FRANKLIN NORTHWEST SUPERVISORY UNION BOARD
All Board Members Act 46 Meeting (FNWSU)
MEETING MINUTES
SWANTON SCHOOL LIBRARY
April 6, 2016
7:00 PM
Present: Board members: Jason McConnell, (Sheldon), Connie Beyor (Highgate), Denis Boucher (MVU), Tobias Maguire (Swanton), Jay Cummings, (Swanton), Tim Magnant (Franklin), Thomas Gates (Franklin), Bob Irish (MVU), Julia Callan (Sheldon), John Creelman,(Swanton) Nola Gilbert (Highgate), Chris Shepard (Highgate), John Ho (MVU), David Roddy, (Highgate), Richard Flint, (Highgate), Mary Wood, Swanton.
Others present: Winton Goodrich, Superintendent; Becky Hart, Business Manager, Lora McAllister, Assistant Business Manager, Michelle Spence, Jay Denault, Jim Jewett and Pierrette Bouchard, School Board Secretary.
AGENDA:
Call Meeting to Order- Jason McConnell called the Sheldon Board meeting to order at 7:14pm. Jay Cummings called the Swanton School Board Meeting to order at 7:15pm. Tim Magnant called the Franklin School Board meeting to order at 7:15pm. Jason Mcconnell explained that the purpose of this meeting was to discuss whether or not to proceed with the Act 46 706 study.
Public Comments and Correspondence There was no public comment.
Winton Goodrich provided an Act 46 Power Point presentation. Win went over the Act 46 goals and the five domains of the Act 46 Legal Requirements.
Act 46 Goals
Move state towards sustainable education governance models
Encourage local decisions and actions that:
•Provide substantial equity in the quality and variety of education opportunities
•Lead students to meet or exceed state Educational Quality Standards
•Maximize operational efficiencies through greater flexibility to manage, share, and transfer resources, with a goal of increasing district-level student-to-staff ratios
•Promote transparency and accountability
•Are delivered at a cost valued by parents, voters, and taxpayers
Act 46 Legal Requirements
Local School Board Authority
Learn about the complexities of the Act 46 law
Research and study governance options
Present the pros and cons of a merged district to voters
Vote to become a member of an Act 46/706b Governance Study
Select member of the Study Committee
If District is identified as “Advisable,” School Board decides whether to schedule a public vote, upon completion of Study
If no merger, local school board will present argument to State Board for not merging
How Will Study Benefit Each School
Provide cost/benefit school operations analysis
Compare current program quality and student learning opportunities to possible merged district
Identify accurate information
Collect data for presentation to State Board that supports why Board shouldn’t merge
What Influences the Timeline?
To qualify for the $20,000 study grant, the Act 46 study must be completed by June 30, 2017
In order to take advantage of tax reduction incentives, a successful merger vote must occur by June 30, 2017
If no support for merger by voters, Board must attest to the State Board in November, 2017 why the school shouldn’t be merged
What Would Board Be Committing To?
Become a member of a 16 V.S.A 706 Union School Study Committee
If other boards agree, Study Committee representation:
1 = Franklin 2 = Highgate 4 = Swanton
Committee and local boards decide which districts are necessary to the merger and which are advisable
What Would Board Be Committing To?
Committee answer questions developed from Act 46 preliminary study and from state law 16 V.S.A. 706b
If agreed, Committee forward Articles of Agreement to State Board for ratification
Upon Study completion, Committee decides whether to convene public votes in each necessary town
School Board decides whether to move forward to vote in advisable town, unless petitioned by 10% of voters
What Would Board Be Committing To?
Advisable members will not merge unless voters support it following a public vote
If two towns merge, third town will still operate an elementary school
Non-merged district will still have board representation for middle/high school students
If Move Forward, Next Steps
April – December - If two or more town boards agree, appoint members of a formal 706b Study Committee and convene a $20,000 study (paid for with state funds)
706b Committee decides whether sufficient benefits to schedule a community vote before June 30, 2017
Role of Study Committee
Decide “Necessary” or “Advisable” school districts
Grade levels
Cost of renovations and/or new schools
Year-one plan for transportation, staff, curriculum, new collective bargaining agreement, other
Role of Study Committee
Assumed debt from all schools
Value of school property and how pay bills
Allocation of capital and operating expenses
Method for apportioning board members
Role of Study Committee
Board members term of office
Vote date
Date new district will begin to operate
Any other matters
Following is a summary of the discussion that took place following the powerpoint:
Connie Beyor inquired about doing an independent study instead of the 706 study. She felt that the boards need a rationale to merge or not to merge and she would like an unbiased study completed. The board talked about the role of the study committee. The boards discussed who makes the decision on who is advisable and who is necessary. Win explained that when other Supervisory Unions entered a 706 study committee, the school boards decided whether they wanted to be necessary or advisable and the 706 study committee respected the decision. Toby Maguire stated that with Swanton having the largest number of representation, couldn’t Swanton decide that everyone is necessary? Jay Denault stated that the ultimate authority to decide whether a town is necessary or advisable lies with the 706 study committee. Bob Irish felt that there is no drive for a perceived merger, that most of the communities did not have an interest in merging. Jay Cummings explained that Swanton is prepared to go to the $20,000 study. They are willing to look at it, feels like there is still a lot to be learned. Bob Irish felt that this study does not seem to look at the options of not consolidating. Connie Beyor thought there are five goals that the boards should be looking at as in the above power point. She felt that it would be worthwhile to look at efficiencies, talk about educational opportunity, and quality services. She thought if they did an independent study that they could come up with their own make up of representation and include MVU. Bob Irish wondered if there is some way that we can accomplish these Act 46 goals without merging? Can we operate as a cohesive unit without merging? Tom Gates stated that there is no support for merging. Can we benefit from a 706 study, gather the information to make a case to stay as we are. It appears that looking at other 706 studies, they are pro merger and pro consolidation. It doesn’t look like we are going to get the answers we are looking for and it appears if we accept the grant, there are these strings attached to it. Forming a 706 committee may not be the best way to find out the pros and the cons. John Creelman agreed that a good study would bring up both sides of merging, the pros and the cons. Connie Beyor stated that we will need to determine the questions we need to ask before going ahead with the study. Tim Magnant lacks the confidence in the state guided grant. Mary Wood hesitates to do an independent study because she felt that we would be relying on our local school administrators to do a lot of the research and they are already doing a lot with running their schools. Win will look into doing an independent study and the possibilities to obtain an Act 153 Grant. Will need an independent person that can be unbiased and skilled in finance. When presenting to the State Board in November 2017, Franklin Northwest will need to go with some hard data and rationale for not merging if that is the direction they would like to go. This information could be obtained through an independent study. He reminded the board that they could still go through a Nate Levinson’s operations study. If the school boards implemented the recommendations, some Supervisory Unions did save money from this study. Board members would like to include Sheldon in their study. Bob asked if there is wiggle room in an alternative structure? Jason McConnell expressed his disappointment in the $5,000 study. After seeing other SU completed 706b studies, it appeared to be more of a merger plan instead of a study showing the advantages and disadvantages of consolidating. Bob Irish stated that if we enter an independent study, the board will need to have clear goals on what they want to accomplish. Tom Gates suggested that the committee needs to develop clear questions that individual districts want answered so that the independent study will obtain a fact finding report meeting these objectives.
The school boards recessed to caucus individually at 8:40pm. Jason reconvened the meeting at 9:10pm. Jason asked the board chairs of each school district board on what direction they would like to move. Connie Beyor stated that the Highgate School Board opts for an independent study. Tim Magnant stated that they wanted to discuss this further at a local board meeting but at this time, they were leaning in the direction of an independent study. Jay Cummings stated that the Swanton School Board still wanted to continue with a 706 study and with whom ever wants to join them. Denis Boucher of the MVU School Board does not have a quorum at this meeting, but the board members attending this meeting wants to move in the direction of an independent study. Jason McConnell stated that the Sheldon School Board wanted to move forward with an independent study. Jay Cummings commented that Swanton is not opposed to an independent study and wants to be part of an initial study. The following is a summary of the meeting:
- How can we move forward and look at pros and cons of merger
- Look at options even if don’t undertake study
- How meet Act 46 goals without merging
- Convene an independent study rather than no study at all and form a plan to meet Act 46 goals
- Hire own independent facilitator
- Establish clear goals and direction
- Direct existing committee to identify necessary information that needs to be gathered
The Act 46 All Member School Boards meeting adjourned at 9:15pm.