Sep 13, 2021 September 13, 2021 Study Session - 4:00 p.m.

[1. Call to Order]

[00:00:05]

>> GOOD EVENING. I WOULD LIKE TO CALL TO ORDER THE SEPTEMBER 13TH, 2021 SCHOOL BOARD LAKE WASHINGTON STUDY SESSION. LET THE RECORD REFLECT ALL BOARD MEMBERS ARE PRESENT AND PARTICIPATING REMOTELY.

THERE'S BEEN A RECENT UPDATE TO THE GUIDELINES FOR ATTENDING PUBLIC MEETINGS WHICH IS PROCLAMATION 20-28.15, OPEN PUBLIC MEETINGS ACT AND PUBLIC RECORDS ACT PROCLAMATIONS, EXTENDS THE PROHIBITION ON IN-PERSON MEETINGS, BUT CREATED AN EXEMPTION FOR PUBLIC MEETINGS THAT COMPLY WITH THE GUIDELINES FOR 'BUSINESS MEETINGS,' FOUND IN THE 'MISCELLANEOUS VENUES' GUIDANCE'." CURRENTLY, SCHOOL DISTRICTS CONTINUE TO BE REQUIRED TO HOLD REMOTE MEETINGS. IN THE EVENT A SCHOOL DISTRICT CAN COMPLY WITH THE MISCELLANEOUS VENUES GUIDANCE AND ALL OTHER REQUIREMENTS RELATED TO COVID-19, A MEETING MAY BE HELD IN-PERSON. IF THE MISCELLANEOUS VENUES GUIDANCE AND ALL OTHER REQUIREMENTS RELATED TO COVID-19 CANNOT BE MET, THE SCHOOL BOARD MUST HOLD THEIR MEETINGS REMOTELY AND ACCESSED. ALL FACE MASK COVERINGS MUST BE FOLLOWED. BOARD WILL CONTINUE TO COMPLY WITH ALL LAWS INCLUDING THOSE AT THE PUBLIC MEETINGS ACT AND THE CURRENT EMERGENCY REQUIREMENTS RELATED TO MISCELLANEOUS VENUES.

IF THOSE AND OTHER REQUIREMENTS RELATED TO COVID CANNOT BE MET.

THE BOARD MUST HOLD MEETINGS REMOTELY AND PROVIDE THOSE VIA LIVE STREAM AND AUDIO. DUE TO RECENT NON-COMPLIANCE THE BOARD HAS DETERMINED TO HOLD MEETINGS LOCALLY.

THE BOARD WILL TELL THE PUBLIC THROUGH THE BOARD MEETINGS TAB ON BOARD DOCS AT THE ADDRESS GIVEN.

IT IS PLANNED THAT ALL BOARD MEETINGS IN SEPTEMBER, OCTOBER AND NOVEMBER WILL BE HELD REMOTELY.

BOARD MEETING STUDY SEX WILL CONTINUE TO BE LIVE STREAMED ON THE DISTRICT'S WEBSITE. IF YOU'RE UNABLE TO LIVE STREAM THE MEETING YOU MAY CALL TO LISTEN AND THAT PHONE NUMBER IS 425-936-2813. CONFERENCE IDEA 37127.

YOU CAN E-MAIL THE BOARD AT THE LINK PROVIDED OR DIANE JENKINS.

[1. Discussion of Resolution No. 2318 and Policy OE-14, Anti-Racism, Non-Discrimination, Equity, and Inclusion in Education]

INCLUSION OF EDUCATION. >> AS RECENTLY AS LAST EVENING THE BOARD MET IN THE STUDY SESSION TO DO FURTHER REVIEW OF OWE 14 AND TO DISCUSS RESOLUTION 2318 WHICH WILL BE BROUGHT FORWARD TONIGHT IN THE BOARD MEETING BY THE BOARD.OE 14 AND 2318 WHICH WILL BE BROUGHT FORWARD TONIGHT IN THE BOARD MEETING BY THE BOARD. WE THOUGHT WE'D SPEND A FEW MINUTES AT THE BEGINNING OF THE STUDY SESSION TO REVIEW THAT.

YOU HAVE ALL RECEIVED COMMUNICATION FROM DIANE JENKINS WITH THE UPDATED RESOLUTION AND POLICY TO DATE AND I WILL GO AHEAD AND PULL UP BOTH THE POLICY AND THE RESOLUTION AND ERIC, IF YOU WANT TO LEAD THE BOARD IN A DISCUSSION AROUND ANY POTENTIAL CHANGES OR THOUGHTS, THE BOARD HAD, I WILL GO AHEAD

AND PULL THOSE ITEMS UP. >> SOUNDS GOOD.

SO LET'S TAKE THE POLICY FIRST AND THEN THE RESOLUTION.

OKAY. YES, DIRECTOR STUART?

>> CAN WE BUMP THAT UP A LITTLE BIT THERE.

>> JUST GOT TO GET REALLY CLOSE TO THE SCREEN, LIKE I DO.

>> WELL MY NOSE IS NOT THAT SH

[00:05:06]

SHORT. >> THANK YOU.

THAT'S PERFECT. >> OKAY SO ANY COMMENTS, THOUGHTS, THIS ON THE POLICY THIS EVENING?

>> ARE WE GOING THROUGH IT EACH SECTION?

>> I THINK WE'LL JUST TAKE IT, WE'VE GONE THROUGH IT SECTION BY SECTION SO IF YOU HAVE ANYTHING ON ANY SECTION LET'S JUST JUMP

TO THAT NOW. >> DOWN ON 14.4.

ENSURE RIGOROUS EXPECTATIONS LEADING TO STUDENT'S GROWTH, SUCCESS AND WELL-BEING. I THINK THAT'S NOT ONE I WAS THINKING ABOUT. COME BACK TO ME.

I MIGHT HAVE THE WRONG NUMBER. >> OKAY.

I JUST HAVE ONE, IF YOU, JOHN CAN YOU SCROLL BACK TO THE FIRST PAGE SO ON THE DIRECTIVE TO THE SUPERINTENDENT AND BULLET POINT O ONE, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE RECEIVED FEEDBACK ALONG THE LINES OF WHEN IT READS ELIMINATE RACISM WITH ANTI-RACIAL SYSTEMS AND STRUCTURES AND PROCEDURES AND PRACTICES.

I GUESS I'LL JUST TO RECAP THAT FEEDBACK HAS BEEN SOMEWHAT SUGGESTED THAT TO BROODEN THAT BY HAVING IT READ ANTI-DISCRIMINATOR SYSTEMS AND I'M SORRY, ELIMINATE DISCRIMINATOR SYSTEMS AND REPLACE THEM WITH ANTI-DISCRIMINATION. I WANT THE SYSTEM TO CALL OUT RACISM IN PARTICULAR, BUT WE HAVE ABOVE WE TALKED ABOUT IN THE PRE-AM WITH TO THAT TALKING ABOUT ELIMINATING DISCRIMINATION IN BIAS SYSTEM BUT IN THE BULLET THERE COULD BE VALUE IN ADDITION TO CALLING OUT RACIST SYSTEMS TO MENTIONING ELIMINATING DISCRIMINATOR SYSTEMS BECAUSE THAT DOESN'T OTHERWISE, FALL OUT IN THE FOUR POINT BULLET POINTS. SO I GUESS I PROPOSE JUST ADDING ELIMINATE DISCRIMINATOR SYSTEMS AND RACISMS AND STRUCTURES AND PRACTICES WITH ANTI-RACIST. AND REPLACE THEM WITH NON-DISCRIMINATORY SYSTEMS AND PRACTICES.

>> CAN YOU PUT THAT ON CHAT BY CHANCE? I'M HAVING A HARD TIME FOLLOWING IT.

>> NOT A PROBLEM. YES, I CAN DO THAT.

MA MAYBE.

>> I WASN'T SURE IF YOUR CHANGE WAS AT THE BEGINNING OR THE END

OF THE SYSTEM. >> AGAIN I'M JUST TALKING ABOUT BULLET POINT ONE UNDER THE DIRECTIVE.

I WILL. >> IS THE PROCEDURAL PIECE? ERIC, DOES THE BOARD WANT AN UPDATED POLICY FOR TONIGHT IF POSSIBLE, OR DOES THE BOARD WANT TO MAKE CHANGES AS PART OF THE ADOPTION OF THE, OR THE DISCUSSION AROUND THE POLICY TONIGHT? YOU SEE WHAT I MEAN?

>> I DO SEE WHAT YOU MEAN, AS IN, IF WE ARE.

>> SO I HAVE A VERSION I CAN EDIT ON MY LAPTOP HERE AND SO DIANE ALSO, IF YOU CAN CHIME IN TO MAKE SURE THAT WE PROCEDURALLY DO THIS CORRECTLY. SO IF THE BOARD WANTS AN UPDATED

[00:10:03]

MOVING TO ADOPTION? >> WE CERTAINLY CAN UPDATE THE DOCUMENT AND UP LAID IT TO BOARD DOC, SO IT IS THERE SO WE CAN

CHANGE THE AGENDA AS WE WANT. >> I GUESS THAT IS MY THOUGHT AS TO WHAT WE'LL DO IF WE'RE ALL IN AGREEMENT ON THAT.

>> THE ONLY CAUTION I WOULD HAVE WITH THAT IS IN REGARDS TO PEOPLE HAVE SEEN THIS DOCUMENT AS IT CURRENTLY IS AND SO ANY CHANGES WOULD NOT NECESSARILY BE CLEARIF SOMEBODY WAS NOT AT THIS MEETING IT WOULD BE A DIFFERENT DOCUMENT THAN WHAT YOU INITIALLY

HAD SEEN. >> THAT'S TRUE.

>> I CAN JUST SPEAK TO ANY CHANGES AT THE MEETING TOO TO HIGHLIGHT THEM SINCE THE LAST DRAFT.

>> I THINK THAT WOULD BE KEY. >> WE CERTAINLY CAN SHOW THE DOCUMENT AS WITH STRIKE THROUGH AND UNDER LINING THE LANGUAGE FROM WHAT WE POSTED THIS MORNING.

>> THAT WOULD WORK. >> THAT WORKS TOO.

>> LET'S, IF WE CAN DO THAT, LET'S DO THAT I THINK VISUALLY AND THEN I CAN ALSO SPEAK IT TO. THAT WAY IT'S CLEAR.

POSTED IN CHAT THE PROPOSED CHANGE THAT I HAVE.TO IT.

THAT WAY IT'S CLEAR. POSTED IN CHAT THE PROPOSED CHANGE THAT I HAVE. ANY THOUGHTS SO ERIC, I DON'T THINK THIS TWEAK CHANGES THE MEANING AND I THINK IT DOES SPEAK TO SOME CONCERNS WE WERE HEARING FROM COMMUNITY THAT WOULD LIKE TO HEAR THAT LANGUAGE IN HERE TOO SO I'M COMFORTABLE

WITH ADDING THAT. >> OKAY.

IT WORKS. >> OKAY.

>> I DO BELIEVE WE TAKE-OUT SOME OF THE STRENGTH A LITTLE BIT BY DOING SO. HOWEVER IT'S CONSISTENT WITH

WHAT HAS HAPPENED ELSEWHERE. >> THE ALTERNATIVE WOULD BE TO CREATE A 1A AS ELIMINATE RACIST SYSTEMS THE FULL EXISTING PHRASE AND THEN 1B ELIMINATE DISCRIMINATORY SYSTEMS. MAKING IT CHEER WE'RE TRYING TO ADDRESS SYSTEMATIC PROBLEMS THAT MAY OR MAY NOT ONLY BE ABOUT RACISM.

THEY COULD BE OTHER DISCRIMINATORY THINGS BAKED INTO OUR SYSTEM. WHAT DO YOU THINK OF THAT?

>> I THINK YOU'LL HAVE SAME ISSUE EITHER WAY SO IF THE ISSUE OF THE NON-DISCRIMINATION HAS TO BE THERE I WOULD PUT IT UNDER ONE AS APPOSED TO BREAKING IT OUT.

>> OKAY. I JUST THINK WE NEED TO RECOGNIZE EACH TIME WE DO THIS, WE ARE SHIFTING SOMEWHAT DIFFERENT COMPONENT, SO PAYING ATTENTION TO THAT IS WHAT'S

OCCURRING. >> YEAH.

DIRECTOR DO YOU RECALL? I THINK YOU HAD A CHANGE.

>> I DID, BUT I REALIZED IT'S EDITED LAST NIGHT AND ALL OF OUR MEETINGS ARE RUNNING TOGETHER, SO I WITHDRAWAL THE STATEMENT

THAT I HAVE SOMETHING ELSE. >> OKAY.

>> ERIC, THE DIRECTOR E-MAILED US TODAY REGARDING DIRECTIVE

NUMBER FOUR. >> IS THAT IT?

>> THAT'S WHAT IT IS. >> I THOUGHT IT WAS.

>> OKAY. >> SO THAT WAS A FOUR.

I WAS CLOSE. >> IT WAS.

IT WAS THE RECOMMENDATION TO ADD AFTER GROUPS, IN DIRECTIVE 4 AND ENABLE EVERY STUDENT TO EXCEL AND ACHIEVE AT WHY LEVELS.

>> THAT'S RIGHT. I DO EXPECT EVERY STUDENT, IF GIVEN THE PROPER TOOLS AND SUPPORT CAN ACHIEVE AND EXCEL AT WHY LEVELS.

>> SO LET'S SEE IF I CAN JUST PUT THAT INTO THE CHAT SO IT'S

[00:15:05]

I THINK I GOT THAT RIGHT. SO I THINK I JUST POSTED IT IN THE CHAT. THE PROPOSED CHANGE TO NUMBER 4 UNDER THE DIRECTIVE OF THE SUPERINTENDENT WHICH IS TO ADD, AFTER EXCEL AND ENABLE EVERY STUDENT, I'M SORRY.

TO, IT'S MARKED EVERY STUDENT AND ENABLE EVERY STUDENT TO EXCEL AND ACHIEVE AT HIGH LEVELS.

DIR DIRECTOR CARLSON?

>> THIS IS BRINGING BACK A PIECE I FEEL HAD BEEN MOVED ABOVE THE FIRST SENTENCE. THE BOARD BELIEVES EVERY STUDENT HAS THE POTENTIAL TO ACHIEVE AT HIGH LEVEL AS ACHIEVING ACADEMIC AND PERSONAL GOALS. IT'S SOMEWHAT REDUNDANT, BUT IT'S EXPOLICE IT IN PUTTING IT BACK IN, SO I SUPPORT DOING SO.

>> DIRECTOR SAGE? >> A STUDENT THAT RECEIVES SPECIAL EDUCATION SERVICES CONCERNS ME.

ALL KIDS HAVE POTENTIAL AND I WANT TO MAKE SURE WE'RE ALSO INCLUDING KIDS WHO HAVE DIFFERENT TYPE OF STRUGGLES ACADEMICALLY AND SOCIALLY, BUT WE SHOULD STILL EXPECT MY STUDENT TO RECEIVE AN EDUCATION THAT IS RIGOROUS AND ALLOWS HIM TO EXCEL? HE'S NOT GOING TO HARVARD.

I'M NOT EXPECTING THAT AND THAT DOES NOT MEAN EXCEL FOR HIM.

>> I AM FINE WITH THIS PROPOSED CHANGE, AS WELL, TOO.

DIRECTOR STUART? >> I THINK THE IDEA OF EXCELLING AND WE'LL TALK ABOUT EVERY STUDENT.

EVERY STUDENT HAS THEIR ABILITIES AND HAS THE ABILITY TO EXCEL AT HIS OR HER, WITH HIS OR HER GIVEN NEEDS AND I HEAR YOU ABOUT THE SPECIAL NEEDS AND YES I RECOGNIZE MY SON IS NOT GOING TO HARVARD, BUT THAT'S ANOTHER POINT.

WE HAVE A BAD FOOTBALL TEAM, BUT IT'S, I THINK THAT THE FAMILY ITSELF, EACH FAMILY JUDGES THE HIGHEST LEVELS FOR THAT STUDENT TO ACHIEVE AND EXCEL AT. THE STUDENT HAS THAT IN MIND, AS WELL. IT'S NOT SOMEONE ELSE'S MEASUREMENT, BUT THAT STUDENTS MEASUREMENT.

EVERYONE IS DIFFERENT AND IS AN INDIVIDUAL.

>> CORRECT. I JUST WANT TO ENSURE THAT THE EDUCATION THAT WE'RE PROVIDING ALL OF OUR STUDENTS INCLUDING SPECIAL EDUCATION STUDENTS HAS THOSE SAME HIGH LEVELS OF EXPECTATION AND YOU KNOW, THEY GET THE SUPPORTS THEY NEED TO ACH ACHIEVE.

>> ANY OTHER COMMENTS ON THE PROPOSED CHANGE?

>> I MEAN IN ALLIANCE WITH WHAT OUR POLICY ENVISION IS ACROSS THE BOARD THIS IS SORT OF A STANDARD THAT WE HAVE CONSISTENTLY AND IT IS REITERATING IT IN THIS LOCATION.

>> YEP. >> OKAY.

I THINK WE'RE, THERE'S GENERAL AGREEMENT TO HAVE THIS CHANGE IN THE POLICY THAT GOES. DIRECTOR CARLSON?

>> SORRY, I WAS GETTING READY FOR THE NEXT ONE.

>> OKAY. SO WE'LL WE CAN DO THE STRIKE THROUGH SO THE POLICY WILL COME FORWARD TONIGHT WILL SHOW THESE CHANGES. DIRECTOR CARLSON?

>> SO I ACTUALLY, THANK YOU FOR ACCIDENTALLY BRINGING UP 14.4 DIRECTOR SAGE. THERE'S A GRAMMATICAL PIECE THAT'S ALWAYS, I'VE NEVER BROUGHT IT UP BEFORE, BUT WE SHOULD FIX IT. ENSURE RIGOROUS EXPECTATIONS FOR STUDENTS AND SUPPORTS READS AS IF WE HAVE RIGOROUS EXPE EXPECTATIONSAS SUPPORTS AND I DROPPED A COMMA AND TWO WORDS THAT MAKE IT CLEAR PROVIDING SUPPORT IS WHAT WE EXPECT THE

[00:20:02]

ANYWAY, IT'S VERY FINE GRAIN, BUT THAT'S THE POINT WE'RE AT

AND I CAN'T LET IT GO. >> THIS MAKES SENSE TO ME.

ANY OTHER THOUGHTS ON THIS PROPOSED CHANGE?

>> I THINK THE CHANGE SHOULD GO FORWARD.

>> GREAT. >> OKAY.

I THINK I'VE SEEN HEAD NODDING. ANYONE ELSE WITH ANY PROPOSED CHANGES? OKAY.

YES DIANE? >> I'M NOT SURE WE NEED A COMMA

AFTER, STUDENTS. >> YEAH, CHRIS, I THINK THAT IS

RIGHT. >> I HAVE AN ENTHUSIASM FOR COMMAS AND I'M WILLING TO BE OVER RULED ON THAT.

>> I DON'T THINK WE NEED A COMMA THERE.

>> YOU MADE US COMATOSE. >> THAT'S ALRIGHT.

COMMA COMAEST TO. >> I DON'T CARE.

LET'S STAY WITH THE, WITHOUT THE COMMA AND SAVE SOME INC.

ANY OTHER THOUGHTS ON THE POLICY AND THEN WE'LL MOVE TO THE RESOLUTION. OKAY.

LET'S MOVE TO THE RESOLUTION. JOHN COULD YOU? GR GREAT.

SO THIS IS THE DRAFT THAT WE WORKED ON AS OF LAST NIGHT.

>> SO WE WORKED ON FEEDBACK. I CAME BACK AND UPDATED BASED ON BOARD FEEDBACK. DIANE WENT THROUGH AND DID AN EDIT FOR FORMATTING AND SOME CONSISTENCY IN VERB TENSES AND THINGS LIKE THAT TO MAKE SURE WE'RE ON POINT WITH THAT, BUT THIS IS EXACTLY WHAT YOU SAW LAST NIGHT WITH UPDATES AND WE TOOK OUT THE HEADERS AND THE MAJORITY OF THE CONVERSATION NOW THAT I WENT BACK TO MY NOTES WAS IN THAT DATA SECTION.

REALLY TRYING TO NARROW IN ON HOW THE BOARD WANTED TO ARTICULATE THOSE COMPONENTS SO I'LL SCROLL DOWN TO THAT AND

WE'LL START THERE. >> ALRIGHT. SO AT THE TOP WHERE AS YOU HAVE. IT STARTS THERE?

>> WELL IN PARTICULAR CHRIS HAD THE SUGGESTED EDITS WHICH WAS TO FOCUS ON THE RESULTS BECAUSE OF OUR SYSTEM AND NOT BECAUSE OF

OUR STUDENTS. >> THANK YOU FOR TRANSLATING WHAT I WAS GOING FOR IN THE FIRST SET OF BULLET POINTS.

I DON'T HAVE MUCH CONCERN WITH THESE.

THE NEXT SET OF BULLET POINTS I DO HAVE A CONCERN ABOUT CONSISTENCY OF PRESENTATION ACROSS DEMOGRAPHIC STRATA, BUT HERE I'M NOT SEEING ANYTHING THAT'S SCREAMING FOR AN EDIT.

>> SO IN THIS SECOND PIECE, THE CONSISTENCY OF PRESENTATION.

THE FIRST AND THE LAST BULLET POINTS OUR DISTRICT BRINGS 74 TO 79%. THAT'S FRAMED IN THE SAME WAY.

THE TWO INTERNAL BULLET POINTS ON AVERAGE ABOUT 42% FOR CONSISTENCY IT WOULD BE EASIER TO PRESENT THAT IT'S PROBABLY 38 TO 48%. TO FRAME IT IN THE SAME STRUCTURE AS THE FIRST BULLET POINT WOULD MAKE IT EASIER TO COMPARE ACROSS THESE VARIABLES. AND IN PARTICULAR THE THIRD BULLET POINT IT'S GREAT WE HAVE A NUMBER OF LESS THAN 50% AND LESS THAT 50% IS A DIFFERENT WAY TO DESCRIBE DATA THAN 40 TO 50%.

THAT AS CLEAN RANGE. LESS THAN 50% IS SOMEWHERE BETWEEN 0 AND 50%. MY SUGGESTION WOULD BE FOR LOW-INCOME IT SHOULD BE WHATEVER THE % IS.

20 TO 40. USE THE SAME RANGE MARKERS.

[00:25:01]

DISCUSSING. >> CHRIS CAN WE NARROW THE RANGE

SO IT'S MORE SPECIFIC? >> THIS IS WHERE IT GETS TO BE AN INTERESTING CONVERSATION. I BELIEVE THE RANGE IS PRESENTED BECAUSE ACROSS THE LAST FIVE YEARS OF DATA, THE NUMBERS DO BOUNCE AROUND YEAR-TO-YEAR. PARTICULARLY WHEN WE HAVE SMALL GROUPS OF STUDENTS. HALF OF OUR STUDENTS ARE MALE, BUT NOT HALF OF OUR STUDENTS ARE BLACK SO THERE'S A BIT MORE NOISE IN THE DATA FROM POINT TO POINT.

>> JUST ASKING. >> SO, YEAH, I MEAN, I COULD LIVE WITH PHRASING THEM ALL AS, ON AVERAGE BECAUSE IN FIVE YEARS OF DATA THAT TAKES THE NOISE OUT AND GIVES US WHAT THE TREND IS, OR NOT THE TREND, BUT WHAT'S THE MEDIAN FOR YOUR DATA? IT'S GOING TO BE A WIDER RANGE FOR THE SMALLER GROUPS.

LOW-INCOME AND BLACK AND AFRICAN BEING THE SMALLEST GROUP OF THE FOUR BULLET POINTS. SO ANYWAY I'M JUST TRYING TO MAKE IT CLEAR AND COMPARABLE BETWEEN DIFFERENT GAPS THAT WE'RE TRYING TO DECLARE. THESE ARE GAPS OF CONCERN AND I DO LIKE THAT THE FOURTH BULLET POINT IS A DIFFERENT COMPARISON GROUP, AND IT IS ABSOLUTELY WELL DONE.

THERE INSTEAD OF COMPARING AGAINST ALL STUDENTS OR HERE WE'RE COMPARING MALES WITH FEMALES.

IT'S GIVING A RANGE FOR BOTH GROUPS AND SHOWS THERE'S CONSISTENTLY A GAP OF THREE TO FIVE POINTS BETWEEN THE MALE AND FEMALE STUDENTS ON THIS MEASURE. OVERALL, SO AGAIN JOHN THIS IS GETTING BACK TO I'M HAPPY WITH THANK YOU FOR TRANSLATING THINGS. I THINK THAT THE FIRST SET OF BUT LET'S NAILED IT. I DON'T HAVE MEANINGFUL EDITS TO OF. IT'S JUST IN THE THIRD GRADE SECTION WE'RE TRYING TO MAKE SURE HOW IT'S PRESENTED FOR EACH DEMOGRAPHIC GAP IT WE'RE CONCERNED WITH IS CONSISTENT WITH WHAT WOULD HELP MAKE THE ARGUMENT FOR US AND GETTING BACK TO YEAH, I THINK PRESENTING THE AVERAGE ACROSS THE LAST FIVE YEARS WOULD BE MORE MEANINGFUL THAN THE RANGE ACROSS THE LAST FIVE YEARS BECAUSE IT WILL BE A BIG RANGE FOR SOME OF THE SMALL SUB SUBSETS.

>> SO THE RANGE FOR OUR, SO IT READS NOW OUR SCHOOL DISTRICT ONLY BRINGS 46 TO 49 PERCENT OF STUDENTS FROM LOW-INCOME HOUSEHOLDS TO PROFICIENCY IN LITERACY BY THE END OF THIRD

GRADE? >> SO THAT'S, THE PRE-AMBLE WAS FIVE YEARS OF DATA COLON SHOWS AND HERE IT SAYS OUR SCHOOL DISTRICT BRING AS AVERAGE OF 33% STUDENTS RECEIVING SPECIAL EDUCATION PROGRAMS. THAT'S MY RECOMMENDED WAY TO PRESENT THIS IF YOU JUST GIVE THE RANGE HERE WE HAVE A 10% RANGE FOR THE SPECIAL EDUCATION STUDENTS AND WE HAVE A 5% RANGE FOR MALE STUDENTS. IT'S GOING TO BE MUCH MORE THAN A 10% RANGE FOR BLACK STUDENTS BECAUSE OF THE SAMPLE SIZE SO THE AVERAGE SIZE DOES AN IMPORTANT THING GETTING TO THE POINT. IT'S THE MEAN ACROSS THE LAST FIVE YEARS. THE RANGE IS LESS IMPORTANT.

>> SO THE RANGE? >> SOUNDS LIKE A GOOD CONCEPT.

ARE WE ABLE TO TURN THAT AROUND BY THE MEETING?

>> I DON'T KNOW. I DON'T HAVE NUMBERS AT MY

FINGERS. >> I'M NOT SURE I FEEL CONFIDENT IN CRUNCHING THE NUMBERS IN THAT AMOUNT OF TIME.

I WANT TO BE ACCURATE IN WHATEVER WE ARE REPORTING AND RIGHT NOW THE LAST FIVE YEARS OF DAY FOR THE BLACK, AFRICAN-AMERICAN END OF THIRD GRADE LITERACY IS BETWEEN 50 AND 60%. FOR THE HISPANIC AND LATINO STUDENTS IT'S 54 TO 60, AND SO WOULD IT BE BETTER IF I BROKE OUT BOTH OF THOSE GROUPS OF STUDENTS RATHER THAN BLOCKING THEM IN THE SAME CATEGORY BULLET POINT?

>> WELL, LET ME GIVE YOU LANGUAGE.

I DON'T HAVE THE DATA IN FRONT OF ME FOR THE LAST FIVE YEARS, BUT IT WOULD NOT BE THE END OF THE WORLD.

I WILL GIVE YOU A FRAMEWORK FOR IT AND THEN IT'S FILL IN THE BLANK WITH THE PERCENTAGE. BECAUSE I'VE REALIZED THERE'S ACTUALLY A, THERE'S A TENSE CHALLENGE BECAUSE OVER THE LAST FIVE YEARS OUR SCHOOL DISTRICT BRINGS US TO THE PRESENT.

[00:30:01]

I'LL DO A KQUICK HASH ON THE LANGUAGE.

>> JOHN, COULD YOU SPEAK TO WHY HISPANIC AND LATINO STUDENTS WERE NOT BROKEN OUT INTO THAT? WAS IT BECAUSE THE NUMBERS WERE

SO CLOSE? >> THAT'S TRYING TO RECOLLECT FROM A WEEK AGO WHY I SPECIFICALLY DID THAT.

I DON'T BELIEVE THAT WAS PROBABLY THE REASON WHY.

JUST THINKING ABOUT OUR STUDENTS FROM THE RACE LANDS THAT WERE HAVING SIMILAR TYPE PERFORMANCE, BUT I THINK THAT'S WHY AND THAT'S WHY I RECOMMENDED WE CAN BREAK IT OUT JUST AS EASY TO BE SPECIFIC ABOUT OUR BLACK AFRICAN-AMERICAN STUDENTS AND OUR HISPANIC AND LATINO STUDENTS.

>> BEING MORE SPECIFIC SEEMS LIKE SOMETHING WE SHOULD ALWAYS WANT. I DON'T SEE WHY WE WOULDN'T I

GUESS IS MY THOUGHT. >> I WOULD WANT TO DO THAT.

I BELIEVE IN OUR GRADUATION. IS IT THE SAME DATA SO I WANT TO BREAK THAT DATA OUT, AS WELL TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE AS SPECIFIC

AS WE CAN BE ABOUT OUR STUDENTS. >> AND I HAD A QUESTION.

I THINK I BROUGHT THIS UP LAST NIGHT.

IT'S ALL BLURRING TOGETHER. WE PULL OUT TWO DIFFERENT DATA SETS. GRADUATION RATES AND THIRD GRADE LITERACY. DO WE NEED TO POINT OUT THERE'S MANY OTHER WAYS THAT WE MEASURE PROGRESS? I WOULD HATE FOR PEOPLE TO THINK, OH, THIS IS ALL THEY ARE DOING. THERE'S MANY, MANY MORE WAYS THAT WE LOOK AT DEMOGRAPHICS TO SEE DEEPER DOWN WHAT MIGHT BE OCCURRING AND PROGRESS THAT IS OR IS NOT BEING MADE.

IT'S NOT CURRENT OUTCOMES PRESENT ON-GOING FOR THESE, IT'S MUCH MORE THAN THESE TWO SESSIONS.

THESE ARE AN EXAMPLE OF TWO. >> AND I GUESS YOUR INTEREST IS MAKING CLEAR THAT THESE ARE EXAMPLES OF DATA, NOT THE ONLY

DATA >> RIGHT NOT THE ENTIRE DATA SET. I DON'T KNOW IF IT NEEDS TO BE MORE CLEAR OR NOT. I WOULD READ IT AND SAY THERE'S

MANY MORE WAYS WE MEASURE. >> YEAH.

I UNDERSTAND THAT. ONE OPTION THAT COMES TO MIND IS BEFORE YOU READ THE CLAUSE 8 YEARS OF DATA SHOWS, YOU COULD JUST HAVE THE TERM FOR EXAMPLE COMMA AND THIS IS CLEAR THESE

ARE EXAMPLES? >> UH-HUH.

>> NOT MY FAVORITE, BUT I THINK IT ACCOMPLISHES IT.

>> ANOTHER COULD BE ADDING ANOTHER WHERE AS STATEMENT THAT SPECIFICALLY TALKS ABOUT DATA, THE TRENDS, THAT THESE ARE JUST TWO EXAMPLES OF DATA THAT HAVE SIMILAR TRENDS TO OUR ACHIEVEMENT DATA ACROSS THE BO

BOARD. >> I MEAN, THAT WORKS, I JUST, MY MIND IS COMING UP BLANK ON THE WORDS TO USE TO SAY THAT.

>> IT COULD BE EIGHT YEARS WORTH OF DATA SHOWS.

FOR EXAMPLE COMMA. >> I FEEL THAT'S THE FASTEST

MAYBE THE LEAST ARTFUL, BUT. >> AND IT MAY NOT NEED TO BE POINTED OUT. IT'S SOMETHING I WAS THINKING

ABOUT LAST NIGHT. >> IT'S VERY HARD TO READ WHAT

YOU JUST DID. >> I'M SORRY IT PASTEED IN WITH THE BLACK FONT WITH THE BUT LET'S.

I'M NOT SURE WHY IT DID THAT. LET ME TWEAK IT.

[00:35:10]

>> YES. AND YEAH, SO THERE'S THE PRESENTATION CONCERNING WHICH IS LESS IMPORTANT THAN THE DETAILED CONCERNS SO YES, YOU ARE RIGHT THAT THE LAST CLAUSE.

THAT'S NOT GOING TO DO IT FOR ME.

NOPE. LET ME TRY TO.

>> IT'S NOT AN ISSUE I'M ADAMANT ABOUT SO IF WE DON'T WANT TO WORD SMITH IT, I'M FINE WITH THAT ALSO.

I JUST WONDERED IF I WAS THE ONLY ONE READING IT AS OH, THERE'S TWO SETS OF DATA AND MAYBE THAT'S ALL? SOUNDS LIKE I'M THE ONLY ONE SO I'M OKAY WITH LETTING IT GO.

>> OKAY. LET'S DO THAT THEN.

>> I FINALLY GOT THE FONT COLOR RIGHT, WHICH MAKES LIFE EASIER.

>> THERE WE ARE. ALRIGHT.FONT COLOR

RIGHT, WHICH MAKES LIFE EASIER. >> THERE WE ARE.

ALRIGHT. >> CASSANDRA YOU ARE SAYING, STATING IT EITHER WAY DOESN'T AFFECT THE ACCURACY OF THE INFORMATION SO YOU ARE COMFORTABLE?

IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE SAYING? >> IT SHOULD BE OBVIOUS THAT SCHOOLS MEASURE A LOT MORE THAN THE TWO CATEGORIES WE HAVE IN FRONT OF US AND DIFFERENT GRADE LEVELS AND YOU KNOW, DIFFERENT TESTS THAT KIDS HAVE TO TAKE TO GRADUATE, ET CETERA.

SO PROBABLY NOT THAT IMPORTANT. I WOULD HATE FOR SOMEONE TO LOOK AT IT AND SAY, YOU'RE HARDLY MEASURING ANYTHING.

>> YEAH. >> YES.

WE REALIZE THERE ARE GAPS IN MANY OTHER PLACES.

>> I THINK THE LAST BIT THAT CHRIS HAS IN THE RED, I THINK IT HELPS TO ACHIEVE THAT. I DO FIND THAT.

>> AND SO, ALRIGHT. FOR YOUR CONCERN I COULD EVEN EXPAND THAT TO BE, IT IS NOT LIMITED TO THESE GRADES, BUT THESE ARE KEY GRADES OUR SYSTEM WHERE WE MONITOR STUDENT

PERFORMANCE. >> HOW ABOUT NOT LIMITED DATA?

>> YEAH, YEAH. >> AGAIN.

>> SORRY, MARK, I DIDN'T HEAR YOU.

>> THERE'S KEY BENCHMARK TIMES AND YOU HAVE BASICALLY IDENTIFIED THOSE FROM THE STUDENTS PROGRESSION TOWARDS

GRADUATION. >> MIKE?

JUST PUT HIS HAND UP. >> YEAH, I'M JUST CURIOUS ABOUT HAVING THE RATES IN THE POLICY WHEN THEY MAKE CHANGE FROM YEAR-TO-YEAR AND THE POLICY WILL LIKELY BE IN PLACE FOR A WHILE AND SO I'M WONDERING YOU PUT HISTORICALLY THEY'VE BEEN IN THESE RANGES AS APPOSED TO THE HARD NUMBERS BECAUSE THEN THE POLICY NEEDS TO BE UPDATED OR MAYBE THE INTENT WAS TO UPDATE EACH YEAR AND PUT THE NUMBERS IN.

>> TWO THINGS ON THAT. ONE, WE MOVED THIS OUT AND NOW THIS IS ON A RESOLUTION WE'LL BRING FORWARD WITH THE POLICY AND WE MOVED IT OUT IN PART FOR THAT VERY REASON SO WE WOULDN'T HAVE TO. SO THAT SOMETHING HISTORICAL

WOULDN'T BE BAKED IN. >> SO THIS IS JUST READ THIS YEAR AND NOT AN, ANNUAL RESOLUTION.

>> THE IDEA IS TO MEMORIALIZE WHERE WE ARE NOW AT THE TIME OF ADOPTION. SO IN CONCEPT, I THINK CHRIS IS, I CAN'T SEE ALL THE HANDS. IN CONCEPT, I LIKE THE IDEA, CHRIS, BUT I'M WONDERING, AGAIN I'LL ASK JOHN AGAIN.

ARE WE ABLE TO CRUNCH THE DATA IN TWO HOURS WHEN WE'RE ALSO IN A MEETING? TO BE ABLE TO PROVIDE THESE PERCENTAGES? SEEMS LIKE RANGES WOULD BE - EQUALLY DESCRIPTIVE.

>> AND IT WOULD BE EASIER BECAUSE THERE'S ONLY ONE I'M WORRIED ABOUT THE RANGE NOT BEING THERE WHICH IS THE ONE

THAT SAYS UNDER 50%. >> IS THERE A LINK THAT SHOWS

ALL OF THIS FOR OUR DISTRICT? >> SURE.

>> AND THEN PEOPLE CAN LOOK UP WHATEVER ELSE THEY WANT TO LOOK UP. DO THEY KEEP THAT DATA BY YEAR SO HISTORICALLY THAT WILL SHOW THE LAST FIVE YEARS.

>> YOU CAN FOLLOW TRENDS ON THE DATA, YES.

>> SO PEOPLE CAN LOOK IT UP FOR THEMSELVES?

>> OKAY. >> ALRIGHT.

[00:40:01]

>> I THINK THE KEY POINT WE WANT TO GET OUT IS THE GAPS HAVE EXISTED AND THEY PERSISTED ACROSS REGARDLESS OF SUBJECT MATTER AND FOR THE MOST PART THESE ARE CONSISTENT AND HAVE

BEEN. >> THANK YOU I AGREE AND THAT'S WHAT I LIKED WHAT CHRIS HAD AND I LIKE WHAT HE HAS WITH THE MOST RECENT CHANGE BEING THERE. RECOGNIZING.

>> THAT WOULD BE THROUGH DIFFERENT METRICS AND NOT JUST THEE L.A. AND MATH. WE SEE IT IN SCIENCE AND WE SEE IT IN CLASS GRADES. WE SEE IT IN MULTIPLE DIFFERENT LOCATIONS, SO DIFFERENT WAYS YOU SOMETIMES SEE DIFFERENT THINGS BREAKING THROUGH IN DIFFERENT FASHIONS SO WE CAN LEARN FROM THAT, BUT I THINK THE IDEA THAT THESE APPEAR TO BE SYSTEMIC IS BECAUSE THEY ARE ACROSS THE BOARD IN MANY WAYS.

>> OKAY. I HEAR YOU ON THAT AND I AGREE WITH YOU, SO HERE COMES THE LAT

LATEST. >> YEAH.

I'M FINE WITH THAT. >> I MEAN THE POINT TO BE MADE.

WHAT'S NICE ABOUT THE TWO SETS OF BULLETS IN HERE ALREADY IS THEY REALLY DO PUT BOUNDARIES ON OUR SYSTEM.

AND THE FIRST IS A MEANINGFUL MEASURE OF HOW WE'RE DOING AT BRINGING KIDS TO LITERACY AND COMPARING THAT TO END GRADUATION RATES AND THIS IS JUST A CLAUSE SAYING, LOOK IT'S IN BETWEEN AND IT'S REALLY DEPRESSINGLY CONSISTENT ACROSS MATERIAL METRICS AND GRADE LEVEL, SO I DON'T THINK WE NEED TO CALL IT OUT MORE EXPLICITLY THAN OUT THE TWO END POINTS AND ACKNOWLEDGING IN BETWEEN WE HAVE THE SAME PROBLEMS.

>> OKAY. SO SOUNDS LIKE EVERYONE I SAW HEAD NOD WITH THE MOST RECENT DRAFT FOR THE SENTENCE THAT FOLLOWS THE BULLET POINT BUT I WANT TO RETURN TO THE PROPOSED CHANGES IN THE BULLETIN THAT CHRIS HAD.

I LIKE WHAT YOU DRAFTED, BUT I THINK WE SHOULD TRY TO DO IT

WITH RANGES TO GET THAT. >> WE'VE ALREADY GOT THE RANGES FOR ALL, BUT ONE OF THE BULLET, SO I'M FINE WITH THAT WE WOULD JUST FILL IN THE RANGE FOR THAT ONE.

LET ME TWEAK THE LANGUAGE. >> JOHN MIGHT HAVE BEAT YOU TO

IT. >> I DON'T TYPE VERY FAST.

>> I THINK THIS IS WHAT WE WANT. >> YEAH.

[00:45:11]

GROUPS. >> THEN WE WOULD HAVE THE MOST RECENT LAST SENTENCE THAT YOU BEGIN SIMILAR PERSISTENT GOOCHS

CONCERN WOULD FOLLOW THAT? >> YEAH.

>> IS EVERYONE ELSE OKAY WITH TH

THAT. >> I THINK IT'S MUCH EASIER TO READ ALL IN THE SAME FORMAT, DISCUSSING THINGS IN THE SAME

WAY. >> YEAH.

>> OKAY. >> AND SO THE ONLY OTHER THING IS THAT THESE ARE METRICS FOR WHERE EACH GROUP IS, AND IT'S NOT, YOU CAN INFER WHERE ALL STUDENTS ARE FROM THE MEAN OF MALE AND FEMALE, BUT DECLARING IT UP FRONT AS FOR THE LAST FIVE YEARS, 79 TO 28% OF ALL STUDENTS HAVE RECEIVED PROFICIENCY BY THIRD GRADE IN CONTRAST AND THEN THE BULLET POINTS WILL GIVE YOU THE BENCHMARK OF HOW BIG IS THIS GAP? THAT'S SOMETHING THAT, THE NERD IN ME WANTS TO SEE THE BASELINE, BUT THE, I KNOW THAT DOESN'T NECESSARILY HELP THINGS.

MARK, WHAT'S YOUR TAKE ON THAT? >> YOU KNOW, AS LONG AS THE CONSTRUCTION IS PARALLEL, WHICH WE NOW HAVE MOVED TO, THAT WAY IT'S EASIER FOR THE READER TO COMPARE POINT A AND POINT B AND POINT C AND D, TO A DEGREE. AND THAT TO ME MAKES IT, YOU KNOW ANYTIME YOU CAN MAKE MORE CLARITY BY REPEATING THE SAME

FORMAT WORKS. >> YEAH.

>> I THINK STANDING ALONE WHAT WE HAVE HERE IS CLEAR THAT IT'S A PROBLEM. I JUST WOULD LEAVE IT AS IT IS.

>> I CAN WORK WITH THAT. >> OKAY.

ANY OTHER AND I SAW HEADS NODING FOR EVERYONE GOING FORWARD WITH

WHAT CHRIS PROPOSED. >> I PUT SOMETHING IN THE CHAT.

SO AS CHRIS WAS TALKING, I KIND OF AGREE.

THERE IS NO REFERENCE POINT TO ALL THE DATA POINTS AND SO FOR GRADUATION RATES, I'VE BROKEN OUT BLACK AFRICAN-AMERICAN, HISPANIC AND LATINO AND I'M WONDERING BEFORE THE EIGHT YEARS OF DATA STATEMENT, JUST PUTTING ALL STUDENT GROUP GRADUATED AT 84 TO 94% AND 8 YEARS OF DATA SHOWS AND THE BULLET POINT.

>> IT'S IN THE EIGHT YEARS OF DATA THAT SHOWED THAT AND THEN

IN CONTRAST COLON. >> SAME THING FOR THE THIRD

GRADE GROUP. >> IT DOESN'T NEED TO BE IT'S

OWN BULLET, BUT IT HELPS. >> I SEE YOUR POINT IF WE CAN DO

THAT, LET'S DO IT. >> THANKS JOHN.

ANY OTHER? >> I THANK TIM AND HIS TEAM FOR

POWER BI. >> BEFORE WE START, I WANT TO GIVE JOHN A MOMENT HERE BECAUSE HE'S UPDATING ON THE FLY, BUT DOES ANYONE HAVE ADDITIONAL EDITS?

CAN I SEE A SHOW OF HANDS? >> CAN YOU STRO SCROLL DOWN?

I'M SORRY, THAT'S JOHN. >> I TRIED TO EARLIER, BUT THAT

WASN'T MY SCREEN. >> OKAY.

[00:50:23]

>> OKAY IF WE CAN CAPTURE THE BOTTOM LINES.

THAT WOULD BE GREAT. MARK WERE YOU ASKING TO SCROLL DOWN FURTHER. MARK, YOU'RE ON MUTE.

>> USUALLY I'M NOT. JUST ENOUGH TO PICK UP SOME OF

THE BOTTOM STUFF. >> I THINK DIANE HAS A QUESTION IN TERMS OF WHERE WE'RE PLACING THIS AND THE IDEA WAS TO PUT IT IN THE BODY OF THE PARAGRAPH. RIGHT BEFORE.

>> SO DIANE I WILL SEND YOU MY DRAFT I'M WORKING ON HERE BECAUSE I'VE CAPTURED ALL THE CHANGE, SO FAR.

>> EXCELLENT. >> OKAY.

ANY OTHER COMMENTS AND CHANGES OR QUESTIONS FROM THE BOARD? OTHER ITEMS ON THE AGENDA FOR THE STUDY SESSION TONIGHT, SO I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE HAVE TIME FOR THIS AND EVERYTHING

ELSE. >> DESPITE MY CONCERNS YESTERDAY, NO, I HAVE NOTHING MORE.

>> WE HAVE GOOD RESOLUTIONS, RIGHT?

>> SORRY? >> THERE'S STILL MORE RESOLUTIONS BEYOND THIS PAGE, RIGHT?

>> YES. >> WHOA.

>> IN THE FIRST BULLET, DO WE NEED, I THINK WE MIGHT WANT TO ADDRESS, SINCE OUR TITLE INCLUDES INCLUSION THE NON-INCLUSIONARY PRACTICES. NOW THAT MIGHT COME IN UNDER IN EQUITABLE, BUT IT I THINK NEEDS TO BE SPELLED OUT FOR SOME FOLKS, SO THAT NO FAMILY OR CHILD NEEDS MORE INCLUSION AND DOESN'T GET IT.

>> SO WOULD YOU BE OKAY WITH JUST ADD ING, IN THE LIST, INCLUSION. ADDRESS ISSUES OF RACISM, DISCRIMINATION AND MARGINALIZATION AND JUST ADD

INCLUSION IN THERE? >> INCLUSION OR NON-INCLUSION.

WHAT EVER MAKES MORE SENSE. I'M NOT SMART ENOUGH TO KNOW.

WE HAVE IN EQUITABLE VERSES DISCRIMINATION SO WE KIND OF BOUNCE BACK AND FORTH. ANYONE ELSE HAVE ANY THOUGHTS ON

THAT. >> OH, THANK YOU DIRECTOR.

EXCLUSION WOULD BE A BETTER TERM FOR THAT.

>> THAT'S WHAT I WAS GOING TO SAY TOO.

>> THAT IS THE WORD. >> YEAH.

THE IDEA TO KEEP THE MAIN WORD, WHICH IS IN THE TITLE AND IT'S REALLY THE LANGUAGE OF DEI, I THINK.

THAT'S WHY I WAS GOING FOR IT. ANYWAY.

IF WE CAN PUT INCLUSION IN THERE I'M GOOD WITH IT.

>> YEAH, I'M FINE WITH THAT. >> LACK OF INCLUSION.

>> YEAH, I DON'T HAVE LACK OF INCLUSION.

>> YOU CAN'T ADD INCLUSION BECAUSE THAT WOULD BE A POSITIVE COMPONENT WHERE THE REST YOU'RE WORKING AS A NEGATIVE CONNOTATION TO NOT HAVE SO IT WOULD HAVE TO BE LACK OF.

>> YEAH. >> I'M FINE WITH THAT.

>> YEAH. >> SO I GUESS JOHN I WOULD JUST

SUPPOSE. >> I ADDRESSED IT AS RACISM, MARGINALIZATION, DISCRIMINATION, LACK OF INCLUSION, OPPRESSION, IN EQUITABLE PRACTICE AND SYSTEMICS BYES.

>> RIGHT. THANKS JOHN.

[00:55:13]

>> ANYONE ELSE WITH ADDITIONAL EDITS.

>> I WANTED TO POINT OUT CHRIS'S MESSAGE IN THE CHAT THAT PERHAPS THE ALL STUDENT DATA COULD GO TO THE TOP SO PEOPLE CAN READ, HERE'S ALL STUDENT BUT HERE'S WHAT HAPPENS WHEN WE DRILL DOWN AND LOOK A LITTLE DEEPER AND LOOK AT THE DIFFERENT DEMOGRAPHICS OF STUDENTS WHO ARE NOT HAVING THE LEVEL OF SUCCESS

THAT THE ALL STUDENTS GROUP IS. >> I'M CONVINCED.

IT MAKES SENSE TO ME. >> SORRY.

I WAS JUST TRYING TO SAY THAT FIVE YEARS OF DATA TO SHOW AND I WANTED TO PUT THE COLON ON BEFORE ANY OF THE BUT LET'S.

>> THANK YOU. >> LET'S DO THAT

>> THANK YOU. >> OKAY.

ANYTHING ELSE? OKAY.

WELL WE'LL HAVE ANOTHER OPPORTUNITY AT 7:00 TOO.

IF YOU HAVE ANY OTHER IDEAS WE CAN ALWAYS MEND AT TAMEND AT TH.

JOHN, I'LL GIVE YOU A COUPLE OF MINUTES.

LET ME KNOW WHEN YOU ARE CAUGHT UP.

>> SO WHY DON'T I INTRODUCE OUR NEXT TOPIC AND THEN BECAUSE I'LL BE INVITING MATT GILLING HAM TO PRESENT TO THE BOARD AND SO ARE

[2. Discussion of Results-3, Life Skills and Citizenship]

DIANE? >> PERFECT.

>> PART OF OUR AGENDA IN THE STUDY SESSION IS TO HAVE A DISCUSSION AND REALLY REVIEW RESULTS THREE FROM A STRUCTURAL STANDPOINT, BUT A DATA STANDPOINT.

WHAT DATA IS EMBEDDED IN RESULTS THREE AND THE INDICATORS THE BOARD ADOPTED AND HOW DID THAT PLAY OUT THIS YEAR KNOWING THAT TONIGHT ON THE BOARD'S NON-CONSENT AGENDA IS RESULTS THREE AND I KNOW MATT, I BELIEVE MATT, CASSANDRA AND SIRI AND MYSELF HAD AN INFORMAL CONVERSATION, A FORMERLY INFORMAL CONVERSATION ABOUT RESULTS THREE AND JUST HOW THAT PLAYED OUT GIVEN THE INDICATORS THAT WERE ALIGNED WITH THE DIFFERENT COMPONENTS, AND SO WE THOUGHT IT WOULD BE GOOD FOR THE BOARD TO REALLY HEAR THE THINKING AROUND RESULTS THREE, SOME OF THE COMPLEXITIES AND WHAT ARE THE OUTCOMES THAT WE'RE ACTUALLY DEMONSTRATING AND POSSIBLY SOME STRATEGIES OR EFFORTS TO MOVE FORWARD WITH RESULTS THREE SO WITH THAT I'LL HAND IT TO MATT TO SHARE A PRESENTATION.

>> ALRIGHT. THANK YOU.

I'M GOING TO PULL A SLIDE DECK UP TO WALK US THROUGH RESULTS THREE. OKAY.

R3. ARE YOU SEEING THAT ON YOUR END, JOHN SO RESULTS THREE IS OUR LIFE SKILLS AND CITIZENSHIP POLICY WHERE WE'RE, THE BOARD IS LOOKING AT SPECIFICALLY OUTCOMES FOR OUR STUDENTS REALLY AROUND KIND OF THOSE ATTRIBUTES NEEDED TO LEAD PRODUCTIVE LIVES AS A CITIZEN AND CONTRIBUTING MEMBER OF OUR SOCIETY SO IT'S CRITICAL TO OUR WORKS AN EDUCATORS IN HELPING SHAPE AND CREATE CONDITIONS FOR OUR STUDENTS TO BE ABLE TO THRIVE AND CONTINUE TO GO OUT IN SOCIETY AND THRIVE AS WE THINK ABOUT REALLY KIND OF CREATING WELL-ROUNDED AND HELPING TO SHAPE WELL-ROUNDED STUDENTS.

THIS IS REALLY IMPORTANT AND IT'S ALSO INCREDIBLY CHALLENGEING WE THINK OF WAYS IN WHICH WE CAN MONITOR THESE SKILLS, SO THE BOARD HAS IDENTIFIED 12 SPECIFIC ATTRIBUTES RANGING FROM THINKING CREATIVELY TO SOLVING PROBLEMS TO DEMONSTRATING BALANCE OR HAVING A STRONG WORK ETHIC AND YOU CAN SEE THE 12 ITEMS THE BOARD HAS IDENTIFIED THERE.

AND WE CURRENTLY MEASURE THESE 12 ITEMS USING A SERIES OF

[01:00:02]

WE LOOK AT AVOIDING BEHAVES THAT RESULT IN EXCLUSIONARY DISCIPLINE AND SECONDARY STUDENTS MISSING ASSIGNMENTS AND STUDENTS AVOIDING CHRONIC ABSENTEEISM.

LOOKING AT THE PREPARED R3 FOR THIS YEAR, I THINK THERE'S KIND OF FOUR KEY CHALLENGES WHEN WE LOOK AT THE INDICATORS THAT WE'RE TRYING TO USE TO MEASURE AFFIRMATIVELY MEASURE STUDENT LIFE SKILLS AND CITIZENSHIP. SO ONE OF THOSE CHALLENGES COMING WHEN WE'RE USING GRADES AND SO IF YOU, IF WE LOOK AT WHAT'S OUR THEORY BEHIND USING GRADES AND WHY WE PICK GRADES.

THE THEORY OF ACTION OR THE ASSUMPTION THERE IS IF THE STUDENT IS SUCCESSFULLY PASSING A COURSE, MANY OF THESE SKILLS ARE EMBEDDED IN THE COURSES AND THE STANDARDS AND THEREFORE, A STUDENT THAT'S PASSING WILL HAVE DEMONSTRATED SOME PROFICIENCY WITH THOSE SKILLS. BUT ONE OF THE CHALLENGES WITH THIS IS THAT A GRADE IS A SINGLE INDICATOR WHERE THROUGHOUT A COURSE, THERE ARE MULTIPLE STANDARDS THAT GET MEASURED.

SOME WHICH MAY NOT AND THEN THERE'S OTHER BEHAVIORS OR OTHER ASPECTS TO A GRADE THAT GET PACK FACTORED IN.

GRADES CAN BE A IMPERFECT INDICATOR.

IF WE TAKE THREE STUDENTS A AND IN A CORE CLASS THE ASSUMPTION IS A STUDENT THAT RECEIVED A B, ON THE LEFT THERE, WILL HAVE SATISFIED THESE AREAS. THINKING CRITICALLY, SOLVING PROBLEMS. MAKING CONNECTIONS.

CONTRIBUTING IDEAS AND MAINTAINING A GLOBAL PERSPECTIVE AND WE SAY, WELL B GRADE AND C PLUS, AND HIGHER THEY WOULD HAVE DEMONSTRATED FOR ALL OF THAT. BUT IF WE LOOK AT A STUDENT WHO, WE HAVE TWO STUDENTS ONE IN THE MIDDLE AND ONE ON THE RIGHT THAT RECEIVEDED A C GRADE MAY HAVE PARTIALLY MET SOME OF THESE, BUT MAY HAVE COMPLETELY MET SOME OF THESE, BUT THEY MIGHT BE VERY DIFFERENT ONES. SO THE STUDENT IN THE MIDDLE WE CAN ASSUME HAD SUCCESSFULLY DEMONSTRATED THE ABILITY TO THINK CRITICALLY AND CREATIVELY, BUT MAYBE HAD DIFFICULTY MAINTAINING A LOCAL OR GLOBAL PERSPECTIVE WHERE AS THE OTHER STUDENT WHO HAD A C MIGHT HAVE BEEN ABLE TO MAKE CONNECTIONS AND CONTRIBUTION BUT STRUGGLED WITH SOLVING PROBLEMS OR THINKING CRITICALLY OR CREATIVELY.

WHERE WE USE A SINGLE INDICATOR OF A LETTER GRADE THAT CAN ENCOMPASS A LOT OF SKILL SETS AND REALLY LIMITS OUR ABILITY TO ALIGN AND SAY HOW ARE WE DOING IN HELPING OUR STUDENTS TO THINK CREATIVELY. YOU CAN HAVE TWO STUDENTS WITH THE SAME INDICATOR AND ONE HAS DEMONSTRATED A SKILL AND ONE HASN'T. RIGHT NOW WE STILL PUT OUR ASSESSMENTS INTO A GRADE THAT IS SOMETHING THAT'S A CHALLENGE FOR

US TO DESEGREGATE THAT WAY. >> ONE OF THE OTHER CHALLENGES IN ALL OF THESE INDICATORS AND TO A CERTAIN EXTENT MAYBE PRESENT FOR ALL IS THAT THERE'S A MULTIPLE FACTORS AT PLAY SO WE HAVE TO KIND OF BALANCE HOW MUCH OF IT IS PERHAPS THE ENVIRONMENT OR THE ADULT MEAL PRICES PRACTICES OR POLICIES VERSES HOW MUCH OF THE STUDENTS ENGAGEMENT OR ABILITY TO DEMONSTRATE A SKILL. SO GRADING IS ANOTHER GREAT EXAMPLE WHERE TEACHERS MAY HAVE DIFFERENT GRADING PACK PRACTICES AND THOSE CAN LEAD TO DISCREPANCIES BETWEEN ONE STUDENTS GRADE AND ANOTHER'S. SO ANOTHER INDICATOR WE HAVE FOR EXAMPLE IS THE USE OF DISCIPLINE AND WE KNOW THERE'S DISCREPANCIES ON THE USE OF EXCLUSIONARY DISCIPLINE BY RACE,

[01:05:06]

ANOTHER CHALLENGE WITH OUR INDICATORS IS WE HAVE TWO IN PARTICULAR. ATTENDANCE AND DISCIPLINE WHERE WE SAY THE ABSENCE OF SOMETHING. SO THE ABSENCE OF A NEGATIVE BEHAVE IS WE'RE USING AS AN INDICATOR FOR THE PRESENCE OF A POSITIVE BEHAVIOR SO FOR EXAMPLE TAKING PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY.

WE'RE SAYING YOU ARE NOT GETTING SUSPENDED.

ANY STUDENT THAT DOESN'T GET SUSPENDED THEREFORE, HAS DEMONSTRATED PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY AND, I WOULD ARGUE THAT THE ABSENCE OF ONE THING DOES NOT NECESSARILY EQUAL THE, OR MEAN THAT THE AFFIRMATIVE PRESENCE OF THE OTHER IS THERE. SO WITH OUR LIFE SKILLS AND CITIZENSHIP WE'RE LOOKING AT, CAN STUDENTS DEMONSTRATE THESE THINGS AND SO INDICATORS THAT LOOK FOR THE ABSENCE OF SOMETHING THAT WOULD BE THE ANTITHESIS OF THAT BEHAVIOR IS PROBLEMATIC. FINALLY ONE OF THE CHALLENGES THAT WE ALSO SEE IS THAT WHAT WE'RE REALLY LOOKING AT IS WHEN WE'RE LOOKING AT STUDENT CHIEF. YOU KNOW, WE HAVE TO ACKNOWLEDGE THAT ACHIEVEMENT IS COMING THE CONTEXT OF AN ENVIRONMENT.

SO HERE'S A MODEL OF THE HIERARCHY THAT THEORY PROPOSES THE DEPOSITS THAT THE STUDENT'S SENSE OF SAFETY AND BELONGING IS A PREREQUISITE FOR ACHIEVEMENT AT REALLY HIGH LEVELS AND SO FOR EXAMPLE, WE KNOW THAT ACCORDING TO OUR PANORAMA SURVEY DATA STUDENT THAT QUALIFY FOR ENGLISH LANGUAGE SERVICES REPORT LOWER LEVELS OF A SENSE OF SAFETY OR BELONGING THAN STUDENTS NOT RECEIVING THOSE SERVICES AND WHEN YOU GO AND LOOK AT SOME OF OUR DATA, YOU CAN SEE THAT SOME OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL DATA THAT WE LOOK AT WHEN WE MONITOR LIKE OE 10 HAS A CORRELATION ALSO WITH THE ACHIEVEMENT DATA. WE'LL GO THROUGH AND SHARE THE DATA THAT WE DO HAVE AND THEN PRESENT SOME IDEAS OR FIRST OF ALL, HOW WE'RE GOING TO BE CONTINUING TO RESPOND, PARTICULARLY AROUND THE ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES THAT CREATE THE CONDITIONS FOR WHICH OUR STUDENTS CAN THRIVE AND THEN SOME IDEAS THAT THE BOARD MAY TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION FOR THINKING ABOUT HOW WE MAKE OR MONITOR R3 REALLY IS AS IMPORTANT AND VALUABLE AS POSSIBLE.

SO I WALK THROUGH EACH OF THE INDICATORS BECAUSE THERE'S FEWER THAN POLICY AND POINT TO WHAT IS A POLICY CONNECTION.

WHEN YOU LOOK AT STUDENTS WITH A GRADE OF C PLUS, OR HIGH WE MAKE THAT CONNECTION TO FIVE DIFFERENT POLICY AREAS LISTED THERE. OFFERING CONTRIBUTIONS AND MAINTAINING A LOCAL AND GLOBAL PERSPECTIVE.

AND THE WAY THAT WE RECORD THIS IS WE'RE LOOKING AT WHAT WAS THIS YEAR'S TREND DATA. WE ACTUALLY GO BACK A YEAR.

WHAT WAS THE LAST YEAR'S DATA? WHAT WAS THE TREND, THE FOUR YEAR TREND SO WE CAN SMOOTH OUT ANY KIND OF DISCREPANCIES BETWEEN A PARTICULAR COHORT TO THE EXTENT WE'RE ABLE TO, IF WE CAN LOOK AT BENCHMARK RATING. WHAT I WANT TO POINT OUT HERE IS YOU'LL SEE THAT THE FOUR YEAR TREND FOR 8TH GRADE IS A NEGATIVE TREND SO WE ACTUALLY HAVE DECLINES ACROSS THE BOARD IN EIGHTH GRADE WHEN IT COMES TO GRADING.

STUDENTS RECEIVING A C PLUS, OR GREATER THAN ONE CORE COURSE.

YOU'LL SEE WE HAVE HERE, I'VE SORT OF HIGHLIGHTED FOUR GROUPS THAT ARE DISPROPORTIONATELY BELOW IN TERMS OF RECEIVING THE C PLUS, IN ONE AREA OR HISPANIC AND LATINO STUDENTS AND STUDENTS WHO ARE FROM LOW-INCOME HOUSEHOLDS OR STUDENTS RECEIVING SPECIAL EDUCATION SERVICES. SIMILARLY, WE LOOK AT THE EXACT SAME SET OF POLICY SECTION WITH OUR TENTH GRADERS.

[01:10:03]

THAT'S A MAJOR REFLECTION OF SOME OF THE CHANGES IN THE ADULT BEHAVES. PERHAPS YOU KNOW, AS WELL AS THINGS THAT ARE RELATED TO OUR STUDENTS.

YOU CAN STILL SEE WE HAVE TWO GROUPS IN THE TENTH GRADE WHO IS A ARE, WELL HAVE GAPS THERE.

WHEN WE GET TO 12TH GRADE WE USE A SIMILAR METRIC AND ASK STUDENTS TO ACTUALLY REPEAT THAT FOUR TIMES AND IN ORDER FOR THEM TO BE COUNTED THEY HAVE TO HAVE A C PLUS, OR HIGHER ALL FOUR CORE CLASSES. PREVIOUSLY A STUDENT COULD HAVE A C PLUS, IN ONE CORE CLASS, HERE YOU'LL SEE HOW THAT LOOKS DIFFERENT AND YOU'LL NOTICE THAT WE ASSIGN THIS TO SEVERAL OTHER POLICY ITEMS SUCH AS TAKING PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY AND EXHIBITING CIVIC RESPONSIBILITY AND WORKING WELL WITH OTHERS AND RESPECTING AND VALUING OTHERS. AND WE AGAIN, SEE A POSITIVE TREND IN TERMS OF THE GENERAL GRADE DATA, BUT WHAT YOU'LL SEE IS THAT OVERALL THE NUMBER OF STUDENTS WHO ARE GETTING A C PLUS, IN ALL FOUR CLASSES IS BELOW WHERE 8TH AND TENTH GRADE AND WE'RE GENERALLY IN 90S WITH SOME GROUPS IN THE 80S AND YOU CAN SEE THE GAPS FOR CERTAIN STUDENT POPULATIONS BECOME QUITE SIGNIFICANT SO FOR OUR BLACK AND AFRICAN-AMERICAN STUDENTS AND STUDENTS FROM LOW-INCOME HOUSEHOLDS AND OTHERS.

AND SO WHEN WE LOOK AT STUDENTS WITH BEING ABLE TO DEMONSTRATE, EVEN IF WE ASSUME BY PASSING A CLASS WITH A C PLUS, OR HIGHER THEY ARE DEMONSTRATING SKILLS, BUT WHAT WE'RE SEEING HERE IS THAT FOR POSSIBLY A VARIETY OF REASONS WHEN WE'RE EXPECTING THAT TO BE REPEATED OVER AND OVER THERE'S OTHER FACTORS AT PLAY. SO THE SAME GROUPS OF STUDENTS, AGAIN THERE SHOULD BE A CROSS OVER OF ABOUT YOU KNOW TWO COHORT GROUPS THAT THE SAME GROUP OF STUDENTS IN TENTH GRADE WERE THESE EVEN THE GROUPS THAT ARE IDENTIFIED AS WHERE THERE'S A GAP, THAT GAP WAS MUCH SMALLER, BUT WHEN WE LOOK AT THE CORE CLASSES IT'S MUCH MORE SIGNIFICANT.

>> WE DIDN'T GET INTO SOME OF OUR DATA WHERE WE'RE LOOKING AT THE ABSENCE OF LIKE THE ABSENCE OF GETTING SUSPENSION OR EXPELLED, AND IF YOU ARE NOT DOING THAT YOU'RE WORKING WELL WITH OTHERS OR TAKING PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY AND MAINTAINING BALANCE. HERE BECAUSE WE MONITOR THIS AND I KNOW WE TEND TO, AS WELL. WE DO HAVE SOME DISPRO P DISPROPORTIONALITY WITH SOME OF THE SAME STUDENT POPULATIONS IN AREAS WHERE AS A SCHOOL DISTRICT WE'RE REALLY FOCUSED ON SOME OF THE SYSTEMS AND POLICIES AND PRACTICES THAT OUR ADULTS ENGAGE IN, AS WELL AS HOW WARE WE'RE SUPPORTING THE STUDENTS THEMSELVES.

E'RE SUPPORTING THE STUDENTS THEMSELVES.

HERE WE SAID IS A GOOD INDICATOR IF SOMEONE HAS A STRONG WORK ETHIC. ON ONE HAND IT MAKES SENSE IF WE GO OUT IN THE WORKFORCE YOU ARE GENERALLY EXPECTED TO SHOW UP EVERY DAY TO YOUR JOB AND ON TIME SO COMPLETING YOUR SCHOOL ASSIGNMENTS AND DOING SO IN A TIMELY FASHION WOULD SEEM TO CORRELATE WITH STRONG WORK ETHIC.

WHAT WE SEE IS THE NUMBERS ARE REALLY LOW ACROSS THE BOARD, SO EVEN ALL OF OUR STUDENTS, ONLY 60% OF ALL OF OUR STUDENTS HAVE LESS THAN FOUR MISSING ASSIGNMENTS.

YOU CAN SEE THERE'S A REALLY SIGNIFICANT GAP WHEN WE LOOK AT WHAT THE IMPLICATIONS FOR STUDENTS THAT QUALIFY ARE FROM LOW-INCOME HOUSEHOLDS. THERE'S CHALLENGES WITH COLLECTING THE DATA. THE TEACHERS CAN ENTER MISSING

[01:15:01]

MISSING ASSIGNMENT ARE WITH CORDED AND OFTEN STUDENTS HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO TURN THEM IN. WHEN I WAS IN THE CLASSROOM I WOULD NOTE MISSING ASSIGNMENTS AUTOMATICALLY AND STUDENTS WOULD HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO TURN THEM IN.

I WORKED WITH THEM ON A TIMEFRAME AND MY GOAL WAS TO GET THEM TO TURN IN ALL OF THOSE SOOIMENTS, BUT BECAUSE OF THE DIFFERENT WAYS OUR TEACHERS CAN WORK WITH STUDENTS, YOU KNOW THIS DOESN'T NECESSARILY TELL US HOW MANY ENDED THE SEMESTER OR GRADING PERIOD WITH THAT NUMBER. IT JUST SAYS THEY HAD MORE THAN THAT AT SOME POINT IN TIME IN THE COURSE OF THE SCHOOL YEAR.

SO IF THIS IS AN INDICATOR WE WANT TO CONTINUE, THEN I WOULD RECOMMEND THAT WE NEED TO CONTINUE TO DO SOME WAYS OF REFINING HOW TO CAPTURE THIS. YOU CAN SEE FOR OUR STUDENTS EVEN IF IT'S LOW ACROSS THE BOARD WE DO HAVE GAPS BETWEEN DIFFERENT STUDENT POPULATIONS. AVOIDING CHRONIC ABSENTEEISM IS ONE OF THE INDICATORS I WOULD SAY IS ALWAYS GOOD FOR US TO CONTINUE TO PAY ATTENTION TO. DEFI DEFINITELY. IF WE SAY STUDENTS ARE SHOWING UP AND THEY'RE TAKING PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY AND MAINTAINING BALANCE AND WE CAN SEE THAT IN THIS AREA THAT WE HAVE SOME GAPS BETWEEN, WITH OUR BLACK AFRICAN-AMERICAN STUDENTS AND HISPANIC LATINO STUDENTS AND ENGLISH LANGUAGE LEARNS AND LOW-INCOME HOUSES AND STUDENTS RECEIVING SPECIAL EDUCATION SERVICES. AGAIN SOME OF THIS, I WOULD SAY, IS ALSO A REFLECTION OF THE ENVIRONMENT THESE STUDENTS ARE ENTERING. LOOKING AT THE LEVEL OF ENGAGEMENT AND CONNECTION, WHICH IS NOT A REFLECTION OF THEIR ABILITY TO TAKE PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY SO IN FACT, I KNOW OF STUDENTS WHO STRUGGLED TO GET TO SCHOOL AND YET THEY WERE WORKING VERY HARD TO TRY TO SUPPORT THEIR FAMILY IN MANY WAY, SO IT'S HARD TO ARGUE THEY'RE NOT ABLE TO TAKE PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY, BUT IT IS THE CONTEXT OF THE WAY WE'RE CHOOSING TO MEASURE IT. WITH THAT SAID, WE HAVE GAPS THAT WE CONTINUE TO NEED TO ADDRESS IF WE THINK ABOUT WAYS, OPPORTUNITIES FOR INTERVENTION, YOU KNOW WE'VE TALKED A LOT ABOUT OUR INTENTIONAL EFFORTS AROUND MULTI-TIERED SYSTEM OF SUPPORTS AND THE WORK WE'RE DOING TO SUPPORT OUR LEADERSHIP TEAMS TO BE ABLE TO REVIEW ACADEMIC AND SOCIAL AND EMOTIONAL AND BEHAVIORAL DATA AND INTERVENE EARLY AND THINK ABOUT HOW THAT DATA REFLECTS ON THE WORK THEY NEED TO DO SCHOOL WIDE. THERE IS USE OF EVIDENCE BASED SUPPORTS AND THIS YEAR, SPECIFICALLY AROUND ATTENDANCE WE'RE INTRODUCING ENGAGEMENT WORKBOOK FOR ALL THE SCHOOLS TO HELP THEM LOOK AT AND ENGAGE WITH STUDENTS DIFFERENTLY AROUND ATTENDANCE THROUGH THE MODEL. SIMILARLY BECAUSE WE NOTE THAT A LOT OF DATA IS AS MUCH A REFLECTION ON THE ENVIRONMENT THAT OUR STUDENTS ARE IN AND THE WORK WE CAN DO BETTER AS PROFESSIONAL EDUCATORS. SO OUR STUDENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT AND EQUITY AND FAMILY ENGAGEMENT DEPARTMENT WORK CLOSELY TO INTER TWINE SOCIAL EMOTIONAL LEARNING AND WELL BEING A LONG WITH RACIAL EQUITY WORK IN THINKING OF HOW WE HELP OUR TEACHERS AND EDUCATORS BECOME SKILLFUL OF WEIGHING AND MAINTAINING AND RESTORING RELATIONSHIPS WITH THEIR STUDENTS AND HELPING STUDENTS WITH EACH OTHER.

LOOKING AT HOW WE ARE USING DATA IN AN ASSET BASED FRAMEWORK AND CREATING MORE OPPORTUNITIES FOR HIGHER LEVELS OF ENGAGEMENT.

>> I THINK THERE'S OPPORTUNITIES FOR US TO CONTINUE TO WORK ON THE THREE MARGINALLY AROUND THE IINDI INDICATORS. ONE THING I'LL SHOW THE BOARD IN A MOMENT THAT I THINK MIGHT BE GOOD FOR THE BOARD TO CONSIDER IS THE STATE OF WASHINGTON DEVELOPED A SET OF SIX SOCIAL AND EMOTIONAL LEARNING BENCHMARK AS FEW YEARS AGO.

THERE'S A LOT OF WORK AT THE STATE LEVEL TO ADAPT THE COUNCIL MODEL THAT'S A NATIONAL RESEARCH BACKED MODEL INTO A STATE FRAMEWORK AND THEY CONTINUE TO BUILD OUT SUPPORTS FOR THINKING ABOUT HOW SCHOOL DISTRICTS CAN IMPLEMENT THIS WITHIN THE CONTEXT OF THAT, BUT ALSO, WHAT DOES A DEVELOPLY APPROPRIATE, WHAT FOR INDICATORS FROM A DEVELOPMENTALLY APPROPRIATE

[01:20:04]

RIGHT NOW WE TRY TO MEASURE THE SKILLS ACROSS 30,000 PLUS, STUDENTS AND THAT CREATES SOME LIMITATIONS FOR US AND WE THINK ABOUT THE TYPE OF DATA WE USED WHICH IS WHY WE RELY A LOT ON DATA THAT'S COMMON TO STUDENTS, SO I THINK THERE'S CONVERSATION TO BE HAD IF THAT'S THE BEST APPROACH FOR SOMETHING THAT CAN BE MEASURED AN OBSERVATIONAL STANDPOINT, BUT IT IS A LITTLE DIFFICULT TO QUANTIFY IN OTHER WAYS.

I THINK WE CAN THINK ABOUT HOW DO WE NARROW IN ON SPECIFIC POLICY ITEMS. SO GET MORE SPECIFIC THAN WE ARE WITH GRADES. WE CAN CONTINUE TO USE PERCEPTION DATA AND SOME ASSET BASED DATA ALONG WITH THE FOUND DATA POINTS TO CREATE A MORE ROBUST PICTURE.

PERCEPTION DATA WHICH IS REALLY HELPFUL FOR US TO LOOK AT HOW STAFF AND FAMILIES EXPERIENCE OUR SCHOOLS.

IT HAS SOME LIMITATIONS, AS WELL.

I MIGHT PERCEIVE MYSELF AS BEING GOOD RUNNER FOR MY AGE, BUT YET MY RACE RESULTS MIGHT TELL A DIFFERENT STORY IN TERMS OF THE ACTUAL SKILL I HAVE IN THAT CAPACITY.

IF WE HAVE AN INTEREST IN USING PERCEPTION DATA FOR RESULTS WE WANT TO MAKE SURE IT'S BALANCED ALONG WITH OTHER DATA AND WE NEED TO THINK ABOUT WEIGHING NEW BASELINE DATA IF WE SHIFT OUR INDICATORS. AS I MENTIONED EARLIER, HERE'S A BASIC VIEW. THERE'S A LOT OF CROSS OVER BETWEEN THE BOARD'S CURRENT POLICY INDICATORS AND REALLY YOU CAN THINK ABOUT THAT THERE'S THEY'RE ASKING STUDENTS TO DEVELOP SELF AWARENESS AND THE ABILITY TO SELF MANAGE AND THE SENSE OF SELF-EFFICACY SO THEIR ABILITY TO SET GOALS AND KIND OF LOOK TO THE FUTURE, AS WELL AS SKILLS AROUND THEIR SOCIAL AWARENESS AND SOCIAL MANAGEMENT AND SOCIAL ENGAGEMENT.

THERE'S A LOT OF PARALLEL WITH THE BOARD'S POLICY HERE.

BUT THERE'S FEW INDICATORS IF YOU LOOK AT THE TOP SIX STANDARDS AND AS I SAID THERE'S A LOT OF RESOURCES BEHIND THIS THAT POTENTIALLY CAN HELP US THINK ABOUT AND PERHAPS MONITOR STUDENTS DEVELOPMENT IN A DIFFERENT WAY THAN WE'RE CURRENTLY DOING THAT. SO WITH THAT, I WILL OPEN IT UP FOR DISCUSSION AND I'M GOING TO STOP SHARING.

>> I SAW DIRECTOR STUART'S HAND GO UP FIRST.

>> MATT, I'M PLEASED THAT YA'LL RECOGNIZE WITH THE PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY CAN MEAN DIFFERENT THINGS.

THERE'S PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY OF TAKING CARE OF SIBLINGS AND IT WILL AFFECT THE OTHERS AND I THINK THE MORE A COUNCILLOR GETS TO KNOW OR THE TEACHER GETS TO KNOW THE STUDENTS AN A PERSON AND THE ENVIRONMENT IN WHICH HE OR SHE GOES TO SCHOOL THE BETTER THEY CAN HAVE AN UNDERSTANDING OF THAT.

THE ONE THAT DOES CONCERN ME AND I THINK WE ADDRESSED IT DURING THE PANDEMIC. IT'S ONE OF THE FEW SILVER LININGS OF THE MESS OF THE PANDEMIC IS WE RECOGNIZED A LOT OF KIDS HAD CONNECTIVITY PROBLEMS AND THE ABILITY TO GET AN ASSIGNMENT INED A MIDNIGHT WAS NOT A REALISTIC EXPECTATIONS FOR OUR STUDENTS WHO COULD NOT GET CONNECTED.

SO I THINK THE A LONGER WE CAN KEEP THOSE HOT SPOTS THE BETTER THOSE KIDS WILL BE OFF, UNLESS PEOPLE START RECOGNIZING THAT DOESN'T WORK FOR EVERYONE. I DON'T KNOW THE ANSWER, I JUST WANT TO BRING IT UP WITH THE IDEA BEING, IF WE CONTINUE THOSE HOT SPOTS THAT WILL HELP TO BE A TECH BAND-AID UNTIL WE HAVE A

BETTER IDEA. >> I'M HAVING TROUBLE SEEING

HANDS. >> OH.

FEEDBACK, YES. DIRECTOR MR. BLIESNER?

I THINK THAT'S YOURS. >> I'M GOING TO PUT IT DOWN, RI RIGHT?

[01:25:05]

>> WHEN I READ THIS MONITORING PART I WAS CONCERNED.

MY HOME PHONE IS ABOUT TO GO OFF AND I CAN'T HIT MUTE ON IT AND I'M IN THE ROOM SO HOPEFULLY IT WON'T BE AN IMPORTANT MESSAGE.

ACTUALLY JUST GO TO SOMEBODY EL

ELSE. >> JUST SIT ON THE PHONE.

THAT'S WHAT I DO. >> I HAVE A QUICK QUESTION IN

REGARD TO R-3. >> YES.

>> USUALLY WE HAVE A PRESENTATION THE MEETING BEFORE WE'RE GOING TO LOOK THROUGH THE OUTCOMES AND THE RESULTS AND THEN VOTE, IS THAT ACCURATE? IS THAT WHAT OUR PATTERN IS HERE OR ARE WE JUST GETTING AN UPDATE ON IT?

>> YOU ADDRESS THAT. >> SO WE BROUGHT R3 FORWARD FOR BOARD ACTION A COUPLE OF WEEKS, MAYBE A MONTHS AGO AND IT WAS ON THE AGENDA AND SIRI BROUGHT CONCERNS FORWARD THAT REALLY MEANT JUST WALKING THROUGH IN GREAT DETAIL AND A LINING THE INDICATORS WITH THE DETAILS AND US IT REALLY PAINT THE PICTURE

THAT THE BOARD WAS LOOKING FOR. >> RIGHT.

>> IT'S ON THE AGENDA FOR TONIGHT, AND IF THE BOARD DOES MOVE FORWARD WITH RECEIVING THAT REPORT, MATT WILL PROVIDE A PRESENTATION AROUND RESULTS THREE LIKE WE TYPICALLY DO, AND THEN THE BOARD WOULD TAKE REQUISITE ACTION TONIGHT.

SO THIS IS MORE OF KIND OF A BIGGER PICTURE R3.

THERE'S WORK TO BE DONE AS EVERYONE KNOWS, R3 HAS BEEN A CHALLENGE TO BE ABLE TO ARTICULATE WHAT IS IT THAT WE'RE LOOKING FOR IN TERMS OF THE RESULTS THAT BOARD HAS IDENTIFIED AND THE INDICATORS THAT ACTUALLY PROVIDE EVIDENCE OF THE RESULTS THAT BOARD HAS SET AND SO AND THEN THE IDEA OR CONCEPT OF LOOKING AT POTENTIALLY SOMETHING HIKE THE WASHINGTON STATE CEL BENCHMARK. IT'S A SET OF STANDARDS IN PLACE THAT DOES ALIGN WELL WITH RESULTS THREE AND WHAT THE BOARD IS LOOKING FOR. IT MIGHT BE A MODEL WE CAN LEAN ON BECAUSE THEY HAVE INDICATORS AND IT ACTUALLY HAS A BASE IN RESEARCH AND BEST PRACTICE ALREADY.

SO AS WE THINK ABOUT THE HOLE R3 I WANTED TO PRESENT FROM WHAT IS CURRENT TO SOME POTENTIAL IDEAS, KNOWING THAT WE DO HAVE A POLICY COMMITTEE THAT WILL BE DOING SOME WORK ON SOME DIFFERENT

POLICY SETS. >> THAT WAS MY DEEPER QUESTION WAS SINCE THE BOARD CAN REVIEW POLICY AT ANYTIME, THEN THE POLICY COMMITTEE CAN REVIEW THIS AND TRY AND BRAINSTORM SOME FURTHER WAYS TO ACTUALLY MEASURE SOME OF THE THINGS IN A MORE CLEAR AND HOPEFULLY RELEVANT WAY.

THANK YOU. >> DIRECTOR, HAS YOUR PHONE

STOPPED RINGING? >> MY PHONE AS STOPPED RINGING.

THANK YOU. MY REASON WITH THIS WAS INITIALLY PRESENTED AND I ASKED FOR IT TO BE PULLED UP BECAUSE I WAS CONCERNED WE WERE UTILIZING INDICATORS.

I HAD ENVIRONMENT COMPONENT AND IT DIDN'T SEEM REASONABLE THAT WE WERE DOING THAT. I THINK THE APPROACH OF THE NEGATIVE CONCEPT AND THE ABSENCE OF EXCLUSION AR Y DISCIPLINE MEANT THIS AND I THINK THAT WAS A LEAP THAN SHOULD HAVE BEEN MADE AND MY CONCERN WAS TO PUT THIS OUT ASSORT OF AN ENDS RESULT. WHEN REALLY THESE WEREN'T GOOD AT MEASURING WHAT WE WERE HOPING TO DO AND, SO I THINK THAT WAS MY CONCERN. WE STOPPED THIS ONE BEFORE I REMEMBER WHEN WE DECIDED THE INDICATORS DID NOT WORK.

SO I REALLY APPRECIATE THAT YOU'RE WALKING THROUGH THE ENVIRONMENTAL PIECES AND HOW WE GET TO THAT.

THE BENCHMARKS FOR THE WASHINGTON STATE PART IS WILL THEY HAVE METRICS TO MEASURE THOSE BENCHMARK?

>> YEAH. SO WE'LL S

SO WE'LL HAVE WORK.S? >> YEAH.

SO WE'LL HAVE WORK. IT'S IMPORTANT TO NOTE THEY'VE DONE SOME OF THE WORK TO SAY DEVELOPMENTALLY THIS WILL LOOK DIFFERENT AT DIFFERENT AGES AND IT'S ALSO STILL HIGHLY

CONTEXTUAL. >> AND IF WE THINK ABOUT IT FROM

[01:30:02]

THE STATE HAS BEEN CAREFUL TRYING NOT TO NEGOTIATE HIGH STAKES WITH THIS AND USE IT AS A FRAMEWORK THINKING ABOUT IT FROM A CULTURAL OR DEVELOPMENTAL LENS AND THINKING ABOUT IT CONTEXTUALLY IN TERMS OF HOW STUDENTS MAY HAVE ENTERED INTO CLASSROOM THAT DAY SO IT IS COMPLEX AND IT'S NOT LIKE THEY HAVE SAID, YOU LOOKING FOR THIS AND WE'RE GOOD TO GO.

WHAT I WOULD SAY IS IF THE BOARD HAS AN INTEREST IN WANTING TO REALLY PICK THIS BACK UP AND DIVE INTO IT, IT MAY MEAN THAT WE HAVE TO THINK ABOUT MEASURING AND MONITORING OUR POLICIES IN A SLIGHTLY DIFFERENT WAY. SO YOU CAN THINK ABOUT WHAT WOULD BE AN APPROPRIATE SAMPLE SIZE.

RIGHT NOW WE TRY TO MEASURE SOMETHING THAT'S TRUE FOR THOUSANDS OF KIDS BY YOU KNOW, I DON'T KNOW HOW MANY HUNDREDS, IF WE THINK ABOUT TEACHERS, LIKE A TENTH GRADE CLASS, HOW MANY HUNDREDS OF TEACHERS ARE INVOLVED IN THAT SO WE MIGHT CHOOSE LIKE SAMPLES KIND OF LIKE WHAT WOULD BE A REASONABLE SAMPLE SIZE AND MAYBE IT INVOLVES OBSERVATIONAL DATA AND DOING SOME KIND OF DIFFERENT APPROACH WHERE THE BOARD SAYS WE'RE KIND OF WANTING TO TAKE DIP STICKS IN OUR A STUDENT EXPERIENCE TO SAY HOW WELL ARE STUDENTS DOING IN THESE AREAS AND IT MIGHT MEAN THAT WE LOOK AT, WE MAY LOOK AT WHAT WOULD BE A SPECIFIC PRODUCT THAT STUDENTS MIGHT GENERATE AS THE COURSE OF THEIR EXPERIENCE. AGAIN DOING THAT IS A CHALLENGE AT THE SCALE WE'RE CURRENTLY TRYING TO DO, SO I THINK THAT'S PART OF THE CONVERSATION IS I WOULD JUST ARGUE THAT IF WE REALLY WANT TO MONITOR THIS WELL WE HAVE TO TAKE A DIFFERENT APPROACH. THE DATA ELEMENTS THAT WE'RE USING WE ARE FOUNDED. WHAT WAS SUCCESSFUL TO US AND WE TRY TO SHOE HORN THEM IN TO THE BOARD'S POLICY AND I THINK AFTER A COUPLE OF YEARS, I'VE LOOKED AT THIS NOW FOR TWO YEARS AND IT'S JUST HARD TO JUSTIFY THOSE DATA SETS MEAN WHAT WE WANT THEM

TO MEAN. >> AGREED AND I APPRECIATE YOUR RETHINKING THAT THROUGH AND TO DIFFERENT WAYS AND LOOKING AT THAT AND WITH THAT, I KNOW THE STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION HAS PUT OUT THE WHAT DOES EVERY WASHINGTON GRADUATE LOOK LIKE? STARTING TO DO THAT COMPONENT AND HAD THE SURVEY OUT TO LOOK AT IT AND THAT'S WHERE THESE WERE PULLED LIKE WASHINGTON'S FRAMEWORK FOR WHAT WE HAD WHAT A GRADUATE HAS ON THE

CHARACTERISTICS OF A GRADUATE. >> PROFILE.

WASN'T IT PROFILE OF A GRADUATE? >> THERE WE GO.

THAT SOUNDS GOOD. PROFILE OF A GRADUATE.

I THINK THOSE ARE PIECES TO BUILD ON AND USES DIFFERENT WAYS IT REALLY IS ABOUT PERCEPTION. THESE ARE THE HOLISTIC PIECE FOR OUR STUDENTS THAT WE'RE LOOKING FOR AND NOT THE OKAY DEMOCRACY EBBING COMPONENT SO HOW DO YOU ENSURE THAT WE BUILD THAT AND I THINK YOUR ENVIRONMENTAL PERCEPTION ARE WITH IT AND I'M NOT SURE WE REALLY WANT TO, I MEAN I WOULD BE COMFORTABLE SAYING AS WE LOOK TO HOW TO HANDLE THE THIS REPORT IS WE SAY, WE RECOGNIZE IT'S DONE AND WE THINK THE INDICATORS NEED TO BE REVISITED AND THEY COME BACK IT TO AND THAT'S POTENTIALLY SOMETHING WE SPEAK ABOUT TO THE NIGHT AS APPOSED TO SAYING REASONABLE PROGRESS ALONG THAT LINES AND LOOKING AT IT THAT

WAY. >> YOU TOOK THE WORDS YOU THE OF MY MOUTH. I THINK WE KEEP IT ON THE AGENDA TONIGHT AND ADDRESS IT THERE AND I GUESS MAYBE - I GUESS I WANT TO PUT IN THERE'S A PART OF THE RESOLUTION WE'LL BE ADOPT TOGETHER NIGHT WE COMMITTING TO LOOKING AT EXISTING POLICIES AND TO ME I'M LOOKING AT WHAT WE'RE MEASURING AND HOW WE'RE DOING IT HERE. WE'RE NOT ACHIEVING IT TODAY, SO I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT THAT WE DEVOTE SOME TIME TO RESULTS THREE. THERE ARE SMARTER PEOPLE THAN ME ON THIS AND MATT, MR. GILLING HAM IS ONE OF THEM, SO I THINK WE SHOULD LEAN ON THE STATE TO TRY AND GET THIS MORE ALIGNED TO WHAT OUR VALUES ARE AND WHAT WE'RE COMMITTED TO DO.

I JUMPED IN. DIRECTOR SAGE, I DON'T THINK HAS

HAD A CHANCE TO SPEAK. >> I THINK THAT DIRECTOR STUART

WAS FIRST. >> OKAY.

[01:35:05]

DIRECTOR STUART? >> DOESN'T MATTER.

TWO PIECES. ON THE IDEA OF HAVING, DOING OBSERVATIONAL WORK IN A CLASSROOM, IF IT WAS ABLE TO BE DONE WHERE THE OBSERVER WAS TOTALLY INVISIBLE, NOT ONLY TO THE STUDENTS, BUT THE TEACHER, I THINK THAT WOULD WORK, BUT WHEN YOU PUT AN OBSERVER ON THE PRINCIPAL LIKE OBSERVING YOUNGER TEACHERS, ALL OF THE SUDDEN IT'S WONDERLAND AND EVERYTHING IS PERFECT AND GOES RIGHT. IT'S BASICALLY A DOG AND PONY SHOW. THAT'S HUMAN NATURE IS WHAT I'M GETTING AT, BUT I QUESTION HOW MUCH IT WILL AFFECT YOUR INFORMATION YOU GATHER. AS TO HOW ACCURATE THAT MIGHT BE. IF YOU ARE OBSERVEING FOR A WEEK OR TWO MAYBE YOU CAN ONLY SMILE FOR SO LONG.

BUTING FOR A WEEK OR TWO MAYBE YOU CAN ONLY SMILE FOR SO LONG. BUT THAT MIGHT BE BETTER.

I DON'T KNOW. YOU KNOW THE SURVEY BUSINESS BETTER THAN ME. COULD YOU GO BACK TO THE ONE

SLIDE OF THE B AND C STUDENT? >> I CAN PULL IT UP.

I WOULD SAY I HAVEN'T, I HAVE NOT, YOU KNOW KIND OF THE OBSERVATIONAL RESEARCH IS NOT AN AREA OF MY EXPERTISE SO THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WE WOULD ENGAGE IN PARTNERS WHO MAYBE LIKE THE UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON RESEARCHERS THAT CAN HELP US THINK THROUGH THIS. I KNOW THERE'S GROUPS ENGAGED IN MODELS TO TRY AND HELP BOARDS AND DISTRICTS GET THIS RIGHT, BUT I'M NOT AWARE THAT ANYBODY THAT HAS SOMETHING THAT WE COULD SUCCESSFULLY REPLICATE. I'LL PUT THAT SLIDE UP.

>> OKAY. SO HERE IS THIS THE SLIDE, MARK?

>> YES, SIR. CAN YOU BUMP THAT UP A LITTLE

BIT AT ALL? >> THANK YOU.

>> GOOD. THAT'S GREAT.

I'M LOOKING FOR APTITUDE. AM I MISSING IT? BECAUSE TO ME, APTITUDE IN SOME AREAS, YOU KNOW, GOD KNOWS IF IT IS A MATH CLASS I'M NOT GOING TO BE THE A OR B STUDENT.

IT'S HUMAN NATURE IF THAT'S NOT YOUR APTITUDE.

HOPEFULLY IN THE THIRD GRADE THE APTITUDE HAS NOT ALREADY BEEN CAST IN STONE, BUT IT'S SOMETHING TO BE CONSIDERED, I THINK. I DON'T KNOW.

IF THE TWO C STUDENTS AND TWO STUDENTS COME OUT WITH C'S AND YOU ARE TRYING TO FIGURE IT OUT, WHAT WOULD YOU DO WITH THE DATA TO TRY AND HELP THAT STUDENT IF YOU ARE GATHERING DATA FOR THE SAKE OF DATA THEN IT'S USE LESS, BUT IF YOU'RE GOING TO APPLY IT

TO HELP THOSE STUDENTS. >> DIRECTOR STUART, I THINK THE REASONLESS, BUT IF YOU'RE GOING TO APPLY IT

TO HELP THOSE STUDENTS. >> DIRECTOR STUART, I THINK THE REASON IN LOOKING AT HOW WE MONITOR THE POLICY, ONE OF THE CHALLENGES AS I THINK ABOUT HOW WE USE GRADE DATA IS WE USE IT ACROSS, IN THIS CASE FIVE DIFFERENT POLICY OBJECTIVES AND SO WHERE WE HAVE ONE INDICATOR LIKE HERE, THE C GRADE, IT MEANS TWO VERY DIFFERENT THINGS AND SO IT THEN MAKES IT DIFFICULT FOR MYSELF AND MY COLLEAGUES TO BE ABLE TO PROVIDE THE BOARD WITH A RECOMMENDATION OF, HERE'S, WE NEED TO DO MORE WORK TO HELP STUDENTS IN MAKING CONNECTIONS BECAUSE I CAN'T DRAW ANY CONCLUSIONS OUT OF THAT DATA. A C MEAN AS C, BUT I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHAT'S UNDERNEATH THAT.

BEYOND HELPING THE INDIVIDUAL STUDENT IT MASKS WHERE WE'RE BEING SUCCESSFUL IN SUPPORTING STUDENTS AND WHERE WE'RE POSSIBLY NOT IN SUPPORTING STUDENTS WITH RESPECT TO ANY PARTICULAR POLICY GOAL THAT THE BOARD HAS.

>> OKAY. I WAS TRYING TO LOOK AT THE PRACTICAL POLITICIAN FOR STUDENTS IN A CLASSROOM.

BEYOND THE POLICY AREA, BUT THANK YOU.

>> YEAH. WELL WE COULD SPEND A LOT OF

TIME ON THAT. >> AGAIN, I THINK APTITUDE COMES IN THERE TOO, BUT BE IT AS IT MAY.

>> YOU SAW THE CHANGE WHEN WE LOOKED AT THE INDICATORS FROM

[01:40:02]

WE NEED TO MOVE TO THE NEXT TOPIC.

BOND AND LEVEE PLANNING, BUT I WANT TO GIVE THE DIRECTOR A CHANCE. CASSANDRA, THE LAST WORD?

>> THANK YOU. IT'S INTERESTING TO SEE HOW OTHER DISTRICTS ARE MEASURING DIFFERENT SKILLS THAT WE'RE TRYING TO MEASURE THAT DON'T HAVE CONCRETE NUMBERS BEHIND THEM THEM.

>> PERFECT. SO I THINK TO SUMMARIZE.

IF WE HAVE WE ARE NOT HAPPY WITH THE INDICATORS AND WE'LL DEVOTE TIME TO THE WORK PLAN AND WITH THE POLICY COMMITTEE REFORM TO DO SOME WORK ON THIS. THIS IS THE R 3 AS IT IS NOW ON THE AGENDA FOR TONIGHT. I DO THINK IT'S IMPORTANT THAT WE ADDRESS THE ISSUES WITH IT AT THE BUSINESS MEETING.

>> DO YOU WANT ANY PORTION. WELL THERE'S TWO THINGS.

THE BOARD CAN HEAR MATT'S R3 PRESENTATION AND CHOOSE TO DO WHATEVER YOU WILL, OR MATT COULD TAKE SOME OF HIS PRESENTATION HE DID NOW AND PROVIDE THAT CONTEXT FOR THE BOARD AND SO WE COULD GO EITHER WAY OR NOT DO PRESENTATIONS AT ALL.

ESSENTIALLY TO NOT MONITOR R3 FOR THE 2021 SCHOOL YEAR.

>> I DO THINK THAT IS THE ACTION.

AT LEAST THAT'S MY OPINION. THAT'S WHAT THE DIRECTOR

BELIEVES THERE WAS. >> I THINK HAVING SOME OF THE PRESENTATION PROVIDED TONIGHT WOULD BE VALUABLE IN ORDER TO SET THE STAGE OF WHY THAT IS TRUE.

I THINK SO. >> I WANT TO MAKE SURE WE'RE CLEAR ON WHICH PRESENTATION. LIKE THE R 3 OR WHAT MATT JUST

PROVIDED? >> I THINK WHAT MATT PROVIDED.

THAT'S MY VIEW. I DON'T THINK WE NEED THE R 3.

I'M SURE IT IS A GREAT PRESENTATION, BUT I DON'T THINK WE NEED THE R 3 IF WE'RE NOT MONITORING OR TAKING ACTION TO

NOT MONITOR EFFECTIVE THIS YEAR. >> I WOULD BE CONCERNED IF WE'RE NOT MONITORING IT AT ALL THIS ENTIRE SCHOOL YEAR?

>> IT'S HISTORICAL DATA. SO I GUESS, I'M NOT SURE WHAT THE ACTION WILL BE. WE'LL HAVE TO SEE.

I THINK IT'S TO, WE COULD ACCEPT THE REPORT AND INDICATE THAT WE'RE DOING SOMETHING DIFFERENT GOING FORWARD.

>> NO. I'M JUST SAYING THAT IF WE WORK ON THIS POLICY AND THEN BRING IT BACK, I THINK THERE WOULD BE VALUE IN EVEN MEASURING IT FOR EVEN SIX MONTHS.

>> I AGREE. >> I'M NOT SURE WE ANSWERED JOHN'S QUESTION WHICH WAS, WHAT PRESENTATION SHOULD THE DIRECTOR MAKE TONIGHT? I THINK EVERYONE HAD AN INTEREST IN HAVING AN ABBREVIATED VERSION OF THE PRESENTATION WE HAD FOR THE STUDY SESSION AND THE SECOND QUESTION IS DO WE ALSO WANT A PRESENTATION OF THE RESULTS THREE MONITORING REPORT AT THE MING TONIGHT? AS IN THE AGENDA AND IN OUR

PACKET? >> HOW ARE THOSE DIFFERENT?

>> HOW ARE THEY DIFFERENT? >> THE PRESENTATIONS?

>> IN THIS PRESENTATION I WENT THROUGH ALL THE DATA SETS AVAILABLE IN R3, SO I DON'T KNOW THAT IT SUBSTANTIVELY, I COULD GO THROUGH ANOTHER PRESENTATION WITHOUT MY COMMENTARY AND JUST

PROVIDE THE BOARD WITH THE DATA >> NO COMMENTARY IS GOOD.

>> I AGREE 100%. >> LET'S DO IT THAT WAY.

>> WHICH WAY DID WE SAY BASED ON THAT?

>> WELL, HE'S GOT THE DATA BAKED IN SO BOTH AT ONCE IS THE

ANSWER. >> I HEARD, I WILL DO A SLIGHTLY TRUNCATED VERSION OF WHAT I JUST PRESENTED TO THE BOARD.

>> YEAH. THANK YOU.

>> BUT I DO THINK YOUR COMMENTARY AS MARK SAID IS VITAL BECAUSE THAT PROVIDES THAT COMPONENT AS TO WHY WE DON'T SEE

[01:45:04]

WOULD WE CONTINUE TO DO THESE? >> IT HELPS THE FIVE BOARD MEMBERS TO MAKE A CONNECTION. INDICATORS HELP LOT.

>> CAN DO THAT. I'LL BE PREPARED LATER.

THANK YOU. >> OKAY.

[3. Bond and Levy Planning]

CAN YOU GET US STARTED? >> WELCOME ASSOCIATE SUPERINTENDENT AND I SAW THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR HERE AS WELL.

WELCOME. AS THE BOARD KNOWS WITH THIS TOPIC WE PROBABLY HAVE FOUR TO FIVE HOURS WORTH OF CONTENT TO GET THROUGH IN THE NEXT HOUR, BUT THIS IS THAT NEXT STEP IN THE PROCESS. WE'VE COME TO THE BOARD A NUMBER OF TIMES IN THIS CONVERSATION AND DISCUSSION AND WE'RE COMING BACK TO THE BOARD WITH INFORMATION AROUND DIFFERENT FUNDING STRATEGIES, GIVEN THE CONSTRUCTION NEEDS THAT WE HAVE IDENTIFIED. WE RECOMMEND FUNDING MEASURES TO PUT ON THE FEBRUARY 022 BALLOT. TONIGHT IS NOT THAT NIGHT WHERE YOU RECEIVED A COMPREHENSIVE PACKAGE, BUT ADDITIONAL DATA FOR THE BOARD IN REGARDS TO CONSTRUCTION AND MAYBE A LITTLE BIT ABOUTEP O AND CAPITAL PROJECTS AND I'LL HAND IT OVER TO BARBARA AS SHE WALKS US THROUGH THE PRESENTATION.

WILL YOU GIVE ME THE THUMBS UP YOU CAN SEE THE PRESENTATION? OKAY GREAT. SO I'LL JUST DO A QUICK REVIEW.

IS THE SLIDE CHANGING? ALRIGHT. GREAT.

SO WE'VE BEEN SHARING WITH THE BOARD INFORMATION ABOUT BOND AND LEVY AND I WON'T READ IT, BUT JANUARY AND APRIL.

OUR BOND AND LEVY ADVISORY COMMITTEE MET IN MAY AND JUNE AND WE HAD A STUDY SESSION AND CONDUCTED A COMMUNITY SURVEY IN JULY AND HAD A STUDY SESSION AUGUST NINTH AND THEN AWING 23RD WAS CAPITOL CONSTRUCTION AND HIGH SCHOOL CAPACITY AND WE WANTED TO BRING YOU MORE INFORMATION TONIGHT.

TONIGHT OUR OUTCOMES FOR TONIGHT'S SESSION IS WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THE BOARD UNDERSTANDS THE VARIABLES IMPACTING DECISIONS ABOUT THE 2022 FUNDING MEASURES AND THE BOARD PROVIDES DIRECTION RELATED TO CONSTRUCTION FUNDING OPTIONS AND THE SUPERINTENDENT'S SUPERINTENDENT AND CAPITOL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS SO WE'LL CONTINUE WITH CAPITOL CONSTRUCTION. WE SPENT TIME ON THE LAST STUDY SESSION AND HIGH SCHOOL OPTIONS AND SO THIS IS A SLIDE YOU SAW BEFORE WE SHARED THREE OPTIONS AROUND HIGH SCHOOL CAPACITY.

OPTION ONE WAS ADDING CHOICE HIGH SCHOOLS.

OPTION TWO WAS ADDING A FIFTH COMPREHENSIVE PLUS, THESE AND A FIFTH AND SIXTH COMPREHENSIVE HIGH SCHOOL.

THIS WAS JUST A REMINDER OF THAT OPTION TWO.

KIND OF THE DATA WHEN WE ADD A COMPREHENSIVE HIGH SCHOOL.

HERE'S OUR ENROLLMENT PROJECTIONS.

THIS IS WITHOUT A COMPREHENSIVE HIGH SCHOOL OR ANY NEW CHOICE HIGH SCHOOL'S WITH A FIFTH HIGH SCHOOL AND WITH A FIFTH HIGH SCHOOL AND A CHOICE HIGH SCHOOL HIGH SCHOOL'S WITH A FIFTH HIGH SCHOOL AND WITH A FIFTH HIGH SCHOOL AND A CHOICE HIGH SCHOOL.

SO THE BOARD FEEDBACK IS PLAN FOR A FIFTH COMPREHENSIVE HIGH SCHOOL IN THE LONG-TERM. WE HAVE PUT TOGETHER SOME PLANS FOR ALL OF PROJECTS THAT WE NEED TO DEAL WITH OUR CAPACITY IN AGEING FACILITIES, BUT IN THE SHORT-TERM WE HAVE CRITICAL CAPACITY NEEDS THAT WE NEED TO PROVIDE FOR AND THAT'S AT OUR MIDDLE SCHOOL AND HIGH SCHOOL. OUR BUBBLE THAT STARTED IN TELL

[01:50:05]

BEFORE I HAVE IN YOUR BOARD DOCS THERE'S A HAND-OUT OR A DOCUMENT CALLED CONSTRUCTION NEEDS SCENARIOS AND BEFORE I GO OVER THAT I'M GOING TO FIRST JUST TALK ABOUT ONE MORE SLIDE AND THEN WE'LL GO OVER THAT. AND SO ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE'RE REVIEWING AS WE THINK ABOUT THE NEED TO BUILD A FIFTH COMPREHENSIVE HIGH SCHOOL IS IMMEDIATELY THOUGH BECAUSE A FIFTH COMPREHENSIVE HIGH SCHOOL IS GOING TO TAKE SOME PLANNING AND IT'S GOING TO TAKE ADDITIONAL COMMUNITY FEEDBACK ON TO THE LOCATION OF THAT HIGH SCHOOL BECAUSE THERE IS CONSTRAINTS WITH DIFFERENT PROPERTY AND SO ONE OF THE THINGS WE KNOW THAT WE STILL NEED IN THE NEAR TERM HIGH SCHOOL CAPACITY, SECONDARY SCHOOL CAPACITY SO ONE OF THE THINGS YOU'LL SEE IN THE PLAN IS CONTINUING TO BUILD TWO CHOICE SCHOOLS TO PROVIDE FOR IMMEDIATE CAPACITY NEEDS.

SO THERE'S A NEED FOR A THOUSAND STUDENT CHOICE SCHOOL ON THE WEST SIDE OF THE DISTRICT. THE INITIAL FUNDING WOULD BE FOR A 600 STUDENT SCHOOL, BUT WITH EXPANSION OR POTENTIAL EXPANSION FUNDED IN LATER PHASES. WE'RE DOING THAT ON ALL POTH PROJECTS NOW. WHEN WE I'D BUILD ONE WE CONSIDER EXPANSION FOR THE FUTURE.WHEN WE I'D BUILD ONE WE CONSIDER EXPANSION FOR THE FUTURE.NOW.

WHEN WE I'D BUILD ONE WE CONSIDER EXPANSION FOR THE FUT FUTURE.

AND THEN A SECONDARY SCHOOL WITH FUTURE EDUCATIONAL EXPANSION.

SO IF YOU CAN PULL UP YOUR CONSTRUCTION NEEDS SCENARIOS IN

THE BOARD DOCS. >> BARBARA, CAN I JUST SPEAK TO

THE LAST BULLET THERE? >> BLESS.

>> THAT'S A DEVIATION FROM WHAT WE TALKED ABOUT.

>> THAT'S A DEVIATION FROM WHAT WE TALKED ABOUT.

>> THAT'S A DEVIATION FROM WHAT WE TALK

>> THAT'S A DEVIATION FROM WHAT WE TALK

>> THAT'S A DEVIATION FROM WHAT WE TALKED ABOUT.

>> THAT'S A DEVIATION FROM WHAT WE TALKED ABOUT.>> THAT'S A DEV WE TALKED ABOUT.> THAT'S A DEVI WE TALKED ABOUT.

HOW DO YOU MAP IN THE CAPACITY AND THINKING OF THE FUNDING AND HOW THAT LAYERS IN THE NEED AS WE THINK OF A COMPREHENSIVE HIGH SCHOOL, KNOWING THAT'S A DIFFERENT BUILD OUT THAN OUR CURRENTLY THE MODEL AT THE CHOICE SECOND CARE SCHOOLS AND SO AS WE THINK HOW TO BRING CAPACITY ON-LINE CREATED IN SUCH A WAY THAT IT IS FLEXIBLE IN NATURE, THAT COULD MAINTAIN A 600 STUDENT CHOICE SCHOOL AND THAT IT COULD POTENTIALLY EXPAND FOR OTHER PURPOSES, AS WELL KNOWING THAT YOU KNOW EAST LAKE HAS BEEN GROWING RAPIDLY. YOU KNOW SOME OF THE THINGS WE KNOW ARE GOING ON WITH THEIR POTENTIAL EXPANSION AND THINGS LIKE THAT. TOWN CENTER AND SOME OF THOSE THINGS ARE ON HOLD RIGHT NOW, BUT WE KNOW IF THOSE THINGS MOVE FORWARD WE'LL NEED ADDITIONAL ELEMENTARY CAPACITY, AS WELL SO THINKING OF THAT SITE TO HOUSE ELEMENTARY STUDENTS, AS WELL WITH SOME OF THE UNKNOWNS, BUT WE NEED HIGH SCHOOL CAPACITY IN THE VERY NEAR FUTURE IN THAT COMPREHENSIVE HIGH SCHOOL IS NOT NEAR FUTURE CAPACITY. THAT'S AS WE'RE THINKING ABOUT HOW WE THREAD THIS NEEDLE. THE OTHER THING WAS POTENTIALLY DOING BEYOND JUST A HIGH SCHOOL IN THE EAST LAKE AREA, BUT THINKING ABOUT POTENTIALLY LIKE A 612 OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT TO PROVIDE SUPPORT FOR BOTH MIDDLE SCHOOL AND HIGH SCHOOL.

THAT'S SOME OF THE THINKING OF WHY THIS IS A BIT OF A DEVIATION FROM THE PRIOR DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATION.

>> CHRIS? >> I HAD A QUESTION.

>> SORRY. THERE'S A DOCUMENT SOMEWHERE, BUT THE BOND AND LEVY PLANNING US NOT HAVE DOCUMENTS UNDER IT,

[01:55:01]

>> WHEN YOU SIGN INTO BOARD DOCS THERE'S MULTIPLE CONCEPT, SO SELECT BOND AND LEVY PLANNING AND UNDER ADMINISTRATIVE CONTENT

YOU SHOULD SEE FIVE DOCUMENTS. >> I DON'T SEE ANYTHING THAT

SAYS DOCUMENTS. >> ARE YOU LOGGED IN, CHRIS? WILL YOU MAKE SURE YOU'RE LOGGED INTO BOARD DOCS.

>> I AM LOGGED IN. NO I'M NOT.

NEVER MIND. I WAS GOING TO SAY I DON'T SEE

ANYTHING THERE. >> IF YOU ARE NOT LOGGED IN YOU WON'T SEE ANYTHING. CASSANDRA AND SIRI ARE YOU ABLE

TO SEE THE DOCUMENTS? >> YES.

DID YOU FIND IT, CHRIS? >> I'VE LOGGED IN.

>> WELL I GUESS, WHILE CHRIS IS TRACKING IT, CAN I CLARIFY SOMETHING. THE TWO HIGH SCHOOL KEY CHOICE HIGH SCHOOLS, WILL THEY BOTH BE DESIGNED WITH THE IDEA OF HAVING CAPACITY TO EXPAND TO ONE THOUSAND STUDENTS?

IS THAT THE IDEA? >> POTENTIALLY, YES.

AND DESIGNED WITH FLEXIBLE SPACES SO THAT IF NEEDS CHANGE

THEY WOULD BE FLEXIBLE DESIGNS. >> BUT THE INITIAL FUNDING AND CONSTRUCTION PLAN WOULD BE TO FUND AND CONSTRUCT 600 STUDENT

CAPACITY SCHOOLS? >> YES.

>> GREAT, THANK YOU. >> SO EVERYBODY SHOULD HAVE THE CONSTRUCTION NEEDS SCENARIOS AND ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE SHARED WITH YOU AT THE LAST MEETING WAS A TIME-LINE.

WITHOUT DOLLARS ASSOCIATED ON ALL OF THE PROJECTS THAT WE KNEW NEEDED TO BE FUNDED. YOU KNOW OUR CRITICAL CAPACITY, OUR FACILITYED A VIZLY FOR BOTH CAPACITY AND AGING FACILITIES, SO WE PUT THOSE PROJECTS ON THIS DOCUMENT AND THEN ALSO, YOU KNOW KIND OF DO A TENTATIVE LOOK AT WHEN THOSE PROJECTS ARE POTENTIALLY NEEDED AND THEN WE NEEDED TO INNATE THE DOLLARS BECAUSE CONSTRUCTION COSTS ARE YOU KNOW INCREASING SIGNIFICANTLY EACH YEAR AND THESE ASSUME AN 8% CONSTRUCTION INFLATION EACH YEAR SO WE HAVE WEIGHED THE COSTS OUT AND WE'VE ALSO ARE KNOWING LONG-TERM WE WANT TO REDUCE OUR RELIANCE ON PORTABLES AND WE PUT PROJECTS IN THERE THAT NEWEL ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS IT WOULD REDUCE OUR RELIANCE ON THOSE.

BUT THERE'S $1.9 MILLION IN CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS THAT ARE NEEDED IN THE DISTRICT. AND AGAIN THOSE COSTS ARE KIND OF INFLATED OUT TO 2030. WHAT WE DID IS WE TOOK THOSE PROJECTS AND PUT THEM INTO THREE PHASES AND INITIALLY AGAIN WE WERE HAVING THE CONVERSATION ABOUT SHORTER TERM, SIX YEAR LEVY BEFORE GOING INTO A BOND AND SO WE KEPT THAT FIRST PHASE KIND OF SMALLER DOLLAR AMOUNT AND AGAIN WE'LL BE TALKING ABOUT CAPACITY. OR FINANCING OPTIONS OR DIFFERENT WAYS TO FINANCE THIS SO IN PHASE ONE.

WHAT WE'RE CALLING CRITICAL NEEDS TO ADDRESS CAPACITY, THAT'S MIDDLE SCHOOL AT FIN HILL AND KIRKLAND AND REDMOND AND A TICKSES OR POTENTIAL PORTALS WE STILL HAVE TO ANALYZE THE FEASIBILITY OF THE BUILDINGS CAPACITY FOR ELEMENTARY STUDENTS, WE KNOW THAT THERE'S A LOT OF CONSTRUCTION GOING ON AND A NEWER, OR A LOW INCOME HOUSING PROJECT IN DOWNTOWN REDMOND THAT WILL GENERATE A LOT OF STUDENTS, SO MAKING SURE WE HAVE CAPACITY FOR THE ENROLLMENT EXPECTED FROM THAT AND THEN AS WE DISCUSSED, FUNDS FOR TWO EAST LAKE AREA CHOICE AND LAKE WASHINGTON LEARNING COMMUNITY CHOICE HIGH SCHOOLS OR SECONDARY SPACES AND SO, THE FIRST PHASE IS ABOUT 296,000,000 DOLLARS AND THEN

[02:00:02]

WE KNOW WE'RE GOING TO NEED LAKE WASHINGTON ELEMENTARY CAPACITY.

THE JUANITA FIELDHOUSE AND POOL AND REBUILDING SMITH ELEMENTARY AND THEN PROVIDING SPACE FOR EARLY LEARNING IN THE LAKE WASHINGTON AREA. THEN SO THAT PHASE IS ABOUT 971 MILLION DOLLARS AND THEN PHASE THREE IS AGAIN THAT EXPANSION OF THE LAKE WASHINGTON AREA HIGH SCHOOL CHOICE WITH ANOTHER 400 STUDENTS REBUILDING AND EXPANDING EVERGREEN MIDDLE AND ROCKWELL PROVIDING EARLY LEARNING AND TWO ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS IN DECIDING WHERE THEY WOULD BE TO REDUCE OUR RELIANCE ON PORTABLES. IN PHASE THREE THAT'S ABOUT $705 MILLION SO WHAT WE DID IS WE HAD D.A. DAVIDSON GO THROUGH AND KIND OF GIVE US SOME SCENARIOS AND AGAIN, I'LL GO INTO THAT ON HOW TO FUND THIS CONSTRUCTION AND THOSE COSTS, SO I'M GOING TO MOVE, JUST SO DOES ANYBODY HAVE QUESTIONS BEFORE I GET INTO THE, WE HAVE FOUR DIFFERENT SCENARIOS FOR HOW TO FUND CONSTRUCTION

OPTIONS OR THE CONSTRUCTION. >> SO, BECAUSE I CAN'T SEE HAND,

SO THANK YOU. >> SORRY.

SO AS I'M LOOKING AT THIS AND LOOKING ACROSS THE WAY I SEE THAT ALCOT YOUREST MOUTHING 20 MILLION AND THEN ROCKWELL AT 100 MILLION. SO WE'RE EXPECTING A 20 MILLION

INCREASE IN THE THREE YEAR? >> YEAH IT'S ABOUT 8% A YEAR.

>> OKAY. >> YEAH.

AND ULTIMATELY THE COST WILL BE DETERMINED AS WE GO INTO DESIGN AND SO THESE ARE JUST, THESE ARE CURRENT DOLLARS INFLATED BY 8% A YEAR AND KNOWING THE ACTUAL COST ESTIMATES WILL BE DEPENDENT ON THAT PARTICULAR SCHOOLS DESIGN AND YOU KNOW COSTS OF CONSTRUCTION AT THE TIME. WE HALF HAVE FOUR DIFFERENT TO SUMMARIZE CONSTRUCTION. I WILL SUMMARIZE THE FORE FOUR OPTIONS AND WE LAID OUT BENEFITS AND CHALLENGES OF EACH OPTION.F OPTIONS AND WE LAID OUT BENEFITS AND CHALLENGES OF EACH OPTION.F OPTIONS AND WE LAID OUT BENEFITS AND CHALLENGES OF EACH OPTION.F OPTIONS AND WE LAID OUT BENEFITS AND CHALLENGES OF EACH OPTION.F OPTIONS AND WE LAID OUT BENEFITS AND CHALLENGES OF EACH OPTION.

I'LL SHARE THE TAX RATE IMPLICATIONS.

>> BARBARA I THINK DIRECTOR STUART HAS A QUESTION THOUGH.

>> THAT TAG BY ONE OF OUR VIEWERS, ONE OF OUR LOYAL VIEWERS SAYING THEY COULD NOT FIND THE CONSTRUCTION PRESENTATION FOR THE PUBLIC. A COUPLE OF OTHERS CHIMEED IN

THE SAME. >> THE ONLY POSTING RIGHT NOW IS FOR YOU. BUT IT WILL BE FOR THE PEOPLE

WATCHING. >> THAT EXPLAINS IT TO THE PUBLIC THEN. THANK YOU.

>> SO WE'LL WALK THROUGH THE FOUR FUNDING STRATEGIES AND WE HAVE BENEFITS AND CHALLENGES FOR EACH AND THEN THE PARTICULAR BOND UNDER WRITER, WE DID POST, YOU HAVE ONE OF THE HAND-OUTS IS THE CONSTRUCTION FINANCE SCENARIOS SO THE DETAILED SCENARIOS ARE OUT THERE, AS WELL, SO I WILL GO AHEAD AND START WITH CONSTRUCTION FUNDING STRATEGY ONE AND THIS IS, YOU KNOW WE HAVE BEEN TALKING WITH THE BOARD ABOUT THIS TYPE OF STRATEGY WHERE WE START WITH A LEVY, A CONSTRUCTION LEVY IN 2022. WE HAVE A 2019 CONSTRUCTION LEVY GOING AND THAT'S WHAT BUILT LAKE WASHINGTON HIGH SCHOOL ADDITIONS

[02:05:02]

COMING BACK IN 2024 AND GOING BACK WITH A BOND FOR THE LARGER DOLLAR AMOUNT AND IN 2028 DOING A CONSTRUCTION LEVY AND ON-GOING CONSTRUCTION LEVY TO FUND THE FINAL PHASE AND THEN ON-GOING CONSTRUCTION TO FUND JUST THE CONTINUED AGING SCHOOLS THAT WE KNOW, YOU KNOW WILL KEEP COMING UP AFTER 2030 THAT WE SHARED WITH THE BOARD AT THE LAST MEETING.

SO SOME OF THE BENEFITS OF A LEVY BOND STRATEGY ARE IT PRIORITIZES NEW STUDENT SPACE. THAT'S THE LEVY PROJECTS AND FUNDS ARE IN CRITICAL CAPACITY IMMEDIATELY AND PROVIDES CONSTRUCTION IN AGING FACILITY NEEDS BY 2030 AND THAT WOULD BE THE YOU KNOW BECAUSE WE'RE DOING A 24 BOND WE CAN GET THAT F FUNDING BETWEEN 24 AND 26 AND THE 28 LEVY GETS THE MAJORITY OF OUR FUNDING NEEDS BY 2030. IT FUNDS OUR FIFTH COMPREHENSIVE HIGH SCHOOL BY 030. IT PROVIDES ADDITIONAL PRE-DESIGN WIN TO FOR THE BOND PROJECTS.

IT BUILDS COMMUNITY KNOWLEDGE BY DOING A SHORT-TERM LEVY NOW RATHER THAN A BOND BUILDS COMMUNITY KNOWLEDGE.

WE HAVE TIME TO BUILD IT REGARDING BOND THAT WE WOULD BE NEEDING IN 2024 AND THEN SOME CHALLENGES IS THAT ANY, IT REALLY DELAYS ADDRESSING THE AGING FACILITIES UNTIL THE SECOND AND THIRD FUNDING MEASURE EXTENDS THE PLANNING TIME FOR THE FIFTH COMPREHENSIVE HIGH SCHOOL.

IT DELAYS THE FIELDHOUSE POOL UNTIL THE SECOND FUNDING MEASURE AND THEN IT DOES HAVE AND AGAIN WE'LL SHOW YOU THE TAX RATE IMPLICATIONS AFTER WE GO THROUGH THE STRATEGIES, BUT IT HAS A LARGER TAX RATE INCREASE NEEDED WHEN THERE'S LEVY VERSES BOND.

GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE. FUNDING STRATEGY TWO IS AN ALL BOND STRATEGY SO WE GO OUT IN FEBRUARY OF 2022 FOR A BOND.

OR IT COULD BE LATER IN 2022, BUT IDEALLY FEBRUARY OF 2022.

AND THEN IN 2024 WE COME BACK FOR ANOTHER BOND AND THE NEXT ONE WOULD BE SIX YEARS LATER IN 2030.

AGAIN, IT PRIORITIZES NEW STUDENT SPACE.

IN ALL THE SCENARIOS YOU'LL SEE WHEN WE DID THE FINANCES IS WE KEPT THE FINANCING PHASES THE SAME AND WE DIDN'T CHANGE IT SO IT PRIORITIZES NEW CAPACITIES. BY 2030.

IT IS A LOWER TAX RATE INCREASE THAN THE LEVY BOND STRATEGY.

IT FUNDS THE FIFTH COMPREHENSIVE HIGH SCHOOL BY 2030 AND PROVIDES THE PRE-DESIGN WIN TO FOR BOND PROJECTS AND DOLLARS AND IMMEDIATE CASH UP FRONT FOR PROJECTS BECAUSE WITH LEVY YOU EITHER HAVE TO DO A BOND SALE OR YOU HAVE TO WAIT UNTIL YOU CAN COLLECT ALL THE LEVY DOLLARS BEFORE YOU CAN BUILD THE BUILDINGS. THE CHALLENGE IS YOU ARE RUNNING TO BOND INFORMATIONAL CAMPAIGNS WITHIN TWO YEARS AND THEY HAVE BEEN CHALLENGING IN THE PAST. IT REDUCES OUR TIME-LINE AND OPPORTUNITY TO EDUCATE THE COMMUNITY ON BOND NEED AND AGAIN THE JUANITA FIELDHOUSE POOL IS DELAYED UNTIL THE SECOND FUNDING MEASURE. SO THE THIRD STRATEGY IS WHAT WE'RE CALLING ROTATING OVERLAPPING LEVEES.

SO YOU HAVE YOUR CAPITOL FACILITIES AND LEVY EVERY THREE YEARS RATHER THAN EVERY FOUR YEARS AND THEN YOU RUN TWO CONSTRUCTION LEVEES. THE FIRST ONE ISIES.

THE FIRST ONE IS, IT'S SIX YEARS AND THEN YOU COME IN TWO YEARS LATER AND THAT RUNS FOR SIX YEARS SO EVERY THREE YEARS YOU ARE STILL VOTING ON A CONSTRUCTION LEVY, BUT YOU HAVE THEM OVER LAPPING. AND SO THAT, THE BENEFITS OF THAT STRATEGY, AGAIN YOUR PRIORITIZING NEW STUDENT SPACE BECAUSE THE INITIAL LEVY FUNDS CRITICAL CAPACITY AND YOU HAVE ON GOING VOTER ENGAGEMENT REGARDING CONSTRUCTION BECAUSE YOU ARE DOING IT EVERY THREE YEARS, IT PROVIDES A LEVEL TAX RATE EACH YEAR. IT REDUCES THE DISTRICT DEBT IN

[02:10:03]

LEVEL TAX RATE EACH YEAR. >> I SEE ERIC'S HAND UP.

>> OKAY. >> BEFORE I ASK MY QUESTION, IS

THIS STRATEGY THREE OF THREE? >> THERE'S ONE MORE.

>> I'LL HOLD MY QUESTION THEN. >> LET ME GO TO THE LAST ONE AND THEN GET YOUR QUESTION. SO AND THEN ONE MORE STRATEGY IS THE 2022 LEVY AND 2024 BOND AND 2030 BOND SO WE HAD A LEVY BOND, BOND STRATEGY SO MANY OF THE SAME BENEFITS, NEW STUDENT SPACE COMES FIRST. CRITICAL CAPACITY PROVIDES FOR THE MANAGE OF CONSTRUCTION BY 2030.

FUNDS THE FIFTH COMPREHENSIVE HIGH SCHOOL BY 2030 AND PRE-DESIGN WIN TO, BUILDS COMMUNITY KNOWLEDGE.

WE HAVE TIME TO BUILD IT BEFORE 2024., BUILDS COMMUNITY KNOWLEDGE. WE HAVE TIME TO BUILD IT BEFORE 2024., BUILDS COMMUNITY KNOWLEDGE.

WE HAVE TIME TO BUILD IT BEFORE 2024., BUILDS COMMUNITY KNOWLEDGE. WE HAVE TIME TO BUILD IT BEFORE 2024.D, BUILDS COMMUNITY KNOWLEDGE.

WE HAVE TIME TO BUILD IT BEFORE 2024.O, BUILDS COMMUNITY KNOWLEDGE. WE HAVE TIME TO BUILD IT BEFORE 2024.W, BUILDS COMMUNITY KNOWLEDGE.

WE HAVE TIME TO BUILD IT BEFORE 2024.

AGAIN THE CHALLENGES IS AGING FACILITIES ARE NOT FUNDED UNDERSTAND THE I'LL THE SECOND OR THIRD MEASURE.

IT DOES PROVIDE FOR THE FIFTH COMPREHENSIBLE HIGH SCHOOL AND IT'S A LARGER TAX INCREASE IN THE SHORT-TERM AND THEN A DECREASE. THEN I'VE GOT SOME SLIDE THAT KIND OF SUMMARIZE THE TAX IMPACT SO ERIC, DO YOU HAVE A QUESTION

BEFORE THAT? >> YEAH, I DO.

OKAY SO GOING BACK TO STRATEGY THREE I HAVE A QUESTION ON THAT THAT WOULD BE HELPFUL TO HAVE THAT SLIDE.

>> LET ME PULL THAT BACK. >> OKAY.

THE FIRST CONSTRUCTION LEVY IN STRATEGY THREE, WOULD THAT GO TO

VOTER THIS COMING 2022? >> YEAH, THAT WOULD BE THE OPTION IS YES. YOU WOULD DO A CONSTRUCTION LEVY ONE, A SIX YEAR LEVY IN FEBRUARY OF 2022.

>> ALONG WITH THE CAPITOL. >> AND THEN THOSE WOULD COME BACK. WE WOULD HAVE THOSE THAT WOULD

RENEW IN 2025. >> AND THEN WE WOULD RENEW OUR CAPITOL LEVY AND DO A SECOND SIX YEAR OVER LAPPING MEASURE.

>> IN SCENARIO THREE, IS WHAT, WOULD THE MEASURE THAT GOES ON THE MEASURES THAT GO ON THE BALLOT IN, SEE IF I ASKED THIS TO ARTICULATE. I'M TRYING TO COMPARE SCENARIOS TWO AND THREE. IN 2022 IS WHAT'S ON THE BALLOT IN SCENARIO, OR STRATEGY TWO IDENTICAL TO THE BALLOT IN STRATEGY THREE SO STRATEGY TWO IS IF YOU REMEMBER LEVY, BOND, LEVY IF I HAVE THAT RIGHT. SO WOULD THE CONSTRUCTION LEVY, I'M ASSUMING, WELL TELL ME, DO THOSE LOOK IDENTICAL IN 2022?

>> YES. AND SO THE INTENT IS TO GET ALL FOUR OPTIONS, AT LEAST THE WAY WE'VE LAID OUT THE SCENARIOS BECAUSE WE WANTED TO MAKE SURE WE WERE COMPARING APPLES TO APPLES, BUT ALL FOUR OPTIONS THE FIRST FUNDING PHASE GETS US THE $295 MILLION FOR THAT FIRST PHASE.

>> THE REASON I ASK IS I THINK IN THE LAST MEETING THE THING I'VE BEEN KICKING AROUND IS CAN WE START WITH AN OPTION ON STRATEGY TWO, WE TRIED THE BOND AND BOND DOES NOT WORK.

WE FAILED GET 60%. PEOPLE PIVOT AND IT FELL THROUGH AGAIN SO WE PIVOT TO STRATEGY THREE AT THAT POINT.

BY GOING WITH STRATEGY TWO ARE WE FOR CLOSING OUR ABILITY TO SWITCH TO STRATEGY THREE? IT SEEMS LIKE, NO.

THEY'RE IDENTICAL IN 2022 AND WE'RE ASSUMING WE'RE SUCCESSFUL

[02:15:05]

>> YES. >> THAT WAS NOT SUCCESSFUL AND THERE WOULD BE NOTHING AT THAT POINT PRECLUDING US C.

OKAY. >> YEAH AND THAT'S WHAT WE DID IN 2018. WE DID A BOND AND IT DID NOT PASS SO WE DID A LEVY STRATEGY. THAT CAN CERTAINLY PASS.

WHAT WE COULD NOT DO. WE WOULDN'T TO THE THREE YEAR.

IF WE DID A BOND FIRST YOU COULD NOT IMMEDIATELY SWITCH TO A THREE YEAR BECAUSE WE'D GONE OUT FOR A FOUR YEAR AND SO YOU COULD, BUT WHAT WE COULD DO IS WE RUN A BOND SO WE'VE DONE OUR FOUR YEAR AND CAPITOL LEVY RENEWALS AND THEN YOU RUN A BOND, AND IF THAT DOESN'T WORK, THEN YOU IMMEDIATELY COME BACK LIKE IN 2018, YOU COULD COME BACK AND RUN A LEVY.

>> I GUESS, WELL I'M GLAD YOU PUT IT THAT WAY BECAUSE THE IDEA IS UNDER STRATEGY TWO WE WOULD BE PUT IT IN A FOUR YEAR.

>> CORRECT. >> WHERE AS STRATEGY THREE IT IS A THREE YEAR. THAT HELPS ME TO THINK ABOUT IT.

THANK YOU. >> YOU'RE WELCOME.

>> I THINK MARK HAD HIS HAND UP. >> YEAH, THE LAST TIME WE WENT THROUGH A RATHER LONG DISCUSSION OF THIS IN ANOTHER STUDY SESSION. WE GOT TO A POINT WHERE WHILE THE LEVY BOND LEVY IDEA WAS A GOOD STRATEGY, THERE WAS A CONCERN ABOUT ALL OF THE SUDDEN STUBBING OUR TOE ON THE BOND AND WE CAME UP, AS I RECALL WITH A COMPROMISE OF LEVY, LEVY, BOND, LEVY AND IT SEEMED TO RESONATE WITH FOLKS AND IT'S NOT HERE AND THE IDEA WAS TO BE ABLE TO GATHER THE FUNDS UNTIL WE GOT UP TO THE BOND AND BUILD MOMENTUM SO WE DON'T HAVE TO WORRY ABOUT STUBBING OUR TOE TOO EARLY AND PRECLUDING OURSELVES FROM MAKING

MORE PROGRESS. >> THAT IS SCENARIO ONE AND I DON'T THINK IT WAS A LEVY. I DON'T RECALL A LEVY, LEVY BOND. IT WAS A LEVY AND THEN A BOND SO THE LEVY IS WOULD BE NOW TO GET THE SHORT-TERM AND THEN A BOND, BE AGAIN IF WE MISSED THAT, THEN.

>> YEAH IT WAS SOMETHING I BROUGHT UP AND SOME OTHER FOLKS RANGE IN ON AND THE IDEA OF BUILDING MOMENTUM TOWARDS THE BOND. IT SEEMED TO HAVE A BETTER TRACTION BECAUSE YOUR BUILDING MOMENTUM.

AND ERIC IS SMILING AND I DON'T KNOW IF HE REMEMBERS IT OR NOT.

>> I REMEMBER YOU BRINGING IT UP.

I AM NOT SURE IF I REMEMBER AGREEING WITH IT.

>> AND I THINK THAT CERTAINLY WOULD DELAY IF THE GOAL IS TO DO A FIFTH COMPREHENSIVE HIGH SCHOOL, IT COULD BE CHALLENGING TO GET THAT WITH A LEVY, LEVY BOND AND THEN YOU WOULD HAVE TO WAIT UNTIL THAT BOND MEASURE TO FUND THAT HIGH SCHOOL.

>> THE OTHER PIECE IS PROBABLY WHAT I WAS PUSHING AFTER THE STUDY SESSION WHICH WAS BEING CRYSTAL CLEAR AROUND THE TIMING OF WHEN WE NEED THE CAPACITY AND MAKING SURE OUR FUNDING STRATEGY AS LION WITH THAT. EVEN THIS FUNDING STRATEGY THREE THAT YOU SEE HERE I'M NOT SURE THAT ALIGNS WITH GETTING THE REQUIRED DOLLARS FOR THE NECESSARY SPACE.

WE'LL SEE THAT IN A SUBSEQUENT SLIDE.

IF WE CAN DEFINITELY BRING BACK A LEVY, LEVY BOND IF THE BOARD IS INTERESTED IN THAT. IT'S JUST THE DIFFERENT CONFIGURATIONS OF TAX IMPLICATIONS, DOLLARS NEEDED WHEN AND THINGS LIKE THAT. WE DEFINITELY CAN DO THAT.

>> SO I KNOW WE HAVE MORE PRESENTATION, SO BULLETS THERE'S QUESTIONS. LET'S TAKE DIRECTOR CARLSON.

>> I WAS JUST GOING TO SAY LET'S, IN SLIDE 17, WE'LL GET YOU TO THE NEXT DIMENSION OF THIS AND THAT'S IMPORTANT FOR THE EVALUATION. THE STRATEGY OF SAYING WHAT DO WE ACTUALLY NEED, TIME-LINE? THAT I'M OKAY WITH.

SAYING THIS IS THE CASTE CAPACITY WE MUST HAVE AND NOW I WOULD PAY FOR IT AND COMPARING THE STRATEGIES IN THE RIGHT CONTEXT. HOW TO SELL IT WILL BE COON TENSIONED ON SLIDE 17 SO LET'S ROLL WITH IT.

>> DIRECTOR DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING ON THIS?

>> I HAVE A QUESTION WHETHER THE ASSUMPTIONS THAT WE'RE UTILIZEING IN DETERMINING THE TAX RATE GOING FORWARD.

[02:20:03]

COME OUT LATER? >> YEAH.

SPECIFICALLY ASSUMPTIONS ON THE TAX, IT ASSUMES A GROWTH OF OUR STANDARDAV GROWTH OF AROUND 5% AND ASSUMES WE'RE FUNDING THE AMOUNTS AND THE TAX RATE THAT THE AD VISOR, THAT OUR BOND UNDER WRITER DID, THAT IT FUNDS THE AMOUNTS THAT IS IN THAT CONSTRUCTION NEED SCENARIO, SO PHASE ONE IS $296,000,000 AND PHASE TWO IS $971 MILLION AND PHRASE THREE IS $705 MILLION AND IT ASSUMES BOND ON AN ANNUAL BASIS SO WHEN YOU SELL THE BONDS AND WHEN YOU, YOU KNOW, HOW MUCH YOU SELL, EACH PHASE CAN YOU KNOW INFLUENCE TAX RATE TOO AND AGAIN, USUALLY THAT'S DETERMINED ONCE WE GET CLOSER TO THAT, THE BOND PRICING.

>> RIGHT. SO WHAT - THERE'S MULTIPLE LEVERS AND I GET PULLED IN MULTIPLE DIFFERENT WAYS IN HOW THEY PLAY IN THERE'S THE ASSUMPTION THAT YOU MAINTAIN A STABLE TAX RATE AND NOT TO INCREASE TAX RATE.

ARE WE STILL FALLING UNDER THAT ASSUMPTION OR ARE WE ALLOWING

INCREASE TO OCCUR? >> LET ME GET TO THOSE SLIDES

AND WE CAN TALK ABOUT THAT. >> AND, SO I BELIEVE WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT HERE IS NEED AND HOW DO WE FUND THAT NEED AND THERE ISN'T A SCENARIO HERE THAT DOESN'T GO BEYOND WHAT OUR CURRENT TAX RATE IS. IT ALSO WOULD THEN INCREASE THE TAXES FOR THE AVERAGE $800 THOUSAND DOLLAR HOME IN THAT WHOLE PIECE, AS WELL. WE PUT TOGETHER SUMMARIZING THE FOUR STRATEGIES AND KIND OF WHAT THEY DID WITH THE TAX RATE AND AGAIN, THE DETAILS ARE IN THE FINANCING SCENARIOS THAT ARE BOND UNDER WRITER PROVIDED, AGAIN THIS IS ONE WAY OF FINANCING THE PROJECTS. SO UNDER, SO WHAT WE TRIED TO DO IS SHOW YOU THE TAX RATE AT DIFFERENT TIMES.

DIFFERENT YEARS. CONSISTENTLY ACROSS THE FOUR SCENARIOS. KNOWING THAT THERE'S VARIANTS.

THIS IS JUST THE CONSTRUCTION TAX RATE, NOT THE TOTAL TAX RATE WHICH INCLUDES THE CAPITOL FACILITY LEVY SO OUR CURRENT TOTAL CONSTRUCTION RATE IS ONE DOLLAR AND 15 CENTS PER THOUSAND SO YOU CAN SEE HOW THE SCENARIOS COMPARE TO THAT SO THE LEVY BOND, LEVY SCENARIO WOULD, WHEN WE DO THE LEVY THE FIRST THAT WOULD BE A FOUR YEAR, FOUR OR SIX YEAR LEVY IS ONE DOLLAR AND 39 CENTS AND THEN AS THE BOND CAME IN PLACE BECAUSE THAT WOULD BE A 204 POND, THEN THE TAX RATE INCREASES AND BY 2030 THE TAX RATE IS ONE DOLLAR AND 56 CENTS AND THEN IN 2035 AFTER THE LEVY, AND WE'VE PAID OFF OTHER OLD BONDS THE TAX RATE DROPS TO ONE DOLLAR AND 13 CENTS AND IT JUST ONE OF THE THINGS WE ALSO WANTED TO TALK ABOUT IN THIS LAST COLUMN IS, HOW FAST OR SLOW, ANOTHER WAY TO SAY IT IS, HOW LONG DOES IT TAKE US TO GET ALL OF OUR FUNDS SO $1.9 BILLION WITH THE LEVY BOND LEVY STRATEGY TAKES US TO 2024 TO GET THE FUNDING TO BUILD THESE SCHOOLS.

YOU REMEMBER WHEN I INFLATED THESE COSTS IT ASSUMED THAT ALL BUILDINGS WERE BUILT BY 2030, SO THE REALITY IS INFLATION WILL PLAY A FACTOR IN THIS SCENARIO A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENTLY.

AND THEN SCENARIO TWO, WHICH IS AN ALL BOND STRATEGY, 2024 AND 2030 BOND BECAUSE YOU'RE FINANCING THOSE COSTS OVER A LONGER PERIOD OF TIME, YOU CAN GET A LOWER TAX RATE AND SO IN 2023 THE TAX RATE WOULD BE ONE DOLLAR AND 25 CENTS AND THEN DROPS TO 88 CENTS AND BY 2035 IT'S 79 CENTS AND THIS DOES NOT HAVE, MOST LIKELY WE WOULD HAVE SOME BUILT IN THING TO PROVIDE SPACE FOR OTHER BONDS AND LEVYS IN THE FUTURE AND FUNDS ARE RECEIVED BY 2031. WITH THE LEVY STRATEGY, ALL

[02:25:01]

BUT YOU WOULDN'T GET ALL OF YOUR PROJECT FUNDING UNTIL 2038 AND STRATEGY FOUR IS A LEVY BOND, BOND STRATEGY AND SO THE RATE WOULD BE ONE DOLLAR AND 39 CENTS AND THEN IT WOULD DROP AS YOU SELL BONDS BECAUSE THEY ARE PAID OFF OVER A LONGER PERIOD OF TIME TO 76 CENTS IN 2030 AND 2035. AGAIN THAT WOULD ALLOW YOU TO EITHER DO AN ADDITIONAL BOND PROGRAM OR LEVY PROGRAM IN ALL THE FUNDS THAT WOULD BE RECEIVED BY 2031.

JUST TO BE CHEER. A CLARIFICATION, THESE CONSTRUCTION RATES IMPROVE PRIOR BONDS AND OUR CURRENT 2019 CAPITOL CONSTRUCTION LEVY THAT WILL BE PAID OFF OR THAT EXPIRED

>> SO THIS YEAR WHAT THAT IS -- WE PASS IT IN 2022. WE START COLLECTING IN 2023.

>> WHAT IT SAYS BECAUSE EACH OF THESE SCENARIOS ASSUMES THREE MEASURES ONE IS LEVY FIRST.

>> THEN A BOND AND LEVY. PLAYING OUT THOSE SCENARIOS WE WOULDN'T GET ALL THE CASH FOR

THE NEEDED PROJECTS UNTIL 2034. >> WITH BOND, BOND BOND SCENARIO GET THE CASH BECAUSE THREE COULD ONCE THE VOTERS APPROVE THE BOND WE CAN SELL THE BONDS. SO WE WOULD BE ABLE TO GET THE CASH BY 2031. STILL PAYING THEM OFF OVER 20 YEARS.

>> AND THEN WITH THE THIRD STRATEGY WHICH IS ALL LEVY WE WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO -- NOW YOU CAN GET THE TAX RATE EARLIER LIKE STRATEGY THREE. IF YOU WANT TO GET THE TAX, $1.9 BILLION. TAX RATE NEEDS TO BE HIGHER. BUT AGAIN WE WANT TO DO APPLES SCENARIO MANY LEVY BOND BOND MANY AGAIN THE TAX RATE IS $1.39 TO BEGIN WITH BUT THEN IT'S

REDUCED AS WE PASS BONDS AND THOSE TAKE LONGER TO PAY OFF. >> DR. CARLSON.

>> SO IT WOULD HELP ME EVALUATE IF I HAD THE NUMBER IN 2025 BECAUSE BY 2030 A BOND SOLD IN

2022 HAS BEEN -- LEVY FROM 2022 IS GONE. >> IN 2025 THAT LEVY WILL STILL BE THERE. THAT WOULD BE OUR PEAK LEVEL OF TAXATION UNDER THESE MODELS.

>> IN MOST OF THESE SCENARIOS IN 2025 YOU ARE STILL AT THE SAME RATE YOU ARE IN 23.

>> SO I WILL QUICKLY LOOK THROUGH THEM. I DON'T THINK ANY OF SCENARIOS THE RATE IS NOT DROPPING IN THE RATE IS CONSISTENT FROM 23 TO 24 TO 25.

>> REALLY. WHATEVER WE PASSED IN 25 WAS JUST REPLACING STUFF THAT WAS

SUN SETTING? >> WELL, YEAH. HOW THEY STRUCTURED IT, IF WE PASS A BOND IN 24, THEY STRUCTURED THOSE FUTURE BOND SALES TO LIVE WITHIN THAT

CURRENT RATE. >> OKAY. >> THAT'S GOOD TO KNOW.

THANK YOU. >> I WILL JUMP IN AND ASK A QUICK QUESTION.

>> RECENTLY THERE WAS SOME KIND OF SURVEYING DONE IN THE COMMUNITY FOR SUPPORT FOR

PROJECTS BUILDING, ET CETERA. >> WOULD YOU REMEMBER, WOULD YOU REMIND ME WHERE I CAN FIND THAT INFORMATION? I DON'T KNOW IF IT WAS BOARD BRIEFS OR PRESENTATION STUDY

SESSION OR -- >> CAN YOU BE MORE SPECIFIC WHICH SURVEY YOU ARE TALKING

ABOUT? >> IT WAS THE SURVEY WE DID IN JULY AND WE PRESENTED THAT AT STUDY SESSION. GENTLEMAN PRESENT IT TO THE BOARD.

>> WE CAN FIND THE DATE FOR YOU. >> I CAN BEING LA, TOO. THANKS.

I DON'T REMEMBER IF IT WAS AUGUST OR SEPTEMBER. >> LAST OCTOBER WE DID A LARGER COMMUNITY, FACILITY ADVISORY COMMITTEE DID COMMUNITY SURVEY AS WELL.

>> SO I WILL MOVE ON SO ONE OF THE QUESTIONS IS KIND OF NOW THAT YOU HAVE SEEN SOME OF THE DATA IS WHAT DIRECTION DOES THE BOARD WANT TO PROVIDE RELATING TO CONSTRUCTION FUNDING AND HOW

WE FUND OUR LONG TERM CONSTRUCTION NEEDS. >> ANYONE ELSE WANT TO GO FIRST?

[02:30:18]

OKAY. >> SO MY -- DID THE OPTION TORN BETWEEN ARE -- PUT THIS WAY.

MOST REALISTIC OPTION TO BUILDING SCHOOLS LONG TERM IS THE LEVY STRATEGY.

>> I JUST -- CURRENT TAX ENVIRONMENT POLITICAL ENVIRONMENT GETTING 60% OF

PEOPLE TO AGREE TO A FUNDING MEASURE IS UNLIKELY. >> I AM -- PART OF ME THAT

THINKS IT'S WORTH TRYING, THOUGH. >> BECAUSE I DO THINK THAT IF WE KNEW, IF WE KNEW IT WORKED, WE COULD PASS IT TO ME IS THE BEST APPROACH.

>> I JUST VIEW THAT AS UNLIKELY TO OCCUR. >> SO I AM TORN BETWEEN GOING DOWN THAT ROUTE NOW WHEN I BELIEVE IT'S UNLIKELY TO WORK OR JUST AND THEN TRYING TO PIVOT TO

SOMETHING ELSE OR JUST GOING FOR THAT SOMETHING ELSE RIGHT AWAY. >> I THINK I AM LEANING, I AM

LEANING TOWARD THE LEVY ONLY STRATEGY. >> DIRECTOR CARLSON?

>> SO YEAH I MEAN MY INSTINCT LEVY ONLY IS THE MOST PASSABLE IF WE PROCEED WITH THE WAY WE

HAVE DONE THINGS IN THE PASSED. LEAVES US WITH THIS GAP OF 2038. >> WE NEED THE MAJORITY OF THIS CAPACITY BY 2030 AND SO HONESTLY PROLONGS OUR CURRENT PAIN UNTIL YOUR KID IS IN COLLEGE.

>> AND THAT'S A LONG TIME. >> SO THE -- FOR ME I MEAN THIS IS WHERE I AM LOOKING AT THE BONDS AND THINKING IS THERE ANYTHING WE HAVE NOT TRIED. ONE THING WE HAVEN'T TRIED.

>> THAT'S PUTTING A BOND ON A CONGRESSIONAL ELECTION. >> WE HAVE AVOIDED NOVEMBER UNDER THE ASSUMPTION THAT PEOPLE WOULDN'T VOTE ON -- THEY WOULDN'T CARE ABOUT SCHOOLS DURING THAT ELECTION. BUT IN THE CURRENT POLITICAL ENVIRONMENT THAT BRINGS OUT AWFUL LOT OF PEOPLE WHO MIGHT NOT NORMALLY VOTE WHO COULD BE YOUNG IDEALISTIC PARENTS.

>> SO THE ONLY WAY I CAN SEE DOING A BOND STRATEGY IF WE DO SOMETHING DIFFERENT THAN THE BONDS WE TRIED IN THE PASSED. DOING THE SAME THING AIN'T GOING TO HAPPEN.

MY HEART IS SICK FOR THAT BUT THAT'S THE ONE THING WE NEVER TRIED AND MAYBE IT COULD BE --

JUST CRAZY ENOUGH IT COULD WORK. >> ARE THERE ANY LEGAL REQUIREMENT -- IS THERE ANYTHING WRITTEN IN LAW THAT PROHIBITS US FROM TRYING TO PARTNER WITH A BUSINESS OR ORGANIZATION TO FUND A BUILDING? WOULD IT BE A BAD IDEA FOR US TO DO THAT? WOULD THERE BE ISSUES OF OWNERSHIP AND USE PROPERTY OR SPELL ALL THAT OUT.

>> THERE IS NOTHING LEGALLY THAT PREVENTS US FROM PARTNERING WITH A PRIVATE OR PUBLIC, ANOTHER PUBLIC AGENCY TO PROVIDE BUILDING SPACE, ONLY THING WE AREN'T ABLE, WE COULDN'T GIVE THEM LIKE A GIFT OF PUBLIC FUNDS. WE COULDN'T GIVE THEM CERTAIN THINGS BUT YOU CAN DO A LEASE AGREEMENT TO LEASE IF IT'S OUR PROPERTY WE CAN LEASE OTHER

PEOPLE OUR PROPERTY. >> IF IT'S THEIR PROPERTY, AGAIN THERE WOULD HAVE TO BE AGREEMENTS AND AGAIN THE CHALLENGE OF US LEASING OTHER SPACE IS LEASES ARE NOT ALLOWED TO COME OUT OF THE CAPITAL PROJECTS FUND UNLESS IT'S RELATED TO A CURRENT

CONSTRUCTION PROJECT. >> LIKE A TEMPORARY WHILE WE GOT ANOTHER PROJECT UNDER CONSTRUCTION LEASES HAVE TO COME OUT OF OUR OPERATING FUNDS AND THAT WOULD BE CHALLENGING LONG

TERM TO DO THAT. >> BUT NO NOTHING TO PREVENT US FROM PARTNERING.

I DON'T KNOW WE CAN FIND PARTNERS FOR EVERY SINGLE FACILITY CAPACITY BUILDING

THAT -- BUILDING THAT IS -- >> I DON'T THINK WE CAN. HAPPY WITH ONE.

I MEAN JUST THINKING OUTSIDE THE BOX AND JUST TRYING TO LOOK AT THIS AS AN OPPORTUNITY TO

[02:35:06]

OPPORTUNITY TO EXPLORE SOME KIND OF PARTNERSHIP. >> WHEN THOSE OPPORTUNITIES PRESENT ITSELF WE CONTINUE TO HAVE CONVERSATIONS AND EXPLORE THOSE OPTIONS.

>> I KNOW. I DO APPRECIATE THAT. I AM JUST WONDERING IF THERE IS

SOMETHING THAT DIRECTORS COULD HELP WITH IN THAT AREA. >> SOME ADVOCACY.

>> I THINK OTHER COMPONENT TO PARTNERING IS YOU STILL NEED FUNDS TO BRING TO THE TABLE FOR

THE PARTNERSSHIP. >> I AGREE. WE STILL HAVE TO DO SOMETHING IN

2022. >> NOBODY HAS BEEN KNOCKING ON OUR DOOR ASKING US IF THEY CAN

HELP BUILD US A BUILDING. >> I AM JUST TRYING TO THINK OUTSIDE THE BOX AND THINK OF

DIFFERENT WAYS WE CAN ADDRESS THIS. >> BUT EVERY OPPORTUNITY LOCALLY WITH OUR MUNICIPALITIES WE HAVE ENGAGED AROUND PARTNERSHIPS AS CONSTRUCTION CONSIDERATIONS ARE GOING ON IN THE CITY OF KIRKLAND. IN OTHER -- UP IN SAMMAMISH.

DISCUSSING IN CONVERSATIONS TO SEE IF THERE IS PARTNERSHIP OPPORTUNITIES AND WE WILL PUT SOME THINKING IN AROUND HOW DIRECTORS CAN SUPPORT THAT EFFORT.

YOU ALL HAVE YOUR CONNECTIONS AS WELL AND SO I DO AGREE THAT WILL BE A COMPLETE EFFORT TO LAND ON THAT PARTNERSHIP THAT IS GOING TO BE THAT UNIQUE PROJECT THAT ACTUALLY COMES TO FRUITION.

>> SEEMS LIKE WE HAVE CONVERSATIONS WITH OUR LOCAL JURISDICTIONS ALL THE TIME.

>> ABOUT THIS. ABOUT HOW CAN WE HELP EACH OTHER WITH THIS GROWING LACK OF SPACE.

>> BUT THANK YOU FOR WHAT YOU HAVE DONE SO FAR IN THAT END. >> DIRECTOR STEWART.

>> SO IN LOOKING AT THIS AND SORT OF WHAT DIRECTION IT SODSES LIKE IT WAS PRETTY CONSISTENT THE CROSS MOST OF THESE THAT THE CAPITAL LEVY IN 2022 WAS WHAT MADE SENSE IN REGARD.

THAT JUST SEEMS TO BE THE REASONABLE APPROACH. I WOULD AGREE WITH DIRECTOR CARLSON OF THE CONCERN OF THE 2038 TIME LINE FOR THE USING CAPITAL LEVY THE WHOLE WAY.

>> THAT IS SIGNIFICANT LONG PERIOD OF TIME AND IT'S UNCLEAR WHAT WOULD GET -- MY CHALLENGE WHEN I LOOKED AT THAT IT WAS UNCLEAR TO ME HOW WOULD THOSE PHASES PHASE OUT THROUGH A

CAPITAL LEVY APPROACH. >> BECAUSE THAT SECOND PHASE REALLY DOESN'T FIT IN TO A

CAPITAL LEVY APPROACH. >> UNLESS WE RAISE TAX RATE SIGNIFICANTLY TO $4, 1,000 OR

SOMETHING WOULD HAVE TO BE IN ORDER TO FUND THAT. >> SO -- GO AHEAD.

>> WELL I WAS JUST GOING TO ADD, IT DOES FUND AGAIN WE PUT TOGETHER SCENARIO THAT FUNDS THE DOLLARS THAT WE NEED NOW IF ALL LEVY STRATEGY TAKES UNTIL 2038, SO THEN WE WOULD PRIORITIZE WHAT

PROJECTS COME FIRST AND WHEN. >> SO IT MAY MEAN -- NOT GETTING ALL OUR CAPACITY BUILT BY 2030 BUT WE WOULD BASED ON THE CASH FLOW THAT IS COMING IN, FROM THE LEVY, THEN WE WOULD PRIORITIZE

THE NEEDED PROJECTS WHAT COMES FIRST. >> AND THEN -- IF YOU WANTED -- WHAT WOULD HAPPEN HOW COULD WE USE A CAPITAL LEVY STRATEGY AND ENSURE EVERYTHING GETS BUILT BY

2034. >> RIGHT. SO THEN IT WOULD JUST MEAN THE TAX RATE SO WE COULD -- WE CAN GET MORE DOLLARS EARLIER WITH A HIGHER TAX RATE.

>> IF YOU -- THAT'S HOW YOU DO THAT. >> IF YOU WANT TO TAKE THE DOLLARS OUT LATER AND LOWER THE TAX RATE, TAKES YOU LONGER IF YOU WANT TO LOWER TAX RATE TAKES

LONGER TO GET THOSE DOLLARS. >> BECAUSE YOU ARE ASKING FOR LESS EACH YEAR TO KEEP THE TAX

RATE LOWER. >> RIGHT. THEN THE OTHER PIECE -- I RECOGNIZE THE VALUE OF THE BOND TO BE ABLE TO DO A LARGE COMPONENT.

LOWER TAX RATE BECAUSE IT IS OUT OVER THE PERIOD OF TIME. >> BUT AGAIN IT'S THAT CHALLENGE OF IF YOU -- IF WE DON'T PASS IT HAVE THE BACK UP WHERE WE GO TO. IMPORTANT TO SORT OF LAY OUT WHAT WOULD A CAPITAL LEVY APPROACH MEAN IF WE ARE GOING TO FINISH IT AND HAVE FUNDING BY

2030 OR 2032. >> YES. WE CAN CERTAINLY GIVE YOU KIND OF THE TAX RATE IMPLICATIONS OF MOVING INSTEAD OF GETTING DOLLARS BY 2038, GETTING THE

[02:40:05]

DOLLARS BY 2032. >> HIGHER. >> YES.

IT WOULD BE HIGHER TAX RATE. THAT IS WHAT IT WOULD MEAN. >> DIRECTOR STEWART, THANK YOU

FOR WAITING PATIENTLY. NO PROBLEM. >> GOING BACK TO DIRECTOR STAGE

POINT ABOUT NATURE ENERGY. >> IT SEEMS LIKE THE RESPONSE WAS WE ALWAYS WELCOME PARTNERSHIP OPPORTUNITIES THAT COME TO US. I DON'T THINK THE IDEA WAITING FOR THE NEXT PERSON TO KNOCK ON OUR DOOR. IDEA FOR US TO BE KNOCKING ON THE DOORS ESPECIALLY THE CORPORATE ENTITIES. THE PELICAN ARE PRETTY MUCH

HURTING FOR FUNDS AS WE ARE. >> KIRKLAND COULDN'T PASS ITS POOL ISSUE.

>> SO I THINK IDEA CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, IDEA THAT THERE ARE ENTITIES WITH DEEPER POCKETS THAN PUBLIC. AND WE SHOULD BE LOOKING AT THOSE WHAT WE CAN DO IN PARTNERSHIP WITH THEM. THAT'S NOT SOMETHING WE WAIT AROUND FOR.

ACTUALLY SOLICIT TO BE QUITE FRANK. >> YES, I WAS THINKING MORE ABOUT CORPORATE PARTNERSHIPS BUT IT ALSO THE PUBLIC JURISDICTIONS ALSO ALLOW US TO GET IN ON A

GRAND LEVEL OF CONSTRUCTION PROJECT. >> SO I AM THINKING ABOUT -- AGAIN WE HAVE TO BE PRO ACTIVE. CAN'T WAIT FOR IT TO DROP IN OUR LAP.

HAVING CONVERSATIONS WITH OUR CORPORATE PARTNERS AS WELL. >> SO WHAT I AM HEARING THIS WAS ACTUALLY PART OF THE LONG TERM FACILITY TASK FORCE RECOMMENDATION AS WELL TO PURSUE THESE OPTIONS AND TO BE ABLE TO LOOK TOWARD THESE THINGS AND I THINK WHAT YOU ARE HEARING JUST SOME REQUEST FOR MAYBE SOME INSIGHT OR TRANSPARENCY IN TO WHAT IS OCCURRING IN THAT AREA

AND POSSIBILITY WHAT CAN GO. >> SO THAT AND HOW WOULD THAT POTENTIALLY PLAY OUT THROUGH

THIS PROCESS AS WELL. >> I THINK HIGH SCHOOLS THAT TO ME SEEMS LIKE GREAT OPPORTUNITY IN WHICH TO HOLD THOSE CONVERSATIONS WITH PARTNERS OF POTENTIAL BECAUSE THAT IS IN A DIFFERENT SPACE. DIFFERENT TYPE OF LOCATION. DIFFERENT TYPE OF BUILDINGS SO THAT WOULD BE ONE OF THOSE COMPONENTS. I DO THINK THIS HAS BEEN STRATEGY BROUGHT FORWARD AND WE ARE STILL UNCLEAR HOW IT'S PLAYING OUT.

>> RECOGNIZING THERE IS STUFF HAPPENING ABSOLUTELY. GET THAT.

>> WHEN YOU SAY UNCLEAR HOW IT'S PLAYING OUT, I JUST -- WHAT IS NEEDED TO BE MORE CLEAR BECAUSE I AM TRYING TO, I WANT TO UNDERSTAND WHAT OTHER INFORMATION WOULD HELP YOU BE CLEAR BECAUSE I HAVE TRIED TO LAY OUT AND I APOLOGIZE IF IT ISN'T AS CLEAR.

I TRIED TO LAY OUT THE PROJECTS THAT WOULD HAPPEN IF WE DID A LEVY STRATEGY.

TO START WITH. AND WHEN THOSE PROJECTS, WHEN WE WOULD GET THE FUNDING AND THEN THE PROJECTS THAT WOULD HAPPEN IN A PHASE TWO AND HOW WE WOULD -- THEN THOSE, WE WOULD, IF WE DID LEVY STRATEGY HOW LONG IT TAKES TO GET THAT -- THOSE FUNDS IF WE DID A BOND STRATEGY HERE IS HOW FAST WE COULD GET THOSE FUNDS. AND THEN SO -- PHASE THREE WHAT

THOSE PROJECTS WOULD BE. >> AGAIN WITH EACH OF THE FOUR STRATEGIES I LAID OUT WHEN WE

WOULD HAVE THE FUNDING AVAILABLE FOR THOSE PROJECTS. >> WHAT WE CAN DO IS WHAT WOULD THE TAX RATE BE IF WE WANTED TO BUMP UP IN THE ONE SCENARIO THAT TAKES US TO 2038 TO GET ALL THE MONEY WHICH IS LEVY SCENARIO WHAT WOULD THE RATE BE IF WE GOT ALL THOSE DOLLARS IN 20 -- BY

2032. >> I CAN RUN THAT SCENARIO. >> I WILL ATTEMPT TO SUMMARIZE WHAT I HEARD AND MAYBE ACCURATELY. I THINK THAT GENERALLY FROM THE BOARD THAT -- WELL, COLORED BY MY OWN OPINION. TELL ME IF I AM HEARING THIS WRONG. GENERALLY WHAT I HEARD IS THAT THE BOARD WANTS TO GO FORWARD WITH CONSTRUCTION, WHATEVER STRATEGY IT WOULD START WITH CONSTRUCTION LEVY IN 2022.

>> BASICALLY THE CONSTRUCTION LEVY THAT HAS BEEN PROPOSED WITH THAT PHASE ONE.

QUESTION IS WHAT PHASE TWO LOOK LIKE. >> AND TIE IN TO THAT IS THE QUESTION OF WHETHER WE MOVE TO A THREE YEAR EPNO OR STAY ON THE FOUR YEAR.

>> I DON'T THINK THERE IS CONSENSUS BUT I THINK EVERYONE -- WHAT I AM HEARING IS

[02:45:02]

OUT PHASE ONE AND STARTING IN 2022. >> SOUND ABOUT RIGHT? QUESTION OF THEN WHAT IS NEXT. ARE WE TRYING FOR A BOND. DO SOMETHING DIFFERENT ON THE NOVEMBER BALLOT? I THINK WE ARE BETTER OFF TRYING TO FUND THIS WITH JUST

CONSTRUCTION LEVY FUNDING. >> VARIANTS ON THERE. >> I THINK IT'S GOOD TO HAVE A LONG TERM PLAN. WE CAN ALWAYS DEVIATE FROM THAT IF THE CONDITIONS CHANGE.

>> THESE ARE OWE THESE ARE SCENARIOS, SCENARIOS BASED ON AGAIN LONG TERM PLAN.

>> AND OBVIOUSLY IT WILL NEED TO BE AJUSTED BEFORE EACH FUNDING MEASURE BASED ON ESTIMATED COSTS

AND THINGS LIKE THAT. >> I JUST -- I WAS THINKING BACK.

THE REASON WE HAD THIS LONG TERM PLAN THAT'S WHAT WE ASKED FOR. INITIALLY WHAT CAME TO US WAS

JUST OKAY WHAT ARE WE GOING TO DO NEXT YEAR. >> WE SAID WELL WE NEED TO KNOW, THINK ABOUT WHAT WE ARE GOING TO DO EVERY OTHER YEAR AFTER THAT. REALLY APPRECIATE ALL THE WORK THAT CAME BECAUSE I DO THINK IT IS IMPORTANT TO THINK ABOUT IT. THAT LONGER TERM PROJECTS.

>> I DON'T KNOW THAT THERE IS -- I DON'T THINK WE HAVE -- I DON'T THINK THERE IS ANYTHING CLOSE TO

CONSENSUS FOR LONGER TERM, THOUGH. >> FROM A LONG, LONGER TERM I GUESS THE CONSENSUS I SEEM TO HEAR IF WE CAN SHIFT TO CAPITAL LEVY THE APPROACH, THAT -- IT'S IN INTERIM TIME OF MAKING THAT SHIFT. THAT IS THE QUESTION OF WHAT IS

THE BEST WAY TO ADDRESS OUR NEEDS IN BETWEEN THOSE. >> I THINK I AGREE WITH THAT.

>> WE HAVE STARTING POINT. WE HAVE ENDING POINT THE QUESTION IS HOW DO YOU GET TO

THIS MIDDLE GROUND. >> GET THROUGH THAT PIECE. >> I GUESS MY OPINION IS WE JUST

GET TO IT NOW. >> WE JUST SHIFT TO THAT NOW OF SWITCHING TO A CAPITAL,

CONSTRUCTION LEVY APPROACH. >> I THINK -- I RECOGNIZE THAT COMES AT THE EXPENSE OF YEARS.

OF TIME. >> SO IT'S THE DIFFERENT LEVERS. INCREASE THE TAX RATE WHICH WOULD THEN DECREASE TIME BUT THEN POTENTIALLY YOU WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO PASS IT AND THEREFORE IT

WOULD BE MORE PROBLEMATIC IN THE LONG RUN AS WELL. >> SO -- I AGREE THAT RUNNING BONDS RIGHT NOW CONCERNS ME. I'M NOT SURE HOW SUCCESSFUL THAT WOULD BE.

>> BUT DEFINITELY IN 2022 I SEE THE NEED FOR A CAPITAL LEVY. >> SORRY.

CONSTRUCTION LEVY.

.

>> I CAN GO WITH THE LEVY SCENARIO AS LONG AS WE CAN MAKE THE TIME FROM WORK. I FIND IT VERY HARD TO BELIEVE THAT IN THE CURRENT POLITICAL CLIMATE, WE ARE GOING TO GET PEOPLE SAYING OH, YES. I WANT A BOND AT 60 PERCENT.

I JUST DON'T SEE THE SENSE I'M GEARING UP.

I CAN SEE THE IMMEDIACY OF IT. BUT IF THE IMMEDIACY STOPPED IN MIDSTREAM, IT JUST DOESN'T MAKE SENSE.

>> AND TO CHRIS THIS POINT, IF WE WERE TO RUN A BOND IN A NOVEMBER ELECTION, IT DOESN'T GIVE YOU THE TIME TO TURN

[02:50:08]

IS THAT CORRECT?> CORRECT. AND I HAVEN'T DONE MY HOMEWORK ON NOVEMBER ELECTION. I THINK YOU HAVE TO BE IN CLOSE CONTACT WITH KING COUNTY IN ORDER TO GET THE TAXES FOR NOVEMBER ELECTION TO BE IN EFFECT THAT IMMEDIATE NEXT CALENDAR YEAR. BECAUSE NORMALLY, YOU NEED APPROVAL FOR ALL OF YOUR BALLOT MEASURES -- NOT APPROVAL FOR BALLOT MEASURES, BUT YOUR LEVY AMOUNTS BY OCTOBER 31.

AND SO, THERE ARE SOME UNIQUE CONSIDERATIONS WHEN YOU RUN A NOVEMBER BALLOT FOR ENSURING THE TAX RATE IS EFFECTIVE.

BUT YOU ARE CORRECT, JOHN. IF YOU TURN AROUND AND DID A LEVY, IT WOULD DELAY THE COLLECTION ANOTHER YEAR.

>> ALL RIGHT. WE ARE ALMOST AT SEVEN.

I JUST WONDER IF WE NEED ANOTHER STUDY SESSION TO TALK ABOUT THIS? BECAUSE I STILL DON'T THINK WE

ARE THERE. >> SO WHAT WE WILL DO IS WE WILL TAKE THIS BACK. WE WILL PROVIDE THE BOARD WITH TAX INFORMATION SPECIFIC TO BEING ABLE TO COMPLETE THE PROJECTS WITHIN THE TIMELINE THAT WE HAVE IDENTIFIED THE NEED. PER THE PHASE 1, TWO, THREE ON THAT SHEET. AND WE WILL MOVE FORWARD FROM

THERE. >> OKAY.

DR. STEWART? >> I THINK WE CAN DROP ON THE TRIPLE BOND. I THINK THAT'S DEAD UPON ARRIVAL WITH US. I REALLY WOULD APPRECIATE US LOOKING AT THE SCENARIO. DOING THE LEVY, LEVY DASH BOND LEVY. BECAUSE I ASKED FOR IT.

I THINK IT TAKES A COMPROMISE POSITION BETWEEN US BEING ABLE TO GET SOMETHING BY THE EARLY 30S.

BUT THAT KIND OF BOLSTERS THE FOUR-WAY LEVY.

SO WE DO ANOTHER STUDY SESSION, I REALLY WOULD LIKE A

PRESENTATION. >> OKAY.

SO WE WILL GET THIS BACK ON OUR AGENDA FOR AN UPCOMING STUDY SESSION. ANYTHING ELSE?

>> NOT TONIGHT. >> WE MADE SOME PROGRESS I THINK, RIGHT? BABY STEPS? MAYBE? WE WENT ONE DIRECTION -- IT MIGHT HAVE BEEN FORWARD! SO 6:59.

LET'S START AT -- LET'S DO 7:10.

IS THAT ALL RIGHT WITH EVERYONE?

>> I THINK A BREAK IS GOOD BUT WE DON'T WANT TO KEEP PEOPLE

WAITING FOR US. >> LET'S AIM FOR 7:05.

>> PERFECT. THANKS.

* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.