| BOE Minutes | BOE Home Page | |
| Previous: 2007-04-19 || Special Meeting - Open Session || Next: 2007-04-25 | ||
| Madison Metropolitan School District Madison, Wisconsin Art Rainwater, Superintendent | ||
|---|---|---|
| BOARD OF EDUCATION Minutes for Special Meeting - Open Session April 23, 2007 |
Doyle Administration Building 545 West Dayton Street Madison, Wisconsin |
|
Special Meeting of the Board of Education was called to order by President Johnny Winston, Jr. at 5:08 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT: Carol Carstensen, Maya Cole (arrived 5:39 p.m.), Lawrie Kobza, Lucy Mathiak, Beth Moss, Arlene Silveira, Johnny Winston, Jr.
MEMBERS ABSENT: None
STUDENT REPRESENTATIVE
PRESENT: Joe Carlsmith
STAFF PRESENT: Sue Abplanalp, Sheila Briggs, Mark Evans, Mary Gulbrandsen, Steve Hartley, Doug Johnson, Jack Jorgensen, Linda Kailin, Pam Nash, Roger Price, Art Rainwater, Karen Seno, Ken Syke, Lisa Wachtel, Donna Williams Barbara Lehman-Recording Secretary
1. Announcements
There were no announcements.
2. Swearing in of Newly Elected Board Members
Lawrie Kobza swore in Johnny Winston, Jr.
Johnny Winston, Jr. swore in Beth Moss
(Maya Cole was absent)
It was moved by Arlene Silveira and seconded by Beth Moss to change the order of the agenda in order to take up Item 3 before Item 2 was completed. Student Representative advisory vote was aye. Motion unanimously carried by those present.
3. Superintendent's Performance Goal on Communications
(Packets included a background memorandum from the Superintendent (4/19/07). Copies are attached to the original of these minutes.)
Invited guests included Jim Armstrong from Good for Business, Melanie Schmidt of the Timpano Group, and Jim Wood of Wood Communications Group. Melanie Schmidt was out ill. Their focus would be why parents and guardians should send their children to MMSD schools and how they see a marketing plan developing for the district.
Jim Wood
Suggested 4-5 questions having to deal with what the district is trying to accomplish (e.g., diversity); to whom the district is going to market this (students and/or families the district wants to attract); economic positions that the district has to address (e.g., housing on the west side of Madison and property values); advantages or disadvantages of the district's product. He provided some statistics relative to public perception about education in and around Dane County on various issues like getting a quality education, kids using drugs, dealing with violence, overcrowding, etc. He noted that these are not reflections of reality but what the public perceives. The board is starting with consultants and needs to ask if it has the resources and the will to get the job done.
Jim Armstrong
Stated that his firm uses a little different approach focusing on the creative and content part of the work. Their mantra at Good for Business is "Truth Be Told." If you are in the education business, you are in the communications business - successful exchange of knowledge. The act of communicating itself is the product for and with every student in that student's world. The communications should be completely authentic and true in order to make the mission a reality. He suggested looking at all MMSD audiences and how best to impart the mission to them with full knowledge of strengths and weaknesses. The district has to prioritize its many audiences down to a primary or two to communicate with, and then look at the competitive climate. What is standing in the way of achieving the mission. A collaborative review should be set up among the district's supporters and champions and how to work best with them. Another question is how get the audience to pay attention. The messages have to be personalized and show the benefits to the audience and bring it home to them. Start with the part of the mission statement that says, "...because we make every student successful we make you successful..." and begin to tell that balanced story. He also suggested boiling down the essence of the organization to one key word (two potentials—"every" or "success"). Every message should capture that word. Discussion points must give consistency and clarity and gives the audience a reason to believe. This is where data and testimonials come in. He went on to suggest that the reasons to believe be delivered by the people who already believe them (e.g., students, teachers, etc.). These messengers should take the lead in telling the district's story. Make the message organic and let the language be your own. Create a community of conversation that is rich and valuable and real. The board might consider having students be at the forefront of the messaging campaign and allow them to write it. Make the campaign ongoing, regular and robust that reports in a way that is educational what the district is doing and what was not reached. Students could be the core voice then other voices could be added, e.g., mayor, business leaders, citizens, local paper, blogging, web site, etc. The district must collaborate wherever possible (landmarks, film festivals, etc.). Let the product speak for itself through the students and the press and highlight some things like great graduates. Make sure communications are a personality that reflects the district.
Discussion:
· The board has to change the way it solicits input from the community in trying to determine the needs of the community. What sort of process do you recommend in a community like Madison?
Response from Mr. Wood: Have to recognize the complexity of gathering public information. There are recognized procedures for doing that that have been approved with market research, e.g., focus groups and public hearings but the object would be to discover where the community is and how they perceive the district and where is the competitive edge against other districts.
Response from Mr. Armstrong: Could look at the model used by MG&E who spent years with various stakeholders. Certain people continually come. If polling is done, figure out what is to be achieved and the people who are good at attracting that kind of thing, not just generally.
· Struggle with budget - board gets comments from people who are very happy with what they have but who do think of change as bad and, as a result, they say they are going to go somewhere else. The "somewhere else" is never really well thought-out and it is only perceived that it is better (e.g., class sizes in other communities). How do we deal with that?
Maya Cole arrived at this time.
Response from Mr. Armstrong: Present your strengths and weaknesses. Some people are not going to buy into it; cannot force it. Organization has to be what it is otherwise people start to mistrust. Have to be honest.
Response from Mr. Wood: Have to be honest. Most people do not know how local governments are organized and cannot figure out where to access so, if they are frustrated; they focus on property taxes or waste in government as a long-term piece. They need to be more engaged in how local government is organized and who is paying for what and doing what. Second, put decisions you are making into context. Have to tackle the question of how to get the general public involved as staff goes through their exercises to make recommendations that make sense to the board. Have to try to make sure the news media and the broader general public have a sense of where the MMSD public is on the issues. Board needs guidance on how to find out where the constituency is.
Discussion:
· What is the role of the board and district staff in shaping this communications plan?
Response from Mr. Wood: Critical role of the board is to challenge staff, not the procedures, but how to arrive at a different set of solutions. The other appropriate role for the board is, once agreement is reached with staff, to become the public's voice back into the public. Go to the truth issue—one of the problems is people do not want to talk about the things that trouble us but the things that are going well. People sense significant changes and patterns that indicate certain kinds of problems. They are then already operating on inaccurate information. Have to have a voice and figure out how to position the district so the public understands what it is you are doing when you ask for money or why you are recommending closing a school.
Response from Mr. Armstrong: Issues need to be simplified and clarified. Think of a way to clearly communicate to the public whether it is a half page in the State Journal by the end of the week that people can look forward to or go through the minutes. This can be creative and maybe even emotional but needs to be expressed in a clear and engaging way.
· Really agree with trust and transparency. We are in a tough situation but perception of other districts plays a very important role in the push of attracting and retaining people. People think it will be better if they leave.
Response from Mr. Wood: Need to be collaborating like in the form of a regional council. Have to look at other districts and share information pieces that look at the broader area.
Response from Mr. Armstrong: Competitive vs. collaborative climate—master of the universe no longer works; now it's collaboration. Business organizations that last stay true to their mission. Never give up on what makes this district more powerful. You will grow stronger with that viewpoint.
· Can cut things a million ways—balancing financial limitations. Are the messages geared toward a targeted audience or a general audience?
Response from Mr. Armstrong: Web site home page has to connect with the primary audience. The district has to prioritize its messages. There is a good chance you will appeal to other audiences as well. The current web site tries to appeal to everyone.
Response from Mr. Wood: Agree. Sometimes this is about sequencing. Sit down and talk with the regional development group and say to the public that the MMSD is part of it and is a resource that people ought to be investing in. Form a business and economic panel; district can learn from their models. People are thinking that the district is trying to justify doing business the same old way or is trying to promote higher property taxes. Use the third-party verifiers concept by having key opinion leaders, news media, business leaders, etc., respond to the six things that are true and ask them if they believe it and see what is heard back.
· Like the idea of having others who will be primary communicators and givers of the message but, as an institution, the messages start out and get deflected. How does the district keep communicators focused as well as those that we are going to try and empower?
Response from Mr. Wood: Have to work the plan. Cannot let others determine your timelines or other things. Send out the core messages. Cannot have other people speak for you but can have key messengers before, during, and after any discussion that goes on. Keep an eye on the ball and do not allow people to get distracted. Everyone has to own the message once it is out in the field.
Response from Mr. Armstrong: Message has to provide clarity and answer the question, "Why are you doing what you are doing?"
· Do we need to focus on who delivers the message or on the message itself and the group we want to talk to?
Response from Mr. Wood: What is most important at a particular juncture in time. This is a business that has money. Focus on most important strategic challenges and what the most important things are that have to get done in the next 6, 12, 18, 24 months. Target communications to those audiences you have to have on your side. It is not picking one thing over the other but uses a plan and sequences and delineates people's responsibilities.
Response from Mr. Armstrong: We encourage our clients to begin consistently with the same thing. People are always grounded with what you are doing and not with who you are.
· What would be next steps?
Response from Mr. Wood: Develop strategic communications plan and get people who know how to do that help you to do that--staff and professional firms. Get help doing a Request for Proposal (RFP). Do not think you can do it by yourself. Would not rule out other resources. Business leaders have done this, trade associations, etc., talk to them about how to do this and/or whether they can help with money.
Ken Syke noted that staff would be meeting in the morning with managers of television stations and Charter Communications asking them to run Public Service Announcements (PSAs). The first three are finished and ready to go on.
The three 30-second PSAs were shown. Administration has had very good conversations with all four people who agreed to work with them on the PSAs and they made very good suggestions.
· There was a suggestion about marketing MSCR as part of the MMSD. The district will be very prominent. There has to be a focused message and work with people who know how to do this. There was another suggestion to create an information packet that goes to every large employer in the area that includes students talking about Madison Schools.
It was moved by Arlene Silveira and seconded by Carol Carstensen to suspend the rules and return to Item 2 of the agenda. Student Representative advisory vote was aye. Motion unanimously carried.
2. Swearing in of Newly Elected Board Members (continued)
Maya Cole was sworn in by Johnny Winston, Jr.
4. Proposed 2007-08 MadisonMetropolitanSchool District(MMSD) Budget
(Packets included updates to the binder (questions and analyses). Copies are attached to the original of these minutes.)
Roger Price noted that the updates would be posted to the web site tomorrow.
Questions/Responses:
§ Alternative classrooms within elementary schools—how that would look in terms of physical spaces. Response: Tab C19 has a chart. There are options for allocating programs. Time was spent looking at floor plans of the buildings and other things that needed to be considered (cost savings, equity among facilities, access to gyms, etc.). Work-Learn and the School Age Parent Program (SAPAR) were at an elementary building. Supervision and leadership continues. Issue at Hoyt - no building principal there. Idea G contains the administration's thoughts about where the alternatives might be. All the building maps are on line.
§ There are advantages for pulling some of the alternative programs together. Would like to deal with Alternatives as programs in their own right and not having to find little places to put them.
§ First step is deciding whether to do something with the Alternatives. There are many options. There are a lot of myths about the programs as well.
§ REACH program - what REACH is and why it is important. Details were given on the curriculum and how it provides planning time for teachers. Significant services are provided by librarians. If REACH is cut, it would cut librarians. If REACH is cut the, training would go to the classroom teacher to teach technology. There was further discussion about the history of the REACH program (curriculum).
Educational benefits of a consolidation: Staff - Sheila Briggs, Principal at Schenk Elementary School; Linda Kailin, Principal at Muir Elementary School; Karen Seno, Principal at Cherokee Middle School.
Pam Nash, Assistant Superintendent for Secondary Education, noted that there are advantages to making some middle schools larger and much more likely to enable the middle school design. She added that principals readily recognize some advantages they would immediately put into place which includes holding on to some particular staff. A larger grouping also would provide more parents and families from which to draw as partners.
v Comments from Karen Seno: Cherokee is one of the largest middle schools in the district. She indicated that 90 percent of what is considered is external. She starts at the top and works her way down. A copy of the references used when making these decisions was distributed and covered requirements/
recommendations for federal and state standards, Board of Education goals, Middle School Design Team recommendations, and other relevant polices, as well as school priorities/emphasis, e.g., small class size, small teams, academic offerings, and academic/climate support (a copy is attached to the original of these minutes).
Questions from the Board:
· Consolidation would combine Black Hawk, Sherman, and O'Keeffe into two schools. Class sizes would drop and there would be more offerings, e.g., world languages, health, etc.
· Under Tab C8b there is a chart that shows class sizes projected for all schools for next year. It does not show what would happen if the schools are consolidated.
· Small school allocation for Wright and Spring Harbor - did not address this last year. Spring Harbor stands out as less needy and has the smallest class sizes. They are attempting to offer the same things as large schools for a smaller number of kids. They struggle as does Black Hawk.
· Spring Harbor was a former elementary school - confirmed that the classrooms are not smaller.
· What is being done in the larger middle schools to keep kids engaged and foster school spirit? Ms. Seno responded that Cherokee feels like a happy medium; it feels intimate. There is a summer orientation for incoming 6th graders.
· None of the middle schools proposed for consolidation are over 500 in enrollment. Would go from three smaller schools to two larger schools. One assistant principal would be added.
· Largest class size at Cherokee is about 25.
· Plans for art, music and physical education in the consolidation.
Sue Abplanalp and the two elementary principals, Sheila Briggs and Linda Kailin, spoke about their experiences moving from smaller to larger schools. Ms. Abplanalp distributed written information about the elementary instructional design beliefs that were implemented five years ago (a copy is attached to the original of these minutes).
Comments from Linda Kailin: Muir is an easier school to manage. Groups work more efficiently. Level of poverty almost identical to previous school (Sandburg). It operates well because there are lots of places for people to move around. Very intimate feeling. Makes huge difference. Time that specials teachers are in the building makes a big difference as well because they are integral members of the staff. Ms. Kailin did not have that before. There is a great sense of support. A small building is like a family when things are not operating so well; in a bigger space there is more of a chance for people to handle things more privately and keep things moving. She has not had the experience that it's less personal or intimate. There is a critical point where it becomes too little. Having a teacher 90 percent is very different from having a teacher 50 percent.
Comments from Sheila Briggs: They got 103 more students in a boundary change two years ago. With the combination of the boundary change, kindergartners, and mobility they had 209 children at Schenk out of 387 that were new to the school (over 50 percent). They are just under 400 now; a very big jump. She would reiterate some of the things already said. She mentioned some special things they did to help the families through that process, e.g., she visited Hawthorne and talked about Schenk. People wanted a decision and needed to get out of the current situation. They formed a planning committee with the other school and held various activities for people to get acquainted.
Ms. Nash distributed written material delineating the advantages of a larger school (a copy is attached to the original of these minutes). Ms. Nash commented that they are doing some amazing teaming that other people want to replicate. Smaller schools are saying there is no way they can do these things.
Questions from the Board:
Ø Of the 130 students, between 53 and 60 percent of the students were low income. The schools are physically about 1.5 miles apart at the most. Staff was prepared for overcoming any barriers to parent participation. They started offering busses for all the activities. They had enormous turnouts and no one was riding the busses. Very few had barriers. Boundary change made sense.
FOLLOW UP: Provide copies of maps of buildings. Provide more information on course offerings if there is a consolidation compared to no consolidation.
Recessed at 7:48 p.m.
Reconvened at 8:03 p.m.
Returned to the budget conversation.
Questions/Responses:
Ø There was more elaboration on the handouts.
Ø Mr. Price will continue to work on the forecast.
Ø Balance in the Reserve for Contingencies. Some could be used for the superintendent search and the RFP for salary review for administrators. The main use of the Reserve is for staffing adjustments in the fall.
Ø Communications plan - Mr. Rainwater recommended waiting until they have a solid plan.
Ø Strings - the figure in the budget for eliminating 5th grade needs to be adjusted for fees that have been collected. Instituting a fee for middle and high schools; cannot if credit is given. Fee for middle school is only for instrument rental.
Ø Smaller library service at five locations.
Ø Reduction in total guidance counselors is enrollment driven.
Ø Cuts in social work at the school level because principals have to use supplemental staff in a particular way. That affected some allocations but added a whole position. Little different between Title 1 and regular schools.
Ø Funds for Infinite campus - original Lawson proposal. Using same model. Whole implementation of both systems has been cost neutral.
Ø Use of supplemental at elementary level was included in tonight's packet. How much do middle and high schools get--different for Title 1 schools. The higher the low-income percentage the more allocation the school gets. Decision rests with the high schools for how to use these allocations.
Ø Middle and highs schools are taking somewhat disproportionate hit. Administration tried to protect class size in the primary grades. The high schools are doing a good job but cannot offer classes with 15 students.
Ø Title 1 -- children in private school also have access to Title 1 funds. High school enrollments are going down -- always gets confusing. Rules for Title 1 eligibility were briefly explained.
Ø High school/middle school staffing ratios provided under Tab C7.
Ø Learning Coordinator allocations were explained.
Ø Salary savings addressed under Tab Q3. There was some discussion about the changes in the level of fund equity and how it cannot be allowed to go any lower. The advantages that the new accounting system (Lawson) provides were also discussed. The most recent report on bond rating was included in the materials.
Ø Budget finalization dates and certification of tax levy. Factors affecting July 1 date and Third Friday in the fall.
Ø Difference between total fund equity and equity designated for cash flow.
Ø Athletic fees - district's cost vs. what is covered by fees, cost of athletic directors and secretaries, DPI regulations.
Ø Tonight's information included middle school transportation, specifically for Spring Harbor and Wright Middle Schools - what is and is not provided under Tab Q9c. If the yellow buses are eliminated, administration would work with Madison Metro.
Ø Budget amendments due tomorrow by 4:30 p.m.
It was moved by Maya Cole and seconded by Carol Carstensen to extend the due date for board member amendments another two weeks.
Discussion on the motion:
Ø Have more questions.
Ø Community is struggling with budget decisions out there. There have been a number of e‑mails. Two weeks is too far out. Would like to stay on the schedule. Do owe community an answer.
Ø New members getting oriented as to what questions should be asked. Sometimes the initial question brings more questions. Have not had time to go through schools that are being considered for closure. Even one week would be reasonable.
Ø Must start out with what you would submit tomorrow. Other questions can still be asked.
Ø Much anguish in the community.
Ø Making cuts before public discussion.
Beth Moss made a friendly amendment to give the board members until Thursday to turn in their budget amendments and then to proceed from there.
Discussion on the amended motion:
Ø Concerned about handing in amendments on Thursday then having public appearances on Monday. Also concerned about number of protest rallies. Two separate questions: what to do about the most controversial pieces. Seems the question is what to do with the proposal to consolidate then what to do with the rest of the budget. Structure the discussion to take those up first before the public hearings.
Ø Student Representative election is in May. What do we expect for Monday?
Ø Trying to do budget in April because of the consolidations/closings.
Ø Caution—easy to put something back but getting four people to agree to take something off is the problem. Do not handle the consolidation and closings separately. Public has had opportunities to give input, but not on the amendments. If a public hearing is held now, it will not be only about the amendments.
Ø If everyone else submits their amendments on the original timeline, then the new board members can see what others are proposing. Concerned about having a public hearing on one person's ideas; not in favor of public hearings like that.
Ø People find ways to comment.
Ø Find ways to make the proposals public (e.g., PTOs). Process still allows for new proposals. Not sure how a meaningful public hearing can be held when the board has heard the same comments before.
Remaining budget schedule:
Veteran board members' budget amendments due tomorrow by 4:30 p.m.
Newly elected board members' budget amendments due Wednesday by 3 p.m.
Administration will compile a list for distribution by Thursday a.m.
Previous minutes and process sheet to Board (already on the web site)
Process for Monday night:
All amendments will be ranked based on how many are in agreement.
Further discussion:
Ø Favor something that helps prioritize the larger items.
Ø Send to the local newspapers.
Ø Want to discuss a change in the timeline for next year.
Ms. Cole withdrew her motion. Ms. Carstensen withdrew her second.
Ø Have to submit a cut with every addition; then a vote up or down. Should vote on the 30th if at all possible.
Ø Where are we on the private school funding? Roger Price will be meeting with the Diocese on Wednesday.
Ø Plan G is not in the budget right now. Budget was built on Plan C. Plan G provides almost $300,000 additional dollars to add something back or to provide a cushion.
Ø Value of selling Lindbergh how much to analyze that? Less than $1,000.
FOLLOW UP: Provide copies of the information from the Finance and Operations committee last October regarding sports (per student, per sport and district's costs), total cost of athletics programs, inclusions of cuts to athletic directors, fees in excess of program costs, etc. Report on property near La Follette to generate some revenues and have lots available for Trades houses.
5. Other Business
There was no other business.
6. Adjournment
It was moved by Lawrie Kobza and seconded by Arlene Silveira to adjourn the meeting at 10:04 p.m. Student Representative advisory vote was aye. Motion unanimously carried.
bl
Previous: 2007-04-19 || Special Meeting - Open Session || Next: 2007-04-25