The vote was postponed

The vote was postponed

The vote was postponed

The vote was postponed

• Janelle Ruley of Young, Minney & Corr shared her presentation on the Brown Act
• Christina asked how prominently meetings needed to be posted at the school. Janelle shared that there isn't a strong requirement about posting prominently
• Karla shared that a common challenge is commenting on Google documents

• Mike from EdTec introduced himself
• Bryce & Mike shared the EdTec materials 
• Siobhan asked about historical precedents for such large influxes of funding. Bryce shared that it has occasionally happened in the past when the state has had a large budget surplus, and there is a challenge of making good use of one-time funding without creating structurally recurring expenses. 
• Monte asked for what a budget without one-time funding might look like, to help with planning ongoing/structural expenses. Bryce shared that because we're spending $785k of one-time funding this year, the budget this year would show a $500k operating loss this year (without one-time funds). Bryce also shared that because they don't expire for several years, we have plenty of time to plan a soft landing, and that one-time funds have historically been extended several times. 
  • Monte urged the group to keep an eye on that adjusted number in the future, as an alternative view on the budget. 

• Bryce shared that unaudited actuals show the close out of the last fiscal year, based on the best information we have at the time. They match the numbers just presented in the board materials. They are ultimately filed at the state level. After this, auditors will review all of our numbers, and either sign off or adjust them. 

• Cynthia shared that our fiscal policy includes language around several positions that aren't used anymore. We also have several direct services (speech, special educations services, and counselors, and SFUSD rent) each month that are above $15k and so require board sign off - but there's an opportunity to streamline. 
• Monte shared that he and Nick reviewed the updated policy, and aimed to allow routine checks to go through, while requiring oversight on large-ticket items. 
• Nick shared that there are already so many checks and balances, that increasing the cap to $50k is warranted: it would improve business processes without sacrificing any oversight. He also shared that EdTec advised on our policies, and can continue to advise us if we need to make further revisions. 
• Nick shared that his spending limit in a similar job is $100k. 
• Christina asked about the petty cash fund, since it seemed so small compared to the $50k limit. Cynthia shared that the school doesn't keep petty cash today.

• Karla gave the board an overview of how to use Board on Track

• Nick suggested that because we are transitioning from a very strong co-chair, and because the chair/vice-chair just left, it may make sense to have two co-chairs who combine deep charter school experience & long-standing experience on the board. 
• Karla shared that she feels passionate about supporting Mission Prep. As a head of school of a single-site charter in Oakland, she knows how heavy the load is for a new ED. Karla shared that two co-chairs may add more logistics for the board chair.
• Daniel shared that he has served on the board for 3 years as secretary, on the academic committee, and leading the executive director search committee. He shared that he would happily serve as board chair to bring more continuity and institutional memory to the position. The goal would be to build committees & support the board as they get to know more of the school & school history, and support other board members to take over after filling the remainder of Sam's term in a year. 
• Siobhan shared enthusiasm to be a support to whoever is elected to board leadership. 
• Cynthia suggested that we vote only for the chair, and vote for the vice-chair at the next meeting since it was not on the agenda. 
• Cynthia asked that the board not nominate co-chairs & not nominate a chair to serve less than a full term

• Annice shared SBAC results CAASPP. 
  • She shared that the criteria used for renewal is in relation to the state average. 
  • Although there are state results for 2021, they are not representative because not everybody tested (they will also, for that reason, not count for renewal decisions. 
  • 2022 state results will be out in December
• Karla asked about what difficulties the school experienced with SWDs participating in the test. 
  • Cynthia shared that some students participated in placements this year. 
  • Cynthia also shared that the total number of SWDs is small, so individual students make a big impact on the participation percentage. The same is true for Black and African American students 
  • We also had some students test outside of the window. 
• Karla shared that the results for recent years are strong, compared to what she's seeing in other schools (even thought that info is embargoed for now)
• Daniel asked about whether we have other benchmarks to compare ourselves against, while we wait for a state SBAC benchmark (e.g., NWEA tests). 
  • Annice shared that NWEA won't be a good comparison because they are all benchmarked against grade-level standards that were developed before the pandemic. 
  • She shared that state results will not be strong as previous years when they are available in December