board consent agenda - files.ctctcdn.comfiles.ctctcdn.com/87d6fed8001/c2d584fe-b033-40ed... ·...

Board Consent Agenda

Racine Unified School District 3109 Mt. Pleasant Street, Racine, Wisconsin 53404

RACINE UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT

OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS

Melvin Hargrove, President Pamala Handrow, Vice President

Racine, Wisconsin November 16, 2015

A meeting of the Board of Education of the Racine Unified School District of Racine County, Wisconsin was called to order at 6:30 p.m. on Monday, November 16, 2015.

2. ROLL CALL The following Board members were present: Charles Goodremote, Pamala Handrow, Melvin Hargrove, John M. Koetz, Julie L. McKenna, Don J. Nielsen, Kim Plache, and Dennis Wiser. Absent: Michael Frontier. Also present: Lolli Haws, Superintendent of Schools; Rosalie Daca, Chief Academic Officer; Wendy Rowley, Executive Director of Accountability; Stacy Tapp, Chief of Communications and Family Engagement; Bryan Arnold, Director of Facilities and Operations; Julie Landry, Chief of Human Capital; Keri Hanstedt, Executive Director of Employee Relations; Eric Gallien, Deputy Superintendent; Marc Duff, Chief Financial Officer; and Darlene Gallup, Recording Secretary.

3. APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA Pastor Hargrove noted that Agenda Item 8a, District Annual Goals for 2015-16 School Year, has been removed from the agenda. Ms. Handrow moved, Ms. Plache seconded, to approve the agenda with the removal of Item 8a, District Annual Goals for 2015-16 School Year. All were in favor. The agenda was approved.

4. RECOGNITIONS The Board recognized Board member, Julie L. McKenna, for her recognition by the Wisconsin Association of School Boards (WASB) for reaching Level V in the WASB Member Recognition Program.

5. REPORTS ON STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT a. MAPS/PALS Fall Results

Mrs. Daca, and Mrs. Rowley presented the MAPS/PALS Fall Results agenda item. Major headings of their PowerPoint presentation included: Measures of Academic Progress for Reading and Math, Contributing to Success, and Continuous Improvement.

6. SUPERINTENDENT’S REPORT

a. North Star and Core Values

Board of Education

Dr. Haws and Mrs. Tapp presented a report on the revised North Star and the District’s new seven Core Values. Two videos were shown on the new North Star and the Core Values. This video was shared with staff on Staff Development Day.

b. Summary of October 30 Professional Day Results

Dr. Haws and Mrs. Daca provided a presentation on a results summary of the October 30, 2015, Professional Development Day. The feedback was much improved over last year’s feedback.

7. BOARD COMMITTEE REPORTS

a. Audit Committee Mr. Goodremote reported the Audit Committee met on November 9, 2015. Items of discussion included an overview of monthly financial statements, an update on school financials and a review of a preliminary cost structure.

b. Legislative Committee Mrs. McKenna reported the Legislative Committee met this evening and discussed having “Coffee Chats” with local municipalities in December; asked that state and local officials receive the RUSD news notices; recommended a resolution on referendum legislation; made no recommendation on DPI Rules on Revenue Limit Exemption for Energy Efficiency Projects; asked for a letter in opposition to the State Superintendent Constitutional Amendment; and updated the Legislative Committee’s Objectives, Goals, Measurements, and Strategies document.

c. Board Governance Committee Ms. Plache reported the Governance Committee met on November 12, 2015, and discussion included: consideration of 3 referrals and made recommendations for the December Board business meeting (Referral #4-2015 – the Committee will be requesting some revisions to OE-6; and Referral #6-2015 – the Committee is recommending the Board not approve). The Committee will be meeting on Thursday morning, November 18, to review a wide number of policies and the full Board will meet Thursday from 1-8 p.m. for professional development.

d. Guiding Coalition Ms. Handrow reported the Guiding Coalition last met on November 11, 2015. Dr. Haws has already reviewed most of the work of the Guiding Coalition under her Superintendent’s Report on the North Star and Core Values. The Coalition also heard a presentation on high school transformation and next steps for implementing Core Values.

8. BOARD DEVELOPMENT

a. District Annual Goals for 2015-16 School Year This item was removed from the agenda.

b. Financing for New Schools Mr. Duff presented information regarding Knapp and O. Brown project financing. This will come to the Board for final approval in December.

9. PUBLIC INPUT

SPEAKER TOPIC Richard Melcher Concerns regarding Handbook changes 2414 Drexel Avenue Racine, WI 53403 Halli Stewart Concerns regarding Handbook changes 1516 Deane Blvd. Racine, WI 53405 Christine Ortiz Concerns regarding Handbook changes

1027 5th Street Racine, WI 53404 Kenneth P. Greening Opposition to the Handbook changes 6425 94th Place Milwaukee, WI 53214 Melissa Zeien Opposition to the Handbook changes and teacher overloads 1417 Lombard Ave. Racine, WI 53402 Jen Levie Opposition to the Handbook changes 421 William Street Racine, WI 53402 Matt Landry Need for collaboration and unity 4210 Woodview Lane Racine, WI 53404 Al Levy Concerns regarding lack of collaboration and REA representation concerns 421 William St. Racine, WI 53402 Beverly Hicks Concerns about closing the achievement gaps, desegregation and race issues 1633 Racine St. and teacher rights Racine, WI 53403 Kim Schroeder Concerns regarding RUSD making the same mistakes as MPS (Handbook) 9110 Wilisbon Ave, Apt, 3 Milwaukee, WI 53222 Scott Farnsworth Concerns regarding Handbook changes 1010 Hagerer St. Racine, WI 53402

10. OPERATIONAL EXPECTATIONS

a. OE-3 (Facilities) Bryan Arnold, Director of Facilities and Operations, presented the Operational Expectations – 3 (Facilities) Monitoring Report. The report has not changed since the November Board Work Session. The report is submitted by administration as being in compliance with exception in 3.3.5 (vestibule-entry controls).

Ms. Plache moved, Mr. Goodremote seconded, to accept the Operational Expectations – 3 (Facilities) Monitoring Report as being compliant with exception in 3.3.5. Mr. Wiser moved, Mr. Nielsen seconded, to amend the motion to add Sections 3.7 and 3.1.2 as being non-compliant and correct the “OE-12” references to read “OE-3.” All were in favor. The amendment passed. Vote on the amended motion – All were in favor. The amended motion passed.

b. OE-4 (Personnel Administration) Ms. Landry presented the Operational Expectations – 4 (Personnel Administration) Monitoring Report and answered questions from the Board. Administration submits this report as being in compliance with exceptions in Sections 4.3 and 4.11. Ms. Landry reviewed corrections and changes to the report since the Board’s Work Session on November 2, 2015.

Ms. Plache moved, Ms. Handrow seconded, to accept the Operational Expectations – 4 (Personnel Administration) Monitoring Report as being compliant with noted exceptions. All were in favor. The motion passed.

c. OE-11 (Learning Environment)

Dr. Gallien and Mrs. Rittgers presented the Operational Expectation – 11 (Learning Environment/Treatment of Students) Monitoring Report and answered questions from the Board. The report is submitted by administration as being in compliance with exception in Sections 11.1.1 and 11.1.2.

Ms. Plache moved, Mr. Koetz seconded, to approve the Operational Expectations – 11 (Learning Environment) Monitoring Report as compliant with noted exceptions. All were in favor. The motion passed.

11. ACTION ITEMS

a. Final Audit Report Mr. Duff and Schenck, Certified Public Accountants, presented the Final Audit Report and reviewed the Management Communication to the District. Ms. Handrow moved, Mr. Goodremote seconded, to approve receiving the Audit Report as presented. Ayes – 8 (Goodremote, Handrow, Hargrove, Koetz, McKenna, Nielsen, Plache, Wiser). Noes – 0. Absent – 1 (Frontier). The motion passed.

b. Middle School Boundary Change

Dr. Haws presented the agenda item on Middle School Boundary Change. Gifford will become a 4K-8 school beginning September of 2016. A middle grade (6, 7, and 8) boundary that is the same as the current elementary boundary is proposed. The current Elementary School boundary will remain intact and apply to middle school students as well. This change in boundary will impact Gilmore and Starbuck. Students attending Gilmore and Starbuck living in the new Gifford middle grade boundary will have a choice to stay at their current school or attend the new Gifford 4K-8 school. Transportation will be provided for students wishing to stay at Gilmore or Starbuck.

Ms. Handrow moved, Mr. Goodremote seconded to approve changes to the Middle School boundaries as presented. Ayes – 7 (Goodremote, Handrow, Hargrove, Koetz, McKenna, Nielsen, Plache). Noes – 0. Abstain – 1 (Wiser). Absent – 1 (Frontier).

c. Handbook Changes Dr. Haws presented the agenda item. Mr. Duff, Dr. Gallien, Ms. Landry and Mrs. Hanstedt answered questions from the Board regarding proposed changes to the Employee Handbook. Mrs. McKenna moved, Mr. Nielsen seconded, to pull Sections 3.3, 8, and 10.8 for separate consideration. Ayes – 3 (McKenna, Nielsen, Wiser). Noes – 5 (Goodremote, Handrow, Hargrove, Koetz, Plache). Absent – 1 (Frontier). The motion failed. Ms. Plache moved, Mr. Goodremote seconded, to take a 10 minute recess at 9:54 p.m. Ayes – 5 (Goodremote, Handrow, Hargrove, Koetz, Plache). Noes – 3 (McKenna, Nielsen, Wiser). Absent – 1 (Frontier). The motion passed. A recess was conducted from 9:54 – 9:64 p.m.

Upon the Board reconvening, Ms. Handrow moved, Mr. Goodremote seconded, to accept the proposed revisions to the Employee Handbook with specified effective dates. Ayes – 5 (Goodremote, Handrow, Hargrove, Koetz, Plache). Noes – 3 (McKenna, Nielsen, Wiser). Absent – 1 (Frontier). The motion passed.

d. Policy Change Regarding Minority Hiring Ms. Plache presented the Governance Committee’s concerns regarding the proposed OE-6(17) language revision in Referral #3-2015. She said the Governance Committee had concerns regarding adding the language “and who demonstrate a positive history of minority hiring” to the end of OE-6(17) for numerous reasons including it being too far reaching to include every pencil, paper and every item that utilizes contractors, all vendors, manufacturers and other such agents; difficulty dealing with out of state versus in state companies when it comes to these questions; and requiring dedicated staff. As a result, the Governance Committee voted to recommend the Board not make changes as presented in Referral #3-2015.

Mr. Wiser made a point of order that the Board cannot address a motion on this item until it rescinds the motion from the October 27, 2015, Special Board meeting to postpone the motion which reads: Ms. Plache moved, Mr. Koetz seconded, to postpone the motion until the Board has had at least one work session to thoroughly discuss ramifications of the proposed language. Ayes – 5 (Goodremote, Handrow, Hargrove, Koetz, Plache). Noes – 4 (Frontier, McKenna, Nielsen, Wiser). Absent – 0. Mr. Goodremote moved, Ms. Plache seconded, to replace the words in Ms. Plache’s motion, “at least one work session,” with the words, “one Governance session.” Mr. Wiser said Ms. Plache’s motion was not noticed on this evening’s agenda and cannot be discussed per open meeting law. Mr. Goodremote withdrew his motion and Ms. Plache withdrew her second. Mr. Koetz moved, Ms. Handrow seconded, to defer this item to the next available Board work session. All were in favor. The motion passed.

e. Youth Risk Behavior Survey (YBRS) Data Presentations

Mr. Wiser spoke on Dr. Frontier’s behalf regarding his desire to have a 10 or 15 minute overview on what the YRBS data says. Mr. Wiser said Dr. Frontier has a source for the previous years’ data. Mr. Wiser moved, Mr. Nielsen seconded, that at a December Board meeting, Board members receive data from the current YRBS study and previous four years. Mr. Goodremote moved, Ms. Plache seconded, to amend the motion to read: Board members will receive at least 5 years YRBS data as soon as practicable. Mr. Wiser moved, Mrs. McKenna seconded, to defer this item until Dr. Frontier can be present for this discussion. All were in favor. Motion to defer passed.

f. Construction Projects Employment Data Mr. Wiser presented this item. Mr. Wiser moved, Mr. Nielsen seconded, that at a December Board meeting, Board members will receive data from current and recent projects that qualify under OE-6(18). The presentation should include reasonably current data regarding the percent of number of hours worked by district residents, county residents, minority workers and apprentices. Mr. Goodremote moved, Ms. Plache seconded, to postpone a motion on this item until after the Governance Committee makes its recommendation on Referral #4-2015. Ayes – 4 (Goodremote,

Handrow, Hargrove, Plache). Noes – 4 (Koetz, McKenna, Nielsen, Wiser). Absent – 1 (Frontier). The motion failed. Vote on the original motion, Ayes – 8 (Goodremote, Handrow, Hargrove, Koetz, McKenna, Nielsen, Plache, Wiser). Noes – 0. Absent – 1 (Frontier). The original motion passed.

12. BOARD CONSENT AGENDA

a. Board Meeting Minutes of October 19, 2015 b. Executive Session Minutes of October 19, 2015 c. Work Session Minutes of October 5, 19, and November 2, (Attachment A, B, C) d. Special Board Meeting Minutes of October 27, 2015 e. Audit Committee Meeting Minutes of September 17, 2015 (Attachment D) f. Board of Education Committee Assignments Mr. Goodremote moved, Mr. Nielsen seconded, to approve the Board Consent Agenda items 12(a-f). All were in favor. The motion passed.

13. SUPERINTENDENT CONSENT AGENDA

a. Personnel Changes b. Monthly Financial Statements for October 2015 c. Overnight Field Trips d. Incidents by Students to Staff for October 2015 e. Youth Options Applications Mr. Goodremote moved, Mr. Nielsen seconded, to approve the Superintendent Consent Agenda Items 13 (a-e). All were in favor. The motion passed.

14. NEW REFERRALS

a. Referral #9-2015 (District Core Values)

This referral was submitted by Dr. Frontier and supported by Pamala Handrow and Kim Plache. Mr. Nielsen moved, Mrs. McKenna seconded, to move this item to the Governance Committee. Mr. Koetz moved, Mr. Nielsen seconded, to amend the motion for this item to go to a Board Work Session for discussion prior to it going to the Governance Committee for recommendation. Ayes – 8 (Goodremote, Handrow, Hargrove, Koetz, McKenna, Nielsen, Plache, Wiser). Noes – 0. Absent – 1 (Frontier). The motion passed.

15. ADJOURNMENT Mr. Nielsen moved, Mr. Wiser seconded, to adjourn. All were in favor and the meeting adjourned at 10:48 p.m.

BOARD DEBRIEFING OF THIS EVENING’S MEETING No debriefing was conducted. Signed: ____________________________ Pamala Handrow, Vice President Signed: ____________________________ Lolli Haws, Secretary

ATTACHMENT A



WORK SESSION


and Acting Clerk

Racine, Wisconsin October 5, 2015

A special meeting of the Board of Education of the Racine Unified School District of Racine County, Wisconsin was called to order at 6 p.m. on Monday, October 5, 2015. The purpose of the meeting was a Board Work Session. No action was taken by the Board. The following Board members were present: Michael Frontier, Charles Goodremote, Pamala Handrow, Melvin Hargrove (Left at 7:01 p.m. and returned at 7:57 p.m.), Julie L. McKenna, Don J. Nielsen, and Dennis Wiser (Left at 7:55 p.m.). Absent: Kim Plache (Arrived at 6:05 p.m.). Also present: Lolli Haws, Superintendent of Schools; Marc Duff, Chief Financial Officer; and Darlene Gallup, Recording Secretary. Mr. Edward Jenkins and Mr. David Hazen were present via conference phone.

1. Apportionment Committee Report Dr. Frontier, Chair of the Apportionment Committee, opened the report by introducing the Apportionment Committee members Dave Hazen, Chief of Operations (present by conference call); Carlos Lopez, Community member (Absent); Edward Jenkins, Community Member (present by conference call); Gib Berthelsen, Legal Counsel; Charles Goodremote, Board Member; Melvin Hargrove, Board Member. Dr. Frontier reviewed the Committee’s charge of recommending two proposals to the Board honoring the legislature’s requirement that by November 1 the voting districts are set for the April school board election. Mr. Berthelsen provided an overview and explanation of the rule requirements of the charge of the Committee including that there be nine districts of substantially equal population (approximately 15,444 people each), variance (should not be a difference bottom to top/low to high of 10% in each ward), compactness, congruency, be contiguous and there be three classes of districts to one third of the school board to be elected each year. It was decided that the classes of districts be left to the Board for selection by drawing from a hat after a proposal has been determined suitable. Also reviewed were the

Board of Education

standards of not packing (putting minorities of one district to dilute their power) or of not fractioning (spreading them out so far that again their power of minority community is diluted). These concepts are not mentioned in the statutes regarding apportionment. They are the product of court decisions and Federal regulations. Dr. Frontier said public input was invited. The Committee received only one letter which was from the NAACP. They attended all of the meetings and encouraged the Committee to have three minority districts if possible. Mr. Duff handed out a revised, Revised Resolution Number 2 and Dr. Frontier reviewed the revisions made. Dr. Frontier reviewed the two proposals (Proposal 1a and Proposal 5) that the Committee will be recommending to the Board. He reviewed the statistics using an Excel document presentation and the two “Resolutions Creating Nine Election Districts within the Racine Unified School District.” Mr. Hazen shared that it was not possible to create wards in such a way that the ballots would be the same throughout polling places for the City of Racine. Although it would be cheaper to do it that way, it was also not a legal requirement. Dr. Frontier said he met with the county clerk and she said, in different wards there could be different assemblymen within the same ward (you are voting for different people in the same voting place). The two proposals presented for the Board’s consideration are Proposal 1a and Proposal 5. Dr. Frontier and Mr. Berthelsen briefly shared information regarding the visual maps displayed for each proposal and their honor of the criteria. Mr. Hazen and Mr. Jenkins provided input on how the maps were developed using the statistical numbers and input from Racine County. Mr. Jenkins said he validated the numbers in Mr. Hazen’s statistics. Mr. Berthelsen talked about the issue of incumbency and the Committee’s desire to not take into consideration where Board members live. He said it was mentioned at one of the meetings that there is value in having some institutional history provided by continuing Board members. Mr. Hazen said that is a factor that the Board should look at and consider when making their choice. Mr. Wiser shared the following concerns and comments regarding an alternate apportionment plan and handout:

Scoring said both proposals are compact. Proposal 1a is not compact by most standards.

Congruence – The definition used is wrong. Congruence means the exact same size and shape; not similar shapes, somewhat alike, but the exact same size. The intent of the legislature, by saying that the board districts should attempt to be congruent with existing municipalities is in effect saying that they will have exactly the same boundaries.

Proposal 1a has 4 districts (2, 5, 6, 8) where they are not congruent, meaning the boarders of those districts are at variance with the existing municipal boundaries.

Any district where you have multiple municipalities represented cannot match municipal boundaries because you are straddling a municipal boundary.

In Proposal 5, 6 districts are not congruent with existing municipal boundaries. The alternative proposal submitted is based on exactly the same data that was

used by this Committee to the best of my knowledge. District 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 fall exclusively in the city limits of Racine. They align perfectly with existing aldermanic districts which means you won’t have the issue of polling stations having to print a variety of ballots

The concerns the clerks have about this is legitimate sending two similar but different ballots to the same polling place opens the door for confusion, inefficiencies, extra cost, and recounts because they are confusing if they are similar

There are 15 aldermanic districts. If you want 5 board districts, 15 divided by 5 is 3. You take 3 aldermanic districts, and that is one board district.

There are at least two minority districts guaranteed in the alternate plan Committee Comments on the alternate plan: Variance is too great when we tried to work with the other municipalities When you have different population densities, you won’t have congruency.

You’re always going to have a big one like Caledonia or Mt. Pleasant where you don’t have a lot of people. So that shape will not be like the shape of the city’s where you have a higher density.

If you look at ward make up, you’ll see no two wards are the same size. So working to get up to the 15,000 is a balancing act

Continued comments by Mr. Wiser about his alternate plan:

Districts 1-5 are totally congruent with the boundaries of Racine For the outlying districts, Mt. Pleasant and Caledonia, the district I have selected

may not make geographical sense because I did not have a map of where these districts are but to bring it into geographical balance, you just swap districts back and forth between the various groups I have here.

District 6 is all Mt. Pleasant. Roughly Districts 10-23, because they all lie within Mt. Pleasant, are all going to

be congruent with the boundaries of Mt. Pleasant. District 8, is similar in that it is all Caledonia districts and will be congruent with

the boundaries of Caledonia District 7 and 9 are the ones that catch the left over pieces. These clearly will not

be congruent because one has combinations of Mt. Pleasant, Sturtevant and Elmwood Park. The other has combinations of Caledonia, Mt. Pleasant, Wind Point and North Bay.

This map, unlike Proposal 1a and 5 only has two places where it is not congruent as opposed to one map having 4 and one have 6 that are not congruent.

The overall variance on the alternate map, the lowest low is 4.4, the highest high is 3.2 so it is well within the 10% put forward by the Committee

If I were from one of the outlying municipalities and I looked at Proposals 1a and 5, I would be incensed at the number of instances where portions of the communities are thrown in with Racine and votes are going to be lost

Mr. Wiser stated he did not have a map of the wards for Caledonia and Mt. Pleasant but the items can be taken from one Mt. Pleasant group and swapped with a different Mt. Pleasant group and you should be able to come up with something contiguous. Mr. Wiser stated he did not do a map because he did not have the resources to do that.

Additional Board and Committee Comments:

In respect to each of the requirements, compactness, continuity, congruence, all of the statutes begin with in every case, “to the extent practicable.” This indicates there is a problem with doing this perfectly. It just can’t be done.

Recommendation – reconvene the Committee, put this on a map and look at it An issue with the all city map was Wind Point ended up being an island in the

middle of the city so it was in noncontiguous map One factor, congruence, is of the utmost importance, but I want to know how the

others are related as well The Committee started with a totally wrong definition of congruence and

proceeded to draw maps where in one case almost 50% of the wards are not congruent and in another case 66% of the wards are not congruent. There is no balancing act there. Those transgressions are way out of line with the other problems in the maps.

I was told by legislators that congruent and contiguous mean that they touch and they need to be within boarders of existing municipalities as much as possible. What I have read is that one of the concerns of local legislature is that Mt. Pleasant and Caledonia felt they were not getting proper representation. Not having city population overlap into Caledonia or Mt. Pleasant districts definitely gives them more of an influence than if you put City wards in districts outside the City.

There are a variety of ways of looking at representation. Hard to envision Mr. Wiser’s alternate plan since we can’t see a map and

numbers. Hard to compare them. Board comments on next steps included:

Recommend the Committee look at this alternative plan. It appears to simplify voting and comes at congruency in a different way.

Board motion was for the proposals to be discussed at this evening which we have done. We are technically out of bounds with the motion that was passed. Based on the technically of the motion passed, I don’t think it is appropriate that the Committee consider other things because the Committee was not charged with considering other things. I think the Board needs to come back together and make an additional motion.

Your interpretation of the motion is that the Committee decides what is going to happen. If that is the case, there was no need to have the study session. It could have just been presented at the Board meeting. The study session was to have input, look at the maps, discuss the maps and give input to the Committee’s reports.

The Board gave the Committee a specific charge with the proposals We are going to be looking at a monitoring report tonight, discussing, and making

comments on it. There is nothing anywhere that says that report cannot be

changed between tonight and the night we vote on the final report. The same is true with the situation with these maps. What is the purpose of this meeting if we are locked into what is presented?

There is no limitation at all to what the Board can do here. With respect to a new idea, it is hard to envision it without having a map of it.

Right now, the Village of Caledonia can elect 9 people to this Board. All they have to do is put forth the effort once this law passes. I don’t know how in anyway this alternate proposal protects the Village of Caledonia.

The work you have done here is terrific. If it is all true, I sure want to see it. I just wish though that you would have been part of the Committee, you had come to the meetings and shared your ideas, and shared these ideas before the deadline where we had to make a recommendation to the Board.

Mr. Wiser said his need to participate in this did not start until he received the charts and data last Thursday and it became apparent that 44% of the districts in one plan did not comply with the requirement of congruence and 66% in another plan did not comply with need for congruence. That is when my concern began.

Mr. Goodremote recommended the Board reassemble, make another motion possibly without a deadline to come up with more ideas.

There is no limit to the proposals that can come to the Board for vote. The Committee has recommended two. Nothing prevents others from coming forward so the Board isn’t limited.

Dr. Frontier recommended that Mr. Hazen and Mr. Jenkins look at Mr. Wiser’s proposal and provide information to him so he can bring it forward for the Board to see as well. Mr. Hazen said he will get Mr. Wiser access to the Caledonia and Mt. Pleasant wards and Mr. Wiser will work on a map.

Mr. Hazen said both of the maps provided by the Committee provide what it was asked to do. It is up to the Board to pick one or do something totally different. He noted there are only 25 days left before the deadline. People want to know where they live so they decide if they are going to run for the school board.

. Pastor Hargrove left the session at 7:01 p.m. and Ms. Handrow took his place running the session.

2. Monitoring Section of the School Board’s Coherent Governance Policy: OE-9 (Communication with the Board) Mrs. Tapp presented the OE-9 Monitoring Report which will be presented to the Board at its October 19, 2015, business meeting. Administration submits this report as being incompliance with exceptions (as noted in evidence). The areas of non-compliance are:

Section 9.4 Indicator 2: The percent of respondents to the Parent/Community survey who indicate they fell their perspectives and opinions are valued by the District will increase every year.

Section 9.4 Indicator 3: The percent of respondents to the Parent/Community survey who indicate they have opportunities for collaboration abs shared decision making with District staff will increase by 5% over the previous year.

Section 9.4 Indicator 4: The percent of respondents to the Parent/Community survey who indicate the District’s main focus is on student achievement ill increase 3% each year.

Section 9.4 Indicator 4: The percent of respondents to the Parent/Community survey indicate the District provides good customer service will increase each year with a target of 80% by summer, 2017.

Recommendations/Suggestions from the Board:

Would like to see whether the numbers have gone up or down for Section 9.3 Add the Technology Advisory Council to the Evidence in Section 9.4, Indicator 1 As a measurement, include the total number of respondents for the survey in 9.4 Suggestion – compare the written comments between years to see if we can glean

additional insight from them Question - Do we have information about the number of people who drop out of

the survey between levels? My personal feeling is that it takes a huge commitment to complete the entire survey.

Would be interesting to know about customer service responses similar to how they are done in Mr. Peltz’s area when work tickets are completed. Include in your action plan

3. High School Transformation Master Planning Team Executive Summary

Dan Thielen, Chief of Secondary School Transformation; Terri Tessmann, Supervisor, Personalized Learning and STEAM; and teachers, Terri Jackley, Case High School; Magita Stroud, Park High School, and Chris Neff, Career and Technology Education Supervisor, provided information on this agenda item. Areas of presentation included:

Summer Visioning Event - Engaged multi stakeholder groups (teachers, administrators, business and community partners, faith-based community leaders, and Board members) on what we want to see in our high school transformation

Transformation Summit at Parkside Master Planning Process Development at Wingspread Teachers visiting businesses to learn about skills needed in different areas of

employment The Academies of Racine Engagement efforts with students and parents and course selections Efforts toward collaboration with those who did not attend the national academy Union leadership has chosen not to participate Middle school transformation is also being given thought

Dennis Wiser left the meeting at 7:55 p.m. prior to the Board Room Design presentation. Pastor Hargrove returned to the meeting at 7:57 p.m. during the Board Room Design presentation.

4. Board Room Design Stacy Tapp, Chief of Communications and Family Engagement, provided information about the potential Board Room design using a PowerPoint presentation. The draft murals included:

Main Wall – North Star Trajectory Back Wall – Mission Side Wall (Exterior windows) – Three panels (Board Purpose, Results, and an

area that is open for consideration) Front Wall – Core Values

5. Postponement of OE-4 (Personnel Administration) Monitoring Report to November

Dr. Haws is requesting a postponement of the OE-4 monitoring report until next month to allow the new chief of human capital, Julie Landry, more time to prepare the report.

The Work Session ended at 8:02 p.m.

ATTACHMENT B



WORK SESSION


and Acting Clerk

Racine, Wisconsin October 19, 2015

A special meeting of the Board of Education of the Racine Unified School District of Racine County, Wisconsin was called to order at 5 p.m. on Monday, October 19, 2015. The purpose of the meeting was a Board Work Session. No action was taken by the Board. The following Board members were present: Michael Frontier, Charles Goodremote, Pamala Handrow, Melvin Hargrove, Julie L. McKenna, Don J. Nielsen, Kim Plache, and Dennis Wiser (Left at 5:42 p.m.). Also present: Lolli Haws, Superintendent of Schools; Marc Duff, Chief Financial Officer; Keri Hanstedt, Executive Director, Employee Relations; and Darlene Gallup, Recording Secretary. The salary proposals for all employee groups were discussed. Dr. Haws reviewed information used for determining salary recommendations and proposals. Dr. Haws utilized a PowerPoint presentation showing slides and handouts to review salary information including Analysis of Peer District Salaries, Benefits, Average salary for teachers (2013-14), Teacher salary increases (2015) for neighboring and/or similar size school districts; Average RUSD Teacher Salary Increase (4-Year Trend); and Educational Assistant Rate Increases. Discussion points and comments included:

RUSD’s wages are at about 85% higher than most of the districts throughout the state RUSD’s benefits are in the top 6% throughout the state RUSD has approximately a 68% poverty level this year Only a few of the local peer districts have a higher compensation package This year, Milwaukee and Kenosha are offering lower increases than RUSD RUSD is one of the few districts that pay course overload A survey of local districts was conducted to make sure this information is an “apples to

apples” comparison Request – Provide information on the base salary for last three years The salary schedule will not be increasing

Board of Education

The proposal/recommendation is for a top step addition Administrators have a very narrow salary schedule - number of levels. Not very

competitive. Educational Assistant Rate Increases - have not kept up with cost of living increases. The

proposed hourly rate increase exceeds cost of living RUSD Educational Assistant Staffing – Educational assistants are hired to work directly

with students and during the time students are in the buildings. Shifting has been done to align assistants with those hours. There are a few who work longer hours based on building needs with things like bus loading. There are always opportunities for educational assistants to transfer to longer hour positions.

The number of educational assistants has increased (370 – 414) Concern - If an educational assistant is doing work that directly relates to a student’s

education, isn’t it allowable time? I have heard they have to be in direct physical contact. We are only reimbursed for direct student assistance not assistance to teachers The number of students who have IEPs in place requiring more assistance has increased Request – What is the ratio of assistants per students for special education students for

the two year comparison – is it going up or down? Request – information on the program in place to assist educational assistants (and

clericals) who want to get a teacher license Recommended Salary Increases (pie charts showing allocations for salary increases,

supplemental pay and step/level increases) for Teachers, Educational Assistants, Building Service Employees, Administrators, Clerical and Confidential Clerical

Total 2015-16 additional allocation for salary increase $3,508,970 There is another “meet and confer” meeting coming up to discuss options for distribution

of the $930,000. Tentative agreements have been reached with REA, REAA and Local 152 BSE

There is nothing preventing modifying the salary schedule with the supplemental pay increases. There are discussions about that distribution and continued discussion in the “meet and confer” relative to the supplemental increases.

Because of the base wage that administration proposed, for teachers on the salary schedule who are at the very top, there would be no increase. So cuts in the budget were made to identify $929,000 to cover that everyone receives some salary increase this year.

Mr. Wiser left the meeting at 5:42 p.m.

Does the new salary schedule have multiple lanes? Is this only for those at the top of their level? Administration has recommended that the $920,000 be for everyone who is at the top of their level.


ATTACHMENT C



WORK SESSION


and Acting Clerk


A special meeting of the Board of Education of the Racine Unified School District of Racine County, Wisconsin was called to order at 6 p.m. on Monday, November 2, 2015. The purpose of the meeting was a Board Work Session. No action was taken by the Board. The following Board members were present: Michael Frontier (Left at 8:47 p.m.), Charles Goodremote, Pamala Handrow, Melvin Hargrove, John M. Koetz, Julie L. McKenna, Don J. Nielsen, Kim Plache, and Dennis Wiser. Also present: Lolli Haws, Superintendent of Schools; Dave Hazen, Chief of Operations; Bryan Arnold, Director of Facilities and Operations; Julie Landry, Chief of Human Capital; Eric Gallien, Deputy Superintendent; Andrea Rittgers, Director, Student Services; and Darlene Gallup, Recording Secretary.

1. Monitoring Section of the School Board’s Coherent Governance Policy: a. OE-3 (Facilities)

Mr. Hazen and Mr. Arnold presented the Operational Expectations-3 (Facilities) Monitoring Report and answered questions from the Board. A PowerPoint presentation was used to highlight the major points of the report. This report was submitted as being in compliance with exception in 3.3.5 (vestibule-entry controls). This will be a long term improvement process to get all buildings to be compliant. Mitchell Elementary, Gilmore and the Administrative Service Center, are locations that are examples that meet all of the indicators for compliance. Mr. Arnold reviewed information regarding each of the indicators and answered questions from the Board.

Recommendations/Suggestions/Requests of the Board:

Request – Look into the possible health issues at the new O. Brown site regarding coal plant emissions

3.1; Indicator 2: Will we get a similar report each year? Can we get a list of where projects lie in a priority list (top, middle, or bottom third of the list)

Board of Education

3.7; Change Orders – Requested list at the end of each year that gives an idea of the change order costs

b. OE-4 (Personnel)

Ms. Landry presented the Operational Expectations-4 (Personnel) Monitoring Report and answered questions from the Board. Ms. Landry shared an updated version of the report. The report is submitted as being in compliant with exception in Section 4.3; Indicator 3 and Section 4.11; Indicator 2.


4.1: Change the wording in Evidence to make it clearer that only those who passed a background check have volunteered in the District.

4.3: Check data for Indicator 1 – It should be 96%; and for Indicator 3 it should be 92%

4.3.5: Diversity – Would like to see breakout numbers for assistants and teachers (Counter comments: Administration needs to know the Board’s expectations in advance. Doesn’t need to be in the report every year. This is an administrative call.)

4.8.1: Would like to see the peer list remain consistent from year to year 4.8.1: Although this is a baseline year, there is enough data to see the numbers

listed column by column and not just the percentages 4.12: Include a copy of the survey questions in the appendix Capacity Building: Put back in the missing information about career pathway

opportunities for employees who want to become teachers and principals

c. OE-11 (Learning Environment) Dr. Gallien and Ms. Rittgers presented the Operational Expectations-11 (Learning Environment) Monitoring Report and answered questions from the Board. The report is submitted as being in compliance.


Terminology needs to be consistent: “In Progress, Baseline Data Year, etc.” It should either be In Compliance or Not in Compliance.

Would like there to be a study session on YBRS data Recommendations to Governance Committee for Consideration to Change

OE-11 o 11.2: Change 11.2 to read, “Protect confidential student information” o 11.3: Remove 11.3 from policy and adopt an Administrative

Regulation for employees to indicate annually their understanding of how to handle confidential student information.

o 11.7: Remove 11.7 from policy and adopt an Administrative Regulation (or develop one in the Department of Human Capital) that addresses expectations for adult behavior, attitude, or actions toward students.

o 11.8, 11.9, and 11.10: Change the language by inserting the phrase, “The Superintendent may not . . .”

Discussion on Policy Change Recommendations Procedure: o Has to be reviewed by the Governance Committee first? o Has to come to Board first and then send to Governance? o Review at Board Retreat and bring back to the Board for action? o Needs to be discussed at two meetings before vote? o Superintendent submit directly to Board? o Policy says has to be reviewed by Governance Committee o Discuss recommendations at the Board Retreat? o For now, Dr. Haws will provide a list of requested changes to OEs

from administration. These will be on the Board’s business meeting agenda. The Board will forward them to the Governance Committee for recommendation. To the Board for action.

2. Gifford K-8 Boundaries

Dr. Haws and Mr. Hazen presented this agenda item. The Gifford Elementary boundary will stay intact and will now include middle school students who live in that boundary as well. Middle school students in that boundary who currently attend Gilmore or Starbuck will have the option to continue there or attend Gifford. Coherent Governance Policy OE-10.18 states boundary changes must come to the Board for approval so this will come to the Board for approval at the November 16 Board meeting.

3. Discussion of Deferred Administrative Regulations 4100 (Professional Appearance)

and 4246 (Custody Release and Electronic Equipment) Dr. Haws shared copies of the Administrative Regulation 2000 which shows the process for making changes to Administrative Regulations. She asked the Board to consider whether there needs to be any changes made to the process in Administrative Regulation 2000. This topic was discussed at the Governance Committee level. The Governance Committee made no recommendation for changes at its July 15, 2015 meeting, and this was reported to the Board at the July 20, 2015, Board business meeting. Discussion comments included:

Policy needs to be tweaked so there is a two pronged process – one for Administrative Regulations and one for Coherent Governance Policy. Every policy that gets changed has to be approved by the Board but the process to do that has to be set up

Consent agenda is meant for expediency and as a way for the Board to be kept informed about changes. Consent Agenda items can be pulled for separate consideration

Gib Berthelsen has said, whether its administrative policy or its Board policy, it is all Board policy and the Board should not be handing policy over to administration

The Governance recommended no change to this policy but it didn’t require Board action and remains in limbo until the whole Board discusses it

There were two Administrative Regulations items pulled from the May 18, 2015, Board Consent Agenda (4100 and 4246) and deferred until the Board determines

whether they should be in the business of making changes to administrative regulations

Don’t want every Administrative Regulation to come to the Governance Committee. Have the CG policy say that changes to CG policies have to come to the Governance Committee or have a separate sentence that says, “This does not refer to Administrative Regulations.” For Administrative Regulations, the Board has to discuss a process - they can come to the Board business meeting for vote but need to decide on a process for that to happen (e.g., through a referral).

There is an administrative process in place for changes to Administrative Regulations prior to it coming to the Board as a consent agenda item. They are well vetted (administration, legal review, posted to public)

There are conflicting policies and changes needed. (See Adm. Reg. 2000[g]); GC-5(6.5); GC-1

After considerable discussion, those present considered it a good idea for the language in CG Policy GC-5(6.5) to be changed to include a separate sentence: “This does not include administrative regulations.”

There is no reason Administrative Regulations can’t come to the Board for vote through the consent agenda. Items could be pulled for separate consideration.

4. Discussion on Referral Process

Pastor Hargrove presented this agenda item. Discussion comments included: Question is what is the value of a referral? Should it remain in our policies? What

is the process? Recently they have been coming to Governance without the Board discussing

them or voting for that to happen Not all Governance Committee members have been at the Committee meetings Board is to order the priority of the referrals. This isn’t being done. Referrals are not debatable until they come back to the Board from Governance

Committee with a recommendation from that committee. That has been the process for the last 10 years.

Referrals were sent to Governance to help streamline the process instead of bringing everything to the Board and having long meetings.

There are multiple/parallel paths: GC-2.7 states “Customary practice.” GC-5(6) talks about the Governance Committee’s roll

GC-2.7 is only a point made so that no vote take place on the first night it is seen. If we follow what is written in policy:

o A referral comes from the Board to the Governance Committee o The Governance Committee discusses it o The referral is discussed at a work session o The Governance Committee makes a recommendation to the Board o It then goes to the Board for discussion and vote

Policies need to be rewritten “cleaned up” on the process. Coherent Governance changes have always gone to the Governance Committee

for recommendation and then to the Board for vote. We require 5 hands to move a CG policy related referral forward.

Suggestion - Get all the work done before it comes to Governance or Board (e.g., Dr. Haws for changes to OEs; Wiser drafting his items for Governance, etc.).

It is a lot of work for the Governance Committee to consider all referrals. Some are simple but some are complicated and need a lot of work

All previous 17 referrals have gone to the Governance Committee (until this year) New Board members need to be oriented to the process A majority vote is needed to move a referral forward All of the open referrals have been discussed at the Governance level This discussion on process needs to go deeper and should take place at the

Governance Committee level Dr. Frontier left the meeting at 8:47 p.m.

The Governance Committee needs to schedule a meeting and discuss the Minority Hiring referral, make a recommendation, and it needs to be on the next Board’s November 16 Board business meeting agenda for vote.


ATTACHMENT D

Racine Unified School District 3 1 0 9 Mt . Ple a sa n t St r e e t , Ra cin e , Wisco n sin 5 3 4 0 4

BOARD OF EDUCATION AUDIT COMMITTEE MEETING

MINUTES Sep tem ber 1 7 , 2 0 1 5 Th e Bo a r d o f Ed u ca t io n Au d it Co m m it t e e m ee t in g o f Th u r sd a y , Sep t em b e r 1 7 , 2 0 1 5 , wa s ca lled t o o r d e r a t 6 p .m . Mr . Nie lsen m o ved , Ms. Ha n d r o w seco n d ed , t o a d d Pu b lic Co m m en t s t o t h e a gen d a a ft e r Ot h e r Co n ce r n s a n d fo llo w t h e sa m e p r o ced u r e a s o t h e r Bo a r d co m m it t e e m ee t in gs lim it in g t h e t im e fo r in d iv id u a l sp ea k e r s t o 3 m in u t e s e a ch . All we r e in fa vo r . Th e a gen d a wa s ch a n ge d .

3 . Ap p ro val o f Au d it Co m m ittee Min u te s o f Ju ly 1 3 , 2 0 1 5 Ms. Ha n d r o w m o ved , Mr . Nie lsen seco n d ed , t o a p p r o ve t h e m in u t e s o f t h e Ju ly 1 3 , 2 0 1 5 , Co m m it t e e m ee t in g m in u t e s . All we r e in fa vo r . Th e m in u t e s we r e a p p r o ved .

4 . Mo n th ly Fin an cial Up d ate

Mr . Du ff p r o vid e d co p ie s o f t h e Mo n t h ly Fin a n cia l Up d a t e p a ck e t . Mr . Du ff co m m en t e d t h a t t h e a n n u a l b u d ge t r ep o r t is d u e t o m o r r o w a n d a d m in is t r a t io n is wo r k in g wit h t h e a u d it o r s . Aid a m o u n t s a n d fu n d b a la n ces a r e b e in g e st a b lish ed .

Th e fo llo win g in d iv id u a l Co m b in ed St a t em en t o f Reve n u e s, Exp en d it u r e a n d Ch a n ges Fu n d Ba la n ce Re ven u es b y So u r ce , Exp en d it u r e s b y Fu n ct io n Mo n t h ly Bu d ge t r ep o r t s we r e r ev iewed a n d d iscu ssed .

o All Go ve r n m en t a l Fu n d s ( Ju n e , 2 0 1 4 -1 5 a n d Au gu st , 2 0 1 5 -1 6 )

o Sp ecia l Ed u ca t io n Fu n d Sp ecia l Ed u ca t io n e xp en d it u r e s a r e d o wn m o st ly

d u e t o u n filled va ca n cie s a n d a n u n exp ect ed ch eck fo r Med ica id r e im b u r sem en t ( s t a t e is b a ck lo gged in sen d in g t h em o u t )

o Gen e r a l Fu n d o Fo o d Se r v ice Fu n d o Ba la n ce Sh ee t s (Fo r Fisca l Yea r 2 0 1 5 Fo r Pe r io d En d in g

Ju n e 3 0 , 2 0 1 5 a n d Fo r Pe r io d En d in g Au gu st 3 1 , 2 0 1 6 ) Co m m it t e e m a y wa n t t o ch a n ge h o w th is

in fo r m a t io n is v iewed d ep en d in g o n h o w va lu a b le it is t o b e r ev iewed in t h is fo r m a t

Board of Education

Mo n t h ly En e r gy Co n su m p t io n & Co st Co m p a r iso n (Na t u r a l Ga s, Elect r ic)

o Ut ilit ie s (m o st lik e ly h igh e r d u e t o a wa r m er su m m er --- co o lin g d egr ee d a y s we r e h igh e r )

Up d a t e o n Den t a l a n d Med ica l

St o p lo ss wen t o ve r b u d ge t . Beca u se t h e Dist r ict is se lf -in su r ed in su r a n ce co ve r s t h is lo ss .

Th e fo r m u la fo r em p lo y ee in su r a n ce co st s wa s b r ie fly exp la in ed

Den t a l cla im s a r e o ve r b y 1 5 %. Th is m a y s im p ly b e d u e t o em p lo y ees a n d fa m ilie s h a vin g d en t a l wo r k d o n e d u r in g t h e su m m er .

5 . Sch o o l Fin an cials Rep o rt Mr . Du ff r ep o r t ed t h a t n o t a ll sch o o ls h a d t h e ir r ep o r t s in o n t im e t h is p e r io d . It wa s n o t ed t h a t n o w t h a t t h e secr e t a r ia l s t a ff is b a c k in t h e sch o o ls , a ll o f t h e r ep o r t s sh o u ld a ll b e fin a lized a n d su b m it t ed . Pa ges 1 4 -1 5 o f t h e fin a n cia l p a ck e t sh o w sch o o l b a la n ces. Th e a u d it o r s t y p ica lly d o sp o t ch ecks o f fo u r sch o o ls a n d in clu d e r eco m m en d a t io n s t o a d m in is t r a t io n . Ad m in is t r a t io n m a y r e co m m en d a ll a cco u n t s b e r ev iewed .

6 . 2 0 1 6 Bu d ge t Up d ate

Mr . Du ff p r o vid e d a b r ie f u p d a t e o f t h e 2 0 1 6 Bu d ge t . Co m m en t s in clu d ed :

No t m u ch h a s b een p r ep a r ed y e t o n b u d ge t ch a n ges t o r ep o r t

Th ir d Fr id a y co u n t is t o m o r r o w (Sep t em b e r 1 8 ) a n d en r o llm en t a p p ea r s t o b e h igh e r t h a n a n t icip a t ed

DPI ju st p u t in t h e r even u e lim it fo r m u la o n it s web sit e . A b r ie f exp la n a t io n wa s p r o vid ed .

Th e Dist r ict wo n ’t k n o w u n t il Oct o b e r t h e n u m b er o f vo u ch e r s t u d en t s

Rega r d in g t h e r ece n t in fo r m a t io n r ega r d in g t h e Dist r ict ge t t in g $ 1 5 0 p e r s t u d en t --- Th is m o n ey h a d a lr ea d y b e en in clu d ed in t h e b u d ge t

Declin in g en r o llm e n t cu sh io n fu n d in g wa s exp la in ed o ca n r e su lt in le ss m o n ey fo r m o r e s t u d en t s d ep en d in g

o n t h e fo r m u la o n ew vo u ch e r im p a ct in fo r m a t io n wh en k n o wn will b e

p r o vid ed

7 . Oth er Co n cern s Req u est --- Fo r t h e No vem b er Au d it Co m m it t e e a gen d a : Au d it Rep o r t Review

It wa s n o t ed t h a t o n go in g m ee t in gs a r e t a k in g p la ce o n s t u d en t p la cem en t a n d s t a ffin g ca lcu la t io n s.

Pu blic Co m m en ts : Mem b er s o f t h e REA a n d REAA wer e p r e sen t . Al Lev ie , Sh a r o n Do wn in g, Gwen d o ly n Sh a w-Sco t t , Pe t e Kn o t ek , a n d Ke it h Co lem a n sp o k e a d vo ca t in g fo r h igh q u a lit y t e a ch in g, sa la r y sch ed u le s , co st o f liv in g in cr ea se s , b u d ge t a sse ssm en t / d eve lo p m en t , la ck o f co m p u t e r s a n d flo o r sp a ce , a n d a r eq u est fo r o n e -o n -o n e t im e wit h Co m m it t e e m em b er s t o d iscu ss b u d ge t issu e s .

8 . Ad jo u rn Ms. Ha n d r o w m o ved , Mr . Nie lsen seco n d ed , t h a t t h e m e e t in g b e a d jo u r n ed . All we r e in fa vo r . Th e m ee t in g a d jo u r n ed a t 6 :1 5 p .m .

Oth ers Presen t: Resp ectfu lly su bm itted , Ma r c Du ff, Ch ie f Fin a n cia l Office r Ch a r le s Go o d r em o t e , Ch a ir (Pr e sen t ) Da r len e Ga llu p , Exe cu t ive Assis t a n t Pa m a la Ha n d r o w (Pr e sen t ) Do n J. Nie lsen , (Pr e sen t ) Me lv in Ha r gr o ve , Ex Officio (No t Pr e sen t )






A special meeting of the Board of Education of the Racine Unified School District of Racine County, Wisconsin was called to order at 5:30 p.m. on Thursday, November 12, 2015, with the following members present: Charles Goodremote, Pamala Handrow, Melvin Hargrove, Julie L. McKenna, Don J. Nielsen, and Kim Plache. Absent: Michael Frontier, John M. Koetz, and Dennis Wiser. Also present: Lolli Haws, Superintendent; Dave Hazen, Chief of Operations; and Darlene Gallup, Recording Secretary. The Board of Education met in open session for the sole purpose of considering a motion to adjourn to Executive Session per Wisconsin Statute for the purpose of:

1. Real Estate Matter – 19.85(1)(e) Ms. Plache moved, Ms. Handrow seconded, to adjourn to Executive Session. Ayes – 6 (Goodremote, Handrow, Hargrove, McKenna, Nielsen Plache). Noes – 0. Absent – 3 (Frontier, Koetz, Wiser). The meeting adjourned to Executive Session. Real Estate Matter A real estate matter was discussed. Mrs. McKenna left the meeting at 5:30 p.m. during the discussion. Ms. Plache moved, Ms. Handrow seconded, to adjourn the executive session. All were in favor. The meeting adjourned at 5:38 p.m. Signed: ____________________________ Pamala Handrow, Vice President Signed: ____________________________ Lolli Haws, Secretary

Board of Education






A special meeting of the Board of Education of the Racine Unified School District of Racine County, Wisconsin was called to order at 6:15 p.m. on Monday, November 16, 2015, with the following members present: Charles Goodremote, Pamala Handrow, Melvin Hargrove, John M. Koetz, Julie L. McKenna, Don J. Nielsen, Kim Plache, and Dennis Wiser. Absent: Michael Frontier. Also present: Lolli Haws, Superintendent; Andrea Rittgers, Director of Student Services; and Darlene Gallup, Recording Secretary. The Board of Education met in open session for the sole purpose of considering a motion to adjourn to Executive Session per Wisconsin Statute for the purpose of:

1. Student Suspensions and Expulsions – 19.85(1)(f) and 120.13(1)(c)4.d Ms. Plache moved, Ms. Handrow seconded, to adjourn to Executive Session. All were in favor. The meeting adjourned to Executive Session. Student Suspensions and Expulsions Student suspensions and expulsions were reviewed. Ms. Plache moved, Ms. Handrow seconded, to approve the Student Expulsions and Suspensions reports as presented. All were in favor. The motion passed. Ms. Plache moved, Ms. Handrow seconded, to adjourn the executive session. All were in favor. The meeting adjourned at 6:20 p.m. Signed: ____________________________ Pamala Handrow, Vice President Signed: ____________________________ Lolli Haws, Secretary

Board of Education




Dennis Wiser, President Pamala Handrow, Vice President and Acting Clerk

Racine, Wisconsin December 7, 2015

A special meeting of the Board of Education of the Racine Unified School District of Racine County, Wisconsin was called to order at 5 p.m. on Monday, December 7, 2015.

2. ROLL CALL The following Board members were present: Michael Frontier, Charles Goodremote, Pamala Handrow, Julie L. McKenna, Don J. Nielsen, Kim Plache and Dennis Wiser Absent: Melvin Hargrove and John M. Koetz. Also present: Lolli Haws, Superintendent; Marc Duff, Chief Financial Officer; Dave Hazen, Chief of Operations; Rosalie Daca, Chief Academic Officer; Wendy Rowley, Executive Director, Accountability; Tim Peltz, Chief Information Officer; Stacy Tapp, Chief of Communication and Community Engagement; Gib Berthelsen, Legal Counsel; and Darlene Gallup, Recording Secretary.

3. ACTION ITEMS

a. Resolution Awarding The Sale Of $28,090,000 General Obligation School Building And Improvement Bonds Mr. Hazen and Mr. Duff presented the resolution. Goodremote moved, Dr. Frontier seconded, to approve the resolution to award the sale of $28,090,000 General Obligation School Building and Improvement Bonds at the interest rate 2.2417% and the purchaser being Hutchinson, Shockey, Erley & Co. The net proceeds after premium will be $28,640,306.60. Payments for the debt will be made from the referendum funds approved by District voters in November of 2014. Ayes – 7 (Frontier, Goodremote, Handrow, McKenna, Nielsen, Plache, Wiser). Noes – 0. Absent – 2 (Hargrove, Koetz). The motion to approve passed.

b. Approval of Continued Board Professional Development with Dennis Cheesebrow

Ms. Plache presented the agenda item. The approval is requested for continued professional development services with Dennis Cheesebrow through TeamWorks International. Dr. Frontier moved, Ms. Plache seconded, to approve the Governance Committee working with Mr. Dennis Cheesebrow, TeamWorks International, to provide Board and administrative professional development and guidebooks, as described in the attached proposal, at a cost not to

Board of Education

exceed $9,010 plus associated lodging, transportation, and travel costs. Ayes – 7 (Frontier, Goodremote, Handrow, McKenna, Nielsen, Plache, Wiser). Noes – 0. Absent – 2 (Hargrove, Koetz). The motion to approve passed.

4. ADJOURN

Ms. Plache moved, Mr. Nielsen seconded, to adjourn the special Board meeting. All were in favor. The meeting was adjourned at 5:09 p.m. Signed: ____________________________ Pamala Handrow, Clerk Signed: ____________________________ Lolli Haws, Secretary



WORK SESSION


and Acting Clerk


A special meeting of the Board of Education of the Racine Unified School District of Racine County, Wisconsin was called to order at 1 p.m. on Wednesday, November 18, 2015. The purpose of the meeting was a Board Work Session. No action was taken by the Board. The following Board members were present: Michael Frontier, Charles Goodremote, Pamala Handrow, Melvin Hargrove, John M. Koetz, Julie L. McKenna (Arrived at 3 p.m.); Kim Plache, and Dennis Wiser. Absent: Don J. Nielsen. Also present: Dennis Cheesebrow, Founder, TeamWorks International, and Darlene Gallup, Recording Secretary. Mr.. Cheesebrow worked with the Board of Education on Coherent Governance Policy and professional development options including leadership and influences on excellence in management concepts. The Work Session ended at 8:05 p.m.

Board of Education



WORK SESSION

Following a special meeting of the Board of Education of the Racine Unified School District of Racine County, Wisconsin, a Board Work Session was called to order at 5:10 p.m. on Monday, December 7, 2015. The following Board members were present: Michael Frontier, Charles Goodremote, Pamala Handrow, Melvin Hargrove, Julie L. McKenna, Don J. Nielsen, Kim Plache and Dennis Wiser Absent: John M. Koetz. Also present: Lolli Haws, Superintendent; Marc Duff, Chief Financial Officer; Dave Hazen, Chief of Operations; Rosalie Daca, Chief Academic Officer; Wendy Rowley, Executive Director, Accountability; Tim Peltz, Chief Information Officer; Stacy Tapp, Chief of Communication and Community Engagement; and Darlene Gallup, Recording Secretary.

5. WORK SESSION

a. Proposed Deletion of Administrative Regulation 5127.1 (Desegregation-Integration) Dr. Haws presented this agenda item. Mr. Berthelsen was present as legal counsel. Dr. Haws said it was a parent request that brought it to the attention of administration that the policy needs to be addressed for appropriateness. Dr. Haws said the District is committed to diversity in the schools but it cannot be done through this policy. She would like the Board to consider ways to work with the community to find out what strategies would enhance awareness and access to diversity options. She said it may need a committee to begin steps on this. Mr. Berthelsen provided a history and law surrounding the subjects of both Policy 5127 and the District’s plan for desegregation.

Mr. Berthelsen said the law states that no policy or decision making can legally be race-based. There is some leniency in higher education and in cases of compelling state interest. There can, however, be affirmative action policies with broad goals (e.g., efforts to hire qualified teachers for a diverse staff). Pastor Hargrove shared information regarding an Equity and Access Committee which he co-chaired in the past.

Board of Education

Dr. Haws suggested creation of an Ad Hoc committee to review ideas for this policy and determine what strategies can be used to make the community aware of diverse options. Comments regarding an Ad Hoc Committee included:

Needs to discuss sibling preference issues Need to see what a “replacement” policy would look like Would like to see all the information pieces before the Ad Hoc Committee

convenes. Perhaps have a report in February? There are additional policies in the District that also protect against discrimination Issue of expediency – Since we have a policy that is not being violated, this

policy should at least be finalized in the month or two Not all of the policy is in violation. First step may be to remove the grievous

language, leave the rest in place and address it as a follow up Need to also think about boundaries and state aid considerations Title schools are based on economic guidelines

Ms. Plache asked to move item 5e up on the agenda for discussion next. There was no objection. e. 1.1 Technology for Middle School Students

Dr. Haws opened the discussion on this item. She said Gilmore is the school selected to be the first school because Gilmore has already piloted the Personalized/Blended Learning model in that school. Mrs. Daca, Mr. Peltz and staff from Gilmore provided a PowerPoint presentation on 1:1 Technology and answered questions from the Board. The presentation included the following major points:

What is 1.1 Technology Personalized/Blended Learning Program Goals and Tools Classroom experiences and student input Gilmore staff input and expertise Inclusion into RUSD Tech Plan Additional details and FAQ (ChromeBooks, Technology Advisory Council,

Future digital math curriculum, etc.) Cost of 1:1 Program Initiative (Approximately $200,000 for 680 students) Evaluation (projected student growth, engagement and ability to apply 21st

Century skills)

Discussed: Board Comments/Suggestions/Recommendations/Concerns Concern about sustainability issues Concern about decreased social skills and engagement (Virtual collaboration) Alignment with the revised North Star Appears to be a successful program (defined goals, small pilot) Has a toolkit that can fit into any curriculum Exciting but concern about recurring costs and sustainability Considerations about extending internet to homes that don’t have it ($26 per month,

filtered, can be restricted access)

b. Referral #3-2014 (Board Policy in Support of Minority Hiring) Mr. Wiser addressed this referral. He said his intent was to try to mirror what is being done with the construction language into the vendor language. He offered for this to be brought forward in a different manner that would be manageable and reflective of the difference between the vendor environment and construction environment. Ms. Plache said the Governance Committee agreed and will be recommending at the December 21, 2015, Board meeting that the referral’s requests not be done. Mr. Wiser will provide a different way to address this topic.

c. Referral #9-2015 (Board Reflection on Recently Adopted District Core Values)

Dr. Frontier discussed this referral. He said the schools have discussed the Core Values in their buildings and feels the Board should talk about them and make them real for the Board as well. He said he would like this to come to a work session and be able to go through the same process the schools have experienced. Board member comments included:

Should the Board be doing that or just make sure they fit with its policy? Board doesn’t need to decide if it is right or wrong, but rather the Board needs to

understand them and discuss them to be in sync with the rest of the District We need to embrace them. Include as a discussion piece with Mr. Dennis Cheesebrow They could come through within reported indicators

d. Monitoring Section of the School Board’s Coherent Governance Policy

OE-6 (Financial Administration-External) Mr. Duff presented the Operational Expectations – 6 (Financial Administration-External) Monitoring Report. He reviewed the Audit report for the 2014-15 fiscal year conducted by Schenck CPAs and the auditors’ Management Letter which had no findings or corrective action suggestions. The report is submitted by administration as being in compliance except for Section OE-6.8: Two financial reports due to the Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction were not filed on time. Board Comments/Recommendations:

When this comes to the Board, if administration would like to request policy changes for the Board to consider, administration should provide a referral for each request so the Board can refer it to the Governance Committee

Should include a running history of the referendum funds for buildings as part of the budget or as an on-going report to the Board

Streamlining of Audit Committee reports (Audit Committee is already looking at providing financial information in different formats and cost structure)

R-2 (Reading)

Mrs. Daca and Wendy Rowley presented the report on Reading and answered questions from the Board. The Results-2 (Reading) Monitoring Report is submitted by administration as making reasonable progress with the exceptions noted. Board Concerns/Recommendations: No recommendations or concerns were given.

R-2 (Math) Mrs. Daca and Wendy Rowley presented the report on Math and answered questions from the Board. The Results – 2 (Math) Monitoring Report is submitted by administrations as making reasonable progress with exceptions noted. Board Concerns/Recommendations:

Style comment – Page 3 and Page 4 graphs: Second one should have the percentage figures listed like it is done on the Page 3 graph (applies to the Reading report as well)

Find a way to reflect scores and growth other than just by the ACT

f. Report on Thought Exchange Survey Mrs. Tapp presented a brief report on the Thought Exchange Survey. Access to all of the results is being provided to everyone online. She also provided a synopsis of what is being done with the results.

Sent out to approximately 19,000 including staff Taking this information and now talking face to face with responders Additional issues will need to continue to be surveyed (e.g., school climate)

g. Janes Year Round School Calendar

Dr. Haws opened discussion on the Janes Year Round School Calendar. Dr. Gallien shared that administration looked at aligning the support for staff and students at this school to increase achievement. The two major items considered by administration were achievement data and enrollment information. Dr. Gallien shared 2012 – 2015 achievement and enrollment data. Concerns:

Achievement data shows support is needed but there are missed staff development opportunities due to calendar conflicts.

306 students attend Janes o Enrollment has dropped significantly over the last 6 years o Total Janes boundary holds 234 students. Only 60 students attend Janes

from that boundary. o 103 mostly bilingual students opt in to Janes (involves 4 buses, some

walk) Met with parents and staff to discuss communication of information and payroll Could an alternative (based on a fiscal calendar) be considered? A Fact and Question (FAQ) sheet is being developed

There will be another listening session with the parents being scheduled It may be necessary to move to a traditional calendar This will come to the Board for vote in February or March as part of the calendar

approval When a FAQ sheet is developed, it will be shared with the Board Would like to see data on individual school achievement reports to be able to

compare

h. District Annual Goals for 2015-16 School Year Dr. Haws briefly shared information regarding the yearly goals for 2015-16. The goals are Achievement, Engagement and Continuous Improvement. These all align with the North Star. A more formal presentation of the goals and strategies will be done at the December 21, 2015, Board business meeting.

6. ADJOURN

The work session adjourned at 8:55 p.m.


BOARD OF EDUCATION

GOVERNANCE COMMITTEE August 17, 2015

MINUTES

1. Call to Order The Racine Unified School District Board of Education Governance Committee meeting of Monday, August

17, 2015, was called to order at 5 p.m. 2. Approval of Governance Committee Minutes of July 15, 2015

Mr. Goodremote moved, Ms. Plache seconded, to approve the minutes of the July 15, 2015, Governance Committee meeting as written. All were in favor.

3. Public Comments

No public comments were made. 4. Discuss and Develop Recommendation on Parliamentary Procedures In-Service (Cheesebrow)

Dennis. Cheesebrow, TeamWorks International, will work with Board to help define and develop what the Board is looking for in professional development services. Gib Berthelsen, legal counsel, has offered to provide the Board with an in-service on Parliamentary procedures at no cost. Mr. Goodremote moved, Ms. Plache seconded, to recommend the Board approve Dennis Cheesebrow coming to meet with the Board at cost not to exceed $2,500 plus Per Diem travel and accommodation costs. All were in favor.

5. Discuss Board Annual Work Plan Calendar

The Board’s Annual Work Plan Calendar (GC-6E) was discussed. Discussion points included: A list of proposed changes from Dr. Haws and administration (Handout) August’s R-2 Reading/Math can’t be done until October due to the state embargo). In addition a

completely different test is being done this year. There is no science and social studies test to report on Achievement reports will continue as before We don’t want to lose timing for items (quarterly superintendent check-ins, reports under Other

Business, etc.) Quarterly check ins are needed to prepare the Board and Superintendent for the summative

evaluation First quarterly superintendent check-in this year will be in November/February (includes work with

Mr. Cheesebrow). May will be the summative evaluation based on all the OEs and preparation of a written evaluation document. B/SR-5(E), Pgs. 35-36

Superintendent’s contract says she is to be reviewed by December 1. Individual Board members should bring concerns to the Superintendent individually by December 1

of each year. If quarterly check-ins are to be done, shouldn’t that be in policy? (Response – they were meant to be

informal check-ins done outside of regular meetings). Another argument is that voting on the OE reports provides Board evaluation input.

Board of Education

Discussion has taken place on OE indicators being shared with the Board three months in advance to make sure they align with what the Board is looking for in their OEs. This might mean having two meetings per month.

In the past, Aspen worked with the Board on interpretations and measurements within the OEs The Board president can convene a meeting any time to discuss items Develop the Summative Evaluation in October and complete the evaluation in November.

Mr. Goodremote moved, Ms. Plache seconded, to replace the current Annual Planning and Monitoring Calendar (Policy GC-6E) with the document proposed by Dr. Haws with the modifications as suggested by Ms. Plache that include the Superintendent evaluation timing of October and November. All were in favor.

Consensus of those present was to keep the current Operational Expectations and Results presentations cycle the same this year as it has been in order to keep it simplified instead of bringing indicators forward to the Board three months in advance.

6. Referral #3-2015 (Board Policy In Support of Minority Hiring)

The referral in support of minority hiring was discussed. Concern – discussing this referral when those who brought them forward are not present Will hamstring the District on hires when using small businesses who do not have the required

number of minorities and prevents affordable prices Mr. Hazen needs to provide an explanation on the difficulties and lack of best interest on these This referral gets the Board more microscopic in its work and forces too much scrutiny Historically, a referral asked for a work session and did not turn into policy through this way

(coming to Governance Committee for recommendation to the Board) These referrals have not been discussed by the whole Board The referral policy itself needs to be reviewed and discussed Not sure what action we are to take on these four referrals

7. Referral #4-2015 (Board Policy for Reports on Referendum Projects) 8. Referral #5-2015 (Board Policy in Support of Policy Amendments) 9. Referral #6-2015 (Board Policy for Administrative Policy Review) Ms. Place said the Committee is not going to act on these referrals today. 10. Set Next Meeting Date and Agenda

The next meeting of the Governance Committee will be scheduled for September 14, 2015. Agenda items will include:

Approval of the August 17, 2015, Governance Committee Meeting Minutes 11. Public Comments

There were no public comments made. 12. Adjourn

Ms. Plache moved, Mr. Goodremote seconded to adjourn. The session ended at 5:56 p.m.

Others Present: Respectfully submitted, Lolli Haws, Superintendent Kim Plache, Chair (Present) Pam Handrow, Board Member Charles Goodremote (Present) Darlene Gallup, Executive Assistant Don J. Nielsen, (Absent) Melvin Hargrove, Ex Officio (Present) Governance Committee


BOARD OF EDUCATION

GOVERNANCE COMMITTEE November 12, 2015

MINUTES

1. Call to Order The Racine Unified School District Board of Education Governance Committee meeting of Thursday,

November 12, 2015, was called to order at 5:39 p.m. 2. Approval of Governance Committee Minutes of August 17, 2015

Mr. Goodremote moved, Mr. Nielsen seconded, to approve the minutes of the August 17, 2015, Governance Committee meeting. All were in favor. The minutes were approved.

3. Consider Referrals:

a. #3-2015 Related to OE-6(17) Financial Administration This referral was submitted by Board member Mr. Wiser and supported by Mr. Nielsen, Dr. Frontier and Mrs. McKenna. (Submitted to Board meeting of July 20, 2015; Governance Committee of August 17, 2015; Special Board meeting of October 27, 2015 – action postponed) Dr. Haws suggested to not include vendors in the language because that would even include supplies like paper, pencils, etc. She said administration shouldn’t have to investigate whether Office Depot fits the regulations in this policy. It would mean having to look at these requirements for every bid including textbook companies. Additional comments during the discussion included:

CG Policy OE-6(18) h – already covers all of this as it relates to referendum dollars CG Policy OE-6(17) is address-based Original intent of the language change was to increase minority hiring by the

contractors/laborers used There are many small certified businesses in the area that will never make this requirement. It

is overstretch to add this language to the OE-6(17) language. Pastor Hargrove left the meeting at 5:59 p.m.

What it is that Dr. Haws and her team would have to do differently? Could mean having to hire additional personnel to review every bidder.

Mr. Nielsen said this Committee should recommend the Board put this Referral’s request on hold or say it is already covered under OE-6(18). The Committee needs to provide an explanation to the Board about why it is not recommending the language revision. Mr. Goodremote commented that the Board still needs to look at what administration has to do to change. It was noted that the District could actually lose local businesses with this language. The District would have to have additional personnel to review all of the hiring practices of every bidder. Mr. Goodremote also commented that we are already saying the things in the current policy.

Board of Education

Mr. Nielsen moved, Mr. Goodremote seconded to recommend the Board not change the language as presented in Referral #3-2015. All were in favor. The motion passed. Ms. Plache will present the Governance Committee’s position at the December 21, 2015, Board meeting and will move that no action be taken on the language revision as presented in Referral #3-2015.

b. #4-2015 Related to OE-6(18) Financial Administration This referral was submitted by Mr. Wiser for a revision to the language in OE-6(16) requesting a report be provided quarterly on the construction progress, costs, and use of local and minority employees for projects funded by referendum funds. Dr. Haws noted that Mr. Duff, Chief Financial Officer, no longer has construction projects as part of his position. That responsibility now lies under Dave Hazen, Chief of Operations. She suggested moving OE-6(18) to OE-3(2). Mr. Nielsen moved, Mr. Goodremote seconded, that the Committee recommend the Board, at its December 21, 2015 business meeting:

Approve amended language originally presented in Referral #4-2015, Move the amended language from Section 18 of OE-6 to a new Section (2) of OE-3, Renumber all sections accordingly.

All were in favor. The motion passed. The Committee would like to see the effect of the proposed language changes on the OE policies and the intention is to have those draft policies available for vote at the December Board meeting.

c. #6-2015 Related to GC-4 Governing Commitments Discussion comments included:

This originally should have been postponed, not deferred. Administrative Regulations already state policies have to go to the Board for approval. Administrative Regulation 2000 says all policy changes go to the Board’s Consent Agenda. This new language addition is redundant.

Mr. Goodremote moved, Mr. Nielsen seconded, that the language revision presented in Referral #6-

2015 not be approved. All were in favor. The motion passed. 4. Set Next Meeting Date and Agenda

No next meeting date or agenda was discussed. 5. Public Comments

There were no public comments made.

6. Adjourn Mr. Nielsen moved, Mr. Goodremote seconded, to adjourn. The session ended at 6:32 p.m.

Others Present: Respectfully submitted, Lolli Haws, Superintendent Kim Plache, Chair (Present) Pamala Handrow, Board Member Charles Goodremote (Present) Darlene Gallup, Executive Assistant Don J. Nielsen, (Present) Melvin Hargrove, Ex Officio (Left at 5:59 p.m.) Governance Committee


BOARD OF EDUCATION GOVERNANCE COMMITTEE

November 18, 2015

MINUTES 1. Call to Order The Racine Unified School District Board of Education Governance Committee meeting of Thursday,

November 18, 2015, was called to order at 8:40.a.m. 2. Approval of Governance Committee Minutes of November 12, 2015

Mr. Goodremote moved, Mr. Koetz seconded, to approve the minutes of the November 12, 2015, Governance Committee meeting. All were in favor. The minutes were approved.

3. Review of RUSD Coherent Governance Policies

Mr. Goodremote facilitated a discussion and review of the Board’s Coherent Governance policies. Comments and discussion points included:

All board business is initiated with a motion. There are fundamentally three basic things that give us guidance on motions: (Law, Board Policy,

Robert’s Rules) o Law (We don’t have authority over it) o Board Policy (Coherent Governance) o Robert’s Rules (We don’t have authority over them) o Custom – the way we’ve always done it or past preference (Custom “falls to the ground” per

Robert’s Rules - Pg. 19, when other authority or written policy conflicts with Custom). Improving the Process Discussion

o Need to first understand the process already in place. o Map the process (who and what we do) and then look at what needs to be changed to make it

clear, concise, easy to use, etc. Review of Policies Discussion

o There are multiple areas of conflict that need to be addressed in Coherent Governance policies [e.g., changing the agenda: GC-2E(J) versus GC-2E(D.11)]; amending policy process; etc.

o The next steps in the process - Governance Committee to review policies for needed change recommendations using a pre-populated spreadsheet guide prepared by Mr. Goodremote.

4. Adjourn

Mr. Koetz moved, Mr. Goodremote seconded, to adjourn. The session ended at 10:56 a.m.

Others Present: Respectfully submitted, Darlene Gallup, Executive Assistant Kim Plache, Chair (Present) Charles Goodremote (Present) John M. Koetz (Present) Don J. Nielsen, (Not present) Melvin Hargrove, Ex Officio (Arrived at 9:26 a.m.) Governance Committee

Board of Education


LEGISLATIVE COMMITTEE September 28, 2015

Administrative Service Center, Franklin Room

MINUTES The Racine Unified School District Board of Education Legislative Committee meeting of Monday, September 28, 2015, was called to order at 4:32 p.m. 3. Approval of Legislative Committee Minutes of September 9, 2015

Dr. Frontier moved, Ms. Plache seconded, to approve the minutes of the September 9, 2015, Legislative Committee meeting. All were in favor. The minutes were approved.

4. Review Legislative Dialog/Tour Preparations

Preparations for the October 12, 2015, Legislative Dialog and Tour were discussed. Comments included:

Mrs. Tapp said Case High School students will help serve refreshments and the “Master Singers” will sing the National Anthem (4-4:30 p.m.)

Dr. Haws will talk about behavior, truancy and mental health and any other policy issues that come out of the Legislative Task Force

The dialog will be approximately 90 minutes long o Pastor Hargrove will be the facilitator o Mrs. Tapp will work with Dr. Haws on a pre-dialog quiz questions o Questions need to be sent to the legislators in advance o Mrs. Tapp will check about having the president of the student council attend, sit

with Board during the dialog, and possibly ask a question. That question will need to be submitted in advance.

o Brief review of District Data (Mrs. Tapp will work with Rosalie Daca) o The Board will ask 2-3 questions (Voucher Parity; 4K and possibly a student

question) o Suggestion - If anyone wants to submit written comments, they could be forwarded

on to the legislators. Dr. Frontier may ask for comments from 4K parents or submit a related question.

Closing statements The Case tour will be approximately 20 to 25 minutes in length

o Focus will be on the new Field House o Students will share information about programs

5. Discuss Intergovernmental Relationships

Having coffee meetings with local legislators and officials was discussed. Mrs. McKenna said she talked to Caledonia who said they would like to meet in November. Ms. Plache talked to Mt. Pleasant. They will get back to her after they discuss it with their

board. 6. “Kindness is Contagious” Activities

Dr. Frontier shared information about upcoming activities taking place October 14-28, 2015, for encouraging students to engage in activities of politeness. Dr. Haws will follow up with the Committee about these activities.

Board of Education

7. Possible Resolution on Pending Legislation Mrs. McKenna reviewed pending legislation information regarding the filling of empty board of education seats. She said having the seat filled by selection of the board president is moving forward. Discussion comments included:

Once it passes, it becomes state law Board should submit their opinion to legislators Board would have to determine how it breaks ties (That needs to be a recommendation from

the Governance Committee) Dr. Frontier recommended the Governance Committee meet next week and create a

resolution

8. Set Next Meeting Date Mrs. McKenna will select a date.

9. Public Comments – There were no public comments. 10. Adjourn

Ms. Plache moved, Dr. Frontier seconded, and with no objections heard, the meeting adjourned at 5:05 p.m.

Also Present: Respectfully submitted: Lolli Haws, Superintendent Julie McKenna, Chair (Present) Stacy Tapp, Chief of Communication and Michael Frontier (Present) Family Engagement Kim Plache (Present) Darlene Gallup, Executive Assistant Melvin Hargrove Ex-Officio (Present) Legislative Committee


LEGISLATIVE COMMITTEE COMMUNICATION SESSION

October 12, 2015 J. I. Case High School

MINUTES

A special meeting of the Legislative Committee of the Racine Unified School District Board of Education began at 4:30 p.m. on Monday, October 12, 2015, with the following Board members present: Charles Goodremote, Pamala Handrow, Melvin Hargrove, Julie L. McKenna, Don J. Nielsen, and Kim Plache, Absent: Dennis Wiser, Michael Frontier. Also present: Lolli Haws, Superintendent; State Representatives Tom Weatherston, Robin Vos, and Peter Barca; State Senators Van Wanggaard and Robert Wirch; Jody Bloyer, Case High School Directing Principal; Case Assistant Principals, Adam King, and Nick DeBaker; Case High School Student and Vice President of SkillsUSA, Brian Martinez; and Darlene Gallup, Recording Secretary. Pastor Hargrove welcomed those in attendance and asked the legislators quiz questions regarding their knowledge of Racine Unified School District’s graduation rates and meeting kindergarten benchmarks of readiness for Grade 1. Legislators’ Opening Statement Comments: Rep. Weatherston – Let the Urban Task Force know your ideas and perspectives Rep. Vos – Need to look at what we need down the road for our schools (5, 10,

20 years down the road) Senator Wanggaard – Need dialog about the good things happening in our schools.

Media always look at the negative. The Task Force will help move us forward. Not about one type of teaching; it’s about good education. We need to dialog about the issues and on a regular basis.

Senator Wirch - Education is the most important thing in economic development. Need people who can solve problems with well-rounded educations. Concerned about the dysfunction of political system. Need to get students engaged in that – getting kids involved in societal problems. Kids have tuned out the process. We have to rearrange our priorities. Cut the number of people in prison and jails and put that money toward schools – prison reform. (We don’t have access to why students leave – not shared with the District. We also do not know where they went.)

Board of Education Legislative Committee

The following questions were discussed: Question #1: Racine Unified School District loses much more dollars due to the unequal statutory provision from voucher students than any other district in the State, except Milwaukee. Why do we continue to be in this position? Would you introduce, and or support, legislation that would provide parity for Racine Unified as it relates to cost, availability, and accountability? Comments included:

Rep. Vos – Does agree RUSD has been treated differently. Tried to have rest of state done like RUSD. All districts should be the same. Don’t believe in an enrollment cap. Many reasons why people choose school choice. All participants are funded through state funding. RUSD gets aid. Revenue limit more than voucher.

Senator Wanggaard – Question should be more about the student than money. Need to look at why students are leaving.

Senator Wirch – I agree with the premise of the question and would support legislation. RUSD has been treated wrongly.

Rep. Weatherston – Disagree with the premise. Maybe we are looking at the wrong thing. Maybe RUSD should look at why students are leaving. Improve yourself. Reverse that trend and vouchers will go away.

(Representative Barca arrived at 4:58 p.m.)

Rep. Barca – I want to see all the districts aligned the same. Dr. Haws provided brief explanation of reasons for District academic improvements including efforts in credit recovery, virtual learning, changes in traditional physical education rules, freshman cohorts, and early childhood and kindergarten interventions. Question #2: Would you introduce or support legislation for the State to pay for full-day 4-year-ld kindergarten, especially for high poverty districts? Comments included:

Senator Wanggaard – Have to be able to afford it. The money isn’t there right now and we don’t want to see it taken from other areas. (Could be narrowed to high poverty areas/students.) If you have programs working, don’t take money away from them.

Senator Wirch – I’m in favor of prison reform that will result in more funds to spend on schools. Identify the high poverty schools and set up a program that can economically be done; do a study that shows the difference it makes. Have someone contact my office and maybe we can work on a plan.

Representative Barca - Early childhood is very important. We need to focus on high poverty areas but I agree we shouldn’t take from other programs. We know it pays off.

Rep. Weatherston – I worry about the funding. Can’t keep taking funding from businesses or they will leave. Need to be more creative with funding. Maybe expand working with Head Start.

Rep. Vos – High poverty definition changed and more are qualified. (Would like to see the offer for our highest poverty areas within our schools.) I would love to fund a 13-year school education but we just don’t have the revenue and need to focus on graduation.

Question #3: Mental health issues have devastating effects on children’s ability to learn and succeed in school. Would you introduce or support funding to address mental health issues through joint ventures between school districts and mental health providers? Comments included:

Rep. Weatherston – This is a major topic of discussion. Rep. Vos – Passed a child psychiatry and grant program and modified code for HIPPA Senator Waanggaard – There is a pilot program coming forward. Has been an issue for

years. We don’t have enough people in the field. We see it and we all agree it needs to be addressed.

Senator Wirch – High poverty homes have high stress issues that affect learning. Rep. Barca – Primary health care is vital. Any way we can increase the number of

families who can access it is important. Student (Brian Martinez) Question: How are we as a manufacturing town supposed to provide our city’s employers with qualified candidates if we are teaching students with outdated equipment? What plan is in place to better our student’s chances of getting high paying jobs in the manufacturing sector? Comments included:

Rep. Weatherston – We are not helping you. We are devoid in programs needed for engineers. We don’t supply the right people to employers. I have been a strong advocate of RUSD and GTC working together. That is the only way you can have the technology available for students. Need to move together and have more collective educational programs.

Senator Wirch – I agree with Rep. Weatherston. Rep. Barca - Look into Workforce Development Center efforts and connections with

RAMAC in working with students. See if there are more internships available. Youth Options could maybe be a place to utilize equipment.

Rep. Vos - We need to think differently about education. Fast Forward takes money to have a student learn on a job site so they are educated on the equipment that company uses. We would support expanding that kind of program. People need to brag about their students going to GTC. There should be no difference – going to college should be going to college no matter where they attend and they should be able to transfer easily between all the schools. We have to encourage young people that it is good to have a job including in high school and in college. Their first job should not be the one they get when they graduate from college.

Senator Wanggaard – We are doing things (Roger Palmen, auto mechanics program, Shear, Construction Academy). Need to work on the soft skills – getting up, getting to work on time, and being drug free.

Dr. Haws talked about some events already scheduled including and October internship event, a March career expo and the District’s Career Academies. Closing Remarks and comments regarding Question #4: Do you think RUSD is a successful school district? If not, how do you define a successful school district? What would you have to see for you to believe RUSD is a successful school district? Comments included:

Rep. Barca – RUSD is making steps in right direction Senator Wirch – There is money out there. Corporate tax break is short circuiting putting money in education. We need to rate our priorities. Senator Wanggaard – Yes we need to look at reform. But it isn’t just money. It is about convincing parents and media about the good stuff. Do it person to person. Make them partners. Rep. Vos – There are issues. You need to be proud. Everyone can do better. Why do parents make different choices. We should be happy about successes. Don’t continue to show you can’t even pick a new board member and then leave it to us to fix it. Talk to us – “We do by whom we hear from.” Spend time with us. Rep. Weatherston – Offer to meet with you. Manufacturing has left and not coming back. Some people still think they will. To be successful in high school, graduation is only a start. Need more and need exposures in high school. It isn’t one size fits all. Unions need to be leaders. School board needs to work together. Find out why students leave. You will know you are successful when charters and vouchers end. The session ended at 6:03 p.m. at which time a brief tour of J.I. Case High School was conducted.

Mission: The Legislative Committee will develop and sustain two-way communication with local, state, and federal legislators and governmental agencies. The committee will seek input and information from these constituencies, and in turn will inform them about the Board of Education’s (BOE) positions on relevant issues, recommending new legislation and changes in current legislation.

Objective Goals Strategies Measures 1) Engage in 2-way communication with state legislators

1) Visit legislators during Day at the Capital to discuss current/pending legislation; biennial budget’s affect on RUSD; and key educational issues. 2) Committee members, parents, administrators, students, principals, teachers meet with legislators in Madison. _________________ 3) Educate and dialog with all community stakeholders electronically to advise and inform them of legislative issues impacting education

Send congratulatory letter to senators and representatives

Schedule two meetings a year with senators and representatives, one in the fall and one in spring.

Schedule meeting with WASB Legislative Liaison in advance of Day at the Capital.

Review WASB Legislative Updates at each committee meeting to identify issues.

Develop questions and review RUSD positions with legislators (review summary papers in preparation for meeting).

Communicate as needed with State officials on policies affecting RUSD

Send letter immediately after elections

Schedule meeting between (date) Board member(s) attend Day at

the Capitol each year. Place on agenda for each

Legislative Committee meeting ID issues and develop questions

___________________________

2) Engage in communication with federal legislators

1) Monitor federal issues (use WASB briefing) _______________________ 2) Each Committee member will personally contact their legislators.

Send congratulatory letter to newly elected federal legislators.

Contact WASB Legislative Liaison to ID relevant federal issues. _____________________

Invite to share RUSD views when appropriate via resolution and/or letter.

Have a contact with Federal Legislators to keep up to date and communication as needed

Send letter immediately after elections

Complete by (date) ____________________________

3) Engage in 2-way communication with local officials (municipal trustees, City Council, County Board, District Attorneys, Judges)

1) Plan “Coffee Chats” twice a year. --------------------------------- 2) BOE attend relevant meetings as appropriate

Send congratulatory letters Invite local official to tour a district building and hear a speaker via “Coffee Chats” twice a year. Ask all participants to submit agenda items in advance

of meeting. Potential topics could include policing; reinvestment plan; development plans

Coordinate with RUSD administration and BOE. Ask administration to notify BOE of relevant city and

county issue discussions and votes.

Two meetings (XX). ---------------------------------

Legislative Committee OGSM, 2015-2016 DRAFT

BOARD OF EDUCATION June 25, 2007

BOARD OF EDUCATION

December 21, 2015

AGENDA ITEM: Policy Language Revision: OE-3(2) and OE-6(18a-h) Request by Administration to move language: FROM:

Operational Expectations – 6(18a-h) (Financial Administration) TO: Operational Expectations – 3(2) (Facilities)

PRESENTING: Kim Plache, Chair, Governance Committee DESCRIPTION: On December 3, 2015, the Governance Committee, reviewed requested changes

to Coherent Governance policy. Administration recommended the language in Operational Expectations – 6(5) (Financial Administration) be moved to Operational Expectations – 3(2) (Facilities) because the language is more specific to Facilities than to Finance.

FISCAL NOTE: RECOMMENDATION: The Governance Committee recommends the Board approve moving the

language in OE-6(18a-h) to OE-3(2) and renumber all sections appropriately as presented.

Racine Unified School District 3109 Mt. Pleasant St., Racine, Wisconsin 53404 (262) 635-5600

Board of Education

Governance Committee

OE-3 Policy Type: Operational Expectations

Facilities The Superintendent shall assure that physical facilities support the accomplishment of the Board’s Results policies, are safe, efficiently used and properly maintained. The Superintendent will: 1. Develop a plan that establishes priorities for construction, renovation and maintenance

projects that:

a. Assigns highest priority to the correction of unsafe conditions; b. Includes sufficient maintenance costs as necessary to enable facilities, either open

or closed, and equipment to reach their intended life cycles; c. Plans for and schedules preventive maintenance; d. Plans for and schedules system replacement when new schools open, schools are

renovated or systems replaced; e. Discloses assumptions on which the plan is based, including growth patterns and

the financial and human impact individual projects will have on other parts of the organization.

2. For all construction and renovation projects in excess of $100,000, present to the

Board, prior to their selection of the successful bid/proposal, the result of each bid proposal with respect to the following criteria:

a. Percent of the hours worked that are to be performed by District residents, b. percent of hours worked that are to be performed by County residents, c. previous District/County work hours used by the contractor in similar

projects, d. ability/history of performing work that is compliant with LEED (Leadership

in Energy & Environment Design) Gold Certification, as determined by the U.S. Green Building Council.

e. willingness to or already have entered into a Project Labor Agreement that covers the various trades for the contractor’s direct and sub-contracted work,

f. compliance with current Wisconsin Department of Workforce Development standards to set appropriate apprenticeship ratios,

g. willingness to or already have included the First Choice Pre-Apprenticeship Program, or some similar program, in recruitment efforts to hire for apprenticeship programs,

h. ability/history of minority employment and the utilization of minority contractors.

3. Project life-cycle costs as capital decisions are made.

4. Assure that facilities are clean and safe.

5. Develop and consistently administer facilities and equipment use guidelines delineating:

a. Permitted uses; b. the applicable fee structure; c. clear user expectations, including behavior, cleanup, security, insurance and

damage repair; d. consequences and enforcement procedures for public users who fail to follow the

established rules. The Superintendent may not: 6. Build or renovate buildings. 7. Purchase or sell real estate, including land and buildings, nor recommend land acquisition

without first determining growth patterns, comparative costs, construction and transportation factors and any extraordinary contingency costs due to potential natural and man-made risks.

8. Authorize construction schedules and change orders that significantly increase cost or

reduce quality. 9. Unreasonably deny the public’s use of facilities as long as student safety, student

functions, and the instructional program are not compromised. Adopted: July 21, 2008 Revised: October 20, 2008; May 20, 2013; April 27, 2015; December 21, 2015 Monitoring Method: Internal report Monitoring Frequency: Annually in November Racine Unified School District Board of Education


BOARD OF EDUCATION

December 21, 2015

AGENDA ITEM: Language Revision: OE-4 (Personnel Administration) Requested by Administration PRESENTING: Kim Plache, Chair, Governance Committee DESCRIPTION: At the December 3, 2015, Governance Committee, requested policy language

revisions were reviewed and discussed. The Committee agreed with the language change request for OE-4(2 and 9) and in the preamble except in changing the word “assure” to “assert” because assure delegates the responsibility as opposed to holding the responsibility.

FISCAL NOTE: RECOMMENDATION: The Governance Committee recommends the Board approve the language

revisions in OE-4(2 and 9) and in the preamble as presented.


Board of Education



Personnel Administration The Superintendent shall assure assert best practices in the recruitment, employment, development, evaluation and compensation of district employees in a manner necessary to enable the organization to achieve its Results policies. The Superintendent will: 1. Conduct extensive background inquiries and checks prior to hiring any paid personnel.

This includes temporary, contractual and permanent positions. 2. Conduct background inquires and checks prior to utilizing the services of any volunteers

who have unsupervised contact with students. 3. Recruit and select the most highly qualified and best-suited candidates with a goal to

reflect the diversity of the community. This includes temporary, contractual and permanent positions.

4. Administer clear personnel rules and procedures for employees. 5. Effectively handle complaints and concerns. 6. Maintain accurate job descriptions for all staff positions. 7. Protect confidential information. 8. Develop compensation and benefit plans to attract and retain the highest quality

employees by compensating employees consistent with the applicable marketplace, including but not limited to organizations of comparable size and type, and within available resources.

9. Annually evaluate all employee performance with evaluation instruments that are

aligned to department goals and Operational Expectations. Employee evaluations will measure progress toward achieving the Board’s Results policies as well as document excellent and unsatisfactory performance.

OE-4

10. Assure that the evaluation of all instructional and administrative personnel is designed

to: a. Improve and support instruction; b. Link teacher and administrator performance with multiple measures of student

performance and operational efficiencies toward achieving Results policies. 11. Ensure that all staff members are qualified and trained to perform the responsibilities

assigned to them. 12. Maintain an organizational culture that:

a. Values individual differences of opinion; b. Reasonably includes people in decisions that affect them; c. Provides open and honest communication in all written and interpersonal

interaction; d. Focuses on common achievement of the Board’s Results policies; e. Maintains an open, responsive and welcoming environment; f. Positively impacts the ability of staff to responsibly perform their jobs and allows

them to work in an environment of professional support and courtesy The superintendent may not: 13. Make changes to the Employee Handbook or addenda. 14. Make changes to employee economic benefits. Adopted: July 21, 2008 Revised: October 21, 20113; June 17, 2013; December 16, 2013; December 21, 2015 Monitoring Method: Internal report Monitoring Frequency: Annually in October Racine Unified School District Board of Education


BOARD OF EDUCATION

December 21, 2015

AGENDA ITEM: Language Revision: OE-9 (Title) Request by Administration to add “and Treatment of Students” to the title of

Operational Expectations-9 (Communicating with the Public) PRESENTING: Kim Plache, Chair, Governance Committee DESCRIPTION: On December 3, 2015, the Governance Committee, reviewed requested

changes to Coherent Governance policy. Administration recommended the Title of OE-9 (Communicating with the Public) include the words “and Treatment of External Stakeholders.”

FISCAL NOTE: RECOMMENDATION: The Governance Committee recommends the Board approve revising the

title of Operational Expectations-9 to “Communicating With the Public and Treatment of External Stakeholders.”


Board of Education



Communicating With the Public and Treatment of External Stakeholders The Superintendent shall assure that the public is adequately informed about the condition and direction of the district. The Superintendent will: 1. Assure the timely flow of information, appropriate input, and strategic two-way dialog

between the district and the citizens that builds understanding and support for district efforts.

2. Prepare and publish, on behalf of the Board, an annual progress report to the public that

includes the following items:

a. Data indicating student progress toward accomplishing the Board’s Results policies. b. Information about school district strategies, programs and operations intended to

accomplish the Board’s Results policies. c. Revenues, expenditures and costs of major programs and a review of the district’s

financial condition.

3. Effectively handle complaints. 4. Maintain an organizational culture that:

a. Treats all people with respect, dignity and courtesy b. values individual differences of opinion; c. reasonably includes people in decisions that affect them; d. provides timely and accurate communication in all written and interpersonal

interaction; e. focuses on common achievement of the Board’s Results policies; f. maintains an open, responsive and welcoming environment.

The Superintendent will not: 5. Take any action that damages the District’s public image or credibility.

OE-9 Adopted: July 21, 2008 Revised: April 27, 2105; December 21, 2015 Monitoring Method: Internal report Monitoring Frequency: Annually in October Racine Unified School District Board of Education


BOARD OF EDUCATION

December 21, 2015

AGENDA ITEM: Language Revision: OE-11(2, 3, 7) Request by Administration to Revise Language in OE-11. PRESENTING: Kim Plache, Chair, Governance Committee DESCRIPTION: On December 3, 2015, the Governance Committee, reviewed requested

changes to Operational Expectations-11(2, 3 and 7). The Committee agreed the language in OE-11(7) should not be removed.

FISCAL NOTE: RECOMMENDATION: The Governance Committee recommends the Board approve revising the

language as requested in OE-11(2 and 3) but not remove language in OE-11(7).


Board of Education



Learning Environment/Treatment of Students The Superintendent shall establish and maintain a learning environment that is safe, respectful and conducive to effective learning. The Superintendent will:

1. Maintain a climate that is characterized by support and encouragement for high student achievement.

2. Protect confidential student information. 3. Assure that all confidential student information is properly used and protected.

4. Appropriately involve teachers, administrators, students and the community in developing

student discipline policy.

5. Assure that teachers, students and parents are informed of the disciplinary expectations of students.

6. Ensure that all policies and procedures regarding discipline are enforced consistently using reasonable judgment.

The Superintendent may not:

7. Tolerate any behaviors, actions or attitudes by adults who have contact with students that hinder the academic performance or the well-being of students.

8. Permit the administration of corporal punishment. 9. Permit unnecessary or irrelevant collection of student information.

10. Permit unruly student behaviors that disrupt learning. Prohibited behaviors include:

a. the use of drugs, alcohol or tobacco products by students and adults on school property

and at school-sponsored events;

b. the presence of firearms and other dangerous weapons on school property and at school-sponsored events;

c. any form of bullying, disrespect or violence on school property and at school-sponsored

events.

OE-11

Adopted: July 21, 2008 Revised: October 20, 2008; May 20, 2013; April 27, 2015; December 21, 2015 Monitoring Method: Internal report Monitoring Frequency: Annually in November Racine Unified School District Board of Education


BOARD OF EDUCATION

December 21, 2015

AGENDA ITEM: Language Revision: GC-2(7) Referral #5-2015 (Board Policy In Support of Policy Amendments) PRESENTING: Kim Plache, Chair, Governance Committee DESCRIPTION: At the December 3, 2015, Governance Committee, Referral #5-2015 (Board

Policy In Support of Policy Amendments), was reviewed and discussed. The Committee revised the Referral’s requested language for the purpose of clarity.

FISCAL NOTE: RECOMMENDATION: The Governance Committee recommends the Board approve the Referral

#5-2015 language revision to Policy GC-2(7) as amended.


Board of Education


GC-2 Policy Type: Governance Culture

Governing Commitments

The Board will govern lawfully with primary emphasis on Results for students; encourage full exploration of diverse viewpoints; focus on governance matters rather than administrative issues; observe clear separation of Board and superintendent roles; make all official decisions by formal vote of the Board; and govern with long-term vision.

1. The Board will function as a single unit. The opinions and personal strengths of individual members will be used to the Board’s best advantage, but the Board faithfully will make decisions as a group, by formal vote. No officer, individual, or committee of the Board will be permitted to limit the Board’s performance or prevent the Board from fulfilling its commitments.

2. The Board is responsible for its own performance, and commits itself to continuous improvement.

The Board will assure that its members are provided with training and professional support necessary to govern effectively. As a means to assure continuous improvement, the Board regularly and systematically will monitor all policies in this section, and will assess the quality of each meeting by debriefing the meeting following its conclusion.

3. To ensure that the Board’s business meetings are conducted with maximum effectiveness and

efficiency, members will:

a. come to meetings adequately prepared b. speak only when recognized c. not interrupt each other d. not engage in side conversations e. not repeat what has already been said f. not “play to the audience” or monopolize the discussion g. support the president’s efforts to facilitate an orderly meeting h. communicate openly and actively in discussion and dialog to avoid surprises i. value equal participation of all members j. practice respectful body language

4. The Board will use a consent agenda as a means to expedite the disposition of routine matters and

to dispose of other items of business it chooses not to discuss. All administrative matters delegated to the superintendent that are required to be approved by the Board will be acted upon by the Board via the consent agenda.

5. An item may be removed from the consent agenda upon approval of a majority of the Board.

GC-2 6. The Board will direct the organization through policy. The Board’s major focus will be on the

results expected to be achieved by students, rather than on the strategic choices made by the superintendent and staff to achieve those results.

7. The Board, by majority vote, may revise or amend its policies at any time. However, as a

customary practice, a proposed policy revision will be discussed at one or more sessions of the Board prior to being approved at a subsequent Board meeting.

7. A proposed policy revision will be discussed at one or more session of the Board prior to being approved at a subsequent Board meeting through, (1) presenting a referral at a Board business meeting, (2) review by the Governance Committee, (3) a vote by the full Board at a subsequent meeting. However, the Board, by majority vote, may revise or amend its policies at any time.

Adopted: July 21, 2008 Revised: January 28, 2013, December 21, 2015 Monitoring Method: Board self-assessment Monitoring Frequency: Annually during Board retreats Racine Unified School District Board of Education

WISCONSIN ASSOCIATION OF SCHOOL BOARDS, INC. 1 Madison, Wisconsin 2 November 23, 2015 3

4

REPORT TO THE MEMBERSHIP ON 2016 RESOLUTIONS 5 WASB Policy & Resolutions Committee 6

Stu Olson, Shell Lake School Board, Chair 7 8

9 10

Resolution 16-01: Revenue Limit Flexibility and Time to Adjust to State Law Changes 11 Create: When changes are made in state law that significantly modify school operations or 12

require changes in board policies, the WASB supports allowing school districts to increase their 13 revenue limit by an amount needed to implement such law changes. The WASB also urges state 14 lawmakers to provide for delayed effective dates or delayed implementation dates for those 15 statutory changes. 16

17 Rationale: The Policy & Resolutions Committee advanced this resolution to let WASB members 18 decide whether to support allowing school districts to increase their revenue limit by an amount 19 necessary to make changes directed by new provisions in state law and to support urging state 20 lawmakers to provide for delayed effective/implementation dates to give school districts 21 additional time to adjust to and implement changes directed by such new provisions. 22

23

24

Resolution 16-02: Referendum Approval to Transfer Public Schools to Private School 25 Operators 26 Create: The WASB supports legislation to require that a school district’s voters must give their 27 approval at a referendum vote before the operation, management and/or control of any district 28 school may be transferred to any entity other than by the locally elected school board of the 29 district. 30

31 Rationale: The Policy & Resolutions Committee advanced this resolution, in response to 32 provisions in the 2015-17 state budget act (2015 Wisconsin Act 55) that created an Opportunity 33 School Partnership Program in the Milwaukee Public Schools, in order to provide WASB 34 members a chance to express their position on support for legislation to require voter approval at 35 a referendum before any district public school may be transferred to a private school operator or 36

entity other than by the locally elected school board. 37

38 39 Resolution 16-03: Private Schools’ Eligibility to Participate in the Statewide Voucher Program 40 Create 2.70 (j): Private schools may only be eligible to participate in the statewide voucher 41 program if they have been in existence for five years. 42 43 Rationale: The Policy & Resolutions Committee advanced this resolution to allow WASB 44 members to decide whether to support legislation to require that private schools are only eligible 45 to participate in the statewide voucher program if they have been in existence for five years and 46 have established a track record. 47

48

When the statewide voucher program was created the only private schools that were eligible to 1 participate in that program were those that had been in existence prior to May 2013. That legal 2 requirement for eligibility to participate in the statewide voucher program applied for the 2014-3 15, 2015-16 and 2016-17 school years, but no longer applies under current law. 4

5 6 Resolution 16-04: Maintenance of Effort 7 Create: The WASB supports a change in the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) 8 to allow a local school district to reduce spending attributable to maintenance of effort (MOE) 9 without penalty when it reduces its spending on employment-related benefits provided to school 10 personnel, including but not limited to pay, retirement contributions, annual and sick leave, and 11 health and life insurance, so long as the district maintains the same level of services to students 12

with disabilities. 13

14 Rationale: The Policy & Resolutions Committee advanced this resolution to allow WASB 15 members to vote on whether to support a change in federal law to allow a local school district to 16 reduce spending attributable to maintenance of effort (MOE) without penalty when it reduces its 17 spending on employment-related benefits provided to school personnel, so long as the district 18 maintains the same level of services to students with disabilities. 19 20

21

Resolution 16-05: Creation of a Statutory Mechanism to Allow Districts to Set Aside Funds in 22 Trust for the Purchase of Long-Term Fixed Assets 23 Create: The WASB supports creating a statutory mechanism to allow school districts to place 24

into a trust for future use a portion of their general funds that would be counted as shared costs 25 for state aid purposes in the year the funds are placed in trust. Such a trust would be used for the 26 purchase of long-term fixed assets, including but not limited to, school busses, vans, snowplows, 27 phone systems, or other technology items with a useful life of more than one year when 28 purchased in bulk, and such trust funds must be spent pursuant to a long-range plan adopted by 29 the school board of the district. 30 31

Rationale: The Policy & Resolutions Committee advanced this resolution to allow WASB 32 members to decide whether to support legislation to allow school districts to place into a trust for 33

future use a portion of their general funds. The funds placed into such a trust would be 34 considered shared costs for state aid purposes in the year they are placed in trust and would be 35 used for the future purchase of long-term fixed assets as described in the resolution. It is 36

understood that such a trust would be set up pursuant to a board resolution and purchases made 37 with funds from such a trust would be made according to a long-range plan adopted by the 38 school board. 39

40

41

42

Resolution 16-06: Increase Special Education Categorical Aid Reimbursement to 33 Percent 1 Amend existing Resolution 2.31 as follows: 2

3 The WASB supports increasing the special education categorical aid reimbursement level 4 to not less than 33 percent of prior year eligible costs and maintaining funding at not less 5 than this percentage each year thereafter. The WASB further supports the following 6 provisions related to funding for children with disabilities: 7

8 Rationale: The Policy & Resolutions Committee advanced this resolution to let WASB members 9 decide whether they support increasing the level of prior year eligible costs reimbursed by 10 special education categorical aid to 33 percent and maintaining the reimbursement level at not 11 less than 33 percent each year thereafter. 12

13 Currently, special education categorical aid reimburses between 26 and 27 percent of prior year 14 eligible costs. 15

16

17 Resolution 16-07: Restore Two-Thirds State Funding and Increase Primary Guarantee Value 18 per Member 19 Create: The WASB supports increasing the primary guaranteed value per member in the general 20 aid funding formula to $3 million each year and restoring a statutory commitment to fund two 21 thirds of school costs each year. 22

23 Rationale: The Policy & Resolutions Committee advanced this resolution to allow WASB 24

membership an opportunity to vote on whether to support restoring a state commitment to 25 provide two-thirds state funding of statewide school costs each year as well as changes to the 26 general equalization aid formula that would restore state aid to a number of school districts that 27 have fallen out of the general equalization aid formula because their property value per student is 28 too high and thus no longer receive such aid. 29

30 From 1996-97 until 2002-03, a statutory commitment was in place to fund two thirds of “partial 31 school revenues” (as defined by law) each year. 32 33

34

Resolution 16-08: Sparsity Aid 35 Create: The WASB supports legislation creating a separate allotment, regardless of membership, 36

within the sparsity aid program for districts with fewer than five members per square mile with 37 per pupil aid amounts to be paid on a sliding scale such that lower enrollment districts would 38 receive greater amounts per pupil than higher enrollment districts. 39 40

Rationale: The Policy & Resolutions Committee advanced this resolution to allow WASB 41 membership to decide whether to support making changes to the sparsity aid program to allow 42 all districts with fewer than five students per square mile to receive per pupil sparsity aid 43 payments in such a manner that lower enrollment districts would receive greater amounts per 44 pupil than higher enrollment districts. 45 46

47

48

Resolution 16-09: Sliding Scale Funding Formula Adjustment 1 Create: The WASB supports legislation to implement a sliding scale formula factor multiplier to 2 increase the membership of districts for revenue limit purposes. 3 4

Rationale: The Policy & Resolutions Committee advanced this resolution to let WASB members 5 decide whether to support legislation to implement a sliding scale formula factor multiplier in 6 revenue limit calculations in order to increase the applicable revenue limit authority of districts. 7 A sliding scale formula factor multiplier would give greater weight to students beneath certain 8 enrollment (membership) numbers/levels than it would students above those levels. 9

10 11

Resolution 16-10: Student Assessments 12 Create: The WASB supports statewide implementation of a uniform, reliable statewide 13 assessment that would not be modified for a period of years sufficient to effectively evaluate the 14 performance of all publicly-funded students in the state, regardless of whether those students 15 attend a public school, charter school or private voucher school. 16 17

Rationale: The Policy & Resolutions Committee advanced this resolution to allow WASB 18 members to decide whether to support statewide implementation of a uniform (i.e., single, 19 common) statewide assessment for all publicly funded students that would be in place without 20 modification for a period of years sufficient to effectively evaluate student achievement. All 21 students in the state who receive public funding would take this assessment, whether they attend 22 a public school, charter school or private voucher school. 23 24

25 Resolution 16-11: State-Mandated Graduation Requirements 26 Create: The WASB supports local school board control for determining high school graduation 27 standards and the assessments that will be used to issue a high school diploma. If the state 28 requires assessments for graduation, those assessments should be fully funded by the state. 29

30 Rationale: The Policy & Resolutions Committee advanced this resolution to allow WASB 31 members to decide whether to support: a) local school board control for determining high school 32 graduation standards and the assessments that will be used to issue a high school diploma; and b) 33

the position that if the state requires assessments for graduation, those state-required assessments 34 should be fully funded by the state. 35 36

37

Resolution 16-12: Use of Electronic Communication to Notify Parent of Child's Truancy 38 Create: The WASB supports legislation to allow school attendance officials to notify a parent or 39 guardian of their child’s truancy that does not qualify as habitual truancy using modern 40

electronic communication mediums, including but not limited to email or text messages in lieu of 41 existing notification requirements. 42 43 Rationale: The Policy & Resolutions Committee advanced this resolution to allow WASB 44 members to decide whether to support legislation to allow schools to notify a parent or guardian 45 of their child’s truancy that does not qualify as habitual truancy using electronic communication 46 mediums, instead of current notification requirements. 47

Resolution 16-13: Elimination/Reduction of Newspaper Notice/Publishing Requirements 1 Create: The WASB supports legislation allowing school districts to publish statutorily-required 2 notices electronically on the school district website and other social media maintained by the 3 school district in lieu of publishing these notices in newspapers. 4

5 Rationale: The Policy & Resolutions Committee advanced this resolution to allow WASB 6 members to decide whether to support allowing school districts to publish statutorily-required 7 notices electronically on the school’s website and its other social media instead of in newspapers. 8 9

10

Resolution 16-14: Mental Health Supports 11 Create: The WASB supports the provision of state funding adequate to: address the shortage of 12

mental health professionals in our state qualified to address the needs of school age children and 13 young adults; provide adequate professional mental health supports in our schools and our 14 communities; and permit schools to enter into effective partnerships with agencies that are 15 involved with mental health to provide for school-based mental health programs, that could 16 provide services, including but not limited to, the following: 17

18

Comprehensive student screening in every school; 19

Professional development for classroom teachers on recognition and appropriate 20 classroom response to support affected students; 21

Professional mental health counselors and or services; 22

Professional education and training to expand availability of mental health professionals; 23 and 24

Public information programs related to mental health. 25

26 Rationale: The Policy & Resolutions Committee advanced this resolution to allow WASB 27 membership to decide whether to support the provision of state funding adequate to address the 28 shortage of mental health professionals in our state qualified to address the needs of school age 29 children and young adults as well as provide adequate professional mental health supports in our 30 schools and our communities. This would include permitting schools to enter into partnerships 31 with county and community agencies that are involved with mental health to provide for school-32 based mental health programs, to provide the services, as outlined in the resolution. 33 34

35 36

37

Resolution 16-15: Transfer of Territory from One District to Another 1 Create: The WASB supports the following changes to statutes relating to and governing 2 transfers of territory from one school district to another: 3 4

Reduce the current threshold for a transfer of parcels to be considered a transfer of a large 5 territory from seven percent to one percent so that any petitions that exceed a property 6 value or student count of one percent of the donor district would require approval by 7 public binding referendum held in both affected districts, assuming that one or both of the 8 affected school boards deny the petition; 9

10

Require that all the property values and student counts presented via petition(s) to 11 transfer a small territory in a given annual petition period be aggregated, and that if the 12

aggregated property values or student counts in those petitions exceed the threshold for a 13 transfer of parcels to be considered a transfer of a large territory, treat them as a transfer 14 of a large territory; 15

16

Clarify the standards to be used to determine the asset transfer calculation in both the 17 large and small parcel detachment-reattachment process. 18

19

Rationale: The Policy & Resolutions Committee advanced this resolution to allow WASB 20 members decide whether to support various changes to the statutes governing transfers of 21 territory from one school district to another to broaden the ability of voters in the affected 22 districts to approve or disapprove of such transfer(s) via referendum and to clarify the standards 23 to be used to determine the asset transfer calculation when territory is transferred. These changes 24

are intended to deter owners from presenting multiple small parcel detachments in an attempt to 25 circumvent a public referendum vote on the transfers. 26 27

28 Resolution 16-16: Prevailing Wage 29 Create: The WASB supports legislation to allow a school board to reinstate the state prevailing 30 wage law through local board policy. 31 32 Rationale: The Policy & Resolutions Committee advanced this resolution to give the WASB 33 membership an opportunity to vote on whether to support allowing a local school board the 34 option to reinstate, through the adoption of a local board policy, the prevailing wage law 35

applicable to local school district public works projects. 36

37

The 2015-17 State Budget Act (2015 Wisconsin Act 55) repealed the state prevailing wage law 38 that applies to local projects of public works, effective for any contracts entered into on or after 39 January 1, 2017. Local governmental units affected by this repeal include counties, villages, 40 towns, cities, school districts, municipal utilities and technical colleges. 41

42 43 44 45

46 47 48

Sample Resolution

WHEREAS, State Rep. Michael Schraa (R-Oshkosh) and state Sen. Duey Stroebel (R-Cedarburg) have

introduced legislation (Assembly Bill 481/Senate Bill 355) to place restrictions on school district

referenda ballot dates and implement a 2 year waiting period following failed referenda; and

WHEREAS, under current law, a school referendum can coincide with a primary election, general

election, or a special election can be called specifically for the referendum. Under this bill, a school

district referendum would have to coincide with a regularly scheduled Spring or Fall general election;

and

WHEREAS, under current law, there is no limitation on whether, and how frequently, a referendum may

be placed before voters. This bill would prevent a school board from bringing a new referendum

request for two years if a referendum is voted down; and

WHEREAS, the bill is anti-local control and does not show trust in locally-elected officials; and

WHEREAS, with state-imposed revenue limits on school districts frozen for the entire two –year state

budget cycle for the first time ever, referenda are the only way many districts can access resources. This

proposal will significantly impact declining enrollment districts which comprise over 60 percent of

Wisconsin school districts. Most seriously affected will be small, rural school districts which lack

economies of scale and have few places to make cuts. Many of these districts have come to rely on

periodic referenda to maintain programming and, in some cases, to continue to exist. Legislators should

know that supporting this bill could have the effect of forcing districts to consider dissolving; and

WHEREAS, the bill will further exacerbate the trend of creating “Haves” who can pass referenda and

“Have Nots” who cannot and opportunities for students will further be determined by their zip code;

and

WHEREAS, the bill is extremely restrictive and inflexible for school boards – under the bill in odd-

numbered years boards will only have one opportunity to go to referendum (in the spring). If that

referendum fails, boards will have to wait two years to the next odd-numbered year where once again

there will only be one opportunity. In a state budget year (an odd-numbered year with only an April

general election) a district would have to wait until the following spring to react to funding decisions

made by the state; and

WHEREAS, the bill is extremely restrictive and inflexible for school boards in another way as well—it also

affects a variety of other funding mechanisms used by school boards to help them manage their

finances, such as short-term borrowing, state trust fund loans, promissory notes and other borrowing or

issuance of bonds. It provides that, if a school board applies or adopts a resolution to use any of these

funding mechanisms and it is rejected by a majority of the electors of the school district, the school

board may not use any of these mechanisms for two consecutive 365−day periods. When the

Legislature adopted Act 10, it provided a number of “tools” to school boards to help them better

http://docs.legis.wisconsin.gov/2015/proposals/sb355

manage their finances. This bill proposes taking away “tools” districts use to help them manage their

finances; and

WHEREAS, in arguing for the two-year moratorium, the co-sponsorship memo being circulated states

it is necessary because school boards are “holding repeated referenda in order to either wear down the

public or manipulate the process.” Legislators should be aware that referenda can fail for reasons other

than the community is unwilling to increase spending on their schools. There may be other issues in the

plan that voters do not support and when those issues are addressed the subsequent referendum

passes. For example, there could be disagreement over the plan for construction, not the need for

new/expanded facilities. In these instances, school boards are being responsive to the community; and

WHEREAS, voting is not a difficult process and voters in Wisconsin are intelligent. They do not need to

be protected from themselves. If they do not support a referendum, they can vote no; and

WHEREAS, referenda can provide an opportunity for a community to have a very focused and robust

conversation about what it wants its public schools to be. School boards propose referenda because

they believe doing so is in the best educational interests of the students and communities they

represent; and

WHEREAS, The Wisconsin Association of School Boards (WASB) has formally adopted a policy resolution

(Resolution 1.25) stating that “The WASB opposes limits on scheduling referenda.”

THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Racine Unified School District Board of Education calls on Gov. Walker,

Sen. Van Wanggaard and Robert Wirch and Rep. Tom Weatherston, Robin Vos, Peter Barca and Cory Mason

to oppose this legislation that would further curtail the already very limited set of revenue options available to

Wisconsin school boards.

board consent agenda - files.ctctcdn.comfiles.ctctcdn.com/87d6fed8001/c2d584fe-b033-40ed... ·...

Documents