Springfield School Board — June 8, 2026

4:40 But it's way over there. Yeah. It's okay. Okay. Well, I'm going to go ahead and call this June 8th, 2026, meeting of the Springfield Board of Directors to order. It's 6:05. Please stand for the pledge of allegiance. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of

5:27 America, and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Well, after all that preparation. And Director Langworthy will go ahead and read the land acknowledgement We acknowledge that we are in the traditional homeland of the Kalapuya people.

6:17 I ran up those stairs. Specifically, the community that was known as Chifen, the area that we will now call Springfield. Kalapuya people who have lived in this region since time immemorial were illegally disposed of their land and forcibly removed to what is now called Grand Ronde and Siletz reservations over several years, but most notably in treaties between 1851 and 1855. The Kalapuya are now members of the Confederate Tribes in the Grand Ronde and the Confederated Tribes of Siletz Indians. And the members of the Kalapuya still live, work, study, and thrive in this area and continue to

7:03 make important contributions here in Springfield, across the land we now refer to as Oregon and around the globe. This information is shared out of responsibility to prevent the erasure of Native culture, heritage, and people to ensure a quality contemporary education for the future generations. Thank you. At this time, the board of directors will recess into executive session under ORS 192.6602B, oh, 2F actually, the review of confidential attorney-client privileged information.

49:08 Somebody print them out and put them right to there, everyone. Good evening, everyoneAt this time, we're going to move into our 6:45 PM budget hearing, and this is to allow public comment on the budget, and I'll call this part of our meeting to order at 6:50. And my understanding is that this is the time to give public testimony on the budget, and having not received any applications for public

49:53 comment or any other notification, we'll go ahead and close this hearing at 6:51. Then we'll reconvene the regular meeting as stated at 7:00 PM. Thanks to everyone for being here. Public comment will be held at our regular meeting. Yes. So quiet. I'm going to go say hi. Oh, is that it?

1:03:08 Yeah, that should work. Yeah, it does. That's okay. I think... Okay. We're about to start? Yeah. Okay. Gives me some time. Buenas tardes a todos. Interpretación en español está disponible mediante audífonos. Si desea escuchar el programa en español, por favor míreme acá atrás y yo le ayudaré.

1:04:02 Good evening, everyone. At this time, we're going to reconvene our regular meeting. We had a series of meetings, so we actually opened a series of meetings at 5:30. So at this time, we'll move right into the approval of the agenda. I'll move approval. Second. Moved by Director Cole, seconded by Director Brew. Call for comments, changes, all of the above. Yeah. There's some consent agenda items I'd like to pull for discussion. That would be the May 5th, 2026 special meeting minutes, 4.A.1, 4.A.2,

1:04:50 the May 11th board meeting minutes, 4.A.5, the financial statement, 4.A.11, structural repairs, and 4.A.13, budget appropriation transfer. Okay, thank you. For the record, I will restate those. So Director Cole would like to pull items 4.A.1, the special minutes from the May 5th meeting, 4.A.2, May 11th, 2026 board meeting minutes, 4.A.5, financial statement, 4.A.11, structural repairs, 4.A.13, budget appropriation. Is that correct? That's correct, yeah.

1:05:35 Okay. I had one more amendment, but I don't know. I was going to ask if we have an action item on whether or not we should have another meeting later this week. That was just based on experience. We were going to have our superintendent interviews tomorrow, and in the past, we haven't always reached a decision that day and having another day or two to think about it, I was thinking that now is the time for the board to have a discussion and decide whether or not we would have another meeting. So I was going to ask for an action item, I guess H, to discuss the potential another board meeting. 5H? Yeah. Or 4H,

1:06:21 because it would be an action item- Okay. Thank you ... because we'd have to vote on it. Okay, and I believe there might be other process. That's related to the interim search process, correct? Yeah. So there might be some other conversation around that. I will go ahead and add that. Interim superintendent process. And that will be action item 4H. Yes. And I'm going to also pull consent agenda item 4.A.6, the personnel report.

1:07:07 Any other changes to the agenda? I was going to pull 4.A.1 and 2. Okay, so along with Director Cole? Along with Director Cole. Okay, thank you. Hearing none other, I'll go ahead and call for the vote. All in favor of approving the agenda indicate by saying aye. Aye. Are there any against? Motion carries five to nothing. At this point, we're moving into public comments, and we have a list of 15, I believeWe

1:07:53 actually have 16. Oh, there's some... Oh, sorry. So, we have 26 in total. And as the board knows, typically we allow 25 minutes, which is approximately eight comments. And if we had 26, we're at 78 minutes. So, roughly an hour and 20 minutes. I'm guessing that's just speaking time. There's going to be transition.

1:08:39 That's just three minutes per speaker, and so there's going to be transition time. So, there's probably another 20, 25 minutes on top of that just swapping out the speakers, I would presume. Okay. So it takes a board leaning to expand that time. I would be fine with that. Could I make a suggestion that since we're... If you do that and everybody still speaks three minutes, maybe postpone the discussion items that are just... They're board discussion items that don't have any action involved in them. They're not urgent. So maybe if you still want to give everybody three minutes,

1:09:24 then postpone those items or possibly limit two minutes each. I don't know. But the suggestion is to maybe postpone those discussion items that aren't urgent. Well, in the preamble, usually we talk about if you have a shared topic, perhaps letting someone else speak for you, merging those together so there's less actual people speaking. But having said that, since it's a rather cryptic description of what people want to talk about, I hate to put limitations on that other than the three minutes. Not everybody will probably speak for three minutes, and it certainly isn't required to speak for three minutes, so it may be somewhat less.

1:10:09 So Director Brew, Director Longworthy? I have three discussion items and at that point, when we get to that, if we're running really behind, I think I'd be fine with postponing them. So you'd be okay with expanding public comments and perhaps we adjust our schedule? Okay, thank you. It's a suggestion. Director Longworthy? Yeah, I would be... I'm fine to go the full night with everything.

1:10:55 I am flexible. I do understand we'll probably be here until 11, but I do want to hear everyone's comments. Okay. So it seems like we have a majority leaning towards that. So, before we get started, I'll go ahead and read the preamble. So this is the portion of our agenda for public comment. The board provides three ways for community members to share public comment: written public comment, in-person oral public comment, and virtual public comment. Written public comment is received via email. Public comment received via email for this evening has been reviewed by the board and has also been posted on the district's website. The deadline for submitting a request for oral public comment was today at 2:00

1:11:41 p.m., and those who requested an opportunity to speak this evening were notified by the board secretary, Marty, about their request. So, we encourage groups with a common purpose to designate a spokesperson. If your comments will be covered by a group spokesperson, please indicate so when your name is called. I want to remind those members of the public who have indicated a desire to make comments that our policy provides for a limitation of the aforesaid three minutes. The board will not hear comments regarding any school personnel, whether named or implied. Any complaints regarding a particular employee must be processed through the procedure set forth in board policy KL, which requires that complaints be submitted in writing to

1:12:28 the superintendent. This procedure must be followed before there is any board involvement with such cases. A compliment involving a staff member should be sent to the superintendent, who will forward it to the employee, their supervisor, and their board. So again, I think it's clear that it's a three-minute time limitation. And again, if a point has been made, you might consider any additional information that would be helpful to the board, and for saving time, maybe that would be the way to go. I've heard from some people that there's an impression that you need to also submit written comment, and that's not true when you're giving oral public comment. However, the board has requested in the past, if you have a written transcript, it just saves board members from going back maybe

1:13:16 and looking at the recording and trying to transcribe that. So, we've had many wonderful comments and things that I've wanted to go back and review. So it's just a time saving, but no requirement that you do that. So, moving forward then, I'm just going to call them in the order that they're received. David Willis. Good evening. This one Thank you. And they have the notes that I gave? Good. Yeah. Again, just a reminder that our vice chair, Director Langworthy, will be the

1:14:02 timekeeper, and it'll be turned towards you so you'll be able to see. My name is David Willis. I'm the board chair of Springfield Utility Board. I'd like to start with something we're incredibly proud of, our partnership with Springfield Schools through the Water and Electric Learning Lab, which you may know as the WELL Project. Over the years, SUB has invested more than $4 million in the WELL Project, supporting hands-on, real-world science learning in classrooms across Springfield. But what makes this program especially unique is that it doesn't stop at the classroom. It connects students directly to their community. Through this program, high school students in Springfield provide free water testing for community members, giving residents valuable information about the safety and quality of their drinking water.

1:14:48 They also assess fish habitat, identify restoration opportunities, and collect and analyze water samples from local waterways. And this isn't just a classroom exercise. These remarkable students produce real-world, professional-level data used by our local watershed councils, our local water utilities, and even state and federal agencies. Middle school students also participate. In fact, seventh graders from all four Springfield middle schools are part of a dedicated restoration team that complete restoration work, like planting native species along stream corridors and learning the basics of water quality sampling. Our Springfield students aren't just learning science, they are doing science. In the process, they're contributing in meaningful ways to the health and sustainability of this community.

1:15:33 For SUB, the WELL Project isn't just a program, it's an investment in the future. It builds curiosity, develops practical skills, and open doors to careers in fields like energy, water, engineering, and environmental science. And just as importantly, it helps students see that these systems and their public utility belong to them. That sense of connection to our community is the heart of who we are as an organization. In addition, this is all ratepayer money. We're very cognizant of that, and we also give to the city $3 million every year in lieu of taxes. And we also contribute to Project SHARE $265,000 per year to be able to help those with their utility bills.

1:16:20 So we try to be wise stewards in terms of providing cost-effective, reliable, safe utilities. Thank you. Thank you. Speaking from the board, we very much value our relationship that we have with our Springfield Utility Board. The next up is Loretta Halter. I think I get 10 minutes too. Not yet.

1:17:18 Hi, I am Loretta Halter, and I live in Thurston. And I have been a public school teacher for nearly 30 years. I was perplexed by the views expressed by four former Springfield school board members who spoke at the board meeting on May 11th. They attacked the director, Jonathan Light, without any substantiation, while skirting the district's real issues. Teachers are being laid off or are resigning due to the pressures and restrictions they face. Parents are disgruntled by the complaints of children bored by test-driven curriculum. There is inadequate time allocated to history, civics, art, PE,

1:18:05 music, and science. Many children, like our minority populations, are being bullied on campus. Absenteeism has become a huge problem, hindering student learning. These factors all contribute to the serious decline in enrollment in Springfield schools. Yet possible solutions reside in the growing number of families seeking alternative, well-rounded education, such as the thriving A3 High School. Instead of offering ideas to address these challenges, the former board members criticized the current board, especially Mr. Light's proposal, to allow board

1:18:51 members to visit classrooms without a chaperone from the central office. This freedom would allow board members to connect more often with teachers, principals, and students, and thereby strengthen the Springfield public school community. The current policy restricting board visits baffles me. In the public district I served for nearly 30 years, board members commonly came in as welcome visitors. They were open to learning what challenges teachers and students faced and to seeing positive things taking place in our classroom. Understanding fully what is going on in our schools so they can better support them is what we elect board members to

1:19:39 do. To spread mistrust against and among board members and educators, to undermine and/or make cuts to their work to promote good and effective education, to foster animosity in the Springfield community, is to damage the unity, the strength of our-District family. Ultimately, this undermines the success, hopes, and dreams of its children as they endeavor to learn to use their own talents and knowledge to contribute to our society. Thank you for listening to me. Thank you, Ms. Halter. Naomi Raven?

1:20:39 My name is Naomi Raven. I'm a parent of SPS students and a former Springfield School Board member. I served five years on the board, including two years as vice chair and two years as chair. I served through the COVID-19 pandemic and the hiring of a superintendent. I understand this role and its responsibilities and its ethical obligations. I am here today because I am deeply concerned by the conduct of this board. Untrustworthy means dishonest and not worthy of confidence. Micromanaging means controlling every minor detail in a way that harms productivity and morale. Overreach of authority means exceeding the limits of your role. Unethical behavior ignores professional and moral standards. Corruption is the misuse of power for

1:21:25 personal gain. Unfortunately, these words and their definitions increasingly describe the Springfield School Board as currently constituted. My definition of the current Springfield School Board is a board that is untrustworthy, who micromanages district administration to the point of exhaustion, who exercises consistent overreach of authority in both action and in proposed policy and practice changes, whose majority sustains unethical and corrupt leadership. The examples are clear. The board has failed to fairly negotiate the contract of our current interim superintendent. Department directors are being forced to justify exact curriculum purchase amounts already approved in the budget. Proposed policy changes would allow board members to bypass the superintendent's office when coordinating school

1:22:11 visits, which undermines the governance structure, creates confusion across the district, and signals distrust in district administration. There are also ongoing concerns about transparency, public meeting law, and the integrity of the current interim superintendent hiring process. Meanwhile, time continues to be spent improving your experience as board members, instead of focusing on our students and the needs of the district. The result is our district is consistently losing strong leaders, all citing board dysfunction as a reason for leaving. So now what? Do better. Be honest. Hold yourselves and each other accountable. You can start by showing our community that you will hold yourselves accountable by

1:22:56 having the two board members who were disciplined in November complete the terms of the board-approved disciplinary action. When you vote in new board leadership, choose leadership who will lead with integrity. Each of you has a responsibility to model accountability, humility, transparency, and trust. Most importantly, refocus on your true responsibility: supporting students by creating an environment where district leadership can succeed and education can continue improving for our Springfield students. Thank you. Thank you, Ms. Raven. Ingrid Nordstrom?

1:23:51 Hey. Sorry. I'm a parent of two kids at Yolanda Elementary, and I've attended many of these board meetings throughout this year, and the overwhelming feeling I'm left with is disappointment. Before I explain why, I want to be very clear, I love my kids' school. Our principal is extraordinary. She seems to know every student and parent by name. The staff are supportive, capable, and essential, and the teachers are caring, passionate professionals who work tirelessly for our kids. My disappointment is not with the school, it's with the district leadership, including this board. For years, students have been denied a well-rounded education. This is no longer a matter of opinion. The Department of Ed has confirmed what parents could already see with our own

1:24:37 eyes. The district is out of compliance in science and social studies. The community has repeatedly asked questions about the K five curriculum, but our concerns have been ignored. In what appeared to be an attempt to persuade us that our kids had been learning science all along, at an April board meeting, we heard about students at an elementary school having the opportunity to use microscopes. I'm glad those students had that experience, but one hands-on activity is not evidence of a functioning science curriculum. The state's findings should be a moment of reckoning. Instead, we've received excuses and promises of accountability. But what does accountability actually mean to you? Because from where I sit, most of the people responsible for these failures and for creating the institutional culture that tolerated

1:25:23 them are still employed, still collecting paychecks, and still asking the community to trust them. This district is at an inflection point. We're preparing to hire a new superintendent, and I hope that some of the more disruptive dynamics on the board are coming to an endI don't expect leaders to agree on everything, but I do expect leaders to disagree honestly, respectfully, and productively while keeping their focus on students instead of personalities and internal conflicts. So to conclude, I have three requests. First, provide a public accounting of how much district money has been spent on complaints and legal fees related to board disputes. I suspect that total is significant, and I would rather see the money spent on

1:26:09 supporting students and programs like dual immersion. Second, tell us specifically how you plan to help students who have been denied instruction in science and social studies. What supports will be available, and how will you help students entering middle school without the foundation they should have received in elementary school? And third, tell us what changes will be made to the elementary schedule and report card. Right now, science, social studies, art, and health are expected to share a single hour of instructional time each day and are graded based on effort. How will that change, and when? Parents are not asking whether there is a problem. The state has already answered that question. What we want now is accountability, transparency, and a plan.

1:26:54 Sorry, our kids only get one-- Sorry, my voice is cracking. Our kids only get one elementary education, and they should not be the ones paying the price for the failures of adults. Thank you. Thank you, Ms. Nordfon. Douglas Cornejo Rosales Murray. Wait. Hello, I'm here to talk about dual immersion. To me, dual immersion is the most beneficial and impactful program in this district. It fosters community and

1:27:39 support and so many more important things that it would be too long of a list. The program gets students from many lingual and cultural backgrounds and teaches them two languages that is not only very prevalent and useful, but typically connects them to more people. My dad is from El Salvador, and my mom is from Montana. Due to societal pressure and my dad losing contact with most of his family and friends, we primarily speak English at home. If I didn't have this program, I would most likely be mediocre or bad at speaking Spanish, which would make me lose so much. I would lose family, friends, knowledge, and honestly, I feel that if I was never in dual immersion, I would be a very different person.

1:28:29 I've been in this program since kindergarten, and I remember so much of every year I've been in the program. Like how in every year of elementary school, we had a field trip for Dia de Los Muertos, and we got to celebrate the holiday and learn about it. Even though each year was nearly identical, I always had fun going to it and going with my friends. Another important memory is in eighth grade when me and another student went to a dual immersion conference for the state as speakers. I have no idea if we had any impact on them, but it was nice to have a room full of adults that were as invested in dual immersion

1:29:15 programs as we were and are. These small moments and countless more are the heart of dual immersion and something students outside of the program don't experience, possibly ever. Through these many years, I have supported the program through so much, and these proposed cuts truly hurt me, especially since I'm part of the first cohort of the entire program. But more importantly, it hurts everybody ever involved in the program and our large Spanish-speaking community. Especially for students who only speak Spanish, our dual immersion history classes help them learn history the same as any English-speaking student would. I have had many classes with monolingual Spanish students,

1:30:01 and compared to English-focused classes, they do so much better in the dual immersion history classes. As someone who is mixed, I've always felt like I had to choose my Latino side or my white side, but this program has helped me embrace both. This program, especially at the elementary level, connects primarily English-speaking and primarily Spanish-speaking students to each other and helps them learn together and learn both languages. Without learning Spanish, thanks to this program, I would have never had many of the friends I have now. I also probably wouldn't be able to speak to most of my dad's family because most of them only speak Spanish. Without the program, I would have never attempted the stamp test to get my global seal of biliteracy and so much more.

1:30:46 Mr. Murray, you'll need to wrap it up, please. Yes. Just how I remember so much from every year, especially dual immersion, I'm just one of many. There are so many students who've all had different experiences in the program and countless more who will have experiences in dual immersion in the future, and with these proposed cuts, they will all lose a chance to form more. Thank you. Andrea Madrigal Ramirez.

1:31:34 Good evening. My name is Andrea Madrigal Ramirez. I am a current junior and student body inclusivity officer at Springfield High School. Before I go further in explanation, I do want to clarify that I am not and have never been part of a dual immersion program in this district or any other district I was inHowever, as someone who has benefited from growing up bilingual most of my life, I am fully aware of how being bilingual has affected me throughout my life. So I do have an idea of how the dual immersion program may affect other students. As if by coincidence, just last month, I wrote a research paper in my College Now Writing 121 class titled "In What Ways Does Multilingualism Impact Children's Academic Performance?" And what I learned while researching for my essay is that bilingualism

1:32:21 doesn't just give students access to higher paying jobs, it also enables them to reach fuller academic potential at a more efficient rate than monolinguals. So as a result of cutting the dual immersion program, you would essentially be preventing dual immersion students from reaching their highest academic performance potential. According to my research essay and the sources I used, bilingualism provides advantages in the executive control of young humans. Executive control is a brain's function that makes humans capable of carrying out complex tasks that include problem-solving, inhibiting information already perceived, focusing attention on a goal, or monitoring performance. According to a study, bilingual children show a significant advantage in executive control tasks compared to monolingual children.

1:33:08 Multilingualism can counteract executive control struggles such as impulse control, difficulty in regulating emotions, school organization, time management, independence, future planning, and remembering instructions. In simpler words, bilingualism can speed executive control achievements, which can result in better overall academic performance. Another finding from my research paper is that individuals who are multilingual have better metalinguistic awareness. Metalinguistic awareness is the ability to look at language as a thing, evaluate language as a process or system, and maneuver successfully in using a language. Key components of metalinguistic awareness that I studied and that are positively impacted by bilingual education are phonological awareness, morphological awareness, and syntactic awareness.

1:33:53 In terms of phonological awareness, children who interact in more than one language have higher vocabulary acquisition and vocabulary development. Improved development of phonological awareness is also responsible for students' enhancement of awareness of genre and style norms and test features in various languages. This is crucial to students' understanding of literature and the ability to use words. Now, syntactic awareness is the ability to use a knowledge of grammar to comprehend the meaning that originates from the relationship between words and sentences. Morphological awareness is the ability to acknowledge that words are made up of smaller units of meaning, such as prefixes, suffixes, and roots.

1:34:40 According to a study I found in terms of morphological and syntactic awareness- Thank you. Thank you so much, and sorry to cut you off, but we have to be fair to all people. Thank you. Aidana Vasquez.

1:35:35 Good evening, everyone. Our names are Rhiannon Palacios and Aidana Vasquez. We are currently enrolled as sophomores at Springfield High School and have been in the dual immersion program since we were started in kindergarten. We came here today to speak to you about the intended cut of the dual immersion program in our school district. Our

1:36:21 program was created for people like us in mind, people who grew up with Spanish in our homes and in our hearts. And as a quick note, I would like to clarify that approximately 30% of our student body is represented by Latino students. Not only is our language important for multilingual diversity, which is one of our school's biggest strengths, but for community, for those of us whose parents speak it at home or just the times where there is no word in English that can truly convey how we feel in that moment. To

1:37:13 give a comparison of what the dual immersion program is like, it's like a typical English class, just taught in Spanish. If you were to move a dual immersion student down to a regular Spanish two or three class, it would be like putting a student who is fully fluent in English into an ELD class. It makes no sense. Why would you hold back their learning by putting them into a beginner level class after they've been learning in one that creates adequate rigor? Now,

1:38:00 obviously, with class isn't just statistics, but it's the people who run it The teachers that have been growing... Oh, shoot. Our class size has grown immensely in the past year, even though our teachers have faced hardship after hardship. Thank you. Excuse me. Thank you. We ask that you- Time, yeah ... reconsider your choice about the dual immersion program because it is not just another Spanish class. It is a language class like English. It is students that depend on its aspects to be able to help guide them

1:38:45 through the educational careers. If I might suggest this board and acting and interim superintendents to come to meet the bilingual students and get to know them and their classes. I understand that this is a huge deficit that we need to figure out how to live with in the next year, but cutting a native speaker language class is not the answer. Thank you for your time. Before I call up the next speaker, again, I would just remind the people who are going to speak that we're already committed to a very long meeting and

1:39:30 hearing everyone. So with interest for respect for all speakers, if we can really hardline it at three minutes. So if the buzzer goes off, if you can just wrap up your next statement, that would be very helpful. And as I said earlier, it'd be great if you want to submit the full comment as a written comment to the board. We would appreciate that. Maya Olsen? Hello, my name is Maya Olsen. I'm a freshman at Springfield High School, and I have been a part of the dual immersion program since kindergarten. Since then, going to school has always meant learning in not just English,

1:40:17 but also Spanish. The opportunity I've had to learn Spanish all these years is something I've gotten so comfortable with, that it's easy to sometimes take for granted. I never would've even imagined that this incredibly big part of my life could just be gone. Thinking about this now makes me feel so immensely grateful for this program and everything it has taught me. I've always considered being able to speak multiple languages such a cool power to have, and dual immersion has made that possible for me to grow that ability. One of my main goals throughout school has always been to get recognized at graduation for my completion of this program. To think that my 10 years of working hard and putting in so much effort are for nothing, I only needed to complete three more years, and now I can't.

1:41:02 I don't even want to imagine what the current 11th graders in dual immersion feel like now because of these cuts, with only one more year left. This program hasn't even been given time to grow, and now not a single class will ever start dual immersion in elementary and graduate still in it. And suddenly, out of nowhere, I'm being told that my dual immersion class is being replaced with just a regular Spanish class. To some people, this may not sound that different, but a regular high school Spanish class is far from the same. Beginning in elementary, I haven't just been taught Spanish. I've learned math, language arts, and social studies all in Spanish. That is what makes this program such a remarkable experience. I just want the district to realize what they are taking away from me and the impact their decisions have on my future and so many other students.

1:41:50 With me here today, I have signatures from over 100 students through middle school and high school who want to be heard and deserve to be heard. This program means so much to us, and we don't want to see it go. Thank you for listening. Thank you. Gladys Lopez? Is Gladys here? Okay, then moving ahead, Johannes Tadeo.

1:42:47 There he is. Hi, Johannes. My name is Johannes Tadeo. I'm a Springfield graduate, parent, community organizer for Safer, and someone who has spent years working alongside students, families, educators, and this district. I want to start with a question. How can Springfield Public School say it's committed to reaching every student every day when the program's teachers and educational assistants are being cut increasingly reflect the students who make up the significant portion of our district? Latino students represent approximately 25% to 27% of the Springfield student population, yet we are watching cuts impact programs and staff that directly supports bilingual

1:43:32 students, multilingual students, and families who have invested years into the district. The district has cited enrollment numbers as a reason for these changes, but enrollment does not happen on its own. The district controls recruitment, outreach, access to program scheduling, and overall the structure of the program. The district cannot point to enrollment numbers without also taking responsibility for the decisions that shape those numbers. The district says that the secondary dual immersion program is not being eliminated, but if students are losing dual immersion humanities courses and seeing their pathway replaced with traditional Spanish classes, then the educational experience they signed up for is fundamentally changing. A Spanish class is not the same as a dual immersion class.Dual

1:44:17 immersion is about learning academic content through two languages. It's about developing bilingualism by literacy, cultural competency, and preparing students to succeed in an increasing diverse world. What makes this especially difficult is that the current juniors are expected to become the first senior class to complete in Springfield's dual immersion pathway. After years of hard work and commitment, they should be celebrating this achievement, not watching the program they helped build be reduced just as they reach the finish line. What concerns me just as much as the cuts themselves is the process. Families, students, and educators were not meaningfully engaged before the decisions were made. The people most impacted were informed after the fact. A decision that fundamentally alters Springfield K to 12 dual

1:45:05 immersion pathway should be discussed openly with the Board of Education and the community. Families deserve transparency about how this decision was made, what alternatives were considered, what role the Board of Education played in reviewing these changes, and why families were not included sooner in the process. Tonight I ask you to listen to the students, the families, the educators. Ask yourself what message this sends to our Latino community and multilingual students. At the time when districts across Oregon are working to expand multilingual education, Springfield is the only district that's moving in the opposite direction and cutting. We should be strengthening opportunities for bilingual students and not reducing them. You still have an opportunity to change the course.

1:45:50 You still have an opportunity to rebuild trust. I ask you to pause these cuts, release the data used to justify them, and work with the community to preserve a meaningful secondary dual immersion pathway. Because this is a gem. Because once a program like this is dismantled, it is much harder to rebuild than it is to protect. Thank you. Anselmo Villanueva?

1:46:42 Good evening, members of the school board, the superintendent, and other staff from the central office. My name is Dr. Anselmo Villanueva. I come before you as a local educator and a community member with over 50 years in K12 and higher education. I have been involved in bilingual education since my first position as a third grade classroom teacher. One of my first encounters with your district was in the mid-1980s, when I heard that an assistant principal at one of the high schools was denying enrollment to Latino students who could not prove that they were legal residents. I had to remind him of the landmark 1982 decision by the Supreme Court, Plyler versus Doe, which originated from a lawsuit against the Tyler Independent School District in Texas.

1:47:29 The court ruled that states could not deny students a free public education based on their immigration status. I have lived through the eras where students who are Latino are called disadvantaged, minorities, and at-risk. Now fast-forward to tonight. Along with many others in this room, and the many who could not be here in person, we find ourselves fighting the same battle for the students who are being denied their basic education. I thought we had made progress since that assistant principal wanted to deny enrollment to Latino students in the 1980s.

1:48:14 Now it looks like things are going backwards once again. Not only are these students who are being denied their education by your decision, but just as important, their language and their culture. Bilingual education is meant to level the playing field. In this case, to give students the skills and background to eventually compete in the global job market. I will not go into all the benefits of dual immersion, since I assume that the curriculum specialists in your district have provided you with ample background and documentation. Unfortunately, I find myself here before you again, just like in the 1980s, trying to correct a wrong. I implore you to restore the bilingual program in its entirety.

1:49:02 I am confident that you will make the right decision so that you can sleep soundly at night knowing that you did the right thing. Thank you for your time, listening to other speakers, and most of all, for reading the many letters that were submitted to you. Thank you. Thank you. Marcia Koenig? Good evening. I'm the parent of two students in the dual immersion program, MARCIA, at Hamlin in Springfield. I understand that the district is facing difficult budget decisions, but there's a huge difference between reducing staffing and dismantling

1:49:48 a program. Reducing FTE is like pruning branches from a tree. The tree may be smaller, but it remains alive and capable of growth. Eliminating a program cuts into the trunk itself. Once a program's expertise, momentum, and community are lost, rebuilding can take years or may never happen at all, and that's why we're all here tonight. What's being proposed is not pruning, it's dismantling the very structure of the program. The most consistent support this program has had is parent advocacy. Through five superintendents and ever-changing leadership, parents have attended meetings, written emails, organized events, helped shape a master planRecruited families, and we've repeatedly asked the district to invest in a program that it's claimed to be a priority. And here we are, one year before the program is expected to reach 12th grade,

1:50:35 families receive notice of a supposed restructuring and assurances that the district remains committed to dual. We've heard this before. For the last 10 years, our concerns about this program have been met with this same response, that, "This is a priority program for the district," we've been told. And so when these same assurances accompany cuts that weaken the program, we don't believe you. If this decision had been made with true understanding of dual immersion and its value, you would understand that learning Spanish is not the sole purpose of the program. You would know that placing heritage speakers in traditional classes results in skills mismatch and takes away from heritage students the opportunity to be leaders. You would recognize that replacing dual immersion with Spanish

1:51:20 classes, or a cultural elective, or college courses that they can't get to, does not preserve dual immersion. Finally, you would also have remembered that expanding this program was part of the district's response after ODE flagged us for persistently low outcomes among English learners, and then later cited as a contributor to the district's improvement. You see, this program was not an add-on, it was part of the solution. So what a shame that Springfield cannot sustain a single dual immersion program while more than 140 exist across Oregon, with some districts operating several even without additional funding. Also, if there's any high school where a strong dual immersion pathway should exist, it's at Springfield High, which serves the largest

1:52:05 Latino student population in our county. So be honest about being lost here. I hope the board recognizes that this is not a staffing adjustment. It's a decision that fundamentally changes our program. So once you've made this cut, you can't call it a dual immersion program anymore. You can't tote it on your reader boards or elect to include it in your list of equity initiatives. Stop calling it restructuring, and please look for ways to prune the budget that doesn't impact the tree of the dual program. And Herlands?

1:52:54 Not able to- Ryan Herlands? Oh. I thought I saw you earlier. Yeah, it's full. Hi, thanks for having me here tonight. And I don't want to take away from the important conversations that have just been going on, so I'll try to be brief. Okay, so thanks for giving me the opportunity to speak again tonight. My name is Ryan Herlands. I'm a science teacher at Thurston High School and incoming SEA vice president. There are a couple of interrelated issues I'd like to discuss today involving

1:53:40 communication and transparency. I want to start by sharing my appreciation for a couple of things. First, for your attendance at our fantastic high school graduations on Friday. And second, for your thoughtful discussion during May's business meeting about creating a regular speaking slot for SEA at future board meetings. Past district leadership attempted to silo all of us off from each other, and that helped precipitate the challenging situation we find ourselves in. More communication is clearly better, not worse. One member disingenuously questioned why SEA should have a speaking slot instead of just signing up for public comment every month as community members are required to do. I think most reasonable people can see the benefits of reducing the hoops to jump through for better communication.

1:54:26 Staff are not just community members. We are the heartbeat of the district and the ones in the classroom with kids every day. You, the board, cannot do your job effectively if you don't know what's happening in the classroom. This connects with another contentious issue discussed at last month's board meeting, one that begs for staff input. Let's be clear, we teachers want more administrators and board members to visit our schools and our classrooms. In a recent survey put out by SEA, we collected feedback from 126 members from every school in the district, and 97.6% of respondents said they would welcome you into their classroom. 97.6. Some would want advance notice or the ability to choose which lessons for you to see, but 61% said you were welcome anytime.

1:55:16 It was suggested that schools schedule times for visits to show off a particular event or project, which sounds nice, but our interest is not in putting on a performance to flatter a dictator. Instead, we want those responsible for making the big decisions in our district to see what actually happens day in and day out in our classrooms. Both the fun, hands-on project and little Johnny throwing a chair across the room for the third time that week. You can't make decisions unless you're informed. Thank you. Thank you, Ryan. Rhiannon Palacio

1:56:01 Cronin. And I may have butchered that name. Ms. Cronin here? Yeah. Here. Oh, okay. All right. Your Honor, uh- In the co-presentation. Rhiannon. Okay. Thank you. Nancy Bray So, my name is Nancy Bray. I taught in Springfield School District from 1977 to 2009. In 1999, with the changing demographics in

1:56:48 Springfield, the district awarded me a sabbatical to go to the U of O to get the endorsement in English for speakers of other languages, and to write the district English Language Development, or ELD, plan. When I returned from sabbatical, the district asked me to coordinate the ELD program as a teacher on special assignment. I worked with administrators, teachers, staff members, families, and community members, and together we created the program that is still in effect today. As required by state and federal mandates, the program must teach English and ensure equal educational opportunity in the regular classroom. It's the largest ELD program in Lane County, serving

1:57:36 over 600 students. From the very beginning in 2000, we advocated for a Spanish/English dual immersion program. Research shows that this is the most effective way for students to learn to read and write in two languages. For students whose native language is Spanish, that language is their strength, not their weakness. If they learn classroom content in Spanish while they are learning English, they transfer their skills to English more easily. As new ELD and Spanish-speaking students move into the district, the dual immersion program is a lifeline for them to build on the skills they already have as they

1:58:23 transition to English. Students in this program receive the Oregon Seal of Biliteracy on their diplomas when they graduate from high school. In 2014, the district made a commitment to establish a Spanish/English dual immersion program that would add one grade level a year until it became a grade K12 program. We know that it takes more than the elementary years to become bilingual and biliterate. It must be a K12 program to be effective. By eliminating the middle and high school program, the district is breaking the commitment it made to the students,

1:59:08 their families, district staff, and the community. A decision of this magnitude must be transparent and include meaningful engagement with all who are impacted. Since 25% of the students enrolled in Springfield District are Latinx- 10 seconds left ... this is a huge impact. The district needs to honor its commitment, and the program needs to be supported and celebrated, not eliminated. Thank you. Mm-hmm. Renee Ellis?

2:00:11 Good evening, board members and faculty, whatever. Renee Ellis could not be here, but she asked me to read a few statements from her letter, and for the sake of time, I'm going to read certain parts of her letter. I think some of the other speakers have already mentioned some of the benefits of dual language immersion, in this case, the Spanish dual language immersion program. My name is Rosemary Villanueva. I'm a retired teacher and an ELD teacher who taught here in Eugene, and

2:00:57 also in California. As Renee says here, Renee also is a community member from Springfield. She says, "I know you already know these facts, plus many more, and yet this valuable resource is now on the chopping block." And so now what she is asking is, "I want to ask you why you chose this program for termination in spite of all these benefits you've been hearing. Moreover, how can you justify eliminating it at the very point when students in this program, after years of dedication and discipline, are entering the stage in their educational journey where they can begin

2:01:43 to see the benefits of it and truly experience the rewards of their hard work? What a terrible example this sets for students, that years of extra effort and hard work toward the very worthwhile goal can be thrown away so easily. What do you plan to tell these students? How do you explain that the goal they have committed themselves to for years apparently wasn't all that important after all? What an extraordinary and incomprehensible decision by adults who are supposed to model goal-oriented performance in academics.

2:02:30 Pulling the rug out from under these students and their families with apparently scant little notice or opportunity for input makes it even worse."Parents deserve better. Students deserve better. I urge you to reconsider the decision to eliminate the dual language immersion program in Spanish. It is the greatest gift we can give our children to provide the opportunity to become truly proficient in their native languages, or a second language for other students. There are zero downsides to this. No, none. It is good for them, for our communities, for our society, to send

2:03:19 them out into the world multilingual- Thank- ... truly multicultural. Thank you. I urge you to go back to the drawing board and figure out a better option for saving money without the students in this program being victims of this decision. Thank you. Maisie Contreras Martinez. Hi. Good evening. My name is Maisie, and this is my son Yunuen.

2:04:05 He is a Springfield High School student in the dual immersion since kindergarten. I'm a parent, and the reason why I'm here, I have questions. I want to know the main reason why you guys are cutting this program. What is the reason? Why are you guys cutting their wings? Because they worked so hard to be where they at. Some of us parents, including myself, I come from out of district. I decided to put him into this program because you guys promised us that they were going to continue until 12th grade. And what's happening? You guys just cut it off, like nothing, without thinking of their futures.

2:04:51 I don't think that would be fair. I, as a parent, I drove my son multiple times to school, figure out childcare, pickups. When he went into middle school, he took the city bus because he has a dream. And you guys sitting there promising a future for them, you're not accomplishing that by cutting down the program. How is that fair? I wish you guys have a conscience to see that you're cutting not just his future, but other ones. You see around how many people are here to support us?

2:05:38 Because they know that each individual student who is here works so hard, and I don't think it's fair. Really, think about it. I'm pretty sure you guys are all parents, and one time you guys had kids, and you guys want the best for your kids. Imagine if that one of your kids would be that kid who is in the dual program. That's the reason why I'm here fighting for my kid. It's easy for me to go and be like, "Don't worry, my son. I'll take you to a different dual program. We'll figure it out." But no, that's being selfish, because he's not the only one here. Other students are here, other parents are here fighting.

2:06:26 You should really think about it, or how can we help as parents to continue this program? Nobody has come to us and told us, "Hey, this is the main reason." I guess if you guys had transparency to us and let us know, we'll probably figure it out, because we want the best for our kids. I'm pretty sure you guys want the same thing, or do you guys want to be the first district of Oregon to cancel a program like this? Or support it? We all know, yes, we might have issues, but let's find a solution for that issues. I want you guys to go home and think about that. Thank you.

2:07:22 Just to, again, state the purpose of public comment, unfortunately, it's not designed to be a back and forth, even though the board would like to hear more information, but that's what's tonight's for. And again, I thank you from the bottom of my heart for everybody being here, speaking with the passion about the things that you think are important. So I'm sure the board is going to be taking this. We're hearing this, and we'll move forward. But thank you. Do appreciate that. Crystal Sunstrom.

2:08:15 Good evening. My name is Dr. Crystal Sunstrom. I am a soon-to-be former Springfield Public Schools employee. Until last year, I served as the district's elementary dual immersion program coordinator, but that position was eliminated due to budget cuts. I currently teach English language development, or ELD, at Springfield High School, including to our newcomer and recent arriver students. I'm also the proud parent of two Springfield graduates. Tonight I want to speak about equity, and more specifically, access to linguistic inclusionIn 2021, Oregon passed House Bill 2056, known as the Access to Linguistic Inclusion Act. The purpose of this law was clear: to remove structural barriers that multilingual students face and

2:09:01 to recognize that meaningful academic learning can occur in multiple languages. The law specifically acknowledges that multilingual students should have pathways to earn required graduation credits while building on their linguistic strengths, not despite them. In my current position, I work with newcomer students who are learning a new language while simultaneously trying to earn enough credits to graduate high school. Many arrive credit deficient through no fault of their own, due to interrupted formal education or limited access to secondary public schools in their home countries. They are navigating a new school system, a new culture, and a new language all at once. HB 2056 was designed to help reduce those barriers by

2:09:46 allowing districts to offer courses and credit pathways that honor students' home languages and multilingual abilities. Oregon's guidance explicitly states that the law was, again, intended to remove structural barriers to graduation and to expand opportunities for multilingual learners. Our secondary dual immersion program does exactly that. But by eliminating the middle school and high school dual immersion teaching positions and courses, we are not expanding opportunities for multilingual students. We are reducing them. We are removing one of the very pathways that Oregon created to support student success. I also urge the board to look carefully at the enrollment data being cited to justify this decision. As Johannes Tadeo

2:10:33 mentioned, enrollment does not exist in a vacuum. Over the years, decisions were made that limited access to the secondary program for some multilingual students, including newcomers and recent arrivals. When access is restricted, participation inevitably declines. We should be cautious about using enrollment numbers as evidence against a program when those numbers may themselves be the result of policy decisions rather than a lack of student and family interest. Our multilingual students already face enough barriers. The question before us is whether Springfield will continue to remove barriers as Oregon intended or create new ones. I urge you to reconsider the elimination of the secondary dual immersion

2:11:19 program and preserve these important pathways for our students. Thank you. If we can leave this on, please. Sarah Farren? I raced over here from the ELD graduation. Mm-hmm. We had, I think, about 100 students exiting the program. Thank you for being here. Thanks. Okay, I've never done this before.

2:12:07 Well, my name is Sarah Farren. I have been a Springfield resident for 24 years and a teacher in Springfield for 16 years. As Springfield grapples with staffing cuts and a restructuring of our district leadership, I want to highlight a significant segment of our school community, our multilingual students, who will soon be without a leader at the district level. And just to summarize, I'm here speaking about the ELD program, not the dual immersion. The ELD program serves approximately 700 students in K through 12. The instructional needs of multilingual learners are different from those of monolingual students. For newcomers, they're learning to function in a new language at the same time they're being taught academic content in that language.

2:12:54 For long-term English learners, they're struggling to cross the line from social language to the high level of academic English needed to pass the state English proficiency test. Multilingual learners spend the majority of their day with caring and professional general education teachers, but the district has not required or even offered training in sheltered instruction for those teachers in, I think, at least 12 years. I don't remember it at all since I've been hired here. We need training for all teachers across subject areas and grade levels in scientifically proven methods of sheltered instruction. This is essentially how to teach the district-adopted curriculum in a way that supports the bilingual learning of students and consequently helps

2:13:41 all students. We need flexibility in curriculum implementation and assessment. Most curriculum and assessments are normed on monolingual students, and we need time built into our schedule for the general ed teachers to consult and collaborate with language development specialists. The ELD department is accountable to the state for how we serve our multilingual students. And when we leave students in class to receive sheltered instruction but do not provide training or collaboration time for educators, we are failing in our responsibilities. Please take the unique needs of our students into consideration as you plan the future of our program, and choose a leader who will champion multilingual learners and promote equitable and

2:14:28 forward-thinking practices across the district. Thank you. Thank you. Matt Brandt? Is Matt here or out in the foyer? Say his full name. There he is Oh, here he is. Thank you. Yeah, there's no speakers out in the lobby area, so it's hard for people out there to hear. Thank you for being here. Yeah, absolutely. My name is Matt. I'm a regular

2:15:13 reoccurring person lately. I wanted to come in tonight and just share some of the things that I've been working on in the background and reiterate some of the things I've brought up in the past. One of my mentors used to say, "Don't bring me monkeys unless you bring me bananas." And it's a sentiment that I believe strongly in, in my life, and my personal career, and everything else, that if there's a problem, and we want to talk about it, then we should also talk about solutions. And I've always been an advocate of the same mentality I bring up a lot, which is we should focus on how do we afford what we want. And we hear a lot tonight about cuts to vital programs, and obviously, we've been through a lot of meetings where there's many other painful decisions that had to be made.

2:16:00 And of course, decisions are tough, programs get cut. But one of the things that I always continually try to push and focus on is how can we afford what it is that we want? We clearly are hearing that we want to save a lot of these vital services, but we have to come forward with a path, right? We can't ignore the reality of declining enrollment. Declining enrollment means declining revenue, which of course, is what leads us to this decision point. One of the things that I've talked about before, and I've put a lot of research into as well, is a public levy option, and it's something that I believe very strongly in. It is a tool at the disposal of the district. It's one that we don't currently implement. We have a lot of peer districts across the state that have implemented it to much success. I think that in this district, we could absolutely put forward an effort.

2:16:47 I forwarded off some research that I did. I put together a presentation and a request to see if we can add it to a discussion item for next week to charge the budget committee formally to commit to the study. Do the work and see if we can maybe get it secured to the ballot here in November. And the reason I bring that up is because every time we delay on this, and we don't put it to the voters to help support and buoy our budget, it's one more fiscal year that we can't actually spend that money. And it's something that we could absolutely use to really do exactly what we're all talking about, save our programs, bring back some of the things that we know really help this district out. It's something I would like to see more engagement on and see if we can bring something this to the

2:17:33 people. I think the appetite is there. I think the community is deeply hurting from a lot of these decisions. And of course, they are difficult. There's no judgment in terms of why we had to do them. But I think we have an opportunity to control our destiny a bit, and I think a levy buys us up to five years where we can cushion and restore some of these services. We can even build back savings. I put together a website that many people in the community might have already visited in the past. It's springfieldbridgeplan.org. And I've updated it with my findings on the levy, my proposal. I'll put together my presentation on there as well. I think it's something that we could definitely move forward to help really

2:18:18 bring things forward. Anyways, that's my thoughts. Thank you, Mr. Grant. Mercedes Foreman. Anyone in the hallway? Okay. Guadalupe Anguiano. I probably really murdered that. Thank you.

2:19:06 How should I pronounce that? Anguiano. Thank you. Yes. It's okay. Good evening. My name is Guadalupe Anguiano. I'm radio host of La Que Buena 97.7 FM radio station in Eugene. But today I'm here as a concerned parent, a parent of a nine-year-old third-grader at Springfield Dual Immersion program at Guiley Elementary. Like many families, we made long-term educational decisions based on the understanding that this pathway would continue through middle and high school. That's what I thought. And that is why I'm deeply disappointed to learn that the significant changes to the dual immersion program were being considered without communication, transparency, or opportunities for us parents, for families to provide input

2:19:53 before these decisions were made. Families deserve to understand what data and analysis were used to support these decisions. If our neighbor districts, like Eugene 4J, are facing similar financial enrollment challenges while maintaining their K through 12 immersion pathway, why is Springfield choosing a different approach? I don't understand. I'm also concerned about how these changes will affect our students. Our dual immersion is not simply about learning another language. Students have spent years building academic skills, cultural connections, confidence, and a sense of belonging within this program. And disrupting that pathway may impact the students' engagement, limit opportunities to earn the Seal of Biliteracy, and cause

2:20:39 families to seek education options in other districts like Eugene. Our children invested years into this program, and families have planned their futures around the commitment that were made, the promise that were made to us when we enroll our kids in this program. Our youth already has to worry about discrimination, about ICE taking our community members, our family members. Now they have to worry about their education?I respectfully ask this district to pause these changes, publicly share the data used to justify these decisions, and create a process that includes meaningful input from parents, students, and educators before moving forward. Our children's education matter, our teachers matter, and our Springfield

2:21:24 schools matter. And shout out to all the students right now, right here, my respects for being here today and fighting for your education. Keep fighting and don't give up. Board members, please honor the commitment made to these families and keep the dual immersion pathway for current and future students, please. Thank you. Christian Rivas?

2:22:17 Hi there. My name is Christian. I'm a daughter of Salvadoran immigrants, a first-generation student, and next year I graduate with my doctorate in pharmacy. I was born here in Springfield and I've lived here ever since. Today, I'll be talking about the Springfield Dual Immersion program and how important it is to our community. The first thing I wanted to share is that being bilingual has made me a better healthcare professional. When people talk about dual immersion programs, to some folks that can mean simply learning new languages, but for a lot of us it's much, much bigger than that. In healthcare, communication is extremely critical. Being able to speak the patient's languages helps keep them safe and lets them trust our help. For me, speaking Spanish also lets me connect my culture to my profession.

2:23:05 I don't have to leave a part of myself at the door when I go to work. I can use it to help people. I can communicate with families who might otherwise really struggle to navigate the healthcare system, and this is something that I'm really proud of. Today, I think about the students who have already spent so many years in these Springfield programs, students who have been able to learn more about their own cultures at school, students who have been able to learn brand new cultures. These students have put in the work to be bilingual and bicultural all these years, and all of their progress is being ripped away from them. I'm asking this board to please consider that bilingualism helps kids form their futures. These programs are exactly the kinds of opportunities that we should be expanding for our students, not taking away.

2:23:53 I hope you'll consider what is being lost here, this incredibly important means of our community's growth. I hope you can understand what it feels like to us, for our own community of Springfield to be one of the only districts in Oregon to take dual immersion away from the kids. Thank you for your time. Thank you. Heather Dillon? Okay, we'll go ahead and move on, and if she shows up or we missed

2:24:41 her somehow, please let me know. Laura Farrelly? Okay. Hi, my name is Laura Farrelly, and I'm a teacher at Springfield High School. And also just want to add that we have the best students ever. So inspired right now by all the students here speaking.

2:25:27 So I have a few things I'd like to address. First, the concerted attacks by members of the public at the last board meeting towards Jonathan Light were sensationalist and disgusting. I had the honor of teaching in the same building as Jonathan back in the day, and I witnessed firsthand how he went above and beyond for our students and colleagues. If only I had a child or a grandchild in elementary school, I would hope that their classroom teacher would invite Jonathan and other school board members to witness what is actually happening in our schools. Second, what in the world is happening right now? Certain members of district admin still continue to spin false narratives about the catastrophic midyear cuts by blaming

2:26:14 SCA, when it is apparent that there was either, excuse me, bad faith bargaining perpetrated by the district, or someone in power made major mistakes when they hired 42 new educators in August of 2025. Next, the district claims to care about equity. How can they proclaim that and then cut the dual immersion program? It doesn't make sense, and it's not a good look. While they continue to make these terrible cuts, a new member of our district asked for a raise at the last meeting. Are you kidding me? Read the room. We are still grieving the cuts that were made earlier this year. Clearly, these cuts are not unique to our community. It is estimated that at least 1,000 educators are losing their jobs statewide. This doesn't even include our classified

2:27:02 folks.Many of us have been writing emails and attending legislative sessions begging Tina Kotek to call a special session to tap into education reserves, which would help offset the majority of cuts. There has been silence from her end. Please know she could call a special session today, and she refuses. Since letters, phone calls, and individual meetings are not working, we are changing course. I would like to invite all of you to attend two upcoming events. There is an emergency town hall this Wednesday, June 10th at Roosevelt Middle School in Eugene. It runs from 4:30 to 6. This is an opportunity for us all to come together as a community, educators, students, and families from Springfield and Eugene to

2:27:47 try and save our schools. The next event is next Tuesday, June 16th at the Capitol Building in Salem when legislators are in town. Both the education and revenue committees are meeting that morning. Let's come together and demand that they access reserves by asking Kotek to call a special session, and to actually address the root causes of the perpetual underfunding of public education by, I don't know, maybe taxing the ultra-rich and stop giving tax breaks for data centers. Thanks for your time, and hope to see many of you on Wednesday and next week in Salem. Thank you. Thank you.

2:28:36 Nate Sadler? Hello, I am Nathan, and I am currently in a middle school of Springfield School District, but I was in an elementary school in the Springfield School District. I would like to talk about the lack of science that was happening at the elementary school that I was at. Starting off with a guy named Mystery Doug, is a YouTuber that has free science videos. He also has a website where you have to pay so that you can do independent science activities. Instead of using a district-approved program like STYLE in middle school,

2:29:21 the schools went with a YouTuber with no understanding of the curriculum. What I have come to understand with school is it tries to put something in your head through practice and repetition. When we do one lesson a month, we barely practice, and there's no repetition. Also, Mystery Doug's website hasn't had Doug in it since July 1st, 2023, meaning less qualified people than him are taking over. Students are more interactive with videos playing than when a teacher is teaching, but students miss out on further clarification. A perfect example of this is when I was in sixth grade, I was struggling with divisions with decimals. So I asked the teacher, and they showed me how to do it. With videos, you have to hope to understand it the

2:30:06 way that the creator thinks it makes most sense. It also makes it to where the teacher isn't the dominant figure in the classroom, keeping it all in check. They are now the gatekeeper of the pause and unpause button. There are so many jobs that involve science in day-to-day life. When I went into sixth grade, I wanted to go off and be an aerospace engineer, but I had almost no information on even how air affects an object. I was losing hope until I tried out a rocket video game. I was to calculate how much fuel I need to get a 30-ton object into orbit before my classmates even knew that there were three types of rocks. I learned more in two weeks than in my entire elementary school science class. I believe I can do something big, not because of school, but because of YouTube

2:30:52 tutorials and a video game, and I hope that my sister can come home from elementary school and say that she learned that there are three types of rocks. Thank you so much. This concludes who I have on the list to speak, unless somebody showed up who I called the name earlier and they weren't here, but I don't see that. I'd like to, because we've been sitting for a while, call for a five-minute break and give people a chance to stretch, and then we'll continue with our meeting. Thank you so much again for all of the public input. The board really does appreciate

2:31:37 that.Hello?

2:38:54 Okay. We're going to go ahead and reconvene, so you're welcome to stay. Looks like we've stimulated a few conversations, but again, I'll have to excuse the room. Hello?There's your gathering Hello, folks. Don't be shy. Again, thank you for being here, and if you would like to stay, you are certainly welcome. And Amber's out there.

2:39:41 Okay. So we're going to move into action items here in a moment. Oh. First up- First up... Needs to be recorded. First up is, we're going to return then to the action item 4A, the approval of the consent agenda. I would be happy to entertain a motion as amended. I'll move approval of the consent agenda as amended. I'll second. Left. One, two, three, four.

2:40:26 Okay. Oh, Jonathan, can you raise your hand? She's asking for you. Yeah. Yes. So, the motion for approval of the consent agenda is with the following restrictions. So the consent agenda, as amended, will include items number three, the May 26th special meeting minutes. Item number four, the May 27th, 2026 special meeting minutes.

2:41:12 Item number seven, nutrition services dairy, resolution number 2526058. Item number eight, nutrition services bakery, resolution number 2526.059. Item number nine, nutrition services supplies, resolution number 25-26.060. Item number 10, nutrition services produce, resolution number 2526.061. Item number 12, adult meal price increase 2026 to '27, resolution

2:41:59 25-26.063. I move approval of the consent agenda as amended. Okay. We have already a motion for approval. Do I have a second? We have a motion by Director Cole. I think Director DeGraff seconded before. I think. Okay, and a second by Director DeGraff. Any other questions or comments on these particular items? Hearing none, I'll go ahead and call for the vote. All in favor indicate by saying aye. Aye. Is there any against? Hearing none, motion carries five to zero. As far as the other items, we'll just start at the top.

2:42:44 First item pulled was action item 4A, consent agenda under the May 5th special meeting minutes. That's item number one. Director Cole? Yeah. On page two, the top of page two, there's a paragraph that says, "Director DeGraff sent an email informing OGEC that she'd be unable to attend the training." My question is, I guess, why is that in the meeting minutes? I don't think that occurred in the meeting. Are we including emails that pertain to- Mine was printed out ... the meeting? What's that? I had a question printed out and given to her, so maybe that's why. So, yeah, I don't remember that being discussed in the meeting.

2:43:32 I was curious why that was in there. So, point me, Ken, is that under attendance? No. On the top of page two of the- Thank you ... meeting minutes, you go to the top, and the top, the paragraph there says, "Director DeGraff sent an email informing OGEC." You sent it to me. So, I'm just... Mm-hmm. The only thing I'm... I wasn't there, but the only thing I could guess that is, is because it says that she requested guidance on the set of particulars. So I don't know if maybe that's why it was in there. But- If we're going to be including emails that people sent related to- It was an... I had given her

2:44:20 a message, and it was an email asking her. I had emailed, and it was a letter saying, "Can you cover this in your training?" And then you guys asked a bunch of questions, and mine didn't get asked. So, if you don't want it in there, I don't care. And did Ms. Sylvester mention this? I think what you're alluding to or stating actually, Ken, is was it as part of the minutes, which usually would be a statement or something that happens within the context of the meeting? I don't think she stated. She wasn't going to get to my question then. She stated others she wouldn't get to, but no. But is it part of the formal record is the question. Yeah, I don't know. I guess that's my question. I don't remember that coming up during the meeting.

2:45:06 I don't... So if we're sending... I don't know. Yeah, I'm trying to see what's the purpose of the minutes. Are we reflecting what happens in the meeting and trying to accurately, if that- What would you like to see moving forward? I- Do you have a recommendation or suggestion? Well, to me, that shouldn't be in there, otherwise we open up a can of worms of other emails that get sent related to our meetings that should also be included. So the meeting minutes are summarized from the recordings. So that means somewhere in the recordings, it was stated. That was stated, so that's what the minutes are. They're a summary of the recordings.

2:45:52 They're not word for word or so- Okay. So I went back and watched it, and I tried to find that, and I didn't see that being discussed in the review of the meeting. So yeah. I just know that's how the minutes are created, is from a summary of the recordings. But I wasn't at the meeting. Other comments or questions? Yeah. I actually was wanting to... I had that question, too. And also, I want to have time to go through the training as well and watch it.

2:46:38 I also had emailed, the board attorney to review, to confirm everything that is written on here is actually, it tracks correctly with the law. And I've also just to ensure things are just accurate. So, I would like a little bit of time to review it and, maybe at the next board meeting, can we approve it then? My understanding is that we can approve it at a later date. In the meantime, I would suggest board members might want to be thinking about what we would want the minutes to reflect.

2:47:23 Mm-hmm. My understanding is that it is what actually takes place during the meeting time, and so should accurately reflect that. Whether it's a summary or a transcription, the intent is the same, my understanding, in providing minutes. Yeah. Mm-hmm. That would be my understanding as well, so... Yes. The other thing is, unless the board agrees to contact the attorney, getting advice, I don't think we need to be trying to get the attorney to give us individual advice without the board delegating that. Well, that's not germane to the minutes, or is it? Is it in the minutes that- She just said she contacted the district attorney to

2:48:08 get her take on whether or not these meeting minutes- Okay. Well- I get that ... yes, I have to get a board approval on this. I just am not comfortable passing this, approving this until I've had a time to go over it myself, and while I'm checking off the boxes and also with... Do we have the board attorney? Do we have OGEC look at it? I just want to make sure everything is tracking. Yeah. Go ahead, Director Brewer. You look like you were- I mean, to that point, one of the things they talk about in the OGEC thing is that we're

2:48:53 responsible for making sure the minutes are accurate. Yeah. And so, to the extent that we have to question or we have to go back and listen, that's, I guess, that's the expectation of us. Mm-hmm. Well, and I think going through the training actually provides some insights into the state of flux that even the Oregon Government Ethics Commission is in in trying to determine. And I came away, actually, from that meeting thinking perhaps it's up to this board to determine what works for this board. And then perhaps ask for legal opinion as to whether that works, but... Well, actually, OGEC, at the training, they had said, if we

2:49:40 have questions, because we could collaborate together here, write our questions down, send it off, and the committee could review it. And they could send us back a- Formal That is true. There's different levels, and I think Nicole, you've explored that, too. Different levels of- Yes ... of- Formal advice ... formal opinion. Yeah. Yes. And it would be great to collaborate on that and have a conversation around it. So could I suggest for this evening that we not approve this and then do a little bit more research on that, we can bring back at our June 22nd meeting? So what is the research that... Each one of us is doing research or what is the-

2:50:26 Well, Director Langworthy was stating that she wanted to do a little bit more- Verify- ... than what's done. Verify the accuracy. Okay. Well, should I... Here's an idea. I could just send this off to the committee and make sure that this tracks, and then they could- To the committee, you mean the Oregon Government Ethics Commission? Yes. Mm-hmm. Okay. Yeah. Yeah. You see it sent out? Yeah. Sorry. Sorry about that. Yeah. No, I'm... Yeah. In my head. Okay. No, I think that would be the way to do it, because I did call the executive director at OGEC this morning, and she said to contact the attorney and so it just kind of has us going back between mom and dad here.

2:51:12 So I just want to get the answers to this, and I think that would be the way to do it, possibly. I think it would be reasonable to send this training summary back to the trainer and say, "Is this an accurate representation of the training?" They won't do that because it's an interpretation on our end. So if we approve- Oh ... it, we're approving our interpretation. So I'll go first to Ken. Suggestions or direction? So I guess my suggestion is to delete the one paragraph about Director DeGraff's email, because I don't think that happened in the meeting. And I think the rest of it is a reflection of

2:51:57 what happened in the meeting. So I would be okay with approving that, that the meeting minutes are what transpired during the meeting. That would be my recommendation. Okay, and Amber, you had questions on this too. What would help us move forward there? Is that sufficient, or would you like to add to that? No, like I said, I would like to send this off. I think that would be a good direction to go with this, just to- Send it off to who? I'm sorry, to the OGEIC committee, because if we can send this off to the OGEIC committee or... But I thought you said they wouldn't respond to this because this is our interpretation of the- Well, Ruth, the trainer, I don't think would be able to respond to this,

2:52:45 because I think that's what was mentioned, the trainer. Okay. If we send this off to the trainer. Yeah. But if we send this off to the actual committee themselves, they can review it and confirm what we're seeing here is correct. I'm fine if that's what you would like to do, that's- Can we do both? Can we approve tonight with the amendment, and also send it to the Government Ethics Committee? Does it matter, in other words, whether we send it to OGEIC approved or not approved? No, I guess not, because their attitude is they got handed public meeting laws in, I think, 2023,

2:53:30 and they're still figuring it out. So the situation could still be- Yeah ... up for opinion? Yeah. So I don't think we would be at fault here if anything's off. So I'm good with that compromise. Okay. Yeah. As long as the top paragraph is removed. So yeah, I think the citation about Director DeGraff's email, since she wasn't there, and I think it should be a summary of what was spoken- Mm-hmm ... said. And then, in terms of the other, I think we can approve it otherwise, and then if

2:54:18 Director Langworthy finds that something was... We can always revisit. Right. Mm-hmm. So would someone like to make a motion to that effect? I would move that we approve the May 5th, 2026 special meeting minutes as long as we strike the paragraph at the top of page two. I'll go ahead and second. So we have a motion by Director Cole, a second by Director Light. Any further comments or discussion? Hearing none, call for the vote. All in favor indicate by saying aye. Aye. Are there any against? So consent agenda item A1 is

2:55:05 approved five to nothing. Moving on then to 4A2, the May 11th, 2026 board meeting minutes. Also Director Cole? Yeah. Again, at the top of page two, the third paragraph down says, "Director Cole requested to pull consent agenda item 5A," it should be 5A1. And then on the top of page five where it says, "Director Cole requested consent agenda item 4A2 special meeting minutes be held for discussion," I believe that happened early on in the meeting and not

2:55:51 at the point of when we actually did the approval of the items. So that was at the beginning when we approved the agenda. Also, we have consent agenda item there in the middle, 4A2. That should actually be 4A1, which is the April 13th, 2026 meeting minutes. And I guess when we table it, this was a question on formatting, we don't put down the votes and who did the motion when we table that?

2:56:38 Because we had a motion by Director Bru and a second by Director Light to discuss it, and then Director Bru made a motion to table it, and Director Light seconded it, and we voted five-oh to do that. So does that not get reflected in the minutes? Well, again, coming back to my previous statement, I think that the minutes should accurately reflect. So any of these corrections- Okay ... because it isn't whether we remember necessarily now, but if someone were to review them, and a number of years had passed, would it be accurate? And that's sort of what I think we should be shooting for. And I have one other thing. The next motion down says, "Director Bru moved, Director Graf seconded motion to approve the resolution for

2:57:26 structural engineering services from..." And actually, it was the resolution for a summit security system. We were not dealing with the engineering contract at that time.So that, yeah, it didn't appear to be a transcription from the meeting, but- Oh, I'm lost. So security system- In the middle of page five- Okay. Yeah ... where it says, "Motion Director Brew moved, Director DeGraff seconded the motion to approve the resolution for structural engineering services to

2:58:13 Miller Consulting Engineers." We were not discussing the- That's, yeah ... structural engineering services. We were discussing the Summit security system. That's true, right, Brad? Aren't the cost figures that are there is related to... Yes. Yep. Okay. I think just changing that title would suffice, correct? Getting- Yeah, it should say, "Approve the resolution for Summit Security Systems," and not the- Yeah ... engineering services.

2:59:05 And was there anything else? I think there's just one more on the middle of page seven. Right after where it says, "Yancey clarified the board's action authorizes the purchase, not the contract negotiation," Director Brew had talked about getting a report back on the cost and conferring with the superintendent on a policy definition, and I think the minutes should reflect that there was additional information requested by the board. Requested by the board for? It was...

2:59:51 I had a note here. I have to go back. "Clarified the board's action authorizes..." So what was this? Oh, I think it was about on the final cost of the curriculum. This was around the purchase of the curriculum. I think we got an email back on that. Did we get an email on the final- I think ... costs of the curriculum? I don't recall- Yeah ... that. Okay, I'll check on that. Thank you. Yeah, I'd just like the minutes to reflect that. Was there anything else? Not in those minutes, nope. Ken, in that, let's see, the motion to... I think we were doing the RIF. It's on page...

3:00:36 It's the May 11th, page six, where you declared a conflict of interest as a spouse of an employee subject to the reductions. Does your vote get counted for? Yes, I believe it still does. Yeah. It does? Okay. Yeah. I was just wondering. Okay. And then did you have anything else or- No, I didn't have anything else on those- Okay ... meeting minutes. And then for me, under superintendent communication, in here it says- What page are you on? I'm sorry, I'm on page 10 for May 11th. Under 7B?

3:01:21 Under, yeah- Okay ... 7B. So Amara addressed the concern raised by board members about not being provided the opportunity to visit schools, explaining the priority given to schooling schedules and emphasized the need for board members to be visible in schools and community to build trust and put students first. I also want it to be... I looked up the transcript and also what was said in that communication is, "I did some research and found that board member school visits were postponed beginning in November due to the status of certified bargaining at the time. Following the conclusion of bargaining and ensuring midyear layoffs, it was felt that schools needed time to

3:02:07 adjust to the changes before resuming board member school visits." I just- And that was taken from the video? The transcript from the video, yeah. Yeah. I can- Okay ... I just want that- Well, unless there's- ... summary to be in there ... some more, I would prefer for myself to not approve tonight. Yeah, and there is no- Make changes, bring them back to the board. Okay. Is there some more? Yeah. And, oh, I'm sorry. For this one, and said, "There is no intentional preferential treatment of board members happening in relation to scheduling board member school visits." Okay. But that was it. Yes. No more- But that was under the superintendent communication also.

3:02:53 Yes. So we want to make sure, again, that the minutes accurately reflect, so. And we can do a summary, and I can leave it with... So can we go ahead and put it on the agenda for 6/22 with the corrections? And then if we can read through those to make sure they, again, accurately reflect what happened in the meeting, that would be great. Anything else on consent agenda item 4A2? Okay. Moving then on to consent agenda item 4A5, financial statement, resolution 25-26.056.

3:03:39 Director Cole? Yeah. Under revenues, the second bullet, the end of that second bullet talks about including prior reconciliations assumption for high cost of-Disability for current year, and accounting for bus depreciation, $560,000. And that's new, and I guess I was just hoping to get an explanation on what that is and- Yeah. So, Oregon Department of Education, through the transportation grant, reduces the revenue for bus depreciation. You have buses that get depreciated over a 10-year period of time. We have a number of buses that are in that 10-year period, and that's the amount that they have reduced due to that depreciation. So we get less money for the buses because they're older. Correct. Right. Yeah. We get... Yeah. Okay. That's correct.

3:04:24 And that just showed up? Is that the reason it- Yes. Yeah. Oh, wow. Okay. The other question I had was maybe on the table in the expenditure forecast, under expenditures, purchase services, the projected year-end to date was down 540,000- Mm-hmm ... compared to last month. Yeah. And I was wondering, where were those reductions? Yeah. So, obviously every month it goes along, these numbers on this financial report change, and it's based on activity that has happened and what we anticipate to happen through the remainder of the year. So, as we reanalyze it and looked at it, we're

3:05:10 making reasonable assumptions with our numbers, and based on the contracts that we've paid, the purchase services that we've paid, what we still have outstanding, that's why that adjustment- Okay ... was made. So there wasn't something specific we did to try to- No, we're continuing just to refine- Okay ... these numbers as best we can. Okay. Thank you. That was all I had for that. Any other comments or questions from the board on this specific item? Hearing none, I'm going to go ahead and call for the vote on this. So all in favor indicate by saying aye. Aye. Aye. Are there any opposed? Do we need a motion, Jonathan? We need a motion. We do. Oh, that's true. I move we approve- Can you trigger the motion ... the financial statement, Resolution 2526056.

3:05:58 Second. And DeGraff second. Thank you. So motion by Director Cole, seconded by Director DeGraff. Call for the vote. All in favor indicate by saying aye. Aye. Are there any opposed? Hearing none, motion carries five to nothing. Moving then onto the consent agenda item 4A11, structural repairs, resolution- Jonathan, I think the personnel report got pulled. Oh, oh yeah. You pulled the personnel report. Sorry. Bumped that. Yeah. So, the personnel report, I just had some questions. So, the names of people who have

3:06:43 resigned or retired are not there. And- So we don't ever put names on the personnel report. But then if you look under the new hire- Except for new hires. Other than that, all the other names are- And why would that be? Well, my guess would be confidentiality, and I can ask Dustin for clarification on that, but typically they've never been put in there, other than new hires. Jodi, that's not true. If you go back and look at previous reports, they did put those names in. I think when- I don't know. The least is on our website in terms of meeting minutes, so that goes back- Mm-hmm ... 10 years or so. But I don't know how far back I know that if you go back that- Yeah

3:07:28 ... it was included in there. And there are certain districts that still do that. The reason I ask the question, and I've asked this before, is that, again, there's no years of experience either, and I would like to reach out sometimes as a board member and thank them for their service. And if we're going to publish them for new hires, again, unless there's some disclaimer that they've signed saying, "Please don't put my name in," or, "Please do put my name in," I think that we should include them, unless there's specific laws pertaining to that. I can find out why names are not included, whether or not there's... I'm going to assume that there's a reason, but I will ask-

3:08:13 Okay ... and find out about names being put on the personnel report. Okay. And if it gets cited for confidentiality, can you follow up further, and is that state statute we're paying attention to, or is it just our practice? Any comments or questions on that item? So I will move to approve consent agenda item 4A6, personnel report resolution 2526.057. Second. Moved by Director Light, seconded by Director Brew. Any other comments or questions? Hearing none, call for the vote. All in favor indicate by saying aye.

3:09:00 Aye. Are there any opposed? Hearing none, motion carries 5 to 0. Now moving on to... I think this takes us to consent agenda item 4A11, structural repairs, resolution 2526.062. Yeah, I got a few questions. One is, what is the schedule for the work? The schedule is still being determined. Obviously, there is enough work that we're not going to be able to complete it in one year, and so this is probably going to stretch over two years. Obviously, a lot of this work is very intrusive into the building, and we can't conduct the work when students are in the building, or

3:09:47 we have to relocate students, depending on which classrooms we may be working on. Yeah. And so until we have a contractor on board, we will be working with them to determine the timeline, the project calendar- Okay ... the project approach, all of those things. Okay But obviously, Ken, or Director Cole, we feel urgency around getting this work done. Yep. I can imagine. So, can you elaborate on the, I guess the...

3:10:33 So the work that is being done in over half of the spaces are behind walls. We don't know what's behind those walls. We didn't uncover every truss, meaning we didn't take off all the sheetrock, expose everything. That would've been super disruptive to our entire facility. We also don't know what abatement lies behind those walls that haven't been uncovered, and that is why I'm requesting to carry a 30% contingency. That is following the recommendation of the structural engineering firm that conducted the research on this. So there's a lot of things that we don't know yet until we get into the walls.

3:11:18 Okay. Because I thought I read there was the abatement that we did lead and asbestos surveys. Correct. That we don't think there's any asbestos- Correct ... that they're going to encounter. If there's pipes in those walls, in 1950s buildings, they're going to be wrapped in asbestos. We can't abate those because they're behind walls. Until you get into the wall, then you uncover the potentially asbestos-wrapped pipes, we have to stop and abate before the contractors will continue on with their work. Oh, I thought it said there are no known areas of removal that contain asbestos- Correct ... is what we told the contractor. So- No known areas. Okay. We don't know what's behind the walls. Okay.

3:12:08 So one other question is, how are we funding this? Because before you talked about that we didn't have this amount of money- Correct ... and that we're going to come to the board, and I don't know if we were going to do something similar to what was done with the turf fields, or how are we paying for this? So, did not want to presume or assume anything for the board. So I have made initial contacts with multiple people on financing this, and the proposal is to bring back, at the 22nd, options for the board to consider. That would include further reductions in our budget to fund this or looking at full faith and credit notes, some kind of private financing. So I will be bringing back options

3:12:54 to finance this. In the interim, to begin the work, you'll notice or you probably noticed on the financial statement, I have assumed $1.3 million worth of capital outlay in the remaining budget. We're going to go ahead and move forward beginning the projects, knowing that we have budget in our general fund set aside for some of this work. Not all the work, but enough to get us through the month of June. That 1.3 also includes the 482,000 worth of security system upgrades that we're doing. That's why that number's so big. So we'll begin the work, we have general fund resources to do some of it, and then I'll be bringing back options for the board to consider for financing the rest. Good. As a former finance guy, I'm really uncomfortable with

3:13:39 approving a contract when we don't have resources on board to fund the full contract. Okay. I understand that. I guess I would also- It's 10 schools, so I know we don't have an ideal, totally accurate timeframe, but over what period of time do you anticipate we could fix all 10 schools? Over two summers. Mm-hmm. Yeah. The issue, Director Brew, is that I didn't have an approved contract to take out to financing because the financing options that we have are asking me, "Who's doing the work? What are they doing? Has it been approved by the board?" No, none of that has happened. So if you'd like to wait until we have financing options, we don't

3:14:25 have a contract in place. So it's kind of the cart and the horse. But, obviously you have experience in this as well. My recommendation is to approve this contract and bring back financing options to the board at a later date, but that's my recommendation, and the board is... Obviously you're going to make the decision you're going to make. So my recollection is when we approved the turf fields, the contract, the funding was part of that at the same time. Correct. How is this different? Didn't know the amount. We had the amount in the turf fields because it was all off state contracts. This was intent to bid, and we had competitive bids, so we did not know the amount of the contract until last week when we opened the bids. We had an estimate from our engineer of 5.8 million.

3:15:11 This obviously came in much lower. I didn't want to go out with a $5.8 million financing when I knew there was a chance that this could be much lower. Mark? I guess the other thing, I'm just concerned, I think as we've gone through some painful spending cuts, I think it's important that we be as diligent as we can about the spending, and I'm uncomfortable with a 30% contingency. I would prefer that we limit it and that with the two-year construction, it seems to me there would be adequate time to, as stuff, as we run into things, that we could come back and get reports to the board and

3:15:57 authorize additional funding at that time. It just seems to me that I would like to have more... We have a pretty detailed scope of work for the estimate for the actual constructionThe bid, and this is just kind of another open-ended, fairly large number that I'd like to see that we be diligent about managing. Do our schools stay, sorry, uninsured for two years? Are you doing it one school at a time or- They will remain uninsured if an event happens and we don't have a certified stamp document saying that they've been repaired. Let me... Can I follow on that? Sure. I wanted to clarify with Director Cole on the contingency amount.

3:16:44 So, if we don't have contingency and this exceeds the contract, the contractors will stop work. We won't have the budget to move forward if we have to come back to the board at the next regularly scheduled business meeting, which could be a month away. So I would just caution the board and make sure that you're aware of that. And once contractors leave, as you probably have experienced- To get onto another board ... it's very difficult to get them back. Yeah. But if you're doing work over two years, right? So if you experience the first site, you find something, you have money in the contract to pay them to deal with that, right, in the meantime? And then can come back to the board and say, "We're going to need additional, we've discovered these things." Yeah, we'll have a budget for every building. My point is that if we are at the budget, I can't

3:17:32 exceed what the board has approved, so we have to make assumptions for every building moving forward under the contract. If they open a wall and they see something that needs to be fixed immediately, and I don't have any contingency or limited contingency, that work has to stop, because I don't want to be in a situation where I am going against what the board has approved. Are you saying suggest taking money from another project and moving it over for that one and so if it's $100,000 and $300,000 at one school, I just say, "Okay, I'm going to take $200,000 for now from this school and move it over here," but that leaves the one school very inadequate for the resources we have. And obviously we don't know the work plan and the timeline yet for the schools. From my perspective, what I would

3:18:19 suggest is a contingency of $250,000. You come up with something, you fix it, and while they're fixing that, you come back to us and saying, "Looks like we're going to go through that first 250. Can we get another 250?" Or something like that. Just because, well, contracts seem to spend every dollar- And that's my concern. I don't see any constraints to be efficient. 7% contingency, that is well below what any- That is first payment. That's a down payment. That buys you a month to get back to us and ask for another 250. Oh, okay. Yeah. It's not, yeah. I mean, I'll do whatever the board wants. I want to caution you that this could significantly delay progress on some of

3:19:06 these projects. Because we could hold a meeting. We could set up a meeting, if you're wanting to come to the board, we got 24 hours and we- So, if there was a $250,000 contingency, that's about average for the sites, right? Did you- No. No, Walterville is well over a million. Trying to remember the... And, uh, Director- The statement was made about insurance, and my understanding is we do indeed have insurance on these buildings with the exclusion of anything related to the structural beam. Is that correct?

3:19:53 If there's a structural failure and we haven't addressed it, then we don't have coverage. There's more to that- But if we had a flood, let's say, we had a burst in the plumbing and we had significant damage. Yeah. Okay. I just want to- If trusses weren't damaged due to a named barrel- Mm-hmm ... then we would have coverage. But come winter, if we have snow, and we've specifically asked the question, if we have any trace of snow on these roofs, we cannot hold school in those buildings because they are uncovered. That's what I was going to ask, if you would explain that to Director Bru. That already happened this year. Yes. But that's regardless, right? That's- Unless the roof caves in. Right. I mean, the work has to be done. So it's- Yeah. I mean, obviously, we're going to look at the list and work with the contractor to address the most critical this summer.

3:20:38 Right. Walterville is one of the most critical. Okay. And that is the most expensive. Yeah. Having done similar work for a lot of years, we had 3.5% standard contingency for a lot of projects, and you had to manage it and know if things were coming up and deal with it and get approval if it needed to go over that. Yeah. And so it should be something. I don't know why that it would be- Well, don't we have a separate contingency fund already? In the district? Mm-hmm. We have it in the general fund. In the general fund, and that is how much? And wouldn't that cover- It's a million dollars. A million dollars, so in an emergency before we could get board approval. I mean, I'm just looking for action from the board.

3:21:23 I don't want to argue with you. You set the contingency. If you want to approve the contract, approve the contract. I'm fine with whatever you want to do. You guys obviously have a lot of experience, and I would lean on that as well. Just I think the board has a lot of questions. We've been presented with an option and I'm looking at the timeframe going, well, does it make more sense to do them individually? Does it make more sense to maybe package them around timeframe? I don't know. I don't have any experience in this, but I am asking board members if they have experience, and you obviously have an experience. I have a great deal of experience. So, and that's- Helped build a middle school. I don't want to delay it, but also finances are really, really important-

3:22:10 Mm-hmm ... and they're impacting our kids, so I want to make sure that we give enough guidance that we do it responsibly. Yeah. I think that to determineThe projects and how you'd package them together, that's a critical conversation with the contractor. Mm-hmm. And how they deploy their resources. And in many projects, we don't get to direct that once we hire the contract, they get to direct that a little bit more because that's their business. Well, and that's why I'm asking the question now. Yeah. Have we had those conversations with Essex? We have not hired Essex, so- Have we had that conversation framing- No, we have not. We have to make sure that the contract gets approved before we have any conversations with contractors. Okay. Thank you. Because in that case, we had three competing contractors. If I'm having conversations with a contractor before the bid, that

3:22:57 would open it up for a protest. Okay. I just want to make sure that, although we don't know how much the engineering costs, we didn't get any reports back on that. You told me we were going to get them. We haven't seen any of those. I want to make sure that we've done detailed plans, and so we have a bid on the actual construction, but it's just another million dollars of just- Yeah ... without being able to account for it to, here we are, we've cut teachers, talking about programs, impact to other

3:23:42 programs. I want to make sure that we're being as diligent as we can with spending our money and- Yeah ... and transparent as we can. And so I would advocate for a lower contingency with the idea that, as you use it, you inform the board and say, "We may need some more," and come to the board. Yeah. And so we have a record of how we're spending that money. I would like to clarify a statement you made. I believe I updated the board on Friday updates with how much we are spending each month on structural engineering costs. Yeah. So you made a statement that you haven't ever received any information on that, and I believe that I have provided that in Friday updates on a regular basis that this month it... Huh? It came out of one of my- Yeah. And I did that monthly.

3:24:28 Well, I don't remember seeing the engineering costs in there. I remember- Yeah ... seeing the estimates changing, so I apologize. I'll go back and double-check that, because I- I gave you monthly invoice amounts because we were paying them every month. So I would like the record to reflect accurately. Sure. It should be in the minutes. Meanwhile, in our next Friday update, could you give us a total cost of- Sure ... of all that? That'd be great for those of us math challenged. So board members, do you have enough information to go forward? What we're voting on tonight is this actual proposal, the actual resolution. Yep. So from my perspective,

3:25:16 without a financing source nailed down, we're effectively saying, "Gosh, if we need to take another $4 million in cuts to pay for this out of schools, that's okay." I would rather know where that money's coming from, because I don't want to write that blank check against our students. So you're looking for more specificity around the funding source? Around how it's going to be paid for. Okay. Director Cole? I certainly agree with that. I guess I'm wondering, would two weeks of delay in executing the contract or approving the contract affect the two-year schedule? Potentially, and it could potentially impact the contractor as well,

3:26:04 because for every two weeks, a month that goes by, they'll pick up other jobs. Yeah. So that's just a caution. Obviously, this is the board's decision. Okay. Director DeGraff? We have a motion, right? I'm fine. I've got everything I need. And Director Langworthy? Yeah, I got everything I need. Okay. It's been a while. Who made the motion, and who did the second? Motion by Director Cole, seconded by director- I don't think we had a motion for this yet. Did we not declare a motion? Oh, I guess we didn't. No, we didn't. Okay. I move to approve the resolution to

3:26:52 get a contract with Essex General Construction for the structural repairs. Do I have a second? I would clarify that Director Langworthy reviewed the procurement file in detail. Okay. And had an opportunity to ask questions. Okay, so we have a motion on the floor by Director DeGraff. Do we have a second? Hearing none, motion fails for lack of a second. I would request that the district would bring this back for the meeting on the 22nd, addressing some of the issues that were raised here tonight. So moving then to consent-

3:27:37 Director? Yes? I'm not sure how to say this, but speaking for myself personally, if we have answers earlier, I'm not against doing a special meeting- Okay ... to deal with this issue. I'm trying to be a team player here, so if we need to meet again before the next meeting, I'm certainly available to do that. Well, and I appreciate that. So thanks for speaking up on that. Moving to consent agenda item 4A-13 budget appropriation transfer, resolution number 2526063Just

3:28:24 a couple things. One is the first, the resolution at the top says 24-25 O64 and dated June 9th, 2025. So those need to be corrected because this is actually for the current one. And let's see what's here. I was trying to understand if the subscription-based information technology, if the information there, the requirements in Gatsby were implemented in 2023, I guess why wasn't that included in the budget to begin with? So you'll see that it was included in the budget.

3:29:11 That's what this resolution is. The money is currently sitting in the budget. We're asking you to move it from function 4,000 to functions 5,100 and 2,000. And in special revenue, we're asking you to move it from function 3,000 and 4,000 to functions 1,000, 2,000, and 5,100. And the reason is that we sought and received additional clarifications from the district's municipal auditor. Oh. And that's why we changed it in the functions. We needed to reflect it differently than what we had budgeted. So it was budgeted. Okay. I remember that discussion during the audit. Thank you. Okay. So yeah, just correcting the dates for the resolution and the date,

3:29:56 I think needs to happen. Okay. Do you want to go ahead and make... Or are there other questions on this particular resolution? I don't have any other questions. I was going to move approval as amended. Okay. I will second. I'll second. Oh, okay. So, the motion by Director Brew, seconded by Director Cole. Go ahead and call for the vote. All in favor indicate by saying aye. Aye. Are there any opposed? Motion carries five to zero, which pulls us through the consent agenda, moves us on then to action item 4B, the approval of designation of district officers,

3:30:42 resolution 25-26.065. Mr. Yancey. It's recommended that the board of directors approve a resolution designating district officers, clerks, and agents, including the depositories for district funds, as listed on the attached document for the 2026-27 fiscal year. So moved. Thanks. Second. Moved by Director Light, excuse me, seconded by Director Brew. Comments or questions?

3:31:28 I guess I'd just like the board to consider whether or not to delegate the Public Contract Review Board responsibilities. There's just been some contracting that's done there that hasn't always been clear, and I would like to think it might be good for the board to see those things come through as that gets applied just for learning and for transparency purposes. So clarification, what this is allowing our staff to do is to actually conduct all these procurement processes. So are you saying the board wants to conduct those procurement processes? Only the part where...

3:32:14 Is this the part where... I'm sorry. Is this the right one where it's the Local Contract Review Board? Yeah. This states that you are acting as your own contract review board. Right. So only those things that require the Local Contract Review Board approval. That's not all purchases, right? There's lots of purchasing that happens- No, that's all purchases because you're your own contract review, and we are operating under the Oregon Attorney General's public contract model rules, which include all purchasing ORSs and OARs. So what you're asking, Ken, is so the board wants to conduct all those processes?

3:32:59 It was my recollection that those applied when we were doing special procurements. No. So- These ORSs and OARs talk not only about special procurements- Okay ... it talks about state contracts, it talks about the bidding requirements, it talks about the thresholds on which we have to be bidding, and when we're allowed just to move forward. So this is the Oregon Attorney General's Model Public Contracts Manual stipulates all purchasing and procurement laws for public agencies. And what this resolution is asking is that the board is delegating the superintendent and the chief operations officer to carry out that full authority for this next year.

3:33:45 Without this authority, the district will not be purchasing until the board conducts those processes. Is that what you're desiring? No, that was not my desire. My desire was where we were doing the special procurements related to the construction, and I can't remember what the issues, the particular ones we've done where... What was the... I can't remember which one it was now. Or maybe it was the security systems. That that-That we didn't go through the normal bidding process. Correct. Right. You had to do a special procurement for-

3:34:31 No, not a special procurement. We operate under ORS 279A, which allows us to purchase off of state contracts, which have already been competitively bid by another agency. There's cooperative language, and that allows us to buy off of that with guaranteed state pricing. But that was used when there was an expenditure that was in excess of what the board had authorized for expenditures of 150,000, right? So even though it was over the 150,000, it didn't need to go back to the board for approval. That was my recollection. Because- It's not the security systems. Okay. So I would need to be reminded. So we already are bringing back any contract by state law that

3:35:17 requires the board to approve. It was the social studies curriculum, I believe. Correct, and you approved the purchase of the social studies curriculum, which is required by state law. So I guess I'm confused as to what the board is looking for. And this is standard. I mean, this- Yeah ... the same resolution's been presented to this board until this ORS was in existence, and it's never been an issue. So I guess I'm wondering what problem we're trying to address. I think it's not really trying to address a problem as much as just getting information so that he has a clear understanding. Yeah. My understanding is we've done this- Every year ... even before my time. It's been since probably this Oregon Attorney General office over saw

3:36:03 procurement. Right. Yeah. And I understand there's a long history of doing the curriculum adoption, and it was implied that that was the approval of the contract for the actual purchase of the curriculum. And I guess I'm asking that we see that information. Rather than just approving the curriculum, we should have two actions, one approving the curriculum and one approving the contract for that. And I think that was actually, in talking with legal counsel, that was their recommendation. So that's different than what this is, though. Yes. So how does that relate to this resolution? Then I'm bringing up the wrong spot. Okay. And I apologize. So I thought that was-

3:36:50 But we should and could perhaps seek further information just for clarification purposes. Microphone, Johnson. Oh. So it might be something we want to pursue at a later date. For purposes of this resolution, though, do board members have enough information? Yes. Yeah. So my confusion, Mr. Yancey, is in our operating agreement where it says all contracts of the district must be approved by the board unless otherwise delegated by their import- Right ... by the superintendent or designee. Yep. Are we effectively, by doing this, delegating everything to the superintendent and designee? Or- No. This is only Oregon State procurement law. Employment contracts are different than Oregon State procurement law.

3:37:35 They're employment contracts and under employment law. Okay. So that's a different contract. Okay. And we don't have the authority, or I don't have the authority to approve employment contracts for individual employees. There's a collective bargaining process, which is outlined in the collective bargaining acts, PECBA, and the collective bargaining laws, and the board is required to approve those. So this is not employment contracts. This is procurement law and procurement contracts. Okay. We might want to look at rewriting this because it says all contracts, and if there's limitations on what all contracts are, then maybe we want to say that. Anyway, okay. Thank you. Yeah. So this specifically talks about public contract review under these

3:38:21 specific ORSs. These ORSs are not employment contract law. Okay. This is in the Oregon Attorney General's Model Public Contracts Manual, which is not employment law. This is procurement law. The labor laws don't fall under the Oregon Attorney General's office. So we need more clarity- Yeah ... at some point. And pertaining to our operating agreements, I think there's multiple places that the languages don't agree with themselves or with our policy, and those need to be cleaned up. But for purposes of this resolution, shall we move forward?

3:39:06 Yeah. Okay. I'll go ahead, and we have a motion on the floor and a second, so I'll go ahead and call for the vote. All in favor, indicate by saying aye. Aye. Are there any opposed? Motion carries five to nothing. Moving on to property liability insurance. Thank you. It's recommended that the school district board of directors renew property casualty and liability insurance coverage, including earthquake and flood coverage under Special Districts Association of Oregon for the period of July 1, 2026 to June 30, 2027. It's also recommended that the board of directors renew workers' comp insurance coverage under Safe Corporation for that same period of time, 7/1/26 to 6/30/27.

3:39:55 I would move for approval. I'll second. Comments or questions? Just a quick comment. It looks like we're actually saving money. We are on workers' comp. And I think that's a celebration no matter what the amount. Yeah. So in the amount of 35,967. Yeah. Is that based on experience? Yes, it's based on experience and the negotiations that we do with the Safe... We use our insurance agent of record to negotiate with Safe. Okay. Yeah. Thank youAny other comments or questions? I'll go ahead and call for the vote. All in favor, indicate by saying aye. Aye. Are there any opposed? Hearing none, motion carries five to zero.

3:40:41 Action item 4D, approve designation of counsel and auditor, Resolution 25-26.067. Yeah. Again, Mr. Yancey. It's recommended that the board approve the resolution designating district agents as listed on the attached document. You'll see that we are staying with the same auditing firm. We are staying with the same attorney firms and legal counsel. However, we are making a slight change to general counsel and specialized services for the Hungerford Law Firm. We're still keeping Garrett Hemann. They do a lot of work with PACE, but we're shifting a little bit more of the general counsel and daily work to the Hungerford Law Firm, which is a firm that

3:41:26 we've worked with for a number of years. But what this does is it authorizes to work with any of the firms that we've listed here. So- Are any of these local? Thorpe, Purdy and Jewett is local. That's what I thought. Mm-hmm. So I would entertain a motion. I'll move approval. Moved by Director Cole. Second. Seconded by Director DeGraff. So I have two questions. One, this is one of the few resolutions says the ORS requires, but it doesn't specify which ORS. Do you know which ORS requires that we designate the

3:42:11 law firms and- Hmm. I don't have that on here. I apologize. I looked high and low, and I couldn't find anything that... You have any idea how I'd go about finding that? I can try to look. OSBA might know the RS, but we'll- Yeah ... try to find it and report back on that. Okay. And last thing, under the Garrett Hemann, it just says in specialized service as designated by PACE. Mm-hmm. And I guess that was new language we haven't- Yeah ... and I was curious why that was in there. So when we have an issue that goes to PACE, which is our insurance provider, and say we get a tort claim, we'll give that to PACE Claims, and they will assign a attorney

3:42:57 firm. They're paying the bill of that attorney firm, but we have to authorize that we're actually able to use that attorney firm for our district. So that's why I put in there special services designated by PACE. We don't anticipate using Garrett Hemann as much as we have in the past, but I did want to designate and remind the board that PACE is going to use them as much as they need to. Okay. Thank you. That tends to be their go-to. Okay. Thank you. Has been my experience. Yeah. Other comments or questions? I was just curious because you mentioned all five of the list are designated as general counsel.

3:43:42 Yeah. But we have a preferred general counsel amongst those? Is there a separate designation moving to Hungerford? No. They're equally as would be considered experts in school law. So general counsel for staff, superintendent would be for anything that we need to review personnel. They're very highly skilled in special education law. Okay. General counsel is just to have that day-to-day business that we would need if we want to run a wording by it or an interpretation or anything like that. Okay. Yeah. Obviously, with some of these, you'll see that we get into a little bit more specificity, like Foster Garvey, we've only identified as

3:44:29 litigation and bond counsel, because that's their specialty is bond counsel. We wouldn't look at them for general counsel services. And the same with Miller Nash Graham, right? Is they have certain expertise- Yes ... that we go to them for certain questions. Okay. Yeah. They really are strong in contract administration and construction law. Okay. We actually used them more than any other when we were doing the construction of Pamlin, because we were obviously negotiating big construction contracts. Okay. All right. Thank you for that clarification. Yeah. Is it Hungerford a law firm that specializes in education? Is that- They do. It's one of their specialties, yeah. Yeah. Okay. And then I saw that they offer trainings and all that. Mm-hmm. You essentially get a subscription. Is that something that the district does?

3:45:17 Do they pay for the training? Typically- Not that I'm asking- ... the way these law firms work is they have their standard rates that they would charge, and then they have a discounted rate for school districts. Mm-hmm. And so we get that discounted rate for school districts. And I've not known a law firm to give away free training. Oh, no, I was asking if we were paying for the subscription- Oh, no ... kind of like with OSBA. No, we're not paying for any subscription. Oh, okay. We basically pay as we utilize them. Mm-hmm. Okay. Sorry. Okay. Moving forward, call for the vote. All in favor, indicate by saying aye. Aye. Are there any opposed?

3:46:02 Motion carries five to nothing. And then moving on to item 4E, adoption of the 2026-27 budget, Resolution 25-26.068. Yeah. So, the resolution, this is recommended that the board adopt the 26-27 budget resolution as presented, and it's on the attached document. This is exactly what was approved by the budget committee, and we have not received any further information on appropriation level, whether we're getting more money or less money. So we're bringing this forward as approved by the budget committee, recommended for adoption by the board I'll move approval of the budget.

3:46:48 Second. Moved by Director Cole, seconded by Director DeGraff. Comments, questions? Just one question. If we do get a loan for the seismic, the retrofit, would we then do a supplemental budget to recognize that income and so on? Yeah, potentially. If it exceeds 10% of any fund, we would do a supplemental budget, for both recognizing the revenue, appropriating the expenditures, and then addressing any debt service payment. The debt service payment typically is set up in arrears, so it'd be next year. So that we deal with that in next year's budget. Thank you.

3:47:38 So this budget was passed forward to the board on May 7th in the budget meeting. Yeah. And there's been a lot of water under the bridge that we weren't aware of at that time when it came through. So I have my concerns of whether some of the decisions that have been made are actually reflective of both the information that we took in and the budget forms that we did across the district, and/or even some of the guidance as far as what was given as we moved into the superintendent search. What I heard here tonight causes me concerns. And again, it's just rumors of cuts, but when you tighten your belt, to me, there's a degree of

3:48:26 specificity that needs to happen for me to feel comfortable with that. So I just need to state that up front. Mm-hmm. What I would remind you, Chair Light, is that what we're asking is obviously very high level. This is appropriation levels. And once you get past the appropriation levels, then you start talking about the specifics of staffing and programs and all of those things. So we're not asking for you to approve the specificity of the reductions tonight, because that isn't what the resolution is. This is simply appropriation levels. And if you want to continue having those conversations, then I think there's nothing precluding you from having those conversations. This is simply just getting us the bookends of our budget

3:49:12 moving forward. And I understand that. It's the broad picture. However, if the board or board members want to weigh in, then what's that avenue before the end of the school year? I would say that that would be a conversation between the board and the superintendent. Okay. I mean, obviously, I'm at the pleasure of the superintendent, so- Right. No, I get it. But you do understand how it works. What do you mean by weigh in as far as like... I went to the forums that we had before the budget. So are you talking about wanting to help

3:49:57 decide what cuts happen? Because that's not really a board purview. Well, the board's responsibility is to provide oversight. So we don't meddle in the operations. However, we, I think, are responsible and obligated to reflect our own personal feelings, or even those from the community, the people that elected us. And so one of the things that was a common theme, particularly in the budget forums, was this need to keep cuts away from the classroom. So we heard extensive testimony tonight that it doesn't seem like it's keeping it away from the classroom. And maybe it's just my curiosity, but I'd like to know,

3:50:44 how did we get there? Or what, with more specificity. If there's an opportunity to have that conversation before June 30th, I would entertain that. But, and again, maybe I'm sensitive because I've been on the board a long time, and the statement was made tonight that once these cuts happen, they're very hard to get back. And there's a number of areas, not just in the dual immersion, but there's a number of areas where we've seen us make cuts in areas with the assurance at the time that we were going to address them when times were richer or whatever case, we get more money from the legislature, whatever.

3:51:29 I want to have more confidence going forward that what I vote for is going to follow the parameters that I've been hearing. Speaking for myself, I think it's between a rock and a hard place, and this is what I learned as the new member. It's like, I think all of the speakers that spoke tonight were looking at the board and saying, "Why are you making these cuts?" We learned about it when you did. This does not come from the board, right? We don't get involved with the day-to-day operations, and I don't want to make a speech, but we actually had a former board member talking about overreach, getting involved in the day-to-day operations.

3:52:15 We've actually had board members sued for trying to influence, or for getting too involved. And so, we care , but our options are limited, as I'm coming to understand. Our options are limited as far as taking the actual action. That's not our place. But our obligation as a board member is to provide oversight to our community, the people who elected us, as far as, is this what you want to see in the district? If it's not, then-Again, we have no power to go and actually change those, but we can and should make recommendations or suggestions to our one and only

3:53:02 employee, who is the superintendent. And just for clarification, if I may, I want to remind the board, and Bob, I appreciate what you said, but I do want to remind that on May 11th, you did approve the resolution for reduction in force. So that's when the board learned that we were reducing X number of positions in each area. Didn't come programmatically, but the board was the one that approved the resolution for reductions in force. I, for one, did not approve it and- Right. But consent, it got approved ... it got approved. Yeah, it got approved. I don't feel like I can vote for the budget because too many remaining unknowns. First, the public comments tonight about the changes for dual immersion Spanish language program led to questions

3:53:50 about how much input, if any, was taken from staff, parents, or the public. I know that the elementary immersion program at Guy Lee is popular and has a waiting list. And this is good news. It's increasing enrollment instead of decreasing enrollment. The proposed cuts of the dual immersion program at the middle and high school levels will not help this growth in the future. Second, I cannot vote for the budget due to our needs to revisit board goals, which are over 10 years old and way before the time of the majority of the boards, including myself. The goals determine our priorities, which impact the budget. Big decisions like school districts' budget require

3:54:36 careful deliberation and a clear understanding of cuts we are facing. The board represents the public, and we must be sure we are accurate and clear about the finances of this public entity. So we have a motion. Is there other... Sorry, didn't mean to cut anybody off. Any other comments or questions? Hearing none, I'll go ahead and call for the vote. This vote I will call as a roll call vote. Director Cole? Yes. Director Brew? Yes. Director Degraff? Yes.

3:55:21 Director Langworthy? No. Director Light? No. Motion carries three to zero, or three to two, excuse me. Moving on then to 4F, approval of OSAA cooperative sponsorship, SHS and Mohawk girls' soccer, resolution 2526.069. Oh, there we go. It was recommended that the board approve resolution

3:56:06 2526.069, which, as you stated, is a cooperative agreement between Mohawk High School and Springfield High School girls' soccer. I'll move approval. Second. Any comments or questions from the board or from Indy? I'm just glad that we can do these partnerships and provide opportunities for other kids. So I think it's a great thing. Yeah, it's a great thing. Thank you. All right. All in favor indicate by saying aye. Aye. Are there any opposed? Hearing none, motion carries five to zero. Moving on to action item 4G,

3:56:53 action on information discussed in executive session. I would entertain a motion. So I move that the board take no further action related to the complaint discussed in executive session and delegate authority to the chair to draft a response to complaint based upon board's discussion. Second. Motion by Director Cole, second by Director Brew. Any comments or questions? All for the vote. I would like to declare a potential conflict of interest. I'm sorry, I didn't hear. I want to declare a potential conflict of interest. Okay.

3:57:43 So hearing no further comments or questions, I will go ahead and call for the vote. All in favor of the motion say aye. Aye. Are there any opposed? No. Motion carries four to one. Action item 4H. This is the additional item, the interim superintendent process. So I was going to make a motion that we plan for a second meeting based on recent history in terms of selecting board members and a superintendent that we haven't always reached a decision right away, and that we may be prudent just to plan for

3:58:30 another meeting to give us all a chance to sleep on the decision as after tomorrow when we complete the interviews. So I would, I guess, make a motion that we plan for a meeting on Wednesday. That doesn't work? No. Wednesday doesn't work I think we should just get to the interviews tomorrow and see how it goes. I can plan for another day, but Wednesday I got something I'm attending. Wednesday evening or... I'm just trying to get- Oh, like Wednesday during the... No, I'm on a field trip that day. I just- Can I ask a clarifying question of staff of where we're

3:59:17 at currently so we know? And when you think about the candidate, too. Do we have anything set right now? No additional meetings other than tomorrow's day-long meeting. There's no additional meetings set this week. So is there a meeting for the- Jody ... I think he's talking about the board deliberation. So tomorrow it's scheduled for us to open session, I believe- Right ... at 2:30. Yes. And then go into executive session to deliberate, and then come back out of executive session into open session to make a- Yeah. And I just wanted that knowledge out there, so. Yeah. So that right now is planned for tomorrow at 2:30. Yeah. Yeah. It's just- It's putting the- In the path, the board needed to sleep on it for a day or two on a couple of these

4:00:05 decisions, and I thought it'd be prudent. What's that? We also only had four board members at that point, and we had the candidates in front of us to ask. Yeah. Okay. I found it helpful to reflect over the weekend when we had done that, me personally. It took a lot of people sending emails for me to consider the values of the district, so what our needs were in the moment. So that helped me. And just to make sure that we're all on the same page, that I will be out of town starting Friday the 12th,

4:00:52 and the internet will be problematic by the day, so until probably Thursday. I can do Thursday. So, and I will also state that I don't necessarily have to be there for the board to move forward, but just want to make sure that you're aware of my calendar. I can do Thursday morning. It's the last day of school, so I don't want to- Yeah, I can't ... I don't want to miss that pickup. I would just hate to get to that point where we can't make a decision, or we need time to weigh it, and that

4:01:37 we don't have another meeting already planned. The more lead time I think we can have to that, we can always cancel the meeting, but- That's a true point there. We could always cancel the meeting. So you're suggesting putting a meeting in place now, and then tomorrow at the meeting, if we're just needing to table it, we will have that option. That was the intent, yes. Mm-hmm. I'm available most of the day on Thursday. Yeah. Jody, you got a look on your face. I do. I just want to just remind the board that what you put out was that this was the final interview day- Yeah ... with deliberations and a decision, and so this changes what, not

4:02:24 just the community, but what the applicants are expecting. So I just wanted to throw that out that, if you're able to make a decision tomorrow, that's what you've put out in the past. Yeah. But I also understand that history- Yeah ... indicates you might need additional time. We've been pushed through really fast on a lot of things recently, and so I hear you on that, but I also, if the board is just needing an extra moment, this is a big decision that keeps me up at night. It is. So if we need a little extra time, I don't think it's unreasonable to just have that set aside. Does anyone else...? Well, in our process discussion, I actually mentioned not having the

4:03:11 decision day on the same day, just because I knew it'd be a long day and a lot of information and trying to synthesize all of that. But I do understand that it's been said and announced and that too, so. And just for the record, I don't want to spend my last morning by myself here, so last day of school. But if need be, yeah. What do you guys think? I'm not available the rest of the week, but you guys can go ahead. I could reluctantly do a Thursday. But

4:03:59 I would rather that we could come to a consensus tomorrow, and I would rather it was five to nothing rather than three to one or three to two or three to one to one or something like that. I'd like to see us work together. That is my preference as well. It's just, yeah, just trying to make sure that we plan for ahead and we've given as much lead time, if we do need another day. And so I'm fine if the board wants to... I just wanted to have that discussion and put that out there. Well, I want to thank you, Ken, for bringing the topic up for discussion,

4:04:45 because I think it's important that we all agree and move forward, so thank you. But I'm not hearing a consensus in moving, so we'll- Well, I guess that'll- ... plan ... give us some motivation to get the decision done. That's rightOkay, so moving on to Agenda Item 5. These are discussion items, and up first is- Director? Yes. Just one clarification on something that Superintendent Nemarow said. I know that we had talked about doing a public session and then going into executive session, and then coming back. I seem to- Yeah. At 2:30. Okay. I seem to recall at some point we talked about

4:05:31 doing the whole deliberation in public session. Okay, so we responded to Rob Hess's email requesting, in order for the board to make a decision and an action item, you have to open an open session, go into executive session to deliberate, and then come out, but you have to have opened an open session first. You couldn't just go into executive session and then come out and make a decision and action item. So we had to do a special meeting 2:30 tomorrow, so you can go into open session and then go in for deliberations in executive session, and then come out and do an action item if you- Okay, that was my confusion. Thank you. Yeah, sorry. Good? Okay. Thank you. So then moving on to Agenda Item 5, Discussion A,

4:06:17 Procedure for Meeting Notices. Superintendent- That's me. In response to a question Ken had. I'm wondering with the time of the evening, night, and the long day that we all have tomorrow, if we can push that out to June 22nd, if you're okay with that. I'm okay. Because that was yours, Director Cole. Yeah, I'm okay with that. Thank you. Okay. Thank you. Any objections? Moving on. Discussion Item 5B, Attorney Presence at Board Meetings. Oh. Um- Were we moving on with that? And that was Director Brew. The next three items were mine, and I'm okay with putting them off until the next meeting.

4:07:05 Just to comment, I think they're all important. I do think that Item 5C, Discussion Around the Family Exit Survey, is somewhat time-sensitive. Want to make sure that we allow enough time at our meeting on the 22nd to really have a full discussion and go forward on that. How much time are you thinking on that one? What's that? How much time are you thinking on that one? 15, 20 minutes. And it may not take that long. To me, I've thought about it maybe too much. But I would allow at least 15 minutes on that. And if it's not enough, at least it'll get the ball rolling.

4:07:53 Okay, any other thoughts on Items 5B, C, and D? Okay, moving on then to Item 5E, the Board Retreat. I ask board members to sort of be checking their calendars and see when you might have some availability. I have more availability than many, so it's not really to me. I can accommodate schedules. So thoughts on, A, the retreat, and B, scheduling. For August?

4:08:38 For August, early August. Typically, that's when board retreats are held, right prior to particularly administration coming back. And then yeah, given that we haven't looked at goals and strategies and all of that in quite some time, I want to make sure we allow enough time in the day. Someone suggested we need two days. I'm not willing to go there, even as much as I like board retreats. So I'm certainly open to it. I would like to see it. I presume that it would be added to our board calendar for next year, which I presume will be at our next meeting. We'll have the- Mm-hmm ... board calendar that we approve.

4:09:23 So- And Bob, just the calendar from a school board standpoint goes from July one through to June 30th. The July meeting is typically just our organizational meeting where largely we just pick officers and doing any swearing in if we have that, but we don't have that, so. Yeah. I'm fully supportive of a retreat. I'll make myself available. For my perspective, it would be handy if you just sent out three or four potential dates and just said if those would work or not. That would be easier for me. Okay. Is that something allowed under- Yes. I mean, or is that- Sure.

4:10:08 Okay. Allowed to do. I'm more analog, so I prefer knowing in advance what dates I should be looking at. Somebody has expressed an interest in not doing it on a weekend, which is fine. But we need to do this, I think fairly soon so that we can get the facilitator and start talking about what we want. And that would, by the way, probably be on the meeting for the 22nd of June. And I can spearhead, if you all want the scheduling, just getting everyone's dates to see what works. Is that what you- Easier for me to work with looking at a few dates rather than-

4:10:53 Okay. Yeah ... getting my- And I think we should have options. Yeah. Can you include Marty on that scheduling? Because she's going to have to do- Yes ... everything with that as well. Absolutely. So please. Thank you. Absolutely Okay, anything else for the retreat? Just wanted to get that out there. So then moving on to item 5F, Springfield Education Association public comment. Superintendent Amara? I'm not exactly sure why that's actually on there with my name next to it, other than it was tabled and brought to the next meeting. I was wondering that, too. I think you just left the room. Yeah. And it's like, okay. So, that's- Well, there's been a request- Yes ... from SEA- Yeah

4:11:38 ... to speak, and I think we talked a little bit about the title, the public comment. I value the relationships with our associations and consider them to be partners. So I don't particularly want it designated as public comment because that's sort of a separate item. But I think that we should have more communication with our associations to make sure we're on the same page. This is one vehicle to do that. As I mentioned before in my board experience, we had monthly meetings between the superintendent, board members, a couple board members, and a couple of SEA. It doesn't have to be that way, but I think having that dialogue and allowing that opportunity.

4:12:24 Public comments doesn't allow back and forth, and my vision of this is that we could ask clarifying questions and make sure we're sort of on track. We're there- Just for information to the all board members to have this, that was brought up in bargaining this year to have SEA have its own comment time in board meetings, and the district elected not to approve that in the collective bargaining agreement. So I just wanted you to have that information. I don't have the background as to why, but I know that was brought up, and it was not- Yeah, I didn't know that ... I just wanted to make sure you had that piece- Sure ... of information as well. Yeah, I brought up the email from the employment group or, sorry, the association,

4:13:12 and what they're wanting to do here is inform. Information to be shared includes membership updates, goals, survey results, and timely concerns as they rise. A regular monthly slot provides flexibility for communication, with the option to cede time back to the board if there's no pressing needs. The speaking slot should continue during active bargaining to maintain open lines of communication, even if specific issues are avoided. And the SEA remains open to further discussion regarding the details of these topics. So,

4:13:58 I was wondering if there's-- I know at our last meeting, let's see, Chair Light supported the idea of providing a dedicated slot for the association. Bruce suggested a six-month trial period to see if a dedicated space for SEA would work effectively. And Cole stated he would support it as long as the board was only listening to the report and not veering into negotiation issues. And DeGraff questioned the necessity of the special space for the SEA, suggesting public comment already provides an opportunity to share. Maybe not a good idea for political or advocacy groups to provide special space.

4:14:45 But she did bring up a good point on asking about there will be students or classified staff or community organizations or parent groups, like PTOs. And so, that's something when it comes up, okay. But right now, I think it would be great to have our association come and have a spot. They're the frontline workers, and I would really love to hear from them as much as I can. We should all hear that. Superintendent, this isn't at all a criticism of you, but as I am getting more used to my role on the board, it

4:15:32 seems really strange to all of the mechanisms that keep the board separate from the people doing the work. And the State of Oregon seem to be intent on keeping the elected representatives from having meaningful dialogue with their constituents. Yeah. So, I would be really curious why they felt that was a good idea to speak on behalf of the board being able to listen to people. I'm not sure why that would be a bargaining issue important to administration, but maybe someday

4:16:19 I'll learn. But yeah, it's very frustrating trying to do the job when you can't talk to the people that you're working for in a meaningful way, and you can't listen to the people doing the work in a meaningful way. I think that it isn't just our employee groups. I think from talking to community members and other folks, there's just a great deal of frustration around input in general and conversation in general from a respectful position. So I might suggest that this might be, again, another item to talk about in our retreat under the broader

4:17:05 heading of communication in general.'Cause listening sessions, focus groups, surveys, there's a lot of ways to get input. And the more we know where our constituents are coming from, I think the better decisions we can make. So I will just throw out perhaps that's a broader topic, and then it gives the staff the chance to present some solutions. I'm looking at you, but whoever our new superintendent and the senior leadership is. This isn't an action item, so it was mainly just to garner information.

4:17:52 Are there any other comments or questions, directions, or... Hearing none, maybe, because I think our 622 meeting is going to be fairly busy also. And even if we were to make it an action item, it wouldn't take effect till the next school year anyway, on this particular topic. Is it okay to move forward then? Mm-hmm. Okay. Seeing some head nods. Yes. Okay, thank you. And then finally, for discussion, item 5G is the GLS community survey. So that's when GLS created the survey for input on the

4:18:38 interim superintendent search, the survey was promised confidentiality, and I think that that is an important agreement. But they also extrapolated statements that were unidentifiable by person. There's 570-odd people who took that survey, and for them to release it, a sort of a list of all verbatim comments and questions, they would have to have board direction to do that. So I wanted to put that out there. I think it would be useful information as we design for the future.

4:19:23 There was certain information in the budget forms that we did that I think are helpful. So- I just want to push back on that assertion by them, because it's listed in their proposal a couple of times that they give the board the data, they give the board the report. So, we can certainly all say, "Yeah, we want it," but we've all pretty much kind of said that to them. I think that when they think data, they're thinking if they provide the transcripts, because they're not identifiable. So that's, I wouldn't want to go back on that confidentiality promise. Huh?

4:20:08 I don't want anybody's names or any of that. No, I don't either. That's what I'm saying. Yeah. Or if you're going to identify a position, that's not the point of this. The point would be to develop themes from the information, which would then give the board some guidance as we move forward in setting goals, direction, strategies, et cetera. So, I'm just asking for clarification. So the community survey, from my perspective, what we wanted to see was nothing that would involve anybody's confidentiality. Mm-hmm. It's like, all right, we had a parent group. What was number one with the parent group? What was number one with the teachers? That. And so it would

4:20:53 be finer than what they gave us, which was everybody in one place, but it would not be to the level of individuals. Now, if you're talking about when we did the community meetings and people wrote the comment cards, that's a different thing. No. Were you talking about the survey specifically? The stakeholder survey that- Yeah, I mean, the title is Stakeholder Survey Report. Yeah. I don't know where- And that's the information ... the confidentiality concern comes in. So a little background on where the request is coming from. We had a public records request for the GLS community survey data to be released. Well, actually, I asked for it, too. Oh. Way before that. Apologies. We were responding when GLS asked, and when we got the public records request, we inquired,

4:21:38 and it has to be by action of the board for them to be able to release it for the public records request. Our legal gave the opinion that it was appropriate to release the information, but GLS has a different version of it, which is fine. They are the holder of the data, and so it will take board action in order to release the data information about the survey. I so move. With the caveat that it retains the confidentiality and anonymity of the participants. Yeah. Because I think our credibility would be at stake. Particularly as Director DeGraff mentioned that they committed to providing the data in their-

4:22:25 Yeah ... proposal, so. Well, yeah. So they just want to make sure that the board agrees. So it's not listed as an action item tonight, but it will be given the direction for the 622 meeting. Okay. All right. Thank you. And so then we're moving on to agenda item six, reports and information. Superintendent Amore. I'm going to keep it short, and I'll save the rest- Please ... for June 22nd. I just have two things. First of all, we found the ORS for the auditor. Oh. It's 297.425. 297.425. And requiring us to have legal counsel is ORS

4:23:12 203.145And the second thing is tomorrow, please wear your name badges, board members. That's all. That's all I've got. I'll do the rest of my report. I'll combine it with June 22nd due to the late timing. Okay, thank you. Moving on to board members, in no particular order. I'll just say, it was great attending the graduations I got to do. That was A3, and Bratton, and Springfield, and Thurston. It was really cool to see the kids do that and hear the speeches the kids did was fantastic and yeah, so

4:23:58 thoughtful and mature and yeah. So, I really enjoyed that. All right. Thank you. Director Brew? Yeah. For myself, yes, I very much enjoyed the graduations, and I want to thank all the people that facilitated us being able to attend and participate and seeing all these great, happy families. I know there was a lot of work that went behind the scenes and in front of the scenes to make it happen, and I want to thank all those folks. Thank you. Director DeGraff? I just want to update everybody on three things for SEF, Springfield Education Foundation.

4:24:43 So they funded over $55,000 in grant awards to 31 projects at all 21 schools. We missed the grant giving tour because we were busy with superintendent search. So that was a bummer to miss that, but they did do that. I don't know if anybody had a chance to go the next day on those other two, but did anybody on the board go? I went to the Page and Briggs one the next day. Yeah. Okay. We had board conflict that week. That's fun. And SEF is holding their summer celebration to celebrate grants for the coming year. That's on Saturday, June 27th, from 5:00 to 8:00. Tickets are $25 and can be purchased at seflane.org/events.

4:25:29 And then the last thing is they are still hosting monthly fundraisers at Public House called Toast to Teachers, and for June, the event will benefit the Chieftain Native Youth Center, and it's actually held on the last day of school, so that evening. That might be nice. So 50% of all the food and drink proceeds from Public House will go towards the Chieftain Center, and they select a different school every month, starting again in September. And I only went to one graduation. It was my daughter's at Thurston. I would just ask, Nicole, do you want to address your status as a board member? Because I'm not sure it got widely publicized. I'm good.

4:26:14 Okay. Okay. Director Langworthy. Oh, you're not going to address that? Yeah. I was really honored to go to the Long House and be an observer of the Native graduates. It was great to be in that sacred space and to talk to the families. Just such a proud moment. Made me reflect on my own time being a graduate myself, and yeah, I'm looking forward to school being over,

4:27:01 sorta. And yeah, that's all I'm going to say for tonight. I'm pretty tired. Okay, well, graduations are my favorite part of the year, and this was no exception. And again, it takes a lot of work to make things look so smooth at all of the campuses that we attended. So thanks goes to the leadership and staff at the buildings for making that such a wonderful occasion, not only for students, but their families. I'm excited about the interim search. Tomorrow, interviewing the finalist candidates. It's going to be a long day, so I'd like to thank the board members in advance for that, but it'll be long for a lot of people. So staff that has to put this together.

4:27:48 Thursday at 4:00 is our SPS- Oh, you- ... staff celebration. Oh, you were going to say that? Sorry, go ahead. No, but you're right. Lots to celebrate. I know. Yeah, the SPS graduate. I forget what it is, staff celebration, but yeah, it's really cool. That runs 4:00 to 6:00, and so if you're still available at 6:30, the Willamette Leadership Academy graduation at Springfield High School. Yeah. And then getting to go to Page and Briggs Middle School on the SEF Foundation thing was,

4:28:34 there's something really fun about giving money away. And that was great. So I'm glad they had a partial second day on that. We've got a couple of other meetings coming up, so I want to make sure and mention them. June 22nd, 2026 is a special meeting. It does start at 5:30, so even though it's listed as a special meeting, make sure you adjust your calendars. Maybe we won't get home so late. Jeff, I forgot to ask, do you recall how many were online? 58, and do we have anybody still? Because I was going to super thank them. But anyway, thank you to everyone, the 58

4:29:21 who attended online, all of the many people that were in the room. I think it's great to have community feedback, so it's wonderful. I wish we could have that many every time. So have a great night. Drive safe home, and I'll adjourn this meeting at 10:30. Yeah. Anybody? I'll be back. So soon? Here's- Oh, we're so soon? I can read that.

4:30:08 They couldn't

4:40 But it's way over there. Yeah. It's okay. Okay. Well, I'm going to go ahead and call this June 8th, 2026, meeting of the Springfield Board of Directors to order. It's 6:05. Please stand for the pledge of allegiance. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of

5:27 America, and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Well, after all that preparation. And Director Langworthy will go ahead and read the land acknowledgement We acknowledge that we are in the traditional homeland of the Kalapuya people.

6:17 I ran up those stairs. Specifically, the community that was known as Chifen, the area that we will now call Springfield. Kalapuya people who have lived in this region since time immemorial were illegally disposed of their land and forcibly removed to what is now called Grand Ronde and Siletz reservations over several years, but most notably in treaties between 1851 and 1855. The Kalapuya are now members of the Confederate Tribes in the Grand Ronde and the Confederated Tribes of Siletz Indians. And the members of the Kalapuya still live, work, study, and thrive in this area and continue to

7:03 make important contributions here in Springfield, across the land we now refer to as Oregon and around the globe. This information is shared out of responsibility to prevent the erasure of Native culture, heritage, and people to ensure a quality contemporary education for the future generations. Thank you. At this time, the board of directors will recess into executive session under ORS 192.6602B, oh, 2F actually, the review of confidential attorney-client privileged information.

49:08 Somebody print them out and put them right to there, everyone. Good evening, everyoneAt this time, we're going to move into our 6:45 PM budget hearing, and this is to allow public comment on the budget, and I'll call this part of our meeting to order at 6:50. And my understanding is that this is the time to give public testimony on the budget, and having not received any applications for public

49:53 comment or any other notification, we'll go ahead and close this hearing at 6:51. Then we'll reconvene the regular meeting as stated at 7:00 PM. Thanks to everyone for being here. Public comment will be held at our regular meeting. Yes. So quiet. I'm going to go say hi. Oh, is that it?

1:03:08 Yeah, that should work. Yeah, it does. That's okay. I think... Okay. We're about to start? Yeah. Okay. Gives me some time. Buenas tardes a todos. Interpretación en español está disponible mediante audífonos. Si desea escuchar el programa en español, por favor míreme acá atrás y yo le ayudaré.

1:04:02 Good evening, everyone. At this time, we're going to reconvene our regular meeting. We had a series of meetings, so we actually opened a series of meetings at 5:30. So at this time, we'll move right into the approval of the agenda. I'll move approval. Second. Moved by Director Cole, seconded by Director Brew. Call for comments, changes, all of the above. Yeah. There's some consent agenda items I'd like to pull for discussion. That would be the May 5th, 2026 special meeting minutes, 4.A.1, 4.A.2,

1:04:50 the May 11th board meeting minutes, 4.A.5, the financial statement, 4.A.11, structural repairs, and 4.A.13, budget appropriation transfer. Okay, thank you. For the record, I will restate those. So Director Cole would like to pull items 4.A.1, the special minutes from the May 5th meeting, 4.A.2, May 11th, 2026 board meeting minutes, 4.A.5, financial statement, 4.A.11, structural repairs, 4.A.13, budget appropriation. Is that correct? That's correct, yeah.

1:05:35 Okay. I had one more amendment, but I don't know. I was going to ask if we have an action item on whether or not we should have another meeting later this week. That was just based on experience. We were going to have our superintendent interviews tomorrow, and in the past, we haven't always reached a decision that day and having another day or two to think about it, I was thinking that now is the time for the board to have a discussion and decide whether or not we would have another meeting. So I was going to ask for an action item, I guess H, to discuss the potential another board meeting. 5H? Yeah. Or 4H,

1:06:21 because it would be an action item- Okay. Thank you ... because we'd have to vote on it. Okay, and I believe there might be other process. That's related to the interim search process, correct? Yeah. So there might be some other conversation around that. I will go ahead and add that. Interim superintendent process. And that will be action item 4H. Yes. And I'm going to also pull consent agenda item 4.A.6, the personnel report.

1:07:07 Any other changes to the agenda? I was going to pull 4.A.1 and 2. Okay, so along with Director Cole? Along with Director Cole. Okay, thank you. Hearing none other, I'll go ahead and call for the vote. All in favor of approving the agenda indicate by saying aye. Aye. Are there any against? Motion carries five to nothing. At this point, we're moving into public comments, and we have a list of 15, I believeWe

1:07:53 actually have 16. Oh, there's some... Oh, sorry. So, we have 26 in total. And as the board knows, typically we allow 25 minutes, which is approximately eight comments. And if we had 26, we're at 78 minutes. So, roughly an hour and 20 minutes. I'm guessing that's just speaking time. There's going to be transition.

1:08:39 That's just three minutes per speaker, and so there's going to be transition time. So, there's probably another 20, 25 minutes on top of that just swapping out the speakers, I would presume. Okay. So it takes a board leaning to expand that time. I would be fine with that. Could I make a suggestion that since we're... If you do that and everybody still speaks three minutes, maybe postpone the discussion items that are just... They're board discussion items that don't have any action involved in them. They're not urgent. So maybe if you still want to give everybody three minutes,

1:09:24 then postpone those items or possibly limit two minutes each. I don't know. But the suggestion is to maybe postpone those discussion items that aren't urgent. Well, in the preamble, usually we talk about if you have a shared topic, perhaps letting someone else speak for you, merging those together so there's less actual people speaking. But having said that, since it's a rather cryptic description of what people want to talk about, I hate to put limitations on that other than the three minutes. Not everybody will probably speak for three minutes, and it certainly isn't required to speak for three minutes, so it may be somewhat less.

1:10:09 So Director Brew, Director Longworthy? I have three discussion items and at that point, when we get to that, if we're running really behind, I think I'd be fine with postponing them. So you'd be okay with expanding public comments and perhaps we adjust our schedule? Okay, thank you. It's a suggestion. Director Longworthy? Yeah, I would be... I'm fine to go the full night with everything.

1:10:55 I am flexible. I do understand we'll probably be here until 11, but I do want to hear everyone's comments. Okay. So it seems like we have a majority leaning towards that. So, before we get started, I'll go ahead and read the preamble. So this is the portion of our agenda for public comment. The board provides three ways for community members to share public comment: written public comment, in-person oral public comment, and virtual public comment. Written public comment is received via email. Public comment received via email for this evening has been reviewed by the board and has also been posted on the district's website. The deadline for submitting a request for oral public comment was today at 2:00

1:11:41 p.m., and those who requested an opportunity to speak this evening were notified by the board secretary, Marty, about their request. So, we encourage groups with a common purpose to designate a spokesperson. If your comments will be covered by a group spokesperson, please indicate so when your name is called. I want to remind those members of the public who have indicated a desire to make comments that our policy provides for a limitation of the aforesaid three minutes. The board will not hear comments regarding any school personnel, whether named or implied. Any complaints regarding a particular employee must be processed through the procedure set forth in board policy KL, which requires that complaints be submitted in writing to

1:12:28 the superintendent. This procedure must be followed before there is any board involvement with such cases. A compliment involving a staff member should be sent to the superintendent, who will forward it to the employee, their supervisor, and their board. So again, I think it's clear that it's a three-minute time limitation. And again, if a point has been made, you might consider any additional information that would be helpful to the board, and for saving time, maybe that would be the way to go. I've heard from some people that there's an impression that you need to also submit written comment, and that's not true when you're giving oral public comment. However, the board has requested in the past, if you have a written transcript, it just saves board members from going back maybe

1:13:16 and looking at the recording and trying to transcribe that. So, we've had many wonderful comments and things that I've wanted to go back and review. So it's just a time saving, but no requirement that you do that. So, moving forward then, I'm just going to call them in the order that they're received. David Willis. Good evening. This one Thank you. And they have the notes that I gave? Good. Yeah. Again, just a reminder that our vice chair, Director Langworthy, will be the

1:14:02 timekeeper, and it'll be turned towards you so you'll be able to see. My name is David Willis. I'm the board chair of Springfield Utility Board. I'd like to start with something we're incredibly proud of, our partnership with Springfield Schools through the Water and Electric Learning Lab, which you may know as the WELL Project. Over the years, SUB has invested more than $4 million in the WELL Project, supporting hands-on, real-world science learning in classrooms across Springfield. But what makes this program especially unique is that it doesn't stop at the classroom. It connects students directly to their community. Through this program, high school students in Springfield provide free water testing for community members, giving residents valuable information about the safety and quality of their drinking water.

1:14:48 They also assess fish habitat, identify restoration opportunities, and collect and analyze water samples from local waterways. And this isn't just a classroom exercise. These remarkable students produce real-world, professional-level data used by our local watershed councils, our local water utilities, and even state and federal agencies. Middle school students also participate. In fact, seventh graders from all four Springfield middle schools are part of a dedicated restoration team that complete restoration work, like planting native species along stream corridors and learning the basics of water quality sampling. Our Springfield students aren't just learning science, they are doing science. In the process, they're contributing in meaningful ways to the health and sustainability of this community.

1:15:33 For SUB, the WELL Project isn't just a program, it's an investment in the future. It builds curiosity, develops practical skills, and open doors to careers in fields like energy, water, engineering, and environmental science. And just as importantly, it helps students see that these systems and their public utility belong to them. That sense of connection to our community is the heart of who we are as an organization. In addition, this is all ratepayer money. We're very cognizant of that, and we also give to the city $3 million every year in lieu of taxes. And we also contribute to Project SHARE $265,000 per year to be able to help those with their utility bills.

1:16:20 So we try to be wise stewards in terms of providing cost-effective, reliable, safe utilities. Thank you. Thank you. Speaking from the board, we very much value our relationship that we have with our Springfield Utility Board. The next up is Loretta Halter. I think I get 10 minutes too. Not yet.

1:17:18 Hi, I am Loretta Halter, and I live in Thurston. And I have been a public school teacher for nearly 30 years. I was perplexed by the views expressed by four former Springfield school board members who spoke at the board meeting on May 11th. They attacked the director, Jonathan Light, without any substantiation, while skirting the district's real issues. Teachers are being laid off or are resigning due to the pressures and restrictions they face. Parents are disgruntled by the complaints of children bored by test-driven curriculum. There is inadequate time allocated to history, civics, art, PE,

1:18:05 music, and science. Many children, like our minority populations, are being bullied on campus. Absenteeism has become a huge problem, hindering student learning. These factors all contribute to the serious decline in enrollment in Springfield schools. Yet possible solutions reside in the growing number of families seeking alternative, well-rounded education, such as the thriving A3 High School. Instead of offering ideas to address these challenges, the former board members criticized the current board, especially Mr. Light's proposal, to allow board

1:18:51 members to visit classrooms without a chaperone from the central office. This freedom would allow board members to connect more often with teachers, principals, and students, and thereby strengthen the Springfield public school community. The current policy restricting board visits baffles me. In the public district I served for nearly 30 years, board members commonly came in as welcome visitors. They were open to learning what challenges teachers and students faced and to seeing positive things taking place in our classroom. Understanding fully what is going on in our schools so they can better support them is what we elect board members to

1:19:39 do. To spread mistrust against and among board members and educators, to undermine and/or make cuts to their work to promote good and effective education, to foster animosity in the Springfield community, is to damage the unity, the strength of our-District family. Ultimately, this undermines the success, hopes, and dreams of its children as they endeavor to learn to use their own talents and knowledge to contribute to our society. Thank you for listening to me. Thank you, Ms. Halter. Naomi Raven?

1:20:39 My name is Naomi Raven. I'm a parent of SPS students and a former Springfield School Board member. I served five years on the board, including two years as vice chair and two years as chair. I served through the COVID-19 pandemic and the hiring of a superintendent. I understand this role and its responsibilities and its ethical obligations. I am here today because I am deeply concerned by the conduct of this board. Untrustworthy means dishonest and not worthy of confidence. Micromanaging means controlling every minor detail in a way that harms productivity and morale. Overreach of authority means exceeding the limits of your role. Unethical behavior ignores professional and moral standards. Corruption is the misuse of power for

1:21:25 personal gain. Unfortunately, these words and their definitions increasingly describe the Springfield School Board as currently constituted. My definition of the current Springfield School Board is a board that is untrustworthy, who micromanages district administration to the point of exhaustion, who exercises consistent overreach of authority in both action and in proposed policy and practice changes, whose majority sustains unethical and corrupt leadership. The examples are clear. The board has failed to fairly negotiate the contract of our current interim superintendent. Department directors are being forced to justify exact curriculum purchase amounts already approved in the budget. Proposed policy changes would allow board members to bypass the superintendent's office when coordinating school

1:22:11 visits, which undermines the governance structure, creates confusion across the district, and signals distrust in district administration. There are also ongoing concerns about transparency, public meeting law, and the integrity of the current interim superintendent hiring process. Meanwhile, time continues to be spent improving your experience as board members, instead of focusing on our students and the needs of the district. The result is our district is consistently losing strong leaders, all citing board dysfunction as a reason for leaving. So now what? Do better. Be honest. Hold yourselves and each other accountable. You can start by showing our community that you will hold yourselves accountable by

1:22:56 having the two board members who were disciplined in November complete the terms of the board-approved disciplinary action. When you vote in new board leadership, choose leadership who will lead with integrity. Each of you has a responsibility to model accountability, humility, transparency, and trust. Most importantly, refocus on your true responsibility: supporting students by creating an environment where district leadership can succeed and education can continue improving for our Springfield students. Thank you. Thank you, Ms. Raven. Ingrid Nordstrom?

1:23:51 Hey. Sorry. I'm a parent of two kids at Yolanda Elementary, and I've attended many of these board meetings throughout this year, and the overwhelming feeling I'm left with is disappointment. Before I explain why, I want to be very clear, I love my kids' school. Our principal is extraordinary. She seems to know every student and parent by name. The staff are supportive, capable, and essential, and the teachers are caring, passionate professionals who work tirelessly for our kids. My disappointment is not with the school, it's with the district leadership, including this board. For years, students have been denied a well-rounded education. This is no longer a matter of opinion. The Department of Ed has confirmed what parents could already see with our own

1:24:37 eyes. The district is out of compliance in science and social studies. The community has repeatedly asked questions about the K five curriculum, but our concerns have been ignored. In what appeared to be an attempt to persuade us that our kids had been learning science all along, at an April board meeting, we heard about students at an elementary school having the opportunity to use microscopes. I'm glad those students had that experience, but one hands-on activity is not evidence of a functioning science curriculum. The state's findings should be a moment of reckoning. Instead, we've received excuses and promises of accountability. But what does accountability actually mean to you? Because from where I sit, most of the people responsible for these failures and for creating the institutional culture that tolerated

1:25:23 them are still employed, still collecting paychecks, and still asking the community to trust them. This district is at an inflection point. We're preparing to hire a new superintendent, and I hope that some of the more disruptive dynamics on the board are coming to an endI don't expect leaders to agree on everything, but I do expect leaders to disagree honestly, respectfully, and productively while keeping their focus on students instead of personalities and internal conflicts. So to conclude, I have three requests. First, provide a public accounting of how much district money has been spent on complaints and legal fees related to board disputes. I suspect that total is significant, and I would rather see the money spent on

1:26:09 supporting students and programs like dual immersion. Second, tell us specifically how you plan to help students who have been denied instruction in science and social studies. What supports will be available, and how will you help students entering middle school without the foundation they should have received in elementary school? And third, tell us what changes will be made to the elementary schedule and report card. Right now, science, social studies, art, and health are expected to share a single hour of instructional time each day and are graded based on effort. How will that change, and when? Parents are not asking whether there is a problem. The state has already answered that question. What we want now is accountability, transparency, and a plan.

1:26:54 Sorry, our kids only get one-- Sorry, my voice is cracking. Our kids only get one elementary education, and they should not be the ones paying the price for the failures of adults. Thank you. Thank you, Ms. Nordfon. Douglas Cornejo Rosales Murray. Wait. Hello, I'm here to talk about dual immersion. To me, dual immersion is the most beneficial and impactful program in this district. It fosters community and

1:27:39 support and so many more important things that it would be too long of a list. The program gets students from many lingual and cultural backgrounds and teaches them two languages that is not only very prevalent and useful, but typically connects them to more people. My dad is from El Salvador, and my mom is from Montana. Due to societal pressure and my dad losing contact with most of his family and friends, we primarily speak English at home. If I didn't have this program, I would most likely be mediocre or bad at speaking Spanish, which would make me lose so much. I would lose family, friends, knowledge, and honestly, I feel that if I was never in dual immersion, I would be a very different person.

1:28:29 I've been in this program since kindergarten, and I remember so much of every year I've been in the program. Like how in every year of elementary school, we had a field trip for Dia de Los Muertos, and we got to celebrate the holiday and learn about it. Even though each year was nearly identical, I always had fun going to it and going with my friends. Another important memory is in eighth grade when me and another student went to a dual immersion conference for the state as speakers. I have no idea if we had any impact on them, but it was nice to have a room full of adults that were as invested in dual immersion

1:29:15 programs as we were and are. These small moments and countless more are the heart of dual immersion and something students outside of the program don't experience, possibly ever. Through these many years, I have supported the program through so much, and these proposed cuts truly hurt me, especially since I'm part of the first cohort of the entire program. But more importantly, it hurts everybody ever involved in the program and our large Spanish-speaking community. Especially for students who only speak Spanish, our dual immersion history classes help them learn history the same as any English-speaking student would. I have had many classes with monolingual Spanish students,

1:30:01 and compared to English-focused classes, they do so much better in the dual immersion history classes. As someone who is mixed, I've always felt like I had to choose my Latino side or my white side, but this program has helped me embrace both. This program, especially at the elementary level, connects primarily English-speaking and primarily Spanish-speaking students to each other and helps them learn together and learn both languages. Without learning Spanish, thanks to this program, I would have never had many of the friends I have now. I also probably wouldn't be able to speak to most of my dad's family because most of them only speak Spanish. Without the program, I would have never attempted the stamp test to get my global seal of biliteracy and so much more.

1:30:46 Mr. Murray, you'll need to wrap it up, please. Yes. Just how I remember so much from every year, especially dual immersion, I'm just one of many. There are so many students who've all had different experiences in the program and countless more who will have experiences in dual immersion in the future, and with these proposed cuts, they will all lose a chance to form more. Thank you. Andrea Madrigal Ramirez.

1:31:34 Good evening. My name is Andrea Madrigal Ramirez. I am a current junior and student body inclusivity officer at Springfield High School. Before I go further in explanation, I do want to clarify that I am not and have never been part of a dual immersion program in this district or any other district I was inHowever, as someone who has benefited from growing up bilingual most of my life, I am fully aware of how being bilingual has affected me throughout my life. So I do have an idea of how the dual immersion program may affect other students. As if by coincidence, just last month, I wrote a research paper in my College Now Writing 121 class titled "In What Ways Does Multilingualism Impact Children's Academic Performance?" And what I learned while researching for my essay is that bilingualism

1:32:21 doesn't just give students access to higher paying jobs, it also enables them to reach fuller academic potential at a more efficient rate than monolinguals. So as a result of cutting the dual immersion program, you would essentially be preventing dual immersion students from reaching their highest academic performance potential. According to my research essay and the sources I used, bilingualism provides advantages in the executive control of young humans. Executive control is a brain's function that makes humans capable of carrying out complex tasks that include problem-solving, inhibiting information already perceived, focusing attention on a goal, or monitoring performance. According to a study, bilingual children show a significant advantage in executive control tasks compared to monolingual children.

1:33:08 Multilingualism can counteract executive control struggles such as impulse control, difficulty in regulating emotions, school organization, time management, independence, future planning, and remembering instructions. In simpler words, bilingualism can speed executive control achievements, which can result in better overall academic performance. Another finding from my research paper is that individuals who are multilingual have better metalinguistic awareness. Metalinguistic awareness is the ability to look at language as a thing, evaluate language as a process or system, and maneuver successfully in using a language. Key components of metalinguistic awareness that I studied and that are positively impacted by bilingual education are phonological awareness, morphological awareness, and syntactic awareness.

1:33:53 In terms of phonological awareness, children who interact in more than one language have higher vocabulary acquisition and vocabulary development. Improved development of phonological awareness is also responsible for students' enhancement of awareness of genre and style norms and test features in various languages. This is crucial to students' understanding of literature and the ability to use words. Now, syntactic awareness is the ability to use a knowledge of grammar to comprehend the meaning that originates from the relationship between words and sentences. Morphological awareness is the ability to acknowledge that words are made up of smaller units of meaning, such as prefixes, suffixes, and roots.

1:34:40 According to a study I found in terms of morphological and syntactic awareness- Thank you. Thank you so much, and sorry to cut you off, but we have to be fair to all people. Thank you. Aidana Vasquez.

1:35:35 Good evening, everyone. Our names are Rhiannon Palacios and Aidana Vasquez. We are currently enrolled as sophomores at Springfield High School and have been in the dual immersion program since we were started in kindergarten. We came here today to speak to you about the intended cut of the dual immersion program in our school district. Our

1:36:21 program was created for people like us in mind, people who grew up with Spanish in our homes and in our hearts. And as a quick note, I would like to clarify that approximately 30% of our student body is represented by Latino students. Not only is our language important for multilingual diversity, which is one of our school's biggest strengths, but for community, for those of us whose parents speak it at home or just the times where there is no word in English that can truly convey how we feel in that moment. To

1:37:13 give a comparison of what the dual immersion program is like, it's like a typical English class, just taught in Spanish. If you were to move a dual immersion student down to a regular Spanish two or three class, it would be like putting a student who is fully fluent in English into an ELD class. It makes no sense. Why would you hold back their learning by putting them into a beginner level class after they've been learning in one that creates adequate rigor? Now,

1:38:00 obviously, with class isn't just statistics, but it's the people who run it The teachers that have been growing... Oh, shoot. Our class size has grown immensely in the past year, even though our teachers have faced hardship after hardship. Thank you. Excuse me. Thank you. We ask that you- Time, yeah ... reconsider your choice about the dual immersion program because it is not just another Spanish class. It is a language class like English. It is students that depend on its aspects to be able to help guide them

1:38:45 through the educational careers. If I might suggest this board and acting and interim superintendents to come to meet the bilingual students and get to know them and their classes. I understand that this is a huge deficit that we need to figure out how to live with in the next year, but cutting a native speaker language class is not the answer. Thank you for your time. Before I call up the next speaker, again, I would just remind the people who are going to speak that we're already committed to a very long meeting and

1:39:30 hearing everyone. So with interest for respect for all speakers, if we can really hardline it at three minutes. So if the buzzer goes off, if you can just wrap up your next statement, that would be very helpful. And as I said earlier, it'd be great if you want to submit the full comment as a written comment to the board. We would appreciate that. Maya Olsen? Hello, my name is Maya Olsen. I'm a freshman at Springfield High School, and I have been a part of the dual immersion program since kindergarten. Since then, going to school has always meant learning in not just English,

1:40:17 but also Spanish. The opportunity I've had to learn Spanish all these years is something I've gotten so comfortable with, that it's easy to sometimes take for granted. I never would've even imagined that this incredibly big part of my life could just be gone. Thinking about this now makes me feel so immensely grateful for this program and everything it has taught me. I've always considered being able to speak multiple languages such a cool power to have, and dual immersion has made that possible for me to grow that ability. One of my main goals throughout school has always been to get recognized at graduation for my completion of this program. To think that my 10 years of working hard and putting in so much effort are for nothing, I only needed to complete three more years, and now I can't.

1:41:02 I don't even want to imagine what the current 11th graders in dual immersion feel like now because of these cuts, with only one more year left. This program hasn't even been given time to grow, and now not a single class will ever start dual immersion in elementary and graduate still in it. And suddenly, out of nowhere, I'm being told that my dual immersion class is being replaced with just a regular Spanish class. To some people, this may not sound that different, but a regular high school Spanish class is far from the same. Beginning in elementary, I haven't just been taught Spanish. I've learned math, language arts, and social studies all in Spanish. That is what makes this program such a remarkable experience. I just want the district to realize what they are taking away from me and the impact their decisions have on my future and so many other students.

1:41:50 With me here today, I have signatures from over 100 students through middle school and high school who want to be heard and deserve to be heard. This program means so much to us, and we don't want to see it go. Thank you for listening. Thank you. Gladys Lopez? Is Gladys here? Okay, then moving ahead, Johannes Tadeo.

1:42:47 There he is. Hi, Johannes. My name is Johannes Tadeo. I'm a Springfield graduate, parent, community organizer for Safer, and someone who has spent years working alongside students, families, educators, and this district. I want to start with a question. How can Springfield Public School say it's committed to reaching every student every day when the program's teachers and educational assistants are being cut increasingly reflect the students who make up the significant portion of our district? Latino students represent approximately 25% to 27% of the Springfield student population, yet we are watching cuts impact programs and staff that directly supports bilingual

1:43:32 students, multilingual students, and families who have invested years into the district. The district has cited enrollment numbers as a reason for these changes, but enrollment does not happen on its own. The district controls recruitment, outreach, access to program scheduling, and overall the structure of the program. The district cannot point to enrollment numbers without also taking responsibility for the decisions that shape those numbers. The district says that the secondary dual immersion program is not being eliminated, but if students are losing dual immersion humanities courses and seeing their pathway replaced with traditional Spanish classes, then the educational experience they signed up for is fundamentally changing. A Spanish class is not the same as a dual immersion class.Dual

1:44:17 immersion is about learning academic content through two languages. It's about developing bilingualism by literacy, cultural competency, and preparing students to succeed in an increasing diverse world. What makes this especially difficult is that the current juniors are expected to become the first senior class to complete in Springfield's dual immersion pathway. After years of hard work and commitment, they should be celebrating this achievement, not watching the program they helped build be reduced just as they reach the finish line. What concerns me just as much as the cuts themselves is the process. Families, students, and educators were not meaningfully engaged before the decisions were made. The people most impacted were informed after the fact. A decision that fundamentally alters Springfield K to 12 dual

1:45:05 immersion pathway should be discussed openly with the Board of Education and the community. Families deserve transparency about how this decision was made, what alternatives were considered, what role the Board of Education played in reviewing these changes, and why families were not included sooner in the process. Tonight I ask you to listen to the students, the families, the educators. Ask yourself what message this sends to our Latino community and multilingual students. At the time when districts across Oregon are working to expand multilingual education, Springfield is the only district that's moving in the opposite direction and cutting. We should be strengthening opportunities for bilingual students and not reducing them. You still have an opportunity to change the course.

1:45:50 You still have an opportunity to rebuild trust. I ask you to pause these cuts, release the data used to justify them, and work with the community to preserve a meaningful secondary dual immersion pathway. Because this is a gem. Because once a program like this is dismantled, it is much harder to rebuild than it is to protect. Thank you. Anselmo Villanueva?

1:46:42 Good evening, members of the school board, the superintendent, and other staff from the central office. My name is Dr. Anselmo Villanueva. I come before you as a local educator and a community member with over 50 years in K12 and higher education. I have been involved in bilingual education since my first position as a third grade classroom teacher. One of my first encounters with your district was in the mid-1980s, when I heard that an assistant principal at one of the high schools was denying enrollment to Latino students who could not prove that they were legal residents. I had to remind him of the landmark 1982 decision by the Supreme Court, Plyler versus Doe, which originated from a lawsuit against the Tyler Independent School District in Texas.

1:47:29 The court ruled that states could not deny students a free public education based on their immigration status. I have lived through the eras where students who are Latino are called disadvantaged, minorities, and at-risk. Now fast-forward to tonight. Along with many others in this room, and the many who could not be here in person, we find ourselves fighting the same battle for the students who are being denied their basic education. I thought we had made progress since that assistant principal wanted to deny enrollment to Latino students in the 1980s.

1:48:14 Now it looks like things are going backwards once again. Not only are these students who are being denied their education by your decision, but just as important, their language and their culture. Bilingual education is meant to level the playing field. In this case, to give students the skills and background to eventually compete in the global job market. I will not go into all the benefits of dual immersion, since I assume that the curriculum specialists in your district have provided you with ample background and documentation. Unfortunately, I find myself here before you again, just like in the 1980s, trying to correct a wrong. I implore you to restore the bilingual program in its entirety.

1:49:02 I am confident that you will make the right decision so that you can sleep soundly at night knowing that you did the right thing. Thank you for your time, listening to other speakers, and most of all, for reading the many letters that were submitted to you. Thank you. Thank you. Marcia Koenig? Good evening. I'm the parent of two students in the dual immersion program, MARCIA, at Hamlin in Springfield. I understand that the district is facing difficult budget decisions, but there's a huge difference between reducing staffing and dismantling

1:49:48 a program. Reducing FTE is like pruning branches from a tree. The tree may be smaller, but it remains alive and capable of growth. Eliminating a program cuts into the trunk itself. Once a program's expertise, momentum, and community are lost, rebuilding can take years or may never happen at all, and that's why we're all here tonight. What's being proposed is not pruning, it's dismantling the very structure of the program. The most consistent support this program has had is parent advocacy. Through five superintendents and ever-changing leadership, parents have attended meetings, written emails, organized events, helped shape a master planRecruited families, and we've repeatedly asked the district to invest in a program that it's claimed to be a priority. And here we are, one year before the program is expected to reach 12th grade,

1:50:35 families receive notice of a supposed restructuring and assurances that the district remains committed to dual. We've heard this before. For the last 10 years, our concerns about this program have been met with this same response, that, "This is a priority program for the district," we've been told. And so when these same assurances accompany cuts that weaken the program, we don't believe you. If this decision had been made with true understanding of dual immersion and its value, you would understand that learning Spanish is not the sole purpose of the program. You would know that placing heritage speakers in traditional classes results in skills mismatch and takes away from heritage students the opportunity to be leaders. You would recognize that replacing dual immersion with Spanish

1:51:20 classes, or a cultural elective, or college courses that they can't get to, does not preserve dual immersion. Finally, you would also have remembered that expanding this program was part of the district's response after ODE flagged us for persistently low outcomes among English learners, and then later cited as a contributor to the district's improvement. You see, this program was not an add-on, it was part of the solution. So what a shame that Springfield cannot sustain a single dual immersion program while more than 140 exist across Oregon, with some districts operating several even without additional funding. Also, if there's any high school where a strong dual immersion pathway should exist, it's at Springfield High, which serves the largest

1:52:05 Latino student population in our county. So be honest about being lost here. I hope the board recognizes that this is not a staffing adjustment. It's a decision that fundamentally changes our program. So once you've made this cut, you can't call it a dual immersion program anymore. You can't tote it on your reader boards or elect to include it in your list of equity initiatives. Stop calling it restructuring, and please look for ways to prune the budget that doesn't impact the tree of the dual program. And Herlands?

1:52:54 Not able to- Ryan Herlands? Oh. I thought I saw you earlier. Yeah, it's full. Hi, thanks for having me here tonight. And I don't want to take away from the important conversations that have just been going on, so I'll try to be brief. Okay, so thanks for giving me the opportunity to speak again tonight. My name is Ryan Herlands. I'm a science teacher at Thurston High School and incoming SEA vice president. There are a couple of interrelated issues I'd like to discuss today involving

1:53:40 communication and transparency. I want to start by sharing my appreciation for a couple of things. First, for your attendance at our fantastic high school graduations on Friday. And second, for your thoughtful discussion during May's business meeting about creating a regular speaking slot for SEA at future board meetings. Past district leadership attempted to silo all of us off from each other, and that helped precipitate the challenging situation we find ourselves in. More communication is clearly better, not worse. One member disingenuously questioned why SEA should have a speaking slot instead of just signing up for public comment every month as community members are required to do. I think most reasonable people can see the benefits of reducing the hoops to jump through for better communication.

1:54:26 Staff are not just community members. We are the heartbeat of the district and the ones in the classroom with kids every day. You, the board, cannot do your job effectively if you don't know what's happening in the classroom. This connects with another contentious issue discussed at last month's board meeting, one that begs for staff input. Let's be clear, we teachers want more administrators and board members to visit our schools and our classrooms. In a recent survey put out by SEA, we collected feedback from 126 members from every school in the district, and 97.6% of respondents said they would welcome you into their classroom. 97.6. Some would want advance notice or the ability to choose which lessons for you to see, but 61% said you were welcome anytime.

1:55:16 It was suggested that schools schedule times for visits to show off a particular event or project, which sounds nice, but our interest is not in putting on a performance to flatter a dictator. Instead, we want those responsible for making the big decisions in our district to see what actually happens day in and day out in our classrooms. Both the fun, hands-on project and little Johnny throwing a chair across the room for the third time that week. You can't make decisions unless you're informed. Thank you. Thank you, Ryan. Rhiannon Palacio

1:56:01 Cronin. And I may have butchered that name. Ms. Cronin here? Yeah. Here. Oh, okay. All right. Your Honor, uh- In the co-presentation. Rhiannon. Okay. Thank you. Nancy Bray So, my name is Nancy Bray. I taught in Springfield School District from 1977 to 2009. In 1999, with the changing demographics in

1:56:48 Springfield, the district awarded me a sabbatical to go to the U of O to get the endorsement in English for speakers of other languages, and to write the district English Language Development, or ELD, plan. When I returned from sabbatical, the district asked me to coordinate the ELD program as a teacher on special assignment. I worked with administrators, teachers, staff members, families, and community members, and together we created the program that is still in effect today. As required by state and federal mandates, the program must teach English and ensure equal educational opportunity in the regular classroom. It's the largest ELD program in Lane County, serving

1:57:36 over 600 students. From the very beginning in 2000, we advocated for a Spanish/English dual immersion program. Research shows that this is the most effective way for students to learn to read and write in two languages. For students whose native language is Spanish, that language is their strength, not their weakness. If they learn classroom content in Spanish while they are learning English, they transfer their skills to English more easily. As new ELD and Spanish-speaking students move into the district, the dual immersion program is a lifeline for them to build on the skills they already have as they

1:58:23 transition to English. Students in this program receive the Oregon Seal of Biliteracy on their diplomas when they graduate from high school. In 2014, the district made a commitment to establish a Spanish/English dual immersion program that would add one grade level a year until it became a grade K12 program. We know that it takes more than the elementary years to become bilingual and biliterate. It must be a K12 program to be effective. By eliminating the middle and high school program, the district is breaking the commitment it made to the students,

1:59:08 their families, district staff, and the community. A decision of this magnitude must be transparent and include meaningful engagement with all who are impacted. Since 25% of the students enrolled in Springfield District are Latinx- 10 seconds left ... this is a huge impact. The district needs to honor its commitment, and the program needs to be supported and celebrated, not eliminated. Thank you. Mm-hmm. Renee Ellis?

2:00:11 Good evening, board members and faculty, whatever. Renee Ellis could not be here, but she asked me to read a few statements from her letter, and for the sake of time, I'm going to read certain parts of her letter. I think some of the other speakers have already mentioned some of the benefits of dual language immersion, in this case, the Spanish dual language immersion program. My name is Rosemary Villanueva. I'm a retired teacher and an ELD teacher who taught here in Eugene, and

2:00:57 also in California. As Renee says here, Renee also is a community member from Springfield. She says, "I know you already know these facts, plus many more, and yet this valuable resource is now on the chopping block." And so now what she is asking is, "I want to ask you why you chose this program for termination in spite of all these benefits you've been hearing. Moreover, how can you justify eliminating it at the very point when students in this program, after years of dedication and discipline, are entering the stage in their educational journey where they can begin

2:01:43 to see the benefits of it and truly experience the rewards of their hard work? What a terrible example this sets for students, that years of extra effort and hard work toward the very worthwhile goal can be thrown away so easily. What do you plan to tell these students? How do you explain that the goal they have committed themselves to for years apparently wasn't all that important after all? What an extraordinary and incomprehensible decision by adults who are supposed to model goal-oriented performance in academics.

2:02:30 Pulling the rug out from under these students and their families with apparently scant little notice or opportunity for input makes it even worse."Parents deserve better. Students deserve better. I urge you to reconsider the decision to eliminate the dual language immersion program in Spanish. It is the greatest gift we can give our children to provide the opportunity to become truly proficient in their native languages, or a second language for other students. There are zero downsides to this. No, none. It is good for them, for our communities, for our society, to send

2:03:19 them out into the world multilingual- Thank- ... truly multicultural. Thank you. I urge you to go back to the drawing board and figure out a better option for saving money without the students in this program being victims of this decision. Thank you. Maisie Contreras Martinez. Hi. Good evening. My name is Maisie, and this is my son Yunuen.

2:04:05 He is a Springfield High School student in the dual immersion since kindergarten. I'm a parent, and the reason why I'm here, I have questions. I want to know the main reason why you guys are cutting this program. What is the reason? Why are you guys cutting their wings? Because they worked so hard to be where they at. Some of us parents, including myself, I come from out of district. I decided to put him into this program because you guys promised us that they were going to continue until 12th grade. And what's happening? You guys just cut it off, like nothing, without thinking of their futures.

2:04:51 I don't think that would be fair. I, as a parent, I drove my son multiple times to school, figure out childcare, pickups. When he went into middle school, he took the city bus because he has a dream. And you guys sitting there promising a future for them, you're not accomplishing that by cutting down the program. How is that fair? I wish you guys have a conscience to see that you're cutting not just his future, but other ones. You see around how many people are here to support us?

2:05:38 Because they know that each individual student who is here works so hard, and I don't think it's fair. Really, think about it. I'm pretty sure you guys are all parents, and one time you guys had kids, and you guys want the best for your kids. Imagine if that one of your kids would be that kid who is in the dual program. That's the reason why I'm here fighting for my kid. It's easy for me to go and be like, "Don't worry, my son. I'll take you to a different dual program. We'll figure it out." But no, that's being selfish, because he's not the only one here. Other students are here, other parents are here fighting.

2:06:26 You should really think about it, or how can we help as parents to continue this program? Nobody has come to us and told us, "Hey, this is the main reason." I guess if you guys had transparency to us and let us know, we'll probably figure it out, because we want the best for our kids. I'm pretty sure you guys want the same thing, or do you guys want to be the first district of Oregon to cancel a program like this? Or support it? We all know, yes, we might have issues, but let's find a solution for that issues. I want you guys to go home and think about that. Thank you.

2:07:22 Just to, again, state the purpose of public comment, unfortunately, it's not designed to be a back and forth, even though the board would like to hear more information, but that's what's tonight's for. And again, I thank you from the bottom of my heart for everybody being here, speaking with the passion about the things that you think are important. So I'm sure the board is going to be taking this. We're hearing this, and we'll move forward. But thank you. Do appreciate that. Crystal Sunstrom.

2:08:15 Good evening. My name is Dr. Crystal Sunstrom. I am a soon-to-be former Springfield Public Schools employee. Until last year, I served as the district's elementary dual immersion program coordinator, but that position was eliminated due to budget cuts. I currently teach English language development, or ELD, at Springfield High School, including to our newcomer and recent arriver students. I'm also the proud parent of two Springfield graduates. Tonight I want to speak about equity, and more specifically, access to linguistic inclusionIn 2021, Oregon passed House Bill 2056, known as the Access to Linguistic Inclusion Act. The purpose of this law was clear: to remove structural barriers that multilingual students face and

2:09:01 to recognize that meaningful academic learning can occur in multiple languages. The law specifically acknowledges that multilingual students should have pathways to earn required graduation credits while building on their linguistic strengths, not despite them. In my current position, I work with newcomer students who are learning a new language while simultaneously trying to earn enough credits to graduate high school. Many arrive credit deficient through no fault of their own, due to interrupted formal education or limited access to secondary public schools in their home countries. They are navigating a new school system, a new culture, and a new language all at once. HB 2056 was designed to help reduce those barriers by

2:09:46 allowing districts to offer courses and credit pathways that honor students' home languages and multilingual abilities. Oregon's guidance explicitly states that the law was, again, intended to remove structural barriers to graduation and to expand opportunities for multilingual learners. Our secondary dual immersion program does exactly that. But by eliminating the middle school and high school dual immersion teaching positions and courses, we are not expanding opportunities for multilingual students. We are reducing them. We are removing one of the very pathways that Oregon created to support student success. I also urge the board to look carefully at the enrollment data being cited to justify this decision. As Johannes Tadeo

2:10:33 mentioned, enrollment does not exist in a vacuum. Over the years, decisions were made that limited access to the secondary program for some multilingual students, including newcomers and recent arrivals. When access is restricted, participation inevitably declines. We should be cautious about using enrollment numbers as evidence against a program when those numbers may themselves be the result of policy decisions rather than a lack of student and family interest. Our multilingual students already face enough barriers. The question before us is whether Springfield will continue to remove barriers as Oregon intended or create new ones. I urge you to reconsider the elimination of the secondary dual immersion

2:11:19 program and preserve these important pathways for our students. Thank you. If we can leave this on, please. Sarah Farren? I raced over here from the ELD graduation. Mm-hmm. We had, I think, about 100 students exiting the program. Thank you for being here. Thanks. Okay, I've never done this before.

2:12:07 Well, my name is Sarah Farren. I have been a Springfield resident for 24 years and a teacher in Springfield for 16 years. As Springfield grapples with staffing cuts and a restructuring of our district leadership, I want to highlight a significant segment of our school community, our multilingual students, who will soon be without a leader at the district level. And just to summarize, I'm here speaking about the ELD program, not the dual immersion. The ELD program serves approximately 700 students in K through 12. The instructional needs of multilingual learners are different from those of monolingual students. For newcomers, they're learning to function in a new language at the same time they're being taught academic content in that language.

2:12:54 For long-term English learners, they're struggling to cross the line from social language to the high level of academic English needed to pass the state English proficiency test. Multilingual learners spend the majority of their day with caring and professional general education teachers, but the district has not required or even offered training in sheltered instruction for those teachers in, I think, at least 12 years. I don't remember it at all since I've been hired here. We need training for all teachers across subject areas and grade levels in scientifically proven methods of sheltered instruction. This is essentially how to teach the district-adopted curriculum in a way that supports the bilingual learning of students and consequently helps

2:13:41 all students. We need flexibility in curriculum implementation and assessment. Most curriculum and assessments are normed on monolingual students, and we need time built into our schedule for the general ed teachers to consult and collaborate with language development specialists. The ELD department is accountable to the state for how we serve our multilingual students. And when we leave students in class to receive sheltered instruction but do not provide training or collaboration time for educators, we are failing in our responsibilities. Please take the unique needs of our students into consideration as you plan the future of our program, and choose a leader who will champion multilingual learners and promote equitable and

2:14:28 forward-thinking practices across the district. Thank you. Thank you. Matt Brandt? Is Matt here or out in the foyer? Say his full name. There he is Oh, here he is. Thank you. Yeah, there's no speakers out in the lobby area, so it's hard for people out there to hear. Thank you for being here. Yeah, absolutely. My name is Matt. I'm a regular

2:15:13 reoccurring person lately. I wanted to come in tonight and just share some of the things that I've been working on in the background and reiterate some of the things I've brought up in the past. One of my mentors used to say, "Don't bring me monkeys unless you bring me bananas." And it's a sentiment that I believe strongly in, in my life, and my personal career, and everything else, that if there's a problem, and we want to talk about it, then we should also talk about solutions. And I've always been an advocate of the same mentality I bring up a lot, which is we should focus on how do we afford what we want. And we hear a lot tonight about cuts to vital programs, and obviously, we've been through a lot of meetings where there's many other painful decisions that had to be made.

2:16:00 And of course, decisions are tough, programs get cut. But one of the things that I always continually try to push and focus on is how can we afford what it is that we want? We clearly are hearing that we want to save a lot of these vital services, but we have to come forward with a path, right? We can't ignore the reality of declining enrollment. Declining enrollment means declining revenue, which of course, is what leads us to this decision point. One of the things that I've talked about before, and I've put a lot of research into as well, is a public levy option, and it's something that I believe very strongly in. It is a tool at the disposal of the district. It's one that we don't currently implement. We have a lot of peer districts across the state that have implemented it to much success. I think that in this district, we could absolutely put forward an effort.

2:16:47 I forwarded off some research that I did. I put together a presentation and a request to see if we can add it to a discussion item for next week to charge the budget committee formally to commit to the study. Do the work and see if we can maybe get it secured to the ballot here in November. And the reason I bring that up is because every time we delay on this, and we don't put it to the voters to help support and buoy our budget, it's one more fiscal year that we can't actually spend that money. And it's something that we could absolutely use to really do exactly what we're all talking about, save our programs, bring back some of the things that we know really help this district out. It's something I would like to see more engagement on and see if we can bring something this to the

2:17:33 people. I think the appetite is there. I think the community is deeply hurting from a lot of these decisions. And of course, they are difficult. There's no judgment in terms of why we had to do them. But I think we have an opportunity to control our destiny a bit, and I think a levy buys us up to five years where we can cushion and restore some of these services. We can even build back savings. I put together a website that many people in the community might have already visited in the past. It's springfieldbridgeplan.org. And I've updated it with my findings on the levy, my proposal. I'll put together my presentation on there as well. I think it's something that we could definitely move forward to help really

2:18:18 bring things forward. Anyways, that's my thoughts. Thank you, Mr. Grant. Mercedes Foreman. Anyone in the hallway? Okay. Guadalupe Anguiano. I probably really murdered that. Thank you.

2:19:06 How should I pronounce that? Anguiano. Thank you. Yes. It's okay. Good evening. My name is Guadalupe Anguiano. I'm radio host of La Que Buena 97.7 FM radio station in Eugene. But today I'm here as a concerned parent, a parent of a nine-year-old third-grader at Springfield Dual Immersion program at Guiley Elementary. Like many families, we made long-term educational decisions based on the understanding that this pathway would continue through middle and high school. That's what I thought. And that is why I'm deeply disappointed to learn that the significant changes to the dual immersion program were being considered without communication, transparency, or opportunities for us parents, for families to provide input

2:19:53 before these decisions were made. Families deserve to understand what data and analysis were used to support these decisions. If our neighbor districts, like Eugene 4J, are facing similar financial enrollment challenges while maintaining their K through 12 immersion pathway, why is Springfield choosing a different approach? I don't understand. I'm also concerned about how these changes will affect our students. Our dual immersion is not simply about learning another language. Students have spent years building academic skills, cultural connections, confidence, and a sense of belonging within this program. And disrupting that pathway may impact the students' engagement, limit opportunities to earn the Seal of Biliteracy, and cause

2:20:39 families to seek education options in other districts like Eugene. Our children invested years into this program, and families have planned their futures around the commitment that were made, the promise that were made to us when we enroll our kids in this program. Our youth already has to worry about discrimination, about ICE taking our community members, our family members. Now they have to worry about their education?I respectfully ask this district to pause these changes, publicly share the data used to justify these decisions, and create a process that includes meaningful input from parents, students, and educators before moving forward. Our children's education matter, our teachers matter, and our Springfield

2:21:24 schools matter. And shout out to all the students right now, right here, my respects for being here today and fighting for your education. Keep fighting and don't give up. Board members, please honor the commitment made to these families and keep the dual immersion pathway for current and future students, please. Thank you. Christian Rivas?

2:22:17 Hi there. My name is Christian. I'm a daughter of Salvadoran immigrants, a first-generation student, and next year I graduate with my doctorate in pharmacy. I was born here in Springfield and I've lived here ever since. Today, I'll be talking about the Springfield Dual Immersion program and how important it is to our community. The first thing I wanted to share is that being bilingual has made me a better healthcare professional. When people talk about dual immersion programs, to some folks that can mean simply learning new languages, but for a lot of us it's much, much bigger than that. In healthcare, communication is extremely critical. Being able to speak the patient's languages helps keep them safe and lets them trust our help. For me, speaking Spanish also lets me connect my culture to my profession.

2:23:05 I don't have to leave a part of myself at the door when I go to work. I can use it to help people. I can communicate with families who might otherwise really struggle to navigate the healthcare system, and this is something that I'm really proud of. Today, I think about the students who have already spent so many years in these Springfield programs, students who have been able to learn more about their own cultures at school, students who have been able to learn brand new cultures. These students have put in the work to be bilingual and bicultural all these years, and all of their progress is being ripped away from them. I'm asking this board to please consider that bilingualism helps kids form their futures. These programs are exactly the kinds of opportunities that we should be expanding for our students, not taking away.

2:23:53 I hope you'll consider what is being lost here, this incredibly important means of our community's growth. I hope you can understand what it feels like to us, for our own community of Springfield to be one of the only districts in Oregon to take dual immersion away from the kids. Thank you for your time. Thank you. Heather Dillon? Okay, we'll go ahead and move on, and if she shows up or we missed

2:24:41 her somehow, please let me know. Laura Farrelly? Okay. Hi, my name is Laura Farrelly, and I'm a teacher at Springfield High School. And also just want to add that we have the best students ever. So inspired right now by all the students here speaking.

2:25:27 So I have a few things I'd like to address. First, the concerted attacks by members of the public at the last board meeting towards Jonathan Light were sensationalist and disgusting. I had the honor of teaching in the same building as Jonathan back in the day, and I witnessed firsthand how he went above and beyond for our students and colleagues. If only I had a child or a grandchild in elementary school, I would hope that their classroom teacher would invite Jonathan and other school board members to witness what is actually happening in our schools. Second, what in the world is happening right now? Certain members of district admin still continue to spin false narratives about the catastrophic midyear cuts by blaming

2:26:14 SCA, when it is apparent that there was either, excuse me, bad faith bargaining perpetrated by the district, or someone in power made major mistakes when they hired 42 new educators in August of 2025. Next, the district claims to care about equity. How can they proclaim that and then cut the dual immersion program? It doesn't make sense, and it's not a good look. While they continue to make these terrible cuts, a new member of our district asked for a raise at the last meeting. Are you kidding me? Read the room. We are still grieving the cuts that were made earlier this year. Clearly, these cuts are not unique to our community. It is estimated that at least 1,000 educators are losing their jobs statewide. This doesn't even include our classified

2:27:02 folks.Many of us have been writing emails and attending legislative sessions begging Tina Kotek to call a special session to tap into education reserves, which would help offset the majority of cuts. There has been silence from her end. Please know she could call a special session today, and she refuses. Since letters, phone calls, and individual meetings are not working, we are changing course. I would like to invite all of you to attend two upcoming events. There is an emergency town hall this Wednesday, June 10th at Roosevelt Middle School in Eugene. It runs from 4:30 to 6. This is an opportunity for us all to come together as a community, educators, students, and families from Springfield and Eugene to

2:27:47 try and save our schools. The next event is next Tuesday, June 16th at the Capitol Building in Salem when legislators are in town. Both the education and revenue committees are meeting that morning. Let's come together and demand that they access reserves by asking Kotek to call a special session, and to actually address the root causes of the perpetual underfunding of public education by, I don't know, maybe taxing the ultra-rich and stop giving tax breaks for data centers. Thanks for your time, and hope to see many of you on Wednesday and next week in Salem. Thank you. Thank you.

2:28:36 Nate Sadler? Hello, I am Nathan, and I am currently in a middle school of Springfield School District, but I was in an elementary school in the Springfield School District. I would like to talk about the lack of science that was happening at the elementary school that I was at. Starting off with a guy named Mystery Doug, is a YouTuber that has free science videos. He also has a website where you have to pay so that you can do independent science activities. Instead of using a district-approved program like STYLE in middle school,

2:29:21 the schools went with a YouTuber with no understanding of the curriculum. What I have come to understand with school is it tries to put something in your head through practice and repetition. When we do one lesson a month, we barely practice, and there's no repetition. Also, Mystery Doug's website hasn't had Doug in it since July 1st, 2023, meaning less qualified people than him are taking over. Students are more interactive with videos playing than when a teacher is teaching, but students miss out on further clarification. A perfect example of this is when I was in sixth grade, I was struggling with divisions with decimals. So I asked the teacher, and they showed me how to do it. With videos, you have to hope to understand it the

2:30:06 way that the creator thinks it makes most sense. It also makes it to where the teacher isn't the dominant figure in the classroom, keeping it all in check. They are now the gatekeeper of the pause and unpause button. There are so many jobs that involve science in day-to-day life. When I went into sixth grade, I wanted to go off and be an aerospace engineer, but I had almost no information on even how air affects an object. I was losing hope until I tried out a rocket video game. I was to calculate how much fuel I need to get a 30-ton object into orbit before my classmates even knew that there were three types of rocks. I learned more in two weeks than in my entire elementary school science class. I believe I can do something big, not because of school, but because of YouTube

2:30:52 tutorials and a video game, and I hope that my sister can come home from elementary school and say that she learned that there are three types of rocks. Thank you so much. This concludes who I have on the list to speak, unless somebody showed up who I called the name earlier and they weren't here, but I don't see that. I'd like to, because we've been sitting for a while, call for a five-minute break and give people a chance to stretch, and then we'll continue with our meeting. Thank you so much again for all of the public input. The board really does appreciate

2:31:37 that.Hello?

2:38:54 Okay. We're going to go ahead and reconvene, so you're welcome to stay. Looks like we've stimulated a few conversations, but again, I'll have to excuse the room. Hello?There's your gathering Hello, folks. Don't be shy. Again, thank you for being here, and if you would like to stay, you are certainly welcome. And Amber's out there.

2:39:41 Okay. So we're going to move into action items here in a moment. Oh. First up- First up... Needs to be recorded. First up is, we're going to return then to the action item 4A, the approval of the consent agenda. I would be happy to entertain a motion as amended. I'll move approval of the consent agenda as amended. I'll second. Left. One, two, three, four.

2:40:26 Okay. Oh, Jonathan, can you raise your hand? She's asking for you. Yeah. Yes. So, the motion for approval of the consent agenda is with the following restrictions. So the consent agenda, as amended, will include items number three, the May 26th special meeting minutes. Item number four, the May 27th, 2026 special meeting minutes.

2:41:12 Item number seven, nutrition services dairy, resolution number 2526058. Item number eight, nutrition services bakery, resolution number 2526.059. Item number nine, nutrition services supplies, resolution number 25-26.060. Item number 10, nutrition services produce, resolution number 2526.061. Item number 12, adult meal price increase 2026 to '27, resolution

2:41:59 25-26.063. I move approval of the consent agenda as amended. Okay. We have already a motion for approval. Do I have a second? We have a motion by Director Cole. I think Director DeGraff seconded before. I think. Okay, and a second by Director DeGraff. Any other questions or comments on these particular items? Hearing none, I'll go ahead and call for the vote. All in favor indicate by saying aye. Aye. Is there any against? Hearing none, motion carries five to zero. As far as the other items, we'll just start at the top.

2:42:44 First item pulled was action item 4A, consent agenda under the May 5th special meeting minutes. That's item number one. Director Cole? Yeah. On page two, the top of page two, there's a paragraph that says, "Director DeGraff sent an email informing OGEC that she'd be unable to attend the training." My question is, I guess, why is that in the meeting minutes? I don't think that occurred in the meeting. Are we including emails that pertain to- Mine was printed out ... the meeting? What's that? I had a question printed out and given to her, so maybe that's why. So, yeah, I don't remember that being discussed in the meeting.

2:43:32 I was curious why that was in there. So, point me, Ken, is that under attendance? No. On the top of page two of the- Thank you ... meeting minutes, you go to the top, and the top, the paragraph there says, "Director DeGraff sent an email informing OGEC." You sent it to me. So, I'm just... Mm-hmm. The only thing I'm... I wasn't there, but the only thing I could guess that is, is because it says that she requested guidance on the set of particulars. So I don't know if maybe that's why it was in there. But- If we're going to be including emails that people sent related to- It was an... I had given her

2:44:20 a message, and it was an email asking her. I had emailed, and it was a letter saying, "Can you cover this in your training?" And then you guys asked a bunch of questions, and mine didn't get asked. So, if you don't want it in there, I don't care. And did Ms. Sylvester mention this? I think what you're alluding to or stating actually, Ken, is was it as part of the minutes, which usually would be a statement or something that happens within the context of the meeting? I don't think she stated. She wasn't going to get to my question then. She stated others she wouldn't get to, but no. But is it part of the formal record is the question. Yeah, I don't know. I guess that's my question. I don't remember that coming up during the meeting.

2:45:06 I don't... So if we're sending... I don't know. Yeah, I'm trying to see what's the purpose of the minutes. Are we reflecting what happens in the meeting and trying to accurately, if that- What would you like to see moving forward? I- Do you have a recommendation or suggestion? Well, to me, that shouldn't be in there, otherwise we open up a can of worms of other emails that get sent related to our meetings that should also be included. So the meeting minutes are summarized from the recordings. So that means somewhere in the recordings, it was stated. That was stated, so that's what the minutes are. They're a summary of the recordings.

2:45:52 They're not word for word or so- Okay. So I went back and watched it, and I tried to find that, and I didn't see that being discussed in the review of the meeting. So yeah. I just know that's how the minutes are created, is from a summary of the recordings. But I wasn't at the meeting. Other comments or questions? Yeah. I actually was wanting to... I had that question, too. And also, I want to have time to go through the training as well and watch it.

2:46:38 I also had emailed, the board attorney to review, to confirm everything that is written on here is actually, it tracks correctly with the law. And I've also just to ensure things are just accurate. So, I would like a little bit of time to review it and, maybe at the next board meeting, can we approve it then? My understanding is that we can approve it at a later date. In the meantime, I would suggest board members might want to be thinking about what we would want the minutes to reflect.

2:47:23 Mm-hmm. My understanding is that it is what actually takes place during the meeting time, and so should accurately reflect that. Whether it's a summary or a transcription, the intent is the same, my understanding, in providing minutes. Yeah. Mm-hmm. That would be my understanding as well, so... Yes. The other thing is, unless the board agrees to contact the attorney, getting advice, I don't think we need to be trying to get the attorney to give us individual advice without the board delegating that. Well, that's not germane to the minutes, or is it? Is it in the minutes that- She just said she contacted the district attorney to

2:48:08 get her take on whether or not these meeting minutes- Okay. Well- I get that ... yes, I have to get a board approval on this. I just am not comfortable passing this, approving this until I've had a time to go over it myself, and while I'm checking off the boxes and also with... Do we have the board attorney? Do we have OGEC look at it? I just want to make sure everything is tracking. Yeah. Go ahead, Director Brewer. You look like you were- I mean, to that point, one of the things they talk about in the OGEC thing is that we're

2:48:53 responsible for making sure the minutes are accurate. Yeah. And so, to the extent that we have to question or we have to go back and listen, that's, I guess, that's the expectation of us. Mm-hmm. Well, and I think going through the training actually provides some insights into the state of flux that even the Oregon Government Ethics Commission is in in trying to determine. And I came away, actually, from that meeting thinking perhaps it's up to this board to determine what works for this board. And then perhaps ask for legal opinion as to whether that works, but... Well, actually, OGEC, at the training, they had said, if we

2:49:40 have questions, because we could collaborate together here, write our questions down, send it off, and the committee could review it. And they could send us back a- Formal That is true. There's different levels, and I think Nicole, you've explored that, too. Different levels of- Yes ... of- Formal advice ... formal opinion. Yeah. Yes. And it would be great to collaborate on that and have a conversation around it. So could I suggest for this evening that we not approve this and then do a little bit more research on that, we can bring back at our June 22nd meeting? So what is the research that... Each one of us is doing research or what is the-

2:50:26 Well, Director Langworthy was stating that she wanted to do a little bit more- Verify- ... than what's done. Verify the accuracy. Okay. Well, should I... Here's an idea. I could just send this off to the committee and make sure that this tracks, and then they could- To the committee, you mean the Oregon Government Ethics Commission? Yes. Mm-hmm. Okay. Yeah. Yeah. You see it sent out? Yeah. Sorry. Sorry about that. Yeah. No, I'm... Yeah. In my head. Okay. No, I think that would be the way to do it, because I did call the executive director at OGEC this morning, and she said to contact the attorney and so it just kind of has us going back between mom and dad here.

2:51:12 So I just want to get the answers to this, and I think that would be the way to do it, possibly. I think it would be reasonable to send this training summary back to the trainer and say, "Is this an accurate representation of the training?" They won't do that because it's an interpretation on our end. So if we approve- Oh ... it, we're approving our interpretation. So I'll go first to Ken. Suggestions or direction? So I guess my suggestion is to delete the one paragraph about Director DeGraff's email, because I don't think that happened in the meeting. And I think the rest of it is a reflection of

2:51:57 what happened in the meeting. So I would be okay with approving that, that the meeting minutes are what transpired during the meeting. That would be my recommendation. Okay, and Amber, you had questions on this too. What would help us move forward there? Is that sufficient, or would you like to add to that? No, like I said, I would like to send this off. I think that would be a good direction to go with this, just to- Send it off to who? I'm sorry, to the OGEIC committee, because if we can send this off to the OGEIC committee or... But I thought you said they wouldn't respond to this because this is our interpretation of the- Well, Ruth, the trainer, I don't think would be able to respond to this,

2:52:45 because I think that's what was mentioned, the trainer. Okay. If we send this off to the trainer. Yeah. But if we send this off to the actual committee themselves, they can review it and confirm what we're seeing here is correct. I'm fine if that's what you would like to do, that's- Can we do both? Can we approve tonight with the amendment, and also send it to the Government Ethics Committee? Does it matter, in other words, whether we send it to OGEIC approved or not approved? No, I guess not, because their attitude is they got handed public meeting laws in, I think, 2023,

2:53:30 and they're still figuring it out. So the situation could still be- Yeah ... up for opinion? Yeah. So I don't think we would be at fault here if anything's off. So I'm good with that compromise. Okay. Yeah. As long as the top paragraph is removed. So yeah, I think the citation about Director DeGraff's email, since she wasn't there, and I think it should be a summary of what was spoken- Mm-hmm ... said. And then, in terms of the other, I think we can approve it otherwise, and then if

2:54:18 Director Langworthy finds that something was... We can always revisit. Right. Mm-hmm. So would someone like to make a motion to that effect? I would move that we approve the May 5th, 2026 special meeting minutes as long as we strike the paragraph at the top of page two. I'll go ahead and second. So we have a motion by Director Cole, a second by Director Light. Any further comments or discussion? Hearing none, call for the vote. All in favor indicate by saying aye. Aye. Are there any against? So consent agenda item A1 is

2:55:05 approved five to nothing. Moving on then to 4A2, the May 11th, 2026 board meeting minutes. Also Director Cole? Yeah. Again, at the top of page two, the third paragraph down says, "Director Cole requested to pull consent agenda item 5A," it should be 5A1. And then on the top of page five where it says, "Director Cole requested consent agenda item 4A2 special meeting minutes be held for discussion," I believe that happened early on in the meeting and not

2:55:51 at the point of when we actually did the approval of the items. So that was at the beginning when we approved the agenda. Also, we have consent agenda item there in the middle, 4A2. That should actually be 4A1, which is the April 13th, 2026 meeting minutes. And I guess when we table it, this was a question on formatting, we don't put down the votes and who did the motion when we table that?

2:56:38 Because we had a motion by Director Bru and a second by Director Light to discuss it, and then Director Bru made a motion to table it, and Director Light seconded it, and we voted five-oh to do that. So does that not get reflected in the minutes? Well, again, coming back to my previous statement, I think that the minutes should accurately reflect. So any of these corrections- Okay ... because it isn't whether we remember necessarily now, but if someone were to review them, and a number of years had passed, would it be accurate? And that's sort of what I think we should be shooting for. And I have one other thing. The next motion down says, "Director Bru moved, Director Graf seconded motion to approve the resolution for

2:57:26 structural engineering services from..." And actually, it was the resolution for a summit security system. We were not dealing with the engineering contract at that time.So that, yeah, it didn't appear to be a transcription from the meeting, but- Oh, I'm lost. So security system- In the middle of page five- Okay. Yeah ... where it says, "Motion Director Brew moved, Director DeGraff seconded the motion to approve the resolution for structural engineering services to

2:58:13 Miller Consulting Engineers." We were not discussing the- That's, yeah ... structural engineering services. We were discussing the Summit security system. That's true, right, Brad? Aren't the cost figures that are there is related to... Yes. Yep. Okay. I think just changing that title would suffice, correct? Getting- Yeah, it should say, "Approve the resolution for Summit Security Systems," and not the- Yeah ... engineering services.

2:59:05 And was there anything else? I think there's just one more on the middle of page seven. Right after where it says, "Yancey clarified the board's action authorizes the purchase, not the contract negotiation," Director Brew had talked about getting a report back on the cost and conferring with the superintendent on a policy definition, and I think the minutes should reflect that there was additional information requested by the board. Requested by the board for? It was...

2:59:51 I had a note here. I have to go back. "Clarified the board's action authorizes..." So what was this? Oh, I think it was about on the final cost of the curriculum. This was around the purchase of the curriculum. I think we got an email back on that. Did we get an email on the final- I think ... costs of the curriculum? I don't recall- Yeah ... that. Okay, I'll check on that. Thank you. Yeah, I'd just like the minutes to reflect that. Was there anything else? Not in those minutes, nope. Ken, in that, let's see, the motion to... I think we were doing the RIF. It's on page...

3:00:36 It's the May 11th, page six, where you declared a conflict of interest as a spouse of an employee subject to the reductions. Does your vote get counted for? Yes, I believe it still does. Yeah. It does? Okay. Yeah. I was just wondering. Okay. And then did you have anything else or- No, I didn't have anything else on those- Okay ... meeting minutes. And then for me, under superintendent communication, in here it says- What page are you on? I'm sorry, I'm on page 10 for May 11th. Under 7B?

3:01:21 Under, yeah- Okay ... 7B. So Amara addressed the concern raised by board members about not being provided the opportunity to visit schools, explaining the priority given to schooling schedules and emphasized the need for board members to be visible in schools and community to build trust and put students first. I also want it to be... I looked up the transcript and also what was said in that communication is, "I did some research and found that board member school visits were postponed beginning in November due to the status of certified bargaining at the time. Following the conclusion of bargaining and ensuring midyear layoffs, it was felt that schools needed time to

3:02:07 adjust to the changes before resuming board member school visits." I just- And that was taken from the video? The transcript from the video, yeah. Yeah. I can- Okay ... I just want that- Well, unless there's- ... summary to be in there ... some more, I would prefer for myself to not approve tonight. Yeah, and there is no- Make changes, bring them back to the board. Okay. Is there some more? Yeah. And, oh, I'm sorry. For this one, and said, "There is no intentional preferential treatment of board members happening in relation to scheduling board member school visits." Okay. But that was it. Yes. No more- But that was under the superintendent communication also.

3:02:53 Yes. So we want to make sure, again, that the minutes accurately reflect, so. And we can do a summary, and I can leave it with... So can we go ahead and put it on the agenda for 6/22 with the corrections? And then if we can read through those to make sure they, again, accurately reflect what happened in the meeting, that would be great. Anything else on consent agenda item 4A2? Okay. Moving then on to consent agenda item 4A5, financial statement, resolution 25-26.056.

3:03:39 Director Cole? Yeah. Under revenues, the second bullet, the end of that second bullet talks about including prior reconciliations assumption for high cost of-Disability for current year, and accounting for bus depreciation, $560,000. And that's new, and I guess I was just hoping to get an explanation on what that is and- Yeah. So, Oregon Department of Education, through the transportation grant, reduces the revenue for bus depreciation. You have buses that get depreciated over a 10-year period of time. We have a number of buses that are in that 10-year period, and that's the amount that they have reduced due to that depreciation. So we get less money for the buses because they're older. Correct. Right. Yeah. We get... Yeah. Okay. That's correct.

3:04:24 And that just showed up? Is that the reason it- Yes. Yeah. Oh, wow. Okay. The other question I had was maybe on the table in the expenditure forecast, under expenditures, purchase services, the projected year-end to date was down 540,000- Mm-hmm ... compared to last month. Yeah. And I was wondering, where were those reductions? Yeah. So, obviously every month it goes along, these numbers on this financial report change, and it's based on activity that has happened and what we anticipate to happen through the remainder of the year. So, as we reanalyze it and looked at it, we're

3:05:10 making reasonable assumptions with our numbers, and based on the contracts that we've paid, the purchase services that we've paid, what we still have outstanding, that's why that adjustment- Okay ... was made. So there wasn't something specific we did to try to- No, we're continuing just to refine- Okay ... these numbers as best we can. Okay. Thank you. That was all I had for that. Any other comments or questions from the board on this specific item? Hearing none, I'm going to go ahead and call for the vote on this. So all in favor indicate by saying aye. Aye. Aye. Are there any opposed? Do we need a motion, Jonathan? We need a motion. We do. Oh, that's true. I move we approve- Can you trigger the motion ... the financial statement, Resolution 2526056.

3:05:58 Second. And DeGraff second. Thank you. So motion by Director Cole, seconded by Director DeGraff. Call for the vote. All in favor indicate by saying aye. Aye. Are there any opposed? Hearing none, motion carries five to nothing. Moving then onto the consent agenda item 4A11, structural repairs, resolution- Jonathan, I think the personnel report got pulled. Oh, oh yeah. You pulled the personnel report. Sorry. Bumped that. Yeah. So, the personnel report, I just had some questions. So, the names of people who have

3:06:43 resigned or retired are not there. And- So we don't ever put names on the personnel report. But then if you look under the new hire- Except for new hires. Other than that, all the other names are- And why would that be? Well, my guess would be confidentiality, and I can ask Dustin for clarification on that, but typically they've never been put in there, other than new hires. Jodi, that's not true. If you go back and look at previous reports, they did put those names in. I think when- I don't know. The least is on our website in terms of meeting minutes, so that goes back- Mm-hmm ... 10 years or so. But I don't know how far back I know that if you go back that- Yeah

3:07:28 ... it was included in there. And there are certain districts that still do that. The reason I ask the question, and I've asked this before, is that, again, there's no years of experience either, and I would like to reach out sometimes as a board member and thank them for their service. And if we're going to publish them for new hires, again, unless there's some disclaimer that they've signed saying, "Please don't put my name in," or, "Please do put my name in," I think that we should include them, unless there's specific laws pertaining to that. I can find out why names are not included, whether or not there's... I'm going to assume that there's a reason, but I will ask-

3:08:13 Okay ... and find out about names being put on the personnel report. Okay. And if it gets cited for confidentiality, can you follow up further, and is that state statute we're paying attention to, or is it just our practice? Any comments or questions on that item? So I will move to approve consent agenda item 4A6, personnel report resolution 2526.057. Second. Moved by Director Light, seconded by Director Brew. Any other comments or questions? Hearing none, call for the vote. All in favor indicate by saying aye.

3:09:00 Aye. Are there any opposed? Hearing none, motion carries 5 to 0. Now moving on to... I think this takes us to consent agenda item 4A11, structural repairs, resolution 2526.062. Yeah, I got a few questions. One is, what is the schedule for the work? The schedule is still being determined. Obviously, there is enough work that we're not going to be able to complete it in one year, and so this is probably going to stretch over two years. Obviously, a lot of this work is very intrusive into the building, and we can't conduct the work when students are in the building, or

3:09:47 we have to relocate students, depending on which classrooms we may be working on. Yeah. And so until we have a contractor on board, we will be working with them to determine the timeline, the project calendar- Okay ... the project approach, all of those things. Okay But obviously, Ken, or Director Cole, we feel urgency around getting this work done. Yep. I can imagine. So, can you elaborate on the, I guess the...

3:10:33 So the work that is being done in over half of the spaces are behind walls. We don't know what's behind those walls. We didn't uncover every truss, meaning we didn't take off all the sheetrock, expose everything. That would've been super disruptive to our entire facility. We also don't know what abatement lies behind those walls that haven't been uncovered, and that is why I'm requesting to carry a 30% contingency. That is following the recommendation of the structural engineering firm that conducted the research on this. So there's a lot of things that we don't know yet until we get into the walls.

3:11:18 Okay. Because I thought I read there was the abatement that we did lead and asbestos surveys. Correct. That we don't think there's any asbestos- Correct ... that they're going to encounter. If there's pipes in those walls, in 1950s buildings, they're going to be wrapped in asbestos. We can't abate those because they're behind walls. Until you get into the wall, then you uncover the potentially asbestos-wrapped pipes, we have to stop and abate before the contractors will continue on with their work. Oh, I thought it said there are no known areas of removal that contain asbestos- Correct ... is what we told the contractor. So- No known areas. Okay. We don't know what's behind the walls. Okay.

3:12:08 So one other question is, how are we funding this? Because before you talked about that we didn't have this amount of money- Correct ... and that we're going to come to the board, and I don't know if we were going to do something similar to what was done with the turf fields, or how are we paying for this? So, did not want to presume or assume anything for the board. So I have made initial contacts with multiple people on financing this, and the proposal is to bring back, at the 22nd, options for the board to consider. That would include further reductions in our budget to fund this or looking at full faith and credit notes, some kind of private financing. So I will be bringing back options

3:12:54 to finance this. In the interim, to begin the work, you'll notice or you probably noticed on the financial statement, I have assumed $1.3 million worth of capital outlay in the remaining budget. We're going to go ahead and move forward beginning the projects, knowing that we have budget in our general fund set aside for some of this work. Not all the work, but enough to get us through the month of June. That 1.3 also includes the 482,000 worth of security system upgrades that we're doing. That's why that number's so big. So we'll begin the work, we have general fund resources to do some of it, and then I'll be bringing back options for the board to consider for financing the rest. Good. As a former finance guy, I'm really uncomfortable with

3:13:39 approving a contract when we don't have resources on board to fund the full contract. Okay. I understand that. I guess I would also- It's 10 schools, so I know we don't have an ideal, totally accurate timeframe, but over what period of time do you anticipate we could fix all 10 schools? Over two summers. Mm-hmm. Yeah. The issue, Director Brew, is that I didn't have an approved contract to take out to financing because the financing options that we have are asking me, "Who's doing the work? What are they doing? Has it been approved by the board?" No, none of that has happened. So if you'd like to wait until we have financing options, we don't

3:14:25 have a contract in place. So it's kind of the cart and the horse. But, obviously you have experience in this as well. My recommendation is to approve this contract and bring back financing options to the board at a later date, but that's my recommendation, and the board is... Obviously you're going to make the decision you're going to make. So my recollection is when we approved the turf fields, the contract, the funding was part of that at the same time. Correct. How is this different? Didn't know the amount. We had the amount in the turf fields because it was all off state contracts. This was intent to bid, and we had competitive bids, so we did not know the amount of the contract until last week when we opened the bids. We had an estimate from our engineer of 5.8 million.

3:15:11 This obviously came in much lower. I didn't want to go out with a $5.8 million financing when I knew there was a chance that this could be much lower. Mark? I guess the other thing, I'm just concerned, I think as we've gone through some painful spending cuts, I think it's important that we be as diligent as we can about the spending, and I'm uncomfortable with a 30% contingency. I would prefer that we limit it and that with the two-year construction, it seems to me there would be adequate time to, as stuff, as we run into things, that we could come back and get reports to the board and

3:15:57 authorize additional funding at that time. It just seems to me that I would like to have more... We have a pretty detailed scope of work for the estimate for the actual constructionThe bid, and this is just kind of another open-ended, fairly large number that I'd like to see that we be diligent about managing. Do our schools stay, sorry, uninsured for two years? Are you doing it one school at a time or- They will remain uninsured if an event happens and we don't have a certified stamp document saying that they've been repaired. Let me... Can I follow on that? Sure. I wanted to clarify with Director Cole on the contingency amount.

3:16:44 So, if we don't have contingency and this exceeds the contract, the contractors will stop work. We won't have the budget to move forward if we have to come back to the board at the next regularly scheduled business meeting, which could be a month away. So I would just caution the board and make sure that you're aware of that. And once contractors leave, as you probably have experienced- To get onto another board ... it's very difficult to get them back. Yeah. But if you're doing work over two years, right? So if you experience the first site, you find something, you have money in the contract to pay them to deal with that, right, in the meantime? And then can come back to the board and say, "We're going to need additional, we've discovered these things." Yeah, we'll have a budget for every building. My point is that if we are at the budget, I can't

3:17:32 exceed what the board has approved, so we have to make assumptions for every building moving forward under the contract. If they open a wall and they see something that needs to be fixed immediately, and I don't have any contingency or limited contingency, that work has to stop, because I don't want to be in a situation where I am going against what the board has approved. Are you saying suggest taking money from another project and moving it over for that one and so if it's $100,000 and $300,000 at one school, I just say, "Okay, I'm going to take $200,000 for now from this school and move it over here," but that leaves the one school very inadequate for the resources we have. And obviously we don't know the work plan and the timeline yet for the schools. From my perspective, what I would

3:18:19 suggest is a contingency of $250,000. You come up with something, you fix it, and while they're fixing that, you come back to us and saying, "Looks like we're going to go through that first 250. Can we get another 250?" Or something like that. Just because, well, contracts seem to spend every dollar- And that's my concern. I don't see any constraints to be efficient. 7% contingency, that is well below what any- That is first payment. That's a down payment. That buys you a month to get back to us and ask for another 250. Oh, okay. Yeah. It's not, yeah. I mean, I'll do whatever the board wants. I want to caution you that this could significantly delay progress on some of

3:19:06 these projects. Because we could hold a meeting. We could set up a meeting, if you're wanting to come to the board, we got 24 hours and we- So, if there was a $250,000 contingency, that's about average for the sites, right? Did you- No. No, Walterville is well over a million. Trying to remember the... And, uh, Director- The statement was made about insurance, and my understanding is we do indeed have insurance on these buildings with the exclusion of anything related to the structural beam. Is that correct?

3:19:53 If there's a structural failure and we haven't addressed it, then we don't have coverage. There's more to that- But if we had a flood, let's say, we had a burst in the plumbing and we had significant damage. Yeah. Okay. I just want to- If trusses weren't damaged due to a named barrel- Mm-hmm ... then we would have coverage. But come winter, if we have snow, and we've specifically asked the question, if we have any trace of snow on these roofs, we cannot hold school in those buildings because they are uncovered. That's what I was going to ask, if you would explain that to Director Bru. That already happened this year. Yes. But that's regardless, right? That's- Unless the roof caves in. Right. I mean, the work has to be done. So it's- Yeah. I mean, obviously, we're going to look at the list and work with the contractor to address the most critical this summer.

3:20:38 Right. Walterville is one of the most critical. Okay. And that is the most expensive. Yeah. Having done similar work for a lot of years, we had 3.5% standard contingency for a lot of projects, and you had to manage it and know if things were coming up and deal with it and get approval if it needed to go over that. Yeah. And so it should be something. I don't know why that it would be- Well, don't we have a separate contingency fund already? In the district? Mm-hmm. We have it in the general fund. In the general fund, and that is how much? And wouldn't that cover- It's a million dollars. A million dollars, so in an emergency before we could get board approval. I mean, I'm just looking for action from the board.

3:21:23 I don't want to argue with you. You set the contingency. If you want to approve the contract, approve the contract. I'm fine with whatever you want to do. You guys obviously have a lot of experience, and I would lean on that as well. Just I think the board has a lot of questions. We've been presented with an option and I'm looking at the timeframe going, well, does it make more sense to do them individually? Does it make more sense to maybe package them around timeframe? I don't know. I don't have any experience in this, but I am asking board members if they have experience, and you obviously have an experience. I have a great deal of experience. So, and that's- Helped build a middle school. I don't want to delay it, but also finances are really, really important-

3:22:10 Mm-hmm ... and they're impacting our kids, so I want to make sure that we give enough guidance that we do it responsibly. Yeah. I think that to determineThe projects and how you'd package them together, that's a critical conversation with the contractor. Mm-hmm. And how they deploy their resources. And in many projects, we don't get to direct that once we hire the contract, they get to direct that a little bit more because that's their business. Well, and that's why I'm asking the question now. Yeah. Have we had those conversations with Essex? We have not hired Essex, so- Have we had that conversation framing- No, we have not. We have to make sure that the contract gets approved before we have any conversations with contractors. Okay. Thank you. Because in that case, we had three competing contractors. If I'm having conversations with a contractor before the bid, that

3:22:57 would open it up for a protest. Okay. I just want to make sure that, although we don't know how much the engineering costs, we didn't get any reports back on that. You told me we were going to get them. We haven't seen any of those. I want to make sure that we've done detailed plans, and so we have a bid on the actual construction, but it's just another million dollars of just- Yeah ... without being able to account for it to, here we are, we've cut teachers, talking about programs, impact to other

3:23:42 programs. I want to make sure that we're being as diligent as we can with spending our money and- Yeah ... and transparent as we can. And so I would advocate for a lower contingency with the idea that, as you use it, you inform the board and say, "We may need some more," and come to the board. Yeah. And so we have a record of how we're spending that money. I would like to clarify a statement you made. I believe I updated the board on Friday updates with how much we are spending each month on structural engineering costs. Yeah. So you made a statement that you haven't ever received any information on that, and I believe that I have provided that in Friday updates on a regular basis that this month it... Huh? It came out of one of my- Yeah. And I did that monthly.

3:24:28 Well, I don't remember seeing the engineering costs in there. I remember- Yeah ... seeing the estimates changing, so I apologize. I'll go back and double-check that, because I- I gave you monthly invoice amounts because we were paying them every month. So I would like the record to reflect accurately. Sure. It should be in the minutes. Meanwhile, in our next Friday update, could you give us a total cost of- Sure ... of all that? That'd be great for those of us math challenged. So board members, do you have enough information to go forward? What we're voting on tonight is this actual proposal, the actual resolution. Yep. So from my perspective,

3:25:16 without a financing source nailed down, we're effectively saying, "Gosh, if we need to take another $4 million in cuts to pay for this out of schools, that's okay." I would rather know where that money's coming from, because I don't want to write that blank check against our students. So you're looking for more specificity around the funding source? Around how it's going to be paid for. Okay. Director Cole? I certainly agree with that. I guess I'm wondering, would two weeks of delay in executing the contract or approving the contract affect the two-year schedule? Potentially, and it could potentially impact the contractor as well,

3:26:04 because for every two weeks, a month that goes by, they'll pick up other jobs. Yeah. So that's just a caution. Obviously, this is the board's decision. Okay. Director DeGraff? We have a motion, right? I'm fine. I've got everything I need. And Director Langworthy? Yeah, I got everything I need. Okay. It's been a while. Who made the motion, and who did the second? Motion by Director Cole, seconded by director- I don't think we had a motion for this yet. Did we not declare a motion? Oh, I guess we didn't. No, we didn't. Okay. I move to approve the resolution to

3:26:52 get a contract with Essex General Construction for the structural repairs. Do I have a second? I would clarify that Director Langworthy reviewed the procurement file in detail. Okay. And had an opportunity to ask questions. Okay, so we have a motion on the floor by Director DeGraff. Do we have a second? Hearing none, motion fails for lack of a second. I would request that the district would bring this back for the meeting on the 22nd, addressing some of the issues that were raised here tonight. So moving then to consent-

3:27:37 Director? Yes? I'm not sure how to say this, but speaking for myself personally, if we have answers earlier, I'm not against doing a special meeting- Okay ... to deal with this issue. I'm trying to be a team player here, so if we need to meet again before the next meeting, I'm certainly available to do that. Well, and I appreciate that. So thanks for speaking up on that. Moving to consent agenda item 4A-13 budget appropriation transfer, resolution number 2526063Just

3:28:24 a couple things. One is the first, the resolution at the top says 24-25 O64 and dated June 9th, 2025. So those need to be corrected because this is actually for the current one. And let's see what's here. I was trying to understand if the subscription-based information technology, if the information there, the requirements in Gatsby were implemented in 2023, I guess why wasn't that included in the budget to begin with? So you'll see that it was included in the budget.

3:29:11 That's what this resolution is. The money is currently sitting in the budget. We're asking you to move it from function 4,000 to functions 5,100 and 2,000. And in special revenue, we're asking you to move it from function 3,000 and 4,000 to functions 1,000, 2,000, and 5,100. And the reason is that we sought and received additional clarifications from the district's municipal auditor. Oh. And that's why we changed it in the functions. We needed to reflect it differently than what we had budgeted. So it was budgeted. Okay. I remember that discussion during the audit. Thank you. Okay. So yeah, just correcting the dates for the resolution and the date,

3:29:56 I think needs to happen. Okay. Do you want to go ahead and make... Or are there other questions on this particular resolution? I don't have any other questions. I was going to move approval as amended. Okay. I will second. I'll second. Oh, okay. So, the motion by Director Brew, seconded by Director Cole. Go ahead and call for the vote. All in favor indicate by saying aye. Aye. Are there any opposed? Motion carries five to zero, which pulls us through the consent agenda, moves us on then to action item 4B, the approval of designation of district officers,

3:30:42 resolution 25-26.065. Mr. Yancey. It's recommended that the board of directors approve a resolution designating district officers, clerks, and agents, including the depositories for district funds, as listed on the attached document for the 2026-27 fiscal year. So moved. Thanks. Second. Moved by Director Light, excuse me, seconded by Director Brew. Comments or questions?

3:31:28 I guess I'd just like the board to consider whether or not to delegate the Public Contract Review Board responsibilities. There's just been some contracting that's done there that hasn't always been clear, and I would like to think it might be good for the board to see those things come through as that gets applied just for learning and for transparency purposes. So clarification, what this is allowing our staff to do is to actually conduct all these procurement processes. So are you saying the board wants to conduct those procurement processes? Only the part where...

3:32:14 Is this the part where... I'm sorry. Is this the right one where it's the Local Contract Review Board? Yeah. This states that you are acting as your own contract review board. Right. So only those things that require the Local Contract Review Board approval. That's not all purchases, right? There's lots of purchasing that happens- No, that's all purchases because you're your own contract review, and we are operating under the Oregon Attorney General's public contract model rules, which include all purchasing ORSs and OARs. So what you're asking, Ken, is so the board wants to conduct all those processes?

3:32:59 It was my recollection that those applied when we were doing special procurements. No. So- These ORSs and OARs talk not only about special procurements- Okay ... it talks about state contracts, it talks about the bidding requirements, it talks about the thresholds on which we have to be bidding, and when we're allowed just to move forward. So this is the Oregon Attorney General's Model Public Contracts Manual stipulates all purchasing and procurement laws for public agencies. And what this resolution is asking is that the board is delegating the superintendent and the chief operations officer to carry out that full authority for this next year.

3:33:45 Without this authority, the district will not be purchasing until the board conducts those processes. Is that what you're desiring? No, that was not my desire. My desire was where we were doing the special procurements related to the construction, and I can't remember what the issues, the particular ones we've done where... What was the... I can't remember which one it was now. Or maybe it was the security systems. That that-That we didn't go through the normal bidding process. Correct. Right. You had to do a special procurement for-

3:34:31 No, not a special procurement. We operate under ORS 279A, which allows us to purchase off of state contracts, which have already been competitively bid by another agency. There's cooperative language, and that allows us to buy off of that with guaranteed state pricing. But that was used when there was an expenditure that was in excess of what the board had authorized for expenditures of 150,000, right? So even though it was over the 150,000, it didn't need to go back to the board for approval. That was my recollection. Because- It's not the security systems. Okay. So I would need to be reminded. So we already are bringing back any contract by state law that

3:35:17 requires the board to approve. It was the social studies curriculum, I believe. Correct, and you approved the purchase of the social studies curriculum, which is required by state law. So I guess I'm confused as to what the board is looking for. And this is standard. I mean, this- Yeah ... the same resolution's been presented to this board until this ORS was in existence, and it's never been an issue. So I guess I'm wondering what problem we're trying to address. I think it's not really trying to address a problem as much as just getting information so that he has a clear understanding. Yeah. My understanding is we've done this- Every year ... even before my time. It's been since probably this Oregon Attorney General office over saw

3:36:03 procurement. Right. Yeah. And I understand there's a long history of doing the curriculum adoption, and it was implied that that was the approval of the contract for the actual purchase of the curriculum. And I guess I'm asking that we see that information. Rather than just approving the curriculum, we should have two actions, one approving the curriculum and one approving the contract for that. And I think that was actually, in talking with legal counsel, that was their recommendation. So that's different than what this is, though. Yes. So how does that relate to this resolution? Then I'm bringing up the wrong spot. Okay. And I apologize. So I thought that was-

3:36:50 But we should and could perhaps seek further information just for clarification purposes. Microphone, Johnson. Oh. So it might be something we want to pursue at a later date. For purposes of this resolution, though, do board members have enough information? Yes. Yeah. So my confusion, Mr. Yancey, is in our operating agreement where it says all contracts of the district must be approved by the board unless otherwise delegated by their import- Right ... by the superintendent or designee. Yep. Are we effectively, by doing this, delegating everything to the superintendent and designee? Or- No. This is only Oregon State procurement law. Employment contracts are different than Oregon State procurement law.

3:37:35 They're employment contracts and under employment law. Okay. So that's a different contract. Okay. And we don't have the authority, or I don't have the authority to approve employment contracts for individual employees. There's a collective bargaining process, which is outlined in the collective bargaining acts, PECBA, and the collective bargaining laws, and the board is required to approve those. So this is not employment contracts. This is procurement law and procurement contracts. Okay. We might want to look at rewriting this because it says all contracts, and if there's limitations on what all contracts are, then maybe we want to say that. Anyway, okay. Thank you. Yeah. So this specifically talks about public contract review under these

3:38:21 specific ORSs. These ORSs are not employment contract law. Okay. This is in the Oregon Attorney General's Model Public Contracts Manual, which is not employment law. This is procurement law. The labor laws don't fall under the Oregon Attorney General's office. So we need more clarity- Yeah ... at some point. And pertaining to our operating agreements, I think there's multiple places that the languages don't agree with themselves or with our policy, and those need to be cleaned up. But for purposes of this resolution, shall we move forward?

3:39:06 Yeah. Okay. I'll go ahead, and we have a motion on the floor and a second, so I'll go ahead and call for the vote. All in favor, indicate by saying aye. Aye. Are there any opposed? Motion carries five to nothing. Moving on to property liability insurance. Thank you. It's recommended that the school district board of directors renew property casualty and liability insurance coverage, including earthquake and flood coverage under Special Districts Association of Oregon for the period of July 1, 2026 to June 30, 2027. It's also recommended that the board of directors renew workers' comp insurance coverage under Safe Corporation for that same period of time, 7/1/26 to 6/30/27.

3:39:55 I would move for approval. I'll second. Comments or questions? Just a quick comment. It looks like we're actually saving money. We are on workers' comp. And I think that's a celebration no matter what the amount. Yeah. So in the amount of 35,967. Yeah. Is that based on experience? Yes, it's based on experience and the negotiations that we do with the Safe... We use our insurance agent of record to negotiate with Safe. Okay. Yeah. Thank youAny other comments or questions? I'll go ahead and call for the vote. All in favor, indicate by saying aye. Aye. Are there any opposed? Hearing none, motion carries five to zero.

3:40:41 Action item 4D, approve designation of counsel and auditor, Resolution 25-26.067. Yeah. Again, Mr. Yancey. It's recommended that the board approve the resolution designating district agents as listed on the attached document. You'll see that we are staying with the same auditing firm. We are staying with the same attorney firms and legal counsel. However, we are making a slight change to general counsel and specialized services for the Hungerford Law Firm. We're still keeping Garrett Hemann. They do a lot of work with PACE, but we're shifting a little bit more of the general counsel and daily work to the Hungerford Law Firm, which is a firm that

3:41:26 we've worked with for a number of years. But what this does is it authorizes to work with any of the firms that we've listed here. So- Are any of these local? Thorpe, Purdy and Jewett is local. That's what I thought. Mm-hmm. So I would entertain a motion. I'll move approval. Moved by Director Cole. Second. Seconded by Director DeGraff. So I have two questions. One, this is one of the few resolutions says the ORS requires, but it doesn't specify which ORS. Do you know which ORS requires that we designate the

3:42:11 law firms and- Hmm. I don't have that on here. I apologize. I looked high and low, and I couldn't find anything that... You have any idea how I'd go about finding that? I can try to look. OSBA might know the RS, but we'll- Yeah ... try to find it and report back on that. Okay. And last thing, under the Garrett Hemann, it just says in specialized service as designated by PACE. Mm-hmm. And I guess that was new language we haven't- Yeah ... and I was curious why that was in there. So when we have an issue that goes to PACE, which is our insurance provider, and say we get a tort claim, we'll give that to PACE Claims, and they will assign a attorney

3:42:57 firm. They're paying the bill of that attorney firm, but we have to authorize that we're actually able to use that attorney firm for our district. So that's why I put in there special services designated by PACE. We don't anticipate using Garrett Hemann as much as we have in the past, but I did want to designate and remind the board that PACE is going to use them as much as they need to. Okay. Thank you. That tends to be their go-to. Okay. Thank you. Has been my experience. Yeah. Other comments or questions? I was just curious because you mentioned all five of the list are designated as general counsel.

3:43:42 Yeah. But we have a preferred general counsel amongst those? Is there a separate designation moving to Hungerford? No. They're equally as would be considered experts in school law. So general counsel for staff, superintendent would be for anything that we need to review personnel. They're very highly skilled in special education law. Okay. General counsel is just to have that day-to-day business that we would need if we want to run a wording by it or an interpretation or anything like that. Okay. Yeah. Obviously, with some of these, you'll see that we get into a little bit more specificity, like Foster Garvey, we've only identified as

3:44:29 litigation and bond counsel, because that's their specialty is bond counsel. We wouldn't look at them for general counsel services. And the same with Miller Nash Graham, right? Is they have certain expertise- Yes ... that we go to them for certain questions. Okay. Yeah. They really are strong in contract administration and construction law. Okay. We actually used them more than any other when we were doing the construction of Pamlin, because we were obviously negotiating big construction contracts. Okay. All right. Thank you for that clarification. Yeah. Is it Hungerford a law firm that specializes in education? Is that- They do. It's one of their specialties, yeah. Yeah. Okay. And then I saw that they offer trainings and all that. Mm-hmm. You essentially get a subscription. Is that something that the district does?

3:45:17 Do they pay for the training? Typically- Not that I'm asking- ... the way these law firms work is they have their standard rates that they would charge, and then they have a discounted rate for school districts. Mm-hmm. And so we get that discounted rate for school districts. And I've not known a law firm to give away free training. Oh, no, I was asking if we were paying for the subscription- Oh, no ... kind of like with OSBA. No, we're not paying for any subscription. Oh, okay. We basically pay as we utilize them. Mm-hmm. Okay. Sorry. Okay. Moving forward, call for the vote. All in favor, indicate by saying aye. Aye. Are there any opposed?

3:46:02 Motion carries five to nothing. And then moving on to item 4E, adoption of the 2026-27 budget, Resolution 25-26.068. Yeah. So, the resolution, this is recommended that the board adopt the 26-27 budget resolution as presented, and it's on the attached document. This is exactly what was approved by the budget committee, and we have not received any further information on appropriation level, whether we're getting more money or less money. So we're bringing this forward as approved by the budget committee, recommended for adoption by the board I'll move approval of the budget.

3:46:48 Second. Moved by Director Cole, seconded by Director DeGraff. Comments, questions? Just one question. If we do get a loan for the seismic, the retrofit, would we then do a supplemental budget to recognize that income and so on? Yeah, potentially. If it exceeds 10% of any fund, we would do a supplemental budget, for both recognizing the revenue, appropriating the expenditures, and then addressing any debt service payment. The debt service payment typically is set up in arrears, so it'd be next year. So that we deal with that in next year's budget. Thank you.

3:47:38 So this budget was passed forward to the board on May 7th in the budget meeting. Yeah. And there's been a lot of water under the bridge that we weren't aware of at that time when it came through. So I have my concerns of whether some of the decisions that have been made are actually reflective of both the information that we took in and the budget forms that we did across the district, and/or even some of the guidance as far as what was given as we moved into the superintendent search. What I heard here tonight causes me concerns. And again, it's just rumors of cuts, but when you tighten your belt, to me, there's a degree of

3:48:26 specificity that needs to happen for me to feel comfortable with that. So I just need to state that up front. Mm-hmm. What I would remind you, Chair Light, is that what we're asking is obviously very high level. This is appropriation levels. And once you get past the appropriation levels, then you start talking about the specifics of staffing and programs and all of those things. So we're not asking for you to approve the specificity of the reductions tonight, because that isn't what the resolution is. This is simply appropriation levels. And if you want to continue having those conversations, then I think there's nothing precluding you from having those conversations. This is simply just getting us the bookends of our budget

3:49:12 moving forward. And I understand that. It's the broad picture. However, if the board or board members want to weigh in, then what's that avenue before the end of the school year? I would say that that would be a conversation between the board and the superintendent. Okay. I mean, obviously, I'm at the pleasure of the superintendent, so- Right. No, I get it. But you do understand how it works. What do you mean by weigh in as far as like... I went to the forums that we had before the budget. So are you talking about wanting to help

3:49:57 decide what cuts happen? Because that's not really a board purview. Well, the board's responsibility is to provide oversight. So we don't meddle in the operations. However, we, I think, are responsible and obligated to reflect our own personal feelings, or even those from the community, the people that elected us. And so one of the things that was a common theme, particularly in the budget forums, was this need to keep cuts away from the classroom. So we heard extensive testimony tonight that it doesn't seem like it's keeping it away from the classroom. And maybe it's just my curiosity, but I'd like to know,

3:50:44 how did we get there? Or what, with more specificity. If there's an opportunity to have that conversation before June 30th, I would entertain that. But, and again, maybe I'm sensitive because I've been on the board a long time, and the statement was made tonight that once these cuts happen, they're very hard to get back. And there's a number of areas, not just in the dual immersion, but there's a number of areas where we've seen us make cuts in areas with the assurance at the time that we were going to address them when times were richer or whatever case, we get more money from the legislature, whatever.

3:51:29 I want to have more confidence going forward that what I vote for is going to follow the parameters that I've been hearing. Speaking for myself, I think it's between a rock and a hard place, and this is what I learned as the new member. It's like, I think all of the speakers that spoke tonight were looking at the board and saying, "Why are you making these cuts?" We learned about it when you did. This does not come from the board, right? We don't get involved with the day-to-day operations, and I don't want to make a speech, but we actually had a former board member talking about overreach, getting involved in the day-to-day operations.

3:52:15 We've actually had board members sued for trying to influence, or for getting too involved. And so, we care , but our options are limited, as I'm coming to understand. Our options are limited as far as taking the actual action. That's not our place. But our obligation as a board member is to provide oversight to our community, the people who elected us, as far as, is this what you want to see in the district? If it's not, then-Again, we have no power to go and actually change those, but we can and should make recommendations or suggestions to our one and only

3:53:02 employee, who is the superintendent. And just for clarification, if I may, I want to remind the board, and Bob, I appreciate what you said, but I do want to remind that on May 11th, you did approve the resolution for reduction in force. So that's when the board learned that we were reducing X number of positions in each area. Didn't come programmatically, but the board was the one that approved the resolution for reductions in force. I, for one, did not approve it and- Right. But consent, it got approved ... it got approved. Yeah, it got approved. I don't feel like I can vote for the budget because too many remaining unknowns. First, the public comments tonight about the changes for dual immersion Spanish language program led to questions

3:53:50 about how much input, if any, was taken from staff, parents, or the public. I know that the elementary immersion program at Guy Lee is popular and has a waiting list. And this is good news. It's increasing enrollment instead of decreasing enrollment. The proposed cuts of the dual immersion program at the middle and high school levels will not help this growth in the future. Second, I cannot vote for the budget due to our needs to revisit board goals, which are over 10 years old and way before the time of the majority of the boards, including myself. The goals determine our priorities, which impact the budget. Big decisions like school districts' budget require

3:54:36 careful deliberation and a clear understanding of cuts we are facing. The board represents the public, and we must be sure we are accurate and clear about the finances of this public entity. So we have a motion. Is there other... Sorry, didn't mean to cut anybody off. Any other comments or questions? Hearing none, I'll go ahead and call for the vote. This vote I will call as a roll call vote. Director Cole? Yes. Director Brew? Yes. Director Degraff? Yes.

3:55:21 Director Langworthy? No. Director Light? No. Motion carries three to zero, or three to two, excuse me. Moving on then to 4F, approval of OSAA cooperative sponsorship, SHS and Mohawk girls' soccer, resolution 2526.069. Oh, there we go. It was recommended that the board approve resolution

3:56:06 2526.069, which, as you stated, is a cooperative agreement between Mohawk High School and Springfield High School girls' soccer. I'll move approval. Second. Any comments or questions from the board or from Indy? I'm just glad that we can do these partnerships and provide opportunities for other kids. So I think it's a great thing. Yeah, it's a great thing. Thank you. All right. All in favor indicate by saying aye. Aye. Are there any opposed? Hearing none, motion carries five to zero. Moving on to action item 4G,

3:56:53 action on information discussed in executive session. I would entertain a motion. So I move that the board take no further action related to the complaint discussed in executive session and delegate authority to the chair to draft a response to complaint based upon board's discussion. Second. Motion by Director Cole, second by Director Brew. Any comments or questions? All for the vote. I would like to declare a potential conflict of interest. I'm sorry, I didn't hear. I want to declare a potential conflict of interest. Okay.

3:57:43 So hearing no further comments or questions, I will go ahead and call for the vote. All in favor of the motion say aye. Aye. Are there any opposed? No. Motion carries four to one. Action item 4H. This is the additional item, the interim superintendent process. So I was going to make a motion that we plan for a second meeting based on recent history in terms of selecting board members and a superintendent that we haven't always reached a decision right away, and that we may be prudent just to plan for

3:58:30 another meeting to give us all a chance to sleep on the decision as after tomorrow when we complete the interviews. So I would, I guess, make a motion that we plan for a meeting on Wednesday. That doesn't work? No. Wednesday doesn't work I think we should just get to the interviews tomorrow and see how it goes. I can plan for another day, but Wednesday I got something I'm attending. Wednesday evening or... I'm just trying to get- Oh, like Wednesday during the... No, I'm on a field trip that day. I just- Can I ask a clarifying question of staff of where we're

3:59:17 at currently so we know? And when you think about the candidate, too. Do we have anything set right now? No additional meetings other than tomorrow's day-long meeting. There's no additional meetings set this week. So is there a meeting for the- Jody ... I think he's talking about the board deliberation. So tomorrow it's scheduled for us to open session, I believe- Right ... at 2:30. Yes. And then go into executive session to deliberate, and then come back out of executive session into open session to make a- Yeah. And I just wanted that knowledge out there, so. Yeah. So that right now is planned for tomorrow at 2:30. Yeah. Yeah. It's just- It's putting the- In the path, the board needed to sleep on it for a day or two on a couple of these

4:00:05 decisions, and I thought it'd be prudent. What's that? We also only had four board members at that point, and we had the candidates in front of us to ask. Yeah. Okay. I found it helpful to reflect over the weekend when we had done that, me personally. It took a lot of people sending emails for me to consider the values of the district, so what our needs were in the moment. So that helped me. And just to make sure that we're all on the same page, that I will be out of town starting Friday the 12th,

4:00:52 and the internet will be problematic by the day, so until probably Thursday. I can do Thursday. So, and I will also state that I don't necessarily have to be there for the board to move forward, but just want to make sure that you're aware of my calendar. I can do Thursday morning. It's the last day of school, so I don't want to- Yeah, I can't ... I don't want to miss that pickup. I would just hate to get to that point where we can't make a decision, or we need time to weigh it, and that

4:01:37 we don't have another meeting already planned. The more lead time I think we can have to that, we can always cancel the meeting, but- That's a true point there. We could always cancel the meeting. So you're suggesting putting a meeting in place now, and then tomorrow at the meeting, if we're just needing to table it, we will have that option. That was the intent, yes. Mm-hmm. I'm available most of the day on Thursday. Yeah. Jody, you got a look on your face. I do. I just want to just remind the board that what you put out was that this was the final interview day- Yeah ... with deliberations and a decision, and so this changes what, not

4:02:24 just the community, but what the applicants are expecting. So I just wanted to throw that out that, if you're able to make a decision tomorrow, that's what you've put out in the past. Yeah. But I also understand that history- Yeah ... indicates you might need additional time. We've been pushed through really fast on a lot of things recently, and so I hear you on that, but I also, if the board is just needing an extra moment, this is a big decision that keeps me up at night. It is. So if we need a little extra time, I don't think it's unreasonable to just have that set aside. Does anyone else...? Well, in our process discussion, I actually mentioned not having the

4:03:11 decision day on the same day, just because I knew it'd be a long day and a lot of information and trying to synthesize all of that. But I do understand that it's been said and announced and that too, so. And just for the record, I don't want to spend my last morning by myself here, so last day of school. But if need be, yeah. What do you guys think? I'm not available the rest of the week, but you guys can go ahead. I could reluctantly do a Thursday. But

4:03:59 I would rather that we could come to a consensus tomorrow, and I would rather it was five to nothing rather than three to one or three to two or three to one to one or something like that. I'd like to see us work together. That is my preference as well. It's just, yeah, just trying to make sure that we plan for ahead and we've given as much lead time, if we do need another day. And so I'm fine if the board wants to... I just wanted to have that discussion and put that out there. Well, I want to thank you, Ken, for bringing the topic up for discussion,

4:04:45 because I think it's important that we all agree and move forward, so thank you. But I'm not hearing a consensus in moving, so we'll- Well, I guess that'll- ... plan ... give us some motivation to get the decision done. That's rightOkay, so moving on to Agenda Item 5. These are discussion items, and up first is- Director? Yes. Just one clarification on something that Superintendent Nemarow said. I know that we had talked about doing a public session and then going into executive session, and then coming back. I seem to- Yeah. At 2:30. Okay. I seem to recall at some point we talked about

4:05:31 doing the whole deliberation in public session. Okay, so we responded to Rob Hess's email requesting, in order for the board to make a decision and an action item, you have to open an open session, go into executive session to deliberate, and then come out, but you have to have opened an open session first. You couldn't just go into executive session and then come out and make a decision and action item. So we had to do a special meeting 2:30 tomorrow, so you can go into open session and then go in for deliberations in executive session, and then come out and do an action item if you- Okay, that was my confusion. Thank you. Yeah, sorry. Good? Okay. Thank you. So then moving on to Agenda Item 5, Discussion A,

4:06:17 Procedure for Meeting Notices. Superintendent- That's me. In response to a question Ken had. I'm wondering with the time of the evening, night, and the long day that we all have tomorrow, if we can push that out to June 22nd, if you're okay with that. I'm okay. Because that was yours, Director Cole. Yeah, I'm okay with that. Thank you. Okay. Thank you. Any objections? Moving on. Discussion Item 5B, Attorney Presence at Board Meetings. Oh. Um- Were we moving on with that? And that was Director Brew. The next three items were mine, and I'm okay with putting them off until the next meeting.

4:07:05 Just to comment, I think they're all important. I do think that Item 5C, Discussion Around the Family Exit Survey, is somewhat time-sensitive. Want to make sure that we allow enough time at our meeting on the 22nd to really have a full discussion and go forward on that. How much time are you thinking on that one? What's that? How much time are you thinking on that one? 15, 20 minutes. And it may not take that long. To me, I've thought about it maybe too much. But I would allow at least 15 minutes on that. And if it's not enough, at least it'll get the ball rolling.

4:07:53 Okay, any other thoughts on Items 5B, C, and D? Okay, moving on then to Item 5E, the Board Retreat. I ask board members to sort of be checking their calendars and see when you might have some availability. I have more availability than many, so it's not really to me. I can accommodate schedules. So thoughts on, A, the retreat, and B, scheduling. For August?

4:08:38 For August, early August. Typically, that's when board retreats are held, right prior to particularly administration coming back. And then yeah, given that we haven't looked at goals and strategies and all of that in quite some time, I want to make sure we allow enough time in the day. Someone suggested we need two days. I'm not willing to go there, even as much as I like board retreats. So I'm certainly open to it. I would like to see it. I presume that it would be added to our board calendar for next year, which I presume will be at our next meeting. We'll have the- Mm-hmm ... board calendar that we approve.

4:09:23 So- And Bob, just the calendar from a school board standpoint goes from July one through to June 30th. The July meeting is typically just our organizational meeting where largely we just pick officers and doing any swearing in if we have that, but we don't have that, so. Yeah. I'm fully supportive of a retreat. I'll make myself available. For my perspective, it would be handy if you just sent out three or four potential dates and just said if those would work or not. That would be easier for me. Okay. Is that something allowed under- Yes. I mean, or is that- Sure.

4:10:08 Okay. Allowed to do. I'm more analog, so I prefer knowing in advance what dates I should be looking at. Somebody has expressed an interest in not doing it on a weekend, which is fine. But we need to do this, I think fairly soon so that we can get the facilitator and start talking about what we want. And that would, by the way, probably be on the meeting for the 22nd of June. And I can spearhead, if you all want the scheduling, just getting everyone's dates to see what works. Is that what you- Easier for me to work with looking at a few dates rather than-

4:10:53 Okay. Yeah ... getting my- And I think we should have options. Yeah. Can you include Marty on that scheduling? Because she's going to have to do- Yes ... everything with that as well. Absolutely. So please. Thank you. Absolutely Okay, anything else for the retreat? Just wanted to get that out there. So then moving on to item 5F, Springfield Education Association public comment. Superintendent Amara? I'm not exactly sure why that's actually on there with my name next to it, other than it was tabled and brought to the next meeting. I was wondering that, too. I think you just left the room. Yeah. And it's like, okay. So, that's- Well, there's been a request- Yes ... from SEA- Yeah

4:11:38 ... to speak, and I think we talked a little bit about the title, the public comment. I value the relationships with our associations and consider them to be partners. So I don't particularly want it designated as public comment because that's sort of a separate item. But I think that we should have more communication with our associations to make sure we're on the same page. This is one vehicle to do that. As I mentioned before in my board experience, we had monthly meetings between the superintendent, board members, a couple board members, and a couple of SEA. It doesn't have to be that way, but I think having that dialogue and allowing that opportunity.

4:12:24 Public comments doesn't allow back and forth, and my vision of this is that we could ask clarifying questions and make sure we're sort of on track. We're there- Just for information to the all board members to have this, that was brought up in bargaining this year to have SEA have its own comment time in board meetings, and the district elected not to approve that in the collective bargaining agreement. So I just wanted you to have that information. I don't have the background as to why, but I know that was brought up, and it was not- Yeah, I didn't know that ... I just wanted to make sure you had that piece- Sure ... of information as well. Yeah, I brought up the email from the employment group or, sorry, the association,

4:13:12 and what they're wanting to do here is inform. Information to be shared includes membership updates, goals, survey results, and timely concerns as they rise. A regular monthly slot provides flexibility for communication, with the option to cede time back to the board if there's no pressing needs. The speaking slot should continue during active bargaining to maintain open lines of communication, even if specific issues are avoided. And the SEA remains open to further discussion regarding the details of these topics. So,

4:13:58 I was wondering if there's-- I know at our last meeting, let's see, Chair Light supported the idea of providing a dedicated slot for the association. Bruce suggested a six-month trial period to see if a dedicated space for SEA would work effectively. And Cole stated he would support it as long as the board was only listening to the report and not veering into negotiation issues. And DeGraff questioned the necessity of the special space for the SEA, suggesting public comment already provides an opportunity to share. Maybe not a good idea for political or advocacy groups to provide special space.

4:14:45 But she did bring up a good point on asking about there will be students or classified staff or community organizations or parent groups, like PTOs. And so, that's something when it comes up, okay. But right now, I think it would be great to have our association come and have a spot. They're the frontline workers, and I would really love to hear from them as much as I can. We should all hear that. Superintendent, this isn't at all a criticism of you, but as I am getting more used to my role on the board, it

4:15:32 seems really strange to all of the mechanisms that keep the board separate from the people doing the work. And the State of Oregon seem to be intent on keeping the elected representatives from having meaningful dialogue with their constituents. Yeah. So, I would be really curious why they felt that was a good idea to speak on behalf of the board being able to listen to people. I'm not sure why that would be a bargaining issue important to administration, but maybe someday

4:16:19 I'll learn. But yeah, it's very frustrating trying to do the job when you can't talk to the people that you're working for in a meaningful way, and you can't listen to the people doing the work in a meaningful way. I think that it isn't just our employee groups. I think from talking to community members and other folks, there's just a great deal of frustration around input in general and conversation in general from a respectful position. So I might suggest that this might be, again, another item to talk about in our retreat under the broader

4:17:05 heading of communication in general.'Cause listening sessions, focus groups, surveys, there's a lot of ways to get input. And the more we know where our constituents are coming from, I think the better decisions we can make. So I will just throw out perhaps that's a broader topic, and then it gives the staff the chance to present some solutions. I'm looking at you, but whoever our new superintendent and the senior leadership is. This isn't an action item, so it was mainly just to garner information.

4:17:52 Are there any other comments or questions, directions, or... Hearing none, maybe, because I think our 622 meeting is going to be fairly busy also. And even if we were to make it an action item, it wouldn't take effect till the next school year anyway, on this particular topic. Is it okay to move forward then? Mm-hmm. Okay. Seeing some head nods. Yes. Okay, thank you. And then finally, for discussion, item 5G is the GLS community survey. So that's when GLS created the survey for input on the

4:18:38 interim superintendent search, the survey was promised confidentiality, and I think that that is an important agreement. But they also extrapolated statements that were unidentifiable by person. There's 570-odd people who took that survey, and for them to release it, a sort of a list of all verbatim comments and questions, they would have to have board direction to do that. So I wanted to put that out there. I think it would be useful information as we design for the future.

4:19:23 There was certain information in the budget forms that we did that I think are helpful. So- I just want to push back on that assertion by them, because it's listed in their proposal a couple of times that they give the board the data, they give the board the report. So, we can certainly all say, "Yeah, we want it," but we've all pretty much kind of said that to them. I think that when they think data, they're thinking if they provide the transcripts, because they're not identifiable. So that's, I wouldn't want to go back on that confidentiality promise. Huh?

4:20:08 I don't want anybody's names or any of that. No, I don't either. That's what I'm saying. Yeah. Or if you're going to identify a position, that's not the point of this. The point would be to develop themes from the information, which would then give the board some guidance as we move forward in setting goals, direction, strategies, et cetera. So, I'm just asking for clarification. So the community survey, from my perspective, what we wanted to see was nothing that would involve anybody's confidentiality. Mm-hmm. It's like, all right, we had a parent group. What was number one with the parent group? What was number one with the teachers? That. And so it would

4:20:53 be finer than what they gave us, which was everybody in one place, but it would not be to the level of individuals. Now, if you're talking about when we did the community meetings and people wrote the comment cards, that's a different thing. No. Were you talking about the survey specifically? The stakeholder survey that- Yeah, I mean, the title is Stakeholder Survey Report. Yeah. I don't know where- And that's the information ... the confidentiality concern comes in. So a little background on where the request is coming from. We had a public records request for the GLS community survey data to be released. Well, actually, I asked for it, too. Oh. Way before that. Apologies. We were responding when GLS asked, and when we got the public records request, we inquired,

4:21:38 and it has to be by action of the board for them to be able to release it for the public records request. Our legal gave the opinion that it was appropriate to release the information, but GLS has a different version of it, which is fine. They are the holder of the data, and so it will take board action in order to release the data information about the survey. I so move. With the caveat that it retains the confidentiality and anonymity of the participants. Yeah. Because I think our credibility would be at stake. Particularly as Director DeGraff mentioned that they committed to providing the data in their-

4:22:25 Yeah ... proposal, so. Well, yeah. So they just want to make sure that the board agrees. So it's not listed as an action item tonight, but it will be given the direction for the 622 meeting. Okay. All right. Thank you. And so then we're moving on to agenda item six, reports and information. Superintendent Amore. I'm going to keep it short, and I'll save the rest- Please ... for June 22nd. I just have two things. First of all, we found the ORS for the auditor. Oh. It's 297.425. 297.425. And requiring us to have legal counsel is ORS

4:23:12 203.145And the second thing is tomorrow, please wear your name badges, board members. That's all. That's all I've got. I'll do the rest of my report. I'll combine it with June 22nd due to the late timing. Okay, thank you. Moving on to board members, in no particular order. I'll just say, it was great attending the graduations I got to do. That was A3, and Bratton, and Springfield, and Thurston. It was really cool to see the kids do that and hear the speeches the kids did was fantastic and yeah, so

4:23:58 thoughtful and mature and yeah. So, I really enjoyed that. All right. Thank you. Director Brew? Yeah. For myself, yes, I very much enjoyed the graduations, and I want to thank all the people that facilitated us being able to attend and participate and seeing all these great, happy families. I know there was a lot of work that went behind the scenes and in front of the scenes to make it happen, and I want to thank all those folks. Thank you. Director DeGraff? I just want to update everybody on three things for SEF, Springfield Education Foundation.

4:24:43 So they funded over $55,000 in grant awards to 31 projects at all 21 schools. We missed the grant giving tour because we were busy with superintendent search. So that was a bummer to miss that, but they did do that. I don't know if anybody had a chance to go the next day on those other two, but did anybody on the board go? I went to the Page and Briggs one the next day. Yeah. Okay. We had board conflict that week. That's fun. And SEF is holding their summer celebration to celebrate grants for the coming year. That's on Saturday, June 27th, from 5:00 to 8:00. Tickets are $25 and can be purchased at seflane.org/events.

4:25:29 And then the last thing is they are still hosting monthly fundraisers at Public House called Toast to Teachers, and for June, the event will benefit the Chieftain Native Youth Center, and it's actually held on the last day of school, so that evening. That might be nice. So 50% of all the food and drink proceeds from Public House will go towards the Chieftain Center, and they select a different school every month, starting again in September. And I only went to one graduation. It was my daughter's at Thurston. I would just ask, Nicole, do you want to address your status as a board member? Because I'm not sure it got widely publicized. I'm good.

4:26:14 Okay. Okay. Director Langworthy. Oh, you're not going to address that? Yeah. I was really honored to go to the Long House and be an observer of the Native graduates. It was great to be in that sacred space and to talk to the families. Just such a proud moment. Made me reflect on my own time being a graduate myself, and yeah, I'm looking forward to school being over,

4:27:01 sorta. And yeah, that's all I'm going to say for tonight. I'm pretty tired. Okay, well, graduations are my favorite part of the year, and this was no exception. And again, it takes a lot of work to make things look so smooth at all of the campuses that we attended. So thanks goes to the leadership and staff at the buildings for making that such a wonderful occasion, not only for students, but their families. I'm excited about the interim search. Tomorrow, interviewing the finalist candidates. It's going to be a long day, so I'd like to thank the board members in advance for that, but it'll be long for a lot of people. So staff that has to put this together.

4:27:48 Thursday at 4:00 is our SPS- Oh, you- ... staff celebration. Oh, you were going to say that? Sorry, go ahead. No, but you're right. Lots to celebrate. I know. Yeah, the SPS graduate. I forget what it is, staff celebration, but yeah, it's really cool. That runs 4:00 to 6:00, and so if you're still available at 6:30, the Willamette Leadership Academy graduation at Springfield High School. Yeah. And then getting to go to Page and Briggs Middle School on the SEF Foundation thing was,

4:28:34 there's something really fun about giving money away. And that was great. So I'm glad they had a partial second day on that. We've got a couple of other meetings coming up, so I want to make sure and mention them. June 22nd, 2026 is a special meeting. It does start at 5:30, so even though it's listed as a special meeting, make sure you adjust your calendars. Maybe we won't get home so late. Jeff, I forgot to ask, do you recall how many were online? 58, and do we have anybody still? Because I was going to super thank them. But anyway, thank you to everyone, the 58

4:29:21 who attended online, all of the many people that were in the room. I think it's great to have community feedback, so it's wonderful. I wish we could have that many every time. So have a great night. Drive safe home, and I'll adjourn this meeting at 10:30. Yeah. Anybody? I'll be back. So soon? Here's- Oh, we're so soon? I can read that.

4:30:08 They couldn't

4:40 But it's way over there. Yeah. It's okay. Okay. Well, I'm going to go ahead and call this June 8th, 2026, meeting of the Springfield Board of Directors to order. It's 6:05. Please stand for the pledge of allegiance. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of

5:27 America, and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Well, after all that preparation. And Director Langworthy will go ahead and read the land acknowledgement We acknowledge that we are in the traditional homeland of the Kalapuya people.

6:17 I ran up those stairs. Specifically, the community that was known as Chifen, the area that we will now call Springfield. Kalapuya people who have lived in this region since time immemorial were illegally disposed of their land and forcibly removed to what is now called Grand Ronde and Siletz reservations over several years, but most notably in treaties between 1851 and 1855. The Kalapuya are now members of the Confederate Tribes in the Grand Ronde and the Confederated Tribes of Siletz Indians. And the members of the Kalapuya still live, work, study, and thrive in this area and continue to

7:03 make important contributions here in Springfield, across the land we now refer to as Oregon and around the globe. This information is shared out of responsibility to prevent the erasure of Native culture, heritage, and people to ensure a quality contemporary education for the future generations. Thank you. At this time, the board of directors will recess into executive session under ORS 192.6602B, oh, 2F actually, the review of confidential attorney-client privileged information.

49:08 Somebody print them out and put them right to there, everyone. Good evening, everyoneAt this time, we're going to move into our 6:45 PM budget hearing, and this is to allow public comment on the budget, and I'll call this part of our meeting to order at 6:50. And my understanding is that this is the time to give public testimony on the budget, and having not received any applications for public

49:53 comment or any other notification, we'll go ahead and close this hearing at 6:51. Then we'll reconvene the regular meeting as stated at 7:00 PM. Thanks to everyone for being here. Public comment will be held at our regular meeting. Yes. So quiet. I'm going to go say hi. Oh, is that it?

1:03:08 Yeah, that should work. Yeah, it does. That's okay. I think... Okay. We're about to start? Yeah. Okay. Gives me some time. Buenas tardes a todos. Interpretación en español está disponible mediante audífonos. Si desea escuchar el programa en español, por favor míreme acá atrás y yo le ayudaré.

1:04:02 Good evening, everyone. At this time, we're going to reconvene our regular meeting. We had a series of meetings, so we actually opened a series of meetings at 5:30. So at this time, we'll move right into the approval of the agenda. I'll move approval. Second. Moved by Director Cole, seconded by Director Brew. Call for comments, changes, all of the above. Yeah. There's some consent agenda items I'd like to pull for discussion. That would be the May 5th, 2026 special meeting minutes, 4.A.1, 4.A.2,

1:04:50 the May 11th board meeting minutes, 4.A.5, the financial statement, 4.A.11, structural repairs, and 4.A.13, budget appropriation transfer. Okay, thank you. For the record, I will restate those. So Director Cole would like to pull items 4.A.1, the special minutes from the May 5th meeting, 4.A.2, May 11th, 2026 board meeting minutes, 4.A.5, financial statement, 4.A.11, structural repairs, 4.A.13, budget appropriation. Is that correct? That's correct, yeah.

1:05:35 Okay. I had one more amendment, but I don't know. I was going to ask if we have an action item on whether or not we should have another meeting later this week. That was just based on experience. We were going to have our superintendent interviews tomorrow, and in the past, we haven't always reached a decision that day and having another day or two to think about it, I was thinking that now is the time for the board to have a discussion and decide whether or not we would have another meeting. So I was going to ask for an action item, I guess H, to discuss the potential another board meeting. 5H? Yeah. Or 4H,

1:06:21 because it would be an action item- Okay. Thank you ... because we'd have to vote on it. Okay, and I believe there might be other process. That's related to the interim search process, correct? Yeah. So there might be some other conversation around that. I will go ahead and add that. Interim superintendent process. And that will be action item 4H. Yes. And I'm going to also pull consent agenda item 4.A.6, the personnel report.

1:07:07 Any other changes to the agenda? I was going to pull 4.A.1 and 2. Okay, so along with Director Cole? Along with Director Cole. Okay, thank you. Hearing none other, I'll go ahead and call for the vote. All in favor of approving the agenda indicate by saying aye. Aye. Are there any against? Motion carries five to nothing. At this point, we're moving into public comments, and we have a list of 15, I believeWe

1:07:53 actually have 16. Oh, there's some... Oh, sorry. So, we have 26 in total. And as the board knows, typically we allow 25 minutes, which is approximately eight comments. And if we had 26, we're at 78 minutes. So, roughly an hour and 20 minutes. I'm guessing that's just speaking time. There's going to be transition.

1:08:39 That's just three minutes per speaker, and so there's going to be transition time. So, there's probably another 20, 25 minutes on top of that just swapping out the speakers, I would presume. Okay. So it takes a board leaning to expand that time. I would be fine with that. Could I make a suggestion that since we're... If you do that and everybody still speaks three minutes, maybe postpone the discussion items that are just... They're board discussion items that don't have any action involved in them. They're not urgent. So maybe if you still want to give everybody three minutes,

1:09:24 then postpone those items or possibly limit two minutes each. I don't know. But the suggestion is to maybe postpone those discussion items that aren't urgent. Well, in the preamble, usually we talk about if you have a shared topic, perhaps letting someone else speak for you, merging those together so there's less actual people speaking. But having said that, since it's a rather cryptic description of what people want to talk about, I hate to put limitations on that other than the three minutes. Not everybody will probably speak for three minutes, and it certainly isn't required to speak for three minutes, so it may be somewhat less.

1:10:09 So Director Brew, Director Longworthy? I have three discussion items and at that point, when we get to that, if we're running really behind, I think I'd be fine with postponing them. So you'd be okay with expanding public comments and perhaps we adjust our schedule? Okay, thank you. It's a suggestion. Director Longworthy? Yeah, I would be... I'm fine to go the full night with everything.

1:10:55 I am flexible. I do understand we'll probably be here until 11, but I do want to hear everyone's comments. Okay. So it seems like we have a majority leaning towards that. So, before we get started, I'll go ahead and read the preamble. So this is the portion of our agenda for public comment. The board provides three ways for community members to share public comment: written public comment, in-person oral public comment, and virtual public comment. Written public comment is received via email. Public comment received via email for this evening has been reviewed by the board and has also been posted on the district's website. The deadline for submitting a request for oral public comment was today at 2:00

1:11:41 p.m., and those who requested an opportunity to speak this evening were notified by the board secretary, Marty, about their request. So, we encourage groups with a common purpose to designate a spokesperson. If your comments will be covered by a group spokesperson, please indicate so when your name is called. I want to remind those members of the public who have indicated a desire to make comments that our policy provides for a limitation of the aforesaid three minutes. The board will not hear comments regarding any school personnel, whether named or implied. Any complaints regarding a particular employee must be processed through the procedure set forth in board policy KL, which requires that complaints be submitted in writing to

1:12:28 the superintendent. This procedure must be followed before there is any board involvement with such cases. A compliment involving a staff member should be sent to the superintendent, who will forward it to the employee, their supervisor, and their board. So again, I think it's clear that it's a three-minute time limitation. And again, if a point has been made, you might consider any additional information that would be helpful to the board, and for saving time, maybe that would be the way to go. I've heard from some people that there's an impression that you need to also submit written comment, and that's not true when you're giving oral public comment. However, the board has requested in the past, if you have a written transcript, it just saves board members from going back maybe

1:13:16 and looking at the recording and trying to transcribe that. So, we've had many wonderful comments and things that I've wanted to go back and review. So it's just a time saving, but no requirement that you do that. So, moving forward then, I'm just going to call them in the order that they're received. David Willis. Good evening. This one Thank you. And they have the notes that I gave? Good. Yeah. Again, just a reminder that our vice chair, Director Langworthy, will be the

1:14:02 timekeeper, and it'll be turned towards you so you'll be able to see. My name is David Willis. I'm the board chair of Springfield Utility Board. I'd like to start with something we're incredibly proud of, our partnership with Springfield Schools through the Water and Electric Learning Lab, which you may know as the WELL Project. Over the years, SUB has invested more than $4 million in the WELL Project, supporting hands-on, real-world science learning in classrooms across Springfield. But what makes this program especially unique is that it doesn't stop at the classroom. It connects students directly to their community. Through this program, high school students in Springfield provide free water testing for community members, giving residents valuable information about the safety and quality of their drinking water.

1:14:48 They also assess fish habitat, identify restoration opportunities, and collect and analyze water samples from local waterways. And this isn't just a classroom exercise. These remarkable students produce real-world, professional-level data used by our local watershed councils, our local water utilities, and even state and federal agencies. Middle school students also participate. In fact, seventh graders from all four Springfield middle schools are part of a dedicated restoration team that complete restoration work, like planting native species along stream corridors and learning the basics of water quality sampling. Our Springfield students aren't just learning science, they are doing science. In the process, they're contributing in meaningful ways to the health and sustainability of this community.

1:15:33 For SUB, the WELL Project isn't just a program, it's an investment in the future. It builds curiosity, develops practical skills, and open doors to careers in fields like energy, water, engineering, and environmental science. And just as importantly, it helps students see that these systems and their public utility belong to them. That sense of connection to our community is the heart of who we are as an organization. In addition, this is all ratepayer money. We're very cognizant of that, and we also give to the city $3 million every year in lieu of taxes. And we also contribute to Project SHARE $265,000 per year to be able to help those with their utility bills.

1:16:20 So we try to be wise stewards in terms of providing cost-effective, reliable, safe utilities. Thank you. Thank you. Speaking from the board, we very much value our relationship that we have with our Springfield Utility Board. The next up is Loretta Halter. I think I get 10 minutes too. Not yet.

1:17:18 Hi, I am Loretta Halter, and I live in Thurston. And I have been a public school teacher for nearly 30 years. I was perplexed by the views expressed by four former Springfield school board members who spoke at the board meeting on May 11th. They attacked the director, Jonathan Light, without any substantiation, while skirting the district's real issues. Teachers are being laid off or are resigning due to the pressures and restrictions they face. Parents are disgruntled by the complaints of children bored by test-driven curriculum. There is inadequate time allocated to history, civics, art, PE,

1:18:05 music, and science. Many children, like our minority populations, are being bullied on campus. Absenteeism has become a huge problem, hindering student learning. These factors all contribute to the serious decline in enrollment in Springfield schools. Yet possible solutions reside in the growing number of families seeking alternative, well-rounded education, such as the thriving A3 High School. Instead of offering ideas to address these challenges, the former board members criticized the current board, especially Mr. Light's proposal, to allow board

1:18:51 members to visit classrooms without a chaperone from the central office. This freedom would allow board members to connect more often with teachers, principals, and students, and thereby strengthen the Springfield public school community. The current policy restricting board visits baffles me. In the public district I served for nearly 30 years, board members commonly came in as welcome visitors. They were open to learning what challenges teachers and students faced and to seeing positive things taking place in our classroom. Understanding fully what is going on in our schools so they can better support them is what we elect board members to

1:19:39 do. To spread mistrust against and among board members and educators, to undermine and/or make cuts to their work to promote good and effective education, to foster animosity in the Springfield community, is to damage the unity, the strength of our-District family. Ultimately, this undermines the success, hopes, and dreams of its children as they endeavor to learn to use their own talents and knowledge to contribute to our society. Thank you for listening to me. Thank you, Ms. Halter. Naomi Raven?

1:20:39 My name is Naomi Raven. I'm a parent of SPS students and a former Springfield School Board member. I served five years on the board, including two years as vice chair and two years as chair. I served through the COVID-19 pandemic and the hiring of a superintendent. I understand this role and its responsibilities and its ethical obligations. I am here today because I am deeply concerned by the conduct of this board. Untrustworthy means dishonest and not worthy of confidence. Micromanaging means controlling every minor detail in a way that harms productivity and morale. Overreach of authority means exceeding the limits of your role. Unethical behavior ignores professional and moral standards. Corruption is the misuse of power for

1:21:25 personal gain. Unfortunately, these words and their definitions increasingly describe the Springfield School Board as currently constituted. My definition of the current Springfield School Board is a board that is untrustworthy, who micromanages district administration to the point of exhaustion, who exercises consistent overreach of authority in both action and in proposed policy and practice changes, whose majority sustains unethical and corrupt leadership. The examples are clear. The board has failed to fairly negotiate the contract of our current interim superintendent. Department directors are being forced to justify exact curriculum purchase amounts already approved in the budget. Proposed policy changes would allow board members to bypass the superintendent's office when coordinating school

1:22:11 visits, which undermines the governance structure, creates confusion across the district, and signals distrust in district administration. There are also ongoing concerns about transparency, public meeting law, and the integrity of the current interim superintendent hiring process. Meanwhile, time continues to be spent improving your experience as board members, instead of focusing on our students and the needs of the district. The result is our district is consistently losing strong leaders, all citing board dysfunction as a reason for leaving. So now what? Do better. Be honest. Hold yourselves and each other accountable. You can start by showing our community that you will hold yourselves accountable by

1:22:56 having the two board members who were disciplined in November complete the terms of the board-approved disciplinary action. When you vote in new board leadership, choose leadership who will lead with integrity. Each of you has a responsibility to model accountability, humility, transparency, and trust. Most importantly, refocus on your true responsibility: supporting students by creating an environment where district leadership can succeed and education can continue improving for our Springfield students. Thank you. Thank you, Ms. Raven. Ingrid Nordstrom?

1:23:51 Hey. Sorry. I'm a parent of two kids at Yolanda Elementary, and I've attended many of these board meetings throughout this year, and the overwhelming feeling I'm left with is disappointment. Before I explain why, I want to be very clear, I love my kids' school. Our principal is extraordinary. She seems to know every student and parent by name. The staff are supportive, capable, and essential, and the teachers are caring, passionate professionals who work tirelessly for our kids. My disappointment is not with the school, it's with the district leadership, including this board. For years, students have been denied a well-rounded education. This is no longer a matter of opinion. The Department of Ed has confirmed what parents could already see with our own

1:24:37 eyes. The district is out of compliance in science and social studies. The community has repeatedly asked questions about the K five curriculum, but our concerns have been ignored. In what appeared to be an attempt to persuade us that our kids had been learning science all along, at an April board meeting, we heard about students at an elementary school having the opportunity to use microscopes. I'm glad those students had that experience, but one hands-on activity is not evidence of a functioning science curriculum. The state's findings should be a moment of reckoning. Instead, we've received excuses and promises of accountability. But what does accountability actually mean to you? Because from where I sit, most of the people responsible for these failures and for creating the institutional culture that tolerated

1:25:23 them are still employed, still collecting paychecks, and still asking the community to trust them. This district is at an inflection point. We're preparing to hire a new superintendent, and I hope that some of the more disruptive dynamics on the board are coming to an endI don't expect leaders to agree on everything, but I do expect leaders to disagree honestly, respectfully, and productively while keeping their focus on students instead of personalities and internal conflicts. So to conclude, I have three requests. First, provide a public accounting of how much district money has been spent on complaints and legal fees related to board disputes. I suspect that total is significant, and I would rather see the money spent on

1:26:09 supporting students and programs like dual immersion. Second, tell us specifically how you plan to help students who have been denied instruction in science and social studies. What supports will be available, and how will you help students entering middle school without the foundation they should have received in elementary school? And third, tell us what changes will be made to the elementary schedule and report card. Right now, science, social studies, art, and health are expected to share a single hour of instructional time each day and are graded based on effort. How will that change, and when? Parents are not asking whether there is a problem. The state has already answered that question. What we want now is accountability, transparency, and a plan.

1:26:54 Sorry, our kids only get one-- Sorry, my voice is cracking. Our kids only get one elementary education, and they should not be the ones paying the price for the failures of adults. Thank you. Thank you, Ms. Nordfon. Douglas Cornejo Rosales Murray. Wait. Hello, I'm here to talk about dual immersion. To me, dual immersion is the most beneficial and impactful program in this district. It fosters community and

1:27:39 support and so many more important things that it would be too long of a list. The program gets students from many lingual and cultural backgrounds and teaches them two languages that is not only very prevalent and useful, but typically connects them to more people. My dad is from El Salvador, and my mom is from Montana. Due to societal pressure and my dad losing contact with most of his family and friends, we primarily speak English at home. If I didn't have this program, I would most likely be mediocre or bad at speaking Spanish, which would make me lose so much. I would lose family, friends, knowledge, and honestly, I feel that if I was never in dual immersion, I would be a very different person.

1:28:29 I've been in this program since kindergarten, and I remember so much of every year I've been in the program. Like how in every year of elementary school, we had a field trip for Dia de Los Muertos, and we got to celebrate the holiday and learn about it. Even though each year was nearly identical, I always had fun going to it and going with my friends. Another important memory is in eighth grade when me and another student went to a dual immersion conference for the state as speakers. I have no idea if we had any impact on them, but it was nice to have a room full of adults that were as invested in dual immersion

1:29:15 programs as we were and are. These small moments and countless more are the heart of dual immersion and something students outside of the program don't experience, possibly ever. Through these many years, I have supported the program through so much, and these proposed cuts truly hurt me, especially since I'm part of the first cohort of the entire program. But more importantly, it hurts everybody ever involved in the program and our large Spanish-speaking community. Especially for students who only speak Spanish, our dual immersion history classes help them learn history the same as any English-speaking student would. I have had many classes with monolingual Spanish students,

1:30:01 and compared to English-focused classes, they do so much better in the dual immersion history classes. As someone who is mixed, I've always felt like I had to choose my Latino side or my white side, but this program has helped me embrace both. This program, especially at the elementary level, connects primarily English-speaking and primarily Spanish-speaking students to each other and helps them learn together and learn both languages. Without learning Spanish, thanks to this program, I would have never had many of the friends I have now. I also probably wouldn't be able to speak to most of my dad's family because most of them only speak Spanish. Without the program, I would have never attempted the stamp test to get my global seal of biliteracy and so much more.

1:30:46 Mr. Murray, you'll need to wrap it up, please. Yes. Just how I remember so much from every year, especially dual immersion, I'm just one of many. There are so many students who've all had different experiences in the program and countless more who will have experiences in dual immersion in the future, and with these proposed cuts, they will all lose a chance to form more. Thank you. Andrea Madrigal Ramirez.

1:31:34 Good evening. My name is Andrea Madrigal Ramirez. I am a current junior and student body inclusivity officer at Springfield High School. Before I go further in explanation, I do want to clarify that I am not and have never been part of a dual immersion program in this district or any other district I was inHowever, as someone who has benefited from growing up bilingual most of my life, I am fully aware of how being bilingual has affected me throughout my life. So I do have an idea of how the dual immersion program may affect other students. As if by coincidence, just last month, I wrote a research paper in my College Now Writing 121 class titled "In What Ways Does Multilingualism Impact Children's Academic Performance?" And what I learned while researching for my essay is that bilingualism

1:32:21 doesn't just give students access to higher paying jobs, it also enables them to reach fuller academic potential at a more efficient rate than monolinguals. So as a result of cutting the dual immersion program, you would essentially be preventing dual immersion students from reaching their highest academic performance potential. According to my research essay and the sources I used, bilingualism provides advantages in the executive control of young humans. Executive control is a brain's function that makes humans capable of carrying out complex tasks that include problem-solving, inhibiting information already perceived, focusing attention on a goal, or monitoring performance. According to a study, bilingual children show a significant advantage in executive control tasks compared to monolingual children.

1:33:08 Multilingualism can counteract executive control struggles such as impulse control, difficulty in regulating emotions, school organization, time management, independence, future planning, and remembering instructions. In simpler words, bilingualism can speed executive control achievements, which can result in better overall academic performance. Another finding from my research paper is that individuals who are multilingual have better metalinguistic awareness. Metalinguistic awareness is the ability to look at language as a thing, evaluate language as a process or system, and maneuver successfully in using a language. Key components of metalinguistic awareness that I studied and that are positively impacted by bilingual education are phonological awareness, morphological awareness, and syntactic awareness.

1:33:53 In terms of phonological awareness, children who interact in more than one language have higher vocabulary acquisition and vocabulary development. Improved development of phonological awareness is also responsible for students' enhancement of awareness of genre and style norms and test features in various languages. This is crucial to students' understanding of literature and the ability to use words. Now, syntactic awareness is the ability to use a knowledge of grammar to comprehend the meaning that originates from the relationship between words and sentences. Morphological awareness is the ability to acknowledge that words are made up of smaller units of meaning, such as prefixes, suffixes, and roots.

1:34:40 According to a study I found in terms of morphological and syntactic awareness- Thank you. Thank you so much, and sorry to cut you off, but we have to be fair to all people. Thank you. Aidana Vasquez.

1:35:35 Good evening, everyone. Our names are Rhiannon Palacios and Aidana Vasquez. We are currently enrolled as sophomores at Springfield High School and have been in the dual immersion program since we were started in kindergarten. We came here today to speak to you about the intended cut of the dual immersion program in our school district. Our

1:36:21 program was created for people like us in mind, people who grew up with Spanish in our homes and in our hearts. And as a quick note, I would like to clarify that approximately 30% of our student body is represented by Latino students. Not only is our language important for multilingual diversity, which is one of our school's biggest strengths, but for community, for those of us whose parents speak it at home or just the times where there is no word in English that can truly convey how we feel in that moment. To

1:37:13 give a comparison of what the dual immersion program is like, it's like a typical English class, just taught in Spanish. If you were to move a dual immersion student down to a regular Spanish two or three class, it would be like putting a student who is fully fluent in English into an ELD class. It makes no sense. Why would you hold back their learning by putting them into a beginner level class after they've been learning in one that creates adequate rigor? Now,

1:38:00 obviously, with class isn't just statistics, but it's the people who run it The teachers that have been growing... Oh, shoot. Our class size has grown immensely in the past year, even though our teachers have faced hardship after hardship. Thank you. Excuse me. Thank you. We ask that you- Time, yeah ... reconsider your choice about the dual immersion program because it is not just another Spanish class. It is a language class like English. It is students that depend on its aspects to be able to help guide them

1:38:45 through the educational careers. If I might suggest this board and acting and interim superintendents to come to meet the bilingual students and get to know them and their classes. I understand that this is a huge deficit that we need to figure out how to live with in the next year, but cutting a native speaker language class is not the answer. Thank you for your time. Before I call up the next speaker, again, I would just remind the people who are going to speak that we're already committed to a very long meeting and

1:39:30 hearing everyone. So with interest for respect for all speakers, if we can really hardline it at three minutes. So if the buzzer goes off, if you can just wrap up your next statement, that would be very helpful. And as I said earlier, it'd be great if you want to submit the full comment as a written comment to the board. We would appreciate that. Maya Olsen? Hello, my name is Maya Olsen. I'm a freshman at Springfield High School, and I have been a part of the dual immersion program since kindergarten. Since then, going to school has always meant learning in not just English,

1:40:17 but also Spanish. The opportunity I've had to learn Spanish all these years is something I've gotten so comfortable with, that it's easy to sometimes take for granted. I never would've even imagined that this incredibly big part of my life could just be gone. Thinking about this now makes me feel so immensely grateful for this program and everything it has taught me. I've always considered being able to speak multiple languages such a cool power to have, and dual immersion has made that possible for me to grow that ability. One of my main goals throughout school has always been to get recognized at graduation for my completion of this program. To think that my 10 years of working hard and putting in so much effort are for nothing, I only needed to complete three more years, and now I can't.

1:41:02 I don't even want to imagine what the current 11th graders in dual immersion feel like now because of these cuts, with only one more year left. This program hasn't even been given time to grow, and now not a single class will ever start dual immersion in elementary and graduate still in it. And suddenly, out of nowhere, I'm being told that my dual immersion class is being replaced with just a regular Spanish class. To some people, this may not sound that different, but a regular high school Spanish class is far from the same. Beginning in elementary, I haven't just been taught Spanish. I've learned math, language arts, and social studies all in Spanish. That is what makes this program such a remarkable experience. I just want the district to realize what they are taking away from me and the impact their decisions have on my future and so many other students.

1:41:50 With me here today, I have signatures from over 100 students through middle school and high school who want to be heard and deserve to be heard. This program means so much to us, and we don't want to see it go. Thank you for listening. Thank you. Gladys Lopez? Is Gladys here? Okay, then moving ahead, Johannes Tadeo.

1:42:47 There he is. Hi, Johannes. My name is Johannes Tadeo. I'm a Springfield graduate, parent, community organizer for Safer, and someone who has spent years working alongside students, families, educators, and this district. I want to start with a question. How can Springfield Public School say it's committed to reaching every student every day when the program's teachers and educational assistants are being cut increasingly reflect the students who make up the significant portion of our district? Latino students represent approximately 25% to 27% of the Springfield student population, yet we are watching cuts impact programs and staff that directly supports bilingual

1:43:32 students, multilingual students, and families who have invested years into the district. The district has cited enrollment numbers as a reason for these changes, but enrollment does not happen on its own. The district controls recruitment, outreach, access to program scheduling, and overall the structure of the program. The district cannot point to enrollment numbers without also taking responsibility for the decisions that shape those numbers. The district says that the secondary dual immersion program is not being eliminated, but if students are losing dual immersion humanities courses and seeing their pathway replaced with traditional Spanish classes, then the educational experience they signed up for is fundamentally changing. A Spanish class is not the same as a dual immersion class.Dual

1:44:17 immersion is about learning academic content through two languages. It's about developing bilingualism by literacy, cultural competency, and preparing students to succeed in an increasing diverse world. What makes this especially difficult is that the current juniors are expected to become the first senior class to complete in Springfield's dual immersion pathway. After years of hard work and commitment, they should be celebrating this achievement, not watching the program they helped build be reduced just as they reach the finish line. What concerns me just as much as the cuts themselves is the process. Families, students, and educators were not meaningfully engaged before the decisions were made. The people most impacted were informed after the fact. A decision that fundamentally alters Springfield K to 12 dual

1:45:05 immersion pathway should be discussed openly with the Board of Education and the community. Families deserve transparency about how this decision was made, what alternatives were considered, what role the Board of Education played in reviewing these changes, and why families were not included sooner in the process. Tonight I ask you to listen to the students, the families, the educators. Ask yourself what message this sends to our Latino community and multilingual students. At the time when districts across Oregon are working to expand multilingual education, Springfield is the only district that's moving in the opposite direction and cutting. We should be strengthening opportunities for bilingual students and not reducing them. You still have an opportunity to change the course.

1:45:50 You still have an opportunity to rebuild trust. I ask you to pause these cuts, release the data used to justify them, and work with the community to preserve a meaningful secondary dual immersion pathway. Because this is a gem. Because once a program like this is dismantled, it is much harder to rebuild than it is to protect. Thank you. Anselmo Villanueva?

1:46:42 Good evening, members of the school board, the superintendent, and other staff from the central office. My name is Dr. Anselmo Villanueva. I come before you as a local educator and a community member with over 50 years in K12 and higher education. I have been involved in bilingual education since my first position as a third grade classroom teacher. One of my first encounters with your district was in the mid-1980s, when I heard that an assistant principal at one of the high schools was denying enrollment to Latino students who could not prove that they were legal residents. I had to remind him of the landmark 1982 decision by the Supreme Court, Plyler versus Doe, which originated from a lawsuit against the Tyler Independent School District in Texas.

1:47:29 The court ruled that states could not deny students a free public education based on their immigration status. I have lived through the eras where students who are Latino are called disadvantaged, minorities, and at-risk. Now fast-forward to tonight. Along with many others in this room, and the many who could not be here in person, we find ourselves fighting the same battle for the students who are being denied their basic education. I thought we had made progress since that assistant principal wanted to deny enrollment to Latino students in the 1980s.

1:48:14 Now it looks like things are going backwards once again. Not only are these students who are being denied their education by your decision, but just as important, their language and their culture. Bilingual education is meant to level the playing field. In this case, to give students the skills and background to eventually compete in the global job market. I will not go into all the benefits of dual immersion, since I assume that the curriculum specialists in your district have provided you with ample background and documentation. Unfortunately, I find myself here before you again, just like in the 1980s, trying to correct a wrong. I implore you to restore the bilingual program in its entirety.

1:49:02 I am confident that you will make the right decision so that you can sleep soundly at night knowing that you did the right thing. Thank you for your time, listening to other speakers, and most of all, for reading the many letters that were submitted to you. Thank you. Thank you. Marcia Koenig? Good evening. I'm the parent of two students in the dual immersion program, MARCIA, at Hamlin in Springfield. I understand that the district is facing difficult budget decisions, but there's a huge difference between reducing staffing and dismantling

1:49:48 a program. Reducing FTE is like pruning branches from a tree. The tree may be smaller, but it remains alive and capable of growth. Eliminating a program cuts into the trunk itself. Once a program's expertise, momentum, and community are lost, rebuilding can take years or may never happen at all, and that's why we're all here tonight. What's being proposed is not pruning, it's dismantling the very structure of the program. The most consistent support this program has had is parent advocacy. Through five superintendents and ever-changing leadership, parents have attended meetings, written emails, organized events, helped shape a master planRecruited families, and we've repeatedly asked the district to invest in a program that it's claimed to be a priority. And here we are, one year before the program is expected to reach 12th grade,

1:50:35 families receive notice of a supposed restructuring and assurances that the district remains committed to dual. We've heard this before. For the last 10 years, our concerns about this program have been met with this same response, that, "This is a priority program for the district," we've been told. And so when these same assurances accompany cuts that weaken the program, we don't believe you. If this decision had been made with true understanding of dual immersion and its value, you would understand that learning Spanish is not the sole purpose of the program. You would know that placing heritage speakers in traditional classes results in skills mismatch and takes away from heritage students the opportunity to be leaders. You would recognize that replacing dual immersion with Spanish

1:51:20 classes, or a cultural elective, or college courses that they can't get to, does not preserve dual immersion. Finally, you would also have remembered that expanding this program was part of the district's response after ODE flagged us for persistently low outcomes among English learners, and then later cited as a contributor to the district's improvement. You see, this program was not an add-on, it was part of the solution. So what a shame that Springfield cannot sustain a single dual immersion program while more than 140 exist across Oregon, with some districts operating several even without additional funding. Also, if there's any high school where a strong dual immersion pathway should exist, it's at Springfield High, which serves the largest

1:52:05 Latino student population in our county. So be honest about being lost here. I hope the board recognizes that this is not a staffing adjustment. It's a decision that fundamentally changes our program. So once you've made this cut, you can't call it a dual immersion program anymore. You can't tote it on your reader boards or elect to include it in your list of equity initiatives. Stop calling it restructuring, and please look for ways to prune the budget that doesn't impact the tree of the dual program. And Herlands?

1:52:54 Not able to- Ryan Herlands? Oh. I thought I saw you earlier. Yeah, it's full. Hi, thanks for having me here tonight. And I don't want to take away from the important conversations that have just been going on, so I'll try to be brief. Okay, so thanks for giving me the opportunity to speak again tonight. My name is Ryan Herlands. I'm a science teacher at Thurston High School and incoming SEA vice president. There are a couple of interrelated issues I'd like to discuss today involving

1:53:40 communication and transparency. I want to start by sharing my appreciation for a couple of things. First, for your attendance at our fantastic high school graduations on Friday. And second, for your thoughtful discussion during May's business meeting about creating a regular speaking slot for SEA at future board meetings. Past district leadership attempted to silo all of us off from each other, and that helped precipitate the challenging situation we find ourselves in. More communication is clearly better, not worse. One member disingenuously questioned why SEA should have a speaking slot instead of just signing up for public comment every month as community members are required to do. I think most reasonable people can see the benefits of reducing the hoops to jump through for better communication.

1:54:26 Staff are not just community members. We are the heartbeat of the district and the ones in the classroom with kids every day. You, the board, cannot do your job effectively if you don't know what's happening in the classroom. This connects with another contentious issue discussed at last month's board meeting, one that begs for staff input. Let's be clear, we teachers want more administrators and board members to visit our schools and our classrooms. In a recent survey put out by SEA, we collected feedback from 126 members from every school in the district, and 97.6% of respondents said they would welcome you into their classroom. 97.6. Some would want advance notice or the ability to choose which lessons for you to see, but 61% said you were welcome anytime.

1:55:16 It was suggested that schools schedule times for visits to show off a particular event or project, which sounds nice, but our interest is not in putting on a performance to flatter a dictator. Instead, we want those responsible for making the big decisions in our district to see what actually happens day in and day out in our classrooms. Both the fun, hands-on project and little Johnny throwing a chair across the room for the third time that week. You can't make decisions unless you're informed. Thank you. Thank you, Ryan. Rhiannon Palacio

1:56:01 Cronin. And I may have butchered that name. Ms. Cronin here? Yeah. Here. Oh, okay. All right. Your Honor, uh- In the co-presentation. Rhiannon. Okay. Thank you. Nancy Bray So, my name is Nancy Bray. I taught in Springfield School District from 1977 to 2009. In 1999, with the changing demographics in

1:56:48 Springfield, the district awarded me a sabbatical to go to the U of O to get the endorsement in English for speakers of other languages, and to write the district English Language Development, or ELD, plan. When I returned from sabbatical, the district asked me to coordinate the ELD program as a teacher on special assignment. I worked with administrators, teachers, staff members, families, and community members, and together we created the program that is still in effect today. As required by state and federal mandates, the program must teach English and ensure equal educational opportunity in the regular classroom. It's the largest ELD program in Lane County, serving

1:57:36 over 600 students. From the very beginning in 2000, we advocated for a Spanish/English dual immersion program. Research shows that this is the most effective way for students to learn to read and write in two languages. For students whose native language is Spanish, that language is their strength, not their weakness. If they learn classroom content in Spanish while they are learning English, they transfer their skills to English more easily. As new ELD and Spanish-speaking students move into the district, the dual immersion program is a lifeline for them to build on the skills they already have as they

1:58:23 transition to English. Students in this program receive the Oregon Seal of Biliteracy on their diplomas when they graduate from high school. In 2014, the district made a commitment to establish a Spanish/English dual immersion program that would add one grade level a year until it became a grade K12 program. We know that it takes more than the elementary years to become bilingual and biliterate. It must be a K12 program to be effective. By eliminating the middle and high school program, the district is breaking the commitment it made to the students,

1:59:08 their families, district staff, and the community. A decision of this magnitude must be transparent and include meaningful engagement with all who are impacted. Since 25% of the students enrolled in Springfield District are Latinx- 10 seconds left ... this is a huge impact. The district needs to honor its commitment, and the program needs to be supported and celebrated, not eliminated. Thank you. Mm-hmm. Renee Ellis?

2:00:11 Good evening, board members and faculty, whatever. Renee Ellis could not be here, but she asked me to read a few statements from her letter, and for the sake of time, I'm going to read certain parts of her letter. I think some of the other speakers have already mentioned some of the benefits of dual language immersion, in this case, the Spanish dual language immersion program. My name is Rosemary Villanueva. I'm a retired teacher and an ELD teacher who taught here in Eugene, and

2:00:57 also in California. As Renee says here, Renee also is a community member from Springfield. She says, "I know you already know these facts, plus many more, and yet this valuable resource is now on the chopping block." And so now what she is asking is, "I want to ask you why you chose this program for termination in spite of all these benefits you've been hearing. Moreover, how can you justify eliminating it at the very point when students in this program, after years of dedication and discipline, are entering the stage in their educational journey where they can begin

2:01:43 to see the benefits of it and truly experience the rewards of their hard work? What a terrible example this sets for students, that years of extra effort and hard work toward the very worthwhile goal can be thrown away so easily. What do you plan to tell these students? How do you explain that the goal they have committed themselves to for years apparently wasn't all that important after all? What an extraordinary and incomprehensible decision by adults who are supposed to model goal-oriented performance in academics.

2:02:30 Pulling the rug out from under these students and their families with apparently scant little notice or opportunity for input makes it even worse."Parents deserve better. Students deserve better. I urge you to reconsider the decision to eliminate the dual language immersion program in Spanish. It is the greatest gift we can give our children to provide the opportunity to become truly proficient in their native languages, or a second language for other students. There are zero downsides to this. No, none. It is good for them, for our communities, for our society, to send

2:03:19 them out into the world multilingual- Thank- ... truly multicultural. Thank you. I urge you to go back to the drawing board and figure out a better option for saving money without the students in this program being victims of this decision. Thank you. Maisie Contreras Martinez. Hi. Good evening. My name is Maisie, and this is my son Yunuen.

2:04:05 He is a Springfield High School student in the dual immersion since kindergarten. I'm a parent, and the reason why I'm here, I have questions. I want to know the main reason why you guys are cutting this program. What is the reason? Why are you guys cutting their wings? Because they worked so hard to be where they at. Some of us parents, including myself, I come from out of district. I decided to put him into this program because you guys promised us that they were going to continue until 12th grade. And what's happening? You guys just cut it off, like nothing, without thinking of their futures.

2:04:51 I don't think that would be fair. I, as a parent, I drove my son multiple times to school, figure out childcare, pickups. When he went into middle school, he took the city bus because he has a dream. And you guys sitting there promising a future for them, you're not accomplishing that by cutting down the program. How is that fair? I wish you guys have a conscience to see that you're cutting not just his future, but other ones. You see around how many people are here to support us?

2:05:38 Because they know that each individual student who is here works so hard, and I don't think it's fair. Really, think about it. I'm pretty sure you guys are all parents, and one time you guys had kids, and you guys want the best for your kids. Imagine if that one of your kids would be that kid who is in the dual program. That's the reason why I'm here fighting for my kid. It's easy for me to go and be like, "Don't worry, my son. I'll take you to a different dual program. We'll figure it out." But no, that's being selfish, because he's not the only one here. Other students are here, other parents are here fighting.

2:06:26 You should really think about it, or how can we help as parents to continue this program? Nobody has come to us and told us, "Hey, this is the main reason." I guess if you guys had transparency to us and let us know, we'll probably figure it out, because we want the best for our kids. I'm pretty sure you guys want the same thing, or do you guys want to be the first district of Oregon to cancel a program like this? Or support it? We all know, yes, we might have issues, but let's find a solution for that issues. I want you guys to go home and think about that. Thank you.

2:07:22 Just to, again, state the purpose of public comment, unfortunately, it's not designed to be a back and forth, even though the board would like to hear more information, but that's what's tonight's for. And again, I thank you from the bottom of my heart for everybody being here, speaking with the passion about the things that you think are important. So I'm sure the board is going to be taking this. We're hearing this, and we'll move forward. But thank you. Do appreciate that. Crystal Sunstrom.

2:08:15 Good evening. My name is Dr. Crystal Sunstrom. I am a soon-to-be former Springfield Public Schools employee. Until last year, I served as the district's elementary dual immersion program coordinator, but that position was eliminated due to budget cuts. I currently teach English language development, or ELD, at Springfield High School, including to our newcomer and recent arriver students. I'm also the proud parent of two Springfield graduates. Tonight I want to speak about equity, and more specifically, access to linguistic inclusionIn 2021, Oregon passed House Bill 2056, known as the Access to Linguistic Inclusion Act. The purpose of this law was clear: to remove structural barriers that multilingual students face and

2:09:01 to recognize that meaningful academic learning can occur in multiple languages. The law specifically acknowledges that multilingual students should have pathways to earn required graduation credits while building on their linguistic strengths, not despite them. In my current position, I work with newcomer students who are learning a new language while simultaneously trying to earn enough credits to graduate high school. Many arrive credit deficient through no fault of their own, due to interrupted formal education or limited access to secondary public schools in their home countries. They are navigating a new school system, a new culture, and a new language all at once. HB 2056 was designed to help reduce those barriers by

2:09:46 allowing districts to offer courses and credit pathways that honor students' home languages and multilingual abilities. Oregon's guidance explicitly states that the law was, again, intended to remove structural barriers to graduation and to expand opportunities for multilingual learners. Our secondary dual immersion program does exactly that. But by eliminating the middle school and high school dual immersion teaching positions and courses, we are not expanding opportunities for multilingual students. We are reducing them. We are removing one of the very pathways that Oregon created to support student success. I also urge the board to look carefully at the enrollment data being cited to justify this decision. As Johannes Tadeo

2:10:33 mentioned, enrollment does not exist in a vacuum. Over the years, decisions were made that limited access to the secondary program for some multilingual students, including newcomers and recent arrivals. When access is restricted, participation inevitably declines. We should be cautious about using enrollment numbers as evidence against a program when those numbers may themselves be the result of policy decisions rather than a lack of student and family interest. Our multilingual students already face enough barriers. The question before us is whether Springfield will continue to remove barriers as Oregon intended or create new ones. I urge you to reconsider the elimination of the secondary dual immersion

2:11:19 program and preserve these important pathways for our students. Thank you. If we can leave this on, please. Sarah Farren? I raced over here from the ELD graduation. Mm-hmm. We had, I think, about 100 students exiting the program. Thank you for being here. Thanks. Okay, I've never done this before.

2:12:07 Well, my name is Sarah Farren. I have been a Springfield resident for 24 years and a teacher in Springfield for 16 years. As Springfield grapples with staffing cuts and a restructuring of our district leadership, I want to highlight a significant segment of our school community, our multilingual students, who will soon be without a leader at the district level. And just to summarize, I'm here speaking about the ELD program, not the dual immersion. The ELD program serves approximately 700 students in K through 12. The instructional needs of multilingual learners are different from those of monolingual students. For newcomers, they're learning to function in a new language at the same time they're being taught academic content in that language.

2:12:54 For long-term English learners, they're struggling to cross the line from social language to the high level of academic English needed to pass the state English proficiency test. Multilingual learners spend the majority of their day with caring and professional general education teachers, but the district has not required or even offered training in sheltered instruction for those teachers in, I think, at least 12 years. I don't remember it at all since I've been hired here. We need training for all teachers across subject areas and grade levels in scientifically proven methods of sheltered instruction. This is essentially how to teach the district-adopted curriculum in a way that supports the bilingual learning of students and consequently helps

2:13:41 all students. We need flexibility in curriculum implementation and assessment. Most curriculum and assessments are normed on monolingual students, and we need time built into our schedule for the general ed teachers to consult and collaborate with language development specialists. The ELD department is accountable to the state for how we serve our multilingual students. And when we leave students in class to receive sheltered instruction but do not provide training or collaboration time for educators, we are failing in our responsibilities. Please take the unique needs of our students into consideration as you plan the future of our program, and choose a leader who will champion multilingual learners and promote equitable and

2:14:28 forward-thinking practices across the district. Thank you. Thank you. Matt Brandt? Is Matt here or out in the foyer? Say his full name. There he is Oh, here he is. Thank you. Yeah, there's no speakers out in the lobby area, so it's hard for people out there to hear. Thank you for being here. Yeah, absolutely. My name is Matt. I'm a regular

2:15:13 reoccurring person lately. I wanted to come in tonight and just share some of the things that I've been working on in the background and reiterate some of the things I've brought up in the past. One of my mentors used to say, "Don't bring me monkeys unless you bring me bananas." And it's a sentiment that I believe strongly in, in my life, and my personal career, and everything else, that if there's a problem, and we want to talk about it, then we should also talk about solutions. And I've always been an advocate of the same mentality I bring up a lot, which is we should focus on how do we afford what we want. And we hear a lot tonight about cuts to vital programs, and obviously, we've been through a lot of meetings where there's many other painful decisions that had to be made.

2:16:00 And of course, decisions are tough, programs get cut. But one of the things that I always continually try to push and focus on is how can we afford what it is that we want? We clearly are hearing that we want to save a lot of these vital services, but we have to come forward with a path, right? We can't ignore the reality of declining enrollment. Declining enrollment means declining revenue, which of course, is what leads us to this decision point. One of the things that I've talked about before, and I've put a lot of research into as well, is a public levy option, and it's something that I believe very strongly in. It is a tool at the disposal of the district. It's one that we don't currently implement. We have a lot of peer districts across the state that have implemented it to much success. I think that in this district, we could absolutely put forward an effort.

2:16:47 I forwarded off some research that I did. I put together a presentation and a request to see if we can add it to a discussion item for next week to charge the budget committee formally to commit to the study. Do the work and see if we can maybe get it secured to the ballot here in November. And the reason I bring that up is because every time we delay on this, and we don't put it to the voters to help support and buoy our budget, it's one more fiscal year that we can't actually spend that money. And it's something that we could absolutely use to really do exactly what we're all talking about, save our programs, bring back some of the things that we know really help this district out. It's something I would like to see more engagement on and see if we can bring something this to the

2:17:33 people. I think the appetite is there. I think the community is deeply hurting from a lot of these decisions. And of course, they are difficult. There's no judgment in terms of why we had to do them. But I think we have an opportunity to control our destiny a bit, and I think a levy buys us up to five years where we can cushion and restore some of these services. We can even build back savings. I put together a website that many people in the community might have already visited in the past. It's springfieldbridgeplan.org. And I've updated it with my findings on the levy, my proposal. I'll put together my presentation on there as well. I think it's something that we could definitely move forward to help really

2:18:18 bring things forward. Anyways, that's my thoughts. Thank you, Mr. Grant. Mercedes Foreman. Anyone in the hallway? Okay. Guadalupe Anguiano. I probably really murdered that. Thank you.

2:19:06 How should I pronounce that? Anguiano. Thank you. Yes. It's okay. Good evening. My name is Guadalupe Anguiano. I'm radio host of La Que Buena 97.7 FM radio station in Eugene. But today I'm here as a concerned parent, a parent of a nine-year-old third-grader at Springfield Dual Immersion program at Guiley Elementary. Like many families, we made long-term educational decisions based on the understanding that this pathway would continue through middle and high school. That's what I thought. And that is why I'm deeply disappointed to learn that the significant changes to the dual immersion program were being considered without communication, transparency, or opportunities for us parents, for families to provide input

2:19:53 before these decisions were made. Families deserve to understand what data and analysis were used to support these decisions. If our neighbor districts, like Eugene 4J, are facing similar financial enrollment challenges while maintaining their K through 12 immersion pathway, why is Springfield choosing a different approach? I don't understand. I'm also concerned about how these changes will affect our students. Our dual immersion is not simply about learning another language. Students have spent years building academic skills, cultural connections, confidence, and a sense of belonging within this program. And disrupting that pathway may impact the students' engagement, limit opportunities to earn the Seal of Biliteracy, and cause

2:20:39 families to seek education options in other districts like Eugene. Our children invested years into this program, and families have planned their futures around the commitment that were made, the promise that were made to us when we enroll our kids in this program. Our youth already has to worry about discrimination, about ICE taking our community members, our family members. Now they have to worry about their education?I respectfully ask this district to pause these changes, publicly share the data used to justify these decisions, and create a process that includes meaningful input from parents, students, and educators before moving forward. Our children's education matter, our teachers matter, and our Springfield

2:21:24 schools matter. And shout out to all the students right now, right here, my respects for being here today and fighting for your education. Keep fighting and don't give up. Board members, please honor the commitment made to these families and keep the dual immersion pathway for current and future students, please. Thank you. Christian Rivas?

2:22:17 Hi there. My name is Christian. I'm a daughter of Salvadoran immigrants, a first-generation student, and next year I graduate with my doctorate in pharmacy. I was born here in Springfield and I've lived here ever since. Today, I'll be talking about the Springfield Dual Immersion program and how important it is to our community. The first thing I wanted to share is that being bilingual has made me a better healthcare professional. When people talk about dual immersion programs, to some folks that can mean simply learning new languages, but for a lot of us it's much, much bigger than that. In healthcare, communication is extremely critical. Being able to speak the patient's languages helps keep them safe and lets them trust our help. For me, speaking Spanish also lets me connect my culture to my profession.

2:23:05 I don't have to leave a part of myself at the door when I go to work. I can use it to help people. I can communicate with families who might otherwise really struggle to navigate the healthcare system, and this is something that I'm really proud of. Today, I think about the students who have already spent so many years in these Springfield programs, students who have been able to learn more about their own cultures at school, students who have been able to learn brand new cultures. These students have put in the work to be bilingual and bicultural all these years, and all of their progress is being ripped away from them. I'm asking this board to please consider that bilingualism helps kids form their futures. These programs are exactly the kinds of opportunities that we should be expanding for our students, not taking away.

2:23:53 I hope you'll consider what is being lost here, this incredibly important means of our community's growth. I hope you can understand what it feels like to us, for our own community of Springfield to be one of the only districts in Oregon to take dual immersion away from the kids. Thank you for your time. Thank you. Heather Dillon? Okay, we'll go ahead and move on, and if she shows up or we missed

2:24:41 her somehow, please let me know. Laura Farrelly? Okay. Hi, my name is Laura Farrelly, and I'm a teacher at Springfield High School. And also just want to add that we have the best students ever. So inspired right now by all the students here speaking.

2:25:27 So I have a few things I'd like to address. First, the concerted attacks by members of the public at the last board meeting towards Jonathan Light were sensationalist and disgusting. I had the honor of teaching in the same building as Jonathan back in the day, and I witnessed firsthand how he went above and beyond for our students and colleagues. If only I had a child or a grandchild in elementary school, I would hope that their classroom teacher would invite Jonathan and other school board members to witness what is actually happening in our schools. Second, what in the world is happening right now? Certain members of district admin still continue to spin false narratives about the catastrophic midyear cuts by blaming

2:26:14 SCA, when it is apparent that there was either, excuse me, bad faith bargaining perpetrated by the district, or someone in power made major mistakes when they hired 42 new educators in August of 2025. Next, the district claims to care about equity. How can they proclaim that and then cut the dual immersion program? It doesn't make sense, and it's not a good look. While they continue to make these terrible cuts, a new member of our district asked for a raise at the last meeting. Are you kidding me? Read the room. We are still grieving the cuts that were made earlier this year. Clearly, these cuts are not unique to our community. It is estimated that at least 1,000 educators are losing their jobs statewide. This doesn't even include our classified

2:27:02 folks.Many of us have been writing emails and attending legislative sessions begging Tina Kotek to call a special session to tap into education reserves, which would help offset the majority of cuts. There has been silence from her end. Please know she could call a special session today, and she refuses. Since letters, phone calls, and individual meetings are not working, we are changing course. I would like to invite all of you to attend two upcoming events. There is an emergency town hall this Wednesday, June 10th at Roosevelt Middle School in Eugene. It runs from 4:30 to 6. This is an opportunity for us all to come together as a community, educators, students, and families from Springfield and Eugene to

2:27:47 try and save our schools. The next event is next Tuesday, June 16th at the Capitol Building in Salem when legislators are in town. Both the education and revenue committees are meeting that morning. Let's come together and demand that they access reserves by asking Kotek to call a special session, and to actually address the root causes of the perpetual underfunding of public education by, I don't know, maybe taxing the ultra-rich and stop giving tax breaks for data centers. Thanks for your time, and hope to see many of you on Wednesday and next week in Salem. Thank you. Thank you.

2:28:36 Nate Sadler? Hello, I am Nathan, and I am currently in a middle school of Springfield School District, but I was in an elementary school in the Springfield School District. I would like to talk about the lack of science that was happening at the elementary school that I was at. Starting off with a guy named Mystery Doug, is a YouTuber that has free science videos. He also has a website where you have to pay so that you can do independent science activities. Instead of using a district-approved program like STYLE in middle school,

2:29:21 the schools went with a YouTuber with no understanding of the curriculum. What I have come to understand with school is it tries to put something in your head through practice and repetition. When we do one lesson a month, we barely practice, and there's no repetition. Also, Mystery Doug's website hasn't had Doug in it since July 1st, 2023, meaning less qualified people than him are taking over. Students are more interactive with videos playing than when a teacher is teaching, but students miss out on further clarification. A perfect example of this is when I was in sixth grade, I was struggling with divisions with decimals. So I asked the teacher, and they showed me how to do it. With videos, you have to hope to understand it the

2:30:06 way that the creator thinks it makes most sense. It also makes it to where the teacher isn't the dominant figure in the classroom, keeping it all in check. They are now the gatekeeper of the pause and unpause button. There are so many jobs that involve science in day-to-day life. When I went into sixth grade, I wanted to go off and be an aerospace engineer, but I had almost no information on even how air affects an object. I was losing hope until I tried out a rocket video game. I was to calculate how much fuel I need to get a 30-ton object into orbit before my classmates even knew that there were three types of rocks. I learned more in two weeks than in my entire elementary school science class. I believe I can do something big, not because of school, but because of YouTube

2:30:52 tutorials and a video game, and I hope that my sister can come home from elementary school and say that she learned that there are three types of rocks. Thank you so much. This concludes who I have on the list to speak, unless somebody showed up who I called the name earlier and they weren't here, but I don't see that. I'd like to, because we've been sitting for a while, call for a five-minute break and give people a chance to stretch, and then we'll continue with our meeting. Thank you so much again for all of the public input. The board really does appreciate

2:31:37 that.Hello?

2:38:54 Okay. We're going to go ahead and reconvene, so you're welcome to stay. Looks like we've stimulated a few conversations, but again, I'll have to excuse the room. Hello?There's your gathering Hello, folks. Don't be shy. Again, thank you for being here, and if you would like to stay, you are certainly welcome. And Amber's out there.

2:39:41 Okay. So we're going to move into action items here in a moment. Oh. First up- First up... Needs to be recorded. First up is, we're going to return then to the action item 4A, the approval of the consent agenda. I would be happy to entertain a motion as amended. I'll move approval of the consent agenda as amended. I'll second. Left. One, two, three, four.

2:40:26 Okay. Oh, Jonathan, can you raise your hand? She's asking for you. Yeah. Yes. So, the motion for approval of the consent agenda is with the following restrictions. So the consent agenda, as amended, will include items number three, the May 26th special meeting minutes. Item number four, the May 27th, 2026 special meeting minutes.

2:41:12 Item number seven, nutrition services dairy, resolution number 2526058. Item number eight, nutrition services bakery, resolution number 2526.059. Item number nine, nutrition services supplies, resolution number 25-26.060. Item number 10, nutrition services produce, resolution number 2526.061. Item number 12, adult meal price increase 2026 to '27, resolution

2:41:59 25-26.063. I move approval of the consent agenda as amended. Okay. We have already a motion for approval. Do I have a second? We have a motion by Director Cole. I think Director DeGraff seconded before. I think. Okay, and a second by Director DeGraff. Any other questions or comments on these particular items? Hearing none, I'll go ahead and call for the vote. All in favor indicate by saying aye. Aye. Is there any against? Hearing none, motion carries five to zero. As far as the other items, we'll just start at the top.

2:42:44 First item pulled was action item 4A, consent agenda under the May 5th special meeting minutes. That's item number one. Director Cole? Yeah. On page two, the top of page two, there's a paragraph that says, "Director DeGraff sent an email informing OGEC that she'd be unable to attend the training." My question is, I guess, why is that in the meeting minutes? I don't think that occurred in the meeting. Are we including emails that pertain to- Mine was printed out ... the meeting? What's that? I had a question printed out and given to her, so maybe that's why. So, yeah, I don't remember that being discussed in the meeting.

2:43:32 I was curious why that was in there. So, point me, Ken, is that under attendance? No. On the top of page two of the- Thank you ... meeting minutes, you go to the top, and the top, the paragraph there says, "Director DeGraff sent an email informing OGEC." You sent it to me. So, I'm just... Mm-hmm. The only thing I'm... I wasn't there, but the only thing I could guess that is, is because it says that she requested guidance on the set of particulars. So I don't know if maybe that's why it was in there. But- If we're going to be including emails that people sent related to- It was an... I had given her

2:44:20 a message, and it was an email asking her. I had emailed, and it was a letter saying, "Can you cover this in your training?" And then you guys asked a bunch of questions, and mine didn't get asked. So, if you don't want it in there, I don't care. And did Ms. Sylvester mention this? I think what you're alluding to or stating actually, Ken, is was it as part of the minutes, which usually would be a statement or something that happens within the context of the meeting? I don't think she stated. She wasn't going to get to my question then. She stated others she wouldn't get to, but no. But is it part of the formal record is the question. Yeah, I don't know. I guess that's my question. I don't remember that coming up during the meeting.

2:45:06 I don't... So if we're sending... I don't know. Yeah, I'm trying to see what's the purpose of the minutes. Are we reflecting what happens in the meeting and trying to accurately, if that- What would you like to see moving forward? I- Do you have a recommendation or suggestion? Well, to me, that shouldn't be in there, otherwise we open up a can of worms of other emails that get sent related to our meetings that should also be included. So the meeting minutes are summarized from the recordings. So that means somewhere in the recordings, it was stated. That was stated, so that's what the minutes are. They're a summary of the recordings.

2:45:52 They're not word for word or so- Okay. So I went back and watched it, and I tried to find that, and I didn't see that being discussed in the review of the meeting. So yeah. I just know that's how the minutes are created, is from a summary of the recordings. But I wasn't at the meeting. Other comments or questions? Yeah. I actually was wanting to... I had that question, too. And also, I want to have time to go through the training as well and watch it.

2:46:38 I also had emailed, the board attorney to review, to confirm everything that is written on here is actually, it tracks correctly with the law. And I've also just to ensure things are just accurate. So, I would like a little bit of time to review it and, maybe at the next board meeting, can we approve it then? My understanding is that we can approve it at a later date. In the meantime, I would suggest board members might want to be thinking about what we would want the minutes to reflect.

2:47:23 Mm-hmm. My understanding is that it is what actually takes place during the meeting time, and so should accurately reflect that. Whether it's a summary or a transcription, the intent is the same, my understanding, in providing minutes. Yeah. Mm-hmm. That would be my understanding as well, so... Yes. The other thing is, unless the board agrees to contact the attorney, getting advice, I don't think we need to be trying to get the attorney to give us individual advice without the board delegating that. Well, that's not germane to the minutes, or is it? Is it in the minutes that- She just said she contacted the district attorney to

2:48:08 get her take on whether or not these meeting minutes- Okay. Well- I get that ... yes, I have to get a board approval on this. I just am not comfortable passing this, approving this until I've had a time to go over it myself, and while I'm checking off the boxes and also with... Do we have the board attorney? Do we have OGEC look at it? I just want to make sure everything is tracking. Yeah. Go ahead, Director Brewer. You look like you were- I mean, to that point, one of the things they talk about in the OGEC thing is that we're

2:48:53 responsible for making sure the minutes are accurate. Yeah. And so, to the extent that we have to question or we have to go back and listen, that's, I guess, that's the expectation of us. Mm-hmm. Well, and I think going through the training actually provides some insights into the state of flux that even the Oregon Government Ethics Commission is in in trying to determine. And I came away, actually, from that meeting thinking perhaps it's up to this board to determine what works for this board. And then perhaps ask for legal opinion as to whether that works, but... Well, actually, OGEC, at the training, they had said, if we

2:49:40 have questions, because we could collaborate together here, write our questions down, send it off, and the committee could review it. And they could send us back a- Formal That is true. There's different levels, and I think Nicole, you've explored that, too. Different levels of- Yes ... of- Formal advice ... formal opinion. Yeah. Yes. And it would be great to collaborate on that and have a conversation around it. So could I suggest for this evening that we not approve this and then do a little bit more research on that, we can bring back at our June 22nd meeting? So what is the research that... Each one of us is doing research or what is the-

2:50:26 Well, Director Langworthy was stating that she wanted to do a little bit more- Verify- ... than what's done. Verify the accuracy. Okay. Well, should I... Here's an idea. I could just send this off to the committee and make sure that this tracks, and then they could- To the committee, you mean the Oregon Government Ethics Commission? Yes. Mm-hmm. Okay. Yeah. Yeah. You see it sent out? Yeah. Sorry. Sorry about that. Yeah. No, I'm... Yeah. In my head. Okay. No, I think that would be the way to do it, because I did call the executive director at OGEC this morning, and she said to contact the attorney and so it just kind of has us going back between mom and dad here.

2:51:12 So I just want to get the answers to this, and I think that would be the way to do it, possibly. I think it would be reasonable to send this training summary back to the trainer and say, "Is this an accurate representation of the training?" They won't do that because it's an interpretation on our end. So if we approve- Oh ... it, we're approving our interpretation. So I'll go first to Ken. Suggestions or direction? So I guess my suggestion is to delete the one paragraph about Director DeGraff's email, because I don't think that happened in the meeting. And I think the rest of it is a reflection of

2:51:57 what happened in the meeting. So I would be okay with approving that, that the meeting minutes are what transpired during the meeting. That would be my recommendation. Okay, and Amber, you had questions on this too. What would help us move forward there? Is that sufficient, or would you like to add to that? No, like I said, I would like to send this off. I think that would be a good direction to go with this, just to- Send it off to who? I'm sorry, to the OGEIC committee, because if we can send this off to the OGEIC committee or... But I thought you said they wouldn't respond to this because this is our interpretation of the- Well, Ruth, the trainer, I don't think would be able to respond to this,

2:52:45 because I think that's what was mentioned, the trainer. Okay. If we send this off to the trainer. Yeah. But if we send this off to the actual committee themselves, they can review it and confirm what we're seeing here is correct. I'm fine if that's what you would like to do, that's- Can we do both? Can we approve tonight with the amendment, and also send it to the Government Ethics Committee? Does it matter, in other words, whether we send it to OGEIC approved or not approved? No, I guess not, because their attitude is they got handed public meeting laws in, I think, 2023,

2:53:30 and they're still figuring it out. So the situation could still be- Yeah ... up for opinion? Yeah. So I don't think we would be at fault here if anything's off. So I'm good with that compromise. Okay. Yeah. As long as the top paragraph is removed. So yeah, I think the citation about Director DeGraff's email, since she wasn't there, and I think it should be a summary of what was spoken- Mm-hmm ... said. And then, in terms of the other, I think we can approve it otherwise, and then if

2:54:18 Director Langworthy finds that something was... We can always revisit. Right. Mm-hmm. So would someone like to make a motion to that effect? I would move that we approve the May 5th, 2026 special meeting minutes as long as we strike the paragraph at the top of page two. I'll go ahead and second. So we have a motion by Director Cole, a second by Director Light. Any further comments or discussion? Hearing none, call for the vote. All in favor indicate by saying aye. Aye. Are there any against? So consent agenda item A1 is

2:55:05 approved five to nothing. Moving on then to 4A2, the May 11th, 2026 board meeting minutes. Also Director Cole? Yeah. Again, at the top of page two, the third paragraph down says, "Director Cole requested to pull consent agenda item 5A," it should be 5A1. And then on the top of page five where it says, "Director Cole requested consent agenda item 4A2 special meeting minutes be held for discussion," I believe that happened early on in the meeting and not

2:55:51 at the point of when we actually did the approval of the items. So that was at the beginning when we approved the agenda. Also, we have consent agenda item there in the middle, 4A2. That should actually be 4A1, which is the April 13th, 2026 meeting minutes. And I guess when we table it, this was a question on formatting, we don't put down the votes and who did the motion when we table that?

2:56:38 Because we had a motion by Director Bru and a second by Director Light to discuss it, and then Director Bru made a motion to table it, and Director Light seconded it, and we voted five-oh to do that. So does that not get reflected in the minutes? Well, again, coming back to my previous statement, I think that the minutes should accurately reflect. So any of these corrections- Okay ... because it isn't whether we remember necessarily now, but if someone were to review them, and a number of years had passed, would it be accurate? And that's sort of what I think we should be shooting for. And I have one other thing. The next motion down says, "Director Bru moved, Director Graf seconded motion to approve the resolution for

2:57:26 structural engineering services from..." And actually, it was the resolution for a summit security system. We were not dealing with the engineering contract at that time.So that, yeah, it didn't appear to be a transcription from the meeting, but- Oh, I'm lost. So security system- In the middle of page five- Okay. Yeah ... where it says, "Motion Director Brew moved, Director DeGraff seconded the motion to approve the resolution for structural engineering services to

2:58:13 Miller Consulting Engineers." We were not discussing the- That's, yeah ... structural engineering services. We were discussing the Summit security system. That's true, right, Brad? Aren't the cost figures that are there is related to... Yes. Yep. Okay. I think just changing that title would suffice, correct? Getting- Yeah, it should say, "Approve the resolution for Summit Security Systems," and not the- Yeah ... engineering services.

2:59:05 And was there anything else? I think there's just one more on the middle of page seven. Right after where it says, "Yancey clarified the board's action authorizes the purchase, not the contract negotiation," Director Brew had talked about getting a report back on the cost and conferring with the superintendent on a policy definition, and I think the minutes should reflect that there was additional information requested by the board. Requested by the board for? It was...

2:59:51 I had a note here. I have to go back. "Clarified the board's action authorizes..." So what was this? Oh, I think it was about on the final cost of the curriculum. This was around the purchase of the curriculum. I think we got an email back on that. Did we get an email on the final- I think ... costs of the curriculum? I don't recall- Yeah ... that. Okay, I'll check on that. Thank you. Yeah, I'd just like the minutes to reflect that. Was there anything else? Not in those minutes, nope. Ken, in that, let's see, the motion to... I think we were doing the RIF. It's on page...

3:00:36 It's the May 11th, page six, where you declared a conflict of interest as a spouse of an employee subject to the reductions. Does your vote get counted for? Yes, I believe it still does. Yeah. It does? Okay. Yeah. I was just wondering. Okay. And then did you have anything else or- No, I didn't have anything else on those- Okay ... meeting minutes. And then for me, under superintendent communication, in here it says- What page are you on? I'm sorry, I'm on page 10 for May 11th. Under 7B?

3:01:21 Under, yeah- Okay ... 7B. So Amara addressed the concern raised by board members about not being provided the opportunity to visit schools, explaining the priority given to schooling schedules and emphasized the need for board members to be visible in schools and community to build trust and put students first. I also want it to be... I looked up the transcript and also what was said in that communication is, "I did some research and found that board member school visits were postponed beginning in November due to the status of certified bargaining at the time. Following the conclusion of bargaining and ensuring midyear layoffs, it was felt that schools needed time to

3:02:07 adjust to the changes before resuming board member school visits." I just- And that was taken from the video? The transcript from the video, yeah. Yeah. I can- Okay ... I just want that- Well, unless there's- ... summary to be in there ... some more, I would prefer for myself to not approve tonight. Yeah, and there is no- Make changes, bring them back to the board. Okay. Is there some more? Yeah. And, oh, I'm sorry. For this one, and said, "There is no intentional preferential treatment of board members happening in relation to scheduling board member school visits." Okay. But that was it. Yes. No more- But that was under the superintendent communication also.

3:02:53 Yes. So we want to make sure, again, that the minutes accurately reflect, so. And we can do a summary, and I can leave it with... So can we go ahead and put it on the agenda for 6/22 with the corrections? And then if we can read through those to make sure they, again, accurately reflect what happened in the meeting, that would be great. Anything else on consent agenda item 4A2? Okay. Moving then on to consent agenda item 4A5, financial statement, resolution 25-26.056.

3:03:39 Director Cole? Yeah. Under revenues, the second bullet, the end of that second bullet talks about including prior reconciliations assumption for high cost of-Disability for current year, and accounting for bus depreciation, $560,000. And that's new, and I guess I was just hoping to get an explanation on what that is and- Yeah. So, Oregon Department of Education, through the transportation grant, reduces the revenue for bus depreciation. You have buses that get depreciated over a 10-year period of time. We have a number of buses that are in that 10-year period, and that's the amount that they have reduced due to that depreciation. So we get less money for the buses because they're older. Correct. Right. Yeah. We get... Yeah. Okay. That's correct.

3:04:24 And that just showed up? Is that the reason it- Yes. Yeah. Oh, wow. Okay. The other question I had was maybe on the table in the expenditure forecast, under expenditures, purchase services, the projected year-end to date was down 540,000- Mm-hmm ... compared to last month. Yeah. And I was wondering, where were those reductions? Yeah. So, obviously every month it goes along, these numbers on this financial report change, and it's based on activity that has happened and what we anticipate to happen through the remainder of the year. So, as we reanalyze it and looked at it, we're

3:05:10 making reasonable assumptions with our numbers, and based on the contracts that we've paid, the purchase services that we've paid, what we still have outstanding, that's why that adjustment- Okay ... was made. So there wasn't something specific we did to try to- No, we're continuing just to refine- Okay ... these numbers as best we can. Okay. Thank you. That was all I had for that. Any other comments or questions from the board on this specific item? Hearing none, I'm going to go ahead and call for the vote on this. So all in favor indicate by saying aye. Aye. Aye. Are there any opposed? Do we need a motion, Jonathan? We need a motion. We do. Oh, that's true. I move we approve- Can you trigger the motion ... the financial statement, Resolution 2526056.

3:05:58 Second. And DeGraff second. Thank you. So motion by Director Cole, seconded by Director DeGraff. Call for the vote. All in favor indicate by saying aye. Aye. Are there any opposed? Hearing none, motion carries five to nothing. Moving then onto the consent agenda item 4A11, structural repairs, resolution- Jonathan, I think the personnel report got pulled. Oh, oh yeah. You pulled the personnel report. Sorry. Bumped that. Yeah. So, the personnel report, I just had some questions. So, the names of people who have

3:06:43 resigned or retired are not there. And- So we don't ever put names on the personnel report. But then if you look under the new hire- Except for new hires. Other than that, all the other names are- And why would that be? Well, my guess would be confidentiality, and I can ask Dustin for clarification on that, but typically they've never been put in there, other than new hires. Jodi, that's not true. If you go back and look at previous reports, they did put those names in. I think when- I don't know. The least is on our website in terms of meeting minutes, so that goes back- Mm-hmm ... 10 years or so. But I don't know how far back I know that if you go back that- Yeah

3:07:28 ... it was included in there. And there are certain districts that still do that. The reason I ask the question, and I've asked this before, is that, again, there's no years of experience either, and I would like to reach out sometimes as a board member and thank them for their service. And if we're going to publish them for new hires, again, unless there's some disclaimer that they've signed saying, "Please don't put my name in," or, "Please do put my name in," I think that we should include them, unless there's specific laws pertaining to that. I can find out why names are not included, whether or not there's... I'm going to assume that there's a reason, but I will ask-

3:08:13 Okay ... and find out about names being put on the personnel report. Okay. And if it gets cited for confidentiality, can you follow up further, and is that state statute we're paying attention to, or is it just our practice? Any comments or questions on that item? So I will move to approve consent agenda item 4A6, personnel report resolution 2526.057. Second. Moved by Director Light, seconded by Director Brew. Any other comments or questions? Hearing none, call for the vote. All in favor indicate by saying aye.

3:09:00 Aye. Are there any opposed? Hearing none, motion carries 5 to 0. Now moving on to... I think this takes us to consent agenda item 4A11, structural repairs, resolution 2526.062. Yeah, I got a few questions. One is, what is the schedule for the work? The schedule is still being determined. Obviously, there is enough work that we're not going to be able to complete it in one year, and so this is probably going to stretch over two years. Obviously, a lot of this work is very intrusive into the building, and we can't conduct the work when students are in the building, or

3:09:47 we have to relocate students, depending on which classrooms we may be working on. Yeah. And so until we have a contractor on board, we will be working with them to determine the timeline, the project calendar- Okay ... the project approach, all of those things. Okay But obviously, Ken, or Director Cole, we feel urgency around getting this work done. Yep. I can imagine. So, can you elaborate on the, I guess the...

3:10:33 So the work that is being done in over half of the spaces are behind walls. We don't know what's behind those walls. We didn't uncover every truss, meaning we didn't take off all the sheetrock, expose everything. That would've been super disruptive to our entire facility. We also don't know what abatement lies behind those walls that haven't been uncovered, and that is why I'm requesting to carry a 30% contingency. That is following the recommendation of the structural engineering firm that conducted the research on this. So there's a lot of things that we don't know yet until we get into the walls.

3:11:18 Okay. Because I thought I read there was the abatement that we did lead and asbestos surveys. Correct. That we don't think there's any asbestos- Correct ... that they're going to encounter. If there's pipes in those walls, in 1950s buildings, they're going to be wrapped in asbestos. We can't abate those because they're behind walls. Until you get into the wall, then you uncover the potentially asbestos-wrapped pipes, we have to stop and abate before the contractors will continue on with their work. Oh, I thought it said there are no known areas of removal that contain asbestos- Correct ... is what we told the contractor. So- No known areas. Okay. We don't know what's behind the walls. Okay.

3:12:08 So one other question is, how are we funding this? Because before you talked about that we didn't have this amount of money- Correct ... and that we're going to come to the board, and I don't know if we were going to do something similar to what was done with the turf fields, or how are we paying for this? So, did not want to presume or assume anything for the board. So I have made initial contacts with multiple people on financing this, and the proposal is to bring back, at the 22nd, options for the board to consider. That would include further reductions in our budget to fund this or looking at full faith and credit notes, some kind of private financing. So I will be bringing back options

3:12:54 to finance this. In the interim, to begin the work, you'll notice or you probably noticed on the financial statement, I have assumed $1.3 million worth of capital outlay in the remaining budget. We're going to go ahead and move forward beginning the projects, knowing that we have budget in our general fund set aside for some of this work. Not all the work, but enough to get us through the month of June. That 1.3 also includes the 482,000 worth of security system upgrades that we're doing. That's why that number's so big. So we'll begin the work, we have general fund resources to do some of it, and then I'll be bringing back options for the board to consider for financing the rest. Good. As a former finance guy, I'm really uncomfortable with

3:13:39 approving a contract when we don't have resources on board to fund the full contract. Okay. I understand that. I guess I would also- It's 10 schools, so I know we don't have an ideal, totally accurate timeframe, but over what period of time do you anticipate we could fix all 10 schools? Over two summers. Mm-hmm. Yeah. The issue, Director Brew, is that I didn't have an approved contract to take out to financing because the financing options that we have are asking me, "Who's doing the work? What are they doing? Has it been approved by the board?" No, none of that has happened. So if you'd like to wait until we have financing options, we don't

3:14:25 have a contract in place. So it's kind of the cart and the horse. But, obviously you have experience in this as well. My recommendation is to approve this contract and bring back financing options to the board at a later date, but that's my recommendation, and the board is... Obviously you're going to make the decision you're going to make. So my recollection is when we approved the turf fields, the contract, the funding was part of that at the same time. Correct. How is this different? Didn't know the amount. We had the amount in the turf fields because it was all off state contracts. This was intent to bid, and we had competitive bids, so we did not know the amount of the contract until last week when we opened the bids. We had an estimate from our engineer of 5.8 million.

3:15:11 This obviously came in much lower. I didn't want to go out with a $5.8 million financing when I knew there was a chance that this could be much lower. Mark? I guess the other thing, I'm just concerned, I think as we've gone through some painful spending cuts, I think it's important that we be as diligent as we can about the spending, and I'm uncomfortable with a 30% contingency. I would prefer that we limit it and that with the two-year construction, it seems to me there would be adequate time to, as stuff, as we run into things, that we could come back and get reports to the board and

3:15:57 authorize additional funding at that time. It just seems to me that I would like to have more... We have a pretty detailed scope of work for the estimate for the actual constructionThe bid, and this is just kind of another open-ended, fairly large number that I'd like to see that we be diligent about managing. Do our schools stay, sorry, uninsured for two years? Are you doing it one school at a time or- They will remain uninsured if an event happens and we don't have a certified stamp document saying that they've been repaired. Let me... Can I follow on that? Sure. I wanted to clarify with Director Cole on the contingency amount.

3:16:44 So, if we don't have contingency and this exceeds the contract, the contractors will stop work. We won't have the budget to move forward if we have to come back to the board at the next regularly scheduled business meeting, which could be a month away. So I would just caution the board and make sure that you're aware of that. And once contractors leave, as you probably have experienced- To get onto another board ... it's very difficult to get them back. Yeah. But if you're doing work over two years, right? So if you experience the first site, you find something, you have money in the contract to pay them to deal with that, right, in the meantime? And then can come back to the board and say, "We're going to need additional, we've discovered these things." Yeah, we'll have a budget for every building. My point is that if we are at the budget, I can't

3:17:32 exceed what the board has approved, so we have to make assumptions for every building moving forward under the contract. If they open a wall and they see something that needs to be fixed immediately, and I don't have any contingency or limited contingency, that work has to stop, because I don't want to be in a situation where I am going against what the board has approved. Are you saying suggest taking money from another project and moving it over for that one and so if it's $100,000 and $300,000 at one school, I just say, "Okay, I'm going to take $200,000 for now from this school and move it over here," but that leaves the one school very inadequate for the resources we have. And obviously we don't know the work plan and the timeline yet for the schools. From my perspective, what I would

3:18:19 suggest is a contingency of $250,000. You come up with something, you fix it, and while they're fixing that, you come back to us and saying, "Looks like we're going to go through that first 250. Can we get another 250?" Or something like that. Just because, well, contracts seem to spend every dollar- And that's my concern. I don't see any constraints to be efficient. 7% contingency, that is well below what any- That is first payment. That's a down payment. That buys you a month to get back to us and ask for another 250. Oh, okay. Yeah. It's not, yeah. I mean, I'll do whatever the board wants. I want to caution you that this could significantly delay progress on some of

3:19:06 these projects. Because we could hold a meeting. We could set up a meeting, if you're wanting to come to the board, we got 24 hours and we- So, if there was a $250,000 contingency, that's about average for the sites, right? Did you- No. No, Walterville is well over a million. Trying to remember the... And, uh, Director- The statement was made about insurance, and my understanding is we do indeed have insurance on these buildings with the exclusion of anything related to the structural beam. Is that correct?

3:19:53 If there's a structural failure and we haven't addressed it, then we don't have coverage. There's more to that- But if we had a flood, let's say, we had a burst in the plumbing and we had significant damage. Yeah. Okay. I just want to- If trusses weren't damaged due to a named barrel- Mm-hmm ... then we would have coverage. But come winter, if we have snow, and we've specifically asked the question, if we have any trace of snow on these roofs, we cannot hold school in those buildings because they are uncovered. That's what I was going to ask, if you would explain that to Director Bru. That already happened this year. Yes. But that's regardless, right? That's- Unless the roof caves in. Right. I mean, the work has to be done. So it's- Yeah. I mean, obviously, we're going to look at the list and work with the contractor to address the most critical this summer.

3:20:38 Right. Walterville is one of the most critical. Okay. And that is the most expensive. Yeah. Having done similar work for a lot of years, we had 3.5% standard contingency for a lot of projects, and you had to manage it and know if things were coming up and deal with it and get approval if it needed to go over that. Yeah. And so it should be something. I don't know why that it would be- Well, don't we have a separate contingency fund already? In the district? Mm-hmm. We have it in the general fund. In the general fund, and that is how much? And wouldn't that cover- It's a million dollars. A million dollars, so in an emergency before we could get board approval. I mean, I'm just looking for action from the board.

3:21:23 I don't want to argue with you. You set the contingency. If you want to approve the contract, approve the contract. I'm fine with whatever you want to do. You guys obviously have a lot of experience, and I would lean on that as well. Just I think the board has a lot of questions. We've been presented with an option and I'm looking at the timeframe going, well, does it make more sense to do them individually? Does it make more sense to maybe package them around timeframe? I don't know. I don't have any experience in this, but I am asking board members if they have experience, and you obviously have an experience. I have a great deal of experience. So, and that's- Helped build a middle school. I don't want to delay it, but also finances are really, really important-

3:22:10 Mm-hmm ... and they're impacting our kids, so I want to make sure that we give enough guidance that we do it responsibly. Yeah. I think that to determineThe projects and how you'd package them together, that's a critical conversation with the contractor. Mm-hmm. And how they deploy their resources. And in many projects, we don't get to direct that once we hire the contract, they get to direct that a little bit more because that's their business. Well, and that's why I'm asking the question now. Yeah. Have we had those conversations with Essex? We have not hired Essex, so- Have we had that conversation framing- No, we have not. We have to make sure that the contract gets approved before we have any conversations with contractors. Okay. Thank you. Because in that case, we had three competing contractors. If I'm having conversations with a contractor before the bid, that

3:22:57 would open it up for a protest. Okay. I just want to make sure that, although we don't know how much the engineering costs, we didn't get any reports back on that. You told me we were going to get them. We haven't seen any of those. I want to make sure that we've done detailed plans, and so we have a bid on the actual construction, but it's just another million dollars of just- Yeah ... without being able to account for it to, here we are, we've cut teachers, talking about programs, impact to other

3:23:42 programs. I want to make sure that we're being as diligent as we can with spending our money and- Yeah ... and transparent as we can. And so I would advocate for a lower contingency with the idea that, as you use it, you inform the board and say, "We may need some more," and come to the board. Yeah. And so we have a record of how we're spending that money. I would like to clarify a statement you made. I believe I updated the board on Friday updates with how much we are spending each month on structural engineering costs. Yeah. So you made a statement that you haven't ever received any information on that, and I believe that I have provided that in Friday updates on a regular basis that this month it... Huh? It came out of one of my- Yeah. And I did that monthly.

3:24:28 Well, I don't remember seeing the engineering costs in there. I remember- Yeah ... seeing the estimates changing, so I apologize. I'll go back and double-check that, because I- I gave you monthly invoice amounts because we were paying them every month. So I would like the record to reflect accurately. Sure. It should be in the minutes. Meanwhile, in our next Friday update, could you give us a total cost of- Sure ... of all that? That'd be great for those of us math challenged. So board members, do you have enough information to go forward? What we're voting on tonight is this actual proposal, the actual resolution. Yep. So from my perspective,

3:25:16 without a financing source nailed down, we're effectively saying, "Gosh, if we need to take another $4 million in cuts to pay for this out of schools, that's okay." I would rather know where that money's coming from, because I don't want to write that blank check against our students. So you're looking for more specificity around the funding source? Around how it's going to be paid for. Okay. Director Cole? I certainly agree with that. I guess I'm wondering, would two weeks of delay in executing the contract or approving the contract affect the two-year schedule? Potentially, and it could potentially impact the contractor as well,

3:26:04 because for every two weeks, a month that goes by, they'll pick up other jobs. Yeah. So that's just a caution. Obviously, this is the board's decision. Okay. Director DeGraff? We have a motion, right? I'm fine. I've got everything I need. And Director Langworthy? Yeah, I got everything I need. Okay. It's been a while. Who made the motion, and who did the second? Motion by Director Cole, seconded by director- I don't think we had a motion for this yet. Did we not declare a motion? Oh, I guess we didn't. No, we didn't. Okay. I move to approve the resolution to

3:26:52 get a contract with Essex General Construction for the structural repairs. Do I have a second? I would clarify that Director Langworthy reviewed the procurement file in detail. Okay. And had an opportunity to ask questions. Okay, so we have a motion on the floor by Director DeGraff. Do we have a second? Hearing none, motion fails for lack of a second. I would request that the district would bring this back for the meeting on the 22nd, addressing some of the issues that were raised here tonight. So moving then to consent-

3:27:37 Director? Yes? I'm not sure how to say this, but speaking for myself personally, if we have answers earlier, I'm not against doing a special meeting- Okay ... to deal with this issue. I'm trying to be a team player here, so if we need to meet again before the next meeting, I'm certainly available to do that. Well, and I appreciate that. So thanks for speaking up on that. Moving to consent agenda item 4A-13 budget appropriation transfer, resolution number 2526063Just

3:28:24 a couple things. One is the first, the resolution at the top says 24-25 O64 and dated June 9th, 2025. So those need to be corrected because this is actually for the current one. And let's see what's here. I was trying to understand if the subscription-based information technology, if the information there, the requirements in Gatsby were implemented in 2023, I guess why wasn't that included in the budget to begin with? So you'll see that it was included in the budget.

3:29:11 That's what this resolution is. The money is currently sitting in the budget. We're asking you to move it from function 4,000 to functions 5,100 and 2,000. And in special revenue, we're asking you to move it from function 3,000 and 4,000 to functions 1,000, 2,000, and 5,100. And the reason is that we sought and received additional clarifications from the district's municipal auditor. Oh. And that's why we changed it in the functions. We needed to reflect it differently than what we had budgeted. So it was budgeted. Okay. I remember that discussion during the audit. Thank you. Okay. So yeah, just correcting the dates for the resolution and the date,

3:29:56 I think needs to happen. Okay. Do you want to go ahead and make... Or are there other questions on this particular resolution? I don't have any other questions. I was going to move approval as amended. Okay. I will second. I'll second. Oh, okay. So, the motion by Director Brew, seconded by Director Cole. Go ahead and call for the vote. All in favor indicate by saying aye. Aye. Are there any opposed? Motion carries five to zero, which pulls us through the consent agenda, moves us on then to action item 4B, the approval of designation of district officers,

3:30:42 resolution 25-26.065. Mr. Yancey. It's recommended that the board of directors approve a resolution designating district officers, clerks, and agents, including the depositories for district funds, as listed on the attached document for the 2026-27 fiscal year. So moved. Thanks. Second. Moved by Director Light, excuse me, seconded by Director Brew. Comments or questions?

3:31:28 I guess I'd just like the board to consider whether or not to delegate the Public Contract Review Board responsibilities. There's just been some contracting that's done there that hasn't always been clear, and I would like to think it might be good for the board to see those things come through as that gets applied just for learning and for transparency purposes. So clarification, what this is allowing our staff to do is to actually conduct all these procurement processes. So are you saying the board wants to conduct those procurement processes? Only the part where...

3:32:14 Is this the part where... I'm sorry. Is this the right one where it's the Local Contract Review Board? Yeah. This states that you are acting as your own contract review board. Right. So only those things that require the Local Contract Review Board approval. That's not all purchases, right? There's lots of purchasing that happens- No, that's all purchases because you're your own contract review, and we are operating under the Oregon Attorney General's public contract model rules, which include all purchasing ORSs and OARs. So what you're asking, Ken, is so the board wants to conduct all those processes?

3:32:59 It was my recollection that those applied when we were doing special procurements. No. So- These ORSs and OARs talk not only about special procurements- Okay ... it talks about state contracts, it talks about the bidding requirements, it talks about the thresholds on which we have to be bidding, and when we're allowed just to move forward. So this is the Oregon Attorney General's Model Public Contracts Manual stipulates all purchasing and procurement laws for public agencies. And what this resolution is asking is that the board is delegating the superintendent and the chief operations officer to carry out that full authority for this next year.

3:33:45 Without this authority, the district will not be purchasing until the board conducts those processes. Is that what you're desiring? No, that was not my desire. My desire was where we were doing the special procurements related to the construction, and I can't remember what the issues, the particular ones we've done where... What was the... I can't remember which one it was now. Or maybe it was the security systems. That that-That we didn't go through the normal bidding process. Correct. Right. You had to do a special procurement for-

3:34:31 No, not a special procurement. We operate under ORS 279A, which allows us to purchase off of state contracts, which have already been competitively bid by another agency. There's cooperative language, and that allows us to buy off of that with guaranteed state pricing. But that was used when there was an expenditure that was in excess of what the board had authorized for expenditures of 150,000, right? So even though it was over the 150,000, it didn't need to go back to the board for approval. That was my recollection. Because- It's not the security systems. Okay. So I would need to be reminded. So we already are bringing back any contract by state law that

3:35:17 requires the board to approve. It was the social studies curriculum, I believe. Correct, and you approved the purchase of the social studies curriculum, which is required by state law. So I guess I'm confused as to what the board is looking for. And this is standard. I mean, this- Yeah ... the same resolution's been presented to this board until this ORS was in existence, and it's never been an issue. So I guess I'm wondering what problem we're trying to address. I think it's not really trying to address a problem as much as just getting information so that he has a clear understanding. Yeah. My understanding is we've done this- Every year ... even before my time. It's been since probably this Oregon Attorney General office over saw

3:36:03 procurement. Right. Yeah. And I understand there's a long history of doing the curriculum adoption, and it was implied that that was the approval of the contract for the actual purchase of the curriculum. And I guess I'm asking that we see that information. Rather than just approving the curriculum, we should have two actions, one approving the curriculum and one approving the contract for that. And I think that was actually, in talking with legal counsel, that was their recommendation. So that's different than what this is, though. Yes. So how does that relate to this resolution? Then I'm bringing up the wrong spot. Okay. And I apologize. So I thought that was-

3:36:50 But we should and could perhaps seek further information just for clarification purposes. Microphone, Johnson. Oh. So it might be something we want to pursue at a later date. For purposes of this resolution, though, do board members have enough information? Yes. Yeah. So my confusion, Mr. Yancey, is in our operating agreement where it says all contracts of the district must be approved by the board unless otherwise delegated by their import- Right ... by the superintendent or designee. Yep. Are we effectively, by doing this, delegating everything to the superintendent and designee? Or- No. This is only Oregon State procurement law. Employment contracts are different than Oregon State procurement law.

3:37:35 They're employment contracts and under employment law. Okay. So that's a different contract. Okay. And we don't have the authority, or I don't have the authority to approve employment contracts for individual employees. There's a collective bargaining process, which is outlined in the collective bargaining acts, PECBA, and the collective bargaining laws, and the board is required to approve those. So this is not employment contracts. This is procurement law and procurement contracts. Okay. We might want to look at rewriting this because it says all contracts, and if there's limitations on what all contracts are, then maybe we want to say that. Anyway, okay. Thank you. Yeah. So this specifically talks about public contract review under these

3:38:21 specific ORSs. These ORSs are not employment contract law. Okay. This is in the Oregon Attorney General's Model Public Contracts Manual, which is not employment law. This is procurement law. The labor laws don't fall under the Oregon Attorney General's office. So we need more clarity- Yeah ... at some point. And pertaining to our operating agreements, I think there's multiple places that the languages don't agree with themselves or with our policy, and those need to be cleaned up. But for purposes of this resolution, shall we move forward?

3:39:06 Yeah. Okay. I'll go ahead, and we have a motion on the floor and a second, so I'll go ahead and call for the vote. All in favor, indicate by saying aye. Aye. Are there any opposed? Motion carries five to nothing. Moving on to property liability insurance. Thank you. It's recommended that the school district board of directors renew property casualty and liability insurance coverage, including earthquake and flood coverage under Special Districts Association of Oregon for the period of July 1, 2026 to June 30, 2027. It's also recommended that the board of directors renew workers' comp insurance coverage under Safe Corporation for that same period of time, 7/1/26 to 6/30/27.

3:39:55 I would move for approval. I'll second. Comments or questions? Just a quick comment. It looks like we're actually saving money. We are on workers' comp. And I think that's a celebration no matter what the amount. Yeah. So in the amount of 35,967. Yeah. Is that based on experience? Yes, it's based on experience and the negotiations that we do with the Safe... We use our insurance agent of record to negotiate with Safe. Okay. Yeah. Thank youAny other comments or questions? I'll go ahead and call for the vote. All in favor, indicate by saying aye. Aye. Are there any opposed? Hearing none, motion carries five to zero.

3:40:41 Action item 4D, approve designation of counsel and auditor, Resolution 25-26.067. Yeah. Again, Mr. Yancey. It's recommended that the board approve the resolution designating district agents as listed on the attached document. You'll see that we are staying with the same auditing firm. We are staying with the same attorney firms and legal counsel. However, we are making a slight change to general counsel and specialized services for the Hungerford Law Firm. We're still keeping Garrett Hemann. They do a lot of work with PACE, but we're shifting a little bit more of the general counsel and daily work to the Hungerford Law Firm, which is a firm that

3:41:26 we've worked with for a number of years. But what this does is it authorizes to work with any of the firms that we've listed here. So- Are any of these local? Thorpe, Purdy and Jewett is local. That's what I thought. Mm-hmm. So I would entertain a motion. I'll move approval. Moved by Director Cole. Second. Seconded by Director DeGraff. So I have two questions. One, this is one of the few resolutions says the ORS requires, but it doesn't specify which ORS. Do you know which ORS requires that we designate the

3:42:11 law firms and- Hmm. I don't have that on here. I apologize. I looked high and low, and I couldn't find anything that... You have any idea how I'd go about finding that? I can try to look. OSBA might know the RS, but we'll- Yeah ... try to find it and report back on that. Okay. And last thing, under the Garrett Hemann, it just says in specialized service as designated by PACE. Mm-hmm. And I guess that was new language we haven't- Yeah ... and I was curious why that was in there. So when we have an issue that goes to PACE, which is our insurance provider, and say we get a tort claim, we'll give that to PACE Claims, and they will assign a attorney

3:42:57 firm. They're paying the bill of that attorney firm, but we have to authorize that we're actually able to use that attorney firm for our district. So that's why I put in there special services designated by PACE. We don't anticipate using Garrett Hemann as much as we have in the past, but I did want to designate and remind the board that PACE is going to use them as much as they need to. Okay. Thank you. That tends to be their go-to. Okay. Thank you. Has been my experience. Yeah. Other comments or questions? I was just curious because you mentioned all five of the list are designated as general counsel.

3:43:42 Yeah. But we have a preferred general counsel amongst those? Is there a separate designation moving to Hungerford? No. They're equally as would be considered experts in school law. So general counsel for staff, superintendent would be for anything that we need to review personnel. They're very highly skilled in special education law. Okay. General counsel is just to have that day-to-day business that we would need if we want to run a wording by it or an interpretation or anything like that. Okay. Yeah. Obviously, with some of these, you'll see that we get into a little bit more specificity, like Foster Garvey, we've only identified as

3:44:29 litigation and bond counsel, because that's their specialty is bond counsel. We wouldn't look at them for general counsel services. And the same with Miller Nash Graham, right? Is they have certain expertise- Yes ... that we go to them for certain questions. Okay. Yeah. They really are strong in contract administration and construction law. Okay. We actually used them more than any other when we were doing the construction of Pamlin, because we were obviously negotiating big construction contracts. Okay. All right. Thank you for that clarification. Yeah. Is it Hungerford a law firm that specializes in education? Is that- They do. It's one of their specialties, yeah. Yeah. Okay. And then I saw that they offer trainings and all that. Mm-hmm. You essentially get a subscription. Is that something that the district does?

3:45:17 Do they pay for the training? Typically- Not that I'm asking- ... the way these law firms work is they have their standard rates that they would charge, and then they have a discounted rate for school districts. Mm-hmm. And so we get that discounted rate for school districts. And I've not known a law firm to give away free training. Oh, no, I was asking if we were paying for the subscription- Oh, no ... kind of like with OSBA. No, we're not paying for any subscription. Oh, okay. We basically pay as we utilize them. Mm-hmm. Okay. Sorry. Okay. Moving forward, call for the vote. All in favor, indicate by saying aye. Aye. Are there any opposed?

3:46:02 Motion carries five to nothing. And then moving on to item 4E, adoption of the 2026-27 budget, Resolution 25-26.068. Yeah. So, the resolution, this is recommended that the board adopt the 26-27 budget resolution as presented, and it's on the attached document. This is exactly what was approved by the budget committee, and we have not received any further information on appropriation level, whether we're getting more money or less money. So we're bringing this forward as approved by the budget committee, recommended for adoption by the board I'll move approval of the budget.

3:46:48 Second. Moved by Director Cole, seconded by Director DeGraff. Comments, questions? Just one question. If we do get a loan for the seismic, the retrofit, would we then do a supplemental budget to recognize that income and so on? Yeah, potentially. If it exceeds 10% of any fund, we would do a supplemental budget, for both recognizing the revenue, appropriating the expenditures, and then addressing any debt service payment. The debt service payment typically is set up in arrears, so it'd be next year. So that we deal with that in next year's budget. Thank you.

3:47:38 So this budget was passed forward to the board on May 7th in the budget meeting. Yeah. And there's been a lot of water under the bridge that we weren't aware of at that time when it came through. So I have my concerns of whether some of the decisions that have been made are actually reflective of both the information that we took in and the budget forms that we did across the district, and/or even some of the guidance as far as what was given as we moved into the superintendent search. What I heard here tonight causes me concerns. And again, it's just rumors of cuts, but when you tighten your belt, to me, there's a degree of

3:48:26 specificity that needs to happen for me to feel comfortable with that. So I just need to state that up front. Mm-hmm. What I would remind you, Chair Light, is that what we're asking is obviously very high level. This is appropriation levels. And once you get past the appropriation levels, then you start talking about the specifics of staffing and programs and all of those things. So we're not asking for you to approve the specificity of the reductions tonight, because that isn't what the resolution is. This is simply appropriation levels. And if you want to continue having those conversations, then I think there's nothing precluding you from having those conversations. This is simply just getting us the bookends of our budget

3:49:12 moving forward. And I understand that. It's the broad picture. However, if the board or board members want to weigh in, then what's that avenue before the end of the school year? I would say that that would be a conversation between the board and the superintendent. Okay. I mean, obviously, I'm at the pleasure of the superintendent, so- Right. No, I get it. But you do understand how it works. What do you mean by weigh in as far as like... I went to the forums that we had before the budget. So are you talking about wanting to help

3:49:57 decide what cuts happen? Because that's not really a board purview. Well, the board's responsibility is to provide oversight. So we don't meddle in the operations. However, we, I think, are responsible and obligated to reflect our own personal feelings, or even those from the community, the people that elected us. And so one of the things that was a common theme, particularly in the budget forums, was this need to keep cuts away from the classroom. So we heard extensive testimony tonight that it doesn't seem like it's keeping it away from the classroom. And maybe it's just my curiosity, but I'd like to know,

3:50:44 how did we get there? Or what, with more specificity. If there's an opportunity to have that conversation before June 30th, I would entertain that. But, and again, maybe I'm sensitive because I've been on the board a long time, and the statement was made tonight that once these cuts happen, they're very hard to get back. And there's a number of areas, not just in the dual immersion, but there's a number of areas where we've seen us make cuts in areas with the assurance at the time that we were going to address them when times were richer or whatever case, we get more money from the legislature, whatever.

3:51:29 I want to have more confidence going forward that what I vote for is going to follow the parameters that I've been hearing. Speaking for myself, I think it's between a rock and a hard place, and this is what I learned as the new member. It's like, I think all of the speakers that spoke tonight were looking at the board and saying, "Why are you making these cuts?" We learned about it when you did. This does not come from the board, right? We don't get involved with the day-to-day operations, and I don't want to make a speech, but we actually had a former board member talking about overreach, getting involved in the day-to-day operations.

3:52:15 We've actually had board members sued for trying to influence, or for getting too involved. And so, we care , but our options are limited, as I'm coming to understand. Our options are limited as far as taking the actual action. That's not our place. But our obligation as a board member is to provide oversight to our community, the people who elected us, as far as, is this what you want to see in the district? If it's not, then-Again, we have no power to go and actually change those, but we can and should make recommendations or suggestions to our one and only

3:53:02 employee, who is the superintendent. And just for clarification, if I may, I want to remind the board, and Bob, I appreciate what you said, but I do want to remind that on May 11th, you did approve the resolution for reduction in force. So that's when the board learned that we were reducing X number of positions in each area. Didn't come programmatically, but the board was the one that approved the resolution for reductions in force. I, for one, did not approve it and- Right. But consent, it got approved ... it got approved. Yeah, it got approved. I don't feel like I can vote for the budget because too many remaining unknowns. First, the public comments tonight about the changes for dual immersion Spanish language program led to questions

3:53:50 about how much input, if any, was taken from staff, parents, or the public. I know that the elementary immersion program at Guy Lee is popular and has a waiting list. And this is good news. It's increasing enrollment instead of decreasing enrollment. The proposed cuts of the dual immersion program at the middle and high school levels will not help this growth in the future. Second, I cannot vote for the budget due to our needs to revisit board goals, which are over 10 years old and way before the time of the majority of the boards, including myself. The goals determine our priorities, which impact the budget. Big decisions like school districts' budget require

3:54:36 careful deliberation and a clear understanding of cuts we are facing. The board represents the public, and we must be sure we are accurate and clear about the finances of this public entity. So we have a motion. Is there other... Sorry, didn't mean to cut anybody off. Any other comments or questions? Hearing none, I'll go ahead and call for the vote. This vote I will call as a roll call vote. Director Cole? Yes. Director Brew? Yes. Director Degraff? Yes.

3:55:21 Director Langworthy? No. Director Light? No. Motion carries three to zero, or three to two, excuse me. Moving on then to 4F, approval of OSAA cooperative sponsorship, SHS and Mohawk girls' soccer, resolution 2526.069. Oh, there we go. It was recommended that the board approve resolution

3:56:06 2526.069, which, as you stated, is a cooperative agreement between Mohawk High School and Springfield High School girls' soccer. I'll move approval. Second. Any comments or questions from the board or from Indy? I'm just glad that we can do these partnerships and provide opportunities for other kids. So I think it's a great thing. Yeah, it's a great thing. Thank you. All right. All in favor indicate by saying aye. Aye. Are there any opposed? Hearing none, motion carries five to zero. Moving on to action item 4G,

3:56:53 action on information discussed in executive session. I would entertain a motion. So I move that the board take no further action related to the complaint discussed in executive session and delegate authority to the chair to draft a response to complaint based upon board's discussion. Second. Motion by Director Cole, second by Director Brew. Any comments or questions? All for the vote. I would like to declare a potential conflict of interest. I'm sorry, I didn't hear. I want to declare a potential conflict of interest. Okay.

3:57:43 So hearing no further comments or questions, I will go ahead and call for the vote. All in favor of the motion say aye. Aye. Are there any opposed? No. Motion carries four to one. Action item 4H. This is the additional item, the interim superintendent process. So I was going to make a motion that we plan for a second meeting based on recent history in terms of selecting board members and a superintendent that we haven't always reached a decision right away, and that we may be prudent just to plan for

3:58:30 another meeting to give us all a chance to sleep on the decision as after tomorrow when we complete the interviews. So I would, I guess, make a motion that we plan for a meeting on Wednesday. That doesn't work? No. Wednesday doesn't work I think we should just get to the interviews tomorrow and see how it goes. I can plan for another day, but Wednesday I got something I'm attending. Wednesday evening or... I'm just trying to get- Oh, like Wednesday during the... No, I'm on a field trip that day. I just- Can I ask a clarifying question of staff of where we're

3:59:17 at currently so we know? And when you think about the candidate, too. Do we have anything set right now? No additional meetings other than tomorrow's day-long meeting. There's no additional meetings set this week. So is there a meeting for the- Jody ... I think he's talking about the board deliberation. So tomorrow it's scheduled for us to open session, I believe- Right ... at 2:30. Yes. And then go into executive session to deliberate, and then come back out of executive session into open session to make a- Yeah. And I just wanted that knowledge out there, so. Yeah. So that right now is planned for tomorrow at 2:30. Yeah. Yeah. It's just- It's putting the- In the path, the board needed to sleep on it for a day or two on a couple of these

4:00:05 decisions, and I thought it'd be prudent. What's that? We also only had four board members at that point, and we had the candidates in front of us to ask. Yeah. Okay. I found it helpful to reflect over the weekend when we had done that, me personally. It took a lot of people sending emails for me to consider the values of the district, so what our needs were in the moment. So that helped me. And just to make sure that we're all on the same page, that I will be out of town starting Friday the 12th,

4:00:52 and the internet will be problematic by the day, so until probably Thursday. I can do Thursday. So, and I will also state that I don't necessarily have to be there for the board to move forward, but just want to make sure that you're aware of my calendar. I can do Thursday morning. It's the last day of school, so I don't want to- Yeah, I can't ... I don't want to miss that pickup. I would just hate to get to that point where we can't make a decision, or we need time to weigh it, and that

4:01:37 we don't have another meeting already planned. The more lead time I think we can have to that, we can always cancel the meeting, but- That's a true point there. We could always cancel the meeting. So you're suggesting putting a meeting in place now, and then tomorrow at the meeting, if we're just needing to table it, we will have that option. That was the intent, yes. Mm-hmm. I'm available most of the day on Thursday. Yeah. Jody, you got a look on your face. I do. I just want to just remind the board that what you put out was that this was the final interview day- Yeah ... with deliberations and a decision, and so this changes what, not

4:02:24 just the community, but what the applicants are expecting. So I just wanted to throw that out that, if you're able to make a decision tomorrow, that's what you've put out in the past. Yeah. But I also understand that history- Yeah ... indicates you might need additional time. We've been pushed through really fast on a lot of things recently, and so I hear you on that, but I also, if the board is just needing an extra moment, this is a big decision that keeps me up at night. It is. So if we need a little extra time, I don't think it's unreasonable to just have that set aside. Does anyone else...? Well, in our process discussion, I actually mentioned not having the

4:03:11 decision day on the same day, just because I knew it'd be a long day and a lot of information and trying to synthesize all of that. But I do understand that it's been said and announced and that too, so. And just for the record, I don't want to spend my last morning by myself here, so last day of school. But if need be, yeah. What do you guys think? I'm not available the rest of the week, but you guys can go ahead. I could reluctantly do a Thursday. But

4:03:59 I would rather that we could come to a consensus tomorrow, and I would rather it was five to nothing rather than three to one or three to two or three to one to one or something like that. I'd like to see us work together. That is my preference as well. It's just, yeah, just trying to make sure that we plan for ahead and we've given as much lead time, if we do need another day. And so I'm fine if the board wants to... I just wanted to have that discussion and put that out there. Well, I want to thank you, Ken, for bringing the topic up for discussion,

4:04:45 because I think it's important that we all agree and move forward, so thank you. But I'm not hearing a consensus in moving, so we'll- Well, I guess that'll- ... plan ... give us some motivation to get the decision done. That's rightOkay, so moving on to Agenda Item 5. These are discussion items, and up first is- Director? Yes. Just one clarification on something that Superintendent Nemarow said. I know that we had talked about doing a public session and then going into executive session, and then coming back. I seem to- Yeah. At 2:30. Okay. I seem to recall at some point we talked about

4:05:31 doing the whole deliberation in public session. Okay, so we responded to Rob Hess's email requesting, in order for the board to make a decision and an action item, you have to open an open session, go into executive session to deliberate, and then come out, but you have to have opened an open session first. You couldn't just go into executive session and then come out and make a decision and action item. So we had to do a special meeting 2:30 tomorrow, so you can go into open session and then go in for deliberations in executive session, and then come out and do an action item if you- Okay, that was my confusion. Thank you. Yeah, sorry. Good? Okay. Thank you. So then moving on to Agenda Item 5, Discussion A,

4:06:17 Procedure for Meeting Notices. Superintendent- That's me. In response to a question Ken had. I'm wondering with the time of the evening, night, and the long day that we all have tomorrow, if we can push that out to June 22nd, if you're okay with that. I'm okay. Because that was yours, Director Cole. Yeah, I'm okay with that. Thank you. Okay. Thank you. Any objections? Moving on. Discussion Item 5B, Attorney Presence at Board Meetings. Oh. Um- Were we moving on with that? And that was Director Brew. The next three items were mine, and I'm okay with putting them off until the next meeting.

4:07:05 Just to comment, I think they're all important. I do think that Item 5C, Discussion Around the Family Exit Survey, is somewhat time-sensitive. Want to make sure that we allow enough time at our meeting on the 22nd to really have a full discussion and go forward on that. How much time are you thinking on that one? What's that? How much time are you thinking on that one? 15, 20 minutes. And it may not take that long. To me, I've thought about it maybe too much. But I would allow at least 15 minutes on that. And if it's not enough, at least it'll get the ball rolling.

4:07:53 Okay, any other thoughts on Items 5B, C, and D? Okay, moving on then to Item 5E, the Board Retreat. I ask board members to sort of be checking their calendars and see when you might have some availability. I have more availability than many, so it's not really to me. I can accommodate schedules. So thoughts on, A, the retreat, and B, scheduling. For August?

4:08:38 For August, early August. Typically, that's when board retreats are held, right prior to particularly administration coming back. And then yeah, given that we haven't looked at goals and strategies and all of that in quite some time, I want to make sure we allow enough time in the day. Someone suggested we need two days. I'm not willing to go there, even as much as I like board retreats. So I'm certainly open to it. I would like to see it. I presume that it would be added to our board calendar for next year, which I presume will be at our next meeting. We'll have the- Mm-hmm ... board calendar that we approve.

4:09:23 So- And Bob, just the calendar from a school board standpoint goes from July one through to June 30th. The July meeting is typically just our organizational meeting where largely we just pick officers and doing any swearing in if we have that, but we don't have that, so. Yeah. I'm fully supportive of a retreat. I'll make myself available. For my perspective, it would be handy if you just sent out three or four potential dates and just said if those would work or not. That would be easier for me. Okay. Is that something allowed under- Yes. I mean, or is that- Sure.

4:10:08 Okay. Allowed to do. I'm more analog, so I prefer knowing in advance what dates I should be looking at. Somebody has expressed an interest in not doing it on a weekend, which is fine. But we need to do this, I think fairly soon so that we can get the facilitator and start talking about what we want. And that would, by the way, probably be on the meeting for the 22nd of June. And I can spearhead, if you all want the scheduling, just getting everyone's dates to see what works. Is that what you- Easier for me to work with looking at a few dates rather than-

4:10:53 Okay. Yeah ... getting my- And I think we should have options. Yeah. Can you include Marty on that scheduling? Because she's going to have to do- Yes ... everything with that as well. Absolutely. So please. Thank you. Absolutely Okay, anything else for the retreat? Just wanted to get that out there. So then moving on to item 5F, Springfield Education Association public comment. Superintendent Amara? I'm not exactly sure why that's actually on there with my name next to it, other than it was tabled and brought to the next meeting. I was wondering that, too. I think you just left the room. Yeah. And it's like, okay. So, that's- Well, there's been a request- Yes ... from SEA- Yeah

4:11:38 ... to speak, and I think we talked a little bit about the title, the public comment. I value the relationships with our associations and consider them to be partners. So I don't particularly want it designated as public comment because that's sort of a separate item. But I think that we should have more communication with our associations to make sure we're on the same page. This is one vehicle to do that. As I mentioned before in my board experience, we had monthly meetings between the superintendent, board members, a couple board members, and a couple of SEA. It doesn't have to be that way, but I think having that dialogue and allowing that opportunity.

4:12:24 Public comments doesn't allow back and forth, and my vision of this is that we could ask clarifying questions and make sure we're sort of on track. We're there- Just for information to the all board members to have this, that was brought up in bargaining this year to have SEA have its own comment time in board meetings, and the district elected not to approve that in the collective bargaining agreement. So I just wanted you to have that information. I don't have the background as to why, but I know that was brought up, and it was not- Yeah, I didn't know that ... I just wanted to make sure you had that piece- Sure ... of information as well. Yeah, I brought up the email from the employment group or, sorry, the association,

4:13:12 and what they're wanting to do here is inform. Information to be shared includes membership updates, goals, survey results, and timely concerns as they rise. A regular monthly slot provides flexibility for communication, with the option to cede time back to the board if there's no pressing needs. The speaking slot should continue during active bargaining to maintain open lines of communication, even if specific issues are avoided. And the SEA remains open to further discussion regarding the details of these topics. So,

4:13:58 I was wondering if there's-- I know at our last meeting, let's see, Chair Light supported the idea of providing a dedicated slot for the association. Bruce suggested a six-month trial period to see if a dedicated space for SEA would work effectively. And Cole stated he would support it as long as the board was only listening to the report and not veering into negotiation issues. And DeGraff questioned the necessity of the special space for the SEA, suggesting public comment already provides an opportunity to share. Maybe not a good idea for political or advocacy groups to provide special space.

4:14:45 But she did bring up a good point on asking about there will be students or classified staff or community organizations or parent groups, like PTOs. And so, that's something when it comes up, okay. But right now, I think it would be great to have our association come and have a spot. They're the frontline workers, and I would really love to hear from them as much as I can. We should all hear that. Superintendent, this isn't at all a criticism of you, but as I am getting more used to my role on the board, it

4:15:32 seems really strange to all of the mechanisms that keep the board separate from the people doing the work. And the State of Oregon seem to be intent on keeping the elected representatives from having meaningful dialogue with their constituents. Yeah. So, I would be really curious why they felt that was a good idea to speak on behalf of the board being able to listen to people. I'm not sure why that would be a bargaining issue important to administration, but maybe someday

4:16:19 I'll learn. But yeah, it's very frustrating trying to do the job when you can't talk to the people that you're working for in a meaningful way, and you can't listen to the people doing the work in a meaningful way. I think that it isn't just our employee groups. I think from talking to community members and other folks, there's just a great deal of frustration around input in general and conversation in general from a respectful position. So I might suggest that this might be, again, another item to talk about in our retreat under the broader

4:17:05 heading of communication in general.'Cause listening sessions, focus groups, surveys, there's a lot of ways to get input. And the more we know where our constituents are coming from, I think the better decisions we can make. So I will just throw out perhaps that's a broader topic, and then it gives the staff the chance to present some solutions. I'm looking at you, but whoever our new superintendent and the senior leadership is. This isn't an action item, so it was mainly just to garner information.

4:17:52 Are there any other comments or questions, directions, or... Hearing none, maybe, because I think our 622 meeting is going to be fairly busy also. And even if we were to make it an action item, it wouldn't take effect till the next school year anyway, on this particular topic. Is it okay to move forward then? Mm-hmm. Okay. Seeing some head nods. Yes. Okay, thank you. And then finally, for discussion, item 5G is the GLS community survey. So that's when GLS created the survey for input on the

4:18:38 interim superintendent search, the survey was promised confidentiality, and I think that that is an important agreement. But they also extrapolated statements that were unidentifiable by person. There's 570-odd people who took that survey, and for them to release it, a sort of a list of all verbatim comments and questions, they would have to have board direction to do that. So I wanted to put that out there. I think it would be useful information as we design for the future.

4:19:23 There was certain information in the budget forms that we did that I think are helpful. So- I just want to push back on that assertion by them, because it's listed in their proposal a couple of times that they give the board the data, they give the board the report. So, we can certainly all say, "Yeah, we want it," but we've all pretty much kind of said that to them. I think that when they think data, they're thinking if they provide the transcripts, because they're not identifiable. So that's, I wouldn't want to go back on that confidentiality promise. Huh?

4:20:08 I don't want anybody's names or any of that. No, I don't either. That's what I'm saying. Yeah. Or if you're going to identify a position, that's not the point of this. The point would be to develop themes from the information, which would then give the board some guidance as we move forward in setting goals, direction, strategies, et cetera. So, I'm just asking for clarification. So the community survey, from my perspective, what we wanted to see was nothing that would involve anybody's confidentiality. Mm-hmm. It's like, all right, we had a parent group. What was number one with the parent group? What was number one with the teachers? That. And so it would

4:20:53 be finer than what they gave us, which was everybody in one place, but it would not be to the level of individuals. Now, if you're talking about when we did the community meetings and people wrote the comment cards, that's a different thing. No. Were you talking about the survey specifically? The stakeholder survey that- Yeah, I mean, the title is Stakeholder Survey Report. Yeah. I don't know where- And that's the information ... the confidentiality concern comes in. So a little background on where the request is coming from. We had a public records request for the GLS community survey data to be released. Well, actually, I asked for it, too. Oh. Way before that. Apologies. We were responding when GLS asked, and when we got the public records request, we inquired,

4:21:38 and it has to be by action of the board for them to be able to release it for the public records request. Our legal gave the opinion that it was appropriate to release the information, but GLS has a different version of it, which is fine. They are the holder of the data, and so it will take board action in order to release the data information about the survey. I so move. With the caveat that it retains the confidentiality and anonymity of the participants. Yeah. Because I think our credibility would be at stake. Particularly as Director DeGraff mentioned that they committed to providing the data in their-

4:22:25 Yeah ... proposal, so. Well, yeah. So they just want to make sure that the board agrees. So it's not listed as an action item tonight, but it will be given the direction for the 622 meeting. Okay. All right. Thank you. And so then we're moving on to agenda item six, reports and information. Superintendent Amore. I'm going to keep it short, and I'll save the rest- Please ... for June 22nd. I just have two things. First of all, we found the ORS for the auditor. Oh. It's 297.425. 297.425. And requiring us to have legal counsel is ORS

4:23:12 203.145And the second thing is tomorrow, please wear your name badges, board members. That's all. That's all I've got. I'll do the rest of my report. I'll combine it with June 22nd due to the late timing. Okay, thank you. Moving on to board members, in no particular order. I'll just say, it was great attending the graduations I got to do. That was A3, and Bratton, and Springfield, and Thurston. It was really cool to see the kids do that and hear the speeches the kids did was fantastic and yeah, so

4:23:58 thoughtful and mature and yeah. So, I really enjoyed that. All right. Thank you. Director Brew? Yeah. For myself, yes, I very much enjoyed the graduations, and I want to thank all the people that facilitated us being able to attend and participate and seeing all these great, happy families. I know there was a lot of work that went behind the scenes and in front of the scenes to make it happen, and I want to thank all those folks. Thank you. Director DeGraff? I just want to update everybody on three things for SEF, Springfield Education Foundation.

4:24:43 So they funded over $55,000 in grant awards to 31 projects at all 21 schools. We missed the grant giving tour because we were busy with superintendent search. So that was a bummer to miss that, but they did do that. I don't know if anybody had a chance to go the next day on those other two, but did anybody on the board go? I went to the Page and Briggs one the next day. Yeah. Okay. We had board conflict that week. That's fun. And SEF is holding their summer celebration to celebrate grants for the coming year. That's on Saturday, June 27th, from 5:00 to 8:00. Tickets are $25 and can be purchased at seflane.org/events.

4:25:29 And then the last thing is they are still hosting monthly fundraisers at Public House called Toast to Teachers, and for June, the event will benefit the Chieftain Native Youth Center, and it's actually held on the last day of school, so that evening. That might be nice. So 50% of all the food and drink proceeds from Public House will go towards the Chieftain Center, and they select a different school every month, starting again in September. And I only went to one graduation. It was my daughter's at Thurston. I would just ask, Nicole, do you want to address your status as a board member? Because I'm not sure it got widely publicized. I'm good.

4:26:14 Okay. Okay. Director Langworthy. Oh, you're not going to address that? Yeah. I was really honored to go to the Long House and be an observer of the Native graduates. It was great to be in that sacred space and to talk to the families. Just such a proud moment. Made me reflect on my own time being a graduate myself, and yeah, I'm looking forward to school being over,

4:27:01 sorta. And yeah, that's all I'm going to say for tonight. I'm pretty tired. Okay, well, graduations are my favorite part of the year, and this was no exception. And again, it takes a lot of work to make things look so smooth at all of the campuses that we attended. So thanks goes to the leadership and staff at the buildings for making that such a wonderful occasion, not only for students, but their families. I'm excited about the interim search. Tomorrow, interviewing the finalist candidates. It's going to be a long day, so I'd like to thank the board members in advance for that, but it'll be long for a lot of people. So staff that has to put this together.

4:27:48 Thursday at 4:00 is our SPS- Oh, you- ... staff celebration. Oh, you were going to say that? Sorry, go ahead. No, but you're right. Lots to celebrate. I know. Yeah, the SPS graduate. I forget what it is, staff celebration, but yeah, it's really cool. That runs 4:00 to 6:00, and so if you're still available at 6:30, the Willamette Leadership Academy graduation at Springfield High School. Yeah. And then getting to go to Page and Briggs Middle School on the SEF Foundation thing was,

4:28:34 there's something really fun about giving money away. And that was great. So I'm glad they had a partial second day on that. We've got a couple of other meetings coming up, so I want to make sure and mention them. June 22nd, 2026 is a special meeting. It does start at 5:30, so even though it's listed as a special meeting, make sure you adjust your calendars. Maybe we won't get home so late. Jeff, I forgot to ask, do you recall how many were online? 58, and do we have anybody still? Because I was going to super thank them. But anyway, thank you to everyone, the 58

4:29:21 who attended online, all of the many people that were in the room. I think it's great to have community feedback, so it's wonderful. I wish we could have that many every time. So have a great night. Drive safe home, and I'll adjourn this meeting at 10:30. Yeah. Anybody? I'll be back. So soon? Here's- Oh, we're so soon? I can read that.

4:30:08 They couldn't