The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2014-10-23-SMPC-min PMCrXi p4„,t1 pad"• "Kb� TOWN OF LEXINGTON . , Ad hoc School Master Planning Committee (AhSMPC) am�su.ue> .r, Minutes Date October 23, 2014 Place and Time- School Administration Building,Upper Level Conference Room, 8 00 A.M. Members Present Paul Ash, Superintendent of Schools, Judy Crocker, School Committee Peter Kelley, Board of Selectmen (BoS); Patrick Goddard, Director, Department of Public Facilities (DPF) Jon Himmel, Permanent Building Committee (PBC) Carl Oldenburg, PBC Jessie Steigerwald, School Committee Memhers Absent None Liaisons Present Rod Cole, Capital Expenditures Committee Mollie Garberg, Appropriation Committee Alan Levine, Appropriation Committee Liaisons Absent None Semmes, Maini, and McKee Associates (SMMA) Phil Poinelli Educational Planner Joel Seeley- Project Manager Kate Jessup Others Present Joe Pato, BoS and Enrollment Working Group (EWG) Dan Krupka, EWG Alessandro Alessandrini, School Committee Tom Diaz, Candidate for School Committee Bill Hurley, Candidate for School Committee Kate Colburn, Lexington Parents Advocacy Group (LPAG), Lisa O'Brien, LPAG Gretchen Reisig, LPGA, Claire Sheth, LPAG Ashley Waring, LPAG and Katie Wipke, LPAG Mark Barrett, DPF Recording Secretary Sara Arnold Dr Ash started the meeting at 8 04 A.M. 1 EWG Update and Discussion Mr Pato reviewed the challenges associated with developing enrollment projections for Lexington, a Town where regional projections do not provide a model that reflects Lexington s realit\ He said that there have been some slight revisions to the EWG s numbers since meeting with the School Committee His comments included. • Over five years starting in Fiscal Year(FY) 2015, an increase of 585 students is projected. 175 (+/-115) at the elementary level, 215 (+1-100) at the middle school level, and 195 (+/-120) at the high school,because of the wide range caused by the error factors, Lexington needs to incorporate flexible solutions • The cohort survival method, the standard mechanism for projecting enrollment based on existing population and progression ratios,works reasonably well at the middle and high school levels but it does not work well at the elementary level in Lexington because of in-migration. • The EWG looked at a linear extrapolation based on current trends to project elementary school enrollment. This included an effort to factor in housing growth and housing turn-over using a housing units model that identified the trend for new students from each housing class in Lexington over the most recent nine years • Housing growth may eventually reach a ceiling,but that is not expected in the next five years • There is no perfect projection method,partially because unknown factors, such as the economy and personal decisions made by families, can impact reality,but it is clear that Lexington is going to see enrollment increases • The EWG is in the process of trying to develop projections by school district to identify the stress points South Lexington has more apartment complexes so is at a higher risk for turn- over Currently, the south Lexington schools are seeing greater enrollment increases than in other parts of Lexington. Mr Krupka emphasized the need for Lexington to determine the appropriate buffer capacity for its schools Ms Steigerwald expressed the importance of parity within the schools, and using a handout expressed her concern about the anticipated growth in south Lexington that may create imbalances at the schools that serve that area. She suggested that it may be advisable to reconsider the current practices, i e., current school assignments Ms Crocker shared her spreadsheet,which identified short and long term options for addressing capacity There was discussion about the need for SMMA to have 10 year projections in order to create long term options and recommendations because capital projects take time to come to fruition. Mr Pato said that such projections would,by necessity, include caveats based on assumptions used in developing such numbers 2. SMMA Update on Master Planning Effort. There was discussion about the timing for short term and long term recommendations If short term solutions require funding in FY2015, a Special Town Meeting (STM)will need to be held as soon as possible It was agreed that SMMA will have more information regarding costs of short term solutions at this Committee s October 30th meeting, and the School Committee should be able to vote on its position regarding short term efforts on either November 3rd or 4th Mr Pato indicated that,under this scenario, a STM could be held no earlier than January 12, 2015 Mr Levine expressed reservations about the tight scheduling and the lack of information about short term and long term solutions He does not think the School Committee should request a STM without fully understanding the impacts of short term solutions on long term plans, and he questions the ability to get that understanding in the time frame being considered. Mr Porcelli reported that the draft SMMA Phase 1 report is ready for final review It identifies the capacit\ of the School Department s nine school buildings based on current use of rooms and educational delivery methodology, and it analyzes the current Central Administration building (old Harnngton) for potential reuse as a school building based on current needs and practices A draft Executive Summary was distributed. He asked that the report not be discussed at any public meetings until it is finalized. He noted that there will always be fluctuations in the numbers, the report presents a snapshot in time It was noted that seven of Lexington s 140 classes exceed Lexington s guidelines for classroom numbers There was discussion about the differences in Clarke Middle School (Clarke) and Diamond Middle School(Diamond) Both schools have students organized into teams, three teams per grade Clarke has a centralized teacher-work space This allows classrooms to be used by other teachers (shared)when otherwise not in use Diamond does not have a location dedicated to teachers, shared classrooms would leave a teacher without a `home base This ma` need to be addressed if Diamond moves to shared classrooms in order to accommodate more students. Diamond administration would also need to develop an approach to shared rooms to accompany the teacher workrooms This exploration can take place in Phase 3 Mr Seeley reported that SMMA is currently developing its Phase 2 report for the elementary schools On an immediate basis,they are evaluating the following short-term alternatives to address capacity issues in the elementary schools • Relocating one pre-kindergarten program space into the current School Administration building • Moving the entire pre-kindergarten program from Harnngton Elementary School(Hamngton) into the School Administration building and adding permanent modular units • Repurposing space in Hamngton once the pre-kindergarten program is moved out of Harrington. • Installing two classroom-sized modular units at Bowman Elementary School(Bowman), Bridge Elementary School (Bndge), and Fiske Elementary School(Fiske) Mr Seeley reported that SMMA is evaluating the building code implications and utility requirements for moving students into the School Administration building and for adding modular units He identified potential locations for modular units at Bndge, Bowman, and Fiske There was discussion about the quality of the units and the potential need to install toilets in them. In response to concerns, Mr Goddard noted that traffic flow improvements being pursued for Bndge will not be impacted by the installation of modular units because the modular units are temporary and because they can be placed so as to avoid conflict. In response to Mr Levine s concerns about understanding the big picture and long term solutions before putting funds into short term plans, Mr Poinelli said that the short term ideas being considered will not negatively impact any long term solutions 3 Minutes. A motion was made and seconded to accept the September 23, 2014 Minutes. The motion passed. VOTE 7-0 4 Adjournment The meeting was adjourned at 9.45 A.M. These minutes were approved on October 30, 2014 Materials distributed/used at the meeting: Public Meeting Agenda, October 23, 2014, AhSMPC Capacity Crunch— 10 21 1, prepared by Ms Steigerwald Pre-K to G12 Enrollment Options, October 2012, prepared by Ms Crocker Executive Report—2014 School District Master Plan—Phase 1, Executive Summary, prepared by SMMA SMMA PowerPoint slides Lexington Public Schools,Ad hoc Schools Master Plan Committee, School Committee Progress Report, Phase 2—Elementag Schools, October 23, 2014 Letter from the Lexington Parents Advocacy Group to the Ad hoc School Master Planning Committee, October 20, 2014 3