Board of Education Regular Board Meeting San Carlos ESD November 19, 2015 5:00PM San Carlos School District Board Room
1200 Industrial Road, Unit 9B, San Carlos, CA 94070
Open Session 5PM
|
|
Comments from the Public for any Items not on the Agenda: Persons wishing to address the Board on any item except personnel are invited to do so. In the interest of time and order, presentations from the public are limited to 3 minutes per person, per topic. |
|
|
|
|
Consent agenda items are those considered routine and for which general agreement among board members is expected, and as such do not need discussion before a vote. Unless a board member requests that an item be removed for discussion, the entire package is voted on at once without explanation or comments.
|
|
|
|
Staff seeks Board approval of revised contract with PALS for behavioral services. |
|
|
Board approval of revised contract with PALS for behavioral services as submitted by staff. |
This contract is a revision and it is a decrease to the budget because the direct behavioral services decreased from 7 hours a week to 4 hours weekly.
|
revised contract with PALS for student # 13a
|
|
|
Staff seeks Board approval of contract with Cell staff for substitute nursing coverage. |
It is challenging to find substitute nurses. We currently have a contract with Bright Star for back-up coverage however, sometimes this company does not have staff available. Thus, we decided to use Cell Staff as back up as it is critical.
|
|
Board approval of contract with Cell Staff for substitute nursing services as proposed by staff. |
This contract will be an increase to the budget because this is a new staffing company we were not anticipating a need for.
|
Contract with Cell Staff
|
|
|
Staff seeks Board approval of contract with AVID translation for translation services. |
This contract is necessary for meetings with parents (e.g. conferences, 504, SST, IEP, etc.) when we do not have internal staff who can provide translation in parent's native language. |
|
Board approval of contract with AVID Translation for translation services as submitted by staff. |
This contract was anticipated and thus it is in the adopted budget.
|
Contract with AVID Translation
|
|
|
Staff seeks approval of gift to the District. |
Mr. Robert Griess', a former SCSD teacher in the 1960's and 70's, estate has gifted $25,000 to the District for instructional materials. |
Board policy requires any gifts/donations to the District to be approved by the Board. |
|
Approve acceptance of gift. |
Gift total of $25,000. |
Bequest of Estate of Former SCSD Teacher
|
|
|
Staff seeks Board approval for the quarterly report on the statue of Williams related complaints filed during the period.
|
Quarterly report for Board approval of Williams related complaints.
|
Each district is required to send a copy of this report to the County Superintendent after it has been submitted and approve by the Board of Trustees. The District has no Williams Complaints during the period.
|
|
Approve Quarterly Report on Williams Uniform Complaints.
|
None |
Williams Uniform Complaints - October 31, 2015
|
|
|
Staff seeks Board approval to dispose of District Bluebird Bus. |
The District purchased the Blue Bird School Bus from the Sequoia Union High School District in July, 2012 for $1. The purchase was made in order for the District to provide direct transportation service for Tinsely students. The Bus is a 2000 Blue Bird Type 1 Bus with maximum capacity of 76 students powered by natural gas. After maintenance difficulties combined with considerable potential cost to replace the natural gas fuel tanks it was considered prudent to replace the vehicle. The bus was taken out of service due to expired fuel tanks and unrepairable fuel delivery system.
|
Board approval needed for disposal of surplus or unusable property. |
|
Approve disposal of District 2000 Blue Bird Type 1 Bus. |
SCSD Bus
|
|
|
Staff seeks Board approval of revised District Goals and Success Measures
|
Staff presented draft of this document at the prior Board meeting. After consultation with principals, staff is presenting the proposed revision to the Board for approval. It is inclusive of the addition of a mid-point report of 4th grade writing performance (as requested by Board). Further, it includes a modification of the final measure as results of the CELDT testing after the third year are not received until Fall of the following school year.
|
|
Board approval of revised "District Goals and Success Measures" as proposed by staff.
|
No direct financial impact. |
District Goals 2015-2016 Clean Version District Goals 2015-2016 Redline Version
|
|
|
Staff seeks Board approval to dispose of surplus metal folding chairs at Heather Elementary School. |
As part of the Heather MUR renovation, new chairs were purchased to replace 300 well worn and old metal folding chairs. After polling other school sites about possible repurposing, it was deemed the chairs were too old and impractical for further use. |
Board approval needed for disposal of surplus property. |
|
Approve disposal of metal folding chairs at Heather Elementary School. |
Chairs at Heather
|
|
|
Staff seeks Board approval of revised contract with Starfish Therapies for physical therapy services.
|
Services were extended in duration through the IEP process which modified contract. |
|
Board approval of revised contract with Starfish Therapies for physical therapy services as proposed by staff. |
This was anticipated and thus this increased budgeting need was factored into the adopted budget. |
Revised Contract for student #4 with Starfish Therapies
|
|
|
Staff seeks Board approval of revised contract with All Hands In for behavioral services. |
This is a revision in the contract and it is a decrease in the budget because the services have been reduced to one hour per week for student 25 through All Hands In.
|
|
Board approval of revised contract with All Hands In as proposed by staff. |
This is a reduction to the adopted budget. |
Revised Contract for student 25 with All Hands In
|
|
|
Staff seeks Board approval of revised contract with Community Gatepath for Augmentative-Alternative Communication (AAC) evaluation services.
|
The contract is a revised contract and it is a increase to the budget because we added 15 hours for an assessment to this contract for student 30a.
|
|
Board approval of revised contract for assessment of special education student. |
This is an increase to the adopted budget as it was not an anticipated expense. |
Revised contract with Community GatePath for student # 30a.
|
|
|
A warrant report is included on the consent agenda for the Board to review. |
Staff seeks approval of the Warrant Report |
Various warrants are processed during the course of the the year, which the Board of Trustees is requested to approve. A warrant report is included on the consent agenda. |
Warrant Report
|
|
|
The attached Personnel Report is presented to the Board for approval.
|
Staff seeks Board approval of the presented Personnel Report containing new hires, terminations, FTE, location and position changes.
|
|
Approval of the presented Personnel Report.
|
Personnel Report 111915.pdf
|
|
|
Staff will present the Educator Effectiveness Funding plan to the Board. |
The Educator Effectiveness funding will be made available to LEAs and County Offices of Education per FTE certificated staff count reported in the California Longitudinal Pupil Achievement Data System (CALPADS) system for the 2014-2015 school year. Our District reported 174.5 FTE certificated teachers in 2014-2015 and thus our allocation is based upon this total.
The Educator Effectiveness funds are not new monies but rather are previously "unrestricted funds" already in the adopted budget for the 2015-2016 Budget Act and for which a portion was reallocated with restrictions to be used specifically for professional development, coaching and support services as, outlined in Assembly Bill (AB) 104. AB104 requires that the funds be used for the following purposes: ~ Beginning Teacher and administrator support and mentoring ~Professional development, coaching and support services for teacher who have been identified as needing improvement or additional support by LEAs ~Professional development for teachers and administrators that is aligned to the state content standards ~To promote educator quality and effectiveness (including training on mentoring or coaching certificated staff and training certificated staff to support effective teaching and learning). LEAs are required to develop and adopt an expenditure plan and to share this at a public meeting of the Governing Board, adopt an expenditure plan and provide a detailed expenditure report to the CDE by July 1, 2018. The CDE will apportion the funds in two installments. The first in December, 2015 and the remaining funds in March, 2016. However, LEAs are authorized to spend these funds beginning in the 2015-2016 school year. LEAs may spend the funds all at once or spread across the three years. Our district is anticipating $255,909 in Educator Effectiveness Funding in total, of which, $141,000 has already been budgeted for the 2015-2016 school year for Professional Development. The remaining $115,909 apportionment schedule will be determined by a Professional Development Committee (comprised of administrators and teachers) and will be allocated during the 2016-2017 and 2017-2018 school years.
|
|
Educator Effectiveness Funding Presentation
|
|
|
Proposition 30 requires both the creation of an Education Protection Account (EPA) and disclosure of how these funds were spent.
|
Proposition 30, "The Schools and Local Public Safety Protection Act of 2012," approved by the voters on November 6, 2012, temporarily increases the State's sales tax rate for all taxpayers and the personal income tax rates for upper-income taxpayers. The new revenues generated from Proposition 30 are deposited and distributed from a special account established by the initiative called the Education Protection Account (EPA). The distribution of these funds is an offset to State aid, treated like local property taxes received by a district. Although these funds are not restricted per se, districts are required to disclose how the moneys are spent, per legal requirement of Proposition 30.
|
The Board is required to make spending determination for EPA funds in open session of a public meeting. The Board has sole authority to determine how the moneys received from EPA are spent. However, EPA funds may not be used for salaries and benefits of administrators or other administrative costs. The District is required to annually publish on its website an accounting of how much EPA money was received and how the money was spent. |
|
Staff recommends directing EPA , Proposition 30, funds towards teachers salaries. |
The EPA, Proposition 30, funding for 2015-16 is projected to be $3.88 million based on CDE P-2 2014-15 principal apportionment attendance report. These funds reduce the amount of State aid the District receives in its Local Control Funding Formula (LCFF). The Proposition 30 temporary taxes are set to expire within the next 5 years. The additional 1/4 cent sales tax expires in 2016. The increase to personal income for high income earners expires in 2018. The effect this will have on State funding is unknown at this time.
|
|
|
Staff will present Board with issuance cost related to $36,931,111 in GO Bonds, Election 2012, Series 2015 and $12,650,874 in GO Refunding Bonds, Series 2015.
|
On November 10, 2015, the District successfully sold its approximately $36 million General Obligation Bonds, Election of 2012, Series 2015 (the “New Money Bonds”) and $11.3 million General Obligation Refunding Bonds, Series 2015 (the “ Refunding Bonds,” and together with the New Money Bonds, the “Bonds”) through a negotiated sale with Stifel, Nicolaus & Company, Incorporated (the “Underwriter”). The New Money Bonds were issued to finance specific construction, repair and improvement projects approved by the voters of the District as Measure H. The Refunding Bonds were issued to refinance the District’s outstanding 2005 General Obligation Refunding Bonds (the “Prior Bonds”). Credit Ratings The Bonds were upgraded to ‘AA’ from ‘AA-’ by Standard & Poor’s Rating Services (“S&P”). S&P cited the following in the District’s credit report - Strong financial performance with very strong reserves - Silicon Valley location and very strong wealth income profile - Stable average daily attendance, which drives operating revenues - Above-average financial flexibility due to the voter-approved parcel tax The District's Bonds received over 100 orders from a broad investor base which included retail investors, money managers, banks and insurance companies. Certain maturities received excess orders which allowed the Underwriter to lower interest rates to the District’s benefit. The Underwriter also commited their own capital to purchase approximately $3 million in unsold bonds. Overall, the all-in borrowing cost on the New Money Bonds and Refunding Bonds was lowered by approximately 0.055% and 0.051%, respectively, as compared to interest rates shown to the District the day prior. The New Money Bonds achieved an all-inclusive interest rate of 3.96%, which resulted in a very cost-effective repayment ratio of 1.94 to 1, compared to an estimated 2.03 to 1 presented at 9/24 Board meeting. The Refunding Bonds achieved taxpayer savings of $1,683,686, compared to an estimated $1,353,897 presented at the 9/24 Board meeting. The District’s 11.06% present value savings are significantly above the 3% industry benchmark for refinancings. Savings were generated by replacing Prior Bonds with an average interest rate of 4.41% with Refunding Bonds with an all-inclusive interest rate of 1.93%. Based on an assessment from the District's Underwriter, the ratings upgrade from AA- to AA resulted in interest rates that were about 0.10% lower. This saved taxpayers about $360,000 on the New Money Bonds and $112,000 on the Refunding bonds. The rating upgrade combined with the bond refinancing saved about $2,155,686 in interest cost. GO Bonds, Election 2012, Series 2015 represents the final series of Measure H bonds.
|
AB 1482 requires that after the sale of General Obligation Bonds that Trustees be presented with actual cost of bond issuance. |
|
Final Financing Summary
|
|
|
Staff will present a draft of a Three Year Technology Plan with proposed budget. |
A committee comprised of District teachers, administrators and parents met over the course of several months to craft a Three Year District Technology Plan. The presentation of a draft budget and implementation plan represents a best case scenario for meeting the goals outlined in the plan. The Year 1 budget represents the most critical aspects to initiate for the longer term success of the plan. Staff seeks guidance from the Board on these essential elements.
|
The San Carlos School District Strategic Plan calls for the creation of a Technology Plan to support the District's strategic, LCFF, and LCAP goals. |
|
District Tech Plan Presentation Draft Technology Plan Handout to the Board - Tech Plan Presentation to the Board SCSD Tech Plan 3-Year Rollout Tech Plan Draft Budget
|
|
|
Superintendent Baker will report out on a meeting held on October 26, 2015 to brainstorm and rough out an outline for an eventual Marketing and Communications Master Plan. Trustees will be asked to review and provide input on the attached draft outline and then discuss next steps for developing this plan, intended to be brought to the Board in April for action. |
It is estimated, very conservatively, that District staff--Administrators at both the District and School levels, Teachers, and other Support Staff--spend 112 to 154 hours a week collectively reacting to misinformation or concerns regarding lack of information on critical topics. These numbers exclude the normal communications that all employees do (Newsletters, answering email, etc.) At the elementary schools, principals estimated that between themselves, their secretaries, teachers and other staff they spend at least 3 to 5 hours a week on such communication matters. At the middle schools, they estimate approximately 5 to 7 hours a week collectively. District Senior staff estimate a minimum of between 45 and 60 hours a week spent on the same, while all other District staff (Directors, Special Education staff, Teacher on Special Assignment, etc.) spend a similar amount of time on this, collectively. These hours would add up to somewhere between 3 and 4 FTE.
|
Communications Outline - Notes Presentation made to the board
|
|
|
Staff will present revised BP/AR 5125 - Student Records- for consideration of Board approval.
|
Staff continues to update Board policies and administrative regulations on an ongoing basis. Staff is recommending adoption of CSBA update with some slight modifications that better align this policy to our district. |
|
Board approval of revised BP/AR 5125 - Student Records (as proposed by staff). |
BP/AR 5125 - Student Records - Clean Version BP/AR 5125 - Student Records - Redline Version
|
|
|