11:19Call to Order
1.1Roll CallProcedural
2Oral Communication on Closed Session Items Only
2.1If you have public comment related to a Closed Session item, please post it on: (https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSexN3rAtNYJrhCjKT0s9AG__Eq0-_iAUFPI6ID3Mo0Jn8yeGA/viewform?usp=sf_link) prior to the Closed Session Meeting or immediately upon the meeting opening.
3Closed Session – 5:00 p.m.
3.1Conference with Real Property Negotiators (Gov. Code, § 54956.8) Property: 750 Bradford St, Redwood City, CA 94063 Agency Negotiators: John Baker, Superintendent, Peter Ingram, Consultant and Clarissa Canady, Legal Counsel Negotiating parties: Redwood City School District and The Sobrato Organization Under Negotiation: Price and Terms of Payment of Property Exchange Agreement
41:19Reconvene to Regular Session at Approximately 6:00 p.m.
4.1Roll Call
4.2Report Out on Closed Session from June 15, 2022
52:03Welcome
5.1Welcome by the School Board President, María Díaz-SlocumProcedural
62:37Changes to the Agenda
6.1Additions, Deletions or Modifications to the AgendaDiscussion
74:59Approval of Agenda
7.1Approval of AgendaAction
85:22Oral Communication
8.1If you have public comment related to a Regular Board Meeting item, please post it on the links available under Public Content prior to the Regular Board Meeting or immediately upon the meeting opening.Information
97:40School/Community Reports
9.17:53Presentation and Discussion on the General Obligation (GO) Bond Next StepsDiscussion
Jessica Shade (1min) — Voiced support for the new school bond, called for central kitchen language to be included, and praised the district's efforts.
Katerina Schoenbach (1min) — Speaker was called but unable to unmute and did not provide comment.
9.21:06:18Recommended Options to the School Board Regarding North Star Academy (NSA)Discussion
Matt Schwal (2min) — Argued the NSA Forward Committee was negatively framed and urged the board to reframe the discussion positively, celebrating North Star's success rather than proposing changes.
Cameron Hoffman (5min) — Argued the proposals are being rushed and lack evidence, compared North Star favorably to U46 in Illinois, and proposed a district-wide talent development program called 'SHINE' to serve younger learners rather than restructuring North Star.
Tony Webel (2min) — Shared his experience as a committee member and parent of students at both Roosevelt and North Star, and argued that board bylaws require keeping student learning as the primary focus, finding no data justifying grade configuration or location changes.
Diana Fu (2min) — Drew on her experience helping start the MI program to argue the district should provide more choices and improve other schools rather than restricting a choice program like North Star.
Allie Gilmore (1min) — Speaker was called but did not respond or unmute.
Wenjing Sheng (1min) — Speaker was called but was unable to unmute and did not provide comment.
Lone Hin (1min) — Described her first-grader's unmet academic needs at their neighborhood school and argued that scaling back North Star would leave more students without appropriate challenge.
Megan O'Neill (2min) — Argued that options A through C would serve fewer students and contradict the stated goal of serving more students more effectively, and that neighborhood schools must first be ready to serve gifted learners before any North Star grades are cut.
Matt Collier (1min) — As a parent of young children and former magnet school student himself, urged the board to preserve K–8 North Star as a standalone school and to consider Ms. Hoffman's alternative proposal.
Anthony Low (1min) — Stated that three of the four options effectively close half of North Star, called all options deficient, and said his family would likely leave the district if a 6–8 option were chosen.
Andrew Hoffman (2min) — Argued the recommendations target North Star rather than addressing underperforming schools, warned the options would negatively impact North Star's mission, and urged the board not to adopt incomplete proposals.
Heidi Wall (2min) — Criticized the proposals as short-sighted and premature, cited district-wide problems like declining test scores and teacher retention, and called for using North Star's proven methods to improve other schools rather than dismantling it.
Susan Bouchard (2min) — Argued that capping the number of qualified students allowed to transfer to NSA from neighborhood schools would increase the perception of elitism and create more divisiveness, and asked the board to reject and rework all proposals.
Costas Dimitropoulos (2min) — Asked for empirical evidence supporting any proposed changes and questioned whether there is data proving that altering a high-achieving school like North Star would improve outcomes at lower-performing schools.
Kelly McCarthy (1min) — Questioned whether the community pulse had been taken since COVID, called the effort a waste of resources given widespread learning loss, and urged the board to instead use resources to improve neighborhood schools.
Casey Wright (2min) — Called several options 'casually cruel,' warned the board against falling for the sunk cost fallacy, and implored them to postpone a decision and demand better-researched options.
Catherine Stewart (2min) — Observed that virtually every prior speaker opposed changing or dismantling North Star and argued that the general sentiment—'if it ain't broke, don't fix it'—should guide the board.
Gautam Dutta (1min) — As a local attorney, Asian American civic leader, and North Star parent, echoed 'if it ain't broke, don't fix it,' and asked the board to reject all four options and instead improve support and resources for all schools.
Jing Zhu (1min) — Warned that the proposed changes would create many unhappy parents who become reliable voters against the board, and urged the board to think carefully about the disruption these options would cause to North Star families' daily lives.
Kirsten McMullen (2min) — Called the recommendations insufficient and lacking an evidence-based approach, noting they mainly solve the third-grade attrition issue while creating new problems, and urged deeper research and cost-benefit analysis.
Bara Altaba (1min) — As a parent of current NSA students who transferred from private school because of North Star, urged the board not to break a nationally recognized school and to instead bring other schools up to North Star's level.
Michelle Fogarty (2min) — Argued the proposals take direct aim at one successful school without solving district-wide shortcomings, criticized use of outdated data from 2018, and urged the board to conduct new research before implementing any changes.
Katie Goetz (1min) — As a North Star Forward Committee member, encouraged the board to consider and move forward with the proposal to make North Star a 6–8 school on the Bayside, stating it best addresses the committee's three charges.
Christopher Bouchard (2min) — Asked the board to reject all four proposals and pause major changes, citing a flawed and biased committee process built on four-year-old data, and called for a reset with current community input.
David Wright (1min) — Implored the board to defer the decision and request a revised set of options aligned to the committee's stated goals, warning against committing to a process not in students' best interests.
Mike Beebe (2min) — Summarized three broadly supported elements from Dr. Baker's plans (outreach, test prep access, logistics like transportation), suggested spreading entrance grades across third through fifth to reduce the third-grade attrition pinch, and emphasized district-wide learning loss as the true priority.
Meredith Park (2min) — Raised traffic concerns near North Star, warned against adding K–2 at the Duane location, and suggested exploring a neighborhood boundary middle school with an IB program on Duane as an alternative approach.
Nathan Schmidt (1min) — Using a 'ten boats' analogy, argued the board's duty is to save the underperforming schools rather than compromising the one that is succeeding.
Mohamed Tabrizi (1min) — Ceded time to Cameron Hoffman and added that spending district resources on this process instead of lower-income students' education is unacceptable, urging trustees to reject all options and use scientific data.
Lily Melton (1min) — As an Orion parent, urged the board to move forward with bold structural changes and noted that a large community of parents who want district-wide improvement supports significant change even if not loudly represented tonight.
Beatrice Chan (1min) — Called the options deeply flawed, asked the board to instead focus on introducing enrichment programs in community schools and helping current students meet grade-level expectations rather than dismantling North Star.
Maribel Ng (2min) — Shared her child's struggles before finding North Star, emphasized that students who go there have often struggled elsewhere and need an environment that understands them, and suggested spreading that philosophy across all Redwood City schools.
105:31Bond Program Consent Items
10.1Approval of Consent ItemsAction
10.2Approval of Concrete Masonry Unit (CMU) Wall Adjustment Proposal for Orion Alternative School (Formerly John Gill) with BoegerAction (Consent)
10.3Approval of Measure T Bond Program Tracking List of Items Under $20kAction (Consent)
10.4Approval of New Buildings, Modernization and Sitework Project Bid, Package A, Change Order #7 for Garfield Community School with Duran and Venables, and Adoption of Futility Resolution 37Action (Consent)
10.5Approval of New Buildings, Modernization and Sitework Project Bid, Package J, Change Order #4 for Taft Community School with PARC EnvironmentalAction (Consent)
116:20Bond Program Action Items
11.1Adoption of Resolution 39, Resolution of Intent to Convey a Public Utility Easement to PG&E and Calling a Public Hearing in Connection TherewithAction
126:56Consent Items
12.1Approval of Consent ItemsAction
12.2Ratification of Warrant Register, May 1, 2022 - May 31, 2022Action (Consent)
12.3Approval of Agreement between Redwood City School District and Dannis, Woliver & Kelley for Fiscal Years 2022-23 and 2023-24Action (Consent)
12.4Approval of Agreement to Provide Meal Services to Connect Community Charter School and KIPP Excelencia Community Prep Charter School for Fiscal Year 2022-23Action (Consent)
12.5Approval of Agreement between Redwood City School District and Maria Lucila Echeverria-Bustios for CDC Child, Family and Community Liaison Services for Fiscal Year 2022-23Action (Consent)
12.6Approval of Agreement between Redwood City School District and Danielle Webb for CDC Education Specialist Services for Fiscal Year 2022-23Action (Consent)
12.7Approval of Agreement between Redwood City School District and Effective School Solutions, LLC (ESS) Program for Mental Health Services for the 2022-23 School YearAction (Consent)
13Action items
13.1Second Reading and Approval of Board Policy 1230 - School-Connected OrganizationsAction
13.2Second Reading and Approval of Board Policy 4136/4236/4336 - Non-School EmploymentAction
13.3Second Reading and Approval of Board Policy 4141.6/4241.6 - Concerted Action/Work StoppageAction
13.4Second Reading and Approval of Board Policy 6173 - Education for Homeless ChildrenAction
13.5Second Reading and Approval of Board Bylaw 9322 - Agenda/Meeting MaterialsAction
13.6Approval of Personnel ReportAction
13.73:19:42Adoption of Resolution 38, Approval of Education Code Options for Teaching AssignmentsAction
143:21:08Board and Superintendent Reports
14.1Report from Board Members and SuperintendentReports
153:27:03Information
15.1San Mateo County Office of Education Review of RCSD Second Interim Financial Report 2021-22Information
163:27:24Correspondence
16.1Correspondence
173:28:42Other Business/Suggested Items For Future Agenda
17.1Possible Other Business/Suggested Items for Future AgendaInformation
183:28:53Board Agenda Calendar
18.1Changes to the Board Agenda ScheduleInformation
193:29:21Adjournment
19.1Adjourn the MeetingAction