D200 Board of Education Regular Meeting - June 25, 2020

001Gail, could you please call the roll? Mr. Kofsky? Here. Ms. Spivey? Mr. Barron? Here. Mr. Isley? Yep. Mr. Martiri? Here. Ms. Harris? Here. Dr. Moore? Here. Ms. Dixon-Spivey? Here. Thank you. All right. I now move to enter closed session for the purpose of discussing the appointment, employment, compensation, discipline, performance, or dismissal of specific employees of the district or legal counsel for the district, including hearing testimony on a complaint lodged against an employee or against legal counsel for the district to determine its validity. Is there a second? Second. Gail, could you please call the roll? Mr. Barron? Yes. Mr. Isley? Yes. Mr. Martiri? Yes. Ms. Harris? Yes. Mr. Kofsky? Yes. Dr. Moore? Yes. And Ms. Dixon-Spivey? Yes. Thank you. All right, guys. I will see you in the next, the closed room. So Sarah and Dr.

002Putadams are both having technical issues, in case anyone didn't know that. Maybe I'm having technical issues. Can anyone hear me? Nope. You're all good. When I was trying to get into closed session, it kept saying you're being redirected to another meeting, and then it didn't redirect me to another meeting, so I had Gail resend me the link. So there's some technical stuff for tonight's meeting that's just not quite kosher. So if we go till midnight, that becomes Friday, the day of phase four, right? We could maybe all just go to the school at that point. I'm kidding. For the record, I'm kidding. We will not go to midnight. That's my prediction. Well, actually, if it involves some hot wings from Wingstop, I'll be happy to show up. All right. Can we have a phase four

003gathering at 12.01? Like a Star Wars thing, right? Camping out. I'm ready to be done with Zoom. I only wish that was true. What? That we'll be done with it? That we'll be done with it, yes. Yeah, it has its place, but the exclusivity of it has been pretty over the top. I'm having to redesign all the courses I teach for Roosevelt for an online environment for the fall. Really a challenge because the one course I teach at the graduate level in the fall is one that involves a ton of classroom discussion and is more of a seminar type class and trying to translate that to an online environment where no one's at the same room at the same time is going to be really difficult. Folks, I'm working with Dr. Pruitt-Adams right now. Okay.

004I guess I need to tell Sarah I'm in. Sorry, everyone. Chris said I was hit by the blue screen of death or something like that. Is Sarah still having technical trouble? She was trying to call in from her phone, I believe. Okay. I'm trying to pull up the agenda. She just asked me to be a panelist. Did you see that, Chris? She's chatting. I'm not seeing her on the attendees list, Chris. It's the 8863 number, Jackie. Got it. See her there? Yep. Cool. Now, does it give you the option as a dial-in? It's only giving me allow to talk or rename and remove. Go ahead and allow to talk because she's also in as a panelist on the... Hi. Hey, guys. Can you hear me? I'm so sorry. So I feel like Jolene and I

005came into the building and immediately had technical difficulties. So I feel like that's a sign. All right. So do we have everybody now? I think there's Matt, Jackie, Craig, Tom. I see. Yeah, I think we have everybody. All right. So we are back in open session. And I believe Max has introduced three reports. We have. Oh, okay. Ms. Kalmerton, would you share the FOIA report? Yes, we received six FOIA reports and three are resolved. Thank you. Also, because I usually have superintendent announcements at this time, I do want to recognize Dr. Gwendolyn Walker-Farles and Mr. Mike Cariocio. They are both retiring effective June 30th. This is their last official board meeting with us. They will be joining us for the July presentation, but this is their last official one. I just want to say they

006will be missed. from the team. They've been great additions and I want to just publicly thank them for their service to our students, our district, and our community. And the board as well would like to thank Dr. Walker-Qualls as well as Mr. Karioshio. Although he is stuck with us for a little bit longer, but I was very happy to see Dr. Walker-Qualls when she let me into the building this evening. Both of them have been outstanding in their service to our district. I had the pleasure of a road trip with Dr. Rockerquals and she had me laughing so hard I was crying at points. And Mr. Kariotso's steady hand, no matter what the crisis, was so appreciated. So I just want to thank them both from the bottom of our hearts. Their service to the

007district has been tremendous. Thank you. Those are all the introductory reports. Thank you. So I do want to make one statement before public comment this evening. And again, I still can't see anybody, so I apologize. I hope restarting my computer would help. But each and every board member reaffirms our steadfast commitment to racial equality and racial equity and declares unequivocally that Black Lives Matter. In the aftermath of George Floyd's murder, there has been extensive national dialogue about the role of police. in any community, but mostly, most especially in schools. Locally, we received numerous emails urging District 200 school board to discontinue our intergovernmental agreement with the Village of Oak Park concerning the school resource officer at the Oak Park and Reforced High School. I would want the community to know, though, that before the COVID-19

008pandemic caused such a disruption to our board's deliberations and the rhythm of our board agendas, we were... on the verge of discussing that IGA with the village. And we appreciate the input that we've received recently from the community. We do plan to discuss the SRO contract at our next board meeting, which is Thursday, July 9th, 2020. And we hope that all interested community members will participate, most likely virtually, although we're still waiting for official word on that at our board meeting on July 9th. Gail, did we have any public comment at this time? Yes. The first one is from Fred Arkin. He says the morass continues to deepen. This week's reiteration of how the project turns continues to lack transparency. and fails to align with the Imagine Long-Term Facilities Plan. On November 15, 2018, the

009administration came to the board with a building maintenance strategy. The strategy called for a total of $10 million of spending for 2019 and 2020 and $2 million for each year, 21 through 2026, along with a $2 million contingency for unforeseen issues. This would have allowed for $12 million of Imagine funding. over those six years. Under this plan, the ask at the time was for $5.4 million for 2020 capital improvements. Last week, we were told... The maintenance items for 2021 through 2024, a four-year period, had ballooned to $20 million. Let's get one thing straight. The 10-year maintenance plan was developed after acceptance of the Imagine plan and presented at the board on January 24, 2019, not 10 years ago. It was supposed to have been created as a response to how annual capital projects and annual

010maintenance would dovetail with the Imagine projects to identify and eliminate. any overlapping costs. In the hire of FGM as the architect for the project, the board was told they provided a very concise description of Project 1, demonstrated a thorough understanding of what OPRFHS wants done and why. Their work product does not support this view. Virtually each element of the Project 1 has additional scope and a cost associated with it. The Imagine work group was formed to study the district's long-term facility needs. They embarked on a rigorous needs-based project. process that centered around student learning with an attention to equity. This process was to be ongoing. The Imagine group presented a comprehensive plan that seeded some of the most urgent physical needs to later project phases for the student-centric focus. I urge this board to forego

011the opportunity. opportunistic elements numbers two, nine, and 10, which are not prioritized in the Imagine Project One and complete the elements as approved as part of Project One, including the main entrance, student commons, and classroom renovation. These elements directly address the mission and vision of District 200. I also urge the board to direct the administration to create an ongoing method for the continuing updating. of the imagined long-term facilities process that was originally contemplated. The next comment is from Joker Poker and there's some inappropriate language in it so I'm just going to say blank. The comment reads, I just want to say one thing and that is blank you guys for blank making everything remote and I also want to note that you guys can find me in the webinar since I will be attending this

012blank. meeting blank. The next comments are from Monica Sheehan. Good evening. I appreciate this opportunity to address District 200 school board. I want to thank President Spivey for her recent email responses to my questions raised in public comment at the May 28th general board meeting. According to her email, the board has shifted the $20 million that it set aside in December 2018 for the urgent needs in Project 2, namely the pool and auditorium to the construction budget, to fund project one with its academic and special education facility needs. That's positive news. The email also states that the district has put on hold the funding plan for project two. Since the private fundraising effort began 18 months ago, how much money has been raised to date for the urgent needs in project two? Thank you. From

013Bersi Hines. She addresses the Board of Education, the superintendent, the director of equity and student success. and says, on behalf of equity allies across our community and the community for equity and excellence in education, we express our sincere thanks to the leadership of Dr. Ammons and Dr. Pruitt-Adams, who have guided the REPP committee in assembling the racial equity policy procedures before you tonight. These procedures include key racial equity goals, specific measures of reporting, accountability, ongoing evaluation, and revision. With widespread community support, this board and previous boards over the last five years have shown an unprecedented commitment to act on behalf of racial equity. The procedures presented tonight better ensure that OPRF can realize its varied racial equity goals at a time when we must be unequivocal. clear and aggressive in putting an end to historic

014inequities and institutional racism in education at OPRFHS. With your support, our administration and teachers have carried forth concrete efforts to advance racial equity, including using racial equity impacts protocols even before they had been finalized with the REPP committee work of the past nine months. We have advanced racial equity group or work with teams of trainers and learners around restorative practices, curriculum equity and course restructuring, hiring, respecting, supporting and retaining teachers of color and advancing institutional and individual understanding of race identity in the presence of personal and community bias. What in these procedures are historic and vital to our work to end disparities in how so many of our students of color experience education and OPRF? One, among the many strengths of the procedures, we would stress the following. Committing to intentionally act to end racism

015in all aspects of school community life. Two, guaranteeing an active role of representatives for groups most impacted by racial inequities in the racial equity assessment. process. Three, providing a clear procedure for conducting a racial equity analysis using the REAT protocol and including regular reporting and public access to an archive with details and data on the application of equity analysis. Four, asserting that the REAT is central to the curriculum evaluation and revision process. Five, monitoring and improving the culture and improvement of the school through biannual surveys of students and parents. Six, providing a hearing. A process for hearing, responding to, and restoring victims and perpetrators of acts of racial harm through a set of specific racial incident procedures. Seven, providing for biannual meetings with community representatives from the campaign to hire more teachers of color and

016the annual reporting of both qualitative and quantitative evidence for reaching the goal of having a faculty and staff that reflects the student body. Eight, pledging to work. with districts 90, 97, and other local governments who advance the community understanding of racial equity, diversity, and inclusion. What needs to be done? So now, yes, I have finished that one. Now this is from John Duffy. This is from John Duffy. It is urgent for this board. To end any doubt about the district's commitment to eliminate racial inequities in our school, to do this we ask you to revise the language contained in the 2019 racial equity policy. In the policy adopted on April 25th, 2019, it states that if racial inequities are found after an equity review process, the district will consider revision or elimination of the practice,

017procedure, or program. The history of racial inequities in education here and elsewhere are replete. with moments when schools considered how to end racial disparities, the most famous being the Supreme Court decision in 1954 stating that segregation in schools was unconstitutional. Considering racial justice in America too often equates to delays, half-hearted measures, or solutions that require little from the dominant white culture. Considering possible action now more than ever is woefully and morally unacceptable. Instead, our policy must unequivocally commit to eliminating inequitable practices, procedures, and programs. Such an outright commitment can demonstrate that we really do value the lives of students of color. It is also time to apply the procedures the administration sets forth tonight for two pressing racial equity concerns of students, parents, and community members. The MENTA program and the presence of the School

018Resource Office serve initiating a faithful use of the prescribed REAT process combined with other input to central to evaluating these is central to evaluating these programs. We look forward to joining the administration in this process. Finally, as key board members finish their tenure in the coming months, we offer you special thanks for all you've done to advance racial justice in our school community. Your dedication has been indispensable in putting racial equity work in motion. Unfortunately, there are those who seek to slow down the work and even reverse long-awaited racial equity restructuring of curriculum. In challenging this opposition, we beseech you to continue to help our community find candidates who mirror your dedication and who are ready to continue efforts at racial equity you have supported. Lastly, we ask you personally to remain a civic voice

019for racial equity, for racial justice in Oak Park and River Forest. Thank you. The Committee for Equity and Excellence in Education. Period. That's all. Thank you very much. And I meant to say this beforehand, but we will be responding to any questions raised in public comments. But it will take us a little bit of time, but we will get back to you via email. Next, we have approval of the following consent items. I move to approve the following consent items. I'd like to quote. items D and K for individual. And I would like to pull item I, please. Okay, and then we're also pulling item N as in Nancy. Okay, so I move to approve the following consent items, check disbursements and financial resolutions dated June 25th, 2020, monthly treasurer's report, monthly financials. E, contract

020for occupational therapy services for the 2020-2021 school year. F, contract for physical therapy services for the 2020-2021 school year. G, contract for social work services for the 2020-2021 school year. H, contract for psychological services for the 2020-2021 school year. J, tri-district consortium addendum. L, revision of the 2020-2021 school calendar. M, resolution for driver's ed increase. O, policies for second reading. One, 4,50 payment procedures. Two, 3,60 administrative responsibility of the principal. Three, 7,170 vandalism. Four, 7,325 student fundraising activities. Five, 5,200 terms and conditions of employment. 6.6.300 graduation requirements 7.2.125 board member compensation expenses 8.2.160 board attorney 9.2.70 vacancies on the board of education 10.2.200 types of board meetings 11.3.40e checklist for superintendent employment contract negotiation process 12.5.100 staff development program. 13.5.150 personnel records. 14.5.220 substitute teachers. 15.5.250 leaves of absence. 16.5.280 duties and qualifications. 17.5.60 expenses.

02118.5.70 religious holidays. 19.6.135 accelerated placement program. 28.110 public suggestions and concerns. 21.2.220-E1 board treatment of closed meeting verbatim recordings in minutes. 22.2.220-E7 access to closed meeting minutes and verbatim recordings. 23.340-E checklist for the superintendent employment contract negotiation process. 24.7.130 student rights and responsibilities. 25.3.50 administrative personnel other than the superintendent. P, open and close minutes of May 28, June 16, and June 18, 2020. And a declaration that the closed session audio tapes of October 2018 shall be destroyed. Is there a second? Second. Gail, could you please call the roll? Yes. Mr. Eisley? Yes. Mr. Martiri? Yes. Mr. Kofsky? Yes. Ms. Spivey? Yes. Mr. Barron? Yes. And Dr. Moore? Yes. Thank you. Okay, we pulled D, which is gifts and donations. I don't remember who pulled that, but whoever did would like to explain the reason for

022pulling it. Okay. I'm sorry, Gail. Do I need to move to approve? Yes, please. Item D, gifts and donations. Okay. So moved. Is there a second? Second. Okay. Discussion, please. I just wanted to, whenever we get a gift from an alum, just want to have it on the record and not go by as just a letter. So thank you to David Standard, 1977 alum, for the gift. Thank you very much, Jackie. That's a very good reminder for all of us. So, Gail, could you please call the roll as to this item? Mr. Eisling? Yes. Mr. Barron? Yes. Mr. Martiri? Yes. Mr. Kofsky? Yes. Dr. Moore? Yes. Ms. Dixon-Spivey? Yes. Thank you. Next, we have a move to approve the presentation of annual renewal of property, casualty, liability, and workers' compensation insurance. Is there a second?

023Second. Discussion? I pulled this one, Sarah, and it's Tom. So it concerns me that our incumbent provider, broker Gallagher, was the provider of the RFP. And it concerns me that we had a workers' comp component or bid that was $70,000 lower. From my perspective, due to the way it was structured, it was rejected. And so for those two reasons, I am going to be voting in the not, no. Thank you, Tom. Anybody else want to comment? Okay, Carol, could you please call the roll? Mr. Kofsky? No. Mr. Barron? Yes. Mr. Isley? No. Mr. Martiri? No. Ms. Harris? Oh, she's not here. Dr. Moore? Yes. Ms. Dixon-Spivey. Yes, but now we have three and three, is that right? Correct. Gail, I don't know what to do. What happens now? If I'm not wrong, in Missouri, if

024it was a 3-3 vote, it failed. Is that the same in Illinois, Gail? Yes. Gail is checking. While she is checking, do you mind if I ask, Mr. Doerr, if this fails, where does that leave the district with the insurance? We don't have insurance. Yeah. We're not insured. It's all just for work, Ms. Kahn. If it's workers' comp that they're not voting on because they didn't say workers' comp. It was because this is the holistic invoice is correct. And this had been a discussion before of why we would be going to an RFP. So I would say one thing when it came to the... to the workers' comp and the incumbents, they had fees in there that they didn't list on their items. So if we were going to pay them what the fees were,

025they were actually almost double what CLIC would be or Gallagher. And that would be at the 10%. If it was at the 15%, it was almost one-fifth of what we would be paying. So looking at that, that was part of the reason of not to go with them. We also had an equity that we can possibly get from Gallagher or Click. And what they did is they told us back when we were going through in October when we were in their meeting that we would probably see a 15% increase in insurance. And what they did is with the equity, they actually... applied it to everybody so they were able to lower their insurance and that was why we had the insurance a little more than three percent okay so this is ralph martiri i will

026change my vote to a yes just to um not have the district be in a position where it doesn't have insurance but i think tom's concerns are legitimate and should be thoroughly reviewed in the coming year to see if we can go down a different path Well, just to let you know, I do have a committee that I'm going to be setting up when we do this. So I appreciate that. Thank you. Okay. Mr. Dorr, I do have a question for you. Since we went to RFP, how long is the term of this contract? Is it still annual? When would be the next time we go to RFP? Is it a five-year RFP cycle? No, no, it's just one. It's just for this. It's just for the coming year. So the next one we could

027do, it would be for a five-year. And it would be, we were talking about putting it out in January, I'm sorry, July. And it would be... go out for three to six months. We're just looking at the time period because if we let it sit out six months, it would be January when we would be looking at the rates then. Am I on? Cindy? Yes. If I'm correct, we're at this point because when we sent out for bid before and how the bids came in and that's why we're coming back with the one year instead of a five year so that we can get the bids in an ample time. Is that correct? Correct. It's because we gave everybody the information. which gave them enough time to actually come back with pricing. They had decided

028not to vote or, you know, put in anything for anything else like casualty and property, school board, student liability. This time when we go around, we're actually going to ask them to, they have to input that to be considered, but we can also break it down at that point. I was just asking because This is a result of where we were earlier in the year. Correct. Yes. Yes. And your RFP, it's written just to make sure that you're comparing apples to apples. So if we have $2 million in insurance, say for cyber, and somebody comes along and gives us the same price, but they're only going to give us a million dollars worth of coverage, we want to make sure that we're getting the same coverage with the current broker we're with. Okay. Thank you,

029Mr. You're welcome. Thank you. All right. So, Ralph, having changed his vote, that's now four to two, so that renewal passes. Item K is renewal of the Menta contract. I move to approve. I'm sorry. We need to take that vote again. So, we need a first and a second. Oh, okay. Please. Okay, so I move to approve. You're talking about item I, right, Gail? Yes, the insurance. Yeah, okay. I move to approve the annual renewal of property casualty liability and workers' compensation insurance. Is there a second? Second. Okay, Gail. Mr. Barron? Yes. Mr. Eisley? Yes. Mr. Martiri? Yes. Mr. Kofsky? No. Dr. Moore? Yes. And Ms. Dixon-Spivey. Yes. Thank you. All right. Now is renewal of the MENTA contract. I move we approve the renewal. Is there a second? Second. Second. Discussion? I brought this

030up, and I am trying to call. I don't think I have ever voted yes for the MENTA contract. And as we are, with the information that has continued to be provided, I continue to feel that this setting goes against our goals for equity and the education we've talked about. The evaluations that we've received have been minimal. And for all of those reasons, and most importantly, the... The feeling that, and I expressed this last week, the relationship between Menta and OPRF, the racial disparities in the students that we send there troubles me and I have a hard time continuing. to send students there without the assurances of the quality education that we expect and also understanding why we have those racial disparities. So for that reason, I'll be voting no. Thank you. Is there anybody else

031who'd like to make a comment? So I guess I would ask what would be the alternative if we vote no here, what happens in terms of the students with these kinds of needs? So I can jump in for that really quick. If we don't have the contract for these purposes with Menta, I mean, quite simply, we wouldn't be sending them there. And so most pointedly for the. The 10 students that are listed here for the allotment for the contract, we wouldn't have those slots for potential full-time placements, nor would we use Menta for alternative to suspension programming for our students. I'm not exactly sure what we would do for either of those two things to support students at this point. I'm sorry. I'm not sure who, Greg, was that you? You could just say your

032name. I'm so sorry. That was Greg Johnson. I apologize for that. No problem. This is Joy Lynn. Greg, that would also, just let me know if I'm correct, would that do away with the seats that are also for the special ed kids? Yes. I'm sorry. I should have spoken about this before. Yes. And so I guess I would ask then what's the implication of that? So, you know what I mean, in terms of their experience at the high school and whatever other ramifications for other students. You mean we're talking about the special needs kids? Well, especially all the students, including them. Go ahead. Sure. For our special needs populations, Gwen would be able to refer to that a little bit more specifically than I could. I mean, quite simply, the simplest way to... I'm sorry,

033yes? No, I was going to address... Oh, I'm sorry. Gwen, go ahead. Just in regards to the students who are in the special ed program, Parents are, for whatever reason, very pleased with their children's enrollment at Menta. I think it would be problematic for those students to leave the program. And I don't want to go into a great deal of personal information about those students, but... They are achieving success at Menta. We don't have as many students as we have had in the past. For example, when Menta first started, we may have had probably 15, 16 students. Now we are down to approximately seven students, and they are juniors and seniors. So for them, I think it would be a hardship for that family if we terminated the agreement. This is Craig. I guess I

034would, in a sense, support that this issue has come up a number of times over the last couple of years. I think it would be unfair at the 11th hour to take an action to pull the plug on it, but I don't understand, and I would like, you know, in the future for there to maybe be an option here. to be discussed at the board level. That's no problem at all. Can I ask the question, in the report that we received, these nine, Gwen, you made reference to seven students currently at Menta. Are the students in the report represented, the special ed students, are they represented in the report we were given? No. Those are just the general ed students who are participating in the alternative to suspension program. The students at MENTA are considered

035off-campus students. They're not included in that. Okay. And that is one of the... So when we say the contract... what we the data we received which shows the Racial disparities and also I and I won't belabor this I you know, I understand but I I think that the the two sides of this has always been the challenge the the gen ed and the special ed and our lack of understanding of what the education is for those students and the fact that we've talked about our desire to go with our new behavior management plan and suspension still looming is troubling. But I am in no way, this is more a, I would like to have this viewed as my protest and not in any way trying to sway anyone else's vote. Would any other board members

036like to comment or ask any questions? Okay, Gail, could you call the roll, please? Yes. Mr. Martiri? My phone's acting up on me here, yes. Thank you. Mr. Barron? Yes. Mr. Eisley? Yes. Mr. Kofsky? Yes. Dr. Moore? No. Ms. Dixon-Spivey? Yes. Thank you. Our next item that we pulled from the consent agenda is item N, the superintendent compensation for the 2020-2021 school year. We will need to be going back into closed session before we can have a vote on that item. So we are moving that to the end of our agenda this evening. Okay. We had an action item, which was to approve a settlement agreement. However, that is not going forward tonight either. So we are pulling that from the agenda. So I believe we're left with our discussion items. Dr. Prudhoe? Our first

037item is the preliminary budget for fiscal year 2021. Making the presentation tonight is Ms. Cindy Sidor and Ms. Alyssa Alfano. At the conclusion of the presentation, it is recommended that the board review the preliminary budget for fiscal year 2021 and that the next step would be to present the tentative budget for fiscal 2021 in August. This item is in compliance with strategic plan priority four and district policy four, colon 10. Ladies. Thank you, Dr. Pruitt-Adams. What a fun budget this has been. That's all I could say to start this one. So when we first started working on it, the board has asked administration to try and keep the expenditures within the CPI increase. The CPI increase for FY21 will be 1.9%. And the current increases that we have at this point in expenditures is 1.8%.

038I just want to... to make clear to everybody too, we do not have anything in here yet for COVID. We'll talk about this a little bit later as we go on into the presentation. Next. Before we show you the revenue numbers, I just want to give you an overview of what the FY21 preliminary revenue budget contains. So for FY21, we're no longer going to have the TIF surplus. We received our final payout from the surplus in FY20. We're also expecting to see a decrease in our corporate personal property replacement tax. So going back to the Great Recession, we saw approximately a 20% increase in our revenue. So we use this as our basis when we created our FY21 preliminary budget. The state usually comes out with their estimate by August, so we should have an

039updated figure for this when we present the tentative budget. We're also expecting to have a flat evidence-based funding in federal and state grants. We are expecting interest rates to be much lower than they have been. So right before COVID-19 started here, our average interest rate was around 1.5%, and now we're at less than a half a percentage point. We have investments that are invested out, but as those mature, if the investment rates continue to be as low as they are, we're going to see a decline in our interest. We are also expecting our real estate tax collections to be a lot lower. So during the Great Recession, we saw our collection rate to be around 97.5%. And normally we're within the 98.6 to 99.4% range. So just as a preliminary caution, we feel that we

040should drop the collection rate in the budget just because of COVID-19. With unemployment rate higher than normal, expect to see a slight decline in our property tax collections. And we do expect to see an increase in appeals. So the summary for the preliminary budget for expenditures, as I already stated, we stayed within the CPI of the 1.8%. Our salaries and benefit increases came in at about a 2.5% increase. The thing that I wanted to point out here is that some of the salaries are mandated by our collective bargaining agreements, and we have four of those, which are faculty, buildings and grounds, campus safety, and classified personnel. The board annually gets to approve what the salaries are for administration and non-affiliated staff. Our purchase services supplies increased by about a 1.7%. The capital that we have,

041the capital and non-capital equipment decreased by 37%. The thing that I want to point out here is that part of what happened with this is the fact that our threshold for capital equipment has been increased from $500 to $5,000. So it's no longer going to be considered a fixed asset, but it'll be a non-capital item. Also, too, we didn't order as much furniture that we need. We're basically ordering furniture that needs to be ordered or also, too, if it needs to be repaired, we're doing that. And also, too, we did the reclassification. So this helped us move those amounts around. The construction, what we're looking to pay from fund balance is Project 1 was the $10 million for next year. Cindy Spence, We have the life safety of 500,000 and also to the 10 year

042maintenance of 4.13 this is part of what's going to be spoken about tonight. So we had a we this is from a number that we've been working with. This is not a solid number. It's just one that we've had from one of the last reports that we had used. Next, please. It's Cindy. Cindy Spence, Just a quick question. Back on that last slide, you had a reclassification in your capital spending, which means that there was a big chunk of expense in there, something that's now expensed. Is that showing up in purchase services? It's not going to be in purchase services. It's going to be in supplies because these are usually not, these are not what we're calling non-capital plus also too, we have to set up a non-capital account. It's not something we've used in

043the past. So if you've moved that much, you know, all the expenses below $5,000 that were capitalized previously between 5,000 and 500 or whatever into purchase services. What kind of, have you taken a number of actions to keep the purchase services and supplies increased that low? Sarah Silver, With our project one going on right now we're trying to halt any purchase like unnecessary furniture purchase just because Sarah Silver, If we're doing all this construction. We're probably going to be buying new equipment new furniture. So anyone that has a furniture request, to be honest, it's most likely being denied unless it's a broken piece of furniture. So some of that is down because of that. Okay. All right. I'm just curious how you why we didn't see it go out one place and in another. So

044thank you. So as I said before, most of our revenues in our FY21 preliminary budget have been impacted by COVID-19. So we did include the COVID-19 impact in our revenue side, not on our expenditure side. So just to kind of go through them really quick again, we are expecting to see lower real estate tax collections. We decreased our corporate personal property replacement tax. We're expecting a flat evidence-based funding in federal and state grants, and we're also going to see lower interest rates. The expenditure part of it, too, is the expenditure part that we do not have in here. We are estimating, though, that it would be about a $2 million increase for PPE cleaning and additional FTE. Part of what we put in would be, if we're looking at the FTE, it could be security,

045buildings and grounds, technology, nurses, and substitutes. There could also be a potential for... savings to consider that's built into this budget. And that could be transportation, it could be field trips, professional development, travel expenditures. They may be virtual instead of actual travel expenses. And sports and clubs traveling using transportation, hotel and food. Next, please. So this is a historical look back on our prior year revenues compared with our current preliminary FY21 budget. So the major difference you're going to see in our revenue stream from the FY20 budget to now is our real estate tax revenue. And really all this is, is the timing of our real estate taxes. It makes our revenues look higher than they really are. So this can get confusing. So just to kind of give you a quick overview to help

046explain why. So I don't know if you remember our chart from last year and our explanation explaining how our tax levy is different than our fiscal year. So I'm going to kind of just go through it without the numbers. Our tax levy year runs on a calendar year and we operate on a fiscal year. So we're always going to have timing differences between fiscal years on when the levy is actually passed and when the county processes it. So our spring installment is 55% of our prior year levy. Just because the county hasn't finalized our most current levy that we passed. So it's an estimate. But when the fall installment comes around, it's a true up of our actual levy. So these two installments of the tax levy are not in the same fiscal year. So

047we're always going to have this slight fluctuation in revenue, especially if we have a large decrease in our levy like we did with our 2018 levy when we received the property tax relief grant and we abated $5.8 million back. So this is why we're seeing a difference between FY19, 20, and 21. So in FY21, our revenue right now is $74.6 million, and this is based off of our fall 2020 installment and spring 2021 installment. So really, it's the true up of our 2019 levy that we passed this December. And it's an estimated 55% of the 2019 levy because when we go to pass our levy this December, it's not going to be processed by the county yet. So really all this is explaining is this change is timing. So don't freak out when you see

048the numbers. It's just timing. So for looking at the remainder of our revenues, just like I mentioned before, our other local revenue is down, and that's because our lower corporate personal property replacement tax, and we're not going to receive any more TIF surplus payments. Our evidence-based funding is expected to be flat. Our state and federal revenues are going to be fairly flat as well. And just to kind of point something out, the state and county does not recognize us as having the property tax relief grant anymore since that money is now in evidence-based funding. So that's why you see one line item now for evidence-based funding. So just a quick question on that. So if I roll the clock forward 12 months and things happen as you expect. Do I expect the FY 2020 unaudited

049actual to look something like 84 or something like 78? Sorry, can you repeat your question? So if I look back over the last three years, we're collecting about 84 million, right? Yes. Okay. And this year coming up, I understand we have a bunch of timing differences that create some noise. I'm saying if I were to look at this 12 months from now for the 2020 unaudited actual, and if all the things that you said come true, am I going to see a number like 78 or am I going to see a number like 84? You're going to see around 78. So as of May, our real estate taxes were right in line with budget. I think by the time we hit June, we're going to be at 59.3. million dollars. So really if you look

050over a long period of time the real estate taxes are going to start like falling. So I think even in FY22 we're going to be a little bit lower than the 74.6 just because it's going to true up. And that's if we continue with growing our real estate taxes by CPI. So really the outlier year was 2020. Okay. So this is a breakout of our preliminary budgeted revenues. It's very similar split from last year besides the real estate tax revenue. Here is slightly higher just because of the timing of the collections that I explained earlier, but everything else is fairly similar to the prior year, so nothing major to note. So on the preliminary budgeted expenditures, the one thing that I want to point out is when we say unaudited actual, this is actually what

051we were, these were our actual numbers. And that is because we do our budget on a cash basis, and then we do our audit on a modified accrual. And that's because we get the CAFR, which is the Comprehensive Annual Financial Report. When we look at the dollar amount, between FY20 and FY21, it's about a 1.77% increase or one point, say about $1.5 million. The one thing, Craig, I think the one question you had asked earlier is in the 37%. If you look at the supplies and materials on this one, it's 4.9 million versus the budgeted the year before was the 4.1 million. So I think that's where the difference was when we put this in. And also, too, we have a non-capital equipment line, too, now. So with the supplies and materials, they went up

052over the FY20, as it was explained earlier, and this was due to the fixed assets change and the threshold, the reclassifying, and ordering the necessary furniture and equipment. And I think... Cindy Spence, I think Craig you pointed this out in the last meeting on there may be a different structure to classes or and furniture setup due to covert 19 to as we move forward with project one and also to the non capital equipment line. I wanted to point out. Next slide please. Yeah. Craig Vaughn, I just asked a couple quick questions. I don't want to drill too deeply on this one, but just My two questions are looking at benefits, if you look at it from a 2017 to 2021, it looks like it dropped and it's remained flat and that seems inconsistent. What's driving

053that? It shows a big pop from 2020 to 2021. That was my first one and the second one I wanted to talk about was tuition. So for the benefits, what we actually did is these have been the benefits we've actually gone back and we've looked at every single person and all the benefits they've actually are taking. In the past, I think what happened is that it was, excuse me, they use forecast five and if they didn't change something in order to change a rate, that is causing where the flat was actually coming across. When we had the increase, when those were also flatter years too, I believe those were like one percent increases. There were, and we were using some balance if I'm not mistaken from those couple of years. When 20 came around, we

054had a little bit of a bump and we're assuming for next year there again will be a bump because we had a about a little bit more than a four, I think there's a four and a half percent increase. this year for insurance. Now when we come along for the tentative, we'll be working with the insurance broker to see possibly where our rates may be going for January to 21 because the rates actually change for us. We're on a fiscal year when we budget, but insurance is actually on, this insurance is actually on a calendar year. So we have split half and half. Okay, yeah, you just kind of answered the second part of that one, which is, you know, healthcare, because of COVID and other things, I'm hearing some crazy things. And so we're

055not, we don't have anything baked in here for that. Oh, no, no. I'll pass and let you proceed. Thank you. Oh, thank you. So this is just a chart that we look at to see where our expenditures are actually lining up. The salaries are about 58 and benefits are 14, which is about 72% or 75% of our expenses are spent on staff to help educate students. We have purchase services that would be next in line and then the special ed tuition and other would fall in. Next. So here's our five-year financial projection. These numbers, I just want to caution you, will be changing because of COVID-19. So we don't have our COVID-19 expenditures in this yet. But this is kind of to show you pre-COVID-19 what's happening. And you could see our expenditure growth rate

056was at 1.8%. This will be fluid, so this could look completely different come August when we present the tentative budget. As we get information on what COVID-19 could do with our district, we update this. And really with this, though, I just wanted to say one more thing is we haven't really had any major changes in the assumptions from when the CFAC reviewed these last fall and winter. So we have a meeting scheduled with them coming up and we'll go back over the assumptions to see if we do need to change anything because of COVID-19. Oh, go ahead. Oh, sorry, Alyssa. The other thing, too, with this, we're actually tracking anything we have to purchase, services or supplies, we're tracking them separately in different account numbers. So it's an easy track for us, especially if we're

057going to get reimbursed for anything. It's easy to find and track it. When we actually come back to with the five-year projection. This will be a separate line item. So we're going to split it out so you could see what we were what we're going to receive and what we actually have been paying for COVID-19. This second preliminary five year projection is with our construction expenditures that we are spending down fund balance. So as you can see at the end of project one, our expected fund balance will be around 62%. And obviously this is going to change after we put our COVID-19 expenditures in, but as of right now, it's around 62%. And I just want to remind everybody, fund balance is including our $20 million we set aside for future capital projects. So we

058could see that at the end of 2021, we're estimating that we'll be at approximately 85%. As you can see, we've been coming down some. And then by 2022, we should be in the range of where we have the policy currently between the 25 and 75% of fund balance. Thank you. This here is a potential additional expenditures related to COVID-19. This is not a complete list. This is just listing items that we have been going through as a team trying to put together. Like I said, we have separate accounts we're putting these in so it's easier tracking for us. But these are just a list of some of the items that... you'll be seeing when we come forward with our tentative budget. Next, please. And this here is just the timeline. We just put the timeline

059in of when we basically present to the board, when we actually bring the tentative budget, when we have to have it on display, when we have the public hearing and the final budget, and then when it gets adopted and filed with the state. Next, please. Any questions? This is Craig. I don't. Oh, I'm sorry. Go ahead, Greg. Thanks. Oh, sorry. I don't have any additional questions. Thank you guys for, you know, working so hard to get this put together. I think you've done a good job of listening to the board around managing our expenses. I understand COVID-19 is certainly a monkey wrench in that in terms of expenses. And we don't have a lot of data on it now. But the only thing I would say is we do, I believe that we have to

060both spend what we need to spend to keep everybody safe and not worry about that too much in terms of the spending. It's things that we have to do, but it is incumbent upon us to. also look at the things that it changes and the things that we don't have to continue to do. And I know that some of those decisions may be really tough in this kind of environment, but it is part of the challenge that we have to look at. So that's all I have to say. Thanks. Absolutely. Thank you, Craig. Cindy, this is Ralph. I only had one quick question. Were there any anticipated savings from having The building closed down virtually for the last couple of months that maybe we could carry forward into the next year from this budget year.

061We looked at, we were just finishing up the salaries and there is some savings there that we'll have because we didn't have some overtime also to some of the subs. We'll have some potential savings there. I don't know if she's 100%. done with that yet. But I do foresee we will have some savings that we will definitely have some savings there. Others would be transportation. We'll have some savings from that. Let me think, what else is there? I don't think we will have savings from supplies because we're actually having to purchase more supplies unless we get reimbursed for them. So if it's an offset, then it's not a problem, but we may have to be paying a little bit out of the budget in order to keep students and staff safe. Yeah, no, as Craig

062said, safety is first, and obviously any investment in student and staff safety is worth the money spent. I was just hopeful that maybe we could find some money to cover some COVID costs in the next coming year from savings that we realized this year unexpectedly. Absolutely. I mean, that is something we will see towards the end as soon as we hit June 30th and we start closing everything. We'll see if we have some savings there. Obviously, that money would stay in fund balance. So we could say that from what we had from fund balance from the prior year could be used to pay to offset some of the costs in the next year. I want to add, if I might, that while we know there's two grants that we're applying for, we have the CARES

063grant where we're hoping to put some of the COVID costs, cover some of the COVID costs with post-hours, and then we've applied for a FEMA grant that we hope will also help to take up some of the costs. It won't take up all of the costs. But we're hoping it will take up some because what we've learned from West 40 is that it could cost any district the least amount it could cost the district to respond to COVID is 1.7 million. Any other questions? Just thank you from Tom. I appreciate the work being done in this. And I think just so that I'm going to flip back to Ralph's question just to make sure I'm clear. The any short any savings or quote unquote where we underspent this year would basically just end up in

064fund balance, right? Yes. Yes. And you don't have that, but you don't have that in what you presented in your fund balance projection, correct? No, because we're not done with the year yet. Okay. We will. Yeah, we will. We will. The tentative. Yeah. But the data that you showed, just so that I'm clear, did not show any anticipated savings this year, but it also didn't show a lot of costs for next year. Correct. Due to COVID, yes, absolutely. Thank you. You're welcome. Thank you. I'm sorry. One additional follow-up question. So we took out the TIF surplus. We're certainly taking into account the additional EAV that we would be getting on a go-forward basis from the TIFs. Yes. Okay. Anyone else? All right. Thank you so much for the presentation. Thank you. Thank you. So racial

065equity procedures discussion is next. If people need to take a break of a few minutes, please let me know. I do anticipate that B and C combined would probably be a little bit lengthy. So if folks need a break, please alert me. Okay, let's keep going. Okay. The next item is the racial equity procedures. Gail, I don't see the memo. Oh, the memo is behind the slides. Okay, the next presentation, I don't see it, so I'll just move forward, is the presentation of racial equity procedures. As you know, last spring, the board approved a policy, a racial equity policy, and this year we've been developing the policy. The presentation will be made by Dr. LaVar Ammons. and this procedure, this is in compliance with strategic plan priority one, racial equity, board policy 7.10 and 7.12.

066As a conclusion of this presentation, I'm telling the board this item is for discussion only as procedures do not require board approval. Dr. Ammons. All right. Thank you, Dr. Pruitt-Adams. And I am looking to... Can I drive this presentation, Chris? Do I just have to hit the share button? Yeah, so you just share your screen. All right. And that's not it. You all can see what I'm sharing now, right? Yes. All right. Can we see that screen there that I'm sharing, the title screen? Yes, you're good. All right, I'm good to go. So first of all, thanks again, Dr. Pruitt-Adams. And first, I will say before I get into the presentation that, you know, it's been a long time coming. in terms of getting the racial equity policy and the procedures to this point. Just

067a few thanks to go out as number one to the Board of Education just for your leadership and really advocating and having the mindset of making racial equity an important part of what we're doing here in our district. Secondly, to Dr. Pruitt-Adams. and her leadership in this work and the support that she's shown in this work in addition to the executive cabinet, the transformative education team, all of our teachers, our amazing students, faculty senate, community members, content experts. It has really been quite the heavy lift and I just wanted to make sure I started out with thanking folks for the work that has been done. of course we're in a very uh i would say interesting time right in our country where we've all been impacted by a number of things and when we talk

068about racial equity uh we can't help but to talk about you know, COVID-19 and really how COVID-19 has number one impacted all of us, but it's really highlighted some well-known racial disparities that we've always experienced and understood to be true in our society, whether we're talking about disparities in education, the healthcare system, economics and gainful employment, access to resources and so forth. And then, you know, on top of that, we also experienced the murder of George Floyd, right, which literally sets our country on fire and gives us a reminder. that racism is still something that we have to deal with as it is pervasive and prevalent in all of our lives and we need to do something about it. So the timing of the racial equity policy and its procedures are more important and more

069important than ever as we are really faced with concerns around racial disparity. So with that, I'll go ahead and get into the presentation on our racial equity policy and procedures. So just for a little background, as Dr. Pruitt-Adams already said, back in September of 2018, the Board of Education did approve a framework for a racial equity policy to be developed. And during the 2018-2019 school year was when it was actually developed. So there was a group of stakeholders, including a lot of the folks I just mentioned, administrators, teachers, content experts, community members, students, parents, and so forth. that came together and developed the racial equity policy as we know it today. As of this year, or even then after that adoption of the racial equity policy, the policy itself mandates administrative procedures to be developed

070and that was the charge for this year. So the racial equity policy itself is comprised of 12 sections, and each one of those components of the section gives us clear instructions on what it means or what the requirements are to be a more racially conscious and socially aware institution, right, as it relates to racial disparities and the need to act to mitigate those. During the procedure development process over the last school year, the last nine months or so, there was a racial equity procedure team that met monthly. Also, in between that time of those monthly meetings, there was continuous work going on in the building with various teams that worked in specific areas of the racial equity policy and procedures. So with that development... throughout this entire year, we had to keep in mind some

071guiding principles to make sure that we are maintaining a critical racial equity lens and keeping race on the table in all of our discussions. So really figuring out or... being critical of our own practices, right? And having that critical equity lens as to, well, what are the reflections on our approaches to equitable education? Being sure that we stay in contact with stakeholders and having those multiple perspectives at the table as we develop a document such as this one. And then having conversations around the next steps towards implementation and how do we implement a 12-component policy. So what you're looking at now are all 12 components of the racial equity policy, starting in the left column and then moving over to the right. These are how they show up in sequential order in the actual policy

072itself. So these are all 12. We will not be going in this specific order tonight, but just wanted to give you an overview of what the title of each one of these policy items or sections are. So the very first policy item or procedure would be the accountability and monitoring procedure. So ultimately this procedure itself is going to ensure the implementation of the racial equity policy, all of the components of the racial equity policy. And with these procedures, in terms of implementing these procedures, we'll do that with the use of our racial equity analysis for implementation of the specific sections of this policy. So in terms of accountability and coming back and monitoring, the Office of Equity, in particular myself, would come back and do an annual accountability report to the board in the spring

073or in June. just to look at our outcomes, impacts, metrics, various benchmarks towards, as we're working towards various, you know, equity initiatives in the district. So then moving on to the equity analysis. So this is primarily the engine of what's going to make the racial equity policy go, if you will. So this equity analysis, the goal of it or the purpose of it is to provide a set of guided questions to ensure that we maintain our focus on race and all of the decisions, in particular, significant decisions that we make. as a district. So in that process and using these guided questions, of course, we would have to establish what decision is going to be made and bringing all the appropriate players to the table in terms of determining what stakeholders need to be at

074the table when it's time to make this decision and go through the process. Once that decision is established. and the stakeholders have been determined, then that team would go through and complete the actual racial equity analysis tool, which is a form, an online form and a paper form. So folks can just work through these four levels or these four steps within tool, again, making sure that we keep race on the table as we are making decisions for the district. So, and in those four steps, number one, we have to ensure racial equity. and see where race intersects in all of our decisions. So whether we're talking about the intersectionality of race or looking at data to be sure that we're making the appropriate decisions around race in our programs, we have to consider race first.

075Secondly, there is the need to set what are those racially equitable outcomes that we would like to have. And with that, we have to, again, identify and engage stakeholders because we want those multiple perspectives at the table as a value in terms of, you know, being aware of our differences within racial equity. For data review, you know, we have to look at, you know, all points of data in terms of making decisions for the institution and how those decisions may impact various racial groups. The data review will just give us the best opportunity to... make sound decisions that will produce racially equitable outcomes in whatever it is we're trying to implement or evaluate. And then of course, evaluating those success indicators. So finding out what did we do well, what could we have done better?

076Were there any roadblocks or are there any roadblocks or barriers to reaching or obtaining racial equity in a specific area? And if there are any of those barriers, what are we doing to mitigate the impact of those barriers? or just eliminating them outright. So then onto the equitable practices, procedures and programs. So in the previous slide, there was the actual equity analysis, right? So with that analysis, we would then use the analysis to evaluate or make decisions around the five areas that you see here. When we talk about using this actual tool to evaluate these areas, It's not a matter of, again, discovering over or under representation of racial groups, because again, we know that there are disparities that exist, but once we isolate those disparities, the tool itself puts us in a position to

077actually now go into action and do something in terms of trying to mitigate or attempting to mitigate the racial disparities that exist in each one of these areas. So the next section of the racial equity procedures is the racial incident reporting protocol. So for this particular section, the charge is to have a reporting process or protocol for students as well as employees to report any instance of racial misconduct. both for students and for employees. So these are the steps in which they would use in order to file a complaint of racial misconduct. And I'm gonna pull up here a flow chart, which we kind of saw already, but we're gonna. walk through it now. So when we're talking about reporting a racial incident, students have one of four ways to be able to report an

078actual incident. Number one, they can come straight to the Office of Equity and report it to myself or to Ms. Melody Brown. From there, we would start the fact, well, gather information, start the fact-finding process. They could also tell a trusted adult. that adult will then come to the Office of Equity and give us that report so we can start that fact-finding process. The third option for students is to text the anonymous hotline for students where that message will go to a third party and then they end up contacting myself as well as the dean so they are aware that a report has been made and we can go ahead and address that immediately. And then lastly, there is an online incident report form where students would be able to access that online on the

079internet, or they would be able to just scan the QR code and it would take them directly to this incident reporting form that would then be routed to the Office of Equity so we can address the alleged racial misconduct issue. Over on the right-hand side for adults, it's as simple as if an adult sees or has a student that reports an incident or they suspect that a racial incident has occurred, they will go directly to the Office of Equity and we would start that fact-finding process. And in my next slide, I'll show you what happens next. But again, for student responses, that comes directly to the Office of Equity or any employee. reports of racial misconduct, they could either come to the Office of Equity or go directly to our Employee Racial Incident Response Managers,

080Dr. Sanders or Mr. Greg Johnson. So the next steps in that process for a racial incident report is number one, the fact-finding process. So a student comes in, we gather information in terms of what has happened. And then from there, in the Office of Equity, we go and collaborate with the deans to further that fact-finding process to make sure we have all the information we need to make a decision. Also, there's the matter of trying to determine if this was an instance of racial disconsciousness or if it was in fact an outright explicit act of racism. So we'd have to work through that process or work to find that out in that fact-finding process. Of course, we maintain confidentiality as all student records are confidential to the extent of making sure we have a thorough

081fact-finding process and gathering information from whatever folks we need to. As far as support for students, we have to advise both parties, right, both the reporting and the responding party of any resources, you know, that are available. Of course, with these incidents, you know, there are, you know, emotional responses, right? And, you know. from a social-emotional learning standpoint, there's going to be an impact potentially on both sides. So being sure that we point students in the right direction, as well as staff, for resources in the school or the community for that emotional support going through a situation like this is very important. Also within this protocol, we'll have an opportunity to make changes and arrangements where it's appropriate. So if you have students in the same class and there is an incident that happened and

082there's no way that they would be able to remain in that class together, if it is possible, we would be willing to make changes so those students would not have contact with each other. We'd also inform the reporting and responding parties of the outcome in terms of how it's been handled, that it's been handled appropriately. Of course, not, you know. informing someone of a disciplinary action that had been doled out, but just reassuring folks that, you know, the situation was not only acknowledged, but it went through a process and it was handled appropriately given, you know, what the situation was. And then lastly, you know, with that, the outcome, you know, taking either restorative, disciplinary, or corrective actions, again, contingent on, you know, what all the facts were in a given racial incident report. So

083then for the next section of the policy, we go right into our diverse workplace initiatives. So out of the Human Resources Office, Dr. Sanders has put together a talent management plan, which is really designed to increase the percentage of racially and linguistically diverse staff. right from year to year. And within that, you know, we have these four areas of focus. So recruitment, onboarding, compensation and retention, which are all vital components of being sure that we can not only attract and properly onboard, but maintain and retain, you know, a diverse, a racially diverse population of teachers coming into the building. One of the pieces I've been working with Dr. Sanders on in terms of retention is we know that there is an affinity group here at OPRF, which is the Black Leadership Advisory Council. And the

084idea behind it is to provide, you know, Black teachers and staff a space to, you know, to connect with, you know, with like minds and like people. And of course, there's a social emotional component to that. In talking with other staff members, I did find out that there were other unofficial affinity spaces that were happening that weren't necessarily on the books. So the idea behind it in terms of making sure that we have a safe and welcoming environment. or new staff of color is to have these affinity spaces for them to connect with. And it would be in work in conjunction with our current mentoring program. So, in fact, the new teacher would be able to have a mentor within their department, but also be paired up with someone from an affinity space from a

085group that they actually identify with just to have another perspective on our workplace and connection within our workplace. And also it gets those new teachers outside of their department a bit quicker and really contributes to our culture of warmth. So those are just one. of the initiatives that we're thinking about for, that we're looking to get done for diverse workplace initiatives. There's also the matter of looking at the hiring practices, right, and that hiring process. So making sure that we have implicit bias training as a mandatory step for anyone who would be on a given hiring committee or hiring team before we have them go through that process. So culturally responsive and relevant teaching and learning operates in a similar fashion as the diverse workplace initiatives being that there is already a procedure in place

086in terms of the curriculum evaluation and design model that was developed by Mr. Greg Johnson. So with this design model, there's an opportunity to evaluate design and do action research to ensure that we are being, you know, culturally responsive and relevant in our in our teaching and learning. And one of the starting points of that process is making sure that we have a curriculum development team that is reflective of our student population. So once again, those those multiple perspectives are coming in to play when we have conversations about these processes of evaluation, design, assessment, selection of materials and books and such. Moving on to professional development. Now, currently there are established processes already in place when we talk about our racial equity coaches. care team leaders that do the actual action research and professional development

087of professional learning with our teachers during our professional development times. But there's also opportunities for more global or widespread professional development. We talk about the historical roots of racism, which is a very timely topic of PD for current times. culturally responsive mindsets as we're going into next year. Culturally responsive pedagogy is going to be a part of that professional development plan. And I'm currently working with... Mr. Greg Johnson and Dr. Lori Fiorenza and the rest of the transformative ed leadership team on developing that component of our professional development going into next year. Again, there is implicit bias training as well as anti-racism or anti-oppressive. anti-oppressive techniques and such that we can definitely push forward for professional development. And ultimately, we're looking to increase our employees' knowledge and their skills to be able to not only

088acknowledge, but recognize and eliminate bias in achievement, student achievement and hiring practice. So then for welcoming school environment, ultimately we're charged with making sure that we have an environment that is safe and inclusive and equitable. So ultimately we want to, again, ensure that a part of that is ensuring that, you know, students as well as faculty and staff of color, particularly our Black and Latinx populations have these affinity spaces to connect with just to, you know, feel secure and welcomed, you know, in this environment. Another component of making sure our environment is welcoming is being sure that we are intentional about incorporating artwork of our black and brown students in the school. We do a good job of that now, but we want to, again, be intentional and continue to consider that. As far as

089campus safety, there has to be ongoing implicit bias training, restorative practices, professional development, just so we are sure that, you know, we are approaching our students, our staff, our community members in a way, you know, that is appropriate and also welcoming. And also we have to collect data, right, in terms of... surveys from students and from the community to ensure that we are hitting the mark in terms of how we are welcoming folks into our building and how people are showing up in the space. In terms of emotional support, there's going to certainly be a need for ongoing professional development around trauma-informed practices. Again, given COVID-19, given the state, the social political state of our world, everyone has been... impacted and has experienced trauma because you know we have to be reminded that we are

090uh actually navigating a crisis right so when we think about what school looks like uh next year uh and really reimagining what our educational environment looks like uh we have to be mindful of the emotional support that's going to be needed so uh you know work as early as this this summer we are currently looking at going to get some professional development in trauma-informed practices to then be able to come back and roll that into the PD starting for next year because that's going to be a critical component to getting our folks back to school in a way that is very supportive. So then moving on to discipline disparities. So these four bolded tenets of discipline disparities are the pieces that will make sure that we are in alignment and actually dovetailing with the behavior

091education plan. So number one, we have to be able to collect data and disaggregate that data by race just to, you know. understand the story of our practices and who has access to more restorative elements of discipline. And again, with that picture coming from the data collection, we can make more informed decisions on how to go forward with our discipline practices. The behavior education plan, we have to annually review that to make sure that as times change, as things change, that the... the behavior education plan will be in alignment with what we want to see in terms of changing behaviors or addressing the behaviors of students from an emotional, social-emotional learning standpoint. There's already a group of teachers that are focused on school climate and making sure that not only is it a welcoming space,

092but understanding that there's an expectation for appropriate behavior. And of course, there's professional development that's geared around that social emotional learning, being able to establish just kind of common language and goals for the classroom. And every classroom is a part of that professional development. When we talk about restorative practices, You know, currently there is a cohort of circle keepers who are on their second year of, which is their advanced circle keeping through Emoja. So these folks will then in turn be able to go back into the school and provide professional development, specifically, you know, intensive training for our TCT leaders. So those same principles and practices can be implemented during those TCT times so we can connect in ways. and have conversations around curriculum assessment and so forth in ways that we haven't done before.

093And of course, being sure that the deans are supported and implementing restorative practices because as Linda Parker is always mentioning that there is this universal mind shift that has to happen around how we have you disciplined. So, you know. in my work with the deans and talking with the deans and talking with Linda Parker, we are certainly in line with trying to make sure that that universal mind shift happens. And then of course, taking less punitive measures. I mean, we know that the data shows how punitive discipline shakes out for students of color, specifically black males. So when we talk about how to kind of roll that back and take a step back, a prime example of that is our in-school reflection center. It's formerly known as the in-school suspension room, but now the difference

094is that students get an opportunity to not only reflect, but have restorative measures put into place so they can understand the behavior that landed them in the in-school reflection center. So they can again, change the behavior by understanding what they've done. Another great component of taking that less punitive measure in the in-school reflection center would be the fact that we're not keeping students exclusively away from the classroom. So if there's an opportunity or if there's a need for a student to complete a project or go in for a presentation that they would have otherwise missed by being in the in-school reflection center. They would be allowed to go and then participate in that and get the grade. In addition to having work sent down to them by teachers, so then the supervisors in that space

095can distribute that work while maintaining contact again with teachers, with parents. So it's not a punitive. It's a less punitive measure, making sure that we restore the student rather than outright punishing them. So with stakeholder and community engagement. There are a number of initiatives that need to take place to continue to grow our opportunities to bring in a more racially diverse level of stakeholders. So with that, we have to continue to be intentional about our targeted outreach to various racial groups. Again, in particular, the black and brown families and students in our community. You know, and it really goes beyond It goes beyond just sending robo calls or it goes beyond emails, but there needs to be an immersion into the community and meeting people where they are, whether it's, you know, churches. parks or

096whatever the case may be, we have to do a better job of getting out in the community. And there's some work underway now with LaTanya Jackson and the community outreach department to put, again, a plan together to be more targeted in that way for our community outreach. Of course, we'll have to utilize annual surveys, disaggregate that data by race, just to understand the needs of people of color in our district in order to bring them in and welcome them in to the community or welcome them into the building, encouraging them and letting them know that this is your space as well. And then expanding collaboration with districts 97 and our local governments. I sit on a committee with the with the public library, the Oak Park Public Library. And there's representation from all districts, but

097there's the local government piece and also adding in community members, people of color to be a part of these discussions. You know, as we talk about... you know, operations, you know, in the community, in the school, anti-racism, especially in the climate that we're in right now. So being able to pull in more people of color to have that voice at the table. So in terms of our resource allocation and what that means to be more equitable in that, we can see these five highlighted in bold tenants will push us in a direction to, you know, be able to allocate resources more equitably. So number one, I'll always go back to be sure that, you know, we collect data. So just being able to, you know, as far as closing opportunity gaps, understanding where those gaps

098are. and examining those disparities and opportunities so we can make informed decisions on where do resources need to be allocated. Thinking about revenues and trade-offs. if you think about pursuing various revenue opportunities at the federal, states, and local levels, we definitely want to bring in new revenue so we can be able to allocate those resources where they're needed. But even if we're not able to do it at a certain time, we can always look at areas to make trade-offs. So if we know that there is a need for the data that we have collected in a certain area and we can afford to shift our lens to reallocate. funds in a different direction, we'd have to take that opportunity as well. Excuse me. There's then the school-led investment. So really exploring the use of a

099student-based funding model. With this particular idea, we'd be looking to allocate funds based on student need. This is a fairly heavy lift and would take some development and learning and understanding and some research and looking at several models to see if this is something that would be that could be attainable for OPRF. But we certainly will be talking about or exploring the option of student-based funding. increasing impact of existing spending, excuse me. So our school footprint. So when I think about our school footprint, of course, we have the construction that we're working through now. And also when we talk about our freshmen, the restructuring of our freshmen curriculum, those two things are actually changing the footprint of how our organization has operated in the past. So those are two areas specifically. and how we think

100about increasing the impact of our existing spending. Of course, human capital, special education, we have to be mindful of how we are allocating resources in those spaces. And then just continuing to improve on our operational components of our organization. So district office and those central services that we provide, such as transportation, being sure that we are making appropriate decisions and being as frugal as possible in those areas to make sure that we have access to resources that we can allocate to spaces and places of need. And then on to the equity leadership infrastructure. So in order to make this entire process or these procedures go, we have to have the leadership and infrastructure to do so. So annually, the Office of Equity will review and evaluate the efficacy of our leadership infrastructure. With that, you

101know, we'll have to understand if we're trying to get certain initiatives done, we're going to need various things to make them go, whether it be specific leadership personnel. infrastructure, professional development, various proposals of different activities. So once a review of that infrastructure is complete, there'll be a number of key data points and recommendations that could be provided to administration, to the board, to various leadership teams and thought partnership around what is needed for the infrastructure of our racial equity procedures. And then now we talk about implementation. So when we look at the 2021 school year, there are five specific areas of the racial equity procedures that we're looking to implement. Not to say that we're not considering or thinking of all 12 components, but the remaining seven components that are not listed here already have

102established processes in place that are functioning within our institution. Not to say that they can't be pushed out because there are things or elements of the procedures that are not being done, that need to be stepped out a bit further in those areas that are already established in the building to push us more towards racially equitable outcomes. But specifically, these five sections or these five areas currently don't exist. in our building, right? So there's going to be a need for professional development and implementation of these specific areas in the institution going forward. So the equity analysis tool, equitable practices programs and procedures, and the racial incident protocol, that will be a focus of professional development in the falls. So everyone will know, you know, not only about these tools, but how to use those. And

103then in the spring. you know, we'll speak to the accountability and monitoring in June that'll be implemented, but actually happening, the accountability and monitoring will be happening throughout the entire year. And of course, as I just mentioned, the equity leadership and infrastructure component will also kind of be assessed as we are going through the implementation phases. Also in the spring, when we're looking at the remaining components of the procedures, those remaining seven and those established processes that already are in place, will be looking to then step out the additional components that are in those specific areas for implementation going into subsequent years. And that is it for the presentation. I will leave it open now for any questions. Thank you so much, Mr. Ammons. Questions by board members? Sarah, Tom. Sure, go ahead, Tom. All

104right. Thank you, LeVar, for the presentation. I have four questions that I'd like to focus in on. The first one is related to the racial equity analysis tool. You talk about launching that in the fall, I believe. But have we tested it? And what learnings have, you know, what have we found? in what we've done thus far? Yes, so it hasn't necessarily been tested completely to this point. I'm actually working with Christopher Thiem and his team in working through the One Big Idea initiative as we talk about digital citizenship and what that means for our students. So we're actually at this point in time running that initiative through the racial analysis as we speak. Okay. My second question is, you have reference to professional development repeat, you know, through a number of the sections. So,

105you know, how does this impact? Does this mean an increase in the total professional development we're going to be needing to do or planning on doing? Well, there'll be some overlap with professional development that we currently have. I think with the time that we have available to us that is very limited with professional development, we're going to have to be creative, again, in weaving, interweaving that professional development into structures that we currently have. And again, For an example, when we talk about the trauma-informed practices, there's going to be a handful of administrators, teachers and such looking into attending some sessions over the summer to then be able to develop that and roll that into professional development going into next year. Does that answer your question? Yeah, I mean, I think you're saying we won. I'm

106taking from that we have a limited amount of PD and we're going to have to kind of fight for that time is what I'm hearing and leverage it where it clearly indicates that there's need there. Let me just keep the ball moving just because I know there's others. And my next question was, you referenced a potential, a student-based funding model. Sure. And I'm curious how that compares to like the evidence-based funding model that we've seen from the state. I would say that I would have to, and again, with the student-based funding, it will position us to be intentional about placing funds specifically, and not necessarily resources, but specifically funds. towards students who are in need of those funds and there would have to be a specific formula or a set of rules developed as to

107how we would allocate those funds. As far as the piece of the state I would have to look a bit further into that. And again, that's why it's just an exploration at this point in time, and we're not necessarily committing to it, but there's much more research and understanding to be had in terms of the differences and similarities between the two. Okay. And my last question is more of a comment and it's, I think, consistent, I hope, with what I mentioned when you presented last time. I appreciate what we're doing and, you know, you're trying to continue to move the ball. When I think of procedures, the procedures... say what, but they also tell us how with the whole intent of assuring there's consistency. And if there's ever a need for consistency, it's in the

108area of how we deal with these tough, challenging racial disparity issues. So I don't expect it, you know, in a... a 30 minute board presentation, but I just would appreciate any comments you have on, you know, getting down to that level to get to the how, so that we assure consistency. Sure. There's much more detail in the actual procedures themselves as in this, again, 30-minute presentation. I'm highlighting or overviewing each one of those. But yeah, they each go into a level of depth that we could do a presentation on each one of these, an hour-long presentation on each one of these sections. And maybe, you know, perhaps we can, you know, we can bring them back individually and flesh out or have a better understanding of what these will look like in terms of that

109consistency. Yes. It might be better served is now that you have more information in each of the procedures, you know how you gave them a link earlier. If they have a link where they could go in and see those processes and then maybe send some questions. And at another point in time, you could frame the presentation to kind of cover some of that. But with 12 different sections to try to do a presentation on every step in that process. Correct. Would be a lot. So giving them access to those different sections. would at least allow the board the opportunity to look at it and frame any other questions that they might have. Yeah. I mean, my need is not to get into it, just to make sure that we understand kind of the depth of

110things. So I appreciate your responses and I'll yield to others. Thank you. All right. Thank you. Yeah. Hey, Dr. Ammons. This is Ralph Martiri. How are you tonight? I'm well. How about you? I'm tired, old, and cranky. And I appreciate all the hard work that went into this. There's a lot. And I want to, you know, jump up to the 10,000-foot view of this. And so this question, I don't know if it's even a fair one for you, Dr. Ammons, or if someone else should answer it, but is there actually a comprehensive plan? an ongoing professional development for the district that incorporates social-emotional, UDL, implicit bias, restorative justice that's evidence-based and that's designed to reach all the faculty in a way that we can have more assurance that the implementation of your procedures and, in

111fact, all the different programs that we try to implement to eliminate the various gaps that we are trying to eliminate will be effective. Yeah, great question. So with that, I'll say that at this point, we are having conversations because again, there are a number of professional development opportunities with limited time. So there's going to have to be conversations about how do we then either restructure our opportunities at professional development so we can put in a more, I guess, robust evidence-based level of professional development that includes implicit bias training and so forth. Yeah, I think we will need to work through the opportunities that we have. I don't know if I'm able to answer your question, but I know that. And you may not be able to, but I think it's something that we ought to

112get clarified because this is something, in my opinion, as a board member, the board ought to support providing the resources to the district to accomplish this kind of a coordinated, long-term, evidence-based professional development approach that is cross-disciplinary and reinforces everything we're trying to accomplish with the end game of changing outcomes to the elimination of these gaps. And so my next question is... Excuse me, Mr. Martiri, I can either Greg and I can kind of jump in on that one as well. The professional development plan that is part of the curriculum work that's being done is... Equity is embedded in there and Dr. Ammons is on, meets with Greg's leadership team when Greg meets with them on Monday. The goal is to bring that plan forward in August. We didn't bring it forward yet because we

113wanted to also include whatever additional PD is required to responsiveness to COVID. The other piece is the Institute days, which I think may have been in the consent agenda. And if you look at those, you also will see that there's some racial equity pieces that were tied to those initial institute days that are also in honor. Yeah, that's great. Thank you for that, Dr. Pruitt. That's helpful. But, you know, this I think is one of those things that... The board should be supportive of number one. We should have a comprehensive plan as a district number two. We should be devoting resources to number three. And we should have a way to measure the effectiveness of the PD so that if we're not getting the bang for our buck from whatever investments we're making in the

114PD, we could change course appropriately or, you know, go to a different provider. Absolutely. I guess the corollary question on the PD is on faculty collaboration. So that's, you know, one of the international best practices on improving student outcomes, especially for students that have traditionally been disenfranchised by an educational system. So is that built into this somewhere? Yes, I actually, Ralph, this is Greg. Could you repeat exactly what you're saying should be built in? Is it like an accountability to make sure it's producing the level of student results that you're looking for? Is that what the question was? No, this one was on faculty collaboration. I previously asked about the evaluation system, but no, I'm building in more faculty collaboration and collaboration time. So that you see what I'm saying. So that once we start

115developing really good best practices and we have some faculty members that become particularly adept at it. We could promote more faculty collaboration. Yes. Yes. And so we've had conversations about how we utilize the master schedule more effectively to ensure that we maximize the spaces that teachers can possibly have for collaboration. That's an ongoing need for a variety of reasons, but certainly to carry out the implementation of what we learned through professional development. I also want to add that the professional development that we're looking at is a combination of what we understand as best practices in the field, which is not only bringing in experts with differentiation, for example. but also enhancing our teachers to be leaders of professional development in the school around the specific targeted areas that we know we want to focus on

116so that we're learning from each other in a collaborative model. Not only train the trainer, but embedding the collaboration that we need to be successful throughout. Sorry, you can hear my dog barking in the background there. You know, that's brilliant, Greg. Thank you. And just that is the international best practice. If you read Michael Follin's work or anybody else's work, that's really a great way to change the endgame. So my next question, as we identify practices, procedures, and programs, I'm assuming that identification is going to be predicated on two things. Number one, it's going to be outcome-driven. So we're going to be identifying practices, procedures, and programs specifically intended to generate outcome A, B, and C. And our confidence that outcome A, B, or C is going to be generated will be predicated on evidence

117or research. So we will be utilizing evidence and or research-based programs. specifically intended to drive specific outcomes. Am I correct in my understanding? You are correct as long as we also understand that we aren't merely talking about, and I don't think this is what you mean, but I think it's worthy of clarifying. Very similar to the previous answer I gave with professional development. We're talking about enhancing our capacity to grow these programs, design them for our specific setting within the school, right? So we're not talking about going out necessarily and... Ralph Walsh Jr.: Finding some sort of package and bringing it in and saying, I hear it is right. This is my little things can get the results because it's not that clean implementation never worked successfully that way. It has to be something that's

118specific to the local setting. So as long as we put it with Matt context Ralph. Absolutely. Ralph Walsh Jr.: Okay, great. And then on the resource allocation. and identification of resource allocation. I'm very interested in that. Number one, I want to know if you are working on a way of identifying how resources are allocated now along, let's say, number one, the evidence-based model, which really gives us some good... background on practices that have been shown to work to enhance student achievement and then slash or through a subcategory somehow across different income racial ethnic lines. Because when I saw that resource allocation and identifying system for looking at how these resources are allocated, well, we got to know what we're doing with them now. and by which metrics to understand how to reallocate them to improve

119outcomes from an equity lens going forward, right? So I want to know where that is in the process and what steps are being taken there. Yeah, well, that process in and of itself is in its infancy. And we are certainly taking steps because in bringing up the fact that we may take on a student based funding model. You know, we have to again do our research there and to your point, understand exactly how our resources are being allocated now so It's a it's a research effort in tandem. So, so really it's at the infancy stages right now but looking to be developed over the summer. That's great. Dr. Raymond and I'm just gonna I'm just going to, just from a jargon standpoint, student-based funding has failed miserably at CPS and has generated very inequitable outcomes.

120I'm actually on a task force for CPS that's working on moving away from student-based funding. I don't think you are intending it the way CPS has implemented it. I think you're looking more at a needs-based funding. model that's student-centric. So maybe just change the way you phrase it because my initial reaction when I heard that, you know, gave me the weebie-jeebies. Gotcha. Gotcha. Thank you, Ralph. Gina or Jackie, did you want to pose any questions or comments? I thank you for the work. I would appreciate Just and it doesn't have to be for tonight, but just having a understanding of the I guess the committee members and What that process was like I know you you know referenced in the beginning but just trying to get a sense of the combination of students you know,

121community members, teachers, administrators, just as, you know, that doesn't have to be this evening. The question that I have about the work is, in your timeline, you say the spring of 2021, accountability and monitoring and equity leadership and infrastructure. And I'm not sure what that means, given that I would think that both of those things would be just instrumental to the implementation of the procedures. Yeah, yeah. And you're correct in saying that. What I'm saying is in terms of them being listed in the spring is that when that's when those reports will happen or the assessment from the entire year. So again, with accountability and monitoring, there's going to be processes in place throughout the year for that end of the year report to be done. similar to the equity leadership infrastructure as we assess

122and understand the implementation of other components of the policy. Okay, thank you. And the other thing I wanted to say, and this is maybe more directed at my fellow board members, is as I'm hearing comments about the, you know, the accountability piece and how do we ensure that this is done with, you know, the fidelity and that it is prioritized, you know, the needs-based. funding and how we allocate resources equitably. I think that that would be a great board discussion on, you know, perhaps our board goals and how we want to demonstrate what we're the metrics and the goals that we have for how racial equity is demonstrated in our district. And the only last thing I had was one of the things that I did not see in the report and it just triggered

123actually this evening looking at our contracts is that under, I guess it would be under facilities or something. But, you know, as we look at our vendors and consultants and things like that, looking at those with the racial equity lens to see what their boards look like, what their management looks like, who are we, you know, hiring to serve our district? And does it reflect, do those institutions reflect the... Jackie Clark, You know the racial demographics and the philosophy of opiates. Aisha Lowe, Ph.D.: That's a great point, Jackie, and something we might even want to consider making into a policy in terms of representation of minority and women owned businesses among our vendors. Jackie Clark, Absolutely. I recently had that conversation that is on. I think what was presented to the board earlier. what construction

124was shooting for a percentage and I believe that we will be as we continue to move forward in construction, we would be asking the board to determine a specific percentage of minority owned and business owned contractor. I think that would be a great idea. Tina, did you have any comments or questions? Did Craig already speak? No, I think Craig and Matt have not yet spoken. I try to keep track. I don't have a lot of questions. Thank you for the report, LaVar. One of my pieces is kind of similar to what Jackie was talking about. When you talked about... the annual review, that there would be an annual review of the information. I was curious what would be some of your interim benchmarks and how that information would be reported to the board. Okay. And

125I don't have that right now, but that's something that as I develop, I can get that information to you. Okay, awesome. And then I also appreciated that it came up twice about implicit bias training and That's what I was told when I joined the board was that 93% of the staff has attended the Pacific Education Group's Courageous Conversations, which likely covers some of the basics of that. So I'm curious if you're doing some sort of multi-tiered system of support for your adults in the building around who already has some basic knowledge and who needs some next level work as it pertains to implementing. and integrating those understandings of what we're talking about to action. Yeah, those are conversations that are being had with the racial equity coaches and the affiliates in terms of how, you

126know, who is receiving the training, how much has been received, and who needs that added support. So, again, at this point, conversations, but, of course, need to be further developed and actionized. Thank you. I appreciate that. And what do you see as the role of CCB in collaborating with you in these efforts? It's not a question that you need to answer now, but I would love to have more conversations with you and the team about how, you know, how does that intersect? And also, how does the piece that you had around the... racial equity with the flowchart. How does that intersect with the code of conduct and would certain infractions fall into certain levels? Is that part of that? How does that relate? I'm not sure if that's something that you've already discussed, but it's

127a thought that I had. Yeah, no, that's definitely something that I could bring back to you. Great. And my last question is actually more of a comment. A lot of the trainings that you all have talked about, I know that IEA and NEA both offer those in numerous ways. And those trainings are not only as Ralph said, evidence-based, but they are also nationally recognized, specifically around the trauma-informed work and the partnership with poor resilience that IEA has done with the Pediatricians Association. So considering you have a building full of IEA members, those trainings are actually at no cost to the district. So I wanted to bring that up. And there's a plethora of those trainings available for each of the areas that you mentioned, SEL, restorative justice, trauma-informed practices. And so those types of trainings

128are available by various experts from within the two levels of organizations, both state and nationally. So it might be worth having a conversation about with your staff. And I wanted to, I'm appreciative of the intentional pieces around recruitment around Black affinity space and the importance for that, not only for the staff but for the students. And you mentioned Roxanna's talent management, and I'm just not clear because I can't remember when we... did that when we took, I remember I was on the board when we approved that talent management piece and I'm wondering how long it's been and if there's, and what it has shown us so far, right? If we have anything, any data that demonstrates the effectiveness of that talent management tool at this point. As it relates to racial demographics? Yes. Yes, that

129was, we brought that to the board, I believe it was last September and If you notice in each of our reports that we give in our personnel report, we give the demographics. Our goal in the strategic plan is to increase, Roxanna, correct me if I'm wrong, our support staff to 50% minority and our teaching staff to 50% minority and our overall staff to 30%. And so the reports that we give, And the personnel update each year, each month does that. And our goal is to come back at the conclusion of each hiring season and show you the difference in that. Okay, great. I was just, I couldn't remember what our conversation was about how that feedback was coming back about the effectiveness of that tool. Right. Yeah. Thank you so much. There was one other

130thing, but I can't remember it now, but you made me think of something else, actually, Dr. Pruitt-Adams, but no worries. Thank you. Oh, I know what it was. Thank you. You did make me think of it. So, LaVar, you mentioned that there's a committee that's been working and meeting monthly. Are any of those members connected with CCB or how, like, I'm just curious how... I'm just thinking more around how are we doing some more with work versus to work and how that relates. So it's not necessarily something that needs to be answered now. It's just a curiosity. And then I'm really done. Thank you. All right. Thank you. I will say the short answer is yes. Okay. Great. Thanks. Matt, did you have any comments? Hi. Yeah. Thank you, Sarah. And thank you, Dr. Ammons.

131You've been asked plenty of questions. And I guess I would have just one. And it's not related directly to your report tonight. But I just want to let you know, I appreciated your email three weeks ago that you sent on the heels of the murder of Mr. Floyd. And at the end, you gave a lot of resources. and connection, but the comment at the end of that was so spot on. You wrote, it is young people like you, because this was addressed to the students, who historically have brought about the transformative work of changing the culture of America. I am here to support you in this fight. And so I just wanted to just spotlight that because I think it's so important for us to remember, right, that we're raising future leaders. Absolutely. And that

132was just kind of a good reminder for me as a dad and as an old person, right? And so, and not right now necessarily, because I know you've had a lot, but I would be interested to know what kind of response you've gotten from that outreach. I realize it can, you know, there's a flood of emails all the time and communications people are dealing with. I just want to encourage the more that you can continue to step in in these moments, I think the better, so. Thank you. Thank you for that. Yeah, we're gonna have a conversation about those responses. All right. Thank you, sir. Mm-hmm Thank you. And then, Craig, I believe you're the last. Do you have any comments or questions? I do have one. But first, thank you for the presentation and

133the overview. I thought it was very good. It's good to see the procedures now coming into view. And I kind of really am looking forward to seeing them also implemented. But one thing I want to get a little bit you know, maybe it's an understanding of is the best way to put it. In our policy, one of the things that when we approved the policy that I had a question in my mind, and I still have a question after seeing the procedures was we talk about the equity analysis tool and accountability and executive driving outcomes or having outcome metrics. but I haven't really ever seen outcome metrics or what is our baseline that we're starting with? And then what metrics are we trying to improve? Can you give me some color as to what kind

134of baseline we have and what it is we're trying to accomplish? I mean, and I'm not trying to say that in any kind of challenging way. I think the procedures are all good and everything we're doing is all very good. but I want to know what we're trying to accomplish that we can measure and we can see. Yeah, so as far as the baseline, I think that we will have to, in specifics, starting with the... when we look at the equitable practices, programs, and procedures or actual programs that we have in place now, taking a look at those programs, seeing what those outcomes are and the areas that need to be improved. And I can't necessarily give you a specific metric or number or item or data point now. but that will be a part

135of that process, right? Before we even engage in using the equity analysis in evaluating various programs, taking a look at those programs, seeing what they are producing now and using those as the base. And then comparing that to the changes that we make after we use the analysis and make appropriate changes. Can I jump in for a minute? When you get the procedures, the link, there's a column that in some of those have the data points that will be looked at to see if the items are moving forward. Those items, those procedures that are currently in place, have metrics tied to them that are also tied to the strategic plan, such as the ones from the talent, the hiring one would be an obvious one, right? Right. That's there. There's one for curriculum. If you

136look in there. But the other ones that are brand new, this year would be the baseline. But this would be the year we start gathering the data on the equity analysis to the racial equity protocol and so forth. Okay. And that's great. Because, I mean, if we're trying to, you know, drive performance or improvement that we can. We really can see. I just feel like we need numbers or we need some data that helps us and sounds like you're headed that way. But I think that's a very important part. Also, Gail will be sending to the board some proposed goals for the superintendent that are aligned to some of the questions you've asked. Mr. Isley regarding metrics, it's just a starting point for our discussion that will help us to identify those things that I

137think as Mr. Mortieri said earlier, where the board wants us with regards to metrics that will help across the board. Thank you. All right. Well, thank you. Dr. Amos, I did want to just, and this is not something that you need to even address, but I do just want to make sure that we're mindful of including student voice. and working through these procedures and in terms of their implementation to make sure that we are really walking the walk, so to speak, and that our students are reaping the benefits from it. But that's not something you need to respond to now. So thank you so much, Dr. Amos, for the presentation and to everyone who worked so hard on this for so long. Sure. Yeah, thank you all. Okay, it's now 10 o'clock. Why don't we

138take a five-minute break and come back at 10.05? I still can't see anybody because of my computer issues. So, it's... Matt Barron is here. Hi, Sarah. I'm sorry. Matt, you're here? Yeah, I'll give the little tally. Tom and Craig, Tom just showed up visually. Craig, I'm not sure if Mina will be back yet. I don't know about the others. I'm here. Mark here. I'm here. Gina, I'm here too. Awesome. Okay. Thank you, Matt. That was really helpful. Sorry. Jackie's here. I was muted. I'm here. Craig is here. And do we have Gail and Dr. Puredatum? Yes, we are here. Okay, great. Thank you. I'm sorry for my computer problems. This is really frustrating. Next we have up for discussion the construction budget. Okay. Come on, computer. Yes, we have a budget construction update at the

139conclusion of the presentation. We are recommending deferral of the student commons in the main entrance into 2025. In addition, the board has proposed additional deferrals and classroom renovations if the desire to stay within the initially imagined master plan budget. Depending upon the discussion at tonight's meeting, we will bring an action item forward at the special board meeting on June the 9th. This item is in compliance with strategic priority for operations facilities and finance. Making this presentation tonight is Mr. Mike Cariocio, Chief Operations Officer, Josh Krasniak, FGM Architects, and Josh Warriner, Pepper Construction. Thank you, Dr. Prude-Adams, and good evening, everyone. If we can move on to the first page, please. Thank you very much. So this evening, we're going to focus in on the work that is most immediate, and that is the work that

140is in progress right now as we've broken ground at the beginning of June. And it's the Project One scope and the associated work from the 10-year maintenance plan that has been affected by that. And at the last board meeting, we had some very clear direction about the desire for some additional information to try to have a sense of what was really being driven by the Project One itself and what were things that were being done based upon the opportunity to do them. So we'll be covering that in more detail today. So I'm going to the next slide, please. Thank you. So as I mentioned, demolition is... is probably several weeks away. We're actually doing all the prep work for demolition right now. Although that work is going on, there are parts of the project that

141we're still continuing to do a process called value engineering, which is really looking at all of the various components of the project and looking at ways we could potentially save costs in those components. Having said that, the magnitude of the gap that we've identified in the previous board meetings with the board is insufficient. to really cover all of that. So we do plan to do that value engineering. We will say whatever we can there, but we really have determined that we need to do something a little more significant in order to close that gap. We're not going to talk this evening about the 10-year maintenance plan. It's already been approved. The 2020 work is already in progress and we will be coming back to the Board of Education in the August September time frame with

142the 2021 work for approval. So we have a little bit of time for that. The one item that was brought up last month, I'm sorry, it was last week actually, not last month, at the Committee of the Whole meeting that was actually discussed was the idea of the basement. And unfortunately, part of the work that is already underway is that demolition and excavation work, and certainly the design component of that work, which includes the basement. And that... That portion is at this point is locked in scope and the cost, it would be prohibitively expensive to redo that and it would extend the construction schedule. Now that doesn't mean it can't be done. It could be done. But if it was the desire of the board to do that, it would have an impact both on

143the cost and it would also have an impact on the schedule. Next slide please. So I'm going to spend a little time on this slide. I believe Mr. Martiri at the last meeting asked for an accounting of the various items that were not necessarily budgeted for based upon the fact that it was a master planning process and that there were some items which we identified that we had a desire to do because of the opportunity to do them. So I apologize, there was a last minute change. We just heard from our structural engineer with respect to the servery. As you may recall, we had some questions about the servery, whether that was, there was some bad fill in the foundation underneath the servery. And we were concerned that that bad fill might have an impact

144on the rest of the excavation and the foundation that was going into place. We got confirmation from the structural architects that there was no reason to consider that that would have a significant impact. Although we all agree that if we were going to do something with that. bad soil under the servery, now would be the time to do it. But because of that conversation, we didn't feel it was fair to classify that as something that was needed but not budgeted. So it changed from needed, not budgeted, into something that would be an opportunity. So while I'm there, let me just discuss the three items in the legend. The items that are green are items that we've determined through the detailed design process are absolutely needed to complete the project. but they were not initially budgeted

145in the Imagine Project master planning process. Okay, so that's the green. The yellow are the items that we've determined that we would like to do because of the opportunity to do them. And the examples you see on this page are the servery, the infrastructure for future. PV stands for photovoltaic array. So that's really would be for solar panels, which would be on the South Cafeteria and Student Resource Center. So the idea would be when you're putting the roof on, you would actually prepare the roof to receive those solar panels. So that was something that we felt was the opportunity to do that since we were putting a new roof on the south cafeteria and SRC. And then you see the basement also sitting in there. Of those three items, both the... infrastructure for the photovoltaic

146array for the solar panels and the basement. Those funds were covered or are covered out of the 10-year maintenance plan. So they're not part of what we're figuring in for the... for the funding gap for the project one budget. So let me go through these very quickly here because we've talked about them before and in some cases I've quoted some numbers which part of the delay in getting this back to the board is we really wanted to make sure we had the right numbers in here and we do at this point. We feel very comfortable with these numbers. So the first item under the South Cafeteria and Student Resource Center is the soil remediation under the South Cafeteria. And you can see that's about $200,000. The servery is an item that we do not have

147to do. And that's about just a little over $800,000. Number three is associated with number one also. There's a slab heaving in the basement in the west corridor, which is also that slab is heaving because of the bad soil in that area. So that's going to have to be remediated. The elevator, you're seeing there the elevator, which was originally, there was no elevator originally planned for the SRC. So that's actually an overage of $350,000. based upon that. One of the biggest gaps that's driving a significant amount of cost is the original estimate done for the actual square footage of the South Cath and the Student Resource Center was off in terms of the amount of square footage that was allocated. So that's driving a significant portion of the cost right there, almost about $2.8 million

148of overage there. And then number six, we've talked about this before, the assumption made that the existing South Cafeteria would be able to be remodeled and have the new building built on top of it. That was not feasible, so that 50% renovation, 50% new, turned out to be 100% new. You see it's about $1.1 million of the gap being driven by that cost. The next item, there was no allocation in that master planning process for relocation of the mailroom and duplicating. The mailroom has to be duplicated, I'm sorry, has to be duplicated, has to be moved because it is part of the building that's coming down and that was not figured in to the plan. We actually are saving some money here because we're actually combining the spaces for the mailroom and duplicating. So we've

149actually taken advantage of that. But that's driving an overage of about $276,000. A roughly $49,000 item here, number eight. very, very strict ordinances in Oak Park regarding removal of trees and the requirement that when trees are removed, they have to be replaced. And that's going to cost us roughly $50,000, not quite $50,000 to do that. And I mentioned earlier the photovoltaic array number nine, around $300,000, and the basement $3.6 million. And nine and 10 are both being funded out of the capital, I'm sorry, the 10-year maintenance plan. Okay, next slide please. I'm sorry, could you back up? I apologize. The one item I wanted to point out here is if you look at that, the total gap that we're showing here is 8.9. It's up at the sort of the top on the right hand

150side. And what we did, if you look at the 5.7 that is taking out the the monies from the number nine and number 10 the photovoltaic array in the basement. So the gap truly associated just with the Student Resource Center in the South cafeteria is about almost $5.8 million. Okay, thank you. Next slide please. Okay, so that was just the Student Resource Center. Now we'll go on to the other major components of the Imagine Master Planning process. The first item is the main entrance in Student Commons. And of all the items, that is the one item that was actually under budget in terms of what the budget amount was for in the Imagine Master Plan and what the actual costs are coming in at. We're about roughly $200,000 or so to the good on that

151item. We already talked about the South Cafeteria and SRC. That is the second line item. And then going on to the other major components of the Project 1 scope. The classrooms and labs, they're basically 12 classrooms and three labs that will be built from scratch when these spaces from the library, the maker space, and the tutoring center are all moved to the student resource center. Those spaces will be recovered and we'll build 12 new classrooms and three new labs in those spaces. There's going to be an overage of that of about one point. 8 million, almost 1.9 million. And here's an item which I didn't mention earlier going to the legend again. The items shown here in that light blue are items that are really related to the ADA accessibility. If you'll record, recall when

152we had the conversation about having these renovated spaces and not having students having the ability to have access to these spaces. We were very concerned about that so we came up with a solution for that which would allow us to have procedurally to allow students access, students that are having needs of accessibility to have access to those spaces. So you see the line items number two in both this one and then the next item, next two items where those magnetic door hold opens will be used to provide accessibility to these new spaces. So that is the blue, light blue item called the ADA accessibility. Okay, so in the classrooms we talked about the infill of the library space, that's about 1.8, almost 1.9 million over budget. The special education renovation and moving of the Husky

153Pup space, you see that's about half a million, a little over half a million, almost 600,000 over. The classroom renovations, one of the things that you'll see there is I'm sorry, I should be talking about the reason these are over. So the green items under the classroom labs, the reason why that is over. is the new mechanical systems that were required that was not, those items were not fully vetted and estimated in the master planning process. Under the Special Ed and Husky Pops, there were some structural changes that were needed in order to be able to support the scope of the new spaces and offices that needed to be built. And you see for both of those items, we have the magnetic hold opens for accessibility. For the classroom renovation, there was, Driver's Ed was

154one of the areas that was being demoed. The Driver's Ed space is going to be gone when that building comes down. And there was really, in that master planning process, there was not a home identified for Driver's Ed. So we had to find a home for Driver's Ed. So the process of that and the magnetic hole opens gets us about $630,000. a thousand dollars over budget on that item. And the north elevator, this is a case where we had the elevator was we actually have are redoing the freight elevator to make it we're actually replacing the freight elevator so it would be ADA compatible and accessible and there's some significant work that has to be done there and that's what's driving the overage there of about almost nine hundred thousand dollars. And then the all-gender

155toilet rooms, the infamous risers, I apologize to the team. I was quoting a number of a million dollars. The number I was looking at included some of the 10-year maintenance toilet renovations for the regular building. So the real cost of the riser fix is not a million dollars, as I reported earlier, but just almost a quarter of a million, not quite. not quite as much as I had stated it was earlier. So the net effect of all of that, if you look at all of those numbers, is almost 13 million, not quite 13 million. You take out the 3.9 million from the funding that's coming from the 10-year maintenance plan, and we're at the $8.4 million gap that I reported last Tuesday. not last Tuesday, Tuesday before. Okay. So this is the, this is Mr.

156Martirios for this information. Hopefully this answers the question in terms of the funding gap, what portion of that funding gap was driven by things that were really needed and weren't budgeted and what portion of those items were from opportunity. Okay. Next slide, please. So this is just a recap of the same slide we proposed last time. The difference here is we split out the main entrance from the student commons costs and we also at the bottom some also alternates that we could consider is additional classrooms. So we could do those classrooms. You could do we have 13 classrooms that we had originally proposed. We're giving the option of making that taking another 10 out or another 20 out, which would save us roughly 100,000 a classroom. So that's the potential of saving another 2 million,

157not necessarily saving, I'm sorry, deferring the cost of another $2 million there. So if you can go to the next slide. So if you look at this, if the desire is truly to stick with the $32.6 million that was agreed upon with the scope of the Imagine Master Planning process, this would get us just about, this would get us there, right? So if you add up the, if we determined to defer the scope on the main entrance and on the student commons, and we take all of the We take 33 classrooms out of the mix in terms of renovation, we would be at 8.5 million and as you recall the gap is is 8.4 million so we're pretty much we're there. Okay. Next slide please. So I just said this. This is the recommendation. if

158the desire is really to stay within that scope. Now clearly, I've heard a lot of different things from different board members about things that they felt were essential to keep in scope. So this is just an option if you wanted to just keep to take the things out that the district is recommending. Clearly, anything is on the table with the exception of the things that are already in progress. And those conceivably could be on the table too if we were willing to take the additional cost and the construction schedule hit of taking those out. So the idea here was now to have a conversation about what are the choices that the board would like to make. The options are there. The district is proposing a scenario. If we wanted to stay within that initial budget,

159this is a way to do that. There's some significant scope that's being deferred. If that scope is important and we want to continue on with those items in there, then we need some additional funding relief in order to make it. So I believe if we go to the next slide, please. So we want to have that conversation now and get some feedback from the board on what your will is and hopefully we can get some consensus about what is important to keep in and what is important, what sort of funding or relief are we willing to provide in order to match that. And then once we have that guidance, as Dr. Pruden mentioned earlier, I will be very happy to come back at the July 9th board meeting with a an action item that will

160outline the specifics of how we can make that happen. And then also in the August timeframe, the team will come back with a review of the 10 year maintenance plan. And that's all I had for this evening to present. I would be very happy to moderate the conversation or field any questions. Thanks so much, Mr. Carioca. Board members, questions? So, Mike, this is Ralph. Thanks for this. I really appreciate how you presented the data. It makes it a lot easier for me to digest the wants from the needs and the opportunities. So, nice job. So, if I'm understanding correct, the basement is an opportunity cost that you're funding. At this time, you're proposing to fund through maintenance. Correct. If instead we just didn't do it. So, if we just didn't do that. And took that

161$3.5 million in maintenance revenue and utilized it to cover some of the needs that were exposed when we went. and started doing the digging and the checking and saw, hey, in addition to what we want to do, this is what we have to do to support project one, categorize those as maintenance costs because frankly, they are needed to maintain this new project that we're building. Then that reduces our shortfall to under 5 million, correct? Like 4.9. The basement is 3.6. So like 4.8, so then we'd be at about what, 4.8, 5.8? Yeah. So the problem with that, Mr. Martieri, is the fact that that ship has sailed. I shouldn't put it that way. To stop the basement now, because the design is completely done, the demolition contract and excavation contract are signed, there would be

162a redesign necessary. And I think I'm going to stop talking and ask for some of my colleagues to help me out here, because I feel like the specifics of what the... the cost and the impact of taking the basement out at this point would be. I'd rather they answer that than I because I don't want to misstate it. So can I ask one of the Josh's to jump in here, please? Sure. This is Josh with Pepper. I mean, one of the big impacts would be schedule. I mean, I know early on our big thing was wanting to start in June with kind of getting everything rolling within the cafeteria demo. I mean, a redesign now would push that back to, Most likely in February, but then there's also cost impacts because now we'd be redesigning

163everything. And then we would have, at this point, we would have to rebid everything that's already been bid to date because there'd be so many drastic changes. I mean, ultimately you could probably keep the demo guy on board. The only thing is you don't want to knock the building down and then just have it sit there down through until February. And Josh Cerniak here from FGM Architects. In addition to that, there's already enabling work that has been going on for weeks now where we'd have to rewind that to get the existing South Cafeteria so that it could be occupied come the fall semester. So there would be an additional cost associated with that. So gentlemen, could you explain? the rationale behind the redesign so that the board understands it's simply not just putting in the

164basement, but how the rationale for why there would have to be a redesign. Sure. Since what I'm saying, it's not simply, we're just not going to do the basement, we're just going to do the rest of the design. It's other things that hinge on that. Sure, we absolutely, we can absolutely get into the details of that. So the current structural system is bearing all the way down at the bottom of the proposed basement. And so if the basement comes out, the structural system that supports the superstructure of the building has to be redesigned so that it changes so that the load bearing walls and columns that are in the new South cafeteria and run up through the two levels of the Student Resource Center. Their new bearing would be at frost depth or a little

165bit lower and undisturbed soils below the existing South cafeteria slab. So that's one. Two, there's utilities that run through or underneath the existing South cafeteria, which are being dealt with in a particular way under the current design. That would have to change. And then additionally, there is existing, well, I should say that the HVAC system that serves the existing South cafeteria, we're able to reuse the existing air handler that is below the kitchen. And so that would require redesign. of all the branch duct work serving what would be the new South Care cafeteria design if the basement were to come out. And so not only the redesign would be necessary, but because that's such a significant change to the contractors that have already been awarded a contract, you would not want to... go to those

166contractors with a with an RFP because the change order proposals that you would get back, it would really be it would be pennies on the dollar. So, so to to really be better stewards of the taxpayer funding, it would be the recommendation to re-bid that entire redesign so that you're putting that back out on the street and you're getting competitive pricing on that entire redesign. And when you add all of that up, then it equates to many months. And it delays then, ultimately it would delay the completion as it stands right now in the schedule of a December occupancy, December 2021 occupancy for the new South Calf and SRC. And it would really push that into the summer of 2022. Could I ask a question? This is Jackie. As we're talking about this, I'm more

167confused given that last week I was under the impression that the there was a decision to be made about whether we were looking at the basement as opportunistic or essential. It's still being categorized as opportunistic. But it's already underway. And so I'm struggling to understand what decisions we're being asked to make, given what's available when all these things are already, even as we were meeting, you know, work was continuing. So it feels a little bit odd to ask, you know, what decisions we want to make. I'm not clear anymore what. what's not already underway. So seeing that, you know, last week the discussion was about, you know, we don't have to have a basement. That was just last Tuesday. And now it's already, we'd have to do another RFP and it's already being constructed. And

168I just, I don't understand. So I would appreciate understanding what happened between last Tuesday and today. Yeah, I apologize if I misspoke. I don't recall saying we don't have to have abasement. I know concern was brought up by the board with respect to how necessary abasement was. At the time... I don't think at the time, I know at the time I didn't say, well, we can't do that. I had to go back. We had the team had to talk about it. It is in the scheme of the way we looked at the various items. It is an item that did not have to be done. So by virtue of that classification, we classified it as opportunistic or opportune, right? So that's the classification. So that doesn't mean that it's actually on the table for consideration,

169but frankly, it could be. You know, I would not recommend it, but it certainly could be. If the board felt strongly enough, because it's a significant amount of money. If the board felt strongly enough that that money, you don't want it spent that way, then we could incur the additional cost. You wouldn't get all of that money back because you'd be incurring other costs in order to pull it out. and you'd be impacting the construction schedule. So if that's the will of the board, that could be done. So I apologize for the fact that, you know, folks, maybe I should have said back then that this is underway and can't be undone. But, you know, I'm trying to be careful here to make sure, even at this point, it can be done. I don't want

170to misstate things. It's not something I think is wise to do, but by the same token, it could be done. So I apologize if that's confusing. I would not put it on the table as a recommendation. Thank you. Anyone else? Any other questions? It's Gina. I have a question. I wanted to just be clear, Mike. Are you asking us, it says that board agree in concept to a combination of scope alternatives and or additional funding. So what you presented us with doesn't necessarily feel like an option to me. But are you asking us, are we staying on track with what we started or not? Is that the question? Yeah, so I struggle with this. And I think if you recall, at the end of last, two weeks ago, Tuesday's meeting, I didn't know what to

171bring back. because I didn't feel I had a clear signal. So what we did do, what the team did is we looked at what could we do to stay within budget. And as you can see, if we could back up one page, please. Thank you. I'm sorry, one more. So this is a pretty significant shift of scope. But this gets us, if we shifted the scope as it's outlined here, would get us to within the 32.6 million and whatever the original scope was that was laid out in the imagined master planning process. Okay. So if that's the desire. then this is a way to get there. Now, unfortunately, some significant components that were integral to the whole reason for doing the Imagine Master Planning process are deferred in this process. They would be alternates, right?

172So they would be most likely, you would do what portion of them you could based upon favorability of bids, but most likely they would be deferred. This is just one way to look at it. The other way to do it is to say, no, we really like the main entrance and we really want that in there or we really want the student commons. We don't care about the main entrance and we have to have the classrooms. Then whatever amount, whatever the board determines is essential to put in, then there has to be that requisite funding accompanying it. So, and by the way, the reason these are the only items that are listed here is because the first pass of this, which I believe we did in the May board meeting at the end of May,

173we went through, we put a whole bunch of different items on the table and we got some fairly strong feedback from the board about things I'll call non-negotiables. So on the basis of those non-negotiables, those were kept in the base bid. So that's why this doesn't seem like a whole menu of items is because I kept those in based upon the feedback of what the board gave us in May. We can go back to that if we wanted to go look at the costs as they sit right now, which I think are on page five, I believe. We could go look at that, and if there's other things that the board feels would be items that would be things that they would be willing to take out of the mix, that we could certainly do.

174So the idea here was to try to limit the amount of money, limit the amount of additional funding, right? So that's sort of the goal you're being presented with this particular scenario. But that's not necessarily, it's really up to the board. The options are there. And I'm happy to take you through what those options are. But the choice is yours in terms of what are the things that you as a board value to the extent that as we put those in, there will be some additional funding that will have to be allocated in order to support having those in the base bid. Does that make sense, Gina? Yes, it does. Thank you. This is Craig. So it feels to me a little bit like this, that we're between the maintenance plan and this, we're about

175$12.5 million above where we thought we were going to be. Is that right? It's about right, yeah. And that for the most part, the only decision that, the only opportunities that have been put on the table are not to figure out how to reduce scope or value engineer it, but they are to defer scope. We haven't done anything to cut back on what we were going to do. We've just added 12 and a half million, and that decision apparently is already made. So can I ask for clarification? Yeah. When you say... When you say we haven't come back on the scope, are you saying reduce the size or reduce what's in the design? Or are you saying, is that what you're saying? That's what I mean. We've done nothing but really add to the design

176since we started. The things that are in... the current where we've broken ground the student resource center and so forth that design is done part of our conversation the last couple of months week the design that hasn't been done correct me josh's and mike if i'm wrong are the main entrance the student commons and those classrooms those we still have the latitude to alter the design scope am i correct yes That we can, we can alter. We just need some direction from the board. Because we've come forward with alternatives and what was, as Mike said, what was negotiable, what was non-negotiable. If it is the design, because these designs have not started yet. Those are designs where the scope can be altered. We just need some direction. If I could, Josh Cerniak from FGM, quickly

177clarify the designs. We are essentially at the end of design development for the remainder of Project 1. But with the construction document phase ahead of us, there is still ample time to make changes to the components that remain. Would that impact a reduction? Could that potentially bring a reduction to the cost? Yes, and additionally, going back to the point that Mike made towards the beginning of the presentation, we are actively working with the contractors that are already engaged on the South Cafeteria and SRC to come up with budget alignment items working with the contractors. Unfortunately, the way that... the public bidding requirements work in the state of Illinois. We cannot negotiate. before a contract that has to happen after the contract with those contractors. And then a deductive change order would be issued to those

178contractors based upon any reductions that were agreed upon by the district. And so we're actively doing that. But to Mike's point that he made at the beginning, it's impossible to do enough budget alignment to get us back to the original 32.6 budget. And so I guess I would add lastly that the... The assertion that we've added, we haven't added anything in terms of Project One, the original Project One components. What the master plan did was identify a list. When we come in and actually start doing the design, the first thing we have to lead off with is programming and planning. And included in that is space needs programs that we develop in hand with. the faculty and administration. And that determines the space needs. And so thus all of the scope of work that goes

179into those various areas. How many rooms, how many classrooms, et cetera. How large does the new South cafeteria have to be in terms of seating capacity, things like that. I understand. I just feel like Harmon Zuckerman, We spent our budget and now it's now all we have left is the overage and now the question comes to us. Do we want to keep spending not did we decide what we wanted here. It's very frustrating and I'm sorry, but when that comes out, but I'm very concerned that if we spend 40 some odd million dollars on a $32 million project and we have a phase two coming up, that our ability to get capital for that second project goes away. And I don't know what the choice on the table is. So anyway, that's all I have.

180Okay. Matt, Tom, or Gina? Tom here. I don't really have much to add beyond what others have said. I guess, you know, I don't see us being, the decisions made and the options presented, I don't think, you know, we're being given a decision like Craig just said. You know, I have a... We have a slogan at work that I wrote down, which is just because you can explain it doesn't mean it's acceptable. And that's the way I'm thinking about this because I hear all kinds of explanations. When I look at it from a choice standpoint, I think the only, you know, when guidance has been given, there were certain imagined needs that have continued to come from the board. They're sitting in front of us on a screen as things that we're being asked, do

181we want to defer them? Because there have been other things, and it seems like the basement's the big one, that we have spent a lot of resources on. And we're coding them as maintenance, but it's all part of our spec. The only issue I see that we, from the list of the yellows, the greens, and the blues, is the servery seems like it now is something we can decide on. It was not recommended by the Imagine project. So that's one decision that I think we can make based on the data presented. And then the other decision is in line with what Craig was saying, which is do we... just you know are we gonna continue just to overspend or cut back on on what the real deliverables that we had uh intended on getting so

182i'm um i i really don't feel where we get where we have decision the the decisions we need to be making have already been made um of where i see there could be where we we wouldn't want to spend money Mike, could you speak to that? Is the survey still sort of, is that scope that could be reduced or are we at a point of no return to that at all? No, that could be, that could come out. It's about $811,000. I'm sorry. We're on the survey topic. Just quickly, how does the survey affect student experience? Does it have anything to do with our experience, our students' experience? Or is that a matter of modernization and convenience for? Well, the example I'll give, and it's, you know, you're building, we replaced the turf in the

183field, and I got complaints because the stadium looked crummy because you had a new field. So you'll have a brand new south cafeteria with an older servery. Now, again, if you can't afford a new servery, that's fine. But that's really the issue. There also is a structural issue, but it's... We feel that it's the floor may crack the floor may buckle will have to deal with that there's there's kludgy ways of band aiding that but if that's if that's what we want to do, then we can do that. So does it truly come down to a matter of essentially aesthetics or is there a functional component that needs to be upgraded would be upgraded if we were to do the survey. Well, it's more than aesthetics, but we're making the conscious choice to not do

184something that we would like to do simply because it doesn't have to be done. So if it were up to me, I would absolutely do it. That's why it's in the recommendation, but we can pull it out. Because there's bad soil under there and it's caused some cracking in the floor already. So we can patch it up, but it'll ultimately, well, again, we don't know how much it'll shift during what period of time, but it could potentially crack again, most likely would. And we could patch it again. So that's the reality of what we're dealing with in that situation. Okay, thank you. Matt? Hey, so I don't want to restate what's already been said. I have similar concerns and frustrations. The student commons is an element that I know was really an important part of.

185Project One with the Imagine team. And it seems like the work in the basement, you know, that's moved forward, essentially feels like it's got a momentum moving forward. But now it's to stop it is to be fiscally not wise. And so it's like it's as if we're sacrificing a key element of an Imagine plan for infrastructure needs that were discovered along the way. So I don't want that to be on the altar. of that. I want the student commons to still be part of this plan. The main entrance, you know, not as, I mean, they're kind of joined at the hip in my mind, but that comes with it. The classrooms, 3.3 million. And again, you know, I heard about, you know, the phrase of overspending. And then I keep hearing deferring, like, well, this

186is inevitably going to happen or over time we think it will happen. So, you know, we're in a spot now where, yeah, how much over do we want to go or how much do we want to accelerate? Because project one had a certain scope. This is beyond the scope. And so it's not as if we're going eight or nine million over and getting the same thing that was envisioned. There's some other elements here. You know, that's just some of the things on my mind, nothing concrete. I am more inclined, though, towards spending some, you know, now rather than deferring and then paying more later. So that's just generally where I'm at. And I'll just pause now and see what others have to say. Can I add something? It's partly a question, partly a comment. The

187student commons is an important piece. And I hear what you're saying, Mike, about the servery. And like, so you're going to remodel everything, but then you're going to have this one space that's not like the rest of it and could eventually end up needing it anyway. What I'm most challenged by is that there was a meeting that we had, and this is where I would like some clarity and like maybe some forethought on our process as we move forward. We had a meeting. We were presented with the 32.8, I believe it is, that was the estimate of what the work would cost to do this project one. It came back way over what we expected it to be, but we had already voted to move that project forward. So what's happening in my mind now

188is... How do we move forward in this process as we continue to ensure that we have all of this information that you're presenting to us now prior to making that decision? Because now I feel like that decision was preemptive, considering everything that we know. And in addition to the conversation that was given to us by Cindy Macedo about the... potential to take out more debt, right? So all of those pieces came in some form of what felt like not hodgepodge. I know that there was a plan in the thought process behind how the team did it, but came in a way that makes our decision, what feels like to me, the decision-making process right now. Kind of like there is no decision, just like Craig said. So I'm wanting to have a lot more forethought

189and information prior to us approving a project moving forward with some built-in potential for discrepancy or unearthing things or finding things than to have to come back and keep reevaluating the same information in a different way. to get at the same conclusion that there's just no choice here. Like, because what it feels like is to not do the student commons as it's connected to that design. We can't change the design. The design is going to cost more money. All the things that you said has kind of, I feel boxed in by what's already happened, what's underway. So having this information in advance would have been right. So I'm just thinking about process. That's all. No, no. And Gina, you are spot on. I couldn't agree with you more. The thing that I'm going to own,

190I'm going to own this because along the way, there were decisions that were made. And we as a district went along with those decisions. So we're part of that decision-making process. I'm not going to say, you know, the board said this or we said that. We're all on the same team, okay? So I own that. But when that decision was made... That we had to break ground in June. And there were some really good reasons why that was important as articulated by a number of different folks. Okay. That decision, one of the things we stated at that time was the challenge of this is something, it's exactly what Craig said. We've already spent our money by the time we realized we don't have enough money to spend. So the biggest part of this is the

191first part up. which is the South Cafeteria SRC. So by virtue of the fact that that had to be broken off, we didn't have the luxury for a lot of good reasons. We did not have the luxury of doing the entire design up front because that would not have had us breaking ground until February of next year. And that was unacceptable given the circumstances that were portrayed at that time. That's where the boxing in happened. We tried, the team and I have been trying for all this time, and again, I'll own this too, of not being negative earlier in this process. We have said all along the way there are issues with here. We've been trying to find ways to avoid where we are right now. But there's too much that because the master planning

192process was the basis for creating a budget. There wasn't enough rigor done. The process was never designed to come up with a budget that was valid. So this gap in the budget that we're seeing, that was determined right at the very end when the board approved a dollar amount as the gospel of what it was going to cost. That was another boxing in that happened there. But again, it's my job, and I own it, in terms of making sure that that perspective came across. and that the warning bells rang much earlier in the process. So I'm going to own all of that. But that's why. That's why we are where we are. And I've said it a couple of times, and I'm sorry I haven't been more clear about it. I apologize, you guys, because

193I got bounced out during the discussion, so I missed pieces of it, but I missed a ton. So I echo the frustrations of my colleagues and that I'm not really sure what choice. I mean, I hear that you want direction from us, but I'm not really sure what direction there is for us to give. We need to know if you want all the components, if you want the main entrance, the commons, and the classrooms to stay, this is what it will cost. Do you want us to move in that direction? If you don't want that, you know, do you just want the main entrance? We need to know the board's preference so that we can move forward. And if the board is not at a place of making a decision, then that's okay, too. We

194just need to know how to move forward. Because the last several meetings we've vouched for, and I'm not negating that it may not have appeared to be. a process. But the last couple of meetings we've come forward with various items from funding potential to options of leaving stuff in, options of taking stuff out, hearing from the board what's the non-negotiable and trying to pull all of that into one presentation. And so we just need some clear direction as to what stays in, what comes out, or do we just hold off? Or if you want some more information, that's what we need. Hi. Jackie, go. I'm sorry. For me, it is the whole idea of what stays in, what comes out. It appears that the options are those components that are listed are the only things

195without incurring or having to start over or all of the things that would make it foolish and, you know, belabor the process if, you know, having to redraw and So one of my questions is, even if we say we want the main entrance but not the student conference, and I'm blanking on names, I apologize, but our architect stated earlier that all of the drawings, the renderings have been completed. So would that mean that that work would have to be redone? Would there be additional costs? No matter what we say tonight, if we start adding or parceling out which items, does that mean that there is, you know, excuse my pun, but going back to the drawing board in a sense. Dr. Josh Cerniak from FGM here. If you mean in terms of the main entrance

196student commons or the classrooms that are identified on the current slide, no. The district would not incur any additional costs in terms of if the, we're not, because we're not yet into construction, the construction document phase, anything that there's still there's still a great opportunity to do for the remaining components of project one and so it's not necessarily even limited to the main entrance student Commons in classrooms but special education the north elevator all gender toilet rooms and as Mike alluded to earlier those were those were not put on the table because when we did those were the direction that was received was Those have to remain in those have to remain in the base bid, but no the district would not incur any additional cost if Even for these three components that are listed

197as possible alternates in front of you and on this particular slide if there was sort of a reimagining of Some of those components that there would be no additional cost to the district Okay. Thank you. Now, and I will just weigh in on what my thoughts are. I, you know, hearing now that the cost of the main entrance is much less than was originally budgeted. I've been reviewing the recommendations from CCB that had to do with our community and stakeholders and a welcoming environment. And that was front of center for the last three years. I know that that was a priority. I'm thinking back to what we just talked about in terms of resource allocation with our racial equity procedures. And one of those had to do with, you know, providing the space and resources

198that students need to be able to be successful in school. And that was the rationale that the Imagine group came forward for the student comments. It was directly addressing some of our equity needs. So for me, those two, I don't, I'm still, I may, you know, I've never liked basements and this is making me really, really not like basements that that opportunity was taken when it was not presented in that way. So, you know, I'm looking at that $8 million or however much it is. and thinking about lost opportunities. But the student commons and main interests were such viable options that were brought forward by a variety of stakeholders in addressing our policy. So I don't see how we eliminate those. So that's my position. Thank you, Jackie. Sarah? Tom, I have a question just

199related to this, which is in terms of what's next. So as we look at the components that are on the screen that are alternates or deferred, et cetera. So, and I'm focusing specifically on the classrooms. So if we defer the classrooms, when, Well, let me back up. If we proceed with the classrooms, when would we, what would happen over what timeframe for those classrooms? And let me explain what I'm thinking about. With the COVID situation, you know, there is some... reason to think, you know, how's this going to shape up and what's going to change. We've decided to move ahead. I want to understand, you know, what the timing is of moving ahead with the classrooms would look like on a move ahead basis. I know if you defer it, you just push it down

200the, you know, you kick the can down the hill. Tom, great question. Josh Cerniak with FGM again. Half the classrooms are slated to be renovated in the summer of 21, the other half in the summer of 22. Per the current schedule. That's not to say that that can't change, but per the current schedule, that's how the phasing is strategized at this time. Yeah, but that doesn't help. I think I understand that, but the question is, just like the basement, the basement's going to be done soon, but it's the design work and the other stuff that once we've committed ourselves. Okay. So in terms of design of the classrooms, our construction document phase, which is the creation of the documents that go out to bid, are going to be completed in October of this year. And

201then they would go out to bid in November. Okay. The other difference there with the classrooms is you could do those in chunks, right? I mean, you got to do the foundation all at once. You got to build the SRC all at once. The classrooms you could do as alternates of 10. So you have the option with the classrooms and you could do those during the course of the, those are actually fairly easy to fit into a summertime's worth of work versus some of these other components are significant and require many other moving parts to have to be jiggered. Okay. Thank you. All right. So this is Ralph going to weigh in a little bit. So I think part of. Part of this is I'm changing how I'm looking at that initial $32.6 million number.

202When I go back, Mike, and I look at your recharacterization of some of the cost overages, two of them, the size discrepancy for $2.8 million and the budget assumption that we could have 50% renovation, 50% new being wrong, just simply means those aren't really overages in my mind. It means the initial budget estimate was just wrong. Yes. Correct. Okay. So if you add that 3.9 million to the 32.6, you get 36.5 million should have been our original budget number if we'd have just gotten the square footage right and knew that we couldn't have 50% be rehabbed. I guess where I'm going is that reduces the overages to 4.5 million or 12.5% from what should have been our initial budget number. And that's based on the other things we discovered as we went along. Can we

203move back to page four, please? So we can, thank you. Josh, do you want to take it? Well, the only thing, Ralph, what you just outlined is spot on. I suppose that in line items five and six, which you just walked through or walked the group through, it's hard not to then using that train of thought, not including some additional items that are highlighted in green in there as well. But again, it goes back to the master plan. It would be very, it would be inappropriate in a master plan to say that anyone would ever, like the trees, the trees are a zoning item where we have to do a two caliper inch replacement for every one caliper inch of tree that is removed. And those trees have to come out because they're in the

204way of the construction. To me, I would add line items like that into line items five and six. That was the point that I was going to make. Yeah. And I don't know if I agree or not, but clearly five and six. Yes. We could have gotten right at the beginning, just didn't. And so if we'd have gotten those things right at the beginning when we were setting the budget, the overage reduces down to 4.5 million or 12.5% from the new number, which is far different than a 26% overage. Sure. And I'm thinking about it that way only because it makes it somewhat palatable to go ahead. complete the work because I agree with Jackie a hundred percent and whomever else raised the issue I think Gina did as well I'm getting tired so I'm

205not remembering who raised every issue but that student Commons is a core equity piece and it's a core equity piece from the CCB and from my discussions with everyone on the CCB and and I just think that it needs to be done And I would much rather devote the funding to completing project one, if maybe we could phase the classrooms over a couple of years, et cetera, et cetera, fine from a cost standpoint, but utilize the reserve we have to cover project one and then have whatever Craig Willsher, Overages we've had to charge to complete project one impact what we decide to do with project to that's where I come up. Karen Hollweg, Craig, I don't believe you've weighed in as to actual direction for the administration. Well, I see three options on the table.

206option one, which is what I hear from Ralph and Jackie et cetera, have said, and I don't know if Gina said it or not, which is go spend, and Matt, go spend all the money and try to value engineer it out or try to value engineer this. But I guess I'd ask the question on that. Mike, you know, you and Josh, you've said something about continuing to value engineer. If we authorize the additional money, we have no guarantee that you won't spend all of it, right? I mean, how do we put some motivation that we actually do some value engineering? Great question. Because speaking on behalf of FGM Architects, that is our responsibility to the district and the community. We would be doing that even if there wasn't a budget issue. because it's something that

207we're obligated to do. If the board decided to increase the overall budget, that need does not go away. So I'm speaking on behalf of FGM Architects and all of the consulting engineers that report to us on the project. I can assure you, we will not lay down. As a matter of fact, we have two meetings set up with the mechanical and electrical contractor for Tuesday morning next week. Contractors on the South Calf and SRC to do just that. Okay. And I understand that. And I respect that you guys are doing it. But the result so far has been every time we look harder, the costs go up. I think that would be fair. The second option to me is, from my perspective, you know, I personally would defer all the classrooms because of questions about

208what the future of that looks like. and I would get rid of the servery. And I would probably do the rest of the pieces that we've talked about for equity reasons. And then the third option, and honestly, if it were my money, the third option is I would stop the project and I would take a hit till February. And frankly, it delays us. But in the scheme of the next 20 or 30 years of the school, that delay is meaningless. And that money is lost, but... Craig Willsher, Board Member for Colonial Living and Researcher 1 A better project. So those are my three options, you know, the layout there and I've weighed in what I would do, but I don't think I'm, you know, I don't think I'm in the majority of the board. COB,

209Dan Burkeke, Board Member for Colonial Living and Researcher 1 Craig, I'm sorry you laid out three options. What was, what was your preferred option. Number three. Craig Willsher, Board Member for Colonial Living and Researcher 1 My preferred option is I go back and redesign the SRC and take the time. COB, Dan Burkeke, Board Member for Colonial Living and Researcher 1 So, number three. Okay. Sarah Mursjid Altschulter, You know, did you. I'm sorry. I'm losing track of time and comments as well. Um, do you know, did you weigh in on those on the three sort of choices that we have. I think you did, but I just want to make sure. Sarah Mursjid Altschulter, You were the only one who hasn't Sarah Mursjid Altschulter, Me. Okay. Sarah Mursjid Altschulter, So yeah, a little I'm not I'm

210not really excited about the server, just because I don't know how it really affects students. You know, I understand the point about not wanting to have to go back and redo it, et cetera. But if you are looking to cut things, that would be one of the things that I cut. I do not think that we can cut the student commons. The Welcome Center would, you know, that to me is out of the three, maybe something that is not as integral to the actual spirit of the Imagine process and their final recommendations. The Welcome Center has long been problematic, but that to me is something that we could mitigate with through the student commons that unwelcoming center as it is. And then the classrooms, I think that those are also integral to the project. However,

211I am swayed by the idea that they could be done in a more piecemeal fashion and fit in perhaps in summer constructions in future years. So for me, you know, the student commons is really the big thing that we make sure that we get done out of those three options, followed by classrooms and welcome center. So I just want to make sure that we are hearing a direction from the board. so we can come back next week. If I am hearing everyone correctly, the student comment is a go. Is that correct? Is that correct? I feel like it seems like a pretty overwhelming support. Okay. Thank you. The Welcome Center, I've heard. The vast majority is what I've heard say the Welcome Center is a go. But I'm not quite sure that everybody's at their

212place. And then I heard defer the classrooms over time. I would, this is Ralph, I would support that, Dr. Pruitt-Adams, and I would be fine with not doing the survey and saving that $800,000 and not doing the $300,000. for the future PV if we could save that. So there's 1.1 million in savings there. But the infrastructure, I'd be fine with not doing item number two on what we're looking at at the chart here, the servery, and item number nine to save $1.1 million. But I agree with your summary on... Michael Bushenberg- The Welcome Center that that that is something that we should do now. Michael Bushenberg- Certainly, I agree with your summary on the comments for students and I'd be happy to look into deferring some of the classroom work over time, particularly when as

213Craig pointed out, we may have issues with coven 19 and may have to do some serious rethinking on classroom, you know, design. So I'm going to say it again, just to make sure we're all on the same page. So for the July 9th board meeting, the administration will come back with a recommendation tied to the Welcome Center, the Student Commons, deferring the servery, and deferring some of the classrooms over time. Is that correct? Yeah, that's what I heard. That's my... The only other thing that I would throw on the table in addition to that, and maybe the answer's already got a nail in it, is anything that can be done to shave that basement cost down. Got it. Okay? I mean, whatever that is... If it means, you know, abandoning it, whatever it is, we've

214been given some general guidance. But to me, that's the Achilles heel in this whole issue. We've got $3.6 million in a basement and we want to spend money on other things. Or I do. I think I've heard others agree. So my follow-up question would be, because I heard you say, if we could. If we can't shave off enough, and that's a question for the architects, are we still moving forward with removing the servery, keeping the welcome center, keeping the student commons, and deferring classroom space? And I heard Ralph say something about the infrastructure for future. Yes. Number nine. Yep. We'll take that out too. Okay. I guess if I can just say on the number nine thing, I mean, to me, that's an important thing for down the road. But that can happen later though,

215right? Is there just a matter of deferring that versus this isn't the only window and that can happen for the PV stuff? I'll ask Josh to respond to that. Sure. So great question. This would not preclude the district from putting a photovoltaic array on that roof, it would just be a difference in how that array sits on the roof. Most retrofit applications, the photovoltaic array is essentially weighed down, ballasted, and just sits on top of the roof membrane. It's less ideal. You can run into some roofing issues. You can potentially void a roofing warranty depending on your roofing manufacturer. But eliminating this infrastructure, which is more of a best practice thing, would not preclude the district from putting a future PV array on that roof. I personally am not supportive. I support doing it now.

216I feel like this is something that is really important on multiple levels for us to do it as an example, not just for its own benefit of efficiency, but I think as an example and a model for the whole community. So that's just, I wanted to weigh in with that. And I do think that the classrooms, the deferment of those, I think the extent of how much we defer, You know, a lot of it has to do with the COVID era and our sense of how, you know, how beneficial is it to hold off until that shakes out more. So I think that is a logical thing. I think we're mostly in unison on the welcome center, which is the same way as saying the main entrance. Here it says main entrance. That's welcome center.

217Student comments. Those two are both pretty strong support. Okay. Thanks. Can I ask a question of the photovoltaic array? My recollection is that initially the discussion had been around whether to do a green roof or solar. At what point did we decide to do solar, and why was that the choice over the green roof? I'm not actually advocating. I just don't understand it. Yeah, the green roof never made its way into Project 1. I wasn't part of that decision-making, and I don't know the pros and cons of that, and maybe Josh could speak to that. So that wasn't even on the table with the listing of the master planning for Project 1. It seems like if memory serves me, prior to... Even approving the Imagine plan. Something tells me that came off then and we

218wanted and we went with solar. I can't remember. I don't think it was an either or. I think that it was just take the green roof off. And then as we were considering the construction, we thought we would put a photovoltaic array up there because it made sense for the direction we're heading. Okay. All right. Well, thank you. Does the administration feel that it has the guidance it needs at this point? So this is what I heard. I'll say it again. The server is out. Student Commons is in. The main entrance or welcome center is in. Referring classrooms. What I don't know at this point, if the voter PV array is in or out. I've heard both ways. I've heard Mr. Martiri say he could do without it. I've heard Mr. Barron say he'd rather

219do it now. And I agree with Matt. I think this is something we have to do as an example, but also ultimately for our students' futures. Do other board members want to weigh in one way or the other on that? OK. OK. Thank you very much. I think we have our direction. Thank you. And that concludes our agenda item. Thank you. And thanks very much, Mike, to you and the Joshes for the presentation. We have some information items, construction and budget, student code of conduct, and intergovernmental agreement for the youth interventions program. We also have future agenda items. I don't know if there's anything anyone wants to suggest. I will remind us all that after that, we do have to go back into closed session. Sarah? Okay. I wasn't here. I know you made a

220statement about the SRO. That's going to be in a future agenda item? Correct. That is July 9th. Just confirming. Thank you. Yep. Okay. Any future agenda items? All right. At this point, I move that we go back into closed session. Gail, do I need to reread the preamble? No. No? Okay. All right. Okay. So I will see you back. Back in quotes. All right, we're recording now as well. Are we who are we waiting on this point? I think we have everybody. Do we have Tom? Yes. Yes. All right. Awesome. That was that was well done. You guys click by the time we're back in person. This is all going to be so much easier. Okay. So I moved to a prove The superintendent compensation for the 2020-2021 school year and the amount of a

2212.5% increase to her current salary. Is there a second? A second. Gail, could you take the roll, please? Mr. Barron? Yes. Mr. Isley? Yes. Ms. Harris? Yes. Ms. Harris? Yes. Can you hear me? Yes, I can now. Thank you. Mr. Kofsky? Yes. Mr. Martiri? Yes. Dr. Moore? Yes. And Ms. Dixon Spivey. Yes. Thank you. Thank you, everyone. I move to adjourn. Thank you, everybody. Second. Seconded. Thank you. Craig. I think it was Craig. Thank you. Thank you, everyone. Be safe. Bye, everyone. Thank you. And thank you to Gwen and Mike again for all their service. Good night, guys. I think they're gone. Oh, they were in there. Oh, I thought they all left. Yes, thank you, Mike and Gwen. They're hanging on to the end here. Happy phase four, everyone. Happy phase four. Thanks. Good

222night, guys. Yeah, enjoy it while it lasts. We're going to see regression. All right.