has less than 100, local has 77 and george washington has of a. -- has 56. so george washington, only 6.4% of its population are in your program and at local only 8.8%. so you're in violation of not having a viable program by the department of defense standards . so we are attempting here to meet the minimum standards that you state here, however your program doesn't even meet the minimum standards set by your own department of defense guidelines. so i just don't see why -- quite frankly when i see at local 77 students and you plan on hiring another instructor for local you're going to have two teachers for 77 students, out of how many sections that are taught a day? that seems as though it is not excessive but it may be what all of our science and magget classes should have that student to teacher ratio. i think my point is, major, that we're doing all this again, making a lot of changes when really many of our programs in this district are ready -- already are in violation of the own department of defense's guidelines for what is a viable program. set forth by the people who actually run the program and pay for it. so we're doing this to be in compliance but yet we're out of compliance on so many other things. and even if we hire these three, we will still be out of compliance. so i just think this is not a good way to set policy. i think that if we're going to say that we're doing this to be compliant then we should, you know, actually be compliant and actually the program should comply with its own guardians of its program which is the department of defense. and when i look at this, you know, now also with the extension of the date, i feel like we set policy two years ago and the majority of the board approved it and i wasn't one of them to approve it but the majority did approve it and we're doing this because that policy wasn't met and again by your own department of defense guidelines it says that all instructor applicants are subject to local policy. so i just want to reiterate that i just don't understand sort of why we're setting policy like this and i don't think it's actually a very smart way to set policy for a school district. thanks. >> may i say something? i called this afternoon and did a head count at all the schools. lincoln is 126, local's 79 and they have 25 students that they are processing for the independent study program and consequently they'll be in the jrotc program. and it will bring their numbers up to 100. washington is problematic, it's been problematic for years. i will concede that. these numbers do not indicate any of the leadership labs or drill labs that will be put in place. i anticipate every school to be at 100 or better. probably by this time next week. commissioner fewer: if i may respond. so i'm looking at this jrotc drill lab. i see the count 000, 0er zero at be a ham -- abraham lincoln, zero at washington, three at lowell. i see jrotc section two, i see zero at abraham lincoln, zero at galileo, zero at george washington, i see four in a class at lowell high school. which you want to put another instructor. zero at mission and zero at phillip. so i'm looking at jrotc rivalry. i see zero, abraham lincoln, zero balboa, zero at galileo, zero at washington. i see two at lowell. i see zero at mission high school and zero at burton. so a lot of these class sizes are very, very small. i'm looking at also, let's see, i could look at another class here. naval science one, i see zero at lincoln, zero at balboa, zero at washington, zero at lowell, zero at mission and 84 at burton. so it's sort of the same numbers across the board here. so i'm sort of wondering, even with these class sizes, how many sections does a teacher teach or how many sections of jrotc are there in a school day , how many students are instructors actually teaching and, you know, we're not including students who participate after school. we are actually just including students who are currently enrolled with the master schedule and this is where we get our data from. so i think your numbers might show a higher number and a head count maybe and also, you know, we're also looking at a 10-day count but things change, too. so these numbers quite possibly could even be high. again, i don't see how the numbers sort of justify it. vice president yee: can you respond? do you have a response to that? >> well, there are no students at any of these schools in any of the navy one, two, three programs because it's only at burton. the army programs are at the other schools. s.i.s., as you all know, is less than 100% accurate, all i can tell you is that i called and got the numbers. as i was leaving the school, changed by two. the drill labs and leadership labs traditionally are sort of -- they are sort of hand loaded after the regular classes get put in place. some students come in to do those that may not be in another class. and some may go on and do that other drill lab as well. so once the hard enrollment for the school day gets established then we sort of hand enroll the other ones. lists are provided to counselors, the counselors take care of it. it's not something that is automatic as the regular class loading is. so it takes some time. and it's just the way it's been over the course of the 17 years i've been here. commissioner maufas: so i just want to respond to commissioner fewer's sort of question. you had recalled what when he done previously. no, you're correct. i just wanted to reassure you that what you recall is correct. because i recall those same things. so, if i'm understanding correctly, between us and you, i'm going to put this to you, 10-day count, you'll have a hard and fast number, tell me when you'll have your number that you believe will be true? because i'm going to ask our staff to compare and as we go forward i want to know those numbers myself. and i don't want -- i'm going to ask you. when -- when do you believe you will know that you have the correct numbers for your class sizes at school? >> the numbers are not that different. their number is 910 and our number is 874. total. and in fairness we're not to the 10-day count. what commissioner maufas: right. >> so i don't have any reason to dispute what their numbers are and what -- and when the 10-day count happens then we'll know what they are. commissioner maufas: ok. so i want to again just acknowledge, i did know about the instructors, i knew before we had the last board vote because i had spoken to you and you had told me back in march that there were folks, three, that you had -- that really wanted to come to san francisco. so i knew about them. but in regards to the rest of our policy regarding jrotc, i still believe firmly that you all need to be in compliance and i have to tell you that i really appreciate your statement when you came to the board, i'm talking about what had not been a real active effort to comply with what the board's request was around seeking further education because this was what other teachers and folks that wanted to be instructors in the san francisco unified school district do. so i want to thank you for the acknowledgment and really a promise that you were going to be on top of it and the folks that you would be working with, to ensure that they are on top of it. so i appreciate that. and i had spoken earlier to vice president yee, i need to see that in action before i really even move towards being open again to jrotc instructors , just as other instructors are at sfusd, particularly those who are p.e. credentialed. my position remains the same but i want to acknowledge i did know about the three instructors so i want to tell you that. commissioner murase: i think we need to acknowledge that the big picture of overall trend of enrollment at jrotc is in part because the program has been influx based on decisions of this board. so i think we really, the board needs to take some responsibility for the fact that the numbers are not where they once were or where we would like them to be. and i personally would like to give a fully staffed program a chance, i just don't tchi we expect, you know, big numbers for a program that's been under attack for a while and that, you know, i think the program deserves to have a chance to be fully staffed pending funding and check in a year from now what do the numbers look like. commissioner maufas: if i may reply to that. that speaks to what i spoke to. i would like to agree with that but then every other program that we have had at sfusd that has been cut because of funding or because teachers can't stay in the profession, because of the cost, they then deserve the same and if we didn't go through program by program that sfusd no longer has based on that argument, commissioner, then i'd be behind you on. that because we can't g