1976-06-01-SC-min - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

Page 116 June 1, 1976 Mr. Spiris presented the names of twenty-six candidates for Leader- LEADERSHIP ship 1975-1976. He noted that there were eight names which he was not presenting, and that these eight people had the right of appeal under contract. He hoped that the School Committee would accept the names pre- sented tonight, but would receive without prejudice the candidates who might be presented after an appeal. Mr. Wadsworth asked Mr. Spiris to review the procedure by which twenty-six names were selected. Mr. Spiris responded that two committees were established to review all who applied or were nominated. The elementary committee was chaired by Mr. Barnes. The secondary committee by Mr. Spiris himself. Both com- mittees followed the contract procedure. Mr. Wadsworth inquired if every name presented had had the unanimous support of the Leadership Review Committee. Mr. Spiris said that some had been unanimous, and some hadn' t. How- ever, no one who was recommended had more than two negative votes. Mr. Wadsworth asked if the committee and its vote were secret. Mr. Spiris responded that the votes were available if the members of the School Committee would like to see them. It was agreed that any member interested in seeing the votes could do so at the Central Office. Mrs. Swanson noted that Dr. Rotberg had requested that consideration of leadership be held until he could be present. The members of the School Committee agreed to postpone further discussion and a vote. Mr. Spiris presented two bills pertaining to the school breakfast BREAKFAST program. He supports both pieces of legislation currently before the PROGRAM Massachusetts Legislature. Mrs. Swanson agreed, and voiced strong opposition to the idea that schools must provide breakfast. She felt that the responsibility of the schools does not extend to providing food for all who need it; that food might be made available through other state or federal agencies. Mr. Maclnnes commented that if the state mandated law is enforced, the school system would have to provide free breakfast for all students who are currently eligible for free or reduced price meals when a speci- fied number of the latter is reached. He said that we are close to that number in only one school at this time. He strongly encouraged the School Committee to look very closely at further encroachment by the State on the school lunch program. Mr. Michelman noted that both bills are essentially the same. He felt that it was inappropriate for the School Committee to "weigh in" as a public body on this issue. He noted two points. First, we don' t know that the program would greatly affect our system. Second, the bill might have real significance in other systems where such programs might be necessary. He opposed going on record as a committee in favor of the bills presented. Ii