Marta McAllister Posted February 21, 2005 Report Share Posted February 21, 2005 Proceeding of the School/Community Committee Meeting District No. 2, Yellowstone County High School District No. 2, Yellowstone County Billings, Montana February 15, 2005 The School/Community Committee and Education Committee had a joint meeting to hear Board Trustee, Malcolm Goodrich, and Thomas Harper, Business Manager reported on the budget. Malcolm reported that even with money from the Legislature, School District 2 is looking at a budget shortfall next fiscal year. Malcolm reported that the District and the Union have agreed on FTE numbers. Malcolm reported that the Budget Committee is reviewing budget items to eliminate. Malcolm suggested the need of offering a vote for a mill levy increase. Malcolm reported that the district continues to operate under a hiring freeze and they are looking for areas where money can be cut. Malcolm reported that at the present they are using the present budget and going forward. The Business Committee is looking at using the zero based budget concept starting in 2007-2008. The Education Committee adjourned to Room 219 to continue their meeting Call to Order: The meeting of the School/Community Committee was called to order by Karen Moses. Members Present: Mike Dimich, Karen Moses, Carol Wicker, Gail Surwill, John Selvig, Bobbie Larson, Michael Burke, Lisa Posada, Tom Willis, Bill Selph, Mike Hughes, Paul DeLorenzo, Stephanie Krueger, Greta Besch, Don Ami, Jim Hartung, Shauna Kerr, and Jan McCandless. Sheryl Scheafer, Laura Simonsen, Jennifer Howe, Jay Kirk, and Deb Powell were excused. 20-Year Facilities Planning Committee Member Present: Donell Small, Matt Brosovich, Ludlow Howe, Randy Hafer, Ed Workman, Mike Marin, and Tim Cranston. Communication from the Public: Heidi Lombardozzi – concerns regarding changing the Career Center to a high school. Tracy Crabtree – concerns regarding 20-Year Facilities Report Nick Rookhuizers – concerns regarding changing the Career Center to a 4 year high school Nicole Sayre – concerns regarding changing the Career Center to a 4 year high school. 20-Year Facilities Planning Committee Report: The 20-Year Facilities Planning Committee presented their report and Nancy Hines, Communication Consultant facilitated a working session with the goal of reaching consensus on options and determining the next step. Donell Small presented the 20-Year Facilities Planning Committee’s Statement of Problems, Supporting Statements, Shared Beliefs, Criteria for Evaluation of High School Scenarios, and the three High School Scenarios. A procedural question was brought up regarding the scenarios. It was felt that the scenarios were not included in the agenda and not properly noticed for the meeting. It was suggested that if an action is taken by the Committee it has to be in the packet. The 20-Year Facilities Planning Committee is only presenting information. Because their meeting occurred the same night the information was needed to be in the agenda, it was understood they would be bringing information with them. There was confusion as the 20-Year Facilities Planning Committee had given the current material to be copied for the meeting. Some things discussed are as follows: At this point this is just a process for the general public to have input on the three scenarios. The Committee was commended for all their work. There were strong comments that the Career Center should be left as it is and not be used as a four year high school. There were concerns that the three scenarios did not address educational needs. Question regarding how the numbers of students to building capacity ratio was figured. Senior High’s expansion, adequate parking and practice facilities. Census growth and declining enrollments in the future. Demographics of Billings. Concern that the Heights is not being represented on the 20-Year Facilities Planning Committee Long term solutions, such as building a new high school. Lockwood students attending Skyview or Lincoln Center. Expansion for gymnasiums and extra curricular participation space. The need for additional staff. The Committee discussed the next steps needed to move forward with the three 20-Year Committee Scenarios. Nancy Hines reminded everyone that these are decisions on the next steps to move forward not the scenarios. The 20-Year Facilities Planning Committee envisioned their next step would be to present their three scenarios to the public for public comment and input. The five options for next steps were: 1. School/Community Committee with 20-Year Facilities Planning Committee goes to the Education and Business Committee, then to the public for comment, and then to the Board. 2. 20-Year Facilities Planning Committee presents their scenarios to the public, receive public comment, and then come back to the Board. 3. School/Community Committee with 20-Year Facilities Planning Committee goes to the Board and then to public comment. 4. School/Community/20-Year Facilities Planning Committee goes to the Education and Business Committee, then to the Board, and then to the Public for comment. 5. SchoolCommunity/20-Year Facilities Planning Committee report to Board, Board informs Education and Business Committee and Public - not to have them involved in the detail, but the process. Then back to the Board for final approval to put on the ballot. Karen Moses expressed the opinion that she is uncomfortable going to the public before going to the Board for approval and about the “process”. There was discussion that if the scenarios go to the board before the public, the public will perceive it as “this is what the board wanted”. There is concern that in the past the Board made a decision and then notified the public without public input. There was discussion that the 20-Year Planning Committee should take their scenarios to the public to see how the public perceives the scenarios before the Board makes any decision. Members suggested that the public still does not trust the Board and this would be a good way to rebuild the public’s trust. The 20-Year Facilities Planning Committee wants the public comment to be the narrowing of the scenarios, they want the public comment to lend questions and answer to possibilities. They want the public to decide if the three scenarios have merit. The 20-Year Facilities Planning Committee suggested that if the public has input first it will build public trust. A recommendation will be made by the 20-Year Facilities Planning Committee to the board after public input. The comment was raised that the three scenarios appear to be “fiscally responsible based scenarios.” Donell agreed and suggested that after the public reviews the scenarios if the public is willing to provide more dollars the scenarios can be maneuvered. A motion was made and seconded to approve the option, School/Community’s 20-Year Facilities Planning Committee goes to the Education and Business Committee, then to the public for comment, and then back to the Board. The motion passed. An amendment was made to the option that School/Community’s 20-Year School Planning Committee goes to the Education and Business Committee, then to the public for comment, 20-Year Facilities Planning Committee will present finalized recommendations to the School/Community Committee. The question was raised regarding if the School/Community Committee had a quorum present to vote. Carol Wicker explained that after the last discussion at the last meeting regarding quorums she researched the issue. Carol reported that if the Committee has a quorum at the beginning of the meeting and members leave, whoever is left can vote. (Nine voting member were present at this time.) Karen Moses questioned that information and expressed that it is not the way she understands quorums and that is not what they do at the Board. Carol explained that it is according to Robert’s Rule of Order. Carol explained that at the Board only certain Trustees are allowed to vote on certain items, so it is different in establishing a voting majority. Nancy recommended that the School/Community Committee proceed with the next step to move forward with the scenarios as if it is ok to make decisions. If it is not, the School/Community Committee will start over. There were concerns about going forward because there were questions made earlier that items on the agenda tonight were not publicly noticed to the public’s satisfaction. Nancy thought the School/Community Committee could make the decisions on the ”next step”, not the scenarios. Karen Moses stated for the record that she was not comfortable but requested that Nancy continue. Karen Moses asked the 20-Year Facilities Planning Committee where in this process were chances to add, subtract, or bring other options to the table? Donell Small said at the next committee meeting or public comment. It was explained that the 20-Year Facilities Committee will not make changes with the three scenarios along the way until all the public has had a chance to give input. The following time-line was presented for future Committees Meeting: Business Committee March 7 Education Committee March 14 Public Input April 20 School/Community May 4 (Agenda inclusion) School/Community Meeting May 9 School Board May 11th (Agenda inclusion) School Board May 16th This would allow Trustees time to, if they so decided, propose a bond issue by November. A Motion was made and seconded to insert one more School/Community Meeting May 16th. The Motion passed. Karen Moses has concerns that the Board has not seen the three scenarios, that the three scenarios are moving forward to the public without being legally noticed, and the process. It was explained that the scenarios are for public information to get back input from the public. At this point nothing will be voted on. She has concerns that the public will think the School/Community Committee has given these sceneries their stamp of approval. Carol Wicker clarified that the School/Community Committee has simply received the scenarios as information to be considered as will the many other groups. The Committee has taken no action because they were not legally noticed. The 20-Year Facilities Planning Committee members inquired as to a date when they are officially done? Old Business/Announcements/Handouts: MSU-Billings College of Technology handout February 15, 2005 Agenda: Legislative Update: Reminded members to continue the District’s web-site to keep current with legislation issue and the weekly Thursday meetings. Jim Hartung handed out “Guide to Legislation” booklets. Daylis Stadium Update & OPI Annual Yearly Progress (AYP) Report: Moved to next month Minutes of the School/Community Committee Meeting: Approval of the January School/Community Committee will be voted on next month due to lack of members present – only five members remained at this time. The next scheduled meeting is March 14, 2005. The Committee members will meet in the Board Room located in the Lincoln Center, at 415 N 30th at 6:00 PM. ____________________________ ___________________________________ Karen Moses, Chairperson Brenda Cross, Recorder Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.