Skip To ContentSkip To Content

    May 21, 2019 Site Council Meeting
    In Attendance—
    Teachers/Staff: Lori Miller, Jen Sclafani, Ginny Allemann, David Swanson, Mark Fung, Liz McCormack, Nora Sipes, Lisa Calvert, Tammi Mack, Melissa Sire,
    Administration: Jon Gasbar, Principal; ; Kim Sciarrone, Assistant Principal; Chris Cordell, Assistant Principal
    Parents: Kaori Tanaka, Chair; Elizabeth Corman, Vice Chair; Lisa Anacker, Co-Treasurer; Tim Fonken, Co-Treasurer; Mardi Brekke, Erin Shade, William Gould, Erin Gomez, Elizabeth Duffell, Emily Wong, Todd Bowers, Jacob Clark Blickenstaff, Chandra Mullenix, Alys Wylen, Anna Marshall, KC Potter de Haan, Jen Fung, Evan Briggs, Sall Clement-Amadou, Stephanie Barnes, Rosemary Grant, Satcha Dearborn Graham, Bridget Osborn, Emily Mitchell, Jenny Pinto, Erica Seddig, Jac De Haan, Chris Barnes, Hugh McCullogh, Susan Callari, Amelia McGee, Robin Belz, Whitney Gregory, Tanya Wilson, Jen Chan, Chris Ledford, Leslie Kot, Liz Benko, Joyce Macek, Lori Dennis, Lisa Berman, Anna Farr, Leslie Cary, Beck Weinhold, Andrea Mann, Kristy Copeland, Cassie Condon, Stacey Seifert, Moriah Love, Jessica Knaster Wasse, Kelly Hinerth, Layna Moysich, Jenny Sanders, Gregory Lorenz, Cathy Reidy Liermann, Malia Oliver, Tom Pouliot, Donts Jackson
    Minutes taken by: Cathy Reidy Liermann & Robin Belz
    Call to Order—Kaori Tanaka 6:38pm
    Welcome, especially to those whose first Site Council meeting this is.
    Approval of April meeting minutes— Request for corrections to April meeting minutes. None received. April meeting minutes approved as distributed.
    Principal’s Report—Jon Gasbar
    Busy last month.
    Superintendent visit: Superintendent came to visit last week. Six awesome 5th graders led superintendent around school--shared favorite expeditions, visited library and Katie’s self-contained classroom, saw preschoolers, played pogo. Spent time in the art room talking about how art teachers integrate art into expeditions. It was also Dress as a Book Character day. Thanks to art teachers, families, staff who worked on art night.
    Hiring updates:
    An admin secretary has been interviewed and recommended, and now we are waiting on HR, which could take one to two weeks.
    • Fully restored 1.0 assistant principal position.
    • 0.4 ELL interventionist hired.
    • 1.0 interventionist hired (as announced in all-school email).
    • 0.5 counselor position (certificated core) restored. Katie found position at another school in the interim. Laurin is leaving the school district. Counselor position has been posted and we’ll be interviewing after Memorial Day. We have 4th and 5th grade teacher openings. Interviews scheduled for tomorrow for these--11 people on hiring team.
    Race and Equity Working Group: There are families and some teachers that have been working on a long-term community race and equity plan. Point of plan is to think about where we are now and where we want to be in three years and put together a framework. Focusing on gathering input and voices of families that have historically been not as recognized. Working on how to get communication to wider community but how to also work with people who we don’t see at meetings like this.
    Multi-Tiered Support System (MTSS): 4 families who signed up to work on MTSS design. Jon is working with district person, Deenie, to set up training for families. Will be creating overall structure for what MTSS will look like. Teachers will be included.
    Continuous School Improvement Plan (CSIP)—6 or 7 families have emailed Jon regarding their interest. BLT will take CSIP to staff. Families will also work on CSIP. This is the document we look at that guides our goals. Three goals in current CSIP: math goal, ELA goal, social/emotional goal.
    Co-governance—Jon has been asked by a lot of people about his perspective on co-governance, and he’s been asked to address the topic publicly. He has previously expressed some concerns and reservations about lack of clarity around what it is and what it is not. One of the pieces that really concerns him is he feels like it has created a culture that’s led to staff and families combining together, as happened last spring, to participate in Harassment, Intimidation, and Bullying (HIB) of families in our community. He doesn’t ever want a family to feel like they are not welcome at our school . His question to meeting attendees is, do you have the same concerns? If not, why not? If so, what can we do to prevent something like that from happening again?
    Parent: Are we having this conversation right now? Not on agenda.
    Parent clarifying question: Your lead-in linked staff & parents and Harrassment, Intimidation, and Bullying (HIB). Could you elaborate on what you mean? That kind of language creates some real tension and is offensive to many people.
    Jon’s response: I’m not saying everyone is involved, but some people were involved in HIB.

    Parent: If we’re going to have this discussion, we should understand what we’re talking about and why these things are being said. This is a big discussion to be having without some background.
    Parent: I have a letter here from the district that was sent to all TC staff on April 5, 2019. I believe it is public record now that it’s in email.
    Parent read one section from letter discussing results from an SPS investigation on harassment, intimidation and bullying, addressed to TC Staff from Clover Codd, Chief Human Resource Officer at Seattle Public Schools, in which staff involvement in the previous year’s Site Council election was described as bullying in nature. Letter in its entirety was requested by parent to be attached to these minutes. Due the sensitive nature of the subject matter, the letter is not attached.
    Parent comment: I ran for Site Council last year. I’ve never seen the document that was just read in part. That document sounds like nonsense. It strikes me as odd to say something like that is “undisputed.”
    Parent comment: I think we could spend the next 20 hours debating the fractures of last spring; we don’t have that time here. I do want to focus on Jon’s point about co-governance. I don’t’ understand the relationship between co-governance and what happened last spring. I would like an explanation for how there is a link between the two.
    Jon’s response: I brought this up to the bylaws committee during their work. The divide is not clear. Jon has been hearing a lot the sentiment that we’re all one and the same. But we’re not all one and the same. I’ve yet to see the defining line there. It ends up being blurred and that puts us at risk as public employees. That’s where my reservations come from and where my concern is. I’ve told people within our community that. People continue to ask me questions about co-governance.
    Parent question: What do you believe a solution is?
    Jon’s response: How can we work together in a positive way? How can we have community norms? Wants to ask that we start following community norms and repair the things we’ve done in the past. Apologizing for some things would be a good start.
    Parent comment: The way you introduced this subject demonstrates an appalling lack of leadership. I don’t think it leads to the kind of collaboration you say you want. Opening with a mention of last spring and reading that letter contributes to divisiveness. I don’t think it’s the beginning of a conversation. Those are fighting words.

    Kim (AP): I was hired last spring, and my very first moment at TC was the meeting about SC elections. I tried not to get involved, tried to not read emails for a while. I share Jon’s concerns about co-governance. My name was on a petition and no one has ever asked me directly about the things in the petition. What is the end goal? Is it to make things better or to make things so negative that Jon walks out of this building? I have come to SC meetings and had people raise their voice at me. Feeling lots of negativity but it’s mostly directed towards Jon. We have Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA), we have decision-making matrix within the building. I come to SC meeting and hear that the teachers are unhappy. The environment is overwhelmingly negative and I feel it every day, and I feel for Jon, who is getting it 1,000 times worse than I am. Kids run up to Jon, staff members doing amazing things. When can this all be about the day of the kids? Last spring is not over; I feel it every day. Want people to voice their opinions respectfully and stop rehashing the minutiae of last spring. Take a minute to reflect on what we want and what co-governance would look like.
    Chair: Thanks Kim for sharing and apologizes for difficult year. Kaori and Elizabeth are going to put together working group about co-governance. Don’t want to gloss over this topic, important to work on, but also want to get to planned items on agenda. States she’ll take a few more brief comments on the topic before we move on.
    Parent comment: We came to this school specifically because of co-governance so that is the benefit. I want to see direct line between co-governance and bad behaviors. It’s clear that apologies need to happen on both sides and haven’t happened, and there’s a sort of bullying going back and forth. This brought me back to Site Council after a break. Hopefully many who are concerned about co-governance have been involved in the bylaws process.
    Parent comment: I support having a separate meeting about this topic because it’s really important. There is a lot of lack of trust and relationship building across all sides that needs to happen. It’s essential that teachers/staff be at the table in discussions about this topic. They can provide invaluable perspective.
    Vice Chair: This topic was not on the agenda, It’s an important topic that people have strong feelings about, and there are lots of people who probably want to be part of this conversation who aren’t here because it wasn’t on agenda.
    Teacher comment: It would be nice to have meetings where we can demonstrate how co-governance works well in the normal course of operation. Not having everyone follow the adult code of conduct is part of what led to recent conflict. It would be nice to move forward with normal topics and be able to demonstrate how this can work well. Sometimes we experience a lack of institutional knowledge, which is mostly held by teachers since parents turn over.
    Jon: I didn’t bring this up out of the blue. I was handed letter by two parents in the computer lab as I was trying to work.
    Parent comment: It is ok for parents to write to you.
    Parent comment: Petitions are not bridge builders. It’s happened twice now this year. I wanted answers a couple months ago and I went directly to Jon and met with him and was satisfied by information I got from him. Unity comes from relationships. We have to talk to each other. Jon inherited the current mess. I’m in schools all over the country. Jon is a good leader. If he left, who knows what we would get.
    Parent comment: I’m glad you’ve had that experience. Many of us have reached out to Jon for meetings. Not everyone has felt as positive about those meetings. As parents, we have the right to organize ourselves.
    Parent response: As long as you’re having meetings and talking, that’s where relationships come from. I’m not saying everyone is going to get a satisfactory answer every time. The school has doubled in a short amount of time. This is a huge school to supervise. Thank you for disagreeing in a helpful way.
    Chair: Since so many people are interested in this topic, Kaori will leave sheet at front of room for interested people to leave email addresses and she will try to organize special Site Council meeting for further discussion. Anything else in principal’s report before we move on?
    Jon: Got a little off topic talking about petition. Staff are going to work on building relationships. My question is, what are you going to do and how can I support you in that? I need everyone to step up and help in creating the culture because I can’t do it on my own.
    Treasurer’s Report—Tim Fonken
    Tim presented a draft Thornton Creek Parent Group (TCPG) budget for 2019-2020. This is the one time of year that we need to go line item by line item through the TCPG budget at a Site Council meeting. Tim noted that he would skip over things that haven’t changed very much and focus on larger changes and larger line items. This draft budget was created through a process that took into account input received from parents, input from teachers in Building Leadership Team (BLT) meetings, and a careful look at actuals.
    Income Section of the Budget:
    Walkathon/Move-a-thon—decreased goal but not by a large amount. This year, we brought in several thousand dollars less than we had targeted. In next year’s budget, walkathon goal set above what we raised this year but below budget for this year.
    Annual appeal—we were significantly under goal for this year. Set next year’s goal in between what we raised this year and our goal for this year.
    Parent question: Question about corporate matching for annual appeal money. Don’t see it broken out here.
    Response: All corporate match money is combined down below in line 465 Corporate Donations and Matches. It’s often difficult to know what match money is for when we receive it so it’s not actually possible to track by individual fundraising event.
    Winter Bazaar—raised more than $2,200 this year but goal of that event is not fundraising. So Tim suggested we leave budget target the same. Don’t want to think of it as fundraising event. This is a co-sponsored event, by TCPG & Associated Student Body (ASB), so TCPG needs to share some of the proceeds with the TC ASB fund held at the district.
    Instrumental music—Will be discussed more in Expenses discussion. Teachers are still considering prioritization of this.
    Choral music fee—In the income section of the budget, this amount represents what families pay in through classroom fees, which makes up half of the total pay for Mary K.
    Scrip—We had a banner scrip year last year, partly because of the timing of when checks came in. Tim met with KC and Leslie last week. Amount raised to date this year approximately $4,300. KC thinks we might end up closer to $6K by end of year. Scrip program is something we really need to think about. It’s really complicated and needs new volunteer energy. Decreasing target for next year to $6K.
    Corporate Donations and Matches—this is almost exclusively match money. Based goal for coming year off of what we think we’ll get this year.
    Yearbook—pass-through in TCPG budget (paid for completely through class fees).
    Tim is suggesting we use $30K of savings next year in order to not cripple some of the aspects of financial support of the program that teachers rely on the most. Suggesting we pull at least $30,000, don’t think we should pull more than $50K.
    How much is in reserves? Close to $300,000.
    PTSA guidelines suggest an organization should have 60% of one year’s operating budget in reserves. Old bylaws say 3 months of operating budget.
    Parent question: Timing of annual appeal? Timing was moved from last year to this year. Will it be moved again?

    Response: No plan yet for next year’s appeal. We had a very successful annual appeal last year, so we budgeted on that basis. Perhaps that was too ambitious. Maybe it had to with timing.
    Parent question: Are classroom fees represented anywhere on the income portion of budget?
    Response: Just choral music and yearbook. Everything else that classroom fees pay for (field trips, classroom supplies) are very specific to each classroom.
    Parent response: My concern is that those classroom fees aren’t mandatory—this is a public school. Since fundraising (classroom fees) is done by the TCPG, it should be accounted for in the income section of the budget.
    Response: One of the audit recommendations was to change the way we handle classroom fees. Almost guaranteed that it will look different next year.
    Expenses Section of the Budget:
    Instrumental music—Building Leadership Team (BLT) is considering this and could raise or lower the prioritization of this. District pays for music for 5th graders, and for a number of years, we’ve wanted 4th graders to have the opportunity as well so the TCPG has contributed to purchasing additional time with the instrumental music teacher. This is up for discussion this year.
    Choral music—cost of this shared between TCPG budget and classroom fees.
    Academic assistants—Suggested same budget amount as last year, but this will require a 15% cut in hours because now that they are hourly tutors paid by the district, the cost is greater.
    Teachers did an all-teacher survey about financial priorities for TCPG support. Academic assistants were the top priority on approximately 90% of the surveys completed. This is an important part of the program and very appreciated by teachers.
    Counselor—Budget amount here is not based on this year’s expeditures, but the approximate cost of adding 0.2 Full-Time Employee (FTE) counselor time. Anticipate continued discussion with teachers about this as priorities are arrived considered further.
    4/5 interventionist—This is a placeholder currently. We didn’t need this year, but most of interventionist money from district is restricted to K-3.
    Arts and expedition funds—no suggested changes.
    Art room—Current budget proposal includes significant increase here (it was an oversight in this year’s budget that it didn’t get increased from last year since we went to two art rooms).

    5th grade moving up costs (5th grade panels)—Remaining same.
    Professional development—Maintain at same level. In previous discussion at a Site Council, Tim had suggested recouping some of this this year because of annual appeal shortfall. However with lots of new teachers, there has been a great deal of discussion about this needing to remain intact for next year for possible Expeditionary Learning training and Responsive Classroom training, etc.
    Parent Question: Is there a way to plan ahead so that every x years (for example, every 5 years) we could have outside EL training?
    Response: Not really planning on 5-year cycle. What’s really appealing about that is one of more affordable ways is to get people to conference that’s closer and therefore cheaper.
    Jon: when was last time EL came in? Or people went to a conference? No clear answer.
    Kim: RC had separate session for administrators and school leaders. They offer professional development where a team or individual comes through and does a walk-through. Gives feedback and support onsite within classrooms.
    Cut budget for street crossing safety because the district is paying for it now.
    Playground supervisor—question to Jon about whether this level of support still wanted.
    Response: yes.
    Scholarship (financial aid): Has been budgeted pretty high. Tim recommending dropping to more realistic number that we might spend.
    Parent question: What is this for? Class fees/camps, can be used for anything for which families are asked to contribute money.
    Question: What if we overspent new target?
    Response: Priority to fund these things; would come out of reserves if necessary.
    Volunteer coordinator expenses—separate from volunteer committee, more related to Rebecca’s role. Sign-up genius fee here too.
    Question: Does the TCPG budget—or could it—pay for driver’s license fee/driving record? This is an equity issue—to make sure everyone has same opportunity—and the school or district should help with this.
    Follow-up question: Does this need to be paid every year or is it a one-time fee?
    Response: Every year.
    Comment: There are additional fees for parents who’ve moved into Washington recently.
    Bookkeeper stayed same.

    Suggested some small increases and decreases through Site Council committees. If you are a committee chair and see a surprising number, talk to Tim. Bumped up EDI and Special Ed and bumped down several other committees.
    Question: regarding babysitting money—we ran out of money this year. Has this been looked at so that more single parents could come to more meetings, etc?
    Response: Hard to know how to handle that. This budget doesn’t currently set aside more money, but we could. Needed primarily for EDI, Special Ed, and Parent Enrichment in addition to Site Council. Tim will add this into budget.
    Parent question: If the class fee structure changes based on the findings of the audit, would that affect this budget?
    Response: Yes, but it’s hard to know to what degree. Suspect classroom fees will go one of two ways. Either we will be allowed to do much as we have but all communication will need to be parent-coordinated. Or, it could go very far the other way and become more of a school and district function, which makes it more ok for teachers to communicate and be involved, but then the money is subject to more rules.
    Parent question: Curious about whether it’s not even going to be permitted to do classroom fees at all and therefore money would need to come from somewhere else?
    Response: We don’t know yet.
    Teacher comment: Coming from another school where everything went through ASB. Bought same kinds of things, but process of getting reimbursed was laborious and took a while. Also placed greater burden on office staff.
    To wrap up, draft puts us: more appropriate level of childcare. $720 overspend as written. Not worried about that, didn’t expect it to balance in this version. In June meeting, we need to pass budget for 2019-2020. Tim will get more feedback from teachers on relative priorities. Tonight is big opportunity (or by email after this meeting) to vocalize what isn’t here.
    Parent comment: Request for funding for mediation, to change culture, to work on bullying behaviors, training on racial equity.
    Response: It’s not clear that the responsibility/financial burden of that should be borne by parent group. This is just a baseline. E.g. anti-bullying thing: If there is a great opportunity that the district won’t pay for, we would typically talk about it at a Site Council meeting, and if approved, add funding.
    Parent response: Can we see if it’s important now?
    Response: Usually these conversations happen around specific opportunities.
    Parent: Tim reached out to Angela/Jen and asked for requests. Tim’s budget reflects what Angela requested. Maybe EDI committee should talk offline in next week’s meeting about additional asks, if any.

    Parent question: In June discussion, will we see actuals?
    Response: Yes.
    Parent comment: I agree that there maybe needs to be a separate discussion about putting money where our mouths are with regard to culture. But PTSA equity fund is set aside. While original thought is that that is money we would send outside of TC, maybe what we need right now is help within our own community.
    Parent comment: Special Ed co-chair, on email referenced earlier with Tim, Angela, Jen, and might need to fine tune numbers a bit more. Special Ed didn’t have same expenses as EDI because most of speakers donated their time.
    Staff Report—Mark Fung
    Last week was book fair, dress-like-a-book-character day, and art night. Thanks to volunteers and to staff and students for making it a great time.
    Staff members have been working on CSIP.
    May is a very busy field trip time. Camps. Spring camp kicked off by 2nd graders who had a great time.
    There has been lots of testing going on.
    Thanks for teacher appreciation. That was fantastic.
    Bylaws Committee—Chris Ledford
    Bylaws and Charter
    A little context:
    Nobody’s vision of what these documents should be completely made it into the final draft. After listening to members of the community, bylaws committee thought this encapsulated the best version. Everyone will find things they don’t agree with. Originally thought we’d be done with this pretty early. People had ideas about how things should function. The entire idea of shared governance—all of that came into discussion related to these documents. Disappointing that people feel like we haven’t been having these conversations. Have been trying to have that conversation through this bylaws work. Trying to make sure everyone’s voice is heard. Apologies to those who feel like this topic hasn’t been raised. The committee solicited comments and had a couple of community meetings. They took into consideration audit issues, though auditors seemed somewhat ill-informed. They may not have always talked to people who knew and they were not aware of documents in their own files. The committee didn’t want to exclude people from participation unless there’s an actual reason someone shouldn’t be there/a true conflict of interest. The language around this might not be as strong as everyone wants. They’ve asked for district rules around this but haven’t found them. Ultimately they decided not to restrict participation in co-governance. Thanks to all who made comments throughout this process. There have been some strong emotions but everyone has been unfailingly polite and approached the process with the intention to make these documents work. There are problems in our community but everyone commenting on these wants the documents to work.
    We could not have made these documents work without the input of teachers. Nora, Liz, and Lisa attended lots of meetings. Offered invaluable information about how school functions and how it could function better. Others can’t know what the teachers know, no matter how competent in their own fields. Essential to have teacher involvement—encapsulated deep knowledge.
    Move to voting process:
    Best practice is to first deal with the bylaws. Striving for consensus. Board of TCPG has to vote on but striving for consensus. Now not time to offer line edits. Now is time to express thoughts about whether these should be passed on balance. Conversation open to parents/guardians only, not teachers or administration.
    Parent comment: Felt that requirements of committees were not equally handled (e.g. more requirements for EDI than Special Ed). Also, in 4.4 Removal, it doesn’t state that person should be told ahead of time about removal.
    Parent comment: One remaining set of concerns and one recommendation. Still very concerned about lack of clarity on conflict of interest. Believe there’s not enough content here that guides this organization in the event of bumps in the road. Recommendation: potentially after this goes forward, maybe next year’s SC talks about creating an operational procedures document that is more fluid and discusses conflict resolution.
    Response: Think this is a really great point. Standing rules document would be great to have. Could have document that does outline some of those things that might change more frequently. Fantastic idea.
    Parent response: I won’t officially dissent, but I don’t wholeheartedly agree with everything here.
    Parent comment: This process was really good, great attempt to integrate comments, nicely run meetings.
    Parent comment: Getting back to suggestion for procedural document, it would be great to tie in leadership training for committee chairs at beginning of year to set norms and so everyone knows how to work together in an effective way.
    Response: Great idea.

    Suggestion to possibly add this to the budget.
    Parent comment: Thank you. This was a long process. You accepted a lot of input from a lot of people. Appreciate the thoughtfulness that went into this.
    Parent comment: I’m looking at bylaws for the first time. In part talking about elections, page 4 (3.4.4)—doesn’t specifically say you’re elected if you get majority vote. Doesn’t specify minimum number of voters you need for valid election.
    Response: Fair point. Does not, in fact, say that it requires majority (or plurality in the event that you have more than two people running). Good catch. Think that’s presumed.
    Proposed change to 3.4.4 Final sentence. “For a given position, the candidate who receives a plurality of votes cast will be deemed elected for that position.”
    Parent comment: There is a place where there is a blank in 3.9. Needs to be filled in with 3.23.
    SC Chair comment: In 3.3 qualifications, it should say “certificated.”
    Chris moved that with those 3 amendments, the bylaws should be adopted:
    2 no votes, multiple yes votes.
    Chris stated that in the interest of the consensus process, he wants to give opportunity for the two people who voted ‘no’ to add anything they’d like to what has already been said.
    Kristy Copeland stated that she was being a proxy for Angela Hyland, EDI chair, and read a statement from Angela: EDI portion of bylaws has been beefed up without consultation with EDI chair. Could be setting future EDI chairs for failure. In particular, the language regarding monitoring discussion happening at district is setting volunteers up to be out of compliance. I think anyone joining EDI would love to have the group accomplish all these things, but responsibilities are beefed up compared to other similar committees, like Special Ed. Maybe this level of belongs more appropriately in some other document.
    Chris: Fair point.
    Several parents continue advocating against different requirements for EDI than other committees
    Parent question: Why is the feedback from current EDI Chair being ignored
    Response: We incorporated some changes but not all

    Hiring Committee Chair comment: not all of my changes for Hiring Committee were incorporated either
    Parent question: Where did you start with committee descriptions?
    Response: Pulled from existing documents and revised from there.
    Teacher comment: Hearing that EDI committee is very important—maybe we could change wording to “strive for” instead of a requirement
    Response: Existing language already includes “as time permits” – should that language apply to the entire description? Apologizes for EDI feeling like language was pointed against them; they tried to incorporate all comments as best they could
    Parent question: Is EDI recommendation is to drop certain language? If so, what?
    Parent question: How could we incorporate guidance for how SC EDI collaborates with other EDI groups at school (staff EDI, PTA EDI)?
    Bylaws Committee member: Suggests that for today it says something like “EDI exists to support the school’s goals as set forth in the Charter of the EDI committee,” and then EDI has time to write their own charter.
    Parent comment: That’s a big change. Is there some way we can move forward now?
    Parent comment: In the end, this is committee work and a Chair should not be responsible for everything – all committee members share responsibility.
    Parent comment: Recollects from EDI website that goals are much longer than what the Bylaws include right now
    Parent comment: Propose that we vote on Bylaws and plan on amendment as soon as EDI knows the wording they want
    Chris suggests removing existing EDI language and inserting an amendment that says Chair duties will be decided upon later
    Facilities Committee Chair: Health and Safety stuff got put into Facilities Committee – eg, assisting teachers and staff with security issues, emergency supplies. She didn’t know any of that was going to be under Facilities
    Safety Committee Chair: It’s redundant – also under Safety Committee.
    Communication Committee Chair: Asks why Communications Committee has language precluding certain duties.
    Chris offers amendment to Communications Committee language.
    Final committees, amendments for defining language later include EDI, Facilities, Communications, Hiring.

    Parent question: Can we just vote on election section and not put time pressure on other sections?
    Response: Not really
    Bylaws Committee Member: Explains that amendments allow committees to propose their language and he doesn’t understand people’s reservations.
    Chris suggests that the Board will likely approve all amendments without question.
    Staff comment: request to move forward
    Parent question: Can new committees be created by amendment at any time?
    Response: Yes.
    Parent question: Are staff allowed to serve on Board?
    Response: Certificated staff can not, but non-certificated can
    Vote taken, and majority passes the Bylaws.
    Charter has not been discussed and it’s 9:05pm; Chris asks whether anyone opposes the Charter as it is now
    Parent question: Is notice of SC meetings included?
    Response: Yes.
    Parent question: Is Parent Group Board the same as SC?
    Response: Chris explains how PG Directors are members of SC Board.
    Clarifying question: What role does SC have in advising PG in expenditures?
    Response: Chris answers that SC is not allowed to advise on fundraising but is supposed to advise on expenditures
    Jon: What does it mean for SC to advise – how does that affect decision-making? Response: Ultimately SC can’t force how TCPG money is spent, but advise can represent coming together as a community, teacher priorities, in consultation with admin
    Treasurer: adds that SC’s role extends beyond financial decisions, including programming and other things we feel should be done as a community
    Staff comment: When she started as a parent, TCPG funds were used for advocacy, and over time the funds have shifted in use towards alignment with school mission; says there’s never really been a problem
    Chris asks if we have a quorum of teachers to vote on Charter – we do.
    Chris moves to adopt the Charter. It passes.
    Kaori—apologies to committees that have been sidelined due to how long the ByLaws and Charter discussion took.
    Suggestion to add committee reports that weren’t able to be made to the minutes from the meeting so that entire community can prepare for next meeting.
    Suggestion to put everything in a Special Edition newsletter.
    Meeting adjourned at 9:25pm
    The following are committee reports that were prepared but not made at the May Site Council meeting due to lack of time.
    **Hiring Committee Update** Our current pool of parents and caregivers Between 40 and 50 parents and caregivers in our community have taken the district's required interview training. Of those, about 30 have filled out our form so that we have enough information about them to place them on hiring teams. Thanks to everyone who has gotten trained and is willing to serve! Always need more parents It’s important to have a big list of parents who are trained up and willing to help interview new teachers and staff. Each position comes with a set of criteria we try to fill: the more parents we have in our pool, the easier it is to meet these criteria. Plus, the interviews have been coming up kind of quickly, and sometimes we have to contact a few people before we find one with availability. There are still monthly trainings at the district offices – including one June 6 – for anyone who has not yet received training and is interested. So far this year So far this year we have held interviews for: • full-time interventionist • part-time ELL interventionist • admin secretary • fourth/fifth grade teachers Next week we'll interview for the full-time counselor position. Thanks to parents who have been hiring teams so far: Malia Oliver, Hung Nguyen, Kaori Tanaka, Emily Wong, and Satcha Dearborn Graham.

    Questions? Get in touch:
    ****************************** Communications Committee: Facebook Group discussion - How it's connected to Site Council. The discussion about the management of the Friends of TC FB group was cut short at this and the last Site Council meeting due to time constraints - I know there are more opinions to take into account. This month, I have collected input from the communications committee, and shared our notes with the SC Chairs. Here is a summary:
    School Administrators, Teachers, Staff and Parent Volunteers work hard to keep TC Community informed throughout the year using the following tools: email, teacher communication, room parent communications, weekly newsletters, special edition newsletters, school website and calendar, kid-mail, posters and flyers around school, sign-up forms, committee meetings, Site Council meetings, bulletin boards, and now a live monitor!
    Here is the history of TC FB groups as I understand it - In 2010 the Thornton Creek School FB group was started - over time came to be managed by alumni. In 2015, the Friends of TC FB group was created by the then Site Council Leadership to provide a community forum for current families, teachers and staff. At some point it was turned over to be managed by the Communications Committee. Over the past year, several community members, teachers and administrators have shared their concerns with me regarding this forum. Those include, but are not limited to:
    • Privacy for our families, teachers and staff • Topics discussed don’t reach our entire school community. • Posts and comments present a possible liability for TCPG, our school, and the district • Challenges in enforcing community norms • Questions of censorship and who determines appropriate vs inappropriate content • Community members wanting to limit or eliminate social media from their life, but don’t want to miss out on school discussions • Potential for misinformation to be spread to a large portion of the community • The disconnect between online and personal interactions / relationship building.
    • The group has over 600 members, there is no current record of who members are, how they are attached to the school, or a system to manage membership
    Based on these concerns, and the feedback I received from committee members, I recommend that TCPG / SC step away from the management of the Friends of TC FB group.
    If there is consensus to move forward with this recommendation, some possible actions include: - Set up an official school FB public page used exclusively to promote school related events - with restricted posting privileges - Comms work with admin/staff to update FAQ’s on TC school website that answers questions about current school practices and policy - trying to steer parents directly to school employees for resources and policy questions rather than crowdsourcing answers that may or may not be accurate.
    To maintain FB as a networking resource for the families who use it: -Identify parents and/or alumni to administer and moderate the “unofficial” Friends of TC group. - Define and publish: membership definition, access (private vs. public) and purpose of the group - Create and adopt a set of community norms that members are held to. - Remove TCPG / SC management