{"date":"2025-08-19","type":"Regular","videoId":"B8blJsqUL_4","audioDuration":5108,"speakers":{"A":{"name":"Mike Wells","role":"Board President"},"B":{"name":"Evelyn Sanchez","role":"Executive Assistant to Superintendent / Board Secretary"},"C":{"name":"David Li","role":"Trustee"},"D":{"name":"David Weekly","role":"Vice President"},"E":{"name":"John Baker","role":"Superintendent"},"F":{"name":"Rick Edson","role":"Chief Business Official (also Bryan Godbe, remote presenter, shares label in presentation segment)"},"G":{"name":"Jeremy Hauser","role":"Partner, TeamCivX (parcel tax consultant)"}},"utterances":[{"start":6000,"end":10480,"speaker":"A","text":"All right, let's reconvene, and we'll have Evelyn start with a roll call."},{"start":10960,"end":11920,"speaker":"B","text":"Trustee Lee."},{"start":12080,"end":12480,"speaker":"C","text":"Here."},{"start":12720,"end":18000,"speaker":"B","text":"Trustee King. Here. Trustee Marquez. Here. Vice president Weekly."},{"start":18080,"end":18480,"speaker":"D","text":"President."},{"start":18720,"end":19600,"speaker":"B","text":"President Wells."},{"start":19600,"end":19920,"speaker":"E","text":"Here."},{"start":21920,"end":145190,"speaker":"A","text":"Let's see. I'm going to report out on your closed session. So, in compliance with the Brown act, the board of trustee reports that during the closed session, the board took action to initiate legal proceedings related to a due process matter under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. The board, by a vote of five eyes, zero nos and zeros, abstentions. Has directed legal counsel to proceed with filing a due process complaint with the office of administrative hearings against the parents guardians of a student within the district. Due to confidentiality laws governing student records and special education matters, no further details regarding this action may be closed at this time. Okay. Welcome to the August 19, 2025 meeting of the Redwood City School District governing board. Sila necessita tenemas dos opciones te interpretacional espanol. Interpretacion virtual en espanol. Yama al nueve siete ocho. Nueve, nueve. Cero cinco uno tresiete y prescione. Ocho tresiette siete cerro quatro uno. El signo de numero interpretation en Persona en espanol solicita de la sala. Welcome back to school, everyone you know. It's a warm welcome to our students, our families, and all the staff to the 2526 school year. all our board meetings, we encourage public participation and invite your comments on issues of concern, regardless of whether they are on the agenda. If your comment is for an item on the agenda, you'll be called when that item is being considered. If it's for an item not on the agenda, you'll be called shortly during public comment section of the agenda and then to let us know that you'd like to comment. If you're here in person, please fill out a speaker's card at the entrance to the room and hand it to Evelyn. If you're attending via zoom, you may fill out the form linked from the agenda or just raise your zoom hand when the item is being considered. And to be fair to all speakers, we're going to limit public comments to 3 minutes per person per topic, unless otherwise noted. Do we have any changes to the agenda? All right, let's go through a motion to approve the agenda."},{"start":146150,"end":147990,"speaker":"D","text":"I move we approve the agenda."},{"start":148870,"end":149590,"speaker":"A","text":"Is there a second?"},{"start":150230,"end":150630,"speaker":"B","text":"Second."},{"start":151030,"end":160430,"speaker":"A","text":"All in favor? Aye. Great. Okay, so no changes to the agenda. Then we're going to move on to public comment. I don't think we have any for non agenda."},{"start":160430,"end":160830,"speaker":"B","text":"None."},{"start":160830,"end":161510,"speaker":"E","text":"Okay, perfect."},{"start":162390,"end":170230,"speaker":"A","text":"And then we'll move on to approval of the bond program consent items. We'll move this without discussion. So is there a motion to approve?"},{"start":170680,"end":171720,"speaker":"F","text":"I move to approve."},{"start":172200,"end":173880,"speaker":"A","text":"Mr. Weekly, is there a second?"},{"start":174840,"end":175240,"speaker":"B","text":"Second?"},{"start":175480,"end":198730,"speaker":"A","text":"All right. All in favor? Okay, great. There are no bond program action items, so thank you, bond team. We're on to discussion items. And our first item is a discussion of parcel tax survey findings and recommended next steps. We do have this speaker card for this one, but. Well, I think we should do the presentation first and then take public comments. All right. Did I hand that to you?"},{"start":198730,"end":356180,"speaker":"E","text":"Yeah. So tonight we will hear about an option that could make a lasting difference for our students and schools. The possibility of placing a parcel tax measure on the future ballot. Parcel taxes are one of the few local funding tools available to the California to California school districts. They provide stable, local controlled revenue and cannot be taken away by the state or the federal government. As you know, Redwood City school district faces a structural funding gap because costs are rising, but revenue is not. We are carrying spending pressures because. We are carrying spending pressures because our students cannot do without them. Well, with the expiration of the one time Covid funds which we went through last year, ongoing pressures continue to meet not meet the needs of our students, nor the different types of programs we want to procure. This year, we are one. We are once again preparing for a round of budget reductions. And unless we have stable local revenue, those reductions will need to continue in the years ahead. A parcel tax would not solve this challenge totally, but it could protect the programs and the services our families value most. Classroom instruction, Instruction, student support, safe and welcoming facilities, and the ability to attract and retain teachers and staff. In April 2025, you approved to engage Team Civex, Godbe Research and SCI Consulting Group to conduct an independent community priority survey and technical analysis. Tonight's agenda item is the follow up of that effort with Godby research presenting the survey findings and Jeremy Hauser who is here in person from team civics, sharing analysis and recommending action for board's consideration to help us understand what this could mean for the Redwood City school district. They will walk us through survey results, potential parcel tax structure and potential revenue. Their presentation will provide us with a clear picture of both opportunities and considerations so that we can decide together if this is a path worth pursuing. So Jeremy Hauser is with us at this point in time and I believe Brian Godby is online."},{"start":356980,"end":357460,"speaker":"F","text":"Yes."},{"start":357620,"end":359620,"speaker":"E","text":"Okay, perfect. Welcome, Brian."},{"start":360740,"end":362180,"speaker":"F","text":"Thank you, Superintendent."},{"start":363060,"end":480810,"speaker":"G","text":"Thanks, Dr. Baker. And thank you Members of the board for having me Again, Jeremy Hauser, partner with Team Civics. Before we hop into the results of the poll, I just want to do a quick recap of where we've been since we were last in front of you to kind of reorient ourselves to the process and where we're at in the process. And then I'll kick it to Brian to kind of walk through the numbers in detail. So Rick, if you wouldn't mind going to the next slide. So you'll remember we were here in March of this year for an informational session about really everything you need to know about parcel taxes, the legal requirements, the political requirements. We talked about the potential for a square footage based parcel tax and what could be involved in that. We also talked about potential election dates and recommended next steps. As Dr. Baker mentioned, we came back in early April and we got direction from you all to assess the feasibility of a potential parcel tax measure. And since then, in coordination with Gabi Research, we, we conducted that opinion research to answer a few key questions that we're going to present you tonight. First and foremost, we wanted to understand what tax rate sensitivities exist in your community and how they might impact support for a parcel tax measure. We wanted to understand the funding priorities that your voters see in your schools and what they prioritize in terms of uses of funds as they're considering a potential measure. We wanted to see if there are any potential controversies out there in the community and we really wanted to drill down on the optimal time to go on the ballot. And then finally, as you know, this poll was really structured around a square footage based parcel tax, which is a structure that many of your neighboring districts have explored in the past and other districts in the Bay Area, but you have not. And so the poll that we conducted focused exclusively on a measure that would be based on the square footage of buildings on any given parcel. So with that, I'll kick it over to Brian to walk through the numbers and then I'll come back and give some more recommendations and next steps."},{"start":481770,"end":1966630,"speaker":"F","text":"Great. Thank you very much, Jeremy. Thank you. Members of the board, as Jeremy alluded to, we obviously conducted a survey for the district. We looked at a variety of different things. First, we looked at several questions about the district and their the voters perceptions about the district in terms of quality of education, management of taxpayer funds and potential needs for additional funding. We also, as Jeremy alluded to, looked at parcel tax measures. In this case, it was a split sample and we'll talk about that a little bit More where we looked at two different variations based on the different rates. We looked at a variety of things that we might spend the money on. We then tested both positive and negative statements to see what might happen in the course of a campaign. We looked a little more in detail at different rate structure as well as term. And then we also looked at the perception of the economy in the next year or so. The survey is based on a wide variety of demographic and behavioral characteristics that we use to make sure this survey is representative. And that includes stratification of the sample on the front end, weighting it on the back end, and then segmentation of the data after the fact. Next slide, please. A little more. In terms of the methodology, this was a phone and online survey. Phone meaning landline. Yes, there are still a few people who have those and answer them, but the majority of the phone was via cell. The online were text invitations and email invitations. But we really live in a cell and text world. So that's where the majority of our completed interviews come from. The universe that we looked at was likely November 2026 voters in the district. We were in the field at the very end of May. The average phone survey, which is still our metric for measuring the length, was 25 minutes. Our sample size goal was 500. We actually got 505, which leads us to a margin of error of plus or minus 4.33% for the entire sample. And for those ballot questions, split samples, it's plus or minus 6.14. Next slide, please. And then the next one after that. So the first section again is the perception of the district. And the first question there is the perception of quality of education. If you add the variant somewhat favorables together here, you see we're at basically 61% in round numbers in this survey. In the pie chart, if you look at the box at the lower portion of the slide, you'll see the same question from previous surveys. In the survey we did In May of 2024, it was 45%. In February of 2022, it was 53% rounded. And in February of 2019, it was 32%. So this is the highest that it has been, and that's certainly a good indication and an indication of good work by the district. Next slide, please. The next slide is the management of taxpayer or public funds. Same idea here. Adding the very and somewhat favorables together, you see we're at 48%. This is always lower than the quality of education because it's a little bit different. And a lot of people don't actually know what you're up to because they don't follow board meetings. And that's reflected in the the DKNA, which is don't know, no answer. That' 27% that don't have an opinion. When we add the variance somewhat together, again, it's 48% in this survey. It was 34, 37 and 27 respectively in that box at the bottom of the slide. So it has improved here as well. And that's certainly a good thing as we contemplate a revenue measure. Next slide. The next slide was an agree disagreement with the statement that the district needs additional funding to provide quality education. Again, adding the strongly and somewhat together we're at 64% in round numbers. In May of 24, that was 58. In February of 22, that was 61. So again, it's the highest that it has been over these last few surveys. So next slide please. And this is where we switched gears in the survey. We're sort of done with this perception of the district at a high level and we go to specific parcel tax proposals. You see the wording of the question in the box on the right hand side. It meets all of the statewide legal requirements for ballot measure. It's not more than 75 words. It has a tax rate which is 17.5 cents per building square foot and $25 per unimproved parcel. It raises a total of $14.3 million annually. And it has a term which in this case is until ended by voters. There's some other things like independent citizens oversight, senior citizen exemptions, no money for administrators, which are common for most parcel taxes for school districts. It also starts with those bullets that you see, which are that we believed at this stage of the process would be the best items for the parcel tax. So you can see the bullets in preserving science and technology, math, et cetera. When we ask people would they definitely vote yes, probably vote yes, et cetera, adding the definitely and probably yes together, you see we're at 63.4%. That's a good place to start. Obviously, it's not yet at the 2/3 threshold necessary for a parcel tax to be successful, but it is certainly a good place to start. Next slide, please. The next slide. As I mentioned, we did a split sample, which basically means we have a random sample of 505 and then we have two random samples within that. Both of the random samples are weighted and stratified independently to make sure they're individually representative and then they're added together to make sure the entire survey is representative. This is a variation on the same parcel tax with the exception of the rate. In this case, the rate is 5.5 cents, $25 per unimproved parcel, raising $4.5 million annually. So obviously it's a lower, a lower rate, but that didn't really change the data. In fact, it's a little bit lower at 60% in round numbers. So three and a half, 4% lower. Statistically speaking, there's no difference between the two. So that sort of suggests that the higher rate may actually work a little better. But again, statistically speaking, the two variations are the same. Next slide, please. The next set of questions was longer because we're not limited to the 75 words of a ballot question. And this was asked of the entire sample. These items were presented in a random order to present any position bias. And after we're done with the interviewing, we go back and assign numeric values to each of the response categories. So a much more likely gets a two. A somewhat more likely gets a one, somewhat less likely, A minus one, much less likely, a minus two. And that creates what you see, the numbers next to the red bars. It's an intensity scale. And we do that because there's four different response categories plus a don't know response. And it's hard to encapsulate that in one percentage. And if you did, for example, add the much more likely and somewhat more likely together for the ranking purposes, you could have an Item that is 40% much more likely and 20% somewhat more likely, which is 60%. Of course, you could have the reverse. It could be 20% much more likely and 40% somewhat more likely, still 60%, but not the same 60%. The first example is much stronger and a higher intensity. So that's why we use this intensity score to rank the items, albeit it is somewhat abstract. So we also do in fact add the much more likely and somewhat more likely together, and that's reflected in the blue arrow and the range from high to low on the right hand side of the slide. Again, it's ranked. These are items are ranked by the intensity score. But we're displaying the percentages makes it easier to understand what we're looking at. We also put things into tiers, and what that means is that within a given tier the items are statistically tied and that there is no difference between them. Now, there is numeric differences for sure. And at the end of the day, we've got to put one thing in front of the other. If we're writing a ballot question or a ballot argument. And so this is the best order that we have. But realize that within a tier, everything are technically tied. So at the top of tier one, we have maintained hands on science classes at 77%. At least. Somewhat more likely to support the measure. Attract and retain qualified teachers and counselors is next. At virtually the same level, Preserve science, technology, engineering and math instruction. Support quality reading and writing programs. Provide math and science enrichment. Slightly different spin on the math and science components that we've tested previously on this list. Maintain manageable class sizes, protect arts and music programs, and then maintain literacy programs. All of those are above the 70% level, which is three points higher than the two thirds necessary to for this measure to be successful. So that's a good list. The other thing of note is this list suggests that we might tweak the ballot question a little bit in terms of the bullets that we suggested initially. Next slide, please. And the next slide continues the same list just further down. We start with maintain school library programs at 70%. But then quickly we're going into the 2/3 level. So unlike the items on the first slide, they're just not helping us achieve or exceed the 2/3 threshold that we need to be successful for a parcel tax. But you have things like school library programs, updated instructional materials, enhancing school counseling programs, et cetera. Next slide, please. The next slide is another list. This one is even a little bit longer. Again, it's presented in random order and the idea of is largely the same for creating the intensity scale. The response categories are a little bit different, but the idea is still the same. Ranked by intensity, but then looking at the percentage at least somewhat more likely to vote yes. At the top of this list we have. Every penny from this measure will benefit Redwood City elementary and middle schools. The measure ensures that large businesses and large building owners pay their fair share. That's a feature of a per square foot parcel tax, as opposed to what the districts had in the past, which is a flat rate parcel tax. Having a great teacher in the classroom is the most important element in providing quality education. None of the money can be taken by the US Government or the state of California. Always a good accountability provision. By law, no money for this measure can be used for administrator salaries. Another accountability provision, the measure will prevent additional layoffs of dozens of qualified teachers and staff. Every penny from this measure will benefit Redwood City elementary, middle and charter schools. Reason that this is a little bit different than 7W. We just wanted to see if the addition of the charter schools made a Difference. It really doesn't. From a statistical perspective it is numerically lower, but it's still in the low 70s and that's a good place to be. The measure continues funding for critical basic programs including math, science, reading and writing. Another spin on the the core academics. The good news here is all of these are above that 72.7%. Statistically they're all tied. Again, the rankings are are useful for our purposes, but this is all exceeds the 2/3 threshold by basically 6 points in round numbers. And so that's certainly a good place to be. It gives us arguments to work with. Next slide please. The next slide shows the continuation of this list of questions you see here. Quickly, we're still in the 70s. You also see the reason we use the intensity scale to rank them. Because sometimes one of the items can have a much higher, somewhat more likely and as a result the percentage seems higher than the percentage for another one. But the intensity is how these are ranked, not just simply adding the much more and somewhat more likely together. So these two are all good. They're not quite as good as the first slide, but they're all still in tier one, so statistically tied. Many teachers are struggling with the high cost of housing. The measure requires citizens oversight. Funds raised by the measure cannot be impacted by doge. The measure will help provide competitive compensation for teachers and school employees. Given the rapid increasing cost of living the measure if the measure fails, the district will have to cut programs for children across the district. Given uncertainty surrounding the U.S. department of Education, the measure is critical to ensure children continue to receive the best education. And finally the school district has award winning teachers and this measure will help retain them. Again, all of these things are above 70% so that's a good place to be. Next slide please. The next slide. Again, this was a long list, but here you see now all of a sudden we're the highest item here is really just a little bit above the 2/3 threshold. So this is not how these items are not helping us get to the 2/3 that we need to be successful. So while they are positive and important educational attributes, they're just not moving the voters. So at this point in the survey we have introduced the two measures to the respective split samples. We've talked about what they would fund, we've talked about the positive side of the equation and we come to the retest of our ballot questions. So next slide please. So the first one again is our 17.5 cent parcel tax. It started at 63.4. We're now at 73.2. So in round numbers, a 10% increase. That's substantial and certainly a good, a good sign for this particular version. Next slide please. The 5.5 cent again starting at 59.5 has moved up to 68. So almost a 10 point gain. Not quite as strong as the previous one, but it didn't start as strong. And so we have the same thing going on here. There just seems to be more support for a larger measure which will be more effective in meeting the district's needs. Next slide. So the next set of questions is the negatives. Obviously it's not just the positive arguments. In the context of a measure being on the ballot, we need to look at both sides of the coin and that's what this does. The methodology here is largely the same as the informational statements, but you have to remember that we don't put a minus sign in front of the numbers to make them seem bad. The higher they are, the worse they are for us. And also it's important to remember that 33.4% on election day is enough to defeat a parcel tax that requires 2/3. So the bad news here is all of these are above that 33.4%. And there are some particularly strong items that top of the list. The measure does not have an expiration date and will go on forever. We characterized it legally as until ended by voters. The opposition calls it a forever tax and that's 48% at least somewhat more likely to vote no. The measure would more than double the current amount of the current school parcel tax. Obviously rates are important and a negative for us. The residents and businesses struggling with continued inflation, high gas prices and grocery prices. Now is not the right time to do this. The city and county have increased sales taxes and the elementary school and high school districts have as well. And that is a generic nod to the fact that there may be a transportation regional transportation measure on the ballot at the same time. And that's obviously a negative. The district has enough taxpayer money already. They just need to manage their budget more efficiently. A pretty typical anti tax argument, but impactful given economic uncertainty of tariffs, inflation, high interest rates, state budget cuts and looming, looming deficits. This is not the right time, obviously. That's to make sure that we are baking into the final test the economic uncertainty that we're facing. Salaries of school district employees increase automatically based on union contracts. Don't be fooled. The average homeowner will pay $100. That's the 5.5 cent version of the partial tax in split sample and then don't be fooled. The average homeowner paid $315 a year. That's the 17.5 cents version of the parcel tax. So those were split sampled as well. But the responses are virtually identical. And it's the state's job to fund education. It should not be placed on the back of local property owners in the bottom list, but again, still above that 33.4% threshold. So now we've introduced the measure, we've talked about the what we fund, we talked about the positive arguments, we've retested it, we've talked about the negatives. So we go to the next slide and we retest the measures for yet a third time. And so this is right after the negatives, just like the middle test was right after the positives. So this is sort of worst case. The second test is the best case. And here we started at 63, we went up to 73 and we're now down to 66.5, which is basically right at the 2/3 threshold. But it didn't go down as far as where we started. And so that's really encouraging. The other way to look at this, because of the structure of the survey is very intentional to see what the high is and what the low is. Averaging the second and third tests is a good way to figure out what happens after everybody hears the positives and the negatives all mixed together. And so when you do that where the average is 70% in round numbers, which obviously is 3 points above the 2/3 threshold. So that's a good place to be. The follow up question here for this split next slide please, was support for a 10 cent per square foot. So it basically is instead of 17.5 to do the same list of things, what if it was $0.10 per building square foot and you see we get a little bit of a bump from 66.5 to 67.6, it's not statistically significant. What's interesting and almost always the case is the definitely yes has gone up. So while there isn't a significant difference in the total, the intensity has improved, as one might expect at a lower rate. But because our average of the second third test for 17.5 cents is 70%, I'm not certain that going lower benefits our likelihood of passage. It just reduces the revenue. Next slide please. So going back to the other side of the split sample scenario, this is the 5.5 cent version. We started at 60%, we went up to 68 and we're now at 63 in round numbers. So as we've seen all along with this version, it's just not getting to the two thirds threshold with any sort of cushion. And even if we average the second and third tests here, we're just at 66%. So we're just below the two thirds threshold for this. So I think that suggests that the 17.5 is probably the right way to go for planning purposes at this point and that we don't have to go to the lower rate. Next slide, please. So the next slide was asked of everybody. It's no longer split sampled. And this was instead of intent until ended by voters the way we wrote both the ballot questions. What if it was just eight years? So we're looking for a point where we might be able to do a fixed parcel tax which would eliminate that negative of the forever tax. Here we get 65%. It's not quite as good as where we were with the until ended by voters. That is almost always the case because until ended by voters does give people awareness that, you know, they could go out and repeal attacks at any time. Eight years makes it sound like it's set in stone. It's still pretty good. This is the entire sample. So it's a little higher for the 17.5 just because support for that is higher and a little lower for the 5.5. Next slide, please. And so this is the final slide in the survey before I turn it back to Jeremy. But this is what I was alluding to earlier, that we had a question on their opinion of the future economy. So we're asking them what they think the economy is going to be like next fall in 2026 when we might be on the ballot. And 17% said better, 30% said about the same, and 46% said worse. So the bad news is people are very pessimistic. If we compare that with May of 24, worse was only 26%. So the current economic climate is of concern. That's the bad news. The good news is this is baked into the ballot questions that we've already looked at. So despite people being fairly pessimistic about their economic future, they are still willing to support a local parcel tax, as we just saw a moment ago. So that's encouraging. But this bears watching to see if it gets worse than it already is, which is as bad. And we didn't test it in the Redwood City School district, but we've tested this question since the beginning of the pandemic and have a whole variety of places. And the worst responses right now are as bad or worse than at the very beginning of the pandemic. So people are very pessimistic, but again, that's baked into the positive responses. We got to the 17.5% parcel tax. So that's the survey presentation. I will turn it back to Jeremy for his concluding remarks."},{"start":1968310,"end":2321700,"speaker":"G","text":"Thank you, Brian. Just wanted to give a few recommendations based on this research and our experience. I think overall these are really positive numbers and especially when you compare them to the polling that was done a little over a year ago, we're seeing some good trends for your district and we're seeing support for a square footage parcel tax. So we recommend that you continue the process of moving forward towards potentially placing a measure on the ballot in the future. We have some thoughts about how to structure that measure and when to consider it. First and foremost, we recommend pursuing at the full 17 and a half cents per square foot. The polling showed that there was not a difference between that rate and the lower rate and actually showed a little bit of depressed support for that lower five and a half cent rate. Our goal here primarily is to bring as much revenue back to your schools as possible and a 17 and a half cent per square foot measure would do that. Second, we recommend that you consider the inclusion of a cap on the rate in the measure that we tested. In both measures that we tested, we did not include a cap, meaning that we could put a limit on the amount that any one parcel could pay. Right. We're not saying you should include one necessarily, but we're really recommending that you do community outreach and engagement, particularly with the business community, to understand their appetite for this. Oftentimes local businesses, you know, not registered to vote in the district and thus can't take the poll, but still should be an important stakeholder in the process. And we recommend that over the next few months, as you're, you know, workshopping this proposal, that be a really important part of the discussion. And then finally, we really strongly recommend that you consider including a sunset. As Brian alluded to. That was the number one argument against this potential measure was the fact that it did not include a sunset. And while your poor results are very strong, I think we need to recognize the fact that getting to 2/3 is really hard no matter what, and you're making a pretty big ask of your community at the 17 and a half cents rate. We think a nice olive branch would be to include a sunset and take that number one vulnerability off the table right after negatives. We did see both measures drop. Right. And if we took that Number one negative argument off the table, that is it did not expire. We think that would certainly build a stronger proposal for you all. Second, we're recommending that you target the June election. And we're recommending that for a few reasons. Primarily, if you're successful in June, you'll be able to realize the increased revenue from a measure on July 1st of 2026. If you wait until November of next year, you can't start collecting that additional revenue until July 1st of 2027. Dr. Baker alluded to the fact that you've made some painful cuts and have to continue looking at painful cuts. So it seems as if time is of the essence. You've got momentum and strong poll results that say you have support. We'd recommend that you move forward targeting that June election. We also do know that there are likely to be multiple ballot or multiple measures on the ballot countywide next year, likely in November. It'd be nice to get in ahead of those and have less competition for voter time and attention. And then finally, we strongly recommend that you take some time to educate your community both to voters at large, but also key stakeholders like business, PTAs, teachers, etc. To really express the need. I think that was really clear in the polling as we saw the rise in Support from the first ballot question and the second ballot question and nearly 10 points that there is some connecting of the dots to do for your community. And doing the education on the front end before you place the measure on the ballot would be very beneficial for your measure. Next slide please. And then finally, I just wanted to remind us of the big picture timeline and milestones. We've talked about this a few different times now. We've now completed the feasibility phase, that first phase of this process. We've delivered poll results that we feel really confident about and think that we have a really a roadmap forward here to move into steps two and three, you know, with your direction. We'd like to start on that awareness building phase where we begin to communicate with your community about the the needs, how a parcel tax might address those needs, and also really seek their input, you know, both on a broad scale basis through broad based communication, but also through more targeted stakeholder meetings. Again, so you can give them a little bit more information, but you can also hear from them in a nuanced way and start to refine, you know, what your parcel tax might look like next year. After we're done with that awareness building phase, we'd move into the third and final phase of the public side process, the actual development of the measure itself, we would need, in order to qualify for the June ballot, to bring back a resolution to you all that you would need to adopt before March 6th in order to qualify for that ballot. In that resolution, we would have a full 75 word ballot question. We'd have a final tax rate, we'd have a term, whether that include a sunset or not. And then we'd have to make a final decision on including that rate cap. So, you know, we really are recommending that we move forward in earnest so that we can complete these next two steps and bring back a resolution to you all for consideration before that March 6 deadline. And then at that point there would be a passing of the baton. I think, as you all know, the district cannot advocate for, against the passage of a measure. So that work, that traditional campaign work that you've seen for many years with, you know, lawn signs, the community and volunteers knocking on doors and raising money, all that must be privately coordinated and fundraised, but still is a really important part of this process, especially when you consider the 2/3 threshold needed for support. So with that, I think either Brian or I are happy to answer any questions that you might have about the numbers, the process or next steps."},{"start":2322500,"end":2339600,"speaker":"A","text":"All right, thank you, Jeremy and Brian, for the presentation. We'll come right back to your questions. I'm going to take our public speaker comments first and I'll take the one in person, it's Jessica Shade. And then as a reminder, you'll have three minutes. The you can see the timer on the screen because it's on the front of the podium."},{"start":2344960,"end":2440670,"speaker":"B","text":"All right, thanks. My name is Jessica Shade. I'm a parent in the district. I'm really encouraged that the polls showed an increase in support from, you know, when the last time you pulled back in May of 2024. I also think that the square foot parcel tax is a lot more equitable than the flat rate that we've had in the past. So two really encouraging things. Parents are really supportive of a parcel tax. There's a lot of interest in carrying this forward, and we really want to make sure that the funding would go to the areas most needed by our kids. So parents want to be involved and help carry this through. We already have a group of parents that have been looking into parcel tax options. We've been exploring a citizens initiative, but this would be a lot more straightforward given election laws and different complexities. One thing that I want to point out is these numbers are very close to that 2/3 bar that we need to hit to get this passed. So we're really going to need all hands on deck helping with this. So it's. Even though it's more straightforward than a citizens initiative, it's going to be a bigger lift. So just a reminder to myself and other parents that really going to have to put all our weight into this. So thank you."},{"start":2441070,"end":2464360,"speaker":"A","text":"All right, thank you, Jessica. And then we have two, two comments from online. We'll take Carlo Contavelli first from signing up through the form, and then Brandon Matthews will be after him. Hello, everyone."},{"start":2465160,"end":2466360,"speaker":"C","text":"I hope you can hear me."},{"start":2466440,"end":2473560,"speaker":"A","text":"We can hear you. Thank you. Sorry I couldn't be there tonight, but I'm Cava Contavalli."},{"start":2473560,"end":2474760,"speaker":"F","text":"I'm a parent to Edbo City."},{"start":2474760,"end":2479960,"speaker":"A","text":"I was also involved with other parents in time to raise funding for our school district."},{"start":2481000,"end":2482160,"speaker":"C","text":"So my take here is that the"},{"start":2482160,"end":2483640,"speaker":"A","text":"poll is showing that there's a good"},{"start":2483640,"end":2485400,"speaker":"F","text":"chance a parcel tax would be well"},{"start":2485400,"end":2487360,"speaker":"A","text":"perceived as well supported by the voters."},{"start":2489040,"end":2493120,"speaker":"F","text":"So my take it's, let's take the chance and let the voters decide."},{"start":2493680,"end":2507160,"speaker":"A","text":"We have seen drastic budget cuts for the school year. We don't know what is going to happen at the state, federal level going forward. It is urgent for us to secure more funding for our schools. If we do nothing, let's say we don't put this on the ballot, things"},{"start":2507160,"end":2508080,"speaker":"F","text":"will only get worse."},{"start":2508880,"end":2524300,"speaker":"A","text":"By not putting this on the ballot, we would be denying an opportunity for students, our teachers and our voters without even trying. And I'm not sure we have other options, to be frank, like more funding is needed. It's not coming from the state and,"},{"start":2524300,"end":2525220,"speaker":"F","text":"or the federal level."},{"start":2525300,"end":2537060,"speaker":"A","text":"And hey, we need to do what we can at the local level. Thank you. Thank you, Carlo. And our next speaker is Brandon Matthews."},{"start":2544270,"end":2545630,"speaker":"F","text":"Hi, good evening. Can you hear me?"},{"start":2545630,"end":2546190,"speaker":"A","text":"We can."},{"start":2546750,"end":2547150,"speaker":"D","text":"Great."},{"start":2547950,"end":2645960,"speaker":"F","text":"Good evening. My name is Brendan Matthews. I'm a parent in the district and I'm also a homeowner in unincorporated San Mateo County. I am a member of Unidos, which is the parent teacher organization at Atalante Selby Spanish Immersion School. I am speaking up tonight in order to support this measure wholeheartedly. I think it is absolutely the right choice. And it is my impression that the community supports, is also supported by the individual members of the PTO that I have spoken with about this. There is unanimous support for it amongst the parents that I, that I, that I work with on the pto. I in particular appreciate the equitability of this tax. I'm personally against any sort of a cap because I Apprec. The progressive nature of this particular arrangement for the tax, and I want to just call that out as something that I see as beneficial. Unidos, in particular, the parent teacher organization at Adelante Selby is being called on more heavily this year to help fund programs and benefits to the students at our school. But to be perfectly honest, we're quite limited by the demographics of the, of the, of the families that represent the Adelante Selby community. And we were doing everything we can, but, but being able to share this cost in a progressive, equitable, equitable way across the district I think would be huge. And I want to give my full throated support for it. Thank you."},{"start":2646680,"end":2681420,"speaker":"A","text":"Thank you, Brandon. Okay, let's bring it back to the school board of trustees. And does anyone want to start with any questions? Also, this is not an action item, but we do want to give some direction. If you recall the three recommendations that were presented towards the end of the slide deck. If you could sort of share your opinion on those recommendations as well and where you're thinking about that, we'll try and collect sort of where we want to take as the next steps from here. Who wants to jump in? All right, thanks, Jen."},{"start":2682620,"end":2699500,"speaker":"B","text":"Thank you. Thank you, Brandon. And. Sorry, give me a second. I just had a couple questions just for, just for my own information, but of the sample size of 500, do we know how many were homeowners that we pulled?"},{"start":2699500,"end":2744340,"speaker":"F","text":"Or maybe that's a. Yeah, we do know that it's one of the stratification points that we use to make sure that the sample is representative of the likely voters. And actually I've got that right in front of me. The way it's broken down in the sample is 57% are homeowners, 25% are renters. But unfortunately there's also 17% that we don't know. We don't have information on them. So we waited to those three figures to make sure that it's representative. That works. Because if you were campaigning tomorrow and you wanted to send a mailer to homeowners, you would be limited to what's on the voter file. So that's what we limit the sample to as well."},{"start":2744980,"end":2764360,"speaker":"B","text":"Got it. Thank you. And then my other question, it was more just kind of a comment to the next steps. It sounds like we definitely want to finalize the ballot wording. Are you guys going to be using the previous polling information that came through? Are we going to continue kind of community outreach and reforming a committee or like, what is that?"},{"start":2765640,"end":2817650,"speaker":"G","text":"Yeah, I'm happy to we would be relying on the polling first and foremost to inform that decision. I do think as a part of the stakeholder engagement and outreach process, we want to hear from folks and I think in particular we want to hear about probably rate and duration. And we would build all of those points of feedback into the final language that we would present to you as a board. And we could do that in a number of ways. We could do a first reading of a resolution for information only that would allow you all to give feedback on the language and then we could bring back a final resolution for adoption before that March 6 deadline. If you also wanted to have an ad hoc committee, we could certainly work with that as well. But we would be doing it in coordination with your legal counsel, William Tunick from dwk, who we've worked with on all of the square footage parcel taxes in the Bay Area."},{"start":2818740,"end":2829740,"speaker":"B","text":"And then maybe this is more of a Dr. Baker question. You mentioned that as board member or as a school district, we can't be pro or con or for the measure once it's on the ballot."},{"start":2829740,"end":2832260,"speaker":"E","text":"Is that once they pass the resolution?"},{"start":2833060,"end":2875070,"speaker":"G","text":"That's correct and it actually is. At no point can district resources be used to advocate today, tomorrow, on election Day. Now you as board members are elected officials and you have First Amendment rights and are citizens in this community. And you're more than welcome to share your opinions and feelings about the measure and be involved in an eventual campaign on your personal time. District staff can also be involved in a campaign on their personal time as long as they're off the clock and not on district property or using district resources like email addresses, phones, printers, copiers, etc. Got it."},{"start":2875070,"end":2875590,"speaker":"F","text":"Thank you."},{"start":2877910,"end":2882230,"speaker":"A","text":"Other questions? Questions about the polling or anything?"},{"start":2882550,"end":2917560,"speaker":"D","text":"Yeah. So on the polling I liked what we were able to learn from that, but it felt like on the negative questions for instance, we were seeing how people were changed their perceptions based on given specific statements. But what that doesn't measure is the preconceptions that people started with. Right? Was there any kind of freeform field where people could specify what reasons they would have for not supporting such a thing? Do we have an understanding of the opposition beyond just the deltas we measured in the negative statements in the poll."},{"start":2918600,"end":2987420,"speaker":"F","text":"We didn't ask any open ended questions in this survey. Those are certainly valid questions for things like focus groups, more qualitative analysis. But we did not ask him here largely because of time. It was already really over the budget at the 25 minute level. So no, they're not in there. I think though that whatever preconceptions somebody might bring to the ballot are in that first ballot question. The second ballot question for each split is what happens after we've done all of our hard work to explain in a campaign to explain what the measure is about? The negatives, although limited, are also limited to the things we have seen in San Mateo county over and over and over again. I mean, it seems that the Silicon Valley Taxpayers association goes back to the same well, when they write ballot arguments. So there aren't really a whole list of new reasons to oppose it, although individuals may have their own reasons, for sure."},{"start":2987820,"end":3001260,"speaker":"D","text":"So, speaking of classic reasons, I know that a classic reason that we've heard of opposing new taxes is that the elderly will get kicked out of their homes. They won't be able to afford these new taxes. And so there have been elderly exemptions baked in."},{"start":3001820,"end":3003140,"speaker":"F","text":"Yes, there is. In this."},{"start":3003140,"end":3003500,"speaker":"D","text":"Right."},{"start":3004300,"end":3004820,"speaker":"C","text":"Got it."},{"start":3004820,"end":3005340,"speaker":"D","text":"Thank you."},{"start":3006940,"end":3009260,"speaker":"A","text":"Other questions before we go to the recommendations."},{"start":3009940,"end":3017620,"speaker":"B","text":"Cecilia, can you just talk again about what the consideration of cap on rate is?"},{"start":3018900,"end":3186520,"speaker":"G","text":"I'd be happy to. So we have a lot of flexibility with how we structure this parcel tax. That's an underlying square footage rate. As currently structured, there is no cap, which means you pay 17 and a half cents per square foot on every single square foot of your property. You could also decide to put a cap on the rate that any one parcel could pay. And let's say that that rate is a cap of $5,000. What that means is you pay 17 and a half cents per square foot up until $5,000. And if you had qualified for a higher rate, if the cap was not there, you would not pay more. Right. So in theory, larger properties are still paying more than smaller properties, but how much more is limited to that $5,000 limit? That cap can be any number that we decide. The reason we don't test it in the initial polling is because we've seen pretty consistently that including a cap in your measure actually lowers voter support. The reason to do it would not primarily be a voter support reason. It would be a business support reason. And it's why we recommend doing, you know, that stakeholder outreach to meet with the Chamber, you know, Apartment association and others to make sure they're comfortable with the approach. And the reason we're doing it is what we don't want to happen is to have a property owner who decides that they want to write a $50,000 check to a campaign to oppose your measure rather than pay a, you know, larger tax over an 8, 10, 14 year or longer period. So that really is what we're recommending doing. And while the district can't be again involved and in a formal capacity in the campaign process, you can still take into consideration when you're deciding to place a measure on the ballot, the likelihood of success. And I think that having organized, organized opposition is always the number one driver of whether or not you're going to be successful. And we think the most likely source of organized opposition would be from a larger property owner that has the resources to campaign against it. So, but currently we don't. We didn't include it in the polling because we thought we should give it a shot without it and really do the work on the back end to understand if it can be feasible. I believe that it can be, but we still recommend doing our homework over the next few months and doing that outreach to understand if it is. I will say that if, you know, in the course of that outreach, we're hearing pretty consistently that a cap is needed to avoid organized opposition. We would want to do probably a shorter tracking poll to include ballot language that that includes that cap so we can understand how it impacts voter support as well."},{"start":3188999,"end":3210770,"speaker":"A","text":"And I'm just going to tack onto your comment about the tracking poll because I saw that that wasn't actually in the recommendations for it. So is that because other than if we change the language significantly, you think these results are durable through an election in, in June? I'm wondering mostly just because of the high percent of worse outlook on the economy, do we think we would need a tracking poll in January, February?"},{"start":3211410,"end":3251670,"speaker":"G","text":"I would see that omission mainly as an oversight and not as a recommendation. I think we really, as we're going through this process over the next few months, we're going to want to be listening. And if we sense a change in the tides, if the economy changes drastically, if again, we're getting the sense that we want to include a cap, we absolutely would recommend doing tracking research. We wouldn't recommend doing it until early next year closer to that board decision. So we can give you as accurate of data as possible. But, you know, if we move forward and we don't really feel any headwinds and momentum continues to build, I don't think it's required that we would check back in with polling before making the decision."},{"start":3251990,"end":3252550,"speaker":"F","text":"Okay, great."},{"start":3252550,"end":3258910,"speaker":"A","text":"Thanks. David Lee, I don't know if you had any questions. If you didn't, I'd actually love to hear your thoughts on the recommendation. Unless. Did you have questions or do you."},{"start":3258910,"end":3259750,"speaker":"E","text":"I don't have any questions."},{"start":3260060,"end":3260220,"speaker":"F","text":"Just."},{"start":3260220,"end":3268780,"speaker":"A","text":"Yeah, and Then if questions or do you want to jump into your thoughts on the recommendations Microphone I don't have"},{"start":3268780,"end":3271660,"speaker":"C","text":"any questions but I doctor Be did you want to add anything before we."},{"start":3271980,"end":3274060,"speaker":"E","text":"No, just the comments and I'll wait until everybody."},{"start":3274060,"end":3367730,"speaker":"C","text":"Okay. So I don't have any questions. My general thinking, just going straight to the I guess the three prong recommendation piece is I'm, I'm in favor of moving forward with this. I guess the three prongs are. So first just in terms of what we've seen. I agree. I think it doesn't make sense not to go with the 17 and a half as a starting point. I, I do, I think my thing, my thoughts echo the same as some of our public speakers which is like we gotta do like we know that we have to raise money. This is a path toward pursuing it. If we don't, we know that we're not going to get it so we should do that. I also generally I would prefer not to have a cap on the rate or a sunset for some of the reasons that were stated. That said, I don't think any. There's nothing being concrete here. Right. So it's a consideration which I think is totally fair and I'm yeah, we have to see what, how the picture plays out. To Trustee Weekley's point. If we hear other things in conversations about potential critical points that we haven't heard before, then like yeah, we should take all that into consideration. So I guess big prong one. Yes, I think let's do it. And generally in accordance with the recommendations. Same thing with the June 2nd. I think that makes sense. Like we should get going sooner rather than later. And then the last one is educated reform obviously discussions. I think I'm probably in a similar position as what I think Tristan Keane mentioned which is obviously no district resources. But given where I am position wise, like I'm happy in my individual capacity to probably continue educating and advocating."},{"start":3368610,"end":3368970,"speaker":"F","text":"Great."},{"start":3368970,"end":3370370,"speaker":"A","text":"Thanks Jen."},{"start":3372210,"end":3399740,"speaker":"B","text":"Yeah, I pretty much echo what David just mentioned. I'm definitely for the June 2nd. If we can get our ducks in order. Right. The sooner we can get the funding, the better. I don't have a feeling about the cap and the sunset. Looking at the data, it seemed like it could go either way. So yeah, I think we need to at least kind of keep that in mind if that impacts kind of the numbers that we see. But yeah, I'm for this."},{"start":3400540,"end":3402060,"speaker":"A","text":"Great Cecilia."},{"start":3403660,"end":3426470,"speaker":"B","text":"Same here. I support the next steps and I do appreciate the strong pull results. And then with the consideration of the cap rate, I Am happy with the outreach and next steps that would take place to see if that would be something that we want to consider."},{"start":3430950,"end":3431430,"speaker":"A","text":"Yeah."},{"start":3432230,"end":3498110,"speaker":"D","text":"Said that we need to get 2/3 and 66.5% is about as close as you can get to two thirds and we're right on that edge. So we got our, we got our work cut out for us. I think on a cap my druthers would be now. On a sunset my druthers would be now. I was fascinated that things were so invariant on the exact amount, on the exact price, both in terms of the support but also just even on the negative side that there was equal negative sentiment for both as well. So I mean I get curious about how do we pick the right number. We, we picked two numbers that seem to have equal resistance and equal support. Does is there more to explore in the configuration space? That's there. I think we've got an awesome energized parent community who's psyched to go and find a way to support our schools. I think people may not realize that parcel taxes have a lot fewer restrictions than school bond measures and allow us to pay salaries that can pay staff and teachers. And I think this is the mechanism of action to make that happen. So I'm in favor of."},{"start":3499940,"end":3582470,"speaker":"A","text":"Yeah, I'd agree the one time funding let us really do the right thing in a crisis and so stable local funding is going to let us just keep doing the right thing every day. That's like a counselor on campus when a child needs help, manageable class sizes, protecting reading and math interventions, maintaining arts and stem that going to keep kids engaged. So yeah, I'm definitely in favor with going through with this. I thought it was interesting how the stability of the numbers regardless of the amount there. So I'm in favor of the 17.5. I do think that the consideration of the cap for the reasons that you brought up, Jeremy, it's something that we should definitely look at and consider. Same with the, the, the sunset and I guess one of the other negatives was the, you know, obviously we can't change this about, you know that obviously the state should be funding the schools more. I don't think any of us disagree with that. You know, I'm sure we'll continue in our roles to advocate Sacramento to be able to fund it. But our kids really, they just can't wait on state volatility. And so local funding really will give us this stability that we need for revenue and the local control that we're looking for to be able to do this. So yeah, I'm in favor of the June 26 ballot. I think that that puts us into the next fiscal year, should it pass, which would be outstanding. And yeah, we'll make those tactical choices."},{"start":3584600,"end":3705060,"speaker":"E","text":"Great. Well, from hearing the results a few months back and there was this a committee of us that heard it, I was very uplifted to see the results compared to last time. We need to go move forward. We have got to move forward. You have all read the memo and the plan for us going out to the community and talking about reductions and so forth. That's starting next month. So we need to get out there and start this ball rolling and definitely work very closely with the parent groups that have already created the momentum last year to move in another direction to find us funding for the programs that we need to make sure that our students are going to be prepared and ready for as they move forward in their educational career with us and beyond. So with that being said, Jeremy, I know Amy Buckmaster and I have a meeting coming up. I may call you before I go into that meeting. She already knows what about what it's about. Amy Buckmaster is the CEO and president of the Chamber of Commerce for San Mateo. So she has a head up of what we're going to talk about. But we need to go. We just need to start. And you and I will communicate to start this ad hoc committee also. And then I can get board members involved in that too and start meeting with stakeholders, parents, community members, seniors and so forth. And I know Hort has had a list of different entities that we had started meeting with towards the end of last school year where these were not educators, these were seniors, these were members of the, the city council and so forth that we're meeting with. So we need to start those dialogues again. So I'll be giving you a, a ping."},{"start":3706820,"end":3707780,"speaker":"G","text":"Looking forward to it."},{"start":3707780,"end":3719140,"speaker":"A","text":"Okay, great. Thank you, Jeremy and Brian again for the presentation tonight and Jessica Carlo and Brandon for engaging with your comments. All right, thank you."},{"start":3719140,"end":3719420,"speaker":"D","text":"Yeah."},{"start":3719420,"end":3727100,"speaker":"A","text":"Let's move on. Our next item is a discussion of school assignment. Wait, before we move on, you got all the information for direction that you needed from us, Right? Okay."},{"start":3727330,"end":3727650,"speaker":"F","text":"Okay."},{"start":3727970,"end":3763180,"speaker":"A","text":"Moving on. For discussion of school assignments and committee assignments for the board members for this school year. 25, 26. Again, this is just a discussion. I think next meeting we're going to have action items or consent agenda to approve it. So we're just discussing the assignments. Let's start with school assignments because those went through the normal rotation through the the list. Does anyone have questions, comments Concerns about the school assignments as drafted. Okay, great. And then. Yeah David, please."},{"start":3763180,"end":3782210,"speaker":"C","text":"I did have a question more about the non school sites. And just so there's a special ed CDC facilities would like to get clarification on what what assignments to those non school site categories. What that effectively means again practice what. How do we support. How do I. How would I support facilities for example?"},{"start":3783320,"end":3784920,"speaker":"A","text":"I'll let you give your opinion Dr. Bake."},{"start":3784920,"end":3785080,"speaker":"F","text":"Fair."},{"start":3785080,"end":3785880,"speaker":"A","text":"I can give you mine."},{"start":3785960,"end":3834440,"speaker":"E","text":"So in our meeting that we're going to have tomorrow I was going to go over that with you. You had put a question on the. The doc. What we, what we would really like you to do when you're at the facilities department is to go out and meet the staff that are there. You go out, ask questions, listen to them. Martin is the director of facilities and make sure that you meet with Martin prior to getting ask him questions that you may have and then he can give you the go ahead to walk with him. Meet other members that are working in the facilities department, get a taste of what they do, any questions that they may have for you. But we'll go through a lot of this tomorrow at our meeting and have a meeting with Jennifer and you and so Jennifer can also."},{"start":3837490,"end":3837730,"speaker":"F","text":"Yeah."},{"start":3837730,"end":3859650,"speaker":"A","text":"And I'll just add two more things to that. One is that it then also has a direct board member. If they have a question for the board they could look at it and say who they could go to. And also it's not just limited to the as with the school sites as well. It's not just limited to any to that one board member. Any board member can visit the facilities, you know and get to know Martin better and do that kind of thing."},{"start":3859810,"end":3864310,"speaker":"E","text":"Martin. But there's transportation up there and we have the groundsman outhead there so forth."},{"start":3864310,"end":3866390,"speaker":"A","text":"Yeah, perfect."},{"start":3866950,"end":3879670,"speaker":"D","text":"Small note but I thought the John Gill campus had been renamed. I just saw the name of the school site as Mandarin Immersion in Orion Alternative at the John Gill campus as the name of the site which seems like a very long name for a school."},{"start":3882630,"end":3884150,"speaker":"E","text":"It should be just Orion."},{"start":3884230,"end":3885230,"speaker":"A","text":"Yeah, it should be."},{"start":3885230,"end":3890870,"speaker":"B","text":"I can update that. I think it's referring because it used to be the original campus. So I'll update that."},{"start":3890870,"end":3891510,"speaker":"F","text":"Yeah, good point."},{"start":3892830,"end":3893070,"speaker":"A","text":"Cool."},{"start":3893070,"end":3893430,"speaker":"F","text":"Okay."},{"start":3893430,"end":3907789,"speaker":"A","text":"And then moving on to the committee assignments. These are the ones that we've already been on for the the past school year. I think normally we talk about these at our organization meeting in December current"},{"start":3908110,"end":3913510,"speaker":"E","text":"that's true but one of the reasons why we took we did it in December is we did organize and we"},{"start":3913510,"end":3914550,"speaker":"A","text":"had new board members."},{"start":3914550,"end":3917870,"speaker":"E","text":"You're right. Okay, so we're not having new board members."},{"start":3918240,"end":3918520,"speaker":"G","text":"Okay."},{"start":3918520,"end":3925600,"speaker":"A","text":"So let's, yeah, let's go through this. I guess the question would be, does anyone want to change their current committee assignments?"},{"start":3925680,"end":3939920,"speaker":"D","text":"David, Something that would be nice at some point is to have a snapshot of like, when do what committees meet? Like, I don't know that I've seen any such calendar. And like, for instance, I've been on the Stanford University committee and, and it hasn't."},{"start":3939920,"end":3943240,"speaker":"E","text":"I need to talk to them because I, I don't, I don't think that's happening anymore."},{"start":3943240,"end":3943580,"speaker":"F","text":"So."},{"start":3943890,"end":3954210,"speaker":"D","text":"Right. And so like I'm a, I'm just curious generally the, the load. So when looking at some of these, like, is it an equal load? Am I shirking? Right."},{"start":3954610,"end":3956770,"speaker":"E","text":"Policy committee is, is a big load."},{"start":3960290,"end":3982350,"speaker":"D","text":"Yeah. So I think just having some sense of like, how big a responsibility is being on this committee, when does it meet? It. Do we have a calendar of when all the committees meet and if there's something that's under index like, oh, by the way, the Stanford University committee hasn't met in the last year, two years, then we either should disband it or find a way to actually have those meetings happen. Right."},{"start":3982350,"end":3998470,"speaker":"E","text":"It's like the two by two by two. We do not run those meetings. So we depend, we're dependent upon the city. And Evelyn, how many holds do I have in my calendar that no one's gotten back to me yet? And I know David asked me, when's the next meeting? It's like we keep pushing back."},{"start":3998470,"end":4008390,"speaker":"D","text":"You know, maybe the easier ask is like, if it's hard to look at the future, maybe we can look in the rear view mirror like for the last 12 months, like, you know, how many meetings have we had? I don't know, something like that."},{"start":4010790,"end":4019750,"speaker":"C","text":"Sorry, I think I missed this during the initial discussion. If, assuming that we, there are no changes to this, when would be the next time to go over this again?"},{"start":4020310,"end":4026160,"speaker":"E","text":"It would be the next school, next school year that we would do this all over again."},{"start":4026640,"end":4034480,"speaker":"C","text":"Okay. So we'd be, we would be here for, we'd be in these committees for basically a year and a half. The half year that we've already done and then one more year."},{"start":4035120,"end":4035680,"speaker":"F","text":"Okay."},{"start":4035840,"end":4036320,"speaker":"A","text":"Yeah."},{"start":4037600,"end":4058830,"speaker":"C","text":"The only thing that I would maybe consider this is not being selfish is on the policy committee. I think it would be helpful just for like to do a rotation among board members because I think it's super important and good exposure just to like, see how it works and to to go through the process. I think it's super important. That said, I'm happy to, to stay on, but I just wanted to put that out there."},{"start":4061150,"end":4066750,"speaker":"E","text":"So you're willing to stay on? You're willing to stay on for the, for the school year? For the remainder of the school year? For the school year, I should say."},{"start":4066910,"end":4071070,"speaker":"B","text":"Asking for visitor, Visitor committee visitors if they're not."},{"start":4071070,"end":4089320,"speaker":"C","text":"Well, I was just, I think if there is interest, I, I mean, I could step down if Jen wants to stay or if Jen wants to switch somewhere else. Like I could also stay on because I do think that there's, it's probably helpful to have stability among some membership, but just to get some sort of rotation going would, might be helpful."},{"start":4089320,"end":4089600,"speaker":"D","text":"Yeah."},{"start":4089600,"end":4090000,"speaker":"F","text":"And I,"},{"start":4091760,"end":4111350,"speaker":"A","text":"I'm not trying to shirk joining the policy committee because I actually think it would be a fascinating one. I think with the momentum that's been going on, it would actually be helpful to have this stability through the school year and that when we do this next year. Though I do agree the policy is probably a good one to have board members rotate through. Wendy, Wendy, I'd love your opinion."},{"start":4111350,"end":4138390,"speaker":"B","text":"Sorry to interrupt. This particular year we are working with Gamut and just today I got a note for March having an intense time period for that workshop series, which is the overhaul of the board policies. And we are, we've expressed interest in having at least one meeting a month, possibly two as we progress forward, knowing that there's so many to do. And so I just wanted to point that out there for everyone's work schedules, so forth."},{"start":4138470,"end":4138950,"speaker":"A","text":"Yeah."},{"start":4138950,"end":4141670,"speaker":"B","text":"And they're about an hour and a half each meeting."},{"start":4141750,"end":4144950,"speaker":"A","text":"Yeah, yeah. So one of the more intense ones,"},{"start":4147110,"end":4152590,"speaker":"C","text":"I'm, I'm happy to remain and I, I would love to have Jen also remain for the school year."},{"start":4152590,"end":4160390,"speaker":"B","text":"Yeah, no, I, I, I, I'm in it for this, this session. I think it just, when we reconvene next year, maybe we can rotate it."},{"start":4160390,"end":4169840,"speaker":"A","text":"Right on. I agree. I think that's great. Any other, anything, anything else to discuss on the committees? Okay. We'll see these."},{"start":4169840,"end":4170800,"speaker":"D","text":"Sure. They actually happen."},{"start":4171520,"end":4173400,"speaker":"A","text":"Yeah, yeah, we'll see what, what dates"},{"start":4173400,"end":4174320,"speaker":"E","text":"I can get for you."},{"start":4176240,"end":4246730,"speaker":"A","text":"Yeah. So it sounded like we're looking for like a one liner of what it does and how often it meet, like what's the workload kind of thing. Okay. Yeah, I think that makes sense. All right, great. Okay, we're done with our discussion, so we're moving on to public hearing. So next on the agenda is our public hearing for sufficiency of instruct materials for the 2526 school year. Just as a reminder, we've got two parts to this one. Tonight there's the public hearing which is this agenda item. And it's just primarily about receiving public input on this. You know, by all means feel free to ask clarifying questions during the hearings. But we'll, we'll probably have a little discussion if there's anything to discuss right after it. But I will point out that later in the agenda in 14.4 is the. We'll be considering taking action on a resolution to approve this. Probably though if there's anything discussed, we should just do it now during this agenda item and then we can just run through that in 14:4. Okay, so I'm going to now open the public hearing on the sufficiency of instructional materials for the 2526 school year at 8 11. I don't think we have a presentation so we will jump right to."},{"start":4246810,"end":4263370,"speaker":"B","text":"Sorry review. I mean it's every year we have to have this as we're getting audited in the current process. So we have to have this done. It's our yearly public hearing and determination for. And you guys have the list of all the materials that we have that this for each site."},{"start":4263530,"end":4291380,"speaker":"A","text":"So great. We'll take no hands on zoom, no speaker cards submitted. So just one last call for public comment. Okay, so hearing none. I'm going to close the public hearing at 8:12. And now that it's closed, do the trustees have any comments or questions regarding this item?"},{"start":4294100,"end":4296099,"speaker":"D","text":"Everything looked good. Passes the snip test."},{"start":4297060,"end":4317890,"speaker":"A","text":"It looks, it looks sufficient. I did ask one question about the science which was the science curriculum which was I think adopted by the district in like 2007, 2008. New standards came around somewhere in the teens and it has been updated to reflect the next gen science standards. That was great to hear. I think I knew that too, but I just wanted to double check it. Okay, great."},{"start":4318210,"end":4319330,"speaker":"B","text":"Sorry. Yes, One question."},{"start":4319330,"end":4319730,"speaker":"A","text":"Yeah."},{"start":4319730,"end":4350900,"speaker":"B","text":"I know when we're adopting new curriculum, there's samples for the public and parents to look at. Is that available for existing or like something that's. I mean they're all at school sites so usually back to school and I was usually where people. The teacher. Thank you. Usually like at back to school night teachers will usually go over whatever they're going to be covering and sometimes they're available. Then we don't have. I mean they're all available at the school sites. If any parent are interested in seeing"},{"start":4350900,"end":4366580,"speaker":"E","text":"the curriculum or if there's something that is not at the school site, we may have it at the instructional material center where one can go and view it. We just need to get. Make sure that you make an appointment with Carla so Carla can be there to help you with what you want to view."},{"start":4370180,"end":4395300,"speaker":"A","text":"Okay. Well, thank you for the prep. You know, I. I know, I know it feels like a checkbox, but it's really, you know, it's more than that. Right. It's a promise to our families and our students that they're going to have what they need on the first day and like curriculum. So key to our LCAP goals. Right. We're not going to see growth in reading and math or ELPAC without, you know, high quality materials at school. So thanks again. All right, let's move on to our. Let's see."},{"start":4395300,"end":4395780,"speaker":"E","text":"I think."},{"start":4395780,"end":4396340,"speaker":"F","text":"Are we."},{"start":4397300,"end":4410900,"speaker":"A","text":"Are we at the consent agenda? Yes. Okay, so we're at the consent agenda. We are going to pass all of these items in one motion, and this was a lengthy one. So can I get a motion to approve the consent agenda?"},{"start":4412500,"end":4414420,"speaker":"D","text":"I move we approve the consent agenda."},{"start":4415180,"end":4415580,"speaker":"C","text":"A second."},{"start":4415820,"end":4416220,"speaker":"F","text":"All right."},{"start":4416220,"end":4416820,"speaker":"A","text":"All in favor?"},{"start":4416820,"end":4417260,"speaker":"F","text":"Aye."},{"start":4417260,"end":4417740,"speaker":"B","text":"Aye."},{"start":4417900,"end":4418380,"speaker":"D","text":"Perfect."},{"start":4419020,"end":4447010,"speaker":"A","text":"Then we can move on to the action items. Now, many of these feel like they are just kind of pro forma kind of things, but they are action items because they're resolutions and we always have to vote on resolutions. So we will start with the first one, which is the approval of the MoU for a connect Community Charter School school, which we had a big presentation on earlier in the last school year. Rick, is this."},{"start":4447010,"end":4486590,"speaker":"F","text":"You can just say a couple sentences. Good evening, members of the board and community. Tonight, Redwood City School District and Connect Community Charter Schools seek approval of a new MOU aligned to the renewal of the charter schools. Authorization, I believe happened in March. The MOU establishes clear expectations and responsibilities between, excuse me, the district and the charter school, ensuring compliance with applicable state and federal requirements. It also outlines processes for governance, academic accountability, fiscal oversight and operations, while supporting a collaborative relationship that benefits students and families. So with that, I'll hand it back over to them."},{"start":4486830,"end":4492510,"speaker":"A","text":"All right, does anyone have comments or questions? Seems pretty straightforward. Can I get a motion to approve?"},{"start":4492670,"end":4493710,"speaker":"D","text":"I move we approve."},{"start":4494230,"end":4494470,"speaker":"E","text":"Second."},{"start":4495350,"end":4495710,"speaker":"C","text":"Second."},{"start":4495710,"end":4496750,"speaker":"A","text":"Okay. All in favor?"},{"start":4496750,"end":4497190,"speaker":"G","text":"Aye."},{"start":4497590,"end":4497990,"speaker":"D","text":"Great."},{"start":4498630,"end":4505670,"speaker":"A","text":"Moving on to our second action item. This is adoption of resolution number one. And these are teachers gaining permanent status."},{"start":4506230,"end":4542140,"speaker":"B","text":"Wendy, it is such a joyous occasion to bring this list to you. These teachers identified on the attached list have met all of the requirements to gain tenure, which typically is eligible on the first day of the third year of teaching. So they are the school Sites are not listed purposely because these are members of our school district, not necessarily associated to a particular site. But if you're interested in in those sites, I can send that separate list to you. So we are seeking approval for the resolution for teachers gaining tenure to the Redwood City School District tonight."},{"start":4543020,"end":4555480,"speaker":"A","text":"All right, thank you, Wendy. And congratulations to the teachers and the speech therapists that are gaining tenure. Does anyone have questions or comments? Outstanding. Can we get a motion to approve?"},{"start":4555480,"end":4558040,"speaker":"D","text":"I mo move we adopt resolution number one."},{"start":4558040,"end":4559200,"speaker":"A","text":"All right, And a second."},{"start":4559680,"end":4560240,"speaker":"B","text":"A second."},{"start":4561280,"end":4562080,"speaker":"A","text":"All in favor?"},{"start":4562160,"end":4564159,"speaker":"D","text":"Aye. Congratulations, teachers."},{"start":4564159,"end":4564640,"speaker":"A","text":"Yeah."},{"start":4564960,"end":4565440,"speaker":"E","text":"Yeah."},{"start":4567040,"end":4577380,"speaker":"A","text":"We don't stop with resolution number one, so we'll move on to resolution number two, and that's approval of education code and title V options for teaching assignments. Wendy, this is you again."},{"start":4577460,"end":4637540,"speaker":"B","text":"Yes. In order for administrators and teachers to have flexible schedules for students, from time to time, we do like to take advantage of the opportunities of waivers that are available. So we have fully credentialed teachers that might be teaching an elective or one subject perhaps outside their credential. And these allocations are appropriate through the California Teaching Commission. So tonight's list is the next batch that I mentioned that may come in June. They're now arriving. And I actually will have one more next week for North Star's enrichment courses because they mixed students 4th through 8th grade. So that's a really unique experience. And so this particular resolution tonight includes the items that we learned about or any changes in schedules since the June board meeting and new hires over the summer that need these waivers to continue in the schedules that the principals created."},{"start":4639540,"end":4639980,"speaker":"E","text":"All right."},{"start":4639980,"end":4640580,"speaker":"D","text":"Excellent."},{"start":4641060,"end":4642340,"speaker":"A","text":"Any questions, comments?"},{"start":4643780,"end":4644180,"speaker":"E","text":"All right."},{"start":4644180,"end":4656340,"speaker":"A","text":"As always, we thank the teachers for their, you know, flexibility, work outside their credential, and be able to expand the offerings that are, you know, and the support that our district is offering. Can I get a motion to approve resolution number two?"},{"start":4657710,"end":4659550,"speaker":"C","text":"I move that we adopt resolution number two."},{"start":4659630,"end":4660270,"speaker":"D","text":"Seconded."},{"start":4660270,"end":4660870,"speaker":"E","text":"All right. Perfect."},{"start":4660870,"end":4661510,"speaker":"A","text":"All in favor?"},{"start":4661510,"end":4661910,"speaker":"D","text":"Aye."},{"start":4661910,"end":4671550,"speaker":"A","text":"Aye. All right, moving on to resolution number three. This is the one from the public hearing. This is sufficiency of instructional materials for the 2526 school year."},{"start":4672429,"end":4683160,"speaker":"B","text":"So we're just asking the adoption of the resolution number three. We have sufficient textbooks and instructional materials for all our P3s so that they have access curriculum."},{"start":4683400,"end":4692200,"speaker":"A","text":"Yeah, we had the vigorous discussion earlier on this. So if anyone has questions or comments, by all means, bring them up now. Otherwise, I'll take a motion to approve."},{"start":4692680,"end":4695000,"speaker":"D","text":"I move we adopt resolution number three."},{"start":4695160,"end":4695800,"speaker":"A","text":"And a second."},{"start":4696120,"end":4696520,"speaker":"C","text":"Second."},{"start":4697000,"end":4697799,"speaker":"A","text":"All in favor?"},{"start":4697799,"end":4698279,"speaker":"G","text":"Aye."},{"start":4698840,"end":4699720,"speaker":"D","text":"They're sufficient."},{"start":4699800,"end":4706840,"speaker":"A","text":"Yes. We are done with the resolutions, but we are still here to approve the provisional internship permit."},{"start":4707650,"end":4750869,"speaker":"B","text":"Wendy, thank you. So the state of California does offer emergency credential options for individuals that have a specific degree in an area that is acceptable in this case for a multiple subject or single subject credential. So these individuals will begin a credential program into the future, but have sufficient content knowledge to do this work. And they also are assigned a mentor. We have a whole mentorship program that we've had for many years in place to support all of our teachers that don't yet have their full credentials. So these two individuals are hires over the summer that are brought to you tonight. So it must be an action item."},{"start":4750869,"end":4776550,"speaker":"A","text":"Okay, Absolutely. Does anyone have questions or comments? I know I didn't have any concerns. They both. They both sounded qualified. So is there a motion to approve? I'll make a motion and a second. All in favor? Aye. All right, moving on. Board and superintendent reports. Guess this goes for the whole summer."},{"start":4776550,"end":4776910,"speaker":"G","text":"Maybe."},{"start":4776910,"end":4777230,"speaker":"E","text":"But."},{"start":4778910,"end":4820660,"speaker":"C","text":"Yeah, I didn't think that far back, but the one thing to report was yesterday there was the San Mateo County School Board association meeting, the first general meeting for the year that was very helpful. Talked about, met with the other trustees across county, which is always helpful. Talked about potential programming which hopefully will contain a bunch of things that will be interesting to all of us as well as others around the county. And then importantly was. It sounds like there was some interest in developing a ledge policy committee, kind of to our point earlier about the ways that we can advocate for funding and our students in general, but through a more collective body. So it sounds like that might be something that could kick up. So. Oh, you guys posted. There's. There's more there."},{"start":4826180,"end":4850960,"speaker":"B","text":"I don't have nothing to report, but I do have something to say and I just want to say thank you to, I assume, Evelyn on all those behind working behind the scenes to give us this smooth transition to gamut, because for those people that don't know, we just switch. And it doesn't even seem like we switched. So I want to say I appreciate that because I know what happens behind the scenes. So thank you so much for all your work."},{"start":4853200,"end":4861200,"speaker":"A","text":"Yeah, thank you for calling that out because, yeah, it really was smooth. I mean, you're right. It just kind of like naturally fell in place. So thanks."},{"start":4861440,"end":4867600,"speaker":"B","text":"I'm glad it was an easy transition. I will say Rick is behind the scenes as well. So Rick and Olivia have been."},{"start":4868300,"end":4872140,"speaker":"E","text":"Yeah, there's been some frustrations, but you don't see this."},{"start":4875260,"end":4877140,"speaker":"A","text":"Yeah, no, that's good."},{"start":4877140,"end":4877500,"speaker":"E","text":"Thank you."},{"start":4877820,"end":4881980,"speaker":"A","text":"All Right, David? Nothing to report. Yeah, I don't have anything to report either, Dr. Baker."},{"start":4882460,"end":4917700,"speaker":"E","text":"No, just that we had a great welcome back and David Lee was there when we had that welcome back for our teachers and our staff. And then the schools opened up and cabinet members were. We were all assigned to different schools and had a great time for the first. First day watching kids and teachers and staff members and schools with the kids. No running after a little guy this year for me. So that was. That was great. Although Jen did have one of the. That she had to walk to the classroom and while I. While I sat and met with the parent. So. But it was good opening."},{"start":4917700,"end":4953680,"speaker":"A","text":"Very good opening. That's good to hear. I'm so sorry I missed the welcome back event this year. I really enjoyed it last year. So next year I'll be sure to be there. Okay, let's move on to the information items. There's two here. Does anyone have questions or comments or any more information that they need about it? Looks like none. Okay. Correspondence. I know we got several emails to the full board. I think the one that maybe is worth reporting out was just this, the Prop 2 application notification from KIPP. I'm sure that that's going through the process there. Any other correspondence that we want to report on?"},{"start":4954240,"end":4962320,"speaker":"D","text":"I did get correspondence about just the process and timing for applicants for the Citizens Bond Oversight Committee and that was resolved by staff."},{"start":4964400,"end":4972240,"speaker":"A","text":"Sounds good. Let's talk about the next item which is other business and suggested items for future agenda."},{"start":4974000,"end":4991020,"speaker":"D","text":"I would love to make sure that we have carved out some time to go and discuss how to stack rank our parking lot items just to make sure that we have time in future board meetings to go and dive into BD topics. So I'm trying to figure out how we can set aside time to decide what we're going to discuss when."},{"start":4991420,"end":4996460,"speaker":"A","text":"Yeah, we will. Okay. Let's put that on to the. Figure out how to get that on. Okay."},{"start":4996460,"end":4996940,"speaker":"E","text":"Yeah."},{"start":4997900,"end":5000540,"speaker":"D","text":"Because that is a. Suggested items for a future agenda."},{"start":5000540,"end":5000780,"speaker":"A","text":"Yeah."},{"start":5000780,"end":5001100,"speaker":"F","text":"Yeah."},{"start":5001500,"end":5003580,"speaker":"A","text":"Get the topic scheduled. Cool."},{"start":5003580,"end":5004060,"speaker":"D","text":"Thank you."},{"start":5005740,"end":5014510,"speaker":"A","text":"I will point out that there are several media items that we are already covering this year including no doubt the. Yeah, everything that we already have there. Okay."},{"start":5015550,"end":5015950,"speaker":"G","text":"Any."},{"start":5015950,"end":5016750,"speaker":"A","text":"Anything else?"},{"start":5016830,"end":5017230,"speaker":"E","text":"No."},{"start":5017630,"end":5018750,"speaker":"A","text":"How about the meeting?"},{"start":5020270,"end":5055230,"speaker":"B","text":"So talk about future agenda items and the board policy committee. I know that I had brought up way back before the school year was over regarding one of the board policies and I forget the number and it was the raid into which people get reimbursed for attending a conference. So that was one of the things that I know you guys had said you guys were probably going to bring it back, and I know the year's starting and so just you guys can figure out when you guys want to bring it, but just wanted to make sure that what that was."},{"start":5055230,"end":5057910,"speaker":"E","text":"That's the rate for reimbursement when you tend to conference."},{"start":5058390,"end":5068880,"speaker":"B","text":"Yes. I forget what number that is. I mean, I can, I can look it up and give it to you. So. Okay, we meet on September 30, so we can add that to our list."},{"start":5072080,"end":5072480,"speaker":"F","text":"Great."},{"start":5074560,"end":5093600,"speaker":"A","text":"Meeting calendar. Any questions? Comments on the meeting calendar? I think our next meeting's next Wednesday. Okay. We're up to adjournment, which is an action item move. We wrap it and. Is there a second? That was Cecilia, I heard. Okay, great. All in favor?"},{"start":5093600,"end":5094080,"speaker":"D","text":"Aye."},{"start":5094400,"end":5097200,"speaker":"A","text":"All right, thank you and welcome back to school, everyone."}]}