The Board will now reconvene in open meeting. Today is Monday, October 17, 2016. The time is 6.36 p.m.
Katy ISD · Board Work Study Meeting Agenda
Katy ISD Board Work Study Meeting, October 17, 2016
Find something in this meeting
Search every word of the automated transcript. A result moves the recording to the moment the words were spoken.
In this meeting
- 0:00 to 1:14:01 The recording
Full transcript
Automated transcript, not human verified. It is a way to find a passage, not a quotation.
The recording
The Board met earlier this evening in a closed meeting. Any action arising from discussions in a closed meeting must be taken in a subsequent open meeting.
Dr. Hemp, will you verify that we are in compliance with the provisions of the Texas Open Meetings Act regarding the notice for this meeting?
Board President, we are in compliance.
Madam President.
Mr. Mahalsky.
I move that the Board of Trustees terminates the probationary contract of the Assistant
Choir Director, Clarence Appleby III, for good cause as determined by the Board and
discussed in closed meeting.
Second.
I further move that the Board suspends Mr. Appleby without pay pending discharge for
good cause as determined by the Board effective Tuesday, October 18, 2016, and directs the
Superintendent to give written notice to him of these actions.
Second.
Second.
Second.
I have a motion by Mr. Moholsky, second by George Scott, that the Board of Trustees terminates
the probationary contract of the Assistant Choir Director, Clarence Appleby III, for
good cause as determined by the Board and discussed in closed meeting.
It is further moved that the Board suspends Mr. Appleby without pay pending discharge
for good cause as determined by the Board effective Tuesday, October 18, 2016, and directs
the Superintendent to give written notice to him of these actions.
Any discussion? Hearing none, we'll proceed to vote. All in favor raise your right hand and say aye.
Aye. Motion passes 7-0.
3.2.
Mr. President.
Mr. what's your name? DeBrell. Henry DeBrell.
Normally it is. I move that the Board of Trustees approve the personnel report as recommended by the Superintendent in closed meeting.
I have a motion by Mr. DeBrell, a second by Mrs. Vann that the Board of Trustees approves
the personnel report as recommended by the Superintendent in closed meeting.
Any discussion?
We'll vote.
All in favor raise your right hand and say aye.
Aye.
Motion passes 7-0.
Any scouts in the audience?
See any this evening?
This time we'll have a report from Dr. Grooms.
The final report, final results of the Katy Independent School District legislative priorities,
Good evening, Dr. Grims.
Good evening, Madam President, Board of Trustees, and Dr. Hint.
As you know, I'm here this evening to provide the final results on the Legislative Party's
survey which was administered to our community September 20th through October 2nd.
About 3,500 individuals participated in this survey.
That is similar to the number that participated when I reported on the preliminary results
at the last Board of Trustees meeting.
meeting. Once all duplicate submissions were accounted for, the number came out to be about
the same. You'll see here in this chart that the majority of our participants represent
the southwest and the southeast quadrant of the district. The next couple slides show
the level of support for each of the 13 legislative priorities that we asked our community members
to provide feedback on in descending order. So you'll see that 85% of participants,
well I'm sorry, not 85% of participants, but the legislative item more local control
had 85% support wise. And as you go down that list you'll see somewhere in the
middle streamlining the TEEX came in at about 74% support. Going to the next
slide you'll see it goes all the way to the legislative party that had the least
support being eliminating the public school a through F rating at at only 49%
support this presentation is publicly available or will be publicly available
on the website and you also have the full report in front of you so I won't
go through every single slide at the end of the survey we did ask our
participants to rank all 13 of the legislative priorities. When I provide
the preliminary results you'll recall that streamlining the TEKS, less
involvement from the state level and more local control, as well as the
accountability transparency measures for voucher programs were in the top three.
Delaying the implementation of the new statewide accountability
accountability system was actually in the top three and four was the
accountability measures for vouchers it was a close tie at the time and those
two positions swapped when the final results came in and the bottom three
remained the same which is adding college readiness assessments to the
post-secondary redden readiness domain indicators eliminating the public school
a through F rating system and increasing the golden pennies we also allowed our
participants to provide open-ended responses we received over 500 some of
the themes that emerged from those responses is that folks would like to
see less focus and amount of testing participants also expressed a desire to
provide more special ed services to students they believe require those
services some participants commented on the format of the survey itself and
and preferred not to rank the items at the end.
And then finally, the last theme that emerged
from those 500 comments is that participants indicated
the need to lower taxes and manage funds
and build less over the top facilities.
And next steps, as you're aware,
the board has assigned a legislative priorities
advisory committee, which will begin meeting this Wednesday.
and then hopefully it is anticipated that recommendation from that committee
will come sometime in November thank you any questions thank you dr. Grimes that
legislative committee will meet more than once okay we'll move to the consent
agenda. Our first presentation this night is Mr. Campbell. This is an electrical
easement to Centerpoint Energy associated with the construction of
Robert and Felice Bryant Elementary School. Good evening. Good evening Board
President Fox, Board members, Superintendent Hint. This board item is
associated with construction Robert and Felice Bryant Elementary School which is
currently in construction and scheduled to open next year. The school is located
located on Kingsland Boulevard, adjacent to the Willow Creek Farms and Young Ranch subdivisions.
The Centerpointe easement is associated with electrical service to the site necessary for
the project and has been reviewed by a district attorney.
I'd be happy to answer any questions you might have.
Any questions?
Thank you very much.
Thank you.
Our next item is the approval of a contract for the purchase of swimming and wrestling
equipment, supplies and apparel.
Good evening, Ms. Stevenson.
Good evening, President Fox, Board members, and Superintendent Hitt.
I have two contracts to bring forward for your consideration this evening.
The first one is the purchase of swimming and wrestling equipment, supplies, and apparel.
We developed a list of the most commonly purchased items in these sports and sent those out for bid.
and the recommendation is to award line items 1 through 17 for swimming and 1 through 15
for wrestling to the vendor as noted on the tabulation presented to you.
That recommendation represents the best value for the district.
And on the section that is for items not specifically listed, the recommendation is to award to
all vendors listed on the tabulation.
The athletic department and the campuses will be encouraged to seek competitive quotes among
those items whenever possible.
with the requirement for competitive quotes anytime the expenditure exceeds
$3,000 the contract period will be for one year with an option for four
additional one-year renewals routine expenditures are anticipated to be about
a hundred and eighty five thousand dollars annually with another hundred
thousand dollars over the next year for the set up of the sports at Pato high
school any question we will move on to five point three the next contract that
I brought forward for your approval this evening is the board's approval of the
job order contracting method and the use of facility sources through the choice
partners cooperative to install the infrastructure cabling needed for the
seven lakes high school technology retrofit it is required that the board
members review any construction project over $50,000 and accordingly we brought
forward this project for your review and for your approval of the method the
The quote from facility sources includes all the bonding needed for the project, although
any permits required will be the responsibility of KDISD.
So the total proposed cost for the project as quoted is $126,789, and all work is scheduled
to be completed during the winter break.
The total not to exceed cost will be funded from the 2014 bond fund retrofit projects budget.
Thank you, Mr. Stevenson.
Madam President, I have a question.
Okay, Mr. Stevenson.
On that last statement that you made, would you say that again?
I was in...
Okay.
The one on the bond issue, the source of funding.
It's going to be funded by the 2014 bond fund retrofit projects budget.
And this is money that was designed to be in the 2014 bond and is using 2014 bond money?
It was part of the technology projects listing.
Is this a change order or is this a planned, just getting to it, expenditure?
I may need to refer that to Dr. Lowney.
No, it's not a change order, Mr. Scott.
This is part of the original bond, 2014 bond.
Very good.
Thank you.
Moving to the discussion action portion of the agenda,
we'll consider future board approval of an agreement with SPARC
and Katy Independent School District to construct a recreational facility
improvements at Diane Winborn Elementary School.
Good evening, Mr. Tate.
Good evening.
I'm very honored to be here this evening, Madam President, Board of Trustees, and Dr. Hint.
I'm pleased to recommend that the Board of Trustees approves an agreement with SPARC and the KDISD
to construct recreational facility improvements at Diane Winborn Elementary School.
The recreational facilities will be available for public access during non-school hours.
Through the agreement, KDISD will oversee the design and construction of the project,
which is estimated to be completed within six months from the effective date of this agreement.
Funding for the project will be provided by SPARC.
At the conclusion of the agreement, KDISD agrees to own, operate, and maintain the project.
It has been reviewed by our legal counsel and approved for your execution.
Do you remember when we started talking about this?
It seems like it's been a while.
Yes, ma'am. When it was first presented, the original Spark Park for Windborn was presented in April 27th meeting of 2015.
What's the delay?
Well, this actually isn't a delay. This is actually an additional project that Spark has agreed to bring to the district.
The original project that was presented to the board has actually been completed and is up for the Spark dedication in November.
I thought so. Okay, but same school?
same school this is actually a program that spark received a grant from they've
identified a number of schools throughout the city of Houston or Harris
County I should say and when born was selected as one of those and that's why
they're funding this one solely on themselves okay that's awesome I knew
there was some difference of time here thank you very much for bringing this to
to us. Any questions you guys? Okay, thanks so much. Thank you.
Any objections moving this item to consent?
So moved. Thank you for the reminder.
Now we will talk about future board approval of 25 growth units for the 2016-
2017 school year. Ms. Yolanda Edmond, good evening. Good evening, President Fox,
Trustees, and Superintendent Hint. As we progress through the school year,
additional staffing needs have been identified for the 2016-17 school year.
Therefore, we are asking that you consider approving 25 additional growth
units to expedite the process of adding teachers and paraprofessionals. Just so
that there's clarity, I'd like Mr. Smith, our Chief Financial Officer, to give you
a little insight on these growth positions. It's a cost neutral to the
the district because of the funding we will receive from the state in the
budget that was approved in August we anticipated growth in our special needs
program as our bilingual ESL program when this need came up my office took a
look at data that we were able to get from our student management system and
and extrapolated that data and it does appear as though the growth is a little
bit better than we budgeted so I would anticipate based off the data that we
saw last week that we would be able to next month amend the budget and recognize some increased
revenue that would that would go hand in hand with this increased expense
we typically do that calculation when when the fall teams uh numbers are are submitted in
december but but like i said we were able to get that same data out and as it stood as of
october the 14th i'm sorry the october the 13th it did appear as though we were going to generate a
little bit better revenues than then we had originally budgeted mr. Mahalski
okay and I did get that point are we saying that these growth units though
are because our enrollment is growing faster than anticipated or is it I'll
try to speak to something special ed but the numbers enrollment has not
enrollment has gone down however kids that are already in the identify for
needs of special needs okay that's okay and because they're identified for
special needs we receive more state funding or that that clarifies it I had
a little disconnect there for a second thank you it's that some of our special
ed finest with you this evening yes yes madam president board and dr. Hint
Christopher Rigdon director special ed programs and some of our programming
programming staff that helped come up with the numbers and proposal.
Thank you for being here.
Thank you for loving our babies.
Yes, ma'am.
And a great education place for them.
Thanks.
Any other questions?
We're here twice a month, every month.
You all could come back any time you like.
You know, in case you dismiss us.
Thanks for being here.
This item will not be moved to consent.
We'll vote on that next week.
6.3 Linda Shepard. Future board approval of the limited English proficient enrollment
in bilingual education exception ESL waiver application for 2016-17. Good evening Ms.
Shepard. Good evening Board President, Ms. Fox, Board members and Superintendent Dr.
Hint. My name is Linda Shepard. I'm the director for bilingual ESL and this is Jennifer
Jennifer Perpilek, she's the Instructional Officer for Elementary ESL that assists with
the preparation of the application to TEA.
Tonight we are here to report the numbers of limited English proficient students in
KDISD as well as request approval to write and submit the bilingual exception application
in ESL waiver application.
As of October 3, 2016, KDISD has identified 12,603 limited English proficient students
in our district.
district. This encompasses approximately 16% of our overall population and encompasses
91 distinct languages. Additionally, each district with an enrollment of 20 or more
students of limited English proficiency in any language classification in the same grade
district-wide shall offer a bilingual education or special language program. The district
has identified 14 such languages. These include Mandarin Chinese, Arabic, Urdu, Vietnamese,
Korean, Hindi, Portuguese, Telugu, Filipino, Russian, Tamil, Japanese,
Cantonese, Chinese, and Yoruba.
This is the 15th year I've come before the board for Mandarin Chinese,
and new this year we have added Japanese, Cantonese, Chinese, and Yoruba.
At this time we're asking permission to prepare the application
and submit it to TEA by November 1st.
What country speaks Yoruba?
Nigeria.
I had to look it up too.
91 distinct languages.
Did I hear that right?
Yes, and probably a few others.
We have another category that encompasses a few of the tribal languages from different parts of the world
that they don't quite have a category code with the education agency.
So, yes, you heard us correct.
91.
Mr. Scott?
Just out of curiosity, how many of these students, or could you give a percentage of these students,
that are wholly within their language or substantially in English in the middle
I'm just curious from a personal level what's their state of English incoming
students we were looking at like during pre-registration one in three students
that comes to our door right now just during this August period we looked at
and of that group of students one in three identify language other than
in English, and one in four are on the journey to actually needing support in English.
Our larger population appears to be at that advanced and advanced high proficiency level,
so they can communicate.
You might not even realize that they're a limited English proficient speaker, but they
don't quite have the cognitive ability to successfully do the academics without some
type of language support.
Thank you.
CHAIRPERSON WONG.
Any other questions?
Thank you very much.
Thank you for being here.
Any objection to moving this to consent agenda?
Now we'll talk about the district and campus performance objectives.
Mrs. Holland, Dr. Preach, Dr. Matney.
Hi.
Those are some really big binders.
Good evening, Madam President, members of the board,
and Dr. Hint.
As is required by board policy BQ,
we bring to the board for your approval each year
our district and campus performance objectives.
objectives. These are based upon a comprehensive needs assessment and our performance on the
achievement indicators that Dr. Matney presented last month for the Board's consideration.
I want to acknowledge Dr. Matney for her assistance in providing you with the needs assessment
and tonight we have my friend Dr. Creech here who's going to talk to you about the district
and performance objectives and the fact that they are mutually supportive and
she'll kind of take you through that path good evening I can go the good
evening president Fox board members and dr. hint as Bonnie stated we've we've
worked hand in hand with the district and the campus performance objectives so
that they look alike this year for you not only the format but the spreadsheets
and how they're color-coded for you. Just sort of to walk you back through, the
district performance objectives are all set on the level 2 satisfactory
academic performance. It's highlighted for you sort of in a light yellow and
those targets were set based on where the district was at the level 2
performance. We looked at a floor and set a floor for anything that was below 60
and then we looked at anything that was in the 70 range and moved that target to 80.
Anything that was in the 80 range, we moved that 70 to 80 and 80 to 90.
When we got to 90, we realized it's difficult to really make large gains
when you're already sitting close to the top.
So anything that was from 90 to 94, we increased only by 2%,
and from 96 to 100, the goal is to maintain.
So just so you're aware of how we set those targets. As Bonnie said, everything
is mutually supported, both campus and districts. In your information you
receive from the campuses, I've also included some extra information for you.
Since you received Dr. Matney's presentation last month, you have
information for the district and some of those goals and the needs assessments
that were already done for those. What you didn't have in front of you yet was
campus. So we've provided a sheet that is the really cute colorful pie chart. You
know me, I'm going to bring you something colorful. The pie chart and the
statistics so that you have both the complexion of the campus and the
performance from the groups. The second page you have is the 2016 accountability
summary page. So that sort of gives you some background on how the campuses set
their own targets. If you notice on theirs, they, we color coded theirs as well, but theirs
are not all based on level two satisfactory because we have some campuses that are targeting
level three or the advanced or the final performance. You'll also notice that you have some asterisks
in there. Those are for campuses that don't have enough students to actually make up a
complete group to count or they're there we would violate FERPA to put those in
so we've got and you can see that there are some not every campus targeted every
student population or every group those campuses have met with the assist area
assistant soups sitting to my left your right and we have been through every
single page to look at the performance objectives and to make sure that they
adequately meet some sort of progress measure gain from where they are to what
is reasonable and what they can meet those targets were looked at intently by
the campuses and they made a determination of what their target
should be we didn't say okay everybody's going to start with level two and you
set a target from there on everything because that didn't fit everybody we
We needed it to be meaningful to the campus.
And they needed to be able to set their own targets
so that they knew they could meet them.
So.
That's kind of it.
We're looking at your charts.
Sorry.
Oh, we're looking at all this.
We love the charts.
We love the pie graphs.
We like all of this because it's easy to see.
and we're just there's tons of data here so we're kind of going it is don't take
that for silence for anything other than that's okay and I would be remiss if I
did not thank Jamie Hines and the technology department for putting these
charts together they set these up for me they really helped and made sure that we
had what we needed and then we put them on a dashboard and pushed them out to
the campuses. Campuses then filled them in, sent them back to us. We formatted and you
have them.
MS. Incredible. A lot of information. Questions?
MR. Madam President.
MS. Mr. Scott.
MR. Dr. Creech, would you do me a favor? Would you pull that microphone a little
bit closer to you?
MS. Thank you.
MR. You're a soft talker.
MS. I am. I'm sorry.
MR. No problem. Two of my favorite people are seated out there. Dr. Hint, let
let me tell you real quickly that before I became a board member,
I would always call Dr. Creech or Bonnie,
but I haven't called them one time since I've been on the board.
And this is the most painful part of being on the board.
I can't call my old people, you know, my contacts.
You know my respect for you.
We go back a long, long way.
And there should be no question about that.
But I have questions, as you might expect, that I have of this report.
and I want to preface it by saying that this report is more important than
District of Innovation it's more important than the legislative agenda
the notion that KTISD is going to affect the Texas legislature is of course
absurd but we're going to try it it's more important than a lot of things that
go on I've been on the board four and a half months and this is the first
opportunity I've had to ask questions about academics so I'm going to go
through a few questions and not to go for an extended period of time but I
want to try to set the framework because I believe this is a topic that the board
needs to come back to in a very fundamental serious way so as I look at
your performance targets just your district performance targets what does
the second reference to level two satisfactory academic performance mean
you have it on two columns then you have the middle and then you have level three
advanced what does that mean the first column no the second right but the first
level two satisfactory column is like the met standard the entry the second is
final you know how we went through the phases with tax and was now we're with
star you go through years of and they bump the floor and bump the floor well
this is the final okay there's a level final and then there's a level three so
So we're at level two, a phase of level two right now.
Then there's a final level two and level three.
We will end up with just a level two final and a level three.
Is this what is called on the, you're familiar with the raw score conversion tables?
Is this what is called the recommended level?
It would have been.
It would have been.
What it would have been is, you remember the chart long ago that had the year with the mark
and the year with the mark and it just kept marching itself up that's this so
the column that we've highlighted is where we are right now in the
progression level two final we have some campus that have set there's targets on
that because they've already met this one and they're marching forward and
then we have some that are level three because they've already met or want to
exceed that as well so understand but this is a raw score performance and I'm
I'm sure you can't read it, but I'm sure you recognize it.
On this one, it has a level two satisfactory, level two satisfactory interim,
and then it has level two recommended.
My specific question is, if I go to this,
am I looking at what level two recommended it, level two, phase two,
or am I looking at recommended?
You're looking at, I would have to see it.
But my, I mean, I don't know if I can see it or not, but the recommended, unless they've changed the title on it, was the final.
It is where they are recommended to be.
We're calling it the final.
Okay, and that's what is reflected in your tables?
Yes.
Okay.
Okay. So I can't find the nomenclature in the raw conversion table that calls the recommended level, level two satisfactory.
Why didn't we use what the TEA uses, recommended? Why didn't we use that?
We have explained, and I'm talking about even when I was back in the assessment department,
There's a phase in one, a phase in two, a phase in three, and that's not necessarily
indicated on your chart.
The chart was built for beginning, middle, and end.
And we were given those charts early on and they've moved, it was supposed to be at certain
progressions in certain years and that didn't happen either.
I really would have to see the chart to know what I'm talking to.
bed
I don't want to get hung up on this, and I would like to move more quickly if possible.
I'm just trying to get a very important bottom line answer,
just so that I can, when I spend 20 hours on those books over the next two weeks,
so I'll know exactly what you're talking about.
I look at the Pearson reports and I look at the raw data that's available to me,
And I'm concluding based on the numbers that the middle column that you're calling level two
Satisfactory is in fact the recommended level
Right now the middle column level two satisfactory is the one we're basing ours on
level two satisfactory recommended is what we're calling final so that
and I'm
Okay
Okay.
So the district knew we're at the end of the satisfactory part,
and then level three is what would have been commended.
All right.
We'll move on to this.
The STAAR Test is a criterion test, correct?
Yes.
It's not designed to produce a bell curve.
Theoretically, 100% of the kids could pass the STAAR Test,
and there wouldn't be anything structurally wrong with the test.
That's the way it's designed, yes.
In a design?
Yes.
All right.
So when I look at your report and I see the percent passing, I see a very high passing standard.
But when I look at the Pearson reports and other raw data, in Algebra 1, for instance, the passing standard for Algebra 1 is 37% content mastery.
Right.
Okay.
And at the recommended level, what the TEA says is actually approximates actual grade level.
The passing standard is 63%.
Do you believe that this board, acting on behalf of the students and the classroom teachers,
should be told in these kinds of tables that the 90%, the high 80s and the 90% passing standards
are on a very diminished content mastery standard.
Do you believe that we need to know that?
I think we've been through that before at previous school board meetings,
and I realize you were not there.
But when we first started the STAR entry, we walked through some of the,
I can pull that back in, I can do that.
This report is really not meant to do that.
Do you believe it's important that the board and the public, meaning parents,
understand that when we tell students that they have passed the STAAR Test,
that in reading third grade, that's 52% content mastery,
going up to eighth grade reading at 53% content mastery.
At third grade math, it's 52% content mastery,
and at seventh and eighth grade it's 40 and 46 percent respectively.
Does the board need to be reminded every year when we get several hundred pages of statistical analysis,
is there an obligation for due diligence disclosure to say, yes, we have 97 percent or 93 percent of our kids
passing the state's accountability test, but the standard is anywhere from 37 to 54 percent?
Do we have a right to understand that and do parents have a right to understand that I would think that everybody has a?
Right to understand that and so when we look at your at the district's goal setting
We are do we have any distributions for instance I know that even your own numbers here
Would indicate
Even your own numbers here absolutely indicate that
African American students in KDISD and Algebra I had 81% on the passing standard,
but in the recommended level, recommended level, that it's 45% or below.
That's like a 36-point drop between a diminished, de minimis almost, passing standard
and something that even the state of Texas kind of surreptitiously acknowledges,
is grade level. Do we need to know that?
I would think yes, you need to know all of it.
I don't know that I'm
provided enough time to sit here and go through the analysis of the STAAR Test
or all the metrics that are behind it.
But I'll be glad to sit down and do that. I'm not trying to fill burden on you.
I'm trying to make
points and I'm trying to elicit information about what is going on with
education accountability in the state of Texas do you believe your professional
educator you're extremely knowledgeable can you look me in the face look the
board in the face look parents in the face and say in heart of hearts in your
professional judgment that a student that makes 37% content mastery on an
an Algebra I test or a 54% content mastery on an English I test, a criterion test, not
a bell curve test, can you truthfully say that you think that student is functioning
at genuine, true grade level skills?
Answer that.
What I will say is that the state gives us a standard.
whether the standards 90% or 35% the state has set out a standard saying this
is what an acceptable standard is for that and based on that standard Katie
has some areas that they could work on certainly and has some areas that we can
acknowledge as successes but to answer your questions of dr. reach the answer
The answer is yes.
The community always has the right to know.
But there's a lot of questions that we can't answer as a district because it's a state
score or a state standard.
But I get where you're going because possibly our solicitation is at the state level that
they up the bar slightly or that they take a hard look at what they call meeting expectations.
A few more questions and then we'll get out of this.
I want to call your attention to Morton Ranch High School.
And I'm using your number, so I'll quote from that if you can find it.
At Morton Ranch High School, 73% of the students passed the 2015-16 Algebra I test.
27% made recommended grade level.
Yet the goal is to move the passing standard from 73% to 80%.
Should we have goals that are specifically targeting moving from the lowest common denominator?
Is that an appropriate role for the school board to take on?
For the school board or the campus?
To have the superintendent and his team establish standards that are not de minimis,
not the lowest common denominator.
We have an abundance of raw data.
And when we do our KD at a glance and when we do our press releases
and when we do our media, KDISD, which will always have very high on the low standard,
it disguises the underlying reality of the academic performance of this district.
And that's what I'm saying to the board.
It's not enough that we are that we are doing well on a corrupt academically
fraudulent testing standard imposed by the state of Texas. We have a higher
burden and I know we all share that. Let me add this and I'm glad that's the
direction you were going because it took me a little bit I'm not as quick it but
uh you know this is a compliance you are absolutely correct we're doing this
because we have to comply with the state of Texas that requires us to put a
campus improvement plan together and requires us to put a district
improvement plan is this the end-all tell-all absolutely not we're doing so
much more in this district that would gauge how our students are doing right
three more areas and then we'll go mr. Scott we have any correlated ask your
question sure so I I too appreciate with what you're saying and where you're
going and I like your I like your questions I'm asking if you would if if
you here's what I want to ask you I think it's a bit unfair to ask dr.
Creech what she thinks the board should care about but you should ask us if we
should care about that so we absolutely should care about that but asking doctor
kind of putting I feel like I'm not sure dr. Creech if you're feeling put on the
spot but it's a little bit like should the board care about that well that's
not her role our role is to care about that and so just go to dr. hint and tell
him whether you think we should care about something more than her role
that's not her role she does not get to tell the board what we have I am NOT
telling I would have been out of this by now okay I would have been out of this
but I am NOT telling dr. Creech what to say she is a highly qualified
individual absolutely your woman whom I have tremendous respect for I trust her
integrity close to explicitly I agree and I'm asking her advice to give
professional assessment as to this disparity between Katie ISD taking the
lowest common denominator when we have title one kids in this campus who are
facing draconian final question I promise do we have any correlated any
correlated analysis between our district learning assessments our STAAR Test our
other administration's of tests our PSAT our SAT have we done any correlation
between our multiple testing instruments that will answer this question the
bottom line question do parents have a right to understand from the school
district a meaningful credible rational understanding of what their children's
true grade level skills are because those parents that are depending upon a
37.5% content mastery to a 54 or 55% content mastery are not being told the truth, the
whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
And this is what I want to accomplish for this board.
Dr. Moses asked us, what's your legacy?
My legacy that I want in two and a half more years will be that parents have a right to
understand what the true grade level skills of their children are and two, how the district
is organizing classrooms not to sabotage teachers.
Thank you, and you know I love you.
I'm glad.
We all do, and respect your questions very much, Mr. Scott.
That's it.
We're the ones that need to be held accountable.
Okay, great.
Any other questions?
Dr. Preach is going, please, no.
I'm fine.
Thank you, Dr. Creech.
Ms. Holland, and I do appreciate the, for each campus you have the student profile chart
and the student statistics, very, very helpful.
So when I read a report like this, it's got a ton of data in it, right?
I'm looking at first for the highlights.
So my question has to go around, is regarding the distinction designations.
Okay.
Okay, and of course we have campuses that have many of those and it varies campus by
campus.
So I just want you to give me a little general power
What's the criteria for those and I don't need all of them, but just kind of more of a general answer
What how do you achieve those and I'm gonna kind of ask your opinion a little bit is you know
How should we be looking at that is it does stand out to you when you're reading the report it is and it's a moving
Target and it's different at each elementary junior high. Would you bring the microphone a little closer?
Dr. Creech, it's not working. Hold on one second. Maybe trade with...
It's a moving target. The state sets up a group of 40 and you get your distinctions based on your group of 40.
If you happen to be in a tough 40, you may not rise as high. If you're in an easier 40, and I don't mean it as hard or soft,
the easiest way to understand it is if you drew out the state of Texas and you
put all the campuses on there and then you you hit the targets based on free
and reduced mobility and at-risk you look for other campuses that look like
you so they find the 40 closest to you and they're in your circle of 40 we had
an example two three years ago where Maid Creek was the top of theirs and Martin
Ranch was number nine on Maid Creek's list but if you looked at Martin Ranch
Maid Creek wasn't even on their list because when they got their group of 40
Maid Creek didn't match there were more like Martin Ranch and Maid Creek fell
off that list so if you think that you're gonna go out and target my other
there are 39 campuses, you're kind of shooting in the dark because those may
not even be in your list next year and you've targeted. So the best you can do
is head for level three, make all the gains that you can and do the best you
can at your own campus and then as you move forward with your your own identity
and your own campus, when they build that group of 40, you're still going to rise.
your distinctions come when you're in the top 25% of that group I hope that
explained that is actually very helpful I did not realize I get the you said
some moving target I get that so it could yeah your group could change so
you know as we move forward and look for how we do want to evaluate our success
and our student success here for Katie ISD you know obviously it's nice to have
those stars on the chart but that's not necessarily the best indicator is what
what I'm kind of hearing.
It's not.
The best indicator is that your kids are successful,
you're moving toward the level three,
that you're actually seeing some continuity, some progress.
I would personally look for the individual student gains.
Did these kids make gains?
It's the indicator two, the progression,
the progress measure, and then area, the index three,
which is the group that you're looking your two lowest ethnicity groups and
your free and reduced lunch if those are all moving forward and you've got
progress star is a star I'll go buy you a star but you're making some gains
thank you very much for the explanation that was very helpful my question got
got answered by your answer to his question.
Anyone else?
Because it's easy to look at that distinction, the stars,
and be proud of that, and to look and to do a comparison
even within the district.
But that's not what they do.
It's not.
And as we grow and we add more schools,
you're going to see those 40 switch around a little bit a
lot to those that get them, and they hurt when you don't.
But it's not the end all of whether or not
you're a successful school.
looking at progress student progress yeah so because I was told the seven
stars of distinction which is the highest you can get of this in the
entire state there were only a few of those and Katie it's true like for I'm
gonna throw numbers that I can't that are in my mind but I'm not sure all right
but like 14 there were like 14 in the area and we have six right Katie s they
He had like six of those or something like that.
I mean, it was when the statistic was told to me, it was accurate,
and it was very impressive, and I was very happy about that.
Seven stars of distinction is nothing to shake your head at, of course.
It's something to be very proud of, even within your group of 40.
I just don't want anybody to think because a school doesn't have multiple stars,
they're not making progress and not making gains and not being successful.
So I won't focus as much on the stars of distinction,
distinction, but we still have a lot to be proud of because we're making such progress
and because we have such high standards and such high success throughout our district
that it's all over the place, too.
It's not just in one area that people are getting that.
So this is a ton of information, right?
Multiple pages per campus.
Mr. Scott has an understanding of it in a very deep level, and I always enjoy my conversations
with him about things like this.
So but I also love the charts we all do I think something at a glance that we can ask
you know we we can put a picture in our head of how we're doing and and
Overall
We're very think and proud of the success that our boys and girls are getting you know in KDSD
Mr. Griffin did you have a question? Yes, ma'am if I could have just a real quick
Would you say level two, you understand what you were taught in high school, but you're
not really ready for college, where level three is you're ready to go to a Div 1 college?
Actually index four, it's not the levels, it's index four in the state accountability
system shows college ready.
Would I say that if you're level three, you're probably more college ready?
Yes.
Yes, but if you're level two final, I don't doubt that you probably would be successful.
But level three shows a deeper understanding of the information.
Madam President.
Did that answer your question, Mr. Griffin?
Yes.
Do you need to follow up?
Mr. Scott.
When you start talking about college readiness, let me just say this authoritatively.
The state of Texas has never, since 1989, since field testing began with TARS,
The state of Texas has never had a reliable, credible college readiness
predictor out of its accountability test. Never. Not once. Not even close. We have
measurements that we can use PSAT. We have other independent
measurements, AP, pre-AP. We give administrations of the DLA test at
the high school we have zero correlation between our district learning
assessments at the high school level physics chemistry biology English one
English to writing the whole bit we have no correlation between our our
tremendous investment in the district learning assessments and college
readiness and the fact of the matter is in KDISD if you look at the students
that start at a two- and four-year college,
the number of students that fall by the wayside
and do not get a baccalaureate degree,
do not get an associate degree,
and do not get a certificate even,
is a very significant percentage.
And that doesn't include the 35% to 38% cohort
that don't enroll in the state of Texas,
which would include those that go out of the state of Texas.
There is just any, there are data dumps and then there are analysis.
I've spent the better part of my career dealing with Texas Education Agency data dumps that
mean nothing.
And what we need to do, what I'm begging this board to do is to, is what I said at the team
building thing.
We've got to not be afraid of data.
data is our friend right now we don't know whether any of these programs that
we operate we don't know if they work at title one campus is better than so the
Cinco ranches we don't know if they work better with new teachers or experienced
teachers reading and writing workshop professional learning development
Steinberg triarchic station being whatever you want to call it whatever
program we thought differentiated instruction on classroom teachers and we
do not monitor the effectiveness we don't have that many kids who are at the
the bare minimum passing standard we are not I'm not we have to worry about those
The kids we've got to worry about are those kids from 60% content to 80% content mastery
that are going to a community college and not making it.
We've got to worry about the 60% to 80% content mastery that are going to Tier 1 campuses and not making it.
We have brilliant, brilliant kids in this district, and we have brilliant, brilliant teachers,
and they're going to I don't care if they go to Sam Houston Stephen F Austin
or Harvard wherever they go we want them to be successful but we're not doing
we're not tying the dots we're not connecting the dots between staff
development and programs and our own testing movement and our own testing
programs we're not tying the correlated data together and as a board if we don't
require that, then we're just going to be constantly subjugated to the state of Texas.
And the only thing I'll say about the state of Texas, if their metaphorical lips are moving,
they're lying. And we've got to stop. We've got to stop. He's turned me on the District
of Innovation in some ways, and I never thought that. We've got to figure out a way to deal with
this and the only way to do it is data and i'm looking at a person in this district that could
do it superiorly if that's a word if that's a good advert anyone else thank you very much for your
presentation for all the information thank you appreciate it very much okay any objection to
moving this to consent agenda. So moved. And now we will talk about, Mrs. Holland, you
don't get to leave. Consider future Board approval of the legal policies and adoption
of local policies in Board Policy Update 105 and then you're going to go right into 106.
So just, okay. The major event that prompted the changes in Update 105 was the passage
of the Every Student Succeeds Act and the reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act.
Much of this is legal policy. We have already had these things
in place. We have had a lot of changes in terminology
more than anything else. Highly qualified has now gone away and we talk in terms of licensure
and required certifications. Rather than talking about
parent involvement we talk about parent and family engagement so a lot of it is
changes in terminology more than it is changes in concept the McKinney Vento
homeless Assistance Act has had a number of changes also that have resulted from
the every student succeeds act but there's really not anything that is new
to Katie is D or to the board at this point because we're always in the rear
when we receive these and therefore we've already had to put them in place
but we feel good about what we have done with the requirements that are being
presented to you in 105 any questions objections to moving this to consent so
moved right ahead update 106 is the shortest update I've ever brought to the
board so I'm happy to bring it forward we only actually have two policies and
legal policy and local policy that deal with the Education Code 29002. This is
the requirement to have audio and visual cameras in certain special education
classes and these policies are as a result of the Commissioner of Education
rules. We do have all of the administrative procedures in place to
implement these policies. We have all the required forms and notifications that are
specified and we in fact have some cameras in place so we're doing well
with that we do have one local policy with update 106 and that is our policy
at ae local and we have added officially to policy our vision for the district be
the legacy any questions any objection to moving this to come one real quick
quick question on that last one would you read it for me is there anything
substantially different between local and legal not a great deal no not a
very thing important not anything no I can read it but I'm just interpreting
right okay most of it is language that has changed is some differences in
terminology not really context very much
any objection to moving that to consent okay so moved Thank You miss Holland next mr. Smith
will discuss and consider future board approval of an agreement for the purchase of attendance
credit good evening president Fox board of trustees and dr. Hint I am here to talk about
something related to chapter 41 of the Texas Education Code. As I said last year,
this is based on KDISD's situation and when it's wealth per student and
our tax rate. This is a complete process of going through a process. It
really will mean nothing to KDISD, but we are required by Texas Education Code
chapter 41 to go through this step. What I want to show you and show you why it's
not relevant to KDISD is this is our wealth per student there in the gold on
the gold bar that you see on the chart and you can see that that gold bar
compared to the state average in wealth per weighted average daily attendance is
right at or just below or in this last year just above state average wealth per
student and let's define wealth per student that's taking our total property
values divided by our weighted average daily attendance and when if that comes
out to a certain number you may be considered chapter 41 and in our case it
does exceed 319,500 so taking our total property values of divided it by our
anticipated weighted average daily attendance our amount will come out to
319,500. To be subject to chapter 42 recapture, our wealth would have to
exceed that red line there at the top which is 5,140. So we would have to
have about a 12.2 billion dollar increase in our property values or about
a 30,000 student decrease in our weighted average daily attendance or a
combination of both. But in either case we are we are far from being subject to
recapture or sending money back to the state at our current tax rate. But with that and with the
chapter 41 of the Education Code, we are required to complete the form that you have presented
before you. Again, it's just a formality, but what it says is if we were going to give recapture,
capture back, that we would give it back through, we would give money to the state by them taking
what they would pay us through other means.
In other words, they would short our payment.
Any questions?
One question.
Mr. Scott?
The word I get is that the energy corridors are going to be getting a lot of tax rebate
checks out of 15-16.
Do you have any estimate as to the impact that will have in KDISD, or are you hearing
the same thing?
No, sir.
Mr. Scott, as far as 1516 getting rebate checks, we are not made aware of that until they come.
We get it when we reconcile the tax report.
We see losses in rebate checks and that's how we know.
We do not budget for those.
We historically have them.
The size may vary from one year to the next, but it all comes out to our 100 percent collections
rate.
All right.
Thanks.
Mr. Scott, when we do have those rebate checks, we do send our property values to the state
for audit and we reduce our comptroller's property value number. So we may give some
taxes back in a refund, but we'll get that back in state aid. We're very on top of that
with the help of Mr. David Pawanko.
Thank you Mr. Smith. Any objection to moving this to consent? So moved. Our next item is
future board approval of the October 2016 budget amendment. Ms. Butterfield, good evening.
Good evening. Good evening President Fox, Trustees, Superintendent Hint. We have several
several budget amendments for your attention tonight. One large amendment
has summarized many smaller amendments to represent the timing needs in the
budget. These are projects that were budgeted for and started last fiscal
year and because of the hard year end at 831 we need to complete
those projects in the 16-17 school year and therefore we call that a timing need
or a need to rebudget these funds. It's a large amount and I can go through the
components of this large amount. The total of the timing amendment in the
general operating fund is a million eighty six thousand seven hundred thirty
nine dollars. This is comprised of several topics and I can read the dollar
amounts off to you if you'd like but we'll go through that if you please. The
The other amendment that is decreasing fund balance or increasing the expenditure budget
is an amendment for $135,500 and this is to put cameras in special ed classrooms.
The remaining general operating fund amendments are offsets between different functions and
and the total decrease to general operating fund balance is an amount of $1,222,239.
The food service budget is also amended for a summarized timing amendment.
This includes kitchen renovations at two campuses and a delivery truck with a lift gate that was not received before the fiscal close.
approval of these amendments will result in a decrease of five hundred forty seven
thousand four hundred and seventy three dollars in the food service fund balance
questions for miss Butterfield I have one on the food service the kitchen
renovations is this one of those cases where we are utilizing some of the some
excess food service balance funds to do some some capital expenditures and in
in the kitchens at those two campuses that's correct okay thank you and those two campuses
were part of comprehensive renovations this summer or in the midst of mpj okay but in this case we're
not having to use bond funds we have food service from the food service that's awesome it's a benefit
it's a what a benefit yes i agree okay any objection to moving this to consent
so moved thank you miss butterfield 6.9 grant ratifications uh grant ratifications tonight we
have um six grant ratifications to bring to you a thousand five hundred dollars for uh chemistry
grant teacher grant at katie high school uh three grants of six thousand each to the robotics that
made creek high school a field trip grant for hudson elementary and then 85 700 from region
region 4 to support training and products and services
any question any objection to moving this to consent okay so moved thank you thank you miss
better field now six point ten dr. hint this one is yours future board approval of addition of
deputy superintendent yes if the board recalls actually during the interview
process and throughout the first three months of being here in Katie I've taken
a look at the structure that we have and I think that we could better provide for
our campuses and our staff with some realignment that's why I'm bringing the
deputy superintendent position to you as well as the next action item which is
the in-house general counsel roughly the deputy superintendent position would act
act as the chief administrator of course in my absence provide campus support
school leadership support strategic planning district improvement plan as
well as campus improvement plan you'll have somebody else next year that you
might be able to ask some questions to mr. Scott they'll supervise no I'll have
have a year to prepare whoever this person is but we'll work with the area
assistant superintendents human resources and athletics I've yet to
discuss really the realignment with staff pending the board's approval of
the two positions president mr. DeBrow I just want to say we've talked about
this as a board I know we've tossed it around a while so I'm just very happy
and excited to see that you bring this position forward thank you be a great addition to our team
and president it's the reorganization i'm very delighted with this and i hope the public will
understand this is not a symbolic reorganization this is an organization that i think is going to
pay real dividends for the board and for the district and i'm a wholehearted supporter of this
That covers both of those.
We did 6.11.
Well, I can tell you real quick about the general counsel position.
We'll go to 6.11 real quick, all right?
General counsel position will be a centralized approach.
Of course, we're going to still need our retainer program.
We're going to still have to utilize outside counsel,
specifically in the areas of special education.
But we'll have a centralized approach to reaching out to those
versus what I call a shotgun approach of which I kind of see right now we've spent in the last
two years 1.6 million dollars on attorney fees for outside counsel I believe this position will
pay for itself and possibly limit some of those expenses and the chairs for outside the position
of course it's an in-house legal support support to me as well as this school board they'll work
with of course labor law section 504 civil rights FERPA open records policies
and regulations serve as the district's hearing officer for any type of
grievances that would come to the board whether DGBA or FNG and interpret and
inform on actions required by school legislation basically they're going to
serve the district in a legal capacity. Madam President. Mr. Scott. I really support this I
I mean, this is something that is absolutely, a CEO absolutely needs an in-house counsel.
And I'm glad that we have an in-house counsel, and now you could make me really happy if you'll go get us a new out-house counsel.
Any objection to moving 10 and 11 to consent?
So moved.
Thank you, Dr. Hint.
Thank you.
MS.
At this time, we'll move to the open forum section of our agenda.
This time, the Board of Trustees will hear from patrons as established by Board policy.
The maximum amount of any one speaker is three minutes.
A time clock is visible on the podium, so the speaker may see the time remaining.
and our Sergeant at Arms, Mr. Henry DeBrell, will alert the speaker when one minute remains.
Due to posting requirements of the Open Meetings Act, the Board is able to respond only to a statement related to a posted agenda item.
Specific student issues, discipline, and personnel matters shall be addressed through appropriate channels established by policy,
and the presiding officer shall determine whether a speaker has attempted to solve a matter through those proper channels.
As I announce your name, please come to the podium.
State your first and last name for the record.
We have only one speaker this evening.
We're happy to have you here, Mr. Ray Dolan.
Is it Ms. Ray Dolan?
Oh, sorry.
I saw the red T-shirt and thought it was.
Ray, did I say that correctly?
Ray Dolan, good evening.
Ms. I get a lot of emails addressed to sir.
Ms. Good evening, Ms. Dolan.
It's nice to have you here.
Go right ahead.
Ms. I appreciate you all letting me speak.
I know this is kind of preemptive and I know you're not going to be able to respond because
because it is not on the agenda.
But my name is Rae Dolan, I have three children in Katy ISD.
I serve as an officer for the Katy High School
Athletic Booster Club.
My daughter's a sophomore at Katy High.
My son is a seventh grader at Katy Junior High.
And my youngest, Thomas, after three years
of wearing a future Katy Tiger shirt
is now finally a kindergartner at Katy Elementary School.
I live in attendance zone 20B,
which as best I can tell from y'all's map
is made up solely of the subdivision
called Remington Trails.
Katie Tiger family you guys in the community you guys know this is a family it's one that our
neighborhood has been proud to be a part of for the last 20 years our kids have Katie Tiger shirts
hats blankets an immense amount of tiger pride and as parents were Katie elementary school volunteers
watchdogs donors and PTO members however we also have the potentially unfortunate situation of our
community having been built decades ago west of what is now the new kane island subdivision
whether founded or unfounded we've heard rumors that kane island and our attendance zone west of
it might be rezoned to bryant elementary should there be any merit to those rumors i'm here to
ask the board to leave attendance zone 20b zoned where it is at katie elementary school
we may not be part of katie proper but for the last 20 years we've kind of been
an unofficial annex of the community of old katie um remington trail is a small community we only
have 150 lots and we only have 140 homes. When we factor in
numerous retirees, homeschoolers, and private schoolers, we won't make a dent
in any relief rezoning efforts for Katy Elementary. By Katy ISD's own
projections, we're not expected to see any growth in our attendance zone in the
coming years. It has not been stated that any of the current schools that are
being rezoned are planning to relieve katie elementary um however katie elementary is
expected double population in the next five years according to last year's abm so even though a
minute now even though somebody hasn't or even though it hasn't been announced at some point
you guys are going to have to discuss it um while we understand the need to provide relief to katie
elementary based on attendance projection numbers over the five next five years due in large part to
the erection of kane island the only thing reasoning our neighborhood serves to do is
uproot our children with no benefit of having a significant or an even moderate impact on the
projected population entry issues at Katie Elementary School now or in the future. While
Cane Island has no history at Katie Elementary School and therefore no logical historical or
yes emotional attachment to it we do. We had no say in Cane Island's development or geographical
placement. Should the development of Cane Island require rezoning relief to Katie Elementary
we're asking that we not be punished for it and that our elementary age children can continue
their decades-long tradition of being Katie Tigers and that was with eight seconds left
you did that very well Ms. Dolan thank you for being here okay that concludes our open forum
we have let me call your attention to future meetings we have a public hearing
on exploring Katie Independent School District's designation as a district of innovation tomorrow
evening here in this room and our regular board meeting next Monday October
24th there being no further business before the board this meeting is
adjourned at 7 50 p.m.
Official documents
Motions and votes
Recorded actions
MOTION 001 · AGENDA 3.1
PassedI move that the Board of Trustees terminates the probationary contact of the assistant choir director, Clarence Appleby, III, for good cause as determined by the Board and discussed in Closed Meeting. I further move that the Board suspends Mr. Appleby without pay pending discharge for good cause as determined by the Board effective Tuesday, October 18, 2016 and directs the superintendent to give written notice to him of these actions.
7 Yes · 0 No
| Trustee | Vote |
|---|---|
| ashley-vann | Yes |
| bryan-michalsky | Yes |
| charles-griffin | Yes |
| courtney-doyle | Yes |
| george-scott | Yes |
| henry-dibrell | Yes |
| rebecca-fox | Yes |
MOTION 002 · AGENDA 3.2
PassedI move that the Board of Trustees approves the personnel report as recommended by the superintendent in Closed Meeting.
7 Yes · 0 No
| Trustee | Vote |
|---|---|
| ashley-vann | Yes |
| bryan-michalsky | Yes |
| charles-griffin | Yes |
| courtney-doyle | Yes |
| george-scott | Yes |
| henry-dibrell | Yes |
| rebecca-fox | Yes |