MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING,
SEPTEMBER 26, 2005
PRESENT: Chairperson Anne Larner,
Vice-Chairperson Dori Zaleznik, Gail Glick, Susan Heyman, Patricia Kellogg,
Marc Laredo, Nancy Levine, Reenie Murphy, Mayor David Cohen, Superintendent
Jeffrey Young, Charlie Heidlage – student representative, Newton North High
School, Tim Smillie - student representative, Newton South High School
CALL TO ORDER
Chairperson Anne Larner called the meeting to order at
7:35 p.m.
PUBLIC COMMENT
Paul Green,
Jeff Young wanted to make a comment about the concern
that has been expressed around Countryside being left off the list in Boston Magazine. This was a data entry error in the Department
of Education’s information and is something they are working on to resolve. He will send something to the Countryside
community as well as the local media, to expand on this issue. He also noted that despite some of the
physical ailments Mr. Green outlined, Countryside is a terrific school.
STUDENT
REPRESENTATIVES’ DISCUSSION
Tim Smillie announced that he took a poll among students
at Newton South to find out some of the issues of concern. One that was raised had to do with the bells
not being synchronized with the clocks.
A more major issue has to do with class sizes, especially in advanced
placement (AP) classes. Many students
are locked out of the wellness classes because there are not sufficient
teachers and it is causing a lot of havoc in terms of scheduling. He wonders if South is prepared to take
additional students. It is already
beginning to feel claustrophobic. He
realizes that the connector has yet to be built, but he is not convinced that
this is going to necessarily relieve the pressure. He also continues to hear complaints from
students about the heating and air-conditioning problems.
Anne Larner noted that while the commissioning is in
process people are going to have to bear with some of these variations in the
heating and air-conditioning. The
process was delayed when some member of the public questioned the funding for
this project and it was debated by the Board of Aldermen. Therefore, it took a while to get the
consensus to move forward, so she asked for patience for a few more months.
Jeff Young agreed.
This is a time-consuming process but the project manager has assured
them that the outcome will be successful.
Marc Laredo asked the students to keep the Committee
posted as this process continues and let them know if there are additional
issues.
Nancy Levine asked if the student body is aware of the
commissioning process or whether that is something that needs communicating.
Tim Smillie suggested that it could be mentioned at the
upcoming student assembly.
Jeff Young will speak to the principal about this
possibility.
Tim Smillie completed his comments by mentioning that
students do not have sufficient time for lunch, as 15 to 20 minutes of the 30
minute period are spent waiting in lines and it seems that the staff cannot
handle the traffic.
Susie Heyman commented that in the Committee’s recent
tour of Newton South many of the items he raised were brought up and she can
assure him that people are aware of them and are addressing them as best
possible. She feels that the congestion
he spoke of may be alleviated once the new connector opens and she will be
interested in hearing his thoughts on that once this occurs. Finally, the issue of class size is certainly
in the forefront of everyone’s minds and they will be keeping abreast of this
situation.
Charlie Heidlage mentioned that North is experiencing
similar issues with the heating and air-conditioning systems. In some classes people are blocking vents
with books to
make the classroom bearable, which
he knows is not something they should be doing.
They are also experiencing large classes at North, which is not helping
the learning process, particularly in the AP classes.
Anne Larner noted that the Committee has asked for a
preliminary October report on class size.
Given the difficult financial constraints they have been operating
under, this is a real problem, but feedback is important so that they can
understand the implications of their decisions.
RECOGNITIONS
The following students were recognized for being
selected National Merit Scholarship Semifinalists:
Madeleine Abromowitz Jared
Arnold
Jacob Auchincloss Igor
Dombrovsky
Loren Chen Benjamin
Gifford
Gabriel Daly Jesse
Gubb
Liora Goldensher Samuel
Michel
Benjamin Gurvis Sy
Chotz
Stephanie Kaplan Lily
Silverstein
Benjamin Landau-Taylor Leigh
Soares
Eric Messinger
Jason Sullivan
Anne Triest
Daniel Waldinger
Michaela Yule
Clare McCully, Executive Director of the Newton Schools
Foundation, for winning a Community Cornerstone Award from Women in Development
of Greater Boston for her service in the non-profit sector, contributions to
the advancement of philanthropy and the impact her work has made on the Newton
community.
APPROVAL OF
SCHOOL COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES
Reenie Murphy made the following correction to the
minutes of 6/27/05:
page 8 – 5th paragraph,
Dori Zaleznik should be referred to as she vs. he.
MOTION: It
was moved to approve the School Committee regular
meeting minutes of 6/13 and 6/27/05,
special meeting minutes of 7/13/05, and executive session meeting minutes of
6/23/05, as amended.
(Zaleznik
– Heyman)
unanimous
REPORTS
SUPERINTENDENT’S
PERSONNEL REPORT
Reenie Murphy noticed that it appears that last year’s
maternity leaves have become this year’s child care leaves and wondered if this
was a consistent pattern.
Paul Stein, Assistant Superintendent for Human
Resources, stated that this is not unusual and most people return in the third
year unless there are extenuating circumstances or depending upon the date of the
birth and how that falls in the school year.
In addition, many of the leaves are not full-time, so the person is
working part-time. They have been
attempting to limit the timeframe around leaves and after two years they now
treat it as the exception rather than the rule, although they always take every
individual circumstance into consideration.
There has definitely been an increase in this area due to the
demographics of the work force. The
substitute budget is the area that sustains the impact of these leaves, so that
is where they need to pay close attention.
Susie Heyman remembers years when there was a more
senior faculty and there were numbers of leaves of absences to take care of
elderly parents or people addressing their own illnesses, so it goes through
cycles. She wondered if they had any
sense yet of possible turnover savings.
Paul Stein admitted that they have only been able to
take a cursory glance at this information, but would not count on a great deal
of funds from this area.
UPDATE ON
MCAS/NCLB
Jeff Young began the conversation by noting that he had
hoped to be able to talk about
possible in the two highest categories –
advanced and proficient. When they take
up this discussion again they will focus on how well they are doing to meet
this goal. He concluded by reiterating
that the MCAS is just one of a multiplicity of indicators that are used to
assess the strength of the system and student performance and they will also discuss
some of those other tools when they return to this topic.
Gail Glick asked about the status of tracing particular
cohorts to determine how those specific students are doing.
Jeff Young replied that they plan to have this data
available in the full report which will be presented in December. One of the problems with how the MCAS data is
currently presented is that it looks at particular grades and, therefore, the
scores are subject to the vagaries of whatever that population happens to be
rather than following a particular cohort of students. In terms of NCLB, this is a federal mandate
that all students nationwide should be at a proficient or advanced level by
2014. Whether or not this is a realistic
goal or not is debatable, but it is law.
The way this is measured is through reviewing four variables: 1. student
attendance, 2. participation rates in testing, 3. student performance, and 4.
student improvement, in which the bar gets raised each year. Both districts and individual schools are
evaluated through the AYP report based on the standardized test used in the
particular state. In addition to
performance in the aggregate, the government also sets standards that must be
met for various sub-groups, such as limited English proficiency, special
education, low-income, African-American/Black, Asian, Pacific Islanders,
Hispanic, Native American and White and every one of the subgroups has to hit
the performance and improvement target in order for the district as a whole to
reach the AYP. The
larger a district, the greater number of sub-groups. It will come as no surprise to see that there
continues to be a national achievement gap in some of these sub-groups and
Dori Zaleznik stated that while she remains committed to
the goal of having all students reach their greatest potential, she remains
skeptical that a single measure such as MCAS is the answer. She referred to the action of several
districts in other states that are not participating in NCLB because it is a
mandate without appropriate funding and would be interested in hearing the
reactions from other school districts and superintendents.
Reenie Murphy would like to see some specific
information on the funding that is received to match the services.
Jeff Young stated that federal and state money is
received for a variety of programs, such as special education, but there is
nothing dedicated to NCLB or specific sub-groups.
Susie Heyman commented that while the lack of funding is
certainly troublesome, communities like Newton that have done well overall in
years past did not have to focus on populations that lagged behind because the
general statistics were so strong. It is
a good thing that they are now focusing on these groups and coming up with strategies
to better serve their needs. However,
the MCAS exam is a very rigorous test, while other states’ exams are not necessarily
as challenging. Yet the AYP is determined based on whatever test is given in a
state, so this is not necessarily a level playing field.
Jeff Young agreed and commented that there are a number
of idiosyncrasies around this subject. A
small district is likely to have no sub-groups other than special education, so
the larger, more diverse communities are evaluated on a more detailed basis.
Susie Heyman noted that the information should be
helping communities and all students, but often it is used in a negative
fashion.
Jeff Young agreed that the tone from the government can
be harsh, but
Gail Glick asked about the punitive implications for
systems that do not meet the goals.
Jeff Young replied that it is an escalating factor. The first year that a system does not meet
AYP it will be identified; the second year it is put on warning; the third year
requires an action plan, and at some point the state can take over the system.
DISCUSSION
ITEMS
DISCUSSION RE:
DRAFT REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS (RFP) FOR FACILITIES
Dori Zaleznik, Chairperson of the Facilities
Subcommittee, noted that the subcommittee has developed the first draft of the
RFP. The material provides some
background for potential candidates who will respond to the RFP. It includes a section on Study Objectives, as
well as Scope of Services, which lists specific items they would like to see in
the proposals. They are asking the consultant
to re-inventory the facilities, which was last done in 1994, and develop a set
of standards that address what a modern school system should look like and the
deficiencies in the system now. It is
important to note that in defining standards they need to be realistic and
achievable, as well as meet the
objectives of the community. They would like to ultimately own the
database that the consultant will develop so that it can be continually updated
and under the control of the Newton Public Schools.
Susie Heyman added that they are also seeking an
interactive process between the consultant and the various constituencies in
the community, as well as a recommendation for what it will take to bring all
schools up to the current standards in terms of infrastructure (mechanical,
electrical, plumbing, etc.). Finally, for
schools where the consultant feels there is a need for additional space, they
would like a recommendation on how to achieve that on the existing sites.
Reenie Murphy suggested adding the preschool at the
Dori Zaleznik stated that this is a good idea. She also noted that they included
Jeff Young suggested including the entire
Susie Heyman would hope that the outcome of the
renovation process would allow for the creation of space in the elementary
schools for the preschools because this building is not an ideal location for
this program.
Marc Laredo asked if they are considering requesting
that the architects include potential costs of the recommendations.
Dori Zaleznik responded that they are not asking for the
drawing of plans for individual buildings, such as a feasibility study would provide,
but do want rough sketches and cost estimates in order to make long-range
plans.
Marc Laredo urged them to be cautious in terms of the
numbers that will be provided since this is only a limited study and they do
not want to set false expectations of the associated costs.
Dori Zaleznik agreed and remarked that they are not
asking the consultants to start from scratch because they already have an
existing database, as well as a lot of information about the systems.
Anne Larner asked if Nick Parnell, Building
Commissioner, could make some comments about similar studies he may be familiar
with from his experiences.
Nick Parnell would be happy to supply the Committee with
some work products that might help them in determining what amount of detail
they are seeking, as the more layers added the costlier the product.
Dori Zaleznik noted that this study is not meant to
serve as a blueprint for any particular school, but rather a strategic plan
that would review prioritizing, phasing, etc.
Marc Laredo asked if the 1994 study is in electronic
format.
Nick Parnell replied that pieces of it may be, but the
full reports are in bound hard copy volumes.
Dori Zaleznik added that this is one of the reason they
want the consultants to expand upon the database that the system currently has
in place, which they would ultimately own.
Patty Kellogg suggested adding other systems to the
database that may not have been in place in the original report, such as
central air, security systems, and sprinklers.
Susie Heyman stated that these are the type of things
that she would look to the expertise of the consultant for advice. The original 1994 study was much narrower in
scope at its inception and grew as the process evolved. Good long-range planning requires that they
not assume too narrow a target.
Anne Larner emphasized the need for interaction with the
Board of Aldermen and the public in a very active way, which is something they
learned from the last process. She also
feels people should be given the opportunity to weigh in on this right from the
start, so she does not wish to rush this process.
Dori Zaleznik outlined the suggested timeframe with
regard to moving forward. The
subcommittee felt that this should be further discussed at the next two School
Committee meetings, with a potential vote scheduled for the end of October or
early November. They are suggesting
taking the comments from tonight’s meeting and revising the document and then
posting it on the website for public input.
Reenie Murphy asked about the funding source for the
study.
Mayor David Cohen stated that he is not prepared to
identify a funding source at this point, but it is something they are working
on and hope to have more information as the process unfolds. This is something that has been on the
backburner for some time and they have set
aside some money in the capital plan for the schools. Obviously this is a necessary precursor to
spending money on school buildings.
Mayor Cohen stated that a group of citizen advocates
from the soccer leagues has submitted an in-depth proposal for the use of CPA
funds for a series of all weather artificial surface fields. The fields could be multi-purpose use and not
solely for soccer. The advantage of an
all-weather field is that it adds a tremendous amount of playing time and
extends the sports seasons. He would
have liked to give the Committee more time to digest the information, but since
the application deadline is 10/3rd he would like to hear a brief
presentation on the plan this evening and, if the Committee is comfortable with
the concept, they could file the application and continue their discussions in
the meantime.
Patty Kellogg asked if the artificial turf will
alleviate some of the drainage problems in the area.
The Mayor believes that it will partially address that
issue on the field it will cover, but it does not address the problems
associated with the track.
Anne Larner asked about the full source of the funding
proposal and if means the school system is getting into any future financial
commitment.
Mayor Cohen stated that they would be asking that the
CPA funds pay for the full cost of construction of the field.
Marc Laredo asked if there is any obligation on the part
of the school system to make up any difference.
Mayor Cohen stated that the Committee will not be committing
to anything by agreeing with the concept and allowing the application process
to move forward.
Dori Zaleznik noted that she had the opportunity to
watch a football game at the
Ted Tye presented a PowerPoint presentation on the
proposal. Their goal is to improve
access to playing fields and the safety of players. A great many people involved in youth sports
groups have been very active in developing this plan and
the city and school departments
have been helpful in ushering it along.
Their work began in May 2004, when Newton Girls Soccer and Newton Youth
Soccer funded a grant to hire Geller Sport, a leading firm in the area of
designing these type of programs. Many possible locations for the fields were
evaluated and the chosen area seemed to make the most sense since the most
heavily used school and recreational fields are Brown/Oak Hill and Newton
South. The fields in this area are in
poor shape and will benefit from drainage improvements. As
previously mentioned, their plan is to fund this proposal through the CPA. Many
people are familiar with Astroturf, the earlier version of synthetic grass, which
was basically a carpet laid on concrete. This is a far superior product. Infilled synthetic turf is an artificial grass
playing field filled with sand and rubber granules which hold it in place. To the naked eye it looks like a beautiful
grass surface and from a playing point of view it simulates a flat field. The current fields in the community take a
beating with the amount of activity that occurs on them on a regular basis and this
turf assures a far better safety factor.
It does not have ruts and will never get muddy. It will not attract geese, since it is not
real grass, or dogs, as it will be entirely fenced off. It is environmentally friendly, as no
chemicals or fertilizers are used. It will not require watering and the
irrigation and recharge of water back into the ground is very efficient in this
surface. The maintenance costs are
substantially less, as there is no mowing or lining of the fields, which are
permanently lined and it is playable 10 months of the year. Eleven surrounding communities and many
colleges and private schools have these fields, which have proven successful,
so the product is well-established in the industry. Approximately 15,000 residents use
summer it can be made available for
camps and clinics, which are potential revenue generated activities, as well as
pre-season sports for Newton South.
There is also the potential for adding another multi-use field on the
site in the future for baseball.
Ron Lanham, Newton South Athletic Director, totally
supports this plan. Due to the current
drainage issues, they have only been able to play a few baseball games on the
current field in the past two years. The
construction project at South damaged the irrigation system and, as a result,
the other fields have suffered as well.
The football, track, and stadium are showing incredible wear and tear
and, in fact, since the football field was built on wetlands, a portion of it
has sunk. The stands are not handicap
accessible and the
press box is quite old. He is very
excited about fields that can have constant use with little maintenance and most
importantly reduce the injury factor to students. He has seen these surfaces firsthand and is
very impressed. The stands will allow
for 1,200 fans vs. the current 500 to be able to attend events and will allow
them to gain some gate receipts, which can then assist other sports
programs. It will also allow them to
host state events when the teams make playoffs.
Other school systems are gaining a competitive advantage with these new
fields.
Patty Kellogg asked about a spectator area for the
softball field.
Ron Lanham explained that this would not be a problem as
they would continue to use portable stands for this purpose.
Patty Kellogg asked if it might be possible to have the
youth sports teams contribute sufficient funding for replacement costs.
Ted Tye replied that this might be a possibility, as
there appears to be a willingness among everyone to
commit to these fields. The replacement
costs would be far less than the initial amount that requires all the below
surface work. The carpet that lays on top has a 12-15 year lifecycle.
Susie Heyman thanked him and his group for the interest
and time they have put into this proposal and for being in the forefront in
support of recreation and sports for the youth of
Ron Lanham replied in the affirmative, as the location
is perfect. However, they will need to
eventually address the baseball field.
It was agreed that the Chairperson would write a letter
of support on behalf of the Committee for the application process.
ACTION ITEMS
CONTINUED
DISCUSSION/VOTE ON 2005-2006 PROPOSED SCHOOL COMMITTEE CALENDAR/DOCKET ITEMS
The Committee discussed the second draft of the
calendar/docket items. It was agreed to
change the 3/8 budget meeting to 3/7 as the Chair will not be available on the
8th. It was also agreed to
rearrange the budget items so that the first meeting covered non-instructional
areas and regular education would be pushed back, as it takes more time to
digest that area. It was also agreed to
add a discussion of the lunch program and a discussion regarding the public
communications plan. It was noted that
there will be other matters before the Committee as the year progresses,
especially around the development of the Newton North design issues.
MOTION: It
was moved to approve the 2005-2006 Proposed
School
Committee Calendar/Docket Items, as
amended.
(Zaleznik
– Levine)
unanimous
APPOINTMENT OF
REPRESENTATIVE TO DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE
Anne Larner put forward the nomination of Howard
Goldberg as a School Committee representative to the Design Review
Committee. This slot has been open for
approximately a year and it was not a priority as most of the work occurring
was with the Designer Selection Committee around the design team and project
manager. People felt it was important to
have someone with a background in transportation and traffic to round out the Design
Review Committee, particularly as they will be dealing with the Newton North
project. Nick Parnell, Building
Commissioner, suggested Howard as a possible candidate. Howard was serving on the Designer Selection
Committee and those who followed that process were very impressed by his
ability to work so well in getting through complex and difficult pieces to
reach a consensus. He also has the
appropriate background they were seeking.
Dori Zaleznik added that she was impressed by Howard’s
ability to communicate with architects even though it is not his field, as they
are heavily represented on this Committee.
His clarity of thinking and process-oriented approach in was quite
notable, as was his ability to make cut through a lot of the material to cut
through a lot of the material to make the discussions understandable to the
general public.
Susie Heyman agreed.
Even when she might not have agreed with Howard, she always admired his
thoughtfulness around the process.
MOTION: It
was moved to appoint Howard Goldberg
as a
School Committee representative to the
Design
Review Committee.
(Zaleznik
– Levine)
unanimous
COMMUNICATIONS
Anne Larner announced that there were five responses to
the RFPs that were put out over the summer regarding the classification and
compensation study and the management/organizational structure review. A subcommittee of the School Committee will
be interviewing the potential candidates over the next several days and hope to
complete the process by the end of next week.
They will then bring their recommendation back to the full Committee for
a vote. If they are able to meet this
timeline and the Committee agrees, she would like to hold a special meeting
prior to the next regular School Committee meeting, which is not until
10/17. It is their desire to have the
studies completed in time to feed into the budget process, so they would like
to move along as quickly as possible.
The Committee was in agreement and the morning of 10/11 was selected as
the date for this meeting provided there are no glitches in the process. The RFPs are posted on the City website if
any member of the public is interested in reviewing the material.
Susie Heyman suggested linking the material to the
Newton Public Schools website as well.
PUBLIC COMMENT
There were no members of the public who wished to
address the Committee at this time.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 9:50 p.m.