HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 2014-12-16.pdf FINAL
Approved 1.20.15
OPEN SESSION MINUTES
MINUTEMAN REGIONAL VOCATIONAL TECHNICAL SCHOOL DISTRICT
REGULAR SCHOOL COMMITTEE MEETING
DECEMBER 16,2014 7:00 PM
PAUL REVERE ROOM,MINUTEMAN HIGH SCHOOL
Present:
Jeff Stulin,Chair(Needham) Kemon Taschioglou(Lincoln)
Carrie Flood,Vice Chair(Concord) Dave Horton(Lexington)
Nancy Banks, Secretary(Acton) Jack Weis(Belmont)(arrived 7:04 PM)
Alice DeLuca(Stow) Mary Ellen Castagno(Wayland)(left 9:50 PM)
Ford Spalding(Dover)(left(9:40 PM) Daniel Mazzola(Lancaster)(arrived 7:15 PM)
Cheryl Mahoney(Boxborough) Doug Gillespie(Weston)
Judy Taylor(Carlisle)(left 9:40 PM)
Absent:David O'Connor(Bolton), Sue Sheffler(Arlington),Dave Manjarrez(Sudbury)
Others Present: Ed Bouquillon,Kevin Mahoney,Elizabeth Rozan,Christina Laskey(student rep.),Tracey Sierra,
Brendan Dutch,Michelle Roche,Connie Maynard
1. CALL TO ORDER: OPEN SESSION
The Chair opened the meeting at 7:00 PM.
2. PUBLIC COMMENT
There was no Public Comment.
3. STUDENT REPORT, Christina Laskey
Ms.Laskey reported on a number of recent activities at the school,including:the Horticulture and Environmental
programs,Girls in STEM,Skills USA Leadership Conference,National Honor Society,Horticulture's Holiday Sale,
the Senior's Powder Puff Game(which raised funds for American Cancer Society),and Winter Sports.
4. CHAIR'S REPORT,Jeff Stulin
a. Follow-up on Letter to Sudbury
The Chair explained that the documents at the table related to this item were provided as informational,and that
there would be no discussion or vote.
b. Governance Issues: Remote Participation
The Chair reported that the Chair revised the draft policy on Remote Participation,and received comments from the
Wayland Moderator. He also noted that he is not aware of any large regional school district that uses Remote
Participation.His explained that his suggestion is to try a restrictive measure,then lift restrictions if it works. He
explained that his suggestions were based on conversations from counsel and School Committee members,as well
as his own desire not to incur additional costs for the District. With regard to his concern for costs,he read from
correspondence received from the Director of Instructional Technology,Annamaria Schrimpf(shown in
Attachment A).He also noted concerns about not having the software to deal with Executive Session restrictions,
which would cost approximately$7,000. Ms.Castagno requested a copy of this information,and made a point that
she had not been consulted,which was a component of the vote last time. She noted that the remote process works
at her place of employment. It was suggested that perhaps her work had the appropriate software,which Minuteman
does not have.The Chair explained that he did the best he could to inform/include her in the process,and stressed
that there are two issues: one related to providing reasonable accommodation for ADA compliance,and the other
related to whether this body wants to have a Remote Participation policy. The Chair noted also that because such a
policy would make managing the meeting much more difficult,he would be abstaining from any vote related to this
item.
[Mr.Mazzola arrived at 7:15 PM.]
The Chair suggested a motion,which was made(Banks)and seconded(Mahoney)to accept the draft policy
developed by the Chair for a one meeting trial at the February meeting. The Committee discussed the general vs.
the specifics of the draft,whether this policy would be necessary,whether it has any benefits,and other alternatives
for addressing the compliance issues such as car pooling in the spirit of congenial relationships. It was suggested
that allowing remote participation improves the Committee's function and that members who are traveling or
otherwise indisposed are able to be involved. Whether such a policy would be invoked,whether it works for
government bodies with OML compliance issues, and how it works with speaker phones were points raised. It was
suggested that the restrictions proposed are an insult to participants; the one-person restriction and the geographic
distance were cited as examples of this restrictive nature of the draft.A member offered her opinion that there was
no compelling reason for a group this size to use remote participation,that every vote would have to be by roll call,
that this would apply to subcommittees as well,and that it takes energy and time away for issues of concern to
children. She noted quorum issues,planning in advance,and the general impracticalities of working this into a
group this size.Ms. Shrimpf confirmed that the Chair covered all the issues in his review of the questions and
answers he read. The following vote was then taken:
ACTION 2014#134
Moved(Banks)and seconded(Flood)
To move the question and end discussion
Vote: 5 in favor,7 opposed, 1 abstention(with 13 members present)
This did not pass,and the discussion continued. Ms.Castagno expressed that she is disheartened by the School
Committee's discussion. She emphasized that she has a disability,and without this policy,Wayland would not have
a voice. She stressed that it is difficult not to take it personally. She also expressed that she,too,does not want to
waste time on matters that do not concern the students at the school,but felt this School Committee could not be
compared to a government agency.An amendment to the main motion was offered as follows:
Weis Amendment#1
Amendment offered(Weis)and seconded(Gillespie)to accept the original draft developed by Ms.
Castagno for a one meeting trial at the February meeting
Whether the draft document was ready to be rolled out,whether a policy is the preference of the School Committee,
separating out the ADA issues from the policy issues,whether it would make sense to have a subcommittee work
through the issues and discuss it with other public bodies,and whether it would work with the current dynamics and
training level of the School Committee were items discussed.To prevent wordsmithing related to some of the
concerns at the table,the Chair pointed out that the draft he proposed is far from perfect,but the question is whether
the School Committee wants such a policy or not.The following vote was taken:
ACTION 2014#135
Moved(Flood)and seconded(Banks)
To move the question on the amendment and end discussion
Vote: 12 in favor,with one member out of the room
This motion passed. The Committee then took a vote on Weis Amendment#1 as follows:
ACTION 2014#136
Moved(Weis)and seconded(Gillespie)
Amendment to main motion: To accept the original draft developed by Ms. Castagno for a one meeting
trial at the February meeting
Vote: 4 in favor,7 opposed, 1 abstention,and one member out of the room
The amendment did not pass. Ms. Castagno expressed her interest in discussing the matter with the School's
attorney. This was discouraged,and she expressed concern that she had no representation for her disability.
It was clarified by general consensus that no one was against accommodating the ADA issue. Expressing concern
that perhaps neither version was ready to be rolled out,another amendment was offered as follows:
Weis Amendment#2
Moved(Weis)and seconded(Banks)not to roll out a Remote Participation policy on a trial basis,and
instead create a subcommittee with Ms. Castagno to think it through
This was clarified further as follows:
Flood Amendment:
Moved(Flood)and seconded(Banks)to add: "and the Chair will consider other accommodations in the
interim"
Concern was raised about who the subcommittee/task force/study group would be,how it would operate,and when
they would have the time to do such research. It was clarified that the Policy Subcommittee had spent considerable
time researching this issue. It was suggested that the Chair could brainstorm with Ms. Castagno to see how her
needs could be accommodated at this point,and a"straw"vote was taken as follows,with the Chair not voting:
1.) to see how many were interested in having the School Committee pursue a Remote Participation policy
(4 in favor)
2.) to see how many were against it
(4 against)
3.) to see how many were neutral
(4 neutral)
Given this result,it was agreed that nothing will happen quickly on this matter. It was also agreed that at the next
meeting,the Chair will propose a subcommittee/task force/study group be established to review the issues,do
research,and make recommendations. It was also agreed that over the next month,the Chair will discuss
accommodations with Ms. Castagno for the January meeting.It was suggested that the research just be done,
without establishing a subcommittee or task force. The following vote was taken to close the matter for the time
being:
ACTION 2014#137
Moved(Flood)and seconded(Weis)
To table all motions related to Remote Participation indefinitely
Vote: 12 in favor, 1 abstention
There was a suggestion to reorder the items in the Superintendent's Report,and with no objections,this was done.
5. SUPERINTENDENT'S REPORT,Ed Bouquillon
a.Superintendent's Goals: December Progress Report
The Superintendent called attention to materials at the table,and noted that due to the time spent on previous item,
this is informational and will be discussed with the Superintendent Negotiations and Evaluation Subcommittee at
their next meeting. He called attention to evidence he compiled. He circulated a copy,noting it is available
electronically upon request.
b. Professional Development Update
The Superintendent called attention to materials at the table related to a strategic plan underway to improve student
enrollment and retention with consultant Mark Perna,of Tools for Schools. He reviewed the associated details on
cost and collaboration with other schools,and outlined the general plan to establish a professional development
team,noting dates that have been scheduled for a series of meetings for this work.
c. DESE's Proposed Amendments to Regulations for Vocational Technical Education 603 CMR 4.00
The Superintendent gave an update on the status of DESE's proposed amendments,noting that they were
presented to the State Board of Education in November,and that the Public Comment period is now
underway.He explained that the Board of Directors of MAVA met and developed comments,which he
shared with the Town Managers at their recent meeting. He also noted that he is anticipating holding a
Municipal/Legislative Breakfast on February 6,2015 to discuss these issues further.
A request was made by the Stow representative for a copy of these comments, so that they could be used to
raise awareness on the issues,and he agreed to get this to the School Committee.
In response to his request for input,the School Committee discussed a number of specific points in the
documents.How these proposed changes alter the way things work specifically with regard to exploratory
programs,provisional approval,dates,access for out of district students,admissions,and transition period
were some of the issues discussed.
d. Intermunicipal Agreements(Type A and Type C drafts dated 11.17.14)
The Superintendent called attention to the two draft Intermunicipal Agreements included in the packet,and noted
that these resulted from the work of the Regional Agreement Amendment Subcommittee,and the group of town
managers who met after that group disbanded.A motion was made(Flood)and seconded(Gillespie)to adopt draft
Intermunicipal Agreements(Type A and Type C,dated 11.17.14) as templates to be used for"intermunicipal
agreements"with non-member communities in the future,with the understanding that such agreements will need to
be approved by a majority vote of the full School Committee. That Type C gives preference to members who have
left, how it might change the vote for those towns that had voted to "pass over",and the non-negotiability and non-
amendability factors were discussed.A friendly amendment was offered(Spalding)and seconded(Weis)to vote A
and C separately. This was accepted,and the following vote was taken:
ACTION 2014#138
Moved(Spalding)and seconded(Weis)
To vote the Type A and Type C drafts dated 11.17.14 separately
Vote: 12 in favor, 1 abstention
The need for all towns to come to agreement on the Regional Agreement Amendments was emphasized,and the
following vote was then taken,relative to Type A:
ACTION 2014#139
Moved(Flood)and seconded(Gillespie)
To adopt draft Intermunicipal Agreement(Type A dated 11.17.14) as a template to be used for
"intermunicipal agreements"with non-member communities in the future,with the understanding that such
agreements will need to be approved by a majority vote of the full School Committee
Vote: 12 in favor, 1 abstention
The discussion continued around Type C, specifically related to whether a Type C version was necessary,the recent
votes taken in Sudbury,the history and impact of the discussions around the IMAs in Boxborough,the benefits of
non-membership,whether these agreements offer an incentive to leave,the risk factors,and the compromise
components. The advantages/disadvantages of Type C,caps,the timing with the building project,the need for tools
to negotiate these agreements, that the agreements between School Committee would work differently in each town,
and that these are templates for agreements,not the actual agreements were points raised. The following vote was
then taken:
ACTION 2014#140
Moved(Flood)and seconded(Gillespie)
To adopt draft Intermunicipal Agreement(Type C dated 11.17.14) as a template to be used for
"intermunicipal agreements"with non-member communities in the future,with the understanding that such
agreements will need to be approved by a majority vote of the full School Committee
Vote: 9 in favor,4 opposed
[At 9:25 PM,Mr.Mazzola left the meeting. There were then 12 members present.]
e. Admissions Policy Revision
The Superintendent called attention to the draft language for a revision to the Admission Policy,as a result of
the above voted Intermunicipal Agreement templates.He pointed out that reflecting the agreements,this
language could be considered"housekeeping"at this point,and that a review of the Admissions policy may
come before the School Committee in February or March. The narrow cost advantage of not being a member,
that the District is at a major transition point that needs flexibility,and the messiness of the process were
points raised. A motion was made(Banks)and seconded(Gillespie)to approve the related Admissions
Policy revision,and the following vote was taken:
ACTION 2014#141
Moved(Banks)and seconded(Gillespie)
To approve the Admissions Policy Revision,related to Intermunicipal Agreements,as presented
Vote: 11 in favor, 1 opposed
f. Principal Search Process
The Superintendent noted that Principal Houle's last day will be close to February 1,and he explained that he
has been engaged in appointing an Interim,with the help of an Advisory Committee. He noted that there
were 6 internal candidates who applied,and that interviews for 4 finalists are underway.He explained that he
anticipates appointing the Interim by this Friday,and that this person will serve through Julyl,when the
permanent position is filled. He noted other changes in his office,offering congratulations to Brendan Dutch
who will be moving on to work at the State House as a Legislative Aide to Plymouth Representative Vinny de
Macedo,and that both Rose Cappucci,and Donna Heisler and her husband Bill will be retiring by the end of
the year.
g. Review of Proposed School Calendar 2015-16
The Superintendent addressed concerns raised in the draft calendar. He noted that the Union will be looking
at the draft,that there are discussions about the school year beginning earlier,and that a second draft will be
presented in January for a vote.
h. Update on NEASC Report
The Superintendent called attention to the NEASC report cover letter included in the packet,and noted that
the full report is available upon request. He pointed out that in the letter,there is acknowledgement for
efforts made to date,as well as highlighted recommendations. He also noted that Minuteman still is in
danger of losing accreditation,given the facility issues.
6. SCHOOL BUILDING COMMITTEE REPORT,Ford Spalding
The Chair of the School Building Committee gave a brief report,noting that he is anticipating numbers prior to the
February 6 Legislative meeting. These numbers,which will not be final,will outline options for a new building,a
renovation,a new/renovation,and for a non-MSBA project. He pointed out that Minuteman has not yet gone out to
the communities to present and discuss these options, and that this is of concern to him,given the tight timeline.
He explained that the Joint Communications Subcommittee will develop a communication strategy to facilitate these
discussions,as the communities need to hear the information and give feedback. He expressed his opinion that the
issues are all about cost.
[At 9:40 PM,Mr. Spalding and Ms.Taylor left the meeting; there were then 10 members present.]
7. ASSISTANT SUPERINTENDENT FOR FINANCE'S REPORT,Kevin Mahoney
a. Review of FY 15 Q1 Expenditure Report and Revolving Fund Report 9.30.14
The Assistant Superintendent called attention to the Q1 Expenditure Report and Revolving Fund Report included in
the packet, and noted that in his opinion,there were no surprise concerns. He highlighted and clarified detail about
a few specific line items,and explained corrective actions anticipated for the Revolving Accounts.He explained that
the Q2 updates will be forthcoming,and at this time,all is tracking well.
[At 9:50 PM,Ms. Castagno left the meeting; there were then 9 members present.]
b. Governor's 9c Cuts
The Assistant Superintendent called attention again to the reduction in Regional Transportation anticipated by the
Governor's 9c Cuts. He noted that the 93-75%reimbursement will be reduced to 62%,and that Minuteman has
budgeted this at 55%. The Superintendent added that MAVA and MARS are pulling together a fund,with between
$500-1000 from member districts to hire a legal firm to challenge the cuts,and that Minuteman may make a
contribution to that fund out of the legal expense line item. There was some discussion about the history of these
cuts,and a pause while two members looked up the actual law for wording a motion. The following vote was then
taken:
ACTION 2014#142
Moved(DeLuca)and seconded(Banks)
To direct the Superintendent to write a letter to the Governor urging that the 9c cuts to Regional
Transportation be reversed,pursuant to Section 15 of Ch. 15 of the Acts of 2010,to reflect both the
language and spirit of the legislation
Vote:Unanimous
Members requested a copy of this letter when it is sent out.
c. Bid Results: Construction Materials
The Assistant Superintendent provided details on the bid for construction materials for the renovation project the
students are working on at 22 Mill St. He explained that the contract was awarded to Friend Building Center of
Burlington as the low bid,meeting all required specifications. He noted this as informational,and commented that
the project involves students from Horticulture,Carpentry,and Plumbing. He also noted that when the project is
complete,the property may be considered for rental.
d. Preliminary Status: FY 16 Budget
The Assistant Superintendent gave an update on the FY 16 Budget,referencing and explaining details of the
documents included in the packet, specifically the FY 16 estimated Revenue Plan,the FY 16 Preliminary
Assessments,and the Budget Summary by Function Code. He explained that the total operating budget is a 1.64%
change over last year,and that this is the first budget compiled with the 628 student number in mind.He also
explained that there is still more work to do on this,and he anticipates bringing the final recommendations to the
Finance Subcommittee at their January 6 meeting.
Given the hour,the following vote was taken:
ACTION 2014#143
Moved(Flood)and seconded(Gillespie)
To continue the meeting past 10:00 PM
Vote:Unanimous
The Assistant Superintendent continued,noting that the School Bus contract is up for renewal. He noted that he
anticipates an increase,as this will be for a 5 year contract. He also explained the changes in the assessment formula
for SPED,and that the Town Managers were supportive of the first pass on this budget. The Chair of the Finance
Subcommittee added that at the December 2 Finance Subcommittee,the Administration's Executive Team gave an
excellent presentation, and the details of this will be presented as part of the Budget Hearing in January.
8. SUBCOMMITTEE REPORT,Dave Horton
School Committee Evaluation Subcommittee: Survey Results and Next Steps
On behalf of the School Committee evaluation subcommittee,Mr.Horton referenced supplemental material related
to the School Committee evaluation,which was distributed at the table. The frustration of OML restrictions was
noted as one item that people raised,and previous training on OML was explained.Workshops vs.trainings were
briefly discussed,and Mr.Horton noted that it was the Subcommittee's suggestion that they now share the results
with a field representative of MASC and ask for comments/recommendations that can be brought back to the full
School Committee. He pointed out that this is a cost-free service to members of MASC. It was agreed that this
evaluation data was a good start,and that the School Committee was supportive of this plan of action.
9. SECRETARY'S REPORT,Nancy Banks
Ms.Banks noted the comments on the minutes,received by Mr.Horton. These were discussed and the following
vote was taken:
ACTION 2014#144
Moved(Banks)and seconded(Horton)
To approve the past Open Session Minutes of 11.18.14,as amended
Vote: 8 in favor, 1 abstention
10.ADJOURNMENT
All business being completed,the meeting was adjourned at 10:30 PM.
Respectfully submitted,
Elizabeth Rozan Nancy Banks
District Assistant Secretary
ATTACHMENTS TO THE MINUTES OF 12.16.14
A. Details on Remote Participation read by Chair