Policy and Equity Committee Meeting Febraury 13, 2026

001Okay, good morning everybody and welcome to the uh February installment of the policy and equity committee for Cincinnati Public Schools. Uh we're going to start by going around the room with some introductions. Um, if we could maybe start over here on my right and work our way around the horseshoe. >> Cynthia Dolman, office of general counsel. >> Daniel Wiseman, CPS parent and also parent >> Carrie Armbster, board member. >> Ben Lindy, board member, >> Dr. Mafet, board member Shauna Murphy, superintendent, general counsel, assistant general counsel. Lake Augusta, treasurer. >> Jeremy Gullyu, chief information officer. >> Thank you. And last, but certainly not least, >> Rob Wilson, technician. And if you'd like to speak during the speaking of the public session, please uh uh lift uh raise your hand with a hand icon, and we'll ask

002you your name and association to the district and invite you to speak at the end of the meeting. >> All right. Uh welcome everybody. Uh excited to have you here. Excited for our first um uh second Friday meeting. Um which is going to be our cadence for calendar year 26. Um we have a a healthy agenda this morning and um we're going to make sure we keep our meeting to within um 90 minutes to two hours. We'll start with the alcohol waiver uh from Sans Monasuri. Um, we don't don't always need to have a presentation, but sometimes we do. Um, do we have somebody here, Rob, for SANS? >> Yes, >> Ally, I'm inviting you over to if you'd like to speak. >> Uh, and we're very glad you're here. Um, if you have maybe

003a a one or two minute overview of the event you'd like to share, um, we would love to listen. >> Sure. Hi, thank you. Um, I'm Ally. I'm the SNPO president at Sans Monasteri. Um, and I've just I've had some parents kind of in the past couple years request that we bring back alcohol sales at our spring carnival. Um, this year it will be April 18th. Um, so it's something I know they've done in the past. Um it's been it was a process to kind of get approved so it kind of died off a little bit but we're trying to bring it back um to hopefully be able to increase some fundraising um goals that we have. We're hoping that being able to get this approved will give us kind of the leverage to increase

004our attendance and have more people come. Um so yeah, >> that's great. Thank you very much. Do any board members have any questions about the uh alcohol waiver proposal for the Sands Monasuri School Spring Carnival? >> All right. Hearing none, are is there any opposition to recommending a waiver uh out of this committee at our next board meeting? >> None at all. >> None. Okay. So the committee will recommend an alcohol waiver for the Sands Monasuri School Spring Carnival uh in the consent agenda for the next regularly scheduled board meeting. Mr. Ding, >> just a reminder that for an alcohol sale, so that that board approving the waiver will take care of what you would need from CPS. You would also need to apply for alcohol sales for a liquor license, a permit from the

005Department of Commerce, and that requires our signature that that can be sent to our office. We can get that Okay. Wonderful. Thank you. >> Great. >> Uh, yes, Dr. Buffett. >> So, I just have a question for general counsel around um no opposition to any of our buildings having alcohol waiverss, especially for fundraising, but is there have you ever had like the community come back and say we don't want this this this event to have alcohol? I'm just wondering, we automatically usually say yes, but what would be the a worst case scenario or another case scenario? >> Uh, we have not in uh I don't know in the last 10 years, we haven't had a lot of opposition to the alcohol waiverss that were approved by the board. There was a time on the board

006where there was consideration of changing our process. Um, and that that generated a lot of conversation. um it it would it would not have required individual waiverss. This process of going to policy committee and then going to the board and uh there was a lot of uh there was some discussion on both sides at that point and it ultimately was not passed but uh in terms of the individual waiverss that have been passed for carnivals events uh at least our office has received opposition to that. Is is this the most efficient way for schools to do this or I I mean I feel kind of bad that they're coming in February for April. Can they just apply at the beginning of the year when we have our calendars set or maybe they have their school

007calendar set just to say, "Hey, we're getting a whole bunch of them at the beginning of the year. We're just going to approve them as a batch." >> Certainly, there are more efficient ways of uh of u >> doing the alcohol waiver process. Again, that that was kind of what was in mind when this was under consideration. And again, there was some I I will say there was some opposition at that time to changing the process. It it didn't pass also. So, >> so I actually heard from some fundraising individuals from different parent organizations about this exact issue um of like how do we streamline the process of getting approval for things like alcohol or gambling or things so that parent nights can be a little more enticing to increase fundraising because the district is

008low on funds. So parent organizations do feel a lot of pressure to raise funds for their schools. Um so it's definitely something I think is coming up of like not how do we eliminate the process. I do think the approval process is important. So we have some parameters but streamlining maybe making a little bit easier. It is very confusing at the moment of how to get it through. Um so just something that we can consider for next school year. I think >> I have to imagine there are some some wins on um just communication uh like a I actually don't do we have like one pagers and things that exist for for parent groups like how to like a step by step that stuff exists already. >> Yeah. When when >> Okay. >> response process.

009>> Yeah. >> If we could find some ways to get it out there. Yeah. I'm sure we could. Was there more that you wanted to talk about? Well, I I was just asking because as as as times change, maybe we could be a little bit more efficient with utilizing our PTOs and our LSTMC's and those agencies that are doing those types of things, maybe we have a district-wide PTO meeting or addition, you know, we do that for LSTMC's to give them the information at the beginning of the year so that if they do know something's coming up in the spring, which is a typical time, fall or spring, we could get them to get those things in early and then they're not feeling a little under the gun. I didn't have any uh reason to

010ask the question other than yeah um we did one last policy meeting and I felt like okay we have another one. Do they know that they can maybe apply early? >> Certainly we yeah there's no objection to them applying early and many do but we could also maybe do them in batches that way. >> That's what I was thinking. That's all that's reason I asked. >> That's it. Thank you. >> Sure. Um, so we'll keep moving through here with our um agenda, but before we move uh as we move into item three, um I wanted to uh just rem remind any listeners about how we try to structure the um policy committee meetings. Um that uh we we every three years we make it through a review of all of CPS's policies. So we leave

011some room for that. Uh we also uh solicit input from board members every six months for are there particular policies you'd like to see this committee take a look at. Uh and then we leave some room in each agenda for anything that we didn't finish last time um or any other issues that come up in board meetings. Um Phyllis, uh were you able to send out the request to board members for any topics that they'd like to see this six months? >> If you could send that out and maybe give people a deadline, uh let's give them one week. Um, and then we can build a calendar so that by the time we have our March meeting, um, we can say, "Hey, here's what we got back." And then here are the here's when people

012can expect their issues to get taken up. Um, and then we can make sure that happens. Great. Thank you. Um, so we have a first item in continued discussions on entrance requirements for preschool. >> Uh, yeah, just an update. Uh, the board policies were approved. um as amended at the Monday's board meeting. Uh the team actually yesterday uh started communicating that out to families what the process would be. Lottery letters I think sent next week uh is what's currently anticipated. So everything is moving in progress on on that front. Board members, any questions or follow-up? >> Nope. Um great. Rob, I don't know that we do necessarily, but is there anybody online who wanted to talk about entrance requirements for preschool? No. Okay. Um, so next we've got uh 5421, the grading policy. Uh, we

013had a a quite robust conversation about this where we heard from a number of different parents and community members and members of CTF. um and uh I think had a good discussion um had a pretty uniform response from the committee about not changing the policy. Uh the one which we passed back in December. The one uh outstanding item on this was um Mr. Crosset had asked the committee to consider uh whether there could be a way for parents who do not want their students reading level or math level to appear on the grade level on the on the report card, excuse me, to be able to opt out of doing that. Um and so we didn't quite have enough time to fully have that discussion uh in our last meeting. So that's why this is

014on here so we can finish that part. Um I I was hoping we could hear just a minute from from Jeremy. I know. said some of this last time, but could you just talk a little bit about or from the super anybody from the administration? Um, uh, how feasible is this? How unfeasible is this? What would need to be true in order for us to create a way for parents to opt out? I don't think this is the only issue, but it it's one of them and I thought it could give us a place to start. >> Yeah, absolutely. So from the technical side of gathering the opt-in opt out selection, it would be uh very difficult I think what I presented last time to do it like right now during the middle of the

015year where we would have to try to appeal to parents to go in and make an active selection. Um that's a challenge to get the the response rates that we would need to be able to to feel confident in whether we were getting a selection or not. What we typically do is we have that during our back to school packets and enrollment and all those processes up front where we can have parents opt in and opt out of selections like whether you want to be able to use your student information for directory services those kind of things. So if we wanted to do it that would be the time that we would recommend targeting trying to get that selection from parents which would allow us to start with that for potentially next year if we

016wanted to pursue it. >> Thank you. um board members would love to hear any any thoughts they have and then I'd love to see um if we if there are people who wanted to speak at hearing of the public but it was on this topic. I wanted to invite that while we're talking about this topic and I'll probably do that through the whole agenda but we'll start with board members. So I I wonder if we're and again I was not part of policy last uh year. So this question is out of slight bit of ignorance but to the administration. I wonder if we're putting the cart before the horse around talking about opt out or opt in when we haven't decided on what methodology to use for them to opt in or opt out of.

017So for example, it doesn't I I brought this up last time. I am I got a little bit of feedback. I'm not trying to be against I Ready, but that has not been decided by the administration to utilize I Ready scores to my knowledge. So, if we're there was a lot of conversation around using I Ready and I think parents feel like they don't want that information. So, they're requesting to opt out. But if there hasn't been a test, if there hasn't been a pilot, how do parents know what they're opting in of and opting out of? It could simply be on grade level, yes or no. And why would you opt out of I I guess I just don't know if we're deciding on something very prematurely because of a lot of conversation around

018a specific uh determination that hasn't been decided. So to the best of the administration's ability, I'm asking are we close to coming up with something or for them to opt out of or where are we at in that process? >> So we did uh Tuesday in our team meeting Dr. Ma have a conversation of course around this and we feel like the I Ready is the best universal uh measure that we have that it runs across all of the K6 grade levels. it runs across all of the schools and would be our recommendation to go with that as opposed to leaving it to be a school by school decision. Uh I will also say uh the deputy is working on this and has made the decision she's going to pull together a work team to

019uh move through this. We did explain to the principles um that fourth quarter there is an expectation that these levels are placed on the report card. So they know at least that it's coming and that we're preparing and some of them will be invited or there'll be an opportunity even to have their voice at the table with the deputy. >> Will that include parents? >> I believe she's going to include all constituents who may be interested in this. So, just to give you um like to to sum this up, my preference would be that we wait on the opt-in opt out until we determine what the feedback is from the opt-in or the the pilot of it um to hear from and I would really want to have parents included in that if we could.

020>> Is your expectation we're creating a pilot or we are launching this districtwide? >> I don't know because I don't know where it was left. I thought it was something this year but to roll out next year. >> No, I mean the the the policy passed was in a normal year this information should go home twice given that it was starting in the middle of a first year expectation in the first year is that it go home once >> to all schools. >> Um I wanted to ask for misunder you wanted to >> No, I didn't understand. I thought I thought the that the last year was left with to create something for this year and I interpreted that as like a pilot to to figure out for next year. So I apologize if I'm

021using the word pilot cuz I didn't think that something determined. >> Just so you know, our plan based on what I believe we've heard, but we can adjust is that the fourth quarter report card will have the levels indicated. >> Okay. On every school. >> That's that's that's consistent with what the policy is that we assessed in December. >> Okay. November. Sorry. >> Yes. >> Yeah. I have not had a chance to talk to all the schools about this. I have had a chance to talk to some of the teachers in the Monasuri world who do not feel that I Ready is an accurate representation of their curriculum and feel very hesitant about I Ready representing their students performance. Um I'm happy I'm visiting some non-monatory schools today. I'm happy to ask the question there.

022I know a lot of teachers are very hesitant. I think fourth quarter representation might be a lot higher and accurate than you're getting in the first half of the year. Um very few kids are going to be representative grade level in the first quarter um when they come in on an ID test just naturally. Um so that might be alarming to some parents. I just think we should be cautious with how we implement this. I think it's important. I support it. Um I do think we should speak with the classroom teachers about what they think is best representative of their students um and solicit their opinions on this. >> Um thank you. Um, I I'll go real quick and then if we have any people who either in person or online who want to speak

023to this issue would would welcome their their feedback too. Um, Jeremy, what I was remembering from last time and I wanted to make sure I had this right was given where we are, there really isn't a good way to collect enough information about the opt out idea for parents for this spring goround. So to me that creates two choices. There's choice A, which is we delay this whole thing until next school year so that we can have information on the opt-in opt out. That's option A. Option B is we continue and we send the information home in the spring. Uh and then we could determine we have a June policy committee meeting. This information will have gone home. We will have done it once. We could am I right that in the let's let's say

024that in the June policy committee meeting there was energy for creating an opt out for the following school year. We would that give us enough time to get information in the back to school packets to get the information for next school year. >> It would give us time to get the information at a good within a good window. Um the part that we have been looking into and don't have as much confidence in right now is the technical side of >> how to do it. >> Yeah. So if a parent opts out, then we're basically creating a custom report card for those parents that did versus those that didn't. >> So we're still kind of we're still digging into what the development of that looks like. >> So depending on what that h what that

025>> how long that takes, >> that decision could influence whether we could actually put it into practice by which Yeah. >> subsequent report card. >> Yeah. Yeah. Fair. Thank you. And noted. Um I I have a a a perspective on this um which is that we should proceed as planned through the spring. Um uh if following the spring distribution there's the technical ability to do this, the time to do this and the interest in doing this, I have no problem creating an opt out. But what I don't want to do is delay a full school year um because we can't pull off the opt out. And I I want to be clear about my reasons why. Um my I I think we have some real challenges with the status quo. And this is this is

026a descriptive statement. It is not a a statement of judgment or blame for anybody. But we looked at these graphs last time and in several preceding meetings. I talked about my experience with my son. Other parents talked about their experience with their kids. In the current world, it's harder than it should be for parents, I think, to understand where their kids are. Uh, and so I don't want to delay doing something about that. Personally, I'm one board member. I recognize that I'm only one board member, but I also wanted to be clear on where I am on this. I am very open to the idea of creating a parent opt out because I think parents should have choices. Um, but I think we if if we do that, it shouldn't be at the expense of

027getting this information out in a really clear way to parents as soon as we can do that. Well, um, that's just my perspective. Um, yeah, Dr. And I just I just want to add um I I recognize that Monasuri is different. I'm a Monasuri fan, but it is different. So I'm wondering I I'm for what I thought was doing a pilot for different types of systems of schools. So Monasuri should have something different if I Ready is not going to give them an accurate picture than our regular schools that have more traditional um learning. But I'm also really for the administration testing it first and then within the so maybe have one for monasteries, have one for our regular schools or whatever type of um magnets we have that would differentiate that that type of

028readiness and then gathering some staff and some parents together to give feedback on it. I think part of the reason that people want to opt out is because there's been an enormous amount of discussion around one particular measurement and they don't fully understand some do some don't that particular measurement but I would love for the administration to have the ability to diversify that for different types of systems. I know Monastery deals with like four, five, six. So if you have a a fourth grader and doing some sixth grade work, that may not give a true representation. So I would prefer the administration be able to do a smaller version of this with different types of measurements, gather feedback from the staff and parents because I've not only heard from parents here, I've heard from parents

029in the community who wanted this. So there is a a substantial number of parents who want to engage and want to learn but they it is extremely difficult. So I think we have to do some due diligence in not just assigning it to the administration arbitrarily to have one system for everything. Let's allow some space for there to be variety based off of the administration's um guidance on what is needed for what grade. And I would welcome there be a small test so that you all could test this. Give us some pricing on opting out. Give us some feedback from parents on what it looks like, where it's beneficial, where it can be better, so that when we do roll this out for the entire community, we've had with true fidelity feedback from staff within

030those systems and parents within those systems as well. But I'm I'm I definitely think it needs to happen. I just want to give the administration the ability to make it happen with fidelity. >> Yeah. Um, I I just want to say, like I said, I think this is going to be great eventually. It's going to take us some time to get there to get the right thing. I fully understand the simplest way to do it is I ready cuz it is universal. Um, I think our parents and our students deserve us to dig a little deeper on this because I think it is incredibly powerful to be able to provide this information and I think we just we owe it to them to do a little more digging than to just simply default tie ready.

031>> Yeah. I um again I think the uh my perspective is that the folks who are best situated to do that kind of digging digging are the administration. You know that they are the experts on the data. They are the experts on the different assessments. Um, I would I would defer to their recommendation on what the best to do is. Um, and I'm not a monatory parent, but like even if I were, I have to think I'd still be interested in where my student is relative to peers. Um, and I do think the I Ready is a a a particularly good way of seeing that um with a uh just a particular way of seeing that. But let let's let's Rob, do we have people or we'll start in the room. Are there people who

032are here who came so that they could speak on this topic? >> I just wanted to share. Good morning everybody. I'm sorry. My name >> Can you hear it? >> What's that? >> It's got to come like like uh inches. >> Okay, good. Good morning everyone. My name is Terrina and I have a daughter um in CPS school and actually she's a morning story. And so as I'm listening to the conversation as a parent, I feel like parents have choices, right? Either it's the optin and opt out. And I'm also hearing that um you know, you're going to take time about the systems that you're going to use in place. But what I want to say is that I strongly still feel that we should push out for the fourth quarter for parents to know

033I mean as much as as accurately as possible their reading and math levels for their child. I just really want to um hone on the importance of early intervention, right? So, if we know a child is struggling and going into the after the fourth quarter, then when it's time to go back to school, we have um measurements in place that's going to help that child excel for the upcoming school year, whatever that may looks like. I love Dr. Moffets on making sure that teachers and parents and administrators are all included in that conversation so we can build that baseline. So, I really would love to see it for this fourth quarter. And if there's anything that I can do as a parent, you know, I would love to be a part of that. And I'm

034not sure if you guys have anything to say. >> Yeah, I do. >> Tell me your name. >> Hi, I'm Jana. I'm a parent. Um, my children attend Wro University. Um, and I do think it's really important I will be the one that opt in and I opt out um for the next three years of my daughter cuz my son's about to graduate. Um, but I also feel that it'll be what's your name? >> Yeah. Miss Dr. Moffet u what she was saying like what what I call a PDSA which is a plan do serve and act. So plan it out to see how it works and if it works for the parent as well as the teachers cuz it's really important. The teacher plays a big important role as much as the parents do

035too. Um, so yeah, I think a a PDSA would be great for deciding whether that works for everyone in the favor. That's all I had to say. And I agree as well too with the the optin. Um, for me, um, I already I got a lovehate relationship with it. Um, so I have a sixth grader, so her already puts her at eighth grade level for math. and it was to the point to where they had to retest her again just to make sure that she was on that level. Uh, which is fine. But the thing is is even if it's already is showing that she's on a level of eighth grade, I know that there's still room for improvement. So just being a parent, okay, well, we're at sixth grade. They're showing she's at eighth

036grade level. But then I still see, you know, it's still a little struggle here and there in between, you know, with some concepts. So, I would like to know as far as, you know, like what interventions or what can I do to be able to help her um to where she's on a level where she's supposed to be at, but also be able to enhance where she is. So, that way that, you know, she's there's no, you know, as far as like the the struggling. Um that would be as far as reason why I would um want to opt in and then not just so heavily kind of relying just on uh already cuz I mean I already showed she's at a certain level but when I we took the test for Wana heels it

037doesn't show that. >> Thank you. Anybody else in the room who wanted to speak on this topic? Rob, do we have anybody online who wants to speak on this topic? Great. >> Bethany, uh, you can go ahead and comment if you'd like. >> Yes. I would just want to reiterate the fact that the board has received materials from teachers and from administrators that are saying that I Ready is not to be used in this way. It is not something it is a point in time test. It does not demonstrate full competency and to put something on a student's report card which is a um then in record it does a disservice to students and to teachers. I reports are provided to parents in multiple ways and they have access to teachers already. This was also

038a cost to change the reporting system. So, I want to understand if the board has an has a report of how much this is going to cost the district to change and um how we are going to be responding or recording or tracking the outcomes if this is happening. As a parent, I would like an opt out immediately. I don't want my son to have to read a deficiency that we already have record of and that we are already working on. this highlights and um also you know calls out or what it's outing students that have a disability and may never see a change to that I Ready report. Thank you. >> Thanks. Um is there anybody else online Rob who wanted to speak to this one? >> Great. Uh Michelle, welcome. We're on grading

039and we just asked if anybody in the room wanted to speak on this topic and if you do wanted to make sure you can do that. >> You're good. No, it's no problem. I think the three of us should talk for a minute about next steps because there are different ideas that are on the table and I I don't want to leave uh the administration with confusion. um we can't direct the administration but we could make a recommendation to the board. So the the um way the policy is currently written is not as a pilot. The way the policy is written is that uh it would go into full effect next year and this year it would get sent home once rather than twice. Um and when we passed it in November um the feeling

040was oh that will give them December and all of the spring semester to figure out how to get this in place. Um if um instead the idea is to pilot it, um this committee would need to recommend a change in the policy and the board would need to approve that policy. Um I I have to say that just as one board member, I I would need to think a little bit more. My my my request would be to be able to think a little bit more about changing this to a pilot. Um I think it's I think this information is is one of the most helpful and important things we can do for families. Um and I would like to share it with all of them currently. Um I also don't think that it is

041um like there are reasons why one might want to start with a pilot, learn some things and scale it up. Like I don't think that idea is unreasonable. I think it's actually I just need to think about it a little bit because I haven't thought about it before today. Um, I don't really know where we should go or what we should do. Um, but it's got to be what the three of us agree to. And also I whatever it is, the most important thing I I think from a leadership perspective is I want it to be clear. Um, so that there isn't confusion or someone feels like they're being held to two different standards, but it's just it's clear what whatever the expectation is. >> Yeah. >> Um, so how how do people want to

042proceed? >> Yeah. I I don't know what Dr. Moffett feels. I don't feel like by pilot I mean to change the policy and make it so only a handful of students get it. I'm fine going forward in fourth quarter with providing all the information to all students. I think my request is that we look I don't I don't think I see everything sorry I don't think I see anything in the policy that says every student the formula for that is exactly the same for every student. And I think >> that's correct. >> Yeah. So I think when >> that's correct. There's nothing in the policy that >> I'm thinking term a pilot. It's not even a pilot. It's a like we're going to send it in the fourth quarter and it's going to look potentially

043based on feedback as the administration is looking at this like it might look different for different students so that they can see which method looks best going into next year. I don't think that that's without with not within the scope of the policy. Does that make sense in my mind? >> I hear you saying I should make sure I hear this right. Um pilot doesn't mean in this context we're only going to do it in small set of places. >> Yes. >> What it means is we're going to try it. >> Yes. >> It might not have the same math or the same underlying assessment in every context. It's going to be whatever the administration recommends. >> Correct. And whatever they recommend and whatever we send out, we'll learn from it. Yeah. >> Which could

044then inform what happens. Correct. But it's not shrinking the number of families that get the information. >> No. And to your point, the administration's going to make the call and it might be universal and that that's going to be the call that they make. >> I'm asking the administration to think more broadly and say maybe different learning systems look at things differently. Yeah. That's all I have. >> Helpful, clear. Thank you. Uh Dr. Moffett, what do you think? >> So, I um I'm kind of in a conundrum in that I've been a parent who wanted to engage, so I fully support parent engagement. To me, this policy speaks about giving parents an opportunity to engage. I think and I'm gonna just in talking to the previous committee members who aren't here now. I think that

045was the spirit of which it was passed. That was the intention and I'm all for it. However, I and as a parent, I'm all for it and I'm still for it. However, having been a teacher, having things pushed down on you that maybe you don't necessarily you have you may have an idea of a different way to do it, not necessarily better, but just different. You need that engagement as well. and the administration feeling like, you know what, dang, we got to this is another thing to do. I want this done with fidelity. >> And more important than anything else than than the timing of it, I really think that there are things coming down from the state level that are impacting our children. Any tool we can use to engage parents and help us

046fight for the education and the learning of our students, I think we should do. I also hear the administration saying, you know what, we're we we don't have all the pieces yet. And I want to give them time to do that because I want it this to be done with fidelity. And I believe that the trilogy is a partnership between parents, teachers, and um in the school. So I don't know what a pilot looks like. I can give suggestions, but I would love for the administration to tell me how with my expectation of parents being at the table, and I don't mean just one or two. I mean parents being at the table, staff being at the table, with the expectation that we have a diverse system of learning, not just one sizefits-all across our

047district, and with the expectation that that this is this be something that we want the majority of parents to participate in. But I do understand that students with disabilities may have a different need for representation of their information than um other students. So I would would vote to give the administration time to come back and tell us what it is that they can feasibly do being fiscally responsible this year with all those things as an expectation. I want parents to be involved. I want teachers to be involved. I think and I've said this to President Sers, there's space for a win for everybody here. This is not one versus the other. If there is extensive research that I Ready is not the best tool, then work with parents who don't necessarily disagree about I Ready,

048but they want something. So if we create the space for there to be true partnership and true engagement with administration leading that I think that's our best bet for everybody to be happy and to at least make this something that works. So I don't want to say what I what I think the pilot should be. I think the administration can do that. I do believe that they should have time to do something right now or fourth quarter with with Fidelity and engage all of those parties, then come back to us with what they're going to do for the the year. Um and and again, um with fidelity is is my biggest is my biggest issue. So, I don't want us to create an environment where this isn't us versus them. And that's exactly what this

049is. no matter who created it, it's becoming um something that is not beneficial for students and it's not going to be beneficial for parent engagement. So um I'd rather hear from the administration on what is what do you recommend with those types of things um in place from me as a as far as a timeline like do you recommend a pilot? Do you like maybe you put a monastery and regular one together, elementary, high school together? I don't know. >> Yes, ma'am. So after the last policy committee meeting, I thought I was headed in a particular direction. I thought at that time the direction was for fourth quarter we would like this data on the report card. That's where we were headed. >> That was it. >> So um and then listening to the conversation

050today knowing that Dr. Smith is going to have a group come together to discuss how we will actually implement this with Fidelity. I'll take the comments shared um share them with her. make sure we consider every element that everyone has shared and come back to you with this is what we think will work the best also in um coordination with Jeremy's team quite frankly. >> I mean do you think a pilot we're talking about a pilot that was never talked about before. Does that sound like something >> and can I clarify just because people have used the word pilot in different ways in the last 15 minutes. When you say pilot do you mean instead of sending it to all parents only sending it to some parents? >> Yes. But I'm talking about varying what

051the varying the um so I'm talking about you have a monastery cohort of schools and those parents get that you have a regular cohort of schools you have high school every parent would get something but what we're piloting is that some parents may get something that's different from something else. >> Correct. >> This is really helpful because what that's excluding is instead of 100% of parents getting it, we're going to send it to 50% of parents. Well, that's not that >> of the total 50% let me say this 100% of the sample population of the schools are going to get it. So what for instance I'm talking about picking two high schools picking two elementary schools traditional or I'm not saying the number don't don't get on the number but just picking a certain number

052of high schools a certain number of elementary schools a certain number of monastery schools a certain number of literary me schools picking just a few of those types of systems and then 100% of them get whatever it is that if it's I ready Monatory said that they didn't want I ready so they're getting a different system >> there would be some schools that get nothing >> for the fourth quarter just for this this quarter. >> Yeah. I think the reason that's important is just there's dissensus across the three of us at least between you and me on on that point. So I I just and this is what the three of us need to settle because we should off. >> Um and so and look like it may be that like that I'm wrong or

053that you two disagree with me. I at a minimum I need a little bit of time to think about this. Um uh what what I would fully support is what I heard uh Carrie saying and don't let me mischaracterize this but everybody this year would get something but that the administration like and I really like the ad of this working group should involve a lot of parents and a lot of teachers. So from different types of schools, what it is that people get this spring may look different school to school and there could be some learning from that, but that everybody would get something. If if we do something other than everybody gets something, we have to rewrite the policy. >> Well, could we The reason why I'm saying why I'm cautious about everybody getting

054something is because if they get something now and then they opt out and then it changes, where's the opt back in? That to me sounds like a lot more work for the staff. Let's say for instance the staff says, you know, they send out I Ready. People don't want I Ready. They opt out. But then it changes to something something different where now we have to have those parents recognize that it's something different and then opt back in. And to me that feels like a lot of work versus having the administration collect data from those specific groups and then you can have the you can have the monastery parents input that we don't want for all of our monatory schools. we don't want I ready data, we want this and then the administration designs it

055from the onset of what those particular systems of schools want. But I don't know, I'm just I'm just giving that as an example. If it doesn't work, it doesn't work. I just would hate for parents to opt out of something that could very well change. Well, and I think part of that is going to be based on what the superintendent comes back with the recommendation because their recommendation might be that it's standard across or their their recommendation might be that it's just two different things. So, I think maybe we wait and see what they come back with cuz that will change the the change to your comment, right? Because like if their recommendation is that it's universal, then that your concern won't matter because then what's coming next year will be the same. But parents

056will have already opted out of something that could change and >> but it's not changing is what I'm saying cuz if they recommend the one thing then there's not an option to change it. >> Don't know. >> Superintendent, you were going to say something brilliant I think right that was going to create a way forward. >> We'll try brilliant. Uh, I was just going to say exactly what you're wrapping up saying that give us a moment to have our work group work with Jeremy and the IT department bring you something back to chew on. Yeah. >> That we think we can do and that we believe is the best thing to do. >> That that that's that sounds eminently reasonable. I I want to before everyone's welcome to close with any other comments too, but

057I want to say two things before we close out this topic. Um, one is I just want to state really clear there's at least one board member here um who does not want to change the policy and shrink the number of parents that get the information. Um, uh, that doesn't mean you need to agree with me, but I just wanted to be clear on where where where I am. The second thing is I think that um that um, in some of the meetings uh, there have been a lot of negative comments about I Ready and a lot of allegations that were misusing I Ready. I wanted to state for the record that I completely disagree with the characterization of the assessment and with the characterization of misuse. You can literally read this information on the

058report that some schools already send home to parents. What we are suggesting is taking that information and writing it on the report cards that go home to every parent. So it it is not misusing the information. It is the very same information that some schools are already sending home. We're making it easier to find and easier to interpret. We included language. I mean, with any test, there's risk that like it's not right because it's just one test. We included language in this policy when we passed it in the fall that requires that kind of disclaimer to be put on the report card alongside the information. My theory is that this is not about I Ready. I Ready is just a convenient boogeyman. And if the administration comes back with another form of assessment, the criticism

059will shift to that form of assessment. Um, and I think that I Ready is best in class. I'm glad we have it. Um, and I think that it can be good, helpful information that gets sent home. Um, I wanted to I wanted to share that publicly specifically to the administration so that um, the message you take away is not, oh, the committee doesn't like I Ready. Not true. Um there there may be dissensus but at least one committee thinks already it's great or one member um and uh also um not interested in shrinking the scope. Um but that's just me. Um Carrie Kareem, do you have anything you want to add? >> Well, I just want to clarify because I'm not interested in shrinking the scope for the for the for the full in um

060for the full policy. I'm saying to gather enough information with fidelity, start with those groups, those smaller groups so that you can truly engage the staff and parents. And I'm and maybe I'm not I mean I'm not saying 66 schools. I'm saying if you get you're going to get parents and staff from a small number of schools and I think it's going to be a significant number. So, I was just saying for the fir for the fourth quarter piece, get feedback from the staff and the parents because they're coming out and they have an opinion and that can inform the broader the broader group. So, I'm not interested in shrinking it, but I am interested in um representation that's effective and that's useful. So, I just wanted to clarify not interested in shrinking it either.

061>> Thank you. >> Carrie, anything else? >> I'm going to wait until they come out. >> Okay. Um, does that get you what you need? I think so. >> Yes. >> Okay. Um I was just reading this article for my work life about how important conflict is for strategy. >> Um and that often times people avoid conflict to be nice to each other, but it leads to confusion. Um and so I wanted to express some gratitude for the ability of people in the room to disagree about things because I think it forces a conversation about what the actual issues are which will get us to actual clarity on what needs to happen next. And so I think that is a sign of health um not of dysfunction. And so I really appreciate everybody here who's

062willing to disagree. Um yeah. Um, so I know with I guess the way I see it, uh, instead of just like relying just heavily on I already um just my perception of what I'm thinking as far as when they're in the classroom based on homework assignments, classroom participation, um, and a test that has to be administered for when actually on paper. So all that data together, you know, okay, this is what they're doing here on paper and then this is where they're at on already. So this is where I can see as far as like, you know, kind the area of improvement. Um, and I think that's probably kind of like the concept of where because I see as far as being based on one percent of data instead of just doing like a whole

063collective. Um, and I think that would really give a general idea of actually where the student is actually standing at this particular moment. >> Thank you. Um, thank you everybody. We're going to keep keep us moving here. I want to set a goal if we can. Uh, so it's 10:21. Um, we have two guests who are going to join us to talk about the draft general counsel policy at 11. Um, they are on Pacific time, so that's 8:00 there. was the earliest I thought we could ask for and be reasonable human beings. Um so we have about uh 39 minutes then to march through the rest which I think we could do. Um and we'll move then to non-school organizations. >> Sure. So an update on this policy an update on this policy. Uh the

064treasur and I continue to work on um improvements to the non-school organization policy. I just I I want to remind everyone what this policy is. This is this is a policy that sort of defines the relationship between CPS and its um partner organizations like PTOs, friends of organizations, alumni associations, booster clubs, etc. It's a policy that basically went untouched for a long long time. In 2018, the internal auditor uh actually the state auditor uh put out new guidelines for that relationship between schools and non-school organizations and the policy was updated to reflect those changes. Um but but otherwise has gone untouched. The reason it came to everyone's attention I think earlier this year was it it was not being followed. I mean, the the the former policy had said that um non-school organizations may not

065ever use students in any kind of fundraising activity. That was not only not the law. It it it just isn't realistic and we were hamstringing ourselves. And so the the policy committee and the board corrected that. That's no longer included as a part of the policy. the art of trying to improve it, I think, relates to where we're going to go from here. Um, and and this is a really big deal because, um, we have non-school organizations in basically every school in the districts in some form or another. Um, they um have existing and longstanding fundraising practices, many of which have been very successful. Um the suggestion we had started with was well what if we limited non-school organizations to allow use students in fundraisers as long as it wasn't during the school day. But

066what we've learned is there are schools that do walkathons during the school day >> readathons bake sales readathons that are sort of inside and outside of the school day. So we're having a lot of discussions. I had discussions with multiple principles about this. Uh Mike and I met with a representative from Kid Future last week to share have their thoughts on it. Uh the internal auditor continues to be involved. Um so it's a complicated the the policy is itself compliant. It's barely legible or readable. Um it's it's really difficult to understand. And so certainly feedback we've gotten is we need to sort of take it back to something that's understandable, sensible. Um I welcome the board's the policy committee's feedback as well as we continue to try to draft, but it's it's not not easy

067to try to put a policy in place when there are practices already going on throughout the district uh that'll have have an impact. So, welcome some additional feedback, but know that we are continuing to work on this policy. >> And Dan, for the purposes of today, if people have some clear feedback, they should share it. >> If they don't, then we should just be ready to get >> We're continuing to work on it. I don't know if the treasure has anything to add also. >> Yeah. >> No, that was a good summary, Dan. I think >> I think it's really just in in my mind is just having something that is crystal clear for the people involved. I think that's that's one of the struggles especially the current one is >> you know a how

068how are we legally compliant with the law but then how is it crystal clear for the principal for for the PTO chair so so that it's just very easy to follow and stay and stay in compliance with >> yeah I mean Mr. Gustin knows that I have been on this issue for uh a long uh a while now. Um it is incredibly like this policy is so off base um and incredibly limiting. I mean we were talking earlier about the alcohol policy that doesn't even touch what this is this could potentially do to the fundraising abilities of a non-parent or a non whatever it's called non-school organization. I mean, it happened to my school last year where we were it it's it's devastating is what it is when the rules are enforced and money is

069taken away from a non-school or organization. Um, and so I think I have a lot of feedback on on what can be done. I think what's really important is understanding that taking away from instructional time I think is the most important boundary that we should put in place. Like we should not allow fundraising by a non-school organization to take away from instructional time. That's a boundary I think is really important. But I do think that there are other ways that non-school organizations are utilizing their students and the school day that doesn't disrupt instructional time that should be a part of their fundraising strategy. I think it's absolutely insane to say not to use your children to fundra for your school. Um, so yeah, I have so many thoughts, but I just want to thank you

070for taking this on because when it was enforced last year out of nowhere, it was devastating. >> Yeah, I please. So, I um I'm glad we're we're bringing this up because I would as you go back and get some research, I'd love for you to come back to us with what's being done across the district at ver at a variety of schools because I happen to know that there's three different things being done at three different schools. And that is that lack of consistency um can be taken advantage of in some areas because some schools do things one particular way and another school doesn't things another way. um which is which is definitely not not fair or equitable. I would like to see this align and also include um school foundations because I know that

071certain schools form foundations in order to kind of usurp some of this as well. Um not I'm not going to tell on any particular school because they're doing great work for their students. But when their foundation um does an event in conjunction with their PTO, then they feel that there's a way that they can control the money of the school. So, I also wanted to kind of align with um our donations policy and our reporting policy for uh the treasurer um because we have the policy around um like donations and in kind donations and things like that. And I'm not saying to make it more strict. I'm just saying it all needs to align. >> Um we've got like a policy on um the GoFundMe and all that with the educational ones. But that speaks

072to it a little bit here. But what's happening is because this is so ambiguous, people schools have formed foundations to kind of get through that. And I'm not blaming them because we're not being very clear. So I would like to see for you to just gather a list. no judgment, no condemnation around what is being done at other schools and um so that we get a list of what they're doing and we can write the policy around what they're doing rather than to eliminate what they're doing. I don't want the good work to go away. I just need it to align with what the board expects from a policy standpoint. I also want to see it tie into and be cohesive with fun fundraising policies, donations policies, um, and how they report what they're earning

073or making to the district. Um, because one particular school asked, this was during CO, asked to get lanyards for masks and they had raised thousands of dollars during a walk-athon and they said no. So the there was that was where the the the rub was is because they had raised all this money, used the students to raise this money, used the parents to raise this money, and weren't able to spend the money that they raised on the students. So we need to have some sort of alignment to protect our schools so that our schools can say, well, it's in the policy that if the administrator asks for XYZ, I don't know how we do that. Again, that's for you all to kind of gather that information. no judgment, no condemnation, but what what is going

074on in the buildings and then how can we protect ultimately the decisions to for our students? Um some staff have if you participate in a fundraiser and it's a 100% staff participation and then the staff ask for something, I don't think we should tell them no. And so the policy also needs to state that as well. And so th those are just some some cursory things that I looked at. I will to be honest with you I I haven't really looked at it in depthly but um I'm happy >> no one has that's why >> I haven't yeah we have one board member here who who would like to say some >> I have read this very thoroughly um and also uh I forgot to add in and piggybacking on her comment about if you're

075participating the access to the funds should not be limited um in conjunction with this I think we should also look at how the fund process is it utilized because the funds this right if they're not going to the non-school organization the fundraising money is going into fund 19 and then who what happens to it um and how is it utilized and um where is it going and who controls it and how is it accessed and all these other questions that can be asked um and not have a lot of answers. So I think as we're looking at this, so if the fundraising rules are set in place and it's clearly they're going to either the non-school organization or fund 19, I think we need to have clear guidelines on what happens to those funds after

076they've been in in those places. >> Yes, >> please. Just one other thing that's for funds that are go the money that's going to fund 19 which is you're on point but there's also money that's not going to fund 19 and um again the foundations are keeping separate accounts and I don't want us to posit it where they're thinking we're trying to keep tabs on them to take it but we don't know what's going on with some of this PTO money and I thought that that's how Sally and I got to be friends because that's how ABC formed that they could hold the funds for PTO's and allow them to use at the very minimum their 501c3. That's not widely known. And so separate school organizations, separate PTO's are getting accounts and then having to

077either close them at the end of the year when those parents leave or keep these accounts open separately from the school. We need to have more tangible hands-on around that. And I think it should be in the policy. So that's what I mean when I say donations, fundraising policies, all that needs to align with our current policies around this. Um, anyway, because we don't know. So that's kind of the fact finding that I'm asking for is what's going on. Do does your school have a foundation? I know several monastery schools have foundations. I know other schools have foundations. We have no idea. And I'm not trying to police it, but I am trying to be aware of it. >> Um, so plenty good feedback. No, I mean that the I I I I'd say one

078of the the big principles that we've been trying to work on is is making sure especially right now that we are not disrupting successful fundraising that's going on. Uh but at the same time taking all these considerations uh in into um into consideration there there is a lot of strong feeling about this around the district. So uh it's a good process, something we need to continue to work on. >> Great. And we can make some time for this in future meetings. Um we've got about um uh what do we say 11 o'clock. So we've got 27 minutes or so. We know we um and I'll just maybe Dan I'll defer to you to lead us through what's left um in whatever order gets you the information you all need most quickly. Um >> yeah, that's

079fine. These are Yeah, these are review uh policies. Um and and my partner Stephanie and I worked on this uh worked on these uh the reason we brought these forward. Um so particularly uh with respect to the discussions that the board has had related to ICE and the protection of school records um how school records could be disclosed or not disclosed. Um these policies hadn't been looked at uh reviewed in a while and we wanted to make sure uh they were up to date. So that that's really why we chose these four policies to take a look at today. Um starting with our public records policy, of course, uh and and you can jump in. Stephanie made most of these uh revisions as well. Um uh the district is subject to as a as a

080public office in Ohio subject to the Ohio Public Records Act, which is 149.43. Um the information was uh correct in the policy. We tried to clean up a few things. For example, uh attorney client privilege records are considered confidential records. Wanted to make sure that was pointed out as something that that is not turned over. Um again, most of this is is uh cleanup in terms of trying to make the policy more legible um >> and reflective of what we're doing. >> And that's right. Um uh wanted to update on the second page. wanted an update uh just to make sure people knew that this applied to electronic mail, text messages. The public records act doesn't get to employees personal email or text messages except when you're using, you know, employees or board members are

081using their personal email or text messages to conduct p public business. In that case, those messages also become public records that can be requested. Wanted to clarify that. And then just a reminder to employees, I I think people don't always realize employee personnel records are almost entirely public records. Anything you know your from your application to your um evaluations, uh any kind of discipline records, all all public records. So a reminder to employees. And there's actually a separate policy um that that uh we'll talk about in a minute that specifically relates to employee personnel records. But really the when when we get a request for an employees personnel file, the only things we're allowed by law to redact from that file are what's listed here. Home home address and phone numbers, medical records, social security

082numbers, financial account numbers, uh bank bank account numbers basically, and children's minor names. So that that's about it. Other than that, an employes personnel records would be would be a public record. Welcome your questions on policy 8310. We can add >> maybe we could take questions on 8310 and 8320 together for the >> Yeah, we can go on 8320. >> Well, you you were just referencing personnel files. >> This relates to personnel files. If you look at most businesses personnel file policy, it talks about how confidential they will keep them. I I mean it talks about yes of course we're going to ask you for some personal information as a part of your job. We're going to keep a personnel file. We will keep that confidential. >> Not not so in the public sector. So

083again uh a reminder to folks that some of this is just to make it a little more accessible. I think I think the language was a little dense. Um but but really there's a difference in Ohio and and for public offices that personnel files if you look at the bottom paragraph on the first page personnel files of public schools employees are public records subject to disclosure. What we do when we get a request is uh we we try to make the employee aware that their file has been requested. Uh that's actually in the collective bargaining agreement for CFT, but we we make that a practice for all employees. Um, in rare instances, we get an employee who responds to say, "It is dangerous for you to turn these records over. I've got uh somebody who's

084out to, you know, get me." And and we will refuse to turn the records over in those rare circumstances where we feel like there's a wellfounded and and my feeling is if we were ever brought to court, we would say this is why we didn't turn it over. Uh, and and would feel good about trying to withhold that. Otherwise, public records are or personnel files are subject to disclosure. Um, so that that again just a reminder of the specific categories of information we're allowed to redact. Otherwise, personnel files are generally subject to the public records act. Welcome your questions or feedback on these two policies. >> Great board members. Yeah, >> I just have um two questions when I perused it on the public records one third paragraph down. >> Yes. Um, when it's about

085uh requests for public records, it doesn't say anything in there about timing, how long we have to give them. I thought it was 30 days. >> It's always reasonable. And so that that can mean if someone walked out uh there was a reporter waiting outside and said, "Hey, could I have a copy of the agenda that you just used for the uh policy committee?" It would reasonable would be, "Sure, here it is." It wouldn't be we'll we'll get that to you in 30 days. On the other hand, when we get requests and we have for all emails that have been written, you know, by the by the board about this topic over the last 2 years, I mean, that could take us 30 days or more to do all the redactions that are necessary, kids

086names, uh, attorney client privilege, etc. So, it it it is always reasonable under the circumstances. >> Okay. And that's like by the law. >> That's the law. That's right. wanted to make sure because people have sent us things back and saying, "Hey, it's been 20 days." And I thought 30, but I'm glad to know that it's reasonable. >> And then the other I saw and the other um question that I have around personnel files is >> is it clearly stated that upon termination your emails are cut off? Your like your access is cut like is it stated here? Because there have been more than a few times where employees have been terminated. they wanted to get access to emails for whatever a case or for just their own benefit and we've shut them off. So,

087do we outline anywhere that within 24 hours of termination cuz they some of them have said, "Hey, I was able to access it last week. I got terminated a month ago. I was able like is there any expectation that they should know you're hired now, but when you terminate this happens?" >> I I'm not I don't believe that's in policy. It It might make sense here. I'm trying to think through our other policies whether that's whether there's a appropriate place to to include that. It is a part of the standard operating procedure for human resources. >> Sure. But I'm just wondering since we're talking about personnel files, can we put it in here like within 30 days, which I'm sure it's never that long, but they know that the it's stated in the policy that

088your your access all access is going to be terminated. >> Yeah. And it's generally I I mean depending on the circumstances it can be immediate, right? If if the district has a wellfounded concern that somebody could misuse their access. Um even in those circumstances, we try to make sure that employees have access to personal just like they would have access to clean out their desk. >> Sure. I'm thinking specifically like retirees like you know like UC gives you so long and then that you get a different type of email but you still maintain an email. I think some of that expectation is there. So I'm wondering just wondering is it possible to put this somewhere that they will if they retire they're going to have a different type of access. >> Let me review the

089HR SOP and then we can include a sentence here as well if that's the will of the committee. >> Is there anything you'd like us to pass on? I know that one will take another meeting to get >> I can bring that back if you want. >> Is there anything that you'd like to pass forward to the full board today? Whatever the the committee's in desire is, these are not urgent, but uh >> Kareem, the one you wanted to add was on 8310 or 8320. >> 8320. Yeah, >> 8320. Great. So, so we'll pass along at the next board meeting. >> Great. Consent or >> you said that this was mostly cleanup and adding things like text messages because they're more common in requests now than they used to be. I think that's fine for

090consent agenda unless anybody feels differently. Great. Um, we'll bring 8320 back at the next meeting. Um, got time for a couple others. Want to do uh 8330? >> Yes. >> Take your time. Sorry, I didn't mean to rush anybody. >> Okay. 8330 now uh relates uh more specifically to student records. Um again I felt the intro here was pretty dense. So uh wanted to state more clearly uh what I believe to be the board's um principle around uh student records which is that the board is committed to safeguarding the privacy and confidentiality of student education records in accordance with all federal and state laws. So, while personnel files always subject to the Public Records Act, student records are uh well protected both by the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act, that's federal law, FURPA, uh

091but also Ohio has its own version of FURPA that in some ways is even uh more um protective of student records even than the federal statute. um essential to maintaining the trust of students, parents, the community, and to ensuring compliance with legal requirements. Um the the next paragraph I highlighted a sentence uh which was already in policy. It's it's it's certainly already a part of our policy, but an important point to uh make and or to emphasize, especially now uh with with concerns about our immigrant and refugee families. Only records mandated by the state and federal government and/or necessary and relevant to the function of the district or specifically permitted by the board will be compiled by district employees. And and the importance of that is we should not be taking in records even though

092they're protected and confidential. We should not be taking in records that are not relevant to our our specific mandate and responsibilities. And and this this is where we talk about we have no need or or interest in in immigration records. Yeah, >> true. >> I do, but keep going. You want to talk about policy? I'll remember. >> Um I think that's uh uh the key the the other point uh I wanted to make is the board did make a change probably 10 years ago to its directory information policy. So a part of furpa and and also the Ohio law is while the student record as a whole, attendance discipline, grades, IEPs, all very protected, the board has the choice of identifying specific categories of information that rather than a parent affirmatively opting in or saying,

093"Yes, it's okay to release my record to these colleges my student is applying for or his therapist that wants to see and review his records. Directory information is the reverse. Directory information are categories that the board identifies and um and I'll go through what the board currently has identified that in order for a parent to say I don't want that released, the parent would have to opt out of the district's directory information policy. Uh our current policy for direct and this this is the board has some discretion here in determining what categories it identifies. We h we have identified a student's name. It's at the top of the uh first paragraph of the third page. A student's name, school, grade level, parent, guardians name, address, telephone listing, email address, participation in officially recognized uh activities

094in sports and awards received. Uh so those are the categories that the the board has designated as if someone says I want a list of all CPS students that these are the only categories uh that we would disclose and that's only after parents have had they they get in the back to school packet a form that says do you want to opt out and and so unless a parent has opted out that's the information that we would disclose. >> That's great that I think this is timely great selection. Uh I I like all of the edits. Um, I had one question. Um, the the sentence you highlight, uh, records mandated by the state or federal government. Is it possible that the state could require us to collect something >> that we think is unconstitutional to

095collect? >> And and do we create some room for us by kind of, I don't know, amending that sentence a little bit or or is this not something that's worth? Well, so a good question. Uh because I think there's some current legislation that uh would >> would put the district in the position of Yeah. >> Um I think the way I've thought about that bill kind of aside from this policy for a minute is that in general, federal law still requires school districts to enroll students regardless of immigration status. I I would the state if the state were to take the position that the school district is required to collect that information. I I I think there's there's an argument that um you know that could discourage or or prevent families from enrolling in school.

096And I think there's a legal argument to say that that would not be consistent with federal law on this. >> Yeah. Yeah, I I I was just trying to make sure that we could we could fight that fight if we if we need to. Um, and this we this sentence whether it reads this way or a different way has no bearing on like we we can I don't want to create work if we don't need to. >> But I was reading like a state >> like um only records mandated by the state >> um >> right >> uh will be will be compiled by district employees. Like >> I wonder if we uh change that to say only records mandated by law. >> Broadening that to say >> right like it just leaves us room

097to to say that we're consistent with our own pol you know that's all >> I like that I >> I think like there have been a handful of times doesn't always happen but there are a handful of times new board member when um that we are able to fight back in court against something that is unconstitutional. Right. >> I think we should fight those fights boldly and often. Um and uh I really appreciate the council's administration's collaboration on that. >> Other other comments on this one? >> Yeah, I just I just was wondering about um protection of our our immigrant students with regard to and our immigrant and our employees. So I I had a similar question around that state um and federal, but I'll I'll ask my question later. Yeah, I I like that.

098>> I still do have some questions particularly around our trans students, just just our students. How do we protect them um with what we have to provide to parents? And see, to me, this is a super important issue when you talk about directory information. Parents should automatically be opted out and till they opt themselves in. But we're saying that we opt them in unless they opt out to provide this directory information. So directory information the sort of default is reversed. So the the >> So they're automatically in. >> You're in unless you send us something back that says I don't want my students um uh any of this information. Yeah. And some parents do. We keep a list of them. It's updated every year when we get then get requests. Um >> uh you know

099those parents are those families those students informations are not included. >> And so what would the directory information be used for? Is that an internal thing? I just I what? >> Yeah, I I got that part because I've had I have sons, but I can easily see directory information being used differently even though that's what we're intending it. So, I'm wondering if that's safer to opt parents out of rather than um as a default than to have them not know. I don't know if parents necessarily knew that all of that information was being corrected and collected and publicly displayed. So they get in the back to school back packet every year a notice of what the uh board's directory information policy is. I've got I've gotten it before. >> So that that's the purpose of

100that. >> You know that there's there's different views on this. There was when we updated the policy 10 years ago as well. Um the there are you know the proponents of having a directory information policy w had said at the time you're hamstringing us and being able to get to your families talk to them it's a partner organizations etc when yeah and that that was one of the big thrusts of opening up the directory information. So, I'm wondering I I just feel like this particular one may need a more general conversation because I feel like this makes parents super vulnerable and um I just don't know. 10 years ago, we didn't have the threats on our students that we currently have now. And so, I'm just wondering if we need to have a more broader

101conversation about the optin versus the opt out. 10 years ago, it was military recruitment. I have three sons, so I understood that and I got that and I saw this, but now I would make a different decision. And so um I I don't know if I think that should be just cursory um information. I think parents should opt out of that one, but that's just me. Or we should switch it. >> I I don't think it deserves a cursory review either. I think it's an important issue. Um, but wanted to make sure like schools that do directories for example, family directories that say like they would not be able to do that without a policy like this, yearbooks, um, >> you know, celebrating our students for their awards and things like that. So, so but

102it's not a cursory thing. It is something we should think about and and take it seriously. >> I gota Okay. Thank you. >> So, so, so for the further discussion there, um, Dr. Muppet is the request in either of these is fine. Keep this on a policy committee for future months. A b get it before the whole board. >> Talk about it there. >> I think I'd feel more comfortable if if it were if it were broader than just the three of us. >> You know, just and and if if they still decide if we all decide together hearing more conversation that we keep it on, that's fine. But I just feel in our current climate we might need to have a broader conversation. Was there another thought or should So then could I um

103um uh Phyllis I know is is um unfortunately a funeral today uh but she's going to be watching the recording and making the next steps in the committee report. And so for Phyllis when you're back um if you could put a request with Mr. Craig that this go on a board meeting agenda for discussion uh at the next available board meeting slot and we'll talk about it there. Oh, Pat's watch. Thanks, Pat. Great. Um, so just uh some clock management for a second. Um, we have not talked about um the confidentiality piece. My proposal would be um let me just check with my colleagues. We have these two new business items. The uh Senate Bill 311 on the operation of public and chartered non-public schools and then also LSDMC. that can totally be held. >>

104So, so if we put 9142 LSDMC's into the March meeting agenda, um I'm on the Senate Bill 311 operation of public and chartered non-public schools. Is there would people rather talk about that for these five minutes or continue on to confidentiality? I have no preference. I just want to use the time in the way that the uh board members would find most helpful. >> I'm good with the Senate bill as long as they're fine with voting on the confidentiality. Yep. >> So, we'll we'll keep confidentiality in the queue for March. Um, and we'll talk for just a second about uh SP311. Go ahead. Yeah. Is that was that was that yours? >> Who put that on the >> No, I think that's fine. >> Dan. >> Oh, Dan. >> I think I I requested an

105update of the Senate bills. For sure. >> I'll do it quickly. Um, so Senate Bill 311 uh was proposed by Senator Brener. Uh it's in committee in the Senate uh education commission or education committee. Um there are there are a lot of parts of the bill. The ones most relevant to CPS uh relate to provisions related to educational educational lensure um the school district's immunity and the involuntary disposal of uh school district property. And I'll I'll start there very quickly. Um, so the law has required for many years that uh public school districts with quoteun unused school facilities uh make those unused school facilities uh available to charter schools that operate within Cincinnati public schools for sale at an appraised value. That's that's the general rule. We talked about this a little bit or or

106even a lot uh last year during the discussions about phase two of the growth plan as we started to look at what buildings were sort of under uh utilized and and certainly our high schools that were uh in many cases over capacity. And that was uh uh one at least one of the considerations that we had as we went through phase two of trying to spread out our district into our our our schools. um you know and and try to have more uniform usage of our school facilities. One of the defenses that we've had to this this sort of involuntary disposition of school property is that uh uh this was a vague term and one that I felt could be defined in many ways such as for example saying well the square footage of the

107building is is 100,000 square ft and we're using every single inch of it for classroom space, an art room, a computer room, whatever. Uh the state has now redefined unused school facilities and it's defined specifically as uh what what either 60% of the maximum enrollment of that school under the architectural essential design of the school. Um and that that's probably the primary one that's that's of concern to us. Um, so that's a really problematic definition. Um, we have schools that are uh that have many classrooms that are serving, for example, our specialized uh special ed population, resource rooms, MD rooms, uh, autism rooms that also by law are limited to a very small group of students who need to be served in a kind of very specialized setting. And so this statute takes no account

108for that. So if if we had a building that was again um you know had a architectural capacity of 500 students but we had five or six or seven of those classrooms being used for a specialized unit. Um we could very easily fall back into the below 60% enrolled. Um the the other thing is so if it's defined as an unused school facility uh that's that's that would now under this bill be required to be reported to the state every year. Um it also changes who we would have to offer those those unused school facilities to. It expands the definition of who we would offer it to from just charter schools operating in our district to potentially charter schools operating outside of our district and as well nonpublic schools like the St. X St. Ursula

109the the Catholic parochial private schools that are operating in our district. We'd have to offer it to them as well. Um it's just it's it's a it it further changes the definition of what an appraised value is. And I'll use the example of our our um Digby property which is very small lot couple of tennis courts that are abandoned pro. So we had it appraised at an appraised value. Uh and that would include any use such as de a developer using it to build an apartment complex or a a condos. it it changes the definition of appraised value to what its appraised value is as a school facility. Well, it that that parcel of property probably has no value as uh so >> we may need to pick there's there's a lot to talk about

110here and it's also this is the state legislature, you know, they're going to do it well. Um >> we should we this warrants a further discussion. >> It's it's problematic and and definitely um favoring the non-public and charter schools in the district. Um uh we have some guests who are with us online to talk about the model council policy. Um I with the uh with the support of the committee I'd like to bring them in and then if we have any time left over we can come right back to this and if we if if not um Pat or Phyllis when you're watching this could we keep that item on the agenda for the March meeting? >> Of course. >> Great. Um, so we're gonna move now to um Oh, weren't they online before? >>

111Uh, >> Janice. >> Let me um >> Did they get the Did they get the Zoom link? >> Okay. Um, do you have a cell number for Ben Kar? >> Yeah. >> Well, I got I have a I have a number. >> All right. >> Two seconds. I have it. Okay, great. Um, >> Janice to join the uh the meeting. >> So, um, while Dr. Silver is joining us and um, Mr. Cleveland may may join us also. He says he's here. Uh, is do you see Ben on there, Rob? >> I do not. Um >> he may be on the Google meet. >> Yeah. And the link to the Zoom is in the invite, right? >> Yeah. I sent >> Great. We will figure out our tech. Uh we got them all. Awesome. Great. >>

112Fabulous. We got we got Ben and Jan have to accept the invite. >> Dr. Silver. Um okay. Okay. So, just a little uh background context for anybody who is watching um uh or is in here and and from this be helpful. There's been a conversation uh going on for some months about um what the right way to think of. We we did a big overhaul of the way we evaluate the superintendent uh gosh over a year ago. Um we did a a smaller but meaningful rewrite of how we evaluate the treasurer um just a few months ago. Um there has been some question um from some at least one board member about whether there should be some updating of how the uh uh general counsel is evaluated and how the reporting lines work for the

113general counsel. Um uh this is a topic where I think different board members have a variety of different views. Um and as a as a as a way to get us started, this is now back last fall. Um, we shared uh or I shared with the policy committee a a draft policy from schoolboard partners. Um, that was a helpful place for us to to to to read and start thinking. Um, and um what we discovered in looking at the model policy uh was that it was quite different from the way we have historically done um the the the the board's work and the superintendent's work with our general counsel. Um, and so what we wanted to do was create a space, this only took us three or four months to do this, but to create

114a space where we could ask questions to the people who wrote the model policy, um, to try to understand what some of the pros and cons to our current way of doing things are, what some of the pros and cons to a different way of doing things might be. Um, so that at some point this committee could make a recommendation to the board about whether we want to change anything about our current policies here or not. Um, I'll say one more thing by way of introduction. Um, I wanted to start with schoolboard partners because I've found much of their advice, particularly on policy writing, to be really helpful over the years. I also want to invite other organizations or other board members who have other model policies. Um, there's nothing we won't look at or

115consider. So, if OSBA has a model policy or if Council of Great City Schools has a model policy, uh, we'd like to look at all of them. Um but um uh uh Ben, welcome. Dr. Silver, welcome. Can you two hear me? Okay. >> Yes. Good morning. >> Great. So glad you're here. Uh I understand it's really early where you are. Uh and I'm I'm grateful for you all joining us uh um on on Pacific time. Um could we spend maybe a minute or two and each of you just introduce yourself and the work that you've done um to the we have about maybe I don't know 15 people who are in the room here. um and then some watching online and some might watch the recording. >> Of course. Dr. Silver, do you want to

116start? >> Thank you. Good morning everyone and thank you for allowing us to be a part of this meeting. My name is Dr. Silver and I hail from Raleigh, North Carolina uh by way of Indiana and I have recently joined the schoolboard team. It has been a few weeks but grateful to be here and I serve as vice president of our consulting and partnerships team. Uh Ben, >> thank you. Uh greetings to the committee members and any anyone else in the room. I appreciate the opportunity to be here and see if we can help in some way. Um I'm Ben Clebon. I'm a consultant um in uh education and field in general, but primarily um as the lead policy adviser with school board partners. I'm a former teacher, school leader, schoolboard member myself in New

117Orleans. Um, so I've been in your shoes. Um, but have learned far more from working with schoolboard members around the country for the last uh close to 6 years now. So we've developed a new governance model called empowered governance which uh the centerpiece of is our set of model policies um and the legal council policy being one of them. And we as a final note, you know, just would want to say that we offer these model policies not with the intention that you would plug and play, so to speak. Um, but that only that this would be a starting point of language to consider. And, you know, we and we offer support to facilitate making it your own if that's of of interest to you. Um, but also happy to just uh answer any questions

118you have now. And if you all decide to kind of do your own thing, that's fine, too. >> That's great. And um I think in a minute what I'd like to do and and um Dan, you and I did not prep on this. And so either you could do this or I could try to do this, but just try to describe our current state and the ways in which it's a little bit similar or different from the policy. And and I'm happy to do that or you're welcome to do that. Um but but before we do, um either Dr. Silver or or Mr. Cleveland, would you say just a a bit about what schoolboard partners is? I know we've had so my colleague Dr. Moffett member, I'm a member, uh, recently departed board member, Weineberg

119member, uh, and I think Kendra Map also a member, right? >> Um, so you have some meaningful representation, uh, on our school board. Um, but just could you say a little bit for people who may not know what schoolboard partners is about >> Absolutely. Yeah. My apologies. I'm trying to be efficient and mindful of time here. >> No, efficiency is appreciated. So, but I just want to make sure people know where this is coming from. >> Yeah. No, school board so schoolboard partners in a nutshell um is a national nonprofit organization with the primary mission of supporting the professional development of elected schoolboard members such as yourselves. So um you know I certainly know when I took a seat in New Orleans that uh you know there was not a lot of help available. Uh

120not a lot of guidance. Um the training that was available was not always what I was really looking for or needed per se. Um and so that is really the impetus I think with schoolboard partners to try to fill that niche and elevate the quality of professional development supports that are available to schoolboard members. And so this the the foundation of the program is a fellowship, an annual fellowship uh where uh a cohort of elected board members from around the country uh get together in a network and participate in webinars and get coaching support and tech assistance and access the model policies and tools um conferences together etc. and just uh you know develop their learning as as board members um in a small intimate community. Um so um have been certainly uh a privilege

121to have worked with many of your board members over the years in the in those settings and um glad to be here this morning uh to see if we can help further. >> It's great. Thanks. Um Dan, would you like to do a walkthrough? Would you like me to do it? Either way is totally fine with me. >> Okay. Yeah, you can tell me if I forget something. Okay. And I'm just going to try to do this as quick as possible. Um so in the model um in our in our current state um we have a very talented um uh general counsel's office uh in including both Dan and Stephanie and your teams and thank you for all of your work. Um they uh do all of the things that in your model policy the

122district council does. Um so representing the district all legal support for the superintendent teams schools principles arbitrations litigation all of those things. Um the that office also staffs the policy committee. So they lead the committee through a three-year review of all of our policies. Um they make recommendations for how to write or change policies based on changes in state or federal law. If board members have ideas about policies that we want to draft or write, they help and support that process. um they uh are are I think regularly a part of um executive session with the superintendent and the board um related to legal issues facing the district um negotiations with uh our different bargaining units um and I I I think will also um answer uh legal questions that board members have about their

123role as board members and and those cover a wide wide range of issues. Um, I think as I as I read the model policy, um, uh, our current world, um, has one office doing both the district council work and the board council work that you're describing. Um, Dan, am I missing key distinctions between or or Kareem or or Carrie, did you have any differences between the policy or our current state you wanted to note? >> No. And so I think part of why we were excited to have you here is we wanted to understand more about the rationale for separating those two um both on the um just the the the I don't know quality or value that comes from separating those two but also cost. Um, I think it would it would cost us

124a bit to to um uh hire out for the services that are in the board council part of the policy. Um, uh, I I I know you know that, so my my assumption is it feels worth it to you, but we wanted to hear more about why. Um, and any other advice that you all would have for us. >> Sure. Um let me just sort of start with the answer sort of the the the question around what is the purpose or objective in differentiating the roles of a of a district council and board council. Um I would say you know first and foremost the first two bullets I think on page two that pertain to legal services related to the superintendent's employment contract and legal services related to the annual evaluation of the superintendent. I

125would say are sort of the minimum uh objectives here. Um that we uh you know in our experience and just in principle believe there is an inherent potential conflict. Um not you know conflict doesn't mean any mal intent but there's just a structural conflict of interest when uh a direct report of the superintendent is acting on their behalf to negotiate their employment contract or their evaluation with the board. So at a minimum, especially if you're trying to be, you know, especially costconscious, uh I would recommend that those two things be be those two services related to those issues be be sought from an in an independent firm. In addition to that, as we get to the remaining bullets, these things read probably broader than they're intended and could be further refined and restricted to your

126to your preferences. Um, but this, you know, the other matters that the board is dealing with that are probably more gray areas in terms of not not so clearly potential conflicts like the evaluation or the contract, but areas where there may just be an interest in getting a second opinion or maybe there's uh an issue, you know, pertaining to some form of accountability for the administration the administration's objecting to that the board wants some outside, you know, objective, you know, no rat in the race kind of advice from. Um, so those things I think can also be helpful. I think they're more limited events. Um, you know, the way this language starts out is probably broader maybe than it has to be. Um, but um I I mean I I'll just share personally as an

127anecdote. Uh, in New Orleans, we had an external firm and a specific attorney assigned to us as the board's counsel. She served uh as our primary liaison with any contract or evaluation issues. Um she also worked very closely with the district council. So the district council leaned on her firm oftentimes to either get external support or second opinions or uh sometimes even to engage in in handling lawsuits. Um but that was entirely at the sort of discretion of the administration. She also served as our parliamentarian which was again not a requirement but it was helpful to have somebody somebody in the room who is serving as the parliamentarian of the board who is not um again has no invested interest in the district in any way um can just serve purely objectively and independently I

128found useful as a board member myself. Does that have to be uh an attorney? No. But it probably at least needs to be somebody who knows Robert's rules pretty well, right? Um, so those are, you know, as a starting point, some of my responses to your questions, uh, Mr. Lindy. Um, but I think there are ways to I understand the cost consciousness certainly. Um, we in New Orleans, for example, I think had this kind of relationship, never really had costs that I found exorbitant in any way. But part of the point of this process is to or this policy is to establish a process that can help manage for and minimize those costs. Um so for example like if you had every individual board member with full cart blanch access to an external law firm

129that could obviously get out of hand, right? Um so that's the purpose for example in having the president be kind of the main conduit or gatekeeper in accessing those services. Um, and if there were cost concerns even beyond what's written in this model policy, we certainly could offer additional ideas on how to kind of create more constraints there. Um, but I do at the at the end of the day again, I think at least at the very minimum pertaining to superintendent employment and evaluation issues, I do think you would be well served to have independent counseling. >> Thank you. Uh, I know that uh Carrie has a question. Yes, I love that feedback. Thank you. I have a quick question for Dan and Stephanie. I assume Stephanie, you directly report to Dan, not the superintendent.

130Is that correct? Okay. So then my question would be I totally agree with the first two bullet points of not having a direct report to the superintendent be involved in her employment or annual review. Would it Would it make sense for us to depend on our deputy or what's your title? Sorry. Assistant. What's what's your wonderful title >> in charge? >> Yeah. Okay. >> The general counsel. >> Our amazing assistant general counsel um do that work as she is not a direct report. She is still a district employee, but it does provide that level of separation between her and the superintendent. I'm I'm just asking. I I don't have an an I'm not asking with an answer in mind. >> It's a good question. I I would I would still maintain that there is a

131supervisory relationship there even though there may be a separation of one individual in between there and I and I'll tell you as a consultant even I'm not going to name districts but I have witnessed on multiple occasions um things go on in the negotiation of an employment contract renewal or in finalizing an evaluation where I felt I just as an outside observer with no stake in it just felt like some of the attorneys that were involved from the district's staff, even those that weren't direct reports to the superintendent were pushing for like a certain agenda that seemed biased like in favor of the superintendent. >> And again, I don't think people it doesn't even it doesn't mean people are malicious or even doing it wrong, but there's there's some natural pressure there, right? like you

132how you know how can you really represent your boss completely objectively >> or your boss's boss. >> Um that's a pretty high expectation. >> Understood. Thank you. >> Great. >> So Ben, it's great to see you again. Dr. Silver, it's great to meet you. I um I liked what you've written, but if I apply it to our district and um it just seems that it's not financially feasible for us right now. So, I want to share with you just brief very briefly um the perspective that I've heard from some board members and my own and see if there's a way that you could suggest something that aligns with semi what you've written with financial and fiscal responsibility. So, this is not in any way a dig on our current general counsel or his department because

133I absolutely love them and the work that they do. But when I look at this, I look at this as um the general counsel should work for the district as as in totality and the district is in part board members collectively and in part the superintendent. the the the loyalty, if you will, or the impetus behind everything should be around I'm representing this district. I think we place our general counsel in a precarious situation as much as as you have already described because there is that potential bias. There is that potential um conflict of interest inherently. There's nothing that has happened. It's just it's just by way of how it's set up. It just happens that way. What I would like to do is to create a way that protects the general counsel and that

134department around representing the district. So, and not the the bend on one or the other. So, I like your example about the evaluation because I think that is definitely an area of bias or potential bias. Is there a way that we could set up what we currently have to allow the general counsel's office to maintain that separation um cheaply, inexpensively um because that's really I think what the the issue is and this is not something that has just happened recently. This is looking at it since I've been on the board, much of which you already know, Ben, around um in totality, we don't want to put them in the in the situation of being um having to choose or the board members doubting the confidence level of the information given. So, I'm just wondering, is

135there a way that we could use what we currently have knowing that the only limitation is because we we fiscally we we just don't have the money to protect that office and allow them the ability to be more strengthened in their true role rather than to be in the situation that they're in. Is there a way that you all can think of that we could change what we're doing to model more like what you are offering but knowing that we don't have the money? >> Yeah. So again, I don't I you know even with the way this policy is laid out there it is not a a an automatic outcome that this is going to be super expensive right there there are ways. So for example like if you as a board only engaged outside

136council on contract issues which only happen what once every two or three years um and the annually on the evaluation that is really not that expensive right. >> Okay. Um, if you and again, you know, happy to support, you know, if we can on like additional like more narrow language, but if you allowed for the availability of a second opinion from an independent council, but in limited circumstances, I think that is doable without it being exorbitantly expensive. Like I think it's af that can be affordable and and potentially of real value. Um, I would have to like better understand when you ask me, Dr. Moffet, like how could we change what we're doing now? I'd have to better understand how things are working now because obviously every district's not the same and that would probably

137require a little more engagement. But, um, but I'm trying to answer your polic your question more from the policy perspective is I do think there's ways to narrow this and even generate more confidence that this is not going to be some kind of like cost boondoggle and which is obviously not the intent to begin with. Um, the last thing I would say just as a general theme that I think is, you know, in some cases maybe just a different train of thought than in the conventional sort of mindset. Um, you know, no offense to the attorneys in the room, that not just because you're an attorney doesn't mean you're always right, right? Um, attorneys give opinions and it's called an opinion because that's their opinion on their interpretation of the law. and different very intelligent

138attorneys can have different opinions, right, on the interpretation of law. Um, that's why we commonly hear the term get a second opinion. You know, I I I commonly see board members in in or all around the country, government agencies in general maybe lean on attorneys as if they are all knowing. Like we unfairly give them, we give them great credit as they deserve. They're well educated but sometimes we give them more credit than they you know is fair to expect them to rise to right like they they are not uh you know all knowing right and sometimes these things these issues are difficult they're complicated interpretation of law is not that straightforward um it's a new situation that there's not enough case law on all things can happen right um and sometimes to try to

139especially to resolve a more complicated issue or more controversial issue it can help to have somebody from the outside who maybe has a different set of experiences or a different specialty engaged to provide another opinion and then you as board members or the superintendent look at both and decide you know what you think is the best answer for you. Um so all that to say is I think there there are some legitimate reason you know very objective reasons to have access to external counsel. It does not have to be co you know inefficient or inex or unaffordable in terms of cost. Um, and we'd be happy to, you know, if that's a primary concern, we'd be happy to work with you on a more narrow version. The last thing I would say is Denver Public

140Schools just passed a policy based on this policy. It is more narrow. I shared that with Mr. Lindy. It's also obviously publicly available um for the same reasons. They had concerns about cost. So, it that happens all the time and there are ways to do it. >> I um thank you both again. We have a real commitment to uh trying to end on time here. We do have five minutes left. Um Rob, we didn't have anybody else waiting to do hearing of the public today who didn't go already. Great. Um did you have anything else you want to talk about that was different topic? Great. So we'll we'll save we'll save a minute for that. Um I wanted to ask while we have you two um one of the discreet issues that was coming up

141from one of our other board member colleagues was was who evaluates the general counsel. Um and I don't think the policy spoke directly to that. I also might have missed it. like in in your in your in your framework, I would assume that the the district general counsel is evaluated by the superintendent and solely by the superintendent that the board plays plays zero role plays a small role like what role if any does the board play in evaluating the general counsel and can you say why? >> I would say typically none. We wouldn't advise that there would be a role there. Um the first line under district general counsel says that the district council serves under the supervision of the superintendent that is intended to include evaluation. There are districts there are fewer or far

142between that do have like direct reporting relationships to a district council. I we wouldn't advise that. Um I don't you know the the superintendent in our governance model in our sort of best practice recommendations is the sole employee of the of the board right there are no other employees of the board. um everyone else reports to the superintendent. Um that would include evaluation purposes. However, and as is articulated in this model, it is important for the board to be monitoring the performance of major functions of the district and the legal department is certainly a major function of the district. Um unfortunately, school districts get sued frequently, right? sometimes for valid reasons, sometimes for invalid reasons, but they have to, you know, seek legal services to handle those issues. Um how that legal department and that

143legal department obviously can have a sizable budget depending on the extent and the scope of those lawsuits. So the reason there's some performance metrics in here um suggested is not to say that the board would be using those to directly evaluate um the superintendent's employee, but it is important. And I think the board for the for the board as a in its role as performance monitoring the entire district to understand some key highle performance indicators on how its legal department is uh is delivering results on behalf of the district. >> That's great. Any any last questions for our guests before we anything um Dr. Silver or or Mr. Cleman that you want to share that you didn't get a chance to share this morning? >> I don't think so. No, Dr. for silver. >> No,

144we will. >> Great. I I'd like to keep this just for for patent for Phyllis on the agenda for next month so we can talk again about I'm sure we'll talk about this with the rest of the board and um uh figure out where we go and just invite again other other any model policies people have uh we'd like to take a look at. Also, thank you both. This is hugely helpful. Uh and enjoy the rest rest rest rest rest rest rest rest rest rest rest rest rest rest rest rest rest your Friday. >> Thank you. >> Uh okay. Um, hearing of the public. >> Hi. Um, this is Michelle Dunn with Cincinnati Federation of Teachers. Um, I don't normally come to policy. I cover budget, but it was great to be a guest here

145today. I just want to caution uh the board, this committee uh of entertaining policy guidance from consultants who have extremely concerning track records. I did a quick search on the guest that you brought in today, uh board member Lindy. And I got to tell you, I'm surprised he even mentioned Denver because uh he was in a lawsuit uh for um being um an part of an initiative very controversial that closed to public schools in Denver um and then reopened an additional 70 charter schools. Obviously, he's from New Orleans. He's he um ran a charter school network. And to uh Miss Silver, uh Dr. Silver, um of course, she's a consultant. She um sells curriculum products. Uh she's a clear proponent of including testing in in on report cards, things that we were mentioning earlier. I

146just think that if we're going to have and these are both people who have uh no uh and probably an antagonistic uh position towards issues of collective bargaining and employee relations. I just think that there are better sources of policy reform advising and I really hope we're not going to spend any public money on advisors such as these without uh due diligence before we enter into contracts with with folks like this. Thank you for your time. >> Thanks. Um I'll just reiterate our interest in any recommended model policies from any organizations. Um would love to consider them and please send them our way. Uh any other absent any other business I'll entertain a motion to adjurnn.