N. Lou. Hey. Hey. calling the meeting to order at 402. Roll call, please. Here >> here.
>> Here. Okay. Next item on the agenda is the oath of office uh for board member Errol Dassi. getting pictures. Oh, there maybe you just stand. Okay, I got you. All right,
we all ready for Okay, so um raise your right hand and repeat after me. I, Errol Dassi, >> I, Errol Dassi, >> do solemnly affirm >> do so solemnly affirm >> that all of my actions as the student member
>> as all of that all of my actions as a student me member >> of the governing board of Pasadena Unified School District >> as the at Oh my gosh, give me a sec. Uh, of the governing board of the Pasadena Unified School District >> will at all times attempt to
>> will at all times attempt to >> represent faithfully all student interests and viewpoints. represent faithfully all student interests and viewpoints >> in matters coming to my attention >> in matters coming to my attention >> as the student member of the governing board >> as the student member of the governing
board >> that I will bear true faith >> that I will bear true fa true faith >> and allegiance to the constitution of the United States >> and allegiance to the constitution of the United States >> and the constitution of the state of California >> and the constitution of the state of California
>> that I take this obligation freely >> that I take this obligation freely >> without any mental reservation >> without any mental reservation >> or purpose of evasion >> or purpose of evasion >> and that I will faithfully discharge >> and that I will faith faithfully discharge >> the duties upon which I am about to
enter >> the duties in which I am about to enter. >> Congratulations. >> Thank you. Okay, next item is C. Special recognition of Mr. Miguel Marquez of City of Pasadena, the former city manager.
Come on up. So, thank you for all of your service to us and um always being a wonderful partner and we miss you so much already. Um although you have left a good legacy of people that are still supporting us and um we wanted to take this time to
give you a special recognition for the support that you helped us with and um moving our assets forward and just always keeping us ab breast when there were emergencies in the city and you know just being a great partner.
>> And uh if anybody else wants to speak that's fine. And uh Trusty Bailey was actually the one that's spearheaded this whole effort and get got this organized. So Trusty Bailey, you want to speak? >> Yeah. No, I absolutely um it was an honor to
spearhead this effort. Um, I really appreciate you were we you were great in really um feeding pouring into my presidency when I was president of the board during that
time with the matters that we had to deal with between the city and the school district. And you know, I I don't know what I would have done without you, your leadership. Um, so I really was I thought it was important that we show
the school community um the value that we placed on your leadership in nurturing the relationship between the city and the school district which is so so important. So you bought a sense of calm, you bought you bought a sense of,
you know, security and and confidence in our ability to work together. And so I really really appreciate that and so this is just a token of our appreciation on behalf of the board and the passion high school district. So thank you.
>> Thank you Trusty Bailey. Anybody else? Trusty Harden and Trusty Holly Trusty McKenzie. Well, I'm only sad that I've had the least amount of time to collaborate with you, but I've known you for many uh years in this community and you've shown up for it and uh it was
said by the superintendent partnership and you embody every aspect of that word. You are a collaborator. You're a true partner and I wish you well in whatever future endeavors you take on. And I know that um you'll bring your same fine character to everything that
you put your mind and your heart to. Thank you. >> Thank you, Mr. City Manager, for your service to our community, for your commitment to public service, and for really upholding that banner with the honor and the dignity that it deserves.
We are grateful to you for your leadership, for your collaboration. I know that you've been an incredible partner to Dr. Blanco as kind of co- um agency executives in terms of leading
our um bodies on opportunities of shared interest, shared collaboration and for the betterment of this community. Um we are going to be a better city and a better community because of your footprint and your presence here and we're grateful for you and wish you all
the best in your retirement. >> Thank you, >> Trusty Hale. Thank you for your service on the city and um it really meant a lot to have you here during these crisis that we're in
and you were very helpful and very much needed and you were always there and uh your kindness and your helpfulness is a huge part of your skill set and um it's hard to bridge those two things. you
know, the sort of brass tax of how to do a job and then the empathy and the kindness and knowing what to do when to do it. Not everybody has those skills and you do. So, thank you very much. >> Can can I say just one quick minute?
I'll be very sorry. I know you have a long meeting ahead of you, but you know, it's now been 75 days since I've been retired, and it's sort of a different feeling now being back on this side. And honestly, all I feel is gratitude that you guys are here that you're doing what you do for the community. I know it can
sometimes feel like a thankless job because there are so many difficult decisions. I hope you recognize, I hope the community recognizes what makes these decisions so difficult is schools are underfunded and they're not the only ones. I have a lot of experience as an
executive in cities, counties, courts, and school districts. Each of them are suffer from underresour. It all stems from Prop 78. It's 48 years old. The 50th anniversary will be in 2028. But that's what's really driving it. And I just ask this community as you look at
what's happening to the school district now. You're suffering not just from being underresourced, but from big changes like decreasing enrollment due mostly to demographic changes. You have to take responsible actions even if
they're unpopular. Uh that that's my advice to you, but I just want to really really thank you for for doing what you do. I know what you get paid. It's it's not a lot. You're doing it out of service. And I was uh it was such a privilege to be here for three and a
half years and work with Dr. McDonald's first and Dr. Blanco and all of you as we you know I am so proud that we have so many students going into the city now to all of our departments learning uh you know what what's ahead of them learning their careers. We are good
partners operationally and when the fire hit we were incredible partners as we bounced back I think Dr. Dr. Blanco and I probably had 10 calls a day and I thank you for participating in our emergency operations center. We knew we had to keep communities safe and with your participation uh and your
partnership we did it. So, thank you so much. >> So, with that said, it it gives me a great privilege and honor to present you with this beautiful, beautiful. Um, I call it a trophy, but >> that is beautiful. >> But that's our token of our appreciation
to thank you for everything. >> Thank you so much. Thank you everybody. >> Absolutely. And I think they want to take a picture with us from the board. Take another picture with our new member. Is that okay? >> Yeah. I don't want to get into
All right. Okay. We're at D1. Uh, committee advisory committee report to the board of education. Board of Education will receive the community advisory committee's annual recommendations for improving services
and supports for students who receive special education services. Thank you. >> Welcome. >> Is that okay? Okay. >> Uh good evening uh board trustees and Dr. Blanco. Uh my name is Adria
Schneider, chair of the community advisory committee and I'm joined by our incoming chair Deborah Watson and our vice chair will be coming back in the room any moment now. That's Rachel Axelrod, our incoming vice chair. Uh tonight we'll be presenting our annual
recommendations for consideration by the board and special education department. Our objective uh these recommendations reflect our committee's priorities and desire to see progress on the following initiatives during the 2627 school year. Our priorities were driven by CSC member
feedback, conversations with parents of children with special needs, ongoing discussions with sped leadership, board members, advocates, and community stakeholders. a rundown of what we're asking for tonight. Uh, a comprehensive inclusion improvement plan, an inclusive
facilities and playgrounds prioritization, age 14 transition IEPs requirement, a district toileting policy, and individualized student safety plans in IEPs. Goal one, comprehensive inclusion
improvement plan. We're asking the district to reexamine its approach to inclusion inclusion programming. We'd like to see inclusion happening at higher rates across all grade levels. We'd like to see a reversal of the trend of failing least restrictive environment
indicators. And those indicators to refresh your memory are here 5A through 5 C and 5 A through or 6A and through 6 C. Uh we are succeeding at our Ellery targets for our
preschool age students, but we're lagging behind year after year with our K through 12 students. PUSD is currently meeting its least restrictive environment targets for preschool. Uh but as you can see from
these monitoring years, the last four uh we have failed to meet the targets set forth by the state. But in practical terms, uh I've included this inclusion diagram, uh to better explain what that looks like. Right now,
we are succeeding at placing students in SDC classes and in embedded programs on inclusive campuses, but we're yet to meet our inclusion goals, which would be our our placement in Jed. Uh but our committee likes to look beyond that in
terms of our students being fully known and accepted and and finding a sense of belonging in their classroom. So um some diagrams will end on inclusion. Um but that really just means placement. Uh we want our students
to be embraced, cared for, welcomed, accepted. At a recent inclusion conference, a breakout session centered around the reasons why inclusion efforts stall at districts uh included a couple of hard truths. One of which is that you cannot
fiscally sustain inclusion and segregation. And a central theme of any district's efforts to improve inclusion rates is acknowledging inclusion isn't a special education issue. General education is where meaningful inclusion takes place.
So what are we asking for? Uh our first step would be the inclusion summit that we proposed last year. We feel that uh a meaningful first step would be identifying the current roadblocks to our inclusion efforts. whether that's
surveying staff or reconsidering this bed internal audit to better understand areas of alignment and areas for growth. Uh second step would be holding the summit. This would be a place where we would encourage all stakeholders to come together and agree on how to achieve
this shared goal. We can use some SIP grant money that has been earmarked for us, but um with the largest special educationbased funding increase in state history recently announced, making an investment in inclusive practices we feel would be
a meaningful and economically prudent way to use those funds. Uh we don't aim to be prescriptive about what's gone wrong, but some roadblocks that consistently um have been pointed to in the conferences I've attended for
inclusion practices in California include acknowledging the transition cliff. Um prek ends and schedules revert to pull out or SDC SDC seats. There's compliance gravity. Teams ask whether a seat exists instead of designing
supports around access. There's personnel scarcity. Uh, of course, two teacher models are hard to scale across grades. Uh, and that's not even uh taking into account our recent budget uh crises. And then there's clustering
risk. Students with disabilities are often concentrated in a few inclusive classrooms. And um the clustering risk sort of compounds when those students are then not in an inclusive setting in subsequent years. So then they're
clustered in SDC classes on those same campuses or in general ed uh classes but still uh in larger numbers than their peers. What we're proposing at this summit is to co-create the path forward with all stakeholders. Um, it would be engaging
in an equity reflection on all levels, all people involved in the district and on sites. Um, we would foster a justice driven leadership uh focus. We'd also want to make sure educators understand the the shift we're trying to see in the
guest and the host power dynamic in general education. And we want to find a way to support educators in planning for learner variability. Um, and all of this uh is in an effort to establish a culture of
rightful presence on our campuses. Additionally, these conferences can feature speakers who have lived experience in being included in elementary and high school classes and what um those benefits were in adulthood. And we can also have breakout
sessions for educators, leaders, parents, and students to share perspectives and collaborate on improvement plans. But beyond what feels good, we also know that inclusion is a smart investment. Uh the return on investment you'll see
is better communication skills for students, higher academic achievement, wider social networks, fewer behavior problems, increased exits from services, greater independence, more opportunities for higher education and improved rates of employment as adults. Not only do
students statistically show improved outcomes over a lifetime from inclusive practices, districts can also save money in the long term by doubling down on early intervention services. meaning students will have less reliance on services as they age and higher rates of
exits from special education. But I think it's always important to note that inclusion doesn't just benefit our students with disabilities. It benefits their neurotypical peers as well. Uh research has shown uh improved
grades for students with um typical students in classrooms, whether that's due to building empathy or benefiting from differentiated instruction. Uh neurotypical students do also show improvements in outcomes
alongside their being included alongside their peers with disabilities. Our second goal, we'd like to see a prioritization of inclusive facilities and playgrounds. We're asking the district to make the needs of students with disabilities
central to the planning of all capital projects and modernization efforts and not seen as an afterthought. A meaningful first step for us would mean a commitment to building inclusive playgrounds because play is a foundation for children with disabilities to connect and interact with peers. This
would mean no separate playground sections or separate recess times, include adaptive or modified equipment in the main play area, and go above the the bare minimum of ADA compliance for background or playground design.
There was a recently approved Allenale Elementary playground project. Um if you look at the pictures here, you can see that we have made our ADA compliance um requirements. We have a transfer station
which is the square plate just above the first step of the elevated play structure. This is where students in mobility devices can transfer to the play structure and then uh climb the steps. uh we meet ADA compliance by having maneuverability around the
equipment and we also have compliance surfacing. What we see missing from these um specs is ramps, elevated play area access, adaptive equipment like swings that hold children upright or harness them in. And
uh these current renderings in the approved project don't show um an intention to have shade structures. Uh shade is important for students with disabilities that are negatively affected by heat or for students who are unable to sense temperature or self-regulate when overheated.
And the same goes for the second project on that campus. It has it meets the same ADA requirements which are a baseline, a transfer station, maneuverability around the equipment, and compliant surfacing. Uh but it's lacking some of the other um
accessibility um upgrades that we see in inclusive playgrounds. Being able to navigate around equipment is not the same as being able to meaningfully engage with it. As you can see from the Allenale Elementary Playground project, the specs indicate
there are no ramps or mobility device access to elevated play structures. And perhaps surprisingly, this project currently meets ADA accessibility requirements. But state lawmakers are increasingly interested in seeing inclusive design
prioritized by public agencies. Recently proposed assembly bill 2241, which is currently under Senate Appropriations Review, would ensure newly built or renovated playgrounds and public schools are made with inclusive features like adaptive swings, sensory play
structures, ramps, and quiet spaces. Bills like this as well as AB 2468 which would expand the reach of CDE's supporting innovative practices project are aiming to expand inclusive education and design. And we would like to see
POSD carefully consider capital projects that do not meet emerging inclusive design standards because playgrounds and facilities will be around long term. Designs that do not take into account all abilities uh will likely become
non-compliant in the future. Accessible does not equal inclusive. In simple terms, accessibility focuses on removing roadblocks whereas inclusivity enhances an individual's experience. Our
third goal, we'd like POSD to require age 14 transition IEPs. Beginning last July, the state now requires IEP teams to begin post-secary transition planning when students start high school rather than waiting until
age 16. However, IEP teams can still choose to wait until age 16 if they justify the delay. We're recommending PUSD wave this exemption and require transition service IEPs be held at age 14 or during the students first year of
high school, whichever comes first. The benefits of an age 14 transition IEP uh include diploma options would be understood um whether it's a high school diploma, alternative diploma, or certificate of completion. and uh students and families would understand
the requirements needed to earn each. Families would not be in the dark regarding A throughG requirements and would know if their child is on track to earn a high school diploma early on. While some students might need extra time to figure out their specific
post-secondary plans, we feel it's best to start conversations early regarding the type of goals students and families have regarding attendance of college or trade schools or whether they intend to take part in job or life skills training programs following their senior year of
high school. We feel holding age 14 transition IEPs will better prepare families to navigate the complex landscape of college planning or public agency programs for young adults, including the Department of Rehabilitation, Social Security, and the
district's Pasadena adult living skills and workability programs. The transition age cliff is real and can be a huge adjustment when students age out of district programs. Our goal is to ensure every student is prepared for post-secary education, employment, and
independent living while making this big transition as manageable as possible for families. We have a few suggestions for transition age engagement. Uh we'd like to see the district hold an annual high school transition family night with a breakout
session for students with IEPs to share resources and considerations. Uh we'd also like to see the district distribute a comprehensive H handout that um outlines the differences between the certificate of completion, high school diploma and alternative diploma
options. And we'd like tours of the Pasadena adult living skills and workability program made readily available to interested families. Our fourth goal, we'd like to see the district adopt a toileting policy. As the state continues to expand early
education opportunities and increase inclusive education practices, it is important to ensure toileting support needs do not impede a student's placement in a general education setting and that staff meet these needs with the care and dignity they deserve. Having
toileing practices and policies in place is essential to ensuring staff feel supported and the district may need to review its job duties and work with unions to determine who is responsible for helping students with these needs. Why do we feel this policy is needed? Um
besides the fact that we've asked for a few years now to see a toileting policy and no one has been able to provide one to us, uh we also feel that families and school staff may have differing expectations regarding regarding toileting support roles and procedures
when it's not clearly communicated. We feel a policy would promote consistent um consistencies across schools and ensure that students receive equitable support. We believe it would help PUSD meet its obligations under special education and disability laws
and toileting accommodations as well as appropriate restroom facility and changing table access will be addressed. And we thought it was important to mention uh one of the reasons that this topic has come up time and again is that over half of four to five year olds with
autism are not toilet trained and this is compared to 8% of their typically developing peers. So our autistic students who are in TK and kinder uh are not potty trained at six times the rate of their neuronormative peers. Uh it's
important to mention because of course autism is um being diagnosed at a higher rate in the state and the district and we should pay attention to uh those needs since it it clearly indicates that half of students that are entering POSD
schools that are autistic are statistically not likely to be potty trained or know those toileting cues. But the district does not have to develop this policy from scratch. The CDE has a toileting toolkit that can be utilized to draft this policy and larger
districts within California haveUS that reference um and outline staff support expectations. In 2021, the DC Office of the State Superintendent of Education issued a special education policy bulletin that advises districts on non-discrimination
and idea obligations as they relate to toileting skills, stating that LEAs should review and revise policies and handbooks to address non-discrimination on the basis of toileting ability, expectations to toileting,
exceptions to toileting expectations, school readiness definitions, and child find obligations. In addition to physical disabilities that may affect a student's ability to potty train or recognize toileting cues, other conditions including autism, as we
mentioned, fetal alcohol spectrum disorder, oppositional defiant disorder, and ADHD may present challenges that need to be met with sensitivity and appropriate support. At the heart of this recommendation is an earnest desire to make clear that students toileting
needs should not be a factor in LE placement decisions. And our last goal, uh, we'd like to see the use and the broaden the use and scope of individualized student safety plans within IEPs. Currently, PUSD students with
disabilities do not consistently have emergency and lockdown safety plans documented in their IEPs. We do find that students with orthopedic impairments are the ones who most often are identified as needing assistance during an emergency. Uh but other non-mobility related considerations
should also be made. Uh for students with intellectual, developmental, and emotional disabilities, IEP teams should ask questions like, "Can these students hear alarms, understand verbal directions, stay quiet, regulate under stress,
communicate needs, and tolerate sensory overload. This basically comes down to many disabled students not being able to readily adhere to safety protocols during a crisis without individualized planning. We've included some student safety plan
accommodations and supports. Um we've gathered a list here that you can use with um teams. Um they include things like communication supports, mobility needs, which the district already has
five evacuation chairs for our uh campuses that are over two stories and for students who have orthopedic impairments. But there are other considerations that should be made on an individual basis. Does this student have sensory regulation um issues? Are there
behavioral supports that are needed? And does do staff members know deescalation procedures? Are medical supports in place during a crisis? Have the teams considered lockdown modifications? Transportation plans are a district-wide
need, but also a sitebased need. And of course, staffing assignments. We do believe that staff should be identified in the IEPs for students who need a responsible adult during an emergency and there should be a backup or alternate identified in these safety
plans. We feel quality safety plans for students with disabilities uh would involve the family. They would help in identifying sensory triggers, alopement risk, communication barriers, regulation strategies that work, and medical
priorities for their child. These safety plans must be practiced, not just written down. Um there's a lot of um research showing that drills need to be um carried out and that oversightes can be identified during
drills. Incorporate and we think it's important to incorporate differentiated drill participation to accommodate uh students with psychological or developmental needs. Um, we want students to be included in drills to the greatest extent possible, but we also want IEP
teams to consider whether students who've experienced trauma or who struggle with sensory regulation would benefit from inclusion. And we think these plans should include substitutes and staff for staff absences. Again, more than one adult
should know a student's emergency support procedure. But for us as mothers, uh what's most important is not compliance. Uh we feel these are important for student safety. They're about student equity, and most
of all, they're about dignity. In summary, we're asking for a comprehensive inclusion improvement plan, inclusive facilities and playgrounds prioritization, age 14 transition IEPs requirement, a district
toileting policy, and individualized student safety plans in IEPs. Thank you very much. And we have some resource links on the back page for everyone. Thank you. That was a excellent presentation.
Trusty Holly, >> thank you very much. That was really interesting. And I just have a couple of things. I do I'm really appreciate the goal for the prek because I do know that the more we invest in inclusive practices in prek, the better off all of
us are as we move towards graduation. So, it's really important to focus there. And I really welcome a summit to really talk about this because I think sometimes just when I'm in the community, these ideas aren't wrapped around everyone's heads. And we still
have this idea of a special education class, right? Which obviously we're talking about here, but it's really hard to get to that kind of creative space where you can envision a world where every single building is equally inclusive for all people with
disabilities. um which includes older people working in our buildings and why we always have to be able to equ um go in through the front door equally. That's such an important thing for us. The other thing I wanted to ask you because I'm really
glad that this has come up right now. I kind of wanted to hear how you felt about this DOJ memo that just came out um about ADA and um the the federal government basically saying the states
don't have to follow these things. I don't know if it just came out yesterday. It's kind of disturbing and frightening. And what if I think you've read it and maybe you could um just talk to me a little bit about it because when we talk about these big goals which are
very important if we're always being pushed back from powers that be we never get to this place because we're always fighting to hold on to what we have. And so maybe if I could just get a few words from that that would be helpful to me as
I talk to other people. We definitely have concerns as well about, you know, the defunding of the Department of Education and everything moving to home health services. Um, that's a big um worry of ours because, you know, I don't we don't feel that that department can truly handle
education needs and the things that our students need to truly succeed. So, we're also definitely very very concerned about that, of course. Um but when it comes back to like the playground situation, you know, we've been talking to um the director of the facilities and you know, he's come back to us time and time again about you
know, we are ADA compliant, we are ADA compliant, but we just want to put the focus on there about being more than just ADA compliant, but being in truly inclusive, especially right now while we do have all of this money for um playgrounds that are being rebuilt right now and being restructured that we're having that in the forefront of our mind
to go above above and beyond just being ADA compliant, but just being truly inclusive. So that's one thing that we've been working with the director of facilities about. >> Dr. Vasquez, >> um this is a question more for the
district. Um when can we expect a followup on um some of the recommendations presented by the committee and how we can adopt those. Um I think our relationship with um CAC members and district at large um has
been improving um considerably and I value these women and these um parents who bring forth really um exceptional recommendations. I think to answer your question Dr. Velasquez. Um, since it is summer break and people are out and about, I think we will convene a time to
really dig in um with our team um especially our board with CIC to really d divulge the the areas in which um we can um inform our school sites when they're having their IEP meetings and having the safety plans and I couldn't agree more. um being in charge of the
safety plans as a whole um making sure that students can who are deaf and hardened hearing or who do not see that or the over sensories like they mentioned are critical and they're absolutely right because when that adult is out um we need to have a backup. So I'll be working with um Mrs. Lara Barbara our senior director of special
education to address um all of these and we expect to hopefully have um some type of an implementation once we begin the school year. So um what would be useful too would be to have uh a date or a time frame for
which some of the recommendations are very specific like uh policy recommendation. Okay. So the toiletry com policy er what is the recommendation from staff and how to proceed and what how how long and what would it take for
implementation the guidelines for facilities? What would uh what would take for um facilities to take this into consideration and what would be the timeline to receive recommendations on
how to adopt some of those in our construction guidelines as we move through the facility allocations. >> May I also add that none of the recommendations that the CAC have brought forward is anything that they're springing on us as a surprise. They have
been in communication with us for um a length of time on nuances of this and have offered their support to lead some of it as well from the parent perspective. Um in particular inclusion um a lot of planning around our SIP grant. There have been some adjustments
that we're you know working with them on um and these are very practical and implementable. They so things that we've already received nuances from are incorporated in our special education program implementation plan. We had that program review that actually unearthed a
lot of similar um you know generalities. Uh CAC has distilled it to some specific actions that they want to see. So we have attached that to the the program review. Um in the transition with Dr. Reynoso and Miss Barbara um you know our CAC has been a very stable and steady
force. So, these are things that are consistent with goals that we're already working on that we just want to make sure that we actually put into action since they are so implementable. Um, but I wanted to just note that those goals are there. >> We can also provide an update to the
board um and communicate as things um progress and provide updates um for you all so that we can give you um and and like Dr. Hill said some of these things I think are um available as soon as possible and some are going to probably just take some time in terms of um
curating and um collaborating with them. So we're looking forward to the opportunity um with their teams and the departments. >> Thank you Trusty Harden. >> Thank you. Um I you know the the the CAC's sort of mantra is collaboration, advocacy and community and all three of
you are the dream team when it comes to doing exactly that. So, I thank you for your service and I welcome our new leadership next year and look forward to working with you. Um, I also support the inclusion summit. I would be nice if we could make a commitment to that. Um, I
think it's educational as well as um fostering those the sort of collaborations and inclusive mindsets, but it also helps bring the community along which you know is always important to do and I think that um that also is your mission as well. So, even if community partners can sort of help
facilitate, you know, maybe that's a way to take the load off staff. Um, the co-creation aspect, I love that. Um, and perhaps there's an opportunity to come alongside the facilities master planning process when it comes to intentional,
you know, design for the kinds of spaces, play spaces that you're talking about that we can really kind of set a new template for what that could be, you know, in the short term and the the long term. So, thank you >> Trusty Kenny.
>> Great job. Um, I I did have some questions for staff. So there's been a few articles and um one by Angette I think it's Pelleteer from school services talking about uh what an opportunity the additional
funding this year from the state is for special education to create more inclusion as a long-term efficiency and costsaver in the long term for special ed. And I don't know if we've really because you know the budget
just really started about a month ago if we've really had a chance but is are we intending to think about using some of the new funding to create more inclusion? Is that on our agenda for this coming year?
So what a conversation that we're having around inclusion actually is really well exemplified by the diagram that you had um around the least restrictive environment and really talking about that that at its core in essence. It's a belief system and it's an understanding. It's a mindset as well as a placement.
And so we do know that we've created placement opportunities that will move us closer to inclusion. um but without the understanding of all parties of how to do it well, why we're doing it, the benefits of doing it um for the students, the families and the other
students um as well. We are um we may almost be harming uh you know that that classroom environment. So a lot of this has to be poured into professional development, training as well as creating the structures. So, in a conversation when um Miss Barbara uh
came on board, one of the initial meetings we actually had was with um the uh the I was going to say purveyors, the the dispensers of the the SIP grant and inclusion and where are we as a school district. Um, and they uh gave us some
guidance around actually utilizing their tier one resources because at the the level of what we were kind of describing to them on how we wanted to expend some of the grant funds and things like that, they they said, "Let's not be naive. You could possibly be putting the cart before the horse by imagining that
everybody will just magically do this very well." And so, here are some tier one ideas that we think you should consider that are actually maybe lower in or direct the funds in a certain way so that you can build uh sort of that foundation that allows for later when we
implement that structure for it to be successful. So that's the kind of work that we we are carrying out. So as to the funds that um that were written about absolutely we see that that's an opportunity um but we just need to be methodical so that we're doing it the right way. >> Okay. So that's something that could be
reported on to the board. And then on the inclusive playgrounds I know Mr. Dunning has shared the design standards and these are huge documents that my computer just does not want to show me or it wants to download them. I'm afraid that my entire computer will
be taken over and then actually when I do get into them they are engineer talk. They don't make sense. So I can't tell if we have included some inclusion type ideas into our playground design
standards that we've already created. So maybe that's a question that someone can come back. I know Mr. Dunning's not in this week, but I can't tell how much of this may already be in there, but that is what we are then giving to everyone saying here's, you know, architects and contractors, here's what to build. So if
it's not there, we're not going to get it. So maybe that's a first step is just understanding what's there and what we could add. And then um I know last August we updated our policy and went a little bit beyond the state for
transitions uh for transition meetings. And so the state said high school, the first year of high school or by age 16. And we said 8th grade or the first year of high school or if the IEP team thinks
possible or preferable to do it by age 16. And I know we want to give some time for implementation, especially when we push to eighth grade because that's involving middle schools who may or may not have been part of a transition process before as opposed to where high
schools have been doing it all along. Is this something that we might be ready to make some more changes to this policy and implement? I mean, let us know. will let us know if it should come back to policy and take out the option to go to 16 and have it either be eighth grade or
first year of high school because I like I said we just made that change last August and I don't know that we've really heard back about >> whether broad implementation but we just want to make sure that parents are getting the information early on so they're not caught off guard later in
high school when their kids aren't on the track they think they're on. >> True. I do think the um outreach and having the um what did you call it the ninth grade I think was a San Francisco example you showed. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. >> That would be a good thing to have. But again, if there's something we need to
do and I'm sensitive to implementation doesn't happen overnight just because you change the policy language. So >> I mean I know it's a long meeting but the short answer is yes. The the longer answer is that while the board policy is in place and it moves in the same direction which is a good thing um maybe
some minor tweaks the implementation itself also required staff time and you know training. We have a shared understanding and belief that earlier transition planning is better. Dr. Blanco and I recently just had a parent meeting as well about students even knowing what their pathways are
postsecary um are difficult to have when they're 18. And so um we definitely want to other pathways. The board policy allows us to do it and dictates that we do it. It's more about the transition within our own department to lead it. So that's we know where we are on that.
>> Dr. Blanco and then Trusty Baley. >> Okay. I didn't know if you had something on piggybacking. >> Yeah. My question my first question is for staff. Um, I just wanted to know what what are the barriers to meeting
the the LRES uh the LRE targets year after year and how can the board support you in accomplishing that? How can we support your work? >> So, I was going to speak to a little
about Mrs. Kenny said, but I also can speak um to your question, Mrs. Bailey. So um you know uh we just set our priorities as SLT and extended SLT at our SLT retreat and special ed is one of the top priorities and you know we have
agreed that um a department cannot make the changes that are necessary for students with disabilities alone. It takes everybody in the organization taking ownership and working together. So um that will be um one of our focuses that we work on this year and really
removing uh barriers. Um barriers can be um technical and adaptable, right? And a lot of it is sometimes um people not having the skills in training and other times belief systems, right? And myths about students and it can be students
with disability, students of color, English learners, right? And we're always trying to work to overcome and give that cultural competence to our staff so they believe that they can work with all children that it doesn't take a specialist, right, that has to come and
help them. So um that's training that we have been doing for um the last few years. But um I appreciate your presentation and I want you to know that this is at the going to be at the center of our work next year.
>> I I had one more. So my other um well it's a comment I guess um in my office in our office today at the college there was a big board out there
and um they were talking about basically inclusivity just like we are at the college level. And there was a staircase. And the staircase caught my eye because it was it was like a square like you're
walking into a large facility. And embedded in the staircase was the wheelchair ramp. It was beautiful. But what it demonstrated was inclusivity.
you know, so the the students who require the ramp are going up the stairs at the same time as the students who can take the stairs. And so everyone was going up together. And I meant to take a picture of it, but I'm going to take a
picture of it and make sure that um our facilities uh director gets that because I think that would be um a great um uh st a great what item to put into to build into um our development, our pro
our facilities. Um, you guys, I'm sorry I have a headache today, but to build into our work as we go through and and do the work on our our facilities. So, I just wanted to say that it's beautiful. So, this this conversation is
so timely and I do have to say I you you all are like a breath of fresh air for this committee and I really really appreciate your commitment to that committee and the work that you're
doing. I mean, it's it's professional. It's it's like really great. I really appreciate it and I'm so happy to have you all in that space right now. So, thank you. Thank you. >> Thank you. We really appreciate that and I appreciate your comments on uh
adaptability because what we're asking for is yes things that our special uh need students can use but adaptable uh features inclusive features can be used by everyone. Everyone can use a ramp, everyone can use an adaptable swing. So I appreciate you acknowledging that.
Thank you >> after me. Um thank you. I I also support the summit idea and um I guess I would ask you know for me nothing happens unless
it's scheduled. So if we had a summit and then maybe I'm asking you know Dr. Blanco uh what or Dr. Hill you know when would the summit happen? Would it be like a summer summit or winter summit? Like is there a best time better time
for that? We could uh talk to districts like Rialto, places that have done multidispas have had inclusion summits and we can talk to them about the logistics of it. I know I believe that they did it during school um during the school year because they were able to
get funding for uh substitutes so that educators could take part in this summit. And um we'd love to find all those nitty-gritty details and make this something that's actionable. Um, and there are districts that we can talk to about how they financed it, planned it, and got that money to support uh,
teacher involvement. >> Okay, it's good to hear that you've already got your feelers out. And I mean, we can really lead on this and, you know, invite other districts to participate in it. Uh my favorite slide is the playgrounds because it really
just illustrates the room for improvement and uh and I I I also am very grateful for their patience in educating us um to really understand what our students needs are.
Um and I I also want to uh understand you know our progress and I hope that this is not going to be the same ask next year you know where nothing happens. So um I look forward to the progress reports on that. Um yes Dr.
same >> I was just reminded that um the depart the federal government just extended the deadline for digital accessibility for the universities and I wondered is that deadline extended for K12 and it has
been but we at the university level we've had a real difficulties uh meeting those deadlines so the ability of the K12 system to plan ahead head of meeting that and that means accessibility for
all um digital materials including everything that's posted in canvas by every single teacher. So that landline is coming and so when we come back and talk about our preparedness it would be
nice to think about um what is the plan to meet those deadlines as well. We need a whole day for this. I think we would love this topic. Um, yeah, half an hour was not enough. But thank you so much. This is a great presentation.
Is there any uh public comment for closed? >> Yes, there are three cards. >> Okay. Three minutes. Two minutes. Actually, we're kind of behind some too.
>> Fine. Okay, Rachel. >> Well, I'll come back to Rachel. Laura Arias Mononttoya. Two minutes. Sorry, never done it before. >> Hi, my name is Laura Aries and I'm a
PUSD parent. My son is not part of this bed community, but he was in an inclusion class at Don Bonito in TK and kinder and this is how the program benefited our family. Inclusion provided differentiated education. My child is classified as gifted and struggles with
the slow pace of school. The sped teacher was trained to spot these differences, met him where he was at academically, and the sped teacher, not gened, gave him advanced reading material and second grade math work in TK. This was the only work that engaged
him in school. Inclusion developed his leadership skills. He came in very much a bit of a follower. And in this class, he learned to help his classmates stand up for his friends, which gave him confidence and turned him into a leader in class. an inclusion different was the
norm. Because of increased neural connectivity, gifted kids often have higher sensorial sensitivity. This is why my son is extremely sensitive to loud noises and wears headphones in loud places. Because the class was set up for inclusion, he was provided with
headphones as needed, and it was no big deal socially because lots of kids wore them. He didn't feel out of place. Inclusion gave him lasting friendships. My son's best, longest lasting friendship is with an autistic boy that he wouldn't have met if it weren't for the inclusion class. They're so close
that my son calls him his brother. He found he had stuff in common with most of the kids in his class. The non-verbal boy was really funny. The boy with delays knew everything about dinosaurs. Inclusion made explaining my son's differences smoother. Now a rising first
grader in a non-inclusion class, my son's differences are more pronounced. He asks why he's reading Percy Jackson while his classmates are just starting to read sentences. We explain that all kids have different abilities. He genuinely understands because he saw it
was true in his inclusion class. He accepts that he's just another kind of different, but that he still belongs. Rachel Azeroth. >> Hi everybody. Hi everybody. Um this is my daughter Billy. Billy, do you want to say hi? Don't. I only have two minutes.
Um anyh who um I brought her because uh it's terribly manipulative and um uh pull on heartstrings, but also it's important to uh see a face. It's very powerful, right? Um I'm here to support
the adaptive playground equipment. Um, my daughter is not in a wheelchair, but um, I don't know who makes um, those ADA compliance standards. I think it's a man
that lives on an island that's never been around children or playgrounds. Um the the uh the ADA requirements allow my daughter to get to the playground and
not use it. They allow her to get to the playground and touch it and they allow her to get to the playground and watch other kids have fun rather than having her engage it. Um so when I go around the community, I look for playgrounds where she can actually participate.
Um, and I I I strongly strongly support um considering our playgrounds moving forward to include adaptive equipment for her and for all kids like her and also the neurotypical kids. It's kind of like going to a car dealership and
saying, "I want to take this car for a test drive." And the salesman bringing you to the car and he's saying, "There you go." And you want to get in the car. So you're like, "Can I have the key?" He's like, "No. Can I have Can I get in the car? No.
Well, how am I supposed to test drive it? Yeah. I don't know. This analogy worked much better in the mirror. Much better in the mirror. Um, but please consider doing it for kids like her. Right. Do you want to say bye-bye?
>> Bye-bye. Thank you, Lene. Gonzalez. Good evening everyone. I can't help but feel very troubled to to hear the the asks for special education parents, a community that I spent 19 years of my life in Roosevelt
Elementary. And here Dr. Blanco said that after a recent retrieve, you realize that you cannot make a decision without considering them. The facility task force that included some board members and their husbands have no special education input or
consideration. Yet, they decided that it was a very brilliant idea to close Roosevelt that had all the accessibility and fullsize changing tables and everything that a special education child can dream. Before you go into a
close session and settle all kinds of special education cases, I want you to remember that the organizational charge puts students at the top, not vendors, contractors, consultants, because that's what's happening here. It's been happening for over a decade. And so the
unfortunate recent incident at Madison Elementary where a student suffered a severe head injury was a combination of unsafe school conditions, poor supervision staffing, and a failure to correct
issues that were already reported to facilities and the school principles. The current facilities master plan should be completely scrapped because of a number of reasons including the ongoing school consolidations,
special needs uh requirements and the exaggeration of the cost assumptions to build these sites. $128 million to rebuild a school is completely exaggerated and this is not
okay. and the children are suffering. So I encourage you to remember the educational chart and invest on the schools and the zones where the school age children live and not spend irresponsibly. You're very welcomed.
>> Actually, you're not welcome. >> Is there any more public comment? >> Oh, thank you. >> All right. I think uh that concludes the public comment for close. So we're recessing to close. Hey. Hey. Hey.
Nat. Hey. Hey. Heat. Heat. Hallelujah. Heat. Heat. Hey, hey, hey. I don't know. Happy birthday. Hallelujah. Hallelujah. Heat. Heat.
Uh-huh. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Hello. Come on. I don't Heat. Heat. Heat.
Heat. I don't know. Hey. Hey. Heat. Heat. Louder. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. N. Heat. Heat. Hallelujah.
Heat. Heat. Hallelujah. Heat. Heat. Come on. Come on. I Oh, hey. Hello. Come on.
Heat. Heat. N. Hey, hey, hey. Hey, hey, hey. Hey. Hey. Hey. I do. I know you. Christmas. Hey.
Hallelujah. Come on. Hey, hey, hey. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Hey. Hey. Hey.
Hallelujah. I don't know. Doo doo doo doo doo doo doo. Hallelujah. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Oh yeah. Hello. Hello. calling the meeting to order.
A public announcement of close session concerning item F1, case number 2026020052 by a vote of 7 to zero. The board took action to approve of the settlement of special education litigation in accordance of the terms of a written
agreement concerning item F2 case number 202603 0686 by a vote of 7 to zero. The board took action to approve of the settlement of special education litigation in accordance with the terms of written agreement concerning item F3 case number
20260400002 by a vote of 7 to zero. The board took action to approve of the settlement of special education litigation in accordance with terms of written agreement concerning item F4 case number 933494 by a vote of 7 to zero. The board took
action to approve of the settlement of special education litigation in accordance with the terms of written agreement. The announcement of close session session item actions session actions is complete and the close session stands adjourned. Calling meeting to order at 6:38.
Roll call, please. >> Here. >> Here. >> Here. >> Here. >> Here. Here. Here.
here. Dr. >> Hill, would you like to lead us in the pledge of allegiance, please? How many public comment cards do we have? Trusty McKenzie >> 49 at the initial. >> I'd like to propose one minute public
comments. Okay. Thank you. All right. Good evening everybody. Before we get to the speakers who are here in person, I'd like to acknowledge that the board of education acknowledge the receipt of public comments received by way of email. These comments will be made part of the permanent record of
this meeting. Now, in order to facilitate all of you who have come out tonight to have your voices heard, we are going to allow you to speak for one minute each. Our policy allows for 30 minutes of public comment, but we are going to be
gracious and extend the time so we can get through all 49 of you who requested to speak at the beginning. Help us. Help everyone have a chance to speak by really adhering to this one minute time limit. When that bell stops, I need you to complete your sentence, wrap your
thought up, and let's move to the next speaker. >> Um, let me remind people last time uh public comment was done very well and uh I reminded people that if you could please respect the one minute that each person gets. If people start uh making
noise over their time, we will stop the clock and allow them to finish out their public one minute public comment. Thank you. >> Okay, I'm going to call the first three speakers if you can be on deck. Fiona Burgess,
Felita Keeling, Rami, Miss Rahi, If you could line up the next people that would help facilitate. Go ahead, Felita. Since you're here, when the others come, we'll take them in that order.
Good evening, trustees. Superintendent um Blanco, one minute. I Well, first I'll state I'm opposed to resolution 2852. I said my public comment already, but I want to make a statement. In 20 2009 to 2010, I served on the strategic plan steering committee. Um, one of the
things I really loved about the committee was the fact that when they when the when the district contacted us, we had about 15 people that came in to this boardroom. We sat around. We went to talk to stakeholders. We had people in our homes. We had we went to Villa
Park, Ala Park, Jackie Robinson Center. We went around the community and really spoke with people about what was happening. The outcome is we spoke to over 800 stakeholders and what we now know as linked learning was part of the success with that committee because we went to the community and spoke with them. I would love to challenge the
board to bring people not just 30 people the community together to really have vision and purpose and strategies and making changes. And again, I'm opposed to resolution 2852. Good evening everyone. My name is Ramit
Misrai. I'm a Linda Vista resident. I live less than a block away from the school in the park. Um the park is really special. During co when we didn't even live in the neighborhood, we would come in and my boy would get to play there. He still plays there all the time. Every week, sometimes multiple
times a week. I urge you as you are considering a plan for that space to preserve the park to protect it, not to move it because it's not going to be what it is if you try to move it to a different place. It's not going to be able to be there during construction and for the families in the neighborhood who
really rely on it. Um it really makes a difference. I'm grateful. I know you are all putting in a lot of time and care and thought um to try to find a plan that allows for use of the space while still allowing it to be a pillar of the community that it is. So, thank you very
much all of you for your consideration. >> Hi, I'm Fiona Bergos. Um I uh in in you're seeking to restart the consolidation process. Um, I want to say that we understand there are intense financial pressures. Um, but we can be intentional about how we proceed so that
we can protect vulnerable kids from bearing the brunt of these decisions. Uh, we need detailed plans before decisions are made about which consolidations to do. Uh, on how exactly these would work. How, for example, could you move IB and preserve the IB
authorization uh preserve the DIP program with Spanish that it also has um and not just move it uh without thinking through how this could work, how the interd district families could retain their authorizations to be here. The equity analysis should also include beyond just race, but um special
education students, LGBTQIA plus students, um and also um detailed data on the programs that people care about most at these schools and how to preserve them. Thank you. >> Thank you so much. The next three
speakers on deck are Sakoro Selenus, Isla Hill, and Allison Melo. Alisa Melo. My name is Isa Hill. I am 8 years old. I have a sister named Cleo who is four years old. I'm here speaking for all the
kids of Linda Vista. Please don't take our park. It is the best park in the world. All the kids love it. We need a safe a safe place to play that is that is not next to our road. Save the park,
please. Thank you. Thank you. >> Hi, good evening. Um, my name is Allison. I'm here to speak about the tree removal. Uh, that still stands as an issue. Um, I want to say that I'm deeply empathetic to the issue of dealing with um, recovery postfire, but
I'd also like to encourage the district to further evaluate alternatives to tree removal where feasible. Um, recently I spoke with professionals uh, professional contractors via arborare about soil remediation methods such as air spading and wet vacuum excavation
um, which can remove contaminated soil while preserving established trees in appropriate situations. Blair High School appears to be an especially strong candidate for exploring these approaches. The proposed trees there are not only potentially well suited for targeted soil replacement, but they also serve as a critical frontline defense
against the um constant pollution generated by the 110 freeway. If we act now, we have time to um we have time and resources to do this the right way. Um we urge PSD to take another look at alternatives and work with the community for solutions. Thank you.
>> Calling again for Sakoro Selenas. In the meantime, when she comes up, we'll take her, but I'll call the next three. Claire Robinson, Jessica Richards, Ryan Fulture.
>> I'm Jessica Richards, but there's someone before me, right? >> We'll take her when she comes. But you're here. >> All right. I'll hit it. All right. Hello. While I was optimistic hearing about alternative med methods being considered last week, the motion that passed was disappointing, providing zero
commitment to spare even a single tree. Further disappointment was the false dichotomy presented by the board. Save the children from contaminated soil or spare the trees. Both are possible. Trees are not simply aesthetic. They are public health asset with heat related illnesses on the ride. Rise. Shade is
not a luxury. It's a necessity. Professionally, I'm a child therapist. Trees and nature have researchbacked benefits for crucial areas of emotional regulation, attention, and reduced aggression. All critical for learning. I ask, please engage independent arborists to reassess the trees. Presently, there
are many errors and underreported DBHs. That is critical in determining protected status. Please refrain from a one-sizefits-all approach to this project. Some areas not used by students can take a slower method such as bio remediation while using hydrojet is may be better for student to get students
back in that area. >> Good evening. My name is Brian Fulture. I live at South Oak Null. I'm a mechanical engineer, professional engineer, retired. I'm here to talk about trees. We're very in very well informed about tree protection ordinances at the city because we have a
protected tree. And what I'd like to quickly point out in a time that's very limited is public outreach. It is your duty to inform the public. Is your duty to comply with the law in this particular case is a tree protection ordinance. Developing a tree protection plan, a root protection plan.
This little brochure about the trees outside this building doesn't have the word tree in it. That's the point of the mission. Um, certified arborist report, SQL report, and what are you going to do when you dig a hole in the ground and you find out it's cost more to fill it back again
than you anticipated? This is a major undertaking. There needs to be a decidedly assertive effort to find other soil remediation methods that aren't so intrusive to cut the entire trees down. Thanks for your attention. Hi, good evening. My name is Claire
Robinson. I'm the managing director of Amigos Deos Rios. We've been a longtime partner with the district planting trees, trying to green and reap the benefits for mental health, academic performance, physical fitness. And first, I'd like to say how very sorry I
am about the fire that we've all been navigating post-traumatic stress disorder and how important the trees are to children's health. And I think Allison mentioned particularly Blair as an example. We've had a lot of fun just looking at the the list of trees and
where they are with respect to the contamination. What contamination is there? And since we're near JPL and NASA, what the technology is to save trees that has a cost benefit that is equal or less than the idea of chopping them down and putting them into a way
site. 5,000 pounds of particles, 2.5 PMT, which is goes straight into your blood and your lung tissue. uh would be saved if we could find a way to save for example the Blair trees. Thank you so much.
>> Sakoro Selenas will still have an opportunity when she makes her way into the room. But Rebecca Lada Elizabeth from Upper Hastings Ranch and Kathy Greg. >> Hi, thank you for the opportunity to speak. I was the city forester in
Pasadena from 97 to 2002. I wrote the original tree ordinance which would apply to the to the project in Lenda Vista and also should apply to the the projects that are going on for tree removal in the other areas of Pasadena. Um we know that there are discrepancies
in the current maps um including the zones for where the testing was done ver and and the fact that some of the verit test maps have expanded zones that aren't explained. We need to understand why there's inconsistencies. We measured
trees and found that there were big errors in the size of the trees as they were measured. We really feel like there needs to be an independent arborist looking at the trees and and what was recorded. We have not seen a tree report because we have not been given the data.
We put in a foyer request on June 2nd. We still don't have the information and that makes it very difficult for us to try to understand what you're trying to do. Good evening. I'm resident of Upper Hastings Ranch and I'm concerned about how Don Bonito is being treated
regarding resolution 2852. The resolution by definition should not even include Don Bonito. Don Bonito does not even meet the resolution's criteria. So remove Don Bonito from the closure list and resent resol resolution 2852
and vote no on resolution 2894. Thank you. That was Mona on the card because she has to leave right now. So I put her in front of me. It's right after Kathy. You'll see it. Okay. Got it. Okay. Good. All right. Um,
I live in Upper Hastings Ranch and I want to understand why PUSD appears to prioritize real estate projects over educational needs. Dominito is being denied funding it is entitled to. While the district plans to spend $218 million to demolish and rebuild San Raphael,
this is difficult to justify when San Raphael has only 40 more students than Don Bonito. It seems the district believes a new campus will attract families, but parents choose schools based on academic safety and student outcomes, not shiny new buildings. PUSD already draws families to strong
elementary programs like San Raphael's DLI. Yet, many still leave after fifth grade. A new facility won't fix that. Why not a standard $35 million modernization instead and invest the savings in strengthening programs, outreach, and addressing the middle
school cliff? This would better address enrollment losses and be more fiscally responsible with taxpayer dollars. Please reconsider this plan and resend resolution 2852 and vote no on
resolution 2894. Thank you. >> Thank you, Elizabeth. >> Good evening. I live in Upper Hastings Ranch about a half a block from Don Bonito. Uh, I don't understand why Don Bonito is even being considered for closure. Don Bonito does not meet your
own resolutions criteria. You need to unlock Don Bonito's withheld Measure own measure O bond money to begin matching the upgrades at other schools such as Longfellow. Rescend resolution 2852 now and do not create any new hasty
resolutions to cover up your poor management of a multi-million dollar federal windfall. Leave Don Bonito alone. It is an outstanding school. It is not your scapegoat for your deficit.
Thank you very much. >> Thank you. The next three speakers are Tim Martinez, Bianca Vasquez, Amy Valencia. >> Good evening. Uh, I'm Tim Martinez. Uh, I also wanted to speak about the tree
removals. Um, I'm concerned that at the the recent motion you made did not provide a clear guarantee that the trees are protected under Pasadena's tree protection ordinance and will actually be preserved or that proper permits will be required before potential removal. That's troubling. Uh, if the city's tree
ordinance applies, then PSD should comply fully and transparently. Protected trees should not be removed without the required review, permits, and findings. And even for trees that may not legally be protected, the district should be doing everything feasible to preserve the mature canopy.
Alternatives do exist uh including careful soil removal, air excavation, hand work around roots, or sight specific remediation plans. Those alternatives should be required to be uh looked at before mature uh trees are removed. I'm asking you to please pause unnecessary removals, fully comply with
Pasadena's tree protections, provide clear public information about which trees are being removed and why. Thank you. Hello, I'm Amy Valencia at 1313 Bryant Street and I appreciate everything
you've done thus far for moving the proposals. Um, my question was how what was the deciding factor on the one that you went with because it's requiring moving the park and and moving it in
front of the library. Um, my house faces that area and there's no trees whatsoever and there's established trees in the park and I just feel like there's only concrete in front of my house. Um,
the proposal you went with is wanting to move the park and there was another proposal that was wanting to keep the park and I know it's about getting the the money you need but the other proposal was I I don't know was never
brought I guess or picked so I just wanted to know the deciding factor for that. Thank you. Calling again for Bianca Vasquez. Okay, moving on to the next three speakers. Patricia Perrera, Upper Hastings Ranch, John Deto and Nathan
Kaer Kaiser. Good evening. I'm going to make this point very clear before I get cut off. resin resolution 2852 and remove Don Bonito from the closure list and vote no on resolution 2894. I'm a community
member of Upper Hastings Ranch community and I'm concerned about PUSD's ability to responsibly manage its 1.5 million budget. Declining enrollment is not a new issue. You've closed 11 schools. Yet the district has responded without a
clear long-term plan. Instead of adjusting to a 13% drop in students, COVID relief funds appear to have been used temporarily offset ongoing deficit spending. Not a good choice. This approach has mass
structural financial issues and prolonged spending on administrative costs rather than addressing them directly. How does this benefit students? How does it support teachers? Okay, thank you. >> Hello, my name is Jonathan Yetto and I'm
also a Casey's Ranch resident. Uh, I still do not understand why Don Bonito is being targeted. When Cleveland Elementary closed in 2019, enrollment had been below 300 students for seven years and near 100 students for two years. Historically, schools were not
considered for closure until RO enrollment far fell far below Don Bonito's current enrollment of 347 students. Resolution 2852 established a minimum enrollment threshold of 300 students for K through five schools and states that schools falling below that
threshold for two consecutive years may be studied for closure. Don Bonito does not meet that criteria. So why is Don Bonito being targeted when it it exceeds the district's own minimum standard? Past closures also came at a cost. When Cleveland closed, families left the
district taking valuable ADA funding with them. If Don Bonito does not qualify under your own policy, then the community deserves a clear explanation. Remove Don Bonito from this list and resend resolution 2852 and vote no on resolution 2894.
>> Hi, my name is Nathan Kaiser. I also live in Upper Hastings Ranch and I'm here to ask why major upgrades at Don Bonito have been frozen. Is this related to any consideration of closing the campus? Don Bonito's $25 million master plan funding has been paused, but the
campus is still entitled to baseline safety and maintenance work. This includes HVAC repairs, ADA accessibility fixes, and IT infrastructure upgrades that are needed for daily operations. With roughly $ 1.5 billion dollars in voter approved bond funds from Measure O
in 2020 and Measure R in 2024, we are requesting clarity on where the funding is going. Please unfreeze Don Bonito's modernization funds, resend resolution 2852, and vote no on resolution 2894.
Thank you. >> Thank you so much. The next three speakers, I believe it's Enlo Perez Lreti, followed by Elizabeth Perez Lreti. Forgive me if I am not pronouncing your name correctly. I'm so sorry. And Mario
Ascari. Hello, my name is Chloe Perez Prey and I live in the Linda Vista neighborhood. Um, for a long as long as I've lived in Linda Vista, I've gone to the park whenever I needed to stretch my legs, play with my brother, or take my my dog on a walk.
Um, when uh closing down the park means shutting down play. Cutting down trees means less fresh air. In conclusion, please keep the park open and don't cut down trees. Thank you. >> Thank you, Chloe. Hello board members. My name is Liz
Perezo Prey. My family walks to Linda Vista Park on a regular basis. One of the things we most value is how safe and peaceful it feels, especially during busy Rose Bowl events. I understand the reason for its redevelopment, but I respectfully ask that tonight's decision
not lock preliminary design. Please require a series of community design sessions so residents can work alongside the developers to find solutions that protect what makes the park special. I also ask that you preserve the mature trees because once they are gone, they
cannot be replaced within our children's lifetime. I ask that you keep the park in its current locations as it would allow families to use this cherished community space throughout much of the construction process rather than losing access to it for years while a new park
is built elsewhere. Please let the community help design a future that includes both housing and a park that families can continue to enjoy for generations. Hello, my name is Mario Ascari and I'm a resident of the upper Hastings Ranch as
well. And u I want to know why PUSD temporarily uh used the temporary pandemic relief funds to create permanent financial obligation by hiring staff and increasing ongoing payroll. I
also want to share my own experience. I'm a realtor. I work up there and I know by closing school not only you don't save money you're going to lose money and also it hurts the education of the students. So, it's a losing purpose
and I think uh by closing the school and u the you know misappropriating the fund you're not going to save any money you're going to lose. It's a temporary solution for a long-term problem. It's like masking the problem. So, I also
like to resend the um resolution 2852 and no resolution 2894. >> Thank you so much. The next three speakers are Deborah Tannenbomb, Jenny Clifton,
Ashley Lincoln. Hello and thank you for doing your job. um as a resident on Oaknull, as a former acute care neo nurse, as well as a masters in special ed and a masters in ESL and teaching LA Unified up to PCC
and then on to Glendo College. I care a lot about educating our youth. I think um and my concern is tree removals. Please don't cut down the trees. Remediate the soil without the
trees. By the way, why not remediate soil at McKinley Avenue in Elliott Junior High where students have played on this soil for a year and a half? The wind blows from north to south or east to west. And if it's it's hitting those that field, then it's hitting the field
for the school as well. Are trees being removed to spend um removed to spend approximately a half a million to a million instead of educating our students with this money? Let's support educating our students and st other ways to consolidate. Don't cut
the streets. Thank you. >> My name is Ashley Lincoln and I'm a parent of two sped students at Don Bonito. My oldest is in a special day class and my youngest is an RSP student in a Jedi classroom. I'm here tonight to express my support for all the CAC's
recommendations that you heard earlier, particularly having more inclusive programming across all grade levels. While my children are thriving in their current settings, they and all students would benefit from more inclusive spaces. I chose to send my children to public school because our neighborhood schools reflect the diverse community in
which we live. This includes disability. Um, not only would my neurodiverse children learn how to be successful in their community, but neurotypical children would see that differences are not scary or bad and that they can be friends with children with different abilities than themselves. Inclusive
inclusivity leads to acceptance and belonging. At a time when public education and the disabled community are being attacked by their current administration, these lessons are even more important. My children deserve to be in public space, and that work begins now in elementary school. Thank you.
Thank you so much. Is Jenny Clinton in the room? We'll come back to her. Cat Chavez, Robert Decker, Shaina Palote. We've got some folks that are in
overflow. So, we'll definitely um allow them to speak when they come in. >> Hi, my name is Cat Chavez. Um I am a recent graduate of the Master of Landscape Architecture program at CalPoly Pomona and I went to public schools in Los Angeles County my entire life. I'm here to express my concern
about the tree removal. Um, trees are not only first are first and foremost relatives and are part of our community, they are community members and that needs to be understood. But also as someone who grew up here and on this landscape, I think that trees are incredibly important to cultivating
students who will change the world later. Um, some of who might grow up to be in this discipline that I've chosen to be in and to do this work. And if the school district believes in that and believes in creating students who can do that, then the trees need to be there for the students to develop a
relationship with as early as possible in their lives. I just I think that for me it's it's devastating emotionally for me. I can't even imagine what losing these trees does to the students. Um so just I I beg you to please remove not
remove the trees. Thank you. Hi, thank you for the opportunity. Uh, Robert Decker. I live on Linda Vista. I'm pleased to see that the board is seriously considering doing something with the Linda Vista School, which has
been abandoned for almost 20 years. Uh, there's a problem with decay and a lot of other problems. But one of the problems I've seen thus far is that the preliminary plan that you've proposed
will increase the density of housing on that site um quite significantly. Furthermore, the outlet to the to the proposal takes all of the traffic onto Bryant Street across from the library.
You're going to have a difficult time managing traffic. It's going to be a big increase and it'll have a major effect on the library itself. So, I hope you consider what this design does for the area.
Thank you. >> I've been disappointed to witness the board making decisions about the soil remediation plan based on inaccurate and incomplete information. We understand PUSD hired wildlife biologists and found no bird nests. We hired our own wildlife biologist who differs with this opinion
and I will will read into the record a portion of her report. This relates to a nest high at top the Aleppo pine tree outside of this building on Hudson A which was partially cut about by your cut apart by your tree crews from biologist Mia Aguilera. Bird survey 62426
observed common raven pair and juvenile perched on building to the northwest of the tree about 500 ft away from the nest. adult was feeding the begging juvenile ravens circling area and perching in the tree northwest about 400 feet away at Pine Tree near the corner of Delmare and Oaknull. Based off
observations and high activity of ravens in the area, the nest is more than likely still occupied and used. I request that PUSD find another biologist to search for nests at sites where you plan to needlessly cut down trees during the height of nesting season. Nests continue to be built throughout the season.
>> Can you say your name for the record, please? Excuse me. Can you say your name? >> Oh, sorry. >> Shaina Palota. >> Thank you, Shaya. >> Kristen Ooa, Nicholas Harmon,
Twe Vanwin. I think I got it right. We'll put them on standby when they arrive. Ellie Cassan. >> Good evening. My name is Kristen Oo. I'm a resident homeowner in Pasadena. Um, I hope you are impressed by this
phenomenal show. The room that I came from is full. This room is full. Democracy is alive in Pasadena. And many of us are here to tell you that we want the trees preserved while soil is remediated without removing the trees.
Uh we don't believe that the resolution that you passed was sufficient. We saw right through it. You're not committing to preserve a single tree. Get an expert. Do not rely on your facilities director. He is not an expert. It's not a good idea for you to listen to him. We need a neutral monitor to monitor this
situation who's an expert. Um additionally, we're not going to go away. We're going to be here. We're going to be protecting the trees and Julia Butterfly Hill is coming to town and the media is only going to get more intense. So, please, please make a good
decision. Thank you. Y >> Hi, my name is Nick and I just want to speak on behalf of the trees as beings and I want to speak to the heart and we are all beings in this room and they are all beings out there and we are all one
thing and if we cut them down without looking into other methods of remediation I think that we're disrespecting trees that have been here for so long and deserve venerance and reverence and they deserve to be seen from the heart and cared for and seen
with the same amount of love that we would give to each other in this room. So that's all. Thank you. >> Good evening. Uh we are Ellie Kassen and Twean Nuion, co-founders of the local chapter of Schools Beyond Screens, founded in May. Our chapter includes 135
members of the PSUD community and is continuing to grow. The original Lost chapter of Schools Beyond Screens was instrumental in convincing their district to adopt the resolution using technology with intention which prioritize prioritizes children's development over corporate edtech
interests. We are coming to you today as a co coalition of parents and educators who are deeply concerned about screen time and technology usage in PUSD. We are calling on the district to review existing tech products and policies, block harmful and non-educational distractions, require independent
standards for efficacy, create real opt out pathways, and involve parents, teachers, and students in setting the rules and creating systems to ensure these rules are actually put into practice in our schools. We have already connected with district staff about starting a task force to formalize
edtech policy. Schools Beyond Screens is eager to collaborate with PUSD on this endeavor as we represent all corners of the district and many of our members have backgrounds in education and child development. Thank you. >> Hi Ellie Cassen. I'll pick up where Tweon left off. Um we are committed to
providing all children in PSD with quality instruction and human connection. We are treating this as a matter of urgency as new studies about the effects of edtech are already showing a decline in literacy and math levels, not to mention children's mental, emotional, and physical health.
Our goal is to have a task force in place before the start of the 26 27 school year, new policies piloted before the holidays, and comprehensive policy reform adopted by the end of the year. Ambitious, but we think we can do it with your support. Uh we ask that PUSD
board members and district staff support this effort to thoughtfully reform and enforce new policies so that technology service serves schools and our students instead of extracting from them. Thank you for your consideration.
Thank you so much. Calling again for Paloma Monise OA, Jenny Clinton, Bianca Vasquez, and Sakoro Selenus. Moving on, Susanna Castro,
Isis Graci, Hernandez. >> Good evening. Transparency matters. I hope proposed resolution 2894 is not another step toward reopening discussions about school closures without clearly stating that the intent that intention from the outset. If
school closures are being considered as part of the district transformation process, the community deserves to know that openly, not through broad language in a resolution that once again leaves families questioning where this process is ultimately headed. I'm especially concerned that an item of this magnitude
is being intro introduced during the summer when many families, students, teachers, and staff are away or have limited ability to participate. Decisions that could shape the future of our schools for decades should be discussed when the greatest number of our stakeholders have a meaningful opportunity to engage. If rebuilding
trust is truly the board's goal, this conversation should occur when the community can fully participate. As you move forward, please ensure that the voices helping shape this process are true stakeholders who are directly impacted by this process. Our concerns are valid. We deserve more than simply
being heard. >> Hi, can you say your name for the record? Paloma. >> Yeah, I'm Paloma. >> Um, hi, my name is Balamis Choa. I'm 17 years old and I've been tree sitting in the coast lively oak maroval in your parking lot right next to this building.
Your last resolution, thank you. Your last resolution on the protection of the tree isn't going to shoe us away. We see that your resolution doesn't guarantee the protection of any of these trees. You're not providing a good example for youth. You're teaching us to take the easy way out and to create a veneer that
you're actually doing something. I wouldn't call that a good example. you're um we are going to keep coming and we are going to keep showing up. Please take action on the public's concerns for the trees. Thank you. >> Hello, my name is Isis Graciano. I'm 17
years old and a resident here in Pasadena. I'm here because I oppose the removal of the trees. I've spoken before and I wanted to remind you once again that we are going to continue to show up. The rooms are overflowing with supporters. You have hundreds of people
supporting the trees and that will not stop. And I urge you to come back to this decision and to actually legally put into paper that these trees will not come down because there are so many people that will not allow that. And it
is so much easier for both you and us if you don't take the easy way out and find a way to and find a different way of so soil remediation other than just removing the trees. Thank you.
>> Thank you so much Stephanie Miller. Caroline Coner, Maggie Loel. >> Good evening. I am Maggie Loel. I am a licensed landscape architect. I'm one of
the founding members of Aladina Green. And since the fire, we've been working really hard to preserve the remaining trees in Altadena. We lost I believe about 50% of the canopy and many more at threat. So to see so many trees at risk
of being lost in Pasadena is just heartbreaking. Um so many of the students in Aladena are now attending these schools. So that's just another layer of trauma to add to them. Um this is my third meeting that I've attended on this topic. So, what I'm going to say
is not going to be brand new for any of you, but um I just want to reiterate that um the importance of the trees to kids health and well-being cannot hardly be stated. It's so important um and it's well documented and you have a
tremendous number of professionals, so arborists, soil scientists, people that are here to offer their services. So, please take advantage. They're Thank you. Hi, my name is Caroline Coner and my home is a fence away from Don Bonito
Elementary School. We all know that 11 schools have already been closed. Tonight, I ask each board member to take a moment to read the signs in front of you and look at the people holding them.
The signs that you read speak volumes about why additional school closures are unnecessary. In this room, we are the community you were elected to serve. I ask you to reflect only on a
single inquiry. What does servant leadership require of me now as a board member of PUSD? And here is a quote. If I am not for myself, who will be for me?
If I am only for myself, what am I? And if not now, when? >> Thank you so much. >> My name is Stephanie Miller and I'm here to oppose the approval of resolution 28.95.
I think it is premature to sign any agreement with a developer. There needs to be more community thought and discussion about three things. First of all, a community park in Linda Vista.
Second, the density of construction that is being considered. 32 homes is way too many homes. And third, there needs to be reflection on the traffic impact of whatever homes are built. So I ask you please do not approve
resolution 2895 but engage us with more discussion. Thank you. >> Thank you so much Emily Sta Barbara Ishida Lou Horn. Hi, my name is Emily Sta. I'm a Blair
parent and a mere parent. And I know you're not allowed to answer questions, but uh what I have tonight is questions about the district transformation process. I'm wondering how we are going to rebuild trust, how we are going to engage the community and how we're going to have a process uh that actually
works. Um just concerning past uh regarding the budget um I see this line in there that says contracted services and I I really want more detail there to understand uh what's going on what is all this money that we're spending and what are we getting in return and then
uh more specifically along those lines agenda item P5G for the RSSC consulting uh it's a very big budget increase and I'm wondering if we've looked at if like all those items in exhibit A look like really good things to do, but have we
looked if we can do those inhouse um with some of the resources that we already have? So, those are the questions that I have. Thank you. >> My name my name is Barbara and I'm a teacher at Normakums Elementary and um I
I'm just here tonight to say you can change your minds. You can change your minds about San Raphael and demolishing it. You can change your mind about um AI in the classroom as the parents
were talking about. I can tell as a I can just testify as a teacher a mirror the kids don't like it and it inflates their it inflates their where they're at. That's just my experience. um you can change your mind about um how you're
going to remediate the soil. We have that option. Sometimes it doesn't feel like that. I know you have a lot of pressures on you, but we can change our mind and the community is here to help you and be with you if you will engage with us and
um work with us. Thank you. Hi, my name is Lou Horn. Uh, I've been a resident of the Linda Vista um community for the last 40 years. I've got five family members that actually live on Linda Vista. So, we have a vested interest in the community. I I want to make a couple of comments. First of all,
I'm first I'm the president of CBRE for this part of the world. I have no conflict here because frankly I I have no idea how bank team ran through this process or what they did or who they discussed any of this with. But I will just ask you to reaffirm that there is an opportunity for the community now to
have the next several months to actually have dialogue and and have separate meetings so that we can make recommendations on where we think that the developer could actually play a role. And if as long as there is that open mind and that due process, I think most of the concerns in the community
tonight will be let go. We're actually thrilled that you've made the choice to release the school to the developer. We're very very excited that it's just a residential community and we just want to make sure that we have not only a voice but at the end of the process have the ability to be able to come back to
you with hopefully a vote. Thank you. >> Thank you so much Pria S. Jensen Hollstrom Serena Chang. Good evening. Um, I am a recent resident
of Upper Hastings Ranch and I'm concerned about how Don Bonito is being treated in the district's facilities planning. Under the master facilities planning, 25 to 30 million in modernization funds were originally allocated for Don Bonito. However, those funds appear to be on hold while the school is being evaluated for possible
closure or consolidation. As a result, Don Bonito has been left in limbo while other campuses move forward with major construction and relocation plans. The community deserves consistency and fairness in how bond money is applied across schools. I am a recent resident
of Upper Hastings Ranch. I had a baby in March and I was actually hoping to walk my child to Don Bonito and so I am really really hoping that you all resend resolution 2852, proceed with Don Bonito's plan moderization and vote no
on resolution 2894. Thank you. Good evening. My name is Jensen Holstrom and I'm here to follow my comments last meeting in discouraging the board from rash and unnecessary mature tree removals. I'd like to say that the
motion which was passed last meeting given considerations to prevent the disruption of student life I find ironic given the value to student life which mature trees have on school campuses and a value which cannot be replaced as was
mentioned before within the the children's lifetimes which are currently attending these schools. It was um very clear to me uh that the shade canopy on a lot of these school campuses, especially in key areas like parking lots, is very poor. On this
property, both parking lots have virtually no shade. Also, last meeting it was mentioned that there are no popular trees on the removal list. Um which is not true. San Raphael has six popular trees, native cottonwood trees, including two which are 50 feet tall. So, I'd like that inaccuracy to be
corrected. Thank you. >> Thank you. Hi, my name is Serena and I'm here to speak about the tree removal issue. I just moved to Pasadena because of the trees, so it's really shocking to hear that PUSD wants to cut them down,
many of which are older than we've been alive. These mature trees aren't replaceable once cut, and newly planted trees simply can't provide the same habitat for people and animals alike. P USD must utilize another method to achieve the goal of so soil remediation. I wonder if this route was chosen
because it was cheaper and faster, not because it was the most effective long term. The preservation of these beloved trees and native biodiversity is paramount. Please listen to your community. Thank you. >> Thank you very much. Jeriah Pitman,
Andrea Jimenez, Diane Paulby. So Dia's coming from upstairs, from downstairs, so she'll make her way. Andrea Jimenez, come on up. >> Good evening. My name is Andrea Himenez and I am here to oppose the planned
removal of trees in the name of soil remediation from Pasadena school campuses. As you heard earlier, trees are our relatives. They're not simply trunks with roots and leaves. Trees are living members of our community. They they cool schoolyards, clean our air. I
repeat, they clean our air, store carbon, stab stabilize soil, and provide food and shelter for birds, insects, and other equally important wildlife community members. Removing a mature tree destroys relationships that took generations to form. A newly planted
sapling cannot immediately replace the shade, habitat, protection of an established canopy, especially as Pasadena faces increasing increasingly dangerous heat. I understand that soil remediation may be necessary but current plan appears to treat remov tree removal
as a default rather than the last resort. Remediation must be approached with greater care and transparency. I urge the district to consult with experts before moving forward. Um our community including wildlife deserve better. much. Calling again for Diane Palby,
Emma Green, and Amanda Elliott. Good afternoon. My name is Jerea. My daughter Mia attended Phil Elementary and is headed to Sierra Madre. We were very excited about her upcoming middle school years, but our enthusiasm has
greatly been tempered by drastic cuts the district has made. The decision to cut personal and some programs at the school site seems very shortsighted and ill- advised. I understand that we have four high schools with 3,700 students attending them. That's a great misuse of
district's fundings. I'm concerned that my daughter's scholastic experiences will be harmed by these cuts and she will not be have she will not have the full high school experience. I grew up in Compton and I and I attended school outside of CUSD because my mom wanted it better for me. I didn't understand that,
but now I do. It's crazy for me to see how CUSD is excelling and meanwhile Pasadena is cutting with only four high schools open. Moving forward, I hope that PUSD strongly considers high school merges. Thank you. Good evening. I'm Amanda Elio. I live on
Oaknull. I walk by the beautiful trees on this campus almost daily. Much has been said tonight about preserving the trees, the benefits of the trees to the environment, not to mention their beauty. Removing these trees would clearly be detrimental.
Um, like I said, a lot has been said, but there's one point I wanted to make is that um, removing the trees will likely put PUSD out of compliance with the Cal Green program that requires a minimum 20% tree canopy. So, please look
into that as well. Thank you. Hello, I'm Emma Green and I wasn't going to speak tonight because there is a match on, but we're here. So, I did get dressed and I thought, okay, I have to come and speak. Because the bond money
is money that we, the taxpayers, have voted for to go to schools so that they can be upgraded, so that they can have the best facilities that they deserve. My son stood in this room with
many of his teammates relatively recently, pleading with you to agree to a new track at Marshall, which you did. and this appears to be threatened and that is really concerning because you've approved it. You've approved the plans
and now everything has stopped and listening to the people from Don Bonito we're in the same situation. Everything at Marshall has stopped >> because this situation is currently going on. >> So I implore you to do the right thing
and let us rebuild trust in you. Thank you. I'm going to do one more last call for the folks that have not made it into the room yet. Diane Palby, Jenny Clinton, Bianca Vasquez,
Sakoro Selenus. Moving on. Thank you so much for your cooperation tonight. >> Yes, that was great. Thank you. We appreciate your public comment. >> Now we will go to item K on >> um >> Madam President, there's a hand up. Did
she miss her? >> Oh, are you at the item? >> Are you addressing a point? >> Oh, yeah. Come on up. I'm I'm terribly sorry. I submitted a card, but my name was not called.
>> If you sign up to speak at the item specifically, we'll call your name at that point. >> That was the initial public comments. >> Got it. Thank you. >> Thank you, sir. Thank you. >> Okay, so we're at item K, comments from recognized employee organizations.
Anybody else besides UTP here? Okay. Good evening board, Dr. Blanco, members of the public. Um, I have my last comments I guess for the fiscal year. Um,
so I wanted to start with uh community school success. The community school, it's now at the steering committee. successes include um greater student participation in the the um district-wide group. Um they encouraged
and it led to the state seal of civic engagement. Uh I guess I think it was 14 individuals who got that. That was exciting. Uh we recruited community school teacher leads at almost every if not every community school. Um unfortunately some of them have been
shuffled with all the involuntary transfers, but that's a discussion for later. uh PD on community based learning uh happened at October 7th and we look forward to developing and putting out more model lessons that show uh
interface between um Sierra Madre Al um Pasadena and Aladina as well in the classroom, right? So the students feel that connection to their community. Also, uh just the general concept of uh weaving those principles into our
schoolside councils as well as uh across the district in the way that we share uh decision-m and make sure that the community is um at the forefront. You know, every member of the community is involved meaningfully.
Unfortunately, PSUSD has not valued DTP and other interest holder input in the past in developing the LCAP. And the result is what you see, our LCAP targets not being met. Unfortunately, program titles, outside contractors, and central office support have been emphasized over
effective instruction and best practices for those programs. This is DIP, IB, etc. Just having the title is meaningless if we do not have the best principles in action. powerful LCAP plans uh would be built
through robust analysis of needs and assets, shared decision-making using this community school principles as our foundation. And I hope that as we develop the next one, that will be what happens. In addition, PSD has not been valuing
its labor partnership. Right now, uh PSD has been refusing to plan for payraises or even keeping up with cost of living. Instead, PSD's budget squeezes out all labor groups with only 72% of the budget being salary and benefits compared to
most districts being at 86%. PSD overvalues contracted services at 23% which is $40 million beyond the typical 10%. PSD actions should match with your goals
and your stated intention. Currently, PSD's general admin spends $2,100 per student. This is 50% more than Arcadia's 1484 and 275%
of Glendale's 800 per student. In addition, four central admin salaries exceed the California governor salary. Uh teacher funded district. In addition to the countless hours of classroom setup, lesson planning, grading, communication with families, we know
those are part of our duties. PSD though has demanded that our teachers work without pay to attend IB and AP training to do summer interviews even though admin are paid at those exact same interviews. chaperoning beyond work hours and uh losing their lunches,
everinccreasing list of mandated trainings as well as translation of curriculum into target languages. PD must do better next year. UTB members work together with the community to pass measures E and J, adding up to $16
million between the two every year. 2526 is the second um year in a row with a 0% increase proposal from PSUSD class size caps which we have proposed would reduce and or eliminate overcrowded classrooms students and
schools must be the focus and not central admin careers and outside contractors we have an unethical 2526 spending record subtracting fire costs which is reasonable to do PD spent barely 49% of
their budget on classroom instruction, not even a majority. That's $14 million less than the legal minimum, 55%. What that translates to, that $14 million translates to more than the cost of 60 teacher positions, which would help us
reduce class size by 10%. And the UTP cost of living adjustment proposals um that we have put forward. Instead, PSD is circumventing state law while laying off or keeping in temp status limbo 60 plus teachers. Currently
for next year, it's set up to be worse. The 2627 budget is setting aside 43% on the classroom. This is again red subtracting um fire costs. That's 12% less than the
55% minimum, $36 million, which is nearly three times as much as last year's that I just shared earlier. Instead, amongst other things, PSD will still have 182 management, supervisor, and confidential FTE positions, nearly
double that of peer districts, $70 million in nonfire contracted services, $3.2 million plus in legal services. That's the number from this year and I'm it seems like it increases every year
but this in and I understand we have a lot of legal costs but I especially object to the way the district has used legal services to deprive labor partners like ourselves and CSEA of rights through legal expenses instead of
focusing on student needs. In addition, something else that does not prioritize student learning is the board recall effort that is slated to waste another 500,000 to million dollars. The best practice is the student centered budget. A student- centered
budget for PSD would look like this. 86% the blue salaries and benefits of PSD staff, 4% books and supplies, 10% on contracted services. This is responsible spending.
PSDs looks like this. 72% of salaries and benefits for a PSD staff, 5% books and supplies, and 23% contracted services. You can see that is dramatically out of line.
I want to end with um a request that uh PSD board of education agenda and support these two resolutions. The California Renew State income tax increase for education funding
initiative has been approved to be on the ballot. This renews Proposition 55 to avoid about a 15% cut. Uh we would urge the board to adopt a resolution in support of that. In addition, we would
ask the board to uh prioritize a resolution in line with what we brought to you on June uh June 11th to have fully funded, stable, integrated, and equitable schools uh in line with the document that we shared with you. Thank
you for your time and I hope we can go into the new year in a better place. question for clarification. Sorry. >> Yes. Throughout your uh presentation, you use the term community, but it would be very useful if you qualify exactly
what you mean because by the context, it feels like it means different things. >> Understood. So, the community schools framework, I I tried to tie it into that um but the community schools framework is what I'm referencing and this speaks to um not only sort of organizations and
leaders in our community uh but of course parents, students, teachers, admin um everybody who touches our >> So your community would be the teachers and the community would be everybody else. >> No, community would be everybody. Yeah,
including teachers, admin, etc. Thank you. >> Thank you. Are there any other um employee organizations? >> Okay. Next item is student board member
report. Trustee Bleecker. >> Thank you, President Frederick's esteemed board members, Superintendent Blanco, and PSD leadership team for your continued contributions and dedication to PSD students. The student think tank and student assembly members have been
involved in a three-week internship this summer. We have spent our time planning for the upcoming 20 2026 2027 school year by working on our conference and fundraising. We appreciate President Frederick's trustee Bailey and Trusty Harden for taking the time to come visit and talk with us. We hope that we can
meet the rest of the board meet with the rest of the board members in the fall. We are also happy to announce that the student think tank alumni and current students are organizing a book launch for the learning curve. our publication that Abel Rivera shared with you a month ago. Please mark your calendars for 6 PM
July 17th and we will send a reminder via email. This is the book once again. We acknowledge that the board is listening to community input and based on that input is re-examining its course of action in attempt to protect more of
USD's mature tree population. The students are hopeful that the board will find alternatives that permit soil remediation while at the same time preserving all of our district's mature trees. This board has also received a significant amount of community input regarding the best approach to deal with the challenges facing our district. This
board directed Dr. Blanco to assemble a diverse and unbiased committee made up of community members to consider potential school consolidation. This board also approved the hiring of a third party consultant to assist this independent committee in its work. After these 30 plus individuals spent a
substantial amount of their valuable time and energy considering all of the facts that were presented, this committee by a twothirds margin rejected every proposed consolidation plan offered by the consultant. The board has also heard substantial public comment from students and community members
which shows that a vast majority of these speakers strongly oppose school consolidation. In addition, this board has heard that the voice of the students represented by the student assembly throughout the consolidation process. The student assembly has made it clear that we strongly oppose school consolidation and have asked the board
to find other solutions to challenges facing our district. The board has confirmed that student input will be prioritized. If the board were truly prioritizing student input, the board would not pursue consolidation at this time. Specifically, as to resolution 2894, district transformation process,
the student assembly is strongly concerned that this is another consolidation plan by a different name. We, the student assembly, feel this resolution is pouring salt on an unhealed wound. This consolidation process has caused students unnecessary stress, fear, and anxiety. It's unfair for the board to expect students to be
resilient when we have been through so much. Finally, finally, this is the last meeting that this year's student assembly council will be on the dis. Nathan, Abel, Isabelle, and I really appreciate being able to represent our fellow
students and make sure that they get a voice, too. We are very excited to see what the next cohort is able to accomplish. We expect that the board will listen to and prioritize student voices. Thank you. >> Thank you, Trusty Bleecker. Let's let's uh give another hand to our our trust
student trustees out there. Thank you. All right. Next item is item M staff presentation on 2526 local indicators. Dr. Turley board of education will receive the annual local indicators report which provides a self assessment of PSD's
progress in key local LCFF local control funding formula uh priority areas including basic services implementation of state standards parent engagement school climate and access to a broad course of study. >> Thank you President Frederick's um thank
you board trustees uh Dr. Blanco SLT members. Um so like you just indicated our local indicators are um less likely to be found the results um online through the dashboard or through data quest. Uh
these are local indicators meaning they are um things that we track internally with some of the information that we have through surveys um through other reporting that goes out to the state. It's a consolidation of some of um some
of those reports as well. So um the priorities are numbered oddly. It's 1 2 3 6 and seven. There's no four and five. Um so I didn't skip them. They just don't uh exist in this. So priority one
uh reviews um our textbooks for students. It also reviews our um teachers and it monitors um whether our teachers are appropriately placed or not. Um and so for our w it's the Williams reporting for Williams
reporting um we've reported no instances where students are without um without access to the materials that they need and our our teacher assignments. Um this is according to the TAMO
which um may be multiple ways to report this, but out of um 6,732 FTE equivalents, 75.2% were classified as clear and 1.3% are classified as um out of field. This is
according to the 2023 2024 TAMO report. So, as you can see, it's a few years behind, but this is at the um data point that we started with. So, we're going to continue to use that one. Priority two is the implementation of
state standards. Again, this is an internal um way for us to reflect and um and then use this data for continuous improvement. Um so you can see that um
through the um through the feedback of teachers who attend trainings and our staff who train teachers and implement um these types of training. You can see that our overall um our overall
implementation of the state standards are are very high. We are working on uh the professional learning for our EL. Um that's one area that has been reported to the board that we are continuing to improve.
Priority three um revolves around uh parent involvement and engagement. And this data is taken from our panorama survey that is um put out to our families um in order for us to receive this feedback and the feedback is um is
compiled in our family engagement office and reported out. uh we have very high scores particularly in um the progress in developing capacity in staff uh and building trust and respectful relationships with families. So we we've
scored pretty high there and in creating welcoming environments for all families and communities. Uh where we need to uh do a bit of work is provide providing professional learning and supports to teachers and principles to improve schools capacity to partner with
families. So a lot of our our families are indicating that there there can be more work um that happens there. Priority six uh again is school climate and this takes into consideration student voice as well. Again this data
is compiled um from our uh Panorama school climate survey. Uh there's just a brief analysis. The Panorama survey includes um many different topics, but this is just a snapshot of some of them. Um 95% of our families report that their
child feels safe at school. 91% of families report a strong sense of belonging. In our uh secondary schools, uh emotional regulation increased 3 percentage points. So it went from 54 to
57% over the last year. And um our family engagement ranks in the 80th to 99th percentile nationally. So we're we're very proud um proud of that. We have definitely uh since co seen an increase in family
participation in events. Um so that's a very happy thing to to report. areas where we still see uh improvement needs are an increase in survey participation uh and representation. So often we see
that one school will respond over another school or certain demographics will respond over other demographics of our student population. Um so we definitely want to see more consistency and more representation. Um that way we
know we're accurately portraying the um the wishes of all community members. Um priority seven is probably the most complex. It's access to a broad course of study uh for the public. That means
if courses are available to students, are students accessing those courses equally? Um, and that's a balance of of any type of configuration you can think of, male female students, um, our demographics like English learners, um,
or African-American students and Hispanic students. So, all of those different diverse student populations, do they all have access equally to the courses that we are offering? Um overall we have found that yes in fact um our
students do have access to the courses. So if they are looking to take a CTE course for example they have access to those courses. If they're looking to take a foreign language class um all students equally have access to those um courses. where we know we need to
improve, and this has um been something we reported last year, is um once our our English language learner students reach high school, their um their courses are a bit more restricted because they do have to take ELD within
their um within their uh schedule for the day. Um, so in order to in order to allow them more flexibility in their schedule and access to more courses, um, it's imperative that we reclassify them before they get to high school. So it
does open up, um, those opportunities for students. And that is our last local indicator. Are there questions? >> Trusty Holly, thank you for your presentation. >> Thank you, Dr.
Okay. Um, very interesting. So, I have a couple of things. I do know that our high school graduation rate is higher than the state average. >> Yes. >> And I'd like to know how much is there a connection between that and school climate family engagement
since these we do have a strong ranking here, right? So, if kids feel that they feel safe in school, what is it? 95% of families feel >> feel that their child safe >> feel safe in school. They have we have strong family engagement and our school
climate 91% have a strong sense of belonging. Um how much is Dr. Reynoso's team a part of this? >> Yeah. So her team um and the family engagement are the ones that her team uh sends out this survey and they analyze
it um in the fall and in the spring and they push it out to um staff and stakeholders. I don't know if you wanted to respond as well, Dr. >> I would say the school sites are the most responsible and we are definitely um the hosts of trying to collect the
information and preserve the um and time for students, staff and families to participate, which is why I think we get such a strong result. coming out of COVID was the first time that we started activating student voice so that we were
getting a real in time what's happening on campus as opposed to what we used to do is have our staff use universal screener over a course of I think it was about 12 different questions and it was um a bit subjective if you will because it wasn't really authentic to how the
students were experiencing um school life and trusted adults and things like that. So, um, our team, our our team of one, um, and myself have really made an honest effort to work with our administration and counselors and, um, a variety of different folks on the in the
schools. And again, I say preserve the time because taking a survey that when it's school climate and when it's social emotional learning should not be rushed. Um, we need to give the time for our students to be able to answer properly in and um, in the fall we do it around
September, October and then we do a on so that we can um kind of counterbalance what's actually happening to see what growth is happening and then the schools actually use that data um to set their tone and plans with their um RTI plans and their PBIS plans. So it's it's a
full circle opportunity but we do feel um very strong that um strong about the fact that our schools need to really own this but we are the hosts of um the platform. I have one more question on the cuts that we've recently had that
have hurt your department. How do we move forward because of these cuts and still maintain these high numbers that really do point to student achievement and graduation rates? How do we deal with this? >> Yeah, I think it's really built upon our
multi-tered systems of support. We built this framework. I think we're going into our fourth or fifth year of that and it it gets enhanced um annually. We've been on all sides of the pendulum where we've had many, many staff to assist. But at the end of the day, things like this,
like a survey, is about the classroom. >> And the best thing we have is that we still have amazing teachers and staff that will be supporting them. And we still have incredible um administrators who are making the space and time. In fact, our participation rate has been growing um every single year. And so
that's really powerful and that tells the story that they're making time. and we've seen it um equate to academic achievement as well as we continue to grow um and accelerate in that area as well. >> I can see all of this um in our IB rates
for candidates. We have um we've quadrupled the number of IB candidates for IB diploma and these things are just really exciting. So, thank you for the hard work and to the sites for the hard work. >> Trusty Velasquez.
Hi, I coincidentally I'm also interested in school climate and I have two questions about it. Um so in the fall we have an anticipated significant cuts in safety and security at all campuses. Um what do you think are the anticipated
impacts of reducing the safety staff in all of our campuses? >> Are you referring to our district security officers? >> Yes. Um so every year when we have to dial in whether we need to expand or we
need to um in this case reduce um the analysis was done prior to the ESPback when we were given that 25% um reduction uh we have anticipated seven DSOs um across the
secondary schools the um is it going to be difficult I I think so but we worked with every single one of our administst ministators to make sure that they're reccalibrating where our DSOs will be on those campuses. Um we've got two of our finest DSOs here as you have seen and
they are incredibly equipped to do this. Um is it added um stress in some cases? Yes, because some of them have to do it alone. But again, I rely heavily upon their efforts and their expertise. They speak and tell us I'm out every single
month and they give me the updates. I also work very closely with whoever oversees our district security officers. Um, safety is a priority for them first and foremost, but also more importantly is the relationships they build with our students. And I know who remains on all
of our um secondary campuses. I'm very confident that we will not see any um increase in any of that area. In fact, it'll probably be dialed even tighter. also in the community um climate
area. Um some of the parents at one of our schools with the highest percentage of Title One students were here earlier. They decided not to come in and speak, but um they're really concerned about uh
the allocation of a community assistant in their um school spec. I'm talking about Madison Elementary. They have a full-time community assistant that now has been reduced to one day. Um the
allocation of resources and community assistance now is going to be equal in all of the campus. But that is not equitable because the level of need in that particular campus substantially
differs from some of the other campuses that are going to be served. And so, um, how are we going to mitigate that? And, um, and what can we tell that community? >> I actually have a board communicated
that's been submitted for you all tomorrow with some detail. Um however uh what I can share is that the draft schedule that is out there for the community assistance does indicate equitable scheduling to every school because in the first 8 to 10 weeks of
the school year we want to u make sure that there is a checkpoint for all schools with the with the now centralized for community assistance to bring some consistency. However, um we've made a commitment to the school principles and also a bit of a warning
that at the 8 to 10 week mark, we're going to reassess where the needs are and potentially readjust the schedule. So that is that does remain flexible. Um but I would also say to that as well as the DSOs and other positions um when
people have done their job well, we miss them. And so I do think that these cuts are um are are uh also an indicator that people have done their jobs well. And we do, you know, seek that when we're in stable positions and times, we know what works.
Sorry. I want to acknowledge that that is related to the item ex and so if there's any question that you know you're not prepared to answer feel free to um give us the answer later. I'm just letting
you know. Uh Trusty Kenny, >> thank you for these local indicators. Um I I did on priority six also on school climate want to um express a little bit of confusion and and maybe disappointment. The tool um says to
report on student perception of safety and connectedness but what is what is reported to us is the family um ratings of 95 and 91%. Now in the LCAP itself, we did get a report on how students felt
in terms of safety and connectedness, which was 60% for elementary, 59% for secondary, I believe that's for safety, and then 74% and 60% for school belonging. So those numbers are pretty
different. Um, I think if the tool asks us for very specific data and it also asks us for the demographic breakdown, then that's what we should report and and not something else. Um, so that was one of my concerns. I I also
wanted to bring up on priority three for family engagement. I asked a question because it talked about a 4% increase on uh family engagements and said that we were in the 80 percentile nationally. But I think if you go back to that um
slide for priority three, the bottom graph shows it's on the the yeah the bottom one on the rightmost. So 30% of our families feel they're involved in their school. The degree to which families are involved in school. So, while that may
put us in the 80 percentile nationally, again, it feels a little disingenuous to only say 80% and not reflect accurately that that's 30% of our families because someone just reading it might say, "Wow, 80% of the families are
engaged, which is not what our data shows." And then I did want to ask a little bit about um the teachers on priority one. So the percentage with clear credentials
in 2324 I realize the data is a little bit out of date that went down five percentage points. So we were at we two years ago we were at 83 or two years prior we were 83% and we went down to 80 and this last year we went down to 75%.
Our teachers who they call ineffective because that's the um federal language that number tripled. We have three times as many teachers in that category who don't therefore have a full clear credential. So can someone speak to
why that number tripled? You know what's going on there? >> Sure. I I spoke to HR earlier, so pardon my probably u um lacking response. Um but uh after speaking with uh human
resources, some of it was was clerical. So our calpads was reported um inaccurately. The way we were receiving the data and then reporting it was um not as accurate as it as it could have been. Um additionally some I I mean the the term ineffective
is is um I shudder when I hear that because I would not describe our teachers as ineffective. However, um that could mean that the teacher is is fully credentialed. However, they may have one class, especially in secondary, they may
have one class that they are not um credentialed to teach or in middle school a lot of times we have um we have multiple subject teachers and sometimes they're they're teaching maybe one class group that is not the same for two
subject areas. So, it's very nuanced. Um but that was the response I received from from HR. >> All right. It would be great to understand better why it tripled. I mean, I can understand that there's a reason people might be in that category, but it increasing that much in one year
is still pretty big. And again, um I know that it's we send our data in and I think it's matched with the teacher credentiing data. >> So, it would be great to because I don't know that we want to see this going down. I'm not hearing that we're having a you're saying that we can't find teachers. I'm not hearing that message,
but it would be great to kind of understand those numbers better. >> Yeah. Thanks. I have a similar question uh to um Trusty Kenny and Trusty Velasquez about the school climate. Uh doesn't really disagregate by site or
by um demographic, you know. Uh so I don't really know uh which families, which students and how many respondents did did it say how many respondents? Actually, yeah, it did. I believe a Friday commu a communique was when it
was >> yeah we can we can definitely >> I think I there's >> we can definitely give more data because on the back end we have all of that disagregated um data so if that's a request we can definitely meet that request.
>> Yeah because uh you can't tell like where which schools are are reflected with this 95%. And then um you did point out the e and um long-term English learners uh
to uh kind of address the master plan master scheduling and that's always been a challenge. Correct. And correct. So can you kind of elaborate on um our progress there? >> Sure. We we've made progress um
and a lot of that has to do with our schools. So we have two schools that are on block schedule um Mure and Blair that actually opens up student schedules and does allow students who are in EL courses to also take um some of those um extra courses because they have more
time in their schedule and they're not um confined to the sixth period day. So, I think because um I would attribute the the increase to Blair becoming block schedule and students having more access to courses.
>> I'm going to ask you a question that maybe you're not prepared to answer, but does that mean that the other high schools are going to go towards block or >> No. Okay. >> I mean that I don't have a You're right. I am not prepared to answer the question.
>> I saw Dr. Hill shaking hand. Um, and then what actions are triggered by the indicators? Because I I hope that we, you know, these are sort of compliance things that we just sort of check off, right? But hopefully we're
using it as a feedback for us to take different action. >> Absolutely. I I mean all of these reports are internally um reviewed and a lot of our department plans utilize this data in order to make progress um from
our from the department standpoint. Um I know the broad course of study is something we review with counselors making sure that counselors are aware of students who are not accessing particular courses for example um API
courses sometimes um all students are not able to access those courses. So that is something we do review uh with the counselors and we utilize that data for for conversations and master schedule conversations all of that. So internally we do use this data. So
that's the um proactively breaking down the institutional barriers. >> Yes. Okay. >> Essentially. Yes. >> And um so we can get the data on the disagregated data on the school climate. Is that >> Yes, it's a report. >> It's a report that that is already there
on the on the platform. >> Yeah, that'd be great. Thank you. >> Any further questions on LCAP indicators? >> Oh, Trusty Harden. >> Thank you again. Um, specifically in priority three, um, you know, I'm I'm I
think we've been doing things that have moved us the needle a bit on in terms of parent groups feeling interconnected to each other this year. So, I'm pleased to to see that and and would like to see that uh evolve even further. Um, you know, I think some of what you're trying
to achieve in terms of coordinating, um, and, you know, better scheduling is possibly doing some of these things earlier in the school year rather than towards the end of the school year, so parent groups have a chance to build relationships, you know, early on in the school year and that that builds better better networks. Um, there was a comment
about uh, well, the coherent and inclusive system for engagement. Um and so intrigued about that. But um also just uh there was a there was a another point made about we will invest in building the capacity of parent leaders
so they are better prepared to support and represent other families including clear guidance on roles and expectations. Can you clarify that what that is that training about what a parent group does or what their role is within a parent
group? What what does that mean? So, >> so this indicator is um lives in the family engagement um space. So, I don't know if I can accurately interpret what that means, but I I would guess it would
mean making sure that all of our our family, our parent groups do understand what each each other does. And um when they are voicing their concerns, they're also speaking for more than just themselves. That would be my
interpretation. Um, and I think our family engagement team has done a really good job, like you said, of bringing the the leadership teams of each of those groups together so they can have a firmer understanding of what each group represents.
>> Okay. Uh, the meet your map series, when was that? I didn't wasn't familiar of that. How did that how did that go? >> I again it indicated that efforts like that. I didn't know if that actually happened. >> I Yeah, I'm sure it was an initiative uh this year. I wish I got out of my office
and was able to >> and then I also share the concern about the equitable community assistant situation that we have. So definitely want to be monitoring that which community assistants are very vital. >> Thank you.
>> Any further questions? All right. Thank you, Dr. Jury. >> All right. We have item next is the action items N1 on resolution 2895 board of education to receive and
consider proposals to develop real property located at 1259 Linda Vista Avenue approve negotiating an exclusive negotiate agreement with the selected developer and declare the property as exempt surplus land. Dr. Hill, are you on that? >> Thank you.
>> Yes. I'd like to introduce um our presenters from CBRE um Damon Feld Feld. There we go. Um and Edward Metabosian. They're also joined here by our council
from OH uh Tempest Tatum and Serena. And I myself along with Dr. Reynoso were members of the RFP process. Uh so we are also here for input. push there to talk. Okay, great. Well, thanks for the introduction. Uh, my name
is Damon Feldmouth. This is Ed Matavoszian. We're with CBRE. CBRE is the largest commercial real estate firm in the world. We're located in the Glendale office, not too far away. Uh, I live here in Pasadena. Um, we have a
focus on development projects. that's part of our business uh with a specialty in the San Gabriel Valley and in Pasadena. So, CBRE was engaged to formally market the Linda Vista property and to manage
the RFP process. So, if we can maybe go to the next slide. Oh. Oh, we have it. Oh, we have it. Awesome. Okay, there it is. A little hard to see. Um, so the RFP stands for request for proposal. Uh the purpose of
the RFP was to solicit um proposals from developers to develop a lowdensity residential project on the Linda Vista site and we executed a very thorough fully public multi-channel marketing
campaign. Um the opportunity was marketed openly to maximize exposure and competition. We reached an exhaustive database of potential developers. In addition to a direct email campaign, the listing was posted on leading thirdparty
platforms like Co-Star and Loopnet and Krexy and on CBRE's proprietary channels which is uh deal flow and global listings as well as on the PUSD website. And this ensured us to um you know expose the building the property to the
widest range of both local regional and institutional developers. So RFPs were sent out. We received offers. There was a uh best and final. We asked all of the developers that submitted
offers to create to sharpen their pencil and and submit a best and final offer. Then in-person um oral interviews were executed and that led us to or that that led the selection of insight
um as the preferred proposer proposer is what we're calling it preferred proposer and that would be for the board's approval to negotiate the next step which is the ENA exclusive negotiation agreement. So the exclusive negotiation agreement
involves further due diligence. um the developer has to reach out and prepare a community outreach plan to get input from the community on the on all aspects of the development. Um once the um the
ERRA is I'm sorry the ENA is executed then their next step of entitlement begins where they go to the city and they um you know continue their due diligence. there's more opportunity for a community engagement and the project
becomes refined. Final step is after the entitlements have been approved then there is a ground lease which is negotiated and signed and then then the transaction is completed.
All right. So, >> good evening, Ed Manavosian, CBRE. Uh, prior to the issuance of the RFP, our team prepared a preliminary opinion of value. This was based on a residual land analysis as well as comparable land sales. Uh, we then concluded that the
estimated value range for this site was between 11.9 million and 14.7 million. Ground rent is typically four to six% of land value. In this case, making the range of ground rent 476,000 a year to
$585,000 a year. We then continued that revenue stream over the term of 99 years just to project the total revenue proceeds to Pasadena Unified School District over the 99-year term. This was based on an assumption of CPI increases
every year about 2.75% and that gave you a value of 252 to 292 million over the 99-year term. This is a summary of our best and final round. We received a total of five
proposals. All five offers presented in the best and final round. We highlighted Insight Realy for a variety of reasons as they stood out. Their project description is low density detached single family homes. They are
uh committing to a 99-year ground lease. Their rent is on the high end of our valuation, 575,000 per year. They proposed a CPI increase annually, minimum 2%, maximum 3.5% with a 90-day feasibility period and a
$1 million deposit. There were two offerers that were proposing assisted living/mememory care facilities and two other residential developers proposing single family homes. A brief breakdown of the inside proposal
is on the screen. Um their density is 6.5 homes per acre or a total of 32 homes. These are detached single family homes, three to four bedrooms each. Um, primarily appealing to younger families.
Average lot size is 8,000 square ft. It's a 99-year ground lease and their annual rent is 575,000 per year. >> So, the diagram on the right is the developer proposed site plan. This is a
very preliminary plan. Want to emphasize that. that was given to us by the developer. It is still subject to comment and revision by the board and also community input as we've talked about. But the reason why this plan stood out is that it showed the low
density. It showed detached houses with garages and it showed accessibility. The park is intended to be like for like with the existing park. Um, the community will have opportunities to express its concerns and needs for the
park as part of the ENA process as well as a developers entitlement process with the city. Okay. So, all we did here was um project the total revenue uh the total proceeds to Pasadena Unified School District over
the 99-year term based on the insight uh proposal. And that starting ground rent is 575,000 a year. uh based on their minimum 2% maximum 3.5% CPI increases annually we assigned a 2.75% average
over the 99 years and we received um or we come to a total of $285 million after 99 years and that's consistent with our opinion of value on the high end. It was important for us to qualify the financial capabilities as well as the
experience of Insight Development. This is a reputable developer with institutional capital partners. You can see Goldman Sachs, Harrison Street, Broadview. These are wellfunded um respected capital partners. Uh they've engaged a architect, gentleman named Mark Kiner, who has a connection to the
property. His mother attended school at Linda Vista. So we believe he has uh and the the group in general has a solid understanding of the character of the neighborhood um and that the the project will support collaboration and compatibility with the community
and that ends the presentation. >> Thank you. How much public comment do we have? >> 19 cards. >> Okay. One minute. >> Do we stay or go? >> Okay. >> Thank you, gentlemen. >> Thank you.
>> So, the first three names for public comment on item N1, Carly Whitney, >> Spike Whitney, >> Kate Newark, speakers. >> I'm sorry.
>> Sorry, one minute. We have other public comment as well. So, for other items. >> Okay. Thank you. My name is Karly Whitney. I live in the Linda Vista community. I have two boys that use the park almost daily and the park is the heartbeat of our community. I urge the
board to reject this proposal for three reasons. This proposal relocates the park instead of preserving it. It replaces mature trees, which is a big thing tonight, and the enclosed safe space. As parents, we value the sense of security. Second, the rental housing project provides less public benefit
than the senior care alternatives. It does not create permanent local local jobs, while the competing senior care proposal would create more than 80 jobs for Pasadena residents. It also offered higher annual revenue to the district. Choosing a proposal that generates neither jobs nor the greatest financial
return is difficult to justify. Finally, the proposal displaces the existing preschool but provides no transitional plan for the families who rely on it. As educators, you understand how important stability is to the young children. I respectfully urge you to reject this proposal and choose an alternative that
better serves the district and the community. Thank you. Hi, my name is Spike Whitney and appreciate you all allowing us the time to speak this evening. Thank you for bearing with my voice as well, which is a little scratchy. Um, I'm a resident of the Linda Vista Park, Mary, excuse me,
Lindista neighborhood, married to Carly. We have the two little boys. As Carly mentioned, you're going to hear often this evening that the Linda Vista Park is truly the heartbeat of the neighborhood. And so I think a lot of what you're going to hear from those who are most invested in this particular
site, the neighbors, is that we care about the children. Something I assume that all of you care deeply about as well. Um and and their well-being. The park is truly um a place that our children call home, their second home. They're growing up there. They're making
friends and developing friends there, as they like to say, if they become the esteemed park crew. Um, I understand this is an ENA. This is a process to kind of enter the ENA. I'm a real estate investor and developer myself. I've done
a lot in Pasadena. There it is. >> Hi, my name is Kate Newark. I live around the corner from Linda Vista Park. I have two kids, five and three and a half. We moved to Pasadena a few years ago and we spend approximately 10 hours
a week at Linda Vista Park. Linda Vista Park is where my kids ride too fast on their scooters, learn to hit a baseball, get their pre-bed bedtime zooies out on the slides, escape the heat, run free without me saying not too close to the street, and where tired
parents bring five pizzas, open them all up, and let all the other tired parents share dinner. which is to say that it has a paved loop, a baseball back stop, a big kid playground, a little kid playground, huge trees, huge safety buffer from traffic, and picnic tables.
Most importantly, it's where we've met our neighborhood friends. Friends who have made Pasadena feel like home. Insight, the proposed developer of the old grounds of the Lindab Vista Elementary, seem to think that a park is any flat grassy spot open to the public, and that's not true. Every public park
is unique and brings its community together in a different way. And what is special about Linda Vista Park determines the very spirit of our neighborhood. Thank you, Emily Kugan, May Whitman, and Carlos Valdez,
Jessica Richards. Sorry. Hi, I'm Emily Kugan, and um thank you for seeing us tonight. We are excited to see progress at the park, but tonight I urge you to only approve an ENA with the
condition that the park remains in its current location. Please vow to only develop the land that is already developed and do not destroy the mature trees and the current park in its location. There's no point. That's wasteful. The current plan that was
proposed would completely move the park, which is unnecessary when we could be using it in the meantime. Please also remember that this is an extremely high fire zone. Bryant Street is one of the main exit routes in case of a fire.
Adding 32 homes onto that street and traffic in the case of down trees like in January of last year would reduce our exit routes and prevent us from escaping disaster. Thank you.
>> If any of you are parents, you're probably aware of the fact that it takes a network of support. That's what I found in Linda Vista Park after my kid was born. A charmingly helpless group of people just like me, feigning confidence through the seemingly impossible task of raising these chubby and temperamental little monsters. In an incredibly
insular world, this park makes our community known to us. We're talking about a system of close to a hundred families that all know each other by name, occupation, ages of our kids, hometowns, our struggles. Because of this park, it's brought us together and helped us lift each other up. What makes this park so special? accessibility,
safe space from traffic and other hazards, shade, size, a wonderful playground, picnic tables, and the company of some very old trees that keep watch over us as we keep watch over our sons and daughters, human and canine alike. This park is special, as is also evidenced by the many people who come
from other neighborhoods in LA to enjoy what most of them describe it as a hidden gem. This proposal wouldn't just destroy that reputation, it would take away a critical support system for many of us inside and outside this neighborhood. Hello. I want to mention I could not read the text on the slides. Not a
strong start for community engagement and transparency. Uh you have the potential to do this better than the soil remediation project. Be honest. Be open. Engage the community. They are here. They're going to keep showing up here. And part of that community
engagement needs to fully disclose any plan's impact on the tree canopy. Please learn the lesson that withholding and burying that information is not in your best interest if you want to move forward. The TPO, that is the tree protection ordinance of Pasadena, is
also something you must factor in. It is not optional. Unless the developer has a magic wand, the claim of like for like is a falsehood. You cannot replace a mature tree with a sapling and call it like for like. I encourage you to look at other
options as suggested by other speakers and to commit to not developing this park. Elizabeth, Tim Martinez, Eric Kern. Okay, I'm going to go fast. Linda Vista
sat largely unused for 20 years other than its joint use agreement with the city and a small preschool lease. Now, under the 2024 asset management plan, the district is pursuing a 99-year ground lease with a private developer that promises millions of dollars for the general fund. However, that revenue
is still years away. The district does not expect significant income until at least 2027 with only a minimum of a million dollars upfront payment projected between 2027 and 2029. The larger revenue stream depends on a project that still faces major legal,
political, and environmental hurdles and could be delayed or stopped entirely. The promised develop income remains uncertain. While the enrollment and funding losses are real and ungoing after two decades of waiting, our community deserves a realistic
assessment of what has been lost and a clear plan that delivers results, not just future projections. You've heard them speak. Stop this. >> Hello, Tim Martinez, a lifelong Linda Vista resident and I attended Linda Vista school as a child. I'd like to ask
you to please continue this item until our neighborhood has had meaningful input. Uh I understand that you need to generate revenue. I actually think there's a way that the de developed portions of this campus can be used for housing or other uh improvements and that we can preserve the park. I think there can be a win-win here, but this
has to be done with us, not to us. >> Their current concept is too dense. That is not low density uh uh housing. Okay. Um the lower canyon that we call the bowl when I was growing up, uh you've heard that it it shelters parents from
the traffic. It it is, you know, you can't replace that, the tree canopy, so forth. Uh it's our only walkable neighborhood park in our area. So, losing that, shrinking this park would be a major loss for our community. better approach as you've heard is I urge you to please look at developing
the already paved portions of the upper campus along Lind Vista and Bryant Street with the bungalows with the old building that is neglected. Thank you. >> Good evening Dr. Blanco and board members. My name is Eric Kern and I'm the president of the Linda Vista
Anendale Association. Our association represents many of the engaged U residents and our members that are here tonight with their kids speaking on behalf of this park and site uh elementary school site. Um they're very
interested and engaged in this process and being heard throughout. Uh our neighborhood is encouraged to see uh the RFP advancing. We have several questions and concerns from the uh time that was the RFP or the
results of the RFP were released last Friday and today. Many of our uh neighbors, residents, and members haven't had yet the time to digest all the information that's there, but the the information or the the feedback that we've heard from them has identified
three things that we really want to engage with the developer on. The first is the uh uh preservation of our park. >> Mr. Kern, I need you to conclude. Your time is expired. >> Second is the definition between high and low density.
>> Thank you, sir. Victoria Kaiser, >> Marlene Decker, Daryl Clark. Hi, I'm Arlene Decker and good evening to you. I was born and raised in Pasadena and went to the Linda Vista
School and remember playing in the bowl. Um the bowl area is sort of a natural feature of the land there. It's um graded down. it's salivial plane or whatever and the park should remain there because I can't quite understand
how they're going to fill it in and the neighborhood will have a cliff all of a sudden with the houses that are level with the bowl. So, I would like to see the park remain where it is with mature
trees and do the housing up in the develop in the area where there are houses now. So, I appreciate you finally getting to Linda Vista and doing something and I look forward to seeing the development and being involved.
Thank you. >> I guess that's me. I'm Daryl Clark, live on Ontario, just north of the school. Um, I want to focus again on the park, and that was a great leadin. This is a historic creek bed before they
put in all the storm drains along the south side of the park next to all the trees. And the site plan kind of ignores that. It's like you've got a big retaining wall that would have to go in to make a
flat site and lose the enclosure, the the wonderfulness of the trees surrounding and the safety that many other parents have talked about. It's got to have a redesign to put to
keep the park where it is as it is. And they can do that. A developer can do that. They they they they had this idea. Oh, let's put put it across from the library. No. Thank you. >> Thank you, sir.
Virginia Clark, Rebecca Lada, Jose Sandival. >> Okay. Virginia's in the other room. She'll be in shortly. >> You want me to go ahead? >> Yes, please. Thank you board for giving me the
opportunity to speak again. Um Rebecca Lada, past city forester. Um I do a lot of I'm a consulting arborist and I do municipal work for cities all over Southern California. Um so my concern about this project I I definitely oppose
resolution 2895. Um, Lindvista Anandale is a force and as you can see they showed up in large numbers here. As the city forester I learned that and I want you to learn that they need to be engaged. You're
alienating these people by not engaging them and that's not okay. Um, so one of the things I can tell you is if you remove that many trees from the site, you're going to change the microclimate of the neighborhood. Right now, those trees cool in shade. They cause the
temperatures during our heat spikes to be lowered. They provide protection to people from from heat and sun and pollution. >> Good evening. I'm Virginia Clark. I live 100 feet from the school property
and looking at this proposed plan, um I think you've got a bit of a challenge in front of you that you're not used to dealing with as a school board. um a piece of real estate that you're
expected to develop, make some financial sense out of for the district, but we in the neighborhood are concerned about other things. Um for one thing,
this looks like it's over densified. 32 homes on this small piece of real estate. Um, you know, I I don't think it was represented correctly. Um, when you show
2,500 or 3,000 square foot homes, never mind. >> Uh, hi, good evening. Uh, my name is Jose Sandival. I live diagonally across the street from the school right on Linda Vista. We've been there 35 years.
Uh we came here because it's a lovely, quiet, well-designed, architecturally interesting neighborhood. Uh the plan that apparently is the leading plan um gives me no sense of what the architecture is going to be like. Uh I'd
like to see something that preserves the peace and quiet of the neighborhood and further something that presents softly, if I will, in an architectural basis on Linda Vista. Let me also echo the comments made by several people that I'm deeply concerned about the increased
density. 32 houses is at least 1.25 cars per home and I'm concerned about the traffic. Uh there's enough traffic on Linda Vista and I'm concerned about this project uh increasing that. So I urge a vote a no vote on that and hope that we
can uh come back with uh you have you guys come back with something in addition. Thanks. David Sam, Bob Harrison, and David Lie. >> Yes, please. >> I'm Bob Harrison. I've been a resident
of Linda Vista for 41 41 years, 45 years. I lost count. My kids use the park. This is not low density. I don't know if you've ever developed it. This is not low density. What they
failed to say is that if they're going to make this a house, the state allows them to make an additional unit on the back. So you take 32 units times two. Now we all of a sudden have 64 units at
one one and a half people. How many cars are they going to generate? This is not low density. I ask you not to approve these people tonight. They should engage the community, get some feedback from the community, and come back with
something that is real. I'll guarantee you this is dead on arrival if they come up with this. Last call for David Samath. David Lopei, I'll >> Yeah, my Thank you. My name is David
Samath and we've been residents in Linda Vista for 34 years and I know you're trying have problems we definitely trying to solve with this proposal but um I assume there must have been some even
worse designs considered. I'm sure there weren't. So thank you for not wanting to proceed with those. But I know that there's many better ideas and you can hear it tonight when I heard low density. who ever said those words. That was it. The
the night needed some comedy. That was fun to hear. Um, all right. So, uh, please don't approve this design. Have a dialogue with the community. I know that's being proposed, but that this park is unique and special and used, and
I can't really say much else except the best, the person who said the best thing except I guarantee it. I like that. uh was the the child probably the third speaker who said please don't take our park. Please
please Andy Gatman. >> Good evening. My name is Andy Gantner. I've been a resident of the Linda Vista Anardil area for 55 years. I've served on the board for over 25 years, six of
which is a vice president. This what we just heard is a travesty for the area, for the neighborhood. Cannot believe that we'd be considering putting like 60 homes in this existing area. Uh I've
worked with the school board uh with beautifification and maintenance of the buildings etc. Uh I can't say how many times I had to contact the uh school maintenance department on breakins over the years. This property has been an
eyesore and uh we look for in development in a realistic and honest and truthful way for the neighbors to be proud of what we're doing here, not a negative view.
Thank you. >> We have one more speaker, Peter Drier. Uh thank you board and superintendent. So um you this is a tradeoff between getting the most revenue for the school district and making housing that's
affordable to people in the city. I'm going to talk later about how um the declining enrollment is based in large part because of gentrification and rising housing prices. And I didn't hear anything from the uh about this
development creating housing that's affordable to anybody uh with kids. Uh it seems to me that and when I was the deputy mayor of Boston, we had the same problem. We had a lot of excess schools and uh we decided to sell those schools
to developers, mostly nonprofit groups, for a dollar in order to get the most affordable housing out of them. Uh, and that would mean housing that's affordable to custodians, to teachers, and to other people in the school district, and to people that work in the
in uh in the greater Pasadena area in the PU area. So, I hope you'll scratch this proposal and mandate that the developers uh propose something that provides affordable, not market rate housing. Thank you.
>> Thank you for the public comment. Uh, can we have CRB, forgot the acronym, CB CBRE, uh, come back up so we can ask questions? And thank you for public comments.
Um, anybody have any questions right now? Dr. Velasquez. >> Hi. I have a couple of questions. Um first question um can you explain the timeline of
engagement? So let's say that the board votes to approve this proposal today. Then what is what are the next steps? Does that mean that whatever we have here is set on stone and this is what we're going with?
>> No you Yeah. So if if the board authorizes the staff to proceed, the next step is to negotiate the ENA, which would then go back to the board for approval. During the ENA period, the developer conducts its due diligence and prepares the community outreach plan. So it has to listen to all of the concerns
of the community before completing the ENA. Then the project is refined and then it begins the city entitlement process and the SQA process. So, Insights proposal talks about a 90-day feasibility period, but the entitlement and the sequent
timeline that's open and it depends on the city review, the environmental review, all of the community feedback, and any project revisions. So, it's not likely to be a six-month process from selection to final um lease approval. It's likely to take a year or longer depending on the length of the
entitlement process. >> Okay? So let's say we approve, then you go have engagement with the community, finalist a plan, you come back, and then we approve whether or not we liked or not that plan. >> Yeah, I'm going to defer to
>> and then goes to the city. So it it's basically Can you say it in simpler words for me? >> So tonight's um resolution is only to authorize entering into negotiations with the developer. We're not approving a plan. We're not approving the site
plan that was proposed. So the next step after this would be we would negotiate the ENA with the developer and during that process the developer would decide and do their due diligence and determine okay um is the site plan feasible? We heard um all the feedback from the
community and so there will be a lot of iterations of the site plan. There will be community input. Um also they will have to look at the tree issue. What's again, what's proposed isn't they're not proposing to cut down the trees. This is just a conceptual site plan. So, they'll
do all of that work up during the ENA phase. After the ENA phase, they'll submit their notice to proceed with the project. And then that's when they'll go to the city, start that process because the city will also have their own um design um review, design requirements,
um you know, different uh requirements. Somebody mentioned like the creek bed and um storm drains on the property like that will all be part of the city process. So then after the city approved the city has to approve the project. Once the city approves the project then the ground lease will come back to the
board for approval and then that will be the end of the the process. >> So so we expect to see this two more times minimum. >> Minimum. Correct. >> Okay. That's question number one. Question number two. Um, is it possible to
um approve moving forward with a condition to preserve the park as it's current in its current state to add that language here? Is that
possible for the board to do today? >> That would really limit the developers hands, I believe. And I'll I'll let CBRE Goodbye. >> Excuse me, but we need to maintain that corum. Yes. So, can we let them
understand that you might not like her response, but it's not appropriate to respond like that. >> Yeah. >> So, yeah. So, like I was saying, um that would really um uh limit what the developer could do. Um and it's really early in a process to even um consider
that like all of the feedback should be given to the developer during the ENA process. that would be the time to you know voice the displeasure of the conceptual site plan give all the input um it would be a robust process um during the ENA period the developer have to come up with a community outreach
plan on how they're going to engage the community um how they're going um how many meetings they're going to have you know how the meetings are going to be accessible how much input um the community can have and so that would be the time the appropriate time to uh discuss those things
>> I understand But I also heard that it is not recommendable. But you did not say that it's not possible. Correct. >> Correct. >> Okay. And um I I have another question. It's technical and I don't think it has to do with you. So I guess it's for
staff. Um so currently we have other tenants in the um property. If we enter into this agreement, how does the contract with the tenants impact it? And specifically speaking about the preschool,
>> so we've had the preschool on a month-by-month lease for the last couple years for the reason that we have made plans to use our assets to, you know, uh, close some of our budget gaps. But we have a good relationship with the preschool. Um, it would be up to the
developer to make decisions about the future of the preschool, but we also have other uh property and we can work with them to find another place. We also have preschool. We would love the children to enroll in our preschool. >> Yeah. But that that does I excuse me
that does not address my question which is um so if we enter into the contract with the developer does that mean that the preschool has 30 days to vacate or does that mean what does that mean? >> No I think that it would you know I can't speak on behalf of the developer
but I think it will be at least two years before the project is breaking ground. Right. Based on so the we still would own the property. We wouldn't be asking the preschool to leave. >> Then that question triggers another question. I'm sorry. Erh. So there is an
ongoing and growing concern over the demolition the initial demolition of that uh property because it's vacant and um let's see not in the best shape.
Um so um so does that mean that uh in a fast track for the property the demolition would start in two years? We've heard a strong desire from the
neighborhood um to remove the buildings as quickly as possible, but that would have to be negotiated with um the developer because we would want to incur extra costs and then there are some laws that we have to follow in regards to disposal of buildings that are school
buildings. So, we could, you know, get back to you on that question. If that's approved and if we start the process of negotiations, would that be in the beginning negotiations that we would discuss that or what part would we talk about the removal of the buildings?
>> We could discuss that with the developer during the ENA period. Um because once we enter the enter the ENA with the developer, then we'll start um also negotiating the ground lease. So um items like that would be part of the ground lease.
Thank you. I think everybody wants to speak. It's going to be Trusty Kenny, Trusty Holly Harden, Trusty McKenzie, Trusty Bailey. Okay. Okay. Trusty Bleecker first. >> So my first question is in what ways
will the plan be altered based on the community input? >> The this plan that was shown was a preliminary plan. It was it's the the developers call it their wish list, but it has nothing to do with what's going to be finally negotiated in the in the
ENA. This is their this is their plan that they they laid out, but the negotiation will happen as part of the ENA. All the community concerns will be reflected and there has to be an agreement between the district and the developer before this goes on to the
next step. So every aspect the the size, the design, the location, the trees, all of that is subject to further negotiation between the district and the developer. >> Okay. And then do you know how many trees are at risk like currently?
>> Oh, sorry. >> Can I just ask the audience to remember that this is a public meeting of the board and right now we're not engaging in dialogue with you. We are this is our time to have conversation, please. Thank you. >> Sorry. Do you like currently know how many trees are at risk?
>> I do not have that number. >> Okay. Thank you, >> Trusty Kenny. >> Thank you for the presentation. Um, I just want to push back a little bit on the 6.5 per acre. That's only if you're counting all four 4.9 acres. So, that
disregards the park. True. >> So, typically, sorry, the density is based on the gross acreage. So for example, you could have a 200 acre site and 50 acres is not developable. Cities typically grant density per acre on the growth acreage even though the buildable
area is less. >> Right. And I couldn't tell from this plan or from your summary how much how big that park is. And the other people said one of them said they were going to have almost two acre park. One said they were setting aside 1.6. One
said 1.19. >> Yeah. I can't get any idea of how big this park is. >> Right. Our preliminary estimate is 30% of the gross acreage, but it hasn't been accurately measured or serviced. >> So, you're saying if I do 30% times 4.9, I don't know how many acres the park is.
All right. Um, when does the lease revenue begin? I know we want to deposit. So, does the lease revenue begin when we sign the ground lease or not until there's actually finished structures and they're getting revenue? >> Right. So there's an entitlement
process. So it's subject to city approvals, permitting, and then uh constructing the the final product. So it could be >> So in other words, do they start paying us a lease as soon as we signed the ground lease even though there's nothing on it >> or do they start giving us the the lease
money when they've completed the buildings? >> So we can negotiate negotiate that during the ENA period um when the lease payments commence. That's all part of the negotiation process. >> Okay. So, we want a million up front, but that will end up being approximately
the first two years of that lease payment whenever the lease payment does start, right? Because that's we apply that deposit to their lease for almost two years. Okay. So, I'm a little confused here. So, negotiation of the
ENA is what we're approving, but that's not what did you say in the ENA or you used a phrase and then there's actually approval of the ENA. So you said there's community outreach. I'm sorry I can't remember the phrase you used. During the ENA
>> community outreach plan >> is that after we've approved the ENA or while we're negotiation negotiating the ENA because those >> so the public >> No, no, no. So we'll negotiate the ENA and as part of that ENA document, the agreement, we're going to require the
developer to do uh many things. Think of the ENA at the developer's obligations. So, under the NA, they'll have to come up with a community outreach plan. They'll um have to come up with different iterations of the site plan. They'll have to do their due diligence to make sure what they've proposed to
build is actually buildable. Um and so once once the community outreach plan is approved and then um under that plan, they'll do their community input, but the the actual ENA is the document that
governs um these obligations. So I think Dr. Vasquez has asked question. So we could tell you tonight things we would like to be negotiated in the ENA once it comes back to us and we approve the ENA. That will include the community outreach plan. So the community outreach
plan isn't coming isn't going to happen until after this board approves the ENA. >> Yes. >> And the design changing could happen during the negotiation of >> during the ENA during the ENA period. So, it could come back to us for us to approve the ENA with a completely
different design, but then after the ENA is approved and it goes out to community outreach, the design could completely change again. >> Possibly. It could. >> Well, I'm just thinking if I'm the developer, I'm like, I put together this
deal based on a certain number of homes and a certain number of projected revenue. And so, I'm not I'm wondering how that all holds together. In other words, it can't change that much or it's not worth it to them anymore. So, >> corre correct. Um during exactly during
that phase, they'll decide during the due diligence of the ENA period, the developer will decide is the project feasible for them also. >> I'm sorry, that's after we approve the ENA. >> Yes. >> Okay. Not during the negotiations. And then this may be a question more for the
lawyers. So, in our resolution and in the law in the ED code, I believe it's ED code, it says that the board selects the proposal from all of the submissions, but we didn't see all of the submissions until it was posted Friday. So,
it doesn't feel like the board is selecting from the proposals. We are we have a recommendation. Is it feasible that we could say, well, no, no, we like this other one tonight or no. So,
so district staff followed the process um in the resolution of intention and in the RF RFP which authorized district staff to review the proposals to conduct the interviews to review the best and finals to um score the score the
developers and then bring a recommendation back to the board. So, that was the process that was followed. Um, and now it is uh the board's in the board's perview tonight to approve what the district staff have recommended based on um the prior authorization.
>> I'm just reading section seven from the resolution. It says after considering all proposals submitted, the board shall select proposal that best meets the needs of the district. Again, it's right after section six, which says that the district will provide a report and a recommendation. I'm just clarifying
whether all we are allowed to do is to approve this recommendation or reject it. Are those the only two options? >> Yes, you you can approve the resolution tonight or you can reject it.
>> Thank you, >> Trusty Holly. >> Thank you. So, a couple of clarifications. Um you second I kind of wanted to talk to my colleagues a little bit about this whole process because so we have all of
these sites that we want to monetize because we need to support our district and in urban districts we have low enrollment because of low birth rates charter and private school competition
and a lack of affordable housing. So there is path forward here for some of our sites to solve some of these problems for us. And that's why we're in this process. And we have choices to sell all of our properties to a
developer or we can develop them ourselves or we can enter into a joint occupancy. And so we decided to enter into a joint occupancy on this. And we voted on this last August. I believe it was last August. And um I'm pretty
excited about it because we want to work with our community, but I am concerned about talk about hemming in the developer to one site for the park because we need to be able to develop this
property to help us. And that's what we've entered into. And I know there may be some people that aren't happy with this, but it's a very serious situation with our declining enrollment and competition with private and charter schools and a lack of
affordable housing. So young families can't come here and live because they can't afford to live here. So this is part of a solution hopefully that we can be a part of a solution as we go through this plan on our assets. So can you
explain to me why we wouldn't want to say this park and I don't even how the park even developed. This park has to stay in this configuration for this development process.
Why is that a problem? So um the developer submitted their proposed uh project based on their opinion and the highest efficiencies for their uh benefit that and that achieves the
greatest economic value. We haven't begun to negotiate with them on any of those points. We haven't discussed or negotiated any of any features to their site plan. So we don't know how, you know, that conversation will go yet. We haven't we haven't begun but once we have an exclusive negotiate agreement we
can explore all these you know various tweaks and and changes but we haven't discussed it at all yet. >> So I have one more question. Parks that were developed like in the 80s do the parks that are developed now look a little bit different
maybe a little bit better maybe like stupendous completely inclusive for people of all abilities. So, this is an opportunity to really make something incredible for a community. >> Um, but we could >> me, excuse me.
>> Yeah, we we could um develop the whole thing, sell, we could do anything we want, but I like the idea of a joint occupancy and making a park that's exciting for people of all abilities to
partake, go in, a completely inclusive space for all people of all abilities. That would be >> for me to remind the board that we're in question question phase right now. So you you could also say that in advocacy. Thank you. Uh Trusty Harden.
>> So um cost of inaction if we reject this tonight what happens then? >> I'll defer to legal counsel. So, it would be up to the board um the board's direction to give district staff um direction as to how they want to move
forward with the property. Um again, back in August, the board approved the res resolution of intention to proceed with the joint occupancy process. So, the board would have to um just direct staff as to how it wants to proceed. >> Okay. Uh and then this this I may be
this may be broken record time, but so if if the If the ENA is is approved is is entered into and that then after after that can negotiations occur on change of use the use type of the property um things like
density um the base rent is whether there's a you know there was a comment about affordable housing and a portion of the properties be considered affordable I mean those types of criteria can those be uh looked into and negotiated >> those would all be um negotiated during
the ENA period >> and the board would continue would would the board continue to be involved in providing preference preferences with regards to that? >> Yes. Yes. During the ENA period, the board, the community, the city,
everybody gets an input and the developer also because again they have to decide and make sure that the um project is feasible for them as well. And then um there's with the open-ended entitlement there's
which could take some time with regards to the deposit. I know there's language about it being um non-refundable, but it sounds like that if there's some something falls apart in terms of the entitlement
process, then the district would have to refund those those monies, which is about 1 million. >> Yeah. So, so the money would be held in escrow for a period of time and then again this is something we would negotiate in the ENA. um when certain
conditions are met then certain monies can be released to the district but again these are all negotiate negotiation points that we would uh work on the developer with >> okay >> respect to um some of Mr. Harden's um
questions. In the entitlement process, the developer would be required to follow all of the city ordinances in regards to trees and affordable housing. Correct. >> Correct. >> Okay.
>> Trusty McKenzie, then Trusty Bailey, my questions are for um CBRE. How recent is the um valuation of this parcel? >> How do we base the valuation? >> How recent?
>> Oh, recent. Oh, this was done uh earlier this year, late last year, and it's kind of revisited every few months as market conditions evolved. >> And then what um comparables were used to determine said valuation? Yeah. So, you have land values up and down the
Saniro Valley from Pastina to Glendora in the $60 to $100 a foot range on average for single family development. Um, and then we do a residual land value analysis which estimates the pro- for income and expenses, the stabilized
value, estimated construction costs, and we arrive at a number that a developer can afford to pay and develop. >> And so, you said within the San Gabriel Valley. So what's the sort of like kind of radius that you're using in terms of mileage that you would go out to identify like properties that you would
>> Sandy missina everything in between >> Coina you know kind of call it the northwest Sanango Valley >> so we're talking 15ish miles 20 miles >> probably seven eight miles >> it's only seven miles to Monrovia
>> Sandus is Sand Deus yeah nine miles 15 >> yeah we you know yeah I mean like we consider like markets up and down the San Gabriel Valley. So, Pasadena, Glendora, um these are but again the the analysis goes deeper than that.
>> Understand trying to get a scope of where we're talking about and how we're determining >> like we sold >> what's comparable. >> We sold seven acres in Glendora, you know, for $60 a foot and they were going to go through a lengthy entitlements process for probably 22 homes an acre.
And that's been the sweet spot. 18 to 22 homes per acre for town home development. >> Okay. So, thank you. >> Sure. >> I think we've achieved clarity hopefully that if entering into this um
ena that that's essentially like dating. Yes. that you get to decide what you like, what we like, and then there's some agreement about sort of what the finished product is, and then there's a termination if we're going to move forward or not.
>> Correct. And I just want to clarify tonight we're not entering into the NA. We're just authorizing negotiation of DNA and the NA will be brought back for approval um once we negotiate that with the developer. So, you know, within a couple of months. >> Thank you for that clarification.
Trusty Bailey. >> Yeah. Um, I want to thank you for the clarity of the process because initially I was concerned that this proposal did not represent the
voices that I heard while serving on the facilities committee from the residents in Linda Vista of the type of project that they envisioned there. So, I was a little concerned with that and I'm happy to know that um we haven't really gotten
into that process where we're actually receiving feedback from the community on this project. So, um, knowing how these projects go, um, I just want to ask my colleagues,
um, you know, whether or not I'm not sure how we're thinking about moving forward, but I just want to ask just thinking about the timeline and the process and the back and forth that has
to happen and the timeline with that, knowing that tonight's our we were to approve this uh part of this process. It's not the last and final that we will have more information brought back to us
through this process that we will then um be able to approve or not. Um, I just want to ask, could we just move forward with approving this so that the negotiations could begin
and then make sure that we put the contractor on notice, that we feel that the voice of this community, that neighborhood in that area is very important. and that,
you know, we may not approve a project that doesn't align with their vision. Um, especially where the park is is is concerned, mainly with the park because I hear them. Um, unless
the community decides otherwise, um, I think that we should really listen to them. I think their voices are important and that's why we have community engagement with these types of projects and so that's my
I get my first turn. Um so this is the park has always been a major um priority for that community and this is
the second time um that we're talking about this. the first time uh a community member was gracious enough to give me a tour and so I got to see the park. Um I understand the park and
uh when we talked about this first time, some of us fought for that park and we actually did not get to require the park.
as part of the RFP, but it was somehow decided that the park was important, not from the board, but some other miraculously. Um, and so the park is is in there in
the choices, but it's not exactly the way the committee wants. Um, can you speak to the traffic that this would cause or is this more of the ENA
would handle that or is that something appropriate to be talking about now? Yeah, it's too early to discuss that because that's some once the cons once the site plan is finalized then the SQA analysis um would include the traffic analysis all of that that whole process
would go through the city and the city would likely require um a traffic impact analysis and you know all the different environmental analysis that the project would impact. >> Affordability is that now or later
or is that even in the discussions? This developer is proposing uh 100% market rate housing, three to four bedrooms each, but that's going to be a discussion they'll have with the city and if the city requires it or not and what format. >> Uh and then the bowl that they're
talking about is is the where the park is. So it's hard to tell from the diagram because it's a top view. Um so that would be filled in or that's sort of again an item that needs >> right. We didn't engage them at all on discussing their site plan or their
project yet. And that's the purpose of the ENA to get into the details and find out the pros and cons of of every feature. >> And then low density housing is that again is that something we are claiming this is or or not? So, you know, if you
look at your uh typical home builder, KB LAR, you know, their average density is 18 to 22 units per acre. 18 to 22 homes per acre. That's the kind of housing development you see popping up throughout Southern California. High
density is 45 per acre. And so, low density, the true definition is, you know, six to eight, four to six homes per acre. That's a legal definition. it's not, you know, it's just a legal definition. And so, yeah, 90% of the
home developments are 18 to 22 units an acre. Otherwise, they can't afford to to scale it or develop it. So, um, when we talk about community input and engagement, um, a lot of times we we
what I what I worry about is that yes, we do offer these opportunities, but they don't ever get implemented. And uh what I worry about is we we do these engagements and we and they they give us
their input, but none of that gets actually implemented. And so and then it would come back to us to be voted on only for it to not reflect our community. So I mean I'd rather have some
guidelines now that are guaranteed than to waste that time for only for it to just be defeated in the end. So I think we have to realize what the requirements are and what we should guarantee.
That's my trusty Velasquez. I would like to move a motion to a >> one more question. >> I just wanted to go back. So one of the proposals the Olsen company was a lump sum and so that 6.1 million was for the
entire 99 years. >> That's correct. >> Okay. So perhaps not within the same ballpark as the others. Would you say that the criteria and I don't know if this is a question for you or or more the district
staff that the criteria that we that the district used to make a selection here was weighted heavily towards the qualifications of the developer because I heard you say we weren't really
looking at what they're proposing in terms of a site plan. >> No, we didn't begin negotiating any changes to their site plan. >> Okay. >> But we were requiring a low density, highquality residential development that is consistent with the quality of the neighborhood and the architecture
including the quality of the construction materials involved. The park use shall remain. That was a requirement as well as um the financial financial capabilities of the developer. So did the senior um centers or assisted care did that qualify under residential
that did you feel that that wasn't qualifying or or did that meet the RFP criteria in your in your consideration? >> Yeah, I think you know the residential single family development was the preferred
development that would be most consistent with the neighborhoods. So >> okay, so you felt perhap So it was perhaps seen and and rated during the criteria that those uses were not as aligned to what we put forward in the RFP.
>> Correct. >> Thanks. >> Any further questions? >> All right. Is there a motion? would like to move to approve the resolution with the additional direction that to the
exclusive negotiating agreement shall require the proposed development to preserve the existing park footprint in its current location and size. A second Any discussion?
I I second it. Sorry. Yes. >> I second the motion. >> I would like to enter the advocacy. Um >> Okay. Go ahead. Um so this community, this this this property is in my district. And as a
consequence, I've had multiple meetings and I've been at multiple conversations with the neighbors in Linda Vista um alongside with the the the district and in in honestly
um the district is very invested in making this process work. We need this process to work as an example of a successful collaboration moving forward. Um, as all of you have noted and have been in conversation and have understand
the situation where the district is, we need to do take aggressive measures in many aspects and one of them is in asset management to increase our revenue and because of that um I believe it's very
important to engage with the community and specifically what I mean by community has been the Linda Vista neighbors that have um had this property uh vacant for so many years. And so I
believe that this proposal um does many of the things that I've heard you mentioned. One, you need an urgent action in this particular site. I've listened to it many many times from
almost all of you and while it is true that not all of you agree into what is the proposed solution I've heard very clearly from all of you something needs to be done in this space so got it um
I've also heard from you hey we would like our children our grandchild children, our family to be able to stay here in Linda Vista and be able to buy property in Linda Vista. This proposal in many ways does that by
proposing development that is uh a middle point or an entry point to some extent into this community. I also want to note that this is also not
a affordable housing development and when you speak about highdensity housing I respectfully have to disagree because we are developing at the Roosevelt site which is a 5 acre site
120 units. We are developing the Linda Vista site which is approximately 5 acre sites at 32 like this. There's a significant difference. So I respectfully disagree
in that argument of high density, but I also understand that this is the beginning of a negotiation. And this is something that the community and the developers and the city and us
can enter in conversation in the upcoming months. Is it perfect? No. Can we all leave tonight with an agreement that everybody sort of gets it a B minus or a C plus? I
think we can, right? I think we can all leave here with something that maybe it's not A++, but it's something that we can all move forward with. What I want to avoid is
um adding conflict to the already existing conversation about um trees and canopies and spaces. We support and and I appreciate trees.
My high soul is particularly invested in conservancy and I think that um there are some challenges throughout the city that we're facing that are very real that are forcing us
to make difficult decisions when it comes to understanding the priorities between trees and children's and services and all of these things. And this is a real very complex conversation that we're having and I don't want to minimize every anybody's but in this
particular case we have the ability to um protect this existing space in September of 2025 when this project first came to us. One of the arguments
that I made was if we are able to protect and ensure this particular park in its current space and size, it's going to be a much smoother process. Okay. Now, we have a second opportunity
to make that statement in this board. Right. I would like to use this opportunity to say we're going to save the park as we're going to reach some compromise that you don't love but we can live with and we're going to make this property work for the children of
Pasadena because ultimately I want you to remember that as difficult as this may be the goal of this organization is to provide services and educate children. That is the goal. And although we have
all of these other marginal goals that are important that have to do with environment resiliency and this and that and that and community engagement and protecting spaces and all of these things, those are secondary goals.
Our prime the primary goal of this organization, which is not a wealthy organization, that it's not a for-profit organization, is to educate children. And we spent in this boardroom a lot of time not talking about children's
education. I think that we should move forward with this developer, with this project and keep the park in its location with its footprint. and we can move forward with
this project in a way that it's satisfactory for the neighborhood, the district, and the schools. I disagree with you, Dr. Velasquez. I think this is a B+.
Um, when you put this against the soil remediation issue and the tree removal, I just think like this is a this is an opportunity to get it right, you know, like we're we're catching it in the beginning
and uh there's no we don't have to put the park there or we don't have to change the park. Let's leave the park. I mean there's nothing there's nothing risk at risk there like the soil remediation issue. So I just feel like
we're on the cusp of a win-win here and like we can make a difference in keep you know keeping the community intact. Yes, this is an institution of education but strong schools, strong communities.
We're all together in this and um I don't know. I I just feel like this is we can absolutely do all the above very well and we're we're hitting this in the beginning and we're going to get the community input on this and there are
things that should remain and I think the park is is the heart of the community and uh it would be very bad for us to to break that. So, I I support the amendment as is. Trusty Kenny,
>> um, you know, because we didn't I don't know that we got to see as much detail on the different proposals as staff did. Um, but when I was reviewing these for the first time this weekend, it seemed that
the senior care facilities were better suited to the site. But I don't know enough about the financials to know that those developers, you know, would would meet our other criteria. Their annual rents were, you know, in the ballpark. Um, so
and I think that addresses some of the concerns potentially about traffic, about density. Um, I think that the park probably should stay where it is. Um, but I think we should recognize that
saying that it stays where it is and it stays the size it is. And again, I'm not entirely clear where anyone would draw the lines because um because again the the other people claimed it at different, you know, different amounts that we have to recognize that that could jeopardize the
deal that if they were planning to have a smaller park and to maximize the space for homes, it might the requirement to leave the park where it is could make this deal not feasible for them.
Oh, I don't think we'll know until they go try and develop a different site plan to see if it still pencils out financially. >> Yeah, I don't know if I believe that, but um but I mean it has to get through many many other hurdles. I'm just saying that it it's a possibility. I mean, this
is a very lengthy process that has lots of potential offramps. So, >> I know you want to have a some information. >> I was just going to say what Mrs. Kenny is saying is correct, right? That that
we that we can change it and sounds like that's, you know, um what everyone thinks is a good idea. But then the person that submitted during the negotiation will have the right to also say no and then we would have to start the whole process over. >> Trusty Harden.
>> Yeah, just briefly. I mean I I appreciate the sentiment of the fact that we're in the business of educating kids. We're supposed to be. And so, you know, this is this is a lot to decide that affects a long-term future for this
community and, you know, and it's it's all coming to a head tonight and and I know that we can negotiate and change, you know, parameters, but you know, there is an anchor point uh that we know that we have the power to put our foot down and say we preserve and that's, you
know, what folks have said is their is their their dear park where the kids are growing up experiencing their childhoods. Um I you know I would I would echo a bit of concern however from Miss Kenny about the fact that you know we want to make sure it's reasonable
that the developer can you know if there's some discrepancy as to where the pro where the park property line ends and where the development develop part of the process uh property begins. Um you know that might get a little messy.
So, you know, ideally that that that we would have some even with the direction that we give tonight, which I support, um that we have some flexibility to just be a little re reasonable in terms of encroachment in the park space if it
makes sense for the overall development. Trusty Holly, >> I think we could probably get a really great looking park working with people. And I always think it's best to have the best possible outcome. And I think if we hem in the developer, we could get
something subpar. And part of our jobs as trustees is to oversee district facilities and oversee the budget. So I want to make sure that we're using our money wisely on this development. So, I am not for an amendment to hem in a developer because I think we can
possibly have something really fantastic there. >> Thank you, >> Trusty Bailey. >> So, um I think that right now it's too early in the process for where we're thinking right where we're where we're speaking of
right now. And it sounds like we're almost dooming this process before it even gets going. Again, I go back to just focusing on the recommendation that's before us so that
we can get the negotiation process started. But we need to remember how important it is that if the community if it comes back to us and we don't see the community's voice represented in what
comes back to us, that's our opportunity to say no. And we can do that. If you want to talk about if you want to talk about where our power lies, we can do that. And so that's when we start having this
type of dialogue. So, I think we need to move this forward. Let the negotiation start. Let the process start. Let's make sure that we're involved or engaged so that we're watching that the community is involved
and engaged in this process until they've had enough to say. And that's doable. I've been on several of these types of projects for the city. So, I think we need to I would like to
for us to move. Did you I'm sorry. >> Yeah. I just want >> Bleer and then Trusty Velasquez. >> Um we were originally going to um vote yes for this. I have a statement by the student assembly that says, "Well, we understand the community's concerns.
We're voting yes because the overall costs of construction are offset by the income generated via rent and need for housing. However, we want this to be a collaborative effort. Um, I'm not allowed to like comment or vote on the amendment. That was our original opinion.
>> Thank you, Trusty Velasquez. Um so I think that the choice that we have is um do we choose this opportunity to protect the park in its
space and its uh footprint now or later? because it I I think that the few times that we've asked and we've engaged the number one priority of this
community has been we want to keep the park. So they said we want to keep the park last year. They said we want to keep the park earlier this year. They are saying today we they want to keep the park. I don't know if magically
between here and the next couple of meetings with us or with the developer, they're going to forget that that's their request. Or if we need them to tell somebody else
to want to preserve the park so that we can then approve a plan with the preserve park. So again, I think that if we are pragmatic about this, our best
chances of having a smoother process is to make the adjustments to that plan. Now, I mean, I understand that we don't need to agree. I'm just explaining my position.
So it is okay if you disagree but I think that this group of people have been very consistent in saying we want the preservative part as is and when they go to the city and the city is about to have that conversation with us they're going to say the same thing
there so we can have this conversation now or in three months but the community has been consistent in saying we welcome the development we're tired of seeing this dilapidated building we want to keep our part If you want to bet on that
being different in two months, fine. Let's do that. Trusty Kenny, >> I just want to be clear that if if this is something that we feel is important about the park, I'd rather we put this
in to the negotiations now than hold it until after. So, >> okay. Any other further comments or advocacy? >> Yeah, I I'm >> Oh. Oh, yeah. Go ahead. >> I'm just trying to understand where we put it now. The only thing that this is
asking us to do is approve that the negotiations begin. So, if we're like you admitted that we could actually restrict or make the the the contractor
feel that the board has restricted him before he even gets going. and we don't know if he's going to propose a better park once he hears from the community that they want him to scale the project down. Maybe he's going to add to what's
already there. I mean, we just don't know. And I feel like we're just jumping ahead, too far ahead than where we need to be right now. We still can go back and make those changes once everything
starts rolling. We absolutely can do that. And and I agree with both Tina and Jarma. I mean, I sat on the facilities committee for years and I've been hearing over and over the voices of the
members of that community and what they want there. And so I know I'm going to do my due diligence to make sure that their voices are heard and included and that when it comes to this board, if it
is not in writing that we keep that park or that that park is maintained, not moved. I mean, I hear what you're saying. If it's if it's feasible to the community that it's not moved after they go through the process with the with the
developer, I'm going to make sure that I'm going to support representing their voices because it's been going on for a long time. I've been hearing it for a long time and it is important to this project. So, I think we just need to
move this part this portion forward. Let's get the negotiations. You all are on facilities. I'm on the superintendent facility advisory committee. We got this. We can watch it. We're the watchd dogss. We're going to be the ones making sure
along with the others of you, but we're going to be the the ones who are making sure that these contractors respect our community and listen to our community when they come here to do the work in our community for our community. And that's what our jobs are. But I don't
want to see us get ahead of this and, you know, throw the thing out of whack before it even gets going. That we don't have the time and money to to keep going back to the drawing board, starting over.
>> Okay, it's almost 10. less. >> So, CBRE, we've paid them to do this work and we've asked them, is it advisable to keep in words the park in that spot and require it? And they
basically said no because you'd be hemming in the developer. And we are responsible for the money going into this. We are responsible for what we paid them to do. So, I just want everyone to know that you'd be going against what our this consultant has
said to us and we are responsible for the finances here and maybe getting something subpar where we could get something really great because this is joint occupancy and we've been working with the people. Thank you. >> Can I say one more thing? Would
>> Oh, yes. I make a motion that we extend the meeting to 11. I think >> I'm just kidding. I'm making a motion that we extend the meeting until what? >> Midnight. >> 12:30.
>> Second. >> Okay. >> Midnight. >> Yeah. Midnight. >> Okay. So, >> all in favor? >> Okay. And then with all due respect,
Yarma, I know exactly where what you're doing. But this time, I think I really would like to make a friendly amendment. I want to make a friendly amendment. I don't know. Kim is probably going to say it's not friendly because I wanted I
want us to go back to an original or a motion where we're just going to consider what's before us to approve that so we can get the negotiations going. So, I'd like to make
a friendly and I am being friendly amendment that um you amend your motion to consider the um resolution as it's written knowing that later on we reserve the
right to um push for advocate for the community's voice. >> Thank you. And in many ways I feel that had we done this last year and said
we're going to ask for developers to come and give proposals excluding the park then then we would not be in this position right now and so I can't >> we did have that conversation in facilities and you were there >> yeah and we had it at that mum failed in
September when we did this but when we had this conversation But I in good conscience I can't accept that friendly amendment. Um I guess the motion can fail and then we can move forward with another option.
But I think it is it is important for us to consider not just look we want this process to work and be successful and I fear that
this is just th this is the conclusion that we're going to get to when this goes into city when this goes into community outreach when this goes like >> I don't think so. I think it's equally important for us to do things in order.
And I I really think that jumping into something that's not even even on the docket for us to approve. Um, and it it doesn't even have anything to do with the next step of the process.
So, you're jumping ahead of the process. I think that's kind of out of order for a board of uh at this level. Um, I think we need to understand, you know, how you move forward through a
process. We need to understand process and we need to show that we understand process. >> I appreciate your comments and your expertise and I call for the question. >> You're cutting me off though. You can't just cut me off. I'm still speaking.
>> So, I just I want the board to understand or to show that we understand process. and that we understand how to work together to get to where we want to be in a process and not just jump right
into where we want to be. We keep getting in trouble doing that. And so, you know, that's that's the point that I'm making. And I I just think we need to stick to what's before us in this case because we
will have an opportunity to to interject which direction we want this thing to go if we don't see it going that way. >> Thank you Trusty Bailey. Point will taken. Any other further comments? >> Call for the question.
>> Okay. Preferential. >> Oh sorry. Oh you want the motion amended because we're resolution, right? And this is an amendment of the resolution. >> Yes. >> I just checked with legal. So, we're going to have to add it. I just want to
make sure that everybody knows where this is supposed to go. So, it's going to go under the last section where it's findings and I guess it's going to be a section seven where it should read the board shall require
the condition to preserve the park location and size. Is that what you guys is that the amendment or can you repeat the amendment? a proposed development to preserve the existing park footprint in its current location and size.
>> Okay, that would be then section seven on the new resolution. >> Did you get the footprint part? >> Yes. I mean, it's recording, so I got it. >> All right. What is your preferential vote, Trusty Bleecker? >> Uh, I can't vote because it's an
amendment, but we were going to vote yes before the amendment. >> Thank you. All those in favor of the motion as amended. All those against any extensions. Motion passes. >> Okay. Item N2,
approval of adoption of a 2627 LCAP. Dr. Turley, is she here? >> Oh, yeah, there she is. Board of Education will consider adoption of district 2627 LCAP, which
outlines goals, actions, services, and expenditures designed to improve student outcomes and address state priorities. Thank you again um >> trustees superintendent Blanco SLT um this is uh just a followup for your
approval of the LCAP a draft was presented I'm a teacher I can wait So, this is a followup to the LCAP that was presented um two weeks ago. Um just an overview of the LCAP. It includes
base funding, supplemental funding um for students uh who are in our targeted subgroups and concentration funds um for our students who and schools who um who
are 55% of the student enrollment is one of the three key subgroups which is our English learners, our foster youth and our um English learners, foster youth and our socioeconomically disadvantaged um students. So, the LCAP uh integrates
all of those funding sources. Um our PUSD profile, I'm sure you're all aware, um but the LCAP serves are uh the totality of our student population. Um particularly our English learners, our foster youth, and our socioeconomically
disadvantaged students as just um spoken to. Um also included is our students with special needs. Although there is a separate SEPA plan that addresses um the needs specifically for our um students with disabilities.
Um so uh the board approval is a um requirement uh in ed code and within the LCAP we do address um all of the indicators the eight state indicators identified um and we must include uh
goals for each of our subgroups and um we have our broad goals and then we have our um more local locally identified ified goals within this LCAP. You will also see the remaining of our learning recovery
emergency block grant funding. Um we have spent most of that funding. However, there is a a little um carryover. I know there was a request for those um for those numbers. So in action goal one action one we are using
some of that funding to support the remaining MTSS coaches. The funding for those coaches is is a braiding braided funding source. So they are um they are funded through multiple uh funding sources including title 2 um and private
uh funding sources through Pastine Educational Foundation. Uh the total amount that we're using for um that particular goal and action item is 200,965. Um we are also supporting a partial MTSS
coach for our international academy. Um so we were able to bring that back using these funding. This funding source uh that is approximately 66 67,000. Additionally, in goal nine, action one,
we are supporting the immersive storytelling academy um staff there and that dollar amount is $117,000. So, the approximate total of our funding that we are utilizing this year is
$385,000 out of learning um recovery. There were um changes made from the draft that you saw. There's additional changes to this, but this was turned in two weeks ago. So, these were the changes up to that point. Um there uh
tomorrow there will be posted a more final version. We have received feedback from LEO um twice already on our draft. So, those um those changes have been incorporated as well. I did um give a
document because I know the LCAP is not the most friendly document. So if you wanted to follow along and find where the changes were made, I created a um a matrix here so you could uh find the
changes that were made. Um next step uh next step would be we are turning in our final um after this is approved we will turn in if it's approved we will turn in um the draft to our partners at LEO have
them uh look over the document for final approval and then this is our last year in this um LCAP cycle. So next year we will be engaging the community and stakeholders in creating our new LCAP. So that's that's exciting for everyone.
Um and I know that this community has been through a lot. So I think this is um wonderful timing for us to revisit our our goals and actions. Um and we will develop a plan for um all
stakeholders to be a part of the LCAP um process as we develop our LCAP for 2728 through oh my gosh 30 31 I believe if my math is
correct there. Yeah. Wow. Uh yeah it's late and I haven't eaten. Um so thank you uh questions. >> Trusty Kenny, >> I just want to clarify. You said 385K
for learning recovery block grant and and that's the carryover. >> That's the carryover. >> That's not including the money we're getting for 2627. >> No, we we didn't budget for that because we don't have >> So, I mean, he's giving the governor said I'm releasing the rest of what I
took. So when will the plan for that money be presented to the board so that we understand how it's being spent? It's I think a million. >> I think that we actually need to receive the final confirmation and then we can
proceed as quickly as we um we already discussed many of the plans. It shouldn't take us too long to get that um in place for presentation. That would be great because I know there was some talk that said we wouldn't see some of those additional monies until first interim, but it would be better probably
to see it sooner rather than >> it would be so much better. >> And also, you know, we have our current plan in place. So, that's what made this easy to plug into. We just followed the the plan that we already had in place. So, I imagine that is the the easiest
route that we will take um for our next funding. >> Uh Trusty Harden. >> Uh yes. So, you know, we talked earlier about uh opportunities for uh parent groups to get together and know each other and understand their roles and all
those good things. So, as we enter a new planning cycle next year, that could be an opportunity for both of these sort of to work together in in concert with each other to to you know, have these parent groups come together and help help set goals uh but also get to understand each
other and what they're all about. a kind of a joint venture as far uh as that goes. Um and I know you know we've the LCAP pack has historically had uh a briefing book uh which helps uh humanize
the LCAP for the uninitiated um and so um that will be coming shortly I understand. So excited to uh to see that. >> Yes. And um I did an LCAP presentation at our last um parent leadership uh
summit and it was it was wellreceived. Um and I believe the briefing book is an integral part of folks understanding the LCAP because we fully admit it is not a um reader friendly document. >> Props to Lily Barton Steve.
>> Yes. Yes. Thank you, Lily. Your legacy lives on. the uh goal nine on the immersive storytelling academy is that a braided funding situation as well? >> No, that that um for the entire program.
Yes. However, for for that staff position um they will be paid singularly out of uh learning recovery. >> And are we expecting to do to fund um that position that way for in future
years or >> if we receive additional funding? I believe that is the plan. >> But again, once we receive the funds, we will uh bring >> What do you mean by additional funding? More than we have now. >> Yes. If if the governor's budget
proposed sending um sending school districts additional learning recovery uh funding that remains. So if we do in fact receive those, then then yes, we will um propose the spending of that funding.
>> Okay. Any further questions? All right. Thank you, Dr. Charlie. >> Thank you all. >> Next item is approval of this. >> That's an action item. >> Oh, I'm so sorry. This is an action. >> Move approval. >> Second.
>> Oh, advocacy. Go ahead. >> Yes. Um I I did want to reflect a little bit um on something that I've said about the last two LCAPS and and because this is now the third year of the same version that it's it's really almost it's next to impossible to tell how our
supplemental and concentration funds that are being spent to address the needs of our targeted students which actions they're um being spent in. Actions that are marked as for targeted students are being funded with both base funds and SNC funds and actions that are
not marked as contributing to those students are also being spent with SNC and non SNC but it's for someone just reading the LCAP it's it's almost possible. Um in response to the questions I asked prior to the meeting I
asked what is the additional $4 million in uh action 1.2 two which talks about um providing services to sorry if you indulge me for a second.
It's the same description that it's always had which is um instructional services and support for mathematics and literacy central office based curriculum specialists additional training for MTSS coaches supports
coordination across schools ensures educators have access to high quality researchbased training etc. So this this action item now includes $4 million of transportation curb to curb for special
ed students is my understanding unless unless we've started providing transportation for gened students but that would be news to me if we have because we did pass a transportation plan or talked about one earlier. So again, so now this special ed cost is
coming into this contributing and so it looks like part of the money that's going to targeted students, but it's the same special eding that we've done in the past. So for those reasons, um I can't support this this LCAP. It's not a document that the public can understand
and read to see how we are linking our intentions to serve students with needs with the funds that are given to us for their benefit. Um I do hope that we have a robust and inclusive process to start
the next LCAP cycle um that is inclusive of many of our partners and that fixes this issue that was introduced three years ago that is causing the LCAP to be very difficult to understand. Any other advocacy?
>> All right. What's the preferential vote from Trusty Bleecker? >> Yes. >> All those in favor? Those against extensions? Motion passes. Thank you. Now we will go to
item N3, approval of SULPA 2627 annual budget and service plan. Dr. Way Noso. >> Good evening. Just uh seeking your approval of the 2627 plan. There's no presentation. You had
all the documents. >> Motion to >> second any advocacy. Trusty Kenny >> very similar here the So this special ed plan no longer shows
twothirds of the amount that we're spending on special ed students for busing. So that's one of the reasons why the contracted services had gone down so much. I know also I just want to comment it's not a a reason that I'm not supporting this but I just want to
mention also that this because of the timing and when we have to um put this out for public hearing it doesn't include the additional new funding this year that's coming from the state for special ed just because it has to be done so early. So there if you look at our budget documents they show four
million more than this does. So if anyone wonders why they don't match, that's why. >> And may I I also just add that the timing of this when we didn't know what the AB 602 increase was going to be and to your point, the timeline of which we had to have CAC approve this and have
this ready for tonight um does not include that. So she Trusty Kenny is correct. But we will be working with our new CBO Armen and Rowan. They're already on standby um for when uh we will be making those adjustments. >> Thank you Dr. Enoso. Trustee McKenzie,
>> but doesn't the state have a like finite timeline on when this document has to be submitted? And that timeline doesn't necessarily align with when the budget is presented or when the May revise comes out. So if we want to raise the
concern about the misalignment of those timelines, then it's not an issue for us to solve tonight. And I think that's a larger conversation to have at the California Department of Education level with their process, their form, their
document, their requirement. >> Correct. And we have to still get this approved by you all tonight. We still need to get it to LEO and it's due on Tuesday to the state. >> Any other advocacy? >> What is your preferential vote? Trusty Bleecker. Uh can I say something before?
Um so we uh the student wanted to say that this is an important action item and after reading and reviewing the CAC presentation and hearing parents, we understand the urgency of having clear plans to support our special education peers and we're going to vote yes.
All those in favor? Any against? Any extensions? Motion passes. Thank you, Dr. Venosa. Okay. Item N4, approval of adoption 2627, budget and
approval of resolution 2891 for fund balance commitment. >> Dr. Canal is not here. So, do we need to say anything? Dr. Hill, >> I apologize. Um, we are requesting the
approval of the budget based on the presentation um of the draft uh that you received at the June 11th board meeting. Move approval. >> Second. >> Go ahead, Dr. Kenny. >> I just had a question because I believe
that included in this item is the approval of the fund balance commitment. True. The adoption of the 2627 budget and approval of resolution 2891 for fund balance commitment. So my question is
what is the board committing the funds for? Good evening. >> Okay, regarding your question about the fun 17 commitments. So this was raised like a couple of times and we already explained that. So there's a board
resolution 20 2827 and it's been specified there. The California Department of Education and the Government Finance Officers Association recommend that school
districts maintain committed assigned and unassigned reserves equal to at least two months of operating expenditures or approximately 17% reserve to mitigate revenue shortfalls and anticipated expenditures by the governing board of the Pasadena Unified
School District that the following amount shall be committed for specific purposes in accordance with Gazby 54 and board policy 3100 and the attachment was the the committed funds which we it was attached to the board when it was
approved back in June 26, 2025. So the now therefore it be resolved says that we are committing it for specific purposes and I I guess I'm asking what are the specific purposes that we're committing this 11.5 million for?
>> Again as it specifies is for Gazby 54 requirements and also any revenue shortfalls. >> So we would use it to cover our deficit. So we will be spending it, we will be transferring it if we have a deficit in. >> So my understanding fund 17 it's for
that. So district set aside some reserve for any revenue shortfalls and again it was based on the resolution it specifies there and also for the Gatsby 54 requirements which again says if you have any fund balance you need to um
indicate is that assigned unassigned committed you can just leave the fund balance as it is. So you need to specify what kind of fund balance you do have. >> All right? Because originally when we moved this and it was I think 10 million at the time when we first moved it, it's just been accumulating interest. We um
committed it for OPED to cover our OPED liability and then when we kind of encountered budget difficulties, we uncommitted it for OPED and said no, it's there to provide a buffer. So I guess this is just like having a savings account that's just there. That's what
it's for. It's not for us to spend on students. It's 11 million that's going to sit there. It's I just It's ironic for me because 10 years ago, uh the board passed our board policy and said we would like to hold 6% reserves rather
than 3% reserves that are required. And staff many many many times said that's so hard. Maybe we can do it for the budget year but not for the two out years. And so I believe we actually removed that language from our board policy. But with this money here, we in effect are having
a 6% reserve for every year. So just reflecting on that. Thank you. >> Any further questions for advocacy? >> Oh, sorry. We were in the question. Okay. Questions? Okay. And then there was a motion in a second.
>> Okay. Advocacy. Go ahead. >> All right. Um, again, I wanted to reiterate that I have an issue with um using our one-time grant money to pay off stirs and pers for the next three years. You know, as as we remember that when we paid off our operating expenses
um during the pandemic with one-time funds, that's what led to that cliff. Um, again, I'm also extremely concerned about not marking the special ed expenditures as special education. Um, I
would throw out again as a a request to see if anyone else is interested on the board to move the fire insurance to another fund if it's possible. Um, I don't know if it can go into fund 17 as well. As um staff pointed out to us in
their presentation uh two weeks ago, we are using $6.9 million as excess routine restricted maintenance because the fire money is in fundo1. So we are tying up $6.91 million over two
or three years of money that we could be using for students to go to academics. Um and I would like to put in a plug that when we find out our final budget, which I assume will be in the next few weeks
when the governor's when they're done, that we consider very early in the year, um restoring community assistance. I think that without them at our sites, uh pursuing chronic absenteeism, uh remedies and other many other things
will become much more difficult. >> Trusty Velasquez. >> Okay. But practically, how can like are you proposing like a an amendment to the motion that specifies any of that? Are you just
saying it like what? I'm like, "Oh, that sounds great. Now what?" Because that's very interesting. And how does that >> There's a motion in on the floor in second. One second on the floor, but I assume that if people felt some of these
things had merit that they could express their opinions and that staff is paying attention. >> Okay, >> I think we're ready to vote. What is >> there is a mechanism where you can ask
for a friendly amendment and give specific a No, Trusty Harden, sorry. Go ahead. >> Well, I think we're what we're talking about with the fire insurance is is as we get to sec, you know, first
interim debt is that I mean, I think that's what I'm sort of inferring is that as we revise further budget documents in the future, we would see those fire uh monies separated out. Well, I think we would have to hear whether it's feasible and whether it's
possible. And I think uh it's not just the money that we have received already. I think we need a plan for when the final settlement comes through, which is potentially even larger sums of money, which again would cause us to set aside even more of our general fund just to
meet 3% reserves and 3% routine restricted maintenance. And I don't know that that's what we want to do on an ongoing future basis. Yeah, I think we should have that as a separate thing. >> So motion's on the floor. Oh, I'm sorry.
Did you have an advocacy? Can we just keep the main thing the main thing right now? We're having a lot of dialogue about speculative dollars that we do not have in our hands. And it is irresponsible for us to try to conflate dollars that
are not in our hands yet and have proposed plans for them and have staff spinning their wheels about things that we do not yet have the dollars to expend for. Yes, they are nice things we want to be able to expend and invest in. We don't have that money today. So
therefore, let us focus on the budget that is proposed as is written and should some other happen later. That's a conversation for a different day than we can agendas at that point in time. >> All right, Trusty Bleecker, what is your
preferential vote? >> Yes. >> All those in favor? Any against? >> Extensions. Motion passes. >> Thank you. >> Okay. Item N5. Trusty McKenzie, how much how many
public comment do we have? 14. >> Oh, yeah. Miss Kenn Trusty Kenny, do you have anything to say on this? You probably should say something, but one minute on public comment, but do you want to say something >> to introduce it or do you want me to go
into my spiel >> to introduce it? >> I don't know. I just thought you might have something >> advocacy is different than This is an item as a resolution to initiate district transformation
process. Um I believe there's been some conjecture that this means consolidation but I hope that the words that are in it will speak for themselves and we can
have conversations about it. Right. Any clarifying questions? >> Oh, sorry. Public comment. Sorry, public comment. Just one minute. >> Thank you for your patience, everybody.
First three speakers are Mimi Fitzgerald, Lisa Cruzie, Denise Rob. Hello. Nice to see you all so late. Um, I appreciate all the hard work
everyone has been doing and um, I'm speaking in favor of adopting 2894. Um, the community has asked to resin resolution 2852
um, concerning the right sizing of our schools. And I I think this one uh transformation process that replaces that. Um I think if you adopt this resolution Oh, Mimi Fitzgerald,
I forgot to say that. If you adopt this one, it um calls for a new process that would allow allow all the stakeholders, students, parents, caregivers
to be in. Good evening. I'm Lisa Cruzie. I'm here as a parent. Being a PUSD parent and advocate should not feel like being attacked. It shouldn't feel like being at war. It shouldn't feel like having a
third full-time job on top of working and taking care of our kids. The SCAC voted no on every closure scenario proposed. Let it go. Restore trust in our community.
Pursue alternatives. Hear the research and feedback. Let's talk about feeling connected to our schools and our beloved communities. Tina Frederick's your lawyers have written op eds comparing parent
advocates to the segregationists of the 1970s. Additionally, people have compared Title One parents choosing integrated schools to elitists.
Thank you. Have a good evening. So to rebuild trust, I had some advice. Focus on bringing money into the district, not closing schools. We're not Blair is not competing with Mirror. Blair is competing with 45 private
schools and charters and over 9,000 students. Uh some say that we have too many programs that are expensive. Maybe we do do a thorough study. Find out find out what it would cost to move the program. Find out what it would cost to close the
program and lose those 140 interdist families. Stop spending a fortune on consultants when you have so many of us data scientists and experts would probably do it for free for you. And we need a 6
through 12 model. We have almost 3,000 students that chose 6 through 12. So, let's do that. It's a stupid idea to get rid of 6 through 12. I guess that's it. Elby Hickinbottom Jr.
Jera Recendes Anushia Ayenar. I don't see them in the room at the moment. Donna Perkins, Peter Dryer, and Elizabeth.
Good evening again. My name is Peter Drier. My kids went to PUSD. I was on the PEF board, lived in Pasadena for 33 years. Uh for those 33 years, the school district has been kicking this can down the road um of trying to deal with
declining enrollment and inadequate funds. And those are things you don't have any immediate control over. I think the people that are against uh rethinking and right sizing the schools could spend their time trying to get the
state to increase its per student expenditures for public education K through 12. Uh the school district has gone from 23,000 students to the current roughly 14,000 students to a projected uh less than 10,000 students. We could
have fewer schools and better schools, but that's not up to me. That's up to you. That's up to the community. And so I think it's the right time to scratch your old proposal and start again and listen to the community. Thank you.
PSD is allocating $ 37 million to Longfellow and 43 million to Madison and measures O and measure R still include hundreds of millions in available bond funds. Given these resources, it is
difficult to justify using aging infrastructure as a reason to consider closing schools. These voterapproved funds of over a billion dollars were intended to address exactly these conditions and should be used to
modernize, not reduce, school capacity. Don Bonito should be prioritized as a tier one full modernization project, not treated as a potential closure target in
future cycles as with this rebranded resolution. remove Don Bonito from the closure list, proceed with its plan modernization, and resend resolution 2852, and vote
on resolution 2894. Should I get the four minutes that the lady did on June 11th? Thank you, >> Patricia Herrera. Followed by Ashley Lincoln and Franchesca Mariani.
Good evening. Resolution 2894 does not fix the flaws in resolution 2852. Instead, it creates a more vague and open-ended process while relying on the same data timeline and consolidation
agenda. If the goal is to restore public trust, please, you need to do that. The district should focus on revenue generation, asset management, enroll enrollment recovery, program evaluation, and comprehensive budget audit, an
alternative to school closures. Resolution 28.94 appears to be a rebranding consolidation effort intended to preserve the original agenda rather than address its underlining problems. I
urge the board to remove first of all Don Bonito from the closure list. Resin resolution 2852 and vote no and resolution 2894. Hello again. I support rescending resolution 2852 and I am concerned that
resolution 2894 is more of the same just with a new number. I fear that some of you are stuck in your opinion that closing schools is the way to go. If 2894 were really a new resolution with a new process, you wouldn't know what schools you're closing yet or if you're closing schools at all. So why have necessary facilities updates for Don Bonito been delayed again? You cannot
close our campus for facilities reasons when there have been no opportunity to make improvements. I'm not asking for a full remodel of my children's school, but fixing what's broken at Dominito and other campuses is imperative. You have a responsibility to current students. The HVAC in the Dominito cafeteria needs to
be updated. That room gets hot during extreme heat. It's uncomfortable. More importantly, there are children that attend our school who are susceptible to extreme temperatures. They sometimes need to eat in their classrooms instead when it gets too hot. We've been talking about inclusivity a lot tonight. That is
not inclusive. All children deserve to be safe and comfortable at school. Comfortable should be the bare minimum. Please proceed with the HVAC updates that were supposed to be this summer. Thank you. Hi everyone, my name is Franchesca Mariani and I'm here in support of
substantial revision to resolution 2894. Uh the recent RSS consultant facility survey um that just came out illustrates the problem. Um people have lost trust in what PSD board is doing. Many parents
are therefore a wary to respond and provide honest feedback because they do not know how the information will ultimately be used. When even a simple survey is viewed with suspicion, it tells us something important about the current state of trust. What can be done about this? I provide seven proposed
amendments to resolution 2894 that directly address community concerns. These amendments would ensure that community priorities are established before major bond expenditures or consolidation scenarios are put forward. require greater transparency around consultant work projects and clearly
explain how surveys and community input will be used. In addition, they provide a mechanism for studying challenges with retention, supporting recruitment and PSD and generating revenue from unused properties. much, Miss Franchesca. >> And um so please consider >> Una Jo.
Hello all, I'm Ya Leos, PhD parent. A week ago, the California Teachers Association released a statement saying, quote, "A new Stanford study of California closures found districts that closed schools lost about 287 students over five years, roughly 2.4 million a
year in funding. The savings never showed up." End quote. In aligning with the research, I urged the board to resend the resolution 2852 and reject resolution 2894 that raised similar concerns. As Ranata Cooper said at the
May board meeting, it's important to do things the right way, not in private meetings, public meetings. And if you want to make significant changes through the school district, then you should do so in a way where you have buyin from the community that you're elected to serve. This includes at a baseline making the board's information
accessible and decisions openly, not in closed door study sessions, and setting board meetings when school resumes, not during summer break when PSD families are away. and the agenda should not be framed around school closures. Uh really we should be resetting the process with
an actual fair transparent community centered visioning process for the future PSD. Thank you. >> Do a last call for Donna Perkins Elby Hickin Bottom Jr. Jera Rosendez
and Anushia Inagar. Okay. Thank you very much. >> Thank you. Thank you for public comment. Okay. Um I have a I have an amendment to this. So
um I guess see it. So I want to make a motion to approve this but with the amendment I'm about to say. Um there's a second to the last
be it further resolved. It says in conjunction with community partners. I wanted to add after in conjunction with students, parents, residents, teachers, staff, local business owners.
After in conjunction with just to be more inclusive of the different stakeholders. Was that the intent of that or is there >> I I think the intent was that the scheduling would be the district and
the community partners would facilitate and schedule and then everyone be would be invited from the community. Yeah. So it's not that not just having that with the community partners, they would be helping us outreach. Yeah.
>> Okay. Then I' I'd retract my amendment then. I didn't know that's the intent. >> Trusty Velasquez, >> could I move? Okay. I would if there's no questions, I would move approval. Although I would say on the the first be
it further resolves. So right after the now therefore be it resolved. Um my understanding is that the facilities master plan demographer may not be available on the 13th, but he could be available at our August 6th meeting. So if that could be changed to say that we
arrange for that the superintendent arrange for them to for the demographer to present at or before that study session. So just add or before between at and that meeting.
>> How how did you find out that information? >> Because I haven't asked the demographer yet. I heard it. Well, I I just want to know that it's verified to be true. >> Well, that's why I'm saying if we just say at or before, then it covers it.
>> Oh, okay. That's okay. >> Okay. Trusty Vasquez. >> Um, so my initial uh reaction to this resolution is >> so if I've made a motion, >> are you doing advocacy or Okay. Or you're >> I'm asking for something.
>> Okay, great. >> Okay. So my initial reaction to this resolution is is it possible to separate um the elimination rescending or I don't know
the conjugation of that word sorry I sometimes my English is not great yeah yeah okay so the recession is that it okay whatever we we can separate the part where we eliminate Okay. The first one from the proposed like so to is it
possible to have two resolutions separate like one that says and that it's a like a clean close of we're going to resend or close or end this one and then the second resolution is to approve
the document or whatever. Is it is that possible? So, I'm going to give you some context because this >> a point of order. >> I wanted to give some information to address her her concern because we did talk about this. I'm >> just asking for a point of order. That's all.
>> Yeah. Should we address whether it's possible rather than the reason? >> In other words, if it's not possible, >> it's not even related. >> Okay. >> Is there a second on the motion for there to have discussion at this point? That's my question.
I'll second. >> No, because we have inquiry before we do do the motion. So, I thought that was an inquiry. >> But who who seconded it? >> I don't think I heard a second, which is why I asked the question. >> So, there's no motion on the floor.
>> I'll second if that allows me to ask the questions. So, I second. >> Okay. And I saw Miss Mononttoya trying to answer your question. >> I think it would be a significant change because doing two resolution I will need
another number for a resolution. So I don't think that can work. >> So I I wanted to answer your question which is the our legal had evaluated that resolution and
It was recommended that we keep that as is and not separate it. So that was considered. So my second question is um are you open to including the
number four from this document that reads be it further resolved that all reports anal analysis presentations sorry again English starts to decrease survey instruments, data sets,
recommendations. The one that is in page two, the number four here. Meeting materials prepared by consultants engage in support of the district transportation shall be made public and available in the on the
district website. So is it okay if I read the thoughts that I had prepared because I think it answers your question a little bit. Um I think the goal of this uh resolution was to be fairly straightforward that we
hold a study session and review some information and discuss how to move forward. We've been receiving suggestions from the public and I think a lot of these are good and I had a lot of suggestions about what kinds of things we should cover as well in that meeting but I think it's the study
session is to have this type of conversation about how are we going to move forward are these the parameters of how we want to do this work if we're going to do this work what is this work that's what the study session is for I think again I like I said I had a lot
Well, we have to talk about transportation. I had a lot of those very specifics, but this is just to get us to the point where we sit down and actually talk about what are all the specifics that should be included. I think these are great suggestions. Um so
>> but then again so then >> I mean this says that there's well >> we can still keep that all reports analysis presentation survey instruments data set related to this resolution
>> public >> well well I mean I think and this kind of goes to one of the other comments So this is a board study session which is an open brown acted meeting and everything that we get as a presentation will be posted. It will be available to
the public. Um, >> I don't, but I'm saying I think but this sounds like everything going forward, not just for this one meeting. And I think it's it's premature, but I do
think we should consider it at the meeting. >> I am asking as a friendly amendment for the resolution for the um, >> I'm gonna say not at this time. I think we should talk about these things at the meeting. Um,
all right. And so I should continue or no? Um, I think the factors that make having a discussion like this on in August that what make it necessary have not changed. We still have budget challenges, reductions in programs, fewer students, a need to schedule bond
projects. Starting this fall would align us with the time frame originally proposed by the staff back in February of 2024. If we remember back to when we approved the long range planning originally that um item said begin in
2627. We'll be aligning with our facilities master planning process as well as the release of the program evaluation reports that's coming this fall as we did at our 2019 master planning process. We can look at all the alternatives, keeping all the schools
open with appropriate program reductions or reducing the number of schools and the pros and cons of each. We should help the community understand what those options look like and listen to their feedback on the options. The goal is for a process moving forward to be transparent and open to the community.
The district needs to adapt to our changing circumstances and the board and the district need to communicate with the community as we adapt. I felt that we weren't always as clear as possible as we could have been this last year in in the budget cuts because we made those
cut decisions in November, but I think it took until the spring for a lot of people to realize what their schools would be missing next year. And I think that was a little bit of a communication process that we didn't get the word out to the principles to really share with their sites as well as they could have.
Um, I'm, you know, more than willing to engage with the committee and and the public on this conversation. Um, I've already met with several groups of parents. I'm really encouraged by the passion and the datification of our parents for Pasadena Unified.
I did think that I've been hearing some different kinds of um things out in the public that maybe need to be clarified. Um, a board study session, as I said, is a public meeting open to the public with public comment. We have streamed past study sessions. So if people can't make
it in person, we can talk about whether it's a recorded session or just something that is streamed. Um there is no time frame mentioned in this resolution except to hold the meeting on the 13th. Um and maybe Dr. Blanco, you
can verify that the board has not placed any bond projects on hold. >> That is correct. We are not placing any bond projects on hold. >> All right. And then are there any other school sites that are vacant that we could be actively working on asset
management for >> at this time? >> We are um we have proposed looking at um some of the leases that we have in this building, but we haven't brought that forward yet. >> Okay. >> All right. But there aren't someone said to me, "Well, you've got a lot of empty
school sites and we do have properties where schools burnt down, but we are actually having to refurbish one of our empty sites to be a swing space to allow us to do at Franklin to do us to do um our bond projects at other elementary
schools and those are scheduled." >> Okay. Thanks. >> Any other advocacy? Trusty Bleer. Sorry, I just want to confirm there is no closure list, Dr. Blanco, that you're aware of
in terms of having to take schools off of it. >> Only the um EIA, which was rejected by the board. >> Trusty Bleecker, >> I have a statement to read from the student assembly. Um, so to start off,
it's great to hear that the to hear the board's response to the Linda Vista community and I would like to ask if there can be the same response to community input regarding the students opposition on consolidation. The student assembly spent a long time and heavily analyzes action item. The student
assembly unanimously opposes resolution 2894 district transformation process. As mentioned, the student assembly statement that I delivered earlier, the assembly and think tank, as well as the informed student body, are concerned that this is another consolidation plan by a different name. For the past six
months, the PSD community has been subjected to fear and anxiety over whether our schools will be closed. Student learning time was disrupted because students needed to discuss their worries about consolidation. A student school is one of our most important communities. It is a place where we feel safe and connected. When students lost
their homes in the fire, it was their schools where they sought refuge. Some of these students attended the SCAC meetings and board meetings to let you know how traumatic it would be to lose their school on top of their home. While the Eden fire may have happened over a year ago, our community is still grieving our losses and coming to terms
with our future. The premise of this resolution is to seek community input while in reality it is ignoring the six months of community input the board has already received. It's unfair to all the students who have come to the board meetings to express their opinions. Introducing this action item during the summer when families are
away or not paying attention to what is happening to the district will continue to impact lack of trust. Additionally, asking Dr. Blanco and her team to divert their attention away from the 2026 to 2027 school year is not in the best interest of students. Further, the district lost students to outside
public, charter, and private schools because of the spring consolidation worries. This resolution undermines district efforts to bring those students back into PSUSD and to bring new families to PSUSD. The focus should be on rebuilding public trust, including with students. That said, the student assembly believes that revoking
resolution 2852 should occur as part of the process of restoring trust, but unanimously opposes resolution 2894. especially >> Harden. >> Thank you. Thank you. >> Um, thank you. U, I, you know, I think
reading this resolution, I think it, it, um, it's a bit easy, uh, for the public to misunderstand it. I think, you know, it's it's not really replacing an old process with a new process. It's, you know, it's ending uh what I consider a
flawed process and a premise and I think it commits us to dialogue on a, you know, on a way forward. I think the the next steps are yet to be determined and so I think this study session allows us as a board to think creatively and
collaboratively about how we do that. Um, I think I'm uh this is an opportunity to address um student experience stability challenges at PUSD. I think it it it can happen in a more authentic way. Um I think it's a chance
to start the process of rebuilding public trust um with developing a plan that engages authentically with the community about the future of our district. Um I think we have to identify, you know, what problems we're
trying to solve um and what doesn't happen if we, you know, if we don't rise to the occasion to solve them. But I also think we have to talk about what we value um and how we can sure ensure every child um has equitable access to
everything PUSD has to offer. So you know what does our district look like you know in 5 to 10 years from now? How could we realistically get there? Um and you know what could stop us? So I I don't want this session to be
performative. Um but I you know I want us to all have meaning meaningful dialogue. Uh I would ask the board for their full commitment uh and positive intention to um get to a reasonable agreement about
how we move forward. And uh I also think it's important for us to align to terms that we use um you know so that people know what we mean when we say things in the resolution like transformation, community values and visioning so that
there is no you know mystery about what those things mean to us. um and what they don't mean. Um I would encourage highly that we use strong facilitation in this meeting uh to help keep us on track and ensure that every every board
member's voice is heard. So I support the resolution to agendaize the meeting. Um and I I'm optimistic that we can uh map out a plan to move forward. >> Trusty Holly, Trusty McKenzie, and Trusty Bailey.
So, I was really surprised to see this and I I feel a chill on the deis right now and but I'm going to say what I'm going to say and maybe somebody will listen. This is not the time to do this. We have
hurt these children, these teens. They have been stressed. The parents have been stressed. And we are in the middle of a recovery of a disaster.
This is not the time for this. Fiscally, we're in a positive situation right now. I can feel the chill, but fiscally, we're okay. And we You can laugh all you want, Miss Kenny. You know what? I'm used to your laughing when I talk.
>> So, you're talking >> the chill of the the quad. So, um, it's I mean, when I see a resolution that talks about transformation, I hear a corporate buzzword. That's what transformation is. It's from Silicon
Valley. And when I hear the words rightsize, I know that that means something different to everyone. I understand that we have declining enrollment. And I understand that we have a lot of charters and private schools to contend with. And I
understand we have to have this conversation. I really, really do. And it's something that I do talk about quite a bit. But I don't dive in to an action item to put the community on edge. We have to listen to them. And I
just watched you all listen to these parents about a park, but you're not going to give the same listening to our student trustee. And And I think we need to listen to our
students right now and we need to rest and give our community a break. >> Christine McKenzie, >> I'm not finished yet. >> Oh, sorry. >> And it doesn't mean that I'm not open to talking about it. I'm I don't know what
gets concocted out there about different people and labels, but I came onto this board creating an enrollment committee and we did a lot of work on that committee and it was robust good work
and we figured out what we needed and we made changes and it was excellent and I think this is where we need to start talking and if we need to do something with our sites, we can. But when I read an opinion piece by
a parent of a child with disabilities who visited every single middle school in this district and said that Blair Middle School was the one school that her child was having an inclusive experience both culturally and
physically in the building. When you put that school on ice and you make people feel unstable, you're hurting the entire community. And we don't need that now. Not after the fire. Not after an entire
town that's been decimated. And I know we've got problems on this board and I am very willing to spend August 13th rebuilding trust. And I always say that trust is always rebuilt
at the deis first. We can't expect people out in the community to trust us if we don't trust each other. That's where our work has to start and we need to lay this resolution to rest. And then
we need to start picking up and dealing with each problem step by step. We've already closed 11 schools. We can keep shrinking this footprint and schools like Blair can get filled with a charter school
and those kids will be in that building. And EF Academy has kids walking to EF Academy which has an IB program and they're going to keep walking there. But these are the problems we need to deal with as a trustee and it's one of the
reasons I ran for office. But to run for office just to decimate a district, shrink its footprint, put the kids into anxiety and the parents is not something I believe in. So I am against this resolution. Thank you.
>> Trustee McKenzie. Well, so much of what I was going to say was um beautifully articulated and encapsulated by um student trustee Bleecker. I'm going to keep my remarks very short at this point. Um I really
want to focus on the issue that still looms large in our community right now and that is the fracture of public trust. And I think that as a governing board, as elected trustees, as community
members and leaders, our first obligation to the public is to repair that trust. Full stop. And we need to spend internal work together going through that process.
I think that once we take meaningful steps to repair that public trust, um there will be confidence in us to be accountable to the public. Again, I also believe that this conversation
about transformation, we have already engaged in some significant transformation where we've had to make some very difficult cuts to our staff and um operating budget in order to um
meet our financial obligations and pressures at the time. What we have not had an opportunity to do is to allow the leadership team under the superintendent's direction to be able to really focus on
what next looks like because shortly after we had to make the cuts, the directive was given for the discussion about consolidation to occur before we even knew what the baseline was. And I think
that was our misstep. So we don't have a baseline to operate from in order to begin to discuss transformation. We don't know where we are starting from. And I think that for us to proceed again down a path without having good
information is irresponsible and reckless. We also have to be very realistic about the fact that there is only so much staff capacity that we have from the superintendent and her team. I I see three leaders here tonight. Um
there are two more that are not present but by and large you're asking five people to do the work of operating this district dayto day being prepared to open school in August being prepared to operate school as their first obligation
and we want to then add on these kinds of projects to a very limited capacity team that is not the best use of their time. It is not in service of students and it is not a value to us at this point. It has been said that our
community is still very much grieving and I am immensely blessed to be in my home. I recognize what a privilege that is because everyone in our community is not in that place. And for us to even have
the idea that it's okay to think about disrupting school which is the remaining kind of like reliable consistent community point that exists. It is insensitive. It is irresponsible and it is unconscionable
for us to be having this discussion right now. I know that there will come a time when we need to have a conversation about consolidation but today is not that day. We should already know that right now yesterday's price is not today's price. And we need to be
thoughtful about how we initiate that conversation, when we initiate that conversation. Timing really matters and this is a horrible time to have a conversation that does not have urgency to it.
I also want us to really remember that we are here to serve students. And if we want to be in service to the voice of the students that trustee Bleecker, student trustee Bleecker raised and represented, then we need to take a full
step back, re-evaluate who we are, why we ran for office, why we chose to serve in this position, and what it is our focus and purpose is. And it is not to divert time, resource, energy from the
goal of serving students like Trusty Bleecker, ensuring that all of our students have an opportunity to re receive a highquality education and to divert our energy from
launching them into the future that they deserve. And until we can get our priorities straight as a governing board, this initiative and this resolution is a full no for me at this point. Thank you,
>> Trusty Bailey. Then Trusty Velasquez. >> Yeah. Um, you know, the students said it all and I really appreciate the effort that you all take to
derive at the decisions that you make because it's very thoughtful and um it's not easy as you can see up here. It's just not easy. So, I appreciate your efforts
and I want to encourage you. But when I read the resolution, I have to say the feeling that came over me was that it lacked transparency.
I felt like it was a a bait and switch and I was disappointed to say the least. What the resolution does not say, which I think resonates with me the
greatest, is it does not open or create a space for for us to address restoring confidence and trust in this
community. And there's a certain level of arrogance when you can move past a community of folks
who have experienced who's had a negative experience through your action as a board trustee. And they're telling you
in your meetings, packing your boardroom, every meeting, and you just keep moving on like they're not there. I can't in good conscious continue to do that without saying
something at this time. Um, again, we didn't learn our lesson. We put another resolution on for action before discussion. Um
it's just hard to move forward in with confidence when integrity is shattered. Um, and again, this is something that has not been uh planned for
or included in the superintendent's goals, and I believe it's time for us to start working on goals for the coming year. And it feels rushed. So, you know, I feel to proceed down this
path without addressing the issue of restoring trust with this community is reckless. It's dismissive of the loss and challenges that this community and our families, staff,
and our students have experienced and what they're suffering through and they continue to struggle with to this day. And I cannot support this resolution
because it just doesn't feel like the right thing for us to be doing right now. Thank you, Trusty Velasquez. So I understand that this resolution comes at a moment where the community
is experiencing lots of divisions and concerns about trust. But uh to me uh when I hear um some of the public comment I struggle to understand that um
rebuilding trust is part of having a conversation and that is what you asked. You've been asking for months. We need more information. We need clarity. We need transparency. So let's have a
conversation. I cannot um in good faith say the best way to build trust is to stay silent. There are some important issues that we need to
address. Um and we have to be able to talk about them and and some of the accusations are um we do not trust the way in which you are behaving but what we're proposing
today or what it's being proposed today is okay. So let's have the conversation. Let's have the conversation in public. Let's have the conversation open. let's discuss some of these issues and let's look at the data. Right? So that is the
process that the public and and and the community the school community has been asking for. um whether or not people support consolidation as a result of that
conversation, whether or not we can act in principle or in uh in principle depends upon having the possibility of discussion. If the com if
if if the crime is we will not have the conversation. I I I I have a problem with this. If we want to have a better conversation,
let's do it. Let's do it. Let's have a Let's have a Wait, hold on. >> We're having a meeting right now. It's It's her turn. So I think I've expressed this many times before and I feel like I have to repeat
it but um we we have schools that have in effect been consolidating starting in August that are going to be sharing principal that are going to be sharing staff that are going to sharing curriculum that are going to be sharing electives that is already happening in August. It already
is happening. But we cannot have a conversation about how that looks like when when how how are we going to have conversations about that if we don't have it? It it's it already happened.
So I think that to say I oppose this in principle and therefore we should not talk about it. It's really not not not a not not an option for me. And um
in the last pass I'm trying to show grace and trying to understand okay I also want to know what is the staff's recommendation to this very real issue
because we do have a resolution approved by this board to rebuild Elliott, but Elliot right now is consolidated with McKinley and I don't know what is the long-term plan for that arrangement and don't know when is it that we are
supposed to have a conversation about that or what is the plan about it? We're supposed to let that fizzle out and resolve itself. Right? So, I think that there are things that demand action that are already
happening. Um the same thing happens at an elementary where we're also sharing a principle like it it just I cannot in good conscious continue to ignore some of the things that are already happening in the district and believe that we need
a space so we can have a conversation about it. I hear that we don't agree. that's fine. But to say the disagreement starts at the point of the conversation, that is an impossible position.
Um, the process in the past uh has a lot of room for improvement. I've had conversations with Dr. Blanco about it and um, you know, the suggestion from the member of public on amendments to
the resolution is is sort of like that's what we want to hear. You know, when Trusty Kenny brought forth the resolution, I it took me a little a while to understand it because uh
I kind of like things already defined, but uh this is more like bring back the information next time and then we'll define you know this sort of language I mean implementation of the process and all
that. So um I think the public will have an opportunity to help us with that. You know the student the leaders have told us that they want to be more engaged and involved. So I hear that and I
I I mean one of the things about the committee that um it's I've told this to Dr. Blanco and other people before where I I say, you know, it took me a while to on the schoolboard to actually formulate questions,
actually read through a lot of information, know how to ask questions, but to have a committee that we had last time to digest all of that in like six weeks or whatever it was, like that's a
lot. And I, you know, that's something I didn't think about, you know, like now I know it's it's a big decision and there's a lot of information to process. So, um, there's a lot of room for improvement and I think we're going to
hear that. There'll be opportunity to hear that um, once we come back in August. So, um, yeah. Anyway, I I I support moving forward and uh I hope that we can get people's input to how how we can improve
in the future on this process. Any further advocacy? >> Okay, go ahead. >> Yeah. Yeah, sure. >> Um I'm wondering um how space and time can be allotted so the voices of the larger body of students can be included in this process.
So when we come back in August is where we will >> the August 13th meeting. >> The August 13th meeting. >> Uh August 13th, right? >> August 13th. Yeah. I mean I I support that what's being said about having students, you know, possibly board
student board members being in that. >> So is there issue with August 13th? >> I just feel like it's hard for students to learn about the board meeting during the summer and also attend it during the summer like the student body to learn about this issue. And I feel like it should be moved once the school year started so they have a chance to learn
more about it and also be able to like be able to go and attend the meeting. >> Okay. Um >> so I think this is the Thursday before school starts on Monday. Is that true? >> So we'll had our welcome back and the
teachers will be in the classroom and stuff I think. >> Okay. Excuse me. Let's >> Okay. Thank you for your input. All right. Um, so are we ready for the
vote then? Um, clarification. >> Okay. Thanks. >> So, um, Mrs. Kenny, I um, sent a message to the board about the capacities not being able to be ready at that time. So, I just want to make sure I don't know if
you want to amend that in any way because I don't want to have an unreal unrealistic expectation for staff to bring a data report that we don't have ready. >> Well, so it looks like the the detail from this has already been compiled by
the um facilities department. So, it's just a matter of creating a summary document which >> which you're more than happy to do. >> Sure. >> Okay. Again, I mean the goal of this was to for so for the
things to bring to the meeting. They were things that were already in the happening. It wasn't the goal to assign any additional work in the time when school is getting ready to open. These were things that were already part of the schedule.
>> Yeah. I think um what I clarified is the demographer would be able to come to have his work ready but then you mentioned he can't come at that time and you want him to come at a different time so we wouldn't have the capacity report or the demographer report which two of
the items in here depend on those things right but we do have two demographer reports I mean we have MGT and we have we do have demographer data from two different sources right we have projections from TSS and we have projections from MGT. >> Okay, I just want to make make sure that
you know what we can bring to the meeting. >> Okay, Trusty Bleecker, what is your preferential vote? >> Once again, I want to reiterate that the board has confirmed that student input will be prioritized and the student assembly represents the student body when you unanimously voting no. The
board members need to be talking to students, not each other. I saw community voices being heard today and I behalf on the student body and assembly and students want the same from the board. We vote no. >> Right. All those in favor of resolution as written.
>> Oh, sorry. >> Oh, the amended date. Sorry. Okay. with the amendment. All those in favor? All those against? Any extensions? Motion passes.
Okay. Item six, uh, approval of contract addendum for the superintendent of schools. >> Move for approval. >> There a second. >> Second. >> Any uh questions or advocacy? All those in favor?
I'm sorry. Preference to vote. >> Yes. >> All those in favor? Any against? Motion passes. Four committee reports. Polic policy legislative
committee. >> The legislative advocacy committee will resume their meetings in August. >> Thank you. The facilities committee had really a boisterous meeting with the tree advocates. We got the we got the bear and we got
the wrap. And then um our next meeting is August 11th. >> Okay. Uh policy, do you have an update? uh we held a meeting and we had some
items that needed to be approved by July 1st and the deletion of sun safety and the addition of weather I think it's called weather safety also needed to be approved. We have to have the protocols in place. So we felt it was good to have the policy
in place as well by July 1st due to recent legislation. So those are on the agenda tonight. >> Thank you. All right. Now we're consent. Are there any pools? >> Okay.
>> Um number five, facilities G and then two um not item two. So item two and item five and item two it's N and P >> two N
>> and then five is G. >> Anybody else? P2 and P4K. >> Wait, what? >> Two 20 and 2K. >> It's all section P. >> Number two, sublet letter.
>> Yeah, two. Okay. Okay. Two. We already have two P, I think. 4K 4K. I don't know if I need to pull them. I'm just voting though on those two items.
And then um P6B is in boy. Okay. So to sweep Second. >> Any comments on the sweep? >> Yeah. Any items on the sweep? >> Okay. All those in favor?
Any against? Any extensions? Motion passes. Okay. Item 2N. >> 2N and 2P. I have questions about these. I I feel uncomfortable passing them right now. I feel like I need to have a discussion with the full board on these
because of the PUSD specific language. So 2N is facilities master plan. >> Okay. So should we vote on that then? Well, I I I'm going to vote no on this because the
PUSD specific language says reviewed an update at least at least every 5 years or more as or more often as necessary. I think this is going to be a situation where people just keep asking the superintendent for information that just goes on and on just for the the sake of
getting data and I'm uncomfortable with that. Um there's enough on her right now And I'm not sure why we have to put the workforce housing needs in here also. So I'm just not comfortable passing. >> Your motion is to table it or
>> My motion is to table this NP. >> Okay. Um >> 2P just do 2N first. >> Sure. >> Is there a second on the table? >> Second. >> All right. Advocacy. So I this was something that came
forward from CSBA. The workforce has been in there since previous times. Um when we discussed this with Mr. Dunning, um the reason that it says more often is if there is a need to do it from his point
of view, not that wasn't put in by the board. >> Okay. >> It's yellow. It's PD specific. So all those oh >> so I I mean so CSBA took out every five years and then
in their notes said the state the state bond organization uh says that they recommend that you have it every five years. So, they took out the language, but they left it in their note. And I can't
remember it's >> I don't know. It when I read it, it was something about it that um made me feel like it didn't fit in that space, workforce housing. >> It didn't align with the other items
that were in that space. >> We can take work work force out. Again, that was put there some point in the past. I mean, >> I don't see it wasn't redlined. It was yellow. So, >> well, actually, I'm so sorry. So, what
the CSBA says is teacher housing needs. >> It says teacher housing needs. So, we changed it to workforce housing needs so that it didn't just say teacher housing. >> Well, it says housing needs. It's so housing needs could mean more than
workforce housing. I'm just saying that the CSBA says teacher housing needs and we wanted to be more inclusive which is why workforce was put in there in the past and we are >> remind me are we're doing a workforce housing project with our facilities master plan
>> it >> but it still didn't fit in that instance even though we are >> I mean you know that CSBA is very much in favor of building workforce >> I do understand that and so am I but I
still feel like it didn't fit there. >> Tabled, right? >> Yeah, we need to table it. And I wish I can we please get an item to to talk about first and second readings of these policies where PUSD specific language is added. >> But again, this wasn't added. It's been
there. It was approved in the past by >> highlighted. >> Yellow. >> Yes, because it was added in the past. And we have to keep it highlighted or else every time we get a new version it would get deleted. >> So you mean every time we look at these
we're thinking that this is new language that was just added by the policy committee. >> If it's yellow it means that it's specific to us. It doesn't mean it's new unless it's in red. >> So workforce isn't in red. So it's not new. But you can see underneath it it has >> red lines.
>> It it doesn't fit in. >> I'm just saying it doesn't fit. We can still discuss it >> colleagues and only because we've pulled a bunch of items and it's 11:20. I think we need to call for the >> So yes, the motion is to table. All those in favor of tableabling.
All those against an extension. >> So what does that mean? You want it to go back to policy and we'll bring it back to you the exact same way again. There's >> well I I'm trying to understand the utility of the board tableabling things and it going back to policy and looking
at and saying well this is what we wanted to bring forward to the motion did not pass. Let's move to the next one. We do not have >> so you need to talk to the maker the one who made the motion who suggested that it be tabled to find out what her
thoughts are around it. That's all. So I'm sorry you said the motion. So you voted the table. >> I voted. >> So let's take it to policy. >> The motion passed the table. >> Yes.
>> Okay. 20. >> So I actually wanted to pull this so that we could table it. >> Yeah. But it's after P is after old. And I just I tried to call the superintendent's office earlier today to pull this one prior to the meeting, but I couldn't get in touch. Uh O board
bylaw 92000. So it's my recommendation that we table it. >> I'll second any advocacy. All those in favor of tableabling. Those against.
Okay. Motion passes. 2 P trusty Holy >> I'd like to table this one also. So >> second to table >> I want I want to go through this and talk with people about this for a lot of things that are highlighted here.
>> Okay. Did you make the motion? I'll second it. >> Yeah. I motion to table. Okay. Any advocacy? All those in favor of tableabling? Those against?
Right. We're not tableabling. Is there a motion to approve? >> Move approval. >> Is there a second? >> Okay. >> Second. All those in favor. >> Oh, advocacy. So, I was just Can I go? I'm sorry. Were
you pointing me? >> So, with this one, I was concerned about um the way that the first paragraph was was changed to define
board policies. The PUSD specific language is added But it seems a little I don't know. It just seems a little excessive. And um
I didn't have a problem with the other one, but it was the first paragraph that I had concerns about and just trying to follow through it. I felt a little challenged as well. It took me a minute to understand
what was redlined because there was red writing that was redlined and not black writing that was redlined, but then there's red, red print that is highlighted in yellow. So, it took me a minute to try to figure
out how to follow this one. And again, I just wish that we would take the time and the opportunity to review these um bylaws and these policies when we do this this way. All of us cannot
make policy committee meetings. It's just, you know, not in the cards for all of us to be able to make them when they happen. So, it would be nice if we could include a first and second read while we're in this meeting
because just as sure as this happens, something will come up in one of our meetings and Kim will look at us and say, "Well, you all approved it at the last meeting." And we have no clue what she's talking about until we go and look it up and we see that we did approve it. And it shouldn't be that way. We should
know what we're doing and we should be able to discuss it. and make amendments as well. Thank you. >> Well, I'm into policy with you guys, so I thought these were just definitions. Did Who wrote this? It's I mean, it's in
yellow. So, somebody in our staff wrote this, right, Miss Montoya? Do you have uh do you recall Sorry, this is one that hadn't been updated. Sorry. Going down to the bottom to look
for the date. >> This one cleaning. >> Is this the one we looked at at policy? Sorry, I'm not really >> You don't remember? It's okay. It's really late. >> I don't remember this one. I'm sorry.
>> Yeah, I mean I just remember this is sort of definitions and Does this look familiar to you? Oh, okay. This one hasn't been updated since 2018. So, I think that's CSBA language that's new, which is why it's in red. But I
don't know that it's PUSD specific. The definition. So the yellow should be red. >> The yellow should it already is red. It just should >> no yellow >> in those definitions on that first page. Um, >> so Kim
>> Kim, >> yes, >> just so you're aware, CSBA's language does propose that there are two readings of the draft before they're approved. >> I would like to have two readings. Okay. So motion on the floor is the
table, right? Any any of the advocacy? >> I mean, sorry, the motion is to approve. Sorry. >> Okay. >> Sorry. Yeah, I forgot. So, all those in favor? >> No, this is to approve. approve as is
with the removing of the yellow to take the yellow off. Please turn on your mics. >> Okay. So, who made the motion? Initial motion. >> Okay. So, you Trusty Kenny.
All right. Can I change my premote vote on tableabling? >> No. >> Okay. There's a motion to approve. >> There's a motion to approve. >> Yeah. Motion to approve. So, did we vote
yet? Motion to approve. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> So, you figure out what that what to do with that. Okay. 2p. >> I mean, not 4K. 4K.
Interesting. 4K. >> I asked um >> I'm voting no on paradigm. Just >> Okay, that's all. >> Okay. So, motion to approve. >> Move approval. Okay. Is there a second? Is there a second? >> Second.
>> Any advocacy? >> Sorry. Are we on >> 4K? >> 4K. Okay. >> Advocacy. Trusty Harden. Oh, >> well, I'm saying that I'm voting no because I'm not certain that we are able
to um shorten the timeline to receive the reimbursements and or maximize reimbursements. So in my opinion, I'm voting no. >> Okay. I would say that I I the answers I asked about whether we have seen any
additional funding come in from the new process, I wasn't clear that the answers I was given were as specific as I would have liked. So >> okay. All right. All those in favor?
One, two, three. All those against Any extensions? Oh, against motion passes. 5G 5G extra money for data privacy. I would just like somebody to talk to me about that because it's $250,000.
>> RSS. >> Oh, is someone gonna >> somebody gonna >> RSC? the data privacy. I just have a question on what this is. >> Data privacy for RSSC. >> Yeah. >> Um I'm not sure which are you looking at
uh at the amendment A uh that outlines the six different components of the addition. >> This is going to cost $250,000. So, I'd like to know what it says as part of the amendment. Uh, demog demographic subconsultant data privacy addendum.
That seems to be what we're paying for here. Correct. >> Uh, actually, this is primarily additional engagement and the diff different engagements are laid out in the uh in the addendum, the one page. >> So, we've added things to this. Is
that's why it's costing us more? >> That's exactly what it is. additional scope >> outreach. Can somebody explain to me what this is the outreach? >> So there was a certain level of engagement defined in the original proposal that they submitted that the board approved.
>> Okay. >> And what uh the superintendent and leadership team requested was additional community involvement. So there was a school site committee uh formed and and in the process of being formed each
school will have a school site committee representing different stakeholders. Uh and that school site committee will meet and provide feedback on the facilities master plan for that campus. Uh but it's not including the entire school
community. It's those representatives who come to that school site committee meeting. The superintendent said I want wider engagement. So that's some of what you see in here. Uh Elliott because of what's going on at that in that community has even broader engagement.
So uh it it's primarily broader engagement. There is some the facility condition assessment uh work that was part of the initial proposal is being expanded because the ed center and Burbank Elementary School weren't uh initially part of our RFP. So that was
an oversight they needed to be added. So, >> okay. Thank you very much. I appreciate it. >> All right. Is there a motion to approve 5G? I mean 4K. No, 5G. Sorry. >> Approval. >> Second.
>> Okay. All those in favor? >> Patrice? I I second it. >> All those in favor? >> Okay. Motion passes. P6B. >> I just need to recuse myself.
All those Oh, any motion >> to approve? >> Second. >> Any advocacy? All those in favor? Any against extensions? >> Okay.
>> Okay. Done with consent. Uh board comment or report. Anything? Oh my gosh. 11:35 meeting journey.