The Neshaminy Board of School Directors met on April 11, 2000 in the Board Room of the District Offices, 
Maple Point Middle School.  The following persons were in attendance:

1.       Call to Order

       Mr. Stack called the meeting to order at 8:05 p.m.

2.   Pledge of Allegiance

      Mr. Stack requested those in attendance join in the salute to the flag.

3.   Agenda Amendment

Mr. Stack noted the number of residents in attendance at the meeting and presented the following motion:

I move the Public Work Session agenda be amended to allow public comment after the items for discussion (5a through 5e) and the NSBA Report be added as an agenda item under committee reports (agenda item 10).

Dr. Frank seconded the motion, and the Board unanimously approved the motion.

4.   Announcements

      There were no announcements

5.   Items for Discussion

      a.  Student Transportation Issues

           i)  Correspondence from Lisa Zavorski - Mosaica Transportation Issue

Letter distributed prior to meeting.  Mrs. Zavorski was in attendance at the meeting.  Dr. Bowman explained the letter from Mr. and Mrs. Zavorski was distributed to the Board members and briefly reviewed the busing situation.  He noted the two Zavorski children, grades three and kindergarten, attend the Mosaica Academy Charter School located in Bensalem.  By taking her children to school by car, it is a 10 to 15 minutes car ride.  Mr. and Mrs. Zavorski are concerned about the amount of time their children would be on the bus and the times for boarding the bus in the morning and arriving home in the afternoon.  The Mosaica Academy Charter School�s day starts at 8:00 a.m., which is not a good time as far as the District�s elementary school transportation schedule is concerned.  The children being on the bus an extended period of time is not unusual for transportation to a private school.  Neshaminy has 14 schools and the District buses students to over 100 different schools that are located within a 10 mile radius of the Neshaminy School District.

Dr. Bowman explained Mrs. Zavorski talked to the State Coordinator for Public Transportation of the Pennsylvania Department of Education, and was advised it would be legal for the District to hire Mrs. Zavorski as a �contractor� and pay her 22 cents per mile for the 22.8 miles she travels to and from the school daily.  Mrs. Zavorski has requested the District pay her for transporting her children to and from school each day.  Dr. Bowman explained the District would only do this if it is a situation where the District is not running buses to a particular location, which is not the case in this situation.  A number of Neshaminy students attend the Mosaica Academy Charter School.  There are various bus stops in the District where the Mosaica Academy students are picked up for transport to the school.

Mrs. Zavorski stated it takes her approximately 10 to 15 minutes to drive her children to the Mosaica Academy Charter School.  If her children took the bus to the school, they would have to leave the house at 6:30 a.m., board the bus at 6:40 a.m. and would not return home until 5:00 p.m.  The children would be on the bus one hour and fifteen minutes each way.  She explained when she discussed the issue with Mr. Dowart, State Coordinator for Pupil Transportation at the Pennsylvania Department of Education, she was advised it was not uncommon for a school district to hire a parent as a �contractor� and reimburse the parent for mileage.  She said the school district would be reimbursed by the state for the mileage fee amount.  Mrs. Zavorski explained her children have never rode the bus.  Dr. Bowman explained the School District would be reimbursed as though the students were riding the bus.

Ms. Drioli inquired if Mrs. Zavorski would transport any children, beside her own children, to the Mosaica Academy Charter School.  Mrs. Zavorski explained that would be a different situation and there would be various state regulations that must be met.  Ms. Drioli recommended Mrs. Zavorski approach the Mosaica Academy Charter School about changing their start time to be in alignment with the local school districts� elementary school start times.  Dr. Bowman explained the Mosaica Academy Charter School 8:00 a.m. start time is after the middle school drops and before the elementary school drops.  All the buses are on the road.  The transportation to the private schools is taken care of between the middle school and elementary school drops.  It is a difficult time and does not allow for a lot of flexibility.

Mr. Paradise explained it is not uncommon for students bused to private schools to be on the bus one hour to one hour and fifteen minutes.  The students are transported in the most efficient manner possible.  Depending on the situation, there is some shuttling, agreements with other school districts who can transport the students more efficiently, etc.

In response to Mrs. Butville�s questions, Mrs. Zavorski explained her children would remain on the same bus in the morning.  In the afternoon, the children would be shuttled.  Mrs. Butville suggested Mrs. Zavorski discuss carpooling with other Mosaica Academy Charter School parents.  Mrs. Zavorski explained the issue of carpooling was explored last year.  Due to the parents� different schedules and some parents not being interested in carpooling, no carpooling arrangements were ever made. 

In response to Mr. Mecleary’s question about the transportation reimbursement rate, Mr. Paradise explained the District’s total transportation cost is $5,600,000 and the District receives a reimbursement of $2,000,000.

Ms. Drioli stated if the Board were to grant Mrs. Zavorski’s request, it would be opening up a Pandora’s box.  She expressed concern that parents with children enrolled in private schools and every parent in the District who feels their children are on the bus too long would make the same request. 

Mr. Mecleary felt there are unusual circumstances in Mrs. Zavorski’s situation, because her children are young and on the bus one hour and fifteen minutes.  He indicated he wasn’t sure that granting Mrs. Zavorski’s request would open the floodgates as wide as some Board members think it may.  Mr. Eccles indicated he was concerned about granting the request and opening the floodgates.

Mr. Paradise stated it is within the Board’s power to grant the request.  However, he has never heard of a situation where a school district reimbursed a parent for transportation to school when bus transportation was available.  It is more common for a school district to say it is not financially feasible for the school district to run a bus to a particular school.  Therefore, the school district will hire the parent as a “contractor”.  In Mrs. Zavorski’s situation, Neshaminy is providing the transportation and it is being suggested Neshaminy also pay a private individual to transport the children 

In response to Mrs. Zavorski’s question about transportation reimbursement, Dr. Bowman explained if a child is assigned to a bus and the District runs the bus, the District receives a transportation reimbursement for the child whether or not the child actually rides the bus.  Mr. Paradise pointed out the transportation reimbursement formula is complicated.  Whether the students are on the bus or not, the District receives the reimbursement because it is incurring the expense of providing the transportation.

It was determined there was not Board consensus to grant Mrs. Zavorski’s request to hire her as a “contractor” and reimburse her for transporting her two children to the Mosaica Academy Charter School.

           ii)  Correspondence from Denise Ghantous - Sidewalk on Maple Point Property

Letter distributed prior to the meeting.  Dr. Bowman explained Ms. Ghantous’ request was investigated.  A blacktop walkway, which is maintained by the District, is provided for the students to walk on from the cul de sac in Lakeview Estates to the Maple Point Middle School property without interfering with homeowners’ properties.  Ms.Ghantous will be advised of the walkway. 

      b.  Proposal to Develop Eisenhower Fields

Information distributed prior to the meeting.  Dr. Bowman advised the Board a letter has been received requesting the development of the Eisenhower fields into a soccer facility.  Dr. Bowman inquired if the Board wants the administration to pursue the request.

Mr. Fleck left the meeting at 8:25 p.m.

Ms. Drioli indicated if the request would result in no cost to the District, she would support the request to develop the Eisenhower fields.  Mr. Eccles recommended any expenses related to the survey cost be paid for by the Middletown Township Athletic Association. Mr. Stack requested input be obtained from the homeowners near the fields. 

There was Board consensus to pursue the request as long as it does not involve taxpayers’ money.

      c.  NESACC/Neshaminy Kids Club Lease Renewal

Information distributed prior to the meeting.  Mr. Paradise reported at the Finance Committee Meeting, which was held prior to the Work Session, the NESACC/Neshaminy Kids Club lease renewal request was reviewed.  The Finance Committee members discussed with Mr. McPartlin paying fees in exchange for the use of District facilities.  As a result of the discussion, Mr. McPartlin will submit financial data for review.

Mr. Eccles advised the Board the committee also discussed with Mr. McPartlin the possibility of receiving federal and state child care grants.  If the organization had bills for rent, electricity, etc., it could apply for grants.

The Board tabled the lease renewal issue until the financial information is received from NESACC/Neshaminy Kids Club.

      d.  2000-2001 Portfolio of IU Special Education Services

Information distributed prior to the meeting.  Dr. Bowman advised the Board that the Board President and Secretary are asked to sign the agreement with the Intermediate Unit.  If the District makes use of the special education services, the related costs are included in the portfolio.  The District only makes use of the Intermediate Unit special education services if it cannot provide the services in a more cost efficient manner in the District.  The Board President and Secretary signed the agreement with the Intermediate Unit.

      e.  2000-2001 Budget (Working Copy)

The following information was distributed at the meeting:  2000-2001 working draft budget dated April 11, 2000, copy of Power Point presentation, 2000-2001 Enrollment Projections Report, non-mandated programs and services list and Demographics Affecting Earned Income Tax Chart.  Dr. Bowman explained under the 30-20-10 rule, 30 days prior to the adoption of the budget the budget must be printed in a particular format in accordance with the state accounting regulations.  The budget must be made available to the public 20 days prior to its adoption.  When the Board adopts the preliminary budget the fourth Tuesday in May, it will make the budget available to the public.  Ten days prior to final adoption, it must be publicly advertised that the Board plans to adopt a budget.  He noted the budget document will not be available to the public until the preliminary budget is adopted in May.

Dr. Bowman advised the Board that the administration has been working on the budget since December.  Over the last several weeks $2,200,000 has been removed from the budget.  A third review of the budget will be conducted over the next several weeks.

Dr. Bowman advised the Board that enrollment data is now available, including how many students will be attending the Technical School on a full-time basis and no longer attend Neshaminy High School.  Neshaminy’s Technical School allocation is 100 students per grade level or a total of 400 students.  Due to Neshaminy’s unique middle school situation (grades 6-9), only 34 students have elected to attend the ninth grade class of the Technical School.  The students want to finish their fourth year (grade 9) in Neshaminy’s middle schools.  The students might elect to attend the Technical School for grades 10 through 12.  Neshaminy is under enrolled in grade 9.  In grades 10 through 12, 174 students are planning to attend the Technical School full time.  Even though a 10 to 15 percent drop in Neshaminy’s Technical School enrollment was anticipated, the administration is concerned about the low enrollment.  Mr. Wyatt has followed up with the guidance counselors to make sure every student had the opportunity to attend the Technical School.  All of the Neshaminy students, who elected to attend the school, were accepted.  When students have attended Neshaminy High School for one or two years and are then asked to attend a full-time Technical School, the students are reluctant.  It is believed the Technical School enrollment will come back up in a year or two. 

Dr. Bowman explained during the month of April he will be reviewing staffing.  He noted 80 percent of the budget is comprised of staff and personnel costs.  During April and May, the number of teaching positions required for grades K through 12 will be determined.  The staffing will be based upon enrollment projections, Technical School enrollment and course selections at Neshaminy High School.  On June 1 all staff members must receive their assignments.  It is anticipated there will be fewer teachers next year compared to this year.  Since over 170 students will be attending the Technical School next year, there will be fewer high school teachers.  The enrollment projects indicate enrollment is down by 85 students at the elementary school level and 50 students at the middle school level.  The net affect at the high school is 172 fewer students.  Next year district-wide there will be 307 fewer students attending Neshaminy schools.  The preliminary budget, which will be presented for approval in May, will reflect the reduction in staffing.  Next year the average cost per teacher, including base salary, social security, retirement and benefits program, will be $52,000.  Dr. Bowman advised the Board the administration will review all of the line items again. The budget document will provide the Board with not only budget data, but also narrative information.

Mr. Paradise presented a Power Point Program outlining the 2000-2001 working draft budget (see presentation sheets distributed at meeting for detailed information).  The following highlights were included in the presentation:

Expenditures

·         Collective Bargaining Salary Increases - 2.75 percent increase plus step increase for certified staff and 3 percent increase for support staff.  The increases are equal to approximately $2,500,000.

·         Health Insurance Cost - Projected increase is 17 percent or $1,667,000.

·         Public School Employee’s Retirement System - As a result of market growth, there is another rate reduction in the Public School Employee’s Retirement System.  The 2000 rate is 4.61 percent and the 2001 rate will be 1.94 percent.  The savings in 2001 will be $1,701,000.  Three year savings equal $3,950,000.

·         Comprehensive Technical School - Increase of $1,932,000 or increase of 128 percent over current contribution rate.  The contribution is calculated based on a fixed plus variable portion based on the prior year’s enrollment.  The increase is not net of any staff reductions, which will result due to the Technical School becoming a comprehensive school. 

·         Debt Service Payments - The debt service payments will increase.  In 1997 the District’s existing debt was refinanced, which resulted in a $1,350,000 savings.  The savings were taken over the first three years.  The year 2001 is the fourth year and the debt service payments return to pre-refinancing levels.

·         Fuel Oil - The present cost is 44.7 cents.  The 2001 budget includes a cost of $1.00 per gallon.  The District purchases 813,000 gallons a year.

·         Diesel Fuel - The present cost is 45.5 cents.  The 2001 budget includes a cost of $1.00 per gallon.  The District purchases 215,000 gallons a year.

·         Special Education - Special education deficit is $10,868,000.  The total proposed expenditure for 2001 is $15,192,000 or an increase of 11 percent over the current year.  The projected state subsidy is $4,323,532, which is an increase of $268,000 over the current year. 

·         Electricity - More efficient use of energy continues to be a priority in Neshaminy.  Many energy savings projects have been adopted over the years.  The Board has approved five projects in the last six months.  The District is a part of the five county energy consortium.  As a result of using a new supplier, the District will realize an additional 3 percent overall savings in 2001.  The Greentech Act 129 Lighting Programs have been done at five schools.  The proposed budget reflects a $170,000 electricity reduction.  By changing suppliers, a $37,000 savings will be realized.  The total reduction for next year will be 13.7 percent.

·         Facilities - Five Year Capital Replacement Plan 

*         Boilers for Hoover and Poquessing Schools.  Authority to fund Hoover School boiler.

*         Roofs for Heckman School and transportation building.  Possibly Authority will fund Heckman School roof project.  The transportation building roofing bid will be presented to the Board in May.

*         Exterior door replacement at various schools.

*         Funds included in the budget to deal with specifically the Poquessing Middle School.

·         Facilities - The budget includes funds for the following:  water, radon, air and asbestos testing, annual maintenance items, repaving of roadways and parking lots, vehicle and tractor replacements and building emergency system upgrades and replacements.

Revenues

·         Tax Levies - The District has mostly flat local revenues.  The District does not have a growing tax base to support the budget.  There has been an increase in local revenue of only $162,196 or 2/10 of 1 percent.  As a result of new development, current real estate taxes have increased $587,000.  However, there has been a $479,000 decrease in public utility realty taxes. 

·         Value of a Mill - The value of a mill for the 2000-2001 budget is $177,365. 

·         State Revenue Sources

*         Basic subsidy increase of 1 percent or $96,438.

*         Special education subsidy increase of 6.7 percent or $268,000.

*         Rental payment subsidy increase of $67,840.

*         FICA and Medicare subsidy increase of $70,501.

*         Retirement system subsidy decrease of 53.9 percent or $803,000. 

*         Total state subsidies from all sources are down by $300,000 or 1.3 percent.

Fund Balance

·         71 percent accumulated fund balance was used to balance current year budget, which was $6,800,000 of $9,500,000.

·         It is anticipated the June 30, 2000 total accumulated fund balance will be approximately $4,200,000. 

·         If 71 percent of the fund balance were used again, it will result in a $3,800,000 less fund balance in the current year.  It will cost 21.4 mills to make up just the $3,800,000 difference.

·         If 100 percent of the fund balance were used, it will result in a budget fund balance gap of $2,600,000 or 14.7 mills.

Impact on Bottom Line

·         In the year 2000 there was a $6,800,000 gap between expenditures and revenue.  The gap was funded by utilizing the accumulated fund balance.  The fund balance is one-time revenue.

·         In the year 2001 budget there is a gap of $14,190,000.  The gap has grown because the budget was balanced last year by using one-time revenues. 

·         Currently, the 2001 budget factors are as follows:

      Expenditure                    $116,200,000

      Revenues                        $102,010,000

      Gap                               $  14,190,000

      Fund Balance (available for use)   $    4,200,000

      Remaining Gap             $    9,990,000

Expenditures Impact

·         Total expenditure increase 5.1 percent

·         Dollar Increase of $5,573,000

·         If one-time costs (health insurance, Technical School and debt service) are excluded, increase is less than $1,500,000 or 1.38 percent

Reconciliation

·         Total one-time needs (lack of fund balance, Technical School, health insurance, reduction in revenues and debt service) equal 39.7 mills.

·         Total gap as of April 11, 2000:

*         Total one time needs     39.7 mills

*         Normal growth items    16.6 mills

*         Total Gap as of April 11   56.3 mills

Mr. Paradise noted budget reductions made to date have totaled more than $2,200,000.  The administration will continue to monitor the real estate tax income, investment income, miscellaneous fees, state subsidies, fund balance calculations, health insurance, Technical School staffing, staffing and fuel oil bids. It may be necessary to consider elimination or reduction of programs and/or services and alternative revenue sources.  He pointed out the preliminary budget will be presented for adoption on May 23 and the final budget will be presented for approval on June 20.

In response to Mrs. Butville’s question about salary increases for Neshaminy teachers who may teach at the Technical School next year, Dr. Bowman explained the District will not be sending teachers to the Technical School.  If there are not enough retirements in the District, some teachers will be laid off.  The laid off teachers will become part of a pool that the Technical School can consider hiring from to fill their vacancies.  The teachers will be paid on the Technical School’s salary schedule.  The laid off teachers will be completely eliminated from the District’s budget. 

In response to Board members’ question about the Technical School enrollment, Dr. Bowman explained if the District does not fill its seat allocation by May 1, the remaining seats are automatically released to other school districts.  The rate is based on the prior year’s attendance.  Therefore, the other school districts would pay for the additional seats the following year. 

Ms. Drioli stated if the state and federal governments provided special education funding to meet the mandates, there would be no need for a tax increase.  She urged the residents to contact their legislators about providing funding for the special education mandates.  Mr. Schoenstadt said the special education deficit could have been wiped out if the Governor would have given the special education program the money instead of each taxpayer receiving a $100 rebate.

Dr. Bowman distributed a list of 39 non-mandated programs and services, which the Board may want to review and discuss at a later date.  As an example, he noted the District offers the first year of French and Spanish at Neshaminy High School, and it is also offered in grade 9 (middle schools).  This is a duplicate offering.  The District stopped duplicate offerings in some of the Science courses, and the Board may want to consider stopping duplicate offerings in foreign languages.  He noted the listing is not a suggested list of budget cuts, but a list of those programs that are not mandated.  Some of the programs are very necessary.

Ms. Drioli suggested consideration be given to large group instruction at the high school level and the instruction be provided by community interest groups (i.e., MADD, Habitat for Humanity, career representatives, etc.).  The large group instruction period could eliminate the seventh major.  It would not be a study hall and the students would be tested and held accountable for information presented. Such a class may help students prepare for large group instruction at the college level, and provide the incentive for students to reach out and assist people in their community.  She felt such a program would allow for a reduction in certified staff and could be implemented by September 2000.  

Dr. Frank felt Ms. Drioli’s large group instruction suggestion was very good for an enrichment program, but not as a replacement for the seventh major.  Ms. Drioli stated seven majors is not mandated.  Mrs. Butville pointed out by eliminating one period, there would not be much of an impact on staffing.  Eliminating one period, would not result in eliminating a whole teaching position. 

Mr. Wyatt advised the Board that 200 to 300 Neshaminy High School students take seven majors.  Dr. Bowman stated the educational impact of Ms. Drioli’s suggestion would be to remove the opportunity for students to take a seventh major. 

Mr. Schoenstadt felt it would make more sense to change to block scheduling by waiting a year and involving the teachers in establishing a program.  He said whether or not it results in reduced staff is irrelevant.  The fact is block scheduling is better time utilization and better educationally.  Dr. Bowman said he did not believe the District will save money the first year of block scheduling.  It may actually cost the District money.  Mr. Schoenstadt stated the Board needs to look at the long term affect.  The District will not save anything under any program the first year.  The idea is to put together the most solid educational program possible. 

Dr. Frank pointed out the Board reviewed block scheduling two years ago and found no school district that was happy with it.  Mrs. Haggerty stated school districts that have had block scheduling for more than three years are generally happy with the program.

Mrs. Butville said she was not happy with the proposed 56 mill increase and it must be reduced.  However, she does not want to impact in any great way the education of the students.  The Board is here to educate the students in the best possible way, but also the cheapest way. 

Ms. Drioli said the last three years the Board has been approving the budget saying each year it was going to review various changes the next year.  However, next year never really comes.  Every time there are sacrifices to be made in the District and every time there is a shortfall, the people that have to pay are the taxpayers. She stated the teachers union, which is one of the strongest in the state, should be in Harrisburg lobbying for educational funding. 

Mr. Stack felt Ms. Drioli’s suggestion needs to be examined further to determine the cost savings, how the students would be scheduled, etc.  He felt Ms. Drioli’s suggestion merits further review. 

Mrs. Butville pointed out even with large group instruction, by law there must still be a certified person in the classroom and that person would still have to be paid.  Therefore, the District would not be saving the cost of that teacher.  She inquired if the contract or state law sets a limit on the maximum number of high school students that can be in one class.  Dr. Bowman felt the large instruction class could be held, but the Board needs to ask what value is it and why is the Board instituting it.  He said students in the more challenging courses could probably use the time to do their work rather than be in a large group instruction class.  Changing from seven to six periods, will probably have an impact upon 200 to 300 of the best students.  Many students take accelerated programs and skip lunch because they have the opportunity excel and do well.  Large group instruction will result in some financial savings, some students being placed in study halls and eliminating opportunities for some students to take accelerated courses, courses in the arts and music area.  There are a lot of ramifications related to the suggestion.  A value needs to be placed on the impact upon the students and cost savings.  Mrs. Butville noted the Board recently approved adding some AP courses.  By implementing large group instruction, the Board may take away the opportunity for students to take the AP courses.  Ms. Drioli stated the large group instruction class could be a short term fix for a year or two.  The Board has to look at ways to save money and this may be one of them. 

Mr. Stack referred to the non-mandated programs and services list and recommended the Board review the list and add possible additional items.  He felt it was important to provide an estimated cost for each item on the list.  Some of the items, if eliminated, may not provide much in the way of savings; and therefore, the Board should not spend much in time and effort reviewing those items.  Mr. Stack stated block scheduling needs to be reviewed further, but it is not something that could be in place by September 1.  The Board must review the items that the Board can take action on during the budget review.  Dr. Bowman explained block scheduling is a contractual issue.  He said the Board needs to make decisions based upon costs, savings and impact upon programs. 

Mr. Schoenstadt stated one realistic option that could be reviewed is the elimination of transportation completely and the use of the fund balance to fund the remaining gap.  How valuable is transportation?  If transportation is provided for some students, the District must provide it for everyone.  The District could contract out transportation. 

Dr. Bowman stated he will attach dollar amounts and program impact to the items listed on the non-mandated programs and services list.  The information will be provided at the next Board Meeting.  The administration will review all of the line items and across the board reductions.  A freeze has been placed on all job postings for non-essential positions.  The administration will also review the revenue data further.  He said the administration knows the 56.3 mill increase is not acceptable. 

Mr. Eccles indicated he does not believe a 56.3 mill increase is necessary.  There are reductions that the Board and administration can make to get the budget under control.  He stated he has full confidence the administration can cut the costs again.  He said I am not looking to cut education for the kids.  He felt if every department’s budget is reduced by 10 percent, the budget deficit can be reduced down to a small number.  He said he was not sure that the Board needed to consider cutting programs, but it needs to streamline programs. 

Mr. Stack stated he has been serving on the Board seven years.  He noted over the years, the initial budget increase has been high and the final increase reduced considerably (i.e., 40 mills reduced to 19 mills).  He noted 80 percent of the budget is comprised of salaries and benefits.  Therefore, the Board does not have much latitude in terms of where the budget can be cut unless the Board is willing to cut certain language programs, art programs, etc.  Program cuts would have a dollar impact, but the Board would have to agree with the implications of program cuts.  On paper, a $4,200,000 fund balance is available to the Board.  Last year there was a positive contribution to the fund balance because the revenues exceeded the expenditures by $1,500,000.  Last year $6,800,000 of the fund balance was used to help fund the budget.  Generally, at the beginning of the budget review process, there is a significant budget deficit each year. 

Mr. Stack noted if the Board were to enact an earned income tax, at a rate of .5 percent the District would collect $3,600,000.  A full 1 percent rate would result in approximately $7,100,000 in revenue.  The earned income tax collection would not be enough to totally offset the $10,000,000 gap.  He pointed out there has not been any Board consensus to consider both an earned income tax and an increase in real estate taxes.  He felt there is an opportunity to examine the earned income tax issue and obtain public input on the issue.  If an earned income tax were enacted, there would have to be further reductions in the budget so there would only be an earned income tax and no increase in the real estate tax.  He indicated he could not support both an earned income tax and real estate tax increase. 

Mr. Stack referred to the Demographics Affecting Earned Income Tax Report (distributed prior to the meeting) and Demographics Affecting Earned Income Tax Chart (distributed at the meeting) and noted the chart distributed at the meeting reflects a correction in the “Employed NY/Phila” column.  Mr. Stack briefly reviewed the chart. 

Mr. Eccles noted the chart lists renters separately.  He pointed out property tax is paid on apartment complexes by the owners.  The property tax is factored into the rental fee charged individual renters.  Therefore, renters would be paying both taxes, earned income tax and real estate tax.  Apartment dwellers are not getting a free ride.  He questioned why the renters and homeowners are listed as two separate categories on the chart.  Mr. Stack stated a renter’s portion of the real estate tax is not dollar for dollar the same as that of a homeowner.  He noted an earned income tax would affect people differently depending on their individual situation.  Currently, the District’s tax base largely replies upon property taxes.  He felt the Board should examine expanding the tax base and diversifying the collectables.  He pointed out that 4 to 5 percent of the population living within the School District work outside of the District and pay taxes to other municipalities and school districts in excess of $1,500,000.  If Neshaminy had an earned income tax, these dollars would be coming back to Neshaminy.  

Mr. Mecleary inquired if an earned income tax is enacted, how much could the property tax be decreased.  It was noted the first year the property tax would not be decreased.  Mr. Schoenstadt stated an earned income tax would produce revenue, provide continuity of revenue and the base of the earned income tax would increase year to year, which is a long term advantage.  Mr. Stack noted the Council Rock School District is not projecting a tax increase, but they will be using fund balance money to fund the budget deficit.  The Council Rock School District is projecting a $10,000,000 increase in earned income tax revenue.  Mr. Eccles felt due to the demographics of the Council Rock School District, the Neshaminy and Council Rock School Districts cannot be compared.  Mr. Stack reviewed the various Bucks County school districts that have enacted an earned income tax.  Out of 501 Pennsylvania school districts, 460 school districts have enacted an earned income tax.  He noted in previous years, locally a large percentage, approximately 30 percent,  of the population worked in New York and Philadelphia.  In recent years, the areas for employment opportunities have changed and now only approximately 15 percent of the area’s population work in Philadelphia and New York.  Neshaminy’s millage is the third largest among area school districts.  Its millage is only exceeded by Bristol Township and Morrisville.  Mr. Eccles said he is proud Neshaminy does not have an earned income tax.

Mr. Stack stated he was impressed by the time and effort the Tax Advisory Committee spent on the earned income tax question.  He noted Mr. Toth, who works in real estate, made it very clear what impact the continued increase in taxes can have on the ability to sell homes and the value of property. 

Mr. Mecleary questioned why residents would want to pay an additional $500 a year in earned income tax.  He noted the Board has never increase property taxes $500.  Mr. Schoenstadt stated a 60 mill increase would equal a $360 increase for the average real estate property owner. 

Ms. Drioli stated at this time, she does not support an earned income tax.  She said School Boards need to contact legislators and lobby for state funding of the mandates.  She felt the teachers are not overpaid and their salaries are comparable to salaries in the market place. 

Mr. Mecleary expressed concern about the impact of an earned income tax on renters.  He questioned if an earned income tax would affect the rental occupancy rate.  If the complexes’ occupancy rates are low, will the owners be able to pay the real estate tax? 

Mr. Dengler stated he was opposed to a 56 mill increase.  He stated if the real estate tax would not be lower by enacting an earned income tax, he was opposed to an earned income tax.  Mr. Eccles stated he would not support an earned income tax. 

6.   Public Comment

There was a three minute time limit per speaker.  Ms. Andreotti, CASSP, Department of Mental Health and Retardation and Bucks County Life Program, spoke on behalf of Mr. Zavorski of Langhorne regarding a Mosaica Academy Charter School transportation issue.  Ms. Andreotti said Mr. and Mrs. Zavorski’s  request to be hired as a “contractor” and be reimbursed for transporting their children to school is not an uncommon request, particularly in rural areas.  She said there are 25 Bucks County Intermediate Unit vans that transport students throughout Bucks County.  She stated if it would result in a shorter amount of time on the bus for the children, possibly one of the Intermediate Unit vans could be used to transport the Zavorski children to school.  She requested if the Intermediate Unit van is not an option, Dr. Bowman, the solicitor or Board respond in writing to the Zavorski family as to the reason for the Board’s decision not to grant Mr. and Mrs. Zavorski’s request.  Mr. Stack stated an inquiry will be made as to the Intermediate Unit transporting the children. 

Mrs. Coia, Feasterville, urged the Board to keep the issue of security in mind for the middle schools as it reviews the budget.  She stated the first grade classes at the Ferderbar School are huge.  She requested the Board review the class size of grade 2 at the Ferderbar School for the 2000-2001 school year.  She expressed concern about the large first grade class size and emphasized the importance of students learning in the early grades the basics of reading, writing and math.  Mrs. Coia stated she was opposed to the District paying a parent to drive their children to a private school.  She said she drives her youngest child to school because 95 percent of the time the bus is 15 minutes late.  She pointed out her seventh grader’s bus arrives at 7:05 a.m. and school does not start until 7:55 a.m.  The school is only 1.2 miles from her house. 

Mr. Merwitz, Langhorne, stated he was opposed to any increase in taxes.  He suggested a tuition tax be imposed on the parents or guardians of children who are actively enrolled in the school system.  The tax would not be imposed on those whose children attend private schools, senior citizens, etc. 

Mrs. Emerick, Langhorne, suggested services for transportation, food services, maintenance and custodial services be contracted to eliminate some of the budget salaries and benefit costs.  She stated a number of school districts have contracted these services to save salary and benefit costs, and inquired if the Board has ever investigated contracting out these services. 

Mr. Schieber, Langhorne, stated he is a former Council Rock School District resident.  The Council Rock School District has an earned income tax.  He explained one of the reasons that he moved to the Village at Flower Mills was because Middletown Township and the Neshaminy School District do not have an earned income tax.  Approximately 675 homes are being built at the Village at Flower Mills for people who are 55 years old and older.  These residents will have no impact on the School District but will be paying approximately $3,000,000 a year in real estate taxes.  He inquired if this was taken into consideration when calculating the budget projections.  He felt the real problem is the assessment system in Pennsylvania.  He said everyone is not paying their fair share and the issue needs to be reviewed.

Mr. Bontempo, Feasterville, explained how difficult it is for individuals on fixed incomes, particularly senior citizens,  to pay their taxes.  He urged the Board to address the issue of senior citizens and taxes. 

Mr. Soifer, Langhorne, stated tax relief needs to come from the state legislators. Officials and residents need to lobby in Harrisburg for educational funding. The School District is mandated by the state and federal governments to meet certain mandates/requirements.  Currently, the District must spend approximately $15,000,000 to meet the state and federal governments’ special education requirements.  Due to minimal government funding for the special education mandates, the District has a shortfall of approximately $10,000,000 to $11,000,000.   Mr. Soifer stated just because his children are no longer in school, it does not relieve him of the obligation to support the School District.  People before him paid for his children to go to school.  He stated one of the things that drives the value of the homes is the educational value of the area. 

Mr. Knowles, Neshaminy teacher, said the Federation has people working with legislators and the Governor all of the time.  There are a lot of things that have to be done at the legislative level.  The Governor is pro private, pro charter, pro parochial and pro voucher.  He is not pro public school.  Mr. Knowles felt the District’s budget would not be a concern if instead of giving people a $160 refund, the Governor put the money into the school system. 

Mr. Knowles explained a mandated program is a program that as a result of federal law or court cases state something must be done in a specific way.  If parents feel things are not being done properly, they can go to a due process hearing.  Years ago special education costs were reimbursed 50 percent.  This is no longer true. 

Mr. Schneider, Langhorne, felt some of the financial difficulties are due to a lack of long term planning.  He said the taxpayers should not have their taxes increased on a regular basis.  There needs to be a way to bring the budget down so the taxpayers do not have to worry about a tax increase every year.  The budget needs to be balanced by making whatever program adjustments that must be made within the District.  Mr. Schneider stated he does not understand why the buses are late, because they speed down Bellevue Avenue.

Mr. Spitz, Middletown Township, advised the Board he has written a letter regarding the tax issue.  As a member of the Tax Advisory Committee, he felt the committee’s report did not accurately reflect the views and discussions of the committee.  Mr. Spitz stated a number of the recommendations made by the members of public tonight are not things the Board has the authority to do.  He urged the residents to become more involved in the Board Meetings to understand the constraints under which the Board operates.  The Board operates under a very strict set of rules, and it cannot decide to just tax those people who have children in school and not others.  Mr. Spitz felt an earned income tax would just shift taxes from one group to another group.  He said everyone, even renters, already pay taxes. 

Mr. New, Parkland, explained he moved out of Bristol Township because it has an earned income tax, and he moved into the Neshaminy School District because it does not have an earned income tax.  He indicated he is opposed to an earned income tax.  He explained the Chamber of Commerce is sponsoring a program whereby residents can go to Harrisburg for a day to observe how the government operates.  He urged residents to make the trip to Harrisburg.  He also urged the Board to find a way to resolve the budget issue without imposing an earned income tax.

Mrs. Cummings, Langhorne, indicated she favored reviewing the curriculum for possible duplication or repetitive programs, which could be eliminated.

Mr. Stack recessed the meeting at 10:25 p.m.  Mr. Stack reconvened the meeting at 10:45 p.m.

7.   Items for Approval

      a.  Overnight Trips

Information on the following two overnight trips was distributed prior to the meeting and is self-explanatory:

·         Technology Student Association State Conference, Seven Springs Resort, April 12‑14, 2000

·         Future Problem Solving Teams to Penn State for State Bowl Level Competition, May 7‑8, 2000

There was Board consensus for the two trips.

      b.  Technical School Budget

Budget information distributed prior to the meeting.  Mr. Dengler advised the Board the Technical School budget will be presented for approval at the Technical School Convention on May 11.  In order to pass the budget, there must be five votes from four school districts and a total of 28 votes. The Technical School budget must be approved by the second Thursday in May. He urged all Board members to attend the May 11 Technical School Convention.  He noted the Technical School is also in the process of negotiating a new labor contract.

Mr. Mecleary reported a total Technical School budget of $12,837,780 has been reduced to $11,889,300 due to budget cuts made by the administration.  Neshaminy’s portion of the budget is $3,148,599 and reflects the credit for the previous year’s reconciliation. This is an increase of $1,646,883 over last year.  Prior to receiving the attendance adjustment for the previous year’s Neshaminy enrollment, Neshaminy’s budget increase was $1,900,000.  If fewer students are enrolled in the Technical School, an adjustment will be made to Neshaminy’s portion of the budget next year.   The budget includes an increase in the technology expenditure.  The school will be leasing the computer equipment as opposed to purchasing it, which reduced the first year capital expenditures by $1,800,000. 

Dr. Bowman advised the Board that the Superintendents will be meeting with Mr. Snyder, Administrative Director, to review staffing issues.  The Superintendents are requesting a list of all staff members, positions, class size and number of teaching periods. 

Mr. Dengler noted that the Bristol Borough and Morrisville School Districts have only about 50 students attending the Technical School.  Due to the small number of students attending the Technical School, the change to a comprehensive technical school will not result in any reduction in staffing at the two school districts.  They will have no reductions to offset the increased expense. 

Mr. Schoenstadt stated he was concerned that Neshaminy was paying a very steep tab to open the Technical School.  He recommended the Superintendents go as thoroughly through the Technical School budget as they go through their own districts’ budgets.  There should be no fat in the Technical School budget.  Mr. Mecleary stated next year the Technical School budget will be lower, because this year there are considerable costs associated with opening the school, which will not be present next year.  A lot of the capital expenditures will not be necessary next year.  The computers are being obtained through a five year lease.  Mrs. Butville noted the computer programs have been deferred to next year. 

Messrs. Stack and Dengler urged all Board members to attend the May 11 Technical School Convention.

      c.   Approval of Bids and Budget Transfers

Mr. Paradise reviewed the following bids:

Bid No. 01-06 - Magazine Subscriptions

Award Amount:  $11,149.15

The bid is for magazines for school libraries, curriculum library and classroom instruction.

Bid No. 01-09 - Emergency Generator

Award Amount:  $22,890.00

The bid is for delivery and installation of a permanent standby power generating system for Neshaminy Middle School and a temporary unit to serve until successful installation.  It is included in the budget for next year.  The current emergency generator does not function and needs to be replaced. 

Mr. Paradise advised the Board that next month he will present a roof replacement bid.  In 1999 a five year roof replacement plan was established.  The 2000-2001 budget initially included $610,000 for roofing projects for the Heckman School and transportation building.  It has been determined the Heckman roof replacement can be delayed a year.  However, the transportation building roof is in terrible condition and needs to be replaced.  $300,000 was budgeted for the transportation roof replacement and the bid amount is $264,000. 

Ms. Drioli recommended approval of the magazine subscriptions bid be delayed.  Mr. Paradise explained the bid is valid for 60 days and it was opened on March 15.  Dr. Frank indicated she was not in favor of delaying approval of the magazine subscriptions bid.  Dr. Bowman explained the money that the principals use for the magazines comes from the allocation provided to the principals based on a certain amount of money per pupil.  The principals allocate the funds based upon their needs.  The subscriptions are brought to the Board in the form of a bid so the principals do not purchase the magazines individually and pay the premium price.  The bidding process allows the magazines to be purchased at a discounted price. 

There was Board consensus to delay approval of bid no. 01-06 - magazine subscriptions.  The bid will be presented again in May.

Mr. Paradise briefly reviewed Budget Transfer Report No. 00-6 (working copy), which includes six transactions and subtransactions.  He noted item no. five pertains to salary transfers to reflect charges to the correct budget codes for employees who have been transferred within the District.

The emergency generator bid and budget transfers will be presented for approval at the April Public Meeting.

8.   Items for Information

      a.  Safe School Management Plan Recommendations

Information distributed prior to meeting.  Dr. Bowman advised the Board that the Safe Schools Individual Plan Recommendations Report is being reviewed with the principals and the things that have been accomplished to date are being noted.  Dr. Bowman stated some of the recommendations can be accomplished without spending money.  A game plan is being developed for the schools.

Mrs. Butville inquired if it is legal to lock all of the high school’s doors except the main door.  Dr. Bowman stated it is legal as long as individuals can exit from the inside to the outside.  Mrs. Butville pointed out since the high school is so large, a number of students cut across the courtyard while changing classes to save time.  Dr. Bowman said the issue of locking the doors is being reviewed, especially exterior doors for the outside of the building versus the courtyard doors.  The administration is not going  to do something that will create chaos.   

      b.  BCIU 1999-2000 Budget Analysis

Information distributed prior to the meeting.  Dr. Bowman explained the Budget Analysis Report includes valuable information about enrollments, assessed values, millage, taxes, revenues, expenditures, etc.  The report compares all thirteen school districts for 1999-2000.

9.   Superintendent’s Report

Dr. Bowman reported the following:

·         Board members interested in attending the Teacher Accountability Conference, May 16, should complete the registration form and return it to Dr. Bowman’s office.

·         Board members planning to participate in the June 7 Neshaminy High School graduation ceremony are to advise Dr. Bowman.  Board members need to complete the forms regarding caps and gowns.

·         Several Sandburg Middle School students are participating in the First Regional Symposium sponsored by Wheelabrator.  The students’ study was a local community problem of leaking in-ground oil tanks.

10. Committee Reports

      a.  NSBA Conference

Dr. Frank reported that she attend the recent NSBA Conference.  She noted many of the comments expressed at the Board Meeting were expressed nationally.  She reported 18,000 people attended the conference.  She reported the following regarding the conference:

·         Larger representation of minorities as members and presenters.

·         Advances in educational technologies are now taken for granted, but must be further advanced and pursued.

·         There is new emphasis on accountability of teachers, administrators and on more documentation of their credentials.

·         Streamlining administrative governance of public education on all levels, and adoption of a meaningful method of evaluating them.

·         Rethinking of the school budgeting process.  Have a five year budget outline and modify it each year.

·         Savings for schools through cooperative efforts with other school districts of power, transportation and supplies.

·         Continued emphasis on violence prevention.

·         Parents and communities to accept the responsibility and obligation that moral values must be taught at home and can only be reinforced by the schools.

·         Continued emphasis on basic skills teaching and good nutrition.  Focus should always be on children’s needs, not just test scores.  There should always be provisions for alternative education. 

·         Cost cutting and program cutting was rarely mentioned.  Inclusion of local and state legislators in all financial discussions.  Hold them responsible for finding additional funding for mandated programs.

·         The three speakers, Tom Brokaw, General Colin Powell and Barbara Bush were excellent speakers. 

Mrs. Butville explained she also attended the NSBA Conference.  She reported she attended the new School Board session.  She felt she did not learn anything new from the session.  The session reemphasized what she had already learned through the PSBA Workshops and District administrators.  Everything they recommended at the session, Neshaminy is already doing or is in the process of doing.  As a result of the session, she felt Neshaminy is  a very well operated school district already.  She said the emphasis seems to be on a vision instead of a mission statement.  Mrs. Butville advised the Board that she brought back a great deal of information from the conference.  She said the information is available for Board members’ review.

      b.  Educational Development Committee

Information distributed prior to the meeting.  Mr. Mecleary reported the committee discussed the issue of summer reading lists.  Virtually all of the schools in the District have a suggested summer reading list, which is distributed to students at the end of the school year.  At the middle and elementary schools, the teachers and librarians work with the reading specialists to develop a reading list.  PTO groups sponsor some of the reading programs.  There is no real District-wide summer reading program or single list of books.  There is a question as to the legality of requiring an assessment of the summer reading.  The legality issue will be reviewed by the solicitor. 

Mrs. Haggerty stated it was her understanding that Dr. Scanlon had look into the issue of requiring an assessment of a summer reading program, and found it to be illegal to require an assessment of an assignment done outside of the school year.  Mr. Mecleary reported Mrs. Butville had suggested contacting area bookstores for cooperation with the summer reading program.  Mrs. Bostwick recommended the local libraries be notified of the summer reading book list.  The outcome of the discussion at the committee meeting was that Mrs. Haggerty will work with the appropriate staff members to establish a District-wide summer reading list and initiate a campaign to strongly encourage all students to read extensively during the summer. 

Mr. Stack stated he favored rather making the program mandatory, making it interesting and fun.  He indicated he concurred with Mrs. Butville’s suggestion made at the committee meeting that there be some form of recognition/reward, rather than assessment, established for students who  read during the summer.

Mr. Mecleary reported the committee also reviewed the various levels of high school required courses.  The AP, honors, college prep and career prep courses were reviewed.  The classes are fairly evenly distributed in terms of number of students in each class.  Possible exceptions are one or two sections of AP classes with a slightly lower number of students per class.  If any one of the classes were eliminated, the students would have to be placed in another class because the courses are major courses.  It was determined there was no benefit in terms of reducing the number of teachers or classes to dropping any one of the four levels of courses.

      c.  Education Foundation Committee

           No report presented.

      d.  Finance Committee

           Aquatic Program

Mr. Eccles reported the committee reviewed increasing Aquatic Program fees.  It is anticipated this year the program’s earnings will be $35,000 to $40,000.  The earnings go into the District’s general fund.  By increasing the fees, it is anticipated the earnings could be as much as $80,000.  The increases being considered are as follows:

·         Increase current $2.50 per session adult program fee to $4.00 per session. 

·         Increase current $30.00 for ten swim lessons fee to $40.00 for ten swim lessons.  Some of the surrounding area pools charge $50.00.

·         Currently the Friday night recreational swim fee is $3.00 per child and no fee for adults.  Change the fee structure so everyone, children and adults, pay the fee.

·         Currently, there are different rental fees.  Some pay $60.00 an hour and others pay less.  A rental scale will be developed.  The rate would vary depending upon how many hours a year the group uses the pool, i.e., 350 hours, 500 hours, 1,000 hours, etc.

Mr. Eccles said after the fee changes are implemented, initially there might be a slight decrease in membership.  A pool management company has offered to conduct an audit of the District’s pools for a fee of $7,500.  If the fee increases do not generate the anticipated increase in profit, the audit could be conducted the following year.  The cost of the audit could be paid for out of the Aquatic Program profits.

Mr. Stack suggested possible consideration be given to providing a floating island in the pool, which may make the program more attractive and increase membership. 

NESACC/Neshaminy Kids Club

Mr. Eccles explained the committee reviewed charging fees to the NESACC/Neshaminy Kids Club Program.  Paying the fees may be beneficial to NESACC/Neshaminy Kids Club in obtaining grant funds.  Mr. McPartlin will be submitting financial data to Mr. Paradise for review.  Issue also discussed earlier in the meeting.  See page 4 of the minutes.

Beverage Issue

Mr. Eccles presented an update on the beverage agreement issue.  Mr. Hoss, Director of Purchasing, has been in contact with the Philadelphia Coca-Cola Bottling Company, Pepsi Bottling Group and Canada Dry.  Within a week all three companies will conduct surveys.  Hopefully, within one to two months the proposals will be received. 

Dr. Frank felt the Board needs to point out to the public that the beverage agreement is not being considered for the elementary schools or as a part of the lunch program.  These will be additional vending machines for use by people who attend after school activities (games, etc.).  Mr. Eccles said all of the machines located inside the buildings have timers.  There are federal laws prohibiting the dispensing of certain beverages during school hours. 

Alternative School

Mr. Eccles advised the Board a proposal has been submitted for an alternative school.  He explained the District currently pays at least $15,000 per year/per student for alternative education placement.  The cost for educating just 15 students in an alternative school and bus transportation is $225,000.  Currently, 116 students are attending alternative programs. A proposal was presented by Mr. Wilson to add one teacher and a full-time aide at a cost of approximately $101,000.  The program would be held at the TODAY, Inc. facility at a rental cost of $60,000.  The proposal would result in a net savings of $65,000 the first year for 15 students. 

Dr. Frank stated initially the program would be Neshaminy’s program.  However, TODAY, Inc. hopes to get other school districts to participate in the same program.  TODAY, Inc. has the land to expand, but a zoning variance would be needed.  Currently, the facility has one educational classroom.  Neshaminy would be the preferred customer.

Ms. Drioli stated if there is a drop in enrollment in the District, possibly an elementary school could be closed and used as a facility for an alternative education charter school.  Dr. Frank stated if the District uses a facility in its own District for an alternative education program, it does not have to be a charter school. 

Dr. Bowman stated he will engage the Pennsylvania Economy League to conduct a long range enrollment study for the District.  Before consideration is given to closing an elementary school, he asked the Board to consider moving the sixth graders back into the elementary schools and possibly close a middle school.

Mrs. Butville inquired with the reduction in the high school population due to students attending the Technical School on a full-time basis, if there would be space available for the alternative program at the high school.  Mr. Wilson explained it is not a good idea to put an alternative classroom within a regular school setting. 

Mr. Eccles pointed out the proposal would be a good way to start an alternative education program.  If the program is not successful, the District would not be obligated to retain the teacher.  The teacher would be laid off. 

Since the Board indicated it is in favor of the program, it will be included in the budget. 

Lower Bucks Cablevision

Mr. Eccles reported a letter was sent to Mr. Fleck requesting he advise Mr. Paradise if there are any federal or state laws which prohibit the District from generating revenue through website and/or cable television ads to raise revenue for the general fund. 

Advertising on District Vehicles

Mr. Eccles stated advertising on the side of maintenance vehicles could possibly generate $30,000 to $50,000 in revenue for the District.  The Board indicated they were interested in pursuing this idea.

Dr. Frank stated she has heard that Sprint is paying one school district $300,000 per year for one cell tower. 

Alternatives for Obtaining Employee Health Insurance

Mr. Eccles explained Century Business Services would like to review the District’s health insurance program to determine if the District is receiving the best benefits services at the best value.  In order to allow the company to review the District’s program, authorization must be provided for Century Business Services to obtain the District’s records.  There would be no cost to the District.  Mr. Jones explained currently, the District uses a consultant to review the District’s health insurance program.   

After further discussion, there was Board consensus to move forward with Century Business Services’ proposal.  Mr. Paradise will send a letter to authorize Century Business Services to obtain the insurance records from Blue Cross. 

      e.  Intermediate Unit Board

           No report presented 

      f.  Intermediate Unit Legislative Committee

          No report presented.

      g.  Technical School Board

           Technical School issues discussed earlier in the meeting.  See page 13 of the 
            minutes.

      h.  Board Policies Committee

           No report presented.

     i.   Technology Committee

Information distributed prior to the meeting.  Mr. Stack reported representatives from Blair Park made a presentation to the committee regarding installing fiber optic cabling between all buildings in the District.  Fiber optic cabling between buildings would provide the ability to offer distance learning, top-of-the-line communications and reduce telephone system costs.  The District could receive a 40 percent subsidy on the total cost of the installation.  The cost of the program for five years would be $27,000 per month.  After five years, the cost would be reduced significantly.  He noted Neshaminy is one of only two school districts in the County that has not installed fiber optic cabling  from building to building. 

Mr. Stack explained the District pays $5,000 per month for a limited bandwidth between buildings, which is no longer adequate and needs to be updated.  If rather than changing over to fiber optics the decision was made to move off the T1 and go to the next upgrade (SMDS), the monthly cost would be $25,000.  If the District wants to upgrade its network, it makes sense to install the fiber optic cable.  He noted given the budget situation, it is a costly consideration. 

Mr. Paradise explained Bell Telephone is the only supplier of the SMDS lines, but not the only supplier for fiber optics.  All the fiber optics suppliers are all similarly priced.  Mr. Paradise stated to delay the impact on the budget, it would be budgeted for starting in January.  It would not be a full year. 

Mr. Stack pointed out with the installation of fiber optics, there will be higher costs the first five years.  However, after the first five years, the costs will begin to drop down.  In the long term, the investment will be beneficial to the District.  Additional information on the issue will be provided to the Board members.

Mr. Stack explained the upgrading of computer and labs is on target.  There will be no increase in the technology allocation for next year.  It is recommended the current level of allocation be maintained.  He emphasized the importance of teachers being better prepared to provide instruction with technology.  The administration will address this issue by developing a staff training lab to be used to train and increase staff members’ skills.

11.  Future Topics

       No future topics were discussed.

12.  Agenda Development for April 25, 2000 Public Meeting.

       Dr. Bowman briefly reviewed the agenda items.

13. Correspondence

      There was no correspondence.

14. Other Board Business

Mr. Stack reported that Dr. Bowman has narrowed the field down for the public relations position to three candidates.  A session needs to be scheduled so the Board members may speak with the candidates.  He proposed the session be scheduled one hour before the Public Meeting.  A clarification will be obtained from Mr. Fleck as to the arrangements for the session as it pertains to the Sunshine Law.  Resumes of the candidates distributed to the Board members.  Mr. Stack informed the Board members he has the portfolio of each candidate for review by the Board members.  Dr. Bowman stated the three candidates are Scott Mitchell, Ken Lynch who has experience at the Pennsbury School District and we added Marie Wallace.

15. Board Comments

Mrs. Butville stated she attended a Supervisor Convention.  At the convention, a company was present that publishes information/community newsletters for free. The company pays all the costs including the mailing costs and does the mailing. The newsletter process takes six to nine months.  They never have printed a newsletter for a school district, but they could do one.  Mrs. Butville provided to Dr. Bowman a sample newsletter for review.

Mr. Stack adjourned the meeting at 11:55 p.m.

Respectfully submitted,

Carol A. Calvello
Board Secretary