The 4-1-1 on the September 12, 2023 IUSD Board of Education Meeting
Board and Superintendent Buzz Word is "Affirmative Practices"
The Agenda for the September 12, 2023 IUSD Board of Education meeting can be found here. The video replay of the meeting can be found here.
The September 12 IUSD Board of Education Meeting was a standard IUSD Board meeting which followed the traditional flow for IUSD Board meetings. All 5 Board Members were present and the five new student Board Members for the 2023-24 academic year were present and introduced during the meeting. Both Cyril Yu & Terry Walker were absent for the August 22 Board meeting but were present on September 12. Cyril noted his absence was due to moving his oldest daughter into college in New York. Nothing was stated about Mr. Walker’s absence from the August meeting which marks the second time in less than a year that he has been absent from a Board meeting (he was previously absent from the February 21 2023 meeting). The meeting was called to order at 6:30pm by Board President Lauren Brooks and adjourned a bit after 8:30pm. A total of 4 public comments were shared at the beginning of the meeting and 2 public comments were shared on agenda item of business 24(b)Contract Authorization 2024 United Healthcare PPO/HMO Employee Group Medical Insurance-Employee Health Benefit Package. There was a special presentation given by Irvine Public School Foundation(IPSF) at the beginning of the meeting.
The Executive Vice President of the Irvine Public School Foundation introduced the theme for 2023-24 academic year: “The Future is Bright” explaining that with brightness and growth new opportunities are created. He shared that IPSF has given $100 million to IUSD since IPSF’s founding in 1996. Thanks was given to the City of Irvine for renewing their role in a three-way partnership between IPSF, IUSD & the city through a challenge match grant whereby the city of Irvine matches up to $1.3 million per year in donations received through IPSF. It was announced that the annual “Leaders in Education Forum” will take place on November 2 on UCI’s campus in the Beckman Center and Terry Walker will be one of the panelists speaking.
General Public Comments followed the special presentation starting with a public comment on a requested agenda item.
Requested Agenda Item Comment: Ms. Debra Kamm had requested, in accord with Board policies, an item be added to the September 12 agenda. Her agenda item was a proposal that IUSD use an in house legal counsel for Special Education in lieu of contracting out the legal work as IUSD does currently. Approval of the agenda item was granted by the Board which afforded Ms. Kamm and the Board opportunity to interact and engage in discussion of her proposal. She was afforded 3 minutes to introduce and explain her proposal after which the Board could ask questions and engage in discussion. In her opening remarks, Ms. Kamm shared that she is a candidate running for the vacant Vice President role on the Community Advisory Committee- a state mandated committee which serves as an advisory board for the Special Education budget and services. She stated that her proposal was generated in response to repeatedly hearing the Board and Administration talk about how IUSD is underfunded. By bringing Special Ed legal in house, Ms. Kamm suggests that not only would IUSD reduce expenses, IUSD would gain an additional layer of special education oversight. She explained that other school Districts have accumulated savings through doing this because external law firms contracted with are incentivized by the number of billable hours they can accumulate and not by what’s in the best interest of the special education students, families and teachers. The rate charged for such contracted out billable hours can be highly variable from firm to firm- some charging more than $1000 per billable hour paid for via our tax dollars. Ms. Kamm provided datapoints to support her proposal noting that the San Bernardino County West End Selpa garnered a savings of over $350,000 in one year through shifting to utilization of in house legal counsel. Upon conclusion of Ms. Kamm’s comments, board members Yu, Bokota and Brooks posed their questions which were addressed by Ms. Kamm in a discussion period spanning approximately 4 minutes. In closing out the requested agenda item discussion, Ms. Brooks (with support of her board peers) directed Terry Walker to look into the matter and provide a comparison so the Board can “dig deeper”. Mr. Walker agreed that he would make a comparison available for the Board to review. A timeline for when this information will be provided to the board was not established during the discussion.
After Ms. Kamm concluded public comments on her proposed agenda item, Esther Morales followed. Ms. Morales introduced the Community Advisory Committee (CAC) and expressed appreciation for the opportunity to lead it for the 2023-2024 academic year as President. She explained the purpose of the committee and touched on goals for the year highlighting upcoming events and meeting dates. She encouraged attendance of the CAC meetings and noted that childcare will be available for the meetings and accommodations can be made for those who request them ahead of time. She thanked the IUSD Board for their support and the parent volunteers that serve on the committee.
Ms. Kamm followed Ms. Morales with general public comments not related to her earlier proposal. During her general public comments, she provided further clarification on the role of the Community Advisory Committee which Ms. Morales had spoken about emphasizing that the Committee meetings are open to all members of the public whether you have a child with special needs or not. She went on to raise concern that transparency in the District’s Alternative Dispute Resolution process is lacking and a conflict of interest exists. IUSD does not have an independent director for Alternative Dispute Resolution. The current director is part of the Special Education Services department and is ALSO the arbiter of disputes related to denial of Special Education Services hence the conflict of interest. Ms. Kamm noted that other Districts maintain an independent director of Alternative Dispute Resolution. In IUSD, when special education families who have been denied services enter into the appeals/ Alternative Dispute Resolution process they are met by the very same person that denied them the services to begin with. Ms. Kamm concluded by urging the Board to bring more transparency to the process and be more forthright with families engaging in Alternative Dispute Resolution.
IUSD Education Specialist & Irvine Executive Board member & PTA member Shelley Bittner followed Ms. Kamm with public comments. Ms. Bittner did not have any requests of the Board rather she opted to focus on the positives of IUSD noting that very often public comments are focused on what IUSD is not doing well. She offered praise for the Special Education staff, special education process and the essentials classes offered to Special Education students. She noted that her autistic son has had a very positive experience at IUSD and the staff go above and beyond to prioritize her son’s well being and keep Shelley and her husband informed of his progress. She acknowledged challenges do arise but she “trusts that IUSD Staff have my kid's best interests at heart”.
Upon conclusion of Public Comments, and, as per the annual tradition for the September Board meeting, the 2023-24 IUSD Student Board Members were introduced. Four of the student Board members are new and one is returning from last year- Woodbridge’s Student Board Member Shrinidhi Sriram. One is a sophomore, the rest are seniors. Each of the five shared updates on the happenings around their campuses and focus areas of their schools for the year. It was reported that back to school festivities were a success and the athletics programs are in full swing with Varsity Girls Flag Football off to a great start in its inaugural season. The University High Student Board member alerted the Board to a car crash in the parking lot that had recently taken place and gave the students and staff on campus quite a scare. Emergency services responded appropriately. Building a strong sense of community for 2023-24 school year was a common theme amongst all the read outs.
The Superintendent’s report and individual board member reports followed the Student Board Member reports. The substance of those read outs is consistent with past Board Meetings: praise of how good IUSD is being the only school district in OC to have 4 high schools in the US News & World Report top 100 High Schools Rankings (Portola High was the only school that didn’t make the cut), praise of staff, praise of IUSD’s continuous improvement efforts, praise of IUSD’s excellence in equity/diversity/inclusion efforts, praise of the Panorama system surveying students social emotional well being (launched during 2022-23 school year). In a rare moment of humility on display by the Board, Mr. Bokota acknowledged “there are always ways we can improve upon the mistakes we've made and that we'll continue to make. But I'm very proud of the commitment we've had to that [improving upon the mistakes made].” All Board Members shared that they attended a Mental Health Summit put on by IUSD prior to the start of the academic year and gave it rave reviews.
The Board and Administration buzz word for 2023-24 is “affirming” and/or “affirmative practices”- it was used by Mr. Walker and Board Member Kim during their respective read outs. IUSD’s standard buzz words were also used and repeated throughout the meeting. “Social Emotional” was used at least 4 times during Board and Administration read outs & “Mental Health” 19 times. Mr. Walker did not skip an opportunity to place emphasis on “equity” in his read out and made reference to “inclusion” multiple times.
Items of Business followed Superintendent and Board read outs.
Items of Business discussed during this meeting were:
24 (a). Approval of Unaudited Actuals Financial Report – 2022-23- Presentation was made by John Fogarty IUSD Assistant Superintendent of Business Services. The slides used for Mr. Fogarty’s presentation can be found here. The Board voted 5-0 to approve the Unaudited Actuals. Highlights from this agenda item are as follows:
Unaudited Actuals represent the final step in closing out IUSD’s fiscal performance during the 2022-23 academic year and are reported to the State on an annual basis.
IUSD’s annual budget runs upwards of $570 million. Mr. Fogarty reported that IUSD’s fiscal performance relative to budget was “Positive”
IUSD received $2M more in “Unrestricted*” revenue than what was initially budgeted for a total of $411M in “Unrestricted*” funds received. The increase was a result of additional lottery funds received & interest earned on investments; In addition Mr. Fogarty noted COVID funds are still trickling in from the state
IUSD received more $ than initially budgeted in “Restricted*” revenue due to receiving more funds through state discretionary block grants associated with arts/music/instructional materials which the state had originally indicated they would be cutting.
IUSD’s opening of 10 new schools in 12 years has qualified it for an additional apportionment from the State Fund which amounts to about $200 million***. That money is meant to be used on “deferred maintenance and modernization of those new schools as the need arises”. The funds are available for IUSD to utilize at those facilities. In addition there are funds from a mitigation agreement [previously signed] with Irvine Company which guarantees funds to cover modernization and deferred maintenance costs.
Expenditures came in slightly lower than budgeted due to savings on utilities and salaries
According to Mr. Fogarty- 97% of all funding received goes directly to support students- expenditures related to counselors, psychologists, health & occupational therapists & physical therapists are counted towards services that support students.
Figure 1- Break Out of General Funds Provided during Mr. Fogarty’s presentation on Unaudited Financials
24(b). Contract Authorization 2024 United Healthcare PPO/HMO Employee Group Medical Insurance-Employee Health Benefit Package while containing Rising Cost; The Benefits Management Board (BMB) opted to go with United Healthcare as the medical provider for the HMO and PPO plans for the 2023/2024 plan year over Blue Shield based on the proposals received. After hearing 2 public comments on this agenda item (summarized below) the Board voted 5-0 to Authorize the Assistant Superintendent of Business Services to enter into contract with United Healthcare PPO/HMO Employee Group Medical Insurance for the plan year January 1, 2024 through December 31, 2024.
Public Comment 1: Mark, a long time Music Teacher in IUSD and presently a Vista Verde Instrumental Music & Band instructor, shared his distaste for the Benefit Management Board’s (BMB) decision to drop their insurance provider from IUSD’s benefit plans. His whole family presently obtains Health Insurance coverage through Mark’s IUSD benefits package. He implied that little to no regard was given to what the staff had to say in the BMB’s decision making process. He spoke of the difficulty associated with switching to a new insurance provider expressing that this was underestimated by the BMB. He is unhappy that his family’s long time established relationships with doctors will be disrupted and the change in insurance provider will make it excessively difficult to find specialists that will accept the new plan. He expressed concern for the high out of pocket costs his family will incur under the new plan.
Public Comment 2: Michelle, Mark’s wife, echoed Mark’s concerns. She elaborated on the BMB decision noting that the BMB’s communication to staff on the employee group medical insurance provider decision was poor. She shared concern over being able to maintain her health and well being with the abrupt change in coverage the BMB’s decision has forced her into. She has a rare life-threatening illness that requires regular specialized medical care. Having to switch healthcare providers is a predicament and a nightmare scenario for her as she has no guarantee that she will have continuity of care and coverage. She reports that no amount of individual advocacy is enough to solve this problem IUSD that has created for her family and other families. She emphasized “We should not sacrifice our teachers, the employees, their families, the health of their kids which may have special needs that require the attention of specialists.”
Given this was public commentary shared on an agenda item, the Board and Staff are allowed to respond. Assistant Superintendent of Human Resources, Eamonn O’Donovan, addressed the concerns by stating that there is a 98% overlap in the coverage employees will receive and employees shouldn’t be losing coverage through the transition. He indicated the BMB shopped around to find the best plans offering the most coverage for an affordable price. He noted reducing cost was a BMB top priority in the decision making process as the escalating benefit costs of 8-10% per annum are not sustainable.
24(c). Measure E Renewal of Independent Citizens’ Oversight Committee Members- Annual routine item of business- The Board voted 5-0 to renew member terms of the Measure E Independent Citizens Oversight Committee as presented.
As there were no public comments at the end of the meeting, Board President Lauren Brooks called the meeting to adjournment after approval of agenda item 24(c).
APPENDIX
*Unrestricted revenue is money that comes into the District (most often from State level) which can be allocated by IUSD to IUSD’s areas of need as approved by the Board. Teacher salaries & labor costs fall under unrestricted revenue.
** Restricted revenue is money that flows in from the state that is earmarked by the state to cover specific costs at the local level. IUSD must apply those funds to the areas designated by the state.
*** I’m in the process of digging into this apportionment received as well as the mitigation agreements with Irvine Company that were referenced by Mr. Fogarty during his presentation. I hope to do a Substack post dedicated to this topic once I’ve gathered all the pertinent information
Disclaimer to Readers for the sake of full transparency: I have not attended an IUSD Board meeting in person since March 13, 2023. Although I have not been attending in person, I have come to learn what to expect during each of the meetings as a result of attending every single meeting in person from June of 2021- March 13 2023. These meetings operate on a schedule with certain topics ear marked for certain months on an annual basis. I still plan to attend in person as my schedule allows. This report was prepared for you based on watching the live stream, the on demand replay, and reviewing the meeting transcript. Although our daughter is no longer a student within IUSD, I maintain a vested interest in keeping up with what is happening in the district and what is discussed during the Board meetings because what is discussed in these meetings affects everyone in the community and is emblematic of emerging trends we all need to be aware of. I find that I often get a better information on policies being implemented at State/County/City level from following IUSD Board meetings and other school board meetings than from scouring news sources.
If one is looking to get involved in civics and local community matters, keeping up with Board Of Education meetings is where I recommend you start. Even if you aren’t able to attend the meeting in person, live stream and on demand are available for you to watch as your schedule allows. If you have public comments to share but cannot attend in person, you can email your comments to the Board ahead of the meeting. Board member email addresses can be found here. Please know that if you email your comments ahead of the meeting and do not attend the meeting in person, your comments will NOT be read aloud during the meeting. That stated, your comments will be “on record” even though not read during the meeting. Getting things “on record” is one means of holding our elected officials to account. It’s possible reference will be made during the live meeting to having received email comments. Per the Brown Act, the Board is not allowed to have discussion about public comments at the meeting.