Busy, Busy, (and did I mention) Busy Board Meeting

(Update: Tuesday 4ish. Well, gone are both the Executive Sessions and now only the Work Session form 4-5:30 about SBOC is happening. Hey, look at that, Meg, me and Dan D. all made the speakers list. We're also hearing from the head of the SEA and some teachers as well. Also, not picking on Hale but I note that we are spending about $600K to rebuild Hale's greenhouse. It has to be moved over by Summit because City Parks wants their land back where the current one sits. It's a great program but man, I could think of a lot of maintenance that could be done with $600K.)

Talk about packing it in! On Wednesday, before the Board meeting, the Board is having not one but two Executive Session plus, in-between, a Work Session.

The first Executive Session is called a "quasi-judicial hearing" (this under an RCW) for a student bullying incident. I'm thinking it was the cyber-bullying over at McClure but who knows? They are allotting 15 minutes for this so it's either very cut and dried or they are being optimistic.

Then, the Work Session is on a new SBOC model. Let me state: I am for any attention and revamping of SBOC. I think that program deserves it given how many immigrant children come into our district every year. I believe the idea is to make it a "World School" a la one in St. Paul, MN where students could complete high school there rather than it being just kind of a way station for a series of months. (Students could, of course, choose to leave and go to any high school if they wanted to as well.)

However, I know that the district is planning to fly a couple of SBOC staff to see a couple of these schools throughout the U.S. And then there are planning and implementation costs. Where is the money coming from for all this? How can we afford to do this right now? I just don't get it.

Then the Board's next Executive Session starts to discuss collective bargaining and negotiations for 15 whole minutes. That seems odd but I suspect it might have something to do with the Seattle Organizers coalition group asking for parents to be included in the process (not at the table). I'll be able to explain more tomorrow or the next day.

Then there's the actual Board meeting at 6 p.m. and that agenda is huge. They might be able to get through all 12 items on the Consent agenda quickly but that's 12 things to announce. What is interesting is there is an item for Sand Point School modernization to be paid for under BTA II and when we passed BTA II, Sand Point wasn't a school nor was McDonald which is also on the agenda. Some other project probably got axed as they scramble to find funding to reopen the 5 schools. However, there is an Intro Item on BTA III so we'll have to see.

But there are 6 Action Items including the Performance Management policy (with a DeBell amendment). Included is one item put off which is a lease for a place for science materials which is not really going to save that much money and they claim there is no place in all the district properties for it. Is anyone on the Board going to challenge this one? Probably not.

Here's the text of DeBell's amendment:

This amendment includes an expectation that (a) high performing schools that request a waiver
should assume that their waiver will be approved absent evidence shown to the contrary; and that (b) once a waiver is granted, the school should not have to annually apply to continue the waiver.

While a school should not annually need to apply, it is reasonable for the Superintendent’s
waiver process to include an annual check in on the school’s status. Schools that are no longer
high performing should expect that their waiver may be rescinded.

This amendment also includes an expectation that the number of texts available for use by a
school that has received a waiver is limited. The intention of this amendment is to provide
flexibility for high performing schools, but that flexibility does not extend to having a multitude
of texts in use. Texts that are already in use, or those that are recommended by the
Superintendent or designee may be considered, but this is not intended to result in different
materials in use in every high performing school. The Superintendent’s waiver process may
limit the number of different texts available for a waiver.

Schools that receive a waiver to use non-approved materials should note that those materials
must meet state and college-readiness standards. Schools with approved waivers should also
note that the waivers do not exempt students from state assessments (such as the MSP) or from
district assessments that are not tied to district-approved materials (such as MAP). Last, schools using non-approved materials must pay for those materials out of their budgets.

(The paragraph in red is in red on the Amendment.) Note, schools have to pay for non-approved materials which means if the school can't budget for it and/or your PTA can't pay for it, no waiver for you.)

And then there are 6 Introduction Items including the sale of $34M worth of SPS bonds to try to lower the payments on the John Stanford Center. You did know, right, that that building never saved the district money (well, maybe, in getting everyone in one place) but in terms of costs? We are paying and paying for that building. It's a huge albatross around the neck of this district and now we are selling bonds to try to get out under it.

There is also the NTN Contract and I'll be listening to that discussion, if any. They may just have agreed to no discussion and will just pass it. There's also an item for acceleration of BTA III funds to reopen the schools (but no info posted yet).

That is going to be one long day for the Board members.