Worcester School Committee first business meeting of 2020

The agenda is here.
I'll update as I am able


There's a number of petitions coming in from Mr. Davis, which are here. Important note: public petitions are referred to subcommittee without comment from the committee (they aren't posted items, so committee deliberation would be a violation of the Open Meeting Law). This doesn't mean you're being ignored! Petitioners are informed of when the subcommittee meeting is on their items, at which deliberation actually takes place.
In this case, the petition includes a number of proposed topics for policies, and the items are being referred to Governance (chaired by Mrs. Clancey, Mr. Monfredo and I are the other two members).
Speakers speak to the school to prison pipeline, the need for anti-bias training, and greater consideration for the ways in which students, particularly those of color are treated
Petty speaks that wellness counselors is something important to be considered under the funding of the Student Opportunity Act.
Items gb 0-32 and 33 are taken out of order, as Teamsters are here to speak to them.
Mr. Foley notes that the School Committee has little idea of how the buses are actually doing at this time; the items are designed to give that information to the School Committee.
The Teamster business manager doesn't believe that the schools should be running buses, that he'd like to see "both sides" held accountable.
Ms. Biancheria objects to the comparison with Framingham, noting its relative difference in size, comments that she doesn't want to micromanage, that a bus being 15 minutes late on a single day happens due to traffic or construction sometimes.
I spoke, adding a motion, which passed, requesting a simple reporting form on the transportation page for parents and students to report buses which are late, asking that we receive that report weekly until MyStop is up and running (we're on the third contract requiring GPS reporting), and urging administrators to report late buses. I also said a lot about parent and student experience of buses. 
Administration says that MyStop should be up and running in the coming weeks; integration with Durham is what is lacking, it appears.
And the morning article on that is here


Report of the Superintendent is an update on the building of the new South High (the backup is here, but it's just photos; the report includes a video, which the Mayor asks be put up on the website). The Mayor notes that it is projected to open at about the same time as the baseball stadium.

Presentation on vaping: you can find resources here
The Mayor's question is requesting clarification of the amount of nicotine: a Juul pod is the same amount as a pack of cigarettes.

The Commissioner shared with the urban superintendents a presentation which Superintendent Binienda presents: Governor Baker's budget is released on January 22, the Commissioner will present at the superintendents' gathering the next day (Thursday).
Plans must be voted by the school committee prior to submission on April 1; the plan then is for the Worcester School Committee to have it at their last March meeting
focus on how funding will be used to reduce gaps
"commit to doing a few things well" built on district improvements
The state is attempting to require curriculum to be on CURATE in order to be approved
required that parents, community stakeholders, the special education and English learner PAC
collaboration with the community groups
"right now we've been told that no district should be talking about any type of number on this"
"they're also in the process of writing an amendment process" which I assume is due to the fact that budgets essentially are never based on the Governor's budget
targets will be calculated using 2020 as a baseline, but many of them don't exist
the thinking at this time is that there will be metrics but no targets
thus target setting would not be required in the initial plan submitted in April.

Mayor: this is probably the most important issue we'll be doing over the
three Mondays in February excluding vacation week, first week in March in four different quadrants
have we're going to operate those meetings
then come up with a report on how those meetings will be run
Foley: also doing something online to solicit feedback
critical importance of adding our parent advisory councils involved
use site councils
Monfredo: one of the groups we need to reach out to is our educators
teachers have a vested stake in our schools
Binienda: just sent out allocation dates to principals for their meetings
I'll update this with more info as we have it. Also note that the next meeting on Feb. 6 will be on budget

report on the question of consolidation of facilities city and school sides
I had some questions on this, which I'll post on.

report on Columbus Park school, which notes that the HVAC systems (outside the boiler)
Foley: we're at 80% of the deferred maintenance in our buildings (of all buildings in the city, WPS has 65%)
"we have a financial problem in investing in our schools"
remember, we closed eight schools: "our elementary schools are bursting at the seams"

We're going to have to come back to the argument over grants...I'll make a separate post...

On Miss McCullough's request for a report the last 7-10 years on the number of students in the WPS who have mastered a particular trade and succeeded in securing a position in it, we apparently only check this one year out because it is hard to find the graduated students longer.

The Mayor's item to send the rules to subcommittee (Governance) raised concerns from Biancheria and Monfredo that, in essence, we might spend less time on recognitions.

After a back and forth in which Mr. Monfredo initially made a motion to hold and then withdrew it, the Mayor's item on sex ed goes to subcommittee. This made me realize that the state is behind where it said it would be on the new standards; they should have been out for public comment by now. 

Worcester School Committee meets Thursday

And the agenda is here, as a PDF with hyperlinks? I think this is new.
Finance and Operations will be reporting out from their Monday meeting.
The report of the Superintendent is an update on the strategic plan (no backup as yet).

There is a response on interactions with homeschooling families (the link doesn't work; it's page 28): of 158 plans in 98 families, the adminstration reports that 96 were approved within the first week, 26 within the second week, 19 before 20 days, and 17 required more than that. The report states that the 17 were all incomplete upon submission, missing "evidence of progress." They state that only 2 plans are missing. The report says a "recent court ruling supported the WPS standards for evidence" though the case is not cited by name nor is it included.

There is a list of Chapter 74 programs and the number of students enrolled, as well as the after school and evening programs and enrollment.

Mr. Monfredo and Miss Biancheria are proposing support for the Baker-Polito effort to reduce domestic and sexual violence among young people.

Mr. Foley and others note Mr. Hennessey's award of 2019 Administrator of the Year from School Bus Fleet.

There is a proposal to update policies - JB – Equal Educational Opportunities; ‑ JFABD - Homeless Students: Enrollment Rights And Services; ‑ JFABE - Educational Opportunities For Military Children; ‑ JFABF - Educational Opportunities For Children In Foster Care (it's language tweaking).

There are eleven pages of outstanding administrative items that the administration is suggesting be filed as the term comes to a close.

There is a request that the following donations be accepted:

• $400.00 from a donor to Claremont Academy to be used as a scholarship for Latino female of Latina who plans to attend college.
• $84.60 from Box Tops for Education to Canterbury Street Magnet Computer-Based School
• $225.00 from the Digital Federal Credit Union to McGrath Elementary School
• $500.00 from the District Attorney's Community Reinvestment and Crime Prevention Program to Forest Grove Middle School to assist with their bullying campaign

There is a request for information about the new vocational tracks at Doherty (which the Committee has already voted in favor of).

There is a request (without backup) to approve a prior fiscal year payment for $308.79 to Airgas ("industrial, medical, and specialty gases").

Then there are a slew of items from Mr. Comparetto:

• Request that the Mayor consider alternative methods to electing and appointing School Committee members that includes, but is not limited to, district School Committee seats. 
• Request that the Mayor and School Committee establish Worcester Public Schools’ Safe Zones.
• Request that the Superintendent present an annual report on the status of education for Latino students.
• Request that the Administration incorporate best practices for creating a diverse workforce.
• Request that the Administration provide an update on current restorative justice practices.
• Request a moratorium on suspending K-2 students for non-violent offenses.
• Request an "equity audit" of the Worcester Public Schools in accordance to best practices.
• Request that the Administration provide an update on the efforts of the Administration to create ethnic studies programming

Miss Biancheria wants an update on the South High building project (shouldn't this be a standing item in a subcommittee somewhere?) and an update on recess (which I think Ms. McCullough has an outstanding item on already).

And there is another prior fiscal year payment in the amount of $1,484.10 to Johnson Controls Fire Protection LP for services performed at Burncoat High School (fire supression?).

And there is an executive session: for arbitration with the Mass Nurses Association; for litigation with the Estate of Suzanne F. Miville; and for collective bargaining with the computer technicians.

Yes, I am planning on being there and blogging.

Worcester Public Schools FY20 budget deliberations round one

It's 4:10 and the committee is all here but the superintendent is not...the budget is here; I've stuck the account order ("recommended") here.
And it looks like they may be starting at 4:15...
Posting as they go

Worcester School Committee meets Thursday

Sorry for being late posting this; if there is one thing to pay attention to, it is the job description of the Chief Diversity Officer being on the agenda for approval, which I already wrote something about.

The agenda is here.
The report of the Superintendent is on the South High student design club, as covered in the T&G earlier this week.
There are resignations, recognitions, and such.
Of passing interest is a prior year payment of over $18,000 to Leicester for what looks like a division of services to a student on an IEP. Is someone at some point going to ask why we have so many prior year payments now? This didn't used to be nearly as much of a thing.
There is motion to send a letter opposing the change in charter reimbursement proposed by the Governor and passed by the House that would only reimburse charter tuition increases that are due to enrollment being high that any of the prior five years.
As covered by the T&G, there is a proposed change in due process for students.
There is a request for approval for a donation of $685.00 to the Worcester Public Schools’ Transition Program.
There are requests from Miss Biancheria for reports on summer facilities work, on the BRACE program, and this--

Request that the Administration provide a summary of the funding proposed in the City’s Budget for the Worcester Public Schools and indicate the way in which this funding, if approved, can enhance programs in the Worcester Public Schools.

--which...isn't that the budget?

There is a plan to recognize students who will graduate with the Seal of Biliteracy.
And there is an item to set the budget hearings.

Somebody has a meeting on Doherty (and a note from me on comments)

Someone finally had a meeting on Doherty's building plans, and, even if it wasn't the city and the schools, there was some good information shared. Good for the Friends of Newton Hill and ParkSpirit for keeping an eye on things.
The important bit of news that came out is this:

While no decisions have been made about where the new Doherty is going to be built, Mr. Miller said he has “unofficially heard” that the present school site is likely to receive the most consideration. That begs the question: If the current site is selected, would the students and staff at Doherty have to be uprooted during construction?

Mr. Miller said there has been some speculation that the current South High, which is in the process of being replaced with a new building, could possibly come into play as a temporary home for Doherty. But that’s nothing more than speculation at this point. Such a possibility has never been publicly discussed or mentioned.

The idea of South as swing space so Doherty could be built on the same site was something I hadn't heard til this week. The main complications would be parking and transportation (so maybe we should be talking about transportation costs seriously?). It is space the district already owns and operates, which is always the big issue with swing space, which otherwise can get expensive.
What was pointed out during the meeting is building a high school for 1700 on the 20 acres available at Newton Hill will take creativity, and that takes a particular kind of architecture. We can only hope--since no one is making that process public--that those abilities of the architects to build on the current space are being seriously considered.

__________________________________________

Since I'm quoted in the piece, and since this appears to keep coming up in some quarters, let me say again--as I did multiple times at the meeting, as I do before I speak in public in Worcester at meetings, as I do on this blog, as I do on my Twitter feed, and as I do on my Facebook page--I don't speak for MASC in or on Worcester. I can't. MASC Field Directors intentionally do not have their own districts as field directors. We rarely speak in public on district matters of districts we are directors for (and generally when we do, it is to a school committee at their public meeting).
Reading with an English teacher's eye, I can understand what Nick is doing in the column: there is a reason I'd know what is happening in other districts, and thus citing my profession lends that creditability. I appreciate that. I do follow education news across the state for work.
When I speak about Worcester, I speak as someone who lives here and sends her kids to school here. That is more than enough.

What are we doing with Doherty?

Thanks to Steven Foskett for getting in today's Telegram and Gazette that the Worcester City Council is getting updates on the building projects at South High and Doherty (not North, as the headline has). It's in the ridiculously-difficult-to-navigate City Manager portion of the Council agenda for Tuesday; check page 32 and following.
South has actual dirt being moved around, so clearly something is happening over there. But what's going on with Doherty?
You might remember that I asked this back in August, as well, when it had been six months since the school had been accepted to Feasibility. Well, now it has been a year.
The Feasibility phase of the program requires that the city:

...document their educational program, generate an initial space summary, document existing conditions, establish design parameters, develop and evaluate alternatives, and recommend the most cost effective and educationally appropriate preferred solution

And what is it that we're told the City is going to be doing now?

The City of Worcester has selected an Owner’s Project Manager to assist in the oversite of all aspects of this project. In December, DPW&P’s Architectural Division issued a Request for Design Services to secure an architect to conduct the Feasibility Study. The MSBA and the City of Worcester has scheduled a Designer Selection Panel Meeting on March 12, 2019 to review the five submittals received. The MSBA will also schedule interviews for the selected firms in early April. The City and MSBA anticipate an architect to be under contract for this work by May 1, 2019. 

The selected architect will begin the Preliminary Design Program immediately after contract execution. This study will determine the required program needs for a comprehensive high school with an enrollment of 1670 as determined by the MSBA and Worcester Public Schools. The Preliminary Design Program will establish the needed infrastructure required to meet the program. It is anticipated the Preliminary Design Program will be completed and submitted to MSBA by August 1, 2019. Along with the development of the Preliminary Design Program, the City, architect, and OPM will begin to study options that will lead to a Preferred Schematic Report. This Report exams the condition of the existing facility and the requirements to upgrade it to design current standards. This Report will also study the existing building’s ability to accommodate the design program or the existing building with additions. The Report will also examine building a new facility at the current site or at an alternate site. The MSBA has established the June 2020 Board Meeting to act on the Preferred Schematic Report and authorize Schematic Design.

That's...everything in the Feasibility phase, save selection of the Owner's Project Manager, which maybe you should have mentioned the name of. So what has the city been doing for the past year? As far as this report reveals, nothing. And the school website doesn't even having a building link on it.

There's a few reasons why this matters. First, nothing else is moving until Doherty does. Want a new Burncoat? Not til Doherty moves. Noticing we have some aging elementary schools? Not til Doherty moves. Doherty is the bottleneck in the system.
Also, notice that there have been no meetings and no notices about what is happening. This tends to be the way the city operates, so it can then spring a "deadline's looming, we have to do this" option. The obvious version of this is the city says, "sorry, the only option we have is to take Newton Hill." The less obvious version of this is the city has brought to their attention that most of the unbuilt space within Doherty's quadrant is preserved open space, parkland or otherwise. Because the city seems stuck on the notion of a suburban campus, they're looking for acreage, just like they did for Worcester Tech.
It's useful to note that Worcester Tech took as long as it did (once we started trying) because the city was sued over the project. I would assume the same would happen if the city tried to take other preserved open space for the program. There are other options; we could convert buildings. We could build up.
The first thing we have to concede, though, is that Doherty isn't in the suburbs.
I will also reiterate: This is public funding for a public project of major concern. There should be regular public meetings happening. There are not.

Worcester School Committee meets Thursday

Sorry, late posting on this
The Thursday agenda (back, note, to its regular 7 pm time) is mostly a Finance and Operations-related agenda, even setting aside the F&O report from the meeting today at 5.

Today's F&O meeting has the final account summary for FY18, an excruciatingly literal referral of page 415 of the budget book (on indirect costs), and a single page response to a list of queries from Miss Biancheria regarding facilities.
There is also an extensive update on summer work. There is A LOT (and this includes an update on South High construction!). Of concern: note in particular the list of failed boilers that have had to bump other projects; I'm counting Flagg, Wawecus, and Tatnuck Magnet as either failed or "of concern," which, along with the Claremont controls project, are bumping boiler replacement at Chandler Mag, Rice Square, Lincoln Street, and Burncoat Middle. Also, we're replacing boilers at Doherty and Burncoat High, too? And I imagine we've...like maxed out our accelerated repair projects or something, so these aren't split with MSBA? There is a LOT there; go look at it!

On Thursday's agenda, there are some recognitions. There is NO report of the superintendent. There's a posting of a non-specific executive session.

A series of reports are back, cleaning up from the budget:
There is a response on the reduction of outside vendors (specifically looking at applied behavioral analysis).
There is a (much less extensive) response on summer work PLUS a note on Harlow Street School.
There is a response on snow removal (in sum, it's in more than one acccount because it needs to be).

There is a response to an item on tutors which summarizes all action stemming from the final FY19 budget being larger than the House budget (THIS IS WORTH REVIEWING), and including a nice little summary of where we're at on FBRC. This also notes that the district budget isn't really done until the city sets the tax rate in the fall.

There's a list of which positions are funded how in the Teaching and Learning section of central admin.
There's a past year's positions list in the maintenance department.
And there's a list of where there are security personnel.

There's a somewhat vague update on Doherty High: design firm to be selected in November, then review process with community (hey school committee members: INSIST ON SEVERAL PUBLIC MEETINGS! Make the process more like Nelson Place and less like South). The exact same backup accompanies the following item on Burncoat.

Apparently, the Committee is discussing the "Cultures of Innovations" section of the strategic plan. I hadn't realized this--had anyone?--but apparently they were discussing each section (quickly) during the summer. The plan is to adopt the whole thing Thursday night as well. What connection this has with having referred the plan for review to subcommittees, I don't know. Clearly, someone just wants to get it through without an extensive review process.

For reasons that are unclear, the administration is proposing what it is calling a policy on absence, though it appears to me to be language that pushes a notion of truancy. The administration's worrying focus on bringing back draconian (and unsupported) language, and, one supposes, action, around student absences I imagine stems from the state's change in the accountability system. It strikes me, though, that this is going to do nothing more than run more families (what to guess which ones?) into state oversight, more students into conflict with the school system, and won't actually keep more kids in schools.

There is a suggestion for a Municipal Government Day.
There is a request on for an update on the CPR training.
There is a request for an update on South High (which if someone is paying attention, will be filed, since they got one).

Finally, reading between the lines on administrative requests: TRANSPORTATION:

gb #8-259 - Administration (August 28, 2018)
To authorize the Administration to enter into contracts for the lease of property for a term of up to twenty years for the operation of student transportation for a contract term to begin in June 2020.
gb #8-260 - Administration (August 28, 2018)
To authorize the Administration to enter into contracts for the lease of school buses, special education school buses, and wheelchair buses for a term of up to five years for the operation of student transportation for a contract term to begin in June 2020.

Leasing buses and finding space for them...this is bringing transportation back in house!

No promises on live blog. 

(This time for sure) The Worcester School Committee meets Thursday WITH BROCKTON

I don't usually have musical accompanyment for these, but with the City of Champions coming, I can't miss the chance to add this: 



The report of the superintendent is "A Tale of Two Cities" (and we'll leave you to draw your own conclusions about revolution. BYO knitting. "It is a far, far better thing I do..."), which, as I understand it, are Brockton and Worcester in this telling. There is only one recognition Thursday (and a single item in executive session), so the report should start before 7:30. Come see the latest in Foundation Budget Review Commission analysis!

There are a number of recognitions and a few appointments.

There is a request for a prior fiscal year payment of (yikes!) $8,212.50.
There is a request for reception of a donation of $100 from Fidelity Charitable Gift4Giving Program

Mr. Monfredo offers a reminder of the annual City that Reads book drive, a request that the district create a community service program of snow shoveling, and a suggestion that students do math over the summer.

Mr. O'Connell offers a request that Worcester send a delegation to the July statewide Civics Education Institute, a request over multiple items that the district consider blizzard bags or the like (aka, some other way to make up snow days other than adding days), a request for an update on federal grants (in a paragraph), a request that the district submit a grant application for a grant from the Education Innovation and Research Program as well as one for STOP School Violence Act.

Miss Biancheria offers a request for a "a report on the cohort, conducted by the Worcester Public Schools"...which I have no idea what that means. 

Mr. Comparetto requests an addition to school adjustment counselors, the course of study for ELL students, and a report on community organization partnerships.
Administration asks that the dates for summer camp at South High be changed.
Administration also asks that the mission and focus statement of South High be changed (for which the only backup is the new statements and what appears to be a pie chart with no information explaining who is responding, let alone anything about where the mission or focus statement came from or why it is being changed).

There is also an executive session at 6 pm on negotiations with administrative secretaries.

Don't miss the Doherty discussion

...that's in this article on approving the funding for South High:

Meanwhile, the site of a new Doherty High remains uncertain. 

Mr. Petty said consideration has to be given first to renovating the existing school. If that is not a viable option, then consideration must be given to building a new school on the existing campus. 

The problem with Doherty, however, is that it is surrounded by park land. A final option would be to find a site off-campus within the Doherty quadrant, but Mr. Petty pointed out that if the property is privately owned the city would be responsible for 100 percent of the acquisition costs. 

Mr. Augustus acknowledged that the site of the new Doherty High is a “hot topic,” adding that city and school officials would discuss various options during the next week or two

That isn't a discussion that just "city and school officials" should be having; the public should be at that conversation.

It's time to talk about Doherty

The good news last month that Doherty was invited into Feasiblity with MSBA on their renovation/rebuild means it's time to start paying attention to this project. Feasibility is the part  where renovation is considered, and locations of a rebuild are considered.

South High was relatively easy: the school department had enough space at the Sullivan/South campus to build a new building onsite while continuing to use the current building. The city did this at Nelson Place as well.

There will be no such solution possible at Doherty. The footprint of the school, the parking lots, and the practice field are all that the school department has. The rest is parkland.

Those who watch green space in the city have every reason to be concerned: Worcester Tech, of course, was built on Green Hill Park land, after a protracted legal battle. A quick glance down the list of current Worcester schools shows that this was a standing Worcester practice: Belmont Street and Wawecus both have nice granite posts outside not because the school is there, but because they are on what was parkland. And they're hardly alone.

A year ago, Mayor Petty tweeted out this:

RE: New @DohertyMemorial I have no intention of encroaching on Newton Hill. We’ll be discussing alt. sites & the community will be involved

— Joseph M. Petty (@MayorPetty) February 21, 2017

There are other answers possible. It isn't, for example, as though Worcester lacks space in buildings that can/have been schools that can be acquired and renovated. There are also schools of significant size--Everett High comes to mind--that have been built on small footprints for many kids.

Worcester tends, though, to quietly do things behind the scenes unless public process is demanded. Time to start speaking up.

And South High is in!

Not a surprise, really, since it made the agenda, but South High was approved for invitation to Project Budget Scope and Sequence at today's MSBA meeting. Full list of districts moving here.

It's not often we build a new high school

...and Worcester's South High is already into schematic design before the public is seeing it.
Do we not even try to build buildings that are attractive and welcoming anymore? There's no effort here to say "this is a public building: welcome!" nor "what happens in this building is something this community values." 

South High approved for Schematic Design yesterday

Yesterday, as reported in today's T&G, South High was approved for Schematic Design at the Mass School Building Authority meeting in Boston. It is approval for a new building, with a budget (MSBA estimates) of $191M.
You can find what the city (remember, the city, not the schools, build buildings) submitted here, though be warned that it's a big file that takes awhile. That and the preliminary submission from January. are at this point all we have to look at. That page off of South High's main page has no record of meetings--though they have to have had public meetings in order to vote--and no posted agendas--though, again, that has to have happened for the votes to have happened.

In fact, information about what's going on with this building project has been next to nothing, aside from a single T&G article in which Scott O'Connell interviewed Superintendent Binienda who explained that renovation had been considered (as required by MSBA), but:

School officials had been focused primarily on either rebuilding South High or renovating it extensively. The base repair option wouldn’t make any significant changes to the building, only fix existing issues, and Ms. Binienda said in the end, the other two options “were going to cost the same price.”

She also said the renovation option would be more disruptive to students, who would be displaced while the old school was under construction, and take longer than building a new facility, based on the district’s project team’s findings.

This is hardly a surprise, if you follow school building projects, but, outside of the few words here, who would know how this decision was made, or its merits? The relative merits of decisions already made--dropping the pool (suggested in the first round plan), expanding the Ch. 74 programs, adding a piano lab and foreign language labs, and so forth--are ones we have no insight into.

We're about to spend close to $200M on a new high school for the city. It's all public money, even if most of it comes from the state. It's supposed to serve all of our kids.

We should know more than we do. We should be invited to take part.
We haven't been.

EDITED TO ADD: a couple of screenshots of the approved design (thus far) after the jump:

This is two mock-ups from either direction: on the top, Apricot Street is at the bottom of the shot, and we're looking across the street at the campus; on the bottom, Apricot Street is at the top.

This gives an idea of how it all goes together: the ballfield as it is behind Sullivan, a new track facility and a new building. Note that all of this is on WPS property, though (EDITED) the orange triangles are NOT; they're on conservation land. So they're building right out to the line. 

Worcester school meetings this week

and there are a few...
The Governance and Employee Issues subcommittee meets on Wednesday at 5:30. Of note at this meeting: they're reviewing the student handbook--which suggests no substantive changes--and section I of the district policy manual (that's Instruction)--which I also don't see anything to raise eyebrows on--with one exception: they're about to let vocational students out of the two years of foreign language requirement ('though that's only in the handbook, not in the policy manual...and the two should agree). That would mean that students who don't complete that requirement would be ineligible for admission to (for example) UMass, which is why the MassCore requirements (including the two years of language) were adopted.
They're also hearing about collaboration around the Byrne Criminal Justice grant and discussion of municipal governance and of registering students to vote.

On Wednesday night, the final CPPAC meeting of the year is 7 pm at the Worcester Art Museum, and the guest speakers are Superintendent Binienda and City Manager Augustus to talk about the budget. A good time to ask questions...

The School Committee picks up budget again at 4pm on Thursday. The sequence of accounts is here, and they left off with security guards. There's a lot left to get through. If past experience is a guide, they'll go as far as they can til 6, recess to executive session, come back at 7 for the regular meeting, and pick up budget again once they've completed the regular meeting.

The regular meeting has a LOT of recognitions.
The report of the superintendent is on the ALICE security protocol, which includes training students and staff to fight intruders, rather than lockdown. The presentation is here. It appears, from the presentation, that the administration adopted this protocol without a school committee vote or any public notice.

There are also responses to motions made during and surrounding the budget deliberation two weeks ago: the motion on non-fulfillment of transportation, on leasing buses, on the wall by Tatnuck Magnet School, on Seven Hills charter school and WRTA grant-funded transportation, on McKinney-Vento transportation reimbursment (36% last year), on the Foley Stadium revolving fund, on graduation expenses, on what the crew team needs, on the repair of athletic equipment, and on athletic supplies purchased.

Mr. O'Connell is proposing having public meetings and hearings as part of the development of the new South High School.

He also wants to discuss departmental consolidation with the city.

He also is suggesting two meetings a month in summer (continuing the regular year schedule) and an additional meeting in months that have a fifth Thursday.

Miss McCullough is asking for a report on itinerant special education staff caseloads, specifically referencing Boston, and also a report on "what, if any, orientation, training or ongoing professional development is provided by special education department leadership to principals, as it relates to itinerant special education staff."

The committee is being asked to accept a donation of $19.10 for classroom books, of $1000 for SAT for seniors, of $1000 for a scholarship (due to Mr. Allen's award), of $676 for special education transitions, of $250 for the alternative program (from an award they won!), of $660 from Intel, and of $13,000 from the Quinsigamond Village Improvement Council for equipment. They're also being asked to vote a prior year invoice of $585 and invoices of $7695.

Mr. Foley is suggesting the following:

To ask the Mayor and the Superintendent to develop a new approach to the School Committee agenda that will make the meetings more effective, productive, and deliberative. Suggestions would include the establishment of a consent agenda for items such as routine approvals of donations and recognitions, the development of criteria for recognitions, designated meetings for honoring recipients of recognitions, and the presence on the agenda at each meeting or every other meeting an important educational policy issue facing Worcester Public Schools that school committee members would learn about (through materials distributed prior to the meeting) and discuss with administrators at the meeting.

There is an executive session scheduled for 6 pm on a grievance, contract negotiations with the teachers' union and with non-represented personnel (both non-administrative and administrative), and:

To authorize the Superintendent to negotiate an employment contract for Susan O’Neil, Ph.D. as the Deputy Superintendent, effective July 1, 2017.

...which I assume means that the committee voted in favor of the hire?

Worcester meetings this week

Up this week:

• It doesn't appear to have been advertised anywhere, but there is a posted South High Building Committee meeting for tomorrow night at 6 pm in the school library. No idea what's on the agenda or where they are in the building project, as there isn't a folder or full list of topics anywhere I can turn up. 
• The School Committee meets Thursday at 7 pm; you can find the agenda here. There does not appear to be a report of the superintendent. There are several retirements, resignations, and appointments. The enrollment report, already previewed in this weekend's T&G, comes back essentially as a budget preview (timely, as the Governor's budget comes out next Wednesday). It's worth noting not only did WPS break 25,000 students for the first time since 2003; while Worcester also remains the third largest district in the state, we're back within striking distance of Springfield (25,391 to Springfield's 25,633). The inflation rate squeaks in at !.1%, so at least this year, it's a positive number. Honestly, this probably needs its own post, but read the summary. Administration points out that having School Committee members add individual items to the curriculum is maybe not a good plan...and some schools sing the "Smiley Face" song already. There is response to a request on teachers on expired licenses. There will be a performance of the South High band (this is an agenda item).Mr. Monfredo notes the annual Worcester Historical Museum Valentine contest. Mr. Foley requests a budget presentation to the joint committee (on Education for City Council and on Finance and Operations for School Committee). Mr. O'Connell would like more on the 'no confidence' vote at Quinsigamond Elementary. There are also several recognitions and donations, plus grants of $10,000 for lacrosse at Doherty High and $14,000 for LIBRARIES(!) at Canterbury Street, Rice Square, and Worcester East Middle. PCBs and a grievance are on the executive session agenda for 6 pm. 
• There is a Legislative Breakfast at 9 am on Friday at Worcester Tech, with a fairly extensive list of items: one would expect the Foundation Budget Review Commission, but there is also additional computers, preschool, kindergarten, MSBA, AP exams, and "a Compact to prioritize public education and coordinate efforts to firmly establish the Worcester Public Schools as the best urban school system in New England and beyond." 

If I can, I'll try to make the section on Thursday on enrollment, as it appears to be the only budget preview Worcester is getting in January. unless there's one that appears as backup for Friday.

Worcester School Committee meets January 21

The first regular meeting of the Worcester School Committee is this Thursday, January 21. You can find the agenda here and here.
There is an executive session at 6: to discuss the special education director's contract (one of the few done with the school committee) and to review the superintendent search submissions, as recommended by Finance and Operations subcommittee back in December.

On the regular agenda (which is a long one, as there hasn't been a meeting in a month), there is no report of the superintendent.
There are a number of midyear retirements, resignations, and new hires.
The rest of this is NOT in order; I'm going to start with "heads up" and list the rest.

For consideration: as noted earlier, to limit the superintendent search to an "internal" search managed by the mayor and finished by the first week of March.

Also, Mayor Petty wants to consider making South a vocational school or expanding vocational offerings there. 

The Committee is also being asked to forward school building priorities for MSBA. 

And Mr. O'Connell is requesting that the Committee review the ALICE program ("Alert, Lockdown, Inform, Counter, Evacuate") (you've seen this written up as the one where kids throw things at active shooters).

"The Urgency of Excellence" on the Worcester Superintendent Search

The report that's being issued this morning in connection with this event is here. 
Full house...maybe fifty or more people here...they're setting out more chairs
Jennifer Davis Carey comments that it's nice to see so many "education nerds" this morning
report represents "a significent body of work"
"urgency and import that we feel is at hand with this transition point"
report falls into two parts: Worcester as a community, as a Gateway City
second is what we need as a community going forward
strengths of the district, growth over time, critical needs of the district
"core strategic" planning of the district
calls for development of a strategic plan

Finance and Operations meets Monday at 5

You can find the agenda here.
It's time for the first quarter budget update. First, note that once the city does the tax recap, the School Committee will have to reduce the budget by half a million dollars. 
And why?
Charter school reimbursement is underfunded. It was underfunded in the budget we passed, but it got worse, rather than better. I ranted about this briefly yesterday on Twitter, but to recap: A district that serves 25,000 students is going to have to cut their budget by half a million dollars in November/December, because the state can't get its act together enough to fulfill their basic LEGAL responsibilities on school funding. Don't talk to me about "stealing possible" when this is your funding pattern.
In other quarter one news:

• personal services is up quite a bit, as we continue to bring more special ed services back in house, as the Recovery High School tuition is up (good for other reasons, but tough here), and as translation services continue to rise. This is also the line item where the superintendent search is budgeted.
• workers' comp is already projected at a deficit. Again. We'll take Mr. O'Connell's item on a workers' comp update with the quarterly report, but the answer, again, is that we aren't budgeting enough here. 
• nurses are also projected at a deficit, because we need subs when they're sick.
• and in a possible (I'll ask) "chickens coming home to roost," you might remember that we didn't replace school buses on the same schedule this year, because our city capital funding remains SO tight. Guess what's up? Contractual transportation services. If we don't pay for the capital expense, we'll pay for it in operational expenses.

Note also the that the Title I grant being up means that some IAs and preK teachers could be moved back to grant funding, which will assist with some of the above. 

The full rundown on where accounts are currently projected is here. 

In other "clearning the decks" items, we have the South High pool item, which is recommended to referral to the South High building committee (do we have a South High building committee?).

We have the request to see the bid on Lake View's asphalt repairs; the proposal is we get it in a Friday letter.

The ads on buses item is on with a recommendation that it be filed. It turns out that looking at an external object, like an ad, is more distracting than putting on makeup or dialing a phone when you're driving, which is dangerous enough. So putting a known danger on buses to make relatively little money...

We also have the conversation we started during budget on how much of security spending comes out of the facilities budget (which is funded at 61% of foundation).

The proposed 2016-17 and 2017-18 calendars are on here, along with comments from schools. Two notes: both years would start with a full five day week for students over the week that goes from August to September (with teachers coming in for two days the week before), followed by Labor Day (and thus a four day week); there is no change to vacations, though considerable interest expressed in a March break. 

Finally, the Foundation Budget Review Commission's final report is on the agenda. More, I suspect, to come on that. 

5 o'clock, 4th floor of the administration building or livestreamed on the web!

You may have heard we're having a meeting this week

The Worcester School Committee meets in public session this week at 7 (or so). We have an executive session scheduled for 6. You can find our agenda here.

We will be taking up two items in Executive Session:

• Executive session pursuant to Mass. G.L. c. 30A, Section 21(a)(2) to conduct strategy sessions in preparation for negotiations with nonunion personnel and contract negotiations with nonunion personnel, Superintendent’s Employment Contract.
• Executive session pursuant to Mass. G.L. c. 30A, Section 21(a)(2) to conduct strategy sessions in preparation for negotiations with nonunion personnel and contract negotiations with nonunion personnel, Interim Superintendent Employment Contract.

We have several groups coming in to be recognized (including the wonderfully named Spiritually Fabulous Ministries).
The section of the policy manual regarding the work of the School Committee, now on its second hold, is again on the agenda.
The report of the superintendent this week is on our alternative education programs, which has had a grant-funded outside evaluation. Should you have any interest in our programs, it's definitely worth a read.
The EAW is requesting that we open negotiations for successor contracts with Bus Drivers (Aids to the Physically Handicapped), Bus Monitors, Units A &B, Instructional Assistants, Parent Liaisons, ESL Tutors, abd OT/PT Assistants.
We're being informed a few personnel items.
The North High Alumni Association raised money for a van for the school, and so we're planning to thank them for that.
Mr. Monfredo would like to recognize the South High AP Pep Rally.
There's a conference later this month on "Human Rights and Social Studies" that some may be interested in.
We're being asked to accept a donation from Shaw's to McGrath Elementary of $400.
Mr. Monfredo is recommending that schools share best practices to improve school climate and parent involvement.
Mr. Monfredo is looking to schedule meetings with the delegation.
We're being asked to accept a donation of $250 from JVE for Tatncuk Magnet.
Mr. Foley is calling to our attention the work of the Unified Theater.
Yes, I've been selected for the 2015 the All-State School Committee...
Mr. O'Connell is requesting any update on the school security audit (which we got on Friday).
We're being asked to accept an anonymous donation of $5000 and a $100 donation from Kate Toomey to Tatnuck Magnet.
We're being asked to approve prior fiscal year payments to psychologists of $77.63 and $39.68, respectively.
Miss Biancheria would like a report on the Recovery High School.
Mr. Monfredo wants to talk about Family Literacy Month.

Finally, there are three from Mayor Petty:

• Request that the Administration ask the purchasing agent to prepare documents for a Request for Proposal for a search firm for the selection of the next Superintendent of the Worcester Public Schools.
• To consider selection of Dr. Marco Rodrigues as Interim Superintendent of Schools.
• To approve the timeline for the selection of the new Superintendent of Schools.

Executive session at 6; public session scheduled for 7, at City Hall or livestreaming online.

Feasibility for South High!

South High is IN for Feasibility as of this morning's MSBA Board meeting!