ANNE ARUNDEL COUNTY
BOARD
OF EDUCATION
MINUTES, MARCH 17, 2004
APPROVED, APRIL 7, 2004
The Board of The Board of Education met on the above date with the following members in attendance: Ms. Heidemann, Ms. Johnson, Messrs. Rudolph, Spencer, McNelly, Peterson, and Wayson. Mr. Carey was absent. Mr. Rudolph opened the meeting with the Invocation and Pledge of Allegiance.
EXECUTIVE SESSION: The Board met in executive session on March 3, 2004 at 10:00 AM in the Caucus Room of the Administration Building. The purpose of the meeting was to discuss personnel matters, consult with counsel to obtain legal advice, consult on litigation and to discuss negotiations in accordance with Sections 10-508(a)(1), (7), (8) and (9) of the Open Meetings Act. The vote to close the meeting was (6-0). Others in attendance were Dr. Eric Smith, Mr. Tyson Bennett, Ms. Synthia Shilling and Molly Connolly.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Ms. Heidemann made a motion to approve the minutes of February 25, 2004. Ms. Johnson seconded the motion.
On a motion duly made and seconded, the Board voted (7-0), Mr. Carey absent, to approve the minutes of February 25, 2004.
Mr. Peterson commented that he had requested that additional remarks he made at the meeting be inserted into the minutes ver batim, and that was done.
ESTABLISH AGENDA ORDER: Ms. Heidemann made a motion that the following items be removed from the agenda: Item 6.01, ESOL Program Update and Item 6.03, Bridge to Excellence Master Plan Mid-Year Report.
Mr. Peterson seconded the motion.
On a motion duly made and seconded, the Board voted (7-0) to remove those items from the agenda.
RECOGNITIONS: Ms. Mary Gable, director of high schools presented. The Maryland High School Theatre Educational Association awarded Krista Parker, Drama Director of Old Mill High School's Patriot Players, the Maryland High School Citation for Outstanding Service to Secondary Theatre. She is the association's selection as the only statewide winner.
Anne Arundel County is proud to have five students named as National Merit Finalists. From Severna Park High the following students were awarded: Erica Mallare, Daniel McAllister and Adam Mirvis. From Broadneck High School, Stephanie Chambers was awarded. From Old Mill High School, David McLaren was awarded. The National Merit Finalist Scholarship Program is an academic competition for recognition and the scholarships that began in 1955. High school students enter the National Merit Scholarship Program by taking the PSAT. Of the more than 1.3 million entrants, only 15,000 earn this honor.
EDUCATOR OF THE MONTH: Mr. Elliott Harvey from MacArthur Middle School was awarded.
EMPLOYEE OF THE MONTH: Mr. Borko Kos, Carol S. Parham Administration Building was awarded.
VOLUNTEER OF THE MONTH: Lynda Kroh, Bodkin Elementary School, was awarded.
CRASC REPORT: Matthew Eierman, CRASC 2nd Vice-President reported to the Board. He thanked Dr. Smith for speaking at the February General Assembly. The General Assembly CRASC elected the 2004-2005 Student Member on the Board (SMOB), Ms. Sarah Ferguson from Arundel High School. CRASC compiled that data collected from advisors and students resulting in CRASC’s general consensus that it does not support the schedule change for exams for the 2004-2005 school year. CRASC is now accepting officer nomination for the 2004-2005 school year. Officer elections will be held sometime in April. Mr. Eierman informed the Board that Meet the Board Night is May 18th from 6:30 to 8:00 PM.
CAC REPORT: Mr. Sam Georgiou Countywide CAC Chair acknowledged and thanked County Executive, Janet Owens for speaking with the CAC at their March 11th meeting. Ms. Owens spent time with community members discussing concerns about funding and education. Mr. Georgiou commended her for her candid approach to the questions that were asked of her and her efforts to explain her positions and priorities for education, as well as all government services in the county. He believes that the CAC was successful in their endeavor of enlightening CAC members on the budget funding process and allowing the County Executive to understand the sentiments of the community. The next CAC meeting is Thursday, March 25th at 7:00 PM. On the agenda is election of officers and discussion of concerns brought forth during small group breakout sessions that took place at the January meeting.
PTA REPORT: No report.
PUBLIC PARTICIPATION: The following citizens spoke in favor of funding of the Gifted and Talented Program in Anne Arundel County Public Schools: Julie Sweeney, Chip Seymour, David Wissman, the Reverend Mamie Williams, Molly Kalifut, Nancy Zhou, Cori Dykman, Andrew Dykman, Lynne Tucker, Mara O’Connell, Jennifer Wheeler, Valerie Solarz, Sarah Lock, Laurella Ganey, Steve Donnelly, Denise O’Neill, Christina Harle, Rachael Goad, Tricia Hopkins, Linda Carter-Ferrier, Alan Hirsch, James Keeney, Mark McWilliams, Marsha Lob, Zac Plitt, Laura Carr and Steve Johnson.
Stan Platek told the Board that he is vehemently opposed to the placement of an “alternative school” program at the entrance to Central Elementary School. He presented the Board with a petition signed by citizens who feel it would seriously threaten the safety of the children.
Mary Bachkosky, Shipley’s Choice Elementary School CAC spoke to the Board regarding the 2004-2005 calendar and stated the views of the CAC on staff development days, early dismissals, and parent conferences. She also spoke in favor of funding the gifted and talented program.
Martin Krause spoke to the Board about a possible “alternative education program” in Edgewater. Mr. Krause is confused about to the process of community input when partnerships are formed by the school system.
Mr. Rudolph said that the Board makes final decisions and at this point in time no discussion has taken place by this Board about anything at that intersection.
Frank Wise, parent and concerned citizen spoke to the Board about budget cuts made by the Board. He believes that the Board went beyond its role. This is not a Board with taxing authority that has a more direct fiscal involvement in school system finance.
Mr. McNelly said that he wants to address people in Edgewater. He is coming from the background of one of the troubled students who was saved, not by an alternative program, but by a couple of caring teachers who took time out of their lives to help a troubled young man. For twenty-six years he was a police officer, risking his life every day for the people in Edgewater. He has read the letters the Board has received on this issue and he believes that many of those letters were written from a campaign of fear. These students that the system is doing everything it can to help, are getting a bad rap in those letters. The issue is really about academic intervention for troubled kids. They are not mass murderers or pulling armed robberies. Mr. McNelly has a big problem with the label that is being put on these children. He is from South County and he is becoming ashamed of his neighbors. He would venture to say that if Harvard wanted to build on that triangle no one would have a problem. He wants his perception to be understood. Has this Board made any determination or decision to place an alternative program or a school on the piece of property? The answer is no. Tell the people who signed the petition that the answer is no. McNelly would like to see the kids left of out it.
ADMINISTRATIVE PERSONNEL APPOINTMENTS: No appointments.
PERFORMANCE AUDIT: The Board requested at the February 4, 2004 meeting that staff develop a timeline to perform a Management Performance Review for use in the next budget cycle. Dr. Hirsch, director of finance, presented the Board with a revised timeline as a result of discussions of the steering committee. The timeline is a suggestion, pending approval by the Board, availability of funding and development of a scope of work. The Steering Committee has been established and is developing the final scope of work. The Purchasing Office is ready to finalize the Request for Proposal (RFP) for distribution.
Mr. Wayson said that he believes that in these tight financial times, the system cannot afford to hire an outside firm to conduct an audit of the system. He said that Mr. Georgiou was correct when he suggested that the Budget Task Force would be the proper organization to conduct this audit. He believes that there needs to be some further comparison and analysis and that the Budget Task Force should recommend an audit to the Board. He therefore made a motion to assign the responsibility to the Budget Task Force.
Ms. Johnson said that she was part of the subcommittee as well. There was great dialogue and good discussions with County Council members, staff and members of the Board. She believes that if the Board can have a good working relationship with the Budget Task Force as well as Mr. Federowicz the system auditor, who can assist the Task Force, this will be a great thing. She therefore seconds Mr. Wayson’s motion.
Mr. McNelly said that this would be a good way to save money. Would Mr. Wayson consider an amendment to include an amendment that members of the Board service on the Budget Task Force.
Mr. Wayson said that an amendment is not necessary. The way it stands any member of the Board can participate and he volunteers to participate.
Mr. McNelly said that he would like to volunteer as well.
Mr. Wayson thanked Mr. Georgiou for his ideas and all his help.
On a motion duly made and seconded, the Board voted (6-0), Mr. Carey absent, Mr. Spencer away, to approve the Budget Task Force taking on the job of a performance audit of central office.
ADEQUATE FACILITIES ORDINANCE: Dr. Smith reviewed his recommendations regarding the development of capacities for AACPS schools, and a proposed addition to Policy 900.01, Assignment of Students to a School.
Dr. Smith said that there are two parts to this. One is the superintendent’s recommended formula for capacities of elementary and secondary schools. He recommends this formula and asks the Board for action tonight on this item. Secondly, he suggests that the policy does not have as many implications and it is not as time sensitive to have the policy acted on as the formula. The formula needs to be acted on so that it can be converted into tables and then brought back to the Board to evaluate so that it can be sent on to County government. He suggests that the policy be referred to the policy review subcommittee of the Board so that it can be digested and analyzed.
Mr. McNelly made a motion to approve the Superintendent’s recommendation. Ms. Heidemann seconded the motion.
While Mr. Peterson is in general agreement with this he wants to make sure that anything that goes to the County Council will not have any language about magnet schools and other things that the system does not have a policy on.
Dr. Wise said that the product that the Board is required to send forward is a utilization chart.
Ms. Johnson clarified what the superintendent is recommending is as follows: Pre-K stays the same, 20:1, 20:1; Kindergarten changes from the state recommended 22:1 to 18:1; Grades 1-5 state recommended is 25:1 and it would change to 20:1 for grades 1-2; 25:1 for grade 3 and 28:1 in grades 4-5. Special Ed would stay the same at 10:1. She asked for confirmation that is the part of the formula that the Board is voting on tonight.
Dr. Wise confirmed and said that the Board is also voting on retaining the state-rated capacity for secondary school.
Dr. Smith noted that for the media and for those who are in the audience, these changes do not change current practices.
Mr. Rudolph asked for clarification on what format this chart would be in when it goes to the county.
Dr. Wise said that this would go to the county as a utilization chart. Once the chart is made up using the formula, the chart will be brought to the Board for approval. It will be a blank chart, like a template. This blank chart will have to be approved by the County. Then each individual school will be applied to the chart and brought back to the Board. If the Board approves the chart on April 7th, the deadline of submittal to the Council will be the following day.
On a motion duly made and seconded the Board voted (6-0), Mr. Spencer away, Mr. Carey absent, to approve the Superintendent’s recommendation.
Public Participation: Steve Donnelly commented to the Board that school utilization requirements change every year.
REDISTRICTING: Dr. Wise referred to the Superintendent’s recommendation for a boundary clarification of the following streets in the community of Shipley’s Choice: Scarlet Glen Court, Sourwood Court, Buckeye Court, Elm Court, and Minstrel Court. These streets are within the community of Shipley’s Choice and are across Governor Stone Parkway from Shipley’s Choice Elementary School. These streets were not reflected in the attendance map of the original creation of the Shipley’s Choice Elementary School boundary. Students living on these streets have attended Shipley’s Choice Elementary School from the date of its opening. This is the Superintendent’s recommendation.
Mr. McNelly motioned to approve the Superintendent’s recommendation. Ms. Heidemann seconded.
On a motion duly made and seconded, the Board voted (6-0), Mr. Spencer away, Mr. Carey absent, to approve the Superintendent’s recommendation.
Dr. Wise offered the Superintendent’s redistricting recommendation as follows: Redistrict students from Mills Parole Elementary School to Edgewater Elementary School, including all elementary students residing north of the South River in geographical areas that currently feed students into Central Middle School and South River High School.
Mr. McNelly motioned to approve the Superintendent’s recommendation. Ms. Heidemann seconded.
Mr. Peterson said that as his fellow Board members are aware, he asked Mr. Yocum for some specific demographic data on the schools in question. He believes that in the 25th anniversary of Brown vs. the Board of Education, this is the wrong way to go in Anne Arundel Public Schools and the wrong message to send. As he reviewed the data, it became clear to him with the current students the system has, let along the students in private school, that the system would see a net loss in terms of the percentage of minority students there, a full percentage point – is that not correct?
Mr. Yocum confirmed. Mr. Peterson said he would like to go on record so that it is understood what action is being taken. In his opinion, this action flies in the face of diversity, of what Thurgood Marshall stood for, and the whole idea of people needing to get together. As Rodney King once said famously, “can’t we all just get along?” He believes that unintentionally, this looks like resegregation, and he will therefore vote against it.
Mr. McNelly stated that this is a reaffirmation of a promise that the Board made to this community several years ago. The Board basically told the community that when seats open up at Edgewater Elementary School for the students who live in the Edgewater school district, then the Board would take care of the issue. By this action, the Board is reuniting those students into their own feeder system. Therefore, this is just continuing on the promise that a former Board made to a community.
Mr. Heidemann said that with all due respect to Mr. Peterson, she proposed this amendment not to resegregate children in public schools; she does not believe it that. She made the proposal so that children could go to middle school and high school with the children with whom they attended elementary school. That was not the intention of her motion.
Mr. Wayson asked for confirmation so that he understood the motion. The Board, by this action, is allowing elementary school children who live in the Edgewater feeder system to attend Edgewater Elementary School. Since the elementary school was crowded several years ago and there was not enough space for the students living in the geographical area in question to attend Edgewater, those elementary school children were moved into another feeder system. Now the only children that are not back in the Edgewater feeder system are the elementary school children. Once they are promoted from elementary school, they move back into the Edgewater system. Therefore, what the Board is doing is putting the elementary school children back in their own feeder system so that they stay in the feeder system with their peers in their community.
Mr. Peterson said that the numbers speak for themselves, and the thing that has happened here in his opinion is not morally defensible.
Ms. Johnson asked Mr. Yocum for confirmation if this is the only elementary school that is out of its feeder system currently. Mr. Yocum replied that there are other students who attend Chesapeake Bay Middle School and then come back to Northeast High for high school, but that is because of overcrowding at George Fox Middle School. That is the only other one.
Mr. Rudolph said that he would support the motion because it is all about the kids.
On a motion duly made and seconded, the Board voted (5-1). Mr. Peterson against, Mr. Spencer away and Mr. Carey absent, to approve the Superintendent’s recommendation. The motion carries.
Mr. Rudolph asked that the restructuring plan for Van Bokkelen Elementary School be moved up and considered next.
RESTRUCTURING PLAN FOR VAN BOKKELEN ELEMEMTARY SCHOOL: Synthia Shilling, Assistant Superintendent, Nancy Mann, Assistant Superintendent, and Catherine Herbert, Instructional Director, presented. COMAR requires that Schools in Restructuring develop a Plan of Action designed to improve academic achievement. These restructuring actions must demonstrate that they have “substantial” promise of enabling the school to make AYP. The presenters reviewed with the Board the details of AYP Summary and Required actions for AYP schools.
The Van Bokkelen Plan of Action includes the following major components: a plan for an Extended Year Program and an Extended Day Program, reductions in class size as indicated by research, and significant changes in school staffing to improve academic achievement.
Mr. Peterson asked what this would cost. Ms. Mann said she would have to get those figures to him, as they have not been cost out yet.
Dr. Smith said that the estimate he is using is approximately one half million dollars for the extended year and for additional staffing in addition to other items. As the restructuring evolves and is refined, he will provide the Board with the detailed figures to bring the budget to fruition in the June timeframe.
Mr. Peterson said that this is important because if all the good work at Van Bokkelen does not make the school make Annual Yearly Progress this is yet another required cost that the system will not be able to find the money for, correct?
Dr. Smith confirmed, and also stated that there is no question in his mind that Van Bokkelen is going to make it this year. Dr. Smith commented that AYP goes up every year; it is not a maintenance schedule, but a continuous improvement schedule. In most part, this recommendation still needs to be funded for next year. The Van Bokkelen team, with success this year, is still going to need the extended year and additional support or else they are going to run into continued frustration in years out. We have to start building on the out year success that can be built on this year.
Mr. Peterson would like to go on record that starting out with this restructuring, the system is dealing with a deficit, minus, in the best case, $2.5M because of the budget numbers that were sent to the county. The public needs to know that the Board is deficit spending even before they have the money.
Dr. Smith said that the system would have to find the money.
Mr. Rudolph asked about summer school, teachers, and bus transportation.
Mrs. Tasker, principal, said that summer school is planned for the month of July and that the teachers would be AACPS teachers. In addition, some bus transportation would be provided, but many of the students walk to school.
Mr. Rudolph asked if summer school would be mandatory, to which Dr. Smith responded, yes, if the school does not make AYP, summer school would be mandatory. In addition, all three components of the Plan of Action would work together at the same time.
Mr. Rudolph said that he would like the Board to put their stamp of approval on the plan and that it be brought back to the Board at the next meeting.
Ms. Shilling said that the matter is on the way to the state and the state Board will consider the matter on April 20th.
MINORITY BUSINESS ENTERPRISE COMMITTEE FOLLOW-UP: Mr. Greg Nourse, Assistant Superintendent, and Mr.Wayne Frazier, member of the Minority Business Enterprise Task Force presented. In response to the Minority Business Enterprise Program report for FY 2002, a task force was established by the Superintendent to explore and report on various policy and/or program initiatives, which could be taken to enhance minority participation on contracts awarded to the school system.
The recommendations with the report were provided to the Board for information on February 4, 2004. Staff is requesting Board direction on the recommendations within the report as it relates to Board policies and procedures. Mr. Nourse provided the Board with 8 recommendations that have resulted from meetings of the minority business task force.
Mr. Rudolph suggested that the Board form a subcommittee to work with Mr. Nourse to come up with some answers. For example, what would the cost be to have an outside person come in and what are the possibilities of getting certification other than through the Maryland Department of Transportation and what is required? There are a lot of unanswered questions and he would like to see a subcommittee of the Board work to resolve those issues. He knows that the purchasing department does quite a bit to get minorities involved but possibly that could be increased.
Mr. Peterson would like to see a Board subcommittee developed, which would take all the recommendations, work with the people who have helped devise the recommendations and bring a final proposal back to the Board for adoption. Mr. Rudolph confirmed that that was his suggestion.
Mr. Wayson agrees and believes that the Board needs to move on this, get a committee together and he would like to serve on the committee. He would like to recruit minority businesses to participate and move forward on this as quickly as possible.
Mr. Spencer congratulated the task force for their recommendations. If there are alternatives that have to be considered, he believes the Board should be open to giving this a jumpstart. There has been a study and he believes that the task force understands what the system needs to do, and what it want it wants to do in terms of the minority business enterprise.
Dr. Smith said that the recommendations of the task force have been well thought out and well debated. He believes that a subcommittee of the Board could take these recommendations and shape them into what they mean in terms of budget, in terms of policy and so forth. The subcommittee would then bring their ideas back to the Board as a whole. He sees this as an appropriate next step.
Mr. Rudolph asked for a consensus of Board members to form a Board subcommittee. There was a consensus among the Board that a subcommittee be formed composed of Messrs. Wayson and Peterson.
LEGISLATIVE UPDATE: Robert Leib, Director of Business and Government Services presented to the Board. House Bill 345 became chapter 6 of the 2004 Laws of Maryland without the Governor’s signature. This bill appeals the trigger provision of the Bridge to Excellence in Public Schools Act of 2004. It was an emergency measure; it took effect immediately. The trigger is out and Thornton is moving along.
HB 555 – Chesapeake Bay Watershed Restoration – the Board voted previously to oppose the legislation. It is currently on the House floor. Some delegates are trying to adhere to the school Board’s wishes to have public schools exempted. But right now it appears as though there will be no exemptions.
Mr. Leib informed the Board that the Superintendent received a letter from Congressman Ben Cardin pledging his strong support in our efforts to obtain increased federal impact aid for military students attending the school system as well as the military construction appropriation for the construction of Seven Oaks Elementary School.
Mr. Leib then reviewed with the Board the status of the bills that the Board has previously taken positions on, including HB 1505 and its companion bill SB 894, the Education Fiscal Accountability and Oversight Act. The Superintendent recommends that the Board oppose this bill.
Mr. Spencer made a motion to oppose the legislation. Ms. Heidemann seconded the motion.
On a motion duly made and seconded, the Board voted (6-0), Mr. McNelly away, Mr. Carey absent, to approve the Superintendent’s recommendation. The motion carries.
SB 487, HB 1155, and HB 631 the State Supplement to Federal Impact Aid and State Supplement to Federal Impact Aid – Children With Disabilities – Nonpublic Placement Students. This measure is in line with the Board’s policies and positions. Therefore a vote is not necessary by the Board.
HB 1442 Full-Day Kindergarten – Extension. This bill would provide a process whereby county boards of education, in conjunction with their governing county body could apply to the State Superintendent of Schools for an extension in regards to the implementation of full day kindergarten by the 2007-2008 school year. The Superintendent recommends that the Board support this measure with the amendments made by Del. Cadden.
Mr. Johnson made a motion to support the legislation. Ms. Heidemann seconded the motion.
Mr. Peterson’s concern is the message that would be sent by deviating from the Thornton recommendations. He believes that the intentions of the legislators were clear during the election year when they expressed support for public education. They need to live up to that responsibility and full funding of all day kindergarten is right and it is necessary. Although he understands the Superintendent’s recommendation, Mr. Peterson will be voting against this measure.
Ms. Johnson said that each county needs to make its own decision and this bill will allow that. Therefore, she will support the measure so that the decision-making process is not taken away from each individual county, and knowing that AACPS will go full ahead with the program.
Ms. Heidemann confirmed that this is not an excuse or procrastination, but instead if an emergency situation arises, it would be something that a county could fall back on. Who would judge what is an emergency and what is not?
Mr. Leib said that the Board of Education and the county governing body would make the first judgment, the state Superintendent would make the second judgment, and the state Board would make the third and final judgment.
Mr. Rudolph will vote against the measure because he does not want to give the governing bodies any kind of wiggle room.
On a motion duly made and seconded, the Board voted (2-4), Mr. Wayson and Ms. Johnson in favor, Messrs. Peterson, Rudolph, Spencer and Ms. Heideman opposed, Mr. McNelly away, Mr. Carey absent. The motion does not carry.
Ms. Heidemann asked for an update on the legislation that proposes an elected school board. Mr. Leib said the legislation has been withdrawn.
MONTHLY FINANCIAL STATUS REPORT: Mr. Jim Goodwyn, budget supervisor, reviewed with the Board Year-to-Date Expenditures through February 29, 2004 in the general fund, the grant fund, general fund revenue and expenditure projections, and the general fund unrestricted. Two items have been identified that are not included in the projected expenditures, the human resources software upgrade for $600,000 and a $400,000 software upgrade to the special education software program.
Mr. Peterson asked about debt service, which is at 100%, and it was not last year. Is that because of a higher assessment from the county?
Mr. Goodwyn said no, it has to do with when the county makes that deduction to the system’s budget.
Mr. Peterson asked about the fund balance, which has been reduced from last year’s fund balance. Is this a trend? This is of extreme concern to him and we cannot continue in this trend because he does not want to end up on the negative side in the next fiscal year.
Mr. Wayson asked why the computer software upgrades were not included in the budget.
Mr. Rudolph said that the intent was to go to the county and ask for money from the surplus.
Dr. Smith said that the software upgrades are critical. He presented several options to the Board and said that he would like guidance from the Board as to how it would like to proceed.
Mr. Rudolph believes that the FY 03 fund balance will disappear July 1st if the Board does not at least attempt to spend it. He asked for a motion to request the additional consideration items out of last year’s fund balance from the County Executive and the County Council.
Mr. Spencer made the motion. Mr. Peterson seconded.
On a motion duly made and seconded, the Board voted (6-0), Mr. McNelly away, Mr. Carey absent, to request the additional monies for the software upgrades from the County Executive and County Council from the FY 03 fund balance.
DESIGN DEVELOPMENT DRAWINGS: CHESAPEAKE HIGH SCHOOL SCIENCE DEPARTMENT MODERNIZATION: Mr. Peterson made a motion to bundle the items. Mr. Rudolph said that one is an easement and one is construction, so he would like to do them separately.
The Superintendent recommends the Board of Education approve the design development documents for the Chesapeake High School Science Department Modernization project.
Mr. Spencer made a motion to take the item from information to action. Ms. Heidemann seconded.
On a motion duly made and seconded, the Board voted (6-0), Mr. McNelly away, Mr. Carey absent, to take the item from information to action.
The Board has the Superintendent’s recommendation.
Mr. Peterson made a motion to approve the Superintendent’s recommendation. Mr. Wayson seconded.
On a motion duly made and seconded, the Board voted (6-0), Mr. McNelly away, Mr. Carey absent, to approve the Superintendent’s recommendation. The motion carries.
CONSERVATION EASEMENT AT SEVEN OAKS ELEMENTARY SCHOOL: Tyson Bennett, Board Counsel explained that this is an easement that will set aside two small portions of the Seven Oaks Elementary School site that will be kept in a natural state and will not be developed or disturbed. Mr. Bennett confirmed previous questions by the Board about timeliness of the project and assurance from staff that there will be no construction or development planned for these two areas. All technical and drafting changes have been made to the easement. There are no substantive changes. Mr. Bennett recommended that the Board approve the easement.
Ms. Johnson made a motion move the item from information. Mr. Spencer seconded the motion.
On a motion duly made and seconded, the Board voted (6-0), Mr. McNelly away, Mr. Carey absent, to move the item from information to action.
The Superintendent recommends approval of the Conservation Easement at Seven Oaks Elementary School.
Ms. Johnson motioned to approve the Superintendent’s recommendation. Mr. Spencer seconded the motion.
On a motion duly made and seconded, the Board voted (6-0), Mr. McNelly away, Mr. Carey absent, to approve the Superintendent’s recommendation. The motion carries.
Mr. Wayson made a motion to adjourn. Ms. Johnson seconded.
On a motion duly made and seconded, the Board voted (6-0), Mr. McNelly away, Mr. Carey absent, to adjourn.
The Board adjourned at 11:04 P.M.