2014-11-18 PPS School Board Study Session

District	Portland Public Schools
Date	2014-11-18
Time	missing
Venue	missing
Meeting Type	study
Directors Present	missing

Documents / Media

Transcripts

Event 1: Board of Education - Study Session - November 18, 2014

00h 00m 00s
good evening everybody the study session of the board of education for November 18th is called to order I'd like to extend a warm welcome to everyone present and to our television viewers this meeting is being televised live and will be replayed throughout the next two weeks please check the Board website for replay times this meeting is also being streamed live on our PBS TV services website um agenda and as a notice at Agenda item number four the school Improvement plans has been pulled from the agenda this evening and will be heard at a future date so at this time we will move ahead with public comment Miss Houston do we have anyone signed up for public comment we do we have five okay our first two speakers Marisha Childs and Micah gorgonis okay well uh people are coming up for public comment I'll go ahead and read the instructions thank you for taking the time to attend this meeting and provide your comments to the board we value public input and we look forward to hearing your thoughts and Reflections and concerns our responsibility as a board is to actively listen and reflect on your comments the board will not respond to any comments or questions during public comment but we have asked board manager Roseanne Powell who said it over seated over here in the front row to follow up on issues raised during public testimony Roseanne is available if you'd like to add additional information about how the board might respond guidelines for public input emphasize respect and consideration of others complaints about individuals and what individual employees should be directed to the superintendent's office as a Personnel matter you have a total of three minutes and please start by stating your name and spelling your last name for the record during the first two minutes of your testimony a green light will come on right there in front of you when you have one minute left a yellow light will come on and when your time is up the red light will come on and a buzzer will sound and we ask that you conclude your comments at that time thank you very much for being here and we sincerely appreciate your you know comments and inputs you may start anytime okay my name is Marisha Childs uh and I'm speaking on about the Sackett my husband I have a daughter in kindergarten at Winter Haven I attended meeting the meeting last week and I like most parents in the room regarding Sackett I appreciate the work of second they were given a large task to do we appreciate the work probably I collectively feel the recommendation is unacceptable and the recommendation should be rejected the reasons we feel it should be rejected may vary but we feel it should be rejected the second member who remarked last week that she does not care around baggage was incredibly insensitive we all come from varied backgrounds and that baggage she speaks of is what makes us whole people that baggage is is why we have streets named after our ancestors and holidays memorials and museums that baggages our history and Portland already has a very ugly history and his treatment of racial and ethnic minorities and her remarks one especially sharp with attendees and shows a lack of lack of cultural competence and apology should be forthcoming when kindergarten time Kindergarten Roundup time is upon yes my husband and I did what most parents did we went to the neighborhood schools went to many other schools and we chatted with many parents and we ultimately decided that our child would go to Winter Haven but when we filled out the form that the schools PPS sends out we looked on the forum for a place to indicate race or ethnicity and there notice that there is no place to indicate that and we noticed uh on pps's website they say that we strive to maintain gender and racial parity amongst the schools but I don't really see how you can maintain or racial and gender parity if you don't ask for the race of the child my husband called PPS and spoke to somebody at staff and asked where do we indicate that on the Forum they said we can ask that it's illegal my husband and I are both attorneys and we know that was absolutely incorrect but there's no point in arguing with somebody on the phone about that like many parents I have a younger child that would be starting PPS in the fall and concerned about the potential impact of these changes would have not only about the weight giving sibling preference and the current launches but also also of logistical reasons but also we're concerned about the impact it could have psychologically if you speak with any child psychologist or therapist about the importance of keeping siblings and siblings together they would tell you it's extremely important I'm an attorney and I work with youth in the juvenile dependency proceedings often there are multiple siblings involved in any given case and the big issues is always maintaining siblings sibling contact uh if a child can't be maintained in the home of origin courts are always concerned about what's with what's in the best interest of the child and and it's always a Paramount importance for not only for family development but for a child's
00h 05m 00s
development granted it may be extreme examples but the fact is important that to maintain siblings in the same school is important children throughout their siblings around for lunchtime for recess Etc improving the diversity of schools is an important goal but it overlooks the reality that Portland is not particularly a diverse community thank you very much that's going to be hard to follow my name is Micah grigonis g-r-i-g-o-n-i-s I'm speaking also on behalf of the Sackett committee committee recommendations um I'm a parent of a child at Richmond and we we applied for for our child to get in our older child who is currently at Richmond to get in on with the understanding that our younger child would be able to also go there and to me it's sort of the same issue of uh you apply with with the with the with the idea in mind that they would be able to continue all the way through 12th grade and so uh getting rid of the sibling preference is is similar in my mind to saying well we're going to cap it now at eighth grade and then you have to figure out something to do later that wasn't the deal that we that we applied under and that deal in my mind is now changing and there's a big there's a big blurb in the paperwork that you get from from Richmond saying now this is a big commitment we want you to make sure that you go all the way through 12th grade we realize you know that Japanese is going to get hard a family thing and you gotta you know be really committed to it and and that's what we're willing to do and so having having our second child now not you know not being sure that she's going to be able to get in is just bringing back all those um issues of well then where is she going to go and how what where are we going to send her um because like when our older son was ready for uh for kindergarten I went to eight different parent nights for for uh kindergartens I went to my local neighborhood school I went to several language immersion schools I went to uh to a few charter schools and uh every other one other than my neighborhood school was standing room only and there was you know hundreds of parents in there my neighborhood school there was 12 parents there was a sign on the door that said don't bring firearms in the building and one of the one of the parents joked we'll do a lot of third graders bring firearms and the principal said no that's for the parents and I thought okay well I can't send my kids here like I don't feel safe sending my children to this school and so I'm just saying like this it just seems like it's not a very well thought out proposal um there's there's a lot of I've sent you guys all emails about my thoughts about it and I'll continue to do that but there there's a lot of things that I think that just aren't very well thought out with it so for instance like the the sacket board member that was saying well we don't know why people want to transfer from neighborhood to Neighborhood well you could ask them like you don't have to demolish the whole system to find out why people want to transfer you could simply ask them you know who they are um things like well Richmond's not a 50 50 language immersion program well you could make it one there are enough Japanese language speakers in Portland I imagine to fill half the spots thank you very much our next two speakers Nicole Eros eliardo and Toby rates I guess I don't know where the other person is my name is Nicolia rosalardo i-r-o-z-e-l-a-r-d-o and I'm here representing the Scott School apparent community Scott School Kaa is a diverse community in northeast Portland and over 89 percent of our children qualify for free and reduced lunch over 80 percent are kids of color over half speak Spanish in their home and we have significant Somali and Vietnamese populations our principal recently informed our community she is returning to her home state in December Dr Gutierrez initiated several several programs over the past four years to increase academic performance and change the general climate of the school most visible is our dual Spanish language immersion program but the performance and the performance of that inaugural class now second graders are is very promising but our cap details other programs such as instructional strategies like guided language acquisition design assessment strategies such as dra to fine-tune reading instruction and behavioral support such as the rite of passage program for our boys of color so we thank Dr Gutierrez for her service for putting us on this path and wish her
00h 10m 00s
well we also appreciate the support of the board in helping us get to this point as a community we're starting to see change good Equitable change that supports all of our children and we want to know that our next leader will support and build upon these initiatives we have great confidence in our current teachers and in staff to continue and the PTA supports the interim placement that is that began today if doing so results in authentic timely engagement with parents to ensure the selection of an experienced Administration administrator appropriate to our diverse community PPS policy 5.6.60.017 and the administrative directive 5.60.016 require quote meaningful participation in the principal selection process by administrators representatives of the community including Starrett staff parents community members and students direct a state clearly that parents should be meaningfully involved in both the selection criteria and the selection of the principal let me repeat that again the selection criteria and the selection of the principal yet recent practice reveals that PPS administrators find parental engagement messy and ignore it during the hiring process we are here to ask you to reverse that Trend and follow board policy parental leadership at Scott is committed to bridging cultural linguistic differences among our families in all important School matters including this one the PTA will begin with deep engagement starting with tomorrow's PTA meeting and the and the Friday of morning meeting following that we're willing to do our part but we need your help on top of linguistically appropriate Outreach we ask for authentic And Timely engagement from PPS staff our parents have limited electronic communication options limited access to personal vehicles unpredictable work schedules we need time to give this input our children deserve a permanent principle who's prepared to be an academic administrative and Community leader someone with expertise in dual language immersion who supports current programs is committed to equity in his experience in very diverse populations and we ask you to commit to having an exemplary engagement process to make that happen right thank you very much our last speaker is Richard greenstead all right Richard greenstead g-r-e-n-s-t-e-d superintendent Smith and the board thanks so much for the opportunity to speak my family and I have been in our neighborhood school since 2008 Chief Joseph elementary was a school with an amazing Community then two years ago the Jefferson cluster enrollment balancing started our school was threatened The Proposal to merge with auxley green made me Furious Oakley had a reputation in my community in the days and weeks that followed I said horrible things about failing schools I advocated to emulate Great Schools not tear them apart it became Time for Action to ensure change did not occur when I reflect back I see where I was wrong I wasn't interested in finding solutions for Oakley green I was stuck in the me and I trying to save my school today I'm in I am embarrassed about the comments I made about failing schools I owe the octagreen community an apology I have learned that my perceptions were wrong my child's education has not suffered it has flourished both my kids love their birth school they have grown as individuals as a result of the process in its first year Chief Joseph Oakley green has achieved level 4 status and academic growth the investment that Chief Joseph Buckley green received must proliferate to every neighborhood School we must have strong leadership in every neighborhood School and we must provide that leadership with the supports needed to succeed academic growth and success for all students is possible through this investment as members of the PPS Community we have a moral obligation to stand up for all students I hope every parent at every school will honestly analyze the role they play in the greater system Sackett was tasked with helping bring enrollment and transfer in alignment with the racial education Equity policy superintendent Smith thank you for acknowledging the issue and looking for Solutions I commend Sackett Sackets work and their dedication to the task at hand a stack deck deck against the very students the racial education Equity policy is trying to help cannot continue I urge you to make the tough decisions in the coming weeks sitting in those seats requires that you vote the we empower the difficult work will start after those tough decisions are made we must follow up with strong and I mean truly strong parent engagement to address Community needs due to
00h 15m 00s
changes we must provide the investment the investment must include strong leadership at every school in a 2015-16 budget proposal that addresses parent concerns equity and Excellence can and will co-exist please join the focus on the we and our thank you Mr grinstead it's not often we have someone who comes up and testifies like you did so thank you very much okay moving on in our agenda um last week the board heard a report on enrollment and transfer recommendations from the superintendent's advisory committee on enrollment and transfer tonight the superintendent will present her timeline on those recommendations superintendent Smith would you like to go ahead okay we have PowerPoint going up um yes and what I'm doing tonight is walking you through the wreck the proposed timeline um so wait for me to get this up on the screen yeah all right we'll take that okay so board members received a memo and I'm going to walk you through with two different memos one was a flowchart that goes through the sacket recommendations and identifies of the six recommendations that Sackett made which ones require policy changes from the board and which ones would require some kind of board approval and I'll since that's print is very small I'm going to walk people through just so that you hear like it's trying to pick apart what actions actually are required from each of the recommendations and what I said in my memo to the board is um that I'm still considering which of any of these I will recommend to move forward so a lot a lot of what the staff is now doing is looking at what it actually takes to operationalize any of these what are the things that if in fact we make the recommendation we could operationalize by the next enrollment and transfer cycle which are more elaborate and would require more than that in order to do so could end up being things we'd consider for the next enrollment and transfer cycle and some of these don't require policy change there are things that are would be budget budget or operational considerations so the first recommendation from Sackett was to end the lottery transfers to between neighborhood schools that would require a policy change so the First Column says yes policy changes and would it require board approval yes the second recommendation from Sackett was a proposal to enhance the petition transfer process so this would be utilizing petition to do neighborhood to Neighborhood transfer as opposed to the lottery being used as the mechanism for neighborhood to Neighborhood does that require policy change no but does it require board approval not board approval but if in fact it takes dollars to actually implement it so budget considerations would come before the board third one was to conduct a focus option review this is something that was already included in an existing policy so it does not require policy changes by the board and was is board approval required no not to actually um do a review it may require additional staff capacity in order to actually do what's required as part of the policy to conduct the review the fourth recommendation was to support dual language expand immersion expansion does that require require policy change no um does it require board approval yes and this would be specifically if additional dual language programs are cited in the district then it comes back to the board and the Dual language immersion process department is already leading that process so we're actually already in a due diligence process on the next set of proposed dual language immersion programs the fifth one was to do changes to the focus option Lottery that does require a policy change and is board approval required yes new
00h 20m 00s
policy language would require a board approval if the proposals are more about improving Outreach and support and expanding the applicant pool that is not that's a procedure and it's something that the staff can just do the last one special education changes does it require policy chains yes so there's the specific policy that's identified that would need change and does it require board approval yes the new policy language requires board approval however it's also changes that are part of the Strategic plan for the special education department so some of these are more about Service delivery model and some are about what would be required policy change so that's essentially what's the framework that I'm using to then look at what I come back with as recommendations to the board so timeline I'm looking yes yeah it's intercept because all this is absolutely correct except we're missing the number one recommendation out of socket which and I informed the second memory of the day that they buried the lead and so the number one recommendation is basically in a paragraph on the third page two paragraphs above this chart which they say the number our number one recommendation is make sure that the neighborhood schools uh are performing to the degree that they should and to have consequences if they don't um so I would like you to consider that I mean I think we should include this in this chart and you're clearly have some recommendations on how to make that happen so we should we should account for that okay and one of the things that was discussed at Sackett are the multiple levers and what are the different things we have that impact the success of a school the recommend which some of the things that you're speaking of are beyond the scope of Stack its actual recommendations so effective principle it can be I mean there's a whole framework by which we're looking at how do we have successfully performing schools the specific recommendations in front of us right now are about changes to the enrollment transfer policy so it's a limited scope of recommendation I hear what you're saying um addressed things that are Way Beyond what the scope of their um transfer policy yeah it's a whole cloth I totally gotcha yeah okay so the actual changes to the enrollment and transfer system on November 25th which is our next board meeting I will bring back recommendations to the school board including the components which would require support in the next the 15 16 budget and which would require policy change by the board so and ones that were are specifically intended to impact the next enrollment and transfer cycle so actual proposal come back to the next the next meeting on December 2nd which is the the next board meeting I'm recommending that the board hold an open hearing to provide members of the community an opportunity to give feedback on those recommendations and then also to provide the opportunity to submit uh comments in writing and online December 9th board meeting would come back with policy language and a draft resolution for the first reading by the board at that time the board would also hear additional public comment January 6 meeting again more opportunity for public comment and then at the January 13th board meeting a second reading of the enrollment and transfer policy changes and potential board resolution for official board action this particular deadline would allow that any changes that we actually are approved by the board could be implemented for the 2015 open enrollment um opportunity so and it allows us to operationalize those so thank you Carol where's the sibling preference is that focus on focus on the lottery changes it's enough Focus option Lottery changes right yes okay okay probably be good if we just called it right out there so that people aren't trying to figure out where it is yes all right board members who have questions Dr Buell oh man this timeline just seems to me a to be extremely fast but B2B very sketchy we it has one meeting
00h 25m 00s
this massive change that we're looking at and I came from a district where I worked the last 10 years where they had the change that were contemplating and so I have some idea of how it actually works uh it I think we should have at least three major public meetings and those public meetings should be should allow for dialogue because a lot of times what we've done in the past is we have allowed people to come and talk but we don't allow ourselves to ask questions and we should have not only some second members there to answer questions we should have the full board we should have and we should just have a dialogue with people about what this means and so forth in in it just seems to me like this is too sketchy we don't I mean we don't allow we we just saw the public comment and what it is though at our regular meetings so public comment which if you don't come to a lot of board meetings you might look at this and go oh yeah probably comment yeah with six people you can't ask questions you can't talk you're limited and so forth and so forth so so I'd suggest I'd suggest that we actually have a public large public meetings at uh maybe one at Madison one at Roosevelt one in Wilson and we have ones where we allow people to come and we're allowed to ask questions and dialogue and sacket members can comment and ask questions and so forth so we actually have a we look at this in a very and give it the um and we give it the importance that it actually really deserves so I have no problem with what you have except that I just think we need as a board to be have much more extensive communication with the to and from now that's part of the point of having the dialogue tonight so the one on December 2nd the recommendation here is to hold that as a public hearing so it's a regularly scheduled board meeting that you know you'll all be available but that recommendation is to do it as a hearing and your opportunity tonight is to say you could make these all hearings you could keep them as regular public comment you could do unlimited public comments so like that's exactly the discussion you're having here tonight and if in fact you get to the end of this time period that would be the time period that allows us to operationalize it in this enrollment and transfer cycle then we're not there and you're bumping it to next year so what I'm defining for you is the window that lets us operationalize it for the next cycle I think another piece too I mean um an agenda setting we'll need to look at what other pieces what other topics and issues are coming up um on the upcoming meetings along among our other priorities so that's another piece I guess what I would suggest is that we take folks thoughts and reactions similar to director buells hear them tonight and then Pam and I and Carol and staff can take that and then um and then kind of weigh that and figure out how that how that fits in with the other pieces that we're trying to address in the next several weeks if that's agreeable to folks other comments questions well yeah I mean I'll just uh I'll say that um that we want to make sure so I mean Carol this is a great start and then I I mean I'll reiterate I think Sackets recommendations buried the lead I mean we ought to talk about their number one recommendation and and I'd like to get input from you on steps so that we can get there and Leadership is a huge thing and we've talked about that in our in the board so following up on that it would be good um but from a process standpoint we want to uh we want to make sure that we do do it right and we've had a lot of experiences where we haven't done things right we've learned so my one request would be to work is just to uh kick the ball back to to you and work with John in the communications team and what we've learned from past experiences that we don't want to repeat what we've learned from working with PSU that we want to maybe roll out in this so um yeah I think we want to make sure that the process is done correctly on this and I but I appreciate the timeline as well I think it would be helpful for us uh when we're in agenda setting to hear exactly what you consider uh doing it right that would be helpful I mean Steve gave us a good idea in his right what what does your right look um it is only one right in there no you know well I you know I'm I'm not the I'm not the pro at this so I uh but what would it look like to you to me it would when PSU came here and sat here and said we're going to reach 40 of the people or we're not going to consider it done correctly I thought that was a highly
00h 30m 00s
aggressive uh and directionally positive way to talk about things and um so doing it and so doing it right is is setting an aggressive Target on how we're going to reach out to all the people in our district and making it happen do you have any suggestions on reaching out yeah uh yeah I'd like to hear John Isaac's uh suggestions on it I mean you know this is all right I'm just yeah I mean you commented about doing things right so I I was just assuming you had some specific ideas well I just said uh set a Target and hit it okay in terms of people that we that we and I think 40 percent uh is highly aggressive yeah that's Tom did you did you like did you like the at least having three I mean as a man that's basically a minimum well those are now you're defining meetings versus how many people you're actually reaching well I'm just defining opportunity for people to comment on that part okay going beyond that yeah okay yeah other Puerto Rican um so first of all I wanted to apologize especially to Sackett that I wasn't here last week to actually hear the report in person um I have an elderly aunt in Southern California who needed attention so my sister and I flew down there so I have listened to the entire board meeting from last week so I think I'm up to speed but I just want to acknowledge that first um so uh yeah I would love to have opportunity for some interaction with our community related to these recommendations I certainly would not want to have public comment at these meetings limited to six you know comments we need to open that up and I would certainly want us to have an opportunity to have discussion at the end maybe of the public comment one of the things that we did really effectively in the past has been listening sessions with our community we did it um you know around superintendent searches and we've done it around and when we lost the band in 2011. and those seem to be pretty effective because while we were sort of hearing from folks we did it in a way that was um not sort of one person coming and testifying it it was a an environment that felt a little warmer than that somehow um but we also at the end reflected back what we heard um and whether we agree with that or not I think it really helped the community realize that we heard what they said um so maybe a listening session kind of format or maybe even a town hall kind of format we've been doing some Town Halls we have a little bit of experience at it now whether we could maybe do a town hall related to the second recommendations and maybe even invite some of the second committee members to you know help us with that so I just want to throw out a couple of those ideas expansion um I said I'd wanted to say something I didn't know what I didn't have planned what I was going to say um I I think from my time since I've been on the board enrollment and transfer policy has been an issue people have recognized it as inequitable um and what I think I hear Tom you saying um my words not yours obviously and you may not align these two but what I hear you say is a process more similar to what we're doing with district-wide boundary review which sets aggressive targets has a year and a half year year-long process no that's not what I'm saying okay can you clarify then yeah I'm saying let's use that um let's use let's just for for sake of let's just say that's the best in class for that particular topic and it may or may not be but I think it's pretty good yeah um then what is the best in class for this topic in this timeline and let's hit it so you're still asking for us to meet this this timeline to have it in place I don't that would be ideal okay yeah because I get that that's the part yes that's the idea that's the part I struggle with is that right now PSU is looking to help us
00h 35m 00s
get this done in a year and we're feeling like it's pressure um to do it in less than a month and a half um I think is The Challenge from my standpoint my guess is that um PSU or somebody that does this to say if you want deep penetration and since there are changes proposed for every school because neighborhood to Neighborhood transfer will affect every school not just sibling preference for Focus option it would require an Outreach comparable to what I imagine District wide boundaries because that too will touch so again that's how I process it um so I think Sackett has done a great job of reaching out they have not spoken to every school they have not spoken with every school or every Focus option that would be affected by this their charge wasn't my understanding was that it wasn't that wasn't even part of their charge but was to to view our policy in in regards to our racial Equity policy and so they gave us some Reflections on what that was and we can decide whether to accept those or not or to go through another process um right they they weren't charged with right with with that and but we are charged with the with the process to make sure that it's that it um that it hits the mark before we make a decision that's um that's highly consequential perhaps I mean we we made the charge about how much Outreach we want to do again I've been hearing for the three years that I've been on the board that this this Pro this policy has been a problem um Sackett has been working on it for quite some time um so I guess I'm just saying that I um I know that's what we characterized as I'm not interested in public Outreach or public input but I think they have done the work and I'm comfortable moving forward and I don't know about you all but I'm hearing Lots from our community about these proposals and it's probably certain communities more than others so I am intentionally trying to reach out to folks who may not be aware of it um so I appreciate the timeline and I'm comfortable with the timeline and I appreciate the ideas that um so you don't want to change any any process and just so I can understand you you're saying what Carol's laid out is fine there's we can't do a better process I didn't say we can't do a better process I bet after we do distant boundary review we could do a better process as as I think I've heard you say actually just last night we can always do better right there's no perfect um so I couldn't say that we couldn't do a better process but I appreciate what director Buell is saying about saying can we make sure our hearings are are more open so we get to hear that um and I'm I'm comfortable with that other comments from the board or Carol did you have something else I was going to add I mean a couple things you've got leeway in here of um in the time frame to be able to implement this in the next cycle these could be two-way hearings they could be Town Halls they can be I mean you can you guys are deciding how to use those times and then the other thing listed on here is an electronic survey which is another way that people can communicate which is yet to be developed but is one of the things listed on here so we're including that as a way that we're intending to reach people and and solicit feedback and in writing and I will say we've already received feedback from probably a stack this big of people who have already written in from what they know so far so it's even responding like it's generated people that have strong feelings about this are reaching out and communicating to us so like I'm believing we're getting a bunch of feedback organically how's that I think it's uh it's fair to say that it's hard to schedule seven people and a student representative in this in the period of time so while I appreciate us thinking about doing any time right doing these during our Board of Education meetings and I would agree with the one on December 2nd I think that you know we can have other meetings in here where we have like all of the suggestions that everybody's had for ways that we could reach out to the community but I think that we generally as a board are pretty realistic about the fact that we have to move ahead and if all of us can't be there hopefully the people who can't make it are reviewing the record and if we have enough of these hopefully everybody will get an opportunity to go to something to hear what the public has to say so we I'm sure Ruth and I will be telling staff that that's not critical that we are at ever everybody here is at every single meeting so I'm sure we can figure out a way within all this to find ways to reach out to the community and have everybody have an
00h 40m 00s
opportunity to talk to us publicly and then as Carol said we're all receiving lots and lots of emails from people and and we appreciate those as well don't always get a chance to answer everybody but definitely our hearing our hearing so other but Greg I just wanted to say and I'm happy to meet as as frequently as I'm available and it's just as often so if people want to have more meetings I'm happy to do that I think the piece too particularly of dialogue and with staff and with members and us to have that opportunity so yes we definitely want to be able to hear from the community we are I'll be hearing from many folks do more Outreach to hear from those we haven't heard from yet would be great as well but just to make sure that we do have that opportunity and what I'm seeing in the schedule is that is that we would and again to me you know always with these questions where there are no easy answers we're balancing the need to move forward and make changes and make things better in the district with the need to make sure that folks have an opportunity to weigh in whether they agree or disagree or whatever so we're always balancing that and I do feel given the length of time that this has been under you know been an issue that has been called out as one we need to address the length of time that saket has been working on this and deliberating and really wrestling in depth with this we need to move forward now we'll see what the superintendent comes back in terms of you know what portions of recommendations how she wants to move forward and then that'll also I think give us an indication too of you know what what are we dealing with here and are there are there pieces that are are some less controversial than others that we can absolutely move forward are there others we need to pause and have additional conversation about we'll see how that goes but to me it's still that we need to move this forward this has been a topical conversation and again recognized as an issue that needs to be dealt with for quite some time so I I appreciate hearing folks input I don't know if director Morton or mean I'm on a ran too but we'll definitely take that and then weigh that in figuring out mapping out the next meetings coming up I mean do you have thoughts about student outreach are you working on this through supersac or could you make it a topic I mean we could definitely like reach out through super sax super sack is well connected if we wanted to that's definitely an option and I think that students have a voice but I also know that Sakura has had a student representative on it so I'm confident that Marty Berger has provided a great voice on it so I'm pretty happy with the student Outreach on it just because I know Marty also has brought it back to Super sac in the past year and we've discussed it great thank you Matt anything from you yeah I think the uh thank you for asking um I think the uh we're gonna we know that the more information the better uh the more information we have the better uh decision uh theoretically we're going to make um so I'm certainly open to having more meetings more opportunities to hear to hear information and I I do appreciate as director Regan mentioned the town or not the town hall but the sort of listening session format because that was more of a conversation and it's uh in fact I think we used we used a similar format as we were preparing for the Jefferson cluster enrollment conversation too so uh that brought out a lot of good information that ended up going into uh decisions um I think the other thing we have to realize too though is that uh I think the timeline is is the timeline and uh and the recommendations aren't going to change we just have to make a decision based on what that what has been recommended and if there are any tweaks that we would like to uh we would like to see happen um I I think finally the the only thing is I don't think all of us are ever going to agree on how much information is enough information right and uh and we're going to we're going to have to make a decision that we've met a critical mass and we need to move forward because the timeline is what it is where are we planning uh superintendent Smith in your in your timeline here to discuss things like number one sacramentation in Lottery transfers to Neighborhood School something that I pretty much in favor of the like number one do we end it so everybody goes back to their neighborhood schools when do we discuss those issues do we grandfather anybody in is does everybody everybody goes back to their neighborhood Schools starting next uh September first so this is what I'll bring you no I'm talking about I
00h 45m 00s
know what you're asking yeah so this is what I will bring you on the 25th and part of um so we've got a large amount of policy which include addresses grandfathering and how to how do you get from here to there I'm going to bring you the entire policy and tell you which pieces of it I'm recommending change in so how are you getting that Community input into your recommendation I'm going to bring the brain of what I'm going to do as a red line of our current policy taking recommendations from Sackett considering which ones I'm going to recommend change in but I'll bring you the whole policy so you'll be able to see exactly and people will be able to respond by what they see either it hits it or it doesn't and will be in dialogue through this entire period of time and will either be some place in time that we can implement it for this and drama translator or we'll realize it's a much larger conversation we want to take the next year being in it so like or some p as Ruth just said we'll take some piece of it so I will address that specifically when I bring it forward next next week your question about what we grandfather that's part of what I'll bring you next so that's going to be and then and when we decided to do that then our is the part that's that's you've got by January 13th accepting these without the details or with them I'm bringing you the details and then we're going to take those details out and we're going to say to everybody in the city of Portland for instance guess what next year you're you're going back to your neighborhood School let's say that was the detail and then we would have one meeting for people to come forward to discuss all of that plus all of these changes plus although plus all the focus option Lottery changes and all those things in one meeting be because I'm a kind of opposed to doing it in the board meetings I think we've got I sat through that negotiations process and where we almost shut the whole District down I don't really want to shut the board down at the beginning of the budget committee to do this that's why I'm up that's why I'm suggesting that we have at least two more three full community input discussion dialogue open up that around this because I think the minute we hit the detail you're not going to just see these people here oh no we'll hear from people there's going to be yeah all over and we need to have space to allow those people to come forward and make their comments and do stuff so that so when the police we end up voting on the policy that we end up going you know we did offer people the chance to hear and we did really truly listen and we demonstrated that even if we're getting a lot of emails they're not nobody sees emails I'm getting they're almost all from Richmond anyhow there's a handful of books please okay yeah I know I mean and but you see what I'm saying I just think it takes more than and and so the reach out that Mr curler is talking about here is done around those three meetings so we reach out to everybody in the district and say here we're having these meetings you're welcome to come that's that's Tom's Outreach that we put together that's my way of thinking about it so we can reach 40 we can reach 100 of our basically we have a method to reach pretty close to 100 so so that's exactly what we've been talking about here Steve good so thank you very much for summarizing it for us okay so I'll look forward to those three meetings well we'll see I mean we're taking everybody everybody on the board we're taking everybody on the board's uh thoughts into consideration no not just one person that's that's why we're all here tonight that's what we're having the conversation about it so it's all good that's all okay any other comments okay great in that case we'll move on to our next agenda item tonight we'll receive the recommendations from staff regarding a proposed 2016 school building Improvement Bond ballot measure here we go again superintendent Smith would you like to introduce this item very exciting I would so CJ Sylvester who is our chief of school modernization is going to report provide the report and the staff recommendations are what you're going to hear tonight which are based on the work of our bond development committee and I'll be coming back to you next week with a final recommendation on the proposed 2016 Bond measure good evening CJ Sylvester chief of school of organization for program schools in the existing 2012 School building Improvement Bond program there are funds
00h 50m 00s
available to provide High School planning and preparation for subsequent consideration of another Capital ballot measure in 2016. tonight is intended for board discussion about the recommendation that staff has provided based on board input tonight the superintendent's recommendation will become before you at next week's meeting for action it is not until 2016 that the board will actually review then current assessed values possible tax rates Community attitudes and ultimately make decisions about whether to move forward a proposed Capital Bond ballot measure for November of 2016. in 2012 a creative and Innovative 32-year plan and program was identified to fund the full modernization or replacement of our aged School infrastructure this plan is primarily pay as you go in order to ensure that maximum dollars are being expended on learning environments and not on interest payments last spring the superintendent convened a bond Development Committee this committee met five times over six months to develop their recommendation to the superintendent stakeholders included not only three members of the board of directors but interested parties from the city of Portland are Portland OR schools unions citizen activists a state representative PTA program Partners parent leaders Latino Network higher education General Contractors and as well as that there was Crossover with some of those members from the 2012 Bond development community as well as the long-range facilities planning committee the committee reviewed current Bond projects facilities conditions the nature and extent of competing priorities based on those facility conditions Equity the very real issue of political support the value of capital and program Partnerships tax rate and inflationary cost considerations the survey results from August reviewed by the committee are worth noting they indicate that half of the survey respondents are familiar with the 2012 Bond program of those people 69 feel positive about the bond and the projects that are being funded for any contemplated 2016 Bond the following top three priorities for funding were identified first Urgent facility needs followed by benefiting the most disadvantaged students and the most crowded schools the recommendation is to continue the plan of rebuilding modernizing High School's First and to include three high schools in each of the next two bonds previously identified for 2016 and 2020. in each of the next two bonds include two comprehensive high schools and one Focus option High School and complete Master planning three high schools by Fall 2016 in preparation for any potential November 2016 Capital Bond ballot machine in order to complete this master planning with full community participation dedicate the 1.5 million dollars in 2012 School building Improvement funds to the recommended three high schools for master planning purposes in the 2012 ballot measure explanatory language we said we would quote also begin planning for upgrade of all high schools in coming years end quote the facilities visioning and high school education specification work efforts to date meet this requirement the three high schools identified for 2016 consideration are Benson Polytechnic Lincoln and Madison high schools the three high schools identified for 2020 consideration are Jefferson Middle College and Cleveland and Wilson high schools the committee ultimately prioritized facility condition including overcrowding and improving facilities for the highest number of historically underserved students as the highest criteria Benson is the district's only Career Technical education Focus option and has significant seismic retrofit needs Benson also has about 80 percent of its students in the combined underserved category you may remember that combined underserved as a state identified category that includes economic status race English language learning and special education considerations Lincoln High School is by far the district's most overcrowded high school building
00h 55m 00s
we have exhausted all in-building options for managing its enrollment an example of this is the fact that the cafeteria has been converted into classrooms for educational use Madison has a poor facility condition and 77 percent of its students are in the combined underserved category the committee also noted that both Benson and Lincoln offer immediate unique partnership potential so again the schedule is that tonight there's board discussion and input about the elements of the recommendation that next week the board adopts resolution as amended if appropriate based on the conversation tonight but it's not until 2016 that the Board of Education reviews what are then assessed values inside the district possible tax rates the political climate how the community is feeling and decides whether or not to actually move forward with any potential ballot measure in November of 2006 . I'm happy to answer any questions you may have thank you questions director Buell the number one response category says spending should go to the most urgent facility priorities such as unsafe school buildings and linking roofs but that we didn't go with that right we decided that the number one thing should be the three high schools no actually some of the criteria that was used to identify the three high schools is facility conditions and then the three high schools themselves don't necessarily mean that that's the only thing that would be in any potential 2016 Bond ballot measurement of the one this time we have that's exactly right we have urgent facility needs that we're addressing at up to 63 other schools as part of the 2012 ballot measure we call our summer Improvement projects and I would anticipate that in fact those same urgent types of urgent facility needs would be addressed in any subsequent Bond measures up until such a time as the entire portfolio of schools has been completely modernizing retrofitting now this bond with this double what you're paying now for a period of four years because we have to eight it's eight years before it drops right this Bond goes out eight years before it drops then it has another tale of 12 more years well essentially pay as you go and then we have a tail for an additional 12 years what has always been contemplated and the reason we call this the subway tile version is because of the way it lays out is that there would be one more increase in tax rate with the second Bond and that with subsequent bonds three four five six and seven they would simply be renewals of existing tax rates so what that tax rate is going to be is a decision that the board in 2016 will make in deciding whether or not to go forward and with what tax rate so they said so the second Bond the 2016 one because I wasn't around when we were talking about all this stuff uh the second Bond would go would if we contemplated where we were thinking at the beginning of the first Bond right would that go then that would that double the tax rate and then that double tax rate would stay or would it double the tax rate and then drop after a period and then that tax rate would stay what was our contemplation around what I can show you up here is that the original one um based on the long-range facilities planning committee recommendation to the board and board adoption was that we go out strong with high schools and that we go for a larger amount which included that 30 Cent tail there that you're looking at and so that that tax rate is a dollar ten per 1000 value assessed value what it was contemplated at that time was that potentially the next one would be 90 cents per thousand so it's not doubling it would be something less than that based on what was originally contemplated and that that tax rate then would be a total of two dollars per thousand the dollar ten from the 2012 Bond 90 cents from the 2016 and that would remain stable over the balance of the 32-year plan and program so that tax rate is what would remain into act so the two dollar per thousand would remain intact over that 30 years okay thank you very much for sharing that with us other questions no comments the dark dragon um thanks so much so thanks um to the committee and everyone who worked on this I guess just maybe some from the board members who participated in the committee any thoughts on um I mean I know that if there's a case to be made for every single building in this District needing work um so like in the original Bond Cleveland had been on that one it was not on this one just maybe a little bit more of some of the thought process again every every building is deserving and needs the work but it just would be helpful to hear a little bit more of that I I can give you what I what I remember
01h 00m 00s
the conversations um and I think director curler and director Regan were also so please jump in if I'm I'm forgetting something so um at this stage there are a couple of things is that originally when we went out with Bond one the community came to a consensus to start with high schools primarily well for a number of different reasons but partly because it would eliminate the chance that your it would eliminate the opportunity for your child to be in two remodeled buildings at any time during your K-12 education so if we worked backwards from 9 through 12 people wouldn't have their middle school remodeled and then go to a remodeled or then also have a disruption rather than the disruption right yeah um so there was um some discussion but then eventually consensus of saying that um let's stick with that plan to stay with high schools and so then there was a discussion about which high schools and we are at a at a point as you were pointing out that um The Physician the facilities condition index is one or two or three or four points away from each other but when we're talking about those levels it it's indistinguishable they're all in need and so that moved us on to um which ones made the most sense and there was a lot of discussion about which ones made most sense there was caution there was a lot of folks who wanted um Jefferson to be part of this primarily to show the commitment and investment from the district as it's been meddled with a number of times ironically it also is showing great growth academically and so there was not an interest in disrupting that we didn't want to mess with something when it's when it's headed in the right direction if I'm remembering the conversation correctly but that there was still strong commitment and a belief that as it continues to grow that perhaps it would need a different size facility than if we if we rebuilt it now so that left some other high schools there was interest in Benson permanently again facilities condition index but opportunity for partnership but also again as you as you saw a highly diverse student population that's succeeding and a belief that it will help catalyze some of the CTE for the district and then uh like I'm thinking you asked specifically about Cleveland Cleveland was at one point in the mix because it had a significant roof work that needs to be done and it's a big roof not as big as Wilson's I don't think but similar and so there was discussion about should we do the roof and then have to come back and rebuild it later and our understanding is that much of the roof work actually will can be maintained because it's a historic structure there's some diaphragmatic and pieces that will be even if we do it now it won't be all lost um but there was a discussion about the overcrowding at Lincoln there was some safety concerns about downtown that they are currently using Portables and then there was also some interest in again all the facilities the conditions were an issue but that Madison is uh is a growing area and a worry about if we did something like um Madison Cleveland Benson there are some issues about geographic Equity that concerns some folks so again there were there are many considerations in this but that's that's primarily what I remember the discussion I don't know director Regan or director curler if there's anything you would add other than then it's very exciting yeah yeah it is so uh and and all those buildings are in need so I'm hearing I mean so um of the schools that won't be addressed so Wilson did have its roof fixed which is obviously was a hugely urgent need to that it's and then what I'm hearing is that Cleveland might would be able to have some of its roof needs taken care of in the meantime while that's waiting and then and then I totally and I was reading in the memo and appreciate all that information about the discussion about Jefferson and I think as it is I'm growing that it makes sense to be able to say give it the chance to grow without disrupting attending kids other places but will there be any um I know the track just the field and draftus went in which is which is great was there any discussion or information from staff about any sort of interim improvements or anything facility related given that that kind of interim piece and if we're switching from having um Master planning multiple campuses and really focusing on the few which makes sense to me is just again that piece of when the waiting of the decades in the Improvement Project work work that was identified
01h 05m 00s
Cleveland Roof then which will then be completed if in fact it's not slated for consideration in 2016 and some seismic and Ada work at Jefferson has been identified as well in the Improvement project okay great thank you very much I think that's important I mean the selection of these three doesn't preclude other things that I mean it's we're not going to ignore the roof at least right and my expectation would be that we wouldn't be ignoring it right and it's already identified it's on the high schools we've simply been other than Wilson which was uh you know ranked as one of the the top priority roofs in the district needing attention uh we've been uh pushing back the high schools until the determination was made about which ones might be moving forward in 2016 so we would then know how to schedule the work on the balance of the high schools so you're saying that Cleveland this work at Cleveland and Jeff will come out of the current Bond not out of a future Bond that's correct it's already part of the Improvement projects and will be scheduled then for the summer of 2016 if this TJ when do we start looking at other kinds of improvements other than just the high schools these three high schools is that in 2016 when we start to develop either late 2015 or early 2016 uh know more as we go start going through the master planning process with the high schools with what kind of costs we think we're going to be considering at the and then also we have we always have a list of needs and so it's a question of us again making determinations about relative priorities and if those are going to remain the same as predominantly around a roof seismic and accessibility last time and uh in the absence of anything changing between now and then that seems likely that those will remain the priorities only that different schools and will you remind me how how many schools were doing that smaller improvement work on in the district out of our 80 83 82 schools 63. 63. okay and that that includes six through eight science classrooms and it's the educational improve improve the other kind of facility condition thank you I was just going to mention those little those pieces when we figure those out will be the determining factor and what that second Bond actually is needs to be right it works both ways both the costs can determine the size of the of the amount of projects we can do the amount of projects quite frankly are in Access of what we know we'd be able to do with a second Bond simply because of the fact that we have a need to go through with I have no doubt at all that there will be Lively discussion about what's the appropriate tax rate given the need and what gets what gets left in a potential ballot measure and what gets removed from it some of those projects yeah I I agree some of the feedback I think we got in this previous going out to this previous Bond was let the let the projects guide what you need in terms of in terms of the resource not the resource and then fill the projects up to that at that point and there was actually some conversation in that regard at the bond development committee as regards to three high schools even there was conversation and information in there material about the fact that they considered should should we only be moving forward potentially with two high schools based on a potential tax rates and ultimately the committee decided no they think that we need to be able to maintain the momentum and to move forward with three and then to evaluate in 2016 what that's going to look like in terms of the tax rate so that was an active conversation at the committee last spring hello George Reagan so um I think director Lyle did a great job of kind of summing up where the committee discussion was I just wanted to add a couple of things um one was um I think we want to be careful to be talking about these next three schools not as these are the ones we're doing these are the ones we're not doing we should instead be talking about these are the ones we're doing in 2016 which sets up the fact that we're going to be doing these other three in 2020. I mean we all knew that out of these six we had to pick three right so what we really did was we set these three for 2016 in these three for 2020 and that's really the way we should be presenting it to the community where we have made a commitment that we're going to get through our high schools in the first you know three bonds a couple of other things is I think we decided together that it didn't make sense to do two West Side schools in one Bond so we sort of wanted to split those up it didn't necessarily make sense to do two Focus schools in one Bond and so we sort of wanted to split that up um and I think that we really were looking at the partnership potential
01h 10m 00s
um and even with the partnership potential what's exciting to think about is that PCC is likely going to be going out for a bond in 2018 and so having Jefferson 2020 might give us some opportunities to be thinking about what the partnership opportunities are with them as they're designing their next Bond 2 which is kind of fun and I think the other thing for us to all be keeping in mind is that um after we get done with the high schools the pace of our projects is going to speed up pretty dramatically because for what it costs to build a high school now you could build two or two and a half elementary schools or three and so you know once we get through these three all of a sudden I think we're going to take off in terms of the change that's going to happen in terms of our facilities in Portland Public Schools so it's really exciting it's the next one is going to be the big one too talk with voters about and from there hopefully it'll just be renewals yeah I appreciate it CJ you're bringing up the conversation about um that the the committee continued to commit to three high schools um even though um there's some question about rates and inflation about whether or not um that rate will will make it an appreciate director Morton what you were reflecting back of our community processes that part of the challenge I think in bond one from the listening sessions that were referenced earlier was it felt like we picked like the district picked a number and filled it up versus we had very clear criteria about what we were going out for for um for the bond that is now Bond one and expecting to do the same thing with Bond number two and I just want to note that I have heard some public comments and public input that they're surprised that we're considering Bond number two they felt we weren't communicative about that but I just I just want to highlight that because I know that penetration of of information is really important so as we continue to talk make sure that we continue to talk this is this is not even just to get through R9 high schools this is all all of our buildings and it's a 32-year project and we have been thoughtful about it unintentional about it and I'm from what I'm hearing it's very exciting Community is very excited about it and it's been really impressive how we've managed the work so far with what we know is escalating costs because of competition in the market because other districts are now building as well which is great for all of us it does Drive Market rates up and so for us to still be on Target and on budget is is phenomenal and it's it's a kudos to you and your team so I appreciate that and I also just want to acknowledge a little piece of input that I feel is important just to give voice to um again back to Jefferson there was concern and you you mentioned PCC going out for a bond I just want to acknowledge that some people in the Jefferson Community are concerned that PCC will take over on the Jefferson campus that we will somehow seat it to PCC or something like that and I just want to share from my perspective that I am not interested in that and that is not something I would consider as a proposal there are some unique partnership opportunities but that is not something that I'm interested in so I just want to acknowledge that because if it's out there the community I just want to make sure to address it so you know there's there's one final thing I also wanted to say I think there was a lot of excitement on the committee about Madison um especially with the kind of the outer east side and the fact that Marshall had closed that we have so much growth there um Community is so strong so I think there was a lot of excitement about having Madison in the mix in this particular uh Bond so I just want to acknowledge that as well all right can I take on to that one more time I just also want to acknowledge that most of the people on the committee were were recognizing the enrollment Trends and understanding that by the time we get through all of our high schools there may be an opportunity or a need to um to to look at other options for example something like opening Marshall campus again it it was originally built as to add capacity to the system and so just recognizing that enrollment Trends could very much make that a possibility again if we keep our continuing Trend it could well be a master plan for the 2024 Bond if in fact that's necessary or the 2028 or that's exactly right that we're going to have we've got that capacity now in order to be able to use it as swing space for our high schools which is a highly valuable to us and in fact we're probably going to need it for permanent capacity in the future right others anything else CJ thank you very much okay our next agenda item has to do with
01h 15m 00s
our legislative priorities tonight we'll receive recommendation from the board's ad hoc legislative committee on proposed 2015 State Legislative platform director belisles the chair of the committee which also includes directors Morton Regan superintendent Smith would you like to introduce Mr Williams from David Williams who is our director of government relations will walk us through the recommended legislative platform David thank you very much so you have in your packet a draft 2015 State Legislative platform uh as uh was indicated in the memo to the board this was developed by your board legislative committee over a series of uh three meetings and uh you have it before you today for some common feedback I'll very quickly run through the highlights of the document uh for you and then you're sort of happy to take any questions about it um it's of course no secret that a main thrust of our legislative platform for the upcoming session is around school funding and obviously we really hit it right from the beginning in the document this is a very similar to the document you approved in 2013 but even for somebody who's been doing this uh for as long as I have I still find some of the statistics around school funding are pretty striking as we look to try to continue to build the investment in education going forward particularly of note the fact that over the time period from 2003 to today the state budget has grown by 56 percent uh Public Safety excuse me 52 Public Safety by 68 in human services by 84 percent whereas education grew by 34.2 percent not even keeping Pace with the growth in the state budget really tells a more Global story about The Arc that edge education funding has been on in the state so I think it's important to uh so then moving from that we talk about specific sort of legislative priorities again to preface this this document is really about creating a framework for us as we go into the legislative session really establishing the the sort of 30 000 foot principles that I will apply and the district will apply in evaluating individual pieces of legislation so we don't attempt to take specific positions on individual pieces of legislation or policy Concepts in this document what we try to do is inform that process so that we can be nimble during the actual session and taking those positions as the need arises on individual bills I would remind you that during the session there'll be somewhere upwards of three or four thousand pieces of legislation introduced probably uh it's fair to say about 30 percent of those affecting public education so upwards of say a thousand bills affecting public education we won't position on every single one of those a thousand one thousand because most of them won't even get a public hearing or get any consideration so we obviously want to position ourselves when valuable and when we can have an impact on specific bills so that's that's the process we we use during the legislative session so you have a section that we sort of title student achievement we talk about some of our high priorities um talking as well about some of the state's um sort of public policy education policy initiatives globally um obviously speaking to things like the work of the oeib and some of the concepts that have come out of that around sort of strategic initiatives and looking at the the value of that sort of work going forward we do talk about any sort of Education reform proposals should not come and we we talk about that in the I believe that's the third bullet point under there any specific reform should not come at the expense of overall education funding so really looking for any reforms to be additive to the system not disruptive underneath the base um kind of thing as well we have a bullet point talking about sort of lifelong Learners and CTE connectedness as well as higher ed connectedness things like expanded options and such programs in there as well and support for that we come back to education funding and we have again quite a few specifics in here and we'll call out for the viewer we do in the state have something quality called the quality education model which tells us really how much is needed to actually reach it's actually to reach 90 percent of students reaching standards and obviously we have in the state the 40 40 20 goal which an underlying factor of that if you do the math is 100 of all students graduating from high school so this 90 requirement uh standard level the qem says we would need 9.158 billion dollars in this next biennium to reach that goal um I think it's fair to say we are looking at something in the range of seven billion dollars as the likely
01h 20m 00s
outcome of the session so still a very significant Gap when it comes to actually funding towards that outcome forward we also have in here a bullet point around the state school distribution fund formula and how we will weigh proposals in that there is also always in every session a number of proposals dealing with how we distribute the money regardless of how much that money is so we do talk about how we will weigh that and evaluate those proposals individually to on their um I've simply copy and pasted all of the resolution bullet points from the resolution you adopted to someone on the smarter balance assessment as they relate to this the work of the state legislature so um you'll see those copied in their entirety right there then we have a section called School District Operations which looks at more of the well the operational side of the district talking about some of the cost drivers that we um that we deal with in the district things like employee salary and wages and health benefits and um and the like underneath there then we go to the last section which I call other areas of legislative interest which is just a smattering of some of the more Global topics that we anticipate will come up in a legislative session or that we also conversely want to highlight specifically things in this for instance that the the first bullet point as we point out PPS supports targeted efforts that would benefit the district and or the other similarly situated school districts as we know Portland fits a fairly unique spot in Oregon education being both the largest District in the state and the most Urban District in the state so there are a number of initiatives that we work on throughout the session that are sort of uniquely impactful to large school districts in of course there's one hand on one hand we can count this and a number of other bullet points about supporting our Community Partners supporting the work of the city and the county where they intersect with the district and supporting our state Partners as well where their legislative agendas align as you know in a session we do work very strongly in Coalition with any and all willing Partners who for uh graduate greater focus on education and with that would be happy to sort of field questions about this too Dr Buell can you look at this last section under uh student achievement says a key component of lifelong that's the start of it yeah down towards the bottom it talks about CTE and it says that we strongly support additional State Investments outside of the state school fund right I was looking to this in looking through this document I didn't it that's only CTE because you and I were both at the oeib meeting and they had they have last year or two years ago Governor had 75 million dollars that he was spending for his priorities which came out of it all has to come it only comes in two places right it comes from the federal or it comes from the state money state money is common School fund and is that pretty close to correct I mean and so he was spending 75 million dollars in this state common School fund for his stuff well this year as you and I uniform they're he's spending 870 million dollars which for us at seven percent so we're about seven percent of the state correct that's that's 600 FTE of ours that he's spending someplace else that aren't going to get into our classrooms and so are we did we take that into account in our legislation I mean are we saying no that's too much money out of the state school because that's got to come out of the state school fund there's no place else to get it that he's getting it he's getting it there right including the third grade including the third grade uh reading initiative which is 400 million dollars which is 28 million uh he's he's spending that on actually preschool and is that do you did you know is that part of the kindergarten is it because a couple hundred million of that is the kindergarten initiative is that beyond what they're planning to give or is that what they're planning to give see I you see what I'm saying I got I don't know where that separates out and we should be if it's beyond that we should be fighting it and we should be standing up and saying 870 million dollars out there it's too much you know 600 of our fde out someplace in the Hinterlands I mean it's not that it's not good stuff that he's doing I think it's good stuff but not against what he's doing it's just that's a chunk of change 870 million dollars it's only a chunk of changes it comes
01h 25m 00s
out of what we currently get well it's great if he would just add another yeah out of the state budget now that's that I could get behind it is he going to do that I I don't know do you know David I I don't know so um a little bit on the on the process which I think is informative in the specific instance so the governor will release his actual Budget on December 1st um the document that was put out at the oeib meeting previously was informative for sure but it lacked a significant amount of detail for us to know exactly I would point out that a couple hundred million of what we know on that document were what I would describe formula changes that are merely reallocations of existing dollars um of specifically the 400 million you refer to as the third grade reading Early Childhood um he did call out 220 million dollars as um as a way to pay for the move to full day kindergarten yeah that's positive but again we don't know any details below that how is that money being distributed is 200 the right number so uh what we have been advocating for the cult the sort of broader Coalition is about 250 million dollars to pay for the move to um and so to give you the sense um these are not firmed up in final numbers as we go into session and um but what we are generally looking at is what we begin by advocating for is what we call the true roll-up so how much will it cost to run the education Enterprise over the next two years the same as we're running it now okay because we gotta we gotta keep people employed and keep moving forward and we estimate that Statewide to be about 7.3 billion dollars okay so we're at 6.65 right now so 7.3 then add 200 to 250 million on top of that to pay for full link unicorn so um I think generally our approach would be that you have to begin from that as your starting point then if we want to have discussions about valuable strategic initiatives no matter whether they're coming from the oeid the governor or individual legislators because they will all have good ideas but we need to talk about them in the context of adding on top of the existing system as we move forward we can't merely carve out from below those numbers to sort of redefine the system right right are we good on was that legislative committee good on all that because I'm good on all that that's wonderful yeah I think that's exactly what the point I'm trying to make director Atkins and I think the other piece of that too is not only should it not be carving out the exist money and then mandating exactly how it should have spent and then requiring additional compliance and Reporting which in itself has cost added right and and puts limitations on local districts and what they view is the highest and most effective strategies versus having the IV or whoever say well we want you to make sure you spend you know X percent or X you know million dollars on this strategy or this particular approach and you need to report on it and do all this other hire people in order to report on it right I mean so I'm really Direction accountability yes but when it comes in the form of these mandates not a recognition that we need to have if we want to do Innovative Pilots try new things again do it on top of um the other piece too I wanted to ask about I just want to make sure I'm clear on the quality education model it is in the state constitution correct correct and what it says in the state constitution is that the legislature in effect says the legislature will fund the quality education model which as you pointed out is about nine billion dollars a couple billion dollars above where the state currently chooses to invest in our kids uh it needs to do that or issue a report saying why it isn't going to is that basically what the Constitution says that that is basically correct there actually was a very interesting court case a number of years ago about the I think the Constitution uses the word and instead of or when it comes to writing a report and a number of school districts sued the state saying you did you're not off the hook for funding you have to fund and uh the report is a nice little touch but you have to fund the system um if I remember correctly essentially the court said you know you're probably right but we as a court don't have any jurisdiction to hold say the legislature in contempt so there really was nothing they could do about it so who would have that jurisdiction it's okay go ahead well I'll start by stating the obvious I'm not a lawyer um but we pursued this I'm at one point to decide whether or not there were some changes we could make um and I think I just heard director Knowles say under her breath that um this is a this is a a current Court ruling it is a judicial interpretation of the law right which um
01h 30m 00s
says something to the effect of you shall fund education they're very clear that that is a demand and a command and an expectation of the state but when the voters approve the amendment to the Constitution there was language in there that said something to the effect of if you can't fund it you must issue a report and so they didn't feel they had the authority to re-legislate that they said that there are two opposing viewpoints in that and so they try their best to interpret voter intent and what they said is in that in that Amendment it seemed that voters anticipated that there could be an opportunity to not fund at that level and so gave the legislature basically an out a way to do it and so um that's where we left the conversation there is nothing saying that there couldn't be a change to that Constitution again or another amendment and I'll just say publicly that I'd be happy to work with anybody and everybody including our teachers union to work on putting forth some kind of Constitutional Amendment that would correct that because I believe the people of the state of Oregon are interested in funding education at the state required rate you're here so we could include that in our legislative priorities though yes yeah yeah yes we can and certainly as the institution constitutional amendments to the legislature and we have we've brought several Constitutional Amendments previously working trying to work on reforms to the state's property tax system of course the caveat being once something is certified for the ballot we use I wouldn't know battle measure one which was the battle measure proving that um championed and push through correct other comments stretcher built two major things the first one you covered I appreciate and I appreciate the way the board dealt with it because I think it's correct the second one is something we need to deal with too and if you look at the very last thing on the report the draft report says PPS support servers to ensure that when any data is collected and stored a lot of students that have done reliably and securely and that such data is only is for legitimate educational purposes we need to look at that as a district besides this two weeks ago the Oregon Employment Division had 850 000 of their people have their data breached 850 000 we are handing our data down to the state the people who could not protect the even 850 000 people's uh uh social security number we we could they can't protect it they cannot protect our children's data period they've proven that in this breach like hey if you can't protect that how can you protect our children's data and so the state is asking us to send down all of our children's data on the longitudinal database which they can't protect and it would you know what we should really do really seriously this is kind of this is almost a serious thing we should write a letter to every parent in our school district or an email that says we are taking your day your child's data and we are going to hand it to criminals because that's exactly what happened with all of the employ all the unemployment data and it's exactly what can happen to all of our data and the thing that a lot of people don't understand about this data thing with children is that the children's data is much more valuable than adults because it's clean you have clean data so your child can have their data stolen and it can go on for several years so when Mr Morton's son gets to college all of a sudden they find out he's got a record in Wyoming and he owes three thousand dollars in Texas I mean no it's how it it's how it it's how it really works so he can't get into the college that he wants because he's got a felony record someplace it's just craziness and we're just saying to the state take our kids data and give it to criminals and basically that's what happened with the employment data and it's basically what we are doing when we send them our children's data so we need to have our people look at it and we need to go down to the legislature and say I'm sorry we're not we're not going to hand you our children's data to turn over to criminals because that's exactly what we're doing and we need to figure out what we can do about that because it's a terrible thing if it happens or seven about what 600 between 600 and 700 000
01h 35m 00s
kids in Oregon and we're handing their data to criminals good luck on that and just wrong and we need to figure out what we're going to do about it and so I like this part about saying this but but it's stronger than this it's really important thing for our school board to look at and and say hey we need to quit it well I'm glad that you included that within the priorities all those of you on the committee so it was it was a discussion that we had um and also very concerned about it if I'm remembering our discussion correctly and please correct me if I'm wrong um but what I also remember us discussing is that the reality in today's world is the being able to protect somebody's data is really challenging FBI gets hacked CIA gets hacked everybody thinks so we chose um not to and I just want to point out that um if somebody's data is stolen such as the states or any individuals that doesn't make them criminal it makes the person that actually talking about we're actually handing it to criminals because they can't protect it right and so and we say well if they can protect it we want to make sure they can protect the one story they can't protect us right so I guess what our discussion was is that our district State Whoever has the data has been shown that it's really challenging to protect it so what we wanted to make sure is that we were advocating for policies and procedures that take into account because lots of students are on devices iPads Chromebooks all of this stuff and many people are starting to use technology applications and they all have Clauses about what they can do with student data what data they're collecting and then they Market it and sell it and all of those pieces and so we took that tack I'd be curious if other people are interested I'm not sure what we can do to protect data anymore because again everybody but but we then were is on the hook as the state I guess is was our part of our discussion is that protecting data is a challenge and we do as best we can as will the state but our what we were trying to do with the legislative is to say let's be realistic about all the data for example if we are sending them we don't want it to go to a company who then sells it to a third party who then markets to our children or something like that and so we took that tack but if other folks are interested yeah and this is the I think this is probably the best tax you're going to take Lou Frederick is probably will have a bill that deals with data I hope we're really very supportive of it and we and I hope that um he actually goes even farther because I think that um I think it could benefit from even more stringent oh well they should not have a state longitudinal database that in any way identifies any of our children that's where they should go if they want to get disaggregated today I mean data that's aggregated and we send this and that's not but it's the one we send actual information which identifies our children we should not be at they shouldn't even be asking us to do that because it's wrong because they can't protect it sorry okay thank you thank you any other questions or comments first do you have comments correct yeah I had a chance to sit on the committee as well and I want to recognize David and his work and his Insight keeping his finger on the pulse of what's Happening um Statewide I think the uh the reality of this is that in many ways it's our opportunity to create a real partisan uh document to say this is about us as a district but the other balance of that is that it also takes into consideration what we see in terms of the need across the state which I think that's an important balance to strike um the other piece real quickly too is that uh as we make this available the the intention and the attitude in as we go and prepare for Salem is to every partner parent student Advocate that we can gather with us um I I hope we pursue that whether that is Cosa or osba or the governor's office or elected officials in in Salem OR our teachers our p-a-t or oea and so on these are all folks that the voice The Voice amplifies more and more what happens when we have an opportunity to speak together and I think I think things like um uh the funding level can continue to be chipped away as we saw in the last session so and that's a credit that I think everyone can take contest that so I appreciated the opportunity to and I think this document just my perception being on the on the committee this document outlines a lot
01h 40m 00s
of that partisan work but also the balance of what the state needs thank you others Senator we had a couple of questions um so I was also on this committee and um I had an exchange with David today about one area where it seemed like we had um not included a piece and that had to do with the fifth year student issue so could you go ahead and address how we're going to deal with that or yes maybe explain to people what we're talking about thank you so at one of our meetings we did talk about putting in here a a a priority around the growing use of the fifth year senior programs where students who have effectively graduated from high school the district withholds their diploma and allows them to attend a nearby college and they continue to collect State School fund dollars to pay for that student so we did a bullpling and I I apologize it was not in this draft it will be in the final as explored I can read it here for you right now I step right in front of me um we say uh we say there's a current movement among school districts to create five-year high school diploma programs that include a fifth year solely for post-secondary enrollment PPS believes that the state should establish a dedicated source of funds to invest in these programs so as not to dilute the state school fund but rather provide students with no cost or low-cost access to higher education and this is a practice that's expanding around Oregon and so I think it's important that we have something in here so um I also so thank you for that and then I also wanted to mention um two other things as we go forward um David I'm hoping that we are going to be you are going to be organizing an opportunity for us to be meeting with Portland area legislators to go through this with them prior to the legislative session we usually do that right yeah thank you for the question so that really also is the next task for the legislative committee is a great work on developing this really Now launch into the phase of developing an advocacy plan which made something I'll write up for them to improve and work on doing sort of concerted advocacy both in December and January and then once session starts in February throughout the legislative session as I would anticipate some of the things that would be in there as we did two years ago is a fairly robust legislative briefing for as many of the area PPS area legislators as possible came here to the building with board members and staff to go through the legislative platform we had if you recall specific legislators come during the session to your board meetings and address specific issues as they arose I think we had Senator Devlin the co-chair of ways it means we had uh Senator Dem bro come and talk about what was going we will probably continue to do that similar practice as well as Outreach days where members of the board uh come down to Salem last year we had a very uh great day in Salem where we had board members superintendent Smith as well as uh folks from Pat join us for some group meetings in Salem where we really pushed hard on education funding I was I believe around the President's Day rally which usually happens in Salem so a lot of those similar activities will will happen very effective in moving our message David I had a um I was very impressed around the last legislative session with a program that they had out in Beaverton I'm not sure if they've partnered with the PT I think they did but it was more an educational program where they did a review of exactly where the money comes from for the legislature and then where it goes to give parents in the community a better idea about what what school funding is all about where does where's the money to come from for our schools and I think that they had a lot of success with just educating their Community around that but would you check into that uh program I think they they did it with their PTA and with their Foundation I think were the two partners that the district used to do that and they had huge turnouts for those they did two of them so my final one is I appreciate the um statements in here about us working with our Statewide education partners and I know that you ran this past Association of teachers and some other groups in Coalition of communities of color Cosa a variety of different groups so um and I um also appreciate that you mentioned that we're also going to be supporting the efforts of the city of Portland Multnomah County Metro neighboring school districts and the rest um as that makes sense for us to kind of partner together with them my my question is I know that you you focus your primary focus is on the state legislature you also do some federal
01h 45m 00s
work in terms of the city and the county and the metro and and when they're have an item on their agenda that is of interest to us I'm still trying to understand how who's following those agendas so that if the county has a budget item related to health care clinics or some schools or the city has something related to sros we can be sure that we are participating as appropriate in those in those efforts or if they are going to the legislature and lobbying on something that impacts us how we do that together so is that you or is that John who who is who's kind of coordinating the city county other entity roles yeah no I think that's an excellent question and you know what we do try to do is weigh in where appropriate I know for instance the city is going to be discussing the street fee this week and we've been working with them in the development and we'll be presenting um words of support around Investments that the city is making based on that scope of the work of the legislature it is certainly and fairly where we invest the vast majority of our time because the work that they do is both 70 or 80 percent of our budget as well as probably 80 percent of our sort of operating Life as a district is encompassed in statutes so I just think that that's that's where you see the bulk of that work is that scope um where appropriate and where issues arise as needed I think that's when we tackle those with the county and the city um both as our efforts can align in Salem although generally when they align in say limits around the city and the county wanting to support our efforts um for instance the the mayor of Portland two years ago organized a big sort of mayor's education day in Salem and it was mostly a call-in thing but we supported their efforts and tried to help them as they educated Mayors about Educational Funding um where there are specific budget items in the city's budget and the counties try to impact that as much as we can't bring great Partners into the us as excellent partners and so generally they reach out to us on a fairly informal level up and down the organization um you know where where appropriate based on the issue at hand you know whether that be in facilities you know if it's around a planning issue or some such whether it's you know our level if it's something more Global like the street fee or whether it's you know something specific program based that intersects some other area of the organization I guess I want to make sure that we have the opportunity when our when our great partners are devoting money that impacts us in a positive way I want to make sure that we have an opportunity to be out there meetings and to thank them for that or to suggest tweaks or whatever it might be and I just want to make sure we don't miss those opportunities as we go so I want to make sure somebody's pink because I know that David spends a lot of time in Salem during the session but I want to make sure somebody else is following the other agenda so that we can be oppressed and I think we can always do better with that John is doing some of that with the city bureaus and we do an informal get together with the mayor on a regular basis kind of checking where our common you know what are the things we're working on together or how are we supporting each other and David just described it well in terms of there's a lot of interface with facilities David and um and John do some tag teaming and we can always be better at paying attention to this I think you guys also scan things and we'll bring it to our attention too so keep keep doing that you know and I think it's fair to say that there's there's so much of my specific effort is devoted down in silence it will ebb and flow as we have an ability Dr Buell and two specific one comment kind of and then a real specific question on a little section here that I don't understand exactly and I want to make sure it's clear and then I have one other comment we say we support the priorities of the Oregon School Board Association okay I've looked at those are not too bad they're pretty good and so on but the confederation of Oregon school of Administrators I don't know what those are and a lot of times I question those so I'm not so sure that we should be saying that we're supporting their priorities unless they're also mixing with our priorities is you know I don't know exactly how they mix up I haven't studied it enough to know so I just had that reservation
01h 50m 00s
on this David do you have a copy of what they're proposing so you could distribute to us um what you see with osba and Cosa are two different approaches to legislative advocacy osba as you will have read all their stuff they are specific legislative policies in private Cosa takes a much more subjective approach and they don't actually approve a formal legislative platform for the leg Al election and remain as a more Nimble um focused shot and I think to a degree they maintain a greater degree of connectedness with their membership basis specifically the superintendent base among that organization to be a sort of constant sounding board for their advocacy efforts but you know if there was a specific thing that you think we as an institution would have a big problem with that customer do I you know I certainly welcome you to raise that I would note that in that again we do say that's where our issues do align which for all of our Statewide Harbors osba Cosa oea osca Oregon PTA I would say the overlap is probably in the 90 to 95 of Pam points out that it says common okay so I kind of I got the draft on it and I missed that a little bit but yeah okay I wanted to highlight highlight that and maybe we should add the oea in with that we had three thousand teachers in that organization so we should be supporting a lot of their stuff where they overlap too of course uh well go back to can I go back to this one sentence and I have one more comment and oh this one it says it's on the legislative priorities second to last paragraph right above where it says other areas of legislative interest it's the second one that starts out PPS supports the creation I was making a note help me out again okay second paragraph down yep uh and it is this sentence and I want to know which which way to read this sentence uh PPS supports Statewide efforts to encourage local collaboration and development of metrics or including student achievement growth and evaluations and my understanding is that as a school board we talked about it that we're not for that having student achievement growth and evaluations that was kind of in our Common Core thing that was my understanding so I'm not sure are we support are we actually are we supporting this or what and so should this sentence read PBS supports Statewide efforts to encourage local collaboration and local development of metrics or are we actually supporting the development of metrics for including student achievement growth and evaluations which way is that sentence supposed to be right so I read it as encourage local collaboration and local development right exactly okay and the last thing is I I think we have to be careful with that we're kind of we're using as a as a board and as an Administration and as a district really the word achievement gap which and we're not really defining it exactly correct and I think it'd be a good idea if we would at least think about it because the achievement Gap is it the gap on the testing or is it the gap on the reading from my point of view it's a gap on the reading that what we want is all of our children to read at grade level the testing thing is different and it's becoming even more different with the S back testing so I'm not sure which achievement Gap are we that we want to push on one of the other mathematics might be better with but the aspect is also changing the way that we're looking at mathematics of course and it's becoming more can you write about mathematics then can you do mathematics which is questionable there's a lot of questionable things around that so I just wanted to bring that out that when we say achievement Gap do we mean the testing or do we mean the reading and the foundational mathematics skills or what we just use it Loosely and and I and there's a huge difference between the two things I just want to point that out for something to think about as a board so I appreciate you listening to me on that others at direct dragons yeah I think just one comment to that piece I mean I feel like we've been using the term opportunity Gap um because there's it's it's not just about test scores it's also about reading graduation rate it's about opportunities in all different ways exactly anyway I just wanted to say thank you to um to David and to the legislative committee for your work this is outstanding and really appreciated and I'm really excited about moving forward and advocating strongly in Salem and with all our community to keep that I know we've been in there in the trenches for decades some of us and we've got to all
01h 55m 00s
keep keep pushing because our kids deserve it I just wanted to highlight um two other things but before I get there um I wanted to ask we had talked at one point about including this encouraging the state to um locally allow for bonding Authority for buildings for facilities as we just had our bond earlier to help leverage additional funds so it doesn't rest on local communities and I don't see it again in this draft but I know it was in one draft so just a placeholder if it's not there I I would assume that we would support I know it fits perfectly on four pages um but if it's if it's not there to include five pages when you get it back the second thing is I just wanted to highlight um two things that I'm really also encouraged by is one is our position that we don't support the state moving to a Statewide collective bargaining a Statewide salary schedule we believe again that's a local control issue for us to be working with our staff and um lastly I just want to acknowledge that we're also advocating for Statewide funding for outdoor school when I hear director Morton talk about a balance between local and Statewide to bring those opportunities in and we'll have a budget discussion about this but really this is I think a Statewide ethos about Environmental Education and it should really come as a Statewide opportunity so we're when I talked to uh at least one Union person about this particular paragraph they might say you're we're in favor of collective bargaining right as a form okay I just wanted to get that out in public to make a bit here it's not quite as strong a statement as hey we're for yes we don't want you to in there great with collective bargaining don't think the state should meddle in it yeah okay great what a great discussion um so we'll move on to our next agenda item we're fortunate that director Reagan serves on the osba board and is the president-elect of that board so I'd like to an org OSB I should say Oregon school boards Association rather than just osba for everybody who doesn't know what that um stands for so I'd like to ask her to provide us with a brief overview of the osba ballot and the board will vote on this at our uh next meeting in on November 25th so thank you so technically I'm still vice president of the Oregon school boards Association but in January I'll be president-elect um so um there's a series of resolutions that we're going to be looking at voting on um so I think we're just going to introduce those this week and then we actually will vote next week um and the other thing that we wanted to do tonight is to introduce the promise of Oregon campaign and show the new Full uh three and a half minute video associated with that so first of all I just wanted to first start by just saying um the Oregon school boards Association is a Statewide Association and it supports school board members as we seek to improve student achievement and there are school board members now in 197 districts across Oregon and it's helpful to reflect that most of those are very small and very rural school districts there's only 10 or 12 school districts in Oregon that have more than one high school so when you're talking about a Statewide Association supporting that you need to understand that you know Portland Public Schools is the only Urban district and then there's only nine or ten others that have more than one high school so you're an association that's that's supporting all of those so osba as an organization provides services Direct Services to many of our smaller districts it partners with education organizations Statewide to a Lobby for public education generally and it provides tools resources and professional development for volunteer elected school board members across the state so um in terms of the several resolutions we're going to look at the first one is a resolution that supports the promise of Oregon campaign and just so you know what that is at last weekend's uh Oregon school boards association annual convention we actually participated in a workshop to help board members understand what this campaign is all about and how they can use it to change the conversation in Oregon around public education and around our students and so I first of all wanted to thank John Isaacs if he's still here so director of communications
02h 00m 00s
and family engagement and I also wanted to thank Minaj aswald our student representative for participating with me and others in that Workshop that was really fun and it was really exciting to have a student voice in that conversation as well so I have wanted the Oregon School Board cessation Association to do a public relations campaign around public education for a long time and so it's so exciting to see the organization the whole organization come together and embrace it and I just give them huge huge credit and I'm so grateful for this campaign and part of the reason we wanted to do this is because today media is often focused on the most Sensational stories or the most negative stories out there and the question is who's telling the positive stories about public education and our kids and why it matters so you know generally the tone of the messages seems to be often you know public education public employees Public School teachers are bad we should privatize Public Schools public retirement benefits they're too generous you know you even have stories now about kids and how lazy they are and that you move to Portland to retire I mean it's just such negative portrayal of our kids and of public schools in general and even positive stories often end up sounding negative in the media or at least the headlines come off negative and the example I gave was a couple of years ago The Oregonian did an article that basically had a headline about how Washington State beat Oregon again in terms of ACT scores for our high school students well it turns out once you read the article you realize that Washington state was first in the nation in terms of ACT scores and Oregon was second and so the headline could have been you know the northwest or Oregon Washington take first and second place but instead it was if you if all you read was the headline you would have thought Oregon was just doing horrible and so it's trying to just kind of turn that conversation around a little bit and to um talk more positively so we know in fact that we will invest in our kids the conversation really is whether or not we want to invest early in public education which often and always is less expensive than investing later in human services or you know welfare or even in public safety which is a much more expensive way that you invest so if we all accept that we're going to invest it would probably be um smart for us to look at that and then the other thing I think that we all need to be thinking about is whether or not we look at publication public education as an expense or whether we look at it as an investment if you look at public education as an expense you're going to make really short-term decisions and try to spend as little as possible if you look at it as an investment you're going to look at much more in the long term and you're going to make smarter decisions as you go and so again that's the conversation we want to change at the state legislature and even among ourselves um and so what the promise of Oregon campaign is about a quarter million dollar investment that the Oregon school boards Association is making to try to begin to change that conversation and again obviously the hope is to help us all understand that our kids are worthy of the investment so I wanted to see if we could just first run the three-minute video now and then we'll talk about the resolutions that are coming forward thank you I am the promise of Oregon because I'm gonna do so many things when I grow up I want to build Bridges so cars can go over them and under them I want to be a gardener and make more air in the world I want to be a painter and paint everything and travel the world I want to find a way to make people not be allergic to peanut butter and the promise of Oregon because I'm gonna stop bullying and have everyone be friends I forgot what I was gonna say I have the promise of Oregon because when I grow up I'm gonna get a scholarship go to college learn about endangered species and save those endangered species
02h 05m 00s
I would like to take after my dad and be a great electrician I'm gonna swim across an ocean I'm gonna own my own tow truck company I'm the promise of Oregon because I'm gonna make Oregon more green I either want to be a missionary or a comedian I want to be just like my mom I'm the promise of working because I want to help people bring babies into the world I'm going to help premature babies like my brother Logan help children who have heart problems I help people understand different cultures better I'm going to stop diabetes I'm gonna be the mail lady I'm the promise of Oregon because I want to teach people that their mouth doesn't just come from the grocery store I want to change people's lives with music and theater this sounds kind of nerdy but I want to be a physicist I'm going to discover something unknown in the Deep reaches of outer space I am the promise of Oregon because I want to show my passion through like I'm going to teach agriculture education because without agriculture we'd all be naked and hungry I'm going to win the gold medal in the 200 meter in the 2020 Olympics I'm going to be the first person to pole vault on the moon I hope to influence Oregon public policy and get involved in politics I want to start a new family tradition I want to put an end ogram I don't have to suffer I want to write books that will take people to whole new worlds I'm the promise of Oregon because I'm going to keep asking the clinical stand up for people who cannot stand up for them so fight for loss protect the environment I want to design buildings that are good for the environment I went to work for the right to equal opportunity provide a to people in third world countries I'm going to report stories from around the world I want to make people happy every day three two one yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes I'm the promise of organ yes I'm the premise of Oregon yes I am the promise of warrior so Bobby I have a question for you yeah so I'm in maybe you don't know the answer but it's uh 250 000 is what's the main vehicle for how they're going to spend it how we're going to get that message out yeah so first of all just to make this video they ended up visiting 25 to 30 different school districts across Oregon so that it would really represent the whole state they're going to be providing a variety of literature out to districts posters that sort of thing thumb drives with this medium on it and the real focus of the campaign is to have a really strong social media presence with the hope that people will send in pictures of their own kids that say I'm the promise of Oregon or that we will take pictures of ourselves holding up signs like this I'm keeping the promise of Oregon it's really to spread the word and then to you know as we get into the legislative session we'll we'll be targeting that even more as we go so it'll be a whole variety of different mediums like this that we'll be seeing over the next couple of months cool yeah it's really cool and if you didn't notice Mina was in that video and osba did do some filming in uh in the Portland School District which is great every day on the website for a promise of Oregon they're putting out a new promise of Oregon kid that's being featured and again I would really encourage you to like the Facebook page for the promise of Oregon and there's also a website for the promise of Oregon that gives you things that you can print out yourself like this and would show the three minute video I put the three minute video up on my own web page and you know I've had eight shares already in the last couple of days so um it's just trying to spread the word ourselves that we view our kids as worthy of the investment and and truly being the promise this is what's going to take us all forward so it's pretty exciting I'm just excited that we have a School Board Association that is that is so engaged in this way and in supporting us and supporting our legislative agenda so so one of the resolutions that we are going to be asked to vote on next week is simply a resolution in support of the promise of Oregon campaign so hopefully that one's pretty straightforward um another resolution that we're going
02h 10m 00s
to be looking at is we just heard from David on the osba legislative policies and priorities and on Portland's and we also have information here a draft of the Oregon school boards Association legislative policies and priorities and my guess is we might do a little bit of discussion tonight on these if anyone has questions but why don't I just run through really quickly what the other resolutions are real quick um we will be voting on candidates for the osba board and so a couple of years ago osba changed the way they do elections so that instead of it being a Statewide election to the osba board regions are actually selecting our own board members and so in Multnomah County we have three board members on the osba board in my seat I'm running unopposed and we have in position 19 we have two people running recommending Doug Montgomery who is on the Multnomah County ESD for that role he's been serving for one cycle two years he's done a really nice job he went to Washington DC and lobbied with us he's really focused on special on the needs of special ed kids and trying to get nurses into all of our schools he's got a real passion around kind of the safety net and Social Services issues and I highly highly recommend him again for the board there's two other quick resolutions that are are more housekeeping kind of resolutions for osba itself one in and but their constitutional changes so they have to be voted on by the membership one is we have a couple of districts around Oregon especially in really rural outlying areas where it's hard sometimes to find folks to step up into the board if we don't find someone to volunteer to step up to run we don't want to leave the position vacant and so we're proposing that as the last resort we could appoint somebody from adjacent districts so again you have that rural representation on the board that tends to be where we find it the most and I think the final resolution was just again a housekeeping change where we had some old language about or the way we used to pass resolutions in the way we used to elect board members where we voted Statewide at the annual conference and instead we now vote within our own boards after the annual conference and regionally so those are the resolutions I don't think I've left any off um but I'd love to just open it up so um comments on let's start with the promise of Oregon comments that's a resolution for us any comments on the resolution okay and then we also have the osba legislative agenda comments from board members on that I think David covered a little bit of it that's the same the pieces that are common for us so anybody have any questions on that and by the way these are put together by a group of um 38 school board members from around the state so each region has a school board member and a legislative policy Committee Member the legislative poly committee is is all of those combined so it's uh this represents the work of 38 different school board members from around yeah one of the places I disagree with are legislative policies and priorities is the supporting the continuation of the oeib they do have conditions but the conditions aren't strong enough in my opinion the achievement compacts I don't think the Chima compacts are doing any good in this for anybody really and so it's unless that equalized a section 400 no I I don't want to make suggestions or anything I just want to kind of kind of highlight both of those that were things that um it'd be nice if the osba would get behind though and help them straighten up the oeib because it's such a instead of saying well okay little things put a parent on it yeah they have parents on it and I'm I'm poor putting a school board member a paranona but they have parents on it they're people that are parents uh Nicole mayor brought her baby a couple times she's a parent I mean you know they're it's kind of it's just such a weird setup thank you for their comments director Paulo coming I just wanted to reflect back I thought I heard you say for a minute put a parrot not a parent that was like they already have 14 parrots
02h 15m 00s
they have 14 parents on there they just keep parroting cliches back and forth day after day down there so I don't know well it is interesting to think that the the oeib actually does have to be reinstated this year it expires unless it's affirmatively reinstated and so that's going to be really certainly worth considering conversation yeah see anything else other comments okay uh Bobby thank you so much for both the stuff on the promise of Oregon and your work on the Oregon school boards Association I appreciate you representing us there and thank you so I think that's it for tonight uh the next meeting of the board will be held on Tuesday November 25th where we'll vote both on the Oregon school boards Association and I are we coming back and voting on our legislative priorities that night as well that's what I thought

Sources

PPS Board of Education, Archive 2014-2015, https://www.pps.net/Page/1893 (accessed: 2022-03-24T00:57:53.371200Z)
PPS Communications, "Board of Education" (YouTube playlist), https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL8CC942A46270A16E (accessed: 2023-10-10T04:10:04.879786Z)

2014-11-18 PPS School Board Study Session

Documents / Media

Notices/Agendas

Materials

Minutes

Transcripts

Event 1: Board of Education - Study Session - November 18, 2014

Sources