A. OPENING

PRESENT: Edwards, Hackett, Holmes, Huyler, Lok, O'Neill*, Rizzo, Robinson, Thresher**

ABSENT: None

ALSO
PRESENT: Interim Superintendent of Schools Mistretta, Assistant Superintendent for Curriculum & Instruction Brett, Director of Student Support Services Tait, Director of Human Resources Attorney Libby

ABSENT: None

Mr. Robinson called the meeting to order at 7:33 p.m.

Mr. Robinson led the Pledge of Allegiance.

Minutes of September 27, 2004
Mr. Robinson asked for a motion to accept the minutes of September 27, 2004.

MOTION: Hackett/ s.v. The Board of Education accepts the minutes of September 27, 2004, with a friendly amendment of a change on page 14, paragraph 4, first sentence: change five leader schools to five feeder schools. (6/0/1 - Holmes)

Dr. Mistretta introduced Mr. Peter Jasinski, the temporary Business Manager, who was hired through the Capital Region Education Council. He has been helping administration with the construction of the budget.

B. PUBLIC COMMENTS
1. Tom Stringfellow, 183 Hillstown Road. As a follow-up to the Columbus Holiday, he recommended Four Voyages of Columbus by Cecil Jane and the Journey of Coranado by Pedro de Castaneday. Additionally, there is an article in the October 2004 National Geographic regarding the ancient Phoenicians and their descendents. He also recommended a book regarding hazing, High School Hazing by Hank Nower. He stated that October is Fire Safety Month, and suggested that the Fire Explorers make a future presentation to the Board, along with a fire chief. He also suggested that Officer Amy Marotta be invited to make a presentation on the DARE program. He feels that these are two good programs for youth to keep them out of trouble with the law. He reported that there was a conference at UCONN, The Northeastern Alliance of Diversity Education dealing with how minority students learn. He recommended the book, Young, Gifted and Black - Promoting High Achievement. He also recommended a CPTV documentary called The College Track showing on Sunday. He added that he supports the high school referendum issue.

2. Eileen Sweeney, 86 Hawthorne Street. She requested that the agendas for the Board meetings be placed on the Board of Education website. She feels that it would be helpful for those community members who have online access. This also may encourage more people to get involved and participate more.

3. Name Unclear, 14 Lawton Road. She recognized that the district has made strides in the CT Mastery Test, but she still feels there is a ways to go. After looking at the results, she finds that the minority students in Manchester still have to catch up to their white counterpart. She feels Manchester has to maintain its focus on this issue.

C. MANCHESTER PTA COUNCIL REPORT
Dr. Mistretta stated that Merrill Kidd, President, was out doing Manchester High School referendum work, and may be able to join the meeting at a later time. If not, this report would be moved to the next agenda.

D. CONSENT CALENDAR
Dr. Mistretta reviewed the items on the Consent Calendar. She commented on item 10 that there were 40 applications for elementary school principals, and a committee of 15 staff and parents interviewed 12 candidates. It was narrowed to six candidates for Central Office interviews. As candidates were judged against the CT School Leader Standards, and the positions were advertised requesting a strength in literacy and numeracy.

1) Approval of Student Activity Account Resolutions

2) Approval of Tentative Graduation Date (June 14, 2005)

3) Board of Education Operating Budget Procedures (Facilities Usage Fees)

4) Board of Education Operating Budget Procedures (State Reimbursement)

5) Acceptance of the Robertson Elementary School Freezer
Project #077-0197 as complete

6) Extended Field Trip Request - Manchester High School
Historically Black Colleges & Universities Tour
North and South Carolina - 2/19/05 - 2/26/05

7) Extended Field Trip Request - Washington Elementary School
Discovery Center Residential Program - Woodstock, CT
Nov. 1-5, 2004 (first group) & Nov. 15-19, 2004 (second group)

8) Increase in Appropriation for Education Special Projects -
For Bowers School Student Author Center by $5,000 for a total of
$35,000, funded by the Bowers School PTA

9) Permission to Apply - CREC Sister School Grant - $8,000
Washington Elementary School, funded by CREC

10) Personnel Action

Appointments
Kathleen Rosewall to be Principal of Keeney Elementary School. Ms. Rosewall received her B.A. at Marymount Manhattan College, her M.A. Manhattan College and her Certificate of Advanced Graduate Study at Central Connecticut State University and resides in West Hartford. She served as an Elementary Principal and a District Wide Language Arts Supervisor in New Britain Schools. Approved effective December 6, 2004 (salary of $101,863 (Step 5), prorated to her date of hire).

Ms. Rosewall stated that she was very happy, excited and honored to be part of the administrative team of Manchester Public Schools. She looks forward to working with parents and students and to continue all the fine work that has been done. She also thanked the hiring committee, and encouraged visitors to the school upon her arrival.

Dr. Mary Lou Ruggerio to be Principal at Bowers Elementary School. Ms. Ruggerio received her B.S. at the State University of New York at Brockport, and her M.A. and Ph.D. at the University of Connecticut and resides in Glastonbury. Ms. Ruggerio joins Manchester from the East Hartford Public Schools and served as an Elementary School Principal, a District Wide Language Arts Supervisor, and an Elementary Supervisor. Approved effective November 15, 2005 (salary of $104,213 (Step 5 + doctoral stipend, prorated to her date of hire.).

Dr. Ruggerio stated that she is thrilled and excited about the opportunity to serve as an elementary principal at Bowers Elementary School. She looks forward to working with the many supportive parents and hard-working teachers and administrative team.

Mr. Robinson asked for a motion on the Consent Calendar.

MOTION: Hackett/Huyler s.v. The Board of Education adopts the items 1-6, 8 and 10 listed on the Consent Calendar. (9/0/0)

Mrs. O'Neill stated that the students seem to subsidize the chaperones on the extended field trips quite a bit, and feels that it should be looked at. She commented that this particular group would be least likely able to subsidize the chaperones. She requested that as a future item, the Board should review this process.

Dr. Mistretta stated that she could provide a trend analysis of how much trips have been costing.

Mrs. O'Neill asked that it include how much the chaperones pay versus how much the students pay, as well as if it is fully fund-raised.

With regard to Item D3, Mrs. Holmes stated that she supported the Board of Directors authorizing the establishment of a special revenue fund. She asked if it was within their scope to do this.

Dr. Mistretta stated that it really isn't, as the general statute, 10-22a, says the money would be appropriated to the Board of Education. The Board of Education is asking that it be placed into a special revenue fund to help keep better track of the funds that come in.

Mrs. Holmes also questioned if the Board of Education Reserve Fund is the actual name. She asked that the correct title be applied to avoid confusion.

Dr. Mistretta stated that she has heard it referred to as both titles, and will get the correct title.

Mrs. Holmes stated she had questions and concerns regarding the Washington School trip. She asked Mrs. Womack to explain why this trip is so important based on taking students out of school for five days. She asked to hear more about the academic piece of the trip.

Mrs. Womack stated that they would be exposed to the full curriculum, with a multicultural team-building slant. There is a lot of experiential learning as well. This trip is totally free to all students. It is held at a YMCA facility, so it is a lodge that the students will be in for housing, eating and sleeping. There will be another school participating that is not as diverse as Washington School. The students will have correspondence with this school up until the trip. This is a Paul Newman camp, and he mostly funds the project. She feels that it is a great opportunity for the students.

Mrs. Holmes asked if the program could be fewer than five days.

Mrs. Womack stated that was not how it was presented, and that it is a five-day session. They leave Monday morning and return before end of school on Friday. The previous evening, the Director met with the families, and at least 75% of the fifth grade parents attended. Board approval is now needed to proceed.

Mrs. Holmes asked if there was a plan for the students who do not attend.

Mrs. Womack responded that there was concern about a student with disabilities, and this was addressed so that the student could attend. She stated she could not presently gage how many students would not attend. She noted that there is an EMT on board, and all camp counselors and educators are CPR trained and have a background check. There are two groups; therefore, half of the students would go the first week, and the half of the students the second week. If there are students who don't attend, they will be at the school with the students and teachers who are not attending that particular session.

Mrs. Lok expressed appreciation to the individuals who are volunteering and serving on this trip, should it be approved. She also noted that the students who are attending the trip to view historically black colleges would be doing so during school vacation. She believes students should be commended for this effort. She encouraged full participation by students. She asked for a report back from some of the students who attended the trip, and at some point in the future if students apply to some of the colleges visited and get accepted to attend.

Mr. Edwards asked if there is precedent for a weeklong trip and five days away from school by this Board of Education, or any other Board of Education.

Dr. Mistretta stated that she could not recall any instance since 1997, when she began working for Manchester Public Schools.

Mrs. Hackett stated that the Nature Center trip had originally been presented as a five-day trip, and the most the Board has ever granted has been a three-day trip.

Mr. Edwards stated the permission slip states a cost of $35, but understands it will be waived by virtue of the grant.

Mrs. Womack stated that this was correct, and that one school pulled out of the commitment, so they asked Washington to fill the spot. She expressed to the Director that the cost may be prohibitive, and the fee was waived.

Mr. Edwards asked if the grant had been applied for and approved, and what happens if the grant is not approved.

Mrs. Womack stated that the grant is in process and that the urgency is based upon the fact that Washington would be filling an empty slot from a school that withdrew. She commented that there is a waiting list for this particular program. She stated that it is not the district's concern if the grant is not approved, as the $8,000 does not particular cover the $35 fee. She explained it is a grant that CREC offers for partnerships with sister schools, and that there is more to the program than the five-day trip. There is also a pen pal connection and a day trip for the fourth grade students at the camp. There is also a program for grade six.

Mr. Edwards confirmed that there is no risk of the students attending if the grant does not get approved. He asked if the teachers at the camp are certified.

Mrs. Womack stated that she believes the educators are certified by the State of Connecticut, and she would check on it.

Mr. Edwards asked if the Enfield Board of Education approved the trip for the Enfield Street School.

Mrs. Womack assumed so, as there is a waiting list for schools to participate.

Mrs. Holmes asked that items 7 and 9 on the Consent Calendar be considered separately.

MOTION: Hackett/Huyler s.v. The Board of Education adopts the items 7 and 9 listed on the Consent Calendar. (8/1/0)

Mrs. Holmes stated that as much as she is sure that the Washington Elementary trip is wonderful, she is concerned about the last minute approach and not being prepared ahead of time. She is also concerned about the precedent of being away for five days. If it could be reduced, she would support it; although, she understands why it cannot be reduced. She stated she would vote against the motion.

Mrs. Lok stated that she would support both items. She understands in times of tight budgets, there is a desire to take advantage of an opportunity, no matter how quickly the Board has to act. She feels the opportunity is clearly to the benefit of the students. Additionally, she feels with Mrs. Womack's successes at Washington School, she has no reason to question her recommendation. She encouraged other Board members to support the motion. She believes it is a credible replacement for the five days the students would be gone.

Mr. Edwards stated that he would support this motion. He stated that he shares reservations in terms of the number of days away from school; however, he feels good about the things he has heard about the teaching staff and the real curriculum. His biggest concern is setting a precedent for five-day trips. He encouraged the students, parents and administration t0 evaluate the program and see how well it supports the curriculum.

Mrs. Womack stated that the students are assessed throughout the week on the subjects they are learning. At the end, the students and the teachers are asked to do an assessment about the program and what they have learned. She stated she would share this information with the Board. She suggested having the Director of the program to speak with the Board and make the same presentation that she did with the families.

Mrs. Huyler believes the program is excellent. She particularly likes the multicultural portion and believes the program embodies thinking out of the box. She hopes this program is a launching pad of where trips are heading. She does not see the five days out of school as an obstacle. She feels that a start of networking at a young age is needed in our society.

Mrs. O'Neill stated that she would support the motion and that she is glad that the opportunity is available. She believes the curriculum is actually extended on a trip like this.

Mrs. Hackett stated she would support the motion. She stated that she has been conservative about the amount of instructional time; however, she commented that Washington School was hit hard this year with the loss of their grant and tremendous after school program having to reduce enrollment. She would not want to do anything that would cause morale problems or any further disengagement of students. She thinks it is an exciting trip and it meets Connecticut frameworks for all subjects. She is also concerned that granting five-day trips puts pressure on fundraising and students. She looks for a report following the trip.

Mr. Robinson welcomed Ms. Rosewall and Dr. Ruggerio to Manchester Public Schools.

E. SUPERINTENDENT'S REPORT
Dr. Mistretta reminded the Board and the viewers of the Safety Tip Line: 250-3019. She stated that everything is kept confidential and is pursued.

1. High School Testing Report: CAPT/SAT/AP
Dr. Brett stated that she and Mr. Sierakowski would present an overall data summary of CAPT and SAT score reports. The AP scores would be discussed at a later date. She spoke about CAPT high stakes testing from the National, State and Manchester perspective. High stakes testing and educational reform are part of the corporate restructuring of American and World society. Nationally, there is a joint effort between business leaders and educators with a common goal of improving schools so that students can better compete in the world market. Many states and school districts across the country mandate high stakes testing programs like the CMT and CAPT to gather data about student achievement over time. The term high stakes is used because there are serious consequences for students and educators. Schools are judged according to the school-wide average scores of their students. High scores bring public praise and financial reward. Low scores bring public embarrassment and heavy sanctions. High scores for students bring special acknowledgement and exceptional academic accomplishment, while low scores result in students being held back in grades and being denied a high school diploma. The Commissioner of Education in Connecticut stated the 2004 CAPT results shows that grade ten students should be proud of themselves as their participation rate is very high and their performance continues to increase. Participation and performance is higher than it has been over the last four years. The report shows that in Connecticut, the participation rate was 95% in 2004. The second generation CAPT is a criterion-referenced test, which measures the student's skill against a pre-established standard of higher order thinking skills such as analysis, problem solving and evaluation. There are four areas of the CAPT. The Board adopted two policies, 5120 and 5127.1, which are the graduation requirements. The requirements state that beginning with the Class of 2006, diplomas will be conferred only to students who demonstrate they have met a performance standard in English and Math. One way to demonstrate that achievement is to score within the top three score bands on the CAPT, reading, writing and math test. For those students who may not be able to meet these CAPT requirements, there are alternative ways to meet them. They include retaking the test, taking a simulated test, or assembling a portfolio or project to demonstrate the proficiency of skills. If the student is a special education student, they have a right to take the CAPT. If they are not proficiency, they may be exempted from taking the CAPT through an IEP. In Manchester, 98.4% of students participated in taking the test; .67% were absent; and .2% had no valid score. She provided a sample of a postcard that was sent to all parents with the students having to return them stating they understand that they have to participate in the CAPT as a graduation requirement. There was a second notice from the Superintendent reminding parents about the graduation requirement. The scores are reported within five score bands, with the top three being advanced, meeting the goal, and proficiency. There are two others bands, basic and below basic. The strengths in Manchester are noted in Writing Across the Disciplines and Reading Across the Disciplines. Work is continuing in the areas of math and science, although Manchester is not far from their counterparts in the ERG. She noted that progress has occurred throughout the past four years. In 2003, participation was implemented and required and this shows a drop in the scores. However, once full participation is implemented, the scores rise in 2004. Within the subgroups consisting of special education, free and reduced lunch, black and Hispanic students, participation and proficiency has risen. Increases in scores are expected over the years and strategies are in place to address the needs of these students. Manchester is working to close the achievement gap by supporting the Equity Director position that is working across all disciplines with students. In addition, Special Education student needs are being addressed as well. She stated that taking the CAPT is not just a high school concern, but also a result of the academic performance of a student from kindergarten through grade 9. Many efforts are being made with differentiated instruction, flexible grouping and electronic portfolios. Resources are being identified and implemented, and teacher training is in place. There are also many programs being implemented in the younger grades in hopes of seeing the advances when students take the CAPT in grade 10. She congratulated Manchester High School students for their performance on the 2004 CAPT.

Mr. Sierakowski stated the SAT scores for the 2004 class were 494 verbal and 477 math; verbal was down by 3 points and math was down by 24 points. The College Board recommended that scores be reported in band ranges, similar to CAPT. There are a number of initiatives that schools have to meet, such as NCLB, State Frameworks, State guidelines, graduation requirement legislation, College Board standards and NEASC standards. Manchester has adopted the NEASC model as a focus on how curriculum is developed. The NEASC standards for accreditation hold the high school accountable in a way that affects goods. These standards are all about good teaching and what happens with students. The new NEASC Mission Statement and Academic Expectations form the vision for the plan of where the high school will go in the future. The next professional development day will integrate the NEASC curriculum work with efforts to close the achievement gap.

Mrs. Lok asked that the acronyms be reviewed.

Mr. Sierakowski stated that NEASC Accreditation Standards are those by which all high schools in New England are judged. NEASC stands for the New England Association of Schools and Colleges, which evaluates and accredits both high schools and colleges. NCLB stands for No Child Left Behind, which is federal legislation designed to increase accountability in the school. The problem with this legislation is that it has never been funded as promised, and leaves all the mandates on the local Boards of Education. The State Frameworks are outlines for curriculum expectations that the State publishes. The State Graduation Requirements are left to districts to define the requirements. The Mission and Expectations that are being developed are also based on the CT Common Core of Learning.

Mrs. Lok asked if there would be a written report on the SAT scores.

Mr. Sierakowski stated that it would be in conjunction to the graduate follow-up.

Mr. Edwards noted participation rate was up for the 2003 CAPT and questioned if the graduation requirement was in place at this point to be at proficient or above, or if they only needed to take the test.

Mr. Sierakowski responded that this class only needed to take the test.

Mr. Edwards asked if the SAT scores reported were reflective of the PSAT subsidizing, or if that would be reflected in this year's scores.

Mr. Sierakowski stated that the students who took the PSAT as sophomore last year would only take the SATs this year. He noted that student confidence and experience also play a role with the results.

Mr. Rizzo stated that he has been comparing the 2003 and 2004 scores of the CMT and the CAPT, and he feels that the numbers are not consistent with the two years prior with the problem lying within 2003. He noted that the participation rate could explain some of this, and asked for the participation rates of both 2003 and 2004.

Mr. Sierakowski stated that the participation rate in 2003 was 88%; in 2002 it was 82%, and in 2001 it was 72%.

Mr. Rizzo noted that there was increased participation and well as test scores increasing. He stated that he would be interested in seeing the raw numbers of students who took the test. He prefers to look at how Manchester is doing as a district rather than to compare Manchester with the ERG and the State. He stated that he is impressed with the improving scores and feels that it is also a reflection on how the teachers are teaching. He feels that all of the work in differentiated instruction over the years is starting to pay off. He noted that the strategies being introduced are really strategies to improve teaching, and getting professional development that is needed. He noted that the scores increased in all but one of the subgroups, some very significantly.

Dr. Brett noted that parents' sending their children to school prepared has also made a difference.

Mrs. Hackett, as Chairperson of the Board's Curriculum and Instruction Committee, thanked the administration, teachers, students and parents for the substantial improvement in the CAPT scores. She feels this represents the momentum over the time spent throughout the grades. She credited the staff and administrators for this achievement. She feels that making this a graduation requirement is one of the best things that could have been done because everyone rose to the occasion. She stated that she is equally pleased to see the results in the subgroups.

Mr. Robinson thanked them for the presentation and noted that the community should be heartened by the progress. He stated that these scores rebut the notion that an increase in participation will send scores down. He congratulated all those involved.

2. High School Class Size Report
Dr. Mistretta stated that this is a follow-up to a previous discussion on the oversized classes at Manchester High School.

Mr. Sierakowski stated they did a complete analysis of the current study hall locations, as these would be the issue. In order to accommodate three teachers, there is a need for a minimum of 15 free classrooms. This can be achieved, but only if those classes are confined to non-lunch blocks and only if the students are put into a cafeteria study hall situation. The only places where there are open periods during the day are in highly specialized rooms such as auto shop and wood shop where it is not a good place to hold a traditional class or study hall. Although he would love to hire three new teachers, he cautioned that it does come with a price of increased crowding and increased space. He stated if there was an opportunity for three more teachers, they could be placed in three departments enabling class sizes to come down. The fact is that the high school is so crowded and class sizes are so large that there is an incredible stress on the entire system.

Attorney Libby presented updated information beyond the October 1 official enrollment dates. There are 36 classes in English that have more than 25 students; social studies has 35 classes; math has 35 classes; World Language has 23 classes; science has 12 classes; PE and Health has 19 classes with more than 25 students. She stated that it is a different learning experience in a class of 28 versus 22 students.

Mr. Jasinski reported that at this point in time of the budget, it would be difficult to add teachers. They are concerned with and are watching the following accounts: heat and electricity accounts are budgeted at about $108,000 less than what was expended the last fiscal year and the price of heating oil has increased 33 percent; special education transportation is budgeted at $116,000 less than what was expended last fiscal year and analysis shows that the line is $140,000 ahead of this point last year forecasting a shortfall of $367,000, coupled with homeless transportation costs; special education tuition is $500,000 less than what was expended last fiscal year. He noted that these are huge numbers and there is a potential for deficits.

Dr. Mistretta noted that Homeless Transportation comes to the Board as a courtesy of No Child Left Behind. The district, by Federal Law, must transport students who are homeless back to the district. This situation can happen at any time, and money has to be in reserve to do this.

Mr. Rizzo stated that at every Board meeting, a member or two in the community will argue about the size of the high school and the enrollment. For the record, he stated it shows in 1999, there were 2,027 students. Every year since then, except for 2002, the increase in the population was greater than 2 percent. This means that every year, the enrollment has increased by a significant number of students, to a current number of 2,265 students. Clearly the enrollment at the high school is increasing.

Mr. Lok stated the report clearly demonstrates the overcrowded conditions at the high school. However, she does not believe it demonstrates, given the current financial circumstances, the need to hire additional teachers at the high school. She is not terribly disappointed on how large some of the classes are, especially considering some of the class sizes at the first and fifth grade levels. She feels the class sizes are reasonable at the high school given the current financial situation.

Mr. Edwards asked if the district's financial situation is substantially better than it was two weeks ago when class sizes were discussed at the elementary level.

Dr. Mistretta stated that is it absolutely not better and that it is too early to determine if it is worse.

Mr. Edwards asked what the cost would be for a new teacher at the high school.

Attorney Libby responded that it would be approximately $58,500, inclusive of benefits. At the elementary school, it would be a little bit less.

Mr. Edwards noted that in the case of Nathan Hale, the Board took the action of adding a paraprofessional so that the actual difference in keeping a teacher in the classroom versus collapsing the class and adding a paraprofessional was about $25,000. The Board was not willing to do that given those financial circumstances. It is his opinion that it is out of the question to consider an additional high school teacher.

Mr. Sierakowski stated that if the school were to maintain gains that have been made, they would need to have class sizes that make instruction possible. Given the size of the classrooms and the number of students in them, he believes the breaking point is likely. He suggests that staffing is looked at from a total district perspective. The high school has an 11 percent increase in enrollment, and a need for 17 to 20 additional teachers that has not happened. He commented that this increased enrollment is coming from within the district. He is concerned about the impact on the students.

Mrs. Holmes stated that a bigger budget discussion is needed in the near future. She compared the originally approved budget to the final approved budget, and she doesn't understand why some large increases that were initially made to Special Education accounts went down in the final approval. She stated the big issue was the Blue Cross Major Medical. She noted that originally the paraprofessional line was going to be reduced by $175,000 and it was in fact reduced very little. She stated there are competing interests throughout the budget, and she would like to learn more about the budget changes.

Mr. Edwards responded to Mr. Sierakowski's comments. He stated the district has targets for classroom sizes at various levels and noted that the class sizes in the elementary schools were much above the target in grades where children learn to read. He feels that looking at it district wide, it is important to take care of the younger students for them to achieve throughout the higher grades.

Mrs. Lok would like the Board to have a discussion on the budget workshops and look at the possibility of recording them so that there would be minutes that could be referenced, as well as access to information that is shared with the Board during the time the Board is making decisions. She feels the Board is on a slippery slope with this budget.

Dr. Mistretta made a correction to a statement she made previously. She stated they are closely watching the disparity between the two middle schools with respect to percent of non-white students. The October 1 count this year shows that Bennet Middle School has 21.4 percent more minority students than Illing Middle School. She was worried about being cited by the State for racial imbalance; however, after speaking to the State, she noted that Bennet is 11 percent over average and Illing is 11 percent below average. She suggested that the Board might want to discuss such different cultures at each middle school when considering a new middle school.

F. NEW BUSINESS
1. Board of Education/Town Operational Agreements
Mr. Robinson stated that these items are a sequence of draft operational agreements between the Board of Education and the Town. They are New Business items, so no action will be taken at this meeting.

Dr. Mistretta stated that there are overlapping responsibilities between the Board and the Town; however, oftentimes they are parallel responsibilities more than overlapping. She feels this must be kept in mind when reviewing the resolutions.

a) Communication
Dr. Mistretta explained this expects that the top four Town administrative staff will meet on a quarterly basis with the top three Board of Education administrative staff. Previously, the Superintendent was the spokesperson when in fact the administrations work as teams. This expects that the two teams will talk to each other, which should improve decision-making and problem solving. There is a sense of formality and an expectation that there is an agenda and written minutes and actions. This will improve efficiencies. Dr. Mistretta suggested these meetings do not start until a Superintendent and Business Manager is in place.

Mrs. Lok asked if the resolutions would be sent to the Board of Directors for their adoption as well. She also asked if there was a timeframe.

Dr. Mistretta stated the Board of Directors would have to adopt them, and noted that she inserted some timelines. She feels that it will take a month of so for Board adoption procedures.

b) Educational Specification Development for Facility Projects
Dr. Mistretta stated that the Board of Education is responsible for the Educational Specification development. She feels that this is very vital as the Board knows how students learn and teachers teach, as well as the instructional procedures and processes. She noted that if on occasion, certain specifications need to be revised towards successful completion of a project, the revision needs will be immediately communicated to the Town. She also noted the additional language proposed by the Town in fair language to be included. It is included in a boxed format, as it had not been agreed to prior to the September 28 meeting.

c) Bond Facility Related Project Design Teams
Dr. Mistretta stated that this puts the School Board, staff and certain people on the Town side as the project design team. This gives the Board a great deal of responsibility in bonded projects to ensure the educational specifications meet the needs of the school.

d) Agreements Regarding TOMMIF, Grounds Maintenance, and Fleet Maintenance
Dr. Mistretta stated that the Grounds Maintenance plan is currently in effect, as well as the Fleet Maintenance plan. This resolution formalizes the agreement. The TOMMIF account will build accounts together using the same formula.

e) MUNIS Agreements
Dr. Mistretta stated these agreements are very timely. She corrected a typo - November 1 changed to November 30. She stated the Town and Board of Education purchased the MUNIS financial software together. Originally discussions stated there would be one entity, one server and one database; however, one database caused considerable confusion. After much discussion with the Town, there was an agreement that there would be one server and two databases that would be separated by November 30, 2004. During December 2004, the MUNIS software would run parallel so be sure there are no problems. In January 2005, the Board of Education will be operating on a separate database from the Town. The big difference is that the payroll and accounts payable functions should remain separate functions.

f) Facilities Inventory
Dr. Mistretta stated that this is also time critical resolution. It states that an inventory that would include condition, age, estimated life, estimated cost for all building systems (roofs, mechanical/ electrical plumbing equipment with serviceable life) be conducted by Keith Epstein and an outside consultant. She cautioned about the wording in the box as the Board controls its budget. She feels that an RFP or proposal should be put out now for a facilities inventory so that it can take place during the spring and summer. This will allow projects to be considered in budgeting next fall for the 2006-07 school year. She commented that the Board knows there are roofs that need to be worked on. She feels the Board should insist on seeing the RFP inventory estimates to ensure that there are adequate funds in the Board to do the inventory. There is $298,000 in the Board budget that had been earmarked for the Nathan Hale and Verplanck fire alarm and Robertson freezer. These projects have been accomplished out of funds from prior year. It also appears that there is $1,775,834 in an account called Board Reserve or Capital Projects.

Mrs. Holmes stated in regard to Grounds and Fleet maintenance, she would like to see the costs in writing. She also would like to know what the specific plans are and asked if they are in writing for the Buildings and Sites Committee to review. With regard to inventory, she asked if some pieces can be done at a time, and if projects could be prioritized. She thought that the Lawrence Report should be used as a starting place. Additionally, she has been working on policy language regarding collaboration with the Town of Manchester. She will provide copies for the Board members and asked if it could be placed on a future agenda.

Dr. Mistretta stated the work done with Segal Consultants for TOMMIF is in writing. She will put that phrase in the document for the Board's consideration. Additionally, they are working on the high school grounds maintenance plan to have it put into writing. With respect to the $1.7M, it is for 18 projects, 14 of which were completed.

Mrs. Lok stated that she sees the need for formal written agreements. She will look at these with an eye towards how realistic they are, and encouraged other Board members to do the same. When an agreement such as this is entered into, it should be with the intention of following it. She feels that there is detailed information within each resolution. She questioned that should the Board not be able to follow one of the agreements, what the recourse would be. She does not want to adopt resolutions that will create more problems. She asked if any legal advice was given on the resolutions.

Dr. Mistretta stated no legal advice was obtained.

Mr. Rizzo asked if Dr. Mistretta could explain the $1.7M in a side fund, given the current state of the budget.

Dr. Mistretta explained that the $298,000 is protected through Policy 3510 for repair of the buildings. A change to this requires a two-thirds vote. The $1.7M was money that had been set aside through bonds and projects that were reimbursed, and put into an account for Capital Projects. It is actually in a Town account and targeted for Board of Education use for facility repair. It is not money that is in the Board of Education operating budget. She will confirm that this money cannot be legally used for the operating budget, as it was reimbursement money for capital projects.

Mr. Edwards stated that the reimbursement money for a project is not given to the Board of Education but to the Town. The Town puts it into an account that everyone agrees is used to maintain facilities or purchase land for Board of Education purposes. This is similar to any end of year surplus of the Board of Education. He believes it would take an appropriation of the Board of Directors to appropriate the money back to the Board of Education.

Dr. Mistretta stated that she would research this. She cautioned the Board did vote on item C4 that places reimbursements from the State in the Town general funds, which should be transferred from the Town general fund to the Board of Education reserve fund. These funds should be made available to the Board of Education for other capital improvement projects.

G. COMMITTEE REPORTS
None.

H. COMMUNICATIONS
Mrs. Lok received an email regarding the request to have the agenda posted on the website. She added that she feels it is an excellent idea, and she would like to see the Board adopt that practice.

Mr. Edwards attended the Nathan Hale Open House. The School Resource Officers were in attendance and were invited people from the neighborhood to a special meeting with Chief Berry on Thursday, October 21 at 6:30 p.m. at Nathan Hale School.

Mrs. Holmes noted that people could sign up for automatic emails to attend school board events. She stated the CABE Convention would be held on Thursday, November 11. She is willing to attend, and would love to see the Board get more involved in legislation.

Mrs. Hackett also received the email regarding having the agenda posted on the website, and she feels it needs to be posted as soon as possible.

I. PUBLIC COMMENTS
1. Tom Stringfellow, 183 Hillstown Road. He stated that he supports the field trips on the Consent Calendar. He is very impressed with Principal Womack and her work at Washington School. He feels that it is a free program and the district should take advantage of it. He also is glad to see the Historically Black College Tour to continue. He hopes that more students of color are encouraged to get involved with the AP programs. There will be a presentation by Diane Kearney as part of the second action forum on November 17. This deals with academic achievement and student discipline. He recommended an article in Better Homes and Gardens, Raising Can Do Kids by Lori Nudo. He noted that there is a high dropout rate among Hispanic students that needs to be looked at. He stated there is a card that came out from Exxon Mobil about honoring Hispanic Heritage Month. In the 10/14/04 edition of USA Today, there was an article about teachers who inspired students.

J. ITEMS FOR FUTURE AGENDAS
Mrs. Lok asked that the Board at the next meeting have a discussion on the possibility of conducting exit interviews on Election Day related to the issue of Bennet Middle School. She feels it is important for the Board to have the discussion and send a message to the Board of Directors.

Mrs. Holmes formally requested to put the Policy on one of the next two meetings.

Mrs. Huyler asked if there was a committee working for the Board of Education regarding what is put on the website. She would like to receive information regarding this. She suggested maybe collecting anonymous comments on Bennet through this resource.

Dr. Mistretta asked if Mrs. Hackett is still looking for an update on the Bailey Auditorium. She stated that the next meeting would be timely for this as it is part of the referendum question. Mrs. Hackett stated it would be perfect timing for this discussion if it were possible.

MOTION: Holmes/Rizzo s.v. The Board of Education adjourned into Executive Session at 10:27 p.m.