Approved Minutes

ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ MONADNOCK REGIONAL SCHOOL DISTRICT

ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ Board Meeting Minutes

ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ Monadnock Regional MS/HS, Swanzey, NH

Present:ï¿½ Jonathan Kenyon, Gene White, Jane Fortson, Ed Jacod, Colline Dreyfuss, Susan Oerman, Ken Colby, Winston Wright, Tim Aho, Doug Lyman and James Carnie. Absent: William Felton, Tim Peloquin and Phyllis Peterson.

Also present: K. Dassau, Superintendent, D. Hodgdon, Assistant Superintendent and K. Chambers, Business Manager.

C. Dreyfuss reminded the Board that the Chair will keep the meeting moving and to stay on topic. If the discussion should go off topic she would end discussion.

J. Carnie called for a point of order. He asked the purpose of the meeting. C. Dreyfuss explained that it is to review the contracts and the 2008-09 budget warrants. J. Carnie commented that this meeting is illegal. The School Board Policy BEA states that the Board would hold their meetings on the 1^st and 3^rd Tuesday of the month. This is neither. This meeting should not be held. It was posted in Swanzey with two different postings and in Richmond with another posting. So far he has seen 4 different postings. MOTION: J. Carnie MOVED to adjourn this meeting. SECOND: D. Lyman. DISCUSSION: K. Cota asked to see the postings that J. Carnie is speaking of. T. Aho asked if there would be any voting actions. C. Dreyfuss explained that it was only the motion on the floor. K. Cota commented that in the past we have agreed to have a meeting when necessary. It was mentioned that the School Board agreed to the schedule. K. Dassau explained that the Budget Committee approved the schedule and the School Board accepted it. C. Dreyfuss explained that everyone was notified about the meeting.ï¿½ It was a joint meeting between the School Board and the Budget Committee. J. Carnie commented that it is not a joint meeting of the School Board and the Budget Committee. This meeting was posted as a Budget Committee Meeting. J. Carnie said that he saw the posting in Swanzey and Richmond and thought it was the Budget Committeeï¿½s Meeting. W. Wright commented that he was having a problem with this as well. He said that the Budget Committee voted not to have a meeting. C. Dreyfuss explained that N. Moriarty said that there would not be a Budget Committee Meeting. C. Dreyfuss explained that it is a School Board Meeting and the Budget Committee is present. J. Carnie said that it was posted as a joint Board Meeting. N. Moriarty said that there would not be a Budget Committee Meeting. T. Aho commented that 5 people are missing. He also thought it was a Budget Committee Meeting. T. Aho hoped that if the motion to adjourn passes that people do not leave so that information can be given. E. Jacod also said that he was confused. If there is information to be shared than the Board should hear it but he is concerned with the 2/3 of all present. J. Carnie commented that the problem occurred in the posting. Call the meeting a working session. He would be in favor of that. D.Lyman thought it was a joint meeting. C. Dreyfuss explained that the Budget Committee wanted to meet but N. Moriarty did not. That is her perception of the meeting. K. Chambers explained that at the end of the last School Board Meeting they needed the final language on the warrants in order to have the handouts for the Public Hearing. W. Wright said that he does not remember voting on the budget. K. Chambers explained that the Oct. 5, 2007 version of the budget the Board did finalize. There were 2 changes since that were communicated to the Budget Committee. K. Dassau explained that the meeting was posted as a joint meeting of the School Board and the Budget Committee. He said that the postings are consistent. The suit from N. Moriarty reevaluates practice. Referring to the postings 2 were postings and the other 2 were supplements. J. Carnie said that the only posting was of a joint meeting. This is exactly the same situation as last month. The joint meeting is posted and it is now a School Board Meeting. Someone has to get their act together and post the meetings properly. Ten out of fifteen people are present. This needs to be addressed properly and that is why he is giving the Board the opportunity to do it at the start of the meeting. He said that this meeting should be adjourned and then have a work session. VOTE: 3.727/6.077/0/5.196. Motion fails.

The meeting is being audio taped by D. Connell and videotaped by MC2 students.

C. Dreyfuss explained that there are no Public Comments at the beginning because she would like everyone to listen to the entire meeting and then give their comments.

1. NEW BUSINESS:

1. Review of Contracts: Teacher’s Contract: C. Dreyfuss asked if there were any questions from the Board regarding the contracts. K. Chambers explained that there has been information passed out and she is ready for the questions. T. Aho asked how many people are involved in the Early Retirement including the people that have been accepted in the 2008 Early Retirement. K. Dassau explained that the current contract is admitting 5 people for the 7 years. S. Oermen arrives. K. Chambers passed out information concerning the Early Retirement. T.Aho asked 5 people for 5 years or 5 people for 7 years. K. Chambers explained that 13.2 A (2) of the contract answers the question. C. Kahn commented that the intent if the contract passes is that there would be 5 people for 5 years. That is the intent of both parties. K. Chambers explained that the contract year is being confused with the payment year. She explained that they are different. She explained the sheets. T.Aho asked if the people in 2010-2011 receive the money in 2011-2012. K. Chambers said that was correct. T.Aho asked about the evergreen clause. He asked if we are going to notify the public this is a draft copy off the old contract. Did you forget to change it to end in 2012? T. Aho read Article XVI duration on page 34. The Support Staff date for duration is incorrect. C. Kahn explained that it was negotiated to stay in the contract. T.Aho asked if we are going to warn the public of the cost items. T. Aho asked about the insurance cap. He asked if it was forgotten. K. Chambers said that she had no recollection that the negotiating team discussing that. J. Carnie said that he has a whole series of problems. J. Carnie commented that we did not get rid of Early Retirement we prolonged it. He has never agreed about Early Retirement. T. Aho commented that in the first year we did not get rid of Early Retirement but added $100,000.00 to longevity plus 5 people. The second year add $100,000.00 for longevity plus 4 people and the third year add $150,000.00 for longevity plus 3 people and the fourth year adding $200,000.00 for longevity but not adding any people to the Early Retirement. They immediately put in longevity and continue the Early Retirement. C. Dreyfuss clarified that we budgeted those amounts not increased those amounts. K. Chambers said that the bottom line is a $200,000.00 trade for $840,000.00 for Early Retirement. J. Carnie asked how we are going to pay for all these situations. K. Chambers hoped that the Board would review the language of the contracts but not the merits. The Board has already approved the contracts. T. Aho commented that the contracts were passed out last week. The voters need to know the cost of the contracts and the cost of longevity. What makes you think that you will use up the longevity funds. C. Dryefuss explained the longevity points system and explained that longevity is for years of service in the district not for those that are retiring. It was mentioned that C. Kahn, Mary Gaul, Attorney Apple and others have reviewed these contracts. If anything is changed it would have to be renegotiated. We are hearing from the Taxpayers Association with their concerns. Why are we wasting time? D. Lyman commented that others should not refer to other Board Members as members of the Taxpayers Association. T.Aho commented that he is not a member of the Taxpayers Association. C. Kahn commented that there is not one side that dictates the negotiations. We compromise. Longevity kicks in sooner and there is no retroactive pay. The top scale people only receive a $1000.00 raise. Their share on the insurance could be $600.00 to $700.00 so they are taking less pay. Starting longevity early gives a little extra to those that get the smallest increase. She explained that they wanted to sell this to the teachers. This is a teacher compromise. We need to start working together. E. Jacod commented that the Union fails to recognize that there are a lot of people that do not get a raise. It is hard to compensate the teachers to where they expect with the mandates. It is very difficult to get things passed. C. Dreyfuss asked that the Board Members keep their comments to the contract. J. Carnie commented that the Early Retirement was given illegally. It was not warned in 2002. In the end it would be settled in court as being illegal. D.Lyman asked about the updated appendixes. K. Chambers said that she has that information. She said that she would be updating the Table of Content as soon as she knew this was the final one. T. Aho asked about the longevity in the fifth year. C. Dreyfuss explained that it is in the evergreen clause and that he knew the answer. K. Chambers explained that the increase cost to the taxpayers is identified in the warrant article. T. Aho asked if we are paying longevity now. K. Chambers said that we are paying $31,000.00 for the people that are grandfathered. J. Carnie asked the total cost of the steps. K. Chambers explained the sheet she passed out. J. Kenyon thanked the Negotiating Team and the Teacher’s Union. He asked if anyone has questions on the language of the contract because we have already received the major selling points of the contract. If not do we need a motion on the contracts? C. Dreyfuss explained that the Board agreed on the contracts in Sullivan. J. Carnie asked about the evergreen clause. C. Dreyfuss explained that it is currently in the contract.

2. Support Staff Contract: N. Moriarty asked if there was a replacement sheet. C.Dreyfuss explained that there was a spreadsheet. K. Chambers explained that Thursday would be the goal to have that information for the contract packet. T. Aho commented that the health care share was more successful with the Support Staff. D. Lyman commented that the duration date on page 25 of 43 would need to be corrected.

2. OLD BUSINESS:

1. 2008-2009 Budget Warrant: K. Chambers explained that Article Three had to be removed as directed by the Dept. of Revenue. She explained that Article Five had been changed by a vote of the School Board in the amount of $400,000.00 and Article Six had been changed by a vote of the School Board to $123,000.00. S. Oerman asked if the MC2 funds in maintenance would have to be adjusted. K. Chambers explained that where MC2 is they would need maintenance. It was asked if the retiring Assistant Principal was still in the budget. K. Chambers explained that is has not been projected without the number. T.Aho asked about any petitioned warrant articles. K. Dassau explained that there are 2 articles and he would be distributing them. K. Chambers passed out information on the update on the insurance review. There was a $23,209.00 mistake. There was a correction in the District Account of an increase of $47,592.00. There is a 3.76% increase in the operating budget with a 14.81% increase including the warrants. J. Carnie asked for the percentage of increase to be raised by taxes. K. Chambers explained that it was 14.81% and she would be supplying an explanation later in the meeting.

Article One: The operating budget: MOTION: S. Oerman MOVED to approve the language on Article One the Operating Budget as presented in the 1-3-08 draft. SECOND: D. Lyman. DISCUSSION: K. Chambers explained that the Board does not have to vote on Article One or Article Two. G.White asked if the board wanted to change the amount of the operating budget and when could we do that. K. Chambers explained that the Board could react at the Public Hearing but changes at the Deliberative Session. G. White asked when the Board lost control of the budget number. K.Cota commented that the Default Committee brought a number of items to the full Budget Committee but E. Stanley forgot the Director of Building and Grounds. He said that he would speak to the chair of the Budget Committee on Thursday. W. Wright said that he thought it was mandatory that each committee approved the numbers. K. Chambers explained that the Budget Committee would sign the MS27 after both committees approve the numbers. She explained that the board made changes on Nov. 1, 2007 any additional changes need to be done tonight. N. Moriarty questioned Article One. K. Chambers explained that it is statutory language. G.White commented that he did not want to send the warrant to the Budget Committee with a 14.81% increase. That is not how the School Board works. It is our budget we need to make some recommendations to cut something. He does not want to leave it up to the Budget Committee. J.Carnie commented that we are not voting to support or not support but the language of the article.

Article Three Support Staff Contract: MOTION: S. Oerman. MOVED to approve the language on Article Three, Support Staff contract as presented on the 1-3-08 draft. SECOND: J. Kenyon. VOTE: 5.614/3.256/1.955/4.175. Motion passes. VOTE: 6.728/0/4.097/4.175. Motion passes.

J. Fortson arrives and S. Oerman leaves.

Article Four Teacher’s Contract: K. Chambers explained that there are two options for the wording of Article Four. MOTION: J. Kenyon MOVED to approve the language on Article Four, Teacher’s Contract with Option One as presented on the 1-3-08 draft. SECOND: J. Fortson. DISCUSSION: J.Carnie commented that he would not vote on the article because Early Retirement has never been established. VOTE: 7.256/2.706/1.021/4.017. Motion passes.

Article Five Maintenance Article: MOTION: D. Lyman MOVED to approve the language on Article Five, Maintenance Article as presented on the 1-3-08 draft. SECOND: J. Kenyon. DISCUSSION: MOTION to amend: T.Aho MOVED to increase the $400,000.00 in Article Five to $822,617.00.SECOND: J. Carnie. DISCUSSION: T.Aho commented that it is not the proper way to reduce knowing there are problems with the building. K.Cota commented that the change was made at the last meeting. She explained that this building has very little maintenance in the Article it is mostly for the other buildings in the district. She believes that this is a ploy to sabotage the Teacher’s Contract. The Finance Committee could have given the Facilities Committee guidance but it did not happen. The Facilities and the Board agreed with K. Chambers on the roof and try to get a 57% reimbursement. The Board agreed to the $400,000.00 this is a way to sabotage the two important articles and she would not agree to it. J. Kenyon said that they are sensitive of the burden to the taxpayers but we still have to fund education and the students. We can not have everything we need so we prioritized. The Facilities decided to go for the reimbursement on the roofs, it made sense. W. Wright commented that the number could be changed at the Deliberative Session. J.Carnie responded to K. Cota. He said that the Facilities came in with budget numbers and than it gets political. They said they need all the maintenance for the NEASC than they say they are not comfortable with the number. He has a big concern that the public has to pay for it. They should have enough faith in the public to let them vote. Tell them what is needed. They said that we need this than they back away from the number. VOTE on amendment: 3.885/7.098/0/4.017. Motion fails. VOTE on the original motion: 8.030/1.368/1.585/4.017. Motion passes.

Article Six Roof Repairs: MOTION: J. Fortson MOVED to approve the language on Article Six, Roof Repairs as presented on the 1-3-08 draft. SECOND: D.Lyman. VOTE: 8.839/0.247/1.897/4.017. Motion passes.

Article Seven Maintenance Expendable Trust: MOTION: T. Aho MOVED to remove Article Seven, Maintenance Expendable Trust. SECOND: J.Carnie. DISCUSSION: T. Aho would like to remove the article because the voters have no say on how it is spent. K.Chambers explained that it is an emergency fund. E.Jacod informed the Board that he had a letter from the Dept. of Revenue. He read the letter. It said that if we take the article away we have no place to go. C. Dreyfuss explained that we need the article. If we were to spend any of the $60,000.00, which is in the account we would be able to redeposit. J. Carnie would remove his second and T. Aho would remove his motion. MOTION to amend: MOTION: W.Wright MOVED to add $40,000.00 to the Maintenance Expendable Trust for events that we have not covered. SECOND: D. Lyman VOTE: 4.898/5.27/0.703/4.017. Motion fails. MOTION: D. Lyman MOVED to approve the language on Article Seven Maintenance Expendable Trust as presented on the 1-3-08 draft. SECOND: J. Kenyon. VOTE: 9.869/1.114/0/4.017. Motion passes.

Article Eight Establish Capital Reserve fund: MOTION: W. Wright MOVED to approve the language on Article Eight Establish Capital Reserve Fund as presented on the 1-3-08 draft. SECOND: J. Kenyon. VOTE: 9.862/0/1.121/4.017. Motion passes.

Article Nine Up to $500,000.00 2009 School Building Reserve Fund: MOTION: J.Fortson MOVED to approve the language on Article Nine Up to $500,000.00 2009 School Building Reserve Fund as presented on the 1-3-08 draft. SECOND: D. Lyman. DISCUSSION: K. Chambers explained that DRA has approved the warrants. D. Lyman asked how we would be taxed. K. Chambers explained that it is up to $500,000.00. No one knows what it would be until the sale. This has to be presented at the Public Hearing. It can still be withdrawn at the Public Hearing. K.Chambers would check with DRA to see if it could be taken down to zero at the Deliberative Session. VOTE: 8.277/0.809/1.897/4.017. Motion passes.

Article Ten Emergency Notifications System Expendable Trust Fund: MOTION: D. Lyman MOVED to approve the language on Article Ten Emergency Notification System Expendable Trust Fund as presented on the 1-3-08 draft. SECOND: E. Jacod DISCUSSION: K. Chambers informed the Board that there is a balance of $95.00. VOTE: 10.983/0/0/4.017. Motion passes.

Article Eleven Non-lapsing Athletics Revolving Fund: MOTION: E.Jacod MOVED to approve the language on Article Eleven Non-lapsing Athletics Revolving Fund as presented on the 1-3-08 draft. SECOND: D. Lyman. DISCUSSION: It was commented that there was no tax impact. T. Aho commented that there is an impact. D. Lyman asked how they do it now. K. Chambers thought possibly other fundraiser. It is only the high school generated money. E. Jacod would agree not to say “no tax impact”. VOTE: 10.983/0/0/4.017. Motion passes.

Article Twelve: MOTION: D. Lyman MOVED to approve the language on Article Twelve as presented on the 1-3-08 draft. SECOND: W.Wright. DISCUSSION: T.Aho asked for the final report from the auditor. K. Chambers explained that it was the same as the draft that the Board had received. K. Chambers explained that this article is statutory language. VOTE: 10.983/0/0/4.017. Motion passes.

Article Thirteen: MOTION: J. Kenyon MOVED to approve the language on Article Thirteen as presented on the 1-3-08 draft. SECOND: D. Lyman. DISCUSSION: It was asked if this article was needed. K. Chambers explained that it was statutory language. VOTE: 9.804/0/1.179/4.017. Motion passes.

Petitioned Articles: Disband the Budget Committee and Move 6^th graders to the MS/HS: K. Chambers passed out copies of the petitioned articles to the Board. In the past the Board has not taken a stand on petitioned articles. N. Moriarty asked for a point of order. He asked about the number that the Budget Committee would be going forward with. K. Chambers explained that it could be discussed at that Public Hearing.

MOTION: G. White MOVED to discuss the specifics of the operating budget and add it to the agenda immediately. SECOND: D. Lyman. VOTE: 10.983/0/0/4.017. Motion passes. G. White commented that we have to make it clear that we are not happy with this budget. He said that he could suggest about $300,000.00 or more but they would not be too popular. He would like to hear from K. Chambers about the surplus views. T. Aho is saying that the tax impact if different from the 14.81%. K. Chambers passed out information on the tax rates to the Board. She explained that the State had released the equalized value information and she gave the sheet, which showed the change from one factor on the individual towns. She explained that the second estimate is an improved prediction. K. Chambers explained that the surplus had been 2.1 million. We can not predict with a lot of confidence $500,000.00 in the budget. She explained that the surplus was 2.1 million dollars, 1.2 million on the expenditure side that was not spent. They under expended in Special Ed. and wages and benefits to name a few. Another piece of the puzzle is the revenues. There was $900,000.00 in unanticipated revenues. She explained that in the past we had tried to sharpen the revenue estimates. We are being slightly less conservative than she would like. September 1, 2008 she can revisit it before going to the State. T.Aho commented that the total increase of all the warrant articles is 28.9% to be raised by taxes. K. Chambers explained that the number agreed upon by the School Board and the Budget Committee for the budget warrant article is $32,098,502.00. J. Carnie asked for the number to be raised by taxes not the tax rate. K Chambers explained that the tax rate impact is divided by each town’s current value. We do not know those numbers yet. J. Carnie commented that we are asking the District to come up 28.9% increase. T. Aho commented that this is reflecting conservative revenues. E. Jacod asked to hear G. Whites suggestions. G. White commented that in Nov. 2007 we were looking at an 8% increase. K. Chambers explained that it was the increase effect of revenues. She explained that we will not know what the revenues would be, $500,000.00 is not a conservative number. K. Cota commented that the revenues are the wrench in the whole works. K.Chambers explained to the board how it happened. K. Chambers explained that the School Board could not have a contingency. D. Lyman commented to get the increase to 10% we would have to cut the budget by 3%. We would need to make a budget 1 million dollars less. K. Cota asked if we could adjust the revenues. K. Chambers said only if you could justify it. K. Dassau explained the gross variable a Special Ed. placement. If a child were to come into the district in April you would need the whole placement for the next year. He said that the surplus, the Surry Withdrawal and the contracts are a lot of the reasons for the budget increase. R. Bauries commented that the 2.1 million is still in the default budget. He said that the Board has plenty of money. J. Fortson explained that 1.2 million is in the default budget. N. Moriarty asked about the emergency fund for Special Ed. K. Chambers commented that the contingency is if you fall short but does not help with the surplus.

4. Superintendent’s Report: K. Dassau apologized for the email issues. It is being corrected.

He commented on the amount of information the Budget committee and the School Board have received this year. Attorney Apple would be present at the Public Hearing on Thursday so we are not second-guessing. The Board agrees.

5. Chair Report: C. Dreyfuss thanked the Budget Committee Members who attended the meeting and the School Board participation.

6. Public Comments: R. Bauries commented on the tax rate in the town of Swanzey and suggested that the Board cut the increase because it would be very difficult to get passed.

E.Kaplan commented on the cost between the Early Retirement continuing and the longevity. He would suggest support on the contracts. There is a saving even with the evergreen clause. He said that the teachers bargained in good faith and that this was a business decision.

Motion to adjourn: MOTION: W. Wright MOVED to adjourn the meeting at 10:45 PM. SECOND: D. Lyman. VOTE: Unanimous for those present.

Laura L. Aivaliotis

MRSD Recording Secretary

ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ Approved Minutes

ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ MONADNOCK REGIONAL SCHOOL DISTRICT