The 4-1-1 on the August 16 Irvine Unified School District (IUSD) Board of Education Meeting

Board and Superintendent Reject Public Appeals for Transparency and modernization of policies

Aug 23, 2022

The Agenda and flow of the August 18 Irvine Unified School District (IUSD) Board of Education Meeting was standard. All 5 Board of Education Members were present as well as the Superintendent and his Leadership Team. There were close to 30 people in the audience when the meeting was initially called to order including Irvine Teacher’s Association President Sonia Kearney.

The meeting started with two special presentations followed by a budget update from John Fogarty. The first Special Presentation was formal recognition of “International D.A.R.E Officer Of the Year” who happens to be Irvine Police Department’s very own Officer Alex Mendoza. Stan Machesky presented the award stating that Officer Mendoza has been an officer in IPD for over 28 years serving this community. 12 of those years have been within the D.A.R.E program. Mr. Machesky shared “The way in which Officer Mendoza goes about teaching the program is what makes him stand out. It's not just about understanding how to resist the temptations of drugs- it's also about delivering that through the lens of empathy, gratitude, understanding, and the general understanding of how to be a good human being.” For officer Mendoza,

The job is not just about educating students around drug awareness it’s also about connecting with kids and bringing the police officers into the hearts and minds of our youth.

The second Special Presentation was announcement and formal recognition of the IUSD 50th Anniversary photo contest winners. Five honorees were present, accompanied by family members, to receive their awards. Each honoree had their photo taken with Mr. Walker and Mr. Glasky. You can view the complete list of Photo Contest winners and honorees here.

Several of those in attendance departed post the special presentations. Approximately 20 people remained in attendance- 7-8 of whom were IUSD staff.

John Fogarty followed the Special Presentations with good news to share about the Budget update. During his State Budget Update presentation, he highlighted that there have been material changes to the Budget which are favorable for IUSD summarized as follows:

$44.7 Million increase in funding for IUSD (above and beyond what was previously budgeted for);
- IUSD has full discretion over how to allocate ~$34 Million of the new funds
- A portion of the funds will be restricted meaning their use is prescribed/ ear marked toward certain areas of operation

Mr. Fogarty noted that this is the largest dollar amount they have seen for a budget increase since the implementation of the Local Control Funding Formula (LCFF) in 2013. The “windfall” will enable IUSD to continue doing the things they want to do on a more ongoing basis as opposed to on a one time basis. Examples of what the funds will be used for are:

Augmenting mental health services staff,
Reducing class sizes on a more permanent basis,
Hiring more staff at the k-6 level.

Mr. Fogarty paid gratitude toward the Board stating “All o f your [budget] advocacy was very appreciated.”

Mr. Glasky reminded members of the public of the following:

While this is a lot of money, it's important to remember just how underfunded we are compared to other districts. So while we're getting more than we had, we're still getting way less than most other similarly situated districts…. That's important to understand. We're still trying to do more with less than a lot of other districts.

Public comments followed Mr. Fogarty’s Budget presentation. There were a total of 4 public comments shared all from members of the public.

The first public comment was by Debbie Kamm pertaining to agenda item 11(a) Transparency of Litigation Against Students With Disabilities which she requested be placed on the agenda ahead of time. Prior to Ms. Kamm’s remarks, Mr. Glasky noted that whenever members of the public request an item be added to the agenda it will appear as a line item under Public Comments. Ms. Kamm’s comments start at the 39 minute mark of the meeting. Ms. Kamm shared that her reason for requesting “Transparency of Litigation Against Students With Disabilities” be added to the agenda is to bring exposure to how IUSD is less transparent than neighboring districts with regard to handling of matters of litigation against students with disabilities. Neighboring districts list cases pending/currently under litigation on their agenda along with the associated case number for the sake of full transparency. In these districts, the cases are reviewed by members of the Board during closed session and are brought to open session for the Board to vote on whether engagement in litigation or authorization of litigation is approved. She shared that Legal Advisors to Boards recommend the approach that neighboring districts are taking on this matter. She noted financial burdens and administrative costs can be high (in the millions) for these cases therefore the public deserves to know how much of their taxpayer money is expended on litigating against students with disabilities. By bringing transparency to the matter, the tax paying public is better able to form an opinion on whether the money spent on litigation against students with disabilities would be better allocated towards other educational programs/services. In closing Ms. Kamm requested that any cases involving litigation related to students with special needs be added to the agenda moving forward.

Response to Ms. Kamm’s request by the Board and Leadership was withheld until after all Public Comments had been shared.

Ms. Kamm’s comments were followed by IUSD Mom Robin Cowin who made an appeal for greater transparency in IUSD’s operations- particularly as relates to Special Education. Additionally, she raised concern about Special Education Board Policies being outdated leading to students being denied of the services they truly need and exacerbating the mental health crisis. She set the record straight that parents are asking for “the minimum- an aid for their children to participate in classrooms and remain safe”. Parents are not asking for “the sun, the moon and the stars” with their requests- this is a lie being perpetuated by Board and IUSD leadership. In closing, she requested that a collaborative task force comprised of Parents who are impacted, Teachers and District Leadership be formed to review and revise policies in the spirit of promoting lasting change that truly puts children first.

An IUSD mom, accompanied by her son who was observing the meeting to earn his Eagle Scout Merit Badge, made an appeal to the Board to reconsider the requirements that have to be met to participate in Physical Education Independent Study raising concern that they are not inclusive and are un-necessarily cumbersome. The current policy requires the student to be a nationally ranked athlete in order to participate in Physical Education Independent Study. She offered her daughter’s experience as an example. She shared that her daughter, who is in 8th grade, studies ballet for 2-3 hours a night and would benefit from ballet counting towards PE Independent Study. Ballet counting towards PE Independent study would give her additional time, during the day, to focus on homework and academics that is presently spent attending required PE class.

The last public comment was made by IUSD father Mr. Henderson who, by the sound of it, is involved in a custody dispute over his 3 daughters that are IUSD students. He raised concern that he has not been able to locate or see his 3 daughters for more than a year. He believes they were forced into virtual learning and are being denied services that they need. He requested the Board’s support in helping him locate his daughters noting that he had already filed a police report and has directed his concern to the Superintendent’s office but has not been able to get any help.

Board/Superintendent Response to Public Comments from Agenda Item

Ms. Kamm’s request that litigation involving students with special needs be added to the agendas moving forward was met with resistance by the Board. Ira Glasky, speaking on behalf of the Board, stated that there wasn’t any interest in putting forth a resolution on the matter. The Board did acknowledge settlements come before them for approval. Mr. Glasky stated “I think our staff does an excellent job in terms of resolution on cases and when issues come up.” Mr. Glasky then delegated a more formal response to the request to Superintendent Walker. Mr. Walker remarked that prior to Board offering their consent, they [the Board] are provided with the terms of the settlement agreed upon including parent reimbursements, attorney's fees, and contracts for educational services. He acknowledged disagreements exist at all levels of the organization on a variety of topics and special education is not impervious to that. He went on to share that expertise on Dispute Resolution has been added over the years to try and do a better job with this. He reminded the public IUSD does everything it can to keep its promise to provide the highest quality educational experience we can envision. He went on to complement the high caliber leadership and support provided for students in the District stating “we exemplify what many other districts aspire to become.” In closing out this topic, he reminded the public that how IUSD handles the matter is “a very common practice” but this IS an area IUSD is constantly looking at [in the spirit of continuous improvement].

The Superintendent’s Report and Board Member Read outs followed the public comments. During the Superintendent report, Mr. Walker shared that District Wide Professional learning has resumed after a more than two year hiatus due to COIVD. Teachers from all across the district- all grade levels and subject areas- as well as counselors and others were brought togethe

r very recently for a full day session. The intent of the session was to share and collaborate around “meeting the needs of all students through equitable instructional practices and get at some of the what and the how of ensuring we create those opportunities for all students”. It should be noted that this session likely had high emphasis on the Board approved explicit focus on Social Justice with frameworks from the radical Southern Poverty Law Center site learningforjustice.com as the guide. The session was facilitated by Catherine Holmes who works for Cassie Parham (Assistant Superintendent of Education Services) and is directly responsible for overseeing the implementation of Social Justice goals across the District as well as monitoring the progress towards those goals. I will be submitting a Public Records request to obtain the materials that were presented during this session.

Mr. Walker encouraged the public to check IUSD’s website for the latest updates and information surrounding back to school. He shared highlights on the opening of new “Well Spaces” at select IUSD campuses and Measure E improvements underway at multiple campus locations. He reminded everyone to remain vigilant in adhering to Public Health criteria and emphasized that IUSD remains vigilant in its mitigation strategies. He noted that year round program got off to a good start in July and IUSD is one of the few Districts in the state that offers a year round program. He wished everyone well with the first day of school (for traditional calendar) on the 22nd.

Board Members echoed Mr. Walker in their read outs. Cyril Yu reminded the public to use proper discretion, good judgment and take Public Health Protocols seriously when sending children to school conveying that the rigor of oversight for Public Health Matters is likely to be less this academic year than the past two years.

Items of Business commenced at the 1 hour 21 minute mark of the meeting:

23(a) Certify independent study courses provided through IUSD Virtual Academy Middle and High at San Joaquin Schools and IUSD Virtual Academy Elementary as equivalent in hours and rigor to the corresponding in-person District courses, and as aligned to the same local and state standards and approve instructional materials submitted for adoption.

Information and materials for this agenda item were presented by Dr. Rebecca Roberts, Principal for IVA Middle and High School and Director of Alternative Education, and Jeff Warren Coordinator for Irvine Virtual Academy Elementary
During the presentation on this routine annual item of business members of the public were reminded that virtual learning is not new to IUSD and was around pre COVID. 80% of the classes developed have been developed by IUSD teachers and administrators and course offerings continue to be expanded.
Middle and High School Virtual learning programs existed pre-COVID; Irvine Virtual Academy Elementary (IVA) came to fruition as an offering during the pandemic (2020/2021 school year)
Dr. Roberts shared that many middle and high school students continue with the blended learning approach post COVID- enrollment is close to 200 for the 2022/2023 school year.
At the elementary level IVA started out with 8,600 students enrolled in 2020/2021, fluctuated between 800-1200 during 2021/2022 and is currently at 200 for the 2022/23 school year. All 200 are returning families for whom virtual learning has worked well and is the preferred method. IVA has retained many of the same teachers since it was launched in 2020.

Mr. Glasky, before entertaining comments from board members and calling for a motion to certify the courses being offered, reminded the public that the virtual programs are “a continuation of the Board's commitment to provide our families with options- to pick one that works best for them, not only their student, but also the family as well.”

The Board unanimously approved certification of the courses as presented.

23(b) Accept the Superintendent's recommendation to approve contract extensions for Assistant Superintendents John Fogarty, Brianne Ford, Eamonn O'Donovan, and Cassie Parham, effective July 1, 2022 through June 30, 2025.

Contract Extensions & packages for the aforementioned individuals are as follows:

Term: July 1, 2022 to June 30, 2025
Annual Salary $232,040 plus longevity
Health Benefits package under the terms and conditions as set for all District employees

This item of business was introduced by Mr. Glasky at the 1 hour 32 minute mark of the meeting with opening remarks as follows:

We talk about our staff and our people. And we talked about how it's the people that make this district. And it really does start with our senior staff and the example- the leadership, the friendship that they've provided. It’s second to none.

Mr. Walker followed up Mr. Glasky with 7 minutes worth of comments emphasizing that his Senior Leadership team represents the best in their fields- not just in Orange County but in the state. His comments are paraphrased below:

They are a dream team for me….We talk about our 50th anniversary and the state of where the district is now… I've been here 12 years as a superintendent. As I look back, so many of the things that have been accomplished would not have occurred without their leadership, without their diligence and courage. Frankly, we are in a district where not a lot of people are saying “come on, let's go” we are already leading. We already exemplify what many other districts aspire to become yet we continue to push. We continue to refine and adapt what we do because we take the spirit of continuous improvement to heart. We know that that is how we protect and sustain the promise that we make to families and to our students too. That promise is to provide, literally, the highest quality educational experience we can possibly envision. And that's not a light lift. That is something we take very seriously.

Nine minutes into the presentation of this item of business, a motion was made for approval of the contract extensions and unanimously approved by the Board. Positive comments from Board members, about this agenda item, continued for another six minutes post approval.

A final call for Public Comments prior to meeting adjournment followed Items Of Business. There were two Public Comments shared which commenced at the 1 hour 46 minute mark. The public comments were made by myself & Debbie Kamm. I hadn’t prepared comments for the meeting ahead of time. I had planned to just listen and absorb the contents for this meeting. After what I witnessed from the Board and Superintendent in their response to public comments earlier in the meeting- not to mention all the aggrandizing that took place throughout- I felt compelled to address the Board with some comments.

My comments were in response to how the Board and Superintendent dealt with agenda item 11(a) Transparency of Litigation Against Students With Disabilities as well as how they have been responding to public comments shared during Board Meetings I have attended over the past year. I raised concern about the following:

Overall lack of transparency by the Board and Superintendent
Lack of interest in/willingness to entertain, by Board & Superintendent, what public has to say even when we’re bringing solutions to the table that coincide with the concerns we raise
Degree of hubris on display (this has become a trend at Board meetings) alongside failure to admit weaknesses and vulnerabilities within IUSD that members of the public are exposing

Ms. Kamm’s comments followed mine and provided a gentle reminder of what the Brown Act states by reading directly from it as follows:

“The people of the state do not yield their sovereignty to the agencies which serve them. The people, in delegating authority, do not give their public servants the right to decide what is good for the people to know and what is not good for them to know. The people insist on remaining informed so that they may retain control over the instruments that they have created.”

She closed by re-iterating that the Board is supposed to represent ALL of the residents of Irvine and it’s incumbent upon the Board to give regard to all public comments.

The meeting was adjourned at 8:24pm.