Right off the bat, I need to admit something. The 2/9 meeting was the shortest meeting of any I've attended and I was very happy about it. If it weren't for the discussion of ongoing work related to the potential facilities bond, the meeting might have been done in an hour.
This, of course, doesn't mean that Board members aren't engaged in interesting work. Rather the most interesting work related to facilities expansion options is being conducted by the Facilities Expansion Committee. Kudos again to trustees Ritter and Wade for taking on the leadership role of this committee.
I'll say now what I've said before - if you really want to help drive this bus, stay tuned into the district website for announcements of upcoming committee meetings and go take part. Now, I could go on here and talk about the details of the several options being considered, but I'm not going to. I also haven't been to any of the committee meetings so far, which seems to confuse my wife and may confuse some of you out there. Let me explain why. It's because I'm bought in. I fully support going forward with the bond, and I really don't care too much which construction option is pursued. I heard today that someone was overheard on campus saying that if their preferred configuration of campuses was not the selected one, then they wouldn't support the bond. I can honestly say this is one of the most short-sighted statements I've heard in a long time. I am completely baffled by this point of view.
And, from what I have heard so far about what will potentially be in the ballot language, the unknown person whose comment I repeated above is going to be very frustrated. According to Dr. Pitts' comments at the Board meeting, the ballot language will not commit the district to a particular construction layout. It may only define the total scope and budget of the proposed work (e.g. modernize 28 classrooms, build 22 new classrooms, etc.). All of this, I'm sure, will become clearer within the next 1-2 months as the committee continues its work and brings recommendations to the Board for consideration.
Let us all stay tuned...
-Rob
Friday, February 11, 2011
Tuesday, February 8, 2011
Previewing the Agenda for the 2/9 Monthly Meeting
Yes, the February Board meeting is already upon us. I think everyone would agree that Ski Week is not a good time to hold a Board meeting! The agenda is relatively small compared to recent months. I'll highlight just a few items. To view supporting packet materials for all items on the agenda, click here.
Hall Master Schedule and 7-Period Day (Item 3) - The Board had an initial discussion about this item at last month's meeting. Now, the Hall staff are returning and asking the Board to consider funding this proposal for the FY11-12 school year. A simple summary of this proposal is that it will further subdivide the class schedule at Hall and make time in the regular school day for many activities that currently must be pursued before school, during lunch and after school (e.g. band, music, yearbook). The staff believes this will result in a more enriching educational experience for more of the student body. The staff's analysis has projected that an additional 2.6 staff members will be required to implement the 7-period day plan.
2011-2012 Budget Update (Item 5) - Dr. Pitts will provide an update on the status of negotiations on the state budget and the currently projected impact on eduction funding. The staff report regarding budget issues indicates that staff are preparing two parallel draft budgets for the district based on different potential budget scenarios; one in which proposed tax extensions favored by Governor Brown are passed and one in which they do not. This proactive number crunching should allow the district to be as prepared as possible for managing the significant shortfall over current funding levels that would result if the tax extensions are not enacted.
Facilities Planning and Bond Funding (Item 6) - The Facilities Expansion Committee has held two public meetings since the last regular Board meeting. One was held January 20th and another on February 3rd. At this Wednesday's meeting, the trustee members of the committee will report out on the discussions at these recent meetings. The committee's current timeline of activities calls for bringing a final recommendation to the Board in March regarding what type of expansion plan to pursue (e.g. two schools on the NC site vs. re-developing the SC site.)
There you go, folks. See you again soon.
-Rob
Hall Master Schedule and 7-Period Day (Item 3) - The Board had an initial discussion about this item at last month's meeting. Now, the Hall staff are returning and asking the Board to consider funding this proposal for the FY11-12 school year. A simple summary of this proposal is that it will further subdivide the class schedule at Hall and make time in the regular school day for many activities that currently must be pursued before school, during lunch and after school (e.g. band, music, yearbook). The staff believes this will result in a more enriching educational experience for more of the student body. The staff's analysis has projected that an additional 2.6 staff members will be required to implement the 7-period day plan.
2011-2012 Budget Update (Item 5) - Dr. Pitts will provide an update on the status of negotiations on the state budget and the currently projected impact on eduction funding. The staff report regarding budget issues indicates that staff are preparing two parallel draft budgets for the district based on different potential budget scenarios; one in which proposed tax extensions favored by Governor Brown are passed and one in which they do not. This proactive number crunching should allow the district to be as prepared as possible for managing the significant shortfall over current funding levels that would result if the tax extensions are not enacted.
Facilities Planning and Bond Funding (Item 6) - The Facilities Expansion Committee has held two public meetings since the last regular Board meeting. One was held January 20th and another on February 3rd. At this Wednesday's meeting, the trustee members of the committee will report out on the discussions at these recent meetings. The committee's current timeline of activities calls for bringing a final recommendation to the Board in March regarding what type of expansion plan to pursue (e.g. two schools on the NC site vs. re-developing the SC site.)
There you go, folks. See you again soon.
-Rob
Thursday, January 20, 2011
Facilities Committee to Hold Public Meeting Tonight @ 6:00 pm (Report from 1/19 Monthly Meeting, Part I)
I'll return later this week to discuss other happening's at the 1/19 meeting, but for now I just want to make sure everyone out there knows that the newly formed Facilities Expansion Committee will be holding its first public meeting tonight, Thursday, from 6:00 pm - 7:30 pm at the Hall Library.
The core members of the committee (Trustees Wade and Ritter, Dr. Pitts, and the district facilities director) have been meeting since late last year. They have now rounded out the committee with district staff, representatives of the PTAs and Site Councils, and three members of the broader community. At the Thursday evening meeting, the committee will discuss their work to date and set the stage for how the work toward a potential facilities bond in November will proceed over the next few months.
If you are interested in getting a detailed understanding of the options being considered, and want an opportunity to guide the process, I highly recommend attending this committee meeting (and subsequent committee meetings, which will reportedly be held every two weeks). It's true that bond-related issues will also be discussed, and eventually voted on, at the regular Board meetings. However, the Board will be having higher level discussions. Attending committee meetings will assuredly provide one more opportunity to ask questions and provide input than will be available at the Board meetings.
So if you want to jump in, get your hands dirty, and advocate for your preferred facility expansion option, go get started tonight!
-Rob
The core members of the committee (Trustees Wade and Ritter, Dr. Pitts, and the district facilities director) have been meeting since late last year. They have now rounded out the committee with district staff, representatives of the PTAs and Site Councils, and three members of the broader community. At the Thursday evening meeting, the committee will discuss their work to date and set the stage for how the work toward a potential facilities bond in November will proceed over the next few months.
If you are interested in getting a detailed understanding of the options being considered, and want an opportunity to guide the process, I highly recommend attending this committee meeting (and subsequent committee meetings, which will reportedly be held every two weeks). It's true that bond-related issues will also be discussed, and eventually voted on, at the regular Board meetings. However, the Board will be having higher level discussions. Attending committee meetings will assuredly provide one more opportunity to ask questions and provide input than will be available at the Board meetings.
So if you want to jump in, get your hands dirty, and advocate for your preferred facility expansion option, go get started tonight!
-Rob
Tuesday, January 18, 2011
Previewing the Agenda for the 1/19 Monthly Meeting
Happy 2011 everybody. We've made it through the holidays and the early-January deluge and now here we are, ready for a fascinating year of school district fun!
The packet materials for this week's meeting include about 100 pages of scintillating material for any auditors, accountants or insurance professionals out there. For the rest of the world, interesting topics are on the agenda, but not much accompanying information is available in the packet. To review the packet materials, click here. I have three items to highlight:
Facilities Planning & Bond Funding (Item 9) - A brief report in the packet states that trustees Ritter and Wade have been meeting with staff on a weekly basis and that they will provide an update during the meeting. The report also states that a Facilities Expansion Committee will meet on Thursday, Jan. 20 (time not given) and then every other week. The report does not mention who will join trustees Ritter and Wade on this committee. Perhaps this information will be shared during the discussion at the Board meeting.
TANGENT ALERT - Okay, at the last meeting I attended, which was in November, quite a few people interested in the facilities planning topic showed up at the meeting and were confused that the agenda did not include a designated time for them to address the Board. The fact that no designated time for public comment was included was pointed out by President Mangan at the start of the meeting. Since that time, I've become aware of some very fine print that is included at the bottom of the last page of each agenda. It says: "The Board of Trustees welcomes participation by the public. A person wishing to speak on any item on or off the agenda (emphasis added) will be granted up to 3 minutes. The Board will limit the public comment period on any single item to 20 minutes..." What is not made clear by this text is how one goes about requesting to speak. My best guess would be that one should raise their hand, then, when called upon, state that she would like to use the three minutes afforded by the policy stated on the bottom of the agenda. If you're sitting there thinking this text is in direct conflict with statements made at the November meeting, you are not alone.
Superintendent's Contract (Consent Calendar) - Mixed among often mundane items on the consent calendar is this very noteworthy item. Review of the packet materials shows that the Board completed negotiation of a new contract with Dr. Pitts during mid December. I find the timing of this interesting given that Dr. Pitts' current contract doesn't expire until June 30, 2011. However, review of the details of the contract reveals compensation terms that provide the Board with a lot of flexibility. The contract term is for three years, yet it does not include any pre-determined salary increases, as did the prior contract. Rather, Dr. Pitt's compensation will be agreed to with the Board each year and will take into account the budget, the increases given to teachers and other district staff, and the salary level of other local superintendents. This is a welcome change in comparison to Dr. Pitts' current three-year contract that included automatic salary increases that took effect even as significant cuts were made in other areas.
Hall Master Schedule & 7-Period Day (Item 8) - So, I need to admit something right here. Having only a third grader, I know very little about Hall. Apparently a group of folks who know a lot about Hall have been reviewing options for altering the daily schedule and moving to a 7-period day. The analysis is reportedly ongoing and the discussion with the Board will be an update from staff on work to date and presumably a discussion of next steps.
That's all for now, folks. Tune in on Thursday for a report from the meeting.
-Rob
The packet materials for this week's meeting include about 100 pages of scintillating material for any auditors, accountants or insurance professionals out there. For the rest of the world, interesting topics are on the agenda, but not much accompanying information is available in the packet. To review the packet materials, click here. I have three items to highlight:
Facilities Planning & Bond Funding (Item 9) - A brief report in the packet states that trustees Ritter and Wade have been meeting with staff on a weekly basis and that they will provide an update during the meeting. The report also states that a Facilities Expansion Committee will meet on Thursday, Jan. 20 (time not given) and then every other week. The report does not mention who will join trustees Ritter and Wade on this committee. Perhaps this information will be shared during the discussion at the Board meeting.
TANGENT ALERT - Okay, at the last meeting I attended, which was in November, quite a few people interested in the facilities planning topic showed up at the meeting and were confused that the agenda did not include a designated time for them to address the Board. The fact that no designated time for public comment was included was pointed out by President Mangan at the start of the meeting. Since that time, I've become aware of some very fine print that is included at the bottom of the last page of each agenda. It says: "The Board of Trustees welcomes participation by the public. A person wishing to speak on any item on or off the agenda (emphasis added) will be granted up to 3 minutes. The Board will limit the public comment period on any single item to 20 minutes..." What is not made clear by this text is how one goes about requesting to speak. My best guess would be that one should raise their hand, then, when called upon, state that she would like to use the three minutes afforded by the policy stated on the bottom of the agenda. If you're sitting there thinking this text is in direct conflict with statements made at the November meeting, you are not alone.
Superintendent's Contract (Consent Calendar) - Mixed among often mundane items on the consent calendar is this very noteworthy item. Review of the packet materials shows that the Board completed negotiation of a new contract with Dr. Pitts during mid December. I find the timing of this interesting given that Dr. Pitts' current contract doesn't expire until June 30, 2011. However, review of the details of the contract reveals compensation terms that provide the Board with a lot of flexibility. The contract term is for three years, yet it does not include any pre-determined salary increases, as did the prior contract. Rather, Dr. Pitt's compensation will be agreed to with the Board each year and will take into account the budget, the increases given to teachers and other district staff, and the salary level of other local superintendents. This is a welcome change in comparison to Dr. Pitts' current three-year contract that included automatic salary increases that took effect even as significant cuts were made in other areas.
Hall Master Schedule & 7-Period Day (Item 8) - So, I need to admit something right here. Having only a third grader, I know very little about Hall. Apparently a group of folks who know a lot about Hall have been reviewing options for altering the daily schedule and moving to a 7-period day. The analysis is reportedly ongoing and the discussion with the Board will be an update from staff on work to date and presumably a discussion of next steps.
That's all for now, folks. Tune in on Thursday for a report from the meeting.
-Rob
Tuesday, December 14, 2010
Previewing the Agenda for the 12/15 Monthly Meeting
We're all busy with the holidays, plus the agenda is not chock full of excitement, so this will be an efficient post. Here goes:
Superintendent's Contract (Closed Session) - As I have reported in recent posts, the Board appears to be in the process of negotiating a new contract with Dr. Pitts. Her current three-year contract expires on June 30, 2011. The status of negotiations is unknown. It could be that the Board will emerge from closed session and start the open agenda by announcing that a new contract has been signed. Time will tell...
Bond Funding for Facilities (Agenda Item #8) - At the Nov. 17 monthly meeting, the Board announced the formation of a subcommittee that will lead the effort to update the 2008 Facilities Master Plan and lead planning efforts for a potential ballot measure in November 2011. Trustees Wade and Ritter were appointed to serve on the subcommittee. The subcommittee is reportedly meeting weekly, and the agenda packet includes a list of tasks that the subcommittee has outlined for completion in the near future. Highlights include conducting a "mini survey" of parents regarding preferred facility expansion option (e.g. two-school campus at NC site, re-build on San Clemente site, etc.) and organizing a "larger committee" to begin meeting in January to discuss facility expansion options. The draft structure for the committee is listed as: District Staff (2), Trustees (2), Union reps (2), SPARK rep (1), Community members at large (2).
Plenty of other items populate the agenda, but unless you feel like reading 100 pages of details regarding potential re-financing of outstanding bond debt, I think you can safely go back to addressing what's left of your Christmas to do lists.
Happy holidays,
Rob
p.s. It has finally happened. For the first time since the inception of this blog, I have an unmovable conflict and I will not be attending Wednesday evening's meeting. If anyone out there does attend, and you want to share some notes with the class, feel free to send them to me and I'll be happy to post them.
Superintendent's Contract (Closed Session) - As I have reported in recent posts, the Board appears to be in the process of negotiating a new contract with Dr. Pitts. Her current three-year contract expires on June 30, 2011. The status of negotiations is unknown. It could be that the Board will emerge from closed session and start the open agenda by announcing that a new contract has been signed. Time will tell...
Bond Funding for Facilities (Agenda Item #8) - At the Nov. 17 monthly meeting, the Board announced the formation of a subcommittee that will lead the effort to update the 2008 Facilities Master Plan and lead planning efforts for a potential ballot measure in November 2011. Trustees Wade and Ritter were appointed to serve on the subcommittee. The subcommittee is reportedly meeting weekly, and the agenda packet includes a list of tasks that the subcommittee has outlined for completion in the near future. Highlights include conducting a "mini survey" of parents regarding preferred facility expansion option (e.g. two-school campus at NC site, re-build on San Clemente site, etc.) and organizing a "larger committee" to begin meeting in January to discuss facility expansion options. The draft structure for the committee is listed as: District Staff (2), Trustees (2), Union reps (2), SPARK rep (1), Community members at large (2).
Plenty of other items populate the agenda, but unless you feel like reading 100 pages of details regarding potential re-financing of outstanding bond debt, I think you can safely go back to addressing what's left of your Christmas to do lists.
Happy holidays,
Rob
p.s. It has finally happened. For the first time since the inception of this blog, I have an unmovable conflict and I will not be attending Wednesday evening's meeting. If anyone out there does attend, and you want to share some notes with the class, feel free to send them to me and I'll be happy to post them.
Tuesday, November 30, 2010
NC Portables - Special Meeting to Select Bid on 12/1
On Wednesday at 4:30 pm the Board is holding a special meeting with one item only on the agenda, to approve the selected bid for installation of a new wing of "4 1/2" portables on the Neil Cummins campus. The selected location is between the play structure and the creek, south of the parking lot.
Note: A quick review, a "special meeting" is any meeting called by the Board that is not on their schedule of "regular meetings" that is published at the start of the year.
According to district staff, all submitted bids will be opened sometime tomorrow. Sometime between bid opening and the meeting itself, either a summary of all received bids, or possibly full copies of all bids will be posted in the agenda packet section of the district website.
Cheers,
Rob
Note: A quick review, a "special meeting" is any meeting called by the Board that is not on their schedule of "regular meetings" that is published at the start of the year.
According to district staff, all submitted bids will be opened sometime tomorrow. Sometime between bid opening and the meeting itself, either a summary of all received bids, or possibly full copies of all bids will be posted in the agenda packet section of the district website.
Cheers,
Rob
Tuesday, November 23, 2010
Public Meetings Redux (a.k.a Board Operations 102)
Burgeoning interest the state of the facilities at the Neil Cummins and Hall campuses resulted in a lot of people looking for ways to participate in last week's Board meeting. A lot of people, it seems, also got a frustrating lesson in the mechanics of public agency meetings.
I say this because more than a few people arrived at the 10/17 meeting expecting to be able to offer their opinion to the Board regarding the state of facilities and whether the district should pursue placing a facilities bond measure on the ballot in November 2011. The first thing these people heard was an introduction to the meeting in which the Board President informed the room that the Board meeting was a "meeting of the Board in public" not a "public meeting." If you feel like smashing your laptop or ipad on the table right now, you're not alone. The world of public agency management and oversight can seem labyrinthian, obtuse and, well, crazy-making. But it is true that the Board is significantly constrained by state law that governs public agency meetings. To read an overview of the primary requirements that impact the agenda and meeting process, see my previous post Board Operations 101 from September 30.
In case you skipped right past and didn't re-read my old post, and because my wife and editor is encouraging me to restate the primary point, here it is: The Board can schedule a public hearing (agenda item including both public comment and Board discussion) on any subject it wants, with limited exceptions. The procedure often used by our Board, where items are discussed in public but public comment time is not included, is used by choice, not because that's the way it has to be. In case you doubt this, keep reading because...
...Since last week's meeting the ground has shifted a bit. Dr. Pitts' blast email of November 20 announced that the December 15 Board meeting (and, presumably all subsequent Board meetings until a decision is made regarding filing for the November 2011 election) will include time for public comment on facilities. One lesson here is that weighing in with your emails and personal presence at meetings can indeed influence the Board agenda. And rightfully so. The Board does, after all, work for us. We elected them to represent us, which should include actively listening to us. However, a second lesson is that you need to be persistent.
I sense the presence of a lot of persistent folks out there on the topic of our school facilities. I think the upcoming Board meetings, and separate public meetings/workshops that are reportedly being planned, will be well attended. I look forward to seeing you all at one or another of these events. I'm confident that together we can participate in a thoughtful process that will result in a well-informed path forward toward a successful bond measure and improved facilities for the benefit of all our kids and the Twin Cities community.
Thanks for reading, and I hope you all have a great Thanksgiving holiday.
-Rob
I say this because more than a few people arrived at the 10/17 meeting expecting to be able to offer their opinion to the Board regarding the state of facilities and whether the district should pursue placing a facilities bond measure on the ballot in November 2011. The first thing these people heard was an introduction to the meeting in which the Board President informed the room that the Board meeting was a "meeting of the Board in public" not a "public meeting." If you feel like smashing your laptop or ipad on the table right now, you're not alone. The world of public agency management and oversight can seem labyrinthian, obtuse and, well, crazy-making. But it is true that the Board is significantly constrained by state law that governs public agency meetings. To read an overview of the primary requirements that impact the agenda and meeting process, see my previous post Board Operations 101 from September 30.
In case you skipped right past and didn't re-read my old post, and because my wife and editor is encouraging me to restate the primary point, here it is: The Board can schedule a public hearing (agenda item including both public comment and Board discussion) on any subject it wants, with limited exceptions. The procedure often used by our Board, where items are discussed in public but public comment time is not included, is used by choice, not because that's the way it has to be. In case you doubt this, keep reading because...
...Since last week's meeting the ground has shifted a bit. Dr. Pitts' blast email of November 20 announced that the December 15 Board meeting (and, presumably all subsequent Board meetings until a decision is made regarding filing for the November 2011 election) will include time for public comment on facilities. One lesson here is that weighing in with your emails and personal presence at meetings can indeed influence the Board agenda. And rightfully so. The Board does, after all, work for us. We elected them to represent us, which should include actively listening to us. However, a second lesson is that you need to be persistent.
I sense the presence of a lot of persistent folks out there on the topic of our school facilities. I think the upcoming Board meetings, and separate public meetings/workshops that are reportedly being planned, will be well attended. I look forward to seeing you all at one or another of these events. I'm confident that together we can participate in a thoughtful process that will result in a well-informed path forward toward a successful bond measure and improved facilities for the benefit of all our kids and the Twin Cities community.
Thanks for reading, and I hope you all have a great Thanksgiving holiday.
-Rob
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)