MINUTES
OF A REGULAR MEETING OF
THE
BOARD OF EDUCATION
THE
METROPOLITAN SCHOOL DISTRICT OF DECATUR TOWNSHIP
MARION
COUNTY, INDIANA
A regular meeting of the Board of Education of The Metropolitan School District of Decatur Township, Marion County, Indiana, was held at the Decatur Central High School Auditorium of said Board of the School Corporation, 5251 Kentucky Avenue, Indianapolis, Indiana on February 5, 2002, and was called to order at 7:00 p.m. local time.
The meeting was called to order by Mr. Edward Harrell, President of the Board of Education. All five Board members were present.
Mr. Edward Harrell announced that a student proclamation would be presented prior to Patron Comments. He added that patrons would also have an additional opportunity to make comments following the presentation on the building program.
Dr. Moore asked Decatur Middle School student, Zach Burris, to come forward in recognition of being named state winner of the tee shirt design contest for the 2001-02 Young Hoosier Book Award Program. Mr. Harrell presented a proclamation to Zach who was accompanied by his parents, and principal, Tom Carney.
Ms. Cheryl McCullah, 4050 Harmony Drive, spoke to the Board concerning mold at Stephen Decatur Elementary. She said that she is a daycare provider and the students she cares for who attend the school have allergy symptoms. She asked why taxes are so high, but there is no heat at the school and it’s in need of repairs. Mr. Stinson said that tests for mold and air quality had been done throughout the building. He said that one wall was being taken down immediately and reconstructed because of mold, but the air quality tests were clear. He added that a structural engineer had also evaluated the building and said that it was safe.
Ms. Terri Jackson, 3442 Bowen Place, addressed the Board regarding the lack of handicap accessibility to parts of Stephen Decatur Elementary, citing the Rehabilitation Law of 1973. Ms. Sandy McGee, 4429 Standish Drive, told the Board that many things needed to be done at Stephen Decatur.
Mr. John Scott, 5224 Honeycomb Lane, said that he had reviewed the information presented to the Decatur Civic Council regarding the School Corporation’s building plans. As a result he was troubled and insulted that the information contained incorrect assumptions. This led him to believe that since this was an election year, the two board members involved were spreading this political propaganda and trying to scare the retired population in Decatur Township. In conclusion he thanked Mr. Stinson for having the courage to make things better for the community.
DECATUR PATRON
COMMENTS (continued):
Ms. Angila Plummer, 3043 W. Mooresville Road, told the Board that she had recently spent $90.00 on medical bills for her daughter due to the mold problem at Stephen Decatur. She also listed other concerns about heat, security, and safety.
Jim Thompson, a local businessman, commended the Civic Council and Ken Bartlett for helping him solve a problem with the location of his business. He also said that he and fifteen of his employees had recently distributed the fliers in the township with revised information on the School Corporation building programs.
Mr. Robert Schutte, a Stephen Decatur teacher, spoke to the Board about the building conditions at Stephen Decatur. Mr. Harrell made a statement to the patrons who were concerned about Stephen Decatur Elementary, saying that none of the Board or administrators were opposed to updating the building.
Ms. Shannon Maled, 1304 Malvia Avenue, addressed the Board saying that she lived in Warren Township and was looking for a new home. She also said that the decision the Board made tonight on building schools would make the difference in her decision of whether or not to move to Decatur Township.
Ms. Mary Koscielniak, a nurse at the Early Childhood Center, asked what the Board was going to do about overcrowding and making schools safer. Ms. Lucy Hunter, 5331 North Port Drive, told the Board that she had bought a home in May and her two daughters attended the Early Childhood Center. She was concerned about the sewer smell in the building and the lack of heat in the cafeteria and library.
Mr. Brown moved that the Regular Session minutes from January 8, 2002, be approved as presented. Mr. Taylor seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously.
PROGRAM
Mrs. Sullivan introduced Gary Pellico who gave an update on the progress of the Challenger Center Project. He said that the feasibility study has been approved by the National Challenger Center and now the application process would begin. He explained the timeline with a projected opening for the fall of 2003. He also gave an update on the Edventure Lab which will be installed in May and be open for the 2002-2003 school year.
Mr. Stinson recommended approval of the proposed 2002-2003 school year calendar. Mr. Brown made a motion that the 2002-2003 school year calendar be accepted. Mr. Huffman seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously.
Mr. Stinson updated the Board on the progress of the community meetings that have been held as part of the systemic change process. He was very pleased with the community involvement and the dialogue that was taking place. He noted that the next scheduled meeting would be held at Stephen Decatur Thursday, February 7, 2002, and another meeting would be scheduled at the Broadway United Methodist Church.
PROGRAM (continued):
Mr. Joe Preda asked the Board to consider a seven period schedule and listed the many reasons it would benefit the students. Mr. Stinson said that he thought the opportunity for more ISTEP remediation in students’ schedules was important because of the upcoming change in the ISTEP testing. Board members asked questions about the impact the schedule change would have on the grading system, students failing and retaking beginning math and English classes, and increasing required graduating credits to fifty-five. Mr. Preda assured them that these topics were being addressed by the P.L. 221 Committee. Mr. Taylor made a motion that the seven period schedule be approved as presented. Mr. Brown seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously.
STAFF REPORT
Dr. Moore presented the Staff Report for the Board’s approval. Dr. Andrews made a motion that the Staff Report be approved as presented. Mr. Brown seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously.
Mr. Rather presented claims 3420 through 3673 for the Board’s approval. Mr. Brown moved the claims be accepted as listed. Dr. Andrews seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously.
Mr. Rather presented information on leasing portable classrooms to the Board. Mr. Stinson added that the Corporation was considering leasing three or four units now to use at West Newton Elementary. He said that leasing, with a three-year commitment, was more reasonable than purchasing the units and a proposal would be made at the next Board meeting.
Mr. Charles Coleman, Decatur Township Assessor, came forward to clarify his position on information presented in the Mooresville Times, January 30th, and at a recent Civic Council meeting by Dr. Andrews and Mr. Harrell. He said that the information was incorrect and thought it was wrong to scare the public in this way. He explained the process for reassessing land values and then answered Board member questions.
Mr. Marty Larch, a Decatur Township businessman, gave a presentation on the importance of schools to the community. He said that he believed that good schools did attract homebuyers, which raised property values and benefited all in the community including empty nesters and retirees. He also said that we are more effective when we use good advisors and consultants in planning for the future, and that we should trust these people to do the best job they can do.
Mr. Stinson thanked the community and staff for all of their support during the past week when his mother passed away.
Ms. Collette Irwin-Knott of H.J. Umbaugh & Associates came forward to read a prepared statement refuting information published in the newspaper that described a $749 increase for homeowners due to reassessment. Since the implication was that this was based upon the financial information provided by her firm, she wanted to clarify any misrepresentation of numbers used from their report. Said statement being made a part of the minutes by being attached to and immediately
OPERATIONS
(continued):
following these minutes. Ms. Irwin-Knott then responded to Board member’s questions regarding her financial report.
Andy McNeeley and Tom Neff of SchenkelShultz, as well as Steve Greene and Tim Davis of Sheil Sexton addressed the Board. Their presentation showed future facility needs, comparing the building of two new elementaries versus a new 5-6 building. The presentation also included an explanation of the quality levels of renovation for the elementaries and the cost impact. Mr. Brown and Mr. Harrell asked questions about Stephen Decatur’s renovation. Dr. Andrews asked about the student population numbers used in the facility needs study and referred to the growth study completed by Dr. Ivan Wagner. She questioned Mr. Neff why previous estimates for needed repairs were 1.6 million dollars which seemed reasonable and now estimates were so much higher. Mr. Neff said at that time that was the amount of money with which the district had given them to work. Dr. Andrews responded that you don’t spend money because someone says you can borrow it. She asked if the Challenger Center was totally funded by donations. Mr. Stinson responded that everything is funded by donations and the Corporation provides the building with an existing or donated facility. Dr. Andrews said that we could not frivolously spend money and raise taxes, and that it was a big step to go $25,000,000 into debt. Mr. Davis explained the costs of renovation versus new facilities.
Sid Baker of City Securities gave information to the Board regarding the school’s assessed value and the tax impact on homeowners with a $50,000,000 bond issue. He responded to Board members questions.
Mr. Harrell stated that any patrons who wished to comment could do so at this time.
Mr. Steve Rink, 6245 Trotter Road, said that he applauded those Board members that were concerned about taxes. He said that a decision should be based on needs. Norma Jean Graves, 4550 Rainbow View Drive, expressed her concerns about overcrowding in the schools and the importance of good schools for our students. She said that as a single parent she did not look forward to having taxes raised, but considered the new facilities as needs, not wants.
Mr. Tom Barnes, 6324 S. High School Road, thanked Board members for all of their hard work. He said that buildings did not teach students, but teachers are what counted. Mr. Tim Kilbourne, 8121 Milhouse Road, voiced concerns that people outside of the district were sending students to Decatur which could be contributing to the overcrowding. He also said that development in Decatur was growing because of Ameriplex and we need to build better schools. He said that everyone should push for impact fees and businesses should not get tax abatements.
Mr. Mark Richter, 7308 Jackie Court, said that it was not good to use more than one architect and contractor, and that people need to be accountable. Mr. Kenneth Bartlett, 8121 W. Mooresville Road, said that he served on the Growth for Education Committee and had two grandchildren attending school in the district. He said that the nature of the school building does not equate achievement. He continued by saying that school buildings should be adequate safe institutions but beyond that success rests with the education.
OPERATIONS
(continued):
Ms. Kelli Ipock, 6330 Kellum Drive, expressed her concerns about class size. She said that building cosmetics don’t affect test scores, but smaller classes do. Mr. Tim Cox, teacher and resident of the district, said that he was embarrassed about the false information being put out in the
District and said that although buildings don’t teach kids, they do help. He expressed his desire for a vote and action to be taken concerning the building program.
Ms. Patti Gault, 3241 Collier Street, said that she agreed that buildings do not educate the child but teachers are in cramped classrooms with no storage space. She expressed her embarrassment because of the School Board and the Mooresville Times. She also said Stephen Decatur students deserve what the students in the other schools have. An unidentified patron said that overcrowding at Stephen Decatur could be due to students attending there because that is where their babysitters lived.
Mr. Robert Schutte, a Stephen Decatur teacher, again addressed the Board emphasizing that it was time to make a decision on the building program now. Mr. Phil Webster, Decatur High School teacher and resident of the district, spoke about the appearance of the High School. He said that students do not feel good about themselves in comparison to other districts because of the appearance of the building.
Ms. Angila Plummer, 3047 W. Mooresville Road, again addressed the Board regarding concerns she had about her daughter’s health and the health of the teachers at Student Decatur. Mrs. Janet Larch, principal of West Newton Elementary, spoke in response to remarks made earlier by Mr. Bartlett.
Mr. Stinson asked for direction from the Board regarding the building program. Mr. Brown responded that it had been a long process in determining the architects and managers for the building program and he believed that we should look to the administrators for direction and support the Superintendent’s recommendation.
Dr. Andrews said that people could criticize the numbers that she had been using to calculate cost impact of the school building program to the township, but she didn’t see anyone else coming up with numbers. She emphasized focusing on need not “pie in the sky” and the impact that the building program would have on the whole community. She continued by saying that we need to be prudent now or we would have people all over the township losing homes; that now was critical and long-term needs should not be dismissed for short-term needs. Mr. Taylor said that we need numbers, but not Dr. Andrews’ numbers and that something should be done now.
Mr. Huffman said that he had taught for thirty-five years and lived in Decatur all of his life. His decision to run for school board had been prompted when he saw a letter to the editor concerning the school board’s micromanagement of the School District. After the election the new Board organized and agreed to function as a team in a more professional manner. He said, although progress had been made, the Board had been blindsided at a recent meeting when the teachers’ contract was up for consideration. Dr. Andrews had read a two-page statement with misrepresentations and then Mr. Harrell also criticized the contract. Mr. Huffman also spoke of the constant criticism of the Board authorized Growth for Education Committee. Its composition, function, motives and conclusions have been questioned and the Committee’s findings and efforts forgotten. He said the latest examples of Dr. Andrews’ and Mr. Harrell’s unprofessional and
OPERATIONS
(continued):
unethical activities occurred at a recent Civic Council meeting. They presented their own building program plans although the Board had not heard what was recommended by Mr. Stinson. He continued by saying that the estimates and numbers used were based on those Board members’ personal extrapolations. He said that the newspaper article and editorial which followed made it appear as if they were the lone guardians of reason against the Superintendent, Administration, Growth for Education Committee and remaining Board members, who were bent on sending the Township into bankruptcy. These scare tactics have made current and future growth decisions difficult to make. He said let the process work- let the Superintendent and administrators do their job and the Board deliberate after gathering accurate information. He said that more work sessions should be held to hear all segments of the township and then the Board should deliberate what is in the best interest first of all for students, and then parents and patrons. He said that our children and grandchildren’s future depend on quality education, schools, and leadership. He concluded that the us versus them mentality does not work for kids and it won’t work for school boards.
Mr. Harrell said that he had lived in the township for fifty years and attended Stephen Decatur Elementary, Decatur Middle School, and the High School. He said that the goal was not to be adversarial but to do what is best for the community. Whether we repair Stephen Decatur and West Newton, or build a 1-6 or a 5-6 building, the point is to serve the community, not dictate to it.
Mr. Stinson spoke to the Board saying that when he was hired as Superintendent he was given two charges. The first being to move the District forward and operate in a spirit of collaboration. His philosophy was that when people work together and build consensus they will have a better product. Secondly, he was asked to address the facilities and he began with the collaborative approach to put a plan together with input. He said that he would like to make a recommendation that followed the work of the Growth for Education Committee. He wanted a renovation that reflected how we educate children today. Mr. Stinson stated that there were a lot of unknowns but we use our best judgment.
Mr. Brown made a motion to allow the Superintendent to make a recommendation for a building plan. Mr. Huffman seconded the motion. Dr. Andrews questioned if it was necessary to make a motion to allow the Superintendent to make a recommendation. The motion carried unanimously.
Mr. Stinson recommended to the Board that a new 5-6 intermediate building be constructed. It would be a dual connected building large enough to accommodate 450 students with room for growth, but not to exceed 650 students. He said that the 5-6 building might be an appropriate location for the Challenger Center. His recommendation included that Stephen Decatur and West Newton Elementaries be renovated at a Level IV according to the architect’s recommendation. He continued that he would like to look for sections to work in an alternative school. He said that a long-term plan should be in place that also addresses the needs of the High School and that each year the Board would revisit and evaluate. His recommendation was not to exceed a cost of $50,000,000. In conclusion he said that he believed this provided for the basic needs of kids of today and was not pie in the sky. Mr. Brown made a motion that the building recommendation by Mr. Stinson be approved. Mr. Taylor seconded the motion. The motion carried by the following vote: Mr. Brown, Mr. Taylor, and Mr. Huffman voted “yes”; Dr. Andrews and Mr. Harrell voted “no”.
OPERATIONS
(continued):
Mr. Stinson said that he would like to present a timeline for the building program at the next work session, scheduled for Wednesday, February 27, if it was agreeable to the Board. It was the consensus of the Board to hear a timeline for the building program.
There were no Board member comments.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business to come before the Board of Education at this time, Mr. Harrell declared the meeting adjourned.
Edward D. Harrell Donald L. Huffman
Larry L. Taylor Patricia C. Andrews
David B. Brown
February 5, 2002
Mr. Don Stinson and
Members of the Board of Education
Metropolitan School District of Decatur Township
5275 Kentucky Avenue
Indianapolis, Indiana 46221
Dear Mr. Stinson and Members of the Board:
At a Board workshop on December 13, 2001, the Board asked our firm to provide financial information regarding the feasibility of making capital improvements. Specifically, the Board requested we prepare information regarding the debt capacity, affordability of making capital improvements, and the impact of TIF, desegregation, and reassessment.
Our financial feasibility study was presented at a Board workshop on January 24, 2002. The schedules and graphs contained within the report covered a variety of topics. However, no schedule within the report quantified the impact of reassessment. In fact, in the presentation that evening I specifically noted that while reassessment is occurring due to the courts establishing that the previous method of assessment was unconstitutional, it was simply not possible to calculate the impact of reassessment due to legislative changes, etc. In fact, after the presentation that evening a Board member again requested that we attempt to calculate the reassessment impact. I again said that I did not think it was possible to calculate accurately at this point in time.
Consequently, I was extremely disturbed to see the information published in the local newspaper, which described a $749 increase for homeowners due to reassessment, especially since there was an implication that this amount was based upon financial information we had provided. Please know that this amount of reassessment increase was not contained within our report or my presentation. The amounts contained within the written piece entitled “Important Tax Information for Decatur Residents”, were not prepared by our firm, nor did we review, or confirm the accuracy of such information.
It was very evident from the January Board workshop that there is a variety of opinions regarding how the School District should move forward in making capital improvements. This is not an unusual situation. However, our report and presentation were prepared factually and objectively. Thus, I would respectfully ask that such information not be extrapolated to fit the individual desires of certain Board members. My hope is that this “misrepresentation of the financial facts” will only encourage Board members, administrators, school patrons, and taxpayers to focus on accurate, conservative, and responsible financial data. This is such an important opportunity for the children of Decatur Township Schools. The Decatur Township community is counting on the Board and the administration to make the necessary decisions in a professional manner based upon accurate financial data.
Respectfully Submitted,
H.J. UMBAUGH & ASSOCIATES
MINUTES OF A
SPECIAL MEETING OF
THE BOARD OF EDUCATION
THE METROPOLITAN SCHOOL DISTRICT OF DECATUR TOWNSHIP
MARION COUNTY, INDIANA
A special meeting of the Board of Education of The Metropolitan School District of Decatur Township, Marion County, Indiana, was held at the usual meeting place of said Board in the Administrative Offices of the School Corporation, 5275 Kentucky Avenue, Indianapolis, Indiana on February 27, 2002, and was called to order at 7:00 p.m. local time.
The meeting was called to order by Mr. Edward Harrell, Board President. All five Board members were present.
Mr. David Rather presented a recommendation for purchase of security vehicles. Mr. Taylor made a motion that the recommendation for purchase of security of vehicles be approved as presented. Mr. Brown seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously.
There being no further business to come before the Board of Education at this time, Mr. Brown made a motion that the meeting be adjourned. Mr. Taylor seconded the motion. Mr. Harrell declared the meeting adjourned.
Edward D. Harrell Donald L. Huffman
Larry L. Taylor Patricia C. Andrews
David B. Brown