Marta McAllister Posted September 21, 2010 Report Share Posted September 21, 2010 Proceedings of the Planning and Development Committee School District No. 2, Yellowstone County High School District No. 2, Yellowstone County Billings, Montana September 13, 2010 CALL TO ORDER Chair Kathy Aragon called the meeting to order at 5: 30 p.m. on Monday, September 13, 2010, in the Board Room of the Lincoln Center. Committee members in attendance were Chair Kathy Aragon, Trustee Travis Kemp, Doug Armknecht, Margaret Aukshun, Annette Cabrera, Amy Griffin, Jodi Schreiber, Josi Wilgus, and Kathy Olson, Elementary Executive Director. Members absent were Sandra Abraham, Krista Hertz, Deana Elder, Lance King, and Jennifer Molk. COMMUNICATION FROM THE PUBLIC There was no communication from the public. PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE REPORT – September 2010 Chair Aragon asked the committee members to review the proposed executive summary report for corrections, changes, and additions. The following corrections, changes, and additions were recommended, which included: Land Use Section, page 14 - Amy Griffin asked if the14.717 square miles is the current size. Chair Aragon said she will amend to indicate the size in 1970 and what it is today. Chair Aragon will also add the City’s Land Use section of the City of Billings Growth Policy report as Appendix K. Amy Griffin recommended that the official date the city adopted the City of Billings Growth Policy report be added to the document. Chair Aargon agreed and will add the date. - Amy Griffin suggested in the third paragraph that refers to, “Billings lost population in the older neighborhood”, reworded to say, “although Billings lost population in its downtown neighborhood from 1970 to 2000, these older neighborhoods are still more densely populated than the newer neighborhoods.” Chair Aragon noted a higher percentage of single parent households in an area can also create higher density. Chair Aragon said that speaks to the complexity of planning and why studying the density of the population is so important. Chair Aragon said maps will be included to show how different factors impacts an area. Appendix E, Enrollment by Geographical Area - Chair Aragon said she will add a footnote to the document to read, “without consideration for Appendix O factors”, this includes all factors that can change enrollment. Bussing and boundary changes are examples of Appendix O factors. Narrative on page 13 - Amy Griffin asked if the narrative which identifies the geographical areas as the Heights, South, Downtown (core) and West coincide with the maps in Appendix E. Chair Aragon will include a map which corresponds. Appendix G Percentage free and Reduced Enrollment by School, page 60 & 61 - Chair Aragon will include a map with the data that reflects the percentage of students receiving free and reduced meals by school and area for a visual. Planning for the future, page 15 - Amy Griffin suggested policy name be added in the last paragraph. Chair Aragon will add in the last paragraph to read, “The intent of this document is to adhere to Policy 9001 and will be updated annually with either decennial (or the years in between decennial) census information. Annette Cabrera will provide Chair Aragon with the name of what the in between years is called, rest of the paragraph will remain the same. Appendix H, Billings Association of Realtors – Median Sales Price by Area, page 63 - Chair Aragon will add a map of areas associated with the price and description for a visual. Appendix I, City of Billings – Neighborhood Stabilization Program, page 65 - Chair Aragon will add text to define the housing affordability gap. The city document explains the housing affordability gap as the difference from what someone can afford to buy and what the price is. Appendix J, Tax Increment District Maps, page 67 & 68 - Chair Aragon will enlarge and add expiration data to the TIF Districts. Annette Cabrera will get data with the start and end dates. Appendix K - Chair Aragon will add the City’s Land Use section of the City of Billings Growth Policy to include the data of population per square mile by decade. Appendix L, “Educational Capacity” FY 2010, page 70-73 - Chair Aragon explained that the charge of the Committee was to report on demographic data but the District’s educational capacity will probably be the next step as facilities are looked at. Chair Aragon said she added this Appendix so the general public could get a sense of the general capacity of SD2. Kathy Olson said the report on page 70 has the most recent figures. - Chair Aragon said she added several reports to show how educational capacity changes. As the needs of the district, student teacher ratio, special education classes, etc. change the capacity can change from year to year. - Chair Aragon has a question on page72 regarding the 2007/2008 enrollment figures as they do not match the reported OPI numbers for that year. Kathy Olson explained this was the first year Dan Martin created a template book and he used the actual enrollment on the date he created the template, not the date OPI enrollment numbers were reported so it will not match. Chair Aragon said she is not comfortable putting an inaccurate report in the executive summary but does want the public to get the general idea why education capacity changes. Jodi Schreiber asked to include Rimrock School in the educational capacity report noting that the district owns Rimrock, but Rimrock is not open. Chair Aragon asked Kathy Olson to update the educational capacity report for FY10 and include at the bottom of the report that Rimrock has zero students, but to include the building classroom spaces and capacity. Chair Aragon will add to Appendix L. Appendix M, School Openings, Closures (OPI and BPS), page 72 - Chair Aragon noted on page 72 there is a report of school openings and closures, but remodels, enlargement of schools, and annexes are not included. The Committee recommended adding a report to reflect all remodels, enlargements, and annexes of SD2 facilities. The Committee felt the report would be helpful and interesting. Chair Aragon will contact Rich Whitney for the data and attach to Appendix. - Appendix N, Historical Student Boundaries, 75 - Chair Aragon will add the additional historical data Kathy Olson provided. The Committee did not review the information but the information is provided for the public to review. Appendix O, page 77-93 - Chair Aragon said the title “School Closures and Openings” is a mistake and she will replace with factors affecting Appendix O, factors affecting enrollment but not limited to these things. Chair Aragon will re-title to read “Out of area Enrollment Summary, Special Education, Pre-school Data, Bussing Data, Student boundaries”. Chair Aragon will reference Appendix N. Chair Aragon will add student mobility rate, page 89. Appendix Q, Maps, colored maps to be included with legends to be added: - Housing Unity Density per square mile by census tract – 2000 - Under-Age-5 population density (2000) - City/County owned property - Growth Planning Map - City of Billings, Census tract map Chair Aragon will also include the special education preschool trend of students that were housed in SD2. Kathy Olson will provide data and will be attached. Amy Griffin would like an elementary boundary map added. Annette Cabrera will provide maps of the elementary, middle school, and high school boundaries. Kathy Aragon will add a text to the maps to reflect the boundary maps, cover X square miles as can be seen in Appendix Q maps. Chair Aragon will include free and reduced meal program maps. Chair Aragon will also include the work that was completed by the mayor to study the homeless population and reference the data in Appendix Q. Josie Wilgus made the following motion with a second by Amy Griffin. Motion to move forward with the approved recommended changes to the document. Those voting in favor were Trustee Aragon, Trustee Kemp, Doug Armknecht, Margaret Aukshun, Annette Cabrera, Amy Griffin, Jodi Schreiber, and Josi Wilgus. The motion passed unanimously. Chair Aragon will make the recommended changes and ask the superintendent to post the document on SD2 web-site for the month of October for public comment. APPROVAL OF THE JUNE 7, 2010, MINUTES OF THE PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE AND JOINT BOARD MEETING Josie Wilgus made the following motion with a second by Travis Kemp. Motion to approve the June 7, 2010 Planning and Development Committee minutes as presented in the agenda with the recommended changes that the answers to the questions raised at the June 7, 2010 meeting be attached to the next minutes. The questions that Krista Hertz sent to the Chair by e-mail have been addressed in the final document and the answers to the questions should be posted with the questions when attached to any minutes. Those voting in favor were Trustee Aragon, Trustee Kemp, Doug Armknecht, Margaret Aukshun, Annette Cabrera, Amy Griffin, Jodi Schreiber, and Josi Wilgus. The motion passed unanimously. Amy Griffin suggested the official 2009/2010 OPI enrollment report should be included in the document. Kathy Olson will provide a report to Chair Aragon so she can include the 2009/2010 official enrollment data report into the document under Appendix O. Amy Griffin made the following motion seconded by Annette Cabrera. Motion to include the official 2009/2010 OPI enrollment count to the document. Those voting in favor were Trustee Aragon, Trustee Kemp, Doug Armknecht, Margaret Aukshun, Annette Cabrera, Amy Griffin, Jodi Schreiber, and Josi Wilgus. The motion passed unanimously. Margaret Aukshun made the following motion with a second by Doug Armknecht. Motion to approve the June 7, 2010, Planning and Development Committee and the Special Joint Board Meeting with the following recommended changes: Under Motion 4 and Motion 6 remove Margaret Aukshun’s name from voting as she had left the meeting earlier and did not vote on these motions. Those voting in favor were Chair Aragon, Trustee Kemp, Doug Armknecht, Margaret Aukshun, Annette Cabrera, Amy Griffin, Jodi Schreiber, and Josi Wilgus. The motion passed unanimously. Chair Aragon asked Committee members if they would be interested in serving on the Planning and Development Committee in the future if there is a need. Trustee Kemp, Margaret Aukshun, Amy Griffin, Jodi Schreiber and Josi Wilgus agreed to continue. Doug Armknecht said possibly and Annettee Cabrera would be willing to provide data and maps. Chair Aragon thanked the Committee members for all their time and effort. Adjournment There being no further business Kathy Aragon adjourned the meeting at 6:45. Kathy Aragon, Chair Brenda Cross, Recorder Attachment: Answers to the questions that were submitted at the June 7, 2010 Planning and Development Committee meeting. 1. We have closed several traditional neighborhood schools but it doesn't indicate reopening neighborhood schools. We have included a couple of documents that show re-openings, we will also be including the Rimrock property in the educational capacity documents. 2. I think the bussing of students past their neighborhood school and kindergarten students (similar to the sister school concept) being bussed should be addressed or referred to somewhere. We have included both historical bussing, boundaries, and boundary changes. A community discussion will need to take place when we get to the bigger picture with an official re-boundary process – with consideration of closed or reopened schools will need to take place. This report is to give the reader a big picture of district and city demographics. Many children are bussed past their closest schools in both the areas where we have closed schools and where our newest schools are and it is my hope that we will address this big picture with the help of Davis Demographic software and be able to concurrently minimize bussing costs (transportation) which is the 3rd largest expense of the district. With the sprawl of the city our transportation costs have increased. 3. I don't think it is fair to say enrollment has remained flat for 22 years. The chart demonstrates that enrollment has gone through peaks and valleys. The closing of schools was during a "valley". Significant growth, such as last year of 300 students is the enrollment of some current elementary schools. Relatively flat is most accurate. As you can see with the newest document that was added from OPI, BPS had 17,000 in 1970 and has less than 16,000 today. We have added a chart of peaks and valleys since 1987. 4. What is the "process" set for closing, re-boundary and opening schools? I think this is the larger question and is strategic planning dealing with this? It would be great to have a process developed based on data, etc. A great next step and our software from Davis Demographics should enable us to come up with several options that the district and community can review, discuss and debate. 5. I understand that the city drives where housing and development will go. I believe the city has set a precedence and the District is following it. It is the city's choice to annex subdivisions and bring utilities there, for example the new fire station built at 54th and Grand. Isn't Kathy Olson on the city's committee? Yes, The city is realizing the costs as we have spread over a larger area but if we work together we can save taxpayer money, improve education , health, transportation and access to schools. Yes. It is my understanding that Kathy receives information on annexations and development but I am not aware that we are engaged together in a planning process. I have served as the city/county liaison for the board over the past few years and I know there would be great benefit to both in working collaboratively. 6. The tax increment districts are discussed. I am concerned that we don't include and do not have a map that includes the proposed or submitted subdivisions. (Maybe I missed it? I know we asked Candy for it and she said this can tell you where growth will happen in the future.) I am concerned that there is not mention of this. For instance, across the street from Arrowhead Elementary is a new subdivision for 30 or more homes that started this spring and already has 3 homes under construction. It is being marketed as a family friendly subdivision with affordable housing for the family making at or above the median family income. If half of the homes are purchased by families with 2 kids, where are 30 more kids going to fit into Arrowhead? This is a classroom. I know there is growth in other areas of town with proposed subdivisions, such as the Heights and South Side. How does the completion of Shiloh Road affect future housing? Is this our concern? I would really like to see the issue of submitted subdivisions included. Some may not be actually built or started for years but it is part of a long term strategy. The data shows that the overall enrollment has not changed in 40 years and the city is growing larger and older; many houses do not have children; therefore it is critical to collect census data and update this report annually to look at trends by area and most importantly density data. If the city is to grow in a healthy sustainable manner, planning (by reviewing historical trends, current and projected trends with consideration for changes in policies) and integrative planning between city and school will be essential. Affordability has been a large factor in housing for families. Please see the Neighborhood Stabilization Report that is included in the document – Appendix I which explains the “affordability gap” (difference between what people can afford to buy and the median price of housing that is on the market). The affordability gap is expected to more than double by 2020, this will dictate in large part where our families live as you may see in the data on percent of free and reduced by school (appendix G). 7. What will the data from Davis Demographics tell us? What is the timeline and should we include this? They are an outside third party? I have asked for a full scope of work from Davis Demographics. In June, Superintendent Copps, signed a contract with Davis Demographics. It is my understanding that they have a software tool that will aid in re-districting/re-boundary. By looking at today’s enrollment data, possible boundary considerations and more they may help us as we move to the next phase of creating a long term capital improvement plan to maintain, update and refurbish our school buildings. The data may provide invaluable input on helping us look at our schools throughout town as we work toward developing measurable criteria from which to measure our progress in education. The district has owned the Davis Demographic software for several years. 8. I would like to see somewhere where the educational considerations are addressed? This is what really drives a school. We discussed space in schools in length at a meeting. For example how does federally mandated programs affect us now, how has changes in accreditation standards affected us? Have the federal mandates for special education and intervention programs made an impact on education space in schools today compared to 20 years ago? Are state accreditation standards (student to teacher ratios) the same as they were 20 years ago? We have included Educational capacity for 2008-2009 and 2009-2010 and discuss in the executive summary the many factors that drive a school’s space needs including all-day kindergarten, bussing, closures, opening, out of school enrollment, etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.