minutes of the august 12, 2014 regular meeting of …...aug 12, 2014 · minutes of the august 12,...

MINUTES OF THE AUGUST 12, 2014 REGULAR MEETING OF THE

WASHOE COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT BOARD OF TRUSTEES

August 12, 2014 1. Opening Items 1.01 CALL TO ORDER

The regular meeting of the Board of Trustees was called to order at 2:00 p.m. at the Washoe County School District’s Central Administration Building, 425 East Ninth Street, Reno, Nevada. 1.02 ROLL CALL

President Barbara Clark and Board Members Estela Gutierrez, John Mayer, Barbara McLaury, Howard Rosenberg, and Lisa Ruggerio were present. Trustee David Aiazzi was absent from the meeting. Student Advisory Board Representative Logan Carlson was not present at the time of Roll Call. Superintendent Pedro Martinez, Deputy Superintendent Traci Davis, Chief of Staff Kristen McNeill, and staff were also present. 1.03 PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Trustee Mayer led the meeting in the Pledge of Allegiance. 1.04 ACTION TO ADOPT THE AGENDA It was moved by Trustee Gutierrez and seconded by Trustee Rosenberg that the Board of Trustees pulls Agenda Items 3.01, 4.05, 6.01, 6.02 and approves the agenda as revised. The result of the vote was Unanimous: Pass (Yea: Barbara Clark, Estela Gutierrez, John Mayer, Barbara McLaury, Howard Rosenberg and Lisa Ruggerio.) Final Resolution: Motion Carries 1.05 PUBLIC COMMENT President Clark opened the meeting to public comment. Joe Cline, Vice Provost for Undergraduate Education, University of Nevada, Reno (UNR), and Education Alliance Board member, stated that he had known Pedro Martinez since he was hired as superintendent. It was hard to overstate the energy and cooperative spirit Mr. Martinez had brought to UNR’s partnership with the District. From the higher education point of view, Superintendent Martinez was a leader who kept a focus on the

Minutes of the Regular Meeting of the Board of Trustees August 12, 2014

Pg. 2

correct target: student success. Success was measured by high school student participation on the SAT, Advanced Placement (AP) exams, reduction of the math and English remediation rates among Washoe County students at UNR and Truckee Meadows Community College (TMCC), innovative higher education integration of college preparatory courses, and high school courses that were targeted to students at the brink of college readiness. In Superintendent Martinez, the community had a leader who was dedicated to transparency and data access, closing achievement gaps, raising graduation rates, increasing the number of students attending college, and a role model to a large segment of the community. Mr. Martinez was a leader focused on student success during a time of rapidly changing demographics and economic challenges faced by the District. He sought new economic opportunities and developed close partnerships with the chief executive officers in Washoe County, UNR and TMCC. There were many reasons to continue with the strong leadership of Superintendent Martinez and they all had to do with the success of the children. Judy Engman indicated that she was against Common Core. Everything she had read and learned about Common Core showed it was a very bad system to put in place. The Wall Street Journal recently published an opinion piece from Marina Ratner, a professor emerita of mathematics at the University of California at Berkeley, who was concerned about Common Core. The opinion piece stated,

“I first encountered the Common Core state standards last fall when my grandson started 6th grade in the public middle school here in Berkeley, California. This was the first year that the Berkeley School District began to implement the standards and I heard that a considerable amount of money had been given to states for implementing them. As a mathematician, I was intrigued, thinking that there must be something really special about Common Core, otherwise, why not adopt the curriculum and the excellent text books of highly achieving countries in math, instead of putting millions of dollars into creating something new. Reading about the new math standards, I’ve found hardly any academic mathematicians who could say the standards were higher than the old California standards, which were among the nation’s best. I learned that at the 2010 Annual Conference of Mathematics Societies, Bill McCallum, a leading writer of Common Core math standards said that the new standards would not be too high in comparison with other nations where math education excels. Jason Zimba, another lead writer of the mathematics standards, told the Massachusetts Board of Education and Secondary Education that the new standards would not prepare students for colleges to which most parents aspire to send their children. Common Core offers fewer standards.”

Ms. Engman urged the Board to drop Common Core. Roger Elton mentioned that he had helped bring the Advancement Via Individual Determination (AVID) program to Washoe County a number of years ago. He continued to be a strong supporter of the program because it made a real difference in


Pg. 3

the lives of the young people involved. His involvement with Superintendent Martinez had been outstanding. Mr. Martinez was a great supporter of the AVID program. Mr. Martinez was not an “ivory-tower” leader, but someone who would get personally involved and was extremely helpful. Mr. Martinez was making a difference in the lives of many young people, especially those who were working to overcome hardships in their lives. He indicated that the Board had a very productive leader and they needed to figure out how to move forward and work together for the best interests of the students of Washoe County. He looked forward to being able to continue working with Superintendent Martinez. Theresa Navarro stated she had been a community activist for over 45 years in the area. She had been receiving a number of phone calls from the community since yesterday because they wanted to know why only one member of the Board of Trustees went with Superintendent Martinez to the schools on the First Day of School. The community wanted to know why the other Board members did not participate. The Board had told the newspaper that they wanted everything to be right and for the conflict to end, but their actions were not showing that was the case. Christi Cakiroglo was a new parent in the District. The first phone call she had received from the District was about the firing of Pedro Martinez. She had previously worked with a number of members of the Board and had admired and respected them, but the situation was a mess. She had many friends and family members who were employees of the District and knew that Mr. Martinez was not everyone’s favorite person, but Nevada did rank last in education. The action taken by the Board was inappropriate and she wanted to know what legal counsel was thinking in letting them take the action they did. The action affected the moral of teachers, created parents who wondered if the District knew what they were doing, and took the focus off of the kids, which was where it needed to be. It would also make it impossible for the District to find a good new candidate for superintendent if the Board decided that Mr. Martinez was not the best person for the job. Any future action the Board took would be questioned by the community. She requested that those Board members involved in the decision to remove Superintendent Martinez walk away. The District needed new, fresh blood on the Board and Mr. Martinez needed to drop the lawsuit. The focus needed to be on the kids. Colin Robertson remarked that he had been studying the Nevada Constitution, specifically Article 11, which laid out all the responsibilities of the citizens of the State of Nevada and the responsibilities of the elected representatives tasked with caring for the education of the 63,000 students in the District. The actions of the Board since July 22, 2014, suggested that carefulness and mindfulness of those responsibilities, laws and policies regarding education in the District were not top priorities and that deeply concerned him as a parent and as a person interested in maintaining the rule of law in a democracy. Since July 22, 2014, through no fault of supporting staff, the Board’s


Pg. 4

decisions, actions, and communications created confusion and delay at best and educational and financial upheaval of system that could barely afford it at worst. He felt that the communication by the Board told the community a great deal about the capabilities of the current Board to continue to effectively lead. It was embarrassing to see the ways in which education had been “trod under the rug” through the process. It was not right and good decisions needed to be made going forward to assure the education of the children of the community was the top priority of the Board and administration of the District. Fred Boyd stated that even though there was a smaller crowd at the current meeting, the public outcry was not going to fade away. Those present at the July 22, 2014, “meeting” had a combined 65 years of experience as elected officials subject to the Open Meeting Law and a total of 20 years complying with Board Policies. Policies such as Meeting Conduct, “Board meetings will be scheduled, noticed and conducted in compliance with the law;” Board Protocol, “Recognizing our responsibility to act in a manner that is professionally ethical and governed by common decency and not to expose the District to litigation;” and Governing Mission, “Serves as steward and guardian of the District’s values, mission, and resources or ensures that District’s image reflects transparency or accountability.” He felt that over the past year and a half, the actions by some of the Board members of bullying, undermining and/or micromanaging would be brought to light. Boards were to function at a 30,000 foot level, not in the minutiae. In 2010, there were 30 Board meetings and workshops; in 2011, there were 31; in 2012, there were 38; and after the election, in 2013, the Board held 66 meetings, many of them very long. To date in 2014, the Board had held 38 meetings. The District employed a staff to manage the District. He wondered how many hundreds of hours key staff had to sit through Board meetings and workshops, thinking about all the priorities not getting done in a timely manner. The “sleeping” population of the community was now wide awake and monitoring Board activities. Jim Pfrommer mentioned that he was looking forward to the “episode” ending and proper oversight returning to the District. The board of any large organization, such as Renown, IGT, or the District, should aid but not try to overwhelm or micromanage the management. He had made the following statement to the District’s upper level employees at the Administrators and Supervisors (A&S) meeting at TMCC on August 1, 2014,

“As the saying goes, no crisis should go to waste. What has happened in the last 10 days has created a wonderful and massive interaction within and between the business community, Latino community, and the entire community. When this episode is done I want to take full advantage of the collaborations that have occurred in the last few weeks. It has been great to see the best of our community working together.”

What he did not mention at the time was that the multitude of meetings in the community was born of a complete disappointment and anger with the Board’s actions


Pg. 5

of July 22, 2014. Questions from regular people on the street included: how many extra teachers could be hired with the legal fees that were being unnecessarily incurred; why were people with so much public meeting experience so willing to violate the spirit of the Open Meeting Law; why could the Board of Trustees not read an employment contract; and how did the conduct of the Board look to the students in the schools. He personally wondered why the Board would act as they did when the July 22, 2014, workshop was on ethics and how did the Board’s action correlate with the reality that at the same hour, an Open Meeting Law training session was occurring in the building for employees. He encouraged Superintendent Martinez to work on the recommendations contained in the extensive personnel evaluation that was presented at the June 10, 2014, Board meeting because there were some good and constructive thoughts contained in the document. He encouraged the Board to recognize the need to admit their mistake and take the necessary steps to resolve the situation. Their erratic actions over the past 3 weeks had caused the mess, for example, the CPA thing was an issue, then it was not, and now it was again. It was a shame that the actions of the Board and attorneys had ruined what was a beautiful First Day of School for the students. The drag effect the situation was having on the District both internally and in the community was growing and was not going away. He encouraged everyone to move on or step aside. Caryn Swobe mentioned she would be unable to remain at the meeting for the presentation on the attorney’s fees, but she had been able to review the proposed hourly fee. What she did not see in the report was an estimate of the total expense. She wondered what the suit would cost in terms of dollars, good will and community unity. An expensive and aggressive case would be mounted by both sides. She remarked that the Board had the opportunity to take the high ground and move forward to benefit the students rather than squandering the District’s precious dollars that could be used to fill math vacancies or provide technology to students who would not otherwise have it. She appreciated the gesture by Trustee Rosenberg at the A&S meeting and hoped it was genuine. The Board needed to make a move to solve the problems and work with Superintendent Martinez. The community needed leadership to bring the District together. The Board members would be the ones held accountable for the dollars lost in the end and they ran the risk of becoming inconsequential in the public arena and the Legislature. Greta Jensen presented 3 points that had been discussed at her daughter’s school and in the community. The first point was that the Board’s decision to remove Superintendent Martinez from his duties and the current lawsuit had become a distraction. A distraction that deterred the work that needed to be done to educate the children. We needed to get back to the business of educating the students in Washoe County. Many issues were still a great concern, such as capital funding for the schools because of the failure of Assembly Bill (AB) 46. Yesterday the G-B Hall at Reno High School flooded. She wondered if the Board had any idea what that did to the learning


Pg. 6

environment and if the Board was coming up with a capital funding solution. The second point was Common Core. The new curriculum was in place and everyone wanted to know if it was working, were the teachers and students prepared, was everything in place to make the transition successful, and what was the Board doing to aid in those endeavors. The third point was the funding formula in Nevada. The District need to make the funding formula a priority during the 2015 Legislative Session and the Board needed to be prepared to fight for Washoe County’s share. She wanted to make sure the Board was not too distracted with other issues and focus on the priorities because if one watched or read local media, it did not appear that way. She requested the Board allow Superintendent Martinez to do his job and the Board do theirs. Dave Bianchi urged the Board to focus on the priority of educating the students and offered his assistance in any way possible to help them make sure that was the focus. Leslie Mix mentioned that many of the Trustees knew her as a Hispanic community leader, a television manager, and as a communications person, but mostly the Board knew her as someone who cared about the community. Sadly, she requested the 6 members of the Board present on July 22, 2014, resign. She also wanted them to apologize to Superintendent Martinez and the community. She was appalled that they had yet to do so. She was appalled that the community, especially the students and teachers, had to go into the new school year with no idea what the Board was doing. At the end of the day, she did not trust any of the 6 members and that was sad because she had known them for a long time. She held each member individually responsible for what occurred and believed that 6 of them “ganged” up on 2 people, Trustee Gutierrez and Superintendent Martinez. As a member of the community, she did not want to have to pay for the Board’s legal bills because they had shown poor judgment. Fred Altmann had lived in the community for over 30 years and had been a teacher, principal and coach in the high schools. He also had been volunteering over the past 10 years to help education. A number of pluses had been occurring in education over the past 10 years but he was very concerned about what was now going on. He urged the Board to get together and figure out a way to lead the community. They needed to figure out a solution with Superintendent Martinez so the District could move on. If they were not able to manage that, then they should resign. Debe Fennell had been a long time resident of the area, had moved away and then returned because she loved living in the area. She was very involved in bringing new businesses to the area and nurturing entrepreneurs to help grow the community. One of the things she had been able to present to businesses and individuals about the area was the school system. Children could grow and prosper and were educated properly; however, the recent publicity of the Board’s actions had dismayed and embarrassed


Pg. 7

her. She shared the community’s respect for Superintendent Martinez and had volunteered at least once a week in the schools. She implored the Board to do a better job and fix the problems. They needed to apologize to each other, stop spending money, and move on to the more important things, such as educating the children. The Board really needed to determine the pulse of the community before they acted because the consensus was that Mr. Martinez was doing a great job. Carol Wright stated that she had 4 children who had been in the Washoe County School District and had seen superintendents and Boards members come and go. She had been at odds with the Board and District previously because of Common Core. The Board needed to look at what was happening and become more aware of the system that was being brought into the schools. The curriculum and data on the children was frightening. Because of Superintendent Martinez’s support of Common Core, she was against his returning to the District. Common Core was a government takeover of the schools and she was worried about her grandchildren that were currently in the schools. She urged the Board to take a closer look about where the data on the children would go. Media Wright commented that she lived in a senior living facility on Neil Road. She happened to go out on the First Day of School and saw all the parents and children walking to school together. All the children looked very hopeful and happy and the parents looked determined. She thanked Superintendent Martinez because he was the one who created those looks. What she saw from the Board reminded her of what was referred to as “derangement syndrome” because the response to Superintendent Martinez’s lawsuit included the words “attitude” and “disobedience.” Children and, historically, slaves were “disobedient.” Leaders were not “disobedient.” Leaders did not have “attitudes.” Leaders had vision, they had strategy, and they had direction. John Eppolito remarked that he had 4 children in the Washoe County School District. He was against the Nevada Academic Content Standards, which apparently was the new name for Common Core. Last year, his son had completed the math requirements under the Nevada Academic Content Standards as a 9th grader. He did not understand why the program was such a good thing and why the District wanted to continue to with the program. He was also concerned over the loss of 15-20% of the best teachers at Incline Elementary School. The teachers lost were experienced, committed, had years of success in helping all students, and their leaving was indirectly related to the new content standards. He hoped the Board would reach out to those teachers to determine why the left and what their problems were with the standards. He indicated that the teachers were not willing to come forward because other teachers supported the standards. Two of the worst aspects of Common Core were the data collection and the changes to the AP US History course. He felt the changes in the course diluted many important people and events in US history, just as the SAT had been “dumbed down.” He provided a handout to the Board.


Pg. 8

Ginny Jackson had been a volunteer in the District for 25 years and was disappointed with the actions of the Board over the past few weeks. She had hoped calmer heads would have prevailed and the business of the District would have moved forwarded without the distraction of lawsuits and lawyers. She related a story about trust from a Bernstein Bears book. The lesson from the book was that once trust had been broken, it was very difficult to put back together. It was a lesson that the Board needed to be reminded of. The public’s trust was broken when 6 members of the Board decided to “fire” Superintendent Martinez. It was important for the Board to admit their mistake, apologize, and move on. It was something that needed to occur quickly so the community could move on. She felt Superintendent Martinez had done a great job, but if the Board disagreed there were proper ways to go about removing him. If the Board and Superintendent Martinez were not able to work together and put everything behind them, she asked those 6 Board members resign. Andrea Hughs-Baird expressed her disappointment in the leadership of the District. She urged the Board to review her comments from the July, 29, 2014, Regular meeting because she would say them again. Legal actions put an organization in stasis and nothing got done. Energy was misspent on non-productive discussions and actions and the product was forgotten for the short-term. The District’s product was the education of the 63,000 children and was far too important to be forgotten. The District could not afford to be in stasis, waiting for the leaders to stop focusing on themselves and their disagreements. If the Board truly had the well-being of the students as their top priority, then they would make amends as quickly as possible, settle legal matters as inexpensively as possible, and ensure all of their actions and words put the focus back on the students. 2. Items for Presentation, Discussion, Information and/or Action 2.01 CONSIDERATION OF CONTRACT FOR RETENTION OF OUTSIDE LEGAL

COUNSEL PURSUANT TO NRS 386.410 IN CONNECTION WITH THE LAWSUIT INITIATED BY SUPERINTENDENT PEDRO MARTINEZ AGAINST THE WASHOE COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT, AND THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES, AND IN CONNECTION WITH ALLEGATIONS OF VIOLATION OF THE NEVADA OPEN MEETING LAW

Kent Robison explained that he wanted to be clear about he would not be talking about and what could not be discussed. He was not present to talk about the Superintendent’s character, performance or competence. The Superintendent’s counsel had sent a letter to the Board to suggest that if competence, character or performance were discussed, another lawsuit would be filed. He was present to discuss a lawsuit that had been filed against the Washoe County School District by the Superintendent. A reasonable reading of the complaint suggested that over $1 million in damages was


Pg. 9

being sought. He shared a concern, as potential counsel for the District, that there were better places to put that money. However, lawsuits did not go forward without the defendants being represented by reasonably competent attorneys. He was present to discuss why the Board required outside counsel, which was to educate the Board in order to education them to make a prudent and sound decisions about what the lawsuit was about, what the contract with the Superintendent was about, and what the financial impact could be. The best lawsuit filed was the one that was resolved the quickest. Mr. Robison provided some of the reasons why outside counsel should be hired. The first reason was that the Board was entitled, by the people of the State of Nevada, to hire outside counsel. A law had been enacted by the Legislature, which stated the District, through the Board of Trustees, may hire outside counsel when they deemed it appropriate. Board Policy 9012 allowed the District’s Chief General Counsel to hire outside counsel with consolation with the superintendent up to $50,000; however, because the Superintendent was on leave at the time, he was not consulted. Mr. Robison believed the Board and District now had a fight on their hands that they did not ask for and the law firm hired by Superintendent Martinez had over 400 lawyers prosecuting a claim for over $1 million against the District. He had respect for the lawyers hired by the Superintendent and was optimistic they would approach the litigation as reasonably as he would, if the Board approved his contract. Mr. Robison mentioned that another reason the District required outside counsel was because of the nature and composition of the lawsuit itself. The District was sued by the Superintendent on July 25, 2014, 3 days after the July 22, 2014, meetings and actions to relieve him of his duties. The lawsuit was amended, and as presently filed, claimed that the Board violated the Open Meeting Law by virtue of what happened and the action taken on July 22, 2014. The remedy for the claim was a) reinstatement and b) attorneys’ fees. Reinstatement was moot and attorneys’ fees should also be moot. On July 31, 2014, through President Barbara Clark, the Board declared and acknowledged that the action to relieve the Superintendent of his duties was void. Any attorneys’ fees should be minute. The second claim regarding the Open Meeting Law would also be minute because the proposed agenda item at the July 29, 2014, meeting concerning the Superintendent’s performance was removed. Additional accusations had been raised by the Superintendent’s attorneys regarding the Open Meeting Law and public records requests had been filed for each Trustees’ cell phone records and computer records. He felt those requests were “fishing” expeditions and the District should not be required to pay for the fees associated with that. The third claim was that the Superintendent’s employment contract had been breached. That situation resolved itself when Mr. Martinez returned to work in good faith on August 1, 2014, under his existing contract. Related to that claim was that his duties had been assigned to others and his contract did not permit that. But since he had returned to work, his


Pg. 10

duties had not been assigned to anyone. The final claim in the lawsuit was that a tortuous breach, or bad faith breach, of contract had occurred. Mr. Robison indicated that the lawsuit was in the very preliminary stages and the Board’s response was not due until September 9, 2014. The course of the lawsuit could change dramatically between now and then. It was his understanding that a publically noticed meeting would be scheduled by the Board President to discuss those areas of character, competence, and performance before the public. Superintendent Martinez’s lawyers had invited that meeting and insisted that the court enforce the process. What would occur after that meeting was unknown, but one of 3 things could occur. The Superintendent could continue his lawsuit, even as good faith efforts to move forward existed. The second alternative would be that there was the possibility of a termination for cause, as listed in paragraph 14D of the employment contract. The final alternative was a unilateral termination by the Board of the contract, which required a mutual release. Mr. Robison explained what he and his associates would be able to bring to the Board and District if allowed to continue to represent them as associated with the particular case. He was interested in settling the case, but the District and Board did not have control over the lawsuit because they were the defendants. The rates were high, but represented over 80 years of legal experience in the type of cases the District was now involved in and the rates were discounted. He could not provide any information on what the potential fiscal impact could be for the District. He wanted an opportunity to resolve the litigation and minimize the fiscal impact, but he did not know if that could be done under the present circumstances. Trustee Gutierrez stated that her biggest concern was the fiscal impact. She noted that $50,000 had already been allocated and wondered how much had already been spent from that allocation. Mr. Robison noted that the District had not been charged $50,000 but that the Board had the ability to spend up to $50,000 under Nevada Revised Statutes (NRS) before conducting a public hearing. Trustee Gutierrez mentioned that she was optimistic that President Clark and Chief General Counsel Randy Drake would be able to sit down with Superintendent Martinez and work everything out. She did not think the Board needed to hire an outside counsel because she truly believed that they would be able to deal with the situation and reconcile the events and actions that had transpired. She stated that she was in a difficult situation because she cared for the District and the individual Trustees. She knew what was in the hearts of the Trustees and had great trust in them. Additionally, it would be difficult for her, as a Trustee, to approve the retention of outside counsel when there was not even an estimated cost associated with the hiring. As a Trustee, she was responsible for what happened with the children and the programs in the District and the costs could take away from them. Mr. Robison indicated that he


Pg. 11

respected her position; however, many things that had been said by the other Trustees had been used against them and those discussions should be protected. He was unable to present a budget to the Board because there were various scenarios that could occur which would affect the budget. President Clark opened the meeting to public comment. Larry Dailey mentioned that he was in the awkward position of stating that Superintendent Martinez had been wronged. He did not support a lot of what had been occurring in the District under Superintendent Martinez’s leadership and felt that everything that had been occurring with special education had not been “rosy.” He had 2 primary concerns with what had occurred. The first was with the District’s Chief General Counsel, Randy Drake. Mr. Drake had worked for Mr. Martinez but was then under contract with the Board. He felt there was a conflict of interest with Mr. Drake being employed by both parties. There was also a concern about Mr. Drake not knowing the Open Meeting Law since he was also a part of the meeting on July 22, 2014. His second concern was with respect to President Clark. She was his representative on the Board and did not respond to his phone calls or emails. She should also be able to read the Open Meeting Law since according to her biography she had a law degree. There were a number of issues that needed to be addressed and looked into concerning Mr. Drake and the processes he had gone through. President Clark clarified that she had attended law school and had a Juris Doctorate, but had not sat for a bar exam. Michonne Ascuaga remarked that anyone who had been in business for a period of time had been involved in lawsuits. When a lawsuit began, everyone was fired up and believed they were 100% correct and there would be no way a judge or jury would not find in favor of them. Then after the first month or two the bills, anguish, and time would add up and you started to realize that the case would not be a “slam dunk.” She felt that was one of the largest concerns of the community, was that the case involving Superintendent Martinez would not be a quick and easy thing. The attorneys that had been retained were all very good and would go at their jobs full force. The community would be watching as the bills piled up month after month. Mr. Robison had implied that the Board had no choice in the matter because they were the ones being sued, but they did have a choice. She urged the Board to listen to Trustee Gutierrez, step back and take every possible measure to resolve the issues without going to court. People in the community were willing to help mediate with both sides. If both sides tried that first, the community would be supportive. Jim Pfrommer commented that Mr. Dailey was passionate about what he believed in but was willing to put that aside for the betterment of the District, for his child and for all the children in the District. He encouraged the Board to do the same and even build on


Pg. 12

that. Strong feelings needed to be put aside and everyone needed to try to work on what had occurred. There being no further public comment on the item, President Clark brought it back to the Board for discussion. Trustee Rosenberg asked what should occur. Superintendent Martinez stated that he appreciated the welcome and apology he received from Trustee Rosenberg at the A&S meeting. He had a lot of respect for Kent Robison and appreciated what he did for the family at Sparks Middle School after the shooting. For him, the lawsuits were not about money. He had found himself in a difficult situation on July 22, 2014, that he believed was a misunderstanding that had gone too far. He tried to explain, but it did not work. He understood that mistakes were made, which happened. It was important to understand that the students and staff in the District watched his actions and he always tried to advocate that the District admit their mistakes, not bully or harass, and stand up for their rights. He felt that was the only thing he had done. He would love to move forward and that was why he came back to work. He loved the community and the District and believed in the work that was occurring. There had been times when he did disagree with members of the Board, but he felt that it made the final decisions made by both himself and the Board better because when there was tension because it allowed for different perspectives to be heard. Trustee Rosenberg noted that it seemed reasonable to have the attorneys get together and decide how to drop everything. President Clark passed the running of the meeting to Vice President McLaury. It was moved by Trustee Clark and seconded by Trustee Rosenberg that the Board of Trustees approves the Agreement by and between the Washoe County School District (“WCSD”), through its Board of Trustees, and Robison, Belaustegui, Sharp & Low (“RBSL”) and Maupin, Cox & LeGoy (“MCL”), effective July 28, 2014. Vice President McLaury opened the motion for discussion. Trustee Rosenberg noted that he provided the second to the motion to assure everything was handled properly. Trustee Clark explained that the District was currently faced with a lawsuit. She mentioned that she had read in the Reno Gazette Journal that Trustee Gutierrez had


Pg. 13

hired an attorney and asked if that was the case. Trustee Gutierrez responded that she had. Trustee Clark remarked that the District and Board were being sued and it was only fair that they had representation. The District and Board were not the ones who had brought the lawsuit forward and she felt that what was stated in the lawsuit was erroneous. She had to stand up for what she believed in and what was being directed towards her. She did go to law school and one of the first things they taught was that you needed legal representation if you were not an expert. She did not know all the laws of the State of Nevada nor did she know what protected or did not protect her or what she could or could not do. She relied on legal assistance in the legal arena and believed it was fair. Trustee Gutierrez disclosed that she had hired an individual counsel for legal advice. She was in a unique position and wanted to make sure she received the correct advice. She hoped that everything was able to be resolved without the attorneys but noted that she had not been consulted with the items listed in the response from the District. Trustee Mayer indicated that Superintendent Martinez had noted that he was not “in it for the money,” but there was a lot of money riding on the decision of the Board. He felt the Board was also entitled to have representation in case Mr. Martinez’s attorneys advised him to continue with the lawsuit. He felt the attorneys would be able to help with the dialogue that needed to occur. He would be the first to celebrate when the issues were settled because the events of the past few weeks had been tiresome. He had been attacked by people who he had known for years and was not able to say anything because of the lawsuit. He felt the ball was now in Mr. Martinez’s court. Trustee Rosenberg noted that the operative factor was trust. They all needed to trust one another and if the best way to do that was to let the lawyers iron everything out, then that needed to occur. In the long run it would be best for the kids to work everything out. It was important to understand that the kids were doing fine. Superintendent Martinez had done a lot to make sure they would be fine and he appreciated that. Trustee Gutierrez stated that she would still be voting “no” on the motion. The primary reason for that was because the Board had not been shown a possible fiscal impact and she did not want to vote for something when she did not know the costs. Vice President McLaury remarked that she was anxious for the matter to be resolved and felt the attorneys were the ones who would be able to do that.


Pg. 14

The result of the vote was Pass: (Yea: Barbara Clark, John Mayer, Barbara McLaury, Howard Rosenberg and Lisa Ruggerio. Nay: Estela Gutierrez) Final Resolution: Motion Carries. Vice President McLaury returned control of the meeting back to President Clark. President Clark recessed the meeting for 10 minutes. 4. Consent Agenda Items Trustee Rosenberg requested Consent Agenda Item 4.04 be pulled for further discussion. Trustee McLaury requested Consent Agenda Item 4.03 be pulled for further discussion. It was moved by Trustee Rosenberg and seconded by Trustee McLaury that the Board of Trustees approves Consent Agenda Item 4.02, Approval of the minutes from the May 27, 2014 Regular Meeting of the Board of Trustees. The result of the vote was Unanimous: Pass (Yea: Barbara Clark, Estela Gutierrez, Barbara McLaury, and Howard Rosenberg. Trustees John Mayer and Lisa Ruggerio were not present for the vote.) Final Resolution: Motion Carries. 4.04 APPROVAL TO RENEW MICROSOFT VOLUME LICENSING AGREEMENT Trustee Rosenberg asked if the licensing agreement was similar to leasing the programing. Ed Grassia, Chief IT Officer, explained that essentially that was what the agreement was. Microsoft had changed the way they licensed the products over the years and instead of purchasing an upgrade whenever they changed the product, businesses would purchasing licensing agreements that would automatically update if there were changes to a program. Trustee Rosenberg wondered if the licensing agreement was cheaper in the long run. Mr. Grassia stated that it was cheaper because the District would not have to repurchase the same programs and they were able to receive a discount. The District would not be able to afford the retail prices of the programs. It was moved by Trustee Rosenberg and seconded by Trustee Gutierrez that the Board of Trustees approves the renewal of the Microsoft Volume License and payment in the amount of $322,791.47. The result of the vote was Unanimous: Pass (Yea: Barbara Clark, Estela Gutierrez, John Mayer, Barbara McLaury, Howard Rosenberg and Lisa Ruggerio.) Final Resolution: Motion Carries. 7. Legislative Items


Pg. 15

7.01 UPDATE AND DISCUSSION ON TOPICS OF CONSIDERATION FOR THE

2015 LEGISLATIVE SESSION Lindsay Anderson, Director, Government Affairs, explained that the item would allow for the Board to provide preliminary guidance and approval of the Washoe County School District’s bill draft request for the 2015 Nevada Legislative Session. The request had to be submitted to the Legislative Council Bureau (LCB) by September 2, 2014. At previous meetings the Legislative Committee and Board of Trustees provided direction that the emphasis of the District’s bill should continue to focus around capital projects and finding a solution to solve the capital funding problems in the District. The staff report contained 2 topics the Board had previously discussed. The first was to allow school districts to continue using the revenue from rollover bonds without having to seek voter approval. The second was to allow school districts to pose advisory questions on any ballot or specifically on the 2016 ballot. Ms. Anderson noted that since she had last come before the Board, there had been discussions throughout the State regarding the first topic. It was her feeling that if the District did not sponsor that particular bill, someone else would sponsor something similar. There was bi-partisan support for the idea and the other school districts in the State were also behind the concept. Trustee Mayer remarked that he had not heard of anyone sponsoring a bill regarding the rollover bonds. Ms. Anderson mentioned that she had spoken with the superintendents in other counties and there was interest state-wide for legislation to allow continuation of the rollover bonds. Superintendent Martinez added that school districts were one of the few governmental entities that were required to go to the voters for approval of the rollover bonds. There was an equity issue. School districts would be able to show that if they had certainty with their existing bond funding they would be able to minimize any new taxes on the communities. The need for the schools was so high throughout the State that there was bi-partisan support for the idea. Trustee McLaury wondered if there had been any new discussions regarding the funding formula. Ms. Anderson noted that the Interim Committee on the funding formula would be presenting legislation so that was not something the District should sponsor. Superintendent Martinez recalled that the last recommendations that had been adopted by the Committee did include the interests of Northern Nevada. The issue had become a North-South concern and the North had been able to unify the Nevada School Boards Association and the Nevada Superintendents Association. The recommendations were to weight the funding to 1.5 children for English Language Learners (ELL), children that lived in poverty, and improve funding for special education students with the conditions that all school districts were held harmless during the next


Pg. 16

biennium. New resources were trying to be identified and the Legislative Leadership had indicated that the solution to the funding problems in Clark County needed to be solved without taking money away from other school districts. He was also a part of the committee that would review the formula in general and his intent was to make sure all communities were treated equitably. There being no additional questions from the Board, President Clark mentioned that the item would return to the Board for final approval at a future meeting. 4. Consent Agenda Items 4.03 APPROVAL OF STUDENT SUPPORT SERVICES LOCAL PLAN FOR FISCAL

YEAR 2015 President Clark asked why the item was on the Consent Agenda and not scheduled for a presentation. Frank Selvaggio, Executive Director, Student Support Services, explained that the Local Plan had historically been a consent agenda item. Trustee McLaury wondered how the funds would be spent to meet the priorities in the restructuring plan. She was concerned about where students with autism or emotional disabilities fell into the structure. Mr. Selvaggio noted that the Board had previously received a presentation regarding the restructuring of special education. As part of the restructuring, an administrator had been placed over all Social Intervention Program (SIP) specialists who worked with students with emotional disabilities and problems. They had also increased the number of board certified behavior analysts in the Department and develop partnerships with the Children’s Cabinet to increase therapy available to the students. The positions were included during the budget process. Trustee McLaury indicated that she wanted to make sure those students received the proper support and that Washoe County was on the forefront of what they were able to provide in terms of support. She had previously worked with a number of autistic and severely oral language handicapped children so was highly interested in the supports the District was providing. It was also important to tie what was occurring to the Strategic Plan, especially in relation to rigorous and relevant curriculum and instruction for all students. Superintendent Martinez remarked that special education had been one of the largest challenges for the District and it was also where they saw the largest achievement gaps. The steps that staff had been taking were the beginning of the process and additional changes were ahead. Committees were being formed to determine what was working in some schools and if those successes could be transferred to other schools where programs were struggling. Additional training and increased parent involvement would be necessary to assist the students even more. It was something that all school districts in the country were trying to figure out so it was


Pg. 17

critical that Washoe County looked at what was successful in their own schools and try to replicate that elsewhere. Trustee Mayer recommended that the program at Verdi Elementary School be looked at because it was a successful program. Some of the programs offered during the summer were also very successful at engaging students. He urged staff to look at including those teachers in the restructuring process because they were the success stories. Trustee Rosenberg asked if the District was working with anyone at UNR. Mr. Selvaggio mentioned that he had been working with people from UNR and they had been part of the restructuring process and committees. Trustee Gutierrez asked for clarification on the students Trustee McLaury was most concerned about. Trustee McLaury stated that she was concerned about all the students, but those with autism or severe mental health problems could be left out of receiving the services and support they needed. She wanted to make sure that the programs covered every single gradation of the spectrum because in the past there had been a lack of programing available for some and the definitions of autism had changed over the past 5-6 years. President Clark commented that it was important for the Trustees to be able to match the funding to the programing. She felt it was difficult with the way the information had been presented to see the links between the funding and the specific programs. It was important for the Board to be able to align the numbers and see where the restructuring was taking place so they would be able to determine if the restructuring was worth the cost and the programs financially successful. Superintendent Martinez indicated that staff would be able to bring back additional documentation that would show how the restructuring plan fit in to the budget, the Local Plan, and the update to the Strategic Plan. President Clark opened the meeting to public comment. Larry Dailey remarked that many people were afraid to come before the Board to speak about their concerns regarding special education. He had been stating for a long time that there was a crisis of management and a crisis of caring in the District. He felt steps were being taken to resolve some of the concerns, but his daughter only had 2 years left in the District and the 20 federal and state compliance issues found against the District needed to be immediately addressed. One of those findings was that the District had to put a plan in place that the State could verify that a free, appropriate public education was being provided to all students. He had asked about the status of that plan and was told the District had missed the deadline. He wondered if the District was still out of compliance with the State’s corrective action plan and if not, why had he


Pg. 18

not been informed because the compliance issues were related to his daughter. It was important the Board know of the issues with compliance and what the District was doing to correct those issues. John Eppolito commented that he saw the problem with the District from the “other end of the spectrum.” His son was at the top of his class and being told that additional AP classes were not available to him because he attended school in Incline Village. The agenda item was indirectly related to Common Core because it involved data tracking. All the information that was being gathered on the students would follow them to the workforce. Craig Newton remarked that he had recently moved to the area after retiring from law enforcement after 37 years. He worked as a substitute teacher for the District and always liked to work with the special education and English Language Learner (ELL) populations. He was also a mentor to a special education student who lived across the street from him. He had noticed that one of the problems with the special education and ELL students was that there was a lack of discipline in the classrooms. The resources were there but additional attention was required for the students because some were not able to read or write, but continued to move through the District. If the District wanted the students to succeed, then there needed to be consequences if they were not willing to do the work. It was moved by Trustee McLaury and seconded by Trustee Gutierrez that the Board of Trustees approves the Local Plan for Fiscal Year 2015. The result of the vote was Unanimous: Pass (Yea: Barbara Clark, Estela Gutierrez, John Mayer, Barbara McLaury, Howard Rosenberg and Lisa Ruggerio.) Final Resolution: Motion Carries. 5. Reports 5.01 BOARD REPORTS Trustee Gutierrez stated she had attended the Council of Urban Boards of Education (CUBE) Conference with Trustee Mayer. She had enjoyed her time on the CUBE steering committee. She was also present at the A&S kickoff event for the District. It was a positive experience which led to a great First Day of School for all the students. Trustee Mayer mentioned he had also attended the CUBE Conference and A&S meeting. He congratulated the District on the progress the students made during the intersessions and summer sessions at the schools. He was very impressed with the special education session held at Beasley Elementary School for students with hearing impairments. He suggested that the summer programs be held at different elementary schools each year. By changing where the children went each year, the schools would


Pg. 19

be able to receive the deep cleaning they deserved which would be better for the education of all students in the long run. Trustee Rosenberg complemented Deputy Superintendent Davis and Chief of Staff McNeill on the A&S meeting. He was grateful for the way they took the edge off of the situation. He attended the summer graduation and was encouraged by the look on the students’ faces because they were able to finish. He also attended an event at the Unity Church where backpacks and supplies were handed out to students in foster care. Trustee McLaury explained she would be attending a reception at UNR for all of the Presidential Scholars. She complimented the District on the increased rigor because there were a number of students from Washoe County who would be attending the reception. Additionally, there were a number of students who were able to enter UNR with a number of credits already earned. She had one grandson who only required a couple of classes to complete a math degree and he had just graduated from high school. She also had a grandson on the autism spectrum so was able to see both sides of the District. She agreed with the public comment provided by Mr. Newton that additional time needed to be spent with special needs students. Time also needed to be spent with the families so the parents understood what was required as well, including ELL families. Many of those families did not always know everything that was occurring with their children, not because they did not care, but because they did not understand. Student Representative Carlson mentioned that he would be working as hard as he could until graduation day. 5.02 SUPERINTENDENT’S REPORT Superintendent Martinez provided information on the First Day of School. One of the things the District required of Central Office Administrators was that they went out into the schools on the first day so they could troubleshoot any potential problems. He thanked staff for their willingness to attend and handling issues that arose. The students and staff appeared to have adjusted to the new calendar and there were fewer issues from last year. He complemented the instruction that was occurring at Mathews Elementary School because they were able to double the number of kindergarteners that were able to read at grade level in one year. Additional data points would be released soon and there were still challenges, but progress was occurring. He hinted that the District would see a record number of graduates when the final graduation numbers were released in September. He related a story about a principal who was 2 students away from a 90% graduation rate, saw a student over the summer and was able to convince the student to finish the 2 credits they needed for graduation. It was clear staff was willing to “go the extra mile” to make sure students


Pg. 20

were graduating. Staff was also focusing more on the younger children as well to make sure they were prepared and had access to resources. 8. Items for Presentation, Discussion, Information and/or Action 8.01 PRESENTATION ON NEVADA ACADEMIC CONTENT STANDARDS

(NVACS) Scott Bailey, Chief Academic Officer, provided the Board with a presentation on the current status of the implementation and implementation strategies for the Nevada Academic Content Standards (NACS). He reviewed the history of the standards in Nevada. The standards were a baseline and how the District aligned curriculum and assessments. They were based on Common Core and allowed a national comparison of students. Some of the key strategies for the District were to enlist national partners so material would be easily accessed and readily available, the development of a comprehensive professional development plan, aligning personnel so professional development could occur in the schools, improving the infrastructure available in the schools so technology could be utilized, and stakeholder awareness. He noted that the District had been able to garner national attention through the key strategies because they were able to “do a lot with a little” and they were also finalists for an international instruction award. Kindra Fox, Director, Curriculum and Instruction, explained how resources were being aligned around professional development. A design team had been formed that would meet every couple of weeks. The team included department leaders, implementation specialists, area superintendents, and academic chiefs. The meetings were the first of their kind in the District and all aspects of professional development were reviewed and discussed, with conversations centered around NACS. Additionally, content experts from all departments would conduct training sessions for the implementation specialists, who would then go out and work with the schools on the early release Wednesdays. It was critical that everyone, teachers, principals, and administrators, were presented with the same information. Ms. Fox mentioned that the instruction and material the schools were presented with had been developed by teachers. That assured the content was relevant to what the teachers needed to know and were able to use in the classrooms. The District held specific training for elementary teachers in early August that focused on math instruction for all elementary grade levels. During that time, secondary teachers were provided with professional development on content in their specific areas of instruction. She added that the District had partnered with higher education in the area and various community groups and businesses to assure information was relevant and costs remained low.


Pg. 21

Ms. Fox elaborated on some additional strategies staff had been working on. The intent was to work with the existing resources and align those resources with the new standards. For example, the District was able to utilize the current text books for reading in elementary school, but elevate the questions asked of students so they would be required to provide additional information. Additional efforts had been made in the middle and high schools. The efforts allowed the District to control the costs of implementing the standards. They had also been partnering with Clark County to share resources and revised the vendor process to allow individual schools to determine which products they were interested in using from a central location. Trustee Mayer asked if the materials were available to parents to review. Ms. Fox stated that they were. The materials could be accessed on the District’s website, under Curriculum and Instruction. Staff was also working on distributing a Parent Resource Guide for the NACS for each grade level. Before the guides were finalized, staff would have parent groups review them and provide feedback. President Clark suggested that the Diversity and Equity Task Force also review the guides to make sure they are culturally appropriate for the different subpopulations in the District. Trustee McLaury expressed a desire to have the master teacher program more involved in professional development. She wanted to make sure all students, including those who developed at a slower pace, were able to be elevated to the new standards and no one was left behind. She also wanted to make sure students at the higher end of the achievement spectrum were able to learn in the same classes. It was important that teachers were able to teach to every student in a class and make sure all were challenged. Ms. Fox indicated that they were working on different ways teachers would be able to provide instruction to all students. Student Achievement Partners had gone into some of the schools in the spring and recorded some teachers because of their strong lesson plans. While the District did not yet have access to those videos, they would be available soon on-line. Staff was also working on providing additional instructional support for teachers so they would be able to teach to all students in a classroom. Trustee Mayer remarked that there was a lot of integrated curriculum occurring in the District. He mentioned an art class that used letters from World War II to teach reading and then used the letters for art projects and a PE teacher who put words on a wall and had students hit them with a ball. He would like to see master teachers receive an additional stipend for their work. Aaron Grossman, Teacher on Special Assignment, provided the Board with information on the K-6 English Language Arts (ELA) program and the NACS. When the District started working on the Common Core standards in 2011, there were 3 approaches


Pg. 22

school districts across the country were taking to implement the standards: purchase a program, send people to conferences, or have experts come to their districts. The teachers in Washoe County decided to take a different approach and figure out how to implement the new standards themselves by focusing on 3 principles. The first principle was to develop an unfiltered message. The District would provide the content associated with Common Core and allow the teachers to use their professional expertise and judgment in determining what they would use in their classrooms. The second principle was that the Central Administration would only promote materials that were vetted, scalable and free. It was important that the material was consistent with the values of the community and that the materials were free. The District promoted all materials the teachers would be able to use on various websites. The final principle was that the new standards would take time to fully implement. The students needed time to learn the new standards and what would be expected of them and the teachers needed time to implement the new standards in the classrooms and determine what would work for them. It was important that teachers knew they could experiment with the materials and instructional methods so they could find what worked best for them and their students. Mr. Grossman reviewed the Core Task Project with the Board. The Core Task Project was started in 2011 with 18 teachers who began working on the new standards in their own classrooms. The teachers were located throughout the District and included high and low poverty schools. It was important for those teachers to determine if the students would be able to rise to the new challenge of the standards. Those 18 teachers were able to see what their students were capable of and became advocates of the standards. The definition of Common Core was to have students speak, read, and write evidence; navigate sufficiently complex texts and understand the vocabulary, and build a coherent body of knowledge. The Core Task Project was morphed into the Core Task Implementation Project and continued to allow teachers to get together and determine what materials worked in their individual classrooms. They then would let the District know if they would require anything else and provide the next steps the District should take in implementing the program. Trustee Rosenberg remarked that it appeared the new standards were allowing the teachers teach the material. Scripts were not provided and the District was not telling them what to do. Mr. Grossman agreed. One of the reasons that large groups of teachers were brought together was so those who had difficulty learning the instructional techniques would be provided with additional support. Trustee Rosenberg was encouraged to hear that peer instruction was being provided to those who required it. He mentioned that the content of Common Core appeared to be misconstrued. He was concerned about the information concerning AP US History that was presented to the Board during public comment.


Pg. 23

Trustee McLaury remarked that there could be some validity to the concerns raised by community members about content; however, it was important to remember that the teachers were reviewing the information prior to it being presented to the students and a clarification had been released by The College Board concerning the AP US History class. When criticism had come up concerning certain aspects of Common Core, reviews occurred and changes were made to the content and tests. She did not believe it was necessary to denounce the concept behind Common Core when it was the content some people took issue with. What was important to remember was that when criticism had been raised, the content was reviewed and changed to meet the needs of the community. She was convinced that if the Common Core curriculum was taught to students at a high level, then all the students in the classrooms would move up with a higher level of understanding, which would prepare them for college and career readiness without as much effort as was required in the past. It was more about allowing teachers to teach the concept and being able to focus on what part of the concept their classrooms required. Trustee Mayer added that he had taken community members on tours of Robert Mitchell Elementary School after the revitalization efforts and some commented on how noisy some of the classrooms were. He then took them into the classrooms so they could see what was going on. The community members were impressed with the learning that was occurring with different subjects and the students working together on the concepts. One community member had even remarked that he would have had more fun in school if the classes were like that instead of sitting at a desk the entire day. He thought the way instruction was being conducted was much more exciting and effective than it had been in the past. Teachers were now more directors of learning but still there to help those students who needed additional assistance. President Clark commented that it was much more about the quality of teachers in the classrooms. She believed that quality teachers were able to provide the instruction each student needed. The idea of a standard, no matter what it was, was that it was the minimum level each student needed to be at, otherwise there were no expectations and the system was arbitrary. Superintendent Martinez complimented the team that had been working on the implementation of the standards. It started with a small group and was now being presented to all 4,000 teachers in the District. He was constantly hearing from the teachers that they did not think the students could handle the rigor, complex texts, or complex math concepts, but the students had shown were able to grasp the concepts. He noted that in some ways the new standards leveled the playing field for all students, because some of the assessments were text based, students who previously were able to just “know” the answers were now required to refer back to the text and provide evidence. It was important that the community understand the District was focusing on instruction and were sensitive about the content. Staff wanted to make sure what was


Pg. 24

taught to the students worked in the community. The District was not using a national list of materials, but that they thoroughly vetted all the material prior to it being available to all teachers. He predicted the Board would hear concerns regarding the assessments, but the District did not control which assessments were used. The assessments, like the standards, were determined by the State. The District was utilizing the standards to increase expectations for the students. President Clark asked how the District evaluated the process and professional development that was occurring. Superintendent Martinez remarked that the District was utilizing an integrated approach to the evaluations. The teachers were being observed by various people in the District, not to critique but to assist. Additionally, the District was looking at the feedback from the schools to discover what they would be able to improve upon. President Clark wondered if there would also be an objective aspect to the evaluation. Mr. Bailey noted that metrics for professional development were included in the update to the Strategic Plan under Goal 1. He was also working the Chief of School Performance, Paul LaMarca, to set up walkthroughs of schools and classrooms and highlight the Instructional Practice Guide, which was used to show that instruction in the classrooms changed as a result of the Professional Development. Ms. Fox added that teachers were surveyed on the process and content of the professional development was effective. Those surveys would assist in making changes to the training as needed. President Clark wondered how the changes in instruction would be monitored. Mr. Bailey explained that there was a layer process of evaluation. The principals would evaluate the teachers. The evaluation would be aligned with what the District was looking for in terms of core instruction. The Central Office would then look at the systems data to determine if the professional development made a difference and changes in the instruction were noticed. Trustee McLaury commented that research showed that major shifts in instruction did take time to fully implement. She believed it could take up to 5 years for full implementation. It was important that the key strategies be identified so they could be provided to the implementation specialists and site administrators. The ultimate goal in evaluating professional development would be to see a rise in test scores and student achievement increased. Superintendent Martinez added that the District was setting aggressive goals around graduation, which was a huge shift in culture for the District. At the same time, the District was not sacrificing rigor in the classrooms to increase the graduation rates. The District was working on remediation rates, having more students graduate with honors or advanced diplomas, more students taking AP classes, and increasing the


Pg. 25

performance on the SATs and ACTs. It was important to take those changes slowly so students would be able to perform at institutions of higher education because that was where some schools districts were having problems. His intent was to work backwards from the end outcome of an 80-90% graduation rate and figure out how to get students to that point because it was critical that the students had as many options open to them after graduation as possible. One of the ways to get there was to make sure all kindergarteners were reading before 1st grade. Additional changes could be seen with other grades and it was important to track where those students were so they could be provided with resources and support before they became seniors if they needed them. President Clark opened the meeting to public comment. Carole Fineberg stated that she appreciated what the schools were trying to do in terms of standardization; however, she was very concerned about the testing. She did not like the testing and the amount of data that was being collected on the students. She believed that hundreds of questions were being asked that had nothing to do with a child’s education. She requested the Board try to slow down the testing. She also urged the Board to look at who would be making money off of Common Core. Jane Lyon expressed concern for Common Core and wanted to see the Board try to stop it. She believed the standards needed to be set at the local level and not in Washington, D.C. The District was just accepting something that the parents were supposed to set. The people who designed Common Core had never taught at a grade level or administered a school. Math was being taught in a manner that would allow a student to explain how they got an answer, even if incorrect, and receive credit. The amount of data that was going to be collected was too much and it would follow a child forever. People were making money off of Common Core from the testing and they had designed the tests so students would fail then have to retake them. Finally, she was concerned about the history that would be taught. “If you had garbage in, you would get garbage out.” The texts were not teaching the basic history of the American founding and forefathers. She asked the Board to consider stopping Common Core. John Eppolito mentioned that the schools in Incline Village lost a number of teachers last year because of the new standards. They were great teachers and did not need the new standards or professional development to be effective. He asked the Board follow-up with the teachers to find out why they left. It was important to have standards; however, the Common Core standards were written by a group of people behind closed doors who were not accountable to anyone. Common Core was the takeover of American education by people who were not accountable to anyone. They were not accountable to the voters or the taxpayers. The people involved in the creation of the standards were required to sign confidentiality agreements where they would never discussed what occurred in the meetings. Exactly 2 content specialists


Pg. 26

were involved with the validation committee and neither would sign off on the standards. He wondered if those against Common Core would ever get a chance to bring all their concerns to the Board. Craig Newton felt that the system was put in place to make money. There was not a problem with the current standards, but it was the system that was broken. He believed the brightest students in the country were leaving and society was left with the “dumbest.” It was the same thing that occurred in the classrooms when the brightest students were put in classes with the “dumbest.” The brightest students did not want to drag others with them but learn what they needed to and move on. Students would be placed into categories and that would continue throughout their entire lives. Bonnie Klud was the parent of a special education student and it was always difficult getting her child the resources she needed because the teachers did not want to use them. Her daughter did graduate and was enrolled at the University of Nevada, Las Vegas. She provided the Board with a handout that expressed her desire for the Board to stop the implementation of Common Core. David Simko felt the biggest problem in the schools was discipline, discipline meaning self-control. A number of groups were now against Common Core, both Republicans and Democrats. It was important for the Board to develop their own curriculum for the District and stop the federal takeover of the education. 8.02 ACCESS TO INCREASE PRIMARY MEDICAL CARE SERVICES, THROUGH

COMMUNITY-BASED HEALTH CENTER President Clark requested that the parties in the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) reflect that the agreement was between Community Health Alliance (CHA) and the Board of Trustees, not just the Washoe County School District. She wanted to make sure any extension of the MOU was presented to the Board. Randy Drake, Chief General Council, indicated that was the intention and he would express that in the document. President Clark asked for clarification on who would have access to the electronic medical records. Charles Duarte, Chief Executive Officer, Community Health Alliance, explained that the electronic records were becoming standard throughout the health care system and the goal was to make sure medical professionals had accurate and timely access to patient records. Federal Health Information Protection Act (HIPA) and state privacy laws dictated who had access to those records. Primarily it was any individual who was involved in the health care of a patient or the administration of the health care program affecting the patient. If a school based psychologist or physical therapist was involved in the care of a child, HCA would be required to have documentation that they would be able to access the files if needed.


Pg. 27

President Clark asked about the provisions in NRS that allowed for exceptions to signed consent forms. Mr. Duarte noted that NRS 129.30-129.40 allowed for a child to be provided health care services when there was a clear medical need to do so. There were rare instances when that occurred for HCA because they focused on providing continuing care for children. The continuing care required multiple visits and the parents or guardians were involved in that process. However, there could be instances of parental abuse, a parent denying necessary medical treatment or behavioral health therapy, or a parent who presented a risk to the child. Dr. Elizabeth Sexton, Psychological Services, added that the access point at the school would always have parental permission, so if a child went to the office with a high fever, the clinic would be able to provide a one-time treatment. She reminded the Board that the program was a pilot at Wooster High School and they would be returning to the Board with updates and metrics on the program. It was moved by Trustee Ruggerio and seconded by Trustee Gutierrez that the Board of Trustees approves the Memorandum of Understanding and begins the program for the Community-Based Health Center. The result of the vote was Unanimous: Pass (Yea: Barbara Clark, Estela Gutierrez, John Mayer, Barbara McLaury, Howard Rosenberg and Lisa Ruggerio.) Final Resolution: Motion Carries. President Clark opened the meeting to public comment. John Eppolito expressed concern about the data that would be collected on the students. He believed that this would allow for additional information to be collected on the students that would follow them into adulthood. The data would be sent to private entities and could then be released to anyone. 9. Closing Items 9.01 BOARD MEMBER REQUESTS FOR FUTURE BOARD OF TRUSTEES’

AGENDAS AND AGENDA ITEMS Trustee McLaury requested an update on the Strategic Plan. Superintendent Martinez noted that the Communications Department was putting together a more compete document that would be presented to the Board at a future meeting. The request from staff would then be to send the document to the community for their input. Trustee Gutierrez stated she was sorry to hear about Trustee Aiazzi’s illness. She had received a number of phone calls from constituents regarding the process for filling his seat and a timeline.


Pg. 28

Trustee Mayer commented that Trustee Aiazzi had not resigned and he might not resign. President Clark asked if there was a policy regarding the appointment of vacant seats on the Board. Mr. Drake stated that the process was in NRS. He would send the statute to all Board members. Trustee Mayer asked about the number of graduates involved in summer graduation. It was stated that about 100 students graduated in August but there were not 100 students there. Superintendent Martinez mentioned that some students who received their diplomas during the summer graduation walked in June and other students had already started at other higher education institutions or in the military. Trustee Mayer also asked if all the half-time counselors were now full-time counselors. Superintendent Martinez indicated that the positions were all listed as full-time and the District had begun the hiring process. 9.02 PUBLIC COMMENT There was no public comment at the time. 9.03 NEXT MEETING ANNOUNCEMENT The next Regular Meeting would take place on August 26, 2014 beginning at 2:00 p.m. in the Board Room at the Central Administration Building. 9.04 ADJOURN MEETING There being no further business to come before the members of the Board, President Clark declared the meeting adjourned at 6:10 p.m. ____________________________ ____________________________ Barbara Clark, President Lisa Ruggerio, Clerk

minutes of the august 12, 2014 regular meeting of …...aug 12, 2014 · minutes of the august 12,...

Documents