Board Attorney Lewis Lamar

Transcription

1 NASH-ROCKY MOUNT BOARD OF EDUCATION WORK SESSION MINUTES MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 25, 2006 AT 6:00 P.M. AT CENTRAL OFFICE, NASHVILLE, NC Board Members Present for Work Session Richard Horner, Chairman Evelyn Bulluck, Vice Chair Cindy Berry Robert Bynum Doneva Chavis Joe Edge Mary Lewis Foote Bob Jenkins Franklin Lamm Jim Lilley Walt Wiggins Board Attorney Lewis Lamar Others Present: Rick McMahon, Superintendent Leorita Hankerson, Assistant Superintendent Tommy Finch, Assistant Superintendent Mark Strickland, Special Assistant for Auxiliary Services Susan Little, Finance Officer Susan Blackwell, Deputy Finance Officer Sylvia Matthews, Executive Director Ella Batts, Executive Director Michael Perry, Executive Director Robin Boddie-Haggins, Executive Director Reed Jackson, Executive Director Debbie Harris Rollins, Executive Director Sandy Drum, Executive Director Venessa Jenkins, Administrative Assistant 1.0 Board Chairman Richard Horner called the meeting to order. 2.0 Chairman Horner announced the consent agenda would be created as the Board proceeds through the work session meeting. Items 1.1 through 1.6 would be placed on the regular agenda. 3.0 Business Items 3.1 Curriculum Update Ms. Hankerson gave an explanation of the Health and Drug Education Advisory Council and asked for approval of the following names to be accepted to the council: Erica McNeil, Student Representative Rocky Mount High School Page 1

2 Angie Miller, Healthful Living Coordinator K Dr. Michael Perry, Executive Director of Student Services Vincent Powell, Parent Representative Red Oak Middle School Motion was made by Bob Jenkins, second by Evelyn Bulluck to be placed on the Consent Agenda. Mr. Jenkins asked if any were repeat members and what was the process for selecting members. Ms. Hankerson stated that the Executive Director of Student Services is always on the advisory council and because Dr. Perry is new to the position, he needed to be approved. The same is true for Angie Miller, Healthful Living Coordinator. Parents and students cycle off and the next school in the cycle submit their nominations. Mr. Jenkins asked how often this advisory council met. Ms. Hankerson said the council meets once every quarter. Motion carried Leorita Hankerson asked for questions regarding the elementary, middle and secondary initiatives that the Board received in their packs. Mr. Jenkins asked if there were specific programs that the system was focusing on and actually setting goals such as to improve reading by a certain percent or all the students will be at a Level III or IV by a specific date. Ms. Hankerson stated that the Board will be receiving a school improvement plan from each school and deficiencies at each school have to be addressed. Mr. Jenkins asked if there was an overall Nash-Rocky Mount School Improvement Plan to address writing goals. Ms. Hankerson stated that there are several writing goals, for example; writing coaches in the high schools are to increase students efficiency. The systemwide goals are to focus on literacy, reading and writing across the system with all students scoring at least at a Level III. The goals are to increase the number of students scoring at or above Level III on the EOG and by 2013 everyone is to be at 100 per cent. Mr. Jenkins asked if the Board could take part in defining in percents a systemwide goal. Ms. Hankerson stated that the LEA School Improvement Plan had been submitted and it speaks to specific goals from past testing. Mr. McMahon stated that on the State Report Card our students are compared across the state in five areas. The system needs to establish systemwide goals that are aligned with school goals. We want all of our students reading at or above grade level and they are not there yet. In grades three through eight, the only area our students perform at is fifth grade math. Those are very specific things that are being addressed. Page 2

3 Mr. McMahon explained because of the delay in the math scores and ABC growth until November, it was not possible to compare the results from this year to last year to know what was needed to be done for this year. Mr. Jenkins asked if there would be a better success rate if the system focused on a much smaller number of initiatives. Ms. Hankerson said the system couldn t do that because every deficiency in every subgroup had to be addressed. Mr. Jenkins asked if the SAT preparation was at all the schools. Ms. Matthews stated the SAT Summer Camp was available to all high school students. The on-line SAT preparation was only at Rocky Mount High School because they chose to purchase it for their students. Ms. Bulluck stated she was impressed with the amount of information and she thought the initiatives were generic, but once the Board received the School Improvement Plans, then the initiatives would be specific. She asked for all the School Improvement Plans to be in the same format. Ms. Hankerson assured the Board members that all School Improvement Plans were in the same format. Mr. Lamm noted it would be difficult to finish the School Improvement Plans with the math score still in limbo. He, also, asked if anyone at DPI was being held accountable. Mr. McMahon stated the ABC growth drives the teacher bonuses. He explained that two companies had been contracted for the norming of the test and they hadn t been able to complete their work. Mr. Bynum asked for an explanation of Open Court Reading Ms. Batts explained the students were taught how to use the phonics approach. Mr. Bynum stated that he felt all of our programs were very exciting and putting the system on the right track. He was very concerned about student awareness of programs that were being offered at the schools. He wanted to know how the Academy information was disseminated as new students enrolled and for students entering their freshman year. He was interested in all the programs as to the grades they began in and the progression through grade levels. Ms. Hankerson explained students who are not at grade level have to be a part of whatever the program is and have a PEP (Personal Educational Plan). Ms. Chavis said that she has taken part in some of the Academy events and the information that is circulated is very thorough. Page 3

4 Mr. Lilley stated that so much of this information addresses staff development and he wanted to know how new employees were being trained after particular training sessions had been completed. Ms. Hankerson said that each school has staff development or a special time to bring all school members together and that is how they address staff development with new staff members or review staff development. Mr. Lilley said he would like the administration to think about how staff development was kept up with and secondly he would like more instructional discussion incorporated into each work session for information only items that dealt specifically with teaching children or the results of the teaching. He, also, wanted to be made aware of the initiatives that were stopped. He wanted to know when things were discontinued and the reasons the initiatives were not successful or if another program was better or more comprehensive. Mr. Jenkins agreed with Mr. Lilley and stated the Board needed to be more tied to the curriculum. Mr. McMahon stated that one of the models that is done is Train-A-Trainer, an individual at each school. It then becomes the trainer s responsibility at the school to train the new teachers. Mr. McMahon felt this model works well. Mr. Lilley asked if the administration had a way of making sure that was happening at the schools. Mr. Horner asked if there was a single document or guide for a quick reference of topics that bullet programs that were available to students. He would like the document to be user friendly. Ms. Matthews emphasized students receive information in their counselor s newsletters, announcements, postings on bulletin boards, the school s web site and the school s TV announcement channel. Schools, also, use Connect Ed to share information. Motion was made by Bob Jenkins, second by Evelyn Bulluck to be placed on the Consent Agenda for information only. Motion carried. A motion was made by Mr. Jenkins to add Item called Early College Cost versus Out-of-District Student Tuition. Mr. Horner stated Item was added for information only by consensus. Mr. Jenkins asked if the system s tuition covers 100 percent of the cost for Early College, because he was uncertain about the cost of text books in the Articulation Agreement. Sylvia Matthews shared that the school system does not pay a fee to Nash Community College for dual enrollment based on the Articulation Agreement; consequently, it does not cost any money to purchase the NCC textbooks for the dual enrollment students. Those books belong to the Early College High School and are used again for other students. It does not cost the system any more Page 4

5 for the three out-of-district students than for any Early College High School student. Mr. Lamm asked why out-of-district students were being accepted when there was a waiting list. Ms. Hankerson said she could only address two of the students in open session and stated those two students had been in our system forever and their parents wanted them to finish this program. Mr. Edge stated he was at the Early College recently and because that program is growing so rapidly, the Board should think about space. Mr. McMahon said Early College had received four additional teachers this year and it had grown to 190 students. A doublewide had been added to the campus and converted to a lab this year. He felt the system would need to work with Nash Community College for space. Mr. Bynum asked what different programs and areas of study for specific disciplines were available to students. Ms. Hankerson asked Robert Bynum to get with Jane Brooks to discuss specific programs and areas of study that are within her department. 3.2 Finance Update Financial Statements for Local Current Expense, Capital Outlay and Food Services as of June 30, 2006, were presented by Susan Little. Ms. Little provided the Board with explanations of purpose codes and a brief description of the purposes. This information was provided as a supplement to help the Board understand the expenditures. Ms. Bulluck asked about individual line items and she thought that this detail was to give the Board a view of what was actually spent as of June 30. Ms. Little said it was a summary. Ms. Bulluck asked what purpose code Diversity Training would fall under. Ms. Little answered it would be 5900 Other Instructional Programs. She said individual line items were greater in length, and she tried to be keep it at a minimal. Ms. Bulluck stated she would like specific information on the Diversity Training. Mr. Jenkins asked if the money was being carried over from Kellogg Spark Grant, Regional Alternative Licensing and Early Reading First Grant on page one of the Revenues. Ms. Little stated that money was being carried over and some of the grants do not run from July 1 to June 30. Page 5

6 Bob Jenkins asked if the $3,202, of the Fund Balance Appropriated was not needed, if it stayed in the Fund Balance. Ms. Little explained that the total year-to-date revenues minus the total year-todate expenditures would give a very good indication of the total Fund Balance. Mr. Jenkins asked about the Nash Public School Building Fund on page one of the Capital Outlay Revenue Budget. He wanted to know if the money that wasn t requested, could be requested when and if the Board wanted it. Ms. Little said it could with an approved project. Bob Jenkins asked for an explanation of Nash County COPs (Certificate of Participation). Ms. Little said those had a life-to-date project. Those were the year-to-date expenditures and revenue collected as of June 30. They carried over the first of July. Mr. Horner told the Board that was not the system s money. It was money the County Commissioners allocated for our budget and it was shown on our financial statement. Mr. Jenkins stated the Nash Public School Building Fund showed $10, because of where the fiscal year ends versus the calendar year in which it was/ or will be given to us. And the Fund Balance Appropriated of $818, was not needed, so it stays in the Capital Fund Balance. The next question Mr. Jenkins asked was on page 2 of the School Food Service Expenditures, purpose code 8100 Pay to other Government Units. He asked for an explanation of the 41 percent more paid out than was budgeted. Ms. Little explained that the difference between the year-to-date expense and the year-to-date revenue was the money paid to current expense. Anything the child nutrition pays to us is reflected as an expense. The revenue code shows the difference from the Indirect Cost Allocated of year-to-date activity as $354,018.45, and that was what was recognized because Food Services kept that money. All the expenses were shown and then the part of the revenue they kept was recognized. Mr. Lilley asked if the current budget reflected the budget amendments during the year. Ms. Little said the current budget was the amended budget. The year-to-date activity was what was actually recognized because that was what was actually received and there was a corresponding entry on the expense side for the same amount of money. Motion was made by Bob Jenkins, second by Evelyn Bulluck to approve as presented to be placed on the Consent Agenda. Motion carried State Public School Fund Budget Amendment #3 was presented by Susan Little. She explained there was new money that has increased the State Public School Page 6

7 Fund by $2,913, and brings the total amount of the Current Amended Budget to $87,956, Motion was made by Bob Jenkins, second by Doneva Chavis to approve as presented and to place on the Consent Agenda. Mr. Jenkins asked for an explanation of Support Services and Transportation of Pupils because the amounts had decreased. Ms. Little explained that the Transportation of Pupils was an allocation of 90 percent and the additional 10 percent would be received in December. Support Services shifted funds into the Instructional Support Services. The money in Instructional Support Services was increased because of the higher-salaried staff in that program. Mr. Jenkins asked with this amendment how close was the system to being finalized for the rest of the school year. Ms. Little stated that the system had received over 90 percent of its allotments and the only big item that remained was Transportation of Pupils. There would be small amounts of money that would be received on a monthly basis, but that was about it. Mr. Horner pointed out that the state budget of approximately $88,000,000 provides our system for each student according to our 10th day ADM $4,828.00; and if Nash, Edgecombe and the City of Rocky Mount appropriations were added together the system would receive approximately $6, per student without federal money. If the federal money was counted it would be approximately $6, Ms. Foote asked about the funds that were received from More At Four and Smart Start. Ms. Little said those programs are Pre-K and are different from the K-12. The Pre-K students generate funds on a per student slot (per capita basis). The system receives reimbursements from More At Four. Ms. Foote asked if the tuition fee has changed for this year. Ms. Little stated the tuition fee was $1,188 in accordance with Board Policy. Motion Carried The purchase of Yellow School Buses was presented by Ms. Little. She stated that the state determines the system s replacement schedule for yellow buses and this year the system would be purchasing 21 yellow buses in the amount of $1,402,481 and financing it over a period of three years for a total financed cost of $1, Motion was made by Ms. Bulluck, second by Ms. Chavis to approve as presented to be placed on the consent agenda. Mr. Jenkins asked where the system receives the funds for the buses. Page 7

8 Ms. Little said that money flows through our books into Capital Outlay. It had nothing to do with the state transportation allotment. Motion carried. 4.0 Student Accountability for Academic Achievement Policy IHE was presented by Tommy Finch for a second reading and final approval. Mr. Finch said there was one small change in the wording that was made to accommodate the state guidelines. He pointed out the change being on page two in the second bullet, second paragraph that read at least a proficiency level of 2.5 had been changed to read at Achievement Level II or above. Motion was made by Bob Jenkins, second by Franklin Lamm to approve as presented to be placed on the Consent Agenda. Ms. Berry asked if this would be voted on at the next Board meeting. Mr. Finch said that it would, this was the final review. Motion carried. 5.0 Old Business 5.1 Ms. Bulluck updated the Board on Master Board Training stating that she had made a contact for October training, but had not received a response. 6.0 New Business 6.1 Ms. Chavis asked the finance officer to look into the Pay School Program, because without cost to our system, it allows the school system to take on-line payments in a secure manner for a number of transactions, for example; lunch, year book and picture money or any fees. The payments show up immediately. She stated there was a service fee, but most systems passed that fee along to the person making the on-line payment. Ms. Little stated she would look into it to make sure it followed Board policy, and then she would bring this information back to the Board. 7.0 Mr. McMahon presented the Superintendent s Reports. 7.1 Field Trips Northern Nash High, Allied Health Student Clinical Competition, Raleigh, NC, October 17, 2006, 10 students, 1 teacher Nash Central High, FCCLA Cluster Meeting, Charlotte, NC. November 17-19, 2006, 12 students, 1 teacher Southern Nash High, Girls State Tennis Playoffs, Burlington, NC, October 26-28, 2006, 12 students, 1 teacher Southern Nash High, Wrestling Eastern Regional Championship, Greenville, NC, February 16-17, 2006, 20 students, 2 teachers Northern Nash High, Wrestling Eastern Regional Championship, Greenville, NC, February 16-17, 2007, 20 students, 1 teacher Southern Nash High, Wrestling State Championship, Winston-Salem, NC, February 23-24, 2007, 7 students, 2 teachers Northern Nash High, HOSA State Competition, Greensboro, NC, March 8-10, 2007, 30 students, 3 teachers Southern Nash High, CANAMS Cheerleading Competition, Myrtle Beach, SC, March 16-19, 2007, 14 students 2 teachers Page 8

9 7.1.9 Nash Central High, FCCLA State Leadership Meeting, Greensboro, NC, March 19-21, 2007, 25 students, 3 teachers Southern Nash High, Golf State Championship, Destination To Be Announced, May 13-15, 2007, 5 students, 1 teacher Southern Nash High, Tennis State Championship, Destination To Be Announced, May 17-19, 2007, 12 students, 1 teacher Motion was made by Cindy Berry, second by Bob Jenkins to approve as presented to be placed on the Consent Agenda. Ms. Bulluck had a concern of teacher to student ratio with items 8.1.2, and and it being an overnight trip. Mr. McMahon assured the Board that there would be enough teachers and coaches to chaperone students on any field trip. Motion carried. 7.2 Donations Williford Elementary, $ donation from Williford Elementary School PTO for the purchase of three and five subject notebooks for all students in second and third grades Bailey Elementary, $500 donation from Eaton Corporation to help purchase a PA system for the school Middlesex Elementary, $5,000 donation from Middlesex Elementary PTO for playground equipment Rocky Mount High, $500 donation from Wal-Mart for the Rocky Mount High School Athletic Department to be used for the Cheerleaders Nash-Rocky Mount Public Schools, three laptop computers donated from Hospira for the three finalists for Teacher of the Year Motion was made by Doneva Chavis, second by Evelyn Bulluck to approve as presented to be placed on the Consent Agenda. Motion carried. 8.0 Chairman Richard Horner announced the following upcoming meetings: 8.1 Regular Board Meeting, Monday, October 2, 2006, Central Office at 7:00 p.m. 8.2 Work Session Meeting, Monday, October 16, 2006 Nashville Elementary at 6:00 p.m. Dinner..5:30 p.m. 9.0 Mr. Wiggins made a motion, second by Bob Jenkins that the Board go into closed session to consult with their attorneys on a matter within and to preserve the attorney-client privilege, and instruct the staff on the position to be taken on behalf of the board regarding material aspects of a contact and acquire real property and to discuss a personnel issue. Motion Carried 10.0 Mr. Horner recessed the meeting at 7:30 p.m. for approximately 10 minutes before going into closed session. Page 9

10 11.0 The Board returned to open session at 8:06 p.m. Upon returning to open session, Chairman Horner asked Mr. McMahon about the progress of the districting of the Englewood Elementary and Winstead Avenue Elementary attendance zones. Mr. McMahon said that the preliminary work was underway. A general discussion followed. Mr. Jenkins stated that the Board should keep in mind the current feeder system for establishing attendance zones. Further discussion followed. Upon motion to adjourn by Mr. Lamm, second by Mrs. Berry and unanimously approved, the Chairman adjourned the meeting at 8:15 p.m. Richard A. McMahon, Superintendent Richard P. Horner, Board Chairman Page 10

11