[roll call] >> i had a no on one of the items, k12. >> thank you, commissioner. >> next our consent calendar resolutions that were severed for discussion. we have two tonight, k1 and k14. k1 has been polled by

commissioner wynns. we had a discussion about this on our last meeting at the 14th. i do not know if there are different questions tonight. you free to ask them. -- feel free to ask them. plan. what i got actually was a spread sheet that lists a small number of straightively approved contracts only, which total $116,150. i don't think that is our professional development resources, nor is there anything that refers to any strategy related to this.

this is inadequate as best, and i am still unprepared for support -- unprepared to support this for the same reasons as two weeks ago. >> i want to echo commissioner wynns comes and make an additional comment. we are paying for half of this with unrestricted funds. we had someone here begging for $46,000 to restore their literacy program. i really question whether we are doing -- whether we are implementing this contract in any kind of strategic way. my understanding is that we kind of went to schools and offered this to them last year, that there wasn't any sort of process, or we weren't purposesful about which schools we gave this training to and which ones we did not. we have a successful school in

mosconi that is successfully closing the achievement gap, serving their population and begging to maintain the program. i wonder about doing it this way because it doesn't feel purposesful or strategic to me. >> mr. sander son, maybe you can explain in some of the questions here that have been put before you. also, is there an evaluation mechanism for this program that we can give feedback to that i would like to hear about? i think that would answer quite a few questions that folks have. i am interested in understanding what that looks like. i do know that we had school site staff come before us at public comment a few meetings ago and speak to how much they appreciated this particular

work that was happening in professional development at their schools. i think i would like to hear from you. >> there is an internal and external evaluation of this. the internal evaluation is done by research planning and accountability. you got the summary of that evaluation in a report that i gave you about three weeks ago in a white notebook. i have the full evaluation. the national urban alliance does their own evaluation. they do a mid-year and an end of year evaluation. so there are actually two evaluations done on it, one internal and one external. >> will he be able to see the other documents once completed? >> sure. i can send you the full evaluation -- the evaluation from n.u.a. from the end of the year last year, and i can send you the complete evaluation here in may, who is from

research accountability, who is here tonight. she actually is the evaluator that vaulted the program last year. >> thank you. i would like that information. >> i will be glad to send it to you. >> mr. sander of son, on the schools that volunteer participate, there were improvements in every one of those schools, is that correct? no? >> not every single one, and i will pull the list. i will have to reach back and get it out of my bag. no, there were not improvements in every single one of them. i'm looking here. one, two, three, four, five -- seven of the 10 had improvements in some area. >> can you tell me what the three were that did not? >> the three that had no improvements at all were glen

park, and sheridan, and washington. >> and washington? >> yes. >> and then willie brown will continue to participate as we are phasing them out, or who is that working? >> yes, they are going to continue to participate this year as we are phasing them out. >> all right. >> and they had growth in e.l.a. and mathematics last year. >> would you attribute the growth of the other seven to this programming? >> i can say that i believe it had a significant impact on the growth in those schools. i think probably -- the one that is most impressive is that mid valley middle school had growth, and 100% of their faculty participated in this program. that is significant when you can get 100%.

the national urban alliance recommends that, at best, the third of a faculty the first year, and this one had 100%. they saw in their mathematics a 9.3, an increase by 9.3. >> and if we chose not to pay this contract at this rate, what other support do we have to give to provide to these schools? is there other professional development that they would be able to take advantage of? >> we would have to come back with another contract then. we would have to work with the school, because most of these schools have written this in their strategic plan for the coming year and what their plans were. for example, this school have five half days where they had already planned for the national urban alliance professional development. so we would have to go into the

school and see what their needs are and then develop a plan with them and then come back with another resolution or provide something in-house. >> i'm only asking this because six of the 10 schools i have spoken to have really appreciated what n.u.a. has been providing and are happy with it. if we didn't do it, i was curious what we would do in lieu of, and we don't have a plan for that? >> no. >> thank you. >> just in the future, public comment comes at item f. >> i don't want to comment on that. i know i got in too late. what i wanted to ask is a point of parliamentary procedure. this item was raised at the last meeting and failed. does your procedure allow it to be brought back at a subsequent meeting without a super majority?

>> thank you. ms. medina? >> i don't believe we took a final vote the last time. my recollection was that we asked for the matter to be -- >> we took a vote. >> the restrictions on bringing the policy or policies are not specific to k resolutions and contracts. >> role call. >> thank you, commissioner. roll call vote taken. >> five ayes. >> thank you. >> our next severed item is k-14. commissioner norton?

>> i wanted to just raise really a thought, make a comment about this, which is that it seems so often in our special ed, the contracts are always for how to restrain students, and it makes me sad because i would love to see -- we just had an audit, and we have seen information about so many problems in special ed, and i would like to see us do some more instructional p.d. that is not related to restrain students. >> commissioner norton and commissioners and administration. i concur with you. what is important about this resolution is that for a small number of children, as part of their specially designed instruction, part of their education plan, there may be times when exclusion or restraint is used in an emergency.

it is important for staff to be trained so that children and staff are not hurt in the process. it is not a part of special ed that we want to expand, but i want to be clear that the bulk of this training is actually about prevention and about not letting situations escalate so essentially star are getting trained on how to proactively manage behaviors, and a good 75% of the training is focusing on that. only a small portion of the training is focused on restraint. in the report that we had from the auditors, it is clear that professional development has to become priority for special education staff and all of our staff on how to help children and youth with disabilities have a better outcome. >> i absolutely support us being able to be safe, make our

staff safe and keep our students safe, and i am going to support the resolution. but i appreciate your commitment to improving p.d. for special ed. >> thank you for pulling this. when i read through it, i also had a concern. 20 years ago i used to work at an orphanage for mentally, physically, sexually and other abused children. some of them were emotionally abused. what i would like to request is further information about this -- about what this professional

development is going to look like. i did get that it is really a proactive step to reduce the potential of having to restrain , understanding also that in the rarest cases that may be necessary to protect students and our staff. i would love to know more to better understand how far we have come from what i recall more than 0 years ago -- more than 20 years ago. again you, commissioner norton, for pulling that. i was going to inquireoff line, but i am beyond curious to what we are doing today. >> commissioner maufas, i hear you saying you would like to hear more about what the training is about, and maybe you would like to have an

estimate of how frequently restraint happens? >> yes, please. >> i would be happy to get that information. i, like you, can remember to the day the last student that i restrained. it should be only used in extreme cases of safety and emergencies. i really understand what you are saying. thank you. >> role call, please. >> role call vote taken. >> seven ayes. >> thank you. >> moving on to item q, support proposals for a first reing. none. board members proposals first

reading. there was one. there was a request for suspension of the rules to hear this item. >> a motion for a suspension. >> moved. >> second. >> role call. role call vote taken. >> six ayes. >> thank you. may we have a motion and second for a formal introduction of the resolution. >> so moved. >> second. >> thank you. may we have a reading? commissioner fewer would you like to read it? >> actually, would you mind reading that, please? >> thank you. this is actually a resolution in support of proposition d which is on the ballot for this november 2, 2010. it is a ballot measure allowing immigrant parents to vote in just the san francisco school

board election and is a charter amendment. i know that we collectively wrote a ballot argument in favor, but it would be a nice gesture for us to publicly support this resolution as a body. this resolution was unanimously supported in november of 2004 by the board of education then, and we are bring it back, and hopefully it will pass this time. i will read an abbreviated version of this. whereas citizensship has not always been required for the right to vote in the united states, and for 150 year period, imcould vote in 22 states and territories -- allowed immigrants to vote and hold political offices. in the first three decades of the 20th century until the anti-immigrant backlash following world war 1. cities and towns in illinois and new york have allowed

immigrants to vote. before mayor michael bloomberg dissolved the citizens council. whereas the supreme court has repeatedly said that citizenship is not a requirement to vote and the california constitution protects the rights to vote but does not exclude immigrants from voting. and authorizes charter cities such as san francisco to elect school board meetings. it is essential that we expand parental involvement in our schools since participation is a key element in improving schools. whereas immigrants who want to become citizens face challenges, waiting an average of 10 years to go through the process to become citizens, whereas the waiting time for many non-citizen parents lack

the duration of children in schools. household in the u.s. pay $133 billion in taxes to federal, state and local government from property tax. it is estimated that one out of three children in scrant public schools has an imgrant parent and whereas a super majority of the board of supervisors support the proposals for parents and guardians of students to participate in the vote. therefore be it revolved that the board of education supports the november 2010 charter amendment to allow non-citizen guardians with students in the district to vote in board of educational actions. the board of education is committed to maintaining and enhancing high level of participation by all eligible voters and opposes any

implementation of prop d that would separate them from regular boards. it calls on the board of supervisors to implement prop d should it pass in november without removing school board elections from general elections and ballots. the board of education expects the board of supervisors to include any and all possible safeguard preventing the use of noncitizens information in a manner that could jeopardize their status and apply for citizenship. if it is passed by the voters and found to be constitutional. the board of education would consider futures merchandise to allow all citizens to vote in future elections. i have no public speakers for this item. any comments -- i didn't get a

card, but you can speak. >> again, dennis kelly, united educators of san francisco. we are ballot argument folks on this. we are putting money behind this, and it is really because what changes a school is the participation of the parents. if immigrant parents, and these are legal immigrant parents. people come up to us and say this is about illegal immigrants. it is not. it is people who are legally here in the country but have not yet received their citizenship papers. if we cannot allow their participation in the schools in this way, we freeze them out. we slam the door on them and tell them that we are not interested in them. we cannot do that. for the schools to be successful, the schools need the participation of the parents.

i think the figure used in your resolution refers to possible 30% of the parents. a large number of the parents are going to fall into this category. we need to find a way to bring them in, make it easy and comfortable for them to participate in what is going on in the schools and make the schools better for their children. >> mr. kelly did submit a card. thank you for saving paper. any other comments from the public. commissioner maufas? >> thank you, president kim for bringing this resolution forward. i would like to respectfully request to be added. thank you very much. >> i want to thank both of you -- both president kim and commissioner fewer for bringing

this resolution to support the proposition d on the ballot in november. this is totally consistent with our parent engagement resolution to get parents involved, and we all know that the more they are involved with their community, their schools and so forth, then we will get better results. if we are going to believe in democracy, then we need as many people participating as possible. it is not just the parents that will be involved, but their children will also see they are involved so they will respect the process we have in our society. thank you again, and i am fully supportive of this. we are adding everybody's name? thank you. >> i also think it is so

important that all of our stakeholders actually have a voice in who represents them on the board of education. that in itself is profound enough for me to support this, too. >> thank you. actually, i think commissioner wynns was the only one that was here that voted on almost this exact same language of the resolution in 2004. i actually almost listed most of that resolution, and i updated it only minorly. we can thank of thursday in 2004. any other comments? >> i was just wondering. do immigrant parents get to like go on pac? well, then yeah, i agree.

this resolution would be really good because it does help with parent participation. like with parent participation, it would help like connect the schools with the families and communities, and that would be really good for students. >> i just wanted to say that i think it is interesting in a very positive way that this issue about engaging our immigrant citizens in the democratic process always starts with school issues, as it should in my opinion. when this was on the ballot before, it did not pass, sadly. i particularly hope that we actually -- the question of democratic participation for our immigrant residents is

really -- shouldn't only be about school issues or only about the school board, but because of the importance of the public school system to the development of american democracy, i think it is only appropriate that it begins that way. >> and i will just add that i think everyone here supported this in 2004 and are supporting it again. we definitely urge our parents who can vote to please vote for this measure so that all of our families can participate in the leadership for the board of education. i know that i think it is important that all of us be elected by all the parents and guardians that we serve. i am excited that this is on the ballot again. i think that we have -- it looks good, and he encourage folks to come out and volunteer on the week ebbeds to help

precinct walk-on this. role call, please. >> i am adding all the board member names. >> yes. >> role call vote taken. >> seven yithe. >> thank you. at this time we are moving up to the board members report. i am going to move it up as a whole. vice president mendoza. >> thank you. we had a very long meeting on september 21st for two very big issues for our district. the first was the special ed redesign. we had a full report from the findings of our auditor, the special ed collaborative, and they gave us the full low-down

on some of the challenges we have in the school district, which is going to be a great framework for us to work from. and then we did a -- let me just go back a little bit. we had some community presentations as well to share that report publicly. then we had a teacher housing report, and it was just to talk a little bit about two properties in particular that we have that are surplus properties. that was 1155-page street and 1950 mission street and bringing the school board up to speed on some of the thoughts we had as a committee from buildings and grounds on what we could do with the property. the next buildings and grounds meeting will be on october 25, where we will further the conversation. >> thank you. >> our next report is from the

ad hoc city college committee meeting. >> i am going to list the assistance from commissioner yee and norton if she can recall because i had to exit that meeting early. we did have an update presentation from the gateway to college program, which is now at the ocean campus at city college. i think that was actually a good move. it is actually at their new building. they just had a ribbon-cutting ceremony on friday. all of the students are happy to be in the new building at city college, and they have a new interim director, but they will have a new director in a new reports. i will report also when they obtain a new permanent director of that program. and if i may inquire, because i

left right after that presentation, what they experienced for the rest of the meeting. >> so basically they had three other topics. they had an information item, one was an update on the issue of noncitizen student fees. basically they were saying that in terms of the reason rollment fees, they cover all that. and the purpose of this is to make it as inexpensive to students as possible. but for nonresidence -- nonresidents, the staff were saying they had to charge tuition fees if they were not a resident. one of the people from the city college board was raising questions on whether that is true or no, because he is a lawyer. he asked the city college