JUNCTION CITY SCHOOL DISTRICT
BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING
WITH BUDGET HEARING
June 25, 2007
Board of Directors
Randy Trummer, Vice-Chair
Bill Bechen, Laurel Principal
Tom Endersby, Oaklea Principal
Amy Lesan, Laurel Principal (& Molly)
Alan Adler, Territorial Principal
Kathleen Rodden-Nord, Superintendent
Wanda McClure, Business Manager
Kathryn Hedrick, High School Principal
Malcom McRae, High School Assistant Principal
Staff and Others
Mike Thoele, Tri-County News
Vice-Chair Trummer called the work session to order at 5:30 p.m. Vice-Chair Trummer – Enclosed in your packets was a summary form that was submitted to us by Stephanie and it reflects the evaluations that several board members sent in. Are there are any questions about the evaluation or are there any clarifying comments or remarks? Superintendent Rodden-Nord – I would just want to give to the board a copy of another board member’s evaluation that came in after this was put together. This evaluation is not incorporated into the summary that you have in front of you. Mike Tucker – I think this represents pretty well the job that Kate does. Superintendent Rodden-Nord – I appreciate the time people took in completing this. As I have said in the past, the parts that are most helpful to me are the comments that the board members provide. Mike Tucker – I would like to reiterate what I wrote in my evaluation. It has to do with the way you treat people and your kindness and the way you are always welcoming to input even though it might be different from yours. There isn’t a place on this form to put this, but you have such an open and engaging manner and anytime someone has something they want to come and talk to you about, they can come and do it. It’s just nice working with someone who has that kind of attitude toward people. Denise Pratt – That is true for the board, and it is also true for the community and staff. It’s hard on this form because there is no place to talk about your character. It’s probably not appropriate in a situation like this, but it’s such a blessing to participate on a board with somebody who has such a high standard for themselves, and that pretty consistently lifts us, as a board, up to that standard as well; and I really appreciate it. Superintendent Rodden-Nord – Thank you. I really didn’t plan this to be so public so I could have all of these compliments heard in front of all of these people. I really do appreciate the time that you took to fill these out, your thoughts, and the feedback; and I appreciate the work that you do as board members and your encouragement and support of me. Thank you. Vice-Chair Trummer – For this work session, is there a consensus from the board to have this collection of forms and this additional form, and of course Judy’s additional form represent the Superintendent’s summative evaluation? It was a consensus from the board to have this collection of forms, including Jacque and Judy’s forms, represent the Superintendent’s summative evaluation.
Work session adjourned at 5:44 p.m.
Vice-Chair Trummer called the budget hearing to order at 5:45 p.m. Vice-Chair Trummer – This is the last opportunity for public comment on the proposed 07-08 budget before it is adopted by the board. Are there any comments? Jill Schmitt – I would like the board to consider more money for raises. Julie Ankeny – The classified bargaining team has spent many hours during this past school year trying to work out a satisfactory contract for the classified employees with the district. At our last meeting on Wednesday, we were told that the board had not authorized the district bargainers to offer us any more money. We are here to ask that you seriously reconsider this position. The district will be given significant financial support from the state for 07/08 and 08/09. We are thrilled that these resources are available to meet the need for additional staff, equipment, and programs. As you busily move forward with all of this, please do not forget those who weathered the storm with you when financial resources were limited. The classified staff – instructional assistants, cooks, custodians, and secretaries were understanding and worked hard, like everyone else to “make due” with less. We ask that you reward the classified staff for their dedication and loyalty to the district and its goals of educating our children. We need the salary and insurance increases proposed during recent bargaining negotiations. As a sidebar – as a parent, I am very happy about the PE position. Vice-Chair Trummer – Thank you. Are there any other comments on the proposed 07-08 budget before it’s adopted by the board? Wanda – We received official notice that we will be receiving additional money in a school improvement fund. The general fund money that we will be receiving is about what we budgeted at the $6.0 billion level. In addition to that, there is $0.245 billion available to districts. There is a process where you need to apply for the money, but if you apply and you have an appropriate plan that follows the criteria that they have set, then you will more than likely get the money. The criteria is pretty narrow and so what we did, and you can see it on the white board, is the administrators met and looked at what was already in the budget, the red column, that is new for next year that would qualify under the criteria and it could be part of the school improvement fund. Our proposal is to take these items and move them to the school improvement fund, which allows us to go down on the tiers in the budget. We looked at the tiers again, reprioritized, and moved the things in the red to the school improvement fund, which gave us room to add some of the tiers. On the top of the list was the PE teacher at Laurel and Territorial, new lab at the high school, .50 FTE Oaklea health teacher, a technology assistant for Howard, and a .1 FTE instructional assistant time at the high school to help with testing. In addition to that, we had more money coming into the school improvement fund, so we looked at some more things that were on this list and some other things that would meet the criteria and the following was added: .33 FTE auto shop teacher at the high school, we brought the nurse up to full-time, more time for the college/career coach at the high school, brought the remediation teacher at the middle school up to full-time, we looked at providing seven scholarships for English-language-learners to attend the all-day kindergarten, and then looked at a summer school program, and then at the high school an Odyssey program, which is a remediation program. Superintendent Rodden-Nord – There are very specific things that school districts will be approved to spend the school improvement money on, which is why we had to move some of the items that had been added in the general fund to the school improvement fund. The bottom line is that the funds are to be spent on programs to boost student achievement and the things that the legislature identified are: 1) Early childhood support, including pre-kindergarten and full-day kindergarten. That is how we got to the place where we were looking at being able to offer more slots to economically disadvantaged kids who don’t have English as a first language, in our all-day kindergarten program, which currently is a fee-based program. 2) Class size reduction, focusing on K-3. That was a little trickier because we do have a class size reduction teacher planned in the budget, but it was for the 4 th grade, so that was one of those things that we had to leave in the first tier additions in the general fund. 3) Summer programs and before and after school programs. Again, summer school and extended-day kinds of programs that you see listed there would be appropriate uses of the school improvement fund. 4) Mentoring, teacher retention, professional development. We are looking to enhance the funds available for professional development for our teaching staff as well as having some more of our administrative time dedicated specifically to mentoring and particularly with the goal of retaining special ed staff. 5) Remediation, alternative learning, student retention. Those are the kinds of things that you see there with respect to the remediation teacher, the Odyssey program, and so on. 6) Services to at-risk youth. We see the increase in the nursing time being a great way to address that, allowing her a little more time to do some social service connections for kids. 7) Programs targeting the achievement gap. Again that piece with the ELL students having the opportunity to be in an all-day kindergarten and have more language emersion. 8) Vocational education. A number of the things that we are suggesting fit into that, including the auto shop program, reinstituting some small engine course work. The college career coach position, which will hopefully give kids more just-in-time information about opportunities for colleges or different kinds of careers or professions. 9) Literacy programs and other research-based student improvement strategies approved by the state board of education. When we have something that isn’t just exactly point on that list, we are going to have to go to the ODE website, find the reference to the research-based strategies and cite that in our application. Denise – What kind of hope do we have that they will offer us enough money to keep these programs in the future? They all sound wonderful and I am so happy to have them, I don’t want it to be a one-year thing. Superintendent Rodden-Nord – I can appreciate that, and that is something that we are all a little nervous about. We do know that the intention is for the funding to be there for the biennium, and what we have heard, although no one has stated this under oath, is that the intention would be for that money, in the next biennium, to become part of just the base general fund budget. That is the way we are going to suggest that we approach this, is to look at these things over the next two years and of course evaluate their effectiveness and make sure that they are a good fit for us, but also to make it clear that this really does need to be our basic program; that these aren’t just fluffy add-on things, these are things that we need to be doing to help improve students’ achievement and help prepare kids for life after Junction City School District. Jacque – But right now we are treating these as one-time shot money, school improvement only? Wanda – We have to keep this completely separate so we can report back to the state how we spent the money. We have to ask for the money and provide a plan first and then report to them how we did spend it and probably give them a summary of how effective it was. When we put the budget together, we accepted that there was a good possibility that we might be receiving this money, so we put this budget together with that in mind, so we really don’t have to make any changes in the budget when we adopt it because we budgeted enough so that we could cover these expenditures. Vice-Chair Trummer – When we get to the 08-09 budgeting in the spring, we will want to dig this up and use exactly these same numbers, right? Wanda – They could increase slightly in the second year and they usually do a 49%-51% split between the two years. Vice-Chair Trummer – Thanks Wanda. Are there any other comments from the public about the 07-08 budget before it’s adopted by the board? No.
Budget Hearing adjourned at 5:57 p.m.
- CALL TO ORDER/PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE – Vice-Chair Trummer called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. and those in attendance said the pledge of allegiance.
- AGENDA REVIEW – There was an addendum: Under Action Items, K, was added – Approve request for voluntary reduction in FTE for Amy Lesan, Principal at Laurel Elementary, from 1.0 FTE to .50 FTE, for the 2007-2008 school year.
- Gifts to the District – Vice-Chair Trummer read the list of donations and thanked those who donated. List attached to the official minutes in the district office.
- Katy DeHaven – Student Representative to the Board 2007-08 – Oath of Office – Katy was not present at the meeting; this item will be placed on the next agenda.
- DISTRICT UPDATE – Superintendent Rodden-Nord – Because tonight’s agenda is so long, I will keep this short. I would like to say, however, that we had a wonderful end to a really great school year. I would also like to express my deepest gratitude to our staff, our parents, our board, and our community; I think that the contributions of all those people I just named have gone a long way toward making the kids in Junction City the recipients of a really quality education. Thank you. Thanks again to JCEA, not only for the desserts that they brought for our enjoyment tonight, but also again to just say how much I appreciate the collaborative nature of our relationship and the willingness the association has evidenced in terms of being willing to sit down and work through tough issues and keep an open mind, and hopefully we come up with solutions that are good for everybody.
- TEACHERS’ ASSOCIATION REPORT – Kate Gillow-Wiles – Last week I spent two days at OEA’s headquarters doing ‘Experienced President’ training, and after four years, I was the most experienced. One of the most interesting things that I had a chance to do was talk to other presidents about their relationship with their school board and their superintendent. There are other associations that have a report at school board meetings, some of them very similar to what I do. Other ones have to go during the public input because the school board won’t put them on the agenda. It really helped me to appreciate the relationship we have with our school board and our superintendent; it really hammered home how good our association has it. I also talked to other people about meetings with the superintendent. I think we have one of the most informal ones. Others do meet with the superintendents, or the human resources person, or the assistant superintendent, and they all sounded pretty formal. I think we do a good job. Superintendent Rodden-Nord – I think we do too. On a Wednesday or a Tuesday every month you might find a group of us; myself and a board member or two and folks from the JCEA’s executive board, at the JC Café having some iced tea and maybe a dessert, trying to figure stuff out. Kate – It’s been a useful way of doing problem solving and I have felt like the group has been real collaborative, and I just wanted to say thank you. The other thing I wanted to say was that I hope that you would help the classified bargaining team and know they are much lower on the pay scale than they deserve to be because of budget constraints. For the amount of work and incredible work they do to help us keep going, I am hoping that you can find the money to help them with some of their needs. Vice-Chair Trummer – Of the other districts that you spoke with, were there any experiences that any of them had with their boards and/or superintendents that you found interesting? Kate – There were some that made me cringe. They really liked the way our staff and board/superintendent communicates.
- PUBLIC COMMENT ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS –Ed Rogers – Electronic devices: it seems as though there is language in the policy that states where a kid can use them and where they cannot. Teachers could have a notice on the blackboard in each class that states, “Turn off all electronic devices”. If they get caught using them in an inappropriate place then it gets confiscated and then at the end of the period the kid can take it back. If they get three infractions, it goes to the principal. That student would then have to write a 250 word paper as to why it was inappropriate for them to have it in the classroom, in addition to their other homework. Vice-Chair Trummer – Later on in the agenda in #A we are going to discuss electronic devices, so some of your questions may be answered at that time. Ed Rogers – The second thing I wanted to speak to was IA’s. I do have two children at Laurel and I think that the teachers and the teacher’s aides do a great job in seeing that the kids get an education. Having aides that are qualified to help out in leading reading groups, title reading groups, they help with math, they supervise students in the lunch room and at recess; they do a lot of duties that free up the teachers to do the day to day stuff that teachers need to do. I think it would be a shame if we didn’t compensate the teacher’s aides appropriately for the amount of work that they do. Budget constraints being what they are, I know the money is tough to find, but being able to compensate them fairly; I don’t know what the teachers got for their raises or if they have gotten that this year, but they deserve something that is very similar to that. If it’s a matter of benefits and equaling more hours, perhaps more hours can be found for the aides who work so they can qualify for benefits. Superintendent Rodden-Nord – The teachers’ increase for next year is 2.9% and a 6.5% on the insurance cap. Our confidential staff is a 2.6% increase. Vice-Chair Trummer – Thank you. Are there any other comments on non-agenda items? Jill Schmitt – I appreciate the board’s hard work and the kindness and collaborative relationship with the classified group. I would like the board really consider part of our proposal in finding more money to give to your bargaining committee to bargain with us. I would also like the board to reconsider the retroactive pay, as well.
- Approve Resolution 2006-07 #14 – Adjusting Appropriations in General Fund
A MOTION WAS MADE BY DIRECTOR TUCKER, SECONDED BY DIRECTOR GERDES, TO APPROVE RESOLUTION 2006-07 #14 – ADJUSTING APPROPRIATIONS IN GENERAL FUND, AS PRESENTED. The motion was APPROVED unanimously by those board members present.
- Approve Board meeting minutes of May 21
- Approve Resolution 2007-08 #1 – Appointing Attorneys of Record
- Approve Resolution 2007-08 #2 – Appointing Auditors of Record
- Approve Resolution 2007-08 #3 – Designating Newspaper for Official Usage
- Approve Resolution 2007-08 #4 – Payment of Bills
- Approve Resolution 2007-08 #5 – Designating Financial Institutions for Borrowing, Saving, and Depositing of District Finances
- Approve Resolution 2007-08 #6 – Designating Kathleen Rodden-Nord, Superintendent / Clerk, and Wanda McClure, Business Manager, as Custodians of District Funds
- Approve Resolution 2007-08 #7 – Appointing the Superintendent / Clerk to be the Executive Officer for the Board of Directors
- Approve Resolution 2007-08 #8 – Interfund Loans
- Approve Resolution 2007-08 #9 – Setting Meeting Times, Dates, and Location
- Second reading and approval of revised policies AB – The People and Their School District, & BA – Board Goals.
- Approve Official Election Abstract
- Approve Resignation of Samuel Williams, 4 th grade teacher at Laurel Elementary School, effective the end of the 2006-07 school year.
- Approve Resignation of Rhonda Myers, English Language Learner Teacher at Oaklea Middle School, effective the end of the 2006-07 school year.
A MOTION WAS MADE BY DIRECTOR PRATT SECONDED BY DIRECTOR CROCE, TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA AS PRESENTED. The motion was APPROVED unanimously by those board members present.
- Approve Budget Resolutions
- Approve Resolution 2007-08 #10 – Adopting the 2007-08 Budget
- Approve Resolution 2007-08 #11 – 2007-08 Budget Appropriations
- Approve Resolution 2007-08 #12 – Levying the 2007-08 Ad Valorem Taxes
A MOTION WAS MADE BY DIRECTOR TUCKER, SECONDED BY DIRECTOR PRATT, TO APPROVE BUDGET RESOLUTIONS 2007-08 # 10, 11, AND 12, AS PRESENTED. The motion was APPROVED unanimously by those board members present.
- Approve Cramer and Giles as insurance carrier for 2007-08 – Wanda – Cramer and Giles are now going by JBL&K Risk Services.
A MOTION WAS MADE BY DIRECTOR CROCE, SECONDED BY DIRECTOR GERDES, TO APPROVE JBL&K RISK SERVICES (FORMALLY CRAMER AND GILES) AS INSURANCE CARRIERS FOR 2007-08, AS PRESENTED. The motion was APPROVED unanimously by those board members present.
- Beau Dussell as 4 th grade elementary teacher at Laurel Elementary School, beginning the 2007-08 school year. – Vice-Chair Trummer – Beau is currently a temporary 4 th grade teacher at Laurel Elementary School, and due to Sam Williams’ resignation, Bill Bechen and Amy Lesan are recommending that the board approve the hiring of Beau Dussell as a regular 4 th grade teacher beginning the 2007-08 school year. Superintendent Rodden-Nord – Beau is a JCSD alumni, which I always find so cool when we have people who come back and serve the district after being recipients of our services for so many years. Beau started out at Laurel as a classified employee; he worked with our students who had English as a second language and in the course of doing that became really inspired to go back and pursue his teaching credential. He was successful in doing that and left Junction City for a time and went to Las Vegas where he taught for four years and we were fortunate enough to have a position open this past year on a temporary basis when Beau and his wife Heather were wanting to relocate to Junction City. He is a wonderful addition to our teaching staff.
A MOTION WAS MADE BY DIRECTOR TUCKER, SECONDED BY DIRECTOR GERGES, TO APPROVE THE HIRING OF BEAU DUSSELL AS 4 TH GRADE TEACHER AT LAUREL ELEMENTARY SCHOOL, BEGINNING THE 2007-08 SCHOOL YEAR, AS PRESENTED. The motion was APPROVED unanimously by those board members present.
- Stacy Howard as self-contained special education teacher at Laurel Elementary School, beginning the 2007-08 school year. – Vice-Chair Trummer – Stacy is currently a temporary special education / speech therapist with the district. Due to the resignation of Kourtney Shreve this past February, Bill Bechen, Amy Lesan, and Alan Adler are recommending that the board approve the hiring of Stacy Howard to fill this regular position, beginning the 2007-08 school year. Mike Tucker – Self-Contained; what does that mean? Superintendent Rodden-Nord – This is the classroom that serves primarily our students with autism at Laurel. This was Stacy’s first year with the district and she was able to fill, on a conditional basis, one of the speech language positions that we had open. She doesn’t have the proper certification that would allow her to continue in that position, but she did take the initiative and get 4 th grade added onto her license so that she is able to teach the special education class, which is K-4.
A MOTION WAS MADE BY DIRECTOR CROCE, SECONDED BY DIRECTOR GERGES, TO APPROVE THE HIRING OF STACY HOWARD AS A SELF-CONTAINED SPECIAL EDUCATION TEACHER AT LAUREL ELEMENTARY SCHOOL, BEGINNING THE 2007-08 SCHOOL YEAR, AS PRESENTED. The motion was APPROVED unanimously by those board members present.
- Ann Edwards as 2 nd grade elementary teacher at Laurel Elementary School, beginning the 2007-08 school year. – Vice-Chair Trummer – Ann is currently a 1 st grade teacher at Laurel, working .50 FTE regular and .50 FTE temporary. The temporary portion of her assignment is due to Cat Jenkins’ transfer to the temporary .50 FTE Reading Coach and Assessment Coordinator at Laurel during the 2006-07 school year. Due to the resignation of Liz Delikat, Bill Bechen and Amy Lesan are recommending that the board approve the hiring of Ann Edwards as a 1.0 FTE regular 2 nd grade teacher beginning the 2007-08 school year. Mike Tucker – All of these positions are highly qualified, correct? Superintendent Rodden-Nord – That is correct, and a good question. We have an additional layer of requirements that are placed on us in the hiring process now than we had a few years back, and that is a function of the Federal Government’s No Child Left Behind Act and the requirement that we have 100% of our teachers highly qualified and assigned appropriately. Ann is most definitely a highly qualified primary level teacher and she did her student teaching at Laurel.
A MOTION WAS MADE BY DIRECTOR GERDES, SECONDED BY DIRECTOR CROCE, TO APPROVE THE HIRING OF ANN EDWARDS AS 2 ND GRADE TEACHER AT LAUREL ELEMENTARY SCHOOL, BEGINNING THE 2007-08 SCHOOL YEAR, AS PRESENTED. The motion was APPROVED unanimously by those board members present.
- Cat Jenkins as temporary Elementary Summer School Reading teacher at Laurel Elementary School, beginning July 16, 2007 through August 2, 2007. – Vice-Chair Trummer – Cat’s experience as an elementary teacher, and most recently as an elementary reading coach, should serve the students well in this summer assignment.
A MOTION WAS MADE BY DIRECTOR TUCKER, SECONDED BY DIRECTOR GERGES, TO APPROVE THE HIRING OF CAT JENKINS AS TEMPORARY ELEMENTARY SUMMER SCHOOL READING TEACHER AT LAUREL ELEMENTARY SCHOOL, BEGINNING JULY 16, 2007 THROUGH AUGUST 2, 2007, AS PRESENTED. The motion was APPROVED unanimously by those board members present.
- Sue Huntley as temporary Elementary Summer School Reading teacher at Laurel Elementary School, beginning July 16, 2007 through August 2, 2007. – Vice-Chair Trummer – Sue’s experience as a Title I teacher should serve the students well in this summer assignment.
A MOTION WAS MADE BY DIRECTOR CROCE, SECONDED BY DIRECTOR GERGES, TO APPROVE THE HIRING OF SUE HUNTLEY AS TEMPORARY ELEMENTARY SUMMER SCHOOL READING TEACHER AT LAUREL ELEMENTARY SCHOOL, BEGINNING JULY 16, 2007 THROUGH AUGUST 2, 2007, AS PRESENTED. The motion was APPROVED unanimously by those board members present.
- Approve Adoption of Language Arts Textbooks – Mike Tucker – Who is on the language arts textbook committee? Jill – Mary Jo Huisman (Oaklea), Annie Nelson (Laurel), Kathy Oleson (Laurel), Laura Wharton (Territorial), Carol Davis (Oaklea), Wendy Jameson (high school), Kristi Stahl (high school); we had two representatives from each school. In the 11 years that I have been here, we have never had each school absolutely on the money with the reading program where every class had the same sort of reading program, and we will have that next year. This whole package that you are going to approve, along with some supplemental writing materials, and some English as a second language materials, will put you back about $185,000. The textbooks are really expensive; they range from $65 to $70 each. Judy – How long do these books last? Jill – An adoption is good for six years.
A MOTION WAS MADE BY DIRECTOR GERDES, SECONDED BY DIRECTOR PRATT, TO APPROVE THE ADOPTION OF LANGUAGE ARTS TEXTBOOKS, AS PRESENTED. The motion was APPROVED unanimously by those board members present.
- Approve alternative education programs for 2007-08
A MOTION WAS MADE BY DIRECTOR PRATT, SECONDED BY DIRECTOR GERDES, TO APPROVE THE ALTERNATIVE EDUCATION PROGRAMS FOR 2007-08, AS PRESENTED. The motion was APPROVED unanimously by those board members present.
- Approve Superintendent’s Evaluation for 2006-07 – Vice-Chair Trummer – We had an additional form that came in that will be added to the evaluation.
A MOTION WAS MADE BY DIRECTOR TUCKER, SECONDED BY DIRECTOR CROCE, TO APPROVE THE SUPERINTENDENT’S EVALUATION FOR 2006-07, AS PRESENTED. The motion was APPROVED unanimously by those board members present.
- Approve Superintendent Contract for 2007-2010 – Vice-Chair Trummer – This was enclosed for the board’s review. Denise and I have had conversations as a bargaining unit with Kathleen about this and Mike Bonner has as well. Mike Tucker – Randy, would you mind providing the board, as a whole, with the changes to her contract? Vice-Chair Trummer – The changes in the contract include changes in the dates and years. As far as salary and insurance, in 2007-08 a 2.6% cost of living increase (Portland CPI), effective July 1, 2007 and an 8% increase in insurance CAP. It is important to note that the 2.6% salary increase and the 8% insurance CAP increase is what the administrators will receive next year. Teachers settled for 2.9% salary increase and almost 7% increase in insurance. For the superintendent’s 2008-09 salary and benefits, a cost of living increase equal to the Portland CPI, and 8% increase in insurance CAP. 2009-10, to be negotiated in June 2009. The length of the work year would be moved from 260 days to 245 days. Kathleen has proposed that in order to have more flexibility to spend time with her family. The duration of the contract would be a one year extension to her contract so that she has a rolling three year contract. Jacque – The decrease in work days is really in keeping with other superintendents around the county, right? Superintendent Rodden-Nord – Yes. In studying the contracts that other superintendents in Lane County and statewide have, it was fairly apparent that the number of days that I was contracted for every year was in excess of what the norm is. I think that you probably also saw that my salary is lower than the average, both statewide and compared with similarly sized districts in Lane County. The proposal that I made for my contract changes for next year really my desire was to stay in the neighborhood of what the other administrators had agreed to next year. Jacque – Thank you. Mike Tucker – What are the ten holidays? Superintendent Rodden-Nord – It’s the same holidays that are in the classified contract. Mike Tucker – So this works out to 49 weeks. Are you planning on taking it all at once, before school starts or after school ends? Superintendent Rodden-Nord – My general approach would be to not take it all at once. Vice-Chair Trummer – One of the things that stands out here in the comparison between the other mid-sized Lane County districts is that other superintendents have 240-249 day contracts. Junction City is the only one who has a 260 day contract. I think that is something for us to consider because when you talk about being at a parity with other districts and at compensation with staff and different groups we work with, I think it’s important to be at parity with other districts as well and right now we are considerably higher in work days than every other district of like size in our county. Another thing is that we have car allowances at a number of different districts; there is as much as $300 per month, $5,000 annually, $100 per month, and in Junction City we have no car allowance; so we are not paying anything for that. Of course we talked about paid holidays already. The number of personal days is another area where we have some districts who have superintendents with as many as 7 personal days. The average for all of the like sized districts is 3 personal days; Kathleen has 2, currently. The thing that really stands out to me though is, Kathleen is recommending in her proposed contract $102, 308. She is currently making $99,715, which way below what other superintends were making in 2006-07. As far as the 2007-08 salaries, one of the superintendents of like sized districts is making $112,000. Fern Ridge School District is making in upper end of $105,000 and Kathleen is proposing $102,000 and I think the thing that is important to recognize for us is that bringing her to a parity with those other superintendents says much of what Ed said earlier about rewarding those who work hard for us and talking about it being a shame not to compensate fairly and I think it is important that we do compensate fairly; we have a superintendent who is doing a great job and has an excellent relationship with the board, staff, community, etc. My recommendation would be to bring her salary up to roughly where Fern Ridge’s is. Certainly, if we ever lost Kathleen we would be paying $105,000 for a replacement and we probably wouldn’t get anyone with her caliber, character, or her skills. That’s how I feel about it. Denise – I am in total agreement with Randy and I have thought about this a lot because I care a lot about Kathleen; I consider her a friend, and I feel comfortable telling the board that this has nothing to do with why I am agreeing with Randy. I agree with Randy because that is what this position demands that we pay and if you take the person out of it and be as objective as you can be, Kathleen’s position, the job that she does for us, and any other of these like sized districts demands that salary, so I think it is just the right thing to do. We have worked hard to bring all of our staff up to the place where we are in a reasonable distance of the districts like our size; we have done it in every bargaining session that I have been involved with so far. We weren’t there with the classified and we worked hard to get there in the last bargaining session. We worked hard to get there with our teaching staff, and two years ago we had to make some adjustments with our administrative salaries. I believe that we need to move Kathleen’s salary to at least the place where it is in the range of average for districts our size. Jacque – Everything that you have done; your integrity and your honesty and your heart in this position has been amazing and I just so appreciate being on this board with you. I also appreciate you putting in there the same raise that the administrators got and I think that says a lot about you. So, I am stuck because I would love to give you more money because I think you’re heads and tails above all of these other people in other districts. I don’t know how I feel about going above and beyond that. Denise – Except her job is different, and I am saying that other superintendents make this kind of money. We aren’t talking about administrators right now, we are talking about the superintendent. I appreciate what you are saying Jacque, and I have had the same thoughts, but if you separate out that part of it and look at the job itself. Vice-Chair Trummer – I also agree with you because I went through the same anxiety around that and being very concerned about that, but then I started looking at what she did as far as the three years of increases and being commensurate with what the administrators got. However, we have a long history here at this district, especially in the last several years, of bringing different groups up to parity with like-size districts, and if we don’t do that with the superintendent, what does that say? Does that say that next time we want to work with another group; we’ll just decide that we are not going to be up to parity with other districts of like size, and then we begin losing qualified staff to other districts. If you aren’t compensating those who work hard for you and compensating them fairly, guess what, they are going to go find someone who will compensate them fairly, and that is completely their prerogative. I would hate to see us lose Kathleen. Since Kathleen has been here there has been a tremendous leap forward in the way that we approach the budget in this district. Before Kathleen was here we never equated our budget with any kind of mission statement and I have been on the budget committee for 15 years and until Kathleen was here we were never able to look at our budget and say that it is a numeric representation of our mission statement; and now we can. Jacque – I am not sure what to do with this. There are two different notions on the table and there are compelling dues for both of them. Mike Tucker – I would like to think that Kate presented this as something she thought was fair to her. Superintendent Rodden-Nord – When I was putting my contract proposal together it was with the intention of hanging in there with the administrators and also in the context of what other employee groups had settled upon in our district. I did present the board with the comparative information because I just wanted the board to be aware, in my mind, that what I was proposing was what I thought was reasonable in light of what was happening elsewhere. I very, very much appreciate the advocacy of the board, the expression of support, and the acknowledgement that I could probably go somewhere else and make more money and the board would have to pay at least that much to replace me, and I do appreciate that being a consideration, as well as the philosophy of parity that we have used when we have dealt with negotiations with other bargaining units. Having said that, I did put on the table what I thought was reasonable, I don’t know that I would say no if the board decided they wanted to compensate me at a level higher than that, probably I wouldn’t be very happy if someone proposed something less than what I asked for. Judy – I agree with everyone, but I am also going to play devil’s advocate here. Right now we are in a rebuilding stage and I agree that you deserve what you are asking for, plus more, but we are in a rebuilding stage and we want to continue to rebuild, so I am going to vote against that we approve this. Vice-Chair Trummer – I would be hugely concerned with us changing a pattern and philosophy of being at parity with other like size districts and as we work with different groups, it would bother me a lot. Judy – Isn’t that what we are doing? Vice-Chair Trummer – No, that is exactly what we wouldn’t be doing. Superintendent Rodden-Nord – I didn’t ask for what the average was. Judy – What about doing a one-year contract and reopening in the second year and looking at this again? Superintendent Rodden-Nord – I would be fine with agreeing on a one-year contract with the terms that I suggested and look at it again in a year. I’ll do some more research and if I find that I am considerably lower than those who hold similar positions in similar size districts then probably my proposal in year two and three would be different than what it is right now.
A MOTION WAS MADE BY DIRECTOR TUCKER, SECONDED BY DIRECTOR CROCE, TO APPROVE THE SUPERINTENDENT’S CONTRACT FOR 2007-2010, AS PRESENTED.
A MOTION WAS MADE BY DIRECTOR TUCKER, SECONDED BY DIRECTOR CROCE, TO AMEND THE FIRST MOTION AND APPROVE A FINANCIAL REOPENER IN 2008. The motion was APPROVED 4-1 with Director Pratt voting no.
A MOTION WAS MADE BY DIRECTOR TRUMMER, SECONDED BY DIRECTOR CROCE, TO APPROVE THE SUPERINTENDENT’S CONTRACT FOR 2007-2010, WITH A FINANCIAL REOPENER IN 2008, AS AMENDED. The motion FAILED 4-2 with Directors Pratt and Trummer voting no.
Denise – Could someone please explain to me, if we were not where we were at in this bargaining process, would you feel the same way? I guess your argument hasn’t swayed me as to why we shouldn’t be as concerned that our superintendent is not at the average as we are concerned about every other group in our district. Judy – I have been on both the teacher and the classified bargaining teams and when we budget and when we bargain, we have set numbers. Denise – We have done the comparisons. Judy – We have done the comparisons but very often we set what we can afford at the time, first before we do our comparisons, before we do our average, and we try to not be concerned about the average. I mean, yes, we want everyone to be average or above, but we also want to make sure that everything on our budge is moving ahead, we want to be rebuilding everything; we want to add additional; we want to take care of our students. Denise – I absolutely agree with you, but we have done that with every group except this one. Mike Tucker – This is a little bit different; we are always offering them less, and we are offering her more. I suggest that we have reached an impasse here and I don’t see anything really fruitful coming out of this. I think we have a couple of people that aren’t going to change their minds. Maybe we should table this until we have more people? When does your contract run out? Superintendent Rodden-Nord – June 30 th, so I would like to get this resolved tonight. I proposed a contract for the board to consider. I made my proposal based on a careful consideration of the increases that have been afforded to other employees in this district; the administrators in particular. I made that proposal in good faith, in the time since I have learned a little more about other contracts. I would feel fine about resolving this by asking the board to accept my proposed contract for year one and I would like to come back and ask the board to reconsider my salary beginning in the 2008-09 school year, and to be upfront, it is probably likely that at that time I would be looking again at the averages and probably making a proposal that looks different than just the cost of living because as Denise said, at that point in time my salary is going to be farther away from the average than it is now and that it would be even farther next school year. I would like to get this resolved because we have set a standard of no retroactivity and I would rather have what I proposed than nothing at all. Please understand that I do appreciate the support from the board. Mike Tucker – With that in mind, I would like to resubmit the initial motion.
A MOTION WAS MADE BY DIRECTOR TUCKER, SECONDED BY DIRECTOR CROCE, TO RECONSIDER THE MOTION TO APPROVE THE SUPERINTENDENT’S CONTRACT FOR 2007-2010, WITH A FINANCIAL REOPENER IN 2008, AS AMENDED. The motion was APPROVED unanimously by those board members present.
A MOTION WAS MADE BY DIRECTOR TUCKER, SECONDED BY DIRECTOR CROCE, TO APPROVE THE SUPERINTENDENT’S CONTRACT FOR 2007-2010, WITH A FINANCIAL REOPENER IN 2008, AS AMENDED. The motion was APPROVED unanimously by those board members present.
- Election of Board Officers for 2007-08
A MOTION WAS MADE BY DIRECTOR TUCKER, SECONDED BY DIRECTOR PRATT TO CLOSE NOMINATIONS AND CAST A VOTE FOR RANDY TRUMMER FOR CHAIR 2007-08. The motion for Randy Trummer was APPROVED unanimously by those board members present. Randy Trummer will serve as chair for 2007-08 school year.
Mike Bonner was nominated for the office of Vice-Chair. A MOTION WAS MADE BY DIRECTOR GERDES, SECONDED BY DIRECTOR PRATT, TO CLOSE NOMINATIONS AND CAST A UNANIMOUS VOTE FOR MIKE BONNER FOR VICE-CHAIR. The motion was APPROVED 4-1with Director Tucker voting no. Mike Bonner will serve as Vice-Chair for the 2007-08 school year.
Mike Tucker voted no because he wanted Jacque Gerdes to serve as vice-chair.
- Approve request for voluntary reduction in FTE for Amy Lesan, Principal at Laurel Elementary, from 1.0 FTE to .50 FTE, for the 2007-2008 school year. – Vice-Chair Trummer – What do you have to say for yourself, Ms. Lesan? Amy – I had a baby. Jacque – Are you having a good time with the baby? Amy – I am; I am not sleeping a whole lot, but I am having a great time. It didn’t take long after she was born for me to start thinking about next year. Jill Case – Rarely do you see two people who work together as well as Bill Bechen and Amy Lesan. They are very respectful of each other, they work extremely well together. Jacque – I have heard similar comments from other people as well. Mike Tucker – Amy, did you say that this was for a year? Amy – Yes. Mike Tucker – You feel that you would be able to come back full-time after a year? Amy – Yes. Judy – Do you know what your schedule will look like next year? Amy – I would like to work afternoons, but that is something that I would like Bill and me to sit down and discuss.
A MOTION WAS MADE BY DIRECTOR PRATT, SECONDED BY DIRECTOR CROCE, TO APPROVE THE REQUEST FOR VOLUNTARY REDUCTION IN FTE FOR AMY LESAN, PRINCIPAL AT LAUREL ELEMENTARY, FROM 1.0 FTE TO .50 FTE FOR THE 2007-08 SCHOOL YEAR, AS PRESENTED. The motion was APPROVED unanimously by those board members present.
- Electronic Devices in the Classroom – Superintendent Rodden-Nord – I mailed a packet to the board and this was just in an attempt to follow up and give some larger context to the issue of electronic devices in the classroom. As you saw from the materials that I sent you there have been many articles, I just chose one to copy and send to you, in papers around the state and probably all over the country about the discord that is created by the issue of electronic devices in the classroom. There was an article from Crook County that showed that other high schools in the state are experiencing concerns about this issue of kids having electronic devices and bringing them into class. One of the things that came up at the last board meeting was some comments about ‘does our district need to have a board policy that would address this?’ Some further conversation was, ‘do we really need a board policy because in our handbook, both district and schools, there is a statement in there about students’ possession of and use of electronic devices?’ The jist of it is this, at the middle school and high school, students are permitted by the administration to bring electronic devices to school, they are expected to not have those devices on in the classroom because of the potential for interrupting the instructional process and disrupting the learning of others, and perhaps even the potential for kids to cheat. That has been the expectation. I think there was some conversation about the fact that while that is the expectation, it isn’t always necessarily what has happened in our classrooms. I don’t think that the use of electronic devices in our classrooms is widespread; I do think we have some students who have done this and have been disrespectful and I think we probably have teachers that perhaps didn’t want to take the issue on or maybe have their own feelings about when it is appropriate to have those devices on. I included a number of different policies from different districts showing the range of approaches on this issue. Some districts have policies that say you can’t have them and that they are prohibited all of the time, while others said that you may have them, but not during instructional time. It’s all over the map. When I shared this information with the board I said that my recommendation after reviewing these policies, looking at what we have, is that we have this expectation in place in our handbooks. I would suggest that the administrative staff understand very clearly what the board’s position is on this. If you would like to make the statement that you would expect these devices to be off and not disrupting instruction and that is what you would like to have enforced, I am sure the administrators would carry that message back to their staff and the staff in turn to their students. Jacque – Kathryn, do you feel like there is a problem in the high school? Kathryn – I think I have some select areas of enforcement that I need to address, but that can be done with the enforcement in the handbook. Vice-Chair Trummer – I really appreciate what is in the high school handbook, it seems to be pretty much inclusive of any concerns I had and I think tidying up the consistent enforcement is really all we need to do.
- District Health Services Update – Nurse Carol – The asthma grant has been completed. This is the grant that paid for the indoor air quality testing. Mike Tucker – What does that monitor; carbon monoxide? Chris – Yes, carbon monoxide. Carol – What we found during that walkthrough was that the carpets at Laurel were really, really bad and the maintenance staff is now using a green cleaning product that is supposed to help clean up the air quality. At Oaklea, Tom and I have been working on the health curriculum, and Oaklea has been awarded a physical activity and nutrition grant for $15,000. At the high school, the life skills program is doing an amazing job. Superintendent Rodden-Nord – Carol, I am not sure exactly when you came in, but the board acted to approve adopting the budget that had been approved by the budget committee and that will allow our district to be able to have a full-time nurse and we are very excited. We have been so grateful with the services that you have provided to the students since you have been with our district. You have such a great connection with the staff and students.
- Laurel School-Wide Plan – Bill Bechen and Jill Case – Jill – I just want to thank you very much for giving Kathleen so many compliments and now expecting us to work with her. As you remember from the last board meeting, I talked to you a little about Laurel submitting an application to go school-wide. Bill and Amy are here to talk about that, but one of the things I want you to remember is that we just had a monitoring visit that we did quite well in, and we responded, and those responses to the findings have been accepted. While we did that monitoring visit, they affirmed what we already knew, and that was that we should be going school-wide instead of target-assisted, and while that may be difficult for you to understand we will make this as brief as possible tonight. We often wonder if we are being punished for being at the end of meetings and I don’t want Chris to be mad at me. This is the application that went to the state. Laurel worked on every page of 99 pages. I believe the whole document with instructions is 130 pages. I cannot compliment enough, Sue Huntley, who led this effort to a large part and Cat Jenkins. This is a really good process. We thought it would take six months, that’s what Jill Case thought, but it took about a year and a half and it involved every member of the staff and all of the parents who wanted to were involved. You had to have 100% staff approval to even proceed with this. Again, I want to say that Bill and Amy did a wonderful job with this and about 2/3 of this is data collection and data analysis. If we had all the time in the world, we would do this at every school. I want to remind you that the threshold again is 40%, free and reduced lunch, to be able to be considered for school-wide.
Bill Bechen showed a slideshow that spoke to the advantages of school-wide and that is what this application is all about. Targeted Assistance Title Program – Students identified through testing and teacher recommendation; parents informed and asked for permission to serve child; students were pulled out of the regular education classroom for instruction; Title IA’s taught pull-out groups; little coordination between Title and regular education classrooms; served approximately 150 students. School-Wide Model Piloted in 2006-07 – School-wide testing; data provided to teams to make instructional decisions; assistants assigned to grade level teams for flooding; Title I instruction occurred primarily in the classroom; 182 total students served (35 kindergarteners, 32 1 st graders, 42 2 nd graders, 45 3 rd graders, 28 4 th graders). Other Components – Extended day – 81 students served K-4; intervention team – reviewed 54 student referrals and 32 students served through Title; CCC Computers – served 116 students (at-risk and TAG). School-Wide Application Process – School-Wide Committee – Gathered and reviewed data – student surveys, parent surveys, teacher surveys, assistant surveys, student academic performance, demographic information. Shared information with – parents, school board, Laurel staff, and district office. Application was completed and submitted to the Oregon Department of Education on June 15, 2007.
- Facilities Assessment Bids – Chris Meyer – The board wanted some quotes and then I was asked to get some hard numbers. I called four different companies and one was too busy to even give us a quote. The DLR Group, that was one that we got the name through the Bonds and Ballots workshop that we went to, they were interested, but they only took information over the phone. I faxed them a letter stating the square footage, the ages of the buildings, and then that is how they sent their bid down. The other two groups, gLAs and Robertson Sherwood both sent a couple of their people out and they did a quick walkthrough of all four schools and then sent these estimates to me. They do not include anything to do with the asbestos at all, which is a separate thing. We would have to go to an asbestos removal company to remove the asbestos. The gLAs Group have had a lot of experience with schools in the area. Everyone I have talked to from the U of O down to these other schools, had good things to say. They can design a school building from an architect’s view, but they also take input and make it work from teachers, staff, and students. They will work with you. There are different fees in there, broken down from doing a couple of schools to doing all of the schools. gLAs one also had an additional addendum for bringing everything up to ADA code. Approximate cost $50,000, plus $7,500 for ADA issues. Vice-Chair Trummer – DLR noted that for $42,000 more, which was not a great deal more, they would be willing to work with large citizen groups (typically 35-40 people) and review the information and generate strategies, which typically involves 5 evening meetings over 3 months and has resulted in an 85% bond passage rate. When you were talking with gLAs, did they imply that they had ever done something like that, and if so, would that be at an hourly rate? Chris – That would be an additional cost. Superintendent Rodden-Nord – Some of what we have heard, just in following up on other districts’ experiences with these groups, is that DLR is really good at that survey side of things and community process and we were hearing more positive things about gLAs as far as their technical expertise in identifying issues and costing things out and following through and assisting with the actual planning of a bond measure and facilities improvements. Chris – Everybody I talked to really enjoyed working with gLAs. I really didn’t have a whole lot of stuff with DLR; they had a little bit in the area, but gLAs is a local company based in Eugene, so there wouldn’t be that travel time back and forth. I was just a little hesitant about giving information over the phone and getting a bid based on a phone conversation. Vice-Chair Trummer – gLAs has a lot of experience in Lane County, they are familiar with the area, whereas if you look at DLR, their experience is Klamath Falls, Madras, and The Dalles. Mike Tucker – Chris, gLAs states that they will do Laurel and the high school for $45,000, and for $5,000 more they will do the other two schools as well. That seems a little strange that the pricing is only $5,000 more for two schools. Chris – Oaklea is the newest school and I think they actually were involved with that so they have information, plans, etc. for Oaklea. They said it was because they have previous knowledge of Oaklea and Territorial is such a small school. Jacque – Is DLR really saying that to look at all four schools is $23,500? Chris – That is what they are saying. Superintendent Rodden-Nord – I think the concern is having done this over the phone that once they got here it might be harder to stay within the scope of what they bid. Jacque – Chris, what is your gut feeling? Chris – I would lean toward gLAs because they seem to be a little more personable and willing to work a lot better with the staff and community to make what you need, not only what you have to have. Chuck Cook – The difference between gLAs and Robertson Sherwood, one thing I noticed here was that Robertson Sherwood included the assessment of the athletic field, playing fields, and structure, whereas gLAs didn’t mention that in their quote. Chris – I didn’t really mention the athletic aspect of it, it was more just the buildings and what we have right now. Vice-Chair Trummer – If we are concerned about the athletic structures, perhaps it would be worth while now that we have Robertson Sherwood’s figures, it might be worth while to go back to gLAs and have them quote that as well. Superintendent Rodden-Nord – So, the board authorized Chris to go out and get bids. We were first talking about two schools but then thought it would be important to have all four facilities looked at and we wanted to know what the price differential was there. We had thought it would be in the neighborhood of $75,000. Based on what Chuck has said, and what Chris has shared, it probably would be prudent if a facilities assessment is going to be undertaken, to look not only at the buildings per se, but also the peripheral structures; bleachers, athletic fields, and so on, as well as going back and examining those ADA issues because my understanding is if we were to do any significant overhaul or rebuilding, we would be held to those standards so we probably need to know what we would be in for. Do you have a recommendation, Chris? Chris – I still think gLAs is the company to go with. If I called them and talked to them about adding the grounds, I don’t think they would have a problem with it. They have done work at multiple schools, additions and alterations, and parts of the athletic complex in Cottage Grove. Vice-Chair Trummer – I really want to thank you for sending all of this information out in advance. It was nice to sit down in a quiet room and go over all of this information.
A MOTION WAS MADE BY DIRECTOR CROCE, SECONDED BY DIRECTOR GERDES, TO MOVE DISCUSSION ITEM D – FACILITIES ASSESSMENT BIDS, TO AN ACTION ITEM. The motion was APPROVED unanimously by those board members present.
A MOTION WAS MADE BY DIRECTOR CROCE, SECONDED BY DIRECTOR PRATT, TO AUTHORIZE CHRIS MEYER TO CALL GLAS AND INQUIRE ABOUT ADDING THE ATHLETIC COMPLEX AND GROUNDS INTO THEIR ASSESSMENT AND CONFER WITH SUPERINTENDNET RODDEN-NORD ABOUT IT AND ENTER INTO AN ASSESSMENT CONTRACT WITH GLAS, NOT TO EXCEED $75,000. The motion was APPROVED unanimously by those board members present.
Vice-Chair Trummer – Linda Bruncheon has a comment. Linda Bruncheon – I am here about using the high school parking lot during festival. Last year signs were posted stating that vehicles would be towed if they were parked in the lot. I have submitted a facilities use form. Superintendent Rodden-Nord – The application went to Craig Rothenberger, who is our facilities use coordinator. He was tied up in basketball camp from 8:00 a.m. until late hours all last week. I did leave him a voice mail and let him know that I would like to get together with him to get closure on this. He is the person who looks at the policy and regulation that sets forth the fees for the different types of groups and comes up with whatever seems appropriate given the request and the length of time and the kinds of facilities that are being requested. One of the questions that I had on the use form was the request for the showers because that implicates custodial time and security issues so I wanted to have an opportunity to talk with Craig about that. I will certainly let Craig know that time is a major concern for you and that you would like to have an answer by Thursday.
- Financial Report
- Student Count
- Attorney Fees
- Food Services MealTime Pay Online System
Adjourn at 9:20 p.m.
- EXECUTIVE SESSION – ORS 192.660 (1)(d) – To conduct deliberations with persons designated by the governing body to carry on labor negotiations. – Executive Session minutes are not part of this document. The Board will not be going back into open session.
Superintendent/Clerk Chair, Board of Directors