1975-01-27-SC-min - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

Page 24 Dr. Fobert said that because the report dealt with staff, its practices and programs, it was essential that they have a chance to review the report before any action is taken. He said he would take the responsibility to see that copies are distributed. Mrs. Berchtold agreed that staff should be given an opportunity to react to the contents. She added that it was commendable that, in a sense, in an area where few systems have looked at themselves critically, the administration and school committee are willing to do it in this way. She reminded the audience that we will be reviewing a number of items in the report as budget preparation goes on. A discussion followed concerning the report in general between members of the school committee, Dr. Fobert and all those members of the 622 Committee who were present. Proposed calendars for school facilities and budget development dis- PROPOSED cussions were examined by the school committee. Mrs. Berchtold said it waEALENDARS the consensus of the committee to concentrate on the budget in order to arrive at an agreement by February 18. She went on to say that setting up the calendar, we tried to (1) Allow for public discussion when it is productive; • (2) Gather more information and disseminate this to the public; (3) Bring a balanced perspective of the issue; (4) Be ready to make a decision on the date set. She requested that two committees be formed. The first will study the cost implications of the school building survey while the second will study simulated closings of schools. This committee will examine the modifications of school district lines to absorb .all streets affected by schools closing and estimate the potential growth within each district. Mrs. Davison suggested that we either give the committee more than one charge or appoint a third committee to do the following: She stressed the importance of discovering whether we are serving the children in the older schools and felt that parents should examine the educational experiences in these schools. She asked that, as part of the committee, they should be allowed • to observe and make comments on the programs. Mrs. Berchtold asked Mrs. Davison to develop her ideas further on the subject and present them to- the committee in writing at the next meeting. Dr. Fobert, responding to Mrs. Davison's::suggestion, said we should aske the parents about their opinions on the programs in the schools that will be kept open. Mr. Rotberg suggested that a fourth study should be made on enrollment projections in the 1980's. He said it would be valuable for Dr. Monderer's committee to look at these projections through 1991. Dr.' Monderer said he could reconvene the enrollment projection committee to study nationwide trends as they relate to Lexington. Mrs. Davison recommended that we present a charge to each committee to give them some guidelines. Mrs. Swanson made a MOTION which was seconded by Mr. Wadsworth to "Establish a committee of five to study the cost implications of closing our schools'. The committee unanimously agreed to this MOTION.