PRESENT: Crockett, Edwards, Hackett, Pohl, Rizzo, Rowe, Stafford,
Huyler

ABSENT: Small-Miller

ALSO PRESENT: Superintendent of School Ouellette, Director of Student Services Tait, Director of Business and Operations Brooks, Attorney Libby

A.1 Call to Order
Ms. Hackett called the meeting to order at 10:00 p.m.

A.2. Pledge of Allegiance
Ms. Hackett led the Pledge of Allegiance

B. Public Comments

There were no public comments

C. OLD BUSINESS

C.1 Adoption of the 2006/2007 School Budget

Mr. Pohl moved the adoption of the recommended Budget allocated by the Board of Directors in the amount of $88,353.644: increased by $125,000 and reduced by $1,794,150 in the May 10th recommendation for adjustment of the Superintendent. Further that the Superintendent be directed to preserve a staffing position at Waddell School to be named at a later date.

Mr. Pohl admitted to not having weighed in on the Waddell issue: it was important for him to speak now. There were two different issues with Waddell at this time: the Principal had requested an all day Kindergarten: parents were asking for a third 1st Grade teacher. Quite frankly, the Board had looked at all the numbers; discussed at great length how those fluctuated, and the importance of holding the Waddell staff together. However, the situation would be looked at further into the summer by the Superintendent, the Principal and all those responsible for taking care of the children in the school. He recommended adoption of the motion.

Mr. Edwards said he was happy to support the motion. With regards to Waddell, he repeated what he had stated at the Workshop: a crystal ball would be needed here. He thought that what the Board was deciding upon that evening was a good comprise; it said there was the likelihood of the need for a resource there. The numbers that had been submitted to the Board was excellent data: what was even more precise was netting those against the number of students who leave, giving us the real picture of comings and goings. It was clear that Waddell had quite a turnover in students, when compared to the remainder of our elementary schools. Mr. Edwards noted that from year 2000/05, the lowest number of new students net was five: other years the numbers had been six and eight. One year it was sixteen. That made it difficult to do a precise measurement of how many teaching resources were needed. It was safe to say that if history repeated itself we would likely need a resource there. It was wise keeping that resource there.

Mr. Edwards talked about the allocation. This had been better than in past years. While the Board did not get everything it asked for, nor would it ever, the level of funding the town gave us, plus the additional $125,000 was much better. The level of funding was high: it was in the neighborhood of six and one half per cent; that number driven largely by staffing costs: staffing cost numbers were driven by our contractual obligations and our health care expenses which had shot up tremendously over the last few years. It had become more and more difficult for the town to allocate the money necessary to add programs like an all day Kindergarten at Verplanck and Waddell and, indeed, at all of our other elementary schools. He was concerned that we would ever have enough money. We needed help from our State legislators; help in figuring out ways to minimize those costs. He noted that the Board of Directors wished us to undergo an efficiency study and he thought that was a good idea; there were likely to be efficiencies we could introduce through such a study. He hoped that in the coming year the Board would talk in more detail about what we might do in that regard.

Mr. Edwards summarized that; all in all, it was a very good budget. He was pleased with the discussions that had taken place during the Budget Workshops" they had been very productive. Insightful questions had been asked; we had been provided with succinct and accurate answers, and he expressed his thanks to everyone involved in the budget process from the Superintendent on down. He thought the Board was performing an excellent service to the students of Manchester and hoped they would continue to do so. He supported the motion.

Mr. Stafford supported the motion and was very happy that the Board would be keeping the family together at Waddell, without increasing the budget. He thought the issue had been resolved in a favorable way and. This had been his very first time to go through the budget process and it had been a positive experience for him.

Mr. Rizzo said that over the last couple of weeks there had been a lot of discussion about the collapsing of the 1st Grade class at Waddell: many things had been said. Tonight he particularly wanted to add that class size was the last line of defense in student achievement. The Board had jealously guarded its efforts in that area: tried as hard as it could to ensure it looked first at other areas before looking at reducing teachers, and raising class sizes. It had involved a good deal of analysis because schools varied in their needs. It was important that the Board pay close attention to the class sizes that we have in the district. He too thought the Board had done a good job; they had been consistent. While he thought that thirteen children in a class were a little bit on the low side, it would not take much, in terms of students coming into Waddell, to boost the number. History had a way of repeating itself.

Mr. Rizzo thought the Administration had done a fine job in putting together the reductions needed after the allocation from the Board of Directors. Attention had been paid to selecting items in the budget that would not impact children. Mr. Rizzo thanked Ms. Brooks for her fine wizardry, Dr. Ouellette, and all the Central Office staff.

Ms. Hackett desired there be clear understanding on the Waddell issue as to what the Board was approving, as part of the budget. The Board had committed to keeping a teaching position at Waddell School. It would be at the discretion of the Superintendent, looking at projections, and possible fluctuations, taking place over the summer, to determine how that position would be utilized. It could be a 1st Grade; an all day K. It would vary, based on the assessment that the Superintendent made, in conjunction with the building Principal. The Board was fortunate that it could fund the position, as there had been an unexpected retirement that the Superintendent was able to confirm. That position was coming from Bennet and would be absorbed into the organization. Details were not yet specific.

What the Board had been seeing, during the discussions on Waddell was what she termed "the whim of geography". Dependent on where people moved to, or from, one could get a classroom that would be completely over-subscribed to the tune of 20-22-23 students: then a school that would be completely under-prescribed, with 13 or 15. It was a balancing act. Short of determining our grant funding, she would say class size enrollment was the most unpredictable part of our business: the Board does its best to always maintain that. The Board of Education has a class size policy for elementary students. The acceptable range is 20-25 children. Other alerts sounded once a class reaches 21 or 12 students. By union contract, the Board had to be mindful one teacher was not being overburdened. The Board had committed to do something with forthcoming details.

Ms. Hackett repeated earlier remarks: the budget really prepared us for the future and there was a lot going on in Manchester. We had reconfigured our Middle Schools: had a lot of funds and initiatives going on to support our NEASC, our accreditation initiative at Manchester High School. She thought this budget would, systematically over the years, support the improvements and enhancements required to be made to keep our accreditation. Some things had still to be worked on, particularly physical education issues: we had to be able to offer more electives to our students. She was pleased to see a big investment in educational technology. We were approaching the investment a little bit differently than at first discussed but we would be infusing the system with technology, hardware and servers. There had not been anything like it in recent history.

Ms. Hackett expressed her appreciation to Dr. Ouellette, Ms. Brooks and her staff, who had all worked tirelessly on the numbers. It was always a stressful time for Central Office, Board members, parents, students and staff every time we adopted a budget.

Mr. Pohl asked if he was correct in thinking that the Board was going to use $175,000 to lease/purchase $500,000 worth of information technology equipment over the next three years. Ms. Hackett told him that was correct.

MOTION: Pohl/Rizzo s.v. The Manchester Board of Education unanimously approved the 2006/2007 School Year Budget. 8/0/0.

PUBLIC COMMENTS - II
Mr. Woodson Caine was curious to know why the lease/purchase agreement was not committing future Boards. Ms. Brooks told him that future Board would be committed to a lease payment but that was always up to procreation. The Finance company realized that it would be based on an appropriation by the Board each year.

MOVED: Stafford/Rizzo s.v. The Board of Education approved the motion to adjourn at 10:35 p.m.

Respectfully submitted,

Michael Rizzo, Secretary
Manchester Board of Education