001Mics are on. >> There we go. Today is Monday, December 15, 2025. The time is 6 pm. Roll call. Wymer >> here. >> Wilkins >> here. >> Pinker >> here. >> Hernandez >> here. >> Updike >> here. Anderson >> here. Next, we're going to move to the public hearing on the tax levy. [clears throat] The truth and taxation law requires that the district hold a public hearing prior to the board's approval of the taxes to be levied for the tax year 2025. I begin the public hearing on the tax levy at 6 pm. Each speaker will have three minutes to make their comment. Are there any comments or signups? Okay. Is this Yep, that's on. We're good. You have any comments or any >> No, we do not have anyone signed up for public hearing.
002>> Okay. Okay. Uh, this will conclude the public hearing considering the 2025 tax levy at 6:01 p.m. The board will be voting for the approval of the tax levy at tonight's meeting. I move that the board approve tonight's meeting agenda as presented. >> Second. >> Wymer. >> Yes. >> Wilkins. >> Yes. >> Pinker. >> Yes. >> Hernandez. >> Yes. >> Update. >> Yes. >> Anderson. >> Yes. Now we have time for board or superintendent comments. I just want to wish everybody a great holiday break or winter break that's coming up. Um I I know it's welld deserved and well needed relaxation time. And so I just hope that both the staff and the community are very thoughtful about spending this time with loved ones and reconnecting um and more importantly just getting some rest. And
003so have a great great winter break and we'll see everybody when they return. I I ditto that it's been uh a long fall and I want to just share some comments with the public. Over the past week, um I've devoted considerable hours to engage in multiple conversations with individual board members to make progress towards reaching a majority view on the vacant board seat and a school closure vote. and Nicole has been my partner in that process. I appreciate the members willingness to engage in conversation. Despite this, a deadlock remains on both issues. [clears throat] Current conversations have not resulted in any new progress and the differences on in our positions remain significant. The board is in a difficult and unique situation. but must continue to move forward as previously shared with the community. According to
004the Illinois school code, the board has 60 days from November 4th, 2025 to fill the board vacancy. The board did not come to a consensus for a board appointment. Therefore, the matter will be forwarded to the executive director regional superintendent on January 3rd, who has the authority to fill the vacancy within 30 days by February 2nd. The timing of this appointment means it is not possible for the administration to implement any school closures before the 2026 2027 school year. The board must move forward to address the concerns regarding the district's financial stability, educational equity, and academic excellence. It is acknowledged that the effectiveness of the board's governance needs to be improved. Plans are in development to address this. Programming around working collaboratively as a team will be planned in partnership with the Illinois Association of
005School Boards and will occur when the seventh board member is seated. Thank you. Now we're moving on to public comment. Members of the public are welcome and invited to address the board during open public meetings. Speakers are discouraged from using the public comment period to air specific concerns about staff members being mindful that the public comment period is not a suitable forum for factf finding or resolution of disputes. Rather, we encourage members of the public who have concerns about specific district employees to follow district communication guidelines found in the student handbook. We have 37 >> 39 um people signed up for public comments. So, you will have one minute to address the board. Please remember to state your name. Speakers may not yield their time to someone else. Please refrain from applause between speakers, so
006we may respectfully allow all speakers the opportunity to be heard. Also note that it is not customary for the board to respond to public comment. The best way to correspond with members of the board is by emailing schoolboard district.net. net. >> Okay. Um, the first few speakers we have are Kelly Post, Cynthia Battle, Roger Williams, Christina Shestler, Mag Diwir, Mark Sheriffki. Good evening. [clears throat] My name is Kelly Post and I am the president of Deck. I stand here tonight in support of ETAAA, our fellow union. PAR professionals are essential to the daily success of our schools. They are the adults who support students with disabilities, provide academic interventions, assist with behavior regulation, and ensure classrooms function safely and effectively. Quite simply, our schools cannot operate without them. Without a contract, pair of professionals face
007uncertainty, unclear roles, inconsistent schedules, and limited safeguards. This instability leads to burnout and turnover, which directly impacts students who rely on consistent relationships and trusted adults to succeed. Supporting pair professionals with a contract and a living wage is an investment in our entire school community. It improves retention, strengthens collaboration, ensures that students receive the consistent, high quality support they deserve. It sends a clear message that we value the labor that keeps our schools running every single day. [music] [applause] Good evening, Dr. Turner and the cabinet. My name is Cynthia Battle and I'm the president of the Everston Teacher Assistance Association, ETAAA. As many of you know, we are currently working without a contract. I am standing here tonight on behalf of every paraprofessional who serves at the as the backbone of this district every day.
008The everyday par profofessional provides essential support to our students, assisting in classrooms and guiding those with special needs and ensuring that the learning environment remains safe, inclusive and effective. Their contributions are not supplemental. They are indispensable. Despite the vital nature of this work, paraprofessional continue to face rages that do not reflect their responsibilities or the value that the value that they bring to our classrooms. This disparity undermines both morale and retention. [music] [applause] Uh good evening everyone. I see some familiar faces out here. Anyway, my name is Good evening. My name is Roger Williams. I'm the uh president of Reszoning for Better Evston, more relevant to education. I'm also the former president of Crew 65, which is championing racial equity work in district 65. For years, crew 65 was a powerful consistent voice for voice
009for racial justice in our school. It had a historic commitment to endorsing only those candidates who demonstrate an unwavering commitment to protecting and promoting racial equity in the district 65. Our process was rigorous and intentional. It involved thoroughly interviewing interviewing each candidate and asking pointed questions determined to determine their true actionable commitment to this vital work. Following the exhaustive process, crew 65 unanimously endorsed for the school board the following candidates. Nicole Panker, Chris Vanostrin, Andrew Wymer, Pat Anderson. These four individuals were Crew 65's strongest choice to ensure that District 65 builds a truly equitable future for all students. Thank you very much. [applause] Familia Evston closing a growing twe at Willard will demand while demand is rising in the Hispanic population in North Evston continues to grow is not just shortsighted it's harmful families in
010the north region already endured displacement with the closure of Bessie roads removing Willard Twe now strips away access stability and trust from the very community this district claims to support the consequences don't stop in elementary school eliminating Willard Strand Strand creates a capacity bottleneck at Foster, leaving students with fewer seats seats, less continuity, and a weaker peer networks as they transition to middle school. Reducing Strand now means that they will enter Haven with fractured cohorts and fewer bilingual peers, undermining both academic process and social development. Shrinking Twe at the exact moment it's growing and where there's no financial benefit. And when Willard has the capacity to sustain it, even with the Kingsley or Lincolnwood closure, is a step backwards. Hi, good evening. My name is Meg Der. I'm also a parent of a child in
011the Willard Tweet program. Um, I'm also an attorney. I'm not involved in education, so not here to double check that. Um, I'm involved in the Fun World of Tax instead. And so, my concern just comes up on a procedural matter with respect to the Willard closing. There have been several statements by the school administration that have suggested that the decision has already been made, but our concern is that the Illinois code and the school policy makes it clear that magnet programs are a board decision. Um, TWE is currently listed on the D65 selective enrollment page as a magnet program. It's specific in the TWE uh website and description. It's listed alongside cultural programs such as ACC and the King Arts program. and we believe that the board should author provide its authority um and oversight
012of magnet programs in making the determination about continuing that program. Thank you. [applause] >> Good evening. My name is Mark Zurfki and I'm here once again to encourage the board to vote and keep Twi at Willard while also supporting the introduction of Twe at Foster. Twe is one of the flagship offerings of this district and as such the decision to close a TWE location and reduce the overall number of strands cannot and should not be decided unilaterally by the administration. The Illinois Association of School Board states that the administration manages day-to-day district operations while the board is responsible for voting on any decision related to quote legal business. Let's be clear, reducing or eliminating Twe Strands does not constitute day-to-day operations and is not a routine administrative decision. Twe is not an after-school club. It
013is a core academic offering. Without careful oversight and public conversation, the decision to reduce TWE strands can cause irreversible consequences to our community, to the district, and the city of Evston for years to come. The decision to close a strand is a fundamental change to the academic options available to students. It is not a line item cut. >> [applause] >> Next we have Billy Garcia, Emily Garcia, Boris Sanchez, Magnappic, Ava Lebron, and Celia Carline. >> Good evening. My name is Billy Garcia and I'm a first generation immigrant from Guatemala. I I am very concerned about my daughter losing her twe education. While I fully support and understand why it is equitable to open foster school and these two strands of twe, I do not understand why that should result in my daughter losing her opportunity
014to have a twe education in her neighborhood. She is a native Spanish speaker just like me. Why is she viewed different by district administration? Why is it acceptable to dismantle her entire world, her stability and her community? And why is it acceptable to do so without proper engagement of the families and the board of education? It is not acceptable. Let's let's do this right and give this legacy program the respect it deserves. Let's debate it using accurate data and community involvement. If and in the end the board votes that it is just to dissolve the willard tree strand then I would suggest the most equitable and human etc next step is to allow those in the program to finish at willard in the community. >> Hi, good evening. I'm Emily Garcia and this is my
015daughter Sophia. She's a first grader uh at Twe at Willard. I have lived in many places, but diversity here and our community's embrace of it is special. It is why people move here. It is why we moved here. The closure of Twi at Willard means that opportunity for kids of different backgrounds, cultural, socioeconomic, racial, to form bonds and grow up together in their formative years will be eliminated. In essence, Willard will become segregated. Is this the future we want for our community? Is this the legacy that you want to leave? Segregation. We need to Think about the future and the steps we can take now that will create a path towards greatness. A decision of this magnitude closure of a program should come from the board. It should also be handled in a humane way
016including a thorough analysis of its impact on the children and should include all stakeholders. Thank you very much. >> Good evening. My name is Boris Sanchez. Uh board members, I'm new to this country. I'm a native Spanish speaker. Wheelard is my neighborhood school for me and my kids and my family. The data says that I don't live where I live. I don't know why, but I exist. My family exist. We have a culture in Spanish. We speak in Spanish at home. And the imi the community that I found in Willard has made me a bigger family in this Evansson neighborhood. If you take the program away from Willard, you just won't move a couple of families. You will lose them. Some will want to stay to be in their neighborhood school. Some of them will
017be forced to do something that they don't want to do and they didn't ask for. Tui is the crown of D65. Please keep Tui open. Keep to Willard. [applause] Hola Buenes Noes. My name is Meg Nappic and I'm here tonight as a parent of two Willard Tweet students and educator and a member of both SAP 2 and SAP 3 tweet committees to urge you to insist on board oversight regarding the proposed elimination of a two-way immersion strand. The proposal is especially concerning because neither SAP 2 nor SAP 3 recommended reducing the number of twe. The SAP 3 tweet committee specifically was charged with ranking four given priorities to consider if schools were to be closed. Yet the board unanimous unanimously voted to keep Willard open. The committee's top recommendations were to maintain two strand tweed
018programs. So that's keeping Washington open and the two strands from Bessie Roads moving to Foster, of course, followed by preserving program composition to maintain fidelity to the researchbased twe model and then minimizing disruption of bilingual families by maintaining walkability. Additional discussions included minimizing school changes by winding down programs and avoiding the creation of geographic gaps in twe access. >> [applause] >> Hola, my name is Anna Lebron, a Spanish speaking mother of two children in the Wheeler Twe program. I'm here today to urge this board to exercise it oversight authority, stop the decision and call the vote on the administration decision to relocate the Wheeler Twe program to foster school. Wheeler Twe families have not been surveyed, consulted or given any platform to share how this disruptive change affect their children's. Yesterday over 20 over 50
019twe families from all Evansstone uh twe school gathered at Prito Community Center for a holiday celebration. The joy and community spirit were truly remarkable during the event demonstrating the power of staying connected. While these communities working to unite us, some member of the administration appear intend on dividing us. This past week, many of us attended the Evansstone Latino Gala celebration where Ricardo Vijalobo, executive director of Evansstone Latino, say, "Don't be for us, be with us." I hope the board members we elected are with us. The Twe community at Wheeler School. Ethics begin with recognizing humanity in one another. Ethical leadership requires empathy, responsibility, and respect, especially when decision affect the life of families and children. When district 65 administration decide to remove the tree program from Wheeler and relocate to foster without any private communication.
020This was not just a process of failure. It was disregard for ethics and humanity. Superintendent, why were families excluded from a decision that direct affects our children? Why we were not informed or consulted? We are human beings. We think, we feel, and we understand that that what is happening to the board you were elect to represent our voices. We expect you to question these decisions to hold administration accountable and ensure our voice to be here. For too long, especially in Spanishspeaking families and low-income communities, families have been expected to absorb change without explanation or choice. [applause] Next we have Angelica Williams, Bruce Williams, Beavenon Seaffort, Andrew Roland, Christy Norick, Ben Onus, Noel Gravette, Julie Irons. Good evening, members. Uh my name is Angelica Sanchez Williams and I am a proud parent of a willer twe
021students. I have one question for you. If the eighth strand is erased, how does this affect the seat capacity for the dual language program at Haven? Also, since the district hasn't spoken to us, we put out a survey to parents and caregivers in ward five, six, and seven uh and comments in response to the impact of closing to a withered. It is not just moving kids to a new school where they will get new teachers and new friends. It is more than that. A parent from W 7 said, "My daughter has an IEP. We prefer what she stays in twe at willard. The consistency of her community, friends, classmates, educators is important. I also feel twe should be open across this district and not only in specific neighborhoods. parent from word five. Closing tweet of
022Willard is disrupted. [applause] Hello school board. Thank you for your time. My name is Bruce Williams, Ward 7, and I am the father of a Willard uh dynamic and thriving third grader. And I just wanted to follow up with some other observations from the survey that my wife put together uh because we had to do it ourselves because we haven't gotten input from the or uh from the board. from ward five. Closing tui at willard will disrupt my child's IEP by having her start over in a school where she is not familiar with the teachers or any staff members. We will basically have to start at zero, making her reach the point she is at her current school for another one to two years. Another parent from ward six. I would hate to see Willard
023tweet closed. It's one of the best programs in the district in my opinion. My child would not follow Tweet to Foster. Unfortunately, [music] >> good evening. My name is Bevon Ciphford. I'm also a Willard Tweet parent and I'm going to try to read at least one or two more comments from Angelica's survey. Um, that comment that Bruce began goes on to say, "For a district that claims to value diversity, closing a successful tweet strand like that of Willard doesn't make sense to me. It's an insult to the growing number of Spanish-sp speakaking families who live in Northwest Evston and removes diversity rather than cultivating it. We're only about a tenth through our comments, so I'm going to give you a little bit of a summary. Many parents spoke about their kids with IEPs and 504s.
024They're very concerned and don't want to have them change schools and disrupt the supports that they have." of one said who lives in the fifth ward shared that they never received bus service from the district. They ended up having to come in through the lottery um because they didn't want to go to Bessie Roads. They wanted to stay with their sibling. They they would perhaps even select a different school that's already open um to try to keep 504 support. Other parents have shared they prefer to stay at Willard because they already drive them from the fifth ward because they weren't offered bus service. And a six-word parent said she'd rather just stay at Willard to be in the monolingual program to learn English faster. >> [applause] >> Hi, I'm Andrew. I'm a dad of three
025kids in D65. Uh we used to be a bilingual household, but because of Twi, we're now a triilingual one. Um you know, D65 built something rare and excellent, and it's a reason that families choose Evston. Uh I'm here to say Twe at Willard never belonged in this STRP conversation at all. It doesn't make any sense. STRP is about financial stability and long-term planning. Reducing tweed does not meaningfully save any money, but it does weaken one of the district's strongest academic programs and dislodges the community and erodess public trust at a time that you need it. People aren't moving to Evston for the math scores. At least not at the moment. Sorry. But a distinctive high-quality program that reflects community values is twe like Twe is one of the most visible academic assets. And even if
026I wasn't a Twe parent, I'd be saying the same thing up here because it doesn't make sense that Twe has been a topic in this STRP conversation at all. Stop distracting us with this topic. Leave tweet alone. Focus on financial stability, academic outcomes, and a clear vision to get back to 8,000 students. Thank you. [applause] Hi, my name is Ben Oris. I wanted to remind the board that it is not too late to put a referendum on the ballot, one that can strengthen and uh sustain uh financial stability for the district. I also wanted to let the board know there are two residential buildings going up in downtown Evston that can bring back financial um money for the district through property taxes. I think next year is going to look much different in terms of
027a financial picture. Finally, I wanted to let the board know we also do not know yet what the forensic audit is going to recoup. So just like with the um um pension system, pension crisis in this state, no one in this building should be um taking the fall for what someone else's um wrongdoings are. No one in this building should just like the financial crisis in this state that was set up. We are looking for solutions. No one in this building should be taking the fall for someone else's wrongdoings. Thank you. >> Hello, my name is Christy Norick from Washington. Um Pat, it was really helpful for me to hear what you said at the beginning of the meeting tonight to know that there is a lot of work going on behind the scenes that
028we can't see and that people are working hard to try to find a compromise and to work together as a team. that is very very encouraging. Um my comment was basically going to be asking you guys to to do that and um again there's there's probably not any way that all of us here are going to be able to get what we want but um you know I'm I'm game for compromising and I hope that everybody else is too because we need to work together to move forward and to put solutions into action. So I appreciate your efforts on that front. >> [applause] >> Good evening. My name is Nol Gvette. I'm the vice president of ETAAA, more importantly, a pair professional at district 65 for the past seven years at Park School. I'm going
029to ask the board to put themelves in the shoes of a pair professional. So, I will do the same first and put myself in your shoes. I know what I'm asking for might make your job harder or could also influence as decisions yet to be made easier or clear. You have many decisions to make. Most are about the financial aspects of the district. I'm asking that our parers can make a salary that is a living wage. Par professionals deserves a salary that reflects a living wage to honor the importance of the role our role in the district, the impact we have on students and families. Paris play an essential role in our students lives. From arrival to dismissal, paras are often with the students who need the most assistance. We are, as I stated, essential.
030However, like essential workers during COVID, we're told how essential we are and important, but not when it comes to our salary. We're vital to the students, families, teachers, and districts. There even been teachers who have stood up here on our behalf. We want to thank you. [applause] Good evening. My name is Julie Irons and I'm a district 65 bilingual speech language pathologist. I'm here tonight to also celebrate the work of our pair of professionals, many of whom do not have the option to be here tonight as their district 65 salaries require them to work a second job. The failure to develop a strong collective bargaining agreement with ETA fails our students. Our pair of professionals understand our school cultures, our communities, and our approaches to social emotional learning, discipline, and restorative practices. This type of
031deep understanding can only come from experience and commitment. If we are to fill the seven open paraprofessional positions and also retain paraprofessionals long enough to build that experience and commitment, we need a collective bargaining agreement that protects parapro working conditions and pays them a living wage. There's been a lot of talk in this room of the fallout from Dr. Horton's financial legacy, but we have not heard this board's response to Dr. Horton's legacy of union busting. I urge this board to avoid the predecessors mistakes. Do not underestimate the educational value of a supported workforce. >> [applause] >> Next we have Mike Dice, uh, Cochiona Madius, Erica Crawther, Alex Needle, Lauren McNar, Kelly McCabe, Jacob Carlin, Hi folks. Given the updates earlier tonight, I am tempted to come up here and start spitting fire, but I'll
032stick to my script and just extend my hopes that all of you on the board find some time for peace and harmony with your family and loved ones in the coming weeks. Like so much of Evston, I am profoundly disappointed in so much of this process and I hope that the new year brings a restoration of understanding and trust on our board and in this community. Pat, Nicole, Maria, as a firm believer in the invest in neighborhood schools movement, I truly thank you for your leadership, your vision, and your belief in what's possible. To the data nerds, even though you ruined my no cookie diet tonight, I still tip my cap to you and all of your work. And to our incredible teachers and our amazing paraprofessionals and support staff that show up for our
033kids every day, you are our heroes. Thank you. [applause] Good evening. My name is Matias. Uh parent of two um two kids at Wheeler, both of them on a 50 504 plan. And I'm here just just hope that the table here is going to present the opportunity to discuss things that are going on with the board and the administration regarding we uh the Wheeler program. As many of my um fellow parents said before, I think it's important that we have the conversation and understand exactly what the enrollments are. Today we have 104 students at Willard. Even if we take the ones that would be at Foster without the transportation, that still leave us with I think 99, which is a higher average than uh that we have per class uh on Oakdon or you know
034up until now busy roads. So I think it makes all the families stronger. I think if we remove the Walker boundaries, we would be able to actually increase that. And as a closing statement and just to put out there, all the time that the community spent is probably outpacing right now the savings of closing, you know, the school with our So thank you. [applause] >> Hi, my name is Erica Crowther. I have a kindergarten student at Willard Twe. I'm going to read some more responses from the Willard Tweet community from Ward 5. We live in the fifth ward. Our daughter goes to Willard Twe. It's her second year there. We love the Willard community. Our daughter loves her class friends. I'm Polish and my husband is Mexican and we teach her both languages. We want
035her to know her roots and Willard Twe community helps us achieve that. We feel that we are one big family there. From W six, closing Willard Twe would put us at a very challenging position to continue our children's bilingual education. We would have to sacrifice our walkable schools which the district says they value for every family with the principles, teachers, and support staff that we have come to know, love, and trust. From W seven, every student, whether on the north or south side, deserves access to the enriching and future-defining program. Let us move beyond simply providing access and commit to leading with the vision and boldness that truly invests in the potential and future success of all learners. [applause] Hi, I'm Alex Needle, a Kingsley parent, and I'm here because even though the Kingsley teachers
036have had a dark cloud over their heads the whole school year, they're showing up every day and giving their full selves to our children. Our children are the ones who you work for, by the way. My daughter, she's in first grade. She taught my husband what an interrogative sentence is. Who knew? I am asking you to please think about the children. Maya and Andrew and Sergio. You did not get the outcome that you wanted and you owe it to the Kingsley community to explain your reasoning why you thought zero school closures was better than just closing one. Please take the time to do so and show us that respect. Thank you. [applause] My name is Lauren McNamera. I'm a member of the Legion of Nerds and also a [clears throat] Kingsley parent. The community elected
037the board of education members to serve as leaders and provide direction on educational policies. It is irresponsible for the board to string the community along with fresh candidates, claim stalemate, and wait for the regional superintendent to come in and break the conflict, do the transparent, fair, datadriven thing, and choose the next highest vote getter to serve as the seventh seat. It is irresponsible to refuse to compromise and claim a stalemate, setting us on a path to zero school closures, waiting on a seventh member to come in and resolve the conflict. Everyone in the community believes at least one school needs to close. Vote to close Kingsley only. Kingsley's parents, children, and teachers are watching and waiting for you to step up and lead, not sit back and wait. [applause] Good evening. My name is Kelly
038McCabe. I'm a member of the Legion of Data Nerds as well as a Twe parent at Washington. We are all wondering what will move us forward given that you continue to deadlock both on school closures and on appointing a seventh board member. There is one thing that has been unanimously voted on multiple times, indicating rare agreement. The six board members have all voted yes on closing Kingsley School. Even Kingsley parents, in a remarkable demonstration of grace, have acknowledged this difficult truth. This is the true consensus. Close one school now in addition to Bessie Rhodess. Yet, we are still in a stalemate. And why? Because three board members insist on closing two schools despite lacking the votes for that outcome. This refusal to compromise risks delaying necessary actions for yet another year. The rigid stance undermines
039community trust and erodess the credibility needed for a future capital referendum. Why must certain board members undermine compromise when we know what the regional superintendent would do? [applause] >> Hi, my name is Jacob Carlin. I'm with the Legion of Data Nerds and I want to make the case for one school closure because doing nothing this year creates problems at Kingsley and Foster. There's consensus around the need to close Kingsley with the upcoming opening of Foster. Failing to close Kingsley this year risks a repeat of the botch Bessie roads closure. According to the tables on the district uh school closure hub, under the zero clo under the zero closure scenario, Haven feeder pattern schools will have a combined 50% utilization rate. 34% at Willard, 39% at Kingsley, 42% at Lincolnwood, 52% at Orington, 79% at at
040Foster. And this distribution would shift depending on how many students opt to stay at their current school. But clearly utilization would be low, potentially even at the brand new foster school without a decision to close an additional school. This year, we have an opportunity to come together as a community, close one additional school, take measures to rebuild trust like codify a balanced budget requirement, and develop a long-term plan for facilities and a vision for our district. [applause] Hello, I'm Gene Clipperton, a parent and one of the Legion of Nerds. Our principles and our teachers are emailing the board to ask for action. The board agrees on closing at least one additional school. Teachers, administrators, paraprofessionals, and families need time to plan, and there is public support for closing Kingsley. Now, the district is projecting expenses
041to increase by 5%. The longer we delay a decision that everyone knows is coming, the more we will need to cut later to counter effect to counteract the financial impact on an already precarious situation. The board has worked hard already to build trust and move forward. There are many agenda items that need your attention. This delay is siphoning time, energy, and resources that could be spent on creating a vision for D65. Delaying a vote that everyone knows is coming means voting for f fiscal irresponsibility. The board still has time to meet and vote on an additional closure of one school. [applause] By now, we should have clarity, but we don't. So, I'm going to ask questions that I encourage you all to sit with. How can you claim we're at an impass when we all
042know what the regional superintendent will do? Doesn't this so-called deadlock risk delaying action for another year while our financial position deteriorates? If fiscal responsibility is the goal, does settling on or suddenly claiming to be for zero closures make any sense? Is this about pragmatism or pride and holding on to principles at the expense of a community as a whole? Why should the community bear the risks of a double or nothing strategy? Why not come back later this week in compromise and vote to close one school in an emergency meeting? [applause] Next we have Terry Sheepard, Lauren Greenwood, Peter Buggera, Beth Brady, Alexa Calicott, Katie Armstead, >> Terry Shepard, NA ACP. We are aware that after your initial interview of candidates, only two candidates for the position of school board remain. Because of her commitment to
043the DSRP process and membership on the finance committee, I strongly support Jamie Wallace as a nest district 65 school board member. Jaime has a strong financial background with expertise in change management and market research. As a former district 65 board member, I want to share my concerns with the letter of influence past board members wrote in support of closing one school. in addition to Bessie Rhodess. First of all, every one of these board members, though it took them 13 years, ran to topple Dr. Hardy Murphy. They all believed they could run the district better than he. It was only after the failure to open a fifth ward school that he left. His financial message to us all was that the district would be in financial peril if immediate attention was not paid to the district
044finances. Let me remind you that had they listened and acted as if they cared about the entire Edmonson Skoi school community, we may not be in the financial crust we now find ourselves. >> Lastly, they didn't ask one black board member to comment on this. Everyone was white. Period. The end. [applause] Hi, I'm Lauren Greenwood, a D65 parent. Not closing any schools for 2026 will make our financial standing much worse. We all know this. There's no reasonable explanation why three members would vote to close two schools but not close one. Their claims of fiscal responsibility are not credible and amount to a political stunt. On December 1st, before voting, Sergio Hernandez made a plea appearance for unconditional support, no matter what the board decides or does. I'm here to tell you tonight, no such support
045exists. We have conditions. We are your customers and taxpayers. We demand the District 65 do better, and you as our elected officials do better, too. Close one school. Take a single step towards improved finances and rebuilding trust with the parent community. Please, Evston's kids deserve better than this. [applause] >> I'm Peter Boggera, a Kingsley parent of three. I want to speak about the board vacancy and what its delay now means for the district. Every one of you sitting up here earned your seat by running in an election and earning the trust of voters. With that becomes responsibility. not just to deliberate but to act. We've now been told that because this board has not filled its vacancy, there will be no further opportunity for the administration to enact school closures. That decision has real policy
046consequences. It has closed off options and prevented this community from moving forward. Deadlock's not neutral. It determines outcomes. When an elected board chooses not to act, the consequences of that decision belong here. The community doesn't expect unanimity, but it does expect accountability and leadership, especially when difficult choices are on the table. Thank you. [applause] >> Hi, my name is Alexa Kelkott. I'm a D65 alum and a D65 parent to a first grader and a three-year-old. As a mom of a three-year-old, the school closure process feels a lot like negotiating with a toddler. Three board members want to close two schools. The rest of the board and much of the community believe closing one school is the responsible compromise. But those three board members response has been, "If I can't have two, then I want zero."
047That's not leadership. That's foot stomping. Our kids deserve adults who care more about doing right than being right. Thank you. [applause] >> Hi, my name is Katie Armistad from Invest in Neighborhood Schools. Uh, if it's okay with you guys, I'm going to speak to a different audience tonight. If you're one of the hundreds of people watching online right now and you're frustrated and you're alarmed and you're disgusted by the politics you're hearing about that are happening in this building, hang in there. There are people up here who, as far as I can tell, would rather watch this district burn to the ground than loosen their grip on power and welcome change. And to them, I say, "So be it. Burn it down. We'll rebuild it stronger, more financially sustainable, more equitable, with no corruption, without
048a superintendent who's over it, and without those of you who have failed to lead us. We can't stop. We have to keep going. This train is leaving the station. There's space for you on it. This district will become more equitable. It will become more financially sustainable. And we'll do it with or without you. Hang in there. We'll get there. THANK YOU. >> [applause] >> I'M BETH BRADY. I'M A DISTRICT 65 teacher and I'm here in solidarity with my pair professional colleagues who've been working without a contract. Pair professionals do critical work in our classrooms and schools and they deserve to be adequately compensated for the value they add to our learning communities. At Daws, our planning, instruction, problem solving, and classroom management are all supported by our pair professional colleagues. They offer they are often
049the first to know when a child's needs aren't being met, when there's a shift that's required. They offer critical insights into student needs and behaviors. They invest meaningful time working with students who require additional support to access the classroom learning, and they create vital connections with students who struggle with peer and adult relationships. Investing in our pair professionals is essential to a robust, high functioning educational environment with strong networks of support around our learners. Please ensure that they receive the training, support, and compensation they deserve to keep our schools strong. Thank you. [applause] Next we have Robin Tender, Bo Maddox, and Jamie Hopka. Can I restart? Hi, my name's Robin Talender. I'm a Kingsley Mama 3 and I served on the SDRP facilities committee. You've seen our Kingsley community, the kindness, the thoughtfulness, and how
050deeply we show up for this district. And yet, it feels like our community is the one being dismissed. We put our own school, a school we deeply love, on the table in good faith, believing that doing so would bring clarity and stability. What do you think happens to our teachers and students while you remain deadlocked? What will happen next year? May and Sergio, I need to say this directly. Your continued presence on the board and in this deadlock is contributing to the harm families are feeling. Maya, as Kingsley's liaison, have you been in our building? Have you advocated for our community? When board members refuse to move decisions forward, trust erodess. And that erosion is happening in real time. Our superintendent was federally indicted. If you're aware, that's inexcusable. If you are not, that's negligent.
051And right now, families are not experiencing accountability. They're experiencing uncertainty. This prolonged indecision is harming real people. Our children and our teachers deserve better. I'm asking you to lead with care, clarity, and responsibility for every child in this district. [applause] Hi, my name is Bo Maddox and I go to Kingsley. Kingsley helped me learn how to be brave. I'm going to be in fifth grade next year and I don't know where my school or my teachers will be. I have food allergies, so I need to know where the nurse is and who can help me if I'm scared or need to call my mom. I love my teachers and I love my school. Please tell us where we're going to school next year. Thank you. [applause] >> Hi, I'm Jamie. Good evening. I'm a 65
052parent of a twe kids and I'm also in strong support of the Willard Twe and supporting bringing back the Mandarin program. How cool was that? Also, I want to say it was cool to see Pat at the Nutcracker this weekend. I want to begin by thanking Pat, Nicole, and Maria for your no votes on closing two additional neighborhood schools. Um, and I want to also thank [clears throat] you guys for voting for the next highest vote getter from from this near historic election recently. Um, we all understand that the district has massively over spent and we are now in a serious financial predicament, but tough times call for smart decisions. That means fully exploring other options, including closing JH in addition to Kingsley before going after neighborhood schools, other neighborhood schools. Simply put, JH's operating
053costs are a quarter of a million dollars a year, the equivalent of two schools. Merry Christmas. >> [applause] >> THAT CONCLUDES OUR comments for tonight. Uh, next on our agenda is discussion regarding the SDRP3 plan. All right. So, good evening. Thank you to everyone for joining us tonight as we continue to talk through the structural deficit reduction plan phase three next steps tonight. Um, tonight's agenda is what you see here on the screen. We're going to review the STP phase 2 implementation and path ahead to phase three. We will review the baseline financial projections. We will review the financial models and projected financial impacts. We will also revisit the SDP phase 2 reduction levers for possible reconsideration. We will discuss the SDP phase 3 programming and staffing and purchase service uh services expenditure reduction levers
054for zero to two school closures. Um we will talk about the Betsy roads future use option and then we will review the FY27 boundaries. So I I want to just uh take us back to the phase 2 reductions that stabilized FY26 but did not eliminate the structural deficit. This slide here focused on what the district actually did in the STEP phase 2 reductions and the intentional focus on not impacting the classroom in this phase. But now we may not be so fortunate with additional school closures. And so this particular slide just really looks at what we focused and prioritized in the reductions that were on the table for FY26 uh school year that we are essentially enacting now. We focused on minimizing impact to our students. We focused on minimizing the impact of staff that
055directly support students. We minimized the impact on marginalized groups. We focused on the key areas identified by the administration and approved by the board at that time. and we sought to avoid short-term borrowing or taws uh and related expenditures. Essentially, this resulted in the 13.2 million in reductions for FY26. I'm going to turn it over to Tamara who's going to walk us through the next couple of slides um and really give us the true picture of um our financial projections. I'll turn it over to Tamara. >> Thank you, Dr. Turner. Um, so there will be several slides coming up that have lots of numbers on them. So I'll just go ahead and say that. I will try to make this as interesting as possible with all these numbers. Um, I would like to direct your
056attention to the top portion of the slide here where it says net change in fund balance. Um, what you see on this slide is uh our operating fund projections baseline. They include our pre- audit numbers for the previous fiscal year FY25 as well as the uh budget that was approved for this fiscal year FY26 and then projections for next fiscal year FY27 and then forward through FY30. The numbers there, the net change in fund balance in red, those numbers represent the projected deficits that uh the district would see if there was no further action taking to continue to reduce that structural deficit. As Dr. Turner said the um reductions that were implemented for this fiscal year, they bought us some time pretty much and reduced that baseline, but without any further action, um the deficit,
057the structural deficit will remain and projected as so. One last thing I'd like to say before I move on from this slide. Um, there's been mentioned that the district is not currently in a financial crisis and I believe it's important to distinguish the difference between stabilization and sustainability. The recent expenditure reductions have slowed the rate of decline and brought us to this point in time. However, they have not restored those healthy cash reserves um and really um put the district in a sustainable financial position, which that has been the true focus of SDRP phase 3. And from a financial management perspective, low cash reserves combined with an ongoing structural imbalance requires us to have that continued attention on our finances and to take action. I'll address some assumptions. uh as well as budgetary pressures that
058are through these uh financial projections. So I'll just quickly go through that. The revenue growth is projected at 2%. That assumes an average CPI growth of about 2.4% which that is the 25-year average when adjusting uh 2021 and 2022 down to the maximum maximum 5% that the district could capture through the tax levy. Our property taxes are nearly 80% of our budget and the other 20% is assumed to remain flat or even decline. That other 20% is largely state and federal revenues. So that is how we arrived at assuming a 2% revenue growth. Our salary and benefits are largely driven by negotiated labor agreements with the district's five bargaining units. We do know that health care costs have been on the rise. So we do not believe that that assumption is unreasonable at all. Also,
059purchase services were assumed to grow at 3% based on a combination of inflationary pressures as well as contractual cost pressures. Utilities are the most volatile um of the projections. At this point, our um co-op, the energy cooperative representatives have advised us that we should uh project about an 18 to 20% increase in our electric rates for next fiscal year FY27 and also that our natural gas should be projected to increase by 15% for next fiscal year. So again, that remains um one of the most volatile areas that we are projecting for. And then lastly, um we know that we have continued declining enrollment as well as ongoing operating and capital costs for our 18 and soon to be 19 school facilities. I'll talk a little bit about understanding the financial models that we're going to
060get into this evening. Again, there will be lots of numbers on the page, so I just want to kind of set uh the tone and ground the discussion in that. Um, it's important to note that the board aligned on the reduction levers that you'll see on November 3rd and that is the reason for some of the differences. If you look at projections that were presented on November 3rd versus November 17th, um, that's where those differences came in because of those that alignment on those levers. Each model applies those levers uniformly. The difference that you'll see in the models is the capital expenditure and working cash assumptions as it relates to foster school. There are no new levers being introduced here. And lastly, the purpose of this review was to evaluate how each model impacts financial
061sustainability, which again is the ultimate goal of SDRP phase 3. Um so again these levers are applied consistently across all financial models and reduce the remaining amount required from programming and staffing expenditure reductions also reductions in purchase services. Um at the top there the revenues levers number two that seek funding from local university at $250,000. I wanted to take a moment to talk just briefly about that. That's referring to the concert ticket searchcharge revenue expected to be generated from ticket sales at Ryanfield. The language of the resolution uh says that the revenue will be shared equitably between district 65 and district 202. We have been in touch with the city to get a clearer understanding of how that revenue will be equitably shared, when the dispersements will be made, and most importantly, if we can
062expect to see that revenue share in FY27, or if we should not expect to see that revenue until FY28. So, I did just want to point that out. Um, as we're moving through these financial models, this is projection model D. So, as a reminder, the board was presented with two financial models on November 17th. That was model D1 and model D2. This slide is the base model for the two options presented to the board for consideration. Um, and realizing that there again a lot of numbers on this slide. I want to draw your attention up to the top portion of the slide. Um, right where essentially where the yellow highlighted cells framed by a red border are. Please note here that each projection model is independent of school closures. Meaning regardless of whether zero, one,
063or two schools is closed, the projected reductions per year are projected based on maintaining balanced budgets and 90 days cash on hand. What varies per model is the amount set aside for capital projects and the assumed working cash transfer that will be needed to complete construction on foster school. This financial model D provides for $1 million in funding for capital projects and utilizes a combination of proceeds from the sale of Bessie roads and a working cash transfer to fund the remaining uh foster school construction costs. And we are assuming that those remaining costs would be $6 million. So again, as outlined in this model, further reductions will be needed each fiscal year with $5.2 $2 million in expenditure reductions for FY28, $2 million in FY29, and 1.25 million in FY30. To be clear, a net
064reduction of $4.5 million is projected to be needed in FY27 to maintain a balanced budget as well as 90 days cash on hand. This reflects fiscal year 27 only. What you're seeing on the screen right now, the cells highlighted in yellow at the top there represent the amount needed above the net impact of revenue and expenditure levers for each scenario. So as far to the left where it says zero, that's a zero school closure. So that amount would be approximately $2.67 million. And then as you move over to the right there, that would be the projected u need for each of those closure scenarios. As noted on the previous slide, additional reductions are projected to be necessary each fiscal year through fiscal year 30 according to this model as well. So now moving on to
065projection model D1. Um, D1 provides $2.7 million in annual funding for capital projects and utilizes a combination of proceeds from the sale of Bessie roads and working cash transfer to fund the remaining foster school construction cost. The projected reductions needed in this model are higher based on the investment of $2.7 million annually in our building in our buildings. Um, as outlined in this model, further reductions will be needed each fiscal year with 6 million in FY28, 1.75 million in FY29, and 1.25 million in FY30. The initial reduction for next fiscal year FY27 is $5.5 million because of that additional $1.7 million added for capital projects when compared to model D that we just saw. So now looking at the financial model levers for model D1. Again drawing your attention there to the uh yellow highlights
066there. Those are all a million dollars more than model D1 because of that additional investment in capital projects. Um so that's the the difference between what is needed uh as far as programming and staffing reductions when comparing model D to model D1. Moving on to model D2. This model two provides $2.7 million in funding for capital projects and it assumes that the proceeds from the sale of Bessie roads will fully fund the remaining foster school construction costs. So, uh we do not have those final costs just yet. We are in the process of getting all of our final costs in for foster. What this model assumes is that the uh proceeds received from Bessie Roads would essentially be a wash and that we would not have to transfer any additional funds from our working cash.
067As with the other models, reductions are projected for future fiscal years. FY28 is projected to need 6.25 million in reductions, FY29 2.5 million, and FY30 1.25 million. Next fiscal year, FY27 is projected to require $4.5 million in operating reductions. And then the financial uh the levers here apply to model D2. These numbers um essentially look the same as model D with the important caveat again that the capital projects are funded at $2.7 million annually versus $1 million annually. And then that $2 million transfer is not projected to come out of working cash. So there's the numbers look the same there as far as the remaining programming and staffing levers, but that's the two the difference between those two models. This slide is uh really just it simply puts all three finan financial models in one
068table with the annual capital investment assumed as well as the annual projected operating expenditure reductions. Again, there's a lot of numbers on those other pages, but this table just drops all of those numbers uh in one place and by model. And with that, I will turn it back over to Dr. Turner. >> All right. So, this particular slide here is just um something for the board to think about in terms of the possibility of reconsideration of uh reduction levers that were presented as part of SDP phase 2. Um and so, um what you see here on the screen uh the categories essentially that could be reconsidered is the elimination of transport transportation prek routes which was 1.8 8 million with that would be would come the elimination of the transportation prek aids and when we
069talk about the school level nondirect instruction I want to just call out in case anything is compared this particular number is a little bit less than what we uh projected last year as part of SCP phase 2 and that is simply due to this reflects the accuracy of the number of FTEES that would be considered in here versus there were more FTEES last year and we have since um reduce some of those FTEE since. So essentially before um what we had here was $1,3525 1,352595 here. Um and again this went this shows a reduction of FTEES to what we currently have in this space which is really t six in that nondirect instruction category. With that being said, this particular slide here shows the STEP phase three programming and staffing expenditure reductions along with the
070purchase services non-instructional and transportation um reductions that could be considered. And so what I want to really call here is this is the entire menu of options on the most extreme So, this exceeds essentially the $5.5 million, but this encompasses everything for the board to have options as to what it is they want to consider for reductions with a little with some cushion if that makes any sense. And so essentially here on this slide, uh what the district is proposing when it comes to programming and staffing expenditure reductions, the central office level admin and non-administration would be an additional um reduction of 13 FTEEs at that level. At the school level, I want to just really name when we talk about direct support, those are um FTEES who directly support and provide services to students.
071When we talk about the school level nondirect support, these are FTEEs essentially that either support other adults in other ways or support programming but they support schools, right? But they don't impact the instructional aspects if that makes any sense. And then you have purchase services here, non-instructional. Um you'll notice purchase services non-instructional and purchase services transportation. The amounts proposed here are the same amounts on the next two slides that I'm going to show you. Um that essentially shows the variation between uh the considerations for a one school closure or a two school closure. So I I want to just capitalize and just lean in here as we move forward. But it is important to note that these are the categories holistically that the district is bringing forward tonight to the school board as a menu
072of options for where the additional reductions needed for next year and SDRP phase 2 can come from. These are specific categories that are on the table for consideration regardless if there are zero one or two additional school closures. To reiterate, these are specific buckets that are available to choose from across all the options 012 school closures. This slide shows you within each of these buckets again the number of FTEES that can be considered on the extreme maximum end in the personnel category and the other operational and purchase contractual services for reduction. Again, this slide represents all identified staffing and programming levers coupled with contractual and purchase service levers. And this slide is intended for you all to see what is on the table for reductions and the depth of what we can we what can
073be considered. And I want to just really call out with this particular slide. uh in SCP phase 2, the reality is there was a large reduction of personnel and a large reduction of uh central office personnel um in which the district at that time leveraged the opportunity to re-imagine roles and really get thoughtful um and collapse some things to provide better services which is what we're enacting this particular year. If you if you add these 13 additional central office admin and none admin roles, it's going to require another re-imagining or restructuring of roles because it's going to eliminate 13 administrative and non-administrative. And I want to really call this out because the non-administrative central office staff are folks that directly impact students at the school level as well. They are just central office employees. they
074are not employees to the respective school. And so in in making these these level of reductions that we have proposed here again do know that it is now touching the school level and it is again reducing the support at the district office that would then essentially cause a delay in um providing responses um because we won't have the personnel a delay in how we um provide that level of support when needed at the school um because there will be a reduction of of personnel to be able to do that. So just really want to just name that very transparently for the board. On this next slide here, essentially only thing that changed on the table you'll see is the number of FTEES that have changed. So for a one school closure essentially you know instead
075of you know if we look at the previous slide central office at me and non admin was a reduction of 13 in this case it can be a reduction of five. You'll notice the school level direct support in this case um instead of eliminating 18 we wouldn't touch it because we would still maintain that level of support um instructionally. And then the same for for the nondirect staff. Instead of the number that was on the previous slide, which was the max, this still level of reduction would still need to happen at this amount at the one school closure. And then again, non-instructional um purchase services and transportation remains the same. If you go to slide two, I'm sorry, not slide two, school closure, two school closure options. This again you'll see the variation in the
076number of FTEES um that are on the table for here and um you'll see the amount essentially that the district is proposing. >> So if we click to the next slide I'll turn it over. Just one clarification on um when you say um nondirect support or direct support um is that does that mean during the school day after how does that >> nondirect support right now for the FTEES that's factored in there they provide support during the school day. >> Okay. the nondirect support provide um support throughout the day at various times. Can I also I want to just clarify that the expenditure levers that you are enumerating here in these three slides are exclusive of the expenditure level levers that we saw that were enumerated by the SDRP process. So it's different >> want
077to go. >> So yeah sure so uh look at slide 13. Yep. So the expense >> right. Yeah. Rose the detail. >> Yeah. Okay. >> There. >> Yeah. Uh so here the 1.4 million is that are you are you also counting that within your values or are these separate? >> So transportation was yeah these these are we went through and made sense of where the possible reduction. So there's some overlap here. >> Okay. Um but there are some stuff are is couched in the category buckets more broadly. So an example of that is purchase services instructional >> right >> that you know the reduced technology licenses and other opportunities is included in that right like we we did it in a holistic >> way um if that makes any sense. So you're saying so in
078your number on slide 16 is 512,264. So that that in in encompasses the 500,000 it's not in addition to is that correct? >> Correct. >> Okay. So the 500,000 in transportation expenses on slide 13. Are you reducing that number in this slide to 300,000? >> We we did we did reduce it. Yeah. >> Okay. I just want to clarify. Thank you. Thank you. So it's not additive. >> Correct. It's not additive. >> This plus 1.4. >> Yes. Okay. >> Yeah. >> All right. I'm going to pick up for a moment. So, one of the pieces of conversation that has been had is a question about ultimately what would become of the Bessie Road school building after it closes in June. Um, as we have discussed at the board level before, the board ultimately has a
079decision to sell Bessie Roads. They could lease Bessie Roads or could potentially be mothballled. The information tonight focuses on the steps that would need to be taken for a potential sale of the Bessie Roads property. Um, to kind of summarize the process, essentially it's a three-step process. We need to first prepare to put that property on the market. Preparation. Um, we have to make sure that we are following the school board Illinois school board process for selling a district property. To do that, we need to gather title, secure a new title commitment, survey, and appraisal. And once these documents are secured, the school board would draft a resolution. You would prepare a resolution to include a minimum sale price, terms and conditions of the sale, and indicate if the district is selling by sealed bid
080or public auction. I'm going to pause there because there is a decision point within school code that says that the district could sell the building to another government entity through a negotiated deal and essentially real that would not require board action until an approved resolution if it was sold to another government entity. If the board chooses to sell to an entity that is not a government entity or have a government entity go through a competitive bid process, you would draft a resolution with your terms of sale, approve that resolution, and then either move to a sealed bid process or a public auction for the property. Once the board has either negotiated with a government entity a satisfactory price or gone to public auction or sealed bid, you have in the latter case, you have the
081opportunity to decide whether you accept or reject that bid that comes in. Um if you accept that bid and the after you've placed the property for sale, you would move through a closing process. The board could also decide to reject that bid and then there is a process and steps to consider but we would have you work clearly with our legal counsel to understand the steps and processes that would need to be followed should a bid be rejected. Okay. Um so that kind of gives you the over you know kind of an overview of the process. Administration to date is actively taking the three of the four steps to prepare for sale. We've been securing a a new survey, a new appraisal and title commitment. Um we're expecting that process to be complete by the
082end of January and we'll be looking for um input on next steps and direction. The last slide before we move on to discussion essentially is to call out you know what and this is as much to a public comment as it is to a board comment. We are moving to new district boundaries next year and you know I think it is important to note that no matter you know right now we are at a point of no school closures. Many folks are impacted potentially by a new school assignment with Bessie roads closing and Foster opening. This these boundaries were approved by the school board in March of 2022. And in that process, they also did create the exception that families impacted by the boundary changes could opt to stay in their schools should that be
083their preference. And they would need to complete a permissive transfer in order to do that. And that's we'll be working on essentially that's the process that was shared in the memo in our last board packet. And we are moving, we're actually preparing for that process now because our goal is to notify all families of their school placement in the first week of February. And it is our intention to issue a communication to every district family because there are families out there that may be impacted by a boundary change and they're not yet aware of that. >> So are you saying that that every family will be every family who's changing or just every family in >> every family? Okay. every family. I we figure it's better to air on the side of sending out a
084blanket communication to folks that say basically says based on our records, this is where you're attending school next year. We know that, you know, it's it's good to make that clear. And I would also encourage families that if they have moved and have not updated their address with us, that they do take those steps. It's easy enough to email registration info, but you need to attach the doc documents to verify that address because people's school assignments are based on the addresses that we have in our systems. >> Can I just um can you say the date of when you know when people it's people are hearing when people should be um expecting Yeah. expecting the communication? >> We are sending school notifications for next year the first week of February. Um, that also works well
085because conferences are the second week of February. So, if there questions, you've got a logical connection with the school. And then the permissive transfer deadline is March 1st. And that is a really necessary and essential deadline because with these exceptions, we need to have a clear understanding of what enrollments are going to look like to be able to to get as close to a strong staffing model in a fiscally responsible manner as we can. So, March 1st to uh confirm if you want permissive transfer. >> Yeah. And how will you be advising the Bessie Rhodess families about their assignments? >> So, there has been some very regular communication with the Bessie Rhodess families, but they would be part of that same communication um in that first week of February. And Bessie Rhodess families are assigned
086to the foster school. their communications and we've had differentiated sheets when we did our on-site community engagements last spring. Also, let them know what process they would take because if they choose not to attend Foster, that would be a return to home school. So, they have a slightly different process. They would return to home school and if they were remaining in TUI and Twi wasn't offered at that home school, we would assign them to a TWE program in their feeder pattern. But their letter will have the specific steps for them. Can you go back to slide 14? The uh financial model projections compared. I just want to make sure we're all working from the same assumptions and understanding here. So um so that FY27 reductions that means that no matter what this year we have
087to cut $4.5 million. Is that how to read that? To in order to keep 90 days cash on hand. So is that like our minimum target no matter what we've got to cut that amount. Okay. >> Correct. That would be um with the assumption 90 days cash on hand and balance budget. >> Okay. >> Just to clarify >> now is is it different? So the balance budget part of it is that the same as the 90-day cash on hand or would it be slightly different if we kept 90 days cash on hand but didn't keep a balanced budget for the next year? >> Could be different. We would need to run those projections to but it it could be different. >> Okay. >> Could be. >> Okay. >> I just wanted to clarify these base
088reductions do not include the sale of any of our properties. Correct. Not Bessie roads or anything. >> Correct. These the numbers that are here are they operate independently of any assumptions as far as school closures, selling Bessie roads, anything like that. It's just pure numbers. Um I have a couple questions. Uh slide 17 and 18 I believe are the one school and two school projections and they they end up very close. This is at 3 million for the one school and then a 2.5 million. I'd understood there to be more of a gap between those. Can you tell me why those are so closely projected? I I think it's so close because the school level nondirect support is is that if you if you go it's the same reduction. So you can determine that how
089how how deep you want to go for that >> right. Okay. >> Reduction. >> Okay. >> You get what I'm saying? >> It wouldn't have to be the 2.5 depending on which model we use. It could be significantly less. >> Yeah. Right. like you you could say, "Hey, you know, take the two central office FTEEs out, reduce the non-level school direct support for however many, right?" Like again, remember, we we did that to give a little bit of cushion for whatever potentially >> any future decisions >> would would be that wouldn't put the district in a kind of a a panic. >> Okay, thanks. And then slide 13. Um this is D2. It puts us if we remain which no one no one of us has voted to be at a zero but that's where
090we are right now. Um if we remain at a 26.7 model D2 does include the 2.7 million capex instead of the 1 million. Correct. >> Correct. It includes $2.7 million per year for capital expenditures. It does not include that $2 million transfer working cash, right, >> to uh cover the remaining cost of Bessie Roads. >> Right. So, as we're just piecing through possibilities of moving forward and trying to minimize impacts, it could theoretically bring this down to a 1 million if we were to redirect that 1.7 back to away from CAPEX. So, that would be the Yes. So, hold on. Let me get back to model D. >> Uh, whoops, I'm going the wrong way. >> Model D. Okay, so model D was that base model. That's $1 million of capital expenditures, but this also
091includes that $2 million working cash transfer. So, um, that would likely be about a million dollars less once you start moving the numbers around in the model. But D2 includes the 2.7. >> Correct. >> So if as we discussed and were looking for ways forward >> that could be that 1.7 million could be redirected to offset. >> Correct. >> Um >> and is that also the same as it would be 1.6. It could also be you could take a million off of line four. Is that what he's >> correct? >> All the way across. >> 1.7. I mean, yeah, but line all the way across it would be for 01 A1, >> right? Sure. >> Okay. >> The other the other uh thing that I want to go back I think when the question was
092asked, are you are we using the same levers? And I can't recall what slide we were on um when the question was brought about transportation it being 500,000 and in um a previous slide and 300,000 000. Um, in a previous slide, I want to call out that previous slide was contingent upon school closures. This particular slide with the 300,000 reduce that to take that give us that flexibility because we won't does that make sense. Yeah. >> My question was more like is it eight? >> I just wanted to make sure that I it was exclusive and not in or that it was inclusive and not exclusive. >> I understand. >> Okay. Okay. Got it. I just wanted to make sure we we would mind. Yeah. [laughter] >> So then looking back at the recommended cuts
093um I do not remember slide numbers at this juncture maybe 17 and 18 >> 17. >> So there is a path forward uh particularly looking here at purchase services and then on the next slide there is a >> go back. uh 172, I'm sorry. Right. So, there there's there there's a pathway to um help us mitigate direct student impacts here if we need to um as we move forward. Again, acknowledging that this is not where we want to be, but it is where we're at. >> Right. Yes. And also again, as a reminder, in SDRP phase 2, we avoided student impact. Mhm. >> There's no way to not avoid it >> in STP phase three >> with zero school closures. >> So, so that's what we're essentially trying to articulate so people can kind of
094manage the expectation. >> So to the yeah to the next slide. So in some sense the um the two I mean the two to one is really not I guess the harm of of moving right now to two school closures based on what the savings would be if you're on slide 16 16 and 17 >> um I think from the standpoint of the u where we were talking about buying some time to be able to have the the full plan such as what um you've put forward um I Bill, can you go to slide uh 17 18 >> maybe a little >> I'm sorry. Slide 18. Sorry. Uh want to make sure I don't get them all sick. Um I just in part of a conversation I mean just sort of raising asking the question
095here. I think we all probably thought this number has much was going to be has been in my head much higher um throughout this whole time. Um now that's easy to say to so to those who might be in that 33 you know um having one is is high. So I want to definitely um say that I um I'm not trying to be cavalier with people's positions and jobs. Um but to the standpoint of the the of closing two schools um and the implications of that from the savings of 2.5 versus three, you know, needing to cut 3 million. Um I do think that is worth a conversation. >> Well, can we go to slide 13 though because this isn't the number. Can we um >> that's just the that's just what's on the table
096for the actual people in expenditure. >> That's just possibility number here is that a two school club put us 648,000 in the black. >> And so essentially what those other two slides are doing, it gives the board options. So there's $2.5 million on there, but you can look at the options that are available in there to get to those numbers that are on row four. That makes sense. And so here we're looking at needing to get to 1 million um and cut or maybe actually less than that if we took the million uh the million back. So I'm just all I'm just saying one of the conversations we've been having is how the you know thanks to the phenomenal work that y'all have been doing on on all the finance as we started this out.
097It was a much higher amount that we thought needed to be cut. And now as we get to the reality of what the cuts are um and understanding the the harm of closures without having the full plan of next steps. I'm just pointing out that it's not as is not as as dire at least in my eyes as it as it was when we started this coming in in June. >> Well, and so can I just add on to not contradict but add on to if Dr. Harkin was here, she would say, "Your financial state has not changed much, but our modeling capacity did." Right. So, this is our modeling that has changed. We still have to find these cuts. >> Oh, yeah. >> Yeah. Yeah. It's just we're spreading the pain out. >> Yeah.
098And I And I've always So, just I always want to be clear. I am not saying keep something the same between 26, 27, 28, all year 30. It's just one year to um to do the um u the planning that's uh necessary. But no, I think we're >> So the way >> I was going to say so the way I see it, there are two things we've got to figure out. Like I think the immediate concern is what are we going to do in order to get us so that we've got 90 days cash on hand next year. Like that's an imminent urgent problem. We've got to do that now or you know we have big problems next year. But we also have to be sustainable long term. And I think that is where like
099having a plan plan to be sustainable long term because this is just year one like and we have to continue to make cuts through 2030 and and you know those cuts that we make those are year overyear. So it's not like those positions come back. It's like okay we don't have these positions now next year we cut more and then next year we cut more. So, we've got to figure out a way to be sustainable long term in addition to making sure we don't go beyond 90 days cash on hand this year. Um, and you know, like figuring out a way to do that that doesn't put unnecessary strain on the district, that doesn't put unnecessary strain on the schools in terms of, you know, having to make too many moves. um and also taking
100into consideration the time constraints we have in order to be able to actually do things and execute. >> Can I ask a clarification Dr. Turner from slide 17, I think. Um, so say if we were to decide as a board to mitigate, if we still find ourselves here, um, if we were to mitigate the 2.7 down to a one, um, so you said there's no way to do this without d I don't remember your exact language, but some like direct >> direct impact on on on students. >> Yeah. But with when I look at the 1 million here right there's purchase services here which is 812 and then if you go to the next slide I think it was a 2FTTE central office that would get us to essentially almost to 1 million >> does
101that what are the direct impacts of the the purchase services >> and the central office >> um I think the the central office specifically again the way the staffing model is now creates a successful way for us to operate this district with the number of schools that we have without taking any schools offline yet with with the exception of I mean you're you're not taking Betsy Betsy Roads is closing but essentially we're opening Foster we still will have 18 >> schools you get what I'm saying so reducing that we we then have to do another configuration to really talk about what support is and and within those two things it's it's a lot of moving pieces closing a school opening a new school reducing staff when folks are involved in that process does that make
102sense so I think it's just the complication of uh how how we would all make that all work with a reduction a reduction of staff. That school level nondirect support um piece remains the same because the the long term when we talk about sustainability, you know, some of the stuff that we're operating in that area, we need to reimagine what that looks like moving moving forward. And so that remains the same because that still needs to happen to get the district on a a a path forward if that makes any sense. And I'm trying to be respectful and really leverage the level of humanization here as I have the HR um I like to call it the HR police eyeballing me to make sure that we keep the level of humanization because under those numbers
103are people in terms of the the FTE. So I want to be mindful of of of saying >> that. But are you in saying in some sense um if we in some sense there as a as a superintendent and you're looking at your um your total you know your total landscape there's some changes you would be you would make anyway uh regardless of one >> and that's a that's a that's a space that's why it doesn't change from one to two because that is an area that still needs to happen when we talk about creating systems, processes, and structures in this district for efficiency long term. So, so that remains the same because it's still a consideration I'm I'm bringing to forward to the school board because it still needs to happen. Um, I just
104want you to see the dollar amount attached to it, but it's bigger than just the dollar amount for me. It's really getting >> better efficiencies in that space. And so part of what I what I'm what I'm hearing you say the the cuts the first year well I'm not going to say I heard you say that um when we look at on slide 12 where we you know we're like oh okay one year there's 4.5 and then you you know then you have 6.2 and 2.5 this first set of cuts are things efficient things that you might be doing anyway. the real issues become the other years when we're now adding in those additional cuts that if we don't have um a clear plan there really isn't something else to come back to next year
105and say where are we going to get the 6.2 2 million. Correct. >> But this first year, these cessor cuts are in things that you've all, you know, your team has already in some sense been um understanding how to think about being efficient with. Correct. Okay. >> Correct. >> I can just interject here for a second from the buildings and grounds perspective and I'm going to own like and I think you guys had this conversation several months ago. When you're talking about people, it is also very difficult to then talk about capital improvements. The reality is this district has been choking our buildings off for years. >> And so, you know, we literally, as we're trying to figure out summer projects, there's very little we can afford to do for a million dollars with what
106the way that capital improvements cost right now. We had another pipe burst today. Like, this type of stuff just becomes common because our buildings are old and they are run down. Mhm. >> Now, I fully understand when I hold bricks and mortar or a roof, you know, we would like to finish the roof over at King Arts. We can't do it. It's 1.6 million. We can't do it anytime, you know, um when you hold a brick next to a person, the brick always loses. But this is not a sustainable solution. We are keeping the buildings in use. We're keeping them online, and we are not paying to keep them up to date. Yeah. >> And it shows in the experience the kids have. It shows in our ability to heat and to cool and to
107do whatever to make it a decent learning environment. >> So, and I just say, amen. I was one of the ones who scrambled hard to push us to get to 2.7. We started way higher than that. Um, I'm also just trying to model flexibility here and and we find ourselves try to be understanding of where we are as a board because I think that understanding as much as we can create space for us to work through our issues um is important. So that's why I raised that is um you know uh we are having to deal with the sins of many boards in front of us and and the urgency is there and also like we need a little time to work our stuff out and and find our our feet I think and so
108that's that's why I raise it is like this has been the budget for 10 11 years $1 million of capex and it shows and it's not good and it's wrong and also like I just raised that as one way I can compromise to try and help us move forward in the near term >> and I completely and totally understand it. I'd also be wrong not to say something. >> Wrong not to say something. >> Absolutely. >> Because then we're going to turn and say, "Hey, why don't you >> build some we'll try it again next year?" >> I I also want to call out too that you know we have a master's facility plan that's coming. We have a life safety audit that will be included in that. I would imagine roofs are a life
109safety issue potentially. Um, and we do have the ability to uh issue life safety bonds to fix certain things within our buildings should they be issued that way. And we will have a much better view into how to develop a master facilities plan when we have that information in front of us. And I think that, you know, 2.7 million or 1 million was never going to touch the 188 200 million that we have in deferred maintenance over the next from 2022 to 2040. Um, and so having uh bearing in mind that roofs break and pipes break and we need to definitely have money on hand to do those things. um we really don't have uh we have we have opportunities to generate revenue to do these things once we know what they are. >> Yeah,
110I think for buildings we will definitely have to try to figure out what other options we have because it's clear from this budget that we don't have the money to repair the buildings that we have. Um, so I think, you know, part of the goal of having a long-term plan to be sustainable is so that we understand now what investments we should or should not be making in buildings because we know, you know, which ones we're we're going to try to maintain and which ones we're going to take offline. So, I think like it it goes back to what are we going to do now in the short run because, you know, we are we've got to do something for next year, but then also having a long-term plan that can guide some of our
111decisions going forward. And I say long term, but really it's one more school year, so it's not that long term. >> Yeah. So, I um I want to thank Dr. Turner for bringing this information before us. I think we have some soularching to do around this. I think we have some thinking to do around this and I want us to do that. I don't want us to push into a decision at this point. I mean th this is it. This is it. This is full stop. This is it. >> So um in so Dr. Turner, as you give us these, um the list of options, um is the is it for the board to tell you at some point the ordering of this or how would you like >> it's or it's it's for the
112board to direct how deep in that you want to go and really say what's priority. >> Okay. >> Right. So, um >> you know If if you go can you go back to the STRP reconsideration slide for me. So an example um with that particular slide the the previous board was very clear with us in saying take it off the table right like we we we don't want to right like so if if if we're giving you all of what the considerations are then we need to know just where where the board wants to lean in for a priority for us. So then we then know how to manage our expectations and then manage the plan moving forward of how to um but that's why that slide is is is the most extreme. The buckets
113don't change. It's just within the buckets and how deep you want us to go on what is is where we will need the guidance. >> Is the school level nondirect instruction is that included in the is that a different line item then? >> Yeah. Now see this is a a STP reduction level for reconsideration on this side for for phase two. >> This right here >> included certain FTEEs at this particular time. >> Right. Right. >> Which was bare minimum. And again, the school level nondirect instruct instruction folks essentially was was they support schools nondirect instruction, >> but they were essentially >> central office employees. Like that's the that's the best way for me to me to say it, right? like um in the what I presented to you gave you a a even more
114kind of more explicit because you all don't know like what's a central office at me none at meant right like >> okay >> and then it's because we're touching the school level that looks different now because it's actual folks school level direct instruction and nondirect instruction personnel that's being considered so that has a different meaning >> but in here so I understand that like the transportation prek routes or transportation prek aids um they don't appear in slide 16 17 or 18 >> right no because right >> but do the school level nondirect instruction the okay that's okay >> they do okay okay >> they are the only one that category is the only one that does >> but the transportation prek routes and that's not that's not even included in obviously in the 300,000 that
115I factored that's not included in that. >> This is just something for and it's really I mean that's a great point so that you all know for differentiation school level nondirect instruction is factored in >> to that other side because it's >> FTEES. Okay. >> Okay. >> Those other two is specifically related to transportation that comes with contractual services that we provide there. So that's different. >> Okay. Perfect. >> If that makes any sense. No, this is very this has been very helpful. Thank you all for the clarity and how you presented this. >> One more question. >> Question. Oh, you >> No, you go first. Go first. >> Two more. Okay. >> Two. [laughter] >> Um I guess I you know I think right as we're trying to be talk across differences um you
116know one school closure was is in my view was kind of temporary. even a two school probably had some temporary where we're still going to have to make cuts. And so I guess my thinking here is if we can't get there and and come together, which it's not for lack of trying, y'all, you know, um um you know, how can we mitigate harm, direct impact, allow us time, but then also I just have to say based on Dr. Beersley's comments here as well, right? That the pressure is on us >> to have a long term to speak to your comment, Maya, that that um even if we could find a pathway, which I see here, to no direct impacts with a zero school closure. Um the pressure is on for us to have long-term plan
117and solutions next year. Um, so I just that's what I'm feeling and just wanted to name in the space of of we're going to need to get there together. >> Yeah. Um, my question is around timing and I know there's a lot to consider, but you know, especially for the urgency of next year. Do you have any thoughts on timing and how quickly we need to come to um decisions? Um I think a reference was made earlier in terms of the train left the track for me in November. >> Yeah. >> Right. So so when we talk about urgency, >> right? the the urgency is there because it this has a ripple effect on on all the things. um that typically when we come back off winter break like we we go into a crunch
118time mode >> because it's a whole lot of other things that we got to >> keep in alignment um to ensure that the district is in compliance legally with the state >> um that we're following the Illinois school code that we are aligning to PAR any impacts like it's urgent Yeah. >> So, we know what our responsibility is in terms of moving forward. It's really to look at this data and start to think about what our priorities are. >> Okay. Um, now we'll have discussion around the tweet update. Right. We'll be ready to go when we have the slides. And if I could have district folks come on up to the table, please. All right, we'll just do quick introductions before I jump into the presentation. So, Stacy Beardsley, assistant superintendent. Dr. McCoy, >> Dr.
119Shmika McCoy, director of schools management. >> Kimberly Kelly, compliance coordinator for the multilingual department. >> Cecilia Romero, multilingual coordinator. >> All right. Thank you all. All right. So this evening I'll do a short presentation on program placement for the 2627 school year and share the district program placements for TWE going into next year. Prior tonight we have only discussed program placement as a part of potential school closure. Without a decision on school closure, the administration, as Dr. Turner really just communicated, needs to shift into planning for next year. The memo in last week's board packet really spelled out what this looks like from an enrollment perspective. And one key element to this is for us to understand the programs and the compositions of each school. In order for the administration to move forward with our
120shift um a shift to the board approved boundaries for 2627, we're finalizing program placement so we're able to begin registration in January. And just as a note, normally registration would have begun at the beginning of December, but we've been on hold. And on our timeline currently, when we come back with all the pieces in place, we'll be able to open registration on January 20th. All right. When we shift from the 2526 boundaries to the 2627 boundaries, there are changes to all of the Haven F K5 elementary school boundaries. Specifically in the case of Willard, the current Willard boundary at the southwest corner shifts to Lincolnwood and the isolated purple rectangle shifts to Foster and that's frequently referred to as the Willard Island. With the opening of Foster and the creation of the foster attendance boundaries,
121a significant portion of the Willard TWWS and TWWX population is reszoned to Foster Elementary. And to be clear, it's a significant amount. It is not all. What we see is that 77% of our TWWs students that attend Willard in that would it be the kindergarten through the fourth grade live in the foster boundaries. All right. Families m in this situation when we move from one boundaries to the other families may opt to have their student continue at their current school based on an exception created by the school board when the 2627 boundaries are approved and that is for families that are impacted by a change in boundaries. Families must complete the permissive transfer as we spoke about earlier tonight for their student and that needs to be done by March 1st. The district will not
122provide transportation to families who opt to stay in their existing school. In light of the boundary changes and the district-wide TWE program not being fully enrolled over the past several years, the district has continued conversations on two different but connected topics. The first topic or question is, do we have the right number of twe strands districtwide? Currently, we have seven kindergarten classrooms and eight classrooms in first through fifth grade. We need to think about enrollment in the TWEI program with a district-wide lens because it is a district-wide program as opposed to a school by school. The second question that we've needed to continue to discuss is are the twe strands located in the appropriate locations in light of the opening of foster school and in light of where our native Spanish speakers tend to reside.
123Families may opt sorry I'm got to get the right slide going. Sorry about that. There we go. So before we dive deeper into our conversation, I want to share that these questions are not new questions, but answering them becomes more urgent as we move to open a new school and as we grapple with the financial challenges that we do have. In December of 2020, administration began the student assignment project or SAP. SAP 1 contributed to the creation of our 2627 boundaries and the commitment to building foster. SAP 2 began in October of 2022 with a focus on equitable program placement. SAP 2 continued 13 months and facilitated six TWE community meetings as a part of a series of meetings focused on programs. Two of the six meetings were focused on TWE districtwide. Two were focused
124on Willard TWE and two were focused on Bessie Rhodess twe. Ultimately, the committee did not make re recommendations as SAP 2 was put on pause so board leadership in the administration could focus on redesigning the foster school when it came to light that foster was going to cost more than needed, allowable, and acceptable. Um the Sorry, I lost my spot there. Recommendation two was put pause. All right. Um, so SAP 3 was designed to pick up where SAP 2 left off and met with specific tweet prior and met with specific tweet priorities in April and May of 2025. During our SD SDRP3 process, the models that were shared from September forward all showed that the consolidated tweet program, a consolidated TWE program where the roads and Willard strands were consolidated into a double strand at
125Foster. The discussion about tweet strand placements and program improvement and expansion have been ongoing for several years. Running two remotes. All right. Specifically, when we talk about program placement, board policy, specifically policy 6 col10 and 6160 give administration the authority to implement an instructional program which includes program placement. Policy delegates to the superintendent to implement the instructional program and policy also delegates to the superintendent to design or develop and maintain a program for eels's including the instructional program and environment. The final piece of information um to hear is that the SDRP3 program committee also provided guidance to the administration not on the number of strands but to support administrative decisionmaking in program placement. So if you recall there really two questions we're working on. Number one, do we have the right number of strands? And
126then are those strands in the most appropriate place in light of these boundary changes? the opening of foster school and the closing of Bessie roads, the current utilization rate and the current utilization rate in the TWE program, the need as well as the need to operate in a fiscally responsible manner. The administration is moving forward with the following TWE and dual language placements for the 2627 school year. Moving forward, specifically in the chute feeder pattern, we would maintain single strands at Oakton and Daws. We do know that SAP and SDRP have spoken to the fact that there is a preference towards double strands, but those buildings being three section and with ACC don't create a strong environment for a double strand program without shrinking attendance boundaries. Without moving those boundaries, those changes cannot happen. Um,
127in the Haven feeder pattern, we are consolidating the Willard Twe program and the Bessie Rhodess Twe program into two strands at Foster. And it's important to note that dual language is also opening next year at Haven in sixth through 8th grade. So that pathway moves right into the Haven feeder pattern and our road students are moving in the middle school are moving to Haven. And then in the Nicholls theater pattern, Washington would have two strands and Dwey would have one strand. Nicholls also begins the dual language program in sixth grade. That program is scheduled to grow out a grade level a year until it is a full 68 program. And Chute is scheduled to add a dual language program in sixth grade for the 2728 school year also with a growout plan to have 8th
128grade by 2829. The program placement is essentially the output of two decisions. The first decision is to shift seven to seven TW strands districtwide. The rationale for this particular decision is one to have an opportunity to build a larger and more dynamic classroom communities that are still within TWE guidelines. As we've shared in memos previously, the current utilization rate in our twoe classrooms, even when we decrease the MAC maximum capacity to 90% because of isby guidance for dual langu or uh for EL classrooms, the district-wide utilization rate is 68% with an average class size of 16. We currently have 17 classrooms that have 15 students or lower. There is a threshold when classrooms get small enough that it diminishes the classroom environment. And in a TUI classroom, we really want to make sure we have
129an environment where we can be building strong relationships, pla practicing our linguistic skills, having those opportunities to build community. And in a single strand school, you have that same class for six years. A double strand creates that opportunity to build a broader community and to test out different friendships and relationships and dynamics. So the first decision is to shift to seven twe. It addresses utilization concerns. It adjusts class sizes and it really allows us to think about what are those larger and more dynamic classrooms where our students are going to learn best. The second decision ultimately then becomes where do these seven strands belong and specifically the decision has been made here to consolidate Bessie roads and Willard twe strands to a double strand at Foster and that is with that ACC reimagined at foster
130school. So you've got two double strands. The rationale for this is that it locates the program near a significant number of TWWs and TWWX students. And this was both in uh input for feedback or rationale provided from SAP 2 and SDRP3 as well as SAP 3. It creates a double strand program supporting academics, community and collaboration under the leadership of an experienced bilingual twe school leader and it increases walkability and decreases the number of students requiring transportation. If we had shifted to seven strands and had maintained a single strand at Foster and a single strand at Dillard for several years, we would have been in a difficult position of potentially busing Bessie Roads TW students into Foster and Bos busing foster TW students out to uh Willard because a single strand does not meet the
131capacity requirements of the TWE students that live in the foster boundaries. Can you just say that sentence one more time? >> Yep. With essentially the foster students that live in the that excuse me for with the twee students that live in the foster boundaries and the twe students that would be coming to foster from Bessie Roads. We would be in a situation if we had a single strand because that would be 130 kids where we would we've made a commitment to Messi Roads families. We would be busing Bessie Roads twe families into Foster and then would not have enough seats left potentially for the twee families that live in Foster. So we would be busing the foster families out to Willard if we went to seven strands and did one at Foster and one at
132Willard. >> Okay. And so that's just a clip. >> I'm gonna pass to Hannah to talk a bit about communication plan and then we can open up for for questions. >> Um so we've worked in collaboration with principal Battle and Assistant Principal Ernvall at Willard to make sure that there is a clear communication plan in place for this decision. Um after tonight's conversation, communication will go out first to Willard staff and then to all Willard families from Dr. Turner. And then tomorrow at school, students will be informed in an age appropriate caring way. Um sharing circles will be facilitated beginning tomorrow through this week. Um and then administrative and mental health support will also be available. >> I think I just want to you know in closing before we move to questions like we know
133that this decision is a difficult decision. All decisions that create change for students become very difficult decisions. We strongly believe from all of the feedback that we've received that a two strand model is very supportive both of our teachers and our students. We know there's work for transition. We know there's work for opening a new school, but we're very optimistic for what this can become for all of the roads families and the Willard families. This is not intended to be a message of closing. It is a message of consolidation and program building because currently we are not at max utilization in our program and we can create stronger learning environments where our kids can truly prosper. So questions. Um, so I have two and one is um, so when I think about Bessie Roads, um,
134oftentimes I'm thinking of it as a school that's, you know, like so Bessie Rose kids are going to there's a here I think there's like 184 kids and that number stays consistent. But in some sense, Bessie's Rose is closing and so the population of kids who are Bessie Rose kids are going to decrease every year. And so one question I ask is um we know opening a school is hard. Start establishing a school culture is hard. Um, and one of the beauties of Foster is being able to I'm excited about trying to figure out how to bring the population of kids who live in that community together. And that is black kids, Latino kids, white kids, but we live together. And what does that mean with language? Um, and so I guess a question when
135Bessie Rose was brought to Foster originally there was a K8, right? And assumed, but now it's a and Bessie Rose was going to exist. But now that it's not existing, I am I guess the question of starting a school foster with a large population of kids who are going to decrease year in year out. What does that mean for the culture setting of foster? Because you're going to create a culture around a population of kids who won't be in the school. And so I I raised that to the point um about whether but at the same time needing to respect what has been said to Bessie Rhodess families, right? So, I just I don't think there's an easy answer to that, but I'm curious how to make sure that the kids of foster are connecting
136with each other and not necessarily establishing their first connections with kids who aren't from that community and who aren't going to stay in that community. So could um twe for Py Rose has that been an option or a conversation about it going to Willard as it phases out such that Foster um can open as it's unique that is going to be unique twe program given the composition of who's in that school and actually having to address the real question of how do we get black families to opt in to tweet in a place where you know because it's so not I'm not trying to uh cause conflict but as I've always in my head of Bessie Rose is continuing the numbers but in reality as the numbers decrease just how we had that conversation uh
137because when we originally had this Foster was going to be a K8 Bessie Rose K8 foster K8 but now it is Foster with Bessie Rhodess um phasing out. So Charmaikica, I'll pick up on the piece of your question around kind of building school culture from the beginning. I think an important thing to note is that over half of the Bessie Roads population lives in the foster attendance boundaries. And so that's a critical note that for the majority of those students, foster would be their home school. >> So there will be some decrease in enrollment over time, but not over half of those kids, it is their attendance boundary home school. But are they viewing themselves as Betsy Rose kids at Foster or foster kids at Foster? That's the I think an interesting design question. >>
138So a part of the work that we did for SAP 3 with the foster transition committee was starting to really talk around the component of how do we create the community and build that as the building is actually coming together. And so a lot of that initial work that we did last year that we've started this year has been getting the word out to all of the families who would potentially or who live in the foster boundary lines so that they know that they are a part of that space and inviting them into the community- based events starting with the parents and then as we've been doing the parent work starting to lean into the part with the students. We've been very mindful of the student part of the engagement because we know that there
139have been other decisions that play a major part of that. So we want to be sensitive to the nature when it comes to the students. But a piece that we have been intentional to do is creating what we call a dual citizenship type space. So any of those students who would be coming from those feeder schools throughout the district, they would be the Bessie RoadFostster Phoenix. and we have created um imaging and stickers and different things that we've been given to the kids and families that allow them to represent both parts of their student identity. And so specific to the students coming from roads, that school community has done a beautiful job this year and one celebrating who they are as roads rockets as they close out this school year doing different activities, making sure
140the students know the history of roads, but also learning the history of Foster. And so they do monthly activities with one another or with the students where they're looking at the drones of the school being built. They're getting the students excited about the transition. So, their initial community building is getting them excited about becoming a part of Foster and knowing that they will be a part of a larger community with other students. That conversation is always around as uh Rose Rockets, we're going to Foster to become foster, a part of the Foster Phoenix community. So that bridge is being built with those stu uh students with the plan of also incorporating and having other communitywide events with the other students who will be um going to foster as well. So making sure that that's intentional.
141Another part of what you um stated was or asked about was as those road students transition out, what does that look like? And honestly, I see that looking the way it looks any other year because students are always transitioning out and they have their cohort and then you have new students transitioning in and they make a cohort. And so it's up to us to make sure that we're really intentional as that community is building that all of the students see themselves as they walk into foster school. Once the families make their commitments, it makes it a lot easier for us to be really intentional and targeted in those um students who will be invited in even more. Right now, we're hitting everybody who's a part of that um foster community, but as we know who
142those students are, then we can narrow it in more explicitly. >> How many can >> I just follow follow? Yeah, I was gonna ask some numbers about roads. Go ahead. So the um so the to get to two strands of tweed the Bessie Ro I mean I think there's probably at least 80 non 89 nonfoster Bessie Rose kids who we would assume are coming to uh Bessie Rose. Would the assumption be that we're going to pull from the outside of Foster going forward to, as you've said, to to make up for the kids as Bessie Rose moves out? Or is Foster stay a neighborhood school or is Foster is the tweet program at Foster a magnet program for one track and a neighborhood program for the foster kids or is it a magnet program? Right.
143Because in the Bessie Rose kids move and we're not, it's not a school. we're not replenishing. Kids are coming in. Where would the second strand of tweet kids come from? >> So, there are a couple pieces here. Um, based on the the guidance of the SDRP3 program subcommittee. One you there pieces of guidance was let's get make sure that twe is present in each of the major feeder patterns and a double strand is preferential if we can do that. Um, in this case, I think one of the benefits of a double strand is we can be more flexible around enrollment. We can monitor enrollment over time. And if we see in the same way we might in a monolingual classroom, if we see that enrollment coming in this year is 19 kids, that's a single
144section. And next year it could be 35. And that's a double section. When we have single strands of twe, we get left in a situation like we are in a couple of our places where we have a tweet classroom of seven. And that class is probably going to continue one more year because we don't, you know, like that that would mean closing out their experience and moving them along and creating a hole in the continuity of that strand program. So having a double strand allows us to be more flexible. And what we would like to do, I think in hindsight, we've been very rigid about points like we have six strands, we have eight strands. If we can double up strands over time and depending on where we go with school school closing points, we
145might be able to double another strand at a different time, then that allows us to be flexible about the number of strands and reflect the demand in the feeder pattern as opposed to, hey, we're stuck with this number. Does that help? It it it does. So, in essence, the um we might end up with one. Uh but what what I guess what I'm hearing you say, you're not saying that there's a commitment to two strands so that we will then necessarily open up the slots as a as a as a district-wide. what and what I think you need to be kind of aware of in the numbers that you're speaking from. Um, essentially in our current kindergarten through fourth grade, we have 89 students that are either TWWS, TWWX, or TWE that live in the
146foster boundaries. And then when we think about the rest of that Haven feeder pattern, we have an additional 68. Now, a number of those are at Kingsley. There are also some at Lincolnwood, some at Oregon, some at Willard. And so that's where in the memo we have some walkability stats. It shows that in fact that that makes, you know, the foster location is closer. And so wherever those strands are in the haven feeder pattern, they will collect from the full Haven feeder pattern. Um what conversations have happened between you know the administration the central office administration the principal of Willard and the Willard tweet community to talk about this transition and why it's happening and what is driving that the so I think to the slide that we put up here you know one, we
147did a lot of engagement around SDRP where we have heard the voices. We know that that Willard community is would prefer to stay at Willard. I think when we think though about the overall health of the program long term and you know when we talk about we've heard from the podium multiple times that no financial impact. The discussion we had here was that it was up to four positions, but I am careful not to say a specific number because we have a number of exceptions that are at play right now. We know from our family survey that about between 75 and 80% of the Bessie Rhodess families said that they're coming to foster. We know that for families that live in foster that are currently in other school or that that live in foster that
148are in other schools that about 75% of them are also saying hey we we want to stay at our school. We also wonder once foster opens and if we have another winter like this >> how long some of those things are going to hold out. So we have to be flexible. We have to be nimble and I don't want to overpromise. I do think it's up to four potential positions. We will know better when we process, we notify people about their schools, their programs, and we hear back around permissive transfers. That's when we'll have a full sense of the section reduction possibilities. Um, your question though, I got sidetracked. So, we've done a lot of engagement with STRP3. Part of the kind of going back into SAP one, SAP 2 was there's also been a
149lot of engagement over time and specifically in SAP 2, we did program engagements with the Willard community at that point as well. And so this is a conversation that's been going on for time. Um, I don't know what else you guys may want to ask. You were involved in some of those engagements and go ahead. >> Uh, when Dr. Beersley say it's been conversations over time. Uh these are conversations that I walked into as a principal coming into district 65 at Willard. There were conversations starting as far back as then uh which is five years now around the potential of the Willard Strand for Twe uh being closed discussions were starting at that time. Um members of the multilingual team came over and held sessions with our school community. Uh Serita came over who was
150heading up at that time talked with our school community and so at the different phases those have been conversations um but more explicitly as the SAP 3 work was happening there was communitywide engagement as well for people who were interested in being a part of that conversation. So for that I will turn it over to our multilingual team to speak to. So, we held SAP 3 um in last spring and we invited different community members. We had educators come in and we kind of went through what were some of the priorities um that we wanted to share and to bring forth to the SDRP process. um and just kind of guide them and hey these are some of the things that as a tweet community we are looking at that we want to work with
151and ideally if we can have you know AB and C this is what it would look like. Um and so we held three different meetings. We looked at different data. We um had different discussions and the team voted or the committee voted on how they would like to rank the different committee or the different priorities. And so, um, Stacy had that up on the previous maybe like two slides before this, um, where we talked about having a double strand. There we go. Um, that ideally a double strand in buildings would be the most beneficial. Um, h having walkable schools was another one. I'm trying to remember. uh and then maintaining the 7030 or the 6733 composition where um we're able to really lead and um develop our dual language program and fitting within that model
152of the 6733. And so these were some of the priorities that were brought up when we were discussing and how they were ranked throughout. And so these were just some of the discussions that we had with our tweet community during our sap three process. Why did we decide to go down from 67 from 5050 to to 6733? >> So what happens is when we start the program, our students who are coming in start as TWWs's. So they might be labeled as an EEL, but as they move through the program, ideally they exit and so they become our TWWXs and are now bilingual in English and in Spanish. And so the numbers kind of switch um as we are going through because And I we want our ELS to exit out of um being labeled as
153an English learner and then they are now proficient. And um so that number kind of switches that way. But as we think of composition, we still would want about uh whether one way or another either 70% of that population within a classroom to be our Spanish speakers or on the other end it could be 70% of that population being English speakers and holding that other 30. Um but ideally generally what happens is our ELS just exit and the numbers kind of shift. So it's not necessarily 5050. >> That's part of the composition of how the program works. >> No, I know. I was always told and had always known that when you go into a TWE program at kindergarten, first grade, the composition should be 50% Spanish speaking and 50% English speaking. and that that's
154where we've that's the target and obviously fluency moves in all directions throughout that pro that process. But I want to make sure that we're not changing that stance and saying, "No, no, now we're going to take 67% Spanish speaking and 33% English- speakaking." Because I think one of the one of the great things about our district and I unfortunately wasn't able to benefit from it because we had a very full kindergarten year when my son started and so we didn't get into the TWEI program but that you know there's a lot of native English speakers that come here wanting to enter into the TWEI program and we've seen a lot of those families not only in the Willard in the in the Willard um boundaries but also you know multicultural families And so if we
155are reducing the number of sections based on, you know, COVID irregularities, which I want to just call out that the fifth grade class and the small fifth grade class is really due to COVID and the kindergarten being one section at Bessie Rhodess is really due to us closing Bessie Roads. it's not necessarily due to um a reduction in the demand for twe. And so if we're now saying that we're going to go 6733, we're really taking the opportunity to bring multiculturalism into our district by encouraging English-speaking students to apply and get a spot in this program as well. And so I just I've seen this shift over time. And what concerns me is that, you know, we operate the TWE program. You know, I think the the board policy that that's being cited here is
156really based upon educational programs and English language learners. But there is a piece of this that is a magnet program and we have operated it as a magnet program and facts and consideration on the website. It's a magnet program. There's a lottery to it. You can apply to it. It's listed under the magnet programs and magnet program placement is a board responsibility. So if we were going to say the ACC program should move and go to DAWs, that's a board decision. if we were going to say um you know so I just want to be clear amongst my co our colleagues like what we're really deciding here what what's being recommended and what we're accepting as the recommendation and it's really around who's responsible and who's accountable to where our programs are placed for magna
157programs and I think the other consideration I just want to make sure we're all aligned on is by moving to 6733 model we're reducing seeing the number of TWE students that would be accepted into that. And I and I'm as as as a beneficial program for enrollment generally, I'm concerned about us without significant cost savings deciding to reduce an attractive program for people that are moving into Evston or live here already. And so, you know, as we look to, you know, accept this as something that the administration has the authority to do, you know, this is a real question of what is this? Is this a mandated program? Is this a is this a magnet program? Is it both? And then who or how do we think about this program in the context of all
158the offerings that we have here? And this is a real asset to us. And by, you know, removing it from a place that obviously has a very strong culture and a very strong community and that we have, you know, a lot of TWWX families that really look at that program as a strength-based multicultural program that helps them maintain their cultural identity in their homes. and we're saying we're going to move those folks over to Foster and we're not asking them if they're coming or not. And that if I'm concerned about this, you know, we we sort of went into this and it was assumed that it was going to happen and we sort of were more focused on school closure numbers and budgets and things like that and now it's coming out that, you know,
159whose decision is this really and how are we making it under what vision? And I want us to really think through and I want to hear what everyone else thinks because I'm I'm I'm concerned about, you know, the deficit model that we're looking at, the inability to attract students to the program. We're not sure what the numbers look like. We haven't asked the Twe Willard families what who's coming. >> Clarify a few things you're saying because >> there are a few things you're saying as you go on that are inaccurate and I just think as you all continue that conversation or started, it should be based off of accurate statements. Um, so one, I think it'll be worthwhile for our team to even look at how many TWE students have ever been declined. That's number
160one. Because your statement was although we're setting up this model, it's never been a goal to not have our TWE students a part of it. That's what makes our D65 program so spectacular is that it looks at both legally. We have to make sure our TWWs and TWWX students have the space, but we also value the TWE students being at the table and being in the classrooms. >> So, that would be a great question for us just to make sure we get that information before you continue with that line of statement. If I can just interject there too. Uh line in the memo um page three specifically reads, "While TW seeks a 5050 balance of native English and Spanish speakers, the multilingual department has defined an acceptable range of up to a 6733 balance >>
161and that has been >> and the way go ahead Dr. >> that has been consistent. It was consistent through SAP 3, but it was also consistent through the SDRP programs committee. And Kim and and Cecilia, if you can explain because you did a really great job in the SDP phase three programs committee of explaining that to the committee is like kind of what is this range? This isn't a shift. This isn't all of a sudden we have new numbers. This is what does a program model look like? So if can you kind of hearken back to when we were working with the programs committee and how you explained that to us? >> So I mean ideally we want to keep a 5050. We're not saying we're going to shrink it or to move families, but
162what happens is as students are moving through K through five, you have some families who decide, you know, my student has an IEP and what's happening at this moment or dual language does not seem like the best program. So, I'm going to pull them out and give them different services. So, as they go through, that number switches. It's not as they move through into fifth grade, we say, "Okay, well, now only 70% are allowed to be TWWS's and 30% TWEs." We start with that in kindergarten with that 50/50, but as they move through different circumstances, we have a handful of our TWWs's who might move if they're newcomers and, you know, they find a different place to go to. They can't afford to live in Evston. They're moving in and out. And so we keep
163that flexibility for those different circumstances. And so I think that's just one of the pieces that when we look at the research and we're looking at the different programs nationally and what has been stated having 6733 as our kind of the the ends the book ends of um that percentages that that's what we're working with and we try to keep it as close to the 5050 as possible. But knowing that research has shown having it as a 7030 or 6733 is uh like the threshold for us is what we are trying to keep within the district. >> And I think an example of how that was used also in registration this year like as we got close to the end close to the start of school we had one particular strand that was significantly underenrolled.
164We had been holding spaces for TWWS students because we were hoping to fill that strand. We were a able to because multilingual had given us this guidance, we were able to say, "Okay, we'll still hold two seats for native Spanish speakers that move in, but because of the range of 67 to 33, we can move a few additional TWE students into the TWE program." And so that created more opportunity because they've established this range. And so coming at this from a from not a deficit mindset either of like oh we we we have to we have to narrow and limit. We are looking at how do we continue to maintain program fidelity and offer opportunities for as many students as possible. So that idea is 5050 but like there has to be ranges and the
165multilingual team is extremely diligent in working with registration and with schools to make sure that they are maintaining a balance with these in these classrooms of TWWS, TWWX and TWE. So it's it's not like we just flip the numbers. This has been researchbased consistently in their in their in their presentations. Um Amy couldn't be here tonight but but really every single time they come to the table it is heavily based in research. >> I would also note too our current enrollment we have 795 students in twe the capacity when we are at seven strands with essentially that 90% cap cap on our debt guidelines is 1008. So we have space to grow the program with these seven strands. So the reason why I'm pointing out the change is because point 2 on the slide says
1666733 whereas it was always my understanding that we entered in at 5050. So that's why I'm talking about the change. I understand what you're saying about the shift but I think the question still to my colleagues. Was there something else you wanted to point out that I was incorrect about? >> Yes. The other piece was just the prioritization around the walkable schools, which has always been a key component and making sure that the program is set up in spaces where it prioritizes those TWWs and TWWX students so that they have that walkable experience, which is what moving it to foster school would do for those students. Um, as a person who is a member of the Willard community, it's a difficult conversation. It's a painful conversation. um it doesn't take away from what that feels
167like for the families in that space or the students in that space. And also as we're looking at the shifting of our boundary lines and the shifting of a new school opening, what does it look like to make sure that those students also have the opportunity to have what other foster students would also have and being able to go to school in their school community versus continuing to be bust out. And with our magnet programming such as our tweet program, um that's always a potential because we know we have students coming from across the district. It's not magnet programming, but for our tweet program rather, we know that there is the busing piece that ties into it based off of where the school uh students are if it's not at their particular home school. Um
168but in this particular situation giving the program at Foster allows those students to return to that space. >> I think the last closure too I know the public comment speaker spoke to magnet but we did consult with legal counsel and specifically they directed us to the policies that we shared with you tonight for program placement in this situation understanding it was the two-way immersion program. >> Yeah. Which is why I corrected myself. It is not a magnet program. So, we've got 89 students that are coming. I'm sorry. So, we know that there's 89 roads families that live in the fifth ward that live in the foster boundary, >> right? >> That are in currently in kindergarten through fourth grade would be in first through fifth next year. >> And we know there's 32 TWWs or
169TWWX students that are in W five that currently go to Willard. >> The I'm going to have to walk across tables at the moment, but >> Okay. I have some data here. >> The So, I'm sorry. Repeat your what you just said. >> So, there's 32 Well, I guess there's if we're not talking about fifth grade, there's 30 students in Ward that that live in the foster boundary that currently go to Willard. I will pull up that table. >> While Stacy's doing that, do we have any comments from other board members? Yeah, I mean again I I just for me, you know, again this is when we look at a program, this is a systems level responsibility that we have as as as a board like I I want to see and as a former
170bilingual educator, right? One of the things I'd see in programs uh is parents pulling their students out um around third, fourth, fifth grade when tests start to matter, right? Uh and this would be our a lot of our TWE uh and some some of our TWWX folks. Um so that that's always been an issue, right? in regards to consist and again 50/50 is the ideal but unfortunately we don't live in an ideal world and life happens and kids get pushed out families get pushed out because they you know for whatever reason you know not able to to to to live in a community they immigrate whatever that at the end of the day what I want to see with this particular program my vision has always been that we provide a high quality program that
171is taking to where our students where again we're legally required to have these services are and to provide a pathway to a seal of biiteracy that leads all the way up to the high school. Uh and that all of it all all of that's in the works. So, we're, as you see here, again, we're talking about how this is going to be we we're expanding to the middle school, right? Making an ideal, we're really trying to idealize and optimize um a high quality gem of a program in the school district. But to or in order to do that, again, I I I wish we could have two-way immersion all across our schools, but we still have this demographic challenge before us. Now, can we do a lot better in regards to recruiting? Absolutely. maybe we
172could try to do something, but in the meantime, what we're facing in regards to the the lower kindergarten cohort that's coming into Tweet, it's just not sustainable and and and unfortunately, but but again, what we're hearing here today from from the administration is that there is this flexibility. Um, and I believe that again, we for Latinos are the fastest growing one of the fastest growing populations here in Evston for the past, you know, 10 years. So there may be a a time where we will actually have to maybe bring back a strand, but this I see given us gives us this this flexibility to be able to do that to meet the demand and meet the needs of a program that again needs to be given to the folks who actually really need it where
173they are at and where they're at right now are primarily in the second ward, in the seventh ward, the eighth ward, and the fifth ward. That's where they're, you know, so so so so so so I mean yeah I mean it's again I don't want to see I mean again it it breaks my heart to because again I've been to Willard uh and it's an incredible community. Um but but again at this point in time we really need to optimize a program with the numbers that we have knowing that maybe in the future there will be some flexibility and opportunity to be able to expand it. um if our numbers continue to grow and if the need is there, right? So So that's again I know this this is challenging. It's tough. I again I
174don't again I just I wish I wish we could have two-way immersion across the school district and I've talked about this before like I I would love us to be like Shamberg. Shamberg does like different language tracks. They do, you know, two-way immersion in Spanish. They do Japanese. They have like two or three languages they do tracks on. But we're not there yet, right? Um, but that's something again that we could talk about as we figure all of these things out in regards to the our programming, right? When we get all our reports back and I think we're going to get monitored for our program this year by is that right? >> So, so that that's so we'll learn some more things there as well. So there, you know, there'll be an audit of the
175program as well. So there'll be even more information that again we'll be getting in regards to reports, master facilities plan, the you know the forensic audit, all this stuff that we can work off to really really continue to optimize this systemwide program that again should be benefiting uh again the students that it it we're legally required to benefit. I just want to acknowledge there are like at least TWWS and TWWX students that live in the sixth and seventh ward in the Willer boundary. That's not 60. It's not 89. Um but those students, you know, are the same number of TWWS TWWX fifth word students that currently go to Willard. So it's the same split today. Um, go ahead Andrew, you were something. >> So, my my um input on this is um I'm looking at
176it in terms of opening foster strong and having those two strands of twe together have been proven to be an optimal way to implement the program. And if the program grows, then we can grow it. But at this point, I want to see the the program open strong at Foster. That's that's my input at this point. >> Should we find out how many students from Willard are going to go? >> That would be that. So, one of the things I do want to point out um and Kim confirmed came up with 33 for your number like the in regards to so if seven is the right number of twe strands districtwide. If we do not stick to that seven strands districtwide and go to eight, we are adding costs to the district. Okay, this is,
177you know, there will be costs added to the district and so when we, you know, and I kind of acknowledge I acknowledge in my presentation like there are when we there are families that live in that Willard feeder pattern, but we do need to make decisions about where how how much of a program to offer and where to offer that program in a way that can be long-term and can be fiscally responsible. And so there, you know, the we data we've been sharing is, you know, 35 students up in Willard. Um we've got 20 in Kingsley. There are kids that do have to travel it, but we have a density in the fifth ward that it makes sense to have the two strands there. >> One more comment. >> Yeah. Um, so, um, yeah, this
178is really hard. Um, and it it compounds, um, you know, this builds off the history around Bessie Rhodess in ways that are challenging. Um, you said that you'd consulted with legal, right? So, that actually lays out very clearly like, you know, our guard rails here. I think Maria, you've raised a concern that I think just from a governance issue is important for us to bring before the board. I know that we've struggled with this as board members in relationship to other magnet programs that we've we've talked about recently and so I think we have to nail this down as you're raising. Um but um yeah, that's just something we need to do moving forward. Oh, >> so as I'm um so I think we often times we when we create programs we have what we
179think our numbers are and then one thing I would like for us to do is have uh um indicators in some sense to say like hey we're going to do two strands of tweet here if we get x number of kids. My understanding looking at this is there's 157 um in the fifth in the haven feeder pattern. So I'm not counting Bessie Rose students who are not in the Haven feeder pattern. There's 157 twe population here which to me is just barely above one track. Um so to get to the second track that's to me where it becomes a magnet. Right. I think the the first track is is a required programming. The second track when we're in and is where we're finding kids from other places to bring in. So, one question around just
180just to be clear, Bessie Rose students are not can they go to Haven when they do a language, they're able to they do not have to return to their feeder pattern. My understanding initially was they want they were to return to their middle school feeder pattern. So, they can stay at Haven. >> They will have the opportunity to continue into the middle school dual language program at Haven. >> Okay. I also want to point out the um 157 doesn't include incoming kindergarten that we don't know. That just includes students that we are aware of that are enrolled in programs right now. So that'll likely be higher >> and the capacity on a twe is one third. >> Right. But it's we have fourth graders who would then out. So the so the assumption is we
181would have more kindergarters than we would have fourth graders >> or fifth graders that are leaving. >> Right. Yeah. So okay. Okay. I just um so and the numbers what is I know there's in the in the um um in the bylaws there's a number that triggers when you do a second what's the number of students you need in order to trigger a second a second track >> a second section >> second section >> the so the >> it changes by is this the contract language >> yes >> it changes by grade so K2 is what 20 >> K2 is 23 >> No I didn't mean in that I thought there was a number with respect So we have a procedure that we have defined for before school starts. >> Okay. >> Um where we
182take a look and essentially and I depending on numbers we may close sections or we could potentially open but the closure has been if there's 12 or fewer. >> Okay. >> And that's keep you just basically double to get to the duck time. So in reality, we're going to know in February uh what Willard families are doing, what Bessie Rhodess, what families really are choosing to do, and we will know what our what our actual numbers are uh with respect to here and then what happens because I know we're very close to the 60 to the split in terms of TWE E, TES, and TEX, the demographics of who lives in the fifth ward. Um there's not a lot of TWE that lives in the fifth ward. what are the conversations around um which is
183really important to me how we're thinking about um intentionally um engaging African-American families um because if you're talking about increasing enrollment of twe unless you're you know of course you're going to the Willer families and everyone else is coming over the foster you're engaging um foster families is there a plan because I know the numbers what is the percent of African- Americans who were in twe districtwide it's like five or 6%. >> We would have to look that up too. >> Okay. I think it's like five or six%. So that would have to be an intentional um intentional. So that's where then I'll leave this alone where I go back to culture like starting off and saying intentionally the culture of Twe in this place is understanding Twe differently. If foster it has to be
184designed around engaging black families in Twe because of the demographics versus if I'm building it around Willard and Bessie Rose families, no disrespect, that's a different population. And so you build the culture around who's there. And then as those families, Bessie Rose families age out now you're like, "Oh, how do we bring in our African-American families who weren't nec might not necessarily have been?" I'm not saying that's how you're doing. >> I want to reiterate though that roads is over half foster families. >> I'm not speaking our most diverse twe program. >> I'm speaking of the 78 Bessie Rose not in the Haven feeder pattern. I'm viewing the Bessie Rose foster families as foster families, right? As not necessarily as Bessie Rose. So, I'm speaking particularly to the 78 Bessie Rose families, which is a
185sizable half of a twe half of a half of a twe uh track. I think it all can be done. I think this is a unique opportunity to fuse all this together. So, I'm not I'm just just intentionality of understanding how that track is full given who's there, who's coming in, and who's going out. So, I think this is an opportunity to add some vision into the plan in terms of how it's going to move forward, especially as the Bessie Roads students move up through the grade levels and then the fact that they can have a seamless experience into Haven I think is really important. Can I clarif clarify I use the word problem and I just want to just name the dynamic that I was trying to get problem is very vague and I
186don't want to leave that messy is just that um I would invite further conversation about how we want to relate to um specific programs that we understand to be magnet um and so that we can work well uh with Dr. Turner and and you know so that I just want to clarify what I meant by a problem I think. >> So that would be something that we as a board would >> it's a board policy >> pay attention to >> it's a board policy issue >> give further consideration to >> clear that. >> Yeah. I think I think one of the things I just want to name is is that >> you know the the we've been sitting here for many months now listening to the presentations on the scenarios and we've been hearing from
187Willard Twe families and it feels very much like this program wasn't was considered as not as humanized as some of the other decisions that we've made as a board. You know, they they ca it despite what the conversations were in SAP 2 and SAP 3. Um, you know, a lot of that work was unfinished. I think the the two strand model of twe um has many benefits to be able to flex up and flex down. I want to acknowledge that. I think the community piece is also very true, especially we see with with Washington. Um, but I think the Willard community is also very strong and they've created a cohesive program within their school to incorporate a lot of the intercultural and diverse relationships that we want to see. And I want to make sure
188that we honor that and we bring it to Foster because that's a really key component of success. And the worst thing that could happen is that we treat them as an afterthought and we don't honor the community that they've built because it's important. It's very important. And when you're building a new school and you're and you're coming with new families, having strong culture and strong community is very important. and and I I would like for the administration to sit with the foster family or the Willard Twe families along with the principal and hear what their wishes are and encourage them to come because I think when I was there when this first came out as their liaison I went and what I heard was we're not being counted we're not being talked do and we're
189being considered as numbers on the page and that feels very reminiscent to a school that you know we were we we that was closed and has now been you know I think not not considered and the families that have not been considered there and I don't I want us to do better. I think that's something we can all agree on and move forward with that because that applies not only to Willard, it applies to Bessie Roads. >> Yes. >> So, it's it's something that needs to happen with both those communities. So, I think that's something we can agree on. >> Great. And I welcome the work with the administration, >> Dr. McCoy as the lead board liaison to sit with Willard Tweet families and talk about this. I did have a clarifying question for Dr.
190Pinker. Um, when you stated when you asked about the percentage of black students and what that engagement for them looks like, were you referring to the black students in TWE who would be at Foster or the black students? >> I'm saying that the I'm saying the demographics of Foster is majority black, Latino, 15% as my understanding, white. Um and even few of those white students are already in tweet. So as over time as the as the um Bessie Rose families age out and if it if we're viewing Foster as a neighborhood school then the increased numbers of black families the assumption is they would have to be enticed to go into um Twe and my understanding district-wide that's not a it's like probably 5% of of TWE >> TWW district twe TWW what TWW or
191what E but but I'm saying just general the population is only 5%. Which means there would have to be an intentional effort recruitment particularly if there's also ACC reimagining. So, I'm going to say how do we how do we embrace that challenge? Um, and knowing it will it will be a challenge because the the percentage as as it is now wouldn't lead you to think that that's what black families would uh would choose. So, that was just a a question just have we have we thought about which I imagine who the principal is with her background on this that she has. So um just saying it's just something that we just have to own and it's a unique thing to own and it could be a model everywhere about how do you how do you
192actually do it? So I think it's exciting to take on the challenge to try to do that >> and we have in our conversations with principal battle and AP ernvall it has been after we come back from winter break to engage the willer community and to have conversations with them um and looks looking at additional ways in which we can support and really the impact but also how we can be intentional in that engagement with that shift to foster and then as we get the additional information for families that commit to foster also building in that community engagement. So the foster work is continuing forward. Um there's a family community event coming up in January for that. And so we're just continuing to try to get families to come a part of that so that
193they can feel that connection as they make whatever decisions they make. >> And as the liaison I would love to be supportive in in that conversation. >> Okay. >> Our last discussion item is us >> before we move on. I just want to close this out so we clear. We engaging families district is moving forward on what we said that we're moving forward is is what I'm clear on as the next steps. So we will engage families bring the humanization to it which is what we already said stated that we were going to do connect with the leadership do all the things and then we'll move forward. So just wanted to be clear that that's we're closing that out. >> Yeah. Can we just have in February come back with what the numbers are in
194terms of what parents have so we're all clear on what families have chosen to do what because we're assumptions about what Willer families are going to do um what you know what Bessie Rose families are going to do because a large large percentage of them can go back to their you know to their um other feeder pattern. So it just be great to know so we're all clear what we're actually designing for once people make those choices. Can I actually ask can I ask one thing and and I know the time is short and I think one of the things I'm feeling here is that we should have done that engagement months ago and and I guess I would just ask like if you can extend an opportunity to have a conversation with the Willard
195Tweet families before we go out on break. >> I would make myself available for that. So talk to clo talk to principal battle see what's possible but it should have happened months ago and this is like a smack in the face for them and I don't want them to go out on Christmas break on on winter break with this sort of thing looming over without the ability to kind of have somewhat of a restorative conversation. It just leaves a lot of time. So consider it >> and if the if it's difficult at this point to do the scheduling >> to just have just have a plan. Let them know. Yeah. Just have a plan. Have a definite >> we want to be able to have a plan. We want to be able to communicate out.
196We know be an opportunity for people to come together. >> There are community partners that we also want to invite in. So we have multiple opportunities. So doing that this week is not feasible re realistically speaking. Um after winter break we would be able to do it and have multiple times that people would be able to come to the table. So it's not rushed. If we did it this week I don't think it would be >> and it's also it also increases accessibility. So for us to rush through this we haven't set up Zoom meetings. We haven't double checked for interpretation. We haven't engaged our our partner. I mean, we want to make sure that we're going to approach this not in a rushed manner and that's that's that's that's really quick and we've got
197some value partners we'd like to bring in that worked with the community. >> So, Dr. Smith, I'm looking at the slide and it says tomorrow there'll be some communication with the students. >> Yeah, that is set up already. And then how and then how will what will follow up after that or is it just a notification to teachers and students or >> and then there's >> uh so the communication that families will and staff will get tonight. Principal Battle breaks down what the support plan will look like throughout the course of the week for staff tomorrow as well as for the students throughout the week and then things that um and working with the staff alongside us looking at what we will also have in place when we come back from winter break. And I
198also just want to name that this is the opportunity to have those processing conversations with family this week is not due to a lack of planning. It's due to this being separated out from the SDRP decision. That's what makes the timing of this look different than what would have been before. And so that's why I just want to name the community engagement pieces were a part of the SAP 3 work um because it was a bigger picture. It was a bigger picture of the entire SAP 3 component. And so our engagement as we're looking at moving forward to be intentional with that processing component. We'll make sure that we're working with principal battle and AP for that after break. >> If I could just ask Nicole too. Um, you requested information in February. >> After
199you do the >> the best point would be mid-March. >> That's fine. I'm sorry. After you did I'm sorry. After you after the normal uh process. >> Yeah. I just wanted to make sure. So that's that's the window. That makes sense. Okay. >> Just one this date. I'm just in my I'm having a flashback to it was 12 right before we went out to break when Bessie Rhodess families were told. So, I'm just curious about why right before winter break um as opposed to >> and I'm sure there's a reason cuz now you know I'm going home, my school's closing. I mean, they probably is there a reason why now as opposed to after break. >> I I'll speak to that a little bit. You know, it's this is probably not where any of what
200any of us would want to be talking about this week. The reality is this SDRP process, we were hoping to get to the decision on November 17th. We have moved forward with these conversations and with some kind of degree of hope or wondering and we are now at a point where we need to literally I'm having the team begin to place kids. We need decisions. And so as unfortunate as it was to have to have this conversation tonight, we needed to know where we were. We had to be able to say that to get the wheels going for next year. Otherwise, we'd be missing that target in early February and people wouldn't have a month to make their decision around permissive transfers, which we saw as being critically important. So, it's unfortunate because it's a
201procedural decision, but it is an unfortunate reality of where we are right now. And so, it's not when we want to do this, but we felt like it was needed to communicate if that's how we were going to move. And that was part of the zap 3 which is like if there's going to be a change let's get out there let's communicate let's manage and let's support and to Maria's comment we now need to do some work to do that well. >> Okay thank you >> and eventually so these slide HR timelines as well and we're talking about conversations need to be had with the willer staff at some stage in the game so and we're definitely behind schedule so to prepare for these things. So I second uh Dr. beard delay um statement. I'll
202>> also say that we've heard from families that like having some having a decision will allow them to start kind of that closure and healing process. And so the goal is to give them that clarity. >> So we're clear about next steps. >> All right. Um school year 27 calendar. >> That's me as well. Um, good evening. Tonight we're presenting the draft 2026 2027 school year calendar for discussion with the goal of a vote at the January committee of the whole meeting. Feedback on this draft calendar was solicited from the five bargaining groups as well as school administrators, district 202, and the cabinet team. Um, just want to provide at a high level this is very closely aligned to last year's calendar. It aligns with the district 202 calendar for fall, winter, and spring break
203as well as the start of summer school. Um that works for the last day of 8th grade as well as the in for incoming freshman students to do summer school. Um the two changes I do want to note is that Rashashana is observed on a weekend next year. So that is not an a non-attendance day. Um but that non-attendance day is instead observed for election day which is in line with what ISBY recommends and what we've done in the past for federal elections. So uh next is action item approval of tax levy. >> I move I move that the board of education adopt the 2025 tax levy. Second >> questions. >> Wymer. >> Yes. >> Wilkins. >> Yes. >> In >> Hernandez, >> yes. >> Optek, >> yes. >> Anderson, >> yes. Resolution. Action. Resolution
204authorizing a supplemental tax levy. I move that the board of education adopt a resolution authorizing the supplemental tax levy to pay the principle of in of and interest on outstanding limited bonds of the district. >> Second. >> Wymer. >> Yes. >> Wilkins. >> Yes. >> Pinker. >> Yes. >> Hernandez. >> Yes. >> Anderson. >> Yes. action resolution authorizing the issuance of taxable tax anticipation warrants. >> I just have a quick question about this before we proceed. Um Tamara, when are we going to get um does this does this this resolution um incorporate the new timeline or now the known timeline of the uh property taxes being issued? I know there was a question around that timing piece and these warrants. >> So, we don't have a timeline from the county. What has happened is the
205bills were issued to everyone. The county has received money. They have not distributed any of those receipts to any taxing bodies in Cook County and they have no timeline for doing so. So, that is why we need to issue another round of tax anticipation warrants. It's frustrating for everyone in the county. Um there are some taxing bodies that are in better financial positions than not. Um but it's extremely frustrating for those taxing bodies like us who do not have the cash reserves to wait until the county um gets their what we understand it to be is this is tied to the software migration that happened. And so the first thing was they could not figure out how to get the bills out. And now it's we can't get the money out to the taxing bodies.
206>> Good god. Okay. >> Uh I move that the board of education adopt the resolution authorizing the issuance of not to exceed $65 million tax bill tax anticipation warrants uh in anticipation of the collection of taxes levied for the year 2025 by the board of education of the district for educational purposes and authorizing the sale of said warrants the purchase or thereof. >> Second. And I have a quick question. Um, and I did not warn you about this, Tamara. So, um, so what does this cost us as a district in interest and fees? I think it's just for us to keep in mind as we're looking at the future and 90 days cash on hand being a bare minimum. Um, what would this cost us? >> I will work with our municipal advisor to get
207that full cost. It really depends on when the warrants are sold, what that interest rate is. It also depends on how quickly we pay it back. So the longer we hold the money, the more interest costs we incur as well. >> Okay. >> So, and again, right now, we have no idea what the county is going to do. They have not indicated at all when they plan to release this money. And we learned on Friday of last week that um there was a meeting with the technology committee I believe at the county and they did not even have this on the agenda. >> Yeah. >> So >> that's information that I'll ask in a month or two hopefully. Maybe a couple months. >> Yeah. Is there a second? >> Second. Okay, >> question. >> Wymer,
208>> yes. >> Wilin, >> yes. >> Hanker, >> yes. >> Hernandez, >> yes. >> Updike, >> yes. >> Anderson, >> yes. Uh, action approval for the engagement of the law firm of Linbarger, Goen, Blair, and Samson. I move the board engage the firm Lion Barker, Goen, Blair, and Samson to undertake collection actions on behalf of the board and district against former superintendent Dr. Devon Horton related to his default of a repayment agreement with the board and other collection actions for amounts owing the district in accordance with the laws firm's engagement letter to the district presented to the board. >> Second. question. >> Wymer, >> yes. >> Wilkins, >> yes. >> Pinker, >> yes. >> Hernandez, >> yes. >> Optic, >> yes. >> Anderson, >> yes. >> Action approval of district 65's participation in the TEC
209Cooperative Student Data Privacy Alliance. I move that the board approve the district 65's participation in the tech cooperative student data privacy alliance take the vote >> yes >> Wilkins >> yes >> Hernandez >> yes action approval of the application for the FY2026 round one school maintenance project grant I move that the board approve the application submission for the FY2026 round one school maintenance project grant. >> Second >> Wymer. >> Yes. >> Wilkins. >> Yes. >> Pinker. >> Yes. >> Hernandez. >> Yes. >> Updike. >> Yes. >> Anderson. >> Yes. Action. Approval of the SY27 student fees. >> I move that the board Where am I? I move that the board approve the recommended SY27 student fees. >> Second call. >> Wymer. >> Yes. >> Wilkins. >> Yes. >> Pinker. >> Yes. >> Hernandez. >> Yes.
210>> Updike. >> Yes. >> Anderson. >> Yes. >> Action. Approval of intergovernmental agreements. >> Ask for um explanation of what this is. Jenny. Can you come up and explain this intercontinental agreement uh park agreement for special ed services uh for Park School between Creek? >> Thank you. >> So Park School is a district school. Um, we have students that come from other districts that attend Park School. Because they're from another district, we need to inter governmental agreement that the districts are agreeing that it's okay that a student from another district is attending one of our schools. >> So, a student from Cremon is coming here. >> Yes. >> Correct. Not I want to clarify again. The misconception is we're sending somebody there. We're not. >> Yeah. That's what I wanted to hear. Clarification. >> Okay.
211I move that the board approve the intergovernmental agreements for special education services between Evson Scopi School District 65 and Creek Mon School District 210U. >> I second. >> Wymer. >> Yes. >> Wilkins. >> Yes. >> Pinker. >> Yes. >> Hernandez. >> Yes. >> Optek. >> Yes. >> Anderson. >> Yes. Action. Approval of award of taxi services for student transportation bid. >> I want to chat about this for a minute. Um, did everyone get a chance to read the memo? >> Okay. So, it's my understanding, and I'm just going to go quickly, so Tamara, if I say something wrong, please jump in. Um, it's my understanding that part of the reason why Bright Lift is being chosen in this case recommended is because our contract with Bright Lift extends only through the end of January. And
212so there is a short amount of time for other providers to in essence staff up or have their get get vehicles. The difference in some of the bids that you'll see [laughter] specifically if you look at the first one is about a million dollars. And so I want us to consider the possibility of extending the Brightlift contract through the end of fiscal year 25. Wait, sorry, fiscal year 26. And um the million-doll delta to me is a significant number that I'd like to better understand. And it is my impression after talking to Tamara that part of the reason why the bright lift is recommended is because of the timeline and the shity of their ability to p provide services. So to be clear about the dollar amount, the dollar amount that is listed [clears throat]
213on the bid tabulation form for the first responder is based on the number of vehicles they currently have in their fleet and not the number of vehicles needed to service our contract. when compared to Bright Lift. There's that's a big part of why that difference is so much because we could only calculate the cost based on the vehicles that they have in their fleet right now versus the vehicles that they could get in their fleet. Additionally, um when I engaged with the company and some asking some additional questions to do my due diligence, um I learned that they did not have the full staff needed right now to be able to service our contract. So, keeping those things in mind with um are they fully staffed right now with it being December 15th, would they
214be able to hire background check, etc. all of those things to get staff hired um as well as secure the vehicles. The vehicles are I believe are easier to secure than going through the process of finding people and then onboarding those people as well. So those were two key uh important points there. When I look down the rows too of the different [clears throat] bids, the aid fees, the special equipment fees um for Bright Lift were higher than some of the other ones. Anyway, what I wanted to bring up is that part of the reason for this recommendation is the timeline. So we can move it or you know and that um it might not save us another million dollars but for the number of children that are going um you know we may want
215to consider another um opportunity for transportation for in district students. I don't know. So >> what are you you're proposing that we so we we extended our Bright Lift contract? we did in order to competitively bid it because it had never been competitively bid and we had gone from 300,000 to 5.5 million to 2.8 and we've been coming down due to the great work of folks here. But >> and I want to just acknowledge for the record that it was not competitively be it under my leadership. >> No, no, no. I just want to be be clear on >> Well, I mean I think you were operating under >> other guidelines. So I'm not >> existing stuff. >> No better do better. >> Yeah. >> No better do better. So, we had asked that it
216be competitively bid because it never it hadn't been. >> The timeline that we set forth has certain considerations. >> And so, you're pro so I just want to make sure I clearly understand what you're you're suggesting. we stay with bright on the extended contract and push back the start date of a of a of a new >> so we want to rebid this at some other point but extend the current contract that we have with them is that what you're trying to say >> so yes >> in short >> so not move into a long-term contract >> not move into a long-term contract because of this short notice and I >> and then we rebided >> and I just want to name that I didn't think through the potential of that short-term turnaround on the
217bid to contract services when we were talking about renewing the contract on a temporary basis. Now I know better. So if we end up in this situation, I think it's the timing is an issue. >> Tamara, can you chime in because I know when we got ready to um do this extension and we were in conversation with the board legal counsel, we could only do and correct me if I'm wrong. I I thought that the extension could only be done for a a set amount of time and then like it was a rationale as to why we couldn't extend it longer. I feel like maybe I'm off. So, there was some rationale there. Um, the conversation that you're referring to is related to um the size, excuse me, the size of the contract um and
218the fact that it was not and had not been competitively bid. So that's what that uh is relating to. >> I just want to make sure that that was also taken into consideration and we thought about that too. >> Yeah. So is it fair to understand the the first line as u an outlier here because it actually looks like the bright lift contract is pretty competitive looking at all of the options here. Can you help me understand this? >> Sure. So there um again that the total that is there is calculated on I believe 35 vehicles that they have um right now compared to the 55 that we currently have. in the contract. So, if we were to normalize that, they would come in lower than Bright Lift. But again, taking into account all of
219the things that I mentioned as far as um the staffing and uh what I didn't mention was the providing the continuity of services to our families. So, um they're per trip rates. I'm trying to make this bigger so I can see it. Um some of their rates are uh lower for sure, but to your question about Bright Lift being competitive, um they do provide competitive pricing. The other three companies who are fully staffed and do have the um full number of vehicles in the fleet are the Yellow Bus Group, First Alt, and Everdriven. Everdriven and Bright Lift are very close in terms of price. The other two were much higher than those two. >> Tamara, >> yes. >> What would there be a risk of getting a bid that would be higher if we delay
220the process and then come back to it? >> That could happen. What I would not recommend would be turning around and rebidding this within a month. I would say it would have to be a period of four to five months. The other side of that would be um negotiating the extension with Bright Lift if they would be willing to do so and then where that pricing could come in as well because right now we only have the contract with them through January 31st. Do we think that there was a limitation in the number of people that responded to the RFP based on their current availability to service the contract? >> Um, I doubt it. We got seven respondents. I was not expecting to get that many. Okay. To be honest with you, um, that's a
221a good number of responses to come in for transportation bid. Are there any other downsides to um trying to extend the Bright Lift contract and then looking to start a contract based on our fiscal year timeline for next year that I'm not considering? >> I can't think of any. No. [clears throat] Okay. Anyone else want to talk about this? >> So, I I guess can I I'll try and ask a question. Um, you said something about continuity of service, Tamara. So, we're talking about a provider that this level contract would be far above anything that they've done. Um, is that right? Am I hearing that right >> for the um the first line? >> Yeah, >> correct. Correct. >> Did they say they don't do this >> there? We do have their um in their
222bid documents, they shared some level of service that has been provided to um other schools. So >> at this level though, if they don't have the vehicles, that's that I'm trying to understand. not having the vehicles, not having the staffing. >> They have provided some service to Chicago public schools. I believe their contract with CPS ended summer of 2025, I believe. I cannot recall off the top of my head how many vehicles were involved in that contract. They currently have some smaller contracts with some private schools right now. um but not a single contract right now that has 55 vehicles available and transporting the number of students that we have. >> That does bring up some concerns in terms of continuity and then being able to really meet the requirements we have. I'm not sure
223how to test that out. Um >> I'm not sure if we want to test it out. >> Yeah. That's my concern. This is your recommendation, Tamara? >> Uh, yes. I put all of my thoughts in the memo. So, that's >> Yes. >> Okay. Uh, I move that the board approve the award the award of taxi services for student transportation bid to BL brokers brightift. >> Second >> Wymer. >> Yes. >> Wilkins. >> Yes. >> Inkard. >> Yes. >> Hernandez. >> Yes. >> Upg? >> No. >> Anderson. >> Yes. Okay, next is the consent agenda. I move that the board approve the items as outlined in the consent agenda. Personnel appointments, leaves, and separations. November 2025 board of education meeting minutes. December 2025, bills payable. >> Second. >> Wymer. >> Yes. >> Wilkins. Yes, >> Hernandez.
224>> Yes, >> Anderson. >> Yes. With no further business, I adjourn this meeting at 9:22 p.m. I'll say >> I. Thank you.