[This transcript was generated automatically from audio using AI and hasn't been reviewed by a person -- it can contain mistakes, including plausible-sounding sentences that were never actually said. Treat it as a starting point, not a verbatim record.]

[0:10] Good evening. I would like to call to order our NOCA Hennepin school board meeting for today, September 25, 2023. Please join the board and pledging our allegiance.
[0:46] Okay, members. Our first agenda item is to approve the board agenda. Is there a motion to approve it as presented?
[0:52] So move. Thank you, Mr. Simon. Is there a second? Thank you. Miss Hayes, is there any discussion? Hearing none? All those on favor signify by saying aye.
[1:02] I, any opposed say no, with six in favor and zero posed.
[1:08] Our board agenda is approved.
[1:10] Our next item is wrecking nations.
[1:12] It looks like we have,
[1:14] um, awesome, pretty exciting wrecking nations.
[1:18] Mr. Mueller, do you want to bring our,
[1:20] bring forward your guests and introduce us?
[1:29] Welcome.
[1:30] Thank you.
[1:43] Good evening, Chair Anderson.
[1:45] Good evening.
[1:46] Superintendent McIntyre.
[1:48] Good evening members of the UNOCA Hennephan School Board.
[1:53] It is my honor to bring forward this evening two individuals that have made them very,
[1:57] very positive difference in student safety on and off the school bus.
[2:04] First, please welcome, Avery, help me, Avery, see you, see you, see you, she'll, now a seventh
[2:14] greater at Tune Rapids Middle School, over the years, Avery has built a very, very impressive
[2:21] poster resume with many district, wins, and state wins both in school bus safety, but
[2:31] also in kindness posters.
[2:33] You have some hanging on the wall out in the hallway here, so congratulations on your
[2:41] tremendous work.
[2:42] Now, your mom told me, even after all of the state wins and the district wins, that your goal was to win the national competition, is that right, Avery?
[2:54] Well, Avery, congratulations, you've done that.
[2:59] Outstanding job.
[3:08] And now, as I tell you, when you win your district award, your poster is going to be used by students all over the nation.
[3:19] Many thousands of copies of that very poster is going to go out to schools throughout the nation.
[3:25] And every time a student looks at that poster, they're going to be thinking about school bus safety.
[3:30] And the reason they're thinking about school bus safety, Avery, is because of your poster.
[3:36] So, thank you very much for all of your efforts over the years.
[3:40] I know your sister is here too. Molly does a fantastic job. Molly has many, many district
[3:48] wins and state wins. Your roller skating one was just awesome this year. It was just
[3:55] tremendous. It, our kids, one, every grade level in the state competition, they swept the
[4:03] state. And this is not our first national winner back in 2015. We had Naomi two out of Jackson
[4:13] Middle School back in 2015. So welcome to those ranks of national winners. Congratulations.
[4:37] And we're going to do some district photos, but family, if you want to come up and get some
[4:40] photos, please feel welcome to do that.
[5:17] One
[5:20] more round of applause.
[5:39] This is a great night for School of Safety.
[5:45] All right. Secondly, now I get to introduce to you the Minnesota state first place winner of our bus pariet educator award, Louise Savonich. Louise.
[5:58] We shall, for now, from district transportation and enjoy us, and any treatments from the Minnesota Association of People Transportation.
[6:11] Welcome.
[6:19] Well Louise was a bus parent educator for over 23 years with an Okhanapet.
[6:27] During that time, the Weaves played a very key role in the training of new bus parer educators.
[6:36] She's also quite the mentor of bus parer educators.
[6:40] When she trained somebody training was never over.
[6:43] Those people that she trained always felt very comfortable coming back to the Weaves and asking her questions.
[6:49] And the leaves would also help out during our rough picks when we have all of the routes for the school year laid out and people would come in and pick their assignment for the year.
[7:03] The leaves would help them. The leaves always had a great knowledge of the students, the schools, and always was very helpful.
[7:12] and we really greatly, greatly appreciate this service that you've given us.
[7:20] I wish that you'd come back, but I know Dick is out there and you're family and you're spending
[7:29] lots of time with them and congratulations on that next chapter, but you know my number.
[7:38] So Amy, you've got a very nice plan to present.
[7:44] I'm Amy Tiddens, and I work as a transportation manager for Intermediate District 27.
[7:51] But I'm a PT board member and just love presenting these awards.
[7:58] I'm the special education chair for MAPT, and so I had the honor of presenting the ways
[8:05] with this award at our state conference in July.
[8:08] So I'm so glad to be able to see her again.
[8:11] So we had many nominees and we had MAPT members and teachers,
[8:21] things like that I took off the names off everything.
[8:25] So it was picked.
[8:26] Nobody knew who she was but it was picked because of her
[8:31] and she just, yeah, made me teary, I'd want to be great enough.
[8:37] So, Jeff, do you want to read her nomination?
[8:40] Thank you.
[8:40] Okay.
[8:45] Are you going to make us cry now, too?
[8:47] Yes.
[8:48] I know.
[8:54] Buster Educator, Louise Sivanich, goes above and beyond,
[8:57] and shows much compassion with students, staff, parents, and drivers.
[9:02] Louise has outstanding attention, attendance,
[9:05] which is extremely important in providing a safe and consistent experience on the bus for our students.
[9:14] The following is yet another example of her work. This information was submitted by a driver.
[9:21] Louise, she's always on time, her personalities blend well. She makes the work day fun.
[9:29] But when it matters most, the special or emergency cases, which those that are blind or
[9:36] non-verbal, are small, calmness and reassurance, voice, adds joy to their day and strengthens
[9:43] them.
[9:44] More than once, I've seen her quick reaction to a seizure, and the supporting hand holding
[9:50] afterwards.
[9:52] Today there was an incident at the bus company with one of our own who is experiencing an onion.
[10:00] I know medical issue. While stamp was calling 911, Louise did what comes natural to Louise. She gently touched them and quietly began to talk to them.
[10:11] Asking permanent questions about their condition and stay calm and reassuring them that help us on the way.
[10:21] And she stayed with them to tell the EMT's got there. And just one of the many things.
[10:27] Many of the things that Louise has accomplished over her
[10:33] signed with the no-can.
[10:39] Well, well deserved and here is your plaque.
[10:45] She's a special education para of the year for 2023 for Minnesota Association for People's Transportation.
[10:53] That's amazing. Congratulations.
[11:02] And it's certificate.
[11:05] Thank you very much.
[11:08] We would like to give to you with a little token of our appreciation and take some photos
[11:13] if you wouldn't mind.
[11:55] Congratulations again.
[12:03] Thank you.
[12:05] Okay, members, we will move on to our next agenda item and that is our consent agenda
[12:11] and the floor is open for a motion to accept the agenda presented, or members are welcome
[12:16] to remove more remove items for separate consideration and discussion if that's what you
[12:21] wish.
[12:22] Is there a motion?
[12:23] Chair Anderson.
[12:24] Mr. Simon.
[12:24] I'd like to move the consent agenda as presented.
[12:27] Thank you, Mr. Simon.
[12:28] Is there a second?
[12:29] Thank you, Mr. Is McCartil.
[12:30] Any discussion?
[12:32] Hearing none.
[12:33] All those in favor signify by saying aye.
[12:36] Any pose?
[12:37] Say no.
[12:37] a six-in-favorite zero post, the motion is approved.
[12:46] Okay, our next agenda item is our communications,
[12:49] delegations, and petitions, and that's the section
[12:52] of our meeting that is for time for community members to provide
[12:56] input directly to the school board in issues that are about issues
[12:59] that fall within our authority.
[13:02] We usually plan about 15 minutes in our agenda for this.
[13:05] Our policy allows community members to speak for up to five minutes.
[13:09] If there are more that want to speak, our chair has the manager, right, to reduce that number.
[13:15] And I wanted to share that just because I've heard some stuff out in the public recently about that we limited it to two minutes.
[13:22] And we don't typically do that unless we have more people that want to speak.
[13:26] And then we want to try and reduce that number so people get, you know, so our meetings don't go too long.
[13:32] So I just wanted to clarify that.
[13:34] And tonight it looks like we have five cards.
[13:37] So just in keeping with our, our a lot of time,
[13:40] we will limit those comments to three minutes each.
[13:44] And I will monitor a timer and try and keep people on time.
[13:48] I'll, you know, just kind of interrupt you
[13:50] if you're running a little bit late,
[13:52] just so you can wrap up timely.
[13:54] So we will get started.
[13:59] I believe this is Kathy Johnson.
[14:05] Welcome to the board.
[14:14] Thank you.
[14:15] I like the celebrating part.
[14:18] I love that, I think that that's great.
[14:20] I'm here representing the parents and the children of an Okaihanapen.
[14:27] And I'm here in regards to the rewriting of the district policies.
[14:31] Discipline policies and the parent complaint policies.
[14:35] I've been advocating for a chain and policies for over a year.
[14:39] Governor Walts wrote these into law after reviewing my situation and what was happening in the public schools
[14:45] Minnesota. As a parent I know firsthand from our current school discipline policy and your
[14:53] parent complaint policies. My child was assaulted by three boys in high school class at
[14:58] in high school in 2020.
[15:00] And you do, which my child required medical care. You're just a plan action of three days suspension for these kids assaulting my child did not follow any of your current safety policies. And you as a school board and superintendent did not want to hear about it. The school principle and a system principle. Relabel the actions of these boys as a fight. They called the students in the teacher in the classroom liars and non reliable witnesses to cover up the behavior of these boys. I press charges against these boys and the judge found them guilty of 50
[15:29] degree of salt and they were placed on probation.
[15:32] As a parent, I want to be proud to live in this district.
[15:35] I want all students to be safe and I want victims to be treated with respect and dignity
[15:40] and this is what I want to see happen in this school year.
[15:44] When kids break, Minnesota laws they need to be disciplined and expelled based on the severity
[15:48] of the behavior.
[15:49] These cases must be referred to the school boards for review.
[15:53] The Minnesota Department of Education and Minnesota Statutes can be used for guidance.
[15:57] Never should the victim be treated disrespectfully and ever forced to leave the school for their own safety.
[16:03] On desired behaviors, we'll not be able to reflect a lesser degree of fence.
[16:09] I never want to see an Instagram page labeled Blaine High School Fight Club ever to be posted again showing single boys being by multiple boys that occurred inside the school.
[16:18] And I really didn't like my child's assault to be viewed by the world.
[16:21] Your board was aware of this histogram page and so was blamed high school.
[16:27] I never want this board to forget that they are in a kid industry and they need to care about the kids.
[16:32] We trust you to keep our kids safe while learning in your schools.
[16:36] I don't want the school board to ever again delegate the full responsibility of discipline,
[16:41] policy actions to the individual school principals.
[16:44] You're responsible and must be involved with the process.
[16:47] I want to show an accurate reporting of negative behaviors to be sent to the Minnesota Department of Education.
[16:54] Use school resource officers to press charges when children broke in the law
[16:57] or when victims' parents requested. Use school resource officers to guide students
[17:02] welcome them as part of the team and listen to recommendations from them.
[17:07] The school board hates their wisdom to address issues they see and deal with throughout their day.
[17:12] I want to see every adult in this district doing their part to support kids.
[17:15] Kevin, you're at three minutes.
[17:17] I'm done.
[17:19] No, you're at three minutes.
[17:20] I'll just wrap it up if you can.
[17:22] I would also like to educate the school board and staff on correct usage of data privacy laws.
[17:28] These laws are meant to protect children.
[17:31] They should never be used incorrectly to withhold any information from parents and guardians.
[17:36] According to the Office of Data,
[17:37] private practices, a parent, guardian, may have access to any public data and any private data
[17:44] or which their child is subject.
[17:47] Thank you.
[17:48] Thank you.
[17:48] Thank you.
[17:48] And Kathy, if you have your written testimony, if you could give that to Kathy, and I also
[17:54] have comments on the rewrite of the, the, if you can give that to Debbie, she'll make
[17:59] sure that I copy that today.
[18:01] Thank you.
[18:01] Okay.
[18:01] Thank you.
[18:02] Our next card is from Andy Ishwin.
[18:08] Welcome.
[18:13] Thank you.
[18:14] Good to see you.
[18:16] My name is Andy.
[18:17] I've been in a no kind of teacher for 21 years.
[18:21] I am a parent of two children that attend in our school district.
[18:25] First of all, Marcy and Nicole.
[18:28] Thank you so much for your service on the board.
[18:31] You're going to be missed.
[18:34] Nicole, I will always think of your servant leadership style from our time together in the
[18:39] math curriculum adoption process years ago, as a model of what a school board member
[18:43] can be.
[18:46] The reason I'm here is to raise concern for what Mr. Adet is doing in our community, specifically
[18:52] as he campaigns for other board candidates on social media, and by misrepresenting what
[18:58] happening in the classroom to win over voters. On September 9th, Mr. Audit shared that
[19:04] to the let them be group, standard base grading. It's happening now on our district,
[19:10] we will end it and goes on to claim that opposes academic excellence, creates classroom chaos
[19:17] and removes parent rights. These claims are false and an illustration of the level of pride.
[19:24] This man possesses to elevate his misinformed opinions to the level of public policy decision making.
[19:32] On an even more basic level, it's clear that he has no idea what he's even talking about.
[19:37] Standards based grading is literally getting back to the basics,
[19:42] and grading students strictly on their understanding of the state standards required by law.
[19:48] It removes extra things like attendance, work completion,
[19:51] and even donating a Kleenex box for extra credit as a part of a student grade.
[19:56] I've used this approach of standards based grading with my...
[20:00] Students long before you were on the board. I've taught over 2,500 students in the blame community. I've had zero complaints about any of the grading that I do.
[20:12] And I believe that families and students in our community think that teachers like me and in our school have done a good job.
[20:21] And they've gone on to be successful in their academic pursuits.
[20:25] Most importantly, there's an overwhelming evidence of academic research, which we are an academic institution, telling us if we want students to be successful this approach is the best and most fair way to get there.
[20:39] I invite you to visit my classroom or any class in the district for that matter to see how hard we are working every day to recapture the love of learning for our students.
[20:48] It's also not blame schools or teachers for the decline in test scores since 2020.
[20:54] A lot has happened since then.
[20:56] That has been out of our control.
[20:59] We are working hard to build back better and we need your support instead of campaigning
[21:04] against the tools that we need to be successful.
[21:07] At the court of my concern, it feels like Mr. Adat does not have a realistic view of what
[21:12] our district needs to be successful for all students and he seeks to gather more on the board
[21:17] like him, who also lack any background in public education beyond their own K-12 school.
[21:23] Sandy, you're over three minutes.
[21:25] You can concern for the future of our district under leadership like his.
[21:29] Thank you.
[21:30] And if, again, would you care to share your written toast testimony?
[21:33] Thank you.
[21:42] Brian, newcomer.
[21:50] Welcome to the board.
[21:53] I'm a little late in bringing this to the board, just had to do some research.
[21:57] So this is as of last spring.
[22:00] Last spring, I have a student, his name is Isaac Newcomer, he's a senior this year and he plays on the lacrosse team.
[22:07] In speaking with the parents on the lacrosse team, this is not just a lacrosse team.
[22:11] Issue, this was sports-wide, at least at the Noka High School.
[22:15] I can't verify if this is beyond a Noka High School though.
[22:20] We had several games away games where the students were being told they had to drive or the game would have to be canceled.
[22:26] And the coach would put into their hands the decision on whether they had to drive or whether we cancel the game,
[22:33] which I believe is irresponsible. No high school kid on a team wants to be the one that says,
[22:36] no, we shouldn't go to a game. That should be the coach or the AD that makes that decision.
[22:42] When I asked about the issue, it was three games over an eight-game away schedule.
[22:46] So more than a third of the games, we asked our students to drive to those games.
[22:49] We had 16 to 18 year olds driving with new licenses where we really we should have had a mature bus driver driving
[22:58] When I submitted a request to why we did receive a letter from the district saying that there's an overall transportation issue that's going on got it
[23:07] But that to me when when I asked the coaches then
[23:10] And I say this isn't the coaching issue with this district-wide issue
[23:13] Then why are we asking all the students to drive the answer I got Mac was we'll watch how we do cancel the games
[23:19] I'll be honest, if it's my kid, that's going to be responsible for getting someone else hurt,
[23:24] because we have a 16 or 17 year old driving.
[23:26] I'd rather we cancel the game, or probably the bright answer is, to reach out to MSHSL and say,
[23:32] can we reschedule the game because Boston can't meet the need tonight?
[23:36] But instead of doing that, we tell our kids to drive, and we don't involve our parents in that process.
[23:42] I'm fully aware that I signed a waiver at the beginning of the year,
[23:44] but said that students can be asked to drive.
[23:47] My kid goes to a noka, they have to drive to get to a good rich field.
[23:52] I have to sign that waiver, they can play a sport at good rich field, otherwise they can't
[23:56] play.
[23:57] It is unreasonable, I believe, for me to be expected or are parents to be expected to have
[24:03] their kids drive to sports as far as an hour and an hour and 15 away.
[24:08] At their sectional tournament game in Chisago Lakes, now in 15 months away, last game of
[24:18] the year, our kids had to drive to that game.
[24:22] Their minds, if they were on the game, they weren't going to be very good drivers.
[24:27] If they were going to be good drivers, they're not going to get pumped up for the game.
[24:30] They're going to disadvantage every time we ask them to do that.
[24:34] So I guess I say three things.
[24:35] It's not reasonable to ask newly driver, newly licensed drivers to make that decision on whether they go to a game.
[24:40] That decision needs to be held by the coach or the AD, not telling the kids that they need to do it.
[24:45] Secondly, I think it's unreasonable to shift the liability to the kid and their families,
[24:49] because when we send an email request in, we receive the response from the AD,
[24:54] who got it from the legal department here at the district, saying there was no liability for the school district.
[24:59] with
[25:00] And those kids drove to games. That is unreasonable. To tell my son to drive to a game and not make any effort to
[25:09] reschedule the game. And say, if you give in an accident, that's your problem, kid, and your
[25:12] entrances, there's lots of building.
[25:14] Brian, you're up for three minutes.
[25:15] Thank you. And the last thing I would say is we pay bus drivers to go to help with these events, to
[25:25] drive to these events because they're more experienced, they're more mature, and they're
[25:28] focused on driving. There is less risk to have a bus driver driver
[25:32] kids to one event than there is and we have kids drive
[25:35] placements and I hope and then we can do something about that.
[25:37] Thank you.
[25:44] Oh, I'm sorry, Brent. Yes, if you have written testimony,
[25:47] would you be so kind to give that to Debbie? Yeah,
[25:50] then she'll make sure we get copies.
[25:56] Sarah, come in, ski.
[26:04] Welcome to the board. Thank you. Hi.
[26:11] God created each and every one
[26:13] of us and I believe we were all image barriers of God, which means we're
[26:17] inherently valuable and were the respect and dignity and with respect, truth and
[26:22] transparency should follow. Recently our ninth grade son brought to our
[26:27] attention a survey that he was instructed to take during his first week of school
[26:31] by a scientist at Kunepp's high school. In this survey he was asked about his
[26:37] legal and preferred name as well as some other questions such as his pronouns.
[26:41] The way I do not affirm radical gender ideology because it does not align with the way
[26:46] things really are, and misuses language.
[26:49] What struck both my husband and I was another question
[26:51] on this survey that we found especially problematic.
[26:55] Our son found this question disconcerting as well.
[26:58] That was, should I use a different name or pronouns
[27:02] when communicating with your parents or guardians?
[27:04] If yes, what should I use?
[27:07] It led me to ask, what kind of message does this send?
[27:10] It certainly does not convey a desire to partner with parents.
[27:13] What this question indicates to us is the willingness for the teacher to hide a preferred name or pronouns from the child's parents.
[27:21] The teacher is willing to lie to parents, his fellow adults and community members and neighbors.
[27:27] As parents who love their children and want to work with our teachers and as people deserving of respect and dignity,
[27:33] mind is never the appropriate action, especially in cases like this.
[27:37] It destroys trust and makes the parent teacher relationships so crucial to our children's development
[27:42] extremely difficult to build.
[27:45] Trust is what brings a community together.
[27:48] My husband promptly brought this to the principal at the high school and we were met with
[27:51] a positive and concerned response.
[27:53] We did notice, however, that he seemed to dismiss this teacher's question as something that
[27:57] they may have used to inject humor into the classroom to make the students more comfortable.
[28:02] I'm paraphrasing and I have his email if you'd like to view it.
[28:04] He mentioned that he would discuss the teacher further, what we have not heard back since.
[28:10] Let me assure you this is no joke.
[28:12] We thought this might be an isolate incident within the school district and it turned out we are wrong.
[28:18] A similar survey within the district went viral online, and one particular post from the Innoca Hennepin parents alliance by a teacher within the district caught my attention.
[28:27] It's worthy of repeating, but in essence of time I have it here for you if you want to read it.
[28:32] Heading the truth damages people's trust and spirit and in the end the kids are the ones that are negatively affected.
[28:38] Not only by this ideology in general but by the dishonesty and disrespect shown to the students and their parents by school staff.
[28:46] How can we work together when we're being torn apart by lies?
[28:49] Our kids deserve better, our parents deserve better, and our teachers deserve better.
[28:55] I would like to see all the gender ideology propaganda brought to an end in cider schools and for activism to be banned in the classroom.
[29:01] But I'll settle for the removal of this survey question or these questions and a public apology.
[29:09] Thank you.
[29:11] Thank you.
[29:12] Is there a, I think you had emailed that testimony to, um, okay.
[29:16] So we'll make sure.
[29:18] Yep.
[29:18] If you can give it to Debbie, then we'll make sure that board members have copies of it.
[29:22] Thank you.
[29:28] Okay.
[29:29] Our last card is Stan Osmondson.
[29:32] Stan?
[29:41] Welcome to the board.
[29:42] Yeah.
[29:42] Thank you.
[29:47] Yeah, I hello Superintendent McIntyre and the board I had some prepared marks. I'm going to add a little bit to
[30:00] The teacher who gave some testimony here, certainly dedicated, does a great job. I'm sure, but I am not here to attack any personal, any person on the board.
[30:16] Just some concerns and topics that have come to my attention that I think should have the attention of the board and the superintendent.
[30:24] First of all, my name is Stan Osmondson.
[30:26] I've been a classroom teacher for 47 years, 34 of those years.
[30:32] We're full-time, 13 is a substitute in many all the way up to 12th grade.
[30:39] I have copies of the topics for all board members and we would appreciate their feedback and
[30:45] also there's a full number on there to call if you have any concerns or questions.
[30:50] With the school board elections coming up soon, it's important for the public to be informed.
[31:00] First topic, I would like to mention is, in a letter to our governor, the Anoka Hanapan
[31:05] Teacher's Union, also known as the AHEM, has called for the immediate cessation of standardized testing.
[31:15] How can we know how kids are progressing without a measurement tool?
[31:19] I hope our school board does not agree in totality with this request.
[31:28] Topic number two, in my opinion, without strong local leadership, a parent's option to opt out of certain school presentations are curriculum.
[31:42] The without that opt-out, that is a danger, they should be able to opt-out case and point.
[31:53] A federal court judge in Maryland, Deborah Ellboardman ruled that parents and I quote,
[32:00] parents who asserted that do-prost parents are a suit should not be asserted, it's legal
[32:09] asserting.
[32:11] Do-process right to direct their children's upbringing by opting out, they're asking to
[32:17] be able to opt out and the quote continues with, they cannot opt out of curriculum that
[32:26] conflicts with their religious views. They wanted to opt out because their religious views.
[32:32] And the judge ruled that opt out was not a fundamental right. It's not a fundamental right to opt out.
[32:42] And I think we could soon be facing that decision as a board that we would not be able to opt out or allow parents to opt out.
[32:53] I'm over three, okay?
[32:57] On a personal note.
[32:59] I recently made a request of freedom of information.
[33:03] And there were six papers that they came up with.
[33:08] And the charge for that information was $195.
[33:14] And with that, I'll kind of shorten.
[33:16] Thank you for your time.
[33:18] I did pass something.
[33:19] I'll pack it for every member and superintendent in McIntyre.
[33:23] Thank you.
[33:24] Yep.
[33:25] Thank you.
[33:26] Okay.
[33:27] And that is the end of our yellow cards.
[33:29] Is there any other yellow cards?
[33:33] Okay.
[33:36] Then we will continue on with our agenda here.
[33:42] Board calendar and district update, Superintendent McIntyre.
[33:47] Thank you, Chair Anderson and good evening Board members.
[33:49] And first step, a success, I turned my mic on,
[33:52] and I was full.
[33:53] Well done.
[33:53] I am well-timing.
[33:55] Well, we're three weeks into the school year,
[33:57] and by most accounts of districts off to a strong start.
[33:59] So I want to give you a few updates for the board
[34:02] and our community as the year is moving into our fourth week
[34:05] next week already.
[34:07] We have many new staff.
[34:09] So I want to highlight the fact that we have 432 new employees
[34:13] this school year.
[34:14] And that the teacher's group leads the list with 161 new teachers.
[34:19] some of those teachers works through the district's
[34:21] grow your own program from other positions,
[34:23] so we're very proud of that effort.
[34:25] The second largest group of new employees
[34:27] is our parent educators.
[34:28] We have 95 new employees.
[34:30] We know we still have openings in that area
[34:32] and we're still working hard to recruit for that.
[34:35] That district total now is at 7,718 employees.
[34:41] As you know, the district launched a back-to-school
[34:43] hiring blitz right before the year started,
[34:45] which did help with that recruitment effort.
[34:48] Our current staffing situation shows full coverage for classroom positions with recruitment
[34:54] continuing for the operational positions such as pair educators and child nutrition staff.
[35:00] So we want to remind our residents to continue to seek interest in our local schools and visit our website at age schools.us backslash jobs to see what positions are available.
[35:14] Also, some operations, so at the beginning of the year, we're always working hard to make sure our operations run smoothly, and it's important to acknowledge the fact that we have the largest student transportation system in the state with nine vendors.
[35:27] I know B.J. was here earlier, B.J. Ice in our director provided me some information to really capture this.
[35:34] So we have nearly 300 yellow school buses, and also another 100 passenger vehicles visiting 8,000 individual stop bus stop locations to pick up and deliver students.
[35:46] The vendors are actively recruiting. We've had shortages as was alluded to earlier, and that staffing and service delivery challenges hasn't proved.
[35:55] So we are working hard to continue to maintain that.
[35:59] Also, the district's traffic safety positions are fully staffed
[36:02] and the work continues to fill our bus that
[36:04] Para Educators as the year begins.
[36:06] At least earlier, we have amazing bus Paris.
[36:10] Another area that's worthy of discussion is
[36:14] the Child Nutrition Department.
[36:15] So the new legislation to provide funding for three school meals,
[36:19] breakfast and lunch for all students.
[36:21] So in the first 12 days of the year,
[36:23] The district has served over 105,000 breakfasts up about 22,000 servings from last year.
[36:31] And 304,000 lunches up 45,000 from last year or about 400,000 or excuse me, 4,000 lunches per day more than this time last year.
[36:42] So thank you to Noah Atlas and our nutrition team for stepping up and doing the best I can to ensure we're feeding our students.
[36:50] We have a number of new facilities, as we started the year, and you all are very familiar with this, and that has generated a lot of excitement.
[36:58] San Bernard Regional High School, right here in downtown America, has generated a lot of excitement for students and staff, and for the first time ever regional was able to host an all school assembly.
[37:08] That was very exciting.
[37:10] The Blaine Early Childhood Center is also operating adding much needed capacity to serve families in the area.
[37:16] The district now has six really childhood centers in operation and this facility is located
[37:21] just east of Highway 65, north of Highway 14, it means, it means street 252 in blame.
[37:29] In addition, Hoover Elementary and Adams Elementary and Coon Rapids are the first two sites
[37:33] in the district to have solar arrays added to their facilities, along with energy savings, the schools
[37:38] will look for ways to integrate lesson plans and instructional efforts around solar energy
[37:44] first students. We're also fortunate I just want to call out that we have so many partners
[37:49] that help us with meeting some basic needs backpacks in school supplies. So our students
[37:56] here in Anokehanna have benefited from offering the offerings of free backpacks through the
[38:01] United Way through Anokehanna of an educational foundation, many area churches and organizations
[38:06] as the year begins. So we just want to take a moment to say thank you for all those who have
[38:10] donated little supplies to prepare our scholars or our students for the school year.
[38:16] Another unique story I'd like to tell you is how our students have stepped up for
[38:22] a recent river cleanup. A team of about 60 outdoor
[38:26] adventures students from and over high school and
[38:28] play in high school recently teamed up to help our one of our communities in need
[38:32] after learning that used car tires were illegally dumped in the rum river.
[38:36] Students, both from both schools developed a plan to clean up that mess and actually that recovered
[38:41] over 200 tires from the river.
[38:45] So just a shout out, and thanks to the students on the job well done, that outdoor adventures
[38:50] classes available to seniors at an okay happens five traditional high schools, and it allows
[38:54] students the chance to earn college credit and environmental sciences because of its curriculum
[38:59] and how it centers around environmental education, field biology, interpersonal dynamics, and
[39:04] personal growth.
[39:05] So thank you again.
[39:07] And finally, just wanted to preview some changes coming to our school board meeting video streams
[39:12] in meeting minutes.
[39:13] We've been talking about this for a while.
[39:15] Beginning next month, viewers will notice some changes to the format of the Nokehennet
[39:18] in school board meetings where we're streaming them online and viewing the media meeting
[39:23] agendas and the minutes that follow.
[39:26] The school district has tested YouTube for video streaming in the past, a few meetings and
[39:32] we're ready to kind of go live with that starting next month.
[39:34] So we also see new meeting software using Board Book
[39:36] for organizing the school board documents.
[39:41] So community members can still access the meeting materials
[39:43] the same way.
[39:45] They are familiar with those as our website,
[39:48] still houses those documents,
[39:49] and that's at ageschools.usbackslash school board.
[39:52] So there are many, many other events and things
[39:54] we could highlight, but I wanted to highlight just a few
[39:58] for you tonight, and you've seen many of those.
[40:00] And my weekly updates as well. So, great start of the year. We're going to continue to build on that.
[40:04] Channerson, that concludes my superintendent's report for this evening.
[40:07] Thank you.
[40:07] Thank you.
[40:08] Superintendent, is there any questions for Superintendent McIntyre?
[40:12] I would just like to piggyback off something, Corey said, about the new board, software,
[40:19] or the board books, we're going to do a little practice run through before board meeting,
[40:23] or our work session next month. So if you can get there early, it's not any major thing.
[40:29] So if you can't attend, it won't slow you down.
[40:33] But just so folks could get a preview of that.
[40:37] OK, so we will move on to our next agenda item.
[40:43] And it looks like we have an appointment
[40:45] of election judges' resolution.
[40:48] Ms. Trulsted.
[40:55] Welcome.
[40:56] Thank you.
[40:57] Is that on?
[40:58] No.
[40:59] OK.
[41:00] Good evening, Chair Anderson.
[41:02] Superintendent McIntyre, members of the board.
[41:04] I am here tonight with a very brief update and resolution regarding our elections.
[41:10] As you're aware, we partner with a NOCA county to administer our elections every year.
[41:15] One of the duties the county performs on our behalf is to hire and train the election
[41:20] judges.
[41:21] So the resolution before you just provides to allow them to be able to continue to do this
[41:27] training on our behalf for the upcoming election.
[41:31] Excellent, is there any questions for Ms. Trulsted?
[41:36] And just to clarify, even though we refer to this as a resolution,
[41:40] we have double-checked and we will take action to accept it,
[41:43] like we would normally do with the motion in a second.
[41:46] Okay, so members, the floor is open for a motion to approve the
[41:50] appointment of election judges as presented.
[41:53] Thank you, Ms. Hayes, there's second.
[41:56] Thank you, Mr. Shayne, any discussion?
[41:59] Hearing none, all those in favor signify by saying aye, aye. Any opposed say no?
[42:05] With six in favor and zero. Opposed that motion is approved. Thank you. Thank you.
[42:13] Okay. Our next agenda item is our Morris Leatherman Community Survey results. Peter Leatherman.
[42:28] And our communications team.
[42:36] Welcome. Welcome. Thank you for spending so much time with us.
[42:39] My pleasure.
[43:02] All right. It's a pleasure to be here with you this evening.
[43:04] to go through the results of this year's survey.
[43:07] If we go to the first page, the methodology.
[43:10] To review with everybody, we ended up the survey
[43:12] of a 500 random sample across the district.
[43:15] This is the same sample size we've done for years in the district.
[43:18] We did add a parent balloon in this survey.
[43:22] So that means that there's an X number of parents
[43:24] and the 500 sample we call an additional group of parents
[43:27] put those together and we have a parent balloon.
[43:30] The 500 samples projectable to plus or minus four and a half percent
[43:33] In 95 out of 100 cases, the parent balloon is projectable to plus or minus 5%.
[43:40] Now, this survey was conducted, the timing on this is important to keep in mind, was conducted
[43:45] last May.
[43:47] So this is kind of an assessment of last school year, as we look at it, between May, then
[43:53] May 25th.
[43:54] And also, especially when we look at the adequacy of funding question later on, it's important
[43:59] to keep that in mind because the legislature had not finished its work yet.
[44:02] And that has definitely changed the dynamic of public opinion across school districts in the state of Minnesota.
[44:09] So that's important.
[44:10] The average interview time was 12 minutes and once people realized we weren't going to sell them anything,
[44:14] they were willing to talk to us, the non-response rate was 5%.
[44:18] If we go through some of the demographics, just so you can see the profile,
[44:22] the demographics are done for two reasons.
[44:24] First off, to make sure that we have accurate sample against updated census information,
[44:28] But then also we can look at differences in attitudes and opinions between parents and seniors, homeowners, and renters across the board.
[44:36] The first set of ours looks at how long has the resident lived in the Noka Hanna Pins School District?
[44:41] We have 20% that have been in the district for five years or less,
[44:45] while we have 41% that have been in the district for over 20 years.
[44:49] On this one, medium comes in the typical residence been here for about 17 years.
[44:54] 10% have preschool children or infants, 28% have a child.
[45:00] Attending, the Anoka Hanna Pen School District, and 66% are empty nesters. And once again, that does not imply an age. You can have a 32-year-old without a child. They're an empty nester.
[45:11] So as you go through the data with the overall 1 and 3, have a child, 2-thirds do not have any children in their household.
[45:18] 17% of our renters, self-assessed home value comes in at about 240,000.
[45:25] If we look at ethnicity, just under 2-3rds indicated white, 18% African-American, 6%
[45:31] Hispanic Latino, 5% each Asian Pacific Islander and Multi-Orbidational, and 1%
[45:37] Native American.
[45:39] If we continue with the demographics,
[45:43] 21%, we're 18 to 34 year olds, well we have 35%
[45:47] over the age of 55, median on this comes in roughly at about 46 or 47 years old.
[45:54] So the typical resident in Naukehannapin has lived in the community for 17 years and is just
[45:59] a hair short of 50 years old and about one and three have a child.
[46:03] Men and women split equally 50, 50 and then you can see the geographic distribution and that's
[46:09] based on looking at registered voters with all the communities in Naukehannapin with
[46:13] Coon Rappets having the largest at 25% blame and then the remaining outline areas at 16%
[46:21] and over Champlain, Pam Lake, a no-gov in Brooklyn Park.
[46:26] If we get into the macro atmospherics in the district, we see a stability now and this
[46:34] is a stability that's been noted across the state post pandemic and that is the shift from
[46:39] excellent to good. In 2021, we saw the drop in the excellent rating from 33 to 21 percent.
[46:47] It is stabilized there over the last two studies. And then on the other side, we have
[46:52] a little of in percent only fairer port. The district has stopped. It has not done with a lot
[46:58] of districts across the state have done now. And that shift is continued, where it's moved
[47:03] from good to only fairer. Where we're at right now with the excellent rating across
[47:09] the state. It's 10 percent in the metro area. It's at 12 percent. And that is half of what
[47:15] it used to be. So it reflects very similar to what we see here. There's a stabilization. It's
[47:21] at this point now that the district's all districts in the state of Minnesota, the move is going
[47:27] to have to be how do you go from good to excellent again. The shift that, and we discussed this
[47:32] from, I think, 2012 to 2020 leading up to the pandemic. That was the challenge facing the
[47:37] okay, hand up in district. It's a challenge facing every district now and how to grab those
[47:43] ratings back and make folks enthusiastic. What do folks like most about the district? Your folks
[47:49] have always been program oriented. So if we look at good programs, we look at curriculum. It's
[47:56] 27%. If we look at the academic quality in the district, if we look at good education, excellent
[48:01] education and high achievement stats. We have 24 percent of multi-actual quality of the education and then teachers at 12 percent.
[48:10] You do have a hierarchy here. It's always been a program curriculum-based district, then the academic quality and then the personnel side.
[48:18] If we look at what the most serious issue is facing the district, you don't have any item that hits 25 30 percent.
[48:25] where you have 1 and 3, 1 and 4 people coalescing around a response.
[48:29] You have four items that hit double digits, the low-teens.
[48:33] Large class sizes, I graduated from Lane in 90.
[48:36] I'm sure that was at the top of the list in 1990 also.
[48:40] It's just part of the ethos.
[48:42] In Anoka Hanna, been large class sizes,
[48:44] is going to be at the top or close to the top of the list.
[48:48] Budget cuts in the lack of funding.
[48:49] You have 23% of that combination.
[48:51] And that's important to remember the time frame here because a lot of discussion was happening in May actually the entire school year last year about not fully funding education.
[49:03] The bullying and lack of discipline at 18% combining.
[49:08] So that's typically what we saw in the school year last school year what happened,
[49:12] especially in light of the unfortunate situation at Harding High School, that raised discipline
[49:19] as a concern across the metro and across the state. That's typically between 15 and 20 percent.
[49:26] The one area you're low on and this is an open top of the mind response is high taxes.
[49:32] 2023's been the year of property tax hostility in the state of Minnesota and the metro area.
[49:38] the norm right now and that is about 15 percent. So you are half that level back in May.
[49:45] If we go to the next slide, what's the reputation of the school district? It's good. It follows
[49:51] it plays out people see their opinion of the quality of education and that's what they hear also.
[50:00] Census 18% say average, and then 13% say large. We look at all the parent perspectives on this. We won't
[50:09] go through these one by one. It's a level. They can strongly agree, agree, disagree, strongly agree.
[50:16] I have collapsed the strongly agree and agree, and disagree and strongly disagree into two categories.
[50:24] Pretty much across the board. There has been more of a tip to a soft agree than a strong
[50:28] degree, but you still have a high agreement across the board, and it's always funny.
[50:34] And I'm just 20 years of doing this, the lowest rated still still remains.
[50:39] My cafeteria offers high quality meals.
[50:42] I do believe back probably probably about 2005 in that era.
[50:47] I think there was about 30-35 percent disagreement.
[50:50] So there has been improvement on cafeteria meals also.
[50:52] So Peter and Superintendent McIntyre, I would still encourage a follow-up question to that in future surveys
[51:00] how many have actually had a school lunch?
[51:03] Just the answer.
[51:04] And do a cross-down on that.
[51:06] The district's play of philosophy.
[51:08] We read them a statement about playing up for 7th and 8th graders playing varsity sports and we
[51:13] just asked folks overall, do you agree or disagree with that philosophy?
[51:17] We have 58 percent that agree with it, 31 percent opposed, 12 percent are unsure, but the vast majority of people don't feel strongly one way or the other.
[51:28] You only have 17 percent, it's an equal distribution, 10 percent strongly, 7 percent strongly, no.
[51:35] So it tips in favor of agreeing with the philosophy, but there's not a lot of intensity in that opinion.
[51:42] Community Education, household participation over the last two years is this is across the
[51:48] state and we look at community education programs. Really it's down to the core of service
[51:54] of students and ECFE in preschool. It has dropped the norm participation across the metro
[52:02] was about 30% pre-pandemic. We're now at about 21-22% so it's right there. What do folks
[52:08] that take and are participated in an experience with community education feel overwhelming enthusiastically satisfied.
[52:17] We have 96% saying either very somewhat with almost two thirds indicating that they're very satisfied.
[52:25] What would folks advise the school board and administration to improve the quality of education?
[52:31] Once again, this is open and they can tell us anything.
[52:34] And when we look at the top, not surprisingly going back to what their top concern was, it
[52:39] is smaller class sizes.
[52:42] Then there is more of a discussion now about going back to the basics, reading, writing,
[52:48] and arithmetic.
[52:49] And I think it's very important to point out also the time frame on that in light of a lot
[52:54] of the proficiency scores that have been coming out.
[52:57] And a concern amongst folks about the core subjects and whether children are proficient
[53:03] and succeeding at those.
[53:05] We also have two other items hitting double digits,
[53:08] and that's better discipline and better spending.
[53:13] Mr. Simon, can we jump in and ask us?
[53:16] Absolutely, I think it's easier.
[53:17] Yeah, absolutely.
[53:18] So on this one, tell me about back to the basics
[53:21] and better discipline and how that might match with the state.
[53:24] Back to the Blake basics, it has been growing.
[53:26] You know, five years ago, that would be single digits easily.
[53:30] It, in ever since the pandemic and especially over the last 18 months we've seen this growing,
[53:36] as a, as a top of the mind, somewhere in that 10 to 20 percent but not all districts ask the question this way.
[53:42] Better discipline, you'd be on the lower side because the, the concern being at 20, 25 percent in a lot of areas at this point in time,
[53:52] the 12 percent would be on the lower side.
[53:53] Thank you.
[53:56] Most important indicator of a high-quality education, while the broad curriculum leads the
[54:02] list.
[54:02] And this is a close end.
[54:03] They pick off of this list on what is most important to them.
[54:07] So the broad curriculum leads, but also now in second place, and it's come back, is the
[54:13] standardized testing.
[54:14] Like we talked about at the work session, that is the touch point for non-parents into
[54:19] what's happening into the district.
[54:20] This is evolved over time. In the 90s, it was insatiable demand for more standardized testing.
[54:27] We got no child left behind, and then everybody was exhausted by testing.
[54:32] And especially now over the last three years since the pandemic, there is a growing sense
[54:37] that standardized testing is the most important indicator of a high quality school district.
[54:43] Two three other items that hit double digits, reasonable class sizes,
[54:46] grads going on to further education and providing a safe and secure learning environment.
[54:52] This one varies from district to district on what the most important thing is.
[54:57] It would basically go back to what you like most.
[55:00] And if you're going to attach yourself to the curriculum, the academic quality, but then also what comes into the mix here is the standardized testing piece.
[55:10] How does the district view in meeting the learning needs of all students, most students, only summer, very few?
[55:17] On this one, you actually have a very impressive result in 2023, with 58% indicating you're meeting the learning needs of all students.
[55:25] That's up 8 points. The norm on this currently is about 47%. So it's 10 points higher.
[55:32] If we look at the 38% that say most, only summer, very few, when we follow up and ask them,
[55:39] is there a certain type of students who's learning these are not being met.
[55:42] You can see the theme in the upper right hand corner, 28% and now that's 28% of 38%
[55:49] so approximately 9% of the community said struggling.
[55:53] 22% average and 13% under achievers and special education.
[56:01] How does the district do in offering a wide range of educational opportunities?
[56:05] And this one is fairly going to be fairly important since such a core value in the district.
[56:10] You have 91% rating the district favorably.
[56:13] This one, though, the challenge is going to be that shift from good to excellent for the district.
[56:19] But if you're in a position where you make it to make them more enthusiastic instead of converting them.
[56:23] So, it is matching up with what they value most.
[56:27] Does the district promote high achievement for all students, most, only some, or very few,
[56:34] very few was not mentioned, in equal distribution, 43 percent say all, 46 percent say most,
[56:41] 9 percent say only some are very few.
[56:44] On this one, it's typically an even split on districts that ask this question, what we have
[56:53] is at 20% and that has been growing as a concern as people talk about less than academic standards.
[57:01] This question is important with the time point.
[57:04] This question asks folks to think about the quality of education provided by the district
[57:08] over the last three years.
[57:10] So the basis on this one is actually the start of the pandemic.
[57:14] So hopefully people think things are moving in a better direction than they were at the
[57:19] start of the pandemic and that is the case.
[57:21] 50% say better, 36% say about the same and 8% say worse.
[57:28] So if we look at a ratio that's 50 to 8, it's 6 to 1.
[57:31] The norm on this one is a 3 to 1 ratio saying that things are getting better.
[57:36] But that, you can see in the data, it doesn't mean we're back to where we were before.
[57:40] It's just things are moving in the right direction.
[57:45] Excuse me.
[57:47] So specific perceptions?
[57:48] Does this school districts fund taxpayers money effectively and efficiently?
[57:52] Up to 82% agree with the statement that the norm on this right now is 58%.
[57:58] Do they trust you to do what's right by the children?
[58:01] The high over the last three years and actually going back to, I looked back to 2010 and that is the high 87%.
[58:10] And does the district provide a safe and secure environment for students 90% agree with that?
[58:15] norm on that is typically somewhere between 85 and 90%.
[58:19] If we continue, does the district do a good job of involving the community?
[58:24] On this one, you were way above the metropolitan area norm back last year at 86% and you
[58:31] maintained it.
[58:33] The districts have started to, this question has does the district do a good job of involving
[58:37] the community in decisions.
[58:40] And the norm on this right now, we're up to 70%, it's leaking back to what it was
[58:45] pre-pandemic, but it's just not what it was before the pandemic, and especially we just have a lot less people engaged, especially in programs.
[58:54] Is the district count accountable? Yes, 81%. And are they satisfied with the decision making?
[59:00] At this point in May of last year, you were at the high over the course of the pandemic, and like we talked about, there's no straight line from 21 to 23 on this chart.
[59:09] There were Ziggs and Zags as you all experienced all the decisions that you had to make over the course of the pandemic,
[59:16] but you've netted out in May of 23 at a nine-to-one ratio.
[59:20] Norman, this is about a four-to-one ratio of folks saying,
[59:24] agreeing that the district, their satisfied with the district's decision making.
[59:31] May of 23 for the field work is important on this one,
[59:36] Because at that time, before the legislature finished his work in an Oca-Henopin, 39% thought
[59:42] Minnesota schools were adequately funded, 55% said they were not, and then specifically
[59:49] does an Oca-Henopin have sufficient funds to provide a high quality education.
[59:54] You were at a 48-48 split, which is pretty much where every school district was in spring.
[1:00:00] The question was going to be what was going to happen after the legislature and the messaging
[1:00:04] that came from the governor and the legislature. Interestingly enough, as we saw in the
[1:00:09] statewide that I presented now, it's actually gone down. We have people, we did not see the
[1:00:14] bounce in like we saw in 2021, where there was a discussion about all the funds that was given
[1:00:19] to public education and that increasing the amount of people saying yes. So, where you're
[1:00:24] But now I would guess it's a little bit less unyes, and that would be what we would typically
[1:00:32] see at this point in time with the survey done pre-legislative session ending and post.
[1:00:41] Overall assessment and financial management at the height now going back to 2019, it's
[1:00:47] important to the 2019 fairly close to the bond referendum.
[1:00:50] What you have is the further you get away from a bond referendum, especially a large one.
[1:00:56] People do feel butter because every district's under the microscope for financial management going through that.
[1:01:02] 74-22, norm on this right now is 53% favorable.
[1:01:06] It's on the financial management.
[1:01:08] If we go back to spending taxpayers money effectively and efficiently,
[1:01:12] this rating, the district does have a reservoir of goodwill when it looks from the residence on financial stewardship.
[1:01:20] Now, the question where the rubber hits the road is that when you think about the property
[1:01:26] taxes you pay and the quality of education provided by the Anoka Hanna Pen School District,
[1:01:33] how do you rate that value? 74% rate at favorably, 22% rate at unfavorably, so it's about
[1:01:40] a three to one ratio.
[1:01:41] Norm on this right now is two to one, and it has gone down because of two factors.
[1:01:46] other more people that are rating quality less than excellence or either good or moving
[1:01:52] into the only fair category which you don't have here but you also have a lot more
[1:01:56] people that property tax saying their property taxes are high. So the input and the outputs
[1:02:02] have changed but relative value then when they look at the financial management and the quality
[1:02:08] it's a three to one ratio indicating favorable to unfavorable.
[1:02:14] In May of 23, the school board job performance was 76 to 19, at that point in time, the norm was about 60-40.
[1:02:24] So by almost 20 points higher on both of those aspects.
[1:02:28] The superintendent, the previous superintendent, May of 23, was 76-19.
[1:02:37] On this one, ratio, this is 4 to 1, the norm superintendent now is about 2 to 1, but 65, 31, and then finally, teachers and instructors, instructors, job performance, 87 to 9, teachers, typically in this tight 85 to 90% range, and the district's been a pretty consistent 21, a little bit of a blip, and 22, and that had a lot to do with a lot of national discussions on teachers, unions,
[1:03:06] surrounding the pandemic.
[1:03:09] The equity and achievement plan, 41% had heard of the plan.
[1:03:13] I think this is the third year we asked this question.
[1:03:17] And I think it's been within two points of that 40% of all three times.
[1:03:21] Once again, your universe on this is never going to be 100%
[1:03:25] being aware that the district has an equity achievement plan.
[1:03:28] If you got to 60% that would be percoliantask.
[1:03:33] do the 41% that have that are aware of it, do they have confidence the plan will address
[1:03:38] the educational needs of students, yes they do, 90% indicate that that's the case.
[1:03:44] If we go through the individual mission statements and ask of the plan, is it very,
[1:03:50] are they very important, someone important, not to or not at all?
[1:03:53] I've arrayed this chart, not a lot of folks that are not important and not at all important.
[1:03:57] So I did a hierarchical based on the very important and the someone important,
[1:04:01] because the lowest combined importance you have on this one is 91% with improving connections
[1:04:06] with the community.
[1:04:08] But if you look at the very important, you can see, there's one at the top, providing a safe
[1:04:14] and respectful environment, then 73% using resources effectively, then promoting high achievement
[1:04:20] for all, meeting individual learning needs, clearly highly trained staff, monitoring student
[1:04:25] achievement, acknowledging parent roles and improving connections with the community.
[1:04:30] So, as a whole, they're all important.
[1:04:33] There's an intensity to the importance that's laid out,
[1:04:36] but there's just not one that stands out in the mind of folks
[1:04:40] when we look at, and go to the next chart,
[1:04:42] and we ask which of these is most important to achieve.
[1:04:46] From the, if we look at the top six,
[1:04:48] it's all within the margin of error,
[1:04:50] a plus or minus four and a half percent.
[1:04:53] So, they're all have significant importance
[1:04:55] in the minds of the community.
[1:04:58] And then finally, community.
[1:05:00] Education, where are folks getting their information? 90% this time, up from 85% read school district communications
[1:05:09] favorably, only 9% rate them unfavorably, a norm on this right now is about 77%, 78%. So it's actually
[1:05:17] a statistically significant increase and above the norm. Now, how do folks feel about the level
[1:05:23] of information they have? Do they feel very informed, somewhat informed, not too informed or not
[1:05:28] all informed. On this one, there's been a gradual downtick now, with 63% feeling
[1:05:35] very or somewhat informed, 35% not to or not at all. As we move away from the pandemic,
[1:05:41] especially in the on-parents, they're not checking out, but they're really not hyper-focused
[1:05:45] like they had been in monitoring what was going on. And they've gone back to it. So the primary
[1:05:50] folks saying very informed right now are the parents. And when we look at the parents' results,
[1:05:55] They're very strong.
[1:05:57] We're our folks getting their information on this one.
[1:06:00] This is really started to change over time and we have 27% say the newsletter and then
[1:06:07] the word of mouth is growing now to the second place.
[1:06:11] One in five volunteering that as a primary source of information, if you want to put social media
[1:06:17] in there, which I was just probably, it's a electronic version of word of mouth, puts it in
[1:06:24] top place at 28%. The only other item in double digits is the district website.
[1:06:31] How do folks prefer to receive information? On this one, if we look at print versus
[1:06:36] electronic, we have 29% the newsletter, 8% the local newspaper, 11% meal, just under half,
[1:06:45] 48% want something in their hands, 13% email, 12% website, 5% social media, you have
[1:06:54] about a third indicating they want something electronic, those are parents, that's their preference.
[1:07:00] But you now are, it's used to be atypical, but now it's pretty typical, that folks are
[1:07:06] willing to admit that they actually prefer word of mouth as a source of information.
[1:07:10] It's how the metro area has become small town, that the grapevine is not only a highly utilized
[1:07:17] source of information, but is becoming a preferred source of information for folks.
[1:07:23] And when we look at the last chart, you can see the top two defaults receive a lot of information.
[1:07:29] Some very little are non from that.
[1:07:31] The district newsletter at 51% pies with informal discussions with friends and neighbors at 51%.
[1:07:38] The only difference is the difference between a lot and some.
[1:07:43] Two secondary district website, school children, and then on down the list all the way down to the daily papers at 10%.
[1:07:50] So I think overall, just in closing, I would say the district has stabilized coming out of the pandemic.
[1:07:57] The challenge now, and it's the challenge that we see across the metro and across the state moving forward, is how do you regain those ratings, those excellent ratings, the enthusiasm that people feel for education in the light of a lot of information that they receive and especially in light of information that they receive from other people.
[1:08:23] regardless of the the the the quality of the source of information whether it's a
[1:08:28] opinion or fact is important but it is it is unique in that sense that after
[1:08:34] everything's said and done people do think that things are moving in the right
[1:08:39] direction the goal now is how to recapture what was lost coming out of the
[1:08:46] So I'd be happy to answer any questions.
[1:08:49] Board members, any questions for Mr.
[1:08:52] Mr. Simon?
[1:08:54] Thank you, Chair Anderson.
[1:08:55] Thank you, Peter.
[1:08:56] Going back to a level of information.
[1:08:58] So you had talked about that the entire population that took the survey.
[1:09:04] I think it was 63% very and somewhat.
[1:09:07] But you've said, parents were highly informed.
[1:09:10] Do you have any numbers about just that parent group and how they were informed
[1:09:14] or how they feel informed?
[1:09:16] Yeah, the parents on this one,
[1:09:25] the parents are at 83% very insumulated, formed with 41% indicating
[1:09:30] very informed.
[1:09:32] Thank you.
[1:09:34] Any other questions or comments for Peter?
[1:09:38] Miss Heith?
[1:09:41] Thank you, Chair Anderson, and thank you, Peter, for doing this.
[1:09:44] I think I mentioned this at the work session, but I just really appreciate that the district
[1:09:49] has made a long-term commitment to gathering this information, and personally, you know, I
[1:09:56] and probably most of us, you know, we have people in our ears and we-
[1:10:00] We have our own little kitchen cabinets that inform some of our knowledge about the district.
[1:10:06] This, I really appreciate, as an unbiased source of information, and that it can challenge us
[1:10:16] to look at things that we may believe or don't believe and then kind of see in a very academic sense
[1:10:25] and a statistically valid sense, what our community is saying, so I truly just appreciate this
[1:10:32] information and the opportunity to reflect on it and the district's commitment, both past
[1:10:38] and hopefully going forward to continue to gather. That is very valuable and I appreciate your work.
[1:10:43] So,
[1:10:45] Ms. Dishin?
[1:10:47] Thank you, Chair Anderson. Peter, do you think that the timing in May is like the right time of
[1:10:55] to do a survey like this, and when have we historically done these surveys?
[1:10:59] Historically, it's always been done towards the end of May.
[1:11:03] I think 21 survey was done at the start of the school year simply because with the pandemic
[1:11:12] going into it. Traditionally in the district, it is an April May timeframe. The only time
[1:11:19] varies away from that is when their reference or levees, where the district will do an earlier
[1:11:27] survey in order to, you know, ascertain, you know, support opposition, what the funding sources
[1:11:33] are. But typically, you know, it's kind of like you want the results to know where you're going
[1:11:38] or where you've been. I think most districts tend to want to look back over the school year
[1:11:43] and where they've been for an assessment moving forward as an opportunity to make changes for
[1:11:48] following here would be pretty typical.
[1:11:51] Thank you.
[1:11:52] Thank you.
[1:11:53] Hang on for one second, Matt.
[1:11:54] And I do remember from previous planning
[1:11:56] that was part of our strategic priority conversation
[1:12:00] about the timing of that, but that was a long time ago.
[1:12:03] Right, yes, the timing, I'm sorry.
[1:12:05] The timing does matter for certain periods,
[1:12:08] certain things, especially like the legislature.
[1:12:12] But the consistent timing is important also.
[1:12:14] You know, like city surveys we're doing, um, you know, if you ask about quality of snow
[1:12:19] piling and February versus piling and snow piling right now, um, it's vastly different.
[1:12:25] So it's important. Thank you so much for that, for to understand what the timing was.
[1:12:29] Thank you. Okay, Mr. Audit.
[1:12:31] Thank you, Chair Anderson. Um, I guess I just had a question about the actual questions.
[1:12:36] Is it possible for us to get a copy of the questions exactly how they were asked?
[1:12:42] Yes. Yeah.
[1:12:43] We have that, Dad.
[1:12:45] Thank you.
[1:12:48] Superintendent McIntyre.
[1:12:50] Thank you, Chair Anderson.
[1:12:50] I just wanted to thank, I feel like I've seen Peter every day for about two weeks lately.
[1:12:56] With the State Survey as well.
[1:12:58] So thank you very much.
[1:12:59] I'm just bringing the different schools to take every other weeks.
[1:13:02] I guess I just want to point out a couple things and come in the board.
[1:13:07] Watching from a distance for the last four years and now being here and really immersing into the work.
[1:13:12] I hope that two things, so be proud of things like we're meeting learning needs from the feedback here, spending safety, involving the community, decision making, financial management, property taxes are all very positive without facing significantly how it's rated in the metro.
[1:13:35] And moving forward, I think we've talked about we need to be shifting now from talking about the
[1:13:42] looking back in the impact of the pandemic to looking forward and how do we become aspirational
[1:13:47] and how do we become clearer and how we talk about the fact that we're not satisfied with this.
[1:13:54] We're not satisfied.
[1:13:55] It's a great place to be because we're just at a really strong foundation to how do we move forward
[1:14:00] and begin to talk about what we're doing about it.
[1:14:03] So that there's a shift that we can use with this data.
[1:14:08] I think we're in the timings right in Worldwide position to move that next phase forward.
[1:14:13] And when we looked at the community told us safety, achievement, and resources.
[1:14:19] Well, that's the foundation of our priorities, right?
[1:14:21] So how do we leverage those things as we move forward?
[1:14:23] And you'll see us working hard to live that aspirational, where we want to be.
[1:14:29] say those high targets and hoping we can hit those and kind of that shift in how we talk about things because we've been locked into as most districts have been what was the impact of the past, right?
[1:14:39] So I hope that makes sense, but I think that's also going to resonate well with our stakeholders as well. They want to move forward with us.
[1:14:47] I hope that's fair Peter. Maybe that's a question I should have asked you, but I think that's kind of what you've found from some of the state.
[1:14:51] Certainly especially from the statewide server that I've been presenting to MSPA and C&AMSD.
[1:14:58] I mean, there's a general concern about the...
[1:15:00] Quality of education, and I think it's in the minds of residents, they're passed across the state of Minnesota, their past excuses, and they want solutions.
[1:15:10] They don't want to understand that they know why, but how are we going to fix it?
[1:15:17] In like I mentioned, from that survey, there's that concerning shift from good to only fair that you don't have here.
[1:15:26] So, it's harder to do that conversion process, but I can't help, but look at the thing,
[1:15:31] but now at this point, because if it stays in place for five or six years, it's going
[1:15:35] to be set at the stone in public opinion if things don't start to shift.
[1:15:41] Well, and I'd like to remind this board that, you know, we got caught up in the pandemic
[1:15:45] like everybody else, but our board has had a focus and on literacy long before it became, you
[1:15:55] So just reflecting on that, too.
[1:15:58] Maybe we didn't get that going quick enough or fast enough.
[1:16:01] But that conversation started here quite a while ago.
[1:16:06] So I'm excited that we have statewide now support, and we're really getting into that, too,
[1:16:12] so.
[1:16:14] Okay.
[1:16:14] Thank you, Peter.
[1:16:15] And we appreciate your work, and we'll see you again.
[1:16:23] Okay, it looks like we are going to talk about or do a mental health supports update.
[1:16:29] Ms. Broder, and I will let you introduce your colleagues.
[1:16:35] Welcome.
[1:16:47] Good evening, Chair Anderson. Members of the board, Superintendent McIntyre. I'm here tonight
[1:16:52] with Nate Minane, Director of Student Services in Julia Messenger, Assistant Director of Student
[1:16:57] Services with Responsibilities for Mental Health. We are here tonight to provide you and
[1:17:03] review of the student support model in an Okennaven schools, and specifically, we'll focus
[1:17:08] on how the district supports mental health and well-being of our students. We'll also provide
[1:17:14] you with an update regarding the school-based mental health therapist contracts. The district
[1:17:18] has held and what our plans are moving forward. Mr. Minine.
[1:17:28] Thank you. In pursuit of our ongoing district medicine to educate each student or success,
[1:17:33] and no hand can provide a number of support to students to enable academic and school achievement.
[1:17:40] These evidence-based supports are selected for the single purpose of empowering each student to access the education
[1:17:46] through improving systems of support, teaching skills, and removing barriers to achieving success.
[1:17:53] The district's works to build capacity of teachers and staff to respond effectively
[1:17:57] to a range of student mental health needs
[1:17:59] We'll also working with qualified community partners to meet unique needs of each student.
[1:18:06] We have a variety of different supports for our staff.
[1:18:09] Our three pillars of mental health PD surround staff relationship,
[1:18:13] so they're based on teacher relationship requirements,
[1:18:16] presenting needs of students through staff and support referral,
[1:18:20] and then supports and interventions through our MTSS process.
[1:18:27] We have a variety of supports for our students within the school model.
[1:18:30] In addition to teaching staff, paraprofessionals,
[1:18:32] there are a number of other staff who directly connect with students each day.
[1:18:36] This involves multi-lingual teachers, our special education staff, general education teachers,
[1:18:41] and our support model includes all of these different connections with students throughout the
[1:18:44] day.
[1:18:45] They have access to a variety of individuals.
[1:18:51] K-12, we have students who access individualized education plans.
[1:18:55] Those students also receive support from case managers, and sometimes our school psychologist
[1:18:59] as well.
[1:19:00] Secondary students also have student achievement advisors, and they support elementary schools as
[1:19:05] And we also have American Indian advisors who support academic and cultural
[1:19:09] advisory.
[1:19:15] Additionally, we have a supplemental model that supports our MTSS
[1:19:19] three tiered model for our school-based mental health
[1:19:21] therapists.
[1:19:22] Anoka Hennepin has established partnerships with community agencies
[1:19:25] for therapy to be provided to students on-site by a mental health
[1:19:29] professional or practitioner.
[1:19:31] This makes it more accessible for families to reduce barriers
[1:19:34] and help those youth to receive mental health care on-site.
[1:19:42] Anoka Hennepin has had these contracts
[1:19:43] dating back as far as 1994. We've done a lot of refinements and reviewed kind of how these
[1:19:49] relationships are established and what our student needs are to best support that.
[1:19:54] More recently, this board prioritized expanding that model in 2018 in hopes that every school
[1:19:59] K-12.
[1:20:00] Would have at least one mental health therapist on their site. We determined this based on our highest
[1:20:05] need schools, including multiple factors, such as students ratios who are homeless or in foster
[1:20:11] care. We prioritized students who are receiving special education services. And we noted that
[1:20:16] there were a lot of risk factors, such as poverty that contributed to our students' mental
[1:20:20] health problems within the inorganic and school district. This is why that school-based model
[1:20:23] is so important to the group to link that right within the school site as an additional service
[1:20:28] that students might access.
[1:20:36] During our 22 and 23 school year, the numbers that you see before you
[1:20:40] are our Uable Mental Health staffing.
[1:20:43] Uable emotional health was hired to support 28 of our sites.
[1:20:47] However, only 36% of those positions were filled.
[1:20:51] People incorporated another site that we utilized
[1:20:53] had 11 out of 11 site staffed last year.
[1:20:57] Several schools, well, they did have a therapist
[1:20:58] through Uable emotional health, also
[1:21:01] saw a high turnover from those therapists
[1:21:02] and inconsistency with staffing models to support those students.
[1:21:08] Additionally, a typical school-based mental health case load serves about 20 to 25 students at each site,
[1:21:13] and those students typically carry over for future years.
[1:21:15] So that case load remains at about 20 or 25 with the same students.
[1:21:25] This past school year, we shifted the contract to support with Uable emotional health to support 25 mental health therapists at 24 sites.
[1:21:34] Anokanopin was known to fight in late July that you were both unable to fulfill that contract.
[1:21:39] At that time, there were only 10 of 25 positions hired.
[1:21:44] Anokanopin has worked diligently to expand that school-based mental health partnership.
[1:21:47] We know that school-based mental health therapy is a great resource for our district.
[1:21:51] However, it alone cannot address all of the mental health needs of our students.
[1:22:00] Our partnership with people incorporated continues to strengthen as our supervisors and on-site therapists
[1:22:05] We're closely with building level multidisciplinary teams.
[1:22:08] We have an additional partnership with American Indian Family Center.
[1:22:11] This is your two of that partnership.
[1:22:13] And they are supporting students who are in our American Indian education program.
[1:22:22] We will continue to utilize the funding sources of state grants and safe schools funding
[1:22:27] as we pursue our next steps with contracts.
[1:22:32] And our next steps with contracts will be working with new partnerships.
[1:22:36] We're exploring them right now through district process.
[1:22:39] And then those school-based therapists will be placed in schools,
[1:22:41] as soon as the contracts are established.
[1:22:47] Anorganic and staff proactively prevent
[1:22:50] identify and support students and families experiencing
[1:22:52] acute and chronic crisis,
[1:22:55] mitigate the impacts and maximize learning
[1:22:56] and access to their education.
[1:22:59] So the things that we've seen before you today
[1:23:01] are pieces of components that presenting mental health needs
[1:23:04] for anorganic and families also need to be supported
[1:23:07] by our student services staff that we mentioned.
[1:23:10] Using evidence-based intervention work
[1:23:12] We're strengthening staff capacity as well as student self-determination and goal-setting
[1:23:17] to continue this work. In addition, we continue to strengthen community partnerships with faith
[1:23:22] partners, YMCA, county departments, local hospitals and chemical and mental health treatment facilities.
[1:23:32] We will continue our continuous improvement process, refining and revising the mental health
[1:23:37] model for students, continuing to assess and analyze it and then bring it back to the board
[1:23:41] to present any updates?
[1:23:49] Questions or comments?
[1:23:50] Board members, any questions or comments
[1:23:53] for our presenters, Mr. Audout?
[1:23:55] Thank you, Chair Anderson.
[1:23:56] I had a question about the grants
[1:23:58] that are funding the mental health therapist contracts.
[1:24:02] Well, it's a state grants created in partnership
[1:24:05] with community agencies.
[1:24:06] Can you speak to more about it?
[1:24:08] Well, I'm not familiar with the grants or who funds them,
[1:24:13] but I'd like to know more.
[1:24:14] Yeah, so there's school linked mental health grants
[1:24:16] specifically, that outside agencies can apply for in partnership.
[1:24:20] So right now, for example, with people incorporated or you
[1:24:22] will help, we work together to talk about specifically how many students
[1:24:26] would be served, what the model looks like, what those services are
[1:24:30] during the school day, and then they provide.
[1:24:32] They apply for the grant themselves the outside agency and just work with us
[1:24:36] on what our expectations are.
[1:24:38] But like, who provides the grant?
[1:24:41] The state of Minnesota.
[1:24:42] It's state money and if they just the agency has to access it from them.
[1:24:47] Thank you.
[1:24:49] Okay.
[1:24:50] Mr. Simon?
[1:24:52] Thank you, Chair.
[1:24:52] I understand.
[1:24:52] Thank you for the presentation.
[1:24:54] Two questions.
[1:24:54] One of the billing.
[1:24:57] With the contracts.
[1:24:59] Don't we all.
[1:25:00] Also use third-party insurance billing for portions of that also.
[1:25:04] So, they bill through a typical diagnostic assessment and then the process of insurance building.
[1:25:09] And billing, and then for under insured, we also work with grant partnership as well.
[1:25:13] Got it, that's what I thought.
[1:25:15] And then my last question, so on your second, I guess, last slide, it talks about assessing and analyzing how it works.
[1:25:24] And what I've seen in the past is how many students we've served, data like that, right?
[1:25:29] how many students we serve and things like that.
[1:25:31] I'm just curious, as you build out your model,
[1:25:33] I know you're doing a lot of work to fill positions
[1:25:36] and things like that to understandable.
[1:25:38] It's not just having a no-can event
[1:25:39] happening everywhere, and not just in education
[1:25:43] and the nation.
[1:25:45] But as you think about the assessment
[1:25:47] and analyzing if it's working,
[1:25:50] I'm wondering if somehow we can also put
[1:25:53] how we are helping students who need this help
[1:25:57] towards our mission, which is educating them for success.
[1:26:01] So academically and things like that, graduation, race,
[1:26:04] however we decide to do it, it would be great to find out
[1:26:08] if once we have a full model, if that model is actually
[1:26:13] helping our mission statement. Does that make sense?
[1:26:16] Okay, thank you very much.
[1:26:20] This here's my cardle. Thank you, Terri Anderson.
[1:26:25] So when we're looking at how many we need and how many therapists
[1:26:28] we're trying to get, and of course, there's always a shortage.
[1:26:31] Do we have an idea of how many more students
[1:26:35] like haven't even really gotten on that list yet?
[1:26:40] Like how many students are receiving services?
[1:26:42] How many we know need them, but aren't getting them yet?
[1:26:45] And what we have coming down the pipeline
[1:26:48] is there, do you know what percentage
[1:26:49] are actually getting services at this point?
[1:26:53] Well, the percentage that are actually getting services
[1:26:56] for the students that we provided, documentation for them
[1:26:59] community resources and other providers when the contract is continued.
[1:27:04] I think a big piece of our partnership is that we use school-based
[1:27:07] mall health therapists but we also are connecting our kids to community agencies and
[1:27:11] partnerships and proactive preventative care to, right, emotional wellness care
[1:27:16] for those different individuals. So we don't have per se awaiting list or that
[1:27:21] information but we shared referrals and other information and partnership with
[1:27:25] youable when students were discharged from their services.
[1:27:28] And
[1:27:32] the other comments or questions,
[1:27:36] I just, I appreciate the structure, I understand we have a great plan, we have great supports, I think this board is invested.
[1:27:45] It's just really hard to produce the people, right?
[1:27:48] And that's the real tough thing, and like Jeff said, you know, it's not just school districts, it's industry, it's nation wide.
[1:27:57] So it's probably going to be a while before we really, you know, realize a fully staffed model and can maybe do that return on investment.
[1:28:08] But we'll still want that information.
[1:28:10] Superintendent, did you want to add any comments?
[1:28:12] Yeah, board members, please know how hard this team's working to fill those gaps.
[1:28:16] We know we have needs that are unmet and I have seen firsthand in my short time here.
[1:28:21] How hard they're working to find solutions.
[1:28:22] creative solutions, how to grow capacity in our own system, the grants are designed in a way for
[1:28:29] those community partnerships, but how do we continue to invest in our own employees that provide
[1:28:34] supports that were mentioned earlier and there's some shortage areas there too. So many are
[1:28:39] taking on more than we would like them to and only because they did this really strong staff. So
[1:28:46] this team is working hard to find solutions and we want to be transparent about it. We want to
[1:28:50] make sure people are aware of the gaps we have and where we're trying to go and helps
[1:28:55] of meeting those needs at a higher level.
[1:28:58] I think this was an annual presentation for a while and we may have shifted from not
[1:29:03] a bit so we thought we'd bring this back to so you have a sense for where our new baseline
[1:29:07] is.
[1:29:08] Ms. Hase, thank you, Chair Anderson and thank you, Chester, three of you and your teams as
[1:29:13] well.
[1:29:13] This is hard work.
[1:29:14] I just wanted to go back to slides five and six and just the acknowledgement of not that
[1:29:24] other staff can take the place of a licensed mental health therapist, but that the resources
[1:29:30] available to students in the schools are vast and wide, and for some students it's about connecting
[1:29:39] with a trusted individual in the building, and that might be a social worker, it might
[1:29:46] be their Indian Ed advisor, it might be the student achievement advisor, it also might
[1:29:51] be a coach, it might be a custodian, it might be a bus parah. So to keep building up.
[1:30:00] That that importance in that role of the relationships that all of our staff have that opportunity with students, and again, not to not to even try to imply that that replaces the work of a training mental health therapist, that is, that is going to work with a student and family for diagnostic needs.
[1:30:21] But, as we look at our MTSS model in the tier one intervention of having every child have a successful place to be at school and to start their day,
[1:30:32] maybe helps alleviate some of the needs at the levels three and four.
[1:30:37] So, I just appreciated the inclusion and those two slides of all of the other staff,
[1:30:43] And just as a reminder to our parents and families too, that if they feel that their child is needing
[1:30:49] a little extra support, another adult to connect to a safe and trusted person, here's a list of people to consider if they haven't thought beyond the classroom.
[1:30:59] Thank you.
[1:31:01] I'm just going to throw out one more thing too.
[1:31:03] And this also just reminds me with some of our unmet needs.
[1:31:08] you know we have kids that are again struggling and yet we're also looking at test scores
[1:31:14] and wondering about achievement and this is just a really good reminder that if
[1:31:18] if these needs aren't mapped it's harder for kids to achieve at a higher level so you know we all
[1:31:23] need to kind of keep that in balance as we think about what we're doing so okay oh Nate go ahead
[1:31:30] yeah just building on what super mac and time super tend to mac and time was sharing and I appreciate
[1:31:34] you getting to it, but I get it wrong. Again, no. It's like the fifth time this week.
[1:31:43] Apologies. A lot of the work that the Student Services Department has been doing is thinking
[1:31:49] about that exact piece of relationship is paramount to our students, right? And being able to
[1:31:54] go to school and say, that's a safe place where I can touch base with a safe adult who's going
[1:31:59] to see me and support me. Whatever that role is, continues to be our effort as we think about
[1:32:04] here at supports, in addition to that,
[1:32:07] that evidence-based practices.
[1:32:09] We've talked about a number of times
[1:32:11] in thinking about what is research show us,
[1:32:14] works for kids, and then what is our data telling us
[1:32:16] kids most need, and mirroring those two pieces
[1:32:18] as being part of our work.
[1:32:21] Thank you guys.
[1:32:22] We appreciate the update.
[1:32:23] And again, this isn't updated to the board,
[1:32:25] like the superintendent said,
[1:32:27] so there is no action required for us tonight.
[1:32:29] Thank you.
[1:32:30] Thank you.
[1:32:37] Okay, it looks like our next agenda item is our preliminary tax certification for taxes payable in 2024, Ms. Vargas.
[1:32:51] Good evening, Chair Anderson, Superintendent McIntyre members of the board.
[1:32:56] Tonight, I am here to present our preliminary tax certification for our taxes payable in 2024.
[1:33:02] This will be for funding for fiscal year 25.
[1:33:06] Tonight, pretty much starts our whole tax calendar.
[1:33:09] The Minnesota Department of Education in early September kicked out our first report showing
[1:33:15] all of the calculations based on law and voter approval.
[1:33:18] Tonight I have the proposed lobby.
[1:33:20] We'll set the initial tax lobby, so that we'll set tax rates that will go out in the November
[1:33:25] mailings.
[1:33:27] There is an election day, we do not have anything on the election for money.
[1:33:31] There is a school board election, but not a tax election at this point.
[1:33:35] And, in November, the county will mail out proposed property tax statements to every
[1:33:39] parcel, with those estimates on there, and then on December 11th, that is our truth
[1:33:45] in taxation hearing night.
[1:33:46] It will be held as part of our regular board meeting, 630 p.m.
[1:33:51] Within the board meeting, you need to have the public as a chance to respond after we do the
[1:33:56] presentation, then within the same meeting, we can approve the levee that night.
[1:34:03] So, for the proposed tax lobby for 2024,
[1:34:06] I love the authority that is granted to a school district.
[1:34:09] We're leveraging for referendums, the local optional
[1:34:12] levy, lease levy, for our facilities that we use,
[1:34:17] operating capital, achievement integration,
[1:34:19] career and technology, long-term facilities,
[1:34:22] safe schools, levy, alternative teacher compensation,
[1:34:25] community education, and debt.
[1:34:28] All of these levy limits for each category are either set by state law,
[1:34:32] our voter approved.
[1:34:38] So the proposed tax lobby that we're looking at currently is a 4.1 million
[1:34:42] increase or 3%. We will then look at just major categories of changes on future slides that
[1:34:50] are explained and then buy funds. So as you can see, our general fund the largest portion is
[1:34:54] going up 4 million dollars or 3.47%. Our community service is a slide.
[1:35:00] Decrease of $1,000, and then our debt service to the regular debt service in our OPEB debt service are about $57,000 increase.
[1:35:12] This next slide, the pinks are the items that are spread on your referendum market value and that's kind of everybody's just the same.
[1:35:21] There's not different class rates. It's your actual value versus the blue or your net tax capacity.
[1:35:28] So our voter approved referendum and the equity and trends.
[1:35:31] Positioned levees are based on referendum market value.
[1:35:34] As you look at this, you can see there's just a few large categories that we'll talk about.
[1:35:38] Referendum levee and the local optional levee areas where those increases are that are over $2 million.
[1:35:46] Overall, and then we'll look at just the changes in prior year adjustments and how that effect.
[1:35:51] There was a big change last year.
[1:35:53] Increase because of the inflationary if you recall.
[1:35:56] And then this year, that doesn't reoccur.
[1:35:58] So overall, we have a small increase of 3%
[1:36:02] 4 million dollars.
[1:36:04] And we're going to look at each category
[1:36:06] that are a large change for this.
[1:36:11] Before we go into that, just to kind of give you
[1:36:13] an idea of what causes some of these changes.
[1:36:16] Most of the equalization calculations are based on
[1:36:20] your tax capacity.
[1:36:21] So if your tax capacity goes up your tax space,
[1:36:24] Generally, your aid goes down.
[1:36:26] They haven't changed these factors in many years.
[1:36:29] It's going to only talk about equalization
[1:36:30] and as we're going down to the legislature.
[1:36:33] These are these items where you can see it.
[1:36:35] So as we look at this, I adjusted net tax capacity,
[1:36:38] which those were all those blue ones on the previous slide.
[1:36:41] That has increased our value by 19%.
[1:36:44] So the adjusted net tax capacity per pupil unit is one up considerably.
[1:36:50] So when you get those type of changes that you're
[1:36:53] really losing aid on that. On the referendum side, which were the pink ones on the previous
[1:36:57] one, our referendum market value is a 21% increase. And just to give you an idea, what
[1:37:05] we're seeing and what we saw from a Noka County as our home county, the majority is there's
[1:37:11] a catch-up that happens with the apartments in the commercial industrial. So they were seeing
[1:37:16] 25 to 30% increase average. Our home values were overall residential was about a 3%
[1:37:23] So, where the other years, it was homes, homes, homes, we're seeing their values go up, now with commercial industrials caught up.
[1:37:31] So, even though we're seeing a 20% increase on our tax space, the average on residential property was 3% average.
[1:37:39] It doesn't mean it's going to happen, there's the ups and the downs.
[1:37:43] But what that does change is that changes your equalization factor and just to give you an idea.
[1:37:47] So, for our lobby, we get zero aid.
[1:37:50] We are over the tier one, which is your higher.
[1:37:53] One, that's a $567,000.
[1:37:57] So, you can see last year, we got zero aid on that one too,
[1:37:59] because we are $594.
[1:38:01] Now, we're at 713, we're pretty high above that.
[1:38:05] On your local optional, the tier one is 880,000.
[1:38:09] So, we're still under it.
[1:38:11] We're getting some aid at that 713,000.
[1:38:14] But when you look at all of our revenue between the two, we have over 70, almost 78 million
[1:38:22] between our referendum and our LOR, in total aid, we receive just 2.4 million, which is only
[1:38:30] about 3%.
[1:38:31] That's where we're getting for our equalization on that, we're getting from our taxpayers
[1:38:35] for the voter, approved in the LOR, which is not a voter approved, that's a state one.
[1:38:43] So I just wanted to give you that kind of background that sets some of these where when we talk about it that we
[1:38:50] it shifted from aid to levy and that's because of those equalization factors in the changes.
[1:38:55] So our first major category is referendum and local optional levy.
[1:39:00] Our referendum is $1,128. The local optional 724. That doesn't change.
[1:39:07] We've tried to get it to change through legislation, but that is just a fixed amount at this point.
[1:39:11] So the change that we see with that for the 3.1 million has to do with an increase on the referendum,
[1:39:19] which is estimated for inflationary increase that was voter approved 2.57%.
[1:39:24] And then the increase in pupil units from what was estimated last year to this year is 157 pupil units.
[1:39:31] Net revenue change overall is 2.6 million but we have more
[1:39:35] levy of 3.1 million and that's that shift from the
[1:39:39] L.O.R. on the increased property value from aid to now levy
[1:39:42] because we're getting less aid.
[1:39:47] The next major one is our prior year.
[1:39:49] Just last year we had that large 5 million dollar catch up on
[1:39:54] the inflationary on our referendum.
[1:39:56] It doesn't re-accurre this year so we're seeing a decrease.
[1:40:00] And our general fund adjustments compared to last year because that 5.3 million. We still have a referendum adjustment for inflation for FY22. What happens is it's kind of every year. Last year was fiscal year 23 and 21. This year they go back for 24 that we're in in 22.
[1:40:18] So fiscal year 22, the adjustment is now that they're catching up, which is only 2.2 million, not 5.3 million. So that's why we're seeing a negative adjustment with all the miscellaneous adjustments.
[1:40:30] You can see that local optional is adjustment for our pupil unit, our re-employing insurance and
[1:40:36] justments minus 429,000 we estimated in the mountain it was last.
[1:40:41] That's always something that you just estimate what you think you're going to have for actual
[1:40:46] expenditures because our unemployment's actual expenditures.
[1:40:50] Our capital project's levy, so that net tax capacity that we saw that 19% increase,
[1:40:55] Our capital project's levee is based on that tax capacity.
[1:41:00] It's 1.55% of your net tax capacity.
[1:41:03] So that is going up 19% to 971,000.
[1:41:08] So it's 5.05, almost 6 million dollars next year.
[1:41:15] Our operating capital is a change of 667,000.
[1:41:20] We're seeing a net revenue increase of 124,000.
[1:41:24] Part of that has to do with the $2 in the
[1:41:28] was the aid for the menstrual products and that that was added.
[1:41:32] The other part is just the shift that we're seeing.
[1:41:35] And increased people units and then now we're seeing the shift.
[1:41:37] As you can see, our levy ratio was 33.6% last year and 43.4%.
[1:41:44] So I'm just a 10% increase just because of that,
[1:41:47] the equalization has changed that much in causing the levy factor to change.
[1:41:54] School-aged care.
[1:41:55] So this is our after school care in adventurous plus faric kids
[1:41:59] disabilities. That amount is based on your actual expenses and we estimate those we've
[1:42:04] had some large ketchup amounts. We're looking at last year we love you to 1.5 million
[1:42:10] we've increased to 1.75 million based on the trend and where we were last year. So that's
[1:42:16] the 250,000 increase.
[1:42:19] This slide shows those major ones we just talked about. The difference
[1:42:24] So you can see the difference.
[1:42:26] Our actual change in that revenue is that gray bar.
[1:42:31] The orange is your levy.
[1:42:32] So you can see in our referendum and local optional,
[1:42:36] our ADCries by 1.6 million.
[1:42:39] Our levy went up by 3.2 million.
[1:42:42] We netted new revenue at 2.6 million.
[1:42:46] Same thing.
[1:42:47] The technology levy is 100% levy.
[1:42:50] So it just shows new revenue, new levee 917,000 operating capital, the one that we talked about
[1:42:57] $542,000 decrease in our aid, $667,000 increase in the levee, but we're really only
[1:43:04] have new revenue of 124,000.
[1:43:11] So looking at our total school levee history, this is just kind of going back to 2018, and
[1:43:16] you can see that our amount that we've went up, the dollar amount you can see are 139 million
[1:43:23] that we're looking at for this year, for pay 2020 for school year 2425, is a 3% increase.
[1:43:31] In the past few years, it's kind of been a gradual up. We did have that percentage increase
[1:43:37] of 1.9% and then 4.96.7%, 3%. I always look at other districts and I can tell you that
[1:43:45] some of our surrounding districts are seeing much higher increases than we are.
[1:43:50] So, it, if solid depends on your, your property tax and the shifts, unless you've, you've got some increases and, you know, you have people in an increases or something, but I would say most of the districts around a certain similar position that we are property wise, we're mostly residential.
[1:44:08] We don't have a lot of businesses, so the changes in that and just not getting the factors up and when you know what home values are at so.
[1:44:17] So, at the preliminary, we approved the maximum, so that if there are any changes, there was a change at 5 o'clock today.
[1:44:26] That reduced to by about $10,000.
[1:44:29] So, I wasn't able to change everything at that time.
[1:44:32] But, certifying this maximum, they're just doing their last minute to each space on information from the county.
[1:44:39] So, what I have presented for you is to certify the maximum, what we're looking at is about a 3% or 2.99.
[1:44:46] as a five o'clock when you're looking at it for a home value of looking at an average home value
[1:44:54] now in an Oconi 350,000. Looking at that.
[1:45:00] If they went out 3%, there's still going to see a decrease, which is the average of about $35 annually.
[1:45:08] If they went up 6% they're going to be about flat. So you could still have a 6% increase.
[1:45:16] That's using my estimates, using what we had for fiscal disparities last year and kind of rolling that forward in the percentage of the increases.
[1:45:23] but what's seen most of the commercial industrial
[1:45:27] as driving that increase more than likely,
[1:45:31] most homeowners is going to see a flat tax,
[1:45:34] unless they're over that 6% increase,
[1:45:37] which on average it was only 3.
[1:45:38] So they'll be some in there,
[1:45:40] but that's about what I would estimate for tax impact at this point.
[1:45:43] So I'll leave it open for questions,
[1:45:45] and I'm looking for approval of our preliminary tax
[1:45:47] levy at the maximum amount.
[1:45:50] Are there any questions for Ms. Vargas,
[1:45:56] Mr. Simon?
[1:45:58] Thanks, Sharon, and thank you, Michelle.
[1:46:01] So all of this aid equals, it all gets very confusing, right?
[1:46:04] So I want your help in explaining this or understanding
[1:46:09] that our move is explaining for the public.
[1:46:12] So when you talk about equalization, that is state aid to help even out
[1:46:21] what homeowners are paying for education, right?
[1:46:25] So a property rich district that might have a lot
[1:46:27] of big businesses, or things like that.
[1:46:32] Their homeowners, if they're getting taxes from that big business
[1:46:35] base, their homeowners may be paying less than a nook ahead of them
[1:46:39] that doesn't necessarily have really large businesses.
[1:46:43] Therefore, our homeowners are going to pay more
[1:46:46] for education on their property taxes.
[1:46:49] Is that, is that a way to say that?
[1:46:52] Not necessarily more the percentage of the property tax they bear more.
[1:46:58] So 80 percent of ours, so 80 percent of our parcels are residential.
[1:47:05] So depending on the percentage of the actual tax space, if you were in a district,
[1:47:14] we're 50 percent of our homeowners, yes.
[1:47:16] And we had a hundred million, they had a hundred million, they're going to pay less from that.
[1:47:22] But in less those districts are collecting a lot more money than they might pay the same,
[1:47:26] but then they would have additional dollars for their district.
[1:47:30] And so I don't know who winners are bearing more of that from because we don't have the commercial industrial.
[1:47:36] And then a higher, the more value that you have per student, if you have that high tax space,
[1:47:43] They've probably been out of equalization much longer than us now just getting into it as a problem.
[1:47:49] I mean, we've been considered more of a property poor district for quite some time.
[1:47:54] We just don't have the commercial property from that standpoint.
[1:48:00] So it's been over the last few years that we've lost that aid.
[1:48:04] And that is to equal it all between the higher value districts and a lower property value,
[1:48:10] but because there's been such a growth in home values
[1:48:15] and we're 80% of it, we're knocked out of that place.
[1:48:19] Now of the equalization and those factors just haven't changed.
[1:48:22] There's not an inflationary increase on those
[1:48:25] that would kind of tie it to it if they tried to keep that
[1:48:28] as you're seen and go.
[1:48:29] So that's kind of been part of your platform.
[1:48:31] And the reason for that in order to continue to get that
[1:48:35] for homeowners and that.
[1:48:37] But yes, that's good.
[1:48:39] Yes. Yes and no. I think that discussion might help a little bit for folks to understand.
[1:48:44] I mean, in some districts that are in a great position that their property rich will call it.
[1:48:51] I have an opportunity to have additional funding to do additional things.
[1:48:57] Whereas, Anoka Hennepin being not in that position.
[1:49:01] Really, we've done more with the last, really,
[1:49:04] and we've been very fiscally conservative and making sure
[1:49:09] we limit property taxes for our homeowners too.
[1:49:12] So thank you for that.
[1:49:13] One last question, I just want to make sure I understand this.
[1:49:17] So you're saying that with this, if this is approved at this level,
[1:49:23] and it is, I guess, one clarification.
[1:49:27] Once we get to the point where we actually get to the point of funding, it doesn't mean we have to fund all of this.
[1:49:35] We can change that if we want to at that time correct.
[1:49:38] Correct.
[1:49:39] Click something.
[1:49:40] Yes.
[1:49:40] At the December, I always at the December approval.
[1:49:43] You have the option to line item items off.
[1:49:47] If you so choose.
[1:49:47] If it's an item that has an aid component to it, it will also reduce the aid from that standpoint.
[1:49:53] But yes.
[1:49:53] And we have done that before too.
[1:49:55] I recall.
[1:49:56] So, I know on an average homecast in New York.
[1:50:00] You said, now, it's 350,000. If their homes go up the average rate of 3%, their home values
[1:50:09] go up, they're going to see, did you say, a decrease on how much they're paying for...
[1:50:17] If fiscal disparities come in the same and that's kind of the shared of the seven-county
[1:50:21] metro area of the business, new business taxes, if we receive about the same amount, I would
[1:50:29] about a $35 increase annually.
[1:50:32] $35 decrease.
[1:50:33] So it's actually a dollar decrease, not a percent.
[1:50:36] And then, so if a home increase is 6%,
[1:50:39] which is double what homes are according to your according
[1:50:44] to yours, they would be pretty flat with our school
[1:50:48] to access.
[1:50:49] I'm looking at about a dollar increase based on some
[1:50:53] or fiscal disparities, yes.
[1:50:55] So I would say thinking of it that way, you are, thank you.
[1:50:59] And we as a district, if we go in this direction, are still thinking about our property
[1:51:04] tax, our homeowners, and making sure we limit or really hopefully don't give a dollar
[1:51:10] increase to them in the property taxes they're paying in this proposal.
[1:51:15] Correct?
[1:51:15] That's, yes.
[1:51:17] Thank you.
[1:51:19] Okay.
[1:51:19] Mr. Outout.
[1:51:21] Thanks, Chair Anderson.
[1:51:21] I had a question a little bit related to your major change in analysis, where it shows that
[1:51:32] aid on both the referendum and local option revenue and the operating capital is falling,
[1:51:42] which I think you have said or you have explained many times that is based on this net
[1:51:49] capacity. The formula is changed based on that. So I guess I get to my question which is
[1:51:55] the certifying the maximum. To the formula is that the state uses to calculate all that
[1:52:00] do they assume that you would certify the maximum amount when they sort of change up the way
[1:52:07] that the aid works.
[1:52:09] Well, they don't, the aid is not really changing the factors that are state the same. It's just
[1:52:15] tax values as is presented from the counties. It's causing that. They assume that you do
[1:52:22] the maximum just because they're still final credits from the state, from the county
[1:52:25] auditors, so that you don't for those changes to go through. So they recommend, yes,
[1:52:31] that you, that's kind of what I mean. If you didn't, if you do a dollar amount and they
[1:52:38] changed, then if we did the dollar amount that I had as of last Friday, we would then lose
[1:52:44] that $10,000 credit unless you went in and took it off on a December that type of thing.
[1:52:50] Or if it went up a slightly due to an adjustment because there was an error from the county you wouldn't get that amount.
[1:52:57] So that's where they recommends, because there's still, there's so many moving targets that I haven't seen a change to be honest.
[1:53:05] From the time from our maximum, they've just been really having some problems with their system loading.
[1:53:11] I've never had this late for the last update for that, but I haven't seen a change in all my years from what we certified to what the December one was unless there was an election that got approved.
[1:53:26] Okay.
[1:53:27] Thank you.
[1:53:30] Okay, members.
[1:53:31] Any other questions for Ms. Vargas?
[1:53:34] Otherwise before us, I would entertain a motion to approve the preliminary tax certification for taxes payable as presented.
[1:53:42] is there a motion? So moved. Thank you, Mr. Simon, is there a second?
[1:53:48] Thank you, Mr.
[1:53:48] is my cardal. Is there any discussion?
[1:53:52] They're none. All those in favor signify by saying aye. Aye. Any opposed? So you know?
[1:53:58] Six in favor and zero opposed. That motion is proved. Thank you. Thank you.
[1:54:06] Okay, it looks like
[1:54:08] we're going to be doing some policy work. Mr. Palmetir?
[1:54:15] Welcome. Thank you.
[1:54:22] Thank you. Thank you.
[1:54:22] chair Anderson Superintendent and McIntyre in school board. One of the efforts of the school
[1:54:29] board policy committee this year has been to revise policies to reflect a number of changes
[1:54:34] that were made to Minnesota Statue from this last legislative session. So we have before
[1:54:41] you two policies today and Miss Anderson. It's okay with you. I'll take them one at a time,
[1:54:47] entertain questions in between if that's all right. I think that's best. Yes. All right. Thank
[1:54:51] So, the first policy for your consideration is policy 413, this pertains to harassment, violence, and discrimination.
[1:55:00] This policy is required by Minnesota statute. It was last revised two years ago in September of 2021. So coming
[1:55:07] forward with proposed reservations from the last policy committee, we are looking at the following.
[1:55:14] And I'm obviously, there's quite a bit of detail in here, so I'll entertain specific questions. I'm giving kind of an overview.
[1:55:20] First of all, the proposed draft policy reflects updated forming and expectations from district policy.
[1:55:26] For example, we put certain headings such as purpose of policy and general policy requirements also reflect certain naming conventions that we are trying to apply consistently amongst our policies.
[1:55:37] The proposed draft policy now includes specific prohibition against malicious and sadistic conduct, which is required by the recent legislative session.
[1:55:46] It also includes several newer revised definitions that ensure consistency with the Minnesota Human Rights Act.
[1:55:54] And then finally, the new policy really addresses prohibition against discrimination that's associated with one's race.
[1:56:02] This is referred to kind of as the Crown Act issues related to hairstyle and that sort of thing.
[1:56:08] So those kind of reflected some of the more significant changes in the reflected in the proposed visions to the policy.
[1:56:16] So I'll entertain any questions at the time.
[1:56:20] Members, do we have any questions for general consult?
[1:56:23] Mr. Outdeck.
[1:56:24] Thanks, Mr. Anderson.
[1:56:25] I had a couple.
[1:56:27] The first question I had was related to, I guess it's going to be number, it's going
[1:56:33] to be number five.
[1:56:34] It's the definition of gender identity and I'm just interested in knowing where that definition
[1:56:42] came from.
[1:56:45] So, in this last legislative session, there were certain changes to the Minnesota Human Rights Act,
[1:56:50] specifically, gender identity was added amongst those protected status categories, and the statute
[1:56:57] also gave us a working definition that's applied here in this particular proposed policy.
[1:57:03] So this is the direct from statute.
[1:57:06] That's correct.
[1:57:09] Is there a reason we wouldn't include that?
[1:57:12] The fact that it is direct from statute?
[1:57:15] In there?
[1:57:16] I'm sorry, just to indicate that it's a statutory requirement?
[1:57:19] Yeah, that state statute, whatever it is, defines gender identity as, and then the way it's defined.
[1:57:28] You know, we certainly could. A number of the recommendations, or the number of the components of this policy,
[1:57:34] all of us already reflected those kind of required components.
[1:57:38] One thing I'll note is, is that oftentimes the policy itself will have provisions in it
[1:57:48] that actually state where the requirements are from statute.
[1:57:52] This particular policy does not have that in it.
[1:57:57] I certainly could add it.
[1:57:59] That's something I think we probably
[1:58:00] want to be consistently in terms of our policies.
[1:58:03] The source of authority where persons can go look at the policy
[1:58:07] reference back to statute.
[1:58:09] Well, and the reason I asked him in it, it's a board policy.
[1:58:14] However, we've chosen to include a definition that's
[1:58:17] directly out of statute. So it's not really our definition per se. It's the state's definition.
[1:58:22] It's the statutory definition. So to me, it makes some sense to identify it that way,
[1:58:28] especially just given the nature of what it is. It just makes sense to me to include it that way.
[1:58:36] So I guess it's a suggestion that I have to do that.
[1:58:42] Okay. Hang on for one second. So yeah, hold on. That's yep. So Mr.
[1:58:47] Pometheus, what page are we on? Because I'm struggling to find it too.
[1:58:51] The definition of gender identity is in the page
[1:59:00] four section D paragraph five.
[1:59:10] Okay, wait a minute. So we're on the student discipline policy?
[1:59:16] No, I'm in policy 413, right?
[1:59:19] That's, I think there's the problem.
[1:59:21] So in our agenda, the student discipline policy was first.
[1:59:27] So I was, of course, grabbing the first one.
[1:59:31] So.
[1:59:31] I didn't mean to throw that at you.
[1:59:32] I'm sorry.
[1:59:33] Well, I just went and see quenchable numbers.
[1:59:35] Quenchable orders, so.
[1:59:36] Okay. Well, okay.
[1:59:37] So then that's on page four.
[1:59:41] And I just, just from, I know a couple other board members want to speak.
[1:59:44] But in our previous policy work,
[1:59:48] I think we made it kind of a concerted effort
[1:59:50] to scrub out state statutes,
[1:59:54] because of the intensive work to change those.
[1:59:58] Now, again, we've got-
[2:00:00] We've got changing board, you know, policy members, but I just wanted that historical perspective too and now I, Aaron, did you want to speak?
[2:00:12] I have some—I'm sorry Matt, I'm—do I—I had another question.
[2:00:16] Oh I'm—okay. I, I guess we can go back and forth on it too. But I do have another question—I'm sorry.
[2:00:21] Sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry.
[2:00:22] Sorry.
[2:00:23] It's okay.
[2:00:25] So my next question is about the definition of sexual orientation in the policy and it's
[2:00:33] really the same question.
[2:00:34] What's the source of that definition?
[2:00:37] Once again, the definition of sexual orientation was modified by the recent changes to the
[2:00:42] Minnesota Human Rights Act.
[2:00:44] So which language is going to be, there's a red line scratching it through and then the
[2:00:48] So which language is going to survive?
[2:00:53] The bolded language to whom someone is or perceived as being went out from there.
[2:01:01] And that's in the statute now?
[2:01:04] All of it after that?
[2:01:07] I believe so, yes.
[2:01:10] I have it.
[2:01:11] I have the statute and here's let me read what it says.
[2:01:16] And this is based on the reviser.
[2:01:18] So, you can I just, just a second though, because I'm not sure if it's actually, is that from the bill or is it from the current?
[2:01:26] Because the, the statutes that you might find online don't necessarily reflect all the recent changes.
[2:01:35] I'm not sure, I'm not sure which I, which I have, this was from the bill.
[2:01:40] Okay, age 16, 55,
[2:01:46] and it defines sexually orientation means having or being perceived as having an emotional,
[2:01:51] physical or sexual attachment to another person without regard to the sex of that person,
[2:01:56] or having or being perceived as having an orientation for such attachment, and that's the end of it.
[2:02:02] Which, to me,
[2:02:05] seemed to be in line with that first definition you had in there, that got redlined, at least part of it.
[2:02:11] I think I, I mean, I can certainly check with you offline because the revised or the
[2:02:17] revised or changes don't necessarily get in from the recent bill changes, so you have to go
[2:02:22] and check in the statute, but I can follow up with you on that.
[2:02:25] So the intent though is to have the definition there be word for word.
[2:02:29] What it was in the statute.
[2:02:30] Correct.
[2:02:31] Okay.
[2:02:32] Thank you.
[2:02:33] Okay.
[2:02:34] And did that occur?
[2:02:36] I don't want to.
[2:02:36] Yeah.
[2:02:37] That's it.
[2:02:38] Okay.
[2:02:38] Thank you.
[2:02:41] Thank you, Chair Anderson.
[2:02:43] The point you made last time about scrubbing the statute numbers from there.
[2:02:48] I remember we had a very specific conversation about that because it made the work later on harder when those were changed.
[2:02:56] Yes, I do remember that too.
[2:02:57] Thank you.
[2:02:59] Ms. Hase.
[2:03:02] Thank you, Chair Anderson.
[2:03:02] No question.
[2:03:03] I was just lost because I was looking at 506, not 413.
[2:03:07] I apologize.
[2:03:08] No, no apology.
[2:03:09] Thank you.
[2:03:10] Okay, I was just focused on getting the superintendent's last name correct.
[2:03:15] Mr. Shane, thank you, Chair Anderson.
[2:03:18] I just wanted to point out in the attachments on the very first paragraph of the purpose.
[2:03:23] It does say the purpose of this policy, et cetera, and lists out some of the areas that we have defined.
[2:03:30] And it does say as defined by the Minnesota Human Rights Act or other applicable state or federal laws at the top of the policy.
[2:03:37] So that is, let's already there, and I do have the Revisor Chapter 52 changes, amendment
[2:03:47] up right now, and it matches what you have included in the policy.
[2:03:50] Thank you.
[2:03:54] Mr. Simon.
[2:03:55] Thank you.
[2:03:56] So I remember when we had that discussion about pulling those out of there, now we haven't
[2:04:02] pulled them out of there in every place though, so even on the next policy we're going
[2:04:06] review we do talk about Minnesota statute and we do talk as KC talked about in the beginning
[2:04:13] of its statement of philosophy on the next one we talked about pursuant to the Minnesota
[2:04:17] education code so personally I'm we do it in other policies I'm not opposed to it if it
[2:04:24] helps to define things to put maybe a broader thing that you know as definition per Minnesota
[2:04:32] or whatever, I'm not opposed to that personally.
[2:04:34] Thank you.
[2:04:36] Any other, Superintendent McIntyre?
[2:04:40] Thanks, Chair Anderson, and also just to point out
[2:04:42] for our public that all the statutory references
[2:04:45] are listed at the end of each policy
[2:04:48] so that AES and kind of referencing.
[2:04:50] And then just to acknowledge, thank you to the policy committee.
[2:04:54] You had extensive conversation
[2:04:56] about this at the committee level.
[2:04:58] This is the whole board is aware of.
[2:05:01] The thoughtful analysis that went on at the policy committee level before coming here tonight.
[2:05:10] Okay, any other comments or questions? Okay, so this is a first read and so it will come back to us.
[2:05:22] For a second reader, will that come on the consent agenda?
[2:05:24] What were you thinking?
[2:05:25] As I understand historically, they have come back to the board on the consent agenda.
[2:05:31] I will be honest, I'm still kind of learning certain aspects of the process, but that's been consistent with why there's that practice has been.
[2:05:39] Okay. Well, I think I heard a couple like recommended or recommendations for changes or an edit, so you know, if we would have to have some kind of nod or whatever if people are okay with those changes or if we feel like the policy is sufficiently.
[2:05:57] Yeah, go ahead and miss Hazel.
[2:06:00] Chanderson, finish your sentence.
[2:06:02] No, I'm getting a little tired.
[2:06:06] Thank you, Chanderson.
[2:06:07] I think it is important that at the beginning of each of these policies, we do have that
[2:06:12] purpose statement, and that's where it can be clearly identified, you know, the purpose
[2:06:17] of the policy, whether it's pursuant to state statute or anokahant, whatever it is.
[2:06:23] So I appreciate that that's in there.
[2:06:26] I also think at the end of each of our policies,
[2:06:29] where we note the update, I think is another indicator
[2:06:34] to someone that is interested in the policy development
[2:06:37] or work, what transpired to create a change
[2:06:41] in the policy language, and that would be reflected there
[2:06:45] as well with the update of date.
[2:06:48] So I think it's most important that our policies
[2:06:51] are consistent and clear. I would be concerned about us trying to consistently have a reference
[2:06:59] to a specific statute across the board in our 300 plus pages of policies, but I do think
[2:07:06] it is important to have that statement in that first paragraph that you have bolded here.
[2:07:14] Okay, any other comments or questions?
[2:07:18] And I would just say, I like clear and consistent policies too.
[2:07:24] I know when we first started this work and this was reviewing policies was on my list
[2:07:30] of things to do probably for six or seven years before we finally got to it because of some
[2:07:36] of the outdated statutes and stuff or reference, you know, that part of it becomes more
[2:07:42] of a workload issue, and I would defer that to our superintendent, because it's not as
[2:07:48] board members that are going to be doing that work.
[2:07:50] What our main objective is, I believe, is clear so our community understands what our policy
[2:07:58] is.
[2:07:59] And then the management of that, I think, in my personal opinion, you know, go to you.
[2:08:06] Chairperson, I just reiterated again the work of the policy committee and that the recommendation came here with the support of the committee.
[2:08:15] So it's come forward with the professional, you know, work of the general council's office and the policy committee's work.
[2:08:24] But that's why we're doing the first reading and that's why we buy a little time between the set now and the second reading to give you time to think about that make recommendations as we bring forward a final version.
[2:08:34] And if it's got substantial changes, then it can be not on the consent week, and I was
[2:08:39] bringing that up for a different kind of approval.
[2:08:42] You just see substantive changes that don't have Timmy, I speak to that.
[2:08:47] Yeah, if I, if I may, Chair and Senator.
[2:08:50] I will tell you that as a school attorney, I do have a lean and a preference towards actually
[2:08:56] having some sort of citation back to statute.
[2:09:00] It's obviously up to us to make sure that we update the statutory references, sometimes statutory numbers change, and all sorts of things can happen.
[2:09:11] But it does actually give myself, but it also gives others who are really interested in the issue to kind of examine why. Maybe something isn't statute.
[2:09:20] We start with what, when our policy, we start with what statutory requirements are, then we work within certain discretion that the school board has.
[2:09:27] So that's kind of my lean, but I think it is something we can continue to explore in policy if that works for the members of the policy committee.
[2:09:36] Okay, so what I think I'm hearing is this particular policy may come back with a statute reference, and then I think we would be okay if it goes on the consent decree as long as there isn't major substantive changes.
[2:09:49] Is that what I'm kind of seeing?
[2:09:51] Okay. In the, yeah. Or wherever you think it best, the lies. And I might add one caveat.
[2:10:00] Moving this under the understanding that the federal government is actually going to be re-issue in Title IX regulations, apparently in October, it was supposed to be in May. We just don't know.
[2:10:11] So this is a policy that's absolutely going to come back to the school board, but I'm trying to get at least some of the statutory changes in effect as soon as possible.
[2:10:19] Sorry.
[2:10:21] Okay. Excellent. Thank you. Next policy. Thank you, Chair Anderson. The next policy
[2:10:27] for your consideration is policy 506. This concerns student discipline. This policy is
[2:10:32] required by Minnesota statute. It was last revised three years ago in September of 2020.
[2:10:38] The proposed revisions to this policy first reflects some of the updated formatting changes that I
[2:10:46] has dragged here includes a requirement related to non-exclusionary disciplinary practices.
[2:10:52] This is a requirement that comes out of Minnesota's statute, and really is a requirement
[2:10:59] any time the school wants to move forward with any form of dismissal, so under the pupil
[2:11:04] for a dismissal like to dismissal of the suspension and expulsion.
[2:11:09] The policy adopts language from MSBA concerning student attire and personal agreement.
[2:11:14] there was some conversation of the policy committee and follow-up amongst members to reflect
[2:11:20] some changes in that regard.
[2:11:22] The new policy eliminates provisions that reference planned use of conditional procedures.
[2:11:27] This is actually an outdated provision that still maintained in our policy.
[2:11:31] We actually called those restrictive procedures right now, and they're only allowed or
[2:11:35] to be used in emergency situations, so that provision needed to come out.
[2:11:39] The new policy incorporates statutory requirements that obligate the provision of alternative educational services to suspended students, namely that those services need to begin on the sixth day of any consecutive suspension.
[2:11:54] The new policy also limits use of suspension for students in kindergarten through third grade.
[2:12:00] It limits the use of recessed detention for students to those situations where the student causes or is likely to cause serious physical harm.
[2:12:07] And lastly, consistent with some of the comments that we actually heard earlier, the new
[2:12:15] policy adopts a complaint process that allows for individual's complaint and seek
[2:12:19] corrective action when the school discipline policy is not being followed or is being
[2:12:24] discriminantly applied.
[2:12:25] And again, that was a requirement that came out of the last slide, just like a session.
[2:12:29] So I'll entertain any questions at this time.
[2:12:31] Members, any questions from this momentary, Mr. Audit?
[2:12:39] I guess my first question we took out in under the statement of philosophy under B, we struck the word school, it's as schools, and then we struck have a responsibility to parents and students, and then from there goes on to do it.
[2:12:57] But I'm just, I wasn't in the discussion, so I'm curious why we're removing the responsibility
[2:13:04] to parents and students related to a safe environment.
[2:13:10] Are you talking about Section 2B in that?
[2:13:15] Okay, and that talks about have a responsibility to parents and students, which goes beyond
[2:13:19] the educational program?
[2:13:20] Yes.
[2:13:22] I will say from a legal perspective, one of my goals would be to eliminate any kind of
[2:13:32] I think we obviously recognize that we have a responsibility
[2:13:36] to parents and students.
[2:13:39] Those come from the educational program.
[2:13:41] To me, the statement actually is somewhat broad,
[2:13:45] and it doesn't necessarily reflect anything from statute.
[2:13:49] There are, again, even if you see the section A statement
[2:13:52] of philosophy on conduct and discipline.
[2:13:55] I think talking about philosophy and school board policy
[2:13:58] isn't necessarily something that you want to do either.
[2:14:00] You really want to just stay with the parameters, aren't you?
[2:14:04] Yeah.
[2:14:05] I think that, I mean, when I read it, I don't think that the word educational program
[2:14:11] in there is probably what broadens it, you know, if you had it say schools have a responsibility
[2:14:17] to parents and students to provide students with a suitable environment while on the school
[2:14:22] premises.
[2:14:22] to me, it seemed that the intent really was just talking about the responsibility that the
[2:14:29] schools have to the community to specifically to the parents and their children to provide
[2:14:35] them with a safe suitable environment, et cetera. So I felt like it actually added something.
[2:14:41] I liked the idea of saying this school district has a responsibility to parents and I'd prefer
[2:14:47] personally prefer not to remove it for that reason.
[2:14:57] So I guess I just put that out for...
[2:15:01] Discussion. Then, Section E, which was added, and we say the school board values, this part about efforts to prevent dismissal severely detection of problems, and it kind of is joined together, I think, maybe not really, but in thought, with F, which talks about these non-exclusionary disciplinary policies and practices, what's the genesis of the F, the non-exclusionary?
[2:15:29] Where is that coming from?
[2:15:31] Again, it's a definition that was added in the last legislative session, and you'll also see in the people for a dismissal act, it says before you dismiss a student, you must attempt non-exclusionary disciplinary policies and practices.
[2:15:45] Yeah. So, it is a requirement. I will say as a matter of practice,
[2:15:50] happily the school district really does that in pretty much 99% of the cases.
[2:15:55] If you look at the definition of non-exclusionary discipline policies and practices,
[2:16:00] many things that we're already doing in most pretty much all of our schools.
[2:16:03] Yeah. So, but the change to the law, especially with regard to K through three,
[2:16:12] I did a few things, right?
[2:16:13] First it said, it really limited the ability to suspend the student.
[2:16:21] And then it added in that before you could, you had to do that.
[2:16:25] I think it said at least one, I don't remember exactly how I was worded from that discussion,
[2:16:32] but you had to do some, it said, I don't think you were required to do all these things,
[2:16:39] right?
[2:16:39] That's correct.
[2:16:40] This is sort of a menu of things you could choose from.
[2:16:42] that's fair. And when our administration brought forward the changes to the policy, they were pretty
[2:16:49] concerned with those changes. It was difficult. It was going to limit the ability to
[2:16:55] suspend a child who, you know, I don't remember. There was something like 600 cases that we had
[2:17:02] that had happened in the previous year that now would not be able to be suspended.
[2:17:07] So,
[2:17:11] on the one hand, I like the idea of saying the board values efforts to prevent dismissal
[2:17:15] for students.
[2:17:16] Clearly we do.
[2:17:17] It would be the best thing if we could have students behave in such a way keep them
[2:17:22] in school that would be great.
[2:17:24] And then when you kind of connect that into this next one that talks about the non-exclusionary
[2:17:29] disciplinary policies and practices and then the subsequent impact to the ability to discipline
[2:17:36] or to suspend K through three.
[2:17:39] Now that all to me feels like it rolls together
[2:17:41] and it says, well, this is something
[2:17:42] that board really wanted to do.
[2:17:44] Board was really interested in doing that,
[2:17:46] we're really interested in promoting
[2:17:48] the non-exclusionary practices, et cetera.
[2:17:52] And I can't really think of how to sail that differently.
[2:17:57] But I wonder if the language in E and F are those,
[2:18:02] are you viewing those to be required
[2:18:05] in order to reflect the new statute or are they there for a different purpose?
[2:18:13] Well, clearly again, provisions concerning non-exclusion or disciplining practices are moving
[2:18:19] it forward from the statute.
[2:18:22] I will tell you as a matter of, it's a reality that we face, not just, you know, can
[2:18:28] have been schools, but 1.40 plus schools were brought in to an effort through the Department
[2:18:34] of human rights to modify discipline policies.
[2:18:37] We know that the MDE is constantly looking at student dismissals.
[2:18:42] And it is an area where schools are under considerable pressure as it relates to that.
[2:18:48] And I also realize, and you made a reference to this, we have, you know, we have some
[2:18:56] serious situations where the staff and the administration needs time to take an opportunity
[2:19:03] to plan for a student discipline oftentimes isn't used for
[2:19:09] consequences used for planning, for an opportunity to teach
[2:19:14] pro-social behaviors and work on it, you know, proactively.
[2:19:18] So I don't know if I'm answering your question.
[2:19:21] I certainly appreciate the notion of recognizing that maybe
[2:19:30] the legislature goes in a particular direction
[2:19:32] that we have to kind of kind of get in line with, but also maybe make some challenges present
[2:19:40] some challenges for us for sharing.
[2:19:42] Yeah, well, and you raised another issue, which was this whole thing from the Minnesota Department
[2:19:47] of Human Rights and the pressure they put on schools to change their disciplinary practices,
[2:19:53] which I don't agree with.
[2:19:58] And so now they've come out.
[2:20:00] And they've sort of, you know, you said heavily influenced, put a lot of pressure on, acted outside a statute to put that pressure on, and now we're coming with changes to the policy that, to me, again, when people look at the policy, I don't think they can always tell the difference between what statutory or what is just actual board policy, and especially when we add in a statement that says, you know, the board value is the efforts to do it.
[2:20:28] And again, I do, I don't want to suspend kids for any particular reason, but if it's
[2:20:33] if our administrators deem it's necessary, then I think it's worth looking at it.
[2:20:40] So it's kind of like the totality of what we're doing here.
[2:20:44] Seems to imply these are more heavily waived by the board, or included on it, it's sort
[2:20:51] of our behest, and they're really not, they're included, because the state required it
[2:20:56] again. And that's the substance of how I feel about that. And so I was just curious to understand
[2:21:02] how we landed on those couple of things. And I think you have explained it. So I appreciate
[2:21:11] that.
[2:21:12] Thank you.
[2:21:17] Next when we get into a few of the things where it relates to the authority, who's got the authority
[2:21:26] to implement the policy and we're changing the words generally from the resting with the building
[2:21:32] principle and changing it more broadly to school administration. Then my read on that is you
[2:21:38] go from one specific person who's got responsibility that be in the principle and you change it
[2:21:45] to school administration. Suddenly there isn't a specific person anymore and so I'm curious why
[2:21:53] I think it's just a broadly reflected, at least in the schools, in many situations you have involvement of certain administrators and disciplinary consequences acting on decision to suspend, for example.
[2:22:08] I think it just reflects our reality quite honestly, in terms of how it rolls out, the principal may not always be involved.
[2:22:15] They are through, they've delegated that authority, though, have they not?
[2:22:20] Fair, yeah, I mean, but someone needs to be present when a decision is made, for example, on a suspension.
[2:22:25] So the principle might not be automatically or immediately involved in that.
[2:22:29] No, but I would say there's still responsible.
[2:22:32] They're accountable.
[2:22:32] I don't, I don't disagree.
[2:22:33] I think that the notion with respect to the policy, though, I think,
[2:22:37] was to broadly recognize that it's not just always sitting with the principle.
[2:22:42] Okay, thank you.
[2:22:47] Hold on.
[2:22:50] You have to ask your question, Herr?
[2:22:52] No, I mean, is that a point of clarification, Mr. Audit?
[2:22:58] Sure.
[2:22:59] Yeah, there we go.
[2:23:00] Chair Anderson, thank you.
[2:23:01] Could part of that relate to in some of our sites,
[2:23:06] we have an administrative lead,
[2:23:08] who does not have the title of principle.
[2:23:11] So we have had a couple sites,
[2:23:13] the lead person is director of something, and yet our policy needs to be consistent across all
[2:23:21] education sites. So would that be an example of why we maybe would say administration
[2:23:26] versus a title such as principal? Yes. I do believe that was some of the conversation.
[2:23:34] Yeah, and that makes sense. I guess I, how I see it all, to me, okay, the principal is, they're running the school.
[2:23:40] So they have the overall responsibility, no matter what.
[2:23:43] Any, any authority that they delegate
[2:23:45] didn't beneath them still falls under them.
[2:23:49] So that's the way that red before now
[2:23:51] it says something called school administration,
[2:23:54] which we don't know who that is anymore,
[2:23:55] who had the authority to do that.
[2:23:57] But I don't know.
[2:23:59] It didn't seem to strengthen it to me.
[2:24:01] Yeah, I broaden it in the sense that other people
[2:24:03] might be involved, I think they always
[2:24:04] could have been involved.
[2:24:05] It just based on the principles of ability to delegate it.
[2:24:09] It's the same thing here with the superintendent being overall responsible for everything can delegate to other administrators under them and certainly does, but never not the responsible person.
[2:24:20] I think that not what's saying those remarks are certainly was no intent to soften the principles involved in a responsibility.
[2:24:28] I think it was just reflecting what is the reality in many of our buildings.
[2:24:34] Okay,
[2:24:38] and then I had a question about under the implementation of the policy on weapons, and you added in under number one, and it's that language consistent with state law, the board may modify the requirement case by case, etc.
[2:24:57] What is, could you, could you talk to that?
[2:25:00] What is that? What is the state law allowing and why?
[2:25:05] Yeah, I mean, it's interesting. So if you look at the gun free schools act, the federal law, which
[2:25:12] has certain requirements, and you look at Minnesota statute, it basically says the school will expel
[2:25:19] for possession of a firearm in particular, and then it goes on to say the board can exercise discretion to
[2:25:28] to basically deviate. So, this is, this is indicative of what the, again, the language of the statute would say and it's just adding that on to be consistent.
[2:25:42] I think that the other thing that I, that, I mean, I can tell you at least from a, um, a practitioner standpoint.
[2:25:52] Some of the stuff that actually came out of the time period when we were talking in zero tolerance policies.
[2:25:59] We had an occasional situation of a student rings a little attached pocket knife to a keychain that's not intended to do it cause any harm.
[2:26:08] We had some school boards in the state that were moving for expulsions in those situations.
[2:26:11] Clearly give some discretion, not just for administration, I think, on some level, but also for the school board to look at and say,
[2:26:19] Not to come in and say, our hands are tied.
[2:26:21] Policy dictates us to have the South come.
[2:26:24] You might entertain some understanding of that student
[2:26:28] circumstances.
[2:26:30] And that makes sense, of course.
[2:26:32] It says the board has to do it on a case by case basis.
[2:26:37] So what I assume that if a student brought a firearm or whatever,
[2:26:45] I guess, is it, by the way, is this specific
[2:26:48] to an actual firearm, or it also refers to replicas, or any of that, is are they all in scope
[2:26:54] for that federal law?
[2:26:55] I don't know that.
[2:26:56] Yeah, federal law, if I'm recalling correctly, I think the federal law actually dealt with
[2:27:02] the definition of firearm, that was a federal definition that wasn't necessarily going
[2:27:07] to pertain to local eggs.
[2:27:07] I think this school policy, and this is consistent with how MSBAs rolled out in a lot of
[2:27:12] school boards, there's a broader recognition of weapons in general to have a prohibition.
[2:27:18] I get, I mean, my question is, I'm aware of right examples in the past year where a student
[2:27:27] has either brought a firearm, a replica firearm, a toy or something in between.
[2:27:32] But I don't recall having case by case discussions on that at the board level, so I'm trying
[2:27:38] to understand why we have not or if we should be based upon this.
[2:27:44] I think the reality is, in many situations, through our district level, principles that deal
[2:27:53] with discipline issues, oftentimes they're looking to find solutions, they're working
[2:27:57] with parents and kids to provide kind of a reasonable response to a violation of the
[2:28:05] policy.
[2:28:06] So it's not surprising that it wouldn't come forward to the board in a lot of those situations.
[2:28:09] At least that's my understanding of how it's kind of rolled out more recently.
[2:28:14] But if a student brought a weapon, and the law says they shall be shall be expelled,
[2:28:22] which means they must.
[2:28:25] And then we say however the board can modify this on a case by case basis.
[2:28:29] I can't see how that wouldn't always come before the board.
[2:28:34] So, Tim, can I just, okay, so let me just weigh in a little bit.
[2:28:38] We have, and I don't remember the name of the document off the top of my head, but we through
[2:28:44] previous superintendent, they've delegated certain authorities down to the principal level,
[2:28:53] and Jeff, if you can help me remember, there's a lot of remediation or whatever other things
[2:29:01] that go on, but there are certain circumstances that would be elevated to the board.
[2:29:07] We might have just pulled that out and dust that off, and just, because off the top of my head, I don't remember, it's been a while.
[2:29:17] So, Mr. Simon, yeah, if you,
[2:29:23] I might have, I might have wanted to hear yours first, because I might have built it off at that.
[2:29:27] In general, if an expulsion comes to the board, which we, we do not get many of those anymore, because we have an egg.
[2:29:37] What do we call it? The expulsion.
[2:29:42] I forget.
[2:29:43] I can't remember the name, yes.
[2:29:45] So we have consequences.
[2:29:48] Our, our,
[2:29:50] given for many things,
[2:29:51] but it is down to a level,
[2:29:55] principle level.
[2:29:56] I guess probably superintendent level,
[2:29:59] but when we do it.
[2:30:00] We have an expulsion that comes to the board, which we do not have that many anymore. There is flexibility
[2:30:07] for the board to do this. So, we'll now use to have a different process. Many expulsions
[2:30:11] would come to the board. And we did have these discussions about how, you know, like for example,
[2:30:17] I'll remember one. A hunting knife was left into a backpack after a kid went hunting with his
[2:30:27] types of situations may be differently than something being brought to school with intent
[2:30:33] for example.
[2:30:34] So I don't know if that probably doesn't clarify anything.
[2:30:38] Well, and I think we've, oh, go ahead, Casey.
[2:30:41] I just think before we continue debating it, too, it's probably important for us to read the exact words
[2:30:46] that are here in item E that consistent with state law, the school board may modify this
[2:30:52] requirement on a case by case basis. And also the recommendations for expulsion have to be consistent
[2:30:57] with limitations imposed by state and federal special ed and disability laws. So that is likely
[2:31:03] why you haven't seen case by case items coming because we may do that, but we must not
[2:31:09] in all situations. So, Chair Anderson, however, the modification is to the federal requirement
[2:31:18] that a student who brings a weapon to school shall be expelled, and the shell has very specific
[2:31:23] meaning, which means what it says they shall. So then if the school board is going to modify,
[2:31:30] on a case-by-case basis, and we've got the legal mind here, but I feel that what that is saying is
[2:31:38] we have to, that authority can't be delegated, that has to that has to rest right here in the school board.
[2:31:47] Well, I think these are good questions, and obviously we might have to do another legal review
[2:31:54] of that potential, eh?
[2:31:57] Just to circle up on that.
[2:31:59] Yeah, I certainly, we can certainly do that, Chair Anderson.
[2:32:02] I will say, I mean, and I think it's fair point.
[2:32:06] I mean, the policy incorporates what the statutory requirements say, and practice the way
[2:32:12] that it's worked in near every school district in the state,
[2:32:17] has been that there's a fairly broad delegation of authority
[2:32:20] to administration at least in terms of discipline.
[2:32:23] Expectations are set by the board,
[2:32:27] and then within this context,
[2:32:29] at least in this school district, many others,
[2:32:31] then administration will work on those individual circumstances
[2:32:33] necessarily before the issue arises to the board.
[2:32:38] But I think it's, I understand the, the remarks of director Adat.
[2:32:46] Thank you.
[2:32:49] Hang on, he's, Matt, do you still have more questions?
[2:32:51] I just, my last question relates to all of the change we made in the complaint procedure,
[2:32:56] and I want to make sure I understand it because we've introduced to me some new terms.
[2:33:00] there are titles, the print, the, let's see here.
[2:33:07] The principal elementary student conduct?
[2:33:10] I think it should be of, so that is a,
[2:33:13] first of all that is a position, right?
[2:33:15] We have a principle of elementary student conduct,
[2:33:18] and we have a principal of secondary student conduct, is that, right?
[2:33:27] And we struck some language related to the Compass program,
[2:33:30] So I'm assuming that we're talking about the principle of that program, is that right?
[2:33:36] That's correct.
[2:33:40] So is this the portion of our process that you were referring to previously about this
[2:33:47] delegation, is that the effect of this, is this describing that specific thing where we
[2:33:55] delegated authority for that person to rather than, I guess, recommend a student for
[2:34:03] exposed and to come up with some alternative. Is that what this is?
[2:34:08] You know, I, not, no, it's not. It's actually pertaining to a new requirement that
[2:34:15] on its way to the statute that said that we needed to have a complaint process for
[2:34:20] And basically individuals could be a student who's maybe alleged person to have engaged in the misconduct, it could be the student or their family who thinks that the consequence wasn't sufficient.
[2:34:36] It could include a staff member.
[2:34:39] So this basically says, you know, school district doubt shall have a complaint process for that type of information.
[2:34:44] So this is all about the complaint.
[2:34:46] We've included that because that's specific to how we're operating.
[2:34:49] that's correct and I will tell you that this is one area where the statute didn't
[2:34:54] say exactly what that complaint process needed to look like, so we develop this one.
[2:35:00] After looking at other policies and MSB policy. Thank you.
[2:35:05] Thank you, Chanderson. Going back to the previous discussion on letter E, the implementation of the policy on weapons.
[2:35:16] And then item 1, the two sentences seeming to possibly contradict each other. If I was understanding Mr. Audette's questions correctly.
[2:35:25] I am curious or wondering if the intent of the second sentence, which says the school board
[2:35:34] may modify this requirement, if the this is referring to our implementation of the policy on
[2:35:42] weapons and not that the this is specific to the federal gun free schools act of 1994.
[2:35:50] And the reason I'm curious on that is thinking back to previous cases, either Minnesota or statewide and I'm thinking of the one that involved a student who had a box cutter from work in the car, I mean that was in all of the news.
[2:36:05] So that that would be a case by case recommendation that a board might consider, but that's related to weapons, not necessarily related to the gun free schools act.
[2:36:17] So, I don't know if part of my interpretation of this is making it more complicated or less,
[2:36:24] but it seems like that second sentence of E1 is related to our policy on weapons, not necessarily
[2:36:32] specifically related to the federal law which is cited in the sentence above it.
[2:36:42] Yeah,
[2:36:45] that might be a fair read quite honestly as I'm sitting here right now, and I'm thinking back to what the statute says the statute.
[2:36:52] Again, that uses the word shell as referencing specifically to a firearm, so this might be consistent with what you're saying here.
[2:37:02] Although, as again, I'm sitting night on the statute in front of me, I believe that that's the very same statute that does a forward and exception.
[2:37:14] So there's kind of a pullback, it's like you shall do this, but you know, and have to do this.
[2:37:19] It's a very odd way of the way the statute's written quite honestly.
[2:37:23] Okay.
[2:37:25] Well, I think the conversation, I think it's a good one to take a quick look at that.
[2:37:31] And hopefully we have a nod, you know, from the rest of the board of the council.
[2:37:35] Mr. Simon has another comment?
[2:37:37] Not another. This is my first.
[2:37:39] Okay, I'm going to comment on others, this is all right, but Mr. Simon has a comment.
[2:37:43] Thank you very much, Chair Anderson.
[2:37:47] So I guess just coming on what we talked about a little bit, when we, on the first one
[2:37:55] where it took the line of parents out and met you asked about, you know, I don't know how
[2:38:02] this discussion goes or how these, how this comes about.
[2:38:05] So much of this is modified by legal counsel and recommendations, right?
[2:38:13] So they'll cross out things to clarify, to update state statute, and then the policy committee just reviews that and we have questions if we have concerns, things like that.
[2:38:24] That, that one I just want to make sure that people understand and that the community understands there is there is no intent to take the parents out of the equation for
[2:38:35] education, specifically on our very first policy that we have, which is our mission of our school district 104.
[2:38:42] It acknowledges parents role as their children's primary educator and partnering with them to increase student achievement.
[2:38:48] So there's no intent upon that whatsoever out of a 506 district student policy.
[2:38:53] I do think that on the weapons, I think that's a really fair legal question to go back and look at if that's contradicting.
[2:39:01] And specifically, the procedures that we're using for expulsion right now are expulsion exclusion,
[2:39:09] I think we call it, if that is following what we, that following legal, right?
[2:39:16] If it's in the school board's hands, are we doing that correctly specifically for weapons and
[2:39:21] maybe for other things?
[2:39:21] I think that's a very fair legal question that I would like to hear about also.
[2:39:26] I did have one question that we did not go over, that Tim, you and I actually talked about
[2:39:34] offline out of the committee, but that is on page 5, 12, talking about student attire and
[2:39:43] the change that we made there.
[2:39:46] And the question that I still have, and it would have been with our current policy, or with
[2:39:52] wording of this new policy, or maybe any recommendation we would make is, who's judgment?
[2:40:00] Do we use or what judgment do we use to find out if a shirt or clothing article is vulgar, obscene, has what words are injectable to people and who, like, what do we use to determine that?
[2:40:18] Because, you know, in the national media, you hear a lot of things about students' expel for this or that or what have you whether that's true or not.
[2:40:26] And I just want to make sure that we're not too broad here, and that at least our practice
[2:40:30] is using something consistent and rational and logical coming to those decisions.
[2:40:36] So, you've not talked about this, you gave me a great answer before, so I just wanted
[2:40:39] you to be able to give that to the public also.
[2:40:42] Sure.
[2:40:42] And some of the interest in some of the conversation that came up in the policy committee
[2:40:47] was around potentially addressing hate groups that might operate.
[2:40:52] And so, when we were looking at that issue and having some conversation, we went back and looked at MSBA policy.
[2:41:00] And that is where this language comes from specifically.
[2:41:04] What I will say to your specific question, director Simon's is the, our Simon.
[2:41:12] I'm sorry, actually. I am changing school boards and that was an honest mistake.
[2:41:19] Nevertheless, is really, it's always going to be context specific, right?
[2:41:24] So there are, there are details in which we're going to want to recognize that certain symbols
[2:41:31] on someone's shirt could be worn and utilized in a manner which is intended to actually,
[2:41:41] Almost in terms of almost pure speech, it really communicates a message, if I use the example
[2:41:49] of if if if if if if a sure said KKK on it and represented clearly a message which has
[2:41:55] a long tortured history related to not just discrimination but dehumanization, it would
[2:42:04] be something where it's pretty easy sign. Are there subtle in between's, I would say that
[2:42:09] probably are going to be some subtle in between.
[2:42:10] It may be a student just unknowingly has a shirt that communicates a particular message
[2:42:17] and no one's offended by it.
[2:42:19] So the idea is not to go around and to identify students wearing articles of clothing
[2:42:24] which the principal might deem potentially offensive.
[2:42:27] I think there's going to be some consideration about whether or not there's a context
[2:42:33] here where someone is being directly impacted by that message.
[2:42:39] Mister Simon I think one other detail you gave me and tell me if this is correct that I didn't get all the details
[2:42:46] I'm sorry. No, that's okay. Is that
[2:42:49] Case loss sets a lot of this to a right so case law in the past that have already
[2:42:54] Have already gone through this and said that this specific symbol or this specific thing through case law that's already gone through minute Minnesota could set some of this.
[2:43:05] So, is that true?
[2:43:06] It is true.
[2:43:07] I mean, I think maybe the perfect example can be Confederate flag cases.
[2:43:11] So there have been a number of cases where the courts have looked at that type of message
[2:43:16] and certainly understood that that message conveys something unique and historical and prohibitions
[2:43:27] against that type of shirt would certainly be something that the school would have an interest
[2:43:33] in.
[2:43:34] School administration would have an interest in.
[2:43:35] So yes, the answer is there are some, there's some case law and then there's always going to be some context.
[2:43:44] Okay. Any other questions, comments?
[2:43:49] Otherwise, we have a little bit more work to do on these, right?
[2:43:52] Yep. Okay. Thank you.
[2:43:54] All right. Thank you.
[2:43:59] We are to almost our last agenda item, board correspondence and communication.
[2:44:05] Members, this is your opportunity to share happenings in your community, report and committee assignments or other items of interest.
[2:44:13] Mr. Shane, thank you, Chair Anderson, just a quick note about the Baptist School and the
[2:44:20] start of the school year.
[2:44:21] I think what I specifically wanted to point out is that I know a lot of our parent teacher
[2:44:26] organizations are super active this time of year, and especially with some of the boundary
[2:44:30] changes that we have had.
[2:44:32] I've seen a ton of reach out and pulling in of the new school communities, and I just
[2:44:37] really wanted to commend that and say thank you to those parent groups for doing that.
[2:44:41] I think it's really making a huge difference to a really good and welcoming start to the
[2:44:46] school year.
[2:44:47] And also for our community members, if you've got neighborhood kids or you've got nieces
[2:44:51] nephews, your own kids, grandchildren, anybody really that you're connected to, there
[2:44:55] are a ton of community events in the fall at all of our local schools.
[2:45:00] Some of them are fundraisers, some of them are just to get to know the school community. I'd really encourage you to reach out and ask and just participate so that you can see and share in that joy and that sense of belonging that everyone has in our school communities.
[2:45:14] Great. Anybody else?
[2:45:18] Thank you, Chair Anderson.
[2:45:21] I was invited last Friday to link an elementary by Principal Zimmerman
[2:45:27] to, I didn't take part in the fun run.
[2:45:30] I'm not really running these days, but to be there for it
[2:45:34] and also to see the homecoming parade, which I had never seen before
[2:45:37] I didn't realize that parts of the band and some of the students
[2:45:40] actually went through the hallways.
[2:45:42] The best part of it was seeing them make two loops
[2:45:45] through Lincoln and trying to decide who was having more fun.
[2:45:49] The high schoolers who were going through
[2:45:51] are the elementary students who were getting to watch it,
[2:45:54] but it was fun all the way around.
[2:45:56] So I really appreciate it being able to do that.
[2:46:00] Mr. Simon.
[2:46:02] So I heard from at least a few that the new model for high school,
[2:46:09] ninth grade orientation was very, very positive
[2:46:13] and helped schools set the atmosphere and the really set the expectations for the new students
[2:46:21] coming in there. So I just wanted to give that feedback that I've heard that a lot and from
[2:46:26] teachers and from principals and that's something that was really well received and they believe
[2:46:32] helps the culture of their schools. Nice. Nice. Mr. Oda. Oh, thanks.
[2:46:39] I a piggyback on that a little bit.
[2:46:41] I heard similar.
[2:46:43] I also heard that possibly doing that in middle school for sixth grade would be beneficial
[2:46:51] to students as well and we haven't looked at it that I recall since I've been here, but
[2:46:56] maybe it has been.
[2:46:56] I suppose it has in the past, but for similar reasons I thought that might make sense.
[2:47:03] And then a different issue that I was wondering about, because I heard from quite a few people
[2:47:08] about the cell phone policy changes that we've made, and actually, you know, I would say
[2:47:16] a lot of very positive responses to what we did, and I am just curious how you can maybe
[2:47:23] update us at a different time about how that's going, you know, how the implementation
[2:47:26] in schools, you know, what's it really look like on the ground, you know, how did it look
[2:47:30] like the first week versus the second week and the third week where, you know, a favorite
[2:47:36] The phones are students favorite device, right?
[2:47:40] So day one, probably easy to get it out of their hands,
[2:47:43] but curious how it's going on day 15 and 20.
[2:47:47] And maybe you could do something with that.
[2:47:49] Because I know a lot of people, we're interested in that.
[2:47:53] OK, interesting.
[2:47:56] Anybody else?
[2:47:58] OK, well, we do not have a close session tonight.
[2:48:02] So I would entertain motion to adjourn.
[2:48:05] Thank you, Ms. Hase.
[2:48:06] This is our second.
[2:48:07] Thank you.
[2:48:08] Ms. Here's my cardinal.
[2:48:09] Any discussion?
[2:48:10] Hearing none.
[2:48:11] All those in favor signify by saying aye.
[2:48:14] Aye.
[2:48:14] Any opposed say no?
[2:48:16] The six in favor and zero opposed.
[2:48:18] We are adjourned.