PRESCOTT UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1

146 South Granite Street

Prescott, Arizona 86303

 

September 6, 2005

 

Minutes of the Governing Board Study Session of Tuesday, September 6, 2005, beginning at 5:30 p.m. held in the District Office Board Room.

 

Governing Board Members Present:

 

President Andy Newton

Mrs. Dee Navarro

Mr. Steve Campbell

Dr. Joan Fleming

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

          Bill Munson                             Brian Moore                   Nancy Martinez

          Joe Howard                    Jim Williams                  Marianne Brooks

          Linda Ryan                    Hilary Eller                    Gerry Janssen

          Mary Anne Kapp            Dorrean Walker             David Martin

          Arn Lavington                Jay Collier                     Jay Collier

          Louise Clark                  Ed Yeager                       Arn Lavington

          Susan Fahrni                 Kerrie Bluff                    Mike Taylor

          Steve Frost                     Buzz Harris

 

CALL TO ORDER

President Andy Newton called the meeting to order at 5:39 p.m.

 

OPENING CEREMONY AND WELCOME

President Newton welcomed everyone and thanked those present for attending. Mr. Spencer Johnson led the audience in the Pledge of Allegiance.

 

APPROVAL OF AGENDA

President Newton noted that Item No. 9 would be postponed.

 

Mr. Steve Campbell moved that the Governing Board approve the agenda as amended.  Mrs. Dee Navarro seconded the motion.

 

Mr. Steve Campbell voted aye, Dr. Joan Fleming voted aye, Mrs. Dee Navarro voted aye, Mr. Tom Staley voted aye, and President Newton voted aye. The motion carried 5-0.

 

PRESENTATIONS

Ms. Kerrie Bluff, the Yavapai County Director for ASBA, was present to introduce herself to the Board, to inform them of her two-year term and to let the Board know that if they have any issues with ASBA, she would be the person to contact.  She reminded Board members of the Law Conference taking place this week and of the County Workshop on October 12th to be hosted by the Camp Verde School District.  She reported that Stone & Youngren would be donating door prizes and that attendees should wear a bandana to qualify.  She also noted that the ASBA Annual Conference would be held in December.

 

Dr. Joan Fleming noted that at the Annual Conference our PHS Highlytes would be performing at the banquet and the middle school jazz band would be performing that morning.

 

Mr. Steve Frost, Project Manager from APS, was present to update the Board on the APSES projects. He distributed a handout that illustrated the amount of money spent, what funds the money came from, and the percentage of completion for each project.  (A copy of this handout is available from the Superintendent’s Office.)  He noted that all of the projects should be completed by mid to late October.

 

Mr. Kapp reported that Buzz Harris had attended the Principal’s meeting and most of the principals had complimented Buzz on his crew’s good work, which had been done behind the scenes for the most part.

 

Mr. Mike Taylor updated the Board on the status of bond projects and distributed two miniaturized blueprints of design work for Abia Judd and Taylor Hicks.  (A copy of these documents is available from the Superintendent’s Office.)  He reviewed the Abia Judd plans with the Board noting that the old baseball field would be taken out, that currently there are 91 parking spaces and that by the end of the project there would be 40 additional parking spaces.  He noted that he is ready to forward all the files to the mechanical, plumbing, electrical and civil engineers and that the next step after that would be a site plan review with the city.  He reported that the Taylor Hicks plans also needed to be reviewed by the city and that fire truck access was a big item on both projects.  He noted that he would be meeting with the principals and other pertinent personnel to establish their preferences and finalize the design plans.  He reported that we are currently behind schedule on both projects due to late surveys and that Phase II would begin in the next few weeks.

 

Mr. Tom Staley asked when the projects would be completed.  Mr. Taylor responded, in the fall of 2006.

 

Mr. Kapp asked, at Taylor Hicks, where will the classrooms go?  Mr. Taylor responded, where the portable building currently is, near the top of the MPR (on the design plans).

 

Mr. Arn Lavington added, knowing that we are going with a four section school, we were instructed by Superintendent Kapp to go out for bid for both a six and eight classroom plan to compare costs.

 

Mr. Staley asked, are we behind schedule on that also?  Mr. Taylor responded, all four projects are.

 

Mr. Steve Campbell asked, will the new buildings be connected to the old buildings for inclement weather?  Mr. Taylor responded, it’s likely that we’ll want to do that, but we just haven’t planned those yet.  Mr. Lavington noted that if you had a covered area, it would inhibit fire lane access also.

 

Mr. Staley asked, we’re not moving the playground equipment now?  Mr. Taylor responded, no.  He added that the portables will stay for now and be moved at a later date and be used for additional parking.  He also noted that they will be reviewing the plans for the Williamson Valley Road widening project and make sure there are no conflicts.

 

Mr. Arn Lavington distributed a Bond Expenditure Report and thanked Mrs. Janice Snyder for putting the report on our website, along with construction photographs.  He noted that the carpet and tile had been purchased from Mohave and that because all petroleum based products would be going up in cost, they had locked in the price for carpeting and tile, which we will receive in March and that they were still $67,000 under budget.  He also stated that they hoped to have an additional $50,000 in carry forward money on top of the $197,374 noted in the report.  He also noted that Mike Taylor has only used $30,000 of the $279,000 contingency available.  He reported that the district is in real good shape so far, but that he did expect construction prices to go up.  In closing, he noted that our bond was for $18.6 million and that so far we have contracted for close to $4.3 million that has been committed.  He added that we also have Mike Taylor’s projects coming up for a total of $6.5 million in committed bond money.

 

Mr. Campbell asked, when we set the budget for these various buildings, how did we do that?  Mr. Lavington responded, Mr. Taylor helped us with a cost per square footage and that he is trying to design within that budget.

 

Mr. Staley complimented Mr. Lavington and Mr. Collier and noted that he was pleased that the district was under budget going into the larger projects and that the project managers have been coordinating three rather large pools of money.

 

Mr. Kapp reported that the district does have a bond page on our website with financial information and photographs and that soon there would be groundbreaking pictures to post there.

 

Mr. Jay Collier reported that regarding the APSES projects, as we get further along and people see the bright lights and notice the cooler air, we need to remind people what we’re trying to achieve – that in 10 years down the road it will be a wash and pay for itself – and people must continue to be energy conscious and conserve as much as possible.  He noted that teachers have already wanted to go beyond the set points and the more we go off the set points, the less we have in energy savings.  He stated that he had met with Totsy McCraley and the PHS Department Chairpersons and noted that lights will be our biggest savings and that we must remember not to go wild with heating and cooling.  He added that each principal will have the autonomy to deviate from those set points, but that we must continue to conserve. 

 

Mr. Collier reported that regarding the locks, he had met with Allen Sharp and noted that we are a little bit behind schedule and that they had reminded each other of the time lines.  He noted that Phase II would not begin on September 12th as scheduled.  He reported that there must be a 120 day time frame and we’ll start during Christmas break now instead of Fall Break.  He noted that they were back on track and things are going well.

 

SUPERINTENDENT’S REPORT

Mr. Kapp distributed the Calendar of Events for September 2005, noting that there are plenty of things going on in the district and encouraged Board members to visit these activities when they can.

 

He also distributed a copy of enrollment figures and reported that the district is up by 44 students at the elementary level (2%), up by 15 students at the middle school level (1.2%), up by 79 students at the high school level (4.3%), and up by 21 students at the pre-school level for a total of 160 students, or 3% growth.  He noted that the district’s goal has been to maintain our 2-3% growth and we are doing that.  He reported that the preschool went from 27 students to 48 and it was felt that by screening those students earlier might have been part of the reason for the increase.

 

Mr. Kapp distributed a copy of a report regarding the number of hits to our website and noted that we are receiving over 1,000 hits each day to prescottschools.com.  He stated that supports the idea that maintaining a web page is very important and also that he continues to get compliments regarding our website.

 

He distributed copies of the registration for the County Workshop to take place October 12, 2005, and asked Board members to let Andi know if they were planning on attending. 

 

He distributed an e-mail from Attorney General Terry Goddard and State School Superintendent Tom Horne regarding the enrollment of evacuees from Hurricane Katrina and noted that we did have one family enroll at Abia Judd.

 

Mr. Kapp updated the Board on the search for a PEAK building.  He reported that the building the district was hoping to lease would not work out due to no sprinkler system and an inadequate water supply to the building to have one put in.  He noted that Denny Colgan was still looking at 2-3 other sites, one by the airport and one in PV.  He added that in the meantime, PEAK is being housed at PMHMS.

 

Mr. Kapp announced that the ASBA Law Conference would be going on this week from Thursday through Saturday and that three Board members would be attending.  He noted that he would be attending his first School Facilities Board meeting to find out how that process works.

 

Mr. Tom Staley asked, regarding SFB, if we got the okay today to build a new high school, isn’t the minimum acreage 40 acres?  Mr. Kapp responded that he thought that was correct.  Mr. Staley suggested that the district start looking at land now so it’s not an obstruction later.

 

STUDY SESSION:

 

CONSIDER THE APPROVAL OF COMPENSATING ELIGIBLE CERTIFIED STAFF IN DECEMBER 2005 UTILIZING THE CLASSROOM SITE INSTRUCTIONAL IMPROVEMENT FUND CARRY-OVER MONEY BASED ON EITHER A TIERED METHOD OR A FLAT RATE METHOD

Mrs. Renee Raskin noted that the resolution should read, “Consider the approval of compensating eligible certified staff in December 2005 utilizing the classroom site fund carry-over money based on either a tiered method or a flat rate method.”  Mrs. Raskin gave a brief history on the receipt of 301 funding noting that we began to receive the funding during 2001-02 and at that time it was $237 per weighted student count.  She noted that the district now receives $353 per weighted student count.  She noted that these funds should continue to go up and was proposing paying a $250 flat rate in December, with the rest paid out using a tiered method before teachers leave in June.  She noted that last year using the tiered method teachers received between $492 for the beginning teachers to $890 for the more experienced teachers. 

 

She noted that the performance pay would be $1,800 if the person received all ten shares and that she would like to pay out the $70 in December.  She went on to say that the flat rate would be approximately $560, with the tiered being from $350-$750.  She noted that the JLBC established that the $70 is one-time money that goes to the teachers in December.

 

President Newton noted the reason it’s one-time is because it’s carry-over money.  Mrs. Raskin added that we haven’t received money yet at the county, but they did tell us the amount.

 

Mrs. Dee Navarro asked, we would pay out $237 in a tiered fashion?  Mrs. Raskin noted that it would be $250 – one-time only in December and then the balance would be tiered.  Mrs. Navarro asked, and we’ve been doing that all along?  Mrs. Raskin responded yes.  Mr. Campbell added that we do that because we don’t receive all the money and it was what the Board felt comfortable with.

 

Mr. Campbell asked, why do we do a flat rate and then tiered?  Mrs. Raskin responded, we give a flat rate and tier the balance.  Mr. Campbell noted that we’ve rewarded the beginning teachers on the new salary schedule, so maybe we should tier the full amount.  Mrs. Raskin responded that she could do it that way.

 

Mr. Campbell stated that $250 would be fine in December, but tier the total amount, subtract $250 out and pay the balance in the spring.  Mrs. Navarro added, plus $70 on top of that, right?  Mrs. Raskin responded, yes – per weighted student count.  Mr. Campbell asked, and that could be tiered out also?  Mrs. Raskin responded yes.

 

Mr. Tom Staley asked, when is the second payment made?  Mrs. Raskin responded, before they leave the district in May.

 

Mrs. Dorrean Walker addressed the Governing Board and stated that she wanted to echo what Mr. Campbell had just said – PEA supports the tiered method for the same reason – the beginning teachers were rewarded the most and experienced teachers received less with the new salary schedule and by tiering this money it would now reward the most experienced teachers.

 

Mr. Jim Williams addressed the Governing Board and stated that the $70 is a one-time fund, we have 20% going into our salary schedule, which will increase the salary schedule by $84,000 – or reduce M & O.  He noted that the $84,000 should kick into the lower 40 and should not go into the salary schedule unless it is funded by M & O.  He added that it’s important that the teachers receive that one-time money, so move it all into the lower 40 and pay it out to the teachers that way – not supplant M & O money.

 

Mr. Staley stated that it was very specific, out of the top 20% - where’s $84,000 coming from?  Mr. Williams responded, it’s the amount that would go into the salary schedule.  Mr. Staley noted, this is in addition to that – it does not decrease the salary amount – we’re giving everyone an extra $70.  Mrs. Raskin added, the $84,000 will go out to teachers – will be paid to teachers directly.

 

Mr. Staley stated that it was his recollection that during salary negotiations Mr. Williams had come to the Board with incorrect information and that he would request that he come to the Board with correct figures in the future.

 

President Newton stated that he would prefer to use the tier method.

 

Dr. Fleming stated that she agreed.

 

Mrs. Navarro stated that she didn’t have a problem with doing it that way.

 

Mr. Kapp noted that it’s a windfall – one-time money that will go to the teachers.

 

Mr. Campbell noted that our history has been to just pay it out – not to go into the salary schedule.

 

Mr. Kapp reported that the $70 per student is guaranteed, but that the $353 figure could fluctuate.

 

CONSIDER APPROVING THE UTILIZATION OF 2004-2005 GROWTH FUNDS AND 2005-2006 GROWTH FUNDS TO ACCOMMODATE STUDENT ENROLLMENT GROWTH NEEDS AS PRESENTED

Mr. Kapp reported that the place for growth has been the high school and that after five weeks of school, the administration felt pretty comfortable with the numbers.  He noted that they had met with the high school administration and would be proposing the addition of four half-time teachers in Math, Business, Science and Social Studies by using growth money.  He noted that the other area of growth is special education and that the students coming in have very high needs.  He reported that Susan Clark had given a tour at Miller Valley and that there are programs that don’t have a place to work out of because when the Board added to the music, art and P.E., they now use those rooms five days a week, so gifted no longer has a space. He reported that to move a portable to Miller Valley the district could use current year growth money ($500,000) or old growth money ($14,000).  He noted that building renewal funds could be used to set up the portable, but not pay for the lease.

 

Dr. Chris Reynolds noted that last spring the Board had approved an overflow priority list, which is money saved over the summer from replacing retiring staff with new staff.  On that list was $7,400 for reclassification and $38,000 for a new high school counselor.

 

Mr. Kapp reported that the high school was in dire need of a counselor and that the high school is currently over the NCA ratio for students to counselors and that we should meet the needs of our kids.  He noted that currently the ratio is 482 students per counselor.

 

Mrs. Navarro asked Nancy Martinez, are the six positions the ones we lost?  Mrs. Martinez responded yes, and of the six positions, four are for brand new students whose IEP’s require one on one aides.  She reported that they are seeing more severe behaviors that must be closely supervised and that the one-on-one aides help to change that behavior.  She noted that all of these are for safety reasons.  She went on to say that their special education enrollment is already up by 10% over last year and that she is anticipating more special education students enrolling.

 

Mr. Staley noted that we were adding teachers both at the high school and for special education – how many students will be served by those positions?  Mrs. Martinez responded, eight.

 

Mr. Staley asked, at the high school – how many students?  Mrs. McCraley responded, eighty.

Mr. Staley pointed out that the expenditure for eight students would be $76,000 and for 80 students it would be $81,200, which is about $10,000 per student – that seems real high to me.  Mrs. Martinez responded that the one-on-one aides are for autistic students, which are more severe.

 

Mrs. Navarro pointed out that those expenditures are mandated.

 

Mr. Staley asked, at what point in time does a student get so violent that they can no longer be a student?  Mr. Kapp responded that there is a process in place and that the district does have some students in residential care.

 

Mr. Staley asked, at what point does a student get so dangerous that we can’t give services?  Mrs. Martinez responded, that’s determined by the IEP team.  She also noted that the earlier you get one-on-one aides for those kids, the more chance you have of modifying their behavior.

 

Mr. Staley stated that that seems grossly over-weighted – or under-weighted.  Mrs. Martinez responded, that’s just special education and we have tried to be creative with para-professionals.

 

Mr. Staley asked, have you looked at those students?  Mrs. Martinez responded, the students that are here have a legal right to be here and we look at them all the time.

 

Mr. Staley asked, when you look at these children, is there any way to save money?  Mrs. Martinez responded, cost cannot be a factor.

 

Mr. Kapp noted that this is one of the reasons we send Dr. Fleming back to Washington, D.C. – the federal government was supposed to fund and we have never received 100% of the funding.

 

Mr. Staley pointed out, it’s a good thing the gifted folks don’t ask for the same thing.

 

Mr. Kapp asked Susan Clark to talk about the Miller Valley situation.  He noted that he only put down the rent - $20,000 total and didn’t put down the cost of bringing a portable up here.

 

Mrs. Susan Clark reported that the New Horizons program is now working in the cafeteria, sometimes in the kindergarten classes, with the limitations being that there are clean-up times and other programs using the cafeteria, along with the social worker, Kids & Co. and PTSA.  She noted that in the kindergarten room, if you’re very tall, it’s hard to work on those smaller tables and chairs.  She noted that she would be glad to give any Board member a tour.  She also noted that the Title I reading teacher, the Gold Mine director and the school psychologist are all working out of closets, which is not necessarily very professional.  She noted that they have partitions in the resource room, which is used for other programs.  She stated that she was just asking for one room for space and storage.

 

Mr. Staley asked, is one portable enough?  Mrs. Clark responded that they were looking at a double portable and that the cost was not that much different.

 

Mr. Staley asked, could we use two portables?   He asked, New Horizons was moved?  Mrs. Clark responded, it was shared space.  Mr. Staley asked, the gifted program was hurt by the expansion?  Mrs. Clark responded yes.  Mr. Staley pointed out that when in doubt – cut or move the gifted program, which he thought was a shame.

 

Mr. Campbell asked, how much would that cost?  Mr. Kapp responded, around $14,000.  Mr. Campbell asked, and we have about $500,000 now in building renewal?  Mrs. Raskin responded, between $400,000-$500,000.

 

Dr. Fleming requested that the Board be given the balances on paper.  Mrs. Raskin responded that she could do that.

 

Mrs. Navarro asked with sudden growth money – can that be used if we were to go over the bond money?  Mr. Kapp responded, yes, but not building renewal.  Mrs. Navarro added, if we didn’t have enough, we might want to tuck away some of the new growth money.  Mr. Kapp stated, that’s what we did last year.

 

Mr. Staley asked, how much last year and this year?  Mr. Kapp responded, last year $588,000 and this year $500,000.

 

Mr. Jay Collier noted that there was only room for one more portable on the electrical panel.  Mr. Kapp added, one for this year will get us through.  President Newton noted that it would be an improvement.

 

Mr. Campbell asked, the established cost for teachers – how did we come up with that amount?  Mr. Kapp responded that it was a ballpark figure.

 

Mrs. Totsy McCraley stated that Mr. Kapp has presented our case very well – we just keep growing.  She noted that they have had high numbers in social studies of the last several years and the reason for the part-time business teacher is because the Board changed the graduation requirements by adding computer applications, for which keyboarding is a prerequisite, and not all middle school students have that credit when they come to the high school.

 

Mr. Campbell asked, where will you put those extra teachers and classes?  Mrs. McCraley responded, we’re going to be very creative – we already have eight traveling teachers and will have more.  She noted that they currently have 1,929 students and that they have reduced the number of special requests from students and parents.  She added that when in a situation as we are right now, spreading those kids out is very important.

 

Dr. Fleming stated that she had a big concern about not asking for an extra English teacher because of AIMS.  Mrs. McCraley responded that they were looking at their greatest areas of need, which are business, science, math and social studies, and after those needs a fulltime counselor.  She added that English class sizes are growing and are of concern.

 

Dr. Fleming asked, where is the counselor?  Mrs. McCraley responded, this is for new growth and a counselor would be coming out of overflow.  She added that North Central requirements state that high school teachers are only suppose to have 170 students each day and the student counselor ratio is supposed to be 425/1 and is currently 482/1, which makes them unable to do what they need to do for their kids.

 

President Newton asked, would anyone have a problem adding an English teacher? Half-time?

 

Dr. Fleming asked, how much help would a half-time English teacher give?  Dr. Susan Fahrni responded that they had set their class sizes at 35, which is horrific.  She noted that they have 24 sections with 34-35 students in each and that they could very much use a three period half-time Language Arts teacher to help with class size.  She distributed handouts that summarized current class sizes for many of the departments.

 

President Newton pointed out that it will be difficult to hire teachers at this time of year.

 

Mrs. McCraley agreed and noted that by the time the Board votes on these positions and we advertise it will be the end of the first nine weeks.   She noted that if the Board would allow them to advertise early, they would have a better chance or hiring someone and a better timeline.  Mr. Kapp noted that the high school is considering a proposal to help those larger classes out by having a substitute teacher assist the assigned teacher in the larger classes.  He noted that according to the School Facilities Board, the official capacity at the high school is 1,950.  He noted that they were going to try and show that within three years we’ll be above capacity, which is based on the 100th day count.  He went on to say that we will have to continue to be creative until we get new classrooms from the bond or establish some satellite classes.

 

Dr. Reynolds reported that half-time teachers are hard to find at this time of year and that often we retain them as fulltime teachers when someone retires.  Mrs. McCraley added that most half-time teachers are teachers that have been on staff and want to remain on staff.  She noted that the benefit of having half-time teachers is that with a fulltime time teacher they teach five periods and two half-time teachers teach 3 periods each, so you pick up an extra section.  She added that we need to make sure that the half-time people that we have will help us out in other capacities, i.e., clubs, sponsors, etc.  She noted that when they hire at the high school level they try to hire teachers that have dual certification.

 

Dr. Fleming stated that she’d like to see a fulltime English teacher added and that with the pressure of AIMS, English is very important.

 

Mr. Kapp pointed out that we have a $30,000 starting salary and that the prospects of finding a mid-year grad improves with the new salary schedule.

 

Mrs. McCraley noted that with a mid-year college grad, often times they teach half of the day and substitute the other half.

 

CONSIDER APPROVING THE UTILIZATION OF APPROXIMATELY $7,200 FROM 2004-2005 “OVERFLOW” MONEY TO COMPLETE THE RECLASSIFICATION OF SELECTD CLASSIFIED POSITIONS, RETROACTIVE TO JULY 1, 2005

Dr. Reynolds noted that this was a continuing discussion regarding the reclassification of certain employees.  He noted that we have $7,200 left and that we could take that money and move to second priorities and could then successfully reclassify everyone on the list.

 

Mr. Staley asked, everyone?  Dr. Reynolds responded, yes.  He noted that originally the Board had wanted that to go to new teachers and that he was asking the Board to use those funds for reclassification.

 

CONSIDER APPROVING A 20% “BUY-OUT” PROGRAM FOR QUALIFYING PARTICIPANTS WITHIN APPROVED PARAMETERS FOR THE 2005-2006 SCHOOL YEAR

Dr. Reynolds reported that the administration was bringing for the Board’s consideration a buy-out program for our employees that would allow people to participate and declare their intentions prior to Christmas break, with the names being submitted to the Board in January.  He noted that item number one in the parameters provides two different ways for employees to qualify through either 15 years of service or 10 years of service and a salary of $42,000.

 

Mr. Campbell asked, what does the new salary schedule do to the buy out?  Will we really save money and how does it affect the teacher experience index?  Dr. Reynolds responded that it would still provide a savings, but that he didn’t know for how long and that it was based on the salary of the person leaving with the salary of the person we will hire.  He stated that he believed we would continue to make a summer savings, but maybe not as high as we have in the past.  He noted that regarding the teacher experience index, independent of a buy-out, people will still continue to leave the district.  He noted that this helps those people who were here for a long period of time during the salary freezes, etc.

 

Mr. Campbell noted that when the teacher experience index goes down, the district does not receive that money from the state.

 

President Newton asked, the TEI is a pretty low number?  Mrs. Raskin responded, yes.

 

Mr. Campbell stated that over the last five years it has been significant and when buy-outs encourage teachers to leave earlier, it affects the TEI.

 

Mr. Staley pointed out that $42,000 versus $30,000 is still $12,000.

 

Dr. Reynolds reported that last year when they estimated our summer savings, we were a little short.

 

Mr. Staley noted that under parameter number seven it states an employee must submit a letter of resignation and that under eight it states that they would be placed as a new employee.  He stated that when we take a retiree as a new employee the district should consider this retiree among any and all other applicants.  He stated that he would like to amend the parameters to read that “they would be subject to the open position policy and they don’t automatically get that position.”

 

Dr. Fleming stated that it’s not automatic – they must be out for a year or hired through a third party in order to come back the same year and that it’s legal and is provided for in the law.

 

Mr. Staley stated that if a principal wants to re-hire them they don’t even have to get approval from human resources.  Dr. Reynolds responded, they do clear it with me and we discuss the rehiring, but ultimately the principal is responsible for the hiring.

 

Mr. Staley noted that we don’t know if we got the best person for our clients if we don’t open up all those positions and we don’t know that there might not be someone better out there.  He stated that he felt the Board should amend the parameter.

 

Mr. Kapp noted that anyone can amend the parameters.  He noted that when advantageous the Board uses current year growth money to cover the cost of the buy-out.  He noted that summer savings now would be around $12,000 and it used to be $15,000 and would probably creep up over time.  He noted that buy-outs allow the district to reward long time employees with their retirement and by knowing early the district is able to post the positions and get better candidates.

 

Dr. Fleming suggested having one salary for certified and one salary for classified and asked Dr. Reynolds to have a recommendation for that by the next meeting.

 

Mr. Staley noted that regarding advertising early, he felt that the district should advertise for every single position.

 

Mr. Bill Munson stated that he understood why there is an appeal to open every position, but that it should be left up to the principals.  He added that if a teacher is burned out, the principals won’t make that offer of coming back to them.  He stated that the principals can withhold making that offer and that you should remember that these are loyal employees and with new employees they are still new employees and unknowns.  He stated that he would hate to lose the ability to keep those teachers and that we don’t want to make opening it up a charade – especially when we know we have a valuable person we’d like to keep.

 

Mr. Staley stated that competition builds efficiency and asked, why would a teacher retire and come back?  Mr. Munson responded, it’s monetary.  Mr. Staley stated that it was double dipping.  Mr. Munson responded that it’s perfectly legal, moral and allows them to maximize their income and to characterize that as something bad is not right.  He noted that the district is getting a veteran teacher that knows our operation inside and out and we don’t have to take them if we don’t think they are the best option.

 

Mr. Staley stated, you said for monetary reasons – not because they have a passion for teaching.  He noted that if we get this person back, how do we know it is the best person?  Mr. Munson responded, no one in this room wants a person in the classroom that is not passionate about children and teaching and hiring is the most important job that I do – every single one is critical.  He added that teachers that are passionate – you know they are good and not the unknown teacher – it’s good for all of us and loyalty is a part of that.

 

Mr. Kapp stated that you never know that if they are the best and I resent the fact that you are alluding to favoritism.  Mr. Staley responded, I’m glad you brought that up – not only is there favoritism, but I have proof that the superintendent created a position for his wife.

 

Mr. Kapp stated that he would like the President to bring the meeting back to order and on to the agenda.

 

President Newton stated that what we’re really talking about is whether we should offer a buy-out next week.

 

Mr. Spencer Johnson noted that his experience with teachers that have retired and come back has been nothing but positive and that the scenario that Mr. Staley poses – it’s the principal that does the hiring and he didn’t see how bias would come into effect.

 

CONSIDER APPROVING THE LIST OF QUALIFIED EVALUATORS FOR THE 2005-2006 SCHOOL YEAR

Dr. Reynolds reported that this is the list of qualified evaluators for this year.

 

Dr. Fleming stated that she was delighted that all have completed the level I and II training.  Dr. Reynolds noted that they will all be by the end of the year.

 

Mr. Campbell asked, are there just two levels?  Dr. Reynolds responded, four.

CONSIDER APPROVING AUTHORIZATION FOR THE DISTRICT TO INITIATE APPRAISALS FOR DISTRICT-OWNED PROPERTY (THE NATURE CENTER ADJACENT TO GRANITE MOUNTAIN MIDDLE SCHOOL AND PROPERTY ADJACENT TO PRESCOTT MILE HIGH MIDDLE SCHOOL)

Mr. Arn Lavington reported that he had utilized the means of an RFP to obtain an idea of what it would cost the district to appraise these three parcels.  He stated that he had sent out one RFP to nine different entities and had received back two responses, with one being a “no bid.”  He reported that it would cost $175 each for the two smaller parcels and that the appraiser would use the Freddie/Fannie vacant land reporting format.  He noted that the larger parcel would cost $400 using the same format, but with more analysis.  Mr. Lavington distributed a letter to the Board from the respondent to the RFP, noting that the cost would still be under $1,000.  He went on to say that there is a problem in that the land needs to be surveyed before appraisals can take place, since these parcels are not broken out separately from the school’s surveys.  He stated that he had talked to Gary Kelley about possible survey costs and he had stated that it would take a ton of research and history to come up with separate legal descriptions for these parcels and that the Nature Center property would cost between $10,000-$12,000 to survey and the parcels at Prescott Mile High Middle School would cost between $7,000-$10,000 to survey, so a maximum of $23,000 and a minimum of $18,000, unless during the research they can find short cuts to come up with separate boundaries.

 

Mr. Staley noted that whoever was going to buy it would want a separate legal description.

 

Mr. Lavington noted that you can’t ask for an accurate figure without accurate boundaries.

 

Mr. Kapp asked, could they give us a range within 10%?  Mr. Lavington responded, we don’t even know the acreage at the Nature Center and that he has estimated that there’s about 16 acres.

 

Dr. Fleming asked, so you’re asking us to increase the cost of the survey as well as the appraisal?  Mr. Lavington responded, I think that if you’re not using the land then sell it. 

 

Mr. Kapp stated that the district would need to know an accurate value of the Nature Center in order to either sell it or trade with the City of Prescott.

 

Mr. Jay Collier reported that we’re also being asked to maintain that property by Yakashba Estates who has requested that the district clean it out due to being a fire hazard, so in that respect it’s a liability for the district.

 

Mr. Campbell asked, where do we come up with $23,000?  Mrs. Raskin responded, 2004-05 or 2005-06 growth money.

 

Mr. Lavington noted that the Board has already approved Kelley-Wise Engineering, so we would not have to go through a bid process. 

 

Mr. Kapp noted that another option is to do one and not the other – do the Nature Center and hold off on the parcels at Prescott Mile High Middle School.

 

CONSIDER APPROVING THE DECLARATION OF CURRICULAR AND INSTRUCTIONAL ALIGNMENT TO THE ARIZONA ACADEMIC STANDARDS

Mr. Kapp noted that the district just needs to sign that our curriculum is in alignment with the Arizona Academic Standards and whether we do evaluations for our employees – which the answer to is yes.

 

CONSIDER APPROVING NEW PROCEDURES FOR THE BACKGROUND CHECKING AND POSSIBLE FINGERPRINT REQUIREMENTS OF PERSONNEL INVOLVED IN PROVIDING PURCHASED SERVICES FOR PRESCOTT UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT

Dr. Reynolds noted that the district already has an affidavit that lists 20 felonies and that Spencer Johnson had his parents look at the affidavit and they are both attorneys.

 

Mr. Campbell asked Spencer to recap his parent’s suggestion.  Mr. Johnson stated that he felt the Board’s concern was mainly for sexual predators on campus in terms of the children and that his parents had recommended that contracts for services with PUSD include a clause that provides that the contractor warrants its employees and sub-contractors are not required to register as sex offenders pursuant to statute, which addresses conviction for the a list of crimes.  He noted that the employer would certify by affidavit that none of his employees, sub-contractors, or sub-contractor’s employees have been convicted of the listed crimes.  He noted that the list was more narrowly defined because it is believed that a sufficient number of construction workers have probably committed crimes listed on the current affidavit used by PUSD, which could result in fewer bids by contractors for future or ongoing projects, and that if the primary concern is that of sexual predators being present on school campuses, then the proposed provisions would adequately address the issue.

 

Dr. Fleming stated that she felt Mr. Johnson had the best solution to this problem – that the classroom teachers should talk to their students and remind the kids repeatedly that they are not to talk to any of the workers on the school grounds.

 

Mr. Johnson reported that fingerprinting can be done electronically.

 

President Newton stated that he thought it would be impracticable to fingerprint everyone that walks onto a campus and that if you do something that shows the contractor that you don’t want those kinds of people on a job at a school site, it will heighten the contractor’s awareness as well as that of the teachers and children.

 

Mr. Collier asked if the Board was still going to delineate between limited and long term.

 

Mr. Staley stated that he has a seven year-old at Taylor Hicks and that he would like to see, as a parent, for the Board to do anything and everything we can do and that he really didn’t give a damn if a contractor is not willing to keep predators off our campuses.

 

Mr. Lavington noted that there are pre-construction meetings where we tell contractors that there is to be no student contact at all or the worker is off the job.

 

President Newton stated that he thought the Board was reaching a consensus and that using a simple affidavit is reasonable.

 

CONSIDER APPROVING A CHANGE IN POSITION TITLE FROM BUSINESS MANAGER TO CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER AND PLACEMENT OF THE POSITION ON THE ADMINISTRATIVE SALARY SCHEDULE ON THE COLUMN FOR THE ASSISTANT SUPERINTENDENT

This item was postponed until October.

 

CONSIDER ADOPTING THE NEW “WORTH THE WAIT” TEXTBOOKS AND MATERIALS THAT HAVE BEEN ON 60-DAY PREVIEW FOR USE BEGINNING IN THE 2005-2006 SCHOOL YEAR

Ms. Linda Ryan distributed a handout regarding the curriculum and noted that this material would be used at the 6th grade level only. 

 

Mr. Staley noted that at the high school level he had attended a presentation by TAPP, which looks like a great program.  Ms. Ryan noted that TAPP currently works with both the Chino Valley and Humboldt school districts and that they use the same curriculum as we do.  She noted that TAPP is a good organization and many of our students go to their extra-curricular events.

 

President Newton clarified that “Worth the Wait” is just for 6th grade, while “Choosing the Best” is for 7th, 8th, and 9th grade.

 

Dr. Fleming noted that one of the Board’s goals was to address the sex education program and analyze its effectiveness.  She stated that she’d like to be involved with the review of these programs and meetings.  Ms. Ryan noted that they haven’t actually set a meeting yet, but would soon.

 

CONSIDER APPROVAL OF THE CONSENT AGENDA:

Dr. Reynolds noted that 150 substitutes are the most we’ve had in five years and that the pay increase must have helped.

 

CONSIDER APPROVING THE TRUSTEES OF THE EMPLOYEE BENEFIT TRUST (EBT)

 

CONSIDER THE APPROVAL OF CERTIFIED AND CLASSIFIED PERSONNEL ACTIONS AS REQUESTED

 

CONSIDER ACCEPTING THE DONATIONS AS PRESENTED

 

CONSIDER RATIFYING THE VOUCHERS AS PRESENTED

 

CONSIDER THE APPROVAL OF THE AUXILIARY OPERATIONS AND STUDENT ACTIVITIES FUND STATEMENT OF RECEIPTS AND DISBURSEMENTS FOR THE MONTH OF JULY 2005

 

CONSIDER THE REVIEW AND APPROVAL OF PREVIOUS MINUTES FROM THE GOVERNING BOARD EXECUTIVE AND STUDY SESSION OF AUGUST 9, 2005, THE VOTING SESSION OF AUGUST 11, 2005, AND THE JOINT BOARD MEETING WITH SKYVIEW CHARTER SCHOOL ON AUGUST 24, 2005

 

ADJOURNMENT

Hearing no objection, President Newton adjourned the meeting at 8:55 p.m.

 

___________________________________

Governing Board Member