Click Here to Return to the Neshaminy Home Page. Neshaminy - We build futures!

June 3, 2003

The Neshaminy Board of School Directors met in public session on June 3, 2003, at Maple Point Middle School
Board Room.  The following persons were in attendance:



Mrs. June R. Bostwick, President

Mr. P. Howard Wilson

Mrs. Kimberly A. Jowett, Vice-President
Mrs. Yvonne V. Butville
Ms. Carol A. Drioli

Dr. Raymond J. Boccuti
Mr. Harry P. Jones
Mr. Richard S. Marotto

Mr. Richard M. Eccles

Mr. Joseph V. Paradise

Mr. Steven E. Schoenstadt

Mr. Bruce M. Wyatt

Mr. Michael A. Soifer*
Dr. William H. Spitz

Mr. Edward T. Stack

OTHERS:  Approximately 38 persons from the public, staff and press

SECRETARY:  Mrs. Anita E. Walls


 *Arrived at 7:40 p.m.


l.    Call to Order

Mrs. Bostwick called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.

2.   Pledge of Allegiance

Mrs. Bostwick requested those in attendance join in the salute to the flag.  

3.      Announcements

Mrs. Bostwick advised that the Policy Debate and Speaker Time Limit was adopted in 1967 and last reviewed in January 2003.  Mrs. Bostwick advised that according to the policy at each monthly board meeting public participation at the time specified on the agenda shall be allowed.  Speakers will indicate whether they wish to speak on an agenda or non-agenda item.  Speakers shall identify themselves by stating their name and address.  There will be a three (3) minute time limit per speaker at the beginning of the meeting.  There will be a one (1) hour time limit for public comment.  Mrs. Bostwick further noted that at Work Sessions the same orders apply, however, there will be a two (2) minute limit per speaker and twenty (20) minutes per comment period.  One (1) comment period is held during a Work Session and two (2) comment periods at the Public Meeting.

Mrs. Bostwick noted that if a person did not have a chance to speak in the first hour of public comment those individuals will be given first chance in the second public comment.   

Mrs. Bostwick further wished to change the agenda so that Board comment takes place after committee reports have been given.  Mrs. Bostwick would like to change Board comment back to the place where policy says it should be, unless there was a good reason for the change. 

Mr. Eccles suggested that this matter be brought up for review since it is not fair to have a public meeting and allow people to speak, and then cut off comment after one (l) hour. 

Ms. Drioli in Mrs. Bostwick’s defense stated that this policy was put into effect in an effort to allow the board to accomplish the business at hand.  Ms. Drioli stated that the Board is under state law to approve the budget and compelled by the laws of the state to complete board business.

Mrs. Bostwick requested that the audience take responsibility.  The policy is in effect so the board can conduct business and listen to the public fairly.  The public must decide whether they need to speak two and three times on the same agenda item.  If an individual has heard his ideas and views expressed they should then cross their name off the list.  Mrs. Bostwick was very concerned about the display of disrespect that was shown to the high school student who expressed a different view.  Mrs. Bostwick asked all individuals to respect other’s viewpoints.  Mrs. Bostwick hoped that this was the last display of rudeness that would occur, and looks forward to some well reasoned solutions to the problems at hand.

Mr. Schoenstadt stated the policy was legally reviewed in 1972 when Maple Point was being considered, and at that time it was not in violation of any state laws.  Mrs. Bostwick stated that the policy was reviewed on January 16, 2003.  Mr. Schoenstadt stated that he could support the policy if the Solicitor states that the policy is at this time legal, and in fact, does not violate any state laws, and that it conforms to Roberts Rules.

Mrs. Bostwick stated that the policy will be submitted to the Solicitor for review. 

Mrs. Butville stated that the Policy Committee has been going through all policies, and this particular policy was reviewed by the Solicitor in January 2003. 

4.   Public Comment

Mrs. Susan Larson, Langhorne, PA, stated that her daughter is a second grader at Oliver Heckman Elementary and active in the AE program this year as an invited guest.  Mrs. Larson stated that her least favorite subject is math, but she loves AE math.  She was identified at the beginning of the year and put on a waiting list with other qualifying students to be tested.  Mrs. Larson noted that it is now the end of the year and she has yet to be tested because of the backlog of students.  Mrs. Larson was told that her daughter should be tested by September.  Mrs. Larson must question the current policy and procedures in place.  Mrs. Larson noted that it is imperative that procedures be followed out in a timely manner to ensure the rights of all children who qualify for this program.  The testing issue is a big problem in the AE program.  Obviously, additional assistance is needed.  Mrs. Larson questioned if anyone has considered contracting out for testing on a per test basis to move things along.  Mrs. Larson thought that using this method would rectify the existing problem as each student would be tested during the school year and before the school year ends.  Mrs. Larson further noted that you would obtain a more accurate report of the actual number of students enrolled in the AE program.  Serious consideration needs to be given to tabling this particular budget cut.  Mrs. Larson requested that each student be tested, identify every single child who qualifies for the program, have them tested, and change any existing policies and procedures to ensure that the rights of these students be respectfully followed out in a timely manner within the school year and not into the summer.  Mrs. Larson noted that the bottom line is that the district has the responsibility to provide a challenging environment.  No child should be excluded from any educational opportunities, and before cutting into any educational programs consideration must be given to cutting at the overhead level.

Mr. Solis Basen, Langhorne, PA, asked the following questions:  What the mechanics are to submit a budget to the state?  Are the budgets ever rejected or questioned?  Is there an association with the 502 school districts and are they doing anything to get help, since nothing is coming from the legislatures?  Mr. Basen thought it was time to change the rules.

Mr. Howard Lindner, Langhorne, PA, stated that he felt embarrassed that he once passed out Mrs. Bostwick’s literature.  Mr. Lindner stated what the community wants:

·         The Board to immediately withdraw Plancon Part A & B from the state.

·         To stop all plans and actions to build a new school until a referendum is held.

·         The Board reappoint Rick Eccles to the Finance and Facilities Committee which he ran for two years before he was unjustly removed by this Board.

·         The Board to reorganize and vote out the President.

·         The Board to vote for Rick Eccles, the voice of the people, as President with his background and knowledge.

·         To do away with the time limit for public comment, because the Board’s responsibility is to listen to the people who vote. 

Mr. Charles Lauble, Langhorne, PA, stated he was happy to see a great amount of time was taken at the last board meeting regarding the education of students and the AE and music programs.  Mr. Lauble stated that excellence is judged not only by how effective something is, but also by how efficient it can be made.  Mr. Lauble believes that the Administration is attempting to bring efficiencies into the system.  Excellence is judged by effectiveness and efficiency.  Mr. Lauble stated that his children do not qualify for the AE program, but he is looking for a well rounded, quality education for his children.  Mr. Lauble hopes that the focus is on the entire system to make it effective and efficient and that is how you judge excellence.  Mr. Lauble stated that he got excellence at Neshaminy and the district should be striving to get back to the excellence in the education that Mr. Lauble received.

Mrs. Kathy Stanford, Langhorne, PA, spoke last week, however a board member was not present.  Mrs. Stanford has a second grader in the math enrichment program who scores very high in math, but he will probably never be a part of the program if the changes are made.  Mrs. Stanford feels that if her child’s school only has a half time teacher he will be left behind.  Mrs. Stanford also wants a well rounded program, but the savings of one salary is not worth all the students who will be left behind and who will not be challenged.  The more students who are challenged and given the opportunity that her son has been given will score higher on tests, help her son, and help the school and community by bringing in more tax dollars if the scores are higher.

Mr. Myrl Brut, Langhorne, PA, inquired regarding the fifteen (l5) questions he had submitted forty-six (46) days ago.  Mr. Brut noted that he e-mailed the school district thirteen (13) times this week and he will not go as far to say that he has been blocked out, however, all thirteen (13) came back rejected.

5.       Items for Discussion

a)       Proposed Cellular Tower at Everitt Elementary School

Mr. Paradise met with T-Mobile who is interested in leasing ground at Everitt Elementary School.  The space required would be a 50’ by 50’ area for a monopole to be constructed.  Mr. Paradise suggested that a meeting be scheduled with the community in the Everitt area to discuss the issue.  Mr. Paradise noted that a draft agreement has been drawn up and he will have the Solicitor review same. 

Mr. Eccles recommended that the PTO be contacted at Everitt Elementary School in order that it may be placed in the newsletter.

There was Board consensus to advertise a meeting and proceed with discussions.

6.       Items for Approval

a)      Bucks County Technical High School Budget

Mrs. Butville stated that the Bucks County Technical High School budget was passed by a vote of 34-4.  Ms. Drioli noted that the Articles of Agreement would be revisited.

b)   Short Term borrowing for Blue Cross Prepayment

Mr. Paradise advised Board members that it would be necessary to float a Tax and Revenue Anticipation Note in order make a Blue Cross prepayment by July 15th.  Mr. Paradise advised that it will be advertised and at the June Public Board Meeting the board will be asked to approve a Tax and Revenue Anticipation Note in the approximate amount of $10M.  Mr. Paradise advised that the district would save approximately $502,000 from the Blue Cross prepayment.  After legal expenses and loss of investment income the net savings to the district will be approximately $400,000.  The time period for the Note will be approximately the first week in July until mid-September.

Mr. Paradise further advised Board members that 80%-90% of the tax collection will occur by August 31st and he is confident that said Note will be repaid by mid-September.  Mr. Paradise has already spoken with some local tax collectors regarding the situation.

There was Board consensus to proceed with the short term borrowing for the Blue Cross Prepayment.

c)   Long Term borrowing for Capital Improvements

Mr. Paradise provided a handout to Board members regarding Options for Funding Capital Improvements.              Mr. Paradise provided the following summary of facts:

·         Swing Loan of $2.3 million, approved November, 2002, for a maximum of 2 years, at 2.022% for 2002-2003 capital needs (Intention was to combine this with a $110 M Bond Issue for High School and provide for other capital needs)

·         New Capital Improvement needs of $2.8M for 2003-2004

·         Additional Capital Improvements needed in 5 Year Plan of approximately $3M per year

                        Mr. Paradise provided the following short term options:

·         Borrow an additional $2.8M for a similar 2 year term

·         Renegotiate original swing loan for a total of $5.l M for same period of time

·         Principal Payment should be budgeted in 2003-2004

·         Other options that the Board may wish to consider

Mr. Paradise provided the following long term options:

·         Contribute a specific amount annually from the General Fund to a Capital Reserve Fund to be used for facility improvements

·         Float a Capital Improvement Bond Issue for at least $15M to provide for capital needs for 2002/2003 to 2006/2007.

Mr. Paradise noted to Board members that no funds have been allocated for immediate needs at the high school.  Mr. Paradise suggested repayment of said amount to be 10-15 years.  Mr. Paradise noted that the existing debt service is $3.3M annually out to 2013.

Mr. Paradise advised Board members that the Administration needs an overall sense of direction.

Mr. Paradise provided Board members with a handout from Mike Lillys, RBC Dain Rauscher, which provided debt scenarios for $15M and $20M with two different payment schedules (level and modified wrap).  Discussion ensued regarding the four scenarios presented.

Mr. Schoenstadt inquired as to the callable dates on the current outstanding bonds.  Mrs. Donovan advised that the callable date is 2007.

Mr. Paradise directed Board members to look at Schedule 1l, which provides the total net fiscal debt service of $4.3M in 2005 and remains that until 2013, which provides room to deal with other issues.

Mr. Schoenstadt stated that the district is borrowing funds for buildings, wings, facilities, tangible assets for the money that was spent, however, the district is taking what should really be paid out of the operating budget on an annual basis and building future debt. 

Mr. Soifer stated that the Fund Balance should be used properly and should not be used to cover short term loans.  

Mr. Schoenstadt stated that a plan needs to be designed that is the most logical, rationale and affordable.  Mr. Schoenstadt stated that at some point there needs to be an adjustment in the tax base.

Mr. Soifer stated that the money for the capital reserve should be taken out of the Fund Balance and that is the only way the fund will be established every single year, otherwise capital improvement monies will be used for short term solutions.  Mr. Stack noted that one-half of the Fund Balance is already being used to get to 28.4 mills. 

Mrs. Bostwick left the board room at 7:45 p.m.

Mr. Soifer further commented that the district cannot continue to keep borrowing.  Mr. Soifer wants to come to a solution regarding capital improvements. 

Mr. Wilson stated that direction is needed from the Board regarding the $6M that is needed.  If the Board wishes to put in another $1M for capital improvements, the millage will go from 28 mills to 34 mills for an additional $1M. 

Mr. Paradise stated that in his opinion it is not a wise option to do a bond issue for $6M-$7M due to the numerous costs involved in the bond issue that are fixed. 

Dr. Spitz inquired regarding the restrictions on a capital reserve fund.  Mr. Paradise stated that the district would have no trouble with this type of reserve fund since the contributions would not accumulate and there are no time restraints.  Mr. Paradise noted that the advantage of a flat contribution into a capital reserve fund is that the district could possibly get ahead of the curve.  Mr. Paradise commented that every time there is a maintenance problem, i.e. roof, boiler, etc., it is a monumental problem because of lack of such a capital reserve fund. 

Ms. Drioli noted that the district can take the capital expenditures over the next 15 years and make it easier on the taxpayer. 

Mrs. Bostwick returned at 7:55 p.m.

Mr. Soifer noted that he is not against a bond issue, but he is against what the money will be used for and what the money should be used for sometimes get put by the wayside.

Dr. Spitz noted that the district does have a five (5) year plan with very specific items and costs, however there is no control over what a board will do in two or three years.   

Mr. Paradise commented that he feels there is a necessity for both borrowing money and establishing a capital reserve fund.  The proposed bond issue for the fifteen years with the first debt service payment to be in 2004-2005.  Mr. Paradise advised Board members that the district debt is very low in comparison to other school districts. 

Mr. Eccles questioned what payments have been made to ATS&R.  Mr. Wilson responded $900,000 and approximately the amount of $150,000 - $180,000 to BASCO.

Mr. Eccles questioned if the Board is saying that the high school issue is over at this point and letting the next board take on the high school issue.  Mr. Schoenstadt also commented that he would like to know what this Board intends to do.  Mr. Schoenstadt stated that it takes a little courage to say “yes or no.” 

Mr. Stack stated his position at the last meeting and supports specific feedback from the community in the way of a survey.  Mr. Schoenstadt stated an election was just held.  Mr. Stack stated there are three (3) regions and there was no contest in Region 3.  Mr. Stack noted that 10 years ago his region represented better then 40% of the total population of Neshaminy, and with the addition of Flowers Mill and Shady Brook the percentage is even higher.  From Mr. Stack’s perspective he cannot accept those results.

Mr. Schoenstadt stated that overall in the district 15% of the voters came out, 85% did not.  Of the 15%, 9% of those said that they did not want to reelect anyone in favor of a new high school.  Mr. Schoenstadt stated that 85% of the voters either felt the situation was decided and they accepted it, or they did not.  However, they are the silent majority, who has not spoken a word.   

Mr. Eccles stated that the voters have spoken.

Ms. Drioli stated that Mr. Eccles was part of the process that hired ATS&R and he was part of the process that fired BASCO.  Ms. Drioli noted that Mr. Eccles was instrumental and Ms. Drioli requested that he not “hang” other Board members out there because he was part of the process.

Mr. Eccles would just like the high school issue stopped and let the people decide in a general election. 

Dr. Spitz returned focus to the $5.8M needed and the $1.9M needed at the high school.  Mr. Eccles stated that he cannot support a bond issue knowing exactly what was said that you can write a bond issue tomorrow.  Mr. Eccles stated that the Board floated a bond in November 2002 just to pay ATS&R.  Mr. Eccles stated he cannot have a $110M bond issue hanging over his head. 

Mrs. Butville commented how long do we put it off.  Can we subject the students to the conditions at the high school, such a health risks, etc.

Mr. Wilson stated that the Board needs to move on with the budget and the $5.8M problem.  Mr. Wilson stated that he has instructed the architects to do no more until they are advised further.

Mr. Soifer questioned whether the $15M addresses the problems at Poquessing.  Mr. Soifer requested to know what are the actual items that need to be done so that the school is totally functional, whether Poquessing, Hoover, Heckman, etc.  Mr. Soifer requested an entire list of the legitimate capital improvements for all schools through 2009.

Mr. Paradise noted that the Administration can only take what direction it receives from the Board, and up until now the direction has been that there would be renovation or construction of a new high school and then renovation of Poquessing.

Mr. Minotti stated that the information provided is only envelope items, doors, windows, fire alarms, roofs, boilers, etc.  Mr. Minotti stated that through the years the plans have changed.

Mr. Paradise noted that the district should consider a contingency fund for miscellaneous, unexpected items.  The district cannot state to the Board with any kind of assurance that emergency roof repair may not be needed at a certain facility.

Mr. Wilson noted that the public has stated over and over to maintain the buildings.  This gives a partial plan to maintain the buildings and putting 4-5 mills into the regular budget as has been discussed will get the district started on what the public has asked us to do with our schools.

Mr. Stack stated that he supports Scenario 2 and supports $500,000 to be put into the capital reserve fund for this year. 

Ms. Drioli inquired what was needed to keep Neshaminy Middle up and running.  Mr. Minotti stated that Neshaminy Middle could cost $18M-$20M which is an old number.

Mr. Paradise noted that $15M covers the district for this year and three more years, Scenario 2 is a modified wrap, which would result in the least millage cost.  Dr. Spitz also supported that Scenario. 

Mr. Schoenstadt stated that he cannot support anything until the Board makes a decision on whether or not it is going to do something at the high school.  Unless there is the courage to speak out and state a position whether minds have been changed or not, as far as Mr. Schoenstadt is concerned this is not an option as long as there is another option that this Board approved, by consensus vote. 

Ms. Drioli, Mrs. Jowett, Mrs. Butville, and Mr. Soifer also support Scenario 2.  Mrs. Bostwick feels that the children are losing out and the deal will never be gotten again and facing this issue in another five years and payments will be double. 

Mr. Eccles stated that until the high school issue is put to rest he cannot support any budgetary increases. 

Mr. Paradise stated that it is important that there is consensus because starting in July roof work will begin based on this premise. 

d)      Approval of Budgetary Increase for Federal and other Programs (2002-2003)

Mr. Paradise noted that during the course of the year the district receives Federal and State grants and in order to properly account for them a motion is necessary to open the budget and add them to the budget.

e)      Approval of Year End Budget Transfers

Mr. Paradise noted that a Year End Budget Transfer motion will be provided at the next public meeting.

f)      Bids/Budget Transfers

Information distributed prior to the meeting.  Mr. Paradise reviewed the following bids:

Bid No. 03-29 Data Center Electrical Upgrade

Bid Amount:  $26,504.00

The bid is for installation of electrical equipment awarded under Bid 03-31.

            Bid No. 03-31 Data Center Electrical Upgrade

            Bid Amount:  $46,146.00

            The bid is for electrical equipment for District Office Data Center to replace existing main power  equipment and add a
            back-up power capability.

The two bids and Budget Transfer Report No. 03-8 (Working Copy) will be presented for approval at the June 26th Public Meeting.

g)      Adoption of Budget for 2003-2004

·      Loan for Elementary Computers

Mr. Wilson advised that further reductions have been implemented and at the last meeting the proposed millage increase was 34.1.  Mr. Wilson advised that with the prepayment of the Blue Cross/Blue Shield payment the anticipated millage increase would be 28.5 mills.  Mr. Wilson further advised that the elementary computers to be purchased are included in that figure.  Mr. Wilson stated that should the Board wish to fund the computers over a four year period it would be an additional 1.97 mills tax break. 

Mr. Paradise advised that the fuel oil bid was delayed this year due to the war, and the district is under budget $112,000 for diesel fuel and $191,000 for fuel oil.  These figures could offset the cost of the elementary computer labs. 

Mr. Schoenstadt inquired regarding the proposed changes to the AE and music programs.  Mr. Wilson responded that what is happening at Heckman and Hoover is not occurring in any other school and it is extremely unfair.  The reason why these schools have more services than any other school in the district is due to the fact that they do not have enough academically enriched students.  The academically enriched teachers are doing a wonderful job working with other students.  Mr. Wilson stated if the Board wants to put Heckman and Hoover back in, then he would insist that one teacher is put at every elementary school which would equate to $700,000. 

Mr. Schoenstadt questioned why the district is taking the academically talented students and putting them at a disadvantage.  Why are we taking the teachers that teach the gifted in this district and putting them at a disadvantage?  Mr. Schoenstadt noted that it is difficult to conduct the program properly when teachers need to travel from school to school

Dr. Spitz noted that he has spent hours speaking with Dr. Muenker regarding the gifted program and Dr. Spitz fully appreciates the concerns that are being raised.  Dr. Spitz noted that Heckman and Hoover are the only two schools that have full time enrichment teachers.  Due to the overall decline in enrollment, those teachers spend less then half their time actually teaching identified AE students.  The rest of the time is spent doing enrichment activities throughout the schools, which is very beneficial.  However, as Mr. Wilson noted it is very unfair.  Dr. Spitz noted that he would love to put a full time enrichment teacher at every school; however, the reality is that the program would need to be redesigned if the enrichment activities would continue for non identified students.  Dr. Spitz advised that from a purely financial standpoint he cannot support adding six additional staff so that equity exists amongst the buildings.  Dr. Spitz further noted that the numbers in the AE program are declining.  The rubric for identifying students has not changed and it was specifically suggested to the district by the Pennsylvania Department of Education.  Dr. Spitz felt that the identification of students by the district could be done quicker.  Dr. Spitz stated that the Education Development Committee will examine the AE curriculum.  Dr. Spitz further noted that next year the district will be audited by the state, which will include the gifted program, and the state will certainly come back with a series of recommendations.

Mrs. Bostwick inquired whether the district is flexible enough so that if the AE numbers increase could the district adapt without adding additional teachers and Mr. Wilson responded that was correct.

Mr. Schoenstadt noted that back in the 80’s each school had a gifted teacher and the students were tested and identified within thirty (30) days of registration and the district is not currently doing that.  Mr. Schoenstadt stated that an equal amount of resources has not been spent on the gifted children.

Mr. Wilson advised the Board that the gifted program is no longer afforded the same rights as under IDEA.  Multiple criteria exists to obtain entrance into the gifted program, which the state recommended during the district’s last program review.

·         Teacher questionnaire

·         Parent questionnaire

·         Standardized Test scores

·         IQ test

Mr. Wilson noted that all four (4) of the criteria must be met.  Mr. Wilson noted that years ago the criteria for the gifted program was the 90th percentile on standardized test scores, the district now goes to the 80th percentile.  Mr. Wilson noted that 15% of the general population is not gifted.  The delays are occurring due to the fact that there are multiple criteria.  Mr. Wilson noted that when a parent signs for permission to evaluate it takes forty-five (45) days, however a student will not be placed into the program just on the basis of an IQ of 130, all the multiple criteria must be met.

Ms. Drioli stated that the gifted child needs to have special programs and criteria, as does the special education student.  However, if a student is missing the program due to a couple of points, then the student is not truly mentally gifted.  Possibly if the average student was taken aside and worked with on a one to one basis, they too would be possible candidates for the gifted program.  Can the district afford this?

Mrs. Butville noted that special education is mandated by the state, the district is mandated to provide the services and the district is required to fund those programs.

Dr. Boccuti addressed the music program and advised that there is a total proposed cut in the music program of one (1) position, which equates to .2 at Maple Point, .4 at Poquessing and .4 at Sandburg.  Dr. Boccuti advised that this .2 is one period of one teacher.  At Poquessing and Sandburg it is recommended due to the size of the instrumental music program, which is generating lesson groups of one to two students.  The program was not built on private music lessons.  The proposed cuts would increase the lesson groups for instrumental music from 1-2 up to the area of six (6) students per lesson.

Dr. Spitz noted that Mr. Wyatt is working on the scheduling of the music program and if possible the district will provide the same program with one less staff member.  Dr. Spitz noted that he received correspondence from a staff member at Maple Point and virtually all the negative impacts have to do with scheduling conflicts.  Dr. Spitz noted that there will be no cuts in musicals, spring and winter concerts, ensembles, etc. 

7.      Superintendent’s Report

Mr. Wilson advised that the following Resolution signed by all nine board members will be forwarded to Governor Rendell:

Neshaminy School District
Resolution Regarding Campaign Promises 2002

            Whereas, during the election campaign of 2002, numerous campaign promises, including 50% state funding for local school districts, were made by candidates relative to the need for increased funding by the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania to support the state constitutional mandate of a thorough and efficient system of public education, and

            Whereas, without the fulfillment of such promises the ever-increasing burden of realty property taxes will remain onerous and intolerable, and

            Whereas, the elections have concluded and it is now time to fulfill and turn promises into legislative action,

            Now, Therefore, Be It Resolved by the Board of School Directors of the Neshaminy School District that correspondence be directed to Governor Edward Rendell and to the Bucks County legislative delegation requesting fulfillment of the aforementioned campaign promises, together with a copy of this Resolution, and that said Resolution and the correspondence responsive thereto be placed on PennLink for perusal of all other school districts with the Commonwealth, with the request of said districts that they, too, adopt similar resolutions and direct similar correspondence to Governor Edward Rendell and their local legislative delegations.

Copies of the resolution will be forwarded to the local newspapers and Board members.

8.       Committee Reports

a)      Board Policies

Meeting was canceled for this upcoming week.

b)      Educational Development

Dr. Spitz advised discussions ensued regarding lead teachers and textbooks.  PSSA discussions will continue in the fall.

c)       Finance/Facilities

Mr. Soifer advised a meeting will be scheduled when the direction of the bond issue is determined.

d)      IU Board

Ms. Drioli advised there was no report.

e)      Educational Foundation

Dr. Spitz advised a meeting will be held this upcoming Monday and a site was found for the fall fundraiser.  Dr. Spitz is working with the Solicitor regarding the Alumni directory.

f)        Technical School

Mrs. Butville stated the budget was passed and graduation will take place on Friday, June 13th.

g)      Technology

Mr. Stack advised there was no report.

Mr. Paradise noted that graduation will be broadcast live.  Mr. Paradise also noted that Robert Fleck, Tax Collector of Langhorne Borough, expressed an interest in not collecting the taxes.  Langhorne Borough is responsible for appointing a replacement, however, if an appointment is not made it is Mr. Paradise’s responsibility as School Board Treasurer to appoint someone to collect taxes.  Mr. Paradise stated that if the Borough does not appoint a replacement, Mr. Paradise would appoint Berkheimer to collect the taxes for Langhorne Borough.  Mr. Paradise noted that Berkheimer would charge approximately $4,500 to collect the school tax and per capita taxes for the year.

9.       Future Topics

Mr. Schoenstadt stated that he would like to see an analysis of the cost savings that would evolve with the elimination of tax collectors.

10.  Agenda Development for June 26, 2003 Public Meeting

13.      Correspondence

The Board Secretary advised that there was no correspondence.


Ms. Drioli moved the meeting be adjourned and Mrs. Jowett seconded the motion.  The Board unanimously approved the motion.  Mrs. Bostwick adjourned the meeting at 9:10 p.m.

Respectively submitted,

Anita E. Walls
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.