Loading...
2009-05-07 MinutesJOINT BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AND SCHOOL BOARD MEETING MINUTES l~J U May 7, 2009 Supervisors in Attendance: Staff in Attendance: Mr. Arthur S. Warren, Chairman Ms. Janice Blakley, Mr. Daniel A. Gecker, Vice Chrm. Clerk to the Board Ms. Dorothy Jaeckle Mr. Allan Carmody, Dir., Mr. James "Jim" Holland Budget and Management Ms. Marleen K. Durfee Ms. Jana Carter, Dir., Juvenile Services Mr. James J. L. Stegmaier Ms. Mary Ann Curtin, County Administrator Dir., Intergovtl. Relations School Board Members in Ms. Rebecca Dickson, Attendance: Deputy County Administrator, Human Mr. Marshall Trammell, Jr. Services Chairman Colonel Thierry Dupuis, Mr. David Wyman, Vice Chrm. Police Department Ms. Dianne Pettitt Mr. Michael Golden, Mr. Omar Rajah Dir., Parks and Ms. Patricia Carpenter Recreation Mr. William E. Johnson, Ms. Kathy Kitchen, Asst. Deputy County Admin. Superintendent of Schools Management Services for Business and Finance Mr. Donald Kappel, Dir., Public Affairs Mr. Rob Key, Director, General Services Ms. Mary Martin-Selby, Asst. Dir., Human Resource Management Mr. M. D. Stith, Jr., Deputy County Admin., Community Development Mr. Kirk Turner, Dir., Planning GETTING STARTED Mr. Warren called the joint meeting to order at 1:07 p.m. Mr. David Wyman gave the invocation. Mr. Trammell welcomed everyone to the joint meeting of the Board of Supervisors and School Board members and stated he had great expectations for the progress that will be made at this meeting. He further stated the budget processes of the School Board and the Board of Supervisors are done differently which does not mean either one is wrong and for 09-331 05/07/09 that reason everyone involved needs to be cognizant of the needs trying to be met by both sides. Mr. Warren stated Y outcome of the mee turnout, of not onl the School System as it is wonderful to elected officials Chesterfield County. county's ten elected also had high expectations for the ping and was pleased for the large citizens, but also staff members of well as the county. He further stated .ave such a professional staff for the to rely upon for the success of He stated it is great to have the officials all present at the meeting. Discussion ensued regarding the dates of some of the previous joint meetings with the Board of Supervisors and School Board. Mr. Warren stated the last time the Board of Supervisors and the School Board met as a group was with the members of the legislature on December 1, 2004, which was a meeting to collect information on what the General Assembly had in mind for the county. He further stated the joint meeting is a very unique situation which will allow the two Boards to gather and compare information to make better decisions throughout the budget process. He suggested the Board of Supervisors and School Board meet at least semi-annually, perhaps in the fall, which is the beginning of the budget process and when the school system begins to learn how many new students the county will have. He stated it is important for the school system to continue to be recognized nationally as well as regionally. He further stated this meeting will be an excellent learning process for both boards. Mr. Trammell stated Dr. Newsome is absent from the meeting due to the funeral of a family member in North Carolina. Mr. Warren requested that Mr. Stegmaier and Ms. Kitchen serve as facilitators throughout the process of the meeting. DESIGN FOR EXCELLENCE Ms. Kitchen introduced Dr. Dale Kalkofen, Assistant Superintendent for Instruction, to present information on the Design for Excellence. Dr. Kalkofen stated the Design for Excellence is the School Division's Strategic Plan, which includes the School Board's vision and mission. She further stated the process of developing the Strategic Plan began in 2001-2002 and continued through its adoption in 2007. She highlighted a portion of the School Board's vision for 2012 which included the words "thriving, dynamic and inspiring educational environment" and noted that is the goal for every school in Chesterfield County. She stated the school system wants to equip every student in Chesterfield County to be a self-directed, life learner with 21St century skills. She further stated the School Board placed two questions on the Chesterfield County Citizen Survey in 2003-2004 which led to a commitment to ongoing public engagement as part of the renewal process. She reviewed J J J 09-332 05/07/09 C C u the five goals in the Strategic Plan- and stated the department improvement plans and the school improvement plans are based on those goals. She further stated the development of the budget is aligned with the Strategic Plan. .She reviewed some of the accomplishments and efficiencies of the School System. She stated accountability of the School System is derived from three sources, the federal level with No Child Left Behind; the state level with the Standards of Learning; and community expectations. She reviewed the key measures utilized by the School System to measure a multiplicity of activities ongoing in the schools. She stated the Technology Master Plan, which is submitted to the state every five years, is currently being revised. She reviewed the middle school restructuring currently taking place which will launch the students to high school more prepared for success and assist with closing achievement gaps. She further reviewed a statement from Dr. Newsome relating to the global achievement gap and having the students prepared for the 21st Century. In response to Ms. Jaeckle's question, Ms. Kitchen stated the target for the key measures for world language is to have 50 percent of eighth graders enrolled. Ms. Jaeckle inquired whether the key measure related to the enrollment of eighth graders in a world language has an end goal such as the students being fluent in a language or to achieve higher SAT2 scores in the language, or is it just a goal to have more students take language in middle school. She inquired what the budgetary implications are of having these types of key measures. Dr. Kalkofen stated the purpose of the world language key measure is to enable more students to become more proficient and take the advanced placement tests and to study language in high school. She stated another one of the key measures is to track the score. level of advanced placement tests in relation to world languages. She further stated the world language implementation plan for elementary students has been put on hold due to budgetary concerns. She provided details of switching teaching positions for different electives at the middle school level. Ms. Jaeckle stated the goal is to have more students taking world language in the school system. Mr. Wyman stated one of the goals highlighted is to push students to learn 21St century skills, which will free up teaching positions used for other electives. Mr: Holland stated he was informed by a Chesterfield County student that her high school was contemplating eliminating accounting as an elective and he feels financial literacy is one of the preeminent skills needed to be taught. He further stated a good financial background is needed to make it in the world. He urged the School Board to not cut accounting or technical education because these are skills needed in every profession. 09-333 05/07/09 Ms. Kitchen stated the schools offer financial literacy or basic financial literacy courses. Dr. Pruden stated the state is mandating a financial literacy course for all seniors. He further stated many of the classes in -the business department contribute to financial literacy. Ms. Jaeckle stated she had a difficult time tying the strategies in the Design for Excellence to the key measures. She further stated the cost of the key measures and strategies needs to be figured out so the public can understand what is being requested. Ms. Kitchen stated all of the budget requests from the departments and schools are tied into the strategies in the Design for Excellence. Mr. Wyman stated there is a detailed process for the school improvement plans and maybe that is something the School Board can provide more information on to the Board of Supervisors. Mr. Holland requested additional information on the curriculum audit that was performed some time back. Ms. Carpenter stated the process for the school improvement plans is a complete roadmap of everything that is done in the school system and ties into the key measures. Mr. Trammell requested Dr. Kalkofen to provide some examples of what goes on during the school improvement plan meetings to help those that do not sit during those meetings understand. Dr. Kalkofen provided details of the discussions during the school improvement plan meetings. Mr. Wyman provided details of a meeting held at Falling Creek Middle School for their school improvement plan to close achievement gaps by providing additional resources. Ms. Jaeckle stated if she had seen those types of examples with the key measures it would make more sense, but the strategy was very difficult to understand. Mr. Wyman stated the school improvement plans are done school by school and the situation may be different at each middle school. Dr. Kalkofen stated she understands the integration of the information is difficult to understand but it is taking place, not just for subgroups within a school but the entire school. She provided details regarding information discussed during school improvement plan meetings. She stated each school works from the key measures to develop their school improvement plans. Ms. Jaeckle stated when goals are implemented by the School Board, they need to be readable and realistic for the general public to be able to understand the goals and outcomes. J J J 09-334 05/07/09 u ^r Mr. Trammell stated the process for the school improvement plan meetings is a very in-depth one, which is similar to defending your thesis in college. He further stated the school is trying to defend what is being requested while reviewing data from administration and the school. He stated the School Board understands what the Board of Supervisors-is requesting in terms of trying to find a way to translate the information so it is easier to understand for everyone involved in the process. Mr. Rajah stated Ms. Jaeckle brought up an important point, but at the end of the day the teachers will have to implement any new processes or ideas. He further stated before an initiative is begun the budgetary impacts in the future need to be calculated so when the School Board approaches the Board of Supervisors for funding for these initiatives everything is worked out. Ms. Jaeckle stated the request is not really brought to the Board of Supervisors but the public instead because the funding comes from the taxpayers. In response to Mr. Gecker's question, Ms. Kitchen stated when the budget process began, the School Board was looking at a $52 million reduction in the budget and a effort was made to hold onto safety net funding and forgo salary raises for employees. She further stated when some of the funding was placed back into the budget the first item the School Board looked at was putting the teaching positions back into the classrooms and reducing the pupil-teacher ratio to the current level since that is where the difference will be made in the key measures levels. Dr. Kalkofen stated although the emphasis was on preserving teaching positions, administrative reductions were not restored. She further stated some of the federal funds were reallocated to restore some of the mathematics and literacy coaches since those divisions are measured on the state and federal levels, but no new initiatives are going to be started. She explained the process for filling teaching positions for electives at the middle and high school levels and the details of the dual enrollment program offered to high school students. Mr. Gecker stated some of the schools do worse than others in the county according to the key measures and some of the schools that do not do as good as the other schools were the schools where the reductions in force were taking place. He inquired whether resources are skewed to poor performing schools to bring their scores up on the key measures and whether the poor performing schools were disproportionately hit with reductions. In response to Mr. Gecker's questions, Ms. Kitchen stated the school system places more resources into the schools that have challenges whether they are poor performing or contain a large population of students with disabilities or ESL students. She further stated the reductions in force are done by seniority for the most part so for example, if a new school has instructional assistants, it is quite 09-335 05/07/09 possible that school will take a greater hit with the reduction in force. Mr. Wyman stated in the beginning of the budget process four to five months ago, there was a great deal of discussion about differentiating funding for some of the schools that were going to be seeing fewer resources due to the budget cuts, although the federal stimulus money added the Title I funding back into the system. He further stated those discussions need to continue on how to prevent some of those reductions in the future when the federal stimulus is removed from the equation. In response to Mr. Gecker's question, Mr. Trammell stated the School Board is going to be reviewing the Reduction in Force Policy from a lot of different perspectives. He further stated the big challenge for the school system in the future is to wean itself from the federal money while continuing to keep the Design for Excellence. In response to Ms. Durfee's questions, Dr. Kalkofen stated the efforts by the school system to prepare students for 21St Century careers are primarily internal with some smaller partnerships that exist externally within the automotive industry. She provided details of the courses and offerings provided through the Chesterfield Technical Center. Ms. Durfee provided details of the Workforce Cafe, an initiative in Norfolk, Virginia, where students can work and learn skills that are going to be needed for the workforce. Dr. Kalkofen stated Chesterfield County has some similar initiatives such as the Positive Vibe Cafe and with an apartment complex where students are trained. She further stated the county does not currently have a large partnership but would invite discussion on the possible areas where a partnership could be formed. She provided details to the boards relative to the Engineering Specialty School at L . C . Bird High School , which has added a second pathway for students, which assists them with the academics portion of the program. Dr. Pruden stated the school system needs a long range plan which will begin at the elementary level to guide students in the course selection in middle and high schools. Mr. Rajah stated the School Board is currently trying to figure out how much it would cost to sustain some of the initiatives currently in place in their third or fourth years. Dr. Kalkofen stated generally the initiatives are done with reallocated professional development and training funds. Mr. Rajah stated three years from now as the School Board moves forward in the budget cycles, the public needs to know whether or not these initiatives can continue to be funded . J J J 09-336 05/07/09 Dr. Kalkofen stated the school system tries not to implement new initiatives which cannot be sustained. She further stated the school system could do more if more funding was available. She stated the process for a longer range plan for career and technical development has begun as well as the concept of career clusters in each high school has been introduced. ^! ^! Mr. Holland stated it is ironic the School Board's Reduction in Force Policy rewards longevity and not excellence, although there is a Design for Excellence in place. He further stated the Board of Supervisors has a responsibility to not only review but also appropriate funds for the appropriate purposes in education and to do it wisely and efficiently. Mr. Warren stated wonderful ideas are being expressed at the meeting and some of the questions proposed will be sent to the Budget and Audit Committee and also the School Board Liaison Committee for further review. Mr. Stegmaier stated staff is tracking the questions proposed in the meeting. COiTNTY PRIORITIES Mr. Carmody stated the discussion on programs and services selections that need to be made reinforces the strategic thinking that needs to go into resource allocation. He further stated the county has a Strategic Plan which consists of seven goals and is a management tool for allocating resources throughout the county. He further stated the goals of the Strategic Plan are established around a balanced score card approach. He provided details of the four quadrants used in the balanced score card approach and the process followed by individual departments to ensure they are aligned with the county's Strategic Plan. He stated the Strategic Plan is updated every four years and is due to be updated in 2010. He further stated the top priorities for the Board of Supervisors are public safety and education, which comprise sixty percent of the general fund. He reviewed the roles of the Strategic Plan and goals at the departmental level. In response to Mr. Rajah's question, Mr. Holland stated the county has a number of initiatives regionally to assist with growing small businesses in Chesterfield, such as Chief Elected Officials in the Region (CLEO), to create opportunities for jobs, training and small business in the region. He further stated the Economic Development Department is diligently working on growing businesses in the county. He provided details of the information which is available at the county libraries on how to begin a business in the county. He stated the ability to bring businesses into the county also depends on the education system. Mr. Stegmaier provided further .explanation on the county's approach for changing the mix of residential to commercial activity in the county. He stated the county has had a reasonable amount of success with economic development over 09-337 05/07/09 the last 15 years, by holding steady on measures, but now the county is focused on having jobs in the county for people who live here. He further stated the new goal for Chesterfield County is to generate one job for every new worker, which there are some good opportunities to recruit businesses in the future, such as Meadowville Industrial Park, Watkins Center and Centrepointe. Mr. Rajah suggested recruiting high school students to work in some of the places coming to the county to assist with keeping tax revenue in Chesterfield County. In response to Mr. Rajah's question, Mr. Stegmaier stated if the overall tax revenue increases by $200 million per year, the overall funding for the school division would increase by approximately $1.2 million per year. Ms. Durfee stated the smart growth principles are starting to ring close to home. She further stated the county really wants to improve upon the percentage of commercial to residential property, which a lot of it is market driven but it also reflects the concentrated effort of the county. She further stated no locality will be able to sustain itself on the percentage of commercial to residential property in Chesterfield County. Mr. Gecker stated the School Board could assist with economic development in the county because the location decisions for schools helps drive economic development. He further stated there is solid evidence which supports new growth locating where new schools are located, which in turn increases the cost of provision of services, whether it be Fire or Police. He stated if the county would look at everything as an integrated whole and try to keep the cost structure down to a reasonable amount, it would assist with the budgetary reductions. He further stated he would like to see the county discuss the school's involvement in the community as a whole, which would assist in bringing the overall cost structure of the county to a point where it needs to be. Mr. Wyman stated one of the key points which came out of the Growth Task Force was the school's involvement in the community as a whole, and he looks forward to working on that in the future. Mr. Rajah stated one of the problems with Chesterfield is there are only a couple of corridors in which development can be built throughout the county and they are shrinking. He further stated that is an area the School Board and Board of Supervisors can work together on when it comes time to think about where to place industrial property in the future. POPULATION PROJECTIONS Mr. Turner stated Chesterfield County experienced a rapid growth rate of almost ten percent in the early `70s and the current growth rate is roughly one percent, which neither of those rates are sustainable. He reviewed information regarding where Chesterfield .County is ranked with J J J 09-338 05/07/09 population percentages throughout the country. He stated the county is seeing a~larger number of families stay in the same house for more than 5 years, which is a positive trend. He reviewed the average number of building permits and population projections. ^i C C In response to Mr. Wyman's question, Mr. Turner stated he would have to get the information to him regarding the projected population growth for students over the next 20 years. He further stated the shift in the economy is going to cause a lot of private school and homeschooled students to return to public school, which will cause a fairly significant increase next year in the student population. In response to Ms. Durfee's question, Mr. Wyman stated he was trying to get an estimate over the next 20 years of the number of school-aged children. Ms. Durfee stated based on the information from the Planning Department, the trend consistently shows there are more -households without school-aged children. She further stated the development explosion which occurred in the past five years in the Matoaca District was because four or five bedroom homes were being built, but the trend is starting to change where new homes are not being built. Mr. Wyman stated he is interested in seeing the number of younger families moving into older homes, which will cause a transition of the population for the schools. Ms. Durfee stated that trend occurred in the `80s also, but a lot of different factors have to be considered to obtain that population transition number. Ms. Jaeckle stated the over 55 type of living needs to be taken into consideration also because many older couples are deciding to shift into that kind of living. Mr. Holland stated the Fort Lee expansion, which is slated for 2011, will greatly affect the school division because it is estimated 38 percent of those families are projected to move to Chesterfield County. He further stated there is a national dynamic in which the greatest transfer of wealth is occurring also which will affect Chesterfield County. Ms. Jaeckle stated the Meadowbrook area was originally full of young children, but the population has shifted, so the need of increasing the capacities in the schools is not there any longer, it should just be bringing them back up to what they were designed for. In response to Mr. Wyman's earlier question, Mr. Turner stated approximately 18,000 additional school children are expected to be in the school system by 2020. Mr. Turner presented a scatter diagram which showed where the new homes were built in Chesterfield County from 2004 to 2008, which have been distributed evenly across the county, which is an harmful growth pattern. He stated there are currently over 50,000 lots zoned for single family residential units which are unbuilt, so that is a 09-339 05/07/09 large possibility for growth, but when you look at the probability of this, growth is low. In response to Mr. Gecker's question, Mr. Turner stated Mr. Bill Handley with the Planning Department works closely with Ms. Cynthia Richardson in the Schools to coordinate projections for the population. In response to Mr. Gecker's question, Ms. Richardson stated she works closely with the Planning Department, tracks the number of building permits and occupancy in the homes; tracks live births; and compares all of the information with the state Cooper Group when factoring the information for the projection of children for the school system which is tracked on a continuous basis. Mr. Gecker stated the Cooper Group numbers seem to be consistently high if you review their numbers for the last five years. He further inquired whether there is enough coordination between the county, utilities and schools when it comes to forecasting data to provide the best planning possible. Ms. Kitchen stated there is not a single set of numbers used for forecasting, but she knows Planning and Schools spent some time discussing how a single database could be tracked for the Planning Commission and the Board of Supervisors to assist with the levels of service planning. Mr. Turner stated a common methodology was agreed upon by both Planning and the Schools and is now being used for tracking and the information is provided to Schools. Mr. Gecker stated disagreement and discussion is good to have on the policy implications but factual issues should not have to be resolved. He further stated having a common set of assumptions would make it easier when the School Board and Board of Supervisors sit down to discuss growth. Ms. Durfee stated the numbers the county uses in zoning cases and citizen input are very general in nature. She further stated a breakdown by geographic area of the growth rate, building permit numbers, and occupancy permits is needed for the entire county. She stated the process of providing the projected numbers to the Board of Supervisors and School Board should be down to a science with the county's GIS system and get away from guesswork. She suggested either formulating a committee or giving staff authority to identify the criteria which is pertinent to allow the county to get a better grasp. of the projection numbers for population. Mr. Wyman stated Planning and Schools may not have the same assumption in terms of projected number of students, but a great deal of data goes into the process. Ms. Durfee stated the county needs to use the available technology to be more concise with the figures. Mr. Wyman stated Ms. Richardson is currently using the technology but some of the figures may be old. J J J 09-340 05/07/09 Ms. Durfee stated a compilation of the data needs to used to include growth rates, building units, students per household, and geographical information. U C Mr. Stegmaier suggested that he and Dr. Newsome meet with staff and work out a more detailed presentation on what staff believes would be a good way to handle projections. Mr. Gecker stated there is a methodology in place, and he would like to see the data that comes from Schools to be reconciled with the data that comes out of Planning. He further stated the history of projections in the last Public Facilities Plan documents are very close to what the county actually had. He stated he would like to see the Planning Department and Schools come together and provide a common set of numbers. Mr. Stegmaier stated he will meet with Dr. Newsome to ensure all of the departments can reconcile their numbers. Ms . Durfee stated there is a need to identify the criteria that will be used, not just from a methodology standpoint, but from a planning standpoint also. Mr. Rajah inquired about the timeframe when the information from the proposed meeting with Mr. Stegmaier and Dr. Newsome would be presented to the School Board and Board of Supervisors. He further stated a timeframe for when the information will be presented will help both the School Board and Board of Supervisors be more accountable to the public. Ms. Kitchen stated staff will work to ensure the information all reconciles for the School Board and Board of Supervisors. Mr. Turner provided information on the countywide Comprehensive Plan which will replace the current fragmented and dated Plan for Chesterfield. He stated the consultant and staff will meet with county citizens and officials to build a countywide consensus regarding the desirable goals for the future character of Chesterfield County as well as community consensus on workable means to achieve those goals. He reviewed the details of the 18- month process. He stated a Comprehensive Plan Steering Committee will be formed to work with the consultant to develop a consensus throughout the process.. He further stated in the Fall of 2010 the consultant and staff will forward a recommendation to the Planning Commission and initiate a public review process with the goal towards the Plan's adoption. He provided the reasons why it is important for the school division to participate in the process. He stated the scope of work for the Comprehensive Plan calls for joint meetings of the Board of Supervisors, School Board and Planning Commission. He further stated the Comprehensive Plan will help Chesterfield County to continue to be a place where people enjoy living and want their children educated. It was generally agreed that the boards take a 5-minute break. 09-341 05/07/09 Reconvening: t d E j CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Mr. Carmody stated the county is committed to funding a significant portion of capital improvements with current revenues and adhering to a number of key ratios in making financial decisions on debt issuance. He provided information on how the debt capacity of county expenditures is broken down between the county and schools and the policies that govern the breakdown. Ms. Kitchen reviewed Capital Investment for Schools, which covered long-range educational facility planning, enrollment projections, functional capacity, facility size and funding allocation strategies for maintenance, renovations, additions and new schools. She stated the School Board Policy 723 is the policy to determine space needs for educational programs, which includes providing permanent classrooms; anticipating and accommodating programmatic needs of students; addressing changing enrollment patterns; using trailers; location of special programs; and revising attendance zones, to name a few. She further stated a major factor in Capital Improvement planning is projections of the number of students that will be in the schools in future years. She provided details on the process used to reach the projections. She stated enrollment projections are going to be impacted by the Comprehensive Plan review. She provided a breakdown of the factors that influence building capacity versus functional capacity. She stated computing functional capacity recognizing the majority of core classrooms in the middle schools remain vacant during team and teacher planning periods, rather than the formula used reveals. She reviewed the current school sizes for elementary, middle and high schools and the results of the Phi Delta Kappa Curriculum Management Audit and the Growth Task Force. She stated the education of the students has not been impacted by the size the schools, but has been impacted by student community factors such as students with disabilities and ESL students. She reviewed some funding allocation strategies from the 1996 Bond Referendum, 2004 Bond Referendum and Post 2004 Bond Referendum. Ms. Jaeckle inquired whether the budgetary implication of using functional capacity versus building capacity has been done. She stated ESL having a permanent position may not always be needed. In response to Ms. Jaeckle's questions, Ms. Kitchen explained the reason for not counting the gymnasium as a classroom. She stated when the school system looks at building capacity versus functional capacity that functional capacity is recomputed each year due to which programs are held at each school changing the functional capacity of the school. She further stated less confusion may be caused when building a new school if it was built for an average functional capacity of 750 instead of a building capacity of 900 students. 09-342 05/07/09 J J J Ms. Carpenter stated even though ESL students do move on to normal classes within two years, new ESL students may be taking their place. u Ms. Jaeckle stated new ESL students may not be taking the place of those students that have progressed to normal classrooms. Ms. Kitchen stated if after two years no additional ESL children came to the school then the functional capacity of that school would increase. Mr. Wyman stated the reality of the situation is that the ESL population is increasing. Ms. Kitchen stated the special education population was increasing at a fast pace but the school system is seeing those numbers flattening off a little more, which will help not having as many classrooms that can house fewer students. Ms. Jaeckle stated as a parent she was more concerned with the impacts of an overcrowded school when it started to impact the cafeterias, hallways and bathrooms as opposed to having to add the portable classrooms. In response to Ms. Jaeckle's question, Ms. Kitchen stated health rooms are always counted as regular classrooms but the gym is not, and sometimes the students are not in the gym. She further stated the. public concern with functional capacity is one the school system struggles with and the Growth Taskforce recommended developing a type of educational process to help the community understand functional capacity. Ms. Jaeckle stated functional capacity does have budgetary impacts because additional teachers are needed to fill those classrooms. Mr. Wyman stated some of the programs in the school system do cost more per student, but the county is tasked with educating all students to certain levels. Ms. Jaeckle stated there is a difference between providing capacity in the school buildings to meet functional capacity and using trailers when the schools need the function. Ms. Kitchen stated the school system is not hesitant to use trailers. She further stated installing a trailer or two does not raise the same level concern in the community as having twenty or so because at some point the core facilities of the building are greatly impacted. Mr. Wyman stated the perception of trailers has changed in the past five years to where the school system is now saying use trailers because it is a more cost efficient solution. Mr. Trammell stated. he knows Mr. Gecker prefers smaller schools but the dilemma faced by the school system is trying to find more land to build more buildings on and 09-343 05/07/09 that is an issue the School Board and the Board of Supervisors would have to consider. In response to Mr. Trammell's request, Ms. Kitchen stated Salem Church and Robious Middle Schools are identical and as far as capacity goes Robious Middle needs additional room. She further stated the architects worked on the main problem at both schools which is the piping and drains in the science labs being nonfunctional. She stated renovating the science labs becomes problematic due to the science labs being located in the center of the buildings. She explained what the architects have planned for each building to correct the problem and also add capacity at Robious. She stated whether or not capacity is added at Robious, the renovations still need to be done to correct the problems at both schools. Mr. Gecker stated some of the frustration when discussing enrollment numbers at Robious Middle School is the proposed renovations will not decrease the amount of trailers being utilized at that facility in three to four years. He further stated having 28.5 percent of the building not being used throughout the entire school day affects the functional capacity of that building. He inquired whether the School Board has looked at increasing the utilization of the middle school facilities or redistricting so Robious Middle does not reach capacity so soon. Ms. Kitchen stated even with the number of seats that will be added at Robious Middle with the renovation, according to the projections, the school system will run out of capacity countywide by the fall of 2018. Mr. Gecker stated the capacity at the middle school level will be 92 percent in 2018. Ms. Kitchen stated if the conversion of Clover Hill is not figured into the equation, there will have to be some boundary decisions made in particular areas throughout the county. In response to Mr. Gecker's questions, Ms. Kitchen stated if the core factor is removed from the equation for capacity, then with the renovation at Robious Middle School the schools will be just about even. She further stated decisions to move children around may have to be made in the future. Mr. Gecker stated the efficiency of the use of the building could be increased. Ms. Kitchen stated an educational issue for the School Board is how efficiently the middle school buildings are used and operate their educational programs. In response to Mr. Gecker's question, Dr. Pruden stated there is a big difference between 6th graders and 8th graders and there is a lot of growth and development in the three years during middle school. He further stated it is more healthy emotionally, physically and educationally for each grade to have their own parts of the building. He stated the school within a school concept allows the students to J J J 09-344 05/07/09 have a personal relationship with the administration which sets them on the path for graduation. He further stated it is not the most efficient use of space for the buildings but it is the most educational use of the space. U C Mr. Gecker requested to see the studies which support the school within a school concept. He stated when the county went through the Public Facilities Plan in 2004, all of the research presented was contrary to that in terms of school size. He inquired whether the county should be building 900-student elementary schools when all of the research he has seen states elementary schools should be between the 500 to 600 students range. Mr. Trammell stated part of the frustrations with the smaller schools is finding the property where a school could be built. In response to Mr. Gecker's question, Dr. Pruden stated the decision to build 900-student elementary schools was probably a financial decision. Ms. Kitchen stated if you look at the schools being built throughout Virginia they are being built the same sizes as those being built in Chesterfield County, which is very much economic driven. In response to Mr. Gecker's question, Ms. Kitchen stated elementary schools operate so differently from middle or high schools because the students primarily stay in their classrooms except for resource and lunch. She further stated there is not a high correlation between the school's size and the student's achievement at the school. Mr. Gecker stated the middle school scatter gram does not segregate out all of the variables enough to be able to make the conclusion from the chart that the size of the school does not matter. Ms. Kitchen stated the scatter gram is driven by demographics and other factors. Mr. Gecker requested again to see the studies which show positive results for building schools with higher building capacities for elementary and middle schools. Ms. Pettitt stated the middle school is the weakest link for the students and where the school system ends up losing children because of developmental issues, and the achievement rates slump. Mr. Holland stated historically middle schools have been the weak link academically throughout the county. He further stated the real dynamic is the elementary level because if students do not learn to read by the 3ra grade, then they are already behind and misdirected, usually not because they are academically challenged but because they just did not perform at the lst, 2na or 3ra grade level. Mr. Trammell stated there is a vast difference in what a teacher faces in the classroom between elementary and middle school. 09-345 05/07/09 Mr. Wyman stated the Growth Task Force reviewed the aspect of school sizes and studied many different angles and found out localities in Virginia are moving in the direction of having larger schools. He further stated as the budgetary implications to fund new schools and the cost of operating those schools are viewed, the decisions may be driven in another direction. Ms. Durfee stated part of the big picture may be financial but another large piece is planning. She further stated in some instances, it makes sense to build a 900-student capacity elementary school because in the high growth areas the school will be over capacity within two to three years. She provided the example of Cosby High School which could have been built with a capacity of 2,000 students instead of 1,750. She stated the county needs to be realistic about what is going to be appropriate in the future in terms of school sizes. She further stated the size of new development drives the school sizes being built. Mr. Rajah stated the projected enrollment numbers are important as a funding apparatus for the entire county because if individual schools and capacities are going to be pinpointed and the enrollment numbers are off then the funding will be off. He further stated teachers are the reason the students are doing such an excellent job and anything we do with the school sizes will affect the teachers. He stated the issue of the smaller versus larger schools needs to be put on the back burner until the economic forecast is better. Ms. Jaeckle stated to operate a middle school with 29% of the building empty has a direct budgetary impact on the county. She inquired whether the middle school teaming concept which was instituted several years ago resulted in higher SAT scores. Mr. Holland stated the county has not done a good job in the past looking at cost structure in respect to the buildings. He further stated he reviewed the suggestions made by the School Board for the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 and a lot of thought did not seem to go into the projects placed on that list. He stated schools that need renovations do not seem to be on the list submitted by the School Board. He further stated if the county expects businesses and citizens to invest in certain areas of the county then the School Board needs to be willing to invest in those areas also. He stated 22 percent of the schools are greater than 40 years old and some of those schools are not on the CIP. In response to Mr. Wyman's question, Mr. Holland stated the county's focus has not changed from 2004 to 2009. Mr. Trammell requested specific information from Mr. Holland in regards to which schools .needed to be placed on the CIP. Mr. Holland stated there are $39.8 million worth of renovations in the CIP for middle schools alone. J J J 09-346 05/07/09 Ms. Kitchen stated the majority of the $39.8 million for the middle schools is for major renovations and not to add capacity at the middle school level. She further stated only $2.8 million worth of renovations actually will add capacity to the middle school level. She stated there are a lot of schools that still need work, but the School Board needs to look at the areas where there are critical needs for renovations or repairs. 0 Mr. Wyman stated the Growth Task Force compiled a list of all schools and the modifications or renovations performed on each school. He further stated it is an inappropriate statement to say there are schools sitting out there unattended. Mr. Holland stated the renovations should be reviewed from a needs standpoint not just what people want. Ms. Carpenter stated Robious Middle School has not had any renovations in about 30 years. Mr. Holland stated he does not see where the county is being looked at as a whole. Mr. Wyman stated the county is being looked at as a whole. Mr. Trammell stated out of $39 million, only $2.8 million is for capacity and that capacity is only because of the need for the renovation of the science classrooms at Robious Middle. He further stated the older schools are not ignored and there is always money in the Capital Improvement Program to do renovations at these schools. He stated Chesterfield County has been fortunate to not to have to call parents in the morning and tell them their child's school cannot open because of no heat or leaking pipes. Mr. Gecker stated the School Board has consistently put money into maintaining older schools, but reallocation of funds was done in conjunction with some of the new construction that took place. He further stated the immediate question is how does the school system plan on catching up. Mr. Trammell stated the School Board is concerned with catching up the funding with the needs in the older schools and it is a difficult matter to deal with. Mr. Wyman stated the School Board is trying to take steps toward focusing funding into those areas in the schools that have problems. Mr. Trammell stated the capacity issues have been placed in the outer years in the Capital Improvement Program with the exception of Robious Middle School due to the problems with the science labs. In response to Mr. Gecker's question, Ms. Kitchen stated so far the School Board has been able to find about $33 million towards the $50 million needed for the major maintenance concerns. She further stated the School Board 09-347 05/07/09 also has $17.6 million the Board put in the CIP for HVAC repairs. In response to Mr. Warren's question, Ms. Kitchen stated the School Board hopes that in the current state of the economy the bids from the contractors will come in lower and will result in a savings for the school system. Ms. Pettitt stated the School Board has a severe problem and it is being worked on but all across the nation, the schools are aging. Mr. Gecker stated Chesterfield County needs to set the trend and not follow the trends in the nation. Mr. Stegmaier stated the question was proposed as to how county resolves the issues going forward of a difference in funds available and the needs out there. Mr. Gecker stated there are historically low interest rates and construction rates now and inquired why Chesterfield County is not in the position to take advantage of those low rates. He further stated reviewing the ratios Mr. Carmody presented, it appears there is some capacity to do this without being fiscally imprudent. Ms. Durfee inquired whether there is a master list of renovations for facilities in the school system and whether or not that list was reviewed when preparing the CIP. In response to Ms. Durfee's question, Mr. Wyman stated there is a master list of the renovations done at the SCY1OO15 . Ms. Kitchen stated a review was conducted of all of the renovations done at the schools and it looked at the critical needs versus what could be done at a later time. Ms. Durfee stated information needs to be reviewed to help determine what the priorities really are for the county. She further stated in the School Board Liaison meetings there was discussion about the renovations which are critical now and what was not understood was the need to increase the capacity at this time. She stated the question right now is do we consider using taxpayer money right now for capacity and how critical is it. She further stated questions were raised regarding the criteria the School Board uses to determine whether to add on to a school or build a new one and redistricting. She stated the possibility of redistricting needs to be an option because all options are being reviewed. She further stated some schools will have higher capacity in the future than other schools, and yet they are not on the list for the CIP. She inquired why the funding would be allocated for the school that is projected to be at 98 percent and whose growth trends will not change and not being allocated for schools that will have major overcrowding in 2018. In response to Mr. Wyman's question, Ms. Durfee stated she is referring to capacity funding. J J J 09-348 05/07/09 Mr. Wyman stated there is a small amount of funding for capacity in the CIP. ~J C Ms. Durfee stated the specific figures are needed for capacity, not only for the Board of Supervisors but for the public to have an understanding of where the funding is going. Ms. Kitchen stated if the funding for the capacity projects at Midlothian and Robious Middle Schools are removed, then the funding request will decrease by $2.8 million. She further stated the remaining projects in the CIP are dedicated to renovations. Ms. Durfee stated there had been discussions about renovations other than just for HVAC issues. Mr. Wyman stated renovations were also in the CIP for safety concerns. Ms . Durfee stated the big question right now is to look at the real needs versus wants and the critical needs. Ms. Carpenter stated the safety issues are not just in the front office, they are throughout the buildings and are significant safety needs. Ms. Durfee stated it is relevant to correlate the building permit totals with the actual numbers of children being enrolled in the schools to allow an accurate forecast of enrollment numbers. She stated the current recession is causing a drop in building permit activity and the tough decision is whether it is pertinent right now to spend funding for capacity. Mr. Wyman stated the CIP was constructed with very little funding allocated to increase capacity. He further stated from a capacity standpoint an elementary school could be built in between Bensley, Hening and Hopkins if the land was available. He stated redistricting has already been done to try to even up some of the capacity issues with Thomas Dale, Bird and Meadowbrook High Schools. Ms. Durfee suggested that the School Board review some of the criteria used in making decisions to place schools on the CIP for additional capacity. Mr. Trammell stated there is currently a need for a new elementary school and a new high school. He further stated the only capacity in the CIP is 500 seats in conjunction with renovation of the science labs at two middle schools, which amounts to $2.8 million. Mr. Warren stated the issues that have been raised by both the School Board and Board of Supervisors are being captured by staff and will be summarized by the County Administrator and Superintendent of Schools and forwarded to appropriate areas. Mr. Stegmaier checked with the Board of Supervisors and School Board on whether or not to continue with the meeting 09-349 05/07/09 agenda, and it was generally agreed that the agenda be completed. Mr. Warren provided details of the work he and Ms. Elizabeth Davis, former Chairwoman of the School Board had done to increase the efficiency in government. He further stated consolidation is a valuable resource in reducing costs in the county. He stated he and Mr. Trammell are continuing to look for ways to save taxpayers dollars and still get the job done. Mr. Stegmaier stated there is an interest for better coordination between the School Board and the county Budget and Audit Committee. He further stated the members of the Budget and Audit Committee have welcomed School Board members participating in discussions with the Committee regarding general budget issues and the disappearance of federal funds over the next couple of years. Mr. Trammell stated the idea of joint Budget and Audit Committee meetings was raised several years ago in order to help everyone along the way in the budget processes. He further stated it is important to remember that the two Boards approach the budget processes differently and joint meetings would allow a better understanding.' In response to Mr. Stegmaier's question, Mr. Trammell stated the Chairman and Vice Chairman of the School Board serve on the Liaison and Budget and Audit Committees to allow consistency on the Board. Mr. Gecker stated the Budget and Audit Committee requested on numerous occasions for members of the School Board to attend the Committee meetings. He further stated the Budget and Audit Committee would be delighted to start as soon as possible with joint meetings to enable the two Boards to find common ground. Mr. Holland stated the Budget and Audit Committee has endorsed the idea of a joint meeting. He requested a Capital Projects Summary Report from the school system to see what projects are in force and the status of other projects. Mr. Trammell stated the School Board felt any issues pertaining to the CIP should be handled through the joint Budget and Audit Committee. Ms. Durfee stated it is important for the same type of information to be shared with the School Board Liaison and the Budget and Audit Committee so there is no confusion for the public. Ms. Jaeckle stated it is important for the School Board and the Board of Supervisors to move past the money issue and look at the whole vision for the county. Mr. Trammell read the following statement from Dr. Newsome, who was unable to attend the meeting: "I regret that I am unable to attend this momentous meeting with the Honorable members of the Chesterfield County Board of Supervisors and Schools Board. While you are conducting the business of the J J J 09-350 05/07/09 u ~'J ~=J serve." 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. We would all consider ourselves fortunate to serve our community with such longevity. 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. This past 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, where again, our innovative and forward thinking strategies to prepare our students for success in the 21st Century was validated as we examined the work of Harvard Professor and author of the Global Achievement Gap, Tony Wagner, and engaged in discussions with educators from Finland and a panel from India. They also helped affirm the profound challenges ahead in light of the remarkable progress we are experiencing. Our president recently said, "The time for finger-pointing is over. The time for holding ourselves accountable is here It is time to expect more from our students Let there be no doubt, the future belongs to the nation that best educates its citizens." Furthermore, he states, "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 CONSOLIDATION SUCCESSES AND OPPORTUNITIES Mr. Warren introduced Ms. Dickson for the next presentation. Ms. Dickson stated the Board of Supervisors and School Board has had many successes in the areas of consolidation and collaboration. She provided details of the consolidations and collaborations between the county and the school division. She stated within all of the consolidations and collaborations the county continues to strive to provide good customer service. She further stated discussions continue to take place for future possibilities for consolidation. Mr. Rajah expressed appreciation for the presentation and inquired about a cost effective analysis of how much the consolidations save the school system. He stated there have been issues raised relative to the grounds maintenance at the county schools. He requested an analysis of the cost of each entity presented since being consolidated. 09-351 05/07/09 Mr. Trammell stated some of the information requested can be received from Schools staff. He further stated the members of the School Board need to have discussions about any concerns and present them to the Board of Supervisors as a whole. Mr. Rajah stated there have been some issues raised and this is the School Board's time to discuss them with the Board of Supervisors. Ms. Dickson stated cost savings analysis can be provided to the School Board. She further stated in terms of the grounds maintenance, the county stands ready to discuss what can be done better. Mr. Stegmaier stated in comparison to other jurisdictions around the state Chesterfield County costs are much lower. He further stated Chesterfield County has far fewer positions in the departments of Purchasing and Internal Audit Departments which leads to a decrease in cost. Ms . Kitchen stated if the schools had offices in the areas of Purchasing, Accounting, and Internal Audit there would be a large duplication of staff. She further stated the school system has been quite pleased with those types of consolidation efforts. Ms. Carpenter stated the consolidation not only saves money on the number of employees, but also the discounts available for purchasing large quantities. SAFE COMMUNITIES AND SCHOOLS Mr. Trammell stated the last item on the agenda is Safety in Schools. Mr. Stegmaier introduced Ms. Jana Carter and Dr. Ed Pruden for the next presentation. Ms. Carter stated the young people in the county are exposed to violence in all aspects of their daily life and there is evidence to suggest a correlation between exposure to violence and future violent behavior. She further stated although the community is growing more slowly, it is continuing to grow, increase in diversity, and increase in the number of young people living in poverty. She provided statistics on the numbers of juvenile offenses and gang involvement in the county. She stated the number of violent incidents in the schools has decreased significantly in the past five years and perhaps that is a testament to some of the work being done in the community. She further stated keeping the community safe for young people requires the efforts of both the Board of Supervisors and the School Board. She reviewed the community partners working together to help keep the community safe. She stated the county has more than 70 different services, programs and resources and provided examples of each. Mr. Rajah stated one of the issues brought up at the After Prom parties for the high schools in Matoaca is the fact there is no community center in the county for the young 09-352 05/07/09 J J J people. He further stated a community center is way to keep young people off of the streets and out of trouble. u In response to Mr. Rajah's question, Ms. Carter stated the county is always looking at options and opportunities to address the need for a community center without actually building a building. She provided examples of some of the programs which operate throughout the county for young people. Mr. Rajah stated as he has driven throughout the county and has seen vacant buildings which could be used as youth centers. He requested county staff to review using vacant buildings in the county as youth centers. Ms. Jaeckle stated there are numerous opportunities throughout the county for young people to be involved. She further stated opening a teen center in isolation of any other expense would cause an operating expense. Mr. Rajah stated not all children are able to afford to go to those places that charge a fee. He further stated if the young people do not have an area to go to for a safe haven, they are more likely to get into trouble. Mr. Wyman stated there have been pilot programs in the schools to assist with keeping the young people off of the streets and provided examples of a few. He further stated the majority of activities available to young people have a cost associated to participate. Ms. Carter stated the county's Boys and Girls Clubs started as a pilot program between the school system and the county. Mr. Stegmaier stated there are opportunities throughout the county to partner with businesses to create partnerships to assist with the students. In response to Ms. Durfee's question, regarding bullying Dr. Pruden stated there is curriculum across the middle schools which is a year long emphasis that has shown tremendous results in the schools. Ms. Durfee inquired whether bullying incidents have increased or decreased since the curriculum has been used. In response to Ms. Durfee's question, Mr. Robert Talley, Director of Student Placement and Pupil Placement, stated programs that are in place in the middle and high schools, which are taught through the health classes, focus on decision making. Mr. Warren called for further questions or comments. Mr. Wyman stated the Student Resource Officers that work in our schools do a wonderful job building relationships with our students. He further stated the schools need more Student Resource Officers. Mr. Trammell expressed appreciation to the teachers who assist with running the extracurricular activities at each 09-353 05/07/09 of the high schools in the county. He recognized the L. C. Bird Robotics Team who participated in a competition and placed 3rd nationally. Mr. Stegmaier expressed appreciation to staff who worked hard to put together a productive afternoon for the members of the Board of Supervisors and School Board. He stated he was confident significant progress was made at this meeting. J J James Steg ier ~ounty Administrator Arthur S. Warren Chairman 09-354 05/07/09 J