General Membership Meeting: PVFT
October 9, 2006

I. Approval of the September 11, 2006 Minutes
Don moved approval; Pat seconded. Minutes unanimously accepted.

II. Old Business
A. Meeting Norms: Changes recommended, include that
o It is OK to monitor electronic devices (silence phones, etc.) and to use the 4 roles of convener, recorder, timer and reflector.
o It is not OK to hold side conversations.
B. PVFT 2006-07 Goals
o Add to goal #1 that advocating and negotiating for employee salary and benefits remains a priority.
o Lots of updates and efforts to keep members informed are in process; we recognize the need for improvement in this area.
o Bob moved that the Goals be accepted as amended, Mike seconded, and approval was unanimous.
C. Endorsements
o Results of member voting was such that a Dual endorsement for both Michael Watkins and Roland Baker for the COE is recommended, an endorsement for Kim Turley in Area 7 is recommended; an endorsement for Willie Yahiro in Area 4 is recommended; and no others received clear majorities. Members accepted these Ex Council recommendations.
D. COPE
o Lots of issues and concerns: should there be by-law amendments to define COPE’s structure, who are members, does donating time equate to donating money, who controls the money, what is the current balance, COPE activists wonder who the other members are who make contributions, how are money decisions made
E. Computer Use
o It is not OK to use a school issued computer to write political e-mails. Use a non-PVUSD e-mail account for any COPE or otherwise political communications. Normal union business is generally fine.

III. New Business
A. Building Reps
o New Reps will be trained at the next membership meeting; member lists will be available soon—sign up non-members who wish to become members; Carolyn will visit each site as building reps schedule her along with members of the Executive Council.
B. NCLB
o Taking more and more time are the ramifications of NCLB legislation. We are a Program Improvement (PI) District, and of concern to the state Office of Education behind only the LA and Oakland school districts (high on the radar screens). This means we must have a system in place which prevents us being taken over by the County or the State by having our own District Alternative Governance (DAG) Committee to support Year 4 schools, of which we have 7. Teachers in these schools have more training, more meetings, more help from DAG, perhaps from the RSRA teams, and sometimes even more resources. Concerns from teachers in these schools is the unfairness of the burden and the impact on teacher and student moral. DAG has the authority to govern PI schools, it is advisory to the Trustees and Superintendent: it can be held responsible for resources, implementation plans, and the like. DAG currently offers regular visitations, seeks to support schools with maintenance and operations needs, material needs (adequate consumable workbooks, for example), and preparations before the school year starts.
o The Reading First breaking news, involving corruptions with the contracts, effectiveness of the program and accountability in the Department of Education was shared.
o How can we be more proactive with our concerns about NCLB?
o Sam Farr wants to hear about our issues. How can we show solidarity with our colleagues in Year 4 and 5 schools?
o RSRA helps reform schools using a collaboration model and AFT trained leaders to Reform Schools to Raise Achievement (RSRA); the model allows each school flexibility since each site has different needs, the model is collaborative and partnered, not top-down; still the success depends on the energy and staff buy-in. Our own PVUSD staff include well-trained RSRA facilitators who are available to help schools who go into Year 3 of PI. Year 4 schools go under the magnifying glass of DAG.
o Beyond Year 4 come questions of restructuring. However, our contract protects teachers in such schools, no teacher will lose a job; nor can contract agreement be broken through PI status. Teachers may be reassigned, but will not be without jobs.

IV. Good of the Order
A. Substitute Crisis
o The district runs out of available substitute teachers often due to low pay or other issues like conflicting staff development planning. When a Principal needs to plan for coverage on a site, it should be a visible plan that is fair. The universities locally could be notified to pass on information to their education students that they are eligible to be subs with passage of CBEST and a Bachelor’s degree. (Communications Workers of America is the union for subs…thoughts about inclusion with PVFT were expressed.)
B. Campaign Buttons
o May be worn by teachers at their site.
C. Reflection: Facilitiation was good; concern for the concept of concensus v. majority vote (thumbs up and down and sideways is perhaps too informal)…true consensus has value but is not easy.

V. Adjournment at 7:00 pm was based on Mike’s motion, a second and rapid unanimous agreement!