my other two sons, they remain at [inaudible] elementary school next year and as a working mom i find it almost impossible to take three of them to two different school at the same time in the morning so i really hope the district will consider my case and get me out of this difficult situation. thank you. >> thank you very much. next speaker please. >> hello, my name [inaudible]

good evening, my name is irene and my daughter's name is isabella hebert.

from home to the school. or allow my daughter to take a school bus to alamo elementary school so that -- and then from there then she can be kind of, like, a go to cis from alamo

school bus. so i hope that you can help me to solve this problem. thank you. >> thank you very much. mr. steel, would you mind taking down their information and we can have education placement follow up with them? thank you very much. general comments is now closed. we will now resume back to our regular agenda to item 8, and this has been moved and seconded on june 10. this is the fiscal year 2014, 2015 local control and accountability plan for the san francisco county office of

education and the san francisco unified school district. may i have a report from the committee as a whole from commission erer er murase. >> the committee as a whole met on june 17. we had extensive discussion about the revised version of the local control and accountability plan and commissioners gave feedback on the fiscal year 2014, 2015 recommended budget. >> thank you very much. superintendent, would you please introduce your designee to read the recommendation. >> i'd like to ask the [inaudible] to take it from here. >> thank you superintendent and commissioners, i will just read the requested action. so this is superintendent's

proposal 146-10 sti, fiscal year 2014, local control and accountability plan for the san francisco county office of education and the san francisco unified school district and the requested action is that the board of education approves the local control and account blt plan, lcap for the san francisco office of administration and the school district, covering fy 14, 15 through fy 16, 17 subject to annual updates. we have some speaker cards signed up for public speakers. please line up to the podium please, and you have two minutes eechl. each. josh davidson, hi again. [inaudible]. anyway, hope i didn't butcher your name. hi josh, you have two minutes.

>> hi. so i'm just davidson, i work for the early education department in the kitchen. i'm a member of seiu and i'm here representing close the gap, which is a coalition of labor and community groups which is really around assisted capability initiatives. in the interest of aligning myself with restorative practices, rather than giving the scolding remarks i've written down here, i'm going to try and model the behavior i'd like to reenforce and encourage. so we're really glad that the updated lcap that is available tonight included the appendix a that was left out of previous drafts. and we appreciate that some additional information about community input has been included in that report. we think this is a real area of growth for the district.

we think that it's important to do more in this -- sorry, i'm used to be scolding. so this is a different attack for me. let me try this a different way. we think there's sort of two existing visions of lcap from our perspective. one is an idea that the community and parents and students and workers can organize around ways to make the district better for students, particularly of color and underserved. in the alternative it seems like there's a vision of lcap as an -- okay. we believe that there's an alternative vision of lcap where it's just another set of forms that the state require bs

s be filled out like the state established budget forms and we've heard a number of times -- i'll take my five seconds of music, if you don't mind. we've heard a number of times [inaudible] constrains the thinking and the way we can present the information about accountability to the community. and i feel like that's really -- if it 's really the problem with the forms, then maybe we should solve the l cap problem the way we solved the budget form. maybe similarly for the l cap we could provide additional useful information to the community. the budget book has gotten so much better over the past few years, i think we can do better with l cap too. >> thank you for that approach. >> good evening. i'm susan solman, i would like to echo what brother josh

davidson had to say and just add a couple more comments. it is nice to see there was an appendix a with information, and at this time unlike last week it still looks a little thin. it doesn't -- i'm going back to what commissioner haney said earlier about teachers, educators asking how are things going to be different at the school sites and it's not evident in appendix a, which is about the supplemental grants. there should be a description of how the services provided are the most effective use of funds. what i see in appendix a is a list of a lot of things with money attached to them, so having a list of those things

would be very helpful and would help make the a in l cap more easier to do, more accountable to the stakeholders. thank you. >> good evening commissioners and superintendent, i'm sarah, and i'm from public council and i'm here on behalf of [inaudible] whom you all know and is very sick tonight. i want to talk regarding the resolution and the l cap. i think the resolution needs more funding to actually make real changes and improvements for school climate and i want to support what commissioner fewer said regarding the office discipline referral data being horribly unacceptable and finding a way to improve it so

therefore we're asking for a million dollars for professional development, training, school site coaches and follow up training for the 13 schools that seem to be struggling with office discipline referrals, very high ones. and so that's a way to really reduce the disproportionalty, the suspension rates and since all of you supported the resolution, i think that this is, you know -- we think this is the best use of that money so we definitely support what commissioner haney and commissioner fewer said earlier. and then regarding the current plan for implementation, i think that plan needs to be more detailed and more intentional about reducing disproportionalty and should include the metrics from the resolution so the public can see how the school climate is being improved and how the

resolution and l cap are actually linked. and then finally we do appreciate that you added the a pen appendix and like the previous speaker said, they need to have more detail regarding the school sites. that's all. thank you. >> we're also part of close the gap coalition. i know other coalman staff have been here during the last meeting to talk about some of the frustration around lack of transparency around the l cap. rerealize this is the first time it's rolling out. we're part of a statewide alliance and we know there's been frustrations around l cap roll out at multiple districts and that's the first time we're doing this. that being said, it sountdz like san francisco has actually been the public hear has experienced the least amount of information in terms of drafts

that have come out, so i want a name that's been frustrating and we look forward to that shifting in the future. in terms of the solutions and suspensions resolution, i within the to [inaudible] i know we talked about coming to the curriculum committee in august with more details. we absolutely support that, as well as different metrics around office referrals and, like, arrest data being included in the l cap field is really critical. we've heard a lot of school sites this they are disprate for additional support. i have a friend who's assistant principal in the middle district who is really supportive of rpi and is excited about it and is rolling out in a way that's [inaudible] and that we don't have the support to, like, make the culture shift happen. and so i think, you know, folks

have talked about school sites. coaches and, you know, increasing professional development and training and all those things and there's not additional resources in the budget towards that end and that feels really critical. sarah talks about additional resources in $1 million towards that end. we know the budget is being passed tonight, but we feel this is critical that this conversation and those resources be prioritized. thank you. >> okay. i think we got a late card. i have one speaker here, louis [inaudible]. you have two minutes and please say your name into the microphone. >> good evening, my name is

gloria laura navez. and i'm here speaking for [inaudible]. on behalf of the [inaudible] group we thank you for taking the time to listen to our questions and answering them also. now we're just waiting for you to implement those plans. the [inaudible] also that we're here really to work with you, shoulder to shoulder for a common will for all of us. thanks for your time. >> thank you. okay. that's end of public comment

and any comments from the board or superintendent? oh, deputy superintendent. >> president fewer and commissioners, if you could just refer your attention to one additional document that has also been made available for the members of the public. so last tuesday at the committee of the whole -- i think -- maybe it was the first readsing. i'm getting my meetings a little bit mixed up, but the parent advisory council did provide some additional feedback at one of the recent meetings that the board held to the l cap and we did provide some -- both a recap of the questions that they asked and

some responses on the part of the district staff so i just wanted to make sure that commissioners saw that as well as members of the public. and one substantive general piece of feedback that they both provided, both the pac and the [inaudible] was the request that given that this is the first attempt at putting an l cap together and therefore, this will -- the up coming year will be the first attempt to monitor the implementation of the l can, cap, as well as to improve the l cap in the annual updates and subsequent versions of the l cap, they both recommended and requested that there be formed an advisory committee or a task force or working group, they use slightly different language in the recommendations, but the concept is there would be a group of some sort composed of district staff, as well as

members from the two bodies and perhaps other community organizations as well, to, as i said, review the plans, implementation to make recommendations and inform improvements to future plans. we think that's a very good idea and that's referenced in this document as well, both in their questions and feedback and in our responses. so in a way, that's sort of a general direction to address the -- a lot of the feedback that was provided both this evening and at several of the prior meetings, just to keep at it. just wanted to make sure you had that. >> commissioner wynns. >> thank you. i want to thank everybody, all the staff that worked on this. it's a big thing. and also all the community groups and individuals that participated in the community

meetings and in the drawing up recommendations. this is -- we're trying to learn how to do something significantly different and it's taking time, i understand that. but i particularly wanted to comment on the recommendation that we have a task force, which i think is a great idea. i'm totally supportive of that. what i wanted to talk about for a minute is we need to think of this as a continuous process so i would really like to have that -- that one of the documents we get as a followup would be something that sort of summarizes the recommendations that were made, not so much -- and actually, i know it's going to sound terrible, but i'd like them to be summarized and listed for us like costs.

what i mean is we have the document that gives us the recommendations, we've gotten documents from the dlac and various groups, and those are important, but we have those so we can discuss and comment on them. a lot of -- i think we need to be able to include them in our discussions and in our planning. a lot of them are general. we want more attention on this, we want more attention on that. usually my -- with rare exceptions, it seems to me the same things that we want to put more focus on, so there's a lot of agreement there, which i think will help us in our planning for the coming years. but i think that we need to think of the work that was done this spring as kind of the beginning of the budget discussion for '15, '16. that doesn't mean that we have haven't incorporated what we can, pretty much, in this budget, and i understand

perfectly how the community organizations don't think, they would just like to do what they said we need to do those things. we'd probably like to do them too. remember the lcff is a multiyear transition period to getting to what we hope will be significantly more money. i'd like us to just -- i'm trying to think about that myself. if we look at a recommendation that says put a million dollars into these things, what would we get for that, how is it aligned where our goals, i think that will help us in our discussion. i think what i'm hoping we'll do with the formation of this task force is to -- in the coming months, to actually put in place what would be a continuous process so that we don't so much think of this as oh, we're going to have a group of people that are going to

critique what they themselves and what we did this year, and then that'll get done and we'll start next year. i want us to be clear, as i am, and i hope we all agree with that, and i think we do, that what we're doing now is taking the enput we got this year, we will continue that so this it deepens and become more responsive and helpful to us for the coming years, but one of the things that has occurred to me this year during this process is that we actually ourselves have to look toward the budgets of the coming years more than we have in the past. all this time that i've been on the board, you know, we think, okay, we get the budget done and then we wait until january when the governor's next budget comes out to think about the budget in the subsequent years. i hope we won't do that, that

we'll be thinking about that starting now, we'll think of the budget process as something we have an obligation to look at all the time. and that will mean, for instance, i mean, as we always have, butt anticipate that there'll be amendments, changes we'll have to do with our negotiations. i just wanted to thank everybody, to say that i think the process has been good for a first try and that i am urging us not to think of this as something we do in isolation year by year, but something that changes the way we talked about the way we spend money, but we do it as part of our conversation all the time. >> i want to thank everybody that was involved in this, the

hundreds of people in the community, engagement sessions, groups that organize nietz with with us. i want to echo the comments that this is clearly a learning process and i think we had a wealth of feedback which we heard tonight which i think is very valid and real, as well as what we've heard throughout the process that i think we need to take very seriously moving forward. i would echo some of the comments that we heard earlier from our kind hearted friend there, who said we should think about this as a version of this that is more outward facing, that's easily navigated for the community and public so they can understand what's going on here. i appreciate that folks were concerned about getting appendix a and were concerned mostly that they got it late. i still am having a hard time

see whag appendix a is telling us. to say we're spending expenditures to support targeted pupils and then we have a lot of numbers here, i don't know what's in each of those categories so it's hard for me as a board member to say that i would agree that a $2.5 million on security aids for example, is expenditures on targeted pupils. all of these categories it would be helpful to have it connected back in some way to another appendix or somewhere in the budget to know what we're talking about when we're saying we're spending $63 million on targeted pupils, which we're making that commitment, yet i don't know what exactly we're referring to here in appendix a. i find that especially in need of further clarification.

i realize we're at the 11th hour here, but in the future that should be something we should think about . in the l cap itself, when weapon we say there's a certain set of money being spents it's hard for me to see exactly how this is all relating to each other. we should think about this, along with our budget of course, as we heard earlier as part of the same song, i think for us to be able to read this that way is difficult. so i could see for a community member who is a part of this process who gave a lot of feedback and wanted to see restorative practices pry or

fiezed for example or culturally intensive teaching practices, to be able to see where that went and where that money is, not just what category it came from or what sort of larger bucket it falls in but specifically what it's being spent on. it's hard to do in this document . and i realize the l cap is not exactly that of us, but i think the expectation from the public is that we do have that clarity because when you say $9 million there is a line i'm item of what's in there, but referring back to what that reality is in this document, that's challenging. that's my feedback and i believe it's reflective in many ways of what i've heard from folks who have engage nd this process and i hope we really are listening and that we improve and that this is really the beginning of what it was intended to be with the l cap,

which is a new robust way of engaging with the community, a new era of transparency and indeed, accountability and that people really feel that. because i think, as we've heard there's a lot of positive things that happened in terms of engagement, butt that level of transparency we still have a lot of work to do.

there was one in there for reducing suspensions and it would really just be reducing it by, like, ten in one year. i think with some of these goals we might want to reflect on it and see if in the l can we want to go further and add additional categories so i know that's something we can talk about more as a board of education, but i think that was a learning process for us and was something we could have brought up earlier, but we should assess whether those are the exact categories we want in l cap and mr. it makes to have [inaudible] superintendent's evaluation that are reflected here but adding some as well. i would say we should have that

conversation as we think of the many things we have to figure out for the next round of this. thank you for all your work. i'm sure we can't do this tonight, but i would like to have for this appendix a, maybe an appendix b, knowing what's in each of these categories, because i know we put $944,000 that's being spent on targeted pupils. i assume there's a lot of detail around how we get to that point but i'd like to know exactly what whoa're pointing to here. maybe it's in the budget book or something, but i don't know how we're calculating that. i've said this before, but i'd like some sort of thought process or response to including the security guards in the funding that we're spending on supporting targeted pupils. i don't have any problem with security guards, obviously it's important that we have them. it just don't know if that's what was intended when we received additional funding to