PUBLIC
BOARD MEETING MINUTES (WORK SESSION)
NESHAMINY BOARD OF SCHOOL DIRECTORS
February 11, 2003
The Neshaminy Board of School
Directors met in public session on February 11, 2003 in the Auditorium of Maple
Point Middle School.
The following persons were in attendance:
BOARD MEMBERS:
|
ADMINISTRATORS:
|
Mrs. June Bostwick, President
Mrs. Kimberly Jowett, Vice President
|
Mr. P. Howard Wilson
Dr. Raymond Boccuti
|
Mrs. Yvonne Butville
|
Mr. Richard Marotto
|
Ms. Carol Drioli
Mr. Richard Eccles
|
Mr. Joseph V. Paradise
Mr. Bruce Wyatt
|
Mr. Steven Schoenstadt
Mr. Michael Soifer
Dr. William Spitz
Mr. Edward Stack
|
SOLICITOR:
Kristina S. Wiercinski, Esquire
|
SECRETARY:
Mrs. Anita E. Walls
|
OTHERS:
Approximately 15 persons from the Public, staff and press
|
l.
Call to Order
Mrs.
Bostwick called the meeting to order at 7:10 p.m.
2.
Pledge
of Allegiance
Mrs.
Bostwick requested those in attendance join in the salute to the flag.
3.
Announcements
No
announcements.
4.
Public
Comment
Mrs.
Patti Leipziger was present on behalf of the Samuel Everitt Elementary School
community and their principal, Mrs. Dawn Kelly. The redistricting of our students and the retirement of Dr.
Abraham are just a few examples of the many transitions Samuel Everitt
Elementary has gone through this past year.
Mrs. Kelly has brought continuity to students, staff and parents.
Mrs. Leipziger stated that Mrs. Kelly has done a great deal to increase
the spirit of the school. As a
member of the community Mrs. Kelly is able to be the eyes and ears of the school
no matter what time of the day or night. As
a mother and former teacher, Mrs. Kelly has a broad range of skills in dealing
with students and parents. Mrs.
Leipziger noted that Mrs. Kelly has outstanding leadership qualities and Mrs.
Kelly is able to energize the students and staff.
Mrs. Leipziger requested that Mrs. Kelly is given every consideration for
a permanent principalship at Samuel Everitt Elementary School.
Mrs.
Helen Kostar thanked Superintendent Wilson and Mr. Paradise for closing Pearl
Buck Elementary School due to the death of Mr. Shanken. Mrs. Kostar stated that Mr. Shanken was her fifth grade
teacher at Walter Miller Elementary School, and he had a major impact in her
life not only as teacher but as a personal friend.
Mrs. Kostar stated that Mr. Shanken deserved that respect.
Mr. Shanken was always there as a teacher for all students.
Mrs. Kostar stated that due to Mr. Shanken that is why she wished to
become a teacher. Mr. Shanken
taught students to appreciate books and encouraged them to read.
Mrs. Kostar stated that Mr. Shanken not only had this type of impact on
herself, but the entire Neshaminy School District.
Mrs. Kostar wished that this school district would continue to have this
type of influence on the children and the community.
Mrs.
Bostwick noted that a copy of a letter was received from the Board of Elections
of Bucks County stating that they are without power to place a nonbinding
advisory question on the ballot. Mrs.
Bostwick stated that the nonbinding referendum is a non-issue and it will no
longer be discussed at the meetings. Mrs.
Bostwick noted that there is another type of referendum, and when that
information is received the ramifications of that type of referendum will be
reviewed.
Ms.
Drioli concurred with that assessment, and noted that since Middletown residents
are seeking the referendum, why was a referendum not placed on the ballot when
the new Middletown Township building was constructed, and while there is still a
chance maybe they would like to approach the County to place the Courthouse on a
referendum as well.
Mrs.
Butville noted that Neshaminy School District is not taking the same approach;
the district is holding many informational meetings to get the word out to the
public and receive their input.
Mr.
Eccles stated that the board minutes from January 14, 2003, read as follows:
�Mr. Eccles again asked the Board to consider a referendum on this project.
Mrs. Bostwick asked the Solicitor, Robert R. Fleck, Esq. to provide the
law regarding referendums. Mr. Fleck recalled that at the Board meeting on December 2,
2002, there was Board consensus for the Solicitor to begin preliminary review of
the law regarding referendums.� Mr.
Eccles noted that the minutes do not state that the Board asked for a nonbinding
referendum, the minutes state a referendum.
Mr. Eccles questioned why taxpayer�s money was spent on something the
board knew they could not do, and that the research was not done on a
referendum. The Board did not
specifically state binding.
Ms.
Wiercinski noted that the opinion researched all types of referendums.
Mr. Eccles stated that he was not privy to that information since he did
not see the entire opinion.
Mr.
Eccles commented that a referendum can be done under the electoral debt act.
Mrs. Bostwick requested Mr. Eccles to supply the ramifications of that
particular type of referendum and its impact on the district.
Mr. Eccles stated that his job as a School Board member is not to do law
research. Mr. Eccles asked that the
Solicitor please research the Electoral Debt Act.
Ms.
Wiercinski noted that it was researched and was available in the opinion, and
the downside of having an electoral debt referendum was noted.
Mr.
Wilson commented that the district knows that an electoral debt question can be
placed on a ballot. Mr. Eccles is
questioning what the impact of an electoral debt referendum would mean to the
district. Mr. Eccles’ impression
is that the Board is not open to a referendum at all, and he would like to hear
from the Board that they are still open to a referendum.
Mrs.
Bostwick noted that she would like to know what happens to the district if such
an electoral debt fails.
Dr.
Spitz stated that he is not in favor of an electoral debt referendum because if
such a referendum were put on the ballot and it fails; the district could not
issue debt for 155 days. The
district would need to again put the question on the ballot in November with
very precise restrictions on the wording. The
district may never get passed that issue. Once
the district begins this process it may never get approved.
Dr. Spitz noted that the high school is in such poor condition, and the
timing right now is so good with interest rates and declining enrollments, the
time to move is now. Dr. Spitz is looking forward to the public meetings and he
will listen to public input and new ideas.
Dr. Spitz noted that the public has raised legitimate questions.
However, Dr. Spitz feels that an electoral debt referendum is not the way
to proceed due to the bind that the district will be in if the referendum fails.
Mr.
Schoenstadt noted that he does not have a closed mind to the idea, however, if
the referendum should fail, the district would not be able to do the borrowing
that occurs during the period when the tax bills are issued and when the tax
bills are collected. The district
would not be able to operate.
Ms.
Wiercinski noted that when the term “debt” is used it pertains to all
leases, such as leases for technology, buses, etc.
This does not just refer to bonds or tax anticipation loans.
Mr.
Stack noted that the district has a swing loan of $2.3M, which needs to be
attached to debt, and if that cannot occur, the district will need to go to the
general fund in the amount of $2.3M and raise taxes.
The district’s plan was to proceed with a larger bond issue and that
would not occur if a referendum failed.
5.
Presentation
– No Child Left Behind Report
Mr.
Marotto provided a power point presentation for board members regarding a law
which was passed January 8, 200l called the No Child Left Behind Act.
This Act will have a tremendous impact, not only on Neshaminy School
District, but also on all districts throughout the state.
The
following points were presented:
·
Largest federal program providing educational funding
·
An act which shapes policy and practice in classrooms
·
Provides funding for disadvantaged student
·
Enforced standards, notices to public and accountability
·
Content standards outlining what a student should know
·
Teacher qualifications
·
Participation in the National Assessment of Educational
Progress
·
Notice to parents of right to request information on staff
·
Reporting testing results to public
·
Reports to public
·
Report cards on each school and district
·
Labeling of Individual Schools
·
Adequate yearly progress
·
Sanctions Against Schools
·
Financial
·
Organizational
·
Staff Related
A
complete copy of the power point presentation is available in the
Superintendent’s office.
Presentation – Neshaminy High
School
Mr.
Wilson advised that this is the first of two videos that the district will
provide to the community regarding the condition of the high school.
The presentation will also air on the Neshaminy channel, and will be
shown at the presentations scheduled for each of the schools and senior centers.
Mr. Wilson also noted that a mailing would be going out to 30,000 homes
with frequently asked questions.
Mr.
Stack thanked the Administration for focusing on the needs of the students.
Ms. Drioli noted that the value of your home is directly involved.
6.
Item
for Discussion
a)
Tawanka
Playground Equipment
Mr.
Paradise advised that the insurance carrier is concerned regarding the
playground equipment at Tawanka and is recommending that it be removed because
it is no longer an elementary school and there is an unnecessary insurance risk.
Mrs.
Butville noted that the school may no longer be used as an elementary school,
however it is still part of the community and community children still use the
facility. Mrs. Butville inquired
how many suits currently exist against Neshaminy School District due to
playground equipment. Mr. Minotti
stated that there are three (3) this year.
Mr. Paradise quoted that “The removal of the
playground equipment which is no longer needed will help reduce possible
liability claims resulting from neighborhood children using the equipment after
hours and on weekends and will help save the school district the cost to
maintain the playground equipment.”
Mr.
Schoenstadt stated that the commitment was made to the community when the
Tawanka facility was closed that the playground would be open for community use.
Whatever the cost may be, it will not be more significant then the
commitment made to the community.
Mr.
Paradise stated that the insurance carrier is noting that if there is one less
elementary school within the district, the district could have one less set of
playground equipment.
Mr.
Soifer noted that the playground is for community use and unless playground
equipment is removed from other facilities, the Tawanka playground should
remain.
Mrs.
Butville noted that the PTO at Albert Schweitzer Elementary School have
purchased playground equipment for students, and is having difficulty getting it
installed due to the insurance carrier.
Dr.
Spitz inquired whether the insurance company is proposing to increase the
liability rates, and Mr. Paradise responded that was not the case.
Mr. Paradise further noted that if the district has the equipment in
place, the district must maintain the equipment.
Mr.
Paradise noted that the proper procedures were not followed at the Schweitzer
Elementary School. The approvals
were not secured and as a result the equipment which was purchased was not
reviewed by the insurance carrier. Mr.
Paradise noted that Mr. Iampietro will have a meeting with the PTO and the
insurance company to minimize the problem and get the playground equipment
installed.
A
representative from the PTO stated that in September, 2002 the playground
company advised that they could offer a fund matching grant which would enable
the purchase of a nice playground unit, however, the grant would expire in
November, 2002. The PTO purchased
the equipment for approximately $12,000 and the matching grant was for
approximately $8,500, because they do not cover shipping costs.
Installation is not included in these figures.
The unit, which was purchased, is a far better unit that is presently at
the school. The funds were raised for this playground unit over two
years.
Mr.
Soifer questioned why this has not had a resolution with the insurance company
in this amount of time.
Mr.
Wilson stated that a meeting needs to take place with the insurance carrier to
get the issues resolved and see what objections they may have to any of the
equipment which was purchased.
7.
Items
for Approval
a)
Overnight Trips
i)
Neshaminy High School State Leadership Conference and Competition –
Champion, PA – April 6 – 9, 2003.
Mr.
Wyatt advised that 35 students plan on attending the conference at no cost to
the district. Neshaminy’s
outstanding business students have the opportunity to participate at this
conference and competition.
There
was board consensus for the students to attend.
b)
Board Policies
Mrs. Butville advised that the entire policy book is
under review. Certain policies are
being updated to reflect current terminology; for example, junior highs are now
middle schools. Mrs. Butville noted
that the Pennsylvania School Board Code supersedes all policies.
If the policy is not in agreement with the Code, the district must amend
same. Mrs. Butville stated that the
following policies have undergone changes:
·
Selection and Election of Administrative Personnel
·
Employee Personnel Records
·
Public Records
·
School Entrance Age
·
Discipline
Mr. Eccles inquired what changes were made to the
Employee Personnel Records and Mr. Marotto informed Mr. Eccles that Act 100 -
Right to Know Act signed on June 29, 2002 would need to be incorporated into the
district’s policy. Policy 120 has
now been revised to contain what is not being affected by the Right to Know Act.
Ms.
Wiercinski stated that the old policy contained Personnel Records, Public
Records and Student Records all in one policy.
The Department of Education two years ago mandated the district to amend
the Student Records policy. Ms.
Wiercinski stated that the Right to Know Act now requires the district to
respond to any request within five (5) days.
The District may also now charge for the copy fees, however, this does
not include the cost of the time it takes for the person making the copies.
Due to these changes, separate policies have been created.
Mrs.
Butville noted that all changes that were made to the policies have been
reviewed by the Solicitor’s office.
Mr. Schoenstadt inquired how the policies are
addressing the issue of maintaining records for 99 years.
Ms. Wiercinski replied all district’s must be in compliance with the
Department of Education’s guidelines and Neshaminy has already submitted
approval to the Department of Education regarding Student Records.
Currently, the district is revising Public Records to comply with Act 100
– Right To Know.
Dr.
Spitz noted that in Policy 102, Selection and Election of Administrative
Personnel “Business Administrator” should not be included since this policy
only applies to Superintendents and Assistant Superintendents. Mrs. Bostwick was in agreement with Dr. Spitz.
Mrs.
Butville noted that even the policies that have not undergone any changes will
have a revision date noted at the end, since the policy has been reviewed.
c) Bid/s
Budget Transfers
Mr. Paradise reviewed the following
bids:
Bid
No. 04-01 General School Supplies
Bid Amount: $170,333.81
The bid is for various classroom and office supplies
for use throughout the district for the school year 2003/2004.
Mr. Paradise noted that the awards are recommended to the vendors listed
on the basis of having submitted the lowest bids which meet the minimum
specifications. Mr. Paradise
further noted that $73,000 of the bid is for paper.
Mr. Paradise explained that this bid is for specific items which every
school requests, for example, construction paper, index cards, crayons, etc.
By ordering these items in quantity the district receives a tremendous
price advantage. Mr. Paradise
further advised that the same bid last year was $156,000.
Mr. Paradise further noted that the largest item, paper, went from $1.94
a ream to $2.10 a ream.
Mr. Stack noted that the district needs to exam all of the costs.
Mr. Paradise explained that this is a bid that creates an asset, not an
expenditure. The bid creates an
inventory and the supplies are purchased from the school’s per pupil
allocation.
Mrs. Bostwick brought up the idea of doing business in a consortium
effort to keep costs down. Mr.
Paradise advised that with this bid the district always does better on its own.
Bid No. 03-28 Bituminous Concrete Paving, Resurfacing and Repair
Bid Amount: $98,773.70
Paving repairs at Maple Point Middle School
Mr. Paradise noted that this paving will take place in the rear of the
facility. Mr. Paradise advised that the budgeted amount for this
project was $100,000.
Mr. Paradise presented Budget Transfer Report No. 03-4 (Working Copy).
Dr. Spitz made an inquiry regarding transaction number 3.
Mr. Paradise advised that this transfer is to balance the salary accounts
for sabbaticals, leaves, salary adjustments and additional staff.
Mr. Paradise noted that these monies have been specifically budgeted for
that general reason and they are being put into the appropriate accounts.
Mrs. Butville inquired why there is a large amount for Mentor Pay.
Mr. Wilson noted that last year the budget was done while the district
was still negotiating with the federation regarding the amount of pay for mentor
teachers, and at that point in time the amount of mentor teachers was
significantly less then the number of teachers this year.
Mr. Wilson further noted that any long term substitute must be assigned a
mentor teacher, and there was also a pay increase for teacher mentors.
That increase went from $500 a year to $l,000 a year or $500 per term. Mr. Wilson stated that leaves are usually by semester,
however, if someone goes out on leave and requests a full semester, but they
have the right to come back earlier.
The two bids and Budget Transfer Report No. 03-4 (Working Copy) will be
presented for approval at the February 25th Public Meeting.
Ms. Drioli requested a price for the energy usage at the high school due
to the fact that she believes the school has an inability to be efficient.
These figures need to be presented to the public.
Also, the public needs to be aware of what an energy efficient building
would cost.
Mr. Schoenstadt advised that the district spends approximately $873,000 a
year on the high school for maintenance, up-keep, fuel, energy costs, etc.
8
Superintendent’s Report
None.
9.
Committee Reports
a.
Board Policies
Discussed
earlier.
b.
Educational Development
Dr.
Spitz advised that the meeting scheduled for February 18th is being
moved to March 18th at the request of Dr. Bocutti due to the
presentations, which will be taking place at the various schools regarding the
high school project.
c.
Facilities/Finance Committee
Ms. Soifer advised that meeting will be scheduled when
direction is received from the Board regarding what action will be taken in
terms of borrowing, etc.
d.
Intermediate Unit Board
Ms.
Drioli advised that the budget was presented and Neshaminy’s portion is down.
e.
Educational Foundation
Dr.
Costanzo reported that the foundation has awarded grants totaling $15,000 to 36
teachers for classroom projects.
f.
Technical School Board
Mrs.
Butville advised that 552 students have applied to 9th grade and
presently the Tech School can accommodate 400 students.
Emergency Services Technology program will be implemented this year.
This program is not gender specific.
Mrs. Butville advised that negotiations with the support staff are moving
along.
Mrs.
Butville noted that a letter needs to be sent out regarding the Treasurer.
Neshaminy must forward a letter to the other sending schools in order
that they can also vote on same. Neshaminy
voted on this last year. This process needs to occur in order that the Articles
of Agreement can be amended.
There
was Board consensus to continue the process.
g.
Technology
Mr.
Stack advised the a meeting is scheduled for March 4th regarding the
elementary school labs.
10.
Future Topics
Mr.
Paradise informed Board members that the district applied for two (2) security
vehicles and two (2) maintenance vans which dates back approximately 2 years
which would contain a certain amount of advertising.
Mr.
Eccles advised that they are brand new vehicles, the district pays $l.00 a year,
and it is provided either at a 2, 3 or 4 year term. The district will have the choice of advertising.
Mr. Eccles noted that the district’s advertising policy would negate
this process since it states that only 10% of the space can be used for
advertising, therefore, the policy would need to be amended.
Mr. Eccles further noted that this is a great benefit to the district and
maintenance department with a further savings to the taxpayers.
Mrs.
Butville inquired how large would the Neshaminy name be on the vehicles, and
would it be easily distinguishable that this is a Neshaminy vehicle.
Mr.
Paradise noted that the two security vehicles were not budgeted for, however,
the two maintenance vans are actually budget requests for next year, and they
could be removed if an agreement is reached.
Mr. Paradise noted that he has forwarded the agreement to the Solicitor
for review.
There
was Board consensus to place this item on the agenda at the February 25th
public meeting.
11.
Agenda Development for the
February 25, 2003 Public Meeting
12.
Correspondence
No
correspondence was received.
13.
Other Board Business
Mrs. Bostwick announced that the next Work Session to be held
on March 11, 2003 will take place at Neshaminy High School in G9A.
Mrs. Bostwick suggested that a tour of the building could take place at
6:30 p.m. and the Work Session could begin at 7:30 p.m.
Mr.
Eccles inquired regarding the Per Capita Exonerations for Middletown Township.
Ms. Drioli noted that the exonerations are mostly high school students.
Mrs.
Butville attended the Legislative Leadership Conference in Hershey, which
included a 4 hour conference regarding No Child Left Behind.
The new Secretary of Education was introduced, Ms. Vicki Phillips from
Lancaster. Mrs. Butville noted that
Governor Rendell has four main priorities for education:
·
Full-day kindergarten
·
Pre-kindergarten program
·
Property tax reform
·
Decreasing class size in the lower grades
Legislative
Lobby Day will take place on April 29, 2003 in Harrisburg.
Mrs. Butville distributed a letter to Board members regarding a Senate
Bill in the amount of $5 billion for Title 5 programs to help school districts
meet the costs of implementing the provisions of the No Child Left Behind Act.
Mrs.
Butville further advised that there is a referendum kit, which is being
discussed at great lengths by the legislation and the PSBA and offered a copy of
same to any board members interested in reviewing the kit.
Mrs.
Bostwick noted that this is why the district needs to continue to send Board
members to various conferences because it gives the district exposure and
information for the district. Mrs.
Butville noted that by attending the conferences board members could voice their
concerns first hand to legislators.
Mrs.
Butville advised that a Booster Seat law will be in effect requiring all
children to the age of seven be in a booster seat, except for school buses.
However, it does include school vans that transport students, but it will
not take effect until July.
Mrs.
Bostwick advised that the Board would be having an Executive Session after this
session.
Mrs.
Kostar noted that this is an election year and requested that the Board take
into consideration that the Solicitor, not only of the School District but also
of Lower Southampton Township, is involved in one of the Republican parties.
Mrs. Kostar is requesting that anything pertaining to the new high school
that the Solicitor, since he is involved in looking for new school board
members, that he should be exempted for anything pertaining to the new high
school, and from being able to make any additional money as a result of the new
high school. Since it is referring
to anything being political, he should be exempted.
Mrs. Kostar noted that the school board should look into getting an
additional attorney, since as far as she is concerned; it is a conflict of
interest. Mrs. Kostar is requesting this as a part of this community
and that it is for the betterment of this community. Mrs. Kostar further stated not only the Solicitor, but also
Ms. Wiercinski.
Ms.
Wiercinski advised that Timothy O’Neill, Esquire is bond counsel.
Dr.
Spitz noted that Mrs. Kostar is the Chairman of the Democratic Committee in
charge of looking for candidates for school board.
Ms.
Drioli noted that the Solicitor of Lower Southampton Township has nothing to do
with the politics of Lower Southampton Township and has no influence in Lower
Southampton politics.
Mr.
Thomas Gallagher, Levittown, requested as a taxpayer to see the Solicitor’s
report regarding a referendum.
14.
Adjournment of Meeting
Mr.
Soifer moved the meeting be adjourned and Dr. Spitz seconded the motion.
The Board voted to adjourn the meeting with nine ayes.
Mrs. Bostwick adjourned the meeting at 9:25 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Anita E. Walls
Board Secretary
|