001Good evening. We'll call the April 27th, 2026th meeting of the ASD School Board to order. Uh the time is 6:03 here in the board room. Present are uh all school board members, Jacobs, Bellamy, Donley, Higgins, Holloman, Lessons, and Wilson. Uh we've called ourselves to order and um conducted our roll call. Member Wilson, will you please lead us in the flag salute and then read our land acknowledgement. I pledge 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. We acknowledge that we gather here today on the traditional lands of the Dena'ina people of Upper Cook Inlet. For thousands of years, the Dena'ina people have been and continue to be the stewards of this land. ASD is
002committed to diversity and inclusion, and it is with honor and respect that we recognize all indigenous people who live and learn in our community. Thank you, Member Wilson. We want to welcome you to our meeting and thank you for attending and supporting the work of the Anchorage School District on this board. The board thanks students, parents, teachers, staff, school business partners, and the entire community for your investment in our district with your time, your talent, and your tax dollars. We have an agenda in front of us to board members. Um we have some technology issues, and so you should have paper copies in front of you. Is there a motion to approve the agenda as drafted? I move to approve the agenda as drafted. Second. Motion made by Member Bellamy, seconded by Member Holloman. Um
003is there any discussion? Seeing none, um we will have a There's no we'll consider the agenda approved as drafted. Okay, seeing no opposition, the agenda is approved. Uh we'll move on to item B, public comments. I want to welcome you to the board's opportunity this evening for public comments. Um during public comments, the board members will not answer questions or engage in discussion with members of the public. This is your time to speak and the board's time to listen. We welcome the public to observe and contribute to our meetings. However, to be productive, our meetings must be structured and civil. We utilize Robert's Rules of Order for uh to organize our meetings. Specific provisions of Robert's Rules of Order that pertain to public testimony include do not attack a member or speaker's motives. Please no
004profanity or foul language. Refrain from disturbing the meeting. No cheering, applause, outbursts, or waving of signs or posters. If you have handouts you wish to share with the board, please hand them to Ms. Sullivan who's seated to my left. Additional details and information can be found on the handout located at the door regarding audience participation and the rules of our board room. Okay. >> [sighs and gasps] >> As always, we'll begin with our student Um in addition tonight, we have a technology issue that's preventing us from displaying um for our testifiers displaying a um a 3-minute clock. And so, um you'll be hearing a a bell chime at 30 seconds left. And so, please time yourself accordingly. After your 30 seconds has expired, um will uh the microphone will cease to operate and then we'll
005move on to the next testifier. So, again, listen for the bell that will indicate your 30 seconds left left. Okay. We have um a student testifier tonight who we'll call first, um Lucas Jesperson along with um Michael Jesperson. You could both please come forward. Welcome, Lucas. You have 3 minutes. Please begin when you're ready. To the Anchorage School Board, Superintendent, and Administration. The recent decision to Anchorage and drastic cuts to music programs across the district is atrocious. The music has music has numerous benefits for students, such as improving performance in school and providing motivation to come to school in the first place. And we cannot be sure of it the voices of those affected are being adequately heard under the circumstances of these cuts. Participation in music classes has been proven to improve test scores.
006A 2019 study by the American Psychological Association concluded that students who participate in music classes scored higher on tests across math, English, and science. The reasoning for these cuts cuts to music programs is that money is short and academics need to be prioritized. However, when funding is largely tied to test scores, first cutting classes that improve test scores will simply recreate the problem we have now. In addition, music provides many students motivation to come to school that they would otherwise lack. East High School East Anchorage High School's own principal has said that if if he had not participated in band during high school, well, he would never would have graduated. If music is cut, we will be dooming many students to a similar fate as the one on East's principal would have had, which in
007turn will again cause funding to drop. Finally, in times when your program as must be cut, it is only just us to have the voices of those affected both heard and considered. But of the three normal meetings from the announcement of these cuts cuts to the end of school year, two fall on concert days for several affected schools. Even this special meeting, which does not have the aforementioned problem, undoubtedly has significantly lower participation by those affected than otherwise would have happened, as this meeting only appeared on the official calendar just yesterday. How can we say that these cuts are fair when a significant portion of of those affected did have no opportunity to speak their voices? With music providing these benefits and more to students, and it being impossible to say for certain that those
008affected are being adequately heard, I plead with you to reconsider these cuts to music across the district. Thank you for your testimony. Uh welcome, Mr. Jesperson. If you'd like to testify, you have 3 minutes. Thank you. Um I do not play an instrument. My six siblings all play instruments. They all played uh at least the piano and one other instrument, and they'd learned them in high school. Uh um all six of them are at or very near millionaire status. The one kid that did sports, me, nowhere near where they are financially or educationally. They all have at least two two graduate degrees. I don't have two graduate degrees. I did go to college. My dad, as a young man, had played piano twice on national TV and later as a retiree, well, near retirement, he
009was invited to be in a choir that toured internationally. He's been on all five major continents singing. Um he also retired as a professor of history and music. So, music's been a big part of my life. Even though I can't carry a tune or stay in beat, I relax when music gets played around me. I have two children that graduated from this district. I used to love to hear them practice their flute and violin and piccolo in my house. I'd even have them come into my room and let them close the door so the others didn't have to hear. Especially when they were playing their scales and tuning up and stuff. It's just relaxing and it helps. Harvard University has done over 30 studies in the past 20 years that show people who play instruments
010do better in math, science, and a bunch of other subjects. But math and science is where we don't do very well as a as a state or district. Cutting music is ridiculous when it can it makes people better in other subjects. Um the National Center for Statistics shows that the average school district spends 6.7% of their budget on administration. We spend 12. We could easily cut and some some out of administration to keep the music programs or at least not hurt them as bad as they are. Why would we want to do anything that would hurt our students' chances of doing better in school? It's ridiculous to cut music. I applaud your recent decision to cut transportation for some of the travel in sports, but I implore you, do not cut music anywhere. Thank you.
011Thank you for your testimony. Uh that completes our student testimony portion. We'll move on to community speakers to be heard. Our first two speakers are Todd Barton and Therese Holtz. You could both please come forward. Welcome. You have 3 minutes. Please begin when you're ready. Good evening. My name is Todd Barton, and I'm honored to be the band director at Betty Davis East High School. Why do we teach music in schools? When you study math or you study English, you have finite areas areas of your brain that are firing to be able to process information. When you study music, you have to take this international language of music notation. You have to spatially recognize the notes. You then have to mathematically calculate and subdivide the beat for the rhythms. All of this has to then
012be processed and put out into breath control and physical motion to create emotion in the music. When this happens, your brain is firing everywhere at once. And because of that, your corpus callosum, which is the part of the brain that transfers data from side to side, must grow. Over years of playing instrument, that physical growth of your corpus callosum allows musicians to process data faster and more more information faster. So, the vast majority of your doctors, your CEOs, are musicians because they can process information better. Our music students have the best attendance, best grades, and best graduation rates. And it's not because of the good kids. It's because their brains work differently. And also because they have something where they want to be. What we're doing in the district right now, in these cuts, is
013going to be devastating to our community. We're taking out half of our elementary music program. We're taking out sixth grade music. We're taking out and cutting one of the best choral programs in the nation of West High School down to two. And we're taking East High School, which is the only program that has a marching band, the only program that combines with its orchestra to create symphonic works, a program that is one of the top performing programs getting superior rating 2 weeks ago in festival, and is the the place where UAA music education majors come to study their craft. Every US UA music teacher comes in during their methods classes and works with my students. Because teachers having experience before they get out is the most important thing. So what you're doing right now is
014not going to work. The data shows and we've have we've done this before in the '70s and late '80s school programs were cut and that the the amount of people who dropped in attendance and the graduation dropped by eight 17.3%. It was financially devastating to districts. And it won't work again. I'm imploring you. Please give our kids a chance. Fix this. Put the sixth grade music back in. I know you have to do the seventh period dance probably the death sentence for my program. Barton Thank you for your testimony. Welcome. You have 3 minutes. Please begin when you're ready. Good evening. My name is Teresa Holtz. If you've read your email in the past week, some of this will sound familiar, but I think it's important that I set aside my fear of public speaking
015and address you directly tonight. I appreciate being able to speak tonight because I'll be at my son's band concert on the 5th. My father, two brothers, myself, and my four children all attended East High and only one of them remains currently finishing up his freshman year. Three of my four children were or are in band. The outlier was in orchestra. And I've seen firsthand how important it is to them. A reason to attend school and try their best. I am here tonight to address the incredibly poor, unethical, and inequitable decision to do away with band at Betty Davis East Anchorage High School due to the unnecessary displacement of Todd Barton who is possibly the best band teacher this district has seen. Do I actually need to address equity? Do I really need to discuss the
016fact that if a child is born in Mountain View, which is where I grew up the public school band is probably their only option to play an instrument, to dress up, to perform that a student born on Southside not only has access to wealth and private lessons, but will also continue to have high school band this year and the potential scholarships that go with it? That removing this basic and treasured elective that has been present at East since 1962 is not only barring poor children from the arts, but potentially destroying their only shot at affording higher education. Band is more than a class for elective credit. The band students foster a greater community by playing at pep assemblies, community concerts, football games, and basketball games. They march on the field. They bring joy and excitement.
017Now there will be a deafening silence in our community, but only on the East side. Attendance will decrease. Grades will suffer. This isn't an extra fun thing like pottery or frankly an add-on job like an instructional coach. Not to take away from other positions or activities, but band is more than a core elective. Band is a safe place for kids who might not have another safe place, outlet, or reason for going to school. A chance to thrive and be part of the bigger picture. A chance at higher education. It is not too late to change course and I hope that you will do something to not only save band, but also retain Mr. Barton at East High for many years to come. Thank you. Thank you for your testimony. Our next two community speakers are
018Nancy Bale and Kimberly Hayes. You both can please come forward. Um Miss Bale, if you could hold just a moment before you begin your testimony. Okay, welcome. Yeah, you have 3 minutes. Please begin when you >> Thank you. Good evening. My name is Nancy Bale. I'm a 20-year veteran of school nursing having spent my entire career at Whaley School and the last few years at the ACT adult student program. Tonight, I want to support the deferrals that are under consideration to any of the cuts made in the middle school model and I want to thank you and appreciate the efforts have been made in that direction. In addition, I'd like to request another deferral. Please defer implementation of the regional nursing model currently proposed under budget guidelines. Thank you for restoring several nursing positions. Because
019of those restorations, we are not that short of positions and do not need to implement the regional nursing model in 2026 27. Why am I suggesting this? First, we have reason to be optimistic about continued restoration of staff positions given our current legislature's proposal of additional operating funds this session and an upcoming election with a probability of electing education-friendly legislators. Maybe I'm optimistic, but I choose to believe that. Second, continued right-sizing that you will do and your successors will make it possible to continue operating on a one nurse, one school level with some sharing and adjusting, but no need for major change. Finally, implementation of the regional model is taking more time than anticipated with a large number of operating procedures and policies still in process unknowns and complications continue particularly concerning delegation scope of
020nursing practice and uncertain changes in our job descriptions. Nurses will soon be going into summer vacation with only partial knowledge of how they will begin the year in August. And how will the district hire to these developing job descriptions and roles? I'm sorry to reveal to you that roll out of the proposed regional nursing model as we currently know it has affected the morale of our line nurses. Some are considering resignation. We can all do better by taking a breath, deferring the plan, cobbling together a way to address nursing care among our schools in 2026 27 and carefully planning for the future over the next many months. Let us take the time to consider what school nursing really means to the district, to our students, and to our staff. Thank you for your testimony. Nancy
021and Kimberly Hayes come forward. Uh Miss Hayes, welcome. I see your telephone. If you could hit star six to unmute and then you have 3 minutes. Please begin when you're ready. Welcome. Thank you so much. Good evening, members of the school board and additionally members of the administration who are there tonight. My name is Kim Hayes. I'm a parent here in the Anchorage School District right now, a student at Rogers Park Elementary and Diamond High School. I'm here to speak about the proposed elimination of transportation for students in the highly gifted program at Rogers Park Elementary. I want to be clear this is not about buses. This is about access to an appropriate education. The highly gifted program serves approximately 150 to 170 students from all across Anchorage, the entire city of Anchorage. It is
022the district's only elementary program specifically designed for students with these academic needs that cannot be met in a typical classroom. These students are not choosing this program as an enrichment opportunity. It actually exists because they require a different level and approach of instruction. Because this program is centralized at Rogers Park, families are coming from all over our city. Transportation is not a convenience in this case. It is what makes the program accessible. Without these buses pardon me. Sorry. Our working [clears throat] families cannot bring their children to school. It's simply not feasible. Anchorage is a large geographic area and for working parents, single parent households, and families without flexible schedules, this change will effectively remove their child's ability to attend this needs-based program that they are entitled to attend. We would be turning a public
023program into one that is only accessible to families with time and resources. I very much understand that the district is facing dire financial challenges including a significant budget deficit. But not all cuts have the same impact. Eliminating transportation for a centralized needs-based program does more than reduce costs. It removes access for many of the very students the program is designed to serve. Out of more than 4,500 gifted students in our district, only a small number are in this highly specialized program. Preserving transportation for these students is a relatively small investment with a profound impact on their education and well-being. Public education should be about access, equity, and meeting students where they are. I respectfully ask you to reconsider this decision and work as a team with the district to find creative models to preserve transportation
024for the highly gifted program at Rogers Park. Thank you so much for your time tonight. And thank you for your testimony. Our next two community speakers to be heard are Casey Holly and Ellen James. Welcome. You have 3 minutes. Please begin when you're ready. Thank you, sir. To the ASD School Board, thank you for this opportunity to provide this testimony. I further express my gratitude to ASD's administration and the superintendent. As it's already been stated, my name is Casey Holly. I'm an active duty soldier stationed on JBER. During the last school year, I received communication from Orion Elementary that my oldest daughter had test scores that qualified her to attend the highly gifted program at Rogers Park. As excited as my wife and I became, one of the primary questions I asked was, "Does my
025wife or I have to bring her to school each day?" This was because due to her schedule and mine and the fact that we have a separate bus stop for another child. When told there was a bus route, my wife and I were ecstatic. We could not believe it. My daughter has tested well in two previous schools. However, the schools did not offer any sort of highly gifted program. My daughter has felt boredom in previous classes because of the lack of challenge. We are personally thankful for for the Rogers Park bus. Since being at Rogers Park, my daughter has grown more educationally because of the challenge she receives. Fast forward to now on when there is the possibility of the Rogers Park on JBER being cut. Due to my daily duty schedule and my wife's
026schedule, we will no longer be able to transport my daughter to Rogers Park every day. This is certainly going to be a detriment to my daughter's education. I can say with confidence it's also going to affect the future of JBER families that can qualify for this same highly gifted program. When I told my daughter that there was the possibility that she was going to have to go back to a regular class with more children, she became very emotional. The highly gifted program has been great for my daughter. It would pain us greatly for me to take that away from her. Higher education is not a given in this world, especially for military kids that move more often. As a board as this board begins discussions, I plead with you that you please reconsider cutting this
027bus for JBER, Girdwood, and Eagle River. I guarantee you this will not just affect the nail and here. It will affect the future of any military families that could possibly utilize that bus and the education that their that their child their children could receive. I thank you for this opportunity to speak to you all tonight. Thank you for giving me this opportunity to help build a better future for our children. Thank you for your testimony. Welcome. You have 3 minutes. Please begin when you're ready. Hi, my name is Ellen Hynes and I'm testifying on the proposed elimination for students Sorry, the proposed elimination of transportation for students in the HG program at Rogers Park. The HG program, as you've already heard, is a needs-based program and in the absence of transportation, many of our students'
028basic educational needs will go unmet. Families with privilege can manage to figure out their own transportation solutions, but for many in our program, just getting to their nearest middle school, which is how the buses currently operate, is challenge enough. If we want an equitable public school system, and I think we do, we need to provide access to our needs-based programs. Having an IQ at either end of the bell curve is rare and it happens across racial, socioeconomic, and geographic areas. ASD serves an amazingly diverse population of children from Girdwood to Eagle River and yet the HG elementary program exists in just one school. And I can tell you from my own experience that currently most neighborhood schools are simply not equipped to meet the needs of our HG kiddos. I was told in no uncertain
029terms by my daughter's ASD neighborhood preschool teacher, multiple teachers at our title one neighborhood school, and even the principal of that school, that my daughter's needs were not going to be met there. My daughter attended the first grade WIN group for advanced readers as a preschooler and when I asked if she could continue this type of accommodation in kindergarten, I was told that it was against district policy. I personally have explored several options to meet my child's needs outside of the HG program and short of homeschooling, nothing exists. My daughter attended kindergarten last year at the HG program. There were eight kindergarteners from across the district and it was an incredibly diverse, multilingual, and multiracial group of kiddos and families. Because the program is qualification or needs-based, each primary grade accrues more students with a
030big bump after second grade due to universal screening for giftedness. Universal screening successfully identifies kids who need this intervention, but only transportation makes the program accessible. Dismantling the current bus route will be devastating not only for our special program and the remarkable children that it serves, but across the district in a thousand ripples from problem behaviors to unmet potential to skewed beliefs about what giftedness even looks like. So, in closing, I urge you to consider the outside impacts that upending these few bus routes will have on the district as a whole. Thank you very much. Thank you for your testimony. Our next two community speakers are Amanda F. Thompson and Matthew Oh, sorry. I didn't excuse me. Speakers are both telephonic. So, Amanda Thompson first and then Matthew Jones. Ms. Thompson, if you could hit
031star six to unmute and then begin when you're ready. You'll have 3 minutes. Good evening, school board members. Okay. And ASD administration. My name is Amanda Thompson and speaking on my own behalf tonight. Um at least one of your members was part of the amazing music program we had at Service High School back in the '90s. And that music hall was alive with such beautiful sounds that I could hear every hour walking through that hall. So, let's fast forward to today. Arts instruction at ASD has been decreasing every single year. It appears to be a program out of change beyond budget concerns. The arts are not being seen for the good benefits that they bring all students in this district. My 1.0 art position at Hanshew was cut last year. This year, you've heard that
032East High is losing their band director. There are so many more cuts. Eight elementary schools have lost their visual arts teacher for next year. Elementary music time is decreasing across the district. So, keeping the arts at levels that allow full participation by all interested students can assist you in meeting your board and district goals in graduation, attendance, and math score growth. So, here are some key findings. I emailed this to you all board members. Um the key findings are from a Missouri Alliance for Arts Education study. They really looked at student achievement and participation in the arts. Some key findings. Attendance rates are higher for districts with higher levels of student enrollment in the arts when compared to districts with lower levels of arts participation. Levels of student participation in fine arts classes are significantly
033correlated to student proficiency in mathematics. And the tests that they are the MAP tests. Um standardized test scores are significantly higher in communication arts. Um they found that you can also show higher graduation rates and fewer disciplinary infractions than districts with lower levels of arts education. Um so, really what I'm asking is just to please pause the cuts to arts teacher for a year while something sustainable can really be crafted. The head arts teacher's input um we don't know this plan that the ASD administration came up with. There's this hasn't been mapped out. We don't know how this is actually going to work. How arts teachers can actually have the prep time to be able to make it work. Um just slightly different after listening to this testimony um regarding the transportation that's being cut
034off for choice schools for this Rogers Park program. Um the state does allocate funds per student just for transportation. We would like as a community to really know where these transportation funds that are attached to each student being allocated to. Um please provide those answers to us. Thank you. Thank you for your testimony. All right. Our next speaker is Matthew Jones, who's also telephonic. Mr. Jones, if you could hit star six to unmute and then begin when you're ready. You have 3 minutes. I'm sorry, we're not seeing Mr. Jones online. So, we'll move to the next two community speakers who are Lanae Winfrey and Susan Ritter. If you could both please come forward. Welcome. You have 3 minutes. Please begin when you're ready. Hi, my name is Lanae Winfrey, ASD school nurse. I'm here to
035testify in support of delaying implementation of the middle school model. As our district has learned time and again, community notification and feedback is critical to successful implementation. It is imperative to include stakeholders in the process and not unilaterally make rash decisions even in response to emergency funding challenges. I would also like to propose the delay of the regional nursing model for the same reasons. I cannot thank the distinguished members of the school board enough for restoring over 18 nursing positions. It was so close to returning to the one nurse one school model that I believe the community does not understand the district is indeed moving forward with regional nursing. Even in the early planning stages, the past 2 months, nurses have been pulled and or positions left unfilled from students from schools who have students
036with type 1 diabetes. Our health care services team has been doing their best to fill positions, but it's turned into a {quote} "lesser of two evil" situation as to which nurses to send where. It is both inequitable and unsafe, indeed life-threatening for some students. In one situation, the nurse canceled her planned leave to rush back to her school. In addition to being unsafe, I project a huge cost offset to the Anchorage Fire Department due to unnecessary 911 calls being made by unlicensed personnel doing their best to handle a safety concern one of your ASD nurses could have handled without 911 services. Mat-Su has not and is not implementing the regional nursing model for a good reason. Delaying implementation of the regional nursing model would allow the district to be proactive instead of reactive. Ideally, returning
037to the one nurse one school model remains the safest option. One of my ASD teachers long long long ago taught me never to come to the table with a problem and not have at least one solution. So, I would like some consideration in regards to delaying spending of the millions of dollars being spent on secure vestibules in elementary school specifically to protect our students from safety concerns on the outside. It doesn't make any sense to do that while we're dismantling safety from within. Thank you for your time. Thank you for your testimony. Welcome, you have 3 minutes, please begin when you're ready. Dr. Good evening. Hi, everyone. Susan Ritter from West High School. Good evening school board members, Dr. Ryan. When the arts are eliminated in our public schools, everyone suffers. I know you know
038this. You're backed up to the wall during some really tough financial times, but cutting music is the most awful thing that you could do. Previous speakers have already provided great testimony regarding the value and the purpose and the need to have music in our schools. My personal story is my daughter started playing piano when she was in kindergarten and played all the way through high school. She in school elementary school, she sang in the the school choir. But the piano was really important to her and it was a valuable outlet for her when she was doing her academic work and she graduated from West High School in the top 20 of her class and she went on to college and graduated as a mechanical engineer and now works in Europe for a aerospace company and
039she continues to play piano because that's her outlet. Music is an outlet that our students need to have access to and learn about so that in the future down the road, we don't know where it's going to take them, but their opportunity is here in public education and that's where we need to support our kids providing the beginnings of a program for their ongoing educational life. So, with that said, my I'd like to switch briefly to the nursing situation again. Um as a life skills teacher, we need our nurses in our schools because we have our most vulnerable students needing medical care and we cannot afford having a nurse not in the building for any type of emergency that might come up or routine tube feeding or an other other event that might be considered
040an emergency. The consistency of having a nurse for a life skills program is incredibly important. So, I urge you to maintain our music programs in our schools and to maintain the one nurse one school model. Thank you very much for your time and please make these decisions work for our kids. Thank you for your testimony. Our next two community speakers are Stacy Dixon and Catherine Kim. I welcome you, you have 3 minutes, please begin when you're ready. Thanks. Good evening, everyone. My name is Stacy Dixon. I am the parent of two kids in the highly gifted program. One is at Rogers Park in third grade and one is at Romig in sixth grade. Um I'm here to speak as Kim and Ellen and Casey have spoke about the cutting of transportation for these kids in
041the highly gifted program. And I'm here tonight as a parent of two kids, but I'm also here for all the other parents who aren't here because they work or they are far away and they don't have time to be here. Um I think a lot of people assume that gifted education is um is a nice to have and that kids who are highly gifted will do just fine if they are not given special services. But in the case of I know my kids and a lot of other kids that go to school with my kids, this is just not the case. These kids need specialized learning opportunities and we are so lucky here in Alaska to have Rogers Park. The school is a lifeline for so many families who who would otherwise their kids would
042just be withering away in a traditional classroom. Both of my kids' teachers at their wonderful neighborhood school and their principal told me over and over again that our kids could not be accommodated at that school. There is no other option for them in this district and we are so lucky to have this program and I don't think you guys understand. Maybe you do understand. But there's no other program like the highly gifted program at Rogers Park and taking away bus transportation means that the only kids who are going to be able to access it are those with the means to do so. When families can't get there, the kids don't have access to that program and they absolutely need it. Um while it may seem like that this is just something for kids who are
043really smart, this is not a convenient program for most of us. I live in South Anchorage. Catherine lives in Muldoon. Like this is not an easy program to get to, especially when you have middle school kids at Romig and an hour and a half difference in times in start times. Um we would love to be able to keep this program thriving. If you're going to take transportation away, it means 46% of our kids are not going to be able to get to school. And as Cath as as Kim Hayes said, this program reflects the the tapestry that is Anchorage. It's not just one type of kid that is at that school. And honestly, like principals and teachers in traditional classrooms don't want our kids in their classrooms. They're very difficult to have and they're very
044difficult to accommodate and this is a wonderful program and I hope that we can keep transportation alive for it. Thank you. Thank you for your testimony. I welcome you, you have 3 minutes, please begin when you're ready. My name is Helen My name is Catherine. Um I can't I can read English very quickly, so I will just briefly summarize my letter. I gave it to you guys. But um I I included more detail in it, so I'd really appreciate it if you could take a look. Um I Okay. I'm a parent of a four kids and three of my kids have been in a um ATG program since 2017. I am also studying early childhood education. I'm here to ask you to please restore funding for ATG program transportation. For family like mine, transportation is
045uh not just convenience. Like Stacy said, it is necessary. I have a children in different school, West, Romig and Rogers Park and morning are very busy. The school bus has been the only real stay way for my children to attend the ATG program. Over the past 8 years, I have closely watched this program. I have seen dedicated teachers who made a strong difference, especially for young student, kindergarten and first grade. But many of those teacher have left. I am concerned that um their experience not being passed on. If a bus transportation is removed, many family will not be able to stay in a program. This will reduce enrollment and weaken the program. This is also an equity issue. Without transportation, access depend on the family situation, not on the teachers not on not on the
046child's need. As a student in early childhood education, it's hard for me to accept this situation. What I've learned and what I'm seeing right now is feel very different. So, for ACT program student, this program is not optional. It is necessary for their learning like all student. They have the right to the education that meet their need. I respectfully ask you to reconsider this decision and support access to the ACT program. Thank you. Thank you for your testimony. Our last community speaker to be heard tonight is Michelle Jesperson. Welcome. You have 3 minutes. Please begin when you're ready. Good evening. My name is Michelle Jesperson. I am the parent of a student at East High band. It is a grievous decision to cut the music programs across the district including but not limited to the
047termination of the East High band program and sweeping cuts to music programs in elementary school. Music provides both physical and mental health benefits, enhances the development of early skills in young children, and many students affected by these cuts cannot afford any alternative options. According to the National Library of Medicine, music has been proven to improve people's mental health as well as provide numerous physical benefits such as improved heart rates and motor skills, and enhancement of the immune system. When music provides such benefits, we will be hurting our students both in body and mind if we cut their music programs. East High School, which is facing a total cut of its band program, has over 2/3 of its student population eligible for free lunches according to the National Center for Education Statistics. If over 2/3 of
048the school is in financial situation that they need this form of assistance, then they likely cannot afford alternatives to school band programs. Therefore, school programs may be the only access many students have to physical and mental health benefits benefits provided by musical education. Further, the California Learning Resource Network describes several benefits of music regarding skills developed early on in school such as pattern recognition, language processing, mathematical reasoning, and spatial temporal reasoning. With significantly reduced presence of music classes in elementary schools, students will lack this crucial aid to development, which may cause them to struggle in school as they get older. Between the health benefits of music classes and the lack of alternatives for many students, the benefits of musical classes to brain development early on in school, I beseech you to reconsider these cuts to
049the music in the schools. Thank you for your testimony. That completes our public testimony this evening. Move on to action items. We have a first item C1 is our uncontested student hearing. Is there a motion from the board? Mr. Chair, I move to accept the uh superintendent's uh recommendation on student item I don't have the number. Do you have the number? Do we give a number? 123? 163, I'm sorry. Thank you. Second. 0521. So, let me do it again. Miss Chair, I recommend I I move that we uh accept the superintendent's recommendation on student number 1450521. Okay. Uh second. Motion was made by a member Bellamy to accept administration's recommendation uh by member Bellamy, seconded by member Holliman. Is there discussion? Seeing none, we'll have a voice vote on this matter. Member Wilson? Yes. >>
050Member Higgins? Yes. Member Holliman? Yes. Member Lessons? Yes. Member Bellamy? Yes. Member Bellamy? Yes. President Jacobs? >> Yes. That item is adopted by vote of 7 to 0. Our next item action item C2 is AST memorandum number 163, the middle school 7-day period one year reinstatement. Um is there a motion? I move to accept uh memorandum the recommendation on middle schools memorandum number I don't know that number. 163. That's the 163. Thank you. Second. A motion to approve was made by member Bellamy, seconded by member Holliman. Um we'll open the floor to Dr. Bryant. Dr. Bryant, do you you and your team have any any information to present? Yes, Mr. President. We'll go ahead and pull up a PowerPoint and while we pull that up, I just like to remind the board that essentially tonight
051we're asking for a delay in the implementation of a six period schedule and to keep the schedules in middle school as it currently is at seven periods because the seven period day, while an extra cost to the district, does provide opportunities particularly to our special education and to our English language learner students and more, and we would benefit from the additional year to consult with the community and various groups to ensure that we have a successful implementation. I do want to be very clear to the public and to the board that this proposal is not the result of additional revenue. I want to say that again. This is not the result of any new revenue to the district. We're making a very intentional trade within the current dollars that we have in order to facilitate
052this. Specifically, the two funding sources that allow this to be possible would one be something that we call hold back teachers. We've been using that term a lot publicly, but I want to be very clear what that is. We use the term hold back teacher to essentially talk about full-time employee positions that are for class size relief. So, in addition to the dollars that we put towards the people to teacher ratio, we set aside some additional teacher positions that we can use to resolve class size bubbles. So, typically the district budgets through the standard budget process at least a couple of dozen positions for this purpose. With that said, this proposal makes a trade using positions that would probably be used for middle school class size relief we're now using to maintain the schedule. That's
053an intentional trade that is not the result of extra revenue. The other piece and one of the reasons why we have our senior director special education here is that we are repurposing potentially if this is approved dollars from a special education grant that would be used to pay for full-time employees providing special education services. And as we shared at the previous board meeting, we consulted with legal and our special education experts to ensure that we're following all regulations related to supplanting versus supplementing and the maintenance of efforts as it pertains to these types of dollars. So, again, it's very important that the public and the board understand that this is a trade to facilitate something that could result in positive opportunities for over 7,500 students that attend AST middle schools. So, with that said, I
054am going to hand it off to our team to brief the board and the public on what exactly we're talking about and asking the board. So, good evening. Um what we're going to do is we're going to go through some of the slides that we went through last week and then we're going to give you some stats as to what um we'll come back at middle school by going to the seven period day and kind of how that staffing works and give you actual numbers for that. So, just to recap why we're here um uh Mr. Zwadny, you want to do this one? Um so, just to reiterate some of the the context around um us bringing forward this memo as as our building leaders and the division started working through a six period day
055for middle school, um some some pretty considerable constraints came forward pretty quickly. Um obviously, the first being as you um remove one period um from every student schedule in middle school, it really starts to limit the opportunities and flexibility that students would normally enjoy in a middle school education setting. Um one of the biggest um hurdles that we ran into was providing access to our special programs, our electives, and even um in some cases just uh required core classes um for some of our students um who may receive services through special education, who may receive services through English language learners. Um we saw some of our immersion students' schedules um were running into conflicts where they they having to potentially um choose between the immersion experience and fine arts um or even CTE and some
056other um middle school experiences that really are a um a driving force for our families. Um so as we start to limit those experiences for students um at all grade levels, one of the um you know one of the almost guaranteed experiences we have for our middle school students in sixth grade is for fine arts. And um we found that we were not going to be able to provide fine arts for our sixth grade students without some um pretty drastic changes to board policy and administrative regulation. Um one of the key um qualities of a middle school experience for students that um that is the need for that seventh period provides teachers opportunities to discuss students and really keep their track on on our students before they fall through the cracks. It allows our teachers
057to have similar students on their case load and um that seventh period for collaboration time is really important and so we're trying to find ways to get through that. Um so Sven's going to talk a little bit more about um some of the more specifics. So looking at the proposal that we brought forward last week was returning to the seven period day and retaining the 34.0 people to teacher ratio that was adopted. Um purpose around this is to allow us to improve systems to identify special education and ELL sports for the middle school students. Um determine methods for uh to provide access to electives cuz in the sixth period day we're having some access issues for electives, clearing up the priorities around programs and CTE experiences. It gives us time to actually do some planning
058and identify um kind of some creative solutions hopefully um when we're looking at the core academic needs. Um and then gathering stakeholder feedback and changes. One of the things that going to this dramatic of a change is that has happened is we need to be able to uh determine and see exactly what the what these cuts and going down to a six period day could could do and could be for the families um and we want to make sure that we're meeting all of their needs. And kind of one year's as we pause for a year um it allows time for the departments to identify some specific constraints. Um of the six period day around the core academic classes especially when those students need additional supports. Um looking at the special education and ELL needs
059and being able to uh kind of plan through those and add things into core that maybe we can do for all students instead of uh pulling kids out for some of those uh supports that they need in special education or ELL. And then um really looking at what are we going to be eliminating when we go to six periods because as you know when we go to six periods from seven we will have to do that. Um this will give a families more advanced notice about electives that would be changing and that determined program priority prioritization like I was talking about. Um and then it's also gives us time to look at school board policy and ARs um and making it so that we can actually do some revisions around those if we need to.
060Um get a clearer understanding of high school preparedness impacts. And then determine solutions for embedding these supports like I said in the academic core areas. Um so the funding like Dr. Bryant said was moving 14 of the special education um stu uh teachers out of the general fund special ed account to the grant funded title four six B um fund um and that that's using rollover money. That is not money that is coming every year so this is why it's a one year proposal. Um utilizing the nine holdback FTE that Dr. Bryant talked about and then we put repurposing the 3.6 FTE that you all approved for zero hour in an attempt to uh solve some of the problems with the six period day early that was identified earlier on. And we're going to talk
061in the next couple slides about what it if you vote this in tonight, what actually you're going to bring back. So Joe. So um we appreciate the expedited nature of bringing this memo forward. Um one of the rationale for um this meeting tonight was we have our staffing event on Wednesday and we wanted to um provide the board an opportunity to make the decision prior to that event. Um as Sven has uh highlighted with the FTE um that we're looking for that would bring 26.6 um positions back to the middle school for next year if this is approved. And so in working with talent management, we've identified where some of our currently uh laid off and displaced employees would be returned um to which school and to which program. Um in looking at the numbers
062today um approval of this memo would remove 11 teachers from layoff status. Um that's 11 teachers that would be in the district next year. Um five five of those would move from layoff status to displaced status and another six would move from layoff directly back to their school. Uh and so those employees would not be in involved in the um staffing meeting on Wednesday because they would be returned for next year. It removes seven teachers who are currently on the displaced status and moves them back to their middle schools. And it provided us an opportunity to um increase the FTE amount of nine of our teachers. Um some ways that our schools um make cuts to to staffing is to decrease a teacher from say a 1.0 to a 0.8. Go from five sections to
063four. Um with this increased um FTE, we are able to um bring nine of those teachers back to full-time for next year. Um which will help with retention as well. Um looking across the the different curricular areas that are impacted here, um we would return four teachers to fine arts. Those are band, choir, and orchestra positions. We return two teachers to Spanish language classes at two of our schools. Um two teachers return to immersion to provide a full immersion um program experience at two of our schools. Uh we would bring back um two CTE teachers and then um we would bring back teachers um back into the core for language arts, math, and social studies as well as creating um more positions. So that is the gist of our very short presentation here um knowing
064that we had talked about it last week and we'd be open to any questions if you had them. Thank you Dr. Bryant team. Uh we'll move to questions. Member Lessons. Um I do have a few questions. Excuse me, I do have a few questions but if we could go back to the last slide will you also be reinstating science teachers as well in the core academics? I don't see them listed. There weren't any current displaced teachers for science. Though there would be a couple openings. Okay, thank you. Just wanted clarification. Um okay. Well, I think for me first of all I appreciate the chance that we are gathered here this evening so I wanted to extend my gratitude for a lot of really hard work that went on behind the scenes um at the administration
065at the administrative level uh to find the FTE to piece this together and to make sure that we're doing the best thing we can for for 7,500 students. So thank you to the staff. Thank you President Jacobs for calling this meeting. Um I was thinking that in this memo as the comments earlier indicated, really there's a section on page two paragraph one that gets to the heart of the problem before us. With the elimination of an elective period many students will receive only brief if any experience with the arts, CTE, and world languages. They That's what's lost. Um I think that the Sven's presentation has fleshed out who we're talking about when we talk about many students in a way that wasn't really present for me during our budget conversations. Frankly, it wasn't on my
066radar and and if it was discussed and that's my mistake then I of course apologize for that but I really wasn't aware as a board member that um we would be potentially putting services for special education students and English language learn learner students at risk. I offered an amendment to restore a zero period opportunity for immersion students and I'm you know in hindsight I feel as though had I known that we were really talking about a thousand or so special education students that's my number and English language learner students um I don't know I [clears throat] I feel like as though I would have attacked that more vigorously but I appreciate the chance to be here this evening. Um I guess one of the questions that I have and I know that you sort of
067danced around it is how in the world is any of this going to be different next year? Right? What what there's only so many administrative regulations and board policies that can possibly be twisted, weakened, or otherwise softened to make this happen in a six period model and that's just my honest opinion. Like it's not good for kids. So, what what hopes do you have for um So, maybe I can >> next for for the 27-28 school year under a six-period if funding is still uh not available. It will give us the opportunity um especially in the special education department and academic services as well to be able to look at what are we actually doing with some courses such as study skills, effective skills, and social skills, and how can we put some of those
068uh frameworks into place, the ones that are best for kids into the core academic uh program that we have. Um it also gives us the opportunity to work with some of our transitional pieces from elementary to middle school as far as what um supports we have in the middle school for kids so we don't overwhelm a special education student or ELL student with extra supports that maybe we can just put into the regular school day. Um there's a lot of work that has to go into it. Uh I think it's a two-page document that uh Pam, our senior director of uh special ed, and Jason, our director of special instruction, have put together for us. Um there's a lot. And it's going to take a year of work to do it, and that's why we
069need a year. So, it's not, for example, just and I say just in quotation marks, just the um we delayed the board policy 5040 and 5041 sort of softening requirements about who needs to take what classes. It sounds like it's going to be much more comprehensive. Yes, it's a probably going to be a lot more that will have to come to y'all. Okay. Um Mr. President, may I continue a couple of questions? Okay. Um can you I think with the uh one of the things so there's a lot of benefits in moving forward with this and I intend to support this. However, one of the things this does is utilize nine secondary holdback teachers. Can you refresh us of a how many did we budget? Sorry, this is a CFO question. How many um secondary
070holdback teachers were available in this budget? We're using nine. How many remain? We I can answer probably at my level, not necessarily at Andy's level where he's going to look at numbers and spreadsheets and stuff, but we we uh you had budgeted 40. For this year, we used I think 86 last year. Um in that 40, we've had to already use utilize quite a few in order to um do the specialists model. And we needed and then we looked at these as we would probably um issue at least nine probably to middle school as it is in in a normal year. Um but we're prioritizing going back to the seven-period day. Um you know, there's probably going to be I mean, no matter what at 34 or even 36.25 PTR, we're going to have huge
071classes next year. And some of those are going to probably have remain because we're down at in single digits now of what we have for uh holdbacks in order to support pretty much we haven't done anything at high school yet. And they're at 36.25 PTR, so yeah, we're we're going to be short. We're going to be really tight, but we figure but we feel like this is really important. We probably would have given nine anyways in some form to middle school. Does that make sense? Yes, and so just to be clear, I think I asked about secondary holdbacks, and it sounds like we had 40 holdbacks K through 12, and you were talking about the bulk of those went to elementary specialists, and nine of them are now going to middle school, and at single
072digits remain for high school. >> Yeah. Okay. Um the last question I have is maybe sort of technical. Do you any additional funds remain in our title um 6B carryover? So, I'll let Pam talk about that. Hi. Um yes, so >> [clears throat] >> So, for FY26, we have um we typically get awarded about $14 million in our title 6B funds. Um this year, we started the year with a $7 million carryover. Um right now, as of today, we are at about 6.8 million of that carryover that's remaining, um which is why we felt comfortable moving forward with this proposal of the 14 FTE for next year. Um by FY27, we'll probably be starting with about a $4 million carryover. The carryover fluctuates every year depending on how much of the grant that we need
073to utilize to support students uh with disabilities. So, um it's all based off of enrollment, it's all based off of um intensive needs, the number of students that we have that require that level of support. Um so, in previous years, um you know, in FY25, we had $11 million in rollover. Prior to that, we had 7.5 million, so it does fluctuate year after year. Any follow-up, member looking back? If I may just ask a technical question, and my understanding of the very strict laws about title funding is not very strong, um which is why I'm asking you. To what extent, if any, could any of the remaining carryover funds from from title 6B be used to support um either transportation or sort of arts um funding or arts opportunities if for for students, areas that
074we are struggling with across the district. I think that when we talk about that title 6B money, the one of the reasons why we're looking at this um is it's helping and supporting the special education students, and I think we need to be very particular about that. Um we also are looking at the maintenance of effort. We we have put in four different distinct times during the year when we are going to be monitoring that maintenance of effort um so that we don't um get caught in a position where we aren't fulfilling that. Um utilizing any more than what we have proposed with the 14 probably gets us a little closer that spot where we would be in trouble or not in trouble, but out of or we would have to be looking at doing
075something else, probably at a more at a time when we'd have to come back to you to find more money in the general fund. Okay, so that 14 is a very specific number that was generated. >> Yeah, that's where we when we were working with Ms. Parrott. 14 is where we kind of ended up at because of and that's why we went to holdbacks from there. Okay. I can hold on my questions. I have I will move to member Holland. Um does this retain middle school as we know it, or is this merely staffed well enough for seven classes to be offered? This brings it back to where we know it, but at a 34 PTR. So, it is an increase in PTR, not all the way to 36.25, but it is an increase in
076PTR, so there is less FTE in our middle schools, and the class sizes would go up, but it brings it back to that level that we were at. We still have teams. Yes, that will all be in place. Thank you. Member Higgins. Yeah, yeah, just I just a little comment. I know you're taking it off the plate for this year, but next year is a different board in a different process, and we don't know what the funds going to be. So, we're canceling this year, and a recommendation next year is likely depending upon funding and all that, but it becomes a a totally new slate at that point of all the things we may have to do. So, calling it postponing it and saying we're definitely going forward is something that would be decided later,
077but everything's going to be on the plate next year. If we don't get the funding we need, if we don't get get this year, we don't get something next year, who knows uh what will happen, but I guess considering it a delaying action, we can't approve a action that's going to be something for a different board is all I'm suggesting. Thank you, member Bellamy. I'm sorry, I'm going to offer the superintendent a chance to respond. >> Yes, sure. I just wanted to say I completely agree with what Mr. Higgins said. We wouldn't um bind any new board to action, but what I will say is that when the new board forms, one of the things I'd like to hear sooner rather than later are the priorities on this area because right now, the team is
078going to go forth and do a lot of engagement with middle school families and the community to try to make the six-period schedule work, but if the board has a willingness to find a way to fund this because this is going to be a cost that we have to fund, I would need to hear that so we can focus our attentions elsewhere. Thank you. Okay. Uh we'll move to member Bellamy. Thank you. I more of a comment than a question. Uh as the uh elder in the room, uh I began my administrative career in this district in a six-period middle school. But I also remember fighting for what was a traditional high school, six-period day. That's what we had. We didn't get a seven-period day probably uh oh gosh, it was a while because we
079had to fight for it. So, it is possible to to have a traditional junior high school, and and kids were learning and kids were doing but we know middle school is the route we need to take. So, uh while I am glad that we're bringing this back that we have found a way to bring it back because we know it's good for kids. Um I know that we're going to have to start thinking differently and it might be that we we are going to have to go back to that six-period day. And all I'm saying is I've lived it and if I had to do it, I would do it again. But we also know middle school is is where we can do the best thing. We can we can do the best we can,
080especially putting sixth graders in middle school. Cuz it's old traditional high junior high school was just that. It was a mini a mini high school, period seven and eight. And as we as we um as education got funded differently and better and adequately, we were able to expand. And so, I'm not willing to give up on the middle school model, but I I I do want to um I do think it's possible for us to deliver a quality education program in a six-period day. I really do. Uh but it takes time. Time and dedicated uh uh uh purposeful thinking. So, that's all I wanted to say. Thanks. Uh member Lessons. Um yeah, I really appreciate this thoughtful conversation um at this time. I do have two amendments I would like to offer and I have
081emailed them uh to Ms. Sullivan. Um It uh so, the first amendment is this. I move to strike the words many students from paragraph one on page two and replace them with students with IEPs and students receiving ELL services so as to read students with IEPs and students receiving ELL services will receive will only receive brief if any experience with the arts, career and technical education, and world languages. Is there a second? I I just need to hear it again. I'm sorry. Member Lessons, you have the floor. It's a It's a move to strike and replace. Okay. So, if I can it's on page This is on the back page, page two, the first paragraph below the bullet points, the last sentence where reads currently reads many students will receive only brief if any experience
082with the arts, career and technical education, and world languages, I would strike the words many students and essentially be specific and say students with IEPs and students receiving ELL services will only receive brief if any experience with the arts, career and technical education, and world languages. And if there's a second, I'll speak. >> I'll second. Um thank you. The The intent is really to um put down in the record that this board is aware that under the six-period model, those are the students that we would be placing at the greatest risk. And so, I just wanted to highlight that um in this document in a way that I didn't feel has been highlighted in the memo itself, although I think that the um slideshow and conversation did. May I ask a question? Yes. Member Bellamy.
083Is that because of the source of the funding? Um I would say the source of the funding, which is really the backbone that the reason that this memo exists, um is definitely a reason to emphasize that we are talking about special education students needing to receive their core services as well as well-rounded education, including the fine arts, CTE, and world languages. And that that is what is um at risk of being lost if we don't move forward on the memo tonight. Okay. Thanks. Member Holloman on the amendment. Um on the amendment, wouldn't this fall under the pertinent facts? And this is Yes, this is under the So, I I don't know that we can amend that. Um I mean, the motion is under the recommendation. And I I don't know that we have the authority
084to amend the superintendent's words, I guess. Yeah, but so That's what I'm saying. Member Holloman, once there's a motion on the floor, um the memorandum uh no longer belongs to administration. It's ours. And we have in the past edited multiple um memorandums, which is what we are in the process of discussing now. So, the the motion is in order and we can modify language from um any portion of the memorandum as it's um the document belongs to us at this moment. Understood. Thank you. Yep. Member Higgins. Yeah, and my reservation with this is you got students with IEPs all grouped together. There are so many different IEPs that are out there for anything at all applies. To say that anyone with an IEP is going to receive um you know, um brief if any experience,
085it depends upon the type of IEP they've got. There's so many different types that may be accommodations uh with it that wouldn't affect at all their experience with this. I like the language. I understand why superintendent left it more open with talking about many students, but but the students with IEPs can be there for uh activities after school, in school, access to different things, resources of different types. And I just rather than get into the details with that, there are so many variables associated with every child with an IEP that I would I'm I'm going to I appreciate where you're coming from cuz I understand, you know, it's it's it's it's wide open, but I think cuz we're dealing with individualized kids with different needs and to be an IEP, I would rather leave that
086up to the administration to be able to do that uh as it currently reads with many students, you know, uh um and not try to get into saying what they can't do cuz this is this part where it says will only receive limits them beyond what an IEP would do. And I just don't want to go in that direction of trying to group everybody with IEPs the same cuz they aren't everyone is different. Some of them may you know, obviously be emotional, some are educational, some have uh IEPs with uh uh you know, you know, all kinds of treatments you can think of uh and I just would rather not put that in there. So, I'm going to request to reconsider this. Thank you. Member Bellamy. Thank you. I um have a question for the
087administration, I guess. Uh Cuz I'm I'm kind of agreeing with um member uh Higgins, but I did want to get it on the floor for discussion. So, I think member Lessons, what is the Do you have a preference with the language? Do you want I mean, I know you do because you put it in the in the original, but I'm I'm thinking um cuz it makes sense to me because we are using a certain funding source that we reflect that in in the language, but at the same time, I don't want to be so specific that it weakens um uh or or restricts uh movement for the administration. Through the president, the rationale for many students is that quite a number of students would benefit from this change in addition to the special education students
088and the English language learner students. With that said, I respect the will of the board to modify the memo such to specify that in particular ELL and um special education students would benefit um at this point. It wouldn't change the substance of the memorandum, which is why I really deferred to the board. Um but with that said, there was a reason for using the term many students. I see that now. Thank you. Is there additional discussion? Member Lessons. Yeah, I think it is a good point made by member Higgins and um while I really do want to somehow make this a part of the record, I absolutely understand um the clarification that you offered. So, I guess I would withdraw the amendment um in favor of the original language at this point in time. Okay.
089A second agreed. We'll withdraw the motion. We're back to the underlying uh memorandum AST memorandum number 163. Member Lessons, you said you had an additional amendment? I do, and this one is much more simple. Um I I move to delete the word temporary from the administration's recommendation. And that is on the first page. Is there a second? Second. Motion made by member Lessons, seconded by member Holloman. Um member Lessons, any additional comments? Sure, I think that it will read um a little less uh slightly less volatile um if you simply say it's a recommendation to approve the reinstatement of the seven-period academic schedule for that specific school year. Um, temporary is a is a word that strikes me as really volatile right now. And so, we're going to move forward with reinstating this for the
0902026-2027 school year. And, um, and I'll be frank. Uh, I had another amendment, but I can't do it right now because we don't have the money. But, I intend to work very hard to obligate the requisite funding needed to be able to retain the middle school model for FY 28. I don't know how, but I will be moving forward with that when the time is right. So, that is the second reason that I would like to eradicate the word temporary from this memorandum. We have a motion to eradicate in the second. Member Higgins, under discussion. I I just want to speak in favor of that cuz this is for the budget year next year, and we're not going to change it during the year, and that's when temporary would apply. So, this is for the
091entire year we're doing this. So, I I do like the idea of taking it off. I I think everybody here understands that this is got to be one of many things that could be on the slate next year when depending upon funding, but we're not going to change it during the year. I don't think the administration's even considering that. So, since this is temporary for the for the next budget year, it isn't temporary for the next budget year. It's for the entire year. There's no plans to withdraw at any particular point in time. So, I think it's a it's a good motion, and I appreciate it. Seeing no other discussion, a voice vote, please. Member Wilson? Yes. Member Lessons? Yes. Member Donley? Yes. Member Bellamy? Member Higgins? Yes. Member Hallman? Yes. President Jacobs? Yes. Motion
092to amend is adopted by vote of 7 to 0. We're now under the original motion, ASD memo 163 as amended. Is there additional discussion? Seeing none, we'll have a voice vote on ASD memorandum number 16. Member Donley, welcome. Unfortunately, this comes at the cost of increasing class sizes in the middle schools. I think the class sizes are already way, way too high. Um, the number one thing parents have told us over and over again in our surveys is class size is uh their priority. And, um, so, that's the downside of this. Thank you. Member Lessons? I I guess a point of clarification, does this increase class sizes next year for middle school? I thought this is separate from the pupil-teacher ratio. Through the president, I think what Member Donley is suggesting is that rather than
093using a holdback for class size relief, we're using the holdbacks to maintain the integrity of the schedule. Seeing no other discussion, Member Higgins. Yeah, I'll just speak in favor of it real quick. I recognize that what we've got is some funds that otherwise dedicated to special ed, but I remember when they made the decision that as long as it benefits a larger group, but it benefits a significant special ed group, that it makes a big deal. We've seen the studies in the past that um the impact that middle school has on graduation rates and reducing dropout rates is significant. Uh, and this really affects those most in in risk as well. So, I just think it it it makes sense to me that it's a reasonable source of the funding, and I think it's definitely
094benefits kids a lot. Uh, so, um, while the class size is always an issue, I don't think these are the two related. So, thank you. Thank you, Member Higgins. Seeing no additional discussion, we can have a voice vote on ASD memo 163. Member Bellamy? Yes. Member Donley? No. Member Lessons? Yes. Member Hallman? Yes. Member Higgins? Yes. Member Wilson? Yes. President Jacobs? Yes. ASD memorandum number 163 is adopted by a vote of 6 to 1. Move on to our last action item, C3, stands on SB 278. Um, for the public who may not have um, tuned in for our work session at 4:00 p.m., the board received a briefing from a Senator Bjorkman of Kenai, and then a staff of Senator Tobin from Anchorage on a piece of legislation that would modify the um, how local
095contributions interacted with um, state funding and the displacement from state aid to local aid. Uh, this is a spot in our agenda where a motion could be made to take a public stance on SB 278. So, we did something similar, and a motion that was made was to direct the superintendent and president to draft a letter of support. Um, that was about the Representative Kopp's pension bill. That was then sent out. Um, if there's the will of the board, we can begin a discussion if there's a motion. Member Hallman? Uh, yes, I do have a motion which I have sent to Mr. Sullivan. Um, I move that the board president and superintendent draft a letter in support of Senate Bill 278 to the Senate Education Committee and to all members of the Anchorage delegation. It
096should also be forwarded to the Anchorage mayor and the assembly. Is there a second for discussion? Why is there a second? Um, the there's Yeah, is there a second? A second for discussion. Um, Member Hallman. I to speak to it. Um, simply put, as it stands right now, there is no limit on how fast and how far uh the required local contribution might go. Um, as Senator Bjorkman pointed out, when the base student allocation was raised, Anchorage, when it was all netted out, got less state money. And our local contribution escalated by quite a bit. Uh, Anchorage Assembly has a tradition of contributing the maximum amount of funds to the district that they're allowed to under the equity formula, but they were prevented from doing that by the tax cap. Uh, Senate Bill 278 simply
097limits how fast uh our uh local contribution might rise. That gives time for all of us to adjust and uh work with it. And I I think also it just helps put some limits on how much we might have to pay for what the Constitution rather clearly states is a state responsibility. Uh, but it has been cost-shifted in a number of ways to both municipality and to the school district. I think it's reasonable that we at least have a little bit of friction on how fast that can go. Thank you, Member Hallman. Um, I'll put myself in the queue just to speak briefly. Um, I appreciate the motion. I appreciated Senator Bjorkman in his presentation. Um, I remain convinced that the best path forward for our state, um, not just for public education, but for
098the um the wide array of core services that Alaskans depend on, the best path forward is for the legislature to immediately um, continue discussions on how to implement um, adopt and implement a sustainable long-term fiscal plan that will include new revenue, likely a spending cap, some sort of reform on um the permanent fund, um, oil tax reform. There's there's a host of issues that could be addressed. Uh, the the work that can happen without that priority, which Senator Bjorkman mentioned has taken decades without significant um results. And, but really um within the last 10 years has demonstrated it's the biggest stumbling block for education being adequately maintained and the legislature honest honoring its constitutional obligation. Um, the work that can continue in the interim really is working around the margins. Um, we heard um that
099the the the legislation largely would um be revenue neutral for ASD. It would um modify who pays. Um, it would add increased obligation on the state. And the state is having trouble meeting its obligations right now. Um, the one-time funding that the legislature appropriated the house appropriated was stripped out of the Senate budget. And what was replaced was funding contingent on oil prices remaining at $95 a barrel, uh, which um is anything but a certainty. And that's funding that we all have each um considered spending in our heads more than once on restoring services. We've heard from community members that they're anxious for us to spend too. Not just this year, but next fiscal year as well when we have a 40 million dollar deficit. I understand why the piece of legislation is being brought
100forward and there is a discussion to be had regarding ensuring the state pays its its fair share. This to me is less productive than talking about new revenue measures and removing the language in the Senate operating budget version that would attach a volatile oil price requirements to much needed one-time education funding. So I can't side in support of this particular motion in this particular piece of legislation at this time. I think it would be much better topic as a broader piece of reform for the state fiscal plan that needs to happen but may or may not happen this legislative session. Member Higgins. Yeah, when you look at this piece, it looks like somehow or another if we give a little more flexibility to raise local funds while property taxes that is somehow compensate or correlate
101to the how much money the state gives us. Right now we're couple hundred million dollars under funding that was adequate and that's based on classroom sizes without all the other changes and somehow or another we're getting away from a discussion who's going to pay a little bit of an increase without addressing the issue of what's adequate funding. What is the state's obligation to us and then how do we meet it? They just want to deal with the leftover change that they've got in the budget to go and give us some additional funding and it's not addressing the issue. We need to have the discussion on what's adequate. We need to recognize the state needs to do that. I know there's a lawsuit out there pushing for this issue. But but this type of language looks
102like this gives you know the flexibility what we're going to raise for our local property tax will somehow be linked to how much the state might give us as if you know when the state's not funding us the way they need to and so we're hurting kids. I don't want to get into a discussion about making putting a band-aid on an artery that's bleeding out in line with it cuz it just doesn't make sense to me. We need to have the discussion and we need to argue it and fighting it at least that one lawsuit is doing it of what's adequate and and this is just allowing us to to impact local property taxes somehow to make up some compensation if we get money down we can raise the minimum some. I don't think it
103would even make a difference to us the way I understand it, but even if it did it's a distraction compared to the seriousness of the problem of how underfunded we are. We need to be focused on that. I can't support this particular thing. I appreciate legislators that at least are talking about education, but this is not a solution that I would want to recommend support for. Member Lesson. Thank you. I really appreciated our work session. I didn't ask a single question during it, but I appreciated all of the questions other board members asked and really everything that both presenters shared. Um One thing that I really focused on during the Senator Bjorkman's presentation, he talked about the state becoming a payer of last resort and that triggered in my mind a phrase that I remember
104from reading a 1991 ICER study a while back where it talked about how when the state created the 1988 funding formula during this 1987 legislative session doing so effectively turned the legislature at that point in time into the financier of last resort. So I remember that phrase. But what happened back in 1987 for the 1988 funding formula was that as oil prices crashed in the state of Alaska the state reincorporated a required local contribution of no less than 35% of basic need. And that's a really interesting number because from 1971 through about 1981 there needed to be a required local effort of just about 10% a little bit under and then it was going down. For a few years in the 1980s there was no required local effort at all. So when oil prices crashed
105in in 1987 1988 um we went from at a state level from a zero required local effort to a 35% of basic need required effort. This feels salient to me right now because it's clear that at a moment of historic fiscal crisis the state leaned on local municipalities to pick up the slack for their school districts and what it seems to me right now with Senator Bjorkman's bill that it's very well intentioned and it certainly speaks to conversations I feel like I've had for years now with community members who are shocked at the cost shift that has taken place here in Anchorage. I don't see how the state could decrease the required local contribution without to your point Mr. President a really comprehensive fiscal plan and so there's a disconnect for me now tonight that
106frankly wasn't there at 3:00 today. So I feel as though the work session actually changed my feelings about Senate bill because it's really complicated, but I appreciate the motion and I really appreciate the work session. It's not that I don't support 278, but I think to member Higgins' point it's really it's not there. It's not sufficient. It doesn't do what what needs to be done. So thank you. Member Lesson, we'll go to member Bellamy then Holland. Thank you. I did indicate during our question and answer period that I was struggling a bit with SB 278 and not because I don't think the senator's heart and compassion is in the right place. It's just because I just got so many unanswered questions. I I really want to understand the risks better and the trade-offs for Anchorage
107and I'm not I mean I'm just focusing on us. Um He gave a I think somebody has to do something. I'm glad he is doing something, but I'm not in a point right now where I can I can I can support it 100%. Um so I would I would like to have a little bit more time. Maybe we could bring this back in the future as we get more information and have more discussion. And then I'm not sure what the timeline on the bill you know how how what does that timeline look like? I mean is it and when at what point if we decide to if it gets passed at what point do we start seeing any you know what is the impact of that that change to Anchorage? So I I won't support
108it, but I'm going to keep my eye on it. Thank you member Holland. Well we've had a demonstration here. Um in the absence of 278 it has not spurred any kind of a conversation about what we should be doing for students. And when you have an open spigot for the state to simply push off cost if they determine that there should be more funding but they tell Anchorage you need to do it. I don't see how we do that if the money's not there. It simply provides an outlet for them to not address it ever. Um and and continue to starve the rural parts of the state as well. What happened the reason we had to have a levy was because so much more money from the municipality had to go fund the basic required
109contribution we couldn't have the full amount allowed under the equity formula and all these things are unrelated to each other, but they collide unless we had a vote of the of the population to exceed the tax cap. That's what happened to us. So we've got I think it was 8 or 9 million less dollars, fewer teachers, fewer offerings. How passing that up is good for kids, I don't understand. As an Anchorage taxpayer, I don't understand why we want me and the folks in this audience to pay more of the state's responsibility just because we have continued to grow our tax base grow the the overall wealth in Anchorage and as it grows we will just continue to pay more and more and the state can slide out with the less and less. So I admit
110it does put pressure on the the legislature. They actually have the ability to control revenue, something we do not. They've chosen to limit revenue and whether or not that was a good idea or otherwise can be debated. But in not supporting this we are simply saying you don't have to do more for us and Anchorage will do as much as it can and our kids can just go without. So, the upside to that I am missing completely. Member Higgins. Well, um let me uh put it in a different perspective from my side. I appreciate the comments. Uh we have a minimum amount that legis that the assembly can approve and a maximum and they go to the maximum. This is adjusting what the minimum can be. So, I don't see that being a big deal
111at this particular point in time. We've got the comparison coming from Kenai, which is getting more money than we are even Wells got a lower cost of living. So, they're probably getting I think the figure was we saw 14% more. Others have that this So, the the 1998 uh base student allocation, which is based on cost of living then, we get less, but today if they did it right, we would get a lot more. So, we're at a disadvantage all the way through it. If they want to fix it, they need to fix the system. But, this just says how much the bottom, you know, will go up the 2% type of a situation. And um we're already paying at the maximum paying at the top. The assembly has been really good uh repeatedly. I
112I'll give credit to the municipality of Anchorage that they have been supportive to the degree that they can. They even went tried to even do the one-time increase in tax. They've tried everything they can to help us. But, but in this particular case, I see this thing as addressing the bottom. I understand I don't want the the state to turn around and say, you know, uh y'all need to pay 25% more or something uh on the property tax. But, I don't see that happening. I see it you got them you got to have a distribution throughout the whole state anyway for funding. They don't have the money uh to increase anything and they'd have to increase the rest of the area too if they if put onus on us for the ones that don't have
113the tax revenue to keep it equitable. So, that would be a problem by itself. So, I don't see this accomplishing anything. What I see this is is a distraction to the issue that we need to have more funding. We need to have more equitable funding as well. And I and this is just a um how much can the state shift to some not just to us, it's not just Anchorage on it, but obviously Anchorage it seems to be their interest always uh within it. I just don't see it accomplishing anything. Uh worst-case scenario, there could be some issues all over the place. When legislature approves funding, doesn't mean they have they approve even the same amount. There's no restrictions on it. But, we need to establish something much more constructive, I think, than this. And
114I just uh uh setting a thing on the on the bottom going up by 2% when we've got more than that that that they may approve, I just don't see what's accomplishing anything. And I think my concern here is that we need to deal with the issue of adequate funding. We need to look at the fairness of it. And this is just a a sidetrack to say if the state doesn't give you more money, you can go up by two. I I don't I don't even want to think about going there because it's really we have to focus on adequate funding from the state. On a point of information. Member Hallman. Um the legislature doesn't set a maximum. That's set under the federal equity formula. Anchorage is not contributing the maximum it can under the
115equity formula. It's contributing the maximum it can under the tax cap. We could give more except our minimum contribution went up and that ate the funds up. That's why we had to vote. And that's why we don't have that money now. If this bill becomes law, about 13 million in state funding would come back to Anchorage. That would give room for the assembly under the tax cap to restore those funds and contribute to the maximum. We are we're shorting ourselves by paying more and we're shorting our kids by funding less. How that leads to a discussion on equitable funding or adequate funding, I don't see. There's no connection. There's no connection between this and the BSA. There's no connection between the BSA and the minimum contribution. We are simply shorting our kids at the expense
116of Anchorage taxpayers by letting this continue to go unchallenged. Why we would do that, I don't know. Member Hallman, thank you for your comments. That wasn't a point of information, but you're um No as you might. Um member Donnelly. I agree with member Hallman. Uh the other thing that's so amazingly unfair the way it is now is that 22% or 20 20% of Alaskans are paying nothing for their local schools. They pay zero for education, not a penny. And as long as that dynamic continues to exist, the state has a lot of incentive to keep dumping more and more on the local governments that are paying. Um we have to get real about how unfair that is. Uh all Alaskans should be helping with the expense of their local schools and right now uh a
117select group is opposing and is continues to oppose doing that at any level. I mean, at anything. Not even a penny towards it locally. Um and so that's incredibly unfair to the municipalities that are taxing themselves to provide um local assistance for education. Um I will enter a queue for the second time. See everyone else has spoken twice, I think. Um I appreciate the passion of the member Hallman speaking with. I I think, you know, the immediately the um the issue sounds wonderful in that um we want to address the fact that property values, which spur the local contribution, um have gone up at a disproportionate rate to the separate process um by which the state contributes to our district, which is through BSA increases. Um that is that is an admirable notion. It still
118comes back to the state needing to shoulder more additional obligations at a time where it can't balance its checkbook. Um we need to have a a fiscal plan conversation and um that while there was political headwinds against that in an election year where the governor race is going to be on the ballot, um I still don't know why every um finance committee hearing in Juneau, it doesn't start with that conversation and end with that conversation. There is nothing bigger they they could or should be addressing. Um as without that issue being addressed, uh core services that Alaskans depend on are going to continue to fail one by one. Um education is clearly leading that pack and um but we're seeing um many others fall in line, too. And so, um it's not that I I
119don't think that this issue warrants discussion. It's that um we're dealing with the um secondary or tertiary issues well before we're taking care of the primary uh driver of um many of the challenges facing our state right now. So, go to member Higgins. Uh yes, uh real quick comment. One, it this won't require any non, you know, areas that do not pay any taxes, don't have any incorporated areas to start paying taxes or paying money for the schools. So, it's not going to change any of that um uh within that. Uh I I see that as a possibility of increasing local funds, but by the same token, that shifts the the the state contribution is what's really killing us right now uh with that and that bothers me. And as this is the last school
120board meeting uh with where we don't make a change, I just want to go on record that uh Mr. Donnelly's agreeing with Mr. Hallman not me. So, we we want to go on record with that real quick just to you can appreciate that, I know. Thank you. Also noted. Okay, seeing no other discussion, uh we will vote on the motion to again, the motion is to uh have the board president superintendent draft a letter in support of SB 278. Um if you would like to Member Wilson, your question. >> So, a no vote right now does not mean that we couldn't bring this back, correct? Was just getting to that. Yes, ma'am. So, this motion would to direct the the board president superintendent to draft a letter in support of uh 278, send to the
121send it education committee and all members of the Anchorage delegation, um and then send that the same letter to the Anchorage mayor and assembly. A yes vote would support that letter happening immediately. A no vote would indicate that uh you don't support that letter happening immediately. It would not preclude this board from taking a position later or individual board members from writing in support of a particular piece of legislation as is your right. If there's no other questions, we'll have a voice vote on this motion. Member Hallman. Yes. Member Wilson. No. Member Lessons. No. Member Higgins. No. Member Donnelly. Yes. Member Bellamy. No. President Jacobs. No. Motion fails two to five. Okay, that concludes our action agenda and our agenda in its entirety this evening. Would entertain a motion to adjourn. I move to adjourn.
122Second. Motion made by Bellamy, seconded by Hallman. Seeing no objection, we are adjourned at 7:54