in 2011 to 2012 school year. approves that an application for the roof at the school of the arts, soda be appoints for a code change. >> thank you. i don't have any public speakers signed up for this. any comments from the board? superintendent? no? role call, please? >> because i think this is allowable because it was part of the report and it was brought up by the curriculum committee but we wanted to ask whether we could begin some process to look at our policy related to allowing student who is don't live in san francisco to go to soda and begin with a report, i understand some research has been done already. we don't have to discuss the time. it is probably not appropriate.

but begin by discussion about stricter enforcement of the policy we currently have so that we make sure at the very least that the out of district enrollment is limited to 10% of the students as is our policy. it is not as bad as it used to be. >> could i make a request that you put that on a future agenda? i believe that would be an inappropriate topic. >> thank you. role call, please? [role call vote] >> thank you. while i have you up there, if it is ok with my colleagues, i would like to move up her authorization to grant or deny the renewal of the petition for the charter schools.

we actually -- i checked to see, we were going to try suspend the roles but we didn't agendaize it that way. if we could move that up i would like to have it heard. so we're moving up item q for a first reading. i need a motion and a second, please? >> i'll move. >> thank you. so this is item 116-14 sp 2. >> the reason why i requested that it only going to budget is that because that is the only meeting that we have with the completion of this year, this school year and the petition has to be authorize bid june 30 of this year. it can go to budget and we'll

have a full report over the educational program which is already complete for a meeting on the 28th. >> ok. so it is not referring to curriculum. >> i don't think there is really any reason but if there is going to be the matrix that you would have prepared for curriculum, if you wanted to distribute that to the board then we could vote on it. >> it was read differently here. it will get referred to budget. >> i just wanted to mention that we're having an augmented budget committee meeting next tuesday on the 17th. >> and then we'll come back on the next board meeting. >> the 21st. and then it will come back to our meeting in time for approval. ok? >> thank you. the next item is we already moved up -- we already did the

pack members. i need a motion and a second for the merging of one of these middle school communities in a k-8 school department of ed county distribute school. thank you -- district school. >> you want to read it into the record. >> good evening. superintendent -- we're here presenting this requested action as an official next step towards the merger of the elementary school. this is continued transition steps that have been continuing over the last several months towards opening school year 2011-2012. i'm here with kevin who helps lead and implement our plan to frept action. >> good evening commissioners. -- present the action. >> with your mission, i would

read the subject of the requested action. merging the middle school and horaceman school. the requested action is that the board of education that the san francisco unified school district approves that applications be submitted for the elimination of the buena vista c.d.s. code and to reflect the merging of the middle school into a k-8 school. i would add because we didn't put it here yet if we could to be referred to as horace mannk-8 school. it would not make sense to call it a middle school any longer. they are expecting it to still be horace mann because that is the c.d.s. code. >> ok. i don't think that decision has been made with the community. just for the application you mean?

>> right. i'm saying the community understands right now that horace mann that, the name was not going to change now. that they have an opportunity to probably change that in the future. that's what the school understands now. >> let's just be really clear about that. so you guys had that conversation with both communities and they will have the opportunity to change the name but just in terms of how we're applying and moving forward. it would not make sense -- we're using the c.d.s. code in other words. >> is that because over the state funding? ok. so it is either the name or no money? so at this point, i think we're using the state code. commissioner norton. the question i have is about the excel after school programs and

i was very concerned to learn that because we are merging two codes into one that now we're going to lose half of our afterschool funding for those sites. is that resolved yet? >> i don't think we know how much we're going to lose. what is going to happen is that it is going to be one school so it will not get two schools allocations but it may be larger because it is a larger school but we don't have a determination of what it is going to be. that was one early tradeoff with you we knew would happen. we wanted to make sure all 600 students were able to benefit. that's an we have been very conscious of. it is an issue we discussed with the joint schoolside councils from the two schools. >> i have heard from members of community. they are very worried about that

whether there will still be afterschool options at the new site. >> absolutely. we're looking at what allowable contributions we can make to the program to help address that. >> i'm a little concerned about the name issue. that has been raised to me. i don't -- could we call it buena vista/horace mann? they don't want to get rid of the -- if they haven't agreed to that, could we just put both names so that nobody is going to jump up and down and say oh, but you already done this without discussing it with us. >> i don't know the answer to that. in all the conversations we have had everyone assumed that because it is horace mann because we're keeping the c.d.s.

code that it would still be horace mann. sfernl the commissioners can authorize the name change, we can enter that. >> yeah, we're doing a change. we're applying for a change. why can't we do that? we're kind of neutral on what the name will be. then they get to decide. >> it sounds like we needed to do that in order to maintain the funding piece. is there a way we can put in paren just so that buena vista is included in the language is what commissioner wynn is talking about. >> the working title has been buena vista/horace mannk-8. we knew we would have this discussion. but for the purposes of submitting this c.d.s., it is

just the code. there is a space in state application whatever name the board deems is appropriate at this point. >> i ask personally i think that once the two communities merge that is the time to speak about the name change, quite frankly. we have heard from parents. it doesn't make sense that the school side council then should make the decision. >> we had both names. they can choose whatever they want. nobody is going to say you already did it by taking out our name. >> so can we just figure out what is appropriate for the application so we don't jeopardize our funding and we ensure that all of that is in place and then if we're able to include buena vista in there in some capacity because i think it is an important acknowledgment for the community and now if

we're not able to do that for legal reason or for application reason or whatever it is, you just have to be really clear with the community that this is just for the application and we're using the code for these purposes only and the opportunity to decide on the name will be chosen by the schoolside council once the school is fully functioning and up and running. >> the only reason this has come up at all is because we realized late that not only does it say horace mann and the full name is horace mann middle school. that doesn't make sense. we should say k-8 school. we're open to the commissioners making a different decision. >> i would like to suggest that we put the name buena vista in the application. i think as long as we keep

horace mann. >> ok. we'll work on that. we hear what you're saying. any comments from the board? >> i would support this for the application submission purposes but i want to make sure by the enrollment fair there is some clarity on this because that name with cause tremendous confusion about families that are unaware of the merger and choose a school based on a name that is no longer relevant. the website, the enrollment materials really need to get this right. having experienced name change when j.v.b. west went to rosa parks. it created so much confusion. i hope we can avoid that. >> if you can make sure we have a timeline about that. >> i just want to say i concur actually it is very confusing. i'm confused about it. >> ok. if there is no further comment business the board, role call please.

>> i have your card to speak about merging schools. thank you. >> good evening again. i rise to speak because of my concern about the funding. i'm glad that you think that if you change the name or change the composition that you'll be able to continue getting money but i'm worried about the quality of education investment act money. qeia money. it is designated for a particular school. we made the grant. we received the money. we are in this middle of the process and i want to know if staff has investigated this fully because i think that it would be a shame to because of a name change or a code change or a c.d.s. change to put that money in jeopardy. thank you. >> there have been extensive

discussions about all the different funding sources that would be impacted. currently our understanding is -- the current understanding is that the school will likely keep qeia but it is not 100% sure. so we don't have i think a final determination on that but our anticipation is that they will and i should also say that the school has so far budgeted only under scenario b because it was the joints communities only did a budget under scenario b. they will have an additional amount of money to work into their budgets and have been able to keep their entire staff for both schools as part of the funding that is existing under scenario b. just as additional information. >> so when will we find out about qeia? >> i'm not sure. we're under the term tation now

that we will have it. -- interpretation now that we will have it. dollar couple of people who have -- there are a couple of people who have suggested they have a different interpretation. i think we need to find out from the state that when we make the c.d.s. code change. >> but that is not getting it. is it because the c.d.s. code change? would it be -- >> we can't merge the code. we certainly won't have the money if we chose the buena vista community. we would only have an opportunity to get it if we keep the manch nn code which is what we're proposing to do. i think the commissioner has already made a prior decision they want the this merger to occur. >> i can see why the joint committee didn't make a fuss about it. ok. >> i do need clarification about

we will need to know what to put into the name slot to be referred to as because i do think we were expecting to keep horace mann but didn't think about the fact. we need to change that to k-8. if you want us to do more than that, we will need to know. >> it sounds like the k-8 piece is fine with everyone. where is the bane vista piece? if you're able to put this that in without jeopardizing any of the funding, if you're able to put that in then we would like to see that in. if it creates any kind of consequence, particularly around the funding then you need to be very explicit with the community about why we're doing it the way we're doing it. >> i just wanted to make sure i deny know if the actual name change has to be the same in the resolution support, the document

that we turn in. that's where i was coming from. >> i have to review the rules. i'm not familiar with the county rules of the state. generally we have to provide the name of the school. i have -- to review the rules. >> may i make a suggestion. it is not that complicated. horaceman/a.k.a. buena vista. >> ok. >> let's be really clear again, though, as long as it doesn't create any tensions or jeopardize the application. ok. >> as chair of the budget i think it is my duty to ask about the cost of the move. it was not kicked to budget so i don't know.

i'm just wondering what the cost of the move is and where we're getting the funds to actually move. thank you. >> i'm going to let our deputy superintendent speak to that. it is part of numerous campus moves. there are i believe four different relocations that are taking place. this is one of the four and there is a -- an estimate for the cost of all of them together. i don't believe that it is the numbers i've seen are move by move or -- although that could be done too. i think the total cost estimate and rita can help me too is about $480,000. is that correct? $485,000 for the four moves together. and the majority of those costs are funded by the unrestricted

general fund and to the extent possible some of those costs are being paid for by capital facilities funds. if commissioners have other questions -- >> i just want to say that qeia is one of the things questioned in the budget. there is a possibility that it will be funded. bizarre as it is to stop in the middle of a funding section. we should just be aware of it. >> commissioner maufas? commissioner maufas: will a more detailed discussion come to budget with the other three moves? because that just seems that it is substantive enough that it should be in the budget discussion.

all of that can happen. all the -- the budget committee and as they trickle forward to the board. we have already been discussed the butt and so we -- budget and we know and wouldn't have to -- i really do want to know more. but i'm not prepared to ask as many questions as i do have about the move as i would ask in the allotted slot on the budget agenda. because i just don't have a clue about that. the move and the cost and all the other questions i would ask. >> thank you. >> so this -- we're just talking about the code change. role call? >> thank you. [role call vote]

>> thank you both. i now call the public hearing to hear public testimony on the receipt of funds for the state categorical program. superintendent, do you want to explain why this public hearing is taking place? >> do you want to come up here? we do this every year just so that you know for the record. >> good evening. i can read quickly the public hearing document. the subject is that the board of education of the san francisco unified school district holds a public hearing to hear public testimony on the receipt of funds for state programs. the enacted state budget chapter 12 is enacted trailer bill. authorizes school districts to

use funding received in the state for tier 3 programs to stand permitted under federal law. the ability to use funds is authorized for five years. 2009 to 2013 by education code. it requires that a condition of receipt of the funds the governing board of the school district or board of the county office or education as appropriate at a regularly scheduled open hearing shall take testimony and disapprove the -- used for funding and explicit for each of the budget items the purposes for which the funds will be used. it reduced funding for education by 8.8 billion. the flexibility of use fund for tier 3 programs for any educational programs as deem

necessary and permitted by law. it allows the public to come tonight and give testimony of what they feel about the tier 3 program and what they would like to do. >> thank you. i only have one speaker signed up. don? >> thank you. in 2009, the legislature effectively ended tier 3 program. since then, the vast majority of districts all over california have been given fubbed funding to support essential services for their general election perhaps but here at ump sfd we

continue the -- usfd we continue to use the bulk of -- that was last year's number. i'm not sure about this year to support what are effectively canceled programs and we simultaneously complain about the lack of state funding. if you yuse choose not to flex tier 3 whose fault there there is a thrs not enough funding for school sites? i wanted to site a a recommendation releas leased in may of this year. entitled california's school funding flexibility recommendation number one. the first challenge is equity. we recommend the state set funding rates. if it continues and the funds within it retains the general purpose designation then there is no longer the compelling rational for differences for people funning it across

districts. districts are no longer required to provide these services. the requirement is the equalizeation of general purpose revenues. since flex item funds no longer support prior programs, it is no longer rational to prevents or exclude any schools or districts from receiving this funding equalizing funding rates addresses this inequality. differences in rates among districts of the same type of diminished in 2009-2010 the statewide range was $22 per pupil. the large variation in flex item funds -- may i? the flex item funds among districts produces in turn large variation of funds and per pupil

funding the statewide range increases from $22 per pupil to $696 per pupil in total general purpose revenue and it is even larger. so without attention to this use issue, the inequality will continue. i just want to comment that the vast majority of districts have been using this flex items to distribute funding on a per pupil basis in the spirit of -- and for the purpose of maintaining services. >> thank you. >> ok. >> fufment >> are you going to speak on this or the budget? >> i'm supposed to do both. i'm sorry. >> ok. >> i'm from -- for children in youth. this is kind of i want to show a couple of things. one i've been passing this out. i'm sorry we don't have the

capacity to make a whole bunch overp copies but there is a report that the institute or corporation did across the state about what the impact is sweeping the programs and it is very interesting because what they concluded was that it actually supports the -- so it comes as no shock that san francisco is actually widening its achievement gap. i want to call that to your attention. you created a strategic plan in this district that says this is what your goal is about. closing that achievement gap. we also talk about another gap called the opportunity gap meaning how much opportunity do students across our districts have? a lot of what we have been talking about meaning it has been about what are the strategies that you're using and it seeps really sad that -- when you had the opportunity to address the achievement gap and

look at how we're spending these program funding we don't really have any end result. so what have we spent that money on last year? has it gone to keeping teachers in the classroom or keeping programs in the academic schools? i'm really unclear as a community member what did that chunk of money go to spending? why did we sweep it? when is it actually being done? you have a legal responsibility to make that public. this type of report it would be helpful to say because there is nowhere in the district process available to say we spent this money on xy and z. if you can please do that process and if you can understand how we have widened our gap and how we have a wider gap than we did even four years ago, that would be really helpful because that information is not publicly available. >> thank you. >> i'll leave a copy. >> thank you.

>> there are questions from the board. >> i don't believe -- i think i've been through -- anyway, the last couple of budget meetings. we have had a fair amount of discussion about what money we were going to flex when tier 3 first came in. i don't know that we have had that this year so i kind of don't, all i have -- no materials have been prepared for this hearing. as i gather. what we is a underage the budget book that tells us the tier 3 programs, page 54 and the -- and the amounts of money that we're going to flex and i think the first thing that we need to say is that we are -- our proposal with which i think i concur but i want to know what it is being spent on is that t