Policy and Equity Committee Meeting May 7, 2026

001Welcome everyone to the um May policy committee meeting for the Cincinnati Public School Board. Um we're in a different room but uh same great group uh and excited to have everybody here. Uh if we could start with some introductions. Um, I guess we'll just do the people who are up here on the stage because we don't have mics out for everybody else. Um, but we have a great group of um 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 nine folks who have joined us today. Uh, welcome. Start over here on my left. >> Good afternoon. Good day. Superintendent Shauna Murphy. >> Good morning. Michael Gustin, treasurer. Hello, Dr. Moffett, board member. Uh >> Ben Lindy, board member. >> Carrie Arsterster, board member. >> Dan Ho, general counsel. >> Okay, and we're going to get started.

002We have a wonderful agenda this morning. Um uh we have at the top of our agenda a likely short item on an alcohol waiver. Uh this is for the school for creative and performing arts um for their uh Cincinnati Chamber Orchestra Summer Music 2026. Um Dan, is there anybody from SCPA who wants to give a short presentation? >> Uh so Lisa Yunker from um the uh Cincinnati Summer Music Program uh was on. I'm not sure if she's on now. Rob. No. Okay. Uh this is a program that we've had at SCPA for multiple years. Uh they do four concerts at uh SCPA. It's been a very successful partnership. Um if she jumps on, I'm sure she'll say more about it, but otherwise uh the administration recommends approval of this alcohol. >> Great. Um if anybody

003is watching a policy committee meeting for the first time, the general rule at CPS is no alcohol on CPS premises. There is a provision where the policy committee can wave that for a fundraiser for uh events. Um uh but we we do review each of those proposals. Um uh Lisa, if you join us later and would like to share a minute or two, you are welcome. And if not, that is fine. >> Lisa, if you raise your hand and you'd like to speak, you can go ahead and talk now. Hello. Lisa is >> Hi. Can you hear me? >> Oh, hold on one second. All right, try that again. Lisa, >> hi. Can you hear me? >> We can. Yes, >> you can. Okay. Hi. Um, can you see me or I' I've never done

004a board meeting like this. So, >> good morning. We're glad you're here. >> No, Lisa, we just unmuted your microphone for Speedians, so please go ahead and >> Gotcha. So, well, I'm um speaking on behalf of Evan Gidley and um basically emphasizing that we're a nonprofit um group and that the sale of the alcohol is not a profit venture. It's more of a break even and a um sort of a um an extra I don't know what the word would be, but um again, we're not it's not a profit. We're a nonprofit organization and the uh alcohol at the event would not be a profit venture. It's um kind of like a um sorry it was uh I little bit stressed out because in the morning I thought the meeting was at 9:30. Had a

005crazy driving hectic thing. But um it's um incentive. >> It's an incentive. Yeah. um just to but and all and also it's not an alcohol event, you know, it's a music event where um alcohol is offered, where you know, drinks are offered and most people don't have more than one. Many people don't even drink. >> And Lisa, we we appreciate all of your work and we appreciate your uh commitment to being here um whether 9:30 or 10:30. And so, thank you. >> Do board members have any questions they'd like to ask? the only I didn't want to necessarily ask anything of uh SCPA in particular, but we brought this up a couple of months ago around possibly um making the process for alcohol waiverss a little bit more central and so that we're not so

006that uh schools don't have to keep coming right before they if they know of an event, they can have that done maybe a couple times a year and then we just entertain exceptions rather than schools to feel like they have to get this done because it's next week. So, I would really implore that we do that. Is that under? >> It is. Uh we anticipate having a uh early board meeting next uh school year where we will we will reach out to all the folks who regularly uh have asked uh the Kilgore 5K, the the events that we have every year, the summer music festival, and hopefully do them in one batch. We there may still be events that come up throughout the year, but we hope to get the uh bulk of them out

007of the way at maybe the first meeting in August, something like that. >> And just just to clarify, not that it would not be approved if there were one-offs, it's just so that to make the process a little bit more easier, I'm absolutely certain these are probably volunteers and they're probably a little stressed. We don't need to add to the stress. So, let's give them the opportunity. And um in that, can they write something rather than to have to be present to to present it? Can they just write a blurb or do we have some information that they can submit along with that alcohol waiver application or request so that they don't have to feel like they have to be at the meeting? >> That would be great. I'm sure they would appreciate that. We

008can have something written for you next meeting as a procedure and if you approve it, we'll go forward with it. >> Yeah, I think that would be great. Thank you. I'm glad you all are working on it. >> Thank you very much. Um, absent other comments, we will put this in the consent agenda for the next available business meeting. Um, and Lisa and and folks who are here or anybody else who is listening or watching, uh, thank you so much for your flexibility with our timing this morning. I think we had some mixed signals on our end. Um, uh, and so folks who came at 9:30, um, uh, apologize for any inconvenience. Uh, and thanks for everyone's flexibility. Um, as I understand it, we have our superintendent and treasurer here for another 21 minutes or

009so. Um, >> an hour, >> 50 minutes. >> We got plenty of time. Okay, great. Never mind. Um, I was going to offer to put up front anything that we wanted to make sure that you all were on. I think let's just check in in 20 or 30 minutes and if we haven't gotten to those things, we'll move them around and make sure we get to them. Uh, okay. So, um, we try to structure our policy committee meetings in a consistent way where we have quick things like an alcohol waiver up front. We leave some space for items that we are coming back to that we did not uh finish from previous meetings or where the administration was going to go do some work and present some updates to us. We then in item four

010um go through every three years every policy in CPS to make sure that it's updated. Uh and then we ask uh our colleagues on the board every six months, are there any topics you'd like to see us take up so that we can uh work through any question, any concern, any idea that a board member has? Um today, as I understand it, Dan, we actually don't have anything in the three-year review. We're we're feeling okay on that front. Um we also, I think, have made it through most of the things that board members asked about this six months. So, we have a couple new business items down here, but not a ton. I was going to request uh Phyllis, would you, as it's uh about to be June, which would be January, February, March, April,

011May, June. Yeah. 6 months into the year, could you send out another request before our next policy committee meeting just asking board members are there any other topics they'd like to see us take up over the second half of the year? Um and then we'll make sure we work through those two. Uh so for um the continued discussion items um on this first one I think Carrie is this this came from you is that right? Do you want to lead us off? >> Sure happy to. So, um, on my glorious tour of all of our wonderful schools, um, I heard some feedback. So, I just wanted to bring this to the policy committee so we could have an open discussion about some of the things I heard. I don't necessarily have any direct recommendations. I

012just thought it would be good for us to chat about some of the things. So um first I um have heard from some teachers specifically that um they are frustrated that their own children are so low on the list for getting accepted into schools within our district. Um, so something to consider as a potential benefit that is not a direct cost to the district necessarily. Um, we all know it's a lot easier if you're dropping your kid off at a school that is near your workplace. Um, so um, yeah, I see they are at like 9 and 10 on the first list and then five and six at the very bottom of this list. So, just something that I heard. Um, another thing I heard from our secondary schools was feedback on when we have

013a specific focus in those schools, they get students that come in without um an understanding of what that focus requires. Uh so then you get students in a monastery program or um in a what was the other one? I forget which the other school was. There was another type of school that had the same issue where there are certain extra requirements um along with your regular coursework to graduate and students are not oh the IB programs. Sorry, it was the IB schools. Um students are not aware of that coming in and so they are behind and not interested in um acquiring those extra things and so the administration of that school is now trying to figure out how to support the student and the overall school with two competing interests. So, just as we're looking,

014I know we prioritize um feeder schools, but doing just a better job of I think as a district communicating graduation requirements, expectations um of specialized programming um for families ahead of enrollment at that level is something that we could look at. And then just one last one and um that is the capacity issue. So we do have a capacity evaluation for everything but our last two schools listed here. So I just wanted to know are they included in that capacity or are they not because they have their own separate paragraph >> for Walnut and SCPA? >> Yes. This was uh we had this on the policy committee agenda I think last October. Um those are two schools that have >> separate entrance requirements. Th those are I mean the only two schools that fall into

015that category. So they are not subject to like they they have unlimited capacity then is my question. >> no we do ask every year they still do um the capacity documentation. >> Okay. >> Uh all the schools do that. >> Okay. >> So yes they do have that. >> So if there was a point they would they would need to limit the number of students enrolling because they were at capacity. >> Yes. Or based Yes. based on >> and they would fall back on this formula then >> is the question >> I'm sorry >> sorry they would then if they were nearing capacity would they fall back to the formula above >> yes I believe so for example uh it's the the difference at SCPA now that it is K to2 they don't have that

016primary audition requirement so that's a little bit different from what is documented here but we do set capacity the limits u and try our best to stick with those. >> Yeah. I just think it's confusing language >> because we have this whole thing laid out with what we do of the schools at capacity and how to do it. And then we have these two schools that are separated. >> Yeah. >> With no mention of capacity limits and no mention of what would happen if they got to that. I'm not saying they're at that or they're near that. I'm just saying in the event that they were, we don't really have a protocol written out for that. >> I definitely, of course, they're both in demand and so we can review um review that very question

017uh how how to make sure we're monitoring that and what is our response when they do get to those capacities. >> Yeah, I just think it's important to have that >> agree. And then with respect to uh sometimes we have children who um select or enter schools and they're not necessarily interested in all the requirements. There's I find two interesting things. One a lot of times the parents are selecting the school for the child and a lot of times parents are selecting schools because of their experience and not necessarily because of what the current program offerings are. So, we'll continue to have conversations with families at those transitional years in particular. >> Yeah, absolutely. I think that's important. Uh we want to make sure we have an amazing district with so many amazing buildings and

018I want to make sure students aren't getting placed for the wrong reasons. M >> um I want the school that's the best fit for them so that they feel >> Mhm. >> like it's a building they want to be in and they're not being forced to do things they don't want to do, take courses they're not interested in. >> Um because it's some requirement that they didn't know about. >> Um so just trying to figure out how all that fits into this was what I was really trying to get to. Is is there just so we're clear on next steps, is there a request for the administration to develop some language on some of the topics you mentioned? >> I think definitely for the capacity thing, I think it should be spelled out in here

019what would happen if the SCPA and Walnut Hills buildings hit capacity what procedure there would be for enrollment. Um, that's important to me. Um, I would ask the administration to consider bumping employee students up on the list. That's just a personal ask. We can talk about that as a as a policy committee. Um I'm not an employee, so it doesn't affect me personally. I guess I shouldn't say personal, but like that's coming from me individually. Um, and then I I think the other one's more just how do we do a better job at that transition level of getting to to families more than a policy probably. >> Thank you, Karine. >> Thank you for sharing those concerns because I I've heard similar. Um, I'm very interested in with when we talk about uh allowing staff

020to have uh an exception or a priority for placement. I'm wondering how many of our staff are in in the district and how many are not. So we if we if we collect data on the number of staff members that are actually in CPS uh 91 square miles that live in the city of Cincinnati can vote on our levies um to what is that number um and I' I'd love that to be broken down by demographic. So teachers and then um others because teachers are asking specifically. So when consideration is made for enrollment um we need to look at is that going to be an outofd district transfer or you not transfer but is that an out of district request and then what that looks like. Um so those are some of the because I'm

021I'm really concerned you know we we we need to ensure that people are able to vote on our levies and actually um you know engage or not to say that they cannot be admitted. So I want to be clear when this gets repeated. I'm not saying to not admit them. I just would like that extra data. >> Yes. So we put our students um for enrollment purposes kind of in three categories when you're talking about employees kids. So first would be resident students that you're an employee but you're also a resident. You you would follow the same priorities that are for other residents. And and to be honest, we can check. I don't know that we have data matching our resident students with being CPS employees. I know there's a question on the application, where

022are you employed? And we may have that data. We can look into that. But if you're a resident student, you know, you are following the same enrollment, you have the same priorities even though you're also an employee. The second category would be out of district employee kids. um they they are enrolled they have a higher priority than other outofdist families. They get the second priority that they're after our resident students regardless of where you're employed but before other outofdist students who are not employees kids. So that would be the second category and I do think we have good data on that because they have a special or they used to at least have a special enrollment category essentially. And then the third would be out of district non-mployees student. So we c we can certainly

023find out what kind of data we have to bring back, but I I'm not sure that we have good data on the number of resident students who are also employed. I >> I agree with you, Dan. um do plan to check on this with Jeremy and with our EMIS team going a little bit deeper, but as I think about what our application looks like, I'm not certain that it asks if you are an employee, but we we will definitely follow up >> and and this is significant because we've had this under a previous administration and the question was the the the teacher both her and her husband worked in the district. They wanted but they lived out of district and they wanted their daughter to be able to go from like Wana I don't know

024this specific school but Wana Hills to their schools and they wanted just transportation for that and they were willing to pay for that transportation. It was just a metro and we told them no. We wouldn't even do like a deviated stop. We wouldn't do any of that and they were willing to pay. So, we've had this concern before from our staff just saying, "Hey, can after school, can they just get a ride to my school where I teach?" And they were told no because they're out of district. They wouldn't get any consideration. They offered to pay the $400 for Metro and they were told no. And so, this is this is not a light issue. This is something that um we've asked about before specifically for faculty that wanted their kids to just be able

025to go where they're teaching. And so that's why I'm asking that question because we've had this we've had this before. So >> that's about transportation though, right? Not school enrollment. >> That was a transportation one, but the student went to Walnut as an outof district student or whatever the school was. They were in a CPS school, but they were an out of district um family, but their their parents worked in our district, and they just wanted them to be able to go to the schools that they were teaching. And that this came up because it was kind of like, well, no, technically, no. So, yeah. So, we've had this I'm saying that to to you in that this is a very valid concern that teachers have expressed before. Hey, can we just We asked for

026an exception. The board members did and they said no. So, um, this is a concern that teachers are having. That's why I asked for the data cuz we've asked for it before. But other than that, I think it's great. >> So, um, my I see my role here is just making sure people feel clear on what next steps are. Um, uh, this is not a policy I have a particularly strong feeling about as an individual board member one way or the other. Uh, just for the administration, is there anything that board members can help clarify in terms of the information that they're requesting? I think I understand. Dan, you good? >> Yeah. Okay, then we're going to keep moving. Uh, next we're on Oh, I'm so sorry. Is there anybody here in person or anybody

027who is online who came to talk about the high schools of choice policy? Okay. Uh, hearing nothing, we're going to move to policy 7500 on community learning centers. Is there a a board member or administrator who wants to pick up on this one? So, this came up last uh meeting. I I think we were asked to bring back um specifically there was a question I think from Dr. Moffett about the fees that are charged for using our facilities. So, excuse me. I I included the community learning center policy, but I also included that that relates more to our facilities use policy 7510. And so, that's included both on board docs and on um in your packet there. Um and then uh Mr. Burkhart's not here but he does there is a procedure that relates to

028use of facilities the application that's used uh the asurances that someone using our properties um needs to give and then the fees are in there as well. just generally speaking and again Chris would be able to speak to this better than I can but again kind of consider facilities uses in in three buckets. One is that we are using our facilities. It's a Woodward football game. It's a SCPA jazz event that there is no charge obviously we don't charge our own teams etc to use our facilities. The second bucket is the um when it's a partner organization the PTO the a partner organization and and there that second bucket the goal is to charge the co the costs essentially if we have to have a security assistant there if we have to have a building

029engineer there to open buildings if there's additional custodial needs food services whatever it is we we just try to keep that at cost and then A third bucket would be if it's it's not really it, you know, our buildings, at least the policy provides that they're available for use by the community and that's where there's I I think uh reasonable cost involved in in using our facilities. So that's the goal there. There are infinite variations on that. Um and uh I know the facilities department has done a lot of work in the last two years to try to get that right. I know the athletics has been meeting with the rec commission to try to get that right. Um but the policies um that relate here are the building use policy and then the community

030learning center policy also. >> So thank you for this. I think that my specific concern initiated because of the little league discussion and then it also evolved into this uh there are nonprofits that utilize our space that don't pay i.e. churches like like that. And that's not mentioned or clarified in here. And it's still not mentioned or clarified in here. I'm a little confused around the wording on the second page, top paragraph. It starts with the agreements shall include a provision clarifying that the partnering agency or organization shall be responsible for reimbursing the district for actual costs for the services rendered um for custodial which you've clarified and you stated and you've clarified and it references the policy 7510 which makes sense but there is a different price for or there has been demonstrated a

031different price for nonprofits. there's been demonstrated a different price for now the little leagues have a different price that needs to be captured here and it's not. So I either referenced to facilities or captured some kind of way because what we're doing and what is written here seems to be conflicting. I know we have churches and they're they're perfectly allowed to use our facilities but they don't pay like that. They don't pay the the custodial fees. they do other things in lie of and part of that reasoning was because they were considered a nonprofit. And so I know for u factually as the chair of the LSDMC some of that happens and it can happen but it's just not captured here. So I'm not trying to change anything that's going on that's benefiting our buildings,

032our our schools and our students. I'm trying to capture it so that when there is a disparity that people bring up to say, "Hey, I'm a nonprofit and I'm being charged x number of dollars, a who do I go to?" Because this policy states the resource coordinator does a lot of that work, but that's not happening in practice, and b what am I to be expected to char to be charged? It doesn't have to have a dollar amount, per se, but it should say that there's a differentiation in price, and it doesn't say that. So, those are some of the things that I brought up before. Um, I didn't we had never really talked about the role of the resource coordinator leading that work for community. Um, again, if if it's here and we want

033to reference that to the resource coordinator policy so that people know what their role is, I mean, that's fine. But I just think that this still needs work to capture in actuality what is going on. not to change what's going on, but what is actually happening versus the the theory here in the community center. So, it's just not finished unless you can point me to where it is. And I'm happy to I just looked at it and I was like, "Wow, we got a lot of mention of resource coordinators here and I think that's that's great." But then we also kind of bring in the one plan which is a little confusing. And then we talk about um the LSDMC all in this community learning centers policy and it talks about how the LSDMC can

034approve things and cancel things. And it's just confusing the way that it's written. It says in the second paragraph, I'm sorry, the second to the last paragraph, once developed, the agreements shall then be submitted to the LSDMC through the principal for approval. Each agreement shall provide for an annual evaluation of the programs and or services. Are we talking about community like churches? Are we talk like what what are we talking about there? Are we talking about um individual programs that want to use our building? They need to go through the LSDMC through the resource coordinator. To me, it's just confusing. I think um that there's a great opportunity here because I I think the intent of this may be something a little different. However, this provides us a time to bring together school community partnership,

035athletics, and facilities because to your point around little leagues, Dr. Mafet, I don't know that that was the intent of this, >> but we do have an opportunity to clarify and clean that up. In addition, the schedule for what it costs to rent an auditorium or that is documented definitely needs to be reviewed with what we are where we are now and what we have agreed to with the athletic department as it relates to our little league. So, this is good timing going into the month of June for us. And I'm not really speaking or harboring on the little leagues because I know we have churches who use our buildings on Sundays. Um, and we I mean Crossroads started at Clark. So that is uh that is going on. And we also have other nonprofit

036organizations that utilize our buildings. That's not captured here that they should be getting a different price and that it does that have to go through the LSDMC does that have to go through the resource coordinator? I just think we need to clarify it. >> What this makes me think about is our colllocated partners. Mhm. >> So we'll we'll have further conversation if that's acceptable and >> sure >> bring some more clarity. >> Thank you. >> Anything else on uh community learning center policy either from board members or from anybody who is here from the public? >> Yes. >> Uh yes. We just have a comment um from Vita Taft High School Vocational is uh school charged football teams athletic departments have to pay to use the William uh Starel Stadium. So just some feedback and

037a comment. So >> Rob, thank you. We appreciate it. Um okay, moving right along. Uh 8330, this is student records. I think this is coming back. Uh would would welcome an update and how we can help. Dan, do you want? >> Yeah, I I mean, I'll just start by saying I think um the the piece that I think warrants some additional discussion is the directory information policy. So, again, I this has been back and forth uh with the full board and and the policy committee. Um I I I don't think there's been a lot of discussion about the other changes that are proposed. They're they're not um they're cleanup mostly. But on the third page of the policy, I highlighted what the board currently designates as directory information. Um, again, the the way directory information

038the presumption is flipped. So the general rule would be that all student information is private, confidential, cannot be shared except for specific reasons or with consent to the parent. The presumption is switched with directory information for so for these 12 or 13 categories. The district sends out in its back to school packet a notice to families to say this is what the board considers as directory information. And unless you tell us that we cannot share this information, this information will be public. It allows schools to print student directories, class lists. Um, PTO's sometimes use this. Uh, it it also gets requested, this information gets requested, as we've talked about, by charter schools and sometimes it's difficult even to keep it out of the hands of marketing firms and things like that. So, the board made

039a intentional decision about 10 years ago to expand what it considered directory information. I will say I think this policy is pretty consistent with what most school districts identify as directory information, but I it's not clear to me that the entire board is comfortable with all these categories being considered public information unless the parent tells us no. Um, I'll I'll just add that, you know, we had a recent news story with CPS where law enforcement were down in our schools seeking essentially this kind of information. And these categories, unless a par a parent had opted out, are really public information. They could have sent us an email for some of this information. So, we we need to I don't know. I think it warrants a discussion about whether or not this is something we want

040to continue. We have time. This this would need to be ready to go back in the back to school packet to inform families what categories we think uh should be should qualify. >> Uh thanks Dan. Uh it's important. Yeah. >> I have a couple thoughts. Would welcome any thoughts any of my colleagues have first though. >> Um so this came up after you had left the previous one and Dr. from Moff and I had asked for it to be held cuz we thought it needed more discussion. Um I've thought long and hard about this and um this actually what the last policy committee was before that incident. >> That's right. >> So interesting timing. I um I think where I sit right now would be that we flip the back to school packet to say

041unless you say yes this we will not be collecting this information. So you have to opt into the directory instead of opt out. That would be my comfort level. I'm fine with collecting and publishing this information if a parent actively chooses to have it shared. Can can you say about why >> why um because I think as someone who has three kids and has filled out a lot of back to school packets, there are often times where you're just going through and clicking buttons and you might miss a directory request where you have to opt out and not know that you have inadvertently shared information that could put your child depending on your situation at risk. >> Thank you. >> Have a thought. >> Yeah, just one other uh ju just for your information. Before

042the board had expanded the definition of directory information, it had the the previous policy had designated directory information as a student's name, school, grade level. And then we did not have parents name, address, telephone listing, email address. We we we have had though in that previous policy participation in officially recognized activities and sports and awards received not to um uh put an intent on prior boards, but I think that the idea was that we publish the honor role in the paper or we used to that that often was a thing. Um Johnny had a great game at uh uh you know in the in the basketball game on Friday. Th those sorts of things were always included. So it was name school grade participation in officially recognized activities and sports and awards received that before

043the policy was expanded. >> Understood. And question to follow up on that. If a parent has opted out or sorry not opted in right at the beginning of school and something happens and they school would like to recognize that student could the school then go back to that parent and request inclusion at that point. >> Yeah. So without those categories you'd need consent for >> Right. Yeah. kind of >> so it wouldn't exclude the student from being recognized for something because they could always come back and get that permission at a later point. >> Correct. the the board what whatever categories the board board identifies. If it's none, >> right, there'd be no need. But any categories that are identified would still go in a back to school packet. These are the categories. You can

044still opt out. Yes, you can always consent. A parent could always consent. >> So, I just want to clarify. I'm not saying >> this would eliminate the possibility for recognition for a great thing if this if the parent chose to do that later. >> Yeah. Another example is so f some school districts identify school photos as directory information. We do not and never have. Uh but there is I believe in the back to school packet a photo consent form so that families can opt into that but it's it's an optin otherwise and so there's a separate Yeah. >> Thank you Kareem. So I I I think this policy was it says adopted in ' 07, last revised in 19. All of that is prior to what we are currently dealing with socially. So my um

045I I have some reservations, but I'm also wanting this to probably go to a wider conversation like Armbster said, the full board because I don't want to to to make that heavy decision on my own. Can there be differentiation to um maybe only allow high schools or only allow elementaryaries? Like I just we we tend to do things as the whole entire district when some things could be and maybe should be differentiated by elementary, junior high, middle, um high school. So that's one thing um I I would think of. And then I do think it's similar to the the photo permission form in that when when we did the tour and went around to different schools, we would easily ask um principles, is it okay to take a picture with this student? And if it

046was a no, then we would put a little something over that person's face, over that b that child's face. Um parents, I think, do opt out. So they they do know like especially for the photo form. um especially for our students who are experiencing either homelessness or something with the judicial system like um foster care, they they opt out um for sure. But I'm very interested. You and I had a conversation around this for clarity afterwards because our charter school and our competitors are able to get our information and they are actively using our data >> because we have them it available right to potentially solicit our students. >> Correct. >> And they are not necessarily reciprocating that. So, I'm just wondering um that that's a concern for me that they get access to all

047of our students are actively using it to recruit our students because I've gotten several mailers and um we we can't limit that. So, I'm con I'm concerned. I don't know, but I'm also conflicted. I want to protect our families no matter what. So, if the high school is really the target area right now for problems, um I want to limit wherever we can put some barriers up for that. But I also don't want us to limit ourselves for potential marketing if we're going to use it. Now, if we're using it and it's not working with the charters, then I think that's not a good return on investment. But >> yeah, I I would say that was at the forefront of the board's mind in 2017 when we worked on or yeah, 2017 when we worked

048on this policy. Um, as as we talked about last time, we we also have the ability that charter schools are subject to public records requests. Private schools are not, but charter schools are. And so we did public records requests to the 15 or so charter schools that actively operate within our district. About three of them uh within a week said, "Yeah, our directory information policy includes all these categories." and sent us the information that we requested for us to be able to also use for marketing purposes. The remainder or most of the remainder sent us back a no and then I asked to see their directory information and they have a very limited categories. Name, school, grade, no address, no email and and so we asked them to send that to us but that's not

049useful in terms of marketing, right? >> And maybe we should do the same. But I'm my last question is around military recruitment. If we were to change that, does that uh impact military recruitment or is that legally we have to give them that? >> There is there is separate for military recruiters a a parents have to decide to opt out on military recruiters regardless of what the board's directory information policy. You said parents do opt out. They do uh just anecdotally I would say maybe in the 5 to 10% range of parents opt out. I think we saw an increase in that this year in part because our schools were >> more active and informing families that this is a right that they have if uh this was something they were concerned about. But yeah,

050there are families that opt out. >> I have a question or two I'd like to ask, but I'm hoping we could put a pin in this and come back to it. We've got about 15 minutes before we lose the superintendent and treasurer. Um, absent descent from my colleagues, I just like to see um are there items on our agenda that we want to make sure we have their perspective on, whether that's LSDMC policy or um anything else in particular. I would love to ask about the two new business items, but I can do both of those fairly quickly. >> Should we do LSDMC? Did you want to be here for that one or No, >> I'm open. Uh, assistant superintendent Badget is also here. So, I'm open to whatever your pleasure is. >> Anything we

051want to ask the super and treasure about? >> The LSTMC was mine, but we can table that or just have um assistant superintendent badge to talk about it. I would like to get to the ones that are specific to the administration and the treasurer. So, if you want to come >> the new ones. Yeah. And I I can do this quick. I think um uh I had a uh constituent ask me this question a couple weeks ago and it's it's one I remember years ago being on the policy committee and talking to Dan about. Um but I have a I have a hypothesis that we lose a lot of revenue because of interd district open enrollment. Um, and I wanted to test this hypothesis with you all and then depending on where that goes, it

052may go nowhere. But am I right in thinking that if if a student if we accept a student who lives outside of CPS, but they live in Ohio, the state dollars follow that student, but the local property taxes do not. >> Local property taxes definitely stay local 100%. So if we increase the number of students that we're getting, but we're not increasing the property taxes, we're essentially shrinking our revenue per student for every marginal student we enroll from outside CBS. >> Say that again. I'm sorry. So if we >> if we if we have a 100 students >> and no students from outside CPS, right, >> and we add one student from outside CPS, >> we get all the costs associated with that student. We get part of the revenue from the state. We don't

053get the property tax revenue. >> Right? >> So if you think about the 100 versus the 101 in the 101 scenario, our revenue per student is lower than in the first where we have no interd district enrollment. >> Yes. And a lot of that but a lot of that is because fair school funding formula isn't funded. Right. So, so, so ideally a fully funded fair school funding formula would give you a significant, you know, chunk of that student's aid, but ours is so low at this point. You know, we're at about $3,000 per student out of $8,000 per student. Um, it's just it's just it's just the way it's the way the formula is skewed makes makes the math harder in some regards. I mean, we don't we don't get incrementally that much per student,

054you know, and so and so you could say, you know, if your tax revenue is is is tax revenue is flat and it's most of it, um then the incremental, you know, gain or loss from any individual student isn't all that much, right? I mean the data that I got back from the um I sent this constituent question to the treasurer. The treasurer included the superintendent and uh Jeremy and then Jeremy sent back some data to me. Um and so I'm happy to share this data with the board. I really try people know this. I try to make any data request one that goes out to the whole board. I was just trying to get an answer to a constituent's question and a bunch of data came back, but I'm happy to share it with

055with with the full board, but the data that Jeremy sent was that it's 1,800 students uh who are coming to CBS from outside the district. And so like if we're losing a meaningful chunk of revenue per student and it's 1,800 students, that's a big number. Um, and so I think one of the I want to just test this hypothesis if the hypothesis is true or potentially true at some point and I know there's a lot going on with the budget right now. This can be stuff that we look at in the summer or the fall, but like at some point would love to see some kind of analysis on if we imagined a future some number of years from now where we no longer did interd district enrollment. How would that change our revenue picture

056or would it would it maybe it would just cause a lot of friction for families and it wouldn't make a big difference for us. But I think looking at those numbers I think my my sense is could be an important first step. But I'd love to know what you think. No, I think it's a it's a it's a good thing to kind of dig into. Like I said, the the formula is kind of wild and we actually had our um had our consultant from Frontline here a couple weeks ago and we're doing some kind of deep dive into into those sort of changes. Um you know, this idea that one incremental student, what does that really do, you know, to your revenue picture? Um we h happy to explore that more and put some kind

057of package it. It's it's hard with it's hard to talk through without some graphs. Honestly, this is one of those ones where you need some, you know, you need to be able to put some graphs up and show some and show some tables probably to really get a good explanation on it. But it's definitely something to talk about. I will say, you know, outofstate enrollment, which we have a few of those, that that is something we do bill for. So that's so that that that is a net positive revenue. I think we I think we bill about 11 a little over 11,000 maybe between 11 and $12,000. We don't have a lot of those students. There's very few of them, but we do have a few. Um so so that's a picture you got to

058we have to kind of take out as well. But but definitely something something we can explore and talk about. I think like you said like what's what's the incremental effect one student and then if we have 2,000 of them, you know, what does that look like? >> Yeah. just like back of the envelope. Um, per kid, what's the property tax revenue going to be in 27? >> It's going to it's going to be around Well, it's a good question. It depends on your enroll, right? Property tax revenue is going to be property tax revenue. So, it's going to be it's going to be what it is and just it's just dividing how many kids. >> Yeah. What's the ballpark for the property? Like, uh, this could be plus or minus $10 million. It doesn't have

059to be exactly right. >> It's going to be fun. Okay, hold on a second. So, if I look at 27, a 27 property tax revenue is going to be including every including state reimbursement. We'll say 391 million. >> 391 million. >> Yep. making sure I add the right number of zeros here so I don't make some mistake. Let's just say we have 35,000 kids. So if I do that math, that's essentially $11,000 per student. And so if we're taking 1,800 students from outside CPS who bring with them zero property taxes and I do $1,800* 11,000, it's $20 million. And I know it's not quite that simple because like if those kids don't come to CPS, it's not like we magically get $20 million. But I think the my point is just that I think we're

060spreading the existing resources far more thinly than I originally anticipated just because that 1,800 number is so high and because they bring a zero of their local property taxes with them. Um anyway, I'm I'm not suggesting we definitely change policy today, but this does seem like an area a $20 million area that's but you know in air quotes um that's worth at least exploring to to see if what we might think about in the future. Yeah, Karine, >> that's a very interesting perspective. I thought about it on the in on the opposite instead of that one. But if they're that's just the property tax revenue. Are they bringing something with them though? They're bringing something with them. It's just not property tax, >> right? They're bringing the state share. >> So, how much would the

061state share approximately be? That would be >> state shares say a little under three grand, but for for big numbers, let's use three grand. >> Okay. So, that that comes down a little bit. They're just not contributing to the property tax, but they are bringing something which is going to reduce that just a little bit. But I thought about this in the inverse in that because we do have open enrollment, some of our students are going to neighboring districts for other things. I'll give you an example. I think Dan and I spoke about this. Um, one of our other district, one of our neighboring districts said all they needed to do was get 20 CPS students and they're fine for for the uh for their their budget. and they get them every year and so

062they they get them because of like the oaks or other programming and that's money that we're losing. >> So I looked at it from that particular standpoint in that we are losing how many students are we actually losing to surrounding districts and then what does that do that how does that impact us for the budget. So when answering that question, I was looking at it from how many are we losing and how much money are we losing to other districts who are gaining our students um because of open enrollment and taking money with them, >> right? And so yeah, there's the net the net in and out. Um and then to really complicate it, not all students are are the same for cost. So depending on what characteristics a student has, >> they can get

063significantly more state funding. you know, especially, you know, our special needs students have multipliers. Our ESL students, >> um, there's extra career tech money that comes in if they're in career tech programs. If they're gifted, there's there's extra money that comes with gifted. So, it is. Yeah. And it it's a it's a pretty it's a complex mathematical model you have to really >> Sure, it can be. But if we were to just look at it from property tax revenue and just a basic number from the state, like let's not get into the add-ons cuz those are really add-ons like disabilities and other things. Um I'm interested in how many students are we losing every year to surrounding districts because we are and um how much of that money is actually being lost. So the number

064and then the amount that of revenue that we are losing due to open enrollment. So, so your question is very good in the in the inverse. How many are coming in? That's 1,800 approximately, but there is a number that we're losing as well. And I don't think it's 20 million, but it's very interesting to see that revenue lost. Um cuz we wouldn't be able to keep the property tax money. How how would that work? If they were local, that property tax value would go with them to another district. >> No. >> Right. So, >> yeah. property tax is just property tax is just going to sit on sit on the people in your district. I mean, you know, I mean, most extreme most extreme case of every student but one every every student but one

065went out of the district for open enrollment, you would have, you know, 600, you would have, you know, $390 million to spend on that one student. you know, vice versa, every student, if every student from our surrounding communities came into CPS, you know, you would have still have $390 million to spend across >> more students, >> you know, 60,000 kids. So, it's >> and and look, I I think I want to um thoughtful about time. I know we got four minutes. I also am not an expert on this and the treasurer is. Uh and so like I'm my my very quick bath of the envelope math may have real problems to it and I want to have some humility about that. So, like if the message comes back is that that board member Lindy is

066just totally incorrect about how he's thinking about this, I welcome that feedback. I just wanted to open that conversation to see what we could explore together. >> Yeah. I mean, two things I know we're interested. One is this does demonstrate the ridiculousness of overreiance on property taxes to fund education, right? >> Unless they were to travel with a kid, you know, like if they were to come with them, that's fine. >> Exercise does that. But also, let me prepare let me prepare some data. make a like like make a presentation so so we can do a little better than back a napkin and and really walk through it. >> Thank you. Um and then while we have you just on the very last new business item that was on here was about student uh schoolboard

067voice. Um I was on uh with the superintendent uh last week for schoolboard school. They do their annual pitch night. Um and they were uh a number of really wonderful proposals. Um, and one of them was about involving um, students in uh, board work and in committee work. I'm paraphrasing. It was more sophisticated than that. Um, but uh, a constituent sent me after that presentation a policy that we have on the books that I had either forgotten about or did not know that we had um, which is up on board docs. It's policy um, which is about student involvement in schoolboard decision-making. And I think the question I had um is what what does implementation of this policy look like at CPS? It's not one that I had followed or tracked closely, but I'm eager

068to learn more about it. >> So, this is really timely as well. Actually, President Craig uh talked with me about this and you probably know I do have a superintendent student leadership council as well. And my plan was to share with him uh the process I used for initiating that work. Happy to share that um to see if that would be of interest to the board if you were interested in um keeping the policy as it is where you would have opportunity to hear from the young people. It does also reference in that policy some of the other student voice initiatives that we have in place that at any given time you could also participate in those. Um so I'm open either way. I'm happy to share the process I use or hear from you

069what process you're interested in uh to hear more often from young people. >> I think I'm also trying to understand have we this policy has been on the books since 2017. Have we been doing this? I don't think that there has been a board student voice specific opportunity. I do not think so. I'm not aware of any. >> So I think my my request would be just if that's true then that the board I think this is not just about the policy committee but that the board at some point get an update on what the plan is to get the policy in place. But I welcome feedback if people see that differently. >> No, I think Brandon's working President Craig is working on it. I think we got that idea from Taft High School students

070as well. So, I love that it's coming up in multiple places and I think he wants to have a similar type council for the board. So, I love it. I think it's a great idea. >> I think it's great. I want to be clear. I think it's not great if we have a policy that has been on the books since 2017 that we have not been following. I'm glad that I'm not saying you are. Uh I'm I'm also I didn't mean to interrupt you. Sorry. >> No, I I just I think it's the work is going to happen now. I think President Craig's working on it now. >> It's great. Um, yes. >> So, I think I think there's been some one-offs and President Craig is is doing the one-off piece. The more all of

071those other programs are one-offs. With regard to the policy, I do agree with you in that the there has been there have been several requests. I made a request a couple years ago to have a board student advisory position and I think that is what this is asking for is that well but what I'm saying is the mentioning it doesn't talk about the process that student it says students are welcome and encouraged to participate in board meetings and committee meetings it doesn't really give a a procedure on how they need to do that it doesn't it doesn't have teeth it just says that they're welcome just like anyone else and so this policy as written to your point I think it does need more work. I think it can name specifics the superintendent council peer

072leadership collaborative if those are still active but it needs to have a a directive and with intentionality that we want students to participate from all over the district and not just those programs that we develop or that are currently existing. And so that's what I would love for this uh administration to work on is actually how does this get implemented? This has been on the books for almost 10 years and we have oneoff programs that are doing these sorts of things. But if a student doesn't know that this exists or that those programs exist to the point of taff to the point of um chair lendy they're not able to they're not even directed on how to engage how to get their voice to matter. And so this I would love for this policy to

073talk about ways that they can do it but be a directive that we want this to happen at the high school level seven or junior high level and how we're going to do that. How do we get students to be involved? I >> I think my thank you Kareem. I think my my pre uh we may have disagreement on the board. Disagreement is healthy. This is a democracy. I think my I appreciate the work that's happening. Um my as one board member, my preference would be to hear from the administration how they want to implement the existing policy before we rewrite it. Um and it it may be that there are lots of things going on and I just don't know about them. Um that should surprise nobody. Uh but but I wanted to give

074them a chance to hear what their plan is with this one before we writing it. But I welcome disagreement if people see that differently. >> Yeah, happy to share the process that I have used, we have used for getting these started. um can't really say why this hasn't been implemented to date, but that is no problem in doing that moving forward um for the start of the school year if that's acceptable. >> That's great. Thank you. Um okay, we understand that our soup and treasure have to hit the road, but thank you for being here. Um if we could maybe go back to where we had stuck the pin in student records. Um, I had a question I wanted to ask. Um, which was about, um, Dan, could you talk a little bit about what

075is the downside to just not having any categories? Like what if we just say we have no directory information? >> Um, you know, I I think that's the up to the board. I I'm I don't know whether and we can research whether other school districts have gone to zero directory information. I I just I know before we have the had the current level, we had those four categories. I remembered them, memorized them. That was our standard response whenever we'd get a a question. >> No. No. Um no counterargument jumps off the page. It's like, oh, here's why nobody does that because that would be a terrible idea. >> No, I I will say I think there are some schools that like the ability to publish a directory. I I think it's hard to I think

076some schools find that that encourages engagement to have student directory that you can pick up. What's what's Mr. Lindy's number? >> What about a yearbook? I mean like it can does this come into yearbooks? >> Every kind of uh publication needs to then have a consent that goes with it. So um that's right. >> Yearbook also. So I mean I I um I think that um this is a process thought. I think that there are certainly some many policies that deserve whole board engagement. I think this is likely one of them. I also think that we play an important role as a committee in weighing some of these tradeoffs and ideally coming to the board with a recommendation so that we can say um hey this is hard. Reasonable people disagree. We don't know that

077we're right, but we we are inclined to go in X direction and here is why. Um I think that forces us to do some of the lifting and it also might make our meetings shorter, which I think would be great. Um and so I was hoping maybe today we could come up with between the three of us and Dan, what what are we recommending to the board, but then we should absolutely talk about this full board. And I I can get us started. I mean, I I think some of the yearbook and the directory and past practice stuff has value. I also think we live in a different era than we lived in 10 years ago. And so I think my thought would be let's shrink what the default covers so that it includes things

078like the old situation >> um and share like hey here's our rationale and this was our effort at trying to find some thoughtful compromise. Um but reasonable people can disagree and what's the full board think? >> Yeah. to to your yearbook point that that would be that that those categories are the kinds of things that would be in a yearbook. Your name, your grade, your school, awards received, participation in uh activities, >> but not your like cell phone number. >> Yeah. I mean, or address or parents' name or email address, etc. So, so I feel most comfortable rather than making a definitive recommendation, I feel most comfortable with a list of pros and a list of cons. And then um we because because with this particular policy, I don't know. I I really do want

079this to be not just a Kareem Ben and Carrie decision to be a little bit broader to hear their perspective. So, I would love to have you all submit something and we discuss it publicly around the pros of this, the cons of this, and then everyone has the same information, and then we can come to an agreement on that rather than a recommendation versus, and this is the only time that I'm saying I don't want us to recommend because I really don't know, and I don't know what they were thinking. I know the time period, but I don't really know what they were thinking when they came up with this. I think that there's there's some potential public records with the levy like getting information out from us like like that's where I'm conflicted. Not

080only is it a yearbook issue where those are fun things that kids could engage in and parents want to see, but and levies need to be passed, but also um safety and I just don't know. I don't I I don't know. So, I want to hear some of theirs, too. So for me, rather than a definitive, I'd rather have just a list of pros and cons and let's talk about it with limits so that we're not five minutes each person. >> Um well, let's hear what do you think? >> I'm comfortable with that if that's if that's what we want to do. I no matter what I don't think we should have parent name, address, telephone, email like I think that should be removed per my individual recommendation. I still would prefer an opt in

081rather than opt out, but I'm absolutely willing to hear a pros and cons list to to make that final determination. >> Um, so I'm going to push a little bit and I think uh I'm minority perspective on this, but that's fine. I'll just say this in the meeting like I I think we can all play a role in tightening our meetings. Um I think one role we can play is by having recommendations and I'm happy to share just what my board member Lindy's recommendation is. um and not that it's on behalf of the committee if there isn't a recommendation from the committee um to do that. Um I think we're asking council to prepare like a I don't know one page with options and tradeoffs. >> Yep. >> Great. Anything else? All right. Anybody come

082to speak about student records or anybody online who has a comment about student records? >> I do have one more question from Dan. What would it look like to just say like Shayla G instead of the whole last name? Is that does that make sense? I don't know. I'm just trying to think of options like like first first name last initial instead of >> would that help with identifi? I don't know. I'm just trying to think. >> I Yeah. >> Okay, that's it. I was just trying to think of ways we could make it work, but um that's it. Thank you. >> Okay. Um so that gets to student records. We're now on uh local school decision-making committee or PTO engagement. We had >> Mr. Badget, do you want to come down? >> Yeah, we

083had a we had a robust conversation about this. Last time um and there were a couple of language adjustments that the administration I think was going to come back and recommend. Could we start just by talking through those? >> Yeah, there were three specific changes that we made. They're highlighted in the draft that's on board docs and in your packet. uh these are the only changes that highlighted are the only changes that we made from the previous meeting. So uh there was clarity around uh who the community representatives are and whether or not they need to live or work within the boundaries of that school. Recognizing that some of our schools don't have those kind of boundaries, we expanded that to say or other members of the school community. Um uh se uh paragraph six

084there clarifying that it could be from the lead uh a representative from the lead agency or partnering agency. Um clarification to what categories the chair can come from. So categories one and categories five. I think there was some discussion about whether category 6 was included but I think the consensus was that it's one and five. And then finally on the last page, uh, under the new section that relates to the monitoring, >> can you scroll down just as we see the last edit here? No, you're good. We're good. We got it. >> Yep. That's the category one and category five. And then all the way to the bottom on monitoring. Uh, this is the new paragraph that was proposed. Keep going, Rob. >> Keep going. The yellow highlight. >> Yep. the yellow highlight at the

085bottom that uh that that had said uh shall >> I think that that the it had said upon request or something that it shall receive uh an annual uh report on monitoring. >> Thank you very much for that walkth through uh board members comments questions. >> Um I'm just looking at my notes. we had talked about um on the second page where you all added the I'm sorry not the second page I guess under section composition section 1 and five um there was discussion around parents and I'm just trying to um I think we we kind of clarified that but for five we said community neighbors which you all kind of added or other members of the community but we also said that there was supposed to be a community council sign off because community

086councils are supposed to have a representative on the uh LSDMC and there was supposed to be some level of accountability that they had either done it and this was their person or they've been asked and they chose not to. But that that's missing um there under five. >> Hit the hit the little person button. There's a face with >> There you go. >> Okay. Thank you. I thought Raymond mute. Sorry. Um >> Dr. Maf is the policy still in there that the community council member does can select one um represent for the community. We we did not take that out. >> No, no, no, no. Well, okay. So, it says three community representatives who are not employed by the district. One to be selected by the neighborhood community council and the other two to be

087selected by the LSDMC. We had just talked about um community council signing off on that so that they they could that recognizes that they had been asked and have appointed the person or and they can put in their records who that person is or that they had been asked and chose not to assign a person. But we wanted that accountability for the community council specifically because there were some community councils that had not been asked. The the comment was just so that everybody can hear it who's remotely was that the community representative could be somebody not limited to a CDC or not limited to a community council. It could be inclusive of those but also broader than those. That is true and that would fall under the other two selections, but with specificity. There was

088to be one community council member and two others who could be exactly what you're talking about, but there was supposed to be one community council member plus two other ones. And so we wanted to just to have the because there was the community council member specified specifically. We wanted to have there be some sort of um sign off on that because community councils had shared that they had not been asked. So that's what we just had community neighbors which you all have added and then community council sign off. That's the only other thing that's missing from there. But it could be a a CDC, it could be all of that. fall under the two. But with specifically, we wanted to have if they if they have a neighborhood community council, we want them to have

089been asked and not just have three CDC members, community coun. They needed to be it was kind of to be a sign. It was to take off the number one if they chose not to do it or to make sure that it was done and who it is for their record. So, that's the only thing that I see that's missing. Do any Mr. Badget any thoughts or reactions to that? >> No thoughts. Just ex thinking about execution of what what that will look like. >> Can the committee be helpful on that front or do you have questions for us or No, >> I'm going refer to Dan just on how we would what that would look like. >> Sure. So, I'm trying to write a sentence here. Uh after the one >> can you Dan

090just for I'm trying to make sure I'm following along with the page and the like this paragraph we're on. >> Composition selection of members uh the fifth category. >> Fifth category. >> Yep. >> Thank you. >> Uh after the first sentence which designates uh one to be selected by the neighborhood community council, the other two to be selected by the LSDMC. This is off the cuff now. Um, the LSDMC shall document its request to the community council to appoint a member or document that the community council has elected not to appoint a member. Something like that. >> That was kind of the exploration that we spoke about because the next sentence states in the case where no neighborhood community council appointee is available then the LSDMC can select the other one. But because it was

091written that the neighborhood community council would be represented, we need we need to document that they have been asked and they refused or they've been asked and this is their person. >> Just got a question. If would it we um so this is annually for the members to vote on who who's going to serve on LSDMC. Would it be okay if we email like we have a list of all the U community councils? So every year in August, could the school and community department school and community department email the whole uh 52 neighborhoods of >> Sure. >> and to say, "Hey, this is an opportunity. This is what's coming on." And then give them their date of that LSTMC meeting. Would that be okay? >> Yeah. It just was to it was to because there

092is that listed. However you guys do it is however you do it, but we need to document that we offered and this is what they said or that we offered and they said nothing. be that takes number one away and then there could be three appointed. But because community councils said that they weren't asked, we were just trying to capture that there. >> Yes, ma'am. >> And I think we could we could handle that with no problem. >> People feel good and take that work off of the individual LSDMC, but we would email all of them and say, "Please provide your appointment by X date or whatever." >> Or just saying that they can do it. The opportunity for them to Yep. that they know that they can do it because I know those presidents

093and vice presidents in those neighborhood change. >> So, we can we can send that out. That won't be a problem. >> Yeah. But I think the LSDMC's already pretty much go to the community councils anyway. So, it could even be a documented conversation like, hey, we're you know, I sent an email. Do you all have anything? But it just needed to be documented because one community council specifically said we were never asked. So, it was like, okay, we'll see if you were never asked, we'll fix that. Now you're asked and this is the documentation to show that we have complied with number one of five like 5.1 and that they chose to respond or did not. >> Great. Any other So we've got one next step on PT on LSDMC policy so far and any

094I don't have any other edits or ads. I appreciate the work. It feels very responsive to our conversation last time. Anything else from Carrie? Are there anybody else who came here today or who's here online who wanted to speak to LSDMC policy? >> Say it again, please. >> We can't hear you. >> Yeah, please come down. We're in a new room for folks who are watching online. Usually we have a smaller room with a mic at every seat. Um we're in a much larger room and we can only hear people if they come down to the microphone. While she's coming down, Dan, did we add the part about um if appointments need to be made or if we had it going to the director of somebody? Did we add that? >> We can we can

095talk about later. >> We had an exception for >> I'm not sure what what section >> it was for Pleasant Hill. >> Oh, okay. >> Appointments could be made by assistant soup or somebody. >> We'll do it after. Okay, please. Mic is yours. Thank you. >> I love having your attention. This is cool. Um, so at district white DMC, we had five groups and uh there was one for principles and I'm not sure if and and the consultant for the for the uh strategic plan had five questions. Every group came out of there with parent involvement being major. We have one person that works with the district to do parent involvement at 66 schools with 36 students. How the hell can that one be successful at that? Now, I know there's not money to to

096pay anybody, but you could put a volunteer group together to work on that. >> Could could put a what together? >> I'm sorry. >> He said could put a blank together to work on it. I just didn't hear what volunteer. >> Got it. We did it in PTA days. We were all volunteers. I was PTA council president for the district and it worked there. Every school probably has their own issues in terms of parent involvement, but they all need to be addressed. There's got to be a way and and part of it's going to be flexibility on the part of principles and administrators. Um but but we really do need to work on it and that's part of the LSDMC parent involvement. >> Mr. Badinet, is that idea of a volunteer group something that we

097could ask you and your team to look into? >> Yes, but Miss Thomas has a advisor group that she just started this year. It's small, but it's scaling up and they are giving her ideas and she's running out um those ideas to increase parent involvement. So I can include you in on that. >> Okay. >> Yes, ma'am. And then maybe at some opportunity in the future, uh, whether it's this committee or the board or a a Cal meeting or something, we we could make sure the board gets an update on how that's going. >> Absolutely. >> Would be great. >> Yep. >> Yes. >> I'm sorry, I just put a price in my mouth. Well, I think that might fall under 9140, um, which is the last of six topics. Um, it says school relationships

098with parents, guardians, and caregivers. So perhaps that would be a place that we need to tie into 9142 uh around parents to your point. I think the D and that would that hasn't been revised since 2022, but I do think that we need to strengthen that partnership. Um it says every school shall have at least one parent organization. That currently isn't happening. Um and we also needed I don't mean to go into that. Well, I just I want to I want to close out LSDMC and then I want to do the non-school organizations policy and development um at some point, but if there's an if there's a reason to do these two together so long as we can save time for the others, I think that's fine. >> Well, I think there's they both tie

099into they're both under n uh community engagement 9,000 section, but to your point, this particular policy talks about parent organizations. LSDMC's ties into parent organizations. So they do have some relevance together. However, h >> no all >> Yeah, they all they all tie together. Um and 90 the policy um 9140 needs revision. It's on the list, but every school shall have at least one parent organization. To Mrs. Gibbs point, this is something that the LSDMC's said was important. parent involvement, >> parent organizations are supposed to be the ones putting the parents on the LSDC. I mean, that's that's how it works, but it's kind of like community councils. You can't have 10 community council members representing 7,000 residents if there not communication going on, >> right? So, they they tie together. Um, and we need

100to define parent organization. Two members is not a parent organization to me. Um, we need to define active. Um, and it says LSDMC in this particular policy as well. The parent organization shall select parent representatives for the LSDMC. So, they do tie together. 9142 needs to mention 9140. 9140 does mention 9142. So, um, they need to they need to work in tandem. >> We just go through this really slowly. So, are you saying, Kareem, that you want an additional reference in the LSDMC policy to the um policy 9140? >> Well, I'm saying under page two of 9142, number one says three parent members who are not employed by the district, three to be select to be elected by at a general parent meeting, which is announced. The parent representative must be and it say states

101that that should come from the established PTO from policy 9140. 9140 which is on the list to discuss talks about what a parent organization looks like and we are defining parent organization as loosely as two people getting together. It doesn't have to be a formalized parent group. to her point, the the strategic planning committee or the team is hearing from the LSDMC's that parent engagement is super significant. So, we need to put strength behind 9140, have 9140 referenced in 9142 because it's already there. We just need to have it referenced and then solidify that on what is an active parent organization and enforce that we have active parent organizations in the schools that can choose LSDMC members to fulfill 9142 >> who then take back the information from the LSDMC to the parent group so

102that all the parents or or newsletter or whatever so that there's information given to everybody. >> Yeah. So, um, thank you. Uh, in an effort to make sure that I I'm clear on the implications for 9142. Um, Rob, could you go to that one for a second? Kareem, you were mentioning a second ago a change to paragraph 1. Would you just say that one more time? Well, the only change that I'm suggesting is that paragraph 1 add the reference of policy 9140 at the end. It just needs to say in compliance with 9140. We have 9140 on the list to discuss. If we get to it today, that's fine. But if we don't, that's fine, too, because 9140 talks about the composition of a parent group. number one is saying that the parent members are

103supposed to be chosen by the parent group. >> The LSDMC manual used to say that it that they had to come from the parent organization. >> So Dan is our um uh is there a >> is that easy enough to do? >> Just cross reference 9140 and paragraph one under composition selection. >> Correct. Because in policy 9140, it references policy 9142. So they need to be referenced together and then strengthened. >> Um so for the purposes of 9142, we've got two changes that are coming back as I understand them. One is this cross reference. Um and then the other is the discussion we had prior. Yep. Um, and anything else on 9142? >> Are we wanting to say to Miss Gibb's point, it used to say that it had to come from the parent group.

104I don't know when that was taken out, but it used to say that the three parent people should come from the parent group. Do Do you know why it was taken out? >> I don't. >> Okay. >> I mean, I I I think um >> maybe they could be different people. It says at a general parent meeting, elected at a general parent meeting. So maybe I mean our school does it that way. That doesn't mean everyone implements it the same way, but I it does at least say that it has to be elected by other parents. I don't know. >> Okay, I'm fine. >> So we're going to make no other changes to paragraph one other than the cross reference. >> Okay, that's going to come back to from a process perspective. that's going to

105come back to this committee at a next meeting um so that we can look at it and the board members can then make it as a recommendation to the full board um absent other feedback or requests. Okay. Um as we were talking about 9140, we we're doing fine on time. We have another um half hour with only these last two items on here. So we can we can certainly stick uh you know Kareem if you want to stick with uh um parent policy. What was that? 9140 while we're on that topic. >> Sure. That that was um I just think it needs to be strengthened. We are reporting that we are like 98% compliant um with regard to PTO organizations or LSDMC and it's just it's just not not factually the case. So I think

106we need to define what a parent organization is and it doesn't have to be a formal PTO because there may be costs incurred but it needs to we need to define that and then we also need to define what is active because one meeting a year is not active. >> So can I can I ask some clarification? So we have two different things. We have the LSMC active and then we have um active PTO. We we haven't presented a number for your active PTO but I will tell you I had Mr. Mr. Johnson, bring my laptop down. Uh, from our parent champion, out of 66 schools, we have 55 active PTOs and that's her um responsibility of going out to those parent organizations and making sure that they're meeting, they have agendas, they have a

107president assigned, and that they're having monthly meetings conducted. So, that's Miss Thomas's um job to do that. and I meet with her once a month and she gives me this this data and we can have her come to our next policy meeting if you want a presentation on that. But currently as of today we have 55 10 are in progress and we do have one that's not uh that's inactive. >> Okay, great. Maybe we should have a presentation um because I'm not necessarily I I don't want to get into necessarily the work that she does. I just want to ensure that um parents are represented particularly because it's coming up as a as a want and a need and in compliance with the other policy along with this one and it's mentioned here some of

108those parents should be sitting on or at least invited to sit on the LSTMC. That's not happening. So, we need to figure out how to make this. If we've got 55 um schools represented and some of those parents are not sitting on LSDMC's, why not? If we've got 55 schools represented with at least one parent, we to me that that I don't know if I define that as active. That's just me because attending her meeting doesn't comply with this to me, but maybe it does. I don't I don't know. >> Could we do an example or two? like this just that's not a topic I'm as close to. So what is a school that has a parent on LSDMC but the parent who's on this LSDMC is not involved with the PTO. So I know

109specifically last year and and into this year we had a conversation with the uh Pleasant Hill LSDMC. The parent was active. They did not have an active LSDMC. And then all of us, you know, we kind of inquired. The parent just reached out to two to a few board members, myself and board member Matt. We inquired and kind of got into it. He had not been he had been doing things at the school but not been formally doing things with the PTO. And so he was willing to they had had an LSDMC meeting that was not really in compliance, but it was in it was documented for two meetings. He was going to sit on the as the chair and then we had parents involved. We had all all kinds of people wanting for this

110particular meeting to be involved to be the chair. It's fine, but that's not really compliance. That's not really a formal PTO picking parents. This is just, hey, we invited you to come to a meeting. He reached out for compliance with the policy and in trying to get more compliance with the policy and clarity. That's how we got involved with this. That's also how it was found out that the College Hill Community Council had not been invited to attend those meetings. And so that's just one example. And we're just trying to clean this up so that I'm trying to work on cleaning this up so that a it's consistent and b it's compliant. We're compliant consistent. And so since January, there have been other community councils. Hartwell is one that has come to the board and

111said, "Hey, we we want to talk about the naming." Evston has come to the say has mentioned has come to the board and said, "Hey, we want to kind of be involved. They're not going through PTO's because some of our schools don't have established PTO's, but they have parents that meet." So again, we just need to to be in my mind consistent. If we're defining a PTO as two parents that get together, but it's not a formal PTO because of costs, what what are we doing? what what are what are we saying? We want those parents to be involved and engaged in attending um Miss uh Thomas' meetings are great, but is that compliant with the policy? And in many cases, it's not been because we're reporting that we have 55 schools represented, but that's

112not a formal PTO. So again, I think >> I don't know. It sounds like they are formal PTO's. They do have a president-elected. They are meeting monthly. They are meeting monthly and and again we can have Miss Thomas come to a meeting >> and each site is going to look different because of the needs of the school. >> Sure. >> And you have parents that are active on LSDMC as a former principal at TAB High School. I had my three parents. They did attend PTO meetings. Maybe not everyone but you know it just depends on their work schedule and the and those demographics of those schools. I think we do have to have some flexibility with parents and just where we are today to meet the parents where they are. So, it's going to look

113different. >> Absolutely. And and this is I'm not trying to belver the point, nor am I trying to degrade anyone's work, but the point is when parents come to a board member and say this policy is not being followed and they want clarification, all that I have to go to is the policy and what it's written. And when there's ambiguity there, then I'd like for it to be clear. And so, again, attending a meeting and, you know, is is different. If we have to have a a presentation, I'm fine to do that. I just don't want us to say we have 98% LSDMC compliance and we don't. We have 98% PTO's and technically we don't. That's what we're doing. >> My request, I don't actually see a definition of a PTO in here. So, if

114that's what we're looking for cuz if we want compliance, we should probably have a formal definition. I don't I think this we we obviously need to dig in if it's if it's causing friction within schools. So I would request that assistant superintendent and Miss Thomas kind of come back and say this is how we view a defined active parent organization similar to how we do with LSDMC. um present that back to us and then we can see if that's something we could write into the policy as like this is the definition of an active parent organization and kind of go from there. That would be my recommendation. I think that's >> and we have that so we'll present. Yep. Not a problem. >> And we would love to have her data um around and recommendations

115around you know what what is she saying. I do not want to stifle anything. So flexibility the parents is is what we need, but I also want us to be um as as flexible and compliant as we can be. >> And she's very detailed on the data and tells you how they're meeting, when they're meeting. You Yeah, you'll see it next month. >> Thank you. >> I just want to make sure I'm I'm clear on the on the next steps here. So, one request is to have a definition for a parent teacher organization that would appear in this policy. >> Correct. a a proposal of what it could look like because Kareem's asking for compliance, but I don't know how they're supposed to comply when I don't see an actual definition. So, >> yeah, >>

116if we're asking for compliance, I would like to see what they're supposed to comply with written out. >> So, bring bring to you what we're using currently. Correct. >> Okay. Got it. >> Just revise the polic, you know, look through the policy and see what how you can further define it here. >> Okay. Uh, those are two different things. We can do both of those different things. I just want we're going to get the current definition they're using and any recommendations for changes. Is that what I'm hearing? >> Um, and then um to go back for a second, I mean it it really sounds in the Pleasant Hill example like the concern is around faithful implementation of the LSDMC policy. And so we've put a number of different changes in there to make sure that

117the expectations are clearer and that the board will get an annual update on that compliance such as that's different from a PTO policy. It's making sure that the LSDMC policy is followed. >> Yes. >> Okay. I just want to add at the Pleasant Hill the Pleasant Hill situation, new school, new members of the LSDMC and we inherited the LSDMC roster um from the principal and she had left mid year. So, I just want to make sure everybody has a clear picture. It was a new school so this is not the normal uh the norm. Thank you. >> Okay. any anything else on um policy 9140 which is which is as as if people have not read it um uh and as I was just looking through it here it's much broader than PTO's like the

118very last paragraph talks about a parent or that last section but it is it is a fairly um expansive vision for what partnerships with families and caregivers can look like and I think that's wonderful um and So, uh, yeah. Uh, anything else on that topic? >> The comment was about the district paying for every school to belong to a national PTA. Yeah. Thank you. >> And board member Armbberster just shared it does say that. So, that's something that >> and we have done that. Sorry, didn't mean to cut you off, but we have done that. Well, Miss Thomas says that there there's an active group and they're ready for it. Our our department up until this year have we have paid for that. >> Okay. Well, we'll get the report. >> Yes, ma'am. >> I

119would just like to flag as we go on. I think there's um there is an ongoing theme that comes up in this committee and not just in this committee, but about um essentially accountability for following policies. um which is sometimes related to writing or rewriting them but not always related to writing or rewriting them. Um and there's like a ven diagram there. Um I I think I think it's worth thinking as we go through the year the three of us about what are the different levers the board has to ensure compliance of policies. And there are at least um two clear ones that come to mind for me. It doesn't mean we couldn't create others, but like if there is real concern, the administration is not following a policy. Um that can be a performance

120issue and we can talk about um performance of a direct hire to the board in executive session. Um and so that is that is a lever that board members have and that we can use. Um, also we have an auditor and when I was first on the policy committee, we did an audit to check for compliance against four different policies. Um, we we have this triannual schedule of getting through the language of each policy. It might make sense to have a schedule for getting through the compliance of said policies. Um, because in my experience, it there's so much in the CPS policies. Um it could be hard for any human being to make sure that all of so just like it might one contribution we might add to the future of board work at CPS

121is to create some kind of way to be thoughtful and intentional and forwardlooking not just reactive around compliance with policies and that might be a topic that we could continue to revisit as we go through the year. Um would welcome feedback or disscent if there is any. >> I like that. I think for me I I I looked at the policy committee as long as I've been on here as we will just get through things unless there are hiccups and when usually there are hiccups it's around CL people have said hey x ex person is not following following board policy and so I usually take that back to the administration and the administration says hey this is how I interpret it and then I want to bring it back to the committee to look at

122are they inter is the administration interpreting the policy as we wrote wrote it the way that we wrote it. And so that's why I usually bring these things. Now, some of these like LSDMC's probably needed an overhaul over time because we now have middle schools um and we're getting information and data that may or may not match up. But for the most part, I don't anticipate going through to rewrite a lot of these policies. I think it's just it's just crazy. We've got too many. And it's only I only want to bring it to the committee for clarification. And so I've ref I've referred some things to to you all like, hey, I think we need to have policy. Look at this. How does the board interpret this based off of what it was how

123it was written and then we can provide that either through what you're sharing to the administration for compliance, you know, that our direct hire, give them clarity or say where they're wrong or whatever, or we can rewrite it. And so I just I've had too many community members come to me because they're looking at the policy and ask me for interpretation and I don't want to make that decision by myself. So >> yeah, sorry. I mean, it just it's always an iceberg question for me, you know, like this is what I was going to ask the superintendent if we had more time before they had to leave, but just like if this one is one that people who are trying to do their best just missed, what else might be out there that people who

124are trying to do their best just missed, you know? And so I think that that's um a good thing for us to continue to look at. Uh 18 minutes I want to talk about um this was a a bear if I remember it correctly. This was not a small thing but the non-school organization policy and development. There was a lot of work that people were trying to do on this. I wanted to make sure we saved some time for it. >> Yep. Um this has been a joint effort with uh treasurer internal auditor uh and our office. um modest changes from last month. Uh and and again highlighted so you can see the specific uh additions that were made uh just to go through the ones that are highlighted. Um oh I don't know if

125it's highlighted on the online version or not. Okay. So I on participation this is on Rob page one two three four. Keep going a little bit. Yeah, right there. Participation uh by students and student fundraising activities. Um >> okay. Yeah, that well there's only two changes. Right after that first bullet, uh we propose a line that says schools shall not condition participation in a school's regular curriculum activities on participation in an NSO's fundraising activities. So, uh, >> Dan, for just for for people who are trying to follow along, we have something in hard copy up here that has a highlight on it, and so that's what Dan and the board members are are looking at. Um, >> I'm going to send it to Rob as well. >> That's great. >> I just was in in

126the future or Phyllis, is it possible to get this version on board docs? >> It's all right. You'll have it in 30 seconds here or 10 seconds. >> Okay. Thank you. Um, >> while he's doing that, can I just say thank you? Uh, this was a big big lift and I think it might be towards the end. >> Yeah. Okay. So uh again under that first bullet under participation uh clarifying that schools should not condition participation in the regular corre curriculum activities um on participation in NSO's fundraising activities. The only thing I'll mention um is this is a big deal at our um Monasuri high schools. the Monasuri High Schools, which which as I understand is really um something we developed in Cincinnati public schools in large part having a high school monastery curriculum um

127has significant out of school experiential uh components um including you know eighth graders I think take uh big trips. Uh the eighth grade at Clark goes to Andros Island. I think the Gamble uh eighth graders go to a program in Florida. Um these are expensive. Um and there's lots of communication to families uh about what's involved and ways that you can fund raise and things like that, but um not all those trips are fully funded are able to be fully funded by the district. And so the schools do a lot of fundraising activities to support those trips. Feel they're very important. you know, all eighth graders getting that same experience to move on to high school. Um, and then in high school, they have regular interession groups. Again, experiential uh it's it's a big part

128of their curriculum. It's how they built this up. Um, and and so both schools are working through that. Um, it's important that every student at CPS has the ability to attend. We're not a private school. Uh, these aren't private schools. So, uh, but that's been a challenge, I think, since the inception of the Clark Monasuri High School program and something we're still working through. But, um, so >> this this language allows that to happen. This language would not allow that to happen. It it would say again I so so for the most part I think at most schools NSOs are involved in fundraising for extracurricular activities things that aren't necessarily a part of the core curriculum that there are these programs at at our monastery high schools which again they consider at least to be

129a part of their curriculum. Now, we've had to work through challenges on lots of it's not just financial challenges. This year, for example, uh we were very sensitive to the fact that some students may not feel comfortable leaving the country, right? Um and and this Clark program goes to it's an international trip. Um so, we work through that and and again try to make sure that every student has the ability to participate fully in their curriculum, but it's just something we will continue to work through. I I don't think it's inconsistent with us having mon this this addition is inconsistent with us having monastery high schools, but it's a challenge that that they continue to work through. >> Yeah. This would prevent a student from not being able to attend an inter session if they

130were unable to participate in a fundraising effort to fund that interession effort. >> Yeah, that sounds great though. I just was trying to make sure that there wasn't anything that we >> I mean that's right. Um Okay. And then the second addition again the only change >> before you move on to that um we have had an increase in the number of concerns from parents around that topic specifically from our monastery schools and I am for this because I think that when you do choose a monatory school my kids have been there um you you are choosing those options but I would wonder would it be appropriate for us to say under the guise of equity that there be an anter alternative option if they cannot afford it because that that has happened like some

131parents have paid part of their money and they had to get it back or they just simply could not afford it. But there should be something because that is tied to a grade, right? >> There can and is opportunities for um alternatives. But you also don't want to have this one experience that's supposed to bring the whole class together and then say, "Well, but then we'll have five students do something else." So, and and the schools, believe me, I know you've gotten concerns about it. The schools get many more concerns about it. I've been at some of their meetings where they they're working through this. How do we implement a really robust monastery high school program, but in a public school? That's a really unique thing. >> I I completely understand and I empathize. To

132the point of the policy though, should we have something that just says that that there the school has the option to choose an equitable alternative if needed. That's the only thing I'm asking about. >> So, the one thing I'm thinking is is again this says you can't do an you can't be required to do an NSO's fundraiser. >> Okay? the school itself may have some fundraising opportunities that for the same kind of programming that maybe are are included. There's they are working through this. I I I assure you they have like they they have good conversations about this with with the notion that we're a public school. So I'm just wondering should we put the exception in the policy? >> I don't think it needs to be specified at this point. >> Okay. That's all

133I'm asking. >> Yeah, >> I get it. And I I don't want to take the autonomy away from the schools to do what they're doing, but I'm just trying to I'm trying to to get the parents to cover the school for the parents that really can't afford it and need something else. >> And I will say the NSOs play a big part in that, right? They do. They they are contributing significantly to ensure that every kid has the opportunity. Um but we can't force a kid to >> Sure. Sure. Sure. I just didn't know if we needed to specify that to cover the schools here. That's all I'm asking. I I think we're okay with this language. Um, again, the only other the second change we made a lot of changes to the policy, but

134the second change from last month from the April meeting is on the There you go. Uh, nope. Keep going to the very near the end page five. That's it. So, there was a question, a good question raised last about tickets and gate receipts, um, which are funds that should not go to an NSO. should go to the school. Uh talked with the treasurer and we feel comfortable limiting that to tickets and gate receipts for OSAA sanctioned athletic games. So this would be like high school sports has to go that that we can't farm that out to an NSO and say they would get those revenues. Those have to come to the school. >> Thank you. >> Yep. Those are the changes from last month. Welcome your questions on the policy as a whole. Um, colleagues,

135other questions? >> I think you covered the things that I was worried about. I'm I'm very happy. Thank you. >> Is this um My memory of this, Dan, was that this was something we're just going to whittle away with at over time because it required a lot of different thoughts and thinking. Is it still, no right or wrong answers, but still in that phase or is in a phase where if we like the yellow, we should recommend it on? >> Um, so so and Going back the the initial concern was that the NSO policy that have said formerly for years for decades that if students were involved in a fundraiser the money had to go to the school that was handcuffing us and frankly wasn't wasn't what any other school does. We fixed that right

136away with an interim change to the policy if you remember I think in November or December. This policy has now been I think thoroughly reviewed by the internal auditor treasurer uh myself um and and needs to be shared with the schools. We I feel pretty confident this is uh going to be wellreceived. Um but we may get feedback that we have I would recommend moving it forward. >> Let's do it. Yeah, I mean I I think what would my request would be and if it's got support from the committee um >> you usually do this and you do this very well, but but a combination of you and Mike um giving a history and reminder of what just like you did, here's the problem we were solving for and why that was a big deal.

137Here's the short-term fix we put in place, but why that's not good enough longer. Just to kind of walk people through that would be very helpful. >> Um thank you. Any any any other concerns from the committee? >> All right, we've got a few minutes left, so we'll put this through uh off not in consent agenda at upcoming board meeting um as room allows per president Craig. Um Rob, do we have any other speakers today who would like to speak on any topic? Not at this time as of now, but if someone does want to speak in the next few seconds, please click the hand icon and we'll bring you over. Okay. Um, again everybody, thanks for your flexibility today. Uh, sorry about the confusion around the time. Um, glad we could get through our

138full agenda and we will look forward to seeing you