October 26, 2021 Special Meeting: ESSER III Study Session

President Joe Schaffer called the special meeting of the Board of Education to order at 6:00 p.m. with board members Don Bridge, Andrew Cruz, Christina Gagnier, James Na and Schaffer present. Bridge, the board clerk, led the Pledge of Allegiance 1. The agenda held one subject, a study session on the district's ESSER III plan, made up of a staff report, public comment on the item and board discussion 2. The minutes record a staff presentation by Dr. Grace Park, 13 public speakers and a set of proposals from each board member. The board took no vote, and Schaffer adjourned the meeting at 8:01 p.m. 11

This page's record is the district's minutes, signed by the president and the clerk, which name the people below. Detail from the recording about a named board member appears only within the proposals the minutes give that member.

Why the board met

ESSER III is the third round of federal Elementary and Secondary School Emergency Relief money for schools. The plan under discussion was the one staff had brought to the October 21 regular meeting. Its cover memo, from Superintendent Norm Enfield, put the fiscal impact at $34,040,685.00 and said the board had to adopt the plan at a public meeting on or before October 29, 2021, after which the district would submit it to the county office of education for review 3. The California Department of Education's guidance set the same adoption date statewide and gave districts five days after adoption to submit the plan for review 4.

On October 21 the board tabled the item until this special meeting 5. The minutes of that meeting record the superintendent explaining that the board would need an October 26 meeting to receive input and give him direction on changes, and a second meeting on October 28 to approve the plan in time to submit it to the state by Friday, October 29 6.

Two line items in the draft figure in the board members' proposals below 1. A "Facilities" action put $5,000,000.00 of ESSER III money toward upgrading air conditioning units to MERV13 filter abilities and replacing units that could not be upgraded 7. A "Technology Infrastructure" action put $20,000,000.00 toward cabling, network infrastructure, the data center, network and cyber security, wireless, and voice and collaboration systems 8.

The staff report

Opening the session, staff asked board members to be specific about any change and to say what they would remove to pay for it, because the grant was a fixed amount. Staff would rewrite parts of the plan the next day and bring it back on Thursday for approval 999.

Dr. Park, Associate Superintendent of Curriculum, Instruction, and Innovation, presented the plan's overview and the process behind it 1. As captioned, her presentation said there was no extension to the October 29 deadline and that districts were not required to apply 9. The district estimated it would receive about $34 million, of which at least 20 percent, or $6.8 million, had to address the academic impact of school closures; all of that share would go directly to schools 910.

As captioned, a district survey ran from July 19 through August 13, followed by school-level surveys 10. In the district survey, as captioned, 1,651 families and 930 employees weighed in, ranking technology infrastructure first, followed by indoor air quality and mental health services 10. Staff also met with five other groups and brought the results to an ESSER committee that, as captioned, had 70 members including every school principal 111212. The plan reflected that committee's top three priorities 12. As captioned, technology infrastructure carried $20 million from ESSER III, mental health services were a $7 million effort with $2 million from ESSER III, and the HVAC upgrades to the MERV 13 standard were an estimated $18 million project with $5 million from ESSER III 1212. If the board did not approve the plan on October 28, the district would not file an application 13.

Public comment

The minutes list 13 people who addressed the board on ESSER III (names as printed): Juli Santorsola, Sonia Singh, Darice De Guzman, Richard Wales, Kelly Allen, Sonja Shaw, Dominique Scogging, Adel Meisenheimer, Jim Flores, Christie Salazar, Tony Flores, Joel Burlingame and Clark Franklin 1. The minutes record who spoke but not what each person said. On the recording each speaker is called to the podium by name, so this page does not summarize individual comments. As captioned, the number of requests to speak announced from the dais was 11, two fewer than the minutes list; the record does not explain the difference 13. Speakers had three minutes each 13.

Board members' proposals

Before discussion, the board was reminded that a study session takes no action: members could recommend changes to the funding allocation, and the board would vote on the plan at Thursday's meeting 1414. Following discussion, the minutes record these proposals 1:

Andrew Cruz proposed cutting 80% from the indoor air quality allocation and 20% from the technology infrastructure allocation to fund mental health counselors at each junior high and high school at a ratio of 500 students to one counselor; adding music for kindergarten and first grade at least twice a week, preferably three times; adding seven special education licensed therapists to support mental health; and allocating $500,000.00 to support full-time staff at the Family Engagement Center 1. On the recording he said he chose 500 because 450 to 700 students per counselor is the usual range 1515. Asked about special education staffing, staff said, as captioned, that the district had 20 school psychologists and about 3,200 special education students 16. In its recap of the requests, staff cautioned that the music addition might not be an allowable expense 17.

James Na proposed adding licensed therapists to support students on all campuses; flexibility in the type of equipment used to improve indoor air quality; $20,000.00 per site for a cool-down room or therapeutic space at every school; and a Peer Support Program Director position for junior high and high schools, a leadership position to engage students experiencing troubles 1. On the recording he described seeing distressed students on one campus feel relieved after licensed therapists worked with them 1818, questioned spending on a filtration system that might not protect students from COVID-19 18, and put the cool-down rooms at about $700,000 across 35 schools, as captioned 19.

Christina Gagnier proposed amending the grant budget's safe school environment action so that its description leaves flexibility to identify the most efficient technology for better indoor air quality, and proposed an agenda item for the November 18 board meeting to look at the general fund budget to support the Family Engagement Center 1. Earlier, answering her question about the air quality line, staff said the MERV 13 standard was a CDE recommendation and that HEPA filtration and UV lighting were other options 20. On the recording she asked that the facilities action refer generally to filtration abilities and system upgrades rather than to a specific technology 2121, and said the Family Engagement Center should be a continual commitment rather than something funded only from one-time grant money 2121. The meeting date was first given as November 19 and corrected on the record to November 18 22.

Joe Schaffer proposed looking at structural changes to the general budget rather than using one-time money to fund recurring expenses for positions and programs, and said he would like to see the Family Engagement Center bolstered, with at minimum its clerk position funded full time 1. On the recording he said his biggest concern was what would happen to new staff once the one-time money ran out, and called such positions structural changes to the annual budget 2323. He also backed bolstering the center, starting with the clerk position 22.

Don Bridge proposed looking at the general fund to sustain costs associated with additional positions 1.

Recapping the requests at the end of the session, staff said it would work the 80% and 20% reductions out as figures, deducting predominantly from air quality and the rest from technology 2424.

What came next

The agenda memo for the October 28 special meeting says the board-requested study session on the plan was held on October 26 and that "The revised plan includes the direction from the Board of Education from the Board Study Session" 25. What the board decided on October 28 is recorded on that meeting's page.