Regular Meeting of the Board of Trustees
Dublin USD
January 12, 2016 5:30PM
7471 Larkdale Avenue, Dublin, CA
4:30 p.m. - Closed Session
5:30 p.m. - Open Session
|
The meeting was called to order at 4:30 p.m.
|
|
|
The Board adjourned to closed session at 4:30 p.m.
|
|
|
| District Negotiators:
Stephen Hanke, Ed. D., Superintendent
Mark McCoy, Assistant Superintendent, Human Resources
Organization Representing Employees:
Dublin Teachers Association(DTA) |
|
|
| Title: Custodial and Operations Supervisor |
|
|
| Title: Information Technology Supervisor |
|
|
| Title: Project Manager, Maintenance and Operations |
|
|
| Property: E-5, Jordan Ranch, Alternate School Site
Property Negotiator:
Chris Foss, City Manager, City of Dublin
John Bakker, Counsel, City of Dublin
District Negotiator:
Stephen Hanke, Ed.D., Superintendent
Marilyn Cleveland, Attorney, Dannis Woliver Kelley, LLC |
|
|
The Board reconvened to open session at 5:30 p.m. President Cunningham stated that there was nothing to report out from closed session.
|
|
|
| A Dublin High School student led the audience in the Pledge of Allegiance. |
|
|
| Ms. Ko read the district mission statement into the record. |
|
|
- Motion made by Megan Rouse and a seconded by Greg Tomlinson. |
Yes Dan Cunningham.
Yes Greg Tomlinson.
Yes Amy Miller.
Yes Megan Rouse.
Yes Leesa Ko (Advisory Vote).
Yes Sameer Hakim.
|
|
|
|
| No visitors requested to be heard. |
|
|
| Ms. Ko - Finals are on everyone's mind. Things are a bit different with the new schedule this year but things are going well. Along with three other students spoke at the staff meeting about the dress code survey and why the students felt it was a relevant issue. Tomorrow will be another meeting with admin with a hope to continue the discussion with the parents and other student to get other perspectives to keep the conversation going. Next Friday is the DHS "Silent Night" and noted she not sure it will end up on national TV again but it promises to be a fun night again this year.
Ms. Rouse - Welcomed everyone back this year. Attended the Wells music concert and noted what a great job the student did and also what an excellent job Mr. Bertelson does with the program. Participated in the Rotary Dictionary give-away program for third grade students at Green Elementary and noted the many smiles from students. Attended the DPIE strategic planning meeting where ideas presented were contributions to the strings program, elementary science program. Attended a meeting at Assemblymember Bakers office to discuss taking a stand to show the state what they should be doing to support schools and districts. Noted a quote she had read over the holiday break that resonated with her: "Being successful isn't about knowing the answers to all the questions, it's about how you behave when you don't know the answer." Thought this would be a good way to start the new year.
Mr. Tomlinson - Attended the Facilities meeting yesterday. Attended the Mr. Dublin fundraiser at the DHS PAEC and noted it was a very entertaining evening and a great fundraiser for the senior class.
Ms. Miller - Attended the Facilities Committee meeting yesterday. Attended the Superintendent's Council meeting with Ms. Rouse this past Friday and noted the Digital Citizenship presentation that was put on by Ms. Bondi at Frederiksen. Advocating that this be presented at all schools. Noted one of the schools (Green Elementary) that is tackling the number of days that students are out on extended independent study days for 20-30 days a year. Attended the Tri-Valley Education Collaborative meeting before the break which was hosted here at the district office. February is National CTE month. Attended the Instrumental Winter Concert in the Performing Arts Center and noted it was a wonderful event. Attended the Facilities Community Forum last evening with the rest of the Board.
Mr. Hakim - Met with community members regarding the high school issues. Attended his alumni reunion. Attended many family events during the winter break. Attended the Facilities Community Forum last evening. Stated it was good to get the community together and stated there was more that we could do in that session and we should have a lot of questions today. Has been meeting with a lot of members of the community, and making sure he is available to them.
Mr. Cunningham - Attended the Choral Concert before the break at the Dublin High School Performing Arts Center and noted it was a fantastic event. Stated that the new choral teacher, Ms. Lopianno did a such a wonderful job that he and Dr. McCarty and some others from the district office went the next day and presented her with flowers. Visited Assemblymember Bakers office to discuss the district's funding issues. She has been a real advocate for the district. Attended the city/district liaison meeting with Mr. Tomlinson and Dr. Hanke. They will meet again in February, and are planning a joint meeting of the Board and Council in March.
Mr. Cunningham also thanked the Dublin High School civics class students in the audience who were in attendance as part of their class assignment.
|
|
|
| Dublin Teachers Association (DTA)
California School Employees Assoc. (CSEA) |
| There was no report from either Association. |
|
|
| Dr. Hanke also acknowledged the attendance of the DHS students in the audience at both this evenings meeting and at last evenings Community Forum. Stated a recommendation should be coming forward to the Board by the first part of March.
Dr. Hanke announced to the community that a School Facilities Academy will be held on Monday, February 1st in the DHS Performing Arts and Education Center. Experts in several fields related to school facilities, developer fees, land use for schools and other related topics.
Dr. Hanke also thanked the Community members who were in attendance last evening at the Forum and who participated in the break-out sessions.
Dr. McCarty reported on the first formal LCAP meeting on January 28th. There are five scheduled meetings planned before the plan comes before the Board on May 10th. The LCAP plan is aligned with Vision 20/20.
Ms. Heironimus - Stated that this has been one of the best years for education funding. LCFF will be funding the LCFF growth at 47%. Much of the money is being brought to us in the form of one-time funds. The Governor is warning that there may be a downturn sometime within the next three years, which is causing him to build a state reserve. Pre-K and Career Track programs are currently being funded, which will help some students in our district. Our main funding base will be at $93M based on our enrollment.
Mr. McCoy - Stated that contained in the tentative agreement with our teachers is are the calendar start and end dates and the winter break for 2016/17. School will begin on Aug. 15, 2016 and end on June 2, 2017. Winter Break is Dec. 23, 2016 to Jan 6, 2017. Also, the start date for 2017 is Aug. 14, 2017 and the end date is June 1, 2018. This information will go out to staff this week and a calendar will be placed on the district website, with additional dates to be added as they are establised. |
|
|
| Ms. Rouse asked that Item I-4 be pulled for comments/questions. |
|
|
| Mark McCoy, Assistant Superintendent, Human Resources
Kevin Grier, Director, Human Resources |
| The Board of Trustees will consider approval of all personnel activities including new hires, changes in status, transfers, resignations, requests for leave, and retirements.
Staff recommends the Board of Trustees approve the Personnel Action as presented |
| The purpose of this item is for the Board of Trustees to consider approval of all personnel activities including new hires, changes in status, transfers, resignations, requests for leave, and retirements. |
The purpose of this item is for the Board of Trustees to consider approval of all personnel activities including new hires, changes in status, transfers, resignations, requests for leave, and retirements. - Motion made by Sameer Hakim and a seconded by Greg Tomlinson. |
Yes Dan Cunningham.
Yes Greg Tomlinson.
Yes Amy Miller.
Yes Megan Rouse.
Recuse Leesa Ko (Advisory Vote).
Yes Sameer Hakim.
|
|
Personnel BP 4111
Personnel Action 1.12.16
|
|
|
| Beverly Heironimus, CPA, Assistant Superintendent, Business Services |
| The Alameda County Office of Education requires the district to have on file signatures of Board Members. The proposed resolution updates all current board member signatures.
Staff recommends the Board of Trustees approve Resolution No. 2015/16-26; Signature Card-Board Members |
| Education Code Section 42632 requires that signatures of all persons authorized by the Board of Trustees to sign orders must be filed with the County Superintendent of Schools. |
| |
| No costs associated with this item. |
| The purpose is to seek approval of Resolution No. 2015/16-26; Authorizing Board members to sign official documents of the District |
The purpose is to seek approval of Resolution No. 2015/16-26; Authorizing Board members to sign official documents of the District - Motion made by Sameer Hakim and a seconded by Greg Tomlinson. |
Yes Dan Cunningham.
Yes Greg Tomlinson.
Yes Amy Miller.
Yes Megan Rouse.
Recuse Leesa Ko (Advisory Vote).
Yes Sameer Hakim.
|
|
| What does the District file with the County Superintendent of Schools?
All financial documents including the payroll warrant registers, the accounts payable warrant listings, and revolving fund reimbursements. All our registers and warrants issued and processed at the county office and sent to the district after appropriate county authorization. |
| This corporate resolution reflects signatures of each member presently serving on the governing board.
|
Resolution No. 2015/16-26 - Signature Card Board Members
|
|
|
| Tim McCarty, Ed.D., Assistant Superintendent, Educational Services
Carrie Nerheim, Principal, Murray Elementary
Brian Senf, Pathways Teacher
Sandra Henriott, Pathways Teacher
Sharon Kovalevsky, Pathways Teacher
|
| Staff recommends Board approval for 75 K-5 students from Pathways to attend an overnight camping trip at the San Mateo County Memorial Park on June 2 & 3, 2016.
|
| Driven by student interest in our animal and plant studies students want to explore marsh, redwood forest and costal habitats and experience a night outside.
The class will leave Thursday morning and drive out to the San Mateo County Memorial Park. Students will hike the Pescadero Marsh, the Redwood Forest, the intertidal zone at Pescadero Beach, and watch the stars at night.
Student interest drives the entire trip. Students brainstorm and list required equipment, create the menu and shop for food. When we arrive at the park the students put up the tents, cook and clean up (supervised and assisted as needed by parents and teachers). Students will continue their studies on habitat and plants and animals while there.
|
| |
| There will be no financial impact to the district. Students and their parents will pay for all necessary fees. |
| The purpose of this item is to seek field trip approval for 75 Pathways K-5 students from Murray Elementary School to participate in an overnight camping field trip at the San Mateo County Memorial Park on June 2 & 3, 2016.
|
The purpose of this item is to seek field trip approval for 75 Pathways K-5 students from Murray Elementary School to participate in an overnight camping field trip at the San Mateo County Memorial Park on June 2 & 3, 2016.
- Motion made by Sameer Hakim and a seconded by Greg Tomlinson. |
Yes Dan Cunningham.
Yes Greg Tomlinson.
Yes Amy Miller.
Yes Megan Rouse.
Yes Leesa Ko (Advisory Vote).
Yes Sameer Hakim.
|
|
| Q: How will students be transported?
A: Parents will drive their own students.
Q: How many students and how many chaperons will be participating?
A: We will have 75 students, 3 teachers, and 65 chaperons going on this camping trip.
|
| On this overnight camping trip, three teachers will be in attendance. Students will be taken to their destinations by parents, who will stay the entire time. Additional family members may join us for the evening.
We leave school on Thursday, June 2 and drive to the main gate of the San Mateo Memorial Park, where we will assemble at Legion Flat and split into 2 groups, grades K-2 and grades 3-5, for lunch and a walk. In the afternoon, we will drive to Wurr Flats campground and set up tents and begin cooking dinner. While there, we will study the redwoods and plants in the area, as well as stars, using our background information from our star and planet study, including our trip to Chabot Space and Science Center.
Friday morning we will do a marsh walk to study birds at Pescadero Marsh and visit Pescadero Beach. We will leave for school at 2:00 pm and arrive back at school about 3:00 pm.
|
|
|
| Beverly Heironimus, Asst. Supt., Business Services
Tess Johnson, Coordinator, Student Services
Dr. Tim McCarty, Asst. Supt., Educational Services |
| Staff recommends the Board approve the renewal of the Attention to Attendance contract with SI&A, from February 1, 2016 through June 30, 2019. |
| On January 26, 2010 the Board of Trustees approved a contract to implement the Attention to Attendance (A2A) program from SI&A. The Attention to Attendance (A2A) program was presented to District administration as a service that would assist the district in focusing on students? attendance issues.
Data collected from the A2A program assisted us in our Response to the Intervention model. It made it possible to establish attendance responses for three of the following PLC questions (reworded for attendance): 1. What do we expect from our students? 2. How do we know our students are meeting the expectations? 3. What do we do, when they do not meet the expectations?
Additionally, through trainings conducted twice a year by SI&A administrators and key school staff have expanded their methodologies in keeping kids in school. Moreover, throughout the implementation of A2A, school-wide leadership teams have become more proficient in utilizing the data to fully support students' academic progress. |
| |
| The cost for the contract from February 1, 2016 through June 30, 2019 totals $102,500.
|
| The purpose of this item is to request renewal of the Contract with School Innovations and Advocacy (SI&A) for the Attention to Attendance Program (A2A), Feb 1, 2016 through June 30, 2019. |
The purpose of this item is to request renewal of the Contract with School Innovations and Advocacy (SI&A) for the Attention to Attendance Program (A2A), Feb 1, 2016 through June 30, 2019. - Motion made by Sameer Hakim and a seconded by Greg Tomlinson. |
Yes Dan Cunningham.
Yes Greg Tomlinson.
Yes Amy Miller.
Yes Megan Rouse.
Yes Leesa Ko (Advisory Vote).
Yes Sameer Hakim.
|
|
| Ms. Rouse - Asked that this item be pulled for clarifying questions, which were asked and answered as followed:
Asked if there are multiple potential exit points written into the contract now, beginning as early as this May? Dr. Hanke stated that this is correct.
With regard to the deliverables, asked if it is correct that a mid-year and year-end report will now be available, which will include the chronic data and subgroups? Dr. Hanke stated that this is correct. He stated it will also be referred to in the RTI report this evening and the information will be received by the Board via Scratchpad. |
| Q: What did School Innovations & Advocacy provide that differed from what the district was already doing in attendance matters?
A: The program increased our communication with parents regarding student attendance matters; letters were actually sent out by SI&A to relieve school site personnel from additional work. Additionally, it provides a comprehensive approach to attendance management that support goals to improve and close the achievement gap. See attachment for more detailed services.
Q: Can we end this contract prior to June 30, 2019?
A: Yes, we can end this contract as stipulated: as early as June 30, 2016, after six months of service and each year thereafter, through June 30 2019. |
| Services offered through the A2A program have provided a comprehensive approach to attendance management that support goals to improve and close the achievement gap.
A summary of services offered by SI&A:
- Allows easy to access student data to monitor all students? attendance progress.
- Provides a system to record results of meetings with parents and any ongoing communication between home and school.
- Provides staff training twice a year, or when requested by district.
- Provides on-going technical support to sites and on-going communication regarding email alerts.
- Provides student, site, and district status reports and trends.
- Sends out letters based on our criteria for attendance problems.
- Produces and mails attendance notifications for the district, including all those for excused and unexcused absences, as well as conference notifications.
See attached for comprehensive services offered through SI&A.
|
Attention to Attendance Agreement
A2A Deliverables
|
|
|
| Mark McCoy, Assistant Superintendent, Human Resources
Kevin Grier, Director, Human Resources |
| The Board of Trustees will consider approval of the Student Internship Placement Agreement with San Francisco State University and the Student Teaching Agreement with Patten University as presented.
Staff recommends the Board of Trustees approve the Student Internship Placement Agreement with San Francisco State University and the Student Teaching Agreement with Patten University.
|
| The district works closely with local institutions of higher education (IHE) and supports school student teacher placements and placements of non-teaching interns to support the needs of the district. Agreements between Dublin Unified School District and a college/university must be in place before a student teacher or non-teaching intern may be placed in the district.
|
| |
| The purpose of this item is for the Board of Trustees to consider approval of one internship agreement and one student teaching agreement.
The Dublin Unified School District must enter into an agreement with local colleges and universities in order to have intern and student teacher placements in district classrooms and/or clinical fieldwork experiences in our schools.
The Board of Trustees has one new internship agreement and one new
student teaching agreement to consider:
- San Francisco State University Student Internship Placement Agreement January 12, 2016 to
November 30, 2018
- Patten University Student Teaching Agreement from January 12, 2016 to August 14, 2017
|
The purpose of this item is for the Board of Trustees to consider approval of one internship agreement and one student teaching agreement.
The Dublin Unified School District must enter into an agreement with local colleges and universities in order to have intern and student teacher placements in district classrooms and/or clinical fieldwork experiences in our schools.
The Board of Trustees has one new internship agreement and one new
student teaching agreement to consider:
- San Francisco State University Student Internship Placement Agreement January 12, 2016 to
November 30, 2018
- Patten University Student Teaching Agreement from January 12, 2016 to August 14, 2017
- Motion made by Sameer Hakim and a seconded by Greg Tomlinson. |
Yes Dan Cunningham.
Yes Greg Tomlinson.
Yes Amy Miller.
Yes Megan Rouse.
Yes Leesa Ko (Advisory Vote).
Yes Sameer Hakim.
|
|
| Teachers, counselors, psychologists, therapists and nutritionists in training often do fieldwork in our schools and are supervised by the administrators who volunteer to provide supervision and training on their behalf. |
San Francisco State University Student Internship Placement Agreement
Patten University Student Teaching Agreement
Contracts BP 3312
|
|
|
| Beverly Heironimus, CPA, Assistant Superintendent, Business Services |
| The Board of Trustees' will consider approving receipt of donations to the District.
Staff requests approval of donations as presented and will express the Board's appreciation for contributions made to the district. |
| Throughout the year community members, groups, parents, and other individuals make monetary and equipment donations to the District. |
| |
| As indicated by each donor and detail provided. |
| The purpose is to acknowledge receipt of donations to the District. |
The purpose is to acknowledge receipt of donations to the District. - Motion made by Sameer Hakim and a seconded by Greg Tomlinson. |
Yes Dan Cunningham.
Yes Greg Tomlinson.
Yes Amy Miller.
Yes Megan Rouse.
Yes Leesa Ko (Advisory Vote).
Yes Sameer Hakim.
|
|
| Why should these donations be processed through the business department and ultimately approved by the Board of Trustees?
This process is recommended so that the funding can be publicly acknowledged and budgeted properly according to donor restrictions.
Is any acknowledgment sent to donor?
Yes, there is public acknowledgment at the public board meeting and a letter of thanks is sent by the business department for the District. |
| The exact nature and source of the donation is submitted to the business department on a standard form developed in the district. It is critical that any restrictions on the funding be indicated and the budget developed based on those donor restrictions. If there is no indication of the school or use of the funding any proceeds or cash donations received are placed in the Dublin Unified local revenue in the unrestricted general fund. |
Donations
|
|
|
| Beverly Heironimus, CPA, Assistant Superintendent, Business Services |
| Staff recommends the Board of Trustees' approval of the warrants listed as presented. |
| The warrant registers below represent a complete listing of all payments made from District funds for the month of December 2015. Because Dublin Unified School District is a fiscally dependent District, each warrant must pass through two separate audits, first by the District's fiscal services department, and second by the County Office of Education.
Note: No warrant can be paid until such time as it is examined and approved by the County Office of Education. |
| |
| As presented above. |
| The purpose of this item is to present warrants made from District funds for December 2015 |
The purpose of this item is to present warrants made from District funds for December 2015 - Motion made by Sameer Hakim and a seconded by Greg Tomlinson. |
Yes Dan Cunningham.
Yes Greg Tomlinson.
Yes Amy Miller.
Yes Megan Rouse.
Recuse Leesa Ko (Advisory Vote).
Yes Sameer Hakim.
|
|
| If the board disapproved the warrants what happens?
The district's warrants issued through the county office of education are different than a check. The warrants, the warrant is not honored till it is presented to the county treasurer. If the district needs to it can stop payment on a warrant up until it is presented to the county treasurer. |
| There are no special funding implications associated with this item.
Any payroll expenditures are included in the monthly payroll figures, therefore some amounts showing on the warrant register will not agree with the above listed figures. |
December 2015 AP Warrants
|
|
|
| Mark McCoy, Assistant Superintendent, Human Resources
Kevin Grier, Director, Human Resources
Keoki Yee, President, CSEA, Chapter #439 |
| The Board of Trustees will consider approval of the revised classified Warehouse Worker II job description.
Staff recommends approval of the revised classified Warehouse Worker II job description, as presented. |
| The District's existing classified Warehouse Worker II job description was last updated in 1998. Accordingly, it did not adequately reflect contemporary job duties, expectations, and qualifying conditions for performing the duties of the position. Additionally, the current job description did not meet the legal compliance regulations of the American with Disabilities Act (ADA). The following job description has been reviewed and revised/updated by a district management and CSEA Chapter #439 leadership. |
| |
| The Range did change from Schedule A Range 18 to Schedule A Range 20 which equates to an increase of $0.98 per hour in column A to $1.23 per hour in column E. |
| The purpose of this item is for the Board of Trustees to consider the approval of the revised classified Warehouse Worker II job description. |
The purpose of this item is for the Board of Trustees to consider the approval of the revised classified Warehouse Worker II job description. - Motion made by Sameer Hakim and a seconded by Greg Tomlinson. |
Yes Dan Cunningham.
Yes Greg Tomlinson.
Yes Amy Miller.
Yes Megan Rouse.
Recuse Leesa Ko (Advisory Vote).
Yes Sameer Hakim.
|
|
| Q: When will other job descriptions and classifications be revised?
A: Human Resources leadership and CSEA leadership will continue to review the job descriptions by job families until all have been revised and updated. |
| Two years ago, the Human Resources department and the CSEA leadership met and formed committees to review, update, and rewrite all of the district's classified job descriptions.
District leadership and local CSEA leadership have approved the revised job description. Salary placement for this job description has changed from Schedule A range 18 to Schedule A range 20. |
Warehouse Worker II Job Description
|
|
|
| Stephen Hanke, Ed.D., Superintendent
Shelley Fischer, Administrative Assistant |
| Staff recommends approval of the minutes of the December 8, 2015 Regular Meeting of the Board of Trustees as presented. |
| The Board will consider the approval of the minutes of the December 8, 2015 Regular Meeting of the Board of Trustees. |
The Board will consider the approval of the minutes of the December 8, 2015 Regular Meeting of the Board of Trustees. - Motion made by Sameer Hakim and a seconded by Greg Tomlinson. |
Yes Dan Cunningham.
Yes Greg Tomlinson.
Yes Amy Miller.
Yes Megan Rouse.
Yes Leesa Ko (Advisory Vote).
Yes Sameer Hakim.
|
|
Dec. 8, 2015 Board Mtg. Minutes.pdf
|
|
|
| Stephen Hanke, Ed.D, Superintendent
Mark McCoy, Assistant Superintendent, Human Resources |
| Staff recommends the Board of Trustees approve the appointment of the Custodial and Operations Supervisor, as presented. |
| The Custodial and Operations Supervisor was posted internally and externally. The District received many qualified candidates. Applications were paper screened and candidates were selected to interview with a panel comprised of certificated employees, classified employees, and site leadership. The panel moved three finalists forward for an interview with Dr. Hanke and members of executive cabinet. It is the recommendation of staff that the individual presented this evening be appointed as the Custodial and Operations Supervisor. Further information regarding the recommended appointee's background and qualifications will be shared at the Board meeting. |
| |
| The purpose of this item is for the board to consider approval of the appointment of the Custodial and Operations Supervisor. |
The purpose of this item is for the board to consider approval of the appointment of the Custodial and Operations Supervisor. - Motion made by Amy Miller and a seconded by Greg Tomlinson. |
Yes Dan Cunningham.
Yes Greg Tomlinson.
Yes Amy Miller.
Yes Sean Kenney.
Yes Megan Rouse.
Recuse Leesa Ko (Advisory Vote).
Yes Sameer Hakim.
|
|
| Mr. McCoy introduced Mr. Tim Leal, who has been in the district for a number of years in both the custodial and maintenance departments. Mr. Leal will assume the position of Custodial Supervisor.
Mr. Leal thanked the Board and senior staff for the opportunity to serve the district in his new position. |
|
|
| Dr. Stephen Hanke, Superintendent
Mark McCoy, Assistant Superintendent, Human Resources |
| Staff recommends the Board of Trustees approve the appointment of the Information Technology Supervisor, as presented. |
| The Information Technology Supervisor was posted internally and externally. The District received many qualified candidates. Applications were paper screened and candidates were selected to interview with a panel comprised of certificated employees, classified employees, and site leadership. The panel moved three finalists forward for an interview with Dr. Hanke and members of executive cabinet. It is the recommendation of staff that the individual presented this evening be appointed as the Information Technology Supervisor. Further information regarding the recommended appointee's background and qualifications will be shared at the Board meeting. |
| |
| The purpose of this item is for the Board of Trustees to consider approval of the appointment of the Information Technology Supervisor. |
The purpose of this item is for the Board of Trustees to consider approval of the appointment of the Information Technology Supervisor. - Motion made by Megan Rouse and a seconded by Sameer Hakim. |
Yes Dan Cunningham.
Yes Greg Tomlinson.
Yes Amy Miller.
Yes Sean Kenney.
Yes Megan Rouse.
Yes Leesa Ko (Advisory Vote).
Yes Sameer Hakim.
|
|
| Mr. McCoy introduced Ms. Mari Terhune comes to Dublin from Pleasanton Unified where she has served in numerous high level classified technology positions.
Ms. Terhune thanked the Board and senior staff for her appointment to her position and looks forward to joining a team that is focused on 21st century learning, focuses on student health and wellness and new smart schools. |
|
|
| Dr. Stephen Hanke, Superintendent
Mark McCoy, Assistant Superintendent, Human Resources |
| Staff recommends the Board of Trustees approve the appointment of the Project Manager, Maintenance and Operations, as presented. |
| The Project Manager, Maintenance and Operations was posted internally and externally. The District received many qualified candidates. Applications were paper screened and candidates were selected to interview with a panel comprised of certificated employees, classified employees, and site leadership. The panel moved two finalists forward for an interview with Dr. Hanke and members of executive cabinet. It is the recommendation of staff that the individual presented this evening be appointed as the Project Manager, Maintenance and Operations. Further information regarding the recommended appointee's background and qualifications will be shared at the Board meeting. |
| |
| The purpose of this item is for the Board of Trustees to consider approval of the appointment of the Project Manager, Maintenance and Operations. |
The purpose of this item is for the Board of Trustees to consider approval of the appointment of the Project Manager, Maintenance and Operations. - Motion made by Sameer Hakim and a seconded by Greg Tomlinson. |
Yes Dan Cunningham.
Yes Greg Tomlinson.
Yes Amy Miller.
Yes Sean Kenney.
Yes Megan Rouse.
Recuse Leesa Ko (Advisory Vote).
Yes Sameer Hakim.
|
|
| Mr. Glagoria has extensive experience in the areas of modernization and school construction as well as areas outside of public education.
Mr. Glagoria thanked the Board and senior staff for his appointment and stated he is looking forward to continuing his work with Dublin Unified in his new position.
|
|
|
| Mark McCoy, Assistant Superintendent, Human Resources
Beverly Heironimus, Assistant Superintendent, Business Services
Katina Lewis, Bargaining Chair, Dublin Teachers Association |
| A public hearing will be conducted for the tentative agreement reached with Dublin Teachers Association (DTA) and the Dublin Unified School District for a three year successor contract, 2015-2018. |
| The District and DTA started negotiations in February 2015. On December 2, 2015, a tentative agreement was reached for a three year successor contract. The DTA bargaining unit voted and ratified the contract on December 7, 2015. A copy of the tentative agreement is available at the Dublin Unified School District Office for review. |
| |
| The cost of the 3% ongoing compensation is $1,409,265.00. The cost of the one-time 2% compensation is $939,510.00. |
| The purpose of this item is to allow the public the opportunity to comment on the tentative agreement reached with Dublin Teachers Association (DTA) and the Dublin Unified School District for a three year successor contract, 2015-2018. |
| The Public Hearing was opening at 6:21 p.m. Hearing no comments, the public hearing was closed. |
| Q. What is the fiscal impact of this tentative agreement?
A. The cost of the 3% ongoing compensation is $1,409,265.00. The cost of the one-time 2% compensation is $939,510.00.
|
| The terms of the tentative agreement include agreement in the areas of recognition, workday, school calendar, compensation, safety conditions, evaluation, technology, leaves, job shares, and an agreement for re-openers.
|
DUSD / DTA Tentative Agreement 2015-2018
|
|
|
| Mark McCoy, Assistant Superintendent, Human Resources
Beverly Heironimus, Assistant Superintendent, Business Services
Katina Lewis, Bargaining Chair, Dublin Teachers Association |
| The Board of Trustees will consider approval of the tentative agreement between the Dublin Teachers Association (DTA) and Dublin Unified School District for 2015-2018. The DTA bargaining unit has ratified the tentative agreement for a three year successor contract.
Staff recommends the approval of the tentative agreement between the Dublin Teachers' Association (DTA) and Dublin Unified School District for a three year successor contract, 2015-2018. |
| The District and DTA started negotiations in February 2015. On December 2, 2015, a tentative agreement was reached for a three year successor contract. The DTA bargaining unit voted and ratified the contract on December 7, 2015. A copy of the tentative agreement is available at the Dublin Unified School District Office for review. |
| |
| The cost of the 3% ongoing compensation is $1,409,265.00. The cost of the one-time 2% compensation is $939,510.00. |
| The purpose of this item is for the Board of Trustees to approve the tentative agreement with the Dublin Teachers Association (DTA) and Dublin Unified School District for 2015-2018. The DTA bargaining unit has ratified the tentative agreement for a three year successor contract.
|
The purpose of this item is for the Board of Trustees to approve the tentative agreement with the Dublin Teachers Association (DTA) and Dublin Unified School District for 2015-2018. The DTA bargaining unit has ratified the tentative agreement for a three year successor contract.
- Motion made by Amy Miller and a seconded by Megan Rouse. |
Yes Dan Cunningham.
Yes Greg Tomlinson.
Yes Amy Miller.
Yes Sean Kenney.
Yes Megan Rouse.
Yes Leesa Ko (Advisory Vote).
Yes Sameer Hakim.
|
|
| Ms. Robbie Kreitz, DTA Co-President offered her thanks on behalf of the negotiating committee to Mr. McCoy for his work at jumping in during negotiations and picking up the process in such a smooth way. |
| Q. Since this is a three year successor contract, what is the status of negotiations?
A. The term of the tentative agreement is for three years (2015-2018) with re-openers. Negotiations will begin again in the Fall of 2016.
|
| The terms of the tentative agreement include agreement in the areas of recognition, workday, school calendar, compensation, safety conditions, evaluation, technology, leaves, job shares, and an agreement for re-openers. |
DUSD / DTA Tentative Agreement 2015-2018
|
|
|
| Mark McCoy, Assistant Superintendent Human Resources
Beverly Heironimus, Assistant Superintendent Business Services |
| The Board of Trustees will consider approval of the attached salary schedule for certificated bargaining unit members, for the 2015-2016 school year, as presented.
Staff recommends approval of the certificated salary schedule for the 2015-2016 school year as presented. |
| The purpose of this item is for the board to consider approval of the certificated salary schedule for 2015-2016. |
The purpose of this item is for the board to consider approval of the certificated salary schedule for 2015-2016. - Motion made by Greg Tomlinson and a seconded by Megan Rouse. |
Yes Dan Cunningham.
Yes Greg Tomlinson.
Yes Amy Miller.
Yes Sean Kenney.
Yes Megan Rouse.
Recuse Leesa Ko (Advisory Vote).
Yes Sameer Hakim.
|
|
Certificated Salary Schedule 2015-2016
|
|
|
| Mark McCoy, Assistant Superintendent Human Resources
Beverly Heironimus, Assistant Superintendent Business Services |
| A public hearing will be conducted for the proposed increase in compensation for classified bargaining unit members. |
| As a result of negotiations with the certificated bargaining unit, a 3% ongoing increase in compensation was agreed to and ratified by the Dublin Teachers Association. In addition to the ongoing amount, a one-time 2.0% off the salary schedule increase for the 2015-2016 school year was also ratified by the Dublin Teachers Association. Both of these compensation increases are applicable to classified employees as a result of a "me too" clause in the collective bargaining agreement.
|
| |
| The cost of the 3% increase is $418,900 and the 2% one-time expense is $279,267. |
| The purpose of this item is to allow the public the opportunity to comment on the proposed increase in compensation for the classified bargaining unit. |
| The public hearing was opened at 6:23 p.m. Hearing no comments the public hearing was closed. |
| Q. What justifies the 3% ongoing salary increase and 2% one-time increase for classified employees?
A. The classified collective bargaining agreement includes a "me-too" clause which states "If at any time during the term of this agreement any other bargaining unit receives any monetary compensation, the Association shall receive the same percentage and shall reserve the right to negotiate the distribution of the compensation."
Q. What is the fiscal impact?
A. The cost of the 3% increase is $418,900 and the 2% one-time expense is $279,267. |
Classified Salary Schedule A 2015-2016
Classified Salary Schedule B 2015-2016
|
|
|
| The Board of Trustees will consider approval of the attached salary schedules for classified bargaining unit members, for the 2015-2016 school year, as presented.
Staff recommends approval of the classified salary schedules for the 2015-2016 school year as presented. |
| The purpose of this item is for the board to consider approval of the classified salary schedules for 2015-2016. |
The purpose of this item is for the board to consider approval of the classified salary schedules for 2015-2016. - Motion made by Sameer Hakim and a seconded by Greg Tomlinson. |
Yes Dan Cunningham.
Yes Greg Tomlinson.
Yes Amy Miller.
Yes Megan Rouse.
Recuse Leesa Ko (Advisory Vote).
Yes Sameer Hakim.
|
|
Classified Salary Schedule A 2015-16
Classified Salary Schedule A 2015-16
|
|
|
| Mark McCoy, Assistant Superintendent Human Resources
Beverly Heironimus, Assistant Superintendent Business Services |
| A public hearing will be conducted for the proposed increase in compensation for management / confidential employees. |
| As a result of negotiations with the certificated bargaining unit, a 3% ongoing increase in compensation was agreed to and ratified by the Dublin Teachers Association. In addition to the ongoing amount, a one-time 2.0% off the salary schedule increase for the 2015-2016 school year was also ratified by the Dublin Teachers Association. These compensation increases are applicable to classified employees as a result of a "me too" clause in the collective bargaining agreement. Past practice has been to apply the increases to Leadership compensation. |
| |
| The cost of the 3% increase is $162,850 and the 2% one-time expense is $108,560. |
| The purpose of this item is to allow the public the opportunity to comment on the proposed increase in compensation for management / confidential employees. |
| The public hearing was opened at 6:26 p.m Hearing no comments, the public hearing was closed. |
| Q. What justifies the 3% ongoing salary increase and 2% one-time increase for management/confidential employees?
A. Leadership has received the same monetary compensation that is bargained with the certificated and classified bargaining units.
Q. What is the fiscal impact?
A. The cost of the 3% increase is $162,850 and the 2% one-time expense is $108,560. |
Management / Confidential (Leadership) Salary Schedule 2015-2016
|
|
|
| The Board of Trustees will consider approval of the attached salary schedule for management / confidential employees, for the 2015-2016 school year, as presented.
Staff recommends approval of the leadership salary schedule for the 2015-2016 school year as presented. |
| The purpose of this item is for the board to consider approval of the Leadership salary schedule for 2015-2016. |
The purpose of this item is for the board to consider approval of the Leadership salary schedule for 2015-2016. - Motion made by Greg Tomlinson and a seconded by Megan Rouse. |
Yes Dan Cunningham.
Yes Greg Tomlinson.
Yes Amy Miller.
Yes Megan Rouse.
Recuse Leesa Ko (Advisory Vote).
Yes Sameer Hakim.
|
|
Management / Confidential (Leadership) Salary Schedule 2015-2016
|
|
|
Stephen Hanke, ED.D. - Superintendent
Beverly Heironimus - Assistant Superintendent, Business Services
Kim McNeely - Sr. Director, Facilities
Tim Boczanowski - Project Coordinator
|
| Staff will update the Board of Trustees on the Facilities Master Plan process to date focusing on high school growth. |
| In July of 2015 LPA held the kick off meeting for the Facilities Master Plan (FMP) process approved by the Board of Trustees. At the August 31, 2015 meeting LPA reviewed the master plan process with the Board of Trustees including, the schedule for the FMP, the community engagement process, recommended FMP Committee members, and a web based master plan. At the conclusion of the presentation LPA discussed the master plan process with the Board of Trustees and their goals for community engagement in the process. |
| |
| No Financial Impact--Information Only |
| The purpose of this item is to provide an update to the Board of Trustees on the Facilities Master Plan process to date focusing on high school growth. |
| Ms. Jim Kissel, district consultant from LPA presented an update on the Master Plan process related to high school growth options.
Board Questions
Mr. Tomlinson - Asked if the $75 ft/per sq. ft, for high school expansion does that include the classrooms only? Mr. Kissel stated that it includes the classrooms, circulation toilets; it does not include the core facilities because they already exist. Mr. Tomlinson stated that this would then impact the core facilities. He said that it could. Asked if there is an overall standard per student. Mr. Kissel stated that there are state guidelines for MPR rooms (5.3 sq/ft per student and for librarys 4.3 sq/ft per student. With DHS we are well within those state guidelines if 500 students were added to DHS.
Board Clarifying Questions:
Mr. Tomlinson - Q: Can bond dollars be used for a charter? It the area we have the least available information on. Is there another possible or viable lease option where bond dollars can be used? Mr. Tomlinson was speaking of a district-sponsored charter school specifically. A: Ms. Heironimus stated she can get a bond opinion on that question from our bond counsel as it was a question that was asked and answered in the past. She will get an updated answer regarding what the options are to using bond funds.
Ms. Miller - Asked what the difference would be between a district sponsored charter and an independent charter and a satellite campus. Would like more information on that.
Mr. Tomlinson - Explained that a satellite campus still goes through the DSA approval process and meets all of the same requirements as a district school. A district-sponsored charter may not have to meet some of the DSA approval processes. The district will get more information on the differences for the Board.
Ms. Rouse - Would also like to see information on district-sponsored charters.
Several board members stated they would like more information on district sponsored charters.
Ms. Miller - One the projections chart, the freshmen class shows 780 and when they are seniors it is projected they will be at 880. Is it reasonable to assume that the class can grow due to enrollment growth by 100 students over those four years? Ms. Heironimus stated that absolutely, that has been the pattern lately.
Mr. Hakim - Regarding the district-sponsored charter, why was no number included on that chart? Could something have been put in for comparison? Mr. Kissel stated that there are just to many options that could be chosen that could change the variables or model.
Mr. Hakim - Asked if any alternate sites are being considered for a high school site? Mr. Kissel stated that some have been considered, such as land area on Camp Parks. Scott Sheldon, the district's real estate consultant will be at the next FMPC meeting to offer his analysis of what properties or options could be used.
Mr. Hakim - Stated that at the Community Forum six viable options were presented, one being a hybrid model. Did that hybrid model come from the FMPC or from LPA? Mr. Kissel stated that at the meetings they had heard from folks pluses and minuses of the various scenarios. This was just one of the many that was a result of those discussions.
Mr. Hakim - Stated that the hybrid may address the short-term needs, but may not meet the long-term needs of the community. Mr. Kissel stated that it does meet the 2500 student growth needs. Stated that they tried also keep in mind that enrollment trends can change due to the economy and this model would allow for some flexibility to meet those.
Mr. Hakim - Asked if it would be more beneficial to have additional meetings due to the amount of work that needs to be done? Mr. Kissel stated that the FMP members have also been attending the Forums. After meeting on on January 25th there is a potential of adding another FMP before Feb. 22nd to get into more detail and still meet the deadline requirements.
Ms. Miller - Thought there was money set aside for the Engineering bldg. Dr. Hanke stated that the Board has not made a final decision on that as of yet. Mr. Boczanowski stated that there are funds set aside for that program. The spaces that would be constructed for Engineering would be more programmatic need and would not add a tremendous number of seats to the campus.
Mr. Hakim - Has there been a cost analysis done for the hybrid model. No, they have not done a cost analysis.
Mr. Hakim - Would Bond funds be considered for all six of the options? Mr. Kissel stated yes, whatever option was chosen, bond funds would be utilized. Dr. Hanke clarified that bond funds would be used for a portion of one of the options as bond funds should benefit all schools in the district.
Mr. Hakim - From the community, it seems that their first wish is to have a comprehensive high school in the east part of town but a hybrid may also be an alternative. How does that change the whole FMPC process? Asked Mr. Kissel for his conclusions? Mr. Kissel stated that LPA does not have any conclusions at this point; that is really what the agenda is for the next FMPC meeting. The committee is a broad representation of the community and what we learned and what we heard very strongly.
Mr. Tomlinson - There is a certain portion of the community that is very focused on a second comprehensive high school. He stated that we owe it to them to fully explore that option if it is viable. Stated that there is land in the east, it's just a matter of what we will pay for it. Will anyone be contacting the developers to find out who will be interested in selling land to the district and discussing the possibility of a mini Mello Roos. Dr. Hanke stated that the question would be, are there developments that are large enough to generate adequate funds? Dr. Hanke stated that Scott Sheldon will be working on getting multiple developers together to discuss that very subject. Staff will also be contacting the city regarding the possibility of a Mellow Roos.
Ms. Rouse - Asked if Mr. Sheldon's discussions will be layered into the timing of the FMPC meetings? Dr. Hanke stated that it is his expectation that Mr. Sheldon's discussions continue to occur so that information can be brought back to the FMPC in a timely fashion.
Mr. Tomlinson - Stated he would also like to see the "what if's" if the bond passes and "what if" it does not. There is always that possibility and we need to plan for that outcome. We need to have the community understand what the impact will be. Dr. Hanke stated that staff certainly can produce that list.
Dr. Hanke stated that there will need to be at least one more FMPC meeting beyond what is planned.
Ms. Miller - Stated she wanted to be clear that she is looking to have a report that looks at everything the district needs to serve the students that we predict are coming. Whether or not we can do it because it is dependent on money, I want to at least know that in 2018, for example, we need to open Nielsen, not saying this is what will have to happen, but this is what you're going to have to do to make it work, or this is what you're going to need. Then it's the district's job to make it happen. I'm looking that it will be a full plan that shows by year, where we will be with managing growth in our district. We have been accused of kind of "flying by the seat of our pants", and I'm not saying that's true but what I'm saying is if we have no bond money, or there is a recession, we have this plan we can refer and we at least know what we need. Dr. Hanke responded that it certainly makes sense but the plan will have a significant amount of speculation because there are a lot of unknowns at this point. We can't pass if the local bond measure will pass, if the state bond measure will pass. We did put together charts for the city on projections but when you look at ten years out those figures are much more speculative. Dr. Hanke stated that the most challenging part of this plan has been the high school. He stated that there will most likely need to be another FMPC meeting.
Mr. Tomlinson - Stated that he takes exception with anyone saying that this Board is "flying by the seat of their pants". That indicates that we make decisions as they come in front of us and we never do that. Ms. Miller agreed, but said that is a perception.
Ms. Rouse - Stated that it looks like the six options are going to go back to the committee for additional discussion.
Ms. Hakim - Stated that FMPC is not just about the high school. They are evaluating it as a holistic approach and he did not see that.
Visitor Comments
Margaret Liang-FMPC Member (Statement read by Ms. Miller) Stated that First of all the FMPC members have been through the meetings mainly to listen to the presentations given by LPA. The committee did one exercise to evaluate the six options given by LPA. The proposed option last night did not come from us. It was only presented, it was never discussed or evaluated. In last night's meeting none of the six options was offered, only the one they came up with and it was not discussed or evaluated by the FMPC at the last meeting at all. At last night's meeting parents came thinking the School Board was soliciting their feedback on the different options. Instead, they were hand-fed just one, with no other choices. In addition, there is little information given about that proposal. In another words, does 1000-15000 capacity mean a new school, is that independent of DHS, where will it be built, when, ect. Five out of five committee groups rejected the proposed options. We do not think proposal has any of the communities support. We are calling for a Town Hall Meeting before the next FMPC meeting.
Board Comments
Ms. Miller - Asked if there has been a pro/con list developed about Dublin High School and if not, can it be done so that the community can see the reasons? If there is not going to be another high school there needs to be something we can use to show why it not the right thing for our community. Needs to be exploration about parcels of land available. Stated that it seems like there needs to be more meetings; doesn't seem like there will be enough time to get through this process without adding more meetings.
With regard to the hybrid option, it looks like there was a ranking of the options, the bottom half were taken off, kept the top half and the hybrid was from the work of the committee but may not have been articulated. With regard to those at the Forum last evening, although we had a turnout, it was not large, and it was only a small percentage of our population.
Ms. Rouse - Seems like we are trying to be responsive to the community. With the committee members, it seems like they don't feel like they were connected to what was happening in the committee and what was expressed during the forum. Feels like we need to go the extra step and close the loop so that the community feels like we are hearing them. Felt like there was a disconnect last night. Need to make sure there is a voice of the FMPC together at the Forums so that they feel like what they are working on is being reflected.
Mr. Hakim - Stated that he thinks the FMPC is doing a great job. Many community members are wanting to add to it. Does think that the number of meetings need to be increased in order to reach a decision-based conclusion.
Mr. Tomlinson - Stated that it may be worth exploring alternative construction methods in order to save construction costs.
Dr. Hanke - Stated that we are taking time in order to do this correctly. This is very important to the district. It may not be what everyone wants but it will be a positive for the district. Our mission and core values will be the same and will not change. We will do what is right for the students of this district. |
| Q: What is the Facilities Master Plan?
A: The Facilities Master Plan outlines the use of facilities for current and future schools in the district.
Q: When will the plan be complete?
A: The draft plan will be presented to the Board of Trustees in late February/early March. |
| LPA is returning to provide an update on the Master Plan process to date. The presentation will focus on a potential scenario to accommodate high school enrollment growth. LPA will be highlighting engagement with various stakeholders including district staff, and the local community. LPA has been working with various stakeholder groups to review data, discuss options, and seek input in order to develop recommendations to the Superintendent and the Board of Trustees. |
FMP HS Growth Options
|
|
|
Beverly Heironimus - Assistant Superintendent, Business Services
Kim McNeely - Senior Director, Facilities
Tim Boczanowki - Program Manager |
Staff will update Board of Trustees on the E-5 School Project. |
The Board of Trustees approved the Schematic Design Concept for the E-5 campus at the regular meeting on August 25, 2015 and directed staff to proceed with the K-8 design for the new school campus. DLM Architects and the Facilities team have been moving forward through educational program refinement, schematic design, site specific detailed information, and budget development for the K-8 grade configuration.
|
| |
The immediate project funding will be Capital Building Fund (211). The final funding sources are expected to be developer fees and state funding program. Capital Facilities Fund (250) and County School Facilities Fund (350). |
The purpose of this item is to provide an update to the Board of Trustees on the E-5 School Project. |
| Board Comments/Questions
Mr. Tomlinson - Stated that whenever possible, the timeline needs to be shortened so that costs can be reduced.
Ms. Miller - Questions will be asked about how we are funding it, so it would be good to have concrete answers for that.
Ms. Rouse - Concerned about the increase in costs because when the business plan was developed we knew that the school was going to be a K-8.
Ms. McNeely - Stated that when they did the first development they did know it was a K-8 but did not look at it programmatically which most certainly will drive up the cost.
Mr. Hakim - Stated that except for the cost, the plan looks very good and he is very happy with it. |
Q: When will campus construction begin?
A: Site Development work is planned to begin in summer 2016.
Q: When will the project be complete?
A: Whereas the construction of this campus is being accelerated to allow school to open in the fall of 2018, all buildings and facilities may not be fully completed. Once plans begin to be approved by DSA, more detailed time lines and building completion dates can be determined. |
Facilities staff will provide the Board of Trustees with an update regarding recent project activities including site investigations, agency and developer coordination, design document progress, and budget development. The project approval process, contracting method, budget, and construction schedule will be discussed as part of the next steps in the presentation.
|
E-5 K-8 Board Presentation 1-12-16
|
|
|
| Tim McCarty, Ed.D. - Assistant Superintendent Educational Services
Tess Johnson, Coordinator of Student Services
Walt Lewis, Director of Assessment, Accountability, Educational Technology
Sheri Sweeney, Principal, Fallon Middle School
Claire Mognaga, Principal, Frederiksen Elementary |
| The Board of Trustees will receive information about RTI and will have an opportunity to discuss progress on our Response to Intervention practices. Two schools will share their RTI progress. |
| Our district has focused on the Professional Learning Community model for over five years. Our RTI plan is based on and is an extension of the PLC model.
Strategic Initiative #1 is Student Learning: We will maximize student learning and achievement.
Our District Goal to achieve this Strategic goal is "PLC teams will develop systematic interventions at each school."
This year we have continued to provide PLC/RTI Institute level training for new school site administrators. New key administrators attended a PLC/RTI Institute in Salt Lake City, Utah. Additionally, some of our administrators and lead teachers are attending an Institute in Phoenix and at Castro Valley Unified.
At each of our three administrative monthly meetings facilitated by Educational Services, we hold seminars and group discussions on PLC and RTI implementation practices and challenges. Each principal has the responsibility to help their grade level and course teams use PLC practices effectively. Additionally, each principal is tasked to develop a school wide Intervention system for students who are not meeting academic or social and emotional skills.
Fallon Middle School principal, Sheri Sweeney, and Frederiksen Elementary principal, Claire Mognaga, will present elements of their RTI programs. |
| |
| Funds from our 2015-16 board approved budget were set aside for leadership PLC/RTI training.
|
| The purpose of this agenda item is for the Board of Trustees to receive information about RTI and to have an opportunity to discuss progress on our Response to Intervention practices. Two schools will share their RTI plans in select 'skill' and 'will' areas.
|
| Response to Instruction and Intervention is a school-wide three-tiered intervention system. Tiers one and two interventions are research-based data-driven practices used by the classroom teachers to identify students who have not responded to initial instruction.
Walt Lewis and Tess Johnson led a team of site administrators, Dean of Students Kelly Zummo, Principals Claire Mognaga and Sheri Sweeney, and Asst. Principal Elena Ball in offering insight into the processes used at the middle and elementary school levels to address intervention support for students.
Board Questions
Ms. Miller - Asked if the seven stages of team development form is something that is filled out by the teams. Mr. Lewis stated that yes, they are filled out and used on a regular basis.
Ms. Miller - Also offered her thanks on a great presentation.
Ms. Rouse - Asked what the challenges are for the teams as they move towards the higher numbers. Ms. Sweeney stated that finding effective interventions can be a challenge for the teams. Ms. Mognaga stated that the students are always changing so there is always a need to change the key parts of the intervention strategies. |
| Q. How does the RTI training connect to our PLC work?
A. Each grade level or course team must address four essential questions to become effective in the PLC model. RTI focuses on the third question: What do we do when students have not learned their essential skills?
Q. In what ways have we developed staff knowledge about RTI?
A.Principals and assistant principals have attended a 2 1/2 day Institute. Teachers and support staff have attended a two day training on the RTI practices during staff development days.
Q. Will we need to hold further training?
A. Yes, further training will be necessary and on-going each year. Our next level of trainings are for grade level and course leaders.
|
| Response to Instruction and Intervention is a school-wide three-tiered intervention system. Tiers one and two interventions are research-based data-driven practices used by the classroom teachers to identify students who have not responded to initial instruction.
A student with academic or social skills gaps receives additional support from the school support staff based on needs. Each school develops systematic plans to assess and monitor a wide range of student behaviors. Students who are not making adequate progress receive research based interventions. If students do not show progress, further assessments and interventions occur by support staff.
One of the foundations of the RTI program working effectively is that each team identifies the essential standards at their grade/course level and that formative assessments are given frequently to determine students who need additional support.
|
Stages of Team Development
ONE STEP AT A TIME
DUSD PLC Team Assessment and Recommendations
Vision 2020 Student Learning - PLC
Response to (Instruction) and Intervention Plan Update
FMS 2015-16 RTI Pyramid
Frederiksen 2015-16 RTI Pyramid
|
|
|
| Traci Bonde, Chief Technology Officer
Tim McCarty, Ed.D., Assistant Superintendent Educational Services
Stephen Hanke, Ed.D., Superintendent |
| The Board of Trustees will review modifications to Board Policy and Administrative Regulation 6163.4, Student Acceptable Use. Administrative Regulation 6163.5 BYOD will be discussed for a first reading.
|
| The use of online resources has provided significant opportunities to enhance communication and collaboration across the district.
|
| |
| The Gamut Manual Maintenance contract is an annual fee of $2,850. There is a budget for this item. General Fund dollars are used for these services. |
| The purpose of this item is for the Board of Trustees to review modifications to Board Policy and Administrative Regulation 6163.4, Student Acceptable Use. Administrative Regulation 6163.5 BYOD will be discussed for a first reading.
|
| Ms. Miller - Asked if there was going to be a rigid rule about taking "selfie" photos with their phones. Suggest the language be softened.
Ms. Miller - Stated that with regard to the language about the use of cell phones in buses, it may be too restrictive, also we don't use buses. Ms. Bondi stated we do use buses for other uses such as games. Mr. Cunningham stated we do use them for field trips so perhaps we just specify "field trips".
Ms. Rouse - Would like to run this by some students to see if they can identify some of the areas that are too restrictive or just don't mke sense. In some respects when reading some areas of the policy, it reads like the dress code policy; there are all kinds of things about what not to do, when in some cases they don't make good common sense. Such as, "students will not charge their phones". Portable cell phone charges are now used by individuals so that rule seems to no longer apply.
Mr. Hakim - Stated he thinks that the BYOD policy seems to be too restrictive. A definition of what constitutes a BYOD needs to be included in the policy. It should be something that adds to their learning.
Mr. Tomlinson - Recognizes that we need to have certain language in the policy to be protected legally.
Mr. Cunningham - Need to have the common sense rules in the policy, such as students are responsible for their own devices and follow the network policies, but not be so restrictive to
impede their everyday use. Leave some discretion so that teachers are not the BYOD police.
Ms. Rouse - Is concerned about those students who don't have a device and cannot have access to one. Would like to have that addressed in some way. Would like that information brought back later.
Ms. Rouse - Wondered if we were overstepping with regard to our rights to their device. Would like to make sure we are not reaching too far into the privacy issue.
Ms. Miller - It would be important to get some input from teachers and students on what they think should be included in the policy. Ms. Rouse suggested that the 5th graders and middle schoolers be included in gathering of feedback about the policy.
Mr. Hakim - Asked what determines a device is a BYOD device? Ms. Bondi stated that is is one that a student brings from home to use on the district network.
Ms. Rouse - Would like to find out if this is something that can be seen on the district App.
Dr. Hanke outlined what he is hearing are the three key issues:
1. The Right to Privacy - Dr. Hanke reiterated that this will be a challenging one on both sides of the issue. If a student brings their device to school they should not expect that what they do on the network with their device is private because it isn't. There is a balance we have to strike here; there is a difference between reasonable suspicion vs probable cause. If we have reason to believe something has happened we should be have the right to look at that device. But that is not an easy issue. With the recent DDOS attacks we have found that out. We will need to find the middle ground on this issue. When students are on our campus's we are in fact, their parents while they are with us.
2. Access - We are working with E-Waste to refurbish, not through the district but through E-Waste refurbished devices. Ms. Bondi and Ms. Johnson will be working on a distribution plan.
3. Age appropriateness - Need to make sure the policy is applied appropriately according to the age/grade of the students.
Teacher/Student input, come back with those adjustments.
Ms. Rouse - Stated she would like to see whatever protocols are established, they are set up for schools district-wide, by level. With regard to the privacy issue, does think that not everyone would agree with that.
Mr. Cunningham - Keep the language broad enough to protect us, which is what will work best for the district. |
| Q: What is the process for revising Board Policies?
A: The process involves a review with suggested modifications by staff; a review for first reading by the Board; a review for second reading and approval by the Board; and final re-writing and posting of approved policies by CSBA. Following a similar process, regular updates from CSBA are then reviewed and included as changes to existing policies.
Q: How are Acceptable Use policies communicated with students, staff and parents?
A: Students will receive information at the beginning of the year in school handbooks, during the annual registration process, and as necessary throughout the year through classroom discussions and school assemblies.
Q: What are the benefits of an opt-in Acceptable Use Agreement?
A: The proposed revisions will ease efforts by staff and teachers attempting to gather a signed agreement annually. Teachers will be confident they can utilize online resources on the first day of school with no ramifications. An opt-out form is available for parents/guardians wishing to pursue such an action.
Q: What is the rationale for AR 6163.5 BYOD?
A: Dublin Unified currently has examples of students bring personal devices, yet there is no clear regulation about guidelines, responsibility, and potential enforcement provisions. Personal device use is briefly outlined in BP 6163.4 and AR 6163.4 and this new AR 6163.5 will further clarify and support staff, teachers, and students with detailed guidelines and a FAQ that will be posted on websites for consumption.
Q: Why are we discussing BYOD with 1:1 as our focus?
A: A BYOD policy will support the instructional use of cell phones and personal devices on school sites and encourage 24/7 learning.
Q: How will school sites implement BYOD following consideration of AR 6163.5 BYOD?
A: The Administrative Regulation, Student BYOD Agreement, and FAQ will provide administrators and teachers guidelines that can be translated into use in the classroom and during the day for educational enhancement. |
| The District has recently reviewed Board Policies and Administrative Regulations 6163.4. Proposed changes will ease efforts for acceptable use and provide clear guidelines for the acceptable use of online resources. These policies will be clearly communicated to parents and students as a part of the opening of school each year.
As the use of personal devices continues to expand, it will be increasingly important for the District to maintain up-to-date policies and to communicate them to students, staff, and parents regularly. This evening staff will discuss proposed revisions to BP and AR 6163.4 and engage the Board in a discussion about the addition of AR 6163.5 BYOD. Plans to formalize "BYOD" best practices will also be shared.
|
AR 6163.5 BYOD draft
BYOD Student Agreement DRAFT
DUSD BYOD FAQ
BP 6163.4 draft
AR 6163.4 draft
AUP Agreement draft
AUP-BYOD Presentation
|
|
|
Beverly Heironimus - Assistant Superintendent, Business Services
Kim McNeely - Senior Director, Facilities
Patty Benavidez - Facilities Planner |
| Staff is requesting Board of Trustees' approval of Resolution No. 2015/16-20 Beyond Bonding Authority.
Staff recommends the Board of Trustees approve Resolution No. 2015/16-20 to complete this required step in the state funding application process for the E-5 K-8 School. |
| The Office of Administrative Law approved emergency regulations on November 1, 2012 that impact how the Office of Public School Construction (OPSC) processes applications received after existing bond authority is no longer available for New Construction and Modernization applications. These regulations establish a State Allocation Board (SAB) acknowledged list for projects that are received by OPSC after bond authority is exhausted. The list is called the "Applications Received Beyond Bond Authority List". Applications placed on this list only undergo an intake review to ensure all of the required documents have been submitted, but are not fully processed by OPSC nor presented to SAB for approval.
All New Construction and Modernization applications received on or after November 1, 2012 are subject to the new regulations and processing procedures, as approved by the SAB. A new construction or modernization application package received on or after November 1, 2012 must include a school board resolution that includes several acknowledgements, as specified in regulation section 1859.95.1. Adoption of this resolution ensures the State Allocation Board that Districts and their Board of Trustees understand there is no longer any bonding authority available and that submitting an application is not a guarantee of state bond funds. The resolution attached to this agenda item meets OPSC requirements. |
| |
| No Financial Impact. |
| The purpose of this item is Board of Trustees' approval of Resolution No. 2015/16-20 Beyond Bonding Authority, required for submittal with the OPSC New Construction application for funding for the E-5 K-8 School. |
The purpose of this item is Board of Trustees' approval of Resolution No. 2015/16-20 Beyond Bonding Authority, required for submittal with the OPSC New Construction application for funding for the E-5 K-8 School. - Motion made by Megan Rouse and a seconded by Greg Tomlinson. |
Yes Dan Cunningham.
Yes Greg Tomlinson.
Yes Amy Miller.
Yes Megan Rouse.
Not Present Leesa Ko (Advisory Vote).
Yes Sameer Hakim.
|
|
| Q: When will state bond funds become available?
A: There is no identified date currently. State bond funds may become available if voters approve a new statewide school facility bond in the future.
Q: Must a resolution be adopted for every New Construction or Modernization application submitted to OPSC?
A: Yes, however, if there are multiple applications to be submitted simultaneously, the District may list them on one Board Resolution.
|
| Resolution No. 2015/16-20 was first presented to the Board of Trustees at the November 17th, 2015 meeting. At the direction of the Board of Trustees, staff is returning this evening seeking approval of Resolution No. 2015/16-20 to complete this required step in the state funding application process for the E-5 K-8 school. While recognizing the requirement to pass a Resolution acknowledging that existing bond authority is no longer available, the Board of Trustees further directed staff to include Resolution No. 2015/16-24 Beyond Bonding Authority Supplemental Resolution regarding State of California's lack of bonding authority, the intent of which is to urge the state to provide financial support in funding K-12 school facilities to ensure safe, healthy, and educationally adequate school facilities for students.
Resolution No. 2015/16-20 is being presented to the Board of Trustees for approval this evening. |
Resolution No. 2015/16-20 Beyond Bonding Authority
|
|
|
Beverly Heironimus - Assistant Superintendent, Business Services
Kim McNeely - Senior Director, Facilities
Patty Benavidez - Facilities Planner |
| Staff is requesting Board of Trustees' approval of Resolution No. 2015/16-24 Regarding State of California's Lack of Bonding Authority.
Staff recommends the Board of Trustees approve Resolution No. 2015/16-24 for submittal to state legislative leaders to clarify the Board of Trustees advocacy regarding future school construction bonds. |
| Resolution No. 2015/16-20 Beyond Bonding Authority was first presented to the Board of Trustees at the November 17, 2015 meeting. At the direction of the Board of Trustees, staff returned December 8, 2015 seeking Board of Trustees approval of Resolution No. 2015/16-20 to complete this required step in the state funding application process for the E-5 K-8 school. While recognizing the requirement to pass a Resolution acknowledging that existing bond authority is no longer available, the Board of Trustees further directed staff to include Resolution No. 2015/16-24 Supplemental Resolution Regarding State of California's lack of bonding authority, the intent of which is to urge the state to provide financial support in funding K-12 school facilities to ensure safe, healthy, and educationally adequate school facilities for students.
At the December 8, 2015 meeting the Board of Trustees proposed revisions to Resolution No. 2015/16-24 and directed staff to consult with legal counsel and the District's state agency consultant to analyze the proposed revisions. Based on that meeting with legal counsel and the District's state agency consultant, the proposed revisions from the Board of Trustees were incorporated into Resolution No. 2015/16-24. It was further advised that Resolution No. 2015/16-20 be submitted to the Office of Public School Construction (OPSC) as a stand alone document, and Resolution No. 2015/16-24 be submitted separately to state legislative leaders as a leverage tool to clarify the Board of Trustees advocacy regarding future school construction bonds.
|
| |
| No Financial Impact. |
| The purpose of this item is Board of Trustees' approval of Resolution No. 2015/16-24 Resolution Regarding State of California's Lack of Bonding Authority. |
The purpose of this item is Board of Trustees' approval of Resolution No. 2015/16-24 Resolution Regarding State of California's Lack of Bonding Authority. - Motion made by Megan Rouse and a seconded by Sameer Hakim. |
Yes Dan Cunningham.
Yes Greg Tomlinson.
Yes Amy Miller.
Yes Megan Rouse.
Not Present Leesa Ko (Advisory Vote).
Yes Sameer Hakim.
|
|
| The Board directed staff to send a letter along with the resolution to the State Allocation Board members, Senate, Assembly and any others whom it will make an impact.
|
| Q: Does the Resolution Regarding State of California's Lack of Bonding Authority have any impact on the District's application for funding to OPSC?
A: The Resolution will be submitted to the state legislative office to clarify the Board of Trustees advocacy regarding future school construction bonds. The Resolution will not be submitted to OPSC as part of the District's application for funding.
|
| Resolution No. 2015/16-24 prepared by legal counsel as revised by the Board of Trustees is being presented to the Board of Trustees for approval this evening. |
2015/16-24 State of California's Lack of Bonding Authority.pdf
|
|
|
| Steve Hanke, Ed.D, Superintendent
Beverly Heironimus, CPA, Assistant Superintendent Business
Kim McNeely, Senior Director Facilities |
| Establish a bond project working committee and receive direction from Board of Trustees on the next actions they would like the committee to pursue, include the two members they want on the committee. |
| On September 8, 2015 the district contracted with TBWB for consultation and assistance evaluating the feasibility of a bond measure, development of a measure for the ballot and implementing a public outreach and communications program to raise awareness of the district's funding needs. On October 27,2015 the results of the bond feasibility study were presented to the Board of Trustees. The initial ballot test and the final ballot test showed support for the district but the district would need to mount a campaign to assure a positive outcome. |
| |
| None at this time |
| The purpose of this item is to establish a bond project working committee and take direction from the Board of Trustees on the next steps as they consider placing a bond on the ballot. |
| After discussion it was decided that Mr. Tomlinson and Mr. Hakim will serve on the GO Bond Project Committee. |
| Q: Why is this working committee needed for the Bond?
A: As the Board of Trustees considers placing a Bond on the ballot the resolution that must be approved by the Board by March 11, 2016 has to list what the proposed projects for the Bond will be.
Q: In the next few weeks school site personnel, LPA and our facilities department team will work on school site master plans and these items will be discussed at a meeting in January. Will this information be considered in the decision?
A: Of course, we must consider that school site personnel may not be as knowledgeable about the infrastructure needs of each of our sites that may be at a critical phase, so facilities detailed knowledge will be needed in this phase and development of the site master plan. |
| At the same time as the survey for bond feasibility was conducted the district has been involved in a Facilities Master Plan Process with LPA and KNN. As a part of this process many community meetings for input were held and are being held over January and February 2016. The plan is the final Facilities Master Plan Recommendation is being presented to Board of Trustees in March. The working group will coordinate with these groups to gather information that can be utilized for preparing projects for inclusion in the ballot. The committee members being recommended at this time for the small committee is:
Kim McNeely
Tim Bozcanowski
Steve Hanke
Beverly Heironimus
Tim McCarty
2 Board members to be named
|
Financing Schedule for 2016 Bond
|
|
|
| Mr. Hakim - With regard to the letter that was received from the city manager, a response letter needs to be sent to the city manager. Dr. Hanke responded that a letter has already been sent to the city manager.
Mr. Hakim - There is a last Community Forum coming up and would like to see the format be that of a Town Hall meeting. Dr. Hanke stated that the meeting was last evening.
Ms. Miller - Stated that with regard to the Town Hall forum that was used for the DOC last year, it was not really effective for the district. Asked if that is what Mr. Hakim is asking for.
Mr. Hakim - Stated that at the Forum meeting last night there is the FMPC with six viable options, with the hybrid option being presented. We did not take discuss the other options.
Mr. Cunningham - Stated that what ended up being discussed was a second comprehensive high school. He did not hear anyone give any pros and cons on the hybrid.
Ms. Miller - Stated that individuals can come to board meetings to offer their input. Mr. Cunningham offered his agreement. As did Ms. Rouse.
Dr. Hanke stated he is looking for direction on this topic. We have a set plan in place and we are meeting with individual sites as a next step in the process. Stated that he feels the options can be narrowed very quickly.
Ms. Miller - Suggested that individuals can attend the FMPC meetings as observers and if they have something they would like to share with the Board they can attend a Board meeting and offer their input to the Board under visitors.
Mr. Cunningham - Asked if the final determination for meeting dates could be shred with the Board via Scratchpad.
Ms. Rouse - Has a couple of things that have been Matters that she's waiting for: 1)Attendance Mid-Year Report. Dr. Hanke stated this was to come back via Scratchpad. 2)Grad Requirement/4 yrs Math/Computer Science credit. Dr. Hanke responded that with more than 20 items pending on the Board Item calendar it's a matter of finding a time to get it on the calendar. 3)Fitness-Gram. Dr. McCarty will check for an upcoming date for this item.
|
|
|
| Stephen Hanke, Ed.D., Superintendent
Shelley Fischer, Administrative Assistant |
| The Board of Trustees will review and comment on upcoming board agenda items. |
The purpose of this item is for the Board to review and comment on upcoming board agenda items. |
Upcoming Agenda Items 1.12.2016 pdf
|
|
|
| The meeting was adjourned at 9:57 p.m. |
|
| In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, the Loomis Union School District encourages those with disabilities to participate fully in the public meeting process. If you have special needs in order to allow you to attend or participate in our public meetings, please contact our office at (916) 652-1800 well in advance of the regular meeting you wish to attend so that we may make every reasonable effort to accommodate you, including auxiliary aids or service. Documents distributed for public session items, less than 72 hours prior to the meeting, are available for public inspection at the Loomis Union School District office, 3290 Humphrey Rd, Loomis, California. |
| |
| Present | Shelley Fischer |
| Present | Beverly Heironimus |
| Present | Dr. Tim McCarty |
| Present | Dr. Stephen Hanke |
| Present | Dan Cunningham |
| Present | Greg Tomlinson |
| Present | Amy Miller |
| Present | Megan Rouse |
| Present | Leesa Ko (Advisory Vote) |
| Present | Sameer Hakim |
| Present | Mark McCoy |
|
|