August 14, 2023 Summary

KEY TAKEAWAYS:

Those who attend the meeting can now sign up to speak to the board on any topic at the beginning of the meeting, before any votes take place. About 10 percent of our students participate in our special education program. Our school district provides no incentives for teachers who receive high evaluation scores. The procedure for selecting students for the high ability program was discussed. Students are allowed to test out of math courses at the JSHS. Our JSHS does no student drug testing. It doesn’t appear that school administrators have easy access to any historical class size data, which makes it difficult to manage class sizes.

Agenda with links to board documents

TOPIC TIMESTAMPS: WLCSC – Regular Board Meeting August 14, 2023

•      2:40 Communication from the audience
•      7:26 Revising Policy 0166 to allow the public to speak before other business
•      14:51 Presentation on our special education program and identification process
•      38:29 Presentation on our teacher evaluations which do not affect salary/bonus
•      54:16 Personnel report 
•      57:07 High ability program information and process for identifying high ability students 
•      1:17:24 Procedure for testing out of a math class at the JSHS
•      1:23:16 School resource officer agreement and discussion about student drug testing
•      1:31:42 Accounts payable approval
•      1:33:12 Request for class size data and a discussion about class size increases
•      1:54:55 Public records request for Rocky Killion’s emails to current administrators
•      1:56:19 Student name change requests and a top-50 niche.com ranking
•      2:02:08 Board reports

The following is my summary of the public school board meeting, not the official meeting minutes. My personal thoughts and opinions are given in italics and represent my own views which do not necessarily reflect those of any other member of the school board. I identify myself as Mumford in the summary but use first person when describing my personal thoughts and opinions.

1:40 – Brad Marley had a work conflict and is absent.

1:55 – Moment of silence in honor of Bryan Gustus, JSHS custodian, who passed away.

2:40 – Communication from the audience (those who had signed up before the meeting began) 

• Randy Studt, union leader and JSHS German teacher, spoke about teacher evaluations. He appreciates that school leaders work well with the union and that our teacher evaluation process has not changed and does not incorporate any students or parents input.

6:21 – Approval of the Agenda for the August 14, 2023 Regular Meeting of the Board of School Trustees.

Voted 6 out of 6*

6:51 – Approval of the Minutes of the July 10, 2023 Regular Meeting of the Board of School Trustees.

Voted 6 out of 6*

7:26 – Witt asked for approval of Policy 0166 Revision which is about school board meeting agendas. In the April, June, and July meetings, Wang recommended changing the order of school board meeting agendas so communication from the audience happens first and that those who wish to speak to the board on non-agenda items do not have to wait until the end of the meeting to do so. After the July meeting, the policy committee worked with the school board’s legal counsel and recommended changing four words of policy 0166: “public participation as indicated by agenda item three” changed to “public participation as indicated on the written agenda.” Witt said she would call for a vote after just one reading because this is not a substantial change. Wang said that he does not want to discontinue the practice of allowing public comments at the end of the meeting and recommending hearing communication from the audience at the beginning and the end of each meeting. Mumford said that policy 0166 has several other issues and that it would be good to address them all while revising this policy. She recommended: 

• Removing the requirement that each agenda contain the statement: “this meeting is a meeting of the School Board in public for the purpose of conducting the School Corporation’s business and is not to be considered a public community meeting.” Mumford said that she could not find an example of any other school district that requires a similar statement. It has been years since this statement has been included on our meeting agendas. Why have it in the policy if we are not following it? 
• Removing the requirement that the agenda be sent to board members seventy-two hours prior to the meeting because it is in conflict with the requirement that the agenda be mailed to board members no later than four days prior to the meeting.
• Removing the requirement that the agenda be sent through the mail by changing “be mailed” to “be shared.”
• Adding the option for board members to add agenda items. For example, TSC’s policy is that any 2 board members can add items to the agenda. 
• Requiring that the agenda be posted both at entrance and electronically (change “or” to “and”).

Austin asked that Mumford email these suggested revisions so they could be reviewed by legal counsel. After the meeting, I emailed my suggested revisions as requested. Wang has been pushing for this change for months and it is great to finally see the school board leadership make this small but meaningful change to help school board meetings be more welcoming. Austin argued against Wang’s proposal at both the June and July meetings claiming that the change would make meetings too long and that it goes against Robert’s Rules of Order. She only dropped her opposition because the school lawyer said that her advice is to allow public comments before any voting. 

Voted 6 out of 6*

The policy committee continues to violate open door law. This committee was organized by the school board president and is required by Indiana law to advertise their meetings, allow the public to attend their meetings, and take minutes. This would allow transparency and discussion on school policies. The school board should also have 2 readings on every policy change to give time for community input before the vote. I do not understand why the board leadership continues to push for the policy committee to meet privately. The school board has a policy on the books that requires two readings for revisions to policies that the school board leadership continues to ignore. If the policy committee met in public, as required by state law, I believe that they would do a much better job.

14:51 – Roth shared a presentation on Special Education Services that was prepared by Shelby Johnson, special education director. Roth gave the presentation because Johnson could not attend the meeting. Roth presented data on our special education staffing, students, funding, and Greater Lafayette Area Special Services (GLASS). Our school district offers an essential skills program at WLES for students in K-6 and at the JSHS for students in 7-12. Across all three schools, our district has 10 special education teachers who have an average of 11.5 years of special education teaching experience and 40 special education paraprofessionals who have an average of 3.5 years of experience. About 10% of the students in our district receive some level of special education services. The state average is between 14 and 15% and the national average is between 12 and 13%. Students are eligible for special education if they have 1 of the 13 identified disabilities and there is evidence that the disability affects the student’s ability to succeed in school. 

In 2018 we started an effort to separate from GLASS and provide some of these services ourselves. We are currently in phase 3 of a 5-phase decentralization plan. However, we are currently on pause, in part because the GLASS director just retired.

Funding for special education is based on Adjusted Pupil Count(APC) at each level of disability: 

Funding	Level 1 Severe Disabilities	Level 2 Mild/Moderate Disabilities	Level 3 Communication Disorders
2020-2021	$9,156	$2,300	$500
2021-2022	$9,614	$2,415	$500
2022-2023	$10,575	$2,657	$500

In 2023-2024, WLCSC increased pay to paraprofessionals and also began district-wide training for paraprofessionals. There is also a new special education curriculum for WLES. Roth shared that Indiana University’s Center on Education and Lifelong Learning recognized our district for our special education policy and our procedure monitoring. 

Mumford asked what is different with the new curriculum at WLES and if there would be new curriculum at WLIS and the JSHS? Roth said this would have to be a question for Johnson. Sara Delaney, WLES principal, said the new curriculum is focused on foundation skills that are hands-on and age appropriate. Mumford asked if a study group could be formed with parents and teachers to identify ways to provide better Special Education support. Witt said that question would also need to be for Johnson. Yin asked about the identification process and noted that our percentage is lower than in other districts and that she has heard concerns from parents about some students not being able to get the help they need. Roth said Johnson would need to explain the identification process. Yin asked if the state funding for special education is enough to cover the cost? Roth said no, special education is an unfunded mandate because the federal and state funding is not enough to cover the cost of providing the required services. Wang asked for more understanding about case conferences. Roth said there are requirements specifying who attends case conferences. Greiner said there are required case conferences each year as well as anytime a parent or teacher requests a meeting. Roth said that Johnson would need to answer with more details. Wang said he would also like Johnson to share how often there are meetings to determine if students are eligible and what percentage qualify.

At the May and July school board meetings, two different parents gave a public comment about our special education services. One asked several questions about our school district practices (May 7:07) and another shared that they have withdrawn their student who had special needs because those needs were not met (July 7:40). I appreciate that the administration’s response is to share information. There were a lot of unanswered questions and I’m hopeful that this will be the beginning of an effort to improve. I think the best way forward would be to form a study group to identify our special education strengths and weaknesses as well as ways we can better support the students, teachers, and paraprofessionals.

38:29 – Greiner shared a Teacher Evaluation Presentation. Legislation requires that the evaluation tools and results are shared publicly each year. The evaluation tool has not changed so is the same as shared last year (7:44). The evaluation requirements were determined by union leaders together with administrators. The evaluation is based on 4 factors with weights: effective instruction (30%), instructional leadership (25%), student assessment/feedback (25%), and professionalism (20%). There are a minimum of 2 observations by the evaluator before completing the evaluation. Teachers are rated into one of 4 categories: highly effective, effective, needs improvement, or ineffective. 

2022-2023	Total Teachers	Highly Effective	Effective	Needs Improvement	Ineffective
WLES	51	48	1	0	0
WLIS	37	29	6	0	1
Jr/Sr HS	73	60	13	0	0
Corporation	161	137	20	0	1

For comparison, this chart was shared at last year’s school board meeting:

2021-2022	Total Teachers	Highly Effective	Effective	Needs Improvement	Ineffective
WLES	48	46	1	0	1
WLIS	35	30	5	0	0
Jr/Sr HS	72	61	11	0	0
Corporation	155	137	17	0	1

Greiner said that if a teacher is hired later in the year or resigns part way through the year, the teacher does not receive a full evaluation, so the number of teachers rated does not equal the total number of teachers. Mumford asked if the school district has any incentives for teachers who receive the highly effective rating. Greiner said no. He said it was discussed with the teachers and they do not want to have any incentives. Greiner said that not having incentives makes a healthy school culture that encourages collaboration. If there was any difference in pay for highly effective teachers, we would see teachers’ doors start to close and the focus would be on the money rather than on collaboration. Mumford asked Greiner to verify that the state gives our district funding to provide highly effective teachers a larger bonus each year, but that our district uses local funds to equalize the annual bonus for everyone. Greiner said that it is correct that teachers with the highly effective rating receive a 25% larger bonus from state funds than teachers with the effective rating, but then local funds are used to equalize the bonus payments. However, teachers who receive a rating of needs improvement or ineffective do not receive any bonus payment and are not eligible for a raise that year. 

Yin asked who evaluates the teachers and how feedback is shared. Greiner said that principals and assistant principals complete the evaluations and meet with the teachers to share the evaluation feedback. Yin asked how students and parents give feedback on concerns with teachers. Greiner said they should first share their concern with the teacher and then they would go to the principal or assistant principal. Yin shared that she has heard from the union leaders that they don’t want incentives, but she wondered if there are other ways to recognize outstanding teachers and staff. Wang asked about the student assessment/feedback evaluation category. Greiner said that this is about how the teacher uses assessment data to provide the students with feedback. It does not relate to seeking feedback from students or parents. Wang asked if the special education teachers are assessed differently since their teaching responsibilities look different. Roth said that there are different forms used for special education teachers.

I do not know of any other school district that uses local funds to equalize the state bonus payments to teachers. Greiner said that this has been discussed with teachers and that this is what they want. I think he means that this has been discussed with union leaders and it is what they want. I was a teacher in our school district for several years and no one ever asked me what I thought about equalizing the state teacher appreciation grants. I would like to see if an anonymous survey of teachers confirms Greiner’s assertion that teachers do not want to receive incentives for excellent performance. My view is that if we were to provide incentives and better recognition of outstanding teaching, we would not have as many great teachers leave our schools to teach in neighboring districts.

54:16 – Greiner recommended the approval of the Personnel Report. Mumford noted that the mental health therapist resigned and asked if this means that counselors are having to provide those services in addition to their regular duties. She asked how the schools can provide extra support until the position is filled. Greiner said they would be working to help. Delaney shared that the mental health therapist was helping children who were on a waiting list to see a therapist in the community. Many of those students were able to get regular appointments with a therapist over the summer, so that helps the current situation. Roth said that many teachers are working to understand and have set up a class environment that is trauma friendly. 

Voted 6 out of 6*

57:07 – Roth shared a presentation on the High Ability Broad-Based Planning Committee. The committee met in May and consisted of teachers, counselors, parents, administrative team, and school board representative, Yin. About 100 people attended, mostly parents of students who have been identified as high ability. Holding high ability committee meetings is a state requirement in order to receive funding. The committee reviews student identification, differentiated curriculum & instruction, differentiated guidance and counseling, the professional development plan, and evaluates the overall program. The 2023-2024 goals are:

• Family education & communication about high ability programs
• Teacher training in high ability best practice
• Promote understanding of social and emotional factors for gifted students
• Broaden stakeholder engagement

The school district plans to create a webpage with high ability program updates, communication to families of high ability students, and information about the high ability bootcamp and coursework. The committee will have two more meetings before their annual meeting. 

Wang asked about the identification process. Roth said that high ability student identification is based on an aptitude measure (CogAT test), an achievement measure (NWEA assessment), and a qualitative measure (teacher input). The CogAT test is given to all students. Those scoring in the 96 percentile or higher in verbal (language arts), quantitative (math), or both areas are identified as high ability. For students scoring near the cutoff on the aptitude and achievement measures, teacher input is used to identify high ability students. At the JSHS, students are given more choice in high ability courses and student high ability identification helps the counselors to direct students. Yin asked at what grade students are tested. Roth said that testing starts in kindergarten. She also said that parents or teachers can request students be tested.

Wang asked if the school board approves the high ability programs. Roth said no, that hasn’t been done in the past. The goals and details about the committee is what is shared with the board. Wang noted that our Policy 2464 requires that the school board approve the high ability program, but said that he is unclear on the proper procedure. Wang asked Roth to verify that the state provides only a small amount of funding for high ability programs. Roth said that we receive grants that cover some of the costs. Wang asked how much the high ability program costs? Roth said it would be difficult to determine because we use a cluster model mixing students of different abilities and said that this model follows the mindset of “a rising tide lifts all ships.” Yin asked for understanding about the cluster model. Roth said that the high ability classrooms are not strictly full of high ability students. There are many ways that students can be gifted. Yin asked if students with the same high ability category (language arts, math, or general) would be put together. Roth said they would receive instruction with students who have a similar high ability. Delaney said that differentiation happens in all classrooms. A 90 minute reading block has the teacher working with small groups of students with similar abilities. She said the cluster model was chosen because we have a lot of high ability students so this helps everyone. Delaney said that in K-3, some students may be high ability in one area, but have some gaps in other skills. The cluster model helps fill in those gaps. Psarros, WLIS principal, said that sometimes students are lacking foundational skills and the cluster model helps with those gaps as well. Yin asked how teachers are assigned to be a high ability teacher. Roth said the principals work with the teachers to determine the assignment and grade level. Teachers who work with high ability students have received training. I am grateful that Yin and Wang have been working so hard to get this committee started in order to meet state requirements and improve our high ability program. I am looking forward to learning more about our program.

1:17:24 – Yin asked about the procedure for testing out of a math class at the JSHS. She said that there is still uncertainty among parents and students because some students have been allowed to take a math placement test and others have been told that this is not allowed. She said that she would like to see more clarity about the policy and better communication. Roth said that the high school put the new policy in the coursebook, but understands that parents may not have seen it. Roth acknowledged that there has been some miscommunication about the new process for math placement. Math placement testing has been a frequent complaint from families in our district for many years. It was just a few months ago that the JSHS administrators changed the policy to allow math placement testing. However, communication with parents and students about the policy change has been poor.

1:23:16 – Cronk asked for approval of the School Resource Officer (SRO) Agreement and memo. The school corporation hires off-duty police officers to provide security services to the schools. Guidelines have remained the same as in previous years with the exception of the agreement being extended for a three-year period rather than a one-year period. Mumford verified that another change in the agreement is that SROs would now be eligible for classified staff raises annually. Cronk said they have received raises in the past, but not at the same time as classified staff, so that is being updated.

Mumford asked why there is no student drug testing at the high school and asked if we are planning to start drug testing. Greiner said they did drug testing years ago but haven’t done it for several years and said that there is no current plan to do any drug testing. Mumford asked Greiner who did the drug testing at his previous school district. He said it was an outside agency that performed the student drug testing and that nurses were responsible for the testing. 

Voted 6 out of 6*

1:26:50 – Cronk asked for approval for the Addendum to Lease – WL Baseball and memo. She explained that the school district has had a lease agreement with the WL youth baseball program for many years and this agreement is renewed every 3 years. The grounds crew has been asked to provide mowing. The league will allow for the exclusive use of the fields during the normal school day. Yin asked about the rent being only one dollar and asked what benefits the school district. Cronk said the league has made quite a few improvements to the school district’s property including construction of a concession stand and restrooms. Cronk noted that this type of agreement is common for other school districts because the league pays to maintain the fields. She said that many of our students participate in the little league program during the summer. Delaney said that WLES students use the fields sometimes during the school day, for field day, and at the end-of-year kickball tournament. When I taught kindergarten and first grade at WLES, I used those fields for a variety of outdoor activities including a parent doing a bubble lesson. 

Voted 6 out of 6*

1:31:42 – Cronk asked for approval of the Accounts Payable WLCSC and Accounts Payable WVEC. She shared Financial Report – Funds, Credit Card Statement, and Claims Docket Object Breakdown.

Voted 6 out of 6*

1:33:12 – Mumford asked the administration to share subject-level average class size at the JSHS. The school board packet included a summary of 2022-2023 K-12 class sizes. This document was prepared in response to Mumford’s request several months ago as well as the table below that Greiner shared at the July meeting (50:32). 

The summary of 2022-2023 K-12 class sizes only contained JSHS class size information for language arts and math classes:

• Language Arts 7: average 25
• Language Arts 8: average 20
• English 9 : average 21
• English 10: average 30
• English 11 Options: average varies from 17 to 30 depending on the requests
• English 12 Options: average varies from 11 to 30 depending on the requests

• Math 7 Options: average varies from 20 to 25 depending on requests
• Math 8 Options: average varies from 17 to 25 depending on requests
• Algebra: average varies from 16 to 27 depending on requests
• Algebra II: average varies from 14 to 26 depending on requests
• Geometry: average varies from 14 to 26 depending on requests
• Statistics Options: average 20-21 depending on request
• AP Calculus AB: average 20
• AP Calculus BC: average varies from 19 to 22 depending on requests

Mumford said that Greiner had asked that the board decide on the amount of class size data that should be collected and publicly shared. Mumford said that managing class size was one of the purposes presented to voters on the 2017 referendum ballot and that the upcoming referendum spending plan also lists managing class size as one of the purposes. She said that the school district should have class size data from 2017 onward for each subject area in grades 7 through 12. Witt asked Greiner to verify that this information is not available in a format that is easily accessible. Greiner said that is correct and that it would be very time consuming to collect. He said it is more complicated at the JSHS because there are many classes and more options in the same subject. Roth shared that to collect the class size data for 2022-2023 in just language arts and math took 4 to 5 people about 2 hours, and it was just for the second semester. Mumford asked if this means that the JSHS administrators do not know what their average class sizes have been by subject area over the past several years. Greiner said that the JSHS principal, Shriner, told him that average class size hasn’t changed over the past few years. Griener said that Shriner told him that if class sizes were to increase, he would request additional teachers through discussions with union leaders. Mumford asked if the only way to get JSHS class size data is for Roth and the central office staff to do hours of work and wondered why Roth could not just request this data from Shriner. Does the JSHS not have class size data? Roth said the data is available, it just isn’t easy to access. Roth said that the request needs to specify if the average is by department or subject area. She asked if the intent was to compare junior high and high school class size? Mumford suggested just asking for the current enrollment in every class at the JSHS and then asking Shriner what historical class size data he has available so the central office staff does not have to spend so much time collecting it.

Schott recommended that the referendum PR consultant, Dehler, should be asked if he thinks that collecting average class size information is beneficial. Witt said she hadn’t heard that Dehler wants to see this data. Schott said that if Dehler thinks it is beneficial, then he would be willing to approve collecting it, otherwise it is a waste of time. Austin noted that the union leadership is in the audience and asked for their input. She asked if they have heard complaints from teachers about class sizes. Amanda Hart, JSHS teacher and union leader, said they always pay attention to class sizes and bring any concerns to the discussion table. She noted that they added another English teacher this year because of those discussions and said that they are doing well with class sizes right now. Randy Studt, JSHS teacher and union leader, said that every JSHS teacher has a class that is too large and a class that is very small. He said that he doesn’t see the point of collecting class size data because some classes will have more students and others will have less. Studt noted that he is the only German teacher and currently has a class with 33 students, but doesn’t want to set a class size limit because that causes other issues. He said that grade levels with more students experience larger class sizes and those with fewer students experience smaller class sizes, but there is nothing that can be done to solve this issue. We can’t hire more teachers and we can’t tell students that they cannot attend class. Studt said that sharing average class size data for grades K through 6 is easier. At the JSHS, looking at historical data has little meaning because we don’t know if students have chosen to double up on math or other classes. He said the statement in the referendum to manage class sizes isn’t about having 20-25 students per class, but making sure the referendum passes so that we don’t have 35-40 students per class. Austin said if we want to know if class sizes are appropriate then we should ask a teacher. Yin said she appreciated hearing the perspective from the union leaders and would like to see a survey of all our teachers asking their perspective on class size. 

Mumford said that her request is just about collecting class size data, not a discussion about what class sizes should be. Austin said that she wants to know how the data will be used before the administration spends lots of time collecting the data. Instead, they could use their time to solve real problems that exist. Witt said that this agenda item was for information only and since it is just a discussion and no conclusion had been reached we can move on. Mumford motioned that class size data from the JSHS for each subject for the current school year be collected. Witt asked Greiner if he would be willing to put that information together. Greiner said yes. 

I’m shocked to learn that our school administrators don’t have easy access to class size data. It appears that no one is keeping track. I don’t understand why there was so much pushback from Schott and Austin to my request to publicly share average class size data. Whatever the data shows, it should be publicly available. Studt’s comment that 33 students in his class is fine because we can’t do anything about it was discouraging. One thing our school district could do is adopt a transfer student policy. The number of students in each grade level can be directly influenced by the number of transfer students accepted into each grade. Our current policy of accepting every student who asks to transfer in is not a good way to equalize the size of each grade level, which was the core issue according to Studt. He is right to be worried that if the referendum were to fail, we could end up with classes of 35 to 40 students. But, why is 33 students fine if 35 is unacceptable? In the end, I am grateful that Greiner agreed to collect and share class size data for the current school year. I will keep requesting data. I think the community would like to see how the JSHS class sizes have changed since the last referendum. For a historical look at WLES class size, see the yearbook data which shows a long-term upward trend in class size. Greiner reported that the average WLES class size was 21.6 last year.

1:54:55 – Witt said that the school board retreat will be August 24th. Information will be shared in advance with board members about the school district priorities set at last year’s retreat. She noted that survey questions for the referendum are available for board members to review. She said that there had been a public records request from Angie Janes. This was processed with a follow-up request for metadata which was also resolved. Witt said that there are now no open public record requests. Janes posted on Facebook Open Forum that her public records request was for email communication between the former superintendent, Rocky Killion, and the current administration. Her post said that her first request was denied, but with help from the Indiana Public Access Counselor, she resubmitted and was informed that there were about 2,000 emails between Killion and the current administrators, so it would take some time to fulfill the request. After nearly two months, the school district administration completed the request by sharing one email. She asked, “What do those other 1,999 emails say? Why won’t they share them? . . . Why, two years after retiring, does Rocky still have a school email account?” At the time Killion retired, he was hired by our school district as a consultant. It appears that he has continued to be very involved in our school district operations.

1:56:19 – Greiner recognized the great start to the school year which is due to teachers, students, families, and the community. He felt the passion and excitement from the teachers. He also shared that everything went well with the student name change requests, recently mandated by state legislation. A name change request has to be done if a student wants to go by a different name at school. He also shared that niche.com recognized the JSHS as one of the top 50 in the nation. He said that this recognition is the result of all our K-12 teachers and our community. I agree that our school district has a lot to celebrate. In 2020, our school district paid niche.com $9,900. 

Board Committee Reports:

2:02:08 – West Lafayette Schools Education Foundation – Schott shared that the homecoming tailgate will be September 15th from 5:30-7:30pm. The scarlet and gray fundraiser dinner will be April 19, 2024. Teacher grant applications will open in the middle of September.

2:05:02 – Public Schools Foundation of Tippecanoe County – Mumford shared that the cupcake run fundraiser will be September 17th and registration is open. Teacher grant applications are open with the deadline on September 20th. Roth is working to find another collaborator to facilitate the math tutoring grant received by Mrs. Falk before she resigned.

2:06:00 – Safety Committee – Yin attended because Mumford was out of town. She shared it was a short meeting with a brief discussion about student drug testing. 

2:06:30 – Legislative Committee – Austin attended an ISBA legislative committee meeting in Indianapolis to discuss legislative priorities.

2:07:25 – Board Teacher Discussion – Austin said it was a good discussion but shared no details.

2:09:08 – WL Park Board- Yin shared that Tiffany Lyle was sworn in as a new board member of West Lafayette Park and Recreation. There are many programs offered to the community. There will be a groundbreaking ceremony for Cason Family Park on September 7th at 10am.

Location: Happy Hollow Building, LGI Room

Future Meetings (calendar link)

• Executive Session Board Retreat – Thursday, August 24th from 5-9pm – Not open to the public
• Regular School Board Meeting – Monday, September 11 at 6:00pm at Happy Hollow LGI Room (enter from North side/pool side of building)

*Marley was absent.

This document is my summary of the public school board meeting, not the official meeting minutes. My personal thoughts and opinions are given in italics and represent my own views which do not necessarily reflect those of any other member of the school board. I identify myself as Mumford in the summary but use first person when describing my personal thoughts and opinions. Previous agendas, minutes, and audio recordings can be found at the WLCSC website.