PASCO SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1 Board of Directors’ Regular ... › cms › lib › WA01001055 ›...

PASCO SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1 Board of Directors’ Regular Meeting

Tuesday, February 28, 2017, 6:30 p.m. C. L. Booth Education Service Center, 1215 W. Lewis Street, Pasco, WA 99301

A G E N D A

BOARD RETREAT – 4:00 PM Annual Planning Calendar and Board Governanace

1. CALL TO ORDER Mr. Scott Lehrman

2. FLAG SALUTE Mark Twain Elementary Principal Barbara Pierce

3. ROLL CALL Steve Christensen Sherry Lancon Scott Lehrman Amy Phillips Aaron Richardson Misty Lace Jesus Mendoza Evan Naef

4. SPECIAL RECOGNITION Pasco Firefighters (Operation Warm) Mr. Shane Edinger and School Counselors

5. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Regular Meeting of February 14, 2017 Special Meeting of February 21, 2017

6. AGENDA REVIEW7. AUDIENCE COMMENTS8. COMMUNICATIONS

9. REPORTS/DISCUSSIONA. READY!B. College and Career Readiness Initiative

Mr. Erich BolzMrs. Suzanne Hall

10. ACTION ITEMSA. Consideration of Request for Waiver Days Mrs. Glenda Cloud

11. CONSENT AGENDAA. Personnel Mrs. Glenda Cloud/Ms. Robin Hay B. Warrant Approval Mr. Howard Roberts, Jr. C. Contract Approval for Internet Service Provider Mrs. Glenda Cloud/Mr. Mark Garrett D. Overnight Student Travel – Chiawana, Delta and Pasco High School Speech Mrs. Glenda Cloud

and Debate Clubs to State Speech Tournament in Tacoma, WA, March 10-12, 2017 E. Overnight Student Travel – Delta and Chiawana High School Speech and

Debate Clubs to State Debate Tournament in Tacoma, WA, March 16-18, 2017 F. Overnight Student Travel – Pasco High School Every 15 Minutes Shift Into Safety Mrs. Glenda Cloud

Program Preparation and Benton County Morgue Field Trip G. Overnight Student Travel – Delta High School Science Olympiad Team to the Mrs. Glenda Cloud

Northwest Science Olympia Regionals in Seattle, WA H. Overnight Student Travel – Chiawana High School Distributive Education Clubs Mrs. Glenda Cloud

of America (DECA) to the DECA State Career Development Conference in Bellevue, WA

12. FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS13. EXECUTIVE SESSION – RCW 42.30.110 (1)(g)-Superintendent Evaluation14. ADJOURNMENT

Revised 2-21-06

PASCO SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1

Agenda Item Summary

AGENDA ITEM NO. : 4 BOARD MEETING DATE: February 28, 2017

TOPIC: Special Recognition – Pasco Firefighters (Operation Warm) and School Counselors

CABINET ADMINISTRATOR: Michelle Whitney PRESENTER: Shane Edinger

X REPORT 1ST READING DISCUSSION 2ND READING ACTION REQUIRED

OBJECTIVE: To recognize members of Pasco Firefighters Union Local 1433 for donating and distributing more than 100 winter coats to students at Rowena Chess Elementary in December. To recognize school counselors in honor of National School Counseling Week February 6-10, 2017.

BACKGROUND: (Pertinent past action/events) For the second straight year, Pasco Firefighters collected monetary donations from the community, and then used that money to purchase warm winter coats for students in need as part of “Operation Warm.” This year, firefighters were able to give out more than 100 winter coats to students at Rowena Chess Elementary on December 8, 2016. Recognition of counselor representatives.

Invited counselors: TBD

Board Meeting Minutes February 14, 2017 1

Pasco School District No. 1 Board of Directors’ Regular Meeting

Tuesday, February 14, 2017, 6:30 p.m. C. L. Booth Education Service Center, 1215 West Lewis Street, Pasco, WA 99301

M I N U T E S CALL TO ORDER President Lehrman called the meeting to order at 6:30 p.m. followed by an opening statement on policy and procedure. FLAG SALUTE Mr. Lehrman introduced Chiawana High School Principal John Wallwork who introduced CHS students Victor Silva, Ivan Perez, Kayleigh Ellsworth, Kaitlyn Roy and Meg Nelson who are members of the American Sign Language classes and club and the Deaf Education Program. The students then led the flag salute. Student board representatives presented each CHS student with a Pride of Pasco pin. Parents were recognized and thanked for their attendance and support. PRESENT Board of Directors Administrators Scott Lehrman, President Michelle Whitney, Superintendent Amy Phillips, Vice President Glenda Cloud, Deputy Superintendent Steve Christensen, Member Sarah Thornton, Assistant Superintendent Sherry Lancon, Member Erich Bolz, Assistant Superintendent Aaron Richardson, Member Misty Lace, Student Representative (excused) Evan Naef, Student Representative Jesus Mendoza, Student Representative Audience Randy Nunamaker Howard Roberts, Jr. Shane Edinger Kristie Docken Megan Nelson Robin Hay Toni Neidhold Charlotte Stingley John Wallwork Joel Nunn Faustino Riojas Mark Garrett Deidre Holmberg Jenny Rodriquez Robyn Dunnagan Jenny Henn Ericka Sayers Mark Rudeen Greg Olson Maria Lee Shellie Hatch Jacqueline Ramirez Victor Silva Victor A. Silva Kayleigh Ellsworth Kaitlyn Roy Meg Nelson Ivan Perez Haley Brown Marie Feryn Jennifer Collins Leah Piskel Laura Rudeen Rodney Dehaan Azalia Norwood Domingo Gonzalez Julia Dudley Michelle Granbois Kathy Wright Phil Koestner Susan Sparks Richard Job Brennen Silva Leti Villalobus Stephen Perez Ford Power Nicole Fischer Carmen Gonzalez


Audience (continued) Kylee Sixkiller-Bossert David Diaz Jose Lopez Julio Blanco Amber Havers Paula Bazinet K.C. Bennion Emily Maloney Erin Hall-Lewis Michelle Smith Andrea Lopez Edalina Diaz Jamie Southworth APPROVAL OF MINUTES Ms. Lancon moved to approve the minutes of the regular meeting of January 24, 2017 and the minutes of the special meeting of January 31, 2017 as presented. Mr. Christensen seconded the motion; the motion carried. AGENDA REVIEW Mrs. Whitney stated there are no changes to the agenda and there will be no request for an executive session. AUDIENCE COMMENTS Mr. Lehrman explained that questions and comments are welcome after each report pertaining to the topic covered at that time. He then opened the floor for comments on any other topics. There were no audience comments. COMMUNICATIONS Dr. Richardson attended the 3rd Annual Triple Header which showcased the best talent our community has to offer in girls basketball, wrestling, and boys basketball. He also attended the regional wrestling tournament and offered congratulations to those progressing to the state competition. He also congratulated the Speech and Debate teams competing at the state competition and wished all the competitors good luck. Ms. Lancon attended the Chiawana High School winter semester graduation and congratulated the graduates. She also attended the State of the District Address and expressed her appreciation of the recent Pasco School District Annual Community Report. Mr. Christensen and Port of Pasco representatives met with Commissioner of Public Lands Hilary Franz to talk about property the Port is wanting to purchase for future development. He also attended the 2017 WSSDA/WASBO/WASA Legislative Conference. He reported the conference was informative and he is hopeful for funding resolution. Mr. Naef also attended the WSSDA Legislative Conference and he expressed appreciation for the wonderful opportunity. He shared it was an amazing conference, informative and seeing legislation in action was almost too much to absorb. He met elected officials, including Justice González and toured the justice building, Senate Majority Leader Mark Schoesler and Governor Jay Inslee. Mr. Mendoza had a recent lunch with his Champion, a program at New Horizons High School that matches a student with an adult mentor providing additional positive support to help them in their efforts to earn their diploma and prepare themselves for their future. He announced the Community Partners Night, “Let’s Taco About It” is February 23 and will include food and events and invited all to attend.


Mrs. Phillips attended the Chiawana High School winter semester graduation and the Legislative Conference. She appreciates and understands the benefit of the conference and shared that the senators and representatives she spoke with want to hear our voice. She encouraged all to contact the elected officials. Mr. Lehrman attended the CHS winter semester graduation and offered congratulations to the students and staff. He enjoyed the State of the District Address. He is looking forward to the results of the bond election coming in tonight. Mr. Lehrman shared a thank you to all who communicated why we are running the bond and putting students first. He noted the district is working with a consultant on a 10 to 20-year plan for facilities. If anyone is interested in participating on community work groups, please contact Randy Nunamaker. Mrs. Whitney shared information on upcoming events including New Horizon’s High School winter graduation on February 15, Mission STEM Possible at Franklin STEM Elementary on February 21, the Highly Capable Rigorous Course of Study Stakeholder Workgroup on February 22 and the 2nd Annual Winter Carnival at Chiawana High School on February 23. REPORTS/DISCUSSION Outrageous Outcome: 100% of Students will Pass Algebra by the End of 9th Grade – Mrs. Whitney provided the board with the rationale, baseline benchmark data and key actions associated with meeting our algebra outrageous outcome. The board’s governance model identifies Results Policies which define the outcomes for our direct clients (students) by clarifying the expected organizational outcomes. These policies provide a framework for decision making and focus. Based on the existing District Strategic Improvement Plan which was developed through a collaborative process using:

survey results from over 10,000 students, parents, and staff input from 201 parent, student, and staff focus groups and 160 summit participants

The board worked with district staff and building principals to identify 5 outrageous outcomes for Pasco School District. Results Policies

100% of all 3rd graders will read on grade level in their language of instruction 100% of students will pass Algebra by the end of 9th grade 100% of students are engaged in extracurricular activities 100% of 9th graders will end the school year on track for graduation 100% of students graduate and have a career path

Board discussion followed. There were no audience comments. ACTION ITEMS Graduation Dates Recommendation – Mrs. Cloud provided an overview of the impacts of inclement weather resulting in school delays/closures and considerations for the possible changes to graduation dates. Mrs. Cloud requested a board decision on the 2017 graduation dates.


The current graduation schedule is: June 1 Delta High School June 2 New Horizons High School June 3 Chiawana High School and Pasco High School

Board discussion followed and it was recommended that graduation dates remain unchanged. No motion was needed. There were no audience comments. Relocating Two Double Classroom Portables for Elementary Schools – Mr. Nunamaker is requesting board approval to relocate two double classroom portables. One double classroom portable for Frost Elementary School and one double classroom portable for McClintock Elementary School from the district’s portable inventory. Discussion followed. There were no audience comments. Dr. Richardson moved to approve relocating two double classroom portables to elementary schools. One double classroom portable for Frost Elementary School and one double classroom portable for McClintock Elementary School. Ms. Lancon seconded the motion. A roll call vote was taken as follows; the motion carried. Mr. Christensen – Yes Ms. Lancon – Yes Mr. Lehrman – Yes Mrs. Phillips – Yes Dr. Richardson – Yes CONSENT AGENDA Ms. Lancon moved to approve the Consent Agenda as presented. Mrs. Phillips seconded the motion. A roll call vote was taken as follows; the motion carried. Mr. Christensen – Yes Ms. Lancon – Yes Mr. Lehrman – Yes Mrs. Phillips – Yes Dr. Richardson – Yes Approved Consent Agenda items include:

o Personnel – approval of routine personnel items as presented o Warrants o Warrant Date: January 20, 2017 o General Fund warrants numbered 252935-253045 in the amount of $874,127.08 o Capital Projects Fund warrants numbered 253046-253051 in the amount of $175,301.48 o Associated Student Body Fund warrants numbered 253052-253057 in the amount of

$12,027.47 o Warrant Date: January 25, 2017 o General Fund warrants numbered 253058-253146 in the amount of $290,769.27 o Capital Projects Fund warrants numbered 253147-253148 in the amount of $485.43 o Associated Student Body Fund warrants numbered 253149-253157 in the amount of

$39,375.83 o Student Body Fund warrants numbered 252237-252249 in the amount of $42,916.50 o Warrant Date: January 31, 2017 o Payroll Fund warrants numbered 253158-253198 and 253537-253647 in the amount of

$94,196.21 o Warrant Date: January 31, 2017


o General Fund warrants numbered 253199-253272 in the amount of $6,979,820.86 o Warrant Date: February 3, 2017 o General Fund warrants numbered 253273-253506 in the amount of $929,601.28 o Capital Projects Fund warrants numbered 253507-253513 in the amount of $49,625.26 o Associated Student Body Fund warrants numbered 253514-253535 in the amount of

$26,683.79 o Transportation Vehicle Fund warrant numbered 253536 in the amount of $9,521.10 o Resolution No. 934 Diversity Assurance for Elementary No. 16 Project o Out of State Overnight Student Travel – Pasco High School Key Club to the Pacific

Northwest District Convention in Portland, OR o Overnight Student Travel – Pasco High School Distributive Education Clubs of America

(DECA) to Pro Sports and Entertainment Career Conference in Portland and Mt. Hood, OR o Overnight Student Travel – McLoughlin Middle School FCCLA Students to Attend State

Leadership Conference/Competition in Kennewick, WA FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS Mrs. Whitney stated the next regular meeting is scheduled for February 28, 2017 and a Board Retreat has been planned from 4:00 – 6:00 p.m. for the board’s annual calendar planning, board reports, study sessions and the governance model. The regular meeting will include a tentative 1st Reading Policy on graduation requirements, this reading is tentative due to possible legislative action. There will be a READY! presentation and a College and Career Readiness Initiative report. EXECUTIVE SESSION There was no executive session. The Board of Directors adjourned at 7:48 p.m. President of the Board Secretary of the Board

Special Board Meeting Minutes February 21, 2017 1

Pasco School District No. 1 Board of Directors’ Special Meeting

Tuesday, February 21, 2017, 6:00 p.m. C. L. Booth Education Service Center, 1215 West Lewis Street, Pasco, WA 99301

M I N U T E S

CALL TO ORDER President Lehrman called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. followed by the following statement: I welcome you to this special meeting of the Pasco School Board of Directors. Thank you for attending and for your interest in Pasco Public Schools. We recently ran a Bond that failed with current count at 57% yes and 43% no votes. To date 9,467 votes have been counted. Approximately 700 additional yes votes (in addition to the 5,402 yes votes currently counted) would have been required to pass this bond. Many community volunteers worked tirelessly to advocate for this Bond, and we thank them for that. We are here this evening to listen to the community, listen to district staff, discuss the pros/cons of various options, and discuss a path forward. The most talked about options I have heard to date are rerunning a Bond in April, with Board Action required this evening, or rerunning a Bond at a later date, after using a disciplined approach to collect community input and focus on clear communications and messaging on the value/price/contents and the impact of the bond to our students and community. The board has identified our “owners” as the community at large, from young parents new to public schools to our valued senior citizens who are our connection to Pasco’s proud history of quality education for all children. Every voice in our community is important. We utilize the information we receive to set goals and direction for the district that best communicate the shared beliefs, values, and expectations of our community. The education experts leading our district implement the expectations and direction set by the board, which will lead to improved outcomes for student achievement, customer service, and operational efficiency. We expect our Board, and the district to be learning organizations that seek continuous improvement. The definition of a learning organization is one that facilitates the learning of its members and continuously transforms itself. We welcome any and all input this evening. I would like to change the agenda so that item number 4) is community input, and item number 5) is Reports and Discussion. Between reports and discussion and adjournment I will then entertain a motion if board members wish to make one. Finally, I remind you that this special meeting will be recorded for broadcast on PSC-TV, Charter Cable Channel 191. It will also be available by searching “pasco schools” on youtube. FLAG SALUTE Mr. Lehrman introduced Student Representative’s Jesus Mendoza and Evan Naef who then led the flag salute.


PRESENT Board of Directors Administrators Scott Lehrman, President Michelle Whitney, Superintendent Amy Phillips, Vice President Glenda Cloud, Deputy Superintendent Steve Christensen, Member Sarah Thornton, Assistant Superintendent Sherry Lancon, Member Erich Bolz, Assistant Superintendent Aaron Richardson, Member Misty Lace, Student Representative (excused) Evan Naef, Student Representative Jesus Mendoza, Student Representative Audience Mark Rudeen Howard Roberts, Jr. Shane Edinger Jennifer Collins Courtney Stenson Richard Job Alisha Miller Andrea Luther Meghan Ehlis Severa Fuentes Michelle Simon Kristina Brown Heidi Redfield Amanda Russell Janie Heitschmidt Michelle Granbois Sarah Winaker Christy Grimm Kathy Wright Marcia Stillwell William Stillwell Cameron Probert Jim McNeill Ashley Fischer Sarah Dodson Kendle Dodson Jamie Southworth Susan Sparks Robin Hay Alma Duran Emily Maloney Erin Hall-Lewis Angela Nemoth Todd Woodward Krissa Peterson Cindy Woodward Rebecca Oxford Debi Maxwell Betsy Kemp Ruvine Jimenez Stephanie Swanberg Sergio Alvarez Nathan Grimm Julia Dudley Natallie Howard Brian Howard Ana Ruiz Peralta Elisa Rayl Chip Elfering Jaime Villalon Maryla Villalon Ines Capetillo Zaydel Capetillo Lance Dever Maribel Carpenter Smith Valerie Aragon Rebecca Richardson Eriberto Frias Whitney Billman Larissa Peterson BOARD COMMENTS Dr. Richardson stated that with the climate in our country currently it is a good reminder to remember to be civil as we communicate. He expressed his gratitude that we could hold this meeting tonight and reported that the night of the bond results the board got feedback and thoughts from several community members. This meeting was called to consider whether or not the board wanted to move forward with a rerunning of a new bond in April which would require a quick turnaround as a resolution would have to be completed by this Friday. He addressed the audience asking for their feedback. All other board members chose to hold comments until after hearing from the audience. AUDIENCE COMMENTS Sarah Winaker - 3rd grade teacher, Pasco voter, no kids. She stressed her support of the current bond as is with the updates to Curie Elementary as opposed to bringing in more portables to solve the overcrowding issues. She will support whatever the board proposes but believes the elementary schools need to be the priority. Voted yes on the bond.


Christy Grimm – 5th grade teacher, taxpayer, no children in the district. She supports the bond as is and does not think running another bond so soon would change voter results. She would like to see us take the time to work with long-range facility planners and the task force before making any changes to the bond. Current numbers show the need for schools everywhere at every level. Would also support looking at the boundaries again. As a teacher she always supports bonds but wants what is best for our kids right now. Marcia Stillwell – teacher and parent. Supports a 4th middle school and running the bond right away. Sarah Dodson – parent of four. Supports 4th middle school and running the bond right away. Kendall Dodson – student who attended McLoughlin and is now a freshman at CHS. Supports 4th middle school as she believes the overcrowding at middle school level is harder than in elementary. Emily Maloney – parent of students at McClintock and serves on the Pasco Citizens for Betters Schools. Supported the current bond as is. Will support what the board believes is the best option for Pasco taxpayers but is concerned about overburdening them if we ask for too much. Thinks we should wait for more information before moving forward. Erin Hall-Lewis – mother of 4 and community member. Supports a 4th middle school. She acknowledged that we need space everywhere, but has felt the impact of an overcrowded middle school on her child. She also read a letter from Melissa Reed - parent of two children at McClintock who was unable to attend. She supports a 4th middle school with a bond to be run in April or November. Mrs. Phillips said we have a lot more information to consider which might include moving 6th graders back up to middle school. Dr. Richardson commented that he would still want to have at least one elementary and still leave Stevens on the bond. The 4th middle school would be in place of the second elementary. He also reconfirmed that he likes the 6th graders in elementary and that the middle schools could not handle putting 6th graders back at the middle school level. Ms. Lancon stated that there had been no discussion about moving 6th graders back to middle school at this time. Todd Woodward - parent of Pasco students, one at McLoughlin, a freshman at CHS and three CHS graduates. While he supports a 4th middle school he is not in favor of removing the two elementary schools as they are needed. He would support a larger bond that includes both. Dr. Richardson stated that he had not heard/seen anything from the voters that said the bond was too high. Mrs. Phillips stated that she had. Dr. Richardson encouraged all those emailing to copy all board members so that they could all be informed of their input. Ashley Fischer – asked if when a new bond is run the old one falls off. It was clarified that they do eventually fall off, but Pasco does not currently have one coming off. She encouraged more advertising in different ways as the commercial she saw was good, but many people do not watch local


commercials. She would like some clarification on the “other.” Dr. Richardson explained that the “other” is outlined on the PSD website. Nathan Grimm – resident taxpayer, no kids in the district, wife teaches in Pasco. He works in the construction industry and has looked at the Office of Superintendent of Instruction figures and found that the elementary schools are at 158% of capacity, middle schools at 113% and high schools at 139%. Based on those figures he does not support rerunning the bond so soon and would have to think long and hard about voting yes for a 4th middle school. He also recommended looking at middle school boundaries. He asked if a new middle school would qualify for any state matching. Mr. Lehrman clarified that it would receive matching, just not at as high a rate as the elementary buildings would. Dr. Richardson stated that the issue with those types of numbers is that it assumes that the level is equal in effecting the students. It is absolutely not. Mr. Christensen asked if Dr. Richardson had information that supports that statement. Dr. Richardson responded that it was based on what he was hearing from the many people he had spoken with. Nathan Grimm asked why we did not qualify for superscap funds, would McLoughlin qualify for new in lieu matching dollars and can you provide the public with a cost per student of a new facility both at the middle school and elementary level? He also asked if we have any underutilized schools. He has heard there are empty classrooms at Ochoa Middle School. Ana Ruiz Peralta – parent. Would not support running the bond immediately. She would like to hear from other members of the community who may for one reason or another not be able to be here tonight. She supported the recent bond and will support whatever bond the board determines will serve the whole community best and not just those in attendance. Jaime Villalon – agreed with Mr. Grimm. He supports running the same bond again at a later date. We should be celebrating the 57% even though we did not get the majority vote, it is clear that there are many out there who support the bond as it was presented. He also reported that he believes there were several things that got in the way of voter turnout and that the cold weather was one of them. The snow made door to door visits near impossible. He would like to see all those people in the room using their positive influence to encourage personal friends to vote for the bond. He is aware we need another middle school, but believes that the majority still want to see two elementary schools built. Lance Dever – no kids in school currently, 3 came through Pasco schools. He supports what Mr. Grimm said about no 4th middle school at this time and while he understands the need he has concerns about the resistance we may get if the numbers (cost) go up any higher. He asked about the percentage of funding received for middle schools. Mr. Lehrman and Ms. Lancon told him that the matching for middle schools is 65%. Mariville Carpenter Smith – McClintock teacher, son at CHS, 2 at McLoughlin and 2 at McClintock. Supported the bond as it was, while she knows it was conservative, it included what is needed at this time and what is good for our community. She supports running the same bond again. She was one of the teachers who moved down to elementary with 6th grade, and while she did not support the decision at first now agrees that it was a really good decision and most teachers would agree. Besides being a good thing for the students it helped alleviate crowding in the middle schools. She does not believe we


can ask the voters to pay for all the buildings needed at one time. This was a good bond. We just need to get more people out to vote. Mr. Naef supports a 4th middle school. Courtney Stenson – parent of 2 children, one in Markham and one in McLoughlin Middle School. Supported the current bond. Her daughter loves McLoughlin and has had no decrease in her ability to excel there. She is a member of the CFBS and noted they never had a single meeting that was this full which is a disappointment from a vote yes standpoint. She wants to do what the community wants to do and consider also what the community can afford. She asked the board to consider all of the community, including those who do not come to board meetings for whatever reason, possible language barriers, not knowing they can advocate, nobody to help with family, whatever may keep them away. She was disappointment and felt the board meeting was being railroaded by one particular board member. Dr. Richardson stated that he assumed she meant him as he was the only one talking. He responded by saying that he has spent the last year trying to convince board members that the 4th middle school was needed. He begged everyone to agree and was hoping for a miracle as waiting another year to run a bond horrifies him. He stated that he has felt railroaded every meeting for the last year. Trying to stay calm and patient, when it was him against 4 other members on most issues. Mrs. Stenson stated a concern for running a bond close to a levy. We would need to be cognizant as a committee and as a board that we’ll have to put together an excellent communication campaign explaining the difference between a bond and levy, especially since we’ll be asking for money on the heels of asking for money. Rebecca Oxford – teaches 5th grade and has 4 registered voters in her home. Supported the current bond and believed it was well thought through. She does not agree with removing the 2nd elementary in order to get a middle school. She is also in support of more schools if that is what the board decides, but it may not be true of the whole community. She encouraged everyone to work together positively in order to get what is best for all students. Whitney Billman – 5th grade teacher. Supports keeping 6th graders in the elementary and rerunning the same bond in November. She does not agree with putting a 4th middle school on the bond as it would make it too expensive. The complete rebuild of Stevens gives us a new middle school. She encouraged the community and audience to take advantage of every opportunity to get the message out regarding why their vote is needed. Krissa Peterson – parent of 5 including a special needs student. She has concerns about overcrowding and supports a new middle school to help alleviate it at that level. Believes her child would do better in a smaller school. Larissa Peterson – 8th grader at McLoughlin. Supports building a 4th middle school. She attended McGee elementary which was overcrowded but did not notice it as she remained in single classroom. In middle school they are required to attend multiple classrooms. She thinks larger middle schools make extracurricular activities difficult with so many kids in each activity. Bill Stillwell – 6th grade teacher with 5 children. Supports 4th middle school stating that we should listen to the kids.


Stephanie Swanberg – 6 children in Pasco schools. Was hoping to have heard the report from Superintendent Whitney before comments were called for. Mr. Lehrman explained that several board members asked that we hear comments first so the agenda was modified to accommodate that request. Meredith Taylor - 5 children in Pasco schools. She asked if OSPI counts portables in square footage numbers. Mr. Lehrman said no. How many classrooms does McLoughlin have that are not portables? Mr. Lehrman, there are 45 brick and mortar and 34 portable classrooms. She supported the bond and has concerns about running the same bond. She supports a 4th middle school and wants to see the “other” projects go away in order to utilize all funds for building new schools. She would support a larger bond, but only for new buildings. Jennifer Collins – Twain teacher. Shared some data that she found on google that supports that students in low socioeconomic settings benefit with smaller class sizes. Teacher in purple and substitute – Supports this bond and thought it was thoughtful and reasonable. She supports waiting for more information and doing some research as we are not hearing from everyone that needs to be represented here tonight. She would like a 4th middle school, but understands why we did not put it on this time, based on need. With the 6th graders moving to elementary the middle schools are much more reasonable than they were. Unknown – parent, graduate of PHS with her oldest in kindergarten. Supports smaller middle schools. She feels like Kennewick and Richland get more bang for their buck. She is a single mother in a family with six children and supports looking at more options. Jamie Southworth – parent and Chairman of CFBS. Reported the following: As a committee they did a lot of work to get the word out but the weather killed us. We had a committee of about 20 people and we need more volunteers to get the message out there. We cannot make up that difference (low voter turnout) without support. She was heartbroken for Stevens students and families who were so excited about the brand new school. Everything on the bond was necessary for our community, including the “other” projects which addressed busses, security systems, etc. that are necessary items for child safety and service. I feel like there is a lot of uncertainty right now. Legislature is still looking at how they are going to fund education and how money will be distributed throughout the state. She does not support rushing into putting another bond together quickly in April, as in her opinion it makes no sense and is through good money after bad. It costs money to run a bond. Christy Grimm – teacher at Curie. Strongly supports at least two elementary schools be on the bond and that it be run later. She asked how many of our schools were over 700 and how many of 800. There are many over capacity. REPORTS/DISCUSSION 2017 Bond Follow-up and Long-term Facilities Planning – Mrs. Whitney reported the following: In preparation for tonight’s meeting she:

• Consulted Bond Attorney Jim McNeil (Foster Pepper) • Consulted Underwriter Trevor Carlson (Piper Jaffray)


• Consulted Vice President of Education Services Joe Clark (MGT of America) • Consulted District Staff • Talked with local community leaders and stakeholders • Read emails and engaged in telephone calls from patrons

The following options are available for future elections:

Resolution Filing Deadline Election Date

February 24, 2017 April 25, 2017

May 12, 2017 August 1, 2017

August 1, 2017 November 7, 2017

December 15, 2017 February 13, 2018*

*Probable Maintenance and Operations (M&O) Levy proposition

After consultation, the following pro’s and con’s were listed for each date: April 25, 2017: this approach is usually used to rerun the same bond proposal when the February election results are just under the supermajority threshold or the election passes but does not validate

• Pro • Stakeholders are interested and engaged • Responsive to community requests

• Cons • Limited time for reconsideration and reflection on new bond strategies and community

engagement • Although there are expectations, rerunning a bond issue immediately after a failed attempt

may not increase the likelihood of success • Difficult to change bond projects from the February election to the April election • Uncertainty around legislative impacts

August 1, 2017: this election date is rarely used by school districts

• Pros • Stakeholders are interested and engaged • Responsive to community requests

• Cons • School is not in session the months prior to the election making stakeholder communication,

awareness, and participation a concern • Stakeholders are not used to school issues being on an August ballot • The May 12, 2017 resolution filing deadline may be too early to gather sufficient information

from the community • Uncertainty around legislative impacts

November 7, 2017

• Pros • Reasonable amount of time to engage in facility master planning work and to understand

the community’s priorities


• Usually stronger voter turnout minimizing concerns for validation • Awareness of legislative impacts • Cons • Some community interest in an April 2017 or August 2017 bond election • Close to February 13, 2018 M&O Levy proposition

February 13, 2018

• Pro • Ample amount of time to engage in facilities master planning work

• Con • Some community members have interested in rerunning the bond sooner

Consideration

• Bond will potentially be on the ballot with the M&O Levy

Vice President Education Services Joe Clark, (MGT of America)

• Prepare for a bond election in November 7, 2017 • Resolution Filing Deadline: August 1, 2017

• Board Retreat March 2, 2017 • Review: data from facilities master planning phase I

• Educational Specifications • Building Condition


• Site • Educational Suitability • Technology Readiness

• Immediately proceed with phase II of the facilities master planning process to include: • Enrollment projections • Future capacity and utilization analysis • Community engagement and input

• Stakeholder input events • Community Builders work group

• GIS analysis of future school sites and potential boundary adjustments • Budget and financial analysis • 10 year Facility Master Plan

The Facilities Master Planning Process will:

• Create a single focus to address our key issues in a way that stakeholders can support • Use a system of foundational data to drive identification of priorities • Construct and execute a community engagement plan to harvest the community’s priorities • Involve community through:

• Input events and, • A new open work group called Community Builders

• Use the current election results as positive momentum and a launching point for a refreshed, relevant, renewed and revitalized approach to facilities management

District Staff Recommendation

• Immediately engage in facility master planning process • Schedule March 2, 2017 Board Retreat with MGT of America

• Review Phase 1 facility master planning data • Initiate and complete Phase 2

• Prepare for a Bond Election November 7, 2017 • Resolution Filed: August 1, 2017

President Lehrman then called for comments from the board. Mr Lehrman reported that he did not see the 4th middle school as a priority over building two elementary schools. That is not to say that he would not support that if it is the desire of the voters as a whole. He would support a middle school and two elementary schools if the community would support that. He has children of his own attending a school built for 450 and 890 are currently attending there. His children would also be attending McLoughlin Middle School. While he does not want to discount what the students have said, we have to prioritize or run the super bond. Mrs. Phillip still supports two elementary schools as the priority and rerunning it in November to give time to look at all the information. It would give us time to determine what legislation is doing to support education. Mr. Christensen agreed that we need another middle school, and we need three elementary schools, at least. He stated that he would struggle to take off one elementary to add a middle school especially on a short turn around. We do not want to guess, and is not sure the entire community would support


that. The 3% sounds small, but is huge when it comes to the number of votes it would take to turn it around (700). In order to get two elementary schools and another middle school it would require the support of the whole community. It will take time to build that kind of momentum. In response to the question of Richland and Kennewick getting more bang for their buck on their bonds, he explained that Pasco builds bigger elementary schools and therefore cannot afford to build as many, giving the appearance that they are getting more. He also echoed Mrs. Southworth’s comment about legislation and the changes that we are hoping to see there in supporting education. He would like to see what is going to come out of that in hopes that it could reduce our levy rate making it more favorable to run a bond. Mr. Mendoza supports a 4th middle school and considering the feelings of the students as they grow towards entering high school. Mr. Naef agreed it will take time to get community support so November is a good idea. Mrs. Lancon is also in favor of waiting until November to run the bond. She still supports two elementary schools and the need for “other” projects to be on the bond. If we can get the support for the 4th middle school that would be great but believes it is asking a lot of Pasco, state that Pasco has never run a bond of that size. Dr. Richardson expressed his disappointment in having to wait another year to run the bond. He shared that we have spent the last year preparing and taking the time to get good answers and input from the community. The bond was approved unanimously then Pasco’s accessed value went up dramatically and the board sought further feedback and we were in a great situation with interest rates on construction going down and new options were considered. He stated that there were even those who thought the bond not passing was his fault, that if he would have provided more positive influence the bond would have passed. He also reported that he tries to reflect on the feedback he gets, he visited all schools last year and went around the district as he speaks Spanish fluently and has patients that he is able to speak to. He was hoping for a miracle and that the bond would pass. He is invested in the community, we live here. He is disappointed to hear people get divisive and make it about who wants a middle school and who does not. He looked through the numbers and tried to get a feeling for what the community will support. He was thorough in asking if it was possible to do something by this Friday and was told it was possible. He expressed frustration with having spent the last year in meetings like this collecting the feedback and was worried that the bond would not pass without the middle school on it. He would be in favor of rerunning the bond in April with the middle school on it. He reported that he had voted for the bond even though he had wanted to see a middle school on it and expressed his desire for the community not to be so divisive when moving forward, as any building is going to make another school less crowded. He thanked the audience for attending and shared his hope that we could find something the community can support. Mr. Lehrman thanked the audience for participating in the special meeting this evening. He read that one part of the Lone Ranger’s moral code was that “Men should live by the rule of what is best for the greatest number.” It reminded me that the theory of utilitarianism is nothing new for most school directors, but bond success requires that 60% of voters in a community agree with the theory. Our challenge as a board/district/community is to pull together and get more of the community to believe that we are doing what’s best for the greatest number of students, prior to running our next bond.


He asked that anyone wishing to assist in the process of long range facilities planning contact Randy Nunamaker. We will be advertising for opportunities to serve and we would appreciate community involvement. Mr. Lehrman announced that the board would be having a board retreat on Thursday, March 2 with MGT America to discuss long range facilities planning. These meetings are always open to the public. ADJOURNMENT The Board of Directors adjourned at 8:45 p.m. President of the Board Secretary of the Board

Revised 9-22-06


Agenda Item Summary

AGENDA ITEM NO. : 9A BOARD MEETING DATE: February 28, 2017

TOPIC: READY!

CABINET ADMINISTRATOR: Erich Bolz PRESENTER: Mr. Rick Donahoe CEO and Grant Project Director, The Children’s Reading Foundation

X REPORT 1ST READING DISCUSSION 2ND READING ACTION REQUIRED

OBJECTIVE: Informational

BACKGROUND: (Pertinent past action/events) Mr. Donahoe will provide an overview of The Children’s Reading Foundation’s READY! for Kindergarten Program. READY! shows parents and caregivers how children learn and develop, and provides tools and activities for adults to work with that natural curiosity to nurture a child’s learning. Engaging our parent and children ages birth to five are cornerstones of our outrageous outcome: 100% of all 3rd graders will read on grade level in their language of instruction.

POSSIBLE ALTERNATIVES:

PROJECTED COSTS: BUDGET CODE: SUGGESTED MOTION:

NEXT STEPS:

Improving Early Childhood Success

©2016 The Children’s Reading Foundation®. All rights reserved.

Rick DonahoeCEO

Children’s Reading FoundationRSD School Board

READY! for Kindergarten

• Serving over 300,000 families• 26 States• 140 School Districts• 20 year history

“Read with Your child 20 Minutes a Day”


Reading is the foundational skill for all other learning.


Every year, 40% of children start school with skills one-to-three years behind.

40%


School Readiness: Does it Matter?

A five-year range of literacy skills is common in elementary classrooms.

Sadly, some students have skills three years behind

Some are at grade level

Some students are functioning two years ahead


The First Five Years Impact

©2016 The Children’s Reading Foundation. All rights reserved.

Most school districts spend twice as much per child per year on students who need remediation

Catch-up growth in public schools is very expensive and historically unsuccessful

Parents are a child’s first and most influential teachers

Education Begins at Birth


Compounding the problem – poverty.


Impact of Poverty on AchievementThe achievement gap emerges by age two

Source: Dr. Betty Hart and Dr. Todd RisleyMeaningful Differences in the Everyday Experience of Young American Children (1995)


Number of Words Babies Hear Per Hour

Source: Strategies for Children

2,1531,251

616

Professional families

Working ClassFamilies

Families in Poverty


Why do we care about parent engagement?


“Years and years of research has brought us to a very simple conclusion about what is needed for children to develop in healthy ways: stable, warm, nurturing relationships and a variety of rich learning opportunities that allow them to explore and configure the world.” Jack P. Shonkoff, MD

Harvard University

Early Learning Research


• Relationships are strengthened through everyday interactions, particularly play and conversation

• It is more about HOW materials are used, than WHAT the materials are

• Many products claim to “boost brain development,” but YOU are the best toy in the room

University of Washington (I-LABS)

Relationships are Key


Parent Engagement

Children learn at home, in pre-kindergarten programs, in school,

in after school programs, in faith-based institutions,

and in the community.


Predictors of Student Outcomes• In the 1990s, the mother’s educational background was

the number one predictor of student success• Currently family income is the strongest predictor of

students successHarvard Graduate School of Education 2014


Proven school readiness program available nationwide

Research-based, age-level developmental targets

Language and Literacy

Math and Reasoning

Social and Emotional

A five‐year‐old with these skills is ready to succeed in school:



• Hands-on, interactive workshops to engage parents and caregivers in a child’s learning from birth to age 5

• Activities, information and take-home materials to nurture a child’s early literacy, math and social-emotional skills

• Research-based, age-level learning targets, curriculum and educational tools



• Supports parents to adapt everyday experiences to become “purposeful play”

• Is a starting point – parents are encouraged to make adaptations that work best for their child or the situation

• Parent workshops encourage “invitational learning”



17.24

12.73

Students of families exposed to READY! had “statistically significant higher scores” (based on the DIBELS and WJLNI) than those whose families were not exposed to the READY! program. Average DIBELS Letter Naming scores were 17.24 and 12.73 respectively. Washington State University and

Chicago School of Professional Psychology Study:The Children’s Reading Foundation of Greater Chicago (Illinois)

PRELIMINARY DATA Randomized Control Trial: Evaluating the Efficacy of READY! U.S. Department of Education IAL Grant

Research on READY!


“Every dollar invested in early childhood education produces a 7-10% per annum return in better education,

health, social, and economic outcomes.”

Early Learning Research

James Heckman, PhDNobel Laureate in Economics, 2000


How to Fund Early Education

• Title 1• State early learning grants• Basic education allotment• Levies• Grassroots funding• Corporate sponsors


Let’s Connect!

Rick Donahoe

[email protected]

Thank you!


Revised 9-22-06


Agenda Item Summary AGENDA ITEM NO. : 9B BOARD MEETING DATE: February 28, 2017

TOPIC: High School Reimagining/Career and College Ready Initiative

CABINET ADMINISTRATOR: Mrs. Glenda Cloud PRESENTER: Mrs. Suzanne Hall

REPORT 1ST READING DISCUSSION 2ND READING ACTION REQUIRED

OBJECTIVE: To provide an update on high school reimaging efforts and future work.

BACKGROUND: (Pertinent past action/events) The Class of 2021 will be required to complete 24 credits for graduation. This is an increase from the current district requirements of 20 credits at NHHS and 22 credits at CHS and PHS. This plan will take effect with next year’s ninth graders. We will report the recent activites to engage all stakeholders in the conversation, provide a summary of where we are now and explain how we will proceed.


PROJECTED COSTS: BUDGET CODE: SUGGESTED MOTION:

NEXT STEPS:

Career and College Ready

Initiative Progress Report

February 28, 2017

Putting students first to make learning last a lifetime

Celebrating academics, diversity, and innovation

Beginning with the Class of

2021, all high school students in

Pasco will be held to new

statewide graduation requirements of 24 credits

Time of Exploration

• Formed a core team comprised of community partners, staff, students and administration

• Crafted a working vision statement and goals

• Shared information and gathered input from staff, students and community members on our forward direction

Working Vision Statement

Students will graduate as advanced

thinkers based on rigorous, standards-

based instruction, with a specific college

and career plan and having taken the

initial steps in the plan in the form of

college credits or a professional

certificate.

Not Just About Getting to 24

• Create a personalized learning plan informed by guidance from caring, knowledgeable advisors and reflecting their growing self-awareness, aspirations and specific college and career goals.

• Become advanced learners by pursuing their plan through rigorous coursework, standards-based instruction, and educational, real-world experiences both in and outside of school.

• Graduate with academic and social skills relevant to their goals and having taken initial steps in the form of accredited coursework or learning experiences valued by employers and postsecondary institutions.

Current Status:

• PHS – 22 credits

• CHS – 22 credits

• NHHS – 20 credits

Only about 38% of high schools have

systems in place to support all

students in a new 24 credit environment.

Just over 60% of high schools in

the state are operating in a

straight six period daily

schedule.

• At risk students (multiple F’s as freshman)

• Support beyond the core (language

acquisition, intervention, etc.)

• Transportation to support extending learning

options for credit retrieval and extra help

• Students moving in from out of state

• Students who need an open period during

the day

Challenges

Ideas to Meet

24 Credit Requirement

• Master schedule options which provide for more than 24 credits

• Increase credits at middle school

• Expand additional credit opportunities such as zero hour and eight hour

Other Ideas

• Extended semester

• Expanded summer school

• New credit offerings to

support personalized high

school and beyond planning

Next Steps

• Continue to work in collaboration with the

teachers to explore viable options for

implementation in the fall and grow with

future classes

• Provide opportunities to build shared vision

and plan with high school staff across the

district

• Develop a comprehensive plan to support

the changes

• Devise a communication plan for parents,

sutdents and the community

THANK YOU

Revised 9-22-06


Agenda Item Summary

AGENDA ITEM NO. : 10A BOARD MEETING DATE: February 28, 2017

TOPIC: Consideration of Request for Waiver Days

CABINET ADMINISTRATOR: Glenda Cloud PRESENTER: Glenda Cloud


OBJECTIVE: To provide an overview of the impacts of inclement weather resulting in school delays/closures and considerations for the possible changes to the current calendar and request for waived days.

BACKGROUND: (Pertinent past action/events): Information on the closures and consideration of applying for a waiver of school days was provided at the January 31, 2017 board meeting. The waiver days are possible based upon Proclamation 17-01 and 17-02 that declared a State of Emergency for Franklin County.


PROJECTED COSTS: BUDGET CODE: SUGGESTED MOTION: I move to submit an application to the Superintendent of Public Instruction requesting a waiver of 4 days because of district-wide emergency closures.

NEXT STEPS:

Consideration of Request for Waiver Days

Putting students first to make learning last a lifetime Celebrating academics, diversity and innovation

February 28, 2017

Background

School districts are required to:• Provide 180 days of instruction; and

• Meet an average of 1,027 instructional hours RCW 28A.150.205 defines instructional hours as:

– Students provided opportunity to engage in educational activity

– Inclusive of intermissions for class changes, recess and conferences

– Exclusive of time actually spent for meals

In addition:• The last five days of the 180 days can be non-

instructional for seniors

Background

• Graduation dates remain as scheduled

• The last day of school was scheduled for June 9

• The last day of school currently published is June 16

• Given closures, with no waiver days, the last day would be June 22

Updated Information

• February 15 was a closure day

• A contract waiver with PAE was signed designating March 3 as an instructional day

All bargaining groups aware and support

Information sent by social media regarding the change

• Discussion with unions continue

• High school principals met to determine plans for make-up days for seniors

Once confirmed parents, staff, and students will be notified

Waiver Requirements

• Waiver only applies to days covered under the Governor’s Proclamation between January 10th and 20th

Four days could be requested to waive

• Three days must be made up

• School must be conducted through June 14

• The 1,027 instructional hours requirement must be met

Possible Scenarios

As of February 28, 2017

Last Day ofSchool

Number of Instructional

Days

Average Instructional

Hours

Number of Days Needed

June 14 174 1020.64 6

June 16 176 1032.38 4

June 22 180 1056.68 0

Waiver Considerations

Change last day of school to June 14

Pros Cons

Seniors will need to make up 3 days

Dates have been published for June 16

Would be 174 days of instruction

Loss of nutrition service revenue

Instructional hours not met


Keep published date of June 16 and request 4 days waiver

Pros Cons

Dates have been published Would be 176 days of instruction

Parents are aware and plans may have been adjusted

Loss of nutrition service revenue

Would meet instructional hour requirement



Change last day to June 22 with no request for a waiver

Pros Cons

Would be 180 days of instruction

Later than expected last day and may impact plans that have been made

Would meet instructional hours

Finals schedule and completionof courses for credit

Later start date for summer programs


Recommendation

• District staff recommend approval of the board to submit an application to the Superintendent of Public Instruction requesting waiving of four days because of district-wide emergency closures

Next Steps

• District staff will continue discussions with our unions on the impact of the closures and changes in the calendar

• Communications will be prepared to inform the stakeholders of the decision

Thank You


Agenda Item Summary AGENDA ITEM NO. : 11A BOARD MEETING DATE: February 28, 2017

TOPIC: Personnel Actions

CABINET ADMINISTRATOR: Glenda Cloud PRESENTER: Glenda Cloud/Robin Hay

REPORT 1ST READING DISCUSSION 2ND READING

X ACTION REQUIRED

OBJECTIVE: Board approval of personnel actions as presented in the packet.

BACKGROUND: (Pertinent past action/events)


PROJECTED COSTS: BUDGET CODE: SUGGESTED MOTION: I move to approve the personnel actions as presented in the packet.

NEXT STEPS:

PASCO SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1 REPORT FOR BOARD OF DIRECTORS – February 28, 2017

CERTIFICATED-ADMINISTRATIVE-COACHING PERSONNEL ACTIONS

2/10/17 – 2/23/17

Request Board approval of the following personnel actions. All salary amounts are based on the negotiated agreement between the Pasco School District and the Pasco Association of Educators.

NAME POSITION ACTION TAKEN EFFECTIVE DATE Baker, Diana Librarian Retired End of 2016/17 SY McClintock Burges, Stephanie Science Leave of absence 2/6/17 – 2/21/17 McLoughlin Campbell, Ivonne Nurse Leave of absence 2/8/17 – 3/7/17 Captain Gray Extension Church, Judy 4th Grade Retired End of 2016/17 SY Chess Cox, Joseph Assistant Coach Hired 8/16/17 Football (coaching contract) Pasco High Davis, Marilyn 3rd Grade Retired End of 2016/17 SY Longfellow Eads, Andrew Photography Retired 6/30/17 Chiawana Fife, Ezekiel Assistant Coach Hired 8/16/17 Football (coaching contract) Pasco High Fisher, Stephanie 5th Grade Leave of absence 2017/18 SY Angelou Extension Fulton, Hugh 6th Grade Retired End of 2016/17 SY Livingston Fulton, Lynn 6th Grade Retired End of 2016/17 SY Livingston Garlick, Ashley Kindergarten Resigned End of 2016/17 SY Captain Gray Garza, Michael Assistant Coach Hired 8/16/17 Football (coaching contract) Pasco High Garza, Miguel Assistant Coach Hired 3/7/17 Baseball (coaching contract) McLoughlin Kirkwood, Christine Assistant Coach Hired 2/27/17 Track (coaching contract) Pasco High Martinez, Camille 2nd Grade Leave of absence 3/8/17 – 3/17/17 Livingston Extension

NAME POSITION ACTION TAKEN EFFECTIVE DATE Miller, Marcia Reading Recovery/LLI Retired End of 2016/17 SY Robinson Mills, Cameron Head Coach Hired 3/6/17 Baseball (coaching contract) Ochoa Montes, Constantino Assistant Coach Hired 2/27/17 Tennis (coaching contract) Pasco High Ortega, Elizabeth Instructional Coach Retired 6/16/17 Whittier Ramirez, Silvia 3rd Grade Leave of absence 3/19/17 – End of Longfellow 2016/17 SY Rose, Darci History Resigned End of 2016/17 SY Stevens Schlagel, Leah Kindergarten Resigned 2/15/17 Robinson Schrader, Zachary 1st Grade Hired 2/24/17 Captain Gray (noncontinuing contract) Smith, Sandra Business Education Retired End of 2016/17 SY New Horizons Van Klaveren, Karen Family/Consumer Science Retired End of 2016/17 SY Chiawana Wheatley, Pamela Music Retired End of 2016/17 SY Livingston Woodall, Linda Reading Recovery Retired End of 2016/17 SY Robinson

PASCO SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1 REPORT FOR THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS – February 28, 2017

CLASSIFIED PERSONNEL ACTIONS February 10 - 23, 2017

Request Board approval of the following personnel actions:

NAME

POSITION ACTION TAKEN

EFFECTIVE DATE

Ainslie, James Driver Transportation

Resigned 2/22/17

Alvarado, Frances Paraeducator, Special Services Gray

Hired 2/15/17

Bayona, Nelly Paraeducator, Special Services Frost

Hired 2/13/17

Farias, Jessica Paraeducator, Special Services Franklin

Hired 2/13/17

Gentry, Scott Transportation Manager Transportation

Hired 2/27/17

Goodpasture, Stephany Paraeducator, Special Services Franklin

Hired 2/13/17

Ramirez, Monica Bilingual SLP Tutor Special Services

Resigned 3/3/17

Scott, Gail Paraeducator, Special Services Livingston

Resigned 2/28/17

Wharton, Paula Helper, Nutrition Services Chiawana

Resigned 2/24/17

Revised 9-22-06


Agenda Item Summary

AGENDA ITEM NO. : 11B BOARD MEETING DATE: February 28, 2017

TOPIC: Approval of Warrants

CABINET ADMINISTRATOR: Howard Roberts, Jr.

PRESENTER: Howard Roberts, Jr.


OBJECTIVE: Obtain board approval of accounts payable warrants for 2016-2017 General, Capital Projects, Associated Student Body, and Transportation Vehicle funds.

BACKGROUND: (Pertinent past action/events) All district warrants are subject to board approval. Policy 7322 allows the district to issue accounts payable warrants in advance of board approval. In the event any claim is disapproved, the auditing officer and superintendent will cause the claim to be recognized as a receivable and pursue collection until the funds are collected or until the board approves the claim.

POSSIBLE ALTERNATIVES: N/A PROJECTED COSTS: N/A BUDGET CODE: N/A SUGGESTED MOTION: I move the following District payments be approved: Warrant Date: February 10, 2017 General Fund warrants numbered 253648-253795 in the amount of $605,196.93 Capital Projects Fund warrants numbered 253796-253802 in the amount of $689,547.40 Associated Student Body Fund warrants numbered 253803-253810 in the amount of $32,218.41 Warrant Date: February 17, 2017 General Fund warrants numbered 253811-253963 in the amount of $678,110.45 Capital Projects Fund warrants numbered 253964-253973 in the amount of $181,015.07 Associated Student Body Fund warrants numbered 253974-253986 in the amount of $49,784.94

NEXT STEPS:

Revised 9-22-06


Agenda Item Summary AGENDA ITEM NO. : 11C BOARD MEETING DATE: February 28, 2017

TOPIC: Contract Approval for Internet Service Provider

CABINET ADMINISTRATOR: Glenda Cloud PRESENTER: Mark Garrett


OBJECTIVE: Approve the bid response for the district’s Internet Service Provider Request for Proposal.

BACKGROUND: (Pertinent past action/events) Information Systems released a Request for Proposal in December 2016 for Internet Services. The contract with our current service provider, Charter, expires June 30, 2017. The district received eight bids from five different companies. The request for proposal specified requirements for a resilient, high speed Internet service with divergent physical routes from the district’s two datacenters at Booth and Chiawana. The winning proposal meets the requirements while also remaining economical. Transitioning to the new service will provide five-times the bandwidth which will accommodate the growth in district instructional and operational activities occurring on the Internet. Internet Services are eligible for Erate financial support through the Universal Service Administrative Company. Below are the expected costs before and after Erate support.

Contract # Company

Total 3 Year Cost

District Share after Erate Support

Term

EC-3Y-WA0001-31012017-2 Ednetics $ 344,674.70 $ 68,934.94

3 Years with two optional one year extensions

Contract is available in the Superintendent’s office for review.


PROJECTED COSTS: Annotated Above BUDGET CODE: 9736, Information Systems

SUGGESTED MOTION: I move to accept the winning bid from Ednetics for Internet services.

NEXT STEPS: Pasco School District files Form 471 with E-Rate, service will start July 1, 2017.

Ednetics | (888) 809-4609 · [email protected]

Ednetics Connect™ High Performance Internet Service Agreement

January 31, 2017 Pasco School District

Glenn Whitcomb 1215 W Lewis St • Pasco, 99301

CONTRACT NUMBER 470 APPLICATION NUMBER SPIN RFP NUMBER

EC-3Y-WA0001-31012017-2 170056432 143008534 PSD C1 2017 ISP

mailto:[email protected]

Ednetics Inc. 888-809-4709 | EC-3Y-WA0001-31012017-2 2

Summary of Service and Charges Ednetics Connect is high speed, high capacity internet service optimized to deliver voice, video and data. Reliability is ensured through proactive monitoring making it ideal for supporting district operations and curricular objectives.

Ednetics Connect™ 3 year Service Agreement Diverse Service Provider

Service Option Total Monthly Charges 4 Gbit Internet Access (2 x 2 Gbit) $7,780.00

6 Gbit Internet Access (2 x 3 Gbit) $8,580.00 8 Gbit Internet Access (2 x 4 Gbit)

10 Gbit Internet Access (2 x 5 Gbit)

12 Gbit Internet Access (2 x 6 Gbit)

$9,340.00 14 Gbit Internet Access (2 x 7 Gbit) 16 Gbit Internet Access (2 x 8 Gbit) 18 Gbit Internet Access (2 x 9 Gbit) 20 Gbit Internet Access (2 x 10 Gbit)

Optional Services One Time Charge Network Edge Configuration $8,500.00


Ednetics Connect™ High Performance Internet Service

APPENDIX I | MASTER AGREEMENT

EXHIBIT A | EDNETICS ACCEPTABLE USE POLICY EXHIBIT B | NOTICE TO PROCEED

ATTACHMENT A | EDNETICS CONNECT™


APPENDIX I | MASTER AGREEMENT

General Terms and Conditions This Master Agreement (“Agreement”) is between Ednetics and the entity identified as the customer ( “Customer”), each referred to as a “Party” and collectively referred to as the “Parties.” This Agreement consists of Service(s) Attachments (“Attachment(s)”), Service Order(s) and any forms or authorizations attached hereto and/or incorporated herein by reference and this Agreement. This Agreement will survive as long as there are working Service(s) associated with it. The Attachment(s) and Service Order(s) further describe the Service(s) Customer purchased and set forth any additional terms and conditions for those Service(s). In the event there is a conflict between this Agreement and the terms and conditions contained in an Attachment or Service Order, the terms and conditions in the Attachment(s) and/or Service Order(s) take precedence. The Parties agree to be bound by this Agreement and affirm that each have caused this Agreement to be executed by their respective duly authorized representatives on the dates written below their names

1. Obligations of the Customer.Customer agrees to provide all information, access, and support for timely installation and proper use of Service(s) and to comply with all of the terms and conditions of this Agreement. Customer also agrees that Customer's use of Service(s) will at all times be consistent with the terms outlined in Ednetics Acceptable Use Policy ( “AUP”) and will not be used in an unlawful manner and will be used in such a manner as to prevent damage to Ednetics network and equipment. Ednetics AUP is attached hereto as Exhibit A and is made a part of this Agreement by reference. Updates to Ednetics AUP will be made on the web site https://portal.ednetics.comand will apply to all Service(s). Customer agrees to accept a Material Staging Agreement, if required, provide all information required, access to the premises, support for timely installation, proper use of Service(s) and to comply with all terms and conditions of this Agreement. Customer acknowledges and accepts that not accepting the Material Staging Agreement may subject Customer to higher costs.

2. Customer Representations.Customer warrants that they have the legal right and ability to enter into this Agreement and are authorized to act on behalf the school, library, or state/local government entity. Customer represents and warrants that Customer name and contact information is true and correct. Customer acknowledges and agrees that Ednetics relies on the information supplied by Customer and providing false or incorrect information may result in delays in the provision and delivery of Service(s) and the suspension or termination of Service(s). Customer agrees to promptly notify Ednetics whenever billing information changes, including, but not limited to, Customer's name, address, e-mail address, telephone number, and credit card information, if appropriate.

3. Term Commitment.For each Service, the term commitment of the Service will begin the date Service is first installed and made available to Customer unless Customer advises Ednetics in writing that Service is in material non-compliance with the specifications contained in the Attachment(s) or Service Order(s), in which case the term commitment for that Service will not commence until such time as Ednetics and Customer mutually agree that the issues with Service have been resolved and will continue for the number of months/years set forth in the applicable Attachment(s) or Service Order(s) (“Initial Service Term”).

4. Fees and Charges.Customer shall pay for all Service(s) Ednetics supplies to Customer. Attachment(s) and Service Order(s) specify the fees Customer will pay for Service(s) during the Service Term. The fees on the invoice are categorized as“Monthly Charges” and “One Time Charges.” Monthly Charges will be billed monthly in advance and One Time Charges shall be billed as they occur. “Other Charges” are generally actual usage charges such as international calls, directory assistance calls or bandwidth usage and may not apply to all services. Ednetics will bill Customer and Customer will be responsible for other legal charges including, but not limited to, federal and state universal service fund (USF), federal and state telecommunications relay service (TRS), state and county E911 surcharges, state and local sales taxes, and local utility taxes and any other applicable federal, state, county, or local taxes and fees. Customer's invoice will reflect all taxes and fees applicable to the Service(s) purchased.

5. Payment.Ednetics will provide Customer with monthly invoices which will be due and payable thirty (30) days from the invoice date (the “Due Date”). For the purposes of billing and adjustments, Ednetics assumes there are thirty (30) days in a month. Although the invoice date is the 10th of each month, the charges reflected are for the period from the 1st through the 30th of the month. All Monthly Charges are billed one (1) month in advance and all One Time Charges for installation and/or changes of service are invoiced on the first invoice following the date charges were incurred. Your initial invoice could contain One Time Charges, pro-rated charges for partial month’s services and Monthly Charges for services in advance and Other Charges which could be usage charges or any charges not categorized as Monthly Charges or One Time


Charges. A late payment fee may be applied on balances remaining unpaid thirty (30) days following the date of the invoice in the amount of one and one-half percent (1½%) per month of the amount of the unpaid balance from the date of invoice. Subject to any applicable state or federal regulations, in the event Customer has an outstanding balance of fees due and owing under this Agreement, Ednetics shall not be obligated to transfer transportable, toll-free, local or other numbers to another carrier. This may not apply to all Service(s). In addition to the remedies contained in this Agreement, Ednetics reserves its right in law and equity including, but not limited to, its rights under the Uniform Commercial Code.

6. Taxes.Customer hereby acknowledges and agrees that all pricing for Service(s) and other charges due hereunder, including value added taxes, sales taxes, duties, fees, levies or surcharges (including where applicable Universal Service Fund or similar surcharges) imposed by, or pursuant to the laws, statutes or regulation of any governmental agency or authority, are the sole responsibility of Customer and shall be paid promptly when due by Customer and Customer agrees to indemnify and hold Ednetics harmless from any liability therefor. Except as set forth herein, all amounts payable by Customer under this Agreement shall be made without any deduction or withholding and, except to the extent required by any law or regulation, free and clear of any deduction or withholding on account of any tax, duty or other charges of whatever nature imposed by any taxing or governmental authority. If Customer is required by any law or regulation to make any such deduction or withholding, Customer shall, together with the relevant payment, pay such additional amount as will ensure that Ednetics actually received and is entitled to retain, free and clear of any such deduction or withholding, the full amount which it would have received if no such deduction or withholding had been required. Notwithstanding the foregoing, a monthly Universal Service Fund charge shall be added to each applicable invoice for Service(s) based upon interstate total billed revenues, the amount of which shall be based upon the Federal Communications Commission assessment.

7. E-Rate.This Agreement, including Attachment(s) and Service Order(s), begin upon their execution by both Ednetics and Customer and either (i) Customer's E-rate funding approval or (ii) Customer approval to proceed with service via a Notice to Proceed (“NTP”). Customer understands and agrees that One Time Charges and Monthly Charges are Customer's firm contractual obligation for the duration of this contract after customer receives E-rate funding or has given Ednetics an NTP for Service(s) without E-rate funding. The NTP is included with this agreement as Exhibit B and is made a part of this Agreement by reference.

8. Unauthorized Use of the Service(s).Customer accepts full responsibility for the charges and fees invoiced by Ednetics for the provision of all Service(s) to Customer including, but not limited to, outbound and toll free Service(s), regardless of whether Customer authorized the use of the Service(s). Customer shall indemnify and hold Ednetics harmless from any and all costs, expenses, damages, claims or actions arising from any fraudulent or unauthorized use of Service(s). Customer shall not be excused from paying Ednetics for Service(s) provided to Customer or any portion thereof on the basis that fraudulent use of Service(s) comprised a corresponding portion of the Service(s) for which charges and fees are invoiced. In the event Ednetics discovers or reasonably believes that Service(s) are being used fraudulently, nothing contained herein shall prohibit Ednetics from taking immediate and all reasonable actions necessary to prevent the fraudulent use of the Service(s).

9. BACK-UP POWER.CUSTOMER ACKNOWLEDGES AND AGREES THAT IF ACCESS TO AND USE OF SERVICE(S) IS DESIRED OR REQUIRED DURING A POWER OUTAGE, CUSTOMER IS SOLELY RESPONSIBLE TO PROVIDE APPROPRIATE BACK-UP POWER TO ANY EQUIPMENT LOCATED ON CUSTOMER'S PREMISES TO THE EXTENT SUCH EQUIPMENT MAY BE USED TO ACCESS AND USE OR IS OTHERWISE RELATED TO THE USE OF SERVICE(S). EDNETICS SHALL NOT BE RESPONSIBLE OR LIABLE TO CUSTOMER OR ANY THIRD PARTY FOR THE UNAVAILABILITY OF SERVICE(S) DURING A POWER OUTAGE AS A RESULT OF CUSTOMER'S FAILURE TO PROVIDE NECESSARY BACK-UP OR SECONDARY POWER FACILITIES FOR USE OF SERVICE(S).

10. Interruption of Service(s) Credit.In the event there is any defect, error, omission, delay, mistake, interruption, suspension, or other failure in connection with furnishing Ednetics Service(s) or maintenance of the Service and the same is reported to and confirmed by Ednetics (an “Interruption”), the liability, if any, of Ednetics shall in no event exceed an amount equivalent to the proportionate charge to Customer for the affected Service for the time period during which the interruption occurred (the “Interruption Credit”). Ednetics shall not be liable nor shall any Interruption Credit be given to Customer for any Interruption which is: (i) caused by the willfulness or negligence of a third-party or any other entity other than Ednetics; (ii) due to failure of equipment and systems provided by Customer or any other entity; (iii) due to a force majeure event as set forth in Section 23 below; (iv) during periods when the Customer elects to use the Service(s) on an impaired basis; or (v) is the result of data services or data integrations interfaced with Ednetics Voice™. Ednetics will provide Interruption of Service(s) Credit based on seven hundred and twenty (720) hours in a thirty (30) day month. There is no credit applicable to the first two (2) hours after Customer notification is provided to Ednetics unless the reported trouble is determined to be due to the negligence of Ednetics or its


underlying carrier. Customer hereby acknowledges and agrees that its sole and exclusive remedy for an Interruption shall be an Interruption Credit. Exceptions to Interruption Credit applicability to Service(s) are detailed in the appropriate Service(s) Attachment.

11. Termination by Ednetics.In the event Customer is in breach of any terms of this Agreement, Ednetics may provide written notice to Customer of such a breach, upon receipt of which Customer shall (i) have ten (10) days to cure such breach if the breach is due to Customer's non-payment of all undisputed charges by the Due Date or (ii) have thirty (30) days to cure all other breaches of this Agreement. If such breach is not cured by Customer to Ednetics satisfaction, in its sole discretion, within the applicable cure period set forth above, Ednetics may terminate this Agreement and the affected Attachment(s) and/or Service Order(s), in whole or in part, and discontinue its provision of Service(s) under this Agreement effective immediately pursuant to Section 12. Notwithstanding the foregoing, in the event Customer's use of Service(s) violates the Ednetics AUP, Ednetics may suspend the provision of Service(s) to Customer or terminate this Agreement and the affected Attachment(s) and/or Service Order(s), in whole or in part, effective immediately.

12. Termination by Either Party.Either Party shall have the right to terminate Service(s) without liability including early termination fees in the following instances; (i) if Ednetics is prohibited from furnishing Service(s) under this Agreement. (ii) If Customer fails to obtain state or federal funding approval, through no fault of Customer; however, negotiations for a new agreement must be initiated. The requesting Party must provide thirty (30) days written notice to the other Party, which notice shall include a request to negotiate a new agreement. If negotiations for a new agreement are not successful and it was determined that the loss of state or federal funding was not the fault of Customer, Ednetics will waive Early Termination Fees. (iii) If any material rate or term contained herein is substantially changed by order of the highest court of any competent jurisdiction to which the matter is appealed, the Federal Communications Commission, or other local, state, or federal government authority. This does not apply to a decrease in state or federal funding, although Customer may request to negotiate a new agreement as outlined in (ii). In all cases, Customer will remain responsible for payment of the Service(s) up to the effective date of termination.

13. Early Termination Due to Default.If Service(s) are terminated by Customer or by Ednetics following an uncured default by Customer prior to the end of the Service Term, then commencing on the effective date of such termination, Customer will be subject to early termination fees equal to one hundred percent (100%) of the remaining value of the Agreement ( “Early Termination Fees”). Customer and Ednetics acknowledge and agree that (i) the Early Termination Fees are a fair and reasonable estimate of damages that would occur in the event that the Agreement is terminated prior to the end of the Service Term; (ii) actual damages incurred by Ednetics as a result of the early termination of the Agreement would be difficult to determine; and (iii) the provisions regarding the Early Termination Fees in this paragraph are reasonable and appropriate measures of the damages for such early termination and not a penalty. Customer agrees to pay all such Early Termination Fees within thirty (30) days of Customer's notice of termination of Service(s) immediately upon receipt of Ednetics last invoice to Customer (“Final Invoice”). All requests to terminate Service(s) must be received, in writing to Ednetics, thirty (30) days prior to the termination effective date. A minimum of thirty (30) days will always be billed to Customer from the date that the termination notice is submitted.

14. Bill Disputes.Customer's billing disputes or requests for adjustment, together with all supporting documentation, must be made in good faith and must be received in writing by Ednetics within thirty (30) days from the date of the invoice or Customer's right to raise such billing disputes is waived. Customer shall otherwise timely pay any undisputed amount. If Ednetics determines that a disputed charge was billed in error, Ednetics will issue a credit to reverse the amount incorrectly billed. If Ednetics determines the disputed amount was billed correctly, Ednetics will inform Customer of such determination and provide Customer with proof of correct billing. If Customer does not accept such proof as definitive, the dispute will be escalated for a supervisor review/resolution with Ednetics and Customer in accordance with this Agreement. In the event that the escalated dispute is resolved against Customer or in the event Customer accepts the foregoing proof as definitive (or if Customer fails to notify Ednetics within thirty (30) days that Customer does not accept proof as definitive), Customer shall pay the previously disputed amount within ten (10) days thereafter.

15. Resolution of Disputes.Except as otherwise provided, any dispute, controversy or claim (individually and collectively referred to hereinafter as a “Dispute”) arising under this Agreement shall be resolved in accordance with the procedures set forth herein. In the event of a Dispute, and upon the written request of either Party, each of the Parties shall appoint, within five (5) business days after a Party's receipt of such request, a designated representative who has authority to settle the Dispute and who is at the higher level of management than the persons with the direct responsibility for administration of the Agreement. The designated representatives shall meet as often as they reasonably deem necessary in order to discuss the

Ednetic

PASCO SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1 Board of Directors’ Regular ... › cms › lib › WA01001055 ›...

Documents

Transcript of PASCO SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1 Board of Directors’ Regular ... › cms › lib › WA01001055 ›...