Unified Union Study Committee
Session #8
Agenda
ANWSU Governance Study Committee
Meeting Minutes -
Committee Members Administration Guests/Visitors
Kristin Bristow Laurie Gutowski Tom O’Brien Diane Cousino
Samantha Kayhart Amy Johnston Donna Corcoran Allison Vigne
Adela
Langrock
Linda Hawley(absent) David Kayhart Kitty Muzzy Rick Kerschner
Dennis Mueller Scott Gaines Ann McGrath Michelle Chamberlain
David Tatlock Paulette Bogan
Karen Petersen Sid Bosworth (arrived
Ray Proulx
Winton Goodrich
1. Call to Order: The meeting was called to order by K. Bristow
at
2. Approval of
Minutes: Motion by A. Langrock,
seconded by L. Gutowski to approve the minutes of
3. Public Comment: None at this time.
4. Study Committee Members’ Comments: None at this time.
Ms. Bristow introduced Winton Goodrich, Associate Director of the VT School Boards Association, who came to this meeting to discuss media communications. Mr. Goodrich distributed and reviewed copies of a “tool kit” that was prepared by VSBA to help school boards work effectively with the news media. He called attention to page 7 of the booklet – “building community support through school events” – as one of the best target audiences to get the word out. There are several options available to utilize, including public access television and radio talk shows. Mr. Goodrich indicated that this booklet is a good resource tool and that he is available to help, once the committee decides to move forward. An interesting statistic on parents/taxpayers – 20% still have children in school – 80% are outside of school.
5. Middle School Readiness: Superintendent O’Brien explained that he had some reservations about asking staff members to attend this meeting – did not want to get into discussion about a particular school or student. He asked Manya Bouteneff to seek feedback from them. They responded that it is not that they see differences between the schools – the concern is the lack of improvement in the basic skills, given all the improvements in curriculum at the elementary level.
Mr. O’Brien distributed copies of the NSRE results from grades 4, 8 and 10. Reading analysis & interpretation and writing effectiveness are two areas where you can see the deficiencies between the grades, which he asked Carol Spencer to speak to.
Carol indicated that we are bringing grades 5-8 together to look at the results and find the needy areas so that they can be addressed in the curriculum. Principals are supporting the 5-8 teachers coming together to create a model in curriculum/instruction and assessment so that we will see positive results. Variables should not be school to school – as we do year to year. We need to be looking across all grade 5s and beyond - not just at one school. New tests will allow us to look at growth from year to year - of the same group of students.
Mr. O’Brien indicated that the question about student preparedness (at 7th grade) is only one piece. Work in the schools is enhanced by teachers working together.
Ms. Spencer noted that tests are not calibrated together in
the State of
Dave Tatlock commented that, in trying to relate all this to a unified district, wouldn’t it be great to take the best from each school.
Carol indicated that she is trying to find staff with certain strengths to be teacher leaders across the district, which is very difficult to do. The compelling argument is that if we were a unified system we would be sharing the resources – teachers, programs, students, etc.
6. Continued Discussion & Action on Articles of Agreement: Business Manager Corcoran distributed worksheet estimates, by town, of what the annual debt payment per equalized pupil and the tax impact would be – with and without the proposed construction projects at Addison and Ferrisburgh. She noted that the total figures for each town, includes the two union schools and all data is per equalized pupil. Construction costs and associated bonds are estimated and she noted that any changes in the numbers of equalized pupils from year to year could change the comparison. Discussion ensued.
K. Bristow indicated that a selling point to taxpayers is to point out the fact that the equalized per pupil cost could change from year to year, dependent upon enrollment.
Ms. Corcoran noted that the unionization impact will be less than the year to year variance in enrollments and budgets.
Rick
Kerschner commented that it’s not going to affect the tax rates enough to
bother with the unionization and encompass the proposed construction. Why not just let
Discussion ensued regarding payment of the debt load – who would pay for it, etc. The question remains – do we unionize first and include all the debt or draw a line and leave the construction projects separate.
ANWSU Governance Committee
Page 3 of 5
Kris Bristow pointed out that if this committee decides to go forward with this – it’s a philosophical mind set that we have to explain to the taxpayers.
Rick Kerschner noted that perhaps a larger percentage of construction costs from the state would be a good incentive. Mr. Proulx indicated that the state has proposed a larger percentage – but only on new construction. It was pointed out that, looking at this year only is different than looking forward 10 to 15 years.
Mr. Proulx stated that his recommendation would be to bring this initiative forward not – rather than tie our hands for the future. Resources are not just the school buildings – but staff, programs, etc.
Dave Kayhart – we have to get over this mind set. If we unionize, all our schools become 1, with separate buildings. If we go forward with this without the construction at Addison and Ferrisburgh, then in another few years another school will need something done and Addison and Ferrisburgh will be paying for their own projects, plus their share of the new one. Doesn’t it make more sense to include the construction at the time of unionization?
Rick Kerschner stated that in spite of everything he has said this evening – he agrees that it makes sense to do this.
Mr. Proulx indicated that language can be written into the Articles of Agreement to cover any new construction, as well as the current proposals.
Mr. Goodrich noted that in 2008, the state is offering $150,000 for year one of starting up a unified union.
Nancy Larrow indicated that she sees this as an all or nothing decision. We need access to all the buildings and the resources that will be available to us.
Dennis Mueller noted that if we do this, Addison and Ferrisburgh would have a year to get their projects through and the union would pick up the debt. Mr. Proulx noted that, there again, language can be written into the Agreement to spell out when, etc.
Adela Langrock – what if the two communities move forward with their projects and we go forward with the unionization question at a later date – just to get everything out and open on the table. The concern is that if we do construction after the unionization – it could look as though we waited intentionally.
Karen Petersen noted that this would allow us more time to educate the public on what the unionization is.
Mr. Proulx pointed out that what we are really talking about is the timing for the vote. Superintendent O’Brien indicated that back before this group started meeting, the communities supported funding of this study, which indicates that there is probably still support out there for the idea of unionizing.
Dennis Mueller indicated that delaying the vote is a gamble – as is Addison and Ferrisburgh going ahead with their projects before the unionization.
Kris Bristow indicated that she feels if we do not move forward now, we will lose the momentum of this group
Mr. Proulx indicated that the committee has 4 major decisions to make this evening:
# 4 – facilities
# 7 – assets
# 9 – board apportionment
# 11 – the time of the vote
Article 4 – regarding the existing buildings and proposed construction projects. Discussion ensued. Ray Proulx will edit the Article and review language with the Department of Education attorney and bring back the final language.
Motion by David Kayhart, seconded by Laurie Gutowski, to approve the Article as amended. So voted and the motion carried.
Article 7 – regarding all school districts’ assets – real estate and personal property will be conveyed to the Unified Union District for $1.00 each.
Motion by David Kayhart, seconded by Dennis Mueller, to approve the Article as written. So voted and the motion carried.
Article 9 – regarding the board membership apportionment, based on population of the respective community.
Motion by David Kayhart, seconded by Paulette Bogan, to move Article 9 as written. Having at large members was discussed. So voted and the motion carried.
Article 10 – regarding the election and 3-year terms
for board members from each of the communities.
Discussion ensued. Agreed to
change the initial election of membership terms for Vergennes and
Motion by David Kayhart, seconded by David Tatlock, to approve the Article as amended. So voted and the motion carried.
Article 11 – regarding the date of the vote for
forming a Unified Union District. Agreed
that the vote and election of board members will take place at Town Meeting in
March, 2005. If approved, the U.U.
District will be formed
Mr. Proulx indicated that by the next meeting he will have met with the attorney at the Department of Education to review the Articles of Agreement (with the changes) and get them out to the Committee to review. Mr. Goodrich indicated that Mr. Reedy does not stand behind these Agreements in a court of law – and advised that the Boards’ local attorney review them as well.
In the next few weeks we will need to meet with the Commissioner of Education and the State Board of Education, etc.
Discussion ensued regarding the presentation that Superintendent O’Brien and Kris Bristow are doing at the VSBA Conference on Friday of this week.
Mr. Proulx indicated that, in addition to adopting the Articles of Agreement at the next meeting, the Committee needs to discuss the marketing piece.
He suggested that the Committee come up with several “compelling stories”, such as:
Time will need to be spent at the next meeting developing marketing strategies, etc.
Sid Bosworth suggested that members bring questions that have already been asked by community members – in order to develop a question and answer sheet.
The next meeting is October 26th at
An additional meeting was scheduled for November 30th to meet with Mr. Goodrich regarding talking points and marketing strategies, and the December meeting was changed to the 15th to accommodate his schedule.
The meeting was adjourned by the Chair at
Respectfully submitted,
Sally A. Bushey
Recording Secretary