>> vote on student expulsion i move approval ever expulsion agreement of one multable student matter 2223 number 6 from the district for the remainder of the fall semester, 2022 suspended for spring 2023. i move approval of stipted expulsion agreement of one middle school student matter number 2022--sorry, yes, 2022-23 number 7 from the district for the remainder of the fall semester 2022 suspended enforcement of the expulsion for spring 2023. can i have a second please. >> second. thank you, roll call vote mr. steel. >> thank you on 6 and 7

>> yes. >> vice president. >> yes. >> commissioner hsu. >> yes. >> commissioner matomodi. >> yes. >> yes. >> ward. >> yes. >> president lamb. >> yes. >> 7 ayes. >> report from closed session in five matters of anticipated litigate the board gave versus unified case number 2022-090405 the board buy a vet of 7 ayes gives authority to the district to pay up to the stup lated amount. in the matter of student eh versus sf usc, 0908165 the by the vote of board 7-ayes, gives authority of the district to

pay up to the stipulated amount. case number 2022-090 p 2, gives authority of the district to pay up to the stipulated amount. case number 22-090181, a vote of 7 ayes gives authority to the district to pay up to the stipulated amount. case number 2022-080754 the byrd by 7 ayes voteded to give authority of the district to pay up to the stipulated amount.

and that is closed session, and now going to item number d amendment to the agreement with services with al va res and marcel to stabilize the power of san francisco. i would like to ask for a motion and a second. >> so offed, if we can project the presentation, thank you. if you go to the first slide, i think as people are aware, on november 7th, we declared a payroll state of emergency. we know, our number one priority needs to be make our

staff whole be transparent about what we're doing to address this issue and be held account on the plans that we're prepting. since then, as i go two more slides. that's a critical team and they've been working hard to close tickets, i'm in the command center and sometimes hearing the bell when they close a ticket. we're challenging them to get as many closed as possible. so i want to highlight we resolved the contribution process in a previous update, i shared we resolved the health deny fit issues. we're still needing to follow-up with people so i was talking to teachers who want to

up their contribution. and i want to highlight one more bullet, we have 8 teens in the command center they now have clear objective and tasks that need to be completed and we're going through prioritizing what is going to be done when. it's a comprehensive approach. you know but we still face if you go to the next slide, challenges and barriers of stabilization. and these include we still have on our side multiple vacant he's and we've had people leave. as well, you know, it's taking time to train on board in this new role.

one thing that is critical and something that we know we need to build in to have a stable system is to have more redundant see and that means having more people to do the same staff. to fix this system over there or address the issue over there. and then just recognizing these are very independent denied systems. if you go to the next slide, that's why i'm coming together to ask for a contribute amendment where anm we're asking that we'll increase the capacity participating the command center. one thing that we recognized when we presented the scope it was very focused in the issued identified in the tickets we

received but this is a part of our whole system and the command center is part of our on going operation. this is the first time producing w2s from the empower and even it actually takes different paper to do. and lastly giving time to give exit plan. we appreciate anm, they're not meant to be here forever and you know, for a real long time. they're then leaving the documentation and processes behind to help us continue with the corrective action. not everything will be resolved and then also help us resume normal sfdd operations. i know bringing amendment we want our resources to be supporting our student outcomes. and that's what we're going to

be talking about tonight. but we understand to do that, we need to make sure that we're operating a successful district. i've been laoging to understand more, what does it take to do that and why hadn't we done that up until this point. when i say we need to bring this amendment to increase our capacity, we have recommendations from several different sources. so in looking at doing review to understand what happened, the emphasis had recommended additional 28 staff in addition to staff in payroll and strategy. but this came at a time when we were reducing millions of dollars in school site. then also we now have, i shared last time we've been escalated to, we're on the global

escalation team for sap or their teams out here. and they've been analyzing what they need. and they're also making a recommendation of increasing staffing, the number of assignments that we have. recognizing, we have a district where people do different jobs and that's a different a siepment in the district. so for example, i was talking to the people yesterday who's pay was accurate but as a summer school pay was an issue. it's a different job, different job description, different hours, different salary schedule, all of these need to get uploaded in the system it's not like we have 10,000 employees, we have 20,000 plus assignments. and then lastly a & m came in when we're now in a state of emergency and we're going to need, their assessment said you need up to 30 or 50fte in order

to access this. i know we're increasing the cost but addiction al support but looking at the implementation, we should have invested up to 12 million. weaver bringing forward the cost now with a premium because we're in a state of emergency. do want to be clear we do, we do have some salary savings. when i first brought the contract, i shared. we filled some position that's people have left. we're using some carry over funds that were spent and we're not using the unrestricted general funds that are the primary funds for our schools. lastly, appreciate you know, a & m has been here, they've done their analysis, they offer the corrective action plan and have been helping us launch the command center. and they're helping us do the

review we need to do to understand what happened and why. so you heard some of that when you were sharing the original recommendation around staffing. i do want to invite erin cuffington to come back, we still heard this question. she spoke about this last time why not get rid of empower sf. if i could, i would, i would say, i understand people want a system that works and it feels like this is not the system that works. well there is two issues, i'll speak to one and i'm asking erin to speak to another. one is bringing back the previous system would be time intensive, we don't have the capacity. maybe after month one, we would have turned back the clock. we're now in a new school year. we have hired, thousands of more than, you know, in the thousands of employees who all have to be reentered into the previous system. so there is no way, now going

back from just a logitickal point of view. you can stalk about the outcome of pay roll tickets. >> thank you, so earlier this year, we conducted of the roughly 10,000 tickets that are outstanding. and so upon review of those tickets what we observed is that many, 50, 60 percent of the tickets relate to process issues which means defining a requirement and assigning roles and training staff. so there are still systems issues that do need to be addressed. but the primary driver of the issues that we're seeing is as a result of poor business requirement and the need to train staff in the organization. >> yeah, so again, that's a question that comes up a lot

and want people to understand we're taking it seriously and this is the assessment and what you don't understand is this is the assessment at this time. so if you go to the next slide, we're asking you that you approve the amendment and that this will help us accelerate issue resolution in the command center. and really working, we have our dashboard up, you can see we're working on faster processing of the issues fpt we have the end of year activities and getting out the w2s. and doing that prioritization and on going prioritization so we can be a responding in realtime to the needs we hear from our teachers and our staff and while also doing the fixes and the committed to these regular updates as well. so, so with that, that is presenting this contract, i would i know there is a motion and a second, i would like to

also note that as a best practice that names to the amendment but we're going to change those to roles. so just it's clear what role is doing what and has what responsibilities and that's i think a good practice in contract with focus on so we're clear in the organization where this is situated. so if you don't mind, acknowledging that, that will be part of the what you would approve. >> and those modifications would be in the first amendment and contract agreement? >> yeah. >> okay. >> and then we would repost it as amended. >> thank you, dr. wane. and at this time i would like to call for public comment. >> we have two cards for in-person at this time. >> this time two minutes each, speaker. >> thank you.

>> matthew and leslie who, come on up. >> speaker: do i get a timer? >> i got it, two minutes yes. go ahead. >> speaker: i'm pretty uniformed i just came here from school. i don't even know if what i'm going to say will be used. i just wanted give you a teacher's perspective with planning and grading and late night emails and letters of rec, working through my lunch period, teachers can't stay informed.

i think this meeting was dropped on us, 24 hours is what you give for special sessions. before power, we got paid the same thing every month, we never had to worry about what was going to happen. never ever, and power comes and suddenly in the middle of the last year, it's been disaster after disaster, we're paid pay roll specialist to help our pay roll specialist from the district. everything you said, it's like really complicated. i just don't understand why we can't fix this. why is this not fixed already? we paid 14 million dollars for this program. what have we gotten for it? we either pay four million dollars for this consultant, if you have another 8 million dollars, what are we getting from this? my co-workers i see them every day in the work room and we're like, every person has a gripe,

every person has an issue for contributions getting the u.s. ds getting pulled out instead of once a month. teachers getting charged money instead of getting paid. 8 million dollars for this consulting firm is 111 years of my years of me being a spanish teacher at school. this is limb naigt teachers. i think a lost teachers are going to leave, worrying about getting paid should be least of our worried. if you're going to spend 14 million dollars on a program and 8.2 million for this consulting firm, why not fix the holes in our walls, replace the dead trees. get the rats out of our walls. there is so much that needs to be done and we're spending this money on suits. >> thank you. la*uz --[applause] >> thank you.

good evening, my name is leslie hoo i'm a secretary of san francisco. i'm really glad and excited that there seems to be acceleration of causes which we wish should be happening months ago. that the need is still extremely high to resolve issues faster. we need working to prevent issues from happening in the first place. and one of the things that is really concerning from the documents that came out on the board agenda is that the additional 8 million dollars to ask for this contract in the existing problems that is also being extend today may which is extremely concerning. since this implies that it's going to be a longer timeline to fix. that is a timely crisis right now. and that's concerning for us. this amount of money has the previous educators said, this

additional 8 million dollars it's really important for us to fix these issues, this money is being taken away from students. we need this money to fix all sorts of things that is happening in our building but also the fact that we are not addressing the thing, which is educator shortage that we have. we know it's not a shortage it's a shortage of wage and benefits and respect. and if we don't get a handle on this problem, we're still going to be continuing to bleed money, to pay for these contractors to fix this problem. this money should be going straight to students. thank you. >> thank you. please raise your hand if you're on zoom and you wish to speak at this time. can that be repeated in spanish and chinese please.

[being repeated in spanish and chinese] >> thank you, president three hands up. >> okay, it will be up to two minutes each. >> thank you, emily you have up to two minutes. >> speaker: thank you, i'm a parent and a law processor and i teach contract. every lawyer parent wants to know where the accountability for who negotiated these agreements in the first place. what there seems to be, and we'll be asking for this accountability is somebody negotiated this contract with empower. they're clearly in breech and we are paying for it. our students are paying for the

breach. i would like to know about the education money that should be going to our teachers. i know a lot of lauren parents in the district and we're all astonished at what appeared from the facts available to be borderline incompetent in the general council's office. so we would like to hear some accountability at that end too. if we need to spend money now, we need to figure out how to get this back. they're clearly in breach. thank you. >> thank you. >> chris, go ahead. >> speaker: hi i'm chris i'm a special education teacher at washington high school. we had educators speak at this meeting before, you talked to

superintendent to a lot of educators at lowell high school yesterday. you've spoken to us and we've listened. there is nothing more than i can say other than i'm torn on these. i want these pay roll issues resolved but this money absolutely could have been used for a better district had the district planned the first time. when i was getting bachelor's in technical theater, one of my teacher had a phrase, it was work harder not smarter. you implement it first the right to prevent hurting people next time. there is very little opportunity for people to speak because we were not aware that this meeting was happening. not everybody is plugged in.

it's the finals week next week for all of our high schools and i feel that it would only be right for the victims of this to be involved in the conversations around the solution and that does not mean educators, that means every employee of the school district should have an opportunity. thank you. >> thank you. sarah. sarah, are you there? elizabeth? >> hi. this is elizabeth i'm a math teacher from lowell high school, i want to thank dr. wanel again for meeting with me

and 50 of my colleagues yesterday here in this board room. we really appreciate the accountable conversation even though it was at times, i know it was challenging. i want to echo some of the calls for professional, for accountability what i can only describe as pro medication al malpractice which comes from a previous, a previous administration in the district that unfortunately, you know, we're kind in the pottery barn world. where it's broken and we own it. i am extremely concerned about end of year tax issues and these are problems that happened on aur watch. we cannot blame sap for the failure to calculate our tax

withholding correctly. many of us teachers talked to dr. wayne yesterday about the fact that in april many of us discovered that due to withholding over the course of our ten months of employment. we owed the feds thousands, i owed the feds 7,000 for last year's under withholding and i'm really concerned about that continuing next year. i will not be able to keep working for sfusd if i'm losing money. >> thank you, and sarah one more time are you there? >> speaker: yes i'm here can you hear me. >> yes, go ahead. >> speaker: a substitute teacher and i worked for the district since 2001. and because empower sf and they didn't pay my sta union dues, i had a disability that required

me to work lesson the online program. i didn't get work and i'm losing my health insurance. and i don't want to lose my health insurance. i've been a loyal employees, and they're going to dock my husband's check $500. he will not be able to pay expensed. and this because of empower sf i'm losing this. i'm working now consistently and i'm losing health insurance. i want somebody to resolve this. i want my insurance renewed. >> sarah, could you please email me your personal information. are you still there? >> speaker: i am still there. >> my email is-- >> speaker: hold on. i have to print that out.

>> clerk: eelej the number 1, @ sf u.s. d. >> thank you. >> thank you. >> speaker: thank you. >> that concludes public president president lam. >> thank you, thank you to the public. this time i would like to open it up for comments from colleagues and board members. questions for the superintendent? vice president boggess. >> i wonder if you can talk about, to me as a commissioner, not saying that this individual did xy andz but what how were the errors made and how are we

going to correct it and how to improve the system to catch these things? as they're happening in process versus after the fact? >> yeah, i think i'll give two examples. i think one is there needs to be, i started sharing there needs to be a full accounting on what happened and where did this go wrong. as an example, giving that example, finding out that there was a recommendation around the staffing level that was not implemented finding out how that was communicating. we know we're facing budget issues but if anybody would ask if you would invest in this to avoid that, everything would have said, how did that not get to the, you know, enter into the conversation to be able to make a decision. and then, so having need the full accounting and secondly, we need what is, you know, i

mean, you know, while i recognize some of these things happen while i'm not here, while i'm here, what is being put in place to ensure that does not happen again? so now how does the board know that is the resource that they need. so sing, concrete examples that we need to present the full accounting and you need to see the issues are addressed. >> and i guess to follow-up on that, when do you feel that members of the public will see that full you hadity and be able to have a fuller picture of everything. >> so we've had this discussion to some extent and we say we're focused on resolving the issue. but, i will say that i have started, myself looking into this and as part of the, again as part of the process of

learning what to fix. i think, i hear the need, the need for it. so let me consider what the timeline would be for that so the next time you ask, i'll have an answer. >> i really appreciate tha. i think i'm just curious about is, i totally lost my thought which means maybe i will not need to say is it so i'll step back. >> commissioner hsu? >> yes, given that some comments were about not having enough notice about this meeting, in line with na, would i like to know what is a more proactive communication plan about empower to broad constituents. there are lots of other constituents in within the sf u.s. d universe, there is

parents, teachers, just people who care about sfusd, how are you going to update everything to people don't still think, it's still a mess even though we're making a good progress but not everybody knows. so instead of just updating a dashboard, not everybody is going to look at the dashboard. >> yeah, we've been doing the dashboard, we send out messages to staff, community messages where we got appreciation for that message and also some feedback about the challenges. i will say the conversation that had you heard was reference, i do get to speak to a group of teachers from lowell and out of that came two key straj tegies that we need to implement. having up front, here's what happened this week. and if you want to learn more,

here's the explanation. i gave a de tailed explanation about health benefits and they appreciated hearing that and said that would be good to know. not everybody is going to read through everything and secondly, i did think that we need to find more forums for interaction for more action on the overall and general questions because it was helpful going through, we ended up going with an employee through a pay stub and that was luminating to a lot of people. i was able to point out some things, information that they were asking for. finding out more of those engagements. those are two things that came out of yesterday that we need to do. >> those are good things but they're reactive. the teachers came and you answered them. >> yes, so rather than wait, create forums for that.

>> how can we in general think of way to be more proactive without people saying, what happening. >> yes, that's what i'm saying, how are we going out and speaking about what is, what is happening. >> can we sort of have a plan next time. >> yes, so those are the strategies so i need to put it together into a plan. >> commissioner motamedi and i have a comment--go ahead, commissioner alexander. >> motamedi alexander and then. >> first i do want to say thank you to a & m in the last several of weeks as a board member, i feel like that i'm finally getting updates that are cause oriented and scope and the timeline is being put forward. that said, i do share the on

going concerns around accountability, clarity around the timeline and also about just a true of an audit to make sure that what we have going forward is working but also that our teachers and all those affected by the pay roll system have confidence that from the beginning, to the present that they have have been made whole and their paychecks have been corrected and reviewed. so i also want to echo concerns about noticing. you know, special meetings, they don't have to be noticed, we have 24 hours. that said as a courtesy to both members and public, i do agree that the presentation should be loaded and viewable and there be notice. i had not seen the presentation that you just saw. i saw it alongside you, i want to underscore the work that we

did as a board around our governorance practices and our commitment on our end and ak that that be reciprocated by staff and to adhere to the hand off that took place, i guess like the back and forth that is part of that. i'm going to echo timeline, i appreciated your comment supervisor and also commitment to a full review. i know we have to fix going forward but a i commitment to a full review to all those who may be affected who may not even realize that are affected. >> i want to echo much of what or maybe all of what commissioner motamedi just said. and just to say, and several

commissioners brought up the fact of hiring more commissioners and that's something i'm uncomfortable with. and as my colleague commissioner motamedi said, this is the first time that i've seen progress. i think a & m is getting us towards fixing this problem. the problem is, we have serious issues in the district. and that's one of the things that has come out. that was a cause of the problem in the first place and it's now very very clear. so i want to say that publicly. so having here a & m is filling capacity. some sft positions are on the ground doing the work. so in this sense, they're not consulting, they're actually doing the work. and so i think a part of this conduct is, bringing increasing our capacity to fix this problem. that being said, come april, we need to have the capacity to be able to actually run this

system on our own and have a competent business in our school district. i don't know if you want to anything about that. i want to raise that as a concern around this contract and i'm sure when a & m leaves, we have a plan to set up for success moving forward. >> yeah, i'll just say, yes and when identifying one of our barriers, it was about the, you know the technical term is lack of redundancy. we need more staff hiring staff who can do, you know, hiring staff who can shadow the people who are doing what they, you know, all those tasks, so we have multiple people who can do that. we do need to start working on that hiring now so by april, it's, you know, we have it in, we have that in place. >> i also want to make a couple

of comments, i want to echo and support many of the remarks that have been expressed by my colleagues. one thing, i want to particularly lift up, is around the accountability piece. because that was the promise that when we agreed to bring a & m on, it was around stabilization. and now we're reaching digging deeper into the root cause issues. and just tonight, thank you to you and your team, continuing to be much more, deliberate and naming those root causes and what is most challenging and continues to be troubling is understanding the lack of business processes and systems internally. and you know, what are we going to do and that is really lead

by our superintendent to put together what that plan looks like and how to implement that. i also want to acknowledge that the lack of business prophecies and systems is something that was highlighted to us in the fiscal health report as well on going concerns from our fiscal experts and to remind acknowledge that this board is well aware along with our superintendent that we continue to be understate watch because of the vulnerabilities around our business practices and financial system. so it will going to be critical that this board is looking forward that accountability and the timeline for doctor wayne to be bringing forward. with that, do you have additional comment? at this time i would like, we

made a motion with a second with dr. wayne's amendment of as records. >> commissioner alexander. >> yes. >> vice president. >> yes. >> commissioner hsu. >> yes. >> commissioner motamedi. >> yes. >> commissioner sanchez. >> yes. >> commissioner wiseman ward. >> yes. >> president lam. >> yes. >> 7 yes. >> thank you, i appreciate, i know these are difficult decisions, you know, i'm presenting to you to have to make and you know, there is the commitment to both resolve these issues and you know, follow-up on the accountability piece. i want to appreciate the partnership and i want to appreciate, you heard me to have reassigned staff who did not necessarily sign up to

become case manager but working with employees, and that command center, you know is true partnership of, you know, district leadership and staff working with a & m, we have members there as well. we even have today we were hosting members from the city of san francisco who may be able to support us. so i do see everything recognizing that we're in the state of emergency. >> thank you. we will now shift to our informational items tonight. i would like to call upon aj travel. we will take a few moment to see get situated and we can get started.

>> good evening, again.

>> i do appreciate this second meeting around the tainl, it's an opportunity to have discussion. joining us at the table is anne marie our financial officer and aj from the council of gray city school as well as alan from california department of education. >> i would like to ask the audience, if would you like to have side conversations please go out into the lobby.

and our values and establishing goals for and the guard rails and in last time we talked about part of monitoring for student outcome. today's session is about, learning from aj the discussion among us, what does that look like? we worked with a lot of districts that, what does that look like when we're aligning the support. and then we have a second workshop in february, what does it look like, what we sources do we have? that would be after the governor releases the initial budget and that will be more lead by henry and i and elliot, aj will be here to keep us on

track but that will be more on, you know, taking the principles we learn tonight what does that mean as we plan the budget. >> thank you, wonderful to be with you all again. you all have a really tough situation with you and having watched other teams. i appreciate seeing on online photos of you interacting with staff, i appreciate the level that the board is bringing to this and the amount of time that you're spending outside of board meetings to under what is happening. it is, an impossible situation that you're handling it as well.

i've seen, governorance teams handle something of that nature. this evening we're here to talk about the budget process. i want to accomplish a couple of things with our time. one is to think through the process from today to the moment that you adopt the next budget. but also i want to give you an opportunity to practice and think what things should i be thinking about and asking about this process and where the process should i be thinking about and about the things. so you leave with practice on what your role and how you expert leadership. fortunately, we have some experts. so if you have expert level questions, i'll differ to appropriate individuals. first the easiest question and this will be the frame for all

of time when if comes time for the board to adopt the budget what is the primary criteria that the board should apply whether or not they should adopt a budget? is it helping us meet our goal. it's the number one criteria. why should that be the number one criteria you should apply? >> because the money should follow the intent? >> yeah, the money should follow the intent, why is that the number one criteria you apply? >> adopt the goals. >> adopt the goals for a reason, it was not just for show. why should that be the number one criteria. >> to improve student outcome. >> to whom did you make that commitment. >> ourselves and the community.

>> we made a commitment to the community and ourselves there is a set of priorities, and we're going to focus in on what those priority on what our students should be able to do. this is the easiest thing to understand in the front of the process. but you will find it one of the hardest things to accomplish throughout the end of the process. so just anticipate this will not be the last time i ask which sounds like an easy and obvious question. it's one thing to say we stand on the shoulders of our community and that we're marching in the direction. it's another thing entirely to act on it, a large part of my role in the coaching capacity will be to constantly highlight anytime of the behavior from my perspective are materially deviated from the commitment that you made, moving away from the saying, this is what i want for our children and we're aligning our resources.

the reason you have me here is to have me. let's dive into this process. everything that we're going to talk about is in the process. so those who are meticulously literate, you sorted this out. but if you haven't, this will be an opportunity to review. we'll walk by it step by step. starting with budgeted option part 1, board and superintendent plan for budgeting? so really you've already completed the first step of the budget process. you clarified for the superintendent what the priorities are, you said these are the grounded community vision and here are the goals for the students should do and community values and here are the non negotiate value, you've completed the first and for the

board the single most important step in the adoption process. what happens next is the superintendent has homework, and you heard him speaking to that that he'll come back to you with some amount of assumptions here's what i think, our expenditure picture is going to be. and ideally you have a full conversation around that. and i think we said we're doing that when? january 10th? is this february? >> it's february, which you'll have the conversation. a large paster of the attention around that is before you ever talk about an actual budget, there should be clarity for you as board members about what are the assumptions around what money, what resources are coming in, what are some assumptions around, what type of expenses we're expecting to

have. and that's a critical thing to get clarity before you talk about what the budget is actually going to be. so that's, step 1. board says what the priority and the superintendent analyzes the landscape and says these are some of our assumptions. what questions do you have about part one of the process? >> i'm going to make an object servation, is i have not seen us go through a process where we look at the bucket and the assumptions. from what i just observe this will be a new approach and so not to jump ahead but i'm assuming that when aoufr talking about the operational buckets we're also talking about, all, all revenue sources

and expenditures. >> that would be my recommendation, that is going to be constrained by what you have available. for example, i know states where the, the state department of education got people projections about their resources and extremely light. well then that means the superintendent will get you projections. i know places where new legislation came in in the middle of the budget set ising season that created new constraints on the budget, that popular thing, yeah, those things roll in at any time. so they're going to be, things that you cannot predict that will have i am panting on how useful those assumptions are about revenue expenses. so don't write them down as gospel but it's helpful and the planning process to have been thoughtful about those things to the extent that you can't be.

>> the government makes this proposal in january. >> the other is how this timeline maps into our school site and when they make really important decisions about programs and staffing. this money coming in, can it be used for the next school year, maybe we're dealing with bigger budgetary concerns. it seems like all of this, we need to make sure that we know how it's landing on school site decisions. >> yes, that is definitely not a part of the board's budget process. but that's a part of the superintendents administrative cycle working with staff and making sure, and i say not only the staff have an understanding what resources are available to them. but also some amount of support how best to utilize those. and i have to think back to my

district one of the things that we pushed forward in the boards was really trying to push more resources to being decided on at the campus level. so the superintendent, honoring our action pushed for that. and we quickly found out that our principals had lacked capacity and had to do on how tft consistent on the different resources. so all of a sud zen, title one issue. so it's not just a matter of how what we needs to do but make sure that they have the support that they need to deploy those as effectively as possible. that being said, none of that is part of the board's budgeting process. but it's something that, you he department have to handle. >> yeah, so i'm interested in that, it seems like if the board, if our approval is in june.

and the school have to given a budget and given decisions. so the bored says in may or june, we don't have, this is not aligned, but yet there is all kinds of things that have happened. >> that happens in every district in the land. is it realistically, you're going to have schools that are already making plans, your more clever principals are making plans right now about things that will happen next year. the reality is there is no way for your principals to be successful waiting on your current timeline. so they're going to make assumptions and proceed. usually these things workout because your principal tend to be a clever group. but that being said s yes, you always run the risk that there are budgetary priorities that take place at final adoption

that don't perfectly echo planning that happened at the campus site. and i have yet to come up with a reasonable approach to avoiding that. other than, i guess potentially you all could create a budgetary process where you did final adoption in february. >> what about, i guess to you, historically we've had a very low percentage of our budget on construction for example. so let's say, that the board, to me that seems like a board level conversation around, how many are you sending to site. if we already made the decision, the decision has been around allocation in march, how does that conversation occur? >> let me back up, there is one item that we missed.

you're making an assumption that may or may not fit. because of number one criteria that the board needs to consider is, whether or not the budget aligns with accomplishment of the goals and secondary whether it aligns with honoring of the guard rails fm because that's the primary decision making criteria. my coaching to you is to come in with a default assumption that the budget is not aligned to the accomplishment of the goals and adheres to the guard rails. often i'm saying, hey, you hired the superintendent give him the benefit of the doubt. but in the budgeting processes we're, my coaching to you is come in with a de fault assumption. you know what, i bet this is not in line with the superintendent staff. proof otherwise, and then it's on them to say here is what

we're recommending for the resources on and here's why. and here's why we believe that this is going to accomplish the goals. your judgment of the budget is not in fact contingent on is the superintendent using the strategy that makes the most sense? that's not the basis, the basis is does it they come forward that the first five resource allocation is accomplishment of the goals. and it should be a odd bar, you should not be easily convinced. but the standard is, as i look at this budget, has the superintendent made a compelling argument for how this resources will accomplish our goals. not as a superintendent identified deployment of resources or processes for deployment consistent with what i think is the best way to get that to actually accomplish the goals.

i would give an example where does he get to do that before june is my question? >> so let me try, this is a learning for everything. i've done budgets for the district. >> slightly different process. >> so right now in the district, 75% of our expenditure goes to school, 25% to our central office expenditure. of the 75% that goes to school, that number, that number is grounded in an analysis. of the 75% make up a little, you know, 80% of that 75% is kind of set. you have to have classroom teachers, custodians, there are things that are set.

it's the 20% that the school, that's where they design and here there is a lot of authority and a economy given to schools, do you want to hire more coaches, do we want to have more social workers things like that? that is going to happen over the next six months before we you know, before we before we make any big decisions to say hey, maybe we want to change, maybe a board level or my recommendation of where, where do we have to have more economy or less economy of the decisions. at the same time, the district's office, there is up to 25% there is same thing. we need pay roll department and we need, things that expenditure that's we need. but then there are things that we do that can shift. i will say this in the first year of budgeting, because of

budgeting, it's just going to be principals looking at the goals that are going to make the shifts themselves? we're not going to be able to provide direction in time for that. and then, at the district level, there is more, i think there is more we say and that's what i imagine the conversation happening in february when we're getting the specific dollars, i don't know if that was too much. >> yeah, some of that i would say, absolutely and a few, would i say please, absolutely not. and let's start with the please absolutely not, because the rest was spot on. so the thing that would i push back against is no, the board is already articulated its priorities. if there is a priority that the board wanted around something else, then the opportunity to express that is their goals, so it's not like, these are the priority except for all the priorities that we have. so encouraging having the additional prior pit, to the

defeats the purpose of having priorities. i want to be clear. this is what i said when we started, the hardest thing about having priority is not saying it, it's actually honoring it. so you all said, there are this specific set of constraints that we place on the superintendent in the form of guard rails, those are the prior pit. as you have additional prior pit, that is lovely, but those are not which you have articulated in the vision of the value. there is one small caveat, one of the tool that we, find at some boards take advantage of, the boards can adopt a special type of guardrail that we refer to as a series of action. and a series of action certainly with provide one more opportunity for the board to try to express the vision of value of the community. and if that's something that

makes sense, so for example, auto maoe, and they can, so you, that's the board expressing a means through which we move the enveloper of decision making from central office to campus and back. but, with the exception of that as a special type of guardrail, that is something that we can discuss. the goal of the roared in budgeted option is to ascertain the extend where there is alignment between the guard rails, the priorities that you state and the budget. it's not the rule of the board looking at way here are the things that should happen and additional priorities.

as i told you my task during these processes, we constantly press you to the things you set priority and call you back to them. so this is, this is why we have, you know, trying to get the very front end of this, before we have done anything else is to set some expectations on what it looks like to be focused on the priority that we set. we're talking about right now about what happens we even get into budgetary process. and we've identified the board and said what the priorities r superintendent identified the assumptions and done some amount of engagement with customers and staff and developing some of that and should be able to relate some of that to you. other questions and thoughts about part 1 before we move on to the subsequent parts of the sequence.

it's planning the plan essentially. any other questions on part 1? yeah. >> pi have a question on r cap process and the role that it plays not just how did we lead with guard rails and know that we must improve that process. >> i don't see the l.cap as a governorance, there may public some people that disagree but if they do, i just think they're wrong. because it's not a governorance document, it falls under every other plan that you all produce. and that is delegate it to the superintendent to produce the plan that is consistent with the priorities that you articulated and he should come back and be prepared to convince you that l cap is an alignment with the accomplishment with the guards

and rails that you defined. if you're not convinced, i would encourage you not to a vote to adopt. but be clear the only reason that you're voting is not because it's a governorance document. in my mind, it's very cut and dry designed as a management document. the only reason is because that's the law of the land. and it's only being the law, that causes it to be governorance document, raised to your level. if it was not the law, my encouragement would be don't vote on it at all and either he creates an l.cap that in due course he'll be looking for all kinds of employment. but you will have to vote on that because that's a requirement. i encourage to accept the same criteria to what extent with. as an aside, one of the things that is mentioned in part 1 is

the superintendent when putting together the budget should do some amount around the budget, should be doing some amount of checking in. he should not be doing this in isolation, he should be checking in with customers and staff. i would say that that is similar to l.cap, it's reasonable to check in with the superintendent. what process that you went through that engaged with our customers, families, students and how did you include staff and not just the staff in this building but representation, you know, system wide. how did you engage with the staff in a way that gives you confidence. zoo part two is really straightforward.

ttsz easing' to read the words but let's take it one by one. the superintendent any questions about who drafts the budget. there is always a temptation, always a temptation to violate this step and have voters, well i was elected so i should be drafting that budget. i encourage you with that temptation. this is a path that leads awe way and distribution of resources that does not, is less likely to honor. so they use a process, they engage folks and they and then they bring it back to you all. at that point, you all have start to have questions about it. but the main thing here is after all the listening to the

super does after all connection that he connects w the superintendent will sit down and craft the budget. questions about the saoufpt drafting the budget? questions about the draft role drafting the budget. can you move this over here for me, yeah, that will be the temptation. but critical thing here it's not the board members budget. what you all adopt needs ton a board, a budget that represents the board, members see them. so members always want to put their thumbs on the budget. but that's complete violation in what you claim to believe in, partially equity but in a

whole other level, democracy. it's the board's budget. so if the board as a whole wants to have a conversation about its priorities, that's always fair game. that will then wind up applying to the next budget not this one. but it's always fair game to say, you know what, we just picked the wrofrng priorities. if you want to change priorities, that's fine you've got to move to the next budget. but that's the board's role in articulating what should be prioritized is you adopt your goals and guard rails. other questions about this idea that the superintendent develops the budget? superintendent drafts the budget and comes back with a draft. and then at that pointcious you start to ask questioning about it. again i want to reiterate the standard is to come into the process with the belief that

you know, you know this budget is is not in line with my community's vision and values as articulated. and so it's up to the superintendent to convince you otherwise and provide you evidence. and my caution is not to be automatically convinced to really use this a occasion by which the superintendent is clearly spelling out for you and through you in public forum, the entire community here is what the alignment looks like. >> i think this is what i was looking about earlier and i don't think i framed my question correctly. if this conversation is happening in june, i don't understand how it can have impact on the budget lefm. so if the superintendent is presenting a budget two weeks, three weeks before it's due, we ask these questions, if the board says, we're not convinced, we don't have an option. and what i see every single year. we do this, i think now we're

set toup do a softer way. but we're up against the wall. >> yes. >> i guess i'm saying, how does, i want to ask these questions early enough so that you know, so it's for him too, i want to be able to say and' i'm spectacle about f. >> this is why i clearly articulate you should start this process, 35 months three to 5 months before the statutory deadline for adoption. >> this document is six months. >> no for part one it says 2 or 5 months, i'm reading it. all of the very last sentence

is part one. it take place three to six months. and so that's why i'm saying, this whole process needs to start at least 3 to 5 months before you get around to adoption. because to your point, if you start anything later than that, it's going to be really really hard for the board to have a thorough conversation without feeling like we just have to press play because our backs are against the wall. that minimum should start 5 months before adoption. which what we're doing this time around. >> i totally understand, what they're saying. so let me try this. when i'm imagining, this may happen sometime in march, right. but like, for it to happen the way you just described, to alexander's question, i feel like in february or march, i'm

just saying this, [laughter] here's a task and you have, we talked about it a little. unlike say for looking at it, and let's keep it in the office, 15% of our expenditure are on literacy. we need to bump that up to 25% and here's the bigets of what that is, training adoption of assessment, and some staffing, you know. and then, so that's not a budget that's like, i mean it's a high level here's where we're going. that is then, you're going from 15 to 20%, that's not bold enough. >> that would be huge, actually. >> and that, otherwise, here. >> yeah, those scenarios,

starting this as as soon as possible, to be sink and the conversation we'll be having in february, ideally we'll have in december or january and then the follow fup. yes, with this documents contemplating is that you're nudging back your time a little bit so it should be conceivably possible for the board to, vote on a budget and april or may, definitely don't recommend you waiting until june to do so. like the, all things being equal earlier is in fact better in the scenario. but to your point to get there, that means you would have started earlier. and it's hard to do that when you're up against the wall when the state provides you data. but, the other way to do that is find other creative ways to you know, figure out how we can press the timeline or what are the things that we can do earlier in the process. there is a certain amount of

listening, stakeholder engagement can be done, you know, can be front loaded that is not in fact heavily dependent on the state. the other massive rethinking that all of this encourages is the normal way that they do budgeting, and this is all across, the country is they do, they go back to the board and say, here is statutory bucket a and b, these are folks know what i'm talking about. i find that to be thoroughly worthless in order to understand. what i'm recommending in fact, is completely distinct from the process. will they still need need to do that and for just operational purposes, yes, they will still need to do that. but talking about this bucket and that bucket is not a proxy for how we're realigning our

resources on priority. that's part of the challenge is there is two way to see look at it from one financial systems implementation perspective which what you normally get, which again i find wholly inadequate. what this is recommending is separate from that. yes, which is additional work for your stefl is a look at your budget that articulated from a perspective of your prior pits. >> i think that, the what i'm imagining is, in prior he'ser when we've been able to have some conversation in january, february, before where we need to change the frame. here is the approach that the

superintendent is recommending for how school budget play be developed. and that is part of the articulation of the draft budget. does that align with goals and honor the guard rails? and then, the recognition of then, what that will look like when the budget is presented where it's the compilation of all of oufr school sites going through a school planning process and making decisions how they will school by school use this fund. having more of that conversation to really talk about the approach and the rational of why this approach will address the goals, would probably help with the question that, that comes about the spring as schools are planning.

>> what do you think? >> observation by pointing and what you just said, it seems to me, like 15% to 25%, too m it should have been like a third grader, asking the teacher what do you think is going to take? is it going to take one of two, five of you? and then%backer then you say, 5 teachers here and 120 times 5, and instead of saying 25% and that comes up to one person.

st. it's like figuring out how much to spend. >> starting with the kids and the people serve them and building from bottom up. >> may i, you spend a extreme amount of time with this gentleman and a couple of his friends going through your vision goals and guard rails. you've done the head work on this. what you just said and joe excuse me but it's part of the wound not the why. your superintendent may decide that there is a better way to do this. you may not like it, you may get pushed back and how how you

evaluate him. did he increase student outcomes? and you know, i want to make this simple because the state is very complicated but basically it boils to 8 priorities. and you can almost anything under those 8 priorities. your goal that you developed, i guarantee you, provide a higher level, they're your top goals and from that goals, that's what the superintendent will say, let us see by third grade what is the best way to do this. he's doing the how, he's doing the what and you told him the what. i understand that a best practice may be to go to the community but technically that's dr. wayne's job. i don't think i'm disagreeing with you i'm actually reenforcing it. >> you know what, anything that he proposes he's going to be able to justify and we're not

going to have anything to say about it. done. that's what i'm hearing. >> i'm not saying you don't have discussions and you don't inform his management decisions but you don't make them, there is a difference. >> what i'm hearing what you described, does not necessary laoe, the way we described, i didn't comment whether i would or not, bring 25% that i gave that up in my head or talk to teachers? you better talk to the teacher, but i feel like, i feel like, the i heard three examples of where the conversation of the budget discussion comes from the guard rails of the goals. meaning like, decision making,

is it l cap a major decision? i know what you're saying, it is, it is something that is put for the board one of the things, whether we say it's a major decision. so there is affective decision make ing. there is resource allocation in regard guard rails and then there is the serving the whole child in guardrail. i expect to be challenged to see how you're putting a structure that meet our goal also doing it in a way that does not negotiate while doing that. sometimes these guard rails are a little thick.

the values of the community, the guardrails in which you have to pursue those. this is why you have the copy if you don't have a copy on the green, there is copies in the middle of the taibs. --table. those are not options, those are not suggestions, they're mandates. inquiry is fair game. what is not fair game is telling them, you have to do this way or i'm not convinced. we president with parents and guardians fwf you make a decision to make. and either he can convince you that he honored it or he can't if he has homework to go do.

you have every right to ask. but, the limitation is, it's just what specifically in the language of the goals and what speflz in the language of guard rails. so for example, affective decision making, says parents guardians and students and staff. it does not say about taxpayers. and so you can say hold on, the taxpayers are putting the bill on this budget, what did you do to engage with them? is that reasonable? sure. that sounds reasonable but is that what you actually said? so if i was here, i would say hold on folks, that is outside what you articulated to your superintendent. maybe we need to modify in the future but it's not what you articulated that. i appreciate that that is a

great example twaoent goals and the guard rails and his expected task. >> and having that conversation, we focus on in termr guard rails but this is a different approach of following the guard rails. in the end, i think what we're going to debate, you give an obvious example, what is meaningful consultation. and you don't get to say, meaningful conversation, and if you had 19, so we're, if there is somewhere between, you don't get to say that to they don't get to believe everything i said. i consulted with people and i that was enough and anybody who you're hearing a complaint about, they dismiss them. somewhere between there. and the tension between the two is healthy governorance practice. that is entirely helpful.

there is a tension between that and that is what the process is intending to elevate. now it is on the superintendent to offer some interpretation. what i interpret is to mean xy andz. and here's the evidence that we did xy andz. and you can demonstrate or not. if the board as a whole says, conducting xy andzno reasonable person would ever look at xy zthat is a different conversation. at that point what the board is saying that the superintendent interpretation is unreasonable. and that is an appropriate position for the board to take. there will always be a board member who thinks that's not reasonable. what is relevant is majority is right, it's going to be that guy. the more relevant point is did the majority of the board, look at it, look at interpretation

and say you know what, a reasonable person would get there, it's not the definition, it's not the interpretation i would say. his interpretation was i sat down with the, these 30 different constituent p groups and walked through this conversation with each of them. you know, over the course of two months. and that's the definition of reasonable. and some of you are going to say, that's not reasonable, you need to do a b and c but unless that's the majority of the board, we keep it moving. that television is a healthy television those are healthy conversations to have. you set the priorities, he's interpreting them and now he's going to bring evidence and he's actually following through on his interpretation, you know, of the priorities and he's giving you evidence that suggest, the reason we are hiring 5 more literacy coaches

for our lower elementary is because here's the evidence that the unique need that the students would be best met by having access to these group of professionals and they're going to be targeted. and that, and that's his argument. it does not matter that you in your heart of raerts is five people who says, what happens is, reasonable interpretation of the goal's goal and brought any evidence that that is a reasonable course of action to take. and if so, at that point, you have to be prepared to vote. what is critical about this. the decision to vote on a budget is is not whether you like it or not, that is the hard thing that i'm going to be hard with.

whether to approve the budget it's not a function whether you agree. the question is, is the superintendent evidence, that the budget is in fact an alignment with the accomplishment of your goals and alignment with having honored your guard rails. what she said about grounding the decision about the focus of doing this work and having the expertise that really resonate. i also understand we're not to micromanage how dollars are being spent. and one of the things that i wonder and make sure that we're honoring how are we engaging, with the extras that are doing

the teaching comes into the guardrail of affective decision making. if we're talking about how money is going to increase, well then presumably you're engaging with school sites and teachers about best ways to improve literacy and oh, this and this and this, and that will inform the budget. i wonder if that's a through line of affective decision making, will not make a decision without utilizing and that gets to, i think what, at least really resonated with me about making sure that we're listening to the folks that know how to do this.

>> that includes, parents and guardans and staff will be impacted by the decisions. >> that is a standard that you adopted. >> right, so, i would hope that's what it would look like talking to the people. >> so you level need to engage in consultation with these constituents groups that you have described, adoption of and so certainly having those conversation in advance and bringing you budget is having those meaningful consultation discussions but who is specifically that is? what the conversation are may not match your interpretation of you know, well he talked to

the people at this school. but i asked the folks at this time and he didn't get to talk to the superintendent about this. or maybe his definition of consultation is he invited all the principal and i want to you go through these questions and start to bring some of the conversation you know, back i'm going to sit down with the principal. so then the teachers approach you and say, i never got to talk to the superintendent and the superintendent says i engaged with conversation with the teachers. your investment is evidence that he did it. that's going to be the challenge is each of us, like, i do a lot, i work with a lost

boards on constituent engagement. i have ideas on what my threshold is, and i have to nudge them up. but in the point that we get here, it's actually not my standard for what is meaningful consultation is the reason of interpretation he has come with. now if his interpretation is unreasonable, that's a different conversation. it's not one na you agree with it does not match the interpretation that you would have. but he's not going to give you one that is unreasonable. >> but i think, in some ways you're offering, and i think i appreciate the line that you're drawing. but what i appreciate more is he said, we're going to work that out and to me, what is most encouraging is there is actually a space for healthy conversation. if i did cult any teacher, you know, i would probably is not a reason. >> that's weird.

when i get challenges is i think there is space for me to say, okay, right, it looks like this and here's why and here's why it didn't look like, because, because this is a controversial topic. literacy, there is consultation, you know, but basically, we get to start to say and not being being defensive. what is reasonable consultation. i feel it's the focus of the

conversation having this framework as opposed. president lam brought up the about l cap. what is it that we're going to be seeing? it has been and still required, you know, some piece of it has to be documented in the l.a. cap that you described as a document, but presumably there needs to be some documentation of what the goals are and what the activities and through the line of budget to the

activities to meet those goals. >> regarding thed l cap it's still the standards. so it's the same conversation it's just the different document. what is it that he with should be voting on and reviewing that

does satisfy, the things that, in here? there is going to be a bunch of key decisions, it's just a normal part of operations and for all of them, the same cell process of you know, what si priority and then the superintendent communicating what are some of the core assumptions, the doing engagement in a way that is consistent with your values with the communities values and coming back to you with a product and you evaluate the product. that is the critical part of

the government function, you will figure out where that is alignment. and once they combination you that the alignment exist, then you vote on it. it feels repetitive, even when we talked about the earlier, the superintendent will share expenses, like it talks about including enrollment expectations. and at the end do we get to the budget, commissioner alexander's point earlier, what

happens two weeks before the budget needs to be adopted, we get the first reading and so, and that's why all of a sudden, there is the unveiling of presumably the work that has been done. and also the calendar has to be reflective of the needs. >> there are two things about calendaring, i provided you all with the board implement timeline and articulated how you should do this here and here, so now my team is going to revamp that thing and bring it back to you over in the next 18 month period. so how you you spend your time is sleeply important for governoring things.

we're going to have to bring it to you and you tweak and decide to adopt it and key things like budget are absolutely on that document. that's one part of calendaring. a second part of calendaring that you cannot do but it will be critical is your monitoring calendar. so once we've got the interim you have a board monitoring calendar. but then you'll see each month here is the specific slices of our guard rails that will be monitoring.

there is no way to have it and that is publicly available? >> all of these are public documents. >> so as far as being in service to the community the community is aware of what we've committed to? >> this is helpful it was feeling very abstract.

we'll be talking about math next month, so it's really great to have that monitoring calendar. not only, we're not, it's not nebulous whether or not we're focused on the priorities here it is in realtime. and we invite to join us. >> when. >> the monitoring calendar is at all times the function of the interims. >> so when do we anticipate this? we're going to start monitoring. >> we'll do a test. >> okay. and then next year, next year is when we'll have it. >> you only have base line for a number of these things. >> we'll have a governorance calendar in january.

>> so usually after the interim it takes them the final month. so i would expect to have a calendar in february, that's just the function of when the data is made available. so that means, it sounds like as long as you land on interims in january, you should have a monitoring calendar by february and start doing that. the first month are just going to be for practice. whether i do in zoom or in-person, we'll give you a sample monitoring report and we'll have practice so you can start building the muscle. goal monitoring at the governorance level, is significantly different than the type of progress monitoring that some of you have done in your other positions. so we'll take two or three months to practice and get you

up to speed but also give administration time. ever finally having this, but there is a lot of trial and error in the first few months of this. it's just, the normal start of this process. >> we're talking about both. >> in march we're going to be talking about our literacy plan.

so that's not, well we are going to talk about this today, the context of our monitoring report. we have task force, that's, that's what i'm saying, i can governor calendar lays out the main topic for the next six months. >> so when i work on, you'll see those types of things go on there. so the monitoring calendar is covering. here is what we're going to spend board meeting on and the intention is majority is monitoring but other activities will be spending time on is in

there as well. the implementation what is a big picture of the activity and board is engaged in. for example, if you have ad hoc beyond that timeline as well. >> it's just affirmed, because you had not the support but you had, presented them and gotten some engagement from them, so i think this confirms that in january you'll be bringing those forward? >> as i'm engaging with people, the superintendent follows and we're looking them over and so, yeah, so then the idea is to show various updates from when i presented and, in october.

that we talked about interim goal of literacy. i don't know that by january, the we're going to need to talk about literacy plan. so if, i know i'll have an interim goal on literacy. our benchmark may evolve what we're using when we get into the real monitoring of 23 and 24. some of it may still change because we're developing literacy plans that might shift, with assessment we use. >> and at this point in the process, that's entirely normal. >> okay.

but that is really important to be able to tie back to the plan, and to be really signal in the coming school year what that is. in community there is a lot of consciousness to delivering on those promises. our goal is to ininquire around that budget allocation, the assessment towards that goal is going to be important just as an example.

>> i guess you don't want to have another year go by, get us in another year and that's missed opportunity of making progress for our earliest learners. >> i totally hear that. this is exactly about 20 minutes ago, i saw healthy total to hear that. we're going do need to make some decisions assessment, you want then, when i come i'm going to say, here's what i can engage, here's how i can engage in meaningful consultation in three months as opposed to 12 months. that's where i would be tempted to say, that's where the tem ption, we need to make decisions. the temptation is to put it off. i'll come with something reasonable but in three months, it's going, we need to decide this. >> and towards that, it's then your rational and evidence

around the trade off. i think being really explicit that if we want to engage in a longer reasonable, then this is the risk and us being clear and communicating also with the public because we're representatives of the community to what that trade off will be. >> and that been the board. if the board wants to say, we are owed this and we're owed on that timeline. but giving the as a board, we're comfortable continuing to be in the dark for x number of months. that is a decision that is within the board's authority, instead of coming back to us with this which we should have in april, we understand that you want to take more time. we're comfortable not nothing about this until september.

recognizing there will be have to be edits and recognition later on. >> the last struggle is for the moment venue, we're talking about the budget. it's the superintendent creating the budget, responsible for the budget. yet the venue continues to be the board room for so much of the decision making whether it's literacy or budget or i don't know, many number of things. so what i'm, what i'm seeking is some demonstrable or some demonstration where we have staff contacts. and it's not where we don't work here.

so it's great to have a governorance calendar and monitoring that we're doing as a board, because that is our responsibility. but it needs to go in conjunction with clear ownership and ways to engage and get information from staff fm and i'm still waiting, governorance committee and i'm still waiting for the designee and what the management what the concerns are. >> there is a system for that. >> there is a system and of getting our agendas out earlier which is very much part of the building trust. and so, i'm feeling as a board member, increasing pressure because of what, we have done on our part.

even though there is progress being made. so i just want to name that the pressure still lands on the board because that is how things have been historically and it's not changing noticably from staff. you're still the designee from everything you can think of. >> that's not what i heard.

>> why are we still the point of contact for everything other than the command center? if we're going to go for this budget process, not the high school task force any number of things that i asked about every day. and i don't know what the system is, we're still getting our agendas, you know, by 5:00 p.m. the day before a special meeting. i just, we're still the most accessible. >> see--the agenda is what i'm invoking state of emergency.

i mean, there are you know, we're not expecting you to respond when you get the email around, what are you doing with the literacy plan. >> i'm just saying as we go through this budget process, i'm still grappling with, i'm grappling with the partnership of staff and visibility of staff and also just being aware of who are the staff ses i go--designee s and provide you. it's feebling very ad hoc.

and governorance we were suppose to have staff designee and there was evidence of that and i'm wondering how this con joins with the process. it still feels like, it's still feels very such thing. >> well i wonder, i don't know if this is helpful. how management is organized. thinking about the budgeting concept. there is what is happening in school site and essential office and we have a report coming out next month in the city around that and i know you're thinking about that. i guess, part i've been a little bit kind of like expecting that that was going to happen too but it sounds like this process is unholding. and it's clear that there needs

to be some shifts there. we don't have staff that is not competent. so i en generally encourage some generosity. there is a lot going on. however this is not one of the various that i would encourage any of that. the superintendent is by my recollection given a time line of deploying all of the systems starting in january that you're going to experience your for your regular meetings that

you'll get information 12 days out. that they'll be a system in place for how constituents can express concerns and all of those things that they'll be a list of designee so that when people come to you, you'll have an idea of what is the the november gator role. my recollection is superintendent, you should have those things in january. i would not encourage a lot of generosity in that timeline. on that i would not be inclined to patient. if those things don't come in line in january, you stay on budget for the school system. and that is not helpful for

your students, it is not helpful for your families. on a separate note, we intentionally made the agenda changes. i encourage you to consider reviewing that and do you need a separate standard. not a full standard but maybe a slightly separate standards that applies to meetings like this. the praoek see which which will be something that can't sit for three days. that is very infrequent. so i do not recommend you know

making your habit 24 hours, even though that's a statutory limit. i recommend going for board meetings we're going to put out the material for the boards. if it is something we have to do at minimum, we'll make sure the board members have 72 hours. so we intentionally did not attach anything like that. to meetings like this so maybe after january this may come back. if i was looking for a minimum for all meetings, my recommendation is 72 hours even in the event of things that are in urgent. in the only event that if we don't do this, 25 hours from now, you know, super bad things happen.

and either really bad look. you needed to take an action that you have 24 hours to review. so yeah, that's helpful. so we made the administrative decision to bring this now because we wanted to forward this. that was a prayed off that we didn't discuss.

if it's an action item that is the kind of advance notice that we need. it was set a long time ago. >> so we, so part of the reason that we're even having this conversation is because, there are concerns, i think valid concerns is just around what is the process going to look like? the process of your first year of implementing this work is always rough the first cycle, the first full cycle. the monitoring reports will be painful for you and your staff.

expect this will be rough and minimize your experience of suffering around it. some of the things that you're expecting are slated to be in line in january. i bring this to you all because like out of the support and love for the district, it's not, it's to build it not to break it. and i want students, we all want to do better but we have to be accountable and we hear that loud and clear. from one of the values that is not on here that i hear loud and hear is accountability, a real demand for, you know, it's support what what we say but a real demand around what we do.

within the district of why we make the decisions and justifications. and a lot of unlike the expert of the superintendent or their designee even when other logic is not available. so going through this process will allow for that to be a little bit more transparency and explanation. one thing that is always a struggle is the different site that reach out to us about things that happen to their budget. kind of near the end of the cycle and their trying to respond to it and how schools

feel isolated and targeted when a lot are experiencing the same situation and there is no clear direction from us as a district why we're making the decision and i am pantinging the school sites. and i'm interesting how that shift and how that, of really kind of making the clay, the case for why the path of the superintendent has kind of crafted is the right one. but i think ultimately we cannot agree but we can fall back on the net of the story and what is going to be produced. and part of what we're talking about here and how rerecognize it, how does that look like? what does it look like for us to ensure that they're doing all the things that we have established for them to do separate from the budget cycle. i think for us, if the budget is in support or not, is evaluation of superintendent, we all fail.

to keep achieving and producing and giving us the results that we want to see. >> all of that, the point that you heard, what you heard a critical piece of this that helps get at making sure that the community has an experience of how it's representatives are holding the administration account. a superintendent has to take on by default not convinced. and i cannot go in and say, but i'm the guy instead of the superintendent in fact has to

bring forth something that shows, here's what i interpret this to mean and here's the evidence, this is in fact that we need to go in order accomplish the needs. at the end of t i know that there are x dollars in bucket y, but that's all i know. here's the evidence here's why

we're going this way. another reason why this is important, is superintendent how superintendent have to make really tough decisions and in a place with 10,000 employees? what you need as board members in order to you know, be responsive to do your job as representative of the communiticious you need to have something to say to us. actually, here is the rational that is what the superintendent relying on, here's the evidence that is reasonable evidence to me.

you deserve to be able to have that conversation, you should not fumble around trying to justify justification, you should have that at hand. >> decision making another indicator if superintendent has engaged me for consultation. it will be minimized, the kind of thing that we're talking about. you want teachers saying, wait a minute, if that happens, that is evidence that perhaps there was an issue. so i think that's where, you know, in terms of being you don't arrive at that.

>> i would not consider that if the superintendent said, hey, i went out you know, my team, we heard these three visions for literacy. if the superintendent can articulate why it was chosen over others. that's what it would try to convince me if i was still in your seat. people are okay with that. people are understand that as decision makers we're going to make tough decisions.

>> and we also want superintendent to bring forward the spot. >> and lenny's point is also well made. i think it's entirely reasonable for the superintendent to come back and say, i heard this vision, here's why this is the one we're going with. what do you think. that is a failure of leadership.

>> yes, do you have some? >> yeah. so last thing i want to do, the last step is walk in the process. there is a special note for you here. board members, evidence that this budget does not address the goal and actly violate the guard rails, it's a reasonable for the board to check in on. but if nobody has evidence of that, you know, if people there is a reasonable interpretation, it's not the one i picked but it is there, then at that pointcious we're good to go. but if somebody has, no it's very clear that we have said that we have to have meaningful

consultation with staff and there is no evidence that staff we're engaged, it's a no, i'm not ready to vote on this. if there is res tation, is there a board majority that the superintendent has not provided evidence reasonable interpretation. if there is, then you've got to push back, if there is one, two or even three people. i say foresee them. idealy, it's really great to have 7, that's a really good day. and if there is a path, maybe you spend sometime pursuing it. this is going to require, we need to have a wholesale redesign, i say keep them. that's the whole process before

we let this topic go, i want to invite you and take a moment, imagine that you have the budget in front of you. all of you have lived through the budget cycle, imagine you have the budget in front of you, what is one question that you think you may ask. and i want to throw some questions on the table and see if they're calibrated and do some work if need. everybody take a few moments and whether on paper or on your device write down one to three questions that you may want to ask if the budget is in your hands. take a few moments and write 1 or 3 questions that you may want to ask. we'll dive to see how well calibrated they are.

>> okay, some folks are still typing away. that's great keep doing that. i've got to do something at some point. but we'll get to several of your questions.

any questions, we don't get to. my invitation, go ahead and email them to me. so who wants to put out the first question, what is an example. >> i feel like i asked this last budget cycle, maybe it's a little presum ptive. how did this budget affect our students. all right, board to what degree is that aligned with the process? >> what i was going to say, i think it would be if it was, like i was thinking of one like, let's say there was some cuts and like, you know, the

tell me how the cuts create allegations that are stuff to while a dressing equity and excellence. >> it's really specific to one of you mission and value that you codified so the thing to do is connect that question directly to that. i really want to know what impact that is going to have on the destruction. i hear you say we're going to let go of the entire curriculum department. how will making that decision

in the budget allow us to have, that is a reasonable question to ask. but it's reasonable because it's articulated. thank you by the way, i always appreciate folks who go first. is that a liveneder. >> it reflects the board's goals. >> yeah, anything else? >> yeah, the thing i would nudge for you to get the maximum value for your inquiry is taking one goal at a time. so i would not ask that question about all three, letsz start with goal one.

>> can i ask, the reason i asked, i went back and forth on that on my head, i was thinking that it may be the budget allocation is specific to just one of them. so by asking about, this allocation, yes, this relates to college and career ready. >> oh i see the question you're asking. that makes sense, i was thinking about the question differently. i see what you're asking, that makes perfect sense. as i was putting the question together, i wanted to insert a progress piece. because if we look at the highest level, we choose to universal goals, but when we look at the progression is

really important like the end of your kinder, how is this delivering on the progression of goals. could we name on that. >> yes interim is at the end of the conversation. >> i think for me, that's another thing that i raise a theme tonight. is that i don't want us to blink three years down the road and think, actually we were not monitoring the investments going in the interim. and now we're going to miss the opportunity. >> i hear the questions being asked.

how does the fact that this school needed to reduce the number meet our goal of third grade literacy. we're doing practice in january 10th accountser so we'll get in january 10th, we're going to do a practice monitoring session. questions of a tactical nature, of those three, guess which one is goal setting conversation to be based on?

>> it will also be--evaluation, the board governorance level straj tee there is some amount of technical information that is helpful for you to have. but as you see, world actually that's a really good question. and next update, and then you move on to the next one. but you don't deal with out of the blue with rare exceptions, you don't deal with out of the

blue questions. so generally what i coach board members to do, when you have technical question, how are things measured? and also i'll send this document to you all now so you'll have it in advance in january. how do we know this is a valid measure. what is the percentage of students, those are technical questions. technical questions are about how staff are doing things? those are the tactic of the school system. strategic what is our approach at the level of school system for, accomplishing because that

is clearly a tactical, board check should be great question, that's more of a tactical question. ask them before the meeting. if knowing the percent of assessment is critical to your understanding of it, and then you've done your job. that's part of why i'm so hard core on two hours. that's why i'm so hard core realistically, you're going to need that 12 days, you're going to need that in order to get your technical questions, that's why i push that so hard in superintendents look at me

why are we doing this? i appreciate that, we're going to keep going. >> i have a question that some of these tactic questions, maybe the public want to know too. >> yes and the answers to all the questions you ask in advance, in accordance, we put it in a document that is posted to the minutes or the board agenda. so all the questions that you ask, we go back to strategic, will all be provided in writing. it's absolutely, it's not appropriate to have an untransparent approach to this conversation. but having a pdf that a person can search through is going to be easier for most of you users than to go back and try to

figure out where the answer was offered. it will be a much better user experience. the boards that have shifted to this, they don't go back. we're not doing it the old way anymore. this is a much better experience for our staff and families. so yeah, it has to be transparent, that's how you'll accomplish. all the answers that were given in advance and pack it in the agenda. now anybody that wants to know, now has access. let's get one more question. >> guard rails to help you come to decision concerning budget education aligned for student outcome. >> yeah, and i think you can even be specific how did you,

what is your meaning in full engagement look like? >> right. >> can i just ask another question, i was not sure how to frame it. i had a couple of questions and they were around what has, what have we expanded reduced and eliminated and will those children's learning? >> so i've got to admit, even though coaches are not suppose to have favorites, my parent is the one that did the briefing. and these are absolutely strategic level questions that i would encourage you to ask about. what i'm suggesting to you is

you will, it will give you more clarity to have some specific things. because then you'll have a more specific example. you're going to get a different answer than what are the strategies that we're walking away from. so those are legitimate questions, all i'm suggesting is, generally speaking, you usually have one particular goal and guard rails in mind. questions about how, what evidence do we have? relative to our goals, what strategies, are you adding goal

one? what strategies are being continued and abandoned? all are strategic level. and then the laflt one that you ask, all the way let's see where. it's in the board section for the very first time you go through this process, we do encourage that you consider zero approach in the budgeting. only because the accumulated expenditures is a powerful drain on strategic intention. so considering a zero, i don't recommend a single approach every single year. but at minimum in the first couple of years that you've

adopted a set of goals and guard rails. >> i hear a response there was an intention to that two years ago. i appreciate that, i do not see that happening in the first two years. head financial officer. we have half the budget staff and reassigned to the commissioner, like, you know, yeah. it did happen two years ago. >> that says to me that is an offer for the upcoming budget cycle. if the team is not already on the ground and has not begun that approach, it does not surprise me that is not a offer

for the cycle. >> so i think that means we're going to be confronted with the budget. if anything, if we don't do budgeting, we will not accomplish that. and again i shared that. so one thing to think about and this is for the document. you're not looking for, did we jump from you know the

president state to the future state, did we make a move in the direction. so it's not are we going to 50% to goal one to 50% are we going from 15% to 70%. what i say to that is i generally agree with you that if you don't make something like that happen as soon as possible, you are going to becious your budget will continue to be wayed down making it harder to access. that the thing that you have to look at is how much alignment can i actually deliver this board without taking that approach?

and how, how far off can i, push that? without doing ir repitable damage. folks are already thinking about it. next year, preferably, the year after, itemly sometimes, past budgets will haunt future budgets if you don't address it. >> i can't promise that this will not be the case a year

from now, but extremely tested and challenges by the fact that we were doing in order to make drastic reductions. it's easier to go through a zero base projects, when everybody, because everyone wants to protect, right? and so everyone is going to say that everything they do is core and base. if they know that otherwise, it means getting cut. i cannot promise that in a year we will not be in a situation of what we may have to do to balance a budget. my hope is if we were going to pursue and it talk about it what it would look like to commit to that approach, that i would hope it may not in such a dire circumstance because that is really, i think that is a really big that really informed how people approached the

process and made it much more challenging. for this upcoming, for 23 and 24 and how how do we make forward progress in articulating what we do and honors the guard rails is really pushing to articulate and/or yent our current state to the goals and guard rails, to contextize it. unless we're expecting or unless the expectation is there is really drastic change in six months, that is, that is what it's like to be ready for, a zero base budget approach for the potential of really, i just

imagine there would be a lot of change or potential for a lost change. to think about what i'm doing in ton text of the goals and guard rails. >> i don't mention them all. i think one of your guard rails is very important here. and that's resource allocation and superintendent will not allow resources to be allocated without transparency, you can read them. but i think in public education when you approach zero base budgeting, you have to start first with what are the parameters you cannot change?

you have to have money to routine maintenance. so you have to have statutory things, but i think it's very important cause what i did not hear when you went through that process, last year, is these are the given. we have to do this. we have to have, you know, less than 21.37, i have the number wrong, teachers on average on tk through 3 for our class size reduction. i think the concept is good, because zero you have to include the given.

i think the thing that i was most interested in seeing us pursuing is how do we get more consistency about what is going to happen if there are reductions? how was there a clear understanding of how our priorities are reflected and decisions that are made. for me, i feel like a lot of people when they see some of the budget dictions, they seem to go directly in contradiction of what they're trying to do is accomplish. it's reaching an objective or how it isn't it, even if we're not able to get to zero base piece up, figuring out for me, the area around the transparency.

i guess the board will have the last say in the final decisions on how things are allocated and being a more selective decision on the district as a whole. >> the only thing that i will add on this conversation before i put it away, obviously in a document, i'm offering direct encouragement to the superintendent to consider something of this nature. part of why, i included as a document, normally i i don't. a lot of managerial advise, but this time i did. it's a very hard thing to do. so i intentionally put it in there just to offer some cover to superintendent to choose to go in that direction. that being said, i guess we have to have a managerial decision, unless you have a guardrail about it. and if you can have a way to

constantly generate increased amount without doing that, then more power to you. yeah, we spoke about radical change. so maybe it's possible to do that with non radical. >> yeah, and he'll look at it and figure out, and actually, i don't know if we can get there without doing xy and z. then you'll figure it out. anybody else have a question that you really wanted to ask before we wrap this wrap up. >> can i get, i was just thinking about, you know how we measure impact and ethicacy. there is the interim goals in all of this. but that's one thing that doesn't, that it hasn't been

baked in as a way to just in form how things are working. when it comes to base budgeting or even review of what we're going to increase or expand or reduce, that's a wonder that i have. i think tagging on that, we look at the number. i believe like, a very low percentage less than half percent. half of the percentage that we can measure the outcome. so i think that speaks culture.

personalization around divisions, not doing job, i think that what i see both serving on the board, being a parent added --advocate in the district. frn having the impact. i think what i'm naming is you were as the board because we did the community work and engagement, we want to see that in charge. >> still work over those years. >> i'm going to put another

spin in there and then we can move on. this is around the consent agenda contracts, i don't know where this money is coming from. has it been budgeted, is it moving funds around. and i often in many of our contracts i don't know which students are being served how we're measuring the impactful and when it will come back for renewal. there is a lot of opportunity. >> subject to roll over. >> yes, one of the things that we did is we added in so the operating procedures that you all just revamped, we added in an additional piece, that we can create something that articulated the board's expectations regarding items

that the boys are being asked. and in our case, an item with fiscal impact higher than x, we see, a b and c. so that's a reasonable thing to bake into operating procedures. so one of the things that we baked in, if it's a contract renewable over x number amount, we expect to see an evaluation of the contract as one of the items attached to the board item. and if we saw something for renewal, it was definitely come regular and it was likely, we have evaluateded ethicacy of this contract, we're not prepared to vote on this. it would table to the next board and conduct evaluation and come back to us.

so that's one example of how we break into operating procedures what our expectations of the board were for things. i know another board went through similar process they put in the operating procedures, that they wanted to see exactly what you mentioned. they wanted to know in each board items which act it's being drawn from. does this represent transfer of dollars or is this a prebudgeted amount? that's what they care about so it's automatically for things over x dollar amount, just automatically put that in the items when we get an advance. got it and if you want to ask a

question about it, you've got ten days in advance. what are types of reoccurring things that will be baked in the process. staff does not have to get to the what you want, it's just built in. i would not board item should not be encyclopediaic in nature. but there is a reasonable threshold, i would not do it for every $10. i would be thoughtful about it, just know that is not a usual practice. is it different from what she just asked. >> it's a tag on it. >> okay. >> while i appreciate this potential practice around procedures, around the

contract, my question then is about base contracts. we have a lot, and i think just to be real beinger this is a balance of district that has centralized budgeting versus base budgeting. so i just wanted to get some coaching there potentially to think about, when we're talking about contract amount, we have each one of our site are contracting out a lot of their work. i guess that's my question, so that's just. >> yeah, it depends on accumulation. in my current district, my policy is essentially if there is an accumulated spin, even if it happened at ten different disconnected sites.

then it does in fangt trigger. i think it would be helpful to have it. so i might have, this this is a need that the con nr*ikt is s i feel like i want to ask if, is this an expectation? and how long do you think that will take to change? and, you know, just discussion?

part of me wants to say, why, i say the way it was on the board, it seems very separate forward. on the other hand, i asked, if we'll take, take a while to change. is this an expectation or is this nice to have? it would be nice to have. you need to think this through and decide if that's what you want to go through. and then anytime you implement something like that h the business changes changes required generally take three months to come online. but the superintendent raises something i should be doing. is worth the.

if the answer is no, then you don't. >> i want the other thing that you were talking about which is the bucket. and then it's like, once we know, the contract bucket is, then i think we can do a deeper dive. at first the process in the next five months is really important at a high level. right and, you know what i mean. those questions are and what are they for? in terms, it's not just a counting but a functional strategic. i'm as grateful to invite you for this. you understand why we spend time to talk through this.

than to get in the middle and try to weigh through fm as you have additional questions about ideal process, feel free to reach out to me if it's something that we just need to talk about, and want to spend time one on one, but if it's something that needs to sufrns the full board, i'll reach out to ask for that. but know you can reach out to me or the team anytime. but to go through this, like i said mia additional homework is i'll get you that tactical document into one-pager, great reading you'll enjoy as always. thank you for your time, madam chair, back to you. >> thank you. we are going to need to take public comment. so at this time, -- ~>> one public speaker in-person, jeff lucas you can step to the dais.

>> speaker: good evening, jeff lucas. one thing to start with is the vision and guard rails, i cannot find a clear version of that in the website. all i see is october 25 mark up version. secondly, secondly is the capacity for the district to make changes is pretty low. earlier tonight, we heard pay roll change that was a mess. i think the budget is bigger and harder. so just, i don't want to say be patient but start going in the right direction continuous improvement is not speed, it's a journey of many many many

many steps. and so, start going the right direction, i'll come up with the priorities. and it will take a long time to get there. next thing is guardrail four, to me that's the one with the most meat in it. what does base line sufficient mean? the interim guardrail is going to identify base allocations for schools by february of 2024. i've been anxious about this for ten months, i recognized it's not going to happen this year. but we can make it towards it. and when i get to the question that i want to ask, is for all the money that is spent above the base linecious where does it go and why? to put it into sper respective, i dug into a lot of details, when i look at the details.

>> finish up. >> 7 high schools, kids can take 7 classes and 6 high schools, kids can take six classes. to me, i don't know where the equity is in that? and same thing happens in middle schools too. and we need to start making progress towards figuring out why na exist and how that helps us get to our goals. thank you. >> thank you. haoefr to speak on the item, please raise your hand can that be repeated in spanish and chinese please. thank you. >> thank you.

seeing none president lam. >> thank you, that concludes public comment. i want to thank again aj for your coaching and on going mentoring of governorance team and thank you to the team that also provides support into our fiscal expert desean and thank you to staff the presentations tonight engagement and appreciate you all. so i like to formally adjourn our special meeting.

>> call this meeting of december 8, to order. roll call. ?fm commissioner alexander. >> here >> commission bogus. >> here. >> commissioner hsu. >> here. >> commissioner sanchez .d >> here. >> president lamb. >> here. >> at this time before the board goes into closed session, i call any speakers, there will be a five minutes per speakers are there any speakers for public comment? >> seeing none in-person, if you're on zoom and you care to speak to any of those items please raise your hand at this time. seeing none. >> thank you, at this time i'll

call recess of this meeting. and going into closed session. >> good afternoon. d ph staff and the public welcome to the health commission meeting tuesday, 26 of 22. secretary morewitz all the roll wrochl commissioner green. >> present. >> commissioner chow. you are not on. your mic is not on. >> present. >> and commissioner giraudo. >> ( >> and commissioner bernal. >> present i have a quick script to read. good afternoon and welcome to the december 6 san francisco healing commission meeting this is hd