Minutes – February 8, 2018

BERKSHIRE HILLS REGIONAL SCHOOL DISTRICT

Great Barrington                   Stockbridge                 West Stockbridge

SCHOOL COMMITTEE MEETING

Regular Meeting

Monument Mountain Regional High School – Library

February 8, 2018 – 7:00 p.m.

Present:

School Committee:                S. Bannon, A. Potter, J. St. Peter, D. Singer, A. Hutchinson, R. Dohoney,

K. Piesecki, B. Fields, S. Stephen

Administration:                      Sharon Harrison

Staff/Public:                            B. Doren, M. Berle, K. Farina, S. Soule, K. Burdsall

Absent:                                   D. Weston, P. Dillon

List of Documents Distributed:
Good News from All Schools
MM Finance Committee Conversation FY19
DBM Finance Committee Conversation
Student Centered Learning Document
February 8, 2018 Personnel Report
2018-2019 Draft School Committee Calendar with Tentative Dates

RECORDER NOTE:  Meeting attended by recorder and minutes transcribed during the meeting and after the fact from live recording provided by CTSB.  Length of meeting:    1 hr.  minutes.

CALL TO ORDER

Chairman Steve Bannon called the meeting to order immediately at 7pm following 6:30pm tours of high school science labs.

PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE

The listing of agenda items are those reasonably anticipated by the chair, which may be discussed at the meeting. Not all items listed may in fact be discussed, and other items not listed may be brought up for discussion to the extent permitted by law. This meeting is being recorded by CTSB, Committee Recorder, members of the public with prior Chair permission and will be broadcast at a later date. Minutes will be transcribed and made public, as well as added to our website, www.bhrsd.org once approved.

Executive Session: (Chapter 30A, Sections 21, #2, 3)

Negotiations/Tuition Agreements – The Berkshire Hills Regional School District School Committee will enter into executive session pursuant to M.G.L. c. 30A, Section 21 (a) (3) to discuss strategy with respect to Tuition Agreements (Farmington River & Richmond).  Following Executive Session, the School Committee will reconvene in open session.

MINUTES:

None

TREASURER’S REPORT:

DUE TO  TECHNICAL DIFFICULTIES, THE FIRST 20 MINUTES OF THE FOLLOWING MEETING WERE NOT RECORDED.

SUPERINTENDENT’S REPORT:

• Good News:
  • Muddy Brook Regional Elementary School – Mary Berle, Principal:
  • Du Bois Regional Middle School – Ben Doren, Principal:
  • Monument Mountain Regional High School – Amy Rex, Principal
• Approval of Donations (Wisdom Lodge, Rotary)
• Set Public Hearing Date – FY19 Budget
• FY19 School Calendar –
• Continued Discussion and Review FY19 Draft Preliminary Operational Budget – S. Harrison: The plan for tonight is a discussion and answering questions on any part of the budget, but specifically we were thinking about the middle school and high school.  We will have just a few minute overview from each of the principals.  Doren:  I know you had a chance to look at the presentations that we put together from the finance subcommittee, so I will just go over that rather quickly.  There was an intro: met needs, ongoing needs and reallocation of resources.  With the met needs, just a lot of appreciation for working with Kate over the last several years and putting together these specialized programs.  Things are humming along really well for our emotional behavior students and this year for the autism behavior center.  The ABC program is just phenomenal with the staff that we used to launch the program.  Thank you Kate for that.  Also the BCBA and ATL, that is the Behavior Analyst and the Educational Team Leader really just making our supported kids really in depth.  Additional community time is nice to see a lot of the coordination going on on the depth and maturity of those programs.  The ongoing needs are the big ones.  We talked a lot about funds for professional development on specific areas that faculty has designated.  We have started work on that.  Both shared leadership and activities we are trying to meet all the leadership needs finding it hard to do so we are trying to bring some equity into the after school programming.  We actually have some of the highest needs students with needs met but we don’t actually have enough programming after school for a range of students.  A big one is paraprofessional coverage.  Just through the cuts over the past 4 years or so, we have cut several paraprofessionals and we have started to feel the pain especially in lunch coverage and recess as well as course coverage around the lunch and recesses.  We just don’t have enough paras to cover all of the students and also to give adequate safety coverage to lunch and recess.  With these new programs, materials for ABC and TLC, we need more speech services in ABC and we pretty much decided at this point we don’t need to split the ABC program into an autism program because next year we look like our cases will allow us to maintain but in the future we may have that.  The reallocation of resources, things have been working out for the past two years that came out of reimagination; really deepening the work of performance music and equity.  The instructional framework in 6th grade has gone quite well.  We will see if we can move it on to next year working with 7th and 8th grade on connecting them and making that instruction much more deep with collaboration with high school teachers and really expand on the advisory program.  B. Fields:  How many paras do you have now?  B. Doren:  Right now we have about 11 maybe 12 classroom paras.  We have extra ones that are specialized in the ABC and TLC programs.  Those are 1:1.  B. Fields:  For you to adequately do what you just said in your needs, now many do you need:  B. Doren:  Honestly, probably two but I put in for one just because I know that the budget is tight.  One would make a world of difference; two more paras would allow me to meet the needs of all the students that we need to support.  J. St. Peter:  It is funny that you bring up the lunchtime, because I have been getting some contacts from some parents from the middle school that are concerned about the lunch time and recess and not going out.  That falls right into this category with the need for more supervision.  B. Doren:  We are short.  It is a tense situation.  During the 5th and 6th grade lunch happens the 7th and 8th graders are in their class.  7th and 8th graders lunch happens while 5th and 6th graders are in class.  There a tension of pulling paras out of classroom support to cover.  We need safety and the ability to go outside even in the cold weather which creates some issues.  J. St. Peter:  The feedback I’m getting is there is a definite need for that increase in personnel.  B. Fields:  So one would definitely be a lunch para.  B. Doren:  The primary issue I have is those two lunch recess areas where I don’t have enough coverage for classes and for lunch and recess.  It would still be tight if I got one more and but fully flush with two.  There are other needs in the other periods so the para would help with the lunch and recess but also the other periods of the day would be benefitted.  R. Dohoney:  Currently are paras servicing our after school program as it is now and are powers ever utilized for after school programming?  B. Doren:  Project Connection, definitely.  But that is not part of their day contract.  They are brought on through the stipends through Project Connection.  Lots of our paras and secretaries teach classes for Project Connection and it is wonderful.  The paras are either support people and they are in special ed to support students but paras also lead classes as well.  They get paid on that different scale of quality.  R. Dohoney:  You and I have discussed expanding our after school programming, we don’t know what is going to happen to Project Connection, if we had developed some after school programming from other funding sources including potentially general fund sources, would you envision paras participating in that?  B. Doren:  That is interesting.  I haven’t ever thought of it or have had a para that has stepped up with an idea; I’ve never asked.  It has always need teachers that lend that.  I don’t know what the rules are with a Unit C person taking it on.  But it would be great and they could run some wonderful programs in Project Connection so why not.  S. Bannon:  It is in the Unit A contract, Exhibit B, it is open to anyone.  B. Doren:  We use the funds we have.  We do the newspaper, we do the yearbook, we do a few sport activities but definitely not meeting with the demand of what kids would do.  In the past four years, we have done lots of cuts so my second and third year we bumped it up and were able to fill it with kids and programming.   S. Bannon:  Just so you know Dan is at a parent teacher conference tonight and one of the tensions the school committee has had over the past 20 years of me being here is we have a district calendar but we always seem to have some conflict, some understandable, and this is one of them.  It shouldn’t of happened but it happens.  We just have to work harder.  You wonder why it is hard to get parents on the school committee when you schedule things like plays, parent teacher conferences, etc., then you wonder why you can’t even get parents to think about it.
• Rex:  Being new, I wasn’t really sure what the met needs were or what the ongoing needs needed to be or what the unmet needs were or how to reallocate funds but I did the best I could in terms of my very short time here.  Met needs seem to be the development of the department deans and that was new and came out of last years budget so I have been working with them and really developing a shared governance model for MMRHS.  I think they sorely were missing that consistency around that.  Each year for the last four or five years, they have had kind of a different model with different people serving in different roles but this is a true leadership team that really needs to stay intact and work to support being stewards of the vision of learning.  Not just managing departments but really how to move the school forward.  I am doing some work with them around that.  It has been good.  We have finally reached a turning point where the work that we are doing is clear to everybody as far as roles and how to contribute and have difficult conversations.  I think when a new leadership team comes together that is one of the first challenges that everybody doesn’t want to step on somebody else’s toes.  I think they have kind of gotten over that and are making progress.  Ongoing needs are focused around students center learning and staying aligning with the district improvement plan; looking at progressional development for competency reading and learning; meeting diverse needs; having a voice and choice in the classroom and in the school and having full inclusion in the classrooms.  Also looking at the acquisition of resources so with supplies for the science labs, some more technology and some of the departments need updated textbooks and materials.  Also looking at structures that are happening but not intentionally, so things like system of supports and interventions for students that are at risk or not at grade level.  I think folks are going the best that they can with that but there is no system in place to ensure that nobody is slipping through the cracks there.  The department deans and I are evaluating scheduling and some grading and reporting practices.  Also, I am seeking an athletic and co-curricular director.  I think that over the years especially more recently this has been piecemealed together and divided up amongst several people and I think one of the setbacks has been that there hasn’t been one person who can really articulate a clear vision of programming for athletics and co-curricular and then do the work that is necessary that it is carried through so all students have a really quality experience.  That is one thing that we are seeking.  In terms of the reallocation of funds, it is being committed to the district initiatives around right sized classrooms and looking at how to program so that our funds are being used in the most effective and efficient way and I just need some more time to figure that out.  B. Fields:  I would like to talk to you about this athletic and co-curricular position then I will go into the leadership thing.  What is the salary we have established in the contingency fund for this position.  S. Harrison:  The salary hasn’t been set yet, but we did put aside $70,000 for it.  Would this position carry with an evaluative component where not just coaches but the whole….Dan brought it up in a meeting about a year ago in regards to co-curriculars.  We offer many co-curriculars but there doesn’t seem to be an evaluative tool to do that.  Would this be part of that?  A. Rex:  Yes, absolutely and I think that there would be a real opportunity.  I have noticed that some of the co-curricular programming is really strong and other components are really weak and I think it is because there isn’t a person there to really provide that sort of guidance.  It could be simple things like who to connect with in the community that could help support you or help with some of that legwork.  I think this person could work with some of our community partnerships like Shakespeare or Jacob’s Pillow, I don’t think we are getting the most bang for our buck there because there isn’t somebody who is meeting with them on a regular basis and really understanding what they are doing and could they be doing more with us.  Especially with Jacob’s Pillow.  I don’t think we maximize the great expertise they bring to our building effectively.  I also see this as maybe an opportunity for us to begin to bridge some programs like the Farm to School store and the Project Spout.  I really think it could be expanding some after school activities for students that typically don’t get involved in athletics full time but maybe some intramurals.  B. Fields:  In regards to the supervision and evaluation of coaches, one of the things I have been thinking about recently especially with this study on CTE and concussions that we are now knowing it is hits not concussions.  Are our coaches currently who are coaching, given any in class training as to how, not just from a medical point of view, but from a holistic point of view as to what they should be doing with their athletes?  A. Rex:  I would say probably not.  B. Fields:  Would this be possible under this position?  A. Rex:  Absolutely.  I think it not even with just the concussions but a whole broad range of health and safety just in terms of appropriate stretching and other training programming for students and having some consultation and expertise.  I think also with substance use.  We have some concerns there as well.  B. Fields:  Under this department dean thing, I taught at the high school for 40 years, is this another word for department chair?  A. Rex:  I am not really sure how the department chair worked.  B. Fields:  The department chairs basically had some of the power to hire, evaluated and part of your personal record and permanent record was the department head’s evaluation.  They basically coordinated ordering all materials; I would suggest a book, what does the budget look like, he would come back and say if you want to use it, I have some much in my budget, I can get it but the key was evaluation.  A. Rex:  No, they cannot evaluate and that is because of the new state endorsement that state evaluators have to have so that is a little problematic.  We look at it from a little different way.  So instead of evaluating you would more coaching and guiding kind of person and we need to provide some training for folks to do that instructionally.  Our focus is really around teaching and learning and programming so if we are starting an new initiative around differentiated instruction, the expectation is the department deans become somewhat experts in that and can dispense that information in their departments.  B. Fields:  This is just an information question but there used to be a curriculum steering committee at the high school that each of the departments had a representative which was the dean plus another teacher and they looked at the curriculum every year and it was about 16 people.  Is that coming back or has that….A. Rex:  It is interesting because sbeing my first go around just recently with this, it needs some work, but there is a group and it has representatives from each of the departments.  What they do is just look at new course proposals and that is problematic because they don’t have the 10,000 foot view of the whole program of studies that really needs to be …. You can’t look at one and not the other.  We will work on that.  B. Fields:  But that could be the direction that this model would be going to because you can’t revise a curriculum unless you know what is there.  R. Dohoney:  The proposed new activities person, that person would report directly to you as principal?  A. Rex:  Yes.  R. Dohoney:  It would not be a member of any of our collective bargaining units?  Maybe that is a question for Sharon or Steve.  S. Harrison:  We don’t have anything on that yet.  S. Bannon:  As I understand it, it depends on if we call it an administrative position or a teaching position.  If it is a teaching position, then it would be Unit A but if it is an administrative position then it would not.  If they do any sort of teaching, which I don’t hear that being proposed, it would have to be Unit A.  My guess is it would be an independent not an administrative for political reasons.  That would be my guess.  S. Harrison:  It would be like the food service director.  R. Dohoney:  Has there been any dialogue from the union to make sure they don’t have a different opinion.  S. Bannon:  Not that I know of.  It doesn’t sound like this falls into a teaching position.  R. Dohoney:  I don’t think it does either but I just wanted to make sure.  Is that how you understand it Amy?  A. Rex:  Yes.  R. Dohoney:  This estimate of $70,000 and I know that is not an upfront number, a number of line items would be eliminated with this, correct?  S. Harrison:  What I am doing for next week’s meeting, I did take out the director and assistant directors salaries out of the coaching line in anticipation of this position.  R. Dohoney:  Roughly how much is that?  S. Harrison:  Just over $20,000.  R. Dohoney:  So worst case scenario, the next increase is $50,000 not $60,000.  A. Rex:  There is also a handful of stipends that would go away of this position.  S. Harrison:  Peter and I did talk about that and it was a little concerned about the first year, taking everything away while this is ramping up because it is a new position it is going to be much different the way it has been in the past that taking it out immediately so I think there is more discussion with Peter.  A. Rex:  I think there are some people who are dying to get rid of those even though they would be giving up the stipends, they are done with it.  S. Bannon:  that would be something that would have to be approved.  The other thing to realize is if our athletic director and assistant athletic director give up $20,000 it is a little unfair to say that is our only savings because quite honestly when and if we are only hiring a new athletic director, $20,000 wouldn’t even cover it.  We are underpaying that position now.  Even if we didn’t create this position, there would be an increase somewhere along the line if we had someone other to that that position.  S. Harrison:  In the contract, the stipended positions could remain in the contract and not be filled.  S. Bannon:  Yes, that is perfectly fine to do.  R. Dohoney:  It would be good to review all the stipends that can be eliminated with this new position.  S. Bannon:  Even if Peter wants to give us the reason why not to eliminate them, we still would like to know they….R. Dohoney:  If he talks us out of it, he talks us out of it.  B. Fields:  This person would be evaluating the musical and all that.  A. Rex:  Yes.  A. Hutchinson:  What is this person training or background?  A. Rex:  There are programs that train people as athletic directors and co-curricular directors.  It would be a minimum of a bachelor’s.   S. Harrison:  Do we have the job description?  A. Rex:  You do, yes.  R. Dohoney:  We approved it.  S. Harrison:  We can pull that and bring it back.    R. Dohoney:  Is this person going to have budgetary responsibility.  Ultimately, I know that is Sharon but will this person be submitting a separate budget.  A. Rex:  We would do it collaboratively.  R. Dohoney:  But they would have some responsibility composing that and projecting things for us.  A. Rex:  Yes.
• Updates:
  • Southern Berkshire Shared Services Project – P. Dillon: N/A

Sub-Committee Reports:

• Policy Sub Committee: N/A
• Building and Grounds Subcommittee: N/A
• Superintendent’s Evaluation Subcommittee: N/A
• Technology Subcommittee: N/A
• Finance Subcommittee: N/A
• District Consolidation & Sharing Subcommittee: N/A

Personnel Report:

• Retirement(s)
• Extra-Curricular Appointment(s)

Business Operation:

Education News:

Old Business:

New Business:

• Potential Vote of Tuition Agreements (Farmington River & Richmond) – R. Dohoney: As you know, I met with Farmington River at their school committee meeting last Thursday.  Both parties confirmed that we would like to continue the relationship.  There was some very positive discussion on both sides about why it is beneficial to everyone.  As you may recall, amidst some controversy at last negotiations, we were able to successfully negotiate an annual 4% increase which ended up as a net 20% increase over the last contract which we were really happy; I don’t know if they were quite as eager to sign that one.  After some back and forth they were willing to continue with the 4% per year annual increase going forward.  Their one request was that this time we go to a term of five years rather than three years.  That is something we have not done before.  I can tell you going into my meeting with them, my prior instincts would not be go with longer with three years.  After speaking with them, I am personally in favor of the five years and I will be making a motion shortly that we approve a tuition agreement with them with an annual 4% increase for a term of five years until the ‘23 school year.  It think it provides stability.  As you know over the term, we are not the only school district they had a tuition agreement with.  When we impose these increases over a five-year term, I think we will result in what is a pretty equitable end point.  Not where we were originally when I got on this committee five or six years ago.  We had some rough negotiations and this one, we are all on the same page.

MOTION TO APPROVE A TUITION AGREEMENT WITH THE FARMINGTON RIVER REGIONAL SCHOOL DISTRICT COMMENCING WITH THE 2018-2019 SCHOOL YEAR AND RUNNING THROUGH THE 2022-2023 SCHOOL YEAR WITH INCREASE NEXT YEAR OF 4% AND CONTINUING WITH 4% INCREASES THEREAFTER INCLUDING WITH THE FINAL TUITION RATE FOR HIGH SCHOOL OF $10,297.32.  R. DOHONEY                  SECONDED:  A. POTTER     ACCEPTED:  UNANIMOUS

1. Bannon: This is for regular ed.  R. Dohoney:  Yes, we left that open; the SPED agreement.  I wanted to negotiate that.  I talked to Sharon and talked to them but that is something that Kate has to be more involved in as it is more technical.  A base point of that is the underlying rate so this goes into that.  K. Burdsall:  Sharon and I will talk about it before the next meeting.  S. Bannon:  Just the understanding is that, and it is not a bone of contention that Farmington River understands that special ed is separate from this agreement.

• Public Comment
• Written Communication

MOTION TO ADJOURN:   A. Potter             Seconded:  J. St. Peter                 Accepted: Unanimous

The next school committee meeting will be held on February 15, 2018 – Regular Meeting – Du Bois Regional Middle School, 7pm

Meeting Adjourned at 8:00 pm

Submitted by:  Christine M. Kelly, Recorder