HomeMy WebLinkAbout2018-09-14-SMPAC-min Lexington Public Schools Master Planning Committee
Friday,September 14, 2018 from 8:30-10:30 a.m.
Samuel Hadley Public Services Building,Training Room#221, 201 Bedford Street
Master Planning Committee Members Present
Dr.Julie Hackett Joe Pato
Dr. Maureen Kavanaugh Dan Voss
Peter Rowe Marina Levit
Michael Cronin Sara Cuthbertson
Donna DiNisco Daniel Abramson
Kate Colburn Richard Perry
Kathleen Lenihan
Alan Levine (Liaison)
Sandy Beebee (Liaison)
The minutes were taken by Maureen Kavanaugh, Director of Planning and Assessment for the Lexington
Public Schools.
I. Welcome and Introductions
II. Review of the MPC Charge:Why are we here (the Problem) &what do we hope to accomplish?
A. The current planning effort is viewed as a continuation of the last round of master
planning. Although we have a number of projects completed or already in progress,
enrollment continues to grow. It is essential that the Town has direction on where to go
next.The committee came to consensus that it should be a 10-year plan, acknowledging
the accuracy of longer term enrollment projections is as a possible challenge. Members
proposed looking back at the last master plan to determine what successes we can learn
from. The goal is to arrive at a plan that anticipates solutions, knowing that this will
have to be reviewed annually and adjustments made as needed.
III. Reconvening the Enrollment Advisory Group: Maureen Kavanaugh and Joe Pato described the
previous work of the Enrollment Advisory Group (formerly the Enrollment Working Group).The
Enrollment Advisory Group will be reconvened again to continue evaluation of enrollment
projection methods and determine what complementary analyses would help inform planning.
This effort would be separate, but is expected to contribute to the Master Planning process.
IV. Back of the Napkin-What kind of Master Plan do you envision? After discussion in smaller
groups,the following was discussed as preferred elements/features:
A. The tone should be objective, explicit, transparent and accessible (e.g. we should use
simple, clear language, effectively incorporate and use visuals to present ideas).
B. Include a thorough problem identification and needs assessment. We should be clear
about what was reviewed/considered, and ultimately how decisions were made (e.g.
include the pros& cons of different options, why options were and were not included).
This could include:
1. Education vision & programmatic assessment(inclusion philosophy)
2. Special education analysis
3. Analysis of enrollment and enrollment drivers
4. Space analysis
5. Financial modeling (including predictable maintenance)
C. Include a space inventory and timeline (see Montgomery county example)
D. We should be should be explicit about intended outcomes and what is planned to get us
there
E. With respect to solutions, we should present a range of solutions/options for the longer
term (i.e. in addition to space expansions,what other strategies will be used to manage
growth, such as redistricting, grade re-configurations, etc.? ) What efficiencies do we
plan to pursue?We should aim to be explicit about the criteria/thresholds that will be
used to determine when solutions would be employed.
F. Plans should include some built in flexibility. Plan should be nimble and anticipate
different scenarios (e.g. lower, higher, mid-range enrollment growth). We need to be
clear about parameters/assumptions that were used (and why) to play out scenarios.
G. We should acknowledge the broader community implications of plans.
H. Enrollment is a critical factor, but there are components that are "immune"to
enrollment changes (HVAC, a roof,windows, mortar, etc. have an expected life span and
course of maintenance). What can and should we account for?
I. The plan must be revisited regularly after completion. We should plan for this and be
very specific how this will happen—Who?When?
J. Connecting our work with the town comprehensive plan?
V. The Architecture of the LIPS Master Plan: Reviewed several examples, including a national model
from the Montgomery County Public Schools, a local sample from Burlington, MA and also ones
from UMASS, Palo-Alto and London
VI. Brainstorm Possible Future Agenda Items
A. Community Involvement? How can we:
1. Communicate a plan is happening and send out specific updates (e.g.formal
update in December? Continuous updates through website, such as posted
minutes and agendas?Standing item on SC meeting agenda? Lexington
minuteman?)
2. Build momentum around the plan?
3. Gather information and input? From staff? From families and community
members? Discussed possible in person formats (an "open house" or forums)
4. Use the website or other digital means to communicate and collect input (e.g.
forms/survey placed on district website, posted google doc where community
members can leave feedback and ideas)?
5. Reach out and include civic organizations?
VII. Next Time:we will continue discussion of community involvement, discuss LHS SOI and review
examples
