001Alrighty, we're going to go ahead and call this meeting back to order for our open session at 5:30 p.m. Just a heads up, I think I see Carlos. Are we good to go? This meeting is being audio and video recorded. Welcome to the last meeting of this school year. Um we have a few items to report out. Um first starting with item 3.2.1 stipulated expulsion 179C 25 to 26. Do I have a motion? >> Motion second. >> We have a first by Trusty Lake and a second by Duncan to approve item 3.2.1 stipulated expulsion 179C 2526. All in favor say I. >> I. All oppose. Hearing none. Motion carries. 4. Item 3.3, public employee discipline dismissal release pursuant to government code section 54957. Uh, this item was discussed. No action was taken. Item 3.4, conference
002with labor negotiator pursuant to government code section 54947.6. This item was discussed. No action was taken. Item 3.5, public employee performance evaluation, uh, title of the superintendent. This item was discussed. No action was taken. With that being said, welcome to open. Um, we are missing one board member tonight. Trusty Jeff is not with us. And, uh, at this point, we will go ahead and start with our pledge of allegiance. If everyone would please rise. I allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands. One nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. >> All right. Item 5.2, approval of the agenda. Do I have a motion? >> Motion to approve. First by Trusty Duncan, second by Trusty Lake to approve item 5.2, approval of
003the agenda. There are no changes to this agenda with this motion. Just want to acknowledge. All right. All in favor say I. >> I. All oppose. Hearing none. Motion carries unanimously. Item six, reports and communication. Starting with item 6.1, board reports. Do I have a taker? >> David, would you kick off our board reports? >> Yeah. One thing that is exciting is how well our foundation scholarship program is going. We started with $3 million. We're up to $3.86 million. Outstanding uh fiscal stewardship by our advisor Matt Nati. I'm really happy with that. And Sarah has come up with some wonderful ideas in terms of how we can continue to grow and evolve in this organization. by one way is to create a website which we would incorporate and put into the district site which would
004give people the opportunity to see to to uh make charitable contributions if they wanted to to see where our status is financially, what we're invested in, uh the scholarships we're having, the new scholarship possibilities. It's pretty exciting. uh in terms of fiscal uh conservative management, we have 10% of our of our money in the bank in case the market would turn. We would be able for two years to continue with the scholarships we're giving right now without having to take into the market itself. So, I'm excited about that. It's uh and Sarah uh thank you for all of your hard work. It's uh it's amazing how this committee started three years ago and to see how it's evolving and changing. Bottom line is it's going to help kids and that's what we're here for. So,
005>> thank you so much, David. >> Any other takers? >> I don't have anything this week. Go ahead. Yeah, just to add on on that, uh I have the chance to sit on that committee on that uh finance committee where we uh discuss a lot of those ideas on how to promote, you know, very similar to what other colleges do. They have an endowment. They have uh they make it very easy for those that are in a position to be very generous to to donate to a to a very good cause. and uh uh we are fortunate to to work with um with our adviser. Um but uh but yeah, I mean that's moving forward. That's that's the that's the vision. That's the plan and uh we'll we're we're excited for that. Um, we've been
006doing our uh our one-year review of our uh of our superintendent uh uh superintendent Ali and it's been really good and I'm I'm um I'm happy to see uh the progress that we've made as a as a district and that and that he's been able to make over this past year. And we've talked a little bit about when we went through the hiring process, how big of a concern fiscally uh speaking about our district, how concerned we were and that the the person that we would hire would have to have that was like at the top of our list of uh of importance because we saw um this impending um doom and gloom economy coming with our decreasing enrollment and so forth. Um, but it he's he's really done a great job. I just want
007to give you public uh congratulations for a lot of it goes unspoken, unsaid, but but you've really earned the trust of uh of your team and uh and of this board that you're you're wonderful with numbers and you have this ability to to to see things in a different way. And it and it's really it gives us an assurance moving forward in the future that uh we have a a good steward that we're being fiscally uh responsible and that you know um we're going to be able to maneuver through some of these challenging times that are that are projected to come in the in the near future. So thank you. Um I don't have a whole lot other than that but we are talking about uh goals and so you know we spent a lot
008of time thinking about uh the the the vision of this district and um and it just seems like over the past year there's been a lot of challenges where we faced uh you know seems like there was always some sort of litigation or some sort of uh just there's a lot of legal stuff that that that comes with a a governing body that comes with a a you know a school board. And it it just feels good to know that we've uh we've we've crossed a lot of hurdles and that there uh there's we expect some stability um moving forward and it's going to do good things um ultimately for the for for our students. Um yeah. We'll keep it short. >> Thanks. >> Thank you. >> Yeah, you know, when you have two meetings
009a month, you've you've got out most of your report. So, I just wanted to say, you know, thank you guys so much for for the hard work that you've done this past year, to all of our staff, to our staff that is still on site uh working and our facilities who will be doing all kinds of work over the summer, for the the bridge program that happened the first week out of school. I was excited that my incoming freshman was able to participate. It was a very small little cohort. Um, but they enjoyed it thoroughly and so I just wanted to thank you guys for putting that together. Um, and notably the Chromebooks in our district are much better than the one in his former district. He could not believe it was touchscreen. So he
010was like, I'm already winning. Um, so there's there's so many good things already happening. There's camps happening at at um multiple sites right now. So, thank you to the coaches and the kids for giving back to the this incoming group. Um, but also to the children in our community, a very cost-effective way for these kids to participate in some of these sports teams. So, just want to thank all the good work that's still happening even when our students are not inside of our classrooms every day right now. Um I uh attended a a very successful golf tournament on behalf of um one of the teams you may know and um on Friday and we just have such a generous awesome community and I am continually blown away. Speaking of the scholarships and other uh in
011attending all the scholarship nights for our seniors, our our community is so awesome and I said it repeatedly, the gift I've given my children is to live in Auburn and that they get to go to school here. um with amazing uh kids and staff and families who love this area. It's so historically rich and I just feel so blessed. So um that is all I have to say. We're going to go ahead and kick our way to uh item 6.2, superintendent report to the board. >> All right. Well, first off, uh thank you for your kind words. I appreciate that. I have been blessed with a great team and that's always helpful. Um Dr. Dr. Camine is going to talk a little bit the a little bit about the admin summit we had last week.
012I just wanted to touch on the uh plaster school for adults graduation which was um a couple weeks ago and it it's a it's a wonderful event and you know I kind of walked out of there realizing that we're all kind of like one event away from from maybe not being where we want to be you know and um you've got people who persevere and overcome and and are able to get through you know high school at a at a later date and the amount of joy and appreciation that brought them was was really neat to see. I was talking with principal Casperite afterwards and he's like he said, "What kind of a metric do you want to see from this?" And my response was, "I want as many people as possible graduating because these
013are directly this directly affects our economy. It directly affects people's lives. You have a high school diploma, the world opens up a little bit more. So, we just want to keep increasing those numbers out of PSA." Um, but kudos to them. They do a phenomenal job. And with that, our next board meeting will be in August on the 18th. I know we'll do some work before then. And Deputy Superintendent Camdi, >> thank you. We had a great day and a half last week, Thursday, and half of Friday, um, with our admin summit. Thank you to Executive Director Mr. Wilson for leading us through um a a great day of leadership training um goal setting um and Elena helped us with some team building as a as a group for all of our administrators, our directors
014um every side of the house. It was it was great. It's always a great time to be together and forecast and look ahead to what's coming, but then also reflect on where we are as a as a district over the year. C do celebrations. Um it was good. We had a we had a great time together. Um we will be working with Plaster High School um for their assistant principal opening. Um and so that position has not closed yet. It's still got a little bit left on that. Um but they'll be setting up those interviews uh Lena's team and finding an outstanding assistant principal to to round out their team. That's all I have. >> Thank you so much. Item 6.3, Associated Teachers of Plaster, CTA, NEATP, President's Report. Welcome. >> I've changed the font
015on my paperwork now so I can see it better. I've acknowledged them at that stage. Um, student needs require quality educators and quality educators require competitive compensation. Um, we've entered another round of bargaining for the 2627 school year and so for this report I'm going to um try to connect some dots relating to that. So, good evening everyone. Um, my son and his girlfriend were making slime at my house just as I was getting ready for this board meeting. And uh, so he didn't hear the phone ring. He just applied for a job at uh TJ Maxx this past week and he got it. Um but when he was offered that job, they're like, "Hey, do some stuff online and then we'll get back to you." So he gets back to them and they can't
016find his paperwork and so he calls again and he misses the phone call again. And so they're in this endless round of going back and forth with phone tag. And I kind of feel like in some ways um it's related to just connecting the dots, right? And I'm going to come back to that in just a minute. So tonight's agenda includes many separate documents. The grading policy, LCAP, preliminary budget, cars, local indicators, the SIPs, dual enrollment, and Prop 55 expenditures. But they are all connected by one question. How is this district ensuring that every student has access to qualified, stable, and appropriately supported educators? Research consistently shows that educators are the single most important inschool factor affecting student achievement. Educators are the single most important inschool factor affecting student achievement. Rand summarizes it clearly. Among
017school related factors, educators matter most with two to three times the effect of services, facilities, and even leadership on student performance. That's why competitive compensation is tied directly to student achievement. It is one of the conditions that makes student achievement possible. A real life example is the grading policy. On paper, the grading policy may look like a technical board item. In practice, it means teachers have to redesign syllabi, gradebooks, retake policies, late work policies, ELO waiting, extra credit, communication to families, and course specific grading structures. A chemistry teacher, CTE teacher, PE teacher, special ed teacher, dual enrollment teacher, and aled teacher will all face different implementation issues. That work requires professional judgment. It also requires time, training, and trust. So as the board considers BP and AR-5121, ATP asks the implementation be clearly non-disciplinary and
018non-evaluative. A teacher's goodfaith implementation questions, pacing differences, course specific grading practices, gradebook structure, or exercise of professional judgment should not be used for discipline, negative evaluation, retaliation, or adverse action. And this is something that could just be added to the AR. Um, the June drafts also need more clarity before final approval. Teacher grade authority should be preserved. Retake language should return to the clear April version. Academic integrity should be restored. CTE, lab, PE, VAPA, workbased learning, and performance-based courses need language that recognize safety, participation, professionalism, collaboration, and employability skills. when those are part of the approved curriculum or standards. Dual enrollment needs language that recognizes FURPA college partner policies, withdrawal deadlines, transcript consequences, and CCAP or articulation agreements. And that brings us back to the bigger picture. The LCAP identifies serious student needs. Students with
019disabilities are read in math and ELA at the district level. At Plaster, students with disabilities, Hispanic students, and socioeconomically disadvantaged students are red in math. Maid's college and career readiness rate is listed at 15.2%. The documents also reference hiring difficulties and the need for teachers who can teach dual enrollment. The local indicators show 26 out of field assignments out of 183 FTE, which is about 14% 14% out of field assignments. The SIPs identify subgroup gaps, suspension concerns, and sight specific needs. The CAR's documents raise questions about how title two funds are being used to support effective instruction, English learners, and staffing. And then I've been heard that there'll be a review of the title three funds in terms of um are we eligible? Are they worth going after? Because currently those are marked no. And
020if we are going to go after those funds, um I think we have until maybe June 30th to change that documentation. Um but that would be piece of the board approval for today. Um these are not just compliance concerns, they are student access concerns. If students need stronger math support, they need qualified math teachers. If students with disabilities are read in ELA and math, they need stable, qualified special ed and general ed teachers with time to collaborate. If the district wants dual enrollment and needs teachers with the qualifications to teach college level courses, if CT, lab science, VAPA, PE, and foreignbased courses are part of the student program, those courses need instructors with the expertise to evaluate real course competencies safely and fairly. If Confluence, Maidu, and other programs have specialized needs, those programs need
021experienced educators who are willing to stay, and that requires competitive compensation. We have places within our pay schedule where if people switch districts, they get 15,000 more dollars. And at the minimum, we should be trying to keep pace with that district, if not close that gap a little bit when there's opportunities to do so. The preliminary budget projects the general fund ending balance growing from approximately 6.87 million in 2627 to approximately 9.55 million in 28-29. The board should ask what assumptions are built into those projections regarding certificated staffing, step-in column, health benefits, class size, vacancies, and compensation. The board should also ask how one-time funds, including the student support and professional development block grant, learning recovery funds, Prop 55 funds, title 2, and possibly title three funds are being used to directly support student learning,
022qualified staff, and educator retention. And those um grants are well over $3 million. A budget is a statement of priorities. If the district's documents identify student needs, subgroup gaps, out of field assignments, hiring difficulties, professional development needs, and complex grading implementation, then compensation and retention must be part of the solution. Tonight, ATP asked the board to look at the agenda items through one lens. Will this action help attract, retain, and support the qualified educators our students need? Students do not experience the LCAP, SIPA, budget, CARS, or B board policy as documents. They experience them through the educators standing in front of them. We want every student to have access to a qualified educator. We must make this a district, a place where qualified educators can afford to come, can afford to stay, and are respected
023enough to do their best work. Our student needs require quality educators and quality educators require competitive compensation. Um, thank you for your time. Um, I did send um some detailed notes because there were so many documents for tonight and so if you guys didn't happen to see those, um, it's there for you. Um, just in terms of some questions that I had and maybe some possible discrepancies, um, I have heard in the meantime from a few people, granted we're on summer vacation, um, so it's been a little spotty, but a concern about how splitting the um the BP, which we're so glad it's shorter, um, but how splitting the BP into the BP and AR resulted in documents that are so different. And so there were questions that came up again like is it possible
024because again we're now at the summer, right? And so I expressed last year and I'm expressing it again this year when we're the implementators of the grading policy. It is so incredibly helpful if we're actually around to be part of this discussion before changes happen. And if you look at that document I sent, I listed I think there were five major things that I saw that were concerning that weren't on the previous document or weren't problems with the previous document. Plus, there's still a clarity issue. And so I would suggest um I'm putting this out now that um that we look at possibly if it's that much of an issue that we can't come up because it's been a year now, right? that we can't come up with a clear grading program that we can
025get behind a policy that maybe we consider going back to the 2019 policy before there are problems and take it in pieces with direction that we need. Um I I just we've had so many hours of conversation about it. I am um I'm concerned about these changes that happened on the fly between April and now or at least that's what appears from the outside. Um feel free to message me if you have any questions about what I sent. Thank you. >> Thank you very much. Item seven, public comment on non-aggendaized items. This is our opportunity for public comment. Do we have any blue cards? Technically, you do not need a blue card. Going once. Going twice. I saw a wave by Mike Reer. He is not coming forward. All righty. We're going to go ahead
026and move to item eight, consent agenda items. Do I have a motion? >> Motion to approve. >> We have a first by Trusty Underwood and a second by Trusty Lake to approve item eight, consent agenda items. No changes to this consent agenda item. Nothing being pulled. Just want to make sure. >> I think I was a second by >> We've got first and a second. >> Yeah. >> Yes. >> Lake. >> Oh, you had a You think you won it? >> No. I'm saying you said lake. >> Yeah. >> And I'm saying it's Underwood. >> Said Underwood and Lake. >> No. Dun. >> Oh, sorry guys. Translations. >> You're good. >> Underwood and Lake, not Duncan. >> No, it was Dun. >> Lord have mercy. Somebody motioned and somebody second. Was it Was it Duncan?
027>> Under Underwood Duncan. >> Underwood and Lake as well, but >> didn't say a word. This is amazing. >> We need to have more nights like this. >> Underwood and Duncan. >> Thank you. We made it. All right. All in favor say I. >> I. All oppose. Hearing none. Motion carries. 40. Look, we can do that. Good job, guys. Alrighty. Okay. Item nine, action where all the action occurs here. Item 9.1, amendment to the employment agreement with deputy superintendent of Plaster Union High School District. This is an amendment to the annual employment agreement of PHSD, Deputy Superintendent Steve Kminetti. >> Yes, Madame President. This is an amendment to um address the period of time that's based on ED code. You can have up to three years for your contract. And this is um a recommendation
028on the behalf of the superintendent to extend deputy superintendent's um contract to include the additional years that will get him a three-year contract. So through 2029. Thank you. Do I have a motion? >> I move approval. >> First by Underwood, second. Second by Lake to approve item 9.1, amendment to the employment agreement with deputy superintendent of the Plaster Union High School District. Any questions or comments? I just want to say Dr. Cabinetti, you do a phenomenal job. I'm just very thankful that you're here. Um, obviously in your role last year as the interim uh superintendent, you did a phenomenal job and I really got to know you and your leadership style and and what you bring to this district more personally. and I'm just very glad you're here. Thank you for all you do. You
029make this place a better place. >> And Madam President, if I may, Steve, sorry, Dr. Camoni, uh, has been invaluable to me. Um, his leadership, his forethought, he is just, he's a phenomenal educator. He is a total pro at what he does and this district is very blessed to have him. >> I second that. All right, we have a first and a second on the floor to approve item 9.1. All in favor say I. >> I. All oppose. Motion carries unanimously. Item 9.2, amendment to the employment agreement with superintendent of the Plaster Union High School District. This is an amendment for Superintendent Omali placed before the board. >> Yes, Madame President. Um, this again is an extension of the contract to go through 2029 for Superintendent Ali. So um unusually on my behalf on the
030behalf of the of the board president there's recommendation for the approval of this amendment. >> Thank you. Do I have a motion? >> Motion to approve. >> We have a first by trustee Duncan. >> Second by trustee Lake to approve item 9.2 amendment to the employment agreement with the superintendent of Plaster Union High School District. Questions or comments? Thank you superintendent Ali. I will I will reiterate what uh Trusty Lake had shared. You came into a ship that had been through a lot of shifting um rough waters, a lot of turnover, a lot of change, a brand new board and um you've navigated it um as beautifully and I think as best as anybody could come in in a year one. It's been a lot. Um we appreciate your hard work and your commitment to
031this district and building relationships with staff being so present at every site. I don't think that there was an event that I attended that you weren't at. You were everywhere. I don't know how you did it actually. Um, so kudos to you. Look forward to seeing your continued growth this next year. We're we're really glad you chose PUHSD. >> As am I. I appreciate y'all and and thank you for having me. Well, I guess I'll wait till the vote and then we'll >> we're about to find out. Hey, you still have yours on your contract whether this goes through. No, >> but thank you. >> You're welcome. All in favor say I. >> I. All oppose. Motion carries. Unanimous. You're stuck with us. 9.3U with Newcastle Elementary School for Occupational Therapy Services for the fall
0322026 semester. This is a newou. Come on down, Carrie. Thank you for being here tonight. >> Yes. >> Good evening, Madam President. So, this is um our occupational therapist. We typically contract with Kfax Elementary District and share with them. She is happily on maternity leave. So this semester we will be partnering with Newcastle to have their occupational therapist come and help support us during the fall semester. >> Awesome. Thank you. Do I have a motion? >> Motion to approve. We have a first by Trusty Duncan and a second by Trusty Spade to approve item 9.3U with Newcastle Elementary School for occupational therapy services for the fall 2026 semester. Any comments? Hearing none. All in favor say I. >> I. >> All oppose. Motion carries 4. Item 9.4 4 approval of PHSD's local control accountability plan
033LCAP for fiscal year 2026 2027 and Maidu virtual charter academy fiscal year 2026 2027 it's our annual LCAP update uh for the coming year I got Robert Lemon here who is our coordinator of curriculum instruction and heads up this uh beefy document and does a great job gathering all the information and the data uh surrounding it and making sure that uh uh it will uh qualify with our county office. And so he spends a lot of time um uploading these documents and and uh ensuring that it it's meeting our requirements and and stating our goals and giving our direction for what we're going to do uh in the coming year. Um, Robert, you want to add anything to this or >> uh just the only thing to look forward to is um noting that this
034is the end of a three-year cycle. Um and so a lot of our goals, actions, and metrics that were decided upon three years ago. At the end of this cycle are looked at and evaluated and analyzed whether they were successful or not. And a lot of the work is going to come into next year as we start the next three-year cycle for the 2728 because what we do at the end of this three-year cycle is we analyze whether those goals and actions were successfully met and if they were meeting those subgroup needs and if they weren't then it's decided obviously that those subgroups or those actions weren't weren't viable, they didn't work. Um and so those are reworked and reanalyzed and feedback is gathered um from all of our educational partners to inform the next
035three-year cycle that'll start with the 2728. >> Thank you. >> Any questions? >> Do I have a motion? >> I move approval. have a first by Trusty Underwood and a second by Trusty Duncan to approve item four or 9.4. All righty. Any comments? Thank you so much for this. The LCAP is a massive document and it is not communityfriendly. I really >> I was gonna say it is funny how the initial idea was like local control and you know it'll be great and then it turned into this behemoth of documentation and oversight uh >> from various places. So I think it's missed its uh original plan um was to give local people control to determine all these things and now it's it's it's not so much. So >> yeah, now we we keep um every
036I I believe at every delegate assembly this document comes up and years ago CSBA brought forward um a a policy or excuse me a bill that was that was passed around um drowning in documentation and this document is always discussed exactly how you put it. I wish that they would do something about it. if we keep whining and you know the squeaky wheel, maybe they will make this this document more usable and uh communityfriendly and palatable. But for the time being, I I appreciate the hours and hours and hours it takes to to put this document together. I hope someone reads all of the hard work that you do. Um and just appreciate all you do. So with that being said, all in favor say I. >> I. >> All oppose. Hearing none. Motion carries
037unanimously. 113 pages. >> Yeah. Ridiculous. >> Yeah. Yep. Indeed. Okay. Item 9.5, resolution number 2725 to 26 adoption of the 2026 2027 preliminary budget. Welcome, Sue. Thank you for being here. >> Thank you. Good evening. Um, President Spade, members of the board, Superintendent Omali, I'm here tonight to present you the preliminary adopted budget for 2627. Um, a lot of ups and downs while preparing this, say the least. Um, so this again, this is the preliminary budget. Um, I believe things were sent to the governor today. Um, we'll see what he does with it. Could change. It will change. I can guarantee you that. So, so on the first page, our general fund revenues. Um, this is included with the expected uh proposed COLA of 2.87 plus the 1.44 augmentation. So, our general fund revenues uh
038came in at 68.9. And then you can see of our how it's made up of our LCFF 52.1. Um, and in that blue, our supplemental funding, it's not that up there, but we're getting about 2.2 million for our supplemental funding. We don't get concentration. We don't have a high up. We got some federal other state other state rows obviously with our one-time um some of our grants that are coming in that he's proposed. And then we have our other local on the next page. This is where our dollars are going to go next year. This is what the proposal is. 68.3 million. Um, so as you can see already, our revenue is larger than our expenditures. It's usually been the other way around quite a few times. Not by much, but it's there. And then
039you can see where most of our dollars are going. Um, most of it obviously is instruction related services. That's salaries, you know, health benefits, anything that goes to instruction or maintenance operations, uh, general admin, athletics and activities, and pupil services. On the next page, these are our other financing sources. Um, so our transfers in this year. Um, we have some money coming in obviously our our tech grant, tech endowment grant, 96,000 and then our administration fee for running fund 25 for our development. Um, our contributions uh there is a proposal again for that the they put forward to increase the special ed allocation. So that's really helped. Uh so you can see our special ed is about 34 about five million which has gone down tremendously since the year before. And then our routine maintenance
040it's a 3% 1.9 we contribute to that. So we get down to basically this is the components of our our general fund balance. I have 2526 in here. Um we won't that won't be finalized till September. Obviously when I do the unodit actuals this is kind of what we're projecting. Um and then for f fiscal year 2627 um as you can see in 2526 our our decrease in fund balance is about 1.6. We are spending down a lot of one-time educator effectiveness. We had the learning recovery block grant and we had some of that spud bug I guess you want to call it the development fiscal year 2627. We're looking at a small increase in our fund balance of about 800,000. Um but again that could change first interim depending on what happens. Uh for
041Maidu virtual academy um their revenues are coming in at about 2.1. Their expenditures are going out about two at 2.1. So they're they're looking pretty good. Um their LCFF again they're getting that increase as well. Um so we'll see how their um enrollment comes in for the seabeds. It's hard to project with with the mighty with the charter because it does fluctuate. I know towards the end of the year their enrollment increases but again their funding is based on current year when that number comes in in October that's what they're going to be funded on. But when their ADA when their average daily attendance comes in in April sometimes it looks funky because it can be higher than the enroll because their enrollment increases. Then we have our other funds. We have our ASB student
042activity. Um, our adult education, that's fund 11, a PSA some people refer it to, and our cafeteria fund. Um, what we have projected for next year. Um, and I know Crystal is also getting a grant, kitchen infrastructure grant, some more money for her. So, that's going to be good when that comes in. We have a little bit left in deferred maintenance. Um, and again, our educational foundation, that's looking really good for us. So again, they're going to really try and push that for next year and getting that that website up and going, but a lot of scholarships were given this year. Um, and a lot what was allocated, I think a lot of the the students took full advantage of. It looks like they a lot of them were given. So then our fund 17,
043this is basically our savings account. Um, as you can see, it's going to be about 4.7 million. Um, prior second interim, we showed moving money out of here into fund 01 to help offset our deficit spending with that increase cola and the special education uh increase per student amount. It's we don't have to yet at least this yeah fingers crossed. So that's going to still um have some good balances in there of you know again 4.7 million. So that really helps our reserves. Then our building funds, well 2122, our bonds are done. They are spent out. Uh they'll get audited one last year and we'll be able to do some closeouts. So some really good stuff was was done with all those as you can see at some of the schools. Then our capital facilities
044fund 25. Um that's our restricted balance about 1.4. Our fund 40. We're looking at about 9.8. I know Peter has a lot of plans for that. Uh we're kind of hoping KFAX gets a majority of it. They need it. And then our retirey benefit fund um 71 that's just a restricted fund to help with the to offset the costs of the PERS and stirs which really isn't rising. Actually PERS went down. So that's been nice. So we go into our multi-year projections. Um so as you can see I have up there for fiscal year um 26 27 27 28 and 28 29 the assumptions we're using based on what was provided to us at the May revised from the governor. Um so as you can see that cola next year 4.31 3.3 and then 3.09.
045Um our enrollment you know we're still projecting declining enrollment so we'll do that. Uh basically our average daily attendance what we're getting funded on is you it looks like the three-year average is what's been projected and then it shows our change in our uh LCFF. Um there's our onetime revenue student support and professional development block grant that we're expected to get and some more money for learning recovery. So that's really really helped us. So then we go into our general fund projection. Um what you can see here is our beginning fund balance. the increase or decrease our ending fund balance. Then from there, that's how it's broken out. You have some revolving cash, uh prepaid expenditures, illegally restricted balances, that's our restricted programs, um and we're meeting our 3% um economic reserve. So, that's good.
046And then our bottom line numbers, that's what's left. So, the road ahead, again, one-time resources are great, but they're just one time. So, we have to really thoughtfully strategically look at those funds to see how to maximize those for our students. He's still underappropriating the Prop 28 by about 3.9 million, but I read today something the legislature put a plan to where we can receive it. We'll see what that plan is. Um, so we're able to to maintain our fiscal solveny for the current year and two subsequent years. Real happy with this budget. Um, again, we're going to have an election of a new governor, so we'll see what happens. Um like I said this will change come first interim but I will be here back here in September um with the closing of the
047books and from there I am we recommend the board approve the adopted budget report. >> Thank you so much Sue. Quick question and I apologize I didn't shoot this to you in advance but um regarding the ADA I I know that there is some efforts in the legislature to move it to enrollment. This has been an ongoing conversation they may or may not get traction on on it but um would it also are you aware if it went to enrollmentbased would it also be an average of those three years? Are you guys hearing anything? >> I haven't heard anything of that. Okay. >> It might just be based on enrollment for that year >> period. Yeah, >> it really does kind of feel like the enrollment thing kind of just died. >> Yeah, it kind
048of fizzled out. I wasn't sure if you were still hearing something that I wasn't. So, >> because right now that three-year average is benefiting the declining enrollment districts. >> Sure. Sure. >> And thank you for putting on the slide what they're shorting education. >> It drives me crazy. >> Drives me crazy. And then was it last weekend? You know, I received an action alert that they were trying to appropriate um uh prek pre private preschool out of out of our budget, which would take more money away from >> Okay, I saw something. >> So, yes, they're basically trying to add another grade level in in addition to TK, which would also go towards funding private preschools. >> Y >> into the Prop 98 money that they're still looking. >> Yeah. Yeah. >> Yeah. So >>
049there was an action alert from actually you mean you and I both signed audit from CSBA to you know send it into your assembly person and your state senator saying absolutely not. Okay. >> Yeah. I don't know how much money that that would have changed it. But again all these changes you guys I always say it all the time is you guys have to you know be psychics to to get anywhere you know really close to what that budget's really going to land. So, um, in addition to the kudos for Superintendent Omali in this fiscal, you know, uh, time that we're in, thank you and your team for all you do. >> U, it's it's major. School finance is crazy. >> Our team's been great. I'm losing two of them, but I've replaced them, so
050two of them are retiring. So, >> we've got some good people in their place and looking forward to building up that team and really getting going next year. >> Awesome. Thank you, Sue. Madam President, I just wanted, if you don't mind, um, >> you all sat here in June last year because I wasn't here and you were staring at a $6.1 million deficit for 2425 and a $4.2 million deficit for 2526. So, you were looking at overspending by 10 million last June. That's how quick this education thing can turn because now we're looking at, oh, a potential black budget for this year or this coming year. So, this is kind of a it's a weird world in in education, but you know, kudos again to the to the business department and, you know, the team
051and kind of get some things under control and the state finds money and and here we are. But it's an interesting world for sure. >> Thank you all. >> Thank you. >> Do I have a motion for item 9.5? >> Motion to approve. >> We have a first by Trusty Duncan. >> Second. Second by Trusty Lake to approve of to approve item 9.5 resolution number 27 25 to 26 adoption of the 2026 to 27 preliminary budget. Any questions or comments? Take it away, Superintendent Omali. >> Trusty Underwood. >> Oh, we're sorry. David resol. Okay. Roll call vote. President Spade. >> Hi. >> Uh Trusty Duncan. >> Hi. >> Trusty Lake. >> Yes. >> Motion carries 40. >> Thank you so much. Item 9.6. This is board policy and AR5121 grades and evaluation of student achievement
052update new. >> All right. So obviously last meeting some concerns were brought as far as the the grading policy that you know we had been training on for the year and and and working towards. So, just, you know, in conversations with a couple of the of the board members, um, it's funny that the 2019 policy came up, um, again, um, from the ATP. Um, that seems to be a favorite, um, even with with some of the boards. So, um, in speaking with President Spade, it was kind of a, you know, a request to see if myself and my team could come up with something based on that 2019 policy. So, I looked at uh, Dr. Dr. Camdi and Mr. Wilson said, "What do you think we can do?" And again, just trying to get back
053to this whole ends and means type of thing and that, you know, the ends being the vision of the board and what does the board want from student grades and the means being how I get my team there and trying to segregate those two. Um, hence the BP and the AR and that's where that comes from is allowing that AR being the means as to how we do implementation. that BP capturing the intent of the board as far as the vision of what a student grade actually means. So, I'm gonna look to my left and >> yeah, great um um overview. So the the board policy um we think we've we've captured the the board's intent behind um your philosophy of grading and the AR just as a reminder though it says it's new and
054that's why it's bold and italicized other than some minor word changes. Um, this is the 2019 policy, the AR. Um, we just revived it, but because CSBA once you retire a policy, it no longer lives in our repository. So that's why it's by definition it's a new AR, but it is it's a a revisited new AR. Um, that will allow us the flexibility to pivot um when we when we find um a need to change particular direction. And so the meat of the AR there grades should be impartial um should encourage student agency and they should be transparent. Those are where the kind of the meat of the AR is which is basically those bullets are identical to the 2019 policy that was already brought up this evening. >> Thank you very much. >> So
055>> questions. >> Sorry. This document that we're looking at is the is the uh one with that's lined out. That's the 2019 AR. >> No, the the one that's lined out is our current existing BP that um is currently in in practice right now. >> And then this is what you guys came up with the uh >> so then the BP at the very bottom will show you what is the new the new verbiage of the BP right there. What was your what was your reference to 2019? >> The a the corresponding AR which is on the the other document. >> I think 2019 was prior to any CBE um implementation focus. Um it had some language that was referenced to some of our work in in grading practices at the time. Um, but we
056took out some of the language that existed there that I think was clear that the board had made that they, you know, weren't supportive of or had a different opinion about. And so we made it more uh in line with with those things. Um, I think uh um it is simple to get back to a place where uh this was the familiar territory that guided us even before 2019. um this this wasn't a huge change um prior to that except you know we had some some new language in the AR that we added. So, um, feeling like we want a clean slate to say, "Hey, let's start this where the teachers feel comfortable, we feel comfortable, we know what this is." Um, and that, um, uh, as I think something that you said, uh, Trusty
057Lake, that the teachers could get back to the joy of teaching, that this is so familiar, that this is something that we're not going to spend a lot of time in our world discussing because they have used it so often. Um we've ran I you know I've um talked to a number of teachers just just asking them what they would think about that they all felt pretty comfortable about that. Um so that was sort of the rationale about going towards 2019. Thank you very much. I'm okay. Any other questions? public comment. So, I just pulled up the BP from um 201 moment. Do we have a timer going? Here we go. >> Thank you. Mhm. I pulled up the BP from um 2019 dated uh May 7th and I think it would be advisable before
058anything is approved um for the board to review it. I'm seeing changes that um have not been addressed. And I think just as I would say it's uncomfortable to go from the few people that have messaged or that um I've heard from since Thursday. I would also feel uncomfortable going from a few people feeling comfortable that you've spoken to as well. Um, I think that depending upon how it's worded when we talk to people, if we say, "Hey, do we want to go back to how things were in 2019, I think they would answer yes to that, right?" Um, there weren't these issues that we had. We talked at the second to last board meeting on April. Um people were asked the students that were there um the I I believe teachers as well um
059in terms of if there were any problems currently this year and all of that's kind of dissolved, right? And so why do we want to do things or have things added in that may cause further problems? So, if we're truly going back to the BP5121 from 2019, I would say let's make sure that we're doing that and move from there as opposed to minor edits that may be problematic and that there um are clarity issues with. Thank you. >> Thank you. prior to opening any form of discussion. Um, the board is where we need to have a first and a second on the floor to have further conversation. >> Do I have a motion? >> Are asking questions? We need a motion. >> If we we can ask questions. We just can't have discussion. tell
060without without opinion or or conjecture. If we have questions about the language, that would be the appropriate time. Once we want to have a conversation about it, we need a first and a second on the floor. >> Uh Trent, can I ask a question? >> It seemed like the the the point of uh frustration from the speakers of last meeting had to do with this 8515 >> Yep. >> uh segment. And so >> is there a uh was there something beyond that that you found in your work on this that was also concerning? >> I think that was an area of just concern and confusion for sure that they feeling like they had no idea where that that came from and why you would put that in a board policy where 85% of a grade
061has to be connected to an ELO and 15% doesn't. And I do think Mrs. Stafford was right uh in her regard to maybe some misunderstanding about what that meant. Um is is thinking that 85% of your grade was based off tests. Um but every assignment should be connected to an essential learning outcome or objective. I think um if I went back but the way it was worded, it said 85% non, you know, for ELO based and and so there was some wording problems there as well. Um I think that was one. I don't want to put words in their mouth, but I do know that 85% did cause some uh concern and issues for for that. >> And remember this was at 50/50 before. >> Yeah. >> Right. But >> or like >> it was
062it was a 5050 >> point at you know prior to >> I don't know where the 85% came from. >> You you were part of I mean >> no no we did not say 85%. That was never part of our conversation. >> Was that Jeremy then? that it showed up when it got on the board policy. That was where the first time I'd ever saw 85%. >> But what Jeremy told me was from the conversations that you had and the feedback you had. >> Stephen and I were there. >> Okay, I'm voting no on this. I'll tell you that right now. I mean, this this is completely dismantling what was built. So, it's down to like two paragraphs and it's really vague and it makes it very easy to circumvent and to pivot. So >>
063it's really Oh, never mind. >> To circumvent what? Oh, this is we can't have a discussion >> policy. >> Yeah. If we want to discuss it, let's put a first and a second. Whether or not it goes through is irrelevant, but I think the reason why I felt like it was important to have a conversation around it today is because things keep coming forward. I think that this and I'm apologize. I didn't go back and and double check it. I think this is the fifth or sixth time we've had the grading policy on the agenda in less than two years. It came back January of 2025 when the community staff there was an uprising because there was mass confusion. It it led to us needing to pivot to give some relief to our to our
064staff who was um struggling um some of our staff struggling and families who were who were totally confused um and students and we had to offer some grace and figure out what we're going to do um as well. So, I thought that it was important that we at least have a conversation about it. And as you know, the Brown Act precludes our ability to communicate unless it's on an agenda. So, I'd like us to take this time to have some conversations around what's here and what got us here and how we move forward together. Whether or not this is it is irrelevant. Um, the board provides direction and that takes a majority. So, I think it's worth having a conversation around. Do I have a motion? >> Was there any thought to make some uh
065recommendations for corrections to the to the BP? I I would say the the thought really was to give my administrative team here the ability to make adjustments on the fly. So, you know, when there is going to be confusion, which there always is, let's be honest, it allows us to go in make those changes in the AR or you and adjust that to whatever it may be and then we would simply come back and report those out and say, "Here's what we did, what we've done." And the moment we lost the intent of the board, well, then we get called out on that and we fix that. So, um, it really is an attempt to, in all honesty, take this off of your plate and get it into mine so we can run with it
066and fix it and make it work. because otherwise every point of confusion is going to have to wait a month and we're going to have to come here either have the um the ad hoc committee go through and bring another recommendation or we come back and we have these discussions in in open session as to what do you guys want to do and we will simply wait and you know enforce those when they come through. So you know no matter what there's going to be the current grading policy is in play and we will enforce that. I mean that's that's where we're at. So, if this just, you know, doesn't go anywhere, that's what'll happen. It's trying to get this kind of off your plate and into into my arena so we can so we
067can work it. >> What do you think, David? Oh, can we have we can't ask? >> No, but if we have a motion in a second, we can have a conversation. >> The motion and the second is just to open up the conversation. So, if there is no motion second, it dies and we just move on. And if there is a motion a second, then now we can have free flowing conversation and questions and then we call the question. You all vote how you all want to vote. It's just open up that dialogue. >> Or if there's not a motion, it dies. >> Correct. >> Yep. I'm going to call going once, going twice. My last two cents on this will be this will be coming back in some form at some point. There's no
068question if we can't have a conversation about it. It's inevitably it's going to come back because issues continue to rise. If we want this to continue to be a standing item on the agenda or at least quarterly or yearly, it's going to require some conversation. I'm not opposed to moving it to AR. Uh, >> do you have have a motion? >> I mean, >> does not mean we're going to pass it. It's just to open up dialogue. Well, >> is that the main gist of this is to is to move the policy to AR. The gist that's like the main purpose. >> I I don't know if the main purpose I think the main purpose is us for us to move on from the topic. We want the teachers to go and teach and grade.
069Uh this is how they do it. Um I I there's no other hidden agenda on our part except that um the current uh document we have based off of what ATP has said in the past that it's going to require a lot of implementation and uh other other things of that nature. And this is like hey let's find a way to make sure that our our students are being evaluated based off articulated ELOs's it's clear to them that it's fair it's transparent and it's reported to them on their progress. That's essentially what we're trying to get to. Um, and then as nuance comes up with things that we can um, uh, engage in that process and move forward through through the AR, but there's nothing outside of what we're trying to do except get over
070this hump. That seems to be a place that we keep um, getting stuck and and we would say why, let's move forward um, by maybe going backwards a little bit. Uh but the whole goal is just to to take this off of the the major concern for ATP and our teachers and our administrators and and then push the work of uh curriculum and instruction and those kinds of things. >> Thank you. >> I'll wait for my timer. Thank you, Sarah. >> Your free time. >> Um, as a teacher, I'll just give you my perspective. Reading over this, I find it takes away from what we were trying to define as an ELO. Um, it talks about core standards, but I don't know what those core standards are. Are those state standards? Are they ELOs's? Are
071what are they? Um, and then when it goes down to grades shall be impartial, it talks about extra credit can be used, but then it cannot be based on any circumstances. So, is that impartial grading or is that accurate grading? I just feel like it hasn't been really um given the time that it deserves to make sure that it's spelled out in an actual way that I can take this and use it because right now I have questions. right now. I I would come to these guys and I would say, "Well, what did you mean by this?" And when I do this in my gradebook, what does that look like? Because when I want to know what this looks like, sounds like, feels like, tastes like in my classroom, I'm I'm even more confused than
072I was before. And I thought I understood what we had. And I thought my gradebook worked really well this semester. Um I did it differently fall semester to spring semester, and my spring semester gradebook worked well. So, I'm just confused now looking at this. Um, and I just think it needs to be I don't know if it's a committee thing. I don't know if you go back to teachers and ask them what we want because I feel like you've heard our voices. Um, but I I definitely think it just needs a a a rewrite of like what does this look like in the day of the life of a teacher and hold our hand and walk us through and what is it what do we do with this? >> So, >> I have a quick
073question for you. >> Yeah. >> Um, because you um did not mention the 8515. Is that clear to you in understanding how you were going to implement that? >> So I felt like me personally that was a misunderstanding um because we have formatives and we have summitives and formatives should be that like 20% and uh sumatives should be your 80%. So I actually did my grade book this last semester. I am English so I'm skills based and then our history teacher that I work alongside he is content based. So we kind of each work together to do our grade books at the beginning of the semester and we're like this is what we're going to do. He did the formative summitive percentage and I did not. I went strictly ELLO percentage and then at the
074end of the semester I saved my gradebook and I switched over and added that 8020 formative summitive on top of everything else and I had a deviation of 1%. So I'm feeling like it was whether or not we did that it didn't really matter. Um, when I look at it, if it's foundational skills being a 15% and then ELLO's being an 85%, >> I don't want to give that much weight to foundational skills. Um, and then the 15% if I use that as like in-class work, well, that's still ELO work. So, I just kind of pushed that aside and said if I have my own way this year and do it my way, I'm just putting the 88515 aside because that didn't really follow through with what makes sense in my grade book. >> Angela,
075can I ask a question? Yeah. >> Um, on your either your spring grade book or your fall grade book, would it would it not >> would this >> and if it didn't, how wouldn't it not? >> So, I'm not sure what the I is and I'm not sure what the D is anymore. Um, so the school that I used to work at, we had an I that would hold in the semester. So, if a student failed a test and I was going to reassess them on it, it would keep that eye in Aries to alert them that they had not cleared that ELO, we had super standards, whatever your district wants to call it. Um, and then that student would always know, would never be a surprise. They wouldn't think they were passing with a
076B, but had this one ELO they had never mastered, they would know because it was always an I in Aries. And then we would be working on until they cleared that I, if that makes sense. So when it says the grade I incomplete is assigned when a student has not yet completed the course requirements, I'm reading that as in my old district. I put that I in and it stands until they pass that I. >> Does that make sense? We're not doing that in our district right now. >> That's what it that's what we're doing. >> You have an eye that holds an Aries all semester instead of letter grade. >> It it'll hold until the teacher changes it based off of the time frame. So maybe there's our training issue because I've never been
077told that and nobody in my school uses that. So I think that's >> she's saying during the term. >> During the term during the term >> like not as a not as a progress report it would come up. It would in the misconception that parents have and the confusion that they have is when I put grades in Aries it doesn't matter what my categories are. It doesn't matter what my eels eels are. I've had to teach students to scroll to the bottom of Aries and look at that little chart and see where that percent percentage lies because they just look at that top grade and they're like, I have a C. I'm good. I'm like, actually, you have two ELOs's that are below a 65%. So, you're actually failing the class. >> Communicating that with
078parents is a huge hurdle because they only see my students doing fine. They're passing with a C. And I am not a class as English where they can pass with a D. They have to pass with a C or better. So, lots of conversation that I would that I holding an Aries would really be helpful. Um, but this I doesn't make that clear. And then there's really no talk of D's. And I think that's one that we all scratch our heads about is where where is that D and where does it stand? If that's fair. >> Yeah, I I I get that. But currently your grade book this past spring would would work under this board policy. >> I think so. I just think that what I do is based on the the shall and
079shoulds and woulds document that we used before versus this because this to me is less clear than that was. >> Thank you. Thanks. >> Thank you. >> That was the impression I got reading through it. It was just like it just seemed like a little vague uh very simplified uh and I I I get the intent and grading should be understandable. Do you have a question? >> I have a question. >> Um, >> is it not possible to We agreed in the beginning that we'd be open when we did this whole policy thing, we'd be we'd be very open to modifying as as needed. It sounds like there's some modifications that are needed. Can we focus on those? Then bring that forward. And if you want to add some language in there that that gives
080some some shift to AR, that's fine. I mean, We don't need to micromanage the grading policy. We We >> Emerson, is there a question? >> That was my question. There was There was a question in there. >> There's a question in there. Buried. >> Take it away. Can we do >> that? >> Yeah. I'm not sure what the question is either. I'm sorry, Emerson. >> Can we Can you Can you >> make small adjustments to the >> the existing? It sounds like there's a little bit more clarity in the existing uh with some concerns. Address the concerns. bring those forward and uh with some language that gives some mobility to you know whether it's a a title designation like hey we're actually going to make this AR. So the answer to that question is yes.
081That would require the the ad hoc committee to come through and work on it because it's a board policy. It's not an administrative like you know we're not writing it's your policy. So it needs to be it needs to reflect what you want. So that requires in all honesty the the work to come from the board. >> We can be there to supplement and and give us you know we can be there and be present but you guys the the ad hoc committee has to bring those changes. But the work's been done by the board and it continues to shift. So >> is there a question there? >> Well, the question the question the question stands >> you to put a motion on the floor so we can please have a conversation. >> Question there
082were there were concerns about the existing policy. Can we address those concerns within the existing policy and move forward? Yes. Through board action. >> Okay. Is there something that we can shift to where it can become more admin action? >> Can we put a motion on the floor? >> No, it's a question. >> That's fine. But I I want us to be able to have a conversation about it. I will second your motion. Please put a motion on the floor so we can have a conversation about this. >> I don't have a motion to pass this in its current form, >> which is fine. That's totally fine. >> Motion to not pass. >> It's fine. We just have to have a motion to have a conversation about it. Whether or not it passes is fine.
083>> And you can still vote no. Emerson. This is not your vote. It's opening up the conversation. That's all. >> No one else wants to move. Jessica, >> I I will, but I'm going to be standing out here on an island alone unless somebody does a second. I think we need to have a conver. It's obvious we need to have a conversation. I'm going to put a motion on the floor to approve this item. >> It doesn't mean you have to vote yes. Anyone? >> I'll second that and have a discussion. >> Okay. >> Do you have a question, Emerson? >> No. Now you can say whatever you want. >> Obviously, there's been a ton of work by our ad hoc committee. Hours and hours and hours of gathering information, a ton of conversation with
084teachers, separate conversations with our admin and teachers, with admin and board members. There's no question that there hasn't been a ton of effort and time crafting this to be a reflection of the community's priorities and needs and obviously the boards and of staff's needs. The problem is everything there are still tweaks and things that keep coming up. This policy was on the agenda in February because there was an issue with grade bumps. was back in April um with a few minor uh amendments that still needed clarity and was causing confusion. In fact, ATP was you know requesting anou because of the complexities of of this of the changes and just full implementation of this. Last board meeting we had a number of comments regarding confusion and and issues around um language or competing language that
085couldn't coexist in the same policy. It's obvious that this needs some still some TLC whether this BP and AR the AR is a fluid working document. The BP only changes when it comes to the board. When you're talking about admin being involved and trying to to mold this and and provide that clarity that the staff is asking for. If this were to be adopted, staff could add the clarity without it coming to the board. The questions that were were, you know, posed here tonight could be addressed through the AR with the administrators without this coming back. My goal, my hope, it's not about it's not about taking away the board's authority or removing a bunch of language. It's about creating a fluid document that we're able to use in real time. Our board has discussed
086through governance training ends and means repeatedly and talking about you know what what what our where our place is in this vision. This policy is ours. It's very prescriptive and I don't disagree with most of it. I I I agree with the the content um the theory the spirit of it. I agree with it but there are still nuanced issues that will continue to rise because we are making shifts and without us giving some leverage back to the admin to roll it out which is the means if our ends is here this is this is the board's vision this and it's simplified if the major content is in the AR and these issues arise they can handle it without us needing to deliberate for 30 minutes to an hour or taking 25 minutes to get
087emotion on on the table, right? Like these are the conversations we need to be having. You know, where are we going? What do we want? Where do we want to go? We provide that direction through the AR. They're able to do their work and identify and address these issues instead of our staff being concerned that in 3 months we're going to shift the policy on them again. They could just provide clarity and direction. That's my concern. It's not about trying to undermine the work of of our board or the committee on on any any way. Um, I just think it's important that we have some conversations. I understand the intent to have it be so prescriptive is based on history and concerns and wanting it to roll out exactly how we said it. And I
088and I understand that we have our tools for holding accountable and staff has theirs. I just don't I think that in some of these instances we're handcuffing them and ourselves from being able to to pivoting, we're handcuffing them um on some of these issues where it could be more clear or more concise. Um and and that's that's my main concern right now. I I don't want to disrespect any of the work of the ad hoc committee. I can tell you that this is there have been other ad hoc committees that have worked on contracts and other things in the past where I wasn't completely in alignment. Just because we have an ad hoc committee does not mean we all agree with every element. And it it's not about disrespect. It's about having a conversation. Every
089time this has come forward, we're like, can we work on this a little bit more? Can we bring it back and have more conversation? We keep doing it, raising the tension with staff because they're afraid of what we're going to do. I feel just my observations and my my take and we're providing more confusion for them, for the students, for the families ultimately and at some point we've got to stop bringing it back. But if there are still issues, we don't have a choice because they can't do anything about it. We need we need to steady the ship around this stuff and we cannot continue to bring it back. That that's my number one concern. There has been so many shifts, minor shifts, major shifts, and we just need steady waters. And I feel like
090we've got an opportunity right now, even based on what was shared in the questions. um >> well >> that there's there's an opportunity to steady it a little bit. >> I don't want to adopt something that's going to create more confusion. Another major shift. Yeah, that's what this would do. >> So I I move to tweak what we have. We already agreed that we would we would need to make some changes to it and then whether we have them adopt it or do some sort of reabeling so that it can be in AR that I'm okay with that. we've already accomplished most of the goals which was >> to get away from all the the frustration so let's move to a more agreeable place I don't think the board needs to micromanage some of these
091details I really don't >> so in non-micromanaging can can staff explain to me some of these issues that could provide clarity through the AR some of these issues that were brought up tonight and and previously if it's not prescriptive enough or not clear enough in the AR are, let's just say hypothetically, we charge you to make it a little more prescriptive based on the former policy, but but still keeping it clear and concise. Is that possible if these were passed tonight for you to to make adjustments that were needed or necessary for staff? I think we have to go back to the root to the board policy first to make sure that that it's in alignment with what your overarching goal is as the BP. What is your philosophical stance on on on grading and
092student achievement and then we would go from there. If if if that's not right, then we can't build an AR, you know, I mean, they're connected. So when in the first part it say if you scroll down to the bottom of of the BP it says in the second paragraph pursuant to this to this broad grant of authority under ED code blah blah blah the board adopts this policy and supports administrative regulation which establishes the district's grading system based upon what we just said above. So is that first paragraph and really the third paragraph is that the board's belief about grading and we we know what we we I think we know what you don't want but I think a better question to ask is do we know what you want right >> in terms
093of a grading and and I think that's where it gets into those words about essential learning outcomes standards and frameworks um impartial consistent evaluation of student learning that have the opportunity to demonstrate learning through a variety of value that I mean that third paragraph really is if that if that's something you can agree with then we can go from there I guess that the AR everybody's going to have a little different interpretation of the AR we know that incomplete is something that needs re reworking it it always has because it's not a normal it's not a normal traditional grading and so it's always going to have opinions. We heard tonight, you know, the air the aspect of Aries. That's a that's a tool that we're kind of stuck with until we find a better tool
094that we're going to have to figure out how to maneuver around. But if the essence is accurate, then I it's a long way of saying yeah, we can we can we can do that if if the board is in agreement with the board policy because really what you're proving is the board policy and and we're going to say, okay, this is the board's direction with the board policy. we'll go from there and include you along along the way. Of course, >> that made perfect sense, her explanation of how to deal with the I >> during the course. I mean, you shouldn't see a letter grade if you're technically are failing an ELO. >> Yeah, >> that's the challenge is is Aries doesn't do that for you. You have to game the Aries to get that
095to to do it right. >> Well, >> yeah, >> that's our work. Yeah, >> I love my Friday night text messages when they would come through because my kids were hanging out at home with me or they were have getting privileges. So, it would be it would be helpful to have to know if they they weren't passing one at that time. >> And those systems have been developed. You know, we looked at some grade books over the last couple weeks and and you know, it took us a little while to figure out how their systems work, but once we actually dove into it, you know, there are systems in place. So that is an indication and it's you know it's a it's the onus of the teacher to communicate with the parents when a student
096is not passing they have to make those calls and send those emails as well and >> that's an education code as well. >> Yes. >> Yeah. >> I feel like we're on the right track. I think we need to I'm in favor of of uh you know modifying this 8515 thing to to to bring a little bit more clarity for those that have concerns. Um, so where do you want to go from here? >> So, uh, Trusty Duncan, what specifically in the AR or in the BP is outside of of the objective of the board? Well, I mean, listen, um, >> or that that is not aligning in your mind with with the vision that we had expressed. >> Yeah. I I think first of all, the um it's just it's really vague. Um, it's
097the entire body of what was created has been struck, right? And so it's vague. Um, the AR itself um has components of what was in there. it doesn't have everything. And so, um, I I still have not been given a good reason on why if if we want to take if we want to keep the vagueness in the BP, but take what we put together uh originally and make that the AR, I'm fine with that. >> It's just missing pieces. >> And so, any >> I think that's fair. I think that that's fair to have a conversation around that. And I and I think too like you know I think it's also fair for Jeremy to be here to to speak his voice too on it. Right. So um but that was too my my
098view. So my question to staff is based on what is in the AR right now, if um with addressing some of those issues that needed to be modified, is there a way to either merge or bring in um the elements that are not conflicting in the in the BP that we have currently that could support an AR and address the issues. like what elements could be brought over that would still be reflective of this paired down version and that also provided clarity. I >> think I think we'd have to have a dialogue maybe with Trusty Duncan and Trusty Jeff about what things they don't believe the AR currently has. So I'm curious to your question as to it didn't bring over what what it goes back to president BP what is not in there that
099>> we we understand that we've taken any language out of there that is CBE related. >> I'm not worried about this CBE. >> So but I mean that was that was from the very beginning that was something we we did take out. So what I would ask for an example of what needs to be in the AR that you don't see in there. Well, I I'll also say this. Um if if after all of our research and we spent a lot of time going to different schools and spending time with teachers that we wanted to go back to the 2019 uh form, then we would have but we didn't want that. We wanted something that was different and that stood out. And I also say like that was, you know, the the example that was
100given just a moment ago. Um that was the most concrete example we've had in two board meetings. I'm sorry, but those those folks that got up from Plaster were disrespectful. They're they're in leadership role and it didn't it didn't make sense what they were talking about. So I think the examples we continue to have small voice a few not small voices but a few voices upset then the larger group of teachers are happy with what what's out there right now and it's working needs to be tweaked. We can tweak we can make little tweaks here and there but I I I'm concerned that we'll just keep tweaking it and then we just hold our ground and keep exactly what we had in the original BP that we put together. And I apologize I was not
101at the meeting where it went to 8515 and I was very surprised it went to that. Um and so I I just I think we continue to be bogged down by a few small voices that have other >> well it's they're legitimate concerns. I mean they gave they gave examples where it doesn't apply in some cases in some classes and that's understandable. Let's make it easier without changing the entire the entirety. Let's make it a little more easy, a little more clear, and if we can put in something to to to shift it to AR, fine. >> If we moved, >> Madam President. >> Oh, please. >> I just want to clarify. I don't believe it's a small group. As you mentioned, anou has been requested and theou is requesting total grace of not having
102to fully implement the board policy as it currently reads and to give grace to the teachers during this next year. And so I don't think there is full understanding of it. I think Angela identified her interpretation of how she believed the 8515 worked. I said in that grading policy meeting with Trusty Duncan and Trustee Jeff where Mr. Jeff said clearly that the 15% was not to be connected to ELO's. And so I think there is still a lot of those discussions going on. What is that 15 to 50%? what where are those >> back to training >> and so between theou I don't believe it is a small group of teachers or I don't believe that ATP would be coming to request thatou from us >> the >> I'm sorry point of order we're not
103going to have communicating from the audience >> okay I would just ask that maybe look at theou the documents >> okay >> and she get up and talk or >> no we already had public comment on it I just want to make sure we're not having sidebars from the audience. Okay. Thank you. Sorry. >> My problem I when when they were up here talking, it seemed that TP in what you're saying, right? So, >> well, I think what Elena was just articulating is that ATP brought forward anou, >> right? >> But that doesn't seem >> but but but it's not it's it's not it's not aligned. >> It's not aligned. >> No, that that's that's the problem. And I I continue to go back to training and is Angela, sorry. Hi, Angela. Sorry. Um, she
104said, "Well, maybe I wasn't trained right." I mean, that that goes back to the meeting that we were at where it felt like folks were not trained correctly on on this. >> Well, in all fairness, the 8515 didn't show up until April. So, when was their time to train? in the last month of school >> because that that was a new element, right? >> Yeah. >> So, I just don't think that there was time for that. Yeah, I'm talking about that specifically. >> Um because now that's that's a new point of clarification and confusion. And I hear you about, you know, making making some tweaks, which I think we all agree that it the the document we have now still needs some tweaks. Um again, those tweaks cannot happen without it coming back before the
105board. I I I think >> I think the board should become aware anyway. >> I agree. >> Well, that's why I think if if the committee gets back in a room with um Ali's cabinet members that are assigned to it with ATP members, like I would like let's let's have let's let's have a a better conversation here, right? So, >> and and 100% we want to hear from any teachers that has a valid uh concern about existing policy and how they they're not it's not conducive to their teaching, >> you know? I mean, we want to know those things cuz >> how else? >> Yeah. >> Again, I go back to the the board policy of what your overall overarching vision for grading is. if it's mastery learning and ELO based in the the philosophical
106terms, that way we we know where the board stands on on grading as a as a whole. So, >> and I and I think I think that that conversation, you know, I'm with you at Trusty Underwood. I think that understanding where we're trying to go and setting the ends is the conversation. We're we're having means conversations up here about details. Um, and I don't know that these all of these details need to be in our hands. I think that we set where are we going, what do we want to accomplish, >> you know, structure boundary around that and then and that's where we hand it over. That's you know what I mean? We're talking about details. >> We don't want to this is not the dayto-day like we don't want to do the day. >>
107No. And that's what we're doing. >> Well, because we haven't rol rolled this out. Well, I think part of it too is because obviously there's been a lot of grace this past year. This was that was the theme of the year because of all of the change, >> but again, this is just going to keep coming back. >> Well, let's hear why. I mean, we don't understand why. >> I think I think that we've heard a lot of wise, and there's a lot of different wise. There's a lot of different wise. I mean, between the 8515 confusion about what is >> that's an easy delete. 8515 is an easy delete. I agree and I think it should be deleted. >> So what's the next one? Let's I mean and I get it. I don't want
108to be doing this either, but I mean there should reach a point where this is workable. This is fine. This is our policy. Let's move forward. >> The document that Mr. Ali shared with you. I don't remember when it was that had line by line, >> right? >> It it's very descriptive of what was actually taken verbatim out of our January meeting of what the what the concerns were. But also you have to keep in mind that even as a collective collective whole of our teachers, there was disagreement even in that group as to what the I mean you were touching on something that's very passionate for every educator in in the room. And so there there was some added I don't want to say vagueness there was some added flexibility in the AR to
109try to accomplish the purpose of the goal of of the board while still holding the essence to it but still allowing the flexibility because there's going there will never be 100% agreement in any grading policy and belief about the D the F when extra credit right all that stuff and so that that just it won't I mean we're we're here because it's taken us this many years to get to a point to where we're revisiting it again. And the only reason why we went to the 2019 was not to say this that was the best policy on the planet or the best AR. It was just giving us a reset to kind of start over again a little bit and work our way up to figuring out where the current board wants to go with
110with student achievement. Oh, current board voted for the policy that's in place with the understanding that we'd be flexible and willing to to to change where necessary. Sounds like we just need to make some of those changes and move on. >> And I'm I'm again, let's tweak whatever we have to if we want to make it an AR. I mean to to give you an idea like what the the the questions that came up were what grade what grades actually measure was a question whether mastery or averages matter more whether time or learning is prioritized whether teachers or systems control outcomes and those are some of the major questional things. So >> is there anything >> I thought we made it anyways my opinion is in the very first one that we did that was
111completed we made it clear >> and and the directionally where we were going and since then we have acquiesed and made changes um and so I mean I would go back to the original one if it were if it were my decision >> but we've made probably two or three changes since then um and I get the shalls and the shoods. Yeah. >> Right. Um so that was fair. Uh so >> yeah. >> Are you in agreement with the 8515? Does that make sense to you? The I mean the reason why we put something in was we wanted to avoid originally we wanted to avoid you know um all scales all students right and in terms of this all ELO's right >> don't we still have that they have to pass ELOs >> now yes
112we do now but the whole idea was to have it connected to those ELOs's they they'd have to I I ended up agreeing that fine we can have all ELO's because I originally to answer one of those questions I felt like like we should have that an average to allow grace for some students >> that I do >> and that was what I had put in the original one and then when we have motions and votes and we have discussions and things change right that's why I was not going to have emotions >> because here we are and things will change right um and so so yeah I think I I the so sorry to answer your question that's why we did divide it at 50/50% on the ELO's 50% on the development side of
113things and give other types of of ways to grade and grade the kids right and so um but the 8515 I and that's my fault I could not make that meeting I wasn't there and it was changed and I didn't realize that that that that did that that came from I guess trusted Jeff so So I think the conversation again we're so deep in the weeds um about very specific things. Um I too I understand the essence of why somebody thinks that you know you know if it's essential of course all the kids need to learn that but I wasn't a big fan of all skills all students and I still feel like that exists. Um I felt the same way like about the average. At the end of the day, none of us even
114agree with exactly what we have right now and haven't from the the first one that we adopted. Again, it comes back to some of these things need to be addressed in real time and provided that clarity in real time. And that's something that we're not able to do. And and the truth is is that we don't have another meeting until school starts. So any of these changes or ad hoc committees or meetups that would mean that we're we're going to be having additional changes potentially after school starts if things need to be tweaked. And so I think and I don't know if if we could get on on the same page around adopting this BP moving the AR move replacing the AR language that's there right now and shifting in a with omitting the 8515
115of the current BP and allow the ad hoc committee to meet up and strike out and clean up. I think that what they tried to do was to keep that same spirit but make it more concise and a little less prescriptive to allow that flexibility like Dr. Kminetti was talking about. But at least the committee if they felt more comfortable to move the body of work into the AR to be reworked with the ad hoc and the admin to address some of these issues. At least it could be done in real time. I just don't think again if we'll just keep coming back. I if if the changes that are made the board doesn't agree, you know, technically the board doesn't have to adopt the AR that that becomes their working document, but if they
116go completely rogue, which they're not going to do, you know, then we have another conversation about something completely different. But at least the prescriptive stuff that needs to be massaged is into the other document so they can work on it in real time and ad hoc can provide input then >> I hear you. Um timing is my concern. >> Yeah, >> I don't know. It's too vague. If the body of the BP we currently have was all shifted into the AR. I get it. So all the language still exists in the AR and we we pair down the BP to the language that's here now. And the ad hoc then has some conversations with admin about the roll out. It's still the same content and then they can deal with those issues. >> If you
117shift it to AR, if you shift to AR, then they now have the ability. You don't really need the ad hoc. >> They But the ad hoc could still provide the But the ad hoc could still provide input. >> Sure, >> but it's theirs. Again, if they went rogue, we have other tools. It's just it's the truth. I'm just saying if if we want this to be dealt with in real time, let's find a way to give them the tools they need to address it. It's not, you know, >> can that be a motion? >> Yes, absolutely. That could be a motion. amend the motion. >> Um, this might not be a good idea, but we keep talking about the vision and of the board and everything and item A is that board philosophy and
118what if just the agreement was item A is that board policy and then everything underneath that becomes that AR and any language changes that we make, we will come back to you and obviously report. Um, but that way the policy is unchanged but it gives us some some fluidity. I don't know again I don't know if this is a good idea or not. So we would add a of board philosophy of the original BP that is currently adopted >> which this strikeout is not from that right. >> No all of the strikeouts is the original language. >> The strikeout's the original language. They struck out the whole thing. So if we moved a item a board philosophy, dropped that in to be the the head paragraph of the new BP language and they moved the
119rest of it into the AR so that there was some flexibility to pivot were out of the weeds. >> Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. I I get why in the very beginning, look, I get a BP needs to be more concise and we we added a lot of details. >> Yeah. >> Right. So, but there's a reason why we did it. So, >> if it's still the same content, the bulk of the content And then just take from mastery learning model has four main components into the AR and then down. >> I I would I would leave all that like aboard philosophy and >> oh sorry starting in B. Yeah. And I mean B is >> I mean B is just in honestly it's ED code. So it's it's fairly >> inset the how. >> Yeah. C
120C is where we say how our ELO is determined. Yeah. >> Yeah. you could get behind that. >> Uh what's the next step? >> So I think the next step would be to address some of these other issues. It doesn't sound like the board's in complete agreement on the 8515. So maybe that's something that we can agree in this moment that as it moves in that that's something that could be well ultimately they could do what they want. But I it sounds like there's agreement on the board that the 8515 doesn't make complete sense anyway. to pull that back and then allow them to to massage this and and clean up the language and uh the some of the grammar. Um >> but that my that's my question on the next step. Is it just
121going to be cabinet running with this and making changes? >> I don't mind if I don't I don't see a problem. committee. Can Jeremy and I be involved to >> I think that it would be fine for the committee to be involved in having these conversations of of where these things need to happen. Ultimately, this is their document, but we're providing direction and I don't I don't see an issue with the ad hoc providing some um some guidance on this. >> I try to stay away from daytoday, >> right? I that's wise. It's wise for all of us, right? >> Well, So, >> but there but there are obviously things that we talked about that need to be fixed. I think that we hand it into them, move the body over, and they can highlight
122the issues that need to be touched and and they can make um recommendations um for making these changes, but then it's but then it's also theirs and then they'll let us know where they're at. I think the communication around this is going to be key not only for us but for for staff and for families as this is being implemented. >> But at least they could do it in real time. >> Well, that's the only reason I'd be open to this is so that we don't wait until August and that we the students >> and the teachers obviously >> Yeah. >> um have have something that they can run with. So, I'm I'm making an amended motion to adopt the new BP with the first paragraph A from the original BP uh 5121, moving the
123rest of the body of that work into the AR to be worked on and highlighted by staff to to work on recommendation uh uh changes and and to discuss them uh further with the ad hoc committee and inform the clarifying question. >> That was a real long question. >> I have a clarifying question. Are >> when you said new BP, the the one at the very bottom of this, we're ignoring that. We're just going to bring back the strikethroughs. We're not adding a to the current one or we're not adding one to the new one. What do you what do you suggest? >> In my mind, I was adding a to the rest of this uh to the new language. Like, so it' be the first paragraph of the the new language. >> Okay. Does
124that make sense or does that not make sense to you? >> Yes, >> it would make sense. >> Yeah. So, we have an amendment motion right now to move paragraph A, that section to the top of the new bolded and italic language, removing the rest of the BP into an AR to be worked on by staff to make changes necessary and recommendations um and inform the board. with the input and insight from our ad hoc. Can >> I uh ask Mr. Wilson a question real quick? I mean, but so really we're going to be >> I mean summer's here. We're going to be running the the board policy current starting next year. Probably for all of next year. >> Whatever whatever's up. Yeah. Whatever's written down. >> Yeah. I mean, just because it's in an
125AR, I mean, we're still we can't be changing right now. So, we're going to run I would I would recommend all of next year with the current >> correct. >> And if a weird case comes up where a certain kid, you know, because of certain circumstances or whatever doesn't fit the model, it allows us some flexibility there that we could write that in, >> you know. >> I I think he's talking about the the one we have written. >> One we have written that will be implemented. Yes. >> Right now. Yeah. >> Yeah. And so I asked that question just this is this is kind of an interesting moment of like this is what we do in the office. Um we we really we will be implementing the current policy as is. Even though it's
126an AR, we're still into the school year. Like we can't be changing philosophical things in the in in September, you know, or whatever it is. So, if we were to roll into whatever and somebody brings up a significant problem with this, just because it's an AR doesn't mean we can fix it. We can, but we're going to have to write it out for a semester. So, I just want to make sure you all understand that like this policy, even though if we were if you were to split it, it's going to be the law. And I would say for the calendar year, for the school year, I just think that's fair to the staff and the kids. I mean, they need to know the playing field. some of the issues where they needed some there's
127clarity. Um could some of those things be be addressed though with you guys outside of >> Oh yeah. I'm thinking you know I think right out of the gate we determined that I think Elena you caught this that we didn't have P's in there. There was no P grade and that's kind of a big deal for some of our students with special needs. >> So in theory we couldn't issue it. So, we had to bring that back, you know, and do those. This would allow us to make those changes real quick in an AR that we go, "Oh, we got to put a P in there now." But it's for these cases. >> Yeah. It would allow that. >> The original had had a pass in it, right? The original one we did. I look
128back. Yeah. I mean, again, I'll go back like this is a skeleton of a board policy in my opinion. And I to entertain this only because if we if we take what is there today >> Mhm. >> that's robust, right? And that gives guard rails and safeguards that what we created is going to be at least followed through on and we can have discussions if >> okay >> warranted. But >> is that a second? >> No. >> Oh yeah, not me. I I want to say that, you know, board policy 5121 uh at all the districts I've looked at are pretty much skeletons. They're not they're not that entire long. And some districts, Roseville joint unified, they don't even have an AR with their BP 5121. >> Um so there is, you know, a variety
129of ways to do it. how how specific and those kinds of things you want to get, how much in the weeds you want to get on a board policy. >> That's why I said the AR I mean, look, I I think we were called out in the very beginning. What we wrote was an AR >> at the end of the day. >> Yeah. >> Like that's what we did, but we did it because we felt we needed to uh in order to make sure that it was followed. Um, so that's why I said it's a skeleton. As long as we take what was um in the original board policy, which is an AR, and we put it in there, then it puts the guard rails in place. >> So, right now with the motion on
130the floor, that's what that's doing. We're going to move that body of work into the AR so adjustments can be made on the fly, >> but that body and and explanation of those those terms and clarity that staff was talking about, it would it would explain that. >> Yeah. But I would request that the committee has a chance to discuss this with the cabinet members. >> Okay. >> I'm I'm in agreement with that. Are we in agreement with keeping in the 8515 or throwing that to staff and the ad hoc once it's there and you guys >> I don't I don't think that there's agreement on the 8515 right now. >> When it's done, we'll just have averages and back to 50/50. >> I'm okay with that, >> but I but it's ultimately that's not
131my call. I I'd rather throw that to admin to work out. >> Go ahead. I do feel it's necessary for some clarity being provided to me otherwise theou request is legitimate in some ways if there's a lot of >> there's misalignment between this mo like it's clear so well >> I think the conversation needs to happen not here obviously but >> well the the misalignment in my in my mind is there's there is embedded in the fact that these have changed so much that and the understanding of what is this 8515 what does that constitute that work from 15 to 50% of the grade >> that clarity was never brought and and I mean in my mind it's one thing in Angela's it was another and in your mind you you said formative which was
132much more aligned to what Angela's um interpretation was but when we sat in that committee meeting there was a different interpretation and so um and I can see that that was the workability the skills based of is is this person employable and stuff. And so those those are two different things. And so um with that there's needs to be some very specific clarity or theou has some validity of needing to be put into place which would extend some of that language that we previously had in regards to teachers being able to continue. Um, and I don't mean not held accountable because they're teachers. They need to be accountable. They are experts in grading. A majority of our teachers are long-term teachers, have been teaching for a long period of time. But where is there some
133um movement to support these different interpretations and that is more more so and I don't know if even if it has been anou versus a discussion between us all with some understanding and agreement of how we're moving forward but that clarity needs to be given to us so that I can support that for you guys >> and I I don't I don't know why the 8515 was was put in. I wasn't there. So, I don't know. >> Emerson, >> I'll uh So, I like it if we can move move it to AR and uh I think it'd be really helpful to be informed when there are modifications or changes kind of like we get updates now for hiring positions. Uh that way we're just informed. Um that'd be helpful as well. But, uh yeah, I'm
134in favor of that. So, we have a first and a second on the floor to uh an amended motion that would move item A from the original uh policy into the new bolded italicized language. The rest of the body of the original BP would be moved into the AR and worked on with administration uh to provide um input to us as they recommend um clarity and clarifications to that policy. and that the ad hoc will also um be able to provide input. >> And just for one more just to drag this out, one more moment of clarity. So right now what I'm hearing you say is we're leaving this as is at 8515 will go in there. >> I think it will stay. >> I think we're >> strike that in this motion. >> I
135think we could strike it in this motion. I'd like to strike the 8515. >> What are we doing though if we're >> I think we throw it to the admin to provide clarity. I >> I think I I feel like I'm a broken record. I feel like we have to go back to we're going to be adding a into this which is mastery learning. And so this is we don't have to answer this question as a as a group tonight. This is a rhetorical question for you as as the board. What is your belief of student learning with mastery learning? That's a whole can of worms that >> that notice that's not included in the new new policy. We're going to be adding that in there. And so therefore, if your vision is mastery learning,
136staff is well aware of that's your vision, we're going to go ahead and do training on mastery learning. But that concept of mastery learning has definite constraints with percentages and what we believe students should know and be able to achieve. So >> and all >> and and all and the word all again allows again. So that clarity on your board philosophy of a it says very clearly in there which I think I mentioned last time. >> Yeah. >> Um master learning is is a an actual pedagogical theory of of learning just like CBE just like standardsbased grading. >> But thank you Steve. If if it's not placed in there right now, it doesn't mean that that couldn't be the tenant that we still are looking towards and adjusting down the road when because even as
137Trusty Duncan mentioned the training the that that support that's necessary for that um would need to happen anyways. Um so and it's my understanding was it was the tenants of mastery learning not maybe the but still mastery learning is all >> ELO's you're right it was tenants of it again it was we didn't we didn't want something prescriptive to >> any Rockland Unified or 2019 we we wanted it to be >> so >> crusty Duncan that that makes sense but one of the basic basis or the base of mastery learning is all ELOs's. So by implementing that in that a part into that >> you are kind of >> that makes sense. >> And I think yeah >> part of what we were trying to do was was we wanted to hear all the voices
138of the board, right? And David's voice was very pro like mastery learning. So we took that we took that into account works because I've been I was in the classroom my entire four decades you know grading kids and mastery learning gives kids the opportunity in whatever uh avenue they need to learn and succeed in it gives them the opportunity to learn those ELOs's and master those standards totally >> all my experience says mastery learning is the way research supports that. Glasser supports that in quality schools. That's what I totally believe in 100%. >> David, if if we kept the the A board philosophy and moved that in with this amended um version, would you be in support of that if we kept the item a >> not the 85%? I can't support that. the >>
139learning is based on the mastery of standards and ELO's period equity grading that's what it is >> this percentage is not only confusing but it takes away from the demonstration of mastery of the standards that's what education is all about >> yeah and again calling it our own and not calling it what the >> somebody else is the mastery because I think there's a little bit of a disagreement, right? And like the way I looked at the original board policy back in January of I don't know what year that was, >> 2025 now. >> Um, it was, and there's going to be a difference in opinion on this, but like that's why I felt like the average, right? We put it at 65%. >> We allowed for D's, which goes against the the the purest
140of mastery, right? And so, um, and Jeremy and I felt like if they can at least get to that 65% and it allows for D's and for some students, not all, but for some students that want that, >> then the majority of the kids would be able to master the class, right? And and that was the the intent and the theme of what we put together. >> Some kids want those D's. >> Yep, they do. And so that's why I said originally what we put together, I mean, I liked it. So, so and I I completely David, I respect you and understand where you come from as a teacher and the 40 years. So, that's why when we when we built this out, we had your voice in it. Although I I don't agree 100%
141on the purity of of mastery, we still wanted language in there because we felt like it addressed most of the kids, right, that were that were trying to accomplish that mastery learning. So just for context, it's been it's been a long time since January 25 we had that discussion. >> See, I believe all kids can learn. All kids can succeed. Period. They can agree. >> Some kids might take more time. Some kids might need a different approach to intervention. But we they can all learn and they can all succeed. >> Yeah. >> That's why failure to me goes against excellence of education. >> Time based. >> Okay. So, it looks like we have a first and a second on the floor um to have this amended version of the policy with item AB uh the
142board philosophy moved in uh to the top of the new italicized language and the remainder of the original BP moved into the AR uh for admin to do what they need to do um in conjunction with communication with the board and the ad hoc committee weighing in. Um but ultimately it becomes their document. Um, and that's where we're at right now. Uh, as far as the 8515 goes, that's the last element of this this motion striking the 8515 >> um to be determined by admin. >> I can't support 85%. >> It's not 8515. >> That's going to get >> that. That's being struck now. >> Yeah. that part struck out. >> So, right now it's the board philosophy that you're in agreement with. The uh condensed version of that policy italicized the body of the
143rest of the work is into the ELO or excuse me into the AR. >> So, >> first and a second on the floor. >> So, my concern is this is going to give the opportunity to go straight to um 100% ELO's, right? There's going to be nothing in there for kids that But it it doesn't right that was that's why that's why we had 50/50 in it in the beginning and it changed right to ensure we had a for some some type of formative um focus. >> I'm not I'm having a hard time hearing hearing you. That's my only concern is this goes back to where >> what was the first part of that about about >> EL question. >> He didn't hear the first part. >> I didn't hear the first >> question over
144here. >> What's the question? >> Um I I think it's I I think we we keep running into a conversation about formatives and sumatives >> versus ELO's. I I don't understand why we wouldn't have a a your grade be reflective of what the what the actual standards are. The 85% makes sense. I think Angela was talking about it earlier too is if it's based off of 85% of it is based off of summitive assessments like tests projects and the 15% is based off of practice and other things of that nature. But the way it's worded, and there are teachers out there who say, "If I have to create a category that's 15% not connected to my class, I don't know how to do that." >> Yeah. >> So, that that's that's the issue with 8515
145is I think there's a some what what I think you intended to say was grades should be 85% or Jeremy 85% is based off of formative assessment. No more than that. test, quizzes, exams. >> Yeah. >> 15% in other in in other methods. >> Yeah. The idea is it it does need to be collect connected to the ELLL. That was always our goal. >> But the way it reads is is it doesn't say that. It says 85% >> not B or 15% not based off ELS. Well, a teacher reads that and they go, how in the world can I have a class that's not based off the ELO's? >> Yeah. >> Which is which is supported by by state standard. >> Correct. Yeah. So, I think what what teachers would have is practice and homework
146and projects and other things that aren't necessarily for um summitative formal assessments. >> Yeah. >> But again, I think when you formalize that, you get into the weeds of a lot of different >> Yeah. teachers where they're like, "Well, I use 80 and I use 90 and and so I think it becomes again we're back into the weeds too much of it of of >> making that determination where I could hear one teacher say >> I think it's 75 and I listen to them and they have a great reason and rationale and I can listen to another teacher says I have 95 and they have a great rationale." So I think when you start doing that, you really hamstring the teachers of landing on a spot that they feel comfortable with, which ultimately is where
147we want them to be able to communicate effectively to their students and to their parents how their students are going to be evaluated. Make sure that it's fair. Make sure that it's transparent and that it's according to the standards. >> See, Trent, it depends on how you define mastery. Okay, forget that. >> This is what this is what Steve's been saying. >> Forget that. you know, uh, if indeed mastery would be a C or above and a C was 70%, then that's what it is. Throwing these numbers in to a teacher in the classroom, 8515, people are going to look at that, interpret that in different ways, going to cause confusion. It's going to take the teacher off their task of education. Makes no sense at all. So I think mastery, you just define what
148mastery means. That's what you do and forget these other numbers. That makes no sense. >> If we remove the 8515 from uh the you know obviously the body of that work that's being moved into the AR and we gave that flexibility back to the staff to make those determinations um for themselves. We just we just leave it out period. But but the problem I I understand what what Trent and Steve are saying. And and B, it says work in this category supports learning based on educational standards but not directly assessed by one or more of those core ELOs's. >> That doesn't make sense. >> Yeah. >> Right. And so again, I wasn't at this meeting. >> Right. >> I do want to say our teachers, I've been in this district for 15 years. We are
149a high achieving district. Our teachers have demonstrated year after year of ability and expertise in grading. And I don't want that to go unnoticed or not validated. And so I think through this process, the trust in our teachers, our ability to have our administrators address this because we have been long-term high achieving district with students that understood the grades. And I understand that that was part of the frustration was that parents and students didn't understand the grading all the time when we were transitioning from CBE. But I do believe in our teachers. I do believe in their expertise and I think with some guidance and support clarity and consistency because I think that was the other thing that you guys were looking for was consistency can be made um through this process. >> I totally
150agree. Thanks. >> Ready? Yep. So, we have a first and a second with all of the things that I've already reiterated, which I'm not going to repeat again with an addition of the 8515 not being included in that. And staff, clean it up. All in favor say I. >> Oh, wait a second. So, what about this 85? >> It's gone. It's that's gone. David, >> take that other day. >> So, the 8515 is gone. The mastery learning is still existing. That that philosophy is still existing. The body of that work is being moved into the AR. So our staff can do it. 8515 gone. >> I could support that. >> All in favor say I. >> I. All oppose. Oh, happy day. We got a unanimous there. You folks want to share. Happy birthday to
151me. Happy birthday week to me, guys. Good job. Thank you. All right, guys. We're moving on to staff reports. Item 10. Hey, do we need to take a moment? >> No. >> We just hustle through. I'm going to take Emerson's cue because he looked like he was ready to go into the next thing. Local indicators, as I've mentioned before, these are five areas that we are required to uh do sort of a self assessment uh ed services and others. We sit down, fill out uh some of the uh the documents that are for this uh assessment and that's what you see there. Um just a self assessment on those five areas. Um if you guys have any questions, I'll be more than happy to answer. I do not. Does anyone have a question on that?
152>> Thank you. Thanks. >> Item 10.2 PHD summer facilities maintenance and operations report. Thank you for being here, Don. Thank you for patiently waiting. >> No problem. >> As we deliberated, >> it's all education. >> Amen. >> Uh before you, Madame President, and the board is the um annual summer report for maintenance and operations. Um the data presented to you shows some of the major projects we've done this year. This year we included six months of vandalism data based on um items that have come up before the board. Um just to touch on a few of those for you. We're currently working at um KFax High on plumbing repairs and lighting replacement for summer projects. Um and then the list of other items that are taking place. Some of them have already been done, but
153these are the things we've we're focusing on for our summer projects this year. Uh we create our summer project list in December. So, we were able to excuse me able to get in front of some of them. So, um some of these things were completed prior to the start of summer, but they were on that original summer project list. Um for Deloro, um we are work we completed six summer projects during the spring this year. Those were all major major projects. So, there was a lot of really great work happening at Delo. Uh, for our remaining summer project, we're going to do a paint refresh in the theater. Um, for and we're also working on um, uh, some other smaller items on that campus, but nothing quite as big as the cleanup of the theater.
154Um, for Forest Hill this year, we're you've approved the track resurfacing, which starts in July. Um along with the restroom plumbing repairs, we've had a had a clogged floor drain in two of the restrooms up there for many many years and we are going to fix that this summer instead of just trying to get by for another year. Uh plaster locker room refresh is the major project for plaster. Um that includes the refresh is pretty extensive. It includes a cleaning and a priming and a painting of the room, refinishing all the benches, repair or replace plumbing as needed, replace all the lighting with new LED fixtures, prep and paint the inside and the outside of the lockers, and then also power washing all the floors so that girls locker room will look fresh and new
155when the students arrive this fall. Uh plaster school for adults, we've got some sighting repairs to portable classrooms that are definitely showing their wear. We are already starting on that. materials have been ordered and we will be doing that in-house. Um, and then district office as of Friday, we lost the HVAC unit in our server area. So, we will be releasing the HVAC unit for tech services. Um, and then as maintenance and operations as an overview, staff completed more than,200 work orders this year. Um, from January to June of 26, 226 of those were vandalism, equaling over 600 hours of labor. Um, and the main culprit was vape pins and uh, down toilets and urinal. And that's where and that's only six months of cost. That's not the full year. Uh, PARs affected maintenance and
156operations. This year we had six people take advantage of the offer and are retiring. Uh we have hired three skilled maintenance staff with a focus on HVAC, plumbing and carpentry and we completed the interview for the four skilled maintenance opening this week and I will be making a recommendation by Thursday. Um we also hired four new lead custodians. Um all of them excitedly were from in-house which is great but now we've got to go back and fill those four in-house positions. So we're working on that. They closed last night. So, we will be interviewing next week. And that is maintenance and operations >> in a nutshell. >> That's quickly. And if anybody wants details on any of the projects or anything you see happening out there, feel free to call our office. I'm happy to
157meet anyone out there that needs to be met and um I'll happily go over it with them. >> Can I ask you about the the Forest Hill track? You said that was happening in July. Yes. >> Is that going to interfere at all with football and other events happening that so just in there down >> being done during the two week dark >> where it won't affect anything? >> Awesome. >> Yeah. >> Awesome. Well, I'm going to cross my fingers that it stays on and drag >> with you. >> Okay. >> And Madam President, if I may, just a couple things. Um, I'm kind of into the facilities thing and I mean things I've seen and I'm emailing Don's already got work orders in place. Don's already got a plan that I'm glad to hear
158that drain in Forest Hill that has been a a problem probably since the building was built >> pretty close. Yeah. >> Um is going to get resolved. So I mean I've seen a dramatic increase in just how good our facilities look. So kudos to you and your team. >> And I do want to point out also 678 hours to deal with vandalism is 678 hours of preventive maintenance that is not occurring. So that's leading to roof leaks and you know, who knows, water damage, dry rot, whatever we're not doing on a regular basis. This prevents that. And this goes back to I mean, it's a it's a thing we need to talk about, but it's it's a culture thing with, you know, kids, take pride in your school. Don't vandalize your learning institution, >> right?
159>> Because this is money that comes directly from them. >> Yeah. >> We put a vape pen receptacle in each stall. Yeah, >> it's it's called a trash can. We finally realized what that was. >> Those don't work. >> No, apparently not. But no, we actually we researched those and then it it's a garbage can. Like it's what it is. >> It's basically a small metal garbage can that you would use that said vape pin on it. We installed those in the male restrooms. Nobody used them. >> They still flush them down the toilet. >> 15. >> Yeah. Trinidad pulled 15 out of one sewer line >> and then was back there three days later. >> Which sewer line? >> Plaster. >> Perfect. >> So, kudos to y'all. I mean, I think I've I've asked
160a lot of you this year and you guys have responded and I appreciate it. >> Thank you. You know, I'm I'm curious, you know, how often that type of information is articulated to these kids and they understand the the dollars associated with what they're doing. Like they wouldn't do that to their own vehicle, you know, if they had a vehicle or to their own precious items, >> their bathroom at home. >> What? Right. Or their bathroom at home, you know, their parents would Yeah. annihilate them. So, I'm just wondering what we can do to address that and have a campaign around that. They they need to understand that what they're doing is impacting their school. >> Yeah. >> Um and their opportunities and the fun great things. I don't know, maybe we do an incentive
161like around, hey, we're going to whatever it costs us to clean out the vape pens, we throw a party if that we don't have one vape pen flushed or I don't know. Like, we need to come up with something. the most vape pens turned into the office by students. >> Just kidding. That's a joke. >> They're not going to do that. Okay. I don't know. I I'm just thinking I feel like there's a way there's a way to to make it more fun and and make and let's use that money more wisely. Let's let's find an incentive for these kids to buy in. I don't know. Things to think about. >> Agree. >> Thank you so much, Don. You're welcome. Appreciate you. All right. Item 11, board calendar coordinating announcements. Y'all, we made it through
162the summer and and a busy June. So, our next regular board meeting is not until August 18th, 2026. So much going on. Um, anything that the board would like to add or any events? Uh, are we going to be invited to the um new student board member? Um, are we going to do a reception this year? >> In the past, they would have their training and then sometimes at the end of the training, the board would be invited to >> Can we get that? Didn't happen last year. >> Yeah. Yeah. My only experience is just we just train them this year and send them on their way. But obviously, we weren't spending anything on anything. So, >> are there families being called in at all at the end of the day this at this training?
163This >> were just invited, you know, when they did took the oath of office. >> Okay. just for that. Okay. Okay. Well, if that changes and you want to send out an invite so we can pop in and and meet these kids before they're with us at the >> jazz it up. >> That'd be awesome. These young adults. All right. Anything else? All right. Item 12. Do I have a motion? >> Move to approve. >> We have first by Trusty Duncan >> and a second by Trusty Lake to adjurnn. All in favor say I. >> I. All oppose. Motion carries. 40. Good night everybody. Thank you.