OAK RIDGE SCHOOLS Oak Ridge, Tennessee

Transcription

1 OAK RIDGE SCHOOLS Oak Ridge, Tennessee OAK RIDGE BOARD OF EDUCATION SPECIAL MEETING APRIL 7, 2008 Conference/Seminar Room School Administration Building 7:00 p.m. A special meeting/work session of the Oak Ridge Board of Education was held on Monday, April 7, 2008, in the conference/seminar room of the School Administration Building. Members of the Board present were: Mr. John W. Smith, Jr., Chairman, Ms. Angi Agle, Mr. Dan DiGregorio, Mr. Keys Fillauer, and Ms. Jennifer Richter. Also present were: Dr. Thomas Bailey, Superintendent of Schools, Mr. Ken Green, Assistant Superintendent of Schools, Ms. Karen Gagliano, Director of Business and Support Services, and other staff members. I. CALL TO ORDER The Chairman opened the meeting at 7:00 p.m. He said the first order of business was the Public Hearing on the 2009 Proposed Budget. He explained that he has had several requests to extend the three minute speaking limitation to five minutes, and asked the Board members if they had any objections to doing that. The consensus was to allow the additional two minutes to speak. The Chairman said if anyone had questions to please submit them in writing to the Board, and they would be answered as soon as possible. He explained that following the Public Hearing the meeting would be adjourned, and the Board would go into a work session for deliberations on the 2009 proposed budget. II. PUBLIC HEARING ON THE PROPOSED 2009 BUDGET Mr. Bill Dodge, 110 Baltimore Drive, said he was having problems with transportation and with the logic of why a contractor could provide bus service cheaper than ORS. He explained that he has been told that the reason a contractor could do this cheaper was because they could buy fuel in bulk, and could buy buses cheaper. He said he looked in the budget and found that they were not buying the fuel, ORS was buying the fuel; there was a conflict there. He added that ORS was not buying any buses, and ORS was also paying the insurance. Mr. Dodge explained that it seemed to him that the only way to do this cheaper was to cut the salary of the drivers. He said he was told that would not happen, but from the comments he has heard led him to believe that the Board was craw fishing on that issue. Mr. Dodge explained that every time he read an article in the paper about the problem with transportation or attended one of these meetings where it was discussed, the number one issue being brought up was the problem of hiring and retaining good drivers. He said he did not see how the retention of employees could be improved by cutting their pay. Mr. Dodge pointed out that Laidlaw was paying about $10.00 to $11.00 per hour for drivers in Atlanta, Georgia, First Student started their drivers at $10.50, and ORS was paying just under $15.00

2 Special Board Meeting Minutes -2- April 7, 2008 right now. He said that was a pretty good cut in salary. He noted that the Teamsters Union was on a mission to unionize First Student operations, which was quite successful; Atlanta, Jacksonville, Florida, Chicago, Illinois, and Minneapolis, Minnesota were unionized. Mr. Dodge said he had sent the Board an about two years ago outlining how many people were dissatisfied with Laidlaw s operation; one city was so dissatisfied that they paid 1 million dollars to get out of their contract. He noted that it was stated that a large contractor was talked to, and the only large contractor left that he knew of was First Student, who bought out Laidlaw. Mr. Dodge explained that he has lived in Oak Ridge for 40 years, and did not recall having any issues associated with transportation until three years ago when the Board decided to fix it. He said if the Board wanted to fix transportation, his recommendation was to put it back the way it was before the Board started fooling with it. Ms. Miriam Pitz, 113 Garnet Lane, noted that the Board had discussed at the last work session the possibility of including step increases for teachers in their 16 th through 19 th year of teaching. She commented that for the six years a teacher worked in Oak Ridge, he/she received an automatic 5% step increase, plus a cost of living increase. She said after that, the step increases went down gradually so that a teacher who came back for their 15 th year would receive a 2% increase plus a cost of living increase. Ms. Pitz commented that she hoped the Board would consider implementing a step increase for teachers returning for their 16 th, 17 th, 18 th, or 19 th year of teaching. She said with a 2% step increase in those years, each teacher would receive at least a 4% increase next year. Ms. Pitz spoke about the possibility of starting a community involvement program, and said she would like to see a line item added to the budget to help fund such a program. She explained that people could submit signed or anonymous s to members of the Board who would then provide a summary of the issues to the public, at least annually. She added that it could be as robust as an entire program based on community input. Ms. Pitz added further, that each Board meeting could include a statement about the number of communications received from citizens. Referring to transportation, Ms. Pitz said she was very pleased that the current budget provided for bus service for all Oak Ridge students, which was a big step forward. She voiced concern because the contract estimate that was received in the Transportation Committee meeting appeared to be missing a line item for the future cost of leasing buses. She pointed out that at a cost of $9,000 per year per bus, $135,000 per bus over a 15 year life span would be needed; a bus currently cost ORS $100,000. Ms. Pitz explained that leasing 24 buses, which would have to be done eventually, would cost $216,000 per year, translated into a $400,000 increase in the contracted amount from what was being seen right now. She requested that before the Board made a final decision about contracting transportation, that several bids be solicited for transportation services, and asked that the Board consider the alternate plan for transportation that she had submitted last week.

3 Special Board Meeting Minutes -3- April 7, 2008 Ms. Trina Baughn, 119 Newport Drive, referred to Ms. Pitz s comment about a public forum where the public would be made aware of communications with the Board, and said she fully supported that idea. She explained that in dealing with budget issues and interaction with Board members, and in talking with people over the past year, she was amazed at how many people shared the same concerns, and who have communicated with Board members over and over again, only to be dissatisfied by the response or the lack of response from the Board. Referring to transportation, Ms. Baughn explained that there were many people who wanted to see equal access for all children on buses. She said she thought that originally that was the what the overwhelming message was. She pointed out that over the last year many people have been asking for that, and some of the original feedback heard from the Board was that it did not know how to pay for it. Ms. Baughn said people came up with possible solutions, but any suggestions made were met with the statement that it was a little too late to do anything. She commented that she was happy that there was over a 500% to 600% increase in citizen participation this year at these meetings, compared to the zero participation last year. Referring to the Transportation Committee, Ms. Baughn said it was announced in November that the committee was formed; it did not meet until January 31. She explained that the committee had a plan submitted to it by the Transportation Director, who had worked on it, and was known as the Bustodian Plan. She said the committee was not tasked to do anything, and the day before the new proposal was submitted to the Board an was sent to the committee stating that there was a change of plans, and transportation would be contracted out, because it would be cheaper and better, and to please vote within the next 12 hours so that this information could be sent to the Board. Ms. Baughn explained that this was not enough time for everyone to respond. She said at the following meeting a week later the committee was informed that they were not there to hash out details, it was for staff to figure out, and they just wanted to know what was wanted. She commented that it was known what was wanted and that was to have children safe and to have equal access to transportation. She pointed out that Oak Ridgers spent more money per pupil, e.g., approximately $11,000 more than any other community in this State. She reiterated that all children needed to have equal access to these services. Ms. Baughn said the Board understood that, and had understood it for a long time. She explained that she was very glad that it looked as if progress was being made after all of this time, but it was not done. She said she hoped that the Board did not go back to City Council with this issue to ask for more money. Ms. Baughn said she appreciated the Board s patience, input, and feedback for all of the questions she had submitted over the last year. Ms. Laurie Paine, 86 Valley Forge, said based on the Audit Report, the Fund Balance showed a zero amount, and asked if that was the end of the year balance, or was that what was in the proposed budget for that year. Ms. Gagliano answered that she would have to look it up.

4 Special Board Meeting Minutes -4- April 7, 2008 Ms. Paine said she had previously asked if there was any money left in any of the funds at the end of the year, and if so did those funds roll over back into the same account, and if not, she asked where did they go. She said the response she had received was that everything that was left over from any account rolled back into the Undesignated Fund Balance for one-time expenditures for the following year. She explained that if there was a zero amount as of the Audit Report, and then in there was a total of $1,515,428. She explained she had been told that the projected amount left in that fund this year would be $1,132,061. Ms. Paine said there was only $483,367 that was being proposed to be spent, which was 1/3 of what was in the budgeted amount for the Undesignated Fund Balance. She asked if there was a way that a percentage could be taken each year of what was left in some of those balances for each account and roll them back into that account. She said clearly only about a 1/3 of it was being used on an average per year, and it was rolling into a different account and could not be touched. Ms. Paine said if there was $50,000 left in salaries or transportation, that $50,000 could not be used for that budget, because it would go into the Undesignated Fund Balance for something else. She commented that it seemed to her that it would be logical to at least take a percentage of that and leave it in those funds to help in the next year; there would not be as much of a deficit, or if the Board wanted to increase something the money would be there such as the proposed 2% increase for salaries. Ms. Paine said if the Board had decided to go to a 3% salary increase that would cost another $353,000, but that could not be used if there was any money left, because it went into the mysterious account that could only be used on a one-time basis. She explained that if it was voted on there would have to be staff and program cuts, and so on. Ms. Paine pointed out that if some of that money was left in there to roll over there would be greater room to move in those accounts. She said she would like the Board to consider doing that in the future, even if it was a small percentage it would help different funds for upcoming years; not just for transportation. Ms. Paine referred to Ms. Pitz comment on the community involvement program was one area some of this money could be put into, and to start a small account to look into more issues for the community, to make it a better and safer place to live for children. She commented that it has been said that once the transportation issue was resolved, there would be no safety committee, but there were still safety issues out there for children, i.e., sex offenders, children who still wanted to ride or walk to school who may still have unsafe routes to school. She said those children may not have the proper sidewalks or crosswalks, and some of them still did not have crossing guards. Ms. Paine explained that some of that money could be rolled into that account to start something small, but continue to help the community in other areas that people were concerned about. She said she fully supported Ms. Pitz s recommendation that program be started. Ms. Paine thanked the Board for working on the transportation issue, which has been an ongoing task. She said even though she was not on the safety committee, while she was there this past week, it was frustrating that school staff had taken the time to get parents involved, that there really was not that many there. She pointed out that it seemed to her that a lot of

5 Special Board Meeting Minutes -5- April 7, 2008 the comments being received were not all accurate, because not everyone was not there to voice their opinion, and maybe they would have said that they would like additional quotes for other options presented, and not just giving the answer that they wanted full bus service, but to actually be able to give input on a formal recommendation being made. Mr. Mark Diemer, 105 Mockingbird Lane, speaking as an individual teacher, said he would like clarification on monetary advances for steps 16 through 19, and if that would followthrough the more seasoned teachers who were at steps 30 through 33. He explained that there were over 100 teachers who could be affected positively with some amount of adjustment for those who were past step 20. Mr. Diemer noted that the last adjustment made was in 1994, and that was for step 20; there has not been an adjustment for anyone past step 20. Mr. Diemer pointed out that if he looked at the budget correctly, it was under this year s proposed budget, and asked if he was correct. Ms. Gagliano answered that it was comparing budget to budget, and said part of the confusion in the underspending of the budget was that there were some issues this past year, i.e., recording of a lease, using more one-time money, and all of those had made the previous budget more than this year. She said revenues and expenditures balanced so there were less revenues matching less expenditures. Ms. Gagliano noted that ORS was within the allocation that the City has stated. She said she was not sure what Mr. Diemer wanted. Mr. Diemer explained that it looked to him that they were 8/10 of 1% under this year s budget, and he thought there was another 4% that the City had. Ms. Gagliano said that was a one-time money issue. She said more revenues were needed to support more expenditures. Mr. Diemer thanked the members of the Board for all of the hours they put in researching and studying issues behind the scenes. He said they were appreciated for all of their hard work. Ms. Michelle Doka, 255 Gum Hollow Road, also thanked the members of the Board for their service to the community. She said she also supported Ms. Pitz s idea and the step increases for the years 16 through 20 for teachers, because they worked very hard and that was a long period of time not to get anything extra. Ms. Doka explained that she also supported a Community Engagement Task Force, which was a new idea that has been floating around different school systems. She said it would engage citizens in different dialogs of communications, and a task force would determine different ways citizens would be able to that. She noted that she had information on that if the Board members were interested. Ms. Doka said she thought it was mandated in Colorado that school boards would have to do that within their communities. She supported adding that to the budget and the information she had contained good suggestions on how to fund it. The Chairman pointed out that one of the hot topics around the country right now was community involvement. He said Mr. DiGregorio and he had attended several sessions that dealt with community involvement at the National School Boards Association (NSBA) conference. He explained that one session addressed community involvement in allowing a blogging site to be hosted by either a Board member or for a Board to allow feedback back

6 Special Board Meeting Minutes -6- April 7, 2008 and forth; he did not get the finer points of that, but Mr. DiGregorio had brought back information in a handout that he wanted to share. The Chairman said the Board was looking at different avenues, and did appreciate the input provided this evening. Mr. DiGregorio said there were very good discussions on blogging sites and community communications, because many people have the same issues and that was community involvement. ADJOURNMENT The Chairman adjourned the Public Forum at 7:28 p.m. WORK SESSION I CALL TO ORDER. The Chairman called the work session to order at 7:29 p.m.. A copy of a Special Report to the Board: Transportation Committee Report, April 7, 2008, was attached to the agenda materials. II. A Proposed Budget The Chairman said since the Board has gone through the budget document line item by line item, he asked if there were any corrections or adjustments to be made before the Board began deliberations. The Superintendent referred to page 33, Line Item Regular Instructional Technology-System wide, and explained that there was a base every year of $74,110. He said that was where the support for a library automation initiative would take place, and also included were non-recurring funds of $131,500 for maintenance of systemwide instructional software. The Superintendent recalled that six years ago the Student Management System came in place, and Chancery was the software used. He explained that this past year Chancery was bought out by Pearson, and throughout the year, Mr. Ray Thach, Director of Technology and Information Systems and staff, have been involved in looking how to approach that. He said they had evaluated Pearson s new module and ended up going to Skyward in trying to be the sift agent with all of those bits of information from transportation to attendance to Human Resources to finance, instead of all these individual pieces of paper going in all directions. The Superintendent pointed out that staff evaluated Pearson s new module along with Skyward, because Skyward was the plan ORS went with for Human Resources and Finance. The Superintendent explained that Skyward has a module in it that dealt with e-class grades, because staff was changing from Chancery being bought out by Pearson and

7 Special Board Meeting Minutes -7- April 7, 2008 now teachers would have to be trained with a new program for next year. Mr. Thach, Jeff Edmonds, Supervisor of Data Services, and a committee of teachers evaluated that, and overwhelmingly said that the Skyward module would do that. He explained that was to ORS advantage, because a license fee was already being paid for Skyward. He said the money for staff training was left out. He proposed that the Board look at Line Item Debt Service Principal, on page 75, and reduce that line item by $53,000, and to add it to Line Item Regular Instructional Technology-System wide. Ms. Gagliano explained that it was broken down between principle and interest, so it would be coming out of Line Item Debt Service - Principal and Line Item Debt Service - Interest. The Superintendent pointed out that it would not require any additional money in the budget. Ms. Gagliano said Ms. Donna Farmer, Supervisor of Staff Development and Special Projects, had gotten notification that the Title I funds would be increasing by $92,173 over what was included in the budget. Ms. Gagliano explained that staff would be adjusting revenues and expenditures, and said she would adjust those pages and give the Board an update. She explained that Title I was one of the allocations that went toward the Preschool. The Chairman asked what was the increase for. Ms. Farmer replied that Title I was increased at the federal level and that was passed down to the State. The Chairman pointed out that Federal Projects Revenues was on page 15 of the budget document. He referred to the amount of $606,812 in Line Item Title I, and asked if the increase of $92,173 would be added here. Ms. Gagliano responded that the amount would be $ She added that those funds were earmarked for Title I expenditures. Ms. Gagliano explained that she had some small adjustments, word changes, housekeeping things, and none of them affected the bottom line of the budget. She said she would make the changes and send the new pages to the members of the Board and anyone else who had a copy of the budget. The Superintendent recalled that the Board requested that he look at the proposed responses to OREA and the Administrator s requests; Dr. Christine Lee, Director of Human Resources, had put together a chart. Increase the base salary by 4.0% to a minimum of $35,821 He explained that both of the organizations had proposed a 4% COLA, and the recommendation made was 2%. He said it was indicated from the State, that Governor Bredesen would propose a 2% salary increase; that was preliminary, it may materialize and it may not. The Superintendent noted that if it did materialize 2% could be supported. He explained that it was all about the recurring dollars in the

8 Special Board Meeting Minutes -8- April 7, 2008 budget, because the minute a step was increased or anything along those lines the dollars have to be there on a continuous basis; it went into retirement formulas and other issues related to that. The Chairman clarified that there have been discussions that Governor Bredesen may rescind a 2% salary increase and recommend a 1% instead. Ms. Agle explained that there was an article in a Nashville paper this morning that indicated that the Governor may take a second look at State employee raises. She wondered if the teacher salary increases in the education budget were usually tied to the same rate as State employees. She said she thought they were. The Superintendent said it broke his heart to be able to only recommend a 1% salary increase, because that was all he could do. He pointed out that the reality was that the funding had to be in recurring dollars. He said that a 1% salary increase represented approximately $348,000. Increase all eligible personnel by one (1) experience increment The Superintendent explained that all eligible employees were increased by one increment. Provide dental, hearing, and eye care benefits of 80% of $1500 every 12 months per employee The Superintendent explained that one adjustment was made for this request. He said no action was taken to increase monetary benefits or to add a second pair of glasses, which the Administrators had requested. He pointed out that a request for hearing was added, i.e., there may be employees who wanted to use that 80% of $1,000 for hearing, eye, or dental. He said the addition of hearing was added to this benefit, and to let employees decide if they wanted to use 80% of that $1,000 for eye, dental, or hearing. Increase the total percentage amount paid on our health insurance policy by 5% on an individual policy and 5% on a family policy No action was taken. Provide one additional personal leave day for full-time staff members No action was taken. Provide a one-time bonus pay of $100 for certificated staff for each year of service with the Oak Ridge Schools, payable upon retirement. The maximum bonus paid will be capped at $3,000 for 30 years or more of service. No action was taken for recurring dollars. Referring to steps, the Superintendent explained that some school systems have steps

9 Special Board Meeting Minutes -9- April 7, 2008 that extend to 32 years; ORS steps were compressed. He said there was some advantage to teachers and staff in regard to that compression, but at the same time it was all about having the money to add recurring dollars in there. The Superintendent summarized by saying actions taken were a 2% COLA, a one increment increase for all of those eligible, and that hearing be added to the benefits of eye care, dental, or hearing, and that hearing be added as an additional option for teachers. Special Report to the Board: Transportation Committee Report Mr. Green said the report was a brief summary of the activities related to the Transportation Committee, and a recommendation to be presented to the Board from the committee. He recalled that on January 31, the first meeting of the Transportation Committee was held; it was comprised of a group of administrator s and community stakeholders. He explained that the purpose of that meeting was outlined at the initial meeting. Mr. Green referred to the agenda of that meeting that was included in the agenda materials and noted that the purpose and charge of the committee was: A. Support safety measures for students crossing major intersections through transportation services. B. Determine how to increase transportation services to all students with available funding sources. C. Provide a recommendation to the Superintendent and the Board of Education for FY 09 Budget. Mr. Green pointed out that there was a total of three meetings; the first two meetings lasted approximately an hour, the third one lasted almost two hours, and they were concise. He said they had tried to respect the time people were committed to this and were taken away from family or other activities. He explained that they had tried to stay on point in most of the cases, and he believed that they were able to do that. Mr. Green said it would appear from some of the comments made this evening that some of that may be interpreted as speeding through the process. Mr. Green explained that he did not think they were speeding through the process. He said their committee s charge was very specific and did not lend itself to a great deal of deviation from the point. He also thought that people got to their position rather quickly, i.e., it was evident that there was much dissatisfaction with the current level of service. Mr. Green said it was very clear that budgetary constraints made it unlikely that the district would return to the previous level of service which could be described as being full service.

10 Special Board Meeting Minutes -10- April 7, 2008 Mr. Green explained that a discussion and review of the current level of service that was referred to as the mile walk zone, and the previous service that was referred to as full service, and what the desired level of service would be had taken place. He explained that Ms. Gagliano and Mr. Clifford Bunch, Supervisor of Transportation, developed a plan that was presented at the initial meeting. He explained that the plan later became known as the Bustodian Plan that utilized bus drivers in both a driver capacity and a custodian capacity. He said that plan was put forward as a framework for people to work from, or the committee had the option of trashing that proposal all together and working from scratch to build another plan. Mr. Green pointed out that there was a significant amount of support for the Bustodian Plan by the committee, and there was a good deal of discussion relating to the details, as well as a lot of information about understanding just how transportation functioned and how it was budgeted for, i.e., what were the costs associated with transportation. Mr. Green said there were a lot of questions answered via , as well as time for administrators to work on the budget development, and information was also received about the 2009 revenue. Referring to the cost of the Bustodian Plan, Mr. Green explained that it was apparent that there would be a significant increase to the district, and that information was shared with the committee at the second meeting. He said it was at the second meeting that it was determined to move forward with a crafting of a recommendation around the Bustodian Plan, but it was the committee s desire, and this point was overlooked in the process, that these services should be considered through a contractor to see what it would cost. He explained that was done in the process, and there was, admittedly, a very short turnaround where that proposal was put together, and feedback was asked for that led to the third meeting. Mr. Green pointed out that in the third meeting committee members reviewed again, the committee s proposal, and asked if they were on track or if modifications were needed to be made, and reiterated that if there were individuals who had not spoken up and felt that they needed to speak up, there was time to make that opportunity available. Mr. Green noted that significant modifications were not received at that time to the recommendation, and that the preferred service was service at the level of the Bustodian Plan. He said how that would come out in the terms of contracting would be open to discussion and debate within the Board. He pointed out that in making a recommendation that this was the level of service they would like, and suggesting that they look at contracting services was far from saying that they would contract the services; that would be a decision left to the Board, and the details would be worked out and discussed with the Board. Mr. Green said what had been received at the end of this proposal was the recommendation from the committee and the considerations that they also wanted factored in.

11 Special Board Meeting Minutes -11- April 7, 2008 Mr. Green read the formal recommendation to the Board from the Transportation Committee: The committee of whole recommends the following for consideration by Oak Ridge Schools Board of Education: Reinstate bus service to all students residing in Oak Ridge including those within the mile radius of a given school. Eliminate door to door pick-up in exchange for strategically placed bus stops requiring that no student walk more than.25 of a mile (.15 for elementary) to reach a bus stop and no student be required to cross a major intersection in order to reach a bus stop. Considerations: The committee recommends that the Board consider contracting the aforementioned services if said contract proves to be more cost effective to the district. The committee understands that in order to accomplish this plan middle and high school routes may have to be combined in the afternoon. The committee understands that this is a cost savings component of the plan but would like the Board to consider not combining these two routes in the afternoon. Mr. Green explained that the last point was a detail that came out in discussing some of the technical issues related to the way Oak Ridge did transportation and the number of tiers that it has when the Preschool, elementary schools, middle schools, and the high school were counted, and the way to eliminate those tiers would reduce routes and dollars. He said even though the route for middle and high school was combined in the morning right now, there was great concern over combining it in the afternoon. Mr. Green pointed out that the committee went through it a couple of times in discussion, and asked again if that was something that they still felt that needed to be a consideration that the Board heard. He said it was strongly felt that it was, and it was included in this recommendation. Mr. Green said attached to the recommendation was the chart that outlined the cost of the current service, the Bustodian Proposal, and the Bustodian s level of service through a contractor that was based on an estimate and not on actual. He pointed out that the three agendas from each meeting were also attached. He said once the minutes from each of the meetings were finalized and approved they would be forwarded to the Board. The Chairman pointed out that Mr. DiGregorio was the Board s liaison on the committee. He thanked all of the people who were part of the committee.

12 Special Board Meeting Minutes -12- April 7, 2008 Mr. Fillauer asked if the Board accepted this proposal, would it also be accepting the budgetary amount that was in the current budget. Ms. Gagliano answered that it was currently embeded in the budget. She explained that if the budget was approved or accepted as is, it would include that provision. Mr. Fillauer inquired if that did occur, would staff be comfortable that the amount in there cover the contract the Board would have to approve; he said that was a difficult question to answer, because it was all supposition. He explained that he was asking that question because he would not want to get into contract negotiations and suddenly find that ORS was $100,000 short with what the proposal was in the contract. Mr. Fillauer wondered if there was some leeway so there was something to work with if the contract was negotiated that would not go beyond what was set aside in the budget. Mr. Green explained that a different question might be if the Board decided not to do contracted services, what type of service would ORS have, and what would it cost. He said Mr. Fillauer s question that if the actual bid for services came in higher, ORS would be in a similar dilemma as if staff elected not to contract at all, and there would be costs that were not in this budget that would have to be inserted back into it. The Chairman asked when would the Board know, which was one of the reasons why he had asked for the date this had to be at City Council. He pointed out that the Board was scheduled to approve the budget on Thursday, April 10, and if there were not hard figures to work with by then, the Board may not feel comfortable approving a budget. He also recalled that the transmission date to City Council was Friday, April 11, and if the Board did not have anything by then it would have to ask if this could be done sometime next week. Ms. Gagliano explained that in her communications with City representatives, their bottom line was to know if the Board was staying within the allocations that they had budgeted; that was the most important piece of information to know as far as they were concerned. She pointed out that right now, the budget stood that way, and if there was not an answer by Thursday, the Board would still have time to go back, as long as the Board did not play with the figure being asked from the City, to work within their own budget. She pointed out that if the Board went back to the current level of service, a reduction of approximately $100,000 would have to be made somewhere else in the budget to cover that cost. Ms. Gagliano said she thought the number in the budget was pretty concrete, based on all of the information provided, but she said she could not guarantee it because it was an estimate. Mr. Fillauer clarified that under a potential proposed contract, ORS would continue to own the buses until those buses were no longer able to be in service. He said once

13 Special Board Meeting Minutes -13- April 7, 2008 those buses went out of service, it would be up to the contracted agency to provide the buses. Ms. Gagliano answered that was correct, and a cost would be passed onto the Board for adding those buses; an approximate estimate of $9,000 per bus, per year was received. She thought the first year, e.g., 2010 or 2011, was when buses that went out of service would need to be replaced. The Chairman noted that ORS would have to prepare for that cost for 2010 or Ms. Gagliano pointed out that it would be $9,000 per bus instead of $100,000. The Superintendent said to remember that there was not $315,000 in this current budget, and that one-time money would have to be put in each year just to be ready for that date. Ms. Richter said she was concerned because as she looked at the differences between what ORS would have with the current service and what it would cost versus the Bustodian proposal; it would save ORS approximately $100,000. She pointed out that the idea of combining middle and high school students on a bus, and adjusting middle school release time on Wednesdays concerned her, and was also a concern voiced by the committee. Ms. Richter commented that those were fairly significant things, and said she would like to hear more about what the committee was thinking or what might be run into down the road. She explained that since she has been on the Board, they have adjusted start times, end times, bus times, and sometimes she thought the tail was wagging the dog. She said she wanted to be assured by someone that these were not just little footnotes, because they seemed significant to her. Ms. Richter noted that she was also concerned about the length of the bus route; if the middle school and high school students were combined, who would be on the bus for how long. Mr. Green referred to the issue of combining middle school and high school students, and said it was an issue that came up in the development of the Bustodian proposal, and was debated a great deal within the committee during that time. He explained that he did not hear it described as non-negotiable, only as a factor that had to be considered in this structure. He said doing it differently may have other costs, e.g., $66,000, that may have to be talked about. Mr. Green pointed out that the reason it was in there as a consideration was that there were strong feelings along those lines, and it was felt to do it justice it would be included. He said he would agree on the middle school release time, and he shared that, not in the committee, but in internal conversations. He commented that a decision to change the school day would not be a transportation decision, but a curriculum decision in terms of usage of instructional time, and how much time was necessary. Mr. Green said he was not comfortable, nor would he recommend that the decision be made solely based on the transportation requirement, and he did not think he would have to. He explained that the movement that could occur in that area was a discussion that staff was having prior to the bus conversation, when in the internal curriculum discussions staff was informed of the significant difference between the

14 Special Board Meeting Minutes -14- April 7, 2008 middle school instructional day on Wednesday versus the other buildings instructional time as a result of the adjustment. Mr. Green said this discussion about instructional time on Wednesday was tabled for a later conversation on the middle schools. Ms. Richter said if this was implemented, and the middle and high school delivery was compressed at the end of the day, how long would students be sitting on a bus. Mr. Bunch answered that their time would almost stay the same, because the number of buses would be added. He explained how the process would work, and pointed out that the amount of time in the way it was broken up was shorter, time wise. Ms. Richter clarified that at the end of the day, a middle school student would get on a bus at 2:45 p.m., and then go to the high school, because their dismissal time was 2:50 p.m. Mr. Green pointed out that this was currently done in the morning right now, but it was done the other way around. Mr. Bunch explained that the way it was drawn up there would be five buses at the high school, i.e., three buses would be for Robertsville Middle School (RMS), and two would be for Jefferson Middle School (JMS). He said the students would get on their respective buses, and then they would go to RMS and to JMS; they would pull in behind the buses already sitting there. He explained that the high school students would get off and go to the buses that they were supposed to go to, and the ones who stayed on the bus would travel on. Ms. Richter said she was not sure that was making any sense to her. She explained that if the middle school students got out at 2:45 p.m., which it did, it would mean that they would be on the bus first. She said if the high school students did not get on the bus until 2:50 p.m. that would mean that the middle school students would be dismissed at 2:45 p.m., and then what would they do. Mr. Green explained that the way Mr. Bunch described it was the way it was drawn up with an adjustment to the end times; that was just on Wednesday. He said he did not know if it has to be in that order. Ms. Richter pointed out that it went to her initial question of how much time would a student be on a bus, because some of them spent a lot of time on a bus already. She said if that was going to be added to it, and have them pause and wait at two schools, she wanted to know that before she made a decision on this. Mr. Bunch explained that he did not think the middle school students would be loaded on buses until the high school students got there. The Superintendent said one of the issues was Rarity Ridge, and at the other end of town was the Centennial area, which appeared to the longest bus routes now; that probably averaged 40 minutes. He asked what was the average time a student spent on a bus now. Mr. Bunch replied that the longest time would be about one hour. Mr. DiGregorio recalled that it was said the start time would not be adjusted unless there was an academic or curriculum issue. He explained that the last time dismissal times were changed it was done solely on the basis of transportation issues, because

15 Special Board Meeting Minutes -15- April 7, 2008 students could not get from the middle schools to the elementary schools within the allotted time. Mr. Green answered yes, that was done, and in his opinion they would not make that kind of decision unless it was being made for academic reasons. The Superintendent pointed out at that staff should and could adjust times in some cases which was done, because at that time there were approximately 652 students who were waiting around school anywhere from 15 to 25 minutes. He said a 45 minute window between the different levels had been taken at that time, because Oak Ridge furnished its transportation by the different separation of levels, where most school systems in Tennessee put Kindergarten through grade 12 on the same bus, which was a one-tier system; Oak Ridge has a three-tier system. The Superintendent explained that staff did not want to do that. The Chairman pointed out that what complicated matters was that ORS also did door-to-door drop-off and pickup. The Superintendent pointed out that currently, middle and high students were picked up together in the morning. He said in trying to still provide services for all students to ride the bus, and being picked up without crossing any major intersections, the question was how could it be done within the dollars available. He explained that one thing was to say that instead of five buses used to deliver middle school students separately in the afternoon, and five buses used to deliver high students in the afternoon, that could be consolidated to save some money since that was already being done in the morning. The Superintendent noted that the issue was parents did not want middle school students riding with high school students in the afternoon on buses, but there was not an objection to that in the morning, because students were not awake enough to worry about issues with each other. The Superintendent said he did not agree with that, because the problems he has had as a principal and superintendent could occur in the morning or in the afternoon; it could occur at any school at any time. The Superintendent pointed out that the recommendation on this proposal coming to the Board would be based on the actual routes that the Board has studied in terms of the.25 and.15 pickup, and in the number of buses it would take to do that. He said even when the Board adjusted times during the year for the elementary schools, the Board had made a determination to do so, and then had to decide what to cut from the existing budget. The Superintendent explained that before it was approved, bids have to be in, staff would want those bids and have a presentation presented. He recalled that this was done with ARAMARK in Food Service, and part of the reason that was beneficial was that it gave health benefits to all Food Service employees. He said as he understood it, contracting the buses would provide health benefits and also Workers Compensation in the summer. He explained that all of those would be in the proposal. The Superintendent pointed out that one of the questions that the Board had asked was whether or not it has to be bid. He said staff would like to see it bid, because

16 Special Board Meeting Minutes -16- April 7, 2008 there would be greater competition by doing that, regardless if it was a major company or somebody bought out somebody. He explained that the Board did not take bids just based on the lowest bids, they were based on what provided the best service; the goal and objective was to move the bid process quickly to meet the legal deadlines, and to also make sure that they have the specifics to identify the bus routes, and what the committee has put forward to provide the service to children. Ms. Agle said if she remembered correctly, years ago lunch at the high school on Wednesdays was abbreviated, and questioned whether or not the lunches were now the normal 50 minute periods that they were on Monday, Tuesday, Thursday, and Friday. Mr. Green answered that he did not have the history to know whether it was different, but right now lunch was the normal length of time. He said the issue that had come up in curriculum conversations was not around the high school s instructional time on Wednesday as much as it was around the middle school s instructional time on that day. Mr. Green explained there was a discussion among principals and others in his office about how much time was being lost on Wednesday in the middle schools, in comparison to the other levels, based on the start and end times on Wednesday. Mr. Fillauer referred to the 3 rd paragraph, 4 th sentence, in the report,...thus, it was recommended by the committee that the Board consider the same level of service in the Bustodian Plan but delivering it through the services of a contractor, and asked if the recommendation would be to go to a contractor and use the Bustodian Plan. Mr. Green replied no, when the Bustodian level of service was referred to, it was transportation for all students, even those within the mile radius; it was the elimination of door-to-door pickup exchange,.25 and.15 elementary. He said it was for that level of service, not using bus drivers as custodians. Ms. Pitz pointed out that she was on that committee and from what she understood they specifically did not recommend that they use the services of a contractor to get that level of service. She said that was taken out of the proposal. Mr. DiGregorio said she was correct on that; she had specifically struck that. Mr. Green explained that what was done was that it was struck from the body of it and moved to the consideration. He said it was moved there, because it was most definitely a consideration of the committee to have it looked at for contracted services. Mr. Green pointed out that Ms. Pitz had requested, and the majority of the committee agreed, that it not be included in the actual recommendation, but be included in the considerations, which was later termed caveats; the minutes would reflect that. Mr. DiGregorio clarified that right now there was not service for students within a mile if they were middle or high school students. He asked if it was decided not to contract and keep the same level of service that ORS had right now, how much would that cost. Ms. Gagliano answered that $100,000 would have to be found, plus

17 Special Board Meeting Minutes -17- April 7, 2008 $315,000 out of onetime money, which was the only place to get it. Mr. DiGregorio noted that the total was $415,000. He asked if ORS had the same level of service that it has right now, how much would it cost if it was contracted out. Ms. Gagliano replied that there was not a number on that, because it was not what the committee wanted. Mr. DiGregorio asked if there was the same level of service now, plus middle and high school within a mile, Rarity Ridge, and Tennessee School for the Deaf, how much would that cost through a contract. Ms. Gagliano responded that if she was hearing Mr. DiGregorio correctly, it was embedded in the budget now, which ultimately saved ORS $100,000. Mr. DiGregorio questioned if it was not contracted what would it cost. Ms. Gagliano answered that ORS would have to come up with $100,000 plus the $315,000. The Chairman pointed out that it was to keep it at the current level. He explained that from what he was reading there would be another cost associated with the Bustodian model. He said this was information that Board members should take into consideration as deliberations continued, and go through the details of the budget. The Chairman asked the Board members if there were any other comments or questions on the line items in the budget, or any changes that they would like to discuss. Ms. Richter said several Board members had questions about steps at the last work session, specifically steps 16 through 19, and then step 21. She explained that Ms. Gagliano had provided the Board with a lot of information and she had more questions to ask. Ms. Richter said she was thinking about adding another step at 16. She requested that Ms. Gagliano review the information she had provided to the Board. Ms. Gagliano explained that she was at a loss, because she had brought it to the meeting electronically, but for some reason it did not pickup the updates that she had done past the first sheet. Ms. Richter said she had hard copies to share, and pointed out that there was a huge cost difference in the items that were costed out for the Board, and asked for an explanation for those. Ms. Gagliano explained that in addition to those, Ms. Agle had sent some questions that were related to that. She pointed out that originally, her understanding was that Ms. Richter had a desire to increase the index in proportion to.02 increments. She explained that she had taken the concept that currently, steps 16, 17, 18, and 19 were all the same. Ms. Gagliano said she increased steps 16 through 19 by the same factor on the index at.02, because she thought that the same pattern was wanted. She pointed out that the cost came out to $32,500; she was not sure that the same index principle would be used or not at step 21. She said she did not use it, because it was being added at the end of the schedule and would not affect anything beyond that as steps 16 through 19 would, i.e., if she had increased the steps 16 through 19 pattern by.06, then step 20 would be less than those steps, so that would have to be increased also. Ms. Gagliano pointed out that she had tried to keep it within the