The meeting began with a detailed presentation from representatives of Effective School Solutions (ESS), who updated the board on the mental health services being implemented across the district. The ESS program, which includes 14 clinicians managing caseloads of 15 to 20 students each, aims to address the mental health needs of students, particularly those with intensive requirements. The program’s objective is to reduce the number of students being referred to alternative educational settings like River Rock, thereby keeping them in their home schools with adequate support. Throughout the school year thus far, no students from certain schools had been referred to River Rock.

The ESS representatives outlined their comprehensive approach, which involves multiple tiers of support ranging from mild to intensive mental health services and includes professional development for staff. They highlighted the program’s success in improving student outcomes in areas such as grades, attendance, and discipline. Specifically, 95% of students in the intervention category either improved or maintained their GPA, and 100% showed improvements in attendance. Discipline improvements were notable as well, with 93% of students in this category showing positive changes.

Feedback from students underscored the program’s impact, with one student expressing that attending school would be a challenge without the support from ESS. This sentiment was echoed by a parent who credited the program with dramatically changing their child’s life by helping them process emotions and equipping the family with necessary tools for improvement. Teachers and principals also expressed positive feedback, highlighting benefits in emotional regulation and improved teacher morale and retention.

In addition to mental health initiatives, the board discussed a new coaching program called the Attuned Behavior Education Framework, designed to support teachers by improving their self-awareness, emotional regulation, and ability to connect with students. The professional development program includes six hours of initial training followed by 225 hours of coaching in various formats, allowing teachers to collaborate and share experiences. An assessment of teachers’ self-reported stress levels revealed that many often felt overwhelmed, highlighting the need for ongoing support.

The board also addressed public comment procedures during the meeting. A participant raised concerns about the three-minute limit for public comments, arguing that it discouraged community engagement, especially given the lengthy agenda. The board acknowledged procedural constraints and confirmed that the limit applies per speaker. There was a suggestion to extend the dialogue format, similar to practices in city council meetings, to allow for more effective communication.

Further discussions included a contract related to a district-wide reading challenge, but a participant was deemed ineligible to comment due to not being a resident or taxpayer of the district. The board encouraged written submissions instead. The meeting then transitioned to official business items, including the capital improvement plan for 2025-2030 and several agreements requiring board approval.

The board reviewed agreements related to student placements, specialized education services, and partnerships with external organizations. Concerns were raised about the financial implications of these agreements, and clarifications were sought regarding the district’s responsibilities. The board also discussed ongoing operations, such as installing security grills in school bathrooms and agreements for energy and transportation services.

The meeting concluded with policy updates, including exemptions from instruction, enrollment, graduation, student fundraising, hazing, social media, and family engagement policies. These updates were moved to the consent agenda for the next meeting.