Skip to main content

tv   Government Access Programming  SFGTV  February 26, 2019 5:00am-6:01am PST

5:00 am
with the obama foundation. i will say one of the challenges has been that it is a national summit that is happening locally. and they want to make sure it's a national summit that is happening locally, which means we do not have the capacity to put all the people we would like to have in the space there. one of the things i stressed, want people to be participating with my brothers and sisters keeper initiative because they're committed to that and not because they want to be associated with the obama foundation. if people didn't know this was happening or coming until it was announced, then that means that you have not been engaged with the work we've been doing, so for me, that is little bit of a challenge. we're grateful to be a host committee. grateful to work with landen dickey and have young people from the school district attend next week, but what we want is for this to be the start of
5:01 am
something and not just a one shot. and then i can't stress enough the idea of partnering with the community clap tiffs. that is -- collaboratives. that is a group comprised of many groups, but we think that is a great way to engage with the community and be connected to what those priorities are and address the challenges we've heard mentioned here today. whether it is micro aggression, whether it is discrimination, whether it is racism, because they have the expertise on how to understand and respect their culture and not to always go to an outside entity to come in and tell us how to do better. i want to elevate and highlight again the opportunities for all. i want to say the mayor launched it in october. the focus is on trying to make sure that all young people have
5:02 am
an opportunity for a paid internship. one of the challenges has been, again, how we share information, not just with the school district but with other places. we've heard amazing numbers over the years around how many internships there are. when we try drill down on that, the numbers are highly inflated. part of that is if the school district is an aggregated number of people they serve and department of children youth and families gives an aggregated number, there is no way to tell what the overlap is. if a nonprofit is paying the young people to go work at a city department, then places them in another department, that is three places that count that one young person. so we're trying to actually find out a couple of things. who is actually working in where they're working and who has access? this is not saying that you have to have a 2.0 or 2 tyler
5:03 am
nicholson .8 -- 2.8 to have a job, so we're focused on creating new slots that get to folks who never worked or maybe don't interview well or realize that the application process was in december. 88% of the people say they want to work. some would rather focus on school. of that number, 45% of the youth surveyed have utilized the services at the school to help them find a job. that means 55% of the high school students are not taking advantage of work based learning opportunities or finding out about them in school. 45% of the youth surveyed never
5:04 am
had a job and over 70% of the youth we've surveyed have only had one job. and the numbers, the other piece we kind of found out, when we did the survey, only 9% of the survey wanted to work with youth or animals, but 40%, that's what they've done. because that's pretty much all that is available. it's about understanding what people are interested in and how we should expand the work. i know you had the presentation earlier from ruth asawa school of the arts. we had 5% say they were interested in careers in the arts. there was zero opportunities for engagement or to be exposed to that. 27% said they were interested in stem, we had less than 1% say they had an opportunity to work in technology or science or in the mathematics field. and then where we have a little
5:05 am
bit more parity would be in retail or culinary, where we see 10% -- 7% say that they have worked in the area and 10% want to. all of these we see a gap in terms of what young peoples' interest are and what they have access to. we had quite a few young people say, they would take any position, so i think we had between 10-15% that said they'd take any job whatsoever, but then we had 10% that said they were undecided and they didn't know what was out there. again, doing a bet job of exposure. that's what the opportunities for all is, because if we go into other -- i taught in private school for a long time and that has been the path for that. building for a long time. young people are kind of folded into internships as a part of their school day or part of their pathway, so thinking about how we create those
5:06 am
opportunities for more young people. again, this is just some of the numbers that we have. this is why opportunities was created. there was a survey done of over 400 employers which represented more than 2 million employees and what they found is that 80% of high school graduates are deficient in written communication. and that was something we were like, if young people are graduating and don't have that skill, it's part of why they're not able to go on and get a job. more of what the deficiencies were that were reported. i think the writing and english, the critical thinking, work effort, which is around 70% is again a major focus of why we wanted to launch this, to create more opportunities for young people to develop those skills. again, just highlighting being able to work with the cte, and
5:07 am
to do the important engagement and other work. we're grateful for those partnerships. lastly, just what we need is continued support and developing protocol and policies and accountability that improves increases partnerships for culturally responsive professional development. we are working with our partners in the collaborative to develop curriculum, to implement that to do the trainings. i cannot stress enough the data coherence and access. i will say we're working withstand ford and the university of stanford and the university of san francisco, but the difficulty that we have just to have people respond to whether we can get access to doing a survey, or partnering with us on something. the fact that it may take me to
5:08 am
e-mail one person five times and never get a response and then to e-mail another person who tells me to reach out to somebody else. it's not that great to have to go back to our academic institution partners, the universities and say i don't know why nobody is responding to you. so if there is a, we don't want do this, or it doesn't fit into the guidelines, i think that would be helpful to know. but i think it's too difficult to move this work. we're not trying to do a gotcha moment, we're trying to figure out how to better support each other. i want to say that i just think the data piece is something that keeps coming up from a lot of different places. and i'm not always sure who the contact person is and i think that back in the days of hover
5:09 am
liedle, hoover loved data and anytime you wanted to meet with him, he would sit and go through the data in a way that you would be like, that's quite enough. but i'm not saying i want to have that level, but i want to be able to say how do we actually measure if we're having an impact. they talked about in the cac earlier, the learning while black, right? and the conference they're going to have. some of this is data we've seen and known and we shouldn't have to wait until somebody is in their 40s to come back and say what are we going to do to fix this? doing a better job of addressing the problems without the fear of somebody using that against us is where i land. >> thank you, ms. davis.
5:10 am
comments, questions? >> ms. collins: what is the type of data that -- specific data you would like to see? i know there is probably more than you can come up with right now. >> so i'll be honest, at this point, it's not about you all giving us the data, it was about the ability to get approval to do an irb with the university of san francisco. and trying to figure out who was the person that could authorize that. we weren't even asking you to give us data, just say that you were willing to let us survey young people. to be in a space and say, can you take this home to your parents? we were almost not able do that study because we couldn't figure out who the person was to authorize it. and when we did, we couldn't get them to call us back. >> ms. collins: thank you. >> ms. lopez: who are you reaching out to.
5:11 am
>> i don't want to throw people under the bus. my intention is to say there is an office that you go through for that. there are people and there are names. we went through the office and i can't remember. i'm sorry, the name, because it's in the name. it's like evaluation assessment. that is the space and the place. and so i know specifically like three people that i reached out to because i know them. and again, i think there is a little bit of what is the process? and protocol? which i'm not above following, but somebody should be clear about what it is. >> can i say, i would hope -- i know for example we had an incident a few months ago when we were opportunities for all and then you reached out to me
5:12 am
and things have run smoothly. my hope is -- the goal is to work directly there, but if it gets some place where you aren't receiving the information, my hope is you would reach out. hi activities like this will do that. but if there is a stuck point, my hope is -- in the previous case, that you just reach out. >> right i appreciate that. you have made that offer and definitely delivered on that. so it's kind of like, at one point when i realized i was pushing things forward for my son in a way and leveraging relationships and i was like this isn't fair, because ultimately, there is a whole other group of people who don't have access. so trying to figure out how do we do this whether i have direct access to the folks up here or
5:13 am
not, that i figure out how it works. because i can definitely call i think any one of you and get a response, but i also feel like figuring out what the -- where the cracks are in the system so that we can fix it for other folks. >> it is her birthday [laughter]. >> i just want to say that the equity ambassador are incredible and amazing and i want more of them all the time. they're awesome. >> i just was going to thank you for the presentation, ms. davis. i just wanted to really say, because i have heard the board say this many times. you echoed it in your presentation, that we don't want to hide data that is true data about the status of our kids and how they're doing. and i've heard that many, many
5:14 am
times from many members of the board. we're willing to sort of take our medicine, right? if it means that we're getting to the bottom of the situation and we're getting the tools that we need to start to address it. so i think that needs to be said because i think we're committed to that. and i want the staff to hear us say that, too. sometimes it's scary and we don't want to put out information we think makes us look bad, but if it's the real data and it means this is where we are, and we can address the situation, i think we're willing to do that. >> i would agree with that. part of our last presentation about when the department of technology was talking about our website redesign, the underlying part of my question was around access to information and website where people can find
5:15 am
the answers to the questions and make that easy to make who we are, what we do, a central part of that, the public getting access to what they need. and not behaving like we're the district so you have to put up with it. i don't think that people that work at the district believes that, but that's what it feels like for people. we have to continue to work on ways to turn that around. so thank you for being candid about that. thank you for your commitment to this initiative. i forget about the history of my brothers and sisters keeper, but i remember coming to some of those first meetings -- >> in this room, right? >> i'm glad you took over the initiative. it's in a much better place now. can you talk -- as a district we want to be open about our needs around addressing
5:16 am
african-american students and with the my brothers and sisters keeper initiative this had to go through progressions. can you speak about the way it's improved over the past few years? and what you're looking to accomplish five years from now? is this an initiative that happens indefinite, or does it have an end date? >> i will say that the summit that is happening next week is really about president obama being able to say that this initiative was not just about while he was in office there was a commitment to move this forward. san francisco has been listed as community to watch in terms of the work that we're doing. the human rights commission has a staff person that is assigned to this. the collaborative pieces, those are things that have been built out as part of the mbsk initiative here in the city, but that will with stand. what we want to see is more of
5:17 am
the partnership growing. so for instance, being able to go from black family day to latino family day to pacific islander and to continue growing these. one of the things we learned early on, the curriculum for families and service providers, we were only highlighting at first the african-american families to address the disparities and inequities we know exist within that community. we have since kind of expanded that to include other multicultural focuses, but for us, the building of this is developing the platform and doing more comprehensive. the life course framework which i didn't speak about, but we did a study this year with a couple of consultants who looked at two young people who are, one, i think is at viz valley and one at malcolm x, we looked at those two young men, went back four generations and looked at their families experiences in the
5:18 am
school district, in trying to find employment, being pushed out of the city. really tracking that and using that to help us develop a road map for what it looks like to address the disparities in real life. not to just keep guesstimating what has happened. but we've done interviews of the grandmother, the great grandmother. the grandmother and the mothers and talked about where did the system fail them and where could they have used more help? we want to use that to build out the approach, but it's not just about the school district, right? it's not just about workforce development. it's not just about hope sf, but really looking at how we all talk and work together. because if we don't do that, we're not going to fix this problem. >> president cook: what about housing in the overall discussion. is my brothers keeper focused on that, or is it in school, out of school? >> that's where the hope sf piece plays in strongly.
5:19 am
i think -- the main reason in the spirit of theo miller was why i expressed the data collection piece. i know they've done a lot to look at the hope sf residents to think about what is going on with them in school. i know one of the pieces that lee romney did, that also was the learning while black was to look at the programs that are happening, the work that is happening with college prep, the walking school bus. for us, it's all intertwined. we cannot separate it. so part of this is looking at the housing situation to look at employment which also affects housing and how all of that actually impacts the ability for young people to learn or get to school. >> my next line of questioning around the engagement of families. i know you're supporting black family day and the efforts to stabilize the home.
5:20 am
we're trying to get our mind around what is happening with chronic absenteeism and the multitude of issues that may be affecting a student at home and how much of the initiative -- how would you say it's weighted? because i hear a lot about youth engagement, but can you speak to how much is focused on the parent engagement piece? >> a huge part of it. so i think for us, we've created the literacy program which was focused on supporting parents in the process. the opportunities for all, we were going to different housing developments to do some of the resource fairs with the intent of supporting parents and families, but i do think that what has been raised already here today in terms of how we support schools or how we support families, i don't think that we can do this without doing workshops and summits and conferences that actually are geared towards families and,
5:21 am
unfortunately, our success sometimes is measured by how many people show up and not the quality of the program. i think the other issue and challenge is that we're not really developing the workshops or the conferences or the summits based on what works best for the families. we're so quick to say people didn't show up or they're not interested and we really don't know what people's stories are and we haven't done enough to learn those stories. for me, the biggest part of that is not saying we're going to do a conference on saturday and we want 200 people to show up in order for it to be successful, but it might be like we're going to knock on 200 doors in this housing development and see who actually opens the door and talks to us. we have to reframe how we do this work. we talk about mental health and trauma-informed care, but we don't actually apply that in terms of how we do the work. and how we respond to people. so for me, it's a whole new way of thinking about community
5:22 am
engagement. it's not about how many people showed up at the fair, it's about us thinking about how we have conversation and engage with people and meet them where they are. >> i feel like saying amen. [laughter] you're telling the truth. so my last question is about the series of meetings. people want to know more about how often you meet. can you share that? >> we have the community collaborative piece which is again, the different community groups meet monthly. they have priorities right now of the community engagement and family engagement and these workshops and workforce development. that meets monthly. the champions, which is open to everyone, meets monthly and those meetings will resume in april. and then the life course framework piece is much more intentional and direct and that
5:23 am
is something if people want to engage with us, we want to talk about how we're interviewing families and building this out to better understand the process that folks have gone through. our justice policy group is a quarterly meeting, but there is a lot of work that happens in subgroups. i can definitely have amelia put that calendar of things together and get that to share with you all. [please stand by]
5:24 am
5:25 am
>> we have public -- public comment for the consent calendar >> thank you, commissioners, superintendents. a week ago -- >> one second. we will restart your time. >> my name is bernice.." a week ago, i sent all of you,
5:26 am
with the exception of commissioner lee, and e-mail on the attached letter regarding facility challenges at mild child touch a school where i am a p.t.a. member. i also sent the letter and the e-mail to two facilities staff at the school district. i didn't receive an acknowledgement from anyone or a response, so i wanted to use this opportunity to make sure that you were in receipt of the letter, and understood the concerns that the parent community has had over the last two school years. we've brought issues to some of your former commissioners, and we have been waiting pretty patiently to have the issues addressed. i have given you a couple of pictures. i am not a facilities person, so i have asked that someone from the school district do a walk-through. this is been a request from the parent community. i have given you some brief illustrations of what i feel are
5:27 am
some really concerning safety hazards, specifically, there is a broken metal piece on a stairwell that has pretty sharp edges all the way across. all of the drains throughout the school -- of the drain covers are not functional, so kids trip a lot. there have been multiple complaints utilizing the system where teachers have complained over and over again about florence and that kids are tripping, and there are safety hazards. there is a road and problems in some of the classes, so we are hoping that someone from the district can come out and look at the facility, and that changes can be made as soon as possible. thank you for your time. >> thank you. let's see, any items withdrawn
5:28 am
because. >> no. >> any items removed by first reading from the board? >> no. >> any item severed from the discussion? >> yes. i would like to pull item 192-1 to s. 11. and 192-12 g. seven. >> thank you. >> we have a motion and a second. >> okay. okay. roll call vote. >> thank you. [roll call] >> six aye. >> okay.
5:29 am
[indiscernible] >> i would just like clarity around the separation given what we were listening to tonight, and if this is the stage where we let go of people, what is the information we are given around why. >> are you talking about the people who spoke, that actually will happen in closed session. >> that is all i wanted to know. >> i just wanted to see if when there was discussion, do we pass it through here, or i guess that is what you are saying, we will go through closed session. >> if it is administrators, that happens in closed session. >> but -- that discussion only
5:30 am
happens with administrators,. >> in closed session, yes. >> okay. >> roll call vote. [roll call] >> i'm sorry, i want to understand what is being put forth. it is unclear to me. >> in the consent calendar commissioners can sever for discussion any of the items. commissioner lopez his average two of them. we discussed them, and now we are voting on them separately. >> okay. yes. [roll call]
5:31 am
>> six aye. >> okay. section d., discussion and vote on the consent calendar resolution for separate consideration. there are none tonight. section e., proposals for action. there are board policies for adoption tonight. very -- they are zero 420-point for two, charter school renewal, 5148.3, preschool and early childhood education, 0450, comprehensive safety plan for a policy 31, 3516, emergency and disaster preparedness plan, student assessing teams, and district and school websites.
5:32 am
all these policies were moved and seconded at a prior meeting. is there a report from rules committee? >> the items were hurried out rules committee and forwarded to the board with a positive recommendation. >> let's see, superintendent, can you call someone to read it into the record? >> general counsel will read them into the record. >> president cook, a point of clarification, are you moving all these items at once, or did you want to read them all separately? >> we are moving them all at once and we will do roll call vote at the end. >> okay. the action tonight is the board approved the following policies. all of which, as you have heard vice president sanchez say or heard at rules committee, and received a positive recommendation.
5:33 am
board policies charter school renewal, preschool early childhood education, board policy comprehensive safety plan , and board policy emergency and disaster preparedness plan. student success teams, and board policy district and school websites. >> commissioner norton? >> thank you. i have a question about the charter school renewal policy. i am glad that we are making sure that the charger partners are going to be complying with changes in the law, but i also wonder, you know, there was an opinion issued by the state attorney general on the brown act, and also compliance with the political format. it occurs to me, i don't know that we require our charter
5:34 am
schools to certify that what -- what their procedures are around the brown act, and also around avoiding conflict of interest as far as a political format. with this policy include that, or what steps are we taking around that? >> this policy could include that, but it is important to remember that the attorney general's position is persuasive, but not the law. we are still waiting to see what the legislature does with those present -- provisions. the school districts have tried to go beyond and to require charters to comply with the brown act, and that has not been successful. we are waiting for a legislative action on that in order to require those types of measures. >> the district has tried to do that since the attorney general's opinion. >> know. not since the attorney general's position.
5:35 am
>> okay. this is something that i really think we need -- i actually would like to -- i will leave it up to board leadership and the superintendent for how to do this, but we should have a conversation about the charter m.o.u. and what we are doing, what we have in them now, what potentially we could, some changes we could make, because i think this is a really important principle, and it is a source -- it has been a source of irritation to me that different levels of schools have not been public schools -- public schools have not been required to comply with the same level of loss. i just want to make sure that we are doing everything we can at the m.o.u. his with our charter partners to make sure that we are trying to keep a level playing field. >> i'm sorry, can i just address that. i just want to correct something i said earlier because apparently tammy wong has
5:36 am
listened to this meeting. thank you, tammy. she is sharing, but we do have some of these provisions. what i would suggest is let us get you a board report on the specific items that you requested, and then you can decide how you want to move the discussion forward. >> great. >> commissioner sanchez? >> the resolution we passed last year on charter school accountability oversight and accountability includes some provisions that we would like the state legislature to pass, including the board for charter schools would have to follow the brown act, which went to the legislature last year, i'm pretty sure, and it was vetoed or never made it out. it was vetoed by the governor. there have been attempts in the past, and now that we have a new governor who is showing willingness to hold charter schools more accountable, i think we want to see that come back and hopefully past. but there's other things that we ask for in that resolution as
5:37 am
well. >> i would just like to understand, i know that san jose has an m.o.u. process where they require chargeable -- chargers that they are approving to follow the brown act and sunshine and those kind of things, and i would like to know , i know that this is constantly shifting, and there's a lot of districts that are doing things that we didn't do ten years ago, because as we are realizing, we need to be more clear, i would just like to be able to unpack that more. i appreciate the fact that maybe varty done that and rules committee, but i would like to know -- maybe you have already done that unit rules committee, but i would like to know more before i vote. >> anyone else? >> are you saying that we are free to vote on this resolution? >> i don't know.
5:38 am
is this locking us in? >> it can always be relented. >> okay, okay. >> roll call vote league his. [roll call] >> six aye. >> we already did section f., public comment. section g., special order of business. number 1 -- appointments to career technical advisory committee. dr matthews? >> the chief academic officer brent stevens will be presenting.
5:39 am
>> good evening, commissioners. we are making a request of the board this evening that the board of education approve the c.d. advisory committee listed nominees for the 2018-2019 school year. >> we have no speakers signed up for this item. any comment? seeing none, roll call vote. >> i move the recommendation. >> second. roll call vote, please. [roll call] >> yes. >> six aye.
5:40 am
>> number 2, proposed plan for the expenditure of funds awarded under the low performing students grant. dr matthews? >> we will have our chief financial officer read -- presenting this item with landon dickey. >> thank you, good evening, commissioners. i am the chief financial officer. i'm joined by landon dickey. the requested action is that the board of education of the san francisco unified school district approves a proposed plan for the expenditure of funds awarded under the low performing students grant. and expenditure plan is also attached as well. >> can you explain a little bit
5:41 am
more about how the eligibility -- so it says, there's numbers about for each pupil that qualifies, and i want to know exactly how -- who those peoples are that would qualify. >> sure. i believe the academic achievement of students in particular schools, and students who identified as low performing on the state english language, arts or meth assessments, and to also do not otherwise receive, are not eligible to receive, or do not count towards receipt of the supplemental grants under the lc s.f. they will receive funding at the rate of $1,976 per eligible people.
5:42 am
those are identified as low performing students, and the block grant is meant to target. >> the grant is about $2 million. >> it is about $1,000,009. it is a one time to be spent over two fiscal years, and there is an additional $15,000 that also comes through the county office of education. >> how much does the grant get to the school site? >> it is incorporated in the expenditure plan. mr dickey could provide some context, -- go ahead. >> so the context here is that we are going to be applying these funds to support the pitch schools, so the 20 school sights that were identified in novembeg
5:43 am
historically low performance for african-american students, or they are being hacked a high achievement gap between african-american students and other racial subgroups. >> so there will be low performing students at other schools that will not get the grant? >> that is correct. >> okay. thank you. >> so is this a reset with the plan, if we approve this grant, or is there discussion around how it will be implemented? >> so there can be discussion about how it's implemented, but we are approaching the deadline, so that is why we have a plan in place right now, already -- it doesn't hit every single low
5:44 am
performing student, but we have a plan in place that we are moving forward to. >> i guess my question is, a lot of schools have been talking about the need for community schools as a model for implementing some of the pitch implementations, and i am wondering, sometimes people think of it as the same thing, so i just want to know, if we are approving this, is there any conversation that we, as a board, can have with the district in ensuring it is done in a community-based model caught with -- in that model of community schools where this partnership with families and staff and community-based organizations? >> absolutely. that is the model we have been using. when schools have come forward with their plans, we asked them to identify the root cause. let me finish please, if you don't mind. happy birthday. [laughter]
5:45 am
>> they will identify the root cause and then their strategies, and then they will come forward with what are the resources they need, and the research they have identified. i had a discussion with the group from community schools, but they were really a group that was -- in one of the things that i said is one of the things we wanted to avoid from previous initiatives around low achieving -- a top-down approach, where we find the solution, and say this is the solution. we wouldn't want to save them macho is their solution unless you came to us and said that, then we would have worked with you towards that. if schools say that this is what they believe is the best way, and absolutely, we will work with them to get the resources. but we don't want to say it has to be community schools, or we are telling you it is community schools.
5:46 am
>> i think there is a specific -- this may be driven from certain members of the school community, but i think this community school model is not necessarily a prescriptive model in what you do. it is -- there is a clear criteria for how you gather information from the community, in that relies on community school coordinators, and it relies on a certain number of gathering input from the community that i don't normally see in schools when they have to submit plans. being someone who has been in the community meetings, and not seeing community members there, we do not do a good job of outreach. that is why m.l.k. is a great model because they are doing good work of involving the communities in whatever plans they have. in approving this, i would like to make sure to have a commitment from the district to truly engage, in that also means
5:47 am
resourcing the folks that do that work, which is a community school program are. it looks different in different schools, but having that person, resources, that capacity for the school to do it with integrity. >> i will just say yes, there's absolutely that commitments. >> maybe at a later date we can talk about what the ongoing, ins and oversight is of the points that is being made. we will ask for questions as they come up. >> can i have a motion and a second? >> second. >> roll call vote, please. [roll call] >> six aye.
5:48 am
>> we are in session h. session i is consent calendar items removed. there are none tonight. section jay, introduction of proposals. i have two speakers for public comments. please make your way to the podium. >> good evening. it has been a long evening. you guys have a big agenda. i will be superquick. it is lovely to see you. those of you i haven't met yet, i'm looking forward to the opportunity. and the executive director of
5:49 am
gateway public schools. we are just about to start today. the charter renewal process --dash we are super excited. this is my 19th year at the gateway, and i can't even remember how many of these charger rentals and authorizations i've done with you all, but i knew a few things for sure, i know that it is always both a rewarding and a challenging process. it is an opportunity for us to look really carefully at what we're doing well as a school, and also where we need to grow. it is an opportunity for us to spend some time together, we are looking forward to that in the time ahead, and it's an opportunity for us to remember that we are all in this work together on behalf of the kids of san francisco. i will be seeing you more soon. i won't take any more time this evening, but thank you for what you do and i will see you.
5:50 am
thank you. >> good evening, again. i will take more then the minute and a half. but to follow up on what the director said, they are part of the san francisco unified school district, so i would like to commend gateway on their parent participation. the real reason i am up here is to speak about policy regarding parent surrogates for special education students. i appreciate, as i've said before, i appreciate the fact we are starting to put policies in place to name a lot of these. thank you so much for the hard work you are all doing. i appreciate that we are using best practices. i would like to challenge you to look at saddleback valley
5:51 am
unified school district version of the same. there is is exceptionally inclusive, their policy flat-out names different laws for advocates, or i'm sorry,, surrogates. a couple fun facts, public agencies must ensure illegally that a surrogate parent is not a district employee, and the state agency must make an assignment of a surrogate within 30 days. two of those are very important safeguards for students. neither one are named in the policy, but if we named it more robustly, and included verbiage from federal law, it very well could be. thank you.
5:52 am
>> number 2, proposal 19212. authorization to grant an alternative to denied the petition for gateway charter school, charter high school and board policies. may i hear a motion and a second on s.b. one and the two board policies? >> so moved. >> second. >> i am referring s.b. one two budget and curriculum committees and board policies to the rules committee. section k., proposals for immediate action. there are none tonight. section l, board member report. vice president sanchez?
5:53 am
>> for rules? >> yes, sorry. >> thank you. i forgot what committee i am on. we reported on most of the items, but a couple were held at -- held up. nonpublic, known secretary and school agency services for special education, and board policy 6146. for, differential graduation and competitions -- competition -- competency standards. >> thank you. >> we met, and we reviewed the state budget update. just kind of an overview, and got -- we looked ahead, and we
5:54 am
moved, what is it called when you don't make a motion to approve or deny? with no recommendation for creative arts charter school. and we also discussed timelines for the committee, and we also discussed potential topics that we might want to discuss more in depth regarding some central office kind of -- learning more about peace, spending, and tss, and specific, if their specific departments that folks are interested in and getting more information about what programs they are spending money on, and specifically, those where curriculum instruction, and within student services, but maybe more specific to just knowing -- to understanding what some of the things that we are doing as a district, but i am also, i would like to encourage
5:55 am
other board members, if there's any specific topics that you would like to put on the agenda, now versus later, please let me know so we can make sure that we are putting that in the timeline. >> commissioner lopez? >> we met for the first time yesterday, and our action item was the petition for creative arts charter, which we moved with a no recommendation, specifically around their language around defiance. we had an update on the assessment committee, and we also had an update on the m.o.u. with sfpd, and there are a number of upcoming meetings coming. around the m.o.u. >> thank you. do we have any board delegates or membership organization reports? any other reports by board members?
5:56 am
okay, we have the calendar of committee meetings, budget and business services will be meeting on wednesday, march 6th at six p.m. the new and improved and incredibly led buildings and grounds of the services committee, chaired by none other than myself. [laughter] >> we will be meeting on monday, february 25th at six p.m. the curriculum and program committee will be meeting on march 11th at six p.m. the rules committee will be meeting on march 4th at five p.m. and an ad hoc mentee on student assignment will be meeting on monday, march 18th at six p.m. and the ad hoc community and labor relations will be meeting on wednesday, february 20th at six p.m. the committee for the school district and city college is
5:57 am
being held until we figure out some other things around a joint committee meeting with the board of supervisors. it is to be determined. section m., other informational items. there are none tonight. section n., memorial adjournment. there is none tonight. we don't have any public comment for a closed session, section oh, closed session of the board will now go into closed session [laughter] >> welcome back. last few minutes of your birthday and we have a read out for the closed session for
5:58 am
february 12, 2019. by a vote of six aye, we approve the contract. we also contribute approved the vote for the intern. issuing notice to one principle that the contract will now be renewed. we will approve the contract for 44 assistant principals. we will approve the contract for 22 program administrators. we will approve the contract of 26 supervisors. we will approve issuing notice that two principal contracts may not be renewed. the board approved issuing
5:59 am
notice that three assistant principal contracts may not be renewed. issuing notice that one supervisor contract may not be renewed. we will approve issuing notice that two program administrator projects may not be approved. approved the issuing notice at six principal contracts will not be renewed. we approved issuing notice that four assistant principal contracts will not be renewed. we approved issuing notice that one supervisor contract will not be renewed. the board approved the release of 11 probationary certificate employees, in the matter of d.c. versus san francisco united school district.
6:00 am
we give the authority of the district to pay up to the stipulated amount. on one matter of anticipated litigation, the gave direction under general counsel. that concludes the meeting tonight. this meeting is adjourned.


info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on