Prior to the vote, Mr. Solkovits, Ms. Malconian, and Mr. Kofahl stated that they will vote to return to in-person Board Meetings.  

Mr. Wright noted that if there is an outbreak of COVID, the Board will not meet in person. 

Prior to Vote, Mr. Solkovits nominated Mr. Wright for Board Chair.  

Mr. Wright accepted the nomination.  No other Members nominated. Nominations Closed via vote.  

Prior to Vote, Ms. Ibach nominated Ms. Ramirez for Board Vice Chair.  

Ms. Ramirez accepted the nomination.  No other Members nominated. Nominations Closed via vote.  

Prior to Vote, Mr. Wright nominated Ms. Malconian for Board Secretary.  Ms. Malconian accepted the nomination.  No other Members nominated. Nominations Closed via vote.  

Prior to Vote, Mr. Wright nominated Mr. Hussey for Board President.  

Mr. Hussey accepted the nomination.  No other Members nominated. Nominations Closed via vote.  

Prior to Vote, Ms. Malconian nominated Mr. Wood for Board Chief Financial Officer.  Mr. Wood accepted the nomination.  No other Members nominated. Nominations Closed via vote.  

Prior to the Vote on the establishment of overall committees, discussion ensued on whether or not the Board wanted to vote to make the Capitalization Projects Committee a Standing Committee as it had been an "Ad Hoc" committee.  

Mr. Wright Moved to make the Capitalization Projects Committee a Standing Committee; Mr. Solkovits seconded the Motion.

The Board members voted 6 Aye 0 Nay with 1 member absent to approve the Capitalization Projects Committee a Standing Committee for the 2022-2023 academic year.

Vote results were as follows:

Ibach - Yes

Lopez-Vargas - (absent)

Kofahl - Yes

Malconian - Yes

Ramirez - Yes

Solkovits - Yes

Wright - Yes

Prior to final Votes on Board Committees' General Membership and Chairpersons, Board members self-nominated and/or nominated other Board members to EACH Committee established for the 22-23 academic year.  After each committee's membership was nominated, moved, voted on, and approved, committee members self-nominated and/or were nominated for respective committees' chairperson position.

The following results comprise the duly nominated and elected membership of each committee, as well as each committee's respective chairperson for the 22-23 academic year:

Executive Director Evaluation (Standing)

Elected Members:  Ibach, Ramirez, Kofahl  

Elected Chairperson: Ibach

Capitalization Projects (Standing) 

Elected Members: Wright, Ramirez, Malconian

Elected Chairperson: Ramirez

Finance & Investments (Standing)

Elected Members:  Malconian, Ramirez, Lopez-Vargas

Elected Chairperson: Malconian

School Site Safety (Standing) 

Elected Members: Solkovits, Wright, Kofahl

Elected Chairperson: Wright

Travel (Ad Hoc)

Elected Members:  Wright, Kofahl, Ramirez

Elected Chairperson: Kofahl

Technology (Ad Hoc)

Elected Members: Wright, Malconian, Ramirez

Elected Chairperson: Wright

Instruction and Data Analysis (Ad Hoc)

Elected Members: Solkovits, Wright, Ibach

Elected Chairperson: Solkovits

Athletics Oversight and Support (Ad Hoc)

Elected Members: Malconian, Ramirez, Wright

Elected Chairperson: Wright

Facilities Maintenance Operations and Support (Ad Hoc)

Elected Members: Wright, Ramirez, Kofahl

Elected Chairperson: Wright

Prior to the vote, Mr. Wood presented the Actuary Review as prepared by Mr. Brett Schwab, and as had been presented in greater detail during the Finance and Investment Committee meeting.

Highlights included:

* These balances are reported to ECRCHS's auditors.

OPEB Account as of End of June, 2021:

APBO Actives $25,844,855

Retirees $6,852,583

Total $32,697,438

Fair Value of Plan Assets: $21,250,357

Unfunded APBO $11,447,081

Funded Percentage End of June, 2021:  65.0%

OPEB Account as of End of June, 2022:

APBO Actives $19,600,428

Retirees $6,603,212

Total $26,203,640

Fair Value of Plan Assets: $20,459,440

Unfunded APBO $5,744,200

Funded Percentage End of June, 2021: 78.1%

Mr. Wood noted that based on investing $2.6M annually, ECRCHS is a little over two years away from fully funding the OPEB account and would then no longer need to invest $2.6M annually into the OPEB account as long as ECRCHS continues to manage actuarial expectations. 

Mr. Wood then discussed page 4 - Reconciliation of OPEB Assets, noting an over $3.4M loss 

Mr. Wood then discussed current and non-current liabilities for 2021 and 2022, and expected benefits payments for the next ten fiscal years. 

Finally, Mr. Wood then reviewed OPEB retirement Census data and eligibility for active employees (237 currently and/or potentially eligible) and retirees (27) who are currently benefits-receiving/eligible. 

Mr. Wood then noted that these numbers will be incorporated into our annual audit. 

Mr. Wright defined OPEB for viewers who may not know what it means: Other Post-Employment Benefits

Mr. Solkovits noted that the OPEB account is the fulfillment of a promise ECRCHS made to its employees. 

Mr. Hussey noted that when ECR became a charter, this was the one issue most teachers were fearful of and for the board, administration, and staff, to be 78% funded is an amazing statistic and that he looks forward to the OPEB fund becoming fully funded for all employees. 

Mr. Wood concluded by noting that this promise is codified in both the UTLA and AFSCME Collective Bargaining Agreements (CBAs).  

Prior to the vote, Mr. Hussey thanked former ECRCHS Teacher and former OPEB co-trustee, Mr. Webster, for his service, and noted that Mr. Wilson is an excellent trustee.

Mr. Wright noted that Mr. Wilson is a very dedicated teacher.

Prior to the vote, Mr. Wood presented the June 2022 Check Registers, noting that he had presented these previously during the recent Finance & Investment Committee.

Mr. Wood reviewed all accounts, including Checking Account, Vendor-specific payments, General Account, and ASB.

Ms. Malconian asked if the board will see the July and August Check registers at the September Board Meeting. 

Mr. Wright asked if the athletics department and coaches receive updates on their trust account activity, to which Mr. Wood replied in the affirmative. 

Prior to the vote, Mr. Wood reviewed the Proposition 30 Budget Education Protection Act (EPA) Revenues and Expenditures, noting that one of our obligations as an organization is for the Board to approve the Prop. 30 budget recommended expenditures (Certificated salaries and benefits) and restrictions (e.g, no administrative salaries). 

Prior to the vote, Mr. Hussey reviewed the ISP, noting that it included a legal review.

Ms. Malconian asked what the major changes were and Mr. Hussey replied that it was more of a legal review without major policy changes.

Mr. Solkovits asked whether the policy had been developed with teacher input and expressed concern about possible rigor of the policy in ensuring that students are held to high standards.

Mr. Hussey noted that the ISP program and policy is based on ISP teacher input, while general education teachers had not had much input.  

Mr. Solkovits opined that this arrangement is "not good," and that in his 35+ years, he's seen kids miracullously turn things around in ISP and get "As" when they had previously failed actual semester-long classes.   He noted that he'd like to see gen. ed. teachers involved in the development of the ISP policy.

Mr. Hussey replied that the ISP program is different, that there is no movement from gen. ed. to ISP, and that there is a process that is followed for students to be permitted into the program.  Mr. Hussey noted that the program is sufficiently rigorous.

Mr. Solkovits asked for Mr. Hussey to confirm that the ISP program is not for students who are failing and then go into ISP and then they become eligible to graduate, and Mr. Hussey confirmed that the program is not for that purpose.  

Mr. Hussey noted that the program is for students who may have social-emotional needs, other health issues, students who are soon to become professional athletes, actors, etc., whose schedules and needs can be met in the ISP program. 

Mr. Hussey continued that students who are struggling, in general, would not be best served in an ISP program anyway, as they would need someone sitting with them every day. 

Ms. Malconian, noted that the ISP is a fantastic program, noting she has spoken with people involved with the program and noted that some ISP students had made presentations during the June in-person Board Meeting and if Mr. Solkovits had seen the presentations he would know what she was talking about in terms of what the ISP program is all about.

Mr. Wright noted the ISP is a rigorous program and that Mr. Bennett, Administrative Director, will have some ideas to address any concerns Mr. Solkovits may have. 

Mr. Solkovits noted that he looks forward to learning about the program because he has his suspicions, to which Mr. Wright asked him whether or not his suspicions were for ECR or for any school, to which Mr. Solkovits replied, "any school."

Ms. Ibach noted that she thought that Mr. Solkovits may be thinking of ISP as more of an adult school program rather than how ISP is administered at ECRCHS.

Mr. Solkovits noted again that he looks forward to learning more about the program, noting that he knows nothing about the program currently, and that he will abstain from voting on the ISP policy revision until he learns more about it to be able to make informed decisions. 

Mr. Hussey offered Mr. Solkovits an opportunity to make an appointment and tour the ISP program. 

Mr. Wright asked for input from Ms. Ibach and Mr. Kofahl, including whether or not the board should hold off on the vote on this item, to which Ms. Ibach replied with words to the effect of "No, this is an important program that is needed, it's not a program for failing students (in gen. ed. to just move over to ISP) and we need to move forward."

Mr. Wright requested the motion.

Prior to the vote, Dr. Lowry, Director, Human Resources and Compliance, reviewed the process and timelines by which proposed revisions to the Employee Handbook were made leading up to this vote, including requested changes discussed in a meeting between Executive Director Hussey, HR and Compliance Director Lowry, and Teachers/UTLA Co-Chairs Collins and Monroy in the Spring of 2022.

Teachers'/UTLA Co-Chairs' requested changes were incorporated into the Handbook, including a non-material revision to Mr. Hussey's Welcome message to remove a reference to Confidentiality, a reference to employees' right to seek or be employed beyond their ECR employment (this is already in the handbook as permissible, with expectations that the supplemental employment not adversely impact the employees' respective performance of ECR-based employment essential duties), and a reference to the employee dress code, which is largely unchanged.

Dr. Lowry emphasized that because these aforementioned changes, and those made by Legal Counsel for their final legal review do not materially affect bargaining unit members, UTLA did not need to be consulted prior to this board discussion and vote on revisions to the Employee Handbook.

Mr. Solkovits asked what is the relationship between the employee handbook and the Collective Bargaining Agreement, to which Mr. Hussey replied that the CBAs are the Gold Standard and "trump" whatever is in the Handbook.

Mr. Solkovits asked if the CBA references the Handbook, because he's been told by UTLA that members have been written up and references are made to the Handbook and that they have won grievances and he is wondering if administration is being told that the employee handbook is an actionable supplement to the CBA for the purposes of writing up employees when it isn't.   

Dr. Lowry noted the final lines in Mr. Hussey's Handbook Welcome message that affirm that the Handbook does not alter the impact of the CBA agreements in place.  

Additionally, in response to Mr. Solkovits' comment on behalf of UTLA's concerns about their members being written up and being held accountable to sections of the Employee Handbook, Dr. Lowry noted the following, with words to the effect of:

1. The Employee Handbook contains specific policies and expectations and examples to which all employees are held accountable; 

2.  We follow the CBA guidelines and Handbook with regard to issuing ungrievable or pre-disciplinary and/or disciplinary responses to employees' choices as to how they behave; 

3.  Depending on the circumstances, employees are held to account; 

4. There are differences in interpretation between 'egregious misconduct' and 'misconduct.'  

5.  Administration and I tailor our responses, according to circumstances, and what Dr. Lowry typically does is review proposed pre-disciplinary and/or disciplinary response with administration and/or our legal counsel prior to issuing the response; 

Mr. Solkovits noted that in speaking with bargaining unit members, he wanted to convey that UTLA believes that their involvement in developing the Employee Handbook is nominal at best.  Mr. Solkovits noted that he values collaborative input on all matters pertaining to school, whether or not the collaboration is required or not, and that he hopes that more then minimal gestures are made to bargaining unit members, even if not required. 

Mr. Solkovits continued by stating that his experience is that the employee handbook has "no operative value" as "a lever" against employees.   

Mr. Solkovits noted that if he has the wrong perception of how the Handbook is being used, he apologizes, but indicated that that is what is has been told to him by UTLA. 

Dr. Lowry noted that he appreciated Mr. Solkovits' remarks and comments.  He continued by noting that "people make choices every day to teach and to communicate."  

Dr. Lowry noted that the CBA does not outline specific behavior expectations and that the CA Standards for the Teaching Profession (CSTPs) and the Employee Handbook do, and that he's handled or been involved with at least forty-four (44) complaints or cases of discipline in the past year of school, most of which are related to people's inappropriate behavior and communications and not necessarily classroom teacher performance.

Dr. Lowry noted that he'd be happy to meet with Mr. Solkovits and any other Board member or teacher or staff member to discuss this item in further detail and to review the evidence of discipline, grievances, and/or other items related to this matter.

Dr. Lowry closed by saying that if teachers and staff members focus on their teaching and/or job, focus on student needs, and remain professional, there would be little reason for disciplining anybody.

Mr. Wright noted, too, that the Board represents not just anybody but everybody, and implored Mr. Solkovits to share any complaints with the Board and that they are first and foremost ECRA Board members an all in this together.  He requested a motion to approve the revisions to the Employee Handbook for 2022-2023.

Prior to the vote, Dr. Lowry, Director, Human Resources and Compliance, reviewed the proposed revisions to the Parent-Student Handbook, including revisions to the following:

* Food and Meals on campus

* Attendance and Truancy Policy

* Prom Attendance Policy

* Pesticides List from LAUSD to which ECRCHS adheres 

* 2022-2023 School Calendar dates 

Dr. Lowry scrolled through the P-S Handbook to show the highlighted sections that had been reviewed by administration and subsequently forwarded to ECRCHS's legal team for review and final approval.

Ms. Solkovits asked if Parents and Student Stakeholders had been consulted for input into the Parent-Student Handbook prior.  

Dr. Lowry replied that he did not know the extent to which parent or student input had been included prior to administrators making their recommendations, but that administrators had based their recommendations on their experiences.  

Mr. Solkovits replied that Dr. Lowry's answer sounded like a "fuzzy answer," to which Dr. Lowry clarified his earlier answer in more succinct terms that he did not know to what extent parents had been provided input. 

Mr. Solkovits noted for the whole board that administration needs to come up with a more formal process through which all stakeholders are provided an opportunity for input into making revisions to the P-S Handbook prior to sending the Handbooks for a final legal review.

Ms. Malconian stated that she agreed with Mr. Solkovits' recommendation. 

Mr. Wright asked Mr. Solkovits if he wanted all stakeholders' input and Mr. Solkovits clarified that its seems that whatever input stakeholders had provided had been provided informally and it wasn't clear how it was done, so moving forward he recommended that the policy be formalized to include stakeholders.

Mr. Solkovits reaffirmed his strong commitment to collaborative processes and recommends this process be formalized and collaborative moving forward, especially as we come out of the pandemic.  

Mr. Wright noted that the ECRA Board is also a stakeholder group.

Mr. Solkovits acknowledged Mr. Wright's comment.

Mr. Hussey acknowledged Mr. Solkovits' recommendation and agreed that moving forward, administration will formalize and communicate a formal process/policy through which students, faculty, and parents will be afforded opportunities for input into the development of or revisions to the P-S Handbook.

Mr. Wright noted that stakeholders can also come to the Board and to the Board Meetings.

Ms. Malconian stated that she believed that Mr. Solkovits had recommended a more robust and formal process.

Mr. Wright acknowledged Ms. Malconian's comment. 

Ms. Malconian asked if there was an effort to adjust the attendance and truancy policy, to which Mr. Hussey noted that the policy has been revised based on what the State defines as chronic truancy (eighteen or more absences) as the basis for eligibility to attend Prom and/or other schoolwide events. 

Mr. Hussey also noted that administration is going to develop a notification system through which students/parents/guardians are notified at the 5, 10, 15 absences markers so that there are no surprises when some students are denied entry to Prom or other schoolwide events. 

Mr. Hussey also noted, too, that COVID is still with us and COVID-related absences are appealable, and the intervention team, counselors, educational therapists, and/or others will be working with students and their families, if/as needed. 

Prior to the vote, Mr. Hussey noted that we have Coaches who have teaching credentials but not a P.E. Credential.  Accordingly, with changes in CALPADS (student data reporting system wit State of CA) and in order to ensure that students get credit for P.E., we need to submit proper authorization requests to allow these fully credentialed teachers, at this time, six (6) coaches, to teach one period of P.E./Coach a sport for which the participating students will receive P.E. credit.  

Mr. Hussey noted that there are six teachers currently who are recommended for On Period Coach Authorizations, including the following:

* Camille King - Cross Country

* Eric Choi - Girls Golf, Girls Soccer, Boys Golf

* Alyssa Lee - Girls Volleyball

* John Terndrup - Wrestling

* Jason Sabolic - Football

* Beth Corbett - Cheerleading

Mr. Solkovits requested that PE. Coaches receive additional training, in addition to Mandated Reporter: Child Abuse Awareness Training, so as to ensure that all coaches understand the nuanced complexities involved in coaching and teams. 

Mr. Hussey noted Mr. Solkovits' recommendation and stated that in addition to the required Coach Trainings (CPR, Concussions, etc.,) he will look into working with the Athletics Department to provide additional trainings to coaches.

Ms. Ibach noted that we are voting on authorizations to ensure students receive P.E. credit for their participation in sports, the time commitments of which are extensive.

Mr. Hussey clarified that we are voting on One Period Coach Authorizations so the teachers can coach and so that the students can earn P.E. credit in their participation.   

Prior to the Vote here in Open Session, the Board discussed this item during Closed Session. 

Prior to the Vote here in Open Session, the Board discussed this item during Closed Session. 

Prior to the Vote here in Open Session, the Board discussed this item during Closed Session.

Prior to the Vote here in Open Session, the Board discussed this item during Closed Session.

Voice Vote taken; 6 members present voted "Aye" to adjourn meeting. One Board member absent.