assign students to school during the semester? i really don't have the answer to that. >> commissioner haney? >> i agree with commissioner merase. i think we spoke about this in one of the committees or the full board. [please stand by]

>> that's essentially where we landed with this. i can see the argument for the semester. although if the kid ends my dear, that's dramatic as well. you are still leaving in the middle of the year. these kids have been in school for years, and they will graduate next year, it will be traumatic as well. i don't know if counsel wants to add any of the staff post desk position, but that's what i would recommend to. >> they did look at the data and staff report around the

demographic of the parents who are perpetrating fraud, and the overwhelming majority owned homes. part of what i think the committee considered is this isn't just disproportionately impacting our most vulnerable students. the other thing the committee looked at is this fraud is happening at our over enrolled schools. so, i think those were other pieces that the committee considered in supporting the staff post-s recommendation. >> i will also add that i will be honest with you, i had the same question. when talking with staff, the other part of the recommendation was around the fraud piece and as soon as a period is over, because it is oversubscribed schools, there is someone waiting to take that seat. that was the position from sta staff. >> to that point, can i ask,

when that becomes available, too we fill it right away? or do we -- we are usually not moving kids until the end of the semester. i will look at commissioner sanchez because he probably has a battle handle of this... i do. my recollection from the presentation is that when fraud is typically discovered, it is still within the window to put a student who resides within the district into that seat. that is not the case with every time, but most of the time, we are catching this on the front end and able to put in that districdistrictstudents in the . >> a lot of kids, -- can i ask what some of the staff initial recommendation was? >> it was actually shorter. >> so 14 days total of appeals, and removal? >> so this

>> my memory is they are removed. there is usually some discrepancy on the paperwork. it triggers the investigation. not always. the other thing that was shown at the committee, even students who are discovered to be there midway through the year, they are students who could otherwise transfer due to safety concerns or other reasons that they might not be able to transfer. so we do need some flexibility with being able to move students. midsemester, so if we have out

of district students taking those seats, it reduces our flexibility to meet the needs of students who live in the area. >> the other thing is there is one person looking into all year round for the district. for the tens of thousands of applications that come through. but there's only, you know, one person doing the investigations. because this issue is, you know, -- this issue is why people leave the city. they do not want to go through the process. they think that we are going to allow more time, folks that are trying to get in the system, and it was deeply concerning to me. i supported this effort and this recommendation. i do think that the majority of cases where fraud is being committed was plenty enough reasons to make the application

-- or to make a midsemester change for a family that is committing fraud. on top of that, we did extend a window for people to dispute the fraud allegations. there's 14 days where you have time to disputed. in the event that there was something that happened there, there is ample time to have your case heard. but, you know, doing anything in the way of supporting or extending time around something that is really egregious i thought was inappropriate. so, i thought staff got around it. >> yeah, and i just want you to know that we are also here if there are other questions. >> to wipe your just so we know what the numbers look like, we

are talking about, couple of years ago it was 34 cases and last year was 48. it has been on the uptake. there is very little staff to review these applications to make sure that they are legitimate. >> how many of those were from the school? >> just last year, there was only seven. thirteen last year of the 48. the highlights are, the high fire schools -- high flyer schools are west portal and washington high, among others. >> that's interesting. any other questions? >> this one is an interesting one. because i mean i kind of agree

with as many of you around this table. it does feel like its a very abrupt -- it was not the kid post asphalt. it went on longer than 20 days. so this would be for the policy going forward next school year. is that correct? >> yes. >> and with the exception of extending the time around the notice to appeal, it is consistent with the status quo? >> o. k. on the 53, this past year, how many of them -- was there a timeframe that those were discovered? >> no. >> do you know when the 53 were discovered? are those ones from the very

beginning? it just seems to me we've always had kind of ongoing investigations and sometimes is from reporting, and then sometimes just from catching them on the applications. >> yes, that's right. gets ongoing. in most cases is when families call in because they are concerned about the application and that's how we catch them. >> i forgot to add. 418 and 19 there are 17 cases. ten of them are one school. the ten of the 17 going into next year. >> going into next year? o. k. >> how many months is the semester?

>> how long? this is true of er. how many months are in a semester in our school district? >> this four. >> so it would be sought from months? if they got busted in the very beginning of the semester, where they would get to state four months versus six months, if we were to go to the semester idea -- >> yes, i think that's right. >> i guess my viewpoint is it is very hard when a student moves to a new school in a new semester. they have to explain why. that's a tough thing -- i just feel like the student is impacted by it. the best possible solution is to have no fraudulent cases, and maybe we can strengthen our messaging. i know we do have messaging on our enrolment applications, but to really make it very, very

clear what the consequences are. but i still feel like i don't want the students to suffer what the parents may have done. >> are you suggesting -- from your point of view, you rather they would get released, or they leave at the semester? right. >> which is kind of how i felt. o. k. i guess we will vote on this and see what happens. if we vote on this and it is voted down, what would happen to the policy? >> if you don't, if the board tonight does not accept either the recommendation or the amended version that you are discussing tonight than the existing policy will remain until you approve a different policy. the existing policy is ten days to appeal and 11 days to exit after you receive final notice. >> so i guess the question is

whether or not there is an amendment that somebody would like to put forward to change the recommendations from rules to the semester, instead of the one month. >> that is correct. >> before you do an amendment i would like to bring back -- just a few questions for the full board about the process of this round. how frauds are being caught and i have more discussions of how we can go forward with an informed vote. can you speak to what the messaging is on the application that says what are the consequences for committing fraud for the district? >> yes. thank you commissioner. as a reminder too, the reason we have this infrastructure and process is because the board asked us to created in 2010. there was concern that because

we were having a lot of priorities that are connected with where you live, with the board wanted to make sure that we had mechanisms to make sure we could do everything we could add as strongly as possible to prevent fraud because of the equity issues for the families who are living in the city and don't get access to the schools that they might choose, or want to attend. so there's a lot of really strong language. it's in the enrolment guide. it's also written on the application form. i don't have it in front of me, but the language makes it really clear what the consequences will be. so i think, to the point about wanting to send a strong clear message, that we want to discourage fraud, we should, you know, consider that as we are contemplating changing, and what is a very difficult situation. in order to prevent fraud and provide the greatest opportunity to serve the kids who do live in the city of san francisco.

>> for the case of the school. , in the coming year, of the 17 work causes of fraud, what is the waitlist currently for both high schools? >> so, with the high school, we actually don't have a waitlist process. it is a competitive process to get accepted into the school. and so the offers are made in around one and what we do is we significantly over and roll the school with the assumption, because not everybody accepts the school when they sign up. we use a yield process in the hope we get to the desired enrolment numbers by the time the school opens. >> can you speak to how the waitlist process is going to be affected with the fraud process? for the other schools where it is in play?

>> we have a number of schools that are high demand schools and families who do not get in go on the waitlist in the hope that they get in. every time we do a run, they go through that process in the hope that they will get assigned. the only way families can get assigned from a wait pool is if seats open up in the high demand schools. we keep doing the rounds until the beginning of the school year, at which point, a few days after school, we do the last run, and family start to sign up to get an opportunity to get enrolled in the school at the semester break because they want to be able to have -- if they don't get the opportunity at the beginning of school, they look to get an opportunity for the second semester. the only way there's an opportunity and a second semester if there is a certain amount of attrition or openings that occur. that is how the process works for the high demand. >> so a change in the policy, if we extend the window of time,

all of the issues around harm are still in play. if we are trying to protect against some type of issue around trauma, all of that still happens but you leave the semester instead of missing a full semester. if there are cases where someone -- a parent is called for fraud and it sounds like its pretty clear in the application they know they are committing fraud when they are applying, if they get caught in the springs -- spring semester, the student spends the entire year at the school? what are the -- can you explain a little bit about the process for how a parent is contacted, what they are told about being caught, and how that transition works? >> i could, at a very high level without going into a lot of detail, there is a pretty small team that is involved in this

work. it's a pretty rigourous process where there has to be a lot of clarity around evidence that there is in fact fraud. we find that it's a quite sophisticated approach for the most cases that people go to quite extensive means to demonstrate that they, you know, have another resident and in many cases people do have a resident outside of the city. and so, you know, there is internal review to make sure, add to this conversation and opportunity for appeal discussions around it. is a personal process, but it's also a rigorous process to make sure we have evidence that they are in fact intentionally deceiving the system in order to gain access to the school.

>> so to be clear, there's no waitlist at the school? if the student leaves in the middle of the semester, that spot will not be taken up in the middle of the semester? >> no, maybe not off the waitlist, but it may well be taken up by a student who needs a seat in the school. you may have a, for example, a special ed student or another student to we need to place, and we won't have that seat to do that. >> so there are places for students at the school who are outside of the competitive entry process? >> there are a lot of students with iep at the school. >> and you said we do not, we generally play students who are on a waitlist at other schools at the beginning of a semester, not in the middle of a semester? >> yes. a lot of this is messaging from the board. what is the message we want to

send about residency fraud? and two families who have a lot of resources and go to a lot of extreme in order to gain access to our wonderful school? >> not all the families have a lot of resources or the circumstance. that is a generality. we have had cases come to us that we talked about that have come to meet directly that are not in that circumstance. i understand some of our homeowners in other places and things, but also, you know, talking about the children and the impact. >> go-ahead commissioner. >> i want to underscore that. we have a situation in this district where only seats that are available for midyear safety transfers, and students with i.e.p. tend to be at under enrolled schools, right? the over enrolled schools are full. if we believe that we want to create a mor more diverse schood have a student who, again,

through no fault of their own but needed a different school in the middle of the year for note for any reason, it seems to be having seats open at this school is a good thing. we would want to have that situation. and so, you know, particularly, i don't have a tremendous amount of sympathy, myself for families that are lying. i think that we have -- we've made this a very clear that the school is not a school that is open to out of district transfers. we have two schools in this district that we don't allow students from outside the district to attend. you know, i think the testimony about the lines that parents have to go to make it look like they actually have established residence here, when they haven't, shows that they are buried knowing about it. they have some resources. while i am sorry that, you know, it is disruptive to the stated, i feel like we have a real responsibility to san francisco

families first and, you know, we need to follow our own policy. >> i think that's actually a very good point that's being made pork i get -- this has always been one of those things, right, where there was a time when we had over 100 fraudulent cases and once we started to crack down on them, people were a lot more mindful about what they were putting -- the situation they were putting the student in. and you kind of triggered something for me, which is that we do want to hold students harmless. students also know they don't live in san francisco. so it is based on double messaging that we do not only to those who are filling out the application but reminders to students that, you know, this could happen to you should we discover that you don't live in san francisco. there is, you know, -- we often

times find out that students just to discover that they will get kicked out. what they didn't know is they would get kicked out. what they did know is they live in burlingame and they are going to school in san francisco. so i came it does put us in a really funky spot because you never know what the situation is for the family. so, the idea of, you know, wanting that person, that student to stay and have a clean cut when it comes to going to -- transferring to another school, is really important but it's also important we take care of our students but are san francisco residents. i think that when we went to a much stronger policy around what we are going to do and we started to actually act on it, it did make families think twice about trying to apply to a san francisco school when they weren't living there. you know, i guess we are giving them a little bit more time. they're giving them months

instead of a shorter amount of time. i actually, you know, unless there is going to be a recommendation for an amendment on this, i would actually be a-ok with this policy for now to see how it is instituted, unless others want to, you know. >> i was trying to wrap it up for you but if you want to keep talking about it, go ahead. >> i did not read this either. fourteen of the 17 are homeowners in another district. these are families with means. >> go-ahead. >> i will be supporting the recommendation, but by being on the prevailing side, i reserve the right to reopen in a year. >> good moves. all right. [laughter] ok.

that was number 1. [laughter] we are doing these four. unless you would like this item to be voted on separately, you would. ok. let's go ahead with item number 1. rollcall, please. [roll call] that's five yes. >> thank you. item number 1212. board policy, physical education activity committee report. mr sanchez? >> nothing to say. >> oh, but i have lots to say. >> it was moved to the full board with positive recommendation.

>> the recommendation on this item is the board approved board policy. physical education and activity. >> just for the sake of the public, is this the biggest change on the screen. >> the only change on this is to remove the temporary nature of the provision and make permanent alternative means to earn physical education credits, and the purpose of that is to serve students who are in different pathways. >> thank you. the policy received a positive recommendation. >> ok. so did the last one. [laughter] >> ok. i don't have any public comment on this. we are going out -- going to go onto item number 3. high school graduation requirements.

>> also, a positive recommendation from the full board. >> any major changes? >> there was no discussion at all. >> no discussion, and no changes. >> we gave this a positive recommendation. it is simply as several groups of students, cultural groups that are eligible for reduced graduation requirements instead of of our -- >> think you. item four, board policy, continuing education. commissioner sanchez? >> likewise, scent to the full board for a positive recommendation. >> any change on that? >> the change on this is to increase at the district post-s flexibility in dealing with students who need to be involuntarily transferred into a continuation school. again, they are assured due process, but this allows us to take a student who has been --

who would otherwise be recommended for expulsion on a nonmandatory a fence and recommend them for continuation school where it is appropriate for the student. >> thank you. on board policy, on what policy items -- two, three and four, i have no public comment on it. actually.actually, on any of th. and any other comments from the board or superintendent on items two, three, or four? seeing none, rollcall on item two, three, and four. [roll call] six yes. >> thank you. items five and six, we will take together as well unless there's any objection to that. ok so this is board policy,

questioning and upper dutch apprehension by law enforcement. committee report? >> those are forwarded to the full board for recommendation. we did have a discussion -- i think i can talk more about it, but basically we wanted to be able to have these past so the administrators can be apprised of the new rules going forward that are contained within the resolutions o and the board policies. there are questions the public had about the nature of them. we do want to commit to a public dialogue with nonprofits and with the student advisory council and with parent groups to make sure that questions are answered. essentially, for the first policy, which is questioning and apprehension by law enforcement, schools -- if eight police come to a school, the school has to try every means to reach a

guardian or parent. if they don't, and can't for whatever reason, the student can be interrogated and questioned by law enforcement. that is the crux of some of the questions that are coming forward that maybe part of the public comments later. the second one, we did amend it. one part of it talks about search and seizure but it talks about perhaps adding to the very minimal metal detectors that we use right now, and if we were to enhance our metal detector capacity for the future, it would have to come to the board for approval. >> thank you. i have one speaker for both items five and six. [please standby] brought these

policies to my attention.hese just looking forward to the opportunity to continue to have that discussion and make amendments as needed in the fall. thanks. >> great. thank you. so on board policy. any other comments from the board or the superintendent? okay. so seeing none -- so we're

voting on item 5 and item 6 miss casco. roll call, please. >> clerk: thank you. [roll call] >> clerk: six ayes. >> okay. thank you. so item 7 is the superintendent's proposal 186-12 fp 3, authorization for material revision to the san francisco sheriff's five keys charter school petition. it was moved and seconded for june 12 and referred for action to this meeting. superintendent matthews >> so we'll have the director of policy and planning charter

schools, michael davis read this into the record. >> thank you, dr. matthews. the proposed action is that san francisco unified school district board of education approve a material revision to the 2350i6b keys charter school charter and five keys indepentant charter school petitions to add some santa clara county sites that will be operated in conjunction and cooperation with the santa clara county sheriff's office. so according to charter school law, if a charter school is going to add additional sites, those sites must be listed in the petition, and to list those in the petition, you have to do what's called a material revision. so to do a material revision, we had to also review the current charter school petitions, which were renewed by this board in january of 2016, most recently, to make sure that everything is up to date. so after doing that, we have

asked that the five keys charter school make three basic changes to the charter petitions for five keys charter school and five keys independance high school charter, and those would be one, to amend element 10, student discipline, to make sure that the student discipline section meets all the requirements of the law that was adopted january 1, 2018. to add a miscellaneous charter provision section and insert a listing of all of the operational sites, including the new santa clara -- proposed santa clara sites. to insert a new operational budget for the period july 1, 2018 through june 30, 2021 to reflect the fiscal impact of the additional sites. and lastly to amend the required affirmations in the petitions to add a declaration of whether or not the charter

school will be deemed an exclusive public employer of the employees of the charter school. >> thank you. i have two public speakers on this, so julian quinones and susan solomon from uesf. >> is you. susan solomon, united educator of san francisco. how did i get that voice? >> you've got some helium. >> let's try that. that's better. so i am speaking in support of the change to this -- to the charter. this may sound unusual because of the positions that uesf does take on -- about some charter schools. this is a charter school where the employees are represented by united educators of san francisco. we have a positive working relationship with five keys. i also want to point out that

this is precisely the kind of charter school that legendary a.f.t. president albert schanker contemplated when he talked about charter schools. this is work that nobody else does. it's a model to replicate in similar settings, essentially, a laboratory school, or should be. it does not have a negative impact on noncharter public school enrollment in sfusd. it does have a positive impact on incarcerated young people who can get on with their lives with some really good education that goes on at five keys. so for these reasons, we do, uesf, support the change to this charter. thank you very much. >> thank you. so julian, you're good? okay. thank you. comments from the board or superintendent on this? okay -- oh, commissioner

merase? skbl just that having had the opportunity to see the real learning that goes on at five keys is just so amazing. i recommend if any of my colleagues have not seen it in action, i'd really recommend it and really kudos to all the folks who make this school so special. >> thank you. thank you for being here, and it is a national model, and we're really proud to be the sponsors for five keys. if there are no other comments from board or the superintendent, role call, please. >> clerk: thank you. [roll call] >> clerk: six ayes. >> okay. thank you. okay. item 8, superintendent's proposal 186-12fp-1, annual update on the 2018-19 lcap for

the san francisco board of education and san francisco unified school district was heard before the committee of the whole on june 19. can i get a report of the whole? vice president cooke? i ne >> i need a minute to find it here. a review of the lcap and the budget. >> thank you. >> your designee, mr. superintendent. >> once again, our chief

financial officer, reeta matavan. >> thank you, superintendent. the requested action is the board approve the local update to the accounting plan for the san francisco unified school district covering fick will year 18-19 through fiscal year 20-21 subject to annual updates. >> thank you. i don't have speakers on this particular item. any comments from the board or the superintendent? all right. seeing none, roll call vote, please. >> clerk: thank you. [roll call] >> clerk: six ayes.

>> thank you. item 9 is the superintendent's proposal 186-12 fp 2 fiscal year 2018-19 recommended budget was moved and seconded on june 12 and heard as a committee of the whole on june 19. a report from the cau meeting was already heard, and the superintendent's representative, reeta matavan is here to read this into the record. >> thank you, president mendoza-mcdonnell. the action is that the superintendent's recommended budget fore the san francisco unified school district and the san francisco county office of education be submitted and the budget for fiscal year 2018-2019, and be placed in the official files of the secretary of the board of education. that the superintendent is authorized to make any transfers necessary to correct erroneous account

classifications or to effect any changes in accounts made necessary by changes in the method of expenditures within the purpose of the appropriation. that in accordance with the california education code, the superintendent is here by authorized to convert the budget approved on school district forms to the official state forms prescribed by the state superintendent of public instruction for legal adoption, which we just did earlier this evening, and to transmit the fiscal year 2018-2019 budget for the unified school district and the county office of education to the county superintendent of schools within five days of adoption of the budget by the board of education or by july 1, 2018, whichever occurs earlier. references ed code section 42127. that transfers between major budget classifications shall be made in accordance with board

of education policy p 325, transfers been clarification accounts may be made by the superintendent where the board of education has allotted a lump sum appropriation for a program or project, transferred it subsidiaries by the county or city. that in accordance with the california education code, the california school accounting manual and governmental accounting standards board statement number 10, accounting and financial reporting for risks financing and related insurance issues, the superintendent is authorized to establish a separate general ledger internal service fund to account for self-insurance activities, including worker's compensation, general liability, property insurance and dental insurance. education code section 39602. >> thank you, miss matavan.

at this time, i'd like to make a motion to amend the budget, so the board and the amendment would be to direct the superintendent to enter into negotiations with united educators for the purpose of memorializing the board's decision to pay certified and classified members of united educators a 7% add onto their base salary as if prop g had successfully passed without -- so it did successfully passed, but if the prop successfully passed without the threat of invalidation of side wise initiative up through and including election day. could i hear a second, please. >> so moved. >> thank you. if there's no objection from my colleagues, this is the amendment that i'd like accepted by general consent. so great. thank you. i do have some public speakers on this. so ellen yeshisagu, julie

roberts fung, and susan solomon. so come on up, and two minutes on this. >> hi name's julie roberts fung. i'm a parent at robert elementary. very excited to hear that the board is considering honoring prop g. our teachers work really hard and we're excited to see they're going to get the raise they deserve. i am a little concerned, though. as a redding parent, i'm wondering if we got a somewhat unfortunate shout out in the budget memo. we are one of the school sites that have seen a decrease in our funding which has meant that we have -- we're planning to have -- we lost a teacher, an excellent teacher who ended up moving to new york because she wasn't able -- she was the last hired and wasn't able to

wait out the uncertainty of her position being maintained. we're also in danger of losing our social worker who has to decide whether or not to take a position where she would be able to be dedicated to one school community or whether she would be split between two schools. redding elementary has had a really tough year because while our school's being renovated, and we're excited, it's destieblized our school community and reported a drop in enrollment. we're happy to report that our enrollment has increased -- we expect based on the number of families that have signed up and said that they'll be returning to redding, that it'll return to the levels that we had before when we returned to our planned location. but we're concerned that we don't know that until the ten-day count, which means that our teachers -- we may end up having to hire an additional staff person after the beginning of the year.

a staff teacher who is anticipating to teach a third-fourth split would have to change their curriculum. students who are assigned to a 3-4 split would have to be reassigned, and right now, we would have a 3-4 split and a 4-5 split. so i want to ask the board again to -- to consider looking at our budget. again, it -- now and allowing us to plan for the next year based on what our enrollment is expected. thank you. >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> susan solomon again, uesf. i first want to say thank you for bringing forth the proposition g m.o.u. we did some good work last week, and let us all hope for the best that the bill that's in the state senate passes on thursday. this will change the landscape,

and we won't have to worry as much as we're worrying right now. in terms of the budget, just in general terms as we go through the year and expenditures are happening, it's important to keep our eye on the prize, the priorities that are set in the budget are laudatory around multitiered systems of support, around professional department, safe and secure schools, and performance gaps. we also should note that the majority of the funds that are expended should be expended at the school sites, and that's where we want to see that happen. we want to make sure that we are student centered, and that is one way to make sure of that. and then in compensation of our members, which has been increasing due to some hard and excellent negotiations, it helps students if approximate we have stable staff as we've said often, and paying people a page that keeps them in san

francisco is a way to do that. so as we move it forward, we know it's always budget items can be contentious. we are seeking clarity. what becomes obvious to people who look at budgets all the time can be miystifying to thoe who don't. so the more we're able to work together, the better. thank you. >> okay. thank you. is ellen here? thank you. okay. comments from the board or superintendent? commissioner sanchez? >> commissioner sanchez: i recall at the budget, we had the same testimony regarding redding, and i don't know if you were able to get back to the redding administration regarding staffing for the upcoming year. if you could respond to that, that would be great. >> sure. i'm sorry. may i call on miss executive

director? she has information regarding redding. >> good evening, commissioners. so regarding redding, we did check in on their round three enrollment productions, and it's looking as though they'll land at higher enrollment projections as was mentioned, so we'll work with staff to revise their staffing projections prior to the ten-day count. >> commissioner sanchez: thank you. >> thank you, and then before you go anywhere, i also had a question with regards to the -- the mtsf, so in your memo back to us, that is right pafs of the questions around -- that is one of the questions around tier one, and if they're going to get sustained. do we have a sense of how long we're going to be doing that, or this year, they'll stay in

their same tier for this year? is that the plan? >> yes, that's the plan. and during the 18-19 school year, we're going to do a thorough analysis of then time mtss system and take a look at the overall criteria for the tiering and because it's been several years now, and it's due for a thorough reexamination. >> and so that's great. so i get we want to maintain it while we're reviewing to see the adjustments, but i think the concern that many of us had was just that it kind of does go away quickly if you do better. so as you're reviewing that, that's going to be an important component is just to have us think about the consideration of phasing and what that looks like. so just want to put a pin in that. you also said one school saw a reduction, and i guess that's the redding. but did they see a reduction because of the -- so you said this in the sentence of the

mtss. so are they mtss, and they're getting -- they went from a two to a one or why are they in that same sentence? >> so sure. for redding, the concern was around their projected enrollment numbers which would have impacted their weighted student formula. i believe the mtss school that saw a reduction as it increased -- as it shifted in tiers was glen park, and the reduction there was their social worker allocation. we had the slide, and we're working with the school site to see what this might look like come fall, so it's a slightly different situation to reddings's. >> okay. so -- but why isn't glen park sustaining their same mtss funding? what's unique about them? >> i think we'll need to look at how the social worker allocations were done. sometimes, schools will look at

whether or not they want to see a social worker increase or a nurse f.t. increase, and so we're working with them to see which of those they'd like to sustain and then keep them at level for fall. >> okay. so the plan is to work with them to see how to at least sustain whatever it is they need at their school site. so that may be a reduction but we're going to make sure that the service or resource that they need is not disrupted. >> correct. >> got it. thank you. okay. any other questions or comments on this nice sized budget that's been different than in the past? so i just want to thank everybody that's worked on this. this is always a big deal for us, and we've seen some real improvements at the statewide level. certainly not to our total excitement, but we're going in the right direction, and i just also want to just thank all of

the voter approved dollars that come to the school district that help us to get the work that we need to get done done, and i also want to just think the private sector who has also been incredibly generous and has allowed us to do some really innovative work in our school district in last several years. so for all of you that have contributed to this budget, i'm glad we're not going to see any cuts to our weighted formula or funding that's going directly to our school sites, and that we're keeping to our promise that our students are the center. i just really appreciate that. so superintendent, thank you for your efforts in all of this. is this your first budget or is this your second budget? second budget? okay. so if there's no other comments -- oh, did you want to make a comment? >> i just wanted to say i was only here a month, but i'll take credit for last year's. >> thank you, deputy

superintendent myung lee for what you did last year, and for always your hard work around this. i know that it's -- you've got an incredible team, and we really appreciate the team because you guys have always been very transparent around the work that you're doing, and i know that over the last couple years, it's just been so much more clear for us to understand the budget. and the idea that we don't have as many folks making comments about this speaks volumes about all the work that you've been doing to make this a much more transparent process for us. so with that great gratitude and -- roll call, please. >> clerk: thank you. [roll call] >> clerk: six ayes. >> fantastic. thank you very much. we have a budget for next year. [applause] >> excellent. and that was as amended, as

amended, miss casco, with the 7% increase. thank you. okay. section g, public comment. so i have several folks that are signed up for public comment. evan chen, amy anderson, mario villaluna, alita fisher, donna futz, and michelle anton. come on up; you get two minutes. >> good evening. i'm amy anderson. i'm a registered member of the mate of metis.

i appreciate being here on ohlone land. i participate in the american indian ed pac. in january of this year, we asked the board to support us taking down the racest murals in the -- racist murals in the main lobby of the high school, and we have not heard an update so that's part of why i'm here to receive that kind of update. by the way as a parent at wash, i do look forward to participating in the name change of the school, but now onto taking down that racist mural. no child, family or educator should have to walk past those murals that perpetuate the hegemony of white supremeacy. it's historically inaccurate

and dehumanizing. racist murals have got to go. i also do not want my child to feel he has to look down at the floor like he has for two years to avert his eyes from the false narrative on the north wall of the lobby of american indians as barbarians during washington's attempts to slaughter these natives. i want to work with you to create a new narrative on these walls that will invite the entire community to come in and belong. takedown the racist murals at washington high school. support us by reporting back to us on the communication that you've received from the school site council from washington high school. if you have any updates, we want to hear them, we want to know what they are, and the racist murals need to go.

we need a resolution from the board that will help us get those murals down. >> thank you. next speaker. >> good evening, commissioners. my name's michelle antone. i am a native american community member. i also work for the native american health center. i'm here also to get a follow up on our p.a.c. presentation back in january 23. most of the -- our priorities have been worked on or are being worked on, but that -- a major one, which is very important to our community is the washington murals and so we just also wanted to find out what's happening with that and how it has moved, if it's moved forward, and what's taking place as far as the board's end of it. it's important for our community. i work every day with our families and youth, american indians, and i know the -- the

toll that historical trauma has taken on our families and communities. and with all the work that we're trying to do, the different agencies that serve our community, we need -- we need the school district to also help in that. we know that they -- our students are -- as mentioned earlier, walk-through the hauls of the school, and to see those -- those paintings is -- is shameful. they shouldn't have to see that, any of our students. our school district should not be proud of any of those paintings and have them in any school anywhere. we also not only have to deal with seeing paintings, racist paintings in our school but at city monuments, inaccuracies in textbooks regarding our history, the american indian history of this country are also all the things that we are trying to work on, and i know we are working on some of these issues with you all, and we

appreciate that, but we also -- this is very important for our youth and for their well-being, for them to be successful and to go onto graduate and not -- not feel bad for where they come from and to be productive citizens in this country. that is one step that we can take, is to eliminate all these racist murals in our schools. not just for us, but for all races. they should not be anyplace in the school. >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> my name is mari dela luna. i'm a future sfusd parent, and i also used to work in sfusd within the high schools. i used to work at phoenix high school back in the day, was on 16th and mission. so basically, i'm here today to support the indian education

p.a.c., ri