DATE:February 21, 2005PRESENT:Michael Dixon, Chair

DATE:February 21, 2005PRESENT:Michael Dixon, Chair

Mary Grace Bright

Jill Camnitz

Betsy Leech

Ralph Love, Sr.

Barbara Owens

TIME:7:30 P.M.Billy Peaden

Roy Peaden

Marcy Romary

Sidney Scott

Dick Tolmie

PLACE:Pitt County Shrine ClubDelano Wilson

ABSENT:

Mr. Michael Dixon, Chair, called to order the Pitt County Board of Education in regular session. He welcomed everyone to the meeting and paid tribute to the life of Mr. Bernie Haselrig, an educator in Pitt County, whose funeral was held this day. He stated that Mr. Haselrig was a tremendous person who had a significant impact in every venue in which he operated and those venues were many. A moment of silence was observed in his memory.

Dr. Ralph Love led the group in the Pledge of Allegiance.

Chairman Dixon expressed appreciation to the Shriners of Pitt County for the use of their building for this meeting. He indicated that the agenda would center around Wintergreen and the Board’s decision to create a K-8 campus with those two facilities. He noted that a number of parents were signed up to speak during Public Expression, and he stated that the Board appreciated the concerns of those parents and their willingness to come to this meeting to listen to the presentation and to share information on their issues. He described the process to be followed for public expression and asked for everyone’s adherence to that process.

The Chairman offered the agenda for consideration or adjustments. Upon motion by Mr. Sidney Scott and second by Mr. Billy Peaden, the Board unanimously voted to approve the agenda as prepared. The following individuals spoke during the Public Expression portion of the agenda: Jeff Foster, Bill Beach, Rev. William L. Johnson, III., Kathy McCurdy, Hugh Vincent, Freddie Martin, Deborah Cartwright, Christine Mumaw, Charles Donaldson, Buddy Ipock, Myra Hubbard, Beverley Church, Tom Proffitt, David Mallinson, Sherry Shafer, Myrna Bunns, Susie Mascarenhas, Pamela Hall, John Olsson, Rhonda Argenbright, Jimmie Hughes, Michelle Wiggins, Tracy Smirne, and Lisa Corbett. The following concerns or issues were expressed (paraphrased):

-Concern about the racial makeup of Wintergreen school district and number of students being bused into the district.

-If racial imbalance is going to be created, it should be created in the neighborhood where those students live; parents need to be able to be involved in their children’s school experience.

-With parents not involved, discipline and behavior problems continuously occur, taking away from the education of other children.

-Wintergreen has 24 to 25 students per teacher; more than is reported at other school locations, with one school reporting 19 students per teacher.

-Teacher lounges, janitor’s closets, the cafeteria, library, hallway floors are being used for non-traditional classrooms.

-Support areas are inadequate; cafeteria is insufficient with children only getting 20 minutes to eat.

-Recognizing there is a resource strain in the county, Wintergreen does not mind pulling its share of the load, but does mind pulling the whole load.

-The Board should do justice for all children.

-In this school that is already over capacity, parents are concerned with adding trailers to Wintergreen Primary to accommodate the third grade.

-Why would the Board take children such as those on Old Tar Road away and leave children at Wintergreen who are being bused in who have to leave their homes just after 6:00 a.m. Some children ride an hour each way. It creates a poor learning situation.

-The comment made by a Board member at PTA Executive Council stating (he/she) did not understand why the parents down the road from Wintergreen did not walk them to school rather than have them ride the bus for an hour was thought to be insensitive. This is not a safe area for anyone to walk during the time school is opening or dismissing.

-There are so many low-performing students at Wintergreen Primary that teachers say they do not have extra time to spend with other children.

-If you drew a box of one square block around South Greenville Elementary School, those would represent the children who actually go there and the rest from that neighborhood are put on the bus to go to Wintergreen. Wintergreen used to be a neighborhood school with folks moving into the area because they wanted their kids to go to a school near them that they felt good about. It has now become a school where the Board sends children that they do not know what else to do with.

-Wintergreen has so many behavioral problems that all the kids are being punished by not getting recess.

-In one fifth grade class in December, only 5 of 26 children were reading on grade level with no additional resources. Board should not be sending all the problem kids to one school, but should spread them out.

-Traffic in the morning and afternoon is horrendous, with no patrolman; is impossible to make a left turn off campus onto County Home Road. With this new proposal, Board would add another 500-600 kids, with more buses and 200 more parents trying to pick up and drop off their kids.

-Board has not looked at socio-economic impact of plan.

-Why is it that so many children get on a bus and ride past Wahl-Coates and Elmhurst to go to Wintergreen?

-Would like to know how Wintergreen will be affected by Mills Road School? Will it help the overcrowding?

-Why is the Board building new schools; would it not make more sense to add on to existing schools?

-Facility is not only inadequate, but new part of facility is not completed and will not be when school starts. Facilities should be comparable to A. G. Cox; i.e., lockers, science labs. Promises previously made for the 6th graders have not been fulfilled; how can parents believe promises being made today will be kept. Why not finish facility for 7th graders and 8th graders and then move students into the facility?

-Don’t like fact that 2nd graders will be going to school with 8th graders.

-Teachers at Wintergreen are great, but an uneven hand is being dealt by the Board to the school.

-Each and every Board member should visit Wintergreen and get experience first hand.

-In regard to racial balance, how is it that the Board will take 115 kids off of Old Tar Road out of the school and bring in another sub-group, and say that you are trying to keep the balance.

-The school district now is not the school district that families chose to move into a few years ago.

-More buses represent more expense to the school district. Fuel costs continue to rise. Pitt County Schools is presently exceeding its state allotted miles for busing. A strategy that requires more busing does not make sense. Board should be moving more toward neighborhood schools.

-Does the Board’s plan for Wintergreen really adhere to and satisfy the goals and objectives as approved by the Board of Education? One of Board’s core beliefs is that “student learning is our highest priority;” if the Board believes that, and is acting in the best interest of all students, then this proposal should be reconsidered. Another belief is that students and staff have the right to work in a safe and orderly environment, and that is not in an overcrowded classroom, not a trailer, and not a closet. To provide a better education for all students, the Board should distribute them equally and fairly among all the better schools; Elmhurst, Wahl-Coates, Chicod and Wintergreen. To force Wintergreen to bear the entire burden, the Board does a disservice to the students and adds an undue burden to the teachers who are already over committed, overworked and underpaid.

-The hearsay is that students from Old Tar Road who are being moved to W. H. Robinson will be there only one year and then be moved back to Wintergreen. The importance of stability was expressed and a desire to have parents know as soon as possible what the facts are.

-7th and 8th graders who already have children should not be riding the bus, eating in the cafeteria, walking the halls with “babies.”

-Concerned about advanced placement opportunities for children left at Wintergreen in math and science. Also, without the true middle school experience, what will happen when these children get to D. H. Conley?

-If the Board waited one more year, would they not eliminate the need to move in trailers for classrooms that are either too hot or too cold?

-Quality is the concern and parents know what the standards are at A. G. Cox but don’t know what the standards will be for future. Class size is something parents are concerned about which translates into better education. Will there be equivalent (to A. G. Cox) teaching loads with sufficient resources and sufficient classroom and support materials? Will there be equitable science labs in place? And an issue that has not been addressed – will there be equitable extra-curricular activities – not just athletics, but clubs, also. Will the children at both schools have equal opportunities in the area of challenges for academically gifted students?

-Would be helpful for the entire audience to hear the benefits of a K-8 school.

-There needs to be assurances that the computer labs will be in place to support these children, a resource officer, and that the school functions as a middle school, whereas now it functions as an elementary school.

-It appears that in order to go to school in Winterville, you need to go to Greenville to buy a house, although you pay taxes in the Winterville Township. How many Board members have a child in the Pitt County School System at this time?

-Referring to the comments made that K-8 schools had proven successful in Pitt County, it was noted that Chicod was compared with 906 students with a ratio of 76:12; G. R. Whitfield with 624 students; Pactolus with 602 students and that Wintergreen K-8 would have 1300 students next year. In further comparison, it was noted that D. H. Conley has 1200 students, South Central has 1083, Ayden-Grifton, 861; these being high schools. It was noted that Pactolus is still not up to par with schools like A. G. Cox and E. B. Aycock and that is was not too late to reconsider Mills Road as a middle school to service all of these schools and then there would be one athletics department, one science and one computer lab and a group of teachers that want to be at a middle school.

Chairman Dixon stated that the Board appreciated the comments offered by everyone and that those comments would be considered as the Board worked to make its decisions.

The Chair described the process by which the presentation of information would be provided and discussed by the Board. He reiterated that no decision had been made at this point.

(The following transcribed verbatim to the degree possible.)

Aaron Beaulieu: Thank you Chairman Dixon and members of the Board. I will be sharing a brief statement that represents the thoughts and feelings of all the staff and cover the information that was provided in your packet. At that time, we will be more than willing to address any specific areas.

I am before you tonight to address the issue of implementation of the 7th grade at Wintergreen Intermediate – not to address the issue of redistricting of K-8 in that attendance area. In August of 2003, the Pitt County Board of Education, voted to convert Wintergreen campus to a K-8 facility. Initial concerns were addressed by Central Office staff as to the feasibility of implementation for the upcoming year.

Upon complete review of all program and facility requirements, and after having weighed the pros and cons of phased implementation versus full implementation, the staff is in support of the current recommendation to add the 7th grade at Wintergreen Intermediate. We are comfortable that all program, facility, and extra curricular issues can be met and will be satisfactory for the implementation of the 7th grade next year. Restrictions center around meeting the requirements of a growing area and converting a structure originally constructed to accommodate grades K-5 into a K-8 facility. They are growing pains of a growing school system and one that given the resources available must meet all of its needs.

Implementation of the 7th grade for next year relieves overcrowding at one of our existing facilities and allows for further adjustment of the K-8 attendance lines. Budget concerns were addressed in last year’s budget cycle, but due to reduced level in local and state funding and the increased construction prices, the resources originally identified for implementation, had to be delayed. Resources for full implementation will need to be prioritized in the current budget cycle with any unencumbered funds or in next year’s request to the County Commissioners. But delaying the implementation of the 7th grade does not reduce the financial burden on the school district. The existing campus does have space to accommodate approximately the same number of children being served this year with the addition of nine regular classrooms, a gymnasium, two science labs, and four additional mobile units. This campus, however, will not have space needed to accommodate the addition of the 8th grade unless adjustments to the attendance lines reduce the current capacity of these two campuses.

At this time, I would like to take you through the documentation that was provided with the Board material. Your initial information is that of the background, “Consideration of Transition of Wintergreen to a K-8 in the fall of 2005.” Following that, you have the pros and cons regarding student assignment and Wintergreen conversion. The pros are that students would not be moved to A. G. Cox for 7th grade and back to Wintergreen for grade 8, space will become available at A. G. Cox to allow both Creekside and W. H. Robinson to feed into A. G. Cox. The cons are that without further adjustments to the attendance lines, Wintergreen campus will grow to approximately 1800 students with the implementation of the 8th grade, and all grade 3 students cannot be housed in either campus for next year without temporarily using mobile units until the 2006 redistricting. Behind that, you have two layouts of both Wintergreen Primary and Wintergreen Intermediate campuses. The current designs outline the new space being created in the shaded areas. Wintergreen Primary will receive six new regular classrooms. Wintergreen Intermediate will receive three, an additional science lab, and a gymnasium, and two existing classrooms will be converted into an additional science lab. The Wintergreen Primary campus with a teacher to student ratio of approximately 1:20 or 1:21 will require 35 teaching spaces to accommodate PK through 3rd grade on that campus. Wintergreen Intermediate with a teacher to student ratio of 1:26 will require 28 teaching spaces and the ability to bring the orchestra, general music, band, and chorus back inside the school facility and locate in regular classrooms.

Behind that information, you have the student number breakdowns, which are preliminary projections. These numbers change daily. They will also change between now and the time we plan to open the school in August 2005. But, these are the preliminary projections. The projections call for Wintergreen, which would house K-3 to have approximately 734 students, with a racial breakdown of 61% black, 28% white, and 11% other. Wintergreen Intermediate would contain a campus of grades 4-7 with an enrollment of 730 students, a breakdown of 63% black, 31% white, and 6% other. The total Wintergreen Primary and Intermediate campus would consist of 1464 students, with a breakdown of 62% black, 30% white, and 8% other. A. G. Cox with Wintergreen rising 7th graders coming to A. G. Cox, would be at an enrollment of 1003; 56% black, 38% white, and 5% other. A. G. Cox, without the Wintergreen rising 7th graders, would have an enrollment of 813; 55% black, 39%, and 6% other.

At this time, staff will be willing to answer any questions you may have. Thank you.

Chairman: Any clarifications that we need to ask of Aaron before he sits down. Raise your hands.

Betsy Leech: When I was going through this information, I had some difficulty being able to follow exactly where the students were coming from that produce these numbers and I feel real concrete about this, because I want to know what the assumptions are based on the numbers that we have here.

Chairman: Would that be a part of Kay’s presentation.

Betsy Leech: Oh, excuse me, I am sorry. If that is coming up too, I can wait.

Chairman: Let’s wait until then. Any other questions of Aaron?

Jill Camnitz: Last week, Aaron, I had requested that we provide or I had requested that we be provided with capacity figures for these buildings. Do you have those?

Aaron Beaulieu: Yes. The most recent capacity figures we have are those provided to you in the Long Range Educational Plan. And again, a reminder that these figures have not been updated with the grades two and three class size reductions that have taken place over the last two years in order to stay consistent with all class size capacity averages. These are the most recent figures, and calculations we have from ORED. With those, Wintergreen Primary is at a capacity of 617 (without new classroom space); Wintergreen Intermediate at 792, A. G. Cox at 854.