All right, we will uh reconvene to open
session. Um Evelyn, can you uh start us
off with a roll call?
>> Trusty Lee
>> here.
>> Trustee King is absent. Trusty Marquez
>> here.
>> Vice President Weekly
>> present.
>> President Wells
>> here. Uh for 4.2, I'm going to report
out on our closed session from this
evening. In compliance with the Brown
Act, the board of trustees reports that
the during the closed session, the board
took action to initiate legal
proceedings related to a due process
matter uh under the individuals with
disabilities act. The board by a vote of
four eyes has directed legal counsel to
proceed with a filing with filing a due
process complaint with the office of
administrative hearings against the
parent 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 disclosed
at this time. Good evening and welcome
to the November 19th, 2025 meeting of
the Redwood City School Board.
deic.
All right, thank you all for joining us.
Um, the board encourages all members of
the public to participate in the meeting
and provide comments on issues of
concern regardless of whether they're on
the agenda. If you're here in person and
wish to speak, you'll find speakers
cards uh available at the entrance to
the room. Just complete one and hand it
to Evelyn. Uh if you're on Zoom, please
complete a speaker's card online. Uh
there's a link in the agenda or just
raise your Zoom hand when the item comes
up. And if you're addressing a subject
listed on the agenda, you'll be called
at the time that item is being
considered. And if the issue is not on
the agenda, uh you'll be called shortly
during oral communications. And then to
be fair to all speakers, we limit public
comment to three minutes per person per
topic unless otherwise noted. And with
that, we're on to the agenda. Um there
are changes for the agenda. I have two.
Uh, one is to pull the consent agenda
item 11.14, which is the second reading
of the board bylaw 9250, and also to
pull from action items 12.1, which is
the approval of the retirement
notification incentive. Um, does anyone
have any other changes to the agenda?
All right, then. Can I get a motion to
approve the agenda with those two
changes?
>> I move we approve the agenda with those
two changes.
>> Second.
>> All in favor?
>> I. Great.
>> Okay. public comment. Um I see none and
none on Zoom and Evelyn none in person.
All right, then we will move on from
public comment. Uh and we'll go right
into our school and community reports
and we're going to start off with
information on art artificial
intelligence tools supporting teaching
and learning.
>> So good evening. Today we have our staff
development uh coaches toas are Kathy
James and Brana Whit will be presenting
on AI and where we are at at this point
in time with the district.
>> All right,
turn on the mic. Yeah, the little
person.
>> Yeah,
>> there you go.
>> I even asked Carlos and then I didn't do
it.
>> Good evening.
So, I'm Kathy
>> and I'm Ba
>> and uh we were asked to be here tonight
to give you a little bit of background
information on where we are with AI in
our district. Um what we've been
learning and where we kind of um need to
go next.
>> One more.
>> There's our lovely avatars created by
AI.
>> All right.
Um I'm going to start with giving just a
brief overview of kind of the what's
been happening the last couple years
where we are with AI. Um
really AI came came onto the picture for
education in the school year of 2020
2022 to 2023
to say
>> and um that's when we first started to
um experiment with chat GPT and uh what
was then Googlebard and um eventually
magic school was another tool that came
on uh the scene and we began to do
initial research and reading about the
tools, exploring with them. Some
teachers explored them and we held a
couple of optional PDs for teachers uh
to talk about what generative AI was and
a little bit about prompting and um we
had kind of our early um adopters who
went out and tried uh tried things and
to see what it would be like with their
teaching. And then in 23 to 24 uh we
started to see some of the products that
we pay for as a district begin to imp to
incorporate
pieces of AI into their products. And so
we started to see um how those u were
appearing for our students uh and to get
an understanding of that. Um Bronnie and
I also attended the Q conference which
is the big ed tech conference for the
state and it was all about AI at that
point. Um so we learned quite a bit
about some of the ethical questions we
should be considering some of the things
that the tools could do some ideas for
how they could be used in the classroom
and for as teacher um efficiency tools.
And so we brought that information back
with us in 24 uh to 25. Um the tools
began to just rapidly expand. There are
a number of things out on the market, a
lot of churn. we kind of have um
knowledge from our history and working
with edtech to know that uh adopting
some things, paying for those things too
early can backfire on you because some
of those tools will get gobbled up by
other tools. Some of them will go away,
some of them will rise to the top. And
so we've taken kind of a like wait and
see approach and like been watching
what's been happening, experimenting
with the different tools, allowing
teachers to experiment with some of them
if they are appropriate for class use,
but not advocating for a full-on
adoption at this point. And then we
attended a series of workshops that the
county gave uh for districts in the
county to be thinking about AI and
particularly about AI policy and
guidance uh for staff and students.
And then this year we have done some
presentations for our administrators,
done some incorporated some AI tools and
some of our PDs that we've offered to
staff and continued to work on um
guidelines for staff and and students.
Uh but also to um consult with your uh
board policy committee in terms of
putting forth a draft for policy that's
coming soon.
And then just uh the next step for us is
that uh just yesterday Ra and I found
out that we were accepted and we applied
and were accepted to a cohort uh that's
a statewide co cohort sponsored by the
CDE Foundation uh to to study AI in
education with districts throughout the
state. So we'll be attending uh those
meetings as well.
So where we are in our journey right
now, our next step, we as Kathy just
mentioned, we created some preliminary
guid guidance that we will be expanding
on. Um, one of the things that we talked
about when we went to the county last
year was that this is the point where we
want to really work on a district-wide
policy and that will be sort of the next
foundation before we can move forward
with uh rounding out guidance um and and
really working with teachers on PD. Um,
so we're here to talk a little bit about
what that policy might look like and
what our next steps would be after that
gets passed. Um, so one of the things we
really want to talk about is the idea of
um, in education
we want our policies and to be about our
mission and our values and our vision
and not about the tool. So if we look at
our district mission, vision and values,
next slide,
and even just look at solely the mission
of creating a safe and supportive,
inspirational and rigorous, joyful and
inclusive environment for all learners.
When we take that and talk about AI,
educational AI use in our district, that
brings up a lot of questions. When we
talk about a safe and supportive
environment, how do we really make sure
that we're encountering it in a way that
is safe? How do we make sure that we are
supporting everyone? How do we make sure
that we in um enhance rigor
and not make it so that it's doing the
work for people? Um we really need to
keep all of our mission and vision and
values in mind as we move forward. Um,
we were had the great opportunity last
week to meet with a friend of ours,
Victor Lee, who used to be an actually
an RCSD parent, although his kids have
all graduated now, but we worked with
him a couple years ago with one of our
PD cohorts, and he met with us for
lunch. He happens to be the faculty
faculty lead at the Stanford Accelerator
for Learnings initiative on AI and
education. So, it was a really good
opportunity for us to pick his brain.
he's been doing a lot of work with the
research in specifically in education
and he had this great analogy of seeing
AI in the same way as the advent of the
car. Um when the car came along, it
changed how people lived. It changed the
layout of cities. It changed what
opportunities we had for work because we
suddenly didn't have to be tied to some
place really close to us. It really
changed society. We don't want Redwood
City to be the place that says no, we
don't need cars. That would not really
be in service of our adults or our
children. But at the same time, we're a
a community with cars, but we don't we
we spend children's childhood saying,
"Okay, look both ways before you cross
the street. Hold my hand when we go in
the crosswalk. Um, make sure you pay
attention to this crossing guard."
So, we need to have that balance. Back
when first when cars first came out,
even for adults, we didn't just say,
"Here, I'm going to teach you all how to
drive and here's keys." We had to have
highways, and those highways had to be
built with the the right grade so that
if we had to turn, we didn't topple the
car. That had to be studied. We had to
have gas stations. We had to have ways
to get the gas to the gas station. We
had to have ways for the ass to go from
the tank to the car. We had to have ways
to put belts and hoses in people's hands
so that if something happened to the
car, they could fix it. There is a lot
of groundwork that goes into adopting
something that's going to change
society. So, we want to keep all of that
in mind and really center, sorry, I went
on for a long time. Um, we really want
to center on the ultimate educational
goal and again, not on the tool. So, I
probably should have said all of this
after this next slide, but here is our
initial
district stance, our guidelines, um, of
making sure that we have human- centered
AI use for adults so far. So, we're
emphasizing humans in the loop and
thinking of AI as a thought partner and
assistant and always centering on the
human. Um, align our use to the
educational goals and vision of the
district, site, and classroom. make sure
we're always, always, always, always
protecting student privacy, um,
considering equity and ethics, and only
use AI for tasks that you have the time
and background knowledge to double check
and then actually make sure that you
double check it.
So, we wanted to talk a little bit about
the tools that we are seeing being used.
Um, so I'm going to start with talking
about the tools that uh teachers have
been using and what some of the things
that you might see that they're using
them for. Um, so all of the ones on here
are ones that have surfaced that we've
heard about through teachers or we've
seen them using. There are numerous
other ones. They keep new ones every
day. Uh but ones that we're seeing, some
of the tasks that we're seeing
frequently being done with them are that
teachers are using them to get ideas for
lesson plan planning. Um figuring out
how to change the level of an activity
to to make it more um differentiated for
different levels in the class. Getting
uh feedback, ideas for feedback on
student work. um ways of giving them
feedback that's positive but yet drives
them forward to the next step. Uh
getting help with wording things like
emails. Sometimes it can be hard to
email a parent and AI gives them maybe
like a better way of framing it. Um
we've seen uh teachers searching for
asset based language for like feedback
again on on report cards for students.
uh searching for specific instructional
strategies for particular needs that get
surfaced. And as we're doing our MTSS
work at the sites and using data and
looking at the site goals, we expect
there to be more of those kind of
questions that they might ask about how
can we how can we differentiate for
these particular student needs and what
can we you know what can we bring um to
the table and AI is is a thought partner
in those things. Um but we you know
encourage teachers to be checking what
it is doing as they are using it. Um and
then uh we also have been seeing
teachers use it to create rubrics. Um
which it's really a help in doing the
first draft of a rubric because rubrics
have all these little boxes you have to
fill in. They kind of are tedious to
sort of fill in and level. Um, but we
also encourage them to go through and
edit and make them really customized to
their assignments.
Then we're seeing, like I said, if we
can go to the next slide. Um, oh, I
forgot about this one. Um, so we're
seeing uh them show up in a lot of our
tools. And just the beginning of this
year, Google, right, like the week
before school started, came out with
here's all these new tools that we're
giving to teachers. Um, and so now
embedded in Google Classroom, which our
teachers use to manage their assignments
and classes, there are a whole set of
kind of pre-done tools where they've
prompted it already um to give an easy
response for teachers. So teachers can
go in and ask like um can you help me
brainstorm real world examples for this
and there's a button for that. So um
these tools are there for all of our
teachers to use. Um in in addition to
notebook LM which we've been trying to
model um for both teachers and
administrators we see that as being a
really strong tool and then also Google
gems which allow teachers to kind of
create a um
template of a prompt that then they can
use in multiple situations. So, like
they could write a whole prompt about,
you know, ask me uh what level my
student is reading at. Ask me what their
I Ready scores are. Do this and then
suggest me. So, we can you can do kind
of a whole sequence. Save that sequence
and then come back to it again and
again.
And then on the next slide,
um these are some of the products where
we're seeing it show up for students. So
we have taken the approach that we uh do
not at this point recommend opening up
full access to a generative AI like chat
GPT or Gemini for students. Um but we do
see a number of our tools using elements
of AI and we're trying to understand how
to use those better. But some of the
ways that we're seeing it like in
products like Adobe Express and Book
Creator and Canva which we have across
the district uh there are ways to do
image generation that have been created
to be safe for students. So the
guardrails are there. It's not going to
create something that's inappropriate.
Um it's it's not going to let them, you
know, make a naughty picture with the
AI, but they can use it for academic
purposes. So a teacher might ask them to
generate a book cover for the book that
they read for their independent reading
and through the way that the student
prompts the image generator and the
images that come out you can tell
something about what they understood
about the story about the book. So it
can be used in a creative way to do
assessment or to enhance like a project
that they're working on. The other uh
way we're seeing it in
um Google Classroom. They have a tool
called practice sets that let students
um teachers set up questions and
students can interact with them. They
can uh they have some AI components in
there too in terms of suggesting uh
additional learning things. If the
students get the questions wrong, they
they kind of give a playlist of things
that um that they could do to get to
understand that concept better. And then
notebook LM that I mentioned earlier.
Um,
we are only allowing for teachers at
this point, but the power of Notebook LM
is that teach Huh.
>> I'm just saying it's pretty cool.
>> Yeah, it's pretty cool. The power of
Notebook LM is that teachers or staff
can upload their own documents to it,
make a whole kind of set of things, and
then ask questions about that set of
documents. So we can put in the state
standards. We can put in the strategies
that we've done for PDs. We can put in
all these things. And then we can ask
questions against those which makes it a
lot more accurate in its responses and a
lot more customized to us. Um as well as
it has some fun features where it can
make videos or or podcasts that sound
like real people talking about the
subject. So, um, so that's kind of cool
and we've been having teachers
experiment with that and their work, um,
process. And then Newella is one that
we've paid for for several years where
they have brought in a new writing tool.
And in that writing tool, when students
um, submit their essays, teachers can
set it up to give automatic feedback
using AI. So, this is something where
we've had a few teachers experimenting
with it. they've been giving me feedback
and we've been giving feedback directly
to Newella and they've been improving
based on things that we've um brought to
their attention. And so we really see
this um possibility of the of the rapid
feedback to students being a strong um a
strong use of the AI. uh it takes
teachers a long time to get to the to
the writing feedback sometimes, but we
know from research that the sooner they
get the feedback, the more effective it
is. So, if we can make sure that that
feedback is is truly accurate and it's
truly along the lines of what a teacher
would say, then it gives that added
layer of that fast feedback before the
teachers um are grading the work.
So um bringing us back to this idea of
the four Cs of human- centered AI
implementation in education. This is
something that keeps getting brought up
as we go to conferences and go to series
of meetings. Um the idea that for adults
and for students using AI in education
is meant to foster critical thinking,
curiosity, collaboration and
communication. It's about enhancing
education and helping kids think. Um,
and we were struck by the parallels with
our learner, our district learner
framework. This, um, if we keep these
ideas in mind, we really are enhancing
the path that we've already been going
forward on um, with our empowered
learners, our effective collaborators,
our knowledge constructors, and our
creative communicators. Um, so this is
one thing that we want to keep in mind
as we build PD for both teachers and and
helping teachers to talk to kids about
AI and what is it that they need to be
aware of in in their world because they
are hearing about it and they are
surrounded by it. So how can they think
about it with curiosity and critical
thinking?
So just recently um I attended the um
accelerate edtech impact summit at
Stanford and this was a one-day
conference that brought together
researchers from Stanford with CEOs and
execs from the tech companies with
funders who support the research um and
education and then educators. So all in
one room to have a conversation about
edtech, but in this case it was all
about AI really. Um, so we saw I saw a
number of panels with experts and you
can read some of the quotes that were
included in the slides, but generally
just the
sense of the day was that a lot of the
conversation was kind of gravitating
towards what is the human aspect of AI
and in education in particular, what do
we need to put our attention on? And it
really is the things that Bronner were
just was just talking about. The word
curiosity came up a lot at the on the
panels. The word imagination came up a
lot and the word discernment came up a
lot. And so just thinking about how are
we making sure that we are helping our
students to be good at those three
things. Um so that they can at some
point use these tools and have the the
discernment to use them well but
maintain their curiosity and their
thirst for learning rather than thinking
of them as a way of shortcutting that.
Then we wanted to just give you a brief
overview of the handbook that we
created. We spoke with the site
administrators at the beginning of the
year um right before school started and
um did a little walkthrough, did some
some playtime with them to show them
what was available in our handbook. Um
as we said at the beginning, once the
policy is in place, we can start
expanding on the handbook. Um, but we
have a few places here where there's
some scenarios where we walk people
through some stop, slow, and grow, go.
Here's what you really want to go ahead
and leverage AI for, but here are some
places where you should stop and pause.
Um, and then some more district
resources and and of course the the
bullet points that we already went
through about making sure that you uh
take care of student privacy and check
the work etc.
So next slide then for our next steps um
we're going to continue to work with uh
you to help inform the schoolboard
policy. So I think that you have your
school board policy committee is going
to be presenting a draft to you soon. Um
and so uh we will work with them in
terms of coming up with the
administrative regulations to go along
with that. And um then once it becomes
policy, we will uh work with you to
implement the the things that are in
that policy and what um you decide to
set forth in terms of kind of our next
steps in this area. Um we want to create
criteria for evaluating and recommending
tools. Uh so like we said, we've been
kind of waiting and watching on the the
tool front, but at some point we will
probably be looking at adopting
something new and um we want to have we
want to kind of know what it is that
we're looking for when we do that. So we
want to get some criteria in place and
have a process for evaluating
uh as that comes up. And then as we
continue on, we will continue our
professional learning opportunities. We
want to do some more work around the
ethical and professional use of AI for
teachers and for administrators.
um we want to we want to take the
opportunities that we have to give them
practical tips for using AI um as part
of their MTSS process or for the
differentiated learning that they need
as a result of that. Um, and then we're
going to continue to work with the
teachers who are kind of more outfront
on this to experiment and to kind of
look and get feedback on what they are
seeing when they try some of the AI
tools and when um students are actually
using things. what what are we seeing
that we need to be um considering
uh about in terms of restrictions or
things that are just like wow we need to
see more of this. So we're going to be
kind of watching that and then thinking
about like which things need to get
rolled out in a bigger and wider basis.
And I think that kind of covers our
overview. So, we're happy to take
questions if you have.
>> All right. Thank you, Ronnia and Ca
Kathy for coming and presenting tonight
and sort of covering this and the
conferences you've gone to and
congratulations on making it into the
state cohort. Um, do people have does
any trust you want to start with um
questions, comments or discussion.
Cecilia, please.
>> Sure. Um, thank you again for the
presentation. Um, I love the
collaboration and obviously your
curiosity for actually helping and
making the connection with all the
teachers um and staff that uses AI. Um
my question is what percentage would you
say that teachers um what percentage of
teachers use are using AI and do you
maybe feel or believe that there are
still teachers are still a little bit
hesitant to use it and if so are you
guys there trying to help them navigate
the this new era I guess
>> I think think it really depends on what
grade level the teachers are, but we do
see the gamut. I mean, we see some who
are not well don't have any plans to try
at all. Um, and then we see some who
just
can't wait for the next the next use
case. I think on the middle school side,
we are seeing teachers using it kind of
in that thought partner role that we
talked about for getting ideas for
lesson plans and um helping them write
some things. They're not always, I would
say, transparent about their use. So,
it's hard for us to kind of quantify. Um
I think in some cases they might be
afraid that it would look bad on them to
admit that they're using the AI. So, we
can't necessarily get a clear sense of
what they're doing with it. Um, we do
know, I mean, like I know a handful,
like three, four teachers who have lots
of questions about it and who are
willing to try things and who when they
see me want to talk to me about what
they're doing or the new tools that
they've seen. But that's not necessarily
the typical. And I think on a recent Did
you want to I can see you kind of on
>> I have one more to add too but
>> um I'm I just I'm doing a teacher survey
and so out of the response that we've
had of 45 so far 21 about 21 have said
that they are using some form of
>> majority are not though a lot say no way
are we going to do this so there's just
a lot of hesitancy I think
>> and and just as with anything really we
did have a few teachers who used it
early on and Then
we're always going to see hallucinations
and incorrect information, but there was
more of it earlier. And so if you tried
something and said and found out, "Oh my
gosh, look at this. I it's not really
helping me," you're going to be more
hesitant to try it again soon.
>> Okay. Yeah, that's it for me. Thank you,
>> David. Yeah.
>> Um I'll echo all the Thank you for
putting this together and also good to
see you guys in person. I know that I
was on the policy committee so I saw
your squares. Uh but great to see you in
person. Uh part of it's funny because I
think we went through it cold. Um and
you've given me the gift of learning
more and so now I have more more
questions and uh but that I guess that's
how it goes is iterating. Um it's also
super timely and like kudos to the
district because
we I CPA has a policy. I feel like we're
ahead of the game in terms of like
really figuring this out which is
amazing. um working with other trustees
on and sampling what their concerns are
across the county. AI is like one of if
not the top question. Um so I love that
we're doing that. One of the I guess the
only thing that I had a question on
reflecting now on your presentation and
the board policy is um and I mentioned
this before but a lot of it I think a
lot of the draft which I Wendy thank you
for circulating that to everybody
because I think it's super helpful. a
lot of it's framed like very positively
and principles based which is very good
in some ways right it's like encouraging
to do the right things and then I think
a little bit buried in there is like and
use it accountably which is good but I
do uh I feel like we I'm a little um I
want to make sure that we're doing we're
making the right balance of encouraging
staff to like take this on as a tool to
multiply their effectiveness while also
guarding against the risk of over
reliance right because like
>> we've seen that in multiple professions
And there's it's not going to be any
different here too. So the the one thing
that I think that I'm thinking about now
is how how can we build that in in a way
that's broad enough to still encompass
all the things that we're not going to
be able to anticipate. But similar like
like with a principle of what are the
things that we are afraid of that we
know for sure we don't want staff to do
and then like how do we build that into
um the policy. And I don't know if you
have thoughts and this isn't like a
question for you now. I I think we're
probably going to talk through the
policy later and maybe maybe AI can help
us with it too. But um that maybe
something to chew on if you have initial
thoughts on that. Like
>> I mean my initial thought is kind of
going to the difference between policy
and guidelines.
Um, and policy
is sort of a a a broader umbrella of the
rules, whereas guidelines are going to
be more specifically about that are set
by the leadership team and are the
things that are going to be around
feedback. You can't it's harder to give
feedback about a policy whereas you can
give feedback about guidelines.
That would be my first my initial
reaction to your question if that makes
sense.
>> I think it makes sense but to push back
a little bit.
>> I think one of the things you mentioned
was in the handbook you guys are in the
process of also building out some of the
the don'ts. Um
>> so I imagine those don'ts are coming
from something like we are guarding
against something at a at a broader
level. So I think that's what I'm trying
to sus out like what what is it exactly
that we want to capture there? Um,
>> I think, um, so I think that some of
this could come in the administrative
regulations um because I do think that
there were statements in the draft
policy about ethical use and um,
>> right
>> and citing sources, but I think some of
the concerns that we've that we have
that would come out in in the more
specific regulations would be around
like specifically
the don'ts around putting putting
student information into the chat bots.
Um making sure that we're guard, you
know, we've got the guard rails for the
for privacy. Uh making sure that um that
teachers and students know how to site
uh the fact that they used AI, that
we're not hiding the fact that we're
using AI. um we don't have like a clear
answer on this but I think that there's
a big question on some of the tools that
um help teachers to grade or to give
feedback uh what are the kind of legal
implications of them having access to
that student work and what kind of act
what kind of things do we need to keep
in mind about you know if students are
only getting feedback from technology
and not from the teachers and how is
that impacting grades and what kind of
legal ramifications could be there. So,
I think some of those things we need to
still
um kind of figure out statewide people
are trying to figure out. Um, so I'm not
sure that there's like a clear policy
line to put on that, but I think we
should be adding them uh into our ARS as
we go because I think that we're going
to see that those things are important
and important to spell out. Um,
so I don't know if that that doesn't
fully answer the question because I
think your your question is also our
question like what else what else should
be there? But our feeling is that the
policy needs to give the guard rails the
general guardrails at this point and
then uh the in the everything is
changing so quickly um that it's such a
moving target. So it's kind of it gets
difficult to nail down every single
don't that we should put in. I mean if
you go back to the car analogy initially
cars couldn't go that fast. So they
didn't realize they needed a speed limit
until it became an issue. And I feel
like AI is going to be similar to that.
>> Yeah. U
Thank you.
>> Thanks, David Weekley.
>> Thanks. Uh this is an area I have a lot
of thoughts about. I really appreciated
the uh back and forth in in advance of
this meeting as well. Um you two are
clearly really engaged on this topic,
which is exactly what we want to see and
congratulations again on the uh on the
award. Um I feel like there's a lot of
thoughtfulness in terms of like the the
risks, the concerns, the guide rails,
like and that's awesome and we and we
want to see that. Um, I I'd love to see
kind of the flip side of that is like
what are you most enthusiastic about
seeing transformed in this district by
AI uh on on student behalf, on teacher
behalf, on staff behalf like what are
some of your hopes for what we could
roll out on what kind of a timeline to
have what kind of impact?
Do you have something? I'm
>> thinking thing that pops into my head
and I don't know that this necessarily
will be what pops into my head a week
from now, but just hearing
>> um one of the things I've been working
with is teachers in um go in uh really
implementing our 10step at this point.
only a five-step comprehension process
because they haven't finished the the
training yet, but the first five steps
um and and being I do feel that being
able to use AI as a thought partner in
creating those materials and and um
and and going deeper with them and
understanding them better. I see a lot
of potential there for that.
>> Yeah, for sure.
So, I see I guess a couple of things um
that I sort of alluded to earlier. One
would be that um you know, we've been
working a lot with teachers on writing
this year. Um that's been a site goal
for many of our middle school sites. And
so as I've been coaching with teachers,
I have to say in the 13 years that I've
been here, um I've tried talking with
teachers about using rubrics for grading
numerous times and it's always been kind
of a hard cell. Uh but we're seeing a
much bigger uptick of them using it as
we're working on the the writing work
now. And one of the things that we've
been able to easily do is kind of say
like, let's feed your assignment into
the AI and and the standards that you're
trying to address from the state and
have it generate a rubric that that has
the criteria that we're looking for and
then using that as a draft. And that's
been a really big timesaver. And it it
seems very doable to teachers when I'm
mo, you know, we're modeling it for
them. And so like I see an increase just
from just that one uh use. And so I
think just in terms of like the
efficiency and like the things that
we're asking teachers to do are getting
harder and harder, but there are ways
that the AI can make that faster and
take the burden off of them. And so that
I think is exciting to me. Um, I think
the I think that the idea of using it
for feedback is also something that
where I see a really uh I I see that as
being promising and that's something
that I've been working with a few
teachers to really investigate how well
that's working um specifically with
Newella writing. But there's other tools
that we're looking at that do the same
thing.
>> These are great like teacher centered
answers. The first bullet point in the
proposed uh policy here is student
centered and and I'm curious uh you've
given some of the guardrails of what
would need to be true to start opening
these tools up to to students
constructively but um I I would love to
hear some thoughts from you about
student transformation visav use of AI
in the learning process.
So, sorry, I'm just trying to think
here. What would be a good example? Um,
so I do think, so I'm just going to go
back to sort of the roots of my edtech
message, which is that whenever we're
asking students to use technology in the
classroom, we really see the strength of
it being when they use it to create
rather than to consume.
>> Yes.
>> So, I'm not interested in having them
use AI to generate the answers to the
questions that the teachers asked them.
Yeah.
>> Um but uh rather to be thinking about
how can they use AI to make uh videos
for example to make graphics for things
to
>> to you know like be imaginative and come
up with things that they um they want to
make and then how could they make them
use you know with AI as a thought
partner in that. And so I think that
there are some tools where we're
starting to see that be, you know,
available to students. Um,
you know, it's it's harder to answer
this one in that we have been,
uh, more focused on the teacher uses at
this point than we have on the student
uses. And so, um, you know, we have a
few teachers who are willing to
experiment, but not a lot. And so with
any technology adoption, that's kind of
typical that we have the people who are
sort of like the explorers that are out
there on the cutting edge and then most
teachers are going to wait until we say
go.
>> So a when do we say go for the teachers
and then b I understand wanting to
sequence like focusing on the teachers
before we roll things out to the
students, but just hallucinating as you
would uh some timelines here. When do
you think we say yes for opening this up
more broadly for teachers and sort of
having this be a baseline expectation
and then B when do we start opening this
up for for students to be in begin
creating with these tools?
>> I think one of my concerns with that is
just the time to do the professional
development because
>> um like one of the speakers the other
day at the Stanford Summit said we like
to prompt the humans before we prompt
the AI. Yeah.
>> And then she she used that to launch
into the need for professional
development. And so um we you know have
limited time for professional
development and that time is often taken
up with our curriculum which as it
should be. Um and so we need to be you
know creative I guess with figuring out
how the AI professional development gets
woven in there. Um but I'm reticent to
to say that we're going to rush into
this without laying a good firm
groundwork with that training. So um so
it makes it a little hard to predict the
timeline. AI itself is going way faster
than any edtech has ever gone
>> yet and our systems are not going at
that speed.
>> Totally. And and I think that means a a
sort of as was alluded to earlier, we're
probably going to need to check in on
this topic a little bit more regularly
than like hey let's have let's talk
about this again in three years and like
maybe something will have changed
between now and then. Um but B that that
things at home and the kind of access to
technology that our students um and and
parents and community members have
access to is going to uh not be
constrained by thoughtful policy
guidelines about like what we do open up
and don't open up and how does that
change for instance how we think about
homework as a district?
Well, so one of the things I was going
to add to what Kathy says is we want to
have the foundation for adults, but we
also need to have a foundation for kids
before they can start using it. And that
would be talking teaching them to think
critically of what they see that is
generated by AI, much like we should
they need to know more about anything
that's in in their world, their media
world. Um and and and I I actually am
excited about that opportunity to teach
them to look at these things critically
because that really is the crux of the
type of thinking and and learning that
we want them to be doing and it's a and
it's relevant to them. Um
and then that would so that really is
timesensitive. they, as you say, they
are um already exposed to all of this
and how do we make sure that they
understand when they're seeing things on
their I don't even know if Instagram is
what they look at anymore on their Tik
Tok or whatever when so that they can
think about it before they consume it.
Um
>> but it's like do we assign homework?
>> Oh, you're So that is not our question.
>> But but but it's salient. It's relevant,
you know. Yeah. No, it I mean, but I
think it's a question that's good for
for you as board to consider as this
evolves. Um, but I also think that we'll
see both in-class assignments and
homework assignments needing to change
and university professors are already
encountering this that they're having to
rethink
>> the way that they give assignments um so
that
>> it isn't uh something that can be done
strictly with the AI. I mean, you know,
without any thought or or um agency from
the human involved.
>> And this is something that teachers
already had to encounter once before
when we were at in sheltering or when we
were doing distance learning, they had
to change a lot of their assignments
because we needed to make sure that the
parents weren't doing it for them. So,
which happened. Sorry. Um but so it is
we do we have to be agile
>> but at the same time I mean we're seeing
you know we're going to see a growth in
products that can give students uh
practice problems that are at the level
where they need to be and um and
potentially offer them sort of tutorials
and that kind of thing and those may be
um good uses at home.
We we talked about how this could be
used for teachers to help them better
prepare materials. Some of the materials
now could include like fully interactive
websites and programs. You know, all of
our teachers could be programmers of
interactive educational materials that
that becomes a thing you can do casually
now, which is kind of incredible.
>> Yeah, there there's a lot that you can
do.
>> All right. Thanks. Um yeah, I'm excited
about these. Thanks again for the
presentation. Um, I think, you know, you
guys ask great questions, but all my
questions were mostly centered around
like what would the policy look like?
And now that I've seen the draft, I've
got a much better sense of what what
kind of things are in there. Um, I guess
the thing that because it's so early in
adoption or hasn't even really been
rolled out. Um it'd be awesome to be
thinking about like how we'll know if AI
is actually improving outcomes for
particularly for like our unduplicated
students um and our you know our English
learners and not just making schools
like high-tech you know and kind of
pulling that in um and uh you know sort
of envisioning like what would it look
what is success like a year from now so
so we can come back. I'm sure some of
the indicators are like the ones that
are in the LCAP and things like that,
but there's probably things like
engagement in classroom or like are we
seeing, you know, what sort of what sort
of trends are we seeing out of there?
Um, and then you mentioned about how
it's moving so fast. And it made me
think like it is it is moving like crazy
fast. Like we you may want to look at
even thinking in advance about like how
do we sunset something? like if it's not
really being effective for student
outcomes, like should we be just, you
know, have like a sunset policy in
there? Be be kind of rigorous about
like, hey, these are the ones that are
working, use them, great. These ones
aren't. We're going to take them away.
Um, and put that in. So, awesome. Very
exciting. Um, and uh, thanks for sharing
the things that you're excited about,
too,
John.
Thank you both Kathy and Bronn for being
on the cutting edge of this. Um, it's
quite exciting and at the same time a
little bit scary. One thing that
concerns me and I know David you brought
it up David weekly um in regard to what
you know how how our parents will use it
at home with with the students we have
parents you know that are quite
different and when it comes to resources
so the thing that bothers me most is
that our parents who don't have those
resources and may not have the ability
uh education wise also to truly
understand the guard rails because
that's a big issue everything you read
and any type of research that's coming
up in regard to students, especially I
understand the high school and I I know
the high school superintendents have
been working with us with their staff,
but the elementary especially those
guard rails are so important and really
to emphasize that with our parents and
then to take it one step further for us
for everybody else who speaks only
Spanish and has a difficulty
understanding. That's the critical piece
for myself and I just hope that we keep
that you know in mind
>> but great presentation. Um I would like
to see what any projects that the kids
have done so far especially with the
notebook LM is there are there some
>> we haven't turned up notebook LM on for
children.
>> It's not for kids yet.
>> It it's so amazing like in about two and
a half minutes with notebook LM
>> I can do I can go in.
>> Oh yeah yeah yeah. And in two and a half
minutes, I put together an 10-minute
explainer video on quazars with like 20
different questions to check for
understanding that we're really well
done. And this is all re uh researched
with like 120 different sources
including nasa.gov. There's just notec.
>> Yeah. Come downstairs tomorrow and we'll
show
>> and we'll have to check it out with
they're always willing to I mean when
way back when when you guys started and
I was in the curriculum and instruction
piece, you helped me out quite a bit
with this publication. Just just for
completeness, my peers in industry use
Notebook LM to educate themselves. So
when they need to come down a learning
curve on some technical topic or a new
industry, they'll go dump a whole bunch
of material into Notebook LM and then
like make a podcast and listen to it on
the drive-in. It's it's it's so the the
world of education is being transformed
by this stuff even outside of education.
I will say that I heard um in one of the
uh online groups that were part of that
a neighboring district that their board
put all of their board policies into
notebookm so that they could query them
quickly and and ask questions against
Yeah.
>> I know I know what one of our board
members is doing this weekend.
>> That's a good task.
>> Yeah. All right. Well, thank you. I want
to be considerate of your time and our
next speaker's time. So appreciate it.
I'm sure we'll partner you in a social
event and you know pick your brain at
that point. So
>> um let's move on to our discussion
items. Uh the next one is 10.1 and it's
an update on the local funding measure
analysis. Um Johnny the introduction.
>> We have Jeremy Hower here with us this
evening and do you have his um who has
his
if you can send it to maybe Anna and
then Anna can. So Jeremy's here to give
us a little recap on how we got to this
point of where we are right now and then
to do a little bit of summary and remind
us of where we were in regard to the
poll and then our next steps. Um, we
know we have a date coming up in March
that we all have to be aware of. And if
we're going in this direction, we need
to start I would uh envision that, you
know, from December moving forward, we
need to really we we we really need to
get well, I should say I need to get my
ducks in a row so that I can start
working very closely with the community
and also with Amy Buckmaster again in
regard to yay or nay and uh us making
that decision. I'm hoping hoping sooner
than later. Thank you. And that's a
tough act to follow. I will try to keep
my uh my content as interesting as the
AI uh nexus with education. Um but we
got to talk about taxes instead. So
apologies. Um so as Dr. Beger mentioned,
I wanted to spend just a few minutes
tonight kind of recapping where we've
been in the parcel tax expiration
process and our recommended next steps
as we look toward placing a measure on
the ballot uh next June. Um, so first
just a a quick reminder of, you know,
the last few times we've been in front
of you as a board. We were here in March
to talk about this in concept, the idea
of uh a supplemental parcel tax based on
square footage, talk about the pros and
cons of that, the legal parameters uh
and possible election dates. We then
came back in April and made it official
and got our contract approved and got
direction from you to work with Brian
Godby at Godby Research to actually do
some polling. you get a better
understanding of what may or may not be
feasible in terms of a parcel tax. That
polling was conducted in late May and
early June and then we came back to you
uh in late August to present the results
for that. You may remember the results
were encouraging and show that there was
a path forward for a partial tax measure
next year. Uh so on the next slide
if you would mind going forward. Thank
you. Just another quick reminder of the
key milestones in the parcel tax
planning process. You all have seen this
slide a lot now. Um there really are
three key benchmarks that we like to hit
before we place a measure on the ballot.
Right now we're squarely in that
awareness building phase doing community
outreach and engagement. Both uh in a
broad-based sense to voters and parents
at large, but also as Dr. Baker alluded
to, stakeholder outreach and one-on-one
meetings to get a better sense of um you
know what folks are thinking about a
potential measure next year. Next slide,
please.
I wanted to recap the poll results
quickly just to kind of remind ourselves
the numbers we're talking about. Um you
may remember that a parcel tax measure
requires a 2/3 yes vote in order to be
approved. Um and so when we did the
polling earlier this year, we looked at
a parcel tax measure that would be uh
based on building square footage. We
were looking at a measure that was 17.5
cents per square foot that would
generate just over $14 million annually.
Uh at the bottom of this slide, you'll
see the results of that. When we first
asked voters if they'd be willing to
support that, we got a 63 and a half%
yes vote. We got 11% undecided and 25%
no. Uh after we provided more
information about the potential uses of
funds for that measure and some
potential positive arguments, support
jumped 10 points to 73%. And then we did
the inverse of that and we presented the
listener with some potential negative
arguments. support dropped back down to
66.4
right at that twothirds threshold.
On the next slide, we also have a
summary of the top uses of funds in the
eyes of voters. Um attracting and
retaining qualified teachers and
counselors, maintaining hands-on science
classes, preserving science, tech,
engineering, and math instruction, and
so on down the list. Um, these have
certainly been a focus of ours in the in
the outreach and engagement as we're
starting to think through uh what a
measure could fund. And I think it's
also just kind of helpful to remind
ourselves, you know, the the big buckets
that a parcel tax could help support in
your schools. Next slide, please.
Uh here you'll see some of the materials
that we've been pulling together. Um
we've got a fact sheet, FAQ, and
PowerPoint presentation web page live on
the district website. Um, all of this
information is available in in English
and in Spanish. Um, a mail piece went
out the the door in the last few days.
You might return to your homes to find
it in your mailbox. Uh, included in that
is a a brief tear off survey that folks
can mail back and give some basic
feedback uh about a potential measure.
Uh, and there's also been some social
media content as well. Um there's been
some stakeholder engagement and outreach
um both to internal stakeholders like
parents, teachers, and other staff, but
also externally to business groups,
other civic groups to get a sense of
where they're at on a potential measure.
That feedback that's been received has
been largely positive. That work will
continue, but thus far there haven't
really been any red flags that give us
any pause. Uh and I think the next slide
just shows a little bit more of the uh
content that's been sent out. You can
see it's all branded uh in your district
colors and and made to look and feel
like it's coming from you all because it
is. Uh and we're excited to see the
feedback that we get specifically from
the tear off mailer and the the social
media content that also directs to an
online version of the same survey uh
included in the mailer.
Next slide, please. So, now for the new
info, you know, what we need to do uh
what we recommend doing from now until
when we bring a potential resolution
back to you all as a board um to qualify
for the ballot. Just a quick reminder,
our deadline to qualify for June is in
early March. So, we are going to have to
have you all as a board adopt a
resolution before then so we can make it
under that March ballot. So this, you
know, this slide kind of shows what the
next few months would look like. Uh, if
we, you know, want to keep this process
moving forward first in November, we've
got that first mailer going out. Like I
said, it went out this week. Could be
waiting for you when you get home. And
really, we want to get direction from
you all as a board on overall structure
of the measure and whether or not to
pursue a tracking poll to kind of check
back in with voters and make sure that
we're still uh on track for a measure
next year. Um, following this meeting
into December, we would do a second mail
piece really kind of recapping what we
heard from that survey mailer and giving
another opportunity for voters to weigh
in on a potential measure. And we would
also be working with the district team
as well as the consultant team in
drafting that tracking poll should we
get direction tonight to move forward
with one with the goal of fielding it in
January. Right? If we field it in
January, we'll get data back in time to
help you make an informed decision. Um,
while that tracking poll is being
conducted, we would also do a third mail
piece uh to to kick off the new year,
keep voters involved in the process with
the goal of bringing results to you at
your February 4th meeting uh as well as
a first reading of a potential
resolution. That would kind of be a a
two item evening. First, probably the
results and then second, our recommended
language for a measure. And then that
would leave February 11th uh as your
last board meeting date before the
deadline where you would officially vote
to place the measure on the ballot. Uh
then after that we do a a final mailer
to your community just to let them know
the action you had taken and and give
them the key dates and information about
the election.
Next slide please. Now I apologize this
is a little bit difficult to read but I
wanted to provide some data to you about
some different revenue scenarios um with
a uh square footage measure. Obviously
you have that first number which is the
bottom row in the 17.5 cents per
building square foot with no cap. So if
you were to put a measure on the ballot
without a cap at 17.5 cents you would
generate $14.3 million annually. Um, we
have talked in the past about the
consideration of a cap. So, we've
included three different scenarios on
this slide. I will say we are not wedded
to any of these three. A cap can be any
number that you choose, but we chose
three that kind of display what what
happens when you put a cap on the
measure. You'll see first that if we
were to keep that same 17.5 cent per
square foot rate and put a $5,000 cap on
it, meaning any one parcel could not pay
more than $5,000, you see that your
revenue drops annually to 11.4 million.
If that cap is reduced to $2,500, your
revenue drops another million bucks to
10.4. Uh, and then if you were to put a
$1,000 cap, your revenue drops to just
over $9 million. just to give you a
sense of the scale there. Um, I will say
there are not a lot of parcels that
would meet these caps. Um, I think at
the Let me just pull up the exact
numbers here for you. Yeah, at the
$1,000 rate you would have 1,469
parcels that hit hit your cap. At the
$2,500 rate, you'd have 597 and at the
$5,000 rate you'd have 281. Just to give
you a sense of of scale there. And then
so on this last slide, I I promise to
keep it to 10 minutes. Um just wanted to
kind of outline the direction that we're
really looking to get from you all
tonight to kind of help you know spur on
the discussion. First and foremost, um
is there desire to do a tracking poll
and tracking research? If so, you know,
as you've seen in that timeline, we got
to get moving pretty soon. And I should
mention that Brian Gabby from God
research is on Zoom tonight and happy to
answer any questions about that. Uh and
then also just wanted to get some some
more direction from you all on overall
measure structure. So tax rate um
whether or not to include a sunset.
You'll remember the polling that we
tested did not include a sunset, but
it's our recommendation that we do
include one because we saw it was the
number one potential negative argument
against your measure. And then also
whether or not to include a cap. And um
before I kick back to you all for
questions and discussion, just to
clarify, this direction we're looking
for is really so that we can design a
poll if we decide to do it uh with some
parameters to give you some data to make
your ultimate decision. Um so with that,
I'm I'm happy to answer any questions
you might have.
>> All right. Thank you, Jeremy. Um I
propose that we have discussion and
questions right now and then we'll go
back around and give Jeremy the
direction that we want to do. that way
everybody can have a chance to hear um
the discussion before like settling on
what their direction is unless you know
you're firmly committed to one direction
or another and want to suit it up first.
Um would anyone like to start with
questions discussion?
Yeah, thanks.
>> Um I think probably less for Jeremy and
more for us discussing including Dr.
Baker and Rickme
just in terms of the tracking pole is
is there a scenario
where we don't want to pursue this? I
guess so like what what would the
outcome of a tracking bull have to be
for us to say no thank you we will not
proceed.
>> It would definitely need to be those
percentages going down. Yeah. more so
than anything
>> I guess to what
>> you know and and what
>> to what degree
>> what concerns me is that this was done
during the summer at this point in time
it was done during the summer I don't
know and Rick and I were speaking about
Rick and I were speaking about this I
think it was today or yesterday they're
all rolling into one um in regard to you
know the economy and so forth and had
that had a is that going to have a play
on this or not and throughout that
discussion we kind of determined maybe
it wouldn't
And so that was one piece. The other
piece is that I um had a visit from a
board member who was on the board many
many many years ago, Margaret Marshall.
I'm sure no one here remembers that
name. Maybe
right. Yeah.
>> Um and pleasantly she came in and I was
wondering I asked Evelyn, "She's on the
she's on my calendar. What's what's this
about?" And um so Margaret remembers
when I was in the classroom and we had
this conversation and she and she's very
um involved with the seniors and so
forth in Redwood City you and her
children and her grandchildren have all
gone through the Redwood City School
District and amazing woman for her for
her age and just I was totally amazed.
um said, "Would you come and talk to the
senior cit senior citizens group about
this?" And I said, "Of course I would."
Cuz they were talking. She goes, "Well,
I know the superintendent. I'll go get
him to come." So that was our that was
our our our meeting. And um she is
definitely one who has always been
supportive of the Redwood City School
District, always.
And um said, you know, I want, you know,
yes, we know there are exemptions for
seniors, but people should not have to
take an exemption. not unless they
really need to and most of us do not
need to take and she went on and on
about that. But um I guess where I'm my
thoughts are coming is in regard to this
poll because she asked me the question,
"When did you do the polling?" It was it
was in the summer, wasn't it? And I go,
"Yes." And she goes, "Do you know what
people are thinking now?" And it got me
to think, I don't know. I would have to
go back to what you just showed again.
And that's where we were. are are is our
community still in that ballpark? I know
our a lot of our parents are, but the
rest of the community and the percentage
of parents that we have compared to
those that are not parents and do like
the Raven City School District have
other issues with us. Who knows?
>> I guess
with that, I'm trying to make sure that
I'm not advocating for anything. Um, I
guess for me it seems like there's a
pretty high need based on the situation
that we're currently finding ourselves
meetings yesterday for example that
where additional revenue would be
particularly helpful. And I um I guess I
I I love data. I love information when
it's helpful, but only in so far as it,
you know, changes the the decision. And
it seems to me even if we get a a result
back that says it's gone down by even
say 10 percentage points like does that
change our answer like or does that
change the approach of
>> Jeremy if it went down by 10 it it
frankly probably would because we we'd
be looking at after negatives being at
56% yes to be clear I don't expect a
poll to say that per se. Um, but like
you, I'm always a fan of having more
data rather than less. And I think also
if we are considering any structural
changes, the biggest one being the cap,
I would much rather have data back on
that than not to help make the decision,
right? And doing a poll isn't committing
you to definitely going on the ballot or
definitely not or definitely including a
cap or not, but it's helping you make a
more informed decision um once we come
back to you with a resolution in in
February.
>> Yeah. And Jeremy, if I could add to
that, um, a couple things. One, the
ballot question changes
because of the sunset. Um, because we
didn't have that in there before, and
and most of the attorneys have said you
have to put reference to the sunset in
the 75 words, which takes away from
other things that we might want to have
in there. So, it is a material change in
the ballot question. Uh two, if you know
you're absolutely going to be on the
ballot no matter what, well then it
probably doesn't matter as much, but
remember you don't have to be on the
ballot in June this year. You can also
be on the ballot in November. So, we
want to win. And what we don't want to
do is plan a two-step strategy where we
go forward without being somewhat blind
uh and then have to do it all over again
in November because that's really hard
to do. So we want to win the first time
around. Hopefully that's in June. Um but
uh not necessarily. And with respect to
the economy, um I just finished a survey
where the the the
where do you think the economy is going
to be next year? The worst response is
in the mid60s.
I have never ever seen it that high. And
that's in a fairly affluent school
district in Marin County.
I mean, it's literally off the charts.
So, so I think there are some material
differences to say nothing about the
general political climate, which is, you
know, insane. Um, and all those I think
are good reasons to be doing a survey.
Obviously, I'm the survey research guy,
so um, you know, I have a bias towards
that. But, um, but I think I think we're
not in a normal climate on multiple
levels. It sounds like there's the
variance of an opinions on the degree
here to which we might drop 10 points.
Um, but even so, I I I don't know. To
me, that informs more so the rigor of
effort on the back end than it does
necessarily on decision. But I I I don't
know. This is just my spit pulling.
Curious further's thoughts.
>> I mean, on on that topic, I think we
just need to kind of figure out like as
a board what would be our risk
tolerance, right? you know um you know
are we would we be comfortable going
forward based upon the current data that
we have without getting more um you know
I sort of felt like yeah I don't know I
don't know if things have significantly
changed since in the environment since
the um obviously there's uncertainty but
there was a lot of uncertainty then too
in fact the poll then had very high
numbers for they're expecting the
economy to be worse um in the future and
yet there was still this a lot of
support in there um it sounds like the
thing that I wasn't thinking about is
and so I was wondering like what are the
key questions that a new poll would
answer for us that we don't already have
from our baseline poll. Um I wasn't
thinking about the change in the ballot
language um and whether and how how that
might need to be tested again. Um
you know I feel like there were enough
variance in the baseline poll that it
might have been covered there too. Uh
and so yeah I mean I think it's I think
that's the right question. And so then I
look at it as just like does a does a
poll lower our risk profile, you know,
in terms of our risk tolerance? I'm not
even totally sure it does. Yeah. So
it's uncertain to me that it's um yeah,
totally necessary.
>> Yeah. I think for me it would be some
theory that the world had changed
meaningfully enough that it was now
fairly likely that we were going to need
to pull back from shooting for June and
we need some confirmatory bit of data
that we either were living in a universe
where it was going to be very unlikely
for it to pass and yeah, we should pull
it or no actually it's not as bad as we
thought and and stay the course, charge
ahead. Um I I'm not sure. I've yet been
presented with enough convincing data
that the world is very meaningfully
different from when we did the last
tracking poll that uh that it would
necessitate the the expenditure and and
the extra time to to go out and do an
extra round of polling. That's it's not
something I feel super strongly about.
So I'm I'm persuadable on the topic if
people feel like we need we need the
checkpoint.
And just one other thing, if the world
has changed that much since the baseline
poll in today, like is it yes, January
to June might might have some difference
in there, too. And again, I'm not I
don't have a I don't have a super strong
opinion here on it. I I but that that is
kind of
soon.
>> Well, I guess um my question would be
more for the experts like should we go
for another tracking pool or not? Like
is it going to be make a big difference?
We also don't want to risk it, but at
the same time, you know, the the
financial situation the district is in.
Um, I think one of the biggest things is
people do have to remember senior
citizens are exempted from partial
taxes. So maybe that would be a selling
point. Um, but again, I don't I just
don't know how much.
>> Yeah, I'm happy to answer that. I would
say if the plan, it really depends on
the other direction we get tonight to be
honest because if the plan is to change
nothing about what we tested in the last
poll, then sure, we could probably make
an informed decision early next year
based on the data that you have. But if
there is a desire to make a structural
change or even explore one, i.e. really
put a cap on the measure that we would
have to do research for that because
that does fundamentally change your
ballot language. It's ironic. It would
not change the tax implication for any
of your voters because the cap, as I
alluded to, affects just your largest
property owners, but we've seen time and
again from research that when you
include that extra dollar amount in your
ballot question, it impacts voter
support. So really I think it comes down
to your direction on the other items we
talked about tonight. Um and if you want
to explore looking at a cap, not even
commit to one, then we absolutely need
to do polling to explore that.
>> Uh let's let's discuss thoughts on CAP.
Um by the way, can uh could you share
like um experiences from other districts
with CAPS? Like what have they done and
how has that affected their polling? Are
there are there any other prior prior
art that we could learn from? Yeah,
there there's a lot of districts that in
include caps. Um, Alama Unified is the
biggest example because they kind of set
the case law on this type of measure,
but we also passed two last year for uh
Berlingame School District, their cap, I
believe, was $7,500 and Mountain View
Wisman, their cap was 25. We also did
pass one for Albany Unified without a
cap. Uh, as well as Berkeley Unified
without a cap. Um what we generally see
in the polling is that including a cap
actually depresses support early on
because frankly it's just a little bit
more confusing of a ballot question to
read. But that once you are have the
opportunity to explain to the voter the
intention and design behind the measure
and the uses of funds, support usually
rebounds pretty quickly. So um we've
looked at it apples to apples um in
multiple districts before and and it's
been a pretty consistent finding. It
doesn't sound to me like adding a cap
will be the make or break that will
likely get this past the finish line.
>> No, the reason to add a cap is because
if you've got a business owner or a
large property owner who says
>> they would back an ad campaign against
it.
>> Exactly.
>> And how far conversations with the
Chamber of Commerce been going?
>> So Amy has been um we have been meeting
about this and she the last slide you
showed with the information that's what
I need for her next. um she's kind of
hesitant right now uh with the cap and
I will not say what she said to me at
the meeting on Friday where I was on the
panel. Um but she says if you can get
that information to me sooner than later
and then we have the numbers that you
have in regard to the properties and the
apartment buildings and a couple other
st and Stanford um that will help us uh
help me get the information to her. so
she can start moving this pathway and
give me a yay or a nay on it.
>> That sounds like pretty important
information for this process.
>> Yep.
>> Okay.
>> I mean, in terms I'm just thinking about
what we're trying to decide today. And I
guess my view is we should have these we
should get more details on the cap, but
I don't know if that necessarily
the majority of our voting I assume is
going to be done I hope it's going to be
done by like constituents and individual
people. Um and I have full faith that
the Redwood City community backs
education. So it sounds like the
question is really what is the degree to
which we anticipate there being um
formalized push back from the business
community and that seems more of a
I don't I don't know if we need a
tracking poll for that part like that's
more of just we need to hash this out
and have that discussion um and we're
not making decisions today on what the
structure are right
>> and then we also want to have a chamber
supported
>> yeah yes yes chamber support A+ chamber
not against good
Yeah.
>> Okay. I just want I want to ask one
clarifying thing um actually to Jeremy
just so we know what we're discussing
tonight. I think that we're just
discussing um whether we want to do a
tracking poll and what the parameters
are that would go into that tracking
poll. We're not actually making any
decision about what we're doing going
forward. Yeah. Okay. And if I can take
that clarifying question and run with
this a little bit, one way we could
structure this poll would be similar to
the last poll where we would employ a
split sample methodology where half of
the respondents heard more or less the
same measure they heard last time, 17
cents per square foot, no cap. The other
half could hear a measure that included
a cap. And you could compare the two
apples to apples in real time, right?
And the reason you're doing that is not
to check in with the business community.
The reason you're doing that is to get a
read of, okay, if on February 4th, the
chamber lines up 10 speakers to come to
this podium and say, "We're going to
oppose this unless you put a cap on it."
Well, now we have data that tells us
what the impact of that cap being on the
on the measure has in the community with
people who are actually voting on it,
right? So, it's it's admittedly
convoluted because again, the cap
impacts not one voter, not one resident,
but they are still the ones reading the
ballot question and interpreting it with
the data that's presented to them. Which
is why if there's any consideration, I
say we certainly should do some polling
just to give you the data, right? You
could get the polling back and say,
look, the data is compelling to us. We
want to move forward with the measure
without a cap. And now you have an
answer to say as to why you did that.
Uh any any other questions around the
cap? Um I also wanted to just have a
quick discussion around sunset if uh
people have questions around the cap.
Done. Um okay. Uh, could you um we we I
know we talked about this when we went
through the poll results um before, but
um the sunset was the other one that we
were going to look at to see because we
did the until ended by voters I think
from the original one. Um I think you
were recommending eight years even
though our like our current measures are
14 like what is state-of-the-art for the
amount of time that if we were to go for
a sunset and what's sort of
>> again like in other situations how have
you seen sunsets affect poll results um
>> and and and actually ballot outcomes.
>> I'll start and I'd love to get to Brian
because he has data that kind of backs
this up. I mean, I would say most
commonly the sunsets that we see are
between seven and nine years. And that
really comes down to these psychological
thresholds. Same way that you know stuff
is priced at Target as 1995 instead of
20 bucks, right? But um so typically we
see 7 to nine years. Brian, if you want
to speak to that a little bit more what
you've seen in the research when it
comes to sunsets.
>> Yeah. Uh Jeremy's absolutely right. Just
like t tax rates and things you buy at
Target, there are psychological ceilings
and those are for for dollar amounts,
it's 1995 versus $20. Uh for the
duration, it is uh a below 10-year
number. So 9 years, 9 months. You
wouldn't do that probably, but uh 9
years will test substantially better
than 10. 10 will be the same as 12. Um,
so, so that's the first psychological
ceiling. The next one is at the 20-year
mark, 1920. So, 19 does better than 20.
Um, the exception to that is until ended
by voters, which always does better than
any of the double-digit durations
because it gives voters the perception
that they have all the control, which
they actually do, but it reinforces
that. whereas 19 years sounds like it's
set in stone forever uh from most voters
perspective. So if you don't do until
ended by voters, anything in the teens
probably won't work. Uh but you have to
go back into the d the single digit uh
duration that Jeremy was suggesting,
seven years, eight years uh in in that
time frame uh to make up what you lose
in the the teens.
Okay. And uh I was just trying to remind
myself when measure U ends. I think
measure U ends in 2027.
>> I think it's
>> 2031.
>> 2031. And it's because that was a 14
year. 14 year. Okay.
>> Yeah.
>> Right. Um anyone have questions,
comments about um Sunset?
All right. So, I think we're trying to
give direction here around whether we
think we want to do whe whether we want
to change the ballot language um to test
a cap um to test a sunset, you know,
whether we want to change the ballot
language on there. And then if we do
think we are we're considering changing
the ballot language, that's something
that we'd want to do come February. Um
do we want to start going down the path
of a of a tracking poll? Um before we do
that, Jeremy, um can you help us
understand when
like is there a way to do this in two
phases? So for example, can we give Dr.
Baker like a couple weeks to get more
information from the Chamber of Commerce
of whether or not there's that feedback
about a cap because that would really
help. I I think that would help the
board, you know, in their thinking about
whether we want to even p whether we
think we need to pursue a cap or not. So
I'm wondering like is there a way to say
maybe prepare to do a tracking poll but
then maybe we don't go out and execute
on it um as a and to step back you know
just last night we were doing budget
reduction committee meetings and things
like that. So I think top of mind for
everybody is are we making a wise
expenditure here um in the knowledge of
knowing that
>> um we have a baseline poll that seems
pretty strong. Uh the external
environment and I don't mean to speak
for everybody so just um you know debate
with me if you disagree. You know the
external environment feels about the
same as when we did the baseline poll.
>> Um and we're looking down you know the
line where even just last night there
were line items on there for just even
$10,000 of savings. Um, so we just, you
know, we're trying to keep that in mind
as we're making this decision.
>> Totally get that. Um, and yes, we could,
and we don't have a lot of time, but we
could wait a little bit longer. But what
I will say is that by the time that we
have to pull the trigger on a poll,
>> we're going to have to do it in, you
know, make that decision in December,
right? And even if we go forth or decide
not to go forth with a poll, your
opponents have any time in the calendar
to come to you and say we're going to
oppose this if you don't put a cap in
it. Right? So, um there's just always
going to be inherent risk, right? Like
if if we didn't do a poll and we just
said we're going to come back to you on
February 11th at your board meeting and
bring you a resolution without a cap and
the business community reaches out on
February 5th and says, "Well, we want
one." Well, now we don't know. Right?
So, you know, this maybe it's a maybe
being too riskaverse, but to me, if it's
either even under consideration, I' I'd
much rather have data to help back up
the answer, right? And and it's not to
be clear, we're likely to see that
including a cap on your measure is going
to decrease support, right? That is
likely to be the finding. That's that's
helpful to a point. What we're really
looking at is does it decrease it enough
that it's not feasible or does it
decrease it to a point where we're right
at 2/3 but we still have support for a
measure. Right? Because that's helpful
data as well.
>> Yeah. And the last last question is can
you and this might be a question for
Brian but ballpark I'm not asking for a
quote like a ballpark cost for what the
tracking poll would be.
>> I I will definitely kick that to you
Brian. Yeah. Uh we actually did provide
that to uh Superintendent Baker and that
for a 22minut survey which is shorter
than the baseline and also uh 400
interviews which is fewer than the
baseline as well because we're trying to
save money with Spanish translation and
interviewing is about $38,000.
>> Okay.
>> More information. More information. Um,
and then before the board starts
discussing the direction, I don't Dr.
Baker, did you want to chime in with
what your thoughts are? I think I sort
of heard an opinion from you earlier,
but I don't want to I don't want to read
into that without you having a chance
to.
>> The thing that I'm concerned about is a
is the cap. And I know um when Amy and I
spoke last week, she's kind of concerned
about it, too. We didn't get into great
detail because I was part of a panel and
this was during the time when I was it
was a break time and she goes, "I need
these numbers. Give me these numbers."
And so I've got the slide now that I can
share with her. Um,
and I've got the information from our
previous conversations on the districts
that have gone forward with a cap and
have been successful in those that, you
know, they put it on and they quite
successful and those that didn't and
then they were successful also. So, um,
that's the only thing that bothers me is
is the cap piece. And when I saw the
numbers in there,
I don't know. um when you
even a small business and I'm thinking
some of our small businesses who are
very vocal in the chamber are always
supportive of the support supportive of
the school district but I could see some
of them coming at us but they're small
they're small
yeah I mean as a defensive measure it
seems you know in the same way that
putting a sunset in because that was the
number one negative that seems like it
could be a negative and an easy way to
to mitigate against it. Um I guess it's
still the question of the need need the
additional data for that. Um okay so
how are people feeling about a tracking
poll?
>> Are we waiting for Dr. Baker to meet
with the chamber before
>> within the next we can do it within the
next two weeks and I I have figures now
and I have information from Rick that I
can show her deadline this year.
>> Well, it's got to be sooner because
break's coming and
>> I'm definitely not here. Um, so we have
to have it before then. You know that
that's that's she will probably work
really diligently to get me an answer,
>> you know. So,
>> so let let's play through the scenario
real fast. If they were to come back and
say, "Yes, we want to put a cap on it."
Um, would we want to, you know, like we
we think that it should be on there, how
would you feel, do you feel like the
measure should go in the direction of
including a sunset as well? Um, I just
I'm just what I'm trying to figure out
is like if we were to change the
measure, like how are we thinking about
changing it? Because if we're right now
saying like we're not going to change it
at all, I mean that might be one one
answer. we might be done tonight and not
have to continue on the discussion. But
if we're thinking like maybe we'd want
to put a sunset on then, you know, or
that kind of thing.
>> My brothers would be to have it as clean
and simple as possible so we can put as
much of the impact language in there
versus the asterisk language in there.
>> Okay.
I think the language did it I need to
look at it. Did the language say until
ended by voters?
>> Uh yes, it did.
>> Yeah. So the language has the the sunset
till ended by voters or for eight years.
>> Yeah.
>> Tell ended by voters.
>> No, that means no sunset versus um for
eight years or something like that if it
had a sunset. So I don't think it it
doesn't change.
>> Yeah. It doesn't take out the the impact
language.
>> Well, but there's a fixed number of
words. So every new word you put in, you
have to take out another word,
>> right? You take out until ended by
voters and put in for eight years. Yeah.
Except for in the large book.
>> Yeah, the book.
>> I think for me it
is funny maybe coming from a lawyer
maybe my risk tolerance is a little bit
higher than others. I mean I would
rather us spend time figuring out
through discussions with chamber like
what their what their general thinking
is. Uh, I don't I I don't feel like
we're gonna that I need to get material
information that's going to change what
the approach should be from a tracking
poll. Um, so sorry, I'm going kind of to
that direction.
>> Yeah.
>> But like like David Weekly, my my
starting point is, you know, I should
keep I would love to keep it as simple
as possible with no sunset, no cap, etc.
for multiple reasons.
>> All right. Um, Cecilia, how are you
feeling about a tracking poll?
I'm kind of at the fence because at the
you know we already did it yet I'm a
little hesitant because the experts are
saying it might be a good idea if we go
with the cap in a sunset right um
I guess depending on the conversation
the Dr. Baker is going to have with the
chamber. Um,
I guess it depends on the answer. I
mean, I'm fine going without a tracking
pool, but if there's some hesitant where
maybe just to do things right, we have
to, then
we would.
Um,
but I guess for right now I would say
too we don't have to.
>> David.
>> Yeah.
>> Uh, yes.
>> Yes. I don't think that at this point as
of tonight I I don't feel that we need
to have an additional tracking poll. I
think if if we get new data that
indicates that we really ought to have a
different question on the ballot, I
think I begin to be more persuadable
that that revised ballot language um is
something that we might want to poll on,
but I don't think we have that today.
>> Oh, yeah. Wait, maybe that's a
clarifying question. Is this an
opportunity? And I think we got lost in
the conversation there. But Mike, I
think your question was basically could
we not take action to tonight, but
effectively take action sometime in the
next couple weeks if we needed to.
>> Depends. When's your next board meeting?
>> It's December 10th.
>> Okay. Brian, what do you think? Do you
think if we got direction on the 10th to
do tracking research, we could turn it
around in time for January? Uh we could
as long as there are people around from
the district and I heard John say he's
not going to be uh we would have to have
final approval by December 23rd
uh because we've got to be working the
week after Christmas to get it
programmed uh and into the week of the
first week in January to be in the field
on the 12th. Uh the holidays do sort of
slow that process down. Normally it's
three days, but um you know we just need
more time because of the holidays.
>> So what does that mean, Brian? Um the
commitment of time during the holidays.
uh an an initial um meeting if we are
approved on the 10th then you know I'd
want to have a meeting uh you know by
the 15th of December to review a first
draft of a questionnaire uh and then we
are going to go back and forth with it
that week of the 15th you know ideally
we're done somewhere around the 22nd to
the 20 23rd I guess because 24th is
probably a holiday for everybody Um
so that's that's the challenge that
we're running into is we're running out
of time.
>> And does that include also um the
members from the parent community that
are working closely with us?
>> Uh yeah, they we would want them to be
involved in that too. Now we can
preschedu that meeting um you know and
just cancel it if you don't need it, but
um
that would certainly help. So, if you
can get me those those dates so I can
talk to uh those parents and the other
piece as long as you can work around my
time of that December and I can have
Rick during that time also so we can
just get our schedules together. I am
going to be a bit out of the country for
a bit of the holiday. Um so
we I can make it work just as long as I
have definite days and times.
>> Sure. No, that's not as fun.
>> Okay.
And then just to check if it came back
and said, "Hey, there's a strong
indicator that we need to put a cap on.
Does that change people's opinion about
going out for a tracking poll? Um, it is
a different ballot measure. We've heard
that it is going to affect the numbers.
Um, it always clearly does. Is that
something that the the board feels like
it would want to measure or where where
is that that I guess that's the part
that before they go through the struggle
of like trying to figure out like how
could we squeeze this all in if we're
just going to come around on the 10th
anyways and be like yeah they say they
want we don't want to we don't want to
do the tracking poll anyway you know we
might as well raise that now um and save
everyone some time but if it's something
where we think like yes when we get that
information back if it says do the do
the cap then we really ought to go out
and test it and do the split AB as
Jeremy suggested. Um, is that what
people are thinking?
>> So, I would say yes.
>> Okay.
>> Um, because I know we're in a
um financial
issue.
>> Yeah.
>> Um, and you know, we're talking 38,000,
but our district will benefit so much
more if this passes. So, I'm I'm for
that.
So, I'm just trying to play out the
situation. If if we come back and the
direction is there's a strong appetite
from commerce to have some sort of cap
um and and we decide to do a tracking
poll, we are expecting those numbers to
decline either like no matter what we're
expecting them to decline if we test
that. And so it's a question of how much
>> I would say the expectation from my
perspective and again the whole reason
we do polling is to test our
expectations and and gut is that
compared in the same poll to the
non-capped measure we'd probably see
lower support. Right? If support has
grown overall then we might see that a
measure with a cap is actually doing
better than these numbers up on the
screen. But that when you ask the other
half of the sample this time around
these numbers have gone up even more if
that makes sense. Right. Right. But the
the general effect of adding that
language, you you would expect
irrespective of whatever comparison, but
like we expect that to be a lower uh
>> that's what we've seen when we've
explored this in other communities in
the Bay Area. We haven't tested it that
much to be honest, right? It's a handful
of districts. So, we we could be the
first where there's no effect or
>> voters like it even more, right? That
again, that's why you did the research.
But um generally what we've seen that
there is a little bit of a depressing
effect
>> and part of that I think is um voters
like progressive taxes. They want the
big guys to pay their fair share and the
cap is sort of the opposite of that,
right? It's saying me the homeowner, I
got to pay my full load, but you know
the box building downtown, they don't
have to.
>> They don't like that. So, another way to
phrase that is that demanding a cap is
against the interests of the the voters.
>> Uh, that's right. Yeah. Yeah. It's in
the interest of the large businesses and
large property owners. That's right.
I'd love if there was effective ways
that we could give carrots to like the
chamber to high-five them for being
willing to go and support a uncapped
measure here because that's that that's
going to be really helpful for getting
this thing to pass and for getting us
the funds that we need for the district.
>> Yeah. I
>> So I think that's and I think that I
don't need a soap box so I won't
>> Yeah. So
>> honing back in onto the the tracking
pole,
>> I I guess my view is
I still don't necessarily know that that
changes my mind on the tracking pole. Um
I I believe that there's a scenario
where
um we come back and there's a strong
appetite from one side to put a cap and
we still don't and we just kind of play
it out. But that that's how I I see it.
But if I guess if we said we did want to
put a cap on it, you're still sort of
like I think we have baseline poll data
that's good enough indicator that people
want to do it and go forward with that.
Um yeah, I mean personally I kind of
lean that way too uh in terms of it. I'm
not sure that um you know even even
putting in the cap I guess I'd have to
see what the response was if it was
something where it was like yeah really
strong to say like it absolutely has to
be there. Um and and maybe yeah, you
know, at that point though it would
really be just a question of like would
we be going forward or not? Um not is it
more successful or is it a non-starter
uh to put it in? Um okay. So I think
it's clear that we really need to
understand if we think we need to put a
cap on. Um and if we don't need to put a
cap on, we don't we don't feel like we
need to go out for another tracking
poll. Um it's not so clear if we did
decide that we wanted that we were
considering putting a cap on that we had
strong indication if we thought we
needed to go out for a tracking poll for
that. Um David Weekly, did you have an
opinion on whether we would go out for a
tracking poll on that one?
>> On the fence about that.
>> On the fence. Yeah. So I think um if
it's okay I I understand that it's a
pressure time um without that last piece
of information of like whether whether
we think it we need to put it on. I
think it's um it's hard for us to be
able to give that strong direction
towards it. Um I did hear that people
are interested in not suns setting.
Would we be testing a sunset as well if
we wanted to do that tracking poll? Um
it was our biggest negative negative on
the um poll results if you remember.
>> Yes.
>> And it's an easy an easy thing for um a
negative campaign to sort of hang on to.
How many percentage points do we think
we can move with that?
>> Well, if if we could go back to the
slide of the progression of the
positives to negatives,
>> right? Right.
>> Um,
and I'm just the consultant, but I will
say that if we
>> if we don't do polling and we bring back
a resolution to you next year, our
recommended resolution will include a
sunset. It's your decision whether or
not to take that recommendation. Okay?
But if you look at the drop in the
basically second row to third row, we go
from 73% to 66. And the number one
reason to oppose the measure was because
it did not expire and it would go on in
perpetuity. So our rationale is if we
can take the number one negative
argument off the table structurally,
we probably should when we're dropping
down to just below 2/3. Is that like
half the drop or just
>> It's hard. It's hard to say to be
honest.
>> I'm asking you to hallucinate some
numbers with me here. We just had a
presentation on LLMs, right? Yeah. So,
this took us from 73 to 66. If it had an
eight-year sunset that that would we
we'd be at 70.
>> Waving your hands a lot here. I
understand.
>> I go ahead Brian. Uh so first of all the
percentage um that the the argument
against which was the measure does not
have an expiration date and will go on
forever. We shouldn't vote for any
measure that doesn't sunset was 48% at
least somewhat more likely to vote now.
Uh that's half of the respondents. So if
we were being AI, we'd probably say that
half of the drop between 73 and 66 was
related to that.
and prove the work.
>> It's a convincing answer.
>> Yeah.
>> Okay. And it sounds like that's what
we're going to get recommended to do
anyway. So, it's really like do we want
to test that as well,
>> right? And the and the reason being is
without a cap, a cap effectively takes
your biggest threat of opposition off
the table.
>> Right.
>> Right. Because you're lowering their tax
bill from hundreds of thousands of
dollars a year to five or 2500 or
whatever. Um, if you don't have that,
then there is more risk for opposition.
And so I would be more conservative on
the other components of the measure
structurally, especially because we
know, you know, citing other research
that the hardest measure to pass is
always the first one. And I don't mean
the first in a district. I mean the
first time you're increasing. Once
you've passed a new measure like this,
going back and renewing it later, it's
never easy, but you know, you have a
track record of eight years of spending
to show your voters. Um, that usually
helps. Uh, and getting it over the hump
a second time.
>> These numbers are close enough to 2/3
that every percentage point matters. So,
you you may have convinced me that an
eight-year sunset needs to be in here
for this to for this to credibly pass.
>> So, does that need to be tracked? Does
that need a tracking bolt?
We're we're not going to make the final
decision until we know about the cap.
But would that be something that you
wanted them to?
>> No. No. Because I feel like that useful
insight was already embedded in the data
captured.
>> Yeah, I agree with that one. Okay.
>> When they talked about numbers, Brian
mentioned like, you know, 15 or 12 is
like 10 or 10 is like 12. And does it
really make a difference between eight
and nine and nine?
So, do we want to go rather than eight
years to 90 nine years and nine months?
>> Yeah. Well, we don't have to make that
decision.
>> We don't have to make that decision.
>> And Brian was being a little tongue and
cheek. It's got to be a year long.
>> Yes. Okay.
>> Eight or nine. I I like eight because it
gets you past multiple
>> election cycles, right? You get multiple
opportunities to renew it.
>> Okay. So I think our direction is we're
not we don't feel the need to go forward
with a tracking poll right now. We would
like to revisit that decision once we
hear from uh whether we think our
opposition is going to demand a cap. Um
the probably the leaning so far is that
even that we may not want to track but
it is a significant change and probably
does merit some little bit of of further
reflection on that. Um the sunset is a
good recommendation. Uh it sounds like
you're going to recommend that into our
proposal as well. I don't think that
from the discussion we've had to hear
tonight that we feel like that needs to
be pulled. The numbers seem to be pretty
indicated from our baseline data. Um so
really the one issue that we're
wondering whether needs to be have a
tracking poll would be putting in the
cap. We're not sure we even need to put
a cap in yet. We kind of need that
information to be able to go forward.
Were we able to provide you with the
direction you were looking for tonight?
>> Phenomenal job.
>> Okay.
>> I appreciate it.
>> All right.
>> Thank you and Brian.
>> Good to see you.
>> Thank you everybody. Bye bye
>> Jeremy. I'll be tech emailing you. Good.
>> Okay,
>> you hear that everyone? We did a
phenomenal.
>> All right, discussion of board policies
for turning into pros of this. Uh I'm
going to propose that we do the first
couples in triplets um because they're
quite literally the same um policies uh
for um the different um employee groups
there. Uh so let's start with 10.2. 2
10.3 and 10.4. These are the first
reading uh in discussion of board
policies and ARS 4119242
for 10.2 4219.42
for 10.3 and 4319.42
for the exposure um uh it's the exposure
control plan for bloodborne pathogens.
Does anyone have any questions or
comments or anything that they would
like to ask or discuss on this item?
I've learned from past meetings to wait.
>> Okay, on to our next triplet. Um, this
is going to be 10.5, 10.6, and 10.7.
We're discussing them together because
they're going to be the also the same
policies, but for the different employee
groups, the certificated, the
classifier, and then the other personnel
that were in those groups. Um this is
the first reading in discussion of BP
and AR4119.43,4219.43
and 4319.43
which is universal precautions.
Does anyone have questions or comments
or anything to discuss?
No. Seeing none, we will move on to the
next triplet. Uh 10.8 8 10.9 and 10.10.
Uh this is the first reading in
discussion of board policy 4151, 4251
and 4351. This is on employee
compensation
uh for the different employee groups. Um
one thing I want to call out about this
one is I did see that there was a
highlight in there about paid monthly
and 11 or 12 equal payments over the
year depending on the work calendar of
the classification. I'm assuming that
was highlighted because it was meant to
be discussed here tonight.
Not exactly, but I'll I'll hand it over
to Wendy.
Uh
>> the items in highlight are board policy
committee andor staff recommendations.
So in this particular case, um fun fact,
we have different work calendars for
different employee groups. And so that's
why the 11 or 12 month payments are
noted as such in there. That might seem
a little confusing, but different
classifications have different work
calendars which drive those payments.
>> Okay, got it. Yeah, I the text
underneath was in red, so I had thought
it was just like because last time we
had a highlight for things that came
from CSVA, so I was just Yeah, got it.
>> Yes, this is also my fault from last
time. Okay, we're all learning.
>> Okay. Uh, does anyone have questions or
comments about employee compensation?
>> All right. Um the following we're going
to do one by one because they're not um
the similar repeats. So we're at 10.11.
Uh this is the first reading in
discussion of board policy 4215. This is
evaluation and supervision. Um and this
is for classified personnel.
No comments. Looks like it's the CSBA
version that we're taking. So good.
Okay. Then we'll move on to 10.12. Uh
first reading discussion of board policy
and AR 5141. This is healthcare and
emergencies.
I see a question or a comment.
>> Just a comment that you know I I just
last week actually did my uh Red Cross
first aid AED C CPR renewal training um
at um PCC up the hill. Um really good.
You can ser save somebody's life if you
know first aid. Uh it cost me 85 bucks
out of pocket for all the materials
online whatever. Um, and just I I would
love to see the board uh find a way to
encourage uh members of the district uh
whether that's staff or uh volunteers,
teachers, etc. uh to to take these
trainings. Um, and if there are things
that we could do to encourage it, I
think that'd be pretty good because um,
that equips people not only in their
jobs here, but also as members of the
community at large to be uh, effective
first responders and potentially save
lives. So, just I I wanted to float
that. Is there any encouraging language
that we could put in that could help
encourage the district to uh promote
such trainings uh to have such trainings
and have a larger percentage of our uh
overall adult population be skilled
first responders?
>> We do we do have that for some of our
staff members.
>> Yeah. So um in some classified job
descriptions there is a requirement for
CPR training. Interestingly enough, the
state just put in effect for emergency
credential teachers, it's required,
which is interesting. Um, and then we
actually have actively been promoting
the the there was a grant for classified
employees over a four-year period that
Antonio Perez was overseeing and
Petrinia Red uh to train classified
staff specifically on CPR uh and first
aid, etc. And then the PE teachers are
actually trained and will be have their
renewal coming and then management was
trained recently uh with Anna Herrera's
funds. So that was back in June. But
anyway, um the point is is that yes,
there are pockets of groups that have
been trained and and of course our
nurses obviously are trained.
>> Um
for about for our 800 and some odd
employees, 900 employees outside of
volunteers or any other parents at that
rate would be, you know, about 76,000
and that would be then every two years.
Um, a lot of times it's about time
actually to train and building that into
our our schedules and so forth. Uh,
there's a difference between being
certified and being trained. So, we'd
have to make sure we differentiate, but
there is actually not one current board
policy that specifically calls out CPR
training and and this. So, that would be
something new. Um, but I just want to
give you a little background. Sequoia
Healthcare has been giving us some funds
to do this work as well. So, I do want
to point that out. But no, there is not
something systematic in place at this
point.
>> Would this be the policy to insert
encouraging language without uh
necessarily obligating us financially?
Um to to try to make a best effort to
find a way to encourage first aid, AED,
CPR training for for staff where
possible.
>> Oh, please. I was I was just looking at
the top of the policy, right, where it
says the governing it would be one of
the what the governing board thinks,
right? And it's I'll step back. It's
great to hear that the district is
already doing stuff, which is like
>> yeah,
>> kind of what the theme is in general
today.
Um yeah, what what if we were to add
something at the end of the first
sentence there just like so the first
sentence is the governing board
recognizes the importance of taking
appropriate action dot dot dot and if
there's a second clause and encourages
um like the encourages staff to be
trained as appropriate like or something
like to that degree I don't know does is
that what you're something that you have
in mind
>> basically yeah I mean that would be
that'd be a good first step in this
direction
>> I don't know what others
So at Sequoia during PD, classified
employees are actually not mandatory,
but it's an optional if they want to
take that as a PD. So they have the
director of wellness actually teach the
class during one of the sessions. Um I
forget where where whether it's a
certificate that we get or if it's
whatever the other stuff that you just
said. Um but that does happen um on a
yearly basis. So not everybody takes it
but it is an option and it's not
somebody from an outside agency. So it
doesn't cost a district other than the
time for the employee um giving the
training.
>> I think Sequoia also experienced the
same grant we had that is just ending.
So I'm curious to know if they'll
continue that. Uh that was lovely for
four years because it was the same type
of idea. In fact, we gave the trainings
the the president's week for classified
staff to come back uh and then I I
believe a day in June. So there were
days when students were not present. So
it was voluntary. But when you make it
voluntary, that doesn't ensure everyone.
So I guess my question back was I hear
it's a little bit more about
encouragement rather than requirement.
In my world, it's it's one or the other.
So, I'm curious to know if the board's
interested in funding it or if it's just
a essentially a sentiment about wanting
to ensure that we're, you know,
available to assist and encourage. Yeah,
>> I'd be interested in exploring ways to
fractionally fund it, maybe to like 50%.
I'm I'm my my comment was not intended
to create an obligation for all staff to
have formal certification, but um I I
think if there's things that we can do
to increase awareness and training, I I
think that we could see lives saved as a
result.
Mike,
>> um yeah, I mean, as I was looking
through it, like take for example the
AEDs. It doesn't require that everybody
get trained on AEDs. It just says that
somebody has to be on site that's
trained for it. Um I think that you know
that while I think it would be great for
everybody should have take the
opportunity, I also think everybody
should learn to swim. Do the I need to
have put that into the board policy. Um
you know maybe maybe not perhaps saying
that there should be on on um
something around like there should be
people trained for first aid response. I
don't know if that's in a policy
somewhere, but that might be the the um
the kind of the direction to kind of par
to par be parallel what the like we what
we say for AEDs where there has to be
somebody on the site that's trained to
be able to use it, but it doesn't mean
that everybody has to be able to be
trained to use it.
>> And I think some of the context here is
that learning to swim is a pretty big
deal and involved procedure and learning
how to use AED takes about like 5 10
minutes and then you've got it. They're
not all that complicated, right? So, so
the the lift the burden is not very
high.
>> Yeah.
>> I assume Wendy's is going to look for
direction on verbage changes. I I'll say
just putting aside the funding pieces, I
think I'd be okay with the sentiment
like encouraging something that that's
not obligated because I don't think that
I don't think I'm prepared to put that
in there. But if it's if it's language
about like supporting or encouraging
staff to do it because we believe in the
importance of it, I'm okay with that.
>> Yeah, it seems fine. An encouraged
statement.
>> Yeah.
>> And maybe something just as simple as
that. The board encourages staff to uh
be trained in CPR, AED, etc.
>> And maybe in the fullness of time, we
could turn that into formal programs
that we make available that make it very
easy for them to sign up for these
things, that we fund these things, etc.
But we we don't have to have that
funding conversation tonight. Okay.
>> When does that give you direct? Okay.
Cool.
>> Thank you. Uh so this was that was that
was not administering medication. That's
the next one. Um so 10.13 first reading
and discussion BPN 5141.21. This is
administering medication and monitoring
health conditions. And I just want to
give everybody a chance to chime in if
you're interested. There was an option
in this one. Um and option two was
selected. Uh and this is around um
uh how what's the language that we use
here? We said prohibit the um the
governing board prohibits the
administration of medical cannabis to
students on school grounds.
Comments, discussion
Okay, let's move on to 15.14.
Um, first reading and discussion of
board policy 5141.5.
This is mental health.
Looks like it's all from CSBA.
New requirements around cultural
competency training, updated referral
protocols. Anything to discuss here?
Looks good to me. Okay. Uh, we'll move
on to 10.15. first reading and
discussion of BP and AR 6142.7.
This is physical education and activity.
Um I had one question for the policy
committee and I'm very sorry I didn't
put this one in in advance but it was
just I noticed that under permanent
exceptions um we struck out all the high
school stuff which makes a lot of sense
but then there was also one bullet that
was just around the student is enrolled
in a juvenile home ranch camp or
forestry camp school with scheduled
recreation and exercise. This could that
have applied to K8 or would that be is
that only for high school as well.
I'll say from our discussions that I
recall that was not an intent. We were
purely I think eliminating things that
were high school only but okay but we
should
>> if that's not the case yeah we should
look into that. E end code 51241
is uh concerns exemptions from high
school physical education requirements.
>> Okay, great. Okay, so as long as it's
just talking about pay, that's all I
want to know. Okay, perfect. Thanks. Um,
so that was that was struck
appropriately. Cool. And again, I I
apologize for letting us see that too
late. Um,
shall we move on? Okay. Uh, 10.16 first
reading and discussion BP and AR uh
6142.8 and this is comprehensive health
education. I think the big thing is
we're adding mental health. Mental
health is being added into health
education,
questions, comments.
Yeah. Okay. Looks good to me. We have uh
discussed our policies. Thanks, Wendy.
Um we're going to move on to our consent
agenda and everything in the um consent
agenda is going to be considered routine
and acted upon by the board in one
motion. I will remind everyone that
11.14
has been pulled from the consent agenda.
So, we would be voting on um 11.1 to
11.13 and then 11.15.
>> I move we approve the consent agenda
accepting 11.14.
>> Okay. All in favor? I
>> I
uh 12.1 has been pulled. So, we have no
action items. Uh you know, we're on to
board and superintendent reports. Who
Who would like to report first?
>> Uh, by the way, it's nine o'clock. We
often take a break. I think we're close
enough to the end that we should just
power through. That's my recommendation.
Everybody in. Okay, great.
Uh, David Lee, please. Sorry.
>> Um,
went to I had two school site visits
over the past week. One to Kennedy and
one to Hoover. Both of them very
productive. Uh, Kennedy, I was intending
to check out some classrooms, but I
ended up just having a very uh nice,
productive conversation with uh with
Jandra, which was great because it was
the second time I've gotten to talk with
her. But uh some highlights uh the I
think she has self-d designated or been
designated as a warm demander, which is
inspirational to me. I love that idea of
um
keeping standards high but still you
know coming forward with a a good
attitude. Um that is at least what was
communicated to me. I love the idea. Uh
a lot of good things I think
particularly for us uh that I heard were
going well were the enrichment um
program the English accelerate we're
calling it that seemed to be going well.
Positive feedback there and no big
hiccups. Uh and then the smart device
policy seemed to also be going well. Uh
I think there was some concerns as
predicted about uh safety kind of at the
beginning but that's been headed off and
addressed and so it seems to be going
pretty well there. Uh the Hoover visit
was also very nice. I know I put in
quotes another uh phrase that stuck with
me was pleasantly persistent. So lots of
things that I'm learning to aspire to.
Um but I think it's a great mantra of
just you know do do the most that we can
but again with a good attitude as always
a great strong community feel. Um, I
think whenever I got to see a lot of
classrooms there and you can just see
the relationships that Lube has with
students and staff, um, which is just
very inspiring and, you know, including
where there had to be some redirection,
uh, it was still done with the
incredible amount of love, which was
just great to see. Um, that said, it's
pretty clear this is still there's a
high need population. Um there's there's
just a lot of stuff going on there
that's unique to probably Bayside
schools in general, but certainly in
Hoover um that they're not the same
issues that are popping up everywhere
else. And I think it's something to be
mindful of especially as we go through
difficult decisions through the budget
and just making sure that we're
supporting all of our students. Um one
one other thing was just and this is me
broadly conversations
just about the teacher retention
attraction. I think it can be
challenging. Um I think we've seen this
through
teacher turnover at some of the higher
need schools. And so, um, just something
that jumped out to me as I asked about
like, oh, how long has this teacher been
here? Um, and that's not to say that,
you know, new teachers can't be good,
but stability is always nice, uh, to the
extent that we can figure that out, but,
uh, something that stuck out to me.
>> All right. Thank you. Uh, Cecilia, do
you anything to report?
>> Yes. So, um, last week I attended along
with Dr. Baker, um, Jorge, Michelle
Ramon, and Aaron Cos from Northstar, and
Miss
I can't remember.
>> I forget her. One of the teachers. Um,
there were some parents representing
some of the schools. I I don't I don't
have the list with me. Um, and then they
actually had a student, too. and the
parent from Northstar. And the parent
talked about her experience going from
Garfield, I believe,
>> to Northstar and how her daughter has
had just a great experience. Um, they
were a little hesitant at first, but the
daughter is actually thriving and so
they talked about the programs and how
they and you guys have heard what
Northstar does. And so,
um,
it was nice to hear from a parent from
the Bayside to see what their experience
is like cuz as we know, we are trying to
pull more parents from the Bayside. And
unfortunately, they're just not coming
as we think that the numbers are not
coming in as we um slowly but not as
much as we wanted to. Um, and then I
forget what else we talked about because
I didn't I don't have any of my notes.
So,
>> we tal
What we spoke about was we we went
through the budget process with that. If
you recall, we did that we did that
portion and got their feedback. And then
you also had Elizabeth that came to the
last board meeting and talked about how
the types of needs that Hoover has and
what they want to um continue with. So,
we talked about that and then we also
talked about the possibility of parcel
tax during the and what a parcel tax is
and even though you may not be voting
the it's good for you to know about this
because you're not a homeowner but you
rent so possibility that your rent could
you know go up because of the parcel tax
be passed on to you.
And then I I do recall there was a
parent there that was like very involved
at Garfield and how she says she lives
all the way by Target and she literally
walks to all the meetings and so you
know here we go the commitment and so I
was telling them that's how I was like I
I was here as a parent um and so the
lady is looking forward to maybe one day
take a seat at the table. So that was
really great. Um and then I also
went to DAC on Monday. Um so
I actually did leave earlier. Um what I
enjoyed about DACA this time is we did
have a little bit more um it was through
Zoom so there was a lot more parents
connected um lots of questions and lots
of
answers within.
So the parents were actually answering
questions that other parents had. So
then you you know I was able to see how
their knowledge passes on to their all
their um friends and so that was really
nice to see. Um so yeah that that's it
for me.
>> Yeah David
>> super cool when just knowledge can
distribute through a community like
that. Um, so, uh, I met with the
Hispanic Foundation of Silicon Valley,
um, who had previously met with Trustee
Lee, um, had a wonderful chat with them
about some of their history, um, their
past engagements with Redwood City
School District and their interest in,
uh, further engaging here, including,
uh, running parent education groups. Uh,
I did introduce them to Augustine, who's
one of our emerging parent advocates for
his Hispanic parents here. Um and that
seems like that uh is likely to be a
very productive introduction. So that
was very exciting. Um was here last
night um also with a bunch of community
members uh talking about some of the
budget reductions. Uh there was a lot of
uh exciting and vigorous discussion that
was there. Um definitely highlighting
that uh to a certain degree every school
in our district is actually kind of a
school of choice and draws from a pretty
large catchment. um that there's complex
interdependencies that exist between
schools. Um there's interest in
exploring a number of different
efficiencies. I learned that uh every
site buys its own technology. So some
school sites might have excess
Chromebooks and others were looking to
buy Chromebook carts. And so just trying
to better coordinate that might result
in some savings. But there was no silver
bullet. There was no single easy uh
thing we could do to go and make this
happen. Um, but it did seem like we were
starting to get some consensus about uh
positive and viable paths forward.
>> Yeah.
>> Yeah, that's that's the one that I had
to report on. Um, the the other thing
I'll point out is um f first of all,
there's three principles there. There's
a bunch of parents that are there. Rick
is there. John is there. Um,
>> Maria was there. Uh,
>> Katherine was
>> Katherine. Yeah. So, it's a it's pretty
it's pretty well attended. This is the
one in English. Um and uh I think there
were three main parts of it. There was
the the superintendent came with the
proposal for how this these budget cuts
could look like. I think that'll be come
out next week or so for for uh people to
look at. Um then the committee so all
the all the parents talked about what
they heard from feedback from their
school. Um and uh and then there was
some data presented to the committee and
so they got a chance to have some
feedback on that. Um, I believe all of
this material will be up on the
committee website, including the notes
next week. Yeah, next week. Um, if you
want to go and go and look at it and
see, but u I don't know if you have
anything to add for that.
>> Just that um I will be sending you each
spreadsheet. I send it David, I'll send
it to you digitally so you have it also
and it'll be a part of our conversation
tomorrow. part of our conversation
tomorrow and part of our conversation
with Cecilia also uh when we set up our
meeting how we either tomorrow or
Friday. Um so that that was that
meeting. Um, and then on last week on
Friday, I spent the morning with the
chamber and they had their education
workforce day and they had myself on a
panel along with the superintendent from
SEOA and one of the board members from
the county office of education and we
had set questions that were sent to us.
At least the ones that they sent us were
not the ones that were asked, but that
was okay. you know, were a was a was
able to to answer and respond and I got
most of them. So, I don't know how that
happened, but but uh we had a lot of our
own um community members that their kids
come to Redwood City School District. We
had parents that who have been in the
district that are now uh have their own
businesses or working for businesses in
Redwood City that you know had a lot of
favorable
insights to how we are moving forward
with the district and really just
applauded what we're doing. So it was
great to hear that. So, and also some
students that have grown up in the
district and now are entrepreneurs or
are working for major comp major
businesses in Stanford and were part of
this um group. So it was interesting to
uh talk to them not only as a large
group but then to answer individual
questions after I was done because I
they
they didn't have the um the timing
correct and the next group after us was
the president from San Francisco State
College and some of her members were
with her. So our time got a little short
because of the difference of questions
that they were asking compared to what
my colleague said these were not the
questions we were given but anyway so
they we went forward but um the whole
essence of them learning about the
Redwood City School District what we do
Hora did a great job with the pamphlets
that I was able to take out and give
around to all the tables uh on the
different schools. So there's uh
pamphlets each table and there were like
15 about 22 t 25 tables in this room and
I gave each table about 10 different
pamphlets with had different schools in
the redwood city school district. gave a
little history. And um one thing that
one of the community members brought up
is what how
exciting that we do have schools of
choice even though they may cause you
know the district some chaos sometimes
and then uh some of our parents too
because they didn't get in and they're
on a waiting list and so forth. um they
really enjoyed that being a factor in
this school district and had asked me,
you know, were you thinking of
expanding? And I go, it's expanded all
the schools as we heard last night when
you they're basically all community uh
not community schools, but um schools of
choice, schools of choice. The other
piece that got me thinking about
community schools is that was a question
that was asked about community schools
and how did community schools get
started? because one of the participants
um has her niece at one of our attending
one of our community schools and wanted
to know more about the wraparound
services. She goes, "How do you are you
how are you able to do that?" You know,
and gave a brief synopsis and I said,
"Well, if you're really interested in
seeing it in action, just give me a call
and I'll set you up with Michelle or Liz
and you can go visit." but very uh a lot
of kudos from the from the audience
about the Redwood City School District.
So, it was it's good that we're out
there and that um the next
superintendent has to also be part of
that that chamber. And Mike, you you're
part of it.
>> Yeah.
>> When you can get there.
>> Um but but it's it's a good group of
people, but this is a larger group that
goes to a leadership.
uh they become this consortium that go
for the whole year which I'm going to
ask probably new Cecilia have you been
did you go Mike
>> I haven't been
>> so we should start put each year
somebody attend you attend like one
Friday per month and it has to do with
the chamber Sonteo County and they um
purposefully
take topics and bring in people so that
you learn more about the chamber and how
it supports not only education but how
it supports social services and so forth
in the county. It's it's it's a full day
one one Friday per month. They give you
breakfast and they give you lunch and
so it it's a good uh opportunity. I went
because at one time um the
superintendents in Sanonteo County were
required to go and I went before I
became a superintendent in 20 No and
yeah it was 2013. It was 2013 when I
went. So they have your as we as you as
you're on the panel they have your your
date you graduated they give you a
little graduate that was 2013 said long
time ago and Crystal hadn't been yet
hadn't hadn't been yet and uh echo it
had been had been. So it'd be good for
you all to you know at some point in
time take turns one year one person go
next year somebody else go it and it's
not very expensive for the district.
It's like 300 bucks. So, that's really
good. So, I'll encourage you and I'll
let the next superintendent know about
it also.
>> Sounds good. Um, all right. We're on to
information. We're receiving some
information about the Sanonteo County
Investment Fund, 4.1%.
Uh, any any questions? No. Um,
correspondence. Uh, anybody want to
acknowledge receipt of uh communication?
Um, make it part of the official record.
David,
>> I got some interesting information about
the Mills Act and various exemptions uh
that were granted to uh homeowners in
Redwood City whose properties are
designated as historic. And apparently
uh actual compliance with the terms of
the act is a pretty small percentage of
the homeowners that are receiving Mills
Act exemptions. And this costs um the
district uh a reasonable chunk of the
change in terms of hundreds of thousands
of dollars that we're not getting um due
to homeowners getting uh historic
property exemptions that they're not
actually compliant with. Um it would not
be up to us to remedy this, but it would
be up to within the jurisdiction of the
city of Redwood City. And so it was
recommended that we petition the city of
Redwood City uh to put a halt to
granting further Mills Act uh exemptions
or renewals that the exemptions tend to
go on for 10 years. Um so I contacted a
number of members of the uh of the city
council.
Any other correspondence to put into the
record? Okay. Um
any other business or suggested items
for future agenda? If you've looked at
the schedule, you'll see that like the
TK reports coming up next. Um I didn't
look farther than that, but I'm sure
there's plenty more on the future
agenda.
>> Yeah. Yeah. First interm. Yeah. Yeah, of
course.
>> Yeah. I I knew not to scroll just a
little bit further. I'm like, that's
when all the excitement's going to
happen. Uh David Lee,
>> um any any thinking on the study session
that I proposed?
instead of us
on the agenda a second. Well, let's talk
tomorrow.
>> Okay.
>> Not yet, but it sounds like there'll be
some followup.
>> Okay.
>> Yeah. Okay. Um let's move on to Wait,
other Okay. So, now we're on to meeting
reflection. Um things that worked well,
things that didn't work well that we
should stop doing and change.
>> Loved your triplets, dude. Just I I like
how you diligently work through batches.
Uh it's
>> I mean if you're going to throw like 20
policies at me, I'm gonna find a way to
make sure we can get through them
efficiently while still giving them the
due measure and time of deliberation
that we deserve to give them and that
they they are
>> t taking the beat to make sure nobody
missed. That was masterfully done and
and Evelyn, great job. Uh the clock
counting up. I noticed that was all very
well orchestrated. So,
Cecilia, David Lee, any feedback,
things we should continue to do, stop
doing anything. Yeah. Go ahead.
I think I just want I wasn't thinking of
the triplets that you talked about, but
um I just want to say thank you because
um I just love the way you kind of reels
back reel back reel us back in when
maybe we shift a little bit to a
different direction. So I appreciate
that about you. So thank you.
>> Okay, this is not my agenda item. This
is our item. But thank you. I appreciate
it. Yeah. Thank you.
Um, we all love Mike. He does a great
job. Thank Thank you, Mike. I actually
did write down what
>> I did write down that I appreciate that
Mike keeps us timely to the best of his
ability, which is limited, granted, but
he does a great job. But I generally do
appreciate that. Relevant to that, uh, I
also I thought the presentations were I
enjoyed the the ratio of time of
presentation to discussion that we had.
I thought it was really rich. Um, which
was great. Like I love to hear more. um
like through the discussion. So that was
really helpful. Um one thing which isn't
I don't think is anything we can really
change. It's just kind of what it is
today. But I do think about like are we
spending the majority of our time
talking about like student outcomes and
I think I'd put the AI stuff in that
category because I think we are really
there. Um the rest of stuff is kind of
like feels procedural but it's also
stuff like we have to do. Um so it's not
yeah not like a we need to change
something but more just a reflection of
h that was you know not what I'd hoped
for. It's always good for us to be
thinking about are we keeping the
meetings focused on student achievement
as much as possible.
>> Yeah. And I I really appreciate Evelyn's
pacing guide and this time having the
split down between the presentation and
the discussion. Um and I thought our
presenters did a really good job of of
sticking around to that time. I was
actually
really impressed. I mean when you come
in with a longer like Jeremy came in
with like 15 slides and said he was
going to do them in 10 minutes. Didn't
believe it. He was done in seven. Um,
you know, and AI was really close to
their time, so I think that that really
helps um allow us to have discussion
without feeling like we're keeping them
for too long and being able to move on.
So, that worked out great. I don't know
what coordination you do behind the
scenes, Evelyn, with everyone to let
them know or ask them and all of that,
but thank you so much for putting that
in. Uh, it's incredibly helpful.
>> That's a lot.
>> Yeah, I know.
I know. Um, okay, let's move on to the
meeting calendar. Um I think we have we
have a meeting on Friday uh close
session. Um the 10th will be our next
meeting. There's a close session before
that. Yeah. Okay. Um anything else for
the meeting calendar that we need to
know?
>> A
will be at AEC. That's not a meeting. So
definitively not a meeting. Okay. I
think that's it. And then
yeah, and just um yeah, for the for
calendaring um it's the close session
starts at 5:45
>> on the 10th. Um so just make sure that
we're you're able to get here for that.
On to adjournment.
>> WFH on the calendar
>> that workforce housing.
>> Got it. Not work.
>> Not work from home. Yeah.
>> In person.
I like that one. Work from home.
>> Yeah. You you'll also see it sometimes
as EW for employee workforce housing. Um
>> all right. Uh 19 adjournment. Uh can I
get a motion to adjurnn?
>> I move we adjourn.
>> Is there a second?
>> All in favor? I I you're returned.