The URL can be used to link to this page

2009-05-07 Packetofr~taocu-~L CHESTERFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS & SCHOOL BOARD May 7, 2009 -Camp Thunderbird Getting Started jaintit 8oa~v+d. Meetf~ng~ Welcom • Art Warren, Chairman, Board of Supervisors • Marshall Trammell, Chairman, School Board ,~ 2 Setting the Stage jaintit 8oa~v+d. Meetf~ ,~ A Di ion of Prioriti • Dr. Dale Kalkofen (Schools) • Allan Carrnod~r (Counter) 3 Setting the Stage jaintit 8oa~v+d. Meetf~ ,~ • Count's Strategic Plan outlines s~v~n goals • Departments have individual objectives and action plans tied to Strategic Plan (included is budget docuineat) • Strategic Plan updated every four dears - an opporh~ait~ to 1'~~~Ll~t~ ~P10P1t1~S 4 Setting the Stage jaintit 8oa~v+d. Meetf~ A Focus on Education and Publi~ • For FY2o~o, 6o percent of General Find ~penditures dedicated to education (42 percent) and public safety (18 percent) • 74 p~rc~nt of locally generated r~v~nue dedicated for edu~atioa and public safety ,~ 5 Setting the Stage jaintit 8oa~v+d. Meetf~ ~) To be ~emplary stewards of the public trust and a model for ~cellence is government 2) To provide world-class customer service 3) To b~ knov~n for eartraordiaar~ quality of life 4) To be the safest and most s~cur~ community 5) To b~ the emplo~~r of choice 6) To b~ the FIRST CHOICE business community ~) To be responsible protectors of the environment ,~ 6 Setting the Stage jaintit 8oa~v+d. Meetf~ Goal 6: To be the FIRST CHOICE business community • Sub-Goal 6.~: Continually irrl~rove c~e~aental anc~ cross- c~e~aental processes that encourage capital investrrlent in the county b~ current anc~ ~ros~ective businesses • Objective 6.i.i; Improve and make more competitive the regulations, taxation and communication tools that attract and retain businesses • Sub-Goal 6. ~:1Vlaintain ~ ratio of coxuxuerci~l/inc~ustri~l t base to residential tam base in the range of ~o to ~5 percent • Objective 6.~.~: Inc~ea~~e the q~-a~ntit~ and c~~-alit~ of jobs each ~ea~ • Objective 6.~.~: Inc~ea~~e ~ea~l ~~o~ex in~e~trr~ent f~orr~ b~-~ine~~ bar rr~o~e than ~ ~ o o rr~illion ~ea~l~ wind bar ~ 9 0 o rr~illion o~e~ the newt fog ~ea~~ ,~, Setting the Stage jaintit 8oa~v+d. Meetf~ . . T~a~~~'o~a~ ll~leasu~es • Number of outre~c~i ~i~it~ • Nurr~ber of bu~ine~~e~ recei~in~ coun~elin~ • Number of ~cti~e ~roject~ • Nurr~ber of bu~ine~~e~ loc~tin~ in enter~ri~e zone ~~ A~~e~ ll~leasu~es • Net change in private payroll employment in county • County unemployment rate • Value of new commercial construction • Ratio of County payroll employment to labor force 3 ~/ ,_ ~ ~ _~ _ ~_ - 8 Planning for Growth jo%v~t' 8oa~v+d. Meetf~ng~ Review of ion Proiecti ive P • Kirk T~.irner, County Planning Director ,~ 9 Planning for Growth jo%v~t' 8oa~v+d. Meetf~ng~ Po~ul~tion Poi actions: 10.0% ~ 8.0% V 6.0% - Average Growth 1972-2009: 3.7% ~-' 4.0% v y., 2.0 % 1.0% 0.0% 1972 1976 1980 1984 1988 1992 1996 2000 2004 2008 ,~ 10 Planning for Growth jo%v~t' 8oa~v+d. Meetf~ng~ Population Proiections: Housing Activity (S`ingle Family Permits) 4, 500 4, 000 3,500 3, 000 2,500 .,.., ~ 2, 000 w ^, 1,500 ~ 1,000 , 500 0 1980 ,~ 1984 1988 1992 1996 2000 2004 ~5 2008 11 Planning for Growth jo%v~t' 8oa~v+d. Meetf~ng~ elation Proiections: Projection ~'hang~s 2oso ~ 2025 2020 ~ ~ 2015 2010 2005 2000 0 100,000 200,000 300,000 400,000 ,~ (23,700) (19,300) (15,400) (12,200) (6,000) ^ Current Former Po pulatio n 500,000 12 Planning for Growth jo%v~t' 8oa~v+d. Meetf~ng~ r u ~: ~- -~~.~~ ~.~ .~: Vacant Land Zoned for Residential Use ~•~' .~ ~.. !. . . 4M1 ~~~ H.: . , ti'a ' 3anuary'1.,2009 14 Planning for Growth jo%v~t' 8oa~v+d. Meetf~ng~ Count v Comurehensive Plan: Goals and Objecti~aes • Establish a countide vision `n~ith implemeatable countide policies and objectives • Clarify and consolidate land use recommendations • Coordinate land use recommendations with transportation, utilities, schools and other public facilities • Integrate the most important ~lemeats of e~usting area plans with broader countyv~id~ objectives ,~ 15 Planning for Growth jo%v~t' 8oa~v+d. Meetf~ng~ Count v Comurehensive Plan: Goals and Objecti~aes • Consider iano~ati~e land use (i.e, smart growth) and facilities financing options • Analyze and establish I.e~els of Ser~ic~ criteria that lead to sound public facility recommendations • M~~t 11~W State IaW P~~ll1I'~IY1~IItS • Incorporate green infrastructure and sustaiaability objectives ,~ 16 Planning for Growth jo%v~t' 8oa~v+d. Meetf~ng~ ive Plan: • S~rin~ 2009: • Surr~rr~er 2009: • Fill 2009: • ~llrinter 2 O 1 O • S~rin~ 2010: • Fill 2010: ,~ Proposed Schedule ~ontr~ct ~~~rded Steering ~orr~rr~ittee be~in~ ~orl~ District ~i~ionin~ rr~eetin~~ ~llrorl~in~ on drift ~l~n citizen 1~leetin~~ t0 ~re~ent drift ~l~n Public re~ie~ ~roce~~ be~in~ 17 Cauital Investment j'aintit 8oa~v+d. Meetf~ng~ ital Investment Planni • Allan Carmody, County Budget Director • Kathy Kitchen, Assistant Superintendent of Business and finance ,~ 18 Cauital Investment j'aintit 8oa~v+d. Meetf~ng~ Funding Policies • Pay-As You-Go F~.inding: County committed to fianding a significant portion of capital improvements with current revenues • County committed to funding 20 percent of general government improvements (over term of the plan) with current revenues • Policy ~u~~e~t~ ~llo~tin~ 5 percent of ~ener~l Band de~~rt~nent~l e~~enditure~ ~nnu~ll~ to ~~~-~~-you-~o funding ,~ 19 Cauital Investment j'aintit 8oa~v+d. Meetf~ng~ Funding Policies • Debt Policies: County adheres to a number of key ratios in making financial decisions on debt issuance Planning Actual June Ratio Cap Ceiling 30, 2008 Debt as a % of 3.0 % 3.5 % 1.47 assessed value Debt per capita $1665 $173 $172 Debt service as % of general governmental 10.0 % 11.0 % 7.7 expenditures ,~ 20 Cauital Investment j'aintit 8oa~v+d. Meetf~ng~ County/Schools Imurovement Funding Mir: FI~2oo9-FI~2o14 C7P ^ Other Debt Funded, $188.0, 56% Sources, $35.7 ~ 11% Cash Proffers, $17.3 5 % ^ General Fund, $91.8, 28% ,~ 21 Cauital Investment j'aintit 8oa~v+d. Meetf~ng~ ital In ~®~~~ • Long-range educational facility planning • Enrollment projections • F~.inctional capacity • Facility size • F~.inding allocation strategies for maiateaance, renovations, additions and new schools ,~ 22 Cauital Investment j'aintit 8oa~v+d. Meetf~ng~ ~ 'til iT~~~ Jr. 1 1 rS~~ i r.l :Tvl ~ :LTA 1 1 ~ i rs~ J [~l it it 1 iT~37 School Board Policy • Polio ~2g sets forth: • Policy objectives to determine space needs for educational programs • Options for addressing individual schools ,~ ov~rcro~ding of 23 Cauital Investment j'aintit 8oa~v+d. Meetf~ng~ Educational Facilities Planni Possibly Solutions to Address Overcrowding • Portable classrooms • Special programs • Additions and renovations • ~t~Pll~tl~~ S~C~ • Att~Y1C~~Y1G~ ZOY1~S • N~V11 COriS~UUGt10Y1 •Combiaations of these are also amiable SIIOT't-t~PYYI OP IOYIg-t~PYYI SOIL1t10Y1S ,~ 24 Cauital Investment j'aintit 8oa~v+d. Meetf~ng~ ~~sis _. • Short-term for budget purposes • I.Oll~-t~Y'Yri fOY' C~p1t~i lYripY'OV~Yri~llt p1~11111Y1~ • Calculated annually and S~pt~mb~r go membership • All membership data is County's GIS ,~ are based on geo-coded to the 25 Cauital Investment j'aintit 8oa~v+d. Meetf~ng~ • Cohort survival ratio • Live births • Housing trends ,~ • Zoning cases • Certificates of occupancy • Student yields 26 Cauital Investment j'aintit 8oa~v+d. Meetf~ng~ Fall ~oo~ /Fall X008 Enrollment Projections Low Moderate F a112007 75,000 70,000 65,000 °' 60,000 55,000 w 50,000 45,000 40,000 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016 2018 ,~ 27 Cauital Investment j'aintit 8oa~v+d. Meetf~ng~ • io-year projections are difficult based on the current economic conditions • ~Ilrhen mill a construction of new ~iorr~e~ irn~ro~e? • ~Io~ rr~uc~i in-rr~i~r~tion mill occur end ~~iere? • ~Io~ rr~uc~i out-rr~i~r~tion mill occur end ~~iere? • Projections do include COPS estimate of the impact of BRAC ,~ 2s Cauital Investment j'aintit 8oa~v+d. Meetf~ng~ Furictional Cauacity: • Regular classrooms contain 23 students • Special education classrooms contain io students • Art, music, physical education, reading, earl childhood and special education resource rooms are not included for capacity development ,~ 29 Cauital Investment j'aintit 8oa~v+d. Meetf~ng~ ~inctional Cauacity: Bon ~lir El~mentary- Number of Student Classrooms Total Total Classrooms (23 students each) 26 598 Minus: Special Education (i3 students each) 3 (39) ESL (23 students each) 1 (23) Regular Classrooms minus Special Programs ,~ 536 30 Cauital Investment j'aintit 8oa~v+d. Meetf~ng~ ~inctional Cauacity: Midlothian Middy Number of Student Classrooms Total Total Classrooms (23 students each) 63 1,449 Minus: Special Education (i3 students each) 3 (39) Regular Classrooms minus Special Programs 110 Total Students times go percent Functional Capacity ,~ 1,269 1269 31 Cauital Investment j'aintit 8oa~v+d. Meetf~ng~ ~innctional Cauacity: Building Idolization • Based on the definition, schools with functional capacity in excess of membership should theoretically have no ti'~11@Y'S' while schools with membership in excess of capacity should require trailers • An analysis reflects the majority of elementary and high schools have the effected number of trailers ,~ 32 208-091V1iddle School 1Viembership and Percent of ~~~8-09 Functional Capacit,~ Amen Pe~rsGrg Prepared ~Y the Chesterfield Cauniy Pu61ic 5clwols L)eparhrrerrt # Plannirr0 ~ ~n~i~g ~;., Cauital Investment j'aintit 8oa~v+d. Meetf~ng~ Furictional Cauacity: Building Utilization • Computing functional capacity recognizing the majority of core classrooms in the middle schools remain vacant during team and teacher planning ~@Y'10(~S Pa~1~P Mall U~ fOY'1T1UIa Y'~`T~aIS: • Robious Middy: functional capacity declines b~ 225 students • Midlothian Middle: functional ~apacit~ declia~s b~ 266 students 34 Cauital Investment j'aintit 8oa~v+d. Meetf~ng~ School Size: Elementary Schools • Marguerite Christian (~995)a Spring Run (~999)a Winterpock and Scott (2008) • 90o student capacity • To assist Parl~ss and Recreation: large g~ with mood floor, large multipurpose field with baseball fold ,~ 35 Cauital Investment j'aintit 8oa~v+d. Meetf~ng~ School Size: Middy Schools • ~~p ~1997)~ Davis and Tomahawk (2008) • 1,200 Stti(l~rit ~2lpaCit~ • Gym with wood floor competition court, 2 cross courts • Football/soccer field with tracl~ • 2 multipurpose fields ,~ 36 Cauital Investment j'aintit 8oa~v+d. Meetf~ng~ School Size: High Schools • 1995 - D~Jong ~ Associates of Dublin, Ohio led a team of internal and ~a~t~rnal participants to review ~1@ ~Y'OgY'~1 arif~ (~~Slgll Y'~g111Y'@1T1@11tS fOY' a 21st G~ritL11~7 ~llg~l SG~lOOI • Matoaca (2002), Cosby (2006), Clover Hill (2oio), renewals of Thomas Daly (2ooi) and Meadowbrook (2002) ,~ 37 Cauital Investment j'aintit 8oa~v+d. Meetf~ng~ School Size: High Schools • Building • x'750 ~tudent~ • Four ~e~~r~te te~c~iin~ ~re~~ ~it~i resource ~re~~ • Auditorium, mn~~ium, commons/c~feteri~ • Campus • Stadium, Meld ~iou~e, b~~eb~ll, ~oftb~ll, end soccer ~ield~ ,~ 38 Cauital Investment j'aintit 8oa~v+d. Meetf~ng~ School Size: R~c~nt ~1,~'~rmations • Phi Delta Kappa Curriculum Manag~m~nt Audit (January 2008) • A.8.3: "Increase building specifications and classroom capacit~...Increase planning for middle schools from i,2oo to at least i,6oo and iacreas~ high schools from ~,75o to a minimum of 2,200. Continue to plan and design elementary schools for 90o students." ~~, 39 Cauital Investment j'aintit 8oa~v+d. Meetf~ng~ School Size: RecentA,~"irmations • Growth Tasl~ Force (D~cemb~r 2008) • In the cost and financing of school coastructioa section, "The School Board should, for ~coaomic reasons, continue to build schools d~si~ned to accommodate these auinbeers of students: E~~~~~~. ~ ~® 900 ~~.~~ ~~~00 ~® ~~~00 ~~~~ ~A~O 4® ~~OOOAA ~~, 40 Cauital Investment j'aintit 8oa~v+d. Meetf~ng~ School Size: Instruuctional Practices • High schools are constructed with four unique classroom areas to enable the school to s~parat~ students b~ grads level or major subject aria • Middle schools are constructed with three "pods" to enable schools to separate students by grade level • These construction designs allow for smaller "schools within a school" arrangement ,~ 41 Cauital Investment j'aintit 8oa~v+d. Meetf~ng~ School Size: Impact on ~lchiev~ment • Some studies have shown a negative correlatioa b~tvv~a larger schools and student achi~v~meat • COPS achie~emeat dogs not appear to have been impacted b~ the size of the school but rather b~ student/community factors such as: • Students with disabilities • Students oa free and reduced by lunch • Students for whom English is a second language ,~ 42 Cauital Investment j'aintit 8oa~v+d. Meetf~ng~ Middle School Enrollment and SOL Pass Rates 90 ,-. 80 ~ 70 ~ 60 ,~ 50 ~ 40 30 ~ 20 ~ 10 0 0 ,~ • Grade 6 Reading Grade 7 Reading Grade 8 Reading Grade 8 Writing Grade 6 Math Grade 7 Math ~ Grade 8 Math 200 400 600 800 1,000 1,200 1,400 1,600 Enrollment 43 Cauital Investment j'aintit 8oa~v+d. Meetf~ng~ ing Allocation Strategies: • Provide permanent classrooms to accommodate long-t~P1T1 @11Y'OII1Tl~llt ~@ll(~S arif~ af~~@SS G~lal'lgll'lg @11Y'OI~Tl~llt ~a~~P11S • Anticipate and accommodate programmatic needs of students • Recognize that older facilities must be renovated to continue their usefulness on a cost effective basis and to meet current program standards ,~ 44 Cauital Investment j'aintit 8oa~v+d. Meetf~ng~ Fun ins Allocation Strategies: x996 Bond Re, fer~ndurre • Two new schools (28 percent of total fiandin~ • One elerr~ent~ry, one high ~c~iool • 1~ely~ reno~atioa and/or addition projects (56 percent of total funding • Sig ele~nent~ry, one middle, four high ~c~iool~, one ~T~ • o high ~c~iool~ mere total ~~rene~~l~~~ • Major mauateaance and technology (16 percent of total fundia~ ,~ 45 Cauital Investment j'aintit 8oa~v+d. Meetf~ng~ F~an~ ins Allocation Strategies: 200 Bond Re, fer~ndurrt • FYve new schools (5o percent of total fiandin~ • o ele~nent~ry, two middle, one high ~c~iool • Thirteen renovation and/or addition projects (28 percent of total fiandin~ • Sig ele~nent~ry, ~i~e middle, two high ~c~iool~ • Major mauateaance and technology (16 percent of total fundir~ • Ftature acquisitions (6 percent of total fiandin~ ,~ 46 Cauital Investment j'aintit 8oa~v+d. Meetf~ng~ ing Allocation Strategies: Post 2004 Bond R~f~rendum • 1~o a~~ schools C53 P~~~~t of total funding • One elerr~ent~ry, one high ~c~iool • Five reno~atioa and/or addition projects (i~ percent of total fundia~ • T~iree ele~nent~ry, one middle, one high ~c~iool • Major maint~nanc~, technology, security and ea~r~,y (26 p~rc~nt of total fundia~ • Administrative and technical space (4 percent of total fundia~ ,~ 47 ~,iture Initiatives jaintit 8oa~v+d. Meetf~ng~ oint Budget .rid Audit Committee • Jay Stegmaier, County Administrator • Dr. Marcus Newsome, Superintendent of Schools ,~ 48 ~,iture Initiatives jaintit 8oa~v+d. Meetf~ng~ ~lidation Success Ounor°tunities • Becl~ Dicl~son, Deputy County Administrator ,~ 49 ~,iture Initiatives jaintit 8oa~v+d. Meetf~ng~ ^ N f'1*'~ A~~ `17 AAA~'Y~'YA~'Y f'1~~ N / ~7P~7P~A7ca*'77~~7*'~ A~'Y ~ Accou~~~gr • Ceatraliz~d for Count' Utilitl~sa ~1d SclloOls 11119•j2 • Consolidated functions include: • Accounts payable • General ledger -accounting records - in accordance with GAAP • Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR) • Implementation and maintenance of financial s~ste~ns • Accounts recei~~ble billing ,~ 50 ~,iture Initiatives jaintit 8oa~v+d. Meetf~ng~ . ~ _. G~ou~~s ll~la~~te~a~ce ~~: i.c~ • • Centralized in X996 • PaY'~S aII(~ R~C~~~t10A S~~°V~S ~S a GOAtPaGtOP t0 ~1~ SGIlOO1S • P~1"fOP1T1S 1T1~1IIt~II~IIG~ ~IId 11T1pPOV~1T1~IIt ~UIICt10IIS • Sc~iool ~round~ ~n~inten~nce including ~no~in~ end turf ~n~n~~e~nent, ~l~~~round ~n~inten~nce, ~no~ re~no~~l, etc. • Minor reno~~tion ~roject~ • Customer satisfaction measured annually ,~ 51 ~,iture Initiatives jaintit 8oa~v+d. Meetf~ng~ ^ N f'1*'~ A~~ `17 AAA~'Y~'YA~'Y f'1~~ N / ~7P~7P~A7ca*'77~~7*'~ A~'Y ~ lY~~rta~ ReSO~~ceS • Consolidated functions include: • Alcohol and drug testing • wella~ss program • Benefits adiniaistratioa • In Focus collaboration • Emplo~e~ Medical Center • Emplo~e~ R~latioas ,~ 52 ~,iture Initiatives jaintit 8oa~v+d. Meetf~ng~ Internal Audit • Centralized since inception in ~9~8 • Consolidated functions include: • External audit support • Int~raal audit plan • Fraud awareness and prevention training ,~ 53 ~,iture Initiatives jaintit 8oa~v+d. Meetf~ng~ lidation Successes and Ouuortunities: PurchasirtQ • Centralized in X956 • Goods and services for County and Schools are procured by the County's Purchasing Director - excludes food supplies and construction funds ,~ 54 ~,iture Initiatives jaintit 8oa~v+d. Meetf~ng~ ^ N f'1*'~ A~~ `17 AAA~'Y~'YA~'Y f'1~~ N / ~7P~7P~A7ca*'77~~7*'~ A~'Y ~ R~Sk ll~la~tag-e~rte~tt • Re~~al~tory requirerr~ents • Internal in~~ection ~er~ice~ • Claims • Property, general liability, and workers compensation • ~~~1~~~.~~~ ~~~~~~~ • Contracts ,~, 55 ~,iture Initiatives jaintit 8oa~v+d. Meetf~ng~ Other Successes • Storeroom and warehouse operations 01993) • Mail service (1993) • Fleet Management 01992) ,~ 56 ~,iture Initiatives jaintit 8oa~v+d. Meetf~ng~ coon and Schools Co anon Areas: ,~ • School resource officers • Radio Shop • E' 11@Y'~71T1a11~~P • Juv~nil~ D~t~ntion Home • School health nurses • Public safety training programs • Public Affairs 57 ~,iture Initiatives jaintit 8oa~v+d. Meetf~ng~ Consolidation Successes and Future Discussions ortunities: • I.~gislative • Printing • Construction Mana~g~n~~nt ,~ 58 Safe Communities and Schools jaintit 8oa~v+d. Meetf~ng~ mmunities end Schools • Jana Carter, Director of Juvenile Services • Dr. Edward Pruden, Assistant Superintendent for Instructional Administration ,~ 59 Safe Communities and Schools jaintit 8oa~v+d. Meetf~ng~ Young P • Exposure to violence is pervasive • D~II~ ne~~, ~no~Ie~, ~Ideo ~~~ne~, tele~I~Ion, Internet, etc. • Media glamorizes violent behavior • Research has demonstrated that there is a GOppeI~t1011 between exposure to violence and future violent behavior ,~ 60 Safe Communities and Schools jaintit 8oa~v+d. Meetf~ng~ • Largest youth population in Richmond area • Percent of children living in poverty increased from ~ percent in 200o to 8.9 percent in 200 • Increasing diversity - Hispanic population increased from 3 percent in 200o to 5 percent in 200 ,~ 61 Safe Communities and Schools jaintit 8oa~v+d. Meetf~ng~ Community • Juvenile deliaqueac~ cases decreased is 200 and X008 • g8 percent of deliaqueac~ cases were diverted is 2008 • Assaults and larcenies, the two most frequent juvenile off~ns~s, accounted for 34 percent of all intal~~ complaints is 2008 • Ina 200 survey, io.5 percent of eighth graders surveyed reported having gang involvement ,~ 62 Safe Communities and Schools jaintit 8oa~v+d. Meetf~ng~ Schools • 58a571 students attend Chesterfield County Public Schools • 28 percent of CCPS students live with only one parent • The graduation rate for ~oo~ was 86 percent compared to the State aV~rage Of 80 percent • Incidents of viol~nc~ in schools dropped by 6o percent between Moog and X008 ,~ 63 Safe Communities and Schools jaintit 8oa~v+d. Meetf~ng~ Families • Approximately i,ioo divorce filings annually • Domestic-related calls to police increased 8.2 percent between 2003 and 200 • Domestic-relations cases increased i2.6 percent between 2oog and 200 ,~ 64 Safe Communities and Schools jaintit 8oa~v+d. Meetf~ng~ • Requires involvement from every sector • History of community working together • Ongoing partnerships among County agencies, schools, public safety agencies and community organizations • Broad spectrum of efforts, a continuum of services involving prevention, intervention and suppression ,~ 65 Safe Communities and Schools jaintit 8oa~v+d. Meetf~ng~ CASA LIBRARY COMM. ATTY. GIRL SCOUTS HEALTH DEPT. CSU POLICE SAFE PLACE ~~ PUBLIC AFFAIRS COOP. EXT. COPS SOCIAL SERVICES MENTAL HEALTH ~ SAFE CATC PARKS & REC DETENTION COL. HGTS. OOY BOYS & GIRLS CLUBS YP&D YOUTH GROUP HOME 66 Safe Communities and Schools jaintit 8oa~v+d. Meetf~ng~ I~ee~in~ You~n~ P • Continuum of services and resources • Prevention -lower cost' 1~Pg@P ~O~L1Iat1011 S@1`~T@d • Iaterveatioa -higher cost, services to a targeted population • Suppression - highest cost, target criminal offenses and behavior ,~ 67 Safe Communities and Schools jaintit 8oa~v+d. Meetf~ng~ Lo~~~ ~o~s~ Universal Prevention Bullying prevention efforts STEPP/SROs Tar eted Prevention Boys & Girls Clubs All Stars Intervention Programs Family Lifeline Mental Health Outpatient Svcs. Diversion Skill Buildin Aggression Replacement Therapy Weekend Community Service Su ervision Probation Home incarceration I~i~~~~ ~o~s~ Control Su ression Commitment to state Gang task force/database 68 Closing Comments 4.'~~'~IJ ~ ~' F]. E `F` ^. J'. it ~~_ '-' GpUN7Y p~ -~`t`,~,0 e~ip Q N n F~ 7 W ~ v v, ~~ tom` Students May 7, 2009 CHESTERFIELD COUNTY PUBLIC SCHOOLS Marcus J. Newsome, Ed.D., Superintendent Message to the Chesterfield County Board of Supervisors and School Board From Marcus J. Newsome, Ed.D., Superintendent of Schools I regret that I am unable to attend this important meeting with the honorable members of the Chesterfield County Board of Supervisors and School Board. While you are conducting the business of the county, I am in North Carolina attending the funeral of a family member who served as a public school teacher for more than 50 years. It is my hope and desire that all parties participating in this meeting leave enlightened, encouraged and united as a result of the staff presentations and your discussion. Both the Chesterfield County government and school division have earned exemplary reputations as a result of the outstanding services and education it offers its citizens, both young and old. Last week I attended a national education conference in the Washington, D.C., area where our school division was highlighted as one of the exemplary systems in the nation. And this week I participated in the Virginia Annual Conference of the Superintendents on Global Education. There, our innovative and forward-thinking strategies to prepare our students for success in the 21 S` Century again were validated as we examined the work of Harvard Professor and author of the Global Achievement Gap, Tony Wagner. The ensuing discussion also helped affirm the profound challenges ahead in light of the remarkable progress we are experiencing. Our president recently said, "The time for fmger-pointing is over. The time for holding ourselves accountable is here.... Let there be no doubt, the future belongs to the nation that best educates its citizens." Furthermore, he stated, "Economic progress and educational achievement have always gone hand-in-hand in America." We can all agree that strong schools are good business for Chesterfield CounTy, for the Commonwealth of Virginia, and for the United States of America. In closing, I extend a special thanks to each of you for your service, and a special thank you to Jay Stegmaier and his staff for the collaborative manner in which they have worked with our school division staff during some very difficult times. May we always remember that it's not about us, but it is all about our children and citizens we serve. Respectfully, Marcus J. Newsome OFFICE OF THE SUPERINTENDENT Post Office Box 10 Chesterfield, Virginia 23832 (804) 748-1405 • fax (804) 796-7178 Equal Opportunity Employer a ~ ~ A R 7 = w d e~ ~ X ad ~ ? m ~ C .n ~ ~ ~ G ~ $ ~ u ~ 9 ~ 5 ,~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ° a .~ ~ .. ~ r ~. ' ~ ~" ~ ~ g a d ~ ~ ~ 3 ,^ R ~ R