The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2000-12-20 School Committee MinutesREADING SCHOOL COMMITTEE Reading, Massachusetts Regular Session December 20, 2000 CALL TO ORDER At 7:00 p.m. Chair Cavicchi called the meeting to order in the Superintendent's Conference Room. Present were School Committee members Cavicchi, Dahl, Griset and Twomey. Also present were Superintendent Harutunian and Associate Superintendent Richards. Ms. D'Antona arrived during executive session. EXECUTIVE SESSION At 7:05 p.m. Mr. Griset made a motion to enter into executive session for the purpose of conducting strategy sessions in preparation for negotiations with the Teachers' Association, Custodians and Maintenance Workers, Cafeteria Employees, Association of Secretaries and Clerks and Educational Assistants and to discuss pending litigation to return to regular session at approximately 8:00 p.m. Mr. Dahl seconded the motion. The vote was 4 -0 Ms. Cavicchi, Mr. Dahl, Mr. Griset and Mr. Twomey. CALL BACK TO ORDER At 8:12 p.m. Chair Cavicchi called the meeting back to order. SUPERINTENDENT'S REPORT Dr. Harutunian advised that the artwork displayed in the Committee room was the work of students at Reading Memorial High School. Chair Cavicchi read for the record a letter from Gadsby Hannah regarding the ten - taxpayer lawsuit. The letter is attached to and is a part of the minutes. CITIZENS' INPUT There was no citizen input. BUDGET PRESENTATION Dr. Harutunian thanked Richard Foley, Dennis Richards and the office staff for their assistance in preparing the FY02 budget. He advised that approximately 240 copies of the budget would be distributed and copies were available for the public at the library and at town hall. Dr. Harutunian reviewed the budget calendar with the Committee. Regular Session 2 December 20, 2000 Dr. Harutunian gave a presentation on the FY02 budget including guidelines used in developing the budget, analysis of the school budgets from FY93 to FY02, school budget by program FY99 to FY02, allocation of line item budget by program FY02, number of births and enrollment data from 1994 through projections to 2004. Dr. Harutunian advised that the Committee and members of the community are welcome to submit questions regarding the FY02 budget to him in writing by December 28, 2000. EXECUTIVE SESSION At 9:00 p.m. Mr. Griset made a motion to return to executive session for the reasons previously noted and not to return to public session. Mr. Twomey seconded the motion. The vote was 5 -0 Ms. Cavicchi, Mr. Dahl, Ms. D'Antona, Mr. Griset and Mr. Twomey. Respectfully submitted, Harry K. Harutunian, Ph.D. Superintendent of Schools r r V l VV IV - Y J Y A.1 VI , V� J I V I J Ronald G. Buscom Tbusconl @gnlaw.com Tel 617 -345 -7002 Fax 617- 204 -8002 l�:'IU JU 1 7311. .: Y[SII VIA FAX AND FIRST CLASS MAIL Dr. Harry K. Hartunian Superintendent Reading Public Schools 82 Oakland Road Post Office Box 180 Reading, MA 01867 Re: Mandell Litigation �Z +l" GADSSY HANNAH 11r December 20, 2000 225 Franklin Street Boston MA 02110 Dear Harry, Tel 617 345 7000 Fax 617 345 7050 www.ghlaw.com You have asked me to respond to the recent articles in the local newspapers wherein the plaintiff taxpayers have criticized the Superior Court decision by Judge Brassard as being in error, and allowing a "reckless expenditure of town money ". Judge Brassard's decision follows the dictates of the LeClair v. Town- of Norwell case, which was decided by the highest court in Massachusetts, the Supreme judicial Court, last November. In that case, the Court said that in matters involving the Designer Selection Statute, the Superior Court should consider two factors: (1) whether the Statute was violated, and (2) the effect of that violation upon the public interest. Judge Brassard, in his decision, followed the standard set forth in the LeClair case, namely, that the alleged violation of the Designer Selection Statute did not impact the purposes and intent of that law, and further, that to set aside the project for such a transgression would not serve the purposes and intent of the Statute, but would seriously negatively impact the public interest. Further, Judge Brassard found no merit to the legal argument advanced by the taxpayers and stated that the taxpayers' key case did not set forth the standard for the issuance of an injunction. He found instead that the LeClair case, cited by the Town, did set forth the standard. BOSTON a80174214.00C;1• WASHINGTON DC .i LVi VV 10:40 1't%A Ulf 04J / V f J Vt1UJLI 11tlly lIAn " "'•• W-j VVJ Dr. Harry K. Hartunian December 20, 2000 Page 2 GADSBY HANNAH «. The Town has received favorable determinations from Town Meetings, Town override votes, the Office of the Attorney General, and two Superior Court decisions. Such a record can hardly be deemed condoning a "reckless expenditure of town money ". I trust the foregoing addresses your concerns. Regards, MWW�� Ronald G. Busconi RGB;djwe CC' john P. Giffune, Esq.