2026-06-16 Arlington ISD Regular Meeting of the Board of Trustees

001Good evening. I will reconvene in open session this meeting of the Arlington Independent School District Board of Trustees for June 16, 2026 at 6:49 p.m. Thank you all for joining us tonight. Our board meetings are open to the public and we welcome everyone. We appreciate your participation in public education. While our meetings are open to the public, this is a meeting and we have business to conduct. Disruptions were not will not be permitted. Anyone who disrupts the meeting or speaks while others are speaking may be asked to leave or escorted by the security attending the meeting. We welcome civic input, but insist that we must remain respectful and civil. Thank you for your cooperation. We'll begin with tonight's pledges led by Trustee Larry Mike. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of

002America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. >> Honor the Texas flag to the Texas one state and indivisible. Please join me in a moment of silence. Thank you. With no speakers registered for the appointment portion of tonight, we will go ahead and move on to appointments. Following appointments, we will take a brief recess for photos and celebrations in the boardroom lobby. and we hope you will join us. Do I have a motion to ratify the appointments of the individuals discussed in closed session? >> So moved. >> Thank you. I have a motion from Trustee Willbanks. Do I have a second? >> Second from Miss Richardson. Please vote. >> Thank you. The motion passes unanimously. Dr. Smith >> trustees. It's my honor to

003introduce our new assistant principal at Joey Rodriguez Junior High, Riley Russell Brutin. Riley brings more than 10 years of experience in Arlington ISD, serving as a teacher, department leader, student behavior support interventionist at Carter Junior High School and at Venture, and most recently as an interim assistant principal at Rodriguez Junior High. She holds a master of education in educational administration from Lamar University and has led work in restorative practices, student support systems, teacher coaching, and campuswide behavior improvement. We are thrilled to welcome Riley into this leadership role and are confident her passion for students and commitment to excellence will help Rodriguez continue its upward trajectory. Congratulations, Riley. >> Thank you, President McMurro. members of the board and Dr. Smith, thank you so much for a wonderful opportunity to serve the students of Arlington ISD at

004Rodriguez Junior High. As a product of Arlington ISD myself, being able to give back to the community that supported me in my formative years is something I consider a great honor and a responsibility I'm genuinely grateful for. Another big thank you to Jared Zh and Dr. Sher Dala for selecting me for a role that means so much to me and that I've strived to for quite a while. I wanted to also take a moment to thank my leadership mentors Greg Meeks and Jackie Parsons at Venture High School for the years of opportunities, patient guidance, and wisdom as I grew in my leadership journey. During my time at Venture under their leadership, I learned how to support unique needs of atrisisk students and I'm excited to apply that knowledge to the work that I'll be doing

005at Rodriguez Junior High. The work that will be happening at Rodriguez this year is super important not only for the district but for the students uh that we serve. It is my hope that my impact on students and staff will be positive, longlasting, and empowering. I'm so grateful to the staff for opening me with or for welcoming me with open arms as I had the privilege to serve as interim this past semester. I'm excited to continue working with them and continue to grow alongside them. They are an inspirational group of educators who value our students and hold them to high standards of excellence. Thank you again for the opportunity and I hope to represent you well. Trustees, it's now my honor to introduce Michael Ball is the assistant principal at Joey Rodriguez Junior High. Well,

006I may have messed this up because I see West Ball. So, West Ball has 15 years I think it's the same guy. So, West Ball has 15 years of experience at Shackleford Junior High in Arlington ISD where he has served as a social studies teacher and coach. He holds a master of education in educational administration from Lamar University and brings experience in campus operations, PLC facilitation, PBIS implementation, restorative practices, student discipline, and teacher coaching. We're excited for Wes as he takes this next step in his leadership journey and look forward to the experienced, dedication, and student centered leadership he will bring to the campus community. Congratulations, Wes. Uh, thank you all so much. President McMurro, members of the board, and Dr. Smith. Uh, thank you all so much for allowing me to say a few

007words. Uh, before I talk about how incredibly excited I am about serving Rodriguez, I want to first recognize my family that's back here tonight. My wife Carly, my beautiful daughters, Landry and Ree, and then, uh, their parents. So, uh, um, to my wife and the girls, I know this journey has truly been a family commitment. I'm grateful for each of you. I'd also like to recognize my Shackleford Junior High family that's back here tonight. Started with Mr. ZH, but now we got Mrs. Smith that's back here. And so for her and her administrative team, uh, Dur Nelson, and Young, um, and everyone that I've had the privilege of working with over the years at Shackleford, thank you all so much. U, you've truly invested in me and helped me grow as a leader and support

008me through my journey with Arlington ISD. I'd like to give a special shout out. They're not here tonight, but Dr. Dancy and to um Mrs. Perez. Uh their guidance and leadership and the conversations that we had leading up to this truly helped me prepare and I'm forever grateful. Last but not least, the athletic coordinator over there at Shaq, Coach Collins. He's not here tonight, but uh thank you so much for accepting that first phone call 11 years ago or so. Uh that started this journey for me. As we look forward to Rodriguez, I want to thank Mr. ZH and Dr. Dollar for this incredible opportunity. Um, I feel a great sense of responsibility to honor them, uh, and the trust that they've placed in me. And after meeting with the staff over the last few

009days, uh, my excitement truly has grown and I'm, uh, looking forward to continuing to build those relationships and serve the community of Rodriguez, um, and continue the growth that's taken place in the last few years there. Uh, with that being said, it's time to roll up her sleeves and get to work. And thank you everybody and go Rattlers. trustees. It's my honor to introduce Miss Tamandrea Johnson as the next assistant principal at Sam Houston High School. Miss Johnson brings six years of educational experience, most of which has been spent at Buouie High School in Arlington ISD, where she served as an English one teacher and instructional coach. She holds a master's degree from East Texas A&M University and has developed expertise in instructional leadership, MTSS, and PBIS implementation, datadriven decision-making, professional learning, and graduation coordination,

010which is no small feat. We are thrilled to welcome this proud long, tall Texan as she takes the next step in her leadership journey and join Sam Houston High School, where she will help advance our commitment to student success, continuous improvement, and excellence for all. Congratulations, Miss Johnson. Uh, thank you so much for that welcome. Um, and good evening, President McMurro, members of the board, Dr. Smith. Um, thank you again for this opportunity to serve. I would also like to thank my Buoie High School family for believing in me and nurturing my potential, not only as a student when I grace those halls, but as an educator and a leader. I would also like to thank Dr. Austin and the Aspire program for providing opportunities that help prepare me for this very moment. Uh to

011my family, thank you guys for being here. Uh my husband, my sisters, my parents, thank you for your endless love and support and encouragement. Uh to Mr. Jones and my new Sam Houston community, I am incredibly excited to be a part of this team and work alongside you as we strive each day to fulfill our mission and create opportunities for every student at Sam Houston High School. Thank you. And finally, trustees, I'd like to introduce another assistant principal at Sam Houston High School, Rita Herrera. RTO brings more than 13 years of diverse educational experience, having served as a bilingual teacher, math intervention specialist, and assistant principal working at elementary, junior high, and high school levels in Grand Prairie Ar in Grand Prairie ISD and Arlington ISD. He holds a master's degree in educational leadership from

012the University of North Texas and has cultivated experience in bilingual education, ELPAC processes, uh, special education, and datadriven leadership. Known for building strong relationships with students, staff, and families, RTO's committed to fostering a culture of support, collaboration, and high expectations. We are excited to welcome him to the Long Tall Texan family and look forward to the positive impact his leadership will have on student achievement and success at Sam Houston High School. Mr. Herrera, congratulations. President McMurro, members of the board, Dr. Smith, good evening and thank you for having me today. My name is Rita Herrera and tonight I am honored to introduce myself as a proud product of Arlington ISD. However, an even more prouder graduate of Sam Houston High School and in addition to that, a former Arlington ISD classroom teacher. For four years,

013I had the privilege of teaching at Crouch Elementary, which is the same elementary that I attended as a student. It was truly a rewarding experience to say the least. Now, Sam Houston holds a special place in my heart. Not only because I graduated from there, but also because many of my former students also graduated from SAM. I share that because returning to Sam Houston truly feels like coming home. And I am excited to serve again the students, staff, and community of Arlington ISD. I want to thank each of you for your leadership and commitment to our students and their success. I also want to thank Mr. Jones for trusting me with the opportunity to be a part of the Sam Houston community. I look forward to working alongside an outstanding team which many of them

014are here today and I am really looking forward to all the great things we will accomplish this coming school year. Now before I step away from the podium I would like to leave everyone with this. Please do not ever forget that in the halls of Sam Houston there are no strangers. Thank you. Congratulations to each of our new leaders and we have a lot to celebrate. We love to visit with you. So at this time I'm going to ask our board to meet on the right side of the boardroom and then we will convene into about a 15minute recess. It is 7:01 p.m. and we are now in recess. Thank you. The time is now 7:16 p.m. and we are back from recess. Up next is our open forum for agenda items. As stated on

015the posted agenda, members of the public who desire to address the board regarding an item on this agenda are required to register at www.isd.net/board meeting speaker request. Miss Crossnode, do we have any requesters registered to address the board regarding agenda items? >> President McMurro, we do. >> Thank you. And um I I will call you by name and if there if there are any virtual speakers I will Okay, there's no virtual speakers tonight. Our first speaker for agenda items is Meredith Wages. And Meredith, as you're coming up, I will go ahead and read um the introduction. Welcome, Miss Wages. This is a routine part of the board's agenda for regularly scheduled meetings. This segment of the meeting provides citizens with an opportunity to share their views with trustees on items that are on the agenda.

016It is not intended to be a discussion or a debate and trustees will not reply to the speakers. Derogatory comments aimed at an individual will not be tolerated. Personnel matters are not appropriate subjects for open forum. You will have three minutes to speak. The timer will ring when your three minutes is up. And if any public speakers have documents for the board to review, please hand them to our chief operations officer, Dr. Hill. We don't have any virtual speakers, so when you are ready, you may be in. >> Thank you. And good evening, trustees and superintendent Smith. Uh, thank you for your time, your service for to for this district, and your willingness to engage in what I know is a difficult and important conversation. I also want to thank those board members who have

017taken the time to meet with parents, listen to our concerns and um and uh really listen to what we have to say. Even if we disagree, these conversations matter and I appreciate the openness and professionalism that has been shown throughout this process. I am here tonight to respectfully ask that the board pause before making any final decision on moving sixth grade to middle school. My request is not that the board reject the recommendation outright. Rather, I'm asking that before a decision is made, we ensure parents, teachers, and students across the entire district have had an opportunity to be heard. The committee's recommendation relied heavily on student experience as a reason for moving sixth graders to middle school. However, I have concerns about whether the student input gathered was representative of the entire district. Earlier discussions

018indicated the study would represent all middle schools and their feeder elementary campuses yet only a portion of those schools participated in focus groups. If student voice is going to play a major role in this decision, I believe we owe our students um or owe it to our students to gather broader input from every campus in AISD. I also believe parent and teacher input should be gathered districtwide before any final vote. Many parents simply do not have the flexibility to attend board meetings, serve on committees, or spend hours in district discussions. But their perspective or perspectives are no less valuable than in the um than those who have the time and opportunity to do so. As I've listened to the discussion, I've also heard concerns raised by parents that I don't believe have been fully addressed.

019What impact will reducing core instructional time to accommodate electives have on math and reading achievement? What evidence supports the assumption that any decline in test scores would be limited to a single year? And where is the data showing that scores reliably rebound after that transition? And if financial considerations are a significant factor in this recommendation, can we be more transparent about that reality? These are not criticisms. They are questions that deserve thoughtful answers before a decision with long-term consequences is made. And I know everyone in this room wants what's best for students. Parents want that. Teachers want that. Trustees want that. District leadership. And that is why I'm asking you tonight to pause, gather broader input from students, parents, and teachers across every campus, and ensure that all voices are represented before moving forward. Thank

020you for your time, your service, and your consideration. >> Thank you, Miss Wages. Our next speaker, and I do apologize in advance if I mispronounce your last name, is Anna Quuowski. Was I close? >> Okay, please help me once you get up to the mic. >> Thank you for being here. And when you're ready, your three minutes, we'll begin. >> My own pronunciation for my last name is incorrect anyways, so we say Quaowski. Um, hi, my name is Anna Quittowski. Our children go to John's Elementary. we will eventually be feeding into the Rodriguez Junior High. And some of the concerns that we have are the transition resources. I have yet to see from the previous video how they intend to seamlessly transition into the middle school. Uh how are they going to al reallocate the

021sixth grade teachers from the elementary schools to the middle schools? And specifically because we do live off of Brookshshire, the traffic is atrocious when the parents are picking the kids up and by adding more kids into the middle school, it's just going to clog up our streets, which is already a safety hazard. Um, I'm personally curious about the ratio of the children to student the children to teacher ratio and how they're going to go ahead and divvy up the various uh extracurricular activities for the children. Um, I personally was miffed that only four elementary schools were surveyed with a panel of students and the parents weren't even addressed. I believe there was three middle schools that also were addressed by a handful of children that they said was uh distributed among different diverse backgrounds. But

022we did not receive an offer and ah yes it is. I also asked that it be paused. I do not think a year's worth of data is enough. I think that there should be considerations for more feedback from the parents and the students. And also I would love to hear feedback from the teachers because they also will be affected by this. Thank you everybody. Thank you. Our next speaker will be Martha Elena Howard. >> Bless you. >> Welcome, Miss Howard. Whenever you're ready. >> Good evening. First, I want to t thank the trustees who have actively listened to us during these meetings, in sidebar conversations, and in other meetings. Even during disagreements, hearing parent concerns is vital. And as I stated the last time, we are your primary partners. Tonight, I want to address the

023sixth grade exploratory committee's presentation. Although I value their hard work, their findings were based on restricted a restricted a restricted mandate and biased information. They presented the transition to junior high as an unrealistically perfect solution. Important data was omitted or minimized. Members of the committee were unable to answer um questions you guys asked. who decided to limit the exploratory committee's focus strictly to the student experience because that was putting your thumb on the scale. Our district is facing financial distress that will inad in inadvertently focus uh sorry inadvertently f force us to make difficult decisions. While any financial decision will obviously impact our students, focusing exclusively on the student experience was very a very narrow scope. We need to further invest in investigate our decline in enrollment. The committee's core mission should have been finding

024innovative, equitable solutions that financially stabilize our district while minimizing disruptions to classrooms. Even if the approach was different from other districts, I understand we need immediate financial relief. So slowing down is not ideal, but slowing down will prevent us from making an irreversible mistake. We must we must ask ourselves if we are compromising AISD's identity, values, competitive edge, and the well-being our most of our most vulnerable students. We need an independent bilingual impact study that reaches to every that reaches every parent, teacher, and student regardless of their proximity to the district leadership. The approach needs to be transparent and honest. During the last meeting, it was stated that several of the curricul that by several several times that the curriculum the district purchases is divided between K and fifth and sixth and eth making the

025academic transition easier. The narrative overlooks a critical fact. State standards for math and reading rarely change. Moving sixth graders to junior high introduces additional electives which directly reduces their time spent on these important subjects. Most importantly, the shift cuts vital instru um instructional time for students who require extra academic support. Today, I urge the board to pause this irreversible blanket decision. We're capable of making a more informed, transparent, and unique decision that will have long-term benefits for our district. Thank you. >> Thank you, Miss Howard. Our next speaker is Amber Wck. Welcome, Miss Wack. Whenever you're ready. >> Thank you. Um, good evening everyone, trustees and Dr. Smith. Um, my name is Amber Wulmarmac. I am a former educator of 15 years. Um, I spoke a couple of weeks ago. Um, I worked in Mansfield

026ISD for 12 of those years and then I taught in Keller ISD for the last three. Um, I have a range of experience from seventh grade all the way to 12th grade. um in my teaching experience. I'm also a proud mom of a incoming fifth grader at Duff. Um and I'm here to to speak from my perspective um uh on moving sixth grade. Um I wanted to thank you for the opportunity and for the fact that you all have listened to us and given us a voice. Um but I have a few other things that I'm concerned about. I do want to thank the committee for their hard work and I want to use this as a time or the platform that they came up with to move forward and maybe make a better or

027more informed decision. And with that, I think if the board is going to vote tonight on moving the sixth grade, I do not think we have enough information. Um, my first concern is the voices that shape this recommendation. Um, and a lot of them were students. We should have more teachers by their side making these decisions or helping us make these decisions. And I don't feel that teachers were brought into the fold as much as they should have been. I think we need to have a more informed decision from them and hear directly from our sixth grade teachers before we make this decision. My second concern is over the timeline. I have looked at the Richardson ISD approach from authorizing their study to the board's decision to commit was about two and a half years

028um and roughly six years before the campus opened their doors to sixth graders. I understand that part of that window was for construction but even setting the building aside the study recommen recommendation alone unfolded over far longer than ours. Arlington authorized the study in November and is potentially voting on it tonight. That's seven months to reach the same point that was spent years trying to reach. Um I feel like we need a clearer road map. Um and then my last point is that um that has to do with the um at risk students. I'm a little concerned about their move. Um, I feel like we need more data to show what support needs to be in place and we need more studies to show that and I feel like if we don't look at that

029before we make a vote and that's part of the decisionmaking process, we're doing them a disservice. Um there are way more special needs kids um our neurode divergent population and our at risk other atrisisk students that need more support and I think it should be part of what's presented as opposed to an afterthought. Oh yes we're doing this and now we're moving into making this happen. So thank you. >> Thank you. Our next speaker is Sheila Ngi. Sheila Welcome back, Sheila. When you're ready, you may begin. >> Thank you, President McMurrow. Good evening, trustees and Dr. Smith. My name is Sheila Nai, and I'm an AISD pant and former educator. Our district uh I understand our district is facing hard financial realities that is likely to result in the consolidation of campuses in some form.

030But if consolidation must happen, please use a scalpel, not a broad brush. What is the least disruptive path that protects student outcomes? Please show us why moving sixth grade is necessary, not just possible. I was recently able to hear the perspective of a student who attended sixth grade at Gun Junior High. And I appreciated that perspective. But what stood out to me was not just that sixth grade can work in a junior high setting. It was that it worked because there were supports, grade level separation, intentional scheduling, strong electives, mentors, and a campus structure to absorb those students well. That is very different from applying a district-wide model to every junior high. whether or not each campus is actually ready. Some campuses may be able to absorb sixth grade with thoughtful planning and minimal disruption.

031Others may not. And if a campus is not ready, the result is not just a capacity issue on paper. It becomes a daily student experience issue. Crowded buildings, portables, strained counseling and administration, and reduced access to the very electives being promoted as a benefit. Your decision tonight could create the need for major remodels or future bond projects at these campuses, which affects every taxpayer. Junior high remodels and expansions would use future bond capacity to solve problems created by this vote instead of using it to maintain the facilities we already have. I understand bond dollars cannot directly pay salaries, but facility decisions absolutely affect operating pressure. When facility costs increase, we limit flexibility elsewhere. And right now, we need every bit of flexibility to protect uh the people and programs who make our campuses strong. That

032brings me to quality over quantity. If AISD is shrinking, then let's focus on becoming smaller and stronger, not smaller and weaker. Families choose our district for quality programs, strong elementary campuses, STEM, GT, fine arts, CTE, Gateway, and other unique opportunities. If we cut what makes our district attractive while also moving children before every campus is ready, we may worsen the enrollment problem we are trying to solve. Some sixth graders absolutely can succeed in junior high. That's not the question. The question is whether this decision is but is best for all students and will it solve the financial problems the district is already facing or is it just compounding it? Please slow down, show the data, apply this campus by campus, um and please do not approve a broad district-wide change before the safeguards are defined.

033If consolidation must happen, please choose the least disruptive option that preserves quality, protects students, and keeps Arlington ISD worth choosing. Thank you. >> Thank you. Our last speaker for agenda items is Ashley Pierce. Welcome, Miss Pierce. When you're ready, you have three minutes. Hi, thanks for having me. I have a third and first grader in the district, so depending on the timeline, my family would be affected by a sixth grade move. Um, I do wish in the fall this had been pitched more as a budget issue. We all understand the position that the state has put all the school districts in in Texas. Um, but to look at it mainly from the lens of student experience strikes me as a little odd when I'm not sure student experience is given the same priority in other

034educational decisions. Was there a movement of sixth graders who contacted the district and said they were unhappy? My guess is they were living their best lives, unaware that someone else thought that they should be dissatisfied. I'm sure if we pulled fifth fifth graders, they would also think their experience would be enhanced by having driver's licenses. But we, as adults with fully formed brains, know that that is not in their best interest. We're charged as parents and educators for making adult decisions. And in every choice for our kids, we find a balance between our wisdom and their wishes. It seems like a very weighty thing to pin just on student experience, which meets me leads me to believe that it was more budget-driven, but not pitched to the community as such. It feels like the committee

035was created to achieve a predetermined result and that is an answer to a deficit. I would have liked to see a wider net cast on this with parents and educators also playing a larger role. If this is primarily a budget problem, could we not reszone and consolidate like with like? Why are we focusing so much on sixth? We have a lot of great things going on in a AISD. We also have many challenges. And was sixth grade in elementary really the first thing that we needed to change. Or is it a means to reszone and address a budget shortfall but not call it that? In the words of the great philosopher Judge Judy, "Don't pee on my leg and tell me it's raining." Thank you. Thank you. We'll now turn over to the report section

036of tonight's meeting. Um we have six reports. Our first item of those reports is the finance and academics committee report and that one is brief. Um about three three weeks ago our finance and academics committee met to review end of endofear student performance data and get a presentation from our CFO Mr. Rivas on preliminary uh budget presentation and you guys will see more of that information tonight. Our next report is resultsdriven accountability or RDA report. Dr. Okay, >> trustees. This is a followup for a request on the uh resultsdriven accountability system and Arlington ISD's progress in that area. And I'm welcoming Dr. Wartz to present to us tonight. >> All right. Good evening, President McMurrow, members of the board. Dr. Smith, I'm here this evening to give a an update around resultsdriven accountability, which is

037a district level accountability system that has applied to our programs. And tonight, we're going to give you an update on the actual results that came in for 2025. talk a little bit about how that accountability system is changing moving forward and some of the actions that we've taken this year to address some of the gaps that existed. Um the course of the presentation I'm going to talk a little bit about our current reality specifically in reference to our 2025 determination levels and how those were actually obtained. uh talk to you a little bit about some of the strategic response actions that the team has taken to address some of the gaps and then also address the the systemic shift that has to occur as we start thinking about this specific portion of the accountability system

038um moving forward. So what is resultsdriven accountability system? The results dri driven accountability system. It's basically an accountability system that is designed to ensure that the programs that are applied or or implemented within a school system are actually implementing supports to ensure that specific student groups are moving and the student groups that they that are targeted in in the results driven accountability system are the bilingual ESL or emergent bilingual student populations. other special populations which are is a category that addresses specifically students who are foster care students, students that are in our FIT program or homeless or students that are military connected and then also um our special education students. As you can see on this slide, the areas or domains that we are assessed on are the same for all three categories with the

039exception of special education. In special education, they do add one domain additional domain which looks to ensure that there is not disproportionality uh uh happening in special education in response to specific things like for example discipline um the number of students that are special education that are actually being u disciplined versus the general population. So what is the difference between a performance level that you receive and a determinational level? And the best way that we can think to to really talk about it is the macro versus micro kind of idea. So micro is really narrowing deeply in and basically what the district receives is our performance levels on various indicators. So in each of those domains, there are a variety of indicators that were measured on. For example, the performance of emerging bilinguals in grades

040three through eight star or the EOCC's or their graduation rates. And we receive a performance level specifically around each of those indicators which are a mean that are um calculated against a cut point. And the when it comes to a performance level, the lower the number, the better. So you're not looking to have fours, you're actually looking to have zeros. Those performance levels are then used to create what the district receives which is called a determination level. And the determination level is a more holistic view. So rather than looking at each of the individual indicators, it's going to look at the whole program and it's going to say overall compared to other districts in the system or in the state uh how are you performing specifically in the whole category. So emergent bilingual, special education

041or other special populations. Again, determination levels are ranging one to four and four is where you don't want to be. You want to be as close to one as possible. The level of deter the determination level that you receive for a specific programmatic area also indicates or dictates the type of intervention requirements that a district has to engage in. Now I think the important thing to talk about when it comes to the way these two things are calculated and I'll specifically speak to determination levels is they have always been a part of a force distribution which is relative ranking. What we mean by that is uh it you are always compared to other districts um and you're always compared about how fast they're moving. So I'll give you an example. If you are, there are

042a schools that are 90s and there are A schools that are 95s. And the state, the way the state calculates determination levels in a force distribution, someone has to be at the bottom and someone has to be at the top. And it doesn't matter that you're all A's. If you're at the bottom of the A, you're going to be have to do mandated interventions even if you are performing well. So the way that it works in a determination level, if you're in the if you meet if you're in the 80th percentile, you're a two. If you're in the 95th percentile, you're a three. And if you're in the 99th percentile, you're a four. How this is now shifting is we're moving to static benchmarks. And the reason why this is important is because when you're

043doing a force relative distribution, it's difficult to set targets because it really is hard to know where your target needs to be because you're always just being compared to the other district. And it really depends on who's moving faster. So you can set a target to improve 10%. And even if you improve 10%, if your 10% is still in the 99th percentile, you're going to be a four. So what the state is moving to is actually static benchmarks for 26 27, which are frozen cut points. And that's actually really good news because now as a district, if you're a level three, you can you know exactly what it takes to get to a level two and you can set goals and targets to actually get there. In the current system, you could actually do those

044same things and move the system and still land in the exact same deter determination category because you're moving as fast or slow as the neighbors around you, but you never really know how they're doing in comparison to you until the very end of the game, so to speak. Uh so next year when we think about RDA, the goal is to actually set targeted cut points so we can actually move the needle and understand how that relates to the system that we're actually living in. So what are the current ter determination levels that actually took place in 2025? This came out several months ago. We have um determination level two for emergent bilingual, three for special educa for special populations and determination level three for special education. And we developed student support plans specifically for two

045areas. One for the areas that were three which are OSP and also for emerging bilingual. And these are the three categories of uh where our interventions primarily land. And I'll go into a little bit more detail in just a minute. We focus on researchbased math and literacy practices. Um, specifically providing professional learning to teachers that are in special education uh uh category or working with students who are special education and also h helping them to think about how to integrate the researchbased instructional strategies into their classroom when they were pulling students or working with students um in the general ed environment. We also worked to standardize our IEP alignment to re really make sure that our IEPs were directly aligned to support increased performance in the areas where we were struggling last year, which was

046English one and two. And then finally, um we focused our comprehensive support for specialized populations by ensuring that we provided enhanced training specifically to leadership at campuses and also intervention monitoring to ensure that students that were foster students or homeless students were actually moving and doing better. So, in in um in in some of the specific things we did, and I I won't repeat too much of this in too much detail because um Miss Brown presented to you around special education, these were in her presentation just a few weeks ago, but in special education, some of the specificity in our support plan that was approved and accepted and finished with the state um was the implementation of some of the instructional materials that we purchased through um UFly, which helped special education teachers take the

047science of teaching, reading integr ated into their practices. We also targeted professional learning and then implemented datadriven instructional cycles to really help uh teachers think about how does data inform students IEPs and how do we track students progress in those IEPs so that they can be more successful. And then finally, building leadership capacity uh through accountability frameworks and coaching to really help think about what are the best moves to ensure that students in special education are making gains. Um in our SSP specifically for other student population or special populations, we focus primarily on professional learning for uh leadership and administration. The reason why this was an important category for us to talk to principles about was because the number of students that fall in this category are very very small. So, if you think about

048who they are, foster students, students are homeless or students that are uh are uh whose parents are in the military. Uh most schools don't have that many of them. And so, it was important for us to spend some time with leaders to think about how do we make sure we're keeping track of who those kids are because their populations don't always rise up in a school because they're so small. We also talked about uh we did some training and implemented some data cycle reviews to ensure that we were able to provide individualized interventions for students specifically through our student uh our social workers because many of the students in this category usually have high needs that are outside of the educational environment and we worked to make sure that they were on track for graduation.

049So really tried to monitor their performance and their credit acrruels to make sure they're moving um towards graduation because that was the area where we scored a three in this specific area was graduation rates. Um and then finally really think about the wraparound services uh and all the those services that could be delivered across departments because as I mentioned um many of their challenges are not necessarily academic in nature. So what are we doing now moving forward? The important thing to think about for 2025 are these plans are done. Like these are the plans that we implemented because this is a 2025 RDA um uh report and the state has already accepted these plans and we're finished with them and we're everything is good. So now we're thinking what do we need to do for

050next year? Um and so next year we want to continue our trajectory and so for students that are in the specialized learning environment specifically emerging bilingual and special ed these are some of the strategies that we'll be implementing. One is really trying to help um teachers connect their the scores that come from TELPASS which are focused on reading, writing, speaking and listening, integrate those more deeply into their researchbased instructional strategies in the math and literacy classroom because what we want to do is increase the number of students who can become proficient in the English language. Also in special education really equipping teachers with data and helping them to think about how they can utilize the diagnostic and screener data for students who are struggling with foundational skills so they are smaller customized groups can be

051more prescriptive in nature and then also provide targeted support. We have um we have weekly specialist check-ins for teachers who are brand new in this environment. So, if you're a special ed teacher and you're either in the inclusion or or the resource environment, we want to make sure that we're mentoring you and coaching you along the way so that you can learn and understand how to utilize the data to drive the instruction you're doing with students who are most at risk. And then finally, continuing to build leadership capacity with principles uh in their buildings. Um like I said, these subops are usually very small in comparison to the general population. and we're trying to ensure that we're cycllically reviewing their their data as they're progressing to make sure that we're filling in gaps along the

052way. For special educ for special populations um next year or the other special populations, we will be implementing a day one protocol. So when students um move into a school or are registered into a school and they land in one of the in this category, we are going to try to implement an onboarding procedure to try to stabilize those students in their environment right away. So know and understand from the onset what their u social and emotional needs may be, what kind of resources outside of the classroom are going to be necessary, and how do we ensure they have academic well-being while they're in school and they feel connected to that environment. We're we're also going to be working to establish uh in our student information system really targeted thresholds that raise red flags and

053let us know when there is actually a problem we should be paying attention to. So, for example, when students uh have an attendance issue in the general ed environment, they have so many they can miss so many days and then as a parent you get a text or there's some flag that's kind of put out. What we want to do is reduce that. So, if you have two consecutive days or you have two consecutive days and a discipline issue, there will be flags that will be raised within the system that will allow administrators and people on the campus know, hey, I need to actually intervene for this student because something may be going on that we need to pay attention to. And finally, the last two, one is around credit recovery. Many students in this

054environment are highly mobile and so sometimes they're coming in and out of systems and what we want to ensure that they don't lose his credit because we want them to graduate. And so as we start building this virtual program um outside of even what we have for venture, one of the things we've talked about is can we leverage the virtual environment for a student who needs to engage in more flexible u less seat time worry but more flexibility in terms of finishing courses so they can actually earn their credits and graduate on time and do it at a at a no cost scenario. And then finally um develop a student outreach services advisory board. So, an advisory board that would consist of students in this population, stakeholders, and other community leaders who can help us

055think about how to provide really wraparound supports to students who are most at risk to not graduate, which fall into this category. So, these are some of our plans as we kind of engage in the next year. Of course, we don't have 2026 RDA results yet because those won't come for quite some time, but we're trying to be proactive and close some of the gaps that um we know exist and build off the ones that we've already started to close. So, That's my report for tonight. >> Thank you, Dr. Wartz. Are there any trustees with questions or discussion regarding the RDA report? >> Mr. Wilbanks. >> Thank you, President McMurro, and thank you, Dr. Wartz, and Dr. Smith for the quick turnaround on this report. I requested what just two two meetings ago. So, yeah.

056Um, this was great. um you know when I see the way the force distribution is when we've got two populations at a three that was a little alarming and especially since we're doing a lot of really hard work >> and feel like we're really moving the the needle on our sped population. >> Um you didn't talk a lot about the emergent bilingual >> group and that is a significant population for us. Um uh are there uh any concerns going into this year now that we've already completed another year that that would continue to be an issue for us or are we seeing signs that that may go down? >> So we have two um so it's a really good question. First I'll say the reason I didn't address them directly and this was primarily because

057I was reporting on 2025. So, as we lean in 2026, which I think your question is really aimed at, we do have to pay attention to them. Um, we do see when we look at like re recent star scores that our Spanish speaking population specifically, I'll use for example, third grade students who are the first cohort of students are landing in a star tested grade that are part of our new one-way dual language model um are doing pretty well. Um, even in comparison to their English peers. So, we're seeing some progress there. Also, we're expanding our CBLI implementation across the district, which is also growing, which specifically targets strategies in the classroom to try to foster English development in the in a in the context of content. So, those strategies are all still deeply there

058because it is a population we have to pay attention to. It's not one that's reached the mark where we need to go. We're still trying to get it to go the other direction as a whole. >> Yeah. So based on the performance on the preliminary star day that we're looking at >> and seeing how well they're performing and the fact that you still have the two domains that are starbased or the the distinction level or determination level. >> So you anticipate that going down? >> Yeah. So I'll give you an example. For example, this year um for 2025 for reading language arts, we went from a two to a one for grades 3 through 8. But our challenge area still continues to be for example science. It was a three in 2024 and it's a

059three in 2025. Um we saw a dip in math specifically when it come to EVs for in the 2025 year. So there are some content areas that we can see gains in and there's others that are either holding steady or dipping a little bit and we're trying to pay attention to that. for math specifically when we roll out the new math adoption next year and we try to integrate specifically the strategies I was referring to in there those are actually embedded in the curriculum they're designed to do those kinds of things to help move the needle when it comes to students performance on STAR and specifically this student population. So, one of the things you'll see in the math curriculum that we're engaging in next year is there are there are specific strategies for EB

060students to for the teacher to integrate to their learning to make it a little more standardized across the system rather than ad hoc so so to speak from the teacher. Um, but yeah, that's how we're paying attention to it. >> Yeah. Go ahead. >> Dr. WZ, can you expand just a little bit for the uh the rest of the board in the audience on CBLI and exactly what it is because I think that's an important strategy to talk about here as well. And it I don't know when we say things like CBLI, if everybody knows exactly what that is. >> So CBLI are specific strategies that teachers who teach emerging bilingual in the classroom can integrate. So when you think of like sentence stems and other strategies that a that a teacher would integrate um

061that that encourages talking and reading and writing in the English language, that's what CVLI is. So um we used to have um strategies that were really structured um I'm trying to think of what the word we used to call it but it was in like in a secondary environment we would have contentbased uh strategies where teachers were specifically trying to integrate how language development in the ELS the English language standards how those would be in taught in the classroom as it relates to content and that's really what CBLI is. So if I'm teaching mathematics, the question is is how do I teach kids in the content of mathematics how to develop their English skills and those things are integrated into the classroom. >> And so one of the things is you're is you have an

062emerging bilingual student in your classroom and that student is learning the English language. One of the most important things we can have them do is practice the English language and giving them the right supports in order to do that while they're learning content at grade level. And I think that this gives the uh the scaffolding approach so that they continue to learn the content and practice language at the same time. So the more we can expand the use of things like CBLI across our system because we have a large population of emergent bilingual students in in Arlington ISD. It is good instruction for everyone. And it the more we can expand that across our system, it allows our EB students to access the content and the language development at the same time so that they're

063practicing uh that language development while they're continuing to learn. >> So, um thank you for that. >> Yeah. >> Um and that the EV population is, you know, really of concern given the size it is here in Arlington ISD. So hopefully we're we're making progress and look forward to hopefully seeing some gains in the next RDA report. Um, we won't get till >> spring, >> November, >> next spring. >> You'll get an early release, but it like finalized spring. >> Um, so let's talk about our homeless population. It is a very small population but is it's smallalish but unfortunately we do have a lot of families um going through those kind of struggles and for most of our campuses it might be one or two students at Larson's it's a little bit different story is

064it not? >> I don't know off the top of my head what it's what the actual number at Larson is um in relationship to the actual school itself. I know the program that houses them is in the Larsson zone, so they do have a more significant population than other campuses. Have we thought about doing um targeted um strategies at Larson to specifically address that population since it is more significant there than any of our other campuses? So the the the department that primarily works around this population is our SOS department and there there are social workers that are specifically targeted at Larsson other schools. Um we actually have a variety of coordinator specialists and specifically social workers who are divided by each of the learning communities and they have they have schools that they're assigned

065to that they integrate some of these strategies in with those students. The important thing to know about RDA as it relates to this specific student population is it's not an academic issue. Um the only area where we were really a three was um we're we're ones and zeros in lots of things and um we're at the most we're a two which is actually at the state standard. When you when you think about two you think oh needs assistance and they label it that way. Um I'm not sure why they label it that way but if you were to talk to someone at TA a two is actually a really great target to be at. And we're only at a we're only at a three actually a three in one area and that's really around graduation

066rates specifically. So most of our interventions have been how do we help these students get across the finish line which is why you see strategies in there around virtual courses and wraparound services because there it's not when they're in the schools they're performing it's getting them across the finish line. So all of our most of our interventions specifically around this population has been around graduation rates. Now the other thing I would like to say about graduation rates is it's a delayed it's a delayed statistic that we get. It's not on time. So like the kids that graduated this last year, it's going to be a couple years in ter in terms of integrating it. So um but we still respond that way because if your graduation's rates here, you're trying to get better the next

067year and the next year and the next year. So even though it's lag, it's still going to re yield a result. So but that's our primary focus on this area. Um it's been grad rates because that's where the deficit is. That's the only reason why we had an SSP for this population. That was it. >> That's good to know. Yeah. So appreciate the presentation and I appreciate quick turnar around and um you know >> hopefully these intervention we still have a lot of work to do and our sped population and our emergent bilingual population especially. So thank you. >> You're welcome. >> Thank you Dr. WZ and um Mr. Wilbanks. And before we move on, are there any other trustees with questions or or remarks about the RDA report? Okay, Dr. WZ, I just had

068one really brief question. So, um, when we talked about the 2025, um, special education SSP, you mentioned how this past year we've really had targeted professional learning, not just on researchbased best practices, but also crafting an IEP that, and I know Dr. Brown mentioned this in her last presentation about how we're really not creating a ceiling for our special education population. we want our students to get grade level content, teaksbased content, and then have professional learning to support our teachers in crafting IEPs around that. I thought those were such rock solid strategies and even though um we're moving into a new school year and we're we're um kind of, you know, evolving there. Are we still going to prioritize um those strategies moving into the next school year, especially given that we have the academic

069calendar still prioritizing professional learning days for our teachers? >> Yeah, absolutely. In fact, one of the things that we've been talking with special education teachers about is that the students educational experience is not limited to the IEP. That's supposed to be supplemental on top that's supposed to be supplemental on top of the general ed environment. So students that are served by special education teachers, those teachers will still be integrated into general ed environment in terms of um professional learning, they'll still be taught specific strategies and utilize the youth the youly materials to integrate those things into the classroom when they're working with small groups. Um that strategy is not changing. In fact, when we think about when we look at our results and we try to anticipate what it could look like in the future,

070like special is actually going up. So we don't have we're not changing course. We're actually seeing movement there. That's awesome. >> Thank you so much and we appreciate you. Thanks, Dr. W. >> All right. >> Our next report will be Proposition C report. Dr. Smith, >> trustees, I'm going to invite Dr. Michael Hill up and uh Dr. Hill is going to lead you through a presentation. Uh as you all know, we had a uh an election in May and we had three propositions up for consideration. We had two that were supported by our community and one that uh narrowly was not. And so, uh, we are presenting this tonight to give you a little information about the contents of Proposition C, but also to get some input for you from you regarding next steps or

071potential next steps. >> Thank you, Dr. Smith, and to President McMurray on board. Again, appreciate the opportunity to be here and present. And so, the purpose, again, as Dr. Smith just alluded to is to provide you with details of projects included in Prop C that were not approved by the voters and again to gain some input and some uh planning options for desired timelines for moving forward. So, as you all know, uh there were three propositions on the on the most recent ballot. Prop A and Prop Both passed and Prop C to the tune of 31.5 million for athletic facilities was not approved by the voters. Uh what was included in Prop C? you see these nine uh kind of areas that are uh summary there and what I'm going to do is take an

072opportunity a few seconds to just kind of go into the detail of each one of those projects to kind of give you a little context of what they were. So the first one was MAC uh synthetic turf that was inside of our multi-purpose activity centers that were built around 2014 bond I believe. Uh the turf in there total replacement for all six of our high school right at $4.8 million. uh the current fields are roughly 10 years old and the life expectancy of those turf uh surfaces is about 8 to 10 years. What we've done is provided what we call a GMAX test and that's basically to test the the responsiveness of the of the turf to see kind of is it still safe or not for students. Uh we had that test done in

073in May and the average to where it starts to exceeding where they're no longer safe is about 165. Uh the average on the six max you can see there from 142 basically up to 155 and at some areas on the field they were already exceeding uh what would be the threshold uh for what what the standard is considered to be safe. So that's just a synthetic turf. Proposition uh C also included uh $4.3 million for turf on softball fields and $16.6 million for turf on baseball fields. We talk about the the uh costly routine for watering, mowing and maintaining those fields and then the actual time lost uh for due to weather uh so that the fields can't recover. Uh synthetic turf uh can withstand more frequent use and recover faster from weather and installation

074of this reduces the labor cost uh from manpower as far as and maintenance and things like that. Track resurfacing estimated 2 point uh 2 million for track resurfacing at eight junior highs. Again, the life expectancy of those tracks is anywhere from 8 to 12 years. The current tracks are nearing 10 years of wear. And again, when we get to certain levels of wear and tear, it becomes a student safety issue or maybe one that uh you not may not be able to use the surface for the way it was intended. So again, two point two $2 million that was in there for resurfacing the eight junior high tracks. Uh, Propsc also included storage for outdoor uh storage buildings at our six high schools. Uh, roughly $150,000 for field mats and $2.27 million for athletic storage.

075Uh, this is again to pro protect the investment of those uh uh elements that are uh out such as pole vaults, hurdles, uh jump pits and things like that. They are expected to last from 8 to 10 years. Uh and then with the exposure to the weather that that deeply uh digs into that life expectancy uh again not being safe for student use if they're not uh maintained well. Again 2.7 2.2 million for the storage and 150 thou,000 for the mats. Prop C also included scoreboard replacements estimated $500,000. Uh gym scoreboards usually last about 10 to 15 years. Uh, and in Arlington, these are pretty uh they're getting pretty old depending on uh I'm sorry, they last about 10 to 15 years. And uh where am I here? Sorry. Sorry. Scorp uh failures often shift

076from simple repairs to ones that our our maintenance team just can't can't manage because we can't get the parts because they're so old in some systems. So again, $500,000 for a schoolboard replacement that was included there. weight room replacement equipment. Uh 500,000 for all 10 junior highs. Again, that's expected to last anywhere from 8 to 12 years. In Arlington ISD, the junior high uh weight room equipment is anywhere from 20 to 25 years old. And so again, uh loose springs and things like that that are on these mechanisms could become a safety issue uh when we get there and and our staff can't repair them. Then they just kind of become like put over in the corner or just kind of out to salvage because we don't want to risk any student injury. uh wrestling

077mat replacement about $440,000 for all six schools. Again, matt uh expecties anywhere from 8 to 12 years old. Compression of the mat. It's just kind of like a a mattress. Uh it's you got to change it every once in a while. Otherwise, you get the the wear, the separation, the cracking and safety issues, especially with hygiene. Uh kids in wrestling and all the sweat and things that go into there. We do do a good job of maintaining the cleaning of the student athletes take care of that. But again, our mats are anywhere from 14 to 16 years old within the district with a life expectancy of anywhere from 8 to 12 years old. So those are the items that were included in in Prop C. I'll turn it over to Dr. Smith now and he'll

078have some conversations about next steps. >> So trustees, as you know, um one of the things is we were um in the middle of a bond election. um it it became a talking point often about the turf and not about the whole package of things that were in there. And I I think being honest, I think that was a little bit of a detriment because I think Proposition C actually impacted um far more students than maybe was um initially perceived by the community. And uh frankly also at the polls at that time we um didn't pass proposition C by approximately 700 votes which is not very many votes in the grand scheme of voting. Um so we wanted to make sure we opened this conversation and brought this to you tonight because we have to

079think about what you want to do for the future. you called the bond election with Proposition C on there because um based on the committee's recommendation, you felt it was a need for our school system and it didn't pass. So, we have some things that um if the board wants us to do things, we have to adhere to some important timelines coming up and it's important that we have some discussions about it. As you know, at our last meeting, we had a citizens bond oversight committee presentation. Um and that presentation suggested using some of the uh bond interest earnings from 2019 dollars that were earned on that that money uh as it was waiting to be used in order to address some of these things. But there are other options for you to consider as

080well. And so tonight, we're going to ask you to have some dialogue with us to give us direction so that if you want us to do some things um with a specific time like like timeline like a November election, we know that and can get things ready for you. So, real briefly, I'm going to go over these four options. And I would say that uh there's more options than this. We can have a combination of these things if needed. Um but I think it's important for us to go over these real quickly. First, u proposition C did not pass. So, you can place all Proposition C items on hold. That means based on the what the voters said, not do anything about any of the items that Dr. Hill just uh elaborated on in our

081system, wait until uh a potential next bond election or a potential next budget cycle to see if there's a way for us to address those things. Um, again, total on Proposition C, I think Michael, was about 35 million. Is that correct? >> 31.5, excuse me. Um, second bullet, address Proposition C priorities through bond interest earnings, which is what Dr. Para and uh um Mr. Baker presented last meeting to us and addressing many of those things. I noted in here it says priorities because I don't know that we would be able to address all of those things, but I do think it's important for us to say, okay, out of that proposition C, there are some interest earnings that we would be able to use if you decide to have us use those on some of

082the items that were outlined in that proposition. Uh the other two items are November 2026 election for Proposition C. So just taking Proposition C as it was on the ballot and saying let's put it back out to voters and maybe do a better job in my communication with our voters about what all it includes because obviously I think the majority of the talking points came down to turf in in this one in athletic storage sheds or um the next one November 2026 election with expanded items. The other part that I think our community gave us some feedback on is it did seem like it was too narrow a scope even those that knew that Proposition C was more than turf. Uh and there is an opportunity for us to say at board if you want

083to address more athletic items we could actually consider some other things in our school district and expand the ask for Proposition C out to the voters. Now, I want you to note that the reason why it says November 2026 for both of those, obviously, you could call a bond election in May of 2027, November of 2027, whenever you wanted to call that. But we have a specific deadline that if the board wants us to actually hit the November 2026 election, you actually have to call for that election by mid August. And so that means that between now and when we meet again July 30th, the administration needs to put together everything to get ready for a potential election should you choose to do that in November 2026. So that's why I use November 26 um

084is those um scenarios. You could obviously switch that for a May thing uh another November year, whatever you would like. But the timelines that we have to adhere to for elections are pretty critical in this discussion for us. So that's the why behind that. And with that, I'm going to Anything else you would like to add, Dr. Hill? >> Oh, that's it. >> I'm going to leave this open for you all to ask any questions of Michael and myself. Kelly Horn, I'm sure, can jump in on some things as well if needed. And uh we're glad to answer those questions, but ultimately the ask that I have for you is if there's something that you're leaning toward that you give us a little bit of direction, give us some input tonight so that we can

085start turning those things around before uh our July 30th meeting if needed. Thank you, Dr. Hill and Dr. Smith. And yes, this is a report. It's not an action item, but I'm really curious to to hear u my colleagues thoughts. We'll start with Mr. Richardson. >> I have a clarifying question for you. On slide 10, you talk about the weight room equipment, 500,000 for all 10 junior high schools. With us just having built and opened Joey Rodriguez Junior High, is that included in that number? >> It is. And I believe Kelly, correct me if I'm wrong, some of the equipment that was in Rodriguez may have come from the old Carter. >> Came from Carter. Okay. So that is why if people say if we were going to replace it, it isn't we're replacing brand

086new items. It is items that were old and aged out. >> Correct. >> Okay. Thank you. was if we go to a November election, what is the cost of that for the district if we decide to run a November item on a ballot? >> I don't have that off the top of my head. It's significant. Every time we have an election in Arlington ISD, the cost of that is is significant. And being that it is uh off cycle for us, we're not paying for a a um an election in November. Uh we would be adding more money to that for our election. And uh I'm looking at Sam and she's deliberately drinking right now so she doesn't answer my question. But I don't know if Sam has any Do you have any idea of what

087that cost for the election would be Samantha? >> I do not I have >> I kind of knew that was going to happen. So >> I didn't know if it was something where great we're already in an election cycle. It's very easy to tack this on. This is not a big expense for us or no this is going to be a little bit >> it would be an expense. Great correct. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Thank you, Miss Richardson. Mr. Chapa, >> thank you, President Mro. I will um I echoed Dr. Smith's sentiment on this and that that there were just a lot of things I think and misinformation around prophecy. I I will put that in context by saying statewide since these uh since bond propositions have gone to have to be broken apart

088on multiple ballots depending on subject matter. Um, essentially you're seeing statewide once you get past Prop A and and B, they tend to fail and athletics and fine arts propositions are failing overwhelmingly um, across the state unfortunately at this moment. And so the fact that we were even close um is a real testament to the the group of folks who were getting information out about this bond and I think the the community has seen the investments we've made in the athletics infrastructure we have over the last two big bonds that we've done and and see the value in that. I would also add to that just anecdotally from working at the polls on election day um the timing in this in the community here. There was a sort of last minute thing thrown into the

089mix where the city um you know not taking position on whether it was the right thing or wrong thing to do but just they locked in the Cowboys for until 2055 and and part of that deal was giving additional money to renovate portions of AT&T Stadium um using you know tax revenue of different types. And so there was this community issue that popped up right before the end. And I had several people come to me at the polls on election day and say, I'm just I can't support any more taxes for stadiums. And I had the conversation with them, these these have nothing to do with stadiums. But I think that's the perception in folks minds is that these when when folks say on their ballot X number of dollars for athletic facilities, which is

090what our said, they think that means stadiums and and that is not what we're doing. Um, so appreciate the conversation on and I'll sorry my computer died here. I just want to run through. I would like a mix I personally prefer a mix of options on these. Um, I'll start with I think that there are certain um items in here that I see that I would be comfortable using the interest earnings off the 2019 bond funds to spend to use those funds to address. and they're all the ones that primarily I think um we've got to protect and maintain the facilities that we have so students can continue to use them and get a good experience out of them. Uh into that category I'd put the MAC turf. That was a major investment that we

091made with 2014 bond funds and those those fields are hitting the end of their lifespan. This is a talking point that I had when I went out in the community to talk about this. And we have here the GMAX data showing that um with the exception of of just two of the high schools and one was very close, all of them at this point are starting to hit max hit, you know, their highest GMAX readings are getting into that above industry standard range. And if so, if the average were to tick up to that point, um we can't really allow students to use them. And so this was a major investment that for those of you who aren't familiar with it, these the MACs are essentially 60 yard long roughly 40 50 yard wide interior

092fields that are used by all sorts of extracurriculars and not just football. Um and so they're hitting 10 years old. So this this is coming up soon. So I would I would be in favor of of using interest earnings on the 4.8 million for the max. Um similar story on the junior high tracks which are also above their anticipated life expectancy. I feel the same way about the field event mats. Um especially given the low cost on the mats. Um only $150,000 to replace all um them at all six high schools. I know some of them are in pretty rough shape. I'm a little bit more agnostic on on the 2.27 million for the athletic storage buildings. I recognize that extends the life um of the mats, but at that low cost, we could buy

093a whole another round of mats in 3 to 5 years and it it's still significantly, you know, it's cheaper than than building the storage facilities. I would not be opposed to putting the storage facilities in a future future bond. I'm open to discussion on on including them in the interest earnings portion. Um I could go either way on the scoreboards and then I feel like the junior high weight rooms and the wrestling mats both of those are sign especially the weight rooms are significantly over their life expectancy. The junior high weight rooms based on what you presented are double their anticipated life expectancy. And I having had um some kids go through junior high um I can tell you some of those are are are quite a bit outdated and so I'm and those are

094just relatively low cost. So I think we have the interest startings to do those. I'm in favor of doing that now instead of can having our kids continue to use equipment that already is past its anticipated life expectancy or imminently will meet it rather than hoping that something happens in the future on the bond front. Um, I do think the softball baseball fields the cost relative to the amount of interest earnings that are available. I I I struggle with using that would I think is as I recall require us to use in addition to the other things I identified almost all of the interest earnings from the 19 bond fund. And I'm not sure if I want to do that knowing that we do have some other facilities um needs coming up that we might

095need to address in relatively short order and use that have access to that amount of funding. Um, the other thing I want to point out in going to the mix of options, I would be in favor of some, it doesn't have to be this November, um, but going back out with something, whether it's the softball baseball fields, whether it's creating another, um, athletics focused package to address that next generation of needs that we know are coming down the pipe. Um, in the last several legislative sessions, um, there have been bills proposed in the state legislature that would require, um, for passage school district bond proposals to exceed either 60% or 67% um, to to pass. and that um what we have been hearing anecdotally is that barring some changes in the legislative uh composition of

096the legislature next year, those bills are going to be presented again and may have traction this year. And so I'm always worried about putting too many things off to the future for bonds. Um because you know, somebody mentioned the phrase earlier putting a thumb on the scale. the legislature seems poised to put their thumb on the scale of what school, you know, how local communities can make decisions for themselves on how they want to spend their own taxpayer money for their schools. I don't think that's fair at all, but I know that that's something that's under consideration. And I would hate for us to be in a situation where we delay going back out if we already know we have these needs, delay going back out into too far into 27 where it might be

097an environment where the law has changed to the point where we now need a twothirds vote to get anything done. because if that were the standard, I think this community would only have had two bonds passed in the last 20 years. So that's all my all the thoughts I have. >> Thank you, Mr. Chapa. Mr. Will Banks, >> thank you. Uh Dr. Hill, um maybe this is a question for Kelly. Could you remind me what the excess total dollar amount on the excess interest >> this point in time? where we're at approximately 45 million in interest earnings, but there will likely be some additional savings from project savings that we as we realize reconcile the end of the bond, but right now that's about our number for interest earnings. Um, I really respect my colleagues

098comments about the need to go out sooner rather than later because that risk is very real. And uh, but I'm also looking at a very contentious Senate race, governor's race in November, and it's really hard to pass a bond with that kind of noise going on. and especially if it's just an athletic bond, which we know is a tougher hill to climb. Um, my list would probably line up exactly with Justin's on one of of the stuff that we definitely need to take care of to create a safe environment for our athletes here in Arlington ISD. And my preference is to do what we can with that while not hopefully utilizing all that 45 million. The turfs are a big thing. I know that's a big need that the baseball community including a baseball mom

099on our board have really clearly articulated the needs for those. Um, but that I think is going to take a bond unless we have um we don't have any excess capital, local capital outlay money and other buckets. Um, we're going to get an update on our fund balance later and we're in the same shape as most of every other district in the state of Texas right now and we need to really be cautious of our fund balance. Um, so having said that, that's kind of where I am. I I could probably be talked into a November election for the reasons Mr. Choa gave, but I would like some research on the probability of getting something passed in this current election cycle. >> Thank you, Mr. Willbanks. Mr. My question would be to my colleagues of

100if the voters didn't choose to pass this and then we say this is how we want to spend our money. What does that say to our voters? Does that say we know better what to do with this interest fund and this is what we should be doing? Is it we can see that with your presentation, Dr. Hill, that the life cycle of these items that it's for student safety, that's why we need to do it. or do we need to take it back to the voters and say you did not pass it before we are going to respect your voice and not just use our interests this way and let you come back out and make that decision. And that's kind of where I get torn between if it was just up to us right

101now. I think I would be okay with us moving forward. But the part of us being elected means we have to do we also have to respect how they use their voice even if it's not what I personally would have done. And so that's where I get a little bit torn on this. That's all. >> Thank you, Miss Richardson, Miss Haynes. >> Um, so I just have a clarifying question probably um I'm not sure which one of y'all can answer it. So the presentation that Dr. Far gave um with the interest funds, do I remember correctly that she said it was possible like they had their ranked list of items that it was possible to do everything that was in Propsc along with I think the lights were their their the CBOC's biggest ticket like

102their most important. Was I right? Like it was one of their higher elevated things that I know they've talked about serving on that committee with them. I know that that's very important to to those individuals. Um, am I remembering that correctly that all of this could be done and a handful of their higher ranked items is that >> So, so the lights, just to be clear, the lights are actually in progress now. Okay. We work we've worked those into the project with the concession buildings and restroom buildings at Junior High. So, that will take care of. Um, there's there were roughly $48 million worth of of needs that they listed, including all of the turf, whether it's baseball, softball, or the banks. >> Um, however, that would exceed the the approximate amount that we have

103is as Trusty Wills asked a minute ago that we have in interest earnings, right? So, and it would leave essentially no dollars for any other item that the board might choose or find as as just Trusty Chapa said that might might be important to you uh as you finish up the bond. So, so uh we would expend all of the funds that that we have earned currently on just those items that they spoke about which we were all athletic in nature for the most part. >> Right. Yeah. I remember all of their items being fairly athletic. Um who so to that point to trusty Choppa's point about it wouldn't leave any money for potential projects that are identified later. Can I get an example of what kind of projects those may be or what has

104come out of other bonds just so I can have some context in that? >> Yeah. So, so I don't know. I mean, Kelly, you might have a better idea of what the most immediate next thing is, but when we're looking at our facility condition index from the capital needs study, we have several campuses that have all portion of the building having a high FCI. Um, previous boards have used either a combination of fund balance and interest earning off of prior bonds to to do some sort of facility needs um all the way from um a full campus to to additions to a campus um using those funds. And so if they're almost, you know, over 40 million anticipated to get closer to 50, that's getting in the range of of almost being able to do,

105you know, a full campus. And and I think we were we had discussions when we were putting together this last bond package, we we identified South Davis and we felt comfortable saying that we know with all the consolidations and stuff coming probably down the road, we know that we need another consolidation elementary, but we also said we probably know that we need several other things. And so I I would I am a little uncomfortable exhausting that pull down too far where we couldn't do something um on a bigger size package or not package project, but that's what has been done in the past. >> And if I could add, one of the things that came up frequently in our capital needs steering committee and also I've heard in CBOC sometimes there are things that are

106um uh refresh needs that we can't get to right now. So, some buildings need paint and carpet and it's not on a schedule for another x amount of years to actually get to that. And some of those funds could be used for some of those campus needs as well that could um significantly help HVAC units, uh, lights, carpet, paint, things like that that are general maintenance things that we end up getting to life cycles on, but could help us address those so that it actually saves us in the long term. So I think there's a wide variety of things that we could do whether it's um whether it's the you know as we talk consolidations and things how we might address some of those things or if we just talk about an aging facility needing

107refresh. >> Okay. Um Trusty Richardson showed me the list. So now I'm refreshed on on what CVOC presented. Um I know that they had like the sound system and stuff in there for elementary schools which I know that um several of us commented on being an important need. Um, Trusty Wilbix pointed out that I am a baseball mom and so obviously I I uh, you know, advocated hard for the turf on the baseball and the softball fields. Um, I understand that it's it may not make the cut right now as a priority. And obviously when you're comparing it to a facility that may need to be replaced or or um or renovated, yeah, it's it's hard to to compare those two and to pick that over that. Um, but I just want to make sure

108that I state that in in comparison to pretty much every district around us, um, we are subpar in that area. We really, really are. And for being ahead of the curve in a lot of other ways, we are not in our athletics in a lot of ways. Um, and turf on our baseball fields and our softball fields is one of those big ways that we're not. So, um, I understand it may not make the cut, but I just want to elevate that that it it really does need to be considered. And if not now, very soon. >> Thank you, Miss Haynes. Um, oh, Mr. Chapa. >> Thank you, President Mura. I just had one thing to follow up on what Miss Haynes and Miss Richardson said, um, two things. I I I want to be

109clear that in saying that we shouldn't use the interest earnings on the bond funds, I'm not saying kick the softball baseball fields off in indefinitely. I absolutely think that we should go out for them at some point in the future because I mean I I talked to many people and that those were um important things in the spring. If you talk to our folks on the baseball side, they'll echo exactly what Miss Haynes said that we're at a competitive disadvantage at this point. We can't host tournaments. We can't host playoffs because of the rain out potential. Um I would say our baseball folks overwhelmingly are in favor of doing this. It'll save the coaches a ton of time on field maintenance with their and and give them more time to work with their their kids.

110um and and the softball coaches as well. It'll also free up some savings on the on the field maintenance side. And that's a point that I want to drive home. I think the the numbers that we looked at, I think there was the potential if that if Propsy had passed and converting the fields, we would between water costs and field maintenance costs save somewhere in the neighborhood of the high six figures, maybe low seven figures a year if those things were to to be put in place. So between the sta staff, you know, save staff time plus those costs, it is an investment that kind of pays for itself in some way. So I don't want it to be interpreted that I'm saying we shouldn't do those at all. I think we should and we

111need to look at doing that in some form of if voter approval. On Miss Richardson's um you know the rhetorical question of what do we do given that voters just rejected this? I think there is a difference between something like the softball face baseball fields which is something we don't have but but we can make the case for and things that you're bringing to us that are things that are already over life cycle and that if they don't uh if we don't do something in short order I don't want to leave those things up to chance that if that we may or may not do a future bond or that future bond may or may not pass and then those things get even further deteriorated in their quality and safety for our kids. And so

112that is where I draw the line on saying yes. Voters said no. But I I feel pretty confident that this community wasn't intending to say that we should have our kids working either, you know, using um unsafe facilities once they reach that point or not taking care of of facilities where we've already made a significant investment in the past using taxpayer funds. >> Trustees, one of the things that I neglected to mention earlier and I asked Mr. Grievous to come up just for a second too is um part of the reason that I I wanted to bring up this discussion now as well is as we were putting together the the three propositions for you all in the consideration that you have um there was a discussion about tax rate increase and propositions A and

113B passed but proposition C did not and so one of the questions that will come up well what's the impact on the taxpayer if we decide to go back out so Mr. Rivas, can you tell us a little bit about what we would expect for an impact on the taxpayer on if we did go out for Propsy as it stood uh in our May election? >> Sure. Good evening everybody. The preliminary numbers showed by our financial adviser, excuse me, showed the entire penny being tied to Prop A. So, Prop B and Prop C did not carry a tax rate increase. The ballot language by law says that it is a tax rate increase, but the entire penny was allocated under Prop. The entire penny for the bond was allocated under Prop A, Prop B, and

114Prop C would not have yielded anything above the penny from Prop A. Would have been a no tax increase even though the ballot language said otherwise, the tax increase, the one penny that we published was on. So, the reason we bring that up is again, state law says this is a tax increase on your ballot. Um, but on this because of the way things were structured, the highest dollar amount was in Proposition A that passed by our voters. So, a consideration of Proposition C would not actually yield a tax rate increase at this time. Now, that doesn't mean you don't have to um very clearly educate the community on that. on the ballot, it's still going to say what it says every time. This is a tax increase. But the reason I share that is

115um that is a reality of this and is you're considering these things and I know some of the you all have passion projects as well and you have talked to me about passion projects in the past that you you know that we need investment in X Y and Z across our district. um by considering putting Prop C back out there whole or in a different form, uh there is a reality that you could pass that proposition, not have a tax rate increase, and use the remaining bond interest for other projects in the district as well. There's a lot of variables in that, but I wanted to be clear that I pointed that out because I neglected to mention it earlier. So, thank you for bringing uh coming up, Nberto. >> Thank you, Mr. Rivas and

116Dr. Smith for that context. Um, I'm not seeing any other trustees with questions or concerns. Feel free to hit your button if that changes. I I wanted to echo a lot of what you initially said, Mr. Chapa, about maybe the mix of options for consideration. I I'm kind of having deja vu because this is something that I mentioned when we were talking about going out for a bond and I just want to reiterate it again tonight since this is um our discussion. I'm really wary of a November election. Um, and I know that this was referred to earlier. I know that it is likely in this upcoming legislative session to get some legislation passed that requires some sort of supermajority for us to pass anything. Um but from our our districts around us um in

117the area um I've I've learned a lot from fellow trustees saying once you get on that November cadence um even if it's just for a bond they they have not found success with that and the last thing that I would want to do is make that investment and then not be able to um pass what was already um not passed this past May. Um and Dr. Hill, I do appreciate how your in your presentation you reiterated how there are safety implications for all of these major Prop Cy pro projects and in hindsight, you know, I and again something we've learned from other uh boards and superintendents when they go out for bond when we're going to learn at SLI and EDCON is there are always going to be lessons learned after each unique bond election.

118We haven't gone out for bond since 2019. we didn't have that required ballot language um or even the requirement to break one bond out into several different propositions. There were a lot of differences in this 2026 bond election versus when we went out seven years ago. Um but I um I'm nervous about the thought of a November election at all. Um but these projects are still very important and if we can um find a way to really keep safety at the forefront of what needs to be um invested in with the um interest earnings. I think that that would be doing right by our students and and community. And another thing that I think um we kind of maybe didn't get messaging across as far as what I anecdotally heard working the polls and all

119that was we we proportionally Prop C was not the um tax rate increase or even um the big price tag as compared to Proposition A. And so, um, just kind of taking away, um, that lesson learned. So, whenever if we do need to put some of these projects on a future bond, um, scope, those are some things that I think we can reiterate and maybe emphasize a little bit more, um, in our messaging and even in our dialogue, um, at board meetings. So, thank you again for bringing up the safety implications because it does come down to student safety, not just extras. And it's actually Mr. Horn and a lot of our coaches, you guys are the ones that educated me on that. And I I I think that every community member should have that

120level of education before they um before they vote. Dr. Smith. So, uh, trustees, based on your input tonight, I think what we will do is we will come back, uh, July 30th with some ideas of how we might schedule some things out or um, utilize some bond interest earnings for some of those safety items that you mentioned uh, and that were brought up and uh, the list that you some of you you shared as trustees. We will also bring you um consideration for what a potential uh bond package could look like um November, May, whatever uh time you want. Uh and again, the only reason we would bring it back to you in in July is not to limit your options at that point. So, if you do say November, you have that option at

121that point, but um we'll ask for your direction in um uh end of July or beginning of August on what you actually want us to do. So we'll we'll develop some proposals based on this input and bring it back to you for consideration coming up. >> Thank you Dr. Hill and Dr. Smith. Our next report is the first reading of policy AE local educational philosophy. Dr. trustees. Um, as you know, we have been working with our governance committee for a number of months. Um, in my mind, studying the most important work that a trustee can do and that's to be really thoughtful about the transformational policies that you have in your system. What is it that you want out of the learning experience in the school district? And um, Dr. Collins is here tonight to

122present to you a first reading. Uh first readings aren't often done in this format in Arlington ISD, but we know that this is such an important topic that we wanted to do that. And I know uh Miss Haynes is the governance committee chair will probably chime in on this as well, but I'm really proud of the work that the governance committee did. They actually studied other districts policies. They actually looked at what other districts were articulating regarding the philosophy of education in their school districts. And realizing that we were over a decade behind in updating this policy, um we took the time to really try and get it right in a first draft form about what um both the board committee and some administrative leaders believe uh should be a draft of this policy. And

123tonight, Dr. Dr. Collins is going to walk us through not only policy AE uh local but also eh local after that because that's the result of this study that we did as well. >> Good evening President McMuro, Dr. Smith and trustees. Um as Dr. Smith mentioned tonight we're going to talk a little bit about AE and we call it a first reading but really it's the first opportunity for you as a full board to have dialogue around the conversations that the governance team has been having for the last semester. Um, all of this work really comes out of our curriculum management audit. This is the first recommendation and the first finding in the audit is to address policy AE. It's so foundational. And so AE um the recommendation was that we break that out into

124AE and then have a separate curriculum policy for EH. And so the way that these um items on the agenda are tonight is we're going to focus in first on AE and the substantial changes that were made to AE and then we will have a separate conversation about EH which is a brand new policy for us here in Arlington ISD. So Miss Haynes I will turn it over to you to talk about the work that we did together as a team. >> Okay. So um I jotted down some things from kind of the overview the journey and then the content. Um both of you, y'all did a great job covering the overview and kind of our process. And so I'm not going to repeat all of that. I do want to add though, I think

125it's important that I think um the majority of our trustees up here went through the Holdsworth training. And so we did um go back to that training and continue to kind of ground ourselves in what we learned there as we were um debating and dialoguing and going back and forth on this policy. So I think it's important to understand where we were coming from with that. Um, so some key elements of AE local that I want to make sure um I put out there before we have discussion on it is that we wanted to make sure we kept it students student centered and so it strictly prioritizes outcomes for all students within Arlington ISD. Um we were strategic in um how we approached the theory of action. So ensuring the if then statement um we

126went back and forth on that and so um I just really appreciate the patience of staff. Um it took a lot of patience on their part to just listen to us kind of fumble through that and figure out what would be best for um our board and what what represents what we want for the students in our district. Um it has data driven foundation. So it um a lot of what comes from AE and then eh directly comes from the findings of the curriculum audit that we recently did. And so it ties directly back to that which I think is very important. Um and then the policy alignment that you talked about, it will allow us to seamlessly um put into place the eh local policy which we have not had in place prior to

127this. Um and then ensuring just that um there is a foundation for a guaranteed and viable curriculum for all students here in Arlington ISD. Um because that's that's the goal and this policy truly allows us to be able to do that. Um so with that, I'm I'm eager to hear what what my colleagues have to say. This was a labor of love. So hopefully it's positiveish feedback. So there we go. Thank you, Miss Haynes. Do I have any trustees with questions, comments, feedback regarding AE local? >> Mr. Chapa. Well, since no one else was chiming in and you're asking for feedback, um I I this is, you know, I we as a board, we work in committees and committees do a lot of work because it's a committee of three. They can't make decisions for

128us and so a lot of times work coming out of committee, the first time we get to see it, as you said, is at a board meeting. Um I know that you guys have been working on AE for a long time. Um I think this very, um eloquently sets out our vision, values, and beliefs and enshrines it into policy. And so, um, I'm happy to see this reading. Um, I nothing jumped out to me on a first read of something that that I felt like needed to be adjusted. And if that changes, I'll certainly communicate those thoughts. But, um, as of today, I think this is job well done and and appreciate all the work the governance committee has put into this. >> Thank you, Mr. Chapa, Mr. Wilbanks. >> Thank you, President McMurrow, and

129thank you to the governance committee. I I love it. And we all know that our old AE local had grown a lot of cobwebs and was out of date and wasn't very coherent uh in some spots. Um so it was long overdue and much needed and I love how it addressed the findings of our curriculum audit specifically for this policy. Um it is very rooted in the Holtzsworth training and by extension um what school board should know book by McAdams. Uh and I think you nailed it on your theory of action. I do have one small edit. Well, first of all, based on the McAdams book, you you're know the proposition from that book is that you don't do managed instruction, you don't do managed performance, you do their what they called MPE. But I

130like how you didn't use that kind of confusing language, the part I didn't like about that book and you focused on the two and how the two are important and also how we as Arlington ISD uniquely what that means for us. So kudos to you on that. I like all of that language. My only small complaint is I think the intention was to point out individually managed um instruction and managed performance as two equal things and I think the headings might not have ended up exactly where you wanted. Is that true? Um Trusty Haynes, Vice President Haynes, sorry. >> So yes, I think we discussed this briefly. I and um so the governance committee just for everyone in the room consists of trusty Richardson and or secretary Richardson, President Mcomero um and so they can

131chime in also. Um I I do believe it's a formatting thing. I I remember the discussion being that managed instruction in Arlington ISD should be down in the margin aligned with the managed instruction body piece. Um and then the managed um performance should also say in Arlington ISD if I remember correctly. So I think that those are just minor little errors. >> Yeah. >> Not complaints. We're not going >> No, not complaints. Just >> just making it clear that these are how we as Arlington >> um use those two philosophies here. >> Uh and so yeah, that's the only minor change that you know, we can make for the second reading. >> Awesome. >> I do want to make sure that trustees, I know you've read this over and stuff, but one of the things

132that we've talked to you about numerous times is the need to have a guaranteed and viable curriculum means we actually have to expect some tightness around that across our system. And I don't want to um avoid that conversation. I think your draft policy that you have in front of you helps us do that. Um I also want to be clear that that is different from your policy in the past and the way things were worded. And so it is a change in expectation that you are saying we're going to be tighter across our system in the curriculum that we use in the expectations we have throughout our school district. We can still do that well and and u ensure that we value the teacher voice and expertise in the classroom. But when it comes to

133the what we teach, the curricular part, we do believe that we have to have some tightness because in a district that has a high percentage of students that are mobile across our district, it's important for them to have the same experience at one school as they have at another with a high expectations and support across our system. So, I didn't I I don't want to um sugarcoat anything on this. This is a change for the system. We believe it's the right change, but I also wanted to directly call that out. >> Thank you for pointing that out, Dr. Smith. My first comment I was going to make on this is, you know, when we first met you down in Belton on our inter during our interview process, that's the one gap, the biggest gap strategically

134that we felt needed to be addressed immediately uh here in Arlington and and we are being very intentional and what we believed um and putting it in policy and so thank you for that. Thank you, Mr. Will Bankbanks, and thank you, Dr. Smith for adding that context. Um, I I just want to commend Trusty Haynes and Miss Richardson for um being on governance, and now that I'm board president, I'm not on a sit sitting committee, but I had the high honor um of being part of the um creation of this draft. And I it is it is not often that my two worlds get to coincide and my lanes are very different because as a profession I work in the curriculum instruction department in a different school district. Um and so not only was I

135really excited to um be able to be part of of this transformative policy in response to our 2025 curriculum audit. Um but I absolutely see the potential and how it will transform and um when we went to the trustee institute in Holdzsworth and that was over the the span of two years so that our several of our board can go um that that only added to um the excitement and I think that we took that energy and that charge and that is what frankly what took so long is because it was a lot of dialogue a lot of give and take um a lot partnership with Dr. Smith and Dr. Wartz and you Dr. Collins and with staff. Um, but just like the curriculum audit said, the board it we're all on the same team

136and the board has to do their part in order to cast this trans this transformative vision and really be able to transform with that guaranteed and viable curriculum that starts with us. And so it is my great hope that this is a wonderful starting point to that awesome transformation. My favorite thing about it as well is that we are as Dr. Smith mentioned, we are wanting to tighten fidelity across the district. And that's not just because we think it's a good idea or that's what some people are saying, but it is what an outside auditing firm told us was a top recommendation. And that is for students. that is for students to be successful no matter where they go to school. But something that I'm really excited about is I think that this also lays

137the foundation to preserve the art of teaching so that the how as far as instructional delivery can still continue because we know that that is what makes instruction so special, meaningful, and memorable for our students. Um, and so anyway, it was an honor to be part of this and I I really do appreciate everyone um who helped making this happen and I appreciate y'all's feedback um on it as well. >> So trustees, I just want to be clear on this one. In a first reading, we present to you, we gain any input. The the input that Mr. Willbanks gave was minor formatting changes. So based on that input, it's our intention to bring this back to you as a consent agenda item at the July 30th meeting for your approval. Um if there was substantive

138changes, we would have brought it back with another reading for you to consider, but the fact that it was just formatting changes, um you can expect to see it on the next board agenda. >> Thank you, Dr. Smith. Okay. And relatedly, um we will now move on to our first reading of policy eh local. Dr. Smith. So, EH is a brand new policy. You won't see a redlinined version because it's all fresh and brand new for us here in Arlington ISD. And what EH allows us to do is to pull the curriculum pieces out of the A section in our policy manual over to the curriculum part of our uh policy manual. And so, eh is um all about curriculum design. It talks about um the written, taught, and tested curriculum. But then my favorite

139part is the way that it lines out roles and responsibilities regarding curriculum because we all play a role in ensuring that curriculum happens with fidelity in the system. >> Yeah. And so um I will just point out that this um this aligns with like she said with AE and that it was a staff developed um companion policy that we went through and read through with them several times. um and that it was one of the biggest findings from the curriculum audit in terms of what the board needed to do or was lacking in our governance role. We this policy hasn't existed. Um and so it was a top priority of our governance committee to make sure that we immediately course corrected that and got this policy in place. Open open to feedback. >> Thank you,

140Miss Haynes. Do I have any trustees with questions or um remarks on the first reading of eh local? Mr. Mike, >> thank you, President McMurro. Um no, I think this is both I haven't talked much tonight because both are really good. Um it's what we need. Just the lawyer and me looking at loopholes on page six of seven under the teacher shall use provided instructional materials. Um that is to to me I read that as the provided instructional materials are the instructional materials that are provided by the district. Correct. >> Yes. I do believe that that was the intent was that the teachers using instructional materials provided by the district. >> Okay. because I know we've had issues with fidelity and you know what I the reason why I really wanted to see this was

141I didn't want to see worksheets from different states being brought in or purchased from different websites to teach our students when we need to ensure that if one student is in one elementary and moves to another elementary there should be no gaps in learning. they should be learning the same thing and not having having any gaps. So, as long as that's that's there, then um it's looks good to me. >> Do you want to have a suggestion to reward the way that that's written? No. Okay. >> Okay. >> And I'll add on and Dr. Collins can add as well. Um so, one of the pieces that you see in this policy is a reference to the exhibit. The exhibit is a what would be a staff developed curriculum management plan. And so based on the

142policy that you all adopt tonight in this this situation uh policy eh local um we have to have a curriculum management plan that manages exactly what you said. What are the resources that we're actually providing to our staff and what are the clear expectations that we are giving them regarding the use of those resources. So as you see uh eventually that exhibit that would come forward for you all um so that you knew what the curriculum management plan was and I do want to say a curriculum management plan should never be static actually it should be ongoing that's why the board doesn't adopt it in policy it is something that we have to manage on a regular basis and say here's where we need to tweak it here's why we need to tweak it based

143on student data or based on teacher use uh of some of those resources we're going to need to change that plan and the efforts to address that curricular and instructional resource need. So, just know that there's more detail that would be coming in that curriculum management plan. That's a staff adopted plan in a in a staff created plan, but that would help put probably some of your concerns at ease, I think. >> Does that plan get presented to the board at at some point or >> that plan would be shared with the board for um for your perusal and any feedback, but that would not be adopted by the board. Perfect. Thank you, Mr. Will Banks. >> Thank you, Vice President McMurro. Um, I only had All of this is great um and much needed.

144I can't believe we've operated it as a district, as a governing body without such an important uh policy that doves nicely with what we did in AE local. Um, I do have one small question. It might be a formatting thing or just a curiosity. On page four near the bottom for professional learning and in instructional um support, that paragraph starts, all instructional staff shall participate in a quotation mark coherent professional learning system. Why does it have quotations around coherent professional system? I don't think those are needed. >> It puts it into question for me. >> Yeah, I >> think it could probably go away. >> What What page are you on? Uh page four >> near the bottom >> under professional learning instructional support heading. >> We didn't we didn't have any dialogue around quotations

145or or no quotations. So I think it I mean they could be removed. >> The only wonder that I have is maybe it was directly referenced in the curriculum audit. um that way. >> Um >> but it's pretty clear in these circles at least what a coherent professional learning what's the intent of that phrase. So >> I I don't see any reason why we couldn't remove those. >> I think we can remove them. >> Yeah. It's only only request. >> No, it's great. >> Looks great. It looks love it. >> Thank you, Mr. Wilbanks. Any other um trustees with questions or remarks around eh local? Thank you Dr. Collins. Thank you governance committee and thank you Dr. Smith. >> Thank you. >> We will now move on to our key progress measure report around the

146priority of culture. Dr. Smith. >> Uh Dr. Lopez is making her way up to the podium tonight. As you note, um, for every key progress measure that you adopt as a board, we report to you the efforts over the course of the year and the impact on our system. And Dr. Lopez is going to go over, um, our progress with you and, uh, tell you where we ended up falling in all this. >> President McMurro, members of the board, and Dr. Smith, thank you for the time this evening to discuss one of our key progress measures from our culture priority. So in this presentation, we'll provide information on the district's completed status of our staff net promoter score which is extracted from our annual staff survey results. So this year we um had an effort

147intentional effort to go from from good to great um when it came to our net promoter score. So we established an aggressive goal of increasing our NPS from a 24 to a 30 for the 2526 school year. So on our annual staff survey we ask a multitude of questions related to factors such as psychological safety, campus safety and working conditions and uh datadriven decision-m. So this year we administered our staff survey um April 20th through May 1st. We sent our um staff survey emails to 8,836 of our employees. The engagement rate was a 68% and the quality response rate was 52%. Now the results from the the whole survey are not the main priority this evening. The dashboard and the results um from the entire survey will be be was shared soon at a later

148date. We're going to review one specific item from the survey that's related to our culture KPM tonight and that's our net promoter score. So the question that we ask on our annual staff survey um more towards the end of the survey is how likely are you to recommend the district as a place for a friend to work? So the results of the specific NPS question are shown visually here on this slide. Um, so you can see that we had 1,939 respondents that responded with a nine or a 10 to that question. And those that respond with a nine or 10 are considered promoters. We had 1,428 respondents that scored the item with a seven or an eight, which is a positive response, but according to the NPS calculation, they fall into the passive category. So

149those roughly 1400 don't actually end up in the calculation that goes towards our net promoter score. And then we had uh 892 respondents that were considered detractors. That's anyone that responded with a one all the way up through a six on the likelihood to recommend. And so um as you can see from the calculation, the promoters that that green portion that was 46% of our employees. when you subtract the detractors, which was 21% that resulted in a net promoter score of a 25 of the 4,259 respondents that um responded to this particular item because you can engage with the survey and not answer all the items. And so um although we grew clearly the 25 was growth from what we had done in um the prior year, it wasn't enough growth to get to that

150aggressive goal of a 30. So although it's it's still in the good category, uh we'll continue to strive for improvement next year. So uh the improvement is going to be informed by the rest of the survey results and that's in addition to many other forms of communication regarding potential strategies for how we can improve. It's just one of many ways that we obtain that information. So, as far as the staff survey goes, u we'll report the results of the dashboard in the upcoming weeks, and we'll be able to identify areas of focus and recognition, especially when we do our year-over-year comparisons. We'll continue to promote the survey toolkit to our leaders, and that provides assistance with analysis of results and goal setting with teams and then resources for communication. When we get back from our,

151you know, the little bit of the summer break, we do reach out with to uh principles and department leaders that showed uh more significant growth to ask them about what were their what was their approach to get to that and then we we add that into um kind of our category of best practices that we then share with other leaders so that they can have some you know replication of that approach. So um we also will continue a district level review of trends and patterns and then continue sense making sessions with our district leaders. So to conclude um although our NPS grew, we did not reach our aggressive goal of increasing our NPS from a 24 to a 30 this year. So I'll now open it up to the discussion portion. >> Thank you Dr.

152Lopez, Miss Fowler. >> Thank you President McMurra. Thank you for this. Let me ask, was there a way, this looks like it's kind of general, is like the whole district, but is there a way that you can look at separate campuses to see >> Oh, absolutely. >> Okay. I think that would be interesting for us to see or or to know about to know which campuses kind of fell into which areas. >> Yes, ma'am. And we do put that on the uh the dashboard. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Thank you, Miss Fowler. Mr. Chopp. >> Thank you, President McMurro. I just I always like to point out that since we started doing this at the net promoter score rubric is a very tough grader because uh I think a lot of folks if you respond

153to a survey on a 10-point scale and you put seven or eight, that means you're probably pretty happy with the way things are going, especially if you're at an eight. But the net promoter system considers that you're just sort of ambivalent, which is not the way the real world operates, but it's the way that this operates. And so the fact that uh you know I'm bad at math, but fully ne 79% of our staff it looks like rated their their satisfaction at a seven or higher I think is a is a really good sign that we're we're heading in the right direction. Almost 50% of our staff says that their satisfaction is at a nine or a 10. Um in an in a in a job that is this tough in an environment that is

154this hard. Um, I think that says a lot about what we're doing at the campus level in our districts. Um, and just in in the private sector, a net promoter score for a business of 25 is considered really outstanding. So, um, congratulations to everyone who's who's putting a lot of work into, um, moving the needle on culture. That was one of our district priorities that we adopted a few years back and and we are monitoring it and it has increased every year since we started doing that. So, thank you. >> I do want to point out trustees, I learned a lesson. Thank you for those of you that gave us feedback when we adopted these when you said I think at the dis that's a really aggressive goal and I was like we got this

155don't worry and Natalie was sitting in the back of the room shaking her head like that is a really poor choice Matt. Uh so no we we didn't hit the sixpoint jump target. Um, we did grow and I I do appreciate Justin in mentioning that we are proud of the growth that we've had, but very clearly we didn't hit the uh aggressive target that we had and I I do thank you for your feedback and uh we will consider those things as we move forward for uh next update with KPMs for you to adopt. >> Thank you for bringing that up, Dr. Smith. And yes, I I think that just the fact that this is something that is is brought as an agenda item at the district level and is something that we were we're

156monitoring prior to this year. Um I think that keeping our eye on this as a KPM and we have a board priority of culture. This is one way that we can tangibly monitor that. And um it was mentioned earlier, but each campus has its own >> staff feedback. Each department in our system has its own staff feedback. That's something that um our board has access to. And Dr. Lopez, I do appreciate you um reminding us about the toolkit because all of our um all of our leaders in the system. They do get the the nitty-gritty. They get the annual feedback down to um each area and each KPM that they were rated on. and they also monitor are we declining in this area or are we improving that's essential for reflection and for you know

157self assessment and it's also valuable when we have a leadership change I think it's important to know um like we met our new administrators tonight um new administrative appointments it's a great data point for a new leader to know exactly what the pulse is of your building or of your team so I I love that this is one of our KPMs that we monitor I'm very proud um to see the improvement and I appreciate you sharing this with us. >> Yes, ma'am. >> Thank you, Dr. Lopez. >> All right. Up next, we will move on to the public hearing on the 2026 2027 proposed budget and tax rate. Dr. Smith, >> trustees, I would like to welcome up uh Nberto Rivas, our chief financial officer tonight. It's our intention to uh hold the public hearing

158tonight after a brief um presentation from Mr. Mr. Rivas and um then move into action items for you to consider the adoption of the budget of which all are tied together. >> Good evening board president McMurro trustees and superintendent Dr. Smith purpose to discuss the proposed 2627 budget and tax rate. Here's just a couple of key points regarding the operating budget as and where they're found in the Texas Education Code and then the three budgets that have to be adopted by the board. There's a lot going on around the state regarding funding and invader elections. So this is a start the slide I'm going to start off with you see in green in the middle in year 2020 2020 2021 that's when Arlington ISD went out for the the Vader election and so our M

159tax rate is now capped and then up top you see teacher pay ranks over several years at the year 0 5 10 15 20 25 so you see a climb in the ranks which was a result of that Vader election which brought in more more revenues. Table on the bottom, student toteer ratio history. I have a slide later on talking about staff to student ratio, which is why I included this version as well, student toteer ratio. So, it kind of shows our ratio at the bottom um district 14.6, 14.7, 13.8. It kind of stays pretty stable along with what the state average was. So those two kind of continued at the same pace as we lost students, we attrition teachers. This next slide shows a lot of data points. Revenue and expenditure history. The first

160data point is 201920. There's a star up top. It's the COVID closure. There was a surplus that year because districts closed. So there was savings on the operational side. The next year after is the Vader election. If you go a little bit below the 2019 2020 column, you see a reference to HP3. That is the last that was the last major increase to the basic um which I'll share a little bit later as well. And then you see in green you see er funding. So you see we saved money because of the esser uh because of the co closure. We got an in inflow of revenues because of the Vader election and then we were able to supplant because of Eser funding. So at table at the bottom you'll see revenues and expenditures and then

161whether there was a surplus or a deficit and at the bottom you see a couple of of those years called out. You see surplus surplus surplus deficit deficit. Now keep that in mind as we look at this next slide. This is the funding cliff. This is a slide that TA was sharing out across the state years ago. The very bottom you see surplus, surplus, deficit, deficit. Right? So there's a little box in the middle and it pretty much is saying by saving 50 million in the general fund balance across years 21 and 22 and 22 23 the LEA can smooth out expenditures over the next three years. So this was a strategy that TA presented because Esser allows supplanting build up your fund balances have surplus years. When Eser goes away you have a fund

162balance and you begin drawing on that fund balance and you have deficit budgets. So I'm going to switch over to the budget now. Budget components. The first big piece is revenues. This is the inputs. This is what's coming in. Right? We have the M tax rate. We have collections, state funding. Then you have a little box that says 90% of our revenue is derived from enrollment and tax collections. And those two go together because of the Texas education reference that's listed next to it. There's a section in that sentence that pretty much defines how school finance works in Texas. And those are the key words. Substantially equal access to similar revenue per student at similar tax effort. So because the state looks at how many students we have based on our tax effort, there's this

163concept of entitlement. So depending on your tax collections and your enroll enrollment, both of those get added together which comprise 90% of our revenues. On this next slide, we're adding now the expenditure piece. That's part on the bottom. These are your output variables. So you have campus staffing, department staffing, operational needs. So 80% 86% of the expenditure budget is tied to pay, right? So 90% of the money comes in with enrollment and tax collections and 80% of the budget is in payroll. You add both of those together and that gives you what is the budget. It's not just one, it's one and the other. Finally, what's left over? That is your financial outlook. So here the line I'm going to call out is um reserves, which is essentially the fund balance. There is a TA

164first rating indicator and there is a board policy that is tied to the fund balance. So depending on how your revenues and expenditures are for that given year that makes up your budget depending on how you end that year. That's kind of what's left over as a financial outlook. I'm going to jump over back to the basic a lotment which I talked talked a little bit about earlier. So this um table if you go to the very far left it starts in 200910 and you see four years in a row where that basic allotment stayed the same. So that means that for two sessions it stayed the same and then 134 1415 it went up and then it stayed the same for former years and then in 201920 the very bottom you see a reference

165to HB3. That's what I mentioned earlier. That's when it went up by almost $1,000 per student. So that was kind of tied up with that aligned perfectly with the Vader election and with ESSER funding. But then the trend of four years then it goes up and then four years and then it goes up that kind of stopped because this basic held for six years and there's a little note up top that kind of shows when the SSR funding expired right so maybe after the first four years a lot of IC still had funding so it stayed the same for two years and then finally the last two columns is the latest increase of the basic allotment which was HB2 this is the one that was $55 $5. So this slide shows you inflation versus the

166basic elements. So on one side you see the consumer price index inflation calculator and the starting point that I'm using is September of 2019 which was at HB3, right? That $6,160 figure. The next one I'm using is September of 2025, which was the beginning of the banium, right? So that's the 2526. So if you take you look right below it, you see September 2025, $7,792. So that's $6,160 basic allotment. The inflation of that became $7,792 6 years later. So it's a delta of about $1,600. If you compare that delta versus the change in the basic allotment, $1,600 versus $55, right? So hypothetically, you take 1632 times 49,000 students at 94.88 RDA, you're at a change of about $75 million in purchasing power that the basic a lotment did not keep up. There's a lot of

167there's a lot of press um this last session about other aotments and a huge influx into public funding. It is true. On the right hand side, these are called out and these were assigned. These were not in the basic a lotment, but it was assigned funding. emphasis on the word assigned because you have things like the teacher retention allotment assigned for a specific purpose. The support staff retention allotment assigned for a specific purpose. The allotment for basic costs assigned for a specific purpose. $106 per student for transportation, utilities, benefits, and insurance. I'm going to call this number out a little bit later in the slide deck. You have other things. And at the very bottom, you have the school safety law. $21 per ADA plus $33,000 per school. Unless you're a big campus, that doesn't

168cover the armed SRO or security officer. The very bottom you see what our budget is versus what our aotment is. So, we're spending twice the amount that the state has given us for school funding. This next slide shows the enrollment trend over several years. We're on the decline. And then there's a reference at the bottom that shows both demographer reports um and where they have us 10 years out from now. This next slide shows student to staff trend. Um earlier I sh I shared teacher to student trend. This is all staff. And so for the last several years these kind of went up went in different directions. So our student to staff ratio is about 6.2. Now, where do we compare compared to the largest 20 ISDs in the district in the state or market

169districts and our peer districts? That's what this comparison does. So, at the far left you have Sakoro and Keller. They're above a ratio of eight. Bottom right, you have um Pasadena. We're towards the bottom end and there's four arrows because there's four ISDs called here. So, Carl Keller, El Paso, and Austin, which I will cover on the next little bit later. Up top, you see some notes. A there was a board approved budget parameter considering changes to this ratio to get us closer to that seven, which would put us a little bit more to the middle. FC did recommend getting to 7.3 over the course of three years. I'm going to cover um days of expenditure, which is fund balance. So for the 2425 school year, you take assigned and unassigned fund balances. Um you

170take your expenditures, you divide your expenditures by 365 days. That's your daily operating. And then you divide that by the assigned and unsigned fund balance. And that's how we get to 152 days. So there's an arrow that shows where Arlington ISD is compared to the same districts on the previous slide. And so the four I called out on the previous slide are all on the same in the same general area on this graph. the two with the largest um student to staff ratio are there and the two right above us that are in the news a lot right now are on that side of this comparison as well. So this was the calculator that was um just a screen grab of that was shared at the at the comp plan presentation. It shows actuals first

171column amended and then it shows a a no change example which is the third column right fund balance impact no change example. So the very bottom you see highlighted in yellow 137 days that's based on the amended budget. had nothing been done and all the students come back everybody everything stays the same that number decreases about 101 days because you'll see towards the middle total financing sources 7915 we transferred in $43 million in 2425 we've been transferring about $57 million this year to help offset that deficit that is no longer available next year on this slide you'll see Once again, that 152 days where we would have been without any changes and where we would be with um the $23 million in reductions because of the KPM. So, the KPM was approved in July based

172on the adopted budget. That number was used as a reference point, which was $70 million. The KPM was approved in October. And then we want we continued on with different variables like the budget parameter and demographer reports in the spring. The at the bottom there's two references to the local board policy and the first indicator. Local board policy is wanting 90 days of fund balance. First indicator is wanting 75 days of operational fund balance. On this slide continuing on what those indicators are. There's a screen grab to the right. This is a press release from last December when we refine when we went through a refunding issuance. S&P the very first bullet point talks about a AAA long-term rating and a double A underlining rating. So the double A is what we earned and the

173AAA is what is assigned because the bonds are backed by the state of Texas and the permanent school fund. There's a note that's highlighted which I do want to read. The stable outlook reflects our opinion that management's prudent and proactive financial practices will allow the district to maintain fiscal stability and healthy reserves despite the adopted deficit budget. So, we got the double A because the fund balance was in a strong position. To the left, you see a screen grab from this is our actual application based on the recent bond proposition that was submitted. So, this is an application for guarantee of school bonds. This is what yields that AAA rating. There's a very there's a question at the very bottom has a district claim financial agency. So there's a district in the news right now

174who just claimed it. Once you go out and claim that then you have to disclose that here to the state before they approve this application. So here's how the fund balance impacts credit and the bond rating. On this next slide up top this is the reductions. You see fiscal year 26 budget. This is the budget I mentioned earlier. This was a starting point. It was a budget on July 1st, 615 in revenues, less 685 in expenditures is a $70 million deficit. So the KPM was onethird of that. And then you see a distinction, departments on one column and campuses on the other. So then I went back one year to fiscal year 25 because that was the last set of actual financial activity. Apartments accounted for about 27% of the budget or about $174 million.

175while campuses picked up about 73% of the budget or $459 million. The next table shows the reductions to support that KPM. The first one is $2.7 million. We implemented zerobased budgeting at the department level, meaning departments had to go in and disclose whether something was required or not, and then they had a priority. That was not implemented at the campus level, which is why you see zero per people funding levels remain unchanged. And then there was staffing changes on both department and campus level. So the overall reduction at the campus level was higher at 12.6%. Versus I mean 12.6 million versus 10.8 million versus at the department level. But if you look down to the next little box when you take that number and you apply it to the FY25 actual spent 10.8 million at

176the department level out of 174 million spent is about a 6% reduction. take that as well at the campus level and it becomes a 3% reduction. Then there's a note at the very bottom. This shows that this is excluding teacher positions that get attritioned just because we have declining enrollment. So that is not factored in the reduction. Finally, just to begin wrapping all this up, here's a play on for site words. My wife is a teacher, so I call this site numbers. The first one you see on the far left, $5.3 million. That's what I mentioned earlier, the a lotment for basic costs. That's how much we got, $5.3 million for basic costs. Right above it, um, you see a $6.5 million increase in insurance costs from 2019 to 2026, right? So that inflation, our

177insurance went up by 6.5 million. Right below it, $6.4 million increase in transportation. So either one of those alone wiped out what we got from the b allotment for basic costs. Look in the middle, we're declining enrollment. So you lose about,00 students a year at 94 94% ADA. That's $6.4 million every year because we're losing enrollment. At the bottom, I mentioned 7.6 million. That's our budget for SRO's. Right next to it, um there's a reference to recapture payments, $4.3 million. And then right above is $4.8 $8 million. I'm there with a screen grab for the tap for the from the tab report. There's 31 employees for the 24 or 25 year. Our percentage relative to the state is is lower. So then if you take those 31 students and if you look at that same

178report and take the average of those salaries and multiply them out, that's how I got to the $4.8 million. And then bottom far right, you see Mo Casey staffing study presented in February of 2025. So this just kind of shows for reference, keep losing a thousand students, insurance goes up, transportation goes up. It's not just cut one one area or like it's there's a lot that goes into the overall budget. Finally, I'm going to move on to how do we close the current year. There is one final amendment that is being proposed on the consent agenda. So you see the first column describing the account and then the amended budget. So the third column is hold harmless. There's a lot of talk about the way the controller changed values and a lot of districts are

179getting hurt by home hold harmless. Our impact is going to be about $4.4 million and this is perpetual. So we're losing that in 2526. We're going to lose that again in 2627. Like we're not going to have that $4.4 million. The next column is TRS. I'm increasing both revenues and expenditures on this one. It is a an accounting entry. It is matching and it is being increased because the TRI was the teacher retention aotment was substantial. The next column is a it's also an accounting entry gazby 96. It's the way we're supposed to be recording multi-year software. This one is also budget neutral. The third the next one in other transfers in there's $6 million that I'm proposing we amend the budget by. There's a note at the bottom that says where that's coming from.

180There's about $3 million more in the local capital outlay fund because of it because of the sale of a property that closed in July. So, we received the money in July and because a because of interest earned in that money in that in that fund with the reserves that are there. And then there's $3 million more in the workers comp fund that is also being recommended to be pulled in. And that should offset the last column which is just based on our projections right now. We're going to be short about $5.5 million in the overall budget. But the bottom line, if you look at what the net effect is, we started with an adopted budget after all resources of $113 million. Looks like we're going to end there as well. 133 million. So, we'll end

181where we started. I'm going to move over to the tax rate real quick. Two buckets of two buckets of funding. M funds day-to-day INS funds debt service and then there's a plus one plus 01 penny which was for the bond proposition like I mentioned earlier bond uh prop was carrying all the entire penny to the and one thing I do want to note on bond funds is bond funds are not subject to recapture which if you look to the right hand side there's a little there's a little graphic labeled entitlement there's a little line there that says entitlement this goes back to the comment I made earlier substantially equal access to similar revenue per pursuit and that similar tax effort. So there's two comparisons. The first one has local collections in blue and state sharing

182in white. That gets you up to the entitlement. So if you're a district that cannot cover everything on your own, the state gives you um gives you aid. If you're a district that exceeds that entitlement calculation, then the state pulls that away through recapture. So essentially what this is saying is the basic allotment and funding formulas from the state determine the funding. So our values can keep growing and growing and growing. That just means there's less state that's coming in. So unless the state changes in the formula, the funding formula or the basic allotment which generates a funding formula to increase the entitlement, the entitlement will not change. The very bottom it just shows you the MCR rate. This one is calculated by TA 63 cents. So out of our 80 cent M rate, 63

183cents is determined by TA. The next 17 cents, eight and nine, was approved by the voters. This was the Vader. And then the last 29 cents is just the debt rate. Briefly here, there's a note our notice did not include the M portion of the tax rate that may be compressed from TA that won't be available until until August. The right hand side, it just shows when it was published in the Fort Worth Star Telegram. And so the first one shows the impact using the average residence value. So one penny increase is actually going to yield a decrease in taxes of about $144 on the average home because a homestead went up. There's something at the bottom taxpayer impact. This is different. This one's showing an increase, but it's based on the medium residence value.

184So this would be the property right in the middle of your tax. If you sort every all all your tax properties from highest to lowest or lowest to highest property in the in the middle would be the medium value. So here there's a slight increase average residence there's a slight decrease. Finally just to go back to the budget to begin getting to the end point here. First column that's highlighted shows the adopted budget which was the reference point for the $23 million reductions for the KPM. So it leaves us with an ending point of about $46 million. Like I mentioned, 20 million was payroll, $2.7 million was GBB. The notes are there on the side. So then what happened on this column on this slide? I'm using the amended revenues but adopted expenditures. Using amended

185revenues because the um homestead went up, our local and state share shifted a bit. So these are a lot closer than the adopted budget in July because the homestead referendum was was after the adoption. So then the budget changes. Here's here's everything that is being considered in this budget. They're explained on the right hand side. There is a decrease I mean there is an increase in local revenues of about $6.4 million. 10 million of that is because of an increase in tax collections. 3 million because of a decrease in interest earnings. um smaller reserves, lower interest rates, and a slight difference in local revenue. The next one under 5,800 state revenues, the $4.4 million is being decreased here because of whole harmless. And there's a decrease of $10 million in state aid, which is tied

186to the $10 million increase in tax collections, right? Because the entitlement didn't change. If we're going to levy, if we're going to collect more, the state's going to not pay us this much. So those actually net to zero. And then the biggest driver is $12.3 million due to enrollment decline. And I do want to note here this is based on the demographers low enrollment projection. So it is the most conservative of all the projection numbers they gave us. If enrollment does not decline as much then that just means there would be an increase in revenues coming in. On the expenditure side, the $ 8.9 million is because we are projecting about 117 117 less teachers due to normal attrition which is based on student enrollment, a slight increase in utility costs, a slight decrease in

187recapture, TRS on behalf nets on both. Column three is the comp plan changes and then the last column becomes the proposed budget. So because we are still losing students and because the entitlement calculation is not going up then our deficit is kind of swinging in the wrong direction still because of the enrollment. The very bottom it shows you projected beginning and ending fund balances, total expenditures and then just the calculation number of days of fund balance. So same graph that I've shared before but now it has fiscal year 25 actuals fiscal year 26 number of 133 with the final amendment and then fiscal year 27 107 days with the proposed budget. So we're still meeting the 25% or 90 days of board policy and the 75 days in the first and we're trying to prevent

188we're trying to prevent getting too close to the edge of that group over there. Finally, this is just a screen grab of of the adoption. So, this is the data we have as of right now. You have the general operating fund, child nutrition fund, debt service fund, capital projects fund, and the local construction fund. The debt service fund will be amended as will most of these probably once we go out and issue bonds and actually receive certified value. So, at that point, I will wind this presentation down. Thank you, Mr. Rivas. This is a public hearing, so at this time we will open the public hearing at 9:34 p.m. Miss Crossno, do we have any members of the public who wish to speak regarding the 2026 2027 proposed budget and tax rate public hearing? >>

189President Muro, we do not. >> Okay. We have no registered speakers. So, the 2026 2027 proposed budget and tax rate public hearing is now closed at 9:34 p.m. Are there any trustees with comments or questions on the proposed budget and tax rate public hearing? We will move to action next, but for um for this portion, are there any questions or concerns about the public hearing? All right. So, we'll now turn to the action portion of tonight's meeting. We have two items up for consideration. Um, and just to give everyone a heads up, I do want to finish um the proposed budget since we have you up here, Mr. Rivas. After that, we will take a short recess. Um, then move to our one um non-aggenda item, public speaker, and then continue our action items. Um,

190so at this time we will consider approval of the of the 2026 2027 budget including the general fund, debt service fund, child nutrition fund, and capital projects fund. Dr. Smith, >> I would like to introduce you to Mr. Rivas who's going to be up here uh leading you through this item as well. As you know, the public hearing and the board and the presentation are directly tied to this action item. >> Thank you, Dr. Smith. Good evening. Good evening again. This is this is a document under this agenda item for adoption. At this point, I'm available to answer any questions the board may have. >> Thank you. Do I have any trustees with questions or comments regarding the budget? >> Thank you, Mr. Will Banks. >> Thank you, Mr. Grievous for um tying out where

191we are ending up in our um budget that we have in front of us to adopt with what we've been working to in terms of where we're trying to get to with the fund def um the deficit and where we wanted to keep our fund balance. If you could could you throw up slide 28 from your presentation? I just want to briefly call out so we're ending up here in the middle this current year with 131 days of fund balance. I really like the fact that Mr. Ravius, you called out all the schools that are in the news because they're either bankrupt or having to get the equivalent of payday loans that are all at the far right hand side. But even with all the hard work we've done adopting this budget, we're getting too

192close to the unsavory neighborhood, I will say. Uh with the districts down over on the right when we're used to being on the far left. Uh and so um it behooves us to continue to scream loud that we need help down in Austin. They thought they helped us, but they didn't really help us. And it's not just us they didn't help. It's the major vast majority of school districts across the state of Texas. So, I just want my colleagues um to make sure I call out the importance of this slide and exactly where we're ending up next year. Um so, thank you, Mr. Rivas, for putting that together. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Willbanks. And um that chart that you shared, Mr. Davis, over the span of the past decade, that really helped put that

193in perspective. Mr. Choa, >> thank you, President McMurro. Um Mr. Revis, I just want to walk back through a couple things because it's a ton of information and I just want to put it in context given what we know is happening in the background across the state and what likely is coming down the pipe next year. And it just I want to give context to what's going on. um because I think this is an incredibly complicated subject has important implications but a lot of people don't understand the position we're in. So I want to go back and to slide start with slide um I can't read the slide number four. It's the one with the BAT pos that one. So, couple questions that we get heading into this environment is what is it? You know,

194these districts around us all across the state, they've been um letting staff go for years. They've been closing campuses for years and we've just started doing that in AISD. And we've been able to do that because we have built up um and I'll come back to it in a minute, such a sizable fund balance. And I've said before that has given us the runway to ride this out in a way that most other districts have not been able to do. Unfortunately, because our declining enrollment, it we are losing a ton of revenue. And so, even as we have been making reductions in and our expenditures all along, it's very hard to meet the budget to balance a budget while we're losing students because we're losing revenue as we're also cutting, right? So, makes it hard

195to get ahead. So, a question I've I've got a lot is, well, can't we just go out and get more money? Isn't there a way we can get more revenue? The answer basically is no in my opinion because um essentially school districts are totally dependent on the state for our funding because of the way the school finance system works. Yes, we have local tax values and they go into they go to Austin and we come it comes back to us um in some way and we're very different than like the city of Arlington, right? So they have sales tax revenue. um they have they have access to bonds like we do, but they al also have access to different types of taxes like the taxes that are um put in place to fund AT&T Stadium

196and and before that the ballpark in Arlington, now Gold Five Field. We don't have access to that. So, we did have an opportunity in November of 2020 to essentially use the authority the state has given us to increase our revenue. And we took it and we increased it to the maximum level that we could. And the reason we did that, if you look at this chart, is because between 2018 and 2020, we lost a lot of ground in how competitive we were in compensation relative to our peers in the DFW Metroplex. And we knew that that was a problem. And the only way that we could fix that under the circumstances was to go out to voters and ask, will you allow us to go to the cap on our taxing authority so we can

197get the revenue to pay our teachers? Campaign for that literally was called pay our teachers. And you can see from this chart, that's exactly what we did. We went from middle of the market in the 2019 2020 school year to for the last at least four years, three years, we have been the overall highest paying district for teachers in DFW. So, we did what we said we were going to do and we used the revenue that we were able to get and we put it towards our staff, which is 80 high 80s% of our budget. So, there's not more money that we can go out and really get. Also want to highlight here um we have a fantastic studenttoteer ratio. I don't think people understand um just how great we are on this on the

198studenttoteer ratio. Um our our studenttoteer ratio is better than a lot of private schools who are sending um stuff for my kids in the mail. So I think that's a big talking point for us strategically. Now if you go to the next slide, how did we get here? Why do why we've been able to ride this out so long? Um, you don't have the surplus marker below the first two here, but it shows that we had a surplus, a surplus, a surplus, surplus, surplus, surplus. So, for the folks who take pot shots at us that we don't know how to responsibly manage money, I know that there's err funding thrown in here, too, and we used it to, as you described, sort of shore us up. Um, this district and this board have a very

199long history of knowing how to balance budgets in a way that we get surplus at the end of the year. and that built up our fund balance in a way that we have been able to write out these deficits that are really have becoming a result of our um decline in enrollment. So then if you go to the slide I want to go to the slide that mentions um it's slide 11 basic a lotment trend over the years you pointed this out how there was like a it used to be a thing it go up every four years or so but I also want to point out um the time period at the at the left portion of that slide in particular between like say 2012 and 2019 um the basic a lotment didn't move

200a whole lot during that time but that was also a period of historically low inflation and So moving in 2019, yes, the basic a lotment went up with HB3 in 2019, but then it stayed stagnant for a long time doing doing relatively record inflation um at least for the last couple decades, right? So even though we got that bump with HB3 in 2019, we immediately hit a scenario where inflation was immediately eroding the money that we got. And if we could just point out I on slide 12, just want to point this out, and I know that you got to adjust for the different little buckets that you mentioned later, but after adjusting for inflation, if last session the legislature had just kept us on par with inflation from HP3 in 2019, we would have

20175 million more dollars right now under basic aotment funding. And what is our remind me what is the deficit you're projecting for next year? >> For next year, 59 million. Last year, we started at 70 million. Okay. >> Would have been white. >> So if if the ledge had just kept us at inflation to HB3, we would not be in a deficit scenario at all. >> Even with declining enrollment. So I just want to to hit on that. Go to the enrollment trend slide on slide 14. For those who haven't been with us for the last several months and sat through lots of board meetings, we've had multiple presentations over the last few months that this decline in enrollment trend playing out all across the nation. And in Texas, public school enrollment is down in

202Texas for the first time. It's decoupled from the population increase. The reason for that is this enrollment trend. If you put up a slide, the slide from our demographer report on declines in birth rates, this tracks the decline in birth rates going back to the Great Recession. Um almost like perfect correlation. So like that's also important to note. I think folks have in their head that well if school districts X Y or Z kids are going to come back to Arlington ISD. But that's not necessarily the case because um districts around us no matter what their ratings are, what they're viewed, you can pick um Keller and Frisco and Prosper and Grapevine Collville and all these districts are closing campuses because they're losing enrollment too. And it's not because they've become more unattractive. Many of

203those districts are A-rated. It's because there's fewer kids coming into the public school system being born to come into the public school system. So our demographer report showed that for this entire time period each year we have brought in between 79 and 81% of the available kids to come to kindergarten. There's just a lot fewer of them. So I like I just want to point this out because there's no like magic time period coming anywhere in the near future where we're going to get more kids and that's going to shore up our revenues. Like we're stuck with this environment. I did have a question on slide 15 and and maybe Dr. Smith is the best person to answer this question, but we we see that as our enrollment declined, our staff numbers maybe didn't decline.

204What's the explanation for that sort of divergence? I think a few things if you go back to uh time during um 202122 and uh moving forward from there, you did have the impact of COVID on student learning. And so I think districts around the state were very cognizant of staff and ensuring that we were hiring as many staff as we could because you were dealing with um significant impact on the student learning experience across uh districts. One of the key strategies that I know um was discussed in Arlington was discussed in districts around the state was is you are coming out of this or addressing the learning loss that was discussed during COVID. Keeping class sizes uh at the lowest possible ratio was a positive thing. A positive thing for our teachers as they were

205dealing with behaviors that were never seen in the classroom before or uh and also the significant gaps in our system. And then as you came out of some of those things when you were doing our best to keep ratios low so things could be managed in the classroom um you started seeing an uptick in the availability of people to fill vacant positions. As you all remember we hit a staffing crisis that the uh tea and multiple news outlets talked about in the middle of this time as well that we had a teacher shortage around the state. Well, as we started getting more and more people in, we had all those vacancies that started to actually be filled in some of the positions that had remained vacant for a number of years. So you add those

206things together, I think a deliberate approach to ensuring that class sizes remained as low as possible, that you had support staff to address some of the the various needs that students had around the state, and that you um started to see more teachers coming back into the system in our hiring pool and those vacant positions that were uh persistent around 21, 22, and 22,23 start to get filled more. And that's why you see a little bit of that increase right there. Um, frankly, now we're at a point where we can't afford that luxury anymore. And I appreciate you pointing out um how um trying to think of the right word, generously, well staffed, whatever it might be, that we in Arlington ISD for a number of years in which you show very clearly in some

207of your slides is staffed better than other districts around in a significant manner. Um, but frankly, as we continue to do that, that staff number is a number that can't survive at 8,217 for the foreseeable future when you're losing a thousand students a year. And thanks for making that point because I I think that there I it's we all understand that there's an immense value in having staff at this this level that's beneficial in a lot of ways that we would like to keep it there but just the financial reality of what's coming and where we're at as Dr. Smith said like we can't continue to maintain that. And if we could go to slide 22. Question I've got recently with the reorganization that we announced last year is well why can't you just just

208cut the fat at the top? Just get rid of all the people on that building at Lamar and we we we've talked about this before. We have always as long as I have been invol we have been below the state average in central administration and incredibly lean and multiple things line up to to prove that. We had the third party Mo Casey staffing study last year that showed comparing us to every West in the state as comparable to us. We are three times as lean in central administration as as our com as our peer districts. The state's own numbers from that 24 25 you know tapper report um central administration is4% um of our headcount. Uh that's a third of the state average. So district we are three times um leaner by that metric than

209our our peers across the state. So we could if we you this $4.8 million for the 31 central administration positions we're facing a $59 million deficit. We let everybody in this building go. District wouldn't run, but we could let the top people go. It would it would put it wouldn't even do a it would not barely put a dent in the deficit. So, like there's got to be like what's coming is bigger than all of these things that we hear in the atmosphere about trying to get more money or trying to cut administrators or trying to cut this or that. It's a really big lift. And so, if I can just skip all the way to the end to the point of your last slide, on 29, we're proposing a a budget that's got a

210$59 million deficit in it. We're going to lose ground on fund balance significantly. We are again using our significant fund balance that we built up over many years to ride this out. It is becoming increasingly hard to ride it out and we're having to use more and more of that runway each year. And so I just want to preview that we can fill this gap in the budget. We have the fund balance to do it for this year, but next year is going to be tough without significant help from the state. there is no way that we structurally can afford to continue doing this um without severely damaging our financial integrity. And so, you know, we've adopted a compensation plan um last meeting um that that for the first time uh I think since the

2112011 budget cuts, this district didn't do a a pay raise increase. We've got a great thing coming on the healthc care front, but no pay raise increase. But the the the fact of the matter is is with a deficit like this, every dollar we could put toward compensation, as my colleagues pointed out at the last meeting is every dollar we do with compensation, there is the risk next year that we have to make up for that with positions, which is people. And given that un reality, which districts all across the state are facing, I think we made a very very reasonable decision on that front. So, I just want to point out that this def the budget that we're about to adopt is one we have to adopt. It has a significant deficit. I think

212despite our best efforts, we and I think at this point it's 80 plus% of districts in the state are in the exact same position. Um, but without significant help from the state, this is just going to continue. And at the end of the day, it's our kids that are going to suffer for it. That's all I have on that. >> Thank you, Mr. Chappa. Mr. Mike, >> can we go to uh the slide that has the stars? That Yes, that one right there. I just want to look at how far we have dropped in our fund balance just in one year. And I think if we continue the trend of where we are at right now, where we where are we going to be at the end of next year? And that's something that everyone

213has to keep in mind. The community has to keep in mind. We we can't we can't continue to do the same things that we've been doing in Arlington in years past. And I've said it before, this is not the same Arlington that we have had for several years. This is totally different. And it's not by our own making. It's a creation that was done by the state. Right now, just jump on some of the realities. Out of all of our elementary schools, there are 33 elementaryaries that will be underutilized next year. 33. For our junior highs, every single junior high will be underutilized next year. And for our high schools, four high schools will be underutilized. We can't keep doing the same thing. So, I just want everyone out there to understand that tough decisions

214are going to have to be made to ensure that we do what's best for this district and the children of the community. >> Thank you, Mr. Mike. I really appreciate um the context that you provided. Um you as well, Mr. Choa, and all my colleagues that weighed in and u Mr. Rivas, all of your slides have th this is the story that that has been told over the course of the year, but tonight we are um tasked with adopting a budget and um no one favors a $59 million deficit. But I do want to reiterate the fact that we are closing the deficit. We're taking um aggressive yet thoughtful measures to do so. Um but that context is always very important. So, I really appreciate the transparency and the do dialogue that y'all have um

215provided. Are there any other colleagues with questions, discussion, or emotion regarding um the budget adoption? >> Trusty McMurro, I do want to say one thing before you get to a motion. I also want to point out uh Nberto, could you go to the TEA slide and the funding cliff slide there real quickly? I want to actually commend previous boards and current board, previous administrators in the district. You did exactly what TEA said to do. And I want to be clear about this. This was the commissioner of education telling all of us as superintendents around the state how to manage through this. But they showed very clearly the situation that we were going to be in. And you did exactly what you were told to do. You made sure that your fund balance is healthy enough

216to ride things out the best that you possibly could. and you've done that for the sake of the students and the teachers in Arlington ISD. And I want to commend you for that because I do know other districts around the state didn't follow some of that advice and they were in uh far greater or dire more dire situations earlier than Arlington ISTD. And so I want to point out the uh benefit of financial stewardship that this board has shown and how it's played out for the students and staff across the district. uh we now have to make some really tough decisions over the next year, but it's uh only because of the financial stewardship that you all have shown that we've been able to sustain things this fall. So, thank you. >> Thank you, Dr.

217Smith. Any other discussion, questions from trustees? Do I have a motion? Miss Richardson? I move to approve the 2627 budget general fund along with the debt service fund, the child nutrition fund, and the capital project fund as presented. >> Thank you, Miss Richardson. Is there a second? Second from Trusty Mike. We will now move to vote. Trustees, please vote. Sorry, my button was stuck. All in the affirmative. Thank you. The motion passes unanimously. Um, prior to moving on to our agenda, I'm going to go ahead and call us Thank you, Mr. Rivas. I'm going to go ahead and call us into a brief recess. It is now 9:57 p.m. and we're in recess. It is 10:08 p.m. and we are um coming back from recess and reconvening into open session. I am going to now

218u move into before we go on to our next action item. We have one um public speaker I believe for non-aggenda items. As stated on the posted agenda, members of the public who desire to address the board regarding an item non-aggenda item are required to register at www.isd.net/board meeting speaker request. Miss Crossno, do we have any requesters registered to address the board regarding non-aggenda items? >> Okay. Thank you. Thank you. Um, I have Taylor Sport and as you're waking making your way up, I'll go ahead and read the introduction. This is a routine part of the board's agenda for regularly scheduled meeting. This meetings this segment of the meeting provides citizens with an opportunity to share their views with trustees on items that are not on the agenda. It is not intended to be a

219discussion or debate and trustees will not reply to the speakers. Derogatory comments aimed at an individual will not be tolerated. Personnel matters are not appropriate subjects for open forum. You will have three minutes to speak and the timer will ring when your 3 minutes is up. If you have any documents for the board to review, please hand them to our chief operations officer, Dr. Hill. When you're ready, you may begin. >> Good evening. My name is Taylor and I am the parent of a student at Pierce. Tonight I want to speak about administrative misconduct and accountability and what happens when the those entrusted with protecting students fail to uphold basic standards of accuracy, transparency, and integrity. On April 2nd, I contacted PIY because my child had been targeted regarding her disability and adoption and then

220physically assaulted by another student. I expected the campus to investigate the allegations. Instead, they were investigating my daughter as both a victim and a bully. When they finished their investigation, the principal pulled me into a 34-minute meeting explaining my child was found to be both a bully and a victim. They called it a mutual conflict. Over the next few days, the written documentation confirmed this. I appeal appealed the campus decision. After the appeal process, I was informed in writing that my daughter had never actually been found to be a bully by the campus. Those two positions cannot both be true. A bullying determination either existed or it did not. You cannot spend 34 minutes explaining a bullying determination, acknowledging to a parent their right to appeal that determination, issue a formal written decision the next

221day, and then later claim that determination never existed. That's not a misunderstanding. That's a contradiction. There was no confusion. The accusation was documented. It was communicated in writing. It was discussed extensively by campus leadership. Yet instead of acknowledging the error, the district issued a revised notification suggesting the original communication may have created confusion. The problem was never confusion. The problem was inaccurate information being placed into a child's educational record and then an apparent attempt to redefine what occurred after it was challenged. This is not a matter of confusion. This is a matter of record integrity. Educational records are not meaningless paperwork. They follow students from year to year. They influence placement discussions. They shape perceptions. They affect how future educators, administrators, and decision makers view a child. When inaccurate information is placed into a student's

222educational record, the consequences can extend far beyond a single school year. What concerns me most is that is when these contradictions were brought to this district's attention, there was no meaningful accountability. Instead, the record changed. The story just changed, but the underlying facts did not. And this was not the first time something of this nature had happened with my child's records at PRC this year. As Miss Brooks reminds our students through the student code of conduct, poor choices have consequences and accountability matters. We should expect the same from those entrusted with leading our schools. The packet in front of you is not just about my daughter. It's about whether investigations, decisions, and appeals are being conducted impartially. It's about whether parents can trust outcomes are not being determined before the process begins. and it's about

223whether district leadership is willing to hold itself to the same standards expected of students, teachers, and families. I'm asking the board to review the facts, follow the timeline, and ask themsel ask yourselves if this happened to your child, would you be satisfied with these results? Thank you. Thank you, Miss Forone. We will now move back to our action items for the evening. And our next action item is to consider approval of junior high school grade level configuration. Dr. Smith, >> trustees, I'm going to invite up uh Dr. Champion and Dr. Dala um and we will go over just a couple of brief things. They're going to give you just a brief synopsis again of our last presentation uh and what was recommended by the committee and then I will take over from there regarding the

224administrative recommendation. >> President McMurro, board of trustees and Dr. Smith, thank you for having us tonight. This school year, as you know, we pulled together a stakeholder committee to evaluate sixth grade placement in Arlington ISD. Importantly, that team was tasked with analyzing the question through the lens of student experience. And we looked at a whole host of things as part of that student experience conversation. We talked about research and one of the things that we found is that there's no universal best configuration. um that that relationship between school climate um is a key particularly as it relates to implementation of the plan if you make a shift and then what that student transition support looks like. The team heard directly from students, not trying to gather every single voice, but to gather some representative voices

225to hear what it was about the transition um into into junior high or in into staying in sixth grade, what some of their fears were, to get a sense of what they believed was important for for them. The team analyzed potential future sixth grade placement through factors such as curriculum and instruction and facilities and social emotional learning, special populations, career and technology discipline, and sixth grade traditions. At the end of the of our time together, the team recommended a transition to junior high for sixth grade students. And while there were some important things to keep in mind in planning like attendance zones and staffing and ensuring super strong transition systems from the lens of the student experience, the benefits of moving to Junior High such as alignment of the instructional program, the expanded opportunity for

226fine arts and efficient use of space led the committee to ultimately make a recommendation that they were insistent that we read exactly as they said it for their recommendation, which was concerning the student experience. The committee recommends transitioning sixth grade students to junior high through a systemwide executable plan that's graceful, purposeful, and collaborative while considering facilities readiness, successful student transitions, and stakeholder voice. We elevate the importance of readiness and communication prior to determining an implementation timeline. At the last board meeting, you heard from a number of those committee members and they echoed their strong agreement with that recommendation. I think that brings us up to tonight. And so, trustees, I want to lean into the conversation that um we have in front of us tonight, we beginning in November um presented publicly on this topic

227and said we wanted to study it and we want to study it for a simple reason and it has been me that has been driving that. And I appreciate the public comments this evening and the questions about why the student experience, but very frankly, and I've told you numerous times, we are going to have to make facility planning decisions long term. And we have a decision point that we have to make. Where do you want sixth grade to live? And it's not based on budget because we're going to make those decisions no matter what. It is at the heart of what we do to focus on students. And so, while I appreciate the comments, I also want to point out I believe that the forward-looking approach that we have to take with with this is

228not what do we need to do for a budget sake, but what do we want for our kids long term in Arlington ISTD? Not what did we used to be, but knowing that the conditions are going to change over the next few years and that we're going to take actions on stuff. What is the experience that we actually want for kids? And that's why we framed it that way. We wanted to make sure that we framed it that way. not about all of the other factors involved, but what was it that we wanted to strive for for the sake of students in our school district. So, when the question arises, why did we focus on the student experience? That's the why, because we want to keep students at the center of the decisions that we

229make as a school district. And there are a lot of factors that are involved in this, rightfully so. But at the heart of this, we had to ask ourselves, what do we want for the sake of our students is we know our district is going to be evolving. And so that was the impetus um for our team in in doing that study. Tonight our job is to provide to you a recommendation after hearing the committee's recommendation. I pointed out last meeting this was not me leading the committee. In fact, this was not me even attending committee meetings. This was let's get a group of people let's talk about this. This is not me coming to them and saying here's what I want. Please make it happen. uh and we very comfortably in my uh estimation

230um have a recommendation from a committee that I trust and I think that they made a thoughtful recommendation for us. I also want to point out that I in no way shape or form ever wanted to say that it was going to happen in the 2627 school year, 2728 school year, 2829 school year. Why? And I mentioned this in the last meeting as well. Uh, part of the challenge of being a superintendent is you have people weigh in on a lot of things. One of the criticisms I heard was they're studying this without even having a plan. And on the flip side, I know that we had people saying, "Well, there's already a plan in place, so why are you even going to study this?" We didn't put a plan in place on this because

231we wanted to say, "What is the experience we want for kids? And if this is something the board wants and desires to do, then we will develop a thoughtful implementation plan for it." And so that's the why behind where we are right now at this point and in this system moving forward. Our recommendation is that we recommend transitioning our sixth grade to the junior high level allowing enough time for purposeful planning and thoughtful execution. You do not see a timeline on here for the reasons that I've outlined there. There's things that we have to that our public comments very clearly outline that we have to account for. We have to account for attendance boundaries and space in our buildings. We know we have capacity at our junior highs to fit our sixth graders in, but

232actual students in seats, we have to look at how that's actually going to play out. We have to look at teacher certifications and the ability to have teachers be able to say, do they want to actually move up to a junior high model or not? And give them some uh runway to be able to do so. In all of this, we have to be able to look at attendance boundaries and we had to do that anyway. You know that that is coming as a board of trustees. All of these things matter in the planning of this, but at the heart of this, why we have this in front of you right now is as we're developing long-term facility plans, this is a crucial decision for us to make. And we thought it'd be best to

233make it based on what do you want for kids and let us figure out how to get there if you want that experience for kids. If it's not something you want for kids, I respect that. Understood. We still have to make that decision so we can plan for the facilities long term as well. And so tonight, you have a an important decision in front of you that we're asking you to take action on because we do have to make long-term plans. We do have budget decisions um that we have to make moving forward. There is not a well this is better for the budget or this is worse for the budget. We wanted to focus on what is right for kids amidst all of the decisions that we have to make and the challenges we

234have moving forward. So tonight, I propose to you this recommendation for you to consider, for you to weigh in on when we talk about allowing enough time for purposeful planning and thoughtful execution. We have to partner with our community if you make this decision. We have to be able to hear what's on our parents' minds and our students minds and our teachers minds and all of this as well. We have to do those things in order to create a thoughtful transition plan. And I believe wholeheartedly that we can do this. I also know other districts have done this and they've done it well in some cases and not well in some cases and so we have the ability to learn from those situations and do uh what we do in Arlington really well and that

235is try and make sure that we're putting the kids at the center of the decisions that we make moving forward since tonight that uh this recommendation is in front of you. If you choose to adopt it as is, that's uh understood. Uh if you choose to add a timeline in there, I understand that we have some community members that are going to want concrete timelines, and I understand that. The only caution that I would have is that there could be is some of our public commenters mentioned tonight, there could be parts of our district that are ready and able at different times than other parts of our district. And I don't think that's unreasonable when you have a district the size of Arlington ISD. There could be phases where we phase this in over a

236number of years based on facility readiness, based on uh a variety of factors, but ultimately we need the decision made so we can make an effective plan to keep our students at the center of the most important work that we do in the district. And so tonight, we bring to you this recommendation. Gladly take any questions, comments, concerns that you have uh and we'll do our best to answer those along the way. >> Thank you, Dr. Champion and Dr. Smith. Do I have trustees with questions and remarks? It's Mr. Mike. >> Thank you, President McMurrow. I just have some comments um that I wrote down. I want to begin by sincerely thanking every parent, educator, and community member who's taken the time to write or speak with us and former teachers whose emails I've read

237carefully. Your passion and firsthand experience remind all of us why these decisions carry such weight. We hear you. Arlington ISD is at a crossroads. We are projecting meaningful enrollment declines next year, the next year after, and every year after that. And that reality is creating under capacity at all junior highs while driving up costs for every student. The sixth grade placement exploration committee reviewed the data and recommended moving sixth grade to junior high. After careful consideration, I support that recommendation, but only if we do it the right way with strong safeguards and by expanding what is already working well. I understand the deep concerns. Many families love our K through six model because it gives children one more year in a nurturing environment with teachers who know them well. Sixth grade is a tender foundational

238year, especially in math and reading, and research shows transitions can be bumpy for some students. Those worries are valid, and we must not dismiss them. At the same time, we have living proof right here in Arlington that sixth graders can thrive in junior high when the setting is intentional. Gun Junior High's Fine Arts and Dual Language Academy already welcomes sixth graders and is delivering strong results in achievement, progress, and closing gaps. That success is inspiring. It shows us what's possible when we combine high expectations with the right supports. For this move to truly serve our kids, we must get the implementation right. I believe a phased roll out with close monitoring of academics, behavior and social emotional well-being, robust transitions, campus visits, mentoring, dedicated sixth grade teams, and strong counseling. Preservation of instructional depth, especially

239those valuable extended blocks in math and reading. Expansion of some gun style programming, fine arts, dual language, and specializedmies, so more students benefit, not just a few. Teacher voices are essential. We must give staff adequate time for meaningful input. Families also deserve full transparency on our long range facility and enrollment plans. This cannot be a rush decision. At the end of the day, our northstar is simple. What is best for Arlington ISD children? By approaching this change with care, learning from guns success, and building in the supports our students need, we can turn today's challenges into stronger middle grades that prepare that prepare every child for long-term success. Thank you. >> Thank you, Mr. Mike. Miss Haynes, >> sorry, I was expecting Trusty Fowler to be next. Your phone went away. Okay, Miss H. >>

240Okay. Um, so I have some questions about the the non-existent timeline um that I want to ask and and maybe get some explanation on and and maybe some parameters around the timeline. So I understand that it's hard to start the planning and to know exactly how long it's going to take without being in the work. Um, but as a parent and thinking through what this is like for kids going into the the next school year, parents going into the next school year, um, teachers on those campuses going into the next school year, not knowing if they need to be making preparations to combine festivities and end of year things and prepare for it to be their final year. So, while I understand that we can't put a definitive date on when this would roll out,

241is it possible to consider a like no earlier than the 2728 school year? >> I would say yes if that's the what the board would like. Uh I I don't see any reason not to. I also just note that that limits your ability to move some things around sometimes. I can't tell you exactly how things might play out um as we get into the study of facility use and when the right timing might be. Um and the only reason I say it like that I think you could easily say um without this going or without this being implemented in the 2728 school year that means 2829 is when you you could be starting. I also I I can't guarantee you that a school and a group of parents and a group of students might not

242be ready in 2728. might be that situation. And so that's the only hesitation that I have. But if it's the board's decision to uh want that that caveat in this recommendation, I support it wholeheartedly. >> So to clarify, I think the 2728 school year is the right time to start. Um not 2829. I my worry is that we head into 26 27 and we've not notified individuals and we're already starting kind of behind the eightball in terms of being thoughtful and intentional with making sure campus cultures are ready to transition and set everything up to make it easy for those families. >> Yeah. And I apologize if I wasn't clear on this. There's no way that this is for the 2627 school year. >> Perfect. That's what I wanted. >> And I there when we

243say develop a thoughtful plan, it's not over a week in the summertime. That that's not that's not a thoughtful plan. We we have to actually study facilities, teacher certifications, etc. That will take and I and uh I apologize if I didn't make that clear. That's going to take months and so it'll be a while before that. >> So at the earliest 2728 school year. >> Absolutely. >> Okay. Perfect. Thank you. Thank you, Miss Haynes. Mr. Wilbanks. >> Thank you, U. President McMurrow. And I want to start by recognizing all the careful work that the committee's put together staff and all the feedback that we've gotten on both sides of this issue from all the emails, the personal uh phone calls um and our community members. Um, the case for moving sixth grade to junior high

244campuses is a serious one. I know it will be made in good faith by my colleagues uh who always put what's best for students front and center in every decision they make. As Mr. Mike reiterated earlier. Um I readily admit that there are a lot of advantages to moving sixth grade up. U broader course and elective offerings, the fine arts. You know, I don't have to repeat what Dr. Champion said. I don't dismiss any of those. I respect every member on this board who have weighed in in the past on this and I know where you guys feel. Um, but I've reached a different conclusion as you guys know. you know, from my lens where I look, looking at the data across the state, experiencing the benefit that sixth grade gave my students exactly where

245it was. Um, my concern above all is academic and the social emotional well-being for our students. And looking at this um I find moving students up to a larger departmentalized environment where they don't have the same teacher. They can't do that 90 block 90minute block unless we kind of think creatively outside the block outside the box. um if we do move sixth grade up, um that extra time that we spend on reading and math pays off. Our scores prove it. The scores for every single elementary that has sixth grade in the state prove it. And if we do vote, which I think we will as a as a body to move it up, that is one thing that I would like us to really look and study those those districts. I think Sigin is one

246of them that have smoothed out that transition plan and allowed that extra um and um maintained an environment that's conducive to those kids getting extra strong foundation for the hard math work and uh other work to come. 11 and 12 year olds are at a you know as Mr. Max had a tender development moment and ev evidence suggests for many of them that that type of environment is going to be essential for them um for them to be able to excel going forward. You look at Dallas, they're kind of reversing course. um it wasn't just academics, it was for that reason and the fact they wanted to they were having trouble keeping their enrollments up after making that decision. So that's one of the reasons why they reverse course. That's something that we need to

247be very cognizant of given the choices that our parents have uh today in our district. So when you when the vote's called, I will be voting no. But let me be clear what happens after the vote. This measure will pass and if it does, it will have my full unwavering support and I will be totally invested in making sure we get it right and we continue to provide an extraordinary opportunities for our kids to learn no matter where six is. Once the board decides, it decides as one body. Talked about our old training. I'll work as hard as anyone in this room to make sure this transition is a success. A board that can disagree honestly yet stand together when it counts is worth serving on. And we've got a great board. And I'm honored

248to serve with you guys. But I will be voting no. Thank you, Mr. Wilbanks. Miss Fowler, >> thank you, President McMurra. I still have worries about social emotional growth and my fear is that the lack of social emotional growth will affect academics. And that's that that's my that's my fear. Um, I had questions about cost and all that, the additional teachers that we're going to need and lunch periods and all that, but that's something that we'll have to work out and I think we will. Um, and as Mr. Will Bank said, I will I will work hard and support what the board uh decides to do and I will I will give it my all, but I will not be voting for moving sixth grade up. Thank you. Thank you, Miss Fowler. Mr. Choa. >>

249Thank you, President McMarrow. I don't have a whole lot to to add the beyond what has been said. I agree with a lot of what Mr. Mike said and and I'll just reiterate the points I made last time that I think that this is a um great uh opportunity for a lot of our students uh on a number of fronts and that it my it what the committee's conclusions were um and expectations of what this will accomplish very much um comport with with the student experience my students had my kids had um one of whom is is on a 504 plan and I thought um and so I think that that I agree with all of that. Um, my concerns are similar to um, Miss Haynes's uh, concerns in that and I an open-ended timeline

250is is not something normally I'm I'm okay with. Um, but I think that I recognize the administration's need for flexibility on that front. My ask would be though that um given all of the things that we know are the moving pieces at the same time that we've learned from the demographer study from the capital needs study um you know I think I think some folks who maybe aren't as as um haven't haven't as I said earlier been here with us for all of these meetings um know that we have been looking at a number of things uh really since the early fall and that this study goes in tandem with those things that we have been So it's not a this is not a rush decision that you're making or that the committee made. It

251goes along with many other things occurring at the same time based on a lot of data and a lot of feedback. Um that really I think goes beyond what we or or not even goes beyond but it is very much in line with how we try to gather feedback on important decisions that we've made. And I just want to reiterate um we had a committee that represented as best we could a broad cross-section of stakeholders in our community from parents and staff to students. I think the the extent to which the district tried to incorporate student voice into this decision does go above and beyond what I have seen in prior decisions that impact students. And so I want to commend the district on that. Um this was announced in the fall. Um I think

252I don't remember the exact month. maybe it was January or February, Dr. Smith put together a video about this that was sent to every parent address, email address in the system uh in the district at the end of which was a survey um of which we collected 500 it was close to 500 comments, open-ended comments on parent feedback on this decision. And so I I just disagree with the idea that this is a rush decision in any way, that feedback was not solicited in any way. We always could take more of course but I think that the district has done a very good job of trying to get as broad a consensus around this as possible with um hearing from as many stakeholders as possible. My ask would be on the timeline that when we

253talk about purposeful that it's not that we put it out in the future because too far because it just gives people time for more notice. I don't want things that could be done. I would like to see a detailed timeline at some point and what you think is the best approach on that. I don't want to see things that are put off until if the decision is made that it's 2829. I don't want to see a bunch of lifting being done at the very approach of 2829. That really in all reason, you know, possibility could have been done this next year because I don't think that that I think that would actually be counterproductive to our efforts that we've been talking about on the facility side. And I want to reiterate this is not um

254I think that that we talk a lot about the financial difficulties we're facing and I talked about them earlier. This is not even primarily um or secondarily I think a a costsavings approach. It's an efficiency approach. It's hard to continue to offer um access and opportunities to students at some of our campuses, elementary campuses that have 250 students in them. um it's hard to continue supporting those efforts and being able to get a critical mass of students to create the extracurricular opportunities that students at at campuses with more kids have for example. Um you know Mr. Riva said uh earlier this year there's we can't we can't close campuses out of the you know we can't close our way out of the deficit like that's just not that's not going to be a thing. I

255think decision probably primarily is made by the student experience but because of that I want there some urgency with it and I don't want things put off to the second year that if that's what we decide that could be done the first year I do think Dr. Smith, you alluded to there may be parts of the district that could do this by 27 28 and I agree. I mean, we have some junior highs nearing below 50% capacity that are only fed by two junior highs or two two elementary schools. Um, and I think that that's a much different ask than some of our campuses, some of our junior highs that um, you know, are are in a different situation, have many more feeder schools. So, with that, um, I'll reiterate my position that I intend

256to support this and, um, I see that Mr. Richardson has some comments, but after that, I do intend to make a motion. >> Thank you, Mr. Choa. Miss Richardson, >> thank you guys. Thank you for what you presented last week. Thank you for what you're presenting today. Um, I have read the emails. I've had the phone calls. I've also sat in people's living rooms and had a conversation even so much that I took my oldest kid with me who went through a sixth grade transition just to let her speak for herself about what her experiences been, but also to let parents ask a question for a real student who had gone through it. Um, instead of talking, I did a lot of listening though at those times. And some of the questions that I have

257that I will submit to you in writing or in one of our one-on ones, but they brought up things that I had not thought about. And it was things like when you have teaks in math and you go from a 45minute model versus a 90minute model, how are we going to bridge that gap for students heading into sixth grade, especially those taking the STAR test? Um what happens when they are needing help in certain areas? Are they going to get pull out services and then those electives that they were so looking forward to doing in junior high? Then they don't get to do the electives that they were hoping to do. How do we balance students who need extra help like they would get in junior high but still or in elementary but still allow

258them to have the junior high experience? Um, I think that we did not do a great job explaining this sometimes, um, with some of a little bit of the marketing that we did. And the example I'll point you to is our district website. We had made a mistake and when we put out the sixth grade community, um, let's see, sixth grade placement exploration in Arlington ISD project goal. The very last sentence says the project goal is should we move junior high or remain an elementary school for the 27 28 year. So we did put out a timeline that later we have backed up a little bit and said that's not what we meant. It's not what we meant but it is what we put in writing and when we direct people go listen to a

259chat with Matt and that's what the graphic shows or we say go read the district website it said that. I think we actually made the mistake of putting some fear out there that we could have done better with if we had realized it. I know if I had known realized that was out there, I would have brought it to you and said something. I wish we could have corrected this sooner. Um, we recently did a training when we all went to SLI and it said, "How do you build trust?" You build trust by saying the thing you don't want to say. What is that thing you just don't want to tell people? And I do agree it's not solely financial, but I do think that part of what we're having to do, it does have

260to do with finances. We have seen based on Norberto your presentation tonight, we have dropped dramatically with what we have in our funds. We have dropped our savings amount, how many days reserve we have. We are looking because the state has forced our hand up. At some point, we're going to have to look at realignment issues. We are going to have to look at offlining certain elementary schools and consolidations. We are going to have to look at reconstructing junior highs. All of those things are going to have to happen. Even if we move sixth grade up, even if sixth grade stays back, we still have to have those hard conversations. And I think that's what I want the public to know is no matter what we do here tonight, there are so many more hard

261discussions we're going to have. This one may feel the most personal sometimes, but the next hard subject may be equally personal to someone else. And so I want to make sure that the emails that we got that we take those and answer and put those those concerns and fears that we really address it. That when we do put out a timeline that says, "Here's what we're expecting." We make sure families know that because I would rather overcommunicate than let them come up with their own stories and narratives because when they paint the story and narrative a lot of times it is out of fear and it's not accurate. Um our unity of purpose has to be students and we do that well. We do that well as a group and I know that we will

262continue to make that unity of purpose happen with this decision and with all others going forward for our students and stakeholders. >> Thank you Miss Richardson. Um I don't see any other trustees with comments or Oh sorry that changed quickly. Mr. Chapa. >> Thank you President Mo. I >> I was going to go ahead and make a motion. Go for it. I apologize, Mr. Chapa. Um, I I did want to weigh in um and I, you know, I think it's appropriate for the board president often to go last. So, I've just really enjoyed listening to each of y'all's questions um last meeting and this meeting and even well before that since Dr. Smith um reminded us that we have been exploring this since November. Um I I you know I I think that there are

263things that the data tells us and there's also things that the data doesn't tell us and that's where we really have to listen um to those stories to those personal experiences and that also means expanding our scope for the stakeholders and listening to students and I know um you know our our slab students that we have collaborated with all year some of them have have anecdotally shared their thoughts with us now that they're leaving the high school or now that they our rising seniors at the high school, their their perspectives were really valuable, too. Um, I remember when I moved to Arlington ISD as a student, I was actually an incoming sixth grader from out of state. And I remember um as a child just really assuming that I was going to be in middle

264school and then just being completely shell shocked to learn. Not only was I going to still be in an elementary school, but with my little brother who I was very much ready to, you know, transition away from. Then there's the school district when I taught here in AISD um for a little bit over a decade. And I I did not teach sixth grade, but as a fourth grade teacher for those 12 years, I observed the sixth grade experience at the elementary level, I observed a lot of great things, and I observed a lot of things that made me question, is this the best placement? Is it appropriate for us to have our sixth grade students be silent in the hallway? um is this master schedule best and most appropriate for the the TEICSS and the

265cognitive um demand that the sixth grade bridge year of coursework um requires. And even since then um like some of y'all have mentioned the TEACS and the state assessment that measures that mastery has drastically changed. Then now there's the district where I am a schoolboard trustee and I'm a parent of the district. I have a student who just graduated from sixth grade and then I have a a a child who is entering first grade next year. Um, I even just since I got on the board, the only thing that's been constant through all of that has been change. Just in the past few years with with our um universal prek program, I say it all the time with pride, prek is the new kindergarten in Arlington ISD. And I I have to admit that that

266is something we need to think about. the trajectory up the grade levels as it stands is we have our our students spend if they start with us in prek um which is offered at all of our traditional elementary schools we have a grade levels in one school facility then we have two grade levels in the next facility and then it's time for high school um I mentioned the TESS and the the fact that TEA really views sixth grade as the first secondary grade level. Um, and my perspective has just really evolved by listening with an objective ear. Um, to our committee, to teachers, to families, and to my own son who, um, like Mr. Chapa, he's also on a 504, and he's had um, his opinions and his his big wins and his challenges as

267a sixth grader over the past year. Um, I personally tend to favor um a longer runway as far as the timeline goes, but I also don't feel poised tonight. I don't feel informed to make a um a definitive proposal to staff to lock us in because you you made some really good points, Dr. Smith. And I know that something that I have gotten recurring comments over time in our emails um just in in passing with teachers and with parents, they do like the thought of a longer runway so that we can implement um a very thoughtful plan. And I know that teachers have definitely indicated to me um that they they would like to a heads up and many of our teachers are parents. Like for example, I know that we had um I know

268that we had a sixth grade teacher or a former sixth grade teacher, a current seventh grade teacher on our exploration committee who also has her two kids in our system. and um she was mentioning how um a longer runway would would be beneficial um just as far as like family planning and also her own um decision whether she wants to go back to elementary or whether she wants to stay in the junior high setting. Um, as far as I understand it, the bell schedule and the core content minutes, even if we did move sixth grade up to the junior high setting, from what I understand, there would be no requirement that it has to be the exact same as seventh and eighth grade courses. I'm not saying that it should or it shouldn't, but I

269do think that that needs to be said because I think that that's probably been the um the most common concern is I don't know if if sixth graders are ready for electives like seventh graders and we don't want our students to lose out on core content um minutes if they do move up to the junior high setting. But I just want to elevate that because that's part of my thought process trying to be as objective as possible. I I do want to just draw attention to everything from the courses that we design for the sixth grade master schedule down to the individual bell schedule. It does not have to work in lock step um with seventh and eighth grade. We also have potential for new opportunities for our sixth graders. Um and it's been referred

270to, but that might mean um access to preil activities. That means additional fine arts, more specialized courses, um, and just a a setting, a new setting for our sixth graders that brings new academic and um, social challenges that I I know that they can rise to the occasion to. Um, I know that our adults are invested in making that transition as great as possible for our sixth graders should we move up um to junior high. And this is why I've really appreciated every email, public comment, survey response, phone call. I do hope I've replied to all of the emails that I've gotten over the ne the last few months. There were some there were a couple that we got today that I have not had a chance to reply to yet, but I did read

271them. But I do want to bring it back to our vision. Our vision is to create exceptional learning experiences that inspire all students, empower their dreams, and prepare them for the future. And my hope is that we hold so tightly to that vision through both the smooth and the choppy waters. And despite enrollment trends, the impact that our state legislation has on budget, I just I think that every decision we do make as a body has to stay rooted in that vision. Um so I support this bold move. I do think that there are absolutely and it's been mentioned tonight and last meeting, there are some risks. Um, but with intentionality and with providing enough time and collaboration that includes parent and staff input, I do think that overall um, this would be a great

272placement for sixth grade. I cannot emphasize enough how much I appreciate each of my colleagues and your leadership, Dr. Smith, because this was um, a bold thing to even explore. And now here we are and we're making this decision. But I know I know the colleagues that I serve with and I know the leaders and and the teachers and all of the staff and families that we have in our school district. And I have no doubt in my mind that the adults are what are who will make this an exceptional experience and a great transition um for our sixth graders. So I just wanted to make sure um I took the time to share all that and I I'll turn it back over to you, Mr. Chapa. Trustees, I want to thank you for your

273thoughtful comments in all of this. There are two things I want to point out as we were doing this. Miss Richardson, thank you for bringing that up. If there were miscommunications in that and spec specifically in timelines, then we own that and that's on me. And so to families, I sincerely apologize because our goal this entire time was to make sure that we got to a point today and said, "Board, we need your direction. we need to make a decision for facility planning purposes. We believe that studying this from the student experience was the right way to go and here it is. And so if we created anxiety that shouldn't have been created, I appreciate you bringing that up. That is was never the intent in any way, shape or form. Um, second thing I

274want to point out is that I also I realize the nebulous nature of not having a timeline on here is comfortable for some and uncomfortable for others. That's a reality of these things. What I can assure you is we will bring things back to the board regarding transition planning. I don't know that you will weigh in on every one of those, but I can promise you that we will keep you updated along the way and make sure that you have the opportunity for input about the actual transition plans, how we're engaging people, and how we're making sure that we're actually taking care of our community in this. So, please know that all of those things will continue to come to our board uh as we move forward with this. your decision is saying yes, move

275forward with the planning. We trust you and we're going to develop the best plan. We're going to use you all for input as we're doing that as well because we know we need to get this right. So, just know that um those those conversations won't be ignored uh and we will be able to provide more concrete information as we get into the study and bring that back to the board as well. Thank you, President Mo. I'll go ahead at this time and move to approve the junior high middle school grade configuration as presented. >> Thank you. There is a motion from Mr. Chapa. Is there a second? >> Second from Trusty Mike. We will now move to vote. The motion carries five 54 and two against. Thank you trustees. Trustees, if I could, I wanted

276to thank Dr. Dala and Dr. Champion. Um, I do believe that they led a very thoughtful process and um, when you're talking about something that is challenging for a community um, and it definitely has emotions on all sides, they did extremely well leading through that, doing the best to respond through that and um, helping us lift things up in the most transparent way that we possibly could in this. Uh, could we always get better? Absolutely. And those things are on me. the work that they did I thought was absolutely phenomenal and I appreciate them and their leadership for getting us to this point and trustees thank you for your uh open honest dialogue this evening it's much appreciated >> thank you Dr. Smith. We'll now move to our consent agenda. Do any trustees wish to

277pull an item from the consent agenda for discussion? Okay, since there is no discussion, we will now move to vote. Is there a motion to approve the consent agenda? >> I have a motion from Miss Fowler. Is there a second? I >> second. Second from Miss Haynes. We will now move to vote. Trustees, please vote. All in the affirmative. The motion carries. Okay. We have um already covered our open forum for non-aggenda items. So, at this time, we will move forward with our superintendent comments. Dr. Smith. trustees. The only comments that I have is this is the last school board meeting of the uh academic year and so I appreciate your work. Thank you for everything that you've done. Uh know that we are going to be here busy planning and uh getting ready for

278the upcoming school year while closing out the last year. Uh and I'm I'm grateful for your leadership and the work that you put in over the course of this year. We are looking forward to an exceptional 2627. Thank you, Dr. Smith. Are there any trustees with reports this evening? Okay. Not seeing any. Um, Secretary Richardson, do we have any items to report? Thank you. All items on tonight's agenda have been addressed. We have no matters to discuss this evening in closed session. There being no further business, this meeting is adjourned at 10:58