HomeMy WebLinkAboutFinal OS Minutes 11.13.12.pdf Final
Approved 12 18 12
MINUTES
MINUTEMAN REGIONAL VOCATIONAL TECHNICAL SCHOOL DISTRICT
SCHOOL COMMITTEE MEETING
NOVEMBER 13,2012 7 00 PM
PAUL REVERE ROOM,MINUTEMAN HIGH SCHOOL
Present.
Alice DeLuca,Chair(Stow) Kemon Taschioglou(Lincoln)
Jeff Stulin,Vice-Chair(Needham) Laura Morrissette(Arlington)
Came Flood, Secretary(Concord) Dore Hunter(Acton)
Ford Spalding(Dover)(left at 11 09 PM) Jack Weis(Belmont)(amved at 7 31 PM)
Cheryl Mahoney(Boxborough) Mary Ellen Castagno(Wayland)(left at 11 00 PM)
Peter Farmer(Lancaster) David Horton(Lexington)
David Manjarrez(Sudbury) Bella Wong(Weston)
David O'Connor(Bolton)
Solomon Rubin(Student Rep)(left at 8 20 PM)
Absent-
Don Rober(Carlisle)
Others Present.
Al St George,Tracey Sierra,Michelle Roche,Kevin Mahoney,Kris Luoto,William Blake,Diane Dempsey, Sheila
Nagle,Connie Maynard,Mariellen Perugini,Bob McLaughlin,Ed DeLuca,Ed Bouquillon,Ernie Houle,Elizabeth
Rozan
1. CALL TO ORDER: OPEN SESSION
The Chair extended thanks to any Veterans or anyone with a Veteran in their family She extended a welcome to
new members David O'Connor(Bolton)and Bella Wong(Weston),and invited everyone to introduce themselves
around the table She asked if anyone was recording the meeting,and noted that no one announced recording She
also noted that if anyone is interested in putting up a lawn sign announcing the November 18 Open House at
Minuteman from 1-4 pm,they should see the Principal,Mr Houle
2. PUBLIC COMMENT
The Chair reminded people that anyone speaking during Public Comment is invited to do so for up to 3 minutes,and
asked that they state their name and town/affiliation
Bob McLaughlin,from the Warrant Committee in Belmont,noted that he was attending the meeting to hear about
the response to Belmont's 9 1 7 12 letter He noted that he had been informed that this may be taken up in
Executive Session,and that as a courtesy he would like to know if it would be an Open Session item or an
Executive Session item It was explained that this item was listed under 8 c in Open Session and that,as it does
deal with potential litigation,it may be referred to Executive Session,should the Committee feel that is the
appropriate route to take
Connie Maynard,a teacher at Minuteman,shared that she had recently had a conversation with a student who
explained that her academic studies were going well,but had some concern about being prepared as her Drafting
shop experience is rocky Ms Maynard expressed her concern that all students deserve the same opportunity,and
that drafting students deserve a teacher like Mr DiPaolo,who should come back and usher kids through to the end
of their program
Sheila Nagle,interim MFA President,spoke on behalf of teachers She noted that some teachers are fearful to
speak,are disappointed,discouraged, feel they have not been heard,and feel that Minuteman has not complied with
DESE closure plan on the Drafting program
Diane Dempsey,speaking as a Minuteman guidance counselor and an MFA Grievance Coordinator,noted the rift
between teachers and administrators,and that the rift does not involve dust a few staff members She questioned
why there is no mutual respect,and why the teachers are always asked to leave the room while the School
Committee deliberates on what the MFA presents to them She also expressed that she has been the victim of
administration's retaliation,and will bring this forward at a later time
Mariellen Perugini,parent from Carlisle and former School Committee member, expressed concerns about the
School Committee by-laws and issues of leadership inherent in them She offered three tenets for consideration and
suggested that these considerations could repair deep rooted damage and get the focus back on students and
education Cheryl Mahoney,speaking as Chair of the Policy Subcommittee,requested a copy of the written
statement that Ms Perugini was reading from Ms Perugini's full comments can be found as Attachment A
Dave Manjarrez, Sudbury School Committee member but speaking as an individual,expressed his sentiment that no
one takes responsibility for action,and that secrecy creates an air of corruption and is indicative of a dysfunctional
organization He suggested that members should be ashamed of themselves as an organization
Tracey Sierra,member of the Minuteman faculty, asked what would students say if they heard the anger and
negativity expressed She noted that they do hear,and urged consideration of the students
3 STUDENT REPORT,Solomon Rubin
Mr Rubin gave an update on Food Day,student lunches,the student presidential election,the NEASC conference,
the Powder Puff Fundraiser,Hurricane Sandy Relief,and buses He expressed that some students in the Drafting
Shop have told him that they feel pushed around and forgotten,and that no student should have to feel that way He
clarified that the bus issue was that there had been no 3 30 buses,but they were added in October,and there are still
late buses
4 SUPERINTENDENT REPORT,Dr Bouquillon,Superintendent
a Overnight Field Trips. Environmental Technology Program
The Superintendent noted that this overnight field trip is an annual request He affirmed that it complies with
School Committee policy,that it is funded through the annual Environmental Technology Program budget,that
three chaperones/adults whose accompaniment will be supported by the District, that families cover the cost of
food,and teachers cover their own food expenses The following vote was then taken
ACTION 2012#189
Moved(Hunter)and seconded(Spalding)
To approve the Environmental Technology Program's overnight field trip to NEED
Building,operated by National Park Service,Cape Cod National Seashore,Eastham,MA
1 Dec 4-7,2012 with seniors and sophomores(21 students)
2 May 28-31 with juniors and freshmen(approximately 20-25 students)
Vote: Unanimous(with 14 members present)
b. Shire Donation
The Superintendent explained the nature of this donation,and noted that it will be included in the dollar for dollar
match offered by the Mass Environmental Life Sciences Center In response to a question,he clarified that there is
an inventory control system in place It was suggested that these items be added to this inventory The following
vote was then taken
ACTION 2012#190
Moved(Spalding)and seconded(Hunter)
To accept the itemized list of items that Shire has agreed to donate to Minuteman,with an estimated total
value of$40,200
100 Dell D-Series laptops $400 each Est Value $40,000
Delivery to Minuteman 200 200
TOTAL $40,200
Vote. Unanimous
Mr Weis arrived at 7 31 PM
c. Update on Grants
The Superintendent gave an update on grants,noting that there has been no word yet on the Regionalization Grant
($110K)or the Mass Environmental Life Sciences Grant($100K for new equipment) He noted that in January,
2012,the District had applied for the Community Innovation Challenge Grant,and that the deadline for the next
funding cycle has been shortened to November 30,2012 He is aiming at meeting this deadline,with a draft
completion by the end of next week The plan was to apply for the regionalization grant,study the region and use
CICG money to look at regional sustainability in a serious way
Since the School Committee does not plan to meet again until December 18,the Chair suggested that any vote
necessary for this submission be considered at this time The Superintendent explained that he and the School
Committee Chair may sign it and submit to the Executive Office of Administration and Finance The following vote
was then taken
ACTION 2012#191
Moved(Stalin)and seconded(Hunter)
To authorize the Superintendent to submit the Community Innovation Challenge Grant on behalf of the
District,pending a review by the Officers
Vote- Unanimous(with 15 members present)
The Superintendent clarified details about the Federal and State grants over the last few years,and noted that
additional grant revenue is anticipated for FY 13 and that staff is working aggressively to that end In answer to a
question,he also gave reassurance that this Community Innovation Challenge Grant does not create any lingering
liability or obligation and that this grant would be managed in house
d Assistant Superintendent for Finance Search Process
As Chair of the Special Subcommittee for the Assistant Superintendent for Finance search,Ms Flood explained the
process used to bring forth the recommendation of Kevin Mahoney She explained that the School Committee had
appointed her,John Blyzinskyj,and Jeff Stalin to serve,with Laura Mornssette as an alternate When Mr
Blyzinskyj resigned from the School Committee,Ms Mornssette stepped in as the third School Committee member
to serve on this subcommittee She explained that since this position has a dual report,both to the School
Committee and to the Superintendent,it was a parallel process,with both groups being represented at meetings of
the subcommittee She explained the sequence of meetings,from the 1St meeting,during which no business could be
conducted,since there was not a quorum of School Committee representatives at the posted meeting,through the
applicant review in Executive Session pursuant to Purpose#8,resulting in the recommendation of 3 candidates for
interviews These interviews took place in a posted Open Session meeting on November 8 She felt that it had been
a good process,and there was surprising agreement on the Subcommittee on the recommended candidate She noted
that all finalists responded in writing to three questions prior to their scheduled interview,and all were asked the
same questions during the interview,although follow up questions varied based on initial responses All were good
candidates, and all were considered seriously,but Mr Mahoney stood apart,particularly in that he had experience
and knowledge of Minuteman from his role as Treasurer The following motion was made(Stalin)and seconded
(Spalding) That the Minuteman Regional School Committee appoint Kevin Mahoney the Assistant Superintendent
for Finance,pending the negotiation of a contract by the Assistant Superintendent Search Committee,to be
approved by the Minuteman Regional School Committee at its December Meeting
The Sudbury member referred to an email,dated 11 12 12, sent to the School Committee Chair expressing
opposition to this recommended appointment,and read it (see Attachment B) He emphasized his view that the
school and the School Committee cannot and should not consider any applicant for any position that has
preconceived biases and ignores Minuteman and DESE operational educational services costs and facts to support
an administration's actions Concern was raised about funding the position,having been told that this position
would be revenue neutral
A request by the Wayland member for a complete list of applicants led to a clarification of Purpose#8 Executive
Session,as described as follows in the Attorney General's OML Guide,namely
"To consider or interview applicants for employment or appointment by a preliminary screening committee
if the chair declares that an open meeting will have a detrimental effect in obtaining qualified applicants,
provided,however,that this clause shall not apply to any meeting,including meetings of a preliminary
screening committee,to consider and interview applicants who have passed a prior preliminary screening"
It was explained that this protects qualified candidates who do not wish to inform their current employer that they
are considering other employment Names of those designated as finalists are public,but not the names of other
applicants Regarding Mr Mahoney's current role as Treasurer,it was clarified that an Assistant Treasurer had been
previously appointed,and it is expected that he will serve until the Treasurer position is filled This will be part of
the discussion in negotiating Mr Mahoney's contract Reassurance was offered that Minuteman will not be left
without a Treasurer
The member from Wayland asked that the vote on this be taken by roll call
Clarification on Mr Luoto's role was sought It was explained that his title is Business Office Manager,and that he
was appointed on 9 18 12,by School Committee vote, Interim Business Manager,effective 11 7 12 until the new
School Business Administrator is appointed Questions about his salary arose, it was clarified that he received an
increase from$75K to$105K over the summer,and when he was appointed to the Interim Business Manager,there
was no change in his salary
With no further questions on process,the floor was opened for School Committee members to ask questions In
response to questions,Mr Mahoney explained that he is comfortable with the dual reportage inherent in the job, and
highlighted the concept of initiatives and implementation and the process of consensus building in conflict He
gave an example related to leasing buses,and highlighted the importance of compromise and collaboration He
noted that he sees this a career advancement,and expressed interest in the regionalization issues and the school
building project at Minuteman
Mr Mahoney clarified that he does not have his MCPPO certification yet,but is on the waiting list for the Inspector
General's Seminars when this can occur It was noted that Minuteman District is covered on this end by the October
16 appointment of School Building Committee member Don Lowe to serve as Interim Chief Procurement Officer,
with MCPPO certification,effective 11 7 12
He also clarified that he is not a CPA,and that he does not see this as helpful to the job He confirmed that at
Whittier Tech,the enrollment is 1258 students,with 4 being tuition students and no post graduates,in contrast to
high numbers at Minuteman Although he acknowledged that it creates a different budget model,he did not see a
problem in making the transition himself He then noted that it was important to look at the programmatic model as
well,as he had explained in his March,2012 presentation to the MMSC When asked,he noted that he has not read
the Marginal Cost Task Force Report,and it was clarified that he had not been given a copy
In response to questions on the position,the Superintendent explained that the role of Assistant Superintendent is a
common role,particularly for a large and complex district He also explained that it is a title which replaces the
Director of Business Operations and Finance,but it has a more educational component requiring broader
understanding of complex financials,given the MSBA process The educational component includes being a
member of the Executive Team,looking at broader issues related to the school,and adding another dimension to
planning,and looking at financial responsibility in a creative way
The Boxborough member noted that she was part of the process when Mr Mahoney was interviewed for Treasurer,
and was particularly impressed with his experience in vocational schools and municipal government She also noted
that she was comfortable with the qualifications of the Assistant Treasurer as well
Estimated expenditures associated with replacing this position was offered,and the Superintendent clarified that
these estimates were incorrect, he noted that that the head count has not changed,and he is not adding a layer of
administration
Offered an opportunity to give a closing statement,Mr Mahoney noted that he is pleased to have been
recommended,is excited about things going on at Minuteman, sees this move as wonderful professionally
broadening opportunity He looks forward to doming the administrative team and working with the School
Committee The Chair of the Subcommittee then explained that Mr Mahoney is able to start within 30 days of the
vote She also confirmed that the School Committee would have to approve the contract,and the following vote was
then taken,by roll call of the members present
ACTION 2012#192
Moved(Stulin)and seconded(Spalding)
That the Minuteman Regional School Committee appoint Kevin Mahoney the Assistant Superintendent for
Finance,pending the negotiation of a contract by the Assistant Superintendent Search Committee,to be
approved by the Minuteman Regional School Committee at its December Meeting
Wong abstain Stulin yes
Horton yes DeLuca yes
Castagno no Spalding yes
Weis yes Mahoney yes
Hunter yes Farmer yes
Morrissette yes Maniarrez no
Taschioglou yes O'Connor yes
Flood yes
Vote- 12 in favor, 1 abstention,2 opposed(with 15 members present)
Mr Mahoney's resume can be found as Attachment C The School Committee Chair extended thanks to the Chair of
the Subcommittee for coordinating the process
At 8 20 PM,the Student Representative left the meeting
5 BUDGET REPORT,Jeff Stuhn
a Report on Recent Meeting
Mr Stulin reported that there is a short window of time between when budget information is gathered and when it is
due He explained that the aim is to get more information in the budget book,and the process will begin in
December
6. POLICY REPORT, Cheryl Mahoney
a. Report on Recent Meeting
Ms Mahoney explained that the Subcommittee needs to do more work on Minutes,Ethics,and Remote Participation
Policies, is waiting for feedback from the Finance Subcommittee on Section D policies,and that updated draft
revisions to Gender Discrimination Policies AC and ACA,with proper name of the District,will be forthcoming for
December consideration
b.Revision: Policy BE (School Committee Meetings and the Open Meeting Law)
The revisions related to draft Policy BE(School Committee Meetings and Open Meeting Law)were explained and
the School Committee took the following vote
ACTION 2012#193
Moved(Stulin)and seconded(Taschioglou)
To approve draft Policy BE(School Committee Meetings and the Open Meeting Law)as presented for 1St
Reading
Vote. Unanimous(with 15 members present)
This draft policy can be found as Attachment D This policy will be on the December meeting agenda for a 2°d
Reading,when any other changes received will be presented
c. Revisions to Policy BBA(School Committee By Laws)
A number of questions arose in the suggested revision presented,including the careful use of the terms"eligible"
and"ineligible",the question of moving between the Vice-Chair and Chair role,the ambiguity of term limits,and
that the language being presented was from the attorney,as the least distasteful option presented in response to a
request for clarification of language in the existing policy It was suggested that the concept of term limits in
general needs fuller discussion by the School Committee,and that the School Committee still controls the process
of Officer appointment by way of vote It was emphasized that the Policy Subcommittee feels the entire policy
needs to be revised
ACTION 2012#194
Moved(Morrissette)and seconded(Farmer)
To table Policy BBA(School Committee By Laws)and review the issue of term limits during a scheduled
agenda item at a future meeting
Vote. Unanimous(with 15 members present)
7. BUILDING REPORT,Ford Spalding
a. Report on Recent Meetings and the OPM Selection Process
Mr Spalding explained the schedule that was used for the OPM Selection Process since 9 18 12,when the RFS was
approved He explained that an informational site visit was held on 10 11 12,that 11 firms had submitted a response
to the RFS by the 10 17 deadline,and that on 10 22,the OPM Selection Subcommittee selected four firms to
interview Skanska,Collaborative Partners,Tishman, and Daedalus The firms were interviewed on 11 1 and a
recommendation was presented to the full School Building Committee at their meeting on 11 5 He extended thanks
to those involved in preparing the documentation package outlining the process and submitting it on 11 8 in
preparation for MSBA's Panel Review Meeting on 12 3,which he will attend He then asked that the School
Committee ratify the work of the OPM Selection Subcommittee and the School Building Committee In response to
questions,he affirmed that all were worthy candidates,and he listed out the projects that Skanska has been involved
in He noted that the Selection Subcommittee was pleased with Skanska's team The member from Acton noted that
all School Committee members had been invited to attend the interviews,but that he was the only one present He
was very impressed with Skanska,and felt they were way ahead of the others As School Building Committee chair,
Mr Spalding noted that the Selection Subcommittee worked very hard to complete the process,and he noted that
Minuteman is very fortunate to have this working group in place, he looks forward to working with them over the
next 5-10 years The following vote was then taken
ACTION 2012#195
Moved(Stulin)and seconded(Hunter)
To approve the vote recommended by the OPM Selection Subcommittee at their
11 1 12 meeting and the full School Building Committee at their 11 5 12 meeting as
follows
That the Minuteman School Building Committee appoint by majority vote an Owners Project
Manager from among the finalists in order of rank,with Skanska being the top selection,subject
to reference checks,successful fee negotiations,and approval of MSBA
Skanska
Collaborative Partners
Tishman
Daedalus
Vote: 13 in favor,with 2 abstentions(with 15 members present)
8 SCHOOL COMMITTEE BUSINESS
a School Committee's SMART Goals 2012-13
The Chair confirmed that no comments had been received on the draft SMART Goals 2012-13 A motion was
made(Stulm)and seconded(Horton) to approve the SMART Goals 2012-13 as written An amendment was
offered to the introductory purpose,which was moved(Wong)and seconded(Stulin) After some wordsmithing at
the table,it was agreed to withdraw both motions in place of the following
ACTION 2012#196
Moved(Stulin)and seconded(Weis)
To table the discussion on the School Committee's draft SMART Goals 2012-13,and to submit any
comments or revisions by 11 20,so that this item can be presented again at the December meeting
Vote. 14 in favor,and 1 opposed(with 15 members present)
b. Review of Open Session Minutes from 10.16.12 and 10.23.12, Carrie Flood,Secretary
10 16 12 Minutes
A motion was made(Mahoney)and seconded(Stulin)to accept the minutes of 10 16 12 as presented
Amendments received were reviewed,and the following votes were taken
ACTION 2012#197
Moved(Horton)and seconded(Farmer)
To accept Mr Horton's amendments as presented
Vote. 11 in favor, 1 opposed,and 3 abstentions(with 15 members present)
ACTION 2012#198
Moved(Castagno)and seconded(Weis)
To accept Ms Castagno's amendments as presented
Vote. 9 in favor,3 opposed,and 3 abstentions(with 15 members present)
ACTION 2012#199
Moved(Stulin)and seconded(Weis)
To accept Ms Stulin's amendment as presented
Vote- 12 in favor and 3 abstentions(with 15 members present)
ACTION 2012#200
Moved(Mahoney)and seconded(Stulin)
To accept the minutes of 10 16 12 as amended
Vote- 10 in favor,1 opposed,with 4 abstentions (with 15 members present)
10 23 12 Minutes
A motion was made(Mahoney)and seconded(Stulin)to accept the minutes of 10 23 12 as presented
Amendments received were reviewed,and the following votes were taken
ACTION 2012#201
Moved(Horton)and seconded(Stulin)
To accept Mr Horton's amendments as presented
Vote: 11 in favor and 3 abstentions(with 14 members present, 1 being out of the room)
ACTION 2012#202
Moved(Mahoney)and seconded(Stulin)
To accept the minutes of 10 23 12 as amended
Vote: 10 in favor and 4 abstentions(with 14 members present, 1 being out of the room)
c. Follow up from 10.16.12. Response from Attorney on the 9.17.12 Belmont Letter
Attorney Tobin was invited to the table He noted that he was prepared to respond,but that he deferred to the
Committee to determine whether the discussion would be held in Open Session or Executive Session,pursuant to
Purpose#3,to consider potential litigation,as threatened in the 9 17 12 letter
Comments offered included that it made sense to continue in Open Session,as previous discussions on the matter
were public,that the letter appeared to involve a contract, that on face value,Belmont was threatening litigation,
that litigation would be to protect interests,but that it would be a terrible outcome and Belmont would prefer to get
past the issue and reach agreement,and that an Open Session is fair as otherwise it supports corruption and secrecy
After a short break,a copy of the 9 17 12 letter(shown in Attachment E) was circulated,and the discussion
continued in Open Session
Attorney Tobin referred specifically to the following three points in the letter
" More specifically,Belmont is seeking a binding commitment from Minuteman
that
1 The contract documents for the Owner's Project Manager and the Designer will clearly
specify that the work is to be performed in phases, with one intermediate phase to
conclude with the presentation of the alternatives for the different-sized facilities that
Minuteman Intends to consider, and the documents must reserve Minuteman's right to
terminate the contracts at the conclusion of that phase without penalty to the District or
the payment to the contractors of any amounts not fairly attributable to work already
performed
2 Minuteman will provide the board of selectmen or chief executive officer of each
member town with a copy of the alternatives analysis described above, and will give each
member town the opportunity to review and provide input on the alternatives under
consideration Each member town may make its own decision regarding which local
boards and officials should be involved in that process, in Belmont's case, it would
include and require agreement of the Selectmen, the Warrant Committee and the Capital
Budget Committee
3 Minuteman will terminate the feasibility study and will not proceed to `Module 4"if it
cannot obtain the unanimous consent of the membership, expressed by the board of
selectmen or chief executive officer of each town, to the preferred alternative "
He summarized that he had been asked to provide an opinion on two points
1 Would counsel recommend the School Committee take a binding vote?
2 Would the vote of the School Committee be binding on member towns and enforceable?
He explained that he cannot recommend a binding vote,and that such a vote would not be enforceable
Discussion included the opinion that no one member town should dictate,and that it had been made clear during a
meeting with Belmont that all towns would be fully engaged and informed through the Feasibility Study,and that
the District would expend funds in accordance with the MSBA process It was explained that at the end of Module
3 (Feasibility Study)of MSBA's process,and before Module 4(Schematic Design)is when the towns can weigh in
on project options,and that if done properly the towns would be notified along the way That all towns need to be
on board was emphasized It was noted that all can attend all meetings and participate,and that there is
commitment to go to every town to make everyone aware of the issues along the way
It was explained that MSBA provided two enrollment options 435 and 800,and that the towns would have to
absorb the costs of other options,taking on the responsibility of looking at how to get the State to give greater
reimbursements,which would help all towns,and looking at in district and out of district students in the building
An opinion was noted that Belmont wrote the letter,and it is up to the School Committee to accept it or not,and
that Belmont's proposal denies the School Committee of its legal nghts It was emphasized that all towns need to be
in partnership,as the project won't happen if one town says no to the project It was explained that if a town wanted
to say no today,this would close the project down The importance of going through the process was emphasized
The member from Sudbury explained that he has been asking for a debate on the out of district students and he takes
umbrage that this has been denied He wondered if the attorney opinion is based on MGL and case law Attorney
Tobin affirmed this,and on the School Committee's agreement with MSBA
The member from Boxborough explained her primary objection is to paragraph 2 and 3 of the letter She noted that
her town values her opinion and they have faith in her as she communicates with them,and brings significant issues
to the town as they arise
The Belmont member expressed that he takes offense at the hint that he's not in communication with the town The
letter emerged because he is in communication with his town He noted that the letter asks the School Committee to
take a vote that is binding
Attorney Tobin explained that the School Committee has a variety of authorities due to the Regional Agreement and
statute They have the authority to create a building committee and to conduct,with MSBA,a Feasibility Study
Funds are appropriated for this,and how these funds will be spent is determined by statute Belmont is effectively
asking to delegate the authority back to the towns,and to dictate an end to any spending before the process proceeds
to Module 4 The School Committee has the spending authority through the appropriation process,and Belmont's
letter places a limit on the appropriation No statute or case law supports Belmont'request He explained that he
cannot recommend that the School Committee meet the request,as it is in conflict with MSBA,and the School
Committee has no authonty to do this
ACTION 2012#203
Moved(Flood)and seconded(Horton)
To continue the meeting past 10 00 PM
Vote. 11 in favor and 4 opposed(with 15 members present)
Additional issues raised included not having the information yet for the right size of the school, concern that
Belmont wants another layer of vote by a Board, offering the possibility of leaving this open to politics of the
moment, the sufficiency of a Town Meeting vote, the need to follow MSBA process and rules, the processes
necessary to get buy-in, micromanagement by towns, that Belmont's suggestion is contrary to MSBA and the
current district Agreement which has been in place for 23 years, the need to resolve the enrollment piece, and to
engage the attorney from Belmont in the discussion
Bob McLaughlin,identifying himself as an Attorney by profession,and representing the Warrant Committee in
Belmont,noted that no one from Belmont is trying to tell the School Committee what to do,but that at some point
the Committee will need unanimous support,and that there is a need to have people lured up He explained that the
vote on the$724K for the Feasibility Study contained conditions Belmont considers that Minuteman's recent
Feasibility Study vote (5 22 12)is an illegal vote,and expressed surprise that the School Committee's law firm has
the opinion that the School Committee does not have the authority to comply with Belmont's request He noted
this as a sure path to a"nuclear"route,as he noted that if Belmont is pushed around,the town will seek a litigation
alternative,and that Belmont is prepared to go to MSBA and explain their position
The School Committee Chair noted that there are charged words in the letter,and suggested that there must be a way
there can be a meeting of the minds in the 16 communities Attorney Tobin clarified that the School Committee does
not have the authority to agree to the conditions of Belmont's letter
Mr McLaughlin reiterated that the path could take on a momentum,as Belmont has their own High School project
to focus on The School Committee Chair suggested that both projects are important as they serve different
students,and that perhaps some dialogue could happen on these issues with Belmont,with a subcommittee of some
fresh faces at the table,and laying the letter aside for now Mr McLaughlin noted that he has no desire to infringe
on the process,and agreed that a subcommittee would be a good idea
In response to this,it was suggested that Belmont revisit the letter,make it less of a demand,and more of a
cooperative,sensitive statement with less confrontation This would be fair way to encourage further discussion
Another opinion raised was that a full feasibility study gives an economics of scale,and that full analysis is prudent
action
The Belmont member clarified that this letter is not an insertion of a new condition,but that the vote for the$724K
for the June 2010 Feasibility Study vote was a conditional vote He also noted that the Enrollment Certification
provides parameters at 435 and 800,but not an either/or He noted that size needs to be determined He expressed
that using the$724K for the Feasibility Study all the way through the schematic drawings doesn't make sense,as
buy in is necessary earlier He emphasized that Belmont feels the original approval on the Feasibility Study was
conditioned on no money being spent on the Feasibility Study until all towns had approved the school sizing
Belmont's current position is to spend that portion of the Feasibility Study funds necessary to answer the strategic
sizing question,but to not spend time and money on schematic design until the sizing has been approved by the
member towns It is Belmont's contention that to amend the terms of the June 2010 vote will require a new vote to
be taken by the School Committee
The Concord member noted discomfort with the process as laid out in the Belmont letter She also noted that people
are saying they want to avoid litigation,but keep talking about it She agreed that a subcommittee for further
dialogue is a good idea,as she believes there is common ground to be found
The Sudbury member noted that litigation occurs when trust is at issue He explained his understanding that
Belmont wants a letter that agrees that the process is binding
The Arlington member expressed concerns of her town,noting that many people are opposed to the project,
particularly in the area of capital distribution,and some aspects of the Regional Agreement She explained that the
commitment to Arlington was to consider the issues,not to resolve them Nevertheless,if they are not resolved,she
could not recommend that Arlington support the project All are concerned with the issues,no one wants to spend
more money,and that all towns want more information
The Needham member expressed his opinion that the hurdle suggested in the Belmont letter is too high,and it is
problematic that the School Committee must do this or else someone will shut down the project
The Boxborough representative wondered if the Belmont member would be willing to float the suggestion of
discussion and deliberation He agreed,but noted that since there was zero oversight on the enrollment study and
enrollment has never been talked about, there is deep seated suspicion and doubt that the School Committee is
willing to discuss enrollment
A motion was made(Spalding)and seconded(Hunter)to table the letter,to hold a meeting of all stakeholders,and
then come back to a School Committee meeting to decide whether to proceed with the project,and meanwhile
to move ahead with the Feasibility Study The Belmont member opposed this,making it clear that Belmont will
contest any attempt to borrow The point was made that the enrollment study in and of itself has to be in the context
of the Feasibility Study This being considered too contentious an approach,the motion was withdrawn A second
motion was made(Flood and seconded(Stulm),and the following vote was taken
ACTION 2012#204
Moved(Flood)and seconded(Stulin)
To table the letter,and that the Chair of the School Committee and Mr McLaughlin arrange to meet,
inviting up to 3 other people each of their choosing,for an informal discussion on the issues,and to come
back in December with an update
Vote- 12 in favor and 3 opposed(with 15 members present)
9. NEW BUSINESS
There was no New Business
10. POSSIBLE EXECUTIVE SESSION
A motion was made at 11 00 PM to enter Executive Session for the purpose described below,and the following roll
call vote was taken by the members present
ACTION 2012#205
Moved(Stulm)and seconded(Weis)
To enter into Executive Session,not to return to Open Session,and to allow Attorney Tobin,Dr
Bouquillon,Mr Houle,and Ms Rozan to remain,as follows
Pursuant to Purpose 3 (MGL c 30A, s 21 (a)(3))to consider grievances filed pursuant to the
Committee's collective bargaining agreement with the Minuteman Faculty Association when an open
meeting would have a detrimental effect on the bargaining position of the Committee
O'Connor yes Taschioglou yes
Manjarrez yes Morrissette yes
Farmer yes Hunter yes
Mahoney yes Weis yes
Spalding yes Castagno no
DeLuca yes Horton yes
Stulin yes Wong yes
Flood yes
Vote. 14 in favor,with 1 opposed(with 15 members present)
Ms Castagno left the meeting immediately following this vote at 11 00 pm
11. ADJOURMENT
The meeting was adjourned at the end of the Executive Session at 11 30 pm
Respectfully submitted,
Elizabeth Rozan Carrie Flood
District School Committee Assistant Secretary
ATTACHMENTS
To 11 13 12 Minutes
A Ms Perugmi's Public Comments
B Mr Manjarrez's email related to the recommendation of Mr Mahoney
C Mr Mahoney's resume and interview materials
D Policy BE(School Committee Meetings and OML), 1st Reading
E Belmont Letter of 9 17 12