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 support low income students and el students and foster youth to be spending additional money on security gashdz. guards. that's one particular thing i had concern on. again, thank you and those are my comments. >> let me start my comments with acknowledgments. this really was a massive community engagement process and i want to thank the district advisory group's offices and programs, in particular the parent advisory counsel, the district english lerner advisory council, the office of equity, family and youth in transition and to foster youth services, but also the outreach of community organizations and we're talking about 400 participants and 29 community conversations. i want to read into the record

our community partners. mission graduates, parents for public schools, san francisco, second district tta, support for parents and children with disabilities. and secondly i think it's important we acknowledge our labor partners. this is the third time i've asked that they be included in this document. you nieted sfra tors and sdiu because i think these groups really helped us with input. i think we heard loud and clear the need for better transparency, the need for better read ability of the l cap and budget documents, but i wanted to thank the pac and dlac for their specific questions about the l cap and budget and to recognize that staff turned around very detailed responses to the questions. and i see this really as a

process. i also wanted to point out that this year we tried something different. president fewer and i really wanted to officiate the budget process earlier than in previous years. we had four meetings dedicated about the budget. i just want to encourage people to engage in this longer process. i was really quite surprised at the last meeting we had no public comment because this is such an important part of our activity and i was expecting many, many different groups to have input into that meeting, but perhaps we have some work to do in communicating that as an opportunity for groups to come and communicate their budget priorities to us. finally, my comment on appendix a, very helpful, but if you could include a description of the many acronyms that are

included in it. people who are familiar with the jargon will know what the these acronyms stand for, but it's very important as we have heard over and over that we focus on trance transparency and read ability. and i believe commissioner maufas wanted to speak nest. >> thank you. i do want to acknowledge the incredible work that we have done, our deputy superintendent leading the way. thank you deputy superintendent lee. i think that the remarkable way you've been able to pull together your staff and really turning around information for the community that has worked with us. i support all the comments that have been made by my fell fellow commissioner and i think that one of the things we need to say and actually do, this is

so much us anyway and i think when other districts look at san francisco unified school district and this process, we're setting so much of the standard and model for them, why not go the next further step really find some common language that we can use in communicating with the public? i think we just need to set a glossary where, you know, this means we know what these acronyms are and what their literal meanings are. here is exactly what it means in the most commonest of terms. and i think that helps people come forward and helps and encourages folks to come forward. i think we can continue as we are doing really an ongoing engagement process. and again, i think i've mentioned it, maybe we need to

segment out certain groups that we're going to come to you at this time of year in this neighborhood and those people know that and get highest turnout instead of trying to do the blanket and hope that people show up. this is your opportunity to get to this particular meeting. by the way, we've catered it for your community so it would be easier for you to attend and we'll have all the reck requisite needs that make it easy for you to participate. i think we're so far ahead of districts around this work and our engagement is phenomenal, but it can be so much better because we are already doing this work. it really is our own improvement plan, but really to tell folks by the way, this is where you need to get to and it's what we're setting the standard as, which is normal for us. i want to encourage our deputy

superintendent to do even more of what you're already doing, which is phenomenal. the meetings i went to were packed and full of engaging community folks who participated in the process. there was translation there, the set up was so stat ic. that was really incorporated from our partner participation and how it works well when they go out into the community. i think i really want to also thank the partnership and the sharing of how you do it well with us to help us do it better and that, i think, makes us really come around this process. and again, in our own world we are really still working

through it and setting up and begin wg it, but i think we've set up great things, but to others who look from outside into us, let's just make this the gold standard i think we can do that, but again, i want to congratulate the deputy superintendent. and a huge thanks to all the community partners who have stuck with us through this process. it was an ongoing process and you were so in it and your comments were so deep and meaningful. thank you very, very much. >> commissioner mendoz-mcdonnell, any comments? >> nope. >> okay. i just want to echo what everybody else said is that sthangs to all our partners and this is really extensive, but i really want to emphasize that this is the first time and thanks to josh for being kind to us because i think that every time someone gives us constructive criticism that we should listen to it so we can do it better next time.

so thanks. and also it's time spent so we are learning here, we are all learning. we hope to do it better next year. i hope that we have taken note of everything that you have told us and how to do it better, you know. and i actually hope that advocates will study this plan and then demand demand for us to do it better. i think then -- we're all just learning here. this is kind of a new deal so thanks for being patient with it, but i do want to say that on staff's behalf that i know this took a lot of work and it was new for staff too and it's new for all of us, right? but i think it's actually a really good rate though because we're get ago lot of input. i think we're getting more people engaged in the budget process than we have in the

past which is really a groovy thing. we have passed the budget in these past years and it's been two people in the audience and now we have 20, and it's really great. having said that, i think -- and personally speaking, i am learning too and so as i look through this and i'm trying to analyze it and understand it, i am learning too. and so i think that as board members we will get better at this and we will -- and staff also will get better at it as we're more comfortable with it and we can really use it as the comprehensive planning tool that it was designed to be. thanks to everyone. i think we're ready for a vote. >> thank you. mr. haney. >> yes. >> maufas. >> yes. >> mendoz-mcdonnell. >> yes. >> murase. >> i. >> wynns. >> i. >> fewer. >> yes.