January 25, 2006

 

Minutes of the Governing Board Mid-Year Planning Retreat of Wednesday, January 25, 2006, beginning at 8:30 a.m. held at the Mountain Club Clubhouse.

 

Governing Board Members Present:

 

President Joan Fleming

Dr. Andy Newton

Mrs. Dee Navarro

Mr. Steve Campbell

Mr. Tom Staley

                                

Also Present:

Mr. Kevin J. Kapp, Superintendent

Dr. Chris Reynolds, Assistant Superintendent

Mrs. Renee Raskin, Director of Business Services

Mr. Spencer Johnson, Student Representative

Mrs. Andi Mayer, Assistant to the Governing Board

 

Others Present:   

         

          Totsy McCraley              Frank Lawhead              Susan Clark

          Gerry Janssen               Arn Lavington                Jay Collier

          Ed Yeager                       Mike Harlan                   Bill Munson

          Joe Howard                    Bucky Bates                   Nancy Martinez              Barbara Van Fossen        Jim Williams                  Dorrean Walker             James Cowan                 Brian Moore                   Mike Taylor                    Hilary Dartt                    Marianne Brooks            Mary Anne Kapp

          Linda Ryan                                      

                                                

CALL TO ORDER AND WELCOME

President Joan Fleming called the meeting to order at 8:30 a.m. and welcomed everyone in attendance.

 

APPROVAL OF AGENDA

President Fleming asked if the agenda was in order and Mr. Kapp responded that it was in order.

 

BOND PROJECTS (PRIORITIZATION)

Mr. Arn Lavington gave a presentation regarding the rising costs of construction and how it will affect the district’s bond projects. (Please see attachment #1 – available from the Superintendent’s Office.)  He reported that the low bid for the Abia Judd Elementary School and Taylor Hicks Elementary School Phase I projects came in at 19% over budget with the next lowest bid being 51% over budget. He presented a proposed use of the budget for those projects and suggested that the district consider prioritizing those remaining bond projects that do not include classrooms, cafeteria, band room or multi-purpose building.  He suggested that as we proceed to keep the following this in mind:

 

Address Projects Over Budget

1.       Prioritize?

2.       Reduce Scale?

3.       Reduce Quality?

4.       Retain Contingency?

 

Projects Not Making Prioritized List

1.       Hold off contracting until additional funding is available?

2.       Down size?

3.       Eliminate?

 

He presented some scenarios for if the bond projects for Phase 1, 2, & 3 come in 50% over budget and how remaining bond projects should also be prioritized.

 

Discussion followed regarding scaling projects, not quality; alternate funding sources and building renewal funds; projects relating to health and safety concerns; scaling down projects; prioritizing the important things that Mike Taylor needs to continue working on; publicizing the status of bond projects due to rising construction costs; and possibly selling Nature Center for additional funding to cover bond projects.

 

After some discussion President Fleming directed the principals to reprioritize the remaining bond projects and noted that the Board would then make a decision.  She stressed that no projects would be cancelled, but postponed until funds become available.

 

DRESS CODES

Mrs. Dee Navarro expressed concern regarding the way she has seen some of the students dress at the high school, as well as staff members.  She felt that if the staff dressed appropriately, the students will follow.

 

Mr. Staley stated that he felt it was difficult to ask students to respect adults and property when the staff does not set the example by dressing correctly.  He expressed concern over nose rings, Mohawk haircuts, dreadlocks, different dress being distracting, developing a unified dress code for classified, having principals talk to parents about student dress.

 

President Fleming noted that you get into legalities with some of those concerns. She asked Spencer Johnson his perspective from a student standpoint.

 

Mr. Johnson responded that regarding staff dress, it could have some merit, but depends on how you want students to view your teachers.  Sometimes those teachers with dreadlocks and nose rings are the one’s that students’ can relate to the most and are more approachable.  He noted that he did believe in freedom of expression. He added that Goth, spikes, short skirts, and chains scares some people.

 

Mrs. Dorrean Walker stated that it’s very difficult, these are our clients and the dress code is set through Student Council, and current fashions don’t necessarily fit the dress code.  She added that when you impose something on students, they’re not happy and it affects us.  She noted that there should be a balance.

 

Mrs. Totsy McCraley noted that the high school does have a dress code, every summer a letter is sent to all parents, which includes the dress code.  She stated that the teachers and administrators are in the halls monitoring for dress code.  She then stated that you must also take a look at what some of the parents are wearing.  She noted that she appreciated where everyone was coming from – to ask teachers to dress professionally – but you also have to look at what a teacher is teaching – P.E. vs. Science, Art or English.  She stated that they do try to create a balance.  She noted that the jeans being made now are very low and tight and that instead of doing uniforms, they were trying to make a balance by creating guidelines. 

 

President Fleming asked, what about the Goth look?  Dr. Newton added, and accessories?  Mrs. McCraley responded, when you talk to parents, they choose to allow their students to dress that way – for individuality. 

 

Mr. Bucky Bates noted that Liberty Traditional had quasi-uniforms, which was almost as much work to enforce as rules.  He stated that there is a difference between outlandish dress (freedom of expression) and vulgar dress and that legally, enforcement of vulgar dress is easier than outlandish dress. 

 

Mr. Bates asked, is there a staff dress code?  Mr. Kapp responded, no.  Mr. Bates noted that it’s difficult to enforce student dress codes when staff dress awkward. 

 

Mr. Staley stated that he believed the district needed a dress code for both certified and classified staff.

 

Mrs. Walker stated that she was not against a dress code for students and that she thought it bothers teachers more than students.  Mr. Johnson agreed with that statement.

 

Mr. Staley asked, what about staff?  Mrs. Walker responded that the principals have been talking to individuals, which she feels works, and that she is usually pretty impressed with our staff.

 

President Fleming stated that she would like to have copies of all handbooks for teachers, staff and students for all Board members.  She also asked that the administration obtain legal opinions regarding dress codes for students and staff.  She added that she’d like to see an agenda item regarding dress codes sometime before school is out.

 

PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT

Mrs. Mary Anne Kapp distributed a report on Professional Development for the Governing Board.  (Please see the attached – available from the Superintendent’s Office.)

 

She updated the Board on the schedules, the professional development notebooks, the focus of the professional development program, student learning, results, and the learning communities.  She noted that the district has a vision and is very clear about where we are going.  She reported on the background of the learning communities, standard-based learning, results-driven areas in development, and reviewed the professional development map.

She reported that the DLT had done a PLC assessment in August and that they were now working on accountability.  She stated that teachers were writing their 301 goals that are specific, measurable, attainable, and relevant.

She noted that there are teacher goals, as well as school-wide goals, and that every week the principals are submitting paperwork 100%. 

 

Mr. Staley asked, what is the percentage of attendance?  Mrs. Kapp responded, 98-99% - usually from illness. 

 

She noted that the principals keep track of the hours and give out certificates to staff.  She then reviewed the first and second semester professional development schedules.  Mrs. Kapp reported that teachers and administrators now have the capability of looking at data and sorting it as never before to look for trends. 

 

Mr. Kapp noted that these are things that we must do because of NCLB and AZ Learns, which are unfunded mandates.

 

LUNCH BREAK

 

LOWER 40

Mr. Campbell noted that this had come from IBN and that his concern was regarding that the staff felt they were not getting the opportunity to give input.  He then asked what process was being used at the schools and if the principals make the decisions without input.

 

Mr. Frank Lawhead reported that the changes came from him and that maybe he should look at including more people in the process.

 

Mr. Bill Munson reported that their funds are used for professional development, that they have been spending it wisely and have not yet used any of the money available from Mrs. Kapp.  He noted that the teachers come to him and ask if they can attend different professional development opportunities.  He stated that his input comes from the Quality Council.  He noted that when staff are paid through those funds, you can’t really change that.

 

Mr. Ed Yeager reported that they are no longer a Title I school, that their reading program was hurting, so we got a reading assistant, which was a staff and site council decision, with the rest going towards staff development.

 

Mrs. Susan Clark reported that she had inherited how those funds are being used for the after school program (Gold Mine) and for professional development opportunities.  Mr. Jim Williams noted that the first year was the only year it was discussed and then it has just remained the same for following years.

 

Mr. Joe Howard reported that he had sought staff input for the original decision, but not since then, and that there was no reason why he couldn’t in the future by running it through the site council and leadership team.

 

Mr. Mike Harlan reported that he originally discussed it with his staff and that since then he brings it before the team leaders and they address it with their teams and then it is discussed at a faculty meeting.  He noted that the half-time person for the Odyssey Lab was a staff recommendation.

 

Mr. Totsy McCraley noted that she had also inherited how these funds are used with most going into salaries – four positions totally or partially, teacher lunch duty, department chairperson compensation, and any money left over we pay to sponsors time, such as NHS, Academic Decathlon – close to $70,000.

 

President Fleming noted that is something the Board should work on to get into the M & O budget.

 

Mr. Campbell noted that some things at the schools are critical, but that it is important for staff to have input and know why these things are important. He noted that it would be good to involve staff so they understand why you make the decisions you make.

 

OPEN POSTINGS FOR ALL POSITIONS

Mr. Tom Staley asked if there was anything written in policy that gives authority to the principals to allocation a job to a retiree.  Dr. Chris Reynolds responded, nothing that speaks to a full-time position. 

 

Mr. Staley clarified, there is no written policy that allows for this procedure to take place?  Dr. Reynolds responded, correct.

 

Mr. Staley asked, what’s the history of that procedure?  Dr. Reynolds responded, it’s an administrative procedure that I authorize and extend to the principals, which we have been doing for several years utilizing the third party hiring process.  He stated that he felt it was an appropriate procedure under a third party contracting model.

 

Mr. Staley asked, what’s the longest period of time after we have rehired them?  Dr. Reynolds responded, probably three years.  Mr. Staley clarified, we don’t have a retiree for more than three years.  Dr. Reynolds responded, they can teach half-time for the first year and then can work fulltime.

 

Mr. Staley stated that he was opposed to this procedure and read from policy that all personnel selected must be recommended by the superintendent and approved by the Board.

 

President Fleming responded that we follow that policy – it’s on the consent agenda under the personnel report.

 

Dr. Reynolds noted that there is a state statute that allows for that if they come back through a third party. 

 

Mr. Staley stated, we’re allowing the waiving of Board policy – third party allows them to be rehired on this basis.

 

Dr. Andy Newton noted that two years ago, we as a Board approved the use of third party hiring, such as Totsy McCraley, who could then immediately work fulltime.

 

President Fleming noted, it’s a procedure.

 

Mr. Staley recommended that it be written in school policy and that both be brought up for review with the words “may apply.”

 

President Fleming reiterated that this is procedure, not policy, is quite legal, and has only been in effect for three years.

 

Mr. Staley stated that he believed the procedure contradicts the policy.

 

Mr. Campbell noted that the policy was written because of law in effect at that time, the state law changed, we changed the procedure, but not that policy.

 

President Fleming stated that she would check with ASBA to see if any other district has a policy regarding third party hiring.

 

Mr. Staley noted that when we have a situation where someone is retiring, we should ask why are they retiring, are they looking for another opportunity because they are burned out, or could they be doing this for purely monetary reasons.  He stated that he understood that they were known entities, but we still don’t know if they are the best without opening up the competition.

 

President Fleming noted that it probably is partially for monetary reasons, since we don’t pay teachers enough.  She added that she has never had a problem with early retirement.

 

Mr. Staley stated that he would still like to open up positions to the competition.

 

President Fleming pointed out that the principals know whether they are good people and would not hire them back if they weren’t.

 

Dr. Newton stated, if I were a teacher, I would do it.  He then pointed out that we didn’t make the law.

 

Mr. Bates added that it’s an Arizona situation and that for years we have accepted people from other states that have retired and we have hired them.

 

Mr. Joe Howard noted that if you look at the internet under law, it’s to retain teachers in Arizona because of a teacher shortage. 

 

Mr. Staley pointed out that it’s done through open posting when hiring retired teachers from other states.

 

CHILD CARE

Mr. Campbell stated that his concern was that some of these child care programs are in the hole – such as Kids & Co – for a fourth year – and that he was interested in where we are financially. 

 

Mrs. Gerry Janssen noted that the preschool may show a loss, but it pulls kids into the district.  She noted that the preschool line item is affected greatly by the number of special education students versus the paying (tuition) students, and that the account pays for a certified teacher and assistant, plus supplies. She stated that their income was not enough to cover the program totally all of the time.  She noted that at the beginning of the school year, enrollment is not as large as during the middle and end of the school year and that last year they had come out with a zero balance until the teachers were paid.  She stated that it’s extremely difficult to budget that account. 

 

Mr. Campbell clarified, the preschool is tuition based?  Mrs. Renee Raskin noted that the special education preschool is the only one out of M & O.  Mrs. Nancy Martinez noted that there is a special education preschool grant that pays for .8 of the salary, but that the amount has gone down every year and should be picked up by M & O. 

 

Mr. Campbell clarified, and the district is required to take a student if they are special education?  Mrs. Martinez responded, yes.

 

Mrs. Janssen noted that Discovery Gardens has a special education block grant and tuition, which covers five teachers and nine classes and that there are special education and tuition students in everyone of those classes. 

 

Mrs. Raskin noted that we have a master level teacher, which we chose to have, and if we used a higher level classified person, it would cost less.

 

Mrs. Janssen noted that the whole state is going towards having all early childhood teachers certified.

 

Mrs. Raskin reported that they had met in early January and had talked about calling other preschools and finding out their tuition and prices to see if we were in the ballpark.  Mrs. Janssen noted that there is one preschool in the area that charges the same as we do, but don’t pay their teachers what we do.  She stated that she wanted to raise the tuition next year – not too much – but enough to help and decreasing the discount for free and reduced families from 40% to 30%.  She reported that substitute pay affects the programs also.

 

Mrs. Marianne Brooks reported that the early childhood block has 18 slots for “at-risk” students, which pays a portion and Title I pays for part, and it requires certified teachers.

 

Mr. Campbell clarified, so we’re $12,000 in the hole at the end of the year, plus $17,000 from the other account.  He asked, is there any way to know if we’re getting additional students in PUSD from these programs?  Mrs. Janssen responded, we’re doing a survey to parents and finding out where they are registering for kindergarten.  She noted that students in the preschools tend to stay in the system. 

 

Dr. Newton asked, how much has it grown?  Mrs. Janssen responded, when it started I was the director of the Winnie the Pooh preschool, about 17 years ago.  She noted that it has grown tremendously, a lot more in the last two years.  She reported that they have 148-150 students enrolled, which is the highest it has ever been.  She added that they have the potential of another 32 students we could place before the end of the year and we don’t have room for them all.

 

Mr. Kapp noted that the preschool numbers have at least doubled and that this year’s kindergarten class is the largest class we’ve ever seen, which could be a factor. 

 

Mrs. Navarro asked, how many special education kids – have we increased in that population?  Mrs. Janssen responded, 73-74, with the potential of 12 more.  Mrs. Martinez added that when we were monitored by the state, we are required to do “child find.”  She noted that we got dinged by the state for saying we didn’t have room and that we didn’t know that if they have a disability, we must take them.  She reported that child find and their screening has increased two-fold and more and more kids are being born with disabilities.

 

President Fleming noted that 32 kids are waiting to be screened or are referred to us – is there a time frame between the screening and taking the student?  Mrs. Martinez responded, 45 days.

 

Mr. Campbell asked, those children not special education are tuition or block grant – does the state pay us for special education students?  Mrs. Raskin responded, yes, but that’s not reflected in the $12,000 loss.

 

Mr. Staley asked, does the special education tuition pay for those kids?  Mrs. Raskin responded, it goes into M & O, but I have never broken it down.  Mrs. Janssen added, we should have gotten at least $152,000.

 

Mr. Staley asked Mrs. Raskin if she could generate a report that would reflect those figures and that he’d like to know how much we are making or losing in these programs.  He noted that his concern is that we have to take these kids and spend whatever it takes – I want to know how much we are losing or making on special education kids.

 

Mrs. Martinez reported, we screen two times a year and if a parent comes with a child, we must screen them and we must take them if they have disabilities.

 

Mr. Staley stated, if we are losing money on these special education students, maybe we should look at the number of times you screen and if one area is jeopardizing another area financially, we need to look at that. 

 

Mrs. Janssen noted that research has shown that the money you put into early childhood prevention early on – you save money in future years. 

 

Mrs. Staley stated, we need to keep track and see where we’re at.  Dr. Newton added, it would help for projection purposes.

 

President Fleming noted that Mrs. Navarro would be meeting with the legislators the first week in February and these are some of the issues she will be taking to them, as well as fully funding for IDEA.  She noted that districts have only received 20% out of the 100% they promised in 1976.

 

Mr. Campbell noted that Kids & Co. is entirely tuition funded and DES.  Mrs. Raskin noted that Nicole McNally had sent a report.  She noted that the program is at MV, DX, TH and WTS.  She noted that the first year the program had a $32,000 loss, the second year a $50,000 loss, the third year a $28,000 loss, and it is projected that this year there will be a $15,000 loss.  She reported that there are 231 kids in the program and it’s continuing to grow.  She noted that Dexter’s program has 63 kids – grew from 50.

 

Mrs. Brooks pointed out that as the preschool grows, so does the daycare end of the program at Dexter.  She noted that it has grown every year with 1st year = 125, 2nd year = (not sure), 3rd year = 210, and 4th year = 230.  She pointed out that as the numbers increase, we have to follow the Arizona Health Services rules and regulations and they say you must have a 1:20 ratio.  She added that the moment you go over five students, you must have two people and that the site director must have more qualifications than the assistant.  She noted that the  problem comes when a substitute is needed, because they must have the same qualifications as the director and a certified substitute teachers costs $75 per day.

 

Mr. Campbell asked, why does the district want to keep a program that we’re not required to have?  We’re losing money ($125,000).  Why do we want to keep this program?

 

Mr. Staley asked, these are net loses?  Mrs. Raskin responded, yes.

 

Dr. Newton suggested raising the prices.  Mrs. Brooks noted that for three years we did not raise the cost and last year we raised it by 10%.  She noted that you could raise it again, but you must look at surrounding programs.

 

Mrs. Brooks responded to why we keep this program – because people come back to the district because of childcare and because we provide a safe environment, homework time everyday, and people who are trained to be with those kids.  Mrs. Raskin noted that it’s getting better.

 

Mr. Brian Moore reported that the TH program has 74 kids and that they had the Fire Marshall go through and found out that the stage curtains are not flame proof.  He noted that the program itself runs real well and that 90% of the kids are from TH families.

 

Mr. Staley stated that we should keep the program because it’s the right thing to do.

 

Mr. Campbell stated that it was hard for him to watch every year and that the only reason we started this program was to supplement the budget.

 

Mr. Kapp noted that the other reason we started the program was an effort to be convenient for kids to come and stay in the district.  He stated that he believed it has contributed to the overall growth of the school district, but that he had no proof.  He also noted that parents have told him that we are providing the best childcare in Prescott.

 

President Fleming stated that she thought it was necessary and that the district should consider raising the fee.

 

Mr. Staley stated, it’s a huge convenience for parents – let’s raise the cost to at least break even.

 

Mr. Kapp suggested looking at this year’s final numbers and then make a final decision.

 

Mrs. Walker stated that we’ve said the same thing for the last 3-4 years – are we ever going to make the hard decision?  Mr. Kapp responded, we did make decisions last year and it has improved.  He noted that there are more young kids involved in our childcare and at the YMCA and the numbers are also up. 

 

President Fleming directed the administration to look at raising the fees.  Mrs. Raskin stated that she’d bring it to the summer retreat.

 

Mrs. Brooks noted that if the district is looking at ending the program, please give the parents plenty of time to find another program. 

 

Mr. Staley said, give it the fifth year, then make the hard decision.  Mrs. Brooks noted that some parents send their child, sign a contract, get a book of payment coupons and then don’t pay.  Mr. Staley responded, at some point in time, the child should not be able to attend if payment is not received.

 

BUS DRIVERS

Mr. Staley reported that we got new buses through the bond, talked about the amount of time kids have to wait for buses, and keeping some of the older buses as relief buses.  He noted that the problem we have now is we have the buses but not the drivers.  He reported that many field trips have been cancelled because of lack of bus drivers.  He stated that he felt we should increase the bus driver wages, get some new bus drivers, even if they’re part-time to accommodate field trips.

 

Dr. Reynolds asked, do we take the current staff and improve their wages and the number of drivers?  He noted that it would cost approximately $15,000 for each new driver.

 

Mr. Staley asked, how many would we need to cut down on waiting time and field trips?  He noted that if the answer if three or ten, we can look and see if we can handle that.

 

Mr. Kapp responded that the transportation department would need to re-vamp the bus system and in order to cut the wait time in half it was estimated that they would need 2-4 more bus drivers – and that does not include drivers needed for field trips.  He noted that Mr. Cowan was going to look at the entire bus route.

 

Mr. Bill Munson noted that it’s frustrating for teachers to plan field trips and we don’t know the day before the trip whether it will go or not.  He stated that the schools are charged for the driver’s salary and fuel costs for field trips. 

 

Mr. Staley noted that this would be a perfect use of tax credit donations.

 

President Fleming asked, are any of the custodians qualified as bus drivers?

Mr. Munson responded, we’ve actually had parents inquire how they can get qualified to help.  Mr. Moore stated that he agreed – we don’t have a pool or work force out there that want to work for under $10 an hour.

 

SALE OF NATURE CENTER

President Fleming noted that the district is planning on putting the sale of the Nature Center on the ballot in November.

 

Mr. Kapp stated that he would like a feeling from the Board whether to put this item on an agenda.  Mrs. Raskin added that the appraiser would cost approximately $3,400 and the survey would cost approximately $12,000 ($15,400).

 

Mr. Mike Harlan suggested that the district maintain at least 1 or 2 acres closest to Granite Mountain for a parking lot – perhaps the portion that contains the cabin and garden for outside use by the schools.

 

President Fleming asked, do you think the Nature Center will object to the sale like they did before?  Mr. Harlan responded, probably not since they are at another site now.

 

Mr. Staley noted that if the district held back 1-2 acres, that would be $100,000 - $150,000 per acre.

 

Mr. Campbell stated that if by doing so would significantly decrease the value, he would not support it.

 

President Fleming asked the administration to put this item on the February agenda as a voting item.

 

Mr. Kapp noted that he had talked with the President of the Yakashba Homeowners and that they are aware of this discussion.

 

CLOSED CAMPUS

Mrs. Dee Navarro noted that the only reason she wanted this on the agenda is so we keep talking about it and the public realizes we are looking at all the possibility of a closed campus – contingent upon the cafeteria being built.  She stated that she felt there is an accident waiting to happen over at the high school and would like to eliminate that risk by closing the campus. 

 

Mrs. McCraley noted that she felt we should and added that you don’t have to close the campus to all students – that you could allow juniors or seniors in good standing to leave the campus.  She noted that with the phone calls they get every year it would certainly promote a “good neighbor” policy.  She went on to say that the only group it would be difficult for would be the fast food places in the vicinity.  She suggested that maybe Barbara Van Fossen could see about making business deals so they could sell their food in the cafeteria.

 

Mr. Kapp asked, what year will the cafeteria be built?  2007-08?  Mrs. McCraley responded, 2007-08 hopefully.  She suggested phasing in the closed campus with the incoming freshmen each year. 

 

Mrs. Walker asked, would there be other hidden costs such as additional security or fencing?

 

Mrs. McCraley responded, there must be some kind of barrier and we would need additional security guards.  She noted that with a cafeteria that large you would have to have additional cafeteria workers also.  

 

Mr. Kapp noted that the cafeteria workers were self-sustaining and that we don’t want to see a 12’ fence with barb wire either.

 

Mrs. McCraley noted that fencing would be needed in the front and on the north side of the campus.

 

Dr. Newton stated that he liked the idea of more choices in food through kiosks.

 

Mr. Staley stated that he felt this was something the Board should look at in the future.

 

Mrs. McCraley added that when tracking attendance, the early morning classes and right after lunch are the classes the students are missing.  She noted that this could improve attendance.

 

Mr. Staley stated that he was concerned with the shortness of the lunch period and asked if the high school could consider lengthening the time to cut down on the rush.  Mrs. McCraley responded, experience has shown me that the more time you give kids, the more time they take.  Mrs. Walker noted that it would cause a problem with the buses too, that the transportation schedule drives our schedule.

 

ASBA LEGISLATIVE PROPOSALS AND BOARD TRAINING

President Fleming reminded Board members that it’s time to think about proposals we’d like to submit to the ASBA and legislature. 

 

She noted that regarding the Board Training, we’ve had to postpone it, but she felt that the Board still needed to do this as an entire Board.

 

Mr. Staley suggested that if she picked a date and gave him enough time, he could usually arrange it with his work.  Mrs. Navarro agreed.  Dr. Newton stated that Wednesdays were best for him. 

 

ADJOURNMENT

Hearing no objection, President Fleming adjourned the meeting at 3:07 p.m.

 

 

___________________________________

Governing Board Member