Public comment – what do we do with written submissions from the public.
Public comments should not be included in the board minutes. Board could keep public comments in a separate comments notebook. Comments do not have to be incorporated into the formal minutes.
At a previous meeting, the Woods school board has opted to go with a notebook that would hold people’s written submissions. Minutes could contain the fact that certain persons did make public comments during the school board meeting.
Public comments, either verbally or written, should comply with some kind of standards. Woods school board has started talking about what the parameters might be.
A Woods Community Input notebook has been started and was shown. It already contains comments from the last school board meeting.
The Chatham County School Board minutes include a summary of the public comment. If a speaker provides written text, then it the text (not an attachment) is included in the minutes. I have made public comments several times, and I give Sheila Talley, who takes the minutes, a copy of my written remarks to make her job of completing the minutes easier.
For comparison, here is an example of Chatham County School Board minutes from October 12 i've included the first 2 of 22 pages from the 4 hour meeting, which include public comment, and then the discussion of the first item of new business, the OR/Ed Proposal.
CHATHAM COUNTY BOARD OF EDUCATION
PITTSBORO, NORTH CAROLINA
REGULAR SESSION MEETING
SAGE Academy Media Center
Monday, October 12, 2009
**Approved 11/02/09**
The Chatham County Board of Education met for a regular session on Monday, October 12, 2009, at SAGE Academy in the media center at 5:50 p.m. Members present were Vice-Chair Deb McManus, and members Col. Gerald Totten, David Hamm, and Flint O’Brien. (Chairwoman Kathie Russell was absent) Robert L. Logan, Superintendent; Board Attorney Trey Allen from Tharrington Smith, LLP; and Board Assistant Sheila Tally were also present. (Due to personal illness, Col. Totten dismissed himself from the meeting after the SAGE Air Quality Agenda Item discussion.)
Attendees at the meeting included: Dr. Robin McCoy, Assistant Superintendent for Instructional Services; Dr. Tina Hester, Assistant Superintendent for Human Resources; David Moody, Assistant Superintendent for Auxiliary Services; Susan Little, Chief Operating Officer; Beth McCullough, Public Information Officer; Randy Drumheller, Construction Manager; Kim Taylor, Principal of SAGE Academy; Joel Caviness, Transportation Director; Peggy Douglas, Director of Technology, and Martin Milano, Network Administrator. Other guests included The Chatham Record reporter John Hunter; Felicia Sawyer, Edrise Glover representing NCAE & CCAE; Tammy Yarborough and Nikki Murchison, representing the Siler City Elementary Parent Advisory Council; Rudy Johnson from Virginia Cross Elementary; and Mia Munn. There were other guests who did not sign in.
Call to Order:
Vice-Chair McManus called the October 12, 2009, Board of Education open session to order at 6:45 p.m.
Pledge of Allegiance:
Board members led the audience in reciting the Pledge of Allegiance.
Invocation & Welcome of Visitors:
Superintendent Robert L. Logan offered the invocation and welcomed visitors.
Public Comments:
One individual signed up to make public comments.
Ms. Tammy Yarborough introduced herself as a representative from the Siler City Elementary Parent Advisory Council. She stated she spoke to the Board several months ago about concerns with the “offer vs. serve” child nutrition department option at Siler City Elementary. She thanked the Board and administration for addressing her concerns. She stated there seems to be improvement in the school’s cafeteria, but some parents still feel students should get a full serving of food without having to ask. She stated there was some customer service training done at the school to address student intimidation issues. She stated that seems to be going well also.
She stated there are still transportation concerns dealing with busing of students in Siler City and the number of reduced bus stops. The busing concerns are particularly centered on the younger children (kindergarten and first graders) who have to walk up to 3/10th of a mile to get to the bus stop. She stated one parent did contact Chairwoman Russell and Mr. Caviness and both responded warmly to the parent and gave a positive response explaining the budget situation and restraints it has caused this school year. Ms. Yarborough stated she recognizes the district does not have a lot of control over the budget being cut. She stated however as parents they feel they have an obligation to express themselves and their concerns to the Board and administration.
Ms. Yarborough announced as a Parent Advisory Council they have developed a monthly newsletter which will be shared with the Board. Board members were encouraged to subscribe to the publication via email. A copy of the October issue was placed in the board members packet. Ms. Yarborough stated the newsletter this month focuses mainly on safety issues and academic issues at Siler City Elementary.
Ms. Yarborough stated another area the Parent Advisory Council is very excited about the possibility of an expansion of the Siler City Elementary dual language program to Chatham Middle School. Ms. Yarborough stated she is the parent of a 4th grader who is in the dual-language program and her child is doing extremely well in the program as well as 10 other children who were in her child’s dual language class last year. They scored significantly high when tested last year on their EOGs.
Ms. Yarborough concluded her presentation by thanking the Board and administration for hearing them.
Adoption of the Agenda:
Board members reviewed the agenda for the regular session.
On a motion by Mr. O’Brien, seconded by Mr. Hamm, the board unanimously agreed to remove agenda item IX. (E) Board & Superintendent/Staff Relations Policy 2010 since Chairwoman Russell was absent from the meeting and bring back at the November 2nd board meeting.
On a motion by Mr. O’Brien, seconded by Mr. Hamm, the Board unanimously approved the agenda as amended.
OR/Ed Proposal:
Mr. Logan reviewed the proposed scope and timeline for the Integrated Planning for School (IPSAC referred to as OR/Ed) and Community study for Chatham County Schools. He stated the proposal is in two phases with the cost outlined. Mr. Logan stated this study will:
1. provide data to further improve the district’s transportation system
2. provide data to study district-wide reconfiguration of the schools
3. provide data regarding new growth projections and population trends
Mr. Logan stated when the first report was completed by OR/Ed for Chatham County Schools, OR/Ed did not know there would be a recession and a drop in the housing market. Mr. Logan stated with any such report, it is a scientific/educated guess based on the best available information at the time.
Mr. Hamm asked if administration had found a copy of the report that was completed in the mid 1980s. Mr. Logan and Mr. Moody were not aware of that report.
Col. Totten stated the district should move ahead with all proposed scope of work (phase I & II) as presented with no delay and made a motion to move forward now with the study. Col. Totten stated past studies have been most helpful to the school district in planning for future growth. Mr. Logan stated this proposal will not require action from the Board, just agreement to move forward.
Mr. O’Brien asked if the reconfiguration report would be for the entire county at all grade levels. Mr. Logan stated the grade configurations for K-5, 6-8, and 9-12 would be looked at for the entire school district. Mr. Logan stated an implementation of this type grade configuration may be years down the road, but it was time to begin looking at and planning for reconfiguration, giving the public plenty of time for input and dialogue on the concept for possible action in the future. Mr. Logan emphasized moving to a K-5, middle school, and high school configuration will help with transportation costs and allow more academic as well as extra-curricular offerings at the middle schools. Mr. O’Brien asked if the Board would receive a map outlining proposed new attendance zones. Mr. Moody stated there will be worksheets with attendance zones outlined for the Board once the report is completed by OR/Ed. Vice-Chair McManus stated OR/Ed will actually make the recommendations for school attendance districts.
Mr. O’Brien asked how far out the projections will be from OR/Ed. Mr. Moody stated they are usually 5+ years out, but it depends on what the district request, which can be an immediate projection, 5 years out, or 10 years out. Mr. O’Brien stated usually three different scenarios are prepared. Vice-Chair McManus stated the last report requested by OR/Ed was for a fast growth scenario. Vice-Chair McManus stated that is usually the time period OR/Ed feels comfortable projecting out. Col. Totten stated he thought the last report prepared by OR/Ed was in February of 2008 and in that report it spelled out a moratorium in the Pittsboro area on building due to a sewage problem. Col. Totten emphasized again that OR/Ed produces very thorough reporting.
Mr. O’Brien stated this is a very atypical time period right now and the next two years will be more predictable as we slowly come out of the recession. Mr. Logan stated administration can certainly ask for different scenarios from the study to incorporate the pace of the growth of the county.
Col. Totten stated he was not sure the Board should have a new western middle school on the CIP plan until the OR/Ed study is complete. He stated if the district does go to a middle school grade configuration that he is sure a middle school would be needed in the western part of the county, but felt we were “getting the cart before the horse.” Mr. Moody stated the new middle school is listed as “for consideration” and would be at least five years out if it is determined that one is needed.
Mr. O’Brien stated that if you look 5 years ahead, you might say, “Obviously, we need a school here. But if you look 10 years ahead, you might say, Well, we really didn’t need it there, we needed one over here and one over here and we screwed up putting it there, but that is how far we looked.” Mr. O’Brien said he doesn’t think we’re looking far enough ahead. In particular with things like bus routes, if we could put a middle school and a high school on the same campus, you don’t have buses from one neighborhood going to two locations. He thinks it’s much more efficient. Not to mention sharing other facilities.
Mr. O’Brien stated that there are two things going on here. One is, where are developments going to go? The other is, what is the pace that we will see those developments develop? Mr. O’Brien stated he thinks this county has a much better idea than we’ve had in the past about where developments will be going. When you are deciding on building a school, there are two different questions of accuracy: one is, are you accurate where the developments will go and the second is, are you accurate in how fast they will build out. When you’re talking about where you should put a school, just being accurate on where developments are going to go, even if you don’t know the timeframe, is useful for long term planning.
Mr. O’Brien stated other school districts are predicting 10-20 years out in planning for schools. Mr. O’Brien stated he felt a five year projection was not far enough out in planning for new schools. Mr. Logan again stated, the further out projections are made in development and growth, the less accurate the information will be and the greater the cost for the study.
Mr. Moody stated the only way the district will get up-to-date, accurate information is to hire OR/Ed back each year to update its statistics.
Col. Totten stated he would withdraw his motion since board action is not required as long as the entire proposed scope of work is accepted.
Mr. O’Brien asked the superintendent when he talks to OR/Ed, could he ask them about projections of where things are going to be built versus projects of when they would be built. Mr. O’Brien said he would be interested in what they had to say. Mr. Logan agreed. Mr. O’Brien went on to ask the superintendent to ask OR/Ed about the idea that if you look 5 years ahead, you may be picking the wrong spots for 10 years ahead. Mr. Logan agreed.
Mr. Logan stated that we’ll inquire what impact long range projections have versus the cost of what they’ve already presented to us. If it’s well within the scope of this, then OK. As Ms. McManus pointed out, their typical work is only 5 or 6 years. They can project out further, but again, the further out you project, the less accurate it is.
Mr. O’Brien stated that he wasn’t interested so much in how much it costs. He was asking for their expertise on; when they’ve done that in other districts, have they seen a big change in where things should go when they’ve projected further.
Mr. O’Brien stated he wanted to make it clear the Board has not decided to change the grade configurations for the district to a K-5, middle school, and high school concept. It is only looking at and collecting data at this time.
(A copy of the IPSAC study for Chatham County Schools is attached at the end of the minutes.)