WAYNE CENTRAL SCHOOL DISTRICT |
BOARD OF EDUCATION MEETING AGENDA | |
DATE: February 13, 2002 TIME: 7:15 p.m. PLACE: District Office Board Room |
7:15 | Executive Session | |
7:30 | Call to Order /Pledge of Allegiance | |
7:35 | Approval of Agenda/Approval of MINUTES | |
Att. 1 | ||
7:40 Public Comment | |||
7:50 Board Member Comments | |||
7:55 | Board President’s Comments | ||
8:00 | Superintendent’s Report |
1. | Middle School Science OLYMPIAD Team | ||
Att. 2 | |||
2. | Staff Reviews | ||
3. | Model Schools Presentation | ||
4. | Building Project Update | ||
5. | 2002-03 Budget Presentation – Capital Portion | ||
Att. 3 | |||
6. | Student Questions |
8:40 | Board Action Items |
1. | Personnel Action | |
Att. 4 | ||
2. | CSE / CPSE Action | |
Att. 5 | ||
3. | Consensus Agenda: | |
Att. 6 |
1) | Webster CSD Health Contract | |
2) | Newark CSD Health Contract | |
3) | Gifts to District | |
9:15 | Public Comment/Board Comments | |
9:20 | Adjournment |
Next Meeting: February 27, 2002 6:30 p.m. District Office Board Room | |||
District Mission Statement | |
Based on the belief that all students can learn, the staff of the Wayne Central School District accepts the responsibility to teach all students, regardless of differences, the fundamental skills. We further accept the responsibility to challenge all students to attain higher levels of achievement. Wayne Central will provide the opportunity, environment, and encouragement to meet this goal while developing the whole child, physically, socially, emotionally, and culturally. | |
Att. 1 |
WAYNE CENTRAL SCHOOL DISTRICT | |||||||||||||||||||
Ontario Center, New York 14520 |
BOARD OF EDUCATION MINUTES | UNOFFICIAL UNTIL APPROVED |
DATE: Wednesday, January 23, 2002 | TIME: 7:30 p.m. | |||||||||||||||||||
TYPE: Regular Business Meeting | PLACE: Ontario Elementary School | |||||||||||||||||||
PRESENT: Trustees Anderson, Brunner, Griswold, Johnson, Lyke, Ratcliffe, Robusto, Triou, Wyse; District Clerk Switzer; Administrators Havens, Young, Armocida, La Ruche, Siracuse, Saxby, Woodard, Atseff, Spring, Pearles, Blankenberg | ||||||||||||||||||||
GUESTS: Visitor’s Roster filed in clerk’s file, this meeting | ||||||||||||||||||||
I. | TOUR OF ONTARIO ELEMENTARY SCHOOL | |||||||||||||||||||
Prior to the business meeting, trustees and school personnel toured Ontario Elementary School and conducted their annual visit pursuant to §1705 of the State Education Law. |
II. | CALL TO ORDER: 7:30 p.m. by Mark A. Wyse, School Board President | ||||||||||||||||||
III. | PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE | ||||||||||||||||||
IV. | APPROVAL OF AGENDA & MINUTES (January 9 & 16, 2002) | ||||||||||||||||||
Mr. Johnson offered a MOTION to approve the agenda for this evening’s meetingas presented/revised, 9 Ayes, 0 Nays, Carried. | |||||||||||||||||||
Mrs. Brunner offered a MOTION to approve the minutes of the meetings of January 9 & 16, 2002as presented. 9 Ayes, 0 Nays, Carried. | |||||||||||||||||||
A. | V. | PUBLIC COMMENT |
Mr. Wyse noted that school board meetings are meetings conducted in public, not public meetings. The Board of Education devotes a portion of the agenda to time for public comment and responses require the action of the total school board. The Board of Education encourages pubic participation and requests that each speaker provide their name, address, group(s) they represent (if any), and the topic(s) they wish to address. | |||||||||||||||||||
A. Matthew Mazura, 1981 Ridge Road, Ontario, read a prepared statement and welcomed school board members to Ontario Elementary School, his alma mater. He asked trustees to carefully consider the impact of any future capital facilities projects to consolidate Ontario Primary School and Ontario Elementary School and discontinue student use of Ontario Elementary School. He cited research that schools of 300 to 400 children are best for instructional purposes, student achievement, attitude, behavior and attendance, among others. (copy attached to these minutes in minute book) |
VI. BOARD MEMBER COMMENTS - None | ||||||||||||||||||
VII. BOARD PRESIDENT’S COMMENTS |
A. | Mr. Wyse stated that he met with Mr. Atseff and Mr. Liebert, from the architect’s office, to review prior concerns relative to the air handling units in the high school’s performing arts center. The issues were addressed and the system is in good working order. |
B. | Mr. Wyse extended condolences to the family of of Donald Tobin, board president of our newly centralized school district in l949, on his recent passing at age 89. He was also a business leader in the Ontario community and father of later school board members Edward and JamesTobin, M.D. and grandfather of Jean Tobin Stein, presently a reading teacher @ Freewill Elementary School. |
C. | Mr. Wyse noted that the proposed employment contract between the Board of Education and superintendent of schools was signed by both parties and filed with the school district clerk. |
VIII. | REPORTS OF THE SUPERINTENDENT OF SCHOOLS |
Mr. Havens welcomed the boy scouts present this evening and invited them to present questions during public comment time. |
CAPITAL FACILITIES PROJECT |
Mr. Havens noted that four basic questions about future capital facilities projects were raised by trustees at the prior meeting. He has met with district and building administrators to refine these issues for presentation and review this evening. He invited trustees to offer questions or comments they may have after the presentations. | |||||||||||||||||||
He extended thanks to district and building administrators for their assistance in gathering and compiling this information in the past four days and preparing for presentations this evening. Their presentations are generally summarized as follows: | |||||||||||||||||||
Possible Uses for Ontario Elementary School |
Mr. Spring, ass’t superintendent for instruction, noted that he, Mr. Pearles and Mrs. Woodard considered varied alternative uses for Ontario Elementary School. In random order, these include space for tech support & services, district offices, for the Hopeworks/community services program, the district enrichment coordinator, district-wide & Board of Education meeting space, a district teacher center, magnet school programs, pre-kindergarten programs, location for collection of school taxes (now in rented community space), and additional storage spaces. | |||||||||||||||||||
In addition, there is the potential for school and community partnerships, community outreach programs and space for health and human service agencies to meet with local families. Still other possible uses are a senior center, teen center, after school student, recreation or community activities, parent resource center, and community arts center. | |||||||||||||||||||
Mr. Anderson asked how much the possible uses would cost. Mr. Havens stated that some uses would have costs, those that are re-located existing services would not. For the most part, the uses presented would not generate substantial additional revenue. At a minimum, rental income could cover upkeep and maintenance. | |||||||||||||||||||
Mrs. Lyke noted that the capital facilities report indicates appx. $1 million for necessary improvements at Ontario Elementary School. Mr. Havens stated that some of these needs would not occur if the structure is not occupied solely for student uses. | |||||||||||||||||||
Mrs. Lyke noted that the need for a good location and space for district office functions has existed for many years. | |||||||||||||||||||
Program Features of Consolidated Facility for Grades K to 5 |
Building principals Kim Saxby (Freewill Elementary School), Joseph Siracuse (Ontario Elementary School) and Robert La Ruche (Ontario Primary School) had reviewed the program impact of a consolidated facility for students in Grades K to 5 on the Ontario Center campus. | |||||||||||||||||||
Mr. Siracuse noted that the current structure of K-2 and 3-5 for the Ontario Primary- Elementary attendance area offers a stable program and has historically provided a fine program for local students. Local alumna have many wonderful experiences to recall. Each of the schools develops their own personality and cultures over the years. The current enrollments of each of the schools is appx. 400 students. When the BOCES classroom lease ends in 2004, Ontario Primary School and Ontario Elementary School could absorb those spaces to maintain program needs. | |||||||||||||||||||
Mr La Ruche outlined the potential strengths of a consolidated school for grade K to 5. These include development of a state of the art facility, design for space needs like larger kindergarten classrooms, equal allocation of resources, consistency in groupings and cohorts, potential for vertical teaming, ease of transition to the middle school and increased opportunities for staff to participate in shared planning and decision-making by grade level and subject area, | |||||||||||||||||||
Also, shared common facilities for reception area, kitchen, gymnasiums, mechanical equipment, shared staff, physical proximity to other buildings, pooling of resources on a large scale, no longer need cross-district bussing, consolidate discipline for student behavior, uniform access for disabled persons and centralized resources in the event of an emergency situation. | |||||||||||||||||||
Mr. Robusto asked for an explanation of vertical teaming. Mr. La Ruche stated it allows more manageable groupings for large numbers of students and provided examples. | |||||||||||||||||||
Ms. Saxby noted that the issue extends beyond an expanded or new building to an in-depth review of the best learning environment for our students. There are numerous options to consider and the principals plan to continue to explore this issue. | |||||||||||||||||||
Mr. Johnson stated he would like to hear the drawbacks or negatives of consolidation as well. | |||||||||||||||||||
Mr. La Ruche stated that nearly each of the topics noted in the prior discussion has a companion negative feature or concern to consider. | |||||||||||||||||||
Mr. Spring stated that any time a program change is made, there is need to plan and consider many factors. These are not necessarily worse or always negative issues. | |||||||||||||||||||
Mr. Anderson stated he would expect an increased amount of time on busses for students from the extreme southern portions of our district if a consolidated K to 5 school were located on the Ontario Center campus. Mr. Havens stated that a common location would require only a single elementary route with a common start and end site similar to existing secondary routes. He added that we presently have cross-district busses between the two K-5 attendance areas that result in lengthy bus rides and loss of about one hour of instructional time for those students each week. Length of travel time for students would vary with the number and distance from school of bus stops. | |||||||||||||||||||
Mr. Ratcliffe asked if Mr. Havens and the staff had developed any alternative revenue sources than rental to BOCES or learned of alternative approaches used by other districts to generate revenue for all or part of school facilities that were available. | |||||||||||||||||||
Mr. Havens noted that there are varied possibilities but they do not yield a large, positive cash flow due to cost of maintenance and heat. Mr. Robusto noted that a rental fee of $6 to $8 per square foot, including utilities, is common for this kind of space. Mr. Havens stated he has not determined an alternative revenue source large enoght to offset the expense of new or additional classroom space. | |||||||||||||||||||
Mr. Havens added that he is meeting with local town officials to discuss possible cooperative efforts or lease arrangements for town purposes if space was available, for example, at Ontario Elementary School. He is uncertain of the possibilities that might exist. | |||||||||||||||||||
Mr. Griswold stated he would not view leases with a business concern adjacent to a pre-kindergarten program as a positive mix. | |||||||||||||||||||
Mr. Havens stated that the mix of business and school uses would have advantages if linked to work study programs for our students or included public library or other resources that schools and the community might share. | |||||||||||||||||||
Mr. Spring noted the potential for a magnet school or business academy program with opportunities for students to attend classes and participate in practical experiences and training. Such arrangements also provide a positive resource for businesses in terms of workforce development. He added that pre-kindergarten providers may wish to lease space for local programs. | |||||||||||||||||||
Mr. Havens noted that potential use might also include a training site or center for local businesses using school and business resources. Partnerships between a teacher center and local industry are also possible. | |||||||||||||||||||
Mrs. Woodard noted the long-range desire and present need to locate space for parents to obtain services from health and human service agencies more easily and closer to home than Lyons or points beyond. There is also the potential to expand the Hopeworks and community liaison program and use for tutoring and GED programs. | |||||||||||||||||||
Mr. Griswold stated he had envisioned a retail business adjacent to a school use; Mr. Havens confirmed that would not be plausible. | |||||||||||||||||||
Mr. Johnson asked if Mr. Spring sees a trend of more schools developing academies for specific subjects. Mr. Spring stated that the state-wide school-to-work initiatives in career and occupational education are creating more interest and value in that area as students are required to develop career plans. | |||||||||||||||||||
Mr. Johnson asked if career plans are a requirement only for college-bound students; Mr. Spring stated that every child needs a career plan | |||||||||||||||||||
Project Options |
Mr. Havens shared information on “must do,” “should do,” and “would like to do” options for future capital facilities needs. Costs estimates from the school architect were used and they may change. | |||||||||||||||||||
Items considered as “must do” relate to structural integrity, health or safety issue, and items necessary to maintain basic instructional programs. | |||||||||||||||||||
Items considered as “should do” are extremely important for the instructional program and provide cost benefits. | |||||||||||||||||||
Items considered as “like to do” would provide valuable additions to our program, continue our objectives to have first rate facilities and programs but are beyond current affordability. | |||||||||||||||||||
He outlined costs for varied items cited in the report and the state and local share of those costs depending on the total capital improvements proposed. He estimated a cost of $12.7 million to expand Ontario Primary School to combine it with Ontario Elementary School for grades K to 5 (with a local share of $4.2 million) and a cost of $24 million to combine Freewill Elementary School as well as Ontario Elementary School into expanded space at Ontario Primary School ($8 million local share). (all estimates) | |||||||||||||||||||
In summary, the projected costs for “must do” items is $4.8 million, with a $l.6 million local share, for “should do” items is $3.5 million, with a $l.18 million local share, and $8.1 million for “like to do” items, with a $2.7 million local share. | |||||||||||||||||||
Visitations to Capital Project Sites |
To help in gathering information and proposing options, visitations to other districts were made. Mr. Spring and Mr. Blankenberg, director of athletics and physical education, reviewed the visits they made and the details they obtained. | |||||||||||||||||||
They plan to make return visits and invited trustees to join them to obtain firsthand ideas of capital improvement options. | |||||||||||||||||||
Discussion followed on the grade structures and campus sizes for the sites visited. |
Financial Options |
Mr. Havens and Mr. Atseff reviewed the financial implications and options of proposed capital improvements. | |||||||||||||||||||
Mr. Havens stated that he continues to have discussions with Coca-Cola and Pepsi on proposals for revenues from pouring rights agreements. The proposals to date are less than in his prior experience. | |||||||||||||||||||
Mr. Griswold asked what amortization period is proposed for potential capital improvements. Mr. Havens noted that some might align with the length of a possible pouring rights agreement, for example, and others might extend for longer periods. Mr. Atseff explained the new state guidelines on amortization of school bonds for capital improvements. | |||||||||||||||||||
Mr. Griswold asked what term prior projects had; Mr. Havens stated the typical term was fifteen (15) years. Mr. Griswold has reservations about committing taxpayers to a long-term debt. | |||||||||||||||||||
Mr. Havens noted that since Wayne-Finger Lakes BOCES has determined other options to meet their needs, local potential for revenue from leases or rentals is greatly diminished to basic support for maintenance and upkeep. | |||||||||||||||||||
Mr. Atseff reviewed the district’s long-range debt level, including the state’s 70% share of local debt loads, and the possible uses of capital reserve funds. He also outlined possible uses of those funds and replacement with future capital improvement debt. He also explained the impact of maintaining debt expense levels in future years as function of district expenses and revenues. | |||||||||||||||||||
Discussion followed on th costs of varied debt levels and the district’s overall debt position. | |||||||||||||||||||
Mr. Havens stated that in terms of long range planning, the best approach is to complete capital improvements on a continuous basis and in a manner that would use existing reserve funds or state aid to eliminate any impact on the local tax levy. | |||||||||||||||||||
Mr. Robusto asked what level of interest is expected on investment of capital reserve funds. Mr. Havens and Mr. Atseff noted that the district’s earnings from investments have decreased from 5% to 2%. | |||||||||||||||||||
Mr. Anderson asked if 5% is a reasonable interest rate to consider; Mr. Atseff stated that is valid in terms of the cost to the district to borrow money. | |||||||||||||||||||
Mrs. Lyke asked when work would start on a capital project. Mr. Atseff stated that the estimated time is five (5) years from planning to completion. The time and amount the district would spend for that work would depend on the scope and nature of capital improvement. | |||||||||||||||||||
Mrs. Lyke asked if a future capital project would create our only debt in future years; Mr. Havens stated that is likely given the current obligations that the district is retiring. |
Property Tax Impact | |||||||||||||||||||
Mr. Havens noted that a one percent (1%) increase in the tax levy produces $145,000; over 20 years, each percentage would support a $2 million capital project (5% interest to borrow) |
Mr. Anderson noted that the school board needs to consider the district’s current financial position. Mr. Havens stated that is among topics planned for later this evening. |
Mr. Ratcliffe noted the need to consider the future reduced value of the nuclear power station, possible loss of sales tax revenues and the state financial situation. He asked if any projections on the 2002-2003 tax levy are available or how we could anticipate that. | |||||||||||||||||||
Mr. Atseff noted that the annual reduction of the nuclear power plant value by the town is a large hurdle for the district. Those reductions are similar to bulldozing an entire subdivision of homes. In terms of a “crystal ball,” the future is “foggy” and it is important to maintain a stable debt level to prevent allocation of funds to other areas. | |||||||||||||||||||
Mr. Ratcliffe feels there is a need for more clarity on the impact of the power plant value, sales tax and state aid issues before decisions are made on capital improvement projects. | |||||||||||||||||||
By way of summary, Mr. Havens noted that the district could potentially support a capital improvement project of $5.25 million dollars without an impact on the property tax levy with revenues from pouring rights agreements, use of existing capital reserve funds and state aid on construction and debt service. |
STUDENT QUESTIONS |
Joe Marini, 4117 Cream Ridge Road, Macedon (Town of Walworth), asked if consolidation of grades K to 5 would result in a single or multiple buildings. Mr. Havens stated that the decision for grades K to 5 is not yet made. |
IX. | RECESS: | 8:47 p.m. | ||||||||||||||||||
X. | RECONVENE | 8:58 P.M. |
Revenue Sources | ||||||||||||||||||||
In response to questions raised prior to recess, Mr. Atseff noted that the district receives appx. $900,000 in sales tax revenues and that distribution is based on each district’s enrollment. If the district no longer received sales tax revenues, the property tax levy would increase appx. 6.2%. |
In terms of current budget status, Mr. Havens noted that we are presently appx. $400,000 behind in budgeted revenues, mostly due to less state aid and lower interest on investments. He noted that he is watching spending carefully with the goal to end the school year with $1.3 million in fund balance, the amount used to offset the tax levy for the current school year, to prevent a tax increase to replace those funds for next year. |
Mr. Wyse asked about any estimate of tax levy impact of a status quo budget for 2002-2003. Mr. Havens and Mr. Atseff stated such estimates are not yet possible due to unknown costs of health insurance rates, interest rates and BOCES services. |
Mr. Anderson asked Mr. Havens if he feels he can replace the $400,000 loss by reduced expenses. Mr. Havens stated that it must and would happen. | ||||||||||||||||||||
Mr. Ratcliffe stated suggested that trustees consider the level they would accept for a capital improvement project and what the community might accept. | ||||||||||||||||||||
Scope of a Capital Improvement Project |
Mr. Wyse noted he posed this question at the end of the prior meeting and asked trustees for their feelings on the issue. He stated it is time to begin to narrow the discussion and the issues. | ||||||||||||||||||||
Mr. Griswold suggested that trustees designate a facilities committee to work off-line to consolidate and recommend an acceptable scope for a future capital project based on data and discussion in the past few weeks and this evening. | ||||||||||||||||||||
Mr. Havens noted that Mr. Anderson, Mrs. Brunner, Mr. Griswold were designated members of the ad hoc school-community facilities committee and suggested they might meet with him and his staff to refine the information and develop recommendations for consideration by the Board of Education. |
Mrs. Brunner offered a MOTION to refer the issues related to future capital improvement projects to a trustee committee on facilities with Trustees Brunner, Griswold and Anderson as members. | |||||||||||||||||||
Mr. Triou asked if the public would have involvement at this time. Mr. Havens suggested the role of the committee to refine the information for future consideration by the Board of Education. | |||||||||||||||||||
Mr. Johnson envisions the task of the proposed committee to consider all of the must, should and desired items and propose a project we could afford. | |||||||||||||||||||
Mr. Griswold stated that was his intent and, depending on the recommendations proposed, to pursue additional public and administrative input at a later date. He feels a committee of three (3) trustees is best since it allows the board president to attend, ex-officio, and not create a quorum of the board as a committee. |
On the question, the vote was 9 Ayes, 0 Nays, Carried. | |||||||||||||||||||
Trustee Feedback | |||||||||||||||||||
Mr. Havens noted there was a substantial amount of information presented and shared this evening and he would welcome input from each trustee for consideration by the proposed committee. |
Mr. Anderson believes more financial information is need to make an educated decision. | |||||||||||||||||||
Mr. Robusto concurs with the need for additional financial information and an idea of the tax impact of the 2002-2003 budget to maintain the status quo. He also does not feel the public favors consolidation of Grades K to 5. He does believe that the track and athletic fields need attention and would favor a budget increase of 3% to 5% for 2002-2003 given the current economic climate. | |||||||||||||||||||
Mr. Triou noted the large amount of time by staff to provide substantial information, which he appreciates. He concurs with the need to update the high school track and supports maintenance of the existing instructional programs, including academic intervention services. | |||||||||||||||||||
Mr. Ratcliffe noted he understands more now that before and commended everyone for an excellent job on information gathering and presentation. He does not feel that consolidation of Freewill Elementary School with Ontario Primary School and Ontario Elementary School is feasible in light of other needs presented. He, too, needs more information on financial implications. | |||||||||||||||||||
Mrs. Brunner noted that prior capital projects have apportioned funds to each of the five-(5) schools to insure that maintenance and upkeep is continued. She feels that such an approach does not result in substantial progress in any one building. She suggested directing significant effort on improvements at the high school (e.g. media, science, technology, dining room) | |||||||||||||||||||
She sees a need for a better understanding from the administration of long-term program requirements and design. Her dream is to make the high school track and district athletic fields the best we can. | |||||||||||||||||||
She feels the use of a trustee committee to determine the scope of a capital project is wise. | |||||||||||||||||||
She feels a swimming pool is a separate issue for voter consideration. If the community approves construction of a pool, the school board would decide the location of a pool as part of capital project financing. |
Mrs. Lyke stated she does not have sufficient justification for consolidation of Freewill Elementary School and Ontario Primary School and Ontario Elementary School and sees some detriments. | |||||||||||||||||||
She feels priority is needed for science classrooms and laboratories at the high school that all students would use. She also feels it is time to determine a proper facility for district office needs and sees potential in the possible uses cited if consolidation of Ontario Elementary School and Ontario Primary School is financially feasible. | |||||||||||||||||||
Mr. Griswold needs more information on the financial impact in order to make an intelligent decision. He also sees a need to re-visit the pre-kindergarten and full-day kindergarten issues and what existing items might need to be shifted to incorporate them into a capital project. He has concern for future impact on the tax levy and strongly supports keeping our instructional program as strong as possible with a stable tax levy. He sees a status quo budget with a tax levy increase of not more than 3% for 2002-2003 with any capital improvements as a separate issue at zero taxpayer impact. | |||||||||||||||||||
Mr. Johnson noted that he was the “dreamer” about the potential for a single campus plan and the potential for creating the #1 educational setting in the state. The data presented indicate that it is not feasible. |
He feels the district must address the “must do” items and would like to include “should do” items if possible. |
He noted that we seek to return our district to the premiere academic role it previously had we as trustees and the taxpayers of our district need to make a conscious decision on the services and facilities they desire and would support. He will support the recommendation of the facilities committee for addressing future capital facilities needs. | |||||||||||||||||||
Mr. Wyse concurred with the intent to establish our district as #1 in programs and facilities but is realistic about current economic conditions and state aid projections. He liked the concept of a single campus yet it appears that it not is feasible. He noted we have three excellent schools serving students in grades K to 5. | |||||||||||||||||||
He does not feel the community will support a capital project that requires a large tax increase. He feels we need to share our intentions and plans with the community and avoid misunderstandings like the comment he heard that we would take back BOCES space before the lease expires. | |||||||||||||||||||
He supports addressing the “must do” items, including track improvements at the high school, and consideration of items we might afford from the “should do” list within the $5 million project estimate proposed by Mr. Havens. | |||||||||||||||||||
Establish First Facilities Committee Meeting Date | |||||||||||||||||||
Mr. Wyse asked Mr. Griswold if he would chair the first meeting. Mrs. Brunner suggested that the committee select a chairperson at their first meeting. The date of Wednesday, January 30, 2002 @ 5:30 p.m. at the district office was determined for the first committee meeting. |
XI. ADDITIONAL PUBLIC COMMENT | |
A. | Mrs. Cathy Contino, 2754 Daansen Road, Palmyra, spoke as president of the Wayne Teachers' Association on varied items, including: (a) note of a recent letter to the editor by the finance committee chairperson of the Wayne County Board of Supervisors on potential future review of sales tax distribution with schools, (b) suggestion that the school board add pre-kindergarten, full day kindergarten and a child care center to ideas for future capital facilities needs in the district, (c) to preserve archival materials to reflect local traditions when long-term staff members with that knowledge retire, (d) if Ontario Elementary School is no longer used for students, consider archival and museum space about the school district. |
B. | David Pannepinto, 5492 Ontario Center Road, Ontario, Town of Walworth, cautioned trustees not to use band-aid approaches to meet long-term facilities needs when considering needs of older structures in the district. He noted that an overly conservative approach is risky and the district needs to carefully consider the future value of large investments in capital improvements. |
XII. ADDITIONAL BOARD MEMBER COMMENTS |
A. | Mr. Griswold extended thanks to administrators for the resource information and hard work evidenced by reports presented this evening; they were well done. |
B. | Mr. Griswold thanked Mr. Johnson for keeping the discussions moving as timekeeper. |
C. | Mrs. Lyke extended thanks to the persons who speak during public comment and attend school board meetings on a regular basis; their input is She added that Mr. Switzer diligently records these comments and they provokes discussion and thought among trustees as they consider the issues raised. She appreciates the public comment and input. |
D. | Mr. Triou noted that the January 24th policy committee meeting is changed to February 12th @ 4 p.m. at the district office. |
E. | Mr. Wyse extended thanks to each of the administrators who assisted in compilation of information presented to date and knows there is much more for future consideration. He is hopeful that when the issues are fully reviewed and determined, the result will represent something of which our district will be proud. |
Mr. Havens encouraged trustees to contact Mr. Spring or Mr. Blankenberg to accompany them on visits to districts to view completed capital improvements as noted earlier this evening. |
XIII. | ADJOURNMENT | ||||||||||||||||||
Mr. Robusto offered a MOTION to adjourn the meeting at 9:35 p.m. 9 Ayes, 0 Nays, Carried. | |||||||||||||||||||
Respectfully submitted, | |||||||||||||||||||
JAMES E. SWITZER | |||||||||||||||||||
School District Clerk | |||||||||||||||||||
APPROVAL OF MINUTES | |||||||||||||||||||
The foregoing minutes of the Board of | |||||||||||||||||||
Education were submitted for review | |||||||||||||||||||
& (approved as presented)(corrected | |||||||||||||||||||
as noted) at the meeting of | |||||||||||||||||||
February 13, 2002 | |||||||||||||||||||
--------------------------- | |||||||||||||||||||
School District Clerk | |||||||||||||||||||
JES/jes:wp |
Att. 2 | |
C O N G R A T U L A T I O N S ! | |
MIDDLE SCHOOL SCIENCE OLYMPIAD TEAM | |
2001-2002 | |
RANKED 10TH IN THE NATION AT THE | |
UNIVERSITY OF DELAWARE | |
INVITATIONAL | |
SCIENCE OLYMPIADCOMPETITION | |
TEAM MEMBERS: | |
Jeni Adams | |
Mike Adams | |
Catherine Aubertine | |
Bryan Bobo | |
Mike Bodak | |
Rob Coward | |
Emma Fink | |
Lindsay Galan | |
Joe Geiger | |
Chelsea Griswold | |
Zack Halloran | |
John Hassler | |
Randy Mason | |
Stephanie Mason | |
Mike Miles | |
Greg Reid | |
Rick Rolon | |
Aaron Roy | |
Zac Ruetz | |
Kristen Sullivan | |
Joel Van Wagnen | |
COACHES: | |
EDWARD CURRIER | |
DIANE DI GRAVIO | |
JESSICA ROETHEL | |
Att. 3 | |
TO: | Michael Havens |
Superintendent of Schools | |
FROM: | Gregory Atseff |
Assistant Superintendent for Business | |
DATE: | February 13, 2002 |
RE: | 2002/2003 Budget |
Attached is the first draft of the Capital portion of the 2002/2003 proposed budget. The following are included: | |
1. | A cover sheet that shows the functions of the budget, broken out into the three-part budget format. |
2. | A three-part budget comparison, which shows the proposed Capital budget in comparison to the existing Capital budget. |
3. | The complete breakdown of the budget, by budget code, for the Capital portion of the budget. |
WAYNE CENTRAL SCHOOL DISTRICT
|
THREE PART 2002/2003 BUDGET
|
Function
|
Code
|
2001/02 Proj. Exp.
|
2002/03 Budget
|
Admin
|
Program
|
Capital
|
Board of Education | 1099
|
38,045
|
||||
Central Admin | 1299
|
169,400
|
||||
Finance | 1399
|
311,480
|
||||
Legal Services | 1420
|
25,000
|
||||
Personnel | 1430
|
217,560
|
||||
Records Mgt. | 1460
|
6,200
|
||||
Public Information | 1480
|
40,680
|
||||
Operation of Plant | 1620
|
1,647,945
|
1,639,050
|
1,639,050
|
||
Maint of Plant | 1621
|
484,910
|
565,310
|
565,310
|
||
Other Cent Service | 1699
|
576,525
|
||||
Refund of Taxes | 1964
|
500
|
||||
Other Spec Items | 1998
|
375,025
|
||||
Curriculm Dev | 2010
|
215,235
|
||||
Supv Reg School | 2020
|
725,260
|
||||
Instruction | 2999
|
16,758,515
|
||||
District Trans | 5510
|
1,394,220
|
||||
Garage Bldg | 5530
|
60,370
|
||||
Community Service | 8998
|
8,000
|
||||
Employee Benefits | 9098
|
3,897,400
|
234,941
|
234,941
|
||
Debt Service | 9898
|
3,196,000
|
2,610,000
|
2,610,000
|
||
Other Transfers | 9951
|
60,655
|
||||
Total | 30,208,925
|
5,049,301
|
5,049,301
|
|||
Percent of Total | 16.17%
|
February 13, 2002
|
THREE PART BUDGET COMPARISON - 2002/2003
|
Expenditure Categories | Administrative Expense
|
Program Expense
|
Capital Expense
|
Total Budget
|
2001/2002
|
2002/2003
|
2001/2002
|
2002/2003
|
2001/2002
|
2002/2003
|
2001/2002
|
2002/2003
|
General Support | $1,760,415
|
$0
|
$2,132,855
|
$2,204,360
|
$3,893,270
|
$2,204,360
|
||||
Instruction | 940,495
|
16,758,515
|
0
|
0
|
17,699,010
|
$0
|
||||
Transportation | 0
|
1,454,590
|
0
|
0
|
1,454,590
|
$0
|
||||
Community Service | 0
|
8,000
|
0
|
0
|
8,000
|
$0
|
||||
Undistributed | 445,523
|
3,304,862
|
3,403,670
|
2,844,941
|
7,154,055
|
$2,844,941
|
Total | $3,146,433
|
$21,525,967
|
$5,536,525
|
$5,049,301
|
$30,208,925
|
$5,049,301
|
Percent | 10.42%
|
71.26%
|
18.33%
|
100.00%
|
FTE
|
HS
|
MS
|
OE
|
OP
|
FW
|
District
|
Total
|
|
Custodian | 6.0
|
30,000
|
33,100
|
25,500
|
22,500
|
45,700
|
20,000
|
176,800
|
Cleaner | 18.0
|
102,560
|
116,110
|
56,600
|
40,000
|
31,700
|
26,080
|
373,050
|
Sr. Custodian | 3.0
|
32,000
|
30,000
|
15,400
|
15,400
|
15400
|
108,200
|
|
Night Diff. | 0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
20,000
|
20,000
|
Salaries | FTE
|
Amount
|
Director of Facilities | 1.0
|
60,745
|
Sr. Maintenance Mechanic | 1.0
|
48,400
|
Maintenance Person | 3.0
|
70,460
|
Clerk/Typist | .5
|
11,535
|
Groundskeeper | 1.0
|
24,860
|
NAME | SPORT | STEP
|
SALARY
|
INCENTIVE
|
SALARY
|
|
TOTAL
|
WCSD
|
LEVEL
|
Kim Verstringhe | Var. Basketball Cheerleading | 1
|
1
|
D
|
No
|
2477 prorated
|
|
Kristen Hastings | JV Basketball Cheerleading | 1
|
1
|
E
|
No
|
2216 prorated
|
Doug Casey | Modified Baseball | 25
|
21
|
F
|
Yes
|
3501
|
Kurt Mangos | JV Baseball | 3
|
5
|
E
|
No
|
2348
|
Bob Taylor | Var. Softball | 4
|
4
|
C
|
No
|
2869
|
Cheryl Herzog | JV Softball | 2
|
2
|
E
|
No
|
2216
|
TBD | Mod. Softball | F
|
||||
Rick Vair | Var. B. Track | 18
|
3
|
D
|
No
|
3455
|
Bryan Ingham | Asst. B. Track | 2
|
2
|
E
|
No
|
2216
|
Ken Schaumburg | Var. G. Track | 7
|
11
|
D
|
Yes
|
3119
|
Joanna Bucci | Asst. G. Track | 3
|
3
|
E
|
No
|
2348
|
TBD | Modified Track | F
|
||||
TBD | Modified Track | F
|
||||
TBD | Var. B. Tennis | F
|
||||
Tom Gentile | JV B. Tennis | 8
|
25
|
G
|
Yes
|
2585
|
Date: 2/13/02
The Committee recommends that the following program be arranged, or approved, for the
following students. Parents are in agreement with this recommendation.
Student: #
00-6387
Grade && Year:
09 (01-02)
School:
Wayne Central High School
Time of Services:
2 hours/week
Classification:
ED
Recommended Placement :
From Resource Room & full
Triennial Due:
2004/12
participation in general ed. to
Consultant Teacher.
Last Program:
Special Class, 15:1/structured
class to meet intense behavioral
Reason for Placement/Services: Needs in class support / test modifications.
Other Placement/Services Considered, but Not Selected: Resource Room
Related
Speech and/or Language:
None
Occupational Therapy:
None
Physical Therapy:
None
Counseling:
Counseling 2x/month for 30 min.
Adapted Physical Education:
None
Other:
None
Student: #
4175
Grade && Year:
10 (01-02)
School:
Wayne Central High School
Time of Services:
2 periods/4 day cycle
Classification:
OHI
Recommended Placement :
From CT to Resource Room for small
Triennial Due:
2004/09
group instruction & full participation in
general education.
Last Program:
Regular Education
Reason for Placement/Services: Small group support for strategy developement.
Other Placement/Services Considered, but Not Selected: Consultant Teacher
Related
Speech and/or Language:
None
Occupational Therapy:
None
Physical Therapy:
None
Counseling:
None
Adapted Physical Education:
None
Other:
None
Student: #
6572
Grade && Year:
05 (01-02)
School:
Ontario Elementary
Time of Services:
5X 40 min/week
Classification:
OHI
Recommended Placement :
From Consultant Teacher for academic
Triennial Due:
2004/08
support to Resource Room for
reinforcement and small group
Last Program:
Regular Education
Reason for Placement/Services: Needs in class support / test modifications.
Other Placement/Services Considered, but Not Selected: Resource Room
Related
Speech and/or Language:
None
Occupational Therapy:
None
Physical Therapy:
None
Counseling:
None
Adapted Physical Education:
None
Other:
None
Page 1 of 2
CSE Recommendations to the Board of Education
Date: 2/13/02
The Committee recommends that the following program be arranged, or approved, for the
following students. Parents are in agreement with this recommendation.
Student: #
7793
Grade && Year:
06 (01-02)
School:
Wayne Central Middle School
Time of Services:
2 hours/week
Classification:
OHI
Recommended Placement :
From Resource Room to Consultant
Triennial Due:
2003/10
Teacher
Last Program:
Resource Room for Language
Arts
Reason for Placement/Services: Needs in class support / test modifications.
Other Placement/Services Considered, but Not Selected: Resource Room
Related
Speech and/or Language:
None
Occupational Therapy:
None
Physical Therapy:
None
Counseling:
1X/week at 30 minutes, individual
Adapted Physical Education:
None
Other:
None
Student: #
96226
Grade && Year:
02 (01-02)
School:
Freewill Elementary
Time of Services:
2 hrs/week writing
Classification:
SI
Recommended Placement :
From Related Services Only to
Triennial Due:
2004/06
Resource Room small group.
Last Program:
Related Services Only
Reason for Placement/Services: Small group support for strategy developement.
Other Placement/Services Considered, but Not Selected: Consultant Teacher
Related
Speech and/or Language:
4X/week at 30 minutes (Location: separate setting)
Occupational Therapy:
None
Physical Therapy:
None
Counseling:
None
Adapted Physical Education:
None
Other:
None
Student: #
97693
Grade && Year:
07 (01-02)
School:
Monroe BOCES-Morgan Middle School-ODX
Time of Services:
100%
Classification:
ED
Recommended Placement :
BOCES 1 Special Class Center-based
Triennial Due:
2003/10
6:1:1
Last Program:
Consultant Teacher (E.
Irondequoit)
Reason for Placement/Services: Continuation of current services.
Other Placement/Services Considered, but Not Selected:
Related
Speech and/or Language:
None
Occupational Therapy:
None
Physical Therapy:
None
Counseling:
2X/week at 30 minutes (as part of program)
Adapted Physical Education:
None
Other:
None
Page 2 of 2
Date: 2/13/02
The Committee recommends that the following program be arranged, or approved, for the
following students. Parents are in agreement with this recommendation.
Student: #
97160
Grade && Year:
Preschool (01-02)
School:
Home
Time of Services:
1X/week @ 60 minutes
Classification:
Preschool Child with Disability
Last Psychological:
12/1/01
Recommended Placement :
Related Services Only
Last Program:
Related
Speech and/or Language:
1X week @ 60 minutes (home).
Occupational Therapy:
None
Physical Therapy:
None
Counseling:
None
Adapted Physical Education:
None
Other:
None
Student: #
97730
Grade && Year:
Preschool (01-02)
School:
Pediatric Therapy Services
Time of Services:
See Related Services Below
Classification:
Preschool Child w/a Disability
Last Psychological:
Recommended Placement :
Related Services Only
Last Program:
None
Related
Speech and/or Language:
None
Occupational Therapy:
None
Physical Therapy:
2X/week@45 minutes
Counseling:
None
Adapted Physical Education:
None
Other:
None
Student: #
97753
Grade && Year:
Preschool (01-02)
School:
Rochester Hearing & Speech @ Webster
Time of Services:
See Related Services
Classification:
Preschool Child with Disability
Last Psychological:
11/30/01
Recommended Placement :
Special Class 12:1
Last Program:
Related
Speech and/or Language:
4X 30 minutes/wk (group)
Occupational Therapy:
2X 30 minutes/wk (individual/group) @ Bright Start Pediatric
Physical Therapy:
None
Counseling:
None
Adapted Physical Education:
None
Other:
None
Page 1 of 2
Date: 2/13/02
The Committee recommends that the following program be arranged, or approved, for the
following students. Parents are in agreement with this recommendation.
Student: #
97817
Grade && Year:
Preschool (01-02)
School:
Home
Time of Services:
See Related Services below
Classification:
Preschool Child w/a Disability
Last Psychological:
11/30/01
Recommended Placement :
Related Services Only
Last Program:
Early Intervention
Related
Speech and/or Language:
None
Occupational Therapy:
None
Physical Therapy:
1X/week @ 30 min, individual
Counseling:
None
Adapted Physical Education:
None
Other:
None
Approximately | 96.8 | students @ | $ 245.82 | =
|
$23,795.38
|
3 | students @ | $ 87.25
|
= | $ 261.75 |