palmerk Posted July 12, 2004 Report Share Posted July 12, 2004 Proceedings of the 20-Year Planning Committee District No. 2, Yellowstone County Billings, Montana June 22, 2004 The meeting was called to order by John Eisen on Tuesday, June 22, 2004 at 6:30 p.m. in Room 213 at Lincoln Center. Members Present: John Eisen, Matt Brosovich, Ed Workman, Barbara Bryan, Randy Hafer, Tim Cranston, Peggy Smith, Donell Small Members Absent: Mike Marnin, Greg Krueger, Ludlow Howe, Greta Besch Also Present: John Fitzgerald (Billings Gazette), Trustees Katharin Kelker and Mike Dimich Jerry Hansen, CPA joined the meeting briefly to distribute copies of the Facilities and Enrollment Data for the committee’s use. Hansen prepared this document as part of the long-range planning committee that met in 2003-2004. His data assume 0% growth in school-age population (SD2 projections are based upon 3% growth.) Trustee Dimich commended the committee and offered encouragement on their efforts. PRIMARY COMMITTEE DISCUSSION To get a better understanding of what the committee wants to accomplish, and what challenges it will face, committee members offered their answers to three questions: 1. What do we want to accomplish by our work on this committee? 2. What are our shared perceptions and beliefs regarding Billings public schools? 3. Why did the proposed 2004 high school bond fail? What were the community’s objections? Committee answers are summarized on attachments 1-3 to these minutes. These answers will be used to develop a public/community communications plan for the committee, and to identify issues that need to be addressed. Two additional questions -- What are the alternatives for our high schools? What data are needed to evaluate those alternatives -- will be addressed at the next meeting. “TO DO” ITEMS During the above discussions, these items were identified as “To Do” items for the committee in the course of its work Talk with top employers in Billings to find out local job market. They can help the district create curricula that meet community needs. Get explanation of school funding and tax structure. Look at pros and cons of open enrollment. Visit all high schools and middle schools this summer and again in the fall. Get review of previous proposal for remodel/updates at existing high school buildings. Talk with Supt. Rod Svee about variety of school issues. Get all minutes/data generated or compiled by previous long-range facilities committee The list is not all-inclusive. Additional items will be identified at future meetings. Before the next meeting, we will set up tours of the three high schools and the career center, preferably over the noon hour and on two alternate dates. All committee members will be encouraged to tour each building. The next committee meeting will be July 13th at 6:30 at Lincoln Center. ___________________ ___________________ Donna Obie, Recorder John Eisen, Co-Chair ______________________ Barbara Bryan, Co-Chair ATTACHMENT 1 to minutes dated June 22, 2004 Proceedings of the 20-Year Planning Committee District No. 2, Yellowstone County Billings, Montana WHAT DO WE WANT TO ACCOMPLISH BY OUR WORK ON THIS COMMITTEE? Take a fresh look at all available data. Look at best practices and what other districts are doing. Look at alternatives not yet considered such as 7-9 middle schools, adding second stories to existing buildings, building up not out, developing magnet schools, etc. Look at or focus on trades (as far as curriculum at career center, etc.) Coordinate our work with plans/goals of the city (look at developer funds and land set-aside for city parks) Develop a plan that can grow/change with district needs Make better use of what we have (as opposed to building new) Consider needs of existing schools and older neighborhoods that are revitalizing and turning over. Take an in-depth look at how our schools are being used (inefficiencies). Look at grade configurations as K-5, 6-8, 7-9, K-6, 9-12, etc. Determine what we can and cannot change (for example, bussing is dictated to some degree by legal constraints? Can we get the law changed where it isn’t working for us?). Develop both long- and short-term solutions that are coordinated. Clearly document our recommendations; rely on sound, objective analysis Conduct an orderly process with community involvement throughout (don’t wait until end to “sell”/recommend a plan to voters; identify questions and issues voters have and address them as we go along) Focus first on the high school problems Challenge/revisit all assumptions previously made (ex: 40 acre site needed for high school, too expensive to fix old buildings)Keep maintenance of existing facilities a priority (develop strategy for doing this). Work in sync with other SD2 committees/staff. ATTACHMENT 2 to minutes dated June 22, 2004 Proceedings of the 20-Year Planning Committee District No. 2, Yellowstone County Billings, Montana WHAT ARE OUR SHARED PERCEPTIONS/BELIEFS REGARDING BILLINGS PUBLIC SCHOOLS? Develop plan that voters can/will accept. Our existing schools/existing space are not used as efficiently as they could be. We all care about education. SD2 is a high-quality district – doing a good job of education. We want to keep it that way. There are positive lessons through the experience with the freshman academies (benefits of smaller learning environments, etc.) Not all of us agree that our high schools are overcrowded. Our work must be coordinated with City/County plans/projects Our determination of building capacities must be fully documented and will be critical to our work. The district has no strategic plan to maintain our existing schools (not doing adequate maintenance). We need to revisit the desired size for our high schools (1,200 vs. 1,500 vs. 1,300, etc), and take a look at previously estimated costs of remodeling or new construction (are there extravagances here, or unnecessary costs, that can be avoided) Our schools don’t have to be identical in size, design, curriculum, etc., to one another. Our No. 1 priority is to fix/update/repair our existing facilities in creative, cost-effective ways. We must be able and should take care of what we have before we build new. We must demonstrate that the district can operate and maintain (over the long-term) any additional space we recommend Ongoing communication with community is imperative. We must bring community along with us. ATTACHMENT 3 to minutes dated June 22, 2004 (page 1 of 2) Proceedings of the 20-Year Planning Committee District No. 2, Yellowstone County Billings, Montana WHY DID THE POPOSED 2004 HIGH SCHOOL BOND FAIL? WHAT WERE THE COMMUNITY’S OBJECTIONS/QUESTIONS? (page 1 of 2) Why build new when we can’t take care of existing buildings? The question “Do we need a new 40-acre H.S?” was never answered? Need not proven. Doubt over new school size, location and site size. Idea of new high school dropped out of the blue. Repairs to existing schools held hostage to building a new school Personal finance concerns (large retired population, fixed incomes) Only 19% of residents have kids in school. Lack of trust in SD2. People questioned how much more we need to spend on schools; how much is too much? Feeling that the requests for money for our schools are never-ending. Anger over elementary school closures. Anger over teacher strike. Not understood why we need new a new high school if elementary enrollment is declining Concerns that remodel/refurbish plans were too elaborate or too high cost; price tag too high (total cost to taxpayers greater that $95 million) Too many unanswered questions. Answers too late. No opportunity to ask questions. New buildings are a hard sell considering the demographics of Montana. The population of kids ages 5-17 in Montana is projected to grow only by 0.14% annually in next 20 years. So that’s essentially flat (little change). The elderly population will go up. And the number of people in the middle (18-60, approx.) will go down. It’s getting tougher in Billings to pass any bond for any purpose. There’s a perceived disconnect between our schools and the larger needs of our community. Feeling that we’re not getting the best bang for our tax dollar; school aren’t used enough by the community for other activities; schools need to be more multi-use and multi-purpose, and used year-round. ATTACHMENT 3 to minutes dated June 22, 2004 (page 2 of 2) Proceedings of the 20-Year Planning Committee District No. 2, Yellowstone County Billings, Montana WHY DID THE POPOSED 2004 HIGH SCHOOL BOND FAIL? WHAT WERE THE COMMUNITY’S OBJECTIONS/QUESTIONS? (page 2 of 2) Changing needs of schools, and their heavy use, not fully appreciated by voters. The proposed plan not consistent with city/county planning goals. City/county not consulted. The hidden costs of the plan were not spelled out (costs of new infrastructure, expanded city services, road improvements, etc.). The voters don’t fully appreciate what good education of kids saves them in the long run. Belief that we’re neglecting our lower income kids in favor of higher income kids in newer neighborhoods. There’s a growing recognition in the community of the negatives and costs of sprawl. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.