reclarify them as quickly as possible i mean we put in our measures when we think we still give support even after they've passed; is that correct. >> even after their reclassified we monitor them for two years for progress available assessments as well their grades. >> and then we see they're not what do you do. >> we document any types of interventions to insure their succeeding. >> have we done an intervention what is the most effective intervention and are they working well, this is should be part of the larger evaluation actually that we look at every step of the way we have els that

will have been reclassified and monitor for two years we find their falling off the chart and pit in interventions to marry the interventions are indeed effective and they're working well would be good to monitor and also, if we could keep data also on our unaccompanied minors that might not have had a fluent or consistent education before they got here i guess i'm talking about i guess the kids that come in kindergarten but acquire a lot of students that are newcomers and els at a later age at 14 or 15 their needs also get somewhat accelerated they have simple little time to complete our graduation requirement and also

the language. >> pie think this is kind of exist and good to get an update as a community on the whole so thank you very much. >> thank you. >> commissioner wynns. >> thank you for this presentation it is clear i really like that but i have a couple of questions i presume with you say that the modified consent decree will be present by the court we have agreement so the last time we did this we were a little bit worried so you shouldn't worry about that everyone is on board or the. >> all parties are agreed. >> and what about the funds i know the last couple of times we've been talking them into not ending the consent agreement and sometime to discuss with the

board the implementations of the end of it. >> so the modified decree and after the 3 years submit the last report and the parties will have 90 days to object if they want to object for any reason and continuing after the decree we need a master plan we're mortgage by the federal and state and the board could also development a policy to implement additional monitoring structures we felt this of the appropriate. >> so i have two comments one this is really high quality work but i would have wanted to see the plan we were to dourpt

before coming to the meeting this was a running theme in terms of getting the material ahead of time to have time to process it and i did want to make one amendment under its on page 32 of the proposal regarding recruitment stramgz for bilingual educators i want to add item h for culturally appropriate media outlets we've talked about with monique vascular question and the human rights department about newspapers and radios that particularly in the chinese community newspapers are widely read and that the radio plays a

big role and so some of the strategies that are laid out people who already know someone about the district what we've heard from the human resources they can't find the bilingual staff using the culturally appropriate strategies is another one that should be used. >> any further questions or comments. >> does that require amendment to the proposal? so we do have agreement between the parties on what the language will be if we make is change i am not we'll not be able to come back to the where had it's to the super controversial that would be the one wrinkle we'll need in the board could approve that with or without the

language and if they agree we'll put it in but if not from the board will still approve that >> so the proposal is to approve the plan with the language but if the other party it if agree i find it not be excluded but proposed propose to the other parties and i'll make a motion it is contingent upon approval of the parties you want to make that motion. >> so moved is there a second. >> second. >> i was going to add and suggest nothing to prevent the districts from volunteering to take on the obligation reaching out with the appropriate media perhaps can we approve the agreement but you can have a second motion to direct staff to

or the to use cultural media is that acceptable to the president. >> yeah. i'll withdraw my original motion and we should take care of this vote and make a separate motion for the superintendant. >> so cultural there is a motion and a second on the floor to approve the sign ms. casco roll call vote. >> ms. fewer mr. haney ms. mendoza-mcdonnell mr. walton and dr. murase. >> 7 i's. >> thank you very much and now i will make a motion to request that the equivalent direct staff to use culturally appropriate media for the bilingual teachers.

>> thank you very much is there any discussion? seeing none if we can have a roll call on my motion ms. casco >> on the amendment ms. fewer mr. haney ms. mendoza-mcdonnell ms. norton mr. walton ms. wynns dr. murase 7 i's. >> thank you very much we will move next to you need a motion and second on the ratification of you thought and charter schools facility use is there a second. >> thank you very much mr. superintendent. >> thank you madam president i'd like to ask director michael davis to please come forward. >> thanks superintendent and good evening board

subject is is ratification of agreement between san francisco unified school district and the charter schools for facility use agreement and the requested action that the board of education of the san francisco unified school district rectify the facility for the 2015-2016 school year negotiated with the charter schools by the superintendent or his designee as so for the in the document we have negotiated agreement with the different chart schools for prop 39 required facilities space in the district for next year of those 92 are state authorized chart schools those will be one person at red heart and the academy anothers independents high school i have no public cards

commissioner mendoza-mcdonnell. >> yeah. i have a quick question about flex academy they litigated that was bans the low enforcement and not having or more students i'm occurs why we continue to engage or did they come up with a number what's the reason why it was accommodating them. >> yes. that's true commissioner mendoza-mcdonnell so - you denied their rebuttal and had solid grounds to deny their renewal the california department of education staff agreed with our finding and

recommended that the state board deny the renewal, however the state board didn't file with the elements in the meantime as you stated we also reviewed their prop 39 request for next year and felt based on the information they initially provided and the enrollment trespassed their alike to have ada in the district of kids in their school next year however, they filed a writ in superior court seeking a judgment seeing u saying we have to provide them space and at gloria right direction davis i mean we've offered gloria davis to kidnap high school and we mediated them to move in part

to move webster so in the discussions with general council at the time that appeared that we didn't know licking we were to prevail in court and how quickly we decided to make an office to neglects. >> what happened if we deny that if we vote to not gave me in the su a - >> so as part of the facilities disagreement with sf wax they've agreed to dismiss their pend writ and each party will walk away assuming their own cost if you approve that within the document i would be happy to

advise you to the explore of liability but if you choose not they've demonstrated they have sufficient in district ada to warrant prop 39 and we have a legal obligation to provide that. >> so you we're saying they are meeting their ada number bans their calculations or their demonstration and in which this case we're providing them with the space is what we should be doing under which you were not here when that advise was give to michael let's workout with them and get the writ dismissed or was that under previous legal. >> when i came in we remember in negotiation with sf flex to negotiating the writ.

>> so your recommendation is that we prior to them saying we have 80 kids we should try to accommodate them. >> well, i'm not sure that's what mr. davis just said are you saying that the sf flex has not demonstrated to the districts satisfaction they have the ada to have a request. >> that was part one the reasons we denied them. >> by at the time, we made the offer did we have they're in district ada their subsequent data there at the time, we made them american people offer of space we had the sunset data i personally found the data unconvincing, however, a low bar to meet they to say they have

families interested in enrolling in the school that's why we department of motor vehicles didn't have a great deal of conversations we will prevail. >> andtolysis no recourse should they show up show up with 60 kids come fall. >> that's for next year i'm talking about this year. >> there's a recourse to charge them the space for students they told us they'll have and i think correct me if i am wrong but p one they have to prove they required in district ada if not they'll owe the district additional fund their attendance for period one. >> i want to follow that i i

don't think they were able to prove at the time i've not seen anything that shows the new number and so i just don't feel like we have an obligation to offer them a space like they came after us last year annoyed me more i wanted to keep an eye on this and understand their enrollment looks like periodically and especially the start of the school year i'm not - it bugs me that's the route they took. >> commissioner walton and commissioner wynns. >> just a clarification question so if they- if we found out they doesn't have sufficient enrollment are we able to remove

them mid semester after the period or ride this thing out. >> right so the second we would look at excuse me. not look back but do a new analysis of the start of the second year and if they don't have the finish in the sufficient ada we'll have other opens but not remove students mid year and commissioner wynns. >> if i may just to be clarify that is precisely what happened a large correct we made them an offer using those what you kind of call low bar they told us to have exactly 80 students the nun they required and they didn't we denied them the prop 39 this

year we had a practice of them not meeting their obligation so - >> apparently, it worked. >> a clear we'll need to consider if clearly it only takes filing a writ this is what we're teaching people to behalf and do whatever they want. >> i'm going to play devils advocate as you recall they have a downtown prime location and moved to gloria right direction davis and many, many families abandoned the school i feel that that move hurt their enrollment greatly and when i visited the school they did show commenting

commitment to the neighborhood and showed how many students were recruited from the neighborhood when schools move there's always an impact sorry if i may respectfully dr. murase the purchase purpose of charter schools when they brought the chart schools first place they said by the way we're going to target underserved community and students noted successful in their system that's what they were supposed to do and render this downtown location and if you recall they came here and said i can't move but i us to gloria davis and i have an obligation to serve them i have let's go sympathy for an

organization they've lied to us twice at least and no evidence they're not doing it again so i understand and it is definitely not the first time we've been faced with this choice do something we think is wrong because it is alike likely it may cost us more those are hard things to swallow i appreciate commissioner mendosa-mcdonnell that he thought we were protecting ourselves so we clearly didn't figure out how to do that maybe we can do a better job in the future. >> superintendent and commissioner mendoza-mcdonnell. >> yes. so commissioners we're in intently noting our concerns

we have similar concerns it is important to understand though that the board a in the action that it took drew a clear line when it goes to the state we're limited in what we can do aside from presenting our case at the state level there are ramification at the local level so we hear the frustration loud and clear we're monitoring the enrollment but share in our frustration. >> commissioner mendosa-mcdonnell not only am i interested in the numbers by the demographics in a location that didn't serve the community in which they claim to be serving i want to keep an eye on that. >> i want to say one more thing. >> wait a second.

>> i want to raise a note of agreement with everything that the commissioners are saying so we had a lot of staff discussions along those lines and looked at it it and dubious mr. davis testified in front of the state board of education to talk about the represents he mentioned the elements and frankly took look at of heat and scolding from the members of the board we didn't take this lightly we tried to make you are case as well we could and that didn't prevail at the state board and fundamentally it effected our positions we should

take at this point. >> commissioner wynns. >> i actually had intended to go and testify but not able for some reason, i think there is an s b.a. we should consider that we ought to ourselves advocating what the state and the last thing i want to say someone south park is keeping the list of the legislative list i've brought this up and need to aggressively pursue prop 39 charts granted by the state because we may live in the most expensive city in the country that makes it more difficult but other discussions u school

districts are deal with that this is an impossible situation and no further discussion roll call vote. >> ms. fewer. >> yes. >> mr. haney ms. mendoza-mcdonnell. >> yes. except for flex academy. >> yes. >> ms. norton. >> i did not hear your vote i'm sorry. >> yes. >> mr. walton. >> ms. wynns except for flex. >> dr. murase. >> thank you thank you very much that concludes this special order of business item m is discussion of other

educational issues thankfully now and then none cds resolution removed at the previous meeting there are none item o vote on the consent calendar with the exception of one 56 on page 221 and on page 223 ms. casco roll call please. >> ms. fewer mr. haney ms. mendoza-mcdonnell ms. norton mr. walton ms. wynns dr. murase 7 i's. >> thank you very much and now under item p consent calendar resolution severed for board discussion and immediate action commissioner wynns severed two items on page 221 and 223.

>> if i may those are short i wanted to point out those are my continuing concern of large amounts of money on outdoor translation services we get an informative memo a few weeks ago from convene about the work that's being done that is good analytical work excuse me. about the relative costs for various things i want to say that i think we should continue to monitor this and particular i'm concerned when it says we have to hire outside translation services to provide us with spanish translation and chinese translation it is different i don't except us to have someone that can do russian or arabic and low instance languages listed on the second page the

second page is low incidents of arresting bic we saidabic we said a huge i have a problems are hire outdoor transparency for spanish and chinese. >> keeping in mind those translation services in spanish and chinese given the population of chinese and spanish speakers a limited number of transparence later in house we understand that and that's part of the analysis that is but point

well-taken. >> i don't know when i look at this i thought that the special interpretation is 70 percent at best by special education it is to technical our trans later may not be up on - >> if we're spending a lot of money on trans later but translations of the i p and others documents it is specialized in a major language like spanish we should have our own technical specialists that can do those translations those

that is the kind of issues. >> no further comment. >> ms. casco. >> ms. fewer mr. haney ms. mendoza-mcdonnell ms. norton mr. walton ms. wynns dr. murase 7 i's and superintendent proposes for first reading two items i need a motion and second for suspension of the rules to hear the first proposal at first reading on restriction to board bylaws and two closed session for the business and agenda and closed session for action and reports and second. >> thank you very much ms. casco roll call vote on suspension of the rules. >> ms. fewer planning ms. mendoza-mcdonnell

ms. norton mr. walton ms. wynns and dr. murase. >> 7 i's. >> we need a motion and second for the proposal itself. >> may i have a motion and second and mr. superintendent a december person to read. >> our general council to do the honors. >> so the first requested the bylaws 9321 and the other the requested action the board of education the san francisco unified school district revised board