PITTSFIELD SCHOOL DISTRICT ANNUAL MEETING MINUTES
PITTSFIELD TOWN HALL
MARCH 1, 2016
Call to Order at 10:05 a.m. Kris Sperber, Chair, Ray Rice and A.J. Ruben present.
Article 1. To elect a Moderator for the year ensuing.
Jerry Drugonis moves to open discussion, Jennifer Howard seconds. Jerry Drugonis nominates George Deblon, Jennifer Howard seconds. Jerry Drugonis moves to close and cast one ballot, Wendy Reese seconds, approved unanimously.
Article 2. To hear and act upon the Auditor’s Report.
Jerry Drugonis moves to open discussion, Jennifer Howard seconds. No discussion. Karen Waterworth moves to accept Auditor’s Report, Angela Jackson seconds, approved unanimously.
Article 3. To see if the Pittsfield School District will vote to pay taxes in the same manner as the Town.
Jerry Drugonis moves to open discussion, Angela Jackson seconds. No discussion. Jerry Drugonis moves to accept, Angela Jackson seconds. Approved unanimously.
Article 4. To hear the reports of the School Directors.
Karen Waterworth moves to open discussion, Erica Hurd seconds. No discussion. Arlene Drugonis moves to accept, Angela Jackson seconds. Approved unanimously.
Article 5. Shall the voters of the Pittsfield School District approve a total budget in the amount of $1,456,309 for the 216-17 school year? It is estimated that this proposed budget will result in education spending of $18,169 per equalized pupil. This projected spending is 2.77% lower than spending for the current year.
Jerry Drugonis moves to open discussion, Arlene Drugonis seconds. Ray Colton asks about the definition of Equalized Per Pupil Spending (EP) as it relates to our costs. Kris, Ray and A.J. all respond with comments regarding the complex formula involved in determining EP and note that Pittsfield has one of the highest EP’s in Vermont. A.J. noted that the consultant working with Pittsfield on the Act 46 study to be discussed later is also looking at the reasons for our high EP spending. (NOTE: Equalized pupils are the number of pupils in a district's two-year Average Daily Membership (ADM), weighted by grade level: 0.46 for pre-K, 1.0 for K-6, and 1.13 for 7-12. See http://vttransparency.org/index.cfm?section=all&pg=Education_Finance. )
Jennifer Howard asked what the impact and if there should be concern regarding Pittsfield’s Common Level of Appraisal being 117%. Kris reports that the high CLA is a measure that our property values are overestimated and the impact is actually a reduction in our tax rate for this year. Charles Pizzo asks if Pittsfield is subject to a tax penalty provision of Act 46 that has recently caused other School Districts to have to reconsider their budgets. The Board replies that our business manager at the Supervisory Union has confirmed our understanding that Pittsfield will not be affected by the tax penalty provision of Act 46. Arlene Drugonis moves to accept the budget, Jerry Drugonis seconds. Approved unanimously.
Article 6. To elect a School Director for a three year term.
Sandy Begin moves to open discussion, Mark Begin seconds. Jerry Drugonis nominates A.J. Ruben, Sandy Begin seconds. Discussion but no other candidates. Angela Jackson moves to close nominations and cast one ballot, Arlene Drugonis seconds. A.J. Ruben elected for a three year term unanimously.
Article 7. To do any other proper and necessary business.
Karen Waterworth moves to open discussion and Angela Jackson seconds. Kris does a recapitulation of our recent transition from the Windsor Northwest Supervisory Union (which no longer exists in large part due to Pittsfield’s action of moving) to the Windsor Central Supervisory Union in Woodstock. This move immediately saved Pittsfield money in SPED spending, but then Act 46 happened, throwing all Districts into upheaval, which the Pittsfield School Board is attempting to navigate in order to form educated opinions about Pittsfield’s options.
Kris described the options available to Pittsfield under Act 46: we obtain tax incentives by giving up school choice and join a unified Educational District (ED) of about 900 students with the towns already in the Windsor Central School District (Woodstock), where many of our students already attend schools. Kris reported that the WCSU schools have thus far made it clear they would not be willing to allow Pittsfield to join their unified ED while maintaining school choice and that pursuant to a State Board of Education decision, it may not be possible to have a choice town in a unified ED; or, we get tax incentives by joining a “Side by Side” ED, that would involve us joining with one or more school choice towns to form a new “ED” that would have one School Board and would send one representative to the Supervisory Union made up otherwise of a unified ED; or, we can do nothing and try to convince the Agency of Education in 2017 that Pittsfield otherwise satisfies the financial and education requirements of Act 46, which have not yet been clearly defined. Kris reports that in the event the AOE does not agree Pittsfield satisfies Act 46 requirements, the AOE can put us with a larger ED, most likely Hancock and Granville given location, and Pittsfield would not receive any tax incentives.
A.J. reports on recent meeting with School Board members from Hancock and Granville and consultant Peter Clarke regarding potential “706” grant to study a “Side by Side” ED between Granville, Hancock, Pittsfield and possibly Ira, and affiliated with the new White River Supervisory Union. A.J. reported that Hancock and Granville would like to move forward with Pittsfield on the “706” study and that the data indicates a significant tax savings if Pittsfield pursues this “Side by Side” option.
Alrene Drugonis and Sandy Being ask questions related to how we could integrate with Woodstock and Ray notes it would be giving up school choice, choosing amongst WCSU elementary schools and going to the one secondary school and that WCSU reaches the Act 46 student population requirement of 900 due large part to Pittsfield’s 70 students. Don Bass asks if would save money to go with WCSU and A.J. and Kris reply that prior efforts to demonstrate savings from such a move have not yielded evidence that money would be saved. A.J. reports that Peter Clarke, the consultant working on the”706” report is also working on a report for the WCSU Districts considering an Act 46 ED merger and it will likely contain information relevant to the financial impact on Pittsfield if we chose to join that ED. Marion Abrams asks about the pros and cons of the “Side by Side” with Granville and Hancock. Kris and Ray reply that issues include retaining full school choice as the main plus, with concerns being loosing local control by merging school boards and that most of our student go to WCSU and centralizing SPED services may be better for kids and finances. Ray Colton asks about the costs towns charge for receiving students and A.J. reports that the cost of tuition has to be the same for all tuitioning students in the school. Kris discusses how the tuition figures we rely on are subject to change, up or down, at the end of each year if the AOE determines refund or bill backs are appropriate. Karen Waterworth asks about SPED services in the prposed “Side by Side” and Kris reports the new White River SU would administer those services, in effect returning us to the same SU we left last year (but actually a new, merged and improved SU.) Ray Colton suggests giving up school choice in order to regain a sense of community that may occur if all our children attend the same schools. Joyce suggests that there may still be choice in elementary school and that is where the community bonds are mostly formed. Megan Charlebois notes that Act 46’s requirement of 900 students per ED is not met if we join the “Side by Side” and will that mean eventually Pittsfield would have to give up choice with that option. Kris reports that the “Side by Side” option is permitted as together with the other ED there would be 900 students. A.J. reiterates that Pittsfield cannot be forced to give up school choice under current law, but that tax incentives or penalties, or other costs, may motivate communities to voluntarily change. Ray reiterates that there would be school choice for elementary schools within the WCSU should Pittsfield decide to join their ED.
Angela Jackson moves to end the discussion and Megan Charlebois seconds, approved unanimously and meeting adjourned at 10:50 a.m.
Mintues respectfully provided by A.J. Ruben
PITTSFIELD TOWN HALL
MARCH 1, 2016
Call to Order at 10:05 a.m. Kris Sperber, Chair, Ray Rice and A.J. Ruben present.
Article 1. To elect a Moderator for the year ensuing.
Jerry Drugonis moves to open discussion, Jennifer Howard seconds. Jerry Drugonis nominates George Deblon, Jennifer Howard seconds. Jerry Drugonis moves to close and cast one ballot, Wendy Reese seconds, approved unanimously.
Article 2. To hear and act upon the Auditor’s Report.
Jerry Drugonis moves to open discussion, Jennifer Howard seconds. No discussion. Karen Waterworth moves to accept Auditor’s Report, Angela Jackson seconds, approved unanimously.
Article 3. To see if the Pittsfield School District will vote to pay taxes in the same manner as the Town.
Jerry Drugonis moves to open discussion, Angela Jackson seconds. No discussion. Jerry Drugonis moves to accept, Angela Jackson seconds. Approved unanimously.
Article 4. To hear the reports of the School Directors.
Karen Waterworth moves to open discussion, Erica Hurd seconds. No discussion. Arlene Drugonis moves to accept, Angela Jackson seconds. Approved unanimously.
Article 5. Shall the voters of the Pittsfield School District approve a total budget in the amount of $1,456,309 for the 216-17 school year? It is estimated that this proposed budget will result in education spending of $18,169 per equalized pupil. This projected spending is 2.77% lower than spending for the current year.
Jerry Drugonis moves to open discussion, Arlene Drugonis seconds. Ray Colton asks about the definition of Equalized Per Pupil Spending (EP) as it relates to our costs. Kris, Ray and A.J. all respond with comments regarding the complex formula involved in determining EP and note that Pittsfield has one of the highest EP’s in Vermont. A.J. noted that the consultant working with Pittsfield on the Act 46 study to be discussed later is also looking at the reasons for our high EP spending. (NOTE: Equalized pupils are the number of pupils in a district's two-year Average Daily Membership (ADM), weighted by grade level: 0.46 for pre-K, 1.0 for K-6, and 1.13 for 7-12. See http://vttransparency.org/index.cfm?section=all&pg=Education_Finance. )
Jennifer Howard asked what the impact and if there should be concern regarding Pittsfield’s Common Level of Appraisal being 117%. Kris reports that the high CLA is a measure that our property values are overestimated and the impact is actually a reduction in our tax rate for this year. Charles Pizzo asks if Pittsfield is subject to a tax penalty provision of Act 46 that has recently caused other School Districts to have to reconsider their budgets. The Board replies that our business manager at the Supervisory Union has confirmed our understanding that Pittsfield will not be affected by the tax penalty provision of Act 46. Arlene Drugonis moves to accept the budget, Jerry Drugonis seconds. Approved unanimously.
Article 6. To elect a School Director for a three year term.
Sandy Begin moves to open discussion, Mark Begin seconds. Jerry Drugonis nominates A.J. Ruben, Sandy Begin seconds. Discussion but no other candidates. Angela Jackson moves to close nominations and cast one ballot, Arlene Drugonis seconds. A.J. Ruben elected for a three year term unanimously.
Article 7. To do any other proper and necessary business.
Karen Waterworth moves to open discussion and Angela Jackson seconds. Kris does a recapitulation of our recent transition from the Windsor Northwest Supervisory Union (which no longer exists in large part due to Pittsfield’s action of moving) to the Windsor Central Supervisory Union in Woodstock. This move immediately saved Pittsfield money in SPED spending, but then Act 46 happened, throwing all Districts into upheaval, which the Pittsfield School Board is attempting to navigate in order to form educated opinions about Pittsfield’s options.
Kris described the options available to Pittsfield under Act 46: we obtain tax incentives by giving up school choice and join a unified Educational District (ED) of about 900 students with the towns already in the Windsor Central School District (Woodstock), where many of our students already attend schools. Kris reported that the WCSU schools have thus far made it clear they would not be willing to allow Pittsfield to join their unified ED while maintaining school choice and that pursuant to a State Board of Education decision, it may not be possible to have a choice town in a unified ED; or, we get tax incentives by joining a “Side by Side” ED, that would involve us joining with one or more school choice towns to form a new “ED” that would have one School Board and would send one representative to the Supervisory Union made up otherwise of a unified ED; or, we can do nothing and try to convince the Agency of Education in 2017 that Pittsfield otherwise satisfies the financial and education requirements of Act 46, which have not yet been clearly defined. Kris reports that in the event the AOE does not agree Pittsfield satisfies Act 46 requirements, the AOE can put us with a larger ED, most likely Hancock and Granville given location, and Pittsfield would not receive any tax incentives.
A.J. reports on recent meeting with School Board members from Hancock and Granville and consultant Peter Clarke regarding potential “706” grant to study a “Side by Side” ED between Granville, Hancock, Pittsfield and possibly Ira, and affiliated with the new White River Supervisory Union. A.J. reported that Hancock and Granville would like to move forward with Pittsfield on the “706” study and that the data indicates a significant tax savings if Pittsfield pursues this “Side by Side” option.
Alrene Drugonis and Sandy Being ask questions related to how we could integrate with Woodstock and Ray notes it would be giving up school choice, choosing amongst WCSU elementary schools and going to the one secondary school and that WCSU reaches the Act 46 student population requirement of 900 due large part to Pittsfield’s 70 students. Don Bass asks if would save money to go with WCSU and A.J. and Kris reply that prior efforts to demonstrate savings from such a move have not yielded evidence that money would be saved. A.J. reports that Peter Clarke, the consultant working on the”706” report is also working on a report for the WCSU Districts considering an Act 46 ED merger and it will likely contain information relevant to the financial impact on Pittsfield if we chose to join that ED. Marion Abrams asks about the pros and cons of the “Side by Side” with Granville and Hancock. Kris and Ray reply that issues include retaining full school choice as the main plus, with concerns being loosing local control by merging school boards and that most of our student go to WCSU and centralizing SPED services may be better for kids and finances. Ray Colton asks about the costs towns charge for receiving students and A.J. reports that the cost of tuition has to be the same for all tuitioning students in the school. Kris discusses how the tuition figures we rely on are subject to change, up or down, at the end of each year if the AOE determines refund or bill backs are appropriate. Karen Waterworth asks about SPED services in the prposed “Side by Side” and Kris reports the new White River SU would administer those services, in effect returning us to the same SU we left last year (but actually a new, merged and improved SU.) Ray Colton suggests giving up school choice in order to regain a sense of community that may occur if all our children attend the same schools. Joyce suggests that there may still be choice in elementary school and that is where the community bonds are mostly formed. Megan Charlebois notes that Act 46’s requirement of 900 students per ED is not met if we join the “Side by Side” and will that mean eventually Pittsfield would have to give up choice with that option. Kris reports that the “Side by Side” option is permitted as together with the other ED there would be 900 students. A.J. reiterates that Pittsfield cannot be forced to give up school choice under current law, but that tax incentives or penalties, or other costs, may motivate communities to voluntarily change. Ray reiterates that there would be school choice for elementary schools within the WCSU should Pittsfield decide to join their ED.
Angela Jackson moves to end the discussion and Megan Charlebois seconds, approved unanimously and meeting adjourned at 10:50 a.m.
Mintues respectfully provided by A.J. Ruben
RSS Feed