TESD Archives - Page 10 of 24

TESD

T/E Proposed Final Budget indicates 3.2% tax increase plus — the new Superintendent search gets underway

April 29, 2014

At the T/E School Board meeting last night, the Board approved the 2014-15 proposed final budget as follows – The Proposed Final Budget for the 2014-2015 school year is in the amount of $117,254,089 revenue, 2,671,891 fund balance transfers and $119,925,980 for appropriations on a tentative basis.

As presented, the ‘Budget Development Summary’ slide below indicates that the projected expenditures of $117,069,428 exceed the projected revenue of $113,962,589 = projected budget deficit of $3,106,839. With a tax increase of 3.2% (Act 1, 2.1% and exception, 1.1%) plus a net revenue increase of $211,370 and a net expenditure increase of $1,356,552, the revised budget has a remaining deficit of approximately $1.8 M. It is proposed that the $1.8 M will be satisfied with a fund balance contribution. The final budget is to be approved in June.

Once the revenue and expenditures projections for the 2013-14 school year are in, it will be interesting to see if the District ‘finds’ surplus dollars. If you recall, the District has found mega-millions in surplus the last two years in a row. Unfortunately, for taxpayers, each year the money has been ‘found’ until after the next year’s budget was passed (with a tax increase).

The budget surplus was $3.9 million for the 2011-12 school year and nearly $5 million for 2012-13 school year. It’s never been entirely clear what caused the budget surplus these last two years although I do recall that “lower than anticipated insurance costs” was used to explain a portion of the surplus. I have to believe that the Board would not approve a 3.2% increase for the taxpayers only to discover a budget surplus for the third year in a row. Not sure that there could be a valid explanation if that were to happen.

Another couple of notes from last night’s meeting. In the update from the Public Information committee meeting, Scott Dorsey announced that the process by which the public asks questions at School Board meetings and the Board responds has moved to the Policy Committee for further discussion. The next Policy Committee meeting is Friday May 9 at 12:45 PM at TEAO.

School Board President Kevin Buraks formally announced that Supt. Dan Waters will retire at the end of his current contract which ends June 30, 2015. Regardless of how people personally feel about Waters, his time remaining on the job is winding down – a little over a year left on his contract. As announced by Buraks, there is discussion underway about the process/search to hire his replacement. It appears that the Board will be utilizing the experiences of Jeanne Pocalyko, the new Personnel Direct, in conducting the search.

Ray Clarke sent the following note about last night’s meeting —

A note on the TESD Superintendent search from last night’s Board meeting. A Board Search Committee has been appointed. Members I think: Graham, Cruickshank, Bruce, Carlson but I could have missed someone over the general hubbub at the beginning of the meeting. There will be a survey to get public input sometime in May.

I wonder if they will ask meaningful questions: eg: From inside or outside the district? Re the above, definitely or preferably? Experience as a Superintendent? Rank a given set of possible selection criteria in order of importance? (Or, rate importance of the criteria, but all could be 10 out of 10). Criteria such as: experience in a high performing district; track record of improving educational results; track record of meeting budget; demonstrated public communication expertise; employee satisfaction results, and so on.

In her prior position at Dallastown Area School District (DASD, Pocalyko and the Superintendent search committee took a ‘community engagement’ approach and included administrators, teachers, parents, support staff, students, community and committee members in the effort. Although ultimately the final determination and selection of the new Superintendent remained the responsibility of the DASD Board, the decision process included the compilation of stakeholder feedback, interview results and comments from each interview round, reference checks and the school board’s consideration of district needs and input from the Committee.

Chesterbrook Shopping Center & Wayne Glen projects are on Tredyffrin’s Planning Commission meeting for Monday

April 27, 2014

3 Comments

There is an update with forward movement on the Chesterbrook Shopping Center redevelopment project! The developers of the shopping center, 500 Chesterbrook Boulevard LP, will appear in front of the Planning Commission on Monday, April 27, 7 PM to review the preliminary/final subdivision application for the site. The developers plan is to redevelop the existing 13-acre site, which contains approximately 122,000 sq. ft. of commercial space, into a mixed used development. Their plan contains approximately 31,000 sq. ft. of commercial space (utilizing a portion of the existing building) and 124 residential townhouses in the newly created Town Center District.

It has been nearly 4 years since Genuardi’s in the Chesterbrook Shopping Center closed. With the departure of the 40,000 square foot grocery store, the Center saw a significant drop in foot traffic and began a downward spiral as the empty storefronts continued.

The redevelopment of the Chesterbrook Shopping Center is very overdue – this project is going to be a win-win for the neighboring residents, the corporate employees working in Chesterbrook and other township residents, who like me, drive through the area regularly.

Also in front of the Planning Commissioners on Monday is the Wayne Glen development project. Unlike the widespread community support that developers have enjoyed with the Chesterbrook redevelopment plans, the Arcadia Land Company project ‘Wayne Glen’ at the northwest corner of the intersection of Swedesford and Old Eagle Roads, has seen its share of spirited debate.

The proposed Wayne Glen project is a mixed-use development with carriage homes and townhouses plus an office-building component. The issue for the residents close to the Richter Tract is how the developer will manage the stormwater situation as much of this area, including Glenhardie, is prone to regular flooding. The Wayne Glen project is located in the Trout Creek Overlay District and the Arcadia developers believe that their plan will utilize design techniques that will alleviate the erosion along the stream banks and flooding issues and improve the poor water quality.

On Monday, the Planning Commissioners will consider Arcadia’s conditional use application to construct 104 residential units in the R-1 Residential District and approximately 240,000 sq. ft. of non-residential building area in the Professional District.

The target audience for the residential construction in both the Wayne Glen and Chesterbrook projects is the age 55 and over market – the emptynesters and those people interested in downsizing from their large single family homes. However, with a combined increase of approximately 230 new residences between the two projects, the possibility does exist for additional school age children for the T/E School District. Typically, there is representation at these Planning Commission meetings by the School Board. However, the Planning Commission meeting on Monday conflicts with the regularly monthly meeting of the School Board.

As an aside, at the last Public Information Meeting this past week, Barb Jackson, an Easttown resident and T/E parent, asked about Dr. Waters contract and whether he would be retiring when his contract ended in June 2015. After Waters confirmed that he would retire, a follow-up question was asked regarding the search committee and process to find a replacement. Although not listed on the School Board meeting agenda for Monday, Board President Kevin Buraks told those of us at the meeting that the Board would give the specific details on the superintendent search at the upcoming school board meeting on Monday.

T/E Superintendent disputes Montgomery County DA report — Conestoga High School NOT involved in drug trafficking

April 24, 2014

37 Comments

In the days since the Montgomery County District Attorney’s office announced the drug trafficking arrests, including the two ringleaders, Haverford School graduates, the story has become widely reported — from CNN to Good Morning America, there are articles and videos on the subject.

I’m certain that an expensive prep school such as the elite Haverford School (with upper school tuition approaching $35K) is in overdrive with damage control — much is at stake with current parents and the endowments of wealthy alum. With a tag line on their website of “Preparing Boys for Life”, the Haverford School struggles to handle the PR nightmare.

Watching Good Morning America report on the story and the high schools (Lower Merion, Haverford School, Radnor, Harriton and Conestoga) and the colleges (Lafayette, Haverford and Gettysburg) was sad — and really eerie to the Conestoga High School logo flash on the TV screen along with the others. But is all the information contained in the Montgomery County DA’s press release of April 21 accurate? Apparently, not according to T/E Superintendent Dan Waters.

Waters has just released a T/E School District press release which disputes the report of the Montgomery County DA’s office. Although Conestoga High School was named by the District Attorney in the list of Main Line high schools involved in the drug ring, Waters claims that the information is not correct. According to Waters in the following press release, no students were identified or arrested from Conestoga High School in this recent drug trafficking incident. Don’t get me wrong, I want to believe that Waters is correct and that no Conestoga students are involved but it seems strange that the DA’s office would just add Conestoga High School to the list of high schools involved — how does a District Attorney make that kind of mistake? If Waters is correct and that the Montgomery County DA’s office erred in their report, shouldn’t the T/E School District board and administration demand a retraction? Shouldn’t Conestoga High School be removed from the list?

Below is Dr. Waters response to the Montgomery County District Attorney April 21 press release — you make your own judgement. Coincidentally, the T/E Public Information Committee, chaired by T/E school board member Scott Dorsey, is holding their regularly monthly meeting tonight (6:30 PM, Administration building). Although the agenda for tonight’s meeting was set before these recent drug arrests, there is certain to be discussion. At every school board meeting, president Kevin Buraks invites the public to attend committee meetings, stating that the ‘real’ work is done at the committee level. With that in mind, I’m guessing that the Public Information committee meeting may have a ‘higher than normal’ attendance.

The Montgomery County District Attorney’s office press release reported on recent drug related arrests naming nearby high schools and colleges. The press release once again highlights the need for continued efforts to provide a safe learning environment for our students. I write to inform our community that we continue to be vigilant regarding the use of drugs and alcohol by our students within our community.

The safety of our students is paramount in our efforts to provide them with a safe learning environment. The District’s drug and alcohol practices and policies include prevention, deterrence and support for our students. The prevention strategies include classroom education efforts, schoolwide programs, student activities supporting healthy lifestyles and counseling programs. Deterrence efforts include random canine sniffs supported by the police and the enforcement of the drug and alcohol policy when applicable. Support for our students include individual counseling by our school counselors and mental health specialists. The Conestoga High School student support team, known as CARE, accepts referrals from students, parents and staff to assist students who may be in need of services. In addition, drug and alcohol counselors provided through COAD (Chester County Council on Addictive Diseases) are available to our students and families. Within the community, we have our on-going strong partnerships with ARCH (Area Residents Caring and Helping) and the police departments of both townships.

Recently, the Montgomery County District Attorney’s office issued a press release which mentioned a drug distribution ring in local high schools and colleges. Although Conestoga High School was mentioned as one of the schools in the news report, at this time, according to the affidavits forwarded to me from the Montgomery County District Attorney, there were no sellers arrested or identified from Conestoga High School. We recognize that future arrest warrants may be issued by the District Attorney if the investigation continues. We are prepared to assist law enforcement officials when they request our involvement in investigations. What can we do as a community? As the police have directed us in the past, we are all encouraged to contact the police department with information concerning illegal drug activity in our community.

Please contact the school principal, school counselor or me should you have any questions or concerns.

Dan Waters
Superintendent of Schools
Tredyffrin/Easttown School District

2014 Pennsylvania School District Rankings based on PSSA scores are in — Unionville Chadds Ford tops the list, Radnor moves up to third and T/E places fifth

April 13, 2014

11 Comments

Spring is PSSA time for public schools in Pennsylvania and the results for 2014 as reported in the Pittsburgh Business Times reveal exciting news for Unionville Chadds Ford School District (UCFSD). For those interested in this type of school district rankings, UCFSD now tops the state’s list, having ousted long-standing Upper St. Clair School District for the number one position based on 2014 PSSA results. The Upper St. Clair School District located in suburban Pittsburgh, had previously held the first place title for the last eight years but dropped to fourth in the rankings behind UCFSD, Mt. Lebanon (Allegheny County) and Radnor school districts for 2014.

The Pennsylvania System of School Assessment (PSSA) formula ranks the school districts based on three years of state standardized test scores, giving the most weight to the current year. The PSSA is a standards-based assessment of what a student should know and be able to do at varying levels in reading, writing, science and math. Reading and math is assessed in grades 3 through 8 and grade 11; writing is assessed in grades 5, 8 and 11 and science assessed in grades 4, 8 and 11. The rankings do not denote the overall quality and performance of the school district, only the PSSA scores.

Although the 2014 rankings show Upper St. Clair School District dropping to fourth place, another Allegheny County school district, Mt. Lebanon holds at second place. This is the fourth consecutive year that I have tracked the top 15 school districts and the highlighted line in the chart below indicates that T/E School District has moved from second in 2011, third in 2012, fourth in 2013 and to fifth place in the 2014 PSSA rankings. Last year we saw UCFSD drop from second in 2012 to third in 2013. However, UCFSD turned it around for 2014 and ended up first in the rankings. Looking at other Main Line school districts, Radnor had dropped from fourth to sixth in 2013 but they also changed direction and are now third in the state. Great Valley School District jumped a couple of spots this year and for 2014, their PSSA scores have them ranked at 11^th in the state.

Looking at the ‘Top 15’ school districts in Pennsylvania (based on PSSA results), Allegheny County continues as the number one county with six school districts represented followed by Chester County with three school districts (Unionville Chadds Ford, Great Valley and T/E), Delaware County with three school districts (Radnor, Wallingford Swarthmore and Rose Tree Media) and Montgomery County with one school district (Lower Merion).

A review of other area school districts indicates that Downingtown School District continues to improve; moving from 25^th ranking in 2012 to 24^th in 2013 and places at 22^nd in 2014. Phoenixville School District moved up four positions this year from 98 in 2013 to 94 in 2014.

A Pennsylvania school district that places in the top 15 or 20 out of 500 districts statewide based on the PSSA exams is an achievement for which students, parents, teachers and administrators can all be proud. Many view PSSA scores as a reliable predictor of future success. As a tool for student assessment, the PSSA exam helps measure and provides useful information of what students are learning. The PSSAs measure the performance of the entire class and provide of measurement of how an overall class is performing.

Pennsylvania allows parents to exempt their children from standardized tests for religious reasons. Some elected officials, including State Sen. Andy Dinniman, have been publicly wary of the way standardized tests are used. As Minority Chair of the Senate Education Committee, he offers ‘Eight Reasons Why We Oppose Keystone Graduation Exams’, believing that it is fundamentally wrong for three standardized tests to determine a student’s high school graduation.

Beyond bragging rights for a school district or as a sales tool for local real estate agents, how important are these test results? Do children (and teachers) need this level of pressure to ‘measure up’?

PA School District Rankings, Based on PSSA Results for 2011 – 2014 years

Tredyffrin Twp: Public Works Director Scott Cannon and Finance Director Tim Klarich are out and it’s only February!

February 25, 2014

20 Comments

Tredyffrin Board of Supervisors held a special board meeting on February 10 to terminate the employment of Public Works Director Scott Cannon. Stating several acts of misperformance, including two instances of improper disposal of materials on Township property in addition to procurement procedure violations, the supervisors voted unanimously to dismiss Cannon, without public discussion or comment.

Two weeks to the day after the Public Works Director’s termination, the ominous “discussion of personnel action items” appears on the Board of Supervisors agenda. We learned last night that the township’s Finance Director Tim Klarich is the next one out the door. Without explanation or discussion, the supervisors unanimously voted to accept the resignation of Klarich.

Although the public wasn’t privy to the details of Cannon’s termination, after only a couple of years in the job, I didn’t have a real sense of the pubic work director. On the other hand, Tim Klarich was Tredyffrin Township Finance Director for nearly 4 years. I found his analysis and preparation of the yearly township budget detailed and complete and his monthly financial updates to the board unfailingly thorough. Two township department heads gone in two weeks, there was an uneasiness with more questions than answers.

During the public comment period at the end of the meeting, I asked several questions and voice concern about Klarich’s abrupt departure from the township. When I received no response to my question as to when Klarich gave his resignation notice, I then asked ‘when’ his last day was. Board of Supervisor chair Mike Heaberg referred my questions to the solicitor Vince Donohue, who stated that yesterday (Monday) was his last day. Donohue then stated that because it was a personnel matter, there would be no further information. It was obvious to those in the audience that there was more behind the departure of Cannon and then two weeks later Klarich than was publicly provided. I

Falling under the jurisdiction of ‘legal and personnel matters’, it is highly unlikely that we will ever know the details of Cannon or Klarich recent departures from the township. Less than two months in to the New Year and two department heads are already gone — What’s that saying from Shakespeare’s Hamlet, “Something is rotten in Denmark”? Makes you wonder if there is more house cleaning ahead from the Board of Supervisors.

From the T/E School Board meeting also held last night came the unanimous vote to approve the teachers to approve the new 3-year contract. Ray Clarke attended the TESD meeting and provides the following personal comments:

Dr. Waters actually lead the presentation of the TEEA contract. A surprise since he rarely speaks. He addressed many of the questions raised on CM, but with only occasional reference to the data on the slides so it was hard to follow, even for an experienced ear.
One of the ways that the impact is minimized is that the caps on column movement are lower than numbers assumed in the budget (but wouldn’t we have budgeted “status quo”?), and that difference is taken as “budgetary savings”
Also helping the overall budget is that (my estimates) there has been a redistribution of ~50 staff from the top level to the bottom levels through retirements and replacements. Dr Waters provided total staff by level which will be handy for those wanting to sanity check the calculated impact. No further “breakage” going forward is assumed in the impact assessment.
It sounded as though the one-time bonus was not included in the baseline numbers.
Note that the increased teacher contribution to healthcare premiums averages $74,000 per year – $160 per teacher. We should not lose sight of the fact that taxpayers fund a very generous benefits package!
Outside the contract, I thought that the Committee Chairs gave richer summaries of their recent meetings than we have been used to. Perhaps that’s wishful thinking, but to be encouraged!

T/E School District institutes 7-minute clock-in and clock-out rule for aides and paras & progressive discipline for violation

February 14, 2014

89 Comments

A bit of background —

On February 4, I received a copy of a memo dated January 31, 2014 from Sue Tiede, Director of TESD Personnel. Tiede’s letter went to ‘All Employees paid on an Hourly Basis’ (aides/paras) with the subject line, ‘Attendance & Punctuality’. Although I was told that ‘all aides and paras’ received the letter, that was not accurate – some of the aides and paras did not receive the letter until this week, 10+ days later. On Wednesday, February 12, aides and paras across the District were called individually into the principal offices of their respective schools to read Tiede’s letter. Before discussing the contents of Tiede’s letter, I have a problem with lack of District cohesive communication.

Memo to T/E aides and paras –

The focus of Tiede’s memo is the District’s establishment of a 7-minute period of clocking-in and clocking-out for hourly employees. These employees are only permitted to clock-in within a 7-minute period before their scheduled start time and within a 7-minute period after your scheduled end time. If scheduled to start work at 7AM, employees can only clock-in between 6:53AM – 7AM. If scheduled to end your workday at 3:30PM, employees can only clock-out between 3:30PM-3:37PM.

Having set the guidelines for the 7-minute clock-in and clock-out period in her memo, Tiede then details the progressive discipline measures for violation. A three level discipline approach, aides and paras receive a verbal warning and written notice for their first offense. An employee receiving a second violation receives a written warning in theur personnel file with threat of suspension or discharge if another violation occurs. If an employees is cited for a third violation of the 7-minute rule, they are subject to suspension without pay and possible termination.

I find the contents and tone of Tiede’s letter demeaning and threatening to the District hourly employees. District aides, paras and substitute teachers currently do not have District provided health coverage. TESD aides, paras and substitute teachers do not have the benefit of organized union protection as do other District employees — the teachers (TEEA) and members of TENIG.

What is driving this letter of intimidation from the District? In my opinion, the answer is Affordable Care Act and a way for the administration to make certain that hourly employees not go over the 30-hour limit that requires employee covered health coverage. By instituting this policy of progressive discipline, the District is not considering the safety of flight risk children and special needs children. Did the District explain this new 7-minute policy to the parents of these children? There will be situations occur where aides and paras are required to choose between remaining with a child or risking disciplinary action by not clocking-out within the 7-minute window. The use of time clocks for our District educators is nothing more than a different category of factory worker.

Was this 7-minute District policy and corresponding disciplinary action vetted by the School Board members? Was their discussion about the ramifications of this policy for special education students and their parents? Is this just another approach by the District to outsource the aides and paras – meaning, intimidate and threatened these employees to the point that they just leave.

Last spring, we saw the backlash from the public over the School Board’s attempt to outsource the aides and paras rather than comply with the Affordable Care Act — is this letter to District’s hourly workers, and its contents, a precursor to round two this spring? As previously mentioned on Community Matters, the School Board has repeatedly delayed any further public discussion of the ACA compliance issues — meeting after meeting. Perhaps part of the back-story to the Board’s continuing resistance to discuss the associated ACA compliance issues is related to Sue Tiede’s letter to the aides and paras.

I encourage you to read the letter below, draw your own conclusions and welcome your comments on Community Matters.. Please share the information with District parents, particularly those parents (and their children) who rely on the services of these targeted District employees. On the offside chance that School Board members are unaware of Sue Tiede’s letter to the aides and paras, I will email them a copy of this post.

T/E Schools Closed Tomorrow — Thursday, February 13th

February 12, 2014

Comments

TESD Calendar update — Students will have 179 school days & other updates

February 11, 2014

21 Comments

An article written by Yuge Xiao & Lavi Ben-Dorin in StogaNews online this morning, reports on the school board meeting and the updated school calendar, stating that“… students now have 179 school days. Staff will still have 191 days, with the last being on June 30. Originally, the Tredyffrin/Easttown School District (TESD) had scheduled 182 instructional days (the state requirement is 180). However, the district has chosen to not reschedule the two additional days.”

Thanks to Ray Clarke for attending TESD the meeting last night — Finance and Special School Board meeting — his notes are offered below:

Ray Clarke – Notes from February 10 Finance & Special School Board Meeting

1. Off-off-the-presses Affordable Care Act changes. The Board committed that the district will analyze the impact and report the results at the February 24th Board meeting. This is a hard commitment.

ACA Change: Companies with 100 workers or more are getting a different kind of one-year grace period. Instead of being required in 2015 to offer coverage to 95 percent of full-time workers, these bigger employers can avoid a fine by offering insurance to 70 percent of them next year

2. As suggested by some CM commenters, there are ways to save Spring Break and have the last day no later than June 20th: reducing instructional days from 182 to the state minimum of 180 and also counting three non-instructional days towards the 180. At the moment (before the the next storm on Thursday!) there are two days that remain to be used in this way and thus preserve Spring Break. The explanation wasn’t the clearest and I didn’t have a good angle on the screen, so the public should check the TESD web site for the approved calendar. Interesting here that the recently hired cafeteria manager was credited with bringing these ideas to the District from his previous public accounting (I think) experience.

3. The preliminary Budget was approved, with the authorization to file for Exceptions, which – if approved by the State – the Board has the discretion to use to whatever extent they deem necessary for the final Budget, which has to be passed by June 30th. Governor Corbett’s PA budget proposes reducing the increase in PSERS, which Art McDonnell stated would have the effect of reducing expenses by $600,000, if enacted exactly as-is. (I think that benefit is net of the state’s contribution, and presumably therefore the allowed exception would also be reduced by this amount – giving an allowed exception tax increase of ~0.6% rather than the current 1.1%). Many moving pieces here, and obviously important to make sure that the latest and best information is brought to bear on the final decision. Much reference to the March and April budget workshops, which hopefully can include fine-tuning across the board, incorporating things like salary “breakage”, for example.

4. Not discussed at the Board or Finance Committee, but there is an important Education Committee meeting tomorrow at 1:30pm. Topics include a review of the Special Education program (which we have told will be over-spending this year’s budget by $850,000 [over 5%], for over 1,000 students receiving special education services in the District]. Also on the Agenda, enrollment projections. At 12:30pm the Legislative Committee will be reviewing the Governor’s education budget and perhaps providing some insight on its prospects.

5. The district’s transportation staff drove the bus routes on Sunday to check that the roads were cleared sufficiently to allow the schools to open today – quite an effort and accomplishment, I think.

How will T/E School District make up snow days?

February 9, 2014

6 Comments

T/E School District made the decision late today that the kids will return to school tomorrow with a 2-hour delay opening. With many roads inaccessible to buses, the District asks that you have your child board at the closest bus stop located on an accessible road.

The revised Emergency Make-Up Day Schedule, as of 2/7/14:
Day 1: June 17, 2014
Day 2: June 18, 2014
Day 3: June 19, 2014
Day 4: June 20, 2014
Day 5: February 17, 2014
Day 6: April 14, 2014
Day 7: April 15, 2014
Day 8: April 16, 2014
Day 9: April 17, 2014

The District has scheduled eight make-up days so far, including President’s Day on Monday, February 17 which is now an instructional day. There are only two days remaining in Spring Break, Thursday, April 17 and Friday, April 18.

As the snow days keep adding up, some school districts are looking at ‘outside the box’ options and are getting creative when it comes to make up days. In Colonial School District in Delaware, the students will start school 5 min. early and stay 5 min. late starting tomorrow. By adding 10 min. to the instructional day, Colonial SD will make up two snow days by June. In Indiana, the Department of Education is discussing adding an hour on to the school day for six days to make up one day. If successful, they will add an hour to another six day period if additional make up days are required.

Some schools, in Ohio, Illinois and West Virginia, are allowing “e-learning days” to make up snow days. In Ohio, most school districts have already maxed out their five snow days. A state law passed in 2011 permits them to redefine three of the snow days as e-learning days. To meet state class-time requirements and avoid tacking on days into summer vacation, Ohio schools have the option to submit a lesson plan to the state outlining their e-learning day. (Of Ohio’s 615 school districts, 156 submitted plans for e-learning days).

How about attending school on Saturday? With no extra snow days in the calendar, Virginia Beach Public Schools decided to make up the instructional time lost over the course of three Saturdays in March. Certainly, there are pros and cons to each of these creative approaches although an extra 5-min. in the morning and extra 5-min. in the afternoon would appear to be low impact. The School Board will vote on the revised emergency make-up day schedule at Monday night’s TESD meeting.

TESD Public Information Committee meeting tonight!

January 23, 2014

5 Comments

Tonight at 6:30 PM at the TESD Administration Building, is the first meeting of the T/E School District Public Information Committee, chaired by school board member Scott Dorsey — click here for the agenda. Dorsey is committed to improving communication with the public and encouraging open dialogue between the Board and residents.

Unfortunately, I am unable to attend tonight’s meeting but I have a personal ‘wish list’ for the Public Information Committee to consider and will send a copy to Mr. Dorsey for his consideration.

Change how residents ask questions at school board meetings. Residents should be able to ask their question and receive an answer not have to wait until all the questions are asked before receiving an answer.
Televise the School Board meetings live, as is down with the Board of Supervisors meetings. I advocate for Finance Committee meetings to be televised.
Coordinate regular School Board meetings and Board of Supervisors monthly meetings == too often they fall on the same Monday nights.
Encourage open dialogue between the residents and the School Board – an example took place at last week’s Finance Committee meeting where residents were encourage to ask questions and participate. Questions were answered immediately with no standing in line. I would like to see that refreshing relationship continue at regular school board meetings.
Provide sufficient details and supporting documentation on the financials and budget so the public understands where the numbers come from – too often, the public is not provided with the necessary background for the numbers to make any sense.
Many school districts, including Unionville Chadds Ford School District have the email address of school board members listed on their website. We don’t need to have their ‘personal’ emails, (like UCFSD) but I think that there should be a way for the public to communicate directly with the Board. Currently all emails to the school board are filtered through Art McDonnell. Why is Art McDonnell, the business manager, the filter for resident’s emails to the school board? This does not seem like an appropriate use of time by one of the highest compensated TESD employees.
I would like to see the end to the consent agenda. Too many non-routine items ended up on the consent agenda – as examples in 2013, included on the consent agenda was the hiring of Andy Chambers and salary increase to the administrators. Other school districts (including UCFSD) do not use the consent agenda for that reason.
Respect and civility is a two-way street. The Board members (plus District solicitor and staff) should be encouraged to respect the residents at meetings as should the residents to to the Board.

← Older Posts

Newer Posts →

Pattye Benson

Community Matters