001foreign I don't know what happened to my gavel I didn't get one well I told her to do it when I was kidding no you're fine I'd like to call to order this work session of the Boulder Valley School District Lord could you call the rule please Garcia here gephard here niznick rajpal here Sergeant here Sweeney Moran here this here thank you Rob I'll turn it over to you to do the introduction of the lovely Heather thank you hey board president Gephart members of the board are off to a strong start this evening uh good to see you all uh board members as you could recall um during last year's election cycle we came to the conclusion that having a very formal process around when our board as a collective would would weigh in on
002either state or local issues to then direct staff to to draft resolutions that you would then pass we tried to really formalize that process as part of that in our prioritization we discussed and thank you heather for being here to having this these sessions facilitated following a formal process and so we're happy to have Heather Bergman here again with us who does just great work with our district and um at this point Heather I'm going to turn it over to you to facilitate our meeting thanks a bunch Rob and good evening everyone thanks for having me back I'm excited for today's conversation um I hope that everyone had a minute to uh review the process that was on the agenda um just quick reminder of the plan for today we invited you in advance to
003identify any advocacy issues that you wanted us to discuss and we ended up with looks like one two three that Kathleen included on the agenda for your reference so if you were one or one um ones of the people I guess who submitted that item I'll invite you to share your reasoning for why you might want the board to support the item and then of course any of the rest of you we encourage you to share your thoughts about yes here's why you also think we should support it or know here's why you think we should not after we have sort of heard sort of the pros and cons of supporting it we'll do a quick check to see if a majority of you support supporting the item and that will help Kathleen prepare for
004your next meeting you will formally vote to support them during a business meeting which you cannot do during a work session um and then after we move through those three things then we'll visit a little bit about any proposed changes you might have to the policy platform sound good Kathleen anything I need to say that I didn't say on the legal things um I don't think you called me awesome but everything else is right yeah the awesome is implied but I will be I will be more attentive in the future thank you the awesome Kathleen um all right in that case we start uh with the first item which was uh proposition proposition HH um would love to hear from anyone who suggested the board addressed this item um and why you think we should
005support it and by we I mean you I don't live here and I think that was submitted by Nicole so are you okay doing that or sure that's the only one um so I brought just for clarification purposes Heather I don't know that folks everything that they submitted was that they supported it that they wanted to discuss thank you thank you for that so I could be you know in future versions of this if there's something that somebody wanted to oppose they could think of it I think this idea is does the board want to pass a resolution supporting or opposing so just as clarification and we have Justin Patron here as well who can give us just watch pull that chair right up to the empty table here and Justin can provide some context
006on Prop HH for the board if so desired thanks um so I guess I wanted to discuss this as a board because this is a really beefy ballot item that has a lot of parts and has generally in my perception created a lot of Confusion And so looking through the documents that Kathleen sent I think you know some of the benefits clearly are that there will be easing some tax burdens to particularly our lower and middle-income families in um if this resolution should pass and some of my initial concerns are somewhat alleviated based on my reading that um unless we hit a recession the public schools are guaranteed money that would be held back from Tabor reallocations and so I that's kind of why I want to discuss it I'm feeling like there's more benefits
007to us than harm and Justin can speak to that unless we hit a recession some nuances around the fact that we're mostly locally funded versus state funded and I'm not sure exactly how that's going to play out to our disadvantage with um so that's why I brought it Forward just to have this discussion to see if it's something that we want to to recommend or not to provide some help our community make a decision on this matter other board thoughts Kathy well I was going to see if Justin wanted to just kind of give us a top-down overview of it just because some people assume might not really know what HH is and what it does is that all right just really quick like this is the kind of ballot measure that you either can
008talk about for 30 seconds or 30 minutes so we're going for the 30 second version and Justin you seem nice but I don't know who you are would you introduce yourself as well Fair uh Justin Patron I'm the Director of Finance and Accounting so I apologize Bill can't be here he's traveling I'll do my best I can put my hair in a ponytail probably if that's helpful to anybody um uh so uh thank you though for asking me here uh so the 30-second version is is yes it does create a reduction in assessed values uh via the assessment rate therefore fewer property taxes that's one of the components it does longer term raise the cap so if we're familiar with the ref c cap that limits State the amount of Revenue that the state can
009retain it it raises that by one percent per year and I think that is the probably the the amount that's most targeted as a potential future benefit to make funds available to all school districts right and then it does some things with the Tabor refunds some reduces them a bit but also then reallocates them is that a good enough 30 second version the only thing I'd add to it is it's a Time limited I think it only goes for 10 years yes 10 years correct so so from other board members I'd be pleased to hear clarifying questions if you have any for Justin or your thoughts in terms of whether the board should support or oppose this ballot item yeah Kitty you know I'm in favor of the board supporting this ballot issue um like
010Nicole when I first heard about it I had a lot of questions and thought wait lower property taxes is that's going to hurt us but um you know I went to one of the presentations or attended it online and got a lot of answers to it and I I think it's going to pass no matter what because coloradans never miss an opportunity to lower taxes if they can um but I think it would be good for us and it would be helpful for the community if they don't need to pay quite as much on property taxes and it will help me personally because I'm a geezer and I get the Geezer tax rate so I can move and still get the Geezer tax rate Kitty other board members comments in support or opposition Richard go
011ahead question oh please the uh people that have endorsed it already you know the people that are in favor for it and people that are opposed I saw that list and I didn't see any of our three C's on that list in terms of whether they support it or not I saw a bunch of opponents you know that are probably pretty much table related opponents but I didn't see any of the three cities the Seas case Cosby cea Richard casby's meeting this weekend to take a vote on it we've preliminarily through the executive committee supported it but not as the whole board so we're having a presentation this weekend I don't imagine that the board would go against the executive committee but that's where it stands does that help I don't know what the timeline
012is for case or cea but I could find out if that was important for you other thoughts Stacy Lisa thoughts on this one I mean not strong thoughts I'm generally in favor of it I think we have some of the lowest property taxes in the country but also reducing them obviously makes room to do additional things and to find new ways that people can support other initiatives through property taxes and the taper thing feels great so I think you wanna okay Richard anything you want to add come you're Pro okay great um so just to make sure we're counting the noses correctly I'm happy to check and see how many of you want to support this but last call anyone want to speak in opposition just want to make sure but I want to talk
013okay a little more in favor great no opposition so go ahead so as Lisa said we have some of the lowest property taxes in the country um but one of the the things I worry about with this ballot measures as with many ballot measures as it's oversold that it's going to solve all the school funding for the next 10 years because of the raising of the cap just call me a healthy skeptic on that doesn't mean I'm opposed to it I just think that the future school boards when that rhetoric gets out there and we're in declining enrollment and people are wanting to know why we're cutting our budget and it's kind of like the marijuana tax didn't it solve everything when we did this I just think we need to be really careful how
014we talk about it locally as something we can support but not something that's going to solve all the problems of the world around school funding so that makes me nervous um but yeah other than that I think it makes some sense to support it I mean I'm in support of it but like I said I just I always worry about campaigns getting out in front of the facts and there's nothing we can do about that except it locally we can make sure we're talking about it actually so I appreciate the information that you've all brought because I think it keeps us in bounds so that's all I have thanks Kathy last call for last thoughts yeah Nicole one of the question I had um Justin is do we have a sense on any way that
015we might be negatively impacted if our local share decreases and our state share increases as a result of this um yes so the information has been hard to come by from the counties because they determine assessed value we finally last night heard from Boulder County and so the impact is about a 200 million dollar decrease in assessed value and that um is about two and a half percent of our total so as you know we have a kind of a host of Mills that we Levy so the school Finance act Mill Levy will just be backfilled by the state like normal so there's really no impact the majority of our other Mills are targeted dollar or fixed dollar so we just set the right middle to collect the right amount the one where there is
016an impact is our operations and Technology Mill which is set at four and so that the the impact is now this is really with only Boulder County's information not Broomfield or Gilpin but that would be about a million dollar loss in the first year concepts for years but in subsequent years would that go up or down or Hold Steady um I would say it depends on the way nav or assessed values change over time I think it would likely grow a bit that Delta um I'm looking to um Kathy but there is a sense that the state will backfill revenues there is not from what I've heard or we've talked to our folks there's not a sense that that those Mills would be backfilled meaning the voter approved Mills so they would if that makes
017sense they would they would backfill this school Finance act but not that one I agree there's been no conversation about that filling anything other than the total program Mills um I mean it'll cause me to ponder this a little bit more I won't be a strong no today but we're not voting on it anyway so I think something to think a little bit about for me because that was one of my main concerns is could this have negative impact even without the State hitting a recession and the state does not have a great reputation for not balancing their budgets on the backs of public education so I you know just healthy skepticism um feels like positive measure but it's hard to not be a little critical well in the piggyback on what you've said Nicole
018I don't know that we have a crystal ball but it's likely in the next 10 years that we're not gonna hit that we will hit a recession or we will hit a Slowdown and I don't think we have any sense of how badly that will impact this and the state's ability to continue to backfill since the promise as I understand it Justin has paid out of surplus and when the Surplus goes away then we're competing against everything else in the general fund at a time when everybody else is competing because we'll be in a recession so I think it's again not a reason to say no but I think people need to understand that again the spin is we're going to be fine for 10 years but we don't usually we've already gone it we're
019hoping for a soft Landing but who knows right is that a fair description it is crystal ball I think is a good phrase or term there the only other thing that I would add is that there's the state for to my knowledge for the first time will be backfilling cities and counties and other local districts and they won't be backfilling all of it by Design and so to me that will create some pressure competition for funding compared to K-12 funding like a question came up today that I didn't know how to answer which is the library district does it involve within like fire districts and Special Districts does it get back filled as a special district or is I don't know that we've thought about Library districts so I don't know that we have an
020answer to that and then there's a weird provision in it which we don't need to go into that if your property taxes go up more than is it 10 or something you have to have a public meeting about whether you're going to keep that increase or whether you're going to reduce it or something like that in there that said but that is that's not at the school district level that's at the city and county level I think is that right Justin that's my understanding so I I think the sort of consensus is that they're referring to local governments I do use that term so a Library District would fall on that category I think in my opinion anyway um so yeah but the 10 increase that's I'm sorry that's okay both I have two questions
021rolled in there that's okay I was just trying to answer one um yes that that is that excludes school districts for sure so that would only but that's new too I mean that's a a new restriction if you will on cities counties and other local governments but it does not apply to school districts in aproposo a concern I had earlier which is if people see cities and counties lowering their property taxes they're going to wonder why we aren't there's already conversation about why don't you just lower the Mills or property taxes already so high so you're just going to still have to be really clear on our message about what we can and can't do any other thoughts questions comments one way or the other so in order to give staff direction we need at
022least four of you to say that you'd like her to prepare a resolution in support of proper proposition HH for voting at a do we know when you would vote is it next meeting or eventually we discussed next the next meaning okay great all right how many of you would support having Kathleen prepare such a resolution one two three for all great thank you all very much Kathleen any clarifying questions you have for the board no hot diggity all right in that case let us move on to just yes sorry I just wanted to address one of Kathy's issues about it being oversold because the way I've talked about it is you can lower your taxes and it's not going to hurt us rather than lower your taxes and it will hurt us with Nicole's
023caveat because the district's gonna lose which is not an incident an insignificant amount of money in a declining enrollment environment so maybe you could just say kitty won't significantly hurt us or put a adjective in there all right anything else on that one okay and let's visit a little bit about house bill 23303 state to ballot proposition two or is it I I or is it two is I I see the state people it's yeah anyway who wanted us to discuss this one also Nicole okay I brought that one up sorry this was the purpose of the Mex education funding oh good so this one you know and I don't have the historical perspective on this board like some of you about how often or frequently uh we backed these ballot initiatives but um you
024know as we're discovering upk and our early childhood education is drastically underfunded here in the state of Colorado re um this proposition would allow the state government to keep the access and taxes that above what they had thought they were going to collect to help continue to fund um uh Pre-K and early childhood education amongst a couple other things syntaxes are always my least favorite way of supporting public education because they tend to impact um you know communities of color people are communities are lower income um but I like Tabor even less and so the idea of not you know giving those dollars back when we can we know we need them is a pleasant possibility in my opinion so I just wanted to bring this up for discussion to see if anybody had any
025thoughts or desire to support this or not does anyone else have any thoughts Pro or con yep Kitty and I forgot to bring my notes because I took copious notes when it was at the presentation but I do remember thinking favorably about it that it would be helpful for funding the preschool issues and again you know with sin taxes if people stop quote unquote sinning the taxes will go down too but um I think overall if we can add to preschool funding that would be a good thing and along with I just want to add similar conversation to HH this is not going to fully fund early childhood education or preschool by any means but it's one step closer but you yourself aren't sure if you support it or not you just I think I
026I mean I support it at the will of the board whether it's something we want to advocate for or not got it okay other thoughts yep Rob and Justin correct me or clarify or anyone on the board but if this doesn't pass then those dollars go back to the tobacco companies in Industry so I mean that's it's do you want to give them the money back or do you want them to keep the money to put towards the things that are in the bill I believe is the question sounds right okay all right Kathy you know sorry Mike say that again my apologies they would lower the tax rate as well so in the future Not only would they give money back but they would lower the rate going forward so it's a longer term
027that's important than just one year mm-hmm but to the earlier points 23 million dollars is helpful that it really doesn't go very far and it's a chance to talk about how silly Tabor is because you have to project everything right the first time and when you don't I think we went back twice on the marijuana tax because we kept getting it wrong how much money it was going to bring in so I don't see any reason to oppose this I think it's important for people to understand what happens if we don't and that it doesn't have any impact on their taxes it's just a correction okay so again for Kathleen to prepare a resolution one way or the other would need to see four of you in support of having her do that additional work
028um first I'll ask are there how many of you would like Kathleen to prepare a resolution in support of this item there we go that's everybody all right Kathleen hot dog last call for last thoughts on that one very efficient all right we have one more this would be the county item 1B [Laughter] Lisa go you also submitted this one oh you put this in Nicole that's great so yes this is um this came from me and I think there's a few things so this is an extension of an existing tax that funds affordable housing so by definition it is uh not groundbreaking it's also not controversial and it's going to pass but the reason I think we should weigh in on it is because as we know we have a housing crisis families cannot
029afford to stay new families can't afford to move in and our staff and teachers can't afford to live near where they work so even though this bill will pass regardless of bvsd's supports I think there are other harder decisions in this space coming before the board in the future and this is a good place to start weighing in on this topic I do think our board should be taking more action around this I think we should be doing more advocacy I think we should be recognizing how important housing is to a healthy district and that this is just an easy non-controversial place to start taking that stand thanks Lisa other thoughts Kathy I have a question for Robert Justin do we know how many of our staff live outside of our School District boundaries do
030we have any way of knowing that percentage even a sweat price can get that for us I just think that would help with your argument Lisa which is we want our teachers in our staff to be able to live close to the communities that they are working in and so to I remember sitting in a meeting a long time ago at Arapahoe Ridge and they went around the room and said who lives in the district and I think maybe one person raised their hand so I think getting that data might be helpful I agree and I mean this is unincorporated Boulder County so I you know there's certainly um a commute still from some of our schools but compared to the we know we have teachers commuting in from Northglenn from Broomfield from Denver so
031commuting from unincorporated Boulder County while it may not be walking to school down the block it's certainly a much shorter commute anyone else have thoughts questions comments go so share a lot of the same thoughts as Lisa on this one the other part when I was chatting with Claire Levy about um was that they didn't specifically put in Amis so they could retain some flexibility for more middle income housing options down the road and there's also in this language the ability or language around stakeholders working with the county to help allocate some of those resources and identify housing needs and that's something I would really appreciate the school district maybe taking a to Lisa's point a stronger hand in like how are we advocating for housing for our school staff our Administration like teachers across
032the board to make sure that they can live near where they work so we not only have a healthy Community but we are impacted when other school districts have situations that cause them to shut down for the day then it turns into over to us with weather and other related issues so um I would if this passes or to if Lisa feels like it for sure I would like us to be having conversations with the county to help advocate for housing for our school staff anyone else oh Rob just as a point from an operations perspective I would say that there was a day and time where school districts along with the University of Colorado were aligning their schedules right so um what we find now is that other districts Adams 12 has totally changed
033the way that they do their um their calendars Saint Vrain has decided not to to no longer align with the University of Colorado with their calendars and so as our as our people aren't able to live here it creates it's not just a commute issue it becomes a child care issue it becomes a substitute issue and those cost us real dollars so just as as we think about the affordability within Boulder County within our school district for our people if they're able to live here and align with those calendars I think all of those other real costs that we that we end up facing come to fruition and so I think that there's certainly benefits um to our operations if more of our employees are able to live within our school district given those circumstances
034alrighty anyone else thoughts comments questions yeah Kathy I have a question but I don't know that we have the answer in this room which is we passed the ballot measure last year that went to affordable housing and there were certain requirements that counties had to do to be able to access the money I don't know if this helps or if we have enough money to access it but it seems like anything we can do to help with State share and meeting some of the needs is is a benefit as well does that make sense okay all right last time then on these need four of you to support Kathleen bringing your resolution and support that's everybody are you voting are you going yes okay great fantastic so Kathleen you'll prepare three resolutions and bring them
035back at the next business meeting yeah yes fantastic all right thank you all very much what a great conversation in that case we go on to our next agenda item which is updates to the policy platform Kathleen you have you have a handout for us darling Kathleen you wanna tell us what you're handing out just so folks know what's coming sure Dr Anderson is handing out our policy platform board members will recall this used to be called our legislative platform and we realized in working through this process last year that it really is a little broader than just legislative so this is the uh one that the board finalized and adopted last October so it's time for our annual review and Kathleen you provided this to the board prior to the meeting so they've had
036a minute but appreciate people have other things going on anyone need time to do your homework real quick on the Fly okay based on what you see here did anyone want to propose any specific changes revisions to the language that you see yeah Kitty what do you got so number um let's see under School Finance number 2.7 yeah talks about um funding for a lunch at no cost and we already have that so it unless there's something we want to change about it which we might well I would not I would either strike it or rewrite it with any kind of changes we'd like to see actually I have a few things that okay let's pause on that one um other thoughts and support opposition questions for kitty go ahead Nicole I was also going
037to suggest we strike that one board members anyone opposed to striking item 2.7 on top of Page Three and again we're you will formally vote on change this at your next business meeting we're just now letting Kathleen know what to bring back to you great all right okay you said you had another one oh yeah I've got it okay why don't you do one more and then we'll let other folks jump in and circle back so under educational programming this is mostly a question because it talks about page three um a comprehensive review of the state's accountabilities um system and Rob is that what the committee you're on is supposed to be doing I don't want to say is doing yet okay um so there was an audit of the system then I'm on the
038state accountability Review Committee that is reviewing it to make some recommendations but there's no Authority given to the committee to make changes so and it's this is like a two-year committee so we'll do a year then we'll we'll publish a report then another year um so so there's so there is a review right now uh you know to if if the board were interested it would be maybe supporting the recommendations you know but but I can't ask we don't know what the recommendations are going to be I'm one of a lot of members and so that is the review is in process um so so I think that answers your question Richard as far as you know Rob is the review going to take these points that we have on our platform or uh in
039consideration I have not been shy on this committee um sharing my thoughts and opinions I have shared number one uh shared number two shared number three shared number four and five six seven eight nine and ten that are not listed there but yes so yeah I would say that this sentiment has been shared um with with the committee and these are public meetings anybody who's listening and you want to pay attention uh you could show up in person or watch them virtually mm-hmm Richard go ahead well my suggestion is just to keep it because it's not done work the work isn't done yet so I mean it hasn't even gone to the state state legislature and this is really us supporting any kind of legislation that will take place later on change the word uh
040to the Sports Supports the comprehensive review is he nodding raise your hand if you support that yep got enough to do that one Kathleen okay all right anything else on that item kitties got a few more but want to see if anyone else has something want to jump in on that same one okay please go ahead I'm sorry yes because I was thinking that 3.4 bbsd supports an accountability system that's flexible and reflects local priorities could be number five under 3.1 okay anyone troubled by that okay fantastic so we'll move that one 3.4 now becomes item five and uh Rob's list of things all right add 3.5 cool all right thanks Kitty all right other board members suggestions for change to the policy platform Nicole in the spirit of striking items um I was wondering
041about whether or not we wanted to consider striking or changing the language in 2.10 on page three and then also 2.6 now that we have um allocations dedicated to preschool funding or we have resources dedicated to preschool specifically and because Esser funds are expiring just the relevancy of those two items are you 2.10 and then 2.2.6 is preschool unless the unless the language error is intended to be something different than the way I'm interpreting it and I would appreciate the clarity there if I'm wrong and then 2.7 talks about um pandemic relief funds I'm sorry 2.10 and you're talking about striking those specific references or striking the whole item the whole item if they're no longer relevant okay Kathy on 2.6 they are taking funding away from special ed preschool funding so I think it's
042okay to leave that in I mean we could make it a little better but that's part of the allegation in the lawsuit that we're not party of so I would think that we would want to support continuing to advocate for funding for sped for preschool I just it's not very well written Nicole I agree so on the Fly I could try to come up with a different way to write it but I think it covers a general idea looking at Kathleen I can certainly redraft that and since we're past legislation perhaps it would be helpful to say something about implementing the upk program in a way that doesn't take resources that that would help a lot of you I think if we wrote it that broadly because then we wouldn't need to put anything else
043in about upk too I see three board members clearly nodding others support that thank you very much okay so Kathleen you'll rewrite 2.6 what about 2.10 and the proposal is just to remove it I think that makes sense yeah Kathleen anything we're missing on what might be lost if we strike 2.10 okay I have a question so Nicole if we just took out from the pandemic and just said we opposed earmark funding and took out from the pandemic so that there's flexibility when we get funding that's what I'm wondering because I agree with from the pandemic makes it completely irrelevant yeah so both places where it says like after educational gaps period and then flex and I guess I don't mind if the second sentence we could totally take out although aren't we still dealing
044with some effects from the pandemic I don't know I guess the question is do we have any additional resources to do that because some of our other I feel like there was another item that talked about um unfunded mandates and not supporting unfunded mandates which might if you remove the pandemic stuff maybe that's what actually is left with that hmm other thoughts kitty yeah I think for a while we have had language saying we don't want the legislature to pass funds and say you have to do XYZ with it we want the legislature to increase General funding so that each district can do what is most urgent for the district so this to me looks like it's the same concept it's just we talked about the pandemic here but I I do think we want
045to keep in the idea of just if you're going to give districts money just give us money don't tell us how to spend it okay other thoughts considerations on this one did we land on a decision then with 2.10 no okay I'm waiting to hear anyone else has any thoughts we have several suggestions Kathy I think your suggestion was the most recent one you want to reiterate that for the board so we hear if they support it you were saying first sentence you would end where after educational gaps I mean I would I guess leave it up to Kathleen's editorial discretion to make it read better I was just trying to get to the general gist of um opposing your marks exactly kind of like what kitty said been taking out the references to the
046pandemic does that help Nicole and then I don't know what to do about the second sentence um I think we could I'm wondering Nicole if what we could say is take that out and put something in the adequacy study language that talks about wanting to look at what the actual costs are because that kind of picks up what the pandemic impacts would be and learning less and all of that and just take out that whole sentence and I was 2.1 and the first sentence of 2.2 talk about adequacy so I there's just like parts that are spread throughout the themes that are spread throughout these different bullets but so I'd be fine taking out that second sentence because I think we could pick it up in the adequacy work okay so I see lots of
047nodding anyone troubled by that all right so Kathleen you'll end that first sentence in 2.10 after educational gaps full stop and then strike the second sentence because Atticus adequacy is addressed elsewhere yeah yes okay fantastic thank you any other suggestions for revision go ahead does anyone else have one all right oh okay kitty go and then Kathy so I don't have a suggestion for revision I have a sec two suggestions for additions and this is all based on what we see going on in thank God other states and not here but to limit what kids can read or be taught so the first one I would say bvsd opposes any legislation that would restrict books used in classes or held in the library We Trust teachers and Librarians to make appropriate Selections in addition we
048support the Colorado Association of libraries and its affiliation with the American Library Association because some states are quitting the American Library Association because the Ala is not in support of banning books Other Board member thoughts questions considerations on Katie's suggestion Kathy do you think Kitty you could give that language to Kathleen and we could look at it next week because that was quite a mouthful yeah and then I have one more any other thoughts questions on the first item related to legislation on book Banning okay kitty next bvsd opposes any restrictions on teaching about race sexual orientation and gender identity and if there's any other that didn't come to mind when I was writing this it would definitely be open to including it uh-huh Nicole can you expand on how that is drastically different from
0493.6 or would on page number four would you just want to modify the language of 3.6 to be slightly more inclusive yeah we could and just add race in there if we want to I like it framed positively the way 3.6 is I think you should also include religion thank you so the suggestion is to amend 3.6 to include references to race and religion anyone troubled by that all right Kathleen you good hot diggity race and religion all right okay did you have any more all right Kathy you had one on 2.1 I would like to add something to the effect of the adequacy study should also evaluate the amount of resources that have been lost through the implementation of the BS Factor because we've lost billions of dollars and there's um rhetoric going around
050that as soon as we pay off the BS Factor we're at adequacy and so we think we need to put a number on well how much money we've lost at least so that we can start having that conversation Other Board member thoughts suggestions or questions around that General support need some visual sign thank you very much Kathleen did that give you enough information to draft something based on what Kathy said okay you have forward support to do that all right do you have anything else I don't think so I'm gonna take one last chance to wander through this I'll give everybody a minute to do that one last swim oh Nicole's got one go ahead I actually have a few more questions um 2.3 and 2.4 feel similar to me and I was wondering if
051there was a way where we could combine that language into one statement and similarly two point five and 2.11 have similar themes that I think maybe we could combine those because they have to do with diverting dollars away from public schools and those typical forms are so if we could combine those just to clean this document up a little bit anyone troubled by that so which ones again Nicole sorry um 2.3 and 2.4 maybe combining that language and then 2.5 and 2.11 and with 2.5 and 2.11 um I mean just saying the BAC opposes any effort to divert public dollars in the form of two public from public schools or private schools or Child Care programs especially those seeking religious exemptions and just combining that language hmm that makes sense Kathy 2.3 and 2.4 we
052could probably come up with something for 2.5 and 2 point 11 I don't I think it's just a close call because of what the Catholic church is doing right now whether we want to have a stronger statement or whether we want to marry those two together because to me sending public dollars to religious institutions as a version of a voucher but not quite the same so I could see adding it or I could see keeping them separate because of the current climate so I'm I could go either way Kitty got a thumb up yeah I'm not necessarily opposed to combining things but I'm not opposed to having you know more items because it makes them shorter easier to read and you don't have to if if something's coming up in the legislature and it dresses
053part of what's in an in one of our items but not all of it then we have to disaggregate it and so I mean I don't feel real strongly about this but I I do kind of like them being short okay other bored thoughts okay coming back to you then Nicole Kathy said she was comfortable combining a 2.3 and 2.4 so anyone opposed to combining those okay and then what about leaving 2.5 and 2.11 separate or would you prefer to continue to combine what's your preference separate's fine you all good to leave them separate going once going twice okay all right and then I have sorry that's right in 2.9 and the legislation did passing that we could do screening for mental health services so I would just remove that word about slit screening um
054and then I think it's fine I think still supporting community-based mental health and addiction treat services is good but the screening passed and then I just have I would love some context on 4.4 and 4.1 okay let's hold on 2.9 oh sorry not 4.1 4.4 and sorry okay so 2.9 anyone troubled by those suggestions go ahead Kitty I'm not troubled and I agree that if we've got the funding for screening we could take that out but perhaps adding language about support because we provide mental health support to our students but it's it's not necessarily treatment those are two different things so you'd have it say and community-based mental health support and treatment services yes okay anyone troubled by that Nicole is that cool with you sweet all right all right and then you're taking us
055to the fours go I think I'm sorry I may have oh it was three point five wanting some more context on that and if that's related to some specific legislation that might have been in the past or um if that still feels relevant anyone have a recollection about why we have this Kathleen Rob I think that goes back to a prior board I would ask Kathleen if we still need that or if we've needs to be are there things afoot that make this still a relevant policy position to have rob you never know what's a foot tricky question that's a trick question you know I do think that uh you know to the extent that this needs to be in this list of legislative priorities I do think that we certainly want to protect the
056privacy of our students I don't know that necessarily needs to be in this document with that information from Rob and the suggestion from Nicole we could strike this one anyone troubled by striking 3.5 all right strike that one and then another clarifying it was 4.2 I feel like that was in the legislation our contractors prompt payment for subconsciousness I feel like that one's not relevant anymore either but I wanted it reads like this just in bbsd opposes legislation that requires a school district to verify a contractor's prompt payment of subcontractors should we wait till Bill's back to get more information on that or Rob is that related to the issue of something having not been paid that because I know in 2017 there was news about I think it was contractors not being paid not
057us not paying but I don't remember for sure maybe because nobody knows it's not necessarily a massive priority for us at this time or the superintendent and the lawyer like I don't know if when Bill comes back if he has really strong feelings about it he can let us know next week how's that otherwise it's gone otherwise strike okay does that make sense 4.2 all right had a question on is um 4.4 and I would just like some clarity on what this is trying to accomplish first and foremost and then I have a follow-up about our Charter our recommendations for these Charter ones but if somebody can explain 4.4 to me that I would greatly appreciate it Kathleen sure so I think over the years we certainly acknowledge or have the role of local boards
058and reviewing Charter School applications and working with Dax which I know you're very familiar with so this addresses the standard to be applied when a charter school is seeking review of a local board's decision at the State Board and right now I think the standard oh let me so this is Seeking a higher standard for review which would give more deference to the local board's decision as long as there isn't a determination by the state board that that was an abuse of discretion that was exercised by the local board and the standard right now I'm looking to board president Gephart best interest of the best interest of the community so the abusive discretion standard is an established standard in the law it's certainly something that we look at when we look at local entities exercising
059their Authority I think the perception over the years has been at the State Board level that perhaps there wasn't adequate deference being provided to local communities and by installing this specific legal standard which we know what it means from other contexts that there would be more protection afforded to local board decisions and with the change in the State Board do we still feel like that the current state board will not provide as much difference to local communities I think you want a standard that doesn't matter what the state board is that'd be my answer to that and the other thing I tell you is that the CSI appeals is this this standard so the only standard of review that I know of that's an administrative appeal that's this low is Charter School appeals to the
060State Board everything else as Kathleen said is subject to a well-established body of law as to how you look at and analyze an appeal so Kathy your recommendation is to keep it for that reason well there's more history than we want to spend time on here but the only thing I'll say is that when this first came up many years ago the State Board did not give any much guidance I shouldn't say any but didn't give much guidance as to how it was ruling so if you were you'd a charter school was approved and you were the next District up you had no guidance because it would say we approved this because we find it to be in the best interest of the community well that could mean a gazillion things so they're getting better
061at telling you why they think that like writing if you think about it in a court of law you kind of know how a Court's ruling whether you like it or not you at least know what they're doing so the next time you're in front of them you can say this is what they're looking for this is what they're not looking for so they're doing better at that so I think this is you know it's a close call as to whether we need to do this since they are trying to improve their practices but again I think it the standard of review should be agnostic as to who's sitting up there what does that tell you does that help Nicole yeah that's fine and like my follow-up question is actually I'll save it for agenda
062setting on some of those ones so last but not least number 4.5 is really specific to vaping and I wonder if we can expand that language to include hypoagency THC and Fentanyl so like illicit drugs including High potency THC and Fentanyl in that language and I can send you something Kathleen if it's helpful I see several people nodding I think you have a majority to support to try that so Nicole you're going to send language Kathleen I can and I'd add the word Federal in there to federal state and look Fentanyl and high potency THC okay cool all right anything else all right anything else from anyone else all right so Kathleen you'll make these adjustments draft the things where that was a suggestion and then bring something back for the board to vote on
063formally during their next business meeting that's correct and then all the policy things will have a happy ending um at that meeting and then you can carry on doing other board business can I describe a quick question on 4.1 we've changed our evaluation system now to include some measure of local performance evaluation ratings in our teacher evaluations is that right didn't we have to change that recently so do we still want 4.1 I know we've changed it under duress I think laughs let me review that even if we change that I'm reading this education educator licensure to local performance evaluation ratings it's it's poorly framed because I don't think it's licensure it's evaluation so maybe we can talk about that when we bring it back but we should change the word revise licensure to evaluation
064thank you educator evaluation to local performance evaluation ratings does that make sense no no supposedly that language it's the use of student test scores aligned to there it is right and you oppose that okay so Kathleen you can revise that one as well cool okay all right good catch anything else all right anything else you want to talk about related to policy things okay in that case Kathy I hand your meeting back to you darling anything else for the good of the cause Stacy can you explain our process for the Cosby resolutions going forward just so that we are all on the same page I will fumble my way through it and then turn to Kathleen I think at the last board meeting when we all had a copy of the resolutions we were supposed
065to get our comments to you as soon as possible so that you had guidance that because the board is not taking official action in relation to any of the casby um resolutions we don't need to actually take official board action on it so I would encourage everybody as soon as possible like do you want a deadline Stacy like by the by Monday or something since it's next I'd actually really like it this week because um at our casby board meeting we're talking about all the resolutions and it'll be helpful to know how our board stands that's totally fair so by Thursday Sunday Thursday night yeah so we have everybody has the packet of resolutions so get your comments to Stacy so she has some guidance as to how to talk about it at the casby
066board meeting and then at the delegate assembly is that did I blow it Kathleen or did I get it I think that's exactly right does that help Stacy so again by Thursday just send it nobody else needs to see it just send it to Stacy so she has some guidance as to what to do at the the two meetings that we've talked about and that's only if you have questions or you're definitely opposed if you agree with the resolution there's no need to say anything about them and if there's I haven't seen this Stacy I'm going to throw a wrench in this if there's anything that you feel strongly that casby needs to take a position on you might want to let Stacy know that too we haven't seen that but there is an opportunity
067for floor resolutions they're really hard to get past but there is an opportunity for floor resolution so if there's something you feel really strongly with that Cosby should take forward and that Stacy should you know Advocate on behalf of the board I would let her know that by Thursday as well yeah I just wanted to point out that at the delegate assembly frequently these issues are amended and sometimes they're amended with a lot of language so just be aware like if you have an objection and Stacy knows about it she'd know okay is are they going to going to amend it with this or not but it's possible that a resolution with totally different language would pass so okay stay tuned because what will be coming to us from casby after this delegate assembly is
068changes to the bylaws but that won't be voted on until December so there'll be time for us to figure look at that and consider that coming down the pike so just a heads up all right anything else for the good of the order thank you awesome Heather and awesome Kathleen and awesome everybody we did this really well I think this process well I have a I just have a quick question I think this process worked reasonably well the people will agree in getting people being heard and information being made public and so I just wanted feedback because it's the first year we've done this like this okay okay good a thumbs up to that too all right um I will adjourn the meeting and thank you Justin