Board of Education · Regular Meeting · May 22, 2025

Approval of the agenda as amended by Miss Chavez. Second. It's been moved by Miss Beyer, seconded by Miss Harold Goff to approve the agenda as amended. Moving 5A ahead of 4 A. is there any further discussion? All in favor say I. I. I. All oppose use the same sign. It passes unanimously. Thank you all. The next item on our agenda are the monthly minutes from April 24th, 2025. Move approval. Second. It's been moved by Miss Beyer, seconded by Miss Chavez to move approval of the April the minutes from April 24th, 2025. Is there any further discussion? All in favor, please say I.

I. I. All oppose, please use the same sign. It passes unanimously. Colleagues, we the next item on our agenda is.

General public comment. I came intending to follow our expectations of one board member not taking up so much of administration's time and asking for a waiver of the policy. But we have 30 people signed up for public comment so we don't need to wave the policy. Each person can have one minute tonight if that's. Okay. A quick review of the rules first. Please state your name. All right, let me let me call the first set of names so they can start lining up.

Elizabeth Sims, Lakesha Holiday, Kalia Dunham, Britney Frost. So, a quick review of the world rules. First, please state your name. If speaking for an organization, please state your name and the name of the organization. Second, speakers are asked to present their comments in one minute. When the yellow light comes on, you have 30 seconds left to start winding up your remarks. When the red light comes on, it will beep, which indicates your time is up. Complaints about named staff, students, or parents should not be voiced in open session. However, we're very interested in hearing your concerns with regard to public education, safety of our students, or to the operation of the school system. Finally, board members will listen carefully and consider the comments, but we do not engage in a discussion with the speakers. Our first speaker is Elizabeth.

Sims. If you're Lisha Holiday or Kalia Dunham, Britney Frost, could you come on and line up inside the boardroom?

Sims. Hello, my name is Elizabeth Sims and I work for the school for creative studies and I have been there since its inception in the form that it currently is and hope to have and stay with. We have the middle school and the high school and they're part of transitioning us and getting rid of the high school. But this is a couple of facts I just thought you might want to know. With our high school currently from 2021 pre postcoid our graduation rate for our high school is 93.8 2022 95 up just above 2023 95% 24 92.9 and as of this year we are projected at 100%. because it's it's a small school that these students need and why not buck the trend where what 4.5% of schools high schools are now year round. Why not keep going with with something that we know is working for those and give those parents with K year round a chance to go all the way through? Thank you very.

Much. Can I start? Hi everyone. I'm Lisha Holidayiday. I am a representative, a ELA teacher for the School for Creative Studies., I've been an educator for 20 years and finding a school that truly caters to the whole child is very difficult. This is my second year working at the School for Creative Studies and it is truly a wonderful school to work at that is and that is very difficult to find where every teacher is invested in our students. When I was called in about my possibility of losing my position due to the loss of so many students, I was crushed. Why are we losing so many students? First, it was bus transportation issues. Now, the division of our school. It doesn't sound like DPS is saying that we're growing together.

It feels like we're truly growing apart. Have you been to our school and asked how this will affect us? Did do you even care? Who made the decisions and voted on dissecting our school?, it's like a clock that's with missing pieces. How can we fix this? Come visit the school and see what see what you are in the process of breaking down. Thank you.

Hi, my name is Kylie Durham. And finding a school that will let you be you and teach you all that you need to be successful in life. You know what else is hard? Finding a middle school that you can still be able to go to for high school is even harder. Especially because you are a year-round school. And I know that SCES should continue being high school and middle school because it's beneficial and important for our learning and to have consistency. And SCS cheerleader, as a SCS cheerleader, it's not going to be the same without our former eighth graders because school is turned into a middle school. Good afternoon, board. I am the mother of Kylie Durham. I am also the communications manager for PCSA of Durham Public Schools for SCS. I have resided here in North Carolina Shik and Grit Durham. I have resided here for over six years. After the passing of my nine-year-old, we moved to Durham.

Durham public school has been absolutely amazing. I'm here today on behalf of the students, the parents, the teachers abroad of SCES. The emotions are high and definitely understandable. The school of creative studies was one of our top priorities for our daughter, which is a school of year round., basically how I feel is SCS is a place where they can grow. It's a place where they can be themselves. It's a place where they have excelled. And I've watched each and every one of those kids be in sixth grade and now they're afraid because they're like, "We got to pick another high school because our school is closing." That's not fair. That's not fair to us. That's not fair to the parents. Thank you, Britney Frost.

Haley Celiger, Angela Eban. Hi everyone. My name is Britney Frost and I'm a Durham Public School social worker. And I want to begin by thanking you for including M's pay in the in the next year's budget. that is a step in the right direction and it reflects that you place value on the work that we do. and as school social workers, we are central to the fulfillment of every core belief that this district holds. And if we're truly a restorative district, then we must also address the harm that was caused.

This year, M's level social workers showed up every day. They served our schools and our students with the skill and dedication and they did this under the expectation of master's pay, a promise that was never fulfilled. Restorative practice calls us to acknowledge harm and repair it. And I urge you to include back pay for this school year in your next steps and also find out how many others were still left out., that's how we build trust and model the restorative values that we teach our students. Thank you.

Good evening. My name is Haley Filiger and I seed my time to Angela Eren. Good evening. My name is Angela Eren and I seed my time to Fiona Watts. Fiona Watts. Sheaya Truit JB Howland Megan Steel Wagon. Hello, my name is Fiona Watts and I am a proud member of the DA. I'm deep deeply frustrated and disappointed by a glaring inequality in our district's compensation structure. One that devalues the work of some of the most vital educators in our school are interventionists. As a dedicated educator and advocate for equitable student support, I find it both disheartening and unacceptable that interventionists are excluded from M's level play while other specialists including AIG, EC, and EL teachers are rightly recognized for their advanced degrees. This disparity sends a troubling message about what and whom we value in our education system.

Interventionists work tirelessly tirelessly every day with our students who are furthest behind, who struggle the most and who need the most intensive targeted support. These educators po pull groups, design datadriven instruction, and pour every ounce of their expertise into closing achievement gaps that have only widened in recent years. They do not choose the students who are already thriving. They choose the students who need the most help, the most patience, and the most skill. And yet, despite fulfilling a similar job as an AIGC and teacher who pull groups of students, interventionists are not guaranteed M's pay. What kind of message does this send? That students who are above grade level deserve highly skilled educators, but those who are below grade level don't. I urge you to take this issue seriously. Students who are below grade level deserve to have the most skilled interventionists and that only happens when those educators are recognized for their education. Please do not allow this injustice to persist.

Let us show our students and the educators who serve them that we value all learners, especially those who need us most. Thank you. I'm Shamaya Truit and I concede my time to JB Allen. Good evening everybody. Dr. Lewis and members of the board. JB Howland, school social worker. Nice to see you all again. I'm here tonight to advocate for you to use the now available fund balance to activate retropay for school social workers costing about $80,000 and bus monitor supplements which estimates are saying is 200,000.

These are both DAE priorities that are worthy uses of the fund balance., social workers have felt very discouraged this year as we've dealt with broken promises all while showing up every day to serve our most vulnerable students and families. In the early fall of this year, we learned that the sudden exclusion of instructional support staff when it was announced that M's pay would only be provided to classroombased teachers, language that was never used in the spring of 2024. We then received an email from HR on October 28th stating that our advocacy had paid off and that social workers would finally be paid fairly. But that email was taken back just a few hours later that same day. on November 21st, Dr. Lewis, you stated we will deliver. You stated you only needed 4 days for a plan. it's been six months, half a year later and still no fulfillment of that plan. I'm going be honest, harm has been done and trust has been broken.

So, DPS advocates a lot for restorative practices. Tonight is a great opportunity to practice, by acknowledging the harm done to the social work profession and fulfill a promise. Five of you, board members have publicly stated at the meet and conference that you support DA's demand of full restoration of masters pay. Several of you have encouraged us to keep advocating all year long, which we have done tirelessly., we only wish that y'all would do the same for us., please do write by the social work profession and the other staff that have been left out of next year's master's plan. The work we do for our students and families is important and it matters. Thank you.

Good evening. My name is Megan Stillwagen. I'm the school social worker at Rogers Her Middle School in Hope Valley Elementary. Thank you for including school social workers for M's pay for next year. Though I am disheartened that other qualified staff are continuing to be excluded. I urge you to follow NCDPI guidelines rather than continue to arbitrarily select who deserves compensation for their master's degrees. I'm here to advocate for you to use the now available fund balance to fulfill emergency spending needs, specifically retropay for school social workers and bus monitor supplements.

These both represent essential timely uses of the fund balance. Regardless of differing perspectives on last year's events regarding M's pay, it's clear there was miscommunication and mistakes. We all returned to work believing that we would receive this pay. The district's fund balance exists for such emergencies and mistakes. Using a small portion to correct this issue would not only restore trust, but it would retain workers. A quote I love is that the measure of a society lies in how it treats its most vulnerable members. We serve our most vulnerable students.

Please support us. Thank you. Sonia Lopez, Sydney Schneleneck, Deja Fle, Abigail Hedgepath, Amelia. Gray. My name is Sonia Lopez. I'm a proud DAE member and a DPS social worker. We say we're a restorative practices district, but restorative practices starts with repairing harm. The fund balance is for emergencies, for urgent repairs and unexpected needs. If an HVAC repair is a valid reason to use it, why isn't repairing harm to people? This board caused harm to bus monitors excluded from the driver supplement to social workers denied masters pay to instructional support left out of this year and next. We're asking for 6% of the estimated fund balance, about 200,000, to begin repairing that harm.

How do you expect to retain workers while treating them as disposable, restore what was promised, repair the harm? That's what restorative practices. Requires. Hey y'all, Sydney Schneck, social worker at Parkwood, here with colleagues tonight to thank you for including us next year in M's pay. At the same time, it's hard to know we have colleagues still being excluded. It is divisive and unfair given how small our numbers are. It's also hard to know our inclusion is still pending county commissioner approval in their own tough budget session next week. Spoiler, I'll be there. But tonight, like many of us, I'm holding my breath as the Senate works on the federal budget. Knowing the cuts that are coming to SNAP and Medicaid, knowing that our food pantries are struggling to stay stocked, our shelters are full, eviction prevention funds are dry. Somehow, I'm here knowing y'all got that fund balance information you've been waiting for, to ask for what me and my colleagues still need, repair.

I'm asking our restorative practices district to uphold their commitment and approve retro pay for our masters for this school year, estimated at 80K, alongside the bus monitor supplement at 130K. I've said it before and will again. This is our petition to keep us. We want to stay. Social workers do our best work when rooted in community and you will miss us. When Hello everyone and thank you for including us next year for M's pay. It's simply not fair that school social workers who are under the same contract as teachers are still not receiving the masters pay we were promised and deserve despite fulfilling the same professional and educational expectations while supporting the most vulnerable students in the building. This not only devalues our expertise and advanced training but breaks a promise that was clearly made to us. Equity matters and it's time for our compensation reflects the qualifications and commitment we bring to our schools and students every day.

Also, as the McKini Vento social worker, I would also like to say bus monitors deserve to be included in the bus driver supplement as without them and the bus drivers, many of our students wouldn't be able to get to school each day. Thank. You. Good evening. My name is Abigail Hedgepath and I'm currently a junior at the School for Creative Studies. I'm the student council vice president, marketing manager of our theater department, a senior student ambassador, and a member of the superintendent student advisory board. I'm sure many of you recognize my face, except tonight, I'm not here to accept an award. I'm here to speak on an issue I've known for years. However, many of my fellow students have only known this for a few months. Our school is shutting down the high school section.

I've spoken on behalf of our entire school before, but today is the first time that I've been afraid to speak out on an issue. This one is so personal, so real, and so close. The School for Creative Studies have allowed me a chance to connect so closely with my teachers, administration, administrators, and other students in a way no other high school could have allowed me. I know everyone will say this, but I couldn't imagine myself at any other school. I couldn't imagine any other relationship to have formed the way it did here at creative studies. One final thing, you will hear everyone speak on behalf of high school. However, this does not only affect high schoolers, but it also infects middle schoolers. The sixth, seventh, and eighth graders will lose a one in a million chance to continue their education with the people, teachers, and students they've grown so close to. Thank you for your time.

Good afternoon. My name is Ameilia Gray. I'm a current sophomore at the School for Creative Studies. I am the student council president, costume manager of our theater department, and a member of NHS. I am also a student ambassador. The School for Creative Studies is unique in many ways, not only because of it being a year-round school or centered around the arts, but the students and teachers who make the school what it is. The students are able to thrive in our small community and the teachers and admin who make our community safe. I have never felt more welcome in any other school in DPS. We are the only year- round high school in all of DPS. We are the only public arts focused school that does not have sports. We are the only arts school that does not have the expectation of advanced academics. There those are some of the reasons why our students come and why our students stay and what makes their time at SCS so special. We have departments and studentrun facilities.

That make our school what it is. We have teachers that are kids reasons for coming to school and taking away that ability will affect many of us. I have 145 signatures that I have collected in the span of two hours of school day in support of our school staying open. Will you leave that with our clerk in the back? Thank you. Leavonne Barnes, Sophia Young, Gerson Zorto, Rebecca Ferguson, Tash.

Adams. Good morning. oh, good morning, good afternoon, good evening to all of you. My name is Leavon Barnes. Y'all know who I am. Y'all hearing the voices of these children. As educators, we talk about when when you make a mistake, you own it. You do better. I need this board to realize a mistake was made had been made and that y'all have the opportunity to change it. In this pile that I tried to scan today, there's probably over like 80 students that have written to you that you will get about why they want this school to stay. Own it. Ch. You have the power to change it. Now, we went from 700 800 kids before this announcement to now we're at 200 kids because of the failures of this office to roll out a phase out.

Now, some of y'all have no responsibility over that, and that's okay. However, rectify the wrong. That's all I got. I won't let.

You. Good evening, board. My name is Sophia Young. I am the valadictorian for the graduating class of 2025 at the School for Creative Studies. I am also the president of the high school thespian society troop and the president of the high school studentled independent euphoria record label created by the school for creative studies and a high school honor society representative. But before I was all this and before I made all these achievements, I was at Jordan High School where I felt unwelcome and I had no place at that school. There were so many people that I felt like I was not a part of it. When I came to the school for creative studies, I felt a sense of family. I felt a sense of belonging where I have never felt before and I made so many friends and I had such a good time. The school for creative studies is truly a family and if you get rid of the high school, you have broken the family. You have erased the.

Community and the history and all the memories that belong with it. Please do not do this. Good evening. My name is Gerson Sto. I'm a graduating senior at the School for Creative Studies., and I've came I've come here to talk about the fact that there has been much miscar put into our school and the fact that Axing completely specifically the high school asking the high school is just a show to how nobody cares about that school. And it's not because we don't try. Our school has been resilient through and through. And to access it, from what I've heard from enrollment rates is entirely just bogus. Our school is placed right where there is almost no way to get to school. I've suffered from transportation issues, too, because it took me almost months to get into a bus.

Not to mention that our creative studies are hardly even funded. Our theater department is entirely run by donations. And yet, we still thrive to actually make a show as competent as those of public schools. Not to mention that we are in competition with DSA. And yet, how are students supposed to choose our school over that school when it seems that it nobody cares about our creative. Studies? It's hard to follow a bunch of brave students. I'm Rebecca Ferguson and I'm a parent of a child with multiple disabilities who attends Morehead Monastery and I'm also a member of DAEC Durham Advocates for Exceptional Children and I'm going to start some comments that my fellow member is going to finish. we'd like to thank the board Dr. Lewis and Mr.

Teter for paying attention to students with disabilities and your proposed budget. For the first time you set out a plan to close the state EC funding gap over a period of five years. We currently have 1,032 students with disabilities in D in DPS that the state is not funding. North Carolina arbitrarily caps that per student EC funding at 13% while in Durham we have closer to 16%. And as you all have recognized that gap must be made up for by other funding. Your recommended budget to the county requested only of that funding. We know that there are many demands on the county's funds, but it is only a fraction of what we need to support our students who are some of the most vulnerable in the district and who, like all DPS students, have incredible potential. And five, good evening. My name is Dr. Tash Adams and I'm a parent of a 2022 DPS graduate. SCEs is where he graduated from and I'm also the vice chair at DAEC.

So tonight, as you continue to navigate the budget process and face the prospect of making difficult decisions about what will and will not be funded with the county funds, as you go down that list, we urge you to not forget about the last item on the expansion request, that 1.1 million in funding for students with disabilities. This board and Dr. Lewis has shown their commitment to being a student centered district. You have also shown a willingness to hear and collaborate with families to hear from and collaborate with families.

So please tonight, please, please, please remember those families. Please remember these students. Please remember that 1,023 of them that you're not getting funding from currently. Thank. You. Maya Willis, Roberto Sanchez, I apologize if I'm getting the names wrong. Samuel Dixon, Dante Alexander, Earl.

Dixon. Hello, I'm Maya Willis. I'm a graduating senior from the School of Creative Studies. This school has meant so much to me, so much to all of us. I first came to SCS in 9th grade. I had never felt so welcomed when I first came. One of my main reasons to coming for the coming to this school was for a small smaller size. When I was in a bigger class in middle school, I felt very overwhelmed. At my time at this school, I felt very pushed to be my best self mentally and academically. I've been prepared and secured and also my career path. Not just by my counselor, but by the staff as well. The small class sizes make it so the teachers can focus on us as individuals rather than as a whole. They can help students choose their own pathways regardless of what they may have. As I was choosing my college and my major, one of my teachers stepped up and also she became my mentor. She's helped me build a.

Portfolio, search for internships, and prepare myself for what's to come in the future. I'm so lucky to have an opportunity like this, but it's a shame that there will be no more opportunities like this if the school is broken apart. Thank you for your time. Hello, good evening. My name is Roberto Sanchez. two years ago I came up here to talk about the situation of our school school creative studies being broken apart and unfortunately we were met with a terrible news of a losing vote. Now I've come back here because I feel it is completely unjust that we have been judged by nothing but statistics yet none of the achievements of what the students at our school have created. I believe that truly the small setting has set me up for a great future. I can confidently say that with the help of the teachers, counselors and other staff that they have helped me even for students who don't want to go for a higher education, they know that.

They can rely on our teachers to help them go into that workforce to help them build a life. This is something that I've never seen bigger schools. Even with my siblings who all three of them graduated from DSA claimed that they have were never career ready and were just let go because they themselves felt like they fell through the cracks. I want y'all to fix what was never completed. Afternoon. My name is Earl Dixon. I want to convey my time over to Samuel Dixon.

Hello. My name is Dante Alexander and I would also like to convey my time to Samuel. Dixon. Good evening board. My name is Samuel Earl Dixon. I am first a man of God, a fresh spring 25 initiate or spring25 full ride graduate from North Carolina ENT State University, finishing with the Bachelor of Science to Computer Graphics Technology with a concentration in user experience design inspired by the SCS Photoshop course. A minor in finance and a certification in blockchain technology. A marketing business owner, a freshly hired Lenovo full-time associate, a member of the Alpha New chapter of Cap Alphasad Fraternity Incorporated, a youth mentor, and lastly, a former student of the School for Creative Studies. I say all of this to give you all a scope of who I am before I dive into explaining the importance of the school and the programs it offers that built the foundation of the man I just described. Also, a 21-year-old born and raised right here in Durham, North Carolina. My journey in creative studies.

Started in sixth grade and ended in the eighth grade. Within those years, the staff and programs that involve both middle and high school students is spec specifically EF tours, young male achievers and seeing the former young women of excellence program played such a pivotal role in creating the foundation of my success. But it was the mentorship of the high school students that really made it special. If you've ever been in a situation where you had a kid that wouldn't listen, but you told their older cousin closer in age to go talk to them, and you saw them take their advice to straighten up and saw a good change, that's the best scenario I can use to describe the unique atmosphere at this school. The Young Male Achievers Program and Junior Young Male Achievers program, which applies to the middle school, gave me my first experience of what true leadership, brotherhood, and service is. It provided me with older guys to learn from, seek advice from, and ultimately bond and.

Have fun with. This program is built to shape and introduce young boys into manhood. Some students had a good structure to lean back on at home. Others had none. But this program provided them with one. It also gave me a close visual of seeing what to do and saved me from experiencing things I shouldn't do. I was able to see the rough, the good, and most importantly, the beauty in male vulnerability and embracement. This not only shoved me in the right direction, but inspired me to reach back to provide the same blessing to students younger than myself. I've done community service and youth mentorship throughout my entire college career and this school's atmosphere and the programs here is what created that drive in me. I've done service through the university itself, North Carolina Anti State University Honors Program as well as my fraternity, the Alpha New chapter of Capal Vasai. In just this past semester alone, we've crack we've completed 360,60 service hours, earned the undergraduate large chapter of the.

Year for the Middle Eastern and province as well as the Godright chapter of the year award which is a national which our national youth mentorship program within our fraternity. The track record for the school of creative studies is immense and the high school plays a vital role in producing the amazing students that have come from the school. Whether it be IB, dual enrollment, etc. The mindset should be to enrich and advance this high school's beautiful atmosphere that is created, not to discard it. I'm here to be a resource of bank and in.

A Thank you. Joseph McMiller, Jeremy Melvin, James Chavis, Anar Keller, or I'm sorry, Allison Keller, and Bellinio Evans.

Good afternoon. I'm Joseph McMillan. I've had two sons attend school of creative studies. The class of 2020 and the graduating senior this year, class of 2025. As you all have heard, the foundation for school of creative studies have been laid. So, if the foundation is not broken, please don't break it. My kids have invested 12 years in school of creative studies. School of creative studies staff, they value those kids. They take them as like their own. When the parents are not there, they are the foundation for those souls. So continue to keep creative studies as it is. If the foundation is not broke, leave it alone. Thank you.

My name is Jeremy Melvin. I'm here to speak on the vision of getting ready to go to high school for school for studies. I've been diagnosed with ADHD since third grade and when I got to school for creative studies has really been helping me to control my ADHD like the program of YMA. YMA has really built my my foundation, my discipline against my ADHD. It stopped. I've stopped blaming my behavior for my ADHD and it's really has gotten me to where I am today with a 4.0 GPA and seven honorable. I would please like you to reconsider getting rid of the high school for the school of studies. Thank you.

Mr. Chavis, you're next.

Good afternoon. I hope y'all heard what those children said cuz I'm here on a different reason and my reason is the same thing. I came in March and asked y'all to sign off on I just that I'm I'm so aware what these kids are going through and I'm looking up here at this board. I can't come and tell you what I want to tell y'all. This make y'all look sorry and no good to me. And I'm going to put this out in the community because this makes no sense.

When you got kids with disability just like I am a old disability, they are young disability and y'all trying to take and not help them. That's a crying shame for y'all to sit there and say y'all are school to help our young black kids and other kids. So take in consideration, put the money where the y'all mouth feels. And I will leave this with.

Good evening. I'm Allison Keller and thank you for listening to all of us. We obviously are on different realms of emotion because SCS is the best. I am pride SCS. Look at my shirt. Keller, we love this school. I'm not kidding. When I played sports, I was not a cheerleader. I was a sports girl in school. I was walking through my halls of SCS just the other day and a new teacher goes to me, "Hey, Miss Keller, were you a cheerleader in school when you were young?" I said, "No, I was, you know, what they called a tomboy then." I I was like, "What?" And I realized, "Holy cow," when I reflected on what she said, "I am a cheerleader now. I love it. I love our school. It's not a facade. I am a real person. It is a special place. You can tell how happy I am and how angry and how emotional we are. Please, we are all here tonight to lay down our emotions because that's.

What keeps us going. That's what keeps the kids at our school. It's very, very special. And it's so special that Aaron Mills from Cameo and the basis of Outcast, we filmed his music.

Video. Hi, good evening y'all. I want to first say, thank you for the the opportunity to talk to you. And I hate the fact that many of you are having to make a decision about things that you didn't start and you hadn't seen. But I want to say that in famous words of Dr. Seuss, we are here. We are here SSCS. What you may not know is that this school for creative studies, what is different about this school? The thing that's different about this school is that students have input that we have our curriculum, we have the standards, but the students actually have input in how they can actually deliver the work back to the teachers. I am not most of your fault, but I I have a problem now because I brought the executive producer from Walt Disney to partner. I've been on four record companies. I have a masters in EC, but I'm also licensed in music.

Thank you. Can you. Thank you. Thank you, colleagues. The next item on our agenda.

Is the consent agenda. Madam Chair, I move approval of the consent agenda items A through N. Second. It's been moved by Miss Beyer, seconded by Miss Harold Goff to approve the consent agenda items. Is there any further discussion? Any discussion? All those in favor say I. I. I. all oppose, use the same sign. Consent agenda passes unanimously. And the next item on our agenda is policy 7215. Meet and confer. Oh no. We wanted to keep meeting and confer. Right.

Okay. it says. 7215. All right. 7125. Sorry. Miss Harold Goff, you submitted this for us. You're going to lead the conversation., yes. I'm going to pass it on to Emily to go ahead and open the conversation.

All right. All right. So, I'm going to make some comments to here. so this is the presentation of a modified meet and comfort policy 70215. so just to go over a little bit the process of coming to that policy. in September the board directed the superintendent to meet with DAE to craft a meeting and conferral policy for DPS and administration and DAE had a collaborative process where they discussed and decided on many aspects of the policy through December and then in December the process became headlocked. on April 10th, the board passed a meet and confer policy the 7215 that we have now which had been proposed by the administration and however the draft of the policy which was passed lacked collaboration between administration and DAE and figuring out some of the final pieces.

And it also had was originally on the on the agenda for discussion. so the purpose of today's proposed modified policy is to refine a few pieces of the policy that were not developed collaboratively and there are three changes suggested here. So an adjustment of the threshold to 11% the addition of a brief definition of an employee representative organization or ero and a practical certification process for qualifying eros. So let me comment on each one. The change to an 11% threshold. the the threshold was of debate in our last conversation about this. so the 11% was thoughtfully developed by Dr. Lewis in consultation with our attorneys at Darington Smith.

It represents the number of workers in the second largest non-managerial sect of workers after teachers which is my understanding is instructional and other assistants who number five approximately 580. and Dr. Lewis may want to share more on how he came to that percentage. and then definition of an employee representative organization. This simply provides extra clarity about the type of organization that would be able to represent workers through the meet and confer process. And then the addition of a third-party certification process is the reason for this is that given that the largest ero in our district has guidelines restricting the distribution of membership list to DPS and that third party certification is a common practice for both meet and confer and collective bargaining processes. It is appropriate to adjust our meet and confer policy to include a third-party certification process whereby the ERRO provides their membership list to a trusted third party for verification.

So in the past week Joy I also miss sorry Miss Harold Gooff and I as well as Miss Cardotten have spoken with all board members this past week and we've heard some concerns. So we have updated just today were able to update the track changes and the modified policy. I'm sorry. Can you clarify? Something's different today than when I looked at it yesterday on the in the agenda. I don't know. I'm asking. I'm sorry. You said something that surprised me. So, I'm trying to be clear on what's different. Thank you. What I'm saying right now is that we I worked on updating the track changes in the modified policy just completed this afternoon to address concerns that have arisen.

So these changes are only around the third third party certification piece not around the threshold or or erro definition. You look confused. I will I will continue to be confused, but I look forward to letting you speak. I'm sorry. Go ahead. Okay., I'm going to email this now to Can we take a recess and have it sent to the board clerk so she can upload it into board docs? Sure. No, they made updates today., can we also can we send it to the board attorney as well? And the board attorney. Mhm. Can we also have the administration's version of the policy sent so we can look at that as well? The one that's already passed? Nope. The changes that they've made since the passing so we can look at them side by side. the one that Dr. Lewis sent out earlier this month. Right.

Right. Yeah. So we can see all three together. Miss her, I'll go make a motion. Wait, wait, wait. I just want to clarify that what's on the precise is the those three amendments. Nothing is changing except that we're offering language based on what we've talked about with the board for that third track the track the track change about the third party verification. So you want us to only look at the versions of the policies that some board members want to review and no other versions. No no no no no. Okay. So we're only going to consider the one that's in board dots.

So, as for the discussion, we can look at this and we can talk you through what it was, but what we're saying in the discussion is we are offering some concerns that we heard from board members for the third party verification language. And so, we want to show you and instead of just discussing for clarity, we want to be able to show you right now what we're talking about as we're talking about it. It's not changing anything that you're seeing or anything on the precise. Right. So, what what we're asking what I'm asking for and then Mrs. Tab's going to have a chance to speak is that the version that's currently in board docs and available for public consumption is what we are discussing as our base point. And Miss Chavez is offering that there were some changes made based on conversations and concerns that you all have heard from board members, but that has not had an opportunity to be reviewed by board members, understood by board members, our attorney, or available for public.

Consumption. So, what I'm asking is we take the moment to get that to our board clerk, our board attorney, so that it can be uploaded and shown while we discuss it. Okay. My confusion is you said three. There are not three. There is only two. So what we're looking at now and what we're offering for discussion. And so, yes, and my request was to look at the one that the superintendent sent to the board as part of the superintendent's update two weeks ago that was being considered with the 11%.

But Mr. Tab has something to say. Yeah, I would like to make a motion that we go into recess so that that Miss Chavez changes that happened today can be uploaded so that we have a chance to review. Second. I'm sorry. It's been moved by Mr. Tab, seconded by Miss Carter Autton for a brief recess so that the changes that have been updated today can be sent to our clerk and attorney for uploading to board docs. There is discussion. I see hands raised. Miss Beyer. Yeah. Mr. Tub, would you welcome a friendly amendment that the superintendent's version of the policy changes also be uploaded in your motion?

Sure. Sure. As much as we need everything, we're going to get up front right now, Miss Okay. Miss Harold Goff and then Missstead. That version was a few weeks old and was not on our precise for discussion. We want to make sure that we keep it really tight and only discuss the things that were on the precise to discuss. So this is the version of the policy that was passed with three amendments. So if we add that third policy to look at, it's going to open the door for a lot of discussion that we that we're not asking for that was not presented to the board. So I would like to keep the motion as it was with just the policy that we put on the precedes to discuss today and the clarity that we want to add for discussion. Nothing else as said just wanted to add we passed the policy.

So the policy that we passed I would if we're going to look at these side by side would like to see the policy that we passed. Miss Carter Adden, I think we are looking at the policy we passed because there are any edits would are in track changes. So by the nature of that that we are looking at that policy that was passed. I also when Dr. Lewis sent that to us that has been a few weeks ago and nobody on this board elected to put that on the agenda.

So that had time to happen. What instead has happened is that two colleagues have put something else on the agenda and that's what we have on the agenda tonight for discussion. The fact that we are trying to think through some feedback and come to a point where board members are feeling good about this should not be something that and also show it on the screen and share it with everybody should not be something that we are penalized for or targeted for. We're trying to be collaborative here.

Miss Beyer. Yeah. No, I appreciate it. I I think if we're going to have the discussion, we should have the discussion in the most thorough way and and the superintendent's policy was also shared with DAE previously, I believe, and and is part of the consideration for this entire board this evening. I appreciate the work that two board members have got worked on to bring their version here tonight. So I look forward to the discussion after recess. So all those in favor of please restate the question restate bill.

The motion the motion the motion is to take a brief recess to upload the policy changes. Mitch Chavez is introducing administration's proposal on meet and confer for review alongside this. That was not the that was there was a friendly amendment. That amendment didn't go through. It did. Mr. Tab accepted it. Oh, Mr. Tab. Oh, so that that's how it works. So the person Okay. So we can vote and it can not pass. And then another motion would be entertained. We can vote and it can pass. And then all three all three of these would be looked at side by side.

How do I make a counter motion to not include? We have to vote this motion that's on the floor up or down. Is that the only way to make a counter motion?

Your policy allows you to amend a motion twice. So if I can make a second amendment, yes, but I don't think your that contradicts Right. I was going to say, but I don't think you can basically reverse the motion that's already there. Right. So you could you could amend it but you you can't effectively try to go back to the original motion. The chair is correct. I mean that motion would be voted on and if it fails then you could make a a new motion. Okay. So my understanding is if all three of these policies are forward we have to understand that the the one that we put in the precedes would be a a a duplicate of the superintendent policy that we're seeing. It would be a duplicate with track changes. One has track changes and one does not. That's that's what we're looking at, right?

No, they all have track changes. They all have track changes. I had asked for the one that we have passed because it's a clean version and that it was not to attack or to isolate. It's just helpful for my brain to see the clean one and then to see the changes beside it just for me as a learner. So that might be where that confusion came in of seeing that additional policy that we had already passed. Okay. So a clean version of the policy pass plus the version with the track changes and the ones that we are.

Okay. We were doing our very best to just not have any confusion about what we were discussing. That's paper's good too. Madam Chair, can I have a question? Okay. All those in favor for the recess to create to allow the board clerk the opportunity to upload the three policy or two policy changes or I guess it would be three. the one that's in board docs already, the one edit for Miss Chavez and administration's edits into board docs for consumption. Say I.

I. I. All oppose. Use the same sign. Okay. Motion passes unanimously. we will take a 10m minute recess. Okay.

Thank you all for your patience, Miss Chavez. All right, so now that all of these are posted, thank you, Miss Smith, for posting all of these., I just want to make clear what we have in front of us here. So, we have a braces. We have a modified policy that Joy and I put on the agenda submitted last week for the agenda today. That's the one that says policy 7215 meet and confer with modifications. And then we have the approved policy which is so it's linked here also available in our policy all of our policies.

And then we have the the one policy 7215 meet and confer May 2025 revised. This one was from Dr. Lewis. He sent it to us. Sorry, May 4th., sent it to the board. So, the the entire board has seen this one., but it was not the public hadn't seen it before. this included two major changes which were the raising of the threshold to 11% for participation an ERO's participation and that's 11% of non-administrative active employees that the ERO would represent in order to participate in the meet and confer process. And then the May 4th version that Dr. Lewis sent to us also includes some language about let's see the certification process where the district would do the certification process rather than a third party.

The policy 7215 meet and confer with modifications 5225 with track changes. That version is what we have just added today and it integrates the some of the again concerns that have arisen and it it changes some of the things that we originally proposed to the third party certification process. So let me explain there was a concern about who would pay for third-party certification. This specifies that the the 522 version specifies that the ERRO would pay for the certification process if it is third party. now there was also a concern about what if a what if an ERO doesn't want to do thirdparty certification or doesn't want to pay for it. you'll see that there's it moves the certification process procedures to an appendix of the policy at the bottom and it allows for two options. one is for the for DPS to do the certification and the the second is for there to be a third neutral neutral third party that does the certification. So it brings in the.

Language that you see from Dr. Lewis's May 4th version of the policy and it also brings in the certificate third party certification process language proposed by DAE and NCE and then let's see okay and then there was also a concern that the laying out the entire third party certif certification process felt kind of bulky it to be right in the policy. So we have moved that to an appendix that would be part of the policy but apart from the the body of the policy., and then I'll just also add that the there are no legal concerns with the third party certification process and.

And so our attorney Eva Dubis, if I'm saying that right, have confirmed that has confirmed that they don't see anything unlawful about the certification process. So, the third party certification process. So, with that would that did you want to I was just going to say that that was also shared in an email with the board. Correct. Yeah. From EVA. Yes. So, the board has received that. So I would like to move forward with making a motion to approve the edits to policy 72. I'm sorry. In the modified version dated 5225. Yes. Go ahead. Second.

It's been moved by Miss Chavez, seconded by Miss Harold Gooff to make changes to policy 72, sorry, 7215 as presented. I see some discussion. Yeah. To approve that to approve the edits to policy 7215 in the modified version dated 5225. Miss Beyer. I really appreciate it and I appreciate you all bringing this item for discussion by the full board. I sent a list of questions in addition to the ones that I posed to you, Miss Herald Gooff, and I appreciate you considering some of the questions.

Now, I'm looking for this extensive list of questions. One of the first things that I would want is to make sure that our policy stay is clean and has legal thorough legal analysis by the board's attorney. And so I look forward to a memo from Therington Smith about this new revised version. I know when I've talked to some of you all, I have I have said that I know the thing that is pressing for for DAE and their concerns is the May 31st certification date and and I welcome the ability in this year for this board to to wave that date, to adjust that date. so that we have time to do this without urgency. Meet and confer is passed is policy in Durham, North Carolina, first district in the state to have a meet and confer policy. So, I look forward to us taking a chance to work through this as a board of seven with legal counsel to make sure that we are thorough in covering all questions and answers.

So, some of my questions that I sent today that I am still awaiting answers on and I and I, you know, we can read in what Eva was able to back of the envelope for us today. What does the superintendent recommend as best practice in other states, including both union and right to work states? Is third-party certification used or do unions or associations just provide their membership list? I believe the majority of DAE members have their dues deducted from payroll. Do we have a starting membership from HR? If DAE falls below the 50% majority threshold for their 13 member team and their ability to serve as a vice chair, how would the policy adjust to reflect that? Should ERRO be redefined to match what is defined in state statute education employee association? How is certification being handled in Asheville City Schools? Would meet and confer be better served through a procedure rather than a policy? Would any list of employees provided to a third party also be subject to FOYA,.

Freedom of Information Act? Does the policy and several other DPS policies already offer employee protection against retaliation? Could we strengthen that language to address these concerns? If the board chooses to support thirdparty verification, could the how be codified in procedure versus in policy, which I appreciate y'all doing, but I don't think that actually procedure even should be written by the board. It should be written by Dr. Lewis and and attorneys. you've addressed the the ERO bearing the expense., and then you've addressed leaving open the option for other organizations to simply provide a list., I would like a legal analysis about concerns with raising the threshold. And my concern with that is that at this juncture, any con action that we take to modify the threshold actually seems like we are trying to prevent existing unions like the teamsters from ever being able to participate.

So, I also think if we're going to open up the policy, there are things that I would like to consider adding to the policy that I'd like my colleagues to consider. Some of those are like a definition of good faith so that we can make sure that we call folks back to that when there is conflict. And I also think it is important for us to to be clear and understand that these meetings are not actually to be electronically recorded and livereamed and and subject to video. So I appreciate all the work that you all have done, all the conversations that you've had. I have significant questions outstanding. I look forward to a legal analysis and and time to work on this in June. And I am prepared to to encourage us all to wave the date so that we can take the time to get this language right. But I appreciate y'all bringing it forward this evening. Thank you. Attorney Malone, did you want to address any of those questions that I.

Actually don't even know that that they can be answered on the fly in a way that is helpful. I really really would rather it be a written documentation that the board can see and reflect upon and and that is why I'm imploring my colleagues we we are making progress on this together but multiple versions of policy answers winging around us all getting things at the last minute. You know I I look forward to us taking some time to to to get it as right as we can if there are modifications that need to be made. Thank you, Mr. Tab.

Thank you very much. Just a few questions., statement first that a lot of this work has already been done and it seems though we're kind of going back and revisiting a lot that's already been done. And I think we're we were in a good place and it's appearing now that we're kind of uprooting all the great things that have already occurred and we're now going backwards and starting all over again. And that's what I don't want to happen here. I think that we are probably at maybe three issues that we need to address. And if we could stay right at those three things that we need to address., and if attorney Malone is okay with addressing specific things like the the percentage if if 11% is okay and by your adisement as our attorney that you have no problems with that and and you have talked it over with Dr. Dr. Lewis. I'd rather hear that tonight., if we're okay with the verification for third party and it does not cost the district any money,.

Then I I want to hear that from from you or Dr. Lewis where we are because that's where the communication the communication was with Dr. Lewis and DAE and we actually employ employed them to have those conversation and I think that we've gotten to a great point and I don't want to see us go go backwards. I want to see us move this forward but yet to answer those questions that have been that have been stated. So if you would indulge in answering those I would really appreciate it.

Sure. as to the 11% as I think Eva and I have kind of consistently stated the there is no real answer that we have from anybody any case law on this statute right so obviously the lower the percentage we believe makes it more defensible six we feel good about seven we feel good about I mean as you go up it it gets It's a little grayer. 11 does not significantly concern us., but I can't tell you that 11 is absolutely legal and that if you're challenged at 11% that you would prevail., but we really can't tell you that even for 6%, but six we feel much better about just because it's lower. But yeah, I mean it's it's a number we would obviously defend the board vigorously. If you select any number, we would defend you.

But the lower the number we think just makes it a much more defensible position. Let me rephrase my question to you then. Would you as our board attorney encourage us to go to 11%. That's not a question for the attorney. Sorry.

I mean, I know what's happening here, but I want to make sure that as I I'll wait till he finishes. I just want to make sure that if we go to 11% that that representing us we're in a a place where you feel real comfortable with and I know that we have already gone up we had gone up to 50 it was first at 50%. So so we are down to 11%. I want to be able to make a a real great decision on where I'm going to to land on this, but a lot of it depends on direction because we're going to be calling on you later to have to defend if necessary. And I what I don't want is is the attorneys to say we didn't, you know, wasn't on the advisement of the board attorneys. And I want to be just clear that as I move forward with this that I'm I'm in a good place because you're in a good place for us.

We feel really comfortable at 6% and as you go up from that it gets to be a little grayer. At 11% it is probably defensible, but I can't tell you that 11% is definitely defensible. Six is more defensible than 11. 11 may very well prove to be defensible if challenged, but I mean it I'm not able to tell you that it's it's it would be a slam dunk, but it's it certainly is in the defensible range. I mean it's it's it's a number that I think we would be able to defend, but we would be much more comfortable defending 6%.

The second part of my question was about the verification or with third-party verification. Are we is that legal? Are we okay with that? Yeah, the concept of third party verification that part in and of itself is fine. Where I'm a little what I would like to study a little bit is the confidentiality aspects of this process because I'm not sure that information provided by NCA or DAE to this third party consultant would in fact be maintained confidentially. So I am concerned that to the extent that that we are putting together a policy in which we are representing that it would be confidential if provided that that that is in fact true and I don't want them to rely upon some representations in our policy that if they provide that information to a third party that it will be maintained confidentially because I I do not know that that is the case. So that's the part that makes me a little uncomfortable. If we removed from the third party this requirement that it.

Be maintained confidentially, I would feel much more comfortable. Certainly providing it to a third party to do it doesn't cause me any heartache. we were certainly concerned that the board through this might be incurring cost associated with it, but to the extent that they've agreed to cover those costs, then that's not an issue. So again, my concern is more with NCE's belief that it would be their information would be confidential and it being in your policy that way. And if if in fact it turns out that it's not, I just, you know, that's the part of how it's drafted that makes me uncomfortable. But the overall idea of third party doesn't cause me any heartburn.

With this second part that you suggesting about what brings you caution, are we at a position where we could move forward with the third party and then work out the other part later, the confidentiality? Because that's the part you're saying that that's the part that makes me uncomfortable about this language when I read it is is the fact that in your policy you would be saying that this stuff is going to be confidential and I'm not sure that that would in fact be the case and because the information that they are saying they're going to provide if it were provided to you I'm not 100% sure that that would be confidential, right? Because when you look at the statute in terms of what is confidential from your perspective, the things that they would be providing do not necessarily fit into that category.

So that that makes me a little nervous, but and again, if that part were not in here, I would feel much more comfortable about the process that as it's as it's outlined. Thank you for sharing and I'm sure my colleagues on the DAS will may have further questions about that since now that you've brought that up now everybody has heard that in the open if that is a concern. We can talk more about that and see what direction we need to go with that or maybe something that you all can share more about. Okay, but thank you so much for answering that for me. I really appreciate it. Thank you, Madam Chair.

Miss Carter and then thank you for that, Mr. Malone. I am a little bit confused about why this is such a contentious issue. in particular, the third party piece., for me it feels really important that the modifications that we've made attempt to address the concerns of our superintendent, of our fellow board colleagues, and they really attempt to present the concerns that have been brought to us by DAE. And given that this is our largest erro representing more than half of our staff, it feels like this is often understated or it's become understated, but this is the staff that teach our students, that feed our kids, that drive our buses. It it is it's over half of our staff and they're saying that this is really important to them. And for me, if it's not a legal issue, which we've heard multiple times now, and if it's not going to cost us money, it just feels like why would we not do that?

It's also really important to me that this process move forward smoothly. This has been a very challenging last year, an extraordinarily challenging last few months. It feels really critical and to me and I would hope for this whole board that this goes forward smoothly and I believe that these addressing these concerns brings us to that point. We should all want that a place where most of our staff are happy and where we feel like we've met in the middle in various points. Our attorneys have said multiple times that there's nothing unlawful about the certification process. Again, it just feels straightforward to me., but I look forward to hearing more about what folks have to say about that in particular, but I again don't know why we're arguing over something that just feels natural.

I do not have an issue with third party certification. My concern was about the confidentiality piece which was brought to us from DAE and so I asked questions to attorneys around if that is confidential or not because if we use a third party and it's still not confidential it does not actually address the concerns of our educators. That feels important to do. Secondly, I do think we had move made progress on this. So the idea that we're kind of going back I think the certification is a different conversation and I really think Dr.

Lewis and DA could have did that without it being a policy change. I think going back to this 11% number felt like we had this discussion before and it concerns me that we're here again. I think that lastly what actually is upsetting me is that I received a policy five minutes ago and that there was a draft that was there then it got changed and now it is like if I don't pass it tonight I am an issue and I think that in order to be a good board member I need to study I need to read I need to consult I need to work with other folks in order to be able to move a policy.

And I understand that things have been moved around, same language. I get that. But that is what's frustrating me this evening of this like three folks worked a lot on this and didn't give us the opportunity to dialogue with attorneys, to dialogue with superintendent on a new draft that we received this evening. And I think our frustrations from all of us comes from not having a clear process that we follow that all of us have access to. And that is what's frustrating me this evening. And it feels as though some of us aren't valued on this board.

I want to figure out a way that all of us can work together and get this done. But I think that requires seven of us to make that happen. And I think I say that often that it requires seven of us without surprises. Give us work. Let us come to do the work to make sure we can make this happen. And so I do have more questions for legal analysis., I know that some things were emailed for us today, but I'm a person that really likes dialogue because I have questions now on some of the things that we received and I would like more time to do my work on some of the information that we've received.

Miss Harold Goff, thank you. A couple of times this evening I've heard like in when the during the public comment emails masters pay there's various things that have come where this this theme of harm keeps coming forward for me and it's impacting communications. When we were having the com the the discussion about coming back to meet and confer but when we were having the conversation about community engagement there was a thing in there about addressing the need even when you don't have the resource to to do that need.

That is how that's like acknowledging that something has gone a skew. acknowledging that something is not right for a person to be able to show up fully or you know whatever that be. So, when I'm listening to Miss Umstead speak, this is what I'm hearing that there are some, you know, there's frustration, there's all these things. We need to acknowledge that that's in the space in this moment. And that board members are doing, let me not speak for everybody, I am doing my very best to be as clear and as clean with the process as we have it now. Nobody in this board is doing process in my opinion perfectly.

But what we did try to do was to address harm that was caused in the last board meeting around this policy which was on the precise for discussion and ended up being voted on. Now again none of us are perfect in process. The way that we tried to address that is to say, okay, we're going to bring it back to the public discussion and we're going to put exactly the things that we want to address. One, two, three. These are the three things. We did our very best to speak to every board member, right? We put the policy with those three sections on there and on the precedes even now with this piece of paper that Lord help our process that we have brought we did this for discussion so that when we're talking about it you could see oh this is what they're talking about. It's still the third thing that was on the precedes to bring up third party verification. So, we could have just not had the paper and we could have.

Just had the discussion and tried to explain it to you, but I'm a visual learner, so I actually appreciate having a piece of paper where I can see what what what exactly is she talking about. So, we were doing that. It was perceived as something that was contrary when in fact the intent was it for for it to be helpful. And so, I want to take a moment to acknowledge the harm and apologize and debunk this narrative that somehow, we're not trying to be collaborative because if that's the impact that it's having or it doesn't feel collaborative, that is definitely not the intent. We are intending to do collaborative work here.

This whole thing is really for me what's contentious is although we're trying we're trying to pass this with three discussing three three things if anybody else has anything else that they want to bring back they can go through the same process they they can though and then we we did we followed the process that we thought to put it on so that everybody could see what we were doing and there was opportunity We also put it on for action. So, we knew that it was going to be for action today. So, I don't know how else to be any more clear. And I I really I'm going to deflect this this argument that somehow we are being divisive. That is a narrative that I feel like other board members are pushing., and when you say something like that, that is what you create. So, I need us to debunk this whole thing about everybody's trying to surprise everybody or trying to pull the wool over somebody's eyes. Everybody is.

Flawed in process here and we're going to continue to move through a messy process. We got to get through the messy middle of transformation to get to the other side of this. We have three things. we can move this forward and we can continue to work on our processes. So, I'm really sick of this. I don't want this to come back in the fall. These are three things we talked to everyone. Everyone might not feel like they've been heard. but we put on the precies the three things we want to address and then we just want to vote on it. That's it. I don't want to go back and rehash anything else. But if anybody wants to bring anything else back, we can feel free and you know we can discuss that further. But for this, these are the only three things we want we want to address.

I'll step back. Inspire the Miss Chavez.

I'm appreciative of the work that everyone has put in. I'm appreciative of the work that DAE has put in. I'm appreciative of the work that Chair Rogers and I and Javannia Lewis put in at the ad hoc and all the way through. This is actually how process and policy gets made by seven people. I wanted to move it to the end of the agenda because I think that the budget conversations and the the facility things are mo most important and that we have months and months to actually address this for DAE. I see you. I see you. I'll tell you right now that what saddens me more than anything is I started getting calls last night that this was going to pass tonight 61. And who's the one? I don't know.

Probably me because DAE stopped talking to me. And that's okay. It's okay. I've fought with you all in Raleigh. I've I've marched with you all. I really appreciate the alignment on progressive values. But just to be clear to my colleagues who have become beloved, this is this has been the most divisive issue for our community. And it is important for us as a board of seven to actually set it up to be something that is successful. And do I have a problem with third party verification? No. Not not as long as they as as legal says it's okay. And I and we have a memo to back that up that goes into the archives. Is this clean tonight? No. So, I'm going to hope that we table it and come back to it June 10th, which will be in plenty of time to get it done and get it done with a unanimous vote. But what do I think the 10 the 11% looks messier than 10? Yes, I.

Do. I think 10 looks like a more logical, defensible number. I'm just going to say it because 11's a weird number. It's not it doesn't have to be a divisive thing for our community, but I do need to be clear that I have concerns that the way that these meetings have gone with board members being asked questions and and rated and graded on articles and then going to the superintendent and saying because four board members were in favor of something that that is what the superintendent is supposed to do or focus on. That's not how meet and confer will work going forward. And we need it to be set up to actually be a collaborative conversation and a conversation with with guard rails that will help it be successful. We we I trust that it will be. But I was, you know, and and I appreciate the ways that that DAE has worked to to calm what I think are really strong emotions that they have about how frustratingly long this has.

Taken. I look forward to DAE being able to celebrate, I think, a clean policy without an appendix about how third party is done. I don't think that's needed at all. Mr. Malone, is that appendix needed or can that procedure be be worked out between the parties that will be working on it? Like cuz I haven't had a chance to look at it at unless it's the same as and you just copied and moved it. Yeah, I didn't like it then. I had a lot of concerns about it, but I don't have time. Like again, it it shifted and I understand y'all are frustrated. Y'all are going to meet in October. We are going to here's here's my understanding of how your numbers come. DAE correct me if I'm wrong. Most people have payroll deductions and so HR could run that and tell us a number today. We would have the majority of a number today. Then some people have electronic check pulls that we would need you all to give us a.

Number and we would trust you giving us a number. The other thing we would trust you for is your early enrollment. the people you're enrolling now that won't have dues taken out into the fall. We're trusting you. We want to count everyone that you think counts. We want to give you that generosity. It is not divisive, but good grief, this community deserves a clean policy. It's not quite there. Nobody's blaming anybody that's worked on it. Nobody's saying this isn't a great whatever. But I do hope that we will take the time for Dr. Lewis and and Eva and Rod to work and make sure that between now and then we have a a a cleaner version than what just landed and got posted tonight. And that doesn't mean that any of us are not supportive of meet and confer worker voice and and looking forward to the collaborative nature of those those discussions. So 10% to me feels more defensible., I don't see a reason and I've never understood why we're redefining erro. I.

Think that the definition as it is is fine. I've heard really strange things that disturb me like people thinking that fraternities and sororities will be able to qualify for or status. I don't even know what what the fears and the conspiracies and the worries are, but I trust that this board and this administration, if it's this process has issues, will address them as we always have. We work with our staff. We work with our staff that are both members of DAE and those that are not. So, I I look forward to to tableabling this tonight so that we can bring back a cleaner policy that we can unanimously consider with more on June 10th and I'll stop talking.

All right. So, I I want to say this is clean. I added this sentence these two sentences. An ERRO may choose to be certified by the HR department of the district or through a third-party certification process. If the ERRO chooses a third-party certification process, they will be responsible for the associated cost. Everything else is the language we've seen. This certification by the district, Dr. Lewis gave us that certification by a third party that's been posted since Monday. And and so and and also DA President Tweet Meer sent it to us the other day as well. I so this thing is it's ready to go and I'll be honest. we do have other things to to deal with. this isn't just about the May 31st membership deadline. I would really like us to put this to bed. It is these three things. They're, you know, they've already I I don't I'm We can make little tweaks. And so in in that vein, let me ask you, Mr. Malone, what is the statute about confidentiality that this.

Might be, connected to? The question is whether the the list that they would present would be a I'm sorry. The question is whether the list that they would present would be a public record under North Carolina's public records law. That's that's my concern. I do think that that we could certainly work with Dr. Louis own, you know, revisions to to address at least the concerns that I've got and and the majority of this would survive if that's the direction of the board.

Okay. Was that it? I'm sorry, Mr. L. Are you saying that's in the appendix is the pro is where you would like to spend the majority of editing time? Is that Yeah. what they've so I would want to be clear whether the it it does appear to me that on page one that the additional information employee only employeeonly organizations that are open to all employees is a is a limitation on on what the original language may have been intended to say.

So, you know, it would have seemed to me that this would as it would seem to me that as drafted, this would prevent an organization that is just made up of child nutrition workers from ever being an anro or only bus drivers from ever being an erro is how I read this language because the organization itself would have to be open to all employees. That may not be what was intended by this change, but that certainly is something that when I read this, I wondered if it was intended. Again, I'm not suggesting that that was the intention., but other than that, my my concerns appear on the appendix and I think that I could work with Dr. Lewis to if if if the concept is what the board wants to make some minor changes to this that could come back at the next meeting for sure. Mr. Malone, if we took out the word all in the definition, open to employees and independent of the district, would that satisfy your your concern there?

Yes. Okay. and then as far as confidentiality, what if we All right. Or it's just one section. No different sections on on this. can you point us to the section that you're looking at? Yes. Confidentially confidentiality and integrity. Number one reads, what's the letter? It's not in the appendix. There's a heading that says confidential confidentiality and integrity.

This is what Mr. Malone was addressing as something he would want to look into. On the back. Number one, all information and documentation submitted for the purposes of the certification process shall be treated as confidential and used solely for the purpose of verification. What if we change that to all information and documentation submitted for the purposes of the certification process shall be treated as confidential to the greatest extent possible. So, I I I guess if if we're going to try to edit this tonight, I would really need to read the whole thing in more detail. Again, I I read it very quickly and the things that jumped off the page at me, I've attempted to identify, but I would not be comfortable with making one or two changes and then signing off on this without having a real opportunity to review it in more detail. But you all had this weeks ago. You or maybe Eva Eva read it., this is the same weeks ago.

Yes. from Yes, the certification language came from DAE on I'll give you a date. Hold on. And it went to the attorneys. Yeah. By whom? I think according to Eva, she got it yesterday and and looked at it a little bit last night and then sent you an email this morning. I mean, that was that's my understanding. Now again, I'm Does it change after last night as well? Like it's I mean I understand you're saying only moving things around, but No, it hasn't. But I'm wondering if the That's not what Miss Chavez said earlier.

The changed. I wonder if perhaps it sounds like there are some things that you might want to take a closer look at while board member Chavez is looking for this documentation and that you might want to do that in partnership with Dr. Lewis and th those are limited to what is in the appendix. Is that correct, Mr. Malone? If if you are removing all from the first thing and yeah I I mean yes because I obviously the percentages are for the board to decide.

I do think that is the case. Yes. Yes, under this version where everything is basically in the appendix that yes, it would be limited to the appendix. So, if the board were to to approve the policy, but direct our attorney and our superintendent to continue reviewing the appendix to ensure that everything is within legal is in legal compliance, then that would be something that you would be comfortable with if the board were to direct them in that way.

Or I mean one just in looking at it. I mean one option.

You know what you could do is in in B2 B2 I think it is. As you could say, if the ERO chooses a third party certification process, the superintendent and ERRO shall agree upon a mutually acceptable form and then just let them decide it at that time and then get rid of the appendix all together and let the superintendent and thero decide on what what that looks like. You know what the So, you're saying that the process a third party certification process could be used, but then you could allow the superintendent and the RORO to decide exactly what that may look like if they choose that option. You're saying add that where Mr.

Malone B2 after after what is written there before C appendix. Yeah. Yeah. I'm saying that one option would be to eliminate the appendix and simply to have the language say that the ERO and the superintendent can agree upon a third party certification process to be used and then allow them to sort that out if they choose that option because under this option they may not even choose that option. So, you know, they wouldn't have to spend time trying to hammer out what it would look like to to circle back., this the certification language was shared by, DAE President Tweet Meer prior to May 1st and Eva, Disson, our, other attorney had reviewed it by May 1st. and she shared her thoughts with Dr. Lewis. I wrote to her on May 1st to act ask if there was a legal legal objection to having third party certification and she responded with her thoughts and that no there was not a legal objection to having third party certification and the.

Full board received a copy of that email I believe yesterday or whenever she sent us I appreciate it. Miss Chavez, can you read Miss Eva's concerns that she emailed everyone today that we received today in its entirety, not just what you you received from her and was forwarded on? That you're talking about dates and times that the entire board has not been in privy to. Oh, let me find her email and maybe I should read into the record them the rest of her her concerns and and her feedback. I mean, this is this is why I am but I'm I'm responding to the legal part that I was reading the part about having a legal objection. Yeah, I would I would just make a motion that we table this and bring it back on June 10th in a clean version. There's already a motion on the floor. Shall I a motion to table supersedes a motion on the floor? A motion to table question because I haven't spoken to the agenda item.

Miss Beyer move that we table this discussion and bring back a clean version to our June 10th work session that incorporates the feedback that Dr. Lewis and the attorney have heard to and is in compliance with state statute and reflects the changes discussed and agreed upon by this.

Board. The motion without a second fails. Is there any further discussion? Anybody else have any Miss Sam said? I do like I understand the importance of this. I know we've been waiting over a year, but I think that we owe it to our educators to actually address some of the concerns because the confidentiality concern is not actually addressed, right? If we still do this third party, we still have this question around confidentiality and if it exists or not. I don't think there I don't think I've heard a question about legality of third party. So, I think we actually owe it to our people to do the due diligence and bring a draft that can actually meet the needs of what they're asking for. And so, I would want to support a motion to do that so that we can allow we can start a small committee if we need to to allow board members, Dr. Lewis and the superintendent to be at the same table having the same dialogue around these.

Things, attorneys as well, so that we can like clean this up, do what we actually need and move forward. My concern tonight about how we're doing this, like kind of keep up with the different changes that are being made on the fly without the attorney, Mr. Malone, having time to investigate it. Like, I just don't think this gets us to a process that will work well. And I'm not sure again that it addresses this concern about confidentiality that's been brought up several times. I think we owe it to ourselves and to the educators to do our due diligence and study this to bring it back to make sure it's clean.

Carter, this is being discussed as though this board has not been wrestling with the issue of third party certification longer than the last few days. And that's not really the truth. DAE brought this concern to us. We've been having conversations about it, trying to understand it. This is not new. So, I just want to clarify that. And I also what feels comfortable to me now because I very I hear your cons I hear the concerns that are coming out around the confidentiality. I also hear how important it is for our educators to have third party certification. I want to listen to them and to and believe that that is their most pressing concern and not tell them to be worried about the confidentiality surrounding that. It sounds like Mr. Malone has indicated that he's comfortable with the language in the policy short of the appendix maybe and that he could work with Dr.

Lewis to continue to refine the appendix. That feels comfortable to me and I don't know if that's something that other board members might feel like is a comfortable middle ground here tonight. Again, the policy language is pretty straightforward. It's the appendix where we're getting caught up and it feels comfortable to me to have further assessment by our attorney on that in partnership with Dr. Lewis. So, I'd be curious to know what others think about that. Miss Harold Gooff and Miss Byer. I just want to add to that and and say yes. I I think that this whole thing is just tainted with all kinds of trust issues. and trust issues between administration, the board, and DAE around all of this that has taken place.

These three things that we're asking for in the policy, I'd be in favor of of of doing just what Miss Carter Autton has suggested and separating the two, but moving those three things because in order for me and confer to first of all take place to happen in the fall and for us to start that process, everybody involved or mainly the administration and the ERRO need to feel like their needs have been acknowledged and addressed. it is very hard at this stage in the game. We're trying to build trust to then hear something but not really deeply listen to what it is that we've been hearing.

This is an attempt to address those three things that caused harm in the first so that we can start a process in a better place. I don't like speaking for our superintendent. He our superintendent is is amazing. But I asked him the same question that I asked DAE and that was what do you need in order for for DAE to build your trust back? I'm asking DAE what does DAE need in order for the s for for administration for the board to build trust back? And both times everybody said the thing that was that was the same was real collaboration, wanting to be not just heard but deeply listened to. And so that if we don't vote on this now, those three things, this is not coming from even though it's a board directive, it's not coming from the board. It's you know what what we want. It's really deeply listening to what our staff has said, you know, is important to them and what our administration is has been trying.

They want that, you know, to be able to build those relationships. So that is also coloring how we move forward in this moment. It's it's an effort of building back trust, of repairing something that is already everybody up here is frustrated with the process. We get that and everybody said it in 15 different ways. So, I don't I wish at this point I'm not in favor of going back and discussing it again because trust doesn't come. The trust is already tarnished. And so to send it back into something, you don't just get trust.

We're just they're not just going to trust us in this moment to to go do the work. They've already told us the first steps of how we get to that place. This is a a hardcore effort to reach some kind of consensus and compromise and move forward. So if it takes moving the addendum to the side to get those three things that we have deeply listened to all of us have in different ways and to move forward. I think that's what we need to do in this moment if we're really trying to repair to build trust.

Missstead, Miss Beyer, Miss Chavez, I think my question is without the answer on confidentiality which is in the appendix. I understand do we still have participation from our educators? If the question is around confidentiality, we cannot guarantee that at this point without additional study. And so if we even move forward, does that actually do what we need it to do in order for the process to move forward is my question. And and I say that because I'm advocating for us to figure out a way to actually move the process forward. And so again, if we have moved this without having that clarity, it still means there's clarity that's not there. And I'm not sure if we actually move forward.

There's some people in the room. Y'all can snap or clap or something. Okay. Miss Ber Miss Miss Beyer. I appreciate it. I think that there's still actually despite the work there's been a lot of of crossing things out, changing definitions, moving things around and it's not clear. I was going to read some of these answers from legal from Eva into the record and then I noticed it's confidential attorney client and I don't know what's fair to read. But we received an email today at 12:49 with answers to several questions that some of us had. Again, the questions I read earlier, some of them were still questions for me, but whatever. You know, I what usually happens is a thorough legal memo that we all get ahead of time that we all can reflect and come to this place prepared with things posted so that if the if the community has concerns so that if DAE has concerns so that if Dr. Lewis has concerns. We have heard from them. And so all I am.

Imploring our colleagues to do and I I believe very much that all seven of us are not going to be strict on this deadline this year of the May 31st. The urgency is not to scramble and and quickly post-it note back of the envelope what is so important to this community. And I think we can give legal time to actually take their time with it and bring us a fully confident document that can be posted with our agenda that is clean through and through. And I and I don't I appreciate those of you all that feel this urgency for this evening and that work so hard to bring this to the agenda as the first thing that we needed to discuss. But I would implore you all to join me in voting down this motion which does not mean that we are not supportive all of us of meet and confer. Let me be clear.

And I am also interested in clarifying that when we put meet and confer on the agenda previously and waved second reading, we would there had been numerous conversations with DAE leadership that the board was able was where at a point where we were able to move it. Now whether that got communicated from from leadership to everyone within DAE, I don't know. But the notion that trust was broken, the notion that Miss Chavez, you came out and said things weren't collaborative at the beginning of your comments and frame that that way, that's not helpful to this board. It really isn't and it's not honest.

So, I look forward to supporting a clean copy, but putting confusing things last minute on the agenda without without legal analysis. That is that is thorough is a is a disservice to this community and and the people that are that are waiting on this if if they want it to be approved. I don't think anyone that is in the audience or watching has not heard that this board as long as third party certification is okay with our lawyers is probably okay. Just bring it back cleaner, right? And I don't think we should be ripping off appendices and saying cross this out, move this over, make this number work. I think we just take the time and do it in June. And I would urge us to do that. Thank you.

I I don't appreciate the the the remark about it's not honest to say it wasn't collaborative. It wasn't collaborative at the LA at the end and the April 10th vote was pushed through. It was up for discussion. That was a surprise. You could have called me or other board members to say this is what I want to propose. That wasn't done. This was put on the agenda days ago and we had conversations with all board members leading up to this. So I don't want to hear about not being collaborative or being dishonest. and I as I said very clearly and I've been in touch with the process the whole time it was collaborate. Most of it was developed very collaborative collaboratively. I know that the administration and DAE gave up parts discussed through things. I really appreciated all of that. it came out with a lot of most of it is is very strong. there are only a few pieces to to revise. We've also revised other policies after they were passed shortly.

After they were passed. and so this is not like a a brand new thing. And I so this pushing it back to June, we have other things to decide to talk about in June. And I think there's you know there becomes this notion like this is all you know some of us want to talk about. It's really not. I'd really like to put it to bed because I have other concerns that and things I want to work on for this district as well. So, let's see what else. third party is done in a lot of places. Asheville was mentioned. It's my understanding that they have an informal or they have a they are doing some kind of third party certification process. it's just not laid out to this you know detailed extent., I want to mention also, this came up earlier, but just to circle back, payroll deductions are not foyable. So, that's not a thing., that's not a concern., I would like to, and I don't think it's just me also.

Who wants this done. I think our staff would like it to be resolved as well, who are waiting to hear what's going to happen., and so I think I'd like to make an amendment to my original motion to take out the word all in the erro definition to add the sentence that Mr. Balone proposed to B2. the ERO and superintendent can agree upon a third-party certification process if that's accurate. Where would that be and what follows and proceeds? B2 B I'm sorry it's confusing. I think there are multiple B2 one two the in the section that starts an ERO may choose to be certified by the HR department of the district or through a C third party certification leave that there if the chooses a third party certification process process they will be responsible for the associated cost take out C appendix certification process procedures for full details of the process add in the ERO and superintendent can agree upon a third-party certification process. We can take out the appendix.

I'm sorry, that last sentence you said, where are you adding? Okay, at the top of the second page, there's a one and a two where it says C appendix. Take that out. Mr. Malone, are you are you capturing all this? Yeah. Thank you. I'm not. So, I'm just trying. Mr. Malone, was that the sentence you basically said? Okay. Yes. Except I would probably use the word shall instead of can. Shall. Great. The ERO and superintendent shall agree upon a third-party certification process.

I'll read it one more time. The ERRO and superintendent shall agree upon a third-party certification. Process and we will take out the appendix for now and allow administration to work with the attorney and consult with DAE and figure that part out. Second. Ma made a motion to amend her original motion. Doesn't make a motion to amend it. She amended it. She offered a friendly offered an amendment to her motion. A second. Okay. Oh, I didn't know that's what you said. That's what I was like.

Okay. All right. I have some questions and some comments. I appreciate everybody being open and honest tonight and having these conversations. They've been tough. I would encourage us all when we come to board meetings and think about the work we're doing together that we understand that we're all equally entitled to most especially in a public setting board meeting to ask administration our questions and ask questions of our attorneys. So just because we're asking those questions doesn't mean that we're not supportive of the policy changes.

And so when I heard some of the back and forth tonight, it felt like people were prescribing or assigning that some people aren't supportive of these changes. I met with Micah. We talked about the third party verification process. I talked to all board members about the conversation that I've had with her. I talked to Dr. Lewis about it., it is something that is not lost on me., and I don't think it was lost on any of us. And we want and and intended to pass a policy that would allow DAE as a majority union to show up and do meet and confer with Dr.

Lewis. That's always been the intention and I don't think any of us sitting here have ever had the intention of stopping that and want to see it move forward. And if they're saying now that the third party verification is necessary, I believe them., and I know that they don't trust us, but I think that, and they may not trust Dr. Lewis, but I think that there's work being done. And I think that it most of us, especially those of us that continue to send our kids to school to be educated by them, continue to trust the work that they're doing both in the classroom and on behalf of public education in Durham and beyond.

So, let me be the first to say that I don't have any distrust of any of you or any member of DAE and appreciate the work and the advocacy that you all have been doing and appreciate the conversations that you've had with us. The qu I did send in a question. One of my questions has already been addressed about the all in the first section. if that would eliminate other erros from showing up. I do have a question if we're attorney Malone. I do have questions about the like Miss said about the confidentiality of the third party.

How do if the district's essentially not picking the third party, not contracting said third party, what responsibility is the district and taking on is the district taking on to ensure that confidentiality that DAE is looking for, the ERO's are looking for. So either by if we could have time to modify this language within the policy, I think within the appendix, I think we could remove we could draft language that would I guess what I'm concerned about is be because it's in your policy saying that it will be confidential and we're taking on ownership of that doesn't necessarily belong. we can't necessarily ensure would be true under the public records law. So I'm but I think that we we given some time to work on this language. I I I don't think it's a complicated fix, but I would need to read all of this more carefully to make sure that we could address those issues. Okay.

Under what circumstances does the district take on the confidentiality process of third parties? Well, you would not normally, okay, but you wouldn't have in your policy a statement that something that someone else is producing is going to be confidential and without us knowing for sure that that's the case. And I guess I just don't want there to then be liability to the district if an employee complains later that something that that we had represented in this process would be confidential is in fact not confidential. I feel comfortable that I can work on some language with Dr. Le that would again the third party verification part we're not well no I understand we're not but like we have it in front of us now and you're here he's here and we're all here and we want to talk about doing this adding this later when it comes we want to have the answers we want to be prepared with the answers right I'd like to not have three days notice to ask this right so I'm.

Say that I'm just asking the question. That's my question. Miss Unstead, go ahead. I just want to ask a followup. So even if it's not in policy where we're having this ownership though, that also does does that also mean that we can't guarantee conf like the confidentiality just can't be guaranteed because I hear that the need is for confidentiality to be guaranteed. So is there is that even possible? Well, that so or we unsure yet? We need to study some more. So to the extent that NCA may represent to its members through this process that is confidential, that's one thing. The way it appears in the policy, I believe the board is accepting some ownership of that confidentiality. So I do think that we could draft language that would allow that risk to rest solely with NCE and whether it's confidential or not is is on them to ensure sorry.

So, and you're again, y'all are scrambling because you got this recently, but to these answers came to me recently. How about that? If we provide a list to a third party, a pastor, a trusted community leader as part is someone outside of the district that is going to do this certification. That list is not subject to be foyed from our direction or from the other person. We're trusting that person to who is not our employee. Your list is a public record. The Ours is a public record, right? Your list is absolutely a public record. I mean the information that you are providing or is a public record. That list will be a public record. there is one other part of this that there was one other change that I noted mentally that I just remembered in here somewhere or in the the original version. There was something about providing some additional information other than the three items that are listed from the school system side.

Other data as needed and requested by the neutral third party to assist in verification. This is in this number three thing., I would want to put other public data as needed., because you would only provide to this person information that's publicly available. So that was the other change that I thought about when I ran through it earlier that you made me think of there. But yes, I mean your so your information is is absolutely a public record. I I just don't know that them providing the same information. I mean, I'm not sure how that's confidential., so I just would want to make sure that Right.

So whatever we do tonight whether this motion carries or or fails whatever and you know the things scratched out and the changes and the everybody trying to keep track of who said what there the process as drafted would be us giving a list of all of our employees to some trusted third party NCA or DAE not NCA providing a list of their members at some defined upon date, which I would say we're too late in the year for it to be May 31st. So, we're going to have to shift that date as part of this going forward, colleagues, right? Because we're not at the point where in the next week, I think that we will have that, but it has to be a a list produced and agreed to on the same date, right? And then there has to be clarification about job categories that that want to be included or excluded.

And we're asking some third party to kind of right is that how this third party is working. My my question my other question my question for administration was exactly who would be responsible for providing the list and making sure the job categories were provided and who the names and who those you know all the people and how much time that would Anybody able to speak to that from. Administration? Who is going to be responsible? Who's going to be responsible for providing the list, cultivating the list, re determining if the yes, the DPS list, making sure that managers and above are excluded.

Yes, that's on us. That's from our HR department, those public records, the list of our employees. And how long would that take to put out to get out? Like you can run it a report. Not long at all. Okay. We could run that. Doesn't take a long time to run the report. Okay. And get that to the third party. Yes. Okay. Miss Beyer, I'll let you finish your comment then Miss Carter. So I'm just one of the questions we worked on and it was that can can someone explain to me what the signature card process which is says it's common in Eva's comments to us and it's what's used by San Antonio ISD. Do you know have you I don't know what the actual card look like but but the employee signs that card stating that they are a member and those for example in San Antonio they're submitted to the superintendent and their teachers what they call consultation process.

So those the employees are are signing saying they're members submitting it to administration and and trusting that as confidential and we could also explore that as a alternative in the future. I mean, I don't know. It seems simpler to me, but but we asked our attorneys on the to also look into what how this is handled in other places and it says they said Asheville City Schools and the governor's office both simply state that employee association will provide evidence demonstrating that it meets the applicable threshold. They've also reached out to Prince William County schools and San Antonio ISD, but signature cards was what came up and I just was trying to understand that as an option and what that looked like and the burden both for for DAE and for our.

Staff. Is anybody from administration or anybody prepared to answer that? I thought Dr. Lewis just did. Okay, Miss. Carter., just wanted to respond to a few things. Well, first, it sounds like Mr. Malone already has some really, clear ideas for ways that he would modify some of the things in the appendix. So, it doesn't sound like it would take very long at all and Dr. Lewis has already been thinking about this. So, I don't think it would take very long at all for them to be working on this. So, I'm not concerned about that., and we are all aligned in our desire to get this moving quickly. So, there's that., Asheville in it is true that their policy doesn't have specific language, but in practice they are using thirdparty certification and using their foundation to certify their membership. I'll also note that San Antonio has a threshold of 40%. So if we want to do what San Antonio is doing, then we could consider some other pieces of their policy and they also have all.

Of the details of their certification outlined in their policy. So I think before we start picking and choosing things we like and things we don't like from policies, we just need to be aware of the full picture of what's happening in other districts. And as we've noted before too, what happens in North Carolina, it's a unique political environment that's different from what happens in Texas and in other states. So, just want to be responsive to that. Not allow excuse me, not allow for misinformation to be released while we're up here just so we're all straight on the same page.

I also it does feel like we've been discussing the appendix but what some of the questions that have come up more recently about the cards feel like we're rehashing whether or not we want to do third-party certification and I thought that we had moved on from that and all agreed that that was something that we were in favor of. I'm sorry I thought signature cards were an alternative way of third party certification. I am just receiving information from legal counsel this afternoon and and processing questions that came and emailed you know on the fly. I am not trying to read this into the into the record but I did think from the beginning Eva wrote here are some quick responses to the question shared. I apologize for the informal nature of this email, but I understand you'd like some answers before tonight's board meeting. This is why I feel like in best practice in the future that we all get the same legal information days in advance, have things posted for.

The public and for this board and our community. But and that is not to diminish the work that the three of you all have done and and the what I believe is a unanimous effort of of this board to bring clear guidance to this and move it forward. Thank you. Colleagues, the motion on the floor is to amend policy 7215 to include In the second paragraph, employeeonly organizations that are open to employees and independent of the. District in section B2 to eliminate any education I'm sorry in section B1 district will recognize eros representing at least 11% non-administrative active employees.

No. No. So, it's one motion to modify the original policy with the track changes because we haven't approved the one with track. Changes. Okay. Miss Carter, will you call the motion?

I make a motion to approve the edits to policy 7215 in the modified version dated 5225 with two additional edits. Removal of the word all from the first sentence in the second paragraph and the addition. Of the following sentence after B2 one two the ERO and superintendent shall agree upon a third-party certification process. I said two additional with these additional edits replacing. The there are people who don't know where where you are. Okay. Okay. But I want to make sure that I'm clear. We have the original your original motion was to accept the modifications that was seconded by Miss Harog and then you amended that emotion that motion that eliminated the word word all and added in on this second page the addition of the ERO and the superintendent shall agree upon a third party certification process. What I'm concerned about is the stuff in between that's track changes is not getting included in the edit during the motion which is why I was reading everything so that we vote one time because you've.

Already amended it. The it was included because the original motion was to approve the edits to policy 7215 in the modified version dated 5225. Right. And then we made changes to those edits. So all of them would then just be edits. And so if you read them all out correctly, line by line, the way they should be, then you're voting on every single thing and we're clearly understanding what's being voted on. We can do that. That's why I was reading it that way before I was stopped. I see. So I'm going to start at the beginning about the motion. And so the motion was made by Miss Chavez, seconded by Miss Harold Goff to add the line in the second paragraph employee only organizations that are open to employees and independent of the district. Then the second modification is in B2 to eliminate any education employee organization wishing to participate in the meet and confer committee shall submit notorized certification of its member roles to the superintendent by May 31st of each year. Representation.

Will be determined by comparing the organization's membership to the then current census of non-supervisory employees provided by the human resources department. Changing that to request for employee representative organization status. An employ one an employee representative organization shall submit a written request to the superintendent indicating it's an intent to be an employee representative organization. Two, an ERRO may choose to be certified by the HR department of the district or through a third-party certification process. If the ERRO chooses a third-party certification process, they will be responsible for the associated cost. The ERRO and superintendent shall agree upon third-party certification process and then the table should a third party was the word a in there?

Sorry. upon a third party process certification process. Thank you. Also, this 11 it goes along with the table. Oh yeah, I missed the 11. I apologize. in B1 changes 6% to 11%. So then the chart shifts in section C2 where 11% to 18% of non-admin active employee erros I'm sorry did you also talk about the strikeout of the C appendex certification and B two she just did it I did B22 and Then I went back and did B1, right? Changing 11% to 6%. Right. I heard the addition of the sentence. I did not hear the strike through of Cend certification process procedures for full details of the process. Yep. The strike through of C appendix certification process procedures for full details of the process. Thank y'all. We're going to get it right. And then C meet and confer committee composition the size of the organizational chart. shifts. So, an organization with 11% to 18% of non-active admin employees will have two representatives. Organizations with 19% to 26% of active employees will have four.

Representatives. 27% to 33% will have six representatives. And then 40, oh I'm sorry, 34 to 41 will have 8 and 42 to 49 will have 10. Representatives and the appendix is not included in the in the or not included in these edits. Can you say the appendix is actually excluded? It would the appendix is excluded from Thank you. these modifications. Okay. All the.

Yes, Mr. Tab. Yes. Thank you all for all of this information. I will not I will not be voting for this in only because of the 11% based on the information that attorney Malone has given I am not comfortable with going with the 11%. However, I am comfortable with everything else. So, if this fails and it you want to amend it or bring it back, I'll be more than happy to to vote for the rest of it. But I just want I just wanted and DAE already knew where I stood with that. So that's not a concern with them. I think everybody else knew exactly where where I stood and based on the information that attorney Malone has given I am not comfortable with with going to 11%. However, I am okay with everything else. Okay. Just want to make sure that's on record.

Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Dab. All those in favor, please say I. I. All oppose say nay. Nay. Nay. Miss said, what was your route?

Now that you've given me the permission to talk, I'mma talk because I feel unready to support this motion because of how it or support this policy just because I feel like I still have questions that haven't been answered. But I also understand that there's an urgency around this and I know that we want to move this process forward. I know our educators want to move this process forward. And I hope that moving forward, I think I heard a lot about like collaboration and trust building that we seek to figure out how we do that with each other in a way that allows us to all feel comfortable when we come to the dis and do our work and I like that feels so urgent and also important to me that the trust goes all the way around. I I felt like I lost my cool a little bit earlier. I apologize for that, but that just feels like that's why I show up because I want to work in collaboration with my colleagues.

For the betterment of our students. And I feel like when we do things this way, it doesn't allow us to do that full work. And that's all I'm asking for is the opportunity to show up as do my deep thought analysis, ask questions, talk to folks, walk around and think about it some more so I can show up ready to do the work. And that's my ask for my colleagues to help build trust for me. Thank you all for all the hard work that you've done on this policy. I'm sorry that we're still in this frustrating place and I'm sure all of us have played a role in that, including myself, right? This process started with me as the chair of this board figuring us out how to move forward. I'm going to support this and I'm going to ask for that back from my colleagues for that support.

So that's a yes. So it passes.

43. The next item on our agenda tonight is the fac All right, we're going to take a 10-minute recess. Be here all night.

Hi everybody. We're back. the next item on our agenda is the facilities and get the language correct. Facilities conditions assessment and learning environment guidelines. And good evening, board chair Rogers., okay. School board members and Dr. Lewis. I'd like to introduce Devin Mitchell, who is going to introduce our guest.

Tonight., tonight we would like to continue our conversation surrounding the current and future state of our facilities., and we would like to have an opportunity to talk about some of the evaluation that's been done of our facilities. As you recall in our last conversation, as we start to develop our capital improvement plan, there are a number of areas that we are investigating and studying that will be prioritized in the capital improvement plan. but at a foundational level over the past several months we have engaged our consultant teams from Turner Townsen and Harry who's here tonight as well as DLR group and they have done a comprehensive evaluation of all of our facilities. They've walked every square foot of our campuses and of our support facilities and they're going to provide for us a very high level overview of their findings. In addition to that, they're also going to be talking about the learning environment guidelines. And as you recall in our last discussion, we talked about the importance of those in.

Setting a standard for the future of our facilities. Throughout this process in the last several months in in creating the learning environment guidelines, we have engaged a broad spectrum of our community, our teachers, our students. And tonight, you'll be hearing some of the the voices and some of the key criteria that our community expressed deep interest in in our facilities. So, with that, I'm going to allow the team to walk you through their findings. There is in addition to what you see tonight, there is a comprehensive database that the team has created for a full evaluation of all of our facilities as well as the learning environment guidelines guide book which will be made available to the board as well in the future. So with that, I'll let the team give you their their thoughts and and review of of our facilities.

Evening., if you go to the next slide, we'll talk about our agenda real quick., there we're going to overview the FCA of what a facility condition assessment is, talk about our analysis process, go through the results, and then do a little bit of review., and then Julie's going to talk about the community engagement, which was very, very intentional and deliberate., what how that resulted into the key principles, and then we'll outline the legs, the learning environment guidelines, and talk real quickly on next steps. So, next slide., my name is Jessica Kian. I'm a vice president at Turner and Towns and Hiri. We're a national public sector project and program management group. we've been in this area for 30 years and doing like I said public sector groups.

Julie McLaren is here with me tonight. She's with DLR group as well. and another of our key team members was Julie Liry also with DLR. Next slide. So, we're here tonight to review the results of the facility condition assessment, the community engagement that we did, and the learning environment guidelines process, which establishes the baseline for the facilities and capital planning process that Miss Mitchell presented to you earlier this month. This intentional and in-depth process allows Durham public schools the foundation for decision-making on capital projects in a way that's wholly based on your community needs and systems. Next slide.

Our ultimate deliverable consists of four main sections related to the FCA key principles developed from community feedback, an overview of the learning environment guidelines and next steps. This approximately 30page document is backed up by nearly 2,000 pages of very detailed findings, assessments, and guidelines to provide DPS with a robust baseline for planning. Next slide. So, why do facility conditions matter to our schools? Miss Mitchell has touched on this previously, but just to reinforce why it's so important to understand the condition of schools to make meaningful improvements, we have to recognize that facilities impact students and staff. Students learn better and teachers and staff are more effective in functional buildings.

Additionally, knowing when to and adequately planning for systems replacements helps budget planning instead of having to use emergency funds. This also allows for strategic capital improvements which are more costefficient. Next slide. So in the most basic sense, a facility condition assessment evaluates all the systems of the building and site. Our team consisted of architects, mechanical engineers, electrical engineers, plumbing engineers, civil engineers to review over 6 million square feet of Durham Public Schools facilities. Once that assessment was complete, we used that data to provide a comprehensive inventory of building systems and conditions throughout the district. This information was also prioritized and categories categorized by deficiency and remaining useful life and costs were assigned to the total systems. To understand how Oh, sorry, next slide. To understand how we determine when systems should be replaced, we prepared this graphic. As you would expect, different components last different amounts of times. Site components include playgrounds, grasses, sidewalks, parking, and other exterior improvements. Typical roofs last 25 years, while windows and doors usually.

Need to be replaced after 20 years. For building systems like plumbing and HBAC, there's a wide range of estimated useful life due to the large breadth of systems. However, our assessment looked at each of these components to develop the full picture. Next slide, please. Part of our analysis included reviewing the existing systems for observed or reported deficiencies and assigning a priority and category to the deficiency. This information provides additional ways to sort the assessment information in the database. Next slide. So all of this component and systems information has been compiled into a database as Miss Mitchell indicated which allows for the information to be collated into summaries. The assessment information is summarized at the district level, but is also broken down into each school or administrative facility for much more detail. What's unique to this assessment is the interactive database that includes live data and is able to be filtered and updated as projects are completed. Next slide. The database is a Microsoft O Microsoft Access file that does not.

Require a licensing fee. It's already on district computers. although the initial evaluation was based at a point in time, the database allows for the information to be organized, filtered, and sorted in a multitude of ways, the interact interactive nature of the database allows it to be a tool for planning and not just a binder of data sitting on a shelf. So now we're going to talk about what all that means. Next slide. Based on our assessment, Durham public schools facilities have a total 10-year facility need of o of of nearly $966 million. That means that over the next 10 years, DPS capital needs for like for-like system replacements is nearly $1 billion. You can see that this rep represents around $322 million of mechanical needs and around $110 million of electrical and plumbing needs each shown here in this table as restrooms.

Over half of this amount is a current need which represents $540 million of systems which have exceeded their useful life and need to be considered for replacement. Next slide. To show this a little bit more graphically, the need in 2026, which considers the 2025 current need plus the additional $30 million for 2026 needs, is approximately $600 million. And about half of this is building systems, which includes mechanical, electrical. Going forward to the table on the right, the breakdown still weights heavily towards building systems, but life safety, which is fire alarm, fire sprinklers, painting and envelope, which is roofing, windows, exterior walls are also significant costs. Next slide. So to summarize how these overall results were prepared, we did factor in escalation. So each year there's a cost increase. It's at 5% included for the first three years and then raises to 7% in years four and beyond. Those costs are total project costs in that they include construction, installation, but they do not consider upgrades to to equipment, abatement, other renovations,.

Etc. You can also see here how aggregating the cost lays out. So, currently the need is $539 million. Waiting until 2030 results in a total need of 712 million. And then the full 10-year plan is over 965 million. Next slide. So these next few slides are going to compare immediate costs in red and the total aggregate tenure cost in blue for elementary, middle, and high. On this slide, you can see that 21 of the elementary schools or approximately 68% of elementary schools have over 50% of their total costs in the immediate category. Next slide. Moving to middle schools, only two of the nine middle schools or 22% have immediate needs exceeding 50% of their total costs. And then on the next slide, at the high school level, all schools except Northern have immediate costs exceeding 50% of the total. This is new northern high school. So these costs reflects painting over the 10 years. Next slide.

Another way of looking at facility condition is through facility condition index or FCI. FCI is calculated by taking the deferred maintenance costs we reviewed in the previous slides and creating a ratio with the cost to replace the facility. As you can see here, excellent and good condition facilities have a ratio less than 0.1 and this ranges to critical greater than 0.4. We've also used industry standard costs to estimate the current replacement value. So that number on the bottom, the next slide, looking at FCI by DPS regions, the northern region has an overall FCI of 0.08 or in the good range. Elementary schools overall are higher at 0.15., this table does include new northern high school, which has a very low FCI because it is so new., also the column showing dollar values here and on the subsequent slides gives you some perspective for the magnitude of replacement costs anticipated. now through 207 2026. Next slide. For the central region, the FCI is a little bit higher at 0.1275. The overall elementary FCI is.

0.17 and middle is 0.13, putting both of those groupings in the fair category. Next slide. In the Eastern region, that has a higher overall FCI at 0.1658. and the elementary, middle, and high are all in the fair category., we do want to point out that the bond funded improvements that are happening at Glenn Elementary are not included in this calculation. So, when that those are complete, that FCI will actually will come down. Next slide. For the southwest region, the FCI is 0.1161 or just into the fair category.

In this region, the high school category is the highest of the three. And the next slide. In the southeast region, the total FCI is 0.11 with elementary similar at 0.1165, high school at 0.1249 and middle at 0.1314. The next slide we looked at FCIS for the other district program schools which are shown here. So Rogers Middle School, School of Creative Studies, City of Medicine, Lake View, Durham School of the Arts, this is the old DSA and Holton Career Resource Center. And then finally, the district admin buildings, sorry, next slide., were considered. Keep in mind the replacement value for these buildings is calculated as an office type dollar per square foot. So, it's a lot lower than a school. Next slide. Okay. Appreciate you staying awake through all of the numbers and the graphs. So, finally, how does this all support the work towards capital planning? The $965 million need we have reviewed exceeds 1.2 billion in 15 years. Again, that's doing nothing. So, developing a funding strategy becomes a really critical piece of the planning.

Grouping projects can increase efficiencies and cost and planning. Considering needs related to learning environment guidelines and growing together should also be part of the planning. As such, one really significant part of what we did was related to intentionally and deliberately engaging the community to include their voices in guiding the district's learning environment guidelines. Julie McLaren will discuss this process and results. We received feedback from nearly 30 3,000 individuals and that was done through student engagement meeting with 200 students at middle schools and high schools. An educator survey that reached over 800 educators in a system. principal interviews and conversations and then a community survey that reached nearly seven that we received nearly 1,700 responses from focus group sessions with educators, subject matter experts in different departments. we had different kinds of workshops and and different kinds of engagement values workshops looking at all aspects of sustainability.

Curriculum and instruction workshops and really intentionally building upon one meeting with the next meeting and trying to uncover and understand as much as we could about what was really important to the community. Next slide. And this these graphs just give you a little indication of how we really deliberately try very hard to reach as many of the different groups in the community as possible. you see with the student engagement demographics that we had really good response and participation from black and brown students with the community survey dem demographics not as much but we did get a lot of responses 43% of the students that we engaged with English was something was spoken other than English 88% of of all schools were excuse me we reached out we we got information back from 88% of your schools and the the staff and Devon worked really hard to try to get it to to reach those schools that we didn't hear from before and and we kept the surveys open a little bit longer. and.

So 11% of the respondents identified as LGBTQ. And so a lot was done to try to to reach out and to listen and to hear from different groups. Next slide. So through all of this engagement we analyzed really everything we could. we looked at categorizing those patterns, breaking down everything by group and identifying really what mattered most and kind of boiling this down to a few key principles. Next slide. And first and foremost, what we heard was that well-maintained facilities all schools being kept in good physical condition was really paramount. students have great facilities close to home and the commitment was an equitable investment and modernization that was above all else. one quote that we we have a lot of quotes in here a lot of feedback but don't neglect schools needing improvement while building new ones. Follow through on promises to update community schools., another key principle, students are continually engaged in innovative learning, realworld hands-on, choice. Students and families are relentlessly supported, fostering, connections with peer-to-peer with, mentors and strong connections to the.

Community, meeting basic needs, and share community use., one of the things with the sense of belonging and need to make those connections was a community hub, a space for bringing all those people together that we kept hearing over and over and that we have put in place in some of the guidelines., students need to feel welcome, valued, and safe., universal design for all. recommendations to to meet diverse needs of everyone, universal needs and you know a dignified restroom experience. we heard a lot from the students and teachers about the need to have restrooms located in convenient locations for them to be working and safe. you know a place that they did not fear going into. a dignified space. Next slide. So all of this was just to boil this down to really what mattered most, those key principles, what's important to the community. And this gives us a a lens for really planning for the future both the qualitative space the qualitative aspects of it quality of the space the activities that happen in the.

Space what's unique about it and then the quantitative implications. How much space is needed? How many spaces are needed? And all of this is to to put this into some guidelines, some standards and consistency throughout the district. so that decision making is is equal across. Next slide. What is this starting to look like? so the legs guidelines are are in the the following sections. The first sections the process and outcome that really talks about the h how and the why. it goes into a little bit more about why this this whole process was really unique and how hard we did try the district tried to reach as many voices as possible. and then the learning spaces, the activities, the access, the layout considerations that really kind of boils down to the intent. And then the model space program is now really having a a model program for elementary schools, middle schools, and high schools that really spells out the quantity and size with unique spaces that were important to this community. And then the section.

Of the guidelines that includes room data sheets, which starts to talk about more of the particulars, finishes, electrical requirements, and those sorts of things. That is also included in this Next slide. And these just give you a little bit of an indication of what the guidelines look like. there there this is some of the space types that were really the information that's in here was it's about the activities. It's the access that the spaces need, the adjacencies, the spatial requirements.

All of this was g gathered through those discussions that we had with departments and those subject matter experts u on all of these things. So we've tried to put it together in a in a document that shows the agency diagrams and starts to give designers who are starting to look at this next renovation project or new school project what's important about whatever particular department we're talking about. So that's that's in the learning space of the space types. Next slide. This is just an example of one of those new model space programs.

This just again it gives us a starting point. It gives a standard something to use with any renovation or new school. we have it in writing and it's based on all of these things that have been discussed. And this next slide is just an example of a room data sheet. Again going into more of the specifics of the requirements of each of those spaces. Yep. Next slide. All right. So to close out, all of this data really sets a unique and robust baseline for capital planning. The FCA database is a tool for project development., and the broad community engagement ensures that the decisions made align with Durham public schools needs. Key conversations will have to continue with you all, the board of education, the county to establish a funding plan, which will also be integral to future bond planning. But in summary, we're really grateful to have been part of this process. We spent a lot of time and effort meeting with a lot of different people. walking a.

Lot of buildings and really seeing where Durham is now and being able to report that to staff and so that they can use that to plan for the future. This this type of effort hasn't been done for Durham Public Schools and actually in a lot of school districts across the country to marry these two things together. and so putting them together really sets you all in a good place to do what you need for your community and your buildings and really set you up for the future. So again, thank you for the opportunity to be part of this team., and we're excited to see where it goes next. You can skip through to the next.

We'll skip these few slides. They were just in case we need them. You going next slide. Next slide. All right.

Colleagues, Miss Beyer, I just want to express gratitude to you all and to the team both for staying here with us so late into the evening, but also just for the thoroughess of of the work and I think we talked about it earlier, but we previously had learning environment guidelines only for elementary schools. that was work that was done inhouse and might you describe a little bit about what that looked like just briefly in in middle schools, high schools. What is that for us? I know when we did it for elementaryaries, it was preserving prek space to meet the our prek expansion plans. It was preserving art, music, dedicated space. It was upsizing cafeterias so that students could not have four or five rotations for lunch.

Can you kind of just broad brush how that expanded into those those middle and high school guidelines a little bit more? We did look a lot at what was done previously and you know some of us on the team were also very familiar with those from working with Durham public schools in the past. So that was helpful. but this really sort of it it took that information but it expanded it so much more and by getting that input from the community it made this so much more richer and specific to Durham public schools because you could really look at everything in that current in the in the guideline previously. There was really nothing that was tailored specifically for Durham. you won't you will see that in in this new guideline. and so with middle school and high school, I mean that just took it that much further. And we've also put it into a document that includes a lot of graphics. It includes a lot of of those other activities that that build upon.

Good spaces in all of those schools. And now we also have a program which we really didn't have before. And so now we do have a starting point for at least those model schools that we've looked at both in elementary, middle, and high. That wasn't present before. Thank you so much. And the the numbers that you all have presented as far as our need are kind of staggering to to me. Dr. Giovanni had something to add on that. Oh, yeah. Yeah. Yeah. I didn't see her. Sorry. No, I just wanted to Miss Miss Mitchell. she has really taken the lead on ensuring that we have those legs. If you the board will recall she presented the capital improvement plan and she was integral I mean in working with our vendors but she really has been kind of the the lead on this and so if you could just share a little bit Miss Mitchell and how you when you were revamping this program ensured that we'd had those legs for high school and.

Middle. Thank you. One of the important values of the learning environment guidelines is they are our our guide book, our north star for the future of our facilities at every grade level. So that as we proceed in in with our middle and high schools, we now have an accurate representation of what should be present in our schools, how spaces are equipped, the size of those spaces so that as we develop projects, we we are designing similarly across the district. We have not had that previously. And so we have a variety of conditions that exist in the district and we want to make sure moving forward that as we have new high schools come online, they're all meeting the same standards. They're all designed similarly. We can go into those schools and see that they all represent the values of our community and they're similarly equipped. And that is a very important aspect of this document and it will be a resource for every project.

And as we develop the capital improvement plan and we develop those priorities, we'll be looking to that as we develop square footages and and assess u numerical values for improvements that are needed. That will be one of the resources that we'll use for the development of the plan. Thank you, Miss Mitchell. I so appreciate your leadership in this and I know that it's been a a fast turnaround for for the team. The the document that you speak of, do we plan to share that publicly? Is it posted or is it an internal document?

How are y'all thinking about that? So, it certainly is a document we can share. It's commonly shared by many districts all over the United States when they're prepared. it is a resource that we actively provide to our design team. So, it's a document that's out there. We of course want to share it with the board so that everyone has an opportunity to read some of the important content. There's a lot of nuances in the document that really talks specifically to what we heard from the community and how that got incorporated into the spaces and I think that's something that the board will find very interesting. as well as some of the newer elements about new kinds of spaces that represent the future of the district. A lot of our district facilities currently are designed for a different time in learning and what this document does is really bring up those learning environments to meet what our future needs are going to be. So, I think you'll you'll find it valuable and.

Interesting to hear what resonated with the community and how we responded to it in the way we're going to design buildings in the future. So, yes, we can make that available publicly. we can put it on the website. we'll of course make it available to the board. But yes can be a public document. I so appreciate that. Thank you. Miss said I really appreciate this presentation. It's really interesting. I'm excited to see the database when it comes together and and thank you for walking all of our buildings. I'm glad to see that we have not just our school buildings but also administrative offices in here. I think that's also really important as well.

I wanted to know how often should we update these learning environment guidelines now that we have them. Sorry, now that we have them, how often should we work on updating those? Because I'm also thinking just about how trends in schools change and learning changes and so sometimes it's open and then sometimes we go back to close and sometimes we do different things. So, well, we've written it such that it should not be something that you have to look out for a little while. But, you know, it is a living document. So, things do change., needs change of of the community and I think it does need to be re revisited., you know, I can follow up and and get you some more kind of rule of thumb guidelines, for how many years apart that that needs to be, but I'm sure we're going to be tracking, tracking the the comments and as projects move through the system.

It'll be a continuously evolving document. I I would just add that many of the components are things that will be continuous for some time. When we talk about flexible learning today, when we talk about things other than front of the room instruction, those are things that are going to be around for a while. Some of those other auxiliary things about different kinds of group spaces, how we use them in the future. Those are things that we might look to change over time depending on how we see fluctuations in learning. but those are also spaces that become very easily adaptable to other things in the future as well. And we need to build in some of that adaptability. And that's a conversation that I don't think that we've had yet. This idea of how we futureproof our schools. traditional schools are very hard to to take down walls and to easily adapt and change and we want to have some strategies for future proofing as we move forward and I think the guidelines are going to.

Give us some of that flexibility when we're looking for spaces in the future. So when we talk about a timeline for updating the document we probably want to take a fresh look at it in five years and and update a portion of it. The the benefit is it's a live document, so we are able to go in and make adjustments and tweaks based on what we're seeing in the district. But definitely at the five-year, probably at the 10 year, it's worth taking a deeper dive into the document itself. But like I said, we do finally have something that represents all students at all grades. And so we have a terrific starting point. So Miss Chavez, oh sorry, sorry, I think I'm two more questions.

One. So in looking and you all might have said this so excuse me if I missed it but in the FCA results when you see that the immediate need is higher than the additional tenure like are we to come to a conclusion on that or is that kind of just a formation and needs further study? No, I mean I think the conclusion is that there's some some deferred maintenance that has not been happening over the over a period of time which has just made things last or not last longer in buildings., so when you see something like that where it's kind of over 50% of that teny year, that means there's some urgency to it., and it is just reflective of budget needs and staffing needs and and all of that for sure. And I guess then we'll get further when we get the CIP of what might need a rebuild, what might need a renovation, what like all that kind of analysis will come a little later. Okay. And then the.

Other thing I want to think about I wanted to ask about is all of this is I think you said like replacement. So this doesn't get into any of the sustainability efforts that we'd want to see in our schools or upgraded HVACs and different things like that. That's not touching any of this, right? So for instance, you would if there's a gas fired boiler, you're going to replace it with a gas fired boiler. Maybe you want to go all electric so it doesn't include it wouldn't be an electric boiler, but that's all part of that planning and looking at it and and honestly, you know, everybody with existing buildings is going through that because some of those systems are actually cheaper you know and you'll get cost savings in the end. There's rebates. So really looking at what the building needs and all the things that you're touching with it. Yeah.

M I'll be brief. Thank you so much. I really enjoyed this. Love all the data. I really like how you broke things into regions. Let us look at the buildings and their conditions that way. let's see. A couple thoughts I was having. I've already mentioned I really like the FCA database as well. the living database that's dynamic, creating a record, but also allowing us to plan for the future and be flexible. and then I was thinking about connecting how looking at our spaces in this way, especially our secondary spaces would support cultivating the skills we want to see in our students for their post-secary options too. So that was something that just came to my mind., and I also am thinking about how we can use the the legs to create spaces that help us meet our SEAL goals and support our students mental health., because that is a major area of of need and that you know we are working on as a district. So those were my.

Thoughts. Thank you very much. I really appreciate it. Miss Garta, thanks so much., this is great. Really useful to see all this data. I think my question is mostly for Miss Mitchell and wanting to know reminder in what the next steps are and how like how we will use this data to address and in particular I think my one of my biggest concerns is these priority like the currently critical or potentially critical like things that are not safe or that are dangerous for our kids because this is I mean just looking at the what we need to do for this district is frankly very overwhelming. So I think if I mentally need to focus on like what is unsafe, what is is going to deteriorate really quickly. So that like currently critical or potentially critical, how are we going to start addressing those or what's the next steps in this planning for that? Yeah. So we've recently obtained the database. So we are currently going through a round of data analysis to look at those.

Types of priorities to see if there's anything that needs to be addressed immediately. if there's anything that needs to happen before the capital improvement plan., all of the information relative to those immediate needs when we're talking in that $500 million range, those are all going to get broken out in the capital improvement plan on a school by school basis. So, as we develop that plan, which we talked about in our last session, based on that timeline, we will have, a school by school analysis of what is included in that first round of immediate needs. As we as we parse the information now and start to develop those, we are going to see where there is a safety or security issue or an immediate need in HVAC that is that is critical. This is something that we've been dealing with on an ongoing basis. Our maintenance teams are incredible. the some of the band-aid solutions they've had to come up with. So those critical needs and that critical number is something that.

Is immediate and will need to happen as soon as possible. Thank you. That's very helpful. Mr. Tab, Miss Herog, anything. Yep. Thank you so much. Y'all have a great night. The next item on our agenda, our budget prioritization activity. Mr. Teter. Good evening, Chair Rogers, board members, and Dr. Lewis. I'm in the process of sharing my screen that we can review activity. There we go. Wonderful. So just for a little bit of a little bit of context for the public regarding this presentation we developed a prioritization tool that was interactive in nature that reflects what sort of decisions we may or may not make based upon the amount of funding that the county manager has recommended in in her local budget that was unveiled. just very recently. You make it larger. Of course. let me see what.

Happens. And let's bring it back over. Okay. Is that better? Okay. Wonderful. So as a reminder the the county manager proposed an additional 10,353,550 for the the current expansion wing of the budget. 6,353,550 of that were for continuation items that we needed in order to continue to operate as we are now. And so in in building this document u for folks to work with, we locked those items in as yeses since we needed those. out of the $4 million that was above and beyond that in the recommended funding stream for Durham public schools, we're required to share $840,000 of that with our charter schools that are here in Durham. So, just went ahead and locked that in as 840. So, even if someone changed that to a no, it's still going to be $840,000.

We listed just various the various expansion items that we discussed throughout the budget development process for this season. there were certain areas here where we developed tiers where if you wanted to try to still include everything if possible you had the the ability to manipulate some of these items to lower options while still kind of honoring the mission of those things. So we the items that have the asterisks next to them reflect the position that we were in the original budget ask to the counties. So just as a reminder of where those spots were. So for example, the teacher supplement, the original ask was to be able to increase that by 700 per year. the original ask for the bus driver supplement was to accomplish 200 a month or 2,000 per year. so on and so forth.

We got some good feedback u from board members as well as from cabinet members. and we worked to including the most recent one that we folded in. and so we were we were able to just sort of look across those and try to get some sense of what would be consensus points for both entities so to speak. and they're pretty close when we look at the two. So I'm I'll we'll look at each of them, right? And so we'll look at each of these and so we'll start with the board version just in terms of feedback that we had from board members.

And so we can see the Oh yes. Yeah, we've moved to a new tab. So now we've got to get a little bit larger. We'll do one more. Okay, wonderful., so we can see right so the board in in its deliberations we had a number of board members that said hey we do want to increase teacher supplements that would be a priority for us but perhaps we cannot go as far as the $700 and but we still want to do something. So the $300 per year seemed to be kind of a median point based on the board member feedback.

Bus driver supplement was just resoundingly important. It it's a new thing for us. It's something what we haven't done recently, right? Teacher supplement increases, something that we did recently. so overwhelmingly the board feedback came through to try to honor that $2,000 per year or 200 per month for the bus driver supplement. So that was very clear. the next space, the lavender, where we've spent a whole lot of time is just the concept of M's pay and trying to chart a way for that to move forward. and so I just want to be clear for everyone sort of consuming this presentation that when we talk about the all certified that does include our social workers and it includes other categories who we've been hearing from., and what's been really what's really helpful in this balancing act in this activity is that if you select a a low enough percentage for the concept of the program, it frees up some resources because we've been committing to a certain level already in our existing.

Budget lines. And so it seems like just where sort of a board consensus at this point is maybe we entertain a model where we include all of our eligible certified folks under the old 2013 rules and apply it at 5%. and so that puts a little bit more money back on the table. The growing together positions seem to be very important across the board. the center for child and family health engagement and and the work that they're doing seem to be very important in that consensus as well as the support for expanding resources for EC. that seemed to be a common thread here for the board.

And you did pretty good. I gave you a margin of error of 100,000 I believe it was and you you did you came in within 62. So good job. just as as a collective with that. I know it was not an easy activity. but just imagine we do this every day. so I'm going to enlarge the cabinet iteration of this based on feedback that we got from cabinet members and we're going to go through this again. We'll have to go through this at least one more time depending upon how things shake out with the commissioners on June the 9th. So we'll get to have more fun.

The supplement cabinet landed at the exact same spot as the board of education. bus driver supplement landed sort of in the middle of the road with cabinet as far as those priorities or as how much we would commit. Local masters pay landed just one rung below the board. Agreed on growing together positions exact same response. the rethink ed curriculum that was one difference between cabinet and board consensus at this point. both entities agreed on the center for child and family health contract and both groups landed to the same spot with additional support for EC. So not too many major differences between the two sets of feedback. so we're at a really kind of a good spot for conversations., and then as far as the cabinet level, you can tell Scrooge McDuck, finance officer, was a contributor to this, and we still had $273,000 to play with in our version that perhaps, right, we could throw some other things. So, so just wanted to kind of share. So, both groups hit.

Within the target., you know, so, just really wanted to share that. So, that's the first sort of blush at this. If we had to sort of manage what would we do with the current proposal and certainly we know it's not the final proposal and we'll have tighter clarity after the commissioner meeting on June the 9th we hope which is my birthday so no pressure on Claudia Hager to populate or the commissioners so and then we'll be back right so June the 10th the goal would be to go through this again and talk through this same exercise, right?

And and think about our homework there. So, so I'll leave it at that and and then happy to hand it over to Dr. Lewis for any additional thoughts or comments and and answer whatever questions we can. Thanks, Jeremy, for putting this tool together. And I think it was a great opportunity for both the board and the cabinet to really go through in terms of understanding, you know, the remaining funds we had and where our priorities priorities are. and it was really interesting to see the alignment there between cabinet as well as the the board. So that's extremely positive in terms of the direction that that we're moving. I will say also in addition to the the June 9th there is a work session on May 29th over at the county that we'll go over to to kind of answer some questions from the board of commissioners. I did send an invite to our board and cabinet as well. So that's on May 29th. Did I say June 29th? May 29th.

Miss Travis, thank you so much. I enjoyed doing this. Can I have one for my personal budget? Just kidding., but I wanted to just ask one clarifying question about the board., the board's it's getting like can't think of words analysis or whatever. Musical instruments refresh. Is that a no?, there was not. Right. We did get a couple of a couple of yeses in that space., and I'd say one conversation that I've had with Dr. Lewis offline is that's something perhaps we can figure out with some of our capital outlay reserves., with it being a just, you know, we've got this initial investment of $150,000., that may be something that we can manage in some other way separate from this. So as we rec we recognize the importance but u it was also difficult to fit things in. So yeah, thank you. I'm also pleased to see the board and cabinet alignment.

It and it's very aligned with what I submitted as well. So I'm happy to to know that we were along the same lines. I want to say I'm I'm glad that there was support for the expanded local mast's pay for all certified positions. I would really like to see us do that. And also the the EC funding. I'm just glad to know that that also was a priority and and certainly running the master's pace we're watching piece we're watching carefully. it's the restoration is proposed in the governor's budget and the house version of the budget. It's not in the Senate version. So that's something that'll be really probably a critical talking point as the two chambers negotiate. So very anxious. Yes. Yes. And hopeful about that. Thank you. Appreciate it.

Miss Ber, Mr. Teter, I wanted to thank you so profoundly for leading us through this exercise. I It reminded me of last year doing one with stickers and trying to prioritize things that this board did and and worked with cabinet on. that this is this tool of at least forcing us to make tough choices I thought was really helpful. I also feel that we can fully defend our full ask and the superintendent's budget which became the board budget when we go over there with full confidence because these choices were impossible to make.

We can we can actually say that we planned it for a reason. There's not fat in it and we actually rift folks for the first time in many many years. We also will have less adults in our schools and we can demonstrate that and I think it's important for us to demonstrate that again to the commissioners when we have those conversations so they see how conservative we are being with our budgeting. I as one that that struggled with M's pay all along still hope that I I would have liked the notion of of starting with your version of M's pay for this year that's in the budget and throttling different levels of that as well as the expansion to all because I want actually the cabinet to make that decision and stick with it based on y'all's best wisdom not ours and and the squeaky wheel feeling that we've gotten through all of this year. I I I think that's super important for y'all to make that recommendation to us.

And I personally, and maybe other colleagues did, struggled with knowing what to do with the panorama and the and the other support systems that and whether they're useful to our staff and our team. And I I look forward to y'all like leading that that with data that and I saw some of questions from colleagues that also reflected some of that. But I really just appreciate this exercise and and the attention that it brought and I hope that the House picks that up and as far as masters pay bigger raises for everybody. That house budget is so much more healthy and robust for personnel and for schools moving forward. But I appreciate it for 2.0 of this. We can build in those additional masters pay scenarios.

For sure. Thank you. Miss Carter adding. Yes. I also enjoyed this activity even though it I I really like that it forced us to engage with the TE decision-m in a very real way., I did land similar to where the board and and cabinet landed on most of mine just having to try to make difficult decisions. I don't I don't love it though because as board member Byer said, it does feel like everything is really important right now. So, like even if we do, so hard to read, even if we do reduce our local certified supplement and do an additional 300 per year, like then we're going to fall potentially fall behind some of our neighboring counties further and be less competitive than we are when we're trying to retain staff here., well, we don't know for certain what they're going to do, but I that risk worries me when we have wakened Chapel Carbone next to us.

I really am hoping that the state restores the master's pay, but if not, I do like this what feels like a more evenly distributed mast's pay that this has landed us at where we're not picking and choosing one group of employees. So, but I I would like for it to be a higher percentage for them and hopefully the state will do that. really grateful that we are united in our additional exceptional children's funding. That's one where it was not difficult for me to identify that. I'm very curious to know why cabinet and why we are are all aligned on the panorama. No. And that leads me to like I just would like to hear more about that.

And relatedly though, I guess I just am so curious to hear what our staff in our buildings also like our school level administrators think about each of those different programs and then also about the tough decisions that we're making. So that's a curiosity to me. If they had to make these tough decisions, what would they be saying about this? Well, I'd say we aren't all aligned on the panorama. I think a majority of the board may have submitted no. Oh, sorry. I misspoke. So, that the fact that the majority of the board and the majority of the cabinet said no is curious to me, but yes. No, we did not all say no to.

Panorama. Any other questions or comments, colleagues? Miss Harog, just a quick comment. I just wanted to also just echo how much I enjoyed using this tool. I would love to a tool like this I would love for the public to be able to have something similar to or I was wondering if this if there's something like with dollars and decisions where you know it it it helped me to understand just how complex all of these decisions are., and I love how it kind of looks like your household budget. So, I was, you know, I would love for a tool like this to exist for to help the public understand how this works and how complex it is.

And I said here something that I think could strengthen the tool would be like a a piece on the data like we had the descriptions of like not looking at it now but the descriptions of panorama and things like this in the other tab. in the future it would be also good to have like data points that talks about you know that helps us understand the impact that each of these you know that these programs have on student outcomes and things like that. So we could consider that too. Well, you know we love this but this seems to have more of an impact you know to help us make decisions like that. some sort of it could be a tab or it's just an an accompaniment tool that comes with that, you know, and that's all. Thank you.

Yeah. And we did have a not exactly like this, but an interactive tool that was released during the March 17th a decisions that allowed members of the public to, you know, just kind of move the the line, I I think it was a line, you know, up per like if you want additional certain number of staff, you can move that up and see how the but see how that impacts overall budget. Yeah, that's something we can continue to have conversations. About. Anything else, colleagues?

Thank you, Mr. Teter, for leading us through this. I know that you said there'll be a part two of this. So, if you could just remind us of the next steps and like when that part two might come back around. So, the more immediate right would be incorporating some feedback that we got tonight. just looking at the other iterations of of the M's pay program to to allow some additional options for decision- making in that space. I think it will be you know and we and we can certainly you know explore sort of that retake. I think there's been some new information that has come out based on your questions about some of the social emotional offerings that fall under Dr.

King's umbrella and he's gotten some answers out to you all and that may impact how you feel about some of those things such as panorama etc., so there will be an opportunity for you to sort of take a second strike at the document and we can turn that around pretty quickly and and have another conversation about that., and then after after the county takes action, if that number moves up or down, hopefully up, right, then we would have a.3 of that, right, of of version three of that, where we walk through the final numbers. and and so right so we'll see this a couple of times in June with different changes.

I look forward to seeing it again because I know we've got to wait for those different iterations to come and budgets to be approved. and I think continuing to ask questions around what our priorities are on for us to continue to think about it will be helpful. I think in the future it would be interesting to have a tool that even more people can give us feedback in, right? Like say, "Oh, we like these priorities or not." I we're not there for this year, but I think if we're talking about I think you talked about starting this process in the fall in the future and so what does it look like for us to gather that because I think part of this is about how do you have buyin from community on what the priorities need to be? And I think that takes some time of, you know, moving slow to build that that community buy in. So I just want to appreciate that. I I did have.

Panorama on my I think I had all of the social emotional well-being pan rethink and Duke Center, right? Because I I just think about the social emotional needs. But that was just me. So I'm glad we're going to have another iteration of this so we could have more discussion and dialogue. So, thank you, Miss Carter. I just had a clarifying question about what additional data we're getting on the M's pay, like how you're thinking about breaking that down further. I And are we Yeah. What is that going to look like for us if we get that? Sure. So we'll have some additional rows just based on the feedback some additional rows that reflect the current so the current model and what does that look like with the different percentages just so you know if you want to experiment with that it's it's available for you to cost out so so it would be the version without without expanding to the other areas and do we do those at lower did I understand.

That request yeah I Guess because what we put in this year's budget, what folks are expecting is the categories that we'd identified plus the social workers, but what you modeled was actually throttling up to everyone, which please employees, I'm always about like trying to get you as much money as we can. I want to be expansive, but that's exactly how we got into classified pay debacle. So, I don't want that to happen again. So some clarity on what is in the budget and I mean we I guess I I think we're assuming that if we had to cut people to 5% that would be popular with folks. I do not believe it would be and so we may be at where we need to feel like we'd rather do fewer people at 7% or eight like model it. Do you see what I mean? And model it with what's in our proposed budget is I think is important to me. I don't I that's what I was talking about.

Still I think I'm understanding. Thank you. and so what is in the budget is the 10% for the classroom teachers. That's what you're referring to. And then the expansion is 10% for the social workers. That's what we budgeted. Yeah. To my understanding. That's what's in the proposed. Yep. Yep. Okay. And then when we look at these four through 9% that would be the classroom teachers, the social workers and the others that would have been included prior to and so you're saying break it out further to where we might apply different percentages to different groups of employees. Is that just so I understand what we're asking for because we are we all asking for it or my request I sent the same what I think is the same request as in this buyer is to see all certified which we see here now but to also see just what is costed out like not interventionist not the other not the expansion piece just to see what it looks like and how it has.

A financial impact on this to help inform our decision- making including the social workers though is including the social workers but not including everybody from the 2013 pre203 wouldn't that be row 11 then well no except that we would like to see four five six seven eight and nine nine and 10% if we don't get the full four right right for each line, right? For just for the social workers, not just the 10%. We'd like to see the other percentage breakdowns for that.

Just the social for the social workers for local masters pay for everybody that's getting it now and school social workers with the percentage breakdowns. So there would be an additional six lines or seven lines that allow the different percentage breakdowns with just that limited subset of employees. Okay. Okay. That's helpful because that's what we voted. I mean that's what's in the budget, right? Yeah. Right. So like Missstead, I was supportive of Panorama. I want to see. I look forward to the data and information that you're going to share.

I I know when they presented about Panorama, I didn't seem like I was team Panorama. what is important to me is that when administrators, educators, employees of anywhere have a tool that we're not just taking it away as a cost savings, but hopefully replacing it with something more efficient, more effective, or offering some alternative. And so I fear that just taking it is a problem. And I think we just kind of like pre-approved a contract on consent for for Panorama, right?

I think I would just just note. So So you authorized us to enter contract with Panorama. we won't be entering that contract until such time as we know we have those dollars. so and I would share that Panorama understands we've been very clear with them from the start of this process that we won't be moving forward with the execution of that contract until such time as the entire budget process has concluded and we know for certain that those dollars are present. Okay. So the board still has the option to say we don't want to do that.

Sure. cuz cuz we haven't done anything with Panorama. All we've done is go through our internal process. Okay. Yeah, I think that understanding how those things support our educators, the Rethink Ed curriculum supports our students and how it helps our educators to interact with our students will be an important part of the conversation. Yeah. Anything else, misunderstood? Or I forgot to say this in my remarks earlier, but all of this is pending. Approval of budget and funding resources. There's a better way to say that probably, but I just think we should make sure we continue to put that at the forefront., just as a reminder to folks and to us that this is all pending available monies.

Thank you, Mr. Jeter. Colleagues, the next item on our agenda is information only overnight field trips that we get each month. These are for May and June and then we have close session on our agenda. Move that we go into close session for the reasons stated on the agenda. Second. It's been moved by Miss Beyer, seconded by Miss Herog, that we go into close session for the reasons stated on the agenda. We appreciate everybody joining us tonight. As a reminder, we will not be coming back live after close session. the live stream will end now and as will interpretation. we appreciate you all. all those in favor going to close session say I. I. All oppose say no. We're now in close session. Thank you.