principals know what the plan is before our public school principals no? as an elementary school where the renovation, we had many meetings with district folk and architects about the impact of our schools. we have not had or seen a single community meeting with malcolm x or with an -- nac who stood up and fought back against the kip school as well. we need to make sure that our families have a voice in these charter locations. we should ask more of our staff to be communicating with families and to make sure this process is aboveboard. thank you. [applause] >> my name is brandy. i'm a parent of a kindergarten boy in the richmond district and i am standing here tonight in solidarity with the families of the bayview who are opposed to the charter school chain and their school. when my son asked me what i would be speaking about today, i told him what is happening and i asked him, how would you feel if the school moved into your school, that had different roles

in different principals and different standards? he said i would not like that and that's not fair and not fun. [applause] my brother, i think -- i did not get to go to the same school as my brother. he was diagnosed with autism 40 years ago and he was counselled out of his school. it makes me sick to see kip being so colonial. kip has a very high rate of suspending and counciling out students with disabilities and that is not fair and that is not san franciscan. another one of their agendas is the ceo of netflix who is on their board, he has advocated, not just getting rid of probably eventually traditional public schools, but school boards. he has invested millions of dollars in tact and it is much easier to sell through charter school chains than having to go through a democratically elected school board like this one. so we all know who these people are. i hope we can all rally around is a community beyond this

meeting to stand up against the agendas of this tractor school. thank you very much. [applause] >> clerk: we are closing this item out. thank you malcolm x. >> is it a student? >> yes a student and a teacher. we are both on the list. >> clerk: your time is up. call out the student, please. >> i love malcolm x. [applause] >> clerk: thank you. the next item is section g., if the malcolm x families would like to leave the boardroom, this would be a good time and i will give you a minute. [applause] [ crowd chanting ]

>> clerk: thank you. we still have the board meeting and session. we will go onto the next item which is section g. a special order of business. this is on the election commission appointment. i need a motion and a section -- a second. thank you. commissioner sanchez, if you would please give us the report from the committee and a reading of the recommendation? >> supervisor sanchez: thank you. last night, the rules committee met in these chambers and we had three candidates for our appointment through the elections commission. i will read their names because we were impressed by all three of them.

cynthia die, charlotte hill, and alex rat trap. we were impressed by all three and they ar all presented very l to our committee. the one who rose to the top was charlotte hill. we selected her. okay. we selected her and i will read the request of action for the record. that the board of education of the san francisco unified school district a point charlottesville to the elections commission of the city and county of san francisco. the board of education appointee will be serving a five-year term from january 1st 2018 through december 31st 2022. our last appointee was with us last night as well. and weight thanked hi we thankes generous service as our appointee to that commission. i think charlotte is with us,"

charlotte would you like to say a couple of words? you can come to the podium. again, thank you for your presentation and congratulations. >> thank you. thank you it so much for inviting me here to speak today and thank you to the rules legislation and policy committee for recommending my appointment to the san francisco elections commission. i wanted to speak briefly tonight to give you a sense of why i want to serve on the elections commission. and i will keep this a little shorter than my comments last night. i was born and raised in northern california. i've lived in san francisco since 2011. i am currently earning a ph.d. at uc berkeley where i study how to increase public trust in government and improve our political system starting with our elections. i've also worked in political reform organizations for almost

a decade o fighting for policies that help regular people make our voices heard and respected by our elected leaders. in one sense, elections are complicated. they are technical, they require a lot of administration, they're expensive. but in another sense, elections are simple. they're how we, the people, fold -- hold our politicians accountable. they are the mechanism that translates our most fundamental needs into public policy. that's why i am especially concerned that in san francisco today, we are not hearing from all of our voters. the 2016 primary turnout, it was below 50 % and five neighbourhoods. meaning that half of registered voters did not turn out. and there were big differences across neighbourhoods. we saw turnout ranging from a low of around 40 % in bayview hunters point to a high of 70 % in the aftermarket eureka value -- valley area. when we do not hear from

everyone our policies and up not representing everyone. one of my goals as an elections commission or is to help identify the major barriers that are facing adversity as we strive towards 100 % turnout. once we know the barriers, we can push harder to fix them. it is a matter of equity, accountability, and of democracy. i am also excited about the opportunity to support ongoing elections commission initiatives such as the effort to develop and certify a voting system in san francisco. we can help our local voters feel more confident in our elections and inspire other communities across california and the nation to improve the way that they do elections. finally, i would like to emphasize my deep commitment to serving on this commission. to the very best of my ability. i believe public service is a privilege and it should not be taken lightly. when i will close by saying how grateful i am once again to be recommended for your appointment to the elections commission. i care deeply about san francisco boston's democratic paul sent -- process and i want

to do my part to ensure fair and inclusive elections. thank you. >> clerk: thank you very much. i don't have any other people lined up for this item. any comments or questions from the board? >> i want to congratulate you. i know you will do a fantastic job and i'm very excited to see you taking on this role. one of the things that we have appreciated in the past when we have had our appointee is due the commission, lives in different ways that you can continue to engage us. i'm sure this came up in the rules committee as well, but, you know, we would like to do a better job making sure our students are engaged and registered and supporting them in their civic engagement. we hope that you and your role, will take on a leadership responsibility with that and not just engaging us, but, you know,

spending time in the schools and talking to students and talking to teachers and really providing that bridge between the elections process and our schools. i think it's probably the reason why we get in appointee or part of the reason. so we wish you the best of luck and i'm really excited about your leadership and i hope we can get to continue this partnership that we've had as a board. >> thank you so much. >> supervisor murase: congratulations. as we discussed yesterday evening, one of the things that is important to us is to report back and i have asked staff to schedule and make sure to reach out to you. we heard from a commissioner that he never heard from us, so he never was keen to present to us. we want to rectify that and invite you to report on the activities of the commission. >> clerk: vice president cook?

>> supervisor cook: i was really impressed yesterday with your presentation. you spoke tonight about election disparity. i think one of the big things that i was convinced of it during your presentation was the commitment to serve all five years. [laughter] >> yep. >> supervisor cook: it is a serious commitment. we want you to set an example in that term because historically we have not had people complete the five years. so, given the research you are doing and the commitment you have had to the city, all of that convinced me you will serve as well. us well. serve our city well all five years. >> yes. [laughter] >> clerk: thank you. any other comments or statements? these will be some really exciting times coming up. we look forward to having you serve us well and i have to

agree with the commissioners and that you will come back at least once a year to report back on anything that you feel we need to know about and that there is an opportunity for you to think about how our students can get engaged. we have some curriculum that has been developed around that. we've been encouraging our 16 year old to register to vote. there's opportunities that i think you will have to contribute. i know we've all said congratulations, but we haven't voted yet. roll call, please. [roll call] >> clerk: congratulations and thank you very much for your service. >> thank you so much. >> clerk: our next item is item h. a discussion of other educational items or issues. dr matthews?

>> yes tonight we will be having a report from the assessment committee and this will be led by an individual who will be introducing the other members of the committee who will be presenting to us this evening. this is a presentation so we will need to move from the seats. >> we are working on that. [laughter] >> good evening.

i am from the research planning and assessment office. it is my pleasure to do this presentation. we are pleased to share this aroc i am sorry. we don't have a forum. i'm not sure where all of my folks went. if you wouldn't mind calculating a moment. there is a little bio break happening, i think. here we go. you can continue. >> thank you. we are pleased to share this presentation on be hops of the sfd you family assessment committee. as the common -- culmination of our collaboration over the past five months. i want to extend a special thanks to the assessment office

for the work and coordinating and facilitating this committee and keeping us on task. [applause] first of all, if there are any committee members in the audience, please stand and be recognized for your collaboration. [cheering and applause] and support of this important work. okay. the work of this committee was based on the board resolution on sfusd assessments from december 2017. the resolution outlined that a committee comprised of representatives -- representatives from the district and families exploit district assessments and make recommendations to the school board prior to the close of the 2017, 2018 school year.

you will see the stakeholder groups that were represented on the slide before you. the assessment committee met four times from january through april and it during this time period, we were able to review and develop recommendations for two of the assessments. we will be discussing all of the

slides for the recommendation and we will talk about the benchmark. with that i will turn it over to you. >> so, i'm happy to be speaking from this corner. it's interesting. i'm also very, very proud of the work of the committee. to get right into the heart of it, we spent almost the bulk of our time, we ended up going deep into making it a meaningful assessment and we came up with four main recommendations which are, well in a nutshell, and you have heard this before in the fall, it is an individual reading assessment which educators value. it informs their teaching, it allows for targeted instruction i was -- according to each

child's strengths and weaknesses, and it forms, it gives teachers a way to differentiate their instruction within their classroom and for planning ahead. the challenges really boil down to their day-to-day efforts. the biggest challenges are at the time taken needing -- needed to give the test far exceeds the one day per assessment cycle that the district provides the teachers. and also, teachers need time to calibrate their results. classroom to classroom and school to school, and there should be a high level of consistency between one teacher pasta scoring and another. teachers need time to reach that consistency through cooperation. aren't this was really a big learning for the whole committee.

that as important as it is that educators is using these assessments to inform their instructions, it is equally as important for parents and families understand how what the results mean, and how they can help their children at home become better readers. and also, we want both leaders and teachers at the school sight to help time to analyse the data. our recommendations, the number 1 challenge is that we need more time to give the assessment and in order to address there is, on the one had to be looked at it from a variety of points of your, and basically, rather than have a big window in which all bay levels were to give assessment, we said basically we would have grade level bands do... second graders, firs first-grads

back then kindergarten. one point to is the number 1 recommendation in this bucket. increase the number of substitute teacher days on the third one has to do with making sure that the assessment is effective on the committee looks very closely at making sure that teachers are administering the test as it is supposed to be which is in particular what we are looking at with happening. teachers only test for the independent level and for the inspection level and not go up beyond one at grade level beyond what the student is capable of. here on the slide, look in the budget. what we are looking at his two subs per teacher per cycle. it is currently that the district divides one slab per teacher per cycle. we need more budget to do that. it is $505,000. we think that is a small

investment and a necessary investment to make this assessment worthwhile. so that's what we are asking you to decide on tonight. find that money for additional sub days. without that you might as well get rid of the assessment. okay, i talked about the challenge. so we also want time for the calibration of results. and we ideally would like to have a half a day sub provided per cycle. but we understand that the first place to go is looking at current resources, if there is extra money in the budget. that would be an additional piece but our number 1 ask is to put extra sub days for the actual administration for the assessment. challenge number 3 has to do with ensuring that families

understand what the assessments are about. and so we are very excited to report that after a good amount of dialogue, everyone on the committee agreed that we want to redesign the way that reports are given to families so the current practice of saying basically your child is reading a level c., will be discarded in favour of basically providing the parent with understandable information about how they can support particulate reading behaviours. and that also they will take advantage of parent teacher conferences but what other avenues of communication we have, make sure this important information is shared to. that goes also towards larger community information sessions. [captioner switch]

>> with this particular assess many, it's not aligned to what's being taught in the classroom which has an a frustration for students and teachers. that's what we've heard across stakeholder engagement. the other piece is equitable access to computers in tech, infrastructure, and support across various schools, members participating we've talked about that as well as -- this is a computer based format, and so another barrier that was access to computers for students across our district. as a committee, we talked about how important it is for student reports to be family friendly and to be able to be shared with families so that it makes sense during family teacher

conversations in the way -- conferences and how they can support from home to support their students growth. the results of any assessments should really be a useful tool and provide data to help inform where students are doing well, where they need to refine their instruction, and where interventions need to be implemented. so the recommendations for -- on this, because we -- are that for next year, that the math benchmark assessment would not be part of the required assessments and so it would remain as an option for teachers if teachers chose to use it. math milestones will be the report that will now be required in the fall, in the spring across the kindergarten through high school. currently, the math milestone is only required -- it's required in the fall for kindergarten

through second grade, and all the way across, but in the spring, it's only required from kindergarten through second grade and high school. the addition would be across the board for all grades. the other assessment that we kind of touched upon was the smarter balance interim assessment block, which is very similar to the smart balance assessment, which all third grade through eighth grade students have to take. while it remains an opt in for teachers to administer, it's something that we talked about as a committee and that the whole committee endorsed it as a viable option, and some of the reasons we talked about that is that the original version of there assessment was not very useful because it provided classroom level information, but now it's been revised, and the current version teachers to see how individual students are

doing and looking at assessment items so see where they're having trouble and hone in on those areas of skill. one of the things we talked about is really reaching out to lead to leverage the messaging across the board with principals, not that it's a requirement, but that it's a still a viable option that provide additional information to really help inform instruction and intervention for their students. another piec piece around that, though it doesn't address equity across the board, it is a computer based assessment, and in the last couple of years around the local control and accountability plan engagement, we heard from families about the concerns and from teachers about some of their students experiencing frustration of not being able to navigate the computer. so this is an opportunity that's not going to close the gap in ebequity, a chance to have data for teachers, and at the same

time for them to support when students are feeling frustrated and wanting to give up, to kind of address that opportunity and say, you know, this is an opportunity to practice so that when you do take the smarter balance assessment, it's a tool that counts. so that's what we talked about that particular assessment. again, it's opt in. again, i mentioned a little bill earlier about the math milestone task, that it is reported in the fall and spring. it actually -- that assessment is provided at the end of each unit. so it actually measures, assess that's particular unit that was just covered inside the classroom. one important piece to that is the results will be entered during the teacher's workday, making sure that the teacher's time is respected within that workday. the final recommendation around math assessments is that we need

to continue this work because we didn't have a lot of time. we spent the bulk of our time delving into the f and p and we needed more time to look at math assessments and options. the idea would be to form a task force to explore other progress assessments and that task force would then be comprised of stakeholders who have a lot of experience in math and come back to the committee to make recommendations about where we move forward. so here's a little snapshot of some of the committee members. there were surveys after each meeting about our process and here you can see the graph on the right-hand side 15 out of 18 participants about the overall process, the majority which were satisfied and another high percentage of very satisfied. nobody was dissatisfied. so that's a good thing.

so the next steps is really we want to put forward our work to continue because we didn't get to delve too deeply in the additional math a h assessments, which is an important piece. it's really to help identify where students -- where the support is needed and continues their growth and achievement. i'm going to read a quote from one of the participants that captures -- it's having all the major stakeholders in the room at the same time, referring to the process, this was a powerful step toward bridging the disconnect between practices and experiences in the field and strategic plans of our district.

>> thank you very much for the presentation. i have two speakers for public comment on this. alita fisher and gina sheer. >> hi. i'm gina sheer. i'm a reading specialist at carver elementary. i was one of the teachers on the committee. this was just a really, really

solutions oriented committee, very unique having district representatives, teachers, and parents together all really working to the to find solutions and make sure that the practices in this case, the assessment practices that we were using were really designed to improve student learning. our conversation and everything focused on is what we're doing going to improve student learning and if not, what do we need to do to make sure that in this case our assessment practices are directly in line with how we're going to all work together to improve student learning. the representatives of all three of these groups met, went back and forth, and really came to agreement on all these recommendations. so i just really urge the board to approve the recommendations of the assessment committee especially increasing the number of sub days per teacher, per assessment cycle, up to two sub days per teacher, per assessment cycle. thank you very much.

>> thank you. >> good evening, everyone. thank you assessment committee for your important work. my name is alita fisher. i'm the chair for special education and the cac is grateful to be participating in the committee. we appreciate that our feedback was included in the findings, and we appreciate having a seat at the table the entire time. i can think of fewer priorities more important for our school district than teaching our children to read. assessments such as these are an important part of understanding our students current levels as well as tailoring instruction to their needs. without data, you're just another person with an opinion. so it's very important for the cac that we do everything we can to implement assessments such as f and p with highest fidelity and we request that the board,

the smart team, everyone and anyone who is involved in the budget process prioritize funding for extra sub days. thank you. [ applause ] >> great. thank you. commissioners. commissioner walton. >> thank you, president mendoza-mcdonnell. i want to thank the committee for the work and the presentation. i was sitting a cup -- visiting a couple elementary schools this year and i'll keep the names to myself. as i was visiting the schools and talking with educators who have had to administer f and p and speaking with the instructional reform cultures as we were assessing the data and talking about approaches to literacy and some of the things that need to do, one thing that was evident and clear was that our educators need more time to administer the test, to correct and go through the tests and to

analyze the data and information. i'm glad one that we had a comprehensive collection of folks on this committee to have that conversation because i think it's important to include everyone in the conversation. so for me, the only thing is, trying to figure out where we find the money that's being requested on slide 5 and not a matter of can we make this happen but actually will we find the resources? i'll give a couple of suggestions, even though they weren't necessarily requested. but whether spark sf, whether cost savings from unfilled position, qta carry over, i think there are resources that are available for us to get this done. so from my standpoint, i hope that we're focusing on figuring out how we will do this and take these recommendations into consideration because these are important, and we need to make sure that we provide our

educators with what they need to really make sure that they're adequately administering the tests and being able to use the data so that we can inform instruction as we move forward. thank you for this. my hope and my fight is that we are able to honor this request. >> thank you, commissioner. >> thank you. i want to recognize commissioner sanchez for bringing the resolution forward for this deep look at our assessment and i want to thank the members of the committee to put in many, many long hours to get us to this point. i agree with commissioner walton that we need to stop expecting our educators to go above and beyond and work for free. we need to find ways to compensate them for the time they put in to execute these

assessments. i'm curious about the recommendation to make the math benchmark. we have so many requirements as so much of our educators that i worry that opt in means no one will do the assessment. so what i would suggest is that i would like us to collect data on who actually does opt in and then under what circumstances because if this is not a good assessment, we should just get rid of it. right? i'm a little bit uncomfortable with an opt in. if the committee finds it's not useful and achieving the goal, we should abandon it. but if it's going to be useful in certain cases, i would like to understand in which cases it is useful. if i can have a sponson that issue. >> it is a standard aligned assessment it is aligned to the standards. what we found is that the

usefulness of it has not been valued by the teachers who need this information because it's not aligned so much with the scope and sequence. it only measures -- it measures the breadth, not the depth of the could not at the present time. -- concept. we're going to be collecting data twice a year now. in the fall and the spring on the math milestone tasks. the milestone tasks is at the end of a curriculum unit in math. they are curriculum embedded assessments. there are like 10 to 12 in the year and we will be collecting at least on two of those. >> and then finally, i do want to support the continuation of the task force. i'm amazed that so many people felt satisfied by their

participation. that's really exceptional. i want to thank the committee and hope they will continue this work. it's very valuable to us. thank you. >> thank you, vice president cook. >> i'm really excited to hear this report. this was the first resolution that i brought forward with commissioner sanchez that got a lot of push back. talking to multiple stakeholders and the district staff about the issues we were having with testing let me know that the push back was something deep here that we needed to unpack. one of the things -- one of the pieces of feedback that i heard from you this evening was -- what i was hearing was validated. when i was going out to schools talking about staff about if these were improving their

progress, the answer was no. it sounds like you came to a shared understanding about how implementing the test wasn't actually working for educators as they were trying to go throughout the year to improve practice especially around math and limited time to conduct the test was a big aspect of that. so we are spending resources currently to conduct the test where we don't have enough time and people don't have -- to conduct if t. and people don't have time to debrief what happened. the time we're spending using the test isn't giving us what we need. we're wasting resources if we're spending time working on a test that people aren't using to improve practice. all these things surface through this committee. i think this is a perfect example of the type of community participation that needs to

drive a policy, having parents at the table now is the first time we've been able to do this. these existed without parent and union participation. so i'm just like -- i'm really glad that not only you guys are presenting the recommendations thus far but that the process is working so get us the desired outcomes we want to see across our district. what i'm committed to do as a result of the changes of this task force is to continue to go out to schools asking them how is it working given the changes that the task force has introduced. i would agree with ms. black that if you're going to continue to execute a test and not have the resources to really use the information properly, we have to consider not using the test because we're spending time on results that we can't actually drive anything around. so if we value the test, we have

to find the money to find the coverage so people can actually do the work and make changes based on what the test rules are showing us. >> commissioner sanchez. >> thank you. i want to thank the assessment committee. thank you. working these past five months to come to consensus, to come up with a presentation that i think we all agree with and want to implement, judging from the comments of my colleagues, i think that we need to actually now find that money to be able to pay for the -- up to two days of assessments for k one and two. i know as a principal with staff, teachers assessing their students with the f and p assessment tool, that the teachers themselves almost universally really want to give this type of assessment, enjoy

having that one-on-one time with their students and the students love it as well, and they actually love it when they can actually use that information to drive their instruction and improve their instruction and make progress with their students. when we were giving the one day, we found oftentimes -- and we found that many times subs didn't show up, but when they did show up, the one day wasn't enough for most of our teachers. i'm happy that we can have a window or one to two days. some teachers don't need two days. they actually have a lot of kids at or above grade level and they're not going to test their kids a year before. -- before. other teachers the vast majority are below or at grade level and they're going to need the two days. it's paramount we as a district find the resources to make sure that happens. i'm really happy about that recommendation. now as a teacher myself, i've never used it, and now i'm using

dra. we don't get sub days to do it. so guess who has to volunteer his time to give that test? me. and that's not a sustainable model. we can't ask our teachers to do that. i'm in daly city, not san francisco. it's a different scene. this is a really good way to really help our teachers do the right thing. i do want to zero in a little bit more on calibration. we've also found over time is that staff themselves if at the they don't calibrate with each other at grade level, although expanding the grades, because there's a certain part of the test that is subjective, that you will -- find errors over time. we need to have that time to meet so they can calculate this assessment tool. and i think that we just need more discussion of how that will look.

across schools we need to that as well. we can't have one school assessing in one manner and another school assessing in a different manner and getting totally different results. so i think even across schools we need to have some kind of cohort looking across schools so we can have calibration as much as we can district wide. as far as the math milestone, i would like us to -- i mean, at this point, i don't have a problem with the two milestones especially if the union is okay with that. but i do think we need to monitor them to make sure we're using that data. i actually am not the kind of person or teacher that think it's that valuable that they get reported to the central office because i think that teachers and their own site cohort of teachers in the site leader can use that data and make the decisions themselves. i think that one of the things that drove the resolution -- and i want to thank commissioner cook for coegg author --

coauthoring -- is that many teachers have expressed they feel they're being injured as a teacher individually or as a cohort of teachers at their site by these assessments because they're being reported centrally. that's just a fact. people feel that way. so if it's being reported centrally, i want that monitored as well. i know part of the resolution was we won't use assessments as a tool to actually punish teachers, but we have to recognize that many, many, many teachers feel that it is being used against them. i want to monitor the milestone task as we move forward. i also agree with other commissioners that this committee should move forward and continue the work as we go on because there are other assessments that we need to look at as well. and i just want to commend again the work you've done and the fact that as commissioner cook and others, this is the first time really we've had significant stakeholders all at

the same table over time discussing a really important issue and coming to consensus. congratulations again for the work. thank you, staff, as well. >> anyone else? okay. great. so this is just a discussion. we don't have a -- >> we need to discuss the financing and how that's broken up. >> for this evening, are we we presenting or is it going to budget. >> it was just noticed for discussion. >> yeah. >> we can't request to bring this up -- >> bring it back after we have e need to have some conversations around budget at either -- we'll figure out where that's going to go. does that sound right, mr. lee? >> if i can make a suggestion. we have, i think, the relevant

information about the proposal to incorporate into the budget development process and that's going to be taken place over the next several weeks. in terms of looking at the various priorities that are identified and to incorporate this, the committee's good work in that process. so i would actually recommend against having a separate discussion at the budget committee, if that discussion would be for the sole purpose of determining whether there should be a budget ask. i think we're clear on the proposal, i think. >> okay. so, again, thank you very much for your collective work. it has been really great to see the cooperation of our community to provide us with such a great and strong recommendation. so we will figure out what we're going to do next on this. thank you so much for all of

that. go ahead, georgia. >> i'm going to speak because this actually came up in the parent circle. one of the challenges was -- one of the reasons i'm sitting in the committee is because the other parent representatives weren't able to actually take time off from work, and that was a challenge, i think, as a committee as a whole that we have a lot of wor working parens the delegate couldn't participate any longer and same with other members. so this has been something that parents have brought up over time is that they volunteer time but to think about when they have to take time off work, that's compensation. >> were meetings happening during the day or -- what time were you meeting? >> 8:00 to 12:00. >> oh, wow. okay. yeah. i can see how that can be a challenge. all right. and were there other members of your committee that are here that -- okay. i just want to be able to acknowledge your other committee members and thank them for the

report as well. yes. >> it's hard to resist a chance to serv service one other -- something that's not reflected in the recommendations but was a concern that came up over and over again. it was computer based testing. put it on the bucket of really important things to take into consideration. as long as a test is computer based and there's vast difference in the implementation of access to computers, you name is, hardware, software, it teachers, how many elementary schools? what are we really testing? there's a question mark. we'll leave it for next year, but i'm also very, very pleased and grateful to have had the opportunity to work on such a productive committee, and i think it is really a good model for moving forward. thank you all. >> thank you. and despite your retirement, we

hope you'll continue to participate as well. thank you, everyone. our next item is item i, consent calendar. there are none tonight. next item is j, section j, instruction of proposals and assignment to committee. we have three policies. one public and board comment. sorry. i have one speaker on the proposals, but i'm going to read them and call for public comment. so board policy 5145.11, questioning and apprehension by law enforcement. and board policy 5145.12, search and seizure. these are policies being referred to the committee unless legal, you think, they should go somewhere else. all right. i have one public speaker on this item.

>> good evening. i am a policy director. i've been keeping tabs on things that we have passed with this board in the pastas well as things that are coming through in the future and have had technical things we want to comment before it goes to rules committee where there will be further discussion. first, with regard to 5145.11, we're pleased to see students are required to speak with an attorney before interrogation but urge the board to set a lead and a higher bar than what the state requires. instead of setting it in place 15 and younger, we believe it should extend to all minors, age 17 and younger within the school district. we also urge the board to include language from sections 16 and 18 of the mou between sfusd and sfpd into the section of related to police arrests of board policy 5145.11. the language provides guidance

about how to minimize with carrying out arrests. that's important to be consistent across all policies. with regard to 5145.12, with school officials searching students, they want to be clear we should not be condoning the use of metal detectors. he can withent respond to school shootings and fortify systemic racism in our education system. allowing them have been proven to make students especially black and brown students feel like suspects, not scholars and policies like this do not improve student sense of safety which i know everyone on this board really cares about. they do, on the other hand, increase opportunities for racial bias and differential treatment of students, increase violations of students rights and increase the experiences of trauma among students. we also want to flag that police are still being called to respond to student issues even

with our young students in elementary schools. so that should be dealt with -- these are issues that should be dealt with by school staff. it's important to train officials in relevant sections of the mou between sfusd and sfpd sections 11 and 14 related to when it's appropriated for school officials to request police involvement. finally, parents and guardians should be notified of any search before it occurs. section 17 allows parents to be present for questioning of a student and so we think the same should apply when it comes to invasive procedures like searching our students or property. >> thank you. we hope you'll submit the recommendations for our committee to review. these will go to rules. can i hear a motion and a second, please, for first reading. >> so moved. >> second. >> thank you. so these will go forward to rules. section k, proposal for immediate action and suspension.

there are none tonight. section l, board members reports and standing committees. let's see. what do we have here? curriculum, commissioner norton isn't here. neither of you report up on -- >> we have an update on the partnership with the new tech network, an overview of kindergarten readiness. a presentation about emergency preparedness so we can go over the policies of how students are being prepared for a natural disaster or emergency on campus

or curriculum related to that. >> thank you. commissioner murase. >> we met on may 3rd and had one information item and several action items. the information item was really about the look back at the work of the committee the previous year with the addition of demographic research conducted. what's important for my colleagues to know is that at the end of the staff presentation, there was a set of recommendations that staff has made that was presented at a committee as a whole meeting. i wanted to refresh everyone's memory.

teacher staff preference for their children, so the recommendation is to allow permanent site based certificate indicated staff to live in san francisco and wish to have their child attend a school they work will have a priority in the appeals process. secondly, for the update to continue, we've not gauged demographers to let us know of any major changes. and then there are three recommendations that staff has asked to be put on hold, but actually, as a result of the meeting, they will come back with options for us. that includes the willie brown middle school preference for the school of the arts, secondly, bayview elementary school preference for middle schools, and finally, the transfer mechanism. so staff will be coming back with options for the board on those three items.

in terms of the action items, we reviewed several board policies, and one of the issues is related to district residency. i just want to flag to my colleagues that we're looking at potential changes to what happens when a student's family is discovered not to actually be living in the district. members of the committee are concerned about the impact on students when they're pulled out of their schools midyear for particularly elementary school students for a decision that their parents made in terms of a fraudulent address. so we've been talking about whether students should be allowed to stay through the end of a semester before they're asked to leave their school.

so that's coming back. it was also discussed in rules committee and it's going to come back to the rules committee for further discussion. happy to discuss these with my colleagues off-line. >> thank you. before we go to rules, i would like to excuse our student delegates. thank you very much. i know you have ap exams tomorrow. you should mosey out of here, please. commissioner sanchez. >> we discussed our appointee and that was heard last night and discussed and voted on with a positive recommendation. we had several other items that we discussed that are going to be voted on by the board at the next board meeting.

so we'll hear more about them at that meeting. >> thank you. so item 2, board delegates to membership organizations. any reports on those, commissioner muiration. >> murase. >> i did review 60 workshop proposals. i hope my colleagues will plan to attend a conference in december. there is a delegate a simply next weekend. i'm not able to be there. i'm not sure about my colleagues. but i do think -- i hope my colleagues will show some interest in -- i think we're missing a delegate or two.

>> no other reports? any other reports for the board? commissioner murase. >> i want to invite families to the second sfusd family welcome day on sunday, june 3rd. it's an opportunity for school communities to come and have -- spend time outdoors. we'll be at the park located behind bryant elementary school. again, on sunday june 3rd, 12:00 noon to 3:00. the superintendent will be stopping by. we hope to have -- it will be the last weekend before school let's out. a couple of other things. i wanted to congratulate the parent leadership group that met on april 26th, commissioner walton was able to stop by as well. really amazing work by this particular network, really great