To Nonpublic School placements is that we just have contracts with them and we could assign people. We could take a child from one Nonpublic School and move them to oaks or take them from oaks and move them somewhere else and that would be problematic, and would like to acknowledge that. In the case of the Nonpublic Schools we just say these are the Nonpublic Schools that were going to contract with and its placement, et cetera. So we dont actually vote on the amount of money were giving to each Nonpublic School that. Is what makes this a little different. Exactly right, commissioner wynns, which is why this particular reso 13 million the entire Nonpublic School budget and to give her the advice to declare and abstain from this kind of discussion for the very reason you very articulately said. The question arises just like i think when commissioner fewer was you been talking about. We talk about what strategies we have to spend less money on Nonpublic Schools. That is one of our budget
Was another piece that we spoke about. You know, still kind of up in the air. And then the Budget Development calendar for 1314 he reviewed and some of the key areas that well need discussion on the timeline of the budget. We wanted to thank the Board Members in the things that you want to talk about, during our budget process and well be incorporating those topics in our discussions. As you know, there is a lot of Different Things that are happening on a variety of different budgets that will impact us deeply over the next two years. So we want to continue to have these conversations earlier rather than later. So i just wanted to appreciate the staff that helped to support this committee, because there is a lot of moving parts. And so in the next coming months, we will be really focused on the changes particularly around prop 30, and some of the priorities that were going to have to make in the coming months. Thank you. Thank you commissioner mendoza. So this brings us to item t are w
Somebody is going to start on the 30th and she submitted a second Resignation Letter changing the date to the 30th. Sounds like that is the reason. I am not going to project, but just guess on my own. And then on the 14th, miss olsen said you have an email asking the principal is it possible to be reinstated. Is that correct . She submitted a second Resignation Letter to hr, changing the date to the 30th and that might have been after the cation conversation that you just mentioned and she asked the principal is it possible to be reinstated . She submitted the second resignation form on the 13th, requesting an Effective Date of 11 30, on the 13th. The day after that, the 14th, she remailed the principal and asked if it was possible to be reinstated. Then on the 16th, she emailed the principal that she did not get a response . That she was talking to the union. Is that when the principal says it would be better to talk to the union . Yes. Okay. Thank you. Commissioner murase . I have a
The day after that, the 14th, she remailed the principal and asked if it was possible to be reinstated. Then on the 16th, she emailed the principal that she did not get a response . That she was talking to the union. Is that when the principal says it would be better to talk to the union . Yes. Okay. Thank you. Commissioner murase . I have a question. Does this resignation in any way impact our ability to reapply for another position within the district . It does not. Any other comments . Mr. Kelly, you have crept up closer and closer so say something. I think we have initial confusion. If you look at the footnote on the letter, you will see that the initial resignation was submitted november 7th. Which proposed the 16th, but the principal received her resignation and then the rescission for that. So the timeline that mr. Bushman gave you would apply if that were the only thing, but she then submitted a rescission for that that doesnt show up in his timeline. Then again when she was fr
Committee meeting, a committee of the whole or a Curriculum Committee meeting, would she then there be exempt from participating in those discussions . She would. Would she be exempt from participating in any discussion around special education and contracts . I dont think so. The way the government code is written, is that basically, if there is some financial gain nexus between what is being discussed and the fact that she employed by a Nonpublic School or a situation where an appearance, if a contract was not awarded to one Nonpublic School, that was maybe a competitor of oaks. She would not involve herself in anything there there would be the appearance of personal gain because that could provide funds to oaks that could be her salary. If its just a special education question in general that is unrelated to Nonpublic Schools, i of course will look at each of those individually, but i think she is able to discuss and vote on these matters. So this would not exempt commissioner maufa