Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2002-11-20 School Committee Minutes READING PUBLIC SCHOOLS 4 Reading, Massachusetts REGULAR SESSION November 20,2002 CALL TO ORDER At 7:35 p.m. Chair Griset called the School Committee to order and Chair Graham called the School Building Committee to order. Present were School Committee Members Cavicchi, Dahl, Griset, McFadden, Russo and Twomey, School Building Committee Members Graham, Radville, Cochrane,Perry, Carroll, Porter, Lacroix, Scarpitto and McRae. Also present were Superintendent Harmunian and Associate Superintendent Richards, architects Robert Peirce and Sid Bowen. CITIZENS INPUT There was no citizen input. � ==rn m �r-r— SCHOOL COMMITTEE CALENDAR D 3mm DMM NT Dr. Hamtunian advised that, as discussed, he would be revising the budge[ calendar C8 N reflect that the Committee would not receive the FY04 budget until after the I"of they year. 4 JOINT MEETING WITH SCHOOL BUILDING COMMITTEE Chair Graham stated outlined the process the School Building Committee had gone through to review the options for renovating Reading Memorial High School. He stated that at last night's School Building Committee meeting the Committee selected Option 3 for the renovation of Reading Memorial High School. He stated that Option 3 would be presented to Town Meeting, hopefully in January. He stated that Option l fell off the table quite some time ago because it would most adversely effect the education of students and there was no propelling economic benefit to selecting Option 1. Chair Graham stated that the one member who voted against Option 3 and for Option 2 stated that he felt Option 2 was the more conservation of the two options and felt that when the public votes they may be more willing to accept Option 2 than Option 3. Chair Graham stated that found it difficult to believe anyone would vote for Option 2 but vote no on Option 3 for a difference of roughly$30 per year per household. Sid Bowen of Flansburgh Associates gave a short presentation on Option 3. He discussed the meetings he has had with students, faculty and the School Building Committee. REGULAR SESSION 2 November 20,2002 Dr. Harutunian discussed the security benefits of having the fieldhouse connected to the main school. Mr. Dahl asked whether the architect had taken into account the problem that may be encountered in building on the soil between the fieldhouse and the school. Mr. Bowen stated that the issue had been raised and it is known that peat is in the area. He stated that the footprint for the building in that area is small and there are ways, after the geotechnical study, to figure the most cost effective way of dealing with the issue within the budget. Mr. Dahl asked whether an indoor track facility would remain in the fieldhouse. Mr. Bowen stated that the direction from the athletic director is that the track remains. He stated that decisions on how to utilize the space and the materials to be used in the fieldhouse would be discussed further into the process. Mr. Dahl stated that in prior meetings he had heard full presentations and discussions regarding the academic aspects of the renovation but had not heard information regarding the athletic aspects. He thanked Mr. Bowen for the information. Mr. McFadden asked why in the architect's chart under furniture it appeared that they were furnishing for 1,000 students and under technology for 1,200 students. Mr. Bowen stated that there should have been dollar signs before those figures. They estimated $1,000 per student for furniture and $1,200 per student for technology. Mr. McFadden asked for clarification on the reimbursement rate including Mr. Ryan's comment at a previous meeting about$15 per square foot for furniture. Mr. Bowen stated outlined the state reimbursement formula for the SBA. He stated that the figures shown this evening were not solid and money would move between lines. He stated clearly that the SBA has a cap on renovations and that he believed the renovations would exceed the cap. He estimated the SBA cap to be$49 to $50 million. He noted that they had not included the children in the RISE program in their figures and that including RISE would increase the cap somewhat. Mr. Russo moved that the School Committee direct the School Buildine Committee to explore spending less to renovate the high school and redirect the savings to increase teachers' pay and new curriculum. Mr. McFadden seconded the motion. 4 REGULAR SESSION 3 November 20,2002 Mr. Russo stated that spending $54 million on a building project is out of balance with our needs. He stated that all the studies he has reviewed indicate that the key factors in increasing student performance is retaining the best teachers and curriculum, parent influence, peer environment and school administrators. He stated that Reading has been able to maintain high MCAS scores without upgrading the building. He stated that the building should be upgraded in a reasonable manner. Dr. Harutunian noted that the School Building Committee is an independent board and the School Committee cannot direct the School Building Committee. He suggested that the motion be amended to state recommend instead of direct. He stated that after the Parker renovation there was a significant improvement in teacher morale. He stated that the money for the operational budget is different than capital money for building projects. Chair Graham stated that the School Building Committee is a special Committee of town meeting, He stated that the Committee will make a recommendation to Town Meeting and Town Meeting will decide on the project. He noted that after the Parker renovation Dr. Delaney told him that he could not believe the impact the new building had on student education. He stated that he agreed teaches and curriculum are an important part of the educational process, there is a strong feeling in the community that we have reached a point where the environment at RMHS is unacceptable. Mr. Dahl stated that a failure to renovate the high school might negatively impact the highs school accreditation. He stated that a failure to renovate will result in a loss of some of Reading's best students and that will negatively impact the MCAS scores. He noted that the Town's history of partial renovation has not been good and cited example of Eaton and Birch Meadow. Mr. Radville stated that students are not a business product and the goal is to improve students' lives. He stated that motivating students and faculty would be difficult if progress is not made in the renovation of RMHS. Mr. Graham reviewed the benefit of state reimbursements for building projects. Mr. Twomey stated that we as a community place a value on our students and educational system and we need to send that message to students and faculty by properly renovating RMHS. Ms. Perry stated that the taxpayers must be allowed to make the decision. REGULAR SESSION 4 November 20,2002 4 Chair Griset stated that he know people who have left the community because of the delay in the school projects. He stated that he assumes Mr. Russo is not attempting to stall another building project and asked what type of renovation plan Mr. Russo would support. Mr. Russo stated that he reviewed the Strekalovsky&Hoit proposal and agreed that we need a renovation of between $25 and $30 million. He stated that he is hoping to engage in a dialogue regarding spending$27 million in resources on a building project. He stated that he wants to give students a greater opportunity so they can get into the best colleges. Chair Griset stated that Mr. Russo had been on the Committee for 2 years and has never moved to increase teacher wages or add or change curriculum. Mr. Radville stated that the Strekalovsky&Heir report options when looked at in 2002 numbers range from $44 to 65 million. Mr. McFadden stated that the School Building Committee has worked long and hard to review the options and make a determination on a recommendation to present to Town Meeting. He stated that he seconded Mr. Russo's motion because Mr. Russo is entitled to view his opinion but that he believed it was almost disrespectful to the School Building Committee to come in at the end of the process and make this motion. He stated that he hoped Mr. Russo would consider withdrawing the motion and moving forward with the project. Mr. Russo stated that Chair Griset's comments were not accurate. He stated that he has, on numerous occasions, discussed Chicago math and whole language and that he had tried to discuss in open session his feelings regarding teacher pay but was prevented from doing so. He stated that in response to Mr. McFadden that the project is not over until someone signs the contract. He stated that he can't stop anything here and he is looking for balance. Mr. McDonald of the Finance Committee stated that if you cut the cost of the project by $10 million the state is paying $6 million so you are only saving$4 million and if you divide that over the 25 year bond issue you are only saving a couple of hundred of thousand per year and there is no guarantee that the money would go back to the schools. Mr. Russo moved to amend the orieinal motion to change the word direct to recommend. Mr. McFadden seconded the amendment to the motion. The vote on the motion as amended was 1-5 Mr. Russo voted yes, Ms. Cavicchi,Mr. Dahl, Mr. Griset, Mr. McFadden and Mr. Twomey voted no. The motion did not carry. 4 4 REGULAR SESSION 5 November 20. 2002 Mr. Twomey stated that he believed it would be appropriate this evening for the School Committee to endorse the School Building Committee's recommendation to move Option 3 forward. Mr. Twomey moved that the School Committee endorse the recommendation of the School Buildine Committee for Option 3 for Readine Memorial High School. Mr. McFadden seconded the motion. The vote was 5-1 Ms. Cavicchi, Mr. Dahl, Mr. Griset,Mr. McFadden and Mr. Twomey voted yes,Mr. Russo voted no. Mr. Twomey thanked the School Building Committee for their hard work and dedication to the students of Reading. Mr. Dahl thanked the School Building Committee for their work and their recommendation that meets the needs of the students and community as a whole. He also thanked Sid Bowen and Robert Peirce of Flansburgh. Ms. Cavicchi thanked the Committee for their work and stated that she was comfortable with Option 3. Dr. Harutunian thanked the School Building Committee and in particular Chairman Russ Graham and member Rich Radville for their work. He also thanked Sid Bowen and Robert Peirce of Flansburgh Associates. Mr. Russo stated that he appreciates the work of the School Building Committee and stated that because he does not fully agree with the recommendation it should not be taken as a criticism of anyone's character and that his disagreement has nothing to do with any individual. Matt Wilson stated that he is a member of Building Pride, a group of residents working to urge Town Meeting to take the issue of the renovation of Reading Memorial High School up as soon as possible and encourage a quick vote early this winter by the public. Mr. Wilson also encouraged the Committee to move forward with the 5th elementary school in a separate vote early this winter. Deb Gilberg stated that she is a member of PEP, an organization working to inform parents about education issues. She stated that PEP's focus was moving the new elementary school forward but that PEP also supported the high school project and Option 3. She stated that PEP would urge Town Meeting and the Board of Selectmen to put both projects on the ballot for a special election. 4 REGULAR SESSION 6 November 20, 2002 Mr. Ryan stated that based on the SBA reimbursement cap formula the reimbursement for the project would be $40 million. ADJOURN At 8:45 p.m. Mr. McFadden moved to adjourn. Ms. Cavicchi seconded the motion. The vote was 6-0 Ms. Cavicchi.Mr. Dahl,Mr. Griset, Mr. McFadden, Mr. Russo and Mr.Twomey. Respectfully submitted, ,Harry K. Harutuman, Ph.D. Superintendent of Schools 4 4