Sangamon Sun

Oak Park Elementary School District 97 Board of Education met April 10.

Here is the minutes provided by the Board:

President Spurlock called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m.

Present: Spatz, Spurlock, O’Connor, Liebl, Breymaier, Broy and Datta (arrived at 6:07 p.m.)

Absent: None

Also Present: Superintendent Dr. Carol Kelley, Assistant Superintendent for Finance and Operations Dr. Alicia Evans, Assistant Superintendent for HR Laurie Campbell, Chief Academic and Accountability Officer Dr. Amy Warke, Senior Director of Special Services Eboney Lofton, Senior Director of Administrative Services Dr. Felicia Starks Turner, Senior Director of Equity Dr. Carrie Kamm, and Board Secretary Sheryl Marinier.

Executive Session:

Breymaier moved, seconded by O’Connor, that the Board of Education move into Executive Session at 6:07 p.m. to discuss (Appointment, Employment, Compensation, Discipline, Performance, or Dismissal of Specific Employees or Legal Counsel 5 ILCS 120/2(C)(1), Collective Negotiations 5 ILCS 120/2(C)(2))

Ayes: Breymaier, O’Connor, Spatz, Liebl, Spurlock, and Broy

Nays: None

Absent: Datta (arrived at 6:07 p.m.)

Motion passed.

Open Session:

Spatz moved, seconded by Breymaier, that the Board of Education move into Open Session at 6:53 p.m. All members of the Board were in agreement. The meeting reconvened at 7:02 p.m.

Transportation Request For Proposals:

Alicia Evans explained that the current transportation contract is scheduled to expire in June of this year. She reported that the district has spent over $2,000,000 over the last four year for transportation and she was trying to find some efficiency. She shared the timeline of the bid process, noting that there were six potential bidders that expressed interest. The bids were opened on April 9, 2018. There were two bids for regular transportation and none for special education. Evans reported that the two bids were from our current vendor, Lakeview Bus and from North American Bus. She reported that the figures indicated that there would be an increase in transportation expenses over the next three years regardless of the company that the Board contracts.

Evans reported that she asked for an alternate bid that included eliminating elementary routes, staggering routes and shuttle routes, hoping to see some savings. Unfortunately, savings were not indicated as a result of these changes.

The Board discussed the alternatives and agreed that the Board will take action to approve one of the bids during the April 24, 2018 meeting, or no later than the May 8, 2018 meeting.

Public Comment:

Katy Jacob, an Oak Park resident, read a paragraph from the district’s recent transportation message and questioned the content. She noted that the map that is being used is wrong, and that children are being double counted. She noted that most of the children using the buses are being bused to the middle schools. Jacob suggested that half of the kids in the district do not take the bus to school. She shared that her child walks to school every day. She questioned why some of the schools would offer busing. She suggested that if the district makes a decision to send children to schools that are a distance from their homes, then the district should supply transportation. She suggested that the district not charge for bus service and asked the Board to reconsider the statement that was published.

Kathleen Priceman, an Oak Park resident, shared that she owns two properties in Oak Park and was a teacher in the district for many year. She shared that her family chose to live in Oak Park because of the schools, art and diversity. She shared that she usually does not attend Board meetings but felt compelled this evening after hearing that parents were going to speak out regarding transportation. She reported that 21 years ago when she was hired for the Spanish Immersion program, the district had one superintendent, one assistant superintendent and the work was done by the teachers.

Member Datta left the meeting at 7:17 p.m. and returned at 8:10 p.m.

Feighanne Hathaway, an Oak Park resident, brought her four children who walk to school. She expressed concern that the transportation audit did not address the busy intersections along Madison Street, like Ridgeland, and that it recommended that the children take public transportation. Hathaway said that she cannot allow her children to take public transportation or cross a four lane road. She asked the Board to think about safety before they remove the measures that were put in place by previous Boards.

Afshan Syed, an Oak Park parent and member of the Holmes School PTO, shared that the Holmes School attendance area is one of the largest areas, and 30 percent of the Holmes students rely on the bus service. She expressed concern for the safety of the children, the burden on the working parents, and the high traffic volume. She note that crossing guards are available near the school, but not for the entire route. She suggested that traffic in the near urban environment would not make for a safe route for our children, and noted that the traffic in Oak Park is vastly different than that in other areas of the state of Illinois. She suggested that the lack of busing would hurt the low income families.

Marshall Brown, an Oak Park resident agreed with the earlier statements and shared that many parents could not attend the meeting this evening because a student concert was being held at the same time. He said that the Board and administration have not presented themselves well in this situation. He noted that the community was not made aware of the consideration to stop busing until recently, and shared that most of the questions posed by the community have not been answered yet. He asked the following;

• What intersections were considered beyond the report?

• What about the police and the village? Was there input sought regarding the elimination of busing?

Brown shared that he has tried to communicate with administration and the Board. He even invited Board members to walk with him as he escorted his child to school, but his invitation was not acknowledged. He noted that the community still does not have answers.

Robert Taylor, an Oak Park resident and parent of a Holmes School second graders, suggested that the process went wrong regarding the transportation discussion and suggested that the district look at ways to fix the communication issue. He suggested that there might be room for efficiencies, like routes or working with the Village, and suggested that the district consider alternative modes and identify some of the crossings that might still be considered dangerous.

Meredith Schacht, an Oak Park resident asked for clarification on the length of the RFP for regular education. She reported that her son walks to Brooks Middle School, but her second grader takes the bus to Holmes Elementary. She also has a preschooler who gets driven to school and will ride the bus next year. Schacht wondered what the basis is to the statement that 5,000 students can competently manage their time, and noted problems with tardiness at Holmes School this year. She suggested that tardiness would be easy to track since it appears on the students’ report cards, and suggested that administration could have looked at the data before throwing this bomb into the community. She suggested that a lot of time and energy was wasted on this issue.

Kari McCarthy, an Oak Park resident explained that she lives close to the train that takes her to work, and bought in that area because she knew her children would be bused to school. It would take her two hours a day to walk her child to and from school. She shared her families schedule and explained that there are no extra hours in her families schedule or funds for extra support. She shared that her younger daughter had cancer and is not capable of walking a mile and a half to school. Last year her husband lost his job and they were able to manage thanks to their savings. McCarthy expressed concern for families that have less than her family.

Katie Hogan, an Oak Park resident and parent of a Beye Elementary student acknowledged the community members who attended this evenings meeting. She explained that she is new to the community and she was able to meet a lot of people this evening. She told the Board that they need to look at the proposal with both a financial lens and a value lens, giving consideration to the parent’s time, safety and equity. She shared that parents feel like the Board did not consider the value of busing. She shared that one Board member told her that the change would be an inconvenience and not a drastic change to our lives. She recommended that in the future, major proposals not be released over Spring break, and not advertised over Facebook. She suggested that if the communication is sent via Email then the families might be more open to the ideas.

David Dumas, an Oak Park parent and Math Professor shared that the transportation concern is an equity issue which would disproportionately affect low income families. He suggested that making this kind of change ignores the infrastructure and is an efficiency concern. He suggested that the district would be replacing a small amount of buses with a large number of cars, inconveniencing parents and neighbors, and would have an environmental impact on the community. He reference part of the statement released by the district on April 6, referencing that the existing busing exposes the district to legal issues because it is not required by law. He suggested that the district should be asking “what is our shared commitment to the community and shared commitment to education and puts real harm to the families.” He encouraged the Board to reject the transportation proposal.

Joshua Drucker, an Oak Park parent and Professor agreed with a lot of what he heard this evening. He suggested that if the busing was eliminated, the community might lose all that it might gain in short order. He would not have bought in his current location if there were no buses.

Matt Tushman, an Oak Park parent told a story about Juan the bus driver. Juan has been the bus driver near his home for about 12 years. When Tushman’s daughter was asked about Juan, she explained that he knows all the children by name, there is never any bullying on his bus, and Juan will always wait for the late child. Juan knows who should go where. Tushman expressed gratitude that Juan knows who they are and watches over them. Tushman noted that the communication on this issue was poor. He found out about the concern on Facebook and expressed concern that the community just approved a tax increase.

Christine Baker, an Oak Park parent shared a petition created by Afshan Syed and signed by 760 residents. She noted that many of the signatures included comments. Baker shared that she has done a lot of reading and looking into boards. She reminded the Board that they make decisions under the directive of the community, not the administration. She suggested that they find out the communities opinion so they represent what they want to focus on. She reported that she did support the tax increase so the kids would get more, and suggested that the community might have been open to this change if it had been brought to them for consideration sooner.

Steve Stein, an Oak Park parent was inspired by the community and what he heard. He shared that he has been in the community for two year, and came here for the schools, but stayed because of the bus service. He shared that in Chicago there were never block parties and he likes how the families that meet at the bus stops offer a sense of community.

Andy Lehman, an Oak Park parent shared that he recently moved here for the schools. His father was a school superintendent, so he appreciates that the Board must make difficult decisions. Lehman observed that the busing system is also about the community, and shared that he also knows Juan the bus drive. The buses make Oak Park a special place to live. He asked the Board to consider how to tailor efficiencies when making decisions. He questioned the district’s statement regarding liability and asked administration to look into the state law, suggesting that it covers children traveling to and from school when not accompanied by parents.

Carolina Fenske, an Oak Park parent shared that her children walk to school. She referenced the transportation audit and noted the reason for eliminating busing was to save money. He questioned how a non-local company could make a recommendation such as this, and noted numerous typos and errors in their report. She noted that the report indicates that rush hour is over when the children would be walking to school. She shared that there have been days when she is running late and drives to the school and noted that traffic is still a mess at that time. She suggested that with extra parents driving, it would only get worse. She expressed concern for the children who would have to cross the expressway at Lombard or Austin, noting that those intersections are not safe. Fenske suggested that the audit is incorrect and does not outline why we should eliminate busing other than to save money. She expressed concern that the district spent money on a report when the town is full of experts.

Amie White, an Oak Park parent shared that she lives close to school and is able to walk her children there. She shared that she is aware of at least one accident this year. She noted that although six buses bring the kids to school safely and on time, there are still a lot of cars. She would not feel safe allowing her five year old to walk alone. She suggested that if the number of kids walking to school increased and the traffic increased, she would fear for the worst. She suggested that the savings would not balance out. White suggested that this is a community issue and parents do not need additional variables at the beginning of the day.

Sean Flynn, an Oak Park parent and member of the Community Engagement Committee, expressed concern that the district asked for more money, saying that if the community did not support the referendum it would lose services, and then threaten to take away busing. He agreed that it is not a perfect system now and noted that one side of his street gets bused while the other side does not.

Victoria Peterson, an Oak Park resident with four generations of Oak Park public schools students, suggested that if the Board cooperates with the community, they will get cooperation in return. She called the district office recently and the person she spoke to was not aware that there are only three schools on the west side of the community. She indicated that in the past the community had Emerson and Hawthorne, but they are now middle schools. Peterson was a realtor for 25 years in Oak Park. She shared that a lot of the houses are in areas where there are no schools nearby. She suggested that if the district eliminated busing, the community would suffer. As a realtor, she would not advise someone to buy a home in those areas. She indicated that she would love for the Board members to walk from the furthest point.

Michelle Zavislah, an Oak Park parent acknowledged the Board for their hard work. She explained that it makes her mad that the community has been asked for money twice in ten years. Because of that, she cannot afford to pay more money to transport her children. She commented on how attractive the district office building is and said that she felt that it would be wrong to take away services after a referendum was just approved.

Kitty Conklin, an Oak Park resident expressed concern regarding the draft Financial Transparency Policy. She shared that she has a history in banking and preparing internal policies. She found the draft of the Financial Transparency policy to be poorly written. Conklin reviewed the past FORC minutes and believes that the draft policy has not been discussed at all by the FORC committee, although it was on the agenda in January. She shared that it is her expectation that the committee will review this document. She noted gaps in the policy, noting that the audience and the stakeholders for this policy are not clearly identified. She reminded the Board that all Oak Park taxpayers are stakeholders and it should not matter if a taxpayer has children in the schools.

She noted that the policy treats school funding and financial results in the same manner. She reminded the Board that these are two very different concepts. She recommended that the policy be clear about which of these items it is referencing. She also recommended that the policy identify significant initiatives that should be included in updates.

In the budget and performance to the budget section of the policy, Conklin recommended clarification on budget expenses and how to address over expenditures.

Conklin shared that she intends to attend the next Policy Committee meeting and asked the Board to make this a policy that truly has teeth.

Korrie Sandoval, an Oak Park parent shared that her child crosses Jackson and the expressway to get to school. She expressed concern for the children who would have to walk to school. She also asked the Board to consider the threat of abductions, robberies, and car jackings. She suggested that the children are too young to be walking to school.

Randall Sfue, an Oak Park resident shared that he sent an email to the Board concerning safety. He shared that he will be going blind in the next couple years and his wife also has disabilities. He asked the Board to take extended circumstances of the families into account when making a decision. He reminded the Board that the elimination of busing would affect the low income families and disabled people.

Monali Shah, an Oak Park resident read Board Goal 1, noting equity, inclusive and whole child, and asked the Board to consider this engagement as an example of how the community wants to approach this issue.

Debbie Eyasu, an Oak Park resident shared that she has been fighting school district for years. She expressed concern about the body language of one of the Board members when another community members talked about possible abductions. She questioned if the Board member has children in the district and if the Board members worries about the child’s safety.

Break:

The Board agreed to take a five minutes break. The Board reconvened at 8:30 p.m.

Discussion On Community Engagement Regarding Changes To Transportation:

Evans shared the details of the bid results and the Board engaged in discussion. Evans explained that the total cost of North American would be less than Lakeview. She reported that North American is located in Joliet and currently working in all suburbs. The company would need to purchase vehicles to accommodate the needs of District 97 and consider opening an office in this vicinity. Lakeview already has the vehicles in place and knows the routes. Evans shared that complaints are received on a regular basis, which is to be expected, but some administrators suggested that we try to find another provider.

Board comments included interest in an extension of the current agreement with Lakeview Bus. It was noted that both companies expressed interest in discussing ways to be more efficient. Concern was expressed that the bids came in about 20 percent higher than what the district is currently paying for services. Concern was expressed about the lack of interest from the other potential bidders, noting that timing might have something to do with it.

It was noted that North American was bidding on the current routes and would probably want to look for efficiencies. It was noted that the original renewal of the Lakeview contract increased by 3.5 percent.

Evans reported that the district keeps a log of issues, noting that buses were not sent where they were supposed to go; some are complaints about the drivers, etc. She noted that Lakeview is very responsive and always tries to find a solution to the problems.

Evans explained that shuttle routes were considered asking for four buses (two on each side of town), but no bids were received for that option.

Board comments included a suggestion that there might be a way to bus everyone in a more efficient way. Because of the 20 percent increase, it was suggested that the Board consider locking into a one year contract. It was noted that the community is interested in alternatives, it was suggested that the district work with the Village and consider options with the community.

Concern was expressed about the worry this topic has caused on the community. The Board acknowledged the communities feelings, and tried to explain that they had to follow a specific process, which included the bid process in order to come to a financially prudent decision. During that time, they were not able to discuss the process publicly or release a public statement. The community was assured that the Board had no intention of eliminating elementary transportation for next year. The Board tested the auditor’s hypothesis and determined that it was false. The Board will now put together an RFP that will include community input. With a 20 percent increase, the Board cannot say that they can continue with the he status quo forever. It was suggested that the Board consider changing the Transportation Policy to align with what we are currently doing.

It was reported that President Spurlock, Dr. Kelley, Alicia Evans met with the Village to talk about alternatives. They also considered traffic and bike safety. It was reported that the Village is happy to consider options and consider safe routes. Although potential traffic congestion was expressed as a concern during this meeting, the Village explained that they would have no way of gaging congestion unless the district actually stopped busing. The Village would have to hire a consultant to complete this kind of a request.

One year bids were suggested moving forward, as well as putting the request for bids out earlier in the year. Concern was expressed that the line item is increasing faster than CPI.

This item will return to the Board on April 24, 2018 for additional consideration. The Board will be asked at that time to make a decision on the length of a contract (one or three years), and decide on which vendor to contract (Lakeview or North American).

The Board was reminded that they need to accept the lowest qualified bidder, and that Special Education and General Education buses are two separate bids. Evans will confirm that this is true and was asked to verify the requirement to bus students who live more than a mile and a half away from school.

Interest was expressed in supporting families where the parents have disabilities. It was suggested that the Policy Committee review this request.

It was noted that the state reimbursement per student is $16 per year. A fee of $5 per student was suggested as a way to supplement this transportation expense.

A task force was suggested. Members Spatz and Breymaier offered to prepare a draft charge for review on April 24, 2018.

Action Items:

Approval Of Minutes From The March 13, 2018 Board Meeting:

Spatz moved, seconded by Broy, that the Board of Education, District 97, approve the minutes from the March 13, 2018 Board meeting.

Ayes: Spatz, Broy, Datta, Breymaier, O’Connor, Liebl, and Spurlock

Nays: None

Absent: None

Motion passed.

Approval Of Minutes From The March 14, 2018 Special Board Meeting:

Spatz moved, seconded by Broy, that the Board of Education, District 97, approve the minutes from the March 14, 2018 special Board meeting.

Ayes: Spatz, Broy, Datta, Breymaier, O’Connor, Liebl, and Spurlock

Nays: None

Absent: None

Motion passed.

2.2 Approval Of The Consent Agenda

Breymaier moved, seconded by Datta, that the Board of Education, District 97, approve the consent agenda as presented.

2.2.1 Approval of Bill List

2.2.2 Approval of Personnel

2.2.3 Disposal of Property

Ayes: Breymaier, Datta, O’Connor, Spatz, Liebl, Spurlock, and Broy

Nays: None

Absent: None

Motion passed.

2.3.1 Cancellation Of Current Ping! Intergovernmental Agreement

Spatz moved, seconded by Broy, that the Board of Education, District 97, terminates the current PING! agreement.

Ayes: Spatz, Broy, Breymaier, O’Connor, Liebl, Spurlock, and Datta

Nays: None

Absent: None

Motion passed.

Approval Of New Ping! Intergovernmental Agreement:

Datta moved, seconded by O’Connor, that the Board of Education, District 97, approves the PING! agreement as presented.

Ayes: Datta, O’Connor, Breymaier, Spatz, Broy, Liebl, and Spurlock

Nays: None

Absent: None

Motion passed.

Member Spatz spoke in support of the agreement, noting that he has been aware of the organization since it’s creation.

Approval Of Erate:

Liebl moved, seconded by Breymaier, that the Board of Education, District 97, award the eRate wireless access point contract to CDWG in the amount of $150,349 as presented at the March 13 Board meeting.

Ayes: Liebl, Breymaier, Spatz, Broy, O’Connor, Spurlock, and Datta

Nays: None

Absent: None

Motion passed.

Approval Of National Board Certification Cohort:

Broy moved, seconded by O’Connor, that the Board of Education, District 97, approves Oak Park District 97’s participation as an Illinois National Board Certification professional development district at a cost of $18,700.

Ayes: Broy, O’Connor, Spatz, Breymaier, Liebl, Spurlock, and Datta

Nays: None

Absent: None

Motion passed.

Approval Of Bids 3a, 3b And 3c For Holmes School And Life Safety Work:

Spatz moved, seconded by Broy, that the Board of Education, District 97, approves bidders and corresponding bid amounts pursuant to the life/safety and Holmes projects (Bids 3A, 3B, and 3C) as presented.

It was noted that members of the Facilities Advisory Committee reviewed these bids during their April 3, 2018 committee meeting, the three bids came in under the estimates, and there were no concerns expressed by the committee.

Ayes: Spatz, Broy, Liebl, Breymaier, O’Connor, Spurlock, and Datta

Nays: None

Absent: None

Motion passed.

Rejection Of Bid 3d Regarding Holmes School Construction:

Spatz moved, seconded by Broy, that the Board of Education, District 97, rejects the Landscaping/Fencing bid (Bid 3D).

It was reported that the Facilities Advisory Committee discussed this item during their April 3, 2018 meeting and had no objections. It was noted that the bid came in 60 percent above the estimates and the committee felt that the district can get better pricing. No scheduling delays are expected.

Ayes: Spatz, Broy, Datta, O’Connor, Breymaier, Liebl, and Spurlock

Nays: None

Absent: None

Motion passed.

Rejection Of Landscaping Bids:

Datta moved, seconded by Broy, that the Board of Education, District 97, rejects all of the District landscaping bids opened on April 2, 2018.

Ayes: Datta, Broy, O’Connor, Spatz, Breymaier, Liebl, and Spurlock

Nays: None

Absent: None

It was reported that this topic was discussed during the last Facilities Advisory Committee meeting. It was recommended that the bid be rejected and that the district explore the possibility of partnering with the Park District to complete the work, as they already maintain the athletic fields. Evans noted that another alternative would be to reject the bid as written, remove the references to pesticides and go out to bid again. Two options were recommended; rebid a 1 year contract that is status quo with no pesticides, or talk to the Park District about performing minimal maintenance at a dollar amount that they would agree to. That option would give them experience to see what the district would need for the following three years to bring the land up to par.

The Park District board met last week. They have not declined the opportunity yet, but would like a year to do an extensive analysis of our property and come back with a proposal.

It was reported that the original pesticide policy was approved by the Board in the 1980s. The motion passed three to two with one board member absent and one leaving the meeting prior to the vote taking place. Integrated Pest Management (IPM) was explained as a way to define what should and should not be used on the lawns. It was suggested that our current IPM is older and general agreement was that it should be updated. It was noted that the Park District, should they take on the districts lawn care would want to use the same standard for the district as they do for their own lawns. The district would need to adopt their policy or have a change to have input into the Park District’s policy. It was noted that the Park District used to outsource their field services and used to receive a lot of complaints. Since the care is in house, they have won awards for their fields.

Interest was expressed in considering ways to communicate the Board’s next steps.

Approval Of Memorandum Of Understanding With Opta On Sick Leave:

Broy moved, seconded by Spatz, that the Board of Education, District 97, approve the Memorandum of Understanding with the Oak Park Teachers Association that allows, in a non-precedential agreement, five teachers to use available sick leave time for the unpaid portion of their FMLA without substantiation by a physician.

Ayes: Broy, Spatz, Datta, O’Connor, Breymaier, Liebl, and Spurlock

Nays: None

Absent: None

Administrative Items:

2017-2018 Budget Amendment-

Alicia Evans reported that FORC recently discussed DSEB. She shared that the $10,000,000 line item needs to be changed to $7,500,000. She explained that the budget amendments can be done throughout the fiscal year, but it takes 30 days to complete the process, and they need to be submitted to ISBE by June 1, 2018.

Public Works Extension-

Evans reminded the Board that in January, 2018 they extended the Public Works agreement for 90 days. That agreement expired on March 31, 2018. The agreement allows the district to extend again for 90 days, and the Village will be approving the extension on their end next week.

Disposal Of Property-

Evans reported that there are books and miscellaneous equipment that needs to be disposed of, and asked the Board to take action on the provided list during their next meeting. She told the Board that similar requests will be coming to the Board in the near future.

Holmes – Av Bid-

It was reported that the Audio/Visual bid request is to support the new classrooms at Holmes School.

Revised 2017-2018 Year End Calendar-

Laurie Campbell reported that the original district calendar allowed for five emergency days. Since the district only used one of those days, the Board will need to take action to modify the year-end calendar. Campbell reported that the last day of student attendance will be a half day on June 1, 2018. The afternoon of June 1, 2018 and the morning of June 4, 2018 will be in service days for the staff. Campbell recommended that the Board approve the revised calendar on May 8, 2018.

Campbell noted that the district will have to take on additional expenses for busing on that day. Dr. Kelley assured the Board that Jeanne Keane has communicated the change to the summer program partners. Because of that, the Park District will start on June 4, 2018.

2018-2019 Board Meeting Calendar-

The draft Board Meeting Calendar for 2018-2019 was discussed. Concern was expressed about concerts being scheduled on Board meeting nights.

Policy Update-

Three PRESS policies were shared. It was reported that the Financial Transparency Policy was drafted by FORC back in September or October. The committee waited for feedback from the District’s attorneys before reviewing it again. The attorneys recommended moving forward with Board review. This is the first time that the Board is seeing this policy.

Board comments included a recommendation for inclusion of a budget adoption calendar. Interest was expressed in including an explicit item about the fund balance, including the taxing rates and/or the burden, noting that the district considered reductions but did not feel that it is appropriate at this time. It was suggested that if there is an industry standard, the district should be following it.

Suggested language included;

• The district will prepare it, demonstrate it, communicate it, and be informed by it.

• Consider language stating that the district will not go over budget.

Members Spatz and Breymaier will share the Board’s feedback with FORC and bring this item back for review on May 8, 2018.

The Policy committee reviewed the policy on Usage Fees and Community Partnerships. The drafts will be presented on May 8, 2018.

Interest was expressed in knowing how much the district is getting in revenue and how much is being spent in this area. It was suggested that the district meeting spaces could be available for a fee, but a calendar would need to exist so community groups would know when they are available.

Board Assignments:

Standing Board Committee Liaison Report Follow Up (As Needed –FAC, FORC, CCE And Claim)

Committee For Community Engagement (CCE)-

The committee created templates for a few different interactions (large meeting, coffee like events) and thought it would be good to have a video so there is consistency with the introductory message. The video has been completed.

Members O’Connor and Breymaier were scheduled to meet with the Irving PTO. President Spurlock offered to meet with the Whittier parent if an invitation is extended. Additional events include a one hour pre-board meeting event. Community members can also submit their comments via a special email address that is being monitored by the Board Committee Secretary.

Concern was expressed that the busing issue might be overshadowing these efforts.

Finance Oversight And Review Committee (FORC)-

Members Spatz and Breymaier were unable to attend the last meeting as were several committee members. The committee did not have quorum for this meeting.

Discussion took place regarding the inclusion of draft committee minutes being included in the board packets. It was agreed that inclusion of a meeting outline would be sufficient.

Concern was expressed about committee assignments for next year. It was agreed that President Spurlock will make the recommendations and the new assignments will begin August 1, 2018. It was suggested that in election years consideration should be given to ensure that one Board member assigned to each committee is not up for re-election.

Intergovernmental Liaison Report Follow Up (As needed – IGOV, COG, PTO Council, CEC, OPEF, Community Council, Tri-Board On Equity, Policy And Self-Evaluation) Ed Foundation-

It was reported that the Education Foundation held a successful event, however; no District 97 Board members were in attendance. It was shared that the Ed Foundation board felt like that was a vote of low confidence.

Superintendent’s Evaluation-

President Spurlock and member Broy, along with Dr. Kelley have been working on the Superintendent’s evaluation. Updates have been shared with the Board members throughout the process.

IGOV-

The next IGOV meeting will be held on May 19, 2018. It was noted that the Oak Park River Forest tour is scheduled on the same day.

Concluding Items:

Board Remarks-

A post bus issue topic was recommended. This would give the Board an opportunity to consider what could have been done better, and what they learned from the experience. Board members were asked to share their thoughts with Member Broy before the next Board meeting, and she will compile the information. It was suggested that this information be shared with the CCE committee and reviewed during an upcoming Board retreat.

The EDI process is moving along. The first review of the data will occur at Erickson Institute on May 14, 2018. The team is working on communication strategies and should be ready to share an update in about a month.

Felicia Starks Turner was congratulated for completing the Barbara Bowmen Fellowship program. It was reported that Carolyn Newberry Schwartz, Executive Director of the Collaboration for Early Childhood also completed the program. Barbary Bowmen was at the celebration to share remarks. Starks Turner and Newberry Schwartz met with the team weekly for 10 months to complete this task.

The Board members were reminded that the Ethnic Festival will be held on May 5, 2018, with the parade starting at 10 am. Board members were encouraged to bring candy. Members Breymaier, Datta and Broy will be in attendance. Member Datta will respond on behalf of the Board.

Day in Our Village will be held on June 3, 2018. It was suggested that the committee chairs be invited to participate, and interest was expressed in knowing if CCE will have literature on the Equity Policy. It was noted that the location of the booth may change.

Frustration was expressed over the recent bus situation. A Board member explained that for the first time he felt like there was an absolute unwillingness from the community to listen, and social media only escalated the problem. Concern was expressed about the level of bad faith in the community being toxic. It was suggested that the Board figure out how to harness it for the good.

Agenda Maintenance-

The draft agenda for the April 24, 2018 Board was reviewed and revisions were recommended.

Adjournment:

There being no further business to conduct, President Spurlock declared the meeting adjourned at 10:52 p.m.

https://campussuite-storage.s3.amazonaws.com/prod/735181/c9be791c-b8dc-11e6-bf0d-22000bd8490f/1775759/fdcb20ac-539a-11e8-9ef4-0a0344361b00/file/04102018.pdf