Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1977-02-14-SC-min Page 47 February 14, 1977 On Monday evening, February 14, 1977, the Lexington School Commit- tee met at the Jonas Clarke Junior High School, at 8:00 p.m. Those in attendance were Mrs. Swanson, Messrs. Brown, Michelmaiu, Wadsworth, Rot- berg and student representative Nancy Abelmann. Also present were Messrs. Lawson, Spiris, Monderer, Maclnnes, Pierson and Barnes. Mrs . Florence Harris, Bridge School parent, of 17 Middle St. , said PUBLIC that she was speaking as a representative of the Bridge School Associa- PARTICIPATION on and the community. She said that she was upset about comments that the Bridge School parents do not care about the school and should not BRIDGE SCHOOL take these reports seriously. She said that Bridge School parents do PROPOSAL care about their school, and certainly do not recommend that it be closed. In a recent survey she said 86% of those polled rated the school as excellent or good. An even higher percentage of 93% was the rating for the physical plant, and 92% considered the teachers as very respon- sive. She encouraged the School Committee to extend to the Bridge School the same consideration afforded all other schools being considered. Mr. Michelman responded saying that the vote to look at Bridge School was broader than just that. It was a vote to look at other schools and was not a precipitious act. He felt that most people do take seriously the decline of student enrollment and appreciated Mrs. Harris's remarks. Dr. Rotberg said that it was a responsibility to investigate all alter- natives in order to be credible with the public. Mrs. Swanson said that the vote taken was a serious vote and not precipitous. It was agreed that all alternatives and options would be considered in any recommend- ation of a school before it was phased out. Mrs. Mary Collins, a Bridge parent, of 86 Reed St. , said that the Harvard report of 1960, classified some of the schools as antiquated and recommended that they be eliminated. She asked if either Dr. Rotberg or Mr. Michelman were aware of the report. Both responded they were aware of the report and Dr. Rotberg stated that the Bridge report pro- vided information on one more alternative of the entire school closing issue. Mrs. Patricia Hadley read a letter from the Bridge School Associa- tion, commenting on their concern for the review of Bridge School as a possibility for closure. At this point in the meeting,- committee member, George Wadsworth SCHOOL CLOSING moved that three schools be closed next year (Hancock, Munroe, Parker) . ISSUE The motion was seconded by Mr. Brown. Dr. Wadsworth said that the large schools were as good as the smaller schools. He felt that the school department could phase out the three schools without any problems what- soever. He said that he felt it was the opinion of at least 75% of the citizens of Lexington that these three schools could be closed, and at the same time place no burden on the quality of education provided. He commented on his previous plan that would equalize all grade levels in all schools and thereby equalizing all classes as well. He said that he still thought this plan was worthy of review. The plan would have four districts, one school in each area having kindergarten through grade 3, and another school 4 through 6. He said that each school could handle the problems of declining enrollment effectively while providing quality education. He estimated that his plan could save the town in the vicinity of $6,000,000 with the possibility of an additional $4,000,000, depending on how the town decided to utilize the empty school space. Page 48 February 14, 1977 Mrs. Swanson said that she agreed that there was plenty of space and has been for several years but could not agree that three elementary schools should be phased out next year. She said that even though she agreed that what the town did with the building influenced the savings, only the school closing issue should be the responsibility of the school committee. A vote was called: Yes, Wadsworth; No, Rotberg, Swanson, Brown, Michelman. It was moved by Mr. Michelman that the school committee request JOINT ADVISOR each of the Board of Selectmen, the Planning Board, the Permanent Build- COMMITTEE ins Committee, the Appropriation Committee, and the Capital Expenditures Committee to designate a member of the Lexington High School Student House, together with a member of the School Committee, on a Joint Ad- visory Committee on Uses of School Property. 1. That the Chairman be authorized to designate a member of the School Committee to serve on such Joint Advisory Committee. 2. That the participating Boards and Committees be requested to make available reasonable amounts of staff time (and their mem- bers' time) to assist the Joint Advisory Committee in carrying out its inquiries. 3. That the Joint Advisory Committee be requested to report accord- ing to the following schedule: (a) by Sept. 15, 1977: file a preliminary report suitable for discussion at a public hearing; (b) by Sept. 30, 1977: conduct at least one public hearing on such preliminary report; (c) by Oct. 15, 1977: review and discuss such preliminary re- port with the full membership of each participating Board and Committee; (d) by Oct. 31, 1977: submit to each participating Board and Committee either a Final Report or an Interim Report recom- mending specific inquiries to be completed before submis- sion of •a Final Report, and an expeditious schedule for completion. 4. That the Joint Committee be requested to address itself to the following matters: A. Utility of school buildings for Town purposes (1) identify existing or contemplated Town programs and activities that are in need of (additional) space; insofar as possible, rank these in order of urgency of need. (2) for each of the above, specify mandatory or preferred characteristics of the desired space, including loca- tion, volume, design, special facilities, equipment, etc. ; Page 49 February 14, 1977 if specific school buildings seem specially suitable or unsuitable for one or another purpose, identify them; for each use under consideration, advise as to likely neighborhood and developmental impact of the conversion from school use; if necessary, comment separately for each school under consideration; for each use under consideration, advise as to its com- patibility with other uses (including classroom use) in the same structure. (3) for each use under consideration, estimate (max.-min. range) renovation and operating costs; compare with estimated costs of acquiring and operating suitable space by other means. (4) for each use under consideration, advise as to feasi- bility of reconversion to classroom use in case of future need. B. Utility of school building or buildings as revenue producers (1) identify possible private (taxpaying) uses for existing school buildings; estimate likelihood of actual bidders if one or another building available; advise as to neighborhood and developmental impact of permitting such uses; advise as to necessity and likelihood of zoning change or special permit; advise as to feasibility of recapture for classroom use in case of future need. (2) identify possible private (taxpaying) uses for sites of vacated and demolished school buildings; estimate like- lihood of actual bidders for various sites; advise as to what uses ought to be permitted in various neighborhoods; advise as to necessity and likelihood of zoning change or special permit. (3) for feasible uses and locations identified under (1) and (2) , above: (a) estimate tax revenue from such use; (b) estimate net purchase-price or net rental reve- nues from such use; (c) advise as to feasibility or likelihood of chan- neling a portion of such revenue to school pur- poses. Mr. Michelman felt that a full study of the matters lited in his motion was needed by the School Committee for its decisions on school closings. He stated that his plan was not to be interpreted as, even thought it might be interpreted by some, as a stalling tactic in the school closing issue. He said that his motion did not preclude any other action by the School Committee including the closing of Hancock School that was already voted or the actions recommended in Dr. Lawson' s school closing analysis. In summary, Mr. Michelman said answers were needed and felt that the Advisory Committee would provide an intensive look and response to the citizens of Lexington. 4 I Page 50 February 14, 1977 Mr. Wadsworth said that the school committee had no business creat- ing a committee to consider the use of s'hool buildings. He felt that this was the responsibility of the Board of Selectmen. Mrs. Swanson and Mr. Brown indicated that the school committee should stick to the educational course of action and that the use of school buildings should be within the domain of the Board of Selectmen. A vote was called on the motion. Yes, Rotberg, Michelman; No, Brown, Wadsworth, Swanson. Upon the recommendation of the superintendent of schools it was SCHEDULE OF PAYMENTS VOTED: to accept the following Schedule of Payments. (Michelman, Brown, Unanimous) SCHOOL DEPARTMENT BUDGETS Personal Services February 4, 1977 Classified Payroll #16 $ 71,262.72 Expenses February 11, 1977 Bill Schedule #122 8,487 .10 February 11, 1977 #123 4,931.64 February 11, 1977 #124 107,665.30 Athletics February 11, 1977 Bill Schedule #23 3,572.69 February 11, 1977 Payroll #15 581.50 Vocational Education February 11, 1977 Trnasportation #6V 481.39 SPECIAL PROGRAMS (NON-LEXINGTON FUNDS) METCO February 4, 1977 Classified Payroll $ 1,537.90 LEADS Program February 4, 1977 Classified Payroll 1,442.74 Adult Education February 11, 1977 Bill Schedule #6 17.38 Bus Ticket Acct. February 11, 1977 Bill Schedule #5 1,841.70 A suggested proposed field trip policy was presented to Dr. Lawson. PROPOSED FIEII. After a brief discussion L,was voted to accept the superintendent's TRIP POLICY recommendation. (Michelman, Brown, Unanimous) Purpose Field trips held on school days must be extensions of the instruc- tional program. Their purpose is to provide educational opportunities which cannot be offered within the building for acquiring skills, under- standings and attitudes. Unless it appears that a field trip is connect- ed in this way with the instructional'program, approval for, proposed trips will not be recommended by the principal. Page 51 February 14, 1979 Participation Field trips shall be organized so as to allow and encourage par- ticipation by all members of a class or team or group for which the trip is planned, and to ensure that no student is excluded because of inability to finance all or a portion of the trip' s costs. For students who choose not to participate, worthwhile instructional activities shall be afforded under the supervision of a classroom teacher if at all possible, or else a qualified substitute. Funding Whenever possible, trips should be financed by funds supplied through the school' s budget. If additional expenditures are required, supervisors of the trip shall make certain that funds are available to provide for students unable to finance additional cost themselves. With- in each school discreet procedures should be established which will allow and encourage students and/or parents to seek needed assistance. The School Committee' s policy on fund raising, dated December 8, 1975, shall be adhered to by each principal if non-school funds are to be raised for field trips. Upon the recommendation of the superintendent of schools it was PERSONNEL CHANGES VOTED: to accept the Personnel Changes (Classified, Professional) (Rotberg, Michelman, Unanimous) . Resignation Retirement Leave of Absence Classified Resignations Mr. Maclnnes and Dr. Lawson presented to the school committee an ADMINISTRATIVE estimate of the system's capital expenditures for the next five years. REPORTS Dr. Lawson said that the budget did not include any of these funds for PROJECTED FIVE emergencies that might arise. He wished the committee to know that YEAR CAPITAL unforeseen expenses could occur if this were the case. He said that EXPENDITURE . .lis was only a plan and not a commitment of the school committee. SCHEDULE Kyles Barnert, a member of the Capital Expenditures Committee, was in attendance and thanked the school c.nmittee and administration for creating the long range plans as requested. fag. Po February 14, 1979 Account 3400, Food Services, was reviewed by Mr. Maclnnes. BUDGET Account 4120-5 Was reviewed by the committee with a brief connien- 1977-78 tary. Mr. Maclnnes noted that the increased price of fuel and prolonged BUDGET periods of below norman temperatures made it necessary to project that UTILITIES the budget may exceed the fuel and electricity budgets by approximately CONSERVATION $30,000 to $50,000. He said conservation was necessary to reduce this PLAN estimated over-expenditure. He read a memo that was being sent to prin- cipals, custodians and central office staff regarding lowering of thermo- stats, lighting in the building, and a notice to all renters and users of Lexington Schools. Dr. Lawson announced that he had received a recommendation from PERSONNEL the principal of the high school, Dr. Clune, commenting that due to SERVICES house reorganization of last year and its successful implementation, he was recommending that the position of Max Ed Coordinator be elimi- nated in the 1977-78 budget. Dr. Clune said that he felt that the pro- gram would function well in the future by being coordinated by the in- dividual house masters . He also noted that the assistant principal would play an increading role in the administration of the program. Dr. Lawson said that he applauded Dr. Clune for his recommendation and anal- ysis and supported the recommendation. The school committee thanked Dr. Kornitsky for the- fine job that she had done during the present school year. Dr. Lawson then noted that this decrease would be included in his recommendation of the total budget. Dr. Lawson stated that the Bridge School Report would be discussed BRIDGE SCHOOL at a public hearing on Friday, February 18, at Clarke Junior High School, REPORT at 4:00 p.m. He encouraged all citizens to attend. It was VOTED: to adjourn to executive session at 10:43 p.m. to discuss a collec- tive bargaining matter. It was announced that the school commit- tee would not be returning to public session. (Yes, Brown; Yes, Wadsworth; Yes, Swanson; Michelman, Yes; Rotberg, Yes) . Respectfully submitted, Richard H. Barnes /k Recording Secretary