Sep 06, 2023 Special Board of Trustees

[00:00:04]

BOARD WILL MOVE BACK INTO OPEN SESSION AND.

RESUME WITH AGENDA ITEM NUMBER TWO.

COMMUNICATIONS TO AND FROM THE BOARD, INCLUDING PUBLIC COMMENTS.

WE DO NOT HAVE ANYONE SIGNED UP TO SPEAK, SO WE WILL MOVE ON TO AGENDA ITEM NUMBER THREE ACTION ITEMS. ACTION ITEM THREE A CONSENT AGENDA.

[3.A. Consent agenda]

MOVE TO APPROVE CONSENT AGENDA AS PRESENTED.

SECOND. MOTION MADE BY MISS ARCHAMBAULT, SECOND BY MR. CLANCY. ALL IN FAVOR? MOTION PASSES.

SEVEN ZERO.

WARD WILL MOVE ON TO AGENDA.

ITEM NUMBER FOUR DISCUSSION REGARDING STUDENT DISCIPLINE.

[4. Discussion regarding student discipline update]

GOOD MORNING. WE HAVE THE STUDENT SERVICES TEAM AND FROM OUR TEAM, FROM SPECIAL EDUCATION DOWN THERE TO HELP OUT WITH THIS.

BUT WE'VE TALKED A LOT ABOUT HOW WE ARE PROACTIVELY TRYING TO ADDRESS STUDENT BEHAVIOR.

WE'VE SHARED WITH YOU HOW WE'VE GATHERED DATA ON STUDENT BEHAVIOR AND THE CHALLENGES THAT TEACHERS ARE FACING IN THE CLASSROOM AND WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO ABOUT THAT.

WHAT WE'RE GOING TO FOCUS ON TODAY IS MORE INFORMATION ABOUT HOW WE REACT AND HOW WE DEAL WITH ASSIGNING CONSEQUENCES FOR STUDENTS WHEN CONSEQUENCES NEED TO BE ASSIGNED.

WE'RE GOING TO DO THAT THROUGH TWO SCENARIOS.

SECONDARY SCENARIO AND AN ELEMENTARY SCENARIO.

THESE SCENARIOS ARE NOT OUT OF THE ORDINARY.

THESE WOULD BE SCENARIOS THAT OUR CAMPUSES ARE FACING ON A REGULAR BASIS.

AND SO WE'RE HOPING BY GOING THROUGH THOSE SCENARIOS AND KIND OF TALKING THROUGH THEM WITH YOU THAT YOU'LL JUST HAVE A BETTER UNDERSTANDING OF HOW CONSEQUENCES ARE ASSIGNED IN THE FOLDERS IN FRONT OF YOU.

YOU HAVE THOSE TWO SCENARIOS TYPED OUT.

THEY'RE ALSO IN HOME BASE AND YOU ALSO HAVE COPIES OF THE SECONDARY BEHAVIOR MATRIX AND THE ELEMENTARY BEHAVIOR MATRIX.

THESE ARE USED AS INTERNAL DOCUMENTS ON OUR CAMPUSES, AS GUIDES FOR ASSIGNING CONSEQUENCES.

WE'RE HOPING THAT YOU'LL GET A BETTER UNDERSTANDING TODAY OF MAYBE HOW A PLUS B DOESN'T ALWAYS EQUAL C, AND BUT THESE GUIDES ARE MEANT TO HELP US TO BE EQUITABLE AND WORK WITH OUR CAMPUSES WHEN THEY'RE ASSIGNING DISCIPLINE FOR STUDENTS.

SO TO GET STARTED, I JUST WANTED TO BRIEFLY GO OVER WHAT OUR PHILOSOPHY IS FOR STUDENT BEHAVIOR IN THE DISTRICT. THERE WERE SEVERAL ITERATIONS OF THIS.

THIS IS WHAT WE FINALLY LANDED ON.

IT WAS A WORKING DOCUMENT FOR QUITE SOME TIME.

I KNOW YOU CAN READ IT, BUT I WANT IN JUST THE PART.

IN THE MIDDLE IS WHAT I REALLY WANT TO HIT ON THAT BY RESPONDING TO MISBEHAVIOR CONSISTENTLY WITH THE FOCUS ON RELATIONSHIPS, PERSONAL ACCOUNTABILITY AND FAIR AND EQUITABLE CONSEQUENCES WILL SUPPORT STUDENTS THE BEST.

SO THAT'S REALLY WHAT WE'RE GOING TO BE FOCUSING ON, IS THAT ASSIGNING CONSEQUENCES EQUITABLY, HOW STUDENTS HAVE TO HAVE PERSONAL ACCOUNTABILITY FOR THEIR ACTIONS AS WELL. SO I WILL TURN IT OVER TO THE TEAM SO WE CAN START WORKING THROUGH SOME OF THIS INFORMATION.

THIS IS ALBERT LEAL, OUR ONE OF OUR MANAGING DIRECTORS OF STUDENT SERVICES.

GOOD MORNING. WE ALL KNOW AND I THINK TO THE BOARD, I'VE DIRECTLY TALKED ABOUT THESE SPECIFIC ASPECTS OF BEHAVIOR THAT DO INFLUENCE OUR CAMPUSES.

WE KNOW THAT WHEN A BEHAVIOR IS OCCURRING IN A LARGE MEASURE, THAT IT HAS AN EFFECT ON THE CULTURE OF THE CAMPUS, THE OVERALL SAFETY OF THE CAMPUS, AND AS WELL AS THE PERCEPTIONS OF STAKEHOLDERS ON EACH AND EVERY ONE OF OUR CAMPUSES.

OUR PRIMARY GOAL COMING OUT OF A DISTRICT PRIORITY IS THAT CAMPUS BASED STAFF WILL EQUITABLY APPLY POSITIVE BEHAVIOR INTERVENTIONS AND THE STUDENT CODE OF CONDUCT TO REDUCE NEGATIVE STUDENT BEHAVIORS AND POSITIVELY IMPACT THE STUDENT LEARNING ENVIRONMENT.

AND THIS IS SOMETHING THAT WE ARE WORKING ON ACTIVELY WITH LOTS OF OTHER PARTS OF THE DISTRICT AND OUR LEADERSHIP TEAMS IN ORDER TO HELP TO MAKE THIS A REALITY FOR EACH OF OUR CAMPUSES.

WE DO THE JOB OF SUPPORTING OUR CAMPUSES IN ATTAINING THIS GOAL IN A WIDE VARIETY OF DIFFERENT WAYS AND WORKING WITH, AGAIN, A MANY TEAMS IN ORDER TO HELP THIS TO HAPPEN.

THE SUPPORT THAT WE PROVIDE LOOKS A IN A VARIETY OF DIFFERENT WAYS.

WE PROVIDE PROACTIVE AND PREVENTATIVE SUPPORT THROUGH THE RCL TRAINING THAT OUR STAFF HAS RECEIVED IN AN EXTENSIVE PROJECT OVER THE LAST 2 TO 3 YEARS.

THEY'VE RECEIVED INFORMATION ABOUT HOW TO CONNECT REALLY WITH OUR STUDENTS BETTER, HOW TO PROVIDE THEM THAT RELATIONSHIP, THAT TRUSTING

[00:05:03]

WE'VE ENGAGED IN THE WORK OF PROVIDING SCHOOL WIDE POSITIVE BEHAVIOR.

INTERVENTION SUPPORTS.

THAT IS EXTREMELY IMPORTANT THAT WE WORK WITH OUR STAFFS IN ORDER TO BE ON THE PROACTIVE END OF EACH OF THESE DIFFERENT PROGRAMS AND PROVIDE THEM WITH MEANS AND A PLAN IN ORDER TO OBTAIN THAT.

WE ALSO ARE WORKING WITH OUR STAFF ON CREATING SUPPORT FOR OUR PROGRAMS IN ORDER TO IDENTIFY STUDENTS BETTER TO.

EMPLOYEE SPECIFIC INTERVENTIONS FOR THEM AND TO ENABLE THEM TO HOPEFULLY BE MORE SUCCESSFUL IN BOTH THE ACADEMIC AND BEHAVIORAL SIDE OF OF OUR RELATIONSHIP WITH THOSE STUDENTS.

OUR RESPONSIVE SIDE REALLY ENGAGES WHEN WE LOOK AT OUR TEXAS EDUCATION CODE IN CHAPTER 37.

SPECIFICALLY, WE HELP CAMPUSES AND WE REFER THEM TO SPECIFIC AREAS WHERE WE CAN ALIGN OUR PROGRESS, WE CAN ALIGN OUR PRACTICES AND BE ABLE TO RESPOND TO CHALLENGING SITUATIONS IN ALIGNMENT WITH OUR CODE OF CONDUCT, OUR STUDENT HANDBOOK, AND THEN OUR DISTRICT WIDE BEHAVIOR MATRIX, BOTH AT THE ELEMENTARY AND AT THE SECONDARY LEVEL.

I WILL NOW TURN OVER THE MIC TO PAIGE HOLZ AND TO JODY DAVIS TO TAKE YOU THROUGH THOSE SCENARIOS.

MORNING. OKAY.

SO ALBERT BRIEFLY TOUCHED ON SOME OF OUR GUIDING DOCUMENTS.

AND AS MS.. MILLER MENTIONED, WE HAVE THE MATRICES IN YOUR FOLDERS THAT YOU CAN REFERENCE TODAY.

BUT BEFORE GETTING TOO DEEP INTO THOSE SPECIFIC DOCUMENTS, I WANT TO TAKE YOU THROUGH THE SECONDARY SCENARIO.

I KNOW THAT YOU'VE HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO READ THROUGH THIS, BUT FOR THOSE WHO MIGHT BE WATCHING AT HOME, I AM GOING TO READ IT ALOUD.

SO EVERYBODY HAS THE CONTEXT FOR WHAT WE'RE DISCUSSING TODAY.

SO FOR THE SECOND SECONDARY SCENARIO, IT SAYS THE ASSISTANT PRINCIPAL WALKS THROUGH THE RESTROOM DURING THE PASSING PERIOD AND NOTICES THAT THREE STUDENTS ARE IN A STALL TOGETHER. THE RESTROOM ALSO SMELLS LIKE STRAWBERRIES.

THE ASSISTANT PRINCIPAL ASKS THE STUDENTS TO COME OUT OF THE STALL AND JENNY ALLISON AND MARJORIE WALK OUT TOGETHER.

THE ASSISTANT PRINCIPAL ESCORTS THE STUDENTS TO THE FRONT OFFICE AS SHE SUSPECTS THAT THE STUDENTS WERE VAPING.

THE STUDENTS ARE PLACED IN DIFFERENT SPACES IN THE FRONT OFFICE AREA AND ARE ASKED TO WRITE STATEMENTS REGARDING WHAT OCCURRED IN THE RESTROOM.

JENNY REFUSES TO WRITE A STATEMENT AND CONTINUOUSLY TELLS THE ASSISTANT PRINCIPAL THAT THEY WERE JUST HANGING OUT IN THE STALL AND DID NOTHING WRONG.

ALLISON WRITES A STATEMENT INDICATING THAT THE GIRLS ARE FRIENDS AND THAT THEY WERE HANGING OUT IN THE STALL.

SHE DIDN'T KNOW JENNY HAD A VAPE AND DID NOT INTEND TO USE A VAPE, AND SHE WAS SURPRISED WHEN JENNY BROUGHT IT OUT.

SHE SAID THAT JENNY TOOK A PUFF AND SHE PASSED IT TO MARJORIE.

MARJORIE ALSO TOOK A PUFF WHEN MARJORIE TRIED TO PASS IT TO ALLISON.

HOWEVER, SHE DECLINED TO TAKE THE VAPE.

MARJORIE WRITES A STATEMENT INDICATING THAT THE GIRLS TEXTED ONE ANOTHER TO MEET UP IN THE BATHROOM AND SHARE THE VAPE.

JENNY BROUGHT THE VAPE AND SHARED IT WITH BOTH GIRLS IN THE STALL, AND ALL THREE OF THEM TOOK A PUFF.

JENNY PUT THE VAPE IN HER POCKET BEFORE THE AP CALLED THE GIRLS OUT OF THE STALL.

SHE PROVIDES SCREENSHOTS OF THE TEXT THREAD OF THE GIRLS MAKING PLANS TO MEET UP AND VAPE IN THE STALL WITH THE ASSISTANT PRINCIPAL.

AS FOR THE STUDENTS BACKGROUND, JENNY WAS OR IS A GENERAL EDUCATION STUDENT WITH NO DISCIPLINE HISTORY.

ALISON IS A GENERAL EDUCATION STUDENT WITH ONE PRIOR E-CIGARETTE RELATED INCIDENT THAT RESULTED IN A TEN DAY EAP PLACEMENT.

AND MARJORIE IS AN IEP ENTITLED STUDENT WITH A DISCIPLINE HISTORY THAT INCLUDED TWO DAYS OF OZ AND THREE DAYS OF ES FOR A PREVIOUS CONFLICT WITH ANOTHER STUDENT.

THE ASSISTANT PRINCIPAL REVIEWS THE STATEMENTS AND THEN INTERVIEWS THE STUDENTS DIRECTLY THROUGH QUESTIONING.

BASED ON THE WRITTEN STATEMENTS, THE ASSISTANT PRINCIPAL ASKS JENNY IF SHE IS IN POSSESSION OF A VAPE.

JENNY DENIES THAT SHE BROUGHT A VAPE TO SCHOOL OR THAT SHE IS IN POSSESSION OF ONE AT THE TIME.

THE AP ASKS JENNY IF SHE IS WILLING TO TURN OUT HER POCKETS BASED ON MARJORIE'S STATEMENT.

JENNY HESITATES, BUT ULTIMATELY SHE COMPLIES, AND THERE IS A NICOTINE VAPE IN HER POCKET.

JENNY THEN SHARES THAT THE GIRLS PLAN TO MEET UP IN THE BATHROOM WITH THE INTENTION TO VAPE.

SHE ALSO PROVIDES SCREENSHOTS OF THE TEXT CONVERSATION THAT CORROBORATE HER STORY.

JENNY SHARES THAT ALL THREE GIRLS PAST POSSESSED AND TOOK A PUFF OFF THE VAPE.

ALLISON CONTINUES TO DENY THAT SHE HELD OR TOOK A PUFF OFF THE VAPE AND SHE REFUSES TO SHOW ANY TEXT MESSAGES THAT WERE SHARED BETWEEN STUDENTS.

SO THAT IS OUR SCENARIO.

AND AS YOU CAN TELL, IT'S A LITTLE BIT TRICKY, RIGHT? LOTS GOING ON THERE AND A LOT OF BACKGROUND THAT WE HAVE TO CONSIDER.

SO THE FIRST THING THAT AN ASSISTANT PRINCIPAL DOES IN THESE CIRCUMSTANCES IS DECIDE.

UP FRONT WHAT THEY THINK WOULD BE AN APPROPRIATE RESPONSE TO THE BEHAVIOR.

THEY HAVE GATHERED INFORMATION, THEY'VE INVESTIGATED.

THEY'VE COLLECTED STATEMENTS.

THEY'VE DONE THE BACKGROUND WORK TO GET A GOOD UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT HAPPENED.

[00:10:04]

THEY'RE MORE THAN 50% CERTAIN THAT THINGS PLAYED OUT A CERTAIN WAY.

AND IN THIS CASE, WE HAVE THREE STUDENTS WHO WERE IN POSSESSION OF AND TOOK A PUFF OF A VAPE BASED ON THIS INVESTIGATION THAT'S PLAYED OUT.

SO FROM THERE, THE ASSISTANT PRINCIPAL WOULD BE LOOKING AT OUR GUIDING DOCUMENTS.

THAT'S WHEN THE TEXAS EDUCATION CODE, OUR STUDENT CODE OF CONDUCT AND THE BEHAVIOR MATRIX COMES INTO PLAY.

AND SO BASED ON WHAT WE KNOW, WE HAVE TO HAVE SOMETHING LOOKING AT A MANDATORY PLACEMENT, BECAUSE AS WE PRESENTED AT THE BOARD MEETING A FEW WEEKS AGO, HOUSE BILL 114 ADJUSTED THE EDUCATION CODE 37.006 TO SAY THAT A STUDENT SHALL BE REMOVED, ITS MANDATORY AND PLACED IN A DISCIPLINARY ALTERNATIVE EDUCATION PROGRAM IF THEY POSSESS, USE, SELL OR DELIVER TO ANOTHER PERSON AN E-CIGARETTE.

SO WE KNOW IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE LAW, WE ARE REQUIRED TO TAKE THIS MANDATORY ACTION OF ASSIGNING A DAEP PLACEMENT.

SO THAT'S THE INITIAL DECISION MAKING THAT WOULD PLAY OUT.

BUT AS A SIDE NOTE, WE WOULD ALSO MAKE SURE THAT OUR SRO WAS INVOLVED BECAUSE ANYTIME ANY KIND OF CRIMINAL OR POTENTIAL CRIMINAL ACTIVITY IS INVOLVED ON CAMPUS, WE MAKE SURE THAT THEY TAKE A LOOK AND DETERMINE INDEPENDENT OF THE SCHOOL DISTRICT, IF THERE'S ANY ACTION THAT THEY HAVE TO TAKE.

SO WE WOULD NOTIFY THEM AND THEN WE WOULD COME BACK AND LOOK AT OUR STUDENTS ON THIS SCENARIO.

WE HAVE A FEW DIFFERENT STUDENT BACKGROUNDS AND WE ARE LOOKING AT DISCIPLINE, HISTORY AND ALSO ANY SERVICES THAT STUDENTS MIGHT RECEIVE.

SO I'M GOING TO FOCUS ON JENNY AND ALLISON RIGHT NOW IN OUR INITIAL DECISION MAKING WITH JENNY.

SHE'S A GENERAL EDUCATION STUDENT WITH NO DISCIPLINE HISTORY, AND WE KNOW THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT A MANDATORY DAEP PLACEMENT SITUATION.

SO IF YOU LOOK AT YOUR BEHAVIOR MATRIX, IT'S ON PAGE FOUR OF THE PACKET THAT YOU HAVE ON THE SECONDARY BEHAVIOR MATRIX.

AND TOWARDS THE BOTTOM THERE'S A SECTION CALLED POSSESSION OF PROHIBITED ITEMS. SO OUR ADMINISTRATORS WOULD BE LOOKING THERE AND IT SAYS POSSESSION OF AN E-CIGARETTE.

OR A VAPE ON CAMPUS AND YOU HAVE YOUR DIFFERENT COLUMNS AND IT GIVES A RANGE FROM MINIMUM TO MAXIMUM.

AND YOU CAN SEE THERE FOR A FIRST OFFENSE AND OUR MATRIX, WE SPECIFICALLY OUTLINED IT THIS YEAR FOR OUR ADMINISTRATORS BECAUSE THIS IS A NEW LAW AND THEY REALLY WANTED THAT CONSISTENT PRACTICE.

SO IF IT'S A NICOTINE VAPE, WHICH IN THIS CASE IT IS AND IT'S A FIRST OFFENSE, WE LOOK AT MAKING A PLACEMENT FOR TEN DAYS.

SO THE ASSISTANT PRINCIPAL WOULD DO THIS LEGWORK, FIGURE OUT WHAT THE APPROPRIATE RESPONSE WOULD BE, AND THEN REACH OUT TO THE PARENT.

LET THE PARENT KNOW WHAT OCCURRED AT SCHOOL AND THEN EVERY STUDENT IS ENTITLED TO DUE PROCESS.

SO OUR ASSISTANT PRINCIPAL WOULD SCHEDULE A MEETING AND INVITE THE PARENT AND THE STUDENT TO ATTEND.

HOST DUE PROCESS.

ALLOW THE STUDENT TO TELL THEIR SIDE OF THE STORY.

AND BY LAW WE CONSIDER ALL MITIGATING FACTORS AT PLAY.

AND SO ON THE FRONT PAGE OF YOUR PACKET WITH THE BEHAVIOR MATRIX.

THIS PAGE HERE, IT TALKS ABOUT THE MITIGATING FACTORS.

AND IF WE'RE LOOKING AT REMOVING A STUDENT FROM THE LEARNING ENVIRONMENT WITH OSS OR IN THIS CASE DAEP OR AN EXPULSION OR.

JJ, WE HAVE TO CONSIDER IF THE MISCONDUCT WAS RELATED TO SELF DEFENSE, WHAT THE INTENT WAS, THE STUDENT'S DISCIPLINARY HISTORY.

IF THERE'S A DISABILITY THAT SUBSTANTIALLY IMPAIRS THE STUDENT'S CAPACITY TO APPRECIATE THE WRONGFULNESS OF THEIR CONDUCT OR THE STUDENT'S STATUS AS HOMELESS, OR IN THE CONSERVATORSHIP OF DSPS OR FOSTER CARE.

SO ALL OF THAT GETS TAKEN INTO CONSIDERATION DURING THAT DUE PROCESS MEETING.

AND THEN FROM THERE, A FINAL DECISION IS RENDERED AND THE ASSISTANT PRINCIPAL LETS THE PARENT AND THE STUDENT KNOW WHAT THE CONSEQUENCE IS GOING TO BE.

SO THAT WOULD BE FOR JENNY.

SHE'S GEN ED STUDENT.

NO DISCIPLINE HISTORY.

WE LOOK AT THE MATRIX.

IT'S A TEN DAY PLACEMENT FOR THAT FIRST TYPE OF OFFENSE.

ALLISON IS ANOTHER GENERAL EDUCATION STUDENT, BUT YOU CAN SEE IN OUR SCENARIO SHE HAS A PRIOR VIOLATION FOR A SIMILAR TYPE SITUATION.

SO SHE HAS AN E CIGARET VIOLATION AS WELL.

SO SHE WOULD BE A SECOND TIME OFFENSE FOR A SIMILAR BEHAVIOR.

AND WHEN THAT HAPPENS, CONSEQUENCES ESCALATE OVER TIME.

SO FOR HER WE WOULD BE LOOKING AT THE SAME PROCESS THAT I JUST OUTLINED.

BUT HER CONSEQUENCE WOULD BE MORE THAN JENNY'S BECAUSE THIS IS A REPEATED BEHAVIOR.

SO WE WOULD BE LOOKING AT PROBABLY A 45 DAY PLACEMENT WITH OUR MATRIX.

I WANT TO POINT OUT ON THE FRONT PAGE, IT NOTES THAT THERE IS ALWAYS DISCRETION FROM THE ADMINISTRATOR TO CONSIDER ALL OF THE THINGS GOING ON THEIR CAMPUS, THE SCOPE OF THE DISRUPTION. IT'S NOT ALWAYS MANDATORY THAT THEY ACT EXACTLY IN ACCORDANCE WITH THIS, BUT WE ARE REALLY WORKING HARD TO TRAIN ON THIS DOCUMENT AND DEVELOP CONSISTENCY ACROSS CAMPUSES AND OUR DEPARTMENT BEING A LISTENING OR A THOUGHT PARTNER WHENEVER THEY CALL AND THEY'RE LIKE, THIS ONE'S A LITTLE DIFFERENT.

CAN I BEND YOUR EAR ABOUT WHAT WE MIGHT DO IN RESPONSE TO IT? SO AT ALL TIMES WE'RE CONSIDERING THAT THERE'S ALWAYS MORE TO A STORY, AND OUR CAMPUS ADMINISTRATORS KNOW THE CIRCUMSTANCES BEST, AND WE'RE THERE TO HELP SUPPORT THEM IN THOSE

[00:15:02]

THINK THAT COVERS IT FOR THOSE TWO.

BUT I WANT TO INVITE JEFF MEN UP TO TALK ABOUT MARJORIE.

OH, BOARD MEMBERS. MY NAME IS JEFF MIN, MANAGING DIRECTOR OF SPECIAL EDUCATION.

WHAT I WANT TO SHARE WITH YOU FOR THESE SCENARIOS, I'M GOING TO SHARE WITH YOU AN INDIVIDUAL WITH DISABILITIES EDUCATION ACT REQUIREMENTS WHEN DISCIPLINING STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES. SO FIRST IEP ENTITLED STUDENTS SPECIAL EDUCATION STUDENTS, LIKE THEIR GENERAL EDUCATION COUNTERPARTS, ARE HELD TO THE STUDENT CODE OF CONDUCT.

WITH THAT SAID, IDA REQUIRES THAT AN ARD MEETING IS HELD WHEN THERE ARE MORE THAN TEN DAYS OF EXCLUSIONARY DISCIPLINE.

SO IF WE TAKE MARJORIE, FOR EXAMPLE, YOU CAN SEE MARJORIE IS OUR SPECIAL EDUCATION STUDENT IN THIS SCENARIO, AND SHE'S ALREADY BEEN ASSIGNED TWO DAYS OF OSS AND THREE DAYS OF ISS. SO SHE ALREADY HAS FIVE DAYS OF EXCLUSIONARY DISCIPLINE WITH THIS NEW DISCIPLINARY INCIDENT.

THE DAP RECOMMENDATION IS GOING TO PUT HER BEYOND THE TEN DAYS THAT IDA REQUIRES FOR AN ARD MEETING TO TAKE PLACE.

SO AT THIS POINT, THIS WILL TRIGGER AN ARD MEETING FOR MARJORIE.

AND DURING THIS ARD MEETING, A MANIFESTATION DETERMINATION REVIEW WILL BE HELD.

WE CALL THOSE MARKERS.

AND BASICALLY WHAT THAT IS THE COMMITTEE IS DETERMINING IF THE BEHAVIOR IN QUESTION OR THE MISCONDUCT, IF IT WAS A MANIFESTATION OF THE STUDENT'S DISABILITY.

SO DURING THESE MDR'S A LOT OF INFORMATION IS REVIEWED.

IT REVIEW ALL CORRESPONDING DATA, DETAILS OF THE INCIDENT, THE STUDENT'S INDIVIDUAL EDUCATION PLAN, ANY BEHAVIOR INTERVENTION PLAN THE STUDENT MIGHT HAVE. ALL THE EVALUATIONS THAT HAVE BEEN CONDUCTED FOR THAT STUDENT AND ANY OTHER RELEVANT INFORMATION FROM THE PARENTS OR TEACHING STAFF.

SO WITH ALL OF THIS INFORMATION DURING THAT MDR THAT REQUIRED ARD MEETING, TWO QUESTIONS ARE ASKED IN THAT MDR.

THE QUESTION NUMBER ONE IS, WAS THE BEHAVIOR CAUSED BY OR DIRECTLY RELATED TO THE STUDENT'S DISABILITY? IF THE ANSWER IS YES, AFTER GOING THROUGH ALL OF THAT INFORMATION, HAVING THAT DISCUSSION AS AN ARD MEETING, WHAT'S REQUIRED IS A FUNCTIONAL BEHAVIOR ASSESSMENT, WHICH IS WHAT WE CALL AN FBA.

AND BASICALLY WHAT THAT IS, IT'S TYPICALLY CONDUCTED BY OUR SCHOOL PSYCHOLOGISTS, BUT IT'S LOOKING AT THE FUNCTION OF A BEHAVIOR, THE CAUSE OF THE BEHAVIOR, AND THEN DETERMINING IDENTIFYING THE REPLACEMENT BEHAVIORS.

IN ADDITION TO THAT, IDA REQUIRES THAT IF WE DO FIND IT TO BE RELATED TO THE DISABILITY, THAT A BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTION PLAN IS CREATED. SO IT'S EITHER INITIATED OR SOMETIMES THE STUDENT ALREADY HAS A BEHAVIOR INTERVENTION PLAN AND WE'RE REVISING THAT BEHAVIOR INTERVENTION PLAN.

QUESTION NUMBER TWO IS, WAS THE BEHAVIOR DUE TO THE LEA'S LOCAL EDUCATION AGENCIES OR CAMPUSES FAILURE TO IMPLEMENT THE IEP? IF YES, THE SCHOOL MUST TAKE IMMEDIATE STEPS TO REMEDY THAT SITUATION.

THAT MIGHT LOOK LIKE COMPENSATORY SERVICES, BUT MORE THAN OFTEN IT IS TYPICALLY TRAINING.

IF THERE'S A STAFF MEMBER THAT HASN'T IMPLEMENTED RECOMMENDATIONS ON THAT STUDENT'S INDIVIDUAL EDUCATION PLAN WHICH LED TO THE MISCONDUCT.

SO THOSE ARE THE TWO QUESTIONS THAT ARE REQUIRED TO BE REVIEWED IN THE MEETING FOR SPECIAL EDUCATION STUDENT.

IF THE RECOMMENDATION IS FOR DISCIPLINE BEYOND THE TEN DAYS.

IF THERE IS AN ANSWER OF YES TO EITHER QUESTION, YES MEANING YES, THERE WAS A LINK TO THE STUDENT'S DISABILITY OR YES THERE WAS A FAILURE TO IMPLEMENT THE STUDENT'S IEP.

THEN, OF COURSE, YOU KNOW THAT WE'LL HAVE TO CONDUCT THE FBA AND THE BIP, BUT THE STUDENT WOULD NOT BE BE PLACED AT DAP FOR THAT FOR THAT INCIDENT.

IF THE ANSWER IS NO TO BOTH QUESTIONS THAT THERE WASN'T A LINK TO THE STUDENT'S DISABILITY AND THERE WASN'T A FAILURE TO IMPLEMENT THE STUDENT'S IEP, THEN MARJORIE CAN BE DISCIPLINED LIKE HER PEERS, FOR THIS INCIDENT.

SO ANOTHER PIECE TO THIS IS WHAT IF THE VAPE INCLUDED AN ILLEGAL SUBSTANCE? SO UNDER IDEA, THERE ARE THREE SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCES THAT A SPECIAL EDUCATION STUDENT, AN IEP ENTITLED STUDENT, CAN BE PLACED AT DAP WITHOUT REGARD TO THE STUDENT'S DISABILITY.

AND THE FIRST ONE IS KNOWINGLY POSSESSES OR USES ILLEGAL DRUGS.

THE SECOND ONE IS STUDENT BRINGS A WEAPON TO SCHOOL AND THE THIRD SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCE IS INFLICTS SERIOUS BODILY INJURY.

ON SCHOOL PREMISES.

SO IF THIS WERE THE CASE FOR MARJORIE, THAT VAPES HAD THC IN IT.

WE WOULD STILL CONDUCT AN EMDR.

[00:20:01]

WE STILL WOULD ADJUST AND LOOK AT THE BEHAVIOR INTERVENTION PLAN.

BUT MARJORIE COULD BE DISCIPLINED UP TO 45 SCHOOL DAYS IN A DAP SETTING BECAUSE IT FALLS UNDER ONE OF THESE THREE SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCES.

AND THAT DO WE? DO WE EVER MAKE ANY EXCEPTIONS TO THAT? THAT LAST COMPONENT THAT YOU TALKED ABOUT, BE IT SOMETHING ILLEGAL? AND SO THE SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCES COME FROM I.D.E.A.

AND THEY SPECIFICALLY LIST THOSE THREE REASONS.

I UNDERSTAND THAT. WHAT I'M ASKING IS, IS HAVE WE EVER MADE AN EXCEPTION TO THAT? THE STUDENT WAS ON AN IEP.

WE DETERMINED THAT THAT WAS PART OF WHATEVER OCCURRED HERE.

BUT WE'RE MAKING AN EXCEPTION, EVEN THOUGH IT WAS THC IN THE PIPE VERSUS NOT.

HAVE WE EVER MADE AN EXCEPTION TO THAT YOU'RE AWARE OF? I DON'T KNOW OF AN EXCEPTION TO THAT.

I MEAN, IT WOULD BE FOLLOWING THE STUDENT CODE OF CONDUCT, SO THE ADMINISTRATOR WOULD PROBABLY BE FOLLOWING THE MATRIX AND THEN MAKING THAT SAME RECOMMENDATION THAT THEY WOULD MAKE FOR ANY GENERAL EDUCATION STUDENT AND APPLY THAT SAME DECISION TO THE SPECIAL EDUCATION STUDENT AND THEN LET THE ARD AND THE MDR PROCESS TAKE PLACE.

SO I'LL JUST ADD TO THAT.

WE CALL THAT THE BIG THREE, AND I WOULDN'T KNOW OF ANYTHING WE WOULD HAVE DONE DIFFERENTLY IF ONE OF THOSE BIG THREE OCCUR, THEY WOULD BE PLACED.

OKAY. AND MOVING FORWARD? CORRECT.

WE CAN HOLD OUR QUESTIONS UNTIL AFTER THEY FINISH THEIR PRESENTATION.

I'LL OPEN UP FOR QUESTIONS AT THAT TIME.

OKAY. PLEASE PROCEED.

I THINK THAT'S IT. FOR THE SECONDARY EXAMPLE, I'M GOING TO HAND IT OVER FOR THE ELEMENTARY EXAMPLE.

OKAY. THANK YOU.

AS YOU CAN SEE, THESE SITUATIONS CAN GET VERY COMPLICATED AND THERE'S A LOT OF DIFFERENT FACTORS THAT WE NEED TO CONSIDER WHEN ISSUING CONSEQUENCES.

SO I'M GOING TO GIVE YOU AN EXAMPLE OF A TYPICAL THING THAT WE WOULD SEE PROBABLY AT AN ELEMENTARY SCHOOL.

AND I'M GOING TO READ THAT SCENARIO TO YOU.

STEPHEN AND JOHNNY ARE 211 YEAR OLD BOYS WHO GOT INTO AN ALTERCATION AT RECESS AFTER TRADING INSULTS ON THE PLAYGROUND FIELD.

STEPHEN MADE COMMENTS ABOUT JOHNNY'S LACK OF ATHLETIC ABILITY WHEN JOHNNY FAILED TO SAVE A SOCCER GOAL, CAUSING THEIR TEAM TO LOSE.

JOHNNY'S OFFENDED BY THE COMMENT, SHOVES STEPHEN TO THE GROUND.

STEPHEN GETS UP AND PUNCHES JOHNNY IN THE STOMACH.

OTHER STUDENTS GATHER TO INTERVENE.

TEACHERS. THEY SEPARATE THE STUDENTS.

AND THE ASSISTANT PRINCIPAL IS CALLED.

SO AGAIN, SOME BACKGROUND ON THESE STUDENTS.

STEPHEN DOES QUALIFY AS A STUDENT WHO RECEIVED SPECIAL EDUCATION SERVICES.

HE HAS ANOTHER HEALTH IMPAIRMENT FOR ADHD.

HE HAS A HISTORY OF ACTING IMPULSIVELY, ESPECIALLY IN UNSTRUCTURED SETTINGS.

OVER THE COURSE OF THE SCHOOL YEAR, STEPHEN HAS ALREADY BEEN SUSPENDED FOR NINE DAYS FOR PREVIOUS BEHAVIORS, INCLUDING FIGHTING, NONE OF WHICH INVOLVE JOHNNY.

JOHNNY IS A GENERAL EDUCATION STUDENT WHO DOES NOT HAVE ANY DISCIPLINE HISTORY.

SO IN THIS CASE, AGAIN, WE WOULD LOOK AT THE MATRIX UNDER AGGRESSION.

AND, YOU KNOW, THE TWO BOYS, BOTH ARE AT FAULT HERE AND THERE SHOULD BE CONSEQUENCES FOR BOTH DUE TO THEIR CIRCUMSTANCES.

THE CONSEQUENCES MIGHT NOT BE EXACTLY THE SAME.

WE'D WANT TO LOOK. WAS THE STUDENT INJURED? WE WOULD CONSULT WITH OUR SRO AS TO WHETHER OR NOT THIS ROSE TO THE LEVEL OF AN ASSAULT AND OTHERWISE WE WOULD CONSIDER IT FIGHTING FOR DEFINITELY THE STUDENT WHO THREW THE PUNCH AND POSTURE AND POSTURING TO FIGHT WOULD BE MORE APPROPRIATE FOR JOHNNY FOR THE SHOVING.

BUT AGAIN, WE HAVE TO LOOK AT AT THESE NINE DAYS WHEN ASSIGNING CONSEQUENCES, AND WE'VE ALREADY DISCUSSED THAT IN TERMS OF NEEDING TO GO BACK TO ARD, WHICH IN THIS CASE IT SOUNDS LIKE IF IT'S BEEN AN ONGOING PROBLEM WITH THE STUDENT, THE ARD COMMITTEE NEEDS TO RECONVENE TO LOOK AT THOSE BEHAVIORS AND ADDRESS IF THE IEP IS ADEQUATELY ADDRESSING THE NEEDS OF THE STUDENT.

SOME OTHER THINGS WE WOULD CONSIDER HERE AT THE ELEMENTARY LEVEL IS AGE.

IF THE BOYS WERE FIVE YEARS OLD, THE REACTION MIGHT BE VERY DIFFERENT BECAUSE AT FIVE YEARS OLD, KIDS WHEN THEY'RE YOUNG, THEY'RE STILL LEARNING THOSE SOCIAL SKILLS THEY NEED TO SOLVE PROBLEMS WITH THEIR PEERS.

AND SO WE WOULD CONSIDER THAT ALSO TEA DOES NOT ALLOW US TO SUSPEND STUDENTS BELOW GRADE THREE IN OUT-OF-SCHOOL SUSPENSION, BELOW GRADE THREE.

SO WE NEED TO TAKE THAT INTO CONSIDERATION.

THAT'S WHY, ALTHOUGH OUR MATRIX LOOKS VERY SIMILAR TO THE SECONDARY ONE, THERE ARE SOME ASTERISKS THAT WOULD REMIND THE ADMINISTRATOR WHEN USING THIS THAT YOUNG STUDENTS ARE TREATED DIFFERENTLY.

STUDENTS YOUNGER THAN TEN MUST RECEIVE SERVICES IN A DAEP IF THEY IN A IF THEY ENGAGE IN AN EXPENDABLE OFFENSE.

SO BUT WE CANNOT PLACE STUDENTS BELOW AGE SIX IN DAEP UNLESS THEY BRING A WEAPON TO SCHOOL.

[00:25:06]

THE OTHER THING THAT WE WOULD WANT TO CONSIDER HERE, TOO, IS FERPA.

WE DO HEAR A LOT FROM PARENTS WHO WANT TO KNOW WHAT HAPPENED TO THE OTHER, WHAT HAPPENED TO ALL OF THE STUDENTS THAT WERE INVOLVED IN AN INCIDENT.

AND WE HAVE TO OFTENTIMES REMIND PARENTS THAT THE EDUCATIONAL RECORD, INCLUDING DISCIPLINE, IS PRIVATE.

AND SO THAT INFORMATION CAN'T BE SHARED.

BUT OUR PRINCIPALS, WE'RE HERE IN STUDENT SERVICES TO GUIDE PRINCIPALS IN NAVIGATING THOSE WATERS AND HELPING THEM TO UNDERSTAND THAT, YOU KNOW, THE LAW REALLY DOES GUIDE US IN CERTAIN THINGS WHEN WE ARE BOTH SPEAKING ABOUT DISCIPLINE AND ASSIGNING IT.

AND THAT'S ALL I HAVE.

I JUST WANTED TO FOLLOW UP WITH STEPHEN IS THE SPECIAL EDUCATION STUDENT.

IN THIS EXAMPLE, AS MISS DAVIS STATED, STEPHEN HAS ALREADY HAD NINE EXCLUSIONARY DISCIPLINE DAYS.

SO IF THE RECOMMENDATION IS FROM THE ADMINISTRATOR TO ASSIGN TWO MORE ADDITIONAL EXCLUSIONARY DISCIPLINE DAYS, THEN THIS WOULD TRIGGER THE MEETING, WHICH THEN WOULD INITIATE THE MANIFESTATION DETERMINATION REVIEW, AND THOSE PIECES WOULD BE DISCUSSED LIKE AN FBA, FUNCTIONAL BEHAVIOR ASSESSMENT AND A BEHAVIOR INTERVENTION PLAN.

BUT IT'S IMPORTANT TO NOTE AGAIN, YOU KNOW, WITH STEPHEN AND THE FACT THAT WE'VE ALREADY HAD NINE DAYS FOR POSSIBLY SIMILAR CONDUCT, WE ALWAYS ENCOURAGE OUR COMMITTEES TO YOU DON'T HAVE TO WAIT TILL WE GET TO BEYOND TEN DAYS TO HAVE AN ARD MEETING WHERE YOU'RE FORCED TO FOR A MANIFESTATION DETERMINATION REVIEW, TO LOOK AT A FUNCTIONAL BEHAVIOR ASSESSMENT AND A BEHAVIOR INTERVENTION PLAN ADJUSTMENTS.

WE CAN HAVE THOSE ARD MEETINGS EVEN BEFORE THAT IF WE START SEEING A PATTERN OF BEHAVIOR.

THAT'S IT FOR OUR SCENARIOS.

THANK YOU SO MUCH.

BOARD. I'LL OPEN UP FOR QUESTIONS AND DISCUSSION.

YEAH, I HAD A QUESTION.

IS IT DOCTOR MIN OR.

NO, JUST. JUST.

OKAY, JUST YOU HAD MENTIONED THAT ONE OF THE MITIGATING CIRCUMSTANCES MIGHT BE IF WE DID NOT HAVE A PROPER IEP IN PLACE.

THAT'S CORRECT. YEAH.

SO THERE'S TWO QUESTIONS IN THE MANIFESTATION REVIEW.

THE FIRST IS IF THERE IS A LINK TO THE DISABILITY, THE SECOND IS WHETHER OR NOT THE CAMPUS HAD IMPLEMENTED THE IEP.

AND SO THERE'S DISCUSSION AROUND THAT.

SO LET'S SAY, YOU KNOW, WE HAD SOME EDUCATORS THAT DID NOT PUT IN PLACE SOME OF THE DE-ESCALATION INTERVENTIONS OR STRATEGIES THAT WERE LISTED ON THAT STUDENT'S BEHAVIOR INTERVENTION PLAN.

THAT WOULD BE SOMETHING THAT THE ART COMMITTEE WOULD DISCUSS TO DETERMINE WHETHER OR NOT IT MET THAT QUESTION, TOO, OF WHETHER OR NOT WE IF THERE WAS A FAILURE TO IMPLEMENT THE IEP. OKAY.

SO THAT'S THE MITIGATING CIRCUMSTANCES.

IS IT ALSO A MITIGATING CIRCUMSTANCE IF ONE OF THE ADMINISTRATORS VIOLATED THE IEP? IS THAT WAS THAT WHAT YOU WERE SAYING? SO IT WOULD BE FOR ANY SCHOOL PERSONNEL, ANY ANYBODY RELATED TO IMPLEMENTING THAT STUDENT'S IEP, ADMINISTRATORS INCLUDED, IT WOULD BE DISCUSSED ABOUT HOW THE SCHOOL MAY HAVE FAILED IN IMPLEMENTING THAT IEP.

THANK YOU. NOW THIS IS MORE FOR PATHOS.

SO THIS IS FOR THE SCENARIO THAT WAS MENTIONED HERE.

SO FOR ALLISON, SHE DENIES IN THE SITUATION.

RIGHT. AND THAT INCIDENT.

SO AND THEN SHE DOES NOT ACCEPT SO WELL, AND THEN THERE'S NO PROOF ALSO.

SO WILL THERE STILL BE AN A DISCIPLINARY ACTION AGAINST HER OR HOW DOES IT WORK? THAT'S A GREAT QUESTION.

SO FOR ALISON, SHE IS NOT ESPECIALLY FORTHCOMING IN THE INVESTIGATION PROCESS.

AND UNFORTUNATELY, THAT DOES SOMETIMES COME UP WHEN OUR WHEN OUR ASSISTANT PRINCIPALS ARE CONDUCTING THESE INVESTIGATIONS.

SO AS FAR AS SCHOOLS ARE CONCERNED, WE LEAN ON A PREPONDERANCE OF EVIDENCE.

SO WE COLLECT INFORMATION FROM EVERYBODY WHO IS THERE, THE ADMINISTRATOR WHO ENTERED THE RESTROOM AND SMELLED THE SCENT OF STRAWBERRIES, WHICH IS, YOU KNOW, NICOTINE VAPES COME IN ALL DIFFERENT FLAVORS.

SO THAT WOULD BE INDICATING THAT SOMETHING WAS GOING ON IN THAT STALL, KNOWING THAT ALL THREE STUDENTS WERE TOGETHER.

AND THEN THE CORROBORATING STATEMENTS FROM THE OTHER STUDENTS WHO WERE PRESENT WOULD GIVE THAT ADMINISTRATOR GREATER THAN 50% CERTAINTY THAT SHE WAS, IN FACT ENGAGED IN THIS, EVEN THOUGH SHE WASN'T FORTHCOMING.

THEY ALSO HAVE THE SCREENSHOTS THAT THEY COLLECTED DURING THE INVESTIGATION WHERE SHE SHOWED THAT SHE DID INTEND TO MEET UP WITH THE PURPOSE OF PARTAKING IN THAT VAPE.

[00:30:07]

WOULD YOU ALL MIND SPEAKING TO PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT STAFF DEVELOPMENT ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THESE MATRICES EITHER NOW OR AS THEY'RE UPDATED? HOW DOES THAT TRAINING HAPPEN FROM YOUR CENTRAL ADMINISTRATION LEVEL DOWN TO THE CAMPUS LEVEL? SO ANNUALLY WE GET FEEDBACK, FIRST OF ALL.

SO WE UPDATE THESE DOCUMENTS AND THEY'RE LIVING DOCUMENTS AS WELL.

SO ESPECIALLY WITH OUR MATRIX, SOMETIMES WE'LL FIND WE COULD CLEAR SOMETHING UP OR WE MIGHT NEED TO ADJUST, AND THAT'S JUST SOMETHING THAT WE DO REGULARLY.

SO WE GET FEEDBACK, CONSTANTLY ADJUST.

AND THEN AT THE SECONDARY LEVEL, WE DO PROVIDE ANNUALLY AT OUR BACK TO SCHOOL MEETING THE UPDATED DOCUMENTS GIVE THEM THE OPPORTUNITY TO DIG INTO THOSE.

AND THEN THROUGHOUT THE YEAR WE ENGAGE IN SOME SCENARIO BASED LEARNING, SUCH AS WHAT WE'RE DOING TODAY WITH YOU ALL TO HELP THEM DIVE INTO THAT DOCUMENT.

AND THEN THERE'S THAT. THERE'S ALWAYS THAT REAL TIME RESPONSE WHEN THEY'RE CALLING US.

SO WE TRY TO PUT IT IN FRONT OF THE GROUP.

WITH EVERYONE TOGETHER TO DEVELOP SOME CALIBRATION, RIGHT, TO MAKE SURE THAT THERE IS CONSISTENCY.

BUT THEN IT'S JUST THAT REAL TIME RESPONSE ON TOP OF IT.

SO THAT'S JUST ONGOING.

DO YOU WANT TO TALK ABOUT ELEMENTARY? WELL, I WAS GOING TO SAY THAT WE HAVE OUR MONTHLY ASSISTANT PRINCIPAL MEETINGS, TOO.

AND SO WE OFTEN, WHEN WE HAVE OUR FACE TIME WITH THEM EACH MONTH, GO THROUGH VARIOUS SCENARIOS SUCH AS THESE AND AS WELL AS INTRODUCE THEM TO UPDATED DOCUMENTS AT THOSE MONTHLY MEETINGS AS WELL, AND ANY CHANGES THAT COME ABOUT.

CAN THE BIG THREE THAT YOU WERE MENTIONING A FEW MOMENTS AGO HARMING ANOTHER AN ILLEGAL SUBSTANCE? I MISSED THE THIS OTHER ONE.

WHAT WAS THE SECOND ONE? YOU BET. THE STUDENT BRINGS A WEAPON TO SCHOOL.

WEAPON. OKAY. THANK YOU. AND THEN THE THIRD IS INFLICT SERIOUS BODILY INJURY UPON ANOTHER PERSON ON SCHOOL PREMISES.

OKAY. THANK YOU. OKAY.

I HAVE A FEW THINGS. THANK YOU. FIRST, I JUST WANT TO SAY I KNOW THAT THIS WAS A LOT OF WORK THAT YOU ALL HAVE PUT IN OVER THE PAST YEAR VISITING CAMPUSES AND ASKING THE TEACHERS AND THE ADMINISTRATORS ON THOSE CAMPUSES.

AND SO SO THANK YOU FOR THAT, BECAUSE I KNOW THAT THIS IS AN IMPORTANT ISSUE TO OUR COMMUNITY, INCLUDING OUR STAFF AT OUR CAMPUSES.

THEY WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE HANDLING THESE THINGS SO THAT THEY FEEL LIKE THEY CAN GIVE THE BEST TO THEIR STUDENTS AT THE CAMPUS.

SO MY FIRST QUESTION IS, FIRST OF ALL, THIS MATRIX IS VERY DETAILED, WHICH IS GREAT, RIGHT? THIS IS I'VE SEEN A LOT OF THESE ACTUALLY IN MY YEARS.

AND THIS THIS ONE IS VERY GOOD.

THERE'S A LOT ON HERE. IT'S VERY CLEAR.

UM, SO I AM GLAD TO SEE THAT.

MY QUESTION IS WHAT HAS CHANGED? MY FIRST QUESTION IS WHAT HAS CHANGED ON THIS MATRIX BASED ON THAT? I THINK YOU CALLED IT THE LISTENING TOUR THAT YOU DID LAST YEAR ON THE CAMPUSES.

WHAT WHAT WAS THE OUTPUT OF THAT IN TERMS OF WHEN WE LOOK SPECIFICALLY AT THIS MATRIX? ONE OF THE BIG ONES WAS OUR RESPONSE TO MUTUAL COMBAT OR FIGHTING ON CAMPUS.

AND SO.

A SECOND OFFENSE NOW RESULTS IN A PLACEMENT AT THE DEEP.

IT'S A DISCRETIONARY PLACEMENT.

HISTORICALLY, IT WAS INCONSISTENT BETWEEN CAMPUSES AS FAR AS WHEN THEY WOULD MAKE THAT RECOMMENDATION FOR A DISCRETIONARY PLACEMENT.

BUT WE'VE NOW COME TO THE POINT WHERE THAT FIRST OFFENSE, IT'S THE PHONE CALL HOME, IT'S NOTIFYING THE PARENT, IT'S MAKING SURE EVERYBODY IS REALLY CLEAR THAT IF ANOTHER OFFENSE WERE TO OCCUR, THERE'S GOING TO BE A RECOMMENDATION FOR A DISCRETIONARY PLACEMENT AND WHERE WE WOULD WORK THROUGH THIS PROCESS.

OTHER THAN THAT, WE BRAINSTORM FOR A SECOND.

THAT WAS ONE OF THE BIG ONES BASED ON THE FEEDBACK THAT WE RECEIVED.

BUT OTHER THAN THAT, I'M NOT I'M DRAWING A BLANK OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD.

THIS ISN'T DIRECTLY RELATED TO THE MATRIX, BUT IT WAS A RESULT OF OUR LISTENING TOURS THAT ARE AT THE ELEMENTARY LEVEL, PARTICULARLY WITH OUR YOUNGEST STUDENTS.

WE OFTENTIMES SEE KIDS COMING TO SCHOOL AND HAVE REAL DIFFICULTY REGULATING THEIR EMOTIONS, AND THEY HAVE VERY LARGE OUTBURSTS IN THE CLASSROOM THAT CAN BE VERY DISRUPTIVE.

AND SO BECAUSE OUT-OF-SCHOOL SUSPENSION ISN'T AN OPTION, NOR IS THE IEP FOR OUR YOUNGEST STUDENTS, WE ARE WORKING ON DE-ESCALATION TRAINING SO WE CAN GET ALL THE TEACHERS IN THE DISTRICT TRAINED ON WHEN THERE IS A CRISIS IN THE CLASSROOM AND A STUDENT IS HIGHLY ESCALATED AT RISK OF ELOPING OR THROWING SOMETHING THAT COULD INJURE SOMEBODY.

WE'RE GOING TO TRAIN TEACHERS IN HOW TO HANDLE THOSE PROBLEMS AND HOW TO DEESCALATE THE SITUATION AND TO KEEP EVERYBODY CALM AND SAFE.

AND SO THAT'S IN THE WORKS.

AND THAT WILL BE ROLLED OUT DURING SOME OF THE PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT DAYS LATER ON IN THE SCHOOL YEAR.

I WOULD JUST ADD THAT BASED ON FEEDBACK FROM OUR COMMUNITY AND FROM OUR TEACHERS, THAT SOMETHING WE REALLY WANTED TO FOCUS ON IS RELATIONSHIPS THAT ARE LEARNING IS VERY

[00:35:06]

AND SO WE ADDED TO THE GUIDELINES ON AT THE BEGINNING OF THE BEHAVIOR MATRIX THAT THERE'S A DIFFERENCE.

SO WE TRY TO FOSTER THOSE RELATIONSHIPS AND DO THINGS PROACTIVELY, BUT THAT DOES NOT MEAN THAT WE DON'T ASSIGN CONSEQUENCES WHEN MISBEHAVIOR OCCURS.

SO THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WE'VE BEEN VERY INTENTIONAL ABOUT, PUTTING THAT ON THE BEGINNING OF THE MATRIX AND THEN WORKING WITH OUR CAMPUSES AND OUR ASSISTANT PRINCIPALS ABOUT THAT AS WELL, BECAUSE THAT'S IMPORTANT THAT WE NEED TEACHERS TO UNDERSTAND THAT AS WELL.

THESE THINGS THAT YOU'RE DOING IN CLASS WITH THE RELATIONSHIP CENTERED LEARNING, THAT'S PROACTIVE.

BUT WHEN WE HAVE TO BE REACTIVE, WE'RE GOING TO BE REACTIVE.

THANK YOU. MY NEXT QUESTION IS AROUND THE SUBJECTIVITY THAT IS INHERENT WHEN YOU DO SOMETHING LIKE THIS, RIGHT? THERE'S NO WAY.

THIS IS A VERY GOOD MATRIX.

I'LL SAY THAT AGAIN, BECAUSE IT IS.

BUT THERE'S NO WAY TO HAVE I MEAN, THERE'S THERE'S EXCEPTIONS, RIGHT? AND THERE'S THINGS THAT FALL OUTSIDE THE MATRIX AND THERE'S THINGS THAT ARE NOT CLEAR AND THERE'S THINGS THAT WE DON'T KNOW.

WHAT IS IT IN THIS BOX OR THIS BOX, RIGHT.

THAT IS INHERENT? WHEN YOU DO SOMETHING LIKE THIS, YOU STILL OBVIOUSLY NEED TO DO IT SO THAT YOU HAVE A PLACE TO START.

AND I THINK YOU SPOKE TO IT A LITTLE EARLIER.

PAGE, THAT THERE'S A LOT OF, YOU KNOW, WHAT STUDENT SERVICES IS DOING IS TRYING TO SUPPORT THE CAMPUSES.

RIGHT. AND THEIR DECISIONS AND BE THAT SOUNDING BOARD AND THAT THOUGHT PARTNER.

THAT'S ALL GREAT.

MY QUESTION IS AROUND IS THERE ANY KIND OF OVERSIGHT BEYOND, UM, YOU KNOW, THE ASSISTANT PRINCIPAL MEETINGS AND THE PRINCIPAL MEETINGS AND MAYBE DOING A LITTLE CALIBRATION ON SOME OF THESE INSTANCES.

IS THERE EVER ANY TIME WHERE MAYBE, FOR EXAMPLE, STUDENT SERVICES WOULD KIND OF SPOT CHECK SOME OF THESE LIKE WE'RE GOING TO GO INTO A CAMPUS AND WE'RE GOING TO PULL SOME OF THE INSTANCE INCIDENTS AND SEE HOW THEY WERE HANDLED AND AND TALK TO THE STAFF AROUND MAYBE WHY AN EXCEPTION WAS OR WASN'T MADE JUST TO ENSURE THAT ACCOUNTABILITY IS THERE AND THAT THE CAMPUSES ARE USING THIS AS INTENDED IN MAKING EXCEPTIONS, YOU KNOW, IN THE APPROPRIATE WAY THAT WE WOULD WANT THEM TO. WE'VE DONE A GREAT JOB.

OUR STUDENT INFORMATION SERVICES TEAM HAS DONE A GREAT JOB WITH PUTTING TOGETHER A DASHBOARD AND WE ARE ABLE TO REALLY MONITOR BEHAVIORS IN THAT WAY. WE CAN TRACK WHEN THEY HAPPEN, WHAT TYPES OF BEHAVIORS ARE HAPPENING.

WE CAN LOOK AT TRENDS BETWEEN CAMPUSES, BETWEEN GRADE LEVELS, AND WE DO MEET WE HAVE A NTSB TEAM THAT LOOKS THAT MEETS EVERY CAMPUS, HAS A COMMITTEE THAT MEETS TO REVIEW THAT DATA.

AS FAR AS SPOT CHECKING, THERE IS SOME WE DO SHARE.

WE DO LOOK FOR TRENDS WHERE CAMPUSES MIGHT BE UNDERREPORTING OR OVERREPORTING.

AND THOSE ARE THINGS THAT WE CAN WE ADDRESS WITH PRINCIPALS WHEN WE MEET WITH THEM INDIVIDUALLY AS NEEDED.

BUT YES, THERE ARE WE HAVE GOOD SYSTEMS IN PLACE TO TRACK OUR BEHAVIOR DATA.

THANK YOU. MY NEXT QUESTION WAS AROUND THE PIECE THAT YOU SPOKE TO EARLIER ABOUT.

FAILING TO IMPLEMENT THE IEP.

SO IF THE CAMPUS FAILS TO IMPLEMENT THE IEP FOR WHATEVER REASON, RIGHT.

THAT THAT THEN.

CREATES A SITUATION WHERE THE CONSEQUENCES MIGHT HAVE TO BE ADJUSTED OR ALTERED.

AM I SAYING THAT RIGHT? I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT I WRITE THAT SECOND QUESTION.

THE MANIFESTATION IS, WAS THERE A FAILURE TO IMPLEMENT THE STUDENT'S IEP AND SPECIFICALLY TO THAT? WAS THERE A DIRECT RELATIONSHIP WITH THAT FAILURE TO THAT INCIDENT? SO IT MAY BE YOU KNOW, IT WOULD HAVE TO BE A DIRECT RELATIONSHIP OF THE FAILURE TO IMPLEMENT THE IEP TO THAT SPECIFIC STUDENT, THE CONDUCT THAT TOOK PLACE.

OKAY. BECAUSE THAT'S A REALLY IMPORTANT DISTINCTION RIGHT THERE, BECAUSE THAT WAS WHERE MY QUESTION CAME IN, IS, WELL, WHAT IF.

WHAT IF IT'S NOT RELATED? BECAUSE THERE'S A PERCEPTION, AND I DON'T KNOW HOW VALID IT IS, BUT I GET ASKED ABOUT IT EVERY SO OFTEN.

THERE'S A PERCEPTION THAT'S AN OUT RIGHT FOR THE BEHAVIORS TO BE EXCUSED WHEN IN FACT IN SOME CASES PERHAPS.

THERE'S NO CORRELATION.

AND AGAIN, I DON'T KNOW. I'M JUST THERE'S THAT PERCEPTION OUT THERE.

SO MY QUESTION IS.

HOW WOULD YOU SUGGEST I RESPOND TO THAT THE NEXT TIME I GET ASKED ABOUT THAT? WHAT SHOULD I SAY? AND I FEEL LIKE I'VE ALREADY WOULD HAVE A BETTER ANSWER TODAY THAN I WOULD HAVE HAD YESTERDAY.

SO THIS IS ALL VERY HELPFUL INFORMATION.

BUT IT IS A CONCERN OUT THERE.

AND SO WE NEED TO BE ABLE TO ADDRESS IT EFFECTIVELY.

YOU KNOW, SOMETHING YOU COULD SAY IS THAT OUR IN OUR MEETINGS DURING THE MURDERS OR MANIFESTATION DETERMINATION REVIEW THAT QUESTION, TOO.

IT'S NOT JUST A YOU KNOW, WE ASK THE QUESTION, IT'S A YES OR NO.

IT IS REALLY WHERE THE ART COMMITTEE DIVES INTO.

LET'S LOOK AT WHERE WE FEEL OR IF SOMETHING'S BROUGHT UP THAT THERE WAS A FAILURE TO IMPLEMENT CERTAIN PARTS OF THE IEP.

[00:40:07]

LET'S SAY IF MARJORIE HAD SOME READING ACCOMMODATIONS THAT HAD NOT BEEN PUT IN PLACE, THE ART COMMITTEE WILL HAVE TO TALK ABOUT DID THOSE READING ACCOMMODATIONS THAT WEREN'T PUT IN PLACE THAT HAVE ANYTHING TO DO WITH MARJORIE'S USE OF THE VAPE? AND SO EVEN THOUGH THAT THERE MAY HAVE BEEN A FAILURE IN THAT PARTICULAR AREA, YOU STILL HAVE TO FIND A CONNECTION TO WHERE THAT FAILURE DIRECTLY RELATED TO THAT MISCONDUCT. THAT EXAMPLE WAS HELPFUL.

THANK YOU. THE LAST THING THAT I'LL SAY IS I THINK THIS IS ALL REALLY GOOD INFORMATION AND I KNOW THAT THIS IS AN IMPORTANT TOPIC FOR OUR COMMUNITY.

I'M NOT SURE IF THERE'S A PLAN TO SHARE SOME OF THIS IS OBVIOUSLY A BOARD WORKSHOP.

SO THESE AREN'T AS.

WELL ATTENDED AND AS WATCHED, I DON'T THINK A LOT OF TIMES ONLINE AS THE REGULAR BOARD MEETING.

SO I DON'T KNOW IF THERE'S A PLAN TO SHARE THIS INFORMATION WITH PARENTS, WITH THE COMMUNITY, JUST TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE PROACTIVELY MAKING SURE THAT THE COMMUNITY UNDERSTANDS THAT WE HAVE HEARD THE FEEDBACK.

WE HAVE DONE A LOT OF GOOD WORK TO ADDRESS THAT FEEDBACK.

AND HERE IS THE THE WORK PRODUCT THAT RESULTED FROM THAT.

I GUESS THAT'S MORE OF A RECOMMENDATION THAN A STATEMENT.

SO I DON'T KNOW. I WOULD SAY THAT THAT IS IN IN ADDITION, SO WE'VE UPDATED THE WEBSITE AND TRIED TO REALLY MAKE THAT MORE ROBUST.

BUT I WOULD SAY THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WE DEFINITELY ARE TALKING ABOUT, IS HOW DO WE FIRST OF ALL, WHAT ARE THE CONCERNS THE COMMUNITY IS STILL HAVING? AND THEN BASED ON THAT, WHAT ADDITIONAL INFORMATION DO WE NEED TO GET OUT TO THEM? SO THAT'S A RECOMMENDATION THAT WE'RE CERTAINLY TAKING INTO CONSIDERATION.

THANK YOU. OKAY, I GUESS I'LL CLOSE THIS OUT.

I DO HAVE JUST A FEW QUESTIONS.

ONE IS A FOLLOW UP TO A QUESTION THAT WAS ALREADY ANSWERED, AND SO I'LL SPEAK TO THE SECONDARY INFORMATION THAT YOU PROVIDED WITH THE NUMBER OF PLACEMENT DAYS BEING.

TO THE DISCRETION OF THE CAMPUS.

CAN SOMEONE CLARIFY THAT? THERE WAS A PORTION DURING THAT FIRST PRESENTATION WHERE YOU SHARED THAT.

THE CAMPUSES WILL BE GIVEN AUTONOMY AS TO THE NUMBER OF DAYS.

SO IN GENERAL FOR A VAPE VIOLATION WITH THE UPDATE WITH HOUSE BILL 114 OUR RECOMMENDATION IS TEN DAYS FOR AN INITIAL INCIDENT, RIGHT? FROM THERE, IT'S A 45 DAY.

IF THERE'S A SECOND INFRACTION, THAT IS OUR RECOMMENDATION IN GENERAL, IT'S NOT NECESSARILY TIED TO VAPES.

IF A CAMPUS COMES BACK AT ANY POINT AND SAYS THERE'S THIS WEIRD CIRCUMSTANCE THAT WE'VE NEVER SEEN BEFORE, DO WE NEED TO RECONSIDER A TIMELINE OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT? THOSE COME UP OCCASIONALLY FOR THE E-CIGARETTE VIOLATIONS.

IT'S NOT COMMON PRACTICE TYPICALLY TO DO LESS THAN A 45 DAY PLACEMENT BECAUSE OF THIS NEW LEGISLATION.

THAT'S WHERE WE'RE STARTING THIS YEAR.

WE'RE GOING TO BE GATHERING FEEDBACK AND GOING FROM THERE.

BUT IN GENERAL, FOR OTHER VIOLATIONS IN INITIAL PLACEMENT IS TYPICALLY A 45 DAY UNLESS THERE IS SOMETHING THAT THEY WANT TO TALK TO US ABOUT AND WE'RE ALWAYS GOING TO PARTNER WITH OUR CAMPUSES IN THOSE DISCUSSIONS.

SO IN TERMS OF OTHER BEHAVIORS.

OUR CAMPUS IS GIVEN AUTONOMY FOR.

A FIGHT OR IF A STUDENT IS MISBEHAVING AND THEY'RE ABOVE THAT THIRD GRADE LEVEL, WHAT THE CONSEQUENCES THAT ARE BEING GIVEN TO ONE STUDENT FOR WHATEVER REASON, WHETHER IT'S THEIR FIRST OR SECOND OFFENSE VERSUS ANOTHER ANOTHER CHILD, WILL THEY HAVE EQUITABLE, EQUITABLE CONSEQUENCES? SO IT DEPENDS MUCH LIKE WHAT WE SPOKE TO TODAY.

IF YOU'VE GOT TWO GENERAL EDUCATION STUDENTS AND IT'S A FIRST INFRACTION FOR BOTH, WE WOULD EXPECT TO SEE THE SAME CONSEQUENCES UNLESS THERE IS SOMETHING THAT WE DON'T KNOW ABOUT. AND THEN THE CAMPUS BRINGS THAT TO OUR ATTENTION.

OKAY. AND IS THAT DOCUMENT THAT'S DOCUMENTED SO ACROSS THE BOARD, THE CONSEQUENCES WILL BE THE SAME UNLESS THERE ARE SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCES THAT WE DON'T HAVE ANY KNOWLEDGE OF.

I GUESS WHAT I'M TRYING TO MAKE SURE I UNDERSTAND IS.

IF WE HAVE A STUDENT.

AT A ELEMENTARY RIGHT AND A STUDENT AT C ELEMENTARY.

AND THE BEHAVIOR ISSUES ARE THE SAME.

WILL THE TWO SCHOOLS.

OFFER CONSEQUENCES DIFFERENTLY, OR DO THEY HAVE A MAP OF HOW THEY SHOULD MAKE SURE THAT THEY'RE EQUAL? THANK YOU FOR YOUR CLARIFICATION.

I APOLOGIZE. I WAS THINKING YOU WERE TALKING ABOUT AT THE SAME CAMPUS.

SO ACROSS CAMPUSES WE HAVE THE MATRIX AS GUIDANCE AND WE ARE ENCOURAGING OUR ADMINISTRATORS TO WORK WITHIN THOSE MINIMUM TO MAXIMUM IN THAT RANGE OF CONSEQUENCES. BUT AGAIN, IT COULD BE THE SAME BEHAVIOR, BUT THE SCOPE OF THE DISRUPTION VARIED.

[00:45:04]

SO YOU COULD HAVE A DIFFERENCE IN CONSEQUENCES BASED ON THAT KIND OF THING.

SO THERE ARE SO MANY NUANCES TO EVERY CIRCUMSTANCE THAT IT'S NOT ALWAYS A PLUS, B EQUALS C, THAT'S WHY THE MATRIX IS WRITTEN WITHIN A RANGE FOR CONSIDERATION. BUT YOU MIGHT HAVE VARIATIONS JUST DEPENDING ON THOSE LITTLE MINUTE DETAILS THAT COME UP.

YEAH. AND JUST TO ADD TO THAT, WE DO HAVE A GUIDING DOCUMENT FOR DEEP PLACEMENTS AND EXPULSIONS TO JJAEP.

SO WE DO HAVE GUIDANCE TO KEEP THAT AS EQUITABLE AS POSSIBLE.

BUT AGAIN, YOU COULD HAVE A STUDENT WHO WAS ARRESTED FOR A TERRORISTIC THREAT THAT CAUSED A HUGE DISRUPTION ON THE CAMPUS AND ONE THAT DIDN'T CAUSE THE SAME KIND OF DISRUPTION.

AND YOU WOULD TAKE THAT MAYBE INTO ACCOUNT WHEN YOU'RE LOOKING AT PLACEMENT DAYS.

BUT WE DO HAVE A GUIDE THAT HELPS US WITH THOSE PLACEMENT DAYS AS WELL.

OKAY. AND THEN.

SO. AND I'M SORRY TO STAY HERE.

I JUST NEED TO. I NEED TO SIT HERE FOR JUST A SECOND WITH THE BEHAVIORS.

JUST WANTING TO.

I KNOW WHEN WE HAD OUR RECENT.

OUR LAST WORKSHOP, YOU ALL MENTIONED ALL OF THE DIFFERENT TRAINING THAT WE ARE OFFERING.

AND I THINK YOU ALL ARE DOING AN AMAZING JOB OF MAKING SURE THAT OUR FACULTY AND STAFF ARE ALL TRAINED TO ACCOMMODATE OUR STUDENTS AND MAKING SURE THAT THEY'RE SAFE AS WELL AS THE KIDDOS ARE SAFE.

I DO WONDER, THOUGH, FROM A BEHAVIOR STANDPOINT, AND THIS MAY NOT BE SOMETHING YOU CAN ANSWER RIGHT AWAY, SOME OF LIKE I'LL USE MYSELF AS AN EXAMPLE, MY SISTER AND I.

OKAY, I'LL USE MY THIS THE CLASSROOM PART.

SORRY. SO MY SISTER AND I HAVE VERY DIFFERENT PERSONALITIES.

RIGHT. WHAT WOULD IRRITATE ME MAY NOT IRRITATE HER.

RIGHT. AND SO IF WE'RE BOTH IN SEPARATE CLASSROOMS WITH CHILDREN THAT ARE IRRITATING IN THE SAME WAY, HOW I WOULD REACT WOULD BE DIFFERENT THAN THE WAY THAT MY SISTER WOULD REACT.

AND SO MY QUESTION IS HOW WHAT GUIDANCE ARE WE OFFERING AND TRAINING OUR TEACHERS TO HELP ENSURE THAT THEY ARE ABLE TO MEET THE NEEDS OF SOME OF OUR MOST CHALLENGING SWEETHEARTS? RIGHT. BECAUSE THEY'RE STILL SWEETHEARTS, EVEN THOUGH THEY MAY BE A LITTLE CHALLENGING.

SO, YES, DR.

DAVIS MENTIONED QUITE A BIT OF THE TRAINING.

ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE'VE DONE THIS YEAR WITH SCHOOLWIDE BEHAVIOR, INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORT IS EACH CAMPUS IS ESTABLISHING CLASSROOM MANAGE VERSUS OFFICE MANAGED BEHAVIORS.

AND WITH THAT, COACHING EDUCATORS OR TEACHERS ON HOW TO RESPOND TO THOSE BEHAVIORS THAT MIGHT NOT NEED TO BE OFFICE MANAGED.

WE CAN EXPECT THAT STUDENTS ARE GOING TO BE OFF TASK SOMETIMES.

HOW DO YOU RESPOND TO THAT? HOW DO YOU REENGAGE THE STUDENT? HOW MIGHT YOU INCLUDE A RELATE, BREAK IN YOUR ACTIVITY TO GET EVERYBODY BACK TOGETHER BEFORE YOU PROCEED WITH THE LEARNING? ALL OF THAT IS BEING OFFERED THROUGH THE PROFESSIONAL LEARNING THAT WE'RE PROVIDING.

WE ARE WORKING OUR SPECIAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT AND STUDENT SERVICES ARE PARTNERING RIGHT NOW ON ONE OF OUR UPCOMING LEARN STAYS TO PROVIDE DE-ESCALATION TO ALL STAFF. SO AS THOSE HEIGHTENED STUDENT SITUATIONS MIGHT COME UP, THEY'LL HAVE SOME GUIDANCE ON HOW TO RESPOND TO THOSE MORE ESCALATED BEHAVIORS AS WELL.

BUT THAT IS PART OF WHAT WE'RE BUILDING INTO OUR PRACTICES.

SO THOSE TEACHERS HAVE THAT BASELINE OF WHAT AM I DEALING WITH AND WHEN SHOULD I REFER IT TO THE OFFICE? BECAUSE THAT'S SOMETIMES THE QUESTION THAT THEY ASK THEMSELVES.

SO THOSE CAMPUS ADMINISTRATORS ARE REALLY WORKING TO EQUIP THEM WITH THAT KNOWLEDGE, HOW TO RESPOND TO THOSE MINOR SITUATIONS, BUT ALSO WHEN TO KNOW IT'S TIME FOR THEM TO TO BE REMOVED SO WE CAN HELP SUPPORT THE BEHAVIOR IN THE FRONT OFFICE.

OKAY. THANK YOU.

THANK YOU SO MUCH.

AND THEN LASTLY, I KNOW THAT YOU SAID THAT WITH THE DE-ESCALATING TRAINING, DE-ESCALATION TRAINING, YOU ALL ARE PUTTING SOMETHING IN PLACE IN THE FUTURE.

I'D LIKE TO SEE IT WILL HOPEFULLY THE BOARD CAN GET A TIMELINE AS TO HOW THAT EITHER THAT'S GOING OR WHEN IT WILL BE IMPLEMENTED. YEAH, WE CAN GET SOME INFORMATION LIKE THAT FOR YOU.

WE CAN PUT SOMETHING TOGETHER AND PUT IT IN HOME BASE SO YOU CAN KIND OF SEE AND WE CAN THEN WE CAN CHECK BACK IN AND LET YOU KNOW HOW THINGS ARE GOING AS WELL.

THAT WOULD BE GREAT. AND THEN FINALLY, WITH ALL OF THE DIFFERENT CHANGES, DOES THIS AND AGAIN, YOU CAN PUT THIS IN HOME BASE.

WE DON'T NECESSARILY NEED IT NOW, BUT IF YOU CAN GIVE US AN OVERVIEW OF HOW CODING WILL LOOK WITH THE CHANGES THAT ARE BEING MADE BEHAVIOR WISE, LIKE DOES OUR CODING CHANGE HOW WE CODE OUR KIDDOS? FOR BEHAVIOR CHALLENGES WITH THE NEW LAWS THAT ARE BEING PUT IN PLACE AND THE CHANGES THAT WE'RE MAKING, I WANT TO MAKE SURE I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU MEAN BY CODING.

CODING? YES.

LIKE FOR WHAT? FOR THE BEHAVIORS.

[00:50:01]

SO IN WHAT WE USE IN BASED ON HOW THE STATE.

SURE. SO OUR SYSTEM OUR STUDENT INFORMATION SERVICES TEAM.

SO THEY WORK WITH THAT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE HAVE THE CODING THAT EITHER THE STATE WANTS US TO USE WHEN IT'S COMING TO TEAMS OR IF IT'S A LOCAL CODE, WE CAN WORK WITH THEM ON CHANGING LOCAL CODES.

OUR CHALLENGE IS THAT WE HAVE TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE ABLE TO TO LOOK AT DISCIPLINE FROM YEAR TO YEAR.

SO WE DON'T WANT TO CHANGE CODES TOO MUCH BECAUSE WE WANT TO MAKE SURE WE'RE COMPARING APPLES TO APPLES.

BUT WE DO WORK WITH THE TEAM TO MAKE SURE THAT OUR CODING IS IN LINE WITH WHAT IT NEEDS TO BE.

OKAY. THANK YOU.

THAT'S ALL THAT I HAVE.

BOARD IF THERE ARE NO FURTHER QUESTIONS.

UM. I DON'T SEE MY AGENDA.

OKAY, HERE WE GO. BUT IF THERE ARE NO FURTHER QUESTIONS.

THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR YOUR TIME.

THANK YOU FOR ALL OF THE HARD WORK AND EFFORTS THAT YOU'VE PUT INTO THIS.

THIS IS LIKE ROUND TWO FOR US BECAUSE YOU ALL PROVIDED SO MUCH INFORMATION AT THE WORKSHOP AND WE'RE SO GRATEFUL AND THANKFUL THAT YOU ARE GIVING US INFORMATION THAT WE CAN THEN TAKE BACK INTO THE COMMUNITY.

SO THANK YOU AGAIN.

BOARD WILL MOVE ON TO AGENDA ITEM NUMBER FIVE DISCUSSION REGARDING LEGISLATIVE UPDATE.

[5. Discussion regarding Legislative Update]

WHAT ARE YOU DOING? OKAY.

THANK YOU ALL FOR GIVING US AN OPPORTUNITY TO COME AND TALK TO YOU ABOUT THE LEGISLATIVE SESSION THAT ENDED BACK IN MAY.

AND THEN A LITTLE BIT, WE'LL TALK ABOUT A SPECIAL SESSION THAT WE SEE COMING UP AS WELL.

SO WE'RE GOING TO TRY TO GO THROUGH THIS AS QUICKLY AS WE CAN TO GET YOU ALL TO THE END OF THIS MEETING.

SO THIS IS MEGAN DEWOLF.

OBVIOUSLY, YOU ALL KNOW HER, BUT OUR GOVERNMENT AFFAIRS COORDINATOR.

SO SHE'S GOING TO PRESENT WITH ME.

I WAS GETTING READY TO APOLOGIZE BECAUSE I SAW HER COME UP.

SO, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, WE HAVE DANNY STOCKTON AND MRS. MEGAN DOYLE. DO Y'ALL YOU MIGHT HAVE.

TURN IT OFF. TURN IT ON.

IS IT ON? IT'S NOT ON.

IT DOESN'T HAVE A SWITCH. YES, IT DOES.

OF US. BUT IT DOESN'T LOOK LIKE IT'S WORKING.

DO YOU ALL HAVE. DID YOU ALL BRING YOUR BOOKS? DO ANY OF YOU. OKAY.

WE BROUGHT SOME MORE.

SO YOU WANT TO HEAR. I'LL GIVE THIS TO THEM WHILE YOU TALK ABOUT.

YOU CAN LOG ON TO THE WEBSITE.

SO IF YOU HAVE A HEART, IF YOU WANT A HARD COPY, YOU HAVE THAT IN FRONT OF YOU.

YOU'LL ALSO SEE THROUGHOUT THE PRESENTATION THERE ARE GOING TO BE LITTLE A LITTLE MAGNIFYING GLASS WITH A PAGE NUMBER IN IT.

AND SO THAT WILL TAKE YOU TO THE PAGE NUMBER IN THE BOOK THAT CORRELATES WITH THE PAGE ON THE PRESENTATION.

YOU CAN ALSO SCAN IT IF ANYONE WANTS TO SEE AN ELECTRONIC VERSION THAT IS WATCHING FROM HOME OR IN THE AUDIENCE.

TODAY, WE'RE GOING TO TALK ABOUT A LEGISLATIVE RECAP.

IT'S BEEN A MINUTE, BUT WE JUST HAD TO KIND OF BUMP THIS MEETING BACK.

SO IT'S BEEN A COUPLE OF MONTHS AND WE HAVE AN UPCOMING SPECIAL THAT WE'RE GOING TO TALK ABOUT, TOO.

AND THEN WE'RE ALSO GOING TO TALK ABOUT BOARD LEGISLATIVE SUBCOMMITTEE ACTIVITY.

AND SO, LIKE I SAID, THE QR CODE, IF YOU GUYS WANT TO SCAN IT AND FOLLOW ALONG ELECTRONICALLY, THIS TAKES YOU TO THE ELECTRONIC VERSION OF OUR PUBLICATION THAT GOES OVER EVERYTHING.

IT GOES ABOUT OUR DEPARTMENT A LITTLE BIT LEGISLATIVE PLANNING, WHAT WE DO LEADING UP TO THE SESSION, THE SESSION OVERVIEW, KIND OF JUST BIG PICTURE, WHAT HAPPENED DURING THE SESSION, OUR ENGAGEMENT WITH OUR LEGISLATORS DURING THE SESSION, AND THEN THE BILL SUMMARIES AND AGAIN THROUGH THE PRESENTATION, LOOK FOR THOSE MAGNIFYING GLASSES SO YOU CAN SEE WHAT PAGE WE'RE ON IN THE PHYSICAL BOOK.

SO THIS IS OUR KIND OF BY THE NUMBERS GRAPHIC, IF YOU WILL, AND IT SHOWS YOUR TOTAL BILLS FILED IN THAT INNER CIRCLE.

A LITTLE OVER 8300 BILLS WERE FILED.

85% OF THEM WERE NON EDUCATION RELATED.

THAT'S THE BLUE. AND THEN YOUR RED, 15% OF THEM, ALMOST 1300, WERE EDUCATION RELATED.

AND THEN THAT SECOND RING ON THE TOP, RIGHT, THAT'S YOUR PASSAGE RATE.

SO THERE'S ABOUT A 15% PASSAGE RATE FOR YOUR NON EDUCATION RELATED BILLS.

BUT FOR EDUCATION RELATED BILLS, THERE'S ONLY A 6% PASSAGE RATE.

AND THIS WAS AN INTERESTING SESSION BECAUSE 30% MORE PUBLIC EDUCATION BILLS WERE FILED THIS YEAR THAN LAST SESSION.

BUT IT ONLY IT HAD HALF THE PASSAGE RATE LAST RATE LAST YEAR.

OUR PASSAGE RATE OR LAST SESSION, EXCUSE ME, OUR PASSAGE RATE WAS ROUGHLY THE SAME AS NON PUBLIC BILLS.

AND SO WE'RE GOING TO KIND OF TALK ABOUT WHY THAT IS HERE IN A MINUTE.

AND JUST DR.

WALDRIP, I WANTED YOU TO KNOW THAT THAT WAS A DONUT CHART, NOT A PIE CHART.

UM, SO JUST REAL QUICKLY, WANT TO GIVE YOU ALL KIND OF AN OVERVIEW OF THE SESSION THAT WE HAD.

WE STARTED THE SESSION WITH A HISTORIC BUDGET SURPLUS.

THAT WAS THERE WAS A LOT OF DISCUSSION ABOUT $33.

EVERYBODY KIND OF WAS OPTIMISTIC GOING INTO THE SESSION ABOUT GETTING SOME FUNDING THERE.

[00:55:04]

LARRY TAYLOR DID NOT RUN FOR REELECTION AFTER REDISTRICTING.

AND SO WE HAD A COMBINATION OF THE HIGHER ED AND EDUCATION COMMITTEES IN THE SENATE, AND CHAIRMAN CREIGHTON BECAME THE CHAIR OF THAT COMMITTEE.

AND THEN BRAD BUCKLEY WAS THE CHAIR IN THE HOUSE.

IT WAS VERY INTERESTING TO SEE THE WAY THE SESSION PLAYED OUT.

ONE OF THE THINGS YOU'LL HEAR OFTEN ABOUT THE TEXAS LEGISLATURE IS IT'S NOT REPUBLICANS VERSUS DEMOCRATS.

IT'S THE HOUSE VERSUS THE SENATE.

AND I THINK THIS SESSION WAS THAT WAS MORE TRUE THAN IT HAS BEEN IN A LONG TIME.

AND TO THE EXTENT THAT THEY EVEN COULDN'T EVEN GET PROPERTY TAX RELIEF DONE DURING THE REGULAR SESSION, AN ITEM THAT IS, YOU KNOW, GOT BROAD SUPPORT ACROSS ALL POLITICAL IDEOLOGIES AND AND PEOPLE ACROSS THE STATE.

YOU KNOW, WE SAW A LOT OF FOCUS ON PUBLIC EDUCATION.

THERE WAS A LOT OF DISCUSSION ON RHETORIC AROUND PUBLIC EDUCATION.

BUT TO MEGAN, MEGAN SAID BEFORE, REALLY NOT A WHOLE LOT WAS WAS DONE.

WE HAVE A COUPLE OF MAJOR BILLS THAT WE'RE GOING TO GO OVER.

BUT IT WAS IT WAS A LITTLE BIT OF A LIGHTER SESSION IN TERMS OF REALLY ADVANCING PUBLIC SCHOOLS AND AND PUBLIC SCHOOL, GIVING PUBLIC SCHOOL STUDENTS MORE OPPORTUNITIES.

TOWARDS THE END OF THE SESSION, A WRENCH GOT THROWN IN WITH THE IMPEACHMENT, WHICH IS ACTUALLY NOW TODAY IS THE SECOND DAY OF THE IMPEACHMENT TRIAL OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL.

AND SO THAT KIND OF TOOK FOCUS AWAY FROM EVERYTHING ELSE IN THAT LAST WEEK OF THE SESSION.

AND THEN WE'VE HAD WE'VE ALREADY HAD THREE SPECIAL SESSIONS, TWO SPECIAL SESSIONS, AND WE HAVE A THIRD ONE THAT WE'RE EXPECTING COMING UP.

AND THERE COULD BE MORE AFTER THAT.

THE GOVERNOR HAS MADE IT CLEAR THAT HE HAS CERTAIN THINGS HE WANTS THE LEGISLATURE TO ACCOMPLISH, AND HE'S GOING TO CALL SPECIALS UNTIL THEY DO THAT.

SO WE HAD THE TAX RELIEF SESSION THAT WAS IMMEDIATELY CALLED.

THERE WAS THERE WAS NO BILL THAT WAS PASSED OUT OF THAT ONE.

SO THEY HAD A SECOND ONE.

AND THEY DID FINALLY GET PROPERTY TAX RELIEF DONE IN THAT SESSION.

SO WE TALKED ABOUT THERE WERE LOTS OF SCHOOL RELATED, PUBLIC SCHOOL RELATED THINGS THAT WERE FILED AND WE WANTED TO GO OVER THE THINGS THAT DIED THROUGH THE SESSION BECAUSE WE KNOW THAT WE HEAR ABOUT THESE ALL THROUGH THE MEDIA AND STUFF.

THINGS GET SENSATIONALIZED LONG BEFORE THEY'RE THROUGH THE PROCESS.

AND SO SOME OF THE THINGS THAT DIDN'T PASS THAT WE HEARD A LOT ABOUT WAS HB 100, WHICH WAS YOUR VEHICLE FOR SCHOOL FUNDING, AND THAT WAS ULTIMATELY KILLED BECAUSE IT WAS TIED TO VOUCHERS, ONLINE LEARNING.

WE NEEDED REALLY THEM TO EXTEND OR DO SOMETHING ABOUT ONLINE LEARNING BECAUSE EVERYTHING THAT WE OPERATED UNDER IN THE LAST AFTER THE LAST SESSION, IT EXPIRED.

AND SO THEY WOULD HAVE AT LEAST HAD TO EXTEND THAT.

AND SO THAT EXPIRED.

AND WE THINK THAT MAY HAVE BEEN SOME PAYBACK ON THE HOUSE SIDE FOR THE SENATE NOT PASSING BILLS, WE'RE NOT REALLY SURE.

SB EIGHT IS YOUR WAS DUBBED YOUR PARENTAL BILL OF RIGHTS BILL, AND IT WAS ALSO THE VOUCHER BILL.

AND THAT ACTUALLY CAME OVER TO THE HOUSE.

AND ONCE THE HOUSE GOT IT, THEY TRIED TO LIMIT IT AND NOT MAKE IT NEARLY AS BROAD AS IT WAS WHEN IT CAME FROM THE SENATE.

BUT THE GOVERNOR SAID THAT HE WOULD VETO THAT BECAUSE IT WASN'T AS BROAD AS HE WANTED IT TO BE.

AND SO IT DIDN'T EVEN GET VOTED OUT OF THE EDUCATION COMMITTEE.

AND THEN LASTLY, SB NINE WAS DUBBED YOUR TEACHER BILL OF RIGHTS, WHICH WAS PASSED OUT OF THE HOUSE.

AND IT HAD A BUNCH OF AMENDMENTS ON IT AND IT PASSED ON SECOND READING.

IT HAS TO PASS ON A THIRD READING.

BUT THEY DIDN'T PASS IT ON THIRD READING.

THEY POSTPONED IT KIND OF AS A PROBABLY AS A, YOU KNOW, A SIGN TO THE SENATE THAT WE'RE MAD AT YOU FOR NOT PASSING SCHOOL FUNDING WITHOUT VOUCHERS.

AND SO THERE WAS A LOT OF BACK AND FORTH IN THAT WAY.

AND SO LOTS OF BILLS DIED AS A RESULT.

SO WE'RE GOING TO GO THROUGH THE BILLS THAT WE'VE TAGGED AS 1 OR 2 PRIORITY, PRIORITY 1 OR 2, I THINK, ANYWAY.

THEY'RE CONSIDERED MAJOR BILLS.

THEY EITHER HAVE SOME SORT OF MAJOR IMPACT TO US OR THEY REQUIRE A MAJOR AMOUNT OF RESOURCES, OR THEY WERE JUST SOMETHING THAT GOT A LOT OF ATTENTION OR HAD A LOT OF STATE LEADERSHIP SUPPORT. SO THE FIRST ONE IS THE BUDGET HOUSE BILL ONE, WHICH WAS THE BUDGET THIS YEAR.

IT INCLUDED A $2.36 BILLION INCREASE IN SCHOOL FUNDING FOR THE TO INCREASE THE GUARANTEED YIELD OF THE GOLDEN PENNY, WHICH IS THE PORTION OF OUR TAX RATE RIGHT AFTER OUR TIER ONE TAX RATE THAT IS NOT SUBJECT TO RECAPTURE THIS.

THIS WAS REQUIRED UNDER CURRENT LAW.

SO THEY HAD TO FUND THIS OR THEY WOULD HAVE HAD TO CHANGE THE LAW.

SO I THINK THAT'S REALLY IMPORTANT.

THIS IS NOT SOMETHING THAT THEY ADDED NEW THIS YEAR.

IT WAS IT WAS ALREADY REQUIRED.

THEY INCREASED THE SCHOOL SAFETY ALLOTMENT BY $200 MILLION.

THAT'S THAT $15,000 PER CAMPUS THAT YOU ALL HAVE HEARD ABOUT PREVIOUSLY IT WAS 100 MILLION.

NOW IT'S 200 MILLION.

THE IT ADDED THIS IS THIS IS BIG.

THIS IS THIS IS A LOT OF MONEY BUT IT ADDED ALMOST $600 MILLION TO OFFSET INCREASES TO TRS ACTIVE CARE PREMIUMS. WHEN A LOT OF PEOPLE DON'T REALIZE IS THAT THE STATE USED COVID RELIEF MONEY LAST YEAR TO KEEP ACTIVE CARE PREMIUMS FROM GOING UP VERY MUCH.

[01:00:03]

AND SO THAT COVID MONEY WAS ONE TIME MONEY.

IT'S GONE. SO NOW THEY HAD TO FIGURE OUT, OKAY, WHAT ARE WE GOING TO DO? AND THEY HAD RATES WERE GOING TO SKYROCKET LIKE 15, 20% MAYBE.

AND SO THEY USED THIS MONEY TO HOLD THOSE RATES TO ONLY A 10% INCREASE.

ONLY A 10% INCREASE.

THE IT ALSO PROVIDED $500 MILLION FOR DISTRICTS TO PURCHASE CURRICULUM, MATERIALS OR INSTRUCTIONAL MATERIALS APPROVED BY THE STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION IN TO.

AND THEN IT RESTORED SOME FUNDING.

SO YOU'LL HEAR A LOT OF REALLY BIG NUMBERS ABOUT HOW MUCH MONEY WAS SPENT ON EDUCATION THIS YEAR.

A LOT OF THAT MONEY WAS MONEY THAT WAS STRIPPED OUT LAST BIENNIUM.

SO NUMBERS FIVE AND SIX, THE NEW INSTRUCTIONAL FACILITIES ALLOTMENT AND THEN THE TECHNOLOGY AND INSTRUCTIONAL MATERIALS ALLOTMENT FUNDING WAS $600 MILLION THAT THEY TOOK AWAY LAST SESSION AND THEY GAVE IT BACK THIS SESSION.

SO THAT $600 MILLION GETS ADDED INTO THIS IS HOW MUCH MONEY WE'VE GIVEN PUBLIC EDUCATION.

BUT IT'S IMPORTANT TO KNOW THAT THAT WAS MONEY THAT IS BEING RESTORED TO LEVELS IT WAS AT AND PRIOR TO LAST SESSION.

THE BILL ALSO INCLUDED $5.3 BILLION TO COMPRESS SCHOOL DISTRICT TAX RATES.

THIS WAS ALSO REQUIRED BY CURRENT LAW.

AND THIS IS YOU'LL HEAR THIS ADDED IN THAT YOU'LL HEAR THE $18 MILLION OF PROPERTY TAX RELIEF.

5.3 OF THAT WAS REQUIRED BY CURRENT LAW.

THE REST OF IT WAS NEW AND ADDED ON TOP IN THE SPECIAL SESSION.

AND THEN IT ALSO PROVIDES SOME MONEY FOR SOME OTHER THINGS IF THEY PASS BILLS TO SPEND THAT MONEY, NONE OF WHICH HAVE BEEN PASSED EXCEPT FOR THE PROPERTY TAX RELIEF.

SO $4 DOLLARS FOR SCHOOL FUNDING INCREASES, $500 MILLION FOR ESAS OR VOUCHERS JUST UNDER 50 MILLION FOR VIRTUAL EDUCATION AND 12.3 BILLION FOR PROPERTY TAX RELIEF. THE PROPERTY TAX RELIEF ONE IS THE ONLY ONE THAT HAS PASSED AT THIS POINT.

SO IF THAT IF LEGISLATION TO SPEND THAT MONEY DOESN'T GET PASSED, IT JUST SITS THERE.

I'M SB 30 IS THE SUPPLEMENTAL BUDGET.

THIS IS WHERE THEY DREW UP THE MONEY FROM THE PAST, THIS PAST BIENNIUM THAT NOW HAS JUST ENDED AND ENDED ON THE 31ST OF AUGUST IN THAT BUDGET.

THEY REDUCED APPROPRIATIONS FOR PUBLIC EDUCATION FUNDING BY 8.4 BILLION, AND THAT'S BECAUSE OF PROPERTY VALUE INCREASES, BECAUSE REMEMBER THAT AS PROPERTY VALUES GO UP, OUR REVENUE DOES NOT GO UP.

IT JUST MEANS THAT WE GET LESS MONEY FROM THE STATE.

SO THIS IS THAT SHOWING IN THE BUDGET.

THE STATE HAD TO SPEND A LOT LESS MONEY ON PUBLIC EDUCATION LAST BIENNIUM BECAUSE THEY BECAUSE PROPERTY VALUES WENT UP SO MUCH, WHICH IS WHY WHEN YOU GET THAT $12.3 BILLION IN PROPERTY TAX RELIEF, IT INCREASES HOW MUCH THE STATE IS SPENDING.

THAT $12.3 BILLION COST IS MONEY THAT THEY'RE SPENDING ON PUBLIC EDUCATION.

BUT IT DOESN'T CHANGE OUR BOTTOM LINE.

IT DOESN'T CHANGE OUR REVENUE AT ALL.

AND THEN THE SECOND PIECE IS 1.1 BILLION FOR SCHOOL SAFETY INITIATIVES.

AND YOU'LL HEAR THIS NUMBER THROWN AROUND A LOT.

WE'VE HEARD SEVERAL LEGISLATORS TALK ABOUT HOW THEY PROVIDED $1.4 BILLION FOR SCHOOL SAFETY.

AND IT'S REALLY IMPORTANT FOR PEOPLE TO UNDERSTAND THAT 1.1 BILLION OF THAT CAME FROM THE SUPPLEMENTAL THAT IS ONE TIME MONEY AND IT'S GRANT FUNDED.

SO IT'S NOT SPREAD OUT EVENLY BY STUDENTS.

IT'S GRANT FUNDED AND IT'S REALLY DESIGNED TO BE FOR FACILITIES.

IT'S REALLY DESIGNED FOR DISTRICTS THAT NEED TO RETROFIT THEIR FACILITIES WITH SAFETY UPGRADES.

WE WILL BENEFIT SOME FROM THAT, BUT IT'S NOT A SOURCE OF MONEY THAT CAN BE SPENT ON, FOR EXAMPLE, ARMED SECURITY BECAUSE IT'S ONE TIME YOU GET IT AND THEN YOU SPEND IT AND THEN IT'S GONE. SO IT'S NOT FOR ONGOING COSTS.

AND THEN OF THE OTHER 300 MILLION, AGAIN, 100 MILLION OF THAT WAS NOT NEW MONEY.

THAT WAS ALREADY THAT WAS ALREADY THE CASE LAST SESSION.

THE PAST TWO SESSIONS, ACTUALLY.

SB 26 IS A BILL FOCUSED ON IDENTIFICATION OF MENTAL HEALTH ISSUES AND TRANSITION SERVICES FOR PATIENTS WHO ARE DISCHARGED.

AND THIS ONE IS KIND OF A LITTLE BIT ADJACENT TO ONE OF OUR PRIORITIES.

AND WE'RE GOING TO TRY TO GO QUICKLY.

SO THERE'S GOING TO BE A LOT OF WORDS ON THE SCREEN, AND WE'RE NOT GOING TO SAY ALL THE WORDS ON THE SCREEN.

BUT THE BIGGEST THING ABOUT THIS IS THAT IT REQUIRES THE COMMISSION TO ADOPT RULES THAT WOULD REQUIRE FACILITIES TO DESIGNATE AN EMPLOYEE SPECIFICALLY TO PROVIDE TRANSITION SERVICES FOR DISCHARGED PATIENTS.

THAT INCLUDES MONITORING UP TO ONE YEAR, WHICH COULD BE A CURRENT EMPLOYEE.

BUT IT DOESN'T NECESSARILY HAVE TO BE.

IT COULD BE A NEW EMPLOYEE.

BUT OUR HOPE, ONE OF OUR LEGISLATIVE PRIORITIES WAS THAT THEY WOULD BASICALLY HAVE THAT SAME SERVICE FOR STUDENTS, FOR STUDENTS, FOR RETURN TO SCHOOL PLAN AFTER THEY WERE IN THE HOSPITAL FOR SOME REASON.

AND SO THIS DOESN'T SPECIFICALLY SAY THAT THEY HAVE TO WORK WITH SCHOOLS, BUT WE'RE HOPING THAT WHEN THEY'RE DEALING WITH STUDENTS, THAT WOULD BE AN OBVIOUS STEP FOR THEM AND THAT THEY WOULD INCLUDE THAT REQUIREMENT FOR THE DESIGNATED LIAISON TO COORDINATE WITH THE DISTRICTS WILL ACTUALLY HAVE TO WAIT ON THE COMMISSION FOR RULES TO COME OUT ABOUT THIS. BUT WE GET AN OPPORTUNITY TO GIVE FEEDBACK.

SO IF THE RULES COME OUT AND IT DOESN'T SAY ANYTHING ABOUT THEM HAVING TO WORK WITH SCHOOL DISTRICTS TO COORDINATE WITH THEM FOR A RETURN TO SCHOOL PLAN, THEN THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WE WOULD GIVE FEEDBACK ON.

THIS NEXT ONE REQUIRES SCHOOL DISTRICTS TO PROVIDE FOR EACH CLASSROOM SILENT PANIC ALERT.

TECHNOLOGY THAT ALLOWS FOR IMMEDIATE CONTACT WITH DISTRICT EMERGENCY SERVICES OR EMERGENCY LAW ENFORCEMENT HEALTH DEPARTMENTS AND FIRE DEPARTMENTS.

[01:05:08]

TECHNOLOGY. YEAH.

OKAY. SO THIS IS HOUSE BILL THREE AND IT'S ACTUALLY TWO SLIDES THAT BOTH LOOK LIKE THIS.

AND TO MEGAN'S POINT, I'M NOT GOING TO READ ALL OF THESE LINES.

I KNOW.

WE TRY NEVER TO DO THIS, BUT UNLESS YOU WANTED THIS TO BE FIVE SLIDES, I DON'T.

I'M NOT SURE HOW ELSE WE COULD HAVE DONE IT.

HB THREE IS ONE OF THE LARGEST BILLS THAT WAS PASSED THIS SESSION, AND THIS IS A SCHOOL SAFETY PIECE OF LEGISLATION.

OBVIOUSLY, YOU ALL HAVE HEARD A LOT ABOUT THIS BILL, PARTICULARLY WITH REGARD TO THE ARMED ARMED SECURITY OFFICER REQUIREMENT.

I'M NOT GOING TO GO OVER THAT IN DEPTH BECAUSE WE'VE ALREADY DONE THAT.

BUT I AM GOING TO TALK TO YOU ALL ABOUT THE OTHER PIECES OF THIS.

ONE OF THE THINGS THAT'S REALLY IMPORTANT TO KNOW ABOUT THIS BILL IS THAT IT'S LARGELY DESIGNED TO HELP IMPROVE COMPLIANCE WITH PREVIOUS LEGISLATION.

SO SB 11 WAS PASSED IN THE 2019 LEGISLATIVE SESSION, AND FRISCO HAS BEEN ON THE LEADING EDGE OF SAFETY FOR AS LONG AS I'VE BEEN HERE, LONGER THAN I'VE BEEN HERE. AND SO WHEN THAT WAS PASSED IN 2019, WE WERE ALREADY IN COMPLIANCE WITH ALMOST ALL OF IT BEFORE WE IT WAS EVEN PASSED AND WE WERE QUICKLY IN COMPLIANCE WITH IT AFTER THE REST OF IT AFTER IT WAS PASSED.

HOWEVER, A LOT OF SCHOOL DISTRICTS ARE NOT THEY DON'T HAVE THE RESOURCES OR HAVEN'T HAD THE RESOURCES, HAVEN'T HAD THE THE EXPERTISE THAT WE ARE SO FORTUNATE TO HAVE WITH MR. HALLER AND MR. BODIE.

AND SO THEY HAVE NOT BEEN ABLE TO CATCH UP AS QUICKLY.

AND SO THIS BILL IS REALLY ABOUT TRYING TO PROVIDE CLARITY FOR THEM, GIVE THEM MORE RESOURCES TO COMPLY WITH THOSE AND PROVIDE FOR SOME MONITORING.

THERE'S A LOT OF REQUIREMENTS FOR THE TEXAS SCHOOL SAFETY CENTER, BUT THEY ARE NOT A REGULATORY AGENCY.

AND SO THERE WAS SOME CONFUSION IN THE LEGISLATION ABOUT WHO WAS RESPONSIBLE FOR MONITORING, FOR ENSURING COMPLIANCE AND THOSE KINDS OF THINGS.

AND SO THIS BILL WAS DESIGNED TO CLARIFY ROLES BETWEEN THE TIA AND THE TEXAS SCHOOL SAFETY CENTER ON THAT PIECE AND HELP TO BRING ALL OF THOSE THINGS TOGETHER.

LET ME SEE. IT CREATES ONE OF THE BIGGEST THINGS THAT IT DOES TO ACCOMPLISH THAT GOAL IS CREATE AN OFFICE OF SCHOOL SAFETY WITHIN THE TO AND THEN INCLUDES SOME SOME THINGS THAT THAT THAT OFFICE HAS TO PROVIDE TO SCHOOL DISTRICTS.

IT ALSO WILL PROVIDE WILL REQUIRE DISTRICTS TO TRANSFER DISCIPLINARY RECORDS AND THREAT ASSESSMENTS FROM ONE DISTRICT TO THE NEXT, WHICH IS NOT A CURRENT REQUIREMENT.

SO TO THE EXTENT THAT WE HAVE A STUDENT STUDENT'S DISCIPLINARY RECORD, IF THEY GO TO ANOTHER SCHOOL OUTSIDE OF OUR DISTRICT, WE WOULD BE TRANSFERRING THE STUDENT'S DISCIPLINARY RECORD AT THAT TIME BECAUSE THE BILL THE LAW REQUIRES US TO DO SO.

SO WE ALSO ARE REQUIRED TO PROVIDE LIKE ANOTHER.

THIS IS ANOTHER EXAMPLE. THIS CAME STRAIGHT FROM UVALDI PROVIDING A MAP OF ALL OF OUR CAMPUSES TO BOTH DPS AND LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES.

WE'RE FORTUNATE WE HAVE A PROGRAM WITHIN THE DISTRICT THAT KIND OF DOES THAT ALREADY WITH OUR LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES, BUT WE WILL ALSO BE PROVIDING THOSE TO DPS AND THAT'S TO ALLOW FOR BETTER COORDINATION FOR THOSE LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES IF THEY'RE RESPONDING TO AN ISSUE.

AND THEN AGAIN, YOU HAVE THE SCHOOL SAFETY ALLOTMENT INCREASE.

ONE OTHER THING THAT'S NOT ON THE SLIDE THAT I'LL MENTION TO YOU ALL IS THAT BECAUSE IT'S SOMETHING THAT WE'VE ALREADY KIND OF DEALT WITH IS THAT THE BILL ACTUALLY ALSO REQUIRES SCHOOL DISTRICTS TO PROVIDE INFORMATION ABOUT SECURE FIREARM STORAGE TO PARENTS.

AND SO WE WILL BE REQUIRED TO CONTINUE DOING THAT.

WE ALL PASSED A RESOLUTION LAST YEAR TO DO THAT, AND WE WILL BE REQUIRED TO CONTINUE DOING THAT AND REFERRING PARENTS TO THE SECURE FIREARM RECOMMENDATIONS, FIREARM STORAGE RECOMMENDATIONS FROM THE TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY.

SO THEY UPDATED THEIR WEBSITE AND THE CAMPAIGN THAT WE HAD BEEN LINKING TO, AND THAT'LL BE INFORMATION WILL CONTINUE TO HAVE TO PROVIDE TO PARENTS.

HB 1416 IS YOUR HB 4545 UPDATE.

AND SO THE BIGGEST THING TO KNOW ABOUT THIS ONE.

WE HEARD A LOT ABOUT THIS FROM THE DISTRICT, FROM OUR PARENTS, AND EVERYBODY SEEMED ON BOARD THAT SOME THINGS NEEDED TO BE FIXED.

BUT THIS BILL WAS A PRIORITY FOR THE LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR, SO NOT QUITE AS MUCH CHANGE AS WE WERE HOPING WOULD CHANGE.

THE BIGGEST THING THAT IT DOES IS THAT IT LIMITS REQUIREMENTS TO PROVIDE THAT SUPPLEMENTAL INSTRUCTION TO NO MORE THAN TWO SUBJECTS.

SO IF YOU HAD A STUDENT WHO DIDN'T PERFORM A SATISFACTORY ON FOUR DIFFERENT, THEY WOULD HAVE TO DO ONLY TWO OF THEM.

AND THEN THEY PRIORITIZE YOUR MATH AND YOUR READING OR LANGUAGE ARTS.

LR SO THAT WAS A BIG PART OF IT.

ANOTHER BIG ONE IS THAT IT REDUCES THE MINIMUM HOURS REQUIREMENT TO 15 HOURS OR 30 HOURS IF PERFORMANCE IS SIGNIFICANTLY BELOW SATISFACTORY AS DETERMINED BY THE COMMISSIONER.

SO WHERE THAT WILL LAND DEPENDS ON THE RULES THAT COME OUT AND WHERE HE DEFINES WHAT.

SIGNIFICANTLY BELOW SATISFACTORY IS WHETHER STUDENTS WILL HAVE TO DO 15 HOURS OR 30 HOURS.

IT ALSO ELIMINATES THE ACCELERATED LEARNING COMMITTEES WHICH WERE MEETING SO THAT THEY COULD GIVE THAT SAME EXACT PLAN FOR EVERY STUDENT THEY WERE MEETING.

[01:10:05]

AND THEN THE LAST THING IS THAT PARENTS CAN NOW OPT OUT.

NO, YOU'RE GOOD. PARENTS CAN OPT OUT OR OPT TO REDUCE SUPPLEMENTAL INSTRUCTION.

SO THOSE ARE SOME OF THE HIGH POINTS, SOME OF THE GOOD THINGS THAT CAME OUT OF IT.

BUT IT'S STILL VERY MUCH LOOKS VERY SIMILAR TO LAST YEAR.

STILL, ONE THING ON THE SUPPLEMENTAL INSTRUCTION THAT I JUST WANT TO NOTE IS JUST BECAUSE IT'S LIMITING THE REQUIREMENT TO PROVIDE THAT TO TWO SUBJECTS DOESN'T MEAN THAT WE WILL ONLY PROVIDE REMEDIATION IN THOSE TWO SUBJECTS.

IT'S JUST THAT THE SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS OF THE BILL ONLY APPLY TO TWO SUBJECTS.

SO I JUST WANT TO CLARIFY THAT.

ANOTHER BIG PIECE OF LEGISLATION THAT HAD A LOT OF ATTENTION BUT REALLY ACTUALLY DOESN'T HAVE A HUGE AMOUNT OF IMPACT ON US AS A DISTRICT IS HOUSE BILL 900.

AND THIS IS THE THIS WAS CALLED THE READER ACT.

AND SO THIS WAS CARRIED BY REPRESENTATIVE PATTERSON, WHO WAS ONE OF OUR REPRESENTATIVES.

AND THE BILL REALLY DOES A LOT FOR REQUIRING VENDORS TO PROVIDE BETTER INFORMATION TO SCHOOL DISTRICTS.

AND SO IT REALLY PUTS THE ONUS ON VENDORS RATHER THAN SCHOOL DISTRICTS TO DETERMINE WHAT BOOKS ARE APPROPRIATE FOR SCHOOL LIBRARIES.

SO, YOU KNOW, THERE'S BEEN A LOT OF I'VE HEARD I'VE SEEN A LOT OF DISCUSSION ABOUT LIKE GETTING IN COMPLIANCE WITH HB 900.

AND THERE'S REALLY NOTHING FOR SCHOOL DISTRICTS TO DO RIGHT NOW.

SO THE FIRST STEP THAT HAPPENS IS THAT THE TEXAS STATE LIBRARY AND ARCHIVES COMMISSION HAS TO ADOPT SOME MANDATORY STANDARDS BY JANUARY 1ST OF 2024.

AND THOSE ACTUALLY HAVE TO BE APPROVED BY THE STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION, AND THEY'RE ENGAGED IN THAT PROCESS RIGHT NOW.

ONCE THOSE STANDARDS ARE ADOPTED, WE WILL NEED TO UPDATE OUR COLLECTION DEVELOPMENT GUIDELINES AND POLICY.

WE WILL PROBABLY PUT THAT IN POLICY AS WELL AND BRING THAT TO YOU ALL AS A BOARD POLICY AMENDMENT AT THAT TIME TO UPDATE THOSE TO MATCH THOSE STANDARDS THAT THEY'RE REQUIRING.

I WILL TELL YOU THAT THE BIGGEST PIECES OF THOSE STANDARDS Y'ALL ALREADY HAVE IN YOUR POLICY, BUT WE'LL PROBABLY TWEAK THEM JUST TO MATCH THE WORDING SO THAT IS THAT IS THE FIRST THING THAT WE WILL HAVE TO DO.

AND THAT'S IN JANUARY OF 2024.

AFTER THAT, THE NEXT PIECE IS THAT VENDORS HAVE TO HAVE VENDORS ACTUALLY HAVE TO GO AND RATE ALL OF THE BOOKS THAT THEY SELL TO SCHOOLS OR REVIEW ALL OF THE BOOKS THAT THEY SELL TO SCHOOLS AND DETERMINE IF ANY OF THEM SHOULD BE RATED AS SEXUALLY EXPLICIT, WHICH ESSENTIALLY FOLLOWS THE DEFINITION OF OBSCENE.

THAT'S IN THE PENAL CODE, WHICH IS WHAT WE USE TO DEFINE BOOKS THAT WE SHOULDN'T HAVE IN OUR LIBRARIES AS WELL.

SO AGAIN, IT SHOULD MATCH THAT.

AND THEN OR SEXUALLY RELEVANT AND SEXUALLY RELEVANT IS BASICALLY THE SAME AS SEXUALLY EXPLICIT, EXCEPT THAT YOU TAKE OUT THE REQUIREMENT THAT THE DEPICTION OR REPRESENTATION BE PATENTLY OFFENSIVE, WHICH IS ONE OF THE MOST SUBJECTIVE PIECES OF ALL OF THIS.

BUT VENDORS WILL BE PROHIBITED FROM SELLING BOOKS THAT ARE SEXUALLY EXPLICIT TO SCHOOLS.

SEXUALLY RELEVANT BOOKS COULD STILL BE SOLD, BUT A PARENT WOULD HAVE TO PROVIDE PERMISSION BEFORE A STUDENT COULD ACCESS THOSE THOSE TITLES IN SCHOOLS IF WE HAD ANY IN SCHOOLS. SO THE FIRST PIECE IS FOR VENDORS TO GO THROUGH AND RATE THOSE, AND THEN THEY ARE REQUIRED TO INFORM PUBLIC SCHOOLS THAT THEY HAVE SOLD THOSE BOOKS TO, THAT THEY'VE RATED THEM THAT WAY.

AND IF WE GET THOSE RATINGS AND ANY OF THEM ARE SEXUALLY EXPLICIT, WE WOULD THEN NEED TO REMOVE THOSE TITLES.

IF NOT, THEN WE WOULDN'T HAVE TO DO ANYTHING.

SO AGAIN, THAT DOESN'T HAPPEN UNTIL APRIL OF 2024.

SO IN TERMS OF OUR ACTIONS, WE REALLY HAVE, THE FIRST ONE IS IN JANUARY WHEN WE ADOPT AN UPDATED COLLECTION DEVELOPMENT POLICY.

AND THEN THE SECOND ONE WOULD BE AFTER WE GET THOSE RATINGS IN APRIL.

BEFORE THEN, THERE'S REALLY NOTHING FOR US TO DO WITH THIS BILL.

OBVIOUSLY, YOU ALL KNOW ALL THE WORK WE'VE DONE ON LIBRARY BOOKS OVER THE PAST YEAR AND A HALF.

AND SO THAT WORK IS, YOU KNOW, WE CONTINUE TO DO THOSE THINGS WHERE WE'RE EVALUATING TITLES AS WE NEED TO AND AS THEY COME UP.

SO. THIS IS PRETTY STRAIGHTFORWARD IN RESPONSE TO THE PANDEMIC, AND IT PROHIBITS DISTRICTS FROM CLOSING SCHOOLS REQUIRING MASKS TO PREVENT THE SPREAD OF COVID 19.

HB 303 ALLOWS A PARENT IN OR ALLOWS A PARENT OF A STUDENT EXCUSE ME, IN GRADES FOUR THROUGH EIGHT TO ELECT FOR THE STUDENT TO REPEAT THE GRADE IN WHICH THE STUDENT WAS ENROLLED IN THE PREVIOUS YEAR WITHOUT A LIMIT.

PREVIOUSLY THERE WAS A LIMIT AND I THINK THEY INTRODUCED THIS AFTER THE PANDEMIC TO DO ONE YEAR.

AND SO THEY'VE JUST REMOVED THAT LIMIT.

AND THEN IT ALLOWS THE PARENT OF A STUDENT ENROLLED IN HIGH SCHOOL TO HAVE THEM REPEAT THE COURSE AGAIN.

BUT IF THE STUDENT EARNED CREDIT, IF THEY PASS THE CLASS AND SAY THEY GET A 75 AND THEY SAY, WELL, I WANT TO REPEAT THAT CLASS, THEY DON'T GET THE HIGHER GRADE.

THEY GET THE GRADE THAT THEY EARNED THE FIRST TIME, BUT THEY CAN STILL ELECT TO RETAKE THE CLASS IF THEY WANT TO.

I'M SO FAST.

HOUSE BILL FIVE. THIS IS A COMPLICATED BILL THAT I HAVEN'T GONE INTO A LOT OF DETAIL ON BECAUSE WE REALLY HAVEN'T HAD TO DO MUCH WITH THESE.

SO WE USED TO HAVE SOMETHING CALLED CHAPTER 313 AGREEMENTS, WHICH WERE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENTS.

WE NEVER HAD ANY WE NEVER ENTERED INTO ANY AS A DISTRICT.

THEY EXPIRED, I BELIEVE, IN 2021.

AND SO THIS SESSION, THEY CAME BACK AND REPLACED THOSE AGREEMENTS AND THEY REPLACED THEM WITH NOW WHAT I GUESS WILL BE HB FIVE AGREEMENTS OR I DON'T KNOW IF THEY'LL CALL THEM,

[01:15:09]

BUT BASICALLY IT ALLOWS COMPANIES TO APPLY FOR TAX INCENTIVES FOR THE PURPOSES OF ENCOURAGING ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT.

THIS ALL GOES THROUGH THE TEXAS COMPTROLLER.

ONE OF THE THINGS THAT'S GOING TO BE MOST INTERESTING ABOUT THIS IS THAT THESE COMPANIES CAN GO APPLY TO THE COMPTROLLER.

AND IF THE COMPTROLLER RECEIVES AN APPLICATION, YOU ALL HAVE TO VOTE ON IT.

SO WE WILL GET FORWARDED THAT APPLICATION FROM THE COMPTROLLER AND THEN Y'ALL WILL ACTUALLY HAVE TO TAKE A VOTE TO DETERMINE IF YOU WANT TO ENTER INTO AN AGREEMENT.

ONE OF THESE AGREEMENTS WITH THEM OR NOT.

THERE'S NOT A HUGE AMOUNT OF BENEFIT TO SCHOOL DISTRICTS TO THESE AGREEMENTS.

SO IF WE GET ANY OF THESE, OBVIOUSLY WE'LL HAVE TO EVALUATE IT AND DETERMINE WHAT MAKES SENSE AT THE TIME.

BUT YOU WOULD HAVE TO VOTE.

YOU WOULD HAVE TO VOTE ON IT USING A PUBLIC HEARING TO MAKE THAT DECISION.

AND THEN IF WE DO ENTER INTO AN AGREEMENT, ONE OF THE THINGS I THINK IS INTERESTING IS THAT THE GOVERNOR CAN THEN TURN AROUND AND TERMINATE IT IF HE DECIDES THAT THE COMPANY IS NOT DOING WHAT THEY'RE SUPPOSED TO DO.

WE CAN ALSO TERMINATE. BUT I THINK IT'S INTERESTING THE GOVERNOR HAS THAT AUTHORITY AS WELL.

SO THOSE ARE THE BIGGEST PIECES.

HOUSE BILL 3033 IS A SIGNIFICANT UPDATE TO THE PUBLIC INFORMATION ACT, AND YOU ALL HAVE ALREADY TAKEN SOME ACTION RELATED TO THIS AT YOUR AUGUST BOARD MEETING.

SO THERE WAS A TEXAS SUPREME COURT CASE THAT HAPPENED, I BELIEVE, EARLIER THIS YEAR OR LATE LAST YEAR THAT DEALT WITH THE DEFINITION OF BUSINESS DAY, WHICH IS A TERM THAT WAS NOT DEFINED IN THE STATUTE.

SO YOU ALL ARE PROBABLY AWARE THAT WE HAVE TO RESPOND TO PUBLIC INFORMATION REQUESTS AS SOON AS PRACTICABLE OR WITHIN TEN BUSINESS DAYS.

WE'VE ALWAYS INTERPRETED THAT TO MEAN IF OUR OFFICES ARE OPEN, AND THAT'S BEEN THE GUIDANCE FROM THE TEXAS ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR MANY YEARS.

HOWEVER, THIS CASE THAT WENT TO THE TEXAS SUPREME COURT, THE TEXAS SUPREME COURT, DECIDED THAT WAS NOT A GOOD INTERPRETATION OF BUSINESS DAY.

AND THEY SAID THAT BUSINESS DAY WAS ESSENTIALLY ANY DAY OTHER THAN A SATURDAY, A SUNDAY OR A STATE OR FEDERAL HOLIDAY.

SO THE LEGISLATURE DECIDED TO COME IN AND STEP IN AND ACTUALLY GIVE A DEFINITION OF THIS SO THAT THEIR DEFINITION WOULD APPLY RATHER THAN THE COURTS.

AND SO THEY DEFINE THE BUSINESS DAY AS ESSENTIALLY THE SAME THING, EXCEPT THAT THEY ALSO ALLOW GOVERNMENTAL ENTITIES TO DESIGNATE UP TO TEN ADDITIONAL NON BUSINESS DAYS EACH CALENDAR YEAR. THAT'S GOING TO BE A CHALLENGE FOR A SCHOOL DISTRICT BECAUSE WE HAVE SO MANY STAFF OFF AT DIFFERENT TIMES OF THE YEAR.

AND SO THERE ARE WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO BE WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO BE THOUGHTFUL ABOUT WHERE WE PLACE THOSE DAYS TO MAKE SURE THAT WE CAN STILL MEET THE REQUIRED TIMELINES.

SO Y'ALL HAVE ALREADY DONE THAT FOR THE REST OF THIS CALENDAR YEAR BECAUSE THIS BILL WENT INTO EFFECT ON THE FIRST.

SO Y'ALL DID THAT IN APRIL ON YOUR APRIL BOARD MEETING AND THAT IS POSTED ON THE WEBSITE.

AND THEN Y'ALL WILL WE'LL DO GOING FORWARD.

IS THAT EACH OF YOUR CALENDAR WHEN YOU ADOPT YOUR SCHOOL CALENDAR, YOU'LL ALSO ADOPT ADOPT YOUR PEER CALENDAR, WHICH IS A CALENDAR YEAR CALENDAR.

SO IT'LL BE FOR THE 2024 CALENDAR YEAR AND YOU ALL WILL ADOPT THAT IN DECEMBER AND THEN THAT WILL BE POSTED ONLINE SO PEOPLE WILL KNOW WHAT WE CALL BUSINESS DAYS AND WHAT WE DON'T. THE OTHER BIG PIECE THAT THIS DID IS IT ACTUALLY PROVIDED SOME SPECIFIC TIMELINES RELATED TO ATTORNEY GENERAL DECISIONS.

WHEN WE SUBMIT A REQUEST FOR AN ATTORNEY GENERAL DECISION, THERE WASN'T A LOT OF INFORMATION ABOUT HOW LONG WE HAD TO GIVE INFORMATION BACK TO A REQUEST OR AFTER AN ATTORNEY GENERAL DECISION.

AND SO IT PROVIDED THAT INFORMATION IN THERE AS WELL, GAVE US SOME SPECIFIC TIMELINES.

HB 605.

YOU GUYS SAW THE MONEY THAT WENT TO CURRICULUM IN THE FIRST I THINK IT WAS LIKE 300 MILLION OF THAT NUMBER, 500 MILLION.

THIS IS WHERE A LOT OF THAT WENT.

SO HB 605 IS THE CURRICULUM BUILDS TEA'S CURRICULUM BILL.

WHEN THIS FIRST CAME OUT, WE WERE VERY CONCERNED THAT THEY WERE GOING TO COME OUT AND FORCE CURRICULUM DOWN ON EVERYONE.

AND IT IS NOT AT THE END OF THINGS WE SEE THAT IT WAS NOT MEANT TO BE, THAT IT'S VERY MUCH AN OPTIONAL THING.

SO IT'S NOT SOMETHING THAT PEOPLE SHOULD BE WORRIED ABOUT.

IT'S A VERY BIG BILL.

BUT THE MAIN IDEA HERE IS THAT REQUIRES T-E-A TO CREATE AN OPEN EDUCATION RESOURCE MATERIALS OR ESSENTIALLY FREE CURRICULUM AVAILABLE FOR K THROUGH EIGHT ELA AND MATH, PRE K ELA AND MATH, AND THEN ALL FOUNDATION CURRICULUM COURSES IN K THROUGH FIVE.

AND THE IDEA HERE WAS THAT THEY DON'T WANT TEACHERS THAT HAVE TO COME IN AND SPEND EVERY WAKING MINUTE TRYING TO CREATE CURRICULUM FROM SCRATCH, WHICH IS NOT SOMETHING THAT OUR TEACHERS HERE IN FRISCO I SEE HAVE TO DO, BUT THERE ARE A LOT OF SMALLER DISTRICTS THAT WE THINK ARE REALLY GOING TO BENEFIT FROM THIS BILL.

IT ALLOWS TEACHERS TO PURCHASE CURRICULUM MATERIALS AND MAKE THOSE AVAILABLE TO DISTRICTS IN AN ONLINE REQUISITION AND DISBURSEMENT SYSTEM.

IT PROHIBITS CEA FROM REQUIRING DISTRICTS TO USE THESE STATE SELECTED INSTRUCTIONAL MATERIALS, AND IT ALSO PROVIDES DISTRICTS WITH A $40 PER STUDENT PER YEAR TO PURCHASE INSTRUCTIONAL MATERIALS THAT ARE APPROVED BY THE STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION.

AND IT REQUIRES THE COMMISSIONER TO ADOPT A PROCESS FOR THE REVIEW OF THOSE INSTRUCTIONAL MATERIALS.

SO IT DOES REQUIRE THE STATE BOARD ACTUALLY TO.

SO IT WILL CHANGE OUR TEXT A LITTLE BIT.

IT REQUIRES THE STATE BOARD TO SPECIFY A LIST OF APPROVED VOCAB VOCABULARY AND AT LEAST ONE LITERARY WORK FOR YOUR TEACHER IN EACH GRADE.

[01:20:05]

OH YEAH, WE GET THE $40 EVEN IF WE DON'T USE THEIR MATERIALS.

YEAH. SO THAT MONEY WILL JUST SIT IN OUR INSTRUCTIONAL MATERIALS ACCOUNT AND COLLECTING UNTIL WE DECIDE TO SPEND IT.

BUT WE CAN ONLY SPEND IT FOR STATE SELECTED MATERIALS.

SO WHEN YOU HEAR ABOUT $500 MILLION FOR MATERIALS, FOR CURRICULUM FOR SCHOOLS, THAT SOUNDS LIKE IT'S A REALLY GREAT THING.

BUT WE CAN ONLY USE THAT MONEY IF WE USE IT ON STATE SELECTED MATERIALS.

SENATE BILL TEN IS A TEACHER'S BILL.

THIS IS FOR RETIRED TEACHERS AND PARTS OF IT ARE CONTINGENT ON THE PASSAGE OF A CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT.

H.J.R. TWO WHICH WILL BE ON THE BALLOT IN NOVEMBER.

SO IF H.J.R. TWO IS PASSED BY VOTERS, THEN THIS BILL WOULD PROVIDE A ONE TIME COST OF LIVING ADJUSTMENT, WHICH BY ONE TIME I MEAN IT ADJUSTS FOR COST OF LIVING ONCE. BUT THEN THAT'S THE NEW PAYMENT BEGINNING IN JANUARY 2024 FOR ANNUITANTS, WHO ARE BASED WHO'S BENEFIT IS BASED ON A RETIREMENT OR DEATH DATE PRIOR TO AUGUST 31ST, 2020, THAT ADJUSTMENT WOULD BE 6% FOR PEOPLE FROM BEFORE 2001 4% BETWEEN 2001 AND 2013 AND 2% FOR 2013 TO 2020 FOR THE THIRD.

THE THIRD PIECE OF IT IS NOT CONTINGENT ON H.J.R.

TWO AND THIS IS A ONE TIME SUPPLEMENTAL PAYMENT OR LIKE A 13TH CHECK FOR THOSE WHO ARE AT LEAST 70 YEARS OLD AND HAVE MORE THAN TEN YEARS OF ELIGIBLE SERVICE CREDIT.

AND THEN THAT AMOUNT IS $7,500.

IF THEY'RE 75 AND 2400 BETWEEN 70 AND 75.

HOUSE BILL 3928.

THIS IS ONE OF THE LARGEST BILLS THAT WAS PASSED THIS SESSION, AND IT WAS KIND OF ONE OF THE BILLS THAT FLEW UNDER THE RADAR IN TERMS OF BEING REALLY A REALLY HUGE DEAL AND THEN NOT PEOPLE NOT REALLY BEING FULLY AWARE OF THAT.

AND IT'S RELATED TO DYSLEXIA.

MOST OF THE BILL CODIFIES CHANGES THAT WERE MADE IN THE DYSLEXIA HANDBOOK AFTER THE LAST LEGISLATIVE SESSION CLARIFIES THAT DYSLEXIA IS A SPECIFIC LEARNING DISABILITY UNDER THE IDEA MAKES SOME REQUIREMENTS RELATED TO EVALUATION TEAMS AND DOCUMENTATION, THOSE KINDS OF THINGS.

BUT THE BIGGEST PIECE OF THIS IS THAT THE BILL ACTUALLY REQUIRES THAT ANY DYSLEXIA SERVICES, ANY EVIDENCE BASED DYSLEXIA SERVICES LIKE THE TAKE FLIGHT PROGRAM THAT WE PROVIDE, WILL NOW HAVE TO BE PROVIDED VIA AN IEP.

SO WHILE IT WAS ALWAYS THE CASE THAT THEY WERE AVAILABLE TO STUDENTS WHO HAD AN IEP, YOU COULD YOU COULD RECEIVE DYSLEXIA SERVICES GOING THROUGH THE SPECIAL EDUCATION EVALUATION PROCESS.

WE HAVE BEEN ALLOWING STUDENTS WHO ONLY NEED DYSLEXIA SERVICES AND NO OTHER SERVICES TO RECEIVE THAT THROUGH A 504 PLAN.

AND THAT WILL NO LONGER BE ALLOWED UNDER THIS BILL.

SO IF A FAMILY DECIDES THAT THEY WANT TO DECLINE TO BE EVALUATED UNDER SPECIAL EDUCATION OR EVEN IF THEY'VE BEEN EVALUATED, BUT THEY DECLINE SERVICES, AT THAT POINT, WE WILL NOT BE ABLE TO PROVIDE THEM WITH TAKE FLIGHT.

WE'LL BE ABLE TO PROVIDE THEM WITH OTHER ACCOMMODATIONS THROUGH A 504 PLAN, BUT WE WILL NO LONGER BE ABLE TO PROVIDE THEM WITH TAKE FLIGHT AS AN EVIDENCE BASED DYSLEXIA PROGRAM.

THE PURPOSE OF THIS BILL IS BECAUSE SOME OF IT HAS TO DO WITH FEDERAL LAW AND MAKING SURE WE'RE IN COMPLIANCE WITH FEDERAL LAW.

THERE IS A SENSE THAT DISTRICTS HAVE USED 504 TO ESSENTIALLY KEEP STUDENTS WHO NEED OTHER SERVICES OUT OF SPED.

BUT THE CONCERN IS THAT THEY WILL HAVE FAMILIES WHO WILL NOT WANT THEIR STUDENT TO BE IN THE SPECIAL EDUCATION UMBRELLA, WHO NOW WON'T BE ABLE TO RECEIVE DYSLEXIA SERVICES THAT THEY NEED. HP 33,908 IS ABOUT FENTANYL.

AWARENESS REQUIRES THE GOVERNOR TO DESIGNATE A FENTANYL POISONING AWARENESS WEEK AND THEN REQUIRES DISTRICTS TO PROVIDE INSTRUCTION RECOMMENDED BY THE SCHOOL HEALTH ADVISORY COMMITTEE RELATED TO THAT, FENTANYL ABUSE PREVENTION AND DRUG POISONING AWARENESS TO STUDENTS IN GRADES SIX THROUGH 12.

AND THEN IT OUTLINES SOME SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS TO BE INCLUDED IN THAT INSTRUCTION.

HB 473 REQUIRES A THREAT ASSESSMENT TEAM TO NOTIFY A PARENT PRIOR TO CONDUCTING A THREAT ASSESSMENT AND PROVIDE THE PARENT WITH AN OPPORTUNITY TO PARTICIPATE IN THE ASSESSMENT.

IT DOESN'T REQUIRE PERMISSION FROM THE PARENT, JUST NOTIFICATION, AND THEN THE OPPORTUNITY TO PROVIDE INFORMATION.

AND OUR THREAT ASSESSMENT AND FRISCO OR THREAT ASSESSMENT PROCESS ALREADY INCLUDES PARENTAL PARTICIPATION.

IT'S OBVIOUSLY JUST GOOD PRACTICE TO GET A FULL PICTURE, BUT IT ALSO REQUIRES A THREAT ASSESSMENT TEAM TO PROVIDE A PARENT WITH FINDINGS AFTER THE COMPLETION OF THAT THREAT ASSESSMENT. SB 2124 IS ABOUT TRYING TO GET MORE STUDENTS INTO ADVANCED MATH PROGRAMS. AND SO THIS WILL REQUIRE SCHOOL DISTRICTS TO AUTOMATICALLY ENROLL SIXTH GRADERS WHO SCORED IN THE TOP 40% STATEWIDE ON THE FIFTH GRADE MATH STAR INTO A PROGRAM THAT

[01:25:02]

PARENTS CAN OPT OUT OF THAT, BUT IT IS AN AUTOMATIC ENROLLMENT.

SO IF PARENTS DON'T OPT OUT, THEN THOSE STUDENTS WOULD AUTOMATICALLY BE ENROLLED IN IN A PROGRAM LIKE THAT.

HOUSE BILL 114 IS THE BILL YOU ALL HAVE HEARD QUITE A BIT ABOUT.

NOW, AT THIS POINT, THAT WILL REQUIRE STUDENTS TO BE PLACED IN DEEP FOR POSSESSING A VAPE.

ANOTHER THING THIS BILL DOES THAT HASN'T GOTTEN AS MUCH ATTENTION BUT IS ACTUALLY PRETTY IMPORTANT IS THAT IT REMOVES THE MANDATORY EXPULSION FOR MARIJUANA.

THAT'S NOW A DISCRETIONARY EXPULSION.

AND THAT DOES IMPACT HOW THAT HOW MUCH AN EXPULSION FOR MARIJUANA COSTS FOR US, BECAUSE WHEN THEY'RE MANDATORY, WE DON'T HAVE TO BEAR AS MUCH OF THE BRUNT OF THE COST WHEN THEY'RE AS OPPOSED TO WHEN THEY'RE DISCRETIONARY WHEN WE SEND THEM TO THE JJAEP.

SO THAT'S ANOTHER BIG PIECE OF THIS BILL THAT HAS NOT BEEN FOCUSED ON AS MUCH.

HB 1225 IS ABOUT TESTING AND IT ALLOWS DISTRICTS TO ADMINISTER STATE ASSESSMENTS IN A PAPER FORMAT TO ANY STUDENT WHOSE PARENT OR GUARDIAN OR TEACHER REQUESTS THAT PAPER FORMAT.

UP TO 3% OF THE STUDENTS THAT ARE ENROLLED IN THE WHOLE DISTRICT.

AND IT'S A FIRST COME, FIRST SERVE BASIS.

IT DOES NOT REQUIRE DISTRICTS TO DO IT, BUT IT ALLOWS THEM TO DO THAT.

THIS IS PART OF THEIR ATTEMPT TO MOVE ALL THE TESTING TO ONLINE.

SO IF IT IS A PART OF A STUDENT'S IEP OR 504 PLAN, THOSE STUDENTS DON'T COUNT AGAINST THE 3%.

IF THIS IS SOMETHING THAT WE CHOSE TO DO.

AND SB 271 REQUIRES DISTRICTS TO NOTIFY THE DEPARTMENT OF INFORMATION RESOURCES WITHIN 48 HOURS OF THE DISCOVERY OF A SECURITY INCIDENT, INCLUDING A BREACH OR SUSPECTED BREACH, EVEN OF A SYSTEM SECURITY OR RANSOMWARE ATTACK.

AND IT REQUIRES SOME FOLLOW UP WITH THE DEPARTMENT WITH DETAILS, INCLUDING AN ANALYSIS OF THE INCIDENT AND A POSSIBLE CAUSE OF THE INCIDENT.

THAT'S A CYBER SECURITY INCIDENT, NOT JUST ANY PHYSICAL SECURITY INCIDENT.

YES. HB 15, 1959 ALLOWS USE OF YOUR POLICE OFFICERS TO REQUEST A TRANSFER TO ANOTHER CAMPUS OR DISTRICT ONLY IF THAT RECEIVING DISTRICT HAS AN AGREEMENT WITH THE SENDING DISTRICT AND TO ACCEPT THOSE TRANSFERS.

BUT IT DOESN'T REQUIRE EITHER OF THE DISTRICTS TO PROVIDE TRANSPORTATION.

AND THEN HB 2892 IS THE SAME BILL.

BUT FOR MILITARY SERVICE MEMBERS AND AGAIN, FROM DISTRICT TO DISTRICT, THERE HAS TO BE AN EXISTING AGREEMENT IN PLACE BETWEEN THOSE DISTRICTS FOR STUDENTS TO TRANSFER BETWEEN THOSE. THIS DOES NOT REQUIRE DISTRICTS LIKE FRISCO.

WE DON'T HAVE AGREEMENTS WITH ANY ANY OTHER DISTRICTS TO ACCEPT OUT OF DISTRICT TRANSFERS.

SO SO IF WE HAD A MILITARY SERVICE MEMBER OR POLICE OFFICERS FROM WHO LIVE IN OTHER DISTRICTS WHO WANTED TO TRANSFER INTO FRISCO ISD, THEN WE WOULD NOT WE WOULD NOT DO THAT BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE THOSE AGREEMENTS.

BUT WITHIN THE DISTRICT POLICE OFFICERS, MILITARY SERVICE MEMBERS CAN TRANSFER FROM CAMPUS TO CAMPUS.

HB 4363 IS CREATES THE FUTURE TEXAS TEACHERS SCHOLARSHIP PROGRAM.

THIS WAS ONE OF THE FEW THINGS THAT PASSED THAT REALLY WAS TARGETED AT TRYING TO IMPROVE THE PIPELINE OF TEACHERS.

AND I BELIEVE THE AMOUNT OF THE SCHOLARSHIP, IT'S UP TO $10,000 PER YEAR, DEPENDING ON HOW MANY PEOPLE APPLY AND THE AVAILABILITY OF FUNDS.

AND IT DOES PRIORITIZE FUNDS FOR HARD TO FILL POSITIONS AND SCHOOLS THAT HAVE A HIGH PERCENTAGE OF THEIR POPULATION AS LOW SOCIOECONOMIC STATUS.

HB 1212 WILL IMPACTS OUR HOW WE OUR PROCESS FOR ABSENCES, FOR EXCUSING ABSENCES FOR RELIGIOUS HOLY DAYS.

PREVIOUSLY IT WAS COMMON PRACTICE FOR DISTRICTS TO REQUIRE A NOTE FROM A CLERGY MEMBER OR RELIGIOUS LEADER.

IF THE RELIGIOUS HOLY DAY WAS NOT LIKE A WIDELY KNOWN ONE.

SO I DON'T KNOW.

I CAN'T EVEN THINK OF AN EXAMPLE RIGHT NOW.

BUT, YOU KNOW, RAMADAN OR EASTER OR WHATEVER, THOSE KINDS OF HOLIDAYS THAT JUST ARE KIND OF LIKE COMMONLY KNOWN AND UNDERSTOOD ARE ONE THING. BUT THEN WHEN YOU HEAR FROM FROM THESE OTHER RELIGIONS THAT THAT AREN'T AS PEOPLE AREN'T AS FAMILIAR WITH IT IS PERMISSIBLE HAS PREVIOUSLY BEEN PERMISSIBLE TO REQUIRE DOCUMENTATION.

THAT'S NO LONGER THE CASE.

SO WE'LL NO LONGER REQUIRE DOCUMENTATION FROM A CLERGY MEMBER TO EXCUSE THOSE ABSENCES.

OKAY. I KNOW WE WENT THROUGH ALL OF THAT REALLY FAST.

DO YOU ALL HAVE ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT THOSE MAJOR PIECES OF LEGISLATION? OR DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS AT THIS TIME? I HAVE JUST A FEW QUESTIONS JUST TO KIND OF SO THE BOARD WE CAN WRAP OUR HEAD AROUND THE THINGS THAT I KNOW.

HB THREE WE ALREADY ADOPTED A RESOLUTION AND THE OUTCOME FOR THE BOARD WILL JUST BE CONTINUAL UPDATES ON KIND OF WHERE WE ARE IN THAT PROCESS.

FOR HB 900.

THE STANDARDS ADOPTION.

IS THAT SOMETHING THE BOARD WILL NEED TO VOTE ON IN APRIL? IS THAT WHAT YOU MENTIONED IN JANUARY? WE'LL VOTE ON IT IN JANUARY.

WE'LL HAVE THOSE NEW GUIDELINES FROM THE STATE BOARD, FROM THE FROM TSLAC, AND THEN THE STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION WILL APPROVE THEM.

[01:30:06]

SO WE WILL PROBABLY TRY TO BRING THAT TO YOU ALL AT YOUR JANUARY BOARD MEETING AS AN UPDATE TO YOUR POLICY.

OKAY. SO WE'LL THAT'LL BE AN ACTIONABLE ITEM FOR US.

AND THEN WE KNOW WE'RE GOING TO ALSO TAKE ACTION ON THE BILL WE SPOKE ABOUT OR WE'VE BEEN SPEAKING ABOUT REGARDING CHAPLAINS.

THAT'S GOING TO BE AN ACTION ITEM THAT WE HAVE TO ADDRESS AND WE WILL HAVE THAT IN THE NEXT PART OF THE PRESENTATION.

OKAY. AND THEN ARE THOSE THE ONLY THREE THAT THE BOARD IS INVOLVED IN FROM A DISTRICT LEVEL? SO THERE'S SOME OTHER SO IT'S VERY COMMON FOR THE LEGISLATURE TO SAY THE BOARD HAS TO HAVE A POLICY TO DO THESE FOUR THINGS.

RIGHT. AND THAT HAPPENS PRETTY MUCH EVERY SESSION.

AND THE WAY THAT WE USUALLY HANDLE THOSE IS TASBIH, WHO RUNS, WHO MANAGES OUR POLICY SERVICE.

THEY COLLECT ALL OF THOSE THINGS AND THEN THEY PUT TOGETHER POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS.

MOST OF THE TIME THOSE THINGS ARE LIKE MINOR SEMANTIC CHANGES.

THEY'RE NOT ANYTHING MAJOR.

AND SO THEY WILL THEN PROVIDE US THAT IN A LOCAL POLICY UPDATE.

WE'LL REVIEW THAT.

IF WE HAVE ANY CHANGES OR RECOMMENDATIONS, WE'LL ADDRESS THOSE AND THEN THOSE WILL BE BROUGHT TO YOU.

THAT USUALLY HAPPENS EITHER IN OCTOBER OR NOVEMBER AFTER A LEGISLATIVE SESSION, BECAUSE IT TAKES THEM SOME TIME TO GO THROUGH ALL OF THAT STUFF.

IT'S MUCH RARER FOR THE LEGISLATURE TO DO WHAT THEY DID IN SENATE BILL 763, WHERE THEY DID TO THE CHAPLAINS THAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT, WHERE THEY SPECIFY THAT YOU HAVE TO TAKE A PARTICULAR VOTE BY A PARTICULAR TIME.

THAT IS THE ONLY BILL THAT REQUIRES THAT HOUSE BILL THREE REQUIRED A REQUIRED ACTION ON YOUR PART UNDER CERTAIN CIRCUMSTANCES.

YOU'VE DONE THAT.

AGAIN, THE HOUSE BILL 900 UPDATE, IT ACTUALLY DOESN'T REQUIRE YOU TO MAKE IT A POLICY.

YOU HAVE TO HAVE A COLLECTION DEVELOPMENT.

YOU HAVE TO HAVE THOSE COLLECTION DEVELOPMENT GUIDELINES.

WE HAVE COLLECTION DEVELOPMENT POLICIES AND GUIDELINES.

WE WILL PROBABLY JUST PUT IT IN YOUR POLICY TO MAKE IT SUPER CLEAN.

SO THAT'S WHY WE DID THAT. BUT THAT'S ANOTHER POLICY UPDATE.

THAT ONE'S JUST A LITTLE BIT MORE SPECIFIC.

AND BECAUSE WE'VE DONE SO MUCH WORK IN THAT AREA ALREADY, WE WOULD INITIATE THAT ONE PROBABLY.

WE'VE SO HEAVILY MODIFIED ZAXBY'S MODEL IN THAT AREA THAT IT WOULD BE HARD FOR THEM TO GIVE US SUGGESTED CHANGES ON THAT WE COULDN'T DO FIRST.

SO. OKAY.

AND THEN MY THIS IS MY FINAL QUESTION FOR HB 3928.

OBVIOUSLY, I HAVE SOME GRAVE CONCERNS ABOUT OUR INABILITY TO PROVIDE EARLY INTERVENTION TO OUR DYSLEXIC KIDDOS BASED ON THEIR FAMILIES THAT MAY NOT WANT TO SEEK SPECIAL EDUCATION SERVICES OR THAT EVALUATIVE MEASURE.

SO DO WE AS A DISTRICT HAVE ANY FLEXIBILITY ON HOW WE CAN PROVIDE THAT EARLY INTERVENTION OUTSIDE OF THESE NEW STANDARDS? SO WE HAVE ABOUT TWO YEARS TO FULLY IMPLEMENT THAT.

THAT BILL, ACCORDING TO TO THEY'RE GIVING US SOME TIME FOR CURRENT STUDENTS.

WE ARE SUPPOSED TO BRING IN ALL NEW STUDENTS USING AN FYI FOR FULL AND INDIVIDUAL EVALUATION UNDER THE SPECIAL EDUCATION UMBRELLA.

WE HAVE NOT BEEN TOLD THAT WE CAN GO OUTSIDE OF THAT OR GIVEN ANY FLEXIBILITY IN THAT AREA.

DR. CUNNINGHAM, DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING TO ADD TO THAT? I DO KNOW THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT THE PROBABLE ADDITIONAL REQUEST OF SOME ADDITIONAL SPECIAL EDUCATION PERSONNEL THROUGH CASE MANAGERS TO MANAGE THE CASELOAD FROM THE SPECIAL ED, AND WE'VE DONE EARLY PROJECTIONS.

LOOKS LIKE WE'RE PROBABLY GOING TO NEED SOMEWHERE BETWEEN 12 TO 15 ADDITIONAL STAFF MEMBERS, PROFESSIONAL STAFF MEMBERS JUST TO MANAGE THIS CASELOAD THAT WILL BE COMING INTO US OVER THE NEXT COUPLE OF YEARS.

YEAH, BECAUSE THE PAPERWORK AND TRACKING REQUIREMENTS UNDER HAVING AN IEP ARE DIFFERENT THAN WHAT'S UNDER A SECTION 504 PLAN.

ONE OTHER THING I'LL JUST SAY ABOUT ALL OF THESE BILLS.

WE DIDN'T READ ALL THE WORDS ON THE SLIDE, AND ALL THE WORDS ON THE SLIDE AREN'T EVEN THE COMPLETE SUMMARIES.

SO THE COMPLETE SUMMARIES ARE IN YOUR BOOK.

AND FOR ANYBODY WHO'S WATCHING, THIS IS ALL ON THE WEBSITE.

WE ARE SUPER OPEN AND TRANSPARENT WITH ALL OF THIS STUFF, AND SO IT'S ALL ON THE WEBSITE AVAILABLE FOR ANYBODY WHO WANTS TO DIG IN MORE.

SO DO YOU ALL HAVE OTHER QUESTIONS ABOUT THE BILLS BEFORE WE MOVE ON TO THE NEXT PIECE? I HAVE ONE QUESTION REGARDING THE STAR FORMAT WHERE I DIDN'T GET TO READ ALL THE WORDS.

YOU DIDN'T GET TO READ ALL THE WORDS.

I JUST WANTED TO IF YOU CAN GO BACK TO.

I KNOW WE WERE MOVING FAST.

THERE YOU GO. OKAY. SO THE PARENT CAN REQUEST A PAPER FORMAT.

IS THAT A FORMAL HOW DO THEY DO IT? IS IT. YES. SO WE ACTUALLY HAD AN ESTABLISHED PROCESS FOR THIS ALREADY ANYWAY, AND WE ARE NOT UPDATING.

MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT WE ARE CONTINUING WITH OUR EXISTING PROCESS THAT WE ALREADY HAVE RELATED TO THIS, BECAUSE AGAIN, THIS JUST ALLOWS US TO ADMINISTER THEM.

IT DOESN'T REQUIRE US TO.

THE ONLY THING THAT THIS WOULD IMPACT IS IF WE HAPPEN TO GET A CERTAIN NUMBER OF REQUESTS THAT WE WOULD NORMALLY GRANT THAT EXCEEDED THAT 3%, WHICH THAT WOULD BE PRETTY SURPRISING, THEN WE WOULD HAVE TO LIMIT.

BUT OUTSIDE OF THAT, WE'RE GOING TO CONTINUE WITH OUR EXISTING PROCESS THAT WE HAVE.

[01:35:01]

I KNOW THAT'S DONE AT THE CAMPUS LEVEL.

SO PARENTS COULD REACH OUT TO THEIR CAMPUS ADMINISTRATORS AND THEY'D BE ABLE TO WALK THEM THROUGH THE PROCESS.

OKAY. AND THIS MAY BE OUT OF SCOPE, BUT THAT'S THE FORMAT FOR STAR.

BUT I'M ALSO TOLD THAT THE SAT IS SUPPOSED TO BE TRANSITIONING AS WELL.

WELL, WE HAVE. THE SAME OPTION FOR THAT IT IS TRANSITIONING TO ONLINE AND WE DON'T HAVE ANY AUTHORITY TO RECOMMEND ANYTHING.

ANOTHER ONE, THE COLLEGE BOARD TELLS US ON THAT.

AND RIGHT NOW WE'RE BEING TOLD IT IS ALL ONLINE.

PALMER. THANK YOU.

OKAY. ALL RIGHT.

SO REAL QUICK, I JUST WANT TO GO THROUGH KIND OF OUR EXPECTATIONS FOR THIS UPCOMING SPECIAL SESSION.

SO WE ARE ANTICIPATING THAT A SPECIAL SESSION WILL BE CALLED TO START ON OCTOBER 10TH.

THAT IS JUST THE RUMORED DATE.

THAT IS NOT AN OFFICIAL DATE.

THE GOVERNOR HAS NOT ACTUALLY CALLED A SPECIAL SESSION.

AND BOTH THE GOVERNOR AND LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR AND MANY OTHER LEGISLATORS HAVE SAID THAT THE SPECIAL SESSION WILL BE IN OCTOBER.

HOWEVER, THAT BEING SAID, THINGS CAN CHANGE RIGHT NOW.

AGAIN, THEY'RE IN THE MIDST OF THE IMPEACHMENT TRIAL, WHICH IS EXPECTED TO LAST FOR AT LEAST THREE WEEKS PROBABLY.

AND GIVEN THE WAY THAT YESTERDAY WENT, THAT WOULD NOT BE SURPRISING.

THEY SPENT ALL DAY YESTERDAY AND THEY GOT THEY DIDN'T EVEN COMPLETE THE DIRECT EXAMINATION OF A SINGLE WITNESS.

SO IT'S GOING TO BE A LITTLE WHILE, I THINK, ON THAT.

AND SO IT IS POSSIBLE THAT IF THAT PUSHES INTO OCTOBER, THEY'LL TRY TO GIVE MORE OF A BREAK BETWEEN THE SPECIAL AND THAT WE COULD SEE THE SPECIAL LATER IN OCTOBER OR EVEN POTENTIALLY IN NOVEMBER.

BUT WE'RE JUST GOING TO HAVE TO WAIT AND SEE.

WE KNOW THAT THAT SPECIAL SESSION WILL INCLUDE A CALL FOR VOUCHERS.

WE EXPECT IT WILL ALSO INCLUDE A CALL FOR SCHOOL FUNDING.

WE ARE NOT SURE WHAT THAT ALL IS GOING TO LOOK LIKE YET.

I WILL SAY THERE DOES APPEAR TO BE SOME WILLINGNESS TO PROVIDE FUNDING FOR TEACHER PAY RAISES SEPARATE FROM VOUCHERS, BUT MORE FLEXIBLE FUNDING THAT WOULD ALLOW US TO ADDRESS INFLATION AND THE SHORTFALL ON SCHOOL SAFETY AND OTHER PIECES LIKE THAT IS EXPECTED TO BE FULLY TIED TO THE PASSAGE OF A VOUCHER PROGRAM.

SO OUR BOARD LEGISLATIVE SUBCOMMITTEE, THIS IS JUST KIND OF THE OUTLOOK OF THE YEAR AND IT'S VERY BROAD.

BUT SOME WAYS THAT OUR BOARD IS GOING TO BE INVOLVED IS YOU ALL ARE GOING TO BE INVITED TO JOIN US.

OUR LEGISLATIVE SUBCOMMITTEE AT LEAST, IS GOING TO BE INVITED TO COME WITH US.

IF WE HAVE EVENTS WHERE WE'RE HOSTING LEGISLATORS LIKE WE HAVE AN A LEGISLATIVE INSIGHT THAT WE DO, WE SOMETIMES INVITE THEM TO TALK WITH OUR STUDENTS AT OUR SUPERINTENDENT ADVISORY COUNCIL.

SO ANYTIME WE HAVE LEGISLATORS COME ON OUR CAMPUS FOR AN EVENT THAT WE DO LIKE THAT WE'RE GOING TO INVITE OUR BOARD LEGISLATIVE SUBCOMMITTEE.

AND THEN OBVIOUSLY THE REST OF YOU, YOU KNOW, ARE ARE WELCOME TO JOIN.

WE MIGHT HAVE TO PUT SOMETHING ON THE CALENDAR.

WE'RE ALSO GOING TO COORDINATE WITH GOVERNMENT AFFAIRS OR THE BOARD AND THE GOVERNMENT AFFAIRS DEPARTMENT ARE GOING TO COORDINATE ON COMMUNICATION STRATEGY WITH LEGISLATORS JUST TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE CONSISTENT IN OUR MESSAGES TO THEM.

Y'ALL ARE GOING TO START ATTENDING IF YOU'RE AVAILABLE, A LEGISLATIVE SUBCOMMITTEE, MEETINGS OR LLC, EXCUSE ME, MEETINGS STARTING IN OCTOBER.

AND SO WE LIKE FOR OUR BOARD LEGISLATIVE SUBCOMMITTEE TO COME TO THOSE SO THAT THEY CAN KIND OF BE A PART OF THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE PRIORITIES AND KIND OF WATCH THAT PROCESS AND AND GIVE FEEDBACK ON THAT PROCESS.

AND THEN LASTLY, ALSO, ANY TIME THERE'S A SESSION, YOU'RE GOING TO RECEIVE REGULAR UPDATES AND TRAVEL TO THE CAPITOL.

THIS WILL INCLUDE PROBABLY THE SPECIAL.

WE'LL PROBABLY MAKE A TRIP DOWN THERE AT LEAST ONCE DURING THE SPECIAL.

AND SO WE MAY BRING THE BOARD LEGISLATIVE SUBCOMMITTEE WITH US.

AND SO THOSE ARE JUST SOME VERY GENERAL WAYS THAT THE BOARD LEGISLATIVE SUBCOMMITTEE MAY BE INVOLVED IN THE STUFF THAT WE'RE DOING.

BUT WE'RE MEETING WITH YOU GUYS ALL THE TIME AND OR WHENEVER YOU LIKE, REALLY.

AND WE CAN SET UP A SCHEDULE WITH YOU GUYS SO THAT Y'ALL CAN KIND OF MAKE SURE THAT THIS IS WHAT YOU WANT IT TO BE, IF THAT MAKES SENSE.

AND ONE THING I JUST WANT TO NOTE ON THE LLC IS THAT WE ARE WE ARE CHANGING OUR STRUCTURE ON THE LLC JUST A LITTLE BIT.

SO THIS WAS OUR SECOND, SECOND SESSION.

YEAH, THIS WAS OUR SECOND SESSION WITH THE LLC.

SO WE'RE HEADING INTO OUR THIRD SET OF LLC, OUR THIRD TERM WITH LLC.

THE FIRST SESSION WE HAD WITH THE LLC WAS THE SESSION AFTER COVID.

SO OUR EXECUTION OF THINGS DURING THE SESSION WAS JUST REALLY LIMITED AND DIFFERENT.

SO THIS WAS OUR FIRST SESSION.

WE REALLY GOT TO KIND OF SEE WHAT A FULL PLAN WOULD LOOK LIKE AND ALL OF THOSE KINDS OF THINGS.

AND WE HAVE BOTH OF THE LAST TWO TIMES BROUGHT Y'ALL, I BELIEVE, 11 PRIORITIES, LEGISLATIVE PRIORITIES IN OCTOBER TO ADOPT.

AND WE WERE VERY ACTIVE THIS SESSION.

AND IT BECAME VERY CLEAR THAT 11 IS TOO MANY.

WE JUST DIDN'T FEEL LIKE WE COULD DO JUSTICE TO THE PRIORITIES THAT WE ADOPTED.

AND SO ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE'RE GOING TO BE DOING IS WE'RE GOING TO BE ADJUSTING THE LLC TO HAVE STANDING SUBCOMMITTEES INSTEAD OF ROTATING ONES THAT CHANGE BASED ON A DIFFERENT LEGISLATURE. AND SO THOSE ARE GOING TO BE SCHOOL FINANCE.

[01:40:03]

AND THEN WE'RE CALLING SCHOOL EXPERIENCE, WHICH IS KIND OF JUST A LITTLE BIT OF A CATCH ALL THAT WE CAN PUT DIFFERENT THINGS IN.

AND WE ARE GOING TO RECOMMEND FEWER PRIORITIES FOR YOU ALL IN THE FUTURE SO THAT WE CAN BETTER FOCUS OUR EFFORTS AND MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE DOING JUSTICE TO WHAT OUR COMMUNITY IS ASKING FOR US TO FOCUS ON.

SO I JUST WANTED YOU ALL TO BE AWARE OF THAT AS WELL AS WE MAKE THOSE ADJUSTMENTS.

SO AGAIN, WE ARE WE HAVE TO CHANGE THAT TWITTER LOGO THERE NOW BECAUSE IT'S X NOW WE ARE ON SOCIAL MEDIA AND WE DO POST THERE.

AND THEN OBVIOUSLY AGAIN, WE PUT ALL OF THIS INFORMATION ON THE WEBSITE.

THE BOOK IS ON THE WEBSITE.

YOU CAN DOWNLOAD A PDF OF IT.

OUR SPREADSHEET VERSION OF ALL OF THESE BILLS ARE ON THE WEBSITE AND WE TRY TO BE REALLY OPEN WITH EVERYTHING THAT WE'RE DOING AND ALL THE WORK THAT WE'RE DOING SO THAT IT'S AVAILABLE TO OUR COMMUNITY.

SO THAT IS THE END OF THE GENERAL UPDATE FOR THOSE THAT NEED THE LEGISLATIVE TRAINING.

[6. Discussion regarding Post-Legislative Board Training]

SO I DON'T KNOW DYNETTE IF YOU WANT TO JUST KEEP ON TRUCKING OR IF YOU WANT TO TAKE A BREAK OR WHAT YOU WANT TO DO.

WELL, I THINK THERE ARE A FEW PEOPLE THAT DON'T NEED IT.

SO I THINK JUST MARK NOW.

YOU ALREADY RECEIVED YOUR POST SESSION LEGISLATIVE TRAINING.

RIGHT? SO THE REST OF THIS IS YOU'RE WELCOME TO STAY IF YOU WANT, BUT THE REST OF THIS IS FOR US TO BE ABLE TO PROVIDE THAT TRAINING FOR THOSE THAT STILL NEED IT.

SO. ALL RIGHT.

WELL, LET'S KEEP ON.

ALL RIGHT. AND IF YOU NEED TO, WE WILL GET THROUGH THIS AS QUICKLY AS WE CAN.

ALL RIGHT. SO WELL, BEFORE YOU START THAT, THANK YOU, EVERYONE, FOR JOINING US TODAY.

THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR ALL OF THE PRESENTATIONS AND EVERYTHING THAT YOU ALL PUT TOGETHER FOR US.

THANK YOU, MICHELLE.

WHO'S THAT BACK THERE? THAT'S GARRETT.

DR. JACKSON. THANK YOU. DR.

JACKSON, I CAN'T SEE WITHOUT MY GLASSES.

BUT THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE TODAY.

OKAY. SO, AS YOU ALL KNOW, THE STATE LAW REQUIRES THAT YOU RECEIVE AN UPDATE ON CHANGES TO THE EDUCATION CODE AT THE END OF OR AFTER EACH LEGISLATIVE SESSION. YOU GOT PART OF THAT AND THE REST OF THOSE BILLS THAT WE JUST TALKED ABOUT.

BUT THERE ARE SOME MORE.

AND SO WE'RE GOING TO GO THROUGH THESE MUCH FASTER THAN WE WENT THROUGH THE LAST ONES.

ALL OF THESE ARE THE REST OF THE BILLS THAT ARE LISTED IN THE BACK OF THE BOOK THAT WERE WHAT WE CONSIDERED LOWER PRIORITY FOR FOR WHATEVER REASON.

SO WE'LL GO THROUGH THESE AS QUICKLY AS WE CAN.

WE HAVE THEM ORGANIZED BY PRIORITY.

I MEAN NOT BY PRIORITY EXCUSE ME BY CATEGORY, BUT SOME OF THEM DO BELONG TO MULTIPLE CATEGORIES.

AND WHEN YOU FLIP THROUGH THE BOOK, YOU WILL YOU CAN SEE ALL OF THEM BY A CERTAIN CATEGORY.

SO EVEN IF SOMETHING BELONGS TO MULTIPLE CATEGORIES, IF YOU WANTED TO GO TO SPECIAL EDUCATION, YOU'LL SEE EVERYTHING IN SPECIAL EDUCATION.

WE DIDN'T DO THAT WITH THE PRESENTATION BECAUSE WE DIDN'T WANT IT TO BE REDUNDANT.

BUT JUST LETTING YOU KNOW EVERYTHING IS THERE ON THIS ONE.

BUT THIS MAY NOT BE LIKE THE ONLY ASSESSMENT BILL, FOR EXAMPLE, BUT HB 1883 OH, LIKE THE SHOW, IT ALLOWS DISTRICTS TO CONSIDER RELIGIOUS HOLY DAYS WHEN SETTING ASSESSMENT ADMINISTRATION DATES, AND IT REQUIRES DISTRICTS TO PROVIDE ALTERNATIVE ASSESSMENT DATES FOR STUDENTS WHO ARE ABSENT IN OBSERVANCE OF THOSE RELIGIOUS HOLIDAYS AND ON DATES WHERE IN ASSESSMENTS ARE ADMINISTERED.

EXCUSE ME. AND I KNOW THE TEXT ON THESE SLIDES IS REALLY TINY.

WE JUST AGAIN, WE WERE JUST KIND OF REPRODUCING IT FOR YOU THERE.

IT'S IN THE BOOK AS WELL AND AGAIN ON THE WEBSITE ALSO.

SO UNDER ATHLETICS, WE HAVE A NUMBER OF THINGS.

A COUPLE OF THEM DEAL WITH HOME SCHOOL STUDENTS PARTICIPATING IN ACTIVITIES WHICH IS ALLOWED.

HOUSE BILL 699 REQUIRES OUR CLASSIFICATIONS FOR SCHOOLS 3A4, A5A WHATEVER TO BE BASED ON THE SAME FORMULA.

EITHER WAY THAT IMPACTS YOU.

NOT REALLY. US CHIROPRACTORS AND PHYSICAL THERAPISTS CAN NOW BE MEMBERS OF CONCUSSION OVERSIGHT TEAMS UNDER HB ONE 1002 UNDER HB 2084.

THIS GIVES SCHOOL DISTRICTS AND U-I-L THE ABILITY TO EXCLUDE SPECTATORS, SPECTATORS FROM U-I-L AND SCHOOL SPONSORED ACTIVITIES.

IF THE SPECTATOR ENGAGES IN CONDUCT THAT IS GOING TO HARM A REFEREE, JUDGE OR OTHER OFFICIAL.

AND THEN 3708 CREATES AN ALLOTMENT FOR HOMESCHOOLED STUDENTS WHO PARTICIPATE IN ACTIVITIES.

I'M SUPER OFFENDED THAT EVERYONE LEFT.

YEAH, YOU DON'T WANT TO HEAR THIS.

HB 2209 ESTABLISHES A RURAL PATHWAY EXCELLENCE PARTNERSHIP PROGRAM OR PREP TO INCENTIVIZE MULTI DISTRICT CROSS SECTOR, RURAL COLLEGE AND CAREER PATHWAY PARTNERSHIPS THAT ALIGN TO THE REGIONAL LABOR MARKET PROJECTIONS FOR HIGH WAGE, HIGH DEMAND CAREERS AND CREATES AN ALLOTMENT FOR THE PROGRAM.

SB 68 ALLOWS FOR DISTRICTS TO EXCUSE UP TO TWO ABSENCES PER YEAR FOR JUNIORS AND SENIORS TO GO AND SHADOW SHADOW PROFESSIONALS AND THEN PROVIDES THE DISTRICTS WITH ADA FOR THOSE DAYS. SOME BILLS THAT DON'T REALLY IMPACT US BUT AFFECT CHARTER SCHOOLS.

HB 1707 REQUIRES MUNICIPALITIES TO TREAT CHARTER SCHOOLS LIKE SCHOOL DISTRICTS FOR ZONING, PLANNING AND PERMITTING PURPOSES.

THEY ALSO EXTENDED THE I GUESS THERE WAS LIKE A LIMIT ON HOW FAR IN ADVANCE A CHARTER SCHOOL COULD NOTIFY THE COMMISSIONER OF THEIR INTENT TO OPEN A NEW CAMPUS OF 18 MONTHS.

[01:45:03]

AND THEN SB 2032 EXPANDS THE ENTITIES THAT CAN OPERATE AN ADULT EDUCATION PROGRAM AS WELL.

SB 2304 REQUIRES SCHOOL DISTRICTS TO PROVIDE INFORMATION ON THE TEXAS DRIVING WITH DISABILITY PROGRAM TO STUDENTS AND THE PARENTS OF STUDENTS WHO HAVE A DISABILITY THAT MAY IMPEDE THEIR COMMUNICATION WITH THE PEACE OFFICER.

HB 3991.

I KNOW I DID THIS.

THIS IS A HOLIDAY, AND MAYBE THIS CAN BE ON OUR CALENDAR FOR A PIER.

SO IT CREATES A STATE HOLIDAY.

SO IT KIND OF IS HAPPY FRUIT AND VEGETABLE DAY ON THE FIRST FRIDAY IN APRIL.

IT REQUIRES DISTRICTS TO PROVIDE APPROPRIATE INSTRUCTION ON THAT NEW HOLIDAY.

I'M GOING TO CALL IT A NEW STATE HOLIDAY.

SB 2294 REQUIRES DISTRICTS TO ISSUE DIPLOMAS TO STUDENTS WHO DEMONSTRATE MASTERY OF EARLY READINESS FOR COLLEGE THROUGH THE FIRST THROUGH THE TEXAS FIRST EARLY HIGH SCHOOL COMPLETION COMPETITION PROGRAM AND A COMPLETION PROGRAM.

DID I TYPE THAT WRONG? SB 1647 ALLOWS DISTRICTS TO USE AN EDUCATION MANAGEMENT ORGANIZATION TO PROVIDE DROPOUT RECOVERY IN-PERSON, REMOTELY, OR THROUGH A HYBRID PROGRAM SYSTEM THAT OUTLINES REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DROPOUT RECOVERY PROGRAM.

IT ALSO APPLIES TO DISTRICTS OR SCHOOLS.

ADA AVERAGE. ADA.

RATES TO THOSE STUDENTS WHO THEN COMPLETE THAT COURSE.

RIGHT NOW, WE'RE REQUIRED TO POST SIGNS RELATED TO HUMAN TRAFFICKING VIOLATIONS ON OUR AT EVERY ENTRANCE IN OUR ON OUR SCHOOLS, WHICH WAS THE SIGNS WERE PRETTY INSANE. AND ANYWAY, THIS WAS JUST THE REQUIREMENT TO BE IN A CONSPICUOUS PLACE.

THAT'S LIKELY TO BE SEEN BY EMPLOYEES AND VISITORS, NOT EVERY SINGLE ENTRANCE.

AND SO THAT'S SB 2069.

HB 1825.

THIS IS FOR DISTRICTS THAT THERE'S ONE DISTRICT THIS APPLIES TO, I BELIEVE, AND IT HAS TO DO WITH ALLOWING THE CONSUMPTION, POSSESSION OR SALE OF ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES AT AN EVENT HELD AT A PERFORMING ARTS FACILITY.

AND AGAIN, IT ONLY APPLIES TO ONE DISTRICT.

THE WAY THEY LIMITED THAT WAS BY SAYING IT HAS TO BE IN A COUNTY IN WHICH TWO OR MORE STADIUMS ARE WITHIN AT LEAST 40,000 OF AT LEAST 40,000 OR WITHIN TWO MILES FROM THE PERFORMING ARTS FACILITY.

I THINK IT'S ARLINGTON, BUT I COULD BE WRONG.

YEAH. HB 1789 ALLOWS DISTRICTS TO HIRE A PERSON WHO'S RELATED TO A BOARD MEMBER AS A BUS DRIVER IF THE BOARD APPROVES IT.

TO HELP COMBAT THE SHORTAGE.

SO IF YOU KNOW ANYONE IN YOUR FAMILY, WE'RE HIRING.

HB 4520 REQUIRES ASPECT TO REVOKE A CERTIFICATION OF A PERSON THAT'S CONVICTED OF SALE, DISTRIBUTION OR DISPLAY OF HARMFUL MATERIAL TO A MINOR, AND THEN IT ALSO MAKES THEM INELIGIBLE FOR THE RETIREMENT BENEFITS.

SB 798 MAKES IT TO WHERE A COUNSELOR ISN'T REQUIRED TO HAVE CLASSROOM EXPERIENCE FOR CERTIFICATION AS A COUNSELOR.

A DISTRICT COULD STILL REQUIRE IT, BUT AS FAR AS LIKE RECEIVING THEIR CERTIFICATION FOR A COUNSELOR, THEY WOULD NO LONGER HAVE TO HAVE THAT CLASSROOM EXPERIENCE PER THE STATE.

SB 1720 MAKES IT TO WHERE AN EMPLOYEE WHO REPORTS A THREAT TO A THREAT ASSESSMENT TEAM COULD DO SO ANONYMOUSLY.

AND THEN THAT REPORT WOULDN'T BE SUBJECT TO DISCLOSURE UNDER THE PUBLIC INFORMATION ACT.

OKAY. SO HOUSE BILL 2929.

THIS ONE'S CONFUSING. THEY KEEP DOING THIS.

THEY KEEP GOING BACK AND FORTH BETWEEN SAYING AT LEAST 25% OF THESE REQUIREMENTS HAVE TO BE THESE THINGS, AND THEN NOT MORE THAN 25% HAVE TO BE THESE THINGS.

AND THIS IS ONE OF THOSE.

SO THIS IS FOR COUNSELORS SPECIFICALLY.

I'M SORRY, THIS IS TEACHERS.

THE FIRST PART IS FOR TEACHERS. THE SECOND PART IS FOR COUNSELORS.

SO IT SAYS THAT CONTINUING EDUCATION ON ONE OF THE SPECIFIC TOPICS THEY LIST CAN'T BE MORE THAN 25% OF THE CONTINUING EDUCATION REQUIRED EVERY FIVE YEARS. AND THEN FOR COUNSELORS, IT'S THE OPPOSITE.

SO IT'S THE SAME STUFF AND IT JUST SAYS IT HAS TO BE AT LEAST 25%.

THIS WAS ACTUALLY A CLEANUP OF A PREVIOUS BILL THAT MESSED UP WHAT COUNSELORS WERE REQUIRED TO DO.

AND THEN WE HAVE A SERIES OF PROPERTY TAX BILLS.

THESE ARE THIS HAPPENS ALL THE TIME, EVERY PROPERTY TAX BILL.

YOU KNOW, THERE'S ALL KINDS OF DIFFERENT EXEMPTIONS AND THINGS THAT THEY WANT TO GIVE OUT FOR PROPERTY TAXES.

SO 40, 77 MAKES THE 65 YEAR OLD TAX EXEMPTION AUTOMATIC IF THE PERSON'S AGE IS ALREADY IN THE RECORDS OF THE APPRAISAL DISTRICT.

4456 CLEANS UP SOME LANGUAGE RELATED TO THE NO NEW REVENUE MAINTENANCE AND OPERATIONS RATE AND THE RATE TO MAINTAIN REVENUE MAINTENANCE AND OPERATIONS RATE SO THAT Y'ALL REMEMBER WITH YOUR TAX RATE PRESENTATION FROM KIM, YOU HAD LIKE ALL THOSE NUMBERS.

WE'LL HAVE ONE LESS NUMBER NEXT YEAR.

SO WHICH IS HELPFUL.

4645 PROVIDES A PROPERTY TAX EXEMPTION FOR ORGANIZATION THAT LEASES LAND UNDER A GROUND LEASE FOR IMPROVEMENTS CONSTRUCTED OR REHABILITATED BY THE ORGANIZATION FOR LOW INCOME

[01:50:01]

AND THEN 2289 ALSO CONTINGENT ON A CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT IN NOVEMBER WILL PROVIDE A PROPERTY TAX EXEMPTION FOR MEDICAL OR BIOMEDICAL PRODUCTS HELD BY A MANUFACTURER OF THOSE PRODUCTS AND TANGIBLE PERSONAL PROPERTY USED IN THE MANUFACTURING OF THOSE PRODUCTS.

AND THEN SB 2350 JUST CLARIFIES THAT ONCE A VOTER APPROVAL TAX RATE HAS BEEN ADOPTED, IT CANNOT BE CHANGED.

DISTRICT GOVERNMENT GOVERNANCE.

WE HAVE A DUPLICATE THAT WE MISSED.

1789 THE SCHOOL BUS ONE.

JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE YOU ALL REALLY CAUGHT THAT ONE.

UM, WE NEED SCHOOL BUS DRIVERS.

OKAY. 1959 IS ACTUALLY A BILL THAT WE TALKED ABOUT BEFORE.

THAT'S THE PEACE OFFICER TRANSFER BILL HB 2012 PROHIBITS SCHOOL DISTRICTS FROM PROHIBITING TEACHERS FROM DISPLAYING A COPY OF THE NATIONAL MOTTO IN THEIR CLASSROOMS. SO YOU ALL KNOW WE HAVE THE BILL THAT REQUIRES US TO DISPLAY THEM IN THE SCHOOL IF WE GET A DONATION OF THEM.

THIS PROHIBITS US FROM PROHIBITING TEACHERS, FROM DISPLAYING THEM IN THEIR CLASSROOMS. WE WEREN'T DOING THAT BEFORE.

TO MY KNOWLEDGE, THAT HASN'T BEEN AN ISSUE.

UM, 2892 REQUIRES THAT'S AGAIN, THAT'S THE SAME TRANSFER ONE FOR MILITARY SERVICE MEMBERS.

SB 2030 OR 232 THIS ONE'S INTERESTING.

THIS REMOVES AUTOMATICALLY REMOVES FROM OFFICE AN ELECTED OFFICIAL OF A POLITICAL SUBDIVISION.

IF THE ELECTED OFFICIAL ENTERS A PLEA OF NOLO CONTENDERE, WHICH IS BASICALLY I'M NOT PLEADING OR RECEIVES DEFERRED ADJUDICATION OR IS CONVICTED OF BRIBERY, THEFT OF PUBLIC MONEY, PERJURY, COERCION OF A PUBLIC SERVANT, OR VOTER TAMPERING WITH THE GOVERNMENTAL RECORD, MISUSE OF OFFICIAL INFORMATION, ABUSE OF OFFICIAL CAPACITY OR CONSPIRACY TO COMMIT ANY OF THOSE OFFENSES.

SO RIGHT NOW, THERE IS PRIOR TO THIS BILL, THERE WAS NO AUTOMATIC REMOVAL.

THERE WAS NO RECALL PROVISION FOR FOR MEMBERS OF SCHOOL BOARDS OR OTHER POLITICAL SUBDIVISIONS.

SO THIS IS THE FIRST ONE THAT THERE IS.

AND SO IT'S THESE OFFICIAL KIND OF MISUSE OF OFFICIAL POWER TYPE OFFENSES THAT WILL NOW RESULT IN AN AUTOMATIC REMOVAL UPON CONVICTION.

HOW DOES HOW WOULD THAT WORK? I MEAN. LIKE, DOES THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY COME IN AND.

WELL, AGAIN, IT'S ONLY AT THE END OF THE LIKE IT'S ONLY IF THEY'RE CONVICTED.

SO IF THEY'RE CONVICTED, THEY'RE GOING TO JAIL.

BUT YEAH, WE WOULD RECEIVE NOTICE.

SOMEONE HAS TO. OH, SO THE DISTRICT WOULD BE INFORMED.

WE WOULD RECEIVE NOTICE OF THAT.

IT WOULD AUTOMATICALLY REMOVE THEM AND THEN WE WOULD HAVE TO CALL AN ELECTION OR FILL THE VACANCY BY OUR NORMAL PROCESS.

YEP. AND THEN SB 763 IS THE BILL THAT WE REFERENCED A LITTLE BIT BEFORE, WHICH ALLOWS SCHOOL DISTRICTS TO EMPLOY OR ACCEPT AS VOLUNTEER A CHAPLAIN. BUT IT.

TO PROVIDE SERVICES, SUPPORTS OR PROGRAMS FOR STUDENTS.

AND Y'ALL WILL HAVE TO DO A Y'ALL WILL HAVE TO TAKE A VOTE ON THAT.

YOU GIVE ME A LOT. YOU GIVE ME A LOT IN A ROW.

SORRY. CAN YOU GO BACK TO THAT LAST ONE? YES. SO WE WILL HAVE TO VOTE ON THIS AT SOME POINT.

WHEN WOULD THAT BE? I BELIEVE WE'RE GOING TO DO IT AT YOUR SEPTEMBER BOARD MEETING.

THE CHAPLAIN. YEAH.

OKAY. YES, THIS IS.

OH, FOR SCHOOL LEADERSHIP.

HB 2012 PROHIBITS THIS IS A REPEAT TO ABOUT THE NATIONAL MOTTO.

SO WE'RE CATCHING SOME REPEATS.

SORRY, THERE ARE LOTS OF BILLS FOR SCHOOL SAFETY.

AND I WAS WATCHING SOME OF THE EARLIER ONES AND I WAS LIKE, OH, THAT'S ANOTHER DUPLICATE.

SO HB 2484 IS DUPLICATE.

HB 17 60 CLARIFIES THE LANGUAGE ON THE PROHIBITION OF POSSESSION OF FIREARMS ON SCHOOL PREMISES TO INCLUDE PROPERTY OWNED BY OR UNDER THE CONTROL OF A SCHOOL, AND EXPANDS THE PROHIBITION TO INCLUDE POST-SECONDARY INSTITUTIONS.

HB 1905 ALLOWS DISTRICTS TO MAKE NO COST SCHOOL SAFETY TRAINING COURSES APPROVED BY THE TEXAS SCHOOL SAFETY CENTER, AVAILABLE TO EMPLOYEES OF CREDIT, PRIVATE SCHOOLS OR CHILD CARE FACILITIES.

AND THEN HB 3628 ALLOWS DISTRICTS TO ENTER INTO AN MOU THAT WOULD ALLOW A SCHOOL MARSHAL TO TEMPORARILY ACT AS A SCHOOL MARSHAL AT ANOTHER SCHOOL DURING AN EVENT WHILE NOT AT THE SCHOOL, WHILE IT COULD BE AT THE SCHOOL DURING AN EVENT AT WHICH BOTH SCHOOLS PARTICIPATE.

SO A FOOTBALL GAME OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT IF YOU HAVE AN MOU.

I THINK THERE'S SOME OTHER REPEATS ON HERE.

UM, HB 4906 MAKES A PEACE OFFICER COMMISSIONED BY A SCHOOL DISTRICT, AN OFFICIAL AUTHORIZED PEACE OFFICER FOR THE PURPOSES OF ANY REQUIREMENT THAT'S RELATED TO THE

[01:55:03]

SB 133 PROHIBITS POLICE OFFICERS OR SECURITY FROM USING A CHEMICAL IRRITANT OR TASER ON A STUDENT GRADE FIVE OR BELOW, UNLESS THAT STUDENT POSES A SERIOUS RISK OF HARM TO THEMSELVES OR OTHERS.

AND THEN LASTLY, SB 999 PROHIBITS DISTRICTS FROM CONTRACTING FOR THE PROVISION OF ACTIVE SHOOTER RESPONSE TRAINING AFTER DECEMBER 1ST, 2024, UNLESS THAT PROVIDER IS CERTIFIED BY A NEW CERTIFICATION TO BE ESTABLISHED BY THE TEXAS COMMISSION ON LAW ENFORCEMENT.

HB 1926.

THIS WAS A PROGRAM THAT WAS CREATED LAST SESSION, THE SPECIAL EDUCATION SUPPLEMENTAL SERVICES PROGRAM, AND IT WAS SET TO EXPIRE.

HOUSE BILL 1926 ELIMINATED THAT EXPIRATION AND THEN ESSENTIALLY TELLS THE THE LEGISLATURE TO SET THE AMOUNT THAT'S GOING TO BE AVAILABLE UNDER THAT PROGRAM IN THE BUDGET. HOUSE BILL 1615 REQUIRES THE TEXAS WORKFORCE COMMISSION TO ESTABLISH A PRE-K PARTNERSHIP PROGRAM TO HELP PROVIDE PRE-K AT LOCAL SCHOOL DISTRICTS IF NECESSARY, AND TO DO PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT, THOSE KINDS OF THINGS.

AND THEN. HOUSE BILL 2729 ADJUST THE MINIMUM QUALIFICATIONS FOR PRE-K TEACHERS BASICALLY TRIED TO TRY TO OPEN IT UP A LITTLE BIT TO MAKE IT EASIER TO FIND PRE-K TEACHERS.

SO IT REDUCED A COUPLE OF REQUIREMENTS, BUT THEN IT ALSO REQUIRES A SUPERVISOR TO HAVE THE ORIGINAL REQUIREMENTS.

SO THERE'S A COUPLE OF CHANGES THERE.

ALL THOSE CHANGES SUNSET ON SEPTEMBER 1ST, 2029.

AGAIN, BECAUSE THIS IS INTENDED TO DEAL WITH THE TEACHER SHORTAGE.

SP 1008 INCREASES THE TIME ALLOWED FOR A PARENT TO PROVIDE PROOF OF RESIDENCY FROM 10 TO 90 DAYS.

IF THAT PARENT ESTABLISHES RESIDENCY WITH THE MILITARY TRANSFER ORDER.

HB 114 IS A DUPLICATE, SO HB 567 PROHIBITS ANY DRESS, CLOTHES, DRESS CODES, INCLUDING ANY FOR EXTRACURRICULAR ACTIVITIES FROM DISCRIMINATING AGAINST A PARTICULAR HAIR, TEXTURE, BRAIDS, LOCS AND TWISTS.

HB 337 ELIMINATES THE REQUIREMENT FOR A PERSON TO REPORT ALLEGATIONS OF HAZING IN WRITING AND ALLOWS THAT REPORT TO BE MADE TO PEACE OFFICERS OR LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES.

FOR STUDENT HEALTH.

HB 59 REQUIRES WRITTEN CONFIRMATION OF A STUDENT'S ABILITY TO SWIM FROM THE PARENT BEFORE ALLOWING THEM TO PARTICIPATE IN A WATER ACTIVITY.

AND FOR STUDENTS WHO CAN'T SWIM, IT REQUIRES THEM.

REQUIRES THE DISTRICT TO PROVIDE A FLOTATION DEVICE AND THEN ALSO VERY CLOSE SUPERVISION.

1002 IS A DUPLICATE.

HB 1297 REQUIRES THE TEXAS HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES COMMISSION TO ADOPT RULES THAT ALLOW FOR THE SCREENING OF STUDENTS TO BE CONDUCTED BY AN ELECTRONIC EYE CHART INSTEAD OF JUST A PRINTED EYE CHART.

AND THEN HB 4375 REQUIRES DISTRICTS TO PROVIDE INSTRUCTION ON THE USE OF DEFIBRILLATORS AND TO STUDENTS IN GRADES SEVEN THROUGH 12.

AND THEN ANY CPR INSTRUCTION ALSO HAS TO INCLUDE THE TRAINING ON THE USE OF DEFIBRILLATORS.

OH, STILL ME. SB 294 REQUIRES THE STOCK EPINEPHRINE EPINEPHRINE ADVISORY COMMITTEE TO EXAMINE THE REVIEW AND THE ADMINISTRATION AND ADVISE ON THE TRAINING OF SCHOOL PERSONNEL AND VOLUNTEERS ON THE ADMINISTRATION OF MEDICATION FOR RESPIRATORY DISTRESS.

THEY'RE BASICALLY GOING TO TAKE THOSE SAME KIND OF RULES AND COPY THEM OVER, INCLUDING ALBUTEROL LEVEL BURETEL ET CETERA.

AND REQUIRES SCHOOLS WHO ADMINISTER THOSE MEDICATIONS TO STUDENTS TO REFER THE STUDENT TO THEIR PRIMARY PHYSICIAN.

HB OR SB EXCUSE ME.

1506 REQUIRES TEA TO FORM TO CREATE A FORM FOR PARENTS TO SUBMIT A SEIZURE MANAGEMENT AND TREATMENT PLAN TO SCHOOLS.

AND IT OUTLINES VERY SPECIFICALLY ALL THE THINGS THAT THAT FORM HAS TO INCLUDE.

AND THEN SB 609 REQUIRES DISTRICTS TO ADOPT A POLICY REGARDING THE ADMINISTRATION MAINTENANCE ALLOWANCE, DISPOSAL OF OPIOID ANTAGONISTS AT EACH CAMPUS GRADES SIX AND UP, AND THEN ALSO ALLOWS THE DISTRICT, IF THEY WANT TO HAVE THAT SAME POLICY FOR THEIR GRADES AND SIX AND LOWER OR FIVE AND LOWER I GUESS.

AND JUST AS A REMINDER, OPIOID ANTAGONIST, THAT'S NARCAN, WHICH WE HAVE ON OUR CAMPUSES.

SO HB 473.

THAT'S THE THREAT ASSESSMENT BILL YOU HEARD ABOUT EARLIER.

AND THEN SB 798 IS THE BILL ABOUT COUNSELOR CERTIFICATION REQUIREMENTS.

HB 621.

THIS REQUIRES THE ASPECT TO ADOPT RULES TO CREATE A TEMPORARY CERTIFICATION TO TEACH CTE COURSES FOR MILITARY PERSONNEL WHO ARE HONORABLY DISCHARGED OR FIRST RESPONDERS TO WHO CAN THEN ESSENTIALLY TEACH THOSE CTE COURSES.

AND THEY SUBSTITUTE 48 MONTHS OF EXPERIENCE AS A SERVICE MEMBER FOR AN ASSOCIATE DEGREE OR 48 MONTHS OF SERVICE, PLUS 60 SEMESTER CREDIT HOURS FOR A BACHELOR'S

[02:00:06]

AND THEN THEY ALSO HAVE TO HAVE A MENTOR TEACHER FOR TWO YEARS.

AND THEN THE SP 544 REQUIRES THE SPO TO ISSUE A TEMPORARY CERTIFICATE TO A PERSON WHO ENROLLS IN AN EDUCATOR PREP PROGRAM IF THEY HAVE A BACHELOR'S DEGREE IN AT LEAST TWO SEMESTERS. EXPERIENCE AS A FULL TIME INSTRUCTOR AT THE COMMUNITY COLLEGE OF THE AIR FORCE.

SO THOSE ARE BOTH ABOUT TRYING TO ADDRESS TEACHER SHORTAGES.

THIS IS THAT TEXAS TEACHERS SCHOLARSHIP PROGRAM THAT WE TALKED ABOUT EARLIER.

THIS IS JUST THE MORE DETAILED SUMMARY OF THAT BILL.

TEACHERS. THIS REQUIRES TEACHERS TO PROVIDE OPTIONAL DENTAL AND VISION INSURANCE PLANS FOR RETIREES DEPENDENT SURVIVING SPOUSES AND SURVIVING DEPENDENT CHILDREN.

HB 1212. IT IS THE BILL ABOUT REQUIRING DOCUMENTATION FROM A CLERGY MEMBER AND THEN HB 3009 17 IS TRYING TO ADDRESS SOME TRUANCY ISSUES AND IT REQUIRES THE DISMISSAL OF A CHARGE FOR A PARENT CONTRIBUTING NONATTENDANCE IF THE PARENT COMPLETES THE TERM.

TERMS OF AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE PARENT AND THE SCHOOL DISTRICT WITHIN 30 DAYS OR LONGER IF AGREED TO BY THE SCHOOL DISTRICT.

AND THEN IT ALLOWS SCHOOL DISTRICTS AND PARENTS TO ENTER INTO THAT AGREEMENT AND ALLOWS TO TO ADOPT RULES REGARDING STANDARDIZED AGREEMENT FORMS THAT CAN BE USED BY STUDENTS. AND THAT'S IT.

YOU ALL HAVE ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT THOSE? NO, THEY'VE BEEN DOING THAT.

IT'S FOR 1225.

IT'S MINUTE FOR WE GOT THROUGH LIKE 60 BILLS AND 30 MINUTES.

THANK YOU. THAT WAS VERY EFFICIENT.

WE TRIED TO BE AS EFFICIENT AS POSSIBLE.

I WILL GET WITH MICHELE AND GET YOU ALL YOUR.

I'LL GIVE HER MY PROVIDER NUMBER SO WE CAN GET YOU ALL YOUR CREDIT.

SO. YEP. YOU'RE ABSOLUTELY WELCOME.

AND YOU'VE GOT YOUR BOOK, TOO.

IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS. WE'RE ALWAYS HERE, YOU KNOW.

YEAH, WELL, WE CAN TAKE HIM BACK IF YOU DON'T WANT TO, SO.

YEAH. I MEANT TO TELL Y'ALL BEFORE THIS MORNING TO BRING HIM, AND I FORGOT.

YOU DON'T WANT TO. WE WILL TAKE IT.

THESE ARE IN HIGH DEMAND. YEAH.

WE DID. THANK YOU.

THIS IS OUR.

* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.