The Neshaminy Board of School Directors met in public session on September 25, 2001 at the Walter Miller Elementary School.  The following persons were in attendance:

Call to Order - Mr. Stack called the meeting to order at 7:35 p.m.  There was a moment of silence for those lost on September 11.  The Walter Miller School Select Chorus sang “America.”

Announcements - Mr. Stack explained the meeting would be a combined Work Session and Public Meeting.  The Work Session was originally scheduled for September 11.  Due to the tragedy that occurred that day, the September 11 Work Session was canceled.

Dr. Bowman noted the fifth grade mask making project, under the direction of Ms. Brabazon, was on display.  Dr. Bowman thanked Mrs. Chak, Miller School principal, the school’s custodians and staff for hosting the meeting.

Public Comment - There was a two minute time limit per speaker.  Mrs. Pennypacker, Neshaminy Federation of Teachers, restated the Federation’s position, which it has been recommending since the idea of closing an elementary school first surfaced.  The Federation continues to recommend the Board keep the Tawanka School open and close all of the modulars at the elementary level.  By closing the modulars, the Board will be increasing the capacity of each elementary building.  A goal toward which the Board has often stated it was working toward.  Closing the modulars will greatly contribute to the safety of every elementary student in Neshaminy.  The modulars are inherently insecure.  Because there is no running water or toilet facilities in the modulars, each and every time a student leaves to get a drink, to go to the nurse or go to the bathroom he or she is placed in a dangerous situation.  She stated the security, safety problem is not being mentioned  as a result of the tragedy of two weeks ago.  The modulars have always been a security, safety problem.  Perhaps, the tragedy of two weeks ago has heightened our awareness.

Mrs. Pennypacker stated the modular classrooms were a band-aid remedy for over population.  Since the District no longer has the problem of over population, do not close the Tawanka School.  Redistrict the elementary population, get rid of the modulars and keep our precious children safe and secure.

Mrs. Pulcinella, Langhorne, stated in 28 years she has yet to see her taxes remain the same from one year to the next.  Taxes always go up.  She inquired since the last Board Meeting, have any of the Board members or administrators checked into locating the alternative school in the high school facility as a twilight program.  She noted the Pennsbury, Bensalem and several New Jersey school districts provide an alternative school twilight program.  The alternative students attend school a different time than the other students.

Mrs. Pulcinella said she has read smaller class size is a good way to help children stay focused.  She indicated she concurred with Mrs. Pennypacker regarding the elimination of the modular classrooms at the elementary level.  She inquired what type of communication equipment (telephone, etc.) is available in the modular classrooms, and expressed concern about safety issues.  She said she was opposed to closing a school.

Mrs. Pulcinella inquired if any of the Board members or administrators attended the recent meeting held by state legislators regarding public education funding.  It was her understanding two of the funding suggestions discussed at the meeting were a gasoline tax and a lottery. 

Mr. Edelman, Oakford, advised the Board he was opposed to the closure of the Tawanka School.  He pointed out the Tawanka School has always been a neighborhood school.  It just missed being named a Blue Ribbon School this past year.  He stated transferring the Tawanka School students to another school and placing problem teenagers in the Tawanka building is unacceptable.  He explained he is the Vice President of a neighborhood organization and the organization has begun obtaining signatures on a petition opposing using the Tawanka facility to educate problem children from other area school districts.  Mr. Edelman pointed out a large senior citizen population lives in the direct vicinity of the Tawanka School.  He said he does not want to see a reoccurrence of what occurred in Bensalem six years ago when three problem students beat a senior citizen to death in her home.

Mrs. Albright, Oakford, noted she voted for a few of the Board members serving on the School Board, and she had the naïve notion that the Board members would work for the benefit of the community.  She explained she left the August 28 Board Meeting with a sense of complete frustration.  The sound system was horrible and made hearing the Tawanka Home and School Association and community members’ concerns very difficult.  A few of the Board members seemed uninterested as people were trying to convey their concerns.  Only a few, limited issues were addressed by the Board.

Mrs. Albright stated after reviewing the information packet provided at the August 28 Board Meeting, she has a concern for her children’s future in the District as well as concern for her community.  She explained she put her concerns in a letter and shared her thoughts with her community.  Mrs. Albright advised the Board she has obtained over 300 signatures on a petition that will be submitted to the Board.  See attachment I for a copy of the petition form letter and Tawanka Elementary School Home and School Association Executive Board letter to the School Board.  She said many people share her concerns, and she will continue to update the Board at future meetings.  She advised the Board she is in the process of sending copies of the petition to the Board of Supervisors of Lower Southampton Township and Middletown Township.

Mrs. Albright urged the School Board members to explain how the closing of the Tawanka Elementary School is in the best interest of anyone.  She said the children are taught day in and day out about cause and effect.  She urged the Board to analyze the long-term effect before the Board makes the ill-advised decision of closing the Tawanka Elementary School.

Mrs. Lanhan, Feasterville, stated with enrollment projections showing a decline in students in the near future, she agrees there is a need to find ways to cut costs.  She noted Board members have expressed concern about the District’s alternative school students and current alternative school tuition costs.  She pointed out at the August 28 Board Meeting Mrs. Butville had stated the cost of sending Neshaminy’s alternative students to out-of-district alternative schools has more than doubled the $1,188,000 figure included in the information packet available at the August 28 Board Meeting.  She recommended the Board consider educating the students in a twilight program as do other school districts.  The Bensalem, Pennsbury and Bristol Township School Districts all currently operate twilight programs in their secondary schools.  The alternative students report to school for three to four hours in the late afternoon each day at a designated secondary school.  Even after the cost of running the program is offset, such a program would result in the District saving a significant amount of money. 

Mrs. Lanhan stated operating a full-day kindergarten program is a part of the District’s long term plan.  Such a program will result in the need for more classrooms and teachers at the elementary level.  Due to the number of working parents who currently send their children to private schools because of their time constraints, the space needed may potentially be more than double that of the current space.  This will also increase the enrollment in the schools. 

Mrs. Lanhan pointed out some of the qualities that are unique to the Tawanka School, i.e., largest shared collection of elementary books, Intermediate Unit students integrated in all of the school’s activities and support classes for learning disabled students teach independence and self-reliance through problem solving strategies. 

Mrs. Lanhan noted currently 18 modular classrooms are used at the elementary level.  She felt before closing any schools due to under enrollment, the Board should redistrict the existing schools and eliminate the need for the modular classrooms.  She pointed out students attending classes in the modular classrooms have to go out into the elements to classrooms with no running water or bathroom facilities.  The modular classrooms present significant security issues.  She said there are options other than closing a school should the Board choose to consider them.

Mr. Filoon, Oakford, expressed concern if the Tawanka School is closed, his six year old son will be bused to the Hoover School.  He stated his son is not old enough to walk around the block, but the Board is willing to bus him to the Hoover School.  He said if your kids were in Tawanka, would you (Board members) still make the same decision to close Tawanka?  He questioned why the Board has not announced which school the Tawanka students will attend.  He felt if the Board does not know which school the Tawanka students will attend, it has not spent enough time studying the impact of closing a school.  He urged the Board to spend ample time deciding which school is the right school to close.  He felt the Board has taken the easy way out by deciding to close the little Tawanka School.  He said what will closing the Tawanka School solve? 

Mrs. Curran, Langhorne, stated the parents deserve a specific explanation why the Tawanka School has been targeted for closure.  She stated it is her understanding that the Tawanka School was chosen for closure, because it is a small school.  If it was chosen because it is a small school, the fact that it is a small, community school is specifically the reason that the Tawanka School should remain open.  If money is the issue, then why close the smallest school for the smallest savings?  Mrs. Curran said more important than money is the safety and security of our children, especially now after the tragic events of September 11.  Our sense of safety and security has been shaken.  It is now, more than ever, important to keep our children in close proximity at a school where the principal knows each child and parent by name.  Our children deserve a sense of belonging, safety, security and community.  Don’t take our community away.

Mrs. Parssinen, Langhorne, stated the residents keep asking questions and not getting answers.  It is very frustrating.  Are we ever going to get answers?  Do we have an expectation of answers?   She urged the Board to provide the residents with the facts.  She felt the Board is pandering to every little group that is one little piece.  By doing this, nobody  is happy, nobody gets what they want, the Board isn’t saving any money, the Tawanka students will still be sent to another school and the Flowers Mill residents will be back before the Board next year saying their taxes are too high.  She asked the Board members from her area how are they representing her.  What are the constituents saying?  What is the position of the senior citizens from the Tawanka community? 

Mrs. Keating, Langhorne, said she is proud to be a part of the Neshaminy School District and has been impressed with the District from the local school level all the way up to the Cabinet level.  One voice counts in Neshaminy.  She said some have suggested that the Tawanka School was chosen for closure because it is small, but small is most desirable in an educational setting.  If money were no object, we would close all of the larger schools and open smaller schools to replace the larger schools.  The educational experience is more than Reading, Writing and Arithmetic.  It is also partnering with the parents toward the character development of the children.  There is personal interaction between staff and parents at the Tawanka School.  As the number of students are increased in a building, the personal interaction does not happen as effectively. 

Mrs. Keating noted it has been suggested that closing the Tawanka School is the path of least resistance and the Tawanka community is apathetic.  She assured the Board that the Tawanka School community feels just as strongly about their school as anyone else in the District.  She said she has tried to follow Dr. McKee’s, Tawanka School principal, lead to be respectful, appropriate and reasoned in any response.  The path of least resistance is not necessarily the right path.  She asked the Board to consider whether closing the school is the best option, is it the only option and right option from an educational standpoint.  She urged the Board not to close a school.

Mr. Stack stated toward the end of the meeting there will be a second opportunity for public comment.  He explained it is not a practice of the Board to engage in a dialogue with speakers at the meeting.  Some of the questions raised at the last Board Meeting will be addressed by Dr. Bowman in his Superintendent’s Report, which will be presented later in the meeting.  He pointed out there is information on the District’s Web site, which provides answers to some of the questions raised. 

Ms. Drioli announced she will abstain from voting on the Personnel Report, because her husband’s name is listed on the report as a part-time bus driver (see attachment II).

Student Report - Miss Ziemer and Miss McAteer, student representatives, reported the following:

·         In light of the tragic events of September 11, students have undertaken various fund raising activities.  All the proceeds will be donated to the Twin Towers Fund.  The Greater Philadelphia Partnership Club raised $2,500 and the car wash held by the cheerleaders resulted in $1,200.  Six boxes of donated supplies has been sent to the Red Cross.  The football players will be collecting donations during the lunch periods on September 28, and the Student Council and junior class officers will also be collecting donations on September 28.

·         On September 30 the cross country team will hold a race against terrorism fund raiser.  For a $10.00 donation participates will participate in the run/walk and receive a tee shirt.

·         The October 13 homecoming will be dedicated to the relief fund and will have many fund raisers incorporated into it.  The homecoming dance will be held on October 12.

·         The choir performed “God Bless America” at the North Penn game and over the high school’s public address system. 

·         The opening of the school year got off to a great start.

·         Reviewed the status of the sports teams.

·         A lot of effort has been put into the graduation projects by the sophomores and juniors. 

·         Neshaminy High School’s back-to-school night will be October 3.

·         October 16 is PSAT day and juniors will have an opportunity to visit colleges on that day.

·         The Kaleidoscope of Bands will be held at Neshaminy High School on October 27.

·         All students are aware of the new attendance policy and enforcement of the dress code.

·         The students feel in light of recent events, the class trips should be, within reason, delayed and not canceled. A good way to help New York City would be to allow trips to the city to help stimulate tourism. 

Mr. Stack stated the relief efforts undertaken by so many at the high school and throughout the District are appreciated.

Items for Discussion

·         Professional Teacher Assessment Act - PDAP (Professional Development Assistance Program) - October 8 (Secondary), October 15 (Elementary)

Information previously distributed.  Dr. Bowman explained last spring when the Governor signed the budget, an education bill was attached to the budget, which provided additional revenue to school districts for regular education and special education.  Part of the Act included a teacher assessment program.  Every teacher, over a five year period, is required to be tested in Reading and Mathematics, depending upon what they teach.  Each year for the next five years, 20 percent of the school districts will go through the testing program for teachers.  In response to the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania’s request, the Neshaminy School District has agreed to be the beta test site for the state.  This will provide Neshaminy a better opportunity to familiarize itself with the mechanics of what needs to be done.  Since Neshaminy is a beta test site, Neshaminy’s test dates have been established for October 8, secondary teachers, and October 15, elementary teachers.  The test must be taken during the regular school day, between 8:00 a.m. and 4:00 p.m., and on computer through the Internet.  An Act 80 day will be used on October 8 for the secondary students and October 15 for the elementary students.  There will be no school for students on those respective dates.  Since the Department of Education has approved using Act 80 Days for the two teacher test dates, the students will not be required to make up the days. 

·         Future Building Renovations and Technology Improvements

The following information was distributed at the meeting:  BASCO Facility Study for Neshaminy School District Report - Executive Summary, Neshaminy Work Plan chart and General Obligation Bonds charts.  Dr. Bowman advised the Board it needs to begin addressing the District facilities that are in line for renovations and improvements.  He noted the Miller School was recently renovated and given another 30 years of life. 

Mr. Paradise explained BASCO conducted a preliminary study in April of 2000 regarding the cost of renovating Neshaminy High School and the remaining two middle schools, Neshaminy Middle School and Poquessing Middle School.  The report includes two concepts with estimated costs for each building.  Neshaminy High School was built and added onto eight times during the course of its life.  The high school is an old building and in dire need of help.  Depending on what work will be done, the estimated cost is $34,000,000 to $45,000,000.   The estimated renovation cost for the Poquessing Middle School is $10,000,000 to $13,000,000 and Neshaminy Middle School’s estimated cost is $19,000,000 to $21,000,000.  For the three facilities, the total estimated cost ranges from $63,000,000 to $80,000,000. 

Mr. Paradise advised the Board in addition to the three facilities, there are renovation needs at the District’s other buildings.  The facilities issues are often the first to find the red pen during the budget process.  It is estimated in the remaining buildings that have not been renovated,  $10,000,000 worth of minor renovations are needed over the next six years.  Minor renovations include HVAC equipment, boilers, kitchens and roof work.  He noted unfortunately, the District no longer has the funds of the School Authority to help fund the renovation issues.  Renovations are a mounting financial burden.  A plan needs to be developed  to appropriately take care of the District’s assets (facilities).  The facilities are definitely in need of attention. 

Mr. Paradise explained the first thing the Board needs to do is decide if these are issues that it wants to undertake.  If it is the Board’s decision to undertake these issues, the Board needs to direct the administration to begin discussions with architects, decide upon an appropriate architect and begin the process of developing a legal contract with the architect.  Developing a legal contract with an architect takes several months.  Other issues to be discussed are a construction manager (outside manager or District act as construction manager) and which part of the $80,000,000 project does the Board wish to tackle.  After these decisions are made, the process of designing, bidding and construction would begin.  Concurrent with this, the process of borrowing funds to finance the projects would take place.  The borrowing process can occur almost at any time.  It is best to do it whenever it is financially advantageous to do so.  Currently, rates are very low.  However, the District does not want to borrow money too soon.  Any construction most likely could not begin for at least two years.  An IRS regulation requires that the District spend 85 percent of money borrowed within three years. 

Mr. Paradise advised the Board the development of a legal contract with an architect should be done prior to the Board going through the process of developing specific concepts.  Developing specific concepts and answering the Board’s questions will require the assistance of an architect.  If a contract is in place, the time it takes the architect to assist with specific concepts and answer questions will be a part of the contract.  If a contract is not in place, it will be time and materials for an architect to provide the information, which can become very expensive.  He recommended a legal contract be developed with the architect first.  The development of a legal contract agreeable to all parties will take several months.  BASCO and other architects that have contacted the District would be considered. 

In response to a question raised by Mr. Schoenstadt,  Mr. Paradise explained  the cost of the architect is based on a percentage of the total construction cost.  The cost of  the options, alternatives and proposals would be a part of the architect’s fee and could be included in the contract.  If the current year’s budget does not include funds to pay an architect, the contract could state the District does not have to pay any fee until the beginning of July, pay no fee until the bond issue is floated, etc.  All the specifics could be included as a part of the contract, which is why the contract is important initially. 

Mr. Stack inquired if priorities were assigned to the secondary schools facilities, what would they be?  Dr. Bowman stated Neshaminy High School needs to continue to be addressed.  There have been major renovations made to portions of the facility, i.e., auditorium, cafeteria, “F” wing, guidance suite and two instructional wings.  However, a core of the high school is in need of renovation, particularly the science rooms.  The science rooms are not up to the standards they should be to deliver the Science Program that the Neshaminy students should have in the 21^st century.  The mathematics rooms also should be renovated.  The Poquessing Middle School needs to be addressed.  General fund money has been used at the Poquessing School to tackle some of the projects.  It is in need of additional work, particular infrastructure.  The issue of roofs and boilers across the District also need to be considered. 

In response to Mr. Stack’s question about the amount of funds needed for roofs and boilers across the District, Mr. Paradise distributed and reviewed the Neshaminy Work Plan chart for the years 2002-2003 through 2007-2008.  The Board needs to agree to regularly appropriate the amounts listed for the respective fiscal years out of the general fund budget or borrow monies to do the work.  Often an attempt is made to appropriate the funds, but it is reduced in the spring during the budget review process.  The funds need to either be kept in the budget so the facilities can be appropriately taken care of  or funds borrowed to do the work.  There is 1.5 million square feet of roof space in the District and major roof work is being done almost every single year.  Funds totaling $9,200,000 are needed for facility issues that must be addressed, i.e., boilers, roofs, doors, etc.  The other work column on the chart pertains to more extensive work such as replacing tile and aesthetic type renovations.  These are more discretionary items that would be appropriate to bring a facility up to the level of a renovated school, but are not mandatory.

Mr. Paradise explained none of the items listed on the Neshaminy Work Plan chart qualify for reimbursement from the state.  The District can only apply for reimbursement on a specific building once every 20 years.  It makes sense to do as much as the District can possibly afford in one building and make it part of the PlanCon and reimbursement process.  It does not make sense to make a school roof project part of the PlanCon process, because it is the first and only chance the District will have to apply for any reimbursement for twenty years. 

Ms. Drioli noted the Miller School was previously renovated except for the kitchen.  If the kitchen were renovated, it would not be eligible for reimbursement.  She felt since every other school in the District needs something more than a kitchen, the Miller School’s kitchen renovation should be delayed until the schools with greater renovation needs have been renovated.  It would be unfair to renovate the Miller School’s kitchen while other schools need kitchen renovations and many other renovations.  Mr. Paradise noted the Miller School kitchen renovation is scheduled for year three of the schedule, 2004-2005

Mr. Stack stated the administration needs to have an understanding of the projects that the Board is willing to undertake.  He said $100,000,000 would allow the District to accomplish a lot of the renovations, possibly not all of them.  What will a $30,000,000, 50,000,000 or $100,000,000 bond amount to in cost to the District? 

Mr. Paradise briefly reviewed the General Obligation Bonds charts, which are estimates of the cost of a $30,000,000, $50,000,000 and $60,000,000 bond issue.  He explained a $30,000,000 bond issue would result in the District having to pay a yearly debt service payment of $2,300,000.  This would be new money the first year in additional to any budget growth for salaries, benefits, etc.  The debt service for a $50,000,000 bond issue would require a $3,800,000 yearly payment.  A $60,000,000 bond issue would require a yearly debt service payment of $4,600,000.  These are quick estimates on level debt service.  The debt service is based on a 20 year schedule as opposed to a longer schedule.  The debt could be structured differently.  For example, a $60,000,000 bond issue could be structured so the debt service the first year would only be $1,500,000, $3,500,000 the second year and $4,600,000 the third year.  This would result in the District paying additional interest. As the term is increased, the interest cost gets dramatically higher. Debt service is typically 20 years. The other consideration is that the District can apply for state reimbursement every 20 years. 

Ms. Drioli inquired if some of the debt will be offset by the state reimbursement funds.  Mr. Paradise stated the reimbursement would offset the debt service by approximately 25 percent.  The reimbursement funds would be received annually. 

Mr. Stack noted with a level debt service, the affect of the bond issues would be as follows:

                      Bond Amount                Mills Equivalent

                      $30,000,000                                    12 mills

                      $50,000,000                                    18 mills

                      $60,000,000                                    24 mills

Mr. Stack pointed out this would be a one time increase and the rate would continue over the life of the bond.  This would be in addition to any other regular millage increase for capital fund expenditures.

Mr. Schoenstadt stated if the debt service is ballooned from the middle of the term onward, the District would be dealing with inflation dollars.  The bond would be calculated at today’s rate, but paid with dollars that are inflated.  He pointed out it would burden future Boards with a higher repayment than would be necessary under a level debt service structure.  He questioned if it was worthwhile for the current Board to burden a future Board to such a significant level rather than having every Board deal with the same amount of debt service every year.  Mr. Schoenstadt indicated he preferred the level debt service structure. 

Ms. Drioli stated the renovation expense is not an expense that the Board can ignore.  Mr. Stack inquired if within the existing debt service, there is an opportunity to refinance or combine debt.  Mr. Paradise stated the District would not be able to refinance or combine debt.  The District has already availed itself of some wonderful opportunities to refinance in the past.  The District is locked in and cannot do anything with its debt for a number of years.  The refinancing resulted in the District experiencing a savings.  The next step would be to take the existing debt service and merge the proposals.  Instead of grading the debt, the debt service can be more loaded at the end if another bond issue will be paid off in the future.  This would keep the debt service payment level. 

Mr. Stack stated he agreed with the administration that Neshaminy High School and the Poquessing Middle School need to be further renovated.  He said he does not concur with the latest BASCO Report options provided.  He referred to page 3-1 and noted it provides four concepts for Neshaminy High School.  He questioned whether there needs to be an addition to the high school to address the science room issue.  He said he recognizes swing space would be needed to allow for the renovations. 

Dr. Bowman stated the administration needs to know the Board’s position on these issues so it can engage an architect as soon as possible to address specifically how this type of option would be addressed.  He requested the Board provide the administration with direction in reference to entering a dialogue with architects.  The architect could be asked what the best way would be to deal with the science room issue without building new additional classrooms and how to deal with the swing space issue.  The most critical issue at the high school will be swing space.  An architect is needed to provide an analysis of the issue, cost factors and options. 

Mr. Schoenstadt noted the estimated renovation cost for the high school is $45,000,000 and the cost of new construction would not be much more than $45,000,000.  Would an architect provide new construction as an option?  Dr. Bowman stated if that is one of the options the Board would want analyzed, the architect would analyze it.  The architect could provide the value for the dollar for new construction, renovations or a combination of the two.  The architect would need to know the parameters established by the Board. 

Ms. Drioli stated one of the concerns is that Neshaminy is already a built-out District and has no financial growth.  She felt consideration should be given to making the high school renovations/construction as high tech and dynamically appealing to the community as possible.  Once the high school renovation/construction is completed, the Board will not be revisiting the issue again for quite some time.  She felt the Board should consider the option of rebuilding the high school.  After the renovations/construction are completed, the high school needs to be the catalysts that will take the District through its non-growth  period and allow Neshaminy to continue to be a high quality District. 

Mr. Stack stated much has already been invested in Neshaminy High School (i.e., auditorium, cafeteria, library, “F” wing).  The Board has previously discussed potentially any new construction being built in the front of the existing building.  He said with new construction, how would the renovated pieces of the facility located in the rear of the building be tied in with the new construction?  He said if the answer is that it would not be possible, then it may not be an option.  He felt the Board would not want to throw away what investments it has already made. 

Mrs. Butville recommended the architect review all possible options, including new construction.  Mr. Stack said he would not be interested in a rather elaborate report on new facility construction when the Board perhaps is not going to go down that road.  However, it should be one of the options considered. 

Mr. Paradise suggested once an architect is selected, the architect be invited to attend a Work Session and address the Board’s specific questions.  Mr. Paradise stated when considering the various options, the long term operational costs of continuing the existing structure versus a new structure needs to be considered.  Due to the way it was constructed, Neshaminy High School is a very expensive building to operate.  An architect would need to spend time and energy examining the facility operational cost issue.  He said perhaps the renovated area could be retained (i.e., auditorium, etc.) and an instructional center built in the front of the existing building. 

Mr. Stack recommended the location of the subject areas and how each of the grade levels can access those subject areas be reviewed.  Dr. Bowman explained with new high school construction, each grade is confined to one section.  Each section is basically a house.  These are the kinds of things the architect would discuss with the Board and administration so the architect has a sense of the educational philosophy for the future.  The architect would provide various options.  It is not only a matter of renovating, but also delivering the educational program. 

Dr. Bowman asked the Board to allow Mr. Paradise to continue the process of dialoguing with the architectural firms in reference to developing a contract.  The process cannot proceed much further until an architect is engaged.

Ms. Drioli inquired how many school districts currently have houses of grades.  She questioned whether having houses of grades is the best option.  She noted not all students work on the same level in the various grades.  Some students are more accelerated in some subject areas.  Dr. Bowman replied some school districts have subject wings (i.e., science wing, mathematics wing, etc.) or some may have core subject areas and the grades share the special labs.  The architect will ask various questions and develop a plan based upon the District’s philosophy.  Ms. Drioli said the Board needs to develop an educational philosophy.  Dr. Frank felt the educational philosophy should be teacher driven. 

Mr. Stack stated in addition to renovations, the District needs to review the issue of technology improvements.  Except for borrowing $1,000,000 eight years ago to install elementary labs, the District has not borrowed funds for technology costs.  Work needs to be done in this area.  The elementary school program is eight to nine years old, and it is now time to reconsider the program.  Strong consideration needs to be given to Internet access at the classroom level within all grades.  A financial investment will be necessary to support these kinds of initiatives.  He noted area school districts have floated millions of dollars in bonds toward their technology programs.  He felt while discussing funding, the Board would be remiss in not considering other major investments in areas such as technology.

Mr. Schoenstadt indicated he was not in favor of financing technology through a bond issue.  He stated technology becomes obsolete within two to three years of purchase.  Therefore, the District should not take twenty years to pay for it. He felt funds for technology should be appropriately budgeted on an annual basis.  Another alternative would be corporate sponsorships and grants.  The school districts that have funded technology with 15 to 20 bonds have ended up with obsolete equipment. 

Mr. Paradise indicated he concurred with Mr. Schoenstadt’s comments.  He explained eight to nine years ago a bank note, which was repaid over four years, was used to fund the elementary school labs.  He recommended similar financing be obtained for technology improvements. 

Mr. Stack pointed out a yearly expense is the replenishment of buses.  A consideration would be a similar approach for technology.  Mr. Stack said he is looking for the Finance Committee to work closely with Mr. Paradise to determine a better way to handle major capital expenditures, long term bonds, short term bonds, general funds, etc.

Mr. Eccles stated the Finance and Building Utilization Committees need to know whether the Board is serious about renovations.  He recommended if the Board is serious about renovations, the Board provide Mr. Paradise with the authorization to engage an architect.  The architect will provide different plans and options, which the committee can review and use to formulate a recommendation for presentation to the Board.  Mr. Stack stated he supported Mr. Eccles’ recommendation.

Dr. Bowman recommended in regard to technology, the Board review where the District has been, how far the District has come along and where the District wants to go with it.  He suggested a five year technology plan be developed, an agreement be reached on the plan, and then a determination be made as to how it will be financed.  The question of how does technology impact upon teaching and learning needs to be examined.  Mr. Marotto advised the Board the Technology and Educational Development Committee are working together on the technology issue. 

There was Board consensus to authorize Mr. Paradise to negotiate a contract with an architect and for a combined Finance and Building Utilization Committee to continue discussing renovations and funding.  The joint committee will explore some of the options presented by the architect.  Options will be presented to the full Board for further review.  Mr. Stack stated the Technology Committee will convene in the next month to take up the question of  a future technology plan for the District. 

·         Summit Trace Open Space Parcels Tax Forgiveness

Information previously distributed.  Mr. Paradise explained there are ten undedicated parcels that are actually open space, which are interspersed between the Summit Trace townhouses.  Since the builder, Gigliotti, went bankrupt, the township has been taking care of the properties.  Over the years, various taxing authorities have been issuing tax bills on the properties, and the municipality has approached the District about forgiving the taxes on the properties. Since the issue involves deed restrictions and legal issues, Mr. Paradise recommended Mr. Fleck be directed to contact the municipality to review the legal concerns of the issue. 

Mrs. Butville advised the Board she spoke to Mr. Burke, Township Manager of Middletown Township, about the properties.  She explained some of the properties are behind houses and open park/community like areas.  Three of the properties could possibly be sold at some point.  The other properties could not be sold because they are not accessible. 

Mr. Fleck explained the builder, Gigliotti, is in bankruptcy.  If the taxes are not paid after a year, the properties go on a lien list.  When a builder is in bankruptcy, the liens cannot be acted upon.  When the builder went to the township for land development approval, the builder may have marked certain areas as open space or there may be deed restrictions that make the properties worthless.  These are issues that have to be reviewed. 

Mrs. Butville stated if the builder had dedicated the properties to the township, the District would not have received tax revenue from the properties.  She noted the township has been maintaining the properties the last ten years.  She suggested the date the properties were first taxed and the date the township started maintaining the properties be determined.  The District collect the tax from the time it was actually to be taxed until the township started maintaining the properties.  The time that the township has been maintaining the property be considered as non-taxable.  She suggested the District forgo this portion of the tax, because it would not have collected taxes on the properties during that time period anyway. 

There was Board consensus for Mr. Fleck to conduct a legal review of the Summit Trace open space parcels tax forgiveness issue.

·         Moratorium on School Trips

Dr. Bowman advised the Board some schools trips which require air transportation and others do not.  He noted information was distributed to the Board members for an overnight trip for the Instrumental Music Program to Anaheim, California, which requires air travel.  Dr. Bowman recommended in light of the September 11 terrorist attacks, at this time the Board not allow any school trips that require air travel.  He advised the Board that he canceled the Sandburg Middle School student trip to Costa Rico.   He noted there are class bus trips planned for Virginia and other trips planned for New York and Washington, D.C.  He stated he has no reservations about putting a moratorium on school trips.  He felt the District should not be placing students in any airplanes.  At this time, trips that involve air travel could be very stressful for students and parents. 

Ms. Drioli suggested rather than making an emotional decision now, the Board delay making trip decisions.  Dr. Bowman explained the trips are planned and reservations are made in advance.  The trip to California involves deposits and fund raising needs to take place.  Therefore, a decision on the trip to California needs to be made now.  He recommended for the time being, there be no trips involving air travel.

Mrs. Bostwick inquired if there are any local events that will fulfill the competitive needs and replace the need to travel so far for a competition.  Dr. Bowman felt there will be the opportunity to find some reasonable opportunities for students to engage in the adjudication process in the area of music within reasonable busing distance from the District. 

Mr. Mecleary inquired what event or threshold of safety is the administration looking for to end the moratorium.  Dr. Bowman stated he did not know.  He felt the Board and administration need to error on the side of safety.  It will take a huge amount of time to adjust to what has happened.  He noted some school districts are canceling all trips, including New York and Washington D.C.  He advised the Board the History Club wants to take a trip to New York and he is not sure that the trip should be approved.  He explained the day trips are another issue and he has the prerogative to approve those trips.  He indicated he would be interested in the Board’s input on the day trips.

Mr. Eccles indicated he concurred with Dr. Bowman.  He felt the students should not be traveling at this point in time.  When the students are at school, everyone knows where they are at and they are safe.  Mr. Dengler indicated he also concurred with Dr. Bowman.  He noted a number of years ago the instrumental and vocal groups were traveling to Europe.  When terrorist incidents started occurring in Europe, the Board stopped all trips to Europe.  He said now that a terrorist attack  has happened in the United States, we should lay low and keep our people home. 

Mr. Schoenstadt said his first reaction was that the school trips should not be canceled and we should not let the terrorists win.  However, you have to balance it with the safety concerns of the students.  Even if the parents are willing to allow their children to travel, the Board has an obligation to review the overall picture.  Mr. Schoenstadt concurred with Dr. Bowman’s recommendation. 

Mr. Mecleary said he also concurs with the recommendation except he would want to consistently revisit the issue.  He suggested the issue be  reviewed monthly.  Ms. Drioli indicated she would also like to review the trip issue on an ongoing basis.  She said I’m not sure you are safe in Philadelphia.

Mr. Stack said the country needs to find some way to come back to some normalcy.  A trip moratorium does not endorse normalcy.  The Board and administration should not be jeopardizing children.  Ultimately it is the parents’ decision as to whether their children drive a car, go on a trip, etc.  In the short term, air travel needs to be stabilized and the American people need to see that.  He said he would not suggest children be used as a testing ground for that.  He felt it would be an injustice to not allow trips to New York City.  New York City, Philadelphia and Washington D.C. have a lot to offer and our children need to see this.  The children need to understand this is history and they can be a part of it.  To prevent them the opportunity to participate in that, is wrong.  He indicated he concurred with Mr. Mecleary that the trip issue should be reviewed on a month-to-month basis.  Mr. Stack recommended since a decision on the trip to California must be made this month, the trip not be approved.  If the trip can be reconsidered at the end of year, it should be brought back to the Board for consideration. 

Mrs. Butville stated since the trip to California depends upon fund raising and possible alternate adjudication trips would require some fund raising, could the students start fund raising now just in general for a trip with the exact trip to be determined later in the year.  Dr. Bowman said fund raising requires certain goals (i.e., how much money is needed and a specific destination).  Fund raising with a purpose is difficult today.  Fund raising without a purpose would be too difficult.  Dr. Bowman inquired about the Board members’ position on bus trips to locations such as Hershey, Pennsylvania, Busch Gardens, Virginia, etc. 

Ms. Drioli indicated she was in favor of stopping air travel this month and revisiting the trip issue next month.  She felt the travel/trip decisions should ultimately be made by the parents, because every parent in the District has a different way of approaching the situation.  Dr. Frank indicated she agreed with the travel/trip limits for now.  She suggested obtaining student and teacher input on future trips.

Mr. Eccles inquired what criteria will be used in regard to day trip requests.  Will it be a random decision?  Dr. Bowman stated he would review how many students are going on the trip, the number of chaperones, destination and mode of transportation.  He said if he was put on the spot tonight, he would say no trips for a period of time, and the trip issue will be reassessed every month.  The primary obligation is teaching and learning in the schools and classrooms.  The trips are important and worthwhile.  If the District had to do without them for a year, everyone would get by very nicely and possibly compensate by doing some unique things in the schools. 

Mrs. Butville pointed out the Board had previously approved some overnight trips, such as wresting team tournaments.  Will these trips be allowed?  Dr. Bowman stated these are all individual decisions that will need to be made.  A small team trip to Bethlehem is different than a class trip.  The tournament trips are usually on a Friday or Saturday night.  Those decisions will need to be made accordingly on an individual basis.  Mrs. Bostwick pointed out the issue is the safety of the students.  Mr. Mecleary suggested rail travel be explored as a viable alternative for trips. 

The Board indicated they were in favor of Dr. Bowman making decisions on the day trips on a case-by-case basis and a moratorium on air travel.  Overnight trips are approved by the Board.  The trip issue will be reviewed on a month-to-month basis.

Items for Approval

·         Overnight Trip - Neshaminy Hgh School Instrumental Music Trip - Anaheim, California, April 11-16, 2002

Trip canceled.  See moratorium of school trips discussion on pages B-11 and B-12 of the minutes. 

·         Formal Act 48 Plan

Dr. Boccuti advised the Board the District had received a one year extension for submission of its Act 48 formal plan.  At the Public Meeting portion of the September 25 Board Meeting the Act 48 Professional Education Plan will be presented for Board approval.  The School District is required to submit its Strategic Plan, Act 48 Professional Education Plan and New Teacher Induction Plan to the Pennsylvania Department of Education by September 30, 2001. 

·         Establishment of Money Market Account

Mr. Paradise advised the Board one of the District’s investments is placed with Mellon Bank.  One of the requirements of Mellon Bank was to open a pass through account.  The School Code requires that the School Board approve any account opened by the School District.  It is a matter of doing the best it can to get the best interest rate available.  Establishment of the money market account will be a motion at the Public Meeting portion of the Board Meeting.

·         National Red Ribbon Week

Dr. Bowman advised the Board during the Public Meeting portion of the Board Meeting, a motion will be presented for approval proclaiming October 22 to 26 Red Ribbon Week.  Instead of passing out red ribbons, people will be asked to wear red on October 24.  The District has participated in the program for many years.

·         Ratification of NESPA Contract Agreement

Information distributed prior to the meeting.  Dr. Bowman advised the Board a motion will be presented at the Public Meeting portion of the Board Meeting to ratify the contract between the Neshaminy Board of School Directors and the Neshaminy Education Support Personnel Association.  Mr. Mecleary stated the contract went very smoothly and the negotiations went very well. 

·         Approval of Bids and Budget Transfers

        There were no bids or budget transfers to be presented for review.

Items for Information

There were no items for information reviewed.

Superintendent’s Report

·         Teacher of the Year Ceremony

Dr. Bowman announced a Neshaminy teacher, Frank Collins, is one of the ten finalists for Pennsylvania Teacher of the Year.  Mr. Collins is a tremendously respected and outstanding Science teacher.  Mr. Collins, his family, the Superintendent and one Board member are invited to attend the October 30 ceremony.  The ceremony will begin at 11:00 a.m. and will be followed by a luncheon.  Dr. Frank will be representing the Board at the October 30 ceremony. 

·         School Opening

 The opening of school was relatively smooth.  In the past ten years, it was one of the smoothest openings in reference to scheduling, facilities in excellent condition, transportation schedule and food services operating efficiently. 

·         September 11Tragedy

Dr. Bowman commended the staff at all levels for the way they have dealt with the September 11 tragedy.  They had the best interest of students in mind.  That day all staff members tried to keep the students in a regular routine.  The District’s Crisis Response Team was ready to go out and provide counseling and related services as needed.  The Crisis Response Team is still available. 

·         Alternative School

Mr. Wilson presented a response to some of the questions raised at the last Board Meeting regarding the alternative school.  Mr. Wilson explained the alternative school to be located at the Tawanka School will probably open the first year with 52 to 60 Neshaminy students.  The staff will include six full-time teachers, one full-time administrator, one full-time counselor and a drug and alcohol counselor.  Many of the students are already attending alternative schools in the community.  The students are not criminals or hoodlums.  They are students who just do not learn as well in the normal 2,300 student high school setting.  Some of the students have made a stupid mistake (i.e., brought a beer to school) and were caught.  When a student is caught bringing beer to school, the student is sent to an alternative school.  Some of the students just do not want to be at the high school for seven periods a day.  Currently, the District is running a one classroom alternative program at TODAY, Inc. with one of Neshaminy’s high school teachers.  It is a model alternative school site.  Last year approximately 18 students attended the program and all of the students returned to their respective buildings.  They all returned very successfully. 

Mr. Wilson explained there would be no cost to retrofit the Tawanka School to accommodate the alternative school students.  Furniture would need to be placed in the classrooms.  If the Tawanka School is chosen as the school to close and the Board decides to open an alternative school, there will be no out-of-district students attending the school at this point.  He pointed out currently Neshaminy has a lot of arrangements with other school districts.  Currently, Neshaminy takes other school districts’ special education students.  Neshaminy would keep control of the alternative school.  The staff would include a drug and alcohol counselor.  He noted the District already has a drug and alcohol counselor.  These people already exist as ancillary services for some of the Neshaminy students.  The District works through the Bucks County Council.  It is nothing new.  The only thing new would be the District committing a full-time person to serve the 52 to 60 alternative school students. 

Mr. Wilson explained the program is being developed as a team concept.  The staff, social workers and psychologists are involved in the program.  It is unanimously supported in the District that the School District educate its own alternative school students rather than sending them out to other alternative schools.  Four of the alternative schools that the students are attending are located in the Neshaminy community.  He pointed out the District has to educate all children in public school, and it will do it to the best of its ability. 

Mr. Wilson encouraged anyone who has questions about the alternative school program to call his office. 

·         Modular Classrooms and Redistricting

Dr. Bowman explained the District has been using modular classrooms for many years.  When the modulars were purchased, the District purchased quality modular classrooms.  It knew they would be in use for a long period of time.  Out of the 18 modulars at the elementary level, five are used for regular classroom instruction, one modular classroom is used by a specialist and three are used for academically enriched programs.  The issue of the modular classrooms not having water, etc. has been dealt with by making provisions for students to go into the regular classrooms.  All the fire, safety and other regulations have been met.  The District has a safety plan in place, and the administration has never felt the students in modular classrooms are jeopardized or compromised in any way.

 Dr. Bowman encouraged community members to realize over a period of time there will be over 1,000 fewer elementary students in the District.  A decision had to be made on financing education.  He said if he had to make a decision to cut programs or close a school and provide the same educational program across the School District for all children that was in place before the school was closed, he would rather preserve quality programs for the students.  As an example, he cited the Board provided for the administration’s recommendation of full-time guidance counselors in every elementary school at a substantial additional cost.  The program makes a difference with students.  He said he would not want to compromise that program.  When it comes down to the final District budget, budget reductions come from people, programs and services, because 80 percent of the budget is people and programs.  There is very little flexibility within the budget. 

Dr. Bowman explained even with the closing of a school, the class size limits would be maintained.  The Board has an agreement with the certified bargaining group that class size will be reduced over the next five years.  The space will be available to provide for the smaller classes, because there will be a 1,000 student elementary enrollment decrease over a period of time.  The closing of a school is a very emotional and economic issue. 

Dr. Bowman pointed out the decision to close a school was not just decided.  There was a study group over a year ago that included parent representatives and developed options.  The Board then reviewed the options, discussed the issue extensively and held numerous meetings. There is information available on the issue on the District’s Web site. 

Dr. Bowman said the Neshaminy School District is tremendously respected and he would like to preserve the educational programs for the children of the District.  The Neshaminy School District is only 26 square miles.  Everyone has become very used to not having to travel very far to a school.  There are other school districts that have much more distance to travel to a given building.  It is an economic issue.  The educational program will remain the same no matter which District school the students attend.  The District has quality teachers and will provide the same program and services throughout the District.  A school that is going to be used when it is closed is much better than a school remaining empty.  The Board does not want to close a school and have an empty building sitting in the community.  The smart thing to do is have a school in that facility.  A school that will be a Neshaminy school.  The program will not be subcontracted.  The school will be under the District’s supervision, direction and administrative team.  It will not be a stepchild to anyone.  It will be a quality school. 

Dr. Bowman explained three separate studies, Pennsylvania Department of Education, Pennsylvania Economy League and District, have been conducted and all three pieces of data concluded the same thing, which is a drastic reduction in elementary enrollment and surplus of facilities.  If finances were not an issue, this probably would not be an issue.  However, that is not the case.  The percentage of state aid to Neshaminy has decreased over the years, and the local taxpayer is providing for a greater percentage of those costs.  Other school districts across the state have gone through similar situations.  Some of the school districts have closed schools and sold schools.  He guaranteed the Board and community that the Neshaminy children will continue to be provided a first class, quality education no matter which elementary school they attend.  All the elementary schools have the same curriculum, programs, materials and quality teachers. 

Dr. Bowman explained the Tawanka School was selected for closure, because it is the smallest program capacity school in the District.  The closing of the school will result in approximately a $900,000 savings.  By opening an alternative school, long term the District will save more money.  He said it is not a happy thing to do, but it’s something we are fiscally faced with if the District wants to continue providing quality programs for students.  The Board has consistently demonstrated it puts kids first when it comes to programs.  He noted most school districts do not have reading specialists in the elementary schools.  Neshaminy does, because it knows it makes a difference.  It is those extra things that are provided that makes Neshaminy different and a quality school district and community. 

Dr. Bowman explained when the studies were conducted, modular classrooms were included as a capacity.  He pointed out enrollment will be balanced among all elementary schools.  A standard capacity will be determined, attendance boundaries adjusted and all buildings will be loaded accordingly.  Attendance boundaries will be changed district wide which means other elementary students, not just those at Tawanka, would change schools.  The key to establishing attendance boundaries is to establish boundaries that will last for five to seven years.  The last time attendance boundaries were changed was in 1986 when the Hoover School was opened.

Dr. Bowman explained where the Tawanka students will be attending school has not been announced, because the issue is not where the students will be attending school so much as closing a building.  The issue is closing a building.  Throughout the District, attendance boundaries that are balanced will be determined.  The Hoover School will need to take more students on.  This means students will be bused from different areas of the District to the Hoover School.  Tawanka students attending the Hoover School is a possibility.  When  determining the attendance boundaries, the goal is to minimize travel time and balance the schools.  Once the school closure decision is made, the administration will be ready to work on determining the attendance boundaries. 

Mr. Stack stated six modular classrooms are currently being used for regular, full-time classroom instruction.  Four of these classrooms are located at the Pearl Buck Elementary School.  He asked the administration to review, as an option, not using the six modulars for regular classroom instruction.  If the six modular classrooms were no longer used for regular classrooms, there would be some significant redistricting that would affect the students attending the Pearl Buck Elementary School.  He pointed out even if use of these modular classrooms is not eliminated, all elementary schools will be affected by the redistricting.  This is an opportunity to review the use of modular classrooms and determine how the Board wishes to deploy them.

Committee Reports

·         Educational Development Committee

        Mr. Mecleary reported the committee is scheduled to meet the first week of November.

·         Education Foundation Committee

Mr. Dengler reported the Education Foundation is working towards the dedication of the Endowment Wall, which will take place at 7:00 p.m. on October 23, 2001.  A brochure has been sent to Board members outlining how to endow a plaque.  Approximately a dozen plaques have already been ordered. 

·         Finance Committee

Finance Committee information discussed earlier in the meeting under Items for Discussion, Future Building Renovations and Technology Improvements.  Mr. Eccles reported the committee had discussed combining the Finance Committee and Building Utilization Committee into one committee.  This would expedite the process when reviewing building renovations and bond issues. 

·         Intermediate Unit Board

Ms. Drioli reported the Intermediate Unit is reviewing virtual reality technology.

·         Board Policies Committee

Mrs. Butville reported the committee discussed the use of drug-sniffing dogs in the schools and including it in a policy.  The committee is reviewing whether home schooled students should be allowed to participate in after-school activities.  Mr. Mecleary requested the committee tread lightly on the drug-sniffing dogs in the schools issue.  Mrs. Butville stated the drug-sniffing dogs would not be in contact with the students.  A policy is needed as to how the drug-sniffing dogs will be utilized in the schools.

Mrs. Butville referred to the Select Committee on Public Education Funding House Resolution 42 Meeting and explained she spoke at the meeting.  The Resolution states Pennsylvania is one of the most inequitable among the 50 states, because of the state’s reliance on local property taxes.  Many issues were discussed at the meeting.  The issue of a gas tax was discussed and is not a valid option.  There was a discussion about a lottery to fund education.  Whatever is done, it must be done across the entire state.  Eastern Pennsylvania is very different from central Pennsylvania.  Nine principles are being reviewed.  It appears the legislators are leaning towards a personal income tax.  Mrs. Butville said she advised the legislators of the personal income tax hardship in this area due to the Sterling Act.  She noted the state is suppose to provide 40 percent of the funding to the District, and Neshaminy receives slightly less than 20 percent. 

Mrs. Butville reported she recently attended the Business Education Regional Summit.  The summit is an attempt to get business leaders connected with educational facilities to determine what the business world needs as far as workers.  Discussions resulted in the following finding

·         The emphasis needs to change.  Instead of pushing students to go to college, the emphasis should be what are the students going to do after high school.  There is a demand for people in the various trades.

·         All students need to have a co-op experience.

·         Teachers need a co-op experience.  During the summer months, every teacher should spend a few weeks in the business world to become familiar with the business world.  This will allow them to better educate their students. 

·         Technical School Board

Mr. Dengler reported the Technical High School had a very good opening.  Tonight, September 25, is back-to-school night.  The Technical School Board has approved a contract with Service Master as the maintenance manager of the school.  Service Master is a professional management company.  The company will manage the interior and exterior maintenance of the school using school employees.

·         Technology Committee

Mr. Stack reported the committee will meet in October on a date to be established. 

·         Board Information Committee

Mrs. Butville reported in September the second student forum was held on WBCB radio (1490 AM).  The first student forum was held in the spring. One will be broadcast each month.  The first forum will be shown on the Neshaminy channel.  The next radio program is scheduled for October 12, noon to 1:00 p.m. 

Mr. Eccles stated since a lot of times at the Board Meetings the Board cannot take the time to answer everyone’s questions, the Board has established a radio program (WBCB, “Speak Your Piece”) that allows residents to call in their questions and comments.  A staff of administrators and Board members participate in the program.  He encouraged the residents to call in their questions on October 12 between noon and 1:00 p.m.  Mrs. Butville stated if residents are not able to call in their questions on October 12, they can submit their questions through the District’s Web site. 

Mr. Stack inquired what is the overall theme for the October 12 radio program, “Speak Your Piece” (1490 AM). Ms. Drioli suggested one of the themes be parents’ feelings about school trips and their children traveling. Mr. Stack said if there is a lack of telephone calls to the program, what will the content of the program be to fill in the time? 

Dr. Frank felt at that time of day (noon to 1:00 p.m.) the people who should be calling the program are not listening to “Speak Your Piece” and calling the program.  Mr. Dengler noted WBCB is very difficult to get in Feasterville. 

Ms. Drioli stated each one of the District’s schools has a special program or is involved in a special project.  Some of the special programs and projects at the schools could be highlighted on “Speak Your Piece.”  Mr. Stack urged the Board members to work with Dr. Costanzo to develop program ideas. 

Dr. Bowman advised the Board legislators will be holding a hearing in the Neshaminy School District on October 11.  Senator Tomlinson will be present at the hearing, and the hearing topic will be funding of schools.  The “Speak Your Piece” program will be broadcast on Friday, October 12.  A good topic for the October 12 program might be how the District finances its budget and the issues that must be addressed. 

In response to residents’ questions about how to call the program, Mr. Stack stated the “Speak Your Piece” telephone number will be advertised on the District’s Web site.

Mrs. Butville stated with the tragedy that happened in New York and Washington, D.C., a program is being started which involves Neshaminy students writing to Neshaminy graduates currently serving in the military.  She encouraged residents to submit the  names and addresses of Neshaminy graduates currently serving in any branch of military service.  The names and addresses can be submitted through the District’s Web site or by mailing it to the  District Offices.

Future Topics

Mrs. Butville noted next year a significant change in personnel is anticipated.  She recommended the Personnel Report be expanded.  Mr. Schoenstadt recommended the Board receive the personnel information on a more timely basis.  Dr. Bowman explained the Personnel Report is presented to the Board as a recommendation from the Superintendent.  The report is mailed to the Board members the Friday before the Board Meeting, which allows the Board members a few days to review the report.  Previously, the Personnel Report was provided to the Board earlier.  However, there would then be last-minute additions to the report.  The Board members would get upset because the information was not on the original report.  If the report were provided at the Work Session, the information would be two weeks old.  Dr. Bowman said possible options for improving the Personnel Report will be reviewed.

Mrs. Butville stated almost all of the elections of personnel included on the current Personnel Report have start dates prior to the meeting.  Some of the start dates are as early as September 4.  What would happen if the Board were not to approve some of the new hires who have already started working in the District?  Dr. Bowman explained if the individuals were day-to-day substitutes for a period of time, contractually they become long term substitutes.  This occurs automatically, but the Board still needs to approve it.    Mrs. Butville inquired if those starting employment on September 4, could not have been submitted for Board approval at the August 28 Board Meeting.  Dr. Bowman explained employment decisions were made after August 28.  The goal was to have the classrooms filled with teachers for the opening day of school.

Agenda Development for the September 25, 2001 Public Meeting

The Public Meeting agenda was established prior to the meeting.

Mr. Stack noted the Work Session portion of the meeting was concluded.  In order to allow the Board to meet in an Executive Session to discuss a personnel issue , Mr. Stack  recessed the meeting at 10:10 p.m.

Mrs. Bostwick left the meeting at 10:20 p.m.

Mr. Stack reconvened the meeting at 10:20 p.m.

Mr. Stack recommended the motions be the next agenda item and the first motion presented for approval be the ratification of the NESPA agreement.  There was Board consensus for Mr. Stack’s recommendation. 

Motion:  Ratification of Contract Between the Neshaminy Board of School Directors and the Neshaminy Educational Support Personnel Association

Mr. Mecleary presented the following motion:

WHEREAS, the Neshaminy Board of School Directors and the Neshaminy Educational Support Personnel Association have participated in contract negotiations; and

WHEREAS, the negotiating teams of the Neshaminy Board of School Directors and the Neshaminy Educational Support Personnel Association have tentatively accepted a proposed collective bargaining contract; and

WHEREAS, the Superintendent of Schools has been officially notified that the membership of the Neshaminy Educational Support Personnel Association ratified the said proposed contract; and

WHEREAS, the District solicitor has reviewed and approved the language of the tentative agreement.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Neshaminy Board of School Directors ratify the said proposed contract between the Neshaminy Educational Support Association and the Neshaminy School District commencing July 1, 2003 and ending June 30, 2009.

Mr. Schoenstadt seconded the motion.

Mr. Mecleary stated this is the second time he has had the privilege of having a meeting of minds with the Neshaminy Educational Support Personnel Association.  They are truly the backbone of the District.  He read the following excerpt from a recent letter to the editor published in the Bucks County Courier Times from a proud educational support staff union member of the Neshaminy School District:

…They are the bus drivers that take approximately 70 students per load to and from the school safely daily.  The cafeteria staff and dining room aides feed and properly monitor our children’s lunch time.  The playground aides monitor our children’s playtime.  Computer lab aides make sure our children’s computers run smoothly and install programs for learning.  The teacher assistants give teachers more time to spend with the children who need that little extra one-on-one time.  The maintenance staff maintains our buildings inside and out, creating a safer place.  The custodians clean up after our children, creating a healthier environment.  The grounds crews  not only make our grounds look good and maintained for children’s play, but also for the community to use for activities.  The secretaries keep parents informed, make sure forgotten things reach the students and make sure the student who misses the bus has a way home.

They have not been given the privileges, but work hard to receive the privileges.  They do not place themselves on pedestals, but place the children on pedestals.  They make them healthier and happier for the school and give them an opportunity to do what they have come to school to do and that is to learn.

The Board approved the ratification of contract between the Neshaminy Board of School Directors and the Neshaminy Educational Support Personnel Association motion with eight ayes.

Motion: Act 48 Professional Education Plan

Mrs. Butville presented the following motion:

WHEREAS, Act 48, Continuing Professional Development, was passed by the General Assembly and signed into law on November 23, 1999; and

WHEREAS, the Neshaminy Board of School Directors previously approved an Act 48 Interim Professional Education Plan on September 26, 2000 that received Pennsylvania Department of Education (PDE) approval on October 13, 2000; and

WHEREAS, the Neshaminy School District is required by Chapter 4 to submit its Strategic Plan, Act 48 Professional Education Plan, and New Teacher Induction Plan to the Pennsylvania Department of Education (PDE) by September 30, 2001; and

WHEREAS, the Act 48 committee reviewed the three-year Act 48 Professional Education Plan on September 20, 2001.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Neshaminy Board of School Directors approves the attached Act 48 Professional Education Plan (see attachment III).

Dr. Frank seconded the motion.  The Board approved the motion with eight ayes 

Motion:  Establishment of Money Market Bank Account

Mr. Schoenstadt presented the following motion:

WHEREAS, a Money Market account is required by Mellon Bank as a “pass-through account” to invest in CD’s; and

WHEREAS, the Pennsylvania Public School Code requires that the Board of School Directors approve all bank accounts.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Neshaminy Board of School Directors authorizes the establishment of a Money Market Account with Mellon Bank in the name of the Neshaminy School District, account no. 000-877-9837.

Mr. Dengler seconded the motion.  The Board approved the motion with eight ayes.

Motion:  Red Ribbon Week

Dr. Frank presented the following motion:

WHEREAS, alcohol and other drug abuse among children in the nation remains a serious problem; and,

WHEREAS, it is imperative that the Neshaminy School District present a visible and unified educational message to students and community members as part of its commitment to fostering a drug-free lifestyle; and

WHEREAS, the Neshaminy Board of School Directors, in cooperation with our local, State and Federal governments, is sponsoring the Red Ribbon Campaign offering all members of the Neshaminy community the opportunity to demonstrate their commitment to a drug-free lifestyle.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Neshaminy Board of School Directors hereby proclaim October 22-26, 2001 as Red Ribbon Week, and Wednesday, October 24, as our traditional “Wear Red Day,” and encourages its citizens to participate in drug education and prevention activities to show support for our strong commitment to drug-free schools and a drug-free community.

Mr. Mecleary seconded the motion.  The Board approved the motion with eight ayes.

Approval of Minutes - Mr. Dengler moved the minutes of the August 28, 2001 Public Meeting be approved and Mrs. Butville seconded the motion.  The Board approved the minutes with eight ayes.

Approval of Treasurer’s Report - Mr. Paradise presented for approval the August 31, 2001 Treasurer’s Report, subject to audit.  Mr. Mecleary moved the August 31, 2001 Treasurer’s Report be approved, subject to audit.  Mr. Dengler seconded the motion.  The Board approved the Treasurer’s Report with eight ayes, subject to audit.

Approval of Personal and Per Capita Taxes Exonerations - Mr. Paradise presented for approval the personal and per capita taxes exonerations for July and August 2001.  Mr. Dengler moved the personal and per capita taxes exonerations be approved.  Ms. Drioli seconded the motion.  The Board approved the motion with eight ayes.

Certified and Support Personnel Actions - Dr. Bowman presented the following for approval:

·         Elections - Certified Staff

·         Resignations and Leaves of Absence - Certified Staff

·         Elections and Changes of Classification - Support Staff

·         Resignations and Leaves of Absence - Support Staff

·         Sabbatical Leave of Absence - Certified Staff (For Board Information Only)

The personnel information appears on pages H-1 through H-9 and addendum page H-4a

Mrs. Butville moved the certified and support personnel actions be approved and Dr. Frank seconded the motion. 

Mrs. Butville stated last month an individual was listed on the long term substitute list (item no. 18, page H-3) but was removed from the list prior to Board approval.  She inquired who filled the position.  Mr. Jones stated he believed the position was filled by one of the other candidates. It was a paper move. He indicated he will check into the issue further.  Mrs. Butville stated this is an example of why she would like the Personnel Report to be expanded. 

The Board approved the certified and support staff personnel actions with seven ayes and one abstention, Ms. Drioli. 

Approval of Bills and Investments - Mr. Paradise presented the following for approval:

·         Bills for payment for August 2001

·         Seventeen investments

Mr. Mecleary moved the August bills for payment and seventeen investments be approved and Mr. Dengler seconded the motion.  The Board approved the motion with eight ayes.

Extra-Curricular Staff and Salaries Report - Dr. Bowman presented for approval the 2001-2002 Extra-Curricular Staff and Salaries Report dated September 25, 2001.  The report includes two positions for Neshaminy High School. 

Mr. Dengler moved the Extra-Curricular Staff and Salaries Report dated September 25, 2001 be approved and Mrs. Butville seconded the motion.

Mrs. Butville stated she noticed there are other positions which still need to be filled.  She inquired what steps are being taken to fill the positions.  Dr. Bowman explained all the positions are posted in the buildings first.  If no one applies from within the building, the positions are posted throughout the District.  If there is still no response, the District goes outside to seek people to fill the positions.  The principals are working very hard to get the jobs filled.  If a parent is qualified, they can apply for the position. 

The Board approved the Extra-Curricular Staff and Salaries Report dated September 25, 2001 with eight ayes.

Federal Programs - Dr. Bowman reported notification has just been received that the District will be funded for its Conflict Resolution/Peer Mediation Program and P.A.S.S. Program in the amount of $180,320.  This is a very large grant.  Dr. Bowman thanked Dr. Costanzo and the grant team for their work on the grant.  To date the District has received $1,638,226 in grant funds.  Of that amount $858,736 is for entitlements and $779,490 is for competitive grants. 

Other Board Business - There was no other board business discussed.

Correspondence - There was no correspondence presented.

Public Comment - There was a two minute limit per speaker.  Mr. Filoon, Oakford, thanked the Board for addressing some of the residents’ questions earlier in the meeting.  He felt if the Tawanka School is closed, the location of the Tawanka School warrants the 357 Tawanka students being bused to the Hoover School.  He said what happens if the District must close another elementary school?  He expressed concern that the Board has not given enough thought to the closing of schools, relocation of students and how disruptive the changes will be to the students.  He urged the Board members to review every school and decide what is the best option.  He stated it may be possible to close another elementary school and bus students only three to five miles to another school.  Once the commitment is made to close the Tawanka School, the students will have to be bused to the Hoover School.  He suggested at the October Board Meeting there be a discussion about alternatives to closing the Tawanka School.

Mrs. Beck, Neshaminy Middle School PTO President, stated the Neshaminy Middle School will have one representative attend all of the Board Meetings, and suggested all of the schools send one representative to all of the Board Meetings.  She stated she will report on the meeting to the PTO and put on the Neshaminy Middle School’s Web site the discussion that occurred at the meeting. 

Mrs. Beck commended the District’s staff on the way the September 11 tragedy was handled in the schools.  She commended Dr. Daggett’s handling of the situation.  She referred to the discussion earlier in the meeting regarding a moratorium on school trips, and suggested the trip decisions be made by the parents, students and teachers at the middle school and high school levels.  She pointed out the cancellation of class trips will mean the seniors will not have a senior class trip. 

Mrs. Parssinen, Langhorne, questioned the logic of closing the Tawanka School and busing the Tawanka students to the Hoover School.  She referred to the discussion earlier in the meeting regarding the renovation of Neshaminy High School and expressed concern that the savings from closing the Tawanka school is a drop in the bucket compared to the cost of renovating the high school.  She estimated her taxes will increase approximately $128 a year and she will have lost her daughters’ school.  She questioned if the Board has a bigger plan than is currently being discussed. 

Mrs. Lanhan, Feasterville, stated the minutes of the August 28 Board Meeting were not yet available on the District’s Web site, and inquired when they would be available.  She said hopefully the Board will make its decision to close a school and discontinue full-time use of modular classrooms all at the same time so all the redistricting can be done at one time.  Mrs. Lanhan said she takes issue with closing the Tawanka School and locating an alternative school in the Tawanka facility.  She felt the Board is not supporting its long term decision.  She noted the Board has discussed closing a middle school, two elementary schools, one elementary school and a middle school and now the Tawanka School.  It has been said in two or three years there may be the need to close another school, possibly a middle school.  She recommended the Board consider a long term solution.  She noted the area school districts already have their own alternative school programs.  She questioned in year two or three of the program, what school districts would be sending students to Neshaminy’s alternative school. 

Board Comment - Ms. Drioli stated the Hoover School is not the only school to which students will be transferred.  Other schools that children will be transferred to are the Ferderbar, Lower Southampton and Heckman Elementary Schools.  She pointed out a redistricting plan has not been established yet, because the Board has not taken a final vote to close the Tawanka School.  Once the final vote is taken, the redistricting plan will be developed. 

Ms. Drioli noted residents have referred to various scenarios the Board has discussed and questioned why it keeps changing its position.  The discussion of the various scenarios was part of the review process for the last 18 months.  Originally, members of the Home and School Organizations were invited to attend meetings on the issue.  The Board has not been secretly reviewing the issue.  She pointed out the alternative school would be for Neshaminy students.  Other school districts would be interested in sending their students to Neshaminy’s alternative school, because the tuition rate would be the same as that to educate a regular Neshaminy student.  The tuition rates at outside alternative schools are much higher than the cost of educating a regular education student.  There has not been a definite decision to open the alternative school to other school districts.  She noted the Board is listening to the residents concerns and is trying to address the questions and concerns at the following Board Meeting.  She pointed out once the tax is levied to satisfy the bond debt, the issue would not have to be addressed again.  The District would receive some reimbursement funds for the renovation projects to help offset the cost. 

Mrs. Butville explained the Board has reviewed all of the options.  The Board could have closed two elementary schools, but decided not to do that.  By not closing a second elementary, it will allow space for a future full-day kindergarten program.  By only closing one elementary school, there is a possibility that all the students attending regular classes in the modular classrooms can be relocated in the buildings.  The initial committee that reviewed the school closing issue included a representative from each school so the individual could share the information with everyone in their school.  It is a good idea to have a representative from each school attending the School Board Meetings. 

Mr. Stack stated once the Board minutes are approved, they are posted on the District’s Web site.  The minutes submitted by the Board Secretary are the only authorized copy of minutes that will be on any District Web site.  He said to the extent there is any other interpretations of comments at the meeting, he is not expecting to see that on any other Web site that the Neshaminy School District supports.   There is only one version of the Board Meeting minutes and that is the version approved at the Board Meetings and posted on the District’s main Web site.

Dr. Frank moved the meeting be adjourned and Mr. Dengler seconded the motion.  The Board approved the motion with eight ayes.  Mr. Stack adjourned the meeting at 11:05 p.m.

Respectfully submitted,

Carol A. Calvello
Board Secretary

Copyright ^© 1998- 2007 Neshaminy School District, Langhorne, PA  19047. 215-809-6000. All rights reserved. 
 Contact Us: Email  Webmaster  with questions or comments. Last modified: August 17, 2007.