Policy and Equity Committee Meeting March 13, 2026

001All right. Good morning everyone and welcome to the March uh 13th uh policy and equity committee meeting for the Cincinnati public schools. Um we're going to start with a round of introductions. Uh maybe if we could start with Rob and then go around our horseshoe uh in this direction. >> Yeah, of course. Of course. >> Yeah. Hi. If you'd like to uh Rob Wilson, technician, if you'd like to speak during the speaking of the public session, click the hand icon and we'll invite you over and ask you the uh your name and your affiliation to the district. >> Phyllis, you are our next introduction. And we're just going to go around the horseshoe grandparent Cincinnati. Sabrina McGee, parent and uh >> Carrie Armbster, board member. >> Uh Ben Lindy, board member. >> Kareem Maf, board

002member. Shauna Murphy, superintendent. >> Dan Ho, general counsel. >> Stephanie Scott, assistant general counsel. >> Liz Martin, assistant treasur and controller. >> Jeremy Gullyu, chief information officer. >> Julie Serar, SAI Federation of Teachers. >> Michelle Dunn, Sai Federation of Teachers. Okay. Good morning everybody. Um we have a Do we get everybody? Miss anyone? >> We're good. Okay. We have a packed agenda this morning. Um so we're going to uh get started in just a second. Um just to give people an overview of what we have on here today. Um uh alcohol waiver requests come before the policy committee. They're usually fairly quick and so we have that up top. Uh we have a section of items that we are continuing discussion from past meetings. Uh we have a section where every 3 years this committee

003reviews every policy that exists within CPS. So we try to make some progress against that calendar each meeting. And then uh at the beginning of each six-month time period uh at least when I've been um committee chair we ask the board is there anything that the board would like to see this committee take up over six months. And so we've received some requests from uh my board member colleagues. We're going to make a schedule. We can maybe tackle some of these today. We'll get as far as we can. Uh and then we'll get through the rest over the course of the six months and then take a new set of requests um for where we go from there. Um we will end with a hearing of the public. Um I will just say that if

004people came to speak on a particular item, um there's no reason we can't have people speak as we cover that item. But we'll also have time at the end if people um have other things that we um don't get to. Uh outstanding commitment to get in and out in two hours. Um so we're going to end at 11:30. Um we're going to get as much done as we can. Uh and excited that people can be here. So with that, um Rob, maybe we can invite our guests from Westwood Works or I don't know Dan if you want to. Um Dan, is there anything we need to say about just what the alcohol waver policy is or how it works? >> Yes. uh the board's general rule or general policy on alcohol is that it may

005not be served uh on school premises when a group has uh interest in uh holding an event that uh uh would include the sale or serving of alcohol, they come to the policy committee uh uh to explain the event. It would go on to the full board for full board approval. So I there's a group this morning from S Monastery >> uh Westwood works. >> Westwood. Yes. >> No problem. Um, so we'll invite them in in in just 10 seconds. I have some snacks this morning that come from Cafe Elma. They are some mini muffins and a divided piece of uh banana bread. So I'm going to send them this way and then when they get down to the end, we can send them around the rest of the way. And please help yourself. >>

006We have a few people online. So if the individuals who want to speak or need to speak on this topic can raise their hand or let me know. We'll invite them in. Or do we know the name? Uh, that's a good question. Do we know who the Westwood or maybe can they chat you? Rob >> Stephanie, I'm sending you an invite now to join us. >> And Stephanie, you can go ahead and unmute my mic and camera >> there. >> Great. Stephanie, thank you. If you want to share maybe just a a minute or two about your event, um that would be excellent. Thank you. >> Sure. So, my name is Stephanie Collins. I'm uh here on behalf of Westwood Works. We're a community development nonprofit in Westwood. Um so in the fall of 25

007we acquired a an 11,000 square foot space um that we are in the early stages of converting into a cultural arts center uh for the community of Westwood. Um so this fall in September on the 26th we would like to uh use the Gamble High School gymnasium to host a gayla. Um we anticipate having between 150 and 200 people um all adults in the space uh for a Saturday evening and so we were requesting an alcohol waiver for that. Um that event is specifically to raise funds um to go toward the uh Westwood Theater renovation. >> That's great. Thank you very much. Uh do my board member colleagues have any questions about the events? Dr. Muffin. >> So, I just want to want to understand and clarify they are how how are they associated with

008gamble? Are they are they is this a gamble event? Is this an event that the school is sponsoring or um so we are just uh we're just really low on venues for this large of a number of people in Westwood. Um we've been a community partner with Gamble uh for a long time. Um we have a mini grant program that has benefited um both Gamble High School and Gamble Monasuri Elementary uh over the last few years. Uh we just completed a project on Gamble Elementary's uh campus, a beautifification project with Safe and Clean. Um so we've been very involved with both of the Gambles. Um, and so when we spoke to principal Greco, he um w was happy to offer the gym as a space um but just said that I would need to come

009in front of uh the board to request permission for the alcohol portion. >> Okay. I was just trying to see if this was tied to the school in any Rob, you're like moving around and out. If this was tied to the school, I'm I'm a criticism, just a just a question. So, thank you for doing all that you do. >> Of course. Yeah. and thank you too. Um it's not tied to the school specifically um but it is just to raise funds for the project to bring the cultural arts center. Um we need about um well several million dollars let's say for that project. So we have a fundraising goal of $50,000 for uh this specific event. Um and then we'll be going to the community after that. So >> Okay. Thank you. >> Great.

010Any objection to including this in our next consent agenda for approval? >> No. >> Hearing none. Okay. We can then Phyis put this through in our next available consent agenda for a business meeting. Um thank you Stephanie. We hope you have a wonderful event. Uh and we're going to >> time. >> Thank you. Um we're going to move next to item three on our agenda which is continued discussion of Senate Bill 311. >> Yeah. uh for this uh we had a discussion about this at the last board meeting. Um we went through some of the provisions. This is the uh proposed state legislation that would change um a number of uh issues including how we sell and dispose of real property. Uh glad to answer any questions, but we had a uh uh we we

011did a more wholesome discussion at the last board meeting on this topic. Thank you, Dan. Um, do we have any questions from board members? Changes the definition of unused school facilities. Um, changes who we have to offer the unused parcels to sale to uh, if we're going to dispose of real property. >> And where was this at? Where is this at? Is this in committee? >> It's in committee. Right. >> Um has it been through like what are the stages? Usually it's like in committee then it goes out. Just would you mind going through the stages for people? >> This is a Senate bill. Um it's gone to committee. If the committee puts it forward, the Senate would have to pass it and then the House would also have to pass it. This is a

012one of a number of pieces of legislation that were originally included in the budget bill uh last year. Uh many of which the governor vetoed. If you remember, he he did a series of vetos. uh it's coming back up as new pieces of legislation now. >> And do we have an anticip if this is on a normal track? Do we have an anticipated date of possible approval? >> Um hard to say. Uh it it's gotten I think two hearings in committee. Um I think our hope would be that if it went back to the governor, he would veto it again as he he did line item vetos out of the budget bill. So, um, then it would require a super majority of the general assembly to pass. >> Is there anything in here that we

013should be lobbying the troops around specifically? I know the the building closure is a continual issue for us. I think education educator lensure is right up there on the screen and then um school facilities and zoning. anything else that we should be uh asking the public to um I I saw some truency stuff on there, but anything that is going to adversely immediately impact CPS. >> I I think the um I think the biggest concern out of the legislation is again regarding the disposal of real property. I I think we did some work last year uh with with our phased in growth plan to try to to um rightsize our schools to to make sure that uh as few of schools as possible are underenrolled because that's that's what they look at. Um we should

014continue to uh be aware that of this kind of legislation. >> And just under um thanks Rob for scrolling. I appreciate that. Um and just regard to um education lensure since we have some uh you know our educator advocates here >> does is there anything there that's concerning or truency? >> Yeah, we talked about this briefly in the board meeting also but uh glad you asked. So the the other piece relates to permitting um the school the the uh uh state board of education office of professional conduct to consider um terminating the license or or revoking the license of a superintendent if they find that uh there's been a violation of the revised code, a knowing violation of the revised code. what in in kind of talking to some folks in Columbus, uh this this

015specifically I think relates to the ongoing battle between the general assembly and the Columbus city schools about busing, they believe. >> Okay. >> Um but this is not just an issue that affects Columbus City Schools. There are lots of school districts that have had challenges complying with what the state is putting out for busing and other things. Yeah, I was I was asking that question because would that have impacted us because we asked our superintendent not to support that DEI? >> So that that's another that's on our mind as well if they found that to be a knowing violation of of the law that that could impact the superintendent now with the board support. >> Correct. >> Yeah. That that so the superintendent is insulated if uh she acts at the behest of a majority

016of board members. However, there's also provisions in this legislation that takes away schoolboard immunity. >> I saw that. I was like, "Okay, you're not talking about that, Dan." >> So, it so it then jumps to the then the superintendent would be able to say, "Well, I did this on behalf of board members." >> Then it allows uh lawsuits to come against board members. So, >> and then the truency piece in there, was there anything um concerning there? Because we we're going to talk about truency in our review cycle. So I was wondering is there anything that would force us to have that policy come back or should we not talk about that right now? >> So the truency uh we are going to talk about today the attendance policy this relates to a different piece

017of legislation that is already in effect. Okay. >> Uh the truency pieces in this statute I think mostly relate to the juvenile court and the offenses that can be brought in the juvenile court. There is new legislation that has already been enacted and that that will come up on our agenda when we talk about the attendance policy. >> Okay. Thank you. Uh, thank you. Other questions about this? >> Looking for tissue. >> Do we have any tissue in here? I'm sorry to be looking around. Thank you. >> Well, it works. Thank you. >> Um, okay. And so, no, this is this is a bill, not a law yet. Uh, if it is a law, will it have an impact on will we need to write policies for it? >> It will affect at least our

018sale of property. That's right. Yes. >> No, sorry. Um, will the policy committee have policies we need to pass? We may not know. I guess >> if it's passed, yes, it'll it'll affect some of our sale of property polic. Yeah. Sorry. >> No, my my mistake. Thank you. So, we'll we'll keep watching this. Um, thank you. Uh, was there anybody who came to speak on Senate Bill 311? Okay. Uh, moving on. Next one is policy 9142, local school decision-making committee, uh, PTO engagement. Um, this was from Dr. Muffet. I also had >> Okay, go ahead. >> Sorry. I had had Dan add a portion into this too. So, I don't know which one we want to tackle first. >> Whichever order you would like. >> And Miss Ar. >> Yeah. No, you're good. Um so

019during my um experiences with CPS and talking with community members um it got brought up that um our LSDMC's have the impact of interviewing and having a um recommendation for the hiring of leadership uh in the school but then don't really have any formal feedback process for that leadership after they're in place. And so >> I remember this. >> Yeah. So, um I asked Dan to see if we could put in place some sort of um reporting process for LSCMC's to be able to report back um to the district um on the school climate annually. So that's what the language in here states. Um, I'm happy to read it and if you want to scroll down, it's the red portion on the but it says the LSDMC shall provide written feedback to the district on

020an annual basis. The LSDMC chair in consultation with the LSDMC shall provide a summary of the LSDMC's activities during the preceding year, whether the LSDMC held regular and purposeful meetings, the principal's engagement with the LSDMC, and any recommendations to the district with respect to the school. The feedback shall be submitted in a form provided to the district by the chair no later than June 1st of each school year. Again, this is just a feedback process. It is not a formal review or going into evaluation process. It's a feedback mechanism for the district to be able to get a pulse on the climate of the school by the members of the LSDMC. Um, if anyone has feedback on the language, on the concept, I'm I'm I would love to hear it. Um, >> uh, I had

021a couple thoughts. want to know if uh >> first of all can we just decide do we like first names or last names in committee so because we we've done it differently in different years but I follow people's instructions >> so >> first name all right we're going first names great okay different board members have had very different opinions about this so I like to ask first okay great um yeah so so um did you have any thoughts on this one >> I do but mine are likely they include what you said so I I have a whole bunch of things that I have concerned about policy. I >> I can go quick. Um I I think I think this is a great idea. Like I think I think um I think feedback is helpful.

022I think LSDMC's are a really important group of stakeholders. Um so no no concerns on my end. I think one thing I wanted to clarify with council um am I right? I know this is true with uh evaluations of superintendents and treasures. Is it true that like any principles evaluation is a public document? >> Yes. >> So if LSDMC writes this is the best principal on the face of the planet and somebody says CBS I want a copy of this principal's valuation we have to turn over whatever the LSDMC said about a given principle in a given year or are there some constraints on that? So the the evaluation of a principal is like uh the evaluation of teachers subject to specific there's an OPEZ Ohio principal evaluation system you have to be I think

023credentialed as an evaluator. There's a whole process for evaluating principles. The result of that just like the result of any public employee is a public document. Correspondence from LSDMC's regardless of the topic would be also a public document too. >> Yeah. So I I just think like some of the I still think on net this is probably a good thing to try. I just think the only risk that I see is let's say you have an LSDMC that's divided about a principle and people share multiple different competing things. Anybody would be able to request that get access to it and have it and we may decide that's totally fine you know and and frankly there's nothing to keep somebody from sending an email to the principal which is then also discoverable. So like I I

024I think it's fine. I just it's the only only potential risk that I saw. No, it I think that makes sense. And I think um in my mind, this would be not like a an open process. It would be a formalized document that would be structured by the district that was sent out just like we have the midyear evaluations for the agencies for the all that so that it would be um universal across all the schools, right? So we're getting similar feedback and we can compare school to school, right? So it would be like rate this from a scale of 1 to 10 or whatever it is, right? So um >> administration would come up with what that is. >> Correct. >> I think it's great. >> That I think would maybe help with some

025of what you're saying because it's not just a free-for-all like we can provide any comments we want, which you still can obviously via email like you said, but um because I think this is an important tool, it should be standard across all LSMC. I would I would recommend that the um administration have a formal document that they would provide to the LSCMC chair through um the district LCMC could come up with that work and that would be my recommendation. >> Yeah, no no concerns. Correct. >> Sounds great. >> Kareem, >> I do like that idea. I also I want us to concern our definition. So going to have a clearer definition of what I think that I'm sorry. It was not. >> Um, do you want me to start all over? >> Just a little

026closer to >> Okay. You're welcome. So, I I do have a concern around our definition of active LSDMC's and what that really means. I think this lends towards moving there. But um I just had some questions around um how we are selecting members. First of all, it the policy says very clearly that there should be 12 members. We've got LSDMC's that don't have that. Um they've got eight members. They don't have this the clearer definitions of the selection of members and how they're supposed to be differentiated. So since that tends to be a problem or concern, do we want to make these definitions these specifics looser and just say 12 members regardless of the composition or I don't I don't think we should, but we are out of compliance as written in many of our

027schools. So either we figure out a way to get us in compliance or we figure out a way if we can't ever get into compliance how to get us into compliance because that's part of the definition of active LSDMC's and it's not happening. So um I think that this does need to be reviewed. I have some concerns around uh the second page under composition selection of members specifically se selection number five where it talks about three community representatives who are not employed by the district. One is supposed to be a neighborhood community council member. That's not been done because some some community councils are saying that they want to participate in LSDMC's and they're not being invited. Um we've got a the number six the one representative from the school's lead agency partner in education.

028We need to ensure that they're not voting because it says that they're not supposed to but they're voting on chair selections. And I know we have one school specifically where that community partner in education is the chair which in in my mind um in invoked the conflict of interest policy because they're paying for a position at that school and that should just not be happening. Um I'm worried about the role under role scope of work. Um how are we in compliance with our middle schools and LSDMC's? Um they're supposed to it says under number two they're supposed to have parent members. We're not and the parents are supposed to select their parent member. That's not happening. Um again that goes to the definition of active. The def definition of active had very little to do

029with the composition and the role of uh work and the scope of work in as defined in the in the policy. Um who reviews the lead agencies? It says here under number four that the LSDMC recommends a lead agency. But who is actually reviewing that lead agency to see if the lead agency is good for the LSDMC? That needs to be added here. I don't see where uh the review process I see the selection process their input is is there but there's not a anything on annual reporting. Perhaps it could be added to there that the LSDMC will review the lead agency. Um to set the goals for the school consistent with the district vision and mission is that happening that should also be defined as part of active LSDMC's and I don't see that.

030So I'm just kind of concerned. I also um the meetings all it's very difficult for some of the community members to find meetings that should be published under Ohio Revised Code. the the public we have all this stuff that's public information yet we as a district need to have one space where the community can find out where all LSDMC meetings are. So I don't know if that's to put it on the website but it should not be that people are trying to run around here to different schools and find out when meetings are. That's that's not um it it's really to me it's not it's not written in the policy, but it says the dates, times, and locations of all meetings shall be publicly posted using methods determined by the LSDMC. I'm not sure that

031that's really happening. I've got a slew of other things that um are really kind of uh tertiary, but this particular policy as written ties to the conflict of interest policy and the anti-racism policy 2256 states it in here. And yet there's there seems to be um little continuity between ensuring that some of these things are going on with regard to equity, with regard to conflict of interest, but they're referenced here. So, um I I I do have um some other things and I've seen in action where some of these things are not being followed. So, I question the definition of active because um active didn't involve any of these things that the LSDMC should be doing in conjunction. The LSDMC is supposed to be made up of teachers, parents, little admin, you know, more in

032a supervisory position and the community and they're not. So, um, I would like us to look and see if compliance is a problem. If we're having problem getting people there, particularly in our middle schools, if it's a if it's an issue, then we need to to get 12 people. Then we need to look at is that realistic. Maybe 12 is not realistic. I personally don't think it's a problem, but it seems to be. And it's also reflective of the def following the policy and the definition of active. So, those were some of my concerns. I think that it needs to be looked at in I think in theory this works but unfortunately in real time it's not being applied. So at a minimum I'd like to see all LSDMC meetings put in one space on

033our website so that regardless if you have someone at Midway or someone at College Hill or wherever you can find out where that is. You don't have to go searching for it. And that's not that's not happening. And I wonder is that in compliance with some of our not only the policy that citizens should be but some of our open records type stuff. So those are my um those are my I think this policy is giving power to the people in the building and the community that the building is in but there's no review there's no continuity um to come back and ensure that that's there. So that's that's just my my summation. >> Uh thank you very much Gary Julie. >> Um I fully support having um more bite to the LSDMC's. Um what

034I see and what I hear from um schools across the district is number one they don't keep their roster up to date. When time comes to select a principal they stack the deck for a certain person. Um there are sometimes people who are selecting it who had not been in the school or in a meeting for two or three years. Um I think that there is the lead agencies are many times running the LSDMC which they should not be. Um they shouldn't even have um a vote on these u many of these selections. So I think that if we can tighten up and I think that this is a really good start to do that. I don't see though um where Carrie has the red annual reporting. I don't see anything here that talks about

035culture. You said about culture of the building um but there are many buildings that do not have a good culture and the LSDMC they know that they don't even have a good culture when they step in the building. So, I think that um this is something and I would never say to reduce the number of people because if you can't get people there, there's a reason why you can't get people there. And that is where you need to have that LSDMC and the school body reaching out to the community council. If there's not a parent there, there is somebody who should be um it's not an appointment of the principal. And that's that is really the main thing of what I'm hearing is that many times it's an appointment that is made and they just

036say just come don't worry we don't really meet that much. They I've heard where they don't share the budget. They don't share the staffing sheets which is the budget. I know sometimes they say well we don't have to share that. That's not the budget. Well no the staffing sheets is the budget. It's called the budget staffing sheets. um that's where most of a school's budget is under staffing costs and how are they allocated those staffing positions and that isn't being looked at at many LSDMC. So I totally agree with this but I would like to have under annual reporting that whatever that form is something about school culture because this has nothing to do with school culture and schools will not improve if the culture doesn't improve and we have schools that have 20% of

037the of the employees of that school leave every year because of the culture of the building. >> That's a great point. I hear you. Um, I I definitely think separately that staff retention should be looked at very closely. Um, but Superintendent, I think you had something. >> Yes, ma'am. All I was going to say is uh I'm in agreement 100%. I totally uh understand there's a lot of things that we need to tighten up uh when doing this important work. I did want to share that um the meeting dates getting them on the website should not be a problem for each of the LSCMC's because we do ask them to turn that information into us when they submit their rosters. Um so I will work with Miss Sheily Green to make sure that happens and

038I'm happy to share with um the policy committee um we do have the LSDMC's review uh each of their lead agencies. So I'm happy to share that information um with you be helpful. >> Yes. I think what Dr. Moffet was trying to say is that should be explicit in the policy from now on. >> Yes ma'am. >> Right. So I as being part of LSMC I was a part of the review process. So I know at my school specifically it was happen but if it's written in the and here we can hold schools accountable to making sure it's happening everywhere. >> Is that right? >> I had a couple thoughts too but >> I just want to follow up. Um it's under section ro scope of work section 4 that the schools support the trans

039the school's transformation to the community learner center model and sustain the maintenance of an existing community learning center which talks about recommending the lead agency. So it could be added there. And the other space that it could be added um it says participate it says uh participate in the lead agency school resource coordinator selection process and review partnerships developed by the resource coordinator. So perhaps it could be added under that as well. I don't know. I don't know the page number. Um 15 16, but I don't I don't have page numbers on here. So um there there are spaces where we tell them to do stuff, but then we don't follow back up with who's accountable for that. And I don't know if they are being told that. Can you share with me is this

040policy gone over with the school community and the LSDMC members? Like I don't want to say word for word, but I just feel like um there's not enough consistent knowledge of the current LSDMC members of what the policy states. >> Well, what I would share with you, Dr. Mafit is um it's reviewed at the very first districtwide meeting, but it is very possible that as members are added or there may have to be a change, meeting two, meeting three, meeting four, do we revisit that? Perhaps that's something that needs to happen. Maybe a uh one one thing could be to create like a checklist that they need to have that is given to the LSDMC at the beginning of the year and they have to review it monthly and maybe maybe have some timelines on

041there like you know, hey, fall review is due in for your October checklist. I don't know. But I'm wondering because everybody has a different learning style. Maybe just reading it here, this is a lot. This is like five pages. So maybe seeing it in a different format with everything that they're supposed to do would allow the principal to work with the chair and the chair to work with the community on helping. I just think they need to see where they're in compliance and where they're not. And if you only have eight members and it clearly says 12, you're out of compliance and they need to get some more people. I agree with Julie. I don't think we should stop it. I think we should engage more. But I know the community that one particular school

042I don't think is in compliance because they have their community partner agency as the chair and that agency um pays a salary of a person and they had not been to any meetings before. So we just need to kind of tighten that up. May I ask um just clarification on the I'm sorry. Oh, just clarification on um You're good. Um >> the agencies not are you saying they shouldn't be voting on any of the pieces? I will tell you I've just thought that it was as it relates to their work. So I just want to be >> that's how the conflict of interest policy is written as it they should recuse themselves from things that directly impact them. I'm saying To me, conflict of interest is also extended beyond that in that if you have

043a direct influence to that building, whether you pay for something or not, I'm kind of concerned that you're sharing something that imp impacts that whole building and you only impact a part of it. I I just I think we need I again I there was more to that particular story which I'm happy to expand on because that particular partnering agency at the meeting said, "Oh, I'm happy. I can I can as the chair I can do certain things which were a conflict but they had never been to any of the meetings at the building prior to them coming to be voted in as chair. So, that's a concern for me. And maybe it's a case- by case basis, but it is a concern that we don't have enough teachers on there. We don't have enough

044parents on there. And we've got people in powerful positions by way of the of the definition of a chair and they're now leading and they had no interactions or very limited interactions with that building. So I I'm I'm I'm happy to stay with the letter of the law of a conflict, but I do think that that there's an inference of a bigger conflict than just what's written and I'm only going to be voting on this. So I don't I don't want to get caught there as much as I want to the the I'm not going to get caught on what a partner in education is doing when you don't even have 12 people on your LSDMC. To me, the problem is bigger that you're not out of you're out of compliance on a broader level

045than just the partner being a chair. So, we can we can I don't want to take up too much time. >> I know Carrie has a thought and I have a couple thoughts too, but when you're no rush, you're good. So, we'll go Carrie and then I'm going to share a couple things. >> I think a potential solution to this is if you look at the the paragraph um in the composition, the very last paragraph says that there shall be three officers. a chairperson who must be a parent/legal guardian or community member. I read that to say that it must be from category 1 and category 5. So I think if we explicitly say in there like in parenthesis category 1 category 5, it would then help with that because that's how I read it

046and interpret it. And I think if we just reiterate that it might solve some of that chair person complication. >> I read it just just for clarity. I read that that way as well, but that still happened. Number six got it. So, it just again >> I'm concerned about clarity from us to be able to give that to the community. >> I appreciate this because I have never said the lead agency has ever come up to this quite frankly >> to the best of my knowledge. So, we will have a couple couple thoughts on on um I think what's a really good conversation. I think there are two big themes that I keep hearing and I wanted to just make sure I was clear on how we were going to ask the administration or ask

047the board to proceed. Um, one there like when there are current LSDMC's that are acting outside of the policy say membership so don't have 12 is the plan and I'm not saying one of these is right or wrong. trying to understand is the plan let's get all LSDMC's to the bar of the current policy or is the plan let's change the policy because what we're asking isn't actually the right thing to be asking or is it a little bit of each it kind of depends on the issue. Um, and I just think getting clear on this could help set a path for the administration. Like if what we're wanting, like we could say, for example, um, I don't know, like maybe a mix of those things, but could you come back in a month with

048a recommendation on what do you think should be rewritten? What do you think we should just execute better to make sure we can get people up to the policies? That's like one theme I want to just land an approach on before we leave this topic. The second one has to do about ongoing monitoring. um because this is right now as of March of 2026. It will then be later and other things will happen. Um and I I think there are different ways that we could go about monitoring, right? Like we could write into the policy something about how often a report has to be given to which body extent to which LSDMC's are in compliance or not in compliance or whatever. We do that in policies all the time where it's like on an annual

049basis before this committee. We'll get an update from the administration on a blank topic, you know. So, we could do that. Um, the other thing we've done, this is the first year I was on policy committee. We actually asked the auditor's team >> to audit certain policies for compliance across the district and we had a report from Lauren in policy committee about I think our equity policy. >> Um, uh, there were a couple others that we did. I could look it up. Um I don't know like I I'm I am fairly agnostic about which approach we take but I think there should be an approach so that when it's three years from now there's some system for making sure that we check whether this is happening or not. Um and so my request was going

050to be could we just give clear direction to the administration on those two things. >> Um you know and my my my take would be can we give you a month to think about this? Come back and tell us what you think a good approach would be. Um because I'm not an expert on this. Um and um but but that would I'm open if if people feel differently. >> I'm fine. I'm fine with that. Take some time. You've now heard my um my saliloquy about it. So I I'm fine with taking some time. But I do think that I what I don't want to happen is the recommendation be oh there's just two things that need to be there's a lot of stuff that needs to be here. And so I want to have an

051open and transparent conversation in reality not in theory about what is happening. I know some of these LSDMCs are not in compliance and so um it we we I just want us to have that conversation. So that's my I'm happy to give you 30 days to come back and and with some suggestions for sure. >> Let's hear from just a quick reaction from either the superintendent or Dan and then we'll get Julie. >> Go ahead. >> My immediate thought is um I want to work towards bringing everyone up to the policy >> rather than but I will it back to the group to have a discussion to bring um I I do believe it should be 12 members and equal voice all of those things. Um so I've taken notes that would be my immediate

052response to you but thank you for the >> and my only comment is just to underline that point about whether the board thinks the community rep should be voting or not because we talk about 12 members but there's 13 listed if you include the community rep. So that's already kind of an ambiguity. >> You mean agency rep, just to be clear. >> Sorry. No, I just want to make sure. >> Agency rep, the Yes. The the 13 the category >> six. That's right. And and I think we we have always been clear that if it's about the lead agency, they're they should they must recuse themselves. I think your point is there may be other decisions that go beyond just what what the choice that that could and I I hear that um it and

053there's ways to address that. The board could say they're an exopicio member. They're uh they may participate in the meetings, but they don't get a vote. But I'd rather we be clear about that because what I don't think is fair is saying to them, "Yeah, you can vote on this." And then after the fact saying like there may be a conflict there. So we we should just have clarity. are they a voting member or not? And um that that would be helpful I think because especially because it says there's 12 members and if you count them there's there's the 12 plus the community rep >> or the lead agency rep. >> Yes. >> Okay. >> Well, I I I I hear what you're saying. Voting and being the chair to me are two different things.

054>> I agree with your point on they should come from five or one. >> Right. But are you saying because it says here that the lead agency doesn't vote. Are you saying it says that further down? >> No, it doesn't say that. It says they they as long as they recuse themselves when there is a conflict of interest due to any contract relationship. And so our position on that is they're a voting member with respect to everything except for yeah votes about the lead agency. But if that's not the board's position, I'd rather be very clear about that in the policy. So just something to think about and maybe let us know. >> Yeah. here. >> Yeah. Julie, >> the other thing that I think that you have to really think about and consider is

055that many of the lead agencies who have hired the resource coordinators, there isn't like a universal um expectation for those lead agencies. that should be coming from like a recommendation from ILT to the um LSDMC of we need these services and that it should be on to the lead agency the and the resource coordinator to bring in those services that are necessary for that school. Every school doesn't need the cookie cutter of um support, but every school should have a list of what is it that our school and our students need in order for our school to make gains and be successful. Those are the things that we should be looking at and making sure that um through the LSDMC that they're making those recommendations of what those services are that are necessary and those

056lead agencies and their resource coordinators are helping to provide those services that are needed >> and and when when the schools select their lead agencies, they start with a needs assessment and that should have the voice of everyone in the school community. Um, and then again, the LSMC's do evaluate, I'll use that word, those lead agencies. And so that feedback should be again from the entire community. If we do get all of those turned into us if we feel like that's not happening as accurately as possible, we'll definitely um take a look at that piece. But I agree with you, Julie. But there there are pieces in place >> to make that happen. But doesn't mean it there's not room to >> Yeah. Because I hear all the time from schools, how come that school

057has that and we don't? And that is part of that equity. But every school doesn't have to have the same thing, but every school should have what that school needs. And it's up to that lead agency to bring in all of the non-academic supports. >> Well, that also goes to the review of the lead agency. Who does that? The LSDMC should be doing that. And it also says in here that the LSDMC is supposed to review all partner. It says review partnerships developed by the resource coordinator. So if the LSDMC under 16 decides that the partnerships that the resource coordinating lead agency has brought in are not sufficient, where is the accountability piece for the lead for the um LSDMC to say we don't want these, we want other ones. Like where is that part?

058>> Yes ma'am. So for every partner there's anou. Okay. And thatou has to come to and through that LSDMC. So they should be approving not just the lead agency and the resource coordinator and the principal. The LSDMC's should be approving all of those partnerships and be a part of how thatou is written. What are the school's responsibilities expectations? What are we asking this partner to do? Those >> So if you that's theory. So, if you have an LSDMC that's not in compliance or that's not even really active, how does who's reviewing that? The principal. >> We'll review that. No, it should be the LSMC. But we'll all of these pieces you're um suggesting need to be reviewed. We will. >> Okay. >> Carrie, last thought. >> No, I was just going to say thank you.

059I would appreciate your consideration on all this and coming back to us with updated potential language, updated potential execution on what we do in district LSDMC's and providing guidance. Can I just on the on the second of the two issues that I was raising about how do we monitor long term in an effort to keep things simple like my my my recommendation I'm open to to different perspectives would be that in what they come back with they recommend a paragraph or sentence that has some kind of monitoring timeline and who and who the addressee of that monitoring would be. Um uh and I think what some in and some way for the board to get visibility into that, right? >> Agree. >> Yeah. >> Is that clear? >> Doable. >> Yes. >> Okay. Anybody else

060come to talk about LSDMC's? >> No. All right. Phyllis, can we just get this on the agenda for next? It's already probably already on there, but for the next uh for the April installment of our policy committee meeting. Okay. So, we are on continued discussions. Item three, we're moving on to the third bullet, which is our draft general counsel policy. Um, I wanted to start this discussion by thanking Kareem for reaching out to OSBA and getting us a second model. Um, and so people should see on board docs, Rob, maybe if you can flip that up for a second. Um, we looked last couple times at this model policy from schoolboard partners. We also now have a model policy from OSBA. I also reached out to the Council of Great City Schools. They have a

061couple of different model policies uh and they should be sending us um one that they recommend. I think we're no longer members, so I think we're a little lower on their priority list than maybe we used to be. Um but hopefully we'll have even a third one that we can look at. Um yeah, and so I mean this this came to you, did you want to say anything about the OSBA one? >> No, I I really just wanted to provide additional information. Um we are members of OSBA. I reached out to them to just say, "Hey, we're talking about general counsel policy." For the public's uh knowledge, OSBA in Ohio, we have different rules than across the nation. So, it I think it's always helpful to get Ohio um organizations to give us sample stuff

062because it's applicable. And as an example, in other states, this the treasurer reports to the superintendent, but in Ohio, they're separate. So, that's just one example. So, I wanted to get some feedback from OSBA of which were members and this is what they uh gave us um for for I think this is from another uh district. Again, I think I probably should have been a little bit more clear, a large urban district because Ohio has a lot of rural and small >> suburban >> uh districts that don't hire a general counsel full-time because they don't need to. And we have over 30,000 students and we probably need to be more in align with other districts of which there are what eight Superintendent Murphy >> Ohio >> in in Ohio that have large districts like us.

063But I just wanted us to have some sort of context that's Ohio related that um we we can kind of use as a reference. >> That was it. >> Thank you. Um, we also just as kind of input into the hopper for this discussion uh received an email from uh member Bolton and I know that Carrie and Kareem have a copy, but I wanted to to read a little bit of what um she wrote just so other people kind of knew what what she was saying. So, in the email um Eva shared um that for her um there's a desire for reporting lines to be formalized when it relates to the general counsel. Um she also said that uh from her perspective we need to formalize and make more routine the times when um the

064board should be getting outside council uh not the general counsel. Um and she uh articulated some reasons why she she does not support creating two distinct standing employment positions. Um I just want to see if there's anything else. Um, uh, I think those are the most important parts of what you said. If I missed something, um, my colleagues will correct me, uh, because they have the email also. Um, and so we've got now a couple inputs. We've got the schoolboard partners uh, model policy input, the OSBA input, member Balden's input, our our last um, conversations. I have a couple thoughts, but I wanted to open it up to Kareem or Carrie first and see um what you all wanted to share and then after all board members go, if anybody else has come and this

065is the topic you wanted to speak on today, we'd love to hear from you, too. >> Yeah. And um I mean I think where I'm at at this point is I um believe that outside counsel should be available to manage situations where um the superintendent's contract or or issues between the board and the superintendent are um at odds. That makes sense to me. Um I think that's appropriate. Um those are oneoffs and not super common. So, um I I think it's okay to have a policy where the board is to engage outside counsel in those specific scenarios and um that's where I'm at. >> Thank you, Karine. >> So, I I want to I agree with what you've said and I do agree for the most part with what uh our colleague board member Bolton

066shared as well. I just want to make it clear to the public and say publicly uh this discussion is not because I as one board member or I believe the board collectively is upset with our general counsel at all. This is not stemming from that. This is I think ever since I've been on the board, this is now year five, never had a problem with general counsel at all, assistant general counsel or general counsel. So the the the discussion around this policy for me is because I don't want to ever place our general counsel in a position where I feel they are not protect able to um openly protect the district and they are they are weaponized against the board. And so that has happened. I think my my personal perspective and I want to

067put in parameters that protect our general counsel, not because they've done anything wrong, but because I would like them to be protected as members of our district. And so, um, I am perfectly fine with having clear delineation that there are times when we as a board should seek outside counsel, uh, for the sole purpose of not putting them in a conflicting position. And so, um, as long as I think that we're clear on that, I do like the major categories that, um, board member Bolton listed. I also think that 90% if not 95% of the work that the general counsel does we don't have any evaluation over because we don't direct them in that manner but I do think that there is a space and I don't know the percentage but for the board to

068weigh in on the evaluation in some capacity I don't know the number but I do think that we should have the ability to say that we believe our general counsel is doing um from an evaluation standpoint what we want or what we don't want but that is separate from the superintendent because um I just think that that's that is a further form of protection of the the general counsel to if the if their direct boss says that they're not but we think that they are we need to be able to express that in a pro in a protective manner or in a manner that's expressing to say we're not happy so uh I don't know what that percentage is, but I do think it should exist. I don't think it should exist over maybe 10,

06915%. But that's just me. But I do think it should exist. So, I just want to make it very clear. This is not because I'm unhappy. This is to protect. And I've said that to both Dan and Stephanie, and I wanted to make sure that I said that publicly. >> Thank you. Um, did we already ask you if you had anything? You're good. Um, yes. So, from where I'm uh I think I agree uh either entirely or almost entirely with my colleagues on this. I I do think um I um agree with Eve that it would be good to have some additional language in our policy to formalize some things. Um, I think that, uh, what to Carrie's point, um, making it explicit that here's how the board gets, uh, help negotiating a contract with

070a superintendent. Here's how the board can get help with an evaluation issue of the superintendent that doesn't require somebody who reports to the superintendent is really healthy. Um, and I think that that that to codify that in policy, I just I completely agree. Um, I I also really agree with with Eve that um I think we have all these rules of thumb that have developed over time for when and I think they're good for like when we seek outside counsel. I think formalizing that in policy also sounds really helpful. I think we should do that. Um I I feel pretty strongly that the general counsel should report to the superintendent. Um, I think it gets really challenging to have um multiple reporting lines. Um, and so I I hear I think Kareem your point about

071the board's ability to share important feedback with the general counsel. For me, I wonder how much of that we could do with executive session. >> Um, without without getting involved in in the the scoring of that person's evaluation by the superintendent. Um I respect other people who may have different different perspectives, but I think I think um clear reporting lines are really important for accountability. Um but I do I do I do hear the point and so I was wondering if how much we get done during executive session. I think so um from a process perspective um it's the last thing I was going to say is I think I think the next we should talk about this however long we need to talk about it today but whenever we end that conclusion we should

072hear from anybody who wants to speak who's come to talk about this. um whenever we end that we at some point need to get some language that we can look at. >> And I just wanted to be thoughtful about our general counsel who is like um I don't know like if you feel fine writing up this draft great if you'd like one of our board members to take a first pen to this because like it's about you know stuff that your evaluation you know Kareem if you want to take first pen or Carrie or if you want me to write a draft I've done that before. I don't know like I just I wanted to just get clear on process. Um but then I think um do you so yeah anything from administration on this

073and then we'll invite guests. >> That is so awkward. I just hate that we're putting you in that position. It is very crazy. >> Mhm. >> Y >> work at the direction of the board. I mean if if you would like us to put it together that's fine. If a board member would like to put it together that's fine, too. We really we work at the pleasure of the board. Happy let's hear from to work with the general counsel on that. How how about we do that because I've already talked to you guys. So I'm happy to work with that. I think it's awkward. >> Um so then like we'll we'll we'll we'll come back to next steps in one second. But is there anybody who came to the meeting today to talk about uh

074general counsel policy? >> Yeah, Julie. >> Um I all of this with using the policy from this outside group. Um I had a lot of concerns with um it sounds in their policy like there is a district legal counsel and a board legal counsel. I don't think that the board is separate from the district. I think you have district legal counsel. And when you need outside counsel just like we already currently have then that legal count if you look through the um treasur's report there's always things in there that it's this attorney from frost and brown this attorney from TAF this attorney from who works on separate issues and separate cases there you may have an attorney locally who works on things with um property issues or sales or purchases of property. But when you

075look at this model policy, it says, >> uh, no, the other one, OSBA, it looks like it's just a small little template, but when you click at the bottom of the OSBA, it clicks you right into all of the Ohio Revised Code. >> This group doesn't do anything with Ohio Revised Code. And so I don't see I mean there are I don't see how the board is thinking that they're separate from the district. I think the legal counsel should be the district's legal counsel which represents you and us. I don't see where you have to you should be having your own separate attorney separate from the district which could create a huge division and then the district doesn't have any control over what what's happening with policy which I think is what some people want.

076They want to make policy that might not be the best thing for the district. And that's what's happening in other districts across the country. And if you look, there's like 10 10 urban districts that are being targeted to try to undermine them. We are not going to become Indianapolis. We are not going to become Denver. We are not going to become New Orleans. Those are all failed experiments and they have no public schools left in their cities that are viable. I we have teachers who have worked in those other cities when those types of things came up and they they said that there was a mass exodus of teachers and the districts will never recover from what was happening. So what sometimes the pathway that sometimes people are going down they don't even understand where

077that pathway is going to end them. And so we've already worked with Ed Trust and that was Patrick Carell. I don't know if Kareem was on the board at that time when Patrick Carell was in the district, but they've already been in Cincinnati. Cincinnati residents are paying the majority of our funding. We get very little from the state and our local people support our schools. And to have board members say, "We're we're not doing enough. We're to me sounds like why are you even on the board when you're saying that the district isn't doing enough? Yeah, we do have to do more, but we have to have the money to do more. You can't expect more with less. That just doesn't happen. We can be as innovative as we want, but that's still not going

078to get us to where we need to be. We haven't had a penny increase since 2016. >> Not one penny. But yet, what is the inflationary dollars of that money from 2016? And in 2016, because we had to give money to the preschool promise, we did we needed more money in 2016. You cannot do more with less and think that we're servicing kids. And to say, well, charters will come and take over. That's not going to be the issue or the answer either. So I don't see I don't really see this policy this policy here as the policy should that should be the model policy for our district especially when you get down to the primary duties of the board council board council should not be have look at all of the things here that

079they want as separate from the district I just >> I don't get it >> I so good my my understanding is we're we're not considering that at this point what we've discussed is having our own policy that is simply adjusting to make explicit when the board needs to have outside counsel when dealing with superintendent issues. That's my my understanding of what's happening. >> That's correct. >> Um we were exploring what was happening in other areas. That's why this came into this policy committee, but I I personally am not considering adopting this language. So, >> so I I think that um and and I'm so glad we're we're kind of talking about this because it has gone and grown further than it has ever intended. the attack on um the school board partners because they submitted

080this was very very uh very it wasn't existent in our mind as one board member in my mind to even use this policy as written and so I think it is very responsible for board members to seek out outside guidance and outside resources when trying to make a policy that impacts 30 plus thousand kids. And so to me, due diligence is to put an all call out and to say, "Hey, I'm going to cast the net. Anybody and everybody that has something that relates to what we're talking about, submit it." That is what I think the intention of this submission was. It was to request information in relatively timely in a timely manner from a resource that quite frankly four of us have been involved with. I reached out to OSBA. Ben has also reached

081out to other agencies to say that we were talking about this and then to publicly say this is exactly where we're going and then to kind of def defame some board members for even reaching out I think is just very um it's unfair. And so I'm going to go back and say this particular policy from this particular agency is dealing with districts across the nation who have different reporting structures than the state of Ohio. It was really just a reference and I hope that the conversation is open enough that we can kind of talk about it so that we don't um get off on tangential things that um were never the intention in the first place. It was never the intention to use this as written. It was always the intention to seek out information

082from other people that find themselves in similar situations and use it as a resource. And that is exactly what I did when I looked at it. And if we if we go back to the meeting where they actually spoke and they only spoke at one meeting. If you go back to that meeting, it was very clear that they had a culmination from multiple districts across the nation. And it was also mentioned that Ohio has specifics that are different than what's here. They took multitude of districts and came up with that. It doesn't relate to us. And so, um, again, I don't think it's irresponsible for us to seek out information, nor do I have an intention to dismantle public education the way it is right now. I I don't have that intention. And so, um,

083I will say there are things here that don't relate. That's why we went on to the next one, which was OSBA, which is more relevant. And to your point, it cites Ohio Revised Code, which is specific to Ohio where we reside currently. Um, I I don't think it's it's it's not my intention to have extra expenses to this district by hiring outside counsel. That was not the impetus behind even discussing a general counsel policy or evaluation. This came for me as one of the people who supported it because we found ourselves after speaking to previous board members in excess of 10 years ago in a very precarious situation where our general counsel was weaponized against the board. And so I don't want to do that anymore. That was a very it was a situation that

084had never happened before. Multiple board members, past and and some present, have said, "We've never found ourselves in this situation." So, I wanted to have something that supported our general counsel to say, "Hey, you work for the district. We represent the district that is very clear. How can we protect you so that you are always always protecting the district and never pit against board members, the community, the superintendent ever." And so that is the impetus behind coming up with anything. And so if we stay there, what can we devise very loosely that provides that protection? That was why it was it was even discussed. Since I have the mic for just a second, I will say I do think that there should be a dotted line because there's always been an inferred dotted line that

085general counsel does kind of report to the board to because again to your point, it's about the district. It is very clearly about the district. And so I think there should be some accountability. I don't even know if it should be an evaluation like a number but it there should be some accountability because general counsel leads and guides the board members just they don't represent the board members but they guide the board members and we should have some accountability there. So, um, I hope I've been able to clarify my position, not the boards, my position around bringing in outside information and I will continue to seek guidance and resources from every option to make the best and most informed decision for students that I can and I'm doing that as transparency as possible from the

086research that we have done with schoolboard partners and talking to districts from other parts of the country and doing the research and talking to people in um, in leadership in those districts and teachers in those districts and community members in those districts because we have been reaching out schoolboard partners is the educational equivalence of ALEC and that's the American Legislative Exchange. These are they are funded by the same types of um people and it is dangerous for our city and our schools to be bringing in schoolboard partners advising us on anything because whatever city they have been in, they have left a crisis behind and a weakened public school system. Well, I'm going to invite you, Julie, to do a little bit further research by asking the board members that have been through schoolboard partners.

087I am one of four and across this city because there have been other board members from districts like Princeton, Finnytown, other board members who have been through some of the programming at schoolboard partners with no intention nor any introduction to bring charters to this district. And so what I I would let's let's definitely have a deeper conversation. I'm not exactly sure who you solicited or why, but I will tell you that for this particular board member, they have been a resource with helping me deal with very contentious situations that we found ourselves in over the past four years. So, it didn't there was no introduction with charters. There was no introduction with dismantling public education at all. That was not why I was involved with schoolboard partners, but they definitely do provide some support for

088uh board members in general. Thank you so much everybody. Um we have a couple of things we're going to discuss this morning. I wanted to get clear on next steps here and I do have one closing comment and then we're going to talk about something completely non-controversial which is our grading policy. Um and so um so the uh um just on next steps as I understand it we're going to have a language we're going to look at in our next policy committing committee meeting jointly worked on by Kareem and by Dan. Um we're going to incorporate the feedback here. We're we're not recommending anything to the board. If you want more, come back in April. We can talk about this again. Um the thing I'm going to say, um I just Julie, I wanted to

089come back to one thing you said about whether we can expect more or not. Um I think you and I are going to disagree on this. And so I'm not trying to convince you to change your mind. This is more for anybody else who is listening. I want to be clear about my position. Um what I heard Julie say was you can't expect more with less or you can't expect more until we have more money. You know, I just wanted to say for the record, I completely completely disagree with that statement. I think the kids and families who are in CPS need us to do more and I think we can. The best example I would give is not from outside Cincinnati, but it's from within Cincinnati public schools and it's Hayes Porter. If you

090look at Hayes Porter for a minute, they have 98.3% of their students are economically disadvantaged. 91% of the third graders in Hayes Porter passed the third grade reading test last year. The district average is 55.7%. And is lower on the economically disadvantaged number than Haze Porter is. I don't think that means it's easy. I don't think that means we don't make mistakes as board members or as administrators or as teachers or as parents. I think there are a lot of ways that we can get better. But the minute that we say we can't do better until somebody else fixes this problem for us is the moment I think that we have relinquished our responsibility as leaders for the school district. I expect nobody necessarily to agree with me. My point is just to be clear

091about why I ran for school board and what I'm going to do with the time that I have here. And so we're going to talk next topic which is policy 5421 which is about grading. And the um assignment that came to the committee and that is before us today is to consider whether to recommend a change in the policy's language to the board that would change what happens in spring of 2026 from doing uh what the policy said and adding reading levels and math levels to the report card or piloting that in some subset of schools. Um and so we have um uh I would like to um my my sense is many folks would like to talk about this today. I want I want to hear first from board members and then I want

092to hear from the administration um and then I want to invite anybody who came to talk about this topic and would like to share can share. >> Can we hear I think that we asked the administration to consider it and come back. Can we hear if they have any updates? >> Yeah, that's if it's okay with the the committee that's fine. I will tell you and then um Jeremy if he wants to add on I Dr. Smith, our deputy superintendent, is working with a uh team of people to bring um a piece back that includes administrators, teachers, parents. Just for clarity, we have been operating as if we're moving forward until you tell us something different. >> Jeremy, do you want to add any detail? >> Uh just one quick thing and maybe a second

093at the will of the committee. The first being a little bit of framing for what a pilot would look like or what the a little bit of help in understanding what the report card uh process actually looks like. Just the I'm going to simplify the buttons down, right? But in short, there's a template that exists for our report cards. That template, there's several different options. One for high school, one for elementary, etc. So what we would be looking at from an actual practical stance is creating a template that when the schools go and submit and finish report cards. Also important to note that most of our schools do not print physical report cards at this point. So really what we're talking about is issuing those final grades which post them into focus and then often

094schools will notify parents and either send that through email or some other contact. Um but that process when they do it is just selecting a template to post those grades. So we would be create we would be able to create a template that includes the uh the information we've discussed in relation to the policy to where the schools could then select that template. So from a pilot standpoint as we consider what that could look like, we could offer it as a here is a template to do at a limited number of schools or all of the schools. It would be much more difficult to do it in any other capacity like that. >> Just out frame. >> Thank you Jeremy. Um yeah um board members Carrie Kareem I'll go last >> I guess I just

095wanted to understand where we are in the process. When is it going to roll out if if because we we've added a couple things different but when is it scheduled to roll out? >> So the original um direction was this fourth quarter report card. That's what we were working towards. But then there had been questions along the way. Again, based on the original direction, we were working towards the fourth quarter report card. If there's something you want us to do differently. >> No, I just I I I guess I'm also confused. And again, Ben, as a chair, help me. why we would have to change the policy in order for the administration to do like a sample. I I guess I'm I'm confused why we couldn't just let them if let them test it on

096their own without putting it formally in the policy that they're allowed to do a test. >> Um so the the do you have the policy up? >> Yeah. >> Rob, you've got this one that you're two steps ahead of me as usual. Um so in the second to last paragraph it says the preceding two paragraphs which is what talks about putting the reading levels and the math levels in the report card will go into effect starting with the 2627 school year >> though in 2526 that's this year the district will send this home on report cards at least once. >> Okay. >> And so that's the sentence we would need to change if we want the district to do something different. >> I got you. Okay. I understand. >> It's a very reasonable question. anything

097from you, >> Jerry? >> I don't think I have anything to add based off what I've provided in in the last meeting and so I'm just waiting to hear back. >> Great. Thank you. I think from my perspective, I I would like to keep the policy as it's written. Uh I' I've made these points in past meetings. I won't I won't make them again here. Um but I think there is important information that parents deserve to have as quickly as possible. I think the pros of that dramatically outweigh the cons, which is why the policy committee unanimously recommended this policy back in the fall and why the board voted to approve it 6 to1. Um, I understand it's different. I understand that support on the board from it is not 70, but it was 6

098to1 and we did follow the process and um, I think this is important. I've shared all all my points about my own experience with my son about what the data says in the three schools that we've looked at a bunch of different times. Um and I think we should be trying to get this in the hands of parents as soon as possible. Um so um if that's um any other comments from board members or from administration would love to see if anybody came today to talk about this policy. >> I just want to ask about we talked about an engagement uh group. Um how what's the status of that? >> Yes ma'am. That's the group Dr. >> Smith. Yes ma'am. >> What has been the feedback from there? It should have teachers on it, parents

099on it. >> Yes. So, we have teachers that um Julie shared with us. I believe there are some members from WEXL participating and yes, >> do they have any feedback now? >> I did uh yes, still working. >> Okay. >> But that does mean that by the time we hit the April policy committee meeting, you all will have met and we could >> Yeah. >> Okay. Okay. anybody who's here from um I'm just gonna get a list. Um Rob, can you ask the online folks to or you have one one who's online and then if you're here and would like to speak on this um would you raise your hand? >> Oh, >> so we got one, two, three, four. Anybody else? >> Okay. Um maybe Rob, can we start online and then we'll work

100our way around? Bethany, go ahead. >> Hi. >> Yeah, my name is Bethany Weber. I'm a parent with children attending data monastery. Um, I want to voice my continuing concern about the new report card guidelines, but I already score narrative form on report cards. Um, you've all heard my concerns about student impact regarding the policy change, but I'd like to address my concern outside of student impact. First, financial impact. How much will this cost CPS to implement and address over time? If you're following state and federal politics at any level, you know that public school funding is under attack and underfunded and why is the board choosing to spend our tax dollars on this? Um, teacher retention. How will this impact teacher retention? A huge impact on learning is teacher relationship. And I question if

101this policy supports our teachers and how it may affect retaining gifted teachers, especially since um from observation, the teacher representation is not being is not supportive of this policy. Um and shouldn't their expertise be given heavier weight and assist like this? Accountability. Initially, how will families be supported after receiving this new information on the last report card right before school closes? Who can they reach out to over the summer? Who do they contact about this policy? Um, and how will the board be doing this? Uh, for the future, what policy does the board have about garnering family feedback to policy changes that directly impact students and are being marketed as a family parent need? seems like there should be a certain a set amount of feedback or threshold before changes like this are made in

102the voice of a parent. Um lastly, the board presented that this is a transparency issue and a main concern. I know honey and that parents and families need to see this information outside of a digital landscape. Um, however, with the last committee meeting I attended, Milani, I had a we had a board member that talked about a different policy and was questioning whether written information really worked. So, I want to understand does the board believe written information works or it doesn't work? Um, thank you for your time. >> Thank you very much. Um Rob, can you um just remind me um >> do we usually use a timer or not? >> Um that's up to the chair. We've been doing open session, but I I'm happy to. >> No, no, I like to do normal.

103We normal I I was just blanked for a second. I can't remember. So So no timer, but we and we'll um we'll start. >> Well, I think I think I think honestly in in the best interest of time, it is 10:53. So, I think we need to stifle not one voice in here, but I do have a hard stop and I do want everyone to be able to speak. So, I won't necessarily suggest a timer, but I will say being mindful of time. >> If it's okay with the chair, I'll start a two-minute timer and then you can just >> I'd like to It's whatever the committee wants to do. So, like if the committee wants to use a timer, it's great. >> I just I want I don't want anybody to feel >> stifled.

104So, let's try let's try it without. We're going to we're going to end 11:30 and um this is this is important. It's why it's on the agenda. I'm glad people came. Um >> I don't want people to be mad at me. >> Policy has sometimes felt sleepy in the past to me. So not not now, but that's okay. >> We are running with coffee now. >> Um >> okay. So we'll we'll um we'll work. Anybody want to go first and then we can just work our way around? >> Yeah, I'll go first. I do not mind. I do not mind. So as you know, my name is Terrina Boyd. I am a parent of not data monitor. >> Okay. I thought I was using my outside voice. >> So my daughter um she attend Monosuri

105as well and um I'm just here to really just say is that we it feels like from my point of view we're beating the we're beating the horse down. Like we're just dragging it out. It's being stalled. Our board has approved the policy. Um so can we push farther I mean farther with that and just proceed. We have built a committee of parents, teachers, um administrators and so we're going to work to establish we are all collectively collaboratively working to establish a clear plan. I want to say it was a comment. I was just just just just doodling, right? Trying to unclutter my brain last night and it was a comment that said that the information is out there for parents to be able to pull up their child's grades, right? Some parents don't even

106know their child's ID to log into focus, let alone understand the information that's in our ready to understand that. We're asking for once a year that the the proficiency levels of reading and math is on report cards. >> Parents are looking at report cards. >> Just because your child is bringing home A's and B's doesn't mean they know their ABC and C's ABCs, excuse me. I am very like u I'm excited to have this not only for my daughter but for all of our students because you have to remember from um kindergarten to third grade 71% of the students are not reading on level at all. So, what type of intervention can we do collectively together right now? And I think this is a great start and I'm going to stop right there. >> Thank

107you, Karina. Other speakers, we can go in any order. Yeah, Michelle. >> Hi, Michelle Dunn with CTF and a former parent of a CPS student. Our I can say pretty confidently that our membership, the teachers, educators of this district really care about parent involvement and wanting parents to know how their students are doing. We are often frustrated that parent conferences aren't very well attended. We we come up with ideas all the time of how to increase engagement. So the the idea that we it's not that we're against parents knowing test scores, right? I mean, we want parents leaned in and engaged and knowing how their students are doing. No question. It is more a critique of the method that we are addressing. It's not that we don't want parents knowing how their students are doing.

108I just want to be really clear. Um, so the use of a one point in time standardized test score is really the rub. That's what we're concerned about. And there's lots of reasons why. Um, there's been uh our president sellers here wrote an op-ed in the newspaper explaining why that can be misleading uh to parents um that the use of these test scores has has a lot of baggage to it. So that's really the debate. It's not that we don't care about parents knowing and in fact our solutions that we kind of came up with is how can the district do more to if parents don't have their student ID how can we fix that like how can we help parents log into focus I mean if that's the problem how can we support parents

109having better access there's lots of ways to do that maybe we need to change the way we do parent teacher conferences to allow more access and I'll just end with putting a one point in time test score on a report card in our view is just not the best solution, right? There are so many other ways we could do better with parent engagement and I'm speaking as a foreign a former parent as well. Thank you for the time. >> Thank you Michelle. Um others who would like us to go. >> There were so many innovative If there were so many innovative solutions, how come we wait until this point where a policy is being introduced and uh and and approved and pushed forward that now everybody has all these methodologies. It's something simple. And I

110remember when the policy was getting um introduced uh I think it was sometime in the fall last year, >> teachers were talking about when you said methodology, it just made me think of this teacher's point and she said it might be more work. So is that the problem or do you have another innovative solution now that this has been approved? Thank you, Sabrina. Um, uh, other people who would like to share. >> Yeah. Julie, you want to go? Okay. >> I was just going to say, uh, my name is Danielle Wagner and I have a child at U performing arts. Um, my thing is is a pilot is a disservice to families. Um I had opportunity to uh as far as know about child says um eighth grade she's on fourth grade level. Why is

111a eighth grader in middle school reading on fourth grade? Why is this parent you know wasn't why didn't the teacher as far as reach out to the parent and say hey you know we need to get this together you know she's doing this she's doing that. Um, you know, it's just to me it's just it's somewhere it's something somewhere where I don't want to say it's like laziness, but to a certain extent we done got to the point to where we done got too comfortable. Uh, we're relying on technology to figure out what these kids are when we can when a teacher can simply just sit there across from a student and just, you know, ask some questions and just assess and then go from there. And then based off the test scores, okay, so

112this is what the test score is saying. This is what I see that's happening in the classroom. How can we use both of these assessments, you know, to get this child to where they need to be at? And then the fact that with the third grade readiness coming up as far as where these kids can't even get promoted to the fourth grade, you know, that's kind of the service as well too. And especially with a lot of our urban schools as far as where they're not even close to proficiency. So, it's like, you know, how can we tackle this situation without feeling like um worrying about teachers being not want to do it, maybe quitting because it might be too much for them. Uh worrying about our kids being dollar signs because the funds are

113not available. So, what what exactly I mean what's the next step? I mean, what can we do about this? Cuz that's the issue. >> Thank you very much. Uh thank you, Danielle. uh Julie or whoever else would like to go next. >> Briefly to the comment, you know, that this is simple and a lot of times things that seem innocuous and simple and obvious really aren't. And an example might be, you know, President Trump's Save Democracy Act, which is like why not um require all these different um voter ID requirements for voting, which I think probably everybody in this room would oppose, but to a lot of people that feels like a simple solution. Why not do that? Because it's attacking voter fraud, right? In that, and I disagree with that completely. I think we

114all do. And I think what we're trying to say is what might seem simple is really not simple in the because there are unintended consequences and we would like to spend more time discussing a way that we can be more supportive of parents. Um and we do welcome that and I don't think anybody at CTF thinks that you know we're finished with improving the quality of students education. We want to do that as well. So this has raised that issue of like you know whether parents whe whether we can do more things to engage parents and we really want to do that but it's not you know I think it is in my mind very lazy to result on a to rely on a test score in one point that is taken at one point

115in time and have that mean something. And there are very complicated reasons that we believe that that is is very misleading. And that's what, you know, I think we're very happy to to continue to engage in this conversation, but we don't want to we don't want to do this now before we've had the opportunity to think through this. Thank you. >> Thank you, Karen. Um, other speakers, I know Julie, do you want to go? That's >> I would fully support this if I felt that it was giving any parent information. Look, my own kids went to CPS. My grandchildren currently go to CPS. I am totally 100% vetted in this district for students to be successful. And yeah, my grandchildren did go to Dator and I know that the Dator parents have come to this

116meeting and they came to the retreat and they came to a couple other ones where they said they didn't want this on the report card because if you go to I Ready I Ready says this here assessment is an adaptive assessment. um when I've spoken to the board and I think many of the people in this room have been there. This is not um an assessment that it should have the reliability or validity to be a score. I Ready says that right on their website. This is a onetime shot. And kids who because it's adapt adaptive, which means if you don't answer a question correctly, you go backwards. If you don't answer another question correctly, you go backwards. And so you might have a student who is reading who is in the third grade and

117their um I Ready reading assessment might say they're reading on a first grade level. You don't want kids who share their report card with everybody else to have that stigmatism on them sometimes. And they there are certain kids who will this will impact more students with disabilities. They cannot read a full passage online. That is it's so many words. It's difficult for them to do that. It's different than if it's on a piece of paper or if they're getting um assistance. These I Ready scores are different than like a state assessment. These I Ready scores are developed as a formative assessment for teachers to know where they should be providing interventions. and the I Ready um report that goes to parents and I'm sorry that some parents don't know their students ID numbers. I'm sorry

118that some parents don't know how to log on. They can still get the report from the schools. I even said why don't we just send the report print it off send it with the report card so that they can see because it is a twopage document. It isn't a single score, but if you look at it, have you seen the I Ready um reports? >> Okay. Okay. So, so when you do the I Ready reports, it shows you it says these are the areas where your child may be above level or below level. These are the questions you should ask at your at your students next parent teacher conference. These are things you can do at home with your child. Education is a complete circle of parents, grandparents, teachers. So when we are talking about

119this, this is if this goes on the report card, it's going to be damaging to many students. Now if your child is in the eighth grade reading on the fourth grade level, that is a problem. But there is no parent who should have an eighth grader who doesn't know their child can't read. Have there been conferences about this? Have there been interventions put in place? And there are some schools, if you're going to a school that like um SANS, they're not a title one school. They don't have reading and math specialists at those schools. non-title schools don't have those specialists because those are federal dollars and you cannot use general funds for that. If it was up to me, I would say every grade level K to three would have a reading specialist working with

120every child starting in kindergarten. Yeah, that costs money and it's not going to happen if we don't have the money. Ohio used to be in the top 10 academically, the top 10. And we were funding in the top 10. We are now funding 37th in the ranking nationally from the state and every state surrounding us is funding the schools at a higher rate. Indiana higher, Kentucky higher, West Virginia higher. And until we start all coming together and not worrying about what's on the report card and what could be damaging the kids and doing another experiment on our children like they're guinea pigs which has been happening. We are not going to do it. Yeah, there is a third reading. >> Could you wrap up in one minute? >> Okay, I'll finish up. There is a

121third grade reading guarantee, but we just f but those kids were still moving on. They weren't holding them back. We've had social promotion in this district for how many years? Probably 20 years we've had social promotion. And the parent has to agree if the child will be um um um held back if they're not reading. Why are they in the eighth grade if they can't read and they're reading on the fourth grade level? There's a lot this this is not going to make the difference with that. There are other things. What are we going to do about chronically absent children who are sitting at home doing nothing? >> Okay. So, >> okay. Thanks everybody. Let me just before we go to board members, um I know that my colleagues on both sides of me have

122some things they'd like to share and I think a desire also to hit some of our rest of our agenda before we end. Um but is there anybody in the public? So, we got Brad and anybody else? Thank you Brad. You are our last speaker. Thank you committee members. I just want to say that you know standardized tests are one measure. You know 48 multiple choice questions once a year in my opinion is not a valid measure of a student's growth of their achievement during the year. If that's the case, why is the district saying that teachers should be given grades every week? Why shouldn't I just give a a one test once a year and that is the child's grade for the entire year? Why? Because that's bad practice. That is not good practice.

123And so my issue with this policy is that the all this is doing is feeding to the teach to the test, drill and kill. That's all that matters. I said in my last public comments when I taught at Rockdale, I had a group of students that 8% passed the the test. At the end of the year, I only had 11% that passed. I was asked to find 40 students to focus on, you know, to, you know, focus on pass the test. When I got to student 20, I was pulling students who scored below 350. The cut score is 400. And so when I looked at my results, yeah, it only went from 8 to 11, but every single child grew at least 20 points. Most grew 40 to 50 points. And so was I was

124I supposed to fail a child who scored a 320 and then scored a 370? They're still not our grade level, but am I supposed to fail that child? You know, grades are not based, you know, these standardized tests are one measure. They're one point in time. And so I, you know, I always told my students, I don't give you grades. You earn those grades. And so, are we supposed to punish children through their grades because they're not on grade level even though they made progress and they grew that year? And so my issue is this is a policy again that is driving focusing on the test that's driving drill and kill that's narrowing the the the the experiences of children in the classroom because all that matters is the standardized test. That's not true and

125that's not education. That's not good education. And so I would rather us focus on providing every child in this district a great highquality education and that does not include just focusing on standardized tests. Thank you. >> Thank you very much Brad. Thank you everybody who came and spoke. Um I think we h we have a discrete decision we need to make as a committee. Um and then we uh see if we can get a couple of things done today. Um I think the the the question we need to uh decide now is is the committee recommending a change to the policy to the full board. Uh I am not uh I've shared my reasons why. Um but I we are a democratic body and we will do what a majority of the committee wants to

126do. I just wanted to hear from my my colleagues in in either order. Yeah, I didn't have anything to say beforehand because I had already talked to the administration, but I do feel the need to speak. Now, I want to be clear, not like I am not attacking the teacher's ability to grade. I think it is what they're grades are a completely different assessment than a test. They should be. It's about what they're doing, how they're showing up in the classroom, what progress they're making, what effort they're making. I brought my daughter's I Ready report. She's at or surpassed grade level, thank God, honestly, because I worry about her sometimes. But she's getting C's because she doesn't always focus in the classroom. She's in second grade. It happens. But these two things in my mind

127are completely different assessments of my child. And I think it's okay to have both. And I don't think one is a judgment of the other. I would never look at an I Ready assessment and assume that is a judgment on the teacher. It's about the child's taking that test. Right? So I I understand I am a unique and that is my perspective. But I think having both perspectives is the healthy thing to do. I think if you're suggesting we send home this paper with a report card, then the idea that it's damaging to the child is negligent because this is the same thing as putting on the report card. If you're if you're sending them both home at the same time, they can read both, right? So, like it's just interesting. I want this to

128come out as a conversation focused on doing everything we can to help support children's growth. I have advocated that we consider something other than I ready because I've heard the feedback from the teachers that that's not the correct assessment to use. So I am with you on that. If that's not the correct assessment to use, that's why we're having this meeting with Dr. Smith. That's because this committee asked them to go and relook at it and say, is there another option? Because we heard you and we I understand that. Um, but I feel like we're putting adult egos ahead of student achievement in this situation and that's really frustrating for me. And so I want us to think about what is best for the kids, what information will help us drive progress. And that's all

129I have to say. This is >> Can I make one more comment? >> Thank you. No, we're gonna we're going to keep moving. Um, Kareem, >> so I'm I'm going to try my hardest to be brief. I've listened. I've um and I was not going to comment. I actually suggested a pilot. So, which is probably part of the reason why we're here and I'm gonna take it back because I'm really really very very frustrated. And as a parent and now a grandparent of um CPS students, I feel slightly disrespected because of some of the commentary that I've heard. I don't hear anyone talking about let's not do standardized tests. I hear people saying let's not put the standardized test result on a on a report card. I wish I heard the advocacy against the utilization

130of standardized tests because I don't agree that standardized tests is a very accurate measurement of where our students are especially over time. I think standardized tests I'm going to read what an agent the american.edu said that they are because I have a different opinion slightly but it does say that it offers a consistent objective measure of student proficiency helping to identify academic strengths, weaknesses and learning gaps. It is one tool. It is not completely defining of students but neither are the letter grades that they get. >> I know students who are getting D's and Fs and are geniuses. I know students who are getting A's and B's and I question that. It has nothing to do with my definition of or support of that student. But it is one measurement of time that I look

131at to identify that student. And it is to say that students share their report cards and that they're going to be running around here talking to other students. What about that student that sits in the classroom and gets an A and knows that the because students talk, knows that the other student is not on grade level because they hear it and they see it, but they're getting an A. What is going on with the self-esteem of that student that is inferring that perhaps I I see this student that's not getting this grade, but that's not proficient. I'm reading above, but I have the same grade. I I don't hear any support for getting rid of standardized testing, but I hear support for saying, you know what, let's just not put it on the report card.

132I hear support to say, I want to support parents, and it's lazy to rely on technology, yet print out the score that they have, which is another expense to the district that we don't have. We're already limiting copy clicks. I hear let's have more parent conferences but I also have parents complaining to me that some some not all when this gets repeated please correct correctly stay some teachers are not accessible outside of the conference hours and we didn't put any additional information in our bargaining unit conversations to allow for I don't think we did please correct me for more innovative and creative uh more innovative and creative opportunities for teachers to have time to do some of the creative things that you're sharing that they already want to do. I support teachers. So, I please

133hope that when this gets repeated or we get an anonymous email that says that I don't support teachers that I that it's not repeated that way because I absolutely support teachers. But I also absolutely and they are the experts in that classroom for sure. But I also know as a parent and a parent of an undiagnosed special needs son, I'm the expert on that parent. I mean on that student. That is me. And I think that two experts should come together and absolutely advocate for the benefit of that student. That is how success is measured. I don't want to take anything away from parents or students being experts within their fields. But if if it it just is disingenuous to me to say it shouldn't be on a report card. It's already there. But you're

134not saying don't don't do the test. You're saying just don't put it right here. And I have a whole group of parents that are saying, you know what, we want an additional resource to be able to advocate. Why are we stopping advocacy for our parents? This policy to me, not the truency policy that's up there, but this policy to me around grading is about empowering the parents to do something different as expeditiously as they can. If we acknowledge the fact that students learn differently, perhaps their parents learn differently. If we acknowledge the fact that we have a diverse group of students that sit in the seats, maybe everybody can't get to a parent conference meeting. Maybe they don't understand the I already report to it's it's wrong to say that it's laziness to rely on

135technology when we utilize the same technology in our classrooms. I am very very disheartened. I hope and pray I've said this multiple times, multiple ways. I'm going to continue to say this again and again and again. I don't think that this is it doesn't say I ready that you have to use I Ready. Hopefully this will empower the committee to come up with something different. But to say that parents are lazy to depend on just a grade to be moved from one level to from one resource to the next I think is not fair. So I rescend my um recommendation to do a pilot. >> Thank you Kareem. Um just as a as a process point I do not hear a recommendation from any committee member to recommend out of committee a change to the

136policy. Okay. hearing that, we're going to move on and we're gonna conquer at least one item from our standing policy review cycle. So, no, we're going to move on. Um, uh, Dan and Shauna or superintendent, I I would just request in, um, is there one productive piece of business we can do in 8 minutes? >> Yeah, we would like to move the truency policy forward because uh, that's one that has a timeline for the statute. >> That's great. Could we talk about the truency policy for a little bit? >> Introduce my colleague Stephanie Scott and >> thank you Stephanie. We're excited excited to hear from you. >> Actually, I'll turn it over to Manisha. She's here to >> present the change. >> Thank you. >> Right. >> All right. Well, I know that we are

137limited on time. Manisha House, the director of positive school culture and a parent um of two lovely young gentlemen that hopefully are doing their best in the class right now. So, um we wanted to uh bring forth this truency policy. We know that um Ohio law has changed. It was originally House Bill 410 um which had the attendance components and requirements of districts and schools and now we have House Bill 96 which is kind of eliminated a lot of those um statutes and so really in uh the policy or really with the law rather um there is no more really kind of definition between medical and non-medical kind of excuses. Um it defines and really change changes the definition of habitual truency. It changes from days to hours. And so there's also um this component

138of a state attendance tracking tool that should start April 15th. Do not know yet specifically what that will look like. Um but it's supposed to give us real-time data on the attendance measures of districts, schools around the state. Um however there was one component that districts needed to adopt a policy around attendance with these new expectations um to be implemented by August 1st and some of the things already started in September um of 2025. And so as committees even within our social work office um have gathered together and we've met with general counsel to really look at how to make a robust um policy and this is not just done by ourselves. According to the law we have to do this with the courts. So, we have met with members of the courts and we've

139spoken um sent information with to Judge Bloom to be able to get feedback on not only just the policy but also our processes and procedures of how we can be better. So, CPS as normally what CPS does, we go above and beyond. We realize that um a portion of this policy that I do like that we're recommending um it pulls out the tiered supports. Tier one, two, and three. tier one being universal supports for all students that we can have this conversation about how important attendance is because it doesn't take much to roll into chronic absenteeism when you think that it is excused and unexcused. It doesn't matter. It's just if the school student is absent from this learning environment at all. Um and then there is this tier 2 for students that need a

140little bit more support. And we are um we want to change the language from absence intervention plan to um student engagement plans because really we're talking about how to engage the student. Um and there could be different modalities as far as it could be academically focused, there could be some behavioral concerns that we want to be able to address the whole needs of a child with the parent and with the child. Um, so that's kind of like that tier two level and then obviously there's the tier three level that we can continue to use additional resources and supports and further use the court system to be able to help us to help identify areas of need. So those are just kind of some of the new new things and we also changed um in our

141policy the recommendation from days to hours and what those hour thresholds will be and that we are um as a department meeting the requirements of the law overwhelmingly and superseding what the statute is asking us to do. We understand that early intervention and notification is the key and monitoring those interventions is what's going to be helpful to support students to eliminate the barriers that give kids access to school. >> That's the best way for me to sum it up. >> Thank you. That's great. So, questions questions from um I think our our goal is to be able to ask questions and decide if we can recommend this out in our next couple of minutes. Questions from and if we need more time, we will take more time. Um, doing it right is more important than

142doing it quickly. Um, but questions or comments from any board members. >> I I just wanted to ask on the second page, yeah, page two, where it says parent guardian notice, it says writing, but I'm wondering can we can we expand that to include or did you already think about it like a robocall or a text message or a phone call? because writing feels like maybe we may miss some people that have moved you know I don't know what their circumstances are but I was just circling writing so our expectation as a department that you do it in different modalities we do robocall uh I tell them anyways by mean all means necessary robocall it is a letter that we send to families like we mail snail mail but then we also send emails um

143even if we can send it through text messaging features so that it gets to a parent as a text message and it comes up as an attachment We do that as well. So it's always and we also do it as um voice conversation. I think the the uh the impetus on the writing is that we have documentation. So we document how we communicated with the families. Okay. So to us just giving a phone call is not enough like we need to be able to document to go back how do we communicate and how do we confirm that that communication happened and occurred. Well, I just the only thing that I would add then is just say or or a custodian in writing using all modalities or something like that just so that we're covered to

144say it's it's a multiple of ways that it can happen. So if somebody says, "Well, you you mailed me a letter and I didn't get it." Well, all modalities means ma'am, did you get a text message? Did you get just so that we're kind of covered, but that that was the only thing that I had had to add. Can I can I ask like do we um is there a version of this that is simple enough and feasible like good administrative process that we could still put forward at the next board meeting or or is this like a change that you would want to think about come back to the committee with? There's no right or wrong answer. I just want to >> So it's August one is the date. So there is time. We

145just wanted to get it in front of you because we're on the clock. Would would you like a month to take this edit and think through it or do you feel like you got a version that feels good to you? Now, again, no right or wrong answers. I just wanted to get >> proced to make sure that we never I'm sorry that we would just have to make sure that a parent was notified um text and a letter. And they said, "Well, you didn't do all modalities. Like, we just want to make sure that we get that language right. That would be the only piece. Maybe it's that, you know, maybe we have like the freedom to use multiple modalities of communication. >> Some of our communication is home visits as well. >> I think

146I think this is everybody trying to do the right thing and we have time. So why don't you take till April and and do a version of it that you really like and we will still get a pass by August 1st. Does that feel okay to everybody? >> Yeah, that's fine. >> Okay. With that, um uh is there a motion to So I think just as we >> I >> we have one more. Well, the only other thing there's a um >> no sh there's a mention on the agenda to renaming the Western Hills Dator softball field. >> Yeah. >> If if that requires discussion, we certainly can take it back. If there's no objection, >> yeah, no, we should look policy doesn't name things, you know, like the board names things, right? So, I

147was unclear why why why it came to policy committee. >> So, the the board policy is that the naming is a function of the board. We we try to get it to and including um gymnasiums or fields or whatever. Yeah, >> they've asked whether they can rename a field to introduce it to the board. We have sometimes come through policy to say is this something you want to move forward? If you don't want it here, we can >> even though the policy says it's the board's decision, not the policy committee's decision. >> Senator, I think it's a recommendation. problem is to put in front of the board naming something to invite people to come and then for the board to hear it for the very first time at a board meeting and say no we're

148not interested in name now you've got the family there we need some way of introducing it to the board that is not that's that's my only concern >> what's the suggested name sorry >> it's after Lorie Treasure she's a beloved coach >> okay >> um longtime coach at Westside it's coming from the school >> is this controversial in any way shape or form does anybody have Any objections to it? >> I approve. >> The only thing I asked is if she is. >> She is. >> So any concerns from colleagues? >> No. No. >> So then let's to have the board decide whether or not this is the Yeah. Okay. Great. Sorry. There. That's a I want to empathize with the practical challenge of what you're describing. And I'm also Yes. Thank you. >> There

149may be a better way for us to do it in the future. >> We'll figure it out. >> Wait, I do have a question though, just really quickly. So that's the suggested name. Did the school community come up with that and say, "Okay, let's see about getting this named after her." Is that what that was? >> Okay. Okay. Okay. I'll see. >> Um, superintendent. >> I got you. >> Straight from the school. >> Okay. Okay. >> I was just, you know, we we can we can rename it if it's a problem, right? Like this. Not not Okay. So, um uh um motion to Okay.