1Call to Order
1.1Roll CallProcedural
20:15Welcome
2.1Welcome by the School Board PresidentProcedural
31:07Changes to the Agenda
3.1Changes to the AgendaDiscussion
41:07Approval of Agenda (Action Required)
4.1Approval of AgendaAction
51:32Oral Communication - If you have public comment related to a Regular Board Meeting item, please post it on: (https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSd3rKbPfVCTpOsK5ILqjnU2u-h-NuNx-vUq4OZxYNVR8lc4aQ/viewform?usp=sf_link) prior to the Regular Board Meeting or immediately upon the meeting opening.
Douglas Alsop (1min) — His written concern about four portables being permanent was addressed by Trustee McBride, who confirmed DSA rules limit portables to two years; Alsop was satisfied with that answer and did not speak in person.
62:48School/Community Reports
6.1Child Nutrition Service ReportInformation
Item details
Rationale: It is the Administration's recommendation that the School Board accept a service report from the Child Nutrition Service Department. The Child Nutrition Service Department continues to provide students with nutritious meals during distance learning on a grab-and-go meal distribution model. Several United States Department of Agriculture waivers are in place which allow for flexibility in meal service this school year. Anna Lague, Sodexo Child Nutrition Consultant, will provide an update on RCSD's Child Nutrition Services (CNS) program. Financial Impact: None. Submission for Approval Prepared by: Anna Lague, Sodexo Child Nutrition Consultant and Priscilla Aquino-Dichoso, Chief Business Official Approved by: John R. Baker, Ed.D., Superintendent §
729:54Discussion Items
Maureen McPeek (3min) — A Roosevelt second-grade teacher urged the board to wait until January 2021 to reopen, citing inadequate safety preparations, temperature-checking issues, lack of PPE, and concerns that behavior management would crowd out academic instruction.
Jackie Moore (3min) — A Hoover special day class teacher argued for continuing full distance learning, citing COVID prevention, positive distance-learning outcomes for her SDC students, and personal financial inability to take unpaid leave.
Nusheen Kavyani (1min) — A parent stated that current reopening plans carry the risks of COVID without the benefits of in-person learning, and urged that chat be open for public viewing to better simulate a public meeting.
Mercedes Kwiatkowski (6min) — A child psychiatrist described alarming mental health trends among students during distance learning and proposed a pilot program using willing teachers and families as a first step toward cautious reopening.
Sarah Henderson Martinez (2min) — A preschool teacher expressed concern about inadequate contact tracing, risk to elderly family members, children's inability to wear masks, a classroom move mid-year, and urged caution before reopening.
Kathryn Stewart (2min) — A parent argued that teachers' lives are valuable enough for parents to tolerate the inconvenience of distance learning until it is truly safe for teachers to return, and pushed back on prioritizing children's social-emotional comfort over teacher safety.
Eric Sutton (3min) — An Orion parent reported that 65% of first-grade Orion families preferred distance learning and 100% wanted to keep their current teachers, warned that the district's proposal would destroy the school's effective two-teacher distance model, and disputed blaming mental illness on distance learning.
Christy Herrera (2min) — A kindergarten teacher argued the district should not reopen until the county reaches the yellow tier, said five-year-olds cannot developmentally comply with masking and distancing requirements, and described severe stress and health impacts on teachers caused by reopening pressure.
Indra Hernandez (2min) — A preschool teacher said distance learning is working, urged the board to ensure preschool receives the same safety protocols as the rest of the district, and asked that safety come first so staff can continue to serve children.
Ramin Kaivan (3min) — A business owner and husband of a preschool teacher argued that distance learning is working in his home, disputed mental health statistics, and warned that returning young children who cannot comply with PPE requirements would be dangerous.
Laura Atherton (4min) — A special day class preschool teacher explained that her students cannot wear masks, require diaper changes and hand-over-hand feeding, and that physical distancing is impossible with young children with special needs, urging the board not to reopen preschool SDC.
Mohammad Tabrizi (3min) — A parent urged the board to compare RCSD's reopening plan with Menlo Park City School District's more thorough plan, argued the district was ill-prepared to reopen safely, and called for rigorous safety and testing protocols as a prerequisite.
Christina Kim (2min) — An Orion Mandarin Immersion parent reported that their community's own survey showed high flexibility and a strong desire to keep the MI program intact, and requested that the board support site-specific, collaborative solutions.
Christina Hsu (2min) — An Orion Mandarin Immersion parent said the district survey caused confusion and anxiety in their community, and asked the board to allow individual sites and programs to work with their teachers and administrators on models that fit their specific needs.
Devin/Michelle Mulaney (0min) — Speaker yielded their time without making substantive comments.
Cameron Hoffman (3min) — A parent called for respectful, fact-based dialogue, asked teachers to articulate what they need to return safely, urged the board to speak up for the most vulnerable students, and noted that learning pods in his experience are working safely.
Linda Elkins (2min) — A parent of three district students gave feedback that the survey's forced-choice format obscured nuances around teacher continuity, expressed support for a return to in-person learning in some form, and suggested leveraging parent expertise in planning.
Melanie Haskell (3min) — A first-grade parent asked the board to continue offering independent study as an option regardless of the in-person decision, and recommended involving parents meaningfully in reopening committees as Menlo Park had done.
Kerry Schmidt (3min) — A bilingual kindergarten teacher with 25 years in the district said she would love to be back in person but that returning without proper safety measures would not provide a safe learning environment and would distract from teaching.
Kamli Nannini (3min) — A kindergarten parent and physician with an epidemiology background argued that teachers are essential workers, that actual COVID transmission risk from masked asymptomatic children is likely negligible, and that hearing from medical experts would increase teacher willingness to return.
Megan O'Reilly Green (2min) — An Orion parent and PTO leader expressed frustration that the Orion program feels perpetually at risk, asked the board to stop characterizing Orion families as well-resourced, and urged genuine partnership and investment in program stability.
Michelle Smith (3min) — An Adelante Selby parent expressed concern about the Spanish immersion program being at risk, noted that masks prevent teachers from modeling mouth movements for language learning, and raised worries about building ventilation and air quality.
Michelle Butler (3min) — A teacher who uses a wheelchair said she loves her students and wants to return when safe, explained she is pursuing the interactive process but fears losing her job, and said managing COVID safety compliance would prevent effective reading instruction.
Jeanette Serrano (3min) — A kindergarten teacher with 37 years of experience warned that class reconfiguration would restart the exhausting relationship-building process, said site-specific concerns should drive reopening decisions, and noted she cannot ensure families of her Latinx students are following the four pillars.
Maria Stockton (3min) — A speaker suggested bringing back older students (grades 2–5) first rather than the youngest, since they can better manage masks and distancing, and asked the board to wait at least until the end of the first trimester before reopening any grade.
Keely Vega (2min) — A kindergarten parent asked the board to respond to the suggestion of launching a willing-cohort pilot program and to explain how the district is learning from schools like Menlo Park that have already reopened.
7.1Discussion on COVID-19/Distance LearningDiscussion
Item details
Rationale: It is the Administration's recommendation that the School Board and Superintendent Baker discuss the procedures followed by the Redwood City School District during the shelter in place order related to COVID-19. The School Board and Superintendent Baker will discuss the procedures the Redwood City School District has followed related to Child Nutrition Services, Technology, Professional Development, and Distance Learning during the shelter in place order related to COVID-19. Financial Impact: None at the moment. Submission for Approval Prepared by: John R. Baker, Ed.D., Superintendent Approved by: John R. Baker, Ed.D., Superintendent §
8Consent Items (Action Required)
93:46:53Action Items (Action Required)
9.1Approval of the Learning Continuity and Attendance Plan for 2020-21Action
Item details
Rationale: Senate Bill 98 (SB 98) established the Learning Continuity and Attendance Plan (LCP), which is intended to balance the needs of all stakeholders, including educators, parents, students and community members, while streamlining meaningful stakeholder engagement and condensing several pre-existing plans. In particular, the state legislature felt it was important to combine (1) the intent behind Executive Order N-56-20, which required a written report and envisioned an off-cycle Local Control and Accountability Plan (LCAP) due December 15, and (2) the ongoing need for local education agencies (LEAs) to formally plan for the 2020-21 school year in the midst of the uncertainty caused by the COVID-19 pandemic. The LCP replaces the LCAP for the 2020-21 school year and supersedes the requirements in Executive Order N-56-20. This plan is intended to memorialize the planning process that is already underway for the 2020-21 school year. All LEAs are required to complete the Learning Continuity Plan, hold a public hearing and approve the LCP on or before September 30. At that time, the approved LCP will be submitted to the San Mateo County Office of Education for feedback (not approval). Items to be addressed in the 2020-21 LCP are: - General information (a description of the impact the COVID-19 pandemic has has on the RCSD community; - An overview of the stakeholder engagement process, including outreach to specific stakeholder groups; - An explanation of any in-person instructional offerings, current or planned; - An explanation of numerous facets pertaining to the district's distance learning program; - Continuity of instruction; - Ensuring adequate devices and connectivity; - Assessment of student participation and progress; - Professional development that supports successful distance learning; - A description of changing roles and responsibilities of staff members due to COVID-19; - A description of the supports for pupils with unique needs (English Learners, pupils with exceptional needs, foster and homeless youth; - Actions that RCSD will take to address learning loss; - A description of how RCSD will monitor and support mental health and social and emotional well-being of pupils and staff during the school year; - An overview of the procedures for tiered reengagement strategies for students who are absent from distance learning and how RCSD will provide outreach to students and their parents or guardians; - A description of how RCSD will provide nutritionally adequate meals for all pupils. Several opportunities for input into the contents of these various elements of the 2020-21 LCP have been provided to district staff and community. In addition to subcommittee meetings, staff and parent webinars, and board meetings, a representative stakeholder team was brought together for two focused opportunities for specific inputs on August 31 and September 7. DELAC members reviewed the draft LCP and provided input on September 14. Financial Impact: The actions and services shown in the 2020-21 Learning Continuity and Attendance Plan (LCP) are already budgeted in the 2020-21 Adopted Budget from Unrestricted General Fund and LCFF Supplemental & Concentration Grant funds. New expenditure items that are not included in the 2020-21 Adopted Budget will be funded from the Learning Loss Mitigation Funds (LLM) allocated to RCSD through the federal CARES Act. LCP total expenditures - $76,323,622, funded as follows: General Fund (Fund 01) including LLM funds - $73,827,622 Cafeteria Fund (Fund 13) - $2,496,000 Submission for Approval Prepared by: Liz Wolfe, Assistant Superintendent, Educational Services Approved by: John R. Baker, Ed.D., Superintendent §
9.2Approval of 2019-20 Unaudited Actuals Financial StatementAction
Item details
Rationale: Education Code Section 42100(a) states that on or before September 15, the governing board of each school district shall approve, in a format prescribed by the Superintendent of Public Instruction, an annual statement of all receipts and expenditures of the district for the preceding fiscal year and shall file the statement, along with the statement received pursuant to subdivision (b), with the county superintendent of schools. On or before October 15, the county superintendent of schools shall verify the mathematical accuracy of the statements and shall transmit a copy to the Superintendent of Public Instruction. The Administration recognizes that this recommendation is beyond the timeframe in the Education Code due to unforseen circumstances. However, San Mateo County Office of Education has been notified of this delay. Financial Impact: Please see attached 2019-20 Unaudited Actuals Report. Submission for Approval Prepared by: Priscilla Aquino-Dichoso, Chief Business Official Approved by: John R. Baker, Ed.D., Superintendent §
9.3Adoption of Resolution 10, Resolution to Adopt the Gann LimitAction
Item details
Rationale: In November of 1979, California voters approved Proposition 4, an initiative that added Article XIII B to the California Constitution . This constitutional amendment, known as the Gann Initiative, placed limits on the growth of expenditures for publicly funded programs. This limit on government spending, which became known as Gann Appropriation Limits or simply Gann Limits, applies not only to the State of California, but also to cities, counties, and special districts, as well as to school districts and county offices of education (ref. Article XII B of the State Constitution). By September 30 of each year , Education Code sections 1629 and 42132 specify that each year county office and district governing boards shall adopt a resolution identifying their estimated appropriations limits for the current year and their actual appropriations limit for the preceding year. The documentation supporting the adoption resolution shall be made available to the public. It is not necessary to submit a copy of the board resolution adopting your appropriations limit to the CDE. However if you find your District is in need of increasing its limitation, Section 7902.1 states that the school district shall notify the Director of Finance. The easiest way to understand this calculation is to envision the dollar amount of the district's Gann Limit as a box. For example, if your current year Gann Limit is $50 million, picture a box that can hold $50 million. First, put into this box local property taxes that count toward the revenue limit, as well as an appropriate portion of the district's interest income. Next, pour all of the district's unrestricted state aid into this box. Under state law, the amount of state aid that fills up the box counts toward the district's Gann Limit, while the amount that overflows the box counts toward the state's Gann Limit (ref. Government Code Section 7906). In addition, all state aid for categorical programs always counts toward the state's Gann Limit. Through this process, as much state aid as possible counts toward school agency Gann Limits. By reducing the amount of state aid that counts toward the state's Gann Limit in this manner, this process helped the state avoid being over its Gann Limit. It is important that school agencies do these calculations to identify how much state aid counts toward the agency's Gann Limit, so that the state of California knows how much state aid counts toward its own Gann Limit. Form GANN has been added to the SACS software to assist LEAs in meeting their constitutional and statutory Gann obligations to calculate appropriation limits and appropriations subject to limitation. Districts should submit their completed forms to the County Superintendent of Schools with their officially exported Unaudited Actuals submission. The attached calculations and documentation of the Gann limits for the 2019-20 fiscal year and the projected Gann Limit for the 2020-21 fiscal year show an increase to the 2019 Gann limit of $27,095,645 and are in accordance with applicable statutory laws. Financial Impact: There is no financial impact to the district relative to this recommendation. Submission for Approval Prepared by: Priscilla Aquino-Dichoso, Chief Business Official Approved by: John R. Baker, Ed.D., Superintendent §
103:48:11Information
10.1San Mateo County Office of Education Review and Approval of RCSD Adopted Budget for Fiscal Year 2020-21 and the COVID-19 Operations Written ReportInformation
Item details
Rationale: It is the Administration's recommendation that the School Board review the attached letter from the San Mateo County Office of Education ("SMCOE") regarding the Adopted Budget for fiscal year 2020-21 and the COVID-19 Operations Written Report. In accordance with Education Code Sections 42127 and 52070, the San Mateo County Office of Education (SMCOE) has completed its review of the Redwood City School District's Adopted Budget for fiscal year 2020-21 and the COVID-19 Operations Written Report. The SMCOE determined that the District's Adopted Budget for fiscal year 2020-21 met the criteria and standards adopted by the State Board of Education and allows the District to meet its multi-year financial commitments. The SMCOE also acknowledged that all requirements for the COVID-19 Operations Written Report have been met. Attached is the SMCOE approval letter. Financial Impact: None. Submission for Approval Prepared by: Priscilla Aquino-Dichoso, Chief Business Official Approved by: John R. Baker, Ed.D., Superintendent §
113:48:40Adjournment (Action Required)