hallelujah. [music] Heat. Heat.
Heat. >> [music] [music] [music] >> Hey. [music] >> [music] >> Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. [music] Heat.
Heat. Heat. Heat. [music] Heat. Heat. [music] Heat. Heat. [music] D [music]
everywhere. >> [music] >> Heat. Hey, heat. Hey, heat. [music] >> [music] >> Heat. Hey, heat. Hey, heat. >> [music] [music] [music] >> That's [music]
[music] heat. Heat. Heat. [music] >> [music] [music] >> Heat. Heat. [music] Heat. Heat. [music] [music] >> [music] [music] [music]
>> Heat. Heat. [music] Heat. Heat. [music] [music] Heat. Heat. [music] [music] >> [music] >> Heat. Heat.
[music] >> [music] [music] >> Ah! Ah! Uh-huh. >> [music] >> Heat. Heat. >> [music] >> Hey, Hello. [music] [music] Heat. [music]
I don't [music] Heat. Heat. [music] [music] >> [music] [music] >> Heat. [music] Heat. Heat. Heat. [music]
[music] >> [music] >> one. [music] Heat. [music] [music] Heat. [music] >> [music] [music] >> Heat. Hey. Hey. Hey.
Yeah. [music] [music] Heat. [music] Heat. [music] [music] Heat. [music] Heat. Heat. [music]
>> [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] >> Oh, hey. [music] >> [music] [music] [music] >> We're back from closed. Um, there are no
reportable actions uh reportable action taken. And how many public comment cards do we have? We have three now and um for the item.
Okay. So, some >> I think it's like 14 or something. >> 10. Okay. So, two minutes. No. All right. Two minutes. Yeah. Um Jessica Richards
followed by Ling Fang. >> Okay. Thank you, esteemed board members. Superintendent Blanco, do you want this denigration of shade of our ecology? Do you want this to be your legacy?
I hope you checked your emails today and reviewed what Julia Butterfly had to say. She is an icon. She stands for our ecology and she had some thoughts she wanted to share with you that I hope you read. On Tuesday, I broke a quorum. My apologies, but I wanted to document on
the record uh Mr. Dunning's assertion that the tree removals were disclosed at the one and only public meeting on April 16th is not accurate. While the word tree was mentioned in the context of efforts to preserve trees, no mention of the 193 trees were was uttered. Only
three sites were discussed, not the full scope of the pre of the project. Regarding public noticing, I would like to share that I live 04 miles south of Longfellow and have never received any notice, nor did any of my neighbors.
I have a couple questions before I sit down. Who made the tree removal list? It has PUSD uh letter head on it. I'm assuming that it came from you, but I would like to know who made that list.
As you are working with the city of Pasadena regarding the protected trees in this project, uh, which do require, are you using the current DBH and species listed, which have several inaccuracies, including incorrect
species and underrepresented DBHs? Will they be reassessed for accuracy? If so, by who? As you address contaminants, I urge you to revisit the apparent use of Roundup, a known carcinogen. PUSD has yet to ban
the use of glyphosate and similar um uh herbicides, and have used them historically. They uh pose a great risk to the health and safety of of our students. Thank you. by Cath
Lyn is up next. >> Yes, Lynn Fang. >> Hi, I'm Lynn Fang. I spoke with you guys earlier. I shared a lot about the benefits of trees for bio remediation and our environment. Um, so I am really just encouraging you to vote against this plan to remove the trees and the
soil and really want to invite you to engage with the community here to lean into the wealth of knowledge and expertise right here in this neighborhood. I think that is part of the legacy of the work at PUSD that there are so many educated, aware and
caring members of the community that really want to build a more beautiful, healthy, and safe world. This community is rich in expertise on tree health, soil health, ecological health and landscaping that conserves water and supports biodiversity, contaminant bio
remediation, carbon sequestration, native plant restoration. I would invite you to um speak with us, be open to our ideas, learn from us um collaborate with us um in your decision-making process. Um and I hope that there can be more
collaboration among all the different groups that are impacted um by this decision. Um I also just wanted to mention that um herbicides like glyphosate do contain heavy metals. So they can be contributing to accumulation
of heavy metals in the soil as well. Um so just wanted to offer that invitation um to you all. Thank you all so much. >> Katherine Um, store the one. >> Yes.
>> Okay. >> Okay. That's it for public comment uh before the meeting open session. Um, now we will have the brief uh presentation on the soil
remediation and tree retention from Mr. Dunning. retention alternatives. Uh the board will discuss and approve soil remediation and tree retention alternatives for district sites. >> Good evening. Uh
we started looking at uh kind of the outcry that the community's been having and obviously we've been sympathizing. Um we've taken a look at uh what our options are which been limited from the beginning.
Um we are put before you uh what we feel is uh a possibility. Obviously there's risk, there's cost. Um uh but what we're looking to do is take the pro protected
species uh that are on the list now um and try to evaluate them and try to remove the soil using um an air excavation method and that would be still require testing
around the trees. Uh we have to retest test test the soil as we go. If we can get to a point where the the levels are low enough, right, we can leave the tree in place and recompact the soil. This will be this work would happen with an arborist. Um it does take longer periods
of time. It does uh come with some risk. we could go through the costs to trying this method at each tree and still not come to a conclusion um that uh allows the soil to be completely removed where in other words if we're still testing
and we have to get go deeper and that might hurt the tree then the tree might still have to be removed but that is the method that we're um presenting here tonight. Uh we feel that that's um a very good compromise. We feel we can fit
most of the work in the schedule. Maybe we're going to do everything we can. Um but we have looked at this with open eyes. We have uh um went physically to each campus and went back and looked at each area and we'll
target specific areas um specifically trying to get uh any areas that might impact students um out of the way first. um still still tough within the windows we have uh but I think it's possible um and we certainly could could try I've
put some of the risks some of the downsides and uh some of the benefits in the board report um the cost is not real it is an estimate it could be we're seeing it uh could be lower could be higher it's just kind of an average of
what we're seeing all of the work that has to be done for each particular tree so that would be um we would end up with a total of somewhere around 55 to 57 trees that would be would remain and all of those
would be the protected types. We would still move forward with all of the additional work that we're planting would be replacing the trees that we do remove with a one to one replacement. Um everything is getting irrigated. All of that process is already in the bid and
moving forward. Obviously any areas without any any uh trees in them, we would still remediate and move forward as well. >> Any questions? >> Um after this is the public comment. So
we'll take public comment and then we'll have uh board members questions. >> So what how many public comment we have? 10. So, two minutes. Barbie is
followed by Jennifer. >> Thank you. >> One moment. One moment. Uh, we have to move to extend the meeting. It's almost 10. So, Is there a motion to extend to
11? Motion to extend to 11. >> All those in favor? Okay. The power of us. That's the [clears throat] PUSD motto. Tonight and Tuesday. There were so many experts, so
many people who are wanting alternative ways to remediate the soils. Consider the community that you serve to be the power behind you to make a better, more informed decision tonight. Consider students at Murin Environmental
Science Academy, Engineering Academy, and OBA to be part of that power and involve them in problem solving with you. Right now, it is not the power of us. It is power over us. Please choose
differently tonight. Choose community. Choose collaboration. Choose the environment. Choose us. [applause] >> Great if they could have while I'm talking. Thank you. Hi, my name is
Jennifer Lelan. I'm not going to tell you my background and why you should listen to me again because you've already heard that. Um, I've taken the time to prepare for you uh some alternate thinking in terms of these trees. Uh, and I have three asks of the
board tonight. The first is that you protect and take off the removal list uh a total of about uh 74 trees. The first list of these contain the highest priority. It's 32 total. These are local native trees that are very delicate to
the ecosystem. They protect birds, pollinators, all kinds of things that are uh indigenous to this area. If you walk outside of your offices here, you're going to see two of the most beautiful sycamores that I've seen in a long time. Literally made me cry to think somebody's going to take a
chainsaw to those. Right. The second piece on page two covers um some very fawn trees, Aleppo pines and Dor uh cedars, which should be considered to keep as well. and uh they're of
reasonable size. When I say these trees are of consequence, it is because they are 5 in or greater in terms of their DBH. Okay? Which means it's going to take a long time to replace them. And then the third list is non-native trees that are significantly large. They are
more than 19 in DBH, which means that they are old growth trees typically unless they're a fast growing invasive type tree. These trees should be considered to be saved. All right. The second ask I have of this board is that you immediately enact something to
ensure that if you're taking down a tree that there is no nesting burden there that is not legal. And then the third ask I have of this board is that you become fully transparent with your interactions as it pertains to this action. RFPs RFIs down in the list.
Lastly, I just want to say I appreciate Mr. Dunning's approach here, but it it needs to reach further. There's a lot of expert in this in this room, Lynn Fang behind you, who has other means that may be useful. We'd all be willing to collaborate. >> Thank you for
[applause] >> Anna. >> Great. And I mean sympathy is from Jarma Velasquez that nobody nobody >> precis and followed by or black. Okay.
Hi, I'm Anna Schlobder. I am not a scientist. I lived in Altadena. I lost my home in the fire and I'm here. My kid went through PUSD schools up in Altadena, the Neyas campus at the top of Allen was particularly gorgeous. It is
now a moonscape as is almost all of Altadena. We have lost twothirds of our canopy. I beg of you, do not cut down mature trees where children are. They are traumatized. They if they live here,
they heard about it up there. They need shade. They need life. They need grass underneath that shade. You can do remediation without taking out the mature trees. Please. We have lost so much in this general area. I come to you
just as a citizen with pain in my heart. On my block, square block, there are 12 trees. 12. And two of them are on my lot and one is an oak and one is a sycamore. Please do not cut the trees. There are
ways. We keep saying it. The room is full of experts. I was sent here by a friend from Altadena who's an arborist and she's traveling and she said, "Please go. Here I am. There are ways to do this. You don't have to take the
trees out. You really don't. Thank you very much. [applause] Orchid followed by Stephanie Lan. >> Um I'm Orchid Black. I um teach horiculture for UCLA extension.
Um, I've done a lot of proono work on Washington Park. Um, and I'm just I'm confused. I'm I'm confused that um people don't think that they could stabilize a tree while they remove soil around it. I I worked with lots of
contractors that could stabilize anything. Um, uh, I'm confused, um, that that the lead at Blair is even fire related. And I'm really really kind of,
uh, very confused by the idea that maybe some of your grants, not just your, not just your SQA waiver, but your grants are maybe not really for fire related toxins. And um and that is really a concern to
me as a taxpayer and I pay for USD taxes. Um and um and the 4T down soil that we we heard about um last uh last
Tuesday doesn't seem to be fire related either. So, I'm I'm just these actions really do confuse me and I think that um it's a good thing that you guys have a pause now in forest. Thank you very much. [applause]
>> Stephanie followed by Ty Garve. Good evening. I'm Stephanie Landeran. I am a licensed landscape architect. I am the former director of the UCLA extension landscape architecture program and horiculture programs and I am now
the director of Altadena green and this is an organization that worked to prevent the removal of the mature trees that survived the fires in Altadena and we protected them from uh needless removal by the Army Corps of Engineers.
>> [clears throat] >> I would like you to know that um the mitigation in what you all have proposed where you have said that you will replace like with like does not include the 30 years
of maintenance that would be required to make a 24-in box equal to the canopy that is being taken out by the mature trees. And that cost estimate should include that [clears throat] the establishment for a tree to reach the
canopy of much of the mature trees that we have seen here would take 30 years. 30 years to grow a like for like and it doesn't even include include attrition which is a high probability and almost
anything that I plant I have on a very large scale um a 10% attrition rate. So that would have to be included. So removal of established trees is counter to the state mandate which now is an
increase of canopy. And I am going to emphasize the word increase. the governor. Of course, a lot of our legislative things counter everything, but the increase of greening schoolyards and adding more canopy for us to have a
much cooler environment is very important. And I would say to save and protect these trees, we can remove the soil and but both are essential for student health. Thank you. [applause]
Hi, I'm Ty Garrison. You met me on Tuesday. Um, I to add to my credentials, I am the chairman of the SeaTac board that for LA County, that's the significant ecological area technical advisory committee. I've taught environmental law, regulation, and policy university level. I'm on the CNPS
board. I'm a biologist and a consultant. One thing that concerns me about what I've read about the uh the wavier or the is that you have a lot of waves language in there. You have language where it says where feasible or something is
reasonable. And using that language means we might not do it. We don't have to do it. That language needs to be removed. You say we will replace the trees. It means we will replace the trees, not we will replace the trees if we feel like it, where it's feasible. So I believe those things need to be
removed. The other thing is the mitigation that you have is wholly inadequate for any studies I've ever done. A one:1 re replacement ratio is never used. Uh it's always far greater than that. As she said that it was you
have to account for attrition. You have to account for time. using something like the ISA which is the International Society of Arborultures evaluation methods to determine the values of the trees is something that you could use or you could use a trunk diameter uh ratio
to establish your mitigation which this isn't even close to that. Um the preservation is of course something I talked about on Tuesday the fact that there are other methods of doing this which I'm very pleased to see that are being considered. Um, also the people have mentioned the birds and the reason
the birds come up is not just because birds like trees but because violating the migratory bird treaty act or and California fishing game code both of which uh are are uh off are set off when you do
anything that disturbs the reproduction of a bird nest. Anything that causes the failure of that nest, working nearby it or killing it is a violation. [applause] >> Jasper Banks
followed by Isis Graciano. >> Hi there. So, I'm Jasper. Um, I live on the west side of Los Angeles actually. Um, but I've been coming here. I've been here by the tree the past for three days. You know, it takes about an hour
to get here each day. But, um, I'm grateful to be here and I'm grateful that, you know, a lot of my friends and family on the west side, I haven't been telling them what's been going on, but they've been seeing it on the news and internet and stuff. and um they've been supporting me and and plum and giving
best wishes and frankly are kind of disappointed by the way that the soil remediation is being handled. Um I think it's this is a wonderful opportunity for PUSD to um be environmental role models and you know really stand for these
trees. I know I don't want to you know [snorts] mirror what everyone else has been saying but they're really beautiful. 193 of them. I think around 16 have been cut down. But each tree holds so much beautiful life. And I don't know, I think it's important to
recognize that. And I feel like, [snorts] you know, humans are very accustomed to taking away life. So I think it's good to, you know, keep it here and preserve. Thank you. [applause] Hello, I'm Eis. I'm 17 years old and I'm
a resident here in Pasadena. I want to take this moment to remind you all that in here in this country, we have a very harmful, horrible history of the removal of native life from these lands. And
that if you proceed to remove these trees, you will be a participant in that history. And I want you to urge you to question yourself whether you would want to be a participant in that history. Thank you for your time. [applause] >> Paloma. >> Hi. Um, we met on the last meeting, but
for those who don't know me, my name is Paloma. I'm 17 years old. Um, and I've spent four days sitting in and under the oak tree in your guys's parking lot. Um, every day that I leave the tree, I'm so worried that the contractors are going
to come and they're going to cut her down. There's so much anxiety that fills me every time I leave the tree. And I know that maybe it's a little bit irrational, but it's very, very sincere and very genuine. It does not take four
days sitting in and under a tree to appreciate nature and to understand how necessary it is and to understand how important these trees are and especially mature ones and especially native ones like coastlife oaks which is the tree in your parking lot.
I've talked and you've heard from from youth and I've talked to countless ch kids and teens who care about nature and who are passionate about this. And I'm sorry to be rude, but I don't understand your ignorance on this. I don't
understand why you can't just not cut down these trees. Thank you, [applause] Rebecca Ray. followed by Anna Solv.
Oh, could I have the story again? Thank you so much. Appreciate you. Hi guys. So, thank you again for taking time on Tuesday to listen to the voices of your community. We're all concerned and upset by your current aim to destroy nearly 200 trees. I've had the privilege of teaching both high school and college
students. And what I know more than anything about teenagers is that keeping their trust and hope is vital to our relationship with them. This unilateral decision without their input is a perfect example of how we lose their trust and destroy their hope. It has
been clearly established through expert testimony that these removals are unnecessary for soil remediation and will likely cause far more harm than good both immediately and down the road. I know that budget and litigation are likely your two biggest concerns, and I know that your hope for using monies
from the wildfire fund is probably playing into this, but reinspecting only 55 of the 193 trees slated for destruction is woefully short-sighted. Why not work with your contractor to simply drop the tree removal? Surely, that would save both budget and scope of
work. What if you took this new information that's been presented to you about best practices on how remediation can actually work, how it's more effective with trees and native plants? What if you made this a community effort? Instead, do it all Dena's doing.
Work together with your community. Consider the legacy that you will be leaving as a board. Do you want it to be framed by stumps? Do you want this destruction of habitats to be what you leave behind? by the regret of knowing that you destroyed trees that should outlive all of us.
Please reconsider. You were all elected to these seats because this community believed in your care and your consideration. Please don't let us down. Don't let them down. Thank you.
[applause] I am here to ask the board to take recommendations seriously, not as a courtesy, but as a genuine commitment. The report acknowledges that protected trees can potentially be retained through air excavation, hydro excavation, near root zones, and an
arbury's director protection measures. It acknowledges that each tree must be evaluated individually. That is exactly right, and I'm glad you put it in writing. What I'm asking tonight is simple. Do not let feasibility be defined by convenience. Do not let cost and schedule override the tree by tree
eval evaluations. This report promises these are protected trees. They have legal standing and they have community standing. The board voluntarily included a 1:1 ratio tree replacement in the contract scope. That tells me you understand what is at stake. Now I'm asking you to go one step further and
protect the trees that are already standing before you reach for a replacement. Soil can be remediated. Trees that are 40, 60, 80 years old cannot be replaced on any schedule that matters to the children on these campuses today. Hold staff accountable to the sidebyside tree by tree process
this report recommends. And make sure this community can see results of each evaluation before removal proceeds. And thank you so much for the comments earlier about the land and what we've done and simply being in the right side of history. We cannot
keep repeating the same mistakes over and over and over again. You have students who are watching you. You have a community who's talking to you, who's sending you feedback. You have a responsibility as you took this position. And that does not mean we kill life.
Like most of these children who are extreme and they're not children, they're extremely smart and they've been very eloquent on everything that they've said. Like Jessica also said, just because you did the wrong thing 18 months ago doesn't mean you keep doing the wrong thing now. You have time to
pause, rethink, reevaluate, and be wise. [applause] Any further public comment? All right. So now we have uh questions from the board. Trusty Harden. >> Uh, Mr. Dunning, a couple questions. So,
uh, I want to clarify that the any any removal of trees or soil remediation for that matter has to be done when schools are not in session. >> Correct. Yes. So, there's a specific
window of time in which you have to >> Right. The first windows are closing before summer started. We have a few weeks before school starts up again in August of clear windows at some of these sites, but they're very small. >> Okay. Um, in terms of what's being
recommended to us, um, I think we've heard sort of from the community that they have not been or they have felt that they haven't been brought along um, in whatever's transpired. And whether that is the case or not, um, moving forward, is there sort of a
communications um, strategy or plan uh, as as as we would potentially move forward to sort of do that to bring the community along so that they feel informed and and spoken to? >> Yeah, I think as we evaluate each site, uh, letting everyone know that the
results that we've come up with and and what the methods are um, and our best path forward, I think is It's the reports we'd end up with anyway, so it's easy to communicate forward. Sorry, I think we went out of the
protocol. We need to make a motion. >> Hold on. Good question. Pretty sure the motions first motion. I think we have just questions at this time. >> Questions? >> Yeah. >> No question.
>> Any more questions? >> Anybody have a question? >> Okay, I have a question. Um, can you please define what protected um means? Uh the easiest definition and and there's a
list um of what protected means in Pasadena. Uh the easiest way is if we stay at the conservative of 18 in anything above that ultimately uh for the most part is protected in Pasadena. There's a very long list of trees. Um
for us that means that what we've identified is protected and what was listed on our aris report for our district. Um inventory that amounts to 55 trees for sure and there's two I think that are to be
evaluated. >> I don't sorry I thought you would define it by certain traits. >> They they all have individual species. Um but ultimately once you get to a certain size they're they're considered
protected anyway. So, um there is a very specific list that has come from our arrest of every single tree. They've all been measured and pictured and listed uh GIS mapped. Um all of that information has come to us. We've cross referenced that with what is protected as well as
the harvest report and they match. So, right now there's 55 for sure. So, does do you first start with the size and then the species and then size? >> The species and the size. Yeah. So, coastlife oak that's a baby is not
protected. Coastlife oak that's larger is >> not. Okay. Hold on. Hold on. This is this is between us right now. Okay. Um, are there any further questions? Just take any
Oh, I'm sorry. after. >> Yeah. >> So when you say 18 inch, that's the >> So when you say 18 inches, this is the DBH, >> correct? >> And which stands again for
>> uh >> diameter at breast height. >> At breast height. Okay, [clears throat] great. Um and so Okay. I just wanted to >> which is four and a half. >> Thank you. >> All right. >> I'm sorry. This is a meeting of among
the board and the staff right now. We had your opportunity for public comment. So, Trustee Holly, >> thank you. So, Mr. Dunning. >> Yes. >> You've been we've been testing soil clearly. Can you just give me a little rundown of what we have found and why
this is such a big deal? I think I'd rather have Brenn do that. >> You'd rather what? >> I'd never rather have Bren do that since she'd be wonderful. Thank you. >> Hi, I'm Bren McCullik with Rodantis and um we've been working with the district
for the past year in testing soil and we have u been testing for fire related contaminants. Um what we have primarily identified is arsenic and lead in soil. There there are two other um lesser contaminants that we have identified
that are related to fire contaminants. And may I ask one more? So I have been hearing about trees being able to remediate or some trees being able to sort of I'm saying this terribly automatically re remediate. I don't
think those words go together. But can you know what I'm talking about? Can you explain to me? >> Yes. Uh phyto remediation. It's where there are plants used uh plants or trees used to remediate soil.
>> And do we have those? >> There not all plants uptake metals. Um arsenic and lead are metals. Uh but there are species that do. Um and you know a very common one is poplars and I
don't believe we have any poplars on the list. No poppplers on the list. So, aren't there So, could you plant a popppler next to a tree that had lead in the soil? You would have to plant many popler
trees, many popular trees. It's um when you're using when you're implementing phyto remediation, you plant um young trees very close together in a sort of orchard uh type fashion. They're usually a couple feet apart um because they need
to be within all of the soil that's contaminated. So, you couldn't in theory plant one or two. You would have to um plant several. And there are tests ahead of time that would have to be done to confirm that phyto remediation would be
a um successful method. >> And what happens to the land around them? Like what do we do? What do you do while while that's happening? >> Yeah. Can I go walk around and >> No, the areas we will will remain closed
>> for how long >> for use until the uh remediation would be complete. >> And how long would something like that take? >> Um, you know, it' be these tests I speak of beforehand, bench scale test, pilot tests that these are um they will tell
us how the soil reacts, but typically this is a several year process. >> Okay. Thank you. Trusty Bailey. >> Yeah. >> Can you um go a little bit into
land covenant um how that happens and what the pros and cons are of that for us? >> Sure. Um ultimately if we don't remove all the soil that is contaminated to a level at least we don't bring it down to a level
uh that a low enough level um we have to we would end up being in a land use covenant with the DTSC. What that means is that every time we dig in the soil uh throughout the campus uh we would have to have trained people. Uh
we'd have to report it to DTSC. Uh we have there's a very long list of of needs once that happens. Once we say that we know there's contaminated soil on the campus, we already know that that's already been established. DTSC knows we have it. We know exactly where it is due to all the testing that we've
been doing. Uh if it remains there uh for a long period of time, we will have to end up being in one anyway. Uh if we've go through the methods to remediate and remove it, uh it has to be complete. So if there's soil up against
the wall and for some reason we can't get enough clean soil and we have to take the wall out and we end up taking the wall out. So that's the that's what we were told. Uh that's the method that that uh DTSC has provided to us until the soil is completely removed from the
site. Uh it's either option A or B. If you're talking about soil, it's a land use cabinet and we have methods either capping uh uh we can cap something that's there. Uh still requires the fact that even if it's under your building,
you still end up in a covenant. Uh there's no way outside of it without complete removal of the existing soil from our understanding and from every conversation that we've had with DTSC. >> And then can you um Can you share a little bit about the cost associated
with that versus the cost if the trees were if the soil was um removed and the trees along with it. So uh ultimately when you enter a land use covenant um the monitoring cost um
on average between the reporting uh the training that we have to do for anybody who's doing work. Uh the additional cost for any kind of um construction or anybody that touches the soil the average that we're finding is somewhere around $30,000 per year in perpetuity. So forever until that soil has been
removed. Um our understanding is once you're in a covenant you're you're in it. So um it is sometimes hard to get out of these covenants as well. So if we wait uh that becomes another problem. Um as for the cost for removing uh the
trees versus replacing them um for us no one wanted to come in and say we're removing trees. It was not a goal. What we had is we had soil that we tested found it was bad needed to remove it. This was our option. Um now that uh
we're getting through the schedule we're we're understanding that even so McKinley we can't touch McKinley if or McKinley is next door to this building we cannot touch this building if McKinley's occupied right that halfs our
window in some of these sites if we have an adjacent property that's occupied by students we can't dig there's there's lots of limitations to to win and how we can approach this and it just gets more and more complex when we start talking about um
long-term methods. >> So I I'm just trying to get some clarity. >> Sure. >> If we do nothing then we have to enter into a land use covenant. >> Yes.
>> And that's when the >> we literally have to monitor or I'm I'm sorry I'm not clear on what you said we have to do after >> that area would remain closed >> right or sealed in some way in other words we can pour concrete over it that's an option has to be a non-p
permeable surface um that area would need to be remain sealed uh and off limits and we whether it's in the front of the school next to the freeway off in a planter if it's one area and it's above the levels and we have to enter
enter into the the land use covenant. It's the entire property. So if we're digging >> the entire property, even the part that's not in that general area, >> that is the rule. Yes. So if we're fixing irrigation in the football field,
that means that we have to have yearly trained uh employees uh special trained uh we have to require special training for any contractors that are on site. It's annual reporting. there's a five-year report. It's constant back and forth with reporting with DTSC for
anything you're doing. Um, so and it gets quite complicated and complex. >> Trusty Velasquez, >> um, I have a quick followup to one of the questions that Trusty Bailey had and then a couple of my own. The followup
is, um, where Like the allocation of money that would pay for these changes comes from general fund comes from facilities money from comes from where >> right now this would be technically
general fund and seeking for reimbursement >> and general fund because our funding functions so that there's money that's goes for buildings and there's money that goes for teachers. So this would come from the teachers money. >> Correct. >> Okay. Um question. What is the
acceptable level of uh exposure for children? What is the level of risk that is acceptable for health for children's health and safety? >> 10 right >> 80 in soil
>> 80 milligrams per kilogram. >> All right. And then what percentage of the trees that we're talking about fall under that percentage under that level of risk?
>> What percentage of the trees? >> Yeah. >> Yeah. So ultimately the trees are in the zones that where the soil has been deemed above those levels. So the the way this worked originally when we're testing the soil is we we come up with a pattern and we go to DTSC and we say this is our pattern. we're going to
test. They take that pattern and say, "Okay, uh, go ahead and test." And then if we get any hits and those are above levels, then we have to do closer testing in those zones and step out. You get that correct? Right. So, ultimately, um, as this the
areas grow or stop, those are the zones. Whether there's, you know, it's in a planter or a garden, um, or a courtyard, it it's it doesn't matter. It's now an area that's been deemed too high levels uh to be safe around students and that's
coming directly from DTSC. >> Are the standards for remediation of soil different for schools than for example the city? >> Absolutely. Yes. >> How so? >> Uh the schools um division of DTSC has a
strict standard uh says that all of this has to be removed. There may be other methods for if you own a commercial property or if you're uh even my understanding it's different at city parks as well. >> Yeah. So, so we um we have a very strict
standards because we serve students, right? So, we're here to make sure that we have a healthy campus and right now we know that we have something that it doesn't belong there. The goal is to remove it. >> All right. I I am most familiar with the
layout of the schools in my district and that's why I'm asking specific question about Blair because it seems like Blair students are older and the trees are um closer to the freeway. So, is there a
way that we can just build a wall between the trees and the children and then that would be enough of a solution? for that particular area, >> we would still end up in a land use
covenant. Um there may be options that we may be able to negotiate um with TTSC, but there's no confirmation of that. Uh certainly without a tremendous amount of uh additional work and testing um and cost
>> and how long do we have to make that decision? Uh depends on how long we plan on having the area shut down. Um >> to having the what? >> Depends on how long we plan on having the areas closed off. Right. So um we believe that DTSC is going to be lenient
and let us move through this process. Uh but there there is a limit on how long you can not do something at the sites without entering some sort of agreement. It's my understanding. So is that answer? I guess so, but I don't know exactly how long,
>> right? They won't give us a date. They didn't say you have to do this within 6 months. It's just they know that we're moving forward. They're working with us and they have from from the beginning. It's already, you know, since the testing started, it's almost a year ago. So we've been working with them for
quite a while. >> Jesse Arden. So based on what you're saying, if we're based on the proposal that's being put forth to us, as you're looking at protected trees,
uh, side by side, tree by tree, >> you are possibly looking at ways to preserve these trees when possible and avoid a land use covenant.
Yes, >> correspondingly to those sites, if those trees remain, >> every we'd look at it each site, tree by tree, um we'd evaluate, see if it's possible. Um as we go through the process, the arbur have to make sure
that we're not damaging um the roots or or hurting the tree in any way. um we would re have to retest uh resubmit get get results submit that to DTSC and they say okay that's below levels we're okay that would have to happen for each tree
basically >> and within the time frame such that I think you know as we were talking about time frames >> school starts in particular sensitive areas >> yes which would very likely kick it into uh some areas what the the idea is that
we are going to remediate every area that we that does not have protected trees in. >> Yeah. >> Um we'll get as far as we possibly can and then we will revisit uh as we need to if we run out of time, but uh right now uh we're going to push this u push
as quickly as we can. Uh we do have a contractor on board right already. So that's a that's a big uh bonus for us if we're it's not like we're just starting now. Chelsea Bailey.
>> Yeah. I have one more question. Do we have um campuses where trees that had to be cordoned off because of this um issue that is interrupting student life on the
campuses? >> Yes, multiple campuses. Do you know the number of trees that >> not off the top of my head? >> Lower number. I most of the trees that are coming out are a lot of them are perimeter.
U regarding the entering the land use covenant. Um, do we know of a situation where a school district or a campus has is in that status? Uh, sure. Um, we were given an example
[clears throat] by Long Beach. Uh, they had enter one because they found contaminated soil under the underneath within the campus. Ultimately, this is the land use covenant from my understanding is normally used for extreme measures. So, you're removing soil, you go through this process, and then you get to the building and you
have to make a decision. Oh, we have to take out the building or we have to enter the cabinet. Uh, and that's the type of thing that this is going on for. We looked um throughout the archives and we talked to DTSC there. There's not very many or we can't find anything that says we stopped and we created a land
use covenant due to a tree. But I do realize that you know this is an extreme circumstances normally you're not dealing with this large a number right so um it's it's certainly a sensitive topic
>> and then the where feasible can you please explain what that means >> feasible means u as we go through the process we have um each tree has to be evaluated a biologist has to look for it uh to make sure there's no birds there
or nesting. Uh that's the first step. Second step is the arborist has to come in and give us an evaluation of the root system. We go in and if we say if the arbor says yes, we can do it with the we think we can do the excavation with this tree. Uh then we start the process and
if the tree survives and we were able to remediate enough soil to bring the levels down uh enough that DTS says it's clear then we put the soil back and and the tree is safe. Uh if we run into an issue where during the process we damage
a main root artery or something and it creates a problem, the arburist is saying that tree is probably not going to survive. uh as a liability, it probably be something we'd say, "Okay, we'll stop and we'll this one didn't make it." But that's not the plan. Plan is to go in with people who have done
this many times before um and save everything we can >> trusty uh Kenny. >> Did they come up here? >> Oh, hi Ben. >> Hi. Sorry. I let Scott know I was here. Please join me then. >> Yeah. If you [clears throat] have any
questions for DTSC, >> I just had a quick question on the bird and the nesting. So >> that one's not me. >> In trees that [laughter] Okay, I can come back. >> Back far away from that one. um in trees
that we are planning to move forward with to remove. >> Mhm. >> If they are found to have nesting birds, what is our plan? >> Uh there's a protocol and a procedure for that and our contractors within the environmental language of the contractor
to make sure that he stops and pauses that tree is to wait and that would interrupt our schedule as well. >> Okay. So the what we would do in that case is wait. There's a process and it's well beyond uh my knowledge. Bren knows a little bit about it, but
>> well, I guess I'm trying to get at it's not going to go to the point where we do a land covenant because the tree has a nest in it. There's a something that there's a different plan than that. No, I I think DTSC, as far as I know, and this is going back, they're not going to [clears throat] force us into a co a
land use covenant because if we're waiting for something to happen, >> so that becomes a wait as opposed to a, oh, now we're not doing something, we have to do an alter willing to work with us. Yeah. >> Just thanks >> Velasquez.
>> As long as you agree, it's fine. See, >> come up and talk. Okay. >> Oh, please. [clears throat] [laughter] >> Thank you for inviting me. I'm uh Ben Stanfill, uh the Southern California
Division Chief for the Site Mitigation and Restoration Program at DTSC, uh which is a long way of saying I supervise uh the staff that Mr. Dunning and and Dr. for Blanco and your staff have been working with on looking at the
uh 15 total campuses that we've entered an agreement around and the 11 really at issue today. So, I'm happy to answer any questions about uh DTSC's position on things or um the the ways we've looked at and you know how we've seen this go
in other situations. >> Please explain your position. Okay. So, I I am the uh Southern California Division Chiefs. Oh, >> not not your title and position, but the
position of the or your organization in regards to the trees. >> Got it. Okay. So, uh, DTSC reviews, uh, proposals from the district on on here's how we're going to deal with the contamination that was
discovered, uh, on the school sites and we are somewhat agnostic to the trees. So if if given that you know
you propose to say we need to remove all the soil from the site and there are trees within that contaminated soil area, we would be okay with that. If you would prefer to say we would rather sign a
land use covenant knowing that there are long-term obligations associated with that related to preventing students, staff and faculty from coming into contact with the contamination. uh we could also accept uh that sort of
proposal. Um if there were a a phyto remediation or or a bio- remediation proposal knowing that that does take additional time that typically involves as Bin mentioned uh testing over a
series of years until uh the lead polyaromatic hydrocarbons or or arsenic concentrations go down. if they do, knowing that if they don't, then something else would have to happen, such as excavating the soil or
signing a land use covenant. Uh we could review and approve that as well. >> But okay, so we have a significant amount of bond money and we have scheduled to do work in many of these
projects. Yes. Is does any of the construction that we have scheduled current that we have ongoing projects and a long list of projects? If we enter into any of those agreements, does that have an impact on our rebuild,
construction, renovation for any of those campuses? It it could it it is hard to say given that there's 11 different school sites with varying extents of contamination and varying levels of contamination.
It's hard to make a really general statement. Um a as mentioned earlier, you know, the while we won't say there's ever a safe level of lead for children to come into contact with, we use 80
milligrams per kilogram in soil as our our residential screening or cleanup levels. A and so it may not make sense for the school to go below that that 80 milligrams per kilogram of soil because often you just can't get to zero from a
a practical standpoint. If a certain area, you know, had one sample result of 82 milligrams per kilogram of soil, we would be able to treat that differently than another area that has
570 milligrams per kilogram of soil in, you know, spread across a large field or in a small area. So it it's hard to say that generally, but we are committed to uh working with you to
make a decision that that makes sense for the situations at each campus. >> So let's say that at what level of immediate compliance can we move forward, right? Because here's the question. Okay. So
the the financial difficulties of these districts are far and extensive and we have to be very clear about the fact that you know the hu like you what you just said to me is like well you know >> there's so many options but those many
options mean an infinite amount like an infinite amount of resources but with a finite amount of resources then the options are much more reduced. So although theoretically we can do all of these possible things over this extended
amount of time in [snorts] practical matters in our daytoday our amount of options are limited but so let's say that we are we move ahead with a
20 30% compliance do we have some leverage to say okay give us a minute for the rest of the compliance while we prioritize okay this is our budget. Within our this budget, we could probably save this percentage of trees. Then let's work with the community to
identify what are our top priorities within this particular budget. And then like to try to figure out a way that um we move forward with compliance in places where the risks are higher just because of the location like so
like a tree that is in the middle of a playground or things like that where we really need to just like it San Rafael comes to mind where students have not been able to use any green area for already a year. Right. So at that at
that particular site, we do need to do something so that kids can have an actual playground because they haven't had one for a year, right? So okay, so let's move that one out and move out some of the ones that have similar exceptions and then
give us a year to figure out how we're going to manage. >> Right. So, so DTSC if there is contamination still in place in the planner or in place in the field uh we would
ask that you prevent or limit people's exposure to that planter um until you've removed the contamination. And now if you want to say this summer is not the right summer.
we're going to deal with that a year from now. That is is totally fine with us. We would ask you to say, "What's your plan in the meantime to keep students from coming into contact with contamination
in this area while we're able to do a and that can look diff that that's probably going to look different at Blair High School than it would at San Raphael Elementary. Right. I I have a a 9, 11, and 17y old, and the nineyear-old is in the dirt a
lot more than the 17-year-old. Um, and and so we're open to having those conversations. And then that is separate from that long-term question of if you get to the spot where you say, "We're just not going to clean this up."
um and we think that's okay and this is why oftentimes that decision comes with that land use covenant and there is again a range of what those look like for schools specifically it's it's often
like Mr. Dunning said, "We were digging. We got to the building. We don't want the building to fall down. That's where the land use covenant is." Um, we have a standard one that we start with that is is fairly restrictive, but there is room
within that to discuss. And again, some schools are going to be more, some are are less. If there's one small planter that is slightly over our kind of health protective levels,
maybe you don't need all of the Haz whopper trained staff to do any work on that school. But if you have a school that has fairly high concentrations spread throughout the campus,
that would be something that that went into there. And so I think when we've had highlevel discussions with your staff, we've tended to say this is the most restrictive option because we really don't want that to come to a s as
a surprise later of wait. We thought it would be less and and now it's suddenly more. We would much rather say this is really scary, but now that we've looked at it, we can be less
restrictive. That's the hope. >> Trusty Holly, >> I have a question about land use covenant. Can you give me an example of how how long it could take, how long would we be in one and how much
does that cost for like one tree? >> Yeah. So, so typically land use covenants go into perpetuity because you've made a decision that uh there's contamination in this area that we're just not going to clean up and we are
going to put asphalt over the top of this surround the tree with a a rod iron, you know, decorative gate um to keep anyone from coming into contact with the contamination around the tree. And that
that's going to be the final answer. We're not going to do anything else. And then every year, you know, let let's say it's one tree, right? Every year we would need you to go take pictures and say, "Yes, the protection is still in place. We haven't turned this into a
ball field." Um, a a teacher hasn't decided to say, "We're going to plant a community garden right here because we've got this this open space." Um, and every year we would get that report. We would charge you to review it. It's
typically not a lot, but I'll I'll say potentially $10,000 a site. And if you did go that way, we would really work with you to see what we could do to combine and minimize that. that that's not again it's really just us paying for our
staff time to look at that annual report that says yes they've continued to protect the students. Five years later we book look back and say we we haven't found some reason that lead or arsenic is even worse for you than we thought it was.
This is still okay. Great. And how give me an example of something that maybe you're in a land covenant, how long it has taken. Do you have an example? >> So typically, >> so it's perpetuity. It's forever, >> right? So typically you only enter a
land use covenant when you have decided we're not going to clean this up. The way we're going to address the issue is fencing it off, putting a concrete slab over the top. I if if you're still if you're doing let's say the the the phyto
remediation bio- remediation looking to see if the tree is going to pull the lead out of the soil that would be something where we would ask you to take samples every year see if the lead concentrations are going down. we would
still ask you to to block off that area, right, to prevent kids from playing in it. But but that eventually ends and you don't have to go into the land use covenant because you've gotten rid of the contamination. >> Thank you.
>> Any further questions? >> All right. Like to entertain a motion to approve item H1. >> Thank you. So, I'm going to move approval. Um, I would like to uh move approval with two
um amendments to the recommendation. um the first paragraph of the recommendation where it says it is recommended that the governing board of the Pasian Unified School District authorize staff to continue implementation of the previously awarded multi-sight so soil remediation and site
restoration project and and insert the word voluntarily evaluate potential retention alternatives for remaining protected trees. And I would also add except protected trees that would
disrupt the regular operations of schools. Those are the two amendments with that with that motion. >> Does anybody need that repeated? >> Okay. Is there a second?
>> Oh, did did I hear you mention the word students in there? >> Okay. So, clarify where your motion is. My second amendment said uh for remaining protected trees except protected trees that would disrupt the
regular operations of schools which is a little different. So it's a little different from what I'm thinking about when I think about student life while the students So there's areas where students are out on
campuses which was speaks to my question were there any trees that um are cordoned off that um that are impacted. I guess that could interrupt student life.
That means where the students congregate on those campuses. >> What if I amend to accept protected trees that trees that would disrupt the regular operations of schools and student life?
>> It's fine. I just >> and or >> can you repeat that please? >> Sure. Do you need the first amendment? No, just the second one. >> Just the second one. You want the full? Okay. So, the full the full uh motion is to move to approve with two edits in the
recommendation. The first one in the third line of the recommendation where the word site restoration project and insert the word voluntarily. And then on the fourth line where it
says remaining protected trees, insert the phrase except protected trees that would disrupt the regular operations of schools andor student life.
>> Is there a second? >> Second. any advocacy. >> Trusty Bailey. >> Yeah, I just I am just concerned um about
any situation where we would enter. Now that I've heard more about the um land use covenant, I'm not certain that our budget could withstand um such a thing. So, I'm a little
concerned about that. Um but other than that, um that's that's just my comment on that. the my major concern is about the safety
of our students and our campuses, our staff. So, I think it's important to add the include the amended language um because we've already had a situation
where a branch has fallen on a student um I think it was preschool and and severely injured um one of our students or a student. So, I'm very um
you know, concerned that um you know, we may end up in a situation like that. I'm hoping that there is a way to tell more sooner than later. Um if there are issues with trees
um especially those that we decide to just um you know remediate the soil from around it. Uh because again I think our number one job after um educating students is to
make sure that they're safe every day. They spend a lot of time on our campuses and they go into areas sometimes that, you know, aren't common areas or popular areas. Students can find, especially our young scholars can find things to get
into that sometimes we look at them and we're how did you get there? And so we just we just really have to do our due diligence to make sure that our campuses are safe. um whether it's making sure that we remove all the toxins in the
soil or whether it's making sure that if it is absolutely necessary um we have to remove a tree and so that's my advocacy trustee then trusty Kenny
>> um I agree with Miss Bailey that um the mission of this organization is to educate students that's our number one mission and um we can't lose sight of how um the decisions that we make impact our
ability to um successfully do so. Um again it it is very important to remind everybody that we have some responsibilities when it comes to
uh the resources of this organization and that is how not only the natural resources of the organization but how do we prioritize uh the financial resources in order to
best support the needs of children and our ability to provide instruction for those children. Having said that, I think that we can we should
uh move forward with all the projects that impact student direct student life. Like for example, I mentioned earlier the project of San Rafael that has already impacted the ability of those
450 children of using having a a recess, right? For already a year, students have not been able to use the playground or use um an area because of this. So I
think that we have a responsibility to address that immediately if we can continue with part of this project next year after we do an evaluation of some of the trees and
establish a criteria of okay so within our resources this is a list of trees that we should prioritize and um what it would cost to save them etc. It may be that next year after we
examined all of the information, we come to the same conclusion. You know what? We are going to have to cut all of these trees. But it may be that we are able to save some of the trees in the process. And if there's not a major penalty for
taking that extra year for better understanding the remediation process or the the way that we have to or or the tools that we have in order to um solve the soil issue. Well, if there's no
major consequences, then we can take a little bit longer in some of the trees that are in question, right? So I I don't think that it I don't think that I'm 100% in in in in you know I'm not 100%
invested in like no it has to be all of them or I think that you know if we've heard enough information that says okay so we can still take some time with some of these trees and you know extend the
work time or the time frame of the work for them till next year and we might have to accept the consequences of that action which is probably blocked areas and school, right? So maybe we can take the time but like all of that
sidewalk or all of that from area or all of that will be blocked for yet another year and that's the consequence that we have to accept. Um I would be remiss as a matter of principle not to make a note about this
last point. in which is um I appreciate all of the expertise and knowledge from the community and would encourage continuous engagement with the schools at your local sites. Maybe it is through
the facilitation of working in collaboration with our principles for the facilitation of workshops or maybe it is through your organizations or the nonprofits that you represent working together for making
accessible more science instruction. And I do welcome all of your expertise and we need that expertise in the classroom so that we can improve our achievement in looking at the science standards for our students, establishing a a pipeline
of environmental stewardists, environmental activists and environmental educators uh by expanding um our achievement in environmental social justice. and as advocates for
both trees and plants and bird not both for trees and plants and birds and um environmental sustainability. I encourage all of you to participate and engage more actively or uh continue to
engage actively with our curriculum matters which is the priority for this board and should be of this community. Trusty Holly I'm sorry, Trusty Kenny. >> Um,
when I saw the list originally of the large number of trees uh that were slated for removal, I was uh taken aback and I appreciate that how long trees can take to grow and that we need to keep as
many as we can. Um but as we have gone through this situation and understood the ramifications um and looked at our responsibilities I think this is a good compromise in terms of
moving forward. Um I think we have agreed to take on additional expense um for the district and so while not perfect I think this is a good compromise solution.
Tracy Harden, >> I would I would further that. I I think that the challenge that this district has uh where we are today is is there's been a lot of disruption because of the fires. We've done uh everything we can
do to stabilize the student experience uh through all of um what has been a challenging time. And so I think it's important to um balance this uh this effort, protect as much as we can. Um we
hear the community um with regards to concern for the environment around around our schools, but it's important for us to ensure that our our students can um be in their spaces of learning and and um min minimize the um
the word the disruption of the work ahead which is you know moving in in specific uh sites moving students from one place to another. while we uh modernize and enhance our our campuses per um taxpayer funding.
>> Trusty Velasquez, then I get my turn. >> I just had an idea which is a great way of engagement if if this time extra additional time is approved. A great way of engagement is in helping us secure funds or grants or
mechanisms in order for us to be able to afford the protection of all of these trees. Uh I don't I forget if we already mentioned this but uh want to acknowledge that we could have done a
better job in communicating to the the public about this entire effort and uh I think uh moving forward we should find every opportunity to update our community on our progress.
Um, and uh, for the 72 people that came to the facilities committee, uh, I think you should, you know, be very proud of yourself. I'm proud of of, you know, this level of engagement, this level of
love for our trees, love for our environment. Like I said in committee, um it's often the environmental issues that bring out this many people. Um like I said before, it was the the greening
the outdoor greening resolution brought a ton of people to support and it's it's the same thing with this issue. So I think you should be very proud. that part of our job as elected officials is to communicate and represent the values
of our community and you are the values of our community. Um, but we have to balance uh our resources and the the time constraints that we have. And I do want to acknowledge that
our our staff really kind of turned this around overnight to to present a a solution that is both practical and as well as tries to represent our community. So um I also want to
acknowledge um the efforts of our staff. This organization is always goes slower than I want it to but it they went very quickly for this one. 11. So, I bet I I guess we should wrap up. All right, I think we're ready for a
vote. Um, all those in favor raise your hand. Anybody against? Abstensions. Motion passes unanimously. Thank you. Oh, no, she's not here.
Meeting adjourned. Heat. Heat.