St. Louis Public Schools Board of Education - workshop

They said, pause. And yes, we paused, but only long enough to gather ourselves. They said, rebuild. But what we're doing is more than fixing. and our spirit back to life. From the halls that carry our history to the hearts that carry our hope, this is us rising again together. This is what leadership looks like here. Teachers preparing rooms with care, principals greeting families at the door, staff making sure every detail is right because our students deserve our very best. The lights are on. Check, check. Mic check. One, two. Check, check. mic check one two this is what success looks like here effort joy curiosity and growth all shining through our students and everything they do every student every day together like never before When our community faces a storm, we don't wait to help. We show up. That's who we are. From staff delivering meals and supplies, to teachers checking in on students' well-being, to counselors helping kids talk through hard days. Support is what we do. And even when the emergency passes, we don't stop. Every day in every school, you'll see adults making sure students feel safe. encouraged, and ready to learn. Families feel it too, through programs like Parent University, workshops that give parents tools and confidence to help their children grow and succeed. This is what community looks like in SLPS. People lifting each other up, standing together, and making sure no one faces challenges alone. Because when one of us rises, all of us rise. Every student, every day, together like never before. They said pause. And yes, we paused, but only long enough to gather ourselves. They said rebuild. But what we're doing is more than fixing buildings. We're restoring energy, restoring pride, bringing our schools and our spirits back to life. From the halls that carry our history to the hearts that carry our hope, this is us rising again together. This is what leadership looks like here. Teachers preparing rooms with care, principals greeting families at the door, staff making sure every detail is right because our students deserve our very best. The lights are on, the doors are open, and the future our kids deserve is right in front of us every student every day together like never before In every spark of discovery, every note sung, every challenge met, you can see what makes our students shine. Some people say kids have potential, but at St. Louis Public Schools, we see their brilliance right now. The scientist building her first robot. The artist mixing colors until they feel just right. The veterinarian caring for man's best friend. They're not waiting for the future, they're creating it in real time. And every step they take, every skill they build, every dream they speak out loud, they do it with teachers, coaches, and families who believe in them just as much as they do. This is what success looks like here. Effort, joy, curiosity, and growth all shining through our students in everything they do. Every student, every day, together like never before. Stop. Every day in every school, you'll see adults making sure students feel safe, encouraged, and ready to learn. Families feel it too. Through programs like Parent University, workshops that give parents tools and confidence to help their children grow and succeed this is what community looks like in slps people lifting each other up standing together and making sure no one faces challenges alone because when one of us rises all of us rise every student every day together like never before They said pause. And yes, we paused, but only long enough to gather ourselves. They said rebuild. But what we're doing is more than fixing buildings. We're restoring energy, restoring pride, bringing our schools and our spirits back to life. from the halls that carry our history to the hearts that carry our hope. This is us rising again together. This is what leadership looks like here. Teachers preparing rooms with care, principals greeting families at the door, Staff making sure every detail is right because our students deserve our very best. The lights are on, the doors are open, and the future our kids deserve is right in front of us. Every student, every day, together like never before. In every spark of discovery, every note sung, every challenge met, you can see what makes our students shine. Some people say kids have potential, but at St. Louis Public Schools, we see their brilliance right now. The scientist building her first robot, the artist mixing colors until they feel just right, The veterinarian caring for man's best friend. They're not waiting for the future, they're creating it in real time. And every step they take, every skill they build, every dream they speak out loud, they do it with teachers, coaches, and families who believe in them just as much as they do. This is what success looks like here. Effort, joy, curiosity, and growth all shining through our students in everything they do. Every student, every day, together like never before. When our community faces a storm, we don't wait to help. We show up. That's who we are. From staff delivering meals and supplies, to teachers checking in on students' well-being, to counselors helping kids talk through hard days. Support is what we do. And even when the emergency passes, we don't stop. Every day in every school, you'll see adults making sure students feel safe. encouraged, and ready to learn. Families feel it too, through programs like Parent University, workshops that give parents tools and confidence to help their children grow and succeed. This is what community looks like in SLPS. People lifting each other up, standing together, and making sure no one faces challenges alone. Because when one of us rises, all of us rise. Every student, every day, together like never before. They said pause, and yes, we paused, but only long enough to gather ourselves. They said rebuild, but what we're doing is more than fixing buildings. We're restoring energy, restoring pride, bringing our schools and our spirits back to life. from the halls that carry our history to the hearts that carry our hope. This is us rising again together. This is what leadership looks like here. Teachers preparing rooms with care, principals greeting families at the door, staff making sure every detail is right because our students deserve our very best. The lights are on, the doors are open, and the future our kids deserve is right in front of us. Every student, every day, together like never before.

I call this evening's monthly work session to order at 6.39 PM.

Ms. Vaughan, roll call. Dr. Harvey. Present. Mr. Hikes.

Present. Ms. Hubbard. Here. Ms. Jones. Here. Ms. Foster. Mr. Marston.

Present.

Dr. Collins-Adams. We have a quorum.

I move to approve the agenda for this evening's meeting. I make a motion to approve the agenda for August 25th, 2026, monthly work session meeting.

Second.

Ms. Vaughn, roll call. Call for a vote.

Dr. Harvey?

Yes.

Mr. Hikes? Yes. Ms. Hubbard? Yes. Ms. Jones? Yes. Mr. Marston? Yes. Motion approved.

And can I get a couple of motions to approve the minutes from the last two meetings?

I'll make a motion to approve the minutes from August 11, 2026, regular business meeting, and also August 15, 2026, work session minutes.

Second.

Ms. Vaughn, call for a vote.

Dr. Harvey?

Yes.

Mr. Hikes?

Yes.

Ms. Hubbard? Yes. Ms. Jones? Yes. Mr. Marston?

Yes.

Motion approved.

We're now to the part that everyone is looking forward to. We've got a report from Superintendent Dr. Berry about Future Ready.

Yes, good evening. First, I'll take this moment To celebrate the incredible first day across St. Louis Public Schools yesterday and the second day for today, from the moment our students walked through the doors, our schools were filled with energy, excitement, and a true sense of belonging. Across the district, we saw engaging activities, warm welcomes, relationship building, and most importantly, instruction happening on day one. Our students were not simply getting settled, they were reading, writing, thinking, creating, and collaborating. I want to thank our principals, teachers, support staff, families, our board members, and every member of the SLPS team who helped make day one successful. There was a lot happening across our district, but when our students walk through our doors our focus remains clear, providing an excellent experience every day, beginning with day one, it was a great start now it's our responsibility to carry that same energy and urgency and commitment throughout the year, so thank you. Now we will jump right in to the future ready update presentation. Okay, tonight's a work session, so you'll hear from various members of the group, so please feel free. There is no way that, right or wrong way, so feel free to stop us at any moment, ask questions, but we will jump right in.

Of course, this is our portrait of a graduate.

My range might be a little far. I may just need you to help me. on our core four and we can keep going. Next slide, please. And so we have shared that our recommendation for our portfolio model is an A plus model. It is mainly comprised of our traditional middle schools, high schools and elementary pre K through five. We will share some exceptions today, but this will be our A plus model. Next slide, please. And I hope you can see this slide. We have a few questions that we would like to pose to the board for today. We are asking as we go throughout this process, if there are any schools, recommendations, or elements of the current plan that we are presenting that you could not support as it stands, and you can let us know what's driving that concern and share that with us. What make you feel like this is a defensible plan to our families? And what do you think about when families communicate their experience is gonna be? Also the impact of these decisions and what must we hold true? Where do you believe that your differences, if any, they lie and are the differences primarily about the process or specific recommendations? And what so, any disagreements do we have and how do we resolve those? And what student experiences are we trying to protect? What could we do to help change your mind as far as the level of confidence regarding our plan? What additional information may still be needed after tonight? Where do you believe there is room for compromise or a different solution? And if we were sitting here three years from now and agreed that we made the right decision, what would you see from our students and families that told us they got it right? And now we're gonna jump right on in. We have Ms. Gina Haywood is going to talk about our strategic architecture plan. and where we go from here.

Thank you, Dr Barry to the board and to the Community excited to have the opportunity to discuss these items is it's been lots of questions. i'm hoping that tonight will provide some clarity around what the process has been thus far to lead us to this point. So you think about the strategic context and the to plan architecture really wants to ensure that we were an answering kind of a two piece question or two part question and the first portion of that question would really live in the space of. You know, being as as a future ready. document considering the structural sustainability as well as the opportunity for growth and competitive positioning and so we definitely want to make sure that the district continues to be responsible for what we currently have but that we also are being mindful about the things that are changing within our city how we're going to compete at a larger level so how does slps create a sustainable system for the students it currently serves is the question that we have for our future ready structural sustainability and then for enrollment growth and competitive positioning how does slps make those schools compelling enough that more st louis families choose them The core work for both of these if you're considering the structural pieces is that we improve our facilities on the consolidation staffing transportation configurations in district. reductions and then we're considering about the competitiveness, you know our market intelligence what's happening in our region, the product strength and retention recruitment family resources marketing partnerships and measuring those on a regular regular continuous basis. At the onset of this work, the team was really committed to ensuring that we followed a process full of principles that were guided by our moral compass as well as our integrity and professional knowledge base. And so when I consider the guiding principles that were developed by the team, it was very important to ensure that we represent the beliefs of the team at large and that they would be the foundation for shaping every decision moving forward. So these guiding principles included creating a high-efficiency anchor sites, student-centered, opportunity-focused design, and you've heard us talk about that in numerous meetings, protecting the foundational conditions for learning, long-term financial and operational facility sustainability, data-informed transparently and disclosed decisions, strengthening our feeder patterns, equity of access regardless of building or zip code, and consistent community engagement. Because we wanted to protect the principles that we outlined, it was important that we also put guardrails in place, the things that we would not do. So we will not prioritize buildings over students, preserve enrollment practices that create inequity, exempt central office or leadership from the efficiency conversation. advance a recommendation without a disclosed database rationale, allow site-level autonomy to override district-wide consistency, use test scores as a sole condition for consolidation, or make plans without engaging stakeholders in the process. Some community factors and considerations, and there were many, As already has been stated in other meetings, multiple criteria have been examined while finalizing the recommendation for the board. But some of these considerations that have been considered are effectiveness of school leadership, safety, health, well-being, and walkability, equity across schools regardless of building or zip code, that's occurring many times across this presentation. You'll hear that community identity, trust and sense of belonging, the number of school options nearby, academic performance trend. You'll hear me speak a little bit more about this later, but it's very important that the decisions that were made, that the receiving school quality would be higher than that of the school that was transitioning because we want our students to be set up for success and research says that's the best practice. And finally, proximity to new housing development, parks, communities, and resources. So now I'm going to ask that Chief Watson will share some information about the developments and plans across the city of St. Louis and within the district that have informed the team.

And while Chief Watson's coming up, just regarding that receiving schools that are performing better, that's for students when schools are not merging. So when there are schools that are merging, there is no research that says the receiving school has to be performing better. But when there are students that are going to receiving schools individually, not as a whole school, research says that school that's performing better, students seem to do better in that school as well.

Thank you, Dr. Mary. So this slide reflects the district's ongoing efforts to gather and analyze information regarding both current and planned development throughout the City of St. Louis. Through previous work sessions and real estate community presentations, we have continued to engage with the Planning and Urban Development Agency, SLDC, the Real Estate Development Division, and other community and partners. This information on this slide presents or provides the ongoing data gathering efforts and identifies approximately 90 development projects throughout the city that are in various stages of planning design funding or construction. This information will be an important consideration as the district evaluates future enrollment trends neighborhood growth and long term facility needs. So building on that development activity that was identified in the previous slide, this slide provides a broader look at the city's planning areas and the long-term development priorities that influence future growth. The context is important as we consider the district's long-term facility strategy and the future ready 2050 vision. So you can see there's an emphasis, particularly on the north side, because of the tornado. So working with our partners from SLDC and a lot of the city agencies, we were able to have weekly meetings or monthly meetings, rather, and we get this information so we know the phased approach to this work in terms of future development. This next slide shows our current footprint. within the city of St. Louis, and as you can see, just the amount of real estate that we cover throughout the city. So this next slide represents the beginning of a long-term vision for the future of SLPS. Our objective is to prepare our facilities not only for the students we serve today, but also for future generations. This vision takes a balanced approach. We anticipate a combination of new construction and strategic renovation of existing schools. So in other words, we're looking how we can effectively mix the new with the old, building modern facilities where needed while continuing to invest in facilities that have long term value to the district and their communities. Under this proposal, the district could potentially construct 11 new schools and complete approximately 21 major renovations through 2050. This preliminary capital projection represents approximately $1.2 billion in estimated construction costs, with the proposed bond cycle totaling approximately $2.25 billion over the period shown. And in most cases, just from just from other districts, there's a general cycle of at least three to five years for bonds and for just to look at the capital improvements for the facilities. So the important point here is that although these numbers should be viewed as a long-term planning framework, this is not a fixed commitment or predetermined list of projects. Our intent will be to establish a reoccurring capital planning cycle. We will look at the next five years, establish priorities, make the necessary investments, and then revisit the plan. At each cycle, we would reassess critical data points, looking at the facility condition assessment, enrollment and demographic trends, utilization and capacity, academic needs, transportation impacts, neighborhood and city development, financial capacity, and community needs. As these conditions may change, our plans will change with them. This approach allows us to move away from the reacting to simply being proactive and provide a predictable capital strategy. Pass it over to Chief Mitchell.

Okay, before finalizing the methodology and scoring approach, our St. Louis Public Schools research and evaluation team reviewed recent school consolidation practices in several urban districts, including Houston, Austin, Atlanta, Boston, Pittsburgh, Cleveland, Baltimore, and St. Paul. Across those districts, the same core factors appeared repeatedly. enrollment, utilization, capacity, facility condition, operating cost, proximity, staffing, and receiving school capacity. That comparative review helped confirm the factors that we are considering locally and that they are consistent with our broader practice. We then translated those common factors into criteria that fit the specific conditions and priorities of St. Louis public schools. That includes the FCI, building capacity, utilization, student population within the attendance zone, and proximity to St. Louis public school options. In these next slides, Dr. Haywood will walk through the actual scoring methodology, including how the criteria are weighted and applied at the school level.

Thank you, Chief Watson and Mitchell. So in considering the weighting of these criteria, as was just stated by Chief Mitchell, it really was an industry standard. So when we look at the facility condition index, we weighted it at 25%, building capacity 25%, building utilization 20%, St. Louis Public Schools students living in the attendance area at 15%, and the percent of students attending St. Louis Public Schools that live within one mile of the building at 15%. These criteria were scored on a scale of one through five, one being a low score and five being the high score. For facilities condition index, the lower the score, the higher the rating on our criteria in our spreadsheet. So you'll see here that the facility conditions index ranges from less than 40%, greater than 40% down to less than 10%. And then with our capacity, we broke it out by elementary, middle school, and high school. So for capacity for elementary school, 300, up to 400 was the scale. Middle school, 400 through 500 was the scale. High school, 500 through 600. For our building utilization, 20% through 80%. And then looking at our enrollment factors of St. Louis Public Schools students living in the attendance zone, we had elementary students 175 down to 400, middle 100 down to 500, high school 200 down to 600, and then our students attending within one mile 20% down to 80%. Here you have an example because each and every one of our schools were placed into this workbook or this spreadsheet to be rated, which resulted in an overall score that we used to inform decision making throughout the process. Each of the schools will have a scorecard that looks similar to the ones that are in front of you. So we have George Washington Carver Elementary School. You see those factors that we talked about in addition to their current enrollment trends. and then some of the things that are happening that are very specific to that school. Because again, we've used multiple criteria, so this has not been just one or two data points, but many data points that have informed the decision moving towards the creation of the portfolio that will be recommended. So our proposed portfolio school structure and figure pattern. There are five zones that we've essentially divided the school district into. For zone one, elementary schools that'll be a part of this feeder pattern are Adams, Dewey, Laclede, which will be replaced by the newly built Mitchell by 2029, and Washington Montessori. Our middle school would be Compton Drew, and the anchor high school would be Sodan. In zone two, Herzog, Lexington, Nance, and Pomoja. Pomoja will be replaced by our newly built Turner Branch by 2030. Middle school will be Yateman. The high school will be Sumner. Zone three, Jefferson, which will be replaced by the retrofitted Dunbar by 2028. Gateway, as well as Bryan Hill. The middle school will be Gateway Middle. The high school will be Ashine. Zone four, Frable, Hodgen, Humboldt, Peabody, Woodward, and Lyon. Middle school would be Long and Carnahan. Segal would also service students pre-K through eight in that zone, with Roosevelt being the anchor high school. In zone five, we have Mason, Booter, Mann, Oak Hill, Werner, Malamfy, the middle school being Long and Bush, and the high school being anchored by Gateway. Our proposed portfolio school structure for our focus school pathways includes an early childhood pathway that would lead with elementary sticks P3 through second and Wilkinson P3 through second. Special education public separate would be Gateway-Michael kindergarten through eighth, Madison kindergarten through eighth, with the high school being Nottingham CJA. Visual and performing arts would include Shaw Visual Performance Arts, Carl Lane Visual Performing Arts, and Central Visual Performing Arts. Our advanced academics pathway would include Betty Wheeler, Mallinckrodt, the middle school being McKinley, and the high school being Collegiate School of Medicine and Bioscience, Metro High School, Central VPA, Advanced Academics, or Classical Academy. The title of the school is yet to be determined. And our last pathway would be career and technical education, with the high school being Clyde C. Miller Career Academy and Gateway High School, which is a hybrid. Important to note that McKinley High School will merge with Central Visual Performing Arts to create a visual performing arts and advanced academics focused school, per our proposal. So now I'm going to disaggregate this information further and provide some rationale behind the thinking, maybe a sneak peek into the minds of the individuals on the team, and hopefully clarify some of the questions that have been existing around why, which school, and how we came to those proposed feeder patterns. I also want to acknowledge that I'm going to do a lot of reading to you today, but I want to make sure I'm thorough, and also if there's anyone that has a question, that they have the opportunity to surface that question. So in Zone 1, our elementary schools, Adams had an evaluation score from the spreadsheet from the criteria that we spoke of earlier of 40 percent, school capacity of 364. Dewey, evaluation score of 66 percent, school capacity of 506. Laclede, evaluation score of 69 percent, school capacity of 338. Evaluation score of 66%, school capacity of 462. The middle schools in the zones, Compton-Drew, with the evaluation score of 85%, school capacity of 589. And the high school, Sodan, evaluation score of 67%, school capacity of 1,232. Repurposed schools or transitioning schools in that zone include Hamilton. The evaluation score is 58% with a school capacity of 442. In the Overture, evaluation score of 62%, school capacity of 560. It's important to note that Adams was selected over Hamilton due to Adams' lower FCI score. Further rationales explaining what will happen with those students in that school community. Hamilton, the transitioning school, has an evaluation score of 58%, Projected enrollment of 224, the APR landed at 15.7%. The receiving school would be Dewey, with an evaluation score of 66%, school capacity of 506, projected enrollment of 305, and an APR of 58.1. And I do believe that our superintendent has already given some background around what that means. For AESM, Lowell-Peture, evaluation score was 62%, Projected enrollment 239. The APR is 38.5. The receiving school is proposed to be Compton Drew with the evaluation score of 85 percent, school capacity of 589, projected enrollment of 411, and the APR of 43.4 percent. Zone 2. Herzog, evaluation score of 64%, school capacity of 494. Lexington, 65% with a school capacity of 450. Nance, evaluation of 78% with a school capacity of 380. Pomogia, evaluation score of 62%, school capacity of 378. The middle school, Yateman-Liddell, 71% evaluation score with a school capacity of 625. And the high school, Sumner, 79%, with a school capacity of 1,163. Our repurposed buildings in that zone are Ashland, Hickey, and Walbridge. Ashland with an evaluation score of 44%, Hickey evaluation score of 68%, Walbridge evaluation score of 61%. Lexington was selected over Hickey due to Hickey's lower school capacity. Important note, the potential build of Turner Branch Elementary and Turner Middle will replace two other buildings by 2030. Drilling down further with the repurposed schools, Ashlyn has an APR of 43.1%, and Lexington has an APR of 51.1%. The other metrics are there for your viewing. Hickey has an APR of 30.9%, and Lexington has an APR of 51.1%. So in this case, we have two schools transitioning to Lexington. And then for Walbridge, Walbridge has an APR of 47.1%, and Herzog has an APR of 57.9%. zone three our elementary schools were gateway with an evaluation score of 69 school capacity 660. jefferson evaluation score 61 school capacity 522 again jefferson will be retrofitted will be replaced by retrofitted dunbar By 2028, Bryan Hill has an evaluation score of 41%, school capacity of 300. The Middle School Gateway has an evaluation score of 75%, middle school capacity 645. And the High School of Ashton, evaluation score of 69%, school capacity 1,281. The repurposed for transitioning schools are Ames, Carver, Columbia, and Pratt & Henry. Ames evaluation score of 50%, Carver evaluation score of 31%, Columbia evaluation score of 57%, Patrick Henry evaluation score of 46%. Bryan Hill was selected over Columbia due to Bryan Hill's key location in the Northeast region of the city. So our transitioning schools for Ames, The APR is 44.8%. It's important to note that Ames is currently a magnet school. So the receiving school options that parents will be presented would be the Haight Neighborhood School or Shaw BPA. So they would be guaranteed a seat in Shaw BPA if they desire to attend. Carver has an APR of 25.5%. The Receiving School Gateway Elementary has an APR of 40.2%. Columbia has an APR of 30.6%. Bryan Hill has an APR of 42.6%. And Patrick Henry with an APR of 42.6%. Jefferson has an APR of 51.1%. Zone four. Our elementary schools are Frable, Hodgen, Humboldt, Lyon, Peabody, Woodward, and Segal service in Pre-K through 8. For Frable, the evaluation score was 67%, school capacity of 448. For Hodgen, it was evaluation score of 48%, school capacity 330. Humboldt, evaluation score of 37%, school capacity 374. Lion, an evaluation score of 60%, school capacity of 300. Peabody, an evaluation score of 44%, school capacity of 336. Woodward, evaluation score of 82%, school capacity of 459, and Segal, evaluation score of 57%, with a school capacity of 408. The middle schools in that zone are Carnahan and Long. Carnahan has an evaluation score of 76%, school capacity of 483. Long has an evaluation score of 76%, with a school capacity of 493. The high school is Roosevelt, the evaluation score is 79%, school capacity 1,710. The repurposed or transitioning schools in that zone are Merrimack, Monroe, and Shenandoah. Merrimack has an evaluation score of 31%, Monroe evaluation score of 52%, and Shenandoah evaluation score of 43%. Hodgson was selected over Monroe due to Hodgson's newer building. Humboldt and Peabody were selected due to upcoming housing developments near each of the schools.

Long Middle School will serve both zones four and five. So they'll be on my next slide as well.

In terms of the merging and transitioning schools, Merrimack, Monroe, and Shenandoah, Merrimack's APR was 40.3%. The receiving school, Frable, has an APR of 48.2%. Monroe has an APR of 42.6%. Frable, again, at 48.2%. So both Merrimack and Monroe will be transitioning as proposed to Frable. Shenandoah has an APR of 52.8%. And Hodgen has an APR of 64.7%. The high school in Zone 4 is McKinley High School. It has an APR of 76.3% and the Central Visual Performing Arts with an APR of 51%. And finally, Zone 5, our elementary schools are Booter, Mann, Mason, Malampe, Oak Hill, and Werner. Booter has an evaluation score of 72% with a school capacity of 416. Mann has an evaluation score of 48% with a school capacity of 322. Mason has an evaluation score of 72% with a school capacity of 459. Mulanfee, evaluation score of 71% with a school capacity of 560. Oak Hill, evaluation score of 54% with a school capacity of 345. Warner, evaluation score of 71%, school capacity of 414. Middle schools are Bush and Long. Bush has an evaluation score of 57%, school capacity of 405. Long has an evaluation score of 76%, school capacity of 493. And Gateway has an evaluation score of 63%, with a school capacity of 1,800. Zone 5 did not have any schools for repurposing or merging. As you can see from the map, this region of the city has the highest concentration of SLPS students. So in total, here's a list of the schools that we propose are merged beginning the 27-28 school year. It's important to note that this number has gone down from 22 to 14. Currently, 11 of the 14 are actual building closures with ongoing repurposing conversations taking place regularly. So in Zone 1, Hamilton will transition to the receiving school of Dewey. In Zone 2, Ashlyn will transition to the Receiving School of Lexington, as well as Hickey, transitioning to the Receiving School of Lexington. Walbridge will transition to the Receiving School of Herzog. In Zone 3, Ames will transition to the Receiving Neighborhood School or Shaw BPA. Carver will transition to Gateway Elementary. We'll transition to the neighborhood school. It's important here to note that these sites will stop. Classy-Miller as well as McKinley High School will stop enrolling ninth graders at the beginning of the 27-28 school year per our proposal.

Columbia. We'll transition to the Receiving School of Bryan Hill. Patrick Henry will transition to the Receiving School of Jefferson.

And in Zone 4, Lowcher will transition to Compton Drew, Merrimack to Frabel, Monroe to Frabel, Shenandoah to Hodgin, and McKinley High School to Central VPA. Now I'm going to transition back over to Chief Mitchell.

OK, there has been significant discussion about charter enrollment and its effect on Saint Louis public school enrollment. So what you see here is a map of our proposed schools to stay open, proposed closures, and charter schools in the Saint Louis region. Charter schools are absolutely part of the competitive landscape and St. Louis public schools must compete effectively for families. But this analysis also shows an important demographic reality. There are approximately 35,000 school age children living in the city of St. Louis. St. Louis public schools, charter schools, private schools, homeschooling, and other educational settings are all serving that same finite population. So our long-term strategy cannot simply be to maintain the same number of seats and assume that enrollment will return. We have to create schools that families actively choose, schools with strong academics, excellent programming, safe and modern facilities, extracurricular opportunities, and strong student supports. That is how Future Ready and our enrollment growth work connect. This does not mean that we accept enrollment loss as permanent. The goal is the opposite. Strengthen the quality and competitiveness of the Saint Louis Public Schools portfolio so that we can retain more of the families we currently serve and attract more Saint Louis families back to the district. We are now going to transition to the academic portion, unless there's any questions about this, of the presentation. So we'll turn it over to Dr. Henning.

Before we go there, can we stay here? Dr. Harvey, go ahead. Thank you. Thank you all. Just to break up some of the conversation, I'd love to stay on the building part. I'm curious, and thank you for the presentation and the methodology and the way that it's being kind of unpacked. When we go back to the districts compared earlier in the presentation, And the repurposing building approach. I'm curious how the other districts approach their disposition pipeline and kind of how their repurposed strategy control for blight. And how we're thinking like, do we learn anything from those other districts that allowed us to think about our current decision pipeline? Who's currently what buildings are currently ready to be disposed of quickly? conversations with neighborhood associations that are already experiencing blight and if we have committed partners to support on blight control. I'm particularly thinking about Cleveland and Atlanta on this more than I don't know the others as well. So I have a few questions and I'd love to just start there and hear us talk out what we've learned.

I was actually going to call up our research and evaluation team members. They're going to help answer some of the questions.

And while they're coming up, what we did learn from other districts and what we're also going to do here What we're going to do here is that we'll talk about a little bit later, go off for an RFQ to see what developments could potentially happen in the buildings and what businesses or organizations are prepared to come in. And so other specifically Cleveland speaking with that superintendent, they did reach out to the community to say, hey, what can you help us with in our buildings? And we're able to have that information well before they got to the end to say, OK, now we're transitioning. What should we do? They knew while they were going through the process. but the research and evaluation team. And when they come up, I just want to thank them. I know the board called us on to making sure we were not the only ones looking at this data. And I'll also talk about some other pieces that we have that people have spoke about or shared their input as well. But as soon as we reached out to the professionals about this, they were able to go in and to look at data. And that's why some of the points actually changed, because they provided us with more insight on how it should be managed.

So I will the Colin and Eliana did do a little more of the deep dive into those districts that we've listed. I will say it was not exhaustive. And so Hello.

So that's a great question. And actually, we didn't really come across very many schools that kind of discussed what the next steps for some of those buildings that they would be consolidating or closing. So that is, I think, a positive that we're doing, kind of discussing what could be done with the buildings that will become repurposed because of mergers of schools. But for right now, we didn't find any additional research, but it's a good question to continue to look into.

Thank you, while I have y'all. I'm curious if you spent time with districts or in your research distinguishing between like FCI and academic adequacy, because FCI is so weighted and I get why it's weighted in the way that it is. but it's a snapshot in time indicator. It is not a long, it's not a helpful long-term indicator without a building plan. And this entire second half of this document rests on an academic vision, but the weight does not currently, as I see it, control for the academic adequacy of each building with convergence to labs, needed spaces, all the things that require for high quality education. So I'm just curious to hear kind of like what else is in fci or is it literally just that one snapshot and then where is academic experience controlled for in the weighted analysis i have a question before we move on so um for the benefit of the audience that are our community members our neighborhood individuals

Let's just explain this a little bit further. We want to, Dr. Harvey, if you had to break that down into a simpler language, you want to know, and give me a specific question that the audience at a different level would understand.

Yeah, that's a great question. we want an academic experience that requires a lot of project-based instruction where children are able to get their hands dirty and we are going to preserve x building because x building can hold 500 kids its ability to hold 500 kids does not tell us anything new about the experience that child gets to have in that building it does not tell us whether or not they have age-appropriate labs it does not tell us whether they have increase in sensory experiences it tells us nothing of the fact that it holds 500 this is the quality of it when assessed today and this is much it'll cost to keep it preserved So I'm curious, buildings are more than their facility quality. Buildings are moral statements. And what I'm curious to learn is like, what's the moral and academic statement of the building that is bigger than its quality? Is that a little better?

That's a lot better. Thank you. Because our average community member needs to know what we're actually looking for in your response. Go ahead. So this was something

I here okay so this is something that came up when we were discussing with the team about which buildings to choose and what to consider when we're choosing those buildings so something that's very important especially when we looked at the differences between k through five buildings and k through eight buildings is having not only the capacity for that many students but also facilities for each of those students that are appropriate so multiple cafeterias we talked about but also those lab spaces you talked about of age-appropriate lab spaces and things like that. So that's something that's been in consideration. I don't have a solid answer to that, but I want you to know that that has been considered and is something that is continuously being looked up to.

Thank you, Dr. Burke.

And I'll also jump in. When the research and evaluation team presented to us, one of the things that came up in the research was when a school, let's say they have the same score, right, and what's the determining factor? And so the research that they found did support a school that is a higher performing school, like if we're going to do a merger, the research showed that if you merge into an already high performing school, whether it's academic high performing, if they have a strong school culture, they're able to retain staff and students, then we have higher rates of success. And so when Dr. Haywood was presenting that and talked about the APR score and that as a consideration for the merger, that is actually why we wanted to explicitly pull that out. I know that doesn't answer the question about labs and things like that, but that was a consideration in looking at it. Now we didn't put in qualitative method right into the actual weight, but that was a consideration as we looked at the buildings and the mergers in the zones.

Just to suggest to stress to Dr. Casey's push what what we are what I can walk away with is it was under consideration. It's in consideration, but it is not in the weighted score that shaped whether or not a building remains after you nodding like that's right. It was considered not weighted.

Not in the weighted school, but there are buildings, for instance, that we mentioned we kept over another building because it was a newer building and had the capacity to hold those spaces that had been asked. And that's one of the reasons for the future plan to be able to create schools that do that. A lot of our buildings are older buildings, and so we would have to go in and actually develop those spaces. So it wasn't in the weighted, but it was actually considered if they were able to hold certain spaces. OK.

It would stand to reason that the facilities department was actively involved in all of these discussions to be able to determine whether or not a building, you know, we always talk about whether or not schools can be retrofitted for residential housing, and in an old building, it's almost impossible sometimes to do that, but when we're looking at transferring students to another building so that we can provide, and it has a greater capacity to be able to provide the things students need for their education, labs, technology, space. I'm getting a nod that yes, you are actively involved in that conversation. And when it was time to pull back and say, no, that's not gonna work, you did that.

So that is correct. And as Dr. Barrett mentioned, To retrofit some of these older buildings, you sometimes pay more just trying to retrofit to put new labs, put some of the new spaces, the technology into these old buildings, these old classrooms. We've moved several labs and trying to renovate labs in the past. We have to think about some of the features and some of the whether it's ventilation, there's other factors that go into just trying to retrofit a space. So all of these were included, even as we did our research. Quite frankly, as part of that 2050 plan that Dr. Berry just mentioned, it includes the newer facilities so that we can accommodate these newer spaces so that we can meet the needs of these things, like we have the robotics program and some of the programs that we have up in our schools now. It's I mean, when you look at the cost, it's close in terms of what we would pay to renovate or retrofit some of these areas, as opposed to building a new facility. But in the overall big picture, in terms of maintenance and the long-term strategy, It's cheaper in the long run to build new facilities with those features to accommodate the 21st century learners, as we call it, with a newer facility.

And I'll hold my questions to my other colleagues. I want to name the reason I'm asking is because if you approach the deck, loosely, it will read as a capital strategy of facility strategy and an academic strategy and i'm i'm hungry for as we get closer to October, the Venn diagram where those three things overlap and we're having a full conversation. that's the only i'm trying to tease out is like I get the capital component that you name. Like facilities being at the table, Dr KC makes a lot of sense to me, but my question is actually an academic question, not a facilities question. So it's like where does, where do I see and zone in on like the academics team saying they can get what they need for the vision we have for a child 10 years out to be experienced. The facilities team says that we have the capital reserves or at least the right sync strategy to ensure the said building can be preserved. And then the capital overlay says there's enough recurring savings and savings. At some point, we will have to turn the corner to talk about all of these as one conversation. And I know that this is maybe not there yet, but that's what I'm chasing after is hearing where all of them land for a clear picture.

Thank you. Board Member Marston?

Got it. Thank you. Did the criteria used to evaluate the elementary and middle schools also apply to the high schools?

So at this time, we were not recommending any additional high schools other than the two high schools, just like when we were going to talk about gifted. We were saving any of those conversations for after we moved through this part of the process. So we did not, we worked backwards. We used the high schools as our starting point and what we wanted to do, and moving back from the high schools to how we worked to figure out what schools we would keep.

Okay. And I had a couple questions about feeder patterns. So Long is a middle school for both Roosevelt and Gateway in this proposal. So is the high school a Long student will be assigned to based on whether they live closer to Roosevelt or Gateway? That's easy. Just wanted to clarify. And then I'm trying to understand how Gateway STEM will operate as a hybrid school. So I'm trying to understand how a focus school can also have a neighborhood feeder pattern. Can you kind of talk about that?

I can jump in there yeah we're we're actually it functions right now as a hybrid school so what we're doing is we are pulling students from across the district high school students juniors and seniors and they are enrolling in the CTE programming at Gateway STEM high school while the students there are Gateway students, and they also have seats in those CTE programs as well. So it currently functions as a hybrid. The change would be that it would, rather than being the old term of magnet, it would be a neighborhood school.

I've got a few more, but I'll kick it over to somebody else.

I just have one question. Did we use any teachers' input on the capacities of these schools or anything?

So thank you. We did meet with Local 420. And so what we are going to do, we'll talk about that later too, have a task force. So at the end of last year, we started working with building principals to ask them, how do you evaluate what the capacity of your buildings could be? So there is a list that they provided. We did one or two schools to go around to see if the capacity numbers that we actually have are matching up to what, A, principals believe. and also what we thought could be utilized in that building. And so we are in the process of also working with the union and our teachers to have the committee to go around to every single building to confirm capacity numbers.

I think I have some concerns about the way that capacity was figured in and also I'm trying to understand first of all when you talk about Clyde C Miller being a neighborhood school would you please explain that a little bit more because I had some concerns I know that that we have a lot of our CTE programs there and it's been taught it is hey you can go there and you can learn a skill and But I was really hoping over the years that we could expand the youth bill component, which has disappeared, perhaps to our elementary, middle, and high schools. And I want to understand, what programs are we currently offering? Because it sounds like we're starting from scratch almost on here. What are we currently offering? It sounds like we're offering pie in the sky right now. But we have some really great programs. I'm really lost for words right now.

Dr. Haynes, feel free to jump in. But yes, the next portion is the academic portion. And we do lay out what programs we currently offer. So Clyse Miller would be our CTE school for the entire district. So right now, it is serving 9th through 12th graders. And so if you are a 9th or 12th grader, you go into Clyse and you go into the college exploration or the career field. We're recommending that every student high school student that has an interest would be able to spend a day as far as their pathway to go to Clyde C. Miller and return to their neighborhood school. So Clyde C. Miller would no longer be a neighborhood school, it would be our CTE center for the district.

Right, and so that's another concern for me is that that would be the primary because we have students, particularly in North St. Louis and South St. Louis as well, that need to have those skill sets before they get out of high school, starting at the middle school level. and I remember shaking so many hands during those 11 graduations that I attended and hearing those students talk about where they were gonna go to school, they were gonna go to Rankin, and I could just see it in their eyes. I was just praying and hoping that they would make it, It seems that our students need to be job ready when they leave high school, regardless to whether or not they can go to Clive C. Miller, Vashon, Roosevelt, or what have you, because the way the economy is right now, our students in our student life right now, they're struggling. A lot of families are in serious need. I'm really hoping that you'll also add financial literacy, from kg through 12th grade because uh to teach our students about money because so many of our families are really hurting so when you start doing this reconfiguration and you talk about locating schools in areas where you get the biggest bang for the buck, like in South St. Louis, I saw a lot of blue, but in North St. Louis, there's hardly anything. I drive there daily because it's my neighborhood, and there won't be anything there. I'm trying to understand what are we going to get over there.

Yes ma'am when we said that we share the same sentiments and so that's why we are following the Urban Planning Committee and we do have I saw Mr. Roper here and so we too are building our proposals for the new schools they were mainly in the areas of redevelopment and as well as we will share a little bit later how we are going to start younger going to those CTE programs and have more offerings for the entire district so we agree what you're saying.

I just hope the youth bill will come back because we did have an agreement a few years back and it was no follow through, but the starting at the elementary school level where we're introducing our young people to the construction trades and CTE.

Thank you. And then Harvey.

have a lot of little questions that I won't ask. But my big question is, have we interpreted these changes according to the student transportation issue? Because some of the schools have been magnet schools. Some of them just have students from all over the city coming to them. And so it's not just like everybody that goes to Ames well no that one was easy because I said you could go to your neighborhood school but just the idea that we know that there's students change schools every semester some of them and that we are busing kids from their neighborhood to a different neighborhood school and What are we gonna do about that? Did we think about that? Cause I don't wanna keep sending kids out of their neighborhoods.

Yeah, thank you. And that's one of the reasons that we are proposing to go back to the neighborhood school model. When we were able to look at the heat map of where children are attending schools, it was all over the city of St. Louis. And that is one of the ways that we're talking about how we're gonna save on transportation costs. And so when the state does a formula, they take in the efficiency, and that's part of the formula. Right now our efficiency is not very efficient, and so going back to the neighborhood model will help in hopefully getting more reimbursements for transportation, but also making sure that students are able to go to their neighborhood schools and have a school inside their neighborhood that they would want to attend.

Thank you. I'm curious on the methodology. When APR is noted in the deck, was there a floor score that we were using around like what we would deem as being substantively strong. No. That's fine.

No, we first looked at all of our schools to see have their APR points increased from 2021 to now. And then as we were looking at merging, we were looking to see if students were going to be moving from a school into one that had a higher APR percentage than the one they were coming from. But we did not establish a base, so to speak.

Got it. Um, and every, and it seems like I did a quick scan, so forgive me, but it seems like every most students move into a stronger ish APR except for the McKinley CVPA one. That's accurate.

Yes, that is accurate, but McKinley would also have access to CSMB, and so we are able to speak with the principals, and once we are able to get a plan approved, working on how the complex right there with CSMB, McKinley, and CVPA would be able to utilize the IB and AP courses that both, that were offered at McKinley, CVPA, and CSMB.

Got it, and then my last question for this section, and it's an academic question, but I'm using a facility hold for it, which is like, based upon the buildings where students would be transitioning, what's the average or ideal student to teacher ratio that can be pulled off in the buildings where students are transitioning, and then is that the ideal that we're aiming for years from now?

Yeah, I'm gonna let, I don't know if Beth Davey, I don't see her, is she here? Oh, she's in the back. I'm gonna call Beth Davey up and so there are some that really want the standard to be about 17 students. That is not ideal. Originally we started at 24 students and we understand that is to some that may seem quite high and so we are now, we have done about three different proposals to see how we can meet in the middle and looking to see what does that look like as far as teacher ratio. So I'm gonna let Beth jump in here.

Sure, so for our listening audience, the State Department of Education releases every year a desirable standard and a maximum standard when they're looking at class sizes. So an SLP s our standard whenever we do staffing allocations is always far below that maximum, for example, that maximum says you can have 43rd graders in a room. I would not personally recommend that, but what we do know is that the desirable standard that low numbers that would indicate for pre kindergarteners having up to 20 students in a class with an aid. The desirable standard with desi would recommend for kindergarten through second grade having 17 students in a class. And I really hope i'm not wrong on this, but third through fourth grade would recommend 20 with fifth grade enough going 22 students per class. The current formula that we are experimenting with because, again anytime we talk about future ready, I know we are also doing this in the context. of our budget, but as we're considering all those factors, our goal at this time is to ensure the maximum class size for third through fifth grade at 24, potentially even lower, Dr. Berry, and the maximum class size for K through two at 22, which I should mention is lower than our current standard in SLPS.

Thank you, Beth. That's absolutely correct. Right now our standard is 24.

I have one question about the pupil-teacher ratio. Do we monitor that so that at the beginning of the school year or up to the middle of October, that if we are pretty close to, so for example, I think you said 17 to 1 in some of your first and second grade classes, right?

So the 17 to 1 is the state recommendation. Ours would operate our current formula says 24 to 1. As we're looking at future ready we'd like to propose moving that to 22. 22.

We have 23 in a class. Then what do you do.

Well that is usually at the discretion of our superintendent as you look line by line through each school based on some schools capacities needs and otherwise supports within a building. A 23 student first grade class may be very doable. But other buildings, based on the individualized need of students in that classroom, teacher capacity, et cetera, it may be time to add another allocation. So that is where that, right on the number, right on that line, is where that professional judgment comes in hand.

And when... We have witnessed, for example, in a video presentation, and it was the teacher, I'll just lay it out, it was the teacher of the year presentation, and some of the class sizes are extremely small. How do we avoid having those small classes of at least 10 students, and under in some cases,

Yeah so from my observation working with staff allocation and ratios here in the district for a few years the schools where we typically see the student to teacher ratio at the 10 or under which as a teacher can be wonderful for individualized instruction but we know that for our effectiveness as a district and our efficiency it is not necessarily the ideal goal. That is particularly at our schools that have one class per grade level. So we do have several schools in the district pre-future ready that have under 150 students that oftentimes have one class per grade level. If there are 11 students in third grade, we know that instructionally it can be an opportunity to combine them with another grade level, but we're seeking to protect the academic integrity by still allowing them to be in their own grade level classes.

I think it's important to know that while we're going through all of these changes, that's one of the things that we will be monitoring. Yes. And that it's important to, because it's important to our budget, our largest portion of our budget comes from the teacher salaries. And if we are spreading ourselves really thin, then we're, you know, paying teachers to be in a class with minimal number of students. But on the student side of that, peers learn from each other, and it is beneficial to have more students in a classroom. I certainly do not ever expect to have that capacity, that higher number that you have. But students do learn, and a combination class has never really harmed anyone. If it's done right and you You and I both know that that we combine the students that are capable of learning at a higher level with the grade above so.

Absolutely. I think there's opportunities for that everywhere. I think part of our goal with Future Ready is to make sure that there are multiple classes per grade level to as you mentioned continue that collaboration between teachers but also to really build a sustainable school culture where we can offer additional related arts additional services and opportunities etc. Thank you.

Dr. Berry? No, just one. I think you cleared it all up, so thank you.

One question, one question. Do we, with teachers, do we usually, per child, do we usually follow the contract, the union contract with the school teacher-school ratio, teacher-student ratio?

Yeah, go ahead. And President Cummings, if you're watching, we always follow it, yes. Because the union agreement supersedes all other board policy.

Yes, it does.

Thank you.

If it's okay, okay, I'm sorry.

I had three more questions and a couple comments. Trying to make them quick. There'd been some talk about having a new gifted center where students could go no matter which school they attend once a week. to do project-based learning. I was wondering if that's still under consideration.

Yeah, so that's in the next portion of our PowerPoint as well. But no, we won't answer that question right now. And so I know we were asked to do a few considerations. And so we had looked at various options. What we are landing on as far as our proposal is to keep the gifted schools as they are, but providing additional supports for our neighborhood schools and students identified as gifted. And we will certainly share that when the PowerPoint comes back up.

Great. And what are the projected cost savings with this proposal?

All right. And that was towards the end. But with this, Beth Davey just left me. I had her also running some numbers regarding staffing. And so I think originally when we had these 17 students, we were looking at about a $16 million savings in staffing. While we know there has been some ask from our local labor unions as well as just the we've been talking about what that looks like. And I know parents have talked about smaller class sizes. Again, we're looking at the 22. So most recently, potential cost savings for staffing, we're looking around 13.6 million. That's a rough estimate, I think she told me earlier. And then with transportation, seeing that we have heard from the community with the original proposal, we're looking about saving about 15 to 18 million. Now we are now looking at what the state requires, a two mile radius. We are looking at a one mile radius for neighborhood schools for transportation, and then looking at a two mile radius for our focus schools. Originally we said four miles, we heard from parents, and so we're reconsidering and looking at a two mile radius now. So with those new reconfigurations, potentially a $10 million savings from transportation. With that, again, the efficiency, you get more money back from the state based off of the efficiency formula. So we are hoping with the new proposal, we will now be more efficient and could potentially get more money back regarding our transportation that can go back into the budget. So with that, I know you're probably adding those numbers. We're looking at about twenty three point six million dollars. And I know you're probably saying a forty one million dollar deficit. We're having a budget meeting tomorrow. We did receive more revenue than we expected, which is great. And so Chief Dobell, please let me know if I say these numbers wrong. We were projected about a $41 million deficit. So last year we said we were gonna spend about 32 million over what we received. So about 350 million we had revenue. We were spending about 366 million. With that and the additional revenues we received, we were looking about potentially having about $20 million we may come under for this year of spending. So not $32 million, $20 million. It's roughly $12 million less than we proposed. And so with the $41 million, if that $12 million comes off, we're looking about potentially being $29 million over what the revenue we received. So with that, the $29 million, and they have the 23 proposed what it will save us with transportation and staffing, we're looking at about $6 million that we potentially will be over for the following year, and that we could seriously balance our budget within two years.

Thank you. And one of the guardrails is that we won't exempt the central office from the efficiency conversation. What changes are proposed for the central office?

Yeah, thank you. We've already started. So with this year, we are feeling our vacancies at the school sites at 100%, meaning if there is a teacher or support staff that leaves us, we need to fill it 100%. Here in central office already, it's at 50%. So if there are staff members that are leaving us, and that is not a critical position to where someone else is not able to absorb those duties without having to exert themselves more than what they're doing, we are not filling those vacancies. So we are collapsing positions. And so we will make sure that we can provide a overview of what that looks like, but we have not waited till the 26, 27 year. We're already starting here in central office. And so there will be about 50% cuts just when we have positions that are no longer being filled with those vacancies.

And two comments. I'm glad to see that the mergers are taking into consideration the APRs of the receiving schools. I think that's important. And I'm also happy to see Bryan Hill remaining open due to its location in the College Hill neighborhood, which is in the northeast area of the city, which from previous iterations, there is a little bit of a void or a gap in that area. So it's good to see that filled. Thank you.

Yes sir, thank you Vice President Marston, that is true. We added about six schools back to the list because of that very thing. We have a large city to make sure we're servicing our students.

I have a comment too. Thank you for what we're doing with our gifted program and I really appreciate it.

Yes ma'am, thank you.

Oh Dr. Berry and the leadership team, one of the things that I've noticed over the many years and the experiences that I've had working with gifted programs both teaching it at the university level and then running it as a central office administrator. The identification of students that are potentially gifted or have a larger intelligent quotient, because that's what we use, our IQs, and the capacity to learn. Really comes from the teachers perspective and the teachers perception of what the child is capable of doing so, if we could. hear some of our professional development and what we do with our teachers to be able to identify students that have unique needs outside of those students with disabilities, you know disability, we can see but gifted issue can't see. so one of the things that i'm requesting as a board member is that you go at about the additional resources that we're going to provide for other students with an open mind to approach teachers and get them to be able to understand how a child that is exceptional in a different area learns so that they can identify them the child hanging from the rafter sometimes is really the one that's most gifted so Thank you.

Yes, ma'am. That's a great segue. Unless remember, Hubbard had something for us.

I remembered something. Sorry. In the past, we've had kind of the Naheed Chapman pathway, which you merge off of. But do we have something like that set up? And this, is it going to be in the next slides? Because then I don't need an answer.

No, that's OK. No, we can share now. I don't know if it's in the next slide, so thank you. We were talking about Segal, that pre-K through 8 school. What we did find is that our families who are new to the country, they prefer to have their students located in one building. And so that's why we picked the Segal location because most of our families are living in that area. And so they would be able to go to the Segal building for pre-K through eight. We're still having the options that they would like to go to another school and then having the Roosevelt location. Is that correct, Dr. Dinong?

Okay.

Thank you. You're more than welcome.

There are no questions. We will jump into academics and hopefully answer some of those questions you had about what we're doing earlier.

Okay. Everybody take a deep breath. Thank you all first board members, I just want to thank you all for just staying in this work it's hard work. It is difficult, there is nothing easy about this and I just wanna thank you all for just staying engaged and focused and all the work you're putting in on this.

I'd also like to request a taller microphone, Dr. Haywood and I, so okay.

So let's get going. We can jump back into the slide deck here. So future ready learning, academics, and there we go. So we started, first by saying to your point board member Jones we started by saying let's start with post-secondary let's look at where we want our kids when they leave high school how do they get into a two-year college a four-year college a training program how do they graduate with an IRC how do we move them into something that is going to lead to post-secondary success So that was the framework that we started with. And what we know is when you work back from there, yes, you have to have the programming at the high school, but you also have to have it at the middle school. it has to align and then you have to have it at the elementary school and you actually have to go all the way back to pre-k so we want our our young folks our pre-k students to have those experience and even all the way down to the career the cradle sorry i'm getting distracted by the okay so Let me go ahead and read through our theory of action if St Louis public schools implements a future ready plan, then the student learning experiences can be transformed by designing rigorous dynamic. And engaging opportunities that connect to learning to students interests aspirations and the world beyond school. So that students will engage more deeply in their learning develop greater agency and purpose. and build and apply the knowledge, skills, and experiences reflected in the portrait of a graduate as they explore meaningful pathways for their future. So this theory of action really laid the groundwork for our academic framework that we're gonna present to you. So what is the framework? St. Louis Public Schools, college and career academies. So what you see up here are we're calling these banners, not to be confused with later. You're going to see something that looks similar, but those are badges. And Dr. Dino will explain those when she gets into the nuts and bolts of this. But these banners basically lay out a framework for our entire district. So pre-K all the way through high school, this is the framework that our students are going to experience. Is the microphone off? Oh, okay, keep going. Okay, so this is the experience that our students will get. They will start at elementary school. They will be able to have exposure to all of these different pathways, all of these different academies. it will get more focused and more experiences. And I know I'm not using all the right terminology. I'm going to leave that for Dr. Dino. And then once they get to high school, that's where it feeds into some of our programming, like the CTE, the AP, the IB, those programs. So it's not going to be disconnected. So to your point, Board Member Jones, having a very intentional focus to our academic programming from the earliest age so our students are able to look as a pre-care and say what does it mean to be a drone pilot what does it mean to be a nurse what does it mean to be a a sheet metal worker right those are things that our students need to be able to see at an early age and grow into those experiences this is the framework that we are we are presenting to you OK, so we also listened. One of our board members pointed out to us, we talk about our portrait of a graduate, but how does it tie in? And one of the things that we recognized quickly is that college and career ready really is the umbrella. So what we've done is we've pulled that out as one of the seven competencies. And we have said, that is our umbrella. All of our students will be college and or career ready. Please note those are not mutually exclusive. OK. And I know that's that's kind of the old way of thinking about academics. We're moving away from that. So all of these competencies now feed into that. And then that leads into our academic programing. We looked at the Missouri approved career cluster framework. This is what we build our programming for, for our CTE programs around. And we basically say, what are the careers that our students are going to, or that our region is going to need from our students once they graduate or once they go to a two-year or four-year college or some other training program. And so this cluster gets kind of defined and redefined every year by things like the state of the workforce and some of those data points. So we know we are preparing our students for not the careers that exist now, but the careers that are gonna exist when they graduate from high school and college and beyond. So one of the key pieces of this is we plan to implement all of our students taking an assessment. This is basically a career self-personality assessment. It's called the RIASEC, and it ties all of our students to their interests in different careers and pathways that they're interested in. So our students, even our babies, right? The pre-Kers, maybe we use pictures and that type of stuff. We have students start to identify what are my strengths? Am I a doer? Am I a thinker? Am I a creator? What are some things that I'm really good at? And what careers are associated with those characteristics. Now, these are not static. These things change, right? Because when I was in second grade, I wanted to play basketball for the Detroit Pistons. Turns out they didn't want me. So my interests and my characteristics and what I thought I was going to be changed over time. And so what this model allows us to do is to let students learn what they want to be, but also learn what they don't want to be. That's a really important lesson. I would venture a guess that most of you, the job you have is not the very first job you ever had in life. It probably is not. You probably had a different job, and then you moved into something else because you said, I don't want to stand on a ladder and paint houses. That was my journey. That was my realization. During the summer in St. Louis, I said, uh-uh, I'm going to a four-year college because it's hot out here. And so part of what we do is we learn as we go along, and that's what this model does. So this is part of what we want to implement is this RIASEC model and to build a lot of our programming and experiences around that. OK. And at this point, I'm going to pass things off to our chief of schools, Dr. Dino.

Thank you, Dr. Henning. And I'm much shorter, so I need to move the microphone down. So as you heard Dr. Henning say, we need to think about what our student experience looks like from pre-K all the way through 12th grade. We want students to have support and support in their interests. So we think about it in kind of three buckets. In the elementary, we're going to think about exploring things. In the middle school, we're going to think about experiencing things. And in the high school, we're going to think about engagement. And so think of those as the student trajectory. It is important that all learning experience support interest and choice within a framework of high quality and rigorous core instruction. We need all students to be reading on grade level, meeting and exceeding state standards, And within that, being able to explore, what are things I like to do? What are things that might be of interest to me? We will be introducing RIASEC career exploration through our School Links platform, which we already use 612. We can bring that all the way K through 12. So we're talking about ways to have a coherent experience for students and families, because families have access to school links too. And right now, we have almost 80% of our sixth or 12th grade families who are actually going on school links and seeing what their kids are doing. We can do that also down to the elementary school. We're not going to forget either about the student family supports, because those things are really important in undergirding what happens in our schools, how we can provide community resources to families. As Dr. Henning shared, we will be talking about some badges. Through our Portrait of a Graduate, in our current curriculum frameworks that we share with teachers, We point out exactly where the Portsmouth Graduate connects. What we will provide for students is the opportunity for them to show us and demonstrate how they're learning and growing throughout elementary school. They can earn Explorer badges. They can show they are a change agent through school or community actions or activities. Being a communicator, doing college and career interest presentations. We saw some really great college and career interest presentations for RISEC when we did a visit to a school in San Diego. That's something that we could bring and incorporate here. how are we collaborators what does project-based learning look like all of our schools host stem fairs every single year how are we helping students see that that makes them good collaborators good critical thinkers communicators etc as students move into middle school while we continue the core of a high quality instructional experiences they are further developing their career knowledge we're introducing computer science Digital citizenship. At the end of eighth grade, every student has to complete their ICAP anyways. We know that if we can get them excited about the things that they're doing in school, and we can connect to them with rigorous and relevant experiences, when they choose that high school, they're gonna be able to choose one that's a best fit for them. We've been talking a lot about how we're moving towards a neighborhood model and it is important that all of our neighborhood schools provide a breadth and depth of experiences for students because when they do choose their high school and ultimately what their pathway will be we want them to have a lot of options to begin with so they know just all of the things that are out there for them in middle school they can continue to earn portion of graduate badges this time they're experience badges what are the experiences they're having and how are they showing and showcasing their attributes as portrait of a graduate and finally they'll be choosing a high school and ultimately choosing a banner which academy is going to be the one that is going to help set them up for the future that they choose Regardless of that academy choice, all students will continue to have strong, connected academics. In high school, they're going to get to participate in specialized coursework. It was key also for them and students to build meaningful partnerships and relationships within and across our community, whether that is through internship experiences, whether that's through industry exposure, work-based learning. ultimately we want students to leave high school as bernard jones says career ready they can earn those industry recognized credentials they can get credits through dual enrollment again this is about students having options and choice in our district having been set up for them from the start to provide them with the foundational skills necessary so that they can accelerate all of their learning At the end of high school, we know that students participate in volunteer and community service. They earn those industry-recognized credentials, participate in dual credit. We want every senior to be able to participate in an internship. That's every last one of them. We know that they are taking all sorts of assessments. They take end-of-course exams. They take the ACCUPLACER. Students in AP classes take AP tests. Students in IB classes take the IB test. How are we going to celebrate each of those milestones along the way? Because again, the goal is for all students to set themselves up for the future that they choose and have the skills and strengths necessary. This particular slide, you can see all of the academies in which CTE or other pathways are mapped to them.

I want to note a couple of things.

Unless they're otherwise noted, the pathways are available to students in all schools. And yes, we will be providing transportation to students who need to go to their CTE class. If it's at a school that's not their neighborhood school. I also want to note, students may access programming from multiple academies. You will see on here that we have the Advanced Academics Academy, Early College Academy, Dual Credit. Those are also available to students who are taking business management as a pathway or in the STEM Academy. while students choose an academy and that's the major banner under which they will be learning in high school it is not we are not limiting their choice and saying sorry you made a choice at 14 you don't get to change that or add to it it is important to us all throughout the way that students and families have choices because as their interests change we want to make sure that we still have something that works for them i'm going to switch past that was really fast i know we've been sitting here a long time into our gifted education programming. As Dr. Berry shared, we will maintain Betty Wheeler and Mallinckrodt and McKinley as our gifted schools. We will also continue to have our gifted itinerant teachers who are already assigned all over the district for gifted students who choose to stay in their home schools now, and they will receive pullout. What we will be beginning to do in 27-28 is providing instructional extension opportunities for some of our students who may not have met the gifted criteria but have met other thresholds or show particular interests at their schools. Also, during the 27-28 school year, we'll be doing a review of our gifted program structures for implementation in 28-29. That might include things like clustered classroom assignments in schools. It might include various project-based learning, tiered supports from gifted specialists across the schools, or even changes to our instructional delivery. All of that won't be done in isolation. We will have families and staff who will be key members of our review team. Thank you.

I refuse to adjust the microphone. I would just tell them to adjust it. So I will be before you about the shortest amount of time tonight. We really just have one slide to share with you but we thought it was critically important to mention. We recognize we've been having lots of conversations about capital this and financial this and academic things like that. We also want to make sure that it's not lost on us that there is gonna be a lot of social and emotional impact that's gonna happen from these consolidations. So we wanted to make sure that the public was aware that we are keenly aware of those things and we already have resources and strategies in place to make sure we're addressing those with our constituents so not just our students we do have people in place we have partnerships in place we have our social workers and although the graphic that you see says social work just know that we are intimately working and collaborating with our counseling staff although they are in the academics department we collaborate often so those trainings that they go to around all the trauma-informed and all of those things, they're participating in those together. So they are aware, they're ready, they stand ready, they're receiving training and things like that about how to have those conversations. Sometimes we don't necessarily realize that when we have students that we deal with on a regular basis, some of our students who are in transition Some of our students, that's been the only school they've ever known. Some of our teachers, that's been the only school they've ever taught at. So those things are going to bring some feelings that's going to surface to some of those individuals that they may need to talk through, they may need to work with somebody, they need to better understand. And so we're just trying to help them understand the process in a better picture about how it's going to make just a better district for all of our students at the end of the process. We know that sometimes a transition through the process may need a little more support. Additionally for our staff, it's not just our students who are gonna feel the impact or who are feeling the impact and voicing their opinions about the impact. We understand that our staffs are also having some feelings, some residual feelings about, again, the fact that they've been tied to some of these locations for a long time. They've seen these locations in their neighborhoods and so it's important for us to recognize those things as well so you'll hear us talk about more from the student support services lens about how we're planning to address all of those things the resources that we're providing when you saw dr dino's slides and every slide from elementary to early childhood to middle school she talked about those family student supports and the student support services department stands ready with all of those academic departments everything from culture and climate to our nurses and health services, to our social work, counseling, recruitment, all the things that fall into having a well-resourced district, we'll be ready and prepared for our constituents. Thank you.

Thank you, Dr. Smith. Thank you, Dr. Dino. Oh, I'm sorry.

I'm turning it back over to Dr. . She's going to give us some next steps and some additional information.

Thank you. and then just finally for those of us that may have seen the powerpoint just the next steps we're going to talk about again our transportation analysis and how what that's going to cost additional staffing analysis and then on-site support providing that transition teams and so what we did learn from other school districts that did this work that when they had transition teams that went around to each individual school it was comprised of community member teachers and also staff to work with the school on how and what transition looked like they were more successful so we will have transition teams once the plan is approved and then budget projections we know ideally we would like to do five-year budget projections and so it is our hope that we would do budget projections once we get closer to figure out how much we actually are going to spend and then having focus groups with individual stakeholders I mentioned the RFQ process with developers and a communications and marketing plan because while we are talking about what we are doing with our schools how amazing our schools are. We want to bring families back home, and so it would be a dual approach about enrollment and coming back to St. Louis public schools. So thank you, and that concludes our presentation.

I have one question, if you don't mind. And this would be for Dr. Henney. Back to the academics. On the CTE aspect, we do a very good job of getting our kids prepared for college. Now, when you prepare them in the CT class, OK, so to speak, we can teach them how to miter a piece of wood. But how are we going to transition from cutting that miter wood when you become a senior into getting into the trade? Because that's a totally different avenue. So we must find a way that, yeah, we can maybe have a class where they can learn how to wire a board. But how are we going to help them get into local one? The high school counselor is going to be, as a district, we need to get in contact with all the local unions. Because if we can show our kids how to do it, but if we can't navigate them through to get to that union, then we're helping them but not really helping them. And that's more of an informational purpose, I guess, so we can figure out a way to get the kids who take those CTE classes, who want to be a carpenter, electrician, sheet metal worker. So we have to get a relationship with those unions so it's easier for them to navigate when they graduate.

Yeah, absolutely. Thank you for that. As you know, it has been hard historically to do that. And for a number of reasons. It's very expensive, some of those programs, to have those facilities in our one of the other issues has been historically they they just don't have not wanted students coming straight out of high school that's changing now and so what is happening now is the unions are they are saying we will take graduates and we want them to start working right away and we'll train them on the job we'll do apprenticeship programs we will we'll pay them and have them work. And absolutely, I think that is something we're navigating, looking at how do we prepare our students to be successful partnerships are key so um you know we we do have some um some increase in those areas we have a partner right now that is working with us around like data analysis and it's not one of the more traditional unions but you know it's kind of connected with some of the sheet metal and they are doing just that building back those programming all the way to middle school So our students, you can't just start them junior year and say, okay, we're going to get you ready to go out into the field. Now that's, somebody's going to hurt themselves doing that. We need to start early on and give those kids experiences so they are prepared when they graduate. So I thank you for that.

And even like ranking, if we can, just like our kids get scholarships to colleges, if there's a way we can find a way they get a scholarship to ranking, you know, because, I mean, Sometimes you do just have to go to school, and I understand that. So we just got to give our kids every opportunity possible. I'm sorry.

Thank you, Dr. James.

Yes, sir.

Can I piggyback off of him? I think it's important in all these academies, which being from the South, that's not a good word to me, but that's OK. When we do leadership, entrepreneurship, and business, and or maybe human and public services, I feel strongly that we, while we're training leaders, we also need to be providing students with examples of what being a worker looks like, how you can organize your workplace. and those sorts of things so that they can, not everybody wants to run a business, but they do need to be able to argue for better working conditions. And so I don't know where that fits in, but I feel very strongly that that needs to be part of what we're doing because that's one of the things that makes a strong workforce in a strong city.

Yeah, no, absolutely. Excellent point. It fits in. And we cannot leave it to chance. We actually need to be strategic and intentional about this. And that's what this plan is, is building out a framework so we can say, to Dr. Dino's point, we're going to have students who have digital portfolios. We're going to have students who every single critical year, where they're moving from fifth grade to sixth grade, they're graduating with a portfolio in some kind. So we're already recognizing those things early

but again I think that intentionality is critical thank you okay real quick there are two things I remember taking a trip with the school district in the Union to Chicago and we went to visit a community school and what was exciting when we went on this trip was that they had all type of informational brochures and all kind of displays in the hallway that were very encouraging that talked about drone programs and talked about how to be an entrepreneur that kind of thing and I've been to some of our schools as well even the Gateway High School and you can see the enthusiasm in the hallway but if a student is going to school every day and the hallways are blank and they don't see those, then there they are. They don't understand the opportunities that they could have. And the second thing that's concerning is we talk about career training and that kind of thing, but entrepreneurship is so important. And I'll be quick about this. I remember my family gifted me a trip to Thailand. It was very interesting. The interesting thing was the little children that were creating things right there on the street. They were making belts. These were little children. They don't have food stamps. They don't have any of that. So they had to make their money off of their own basic skills right there on the street. They were making little things out of twigs, which were very beautiful and sellable. They were making all type of books and that kind of stuff. But the thing about it is they were becoming self-reliant early. And I feel like a lot of our students, what bothered me when I was watching students graduate, is a lot of them were not going to be able to be self-reliant. Because the community that we live in now, people don't really care. I'm just being real about it. A lot of people are suffering. We have thousands of people who are homeless and don't have anywhere to go right this very evening. And thousands of families that don't have anywhere to go. I feel like we need to stop this thing about just saying, OK, when you graduate, you can do this and that. Some of our students need to come out. They could be tailors. They could make shoes. They could do all kinds of things before they graduate. So I'm hoping that entrepreneurship really will be one of our major goals for our students to give them opportunity to be authors, like our young lady down here. She has a very, Miss Smith. She has a wonderful book collection. And many of our students can write their own books. So that's just an example. Entrepreneurship should be one of our major focuses. Thank you. Thank you, Member Jones.

Member Harvey?

Sure. I'm going to hand out my questions and then deal with them as you approve. I really appreciate the theory of action as a frame, and I think it helps to set the right sail for the academic future. Where I have a question, though, is about the lack of measurability of it as a theory of action, and that is a base standard for them. Because the vision that it sets is, quote unquote, engage more deeply, quote unquote, develop greater agency, quote unquote, purpose. None of the three which are measurable. And so as a theory of action, as a board member, I guess what I would love to know before we crystallize the next version of this deck is what two to three indicators the board is going to be able to see and track in the theory know that it's workable. And not the longitudinal stuff, graduation rates, job placement, but what are we keeping our eye on for such an aspirational paragraph? That's kind of my first. My second is I have a very complicated relationship with career academies. I want to name that up front. I honor CTE models fundamentally, but this banner badge framing is really doing something Because what I've not seen yet is the safety mechanism where we don't resort children by race and economic exposure. Holland's model of RIASEC used white middle class children who had high exposure to define quote unquote interest. And interest is like coded language for the things I've been exposed to to know if I'm interested in it. We aren't controlling for that. So I have a wrestling with, like, I'm five years old with limited social exposure by economics, and then you want me to figure out my interests, even if it's by pictures. But what we know from all the research is that, like with literacy, if a child has never seen a mountain, they will wrestle with the passage about a mountain, because they've not been exposed to said thing. And so where I'm struggling a bit and would love some unpacking in the future, right now, is the fail-safe for not using newer brandable language for another resorting of children. And that's a deep fear of mine. And I've seen districts and colleagues fall into, cord and a badge and this for the thing that just ultimately looks the same the next May. A bunch of children who have economic exposure have all these badges and cords and things, and then there are children who don't. And so I get this, but I read this as a destination. I do not read this as a map of how it gets pulled off of equity. That's where I'm struggling. And then my last piece I offer is the gifted education program Because it feels like it creates this waiting room thing over here. And what I don't see is the deeper critical work of how are we just rewriting the rules of screening, identifying the actual instruction itself. Like, there was a celebration of sorts for keeping it. I do not share that celebration at all. I find this to be, yeah, I find this to be in pretty language for, and these kids who did not meet our screening thing will get this thing over here in the waiting room until we can figure out, do you meet this thing over here? And I think that's a really poor celebration for a 78% Black and the percentage of the students who get access to gifted programming don't look like that 78 and so for us to create this like lesser thing that we are showing it's like proposed programming because parents have been loud about it i just find deeply problematic and i think it's playing it And we gave into that. That's why I want to name that the current programming being kept is giving it to people who have time and space. And it ignores justice and equity. And as a black-bodied educator, I have deep issues with it. Thank you.

Thank you. Now, more member Hubbard, give us a second. Any others? I do want to . I do want to, since I was one that did celebrate, and I do respect everyone's opinion. Thank you, Dr. Harvey. But having worked in a district that was 98% African-American and starting a gifted program, I knew how valuable it was to be able to identify students that were at a higher level than the average student in the classroom to be able to meet their needs. So I'm going to turn the microphone over to Board Member Hubbard, and then the superintendent. Thank you.

I was just going to say, I strongly agree with Dr. Harvey, except for the black-bodied part. He said everything better than I could. But a 98% black district that works out a gifted program is not the same as what's happened here, which, like the history of it, is connected to the desegregation agreement. the way that you can, we don't have teachers identifying children. We have parents preparing three and a half year olds to take tests. And that, I know we've done a lot of work, Ms. Mitchell, I hope it's still happening, to make that process less, biased, but still, many tests are, like you said, based on white middle class people. They're not made for children of different cultures. I don't want every student to get the education that they need, but I fear that many of the gifted parents have expressed to me in emails that they have the capacity and the willingness to go elsewhere. The rest of our students may not have that option, and they deserve everything that children at gifted schools receive. And, I mean, from my personal experience, this is N equals one, not generalizable, my children who, they all went to their neighborhood elementary school as gifted students. We were asked when they first got tested, why don't you go down there? And I was like, that's 20 minutes away. I'm not doing that. We're not a morning family. But it meant more to me to have my students at a place that there was a whole lot of love and they got to be together. And they transitioned fine into get to middle school except for the fact that they didn't know anybody because all the other kids came from the same two schools um so i added on something but no i appreciate that thank you thank you

okay I know you asked for a few of these later but I would bring your wrist if I didn't answer some of these so one I we did not give in gifted schools was not on our original proposal because it's an overhaul more than just what gifted looks like the gifted instruction that's taking place inside schools it needs to be better so it's more than just moving school it's about redoing the entire program We also are providing gifted instruction currently for students in their neighborhood schools, and we're just gonna make sure, so it's not, we're not going to provide just something extra for those in the neighborhood schools. You will get the same type of gifted instruction. Actually, those itinerant teachers are really doing what gifted instruction looks like right there in the neighborhood, even more so than what happens inside of the gifted quote unquote schools. also to and we have McKinley McKinley was on the list and we all know how vocal our parents that McKinley have been but McKinley is still on the list we have the interest you talked about what does that look like for exposure when it's younger and so we are now starting I know the chords and the things you mentioned but we're starting in the elementary school which we haven't done in the past but we'll make sure that we share what that actually looks like and that exposure. And then it was one more about the, Board Member Jones, thank you. We share the same excitement that we were seeing around this model. We've done quite a few extensive research over academies. It'll be great to kind of hear why the academies are triggering or what that looks like. Because before we did this approach, we actually did research for school districts that have done this and have done it well. So I'll be glad to hear. And then the last thing to Board Member Hikes, We have Tran, Corrigan Clark, and I don't know if it's Amoresco. I'm saying it wrong. They actually are. We charged them and said, hey, if you're going to do work with SLPS, we need to see how you can also support our students. And so what they did, they're providing internships for our students right now while they're working with us. They're also providing scholarships. Corrigan Clark provided a scholarship for a student. and they are guaranteeing them a job. So when we put a call out to them, they responded. So we're putting a call out to the unions because, truthfully, Dr. Henning was very kind. We've been trying to work with them. They're not hiring our children. So we're putting a call out to them to hire our children. Thank you.

One other note, Board Member Jones. There are community schools in Springfield that Dr. Berry and I did visit. And we weren't able to make the Chicago trip. it's absolutely amazing and so some of the things that you saw i do know that we can start that because it started in their middle schools too with all the literature and the things that we you had mentioned so i do believe i see a path for us to be able to do that and i i'm proud of the steps that we're taking right now so

One way to help address the valid concerns that Dr. Harvey and Ms. Hubbard raised about the district's gifted program is ongoing focused recruiting to identify students who might not otherwise apply. And just as a overall comment about the college and career academies, I think the effort going into planning the college and career academies shows that Future Ready really isn't just about closing schools. It's an ambitious vision that evinces the audacity of hope, and our students deserve that.

Well, thank you. Are there any additional comments?

Board members? Leadership?

Thank you. Well, that was good. Well, we now move to our next section of our agenda, the consent agenda. The consent agenda is voted upon in its entirety. We have items 5.1 through 5.8. And any board member may ask to have an item removed in the consent agenda to be voted on separately. Is there a motion on the floor?

Let's see. There is a total of 18, actually, consented agenda items. I think you were just looking at the first section, maybe.

No. Oh, I'm sorry. 5.18. Yes.

Let's see. I can go ahead and make a motion and then we can do discussion after. Sure. Yes. Unless anybody wants to remove something from the consent agenda.

Any items removed? Board Member Marston.

Okay. I move to move consent agenda items 5.1 through 5.18 to the agenda for our next regular session.

Second discussion.

Yeah, just on item 5.15, which is the Missouri school boards Association consultant for finance. How many open positions in our finance department need to be filled before we're able to handle the work without outside help.

I'll let Chief Dobell come in, but this is not so much of helping with the daily responsibilities. It was coming in based off of the audits that we had. So Chief Dobell.

Yeah, currently we have five open positions in our department, one of them being leadership. And to address some of these audit items, it has been very helpful.

Additional discussion?

Call for vote.

Dr. Harvey?

Yes.

Mr. Hikes? Yes. Ms. Hilbert? Yes. Ms. Jones?

Is this vote for the consultant or for the ?

It's to carry all of the agenda items over.

Yes.

Mr. Morrison?

Yes.

Dr. Collins-Adams? Yes.

Motion approved.

items for discussion we have item 6.1 the tax rate hearing request yes ma'am i'll turn it over to chief dillbill she's going to present um to you and ask and we are requesting from the board tonight if you would approve us to start our hearing for our next board member meeting at o'clock p.m. and the hearing we do have to present the current tax rate and allow the public to come up and ask questions so we'll be asking you to allow us to start that at 6 p.m. during the next board meeting prior to the board meeting starting at 630 two slides He said he's not seeing. That's OK. We can still ask the board.

That's fine. I'll just go through it. There are basically two informational slides. Every year, we have to present a tax levy to our taxpayers. We have policy DC that talks about taxing and borrowing authority and limitations. So as a political subdivision, we are authorized to levy a tax rate based on our assessed valuation. These tax levies are approved on an annual basis to provide the funding for general operations and our debt service requirements that we have as a district. proposed those tax rate tax rates and submit them to the city and the state auditor by october first every year and then they certify those rates so how that process works we get notification of the final assessed valuation from the city after board of equalization um that's typically late august early september when we get our final numbers this is not a reassessment year so we don't anticipate any large increases in our assessed valuation once we get those numbers we go on the state auditor's website there's they basically look like tax forms and we calculate that rate so it goes through the state auditor in that manner and then we get our tax rate, we post our hearing notices, typically seven days prior to, well, it has to be seven days prior to the hearing. So then the board conducts a hearing where public can be heard on any concerns they have about the rate, and then that's typically before your normal meeting, and then during the meeting, we would approve the levy and set the levy. Then I take all those forms, I take them down to the city, get them certified, they send them off to the state auditor, and we get final certification. so that's what that process typically looks like so i'm here tonight to ask that we set that tax levy hearing on the 22nd at 6 p.m a half an hour before a normal meeting would begin um

I move to hold our tax rate hearing on September 22nd at 6 p.m. Second.

Call for vote.

Dr. Harvey?

Yes. Mr.

Hikes?

Yes.

Ms. Hubbard? Yes. Ms. Jones? Yes. Mr. Marston? Yes. Dr. Collins-Adams? Yes.

Motion approved. Section 7, items for information. 7.1, the April 2026 credit statement. 7.2, the May 2026 credit statement. That information is available. Just click on the link. Section 8, items for action. 8.1, acceptance of funds for Washington University for CSMB. Accept the donation of $2,000 for the C-S-H, I mean, C-S-M-N-H-O-S-A. What is this program? I have to click on the.

Is Erin Kane here?

Oh, yeah. There she is.

Hi, good evening. Yes, so that is a check that was made out to CSMB from Wahoo for the HOSA program.

The what?

HOSA. OK. Dr. Hine, can you?

Health Occupation Students Association.

Thank you. I just needed to know what the acronym stood for. Is there a motion on the floor?

I move to approve item for action 8.1.

Second.

Discussion? Call for vote. Dr. Harvey?

Yes. Mr. Hanks? Yes. Ms. Hubbard? Yes. Ms. Jones? Yes. Mr. Marston? Yes. Dr. Collins-Adams? Yes. Motion approved.

Item 8.2, authorization of community partners, Stray Dog Theater, authorize the district to enter into renewals for MOU, no cost programming and services in a form of substantially similar to the form attached in there is a link attached in our uh agenda the partner will provide after-school program five days a week at Shenandoah I move to approve item fraction 8.2 second discussion call for vote Dr. Harvey yes Mr. Hikes yes Ms. Hubbard yes Ms. Jones yes Mr. Marston yes Dr. Collins-Adams yes motion approved item 8.3 acceptance of funds the missouri department of conservation for mckinley acceptance of 315 dollars for mckinley field trip to the august anheuser-busch conservation center schools apply for the grant i move to approve item fraction 8.3 second discussion All right, call for vote. Dr. Harvey? Yes. Mr. Heitz? Yes. Ms. Hubbard? Yes. Ms. Jones? Yes. Mr. Marston?

Yes.

Dr. Collins-Adams?

Yes. Motion approved. Item 8.4, donation log. Accept the gifts under $5,000 both in kind and cash listed on the donation log.

I move to approve item for action 8.4. Second.

Call for a vote. Dr. Harvey? Yes. Mr. Hikes?

Yes.

Ms. Hilbert? Yes. Ms. Jones? Yes. Mr. Marston?

Yes. Dr. Collins-Adams?

Yes. Motion to approve. Item 8.5, policy, DLCA, travel expenses.

I move to approve item for action 8.5. Second.

Discussion? I did have a question on that.

So have the administrative procedures for travel been shared with the full board? I think they've been presented at a governance committee meeting, but I don't know if they've come to the full board.

um they were listed on the june 9th agenda and that was it was a vote to move those off um so this is the second time it's coming back to the full board additional discussion um call for vote

Dr. Harvey?

Yes. Mr. Hikes? Yes. Ms. Hubbard? Yes. Ms. Jones? Yes. Mr. Marston? Yes. Dr. Collins-Adams? Yes.

Motion approved. Item 8.6, the June 2026 consolidated check register.

I move to approve item for action 8.6. Second.

Discussion? Call for vote. Dr. Harvey?

Yes. Mr. Heitz? Yes. Ms. Hubbard? Yes. Ms. Jones? Yes. Mr. Marston? Yes. Dr. Collins-Adams? Yes.

Motion approved. Item 8.7, July 2026, Consolidated Check Register.

I move to approve item for action 8.7. Second.

Call for a vote.

Dr. Harvey? Yes. Mr. Heights? Yes. Ms. Hubbard? Yes. Ms. Jones? Yes. Mr. Marston? Yes.

Dr. Collins-Adams? Yes. Motion approved. If there are no additional items, we now move to that glorious time of the evening.

um i want to recognize that board member aj foster is not here because she was accepting award an award from the boys and girls club is that right yes so we're very proud of her and then additionally i wanted to acknowledge that dolly parton died today and she was a tremendous advocate for education um besides all the wonder wonderful music and stuff we we lost a giant today and i'm sad thank you thank you i appreciate that are there any other announcements

I move to adjourn this evening's monthly work session. Second.

Call for a vote. Dr. Harvey. Yes. Mr. Hite. Yes. Ms. Hubbard. Yes. Ms. Jones. Yes. Mr. Marston. Yes. Dr. Collins-Adams. Yes. We are adjourned at 8.41 p.m. And the board says...