Mountain View Whisman School District Board of Education - Regular Meeting

June 11th, 2026 meeting of the Mountain View Westman Board of Trustees will please come to order. It is 6 p.m. We're meeting tonight in the boardroom at 1400 Montecito Avenue, Mountain View, California. The meeting is being broadcast live on YouTube, Zoom, and on mbwsd.org. It is being recorded. Board President Charles DeSazio will be attending this meeting remotely. And the address is in the agenda.

All right.

Now I'll perform the roll call of the board.

Bill Lambert.

Evan Conley. Anna Reid.

Lisa Henry.

Charles DeFazio.

All members are present with President DeFazio attending online and a quorum is established. All right. Please rise for the Pledge of Allegiance.

Pledge of Allegiance.

All right, thank you. Before we proceed with the agenda, I wish to remind all attendees that the board welcomes and encourages public participation. We ask that all speakers adhere to the decorum and time limits established by board bylaw 9323. I will allot time during each item for public comments as we see how many speakers we have. So the next item of business is the approval of the meeting agenda. Are there any requests to pull items, reorder items, move items from discussion and action to consent? All right, so I will now open public comment on item 1C. If any members of the public in person wish to address the board regarding this item, please turn in a speaker card. If you're online, please use the raise hand function. I will wait to see how many speakers we have and allocate time accordingly. Is anybody online? All right, so we have one speaker in person. Mr. Nelson, you have three minutes.

and I think I'm now online. There's a quote that goes something like, who sets the agenda, sets the narrative. There's a number of different quotes about setting the agenda being an important power of any meeting. says what kind of things can be discussed or should be discussed. But particularly in the school board, it says what kind of things cannot be discussed. So besides the inclusive, it's also the exclusive, things that are excluded from being talked about. Sort of like if you had a marriage and you'd say, well, anything we disagree on finances, we won't talk about. Good way to not have a very long marriage. In this case, what's been left off the agenda, I don't know if it was on purpose, but it seems clear it could have been put on, and I think it should have been put on, was what is the I-ready D3 results? These I-Ready tests are done automatically. If you go via the site, it says once they're done, and even in draft mode before they're done, or if there's a few people that haven't gotten it done, maybe special ed or something, you just have to go into their site, the administrative allowance, and you can get the district summary report. District summary report looks pretty much like what we've gotten before. We're just missing the big narrative on the front and the back. Now the fact that this wasn't done and this wasn't put on the agenda means there's a whole lot of information that you guys don't have going into discussions over the summer about what the results of the different subgroups are. Particularly the thing I'm worried about is support. this economically disadvantage. And I'm also worried about our ethnic subgroup, the Hispanics, who haven't been doing well over the last four years. They've been going down. The gaps are getting bigger. We're below the county and the state in those So the fact that that wasn't put on says something about this institution. I think it says something about the personal integrity of both the superintendent and the president. And what it says to me is not very good. Thank you, Mr. Nelson.

Any comments from the board?

I move that the board approve the agenda as presented.

Second. We have a motion from Trustee Lambert with a second from Trustee Conley. All those in favor? Aye.

Point of order. I think we have to do these by roll call because I'm remote.

Okay. Trustee Lambert?

Aye.

Trustee Conley? Aye. Trustee Reid? Aye. Vice President Henry, Lisa. Hi, I'll get it. President desposio.

Hi.

Great. That was unanimous motion passes with all five trustees voting in favor. All right. We now have the opportunity for members of the public to address the board concerning items on the closed session agenda. I will now open public comment for items on the closed session agenda. If any members of the public in person wish to address the board regarding this item, please turn on a speaker card. If you're online, please use the raise hand function. I'll wait to see how many speakers we have and allocate time accordingly. All right, so we have one speaker in person. And so I'll allocate three minutes, Mr. Nelson.

I guess I can balance that. Yes, Superintendent, I haven't said anything in about this day's evaluation, but it's a continuation of the other one. I've said before, he's now almost halfway through his contract. And one of the things you should realize is this is a fellow who was hired and it seems now he is just gonna be a caretaker. He's talking about plans that will go out for six years. He's unlikely to be around in six years. Some of you guys won't be around in six years. What we've seen is when you make a strategic plan that is so long, strategic plans are not necessary. They're not legally required. And they definitely, the LCAP is only required for three years rolling. So when somebody who maybe is going to be just a caretaker and out in three years starts having to set a plan for the next six or seven years, realize that makes you non-agile. The institution loses its agility. And what we've seen in this district, if you really read the Orenda report, it says we're failing our Hispanic and poor students, failing. That's about a third or a fourth of our students. We're failing because they're not even meeting the average for their subgroups within the state of California, not even counting what it is in our county. So when you have a system that's feeling that much, you need to realize if we had those tests that I complained about, not having I-ready test report done now, It could have been put in at the last 72 hours. It doesn't have to be, or the last 24. When you don't have that, and the superintendent is responsible for that not being clicked, and that not being submitted to you to at least look at publicly, that It's not high credibility. That looks like he's trying to hide something. It looks like he's trying to hide, oh, we've gone yet another year, we've gone down. Maybe we're not. My guess is in math, we're gonna plateau out based on a quadratic fit to what we're doing relative to the rest of the state of California. We're gonna plateau out at 80% of what the, socioeconomic are doing relative to the state. But the fact that he hasn't made this public and it's available is a bad indication for the integrity of this institution. So he's responsible also for the institutional integrity.

Thank you, Mr. Nelson. The board is now closed to public comment on the closed session agenda. And the board will now recess to closed session at 6.10 p.m. All right, the board has reconvened in open session at 7.46 p.m. No more portable action was taken in closed session. All right, so we'll now move on to the consent agenda. Oh, wait, I don't think we have President DeFazio. Okay. We are back. Alright, so we'll now move on to the consent agenda. These items are considered routine and will be acted upon in one motion. Does any board member wish to remove an item for separate consideration?

Okay.

So with nothing being removed from the consent agenda, is there any public comment on the consent items? Anything? OK.

In that case, entertain a motion. I make a motion to approve the consent agenda as presented.

I second.

All right, on a motion made by Trustee Conley and seconded by Trustee Lambert, we will proceed to the vote. Trustee Lambert? Trustee Conley? Aye. Trustee Reed? Aye. I vote aye. And President DeFazio? Aye. That's unanimous. All right, so we'll now double check my agenda. So now we move on to section six, communications. Employee organizations. We first invite representatives from our employee organizations to speak.

None.

Now we'll move on to district committees. Are there any reports from district committees? All right, the superintendent there.

All right, good evening. Just a couple of items here at our last regular board meeting of the year. Track and field season has closed, as it always does at the end of the year, and we had some great success I want to share with you at the county finals. Our current Nittany Panthers captured multiple top finishes, including gold medals, and had finishers in the championship category for the first time in 12 years. Seventh grade boys team earned an impressive second place overall finish in the county. And it's the first ever 400 meter champions for both the sixth and seventh grade. So they're running well. Graham also had remarkable showing with teams placing among the county's best. Sixth grade boys took second place and seventh grade girls took third place. And Graham athletes also captured gold medals in three events. And two students set records across those three events. So congrats to all our student athletes, coaches, and families on an incredible season. And we look forward to next year as well. And then finally, I just want to say thank you and what a remarkable year it's been. Together we've celebrated many successes, passed many milestones, and moments for growth for both students and staff across our district. We've come a long way since I first joined. Mount View-Wisman happily back in February of 25. And these achievements are really a great reflection on this community and what makes our school such a special place to learn and grow. It was great to see graduation this year at both Crittenden and Graham. I wasn't able to attend last year, but that was a fantastic event, just seeing the pride and the celebration. So thank you for a great year. Let's get on with the show.

All right. Thank you, Superintendent Behr. Next up is item seven, community comments. This is the time reserved for community members to address the board on items not on the agenda. The board and administration welcome this opportunity to listen. However, in compliance with the Brown Act, the board is not permitted to take action on non-agenda items. um trustees or staff may briefly respond to clarify facts or we may direct the superintendent to attendize the matter for a future meeting and do we have any speakers on this item looks like we have one in person would you mind turning in your card and I don't see anyone online, so Mr. Nelson, you have three minutes.

Thank you. In just over three weeks, July 4th, it will be 250 years since the United States Declaration of Independence was published. You may not believe, quote, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their creator with certain inalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness," unquote. This community has seen boards more disposed to let some kids suffer, Hispanics and the poor, than to write the institution by abolishing the forms of administration to which they are accustomed. The road to happiness and to glory should be open to Hispanics too. To prove this, let facts be submitted to a candid world. The Orenda system study is enough.

Thank you, Mr. Nelson. All right. We will now move to discussion and action. Item 8A, Local Control Accountability Plan, Federal Ombudsman.

so good evening tonight we are presenting the local control accountability plan federal addendum for approval the details of the addendum are presented at the may 28th meeting the presentation is attached as reference as is the addendum so tonight we're asking that you approve the federal addendum as presented are there any clarifying questions from the board okay

All right, then I will now open public comment on item 8A. If any members of the public in person wish to address the board regarding this item, please turn on a speaker card. If you're online, please use the raise hand function. And I'll wait to see how many speakers we have and allocate time accordingly. Any so I think we have no speakers in person or online so we'll move on to any more comments.

Any discussions on the board just becoming make a motion to approve the local control accountability plan federal addendum as presented. Second. All right.

We have a motion from Trustee Conley and seconded by Trustee Reed to approve the Local Control Accountability Plan Federal Addendum as presented. We'll do a roll call vote. Trustee Lambert?

Aye.

Trustee Conley? Aye. Trustee Reed? Aye. I vote aye. Present to file.

Aye.

That's aye. We have unanimous vote of five ayes. All right. Thank you, everyone. We will then move on to item 8B, 2025-26, California Dashboard Local Indicators. This is an action item.

Again, tonight we're presenting the local indicator data, which will be included on the California Dashboard for approval. Similar to the federal addendum, the information was presented at the May 28th meeting. The presentation and narrative are included, and tonight we're asking you to approve the local indicators as presented.

Thank you very much. Board, do we have any clarifying questions? In that case, we'll move on to public comment on this item. If any members of the public in person wish to address the board regarding this item, please turn in a speaker card. And if you're online, please use the raise hand function. I'll wait to see how many speakers we have and allocate time. No speakers in person and no speakers online. So I'll return to board discussion.

I move that the Board approve the 2026-27 Local Control Accountability Plan and 2026 annual update as presented.

We're on B.

We're on B. My apologies. I move that the Board approve the 2025-26 California Dashboard Local Indicators as presented.

Second. All right, we have a motion from Trustee Lambert and seconded by Trustee Conley to approve the 2025-26 California Dashboard Local Indicators as presented. We'll do a roll call vote. Trustee Lambert?

Aye.

Trustee Conley? Aye. Trustee Reid?

Aye.

I vote aye. President DeFazio?

Aye.

We have a unanimous vote to approve the 2025-26 California Dashboard Local Indicators as presented. Thank you, everyone. All right. Then moving on to item 8C, the 2026-27 Local Control Accountability Plan and 2025-26 Annual Update.

So again, tonight we're presenting the 26-27 local control accountability plan and the 25-26 annual update for approval. We presented the supporting documents for public hearing at the May 28th meeting. We've included the presentation. Based on some of the comments received as a part of the public hearing, we did revise wording in the annual update related to response to instruction, early literacy team, and actions related to English learners to make them more clear and understandable for the public. So tonight we're asking that you approve both the local control accountability plan and annual update as presented.

Thank you. Are there any clarifying questions from the board for this item? All right, then I will now open public comment on item 8C. If any members of the public in person wish to address the board regarding this item, please turn on a speaker guard. If you're online, please use the raise hand function. And I will check to see how many speakers we have. I think I have one speaker in person and no speakers online. Mr. Nelson, you have three minutes.

Thank you, Chair Henry. Like former Governor Brown, I like to use phone boards since I don't get access to the display system. I'd like to remind you, this is what our system looks like If you're looking at the 2027 goals, which are mixed up with the LCAP, right, the long strategic plan, what you'll notice is, If you look at the ethnic subgroups, Asians and whites are doing well, and what they're expected to do over this period from 23 to 27 is to gradually go up a few percent. But this is set up in a system where it's looking at equity and saying, look, these Hispanics and the SEDs are so far down that we should be spending more effort on them. That's what equity means. Doesn't mean exactly the same amount of money or the same amount of effort have to be put in low performing kids that are high needs. It means you really should be making this kind of progress. But here's the kind of progress that we've made. This is what we're trying to get to, and that's the actual progress was made. That's through 2024, but in some cases, some of these ones have gone down below the benchmark year of 2023, like the SCD. So who is accountable for this? What the heck does the A in LCAP mean if nobody is accountable? Nobody in the administration is accountable. It isn't the kids, because these kids are capable, just like the kids I taught in 1974 and 1975 in West Africa. They're kids that are able to do floor level, they're able to meet the floor, but they're not being given the resources they need. This goal number two that you guys say in this great plan looks great on paper. When you actually look at the results, Who is accountable for no progress for these kids, for these categories, right? Same ones, the Hispanic and the SCDs. Those are the ones that are the low parts of these where they were in 2023. So you're gonna be held accountable. I don't know where. But at some level, you're going to be held accountable for somebody. And that's really the board that the community expects to oversee the staff. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Nelson.

Do we have any board discussion on this item?

I make a motion that the board approved the 2026 27 local control accountability plan and 2025 26 annual update as presented.

I second.

I have a motion from Trustee Conley and seconded by Trustee Lambert to approve the 2026-27 Local Control Accountability Plan and 2025-26 Annual Update as presented. I'll do a roll call vote. Trustee Lambert?

Aye.

Trustee Conley? Aye. Trustee Reid? Aye. I vote aye. President DeFazio? Aye. With unanimous vote five eyes the 2026 27 local control accountability plan and 2025 26 annual update are approved as presented next we have item 8d also an action item 2026 2027 budget adoption good evening trustees staff is presenting the 26 27 budget for adoption the presentation is attached uh that we reviewed last meeting Thank you. Any clarifying questions from the board? Okay. Then we will now open public comment on item 8D. If any members of the public in person wish to address the board regarding this item, please turn in a speaker card. If you're online, please use the raised hand function and I will see how many people we have. So we have, I believe one, we have one speaker in person and no hands raised online. So Mr. Nelson, you have three minutes.

Thank you. I sort of feel like, uh, the departed Representative Lewis, who would always show up at things, anti-apartheid protests or civil rights issues. This is just to remind you what this district looks like. This is last year and the year before's Common Core. This is eighth grade Common Core meeting math standards. So this is the floor that was talked about in Orinda. And what this really means is most of these Hispanic kids are below the floor. In fact, a lot of them are in the sub, not in the basement, they're in the sub-basement. They're two or three years behind standard when they graduate from our district. What does that do for their futures? Well, it doesn't do very much. So this is what our budget is doing and the way it's spent. This is your responsibility now. It's been the three new members responsibility for like a year and a half. I want to remind you when The chief business officer talks about structural budget deficits. That includes the extra money that we're spending on what would normally be considered excess administrator numbers. The number of administrators that a regular district gets depends on It's nine administrators per hundred teachers. And that ratio, over that ratio, that proportion is taken out of what the state gives those districts. We're a basic aid district. We can spend as much money on as many administrators that we want. And that comes out of the budget. That comes out every year. And those six extra administrators represent deficit budgets that is built into how this district operates. And you've seen from the Orinda study Look at the last several pages. They talk about how much duplication there is in the district office, how it messes up the science. There are too many administrators, and they're overlapped, and you have good documentation of that now, and you have good documentation of what the teachers feel, and you have quotes that Arenda took and explained now from the perspective of the people who work here. It's your, at the budget revise, you can cut administrators, just like you can cut extra people in any function. You can say, we want you to cut the six extra administrators, you figure out who they are, how you revise it. So when the next budget revise come up, I hope you do it.

Thank you, Mr. Nelson. I'll bring it back to the board for discussion. Any comments?

Trustee Lambert? Yes.

I make a motion that the board of trustees they adopt the 2026 budget as presented.

Second. We have a motion from Trustee Lambert, seconded by Trustee Conley, to adopt the 2026-2027 budget as presented. I'll call a roll call vote. Trustee Lambert?

Aye.

Trustee Conley? Aye. Trustee Reed? Aye. I vote aye. President DeFazio?

Aye.

With a unanimous vote of five ayes, motion passes. All right, our next item is item 8E, also an action item, budget overview for parents.

Step is presenting that budget overview for parents for approval.

Board, do you have any clarifying questions? I will now open public comment on item eight E if any members of the public in person wish to address the board regarding this item, please turn in a speaker card. If you're online, please use the raise hand function. I'll wait to see how many speakers we have and allocate time accordingly.

if we have no speakers in person and i see no raised hands online so we all go back to the board for discussion as i make a motion that the board approve the

budget overview for parents as presented. And I'll just note items A through I believe F were all brought for discussion at our last board meeting and had public hearings or discussion. So that is why we are going through and voting on these items now.

Thank you.

I second.

The motion from Trustee Conley, seconded by Trustee Lambert, to approve the budget overview for parents. I'll take a roll call vote. Trustee Lambert?

Aye.

Trustee Conley? Aye. Trustee Reid? Aye. I vote aye. President DeFazio?

Aye.

We have five ayes and approve the motion for approval of the budget overview for parents is approved. All right, next up, we have item 8F, resolution number 02-052826, Education Protection Act, EPA requirements.

Staff is presenting the resolution on the EPA requirements for the board to approve tonight.

Does the board have any clarifying questions?

All right.

Then I will now open public comment on item If any members of the public in person wish to address the board regarding this item, please turn in a speaker card. If you are online, please use the raise hand function. I'll wait to see how many speakers we have and allocate time accordingly. We have no speakers in person and no speakers online. So I'll return to the board for discussion.

Trustee Codley? Yes, I make a motion that the board approve resolution number 02-052826 for the proposed uses of the education protection account funds as presented.

I second.

We have a motion from Trustee Conley, seconded by Trustee Lambert, that the Board of Trustees approve the resolution number 02-052826, Education Protection Account EPA Requirements. I will do a roll call vote. Trustee Lambert?

Aye.

Trustee Conley? Aye. Trustee Reid? Aye. I vote aye. President DeFazio?

Aye.

With five ayes, the motion to approve resolution number 02-052826, Education Protection Account Requirements, passes unanimously.

All right.

Our next item is a discussion and action item, item 8G, Rural Health Contract Presentation for 2026-2027. Thank you.

Well, for the record, my name is Frank Salvaggio, the Director of Special Education. I wanted to bring an update on what amounts to some increase in costs for our rural health contract that provides our instructional assistants and behavior technicians. I want to say, first off, we know that there's rising costs in special education. It's not just happening in our district. They're happening pretty much everywhere right now. And I'm going to show you some data tonight to show you why some of this is happening in our district, and hopefully it'll bring some context to it. So go ahead and Before I mention that, I do want to just for a second mention about Mari and Kara, who worked for me in the district in my department. And we went down a coordinator about midway through the year. And these two have been working tirelessly to try to make up some of those differences. Mari did a lot of the research and putting together the presentation for me tonight. And so I'm just very grateful for both of them and want to honor them appropriately for what they do for us. So let's talk a little bit about the data. I want to show you first that we've had a unique increase in a couple of areas. I mentioned this at my last presentation, but I want to provide context to it. So you can see that starting in April of 2025, we had 141 students with the primary eligibility of autism. That's now gone up to 184. That's a pretty dramatic increase. Why that's significant is you're going to find that there are going to be students that need additional support that have a primary of autism, and we have found that to be the case with us this year. The second thing is we've had a very large increase in the amount of students in our district that have been identified with a primary intellectual disability. Many of these students will end up in what are known as our extensive support needs classrooms. That increase is one classroom, just to give you context, that comes with two to one support for instructional assistants as well as a teacher. And so we've seen that increase as well. So just a snapshot, we've seen a 43 student increase in students with autism as a primary eligibility. We've seen a five times increase in growth for intellectual disability. We've added 56 students to special education. And the thing I think context wise is we've only lost about seven students in special education. So we have students coming in and I'm gonna show you about move-ins pretty soon, but we don't have a lot of students moving out. And so that obviously is going to affect budget as well. We also know that the growth has been concentrated in disability categories requiring higher level of instructional, behavioral, and individualized support. And so looking at move-ins, if you look at the last two years of data, you will notice that we've had 80 students move into our district that came in with an IEP. And go ahead and go to the next slide. Those that were requiring specialized programming additional support could be one to one support, it could be in one of our specialized programs about half of them. met this category so just under 50% of our students over the last two years that have moved into our district require intensive support to be able to meet their needs in the school district. So the end result of this is the growth and staffing requirements for instructional assistants and behavior technicians. Last year we added 21 additional, and this year we added another 21 to that total, making the total amount of 42 staff that we've had to add to meet some of these needs that have existed in the school district. What's interesting that we're noticing also that while we added 10 for our extensive support needs in moderate classrooms, we had to add 11 for those that are in our regular education classrooms. And this is mostly due to students who have had more significant needs like behavioral needs or dysregulation needs. And so we've had to add additional support to meet those student needs. So I just wanted to let you know that it's not only going on in our extensive support needs in moderate classrooms, but we're seeing this in our general education classrooms as well, where we're having students come in or they're in need of additional support to be successful. And keep in mind, we go through an extensive process for these one-to-one aids that get developed. We go through a process called an INIA process where school teams have to go through really make a strong case that that support is needed in the classrooms. So what are the considerations 42% of the movements that have been required in our district have needed moderate extensive support our home hospital services. 11 of the 21 eight positions, and this is a little more of a trend this year were required outside of these moderate and extensive support needs classroom due to their needs to be regulated in those particular environments. I already mentioned that 42 positions were added the last two years students needs continue to require flexible staffing capacity across program and school sites and program expansion requires additional aid staffing and specialized support personnel. And so for the last couple of years, we've used the company RoHealth. Every year we look to find out, are these rates similar in other contracting agencies? And the rates pretty much are about the same no matter where we go. But there's some clear differences that we find. RoHealth provides subs. Not only subs for our RHO Health staff, but subs for our regular staff inside the district as well. And on average, we have about five to 10 daily absences district-wide for our instructional assistants and behavior technicians. So to not have this ability to do this would really be a problem. We also have tremendous retention rate with RHO Health. And that's very important for students to feel safe in their environments, to know there's familiar faces to work with. And I went to them this year and said, we're in a budget. We have a budget problem in our district this year. We need your help. And they were kind enough to say we won't increase rates this next year for us. And which I thought was really great for them to do that where most of our rates increased by 4% otherwise and with our non-public schools and other agencies. And they do provide additional staff training at no cost for us. So I just think they've been a good partner with us and continue to be so. That's it. I'm sure you have questions about that.

Thank you so much. Board, any clarifying questions?

It looks like you covered everything.

Well, heck, I didn't take that.

She let me think too long. My apologies. So this is somewhat tied to the RoHealth contract and then also losing a coordinator. Do we anticipate We don't like to talk about administrative costs or adding administrative costs. We anticipate that we may need to add administrative expenditures in the future to manage this continuous growth that we see year to year.

Yeah, and I do want to say when we talk about, the answer is no, I think we're going to be fine. I want to say that a couple years ago we had four coordinators, and now we have two. Well, one now, but one we've replaced that position. When we talk about decrease in administrative costs, there's been a lot of decrease in administrative costs, including in special ed. But I believe the staffing we have now is appropriate for us on the district office side. So, yeah, good question.

Any other clarifying questions from the board? Then I will now open public comment on item 8G. Um, if any members of the public in person wish to address the board regarding this item, please turn in a speaker card. If you are online, please use the raise hand function and I will wait to see how many speakers we have and allocate time accordingly. Not seeing any in-person speakers and not seeing any raised hands online. So the floor is now closed to public comment and I'll return to the board for discussion.

I just wanted to say thank you for including the information on how Roe Health offers sub support. That's so important to highlight because other districts that don't use an organization like this really struggle to get particularly IAs and BTs and when they're gone, you mentioned safety for the students, but it's also become a safety issue for staff and gen ed students when those subs aren't, the sub jobs aren't filled. So it's a great thing that we have this to backfill and that those subs are being taken care of.

Any other discussion from the board? Thank you so much, Mr. Slovakian. We do have an action item as part of this.

I make a motion to approve the contract for Roe Health as presented. Second.

I have a motion from Trustee Conley and a second from Trustee Reid to approve the contract for Roe Health. I will take a roll call vote on this motion. Trustee Lambert?

Aye.

Trustee Conley? Aye. Trustee Reid? Aye. I vote aye. President DeFazio?

Aye.

We have five ayes. The motion to approve the contract for Rowe Health is approved unanimously. All right. Thank you, everyone. Our next item is item 8H, also an action item. Approval of schematic design, budget, and schedule for the Crittenden Middle School turf replacement and track surface repairs project.

Good evening, trustees. We have a little bit of background to present on this one since this is a little bit of an unusual project for us. So to talk a little bit about the scope of work, what we'll be doing is the removal and replacement of the existing synthetic turf system, including the turf pad and infill at Crittenden. I'm sorry, I should say middle school. Regarding regrading of the existing subgrade to provide a flat level and stable base for installation of the new service and spot repairs of existing tracks surfacing and underlying asphalt paving. ADA upgrades is required for current codes. Anytime we go through DSA, they are able to request that we do additional ADA upgrades, striping of the new field to match our existing Some more background on this. The original field installation at Crittenden Middle School was completed in 2017. Typically, turf fields last between eight and 12 years, depending on the use and maintenance. In May of 2023, we noticed that there were undulations in the existing field surface and track surface. After extensive investigation work to determine the cause of the undulations, a definitive conclusion on the cause could not be determined. We then engaged with the services of a forensic geotechnical engineer to review the issue further. After extensive review, the engineer determined the cause of the failure was likely due to years of drought, followed by heavy rains. So underneath the surface that years of drought, when they actually were removing, preparing to do the AstroTurf, they found that the layers down below were actually cracked. So, and then after we put the field down, we had heavy rain, if you remember back several years. So given the field surface has not moved since the original discovery, the engineer is recommending regrading of the base layer only prior to the replacement of the surface, meaning that we don't need to take everything else out. We just need to regrade it to make sure it's flat and then put the layers back on top. The city of Mountain View has agreed to cover the cost of the turf replacement, while the district will cover the regrading and associated ADA work. This is what the schematic design drawing City Council Chambers, Showing that we would do spot repairs on the track surface and then replace the turf and pad and recreate the sub base as needed. City Council Chambers, Our budget so staff is proposing that we pay for this project out of fun 40, which is our building fund not measure T 1.2 million is anticipated to be covered by the city and the balance of approximately 1 million will be covered by the district. City Council Chambers, This is our schematic design budget. And then our schedule so you'll notice at the bottom, it says that the schedule is subject to DSA review times we're finding that the DSA review time is lagging. And then actual construction to be determined, based on the DSA approval and then we'll also see how close we are getting to summer of 2027 because it would not make sense to start the project just a few months prior to the start of summer. And then I can also take questions.

Thank you, Dr. Westover. Board, do we have any clarifying questions? Trustee Labrador?

Thank you. And I see, I think we have some representatives from the city here. Are you all here about this topic or? Oh, no. Okay. So I can't ask them questions. I think I'm a little surprised. I'm trying to understand with the city's work on its biodiversity plan and its parks and recreation plan. I thought the city was moving away from artificial turf and towards using natural grass instead. Can you...

speak to that a little bit yeah i would anticipate that i if this were to be taken on it would be a longer planning period because to redo an astroturf field you're not simply removing the top layer you're digging down several feet redoing your doing irrigation and then doing drainage differently so an astroturf field needs a very different base than natural grass would so it'd be a much larger undertaking that i would imagine would take quite a bit of planning for

And I think though that's the city's direction. I think the timeline to make a decision on the Crittenden Field would be much longer than we want to wait.

Is there going to be any type of change? I know there's, because there has been a lot of community concern kind of broadly about PFAS, for example, forever chemicals and those types of things with turf. Is there going to be any type of change in the materials used? I know there's different types of infill. I'm just, I'm concerned about continuing to use this type of material.

Yeah, actually, the city has started to use a corn infill. So instead of the typical synthetic infill, it's a corn infill. So that is a change that is being made.

Thank you.

Are there any other clarifying questions from the board?

I had one. Go ahead. Um, with, with, um, construction running like mid school year on the timeline, do we expect that that a bit of missed the earlier, but, um, are we going to expect that that will affect PE joint use anything like that? I know we have, we're partnering with the city on it, so that that shouldn't be a concern, hopefully.

Yeah, I think that's why we kind of want it to be a little bit flexible on the timing. Um, ideally we are doing this during the summer. Um, if, DSA surprises us and things come through within a month or two, we would want to have a discussion of whether or not we want to get it fixed sooner than later. But with what we're currently seeing, it would most likely be pushed until the next summer of summer of 2027.

Thank you. And are we at all concerned that the contingencies might not, when we get in there and start regrading stuff, that the contingencies might not be enough to manage that? I think it seems healthy, but I don't have a good metric or barometer for that.

Yeah, I think from what we're seeing now, it should be able to cover all of it. Of course, we never know until we pull things up. But from what we're seeing now and what the geotechnical expert had seen, this would be plenty.

Thank you.

Are there any other clarifying questions from the board? OK. Then I will now open public comment on item 8H. If any members of the public in person wish to address the board regarding this item, please turn in a speaker card. If you're online, please use the raise hand function. I will wait to see how many speakers we have and allocate time accordingly. We have no speakers in person on this item and no speakers online on this item. So I will close, the floor is closed to public comment and I'll return to the board for discussion. Trustee Lambert?

I move that the Board approve the Crittenden Middle School Turf Replacement and Track and Surface Repairs Project as presented.

Second. All right. I have a motion from Trustee Lambert and a second from Trustee Reed to approve the schematic design, budget, and schedule for the Crittenden Middle School Turf Replacement and Track Surface Repairs Project. I'll do a roll call vote. I'll try not to cough. Trustee Lambert? Aye. Trustee Connolly?

Nay.

Trustee Reed? Aye. I vote aye. President DeFazio? Aye. We have a vote of four ayes from Trustee Lambert, Trustee Reed, Trustee Henry, and President DeFazio, and one nay from Trustee Connolly, and the motion passes with a vote of four to one.

All right.

Next, we have a discussion item, item eight, I measure T summer construction update agenda item. Dr. Westover.

Good evening. So this is kind of a fun one every year where we get to talk about all of the construction we're doing this summer. And this summer is very heavily impacted by construction. If you remember last summer, we ended up needing to delay phase one of our roofing projects. So this summer we're doing phase one and phase two at the same time, as well as all of our outdoor learning. So it's going to be very busy. Actually, it's already busy at some of our campuses if you drive around. I also have Jason Cave here this evening to present along with me. Of course, we always connect everything we do back to our strategic plan to make sure that our students have the things that they need in order to learn in the classroom. So all of the Measure T projects completed to date, we have done all of the priority one projects that are applicable. They've all been completed on time and under budget, allowing us the flexibility to take on additional projects. We have also received additional modernization friends from the state bond program that I'll briefly go over how much money we have in terms of taking on new projects in the future. So this is a summary looking at what is available to us. I'm not going to read through all of this. I see trustee Lambert putting his glasses on. The big piece here to know is that we have funding for measure T that is available to trustees. So we're going through the master facility plan process currently. We'll be moving and doing more of it into the next school year where we will have study sessions on how we want to address early learning, TK, preschool, where we want these students to be, which will then inform our master facility plan. But to help with the thought process and thinking of what is possible, we have Measure T funds, we have our unallocated funds, funds from the contingency that we can use. So we have contingencies for each project that we take on, and then we also have a Measure T contingency. So the idea is that as we get further down in our Measure T program, we don't need to carry as much contingency because the amount of projects that we have left is smaller. So now is when we start funneling and we say, okay, we're spending down the remainder amount of Measure T. So we have about 28 million left. um in measure t that is available for use as well as some other capital projects which is our fund 40 from various different sources they all have slightly different rules around how we might be able to spend these but in general in totality staff would recommend that we could allocate about 31 million between all of these funding sources to improvements for the district in the future So I'll let Jason talk about the projects that we've completed.

Good evening, everyone. So the next several slides list all of the Measure T projects that have been completed beginning with the Measure T bond in 2020. I'll save you the trouble of reading through all of them for you, but I'm sure you'll remember most of them. There's a number of district-wide projects. There's a number of site-specific projects from security cameras to windows to HVAC to perimeter controls, the park restrooms. I think the big thing to note here is originally when we went into this bond, we were looking at doing the priority one and priority two projects just to fit within the budget available. And the speed at which the district moved was such that a lot of these projects were constructed without needing to use escalation contingencies that were built in overall for the overall course of the bond. So kudos to you all and your staff for getting these into construction quickly, which allowed you to get more projects done and allows your bond dollars to go farther. So now we're completed through this long list of projects. And as Rebecca just said, you still have some measure T funding available. So next couple of slides, just have more projects there. So we've got paving projects, electrical upgrades, clock speaker, perimeter controls, as I mentioned. Let me go to the next couple of slides. Staff housing, of course, which is a big one. Then we have some Some of the pretty pictures. So you've seen these all before, but outdoor learning phase two at Vargas. So as you go through the outdoor learning projects at the other campuses this summer, they'll look similar. Each one is different, but you'll have the beautification of the exterior site improvements. And of course the HVAC, not pretty pictures, but definitely functional for your teachers and students and staff. So yeah, we can go through the next couple slides, more HVAC. perimeter controls. So that's this kind of standard fencing around the campus at front of house, back of house is chain link, which again, you guys have all seen these before. So I'm sure you're familiar. More fencing at Mauna Loma. And then the park restroom projects, which are now open and usable for the public. And as far as I've heard, it's working out fairly well. And then that leads us to this summer's projects, which Rebecca mentioned a couple of them at the onset of this presentation, but I will go through these one by one. So we have the roofing phase one project, which is underway at Crittenden, Bub, Amaya, and Landles. We have the roofing phase two project, which is at Graham, Mistral, and Theracoff, and that contractor is going to mobilize at the end of this week and really get started next week. We have the outdoor learning projects, which we just mentioned, which are across eight of your sites this summer, and then Castro-Mastral, summer of 27. We have the fiber optic cabling replacement project at Bub, Amai, Landles, Graham, Stevenson, and Theracoff, and a few different scopes of work depending on site, but primarily it's new fiber optic cable from your MDF, which is your main data frame room, to your IDFs, which is your intermediate data frame. So it's a built to increase bandwidth and capacity so you can use those systems in the future, basically building for the future. District-wide bottle fillers, which will go in near the end of the summer, that's replacing existing high-low drinking fountains with drinking fountains with bottle fillers, and that's Crittenden, Graham, Mistral, Monoloma, Stevenson, Theracoff, and Vargas. And then we have the Theracoff restroom modernization, which is the modernization of the student and kindergarten restrooms across the Theracoff campus and that project did start Monday of this week and so far so good on that one's moving along pretty well. Next slide. Rebecca, I think you were going to take this one.

Just a quick update for the board. After schematic design and looking at what work was going to be taking place this summer, Monte Loma expressed that the back area for planting was very important to their campus. This is one of the areas that was pulled out of the design to fit within the budget. After requesting, saying this is an area that the kids are really going to use and is very impactful, Carducci went back and looked to see what can we do, what can we shift in order to make sure that this area can be completed. We are going to be removing the front area, the frontage of Mauna Loma, redoing it for outdoor learning, and instead we'll be doing the area back in the garden area for the school site. So moving forward into summer of 2027, we will be doing Castro Mistral outdoor learning. I know that sometimes there's questions about why did we stagger it this way instead of doing all sites at once. It's because we really need a place for kids. So right now, Castro Mistral is hosting summer school. And then projects in planning and design, we have our second floor covered walkway at Castro. Moving on to just looking at what is left from priority two, three, and four. So there's a long list that I'm going to go through really quickly. Some of these may not be applicable anymore, which is why we're doing the master facility plan update. But it's just to give you an idea of what was left at each school site. And as we go through each school site, you'll notice that the total is not the same for every school. Every school is in a different place, different age, and has different needs. And then moving on to available funds. So this is based on the board's last discussion. I touched on this already. We are going to propose to elongate the master facility plan process. So initially, when we discussed the master facility plan with the board, we thought we would be working on completing a draft over the summer. um but i think a few more study sessions are needed to talk about early childhood education and what direction the board would like to go with that one piece before we can come up with what the master facility plan would look like so as opposed to presenting a draft of the mfp at the start of the school year staff will bring back a list of urgent items that need to be addressed by our bond program then work to schedule study sessions for long-term planning including early learning We anticipate that a study session would be scheduled in October or November for that early learning piece. This is a summary again of the funds that are potentially available for all projects. And then we also have a proposal for the board to think through over the summer months. With the funding coming from staff housing, we could create a rotation to replace playgrounds on a schedule. So we notice over time, things that are typically undertaken by a bond program. So school districts aren't funded for taking care of our facilities in general. School districts tend to have to pass bonds in order to address facility needs. We've been very lucky that we've had an active bond program for a number of years, and we've been able to update most of our campuses fully. But what we would like to do is have a way to continually update things like playgrounds that kids use every single day at our elementary schools. So if they're on a rotation, we're constantly bringing all of them up to standard. So we're never in a position where we have to have a bond in order to have the playgrounds up to a standard that we would like. we would address the most in need first, the bond program, and then start the rotation. So the funding would come from our staff housing. So every year we would have a couple of playgrounds that we could update and replace. Any questions?

Any clarifying questions from the board? Trustee Lambert?

Yes. Several questions. First, a big expenditure on the priority list for a lot of the campuses has to do with the collaborative instructional spaces. What exactly are those?

So it's spaces where students can collaborate outside of the classroom, or sometimes it could be in the classroom, but the idea is that the students aren't sitting at desks, that they can have flexible grouping to work. Some of this could be very well addressed through our outdoor learning program, because we have areas that teachers can take kids outside to do group lessons. So in general, that's what a collaborative space could look like.

Yeah, so that's sort of the follow-up. You sort of answered it. So yeah, how does this work with the outdoor learning spaces? And I believe we're setting aside roughly one and a half million dollars for each of the school sites for the outdoor learning. And this is a lot. These are a lot more. So this sounds like a very big undertaking.

Yeah, with showing the priority two, three, and four, these are not things that we would, we cannot take on all of these items. Priorities two, three, and four would really be something that we would work through. A lot of, some of these items could no longer be applicable, which is why we need to do that refresh. So when we see the collaborative learning spaces, we would take a look and say, oh, our outdoor learning project has met this need, and that wouldn't be in our updated MFP.

Okay, and... To be clear too, we have not approved these priorities. These were- Once upon a time. They were included in the master facilities plan, but they haven't been specifically approved.

that's correct so that's kind of our next we can change these yes so our next phase is we've gotten through all of our priority one now we're going to update our master facility plan because a lot has changed over the past few years so we can actually get a project list that we work off that list the idea was to bring this forward so you see the board could see what was remaining and what was prioritized

as you said, once upon a time, as two, three, and four. So the obvious question is going to be, do those still hold? Probably not.

In a way, it's a preparation for a new master facilities plan. So getting this primed here. One final question is that we have about $130 million on the project list, right? But we only have about $80 million to... spend. And I presume a lot of that 80 million now is being spent on current projects that we're working on, like the Outdoor Learning Center. So

So we have approximately $31 million that is available to spend on a list of projects that far exceeds what we have available. And that's always going to be the case. We would always love to upgrade our facilities as much as we could, but that's why we have our master facility plan to help guide what are the most important pieces so we can prioritize.

Okay. I mean, it's just good to clarify all of this for ourselves and for the public. So, thank you.

Trustee Conley?

Thank you. Thank you for the presentation. Will you remind me when the demographer report is supposed to come back to? Because I'm hoping that that aligns with this discussion around the master facilities plan.

Yes, those two go hand in hand. So when we previously reported on the master facility plan and what our process would be, it was to start the process. So hopefully right now the board is feeling like you're getting an idea of the work that's going to be taking place over the summer, the work that's going to be taking place into the next school year. So the initial presentation was a first look at what he saw, and then he has been working on the full study, and that will also come back to the board.

And will that include, you know, something that we're seeing across our district is some of our schools becoming more two strand schools instead of three strand schools. So they're moving down to two classrooms per grade level. I imagine we're going to get a better handle on that with the demographer and the master facilities plan. It was a long lead up to my next question is how much do TK or kindergarten bathrooms cost?

I think that depends where you put the TK or kinder bathroom. So if there is plumbing nearby, less expensive. If we have to trench, more expensive. So it just depends on the location.

But if we have a school that moves from three strands down to two strands, all of our schools, I believe, are currently planned with three kindergarten classrooms that have restrooms. So that would open up a classroom at each school site that does have a restroom that would be useful for TK. Yes, thank you.

Is there any other clarifying questions from President DeFazio?

Yeah, so with regards to deferring the master facilities plan coming back in our study session in like October, November, and taking like a list of urgent items, how like what criteria are you going to be using for bringing back the urgent ones? And will we kind of get to see that and approve that before we before we see them?

I think over the summer we'll be looking at things that are safety related. We don't have a set rubric for saying just how safe something should be, but it's looking at what needs to be done now, either for safety for students or to protect our buildings. It's kind of the litmus test of the list that we'll be bringing to you for more urgent items to look at.

Thank you.

Thank you. I had one question. When you were talking about the playgrounds towards the end as a possibility of something that might be something that we would put in kind of a program of regularly replacing them. How old are our current playgrounds and are they, were they sort of replaced all around the same time from a prior bond or are they more staggered?

They're much more staggered. Some of our playgrounds are very, very old and some are within a few years old. Okay. Thank you.

Any other, Trustee Conley?

At the master facilities plan update process, will there be some community input taken? Because I anticipate or I'm curious about whether or not we could do, because I hear about this from the community, lab space upgrades, for example, which were mentioned in the original bond language. we going to be going back out to the community to get input on the mfp as we update it so i think that'll be part of the process i think we'll do our study sessions and then that'll kind of guide where our next steps are thank you thank you if that concludes the clarifying questions i will now open public comment on item 8i

If any members of the public in person wish to address the board regarding this item, please turn in a speaker card. And if you are online, please use the raise hand function. I will wait to see how many speakers we have and allocate time accordingly. So we have one speaker in person and no speakers online. So now we have three minutes.

Hi, thank you for the presentations. Looking at the list, the projected cost seems really high to me, so I'm not sure, well, I'm not familiar with it, but just one of the examples was like looking at Stevenson. You've seen Stevenson's window, which is one and two windows, and they're really small. Well, I don't know how much AV or those other systems cost, but $350,000? just for the shades and the window. And then like the credit, 750,000. I'm just wanting to make sure that, you know, our districts are spending our money properly and not being overcharged because I hope that, you know, staff are being confident with, you know, the taxpayer dollars. One of the things that I'm excited about is seeing ground the art classroom organizations and home ec. I hope that move up in the system because as I remember seeing the voter ballot, those were the things that were, you know, promised and then updated science lab. I hope that's added as well as like the workshop. What other thing? I thank you for asking about the collaborative space. What I hear from the teachers' complaints is that some of the, they don't have enough, they're running out of rooms to help the kids in the early literacy program. So I hope that that issue is addressed too. That's it. Thank you.

Thank you. I'll bring it back to the board for discussion. Comments from the board? This is the discussion items.

I'm really looking forward to this process moving forward. When we look at kind of what's been carried through from the original master facilities plan, which was passed in 2019. So it's been around for a while, we've knocked off a lot of the high priority items, but I do think that things have changed significantly in the district. So this is almost an illustrative list, but I think getting a temperature check, going back out to school sites, hearing from community members, but also our staff actually working at the sites about what, especially after the outdoor learning projects are completed this summer, I think we're gonna have a better handle on some of these things. um what are the needs at our sites and then how can we take that on and prioritize that as a board i would love to see us revisit that bond language as well and make sure that we have a through line from the master facilities plan to the bond language to actually what we're executing on

Yeah, I think I'm excited. Yeah, I'm excited for, I think the actual study session. So I'll make sure that the superintendent and I calendar it for, I say, October, November, I think would be making sure we firmly have that time because I think the really important thing for us to do is having addressed critical safety things in the interim, making sure we have an updated prioritization framework amongst all of us for the district level. What are the things we need and think that are kind of these dollars should go to in some ranked order? Yeah.

I will add that I also look forward to the conversations in the fall. I appreciate seeing the list, the now seven year old list of things that were priorities two, three, and four remaining on the list. I think it's important for the public to remember that those were, these are the things we will be revisiting. These aren't the things that are currently identified as projects as Trustee Lambert raised earlier. and having those continuing conversations about what are the needs now in our district, what's been addressed by the projects that have already been completed, and what's really rising to the top as important as we move forward.

So thank you very much.

And with that, we'll move on to item eight. J discussion and action city of Mountain View monolingual recreation area renovation project. I appreciate that we have some representatives from the city who will be a part of this presentation.

Good evening. This evening, we have representatives from the City of Mountain View who will be presenting on the Mauna Loma Recreation Area Renovation Project.

All right. Good evening, President, Board members and Superintendent. My name is Fariel Saidiya. I'm a Senior Project Manager with the City of Mountain View Public Works Department. Thank you for the opportunity to present the Mauna Loma Recreation Area Renovation Project here today. we're going to provide a brief overview of the project we'll summarize the community outreach that's been done to date we'll present the preferred concept plan and then we'll request the board's concurrence to allow the project to move forward into detailed design stage next slide So, as mentioned, I'm the city project manager for this effort. And today we have Dave Rubin, the project landscape architect here as well to help present. I'll provide the project background and next steps and recommendation. And then Dave will kind of walk through the existing conditions, some of the community input and the design concepts and preferred plan. Next slide. So the presentation tonight is going to be in three sections. First is just a brief project background and overview. And then we'll give kind of a summary of the two community meetings we've had to date and then the next steps. So this project is located within the Monoluma School Field and Recreation Area, which is adjacent to the Monoluma Elementary School. The area serves both the school and the surrounding neighborhood throughout the longstanding joint use partnership between the city and the district. Because the site is located on district property, the city is coordinated closely with district staff throughout the development of the project concepts, and we're bringing the preferred plan to the board for review and concurrence before proceeding further with design. So just to give a little bit of the project background, the primary goal of the project is really to renovate and refresh the recreation area so it can continue serving both students and the neighboring residents for years to come. The existing playground is about 23 years old or so. Many of its components are reaching end of useful life. So this project focuses on replacing aging elements, improving accessibility, and making targeted enhancements to the site. so the city did conduct two committee meetings one in december and one this past april and both had approximately 35 public members at each meeting and feedback received through those meetings helped shape the preferred concept you're going to see later in the presentation the project currently has an estimated construction budget of 650 000 and would be fully funded by the city of mountain view and at this point i'll turn the presentation over to dave rubin who's going to walk through the the rest of the slides

Good evening, I'm Dave Ribbon, Principal with Calendar Associates Landscape Architecture. Just starting with the existing conditions, the images on this slide really show the existing character and condition of the Montaluma site as it is today. You can see in the images in the upper left corner, picnic tables, they're worn and in some cases don't meet current accessibility. requirements. The pathway out at Thompson Avenue and the strip of lawn in the upper right corner, the playground still functional, but it is definitely worn at this point, as well as the restroom and concession building and the pathways around it. Next slide. So here's a site map showing the Mauna Loa site. It really depicts a lot of the conditions I just described. The red dashed line that you see, that is the project limits that we're working within, within the budget that Faryal just described. And so we've got the features within this site indicated here. So starting from Thompson Avenue, you've got that strip of lawn. There is an existing fitness area with pull-up bars. There's a picnic area identified there in yellow in the number three. And then a little further into the site, you've got four and five. Those are the play areas. This is a talk play area and a youth play area. And then the restroom concession building, number six. And then the second picnic area, also in yellow near the back, as well as drinking fountains at the ball field. Next slide. So at the first community meeting in December, we did ask the community what kinds of recreational area improvements they would like to see. And so the top three were pollinator landscaping, replacement of the existing drinking fountains, enhancement of the picnic area, followed by enhancement of fitness area, improvement of asphalt pathways, shade structure, retrofit the play areas, and then lastly, retrofitting a couple of tree planters that are next to the restroom concession building. So based on the input that we received from that December meeting, we did prepare two concepts which i'll briefly walk you through now, starting with concept a and i'll zoom in here. I know that's hard to see. So next slide. So this concept proposes to convert that strip of lawn as you're coming in off of Thompson Avenue into a pollinator landscape. And so that would bring in plant material that would attract birds and butterflies. The pullet bar just behind that would remain as it is. The small picnic area there next to that would get new picnic tables. The pavement there would remain. And the lawn area just to the left of that would also remain. Next slide. And so we've also heard from the community that they really like the ability to be able to move the picnic tables. And so the image in that upper left corner would allow them to still be able to do that. And then the image in the lower left corner is an example of what a pollinator landscape might look like at the front of the site. Next slide. Okay, so moving a little further back into the play area, this would basically be a full play area retrofit. So it would be reusing the post, but putting on new railings and climbers and panels on that. We've also indicated an integrated shade sail over the youth play area. And the surfacing in this particular concept would all be engineered wood fiber, like the wood chips, as well as an access ramp into it. And then by the restroom concession building, new picnic area, picnic tables, and then new drinking fountains. Next slide. And then this just shows a couple renderings of what the play equipment could look like in that lower left corner. You see the integrated shade sale over the play area. So now switching to concept B. The differences between A and B are pretty subtle, but they do reflect different priorities that we heard from the community. So the features that we highlight here in yellow on the following slides are going to represent what's different about this concept versus concept A. So again, starting at Thompson avenue again there would be a pollinator landscape, but in this instance we're replacing fitness equipment with with some new pieces they're also redoing that picnic area next slide. And then this just shows different types of fitness equipment that could be implemented there, whether it be an elliptical, parallel bars, stationary bike. Here we've shown a concrete picnic table. So this type of table is obviously not movable unless you're very strong. And again, pollinator landscaping. So some differences here. So we're not showing shade sale over the youth play equipment, but that does afford us the ability to do some other things in this concept, like the addition of sand play and like the aforementioned fitness pieces that we just showed you. also would allow us to rebuild those tree planters next to the restroom concession building so that those can be built at sitting height, just another place in the park to be able to sit. And otherwise the concept is actually pretty similar. Next slide. And then here just showing in that upper right corner what a tree planter seat might look like as well as the sand play area in the lower right corner. So we asked the question at the April meeting which of those two concepts was preferred, and pretty overwhelmingly, concept B was the preferred concept between the two. And then just to add a little flavor to that, I think the reason for that is because it did include sand play. After the meeting, staff also received an email from approximately 30 residents indicating a strong desire to not only to keep the amount of sand shown in concept B, but even to increase it more. And so in hearing that, we evaluated and added a second sand play area and just enlarged that in the preferred concept, which I'll show you here. So yeah, that's just the overall and then just zooming in again this eastern and it's very similar new picnic tables. Those would be movable pollinator landscape. That's all very similar. And then moving towards the play area. Here we would have two sand play areas. Those areas total a little more than 600 square feet. And we would be able to do rebuilt tree planters as well within that available budget in the picnic area, as well as replacement of the two drinking fountains with bottle fillers. So at this point, I will turn it back over to Farrell just to close it up.

Thank you, Dave. Okay, so assuming concurrence from the board tonight, the project team's plans to proceed into detailed design development. Because the project includes playground improvements located on school property, we do plan to provide review to the DSA, Division of State Architect, anticipated for the playground area for comment. And then following completion of design and agency review, we anticipate beginning construction in approximately spring 2028. And we're going to continue coordinating closely with the district staff throughout design, instruction, and the school to minimize impact to the school operations. Next slide. So the recommendation before the board this evening is to provide concurrence with the proposed concept plan, allowing the city to proceed with detailed design and DSA review. And I'd like to also note, again, there's no financial impact to the district associated with the construction and this item. Both design and construction will be funded by the city of Mountain View. Next slide. concludes our presentation we appreciate districts continued partnership on this and we'll be happy to answer any questions yeah thank you very much for your presentation um we'll go to everyone for questions

I'm just going to ask one up front. Let's see, they have the school board meeting June 11th, 2026, and then fall of next year, design completion. Is that correct? Yes, that's correct. So just confirming it's over a year just to get to design completion.

We have to go out for a full design consultant first, and then DSA review can take a long time as well. Thank you.

All right.

Trustee Connolly.

I was gonna say we're very familiar with how long DSA review can take, unfortunately. So we've undertaken, well, thank you for the presentation. And we're very excited about the city's partnership on this project and the improvement that it's gonna bring to the community and our school community as well. We have undertaken this outdoor learning project at Mauna Loma as well as our other school sites. Will the design elements, the planting list, things like that from our overall school site and the outdoor learning renewal that's going on be looked at at all in the design process for this recreational area?

It hasn't been discussed yet, but I am in contact with the district and also the principal, so we can definitely take a look at that when we start full design.

I remember I used to be on the Parks and Recreation Commission a long time ago for the City of Mountain View. But when we were looking at our outdoor learning spaces, I talked to John Marchant, for example, about our planting lists and could we borrow from them? And it turned out that we are a little ahead of the biodiversity plan for the city and some of the work around climate mitigation, especially for children. And so I would hope that you all can look at the designs and the elements that we have from Carducci and Associates and see if there's some consistency or things that can be borrowed or stolen that might be really effective in this space. Definitely. Thank you.

I'd like to ask you, what does concurrence mean? I'm sort of thinking that there might be changes in the DSA or with the design and things like that. Does that mean this would come back to us at some time? Yeah. You know, are we just asking you to go ahead and that whatever happens, it will happen?

I believe we would at least provide updates and then, you know, possibly Rebecca could provide those updates to you periodically. But as far as coming back, there is a strong want from the community that we've heard to implement this quickly and get this constructed as soon as possible.

So that's all we're trying. I imagine any... Any changes are going to be monitor I certainly hope, but I just wanted to be clear what concurrence was right.

I suppose concurrence with the concept plan so as long as the elements of the concept plan are acceptable to the district that's kind of what we're looking for if there's anything that's an issue to let us know now to change, thank you.

Any other clarifying questions from the board. public comment on this item. If there are any members of the public in person who wish to address the board regarding this item, please turn in a speaker card. And if you're online, please use the raised hand function. I'll wait to see how many speakers we have and allocate time accordingly. So we have no speakers in person on this item, and no speakers online on this item. So the floor is now closed for public comment, and I'll return to the board for discussion. I'll see you later.

So thank you for the presentation. I would have loved to have come to the public outreach meetings. I live on Laura Lane. But unfortunately, you held them during school board meetings. But I do thank you for actually changing very little of the layout and things like that and not over designing things and keeping it simple and familiar, actually. So I thank you for that. One question I have, and since I'm in the community, I sort of hear things, is there was... I'm not asking him to solve the problem, just to comment on it. It was almost a request that if anything could be done to deaden the sound or improve the safety along the fence right where the housing was.

I believe that would take more districts. involvement to do something like that rather than just the city what we're looking at is kind of replacing in kind to just refresh some of the elements and i think the budget would also exceed what we currently have to do something like that appreciate it i think the privets there you know when they're you know thick and lush and grown provide a great barrier right natural barrier too um so thank you

Trustee Conley? Do we need a motion for this item?

Oops, one comment.

President DeFalco.

Uh, yeah. So I just think, I think it's great that, you know, we're getting a nice win for the community, for, for the, the recreation area and improvements. And thank you to the city for, for working with us on this. Um, I do look forward. I had the comments submitted earlier, um, for us to kind of, as we're talking through the master facilities plan, like how this balances against any of our needs at Mauna Loma there and making sure that's reflected in some of the updates, but I support this.

And thank you for the presentation. I'll add that I am glad that it will be going through DSA so that if it does become useful during the school day, it's approved for those purposes. And I'm glad that you're adding sand. I know that there's sand in Cuesta Park and certain big parks, but it's not at a lot of parks. So it's a good thing to be adding. So I'm glad you listened to the community on that one. And that'll be a fun thing for the neighborhood. Anything else before?

I have the same comment about sand. In my neighborhood, there is a sand play area and it is always full. So making the move just to sand areas, I think is going to be great for the kids.

I have a three-year-old. Sand is life. That being said, I'd be happy to offer a motion. I make a motion that the Board concur with the Mauna Lama Recreation Area Renovation Project proposed concept plan as presented this evening.

Second.

I have a motion from Trustee Conley and a second from Trustee Reid that the board concur with the Mauna Lama Recreation Area Renovation Project proposal as presented. I'll do a roll call vote. Trustee Lambert?

Aye.

Trustee Conley? Aye. Trustee Reid? Aye. I vote aye. President DeFazio?

Aye.

We have unanimous five aye votes from Trustee Lambert, Trustee Conley, Trustee Reed, Trustee Henry, and President DeFazio. Unanimous approval of the motion passes.

And it being

917. I recommend that we take a short break is five minutes. So we'll take a five minute break. Let's say we'll return at 923. So that's a five and a half minute break. All right, we are returning after our break at 9.24, and we will be moving on to item 8K, an action item, resolution 02-061126, supporting, recognizing LGBTQ plus Pride Month.

Yes, so this resolution is presented to the board recognizing June as LGBTQ plus pride month, celebrating diversity, dignity, and ongoing contributions of the LGBTQ plus community. And so we present this to the board for your consideration and approval.

Thank you very much. Do we have any questions from the board? Then I will open public comment on item 8K. If any members of the public in person wish to address the board regarding this item, please turn on a speaker card. If you're online, please use the raise hand function. And I'll wait to see how many speakers we have and allocate time accordingly. So we have no speakers in person and no raised hands online. Fuller is closed to public comment. I'll return to the board for discussion. Trustee Conley?

I make a motion to approve resolution number 02-061126, supporting recognizing LGBTQ plus Pride Month as presented. Second.

Great. I have a motion from Trustee Conley, seconded by Trustee Henry Reid. Sorry, not me. A motion from Trustee Conley, seconded by Trustee Reid, to approve Resolution 02-061126, supporting recognizing LGBTQ plus Pride Month. And I'll call a roll call vote. Trustee Lambert?

Aye.

Trustee Conley? Aye. Trustee Reid? Aye. I vote aye. President DeFazio?

Aye.

And then I would propose that we do a core reading this resolution. All right. And we can start with Trustee Lambert, if that's all right.

Whereas it is the right of every child, regardless of gender identity, gender expression or sexual orientation, to access a free public K through 12 education, and the district welcomes and supports all students and

Whereas the district has responsibility to ensure that all students who reside within its boundaries, regardless of gender identity gender expression or sexual orientation can safely access a free public K to 12 education and.

Whereas research on LGBTQ plus young people noted that attending a school with even one anti-LGBTQ plus policy is associated with higher rates of anxiety, depression, and past year suicide attempts for young LGBTQ plus students and...

Whereas students attending schools with anti-LGBTQ plus policies face dramatically increased mental health challenges, including higher rates of anxiety, depression, seriously considering suicide, and suicide attempts compared to students in schools with no anti-LGBTQ plus policies. And I think Trustee DeFazio might be frozen. Trustee Lambert, would you mind?

Whereas according to a 2025 nationwide survey of LGBTQ plus youth from the Trevor Project, the LGBTQ plus young people who reported living in very accepting communities attempted suicide at nearly a third of the rate, 6% of those who reported living in very unaccepting communities, 18%, and 1%.

Whereas the Mountain View-Wisman School District prohibits discrimination, including discrimination based on gender identity, gender expression, and sexual orientation, and Whereas the district supports celebrating our different identities, integrity, and how we treat others,

and encouraged to do what's right by listening to, learning from and respecting diverse viewpoints and whereas educational personnel are often the primary sources of support, resources and information to assist and support students and student learning, which includes their social and emotional health and whereas

plus students deserve the right to feel safe in school, to openly discuss their LGBTQ plus identity with peers and adults without fear, and to see themselves reflected in school practices and

Whereas Assembly Bill 5, the Safe and Supportive Schools Act, took effect on July 1st, 2025, and added Education Code Section 218.3 , which directs the California Department of Education, CDE, to provide free online LGBTQ plus cultural competency training for teachers and other certified employees and

Whereas the Mountain View-Wisman School District affirms its commitment to being a place where all students feel empowered to reach their highest potential, acknowledging that this excellence is born from a deep well of knowledge sustained through our diversity and...

Therefore be it resolved that the district shall designate June as LGBTQ Plus Pride Month and...

Be it further resolved that the Mountain View-Wisman School District will raise progress pride flags within the first week in June at the district office and keep the flags up the entire month of June and Be it further resolved that the district commits to maintaining and expanding supportive school environments that protect LGBTQ plus students from discrimination and harassment and

further resolve that the district affirms its commitment to implementing policies and practices that support rather than harm lgbtq plus students recognizing the documented relationship between anti lgbtq plus school policies and increased rates of anxiety depression and suicidal behavior among young people thank you everyone

Our next item on the agenda is item 8K, sorry, 8L, action item, action plan for systems implementation and instructional improvement.

All right. Good evening, trustees. So I'm here to talk a little bit about our upcoming plan for 26-27 to improve our systems and improve our instruction. The objectives of tonight was to provide you an update on our current work related to the system study that we had done in the fall to request funding in the amount of $421,000 for a horrendous competitive proposal to implement our systems and instructional improvement services, because we want to ensure a strong foundation to improve certain outcomes. And we do anticipate the governor's budget proposal containing funding for professional development. And we do in the appendix have an outline of the proposed professional development plan for 26-27. So just reminding everybody, we've been facing budget cuts, stagnant state test scores and widening achievement gaps. We're working hard, but we're not seeing the outcomes and the improvement we wanna see. So after a competitive process in the fall, we contracted with Arenda to conduct a system study to answer these questions. What is our current student success profile? What explains that profile and what changes would accelerate student success? The study identified four root causes that are creating a low ceiling for achievement, including symbolic data systems, weak program design, the Christmas tree effect, and weak system alignment. They made comprehensive recommendations and it's imperative that we implement all of the recommendations in order to improve outcomes for students and close gaps. And you're gonna hear this multiple times through this presentation, just that it is gonna take sustained effort and it's gonna take focused commitment over multiple years for us to begin to do this work and to continue this work. So we've been working since January to evaluate and analyze the results of the study. Some efforts are short-term and recommendations have started to be worked on in spring 2026. Other recommendations are long-term and will be included in our strategic plan. And that process has begun. This is just a little bit of a roadmap. So you can kind of see how we're thinking about this work. This work is going to occur over time. And over that time, we're going to take on different chunks of that work. And over time, we're going to see student outcomes improve. Another visual, seeing how our work works over time and also aligns with two cycles of the LCAP. So thinking about this work in relation to the MVWSD way, which is how we serve students with the highest quality educational experience and the work that we're doing is really gonna become what we call or become our MVWSD way. And we're asking, we want to use Arenda to facilitate the learning and the implementation of our strategies. This is just a graphic created. So you can kind of see all of the work and how it all fits together, including How we have our MB WSD way are the recommendations for my Brenda, the strategic plan, how that work in that strategic plan is going to align our systems and focus our work and our goal and our lasting impact is that all students achieve proficiency. So current work for us, as I mentioned, the development strategic plan, the planning part of that has started. And our strategic plan will be inclusive of our system study recommendations. Nguyen and I are working on revising site plans and the format for next year. The local control accountability plan has been revised. We've completed year one of the math committee work and we're ready to pilot new curriculum starting in 26-27. And we've worked very closely with the middle schools to ensure that all eligible students are considered for accelerated math. And then we're also working with our provider, CSMA Rhythm and Moves, to adjust our daily schedule so that we can really maximize instructional time. We completed trainings with Arenda as a part of the original contract in March and April. We had training for district leaders and about 40 administrators and teachers to learn about potential next steps for implementing system studies recommendations. And so the work in 26-27, if you look at the MBW SD way, it's really rooted in these five areas, standards aligned, being responsive, instruction being relevant, explicit, and equitable. But where we're going is back to the standards aligned piece. We can't do the rest of it unless we're all on the same page with the standards. And so really looking to have grade level alignment around core instruction. So looking at backcasting goals, where do we want to be next year, the year after, in order to close gaps and to move all students to proficiency and beyond. Aligning around expectations at each grade level. So what standards are we all teaching, which are most important. Developing an assessment matrix and making sure that our instruction and our assessments are aligned to the rigor of SBAC. So sustaining the work. So this is going to be transformative for us. We want to have rigorous standards-aligned instruction aligned to the SBAC and the key piece being agreed upon at all grade levels and departments. That means all of the teachers, all of our principals, all working in the same direction moving forward. and wanting to get to that minimum expectation for all students, having common assessments that monitor that progress that all students take, and then looking at that data every five weeks after all of those assessments, and then making adjustments. It could be differentiation for our students that aren't there yet. It could be enrichment or extension for our students that have already met those expectations. So doing this work is essential to improving the outcomes for all of our students. Just a graphic. I have much thanks to Ms. Hausman for creating this so that we can see our plan. So the idea behind this rigorous first instruction supported and guided by data reflection and differentiation, getting all of our students to proficiency, which you heard talked about as the floor, that proficiency, minimum expectation, and then continuing those cycles and reflections so that we keep moving kids beyond to exceeding. And again, just restating, this is going to represent change that's going to take time and focused effort. We need to give our teachers and administrators support and time to learn with and from the Orenda team so that then we can incorporate all the work as our own. Because eventually we're not going to need the Orenda team. We want to take this on and we want to be in charge of the learning. And we want to avoid the one degree delta and get it right the first time. And I'll talk more about that. This is just a sample. This came out of the RFP information shared with us from Arenda. The black line on the top shows state test scores for non-SED students over time. So starting way back before 2005 all the way up to present, you see that dip in the middle, that line? That's where we shifted from the old state test to SBAC. The green line on the bottom shows the state test scores for SED students in the state. The blue line in the middle shows the work that was led by Arenda, transitioned to the school, Hoover Elementary School in Los Angeles. And you now see that students that are SED are outperforming non-SED students. But I will just say that Hoover School is probably more similar to Castro School than any other school in our district. So we went through an RFP process. And after that process, we're proposing to contract with Arenda to provide training for our district teachers and administrators next year. The work is the MBWSD way and eventually will be led by our district teachers and administrators. The proposed cost, as I mentioned, was about $421,000. And this will allow us to build the foundation to implement strategies with fidelity, again, avoiding that one degree delta. By the end of 26-27, we'll know that we're being successful because we will have agreement on proficiency and expectations for every grade level throughout the development of the essential standards maestroses, the assessments that have been developed, completion of one teaching cycle and data reflection protocol. So staff teachers are ready to implement in August the development of the NASA data system, which will allow us to look at data more easily. And then we will also be looking at satisfaction with professional development, development measured by teacher exit surveys. And then we'll provide you quarterly updates on our progress.

So implied here, but I'll just say it explicitly. When we talk about essential standards and the matrices for each grade level we're talking about grade levels across the district. Right, so that the agreed upon floor is the same at new straw, as it is a my as it is at Castro, as it is that they're cough right consistency for our kids consistent expectations.

So I think thinking about why now, we have the system study that identified the root causes and the things that were limiting our student achievement. And we require some expertise and support in designing these assessments, aligning and bringing everybody together, developing the data systems and implementation. And the costs do support academic improvement efforts that are gonna affect all of our kids. So without the support, we may continue to have inconsistent instructional expectations. Dr. Nguyen and I can lead this effort, but we haven't done it before in the same way and don't have the same experience that facilitators from ARINDA have. We continue to collect data. We have lots of data, but our achievement gaps aren't closing. In fact, they're increasing. And I think what we need to remember is that this one degree delta is so important. And what we learned in the Arenda report was that we had a process, our UDC process, and that UDC process they highlighted as promising. Well, yes, because it's very similar to the cycle that Arenda uses. You think about what you're going to teach, you plan, you teach, you assess, you reflect, you move on. But I think what happened with us is what created that delta is we got away from being all on the same page and all rowing in the same direction. So not all teachers at every grade level at every site were on the same page. We allowed sites to have some flexibility and that is not going to keep us moving in the right direction. So some things to consider. Next year will be a transition year. We are going to have teachers be excited after the training and some are going to jump right in and some are going to take some time. And I think this is why we have planned for this professional development to happen on staff development days over the course of the entire year, giving the teachers space and time to learn. 2728 will be the first year, full year of implementation where we have the instructional cycles and assessments and the data reflection sessions. We do anticipate we are going to need support in 2728. What that support actually looks like is all going to depend on how we roll things out and how things go in this first part, in the first part of next year. And I think that's something we can report on as we come back. And we do anticipate needing to budget some additional funds in 27-28. And again, we do anticipate the budget containing or the state budget containing some funding. So next steps. So pending decision tonight, we'll move forward with planning in 26-27. We're going to continue our current work. We'll continue to communicate on next steps, provide you quarterly progress reports, and we'll get ready for an exciting professional development starting in actually July and then August. So with that, I'm happy to take questions.

Thank you so much for the presentation, Ms. Bauer. What questions do we have from the board? Clarifying questions. Trustee Lambert?

Yes. So really what you're asking for us to do tonight is to approve a $420,000 contract for, as I understand it, one year of Arenda's consulting service. Yeah. Okay. What we're envisioning also is this is going to take a multi-year effort to, you know, show the results. After this year contract expires, how do you, what is the typical kind of interaction with Arenda going forward? And then a sort of a follow-up question. How is that going to be handed over, their efforts handed over to our staff? And who's going to be responsible?

Right. So I think lots of questions there. So we did ask, we talked to Arenda. We asked them this question. We said, how does this work in districts typically? And they said, well, it all depends. It all depends on how it rolls out, how it works. I think we have a very strong plan. So I foresee, while there's gonna be bumps in the road, I foresee us moving forward and being ready to fully implement in 27, 28, but we're still gonna have to do some work because we are focusing on language arts in elementary. So there's still that need to focus on math. And then there's also the, this is just the core instruction piece, and there's lots of other pieces that need to be layered on top. We need to think about how we're looking at differentiation, how we're looking at ELD, how we're looking at intervention, how we're making sure kids get all the um extra support they need especially our kids that need to make the most growth and so i think that could be an area where we are going to need some more support as we move into 2728 but i think we're going to have to come back to you with updates on how this is going and then make some recommendations for what that would look for look like in 2728 are we looking at every year

Another $400,000? No. Next 10 years?

No. The plan is, and what will happen, is this will be handed to us, right? When Kathy described that one degree delta, right, that is where, and she said it, we could take this on, but without the expertise of an organization that has done this hundreds of times. So, Getting off in the beginning, getting off course in the beginning leads to problems. So the idea being how can we utilize their expertise early on, train us. We need to turn our principles into stronger instructional leaders and not just site managers. And they're hungry and eager to do that. So the game plan is to hand it off to us.

So would it be fair to say that in a couple of years, the full handoff would happen next year after this contract? We still might need them for certain things.

And I think it's going to be a couple of years.

Yeah.

Right. But after that, I believe there's going to be a handoff. Right. In fact, it's there. If you talk to them, that's their desire. Right. They don't want to be involved long term. Their goal is to transform school districts, to help transform school.

Not transforming the school district if they have to keep.

Exactly. Right. It's not a good model.

Thank you. Thank you for the presentation. I think one thing about this item is that it's sort of a double item. It is a plan for moving forward and then it's also a contract approval and review of the RFP process. And so I'd like to ask that whenever we have An RFP like this that in the agenda item, the responses from all of the vendors who responded be included in the agenda item in the agenda packet. I did see, you know, in the trustee questions. There was a question asking specifically for. the scoring itself. And so looking at that scoring, it says that there were seven reviewers who independently scored each firm. And The totals I'm assuming that are in the questions, 641 for Arenda and 437 for the new teacher project. I assume that's what TNTP is. I just divide those numbers by seven because those are from the seven scores. Is that correct? Because the score is supposed to be out of 100. So that total,

is over 700, right? Because there were seven scores, 100 points each. People scored them at varying levels, right? So each of those, that's a total of the seven scores.

Right, so that would mean instead of 641, Arenda scored a 91.6. On average. On average, and the New Teacher Project scored a 62.4. Okay, so I would just like to ask that in the future, I know this is a little different because it's kind of all mushed together, but if we could have both of the, or whatever responses came in and the scoring included, that's just very helpful for the board. And then the reviewers, who are the, not to name names, but kind of staffing-wise, who are the people who are designated to review the RFP?

They were a variety of classified, certificated, administrator, and non-administrator.

Okay, so a pretty broad catchment. Thank you.

Just to follow up with that, another request. We're being asked to approve a contract. We'd like to see the contract on the Is it on?

It's there.

It says Arenda PSA.

Yes, it's there.

It's a 33-page contract. It's on. Any other questions before? I have a question, but President DeFaglio?

Yeah. So this is our initial year of going through some of this work. I think we probably have some leading indicators that are going to come out of it over the next year, right? So we got our assessment matrices and all those things. Yeah, I noticed in the Hoover example, right, it took probably a handful of years for the lagging stuff of scores and S-back and things like that to start improving. Do we have kind of an anticipated timeframe when we'll start seeing those types of changes, right? Some things are already in flight and we'll see some improvements now, but I think the larger scale kind of benefits we're gonna reap will probably be longer, but I wanna know staff's opinion.

So I think I can't give you an exact number. I think it's going to take a couple of years for all of this work to get going for teachers to be teaching before we start to see improvement. But I think one thing that we are doing is We're looking at test scores a little bit differently, and this is something we were gonna bring in August to share a little bit more, but we've been looking at student scale scores. We've been looking at scale scores as opposed to just proficiency rates. And when you look at a scale score, when you see a student moving, we wanna see students moving at least 30 points on their scale score every year. 30 points approximately equates to one year's growth. but then one grade level, right? So if I am a third grader, I wanna improve my scale score at least 30 points so that I move a year's proficiency. But when you're behind, you need more than that. And so what we've had our principals do is look at not only their students that are meeting proficiency right now, but all of their groups that are not meeting proficiency and actually back cast six years How many scale score points do they have to improve every single year in order in that six years to be at proficiency, if that makes sense? So we've set goals. That's going to change a little bit every year. It's something new that we're doing and we're learning. But I do, I think in the end, it's going to take a couple of years before we see probably market change. I do think we'll see pockets of change, but I think it's going to take a couple of years before we see it.

Yeah, I think we're gonna see pockets of change initially, but what we have to get at is for the students in our system currently, we will be developing a way to get more than a year's worth of growth each year for those students who are below the floor. That's the game plan. That's what we will begin achieving. Some students will be less complicated to get that growth from. Other students will need additional support to get that growth. But that's our job to figure that out. And it's just a matter of doing that backcasting calculation to understand how much growth needs to happen while we have those kids. If you think of a fifth grader, we've got three more years with that child to catch them up to grade level, right? So that's gonna need to be more aggressive if by eighth grade that's where we need to get them. A third grader who's two years behind, let's say, reading at a first grade level or performing at a first grade level, we've got more time, but there still needs to be more than a year for year growth for that child. And looking at scaled scores is what we need to do in order to accomplish that. Right. So we're going to bring to the board, starting in August at the, why don't we keep losing the word?

Retreat.

Thank you. The retreat. An initial glance at that to begin developing baseline understanding of that work. And then we will, We will continue that perhaps in the study session, perhaps in board meetings, just really understanding that work we're doing and why our teachers have been excited as they've heard about this planning and having their hands on developing those assessment outcomes. I think they really see the difference it's going to be able to make for kids.

My time zones are different, but do we need to extend the meeting or am I off?

I make a motion to extend the meeting until 11pm. Second. That's, that's longer than I think we'll need. Otherwise, we have four minutes left.

It's specific time Charles also.

We do not have, you can't second as Vice President. I will second.

All right, we'll do a roll call vote. Trustee Lambert?

No.

Trustee Connolly? Aye. Trustee Reed? Aye. I vote aye. President? Aye. All right, we have four votes of aye from Trustee Connolly, Trustee Reed, Trustee Henry, and President DeFazio, and Anae from I know from trustee Lambert to extend the meeting until 11 o'clock. Motion passes. Any further clarifying questions? Trustee Conley.

Yes, so to this question about timeline, when I map this out in my head, I just want to check my understanding. The ELA standards will really be a deep dive next year. And so I anticipate that the 27-28 school year is when we see the biggest change in instruction in English language arts. And the 27-28 school year will be the math deep dive. And that means the 2829 school year will will be when we start to see some more significant change in math scoring and I also always backward cast to. Do we get these babies in kindergarten or are we talking about our third graders we have a lot of urgency to to catch our kids up, especially if they're further along but. I anticipate that if we go with that 28, 29 kindergarten math year, those little ones will be in third grade years out from that. So it's more of like a five or six year timeline at least before we see the most comprehensive change with the students that we get from the very beginning with this aligned instruction. Is that correct?

yeah I mean you're gonna there there's gonna be two waves of students, if you will, moving through right there the students who have. Who are who will experience the new approach right there in we will have. You will have less of them to catch up right because they are going to be, we are going to have more of them on grade level would be my prediction. as we move through, but we have kids in the system now that we need, that there's more urgency around. So both of those are going to be occurring. What the, and again, we're rolling out a little bit extra here, right? What, as we develop this, we're going to have, replacing I-Ready, right? We're gonna have a set of grade level, per grade level assessments, right? That teachers have built and decided upon. And those will be, should be very strong leading indicators of how our students are going to perform at the end of the year, right? It's not, it should not be a surprise to us any longer. Not that it's a surprise now, it should be much more predictive of what we're going to expect. So we're gonna know earlier about that intervention, what types of specific intervention they need for specific standards that we have identified as critical. This will be really transformative to our approach to educating kids in the school district. Struggling and kids who are doing exceedingly well.

A rising tide lifts all boats. When we talk about scaled score, you're talking about CASP scores, not I-ready scores, yes? Correct.

Okay. I just wanted to just mention.

Well, I was just going to say that one of the things we're looking at is that we're, Cindy and I are, Dr. Wynn and I are playing with how we're going to show We're going to make a change in the site plans to not only have the proficiency backcasted targets, but also the scale score targets. So that'll be a change. So you're going to get some of that. We're going to bring some possibly at the retreat, but then also we present to you the new site plan format. So you'll see what that looks like.

because i think that's when we have the previous goals that the board has had around one year's growth in math in ela for every child every year and then accelerated growth for our students were who were behind like we had that goal but we were using iready as our data point and that was not effectively tying back to instruction and so this is making that shift yes exactly yeah okay um Well, I have more thoughts, but I will hold them until discussion. Thank you. And I have just one question.

In the trial cycle in the spring, so just to clarify, at that point, that would be a trial of the new assessment. And would we also be doing I-Ready at that time?

Well, the plan right now for iReady is we're only going to use it for math placement and for the purposes of reclassification for our students because we still need a secondary assessment. So that'll happen in the fall and the spring. Yes, in that trial cycle, they'll actually teach the cycle and they'll give the assessment and then we'll go through the data reflective process so teachers learn how to do that.

Thank you. All right.

One more. One more question. Sorry, I just jogged by my question about I ready. To be clear, the I ready for placement is going to be where it's an or of those two scores. And we're also staff has committed to resolving some of the appeals discrepancies you mentioned during the presentation, right?

So what we did this year is we looked at the range of iReady scores for appeal. We looked at all kids that scored a four, and then we looked last year to see where kids who appealed kind of fell in iReady, and we pulled a list of all of those kids. And so there was, I want to say, I think we had 30 or 40 at each school. Then we... We opted to conditionally place them. These are fifth graders going to sixth graders into math 6.2 based on their score. And then we sent a letter to all the families asking them to please confirm that this was what they wanted. We gave them some more information about what math 6.2 meant. And then currently the middle schools are in process of calling any parent that hasn't responded to have conversations with them. And then we followed a similar process for sixth grade into seventh grade. The middle schools handled that a little bit differently. We did pull the list of kids for them. They know the kids better because they've had them there. So they're working on that now. So essentially what we've done is almost taken the appeals process away. We'll still have appeals, but for all of those kids that met one criteria or another, we've already provided them that option.

And I assume that's like effectively opt out, whereas if we get no response, they will stay in the placement that we've chosen, is that?

It's, it's opt out. And then it's the expectation is that they make contact with every parent because we don't want, we want to make sure that every family is aware of the placement and understands it. Because some parents may not want their child in math 6.2. A math 6.1 might be just fine. A path to algebra one may just fine. So we want to make sure we make that personal connection to make sure everybody's comfortable with where they're placed.

Great. Thank you.

No further clarifying questions. I will now open public comment on this item. If any members of the public in person wish to address the board regarding this item, please turn in a speaker card. If you are online, please use the raise hand function and I'll wait to see how many speakers we have and allocate time accordingly. We have one speaker in person and one speaker online. So you will each have three minutes. We'll start with our in-person speaker.

Hi, thank you for the presentations. I just want to share my comment that I'm questioning how the render was picked in the first place. Back on September 10th, 2025, there was an RP sent out and you got back three bit Westnet for 185K with, you know, giving, the data for April 26th, Oranda almost double 333K with the giving you the result at the end of 2025 in Ibis, which is out of in Utah for 37,500. So Oranda won now and the reason for that somehow was because we need this data by the end of 2025. because, you know, we need to do our budget, even though the RIP has nothing to, didn't have, didn't mention any rush to how this data is, you know, like any rush of the deadline. And also an interesting thing I noticed was I know Superintendent Bear worked with Oranda from LISD, I suppose, from 2015 to 2018. And it was like, so one of the LISD board is on the Think Together and Orenda board. So I don't know if there was a conflict of interest there. I thought that was an interesting connection that I discovered. I just, you know, and just throughout this process, it just didn't seem very transparent. We didn't have any data of like why this was, you know, you know, picked. And I think as, you know, if there is We have an RFP, but if RFP is not being done properly, we cheat our students and our district out of being able to find a company that actually provides what we need for the best price. I mean, with Orenda so far within, it's going to be in a year and a half, we're spending $754,000 for Orenda. And if it's followed the LSD trend, if it's going to be three year, that's going to be another $842,000. That's spending $1.6 million for this thing. Do we need that much, that kind of money? But the change... to make can change we make without spending that much money um and so that's just my concern thank you thank you um we'll move to our online speaker um miss good you have three minutes

Thank you. I wanted to say that Arenda certainly may have insight on how to address generic problems in California schools. Superintendent Baer even said that the organization has done this hundreds of times. They have buzzwords and buzz phrases that probably apply to most of the schools that have any sort of achievement gap. But an outside consulting firm does not know and understand our schools more than our own staff. They spent a relatively small amount of time at our schools, and yet tonight you present that we must implement all of their recommendations. Not that we will consider them, but we're going to implement them. Our district employs the best of the best. I think that you would agree with me on this. And so I'd like to say, let's highlight one of our best, Dr. Cindy Nguyen. She is our director of curriculum, instruction, and assessment. She is intelligent, experienced, thoughtful, and fully integrated in her knowledge of our district. Her opinion is valuable. more valuable to me than Arenda's opinion. I would much prefer to have her guide what recommendations may be effective than to blindly follow what Arenda says. There are other issues with the Arenda plan as well. Classroom teachers are who need the professional development. Arenda is going to focus on administrators and the reduced teachers on special assignment. We do need our principals to have guiding principals for instruction. We also need to figure out a way to have our principals actually have longevity in our district if we're thinking that training the administrators is going to then translate into training the entire district. How will this training actually be transitioned into every classroom? Our district does not have a good track record of training classroom teachers on a new curriculum that they implement. This is not what happened for the writing revolution this year. This was not what happened for Amplify. Just last year, we paid $1.8 million for a new ELA curriculum. It is standards aligned. It is aligned across grade levels because it has explicit lessons that all the grade classroom should be teaching. It has built-in assessments as well. It's fully aligned. But you know what? Many teachers were never taught how to utilize it. With the writing revolution, they were given worksheets but never shown what to do with them. So I'd like you to ask for clarification on how this training will actually get to the teachers. I also wanted to say that I appreciate Mr. Lambert asking about the longevity of this and how much will be paid year after year. The Hoover School that they presented, it looked like they paid them for six years. That hopefully will not be the case for Mountain View, but asking for more details about what it really will cost is important. Thank you.

Thank you, Ms. Good. The floor is now closed to public comment on this item. I'll return to the board for discussion.

I can kick this off. Yeah, I think, so going back to Trustee Lambert's questions, I think the thing that I want to make sure that we're doing here, right, is that we're investing in the capacity of our staff, right? I think that's the important bit here, right? Which is, you know, I think about it in the, you know, I do, we do, you do kind of handoff and how we explicitly teach all of our staff to engage in this. So that's something I think that I really like as our first year commitment to this. We kind of see what that transition plan looks like when, if we want to come back and continue with Arenda in a year, what does that look like for how we're transitioning to our staff? Because ideally, right, like I do not want, I think to Superintendent Bear, you were saying like, they don't want to be here for the long haul. They want to help us do this on our own and it becomes our The envy envy WSD way. So I think that's my, my initial comment on just what I what I envisioned for this I'll pause there in case anyone else wants to Well, I think

the work before us is pretty significant. And when I was a classroom teacher, there were, There were years when I worked in a setting where we had an assessment, a Common Core online assessment, similar to iReady, that the entire school was using, but it wasn't necessarily as aligned to standards as we would like or as implementable in the classroom. And then there were also years where I was making my own assessments for my students This was when I was in Mountain View in this district at Stevenson. I was kind of like an oddball in my little classroom doing these assessments and tracking student growth all year by myself. And I've never gotten to work in a system where the teachers and the administration are aligned around building those assessments and those essential standards together. And I think it would be incredibly powerful to be a part of that community. We have received multiple emails from principals and then heard from different staff about how excited they are about this work and the opportunity to move it forward. And that resonates with me a great deal. When we look at the funding for professional development, my understanding is we are trying to make sure that when we are using our reserves, We are putting that towards one-time expenses rather than relying on reserves to fund ongoing expenses. And to a certain extent, that means having to contract out for some things instead of bringing in significant amounts of personnel to do this programming internally. I'd love to clone Director Nguyen, but I don't think one person by themselves can actually implement this district-wide and do all of the training and support that needs to happen. And so regardless, we will have professional development expenditure for this fall. whether or not we approved a render or not. It's just a fact of life that we will need help to be able to do this on scale for our staff. But I'm curious to hear from my colleagues as well.

Yeah, I agree that this is an important investment in professional development and and that it's not just a consultant providing assessments or providing things. It is working with the very invested staff in developing those things internally to make really all of their time more worthwhile that they've been putting into other types of assessments that aren't giving them the data they need to really pivot and improve the instruction and identify what's needed. So what's most important to me about this is using an outside vendor to facilitate the work, not to do the work for us. And so that at the end of the day, it is something that our teachers and administrators are invested in and own and work forward. And I very much appreciate the... I mean, this is a pretty swift timeline to be able to do a trial cycle as early as the spring. And I think while there may be a longer term where we really get to, you know, the kindergartner who comes in this fall and eventually, but just having that information, I think will really show us some pretty quick results. And I appreciate what I have heard of When you talk about backcasting and having that goal of having every single kid get to that point at the end of, you know, when they leave our district, we just had our promotion ceremonies when, you know, when every single kid leaves this district and is able to go walk into Mountain View or Los Altos High School and be prepared to take what they want to take. But I do appreciate that it is a significant investment of money, but that it is the most important thing we do, and that having that structured process to get us where we need to get, I think, is worth the investment.

Professional development can sometimes be really daunting, and facilitating effective professional development is actually much harder than I think people realize. And there's a lot of teachers out there that you mention the term professional development, and it's just, ugh. I don't wanna do anything remotely in that vicinity because I've had bad experiences with it. But when your experience is really positive, it shifts how you function in the classroom. I've recently, attended a very well thought out professional development series. And it was so well received by everybody that was part of it. The district that I'm in actually contracted with that company to come back and do more training with more teachers because it was so highly regarded. And being a veteran teacher, I just finished year 19, and I refresh my curriculum all the time, and I'm constantly attending development seminars to look at things like standards, making sure that whatever new standards are being put out there, there is something different when a really good facilitator comes in and shows you something new and it sparks a refresh of things that you thought you were doing well and it was like well actually i could i could do that better or there is a different way or maybe the few that i'm not catching i can try this different method so while there are plenty of capable staff that we have access to that can help guide this work. There is something about having a professional facilitator come in to help guide that practice a little bit more rapidly and at higher scale than what staff would be able to do. And with our timeline, it lends to contracting out for this job.

I move that the Board of Trustees approve Arenda's $421,253 proposal to support Mountview-Wisman's Systems Implementation Instructional Improvement Plan for 2026-2027.

Did I jump in with an additional comment ahead? So I think there's one bit that I said in the presentation that was highlighted around teacher satisfaction with the PD being measured in exit surveys. I know one of my LCAP climate survey questions always is around PD and the satisfaction with it. I think that's a really good opportunity to not only, I think there's a lot of detail that's probably baked into that line on the presentation of how we're gonna do that. But I think one of the good things that's gonna be really important is to the point about curriculums and how we work through them. I think back to one of the CSBA sessions I went to write a curriculum is like I see for a good curriculum is like, what's the best camera for doing photography. It's gonna matter actually how people put it into practice and how they're actually implementing it for our students in our schools. I'd love to see in that exit survey for how the PD is working for is the, are they seeing as these develop, as we develop like our matrices and our general practices, is this reflecting what the teachers at say Vargas or principals in the schools are seeing on the ground in their schools? And is it effective for that, right? I think making sure that that gets connected in our understanding of the effectiveness of this is gonna be really, really important. So that's kind of my primary, Anchor point that I think we'll get from information from folks on the ground and how this, this is actually shaking out over the next couple over the next year and potentially if we choose to choose to in further years. And then if anyone else wants to comment. Otherwise, I can second Second I'll give anyone else a chance to comment, but otherwise second We have a

I have one additional comment, but he can go ahead and second. That's fine. We can always discuss the motion that's on the floor. I think what I'm really excited to see this fall when we start talking about scale scores and we start talking about the updated school site plans, we should be able to have a little bit of a predictive factor of what kind of change we think could happen in pockets. So if we look at our students' CAASPP scores, um especially our students who are behind and we target um the the progress that they need to make to accomplish one year's growth or one and a half years growth in that year they're going to be students who are so far behind that they're going to be climbing for a few years before they cross that proficiency line and then there's always going to be students who are kind of not on the bubble but they're closer and may make that transition within the first year And so I anticipate that we will see a bump kind of earlier on of those kids who are closer. But when we have our presentation on this in the fall, I'd love to see some of that detail in the presentation of not just... those bands of where kids are in proficiency, but the full range of scores and where everybody is falling in those range of scores. So we can have a bit of an idea of if everybody made one year's growth this year, what would that mean? If everybody, if the students who were below proficiency level made one and a half years growth, What would that mean at the end of the year? Because I think that starts to give us an idea of the change that we should be looking for as trustees as we move forward in a realistic way.

Yeah, and I think we'll do that as we start talking about backcasting progress. But I would just caution that in the first year, we want to give the teachers the room to go through this process and make those changes to assessments and identification of standards. I think it's going to be a change, and it's going to be very important to give them space and grace.

Yeah. I like the idea of having an idea of where we expect to see growth over time. I know a lot of the big changes are going to be lagging. We're going to build the tracks and build all the things we need to do, and then eventually we'll get to the destination. But I do want to caution that as we start evaluating which metrics and which things we're looking for for success, We do that looking forward from where we are starting. And then, because I think once we get to a year out, we'll be able to look back through a handful of different measurements as we slice and dice. And we will, just by sheer statistical noise, we will probably find some changes. And I'd like to commit ahead of time to where we expect that. And I trust staff to be able to tell us where they think the real reasonable, practical improvements might be.

Any other last comments? All right, we have a motion on the floor from Trustee Lambert, seconded by President DeFazio to approve Arenda's proposal to support MVWSD's systems implementation and instructional improvement plan for 2026-27. I will do a roll call vote. Trustee Lambert?

Aye.

Trustee Connolly? Aye. Trustee Reed? Aye. I vote aye. President DeFazio?

Aye.

We have five aye votes from Trustee Lambert, Trustee Conley, Trustee Reed, Trustee Henry, and President DeFazio. For a unanimous vote, the motion passes.

Thank you, we look forward to the work.

So our next agenda item is item 8M. This is an action item, resolution 01-061126, specification of the election order.

Yes, so this is a resolution for consideration. We have two seats coming up for election. or yeah, for election on November 3 of this year. Part of that process is that the board needs to officially call for an election. So this resolution does that and we will get this sent to Santa Clara County Registrar voters upon its approval.

Any clarifying questions from the board?

Um, does anyone have to recuse themselves on these types of items or is it? No. Okay, thank you.

Just calling for the election.

Any other questions? I will now open public comment on this item. If any members of the public in person wish to address the board regarding this item, please turn on a speaker card. If you're online, please use the raise hand function. I'll wait to see how many speakers we have and allocate time accordingly. We have no speakers in person and no raised hands online. The floor is now closed to public comment. I'll return to the board for discussion.

Trustee Lambert? I move that the Board of Trustees approve resolution number 01-061126, specification of the election order as presented.

Second. We have a motion from Trustee Lambert and a second from Trustee Conley to approve resolution 01-061126, specification of the election order. I will do a roll call vote. Trustee Lambert?

Aye.

Trustee Conley? Aye. Trustee Reed? Aye. I vote aye. President DeFazio?

Aye.

We have five ayes for unanimous vote from Trustee Lambert, Trustee Conley, Trustee Reed, Trustee Henry and President DeFazio, through unanimous approval, the motion passes. Our next item is a discussion item, item 8N, board retreat topics.

There's that word. Yes, so on August 6th, we'll be having a board retreat and wanted to provide some time for the board to generate some thoughts on topics you would like included. I know we want to include, as I said earlier, some information, some front-loading information about the work that's going to be going on. With Arenda, this will be just, actually this will concur With some of the work actually going on with her end on on August six so Want to make sure the boards up to speed as well, but would also like to know other topics. We will also be actually Shelly, including in that meeting. strategic planning will be an important part of that meeting as well. It's really the kickoff for the board to have a heavy voice in that as we begin that process. How much time do they need? Do they want two hours for that?

That's two hours with the strategic planning firm. Any other clarifying questions before we? And you will comment and then Alright, so before we have the discussion about the topics, we'll have an opportunity for public comment on this item. If any members of the public in person wish to address the board regarding this item, please turn in a speaker card. If you're online, please use the raise hand function and I'll wait to see how many speakers we have an allocate time accordingly. We have no speakers in person on this item and no speakers online. So open the floor for discussion from board. Trustee Conley?

Yeah, I just wanted to throw out some things that we typically cover at the fall retreat, although I've also heard it called an advanced retreat. One would certainly be to go over the governance calendar for the year and then also to map out not just kind of the standard things in the governance calendar, but anticipated items that are big topics that we know are coming. So that's where the study session might come up or any varied study sessions. The times when we should be hearing about their strategic plan and working on that. I'm sure there are other items that trustees want to see reports on. And so that's great to fit that within that governance calendar conversation. Also, I think we need to discuss our board professional development. Almost all of our trustees now I think have completed the master's in governance. And so we should look at our professional development budget as a board, and then also discuss how that funds, like how we should be distributing that and what's the most effective way to support, especially our newer trustees, but to support all of our trustees. You're not so new anymore. You've been tempered over the last year and a half, just probably about three years worth of meetings. And then Are there any, and this is more for the board president, possibly the vice president and the superintendent in setting the agenda. Are there any board bylaws specifically about communication or I know we have a board bylaw that's up tonight about trustee roles. Are there any areas that we as a board need to be improving in? I know we've done a board self-evaluation sometimes in the past as well. And then hopefully board goals, discussion around our board goals for the year and how we'll be receiving updates on those.

Other comments?

I can go. I think When I was going through my topics, I think, you know, Trustee Comey, I think you hit on almost all of them. So I think it's glad you were comprehensive up front. Governance calendar, I think, is a really, really important thing. On top of that, I think you touched on this a little bit, but I think We occasionally request updates on specific topics or like we want to come back in X, Y, Z months and see how something's going. I think making sure that that's all reflected in the governance calendar. I'm sure Superintendent Baer and staff, you have lots of notes on these things so we can bring that forward and make sure we cover all of those as they come through. I would love to see board self-evaluation I think it's a useful you know useful part of this the other one I think that is really I think is the strategic planning process I think as you talk through I think is really that's going to be the key driver for a lot of the work going forward for for both the district and us so I think it's good for us to make sure we're involved in that process and kind of engaged well. So those were the main things that came to mind for me, not to repeat too much.

Any comments? I think I would just echo the governance calendar that will be, I think, super helpful to have an idea of how things plot out over the course of the year, especially our role in strategic planning, where those beats are going to be getting the study sessions on the calendar and getting some of those things just mapped out as we kick off the school year will be helpful. There's nothing else?

Well, we've just, just comes to mind, we just, you know, we've had it on our closed session agenda recently of Superintendant evaluation. Do we want a kickoff to the year agenda is portion there for for after the summer, just to touch base. Again, I don't know if that's something folks are interested in.

That is something that we've done in the past, sometimes not every year, but sometimes just to kind of check in on the work that happened over the summer. What's coming in the fall. All right. Anything else? The only other piece, but it sounds like we're going to be pressed for time, is any type of team building or working style activities. Not everybody's touchy-feely, but sometimes it can be a good moment to kind of reinforce those things.

All right. Anything else? Great. All right. We will move on to item 8.0. It's a discussion item, board bylaws and policies. To go over the proposed updates, again, this is a discussion item for first reading. These will come back for approval. And this is actually me presenting. So our board policy committee met actually just last week. Um, we were at a fast turnaround to get some of these on the agenda for tonight, uh, for our first reading, um, really important topics, um, on this agenda, some of which, um, just because of code, um, staff will be working on, um, in any case, but we want to make sure these things are documented in our board policies too. Um, so we met, let me make sure I'm on my right screen. Um, I can see. Okay, so we met June 3 first reading tonight site and then we have current batch. We have BP 1240 volunteer assistance BP 1313 civility new VP 2110, superintendent responsibilities and duties. VP 4100, certificated personnel to mandated policies related to safety. And then VP 5148.3, preschool early child education and board bylaw 9200 limits to board member authority. So 1240, volunteer assistance, it's updated to reflect NULA SB 848, a number of the policies that we've updated from the recent packets from the February and May packet. This is one that was updated in the May packet from CSBA to align this policy. with SB 848, which provides that certain volunteers are mandated reporters. When a volunteer is 18 plus and interacts with students outside of the immediate supervision and control of a student's parent or guardian or school employee, then they are subject to the requirements of the Child Abuse and Neglect Reporting Act, including notification, training, and reporting requirements. They'll also have the administrative regulation will be updated in conjunction with this once this board policy is updated. So it's in that specific situation that that is updated, so we're updating the language. So then the next one. It's Policy 1313, Civility, a new policy for Mountain View-Wisman. It is one of CSBA's optional policies, but it provides a statement from the board of an expectation of civil behavior and a definition of civil behavior. Next one. Policy 2110, Superintendent Responsibilities and Duties. It's updated to reflect new law SB 827, which requires ethics training for the superintendent once every two years. It specifies for superintendents who start after June 1st or July 1st of 2026. But it would be something that I think, Policy-wise it would, just because that's the way the code's written. But it's a similar training to what is now required of board members that we all took last year. Next one. Policy 4100 certificated personnel is just updated for consistency with BP 4200. And then it's CSBA is updated for consistency with BP 4300 administrative and supervisory personnel, which we actually don't have, but will be on a future board policy committee agenda. And the next one. Policy 5141.75, weather safety. This is a new mandated policy. Some districts had a previous sun safety policy, which our district did not have, but CSBA is retiring that one and putting this broader weather safety policy in place. So staff would be working on that policy. developing adopting and implementing protocols for extreme weather conditions over the summer and worry would be adopting a policy in conjunction with that next one. So BP 5142 safety, we actually did this is one of the key policies that's updated with all a lot of the core requirements of SB 848. We did not have this particular policy before, but now it has a lot of mandated pieces that we would we would want to have in our policy. So we would be proposing to adopt this updated version of BP 5142. and overall the theme of policies that promote safe environments for student learning and engagement. And that's where in the last meeting and this one, we've seen a number of things that have related to that. Next one, thank you. All right, policy 5148.3. This is also updated to reflect new law and adds a response to immigration enforcement section specific to our early childhood education program. Board bylaw 9200, which is limits to board member authority. This is one that our board had actually just adopted within the last year, but CSBA had not updated the sample version of it for a long time. So CSBA has updated. their sample to clarify the board's expectations. Just the individual board members conduct themselves in accordance with role of the board and governance standards that we have in place. And to clarify the scope of authority of individual board members. So this is one of those times that CSBA is updating their language and clarifying to bring it to modernize it a bit. So that is, I believe, the last one. So if there are any questions from the board.

Just make a quick comment. Just a note, because I know the board likes to be kept up to date, what's going on with our partner districts. With regard to BP 1240, the volunteer assistance, MVLA is just updating their policy to align with Senate Bill 848, right? And they've actually implemented some pretty stringent requirements requiring all volunteers to complete an application, sign an agreement. All volunteers need TB tests regardless of how many hours or how frequent. They have to go through live scan fingerprinting. And they have to complete six different Kenan trainings every year. So they have really... stepped up the requirements for volunteers and MVLA. Of course, if you want to drive, you have to do all of that. And you have to have a driver's license, of course, and provide a DMV driver's report and proof of insurance. So I know there were some questions when I first came on board. I think this was a hot topic. And it's interesting to see that there's Our partner district is tightening things up as well.

I've seen that as an incoming Mountain View High School parent. I've gotten the notices. You had a question, Trustee Conley?

I did. Let's see. The policy regarding, so it's limits the board member authority by law 9200, but it talks about a board member may observe and or volunteer in a school or is enrolled in accordance with the volunteer policies. Prior to observing or volunteering, a board member shall inform the superintendent or designee. As a current parent in the district, Superintendent Baer, does that mean that every time I want to volunteer at my child's school, I need to contact you first? Can I provide like a ?

It seems like we can do something less frequent. but we can figure that out.

Okay. That was my only question.

Especially if there's a frequent volunteer situation.

All right. Thank you.

Any other questions? So with that, I will... open public comment on this item. If any members of the public in person wish to address the board regarding this item, please turn on a speaker card. If you're online, please use the raise hand function. I'll wait to see how many speakers we have and allocate time accordingly. We have one speaker in person and no speakers online. So you have three minutes.

Thank you. Yes, my comment. I want to ask for clarification about the volunteer assistance. I see that it's say additional volunteers who are over 18 who interact with students outside of the immediate supervision and control of the students. So does it mean is the parent volunteer inside the classroom within the supervision of the the teachers, then does that mean they don't have to do mandate reporter? I understand MVLA have that because when I was looking at the different levels of MVLA, a lot of the volunteers are actually the robotic club, which, you know, you take the kids out of state or just work after hours. So, yes, that makes sense because there's no teacher supervision there. I am looking at Santa Clara Unified, which is another peer participation school. And on their volunteer requirement, there's no mandated reporter. So I'm just hoping that, you know, this requirement for mandated reporter, it's put, it make it harder for volunteers to be, you know, in school helping the kids. And you want more parents, more engagement of the community. You want them to feel invited. And so, you know, just imposing additional barriers for them to be able to help our school district and help our students, it's counterproductive. So, thank you.

Thank you. The floor is now closed to public comment, and I'll return to the board for discussion.

I have a few suggestions. I do not want to discuss them really right now. And I would prefer that just your committee consider them and then decide whether to include them or not. I really don't want to get into a word thing. Civility 1313, you may consider including a statement or includes social media behavior on there. I noticed it was not in that list. I may be wrong, but I believe that's true certified personnel 4100 said Superintendent or just district may provide Professional development and I was thinking we could be provide professional development. be more assertive about it. Same thing goes for safety, 1542. That's a statement there to the effect that on dangerous streets, the district may provide crossing guards. And I think if we do have dangerous streets, we should provide crossing guards. So just to be a little assertive at those statements. But I'll leave that up to you to discuss that. Sometimes it is appropriate to make them optional, but sometimes it isn't.

Any other comments? City Council Chambers, You know it's a in addition to anything else if if anybody has feelings about if there are otherwise normally our next step would be to bring these back on consent for second reading but. City Council Chambers, trustee Lambert has proposed three of them go back to the committee so be interested in there's any discussion on that.

City Council Chambers, Does policy committee ever call a special meeting.

City Council Chambers, Do we have actually think. I think we've set our next August meeting date, but that doesn't mean we couldn't meet before then.

I support the committee reviewing those recommendations. I also just wanted to note that Policy 5142 on Safety talks about the superintendent or designee reviewing cybersecurity and digital media awareness and incorporating recommended practice in the district's process and procedures. Including digital media content, I just wanted to note that and that might be something that we've referenced in our work around technology going forward that that's strictly addressed here.

Any other comments.

I would suggest if Trustee Lambert's amenable that we can take these as considered by the committee and bring them to the next one, and then the policy committee can take them up again to perhaps do the edits and bring those back if it decides. That kind of splits the difference between the two.

I think that President DeFazio is suggesting that we bring all of these back on consent for the next meeting. Because one question would be, what is, which meeting would that be anyway? Because if it's not until the August meeting, then we'll meet as a policy committee before then anyway. So that may.

Yeah, that's fair. We could consider them at the policy committee meeting and then When these are approved, they have any edits that we would need to make to address Trustee Lambert's concerns.

All right, then. Then we will move to the next item, which is board updates, noting that we are at 1053 right now. Board updates.

Anything?

Right. And then item 10, items for future agendas.

So I will note that we're entering the 25th school year of the Mountain View-Wisman School District since our merger. Perhaps at a future meeting, we can agendize either a resolution honoring it or perhaps some events during the year to commemorate this. I think we're at a transformative year in the district and I think it's a good milestone.

Thank you. All right, then.

I would also, I love that. We also inaugurated the Rose Felicetti Award this year, and we need to actually set up our process and make that award and celebrate a community partner in her memory.

I will note that she was one of our early, like inaugural members, I believe, so.

On items for future agendas? Yes. Item 11, future board meeting dates. August 6th is our retreat. August 20th, first regular meeting. September 2nd and September 17th. And so now at 10.55, we will adjourn the meeting of the Mount Lee-Wisman School District.