[1:35] Good afternoon everyone. Good to see
you.
[1:39] Welcome to the board of trustees for the
WA County School District regular
[1:42] meeting for October 25th, 2026. It is at
2:01 p.m. and we will go ahead and call
[1:47] the meeting to order.
Before we before I ask for roll call, I
[1:54] I do want to um point out that due to
the continuing impact of the Hawkfire,
[1:59] the superintendent and I have determined
that we will only hear items that are
[2:03] timesensitive today, we will only uh we
will only be considering items in the
[2:08] consent agenda and item 3.04 04
regarding consideration of the board
[2:14] providing input to Nevada State Charter
School Authority on the Doral Academy,
[2:17] Northern Nevada's request for amendment
of his charter contract. All other items
[2:21] will be moved to a future meeting for
those that have submitted public
[2:24] comment. Um uh the board clerk has
indicated to me, JJ's indicated to me
[2:29] that we will make sure that those public
comments uh get forwarded to the um to
[2:35] the next meeting when those items uh
that those comments pertain to uh will
[2:40] be will be made public. Uh having that
having said that item 1.02 is a roll
[2:46] call. So I'll ask uh the cler cler call
to provide the role please.
[2:53] Um, I am here. President Mayberry
>> here.
[2:57] » Dr. Nichollet.
>> Good afternoon.
[3:01] » Trusty Phoenix
>> present.
[3:03] » Trusty Smith
>> here.
[3:05] » Sorry. Trusty Weslake
>> here.
[3:08] » My voice cracked there. Vice President
Woodley
[3:12] » here.
>> And we have our trusty representative
[3:15] Kaye with us today. Welcome, Kaylee.
We're excited to have you. We have a
[3:19] quorum.
>> Thank you, Madam Clerk. We'll move to
[3:22] item 1.03, the pledge of allegiance. I
see a very distinguished Neadan in the
[3:26] audience, former Assemblyman uh Pat
Hickey. Mr. Hickey, would you lead us in
[3:30] the pledge of allegiance, please?
[3:39] » I aliance to the flag of the United
States of America and to the stands. One
[3:47] nation under God, indivisible, with
liberty and justice for all.
[3:57] » Thank you, sir.
[4:02] And at this time, item 1.04 is our land
acknowledgement. Like to have uh Trustee
[4:06] Smith give us the pleasure of reading
that, please.
[4:10] » Thank you, Mr. President. We acknowledge
that the Wo County School District
[4:15] schools and communities are situated in
the traditional homelands of the three
[4:19] major tribes of the Great Basin Native
American peoples, including the northern
[4:25] Pyute, Wo, and Shosonyi tribes. We honor
their ancestors, past and present, and
[4:31] recognize these lands as a continued
gathering place for communities. We
[4:35] express our respect and gratitude for
the opportunity to live, work, and learn
[4:40] here in Nevada.
Thank you, Trusty Smith.
[4:45] We will hold off on item 1.05 till a
future meeting. Moving on to consent
[4:49] agenda items two.
I haven't seen any um indication that
[4:56] any uh trustees want to pull any agenda
items. So, I'm happy to entertain an
[5:00] item uh to approve the agenda items from
2.02
[5:05] through 2.16.
[5:08] Yeah, I do need that, don't I? Okay. Do
we have a public comment? Okay. Uh my
[5:12] apologies. We'll go to public comment
first.
[5:16] » John Epalo for consent agenda items
2.06,
[5:20] 2.09, 2.11, and 2.14.
[5:27] » John Epileo. You can find 1500 of us on
Facebook at protect Nevada children. Uh
[5:33] thank you to the attorney. When the old
attorney was here, we asked three or
[5:37] four times, "How much money does the
district spend on software and student
[5:41] devices?" We never got an answer. But
now with the new attorney, we finally
[5:46] have an answer. Thank you.
A few years ago, one of your teachers
[5:50] told me, quote, "If it wasn't for all
these screens, we wouldn't need so many
[5:55] school psychologists." End quote. I
don't think it's quite that simple, but
[5:59] she had a very good point. Today you
will approve that the district spend a
[6:04] bunch of additional money for
psychological services for students.
[6:09] Spending more money on screens,
software, and psychologists is not the
[6:13] answer. As I said three years ago when I
was the only one who spoke out against
[6:18] spending 6.5 million for I Ready, quote,
"Is it too late to go back to educating
[6:25] kids?"
Maybe five or six years ago, after Katie
[6:29] Simon Holland was no longer this board's
president, she told me something like,
[6:34] quote, "Everything you've been saying is
true." End quote. There was no
[6:39] substantial response when I asked her,
"What are we going to do about it now?"
[6:44] What bothers me the most is how many
students have been harmed because the
[6:49] district has ignored Protect Nevada
Children and gave student devices and
[6:54] told them, "These are for your
education.
[6:57] It's all been documented. The
inappropriate use of student devices,
[7:01] the addiction to social media, at least
one suicide, and a lot of WCSD students
[7:08] who have been emotionally harmed because
of screens.
[7:11] In my opinion, instead of giving kids
devices and more psychologists, you
[7:16] should go back to educating students and
use Parent University to educate parents
[7:22] on the dangers of social media and
screens.
[7:26] One of the first adapters of screens for
education was the Scandinavian
[7:30] countries.
Now, Sweden has completely eliminated
[7:34] screens through 8th grade, and the other
Scandinavian countries will soon follow.
[7:39] Instead, Sweden has invested in, imagine
this, books, papers, and pencils. The LA
[7:46] Unified School District has severely
limited the amount of screen times for
[7:50] young children. This starting this year,
preK through first grade, no screens.
[7:56] Second and third grade, max 20 minutes
per day. Fourth and fifth grade, max 30
[8:02] minutes per day. Middle school, around
an hour a day, please. Less screens,
[8:09] more books, papers, and pencils.
Pencils. You can find us on Facebook at
[8:14] Protect Nevada Children.
[8:21] That's all I have.
>> Okay. Thank you, JJ. We'll close public
[8:23] comment on the consent agenda.
There's no uh items to be pulled. I'm
[8:29] looking for a motion to approve items
2.02
[8:35] through 2.16.
Uh thank you, uh Mr. President. I move
[8:40] that the board of trustees approve
consent agenda items 2.02 through 2.16.
[8:46] And I'll second.
>> I have a motion on the floor by Trust
[8:50] Vice President Woodley, a second by
Trustee Phoenix to approve the consent
[8:54] items 2.02 through 2.16. There's no
further discussion. All in favor, please
[9:00] signify by saying I.
>> I.
[9:02] » I. I.
>> Those opposed.
[9:05] Motion carries unanimously.
>> Can I Can I just mention?
[9:07] » Yeah, sure. Go ahead, please. Um, I I
just want to mention uh a couple of of
[9:12] our colleagues asked some specific
questions about the playground equipment
[9:16] and I I hope that everyone who's
watching will take a look at those
[9:19] attachments because that is something
that we worked really really hard. Um, I
[9:24] know Trusty Smith brought that item to
this conversation and I think it's
[9:29] really important that we we share that
this this item just approved several new
[9:34] playground equipment and we're having a
lot of conversations about outdoor
[9:38] learning and more playtime for kids and
we are we are fulfilling that promise
[9:42] with this item and um there's some
really I wanted to go play on those
[9:45] playgrounds. They looked amazing and
wonderful. So, I'm so excited for those
[9:49] schools and I just wanted to um to share
that we are we are fulfilling the
[9:54] promises uh of that. So, I think it's
really important that we bring it to
[9:59] light. Thank you.
Okay. Items uh three items for
[10:05] presentation, discussion, information,
and our action item. We are going to
[10:10] pull items 3.01,
3.02, 3.03, 03 and those will be heard
[10:17] at a later meeting. Um
we will go on item 3.4.
[10:25] Uh just some housekeeping items here
before we begin. I do want to ask my
[10:30] fellow trustees just to jot down any
questions. It's a lengthy presentation.
[10:34] Make sure you indicate the slide numbers
if you want to reference or revisit all
[10:37] of the presentation. We'll hold all
questions until staff has uh completed
[10:41] their full presentation. This allows our
staff to present the information in its
[10:46] entirety. Ensures our community members
are watching can hear the full context
[10:49] and respect the time and preparation of
our presenters. In many cases, you may
[10:53] find that your questions are addressed
as the pres presentation progresses.
[10:57] We'll then open it up for questions and
discussion at the end. Um
[11:04] item
[11:10] » do you want to go ahead and make your
disclosure now? Yeah.
[11:12] » Yeah. Go ahead, please.
>> Thank you. Um, before we begin, I would
[11:16] like to um make a disclosure that I will
not be participating in this
[11:20] conversation. Uh, ethically, I do not
feel that it is appropriate for me to
[11:25] participate in this conversation. I have
a close personal relationship with
[11:29] several teachers and administrators at
the Dural Academy. My children also
[11:35] attended that school at one point in
time and uh I work professionally with
[11:40] many people at that school. Uh and I
just I feel like it would not be ethical
[11:45] for me to participate in this
conversation. So I will be asking the
[11:48] president to excuse me from the meeting.
Thank you.
[11:52] » Thank you clerk call. Appreciate that.
[snorts]
[11:56] » Uh item 3.04 04
is a presentation, discussion, and
[12:02] possible action regarding the Wo County
School District Board of Trustees wishes
[12:06] to provide input
to the Nevada State Public Charter
[12:10] School Authority concerning a request
from Dural Academy of Northern Nevada to
[12:13] amend his charter contract.
This item is before the board because on
[12:19] August 6, 2026, the state public charter
school authority or SPCSA formally
[12:25] notified the superintendent and myself
as board president that Doral Academy of
[12:30] Northern Nevada has requested several
significant amendments to its existing
[12:33] charter contract. According to the
application submitted to SPCSA, Dor
[12:39] Academy seeking approval to establish a
second campus on land owned by the
[12:44] University of Nevada Reno, construct a
new school facility, expand from its
[12:49] current K through8 authorization to
serve students in grades K through 12,
[12:54] and increases total enrollments by
approximately
[12:57] 1570 to 1755 students, resulting in a
combined enrollment of roughly 2,500
[13:03] students across his campuses. By the
fifth year of its operation, the SPCA
[13:08] has advised that it is expected to
consider the amendment request at its
[13:12] October 9th, 2026 meeting and has
invited Wo County School District to
[13:17] provide comments or input regarding the
proposal. The deadline for district
[13:21] comments is September 8th, 2026. Hence,
we're meeting today on this uh item uh
[13:28] solely. The evening's discussion, I do
want to be clear, is not a decision on
[13:32] the approval or denial of the charter
amendment. That authority rests
[13:37] exclusively with the state public
charter school authority. Rather, this
[13:40] agenda item provides an opportunity for
board of trustees to review the
[13:44] proposal, discuss its potential
implications, and determine whether the
[13:48] board wishes to submit comments or
feedback to the SPCSA for consideration
[13:53] as part of its review process. As we
proceed, I encourage all my colleagues
[13:57] to focus on their comments on matters
relevant to the proposed amendment,
[14:01] including potential impacts on students,
families, educational programs,
[14:04] facilities, enrollment, transportation,
and any other considerations the board
[14:08] believes to be commun needs to should be
communicated to the SPCSA.
[14:14] At this time, I do want to ask uh our
staff to provide an overview of the
[14:18] amendment requests and any related
information before opening the item for
[14:22] trustee discussion and possible action.
With us is Adam Cersei, our chief
[14:26] operating officer, Chris Hackbush, chief
academic officer, Jen Vantra is our
[14:30] chief academic officer, and Cameron
Dyer, our general counsel.
[14:36] Vice President Woodley.
>> Uh thank you. I just want uh first I'd
[14:40] like to uh uh express gratitude to you,
President. I know we discussed this
[14:44] initially back in June when uh the same
topic was on the agenda for the board of
[14:48] regents and since then I know we've had
other board members that requested this
[14:52] item as well to come before uh on the
agenda. So, thank you for that. But I
[14:56] just wanted to uh start to set the
record straight because I received many
[14:59] phone calls from representatives in the
community and some community leaders.
[15:04] And I just want to state for the record
that we have this today because we have
[15:09] a fiduciary responsibility to our
constituents, to our voters, to our
[15:15] students, to their families, to the
neighborhoods, and the taxpayers that
[15:20] approved WC1 and approved everything
that we do. Our intent is not to vilify
[15:27] any entity or to vilify any individuals
that are doing their jobs. That is not
[15:32] our intent. And I want to make it clear,
nor do we engage in any type of what I
[15:38] was asked um from several individuals
was if we were threatening entities or
[15:43] businesses because if they were to do
business with any other entity that it
[15:48] would we would hold it against them and
I want that to be known that we do not
[15:53] engage in that type of of interaction.
We're here as a community and we want to
[15:57] do what's best for our kids and our
students and that's why we're having
[16:01] this item on the agenda today. Thank
you.
[16:04] » All right. Thank you, Vice President
Woodley. We'll go ahead and uh have
[16:07] staff present. Thank you for coming.
>> Of course, I'll lead it off. Good
[16:11] afternoon. Uh thank you, President
Mayberry, Superintendent McMaster, Board
[16:15] of Trustees. I'll introduce myself and
let my colleagues introduce themselves.
[16:20] I'll be joined um as the slide suggests
by others. Uh good afternoon. My name is
[16:25] Adam Cersei. For the record, I'm the
chief operating officer. And honestly,
[16:30] uh, President Mayberry, your intro did a
good job of summarizing really what's on
[16:34] the agenda here today. Um, the, uh,
charter school expansion request, um, I
[16:42] should note is included as a part of
this item's uh, attachment A, the full,
[16:49] um, proposed amendment. And that's
really uh what what is summarized here
[16:53] on this slide and what we're here to to
summarize throughout this presentation.
[16:57] So just sort of a vicinity exhibit to
help everyone geographically orient
[17:02] themselves to the proposed location as
well as some of the most immediately
[17:07] present school district facilities. The
overview of our presentation today is a
[17:13] a summary of facts as we understand
them. really a summary of the
[17:18] information that was presented to us for
consideration. Um, you know, a thorough
[17:24] over 150 page document with lots of
information we're going to try to go
[17:29] through and distill into a handful of
slides as well as some related facts
[17:35] from the school district. As you uh
alluded to, Vice President Woodley, we
[17:40] are going to stop short of any
conjecture or conclusions, rather a
[17:44] summary and illustration of the proposal
and uh with the intent of facilitation
[17:49] of a board a public board conversation
on this proposal. So, starting off, this
[17:55] is kind of the table of contents or the
order that we're going to uh try to
[17:59] present this to the board in. And
starting off, we're going to go through
[18:03] basically a process overview of how this
amendment may proceed. So, I'll
[18:09] transition over to uh Senior Deputy
Council Cameron for the next several
[18:14] slides. Thank you.
>> All right. Good afternoon, President
[18:19] Mayberry and members of the board. My
name is Cameron Dyer, senior general
[18:22] counsel with the district. Uh thanks for
allowing me to speak this afternoon.
[18:26] This first slide uh starts off with kind
of the operative law behind the request
[18:31] for amendment that we um were notified
from Durell Academy. I might refer to
[18:36] Dural Academy as DANDN for keeping it
short. SPCSA I think we already have
[18:41] that one covered. Um the first uh piece
on this slide is requesting an amendment
[18:46] under the relevant uh statutory
framework here NRS 388276
[18:52] and that just says a govern a chart a
charter school's governing body must
[18:56] submit a written request for an
amendment to its sponsor. I think it's
[18:59] fairly straightforward that they have to
go to their sponsor. In this case the
[19:02] sponsor is SPCSA and the uh charter
school is uh Dural Academy Dan. Um, next
[19:07] we have the regulatory structure, uh,
NAC 388A.400.
[19:13] This kind of goes into more of the
details. The statute kind of is broad.
[19:16] The regulatory regulations are a little
more specific. In this case, it talks
[19:20] about requiring the a written notice of
intent to submit the request for
[19:24] amendment. That needs to be filed not
less than 45 days prior to submitting
[19:29] the request for the amendment. And then
the SPCSA in this case may upon request
[19:33] and for good cause shown accept a
request to amend the charter school
[19:37] contract at any time. Can we do the next
slide? Thank you. Um we're going to back
[19:42] up a little bit to kind of another
statutory structure that looks at
[19:45] amendments. This one calls out five
specific categories for amendments. Um
[19:50] you can see them on the slide. One's
expansion of instruction, one is
[19:53] increasing enrollment, one is reducing
total enrollment, another one's
[19:57] acquiring an additional facility, and
the final one's consolidating the
[20:01] operations of multiple charter schools
into a single location.
[20:05] Um, in this case, the uh proposed
request for amendment hits on three of
[20:10] these, which is the expanding
instruction, increasing total
[20:14] enrollment, and acquiring an additional
facility to expand enrollment. Um D and
[20:19] E are a slightly different color here
because under those two pieces the
[20:22] sponsor must deny the request if the
school that's asking for the amendment
[20:28] doesn't mean it's performance framework
um which is includes academics finances
[20:32] or organizational structure
um under a separate statute or the
[20:37] governing body lacks a comprehensive and
feasible plan to operate the additional
[20:41] facilities.
Uh the performance framework as
[20:45] indicated is here. You have three pieces
academics, finances, and organizational
[20:49] structure. Um my co-sponsor or
co-presenters today will go over those
[20:54] in more detail.
[20:57] So there's an additional process
required pursuant to the NAC 38A400
[21:02] I hit on earlier. Um in this case, I'm
going to focus on good cause. Um Dan
[21:09] submitted its RFA for good cause based
on anticipated opening dates in 2028
[21:15] landly's negotiations with UNR and uh
the board of regents in a pending due
[21:20] diligence period. That's what they
provided in their notice in their
[21:22] application. What they haven't shown is
there's any specific need to actually
[21:27] open a school in 2028. They haven't
shown that there's any pending
[21:31] agreements or contracts that would
result in this hardship or harm if the
[21:35] amendment is not granted. now in the
short term or whatever time frame um
[21:41] applicable and they haven't shown that
time's of the essence given that Dan's
[21:45] been working on this amendment for over
18 months it seems like there's not
[21:49] really a rush it feels a little hurried
that's me maybe prognosticating a little
[21:53] bit but next page please
um an extra layer for our SPCSA
[21:59] sponsored schools is that 45day notice
of intent I hit on earlier
[22:04] um as I noted they are required to
submit 45 days prior to the amendment
[22:10] request itself goes to the sponsor in
this case SPCSA.
[22:14] Um
we have included into the record a
[22:18] supplement um I think is updated already
indicating an exchange that we had with
[22:23] the SPCSA trying to get the information
around this 45day notice of intent. Uh
[22:29] when we asked for that we did not
receive copies. We did not receive any
[22:32] indication that that intent had been
filed prior to us receiving this um RFA
[22:38] that was filed in mid June. Um once the
meeting materials went up on this for
[22:44] today's uh uh board trustees meeting we
were informed informally that that
[22:48] notice had come in. So we are um unaware
of what that notice looks like. We have
[22:52] not received a copy but there is some
documentation that you can take a look
[22:55] at that's posted as part of the uh
meeting materials relating to that.
[23:00] [clears throat]
Um the second piece after that 45day
[23:03] notice of intent is there is a required
hearing. Uh this one specifically
[23:08] applies to the SPCSA for their sponsored
schools and the statute uh NRS 388279
[23:15] requires the SPCSA to hold a public
hearing regarding an amendment.
[23:21] Based on what we've seen um especially
with the the lacking 45 notice that we
[23:26] were unaware of until potentially
recently and
[23:30] possibly insufficient showing of good
cause. Um it doesn't appear that we can
[23:37] hold a hear or the SPCsa can hold a
hearing in line with our own regulations
[23:41] and laws at this point. Um however, it's
been put on the agenda for the SPCSA. As
[23:48] far as we know, this was in the notice
and the attached materials for October
[23:51] 9th, 2026.
[23:55] Um NAC 388A400
has a lot of subp parts. We're going to
[24:00] skip to number nine because this one
looks at um multiacampus uh facilities.
[24:05] Currently Dan operates a single campus
and this request for amendment looks to
[24:11] expand it to a multiacampus situation.
Um this regulation imposes five specific
[24:16] conditions on exactly this kind of
conversion.
[24:19] And if those conditions aren't met, the
SPCSA cannot approve the amendment.
[24:24] Those requirements are listed below.
One, two, three, four, five, an academic
[24:28] leader, metriculation policy, an
application lottery pro process for each
[24:33] of the campuses are separate name, grade
levels, and location of the new campus,
[24:37] and then authority to uh reconstitute,
restart, or close each campus
[24:41] separately.
On the next slide, you'll see that four
[24:47] of those five requirements were not
addressed in the amendment. Um, it
[24:51] doesn't describe who the distinct
academic leader is with at each campus.
[24:56] There's no discussion about the
metriculation policy. It says it will be
[25:00] determined later. There's no per campus
lottery that's been set up. It just uh
[25:05] suggests that the um lottery at the new
campus would mirror the one at the
[25:09] existing campus. And then there's no um
reconstitution, restart or closure of
[25:14] each campus plan. Uh the RFA does cover
name, grade levels and location of each
[25:19] campus.
[25:23] So putting it together, we have a road
map um left to right. Uh the whole
[25:27] process starts with the public meeting.
And this is this is kind of simplifying
[25:30] the kind of statuto regulatory structure
into something that's a little more
[25:34] digestible, if you will. So it starts on
the left. There's a public meeting to
[25:38] talk about whether the request should be
submitted. Then a notice of intent goes
[25:43] to the uh sponsor. Then the submit the
request is submitted and the district
[25:48] would be notified. That's us and we were
notified. That's why we're here today.
[25:52] We got that notice from the SPCSA of the
proposed RFA.
[25:56] Uh the sponsor would review the SPCSA
will review the uh request for amendment
[26:01] and then they can choose to approve or
deny it at in this case a required
[26:04] public hearing.
[26:08] And the last two slides look at the
timeline of where things stand. Um, this
[26:12] first one is completed to date. We are
at the in between the two bottom dots
[26:17] there between August 6th and September
8th. Uh, we have the notice and we have
[26:22] the opportunity to submit um informal
uh input to the SPCSA before they take
[26:29] this to a hearing. The next page uh
shows the upcoming steps. These are
[26:34] based on what's in the uh request for
amendment.
[26:38] There's obviously room for these things
to move, but this is kind of where the
[26:41] prognosis stands right now um from a
process standpoint. And with that, um I
[26:47] will wrap up my portion and pass it back
to Mr. Cersi.
[26:53] » Thank you, Cameron. Again, Adam Cersi
for the record. I'm going to take you
[26:57] through the next several slides. Um this
bullet point is roughly a table of
[27:01] contents. um reflecting how the
application is structured um and roughly
[27:07] how we're going to go through its
summary. This is based on the link on
[27:12] this slide um the uh template provided
by the SPCSA for the purposes of as it
[27:18] says there requesting an amendment for
charter school applications and whatnot.
[27:22] So you can see the different basically
chapters of the full amendment request
[27:28] that uh we're going to break down now.
So starting off really a statement of
[27:32] request as somewhat Cameron touched on
many of these points. These four
[27:38] elements primary elements are listed and
detailed and described in the amendment
[27:43] request um associated with you know
their their reasoning the addition of a
[27:47] new campus the expansion of their
enrollment and then both the affiliation
[27:52] agreement and the land lease associated
with the university.
[27:56] Next several chapters go into more
detail regarding the statement of need,
[28:01] a statement of purpose and proposed
rationale. And while there are a lot of
[28:05] paragraphs and narrative around these
points, the two primary uh pillars of
[28:12] their statement of need, purpose, and
rationale is a sustained unmet
[28:16] enrollment demand and a need for more
innovative and career connected learning
[28:22] opportunities. These are the exact
language that are used repeatedly in the
[28:27] application. Um, as I said, lengthy
explanations and narrative around these
[28:32] points. Uh, we're unable to provide any
analysis. There's no data or sources
[28:38] provided in the application regarding
these two primary points.
[28:43] But just breaking it down now into the
proposed scope and timeline somewhat as
[28:48] has been described. Um the timeline is
such that uh they propose to cause the
[28:55] school to open the 2829 school year. So
breaking that down, they talk in some
[29:00] depth about how due diligence and
preliminary design would ensue
[29:04] throughout the balance of 2026
and that the entirety of the design and
[29:10] permitting would uh be completed
throughout 2027
[29:16] uh culminating in the beginning of
construction. the start of construction
[29:21] in the fall of 2027
um August 2027 with again a completion
[29:27] stated in the application of July 2028
ahead of an August 2028 opening and
[29:33] we'll we'll come back in more detail and
talk about that scope approximately 25
[29:38] acres of land and a new building of
approximately 100,000 square ft. Um
[29:45] there is some lengthy narrative in the
application around various agencies that
[29:50] would uh need to be satisfied and
provide approvals for such a
[29:54] construction project. Many of those
agencies are noted on this page. Um
[29:59] there are a number of agencies that may
likely also require some degree of
[30:05] consultation or approvals that are also
noted on this slide uh that were not
[30:12] mentioned in the application. But uh as
someone who has led now every project is
[30:19] different that comes with a variety of
twists and turns. But as someone who has
[30:24] led many projects of a similar nature
through these types of uh processes,
[30:31] uh it is fair to state that this is a
highly aggressive timeline and accepts a
[30:36] great deal of risk. That alone is
certainly not a failure, uh but
[30:41] something that is to be noted.
The next section of the application, as
[30:47] outlined by the SPCSA, deals with
stakeholder notice and stakeholder
[30:52] impact. Um, and so the application does
a good job of detailing various
[30:57] stakeholders, how and when they were
communicated with, and to some degree
[31:02] what level of impact they might expect
or are anticipated uh from the
[31:07] applicant's perspective. So, of course,
uh, existing students, families, and
[31:11] staff at Dural Academy, um, uh, have
been communicated with in various forms
[31:17] and fashions, including minutes from
their board that were included in the
[31:22] application, uh, dating back into early
2025.
[31:27] Also uh well detailed in the application
is uh engagement and ultimately publicly
[31:34] approved formal agreements between uh
Dural Academy and the University of
[31:40] Nevada and she um as recently as June
2026.
[31:45] Community industry and partners uh is
noted and discussed at some length. Um
[31:51] again uh a lot of nar narrative and then
also a number of letters of support were
[31:58] included in the application from various
local and community industry partners.
[32:03] Um and of course the county school
district is noted as a stakeholder. uh
[32:08] there is one mention in July 2025
regarding a meeting uh with limited
[32:14] detail associated with it and then
within the separate impact portion of
[32:20] the application WCSD is not mentioned.
Um as detailed in the staff report, a
[32:27] simple uh extrapolation of the projected
enrollments
[32:32] um and the associated per pupil revenue
funds um are also detailed on this
[32:38] slide.
[32:42] The next section uh several slides uh
summarize the financial impact and uh
[32:48] projections associated with this
application. So this slide really just
[32:53] goes over the the contents of the
application and some of these major
[32:59] assumptions. Again, we're looking at
enrollments,
[33:03] capital cost, upfront capital costs,
operating expenses, ongoing costs, and
[33:09] the debt financing. So these at the
bottom of this slide um breaks down the
[33:15] projected enrollments into a
year-by-year projection. So obviously
[33:19] they're looking to grow from 800 and
some students in year 1 to570
[33:25] plus in year five. Uh the construction
costs are detailed in the application to
[33:31] range for from between $400 and $500 per
square foot. That's just the
[33:35] construction costs with the total
project costs estimated at 50 to 55
[33:40] million for the total project. and then
uh a number of details around their
[33:46] proposed debt financing appearing to
assume a term of 30 years. That's really
[33:51] the highle summary of those revenues or
pardon me the financial impact analysis.
[33:58] Um these are these are some takeaways
that our business office put together.
[34:02] Um most of these revenue assumptions
appear to be within a a range of
[34:09] reasonleness. Um there were a couple of
questions noted uh by our business
[34:14] office specifically large increases in
interest income associated uh with some
[34:21] of their bond financing. So that was
something that we had questions on um
[34:26] that that uh wasn't readily answered in
the application. Um as well as some
[34:31] revenues attributed to prek enrollments
um which wasn't fully detailed in the
[34:38] application. We weren't sure exactly
what that was referring to, but the per
[34:41] pupil funding is noted to uh be
projected to increase 2 and a.5% a year
[34:47] and other per pupil funding are noted
and appear reasonable.
[34:52] Similar on the expenditure side, you can
see that the application suggests that
[34:57] teacher staffing would remain constant,
that uh appropriate levels of
[35:02] administrative staffing and associated
costs are assumed, modest uh cost of
[35:07] living increases are assumed and
retirement costs and inc modest
[35:12] increases there are also assumed all
appearing to be within a range of
[35:16] reasonleness.
[35:20] debt financing is noteworthy
um in no small part because of its size.
[35:26] This is a large factor associated with
such a large undertaking. And so um that
[35:32] was noted at an estimate estimated
amount of 3.8 million annually. Um so
[35:39] again some questions remain on that. Uh
they did highlight uh a bit about their
[35:46] uh bond category.
um which conflicted with some publicly
[35:50] available information but again overall
uh given the information that was
[35:56] provided in the application this appears
to fall within a range of reasonleness.
[36:01] So kind of in summary regarding the
financial projections, uh limited
[36:06] questions from our business team
regarding the projected revenues on as I
[36:11] mentioned prek funds and um interest
incomes. No obvious areas of significant
[36:18] concern regarding the projected
operating costs going forward.
[36:23] The largest variables however in this or
most projects and therefore the largest
[36:28] areas of risk
uh really include the total initial
[36:32] project costs
and the immediate and ongoing
[36:36] enrollments or revenues associated with
those. So really no matter how we slice
[36:42] it to summarize this while the uh
financial impact and assumptions appear
[36:48] to be reasonable uh we wanted to at
least highlight um that should those
[36:53] assumptions around total project costs
or projected enrollments change that
[37:00] that really exacerbates any risk
associated with the project.
[37:04] So moving on to a little bit more about
the facilities. We touched on this
[37:08] earlier. Proposal suggests a campus
estimated to occupy 25 acres on which
[37:15] they anticipate constructing a new
building of approximately 100,000 square
[37:19] feet. Again, in that application, it's
suggested that the total broad budget
[37:25] pro total project budget
um is anticipated to be between 50 and
[37:30] 55 million. That equates to about $500
to $550 per square foot. Um, I think
[37:36] it's always important to just sort of
overemphasize. Often times we look at a
[37:40] construction bid, for example, divide
that by the project square footage to
[37:46] come up with a construction square
footage. There are many additional
[37:49] costs. Of course, that is the largest
component of a total project cost, the
[37:53] construction of the building. But there
are design costs,
[37:57] uh, permitting costs,
um, and furniture, furniture, fixtures,
[38:03] and equipment costs that add to the
total project cost. But just by way of
[38:08] reference, and we'll talk about this
more later, uh, the district's recent
[38:12] actual total project costs have been
between $650 and $750 a square foot. Of
[38:19] course, every project is unique in its
own way, but just by way of uh point of
[38:24] comparison.
Also detailed in the facility section
[38:29] and appended to the application
are an affiliation agreement with the
[38:34] University of Nevada and a land lease um
executed by the Nevada Board of Regents
[38:41] with the University of Nevada. So, um,
in summary, the lease includes all
[38:46] rights for the tenant, Dural Academy, to
construct this new building on UNR
[38:52] property with an initial term of 20
years. That lease includes up to three
[38:59] 10-year options, and there's a specific
section in the in the agreement um
[39:06] providing that the university has no
obligation to extend those options. So
[39:11] they are they are optional um options I
guess. Um so just just again by way of
[39:17] orienting you to the highle terms of the
lease agreement. Also in the lease
[39:22] agreement um there are several different
um scenarios considered by which the
[39:29] tenant may be found to be in default.
For example, if they fail to uh if they
[39:34] pause construction for more than 90
days, things of that nature. But
[39:38] fundamentally um there is a completion
date uh certificate of occupancy like
[39:43] the actual construction of the building
must be completed on or before August
[39:47] 31st 2029 or the tenants may be found in
default. Um within the lease agreement
[39:54] the rent is set at a flat $75,000 per
year. Um there are various escalators um
[40:01] associated with that, but basically
that's what the the uh rent finance
[40:07] looks like with annual 2% increases
baked in.
[40:12] Um and then lastly, uh the university at
the end of the term will own all of the
[40:18] on-site improvements or upon default or
when the lease is retired. Um and then
[40:24] at such time there is no option to
purchase by uh Dural or anyone else
[40:32] unless amended. So that's kind of a
highle summary of the lease itself.
[40:38] Continuing on with facilities, I
mentioned some of our recent um actual
[40:44] costs per square foot for some of our
projects. We wanted to include this
[40:48] larger exhibit um again for uh regional
orientation. We talk often about
[40:54] enrollment zones and and kind of
vertical alignment within our district
[40:59] ecosystem. Others speak in terms of zip
codes and things of that nature. I think
[41:05] we all know this part of our community
quite well with the various roadways and
[41:09] things like that, but I thought it was
helpful to just sort of see it on a map
[41:12] like this. Um, we also talk at length
about all of the various projects that
[41:20] have been completed, have been approved
in some form or fashion by this board,
[41:26] um, or are approved as a part of our
five-year capital improvement plan. So
[41:31] that is an a listing including but not
limited to of all of the various
[41:37] projects associated with many of these
schools and their approximate completion
[41:41] timeline and approximate total project
budgets.
[41:46] I uh additionally included just a
listing for awareness of nearby WCSD
[41:54] schools you see listed on the bottom um
as well as nearby WCSD sponsored charter
[42:02] schools. All of those schools are
depicted on the map as well.
[42:10] The next section talks a little bit more
about enrollment.
[42:14] As we mentioned previously, this is the
primary revenue assumption and a primary
[42:21] element uh underpinning their statement
of need. Um just to uh reiterate and to
[42:27] be clear, there are no changes requested
in this application to the enrollment
[42:31] cap associated with the current um Geral
Academy campus which is capped at uh an
[42:37] enrollment of 996.
Uh the new application requests an
[42:43] enrollment proposal cap of 1570 or 1596.
There's two different numbers in the
[42:49] application. So it's right in there. I
just want to [clears throat] you know
[42:54] make note that there were two different
numbers. So we're kind of um
[42:57] highlighting both. And then further in
the meeting minutes uh included in the
[43:02] application um it is indicated that the
enrollment caps approved by the SPCFSA
[43:09] typically come with a 10% um variation.
Um that the caps are allowed to operate
[43:17] at up to 110% of that ceiling or in this
case up to 1755 students. If you take
[43:26] that 1596 student
uh cap also the exhibit there is uh a
[43:33] part of the application showing kind of
the breakdown I mentioned earlier
[43:37] [clears throat] how they anticipate uh
initially filling their school roles and
[43:42] then growing into that maximum cap in
five years
[43:49] regarding enrollments. Uh I wanted to
illustrate this graphic again because
[43:56] this the the enrollment is such a
primary part of the statement of need
[44:01] regarding sustained enrollment demand.
Uh we have no data regarding uh weight
[44:07] lists or other uh factors of demand
associated with uh the Geral Academy,
[44:13] but we do know how many children have
been born to Wo County resident mothers
[44:19] for the last 20 plus years. This is a
graphic illustrating the total number of
[44:25] births to Wo County mothers
uh going back to 2004. I can tell you
[44:31] that that we have data beyond that and
that it has been 25 years since we have
[44:37] seen the same number of births in Wo
County as we saw in the year 2025
[44:44] despite the fact that there are
approximately 185,000 more humans living
[44:49] in Wo County today than there were 25
years ago. This is to belabor a point
[44:54] that we've many we've made many times in
this and many other meetings that this
[44:58] is a long-term regional and national
trend of declining birth rates in our
[45:04] community. This is simply a fact. This
is all historical information, not a
[45:09] projection.
[45:12] drilling into this uh historical
information in a bit more detail to uh
[45:19] dive a little bit deeper on this
variable of enrollment. The graphic you
[45:24] see on your left are historic actual
total enrollment numbers across WCSD
[45:33] enrollments, district sponsored
charters,
[45:37] uh, Wo County area private schools, and
area state sponsored charter schools all
[45:45] broken down on those uh, bar charts. And
what I think the takeaway there is is
[45:50] the top line that for six consecutive
years our entire region regardless of
[45:58] state sponsored, district sponsored,
district operated, private schools for
[46:02] six consecutive years, the total number
of K12 students in Wo County has
[46:08] declined. And that is uh historical
fact. Drilling in to a little bit more
[46:15] detail still, we took a snapshot of the
24 nearest schools to this location. Of
[46:23] course, with any magnet school, there
are a number of variables that might
[46:27] influence precise enrollment uh
patterns. So, we're not going to get
[46:32] into that level of speculation or
projection, but looking at the annual
[46:37] historic enrollments across the 24 WCSD
schools nearest to this location, you
[46:44] see a similar trend of declining
enrollment.
[46:48] So, this is about trends and not
specific projections.
[46:52] This is not necessarily to draw
conclusions with, but it is to provide
[46:57] additional context to historical facts
relative to key elements of this
[47:02] application for all of our
consideration.
[47:05] These are the elements associated with
the financial, enrollment, and facility
[47:10] elements of the proposal. And now I want
to transition it to my colleagues for
[47:14] more in-depth discussion about the
academic elements of the proposal.
[47:18] » Thank you.
[47:23] Okay. Thank you, Adam. Good afternoon.
Chris Hackbush, chief academic officer
[47:26] for secondary education. For the record,
[snorts]
[47:29] um here to address some of the academic
and other questions uh pertaining to
[47:34] unique and different offerings.
Uh the proposed rationale for the
[47:38] charter uh expansion request states that
there's a uh unmet unmet need for
[47:44] sustained enrollment demand and need for
more innovative and career connected
[47:49] learning opportunities. I'm here to
share what we do offer as a district uh
[47:54] which we pro which we provide
substantial benefits to our students.
[47:59] From the proposal uh there's a mention
of learning labs uh extensively. Uh it's
[48:04] not specified if that's CTE education or
not. Uh likely maybe dual credit
[48:09] courses. Uh Wash County School District
offers some of the most unique and
[48:14] different academic offerings including
innovative and career connected learning
[48:18] opportunities. On this slide, you'll see
uh some of those listed. So dual credit
[48:23] coursework through TMCC, UNR, and other
uh higher educational partnerships
[48:28] throughout our high schools.
comprehensive CTE pathways in
[48:32] engineering, health sciences, computer
science, advanced manufacturing,
[48:36] business, uh, education, technology, uh,
AP and honors coursework across all
[48:42] comprehensive high schools, STEM
focusedmies and magnet schools and
[48:47] programs, early college opportunities
for TMCC high school and existing
[48:52] university partnerships, and career
exploration and work learning
[48:56] experiences through CTE and community
partnerships.
[49:03] This slide shares specifically uh some
of the uh CTE offerings that we uh
[49:10] provide in our district, which is
extensive. We're proud of the growth of
[49:14] our career and technical educational
offerings districtwide,
[49:17] not to mention the ever growing
internships and workplace readiness
[49:21] opportunities for our students. Whether
you want to be a future engineer, pilot,
[49:26] teacher, a career, have a career in
healthcare, or work in the trades like
[49:29] diesel mechanics or manufacturing, Wash
County School District provides those
[49:34] educational experiences districtwide. I
want to highlight Wash County School
[49:38] District provides busing for our two
CTEMI, AACT and Debbie Smith.
[49:45] Uh I want to further share that CT for
all expands to all our schools and that
[49:51] initiative uh is leveraging the generous
donation of Gilmont Foundation providing
[49:56] two pathway to aviation programs at AACT
and the North Valley's high school
[50:01] vertical. This grant also includes drone
clubs in all our middle schools uh in
[50:08] select elementaryaries which is truly a
transformational opportunity for our
[50:12] community.
Um the CT for all concept I wanted to
[50:16] kind of clarify is if you remember we
had signaturemies
[50:20] uh in our district that's been a
transition where we're we're offering uh
[50:25] advanced coursework in the CTE realm
across our schools. Okay. Uh
[50:32] and that's I think that's an important
point. I also want to uh explain as well
[50:36] that the offerings uh and the space in
terms of ACC and Debbie Smith um are not
[50:43] exclusive to CT. I think a lot of people
don't understand that that we do have
[50:47] these courses in all our high schools
and that the the school of choice uh
[50:52] open enrollment process provides
families choice in these programs. I
[50:57] think that's important as well.
Okay. I wanted to highlight some
[51:04] academics uh uh in terms of Vaughn
Middle School. I wanted the
[51:08] reconstruction as a new three-story
campus uh opened in uh this August, this
[51:14] past August, featuring advanced STEM
labs, robotics areas, and dedicated
[51:19] creative maker spaces. The facility
incorporates collaborative student hubs,
[51:24] a specialized deaf heart of hearing
program with enhanced acoustics and
[51:29] integrated observation areas for
partnership with UNR to train future
[51:35] educators. If you've uh been able to
walk that building, you may have seen
[51:38] that in class where you have an
observation uh space where it doesn't
[51:42] disrupt the learning going on, but
student teachers can can view what's
[51:45] going on in the classroom. Uh not to
mention it's a IB middle years program
[51:51] which we've uh come to our board and
presented on uh a few uh months back and
[51:56] a dual language academy within Vaughn.
Um also included here that not only our
[52:02] schools provide unique and innovative
academic offerings, our district
[52:06] sponsored charters do as well. Just if
you look at the titles of our district
[52:11] charters, you will see the array of
offerings. You know, you've got this the
[52:15] Coral Academy of Sciences. You've got um
Mariposa with the languages. Uh ACE
[52:22] again career exploration and a five-star
school. Uh encompass high desert
[52:27] monastery and snacks.
Those are all very diverse experiences
[52:32] for a community. And of these of this
list, four of these schools are title.
[52:42] So with that, this next slide goes into
what exactly do we offer. Uh we share
[52:50] five featured schools. Uh what extensive
choices we offer within the proximity of
[52:55] the proposed charter request.
Uh you can see here on the chart, if you
[53:01] can squint your eyes there a little bit,
we have you know our CTE sections. These
[53:05] are number of courses. the uh in AP, the
enrollment in AP, the dual credit which
[53:12] is growing across our district uh with
those uh enrollments and then of course
[53:18] our IB offerings across uh AACT
uh Demani Ranch and Reed Sparks and
[53:25] Wooster uh districtwide
the line underneath the chart there are
[53:32] some numbers there in terms of overall
numbers for AP and how many students
[53:36] that impacts dual credit again over
4,000 impacted students and then the IB
[53:44] program. Key highlights that we want to
share from the data that we took on this
[53:49] districtwide again Reno High School
leads across the district in terms of AP
[53:54] participation
with over uh 1100 almost 1,200 students
[53:59] among the featured schools here. Worster
offers the IB program with 46 sections
[54:05] impacting 589 students. the Monty Ranch
and Reeds a close second provide uh the
[54:13] most dual credit uh opportunities and
impact the most students in terms of
[54:18] dual credit currently and that's I think
regionally something to note uh in terms
[54:23] when we look at at the proximity of this
uh proposal uh the feature schools
[54:29] collectively uh over 331 advanced
courses and pathway sections
[54:35] um again it's important to note families
may apply for the Wash County School
[54:40] District School of Choice process to
access specialized programs when
[54:44] capacity is available, including AP, IB,
CTE, dual credit, concurrent enrollment,
[54:50] and signature academy pathways. These
opportunities provide expanded access to
[54:56] rigorous coursework, college credit,
career preparation, and specialized
[55:00] educational experiences across the
district. featured schools were based on
[55:05] regional impact and do not include
Debbie Smith CTE in all these offerings.
[55:10] So again, want to highlight that. At
this point, I'm going to turn it over to
[55:14] Chief Vanress that will continue our
presentation.
[55:22] » Thank you. Thank you. Uh Chief Hackbush,
Jennifer Vaness, Chief Academic Officer
[55:27] for Wo County School District.
So um on this slide we are comparing the
[55:32] demographics of students currently
served in Wo County School District and
[55:36] Dural. Uh for our the most recent data
that we can have is from the 2425 school
[55:43] year. So while enrollment patterns vary
across the school systems there are
[55:48] several notable differences in the
populations being served. In particular,
[55:53] WCSD serves substantially higher
percentages of students eligible for
[55:58] free and reduced lunch, students with
disabilities, and English learners.
[56:03] For example, WOO serves students with
disabilities at approximately 16.7%
[56:09] compared to 10.3% at Dural.
Similar similarly, EEL represents 15.2%
[56:18] of WCSD compared to 1.2
at Dural.
[56:24] There are also notable differences in
racial and ethnic demographics. Hispanic
[56:30] students represent 44% of WCSD compared
to 17 at Dural and white students
[56:36] represent approximately 40% of WCSD
compared to 68%
[56:41] at Dural.
Taken together, these demographic
[56:45] differences provide important context
for us to consider whether the proposed
[56:49] campus is designed to attract and serve
a student population that reflects the
[56:55] surrounding community.
Um, the Dural application projects
[57:00] growth in both student groups as the new
campus expands. However, with the
[57:06] projected growth, the anticipated
percentages remain well below the
[57:10] current levels in WO. In comparison with
the zip code area that Dural is
[57:16] proposing, WSDSD provides comprehensive
continuum of services including
[57:21] specialized programs for students with
autism, deaf and heart of hearing
[57:25] services, intensive behavior supports,
intense EL services, and newcomer
[57:30] supports for our EL students and
families.
[57:33] While the application references special
education staffing and related services,
[57:38] the staffing plan does not identify any
specialized programs, school
[57:42] psychologists, occupational therapists,
physical therapists, or even providing a
[57:46] continuum of services comparable to
those in Wo.
[57:54] We also want to touch base on who is
currently being served to served to how
[57:59] um Dural is proposing to recruit for the
new campus. The application identifies
[58:05] several recruiting strategies including
outreach to students on the current
[58:09] Dural weight list and as uh Chief um
Cersei pointed out earlier, we have no
[58:14] idea as to who is on that weight list or
what populations actually that um group
[58:20] represents.
um families near the proposed campus and
[58:24] then students attending the surrounding
areas. We know from our own demographics
[58:28] that the area they are proposing to
build have higher e numbers than most of
[58:32] the county school district. Yet, they're
only anticipating an increase uh of
[58:37] their e population by 89 students.
It also references a weighted lottery
[58:43] intended to support underserved
students. However, we did not find any
[58:48] details regarding how that lottery would
um operate or whether specific
[58:53] considerations would be provided for EL
learners, students with disabilities or
[58:57] students experience ex economic
disadvantages.
[59:02] The application outlines services for
special education and EL learners and
[59:06] how they would be provided. Yet, none of
these services are above and beyond what
[59:09] are required under state and federal law
and nothing unique to Dural.
[59:15] The primary question for consideration
is not whether services will be provided
[59:19] as required, but whether the application
offers sufficient detail regarding how
[59:24] these students populations will be
recruited, enrolled, and provided
[59:28] appropriate services as they expand.
We found limited information regarding
[59:34] how students requiring more intense
services would be served through the
[59:37] proposed model, such as students with
autism, deaf and hearty hearing, or
[59:42] behavior interventions which currently
reside in the in the population in the
[59:46] area they're targeting. Ultimately,
while the application projects increased
[59:51] enrollment for students with
disabilities and English learners, it
[59:54] provides limited details regarding the
strategies, staffing, and specialized
[59:58] programming that would be used to
achieve the outcomes for the unique
[1:00:03] learners, thus limiting our
understanding of how they would truly
[1:00:06] address the needs of the targeted
population.
[1:00:12] » Thanks, Jen. So, that concludes the
summary of this application. And I want
[1:00:17] to appreciate my colleagues here today
and many others who spent a good deal of
[1:00:22] time over the last 10 days uh putting
this analysis together. It's by no means
[1:00:27] comprehensive but intended to provide an
informed foundation for the discussion
[1:00:32] of the board here today. Um, as noted
originally, SPCSA provided a copy of
[1:00:38] this request to the district uh board
president and superintendent
[1:00:43] offering the opportunity to provide
input and requesting that if we chose to
[1:00:47] do so, uh, to do so prior to September
8th. Um, and in that notice, uh, SPCSA
[1:00:55] also highlighted that they anticipate
considering this amendment request at
[1:00:59] their regularly scheduled October 9th,
2026 board meeting.
[1:01:04] So, with that, I'll uh return the mic to
the president and uh open it up for any
[1:01:09] questions. Thank you.
>> Great. Thank you, Mr. Cers. Appreciate
[1:01:11] it. And Mr. Dyer, I do want to welcome
you to the Washington County School
[1:01:14] District. I think this is your for your
first time behind the the podium, so
[1:01:17] it's good to see you and wish you good
luck.
[1:01:19] » Absolutely. Thank you, President
Mayberry.
[1:01:20] » You're welcome. Um so, colleagues, let's
let's do this. I know there's there's a
[1:01:25] lot to talk about. Uh let's really stick
to clarifying questions first if we can
[1:01:30] and um then we will open it up to public
comment uh for those in the audience. So
[1:01:35] are there any clarifying questions for
our staff
[1:01:40] and there we go. Trusty Smith, you're
up.
[1:01:43] » You know you can count on me, Mr.
President. Um okay, couple clarifying
[1:01:48] questions. Um, also based on some public
comment,
[1:01:54] can you please clarify the number of
district sponsored charter schools we
[1:01:59] have here in the Wo County School
District?
[1:02:05] So, while you look at that, and I don't
just mean in this area, um, I'll start
[1:02:10] with the clarifying statement to the
public that the Wo County School
[1:02:14] District does sponsor charter schools.
And can you state for the record how
[1:02:18] many charter schools we do support?
[1:02:23] » Yeah. So if we go to slide 29, we'll
have the the list there for you. I did
[1:02:28] include all of them right there.
>> Okay. So is that like 11?
[1:02:35] » Well, the multiple campuses.
>> There's the multiple Coral Academy uh
[1:02:40] campuses. Yeah. Which there are five.
>> Thank you so much. And then can you also
[1:02:45] clarify if the WO County School District
is the largest sponsor of charter
[1:02:50] schools in all of Wo County?
>> Yeah, I believe so. Yes, I I believe so.
[1:02:57] » Thank you. I [snorts] thank you for
that. I appreciate that. Okay. Um, so
[1:03:02] going to the percentage of students,
which I think is shown really well on
[1:03:08] that slide 31. Um, I do have some
questions. Thank you for this
[1:03:13] information. I find this to be helpful.
What percentage of at risk students does
[1:03:19] the Wo County School District serve? I
noticed that that demographic was not
[1:03:23] here roughly.
>> So, uh, when you think about to be able
[1:03:29] to compare for, um, Wo County School
District's enrollment, really, we're
[1:03:33] looking at our free and reduced lunch.
Um that also could include their CIT
[1:03:37] students. Um and um our um
[1:03:43] I don't want to call them homeless.
There's another word for it. Our un
[1:03:46] rehomed owners.
>> Yeah. Yeah. Children in transition which
[1:03:49] are foster children in between unstable
housing. Yeah.
[1:03:53] » Yes. The the free and reduced numbers
the 38,000 is approximately how many we
[1:03:57] have in our district that are considered
at risk.
[1:04:00] » Okay. Thank you. I really appreciate
that. And is there a different
[1:04:04] designation for children in transition?
Because I know that has a slightly
[1:04:08] different definition than at risk.
>> Yes. So the children in transition are
[1:04:13] children who are in transition. Um I may
phone a friend on this one because I
[1:04:18] know Dr. Lamar is in our the audience at
the moment.
[1:04:22] » I I do I don't know if he's if he's
here.
[1:04:24] » Oh, did he sneak out of
>> That's okay. Um and and so I appreciate
[1:04:29] that because we we do have so a very
large number of at risk um children who
[1:04:33] are designated at risk and within this
immediate area I for example Libby Booth
[1:04:39] Elementary School once upon a time um
maybe still now actually serves the
[1:04:43] largest number of children in transition
in the Wo County School District.
[1:04:51] Uh yes. Okay. Yes, they um yes and it is
also title and 100% free and reduced
[1:04:55] lunch.
>> Thank you. I very much appreciate that.
[1:04:58] Just straight data. And the reason why I
was asking this is the point of
[1:05:02] clarification that goes with it
[clears throat] since these schools are
[1:05:06] in not the immediate area but within the
zip code being referenced. Did I look at
[1:05:12] the application correct for the
projected
[1:05:16] fran the multiacampus franchise school
and I saw that zero at risk students are
[1:05:23] anticipated. Correct.
>> That that is correct.
[1:05:25] » Okay. So we're in the tens of thousands
and I have zero.
[1:05:29] » Correct.
>> That is correct. Okay. Um moving on from
[1:05:33] that roughly how many title one schools
does WC1 have either by quantity or
[1:05:39] percentage? And if it's possible, please
consider our district sponsor charters
[1:05:44] because my role here, I'll speak
individually. I'll let my colleagues
[1:05:48] speak for themselves. My fiduciary
responsibility is not just to the public
[1:05:53] schools that we have, but also the
charter schools um whose charters we
[1:05:57] hold for them. So, if it would be
possible to just get a rough number, we
[1:06:01] have about 115 schools, right? Give or
take. And how many of those are title
[1:06:05] one?
>> I'm trying to count on the page. Um it's
[1:06:09] two and a half pages worth of the
numbers um
[1:06:14] off roughly we know there are four
charters that are title and um I'm going
[1:06:22] » we'll work to get that
>> we'll yeah we'll have to get that number
[1:06:24] for you
>> exactly
[1:06:26] » okay
>> one
[1:06:27] » but it's lots
>> it's a lot it's lots like upwards of
[1:06:31] over 60ish of our schools it's a lot
okay
[1:06:34] » great is Doral a title one school
No.
[1:06:38] » Okay. Does this application project the
new multiacampus franchise to be a title
[1:06:44] one school?
>> No.
[1:06:45] » Okay. Is is this land located in an area
that is surrounded by title one schools?
[1:06:51] » 100%.
>> Okay. And I'm going to come back to that
[1:06:54] later because I think that there's
there's a way to look at this regionally
[1:06:58] versus just zip code, but I'll come back
to that. Thank you for that. Um,
[1:07:04] in the application, I just want to make
sure that I have this correct. The
[1:07:08] combined student size is projected at,
we'll say around 2700.
[1:07:13] Um, in the proposed system budgets, I
think it's 6-2 in the application. Can
[1:07:21] you confirm that the Doral franchise
would only employ one single reading
[1:07:27] interventionist for about 2700 students
>> based on the application that they've
[1:07:33] submitted? That's correct.
>> Excellent. And also with the student
[1:07:37] size of about 2700 students, can you
confirm that there would only be one
[1:07:43] English language learner coordinator for
the entire system
[1:07:47] » based on their application? Yes. The
coordinator not necessarily a direct
[1:07:52] teacher.
>> Correct. But that coordinator is only
[1:07:55] half their job because the other half of
the English language learner coordinator
[1:07:59] is their community involvement
coordinator. So it's kind of like a 0.5.
[1:08:03] Okay.
>> Um another point of clarification here,
[1:08:08] what is the corporate revenue being
generated by this new school system for
[1:08:13] Academica?
Because I looked in the the numbers here
[1:08:18] and it looks like 1.24 24 million.
That would be on page 6-2.
[1:08:29] Okay.
>> Thank you.
[1:08:32] Um Okay. Um near to the end here. So, I
was also very um interested in and this
[1:08:40] might be a phone a friend for our
legislative representatives here. We've
[1:08:46] got about $600 million worth of
taxpayerowned and funded WC1 projects in
[1:08:51] the immediate vicinity.
[1:08:57] This worries me quite a bit. Maybe this
is more of a question for the
[1:09:02] superintendent
with the money that we have committed
[1:09:06] for WC1, which are taxpayer assets. So,
just as a little side note for anybody
[1:09:11] following along, um, Wo County School
District schools are funded by taxpayer
[1:09:16] money. They're also owned by taxpayers,
unlike charter schools, which are paid
[1:09:22] for with taxpayer dollars, but they're
privately owned. And by the way, that's
[1:09:27] completely legal. That's exactly how the
law is. Nobody's doing anything wrong
[1:09:30] with that. But what I see here is I look
at the number of projects we have and
[1:09:37] the amount of money So, COO Cersi,
considering the facil's modernization
[1:09:43] plan, if about 1,700 students were to
come out of these schools, would we have
[1:09:50] to redo the facility's modernization
plan or reconsider things like
[1:09:53] rebuilding Worster High School based on
the enrollment numbers? Is that just is
[1:09:58] that even a possibility?
[1:10:03] So, as this board well knows, we
annually re-evaluate the needs and
[1:10:09] priorities of our capital improvement
plan. Uh, a material variable on the
[1:10:16] scale of a new high school in this
vicinity, K12 school in this vicinity
[1:10:21] would most certainly warrant a
re-evaluation of our uh distribution of
[1:10:27] investments.
>> Thank you. I appreciate that. So I have
[1:10:31] a question. Does the state public
charter school authority have the do
[1:10:36] they have the authority I know they are
named the authority. Do they have the
[1:10:40] authority to destabilize over $600
million worth of taxpayer assets
[1:10:49] or do we not know? Okay.
[1:10:55] And
if the school was approved um by the
[1:11:02] state public charter school authority
and it would take about $17 million
[1:11:08] worth of state funding for it, would the
school district be in danger of having
[1:11:15] to do a reduction in force or to lay
anyone off? Is that a possibility?
[1:11:25] Um I will just say that a reduction in
the number of students um would have a
[1:11:30] huge impact on the school district and
our funding is really based on per pupil
[1:11:35] funding. So for every student that we
are under anticipated um population size
[1:11:41] would have a significant financial
impact.
[1:11:43] » Thank you. I appreciate that. Um just a
couple more. Mr. President, this might
[1:11:48] be a question for our senior legal
counsel or chief legal counsel. Is it
[1:11:53] legal for UNR to have a building built
on university land that it would own
[1:12:00] that was actually funded by state K12
dollars?
[1:12:08] based on um our our research, it appears
that it is legal under um man, I can't I
[1:12:15] don't have off the top of my head, but I
can follow up with you on the the bill
[1:12:18] and the statute, but it does appear that
it is a legal arrangement to have them
[1:12:22] build on there at least to the charter
school.
[1:12:25] » Thank you for answering that. I think
that's a real creative way for you and
[1:12:29] our to be able to build new buildings.
Um, okay. This one's really important,
[1:12:34] and this is in reference to a lot of the
completely well-meaning public comment
[1:12:39] we've gotten. Um, I am personally very
sensitive to how concerned people are
[1:12:45] when they worry about what's going to
happen to their school. And I don't want
[1:12:48] anything to happen to Dorell. They're a
great school in South Reno. A lot of
[1:12:54] people go to school there. There's so
much concern about regardless of what
[1:12:59] happens with this other campus,
would anything affecting this new
[1:13:05] campus, would that would that negatively
impact any of the students there? Would
[1:13:10] they not be able to go to Doral in South
Reno? Would any of those students have
[1:13:16] to leave their school? Is there any
negative impact to the students who are
[1:13:21] already attending the campus in South
Reno?
[1:13:30] » Um, as far as we know, the South Campus
would continue um to run as it does
[1:13:35] currently.
>> Okay, that that's important to me. So, I
[1:13:38] really appreciate that. I don't want
anybody to have to leave the schools
[1:13:41] that they're at. And then the last
question I had is actually on page 18 of
[1:13:47] the application. Um here, let me pull
that up because it's another legality
[1:13:53] question with it that I wasn't sure
about.
[1:14:01] So it says that the school will utilize
existing unrestricted capital reserves
[1:14:06] to support the construction of the
campus expansion. These reserves were
[1:14:10] generated over time in part through the
school's internal management of its
[1:14:15] before and after school enrichment
programs during the past eight years. Is
[1:14:20] that legal for a school to effectively
overcharge or like do they not have end
[1:14:25] fund balance rules like we do? Like is
that legal for schools to be able to do
[1:14:31] that to save money over eight years
for for capital funding? I I genuinely
[1:14:37] don't know. That's why I'm asking.
[1:14:43] I I don't have an answer for that as far
as the legality and it gets into a
[1:14:48] accounting area region that I'd have to
like [laughter]
[1:14:50] go talk to a CPA on to actually get a
good answer on. But if that's something
[1:14:54] you would like a follow-up on, we can do
that.
[1:14:56] » Um maybe for on the other side of public
comment, but that caught my eye and I
[1:15:00] found that to be unusual, so that's why
I was curious. Okay.
[1:15:03] » Thank you so much.
>> Thank you, Trusty Smith. Uh, any other
[1:15:09] questions or clarifying questions for
our staff? Trusty Weslike. Yes, ma'am.
[1:15:14] » Thank you, President Mayberry. So, being
a fifth generation Neadan, I'm pretty
[1:15:19] familiar with this area and having as a
young child grown up on a ranch um very
[1:15:25] familiar with uh the other ranches that
are around surrounding um my family's
[1:15:32] ranch.
Uh
[1:15:35] my recollection is the the land over on
Pembrook
[1:15:41] was agricultural
in nature and um grazing cattle, but it
[1:15:48] is technically marsh
land. Do you know of any studies that
[1:15:54] have been done for the soil? um impact
studies, uh compaction studies, things
[1:16:01] of that nature in that area because I'm
thinking that cost uh could go up
[1:16:08] considerably if that hasn't been looked
into.
[1:16:15] » So, there's no specific information
included in the application regarding
[1:16:18] like what we would call um property due
diligence. Um that's really proposed to
[1:16:24] take place throughout the rest of 2026.
The property is noted in the application
[1:16:28] as being located within some degree of a
sensitive flood plane area and other
[1:16:35] developments, most notably the Veterans
Parkway had to go through extensive
[1:16:40] environmental clearances
um and mitigative construction
[1:16:45] endeavors. Um so, well, we'll just leave
it at that in terms of expanding on what
[1:16:52] might be required at this property. And
that's why I kind of noted on one of
[1:16:56] these slides that you know uh approvals
such as the Army Corps of Engineers,
[1:17:01] Trucker, Truckucky Meadows Regional
Planning Agency and the Truckucky
[1:17:05] Meadows Regional, uh Flood Management
Authority may also be approvals that are
[1:17:10] required, but it's unclear and they've
stayed as much that due diligence is
[1:17:15] still impending in the coming months.
>> Okay. Um thank you. Uh the the other
[1:17:22] thing is um
the we have a very unique symbiotic
[1:17:31] relationship with our construction
partners,
[1:17:35] uh contractors, electricians, welders,
um all of those wonderful people that I
[1:17:43] kind of think that Wo County School
District is one of their biggest
[1:17:48] supporters. ers for them to be employing
a lot of individuals
[1:17:55] and WC1
with the taxpayers approval. We have
[1:17:59] this very delicate balanced ecosystem
where our construction is in great
[1:18:08] health. We're able to build um beautiful
new schools and support our families
[1:18:17] with that. I just would like it stated
for the record um framed in how I'm
[1:18:23] putting this. It's more of a personal
more of a personal how we take care of
[1:18:28] our people here in Wo County School
District. Would that support be in
[1:18:35] jeopardy
with taking away the funds from Wo
[1:18:40] County School District and the need for
new schools and modernization?
[1:18:46] The money that we would be losing, would
that affect that delicate ecosystem that
[1:18:52] we have with our construction industry?
[1:18:57] » I'll give this one a shot. uh appreciate
the sentiment. Um as I mentioned
[1:19:03] previously, a project of this magnitude,
especially one that's on been
[1:19:07] unanticipated in our recently approved
uh fiscal and capital programs, would
[1:19:13] necessitate a re-evaluation
of our resources and deployment of those
[1:19:19] resources. Precisely how that plays out
would absolutely remain to be seen. I
[1:19:24] also want to uh take a little liberty
with uh your comments and somewhat
[1:19:30] aligned with Vice President Woodley's
comments before. These similar questions
[1:19:33] and comments have been uh posed to me
recently and I want to emphasize that
[1:19:38] the county school district conducts all
of our procurement that is hiring of
[1:19:44] professionals and hiring of construction
partners with the utmost professionalism
[1:19:50] and takes that uh responsibility
incredibly seriously. As someone who has
[1:19:57] administered these and sat across the
table from successful and unsuccessful
[1:20:02] proposers of the highest quality, I want
to state on the record how seriously I
[1:20:07] take that responsibility.
Um, and furthermore, the vast majority
[1:20:12] of our construction contracts are by law
awarded to the lowest responsive and
[1:20:18] responsible bidder, and we have zero
discretion as to who or whom that those
[1:20:23] contracts are awarded to.
Thank you,
[1:20:31] » Vice President Woodley.
>> Thank you. I'm gonna follow up on uh uh
[1:20:34] my colleague um Trusty Westlake's
question because I did um I recognize
[1:20:40] that area. I'm aware of that area. I've
worked floods in that area. So, um I'm
[1:20:47] surprised that at the uh um projection
of costs considering I know at one point
[1:20:54] we were trying to do uh soccer fields
and that required hundreds of thousands
[1:20:58] of cubic yards just to raise a soccer
field and that was in the hundreds of
[1:21:04] thousands of dollars. So, I'm I'm really
surprised at it. Much lower. But um my
[1:21:09] question is um being the fact that this
project would use funding from uh per
[1:21:17] pupil and it's also on uh university
property. Would this project require
[1:21:23] prevailing wage?
[1:21:31] I think that's a complicated question
that um many people at the state level
[1:21:36] are still asking. Uh I believe uh
somewhere in the application it refers
[1:21:41] to uh a statement or a commitment um to
adhere to the prevailing wage
[1:21:47] requirements, but speaking more as a a
legal trigger. Um that is a a topic of
[1:21:53] ongoing discussion in terms of who
actually the
[1:21:58] uh contracting entity is, if it is a
public entity or whether it is not a
[1:22:04] public entity. despite the fact that
future revenues are being received in
[1:22:09] the form of uh taxpayer dollars. So I
can't answer that clearly but I
[1:22:14] acknowledge that is an uh ongoing
question.
[1:22:19] » So my follow question
>> my followup question to that is would
[1:22:24] that not have a significant
um fiscal impact on any projection for
[1:22:29] construction?
[1:22:33] Look, when we talk about construction,
uh, Vice President Woodley, you know
[1:22:37] better than most um just how complicated
and how many variables there are to
[1:22:41] that. I think a honest and simplistic
answer to your question is that it's not
[1:22:45] going to move the needle significantly.
that uh the wages that are being
[1:22:49] commanded in uh our region for all
manner of work are rather a function of
[1:22:56] supply and demand and that prevailing
wage versus the actual uh cost of doing
[1:23:01] business is actually not that far apart.
A far greater variable and therefore
[1:23:06] risk is the time and the miscellaneous
variables of uh the terrain and things
[1:23:13] of that nature. So that's why I choose
to characterize it as a general category
[1:23:18] of risk without really trying to specify
which one is going to go which way etc.
[1:23:24] But with respect to prevailing wage it's
my understanding having not you know
[1:23:28] contracted for work um as a as a
contractor directly that um the the the
[1:23:35] wages and rates that are being commanded
just in this industry in general are at
[1:23:39] or above prevailing wage rates in
private and public work today.
[1:23:43] » Okay. Thank you so much and a great
presentation. Amazing. Thank
[1:23:47] » Okay, I think uh Superintendent McMaster
has uh some answers.
[1:23:51] » Yeah, I just have um one of the
questions you had asked earlier. Trustee
[1:23:55] Smith, thank you for the opportunity to
share. Um we did some calculations. It's
[1:23:59] 52 total um title one schools, both
charter and non-charter in Wo County
[1:24:05] School District. So approximately just
under half.
[1:24:10] » Justin Smith.
>> Thank you. Um Mr. President. So, Vice
[1:24:13] President Woodley, I got the same
question about this and um I'll just,
[1:24:17] you know, read this because I
immediately went looking for this exact
[1:24:20] point. Um there's nothing in the
application it proper that has any
[1:24:25] reference to prevailing wage but in the
minutes of Doral's um meeting minutes
[1:24:32] from it looks like their July meeting um
one of the members of their board um
[1:24:37] mentioned that a firm that they're
talking to has experience with charter
[1:24:44] schools and prevailing wage. And then it
goes on to say, however, that they
[1:24:48] emphasize that they have no
predetermined preferred contractors and
[1:24:51] they're open to community connected
firms. That was the only reference I
[1:24:55] could find in the entire application was
just some minutes about they're talking
[1:25:00] to a few people and some of them have
prevailing wage experience, but I didn't
[1:25:04] find anything else in the application
that indicated one way or the other. And
[1:25:08] so I just wanted to anchor us back to
the factual information in the packet.
[1:25:15] The question I have is, and I know
there's been some discussion about the
[1:25:19] Worster Von Elementary vertical. I'm
curious what what would suggest that
[1:25:27] that students would be pulled from that
vertical, particularly given that
[1:25:31] charters don't
provide bus service.
[1:25:38] So, at the opening and on the uh
vicinity exhibit, everyone's oriented to
[1:25:44] the location of the proposed school. Um,
technically that location is within the
[1:25:50] Vaughn and Worster enrollment zones as
we understand them. Um and while I'm not
[1:25:57] going to speculate as to where the
students uh who future students of this
[1:26:03] school might originate from uh nor do we
have detailed information as to where
[1:26:08] the students who attend the current
Dorado campus uh live and reside. Our
[1:26:14] experience at other magnet schools or
nonzone schools such as AACT and Debbie
[1:26:20] Smith CTE Academy are that geographic
proximity to the campus is the strongest
[1:26:27] predictor of intendance attendance
concentration. So you know I mean
[1:26:32] logically uh speaking and also our
experience has demonstrated that the
[1:26:38] closer you live to a school the more
likely you are to attend it. That's
[1:26:42] about as deep as we can go on that.
>> Okay, fair enough. Thank you, sir.
[1:26:45] Trusty Nichollet,
>> thank you. I just want to ensure that
[1:26:48] there'll be discussion after public
comment. I have no questions, but I have
[1:26:52] some salient points.
>> And we'll uh
[1:26:55] » thank you
>> process uh to to get there. Uh if there
[1:26:59] aren't any trusty Phoenix, please go
ahead.
[1:27:02] » Yes. Uh just to make it quick there
again. Uh uh great presentation, very
[1:27:06] detailed. Uh we all appreciate that. uh
some good points about the need about
[1:27:12] the great deal of risk in the timeline
and the financial impacts and the
[1:27:15] factual trends and in academics uh
talked a lot about enrollment
[1:27:19] recruitment. So if we go to page 31
uh which is going to be Jennifer
[1:27:24] Vantress uh you know I just have one
general specific question for the entire
[1:27:28] staff here or the staff here you know
does the the staff believe based on the
[1:27:33] facts of what you have there Duro has
provided enough detailed on recruitment
[1:27:37] transportation staffing and uh student
supports to make those projected
[1:27:42] demographics changes realistic and again
I'm sticking to the framework of uh you
[1:27:47] know the law the facts the data the risk
the student impact any accountability.
[1:27:52] So,
>> it's um thank you for the question. It's
[1:27:56] very vague uh as far as how there's no
they just say that they're going to
[1:28:00] recruit.
It could be they hand out flyers at the
[1:28:04] grocery store. Um we have no idea as to
actual what their recruitment um will
[1:28:09] look like or how they will actually
provide the services. So, uh there was
[1:28:14] no details at all. And then just for the
legal sir uh just for legal sir uh on
[1:28:21] that there you know on that part that
you had up there on your slide about the
[1:28:24] four of the five and that there a lot of
that which just to clarify some of those
[1:28:30] weren't answered only one was right. Is
that right?
[1:28:33] » Correct. Only one
>> only only one was addressed directly in
[1:28:38] the application. The other four were not
addressed. in that um amendment
[1:28:41] language. I don't know if you can go
back to
[1:28:44] slide
[laughter]
[1:28:48] 15ish.
[1:28:52] » And while he's doing that, I just wanted
to make sure for clarification for point
[1:28:55] for clarification that it was only four
of the five. It was only one that was
[1:29:00] » one.
>> Yeah. So this is um yeah NAC38849
[1:29:04] that does have those five pieces for um
what needs to be addressed when a
[1:29:10] charter school opens up another campus.
>> Yeah, I have no more
[1:29:14] » and so sorry. Correct. Yeah. So only
four or five four of those five are
[1:29:18] addressed in the application.
>> Uh thank you for for answering all those
[1:29:21] things and president I have no more
further questions.
[1:29:25] » Okay. Thank you. Anything else before we
go to public comment? Outstanding. Um we
[1:29:31] will now uh move it to public comment. I
want to remind our excuse me our
[1:29:35] commenters that uh public comments are
limited to three minutes. They must
[1:29:38] pertain to the agenda item. Uh if you
have comments that are not on topic they
[1:29:43] can be provided during the general
public comment period at the end of the
[1:29:46] meeting. So with that we will open up
public comment.
[1:29:51] » Robert Mson.
>> Hello Mr. Mson.
[1:29:56] » Good afternoon
President.
[1:30:02] Good afternoon, Superintendent McMaster.
Good afternoon, President Mayberry. And
[1:30:07] good afternoon, trustees. My name is
Robert Mson, and as most of you know,
[1:30:12] I've been a teacher here in Wo County as
a public school teacher going on my 29th
[1:30:17] year. Most of us recognize the role that
the district sponsored charter schools
[1:30:23] play in our community. Whether we're
talking about ACE, Mariposa, or Coral
[1:30:29] Academy of Science, however, the Wo
County, excuse me, the WO Education
[1:30:34] Association and Nevada State Education
Association have long opposed for-profit
[1:30:40] charter schools such as Matter Academy
and Dural Academy because of their
[1:30:45] connection to academia academica.
While the schools themselves may be
[1:30:52] nonprofit, the out ofstate real estate
development firms behind their
[1:30:57] facilities are forprofit businesses.
They purchase land. They build schools
[1:31:03] knowing that they will have guaranteed
tenants with taxpayer dollars funding
[1:31:08] their investments through rent payments
that may continue for generations.
[1:31:14] The EMOs that manage these schools also
operate for profit.
[1:31:20] So, while the school may be nonprofit,
the infrastructure and management
[1:31:25] surrounding it are not. And that
distinction matters when we're talking
[1:31:30] about public education dollars.
Additionally, as our district continues
[1:31:35] to make major investments in
infrastructure, building new schools,
[1:31:40] and remodeling or rebuilding older ones
such as Worooster High School, the
[1:31:45] playing field isn't necessarily equal.
The district pays prevailing wages on
[1:31:51] its construction contracts while these
private investment firms have argued
[1:31:56] that they are not required to do so
because they are private companies. And
[1:32:01] in fact, they are private companies that
are for profit.
[1:32:06] That creates a different financial model
and raises questions about where our
[1:32:11] taxpayers money ultimately goes.
Changing the rules to allow these
[1:32:16] arrangements
deserves careful consideration of the
[1:32:20] long-term consequences for our entire
public school system. These investors
[1:32:25] may be immunable today. But what happens
to rents and EMO costs if they
[1:32:30] eventually expand enough to gain
significant market power?
[1:32:35] And if a nonprofit school becomes
financially dependent on companies that
[1:32:40] develop and manage it, how realistic is
it for the school to walk away if a
[1:32:44] conflict develops? Finally, we need to
consider the students who will remain in
[1:32:50] our traditional public schools that are
already inadequately funded and
[1:32:54] diverting the profits to out of state
investors. Please oppose the rule
[1:32:58] changes and take a stand for public
schools and the students and community
[1:33:02] you elected to represent. Thank you.
>> Thank you, sir.
[1:33:07] » Angela or
[1:33:13] » Yeah. And and I just as a point of of
reference, and again, I think I said
[1:33:17] this the last board meeting I I I shared
is and I hate to be the guy bad guy, but
[1:33:20] I I can't have any clapping or any
booing. So, this is a business meeting.
[1:33:25] You certainly can, you know, say some
positive things to your um to those that
[1:33:30] you agree with, but please let's keep
this civil and and no clapping. Miss or
[1:33:34] good afternoon.
>> Good afternoon. Thank you for saying no
[1:33:39] booing before I got up here.
Hello, President Mayberry,
[1:33:43] Superintendent McMaster and trustees. My
name is Angela Orur. I worked in the
[1:33:48] district for 20 nearly 20 years and now
I have the great honor of serving as the
[1:33:53] principal of Dal Academy, a public
charter school. My children still attend
[1:33:58] two different Basho County schools. Um
I'm here today because you're
[1:34:03] considering how to respond to our
amendment and I understand that there's
[1:34:07] a lot to consider. I wanted to be here
in person in case you had any questions
[1:34:11] that I could answer and because I
respect the process.
[1:34:15] At the heart of this discussion, I think
we're all in the same place. We want an
[1:34:19] excellent education for every child in
this community.
[1:34:24] I know that sometimes people see this as
a zero- sum game. That is, if one school
[1:34:31] wins, another losses. I don't see the
world like that. I think a rising tide
[1:34:36] can lift all ships.
I hope you'll at least entertain the
[1:34:41] possibility that this proposal could be
a good thing for our community. Our
[1:34:45] affiliation with UNR is working to
develop a laboratory school, a school
[1:34:50] that studies education.
Um, researchers,
[1:34:55] they will be looking at how children
learn. They'll be testing innovative
[1:34:58] practices, preparing future teachers,
and bringing evidence-based practices
[1:35:02] into real classrooms. This is something
worth doing. I've dreamed about a local
[1:35:08] laboratory school for more than a
decade. I shared this dream while I
[1:35:11] worked in the district with many of my
higherups who were excited for me to
[1:35:15] pursue the idea.
I also shared it last year with
[1:35:19] Superintendent McMaster because I really
believe that in following the research,
[1:35:23] studying what works, and learning from
educators and schools that are moving
[1:35:27] the needle, we can make a big difference
in education. I want to address a few
[1:35:31] concerns I've heard, not all of them.
Quickly, if you look at the budget, I
[1:35:36] think you were referencing year one of a
budget with half of the students and
[1:35:40] definitely not the budget for our entire
two system campus. But also, I do not
[1:35:46] believe we will be taking down any Wo
County school district schools.
[1:35:51] Our current students come from 26 zip
codes and four different counties. We
[1:35:56] expect our school of choice to draw
families from throughout the region that
[1:36:00] are specifically seeking this particular
educational model. We are not the right
[1:36:05] fit for everybody. That's okay because
Wo County has so many great options as
[1:36:09] well. We also anticipate hiring highly
qualified teachers who are interested in
[1:36:14] teaching in this particular type of
environment.
[1:36:17] There will not be a lack of jobs for
great teachers. Our current campus has
[1:36:22] never experienced a recruitment or
retention problem and we believe
[1:36:25] educators will be drawn to the
opportunity to serve in a laboratory
[1:36:29] school environment.
Finally, this venture was not conceived
[1:36:33] or funded by Academica Nevada and we are
committed to using local developers and
[1:36:37] contractors and paying prevailing wages.
>> Thank you very much.
[1:36:40] » Thank you.
>> Thank you,
[1:36:44] » Janelle Mosul.
[1:36:49] Good afternoon, Miss Mucil.
>> It's Mosul. Thank you.
[1:36:52] » Mosul. Thank you.
>> Good afternoon.
[1:36:56] » Push the button. Thank you. Good
afternoon, President Mayberry and
[1:37:00] members of the board. I am Janelle
Mosul. I'm an instructional coach at
[1:37:04] Derell Academy of Northern Nevada. I'm
here today speaking in support of our
[1:37:08] charter amendment and respectfully
asking for the or that the input that
[1:37:12] this board provides to the Nevada State
Public Charter School Authority be
[1:37:16] accurate, constructive, and centered on
the educational merits of the proposal.
[1:37:22] I have had the opportunity to see the
vision and planning behind this project
[1:37:25] firsthand. The proposed lab school is
not simply an effort to open another
[1:37:30] school. It is an opportunity to build a
meaningful educational partnership that
[1:37:35] connects K12 students, classroom
teachers, future educators, and
[1:37:40] university faculty. A true lab school
model can provide students with
[1:37:45] innovative learning opportunities while
al also strengthening the preparation
[1:37:49] and continued development of teachers.
It creates a setting where effective
[1:37:54] instructional practices can be
developed, studied, refined, and shared.
[1:38:00] That kind of collaboration has the
potential to benefit not only the
[1:38:03] students enrolled in the school, but the
broader educational community in
[1:38:08] Northern Nevada. As a coach, I
understand that meaningful educational
[1:38:12] innovation requires careful planning,
accountability, collaboration, and a
[1:38:17] willingness to examine what truly
improves outcomes for students. Those
[1:38:22] principles are at the heart of this
proposal. I have also worked closely
[1:38:27] with Angela Our. I know her as a
thoughtful, dedicated, and deeply
[1:38:31] student- centered educational leader.
I've seen the seriousness with which she
[1:38:36] approaches this work and the care she
gives to students, educators, and
[1:38:40] families. I recognize that the board has
a responsibility to consider how this
[1:38:45] amendment may affect public ed education
throughout our community. I simply ask
[1:38:50] that its input be based upon verified
information, the substance of the
[1:38:55] proposal, and its potential educational
value, not speculation, institutional
[1:39:00] competition or assumptions about the
motives of the people involved. Northern
[1:39:05] Nevada students benefit when educational
organizations are willing to
[1:39:09] collaborate, innovate, and create new
pathways for learning. This proposal
[1:39:14] deserves to be evaluated fairly and on
its merits. I respectfully ask the board
[1:39:19] to provide supportive input to the SPCSA
regarding our charter amendment. Thank
[1:39:25] you for your time.
>> Thank you.
[1:39:29] » Mario Fitzpatrick.
[1:39:41] » Good afternoon everyone. My name is
Mario Fitzpatrick and I serve as vice
[1:39:44] president of the WO Education
Association. I'm here today to speak
[1:39:49] about the proposed Dorado K12 school and
UNR partnership. This proposed charter
[1:39:55] to be built in the hidden valley area
has the potential to significantly
[1:39:58] impact the finances of the Wo County
School District. At a minimum, full
[1:40:04] enrollment at this site would redirect
at least 15 million out of Wo County.
[1:40:09] This would be a great greater deficit
than what the district faced last year.
[1:40:13] And with uncertainty around the state of
the economy and how that will impact
[1:40:17] school funding for the next bienium, we
must not only be cautious but assertive
[1:40:22] to threats that will negatively impact
the resources available to our schools
[1:40:26] and students. This follows a familiar
path that I and other educators in the
[1:40:31] district have faced over the last 20
years. Do more with less. Dal's
[1:40:36] potential expansion comes at a time when
we need to be investing more into public
[1:40:40] education, not less. In 1786, Thomas
Jefferson wrote in a letter about the
[1:40:46] importance of education. I think by far
the most important bill in our whole
[1:40:50] code is that for the diffusion of
knowledge among the people. No other
[1:40:55] sure foundation can be devised for the
preservation of freedom and happiness.
[1:41:00] How are we able to guarantee the freedom
and happiness of our students if we
[1:41:04] allow other organizations to directly
divert money and resources away from our
[1:41:08] public schools? Another potential issue
while on the surface of some may seem
[1:41:14] less significant is how these schools
will be staffed. Angela or the current
[1:41:19] principal at DAL has a strong reputation
of being an innovative thinker with high
[1:41:24] standards for both students and staff. I
can personally attest to this because I
[1:41:29] had the opportunity to learn under her
toutelage for well over 10 years and she
[1:41:33] has made me the teacher I became.
Opening an additional school means that
[1:41:38] some of our best and brightest educators
will be recruited to work at a new site
[1:41:42] with promises of innovation and less
bureaucracy.
[1:41:47] Furthermore, the partnership with UNR to
embed practicum and internship students
[1:41:51] will ensure a pipeline of future
educators into the Route schools,
[1:41:55] leaving Wo County School District with a
smaller pool of qualified individuals.
[1:42:00] However, we should also take this as an
opportunity to be reflective and ask
[1:42:04] some tough questions. Why are schools
such as Deral a threat to Washoe County
[1:42:09] School District? It is because we have
failed to be innovative and aggressive
[1:42:13] in our approach to solving issues
regarding student success. According to
[1:42:17] the Nevada Accountability Portal, 48% of
our elementary students and 47% of our
[1:42:21] high school students are proficient. 43%
are math proficient in elementary
[1:42:27] schools while only 31% of high schoolers
are. Our own data tells us we must
[1:42:32] attain better results for the future of
our students. There's a disconnect when
[1:42:36] we graduate 84% of our students, but
less than half are proficient in reading
[1:42:40] and math. Thank you for your time.
>> Thank you, Mr. Fispatrick.
[1:42:46] » Pat Hickey.
[1:42:50] » Good afternoon, Mr. Hickey. Thank you,
uh, Chair Mayberry. Um, good afternoon,
[1:42:56] trustees and, uh, our new
superintendent. My name is Pat Hickeyi.
[1:43:00] I'm a former assembly leader who
supported bipartisan legislation that
[1:43:05] created charter schools in Carson City.
I've served on the state board of
[1:43:09] education and currently I'm a Sunday
columnist for the RGJ where I have
[1:43:14] consistently celebrated the
accomplishments of both traditional Waro
[1:43:19] County school district schools along
with public charter schools. I'm here
[1:43:24] today to speak in support of public
charter schools and more specifically
[1:43:28] the opportunity for you in Warso County
to pursue a stronger stronger
[1:43:33] partnership between the school district
public charter schools the University of
[1:43:38] Nevada Reno and our community charter
schools as you may know were originally
[1:43:43] started by teachers and union leaders
who wanted to give public school
[1:43:47] educators more autonomy and flexibility
than is often possible in traditionally
[1:43:54] structured schools. The purpose of
charter schools was not to undermine
[1:43:58] public education. It was to create room
for responsible experimentation
[1:44:04] to try promising in structural methods,
school structures and curriculum models
[1:44:10] and then learn from the results. When an
innovation works, it shouldn't remain
[1:44:15] isolated in any one place or school.
Traditional public schools should be
[1:44:20] able to adopt, adapt, and benefit from
successful practices. That is how
[1:44:25] charter schools can serve the larger
public school system as partners in
[1:44:30] improving education, not merely as
competitors. Waro County has an
[1:44:36] especially promising opportunity here.
Dural Academyy's University Public
[1:44:41] School Community Lab School could become
a working laboratory for educational
[1:44:47] improvements. It could give UNR faculty,
graduate students, aspiring teachers,
[1:44:53] many who'd work in the district,
district educators, charter educators,
[1:44:58] families, and community partners. a
place to pilot next generation learning
[1:45:04] environments, curriculum models, and
teacher development approaches and
[1:45:09] long-term research. Such a school will
build on UNR's existing strengths.
[1:45:15] Public charter schools should not be
viewed as a threat to traditional public
[1:45:20] education. They are part of public e
education. Their success can be a
[1:45:25] success for Nevada's entire educational
system. Most importantly, it could give
[1:45:32] more Nevada students, not just those in
any one type of school, a better chance
[1:45:38] to succeed. Thank you for your time and
consideration.
[1:45:41] » Thank you for coming.
[1:45:45] » Oh, thank you,
>> Kim Beckus.
[1:45:53] » Good afternoon.
>> Good afternoon. I'm here to just present
[1:45:58] something that my daughter, who was not
able to be here, would like for you to
[1:46:03] all consider.
[1:46:07] My name is Jessica Cunningham. I request
your support for the establishment of a
[1:46:11] K through2 lab school by Dorell Academy
of Northern Nevada. I spent nearly 20
[1:46:17] years in education, 16 years teaching
high school, six in Wo County School
[1:46:23] District, and four years serving on the
Dan's governing board. The expansion of
[1:46:28] the Dan model in collaboration with
University of Nevada Reno will
[1:46:32] undoubtedly raise the educational
standards in Northern Nevada. A lab
[1:46:36] school is an educational site that works
in conjunction with the university to
[1:46:40] host educational research, teacher
training, innovative instructional
[1:46:44] practices, and curriculum development.
Dan is already a beacon of in-house
[1:46:49] professional growth, data-driven
instruction, uncompromised high
[1:46:53] performance standards, and instructional
ingenuity. I was priv privileged to
[1:46:58] spend two days engaging with Dal's
teachers and administrators at their
[1:47:02] most recent professional development
days. The collaborative culture of the
[1:47:08] staff demonstrates a spirit of inquiry,
problem solving, and reflection that
[1:47:12] will partner seamlessly with the unique
opportunities a lab school creates for
[1:47:16] teachers. Lab schools are altruistic in
nature. Benefits extend beyond the
[1:47:20] school site, spread throughout the
entire community. research, innovation,
[1:47:25] best practices will permeate the
regional educational community as
[1:47:29] education educators at university will
inevitably land in local schools, Washo
[1:47:35] County schools, private schools, and
charter schools alike. As the university
[1:47:40] and Dan leadership already know, this is
an opportunity to anchor precocious
[1:47:45] educators to our community and attract
highly motivated teachers to our area.
[1:47:50] Additionally, this lab school offers
pathways and connections to industry and
[1:47:54] higher education that will retain our
most talented students. Students will
[1:47:59] leave the Dawn Lab School with two years
of UNR credit and be connected to a
[1:48:04] mentor in the professional community.
This is an exciting chance to keep
[1:48:08] cohorts of talent local. A true friend
of education cannot in good faith faith
[1:48:15] oppose the expansion of an established
high-erforming instructional and
[1:48:19] professional model. Dan consistently
earns a five-star annual performance
[1:48:24] rating and their teachers are recognized
nationally time and again. Nor can one
[1:48:28] object to extending research and
innovation to professional educators. To
[1:48:33] do so appears disingenuous. Furthermore,
the community demands the high
[1:48:38] performance standard of Dan's current
campus as evidenced by the lengthy
[1:48:42] weight list of roughly 600 families. 693
for the 202526
[1:48:50] school year and five for uh the next.
>> Okay. Thank you.
[1:48:56] » Thank you for your the opportunity to
speak.
[1:49:00] » Thank you for coming.
>> Speak in favor.
[1:49:04] Please enter into the record.
[1:49:13] » Good afternoon, Miss Colburn.
[1:49:18] » Good afternoon, President Mayberry and
honorable board. I am here in solidarity
[1:49:23] with Wo Education Association
representing both the Northern Nevada
[1:49:26] Central Labor Council and the Northern
Nevada Building Trades Council. Um, we
[1:49:31] have also not seen anything on paper
demonstrating that this is actually a
[1:49:35] prevailing wage project and we are
always concerned about money being
[1:49:39] pulled away from our public education
system. It is vitally important to us to
[1:49:43] protect WC1 and any work that goes on in
this community building schools should
[1:49:49] be done under prevailing wage. So unless
and until we see anything in writing
[1:49:53] guaranteeing that this is a prevailing
wage project, we are in opposition to
[1:49:57] it. And uh broadly we are in opposition
to it because we believe it would pull
[1:50:01] money away from WC1. Thank you.
>> Thank you
[1:50:06] » Rebecca or I'm sorry Reena Spansel.
[1:50:16] » Good afternoon.
>> Good afternoon members of the board.
[1:50:20] Good afternoon Superintendent McMaster.
Good afternoon to everyone here in the
[1:50:24] gallery. My name is Reena Spansale and
uh go Colts. I am a proud public
[1:50:30] educator at Worster High School. There
have been many important things said
[1:50:34] today, important things said about the
fiduciary responsibility of this
[1:50:38] governing body. Important things said
about how this will impact our existing
[1:50:43] schools. And I'm here to speak to that.
Like I said, I am a proud Wooster cult.
[1:50:47] I've been there for nine years now. And
despite the fact that I have been
[1:50:51] courted by other uh institutions in this
good district, I continue to stay at
[1:50:56] that school because we do important
work. And I know that the district knows
[1:51:00] that and is in interested in continuing
to invest in that work because back in
[1:51:05] June, you all decided to allocate money
to rebuild, which is very necessary, our
[1:51:12] school. And so I am here to not only
remind you that you have made that
[1:51:16] decision and remind you that your staff
has said that there are significant
[1:51:22] impacts that could happen to uh our
school and the other schools that feed
[1:51:27] us if uh this uh draw academy goes
through. And I also want to remind you
[1:51:31] that we have good people doing good
things that you have already paid for.
[1:51:37] This project has not already been paid
for by Nevada tax dollars. Nevada
[1:51:42] taxpayers, but it would be and it's
important to show our collective, our
[1:51:48] community that we are investing in their
students, not investing in Academica,
[1:51:54] which is based out of Florida, not
investing in
[1:51:59] the University of Nevada Reno, which is
important, but is not a K12
[1:52:03] uh partner for us at this time. It does
not educate our K12 students. And it is
[1:52:09] important to show our students that we
are collectively interested in
[1:52:14] supporting them in where they're already
at. Not in the vision, not in the dream,
[1:52:18] not in the lab, not in the experiment.
Students are not experiments. They're
[1:52:23] living people in classrooms right now
wondering if they get to go back to
[1:52:27] school tomorrow. And I ask that when you
make your comments to the SPSA or SPCSA
[1:52:35] that you include the existing and real
conditions that exist in our schools and
[1:52:39] that you consider what you have already
decided as a governing body to invest in
[1:52:44] and that is the school I work for that
is Fawn Middle School that is all those
[1:52:48] schools around that Hinn Valley zone
that while we don't know students would
[1:52:53] be pulled away from those existing
programs and existing schools as your
[1:52:59] staff said earlier uh we do know and we
do have data that uh just the you know a
[1:53:05] new school popping up in a geographic
area it means more likely that the
[1:53:08] people in that geographic area might
choose to go to that school. Thank you
[1:53:12] for listening. Thank you for investing
in what already exists.
[1:53:24] Kaylin Evans.
[1:53:34] » Hi, my name is Kaylin Evans, president
of the Washoe Education Association, and
[1:53:38] I'm asking you right uh tonight to not
support uh the expansion of DAL Academy.
[1:53:42] And first, I want to be very clear, this
is not a criticism of the educators at
[1:53:46] DAL or other charter schools. They are
passionate, hardworking educators who
[1:53:50] care deeply about their students, just
like the educators um at our traditional
[1:53:54] public schools. My concern is about the
students and the system that we're
[1:53:58] creating for them. I believe we're
moving towards a two-tiered education
[1:54:03] system in Wo County. Look at Hidden
Valley. It houses pivot serving some of
[1:54:07] our most severely behavioral impacted
elementary students. It also provides
[1:54:11] strategies, deaf and heart of hearing
programming, speech and language
[1:54:14] services, occupational therapy, resource
services, psychology, and other
[1:54:19] intensive supports. Uh, Dorado says it
intends to increase its special
[1:54:23] education population, and I hope it
does. But let's be clear, providing
[1:54:26] resource services and operating programs
like SIP, CLS, or Pivot are night and
[1:54:32] day in terms of staffing, resources, and
intensity. So before supporting a new
[1:54:36] charter campus with 1,700 plus uh
students, ask a simple question. Uh will
[1:54:42] this DAL provide those programs too? And
ask about students with and what about
[1:54:47] um our students with significant
persistent behavioral issues that aren't
[1:54:51] in special education? Will the school
maintain the intensive interventions and
[1:54:55] alternative settings necessary to serve
those students? We'll hear that charters
[1:54:58] legally have to serve students with
disabilities and follow Nevada
[1:55:01] discipline laws, and that is true. But
that's not the question. The question is
[1:55:06] whether they're actually serving the
same students with the same level of
[1:55:09] need and then comparing the results as
though these systems are operating under
[1:55:12] the same circumstances. They are not. Uh
we're also being told that this is a
[1:55:17] laboratory school. And I love that
concept. Charter schools were originally
[1:55:21] envisioned as places to innovate, test
ideas, and share what works. But
[1:55:24] increasingly that is not what we're
seeing. We're seeing parallel K12
[1:55:28] systems competing for students. And to
quote one of the members on the Charter
[1:55:33] School Authority Board when they were uh
appro uh approving um Matter Academy up
[1:55:39] north, he said, quote, "Let's go compete
with them." And that was the exact quote
[1:55:43] of competing with the Wo County School
District. So, the idea that this is
[1:55:47] somehow not a competition of some sorts,
it's a disingenuous uh topic and it's
[1:55:51] also been said by charter school leaders
across our state. Um, and then we can't
[1:55:55] ignore Academica. Dorado contact
contracts with Academica Nevada, which
[1:56:00] is a for-profit educational management
organization. DAL's own audited
[1:56:04] financial statements show public dollars
going not only to Academica for
[1:56:08] management fees, but also companies
sharing common ownership with Academica.
[1:56:12] Um, so this model expands, we should
ask, are we expanding innovation for
[1:56:16] students or expanding the footprint of a
private management company? Because
[1:56:21] ultimately this needs to be about kids.
Um, thank you.
[1:56:27] » Thank you, President Evans.
>> Jenny Damonte.
[1:56:38] » That's Dr. Damonte.
>> You're welcome.
[1:56:43] » Good to see you.
>> Hi everybody. Um, I'm Jenny Damonte. I'm
[1:56:48] here on behalf of
many of my indivisible colleagues who
[1:56:53] are want to talk about this. But before
I start, I just got to say this great
[1:56:58] presentation. Um, my daughter, who I've
told you about, is the mother of a
[1:57:04] one-year-old and she's been watching
online and she texted me to say, "Wow, I
[1:57:11] had no idea
that of everything that the county
[1:57:16] school district offers." So, I'm Yay.
Um, which brings me to uh my real point,
[1:57:25] which is there is no need for this
school. None.
[1:57:30] You know, the school district, public
school district offers everything
[1:57:34] anybody could need. And by anybody, I
mean kids on free and reduced lunch,
[1:57:39] kids with behavior problems, kids with
who are special ed, kids who are deaf,
[1:57:44] and so on and so on and so on. There's
lots of opportunities for gifted
[1:57:49] children in our school district and
elsewhere like Davidson Academy.
[1:57:57] Um, also there are stakeholders who are
impacted negatively. There are parents
[1:58:03] and families who might see resources
disappear if they're in the county
[1:58:08] school district. There's taxpayers. Oh,
like me
[1:58:13] uh and the school district itself and
what it can do for students.
[1:58:18] The enrollment for this school, the
projection does not reflect the county
[1:58:24] at all.
Um throughout my career I have supported
[1:58:30] charter schools. Um I've got written
lots about it but I do not when tax
[1:58:36] dollars my tax dollars are going to line
the pockets of corporate leaders.
[1:58:44] Horus man said traditional public
schools are a public good. He is the
[1:58:49] father of the traditional public schools
and um
[1:58:55] and I'm with him. I do not want to send
my tax dollars to a private corporation,
[1:59:02] especially one out of state. And I do
not want to
[1:59:09] I don't want to see my school district
gutted so somebody else can get rich.
[1:59:16] Um, I'm I know and I'm sure Derell, we
have a leadership a person on our
[1:59:21] leadership team who has kids at Derell
and loves it. Great. Knock yourself out.
[1:59:27] We don't need to put a $17 million hole
in our annual budget. Thanks.
[1:59:35] » Thank you, ma'am.
John Epito,
[1:59:53] sorry, John Epilo. I find myself
agreeing with Best Smith a lot these
[1:59:59] days.
In addition, I've also noticed that I
[2:00:03] agree on many issues with three of the
recent past WCSD board presidents. So,
[2:00:08] there's hope, Adam. In fact, it was
Angie Taylor who brought the bill
[2:00:13] protective children suggested last
session it was for the state to start
[2:00:18] deleting subjective and incriminating
student data instead of storing it
[2:00:23] forever. The bill passed and was signed
into law by the governor.
[2:00:28] Now we have to start working on the most
massive student database ever created on
[2:00:32] US school students infinite campus. To
learn more, go to protect nevada.org.
[2:00:38] Now on this issue, I make a living as a
real estate broker. Plus, it's not
[2:00:42] nearly as frustrating as coming to these
meetings. Slide 22. At first, I thought
[2:00:48] this was wrong, but I but it's not. The
district would be spending between 65
[2:00:54] and 75 million dollars to build a
building on someone else's land. And
[2:01:00] after they built the building, then
they'd be leasing it back for $75,000 a
[2:01:05] year plus the 2% increases.
They'd be leasing it for at least and
[2:01:11] and if they're late building it, they
might lose it. And then they'd be
[2:01:16] leasing it for 20 years even though they
built it. And then they might get three
[2:01:21] extensions, maybe up to 50 years. It
doesn't say who who's um obligated for
[2:01:26] the extensions in the slide that was
presented earlier by Adam. And then
[2:01:32] after the lease is up, they walk away
from the building and UNR gets the
[2:01:36] building. Now, as a real estate broker,
who would agree to that? This is
[2:01:40] ridiculous. And and and I do like
charter schools, you know, we don't have
[2:01:44] as many choices up at the lake, but um
this is a terrible plan for you guys.
[2:01:48] And I was here when um you guys sold the
school in Incline to the TTD, the Tahoe
[2:01:56] Transportation District. And I remember
the board president at the time said,
[2:02:01] "Well, we don't mind that we're selling
it for less than market value." Because
[2:02:04] I brought that up because you guys sold
it for a lot less than market value to
[2:02:07] TTD. Now TTD is turning around and
selling it and they're going to make a
[2:02:11] bunch of money on it, by the way. So it
it it's this is terrible. This is a
[2:02:16] terrible idea. I can't even believe you
guys are thinking about doing this.
[2:02:20] Thank you.
>> Okay. Thank you, Mr.
[2:02:24] » Eduardo Martinez.
>> Yeah, I think to to to Trusty Smith's
[2:02:30] point, remember, we're
this is not our real estate agreement,
[2:02:36] you know, we simply are here to take a
position, provide input to the state
[2:02:42] public charter authority. Um, so this
this isn't this isn't our deal. Does
[2:02:47] that help? Okay. Thank you. Um, welcome.
>> Good afternoon everyone. Uh, my name uh
[2:02:55] trustees uh, Superintendent McMaster. My
name is Eduardo Martinez. I'm here with
[2:03:00] Western Public Affairs on behalf of the
Charter School Association of Nevada.
[2:03:04] and the association recognizes that the
county school district has an
[2:03:08] opportunity to provide information and
concerns for the public charter school
[2:03:12] authority to consider. We encourage any
comments from the district to remain
[2:03:16] grounded in the factual record and focus
on matters within its direct knowledge
[2:03:20] and experience. We are disappointed,
however, that some advocacy
[2:03:25] organizations and their members have
chosen to use this application to pit
[2:03:29] public schools and public educ educators
against each other. After all, education
[2:03:34] is like lacrosse. It's a team sport.
Charter schools are public schools, and
[2:03:38] this agreement toward an individual
application should not be a broader
[2:03:42] fight among educators or different parts
of the Nevada public education system.
[2:03:47] We believe this discussion should remain
fair, fact-based, and reflect the full
[2:03:52] record to include the stakeholder
engagement that previously occurred. As
[2:03:56] for our member schools who are part of
the school district, we look forward to
[2:03:59] following up on Trusty Smith's comments
on WC1,
[2:04:04] uh that funding, as you know, has been
excluded for the uh district charter
[2:04:09] schools, and we look forward to
continuing that conversation. Thank you.
[2:04:14] » Thank you, sir. Appreciate you coming.
The board received emails from Joe
[2:04:18] Caluro,
the Northern Nevada Labor Council, Joe
[2:04:23] Rice, Autumn Steagel,
Katie Burquette, Sarah Adler, Jessica
[2:04:31] Cunningham, Simone Gardella, Megan
Canela, a Wo County School District
[2:04:37] teacher, Janice Brown SA,
Jamie Royce Gomes,
[2:04:44] Jennifer Tibbon,
Margot Mott, Duke Stevens, Courtney
[2:04:50] Aoyo, Amber Hart, Amy Bell, Jules
Powell, Lisa Larson, David Zavski,
[2:05:00] Ding Shang Lee, Jenny Hunt, Lee Metaf,
and Griffin Peralta related to this
[2:05:07] item.
>> Okay. Thank you, JJ. We've been uh at
[2:05:13] yes, just got a message.
We've been at this for just over two
[2:05:18] hours. Uh we're going to take a very
short break. Um so just bear with us.
[2:05:22] And when I say short, I'm really try to
keep it about five minutes and then
[2:05:25] we'll come back and and uh we'll begin
our deliberation. So thank you.
[2:15:00] Okay, everybody's quiet. So, that tells
me
[2:15:07] uh
is okay, we good? Okay. Um
[2:15:14] uh
[2:15:18] so, a couple things. We we'll bring it
back to the board for discussion,
[2:15:22] deliberation. I know there's uh still a
few questions, some uh comments folks
[2:15:26] want to make. Uh just want to kind of
give my colleagues a sense of of where
[2:15:31] we are and the potential direction that
we could move. Um I want to provide some
[2:15:37] of that context. So as trustees are
aware, board policy 952 designates the
[2:15:42] board president as the official
spokesperson for the board regarding
[2:15:45] actions taken in positions adopted by
the board. So accordingly, should the
[2:15:48] board choose to provide input to Nevada
State Public Charter School Authority,
[2:15:54] that input would then be transmitted
through a letter from the board
[2:15:57] president reflecting that direction and
the decisions of the board. Because the
[2:16:01] SPCSA has established a September 8th
deadline, again, as I stated earlier,
[2:16:07] for receiving comments, there's not
going to be sufficient enough time to
[2:16:10] draft the letter to be prepared and
brought back to the board for review and
[2:16:14] approval prior to that deadline. So, I
think it's really important that any
[2:16:18] action taken tonight clearly identifies
the board's position and the specific
[2:16:22] issues uh the board wishes to have
communicated to the SPCSA. My intent is
[2:16:28] not to in any way independently
determine the content of the board
[2:16:32] submission. I'm not the I'm not the boss
of this board. I'm simply uh your
[2:16:36] representative. Uh but rather to
accurately convey the board's direction.
[2:16:41] Uh so any issues specifically identified
and approved by the board tonight will
[2:16:45] be incorporated into a letter submitted
to the SPCA. What I'd like us to
[2:16:49] consider and I uh again just giving you
some context. I know there's uh some
[2:16:54] additional questions and followup and
we'll get to that here momentarily. But
[2:16:58] uh so you know now uh in the interest of
of of time and to be efficient, I'd like
[2:17:04] us to initially consider uh a motion to
either support or oppose uh this
[2:17:11] project. And so once we can reach
agreement uh on that matter, then we can
[2:17:16] kind of dive down into the details with
what that input would look like in the
[2:17:20] letter. Does that make sense? Okay.
>> We we are supporting the the letter that
[2:17:26] we submit.
>> That's that would be the second piece.
[2:17:29] Yes. Yes.
[2:17:35] » Yeah. Yeah.
>> Correct. Yes. Yeah. Does that make
[2:17:38] sense?
>> No. So again, because I want to be
[2:17:42] clear, I I want us to take a position on
if we're going to support or oppose the
[2:17:47] Dural Academy expansion.
Based on that decision, the next piece
[2:17:54] will be defining that letter and the
input and we will have a motion and a
[2:17:58] vote on that input as well. So two-step
process. Does that make sense? Okay,
[2:18:04] good. All right.
>> Go ahead, Trusty W.
[2:18:07] » I was going to make a motion. Well, uh,
fair enough. But I do believe that there
[2:18:12] are some, if we can hold that dot, uh, I
think there are some additional
[2:18:15] follow-up questions. Uh, I think Trusty
Nicola, you had some that you wanted to
[2:18:20] uh, to convey. So, I'm going to give you
the floor.
[2:18:23] » Thank you. And I I I'm believe that this
will inform deeper thinking whether what
[2:18:30] we decide remains to be seen. Um,
I think everyone by now knows that I
[2:18:38] support the right and responsibility of
parents to choose for their families and
[2:18:44] that includes education. It's a right
and a responsibility. What's troublesome
[2:18:50] to me about
um this application
[2:18:57] is and it's been mentioned in public
comment is that in slide six and slide
[2:19:04] 16 of the PowerPoint you reference
sustainability and risk which I think
[2:19:10] are extremely
um precarious in this particular
[2:19:15] situation.
Um, I'm troubled by the fact that
[2:19:20] Academica,
um, which is out of state, which is
[2:19:24] really neither here nor there because we
deal with many companies that are out of
[2:19:28] state,
but they don't have to file SEC uh,
[2:19:34] documents. They don't have to show
balance sheets. I worked rigorously
[2:19:39] to find
um balance sheets so that I could see
[2:19:44] about the health of the company
academica. I'm not talking about dural
[2:19:50] now. I'm talking about academica. I
could find nothing. My deeper dive
[2:19:55] showed that there is nothing for a
person like me to find because they
[2:20:00] don't have to file any of the same
documents
[2:20:05] that all 17 public school districts in
Nevada
[2:20:10] have to file. So right there that is to
me that unlevel playing field and that
[2:20:17] concerns me deeply. to continue.
The reference in the good cause
[2:20:24] exemption document
is about scaling enrollment. And I get
[2:20:30] the concept. What a beautiful and
wonderful opportunity that is not
[2:20:36] available to Wo County School District.
We cannot scale enrollment. I wish that
[2:20:43] we could tell parents, I'm sorry, our
classrooms are full. By the way, there's
[2:20:47] laws about this. there's NRS that we
have to file exemptions every year
[2:20:52] because we don't turn away students
and that's the right thing to do. I
[2:20:58] wouldn't want to turn them away.
So, we don't get to scale
[2:21:04] enrollment
and that's very troublesome to me to be
[2:21:08] honest with you. It pisses me off
because it's not right.
[2:21:14] Unlevel playing field.
Finally, I will say that yes, Wo County
[2:21:20] School District, there's so many things
that we want to do for our students, our
[2:21:23] families, our employees,
every employee. And with $9,781
[2:21:31] per pupil, it does tie our hands. But
every single day, 247, 365,
[2:21:39] our 8500
employees work their tails off to make
[2:21:44] great things happen. And it's working.
It's working. We have so many options
[2:21:50] and so many opportunities.
We have lab schools. We have teaching.
[2:21:55] We have research. We do research every
day. Talked to a teacher just the other
[2:22:00] day in government about he he's doing
action research. It's happening
[2:22:04] throughout our schools, all 104 of them.
I love the idea. I've done teacher
[2:22:11] training. I went through fabulous
teacher training programs. I am a
[2:22:16] dewist.
This is not unique. This is not unique.
[2:22:22] It is an opportunity. I love a good
opportunity. But the sustainability
[2:22:28] troubles me greatly because academica
cannot show that they're good for 10,
[2:22:34] 20, 30, 40 years. So I have to say no.
And and I want to leave us with that
[2:22:42] unlevel playing field concept. I'm I'm a
lover of quotes and I know I'm a little
[2:22:47] passionate right now, but I think that's
a good thing.
[2:22:51] A level playing field is where everyone
has an equal chance to succeed by
[2:22:59] following the same rules.
Imagine a football game where I get to
[2:23:06] have 20 players and you get to have five
and I get to have three balls and my
[2:23:10] field's only 50 yards and yours is 100.
This is what we're talking about. And I
[2:23:16] will close with this. I hate when we,
the collective, we consider students,
[2:23:21] children, our most precious gift as
assets. They are not assets.
[2:23:28] Yet, they represent a dollar that ties
all of our hands. They are not assets.
[2:23:32] They're a beautiful future. And so,
thank you for letting me have my tirade.
[2:23:37] I appreciate your time.
>> Thank you, Trusty Nichollet. Appreciate
[2:23:41] it. Uh, Trusty Smith,
>> thank you. And I appreciate Trustee
[2:23:45] Nichollet's words very much. Um, I have
a brief clarifying question, just a
[2:23:50] couple, and then maybe we can move
forward on a motion. There's so much
[2:23:54] talk about um supporting student
teachers and and innovation. Maybe this
[2:23:59] is a question for the superintendent or
perhaps one of the the chiefs that we
[2:24:03] have here. Does County School District
partner with UNR's College of Education?
[2:24:12] Wash County School District has a
long-standing partnership with the
[2:24:15] University of Nevada Reno. Um in fact,
we do have a partnership um with the New
[2:24:21] Von Middle School opening up with the
lab school classroom um that's right
[2:24:25] next door. We've been hosting student
teachers for many years. Um we have
[2:24:30] practicum relationships where our
students um come and learn very early on
[2:24:35] in their careers. So yes, we've been
working in partnership with the college
[2:24:38] of education and I would say that that
relationship continues to grow and
[2:24:42] improve every day.
>> So the answer would be yes, we do work
[2:24:46] with UNR's College of Education and also
yes, we have observation rooms that just
[2:24:52] opened an observation lab that studies
highquality instruction at our schools.
[2:24:58] Would it also be yes that we work in
partnership with UNR faculty on the
[2:25:03] development of education?
Yes. Excellent. Uh, yes, we host and
[2:25:09] support student teachers from UNR.
>> Yes.
[2:25:14] » And yes, we pilot curriculum for the
state.
[2:25:17] » Yes.
>> Yes. And yes. Um, would the answer be
[2:25:20] yes that we offer teacher training here
in the county school district? Yes. And
[2:25:24] then would the answer be yes that we
support research in partnership with UNR
[2:25:29] and other Nevada based institutions?
Yes.
[2:25:31] » Excellent. Does you andR know that we do
this with them?
[2:25:35] » Yes.
>> Okay. Maybe we could make a one sheet
[2:25:38] for them so that they understand that as
well too. I am deeply concerned about
[2:25:42] why they're confused about the research
and labs that already exist. Um but that
[2:25:49] was my my point of clarification for
that. Second one is um board president,
[2:25:53] this might be for you. Um, depending on
the outcome of today's action, would you
[2:25:58] or a representative be able to also
speak on behalf of the board, the
[2:26:03] district will take its position, but the
next meeting would be at the state
[2:26:07] public charter school authority meeting.
Would you be able to speak on our behalf
[2:26:12] in addition to whatever it is we support
on a district level?
[2:26:16] » Sure. Uh um I certainly would be uh
amendable to that uh if if if we land if
[2:26:22] if if I'm supportive of whatever
comments that we provide. Sure.
[2:26:25] » I appreciate that. I know we can all
speak individually as trustees and we
[2:26:28] don't need to do that. Um but only one
representative can speak with the
[2:26:33] authority of the board and that's either
the president or someone you designate.
[2:26:37] » Okay, those are the only clarifying
questions I have and you know we can
[2:26:40] move forward with a motion or whatever
the pleasure of the board is for the
[2:26:44] first part.
[2:26:49] Um, Mr. Dyer.
>> Yeah, President Mayberry, I just had a
[2:26:53] couple of follow-ups for Trusty Smith.
She had asked a couple questions I did
[2:26:56] not have answers for earlier.
>> Just thank you.
[2:26:58] » Um, Trusty Smith, you had asked about
can uh, Dur Academy use public funds to
[2:27:03] build uh, this building on UNR land. And
uh, the statutory reference on that is
[2:27:08] SP 384 from 2013. It was codified as NRS
388A 378. And that does provide for the
[2:27:15] use of public funds for construction and
quote to use the public money for
[2:27:20] purchase to purchase real real property
or buildings with the approval of the
[2:27:24] sponsor. Um, and I believe that ties
into your next question that you had
[2:27:28] about using unrestricted or unreserved
funds for um, this building. And I
[2:27:33] believe the answer to that is yes, under
that same framework. So long as there's
[2:27:37] approval of the sponsor and they have
determined that it's, you know,
[2:27:40] responsible good use of the those funds.
>> Yeah, I appreciate that clarification. I
[2:27:45] wonder if the parents whose money went
to the before and after school care or
[2:27:49] their enrichment programs knew that
savings were being swept into a future
[2:27:55] fund to buy a building for UNR. Um I
would we'd have to go back and actually
[2:28:00] see what those materials were if they
understood that when they were paying or
[2:28:04] the taxpayers were paying for that. I
>> I cannot comment on that part. And uh
[2:28:08] second point I also wanted to note was
um regarding prevailing wage. There is a
[2:28:12] component in the contract with UNR under
article 8 which is attachment 8 page 21
[2:28:17] that says that they agree to use comply
with prevailing wage laws for the
[2:28:21] development of the project. Just as you
know another little piece I think that
[2:28:26] came up as discussion earlier.
>> Thank you.
[2:28:29] » Thank you sir. Appreciate uh the due
diligence and the followup. That's
[2:28:32] helpful. Trusty Westlake. Um, I I had a
a question, but then I also I I was a
[2:28:41] witness when I went to introduce myself
and meet the new principal at Sepulva
[2:28:47] Elementary School. Uh we had uh
education students from UNR that were
[2:28:54] visiting that day and that they were
opened with welcome arms just as any
[2:28:59] school we would welcome um student
educators into our into our schools. So
[2:29:07] that's it's it's a given. We already
have have that element built in through
[2:29:13] Van's lab and through our welcome
welcoming nature for any education
[2:29:21] students to come in and observe or
participate in our classroom. So that is
[2:29:27] not unique to this lab school that it's
being touted as a lab school. Uh a
[2:29:35] question I have um [snorts]
uh this uh public dollars are being
[2:29:42] redirected into a forprofit
education model. Uh Deral does not have
[2:29:49] the academic model or hysteric histo I
was going to say hysterical historical
[2:29:56] record of servicing at risk learners.
Would that be a true or false statement?
[2:30:04] Based on the data that we have available
to us, they uh no, they have a very
[2:30:10] limited or zero at risk school
population.
[2:30:14] » And uh true or false or if you want to
add something to it, but at risk
[2:30:20] students require a lot of supports,
which they deserve.
[2:30:26] um a lot of supports and extra um extra
services and does has Dural in the past
[2:30:37] supported and served these at risk
students?
[2:30:40] » Uh I I can only speak to the one year
where the data was available um that I
[2:30:45] that was reviewed at that time. No. Um
remember for the state we do have
[2:30:51] special at risk funding that the state
allocates to school districts to use to
[2:30:58] address the specific needs for our
atrisisk learners which indicates that
[2:31:02] yes they do require above and beyond
what a quote unquote typical learner um
[2:31:09] needs
and I do want to remind everyone for the
[2:31:13] record that at risk students sometimes
uh two, three
[2:31:21] special needs and we're only
given funds for one weighted need per
[2:31:29] child. Even if they have two or three
weighted needs, we are servicing and
[2:31:35] supporting
sometimes more than just one weighted
[2:31:38] need that we are funded for.
>> Correct. I mean, a student could be
[2:31:43] identified as at risk, could be
identified as an EL learner, could be
[2:31:48] identified as a student with a
disability. And each one of those
[2:31:51] weights, we don't get weights for all
three. We only get a weight for one.
[2:31:56] » Thank you.
[2:31:59] » Okay. Thank you.
>> Uh, trust.
[2:32:02] » Oh, I'm sorry. I apologize.
>> I was going to make a motion, but I'll
[2:32:06] » Yes.
>> Oh,
[2:32:08] » I didn't see. Please, Kaylee. Um, I do
have a question on why don't we like put
[2:32:14] funds into the existing schools rather
than a new school? Whether it's
[2:32:18] expending expanding school buildings to
make them bigger, having more counselors
[2:32:23] for to help students individually, more
teachers to in schools to help the on
[2:32:29] the one-on-one in smaller classes or as
well as funding for like the student
[2:32:35] teachers in every school.
[2:32:40] Somebody want to take that?
[2:32:46] » I'll try and I'll try and uh respond to
that. I mean, it's a it's a great
[2:32:50] question, honestly, and I attempted to
speak to it earlier when I talked about
[2:32:57] our long-term financial plans that we
work so hard to establish and our
[2:33:01] long-term uh facility plans that we work
so hard to establish based on historical
[2:33:07] patterns and projected revenue and, you
know, enrollment needs. And we have made
[2:33:14] a number of decisions
um based on our best thinking and a lot
[2:33:19] of hard work about where we anticipate
investing our dollars for next fiscal
[2:33:24] year and where we anticipate investing
our dollars into facilities for years to
[2:33:29] come, including in some instances the
closure of some schools and
[2:33:34] consolidation of enrollment zones. That
work is complicated and painstaking and
[2:33:40] the work that often comes before this
board and this new proposed school uh
[2:33:47] would represent a major change or new
variable that would inform that plan. So
[2:33:52] it would require some adjustments um
that that we would all have to wrestle
[2:33:56] with.
>> That's it. Thank you.
[2:33:59] » You bet.
>> Okay, Trusty Smith.
[2:34:03] » All right, just a quick point of
clarification. And the first motion
[2:34:06] should be for our board to take a
position and then we would continue the
[2:34:10] meeting and talk about the areas of
emphasis in the response.
[2:34:16] » Correct. I think it'd be a lot easier if
if we came to a consensus on what
[2:34:20] direction we want to move forward on and
then we can begin to talk about the
[2:34:26] input that we want to provide to the
charter committee, the charter
[2:34:29] authority.
>> Yeah.
[2:34:31] » All right. Then I will take a shot here.
Oh. Oh, go ahead. No, no, no. You go.
[2:34:36] Yeah.
>> All right. Because I just want to
[2:34:37] express my thoughts similar to uh my
fellow trustees Wesley and uh Dr. Dye.
[2:34:45] So, I'm a title one student graduate.
Aside from the fact that as stated
[2:34:52] earlier in the public comment, you know,
this looks like a I think it's slide 22
[2:34:57] that breaks down the costs and um the
investments that would be made on this
[2:35:03] property that they will never own. That
looks like a reckless um financial
[2:35:09] decision or approach.
Um which is easy to make if you're not
[2:35:14] making any personal investment. If I
have the prop the abil if I have the
[2:35:19] ability to make these investments with
someone else's money
[2:35:25] and lose it, possibly lose it and never
gain anything out of it, I would I think
[2:35:28] I would take this as well.
And that's what my concern is and that's
[2:35:34] why I feel the way I feel because first
and foremost, if we're going to have any
[2:35:40] other schools in our district, I need
them to have the exact same demographics
[2:35:46] that we have. I need them to have title
one students. I need them to have free
[2:35:52] lunch students. I need them to match the
service that we're providing. So unless
[2:35:57] you're doing that, you should not have
access to our funds. But that's
[2:36:02] separate. Apart from that, I think that
this is
[2:36:07] a bad deal overall and there's no way I
could support something like this. So,
[2:36:13] just wanted to share that. Thank you, T.
>> Okay. Thank you, um, Vice President
[2:36:19] Woodley. And we can certainly have a
motion in a second, then we can have
[2:36:23] some further discussion before we take a
final vote if you want to do that.
[2:36:28] » No, I just wanted to do that. same as uh
Alex did there. And I just really wanted
[2:36:32] to I'll just sum it up real quick here.
I heard the public comment and I
[2:36:36] appreciate uh again, you know, the what
was said about uh innovative and finding
[2:36:40] ways to move forward with charter
schools and the purpose of it. Uh but uh
[2:36:44] again looking at the law part of it
there just on what was stated here,
[2:36:48] there was a lot of loopholes uh that was
already stated. So I won't go into that.
[2:36:52] And then some of the facts that the team
presented, you know, uh there was some
[2:36:56] pretty uh there were some questions that
weren't unanswered there. And then the
[2:37:01] data uh again sticking to our
institutional knowledge and the
[2:37:04] expertise that we have about the
demographic and the financial
[2:37:07] projections raised uh before us today.
So, you know, basically there's a lot of
[2:37:11] big questions there and then going into
the risk uh you know the sign
[2:37:15] significant uncertainty of the the
timeline being very aggressive and can
[2:37:19] you can you not to allude to a public
comment that was made about is that a
[2:37:23] good deal or what real estate uh
thinking. So uh that's uh where I really
[2:37:28] stand with that and also the student uh
remain the concern about whether the
[2:37:33] expansion truly serves everyone you know
and then is that the need uh there's a
[2:37:37] lot more that goes into it but again the
accountability I want to be clear assure
[2:37:41] that governing board that you guys are
taking on this deal and if you do you're
[2:37:45] doing everything right by the book and
you're making a first time go and what
[2:37:49] that means militarily speaking that
you're going to get expert on this and
[2:37:52] you've got it dialed in. There is no
deviation. you're you're absolutely 100%
[2:37:58] uh correct and you get it straight the
first time and I don't feel that you
[2:38:02] know I don't see that based on the the
facts and the data and specifically the
[2:38:06] piece that I like about the law. Um so I
just kind of wanted to sum that piece up
[2:38:10] there uh just in a nutshell. So thank
you.
[2:38:15] » Thank you. Um, I will also add to that
that as a trustee of this district, we
[2:38:23] talk a lot and we have spoken a lot
about our traditional public schools,
[2:38:27] but we have also heard loud and clear
from the local grassroots nonprofit
[2:38:32] charters that this directly threatens
them and their taxpayer investments,
[2:38:37] too. This very board recently approved
Mariposa Language and Learning Academy,
[2:38:43] which is a title one school.
educating 100% free and reduced lunch
[2:38:48] students and they just spent millions of
taxpayer dollars to expand their school
[2:38:53] with a full and unanimous vote of this
board by the way. And so my position on
[2:38:59] this is absolutely student focused,
making sure that every child has an
[2:39:04] opportunity to learn in the best
environment and we have those
[2:39:08] environments here within our own
district and within our district
[2:39:11] sponsored charters. And so I do want to
acknowledge the um incredible response
[2:39:17] from local grassroots charters that this
would undermine and endanger their own
[2:39:23] schools too. So I really want to be very
clear that this is not being framed uh
[2:39:28] from a public district with charters
because our local nonprofit charters uh
[2:39:33] stand against this application as well.
So, on that note, um I will go ahead and
[2:39:40] um make a shot at a first motion and
we'll see where we go with that. I move
[2:39:45] that the board of trustees directs the
superintendent to submit a formal
[2:39:49] position of opposition in response to
the state public charter school
[2:39:54] authority request regarding the
amendment application by the UNR DORAL
[2:39:59] Academy of Northern Nevada corporate
charter school franchise
[2:40:06] » and I'll second that.
>> Okay, we have clarifying question from
[2:40:10] the superintendent. Um, yes. I just want
to clarify um did we intend to have the
[2:40:16] letter come from the superintendent or
from the board of trustees and um
[2:40:21] written by the president on behalf of
the board?
[2:40:25] » Well, that's a good thing. I I thought
we were giving direction to you on what
[2:40:29] staff is going to put together for the
response. Um,
[2:40:34] so I would assume that whatever position
we take would everything else would be
[2:40:39] born from that position,
[2:40:44] but I'm more than happy to make an
adjustment to that because we're not
[2:40:47] just deciding as a board, aren't we also
directing you and staff for what we're
[2:40:52] going to submit?
>> My understanding, and I'll I'll lead to
[2:40:55] to general counsel on this, is we're
we're collectively deciding as a board.
[2:40:59] And then the second piece of this will
be what that letter looks like. And so
[2:41:03] it it technically is the board, not the
superintendent.
[2:41:07] Is am I correct with that?
>> Yes. Um so it would come from the board.
[2:41:13] Um so all of the vote in the letter
would come from the board if if the
[2:41:19] board gives direction for staff to
assist with that. I don't think that
[2:41:23] goes beyond the scope of the agenda
item. But I but I do believe the the
[2:41:27] agenda item is for the board to uh for
this to come from board input to the
[2:41:32] SPCSA.
Okay. So, if I were to make a friendly,
[2:41:37] would I say that I move that the board
of trustees takes a formal position of
[2:41:42] opposition in response to the state
public charter school authority request
[2:41:48] regarding the amendment application by
the UNR DO Academy of Northern Nevada
[2:41:54] corporate charter school franchise.
[2:42:00] » Sure. I'm sending it to JJ, too, so she
has it. I move that the board of
[2:42:04] trustees takes the formal position of
opposition in response to the state
[2:42:10] public charter school authority request
regarding the amendment application by
[2:42:16] the UNR DORAL Academy of Northern Nevada
corporate charter school franchise
[2:42:24] » and I'll second that.
[2:42:29] » Okay. Outstanding. Thank you. We got a
first uh a motion by Trusty Smith,
[2:42:33] second by um Trusty Phoenix. I uh some
more discussion. I do want to just chime
[2:42:40] in too. I haven't had uh that
opportunity yet. Um
[2:42:44] I I will just say that, you know, in in
my five year and I took some notes so I
[2:42:49] I don't get sidetracked. So, forgive me
if I'm looking down on my screen. But in
[2:42:52] my five years on this board, you know,
this the public school charter school
[2:42:56] tugof-war is it's really been
uncomfortable for me personally. I know
[2:43:01] the value of both and the debate has
become so polarized to the point where I
[2:43:06] think it's almost seemingly there's no
there's no compromise to it. I I want to
[2:43:10] begin by acknowledging something I think
is important and that's high performing
[2:43:13] charter school proposal. Uh, I recognize
the work that's been gone gone into
[2:43:18] developing the school and the
educational opportunities that it would
[2:43:20] provide our students. And I I don't
believe that we should dismiss the
[2:43:23] proposal simply because it is a charter
school. But I also have to approach this
[2:43:27] decision from a perspective of
responsibility as a trustee of the
[2:43:31] county school district. And the reality
is that the overwhelming majority of our
[2:43:35] students [snorts] in this community will
continue to attend our traditional
[2:43:38] public schools. That means our
responsibility is to protect the
[2:43:41] strength, the stability, the long-term
viability of the public school system
[2:43:44] that serves the vast majority of
children in this community. I think if
[2:43:48] we were not facing very real financial
challenges on the horizon, I think the
[2:43:52] conversation could be different. I think
the fact is that we have critical needs
[2:43:56] in our schools from staffing and student
services to maintaining our buildings
[2:43:59] and providing the programs our students
deserve. And at a time when enrollment
[2:44:03] is declining regionally and nationally,
adding another charter school means
[2:44:08] additional public resources being
directed outside the district at a time
[2:44:11] when those resources are already
stretched. So I I want to be honest with
[2:44:15] this issue. Uh we have a charter
schools. We have our own charter schools
[2:44:19] that we sponsor.
Some of those schools are not performing
[2:44:23] at the level that we expect. We have an
obligation to look in the mirror and ask
[2:44:27] ourselves why that is happening. And we
cannot stand here and argue that every
[2:44:31] character or that every charter school
rather is a threat to public education
[2:44:35] while ignoring the challenges within the
charter schools that we ourselves
[2:44:38] sponsor. I think that's an important
part of this conversation for me and for
[2:44:43] another time. But this isn't about
whether charter schools are can be good
[2:44:46] schools. They absolutely can be. This is
about whether creating another charter
[2:44:49] school is in the best interest of the
entire public education system that we
[2:44:53] are responsible for governing as a body.
So as a trustee, my first obligation is
[2:44:58] to the students, families, the staff of
the Washoe County School District have
[2:45:02] to consider not only the students who
may benefit from this particular school,
[2:45:05] but also the tens of thousands of
students who remain in our district
[2:45:08] schools and depend upon us to provide
them with a high quality education. I
[2:45:12] respect the people behind this proposal
deeply. I respect the performance of
[2:45:16] this particular charter, but respecting
a proposal and supporting it are two
[2:45:20] different things. So I believe we can
support educational choice while also
[2:45:23] recognizing that public resources are
finite. And when these resources are
[2:45:27] finite, I believe our responsibility is
to make sure the system serving the
[2:45:30] greatest number of children remain
strong, financially sustainable, and
[2:45:34] capable of meeting the needs of every
student who walks through our doors. So
[2:45:37] for those reasons, I um I'll be
supporting the motion. Thank you. All
[2:45:43] right. Any other further comments,
discussions? All in favor? We have a
[2:45:47] motion from Trusty Smith, second from
Trusty Phoenix. So all the a motion
[2:45:50] please signify by saying I in favor.
>> All oppose. Okay. Motion carries
[2:45:54] unanimously. Thank you.
>> Okay. So now we'll go to part two of
[2:45:59] this and uh we have an opportunity to
provide input to the SPC
[2:46:05] SA. Uh and that hearing is the deadline
is September 8th and a hearing is
[2:46:13] October
is October 8th. Thank you.
[2:46:17] Um
so now that we collectively agree to
[2:46:20] oppose
uh entertain some discussion on what
[2:46:25] those uh those public inputs um will be
for us.
[2:46:31] » Okay.
>> Uh Mr. President, if I'll start off I'll
[2:46:33] just point out one
>> um
[2:46:36] » only because I used to write a lot of
these types of uh staff reports. So I
[2:46:40] think first and foremost I would like to
see us identify any which we have
[2:46:45] already identified staff has violations
of NAC in the process. So anything that
[2:46:51] they were required to do that they
haven't done that should be first and
[2:46:54] foremost in our letter to the board.
>> Thank you. Thank you. Okay. They need to
[2:47:01] follow their own rules.
[2:47:07] » Trusty Smith.
>> Thank you. Um, so I have read through
[2:47:12] this like no less than five times and I,
you know me well enough to know that I'm
[2:47:17] not playing. Um, so I have a few areas
that I would like us to please focus on
[2:47:26] uh that were also missing from the staff
presentation. So first I want to say
[2:47:30] everything you had in the staff
presentation I think is really
[2:47:33] important. I'd like to see all that
carried forward, but there were a few
[2:47:37] areas that we didn't really answer some
of the points of the application and
[2:47:43] that is around the star ratings and the
real academic area overview of this
[2:47:49] school. Okay? because this is an area
where very reasonably the state public
[2:47:54] charter school authority will read the
application and go oh you know there are
[2:47:58] all these one and two star schools and
so we know that there are only certain
[2:48:02] rules where charter schools are allowed
to open.
[2:48:06] So in the vein of that we absolutely
need to address the fact that there are
[2:48:12] no underserved students in the Reno
community. That statement is made
[2:48:16] multiple times in the application and it
is not correct uh whatsoever. Our
[2:48:22] educators do provide and meet every need
as we are you know that's the whole
[2:48:26] point of you know FAPE you know. So
[clears throat]
[2:48:30] this is where I think we need to really
focus in the response and that's the
[2:48:35] star rating weaponization. So, we'll
look at Hidden Valley Elementary School,
[2:48:40] which one of our commenters mentioned
the same thing, and I I knew I was going
[2:48:44] to bring this up as well. So, this
school is only allowed in this
[2:48:48] particular plot of land because it's
right down the street from Hidden
[2:48:51] Valley. And I mean, literally right down
one street. It's about a mile away, less
[2:48:56] than a mile to Hidden Valley Elementary
School. And Hidden Valley Elementary
[2:48:59] School is a twostar school, but it's
only a twostar school because it has
[2:49:05] several intensive special education and
behavioral programs there. And those um
[2:49:10] those students are integrated with
general education students, which is
[2:49:14] what we're supposed to do. And this is
how star ratings get weaponized. Uh so I
[2:49:20] would point out that yes, Hidden Valley
is a two-star school, but here's why.
[2:49:26] Because if we didn't have those
intensive programs there, I mean, it
[2:49:29] would conceivably be a three or a
four-star school. And this proposed
[2:49:34] franchise school won't even have any of
those programs. So, Hidden Valley
[2:49:38] specifically serves a population of 25%
special education and 15% English
[2:49:45] language learners. That's based on the
most recent Nevada academic framework.
[2:49:49] And I think we should point out that
this school by its own admission is not
[2:49:54] educating these kids. But yet the
placement for this school is allowed
[2:50:00] because Hidden Valley is a twoar school.
And I think that's something we really
[2:50:04] need to look at. And then we need to
pull it out more broadly. The
[2:50:08] application references the 89520 zip
code which is um I think intentionally
[2:50:14] misleading when you look at where 89502
actually goes on a map.
[2:50:19] this school location is on the the edge
of it. It's very very close to 89521,
[2:50:24] which I'll get to in a minute. Um, so it
pulls from this area again as
[2:50:30] justification, but I believe this
application is disqualified
[2:50:35] when you look at the real radius of this
school. This is really important, folks.
[2:50:40] And in the staff presentation, we didn't
talk about star ratings, but the state
[2:50:44] public charter school authority must
deny if it does not have reasonable
[2:50:49] educational environments around it.
Here's why this is so important. This
[2:50:54] school is literally down the road from
the original, the first hopefully only
[2:51:01] Doral Academy that's there in South
Reno. It's literally the exact same road
[2:51:05] that goes straight there. in this land
is two miles away from 89521.
[2:51:12] So if we look at 89502 and as far as
that zone goes from this school and we
[2:51:18] were to do a full radius
that is really what we need to explain
[2:51:22] to the state public charter school
authority because what they will see in
[2:51:26] our response is two things. One, this
school is asking to open in school year
[2:51:32] 2028. So our response should include all
the schools in that full radius and how
[2:51:38] many of our schools are closing. So
remember we're in our last year of
[2:51:43] service for Dodson, that's a twostar
school. Corbett, that's a one-star
[2:51:47] school. And Veterans, that's a one-star
school. We're closing those schools. So
[2:51:50] the state public charter school
authority should know that and we should
[2:51:54] reflect what schools we'll have in 2028
and shortly thereafter. And then we also
[2:52:00] need to actually include the star
ratings um and the performance of our
[2:52:05] district sponsored charters. We've got
Ace High School and 89502 Coral Academy
[2:52:10] High School, four and five star schools.
But the real goal with this is and I
[2:52:16] think disqualifies the application is
that this proposed school is only like I
[2:52:21] said two miles away right down one road
to 89521.
[2:52:26] It is the closest area to the highest
concentration of top starrated schools
[2:52:32] in the entire state which is South Reno.
So when you actually look at a map the
[2:52:38] application claims that the second
campus is centrally located. It is no
[2:52:42] such thing. It is literally directly
down the street from the original
[2:52:46] location. Um it's right on the edge
there. what it is in the radius of is in
[2:52:52] seven fivestar schools, two fourstar
schools, three um three star schools um
[2:52:58] including a five-star high school. The
reason why this is important is that if
[2:53:02] our response fails to acknowledge the
star ratings of the whole area and take
[2:53:07] into account the schools that are
closing, we're missing an opportunity to
[2:53:11] directly respond to why charters are
allowed to be established. And this area
[2:53:17] is absolutely not an underperforming
area under any shape or size or
[2:53:22] anything. And I think that that's
something that needs to be included.
[2:53:27] Um, staying on with the location, we've
got the members of the state public
[2:53:32] charter school authority. I don't expect
them all to know Reno like the back of
[2:53:35] their hand. I would include an actual
map that puts little stars on the
[2:53:41] original door and then the proposed
second franchise location so that they
[2:53:46] can actually see how close they are and
then they can actually see all the star
[2:53:51] ratings because that's really where
we're we're pulling from is from that
[2:53:55] top performing area that we have here
because I think that that would help
[2:53:59] them understand that it's not centrally
located.
[2:54:04] And um continuing on here, this is
something that I submitted for
[2:54:09] supplemental materials and it's the
non-compliance disqualification.
[2:54:15] So on slide five of our presentation, it
says very plainly that you that the
[2:54:22] state public charter school authority
needs to must actually deny an
[2:54:28] application if it is not it fails to
meet any of its performance frameworks.
[2:54:34] uh with academics, finances or
organization.
[2:54:38] And last week, the audit committee, the
um state audit division released
[2:54:46] probably one of the most stunning
reports I have ever read, and I included
[2:54:52] it for supplemental materials.
This procurement report had some real
[2:54:59] doozies in it about what's happening
with for-profit emos and the state
[2:55:03] public charter school authority and I'll
just read some of those because I think
[2:55:07] we should mention that. So I will
mention that the state public charter
[2:55:11] school authority isn't revealing who
these EMOs are but I do believe that we
[2:55:16] should in our response ask that they
deny this on the basis of finances and
[2:55:21] organization.
uh because there are clearly some some
[2:55:26] really questionable practices and if the
identities of these EMOs were known that
[2:55:32] could be a reason for denial.
And so I'll just mention a couple of
[2:55:37] those so that everyone can be somewhat
aware of this.
[2:55:42] So, of all the charter school contracts
that the auditors looked at, every
[2:55:47] single one of them um had major issues
with the EMOs that they were contracted
[2:55:52] with. Um and it does say that the SPCSA
as part of its organizational framework
[2:55:59] um is supposed to oversee this although
they have the charter authority has no
[2:56:03] procedures in place to ensure contract
provisions. They're not even looking at
[2:56:07] these contracts. The charter school
authority went on to admit, this is on
[2:56:12] page 33, that draft EMO contracts
undergo review by SPCSA at the time of
[2:56:19] the initial charter school application
process. However, this process was
[2:56:24] absent of legal review and approval.
What are you even reviewing? I mean,
[2:56:29] this is some serious impropriy. But the
point of it is is you can't deny this
[2:56:35] because they're hiding the identities of
these EMOs. So, here's a few of those
[2:56:39] things that these hidden EMOs without
names have done. Um, one of the EMOs
[2:56:45] swept the state education funds to a
bank account in Arizona controlled by
[2:56:51] the EMO. And further, none of the
school's governing board members were
[2:56:55] authorized signers. That's not legal.
Um, additionally, um, there was a lack
[2:57:02] of enforcement from the charter school
authority. I mean, it's throughout the
[2:57:05] entire report. Um, all five of the
financial reports reviewed by the state
[2:57:10] auditors um said that the EMO's
management fees did not align with with
[2:57:15] each school's expenditure report as
required by statutes and regulations.
[2:57:20] That would fall under the denial that we
have here.
[2:57:25] And oh, um, one of the charter schools
was paying its EMO $184,000
[2:57:33] without any invoices. just gave them
$184,000
[2:57:38] with no invoices whatsoever, was just
paying them that. Um, another um, EMO
[2:57:44] sent its executives and school personnel
on a cruise for $20,000,
[2:57:50] which I thought was really interesting.
Um, not definitely not okay. So the
[2:57:56] reason why I point this out and then I
have it is that I would like our
[2:57:59] response to show that it is no fault of
our own that we don't know what these
[2:58:04] what these emos are that have engaged in
this malfence. But if any of them are
[2:58:09] academica that would be a must deny.
And um the third thing that I'll mention
[2:58:17] that I'd like to see in the response is
the work that's already happening with
[2:58:21] the UNR College of Education.
We're doing all of these things. Uh we
[2:58:27] have amazing choice. Our district
sponsored charters have amazing choice.
[2:58:32] All of our current charters in the
entire area have amazing choice. We're
[2:58:38] already supporting student teaching.
We're already doing this work. And I
[2:58:42] think that that needs to be really
really clear exactly all the options and
[2:58:46] the support that we have for students.
Not just for student teachers who are
[2:58:50] students that are adults. Um and then
also for our children as well because
[2:58:54] this response must be rooted with a
student centered focus. We absolutely
[2:59:00] must talk about our kids, the options
that they have, the support that they
[2:59:04] have, school of choice, all of those
things that we have to make it
[2:59:09] abundantly clear that there is nothing
in this application or educational model
[2:59:14] that our multitude of educational
ecosystem schools offer, which is not
[2:59:19] just the Wo County School District. It's
district sponsored charters, it's state
[2:59:23] public charters, all of which receive
public funds. And so I think that that
[2:59:27] really needs to be emphasized and that's
on top of everything else that you have
[2:59:30] in the application. Um, thank you for
giving me that time, Mr. President.
[2:59:37] » Sure. Would you like to sum summarize
that in 30 seconds?
[2:59:42] » Um, thank you, Trusty Smith, Trusty
Westlake.
[2:59:45] » Thank you, President Mayberry. I think
it's really important
[2:59:50] that we um
that it absolutely is going to affect
[2:59:56] stakeholders that there is I mean from
families
[3:00:02] uh to our construction.
It is going to literally disrupt, like I
[3:00:10] said before, the whole ecosystem that we
have here in Nevada. And we are
[3:00:16] flatlining
on um on sales tax.
[3:00:22] Doing this is going to create um a huge
hardship. Things that we haven't even
[3:00:29] really looked at. We are being fiscally
responsible by reducing our footprint.
[3:00:36] If there are schools that are not
supporting
[3:00:42] enough number of students to remain
open, we are doing the fiscally
[3:00:48] responsible thing of closing those
schools and moving those kids to a next
[3:00:53] closer area. It's it's hard. It breaks
my heart. One of one of the schools was
[3:00:59] in my district, Little Kate Smith. It
was heartbreaking.
[3:01:03] Um, but we we are making those decisions
in order to do the right thing for our
[3:01:11] state. Now, we have a company coming in
from Florida,
[3:01:17] coming in as a franchise and using
students as a way to make money and take
[3:01:24] the money out of our state. This is
going to absolutely affect that we are
[3:01:29] going to have to close schools. I mean
to think otherwise is being delusional.
[3:01:35] There's there's only so many kids. It's
not like all of a sudden all these kids
[3:01:41] are going to flood in and there's
there's enough for everybody. And we're
[3:01:45] servicing all of the children. But in
closing these schools, we are also going
[3:01:50] to have to take on the hardship of
getting those children that no longer
[3:01:55] have a school that they can afford or
that meets their needs, their special
[3:01:59] needs. We are going to need to bust them
to a school farther away in order to get
[3:02:07] them to a public school because not all
are halves. There's a lot of have nots
[3:02:14] and it has to be stated we because we're
required
[3:02:19] to provide a public education and if
that means then more buses, more gas,
[3:02:27] more expenditures, then we are going to
do that. We will meet those children's
[3:02:31] needs. But is it feasible that we can? I
I just don't know. I don't know because
[3:02:38] everyone is stretched so thin. Another
thing that I forgot to bring up earlier
[3:02:42] is we are also going above and beyond.
We have our own policing organization to
[3:02:50] protect our children and to protect the
neighborhoods around our schools.
[3:02:56] Dural does not. They're going to rely on
Wo County for that large body.
[3:03:02] Seven up to maybe 1700 of students. I
know we haveus with organizations and we
[3:03:09] rely and help each other. We also help
Reno PD and Sparks PD and Wo County, but
[3:03:15] we are going above and beyond to ensure
that our students are safe and our
[3:03:22] [snorts] neighborhoods are safe and we
foot the bill for that. We do. We're
[3:03:27] we're not taking more money away from a
state that is already stretched thin.
[3:03:33] Thank you.
Uh, thank you, Trusty West. Trusty
[3:03:36] Nicllet.
>> Yes, I I can be brief on this. Um, as
[3:03:40] far as the letter, um, if appropriate
and and I know legal needs to chime in.
[3:03:46] All a bunch of experts need to chime in,
but I I would like it to to reflect that
[3:03:52] Academica
um, we can't see their financials and
[3:03:56] and I think that that's extremely
important when public dollars are being
[3:04:01] put into whatever coffer. I'm not even
going to try and identify where it goes.
[3:04:06] I don't know because I can't see that.
And I would like to be able to see where
[3:04:10] our public dollars are going. The second
thing that that I really would like to
[3:04:22] to trust Smith's I'd like to us to
expand on the fact that we are already
[3:04:28] doing
what Derell's expansion and that's a
[3:04:34] lovely idea is doing and much much more.
our community partners.
[3:04:41] I I think they would want us to to shore
them up and and illuminate the fact that
[3:04:48] we do so much with them for our
students. And then finally, um I think
[3:04:54] that I would personally like and and I
don't know, it'll fall on deaf ears. I'm
[3:05:00] not sure, but maybe our legislators and
our Nevada State Board of Education will
[3:05:06] really look at this. But this unlevel
playing field, this ability to scale
[3:05:12] enrollment is
I'm not an attorney, but I'm going to
[3:05:17] use the word, forgive me, uh, Council of
Montalbo. Um, I think it should be
[3:05:23] illegal. That is that is simply not how
things should go down for students. And
[3:05:29] there's my two cents. Thank you,
>> Trusty. Vice President Wood Whley,
[3:05:35] » thank you. I just want to um just state
my last point. I know I gave first um
[3:05:39] input, but here's the reality. The
reality is that we have spent months and
[3:05:45] years directing staff, go out in the
community, find out what they need.
[3:05:51] We're not making investment um
decisions. We're asking the community,
[3:05:56] the parents, the neighborhoods, what
would you like to see? What would you
[3:05:59] like to see in these new schools that
we're building? What would you like to
[3:06:02] see in the schools that we're remodeling
that we're mo with our modernization
[3:06:05] plan, with our onepoint entry? We're
asking them and they're telling us what
[3:06:10] they want and you guys have brought it
back to us. And based on that, we've
[3:06:14] made investments
and we need to protect those
[3:06:18] investments.
And that's what my concern is. So, I
[3:06:22] want to make sure that they're aware of
that because these are our constituents
[3:06:26] investments.
>> Thank you. I I I'll say too that that I
[3:06:30] I good discussion and this is this is
the hard part, right? You know, um
[3:06:36] I I would rather see us stick to issues
that they need to know and of our
[3:06:43] opposition. The the EM the EMO issues
with academia. I know there's a lot of
[3:06:48] concern clearly there's a lot of
knowledge. I I I don't know if that
[3:06:52] necessarily needs to be in this
particular um input
[3:06:57] uh to the um to the charter authority.
It's it's uh it's already noted in our
[3:07:02] um legislative framework that uh that
that we essentially oppose these
[3:07:08] for-profit educational management
organizations. I do like the I'm hearing
[3:07:13] consistently and I agree that a need is
being met already. Uh I appreciate uh
[3:07:18] the discussion on the demographics uh
the WC1 investments, the overall fiscal
[3:07:23] impact
uh that they operate by different rules.
[3:07:27] But I think if if we we start to go down
a rabbit hole when we go into the
[3:07:32] nuances
uh when it comes to us opposing this
[3:07:36] particular project, I think you know the
there's state requirements that are
[3:07:40] already in in place if we really want to
affect change. Uh I think is I think it
[3:07:45] was you uh Trusty Nichollet that we
should really work with our legislators.
[3:07:50] That's where it begins. I I I think some
of the discussions in my opinion has
[3:07:54] kind of gone beyond the scope of of
where we should be going in terms of
[3:07:57] opposition.
>> Trusty Phoenix.
[3:08:01] » Yeah. Just to finish this up here
finally, uh you kind of heard it
[3:08:04] already. So uh number one for me, just
stick to the law like you have been
[3:08:07] already. And that's uh very important
for uh anything that goes down the road.
[3:08:12] And again just sticks to the facts man
that's it you know you stick to the
[3:08:15] facts and and uh you provide that with
the data that supports all that I know
[3:08:19] you have the framework already you
delivered that earlier but again just
[3:08:23] sticking to that stuff there and then
the risk that I pointed out earlier uh
[3:08:27] some of the things with financing
timelines and all staffing operational
[3:08:30] readiness the impacts that I could have
and then again you've heard already so
[3:08:34] again students the access for everyone
and I won't belabor all of that and
[3:08:39] accountability this is where I'll spend
just a little piece on that is that the
[3:08:42] the governance from the SPA oversight
and academia, you know, the
[3:08:47] relationships, the commitments, the
consequences, there's a lot that that
[3:08:51] authority, you know, has to consider.
And we want to make sure, like I said
[3:08:55] earlier, when you go for that expert,
uh, badge, uh, when you're going for
[3:08:58] your infantry expert badge, you got to
get everything 100% correct to get a go.
[3:09:03] And then if you don't, you're out. I
really want to emphasize the importance
[3:09:06] of making sure that, uh, it's done
right. So, just in closing, you know,
[3:09:10] I'm not against charter schools. Again,
it was brought up. It's innovative. It's
[3:09:13] the way to go. But I'll stick to uh
again, stick to the facts. The law, the
[3:09:17] facts, the data, the risk, the student
impact, and accountability is a big
[3:09:20] piece for me. So, uh that's it for me.
Thank you.
[3:09:24] » Thank you, Trusty Phoenix. Trusty Smith.
>> Um so, Mr. President, I definitely hear
[3:09:29] you on that. I do believe that it's
salient to point out the financial
[3:09:34] compliance concerns because if any
of the EMOs are the ones in this audit
[3:09:42] which their identities are currently
being kept private
[3:09:48] that's a must deny
and so while we don't know which of
[3:09:53] these if any are Academica they are the
largest for-profit EMO operator in the
[3:09:59] entire state so statistically ically it
would be really surprising if they're
[3:10:03] not these. I'm not suggesting that we
would outline every one of these, but
[3:10:08] the reality is is this audit report has
disqualifying facts about some
[3:10:15] for-profit emos. We just don't know who
they are. The state public charter
[3:10:20] school authority knows, but if any of
these things are academica, that would
[3:10:24] be a must deny immediately. And so I
would trust staff to interpret what this
[3:10:31] looks like in terms of a letter or in
the response, but I do feel we would be
[3:10:35] remiss to not point out this audit
report because it would be an immediate
[3:10:40] m must deny if any of these are
academica.
[3:10:44] » Yeah, that's fair. I I just I think it
it's just just not crossing that
[3:10:48] threshold of of you know this this
blanket opposition of of AMOs. I mean, I
[3:10:54] think when you get on nuances, I I agree
with you. Thank you.
[3:10:57] » Yeah. Um, I'll also add that I think I
touched on it before and we've all
[3:11:02] talked about it that the response from
the district and from our board
[3:11:06] absolutely must be student focused. It
needs to be from a position of what it
[3:11:10] is that we offer and what it is that our
area offers to all of our schools from
[3:11:15] the experience of our children and not
so much um us as an organization or as
[3:11:21] an entity.
And I think our staff can help us kind
[3:11:25] of drill down.
>> Um, if we can bring forward sort of the
[3:11:30] highlevel topics,
we can fill in the blanks with the staff
[3:11:36] based on this public conversation. That
make sense? Superintendent,
[3:11:41] » how specific do you want this motion to
be? Just like the highlevel themes
[3:11:45] because I've been drafting the highle
themes.
[3:11:48] » I think I think from from my
perspective, I'll speak for myself. I
[3:11:51] think that would be a really good start.
>> Okay.
[3:11:54] » And then we could have some further
discussion. We can hear from our
[3:11:56] superintendent if that's manageable for
them. Um yeah. Does that help?
[3:12:03] » Yeah. No, I already have something. I've
been keeping notes.
[3:12:06] » Uh anybody else if I'm happy to Trusty
Smith, you want you share with us uh a
[3:12:13] draft motion?
>> I do. Thank you. Um I I I do also want
[3:12:18] to say one other thing because this I'd
be remiss to not say this. It's in their
[3:12:22] application and it bothers me. I do not
believe that our current superintendent
[3:12:27] or our former superintendent are being
fairly represented in this application.
[3:12:32] I will not include that in the motion
because I will defer to our current
[3:12:36] superintendent and our former
superintendent about how they'd like
[3:12:39] that represented. But it should be said
on the record that this was a
[3:12:43] misrepresentation.
And this follows a pattern for Academica
[3:12:47] schools. They made the exact same false
representation of now Vice President
[3:12:53] Woodley and Trustee Nichollet and Chief
Van Tress when academic filed their
[3:12:58] application for Matter Academy. And all
three of those leaders I just named
[3:13:04] filed uh statements um clarifying uh
what they supported and what they were
[3:13:10] told and all of that. And so when I read
this application, I felt exactly the
[3:13:14] same way about how Superintendent
McMaster and former Superintendent Ernst
[3:13:19] were portrayed in it, but I'm not going
to include that in the motion. I will
[3:13:22] let you decide what you what you feel is
appropriate with that.
[3:13:26] » Okay.
>> And if I just just say too, you know,
[3:13:28] regardless of what's in the letter, to
your point, um this is a public
[3:13:32] discussion and so everything we say is
is still on the record. and and so uh
[3:13:38] rather it's it makes the letter or not I
mean this is a a [snorts] public meeting
[3:13:43] where people can come hear your
perspective your perspective uh so I I
[3:13:48] don't it's been a a very healthy
exercise from that perspective I just I
[3:13:51] don't want us to lose sight of that that
it doesn't make it in the letter you all
[3:13:55] of us have had a voice
>> oh I would love to send a recording of
[3:13:59] this entire
item to every single member of the state
[3:14:04] public charter school authority board
personally,
[3:14:07] » which is not an elected body, by the
way.
[3:14:09] » Which is not an elected body. That's
exactly correct. They have no fiduciary
[3:14:13] responsibility to the voters um or the
taxpayers in Wo County. All right. Let
[3:14:17] me take a stab at this. And JJ, I'm
going to send this to you, but I was
[3:14:23] keeping notes as to what everybody was
saying. Okay. And I can pair it down. We
[3:14:28] can do it. I move that the board of
trustees includes in its response to the
[3:14:34] state public charter school authority
all points deficiencies and
[3:14:39] disqualifiers noted in the items
presentation
[3:14:43] factual demographics for the WCSD and
current and proposed UNR DORAL schools
[3:14:52] school performance and specialty
education programs at the full radius of
[3:14:57] area WCSD schools
information on local charters in the
[3:15:02] area.
Highlight corporate revenue of the
[3:15:07] for-profit EMO, financial compliance
concerns with the for-profit EMO and
[3:15:14] SPCSA,
protection of Nevada and Wo County
[3:15:18] taxpayer assets and investments,
and the response should be provided to
[3:15:23] all the government entities identified
in the agenda items presentation.
[3:15:33] Okay, that's a lot. Um, but that's it.
It has to be. You want to repeat that,
[3:15:39] JJ?
>> I got it. She sent it to me.
[3:15:43] » Okay. Um,
>> I can read it again.
[3:15:46] » Well, I I'd like somebody to read it
again, please. Yes.
[3:15:50] » Yeah, I'm more than happy to do that.
Um, I move that the board of trustees
[3:15:55] includes in its response to the state
public charter school authority all
[3:16:01] points, deficiencies, and disqualifiers
noted in the items presentation.
[3:16:08] Factual demographics for the WCSD and
current and proposed UNR DORAL schools.
[3:16:17] School performance and specialty
education programs at the full radius of
[3:16:22] area WCSD schools.
Information on local charters in the
[3:16:27] area. Highlight corporate revenue of the
for-profit EMO.
[3:16:33] financial compliance concerns with
for-profit emos and the SPCSA
[3:16:39] protection of Nevada and Wo County
taxpayer assets and investments and the
[3:16:45] response should be provided to all the
government entities identified in this
[3:16:49] agenda item presentation.
[3:16:55] » Okay. Um
any questions on the motion? I I
[3:17:01] understand understand we need a second.
Uh yeah. Well, I guess we got we need a
[3:17:04] second to discuss it. So, is there a
second on this? Second.
[3:17:07] » Okay. Thank you, Trusty Nichollet. Um
any questions, clarifications uh on the
[3:17:12] motion. Superintendent McMaster?
>> Um I do have a question on the um
[3:17:17] highlighting the revenue of the
corporate um EMO. I don't we don't have
[3:17:22] access to that. So, are you meaning
highlight the fact that we don't have
[3:17:25] access to the financials?
>> Oh, no. We've got it
[3:17:28] » for clarity.
>> Oh, no. We've got it. Okay. What's in
[3:17:31] the application? You need
>> Yeah.
[3:17:33] » Okay.
>> Um
[3:17:36] » Oh, wait. We're talking about the the
EMO, the corporate revenue of the EMO.
[3:17:40] Yeah, we have that.
>> You said highlight the revenue at the
[3:17:43] corporate EMO for profit or the
for-profit EMO. Okay.
[3:17:47] » Oh, yeah. We actually have that.
>> Can you reference which what you're
[3:17:51] referring to just for our clarity?
>> Yeah, it's in the proposed
[3:17:55] um it is six slash2. Oh, no. page uh
slicks-3.
[3:18:02] It's attachment six of their
application, the projected system
[3:18:06] budget. So, I did the analysis on this.
When the new campus is proposed to open,
[3:18:13] there'd be roughly a 92% increase in the
fees with their first year being
[3:18:18] $964,000.
And then Academica gets a raise of 13
[3:18:24] and a half% every single year,
yearover-year.
[3:18:27] Um and the last year that they project
is school year 3031 and at that point
[3:18:33] the academica fees go up to 1,241,568.
[3:18:40] So they provide this right for us.
>> And if I may, yes, absolutely. But to
[3:18:47] clarify, my reference is academica in
general.
[3:18:51] » They're corporate dollars, not just
Durell. So which is much bigger and you
[3:18:56] can't find it because they don't have to
file it.
[3:19:00] » So you would like both
>> both what trustee Smith for for the
[3:19:04] motion just so we have clarity on what
you mean by the corporate structure with
[3:19:09] academica and the issues. It is what
Trustee Smith outlined in the um uh
[3:19:16] amendments in their supplemental
materials. Uh the payments that are
[3:19:20] going to uh the Academica and then it is
the issue that Academica's finances are
[3:19:26] not public are not published. So we
don't actually know what their financial
[3:19:30] structure looks like.
>> Correct. Thank you. And and it had to in
[3:19:34] my reference just to kind of remind all
of us it had to do with that long-term
[3:19:38] sustainability.
And so on that note, that is I totally
[3:19:43] agree and that's a great um explanation
of it. I kept it as financial compliance
[3:19:48] concerns with for-profit emos um to keep
it broad for the motion, but that's a
[3:19:54] great explanation of it if that's okay.
But I I kept that part high level, but
[3:20:02] that's a great explanation of what she
meant.
[3:20:06] » Okay, I think that that's clear now. And
I just want to double check with the
[3:20:10] team that presented. I believe
everything else that you've asked for
[3:20:14] was already shared in the presentation
or easily accessible. Does the team have
[3:20:18] any concerns with the ask on this
motion?
[3:20:22] » Good question.
[3:20:28] » Okay.
>> Okay.
[3:20:30] » Vice President Woodley, you had made a
comment too. Um I want to make sure that
[3:20:34] that made it into the motion. Did Did
you hear it? I did in the initial the
[3:20:39] very first um thing she stated something
to the effect of what was omitted or
[3:20:43] what wasn't done correctly that covers
it.
[3:20:45] » Yes. Got it.
>> Yep. And that's in the all the points
[3:20:48] deficiencies and disqualifiers noted in
the items presentation.
[3:20:54] [snorts] C
>> can I clarify on that? I think what he's
[3:20:57] referring to uh uh Vice President
Willy's comment about um is a bad deal
[3:21:03] with UNR um which is in the
presentation. Is that also encompassed
[3:21:07] in that about how they're basically
building a facility that is going to UNR
[3:21:13] and spending public monies to go to UNR?
That that is encompassed in that uh
[3:21:20] motion. Okay.
>> It's was definitely my intent but to
[3:21:23] follow President Mayberry keeping the
themes high level but it sure was
[3:21:28] » from my intent. Yes.
[3:21:33] » Trusty Phoenix, please.
>> Yeah. That is the only comment again as
[3:21:36] always making sure that what we ask of
you and you did I just want to make sure
[3:21:40] that when we ask of the staff is this is
something that you can do or you know
[3:21:45] you got it. I always want to make sure
that you give me that green light you're
[3:21:48] good to go and not just say roger that
sir I want to carry on. I just want to
[3:21:52] make sure I know it was asked and
answered, but please one more time for
[3:21:56] me so I have a good
>> Yeah, I mean to clarify, you know, it's
[3:21:59] the information we provided on this
slide deck in addition to the star
[3:22:04] rating and some of the stipulations that
Trustee Smith had included which I
[3:22:09] believe we can handle.
>> Thank you very much for that
[3:22:13] confirmation.
Yeah. The only thing that just kind of
[3:22:16] gives me pause and and maybe it's not
necessarily in it because there's so so
[3:22:20] many nuances, but I I'm I'm not real
comfortable getting into their Dorell's
[3:22:25] business arrangement with their company.
I mean, that that's that's I I don't
[3:22:30] care. I'm more concerned about their
negative impact, the fiscal impact uh on
[3:22:35] on this organization, on our resources,
um you know, the uh the fact that needs
[3:22:41] are being met. So, I mean,
you know, help me out here. I I just I I
[3:22:47] don't want to get into the nuances of
their arrangement. That's up that's up
[3:22:50] to them. I I could care less.
>> I think
[3:22:52] » it sort of is, but it's not because it
says right there that the sponsor must
[3:22:57] deny if it's not meeting their
performance framework. The state auditor
[3:23:02] says these EMOs that were anonymously in
this report. Yeah, I get that.
[3:23:07] » Are not.
>> We don't know.
[3:23:10] But if Academica is any one of these, it
says right there that this application
[3:23:16] must be denied for not meeting its
framework for finances or organization.
[3:23:20] » Yeah, they they have to follow their own
rules. So that's that's uh I I I I can
[3:23:24] get behind that. Thank you for for
crystallizing that. I just want to make
[3:23:27] sure that's where we're going. So thank
you for that.
[3:23:29] » Oh, Doral, um they can agree to whatever
they want with their EMO. My interest is
[3:23:34] solely that this audit report.
>> Okay. Yeah. if if if it's tailored to
[3:23:39] that, I'm I'm I'm okay with that.
Okay. So, looks like we have a a first
[3:23:46] by uh Trusty Smith with the second from
uh Trusty Nichollet uh for uh on the
[3:23:53] motion as stated. I'm not hearing any
other additions or any further comments.
[3:23:59] Yes,
I'm sure Kayla, you you can repeat
[3:24:02] everything. All right. Just fine. Okay.
[laughter]
[3:24:05] All in favor, please signify by saying
I. I.
[3:24:08] » Those opposed? Okay. Motion carries
unanimously. Thank you. Great work,
[3:24:12] everybody.
[3:24:18] Um,
okay, we're going to move on to reports.
[3:24:22] Uh, I am going to forego item 4.02 for
board reports. Going to 4.01 though, I I
[3:24:29] we have our student representative. This
is Kayle's first meeting. Kaylee, is
[3:24:32] there anything you want to share with
us? Um, yes, we have our kickoff for the
[3:24:37] student voice meeting on September 16th
at the Automobile Museum. And then our
[3:24:43] student voice Instagram is where like
students can share their voice.
[3:24:49] » Thank you very much. That's awesome.
>> Uh, okay. Well, for go 4.02. In the
[3:24:55] interest of time, uh, 4.03 is a
superintendent report. It's the
[3:24:59] superintendent McMaster. Do you have
anything you'd like to add?
[3:25:05] Um yes, thank you. I would just like to
take a moment to recognize the
[3:25:09] extraordinary impact of the Hawk fire in
our community. Um so many of our
[3:25:14] families, our students, our employees
have been directly impacted by these
[3:25:18] fires. Many of our colleagues have been
evacuated from their own homes for
[3:25:22] several days and some have had a
devastating loss of their homes. So,
[3:25:27] first and foremost, I just want to thank
all of our first responders and everyone
[3:25:31] who continues to work around the clock
to protect our entire community. I also
[3:25:36] want to thank the many district
employees who stepped forward to help
[3:25:39] wherever needed. Um, I want to just
share a story on Saturday um as the fire
[3:25:46] crested over the top of Peine Mountain.
It was headed towards the north valleys
[3:25:50] where our north transportation yard is
just at the base of Peine. we got um
[3:25:56] very worried about the potential impact.
Um so we made the decision, the tough
[3:26:02] decision to evacuate that yard. Um this
was an enormous undertaking in a very
[3:26:07] short period of time and I just want to
recognize the team that made this
[3:26:10] happen. So a special thanks first of all
to transportation director Scott Lee who
[3:26:16] assembled more than 75 transportation
drivers and staff in a very short amount
[3:26:21] of time. Scott himself was also
evacuated from his own home during this
[3:26:26] time that he was coordinating these
efforts. Yet, he continued to lead and
[3:26:30] support his team during a very difficult
time. And I think this just speaks
[3:26:34] volumes to his commitment to our
students and our entire community. We
[3:26:39] were lucky to be able to um evacuate all
of those buses before it went into the
[3:26:44] red zone. So, it was truly heroic work.
I also want to just recognize our own
[3:26:49] deputy superintendent Don Angotti. Um
our chief of school police Shauna Baker,
[3:26:55] our area superintendent, Melinda Baker,
our chief facilities officer Tammy
[3:27:00] Zimmerman. Um, one of our interim
principles, Mark Zineran. Um, Alice
[3:27:05] Smith, fifth grade teacher, Stephanie
Smith. Palmer Elementary first grade
[3:27:10] teacher Chris Smith and Palmer fourth
grade teacher Wayan Denny, as well as
[3:27:15] chief communication officer Michelle
Anderson, and communications director
[3:27:19] Ben McDonald. They all jumped in and
went on site and were helping to shuttle
[3:27:24] vehicles back and forth, especially our
white fleet. So, thank you to all of you
[3:27:29] for taking time away from your families
and putting our community first. I'm
[3:27:33] just incredibly proud of the way the
county school district team responded.
[3:27:38] Um, this is what um a community looks
like in crisis when people step forward
[3:27:44] and do whatever is needed to help one
another. Um, I also just want to
[3:27:49] recognize that closing schools across
the districts, I know can be
[3:27:52] frustrating, particularly when a school
itself is maybe outside of the
[3:27:57] evacuation zone. These are not decisions
that we take lightly. But during a
[3:28:02] regional emergency, we have to look
beyond the location of an individual
[3:28:06] school site. Thousands of our students
and employees have been evacuated. They
[3:28:12] face power outages that are affecting
our entire community. our transportation
[3:28:16] system was um significantly impacted and
our public safety resources were
[3:28:21] stretched very thin um and impacted our
broader emergency response. So after
[3:28:27] extensive conversations with our
regional emergency partners, we
[3:28:31] determined that the combination of all
of these factors made that broader
[3:28:35] closure the safest and most responsible
decision for our schools on Monday and
[3:28:40] today. I know closures create a real
challenge for families and we appreciate
[3:28:45] everyone's patience and understanding.
Starting last night and early this
[3:28:50] morning, we began began assessing what
tomorrow may look like, making sure we
[3:28:55] evaluate all safety and operational
needs from the evacuations to road
[3:29:00] closures to potential staffing shortages
to meal services after we've had schools
[3:29:05] that have been without power for long
periods of time to transportation
[3:29:09] impacts. Um, we will be after this board
meeting assembling as a team and sending
[3:29:15] out information to our staff and our
families um because we know that early
[3:29:20] communication is welcome and helpful. So
once again, thank you to everyone. Thank
[3:29:25] you for being kind and patient to one
another and thank you to everyone who's
[3:29:29] pulling together for our community right
now.
[3:29:32] » Thank you, Superintendent McMaster. Um,
yeah, that we none of that goes
[3:29:37] unnoticed. Thank you for your your
continued service and the service of so
[3:29:41] many dedicated public servants at the
Walsh County School District. We'll move
[3:29:44] to closing items. Item 5.01 is our
public comment. Looks like we have
[3:29:48] public comment. JJ,
>> John Epaleo,
[3:29:52] » Mr. Epalo, good afternoon.
>> Good to see you.
[3:29:58] » John Epaleo, Protect Nevada Children.
Like I said earlier, Infinite Campus
[3:30:03] contains the most massive student
database ever created on US school
[3:30:07] students. I'm talking about personal,
subjective, and incriminating student
[3:30:12] data that I see stores forever on our
children. Data like discipline, minor
[3:30:18] discipline, medical counseling,
psychiatric, and lots more. A few years
[3:30:22] ago, I had a phone call from the spouse
of a WCSD school psychologist.
[3:30:28] And this person told me the spouse was
upset about having to upload all this
[3:30:33] psychiatric data into Infinite Campus
because the psychologist realized that
[3:30:39] Infinite Campus is not covered by HIPPO
laws because they are not a health care
[3:30:44] provider. In addition, WCSD has told us
Infinite Campus shares this student data
[3:30:51] with others. To date, the district won't
tell us who all these others are. Go to
[3:30:57] protect nevada children.org to learn
more. Since we just had good luck with
[3:31:03] the new attorney, maybe we'll ask again
who IC shares our children's
[3:31:09] personal, subjective, and incriminating
data with.
[3:31:13] During the next legislative session, our
goal is to require IC to start deleting
[3:31:18] student data.
I'm told this will be harder than what
[3:31:22] we did last session, which was to get
the state to start deleting student
[3:31:26] data. So, we need your help.
If anyone listening has children in WCSD
[3:31:33] who are under 18, you can request to
view all their data that Infinite Campus
[3:31:38] will store forever about your children.
Go to protect nevada.org. org. Toward
[3:31:44] the bottom of the page, there's a link
to WCSD's page to request this data.
[3:31:50] Remember, it's your child's personal,
subjective, and incriminating data. You
[3:31:55] will probably be surprised at the amount
and type of data that IC will store
[3:32:00] forever about your child. Again, we
don't know who Infinite Campus will
[3:32:06] share our children's data with. And more
importantly, no one really knows how
[3:32:10] this may affect the future of our
children. I'm John Epaleo. You can find
[3:32:15] 1500 of us on Facebook at Protect Nevada
Children.
[3:32:19] [snorts]
>> Thank you.
[3:32:21] » The board received emails from David
Murdoch, Tom Maher, Joseph and Penny
[3:32:26] Mayor, Dick Allen, Stephanie
Robersonson, Rachel Rose Van Houston,
[3:32:34] Ding Shang Lee. That's all I have. Okay,
thank you very much. And uh
[3:32:41] item 5.02 is the next meeting
announcement September 8th. And um thank
[3:32:46] you all for uh being flexible today. We
had a time-sensitive item that was three
[3:32:51] and a half hours. So maybe it was a
blessing that we only heard this item
[3:32:55] today given the crisis that we find
ourselves in. I suspect the next meeting
[3:32:59] will be fairly very long because we'll
have to take what we missed and and pile
[3:33:03] that on. But um I'll be in touch with
all of you uh as as we get closer to
[3:33:07] that. So thank you all very much. And
again, next meeting adjournment uh
[3:33:11] announcement is uh September 8, 2026. Uh
item 5.03 is adjourn the meeting at uh
[3:33:18] what is it? 5:32 p.m. Have a safe and
pleasant evening and be safe out there.