There were no public comments.

The board chair shared ideas concerning the return to in-person meetings and highlighted the value and consistency of Navigator's proactive adherence to AB 361 procedures. He thanked members for their participation in virtual meetings. Members expressed interest in potential, time-saving alternatives to roll-call votes.

K. Sved thanked local Lions Clubs for sponsoring vision screenings at schools. He noted that he expects to learn the outcome of Regional Technical Assistance and Coaching (RTAC) Sub-Grant applications by the end of the month. He discussed the development of a list of events and activities for board members who are interested in visiting school sites. 

I. Connell reported tremendous growth across all schools in reading and math pertaining to recent student assessments. He commended the work of staff, noting the especially successful efforts of Watsonville Prep School. Members and staff discussed the success of Navigator Schools' model dissemination. 

J. Flaherty reviewed topics covered during the committee's latest meeting, including Proposition 51 and board member elections.

Members praised I. Connell for his contributions to the board. He expressed enthusiasm for participating in board activities during the upcoming school year.

K. Sved introduced J. Quiroga, highlighting his background, accomplishments, expertise, and connections to the region. Members provided enthusiastic recommendations for the election of J. Quiroga to the board.

J.P. Anderson referred members to committee minutes, and K. Sved reported that committee members provided helpful feedback on the budget and related documents.

Information is contained in the documents accompanying the previous item. 

A. Ortiz explained the purpose of the LCAP, and reviewed LCAP development, metrics, goals, and related next steps, including future board actions. She elicited questions and feedback from the board.

A. Ortiz summarized budget elements relating to model providing and additional staff. She invited questions from the board. The board discussed fund balances, new positions, roles of Hayward Collegiate personnel, and model providing as a strategy for growth. They also discussed funding, cost of living (COLA), and strategies for retaining staff.

K. Sved provided an overview of the Proposition 51 application process, including a summary of the proposition's background, a history of proposition applications at Navigator Schools, and an explanation of related point values, formulas, and allocation types. He explained the role of consultants; grant and loan combinations; provided brief descriptions of related projects and needs at Gilroy Prep and Hollister Prep; and shared images of preliminary site plans. Members asked clarifying questions about several related issues, including application timelines and district partnerships. The chair thanked K. Sved, K. Carr, and A. Ortiz for their efforts.

K. Sved shared the background of TK in terms of state legislation and the strong support of Watsonville Prep leadership for the expansion of TK. Members asked questions and shared experiences, insights, and support for TK expansion.

K. Sved explained the reasoning behind the request to discontinue Long-Term Independent Study and reviewed strategies to support student and family needs. Board members asked clarifying questions and expressed support for discontinuation.

The board chair reported that while in closed session the board unanimously approved the following motion: In anticipation of completing the merger with Hayward Collegiate and its senior officers, the board hereby establishes the position of Director of Strategy and instructs the Navigator CEO to work with the appropriate Navigator board ad hoc committees to continue and complete said negotiation substantially in the manner as directed by the Navigator board of directors.

K. Sved reviewed the merger process, including guiding principles, early wins, and next steps. He explained the text of the resolution and its accompanying attachments. He expressed gratitude to the merger subcommittee for its feedback and contributions. Board members shared questions and insights pertaining to the merger. The board chair thanked the subcommittee for its engagement in the process.

K. Sved explained the purpose and timeline of the amendment.