Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1976-05-10-SC-min Page 90 May 10, 1976 On Monday evening May 10, 1976, the Lexington School Committee con- ducted a meeting at the Jonas Clarke Junior High School at 8:00 p.m. Present were Mrs. Swanson, Messrs. Brown, Michelman, Rotberg, Wadsworth, and student representative Nancy Abelmann. Also present were Miss Quinn, Messrs. Spirts, Barnes, Maclnnes, Monderer. Mrs. Beryl Safford, 12 Meriam St., read the following letter from PUBLIC the Hancock parents: PARTICIPATION "Hancock parents wish to present this petition to you at this time SCHOOL CLOSING to reaffirm our strong support for our school and for its educational program. 'We would like the school committee to note that this petition has been signed by 97 per cent of Hancock's Lexington parents and thus repre- sents the view of the vast majority. Moreover, parents of children who live in other school districts, but who attend Hancock for special needs expressed the wish, when signing the petition that their other children also could attend the school. 'We earnestly hope that the school committee, as our elected repre- sentatives, will be responsive to this virtually unanimous declaration. We also urge that more extensive attention be given the contents of the Educational Program Sub-Committee report before irrevocable steps are taken which would cost Lexington one of its finest schools." Hancock School Association Richard and Beryl Safford Co-Presidents Mrs. Ruth Gallagher, 14 Moon Hill Road, expressed her concern that FOOD ADDITIVES the Food Services Department included processed meats (hot dogs, sausage, etc.) in the school menu. She emphasized the potentially dangerous ef- fects of additives and also the lack of nutritional value. Prof. George Wolf of the M.Z.T. faculty explained that processed meats were not dangerous, but were low in nutritional value and were uneconomical. He further added that meat containing nitrates, such as bacon were potentially dangerous when cooked at high temperatures. He asked the committee to consider the cost in money and potential cost in health. He explained that nitrates were introduced into foods to retard botulism, improve flavor and retain color and nitrites themselves are not poisonous. The danger is in the conversion to nitrosamines from high heat. Mr. Michelman stated that there was a fair amount of public and community concern about additives--some of these scientifically based. He summarized stating he felt the school policy should be to pro- vide an alternative menu. 7 Page 91 May 10, 1976 Mrs. Griffin, Coordinator of the School Lunch Program noted that the amount of nitrites in foods had been reduced greatly by the federal government. She said natural foods also contained them. She stated that hot dogs were used only twice a month and that alternatives could be provided anytime to students expressing concern over school lunch. Dr. Rotberg commented that he felt there was not a good reason to include processed meats in the school menu. Even though data was not sufficient, he expressed concern about gambling with the health of children. Mr. Wadsworth and Mrs. Swanson expressed reservations about deter- mining menus, but agreed that alternatives and use of processed meat should be made under the direction of Mrs. Griffin. Mrs. Griffin and Mr. Spiris agreed to provide alternate choices on the days when pro- cessed meats are on the menu. Dr. Rotberg asked if Lexington would be required to begin a break- BREAKFAST fast program. Both Mr. Maclnnes and Mrs. Griffin responded in the nega- PROGRAM tive due to the lack of qualified applicants. Mr. Maclnnes also asked the committee to oppose the present law requiring such programs. Mr. Spiris presented the school committee with a report outlining EDUCATIONAL a suggested plan for working with the Citizens Advisory Committee. He PROGRAM also suggested that staff and administrators consider the EPSC Report STUDY and make recommendations to the school committee. He then requested COMMITTEE the school committee and C.A.C. meet to decide the major areas of the report that need discussion and clarification. Mrs. Swanson asked the EPSC to set guidelines and establish pri- ority items for discussion. Mr. Wadsworth stated that the school committee was a policy setting body and he would like to hear the views of the advisory committee as they relate to present educational philosophy, suggested changes in phil- osophy and suggestions for implementation. With such responses he felt he could better decide on policy direction. Mr. Michelman agreed that the committee was a policy setting body. He felt that the key sentence in Mr. Spiris's memo was the one stating that the school committee should have sufficient opportunity to discuss the report of the Study Committee. He felt that due to the breadth and richness of the report, more than one discussion session would be needed. Dr. Hoffman then presented his comments on the future role of the E.P.S.C. and its suggested procedure for dealing with the report. He said the future role and discussion should focus on the following: - the achievement of some very clear understandings with the new superintendent to formulate basic policies (curricula correlation, style of management, structure of system) . - the implementation of some other recommendations (curriculum center, curriculum coordinators) Page 92 May 10, 1976 - .the improvement of public understanding (discussion of the report, public discussion groups) - the consideration of school closings. The Superintendent and Mr. Hoffman disagreed on the role of the E.P.S.C. Advisory Committee as it related to discussions with other groups. Mr. Spiris felt he should restrict discussion to the school committee. Mr. Hoffman disagreed. The school committee, in summary, requested the interim superintend- ent to contact Dr. Lawson to arrange a meeting to discuss the report in the near future. Mrs. Swanson requested that the Redistricting Committee and Cost ADVISORY Implication Committee be disbanded. COMMITTEE Mr. Wadsworth then moved to discharge the Redistricting Committee and the Cost Implications Committee. The motion was seconded by Mr. Brown. Both Dr. Rotberg and Mr. Michelman requested the committees remain because their business was unfinished. After a brief discussion it was agreed to place the item on the next school committee agenda. Mr. Wadsworth withdrew the motion. The minutes of May 3, 1976 were discussed. It was MINUTES MAY 3, 1976 VOTED: to accept the minutes of May 3, 1976 as amended. (Brown, Michelman, Unanimous) Upon the recommendation of the Superintendent it was SCHEDULE OF VOTED: to accept the following Schedule of Payments. (Brown, PAYMENTS Michelman, Unanimous) SCHOOL DEPARTMENT BUDGETS Personal Services May 7, 1976 Professional Payroll #23 $400,187.58 Expenses May 7, 1976 Bill Schedules #156 6,692.20 May 7, 1976 #157 8,037.90 May 7, 1976 #158 26,748.11 Out-of-State Travel May 7, 1976 Bill Schedule #18 619.00 Athletics May 7, 1976 Bill Schedule #30 955.00 May 7, 1976 Payroll 427 314.00 1 Page 93, May 10, 1976 SPECIAL PROGRAMS (Non-Lexi_gton Funds) Adult Education May 7, 1976 Professional Payroll $ 284.40 May 7, 1976 Bill Schedule #9 45.60 Driver Education '(Adult Education) May 7, 1976 Professional Payroll 695.75 LABB Pre-K Bedford May 7, 1976 Professional Payroll 329.74 METCO Program May.7, 1976 Professional Payroll 3,527.50 Teacher Training Program II May 7, 1976 Professional Payroll 368.85 LAB Pre-Vocational Life Care Program May 7, 1976 Professional Payroll 580.46 LEADS Program May 7, 1976 Professional Payroll 1,403.87 Autistic Program (Lexington) May 7, 1976 Professional Payroll 717.96 Autistic Program (Arlington) May 7, 1976 Professional Payroll 2,667.45 Multiple-Handicapped (Burlington) May 7, 1976 Professional Payroll 425.65 Pre-K (Burlington) May 7, 1976 Professional Payroll 2,066.54 Title I (PL 89-313 Spec. Ed.) May 7, 1976 Professional Payroll 102.89 ACE Grant May 7, 1976 Bill Schedule #10 2,845.35 Upon the recommendation of the Superintendent it was STAFF RE-ELECTION VOTED: Upon the recommendation of the superintendent the following were LEADERSHIP voted leadership awards for 1975-1976. (Michelman, Wadsworth, Swanson, Brown, YES, Rotberg, Abstained) Upon the recommendation of the Superintendent it was NEW PERSONNEL VOTED: Upon the recommendation of the Superintendent it was PERSONNEL CHANG (PROFESSIONAL) VOTED: to accept the following professional personnel changes. (Rotberg, Brown, Unanimous) Page 94 May. 10, 1976 Appointment Resignations Maternity Leave Leave of Absence Mr. Spiris proposed a suggestion by Mr. Brown to provide an appro- RETIREMENT priate recognition to school employees who retire after 20 or more years RECOGNITION of service in the Lexington Public Schools. Mr. Brown said other town agencies had a similar program. Dr. Rotberg felt a routinized method was void of meaning and sug- gested that members might design a more personal, informal and meaning- ful program--one that would focus on individual contributions rather than town funds. Mr. Michelman questioned the use of town funds, but was assured that it was legal to use funds for such a program. Upon the recommendation of the Superintendent it was VOTED: to adopt a policy to suitably recognize employees with 20 or more years of service upon retirement from the Lexington Public Schools. (Brown, Wadsworth, Unanimous) . Mr. Spiris said that there was no unanimous agreement on phasing PHASING JUNIOR among the three junior high school staff as to a firm direction that HIGH SCHOOL the Lexington Public Schools should move. The L.E.A. had been con- tacted and Mr. Spiris said he was suggesting a professional consulta- tion with the faculties on the topic. It was agreed to postpone discussion on the topic until after the arrival of the new superintendent, Dr. Lawson. Miss Nancy Abelmann ad- vised the committee that the student advisory committee would have a statement on the topic shortly. Upon the advice of the Superintendent it was agreed to accept the PARKING LOT administration's plan to eliminate one of the two part-time high school MONITOR parking lot monitors and make the other position full time. Upon the suggestion of Mr. Michelman the language of the superin- SUPERINTENDENT'S tendent's contract was changed to include an annual evaluation of the CONTRACT superintendent of schools. Mr. Michelman felt the change was a more positive one, and evaluations should occur as a matter of course. The former language made it necessary for a member to express his displeas- ure with the superintendent in order to raise the issue of evaluation. 1 Page 95 May 10, 1976 It was agreed the new language would provide for an evaluation an- nually as a matter of routine. Mr. Spiris requested the school cuuwkittee vote $2,000 to cover the SUPERINTENDEN expenses of Dr. Lawson which were incurred in visiting Lexington on EXPENSES school matters on February 23 and May 14. He said the sum was a rough estimate and was consistent with the policies of other school systems. Dr. Rotberg expressed his objection to the interim Superintendent's request stating that in effect Dr. Lawson' s salary would be $42,000 rather than the $40,000 that the committee had approved previously. In summary, he felt there was insufficient reason for the requested sum. Mrs. Swan- son noted that the sum represented expenses incurred in this school year, not next. The monies then, are not part of his salary. A vote was called: to grant Dr. Lawson $2,000 to cover expenses incurred in visiting Lexington on school matters and time spent on a consulting basis. (YES, Brown, Wadsworth, Michelman, Swanson, NO, Rotberg) It was VOTED: to go into Executive Session at 10:55 p.m. to discuss a matter of litigation and character and reputation of individuals. The Chairman announced the committee would return to open session later. (Yes, Brown; Yes, Rotberg; Yes, Michelman; Yes, Wadsworth, Yes, Swanson). At 11:30 p.m. , it was VOTED: to return to open session. (Wadsworth, Brown, Unanimous) Upon the recommendation of the Superintendent it was VOTED: Upon the recommendation of the Superintendent it was VOTED: to accept the proposal of counsel in respect to the filing of a complaint re: the David Altman case. (Michelman, Wadsworth, Unan.) It was VOTED: to adjourn at 12:00 midnight. (Wadsworth, Brown, Unanimous) Respectfully submitted, ,c. hard H. Bines /k Recording ecretary, Pro Tem