HomeMy WebLinkAbout1976-07-06-SC-min Page 133
July 6, 1976
On Tuesday evening July 6, 1976 the Lexington School Couus.ittee con-
ducted a meeting at the Jonas Clarke Junior High School. The meeting
began at 8:00 p.m. Present were Mrs. Swanson, Messrs. Brown, Michelman,
Rotberg, Wadsworth. Also present were Dr. Lawson, Messrs. Barnes, Mac-
Innes, Monderer, and Miss Quinn.
Prior to the opening of the meeting a presentation of a Paul Revere SCHOOL COMMITTEE
Bowl was made to Miss Dorothy Leavitt in recognition of her dedicated PRESENTATION
services to the Lexington Public Schools. Miss Leavitt was a member of
the Physical Education Department at Lexington High School for the years
1937 to 1976.
Upon the recommendation of the Superintendent it was MINUTES
MAY 14, 1976
VOTED: to accept the minutes of May 14, 1976 as corrected.
(Brown, Michelman, Unanimous)
Upon the recommendation of the Superintendent it was MINUTES
JUNE 1, 1976
VOTED: to accept the minutes of June 1, 1976 as corrected.
(Yes, Brown, Michelman, Swanson, Wadsworth, Abstain, Rotberg)
Upon the recommendation of the Superintendent it was SECRETARY OF
SCHOOL COMMITTEI
VOTED: to appoint Richard H. Barnes, Secretary to the School Committee. APPOINTMENT
(Rotberg, Brown, Unanimous)
Upon the recommendation of the Superintendent it was SCHEDULE OF
PAYMENTS
VOTED: to accept the following Schedule of Payments.
(Brown, Michelman, Unanimous)
SCHOOL DEPARTMENT BUDGETS
Personal Services
June 25, 1976 Classified Payroll #26NC $ 90,690.61
June 30, 1976 Professional Payroll #28C 405,571.45
July 2, 1976 Professional Payroll #IC 5,166.27
Expenses
June 25, 1976 Bill Schedules #176 2,856.76
June 25, 1976 #177 860.37
June 25, 1976 #178 1,516.65
June 25, 1976 #179 18,095.92
June 30, 1976 #180 2,989.70
June 30, 1976 #181 4,103.06
June 30, 1976 #182 17,039.80
July 2, 1976 (1976-77 School Expense) #1 1,000.00
July 2, 1976 #2 4,548.72
July 2, 1976 #3 1,103.90
Out-of-State Travel
June 25, 1976 Bill Schedules #24 80.71
June 30, 1976 #25 149.00
Page 134
July 6, 1976
Vocational Education
June 30, 1976 Tuition #29V 615.00 SCHEDULE OF
PAYMENTS
Athletics (CONT°D.)
June 25, 1976 • Payroll #35AP 75.00
June 25, 1976 Bill Schedules #36AE 881.94
June 30, 1976 #37AE 45.46
Art 7 Prior Year's Unpaid
July 2, 1976 11,319.67
SPECIAL PROGRAMS (Non-Lexington Funds)
Driver Education - Adult Education
June 30, 1978 Professional Payroll 523.25
LABS Pre-Kindergarten - Bedford
June 25, 1976 Classified Payroll #4 74.20
June 30, 1976 Professional Payroll 304.74
NETCO
June 25, 1976 Classified Payroll #20 1,837.78
June 30, 1976 Professional Payroll 3,940.83
Teacher Training Program II
June 25, 1976 Classified Payroll #21 100.00
June 30, 1976 Professional Payroll 307.28
June 25, 1976 Bill Schedules " #20 188.53
Title III - Administrative Grant
June 25, 1976 Classified Payroll 140.00
LABS - Pre-Vocational Life Care Program
June 25, 1976 Classified Payroll #22 1,182.75
June 30, 1976 Professional Payroll 895.46
June 25, 1976 Bill Schedules #18 57.67
July 2, 1976 #19 299.66
L,r,A.D.S. Program
June 25, 1976 Classified Payroll #20 1,398.35
June 30, 1976 Professional Payroll 1,403.99
June 25, 1976 Bill Schedule #18 244.00
July 2, 1976 #19 18.64
Autistic Program - Lexington
June 25, 1976 Classified Payroll #21 421.00
June 30, 1976 Professional Payroll 717.96
June 25, 1976 Bill Schedule #9 16.22
Autistic Program - Arlington
June 25, 1976 Classified Payroll #22 153.60
June 30, 1976 Professional Payroll 2,667.45
June 25, 1976 Bill Schedule #14 178.29
Page 135
July 6, 1976
Multi-Handicapped - Burlington
June 25, 1976 Classified Payroll #20 240.00
June 30, 1976 Professional Payroll 473.65
Pre-School (Burlington)
June 25, 1976 Classified Payroll #19 525.00
June 30, 1976 Professional Payroll 1,771.16
July 2, 1976 Bill Schedule #22 191.72
Pre-School - Bedford
June 25, 1976 Bill Schedule #9 74.00
Title I - P.L. 89-313-Spec. Ed.
June 30, 1976 Professional Payroll 102.89
ESEA Library
June 25, 1976 Bill Schedule #8 889.08
A.C.E. Program
July 2, 1976 Bill Schedule #15 764.20
Adult Education
July 2, 1976 Bill Schedule #11 15.00
EDCO Magnet
June 25, 1976 Bill Schedule 9,000.00
Bus Ticket
June 25, 1976 Bill Schedule 804.00
Dr. Rotberg commented on the recommendation of the department head NEW PERSONNEL
regarding the person recommended for the math-science position at Clarke
Junior High School. Dr. Rotberg felt the ratings by the department head
were un-enthusiastic and wondered if when electing persons to teach in
the Lexington Public Schools there should be persuasive reasons strongly
aligned to excellence rather than recoam:endations that reflected a good
gamble. Miss Quinn responded saying that the choice of words used by
department heads and other references were their own choices, and were
direct quotations. Dr. Rotberg replied saying that he felt that only
superb credentials should be considered with the job market the way it
is. Miss Quinn commented that all candidates that were being recommended
were a result of a convergence of viewpoints. Mr. Michelman said that
it was difficult to know how to interpret phrases used by individuals
since all people had different standards. Mr. Michelman said he had
questions also, but after reviewing the folder of the person and having
a discussion with Miss Quinn was now satisfied.
Dr. Lawson commented that department heads, principals, and central
office staff who interviewed candidates obtained much more vital informa-
tion and feeling about the candidate during the interview than that which
is reflected in some of the written comments. He felt the school com-
mittee should hold us accountable for the production in the classroom
rather than for the selected references. He felt that he was satisfied
after quizzing Mr. Spiris and Miss Quinn in a protracted discussion on
the candidate and would so recommend.
Page 136
July 6, 1979
Upon the recommendation of the Superintendent it was NEW PERSONNEL
VOTED: to accept the following New Personnel. (Yes, Brown, Swanson,
Michelman, Wadsworth, Abstain, Rotberg)
)
Upon the recoumendation of the Superintendent it was LEADERSHIP
AWARDS
VOTED: to accept the following Leadership Awards. (Yes, Brown, Michel-
man, Swanson, Wadsworth, Abstain, Rotberg)
Wendy Thompson - Clarke Jr. High
Arnold Hebb - Harrington
Upon the recommendation of the Superintendent it was PERSONNEL
CHANGES
VOTED: to accept the following Personnel Changes (Professional) (PROFESSIONAL:
(Page 200)
Resignations
Retirement
Maternity Leave of Absence
Set Salary
A brief discussion was held regarding the recommended professional
personnel changes on Page 200A. Dr. Rotberg questioned the salary of
the assistant principal feeling it would be more useful to have the new
person on the payroll rather than pay the incumbent person who was not
returning to the position in the fall. It was explained that this was
the setting of the salary for the person and he would have the vacation
time coming to him anyway. Dr. Rotberg also felt that he could not vote
on the recommendation due to the inclusion of the third name in the
listing of teachers who were recommended for the setting of salaries.
Even though there was no normal increase being awarded he felt the per-
son's unsatisfactory performance should be the basis for non-renewal of
contract.
Upon the recommendation of the Superintendent it was
VOTED: to accept the following Professional Personnel Changes on
Page 200A. (Yes, Brown, Wadsworth, Michelman, Swanson,
No, Rotberg)
Page 137
July 6, 1976
Interim Housemaster
Upon the recommendation of the Superintendent it was PERSONNEL CHANGE
(CLASSIFIED)
VOTED: to accept the following Classified Personnel Changes.
(Brown, Rotberg, Unanimous)
Retirement
Resignations
New Personnel
Dr. Lawson reviewed the procedure for the screening and hiring of ASSISTANT
the new assistant superintendent. He reviewed the time line set up SUPERINTENDENT
prior to his arrival and said that the recommendation of the assistant OF SCHOOLS
superintendent for the evening of July 6, would be accomplished with his (INSTRUCTIONAL
recommendation. He said there were approximately 300 candidates. The SERVICES)
screening committee consisting of central office staff culled the group
to approximately 40. These 40 were then submitted to him for additional
screening. The result was 8 candidates survived the process. The public
interview committee then interviewed the 8 candidates rating all of them.
Dr. Lawson said the overwhelming choice of the screening committee and
his personal review was the candidate being recommended. He said he was
most impressed by Dr. Pierson's credentials and experiences, since many
of them were similar to what he would be doing in Lexington.
Upon the recommendation of the Superintendent it was
VOTED:
Dr. Lawson reviewed the process used to appoint the assistant prin- ASSISTANT
cipal. He said the position was advertised in the system. A committee PRINCIPAL
of three teachers, a guidance counselor, a parent, P.T.A. , president, (DIAMOND JUNIOR
and department head were appointed to screen and interview. Seven appli- HIGH SCHOOL)
cants were interviewed. The committee recommended three. The assistant
superintendent met with Mr. Sullivan and Dr. Lawson to select the candi-
date for recommendation. The candidate being recommended had been inter-
viewed by the superintendent and assistant superintendent.
Page 138
July 6, 1976
Upon the recuaaendation of the Superintendent it was
VOTED:
.
Dr. Rotberg said that he was apposed to the appointment of a Coord- MAX ED
inator of MAX ED since the position was poorly defined as well as pay- COORDINATOR
ment of a high salary for a vague position. Mrs. Swanson questioned
whether there should be a debate on the issue of a MAX ED Coordinator,
since the school committee twice voted in favor of such a position. She
said the discussion was open to remarks regarding the person for the po-
sition, but not the position. Dr. Rotberg responded that it was his
right to question unless the committee wished to deny him that right.
At this point a motion for appointment of the MAX ED Coordinator
was made by Mr. Micheiman who recoiwuended the appointment to Dr. Natalie
Kcrnitzky as MAX ED Coordinator at Lexington Senior High School effective
September 1, 1976 for the school year 1976-1977. The salary to be
$17,578 for 205 work days a year. The motion was seconded by Mr. Brown.
The discussion continued with Mr. Michelman saying that any school
committee member having anything germane to any topic should be allowed
to state such views. He felt Dr. Rotberg had germane points and should
be allowed to speak, Mrs. Swanson replied that anything regarding the
candidate was appropriate, but the practice of the school committee has
been to support prior votes and the position of MAX ED Coordinator had
been voted twice. She felt Dr. Rottierg had plenty of opportunity prior
to this meeting. Mr. Wadsworth and Mr. Brown commented that Dr. Rotberg
should be allowed to speak, but should confine his remarks to the person
being recLiaunended and not the position. Dr. Rotberg reviewed the history
of the development of the MAX ED position and felt that the salary as-
signed to the position was inflated and the position was poorly defined.
The fuzzy role description had never been defined in his opinion and he
had received no further information except the brief report of a few
months ago. He said the interview couuuittee did not give a clear man-
date for the particular candidate either, since a clear majority of the
votes did not reflect overwhelming support. He felt that he needed per-
suasive reasons for voting on this particular candidate and asked Dr.
Lawson to comment. Dr. Lawson said he had discussed the position with
Dr. Clone, Principal of the high school and Mr. Spiris, and was satis-
fied that the position was valid and the person filling the position
would provide quality experience for students. He felt that the ap-
pointment would be a step in the right direction due to the superb cre-
dentials held by the person. He was also most impressed that the candi-
date had a doctorate in reading. Dr. Rotberg asked if the ACE program
and EWOW Programs would be supervised by this person. Mr. Wilson, Assist-
ant Principal at the high school who was in the audience said that this
person would work in harmony with the programs and would act as a resource.
Mr. Wilson also said that the final two people recommended by the screen-
ing committee were most acceptable and that the reason for the large no
preference vote was that either of the two candidates were acceptable.
Mr. Micheh-nan asked that Mr. Wilson comment as to whether it was the
case that nearly every member of the interview committee regarded the
candidate as outstanding for the position. Mr. Wilson responded in the
affirmative.
Page 139
July 6, 1976
A VOTE was called on the motion (Yes, Michelman, Brown, Wadsworth,
Swanson, NO, Rotberg)
Upon the recommendation of the Superintendent it was NEW PERSONNEL
(PAGE 201)
VOTED: to accept the following New Personnel. (Brown, Wadsworth, Unanimous)
Name School Position Step & Level
Upon the recommendation of the Superintendent it was COACHING
SALARIES
VOTED: to accept the Coaching Salaries for the following chairpersons. (CHAIRPERSONS)
(Brown, Rotberg, Unanimous)
Mr. Wadsworth began the discussion with a proposal or formula to SCHOOL CLOSING
retrieve information about schools, enrollments and possible alterna-
tives. He said that the reports by the Citizens Advisory Committees
gave valuable preliminary reviews, suggested directions, and a lot of
very fine work was the result. He said there should be two things kept
in perspective, that cost savings to the Lexington Public Schools will
only occur when there is a reduction in the salary category, and second,
we must cost out our policies to see what effect they will have in the
future. He said that projections were available by school, by level
through the year, 1984. He listed the following as suggested areas
for review:
1. Class Size - Can the school committee agree to a class size?
2. Combination classes - When, where and what will be the school
committee policy?
3. Is the combination of classes harmful or not?
4. What percentage of the time does the administration feel we should
combine classes?
5. School district lines - Should we change school district lines?
6. Distribution of pupils - Are there schools and classes that are
exceptionally low or high in enrollment?
7. What are the maximum number of schools a child should go to in
a six year period?
Page 140
July 6, 1976
3. Should all the schools open at the same time or should we pro-
ject a phasing schedule?
9. Are the small schools educationally superior or not?
He felt that a consensus of school committee was needed and that
each of these policies should be discussed and then run through a com-
puter. He requested members write out a series of ideas or questions
and discuss them.
M . Michelman commented that it seemed sensible that answers would
have to be arrived at before a decision could be made on the alternatives
of closure consolidation or keeping all the schools open. He said the
school committee should have the advice of the educational professionals
and suggested areas for exploration such as the increasing demands for
space for tutoring, therapeutic activities, special needs, and curricu-
lum resource center. He also suggested examination of any relation be-
tween congestion level and quality of program. He said these may not
be questions that a computer could answer, but certainly felt that the
professional educator should assist and the school committee should
discuss them. He suggested that the school committee discuss these
after August 3.
Dr. Rotberg said that the committee should be very careful of the
time parameters due to the depth of questions. He felt many people were
interested and there should be provisions for others to comment.
Mrs. Swanson felt that redistricting should be a focus, also. Mr.
Brown said he had made a request several months ago for a listing of
the spaces and uses in the schools and had not seen the list. Dr.
Lawson said that he did not know of it but would check with Mr. Spiris
regarding the list. Dr. Lawson then said that he would suggest the
school committee members visit all the schools with him as the question
of school closings or consolidation is explored. He felt that agree-
ment should be reached on policies dealing with the present program and
that all programs need to be reviewed.
Mrs. Swanson closed the discussion by asking the members of the
school committee to formulate questions. ;.hese would be discussed at
future meetings.
The Superintendent in conjunction with Mr. Saulsberry, METCO METCO PROPOSA
Coordinator, presented the METCO proposal. The proposal was an outline
of two separate budgets of state funding, to cover the possibility that
additional funding may become available to Lexington as it has in the
past. Mr. Michelman questioned the differences in the budgets and asked
what would happen if additional funds were received. Mr. Saulsberry
responded saying that the funds would be used in the area of workshops
and tutoring programs.
Upon the recommendation of the Superintendent it was
VOTED: to accept the METCO Budget as recommended. (Rotberg, Michelman,
Unanimous)
•
Page 141
July 6, 1976
Upon the recommendation of the Superintendent it was BIDS
TYPEWRITER
VOTED: to award the typewriter service to Gayne Typewriter Co. , as SERVICE
the low bidder meeting specifications. (Brown, Michelman,
Unanimous)
A brief discussion was held on the matter of rubbish removal. Mr. RUBBISH
Michelman and Dr. Rotberg asked if the awarding of a contract to the CONTAINER
low bidder was in the best interests of the town since another bidder SERVICE
was a long time contractor of the town. Mr. Maclnnes responded saying
that according to law there was no choice and their references seemed
appropriate. Dr. Rotberg also noted his concern about recycling paper.
Mr. Maclnnes reviewed the problem of recycling paper in the past because
of the wax problem. Dr. Rotberg then suggested removing the rubbish out-
side of Lexington. Mr. Maclnnes said the cost would increase approxi-
mately 50%. Dr. Rotberg said that perhaps it would increase the life
of the sanitary landfill in Lexington. Mr. Michelman said then that this
might be a matter for the town meeting to decide since they might feel
that the additional cost would be valid. He suggested more information
be obtained regarding this matter for recommendation next year. Mr.
Brown expressed his reservations about dumping Lexington waste in other
towns.
A vote was called. No motion was made. Mrs. Swanson handed the
gavel to Mr. Brown.
Upon the recommendation of the Superintendent it was
VOTED: to award the rubbish container service_ to Cianci & Sons based on
low bid meeting specifications. (YES, Swanson, Michelman, Rotberg,
Brown, Abstain) (Mr. Wadsworth was not present at the time of the
vote)
Mr. Brown returned the gavel to Mrs. Swanson
Upon the recommendation of the Superintendent it was TOWEL SERVICE
VOTED: that the towel service be awarded to the Standard Coat, Apron
and Towel Co. , based upon their low bid of .115 per towel for
the school year 1976-77. (YES, Brown Swanson, NO, Rotberg,
ABSTAIN, Michelman) (Mr. Wadsworth was not present at the time
of this vote or any vote after this point)
Upon the recommendation of the Superintendent it was STUDENT ACCIDEE
INSSRANCE
VOTED: to award the student accident insurance to the Derosier Plan
Admin. , Inc. , for the school year 1976-1977 as low bidder meet-
ing specifications. (Brown, Rotberg, Unanimous)
Upon the recommendation of the Superintendent it was PAINTING
VOTED: to award a contract for painting in the schools as follows:
(Brown, Michelman, Unanimous)(See Page 141A)
'Y
Page 141A
July 6, 1976
R. F. Johnson Painting Co. Southeastern Painting Co.
Sr. High (Interior) $ 3,350.
Diamond Jr. High(Exterior) 2,800.
Muzzey Jr. High(Interior) 3,890.
Adams School (Exterior) 3,350.
" " (Interior) $ 3,500.
Bowman School(Interior) 1,150.
Bridge School(Exterior) 1,760.
Estabrook School(Interior) 1,680.
Fiske School(Exterior) 1,950.
" (Interior) 3,800.
Franklin (Interior) 1,600.
Harrington(Exterior) 3,100.
" (Interior) 2,700.
Hastings (Interior) 2,100.
Munroe (Interior 2,100.
Parker School(Interior) 1,900.
Admin.Bldg. (Exterior) 3,100.
Page 142
July 6, 1976
Mr. Gerald Abegg, a member of the Hancock P.T.A. was recognized at CITIZENS
this point and requested that some painting be done at the Hancock COMMENTS
School even though a prior school committee vote indicated that the
school would be closed in 1977. Dr. Lawson said that Hancock would be
painted, if possible, even thoughit is not on the list of schools.
He felt there should be some painting done.
Prior to the vote of the Data Processing Equipment Dr. Rotberg said DATA PROCESSING
he had questions regarding: EQUIPMENT
1. Owning the equipment versus a rental of equipment.
2. Goals of the program.
Mr. Maclnnes referred Dr. Rotberg and the members of the school
committee to a memo from Mr. Koetke regarding data processing budget.
A vote was called
Upon the recommendation of the Superintendent it was
VOTED: that the previously awarded contract to the Digital Equipment Co. ,
be changed to a five year lease at $9,318 per year with an option
to purchase from future funds if budgeted. (Brown, Michelman,
Unanimous).
Upon the recommendation of the Superintendent it was COACHING
SALARIES
VOTED: to accept the coaching salaries as listed on pages 204,204A, 1976-1977
and 204B. (Brown, Michelman, Unanimous) (See next page)
Dr. Lawson mentioned the following items to the school committee. ADMINISTRATIVE
REPORT
1. The summer reading program began at the Bowman School on July 6,
and approximately 192 students were enrolled. It will continue
until August 6. School Committee members and citizens were in-
vited to visit any morning session from 8:30-11:00 a.m,
2. The memorandum of agreement for two years had been developed with
representatives of the L.E.S.A. and National Association of Govern-
ment Employees (Custodians) . Employees in these organizations
will be asked to ratify the agreements before they are presented
to the school committee for approval. They were now being writ-
ten by counsel for the. groups.
3. The problem of smoking and other unacceptable bus behavior will
be discussed with the contractor this week..
4. A community relations plan will be reconuuended at a later meet-
ing.
5. The drama recommendation will not be presented until principals
and teachers involved have an opportunity to present their views
on the subject.
Page 143
July 6, 1976
6. A 622 resolution will be presented to the school committee in ADMINISTRATIVE
August. REPORT (CONT'l
7. An exemption was requested from the practice of having two read-
ings before personnel appointments are approved by the School
Committee.
It was suggested that August 3 and either August 23 or 24 be the NEXT SCHOOL
dates of the next two school committee meetings. COMMITTEE
MEETING
It was
VOTED: to go into Executive Session to discuss a matter concerning nego-
tiations and litigation at 10:50 p.m. (Yes, MicheLman, Yes, Rotberg,
Yes, Brown, Yes, Swanson)
Restfully submted,
iehard H. Barnes
/k / Recording Secretary