WLCSC - Work Session March 2nd , 2026

001All right. I'd like to call to order the work session tonight. It's 6:02 on Monday, March 2nd. I understand no one has signed up for public comments, so we will move past that and go straight into our discussion. It's uh my understanding that Rachel's going to lead us. And yay, lucky you. So, don't forget your microphone. Um, yep. Knock yourself out. >> So, we met um Lawrence and David and I met with administrators um I don't even know what day it was. One day last week, Wednesday. Yeah. Was it was someday last week? >> Um and we sat and went through. So, we had three full copies. We had uh one version that was edited by another board member, another version that had that another board member had taken that version and edited on top

002of it. And then we had the legal version. So, um what we ended up going with was the last edited version, the one with the most edits on it. You should have all had in your um box file the handwritten notes from that. I'm sorry about the handwriting. there was a lot going on but you can at least understand the conversations that we were having where the language was the same. In other words, where everybody appeared to agree, we just made those changes. Um when and that is the language that we are recommending based on everybody's feedback put together. the as you go down you're going to see there's a couple of spots where there was not agreement and those both sets of languages have been both sets of language have been included. David has

003it up on his screen in an editable format and as we go through tonight he is going to edit and that is what is up on the screen so we can follow along with that. Um and so basically my recommendation is that we just start at the beginning and read through um and ask, you know, this is the time to ask your questions and raise raise points if you believe there's something off. >> I don't know about Mr. Rogers. I know there's some so I think um capacity will be towards the end and will be a big topic but I just hate to make him wait all the way to the end if we were to have questions about the high school but I don't I mean we could ask that now not talk about

004really the numbers specifically and make those decisions but allow him to give us some insights if we have questions on the high school just so if he didn't want to sit through the whole thing we could respect that and then we could go through order is just >> thought I am I am okay with that. I will tell you that I don't think there's going to be a lot of I don't anticipate a lot of discussion through the first through items A B C D. It's going to be when we get down really to capacity where there is the most disagreement. So I I agree. I really want to respect your time, but I think we can fly through it in order. Is that okay? If it starts to get too much, we'll hop around.

005Yeah, I agree. I agree. I'm just concerned sometimes when we hop around in a policy it gets hard to follow is my only thought process. So um in looking at the beginning and the um introduction paragraph you notice that we just changed to clean up the language a little bit. So all this is a rewarding. It's not change of any intent. We just changed it to say um the following provisions describe circumstances that require clarification of termination of legal settlement settlement and circumstances under which a student may enroll without legal settlement. So this is just language and I don't think there's any dissenting voice on this particular edit. Does everybody agree with this change? >> Seems I heard I'm going to click the accept button. >> I just did it. >> Okay. So it's we

006accept it >> here. Keep in mind I'm not asking you to vote. So we can't vote tonight. So I'm just asking you to give your feedback. If your feedback is not the same, then we will incorporate that in. But we are not we're not voting here. >> Um I will tell you that in this next section, section A, we had some question or conversation about whether or not this was in the correct order. We decided to just leave it um as it is. So um up next was children of divorced parents. There were no uh no changes in text on this one and we left it exactly the same. Anybody want to talk about this section anymore? >> Okay. >> For all those first ones, um students of divorced parents, student resident change, that was

007the order that was sent to us by CCHA, right? >> That's correct. >> Okay. >> Yeah. We decided to leave it as it was. Yeah. Um the next one is B student residence um change. So this one in particular, we're making a recommendation to just clarify the effective date of the legal set settlement may be extended until the end of that school year at the election or the parent of the election of the parent or a student 18 years or older. So what that means is um that if a student starts the year and the family moves out of the district that that student can change can stay the rest of the year and not have a mid-year transition. Um transiency inside a school year is challenging to students and teachers alike. And so that

008was kind of the intent. We are required by law the minimum we are required by law is that a student who has completed grade 11 is guaranteed to com to complete grade 12. So, uh, they have a basically they're grandfathered their senior year so they can graduate from where they've been going to school. Does anybody have any thoughts or or concerns with us allowing that for all grade levels, not just seniors? Is everybody okay with us leaving that language as it is? >> So, >> okay. I I think if our focus is on student achievement, that's a change that we need to consider. I'm gonna accept um Jessica's note on there. >> Yes. >> That that way we have a clean document when we're done. >> Okay. May May I actually earlier when you ask

009for questions? I didn't uh got time to ask and actually I have a question about the the A. So the A2 says no later than 14 days. And I wonder What if in people apply like after this time frame? So what will happen? I just it's a clarification question. I'm not like against it or whatever, but I just wonder what if people decided later not earlier. So what will happen? >> That's a probably an Anna or Dr. Dryer question. I didn't. >> So, she's questioning what happens if somebody does not hit the 14 days. What if they come to you five days before school starts and want to enroll their their child and they're inside of that 14 days? What do you do? >> This is for children of divorced parents. If let's say that

010some that parents get divorced the beginning of the summer don't recognize this three days before school starts one. >> Yes. >> So they would become a transfer student. Well, they are a transfer student and so if it was beyond >> if it was be if it was beyond Yes. then and we were full then they they would they would not we would not accept them. >> Okay. I'm going to use myself as an example. >> Sure. >> So I have custody of my children. I have a shared custody of my children. I live in this they're all adults now but I live in West Lafayette School Corporation. If I fail to notify you before say mid July or whatever the 14 days are with this form that says hey my children are going to come

011to school in West Lafayette. You would tell me that they couldn't come though I live in corporation. >> Am I understanding that correctly? My my understanding with this is that if the parent with the full physical custody lives outside the district and the other parent lives in the district >> but they don't have custody. >> So this doesn't say that this doesn't deal with that issue of custody. I will tell you that the m physical custody is not common anymore. It's almost always a joint custody arrangement. >> One parent lives in the district. >> Yeah. Is this one of those cases where what's written in state law is probably behind the times. >> Correct. >> Yeah. >> Correct. >> If if the parent if if a parent has any custody then and lives in the

012district then their student would have the ability to >> Yeah. They wouldn't be a transfer because they wouldn't beh because otherwise they have a res. are living in the district resident student. >> Okay. So why point two? Why not just then leave it with 0.1? It's just saying you have to let us know that this is your situation. But why are we then if that's the scenario including point 2. >> We can ask that question. >> Yeah. If we're not required to keep it >> it's not a back and forth type thing. But >> but if you want further clarification, we can ask the attorney and get that information to you. Yeah. >> Can you note that to ask legal about item two? I'm so glad you're doing this. >> Thank you for raising that

013question. UA, did you have any other questions on that section? >> No, thank you for taking >> Yeah, I totally missed that. So, I'm glad you caught it. Um, moving on to um uh we finished B, we're moving on to C. residency of students with military parents. Um, so we did have conversation about this. You'll see there's qu there's items one, two, and then three. The reason that we left three in there is a, it's explicitly in the law, but b, the conversation that we had really revolved around the fact that sometimes parents don't know what their deployment is going to look like, and so they can say they intend to stay in district, but they don't always have control over that. They have to do what the military tells them to do. So, a

014it's legally required and b it does make some sense. So, I would suggest to you that we would want to accept this language. Does anybody have any concern with accepting that language? >> No. And I think it that even though this sounds really old, I think this got left in for good reason because like you said with military families, they can't always control where they are. So, in this case, intent is enough. >> Yes. >> Even if you don't actually end up living here. >> Yeah. So we want to go ahead and accept that one. >> You has a question. >> Oh, so I I just feel the even even the number number three is what the law says we have to put it there then I'm okay with it. I just feel it's a

015kind of strange because we can intentions hard to measure plus and uh I feel this is exception we give the military families and uh since they they they're staying is temporary right they don't know where they will go next and so I don't I just feel three is unnecessary if only they are military families and they they want to send their kids here we they welcome. So that that's pretty much it. They don't need to intend to leave here or not. It's I just feel three is unnecessary. And so that's all. If we have to include it, that's okay. But I just feel we don't have to. >> Yeah. It says I mean the comment from legal on the sidebar on this, this is explicitly in the law at IC20-261953. So we have to we

016just have to put it in there. Okay. Um so we'll go ahead and accept that comment. Um D, there was no feedback. Students of qualified employees without legal settlement. Um this is consistent. Um does anybody have any comments on this particular particular section? Um Google Docs under underlined something and it made it stand out to me. It says a student's parent uh currently re resides in Indiana. Should that be changed to the student's legal guardian? I'm thinking of a student who lives with their their grandparent who's a legal guardian. I I just >> we should be consistent. >> The whole policy though, if I look, it's it I agree with you. It should be legal guardian, but the entire policy does I would think that'd be an overall comment to send illegal is we make

017this be parent and legal guardian all the way through the policy. Okay. We you want to put that comment in there? Does anybody have any concern with that question? >> May I ask clarification question? >> Sure. >> Um so uh for this one and uh my understanding is pretty much in the employees case are treated as a residential students, right? So they can have guaranteed spots as transfer students. And later in this document, there's a policy for continuing transfer students. And at this time, I don't know yet whether we will have guaranteed spots for the continuing transfer students or not. We will discuss later, I assume. And but I wonder for this one and for these kind of transfer students, will we treat them as continuing transfer students later? Let's say somebody work here for

018half a year and have their kids here as a transfer students and later and this person switches school or quit a job or whatever and will we treat their case as continuing transferring students or >> new transfer students? That's a great great question and at that point they would not be a transfer student under employee but they would be a regular transfer student. >> This was something that we discussed in our policy board meeting of they would become a new the following year they would become a new transfer applicant. >> Um because and so they would have to they they wouldn't automatically stay in they would have to um go through the transfer process. their status would change. Exactly. >> So they will be subjected to capacity for example and even though employees kids are

019not subject to capacity and regular transfer students are subject to >> Yeah. So in item one it says the student's parent is a current employee of the transfer student corporation. So if their employment is terminated then that status would not stay with that student. >> Yes. Thank you for the clarification. And I wonder then in that case do we need oh maybe this is enough or or we need to ex explicitly say so or we or we don't have to or by default everybody will understand it will be the case. >> Thoughts anybody? >> Um the question about number two about this part um I think that's simply a provision to prevent remote employees from trying to send their kids wherever they're working at. This is Indiana code just to be clear. We don't get

020to I mean this is what the code says we have to put in our policy. >> Yeah. Right. >> The question isn't though about any of these specific provisions. It's it's clarifying in the the policy itself that students of employees when the employee is no longer an employee um don't retain the benefit of the employee status. and would become a and would have to reapply as a new transfer student. I think that that's the that's what uh UA is trying to get at that. And and is that implied or is that explicit in here? uh I think is where we need to um we might want to add that in and just explicitly say that if the employee is no longer uh an employee then the the student or their their students would need to

021um apply it. >> Yeah. They would switch to standard transfer status, >> right? They would become a new transfer. >> They wouldn't be considered an existing transfer. But they would my point is they would be in exist they would be treated their status would change during that school year to an ex to an existing transfer but then they would that would be the end of that they would be a transfer student from that point meaning they wouldn't get booted midyear >> well I guess >> no not midyear but because we have the prior um uh >> yeah they they can continue our residency or not um student residence although I guess that But but they would their status would stay for the rest of the year. But >> would they have to apply as a

022brand new transfer the following year? >> Yes. >> Okay. So I think I think what we need to say is that they would retain their uh their status for that for the the current academic year um if school has already started. but after that um the following year that they would need to reapply as a new transfer >> because that would be consistent with what our resident uh students would have to do. >> We could use exactly the same language. >> Yeah. If our resident students were moving out of district in the middle of the year at the new year, Dr. Yen makes a good point. They would have to apply at that point as a transfer student. So, it would make sense then that staff members if they're moving out in the middle of

023the year, they would apply for transfer status at that point. >> Well, that's the reason I brought that up is because there's a difference between not working here and moving away. >> So, if somebody's not working here, but they just lived over in Carroll County, could still full well drive their kid here. I mean, they're not moving to Nebraska, right? So, are we going to if that student transitions into becoming a current transfer when their parent leaves employment and they're still living within 50 miles of here, are we going to make them apply as a brand new transfer or do they get to be a continuing transfer like others? >> Can I can I ask a clarifying question? I heard half that. Are you asking if someone lives in Carol County and is a transfer

024student and then they move to another house that's out of district? No, what I'm saying is if you have because we have employees that come from all over the place, but you know, they drive here to work every day. If uh one of the employees, you know, wins the lottery and decides to open up a business selling hot tubs, um that person is no longer an employee and so they're no longer covered under the employee portion of this policy. But they have every intent to continue sending their kid to school here because they still live here. >> They live here as in out of district. Yeah. So they would re that's what we were that was Dr. Yen's question. They would reapply as now a a typical transfer student, not an employee. >> Okay. And

025then at that point um are we requiring other typical transfer students to reapply every year? >> They they do resubmit an application every year. >> Yes. >> But they they are once they're in they are. >> Yes. >> So so you see where the drop off is. >> No. So what you're saying >> can I give >> what's the I don't understand the drawback because if you if you okay if you're a transfer student and you move again that question was asked earlier in the year >> what if I move but I'm already a transfer student am I starting over yes you're starting over because you've moved but you could have moved into the district so now you're back starting over again >> so let's take the example of we have a student of a

026teacher who they live in we'll just say um downtown Lafayette just they're not county they're they're downtown Lafayette um the the they start the year they get um let's say a quarter of the way they finish the first quarter the the parent who is a teacher um finds this other amazing job um where let's say they they can work remotely so they're not moving or anything like that Um, but they're no longer an employ a student of or the the child is no longer a student or or the student is no longer a child of uh district employee, they we would agree to keep them for the remainder of that year. Correct. >> Yes. >> Um would their status at that point just stay as a student of an employee for that year and then

027the next year they have to apply as a new transfer. they they would apply as a new transfer >> and automatically transition to an um >> an ex an existing transfer and then that would provide >> no because they weren't so they would automatically go into transfer status they would apply for it and if there was room they would get it because they were in good stand >> so we're clarifying that that status stays through the year but then at the new year then they have to apply as a new transfer. >> Yes. Does that >> Yes. >> Yeah. I think uh Sean made a good point about the kind of equivalence between the residence students and the employee students, right? They they we treat them the same way. So if they live here, if

028they work here, their kids can go to our school here. Once they leave, once they resign this job, they their kids will be new new transfer students. then they are the the transfer request will be subjected to capacity limit. So that's but the now the the key is should we put that information there explicitly or should we kind of imply that's the case. >> That's what I'm I'm trying to write out something for that. But I I I think it would be worth putting in explicitly if that's what we believe. If we feel like there should be a transfer or if we feel like there should be a continuing transfer, then we should put that in as well. I >> I think we just need to specify. >> The reality is that we um don't

029have that. I mean, >> we don't have that many, but we have to have >> Yeah, there has to be Oh, sorry. There has to be there has to be clarity, but we do not have that many students who would fall into this particular category. Um, I mean, this is a fairly rare occurrence as far as I would just based on history, but it I don't think it hurts to put the wording in and ask Jesse to look at it. >> But Jordan make a good point. Jordan make a good point regarding how to treat the transfer students. I mean, they they are transferred because their parents work here, but they also they are transfer students. I mean, they have dual kind of status. And then if you the their parents uh left our company

030corporations and the next year we treat them as new transfers and then that means we trade transfer different >> you see you see what I mean that >> I can see where one could argue that I don't agree with it but I see I see where absolutely yeah but but they're in a different category and they're prioritized because of that just like a an in district >> and our the board's point is that they want to attract solid teachers, solid employees >> and so if you want some skin in the game, you're you're great and you're moving on to TSC, let's say. Um well, maybe >> if you stay where you stay with us and you really want your child in our district, >> maybe we'll keep a great teacher. You see what I mean?

031>> Yeah. But I I prefer to I prefer to have to go through the new transfer application. But the thing is this that make our policies kind of u people may challenge hey you treat the transfer student differently. See what I mean? >> Um right now it is that way. So when we were when when staff had to pay or when uh out of district staff didn't have to pay if they were no longer a staff member then they had to start paying. >> Yeah. So it's consistent with what we've done. Yeah. That doesn't mean the board's going to decide to do that. I'm not ultimately the board's going to discuss and decide what the >> I'm not trying to be presumptuous is what I'm saying. >> Little handstand. >> Yeah. And you know, whichever

032direction we decide to go, I mean, it's it's, you know, being as equitable as we can be, but I just wanted to make sure that we knew that there was a slight distinction needed to cover it. >> Back to the policy. I think we may need a one sentence something. So Dave has typed up some draft language >> and has sent me some that I have to open on my phone because that's where I get my schoolboard. Huh? >> Oh, something else. >> No, it's fine. This is where I um >> Yes. >> Yeah. >> That's clear. That's pretty clear. >> Just using AI to match our current what you said just trying to clarify. >> Yeah, we'll see how I stack up next to AI. So, funny story about AI. Um, just a quick

033aside, >> no funny stories about AI. >> No, somebody, you know, because part of my job was to test AI. And so, I saw one funny test where somebody asked the AI, "Hey, I live 500 meters from a car wash. Should I drive or walk to the car wash?" >> And AI said, "You should walk. You'll save gas." So yes, as long as you can, you know, do regular human thought, you're still better than the act. >> Kind of human assumption. >> What if you work there? Everything. All right. So, moving on to um item E, transfer students. Um so, this one there was actually not a lot of disagreement. Um this is really a section where there's definitions. Um, as far as we could tell, we had a lot of agreement on in that

034intro in terms of the definitions. So, just looking at the definitions alone, does anybody have any concerns with the definitions as they are done? You see, we put one grammatical change in there. And so, we're just talking about e the intro section. And I just have one thing and in couple of my revision suggestions I mentioned the total number of transfers and uh I at this time I don't know whether we are not there yet to discuss those and suggestions but I wonder if we decided to use that as one of the criterion that can be in the definition as well the total number of transfers. Okay. So when we get down to that we might consider adding it to the definition. >> Yes. Sort of tentatively and because I don't want to go back

035say oh you know just now I forgot to something I just we're not there yet. But if that that's become one of the criterion then that should go here as well. >> Yeah. Okay. I'll make note of that one or you're putting in the notes. Okay. So if we double if we if we decide to add any additional language we'll double back the definitions at the end >> and I can accept Jesse's change. Could we that last one actually the wording can we change it to say cap um capa? So if the ADM count is equal to or greater than capacity the number of available transfer seats is zero. >> Thank you. >> The verbiage was just weird. >> Yeah. Anyways, so just changing that a little bit. >> Yep. Good Englishing. >> Thank you.

036Um that >> yeah by the way the this ADM count actually include both residence student and employee students right so should we specify that or or oh it's okay everybody knows or something >> that's the state kind of definition of ADM as as I understand it is that what you believe it to be Dr. er the ADM definition is just all students. >> Yes. And that also includes all transfer students that are already in here. We know how many more. >> Yeah. >> Oh, that included transfer already there. >> Existing transfer students are counted in our >> So in the in the in the state report that ADM >> Yes. That's how we get our fun. >> I think Dr. Yen is thinking about I'm guessing because right now we have some that are not

037on our ADM because we have an agreement with TSC. You're thinking I bet you're asking am I correct? You are asking are our TSC students on our ADM? That's what you're wondering, right? >> Am I uh I originally thought ADM only include resident students and employee students. >> So it does right now. And but I'm just explaining so to let you know you're not way off here. ADM average daily membership is what the state pays us for this our students and with the agreement that we have with TSC. They keep the students on their ADM. So they're collecting the state dollars and then we're charging them for the student. If under this transfer policy any transfer student would be under our ADM just as a transfer student. So you are correct right now. Not every

038student is, but if the board adopts this policy, every student will be on our a our ADM or average daily membership collection. >> Oh, I see. Thank you for the clarification. I didn't know the new sort of definition for it. So, the ADM >> I wasn't specific enough when I was commenting. >> Okay. So, pretty much the ADM is the current students we have, right? So it's sort of >> it's it's the ADM is butts and seats that the state pays us >> to today. The a the ADM is the current resident students we have and the current staff students we have starting next year our TSC students will become ADM students too. >> Yeah. Okay. So by go ahead >> then I feel then the assumption here is we will treat all the current

039transfer students as regular for this ADM definition right so we don't >> okay >> they would yes we they would bring in the same revenue as every other student >> okay I see >> so Just to double check clarify. So next year the ADM will be pretty much equal to our so-called enrollment, right? So before we have different Okay. >> Okay. Thank you. >> You're welcome. >> Moving out of the definition section um with that one language change. Um moving on to a item a continuing transfer student. So Sum went in and did some capitalization um this just to make that stand out. Um, we did a strikeout and you can see the comment there, but the corporation shall make efforts to ensure that students who are enrolled in the corporation as transfer students continue

040to attend in subsequent school school years. Um, we felt like that was a strikeout that that was contradictory to item A. So is item A and item B like those two sections are in conflict. We also felt that um it's not the students or the district's responsibility to correct go and try to push families to necessarily stay. That's on on the families to make that decision. >> Yes. >> Are you asking for comments? >> You have comments on this section. Yeah. >> Uh yes, I do. And uh so and I in the earlier file I submitted I made some suggestions but they are not included in the policy for the CCHA right so in this version it doesn't include the suggestion I made so over the weekend I made my suggestions again and uh right

041now it's not here in the in the document so I Wonder but it's in the folder for the board members. So I I wonder what is the best way to make my suggestion. I have my suggestion. I also have my rationale. And should I read everything? No, don't read it. So >> uh we all have access to it where it is. So if are we sharing David's screen right now? >> Do you want >> technically we're sharing Brandon's screen but I >> You're using Brandon's screen. Okay. If can you pull up Dr. Ian's suggestions from >> Brandon where they live? >> They're on box in a separate file right now. >> There are two files and uh there's an earlier one and but if you can open the one called Dr. Ian suggestions 2.28 weakened

042something. >> Yep. >> Yes. Um, not I don't think that's a I don't think it's a one. >> So, >> I can probably try to quickly >> you can copy paste it. >> No, no, not this one though. Not this one. >> No, not not this one. Not not on this one. It's a one written as 228. suggest >> it's a different >> file you gave us before the policy committee. >> So because when I noticed that my suggestion was not included in the policy you shared then I made the similar suggestion again basically. So >> Dr. Y if you look that up you'll find it >> under the work session. >> Is it in the work session folder? in the work session folder. It's >> the first the on my screen is the first

043document. >> It it is depends on how you've got them organized, but it's the one that was uploaded yesterday by Dr. Grryer. >> In that folder, >> one there. Okay. Brandon, if you just pull the Google Docs back up, I I add them. >> You That's it. >> Okay, >> great. Yes. >> Uh the Yeah, the blue ones is my suggestion for the wording and the the black ones are my my rationale for that. >> Where we just were a and transfer students. >> The last file we saw >> on the Google doc. >> Yeah. >> Um >> the last file. >> Not this one. Not this file. >> Uh oh, you put it there. Okay. Yes. You copy it over, right? Okay. Thanks. >> I didn't copy the rest. >> Oh, okay. Yeah, that's

044that's fine. >> It's the continuing transfers. >> Yeah. >> A and >> so so basically the the the current option one says the continuing transfer students are not subject to capacity limit. So what I proposed is everybody suggest all the transfer students are subject to capacity and uh so I have a lot of rationale here and uh so first of all actually yeah besides what I have here so just now we also mentioned the employees case once the employee uh leave our leaves our district and their case will become become new transfer students, right? So suppose a teacher worked for our district for 20 years or maybe less than that if they're still have kids in our district let's say 10 10 years and with the current policy then once that teacher leave our district

045then their kids cannot may not be able to continue if we have a capacity if uh the total number of transfers is over the capacity also in Another scenario if residents have lived in our district pay extra tax for many many years once their kids once they leave our district they they are not have they are not guaranteed to have a spot in our district. On the other hand the current policy option one basically says if you are transfer students you have the guaranteed spot in our district until you graduate which is not subjected to capacity limit. So I feel for the first two kind of people employees students and resident students they will feel it's kind of unfair and so how how is their transfer situation different from this transfer situation I mean you

046see what I mean that's one point another thing is I really feel even though it's unlikely for us to reject a continu transfer students but we shouldn't overpromise anything. I feel that gave us some liability issue. What if something changes in the future and uh we say oh sorry we cannot guarantee your transfer next year and we will have some liability issue. I really don't feel we shouldn't overpromise anything. If we put a little bit uncertain there uncertainty there that protect us because we never promised forever and so that's a that's a thing and um uh so the second point is many residents um expressed at the focus group I and and that they we need to create incentives for people to live in our district and we should prioritize residential students and So the

047uncertainty of for transfer students I think is a big incentive for people to leave our district or move to our district and I think that's very important and so >> can we do these one at a time because when you give us seven things at once discuss them. Um overall, um >> George, can I can I jump in first um just with a little bit of the policy committee discussion on this to give some context? >> Is that okay? You mind? >> Thank you. Um this was actually one of the pieces and sorry this the your wording wasn't in there. It was supposed to be in there, but we it was an oversight. This was one of the things that as a policy committee we felt like we need to it is one of the

048biggest points of of discussion for us whether or not we will um um subject um existing transfer students to capacity limits or or or they're yeah they're capacity limits but they're not um we're not going to be out of fire code. um or if we um um allow them to once they're in they're in and treat them as um as though they as though they're our students which they are. Um so this is one thing that we do want feedback and discussion on. Um we've also received feedback that once students are in our district we need to we should be treating all of our students equally. And so there they're valuable pieces to both sides that I think that we just we do need to discuss. >> Okay, George and then Rachel. >> So does

049anybody have any ideas if we have a scenario where if we're at our recommended capacity and then a family of six moving moves into the district, how do we pick which transfers we're throwing out? So, if I understood you correctly, you want to make it so that people who are transfers can be subject to removal in case in district residents move in and we're at capacity. >> It would be a lottery. Um, Mr. Ly, uh, they would go back into the lottery. >> Well, but yeah, they're going back into the lottery, but again, you know, that's kind of the inherent unfairness of that, >> right? But I'm just saying if if the board were to decide that that because there there's like David said it was it was or Dr. Perper said it was it

050was heavily discussed and that the board would need to discuss this and determine where the board wanted to be and I'll get I'll turn it over to you in a minute. But the point is that like Dr. Proper said once the board decides if they decided that there wasn't a guarantee then if that if there were if we were above capacity because new students moved in for example then the transfer students would all go into a lottery that's how that would be decided. >> Yeah. And and and I understand that but that's why I asked the question the way I did because it sounds very Hunger Games. Don't you think? >> So can I I just I I don't think we actually have a problem with the the wording. Um I I think we have

051a problem with the placement. Okay. So what I'm getting from really Dr. Yin, it's very important to her that the community be very clear of the fact that the only way that you can guarantee enrollment in our school corporation is to live inside of the corporation limits. >> Oh, work for Yeah. So for me perhaps that belongs that is a philosophical statement and maybe that belongs in the opening to this policy as a philosophical statement rather than specifically attached to to this this section of the policy because I mean this reads your part and I understand it reads much like you're putting some teeth into the policy a little bit. It's that kind of language like I need you you're you're that language is saying I want teeth in here so people understand. They're not

052guaranteed to me. I don't have a problem actually with that statement. It's a very truthful statement. This is the only way you can come to school here guaranteed. So, does that belong up at the top in >> paragraph? >> In the intro paragraph that says that exact statement that the only way to guarantee enrollment is boom. >> Yes. Yeah, I think that's a good idea. But as for I'm not sure what the T you mentioned that means, but I I feel it's more like a disclaimer in my sense. I feel I just feel it's a little bit too much responsibility and liability there because at the same time we promised our residents that you know we do referendum we do this and that because we want to guarantee class size and uh you know the

053all kinds of issue and quality education and so on. But you never know what if one day all in a sudden we have too many which is a good problem rather than students and we we are running out of capacity and I just don't I I feel it's very unlikely with a population pattern but I just don't want to kind of make a big promise oh once you are in you are always in I it's just it's a protection for us also there's a little bit uncertainty there we encourage people okay stay here move here and you will have guaranteed spots that also another thing is I think it will be more fair for any kinds of transfer student either you know including the employees suppose I I work in the district for 10 years

054I have my kids here then next day I for whatever reason I cannot work here then you will kick my kids out next year if you don't have a spot and uh how is my kids different from other transfer students I just I I feel it's kind of unfair but if we treat all the transfer students in the same way I say actually we gave them priority we in later actually the trans the priority list also make more sense we the first priority is continuing transfer students in the later part if we don't have this policy then the later one doesn't make sense they are already here why do we give them priority >> okay so here's what I would say to you though if you look at that paragraph that you have written and

055submitted there. Everything in that paragraph exists elsewhere in this policy except for enrollment is not guaranteed. So >> yeah, >> if you have it in there and it says transfer students must submit an annual application for continued enrollment in the corporation that is addressed further down in the policy in transfer applications. >> Yeah. Then this contradict with the option one because if the option one says you are guaranteed to be here why do you even need to submit application? >> Because every year it's not automatic you have to submit the application for it to to be a continuing transfer student. That way if a family does doesn't submit then they >> they're not in >> they wouldn't be in. Well, there's a practical reason for that, too, because we also ask even in district people

056to register every year. >> So, if they don't submit an application, then the assumption is they're registering somewhere else. >> Correct. >> So, that's my that's my point to you is if you look at your text really everything that you have put in that paragraph exists already elsewhere. >> No, >> except for that philosophical statement. >> No, option one just says once you are in, you are always in forever. But option two says we will try very hard to keep you here but we cannot guarantee. So it's just a again give us a little bit protection because you will never know what will happen in the future. What if we somehow somebody else become the school board members and decided no we we don't want to do this open district anymore and >> a different

057board could change the whole policy. We're not chiseling this into a >> but people can argue and oh when we start to transfer you you said forever now you say no and you you break your promise before I just again frankly speaking I I don't imagine we will we will say no to the current transfer students in the future but but just having that protection I feel is make make it safer at the same I motivate people to stay here if anyone want to have that certainty. >> So you keep talking about safety and having the ability to not break promises. >> Yeah. However, my question to you is which is better for the students to worry every year that they're not going to get back in from the time they're in kindergarten till the

058time they graduate and worry that they're somehow secondass citizens in our schools or is it better for them to have the security of knowing that they're going to be welcome and that we're going to keep them? In this case, in this case, will you say for the earlier part and if people trans uh move out of the district, they can still stay here until they graduate no matter when they move out because everybody wants to have stability and for employee the same thing. And uh why do you treat those transfer student differently from those transfer students? So I I just feel people have should have equal rights. Could I suggest to you that this might be one of the items that we would need to vote on in our meeting? >> I agree. >> And

059so I think if everybody's satisfied with option one or option two, one of those speaks to their preference, then we would need to vote on that topic. >> Do we want to add to option two to make it clear? Because in my view, I read option two is just supporting what the policy says as well. So, do we need to say to match what it sounds like UA wants? Transfer students must submit an annual application for continued enrollment in the corporation if there is capacity because that feels like that's what the debate or difference of opinions. In my view, I don't want capacity changing every single year depending on the number of transfer students and and everything like that. I also do not I in my view employee students um resident students and transfer students

060are all different categories and I don't want to be encouraging people to move out by saying if you're a trans a resident you get a transfer student. I also don't think we want to encourage employees to come shortterm and then leave to play this game. I also believe that making kids shift back and forth is not in their best interest. And so from my viewpoint, option one is the best option because if we're going to say we're taking a transfer student, we're committing to say at this point in our policy, we're going to have you join our us. I don't agree that that's promising lifelong never change the policy. In my view, if we get to a point that we can't keep the transfer students, we need to have two readings of a policy and

061have a good discussion. And so, but I think that we do need to have both options to vote on. So, I'm just wondering, do we need to add some verbiage or something to make it clear that there's a difference? Because I don't read a huge difference with the way it is right now from A to B, option one to two. >> I don't I um I think that the primary point of difference is really it's it's it's about adding what have mouse to threatening language. It's it is a it is a a threatening piece of language. You're either going to put it in or you're not going to put it in. >> Yeah. And and my only point is I think that there's I have zero problem presenting people with the truth and the reality

062that if the only way to go here in a guaranteed way is to live in district. I don't have any problem with that. I just think that belongs in the introduction as a philosophical statement because it is a philosophical statement. Where my concern is with option two is that it is redundant text. So later if it says transfer students must submit an annual application, if you repeat that here, then that is where you start to get into some murkiness in your policy. So that's my that is my only real issue with number two is I say move the teeth to the intro and drop the redundant language. And I mean that that's my that's where I am with it. Lawrence, it looks like you had something to say. >> Just follow up with Rachel. You

063say move something on the the first paragraph. So what are you talking about? >> So on the first paragraph it says we will educate tuition free students who have legal settlement in the corporation and students enrolled according to the requirements of Indiana code citation. I would put a sentence in there that says, "The only guarantee for a student to attend West Lafayette Community School Corporation is to live within corporation boundaries be this the child of an employee who meets the criteria for employment." >> Already says that >> I think that's Yeah, I think that's be a better better idea probably. >> I mean, yeah, go ahead. Uh, David, >> we have that language. Thank you. Um, we have enrollment in the corporation is only guaranteed for students who reside within the corporation's boundaries or whose

064parent or legal guardian is employed by the corporation. Uh, um, we could say as specified later. Um, we could add that in where did you say in the first paragraph? >> I think after the Indiana code citation. >> Um, so right before the >> the corporation verifies. >> Okay. So, if we go back, Brandon, can you go up to the very top of here? Um, all the way up. >> I just I I >> right here. >> Yeah. >> Um, >> this is the wording that Dr. Yian wrote. Um, that it it seems is a general agreement among everybody. Um, >> well, but I >> not quite. >> Okay. So, what I was going to say, um, um, but Lawrence wanted to talk. Um, the very first paragraph really already says that. I mean, it

065says that in very legalistic language, but it already says that the only people that the corporation will educate tuition free are students who have legal settle within the corporation. >> Yes, we're not all lawyers, George. >> Yeah, I am not. No, I but I I I think that it it makes sense to make this very clear upfront in not legal language so that when people read that it it's super clear. I I I I think that putting this in uh works >> to me it's a compromise. >> Does that work? >> Should be careful how much edge we're putting on that clarity though. >> Huh. >> Say we have to be careful how much edge we're putting on that clarity though. >> Yeah. I I don't think um I don't think we need more on

066that up here, but >> I think you need to make it say as specified in this policy. >> As specified >> in this policy later makes it sound like next week or >> or when we get around to redoing all >> right. Exactly. >> Won't be here for that. >> Okay. I hope I won't. Um >> does that does anybody have any issues still with that? >> Anybody? George, >> as long as we're not continuing to beat that same pinata later in the document. Yeah, that's fine. >> Okay. So, can I can I click accept on this? Is it is there anybody that doesn't have >> Oh, do you want the the attorney to check these? >> Yeah, I'll I'll h but I'll I'll put this Well, okay. I'll just leave it like that and

067I will also add a comment. language. >> It's just stating truth. >> Okay. >> So, we we have that here. Let's go back unless anybody had anything. Lawrence were I'm sorry I interrupted you. What were you? >> No, that's okay. I'm okay with this. >> Okay, >> let's go back down >> to the option one and two. >> Option one. Yeah, sure. But uh regarding uh this the section E A, right? Option two. Yeah, I don't think Dr. Yin's suggestion is any threaten uh language or uh offend people. I just I just think that's probably uh that's why I think put at the very beginning we have some guarantee language uh that will be uh I mean my understanding our uh surveys and as well as the focus group the number one uh consensus of

068the community and also our school is we want to put the residents uh student priorities so probably um one reason behind uh Dr. 's proposal is uh I think uh she want put our in district residents uh higher uh priorities kind of guaranteed but others doesn't have these uh kind of guarantees I think that's probably initial uh uh purpose so uh but I think uh these kind of workarounds is is okay it's okay yeah that's my my just that's something I want to share thank you >> might might I offer the That problem also kind of takes care of itself with the numbers that we publish because for any given given grade level if there is no room for people to transfer in then they won't. But what if we all in the sudden have

069a lot more resident students and uh we are run out of space then should we keep the promise for transfer students or should we keep the promise for the resident students that we won't have a super large class size. So that's one of the reasons why we had talked about having a published capacity and then building maximum so that there was a little bit of room there and enough enough room in that so that we wouldn't ever reach the point or it' be very very rare to reach the point where kids were you know being you know overstepping the classrooms. But when you talk about the the extra room, the number is one thing and the the the reality is another. Some for example, some people said in some of the language class the class

070size is about 30 already right now and uh >> language classes at what level? in the high school >> language the like French class I don't know that's what I heard from >> the numbers we should talk about that but I think for this the question is are we trying to set a policy that we're never going to change for 20 years and in my view no we don't know what funding is going to happen we honestly don't know what our community is going to look like in a couple years there's a lot of unknowns so in my view what we're doing is setting a policy that we think works for us now and there's I hope that during the budget time each fall. That's when we're making these if we need to make any

071major changes that we're like funding doesn't work, the referendum didn't pass or something like that. That's when we're like, "Sorry transfer students, we can't keep you." But my view is we don't want to every year be playing this game. And so that's why my view is we put it in the policy. But that does not mean that in one year from now if everything looks different from state level funding to referendum funding to our resident numbers that we can't go in and completely change that part of the policy. >> Can can I ask one more clarifying question? >> Okay, Dr. Yen, does putting that comment up on the top satisfy what you were saying? Because I want to go back to what Mrs. as Mumford said earlier and that is that it's two different philosophies

072and I feel like Dr. Yen's part option too is very different than just putting that comment up at the top and if if it if that if that if if putting it at the top doesn't satisfy Dr. Again, a way to solve that is we're hearing everybody today. And in the same way that the board has done with every policy, there would be an option one and an option two in a public board meeting so that the board members could vote the way they wanted to accept it. So, Mrs. Munford shared, which she wouldn't have had to, but that she doesn't agree with it, so she'd vote one way. But if Dr. Yen feels like that option should be there. It doesn't hurt anything to have both options there so that the board can vote

073because that's what uh Mr. Wong, Mrs. Wit, and Dr. Proper originally had said why it might be on there so that everybody got their chance to be heard and then the board could vote the way that the board wanted to vote. Does that make sense? >> Point to do, >> right? Yeah. I think that that was the plan is that we would keep one and two on there in the >> even though you put the stuff on the comment on top. >> Yeah. >> Okay. The So the option two because David moved I think it's a good idea to move the last sentence to the beginning of the document. You can now remove it from this option too but keep the Yeah. Yeah. Right. Yeah. You move it up. Right. So So keep the rest.

074Again I put it here not to threat anyone just as a disclaimer because I don't feel I don't want us to in many of the documents official document they have oh this is subjected to change or something it's just a kind of a disclaimer I don't want overpromise anything because later people say oh you said like a 10 years ago blah blah blah why do you change this blah blah it's again in reality I don't think we need to implement mented the we need to implement this because most likely we will be under the number but just give us a layer of protection really that's what I feel also that satisfy residents who feel they are prioritized and that frankly will make probably our referendum a little bit easier because they got something so special

075>> so they have this guaranteed spot and we implemented >> and in this policy. So that's because that's what people asking for. It's not my thing. It's just what I heard. I'm trying to convey what people are trying. >> So I just I I want to say this is not like the point of the policy committee is not to sit here tonight and force people to raise their language one way or another. It's to write good policy. So it it's to take everybody's feedback and write good policy. My only concern with option two, I just have to say it to everybody, it is redundant to other places in the policy, which is not good writing of policy. >> We I don't think it's redundant. It >> is. It starts with transfer students must submit an

076annual application for continued enrollment in the corporation. If you scroll down, there is a specific >> Yeah, you can remove that redundant part. But the last however part this right now highlighted in purple is not mentioned anywhere. I don't think it's redundant and we are just here is a disclaimer. This is not guaranteed. We tried hard to accommodate and continuing transfer student but it's not guaranteed. That's all I I don't feel it's just a >> uh you is correct. Um the we put there's a different sentence that we put up top. Um the transfer students must submit an annual that is duplicative. >> Um yeah, you can let me delete that. >> Yeah, you could delete that. Yeah. >> The corporation shall make reasonable efforts to allow currently enrolled transfer students to remain enrolled in

077subsequent school years upon timely application. that it it's not completely redundant because it does say something different than um regard without regard to the number of available transfer seats. So that that is contradictory between the two. Um but what if we took the however continued enrollment is not guaranteed and remains subject to policy change. I I'd rather just leave that at policy change and put that up front um or at the end of option one. That way we can say that we can change this policy because we can't change the policy um as as need be. But right now our policy will say that we are pri prioritizing continued transfer students. >> Mhm. >> Would that work for you? But uh let's see whether there be contra whether they contradict each other. So I'm going

078to >> because see the first one >> free much said >> it says that at the current time >> um regardless of our of our capacity limits and all that we're going to continue to keep our existing transfer students >> but um however then says we can make this change at a future date if we decide that this doesn't work. Okay. So, subject to policy change but not subject to capacity. So, if we over capacity, we'll figure out a way, for example, hire extra teacher or something to >> to change the policy or >> we would have to change the policy. >> I think that makes sense. >> So, >> I think that's good compromise. >> Just so we're clear. If our stated capacity at say 8th grade is 189 students, >> you don't see

079that >> that includes in district residents, transfers, children of employees, what have you. If we are at 189 at the start of say the 20 28 29 school year, the only way we would ever go over capacity is if a family moves in with another eighth grader. We would not be accepting any more transfers for that level. So, and we would at most be one over the stated limit, which you know is not unreasonable. >> Three if they have triplets. >> Yeah, maybe three if they have triplets. >> Um, yeah. Anyway, come come back to this policy basically means it's subjected to policy change but not subject to capacity limit. So, we we are okay to exceed the capacity. >> So, if we have to Go ahead. >> Yeah. Yeah, I'm done. >> Um I

080think yes. Um it's subject to policy. We're not going to when we do transfers, we would be doing them in the late spring. Um we may end up having more students show up um that moved in during the summer. >> That would be the only way that we would increase Yes. >> our our number of students. We're not going to tell a family five days before school starts that there's no longer capacity for them if we had agreed to let them transfer in, >> right? >> Because that's the only way that we would exceed um our limits um for the most part, >> right? >> Okay. >> So, I think the concern is if if our limits are exceeded like we do right now. So, we have I think it's seventh grade we have like

081209 that's above our capacity. So if we don't say that it doesn't matter what I mean if we're tying it to capacity that means we are having to say transfer students can't stay in. >> So I think we need this wording just to be clear and then we can move on is option two is if we hit capacity transfer students have to enter the lottery. That's option two and then we just move on and on Monday we'll have to vote between the two. But I think that's just the two differences. And >> that's it. >> I'm just gonna say keep in mind that the very next section is B, capacity, ADM count, and available transfer seats. >> That's for new. >> So but we're going to hit we're going to hit this issue of capacity

082here in just just a jify. >> Yeah, it's a different topic and that's for new transfer students. But this one basically says the continuing transfer students are not subjected to capacity. So that's what I read from the option one. >> I Yeah, I think that's where the difference of opinion comes. So I think that's just the vote. >> Yeah, I'm just saying it's not a kind of redundant point. It's >> Yeah, we can a different point. >> We can vote. >> What? Let's leave these two options as as is for now is option one and option two and we can vote on that next week. >> Do people agree to put this one in the option one though? >> Anybody have an issue with adding the however to option one? No issue. >> Yeah, I'm

083okay. Okay, I'm okay. I think uh what David did is not is very good because he trying to consolidate our different opinions with one everybody kind of common ground everybody can accept. So I don't think uh I think what David did is very good consolidate. >> Yeah. So hypothetically and the current uh continuing transfer students to the rest and feel okay certain they will continue but let's suppose in one year somehow and the board decided okay we everybody will be subject all the transfer student will be subject subjected to capacity uh limit um then the at that time the continuing transfer student will lose this certainty. Is that the case or I assume nobody will complain because we said this pair is that is that a protection we can have? So, we had to make

084really sure that before we vote on this next week that option one and option two actually say what we think they're saying. Because right now, option two doesn't actually, at least to me, appear to have any language about taking out transfer students, which is what sounds like option two was supposed to be for. And then as far as option one is concerned, I mean I suppose it's fine, but again, you know, just adding more of the, you know, thorny language that I, you know, we we've said it once, it's already well defined that if you don't live here, you're not guaranteed here. We don't need to keep telling people that throughout the document. It's like putting a welcome mat on top of a rose bush. So >> Lawrence wants to say something. >> So my

085question to Dr. I mean with this kind of change my major reasonings uh for the option two is basically uh what our community uh the survey and also Fox group require is we prioritize um uh in in district residents and basically the followup question will be how did you what specifically um uh gloss uh in the provisions in your policy your priority uh in district uh questions. I think we have at least two uh concrete uh sentence. One is on the first uh first paragraph we guarantee uh the yin district student and here we also saying uh continue enrollment is not guaranteed for transfers. So from my point of view u the purpose of that option two uh is pretty much uh fulfilled. So do you think you still want to keep that option two

086as as as option or you think this consolidate this kind of modification revation is can be >> I think we just have to vote on this you guys >> I'm not you down a little bit Um yeah, >> you still want you still want to keep the option too, right? >> Okay. Okay. >> But but I really appreciate uh uh David uh Dr. P for put the consolidate David do you make every effort to consolidate everybody's opinion. Thank you. >> Yeah thank you. I I think now the option one is a >> okay so if we could move on to B capacity ADM count and available transfer seats. This is one where we we do have again this is going to be defining what we are going to vote to choose between because I we're

087not going to reach agreement on this one tonight. So in the first part of the paragraph you can see that there's some some punctuation changes. Um >> I can accept those. >> Yeah. I mean if everybody's okay with changing the >> so I don't I want to understand why we took out by by grade level because that is the capacity that we're looking at is each grade level what is their capacity what we talked about is a bothand if I'm saying this right and Dr. Riner and Lawrence and David can correct me, but I believe it is a both and it is a class level limit and also a school building limit as I understand it. Is that what I'm recalling correctly? >> What we can do now actually we've talked further with legal counsel

088now that the what what she call it the plus minus she didn't call it an equation but the formula not the formula that you spelled out. What we can do is because there's a way to follow procedures for it and be fair. It gives the board more ability to get to that number, that sweet number of 23 20ish. And what you can do is use the formula and start at kindergarten and move your way down and then stop once you've reached corporation capacity. So you can have both if the board decides to do that. So, I'd like to leave this in because I actually don't agree with that mindset. For me, transfer students, why at this point, if we don't pass the referendum and I think that should be driving all this, I think the

089conversation's very different. But at this point, our transfer students is not to bring in funding. I feel like our community is saying the referendum is transfer students is to equalize grade levels. So if we're looking at an overall capacity number that will not necessarily equalize grade levels and so that is why for me this byra grade grade level is super important because that's the capacity to me that matters if we have for whatever reason hit capacity by 8th grade. I don't want 9th 10th 11th 12th year grade to be low numbers. This overall one is going to give us kind of what the picture is if we met capacity. But to me, the reason for accepting transfer students is I don't want our grade levels to be all skiwampy. And so that's why to me

090this is a very important part. >> Does that make sense? >> It does. But the point Yes, totally makes sense. And the the equalizing grade levels, it would start earlier and so it' be consistent throughout. So that was the point of having both. But your point, I get your point. But so if as as those larger numbers were transferring out, if you were at the 2300, eventually if you're starting at kindergarten and going down, eventually it should more equalize out to where you're at your 2300 equal. That's why you would keep going to the next grade level. But I'm not arguing with you. I I get your point. I just wanted you to understand the other side of how it still could equalize. Does that make sense what I'm saying? not not suggesting I'm trying

091to >> No, I just um feel like there is a difference at looking at maximum enrollment versus each specific grade level. Um and that's why I um but I see what you're saying, but I still think that the for me it's a big deal this by grade level. So just also so you know one of the things those of you who weren't in that policy meeting one of the things we talked about is there was originally a table in this and the the conversation was that the table is worthwhile and and should be there but should now be in the policy that there should be a link in the policy to the table that allows the table to be updated with changing information. So that that's one of the things that's kind of changed here

092in conversation that is I think part of this conversation too >> and that is something that I'd like to recommend that we can vote on on Monday is I feel like it's very important to have the table in it. Um to me what the capacity is the key point of all of this and I don't want year to year this capacity changing technically behind the scenes. I want capacity set and if ever it needs to be changed then we have a two-reading policy um review the community is well informed that we're changing the capacity and it's very transparent out in the open has to be done with a link honestly what can happen three years from now is the superintendent could say I want to increase capacity and just does it and if I people

093aren't like watching it super specifically so for me I would like that to be an option that is in here because I think um that that is kind of the key transparent piece is to share what our view is of capacity. >> Okay. >> Do we already have the total corporation capacity listed somewhere else in the policy? Because um and I I totally get where you're going and I also get where you're going too. So I keeping the language of grade and building level capacity. I think it's good to allow that flexibility but also proceeding in a practical way with how he's talking about with starting with kindergarten first because then you get to keep those students for longer. So I think we can do both at once. Uh my fear about putting the chart

094in the policy is that then it becomes an act of policy to change it. And if we already have the number, you know, the total district number and that each building number set in stone, that's another one of those things that I think is slightly redundant and makes it a little bit harder to read if we've got a chart in the middle of all this, too. I I'm going back and forth on a couple things. Um, one I I think part of our discussion that we had was capacity um especially in those younger years is dependent on the number of classrooms that we have open. And so if our capacity was based off of say seven classrooms for kindergarten um and we decided that um we wanted to open another classroom that would boost capacity

095that would have to if if the table was in policy or was in the policy then we would we as a board would have to vote twice. place first and second reading to add a classroom uh functionally because we would be increasing policy. If there's a way around that, like I I think that having the the table in here would be could work. Or there are also other ways that like um if we had eight classrooms uh let's say of in one grade and we decided to we made room um somehow for another one for another classroom to to have nine. that would that would require us changing the policy to add another classroom. And I I'm not sure how we could do that easily within the pol within policy. Um but I I also

096do like um in terms of the focusing on grade level capacity um because functionally grade level or transfer capacity uh or the the total capacity is a function of grade level capacity and so it's kind of duplicative and we I mean I don't know like once we reach capacity on each grade level then we get to um uh will be at total capacity. So I don't need I think that it makes more sense to frame it around grade level capacity because that's where that's how we determine individual capacity. >> I don't have a problem in there. >> Oh, sorry. I don't have a problem leaving the words grade level in there, but I agree with David. The handicap there is if um particularly so if we're gonna if we're going to put the table aside

097and link to it as information then it makes sense to say that that exists in the paragraph by saying grade level. So you're essentially saying like hey there's grade level capacity. Oh wait what's grade level capacity? Oh click here there's the table for it. That would to me be a compromise that would allow the superintendent and administrators to add that classroom David's talking about. Um, but still would be a a point of clarity for the reader um that it exists. I don't I mean I don't have an issue at all with grade level capacities, but in that scenario where we open another section that that's a different story and you're not going to necessarily know that until we get into the summer and all this is done. >> And this also gets a little bit

098to Mr. Rogers. I'm glad you're still here. Um >> aren't you glad you stayed? We have we have capacity at 7th through 12th grade that I'm struggling to figure out exactly how like let's say we're at capacity as seventh graders but we're not at eth. Um are we really at capacity for seventh graders and not at eth because um I I think about things like math. Um there are seventh graders taking eighth grade math. Um there are other classes that u as you go through you have students from different grades all taking them. And is it more of a building level and class size capacity or is it truly a grade level capacity? Like if we're over >> Yeah. If we're if we're over say freshman by five uh but we're under um sophomores by

099five. Is that fine? like or how like I I I'm not sure how to how to think about that at the high school. >> So we when I talked when I was presented grade level and we in high school or secondary because junior high and high school are very similar. We don't think grade level that way because like you just said every kid starts to get this own their own unique key code. Even the seventh graders, which is probably the most boxed in that we have, I still probably have about 50 seventh graders, 40 to 50, that don't take seventh grade math. So, they just go to other places. And since I have about 70 staff members that teach both, most of them teach both junior and senior high, then it just becomes I maybe

100need this big seventh grade, for example, as they start to move through the building, I may need to have an an additional section of English nine somewhere, right? And even then, as they start to get through English classes, it's not just English 10, English, English 10, English 11, 12. they they have a lot of different areas in English that they can go. So, no, it's not black and white, real linear and neat. The secondary schedule is very messy and it's very it's very much an amalgam kind of every year. Our goal is to try to meet the needs of what the kids request and the requests drive our schedule. That's mostly. Yeah. >> Okay. So, in the way that I'm thinking about this, >> I hope I answered your question. In the way that I'm

101thinking about this, you really have two scenarios. You have some classes that are standalone where if a student is able to take that class at some point as a student in our school. So film lit comes to mind. >> Okay. >> Right. So they at some point in their four years in high school, they ought to be able to get into that one semester film class at some point in time. >> That's one extra scenario. Okay. Another is when you have one teacher who teaches one subject level, I will point to the one in the room. Um, however many enroll in that, he's he is their teacher period. And they have to have a certain number of years of that in order to get a different variety of diploma or whatever. So to me, well,

102I know I'm sorry. I'm old school. >> That's a sore subject. >> I'm sorry, but that that's a different thing. So it to me you have different layers of that. Yes, is everybody going to be able to get through math and English and science because you have teachers who teach a lot of those grade levels in those subjects. You don't have that in some of the other options. And so to me capacity actually hits you in the specialists faster than it hits you in math and English. Is that true or is that >> it I I see what you're saying. Basically, if I hear you right, if I have a department of 10, I have a lot more flexibility than >> a department of one. >> One, correct? Um, they would argue that they have

103a department of five. Yes, I know that we've got three Spanish and then one French and and one German. Um, but we also are adding to that, like we're taking away a little bit of our flexibility by seventh grade rotations, by even allowing the eighth graders in ahead of schedule. we we don't have to do those things. They want to do that. I get it. We like we like that philosophy to um allow kids to experience a little bit more so they can make a more educated choice. They they want it for recruiting, right? Which makes total sense. Um the biggest sell for their program is them, right? His personality. Not that you would know that he has it. Um so that's they want kids in their room. And so if they're tasked with 20

104or 25, I can handle it. I please get give me more. Um, now are we going to turn kids away? No, not through their four years. Will I have to say to an eighth grader, we're full? Yeah, but you know, we we've just kind of started that over before me, but it's not been around forever, right? Eighth graders starting language. So, and we did that also as things have changed. We needed to get to three years of them, right? Or two and two by high school. Well, our students wanted to get those kind of off the books, if you will, so they get all to the AP classes. So, that driver is is not there as much. Thank you state for not making that so important. So we've got a lot of electives. Uh we

105do have singleton electives, but we don't have anything that I'm seeing that says just because I have a class that's bigger um that won't let kids take facts, you know, my oneheim teacher or my one Amanda Hart teacher. They can still get there. >> Okay. >> Now, long answer again. >> No, it's good. Thank you for that. I appreciate it. and the the physical limits of specials classes, language classes. I mean, this isn't just a problem at our school is problem at all schools. Right. >> Right. Actually, most specials people are are recruiting. That's what they're doing constantly. They want to make sure they have have these kids. So, we have plenty of electives to go around. I have I have students that well, we know our our fine arts, right, which is really strong

106here. And those burn like four four years typically, maybe six, but four years in a high school, um it's hard for them to even get into an art class. And if you do that in an art class, well, they're not taking necessarily that that world language or they're not taking um our tech classes or they may not be taking our fax classes. There's only so many that they can take within their seven period day, four years, right? So, and that's one of our summer school drives is to try to free up classes so they can take more. So, uh we're not at when I say capacity it's a word we're using we have plenty of electives to go around for students to be able to get to >> and the reason I asked that and

107I think Rachel mentioned this in another way as well is that there was concern about French class having you know 35 students um yeah I take it you probably rely on the teacher to tell you when too many is too many >> we do and I we do have there's two areas for world language right now it's their seventh grade rotation and and then it's we can fix that. That's an easy fix. And then it was our first year French and German. As you said, there's just there's just one, right? Um there is constant communication between teacher and director of counseling, uh Mrs. Sheffield, who does our master schedule, and then also Mrs. Sheffield to me. So it is, hey, we've got these numbers. What do you think? Yes, I can take one more. That's

108fine. or it might be um Hey Chad, I think we're going to need to go to two sections of this and in French and German and you can ex you can correct me if I'm wrong, but you have to kind of go through a a cycle of two two ones and and then one. Is that right? Like two and then one. >> Of course, come on up. >> Because it is a little bit more complic complicated for the two single world language teachers. Um >> just introduce yourself first for the home audience. >> Andy S teacher and the guy he's been referring to. Um what happened is several years ago we finally decided look we can't find somebody to teach one period. Well so if I expanded to seven or eight periods I can only

109teach six. What would happen? And we we found that through experience it just doesn't work. So when when uh Mr. Mr. Shriner was principal. We kind of said, "Okay, we should we're going to have to somehow find a way. We can fill up six periods, but if you have two ones, then the following year it'll be two twos and only one one, right? Because it makes sense. You can flip through that." And that therefore an eighth grader and ninth grader as your son's going to be a ninth grader. An e could take it in eighth grade could take it in nth grade, we'll work it out somehow. We'll get you in there. The problem is this past year and and this is what happens when you have a high school where you allow people to

110do what they want to do rather than in Germany where they just tell you what you're going to do. Um, and I'm not suggesting that at all. That's that's that's a set curriculum and then I don't think it meets what our kids need. What happens is in one year when you go from five sections of Spanish one down to three, those kids go somewhere and those 50 chose French and German. And so now we have a double section of one. So that would normally be then a double section of two next year. So we're going to have a little bit of massaging to do with schedules, but we won't tell a kid in ninth grade you can't take it. We're going to look at the eighth graders and say you've got more years so you

111can fit it in. And I believe that that's correctly that. And the other thing I would say is if you're concerned about the seventh grade rotation right now we're sitting at as he just mentioned we we're sitting at about 30 to 33 kids and I I would divide the difference between ideal and practical. Ideal would be 25. Great. I love that. That's not going to help us. We that's not where we need to be. Practical we can handle 3032. We can do that. We've been doing it. We'll do we'll continue doing it. And it's six weeks. They have six weeks with each teacher. They rotate. it works and there's a there's a lot of escape valves because part of what the state is requiring between the mathic math literacy things and interventions and other things

112that students need coming into seventh grade to get them up to speed. We can find a way and we're doing that now with 20 I believe she said 29 but I believe it's 2071 >> 211 okay but none of us I have any idea we have all I know is kids I have in front of me tomorrow morning >> thank you >> the sheet up it's 211 >> I trust you >> thank you >> it almost feels as though high school and even junior high scheduling is very complex and difficult to understand for people who don't do it all day every day. And the kindest thing we might be able to do for your building as a board is to allow you the flexibility to put the kids where the kids need to be and

113trust you to handle your job like to do your job well as you do. >> If numbers are, you know, if you got some some worries about numbers, I I need to hear that. I I do so that we can help fix that. I do. Well, I have a question. >> Sure, go for it. >> So, um, I'm understanding and to me it makes sense when we're looking at 9th through 12th. >> Okay. >> I think same numbers generally in each of those grades. There's lots of elective options. I actually have no issue whatsoever if my nth grader can't take a class because it's full, needs to take it as an older grade. Like, okay, >> I feel like that um that seems to be working, at least what I'm hearing and personal experience. The

114part that I'm still not grasping is having seventh grade numbers equal that because I personally have had children who are sitting in classes that are 33, 35, 38, and we're talking social studies in seventh grade, English seventh grade, language in seventh grade, and there's been severe discipline issues. There's teacher issues. This is their first time in a junior high, and it's just honestly feels like chaos. Okay? >> And no fault of the teachers. the teachers are doing a phenomenal job. So I guess my question is why can't we have lower seventh grade numbers and then boost for capacity? Meaning if we do decide to bring transfers in now, if it's just our in resident, we're going to do what we need to do, >> right? I get it. >> But I'm talking about our capacity.

115If we decide to take transfer new transfer students, >> why can't we have why don't you have seventh grade lower than all the rest? Because seventh grade is moving together, >> they don't have as many options. Mainly math is their only flexibility. >> Yes, maybe we we are already changing our schedule. So to your point, seventh grade I say this I'm you know in year two but traditionally at least the last few years what we've tried to do philosophically is say hey everyone take kind of the same stuff and get exposure. Well, as we are now creating some more electives, as we are now trying to even say, okay, a study hall, for example, might be really good in that transitional year between sixth grade to 7th grade. Um, as the state's mandating, okay, you're

116going to do math interventions and we can even see potentially a need for language arts interventions. Don't know if that we can make that work or not. What I'm saying to you is those he he mentioned the word release valve. So that's actually creating a seventh grade schedule that does have some fluidity to it and not this cookie cutter where everybody goes where they go. And so our schedule probably boxed us in more than anything. And we still would like to keep philosophically for the majority of kids to be able to get exposure. But we also have some unique needs across classes that we may need to be created. In other words, we already are um and I think that we can get some of those numbers down, right? um the the >> well I

117think my question is at some point if I understand scheduling teens I mean this much of it is there is a set capacity you know if you have a >> set number in the class >> set number that the counselor is allowing to go join a group in general >> okay >> because I've had kids who are like I want to take that class it's full >> right >> so there's >> those are the parents I hear from by the way >> those are there's some threshold there and what I'm saying is our threshold has been significantly high especially for seventh grade and others. If we drop our um capacity number, we could drop that to be 25 per se and have that be the max in a science class, in a social studies, in

118these classes where where to me is making a big deal. And so that's why I'm still I guess I'm not understanding because my problem is the numbers are showing to me practicality what we don't want and parents are complaining about saying we have a huge seventh grade we have huge class sizes okay >> this isn't new and just because I appreciate that we're going to add a few more options but still seventh grade looks very different >> schedule and options wise than all you know than 12th grade or 10th if that Makes sense. >> Can I jump in? >> Yeah, go for it. >> Um, I think one of the issues that we're getting at here is the numbers for K6 for capacity are super easy to figure out >> because it's just whatever our

119cap of class, right? Right. Um, but >> we individual CL we can cap a K6 class at whatever number we want to cap it at and then just multiply that. But um we can't necessarily as easily do that. Like we can't say 25 for a high school class and then calculate our um capacity based off of that because there's always flexibility. Like let's say that we have 40 uh kids who want to take this one class um or need to take this one class. That that might require opening two sections of it. But um there might be ju just just saying a cap I think a cap on the classroom size uh for a high school class is different than transfer and total enrollment if that at each grade because the the classes that students

120are in are so fluid that I think it's a different it's a different question we need to figure out what is is um the total number That generally gets us in this ballpark of of class size, but then there might need to be a separate discussion on capping individual classes. Does that confuse it more? >> No. Or does that make >> I mean it doesn't So there's a couple things. I'll go to the the easier question first and then I think I'll get to yours on the seventh grade because I think that there's two pieces. But let's say I drop my my secondary numbers down. It doesn't necessarily solve my problem. It can actually create more problems. So, one of the things I say on on tours when I when I'm talking to prospective families

121or families that have moved in, is what's great about us, especially considering where we are, is we are a small school with big school opportunities. So, we have tons of electives and AP classes. And as we start to reduce potentially my our numbers, I might lose those or I might have to then move those down to every other year. Um the numbers where they don't get nice and neat. If I had 40 to 45 kids requesting this class, um obviously that would be two sections. But what might happen is because the key code for these kids is well I'm in orchestra and I want this AP and I want this AP at those 45 maybe 40 still can only go to this period and then the other five can go to this period. It just

122doesn't always work neat and so even then I'm having to turn kids away or get out of orchestra or get out of this AP. Um and so that's the frustration that we have um where we start to to create all these little singletons. So the lower numbers I have, the more singletons I will then create, which makes it harder to take classes. That's just the nature of the beast. Seventh grade, it is a big class. You're right. Um, and learning from what I've learned already this year and and not me, all of us, it doesn't take much to again go to offer the study hall, which is what we're already doing for a certain group. Um, offer maybe another study hall for the music kids. Those 15 kids could alleviate our world language issue. um

123we can clearly look at instead of this section of eighth grade English, I can look at another section of seventh grade English potentially. So, there's a lot we can still do with some of the core classes if they're too big. We do have recommendations that we we try to adhere to like science classes 24 we try because that's the lab space but we do break those uh guidelines on occasion like I just said because this science class might have 17 and those kids needed it so we might go to like 27 to get that those kids in there because their schedule didn't work that way. And that's the kind of not neatness part of our secondary schedule, no matter what the grade is. Um, I hope that makes some sense. I hope that answered your

124question a little bit. >> And so my question is this. If do you have capacity in the building? Do you have empty rooms? >> I do. Yeah. Okay. So if something were to happen and you said, "Okay, I just we just need to hire another teacher." You have a room that you could put that teacher in? >> Yeah, I do. I have a lab for sure. I have two labs. >> Yeah. Okay. That's that's helpful. Thank you. Because I I think that's the other piece that we have to look at. It's the same thing at the intermediate school. They have empty classrooms. They could open another section. >> Um and at some point, particularly in junior senior, if you have just even one or two teachers can take care of a lot of the capacity

125issues depending on how where they're placed, what they're doing. >> Correct. >> Yeah. Correct. So again, if you're talking about increasing our ADM, money comes with that money pays for additional teachers should that be necessary. So I come back to this issue of not wanting to limit the administrator's ability to make the best educational experience for our students in the classroom and in some cases that is not less students um particularly in those upper grade levels. So I just I I kind of agree with what Amy said earlier. We want to be cautious of putting too tying too many hands so that they can't just do the best decision for students. Is it crazy to say perhaps that we have a firm number for K through six and then for 7th through 12th grade we

126have a total like 1,200 and let that 1,200 people be distributed among those grade levels in a way that makes sense for that specific year based on maybe there's a huge seventh grade class and so we don't want to let in a whole bunch of, you know, or a huge eighth grade class. So, we don't want to let in a whole bunch of new seventh graders or, you know, whatever. But we have room for more seniors because they're not going to be taking eighth grade math, you know, and and and make it one big pile of students for you to sort out rather than trying to say 192 per grade and that's the hard line. Would would that be more flexible? Well, we always we always want more kids. I'm sorry. That's us. But I

127would tell you, you're you're right on the fact that I don't notice anything easier if all of my classes were even or if I do have one that is 25 more than this. Like I that doesn't we don't even notice that. It's it's just >> it's a drop in the bucket to us based off where kids go. And just because they're even doesn't mean I have I keep picking on orchestra. doesn't mean I have the same musicians, right? It doesn't mean that I have the same amount of kids that want to take um film lit. It doesn't mean that I have the same. So, it's not uniform across the board, whereas um to your point, seventh grade is a little bit more we kind of cookie cutter you through. Definitely in the the elementaryaries, I'm

128not an expert there, but they all are taking these exact same things. They don't in hours and we can't predict. Just like we have a big, you know, athletic volleyball senior class one year and the next year we have one in the junior class. Even though the numbers are the same, it doesn't work that way. It's just not neat. >> So maybe having >> so >> an overall capacity for your building >> that would make sense because my teachers are at 70 or whatever it is. And so again, >> then you can >> if we do get full, just like he said, look, if we are full for for German, we're full and we can help protect that that German one or that French one or we can help protect that seventh grade rotation. We

129absolutely can do that. >> Does it make sense to consider seventh and eighth grade as a separate entity? because they're still a little bit more formative age is to kind of as to Disha's point, you know, they're >> they're still trying to figure out like I don't know where the bathroom is half the time as far as I can tell. So, >> I don't know. They they they catch on quicker than I did. That's they knew which stairwells went where. I did about three months. >> So, I mean, does it make sense to say there's a high school capacity, there's a junior high capacity, and there is an elementary capacity. Does that do it that way do anything to you? If you're saying is there is there far more flexibility in the high school than

130the junior high, there is more flexibility. I don't think it's greater than um again based off of our secondary schedule even that it's opening up more for the seventh grade. Um possibly I would say you're kind of starting to split hairs a little bit. >> Okay. Thank you. I think having huge grade levels changes to me does bring up a lot of issues from extracurricular activity or sports like if I have a child trying out for seventh grade volleyball if they're in particularly a large grade they just have bad luck to play you know or being on a um graduation day you know what does graduation look like for maybe a grade that was this huge grade and so I get your point and I do think that it's a valid point that we can

131be a lot more flexible um with those numbers, but I I still find am concerned at saying we're doing away with grade level capacity because it's like a shot in the dark of who's going to apply. And um I do think that as a parent, my kid will suffer if they are happen to be, which my kid has been one of the larger ones. there has been negative effects on being able to participate in the math programs and other things because there just wasn't enough spots and if she had been born one year earlier and so that's why to me I agree with the flexibility and I think it does look different but >> I personally would not like to see just a general we don't care um because I >> nobody's saying we don't

132care well no I mean not care from if it's 9th through you know 7th through 12th we just want numbers or bodies I would like you know I think finding a clear number and capacity to me is what we're trying to do with transfer students is give some consistency to programs instead of we have a huge graduating class and now our numbers are super low because we had had tons get in that year is just kind of that viewpoint but I know it's there's gray area in the middle of all this >> I think you need to adjust your definition of suffering um my kid went to a college with 36,000 students and she wasn't able to get into some glasses and she didn't call that suffering, she called that life. So, I don't know

133if I would call it suffering. That seems a little >> Well, so I think what we've we've hit upon though is that we disagree um on this particular issue. So, this is one that we need to label for a vote. So, the question is just does everybody have the information they need and do we have the options outlined correctly in the policy that we can make a choice? Have you gone over the options yet? >> So I I think one of the qu one of the questions that we're getting at here is related to the table itself and the numbers that are there, not necessarily the text. Um because I'm getting the sense that um there's varying perceptions first on the recommended capacity for different grades um and then whe and then whether we should

134stick to a strict grade level capacity or go to a completely open and I don't know that I've heard any of us completely on like a just fill the high school u regard regardless of how many per grade or if they're somewhere in the middle where like I look at um 12th grade capacity. So looking at at 9 through 12 um they're almost all 910 and 11 are 185 193 191 which are all right near the 192 um uh capacity limit. Uh 12 12th grade is at 167. Um, so what I I I wonder if like would it wouldn't probably I don't know that it would make sense to add more to 9th, 10th, 11th beyond what we have as our capacity limits there to even that out with 12th grade um and and going

135with more with the building max. But maybe we could go a little more than the grade level capacity if one grade is super low. But then I if looking at the next two grades, they're both either at or above capacity. So I I do think that probably sticking with the grade level capacity and maybe allowing a little bit of flexibility um for 9th or 12th, but not seventh and eighth. Um another possibility with this is if we're looking at the table, um we have seventh and eighth grade at the same capacity levels as 9th to 12th. What if we reduced the seventh and eighth grade capacity to be the same as fifth and sixth, but then slightly increased 9 to 12? That way there was an a lower lower number for transition in to the

136building and then we allowed more at high school. >> That's sensible. Does the policy committee want to bring next week? Uh, no. No, the policy committee does not. >> So, this is actually we have a meeting. >> You don't have a meeting emergency meeting. >> Thank you. >> We'd like to not do it, but >> Well, I'll tell you what. Why don't we take a brief um uh na nature break since it's 8:00 and we'll come back in 10 minutes. Okay. >> Wonderfulness. for the note. You know, I think that those are different because they we want those grades to be no more or those classes and those grades to Just a second. Got make sure Brennan has here comes George. Rachel made a good point during the break that she would like to lead

137off with. So, we're going to be here all night if we what we're we're kind of out of the the realm of what policy development looks like. Really, what we need to be doing is just like we did in section E. Hey, we as a board either I can either get behind option one or option two. Um, we really need to get to that place with capacity. So what I would what I'm hearing I would like to just say it and see if anybody disagrees with me that these are the two things that we are debating. If we can come to that conclusion then putting the language behind the concept is not hard. So I just I'd like to throw that out there and see if we can get there that way. So the the

138we're in that capacity ADM counts and ATS available transfer seats. The first thing that I hear us debating is that there would either be a table or there would be no table but there would be a link. To me those are conceptually the two things that we are debating on when it comes to that piece. Would everyone be satisfied with either a table in the policy or a a link to the to the table in the policy? Everybody would be satisfied with one of those two options. Okay, that's one thing that we're going to need to vote on. The other one is the next one is if we are going to have a building capacity um with a grade level capacity. So if both of those it's a both and or if we're going to

139have as I'm hearing Dr. Yin's kind of comments being if it's an eitheror. So it's a building capacity or a cap in a grade level then it's shut off versus there is a capacity level set by um the building capacity plus the grade level capacity if if that I don't know if I'm saying that correctly. >> Repeat that for me so I can write this down. >> Sure. Um so option one would be there's a building cap capacity or a grade level. So both things are in there if if the capac or if the enrollment either hits the grade level capacity or the building capacity transfers are shut off. That's option one. The other is a both end. It has to hit both the grade level and the building capacity to shut off. I think

140that summarizes the two thoughts. Can everybody get behind one of those options? >> Yeah. >> I'm not sorry >> the both end. >> I'm not understanding because so what I'm coming from and so then you can help me see how to understand right is to have available transfer seats. We need to have a grade level capacity to determine what that number is. >> Yes. >> So in some ways it doesn't matter what the building level capacity. Now yes the building level capacity is adding all those numbers together. But I guess what my view what I'm not understanding is how do we get that with just the building level capacity? >> I understand what you're saying. Yeah, I understand what you're saying. Um, I think it makes I think the distinction the words that I'm not

141putting on this is it makes sense to have a grade level capacity only K through six. It makes sense to have a grade level and building level at those higher grades. Yeah, I see >> so that they can exceed the numbers to allow for optimization. >> So, I don't know if that matches exactly. Anna's making the eyes at me that say, "No, I don't know what you're talking about, lady." Well, you have to have a grade level capacity. You have to have that. >> So, there's a grade level capacity, but this is giving permission to exceed the grade level capacity is >> Got it. >> No, no, >> that's what this policy talks about is that you can temporarily exceed grade level capacity. Um, but that's only if uh students admission is required by law.

142So, it's not >> This is where I think it gets fuzzy. I guess that's what I'm saying to you. And I'm not sure what the two options are, but can we get down to two options? Maybe that's a better way to say it. >> So, the way that Can I give names of who? Sure. >> Because we all know who submitted it. The way Mrs. Munford explained it in the policy, >> you can exceed if you're keeping the students you currently have. >> Okay. >> So, that's that's that's that part's not really fuzzy. Um, this do we all agree with that so far? >> Okay. That's that's one option. Okay. So you have to have per grade level capacity so that you can determine what numbers you're taking per grade level to make it fair

143to fair process. >> Okay. >> What we learn so so that part it's not either having that or not having it. You have to have that. >> Okay. what you can have is building or district level and I'll use Mr. point because he's had this dialogue with us several times here I think and certainly with Mrs. Roth and that we talked about if you remember in the summer of keeping things consistent. So anywhere from 23 to 2320 initially we didn't think you could say you couldn't you couldn't just say 2320 because how would you determine that but with the grade level capacity especially spelled out the way Mrs. Mumford spelled it out we can set that district capacity too so that you're not going over a certain grade level. I'm thinking that you guys or

144the board would decide are we going simply by grade level capacity or are we going grade level capacity and district capacity? >> That makes sense to me. >> Okay. >> Are everybody's views covered by one of those options that we would go grade level only or grade level? Can can it be by building? It could be but our recommendation would be district. Okay. So are everybody's views represented by grade level only and grade level or grade level and district caps. >> Yes. >> That would be option two. >> Option two is grade level and district. Option one is grade level only. >> What's option three? >> I propose to ending and So the so option three is a combination of one and the two. So that's I I seen that before. We didn't >> it's

145um >> conceptually what is it? >> Um with option two it's changed the and building in capacity to or so that if it hits either of them it stops. >> Okay. So grade level capacity only is option one. Grade level and district >> and grade level or district >> got a full round thing there. Okay. I I also added the the total number of transfer students. >> That's a separate thing to vote on. >> That'll be a separate >> but but now you are talking. So when you say option one option two you are not saying the option one option two on this file right so you are just a >> I'm just I'm just writing the concepts down right now like just >> concepts options >> yes so just concepts and then we can

146put words behind concepts but >> can you help me understand what this looks like so um in March or April or whatever date is determined we're looking at our capacity number and we're saying are we allowing any available transfer seats per grade. Okay. So, if we're saying districtwide is the number that drives it, how does that like how do you get to that? like um so then we do the lottery or whatever it's supposed to be called whatever date and is it like we're starting with some the younger grade and doing it and then we just are doing it until we hit that max and then we're saying I guess I'm not understanding what this looks like meaning we do it and it hits it on a few but it doesn't hit it at all

147and then we have hit that number so now we don't allow it or if you can explain to me Dr. RER >> absolutely >> I'm not conceptually understanding it matching with the process. >> Okay, there there went on I think too many microphones were on earlier. So the way we would get to the process and part of this came when we were develop the adding the capacity component was we've heard concern from some board members that if it doesn't feel like there's a reason to be more secure at getting in, then there has to be a stopping point. And the way to get to a stopping point is to set a certain district-wide number. So if we said 2320 was the district-wide number, but you also have to have capacity at grade level to get

148there. Is that what it would look like is what you described that at kindergarten you would you would look at the numbers and then if you're not at 2320 you would go to first grade and look at the numbers. And this is after all current transfer students are still in and accounted for. So that number includes them. Then you go to second grade, third grade. If if by seventh grade you're at 2020. If that's what the board decided to put in policy, then we're closed. If there we're not at 2320, you would go on to the next grade level and you would stop at the point that uh you were at capacity. So like right now our seventh grade going to be eighth grade is is significantly over capacity. So we would have our capacity

149limits for the 12 grade 13 grades that equals supposedly the 2320 number. >> No, it's actually over. >> That's over. >> Yeah. But this balance that allows you to balance class sizes at the kindergarten and then second then third grade. But you also still keep that desire to live in the district which we heard from stakeholders and that we stop at 2320. And so if you want to guarantee to be in find a way to buy a home in the in the district >> if I if I may so what you've come up with is a way to encourage that over time. So if you don't get in in kindergarten your chances actually get lower and lower as the grades go up. So then if you're really still seriously considering coming here, you need to

150move in. >> That's exactly right, Mr. Ly. It also addresses, we heard during >> focus groups that preserve that culture. So start them in kindergarten with the rigor and build and build and build and that culture of that student all through the years remains consistent. In theory, it also creates if it works a predictability or classes size class sizes moving up. So K through six, it's not are we seven sections this year or are we eight. It's a more predictable number. It creates where we know our neighbors, we know our classmates, we know the parents, they're joining us, hopefully joining the parent council. And then hopefully it eliminates what we're currently seeing at some point where we have an influx in certain grade levels and that's it just creates more stability for the district as

151well as the students that are joining us. So we'll come back to this this question. Is everybody satisfied with one of the options? One of them is that it's grade level only. That's it. Um, we hit capacity and that's closed for that grade. Option two is grade level and a district cap as Dr. Grryer has just described. Um, I don't know that option three is any different. It's I'm not Yeah, it's it's to me it's the same thing. And so that that's really what we're talking about is grade level only or grade level in district. Are everybody's views represented by those two options? I'm not sure Dr. Yen if that matches what you're wanting, but Dr. Reiner's explanation helps. >> Right. The cap for each grade and the cap for the total district. That's what

152we we have, right? >> Yes. Are you satisfied with that as an option? >> Yeah. Yeah. That >> Okay. So that's what we would be voting on on Monday night on this option in the policy is grade level only or grade level in district. >> Right. Okay. So we have just to recap um >> so far we are voting on if in this just talking about the capacity part again we have another vote earlier. We are voting on if we're going to have a table or if we're going to have no table but a link to a table. Um, and then we're talking about um the second section of this that we're going to vote on is if the caps are set grade level only or grade level and district. >> Can I make a

153>> please? Yeah, go for it. >> So, I I also want to clean this up so that it's more clear what we're voting on. I think that all of um legal's edits like now that rereading it with this extra piece, I think that we can remove the um uh by grade level um grade level capacity because then we can define capacity at the if we accept all these pink edits. I'm pointing to my screen, but it's like in this paragraph that's up, we can all accept all of that. take the available transfer seats may further be limited so as not to exceed the maximum enrollment by grade level or capacity >> corporation capacity >> or or grade level and corporation. So the the change that we would be voting on would be to that final

154sentence um defining that as um maximum enrollment in by grade level and district. So that is the rest of the language in that paragraph is okay. >> That makes sense to me. >> So I hate to to nitpick, >> but if we're going to say and are we truly trying to say that we will stop accepting transfers if we reach corporation capacity or if any one single grade hits capacity? >> No, we shut it off by grade level. Correct. >> Yes. because that that >> so if kindergarten is full which is not our situation right now but if kindergarten is full then there could still be capacity at the first grade and there could still be capacity at the second grade. >> So the reason I say that is to suggest changing option two I

155know this sounds like a very small difference but you if it depending on how it reads make a huge difference changing the and to an or because they do effectively say the same thing but the or makes sure that we don't unintentionally say we're capping everything as soon as one grade hits limits. Okay. I I is everybody all right if David accepts all the pink there and then we make two separate sentences at the end that are the things we're choosing between. >> Okay. >> Um I just Yeah, I proposed and in addition to the greater level limit and the total capacity, I also propose to add another limit which is the total number of transfers. I explained my rationale in my email on weekend and so because like one thing is as we saw

156in the past several years resident enrollment has declined while the transfer enrollment has increased and actually some families move out and become transfers and that means even though the total number of enrollment doesn't change, we lose resident students. But if we set a total number of transfers, we cannot prevent that phenomena. So, so more people will leave ours, leave the district and become transfers. We don't gain more students, but we lose families and many of those houses might be converted to rentals. So we have been saying in our district we don't have enough houses for families with school age children and but if we don't have something to prevent the people's leaving and we will lose more family more houses to families with school children. So but if we set up a total number of

157transfers people will worried that if I leave become a transfer student maybe the total number of transfer student limit will be triggered then I may not be able to transfer back. So you see my >> I I understand conceptually what what you're saying. I think that >> that's an additional question to vote on >> thing. Yeah. >> Can I Yeah. >> Because we are right now talking about the limit. I feel the limit for each grade, the limit for the total and the limit for the total transfers are the three limits and whatever limits is triggered. No. >> So she's so we can add option three there that says by grade level capacity or district capacity or percentage of transfers or number total number of transfers. >> Yeah, >> that would be option three. I

158mean what I'm saying is any of these threshold is reached then we say no >> it's not like a all is n and n end >> so we just make sure when we take a new one so we make sure okay we didn't reach any of those limit and uh >> can you scroll it yeah >> so that's what I proposed >> further >> there you go >> does that work as three options it would just added on to the right after maximum enrollment. >> Either option one is by grade level capacity, option two is by grade level capacity, right? Capacity and option three is by grade level capacity. >> I suppose yeah, I did capacity or total transfer capacity. >> Yeah, it add more kind of uncertainty for the transfer option and >> that

159addresses everybody. >> Yes. >> Okay. Yeah, >> I am going to delete what we have below for options one and two. >> Before you do, can I ask you a question? >> Yeah. Can you leave it at either bygrade level and then bygrade level and district capacity and then >> bygrade level and um >> total total total >> total uh whatever the set limit is like 160 for example and I I suggest that only because from our perspective our recommendation to you would be to keep steady Now, I'm not I know the board feels differently on that, so the board's going to have to decide this. But if you asked us our recommendation, we would tell you that if we can keep enrollment steady, like we had suggested in the summer, then that keeps bargaining

160time consistent dollars. Now, another argument could be or uh recommendation of the board. So, you'll all have to decide this, but could be that you keep it set and you raise the referendum so you build that menu in or that could come later. My only point to you is if we could keep it steady which hears the community perhaps of um it's hard it there's no guarantee and the grade level capacity which is required it could for from our perspective it keeps it a steady amount of state revenue coming in. So, if we could have that option for the board to vote on with our recommendation, that would be great. But ultimately, the board should discuss and decide what your options are going to be. >> Which one of those options matches what you're wanting

161to do from a to me option two is what you're saying >> exactly. >> So, you're you're wanting us you're wanting us to define right in here. Um, the total enrollment will not exceed in in here. Is that what you're asking? >> I think >> the dis Yes. the district total enrollment would not exceed and then what 2330 if that were going to be our re if you're going to follow our recommendation. The other one was you only take so many students. If you do that then enrollment could start to decline. >> So I think that option two is what you're talking about. Is it? >> Yes, it is. >> Okay. So we're going to leave option one, option two, and option three. But the recommendation of administration is option two. I do have a

162question with total transfer capacity. Would that not be calculated as and figured into either the grade level capacity or the district capacity? Are you thinking like a maximum number of transfer students? >> Yes. Maximum percentage of students could be transfers. >> Okay. Yeah. Because I'm really worried that when more homes become rental properties in our district, then few residents will want to invest in public education in the community and that may affect the support for the future referendum compared with districts that maintain a high higher rate of families and because I'm from the investor I I just imagine from the investor's perspective the lower the tax the better, right? So but for families and then we don't mind investing in paying higher taxes for for the public school is more long-term thing. You you can

163even set the total transfer capacity I mean total transfer number higher for example right now we have 158 you can set it as 160 to see how it goes. I just but I just don't want it to be unlimited just like for example in a neighborhood many of the neighborhood I also have that point many homeowner associations cap the percentage of rental units to preserve the community stability and the property values similarly I feel the district should cap the transfer enrollment to have to help maintain the long-term financial stability and the community investment to the district and I just you more and more. >> Okay. So, our houses become rental properties in the district and I feel in a long run that won't be good for us. >> Clarification. Thank you. So just you you

164can limit I feel just like some other numbers and uh we can watch the data and make a decisions year by year but I feel having that number at least deter people from moving out unlimitedly because I become I empty out my my spot for myself to transfer back >> and so that's a >> so can everybody though agree that option one option two Option three represents everybody's opinions in some capacity. >> Total transfer >> total percentage of transfers in the district. >> I'm not sure about the percentage and I just say total number of transfer because we have you know that makes people say hey in this district there's no enough housing. Okay, how about we use this number to accommodate that issue. Okay. But how comes like a >> Okay. Is everybody okay

165if David deletes option one and option two that show up below >> that I'm highlighting >> that he's highlighting right now? >> But they needed the kind of form official language though anyway. So >> well it's in the it's in the paragraph up above it. That's kind of hidden. >> Okay. Okay. That's fine. Yeah. The point is there >> one and two were the old in the what we looked at started with tonight. Now we've shifted it so the language is up above. Brandon, could you just scroll down a tiny bit, please? The other way. >> By the way, up up. There you go. So, see, available transfer students may further be limited is so not to exceed the maximum enrollment. And then we're going to add on one of those two those three things.

166So, we can delete then those two purple down below because they're represented by what is there. >> Yeah. >> Is everybody satisfied with those three options? >> Yeah. >> Yes. Anybody have one option one? I think option one maybe can remove that. >> Anybody want to >> I I think we just leave it. >> We'll leave it at there for >> we'll leave it to the leave it to the meeting. >> Although for option three, who's going to take responsibility for actually defining that number? >> We got to define that. >> We need to define other numbers too. >> We can do that all later. Right now the question that Rachel asked is about the old option one and two. Can I delete that? Yes. >> Yeah. Yeah, that's fine. Yes. >> Okay. >> And

167then Okay. >> So, those can be deleted to clean things up. We're going to come in and look at this one option. Could you go back up, Brandon? I'm sorry. Um, we're going to look at this section right now. I would say to you right now, administration is recommending to us option two. And if we come back and we say an option three passes, then they are going to have to come forward with a different recommendation than what they've already recommended. >> Yeah. Just like other capacity numbers that we can set up a number for this one. So people feel, hey, >> you know, if you move out, you may not be able to come back even though we don't reach the capacity for the total, we reach the capacity for the total transfers, right?

168Right. So there's a kind of more uncertainty there into >> Right. This is just to say is everybody represented by those three options and then let's see what passes and then >> we can ask administrators to do. Okay. >> Okay. I added that note in there for us. >> Okay. If we can go down my computer's dying and we've been here that long. Um if we could go down to transfer applications and student policy. So to me the and the priority to me we actually had pretty strong agreement on what would Thank you. We actually had pretty strong agreement on what would work here. Um and I think everybody's input has been included in that. Would everybody look at C transfer applications? This is the prioritization section. And tell me if that represents or doesn't

169represent your position. Help me understand that first one. If it's determined earlier to just accept continuing current transfer students no matter what capacity is, does that then get removed? Does this first step get removed? >> That was something that we discussed at the meeting as to whether this had to be in here or was already determined. Um, and I I think we had added this in, correct me if I'm wrong, um, in case that wasn't approved. >> Um, but it it we didn't feel like it had to be improved, but the discussion ended or or sorry, we didn't feel like it had to be in here, but the discussion made it feel like we needed to incorporate it. So, if it gets voted on, if the majority of the board votes to allow current transfer

170students to stay past capacity, this would be deleted. If it doesn't, then this would stay the same because they would be the priority on that. Is that am I understanding correctly? >> That is what I understand. >> Okay. And we could could you just put that note in parenthesis, David, that this would be deleted if the board votes to >> then hold those. >> Okay. So, >> sorry. >> Yeah, >> she's got the hard job here tonight. >> The board votes to retain all continuing. >> Yes. >> Sorry. Then how about those the the students who used to be a resident student but moved out and want to transfer back? Do they have any priorities? >> They would be new transfers. >> New transfers without priority >> and though and uh the students of employees

171who quit their job >> also new transfers. So these those students don't have any priority on this list at all. Not even correct as >> they don't even have the priority as number two. >> So pretty much they got the the worst scenario for their transfer request. I understand is legally we asked and they she said we're not allowed to add either of those. Like we don't get to choose. We don't get >> we don't get to pick. like we can't even if we wanted to prioritize both those at least my understanding from legal counsel is we're not allowed to have that discussion >> that that's is that fair >> yeah you're right I asked about that specifically and the other thing that you and I had talked about about prioritizing prek cans we can't

172even do that >> yeah we >> go ahead >> we also don't want to incentivize people to come work for a short period of time get their kid in and then leave or um This also disincentivizes people moving out of the district because if they move out of the the district and try to transfer back in, they don't have priority. Uh which is something that um is important that if if they move out, they're not guaranteed to get back in. They're thrown in the pile with everybody else. this. So the deal with this too is as I understand it, we are allowed to shuffle these three things around inside, but they could be in any order, but we can't put any of these other things in. So any of the other options in So I

173mean, if we wanted to, we could make, as I understand it, we could make students residing in the same household, we could make siblings go above ones who have been I don't think that makes sense, but I think we are allowed to do that if we wanted to. You can't. You don't think so? I thought Jesse said you could switch them around, but I could be wrong. But >> I thought she said you could make them equal or different levels. And I thought the other one is we could throw employees in here is what our three options are. Okay. To mess with those orders, but my understanding is those were our only options of the three that we >> want. Yeah, we wanted to protect employees was the thing. >> So, can everybody be represented

174by those options? understanding with David's note that if we don't pass the one then we have to delete that or if we do pass the one we have to delete that. >> Yeah. Um in the sentence below where we reserve the right to levy tuition I need to change the word these to transfer. Um just so where that sentence isn't only referring to the people in that list above. It's referring to all transfers. >> No trans transfer students. Yeah. We wanted to leave that in there in case the law changes so that we have the ability to pivot quickly and >> right >> and I had so I had a question on that. To me the way it reads is a little bit of a gray area and isn't super clear if we are charging

175or not. Um I understand in the first reading this was there but then there was also a sentence in the same first reading policy that read transfer students will not be charged unless otherwise permitted or required by law. To me, that second statement that was in the first um reading of the policy was clear that we're not charging for transfer students unless we're allowed to. Where this one, at least my reading is we can if we're allowed to and someone could say, "So, are you and and so I like where I just would like it that there's no confusion in what we're doing." >> Yeah. I I think that second language you recommended is good. I just would want to make sure that it specifically says tuition because we can still charge for fees as

176we would for all students. >> That language for me. >> Yeah, I just will not be charged unless otherwise. Is everybody okay with that? Anybody have any concerns with that adjustment? >> So, we'll remove um the corporation reserves, right? >> Yeah. >> And is everybody okay with that? >> Yeah. >> Any concerns? >> Sean, are you all right? >> I'm good. >> Okay. You had a face there. I didn't know. I didn't couldn't interpret the face. >> Can I also Sorry. Can I also confirm that everybody's okay with the changes made by legal to at the first paragraph up there of removing grade level enrollment capacity to available transfer seats. >> Right. Okay. >> Yeah. >> And same with the next paragraph. >> Yeah. I I I would prefer to have the combination of this

177sentence and the previous one. It's just one sentence saying transfer students will not be charged tuition period. The district reserve the right to charge tuition if permitted or required by law. I feel that's more clear. And this it's an so it's just a feel it's more like a promise or something and just but if you say okay we are not charged right now but we reserve the right to charge if permitted or required by law. This is a more I feel it's more clear that way. >> So you're recommending transfer students will not >> this is two separated language two separated sentences. So you putting back in what we just deleted? >> Yeah. >> Sorry. >> You're putting back in what we just deleted. >> Um >> maybe so perhaps it just said maybe the

178cleaner language is transfer students will not be charged tuition. Period. However, the corporation reserves the right to charge tuition if permitted or required by >> Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. >> Are we just I think that that's >> the way that you have it now. >> Yes. That works. >> Are you okay with that? That reads better. uh permitted or required. Yeah, it should say >> because there is a big future. >> Yeah, I know. Okay, so >> do we need to see transfer in the second? But it's hopefully it's clear enough. >> I think it's clear enough. >> Okay, we we we still got a ways to go, friends. Okay. Um >> better tonight than next week. That would be >> okay. Uh yeah. Well, um, if we've moved through priority order, priority order, we're

179going down to the the number of transfer number of requests to transfers exceeds. >> Sorry, go back to the dates. >> Yeah, but I think we still have a paragraph. This >> Yeah, go right there. >> There we go. So this one, this the previous version said any established limits. It was just wordy. We just used the word available transfer seats. That's the adjustment here. >> Everything else in this paragraph stayed the same >> except for the dates. >> Um Oh, you're right. I'm sorry. So the date is another thing that we had some some differing differing opinions on. The reason for we discussed for moving it earlier in the year was to allow for families to plan. Basically, we know it's after the January count, this would allow families to plan. Um, and then

180because the the lottery happens earlier in the year when they can still do that. So, this is another thing for voting on is are we going to go with this earlier set of dates or DeA, what were the date ranges that you had preferred? Well, honestly, I just pulled date ranges. I think it was Avon um is where I grabbed it from. I don't think I'm set. I just don't understand the logistics of this one. So, um because I don't mind shifting it earlier. My question is um if the policy moves forward as written in March, we're determining how many available transfer seats there are. So why? So in my view, like at the March meeting, we we all vote and we say, "Yep, here's the number of transfer seats." So then, if I'm reading

181this correctly, we're then going to have another public meeting before the last Friday of March to vote on them if I mean to have a lottery if needed. So my question is why not just move it to April and so we don't have to have an extra meeting. Why? Because at this point, and if I understand correctly, I was waiting till we had the numbers is why I picked the start date that I did. And I think that's why Avon did. At this point, we're having families apply and they have no idea if we have any transfer seats, which is fine, but I was curious why those two dates. >> Well, so I don't I just to clarify, I don't think the board is doing the like it's not a board meeting to do the

182lottery. It's a board meeting to set the numbers and then the administration runs the lottery. >> But all I meant was it has to be a public view like verifiable whatever thing. And so it feels like frequently school boards are just and administrators are just doing it at a schoolboard meeting so that there's not additional meetings. Um but it I mean I don't care. I just was trying to understand why this um and even the February 28th. So, if we're not doing the draw till the end of March, per se, why cut it off in February? What are we doing with those that are interested there? >> So, um these days were my recommendation. I had a couple reasons for that. Um first, um pu pushing it earlier than what had been originally written in

183was done because the administration and Dr. Grer, correct me if I misspeak at all. um wanted to make sure that everything was done, at least the large bulk of it, prior to the end of the school year while everyone was still in the office. Um my recommendation for putting in at February, February 28th was the application itself is a relatively low bar of materials to put in. And so, um, but for us to be able to have those numbers of how many families want to transfer in, um, it can help us with recognizing, uh, if we, uh, need to or if we could open an additional classroom at one of those earlier schools. It also um uh I think incentivizes people to make sure that they are um putting putting in the information earlier rather

184than later. So we have better planning opportunities. And if we set that priority date for people to get into the lottery earlier, then folks who are moving to town later um after those dates may be more incentivized to look specifically at purchasing a house in the district as the only way to guarantee getting in. um if there especially if um there aren't any available slots at the grade uh level that their child would be in. >> Yeah. And I I want to we that was exactly the conversation and I think the other piece is coming down to staffing administrators the the offices are not open to deal with some of these questions and and work over the course of the summer. So having that happen early enough that it can keep them out of the

185weeds of May and graduation. I mean I don't know that there's a perfect date. Somebody's scenario is going to be is there's going to be it's not going to fit for somebody. Um but I in talking with Anna and Dr. Reiner, it was really what would be ideal for us in terms of how we would administer it and that's where we ended up. And but we could put two options out there. we could put option one and option two. You know, >> I think part of my concern and I I mean I agree I have no issues with going earlier and I have no issues at all of having this all decided before the end of the school year like that. I agree with the sooner that we make this date, we actually are taking

186away some of the risk because right now if I put in an application um if I want to move here in March, I know straightforward is there going to be like there's not a lottery. there is no risk if there's an open seat up till February 28th. I don't even know. And so to me, the longer that we put the window where we're doing a lottery, I think in encourages more risk um and also leads away from people who are in the know and has someone at Purdue that's like it's May, you know, it's March 6, make sure and get yours in because now the date does matter. Up till we have the lottery or whatever that date, February 28th, the date doesn't matter. No one has any special privileges. So I like that a

187lot. So I would love if we extended it just even another month um just to add a little bit more risk but um so that's my view and then like have it end of March because then it's very clear by the end of March what was you know what's our available seats we've had a meeting we've seen what our numbers are starting to look like and then we do it in April is just another viewpoint >> I I see your logic there and that I I see it that that makes sense so I'm I'm If we just move this to March 31st and April, >> remember the ap it' be the last Friday in April. >> Well, the applications on due by March 31st and the um the lottery by the last Friday in April.

188>> So, here's my question. I don't I as you're talking I'm thinking of this question. What if I am the parent of a transfer student and I I want to get my kids in and I can't get a house in West Lafayette yet, I'm going to sign up for the transfer and then if whether or not I think I'm going to continue, I'm going to sign up for the transfer to see if I get a spot. Well, if we're if if we say, "Okay, here's the lottery." And then 20 of the first 50 people say, "Oh, actually, we changed our mind. we're not going to come here anymore. We've got a different thing that we're doing. The people on the wait list, the people further down on the list have potentially already made all their

189own decisions, right? So, we could just end up short. Do you think we would always fill? I don't know if I explained that correctly, but would we always fill because that that to me is I I mean it's a parent who wants to have best odds is going to apply early and often whether or not they actually intend to come. Should we charge a kind of commitment deposit? >> We cannot. I think some of district does otherwise be because the difference between the resident student and the transfer is transfer has a more uncertainty for us. For the resident student, they leave here. If they enroll in row, they leave here because but for transfer they can change mind which is understandable. uh I plan to transfer to westside but oh that's too much a drop

190off and I don't want to do it anymore and they may withdraw their transfer request they can still go back to wherever they live and so >> I think that's why at the end of the next paragraph we talk about the lottery wait list is to deal with that because I do think that that can happen that someone can apply get in and then say never mind personally I don't think I think that if someone genuinely wants to come to Westside side that on the wait list one of them is going to fail. If we're having a big group of applicants, I think we're going to fill it. Now, we may not get enough applicants for those, but I am not as worried as that, but I do think the lottery weight list is key

191because we do want if people don't then commit, we can still fill that seat. Um, >> and we do do it later now anyway. So it truly was just dialogue during the um during the policy meeting uh why one might go earlier. Our only request was that we don't wait till May 31st because of the office component. So if you did it in March like you guys are talking now that's not going to be an issue for us at all. It's really down to what does the board prefer. >> I think it makes I think it makes I'm totally fine with shifting the date. I have no attachment to that particular date. I'm just concerned. I mean, the other piece that we talked about is if people are waiting to see if a sibling gets

192in, sibling doesn't get in and they pull their kids because they don't want their kids in different school corporations. That I think is a fairly likely scenario. And and I just I think my only concern is I don't want to write this so tight that all of a sudden we start the first of the school year and we do not have enough students in our building. because we've just kind of burned enough people or people are gaming the system a little bit to to to try and improve their odds. And I I just I would hate to see us in that situation be stuck without enough money and in a situation where we can't can't meet. >> Well, my view at this point is we're not doing this for funding. I mean, that what we're

193trying to do this is to meet grade level and balance things out. If we don't pass the referendum, then yes, the funding is now on the table and we I think this conversation will look different. I think one thing to consider, like I said, is I did try to find other school districts and like Avon does it from March through the end of May and then they announced in June. So I don't think it see I mean I think they would have the same desires we would have. So I don't think pushing it back a month, but I mean I don't think any of us really know. Is everybody okay making that date range 30 days later than it is written right now? >> Yeah, >> that's fine. >> All right. >> Okay. Um, so

194we scroll on down after David gets that changed. Um, we all agree that the date is going to be submitted and all that set. Um, do do we have a time for people to notify us if they don't plan to take the spot and uh what if people got a lottery and decided to keep it and until the beginning of the new semester or something and then other people who are on the waiting list won't have enough time to prepare for the transfer. So, it doesn't give us a date. That's a good question. Doesn't give us a specific um time. It just says if they don't enroll. >> Yeah, they get in. >> So, if it's but they have to get in, but then they have to enroll. So, if they are notified that they're

195in, but they do not enroll within a certain time period, you're right, that could be problematic. And I don't think that this policy covers that issue. >> Yeah. They don't even need to re notify us whether they want to reenroll eventually. Basically, with this, >> if you if you scroll down a little bit, it says um it any remaining capacity after June 1. So, I guess that's the >> but but we assume that those who got it will reenroll. But what if they don't enroll? Yeah, we can go back to the wait list. I agree. And isn't June 1? >> Yes. So, we could change that, couldn't we? So, to So, if it's it would be April 1, wouldn't it? If Yeah. So if it's May 20, March 28th, it would be >> April 1.

196And then >> I would think if they don't enroll, since we've got until count day, we would go back to the list based on what the policy says and and um look at the weight list. >> Do you want this to be April one? >> Yeah. When when is the registration system open? open >> not usually till July or August, isn't it? >> You have to >> it's late July >> late July. >> So then we won't know whether they will enroll. >> So I think so I think there's confusion here. There's two numbers that we're looking at when we look at capacity and decide how many transfer students we can take. It honestly has nothing to do with what our in district enrollment looks like because up until our fall count date, we're going

197to have kids moving out and moving in and we don't know what those numbers are. That's why like I had asked Dr. Grryer for what grade levels how they fluctuate because like let's say that we hear some family of 10 kids are moving in. That's not going to change the number that we say of available transfer seats. That number is its own number. And that's why here we're saying if someone decides not to take one of those seats, we take the next person on the lottery. But that has nothing to do with our enrollment numbers because we won't know our enrollment numbers till August, end of July. Honestly, we have a lot of students, at least when I was teaching, that came in after Labor Day. And so that's to me why we're wording it

198the way we are because we're it's not about, oh, yay, someone moved out. We now get another transfer student. Those numbers were decided in March and we're done with that decision if that makes sense. Part of the concern with the numbers that I have is there is uncertainty who will move in what those numbers would look like. So we have to have our capacity low enough to give us a bubble to say let's imagine in the dream world we have tons of families move in this summer because of our transfer policy because of SKH Heinix. Let's say we start taking homeschool, you know, we decide to take a few, we've got to have our capacity number low enough that our available transfer seats are so low that we're now not going to be super high

199when everybody comes in. Does that kind of make sense how those numbers don't need we don't need to wait and see who enrolls in district to affect our available on this paragraph. We do have one comment from legal um about the word weight list um saying how do they get placed on a wait list? I do think we that's a good point and we need to add that somewhere. >> So I have >> you have a sentence. >> I have a sentence that I already wrote out. >> Okay, tell me because I do that data. >> Um I would put it where would I put it >> in definitions? >> Don't you think? >> Um no I was just going to put it after lottery process. >> Okay. Um, any student not initially selected in

200the lottery will be added to a weight list based on random drawing for priority order. >> I'm good with that. >> And if seats become available, does it say that's what >> it's in it's in the comment, but you can't see that. Hold on, let me add it into the text. >> Since we already know since there's an application deadline, we'll know how many people apply for each grade. Once you do the lottery, you could just number them all, >> right? Yeah. So, you know, if you know, you have one through 10, if they get in and you know, numbers one and number two then drop out, then numbers 11 and 12 are moved up, >> right? >> Yeah. >> There wouldn't be a new lottery. They just would be not having a spot. So,

201>> I do think that that's a good point from Jesse that we need to add it. >> You want this language or do you want something different? >> It's fine. >> I'm fine with that. >> Because the number and it's 10 spots. a little bit. >> Number 15. >> Probably not gonna again. >> I think weight list is one word there, David. >> Huh? >> Weight list is one word >> at your top. Yeah, >> there you go. >> So, in the next paragraph, this deals with um >> the non sorry, I can see some benefit to putting a date to the enrollment. I'm thinking of if we're if we're looking to maximize states, if we put a date to enrollment um in July sometime, if you've not enrolled by that time, that would allow

202us to open up that to a student before the school year starts. Because if we're waiting for them to enroll and then they don't enroll and then they don't attend on the first day, we've already got I'm thinking for the sake of a student. If I've already started in school, that's a tougher transition than a family that really wants their you know maybe a sibling in Westside and thinking okay if I know in late July that I can send my sibling to Westside instead of another Klondike for instance that's a better transition for a family. How can they enroll though if registration is not open until the end of July? Would they pay manually enroll? >> That's where we would have to like set it after what we would know the registration date to be.

203>> Could we do? >> Okay. >> So, you could make it like July 1 if you don't write if you don't >> or July 15th if you're thinking that July 1 is a difficult time because of the holiday. I don't know. I'm just putting out I don't think it's a bad suggestion to put a date because we could even include that in what is sent to families that are accepted that says you must enroll by this date or your or you will lose >> your spot. >> Yeah. Does everybody agree with putting that limiting in there? Could we actually just do it where we said you have two weeks or a month from notification of being offered your spot to um >> to to to accept that that you're going to transfer or something some

204wording like that. Um and if they then then they'll have to enroll later. But like um you have a certain amount of time to accept this offer and or else we'll move to the next person on the list. The thing is they can enroll and then no show. Yeah. I mean, so to me it needs to be a practical >> like pick a date that >> well I will say it's easier if so from once they enroll their STN is on us and so once they enroll there's a it a little it's a little bit more difficult for them to transfer but at the same point in time if their STN doesn't become ours if they're committing in some way shape a an affirmative sign that I intend to go here. I'm just proposing that

205that date be out there somewhere. That way we are not waiting indefinitely to offer a seat to someone who may for very, you know, personal reasons want to be in the district but for whatever reason didn't get a seat, >> right? Because if we don't make them acknowledge that they've received the offer and say that they're going to accept it, they may just sit on it and not do anything. So I I think because that that will move up us going through the list sooner. >> So what if it just says if an accepted transfer student does not enroll within 30 days of notification resulting vacancy May it's a May provision. So there you need it what what what happens because then what happens is if you pull somebody off of the weight >> then

206it's another 30 days for them. >> So >> um Because if the weight listed if they get notified April or March or May first >> you could do by certain date within two weeks of notification. >> I mean it could be >> so >> I like Rachel's 30 days. I just think people travel over like let's imagine I don't know it just seemed that 30-day number seems reasonable to give us some flexibility and put someone else on it but I don't care >> if you're doing 30 days of notification we would probably want to send it which is an email notific Is that a phone call? Registered mail for anything >> within 30 days of of email notification. >> I'm I'm curious earlier when I proposed the commitment fee, everybody says no. But is that

207a legal issue or what? Because like my son committed to the university that he's planning to attend and then we are charged the commitment fee. If we go they will return the fee. If we don't that's their universities tuition registration fee. We can't charge. >> No it's just a commitment fee. We will return like earnest money >> and I give you the commitment fee back when you get they give you the commitment fee back when you register. >> Yeah. Yeah. or >> yeah just just okay to show that uh I'm committed to university I'm not taking others spot or later decided not to go so just then people when people commit even though they cannot register yet they commit to come I feel but they they feel oh I cannot pay this several hundred or

208something that means they are just trying their luck to >> I feel like you're tying somebody's ability to come based on their ability to pay for it. For some families, $100 is significant for multiply that by X number of children. >> But what if >> I don't think it's >> but what if people just try then they don't they decide not to come they don't notify ours those who truly want to come cannot and all get the notification earlier. It's >> that is going to happen. >> That is happen. One thing that comes to mind is you might be able to if book fees are established, you could maybe I don't know that you could ask someone to pay >> and we have to refund that anyway. >> Yeah. >> And they would know that.

209student that you're not going to know their book until they're registered for class. We can vote on that. There's a desire to have that be an option voting. Do we want to do that? >> We should ask. Yeah, we would first have to ask Jesse if you guys want to have that as an option and we can do that. I Yeah, I don't want to guess. I don't think you could, but >> Yeah, but we could ask it if Dr. Yen if you'd like us to. >> Yeah, I I feel it. It's worth asking because if we need some certainty too, right? People need certainty. We do too. And other families need certainty too. If what people Okay, draw the lottery even forget about it. So we >> Dr. Perition put that into saying we

210will take the money. It's just okay you seriously want to come and you commit to come you pay the fee then when you come we will pay you re refund you the fee. I think it's >> so double check double check with Jesse, but I've already I've already found it. >> And this is that's what a university does. >> That's the answer. >> Postsecary education are completely different ball games. >> But but if we add it, we'll we'll ask and that way it can be voted on and everybody felt heard. So, um if you've got that in there, we'll certainly ask. Can I like I said, >> hold on. Let's tell George. >> Double double check with our actual attorneys. But the law right here, school corporation may accept a transferring student without approval of

211the transfer corporation. A transfer corporation may not require a parent or a student requesting transfer to the school corporation to pay transfer fee. I mean transfer tuition or any other fee associated with transfer of the student. >> Yeah, that's what I guessed it would be. >> So, but by all means, let's see. >> Is everybody good with that though? If they if we are, I won't ask. Um, Dr. Y do you still want me to ask because I'm happy to do that if you would like for me to >> not I I will I will ask >> you to quickly can we accept the changes that we've added in here um this paragraph um first January 1st through March 31st >> um and then any student not initially selected will be added to the weight

212list change June 1st to April 1st >> and um does not enroll within 30 days of email notification of transfer offer. Can I accept all of those? >> My question is legal >> my only question is legal going to come back and say what happens if you can't email contact someone it just but I have no idea but I would guess she'll come back notification >> I don't know but she probably has experience and will have a good recommendation of how to word it. >> Sure. I will have that as a comment. >> And for those who work at PUD, I wonder what what's PUD's hearing procedure schedule is like and does the March 31st give people enough time to apply for transfer just to check the schedule. >> Okay. So the next paragraph down

213as David is accepting those. Um the good news is we're through the hot topics. So the next one is the discrimination anti-discrimination language. We just made one word and said equal access to programs and activities. Um is everybody okay with equal access? >> Yes, >> legal is okay with it. Okay. When you talk about section D transfer student eligibility requirements, there were no edits until we get down to the end. Um, specifically, this deals with things with unexcused absences, etc. Um, if you scroll down to um the bottom, a history of unexcused absences for purposes of this policy means at least five unexcused absences or tardies in a semester or 10 unexcused absences or tardies in a school year. Um there has to be a written determination. Um you can see there are notes to

214the side there from legal um including target tardies as recommended and permitted. Tardies create a disruption learning process. Um I I think that that everybody was in support of that. Does anybody want another option with this language? What we've done is just added targets. >> I just had a question. What? So if I understand correctly, unexcused absences is parents aren't approving it. >> Is that the same with a tardy? Like if I submit and say my kid isn't is going to be late today, >> then that's a parent approved tardy. So that's fine. The five unexcused tardies means parents aren't even giving approval for their kid to be tardy. Is that an accurate understanding? >> I think it's literally truency is really what it amounts to. Well, some gray area with the tardy and there's

215definitely been >> I mean besides just one that we're aware of, I know there's been some misunder anyways about what this unexcused tardy and kind of what that looks like. And so I just wanted to make sure that it was very clear if a parent calls a tardy in if a parent calls an absence in that does not fall under this. >> Okay, perfect. Thank you. There's already a version of this in our current policy now, right? >> Anybody want another option to this? >> Sorry, I have to because earlier you kind of move uh we move faster than I could speak. And for the earlier equal access thing and just ask a clarification question that I heard from several community members. They people ask about parking permit for high school and they said I

216I don't know the real situation. They said uh currently transfer students have more priorities than uh resident students to get the parking permit. And >> that conversation during the break asked Chad that question. >> Um >> Lawrence asked Chad that question and Chad's response was that is currently the setup but there's zero problem changing that. It's just the historically what's been done. But there's no there's no problem from his perspective in saying that um that parking permits are >> first come first serve request. Yeah. Not based upon with the exception of the GLCA students, they will have to have a parking permit to function. >> Okay. So regardless where they live and first come, first serve. >> That's correct. >> Okay. Is it come first per serve or is it a lottery of some form?

217>> So they do it based on older grade like obviously the freshmen are not driving so >> first come first >> serend thank you >> okay sorry while she's up there at that thing where you fixed the June 1st to turn to April 1. Sorry, Ryan, if you'll go up. Um, right here, right before it says April 1st, it says any remaining capacity. Could we change that word from capacity to available transfer seats so that it's very clear? >> Yes, it's a good idea. >> Um, what that is, please. Sorry, I forgot to >> seat spot. What did we use? >> Seats. Seats. Seat is what we used. Yeah, that's a good edit. >> Thank you. >> Okay. Um, if we scroll down, transportation, nobody disagrees we're not providing transportation. Um, additional matters related to

218transfer students. Um, this is, uh, this kind of falls in the miscellaneous section. Um, but do we want to keep the February 28th de date on this one? >> Should we make it March 31st date consistent? We change it. Leave it at March 31st everybody to match >> what is Dr. Grinder would or what do you think as administrators about this? >> Would it make sense to have the date for current transfer students a month earlier? That way >> maybe brothers and sisters who are coming in. Do we want to know early or do we want to know the same date that they're required to >> let us know? I said he says >> you don't have your mic. March 31st. >> Yeah, I'm thinking same date. Is that Anna? Do you see a reason?

219Otherwise, you've got dates all over the place you're trying to figure out. >> The only reason that I could think of us um wanting to have that date earlier is because um because siblings have priority um in the transfer port uh transfer portal in the transfer pool um overu children who aren't siblings or members of the same household. Um, it could mean that a grade would be filled up before or the grade could be filled up um and there wouldn't be any available openings for that grade. >> But let's just leave it the same. >> Still have to go on the lottery. I mean, you'd still have to >> Yeah. Sure. >> Right. but they would be first in line for so if there were two spots available in second in second grade and there

220were two siblings who applied um then that would fill the slots there wouldn't be >> okay so >> so we were thinking that you you would still do the lottery though Dr. appropriate because if there's three sibling ones then so you do the lottery and then you just move those three but in the order that they were drawn up to the front. So you would still does that make sense? >> Yes. Um but they would be essentially a separate lottery then they they would be prioritized in the lottery. Um so it they would be a separate lottery than the others. >> No, it would be the same lottery. I mean, you could do it with the same lottery and just have them all out and then you could highlight them and realize those three came.

221Does that make sense? >> In the order that they were dropped, just move them to the >> Yep, that's fine. >> Okay. So, if we're we're scrolling down, um the superintendent or designate shall annually provide information. This was a compilation of feedback from various members. We believe that it is encompassed everything that everybody wanted. Um, and if is everybody okay or do you want to recommend any more options on this section? >> I may I ask a question about a little bit earlier one right before the transportation section and uh so there in that paragraph it says based upon the location of students residence I'm trying to understand how what does that mean? So can we just say the first part it's based on an excused absence then the then the history of excused uh

222an excuse absence is explanation for that but I just don't know how to operationalize the based on the location of students rather than 20 miles away >> if somebody wanted to live in Illinois and commute here that wouldn't be practical and it could be >> but if they make it every day do we >> well so actually I researched this for a significant amount of time because I don't like this subjective language, >> but legally we're actually required to include it in this section. Yeah. Okay. Yeah. >> Even though I don't like it at all. >> I I feel you still have definition for it like 10 miles, 20 m, 30 m. I mean, >> no. But I think it also gets at the subjectivity of like if a student is living in a more

223rural area within the county. Um throughout much of the winter, it may be much more difficult for them to get here on time because of weather related factors. Uh whereas students who live within the school district boundaries may be um may either take the bus or uh can walk um across different types of weather. Um if there's snow, some of the county roads may not be plowed. So that student might not be able to get here as easily. And so those types of factors might be what get counted in there. And okay so I I'm trying to figure out okay in what situation students who will be denied the the transfer and let's say it's a student only um live close by for example leaving our cheese but missed the school that many and will

224that per say enough for us to deny the transfer request or the student have to do both are and has a history. >> No, it's a if they attendance trumps all. If they don't show up to school, it's disruptive learning process and they are not allowed to continue. >> Right. So, but in another scenario, if a student leave far but the student make the school very well and uh without attendance issue, we are okay to keep taking the students, right? >> Yes. >> Okay. So, so basically that language is just a legal request. I mean it doesn't in practice it's not that useful. >> Yeah. I don't think we're going to have very many commuters from Illinois and generally >> legally have to accept it. >> Legally we can't accept. >> You have to live

225in the state. I'm sorry. From Richmond, Indiana, right next to Ohio. Okay. Um so um this that is everybody all right with the language that we put in with in terms of when the superintendent is going to report or their design shall provide information to the board. What we talked about is that design for example might be Mike Reutder or Mike Reutder might be part of that report because it's part of our financial report. Is everybody okay with that paragraph and that reporting component? We did add uh the language that that I think Dr. Yian asked for in terms of also including financial impacts um which is why it fits with the financial reporting. >> Yeah. >> Um F uh students facing expulsion from other Indiana schools. I don't believe anybody had any concerns with

226this. We didn't receive any and I think we're all in agreement on that. >> Okay. Can I just make one small comment? I actually had lots of issues with this because I have heard from teachers for a very long time about frustration that there's discipline issues with some of our transfer students yet they get a stay in researching this and asking questions we have no leeway it this is the only thing we consider. So my only question is as is to administration is um as you share updates about policy decisions if we can share with staff that it's we our hands are tied in the discipline issue. It feels like to me now that I've gotten in the weeds of all of this that there's a lot lot of misunderstanding with the staff and I

227feel like if they just know discipline issues unless it meets this one threshold they have to stay with us. We don't get to choose. I feel like there'll be less frustration. Um and I've actually it's been Willis and the high school are the two I've mainly um anyways just think it would be helpful as we've all learned from this. >> Absolutely. Once the policy is passed, if it's passed as a transfer policy, we can absolutely make sure that we explain it. >> This last section, summer school, the policy committee recognizes there's a couple of different opinions on this one. We were pretty excited to discover that we can charge a fee for summer school. So, we put that in there as a little bit of a wild card, but we may charge transfer students summer

228school fees. Um, and I my opinion is it'd be a good idea to do that. But we've offered option one and option two. Is everybody's viewpoint represented by option one or option two? Um, can you help me understand if I understand we don't offer summer school, so why are we putting this in here? >> We do offer summer school >> like from our like we don't charge. >> Yes, >> we could charge. >> We can charge for that. >> We didn't know that, but that's a nice little bit of >> Yeah, we can >> we supplement, right? Based on what I learned from the previous meeting, we we may supplement students when they take online classes. If the state funding doesn't fully cover the cost, we need to pay for students. So, >> in this

229sense, we can charge transfer students. >> Yes. So, I I think that's nice to have it. >> Is there anybody that would want us to leave option two? >> Or do we all want to agree on option one? We can't. We can't. We're not voting. We can >> leave it in the building. >> Okay. >> Understand it. So >> Yep. >> Okay. We have >> reached the end. >> Uh any final thoughts? >> I have a final thought, but go ahead Deja. >> Um so my final thought or question is I actually think the most important part of this if it's in the policy or not is the capacity numbers. And um I appreciate the numbers that have been given but I still have concerns with the numbers that are be given have been given.

230So my view is we have the ideal that we're trying to balance grades and look at transfer students to help with that not with funding. And so when you look at the numbers here, that makes sense. Until you bring in the picture that this is moving very fast and telling our residents that we're going to accept 125 additional transfer students. To me, that isn't what I have heard that residents want. I think that we this process needs to be slow with low numbers as we see what happens for this next year. And we've talked about lots of reasons why. And so that when we are going to the residents and potentially saying we have decided to accept a few transfer students to help balance grade levels, we're talking about really low numbers where 125 to

231me is crazy high in my view and brings some concerns. So I guess my question is is there any way that administration could put together and you can bring this one too but I would like a second capacity recommendation and seats that's a lot tighter and a lot lower. >> So that's why in talking with some board members like um Mr. Wong where we said the both and that's why it is our recommendation that it's the the per grade level plus the 2320 because it keeps it consistent. It doesn't add an additional 125. It keeps consistent which is what he current board members and community members suggest. So that was our way of doing that by adding the um the district uh uh maximum number of students overall. >> So I guess and maybe I

232could take I'm still not clear. So right now if I understand at the next meeting not only are we going to decide on a transfer policy, we're also going to decide on how many available transfer seats there are. >> Correct? So if you'd got your formula, >> the board wouldn't decide how many seats. The formula is going to decide it for Yeah. >> which would be what um kind of you shared the document which like I said totals 125 students >> 125 additional students. >> Additional students. >> That's if you don't add the district-wide cap of keeping it consistent. >> So where would we stop? If we were to add the cap, what what grade level would we stop at? you would stop when you reach capacity of 2320 >> which means how many additional

233transfer students would that be with our numbers >> that would depend on if additional >> loss of students >> no but what I'm I guess what I'm saying is we know our capacity we know our ADM number there's no more uncertainty to determine that because we know how many available transfer seats that's set like that's not going to change unless we change the capacity it it's set until you reach. So, like you said, there's you you could have if you just took at capacity at every grade level, it couldn't be an additional 125 students. It wouldn't be an additional it wouldn't go past 2320 if that's what you set it at. And so, where it would stop is whatever grade level got you to that. Does that make sense? To the 2320. >> Yeah. But

234then we still should know how many transfer students that would bring in. >> You wouldn't know. Okay, >> basically you number the total enrollment column that's your total >> and you subtract that and that's what it >> so the only thing I would say though is the kindergarten number >> it could cause it to fluctuate a little bit that was my point but I get what you're saying >> so help me know this fluctuate because that's what I'm saying is I thought the way this policy is written is there is no fluctuation once we have capacity set and once we have ADM set >> the there would be no fluctuation in overall enrollment if if I'm understanding your question. If you if I'm not ask it differently. >> No, I don't know. But maybe this

235is a maybe just offline we can we'll have to because I'm still not clear. So the total enrollment on using this formula is 22.96. So if I understand correctly, if we follow this chart and include a district max of 2320, we would only we only have 24 transfer seats available. And wherever 23 and wherever we reach that starting with kindergarten through 12th is what you're saying is am I understanding correctly? >> 20US 22. >> So 24 and then it's a lottery because it's 14 seats out of 24 available. I have one question though. How do you know that for sure when we don't know what our kindergarten enrollment is yet? >> That's where we would have to decide that. >> So it's 24 students assuming kindergarten comes in what it did last year. If it

236comes in a little lower, then it would it would be maybe a few more than 24, but that's where that consistency is, which is what will allow us to keep that consistent from year to year like we recommended last summer. So, kindergarten numbers, you're waiting to see because I guess that's something that hasn't been considered yet. You're waiting to see who enrolls and what that number is right now. I mean, we know we're going to get a whole bunch more and then you play with that number. Is that what you're doing? >> Right. >> Exactly. >> Good. David, >> um, two things. I wonder if Yeah, the 150ish number that you were looking at is what was messing with me earlier. The available transfer seats for 2026 2027 column at the far right is actually

237capacity minus um in district enrollment and not capa capacity minus total enrollment. Um >> no it's >> right >> it's mine's total when it comes to >> it's not well not at the individual grade level >> if you look at one recommended capacity for third grade is 179 it says that there are 14 available transfer seats total capacity or total enrollment is go to the year before because everybody's going >> oh that's where okay yes sorry that >> oh I >> that okay >> I'm just tired you're good we're all very tired >> everybody's brain we've reached we've reached the point of which this is becoming decreasingly less productive by >> now I remember messing this up one time before as it were >> for kindergarten u it might make sense just to use something

238like a three-year rolling average for our estimate um of how many seats to allow for transfer stu students um that >> yeah I I might I would say probably a three-year roll in average as the estimate just to reduce fluctuation. >> Okay. Before I um close the meeting, I'd like to thank everyone for their time tonight. It has been significant. And since I haven't spoken a whole lot, I'm going to talk directly to the kid who's at home watching with his parents, um who's a transfer kid. And I want him to know that when his parents bought their house, they had to fill out dozens of papers with all kinds of legal language and requirements. But those papers don't have anything to do with how you feel when you walk in your house after a

239long trip. And the feeling I want you to remember right now is that you're a valued part of our school. You are loved and wanted. And none of these arguments about details has anything to do with how we feel about you, your siblings if you have them, or your family. will cheer just as loudly when you pay play a symphony in the orchestra or when you say your lines in the school play or when you hit a home run. All of this was boring grown-up legal requirements that we had to do because it's our job. But you matter and we're grateful and we're glad you're here. Now go to bed. You've got school tomorrow. With that, we're dismissed. Thank you.