BOARD OF EDUCATION January 22, 2007 Administration Center ...board.sps.lane.edu/schedule_2006-07/2006_Packets/BrdPkt_012207.… · D. Board Communication & DeFranco E. Superintendent

BOARD OF EDUCATION

January 22, 2007

Administration Center Boardroom 525 Mill Street

Springfield, OR 97477

6:00 p.m. Executive Session (Non-Public)

under ORS 192.660(2)(d) Negotiations and ORS 192.660(2)(e) Real Estate

7:00 p.m. Board Meeting AGENDA TAB 1. Call Meeting to Order and Flag Salute

2. Recognition: School Board Appreciation Month

3. School Presentation: Springfield High School Jazz Band Springfield High School Youth Vision 4. Public Comments (Maximum time 20 minutes: Speakers will be limited to 3 minutes and may not yield their time to other speakers.)

5. Consent Agenda A. January 8, 2007 Board Minutes 1 B. Personnel Action, Resolution #06-07.029 Roger Jordan 2

C. Out of State Trip, THS Band/Orch, Res. #06-07.030 Bruce Smolnisky 3 D. Out of State Trip, SHS Cheer, Res. #06-07.031 Bruce Smolnisky 4 E. Out of State Trip, SHS Band/Orch, Res. #06-07.032 Bruce Smolnisky 5 F. Financial Statement Brett Yancey 6

6. Action Items A. Board Policies, Sections C & D, Res. #06-07.033 Steve Barrett 7 B. Response to Management Letter, Res. #06-07.034 Brett Yancey 8 C. Contingency Transfer, Resolution #06-07.035 Brett Yancey 9

7. Reports and Discussion A. Student Communication B. A3 Program Status Report Rob Hess & Mike Fisher

C. Bond Update Barrett, Yancey, Lindly, D. Board Communication & DeFranco E. Superintendent Communication

8. Other Business

9. Next Board Meeting: February 12, 2007, 7:00 p.m. 10. Adjournment

In accordance with ORS 192.630, Springfield School Board meeting facilities are accessible to persons

with disabilities, and with sufficient notice, to hearing impaired individuals. (Please note: All proceedings will be recorded.)

January 8, 2007 Page 1 of 16

SPRINGFIELD PUBLIC SCHOOLS SCHOOL BOARD MEETING SPRINGFIELD, OR 97477 MONDAY, JANUARY 8, 2007 5:00 P.M.

MINUTES 10/ A work session was held to discuss bond projects. The meeting was held in the first floor conference room of the district Administration Center beginning at 5:00 p.m. Board members in attendance included Garry Weber, Jonathan Light, Laurie Adams, Al King and Bill Medford. Others identified in attendance included Nancy Golden, Steve Barrett, Jeff DeFranco, Tom Lindly, Brett Yancey, Karen Lewis, Greg James, John & Judy Svoboda, Nancy Schmidt, Laura Pavlat, Joan Bolls, Alison Covey, Will Lewis, Rob Hess, Yvonne Atteberry, Roger Jordan, Keith Hollenbeck, Lottie Duey, Bruce Smolnisky, Sheryl Cramer, Bernie Burson, Sarah Ranjbar, and Kathy Cole. Steve Barrett introduced Tim Woodley, Director of Operations for the West Linn-Wilsonville School District, who had previously worked in the Springfield School District as the project manager for the successful 1994 school bond election. Mr. Woodley was invited to offer the benefit of his expertise to the discussion. Mr. Barrett referenced a handout that showed the timeline of tasks that would have to be completed so that two new schools could be opened in fall 2009. He emphasized that the first step, selection of an architect, would need to begin immediately. Mr. Barrett noted that there were other building projects in the queue besides the new buildings, plus the usual number of work orders (approximately 8,000) each year. All this would mean a very full calendar for facilities staff and others for the next three years. Brett Yancey asked Mr. Woodley to discuss the relative merits of Construction Manager/General Contractor (CM/GC) or Design Bid Build (DBB) as processes for getting the two buildings constructed. His remarks are summarized below:

Design Bid Build Construction Mgr./Gen.Contractor

Buying a building Buying contracting services Linear: Complete design, out to bid, award to contractor, building built

Less linear: Can select contractor sooner, can start without complete design

Can have change orders, unforeseen costs Guaranteed maximum cost (usually priced higher to allow for unknowns)

Each stage bid separately Negotiated management fee, often a percentage of total cost

Standard process for a public agency. Need exemption from Attorney General’s public contracting rules

Do not need to justify using Need to make public record as to why using this method (save time, save money); must provide assessment at end of whether goals were achieved

Usually less costly Can save time

Project management done by district Project management done by general contractor; however, must be carefully monitored by district

With bid, costs cannot change as construction expenses increase Costs increase as expenses increase over time

Mr. Woodley said he always used the DBB method because he felt it produced the best product and was a publicly accepted process. He strongly recommended devoting a significant amount of staff resources to


managing the project, noting that a good project manager could make back the cost of his/her salary with a good negotiated change order or an advantageous agreement with the city. Mr. King asked about including “green” building standards in the project. Mr. Woodley said the standard was LEED (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design), but he had not used it because it was “not worth the effort.” He felt money could be used in certain places to produce lasting energy efficiencies without going to the extent of getting LEED certification. He noted that schools had to adhere to an energy code within the building code anyway. Mr. Barrett said that LEED certification would drive up costs and recommended that the construction adhere to LEED standards to the degree possible without incurring significant additional expense. Regarding project staffing, Mr. Woodley said salaries could be charged against the bond. Mr. Yancey said that any internal or external staff devoted 100 percent to the bond could be paid for out of bond proceeds. Mr. Woodley concluded his remarks by suggesting that the district “get the word out” and promote its projects to contractors. Mr. Yancey then led a discussion regarding the choice to have one architect for both buildings or separate architects for the two, noting that staff leaned toward using only one architect. Factors considered were time and cost savings, the effect of site on design expense, the merits of smaller vs. larger firms, and the impact on staff time. It was pointed out that some smaller firms were forming alliances with one another in order to take on larger projects. Mr. Yancey then stepped the members through the process for selecting an architect. Mr. DeFranco pointed out that savings could be realized in the areas of customer relations and consistency of systems (technology, heating and ventilating, and other specifications particular to district buildings). Mr. Yancey reported on the impact of the bond projects on staff and emphasized the tight timelines. Mr. DeFranco stressed the need to open the new schools in September vs. even one month later. In response to a question from Mr. Light, Mr. DeFranco said the timeline reflected what could reasonably be achieved. Tom Lindly reported on meetings of the Bond Steering Team (comprising Mr. Barrett, Mr. DeFranco, Mr. Yancey and himself) and said a major challenge they identified was administrative oversight of the project. He said the team’s role was to establish, monitor and maintain the timeline and the priorities for the different projects, to monitor progress and report back to the board and the community, to ensure compliance to district policies and procedures, and to monitor expenses. He referred the members to organization charts for both the “bond basics” and “new schools” projects. Regarding project management for bond basics and the new schools, Mr. Lindly said they were looking at using existing resources to manage them. He referenced the project management team of John Saraceno, Construction; Greg James, Purchasing; Will Lewis, Finance; and Brad McEntire, Technology. This group has met and put together the prioritized list of projects. They would also coordinate between bond projects and new construction to ensure that upgrades and new systems were consistent overall. Chair Weber was concerned about pulling management resources away from the current list of repairs to devote time to “bond basics.” He wondered if some of that would come under the purview of the Project Manager. Mr. Barrett said that the majority of repairs were contracted out and that management time spent varied significantly. Mr. Lindly said that “Project Manager” actually meant “project management services” and could refer to one or two people or a part-time person. He acknowledged that there would be a lot of work in the early planning stages. For the “new schools” project, he said one of the ways to manage the impact on staff was to use temporary staff (one FTE each in Purchasing and Accounting and possibly some clerical support). He said they hoped to have a project manager on staff by the end of the month, noting that project management was key to cost containment.


Mr. Lindly concluded by asking for board representation for the project manager and architect selection processes. He also suggested that the members might want to participate in site visits for the schools. Jeff DeFranco reported on the expected communication process for the duration of the bond projects. Plans included:

Standing reports of progress at board meetings that would create a public record Monthly written updates from the project manager and the Superintendent’s Leadership Team Regular communication with school staff Reports of key milestones Community-wide mailing to apprise of progress – at least once a year Online pictures and reports of progress Messages to communities directly affected by new schools

Ms. Adams said she was looking forward to the “hoopla” and the gold shovels, remarking that the community enjoyed the celebratory aspects of new projects. Mr. Barrett said gold shovels would be arranged. The presentations being concluded, Mr. Barrett polled the members on their leanings on the issues. There was general agreement that they would go with one architect, but leave options open depending on the quality of the responses to RFPs. Members also preferred to go with the Design Bid Build process. There was some discussion about sites at Thurston and sidewalk requirements and other potential infrastructure requirements by the city. Mr. Barrett said these issues were being looked into. Mr. King said he would like to see the sites; Mr. Barrett said they would also ask for a neutral expert opinion about which site would be better. Ms. Adams said if they came away from the meeting with a recommendation to build at the current Thurston Elementary site, there would be a collective sigh of relief from the Thurston parents and the community. She said she heard a tremendous amount of input to that effect during the bond election process. After some brief discussion, it was agreed to wait for the third-party report and other information before a decision was made. When asked for comments, Mr. Woodley said it was important to create relationships with architects, contractors, community members and others, and that it was “through those relationships that success will come.” Mr. Barrett thanked Mr. Woodley for attending the work session on short notice. Chair Weber asked if there were “debrief” notes from the last building project. Mr. Barrett said they had everything, and that staff used that information to make the recommendations just heard. The work session was concluded at 6:30 p.m. A Regular Meeting of the Lane County School District No. 19 Board of Education was held on January 8, 2007. 1. CALL MEETING TO ORDER AND FLAG SALUTE The meeting was called to order in the boardroom of the Administration Center at 7:00 p.m. by Board Chair Garry Weber and was followed by the Pledge of Allegiance. Chair Weber said that “Student Communica-tion” would be moved to just before “Public Comments” because the student representatives had a Springfield vs. Thurston basketball game to attend. Attendance Board members in attendance included Garry Weber, Jonathan Light, Laurie Adams, Al King, and Bill Medford. Others identified in attendance included Nancy Golden, Steve Barrett, Adam Koekkoek, Lance Heisler, Brett Yancey, Bruce Smolnisky, Roger Jordan, Jeff DeFranco, Karen Lewis, Tom Lindly, Rob Hess,


Bernie Burson, Lottie Duey, Shadiin Garcia, Kathy Cole, Alison Covey, Judy & John Svoboda, Mike Fisher, Erin Whitlock, Sarah Ranjbar, Ken Raymen, Kittie Yates, Johnny Lake, Robert Scherer, Arwen Moss-DeSpain, Peter Tromba, Sheryl Ott, Dawn Strong, Jeff Butler, Cathy Paine, Sue McNair Gallup, Laura Pavlat, Sheryl Cramer, Rosalynn Jaeger, Nancy Schmidt, Robbin Spraitz, Art Paz, Erin Whitlock, Justin Lindsley, Jay Breslow, Cameron Hewett, Heidi Hewett, Kenny Allen, and Anne Williams of The Register-Guard. 2. RECOGNITION: SCHOOL BOARD APPRECIATION MONTH Superintendent Nancy Golden read the following proclamation in recognition of School Board Appreciation Month:

School Board Recognition Month Proclamation

WHEREAS, school boards create a vision for what students should know and be able to do; WHEREAS, school boards establish clear standards for student performance; WHEREAS, school boards ensure that student assessments are tied to established standards; WHEREAS, school boards are accountable to the community for operating schools that support student achievement; WHEREAS, school boards align school district resources to ensure that students meet standards; WHEREAS, school boards create a climate that supports the philosophy that all children can learn at high levels; WHEREAS, school boards build collaborative relationships based on trust, teamwork and shared accountability; and WHEREAS, school boards are committed to continuous education and training on issues related to student achievement; NOW, THEREFORE, we hereby declare our appreciation to the members of the Springfield School District Board of Education and proclaim the month of January to be School Board Recognition Month. We urge all citizens to join us in recognizing the dedication and hard work of local school board members in preparing today's students for tomorrow's world. Dated this 8th day of January 2007.

Erin Whitlock presented board members with gifts made by the students from Dream Catchers Enterprises at Agnes Stewart Middle School. Gifts included decorative pencil cups and red wooden apple pen holders. Rob Hess presented board members with medicine bags, a traditional Native American gift chosen by Virgil Martin and students from the Indian Education Program. Mike Fisher, head teacher from the Academy of Arts and Academics, introduced students from the digital photography class. The students presented the board with photographs they had taken. Chair Weber said that some described board service as a “thankless” job. He thought it was a very “thank-ful” job, remarking that members often received thanks from the community and those they worked with. 3. SCHOOL PRESENTATION: SPRINGFIELD HIGH SCHOOL YOUTH VISION The presentation was postponed until the January 22, 2007 meeting due to illness. 4. BOARD WORK SESSION SUMMARY Laurie Adams provided a summary of the board’s earlier work session on bond projects. She said they discussed priorities, projects and timelines, and the many things planned for the schools. She acknowledged


Tim Woodley’s contribution to the proceeding, and said the board was still “overwhelmed by the gift the community gave this district” by the bond election. Mr. Weber noted that the district was moving ahead to prepare their Request for Proposal for project management. 9A. STUDENT COMMUNICATION Thurston High student board representative Lance Heisler reported on recent and upcoming activities at Thurston including:

the election of freshman officers; the start of the Act I Festival, a student-run theater program; the wrestling team took first place at the Willamette Invitational in Florence; Thurston beat Marshfield in basketball at Marshfield.

Regarding the proposed charter amendment, Mr. Heisler said he had spoken about the matter to the leadership class and to other students at school. A concern was that a school created for minorities would isolate the minority students instead of dealing with problems in the school. Other concerns were location, since Springfield was “not that big of an area,” and funding. The students liked several aspects of the proposed school, including the extended hours and a curriculum based on multi-culturalism. Springfield High student board representative Adam Koekkoek reported that he had also spoken to a number of students, with similar reactions. Regarding school activities, he reported that basketball and other winter sports had started, noting that Ping Pong was going well. He said Springfield High was in a resting period between Tree of Joy and “Mr. and Ms. Miller.” Mr. Weber thanked the students for their remarks and observed that, whatever the outcome of the game, it would be a win for the Springfield School District. 5. PUBLIC COMMENTS Robert Scherer, 825 McKenzie Crest Dr., Springfield, spoke about the need for additional funding for the Springfield Talented and Gifted (TAG) program. He read a letter he had written to the board, copies of which he later gave to each member. Points included:

Only four hours per week per school for the TAG program, with time used mostly for paperwork, not programs;

Teachers could not be expected to develop special TAG programs on their own; TAG children should be grouped together for exchange of ideas, not spread throughout the school; State-mandated programs for special needs children were funded; a TAG program was also State-

mandated but student needs were not being met; Having a TAG program in the Springfield schools would be preferable to sending TAG students to

alternative schools outside the area. Mr. Scherer said the TAG program was slipping through the cracks. He said the mayor talked of needing to attract people to the community, noting that one of the things employers looked for was a quality education, both at the high end of the spectrum as well as the low end. He asked the board to consider these points when talking about funding. Kenneth Raymen, 2150 Laurie St., #25, Springfield; volunteer in Springfield schools. Mr. Raymen asked the members to consider the “rousing ovation from staff” received by Superintendent Golden after delivering her assessment of achievement and progress in our “already multicultural and multilingual” neighborhood schools. With regard to the proposed ATL charter school, he said if there was community support for such a


school, the proposal would be worth considering. He suggested that the ATL proponents either present their proposal to the 4J school district or open a private school. He thanked Anne Williams of the Eugene Register-Guard for her articles on the proposed school. He hoped the board would “do the right thing” and vote no, saying he did not want to see Springfield neighborhood schools diminished by a charter school. Jay Breslow, 2017 N. McLellan, Portland; member of ATL design team. Mr. Breslow said that if the board approved the proposed charter school, it would open negotiations over the specifics of the charter agreement, during which the school district could stipulate both the conditions and the time line of the ATL implementa-tion. During that phase, many of the questions raised by the district could be resolved, including transporta-tion, special education, building location, admissions and the number of students committed to attending. He noted that many schools gave conditional approvals whereby the charter school had to meet certain deadlines to be fully approved. As an example, he showed a contract between the South Lane School District and a charter school, commenting that it was a “very normal thing” for school districts and charter schools to enter into. Mr. Breslow emphasized that the ATL team was an experienced, dynamic group that wanted to create a partnership that would benefit the entire Springfield community. He said if the board approved the proposal, they would “step out on faith that together we can achieve something incredible.” He added that the negotiations following conditional approval could alleviate the questions of who, where, when and how, but what could be agreed upon was “why.” He listed a number of benefits that would be provided by the ATL and urged the members to vote to create a new school that they would be proud to call their own. Arwen Maas-DeSpain, 437 Lawrence, #1, Eugene; member of ATL design team. Ms. Maas-DeSpain addressed concerns raised in Resolution #06-07.028 (hereinafter “the report”). Regarding location, she said State criteria did not require or expect charter schools to identify location prior to approval of the charter; therefore, lack of location was not grounds for dismissing the charter. She understood concerns based on past difficulties in finding suitable space, but said the group was confident they could secure a location. Funding for the location was expected to come from state funds and from outside. Regarding the issue of “demonstrated sustainable support” for the charter school, she said the team took all comments seriously and felt they had addressed many concerns in their previous testimony and written statements. If the written report was the sole basis for judging support of ATL, she said there were weaknesses in the data presented and reasonable explanations for why ATL did not have a better showing of support. She said 63 respondents could not possibly represent the diversity of Springfield stakeholders, particularly when over half of the respondents were Springfield Public Schools (SPS) staff, which she believed was the result of organized opposition. She added that the report did not summarize positive feedback received during the consideration period and seemed to marginalize positive comments from Eugene residents, even though many of them worked in Springfield. Ms. Maas-DeSpain said that the report did not consider data collected in ATL’s focus groups (mentioned in their proposal). She remarked that the respondents in the focus groups were far more representative of the Springfield community, including SPS administrators, teachers, parents and students. The data collected by ATL was primarily qualitative and overwhelmingly positive in favor of the charter school. Ms. Maas-DeSpain said ATL chose not to do an advertising campaign for the program, opting instead to collaborate with the district to do larger and more scientific surveys of district stakeholders. However, they were denied access to information needed for such surveys so were unable to complete them. Regardless, she said the ATL team was confident that there was support for ATL in Springfield.


Peter Tromba, 1893 Villard St., Eugene; member of ATL design team. Mr. Tromba noted that he was not originally from Eugene, but from Maryland, where towns had been growing together for a much longer period of time. He expressed surprise at the extent of rivalry between close-together towns in Oregon, and said it seemed to him that people in Eugene and Springfield were the same. He told of an earlier time in his friendship with Superintendent Golden when she extolled the virtues of Springfield, and said that when the time came to choose which school district the ATL should be in, he voted for Springfield based on Dr. Golden’s earlier observations. Mr. Tromba said his initial response to Resolution #06-07.028 was to give up, based on its solely negative content. However, the group rallied around the “beauty and idea” of the school, their clarity of vision, and their faith that the board would vote yes. He wished to respond to the section of the resolution dealing with special education costs, saying that the answer to continuously rising costs was to have instruction that was more integrated, more diversified and differentiated, and more focused on the needs of the students. He said that reviewers outside the school district who read the proposal said it was unusual in its focus on assessment, heavy-duty instructional intervention, and pyramid of intervention. He said this kind of charter school was what was needed to reduce costs in districts with innovative ways to serve all students. Mr. Tromba added that the district would likely get a bargain from ATL when they approved it, because they would not need the entire amount allotted for special education to serve that population because ATL would design special instruction in-house. Mr. Tromba echoed Mr. Breslow’s remarks about conditional approval, saying they were willing to bargain about the size and grades of the school. He looked forward to a successful partnership with the district administration. Johnny Lake, 650 Harlow Rd., Springfield; member of ATL design team. Mr. Lake began by emphasizing that he lived in Springfield, then addressed the perception that ATL was for poor and/or minority students. He said the idea did not come from the ATL team, but had circulated around the community to the point that it became stuck to the proposal. Mr. Lake said the ATL proposal was offering “a small piece of an answer to a larger question” and that the question needed to continue to be talked about. He said he often heard people talk about “how nice and quiet Springfield and Eugene and Salem used to be” twenty or thirty years ago, before “people like me – or many of our students ever got here.” He asked if the expectation was that Springfield, or Oregon, or the country would become less diverse. Mr. Lake observed that each generation had to move away from the status quo and say that “this is for our future that we do this, not for our past.” He related a personal anecdote about his African-American grandmother who, though poorly educated, supported and promoted his quest for an education. Mr. Lake said there were reasonable concerns that needed to be addressed, but that avoiding the questions or refusing to engage in discussion was not good. He asked the board to “consider carefully what we do with this school and what we will do in the future with education for our children in Springfield.” Art Paz, 86950 Cedar Flat, Springfield; member, State Board of Education. Mr. Paz said that the ATL proposal was very complex and that, if looked at with detachment, contained many elements that all school districts should support. However, he noted that the original abstract that was submitted to and approved by the Oregon Department of Education indicated that the charter was also going to examine similar programs they could use as case studies and leverage into the proposed program. Mr. Paz compared the abstract to the proposal submitted to the Springfield School Board and said there was a “chasm” between the two, noting that some of the “wonderful things” in the abstract were not articulated in the proposed charter. Mr. Paz said there were a number of ways that charters worked in Oregon, noting that an applicant could come to the State Board of Education and ask them to sponsor a school. He said if the Springfield School Board felt that the ATL was untimely and not appropriate right now, they knew what their resources were,


what programs they were advancing, and what they needed to do to measure the proposal against what the district was doing and its capacity to advance what it did well and take on additional responsibilities. Mr. Paz said there were other options for ATL, including the immediate option of applying to the State Board of Education. He said that at the state level, they would very carefully look at the abstract, the proposal, the physical location, and the numbers. Additionally, they would examine the “alliance of their notions of this special charter school” and how the district may or may not be addressing the issues in their schools. He thought that the proposal was ultimately looking at a case study that “models and changes” all Springfield schools. Mr. Paz concluded by saying he hoped that the school district could take the best of the proposal and review how they might be able to leverage some of the many good ideas therein. 6. CONSENT AGENDA Motion: Mr. Medford, seconded by Ms. Adams, moved to approve the Consent Agenda with the exception of Item C., which was removed for discussion: A. December 11, 2006 Board Minutes B. Personnel Action, Resolution #06-07.024 Roger Jordan recommended that the Board of Directors approve the personnel action for licensed employees as reflected in Resolution #06-07.024 as listed below: New Hires Traci Vaughan

Retirement Kate Burrus Stephen Hertzberg

Resignations Ilene Thames Mara Thygeson

The motion passed unanimously, 5:0. C. Food Service Update Chair Weber asked Mr. Yancey for clarification of changes to the report. Mr. Yancey said he had inadvertently transposed the elementary numbers with the high school numbers under “Average Daily Lunch.” He said the elementary numbers were actually down two percent, meaning that they now needed to focus on food service in the primary grades, whereas they had initially focused on secondary schools for strategic reasons. He cited some plans that were underway to do so, including “Pyramid Pete and the Superfoods”, a tie-in with the Read Across America program and Nutrition Month in March. Mr. Yancey said that food-service focus was going away from a la carte service and more toward balanced, reimbursable meals; these numbers would be reflected in future reports. He added that improvements were being made to the program and that financially, they were breaking even. Speaking to a question from Chair Weber, Mr. Yancey said there had been increased support of the food service program at both Springfield and Thurston High Schools. He also said that the offerings at elementary schools had been evaluated and improvements had been made. Mr. Adams asked about the earlier issue of time spent in line at the Springfield cafeteria. Mr. Yancey said it was addressed during the first month, and that the soon-to-open student lounge would provide another serving area. He encouraged members to visit the school to see the new lounge, which the students were very excited about. Regarding reporting from Chartwells, the school food vendor, Mr. Yancey said they still had a lot of information to reconcile but expected to have a report next month. He said the Chartwells district representative would address the board at that time.


Motion: Ms. Adams, seconded by Mr. Light, moved to approve Item C., Food Service Update. The motion passed unanimously, 5:0. 7. FIRST READING A. Board Policies, Section C & D Steve Barrett recommended that the Board of Directors approve the following board policies as first reading: • CB – Superintendent • CBA – Qualifications and Duties of the

Superintendent • CBG – Evaluation of the Superintendent • CCB – Line and Staff Relations • CCG – Licensed Evaluation – Administrators • CFA – Site-Based Decision Making • CHCA – Approval of Handbooks and Directives • CM – District Annual Report • CPA – Layoff/Recall – Administrative Personnel • DA – Fiscal Management Goal • DBE – Budget Preparation • DBEA – Budget Committee • DBJ – Budget Implementation • DBK – Budget Transfer Authority • DC – Borrowing Funds • DD – Funding Proposals and Applications • DE/DEB/DEC – Revenues from Private, State and

Federal Sources

• DFA – Investment of Funds • DFC – Grants from Private Sources • DFG – Income from Program-Related Sales and

Services • DG – Depository of Funds • DGA – Authorized Signatures • DH – Bonded Employees and Officers • DI – Fiscal Accounting and Reporting • DIC – Financial Reports and Statements • DID – Property Inventories • DJ – District Purchasing • DJB – Petty Cash Accounts • DJC – Bidding Requirements • DJCA – Personal Services Contracts • DJCB – Request for Proposal • DK – Payment Procedures • DLA – Payday Schedule • DLC – Expense Reimbursements

8. ACTION ITEMS To accommodate out-of-town visitors, it was decided to hear Item E after Item A. A. 2005-2006 AUDIT REPORT, RESOLUTION #06-07.024 Brett Yancey recommended that the Board of Directors accept the audited financial reports for 2005-2006 as presented by the firm of Pauly, Rogers and Co., P.C. Mr. Yancey introduced Kenny Allen from the firm of Pauly, Rogers and Co., P.C., and Joan Bolls, the district’s internal auditor, who provided information about the audit process. Ms. Bolls thanked members of the finance team who worked on the report: Alison Covey, Will Lewis, Sheryl Cramer, and Brett Yancey. She directed the board’s attention to particular pages in the report, noting changes in reporting requirements and the addition of trend information. Mr. Allen referenced his company’s Management Report and Executive Summary letters, then highlighted various findings, including the auditors’ findings that the district’s financial statements were “clean,” and that they found no exceptions or issues requiring comment on either state minimum standards or Federal Financial Assistance. He said the district’s books were well-maintained and he commended staff for their help. Mr. Allen said his firm made two recommendations about procedures; these were described in the Management Report. Ms. Adams expressed the board’s appreciation for the district finance staff and their efforts to keep things “on the true straight and narrow” and for managing assets so well. She observed that every audit found so little to change. Mr. Yancey added his thanks to staff and to Ms. Bolls. Motion: Bill Medford, seconded by Mr. Light, moved for approval.


The motion carried unanimously, 5:0. E. ACADEMY OF TEACHING & LEARNING CHARTER SCHOOL DECISION, RESOLUTION #06-07.028 Superintendent Nancy Golden recommended that the Board of Directors consider the information presented in the board resolution, as well as information they have received from community and staff members at the November 20 and December 11 Regular Board Meetings, at the November 27 Public Hearing and Special Board Meeting, as well as written testimony received at the November 27 Public Hearing and written testimony submitted in person and/or by email in making a decision to accept or reject the Academy of Teaching & Learning Charter School proposal. Chair Weber noted that Resolution #06-07.028 was a legal report and was presented in compliance with the law, consisting of seven questions the board was obliged to ask and answer. He said the board had also had “rich conversation” with the design team and with the community and recognized the many positives offered in the proposal, including rigorous curriculum, multicultural and multilingual focus, social justice education, the partnership with Pacific University, and a comprehensive extended day. Nevertheless, the board was required to consider the legal report as well, along with comments from the community, “as qualitative and anecdotal as that may be,” and the focus group results as presented by the ATL team. Chair Weber asked board members to discuss the resolution before making a motion to accept or reject the proposal. Mr. King said he had great respect for the team and the proposal, but that they did not overcome his original concerns about the fragmentation of the student population. He cited the example of “the more active parents” moving their children into alternative schools, thus creating the potential for the other schools to have lower scores for “No Child Left Behind.” He said he preferred the district’s in-source programs to address the needs of the general population that the ATL proposal addressed for a smaller population. For those reasons, he said he would be voting to not move forward with the school. Mr. King told the ATL team they could appeal, but thought a better option would be Lane Education Service District (ESD), where the potential for the program would be county-wide rather than specific to one district. He added that, by statute, they could also work with the State Board of Education. Mr. Light said that after thoroughly reading and re-reading the proposal, having conversations with the team and sitting through the presentations, he felt he understood the vision and mission of the proposal. He said he found many things about the proposal to be very intriguing and innovative, and it was not a question of “why” because the team had communicated their vision very well. Mr. Light said his issue with the proposal was the “impact it would have on the district at this point.” He said the district was doing a tremendous number of things, some of which would overlay what the proposal was trying to do. He cited the A3 school project and the recent successful school bond issue, the impact of which, in terms of staff time devoted to the new building program, created a lot of stress on the district. Mr. Light said he did not know how the board could pass the proposed charter school at this point, observing that you could only put so much stress on a system before it started to crack. Mr. Light said the proposal was very thoughtful and well laid out, and called the design team “outstanding.” He said he would like to have that type of school in the district, but said the window for such a project was not open for the foreseeable future. Mr. Light added that he would entertain the idea “down the road,” perhaps in a different format or for something “in-district,” as he believed it would be an asset to the district. However, he said it had to work for the entire district, and the board had an obligation to the community to make sure that proposals had a good chance for success; and at this point, it would be too much of a distraction for the district.


Mr. Light urged the ATL team not to give up, as he believed there was a need as the world became more diverse. He said he did not see the proposed school as focusing on minorities but as a multicultural experience, which he appreciated. However, he said the benefit to the school district would not be outweighed by the burden of making it succeed. Therefore, he would vote to reject the proposal. Ms. Adams told the design team they were “bright, bright people” and she appreciated getting to meet them and hear some of their thoughts and ideas. She said if the team had come to the board four or five years earlier, that was when the district needed what was being proposed. That was the time they needed a different direction. However, she said the district had “come a long way in the last few years,” citing the example of the Arts Academy, which she termed “a whole new way of thinking for this district.” Ms. Adams referred to the issue raised by an earlier speaker who commented on the TAG programs, observing that the district was indeed letting their “best and brightest” down, and had been for a long time. She talked of the “devastating cuts” that the district had endured over the past several years and hoped that this year they would be able to start adding things back in. Ms. Adams said that in the Springfield School District, things happened best “from the bottom up,” when a need arose and proceeded to solution. She did not think the ATL program would be unsuccessful in the district, but said she was concerned that there had not been more dialogue with the community. Ms. Adams said she agreed with Mr. Paz that there were “so many elements” in the proposal that each school district should embrace, adding that Springfield was already doing many things that had not been done before, making improvements and moving forward. In looking at the research in the proposal, her reaction was that Springfield was “on the same page.” If she did not think Springfield was capable of doing on its own what the ATL team was proposing, Ms. Adams said she would be “more than willing to jump in.” However, she thought the district had proven that it was capable of making improvements and was moving forward at a great rate. She regretted not being able to approve the motion, as she would have enjoyed the opportunity of working with the ATL team. Before closing, Ms. Adams raised the issue of Shelley Smolnisky’s name being brought up during questions from the audience. She termed the occurrence “unfortunate” in that Ms. Smolnisky just happened to work at Pacific University and had to be the one to sign off on the proposal. Ms. Adams said there had been no collaboration between the board and Shelley or Bruce Smolnisky on the proposal. Mr. Smolnisky offered as a point of order that he had asked the school district’s attorney to look into the matter; the attorney determined there was no conflict of interest. Ms. Adams said she appreciated the comments made by the student representatives, calling the remarks “wise and insightful.” She said the students knew a lot about the district and were saying that the district should not go this way right now, a sentiment Ms. Adams agreed with. Mr. Medford agreed that the ATL proposal was good, but there were “a whole lot of things” that he was concerned about, the foremost being the facility. Regarding what he felt was the team’s assertion that, with the help of their realtor, they could have a facility “tomorrow,” he said, “Not in Springfield.” He said they would need 40-60,000 square feet for the 350 to 400 students, and if they had to build, it would be even more expensive than leasing and would thus be a resource issue. He cited “No Child Left Behind,” special education, and staffing as having an impact on resources. Mr. Medford added that the district was already doing a lot of things that were in the proposal, and doing them well. Mr. Medford mentioned the ATL team’s remarks about “negotiating” many of the aspects of the proposed charter school and noted that such negotiation would take “a tremendous amount of staff time.” He pointed out that the district was getting ready to build two new schools that would also require large amounts of staff


time. In conclusion, Mr. Medford said he disagreed with the State approving a school “without the sanction part of it,” (50 percent certified teachers and 50 percent not). He would not support the motion. Mr. Weber said the proposal was “an amazing document by a group of inspired people,” showing the group’s clarity of vision and their passion for the concept of the school. He referenced the report (Resolution #06-07.028) and said the best part about it was the timeline that showed all the times the board had met with the ATL team or shared information. Mr. Weber asked Mr. Paz to please tell his colleagues on the State Board of Education that the charter school proposal process gave the proponents and the district “ample opportunity to dialogue,” and that it was a good process. Mr. Weber, again referencing the report, said that he could not pick one of the seven reasons given as THE reason to deny the proposal, but said that as a “suite” they caused him to conclude that the charter school was not something the district could take on right now. He concurred with other members’ comments that if it were a different time, or if the Springfield Public Schools did not have such a full plate, he could see taking on the proposal and addressing some of the perceived issues through further collaboration. Mr. Weber said if there were opportunities down the road to work with the design team, perhaps through a Lane ESD authorization, he would welcome their expertise to help further Springfield’s already-great efforts, successes and integrated programs. He thanked them for their attendance and testimony. Mr. Smolnisky wished to clarify the state law, saying that if the board voted “no,” the district would have to provide reasons in writing. The ATL team had an opportunity to re-submit an application, then the district would have 20 days to respond. If the proposal was denied a second time, it would go to the State Board of Education. Mr. Smolnisky wanted to make sure the board understood that a “no” vote might be just the first vote. Chair Weber said that the report in the packet was a concise document that paralleled what the State asked for and could serve as the board’s response, along with their remarks at this evening’s meeting. He said it would be up to the design team if they wished to re-submit something, given the written recommendation and the board’s dialogue. As a point of order, Mr. King said he understood that the design team did not have to appeal and be denied a second time to apply to the state board. He believed if they were denied by the district, they were able to apply to the state. For the sake of a “legal track,” Mr. King requested a roll call vote. Mr. DeFranco read some information regarding appeals: “The school board must provide written reasons for the denial and suggest remedial measures. The applicant can re-submit a revised proposal. The school board has 20 days after receiving the re-submitted proposal to either approve or deny.” He said staff would verify this information. Mr. King again said the applicants were able to apply directly to the State Board should they choose to, without appealing to the school district. Shadiin Garcia, a member of the ATL design team, asked as a point of clarity if the report (Resolution #06-07.028) would serve as the official written reasons for the denial. Mr. Weber said he thought that would be included in the motion. Mr. King said the board’s spoken comments would be an official part of the record. Mr. Weber noted that the board members had referenced the report in their comments as an accurate summary of their reasons for denying, should they deny, as there was no motion on the table. Motion: Ms. Adams, seconded by Mr. Medford, moved to deny the Academy of Teaching & Learning Charter School proposal, the denial being based on the findings in the report, Resolution #06-07.028.


Chair Weber called for a roll call vote. The motion carried unanimously, 5:0 B. BOARD POLICIES APPROVAL, RESOLUTION #06-07.025 Steve Barrett recommended that the Board of Directors approve the following board policies: • CG-CGA Special Programs Administration • JHCC Communicable Diseases Motion: Mr. Weber, seconded by Mr. Medford, moved for approval; carried unanimously, 5:0. C. BOARD POLICIES APPROVAL, RESOLUTION #06-07.026 Steve Barrett recommended that the Board of Directors approve the following board policies:

• AB – The People and Their School District

• AC – Nondiscrimination • AD – Educational Philosophy • BA – Board Goals • BB – Board Legal Status • BBA – Board Powers and Duties • BBAA – Individual Board Member’s

Authority and Responsibilities • BBB – Board Elections • BBBA – Board Member Qualifications • BBD – Board Member Removal from

Office • BBE – Vacancies on the Board • BBF – Board Member Ethics • BBFA – Board Member Conflicts of

Interest • BC/BCA – Board Organization/Board

Organizational Meeting • BCB – Board officers • BCD – Board-Superintendent

Relationship • BCF – Advisory Committees to the Board • BCG – Attorney for the District

• BD/BDA – Board Meetings/Regular Board Meetings

• BDB – Special and Emergency Board Meetings

• BDC – Executive Sessions • BDD – Board Meeting Procedures • BDDA – Notification of Board Meetings • BDDD – Quorum at Board Meetings • BDDF – Conduct of Board Meetings • BDDG – Minutes of Board Meetings • BDDH – Public Participation in Board

Meetings • BDE – Public Hearings • BF – Policy Development • BFC – Adoption and Revision of Policies • BFCA – Administrative Regulations • BFD – Board Policy Implementation • BFF – Suspension of Policies • BH/BHA – Orientation of New Board

Memberships • BHD – Reimbursement of Expenses • BI – Board Legislative Program • BJ – Board Memberships • BK – Evaluation of Board Operational

Procedures Motion: Ms. Adams, seconded by Mr. Light, moved for approval; carried unanimously, 5:0. D. APPROPRIATE BOND PROCEEDS, RESOLUTION #06-07.027 Brett Yancey recommended that the Board of Directors recognize the receipt of Series 2006 General Obligation Bond Proceeds and appropriate those funds as designated below: REVENUE: 405-5110-850 Bond Proceeds $14,887,832 EXPENDITURES: 405-2000 Support Services $7,443,916 405-4000 Facilities Acquisition & Construction $7,443,916 $14,887,832


Motion: Mr. Medford, seconded by Ms. Adams, moved for approval; carried unanimously, 5:0. 9. REPORTS AND DISCUSSION B. ASSURANCE STANDARDS Bruce Smolnisky presented the Assurance Standards report that must be completed and presented to the community by January 15 of each school year. Mr. Smolnisky noted that the report serves as the district’s report to the community as required by OAR 581-022-1610(4) and that Springfield Public Schools meets all standards as listed in OAR 581, Chapter 22. C. OREGON DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION STATE REPORT CARDS Rob Hess presented the final state report cards for each of the Springfield Public Schools and reminded board members that the report cards would be mailed to parents by March 30, 2007. He said the ratings had not changed, although there were some minor adjustments. In response to a question from Mr. Weber about the credence given to the scores, Mr. Hess said the report card represented a “box score word” about the school but was not reflective of what was going on, a concept they worked to convey to the community. Mr. Smolnisky said he had seen statistical information that day that showed that almost no parent was moving their child to another school based on AYP (Adequate Yearly Progress). He said a national survey showed that most parents rated their local schools as “very strong,” noting that people tended to rely on their own opinions. Mr. Light observed that the district should just keep on doing what it was doing internally, as those were the numbers that mattered. He felt that state and federal reporting took energy out of the district that could be spent working with students. D. 2007-2008 ACADEMIC CALENDAR ADOPTION PROCESS Bruce Smolnisky provided an overview of the timeline for the 2007-2008 academic calendar. He said he and Mr. DeFranco had been working on a staff survey and hoped later to develop a parent/community survey on collaboration time. This would provide possible models for feedback and staff preferences, and they hoped to have final recommendations for the board in early March. Mr. Smolnisky noted that Thurston’s new trimester model would give a different look to the calendar and could generate questions and answers along the way. Ms. Adams said that the schools needed to be very honest with the parents about what would happen as a result of their input. Mr. Smolnisky said that possible questions might be related to a preference for half-days or a late start, and that the answers could be quantified and brought to the leadership team. There was further discussion about the value of surveys, the type of questions that could be asked, what could be done with the results, and the need to better inform parents about why some changes were needed. E. BOARD COMMUNICATION Mr. Medford and Ms. Adams had no remarks to offer. Mr. Light referenced information he had received from Mr. Smolnisky about the conference count for the fall and noted that some schools had far less parental involvement than others. He suggested looking into ways to boost parental involvement to help the education process, and later handed out an article on the importance of economic background to academic success. Mr. King reported that he, Superintendent Golden, Dr. Hess, Mr. DeFranco and Mr. Paz went to Gresham to a charter school facility run by three different school districts and dedicated to technical training – the Center


for Applied Learning (CAL). Training included health care, technology, and mechanical processes. He said Springfield was going a great job – but CAL was doing a better job. They had a higher matriculation rate, fewer dropouts, and more students moving on to college with high ambitions. Mr. King noted that one thing that surprised him was the school’s emphasis on English, noting it was because of companies wanting employees who had the ability to write reports. Mr. Weber had some items for celebration, including a profile of Nancy Golden in the January issue of The School Administrator magazine, which has a nationwide circulation of 22,000. He also congratulated Springfield Middle School, which had been nominated for the 2007 Celebrating Student Success Award from the Oregon Department of Education for their performance turnaround on the State Report Card. Dr. Golden said there were 21 nominees and that six or seven schools actually received the award. Mr. Weber said the award recipients would be chosen in the spring, and winners would receive a $2,000 check for their school and be honored at a May 11 conference in Portland called “Closing the Achievement Gap.” Chair Weber reminded those present of the Martin Luther King, Jr. celebration on January 15 and said the board would be introduced during the program. Later that evening, Lionel Coleman, a special education teacher at Thurston High School, would be receiving a human rights award at a county-wide celebration being held at Northwest Christian College. Board members were encouraged to attend. The Board Retreat would be held on January 17 from 4:00 to 8:00 p.m. There would be some carryover items on the agenda. Ms. Adams said the board should discuss funding priorities at the retreat. TEAM Springfield Joint Elected Officials Meeting would be held on Saturday, January 20, from 8:00 to 11:30, followed by the dedication of the Willamalane Recreation Center. Mr. DeFranco reminded the members that the Academy of Arts & Academics (A3) was having a Grand Opening and dedication of the building on Tuesday, January 30, from 9:30 to 11:00, with the official dedication taking place at 10:00. The Budget Committee Meeting would be held Thursday, January 11, at 5:30. Mr. Weber said the Mayor of Springfield had given his State of the City address at the Wildish Theater to a capacity crowd. A highlight of the speech was the community’s commitment to education and the city’s partnership with the district, through TEAM Springfield, with education as a priority. The Mayor’s remarks about the partnership of A3 and the Wildish Theater received a round of applause. F. SUPERINTENDENT COMMUNICATION Superintendent Golden said the Mayor’s address began with a PowerPoint presentation accompanied by a song (Van Halen’s “Right Now” – supplied by Mr. DeFranco) that showed all the things happening “right now” in Springfield. Regarding the trip to CAL in Portland, Dr. Golden said the reason Art Paz was asked to go along was the concern about the high school graduation requirements that would be voted on the following week. For the students already on track, the extra credits were not a problem. However, some students who were not meeting standards might need a different kind of education (like CAL offered). The other reason for attending was the work the district had been doing with labor associations to establish an apprenticeship program for students who chose not to go on to college. Dr. Golden said since she has been in the district, she has heard two very important messages: Feedback from parents about preparing students to get into the best four-year colleges, as well as comments from other


parents who advocate more apprenticeship training. She asked the board to keep those two aspects of the community in mind as they moved forward. Dr. Golden said the agenda for TEAM Springfield on January 20 would include the urban growth boundary as well as a “brand” that the team could support. The district would be presenting proposals concerning downtown and the kind of partnerships represented by the A3-Wildish partnership, in light of urban renewal. Another proposal concerned integrated health and social services and entities like the Clothes Closet and the Homeless Center. Dr. Golden announced that her daughter’s baby was due in May (a little boy), and that Mr. Barrett’s daughter was having a baby in March (a girl). 10. OTHER BUSINESS Chair Weber reported that the Thurston basketball team had defeated Springfield, 47 to 43. 11. NEXT BOARD MEETING Chair Weber announced that the next regular board meeting would be held on January 22, 2007, at 7:00 p.m. 12. ADJOURNMENT With no other business, the meeting was adjourned at 9:22 p.m.

RESOLUTION: #06-07.029 DATE: January 22, 2007

PERSONNEL ACTION

RELEVANT DATA: Each month the board of Directors is asked to approve personnel action involving licensed employees. Tonight the Board is being asked to approve the attached list of leaves, retirements and contract renewals for licensed personnel. If the Board of Directors would like to discuss any of these recommendations in executive session, in accordance with ORS 192.660(2)(f) Exempt Public Records, the employee should be identified by the number preceding the name and it will be withdrawn pending further instruction from the Board. Roger Jordan is available for questions. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the Board of Directors approve the personnel action for licensed employees as reflected in this resolution and any addendum presented along with this resolution. Categories include:

• Leaves

• Retirements

• Elementary School Contract Renewals

SUBMITTED BY: RECOMMENDED BY: Roger S. Jordan Nancy L. Golden Director of Human Resources Superintendent

NO NAME CURRENT BUILDING

ASSIGNMENT STATUS FTEEFFECTIVE

DATE NOTES

LEAVES

1 HANKIN, JUDITH HMS CONTRACT TEACHER PT 2006-2007

EXTEND PERSONAL LEAVE FOR REMAINDER OF SCHOOL YEAR

RETIREMENTS

2 AANDERUD, WESLEY BMS CONTRACT TEACHER FT 01/31/07 RETIREMENT

3 LICHENSTEIN, JANET RIVERBEND CONTRACT TEACHER FT 09/30/07 RETIREMENT

CONTRACT RENEWALS

4 BLACKWELL, SARA BRATTAIN CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

5 CHILDERS, SHERI BRATTAIN/RIVERBENDCONTRACT TEACHER PT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

6 COE, ROSEANN BRATTAIN CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

7 DRONZEK, MARY ELLEN BRATTAIN CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

8 FARAH, BRUCE BRATTAIN CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

9 FARBER, SANDRA BRATTAIN CONTRACT TEACHER PT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

10 HOLBROOK, CAROL BRATTAIN/SHS CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

11 KNAPP, DEBORAH BRATTAIN CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

12 KUNSHIER, MITCHELE BRATTAIN CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

13 MCGRAW, MICHAEL BRATTAIN CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

14 MONDON, SUSAN BRATTAIN/CCK/MHWKCONTRACT TEACHER PT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

15 PAYNE, JAMES BRATTAIN CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

16 PETERS, STEFFANIE BRATTAIN CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

17 REED, KATHLEEN BRATTAIN CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

18 TRACEY, LARRY BRATTAIN CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

19 NESS, DIANE CAMP CREEK CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

20 STOCKS, KATIE CAMP CREEK CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

21 WEBER, RITA CAMP CREEK CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

22 BROLSMA, JANE CENTENNIAL CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

23 BUERSTATTE, JANET CENTENNIAL CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

24 BURKE, WAYNE CENTENNIAL/SMS CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

25 COLGAN, DON CENTENNIAL CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

26 FOSTER, KRISTIN CENTENNIAL CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

27 HARTZ-MADSEN, MARIANNE CENTENNIAL CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

28 HAZLEHURST, ALLYSON CENTENNIAL CONTRACT TEACHER PT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

29 HERNANDEZ, KIMBERLY CENTENNIAL CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

30 KING, MARILYN CENTENNIAL CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

31 KINGMAN, STEPHANIE CENTENNIAL CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

32 LANG, BARBARA CENTENNIAL CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

33 LIVELY, TRESA CENTENNIAL CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

34 MOSBY, JOHN CENTENNIAL CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

35 ORSINI, EILEEN CENTENNIAL CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

36 SCHMITT, STEFFANY CENTENNIAL CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

37 SCHROEDER, SHEENA CENTENNIAL CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

38 SMITH, KATHY LYNN CENTENNIAL/MOHAWKCONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

39 WEIRICH, DEBBIE CENTENNIAL CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

40 WHITTINGTON, KATHLEEN CENTENNIAL/MOFFITTCONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

41 BADENOCH, DEANNA DOUGLAS GARDENS CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

42 BROUGHTON, PATRICIA DOUGLAS GARDENS CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

43 BUTTACAVOLI, DORIAN DOUGLAS GARDENS/

WALTERVILLE CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

44 CRAWFORD, JAYLENE DOUGLAS GARDENS CONTRACT TEACHER PT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

45 DRATH, MICK DOUGLAS GARDENS CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

46 ENSEKI, MARJORIE DOUGLAS GARDENS CONTRACT TEACHER PT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

47 FRASZ, KATHRYN DOUGLAS GARDENS CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

48 GEORGE, TRACY DOUGLAS GARDENS CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

49 GLAZIER, JENNIFER DOUGLAS GARDENS CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

50 HUGO, JEREMY DOUGLAS GARDENS CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

51 KIMELBOT, SHARON DOUGLAS GARDENS CONTRACT TEACHER PT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

52 O'DONNELL, MICHAEL DOUGLAS GARDENS/

YOLANDA CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

53 POOLE, CAROLE DOUGLAS GARDENS CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

54 ROGERS, JANA DOUGLAS GARDENS CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

55 SCHLAADT, KATHY DOUGLAS GARDENS CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

56 SIMON, RUTH DOUGLAS GARDENS CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

57 SMITH, CARLA DOUGLAS GARDENS CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

58 TRIPP, JANICE DOUGLAS GARDENS CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

59 WATKINS, RUTH DOUGLAS GARDENS CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

60 GILL, JAMES GOSHEN CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

61 LARSEN, MARY GOSHEN CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

62 MAULDING, MICHAEL GOSHEN CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

63 TUNNELL, KAREN GOSHEN CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

64 VAN VACTOR, JOYCE GOSHEN CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

65 ANDERSON, KATHRYN GUY LEE CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

66 BARRETT, SANDRA GUY LEE CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

67 BORNEMAN, SHARIE GUY LEE CONTRACT TEACHER PT 2077-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

68 CARRIER, ROBYN GUY LEE CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

69 CHOPPY, SUSAN GUY LEE/HMS/PAGE CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

70 DAVIDSON, JILL GUY LEE CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

71 ELISCHER, CAROL GUY LEE CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

72 FRANTZ, JEAN GUYLEE CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

73 GARRELTS, SHEILA GUY LEE CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

74 KEPLER, JOLENE GUY LEE CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

75 LARSON, ANITA GUY LEE CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

76 LEINBACH, ELLEN GUY LEE CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

77 LOVENDAHL, ERIK GUY LEE CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

78 LOVENDAHL, KIMBERLY GUY LEE CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

79 MOFFETT, JUDY GUY LEE CONTRACT TEACHER PT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

80 PENNICOTT, DEBRA GUY LEE CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

81 RIPLEY, MARK GUY LEE CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

82 SAGE, PATTY GUY LEE CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

83 SKOOG, LAURIE GUY LEE CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

84 STRONG, WAYNE GUY LEE/GOSHEN CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

85 VAN EEKEREN, MARIETTA GUY LEE CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

86 YOUNKIN, PATSY GUY LEE CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

87 AYERS, SUSAN MAPLE CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

88 BEACH, THERESA MAPLE CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

89 COLDREN, KAREN MAPLE CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

90 CORETTE, LEE MAPLE CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

91 ESTERBERG, MARY MAPLE CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

92 GALLAGHER, KIMBERLY MAPLE CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

93 GREENLEAF, ZEHRA MAPLE CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

94 HORNFELT, LORI MAPLE CONTRACT TEACHER FT 06/30/09 CONTRACT RENEWAL

95 HUNT, LINDA MAPLE CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

96 KASIK, JOSEPH MAPLE CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

97 KINGSBURY, KATHERINE MAPLE CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

98 PICARD, AGNES MAPLE CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

99 RAWLIN-BRIGHAM, PATRICIA MAPLE CONTRACT TEACHER PT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

100 REPOSA, WAYNE MAPLE CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

101 BERG, TRICIA MOFFITT CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

102 CARLISLE, ANNE MOFFITT/GUY LEE CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

103 CHESTNUT, MARY MOFFITT CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

104 DANZIGER, AMY MOFFITT/RIVERBENDCONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

105 DIXON, CHERYL MOFFITT CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

106 DOPPS, REBECCA MOFFITT CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

107 DRAGGOO, TERI SUE MOFFITT CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

108 GRAY, DEBORAH MOFFITT CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

109 LEWIS, SUZANNE MOFFITT CONTRACT TEACHER PT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

110 MONTGOMERY, JUDY MOFFITT CONTRACT TEACHER PT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

111 MORGAN, KATHLEEN MOFFITT CONTRACT TEACHER PT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

112 QUADE, HELEN MOFFITT CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

113 RICHARDSON, JEANNE MOFFITT CONTRACT TEACHER PT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

114 SCHLOTTER, ELLEN MOFFITT CONTRACT TEACHER PT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

115 WALKER, LARRY MOFFITT CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

116 WILDE, REGINA MOFFITT CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

117 CORNACCHIA, DIANA MOHAWK CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

118 GALLOWAY, HILLARY MOHAWK CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

119 REPOSA, HOLLY MOHAWK CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

120 ANSARI, PAULETTE MT. VERNON CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

121 BERG, LINDA MT. VERNON CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

122 BROWN, TAMERA MT. VERNON CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

123 DERSHON, DONNA MT. VERNON CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

124 DURFEE, RHONDA MT. VERNON CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

125 EEDS, KAREN MT. VERNON CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

126 GAGNON, PATRICIA MT. VERNON CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

127 GREENE, MARILYN MT. VERNON CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

128 HARRIS, BARBARA JILL MT. VERNON CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

129 IRWIN, CATHRYNE MT. VERNON CONTRACT TEACHER PT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

130 JACOBSON, DEANNA MT. VERNON CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

131 JENNINGS, MARGO MT. VERNON CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

132 LANGWORTHY, JUDITH MT. VERNON CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

133 LEWELLEN, TERESA MT. VERNON CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

134 MARTIN, ANDRIA MT. VERNON CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

135 MESSINGER, CHARLES MT. VERNON CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

136 MILLER, MELINDA MT. VERNON CONTRACT TEACHER PT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

137 NEES, CYNTHIA MT. VERNON CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

138 NURRE, SHELLY MT. VERNON CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

139 ORCUTT, BETTY MT. VERNON CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

140 PETERS, ANNETTE MT. VERNON CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

141 RENNE, CHARLENE MT. VERNON CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

142 WRIGHT, LEITA SUE MT. VERNON CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

143 YONKER, DIANNE MT. VERNON CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

144 ANDERSON, KARA PAGE CONTRACT TEACHER PT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

145 BABCOCK, KAREN PAGE CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

146 BURGESS, SUSAN PAGE CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

147 HAMILTON, JULIE PAGE CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

148 HEWETT, HEIDI PAGE CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

149 LANZA, SUSAN PAGE/HAMLIN CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

150 LEDYARD, JEAN PAGE CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

151 LEWELLEN, ALLYSON PAGE CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

152 POOLE, CARRIE PAGE CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

153 RICE, HEIDI PAGE CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

154 ROSS, LAUREL PAGE/CAMP CREEK CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

155 SHANK, MINDY PAGE CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

156 SMITH, APRYL PAGE CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

157 SMITH, DWIGHT PAGE CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

158 SOUTHWORTH, ILA PAGE CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

159 THIELE, KARRI PAGE CONTRACT TEACHER PT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

160 WEBSTER, KATHLEEN PAGE CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

161 WEBSTER, PATRICIA PAGE CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

162 WEST, MARY JANE PAGE CONTRACT TEACHER PT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

163 WILSON, SANDRA PAGE CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

164 ABBOTT, NINA RIDGEVIEW CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

165 CROWDER, REBECCA RIDGEVIEW/GOSHEN CONTRACT TEACHER PT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

166 DAVIS, BONNIE RIDGEVIEW CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

167 FARR, DEBBIE RIDGEVIEW CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

168 FERRY, PATRICIA RIDGEVIEW CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

169 FOUNTAIN, OLETA RIDGEVIEW CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

170 HANSON, JAMES MICHAEL RIDGEVIEW/GOSHEN CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

171 MCCORNACK, CAROLINE RIDGEVIEW CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

172 MCKEE, SARAH RIDGEVIEW CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

173 MOORE, JULIE RIDGEVIEW CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

174 POPE, BARBARA RIDGEVIEW CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

175 REIERSGAARD, MICHELE RIDGEVIEW CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

176 RICHARDSON,ERIN RIDGEVIEW CONTRACT TEACHER PT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

177 SMITH, ALICE RIDGEVIEW CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

178 STEIN, MARY RIDGEVIEW CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

179 SWITZER, JANIS RIDGEVIEW CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

180 THOMPSON, TREVA RIDGEVIEW CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

181 THORSBY, CARRIE RIDGEVIEW CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

182 VANNETT-CARNEY, DYAN RIDGEVIEW CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

183 WEISSBARTH, MARTIN RIDGEVIEW CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

184 ALMEIDA, PETER RIVERBEND CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

185 CAULLEY, KATHLEEN RIVERBEND CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

186 GAYLE, KELLEY RIVERBEND CONTRACT TEACHER PT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

187 GOFF, ANNE RIVERBEND CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

188 HAAS, RICHARD RIVERBEND CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

189 HEAD, DARLENE RIVERBEND CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

190 KETTWIG, JOVONE RIVERBEND CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

191 KLYM, HEATHER RIVERBEND CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

192 LICHENSTEIN, JANET RIVERBEND CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

193 LIVESAY, JOANNE RIVERBEND CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

194 LOW, SHEILA RIVERBEND CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

195 PAGE, TERESA RIVERBEND CONTRACT TEACHER PT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

196 POOLE, MAVIS RIVERBEND CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

197 REED, BRYAN RIVERBEND CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

198 TROTTER, COLETTE RIVERBEND CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

199 TRUEBE, MERILEE RIVERBEND CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

200 VILLANUEVA, BELINDA RIVERBEND CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

201 WADDELL, TRUDY RIVERBEND CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

202 WARD, DENICE RIVERBEND CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

203 WILSON, SHELLEY RIVERBEND CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

204 WOOD, DARLENE RIVERBEND CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

205 ARNOLD, LYNDSEY THURSTON EL CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

206 BONAR, KURTIS THURSTON EL CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

207 BRAY, MARK THURSTON EL CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

208 CORGAIN, LORENE THURSTON EL CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

209 CROSSWHITE, CURTIS THURSTON EL CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

210 DEWEY, JANET THURSTON EL/MAPLECONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

211 ESSMAN, NICOLE THURSTON EL CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

212 FEDERICO, HELEN THURSTON EL CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

213 GRENZ, MELANEY THURSTON EL/ TMS/

GATEWAYS CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

214 HAGEL, STACIA THURSTON EL CONTRACT TEACHER PT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

215 JOHNSON, SARAH THURSTON EL CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

216 JORDAN, BRIAN THURSTON EL CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

217 LEWELLEN, TERRY THURSTON EL CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

218 MARTIN, CAROL THURSTON EL. CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

219 PINSON, JUDITH THURSTON

EL/WALTERVILLE CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

220 ROUSH, GARY THURSTON EL. CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

221 SECKLER, TEENA THURSTON EL CONTRACT TEACHER PT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

222 TROIA, KATIE THURSTON EL CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

223 HAUKE, CYNTHIA WALTERVILLE CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

224 PATTERSON, HEIDI WALTERVILLE CONTRACT TEACHER PT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

225 PRATT, HEIDI WALTERVILLE CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

226 SATHER, MARCELLA WALTERVILLE/CAMP

CREEK CONTRACT TEACHER PT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

227 WARTHEN, SHERRIE WALTERVILLE CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

228 BELSHAW, KAREN YOLANDA CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

229 CARTER, SANDRA YOLANDA CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

230 CHABOT-DUNCAN, JEANETTE YOLANDA CONTRACT TEACHER PT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

231 CULP, MARY LEE YOLANDA CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

232 EVANS, CHRISTINE YOLANDA CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

233 FERRENBURG, VICKI YOLANDA CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

234 FIELDS, SUSAN YOLANDA CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

235 GIBSON, LISA YOLANDA CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

236 GORHAM, NICKI YOLANDA CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

237 HUGO, CHELSA YOLANDA CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

238 HUTCHINSON, SUSAN YOLANDA CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

239 JOHNSTON, LINDA YOLANDA CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

240 LOVDOKKEN, STEPHAINE YOLANDA CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

241 NICHOLS, LOIS YOLANDA CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

242 OLSON, JILL YOLANDA CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

243 ORIGLIOSSO, DEBORAH YOLANDA CONTRACT TEACHER PT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

244 PASCHALL, AMY YOLANDA CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

245 VETTER, KARI YOLANDA CONTRACT TEACHER FT 2007-2009 CONTRACT RENEWAL

RESOLUTION #06-07.030 DATE: JANUARY 22, 2007 OUT-OF-STATE TRIP REQUEST

THURSTON HIGH SCHOOL BAND/ORCHESTRA PROGRAM

RELEVANT DATA: The objective of our trip to Honolulu, Hawaii is to perform. This trip will also give students the opportunity to visit a state that many would never get to in life and to experience an American culture different and more varied. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended the Board approve Thurston High School’s Band/Orchestra Program’s request to travel to Honolulu, Hawaii to perform. Dates of the trip will be, Tuesday, April 24, 2007 through Saturday, April 28, 2007. SUBMITTED BY: RECOMMENDED BY: Bruce Smolnisky Nancy L. Golden Director of Education Superintendent

Springfield School District

P R E L I M I N A R Y R E Q U E S T F O R O U T - O F - S T A T E T R A V E L

School:

Thurston HS

Person Initiating Request:

Tim Vian

Date of Request:

11/27/06

Club/Organization Going on Trip:

Band/Orchestra

Number of Students:

45

Number of Faculty Chaperones: 2 Number of Parent/Other Chaperones: 8

Dates of Trip: (If more than two school days will be missed, please attach additional rationale to justify absences) April 24-28

Proposed method of travel Hawaiian Air, Bus Charters (Note: District vehicles are not available for out-of-state travel)

Estimated Total Cost:

$52,500

Cost to the District:

4 days of sub time

(Includes substitute teacher cost.)

Planned Itinerary Options See attached itinerary

Purpose of Trip: (Attach your answers to the following questions and return with this form.) What are the objectives of the trip and how are the experiences provided related to class or school

program? How will the activities on the trip provide opportunities for students to obtain new skills, insights,

knowledge, or appreciation? How will the trip provide opportunities for students to use those skills they have already acquired?

How will the experience motivate students for further learning? Does the trip make best use of available time and money? What effect does the trip have on other classes or programs? What arrangements for transportation and other factors pertaining to supervision of students have

been considered to ensure maximum safety? Approved: X Denied: Principal: Ed Mendelssohn Date: 12-12-06

Approved:

X

Denied:

Curriculum Director:

Bruce Smolnisky

Date:

1-5-07

I M P O R T A N T N O T E The Preliminary request form must be submitted and approved at least 90 days prior to

date of proposed trip before any commitment can be made to parents, students, etc. If sufficient space is not available on this form, attach supporting data.


F I N A L R E Q U E S T F O R O U T - O F - S T A T E T R A V E L

School:

Thurston High School


Tim Vian

Date of Application:

1-4-06

Purpose of Trip and Destination: See attached documents Dates of Trip: (If more than two school days will be missed, please attach additional rationale to justify absences) April 24-29 Club/Organization Going on Trip:

Band and Orchestra

Number of Students:

14

Male

21

Female

Date and Time Departing:

April 24 – 5:00 AM

Date and Time Returning:

April 29 – 10:00 pm

Total Number of Chaperones: Male: 2 Female: 8 Names of Chaperones: Darlene Poole,

Teaching Staff: Tim Vian, Becky Boyd

Administrators:

Parents/Others:

Dave Lovan, Sabrian Chesnut, Linda Hoechlin, Cindy Loughlin Nicole Reid, Lori Firth, Dana Chesnut

Total Cost: 55,700 Cost Per Student: $1250.00 Cost to District: 4 days sub

(Includes substitute teacher cost.) Transportation - (Charter -Air/Bus, etc..) Hawaiian air – Hawaiian charter bus

(Note: District vehicles are not available for out-of-state travel.)

Attach a Description, in detail, of all transportation arrangements during the course of the trip.

Arrangements for food and lodging: Describe in detail the fund raising activities: Entertainment Books, pizza coupons, garage sale, Autzen cleanup (x3), candy sale, bottle drive (x2), cookie dough sale, (to come) car raffle, pizza night at Roaring Rapids, Mac Court cleanup, Texas Hold-em night, car wash (possibility) bottle drive in February (after superbowl) Special insurance, if applicable: (Company)

Type of Coverage Cost per Person Applicable forms on file: (please check) X Parent Permission Form X Medical Release Form X Student Fundraising Agreement

X Approved Denied Principal: Ed Mendelssohn Date: 1-4-07

X Approved

Denied


Bruce Smolnisky

Date:

1-5-07

THS Band/Orchestra Trip Itinerary April 24 – 28, 2007

Tuesday, April 24 Wednesday, April 25 5:00 am Leave THS 8:00 am Breakfast 7:00 am Arrive Portland

Airport 9:00-11:00am U.S.S. Arizona

9:00 am Depart for Hawaii 11:00 am City Tour Noon Arrive in Honolulu Noon Lunch 1:00 pm Hotel Check-In 1:00-3:00 pm Possible Performance 2:00 pm Meeting 3:00-6:00 pm Free Time 3:00-6:00 pm Free Time 6:00-8:00 pm Planet Hollywood 6:00-7:00 pm Dinner at Perry’s 8:00-10:00 pm Mandatory Study

Time 8:00-10:00 pm Free Time 10:00 pm Curfew 10:00 pm Curfew 11:00 pm In Rooms 11:00 pm In Rooms Midnight Lights Out Midnight Lights Out Thursday, April 26 Friday, April 27 8:00 am Breakfast 8:00 am Breakfast 9:00am-5:00pm

Kuoloa Ranch 9:00am-Noon Snorkel Avenue

6:00-8:00 pm Dinner Noon Hotel/Change for Luau

8:00-10:00 pm Free Time 5:00-10:00pm Germaine’s Luau 10:00 pm Curfew 10:00 pm Curfew 11:00 pm In Rooms 11:00 pm In Rooms Midnight Lights Out Midnight Lights Out Saturday, April 28 Sunday, April 29 8:00 am Breakfast 8:00 am Breakfast 9:00am-6:00pm

To the Beach 9:00 Clean Rooms

6:00 pm Dinner 10:00 am Leave for Airport 7:00-10:00 pm Society of Seven

Show Noon Lunch

10:00 pm Curfew 1:00 pm Depart for Oregon 11:00 pm In Rooms 7:00 pm Arrive in Portland Midnight Lights Out 8:00 pm Bus to Springfield 10:00 pm Arrive in Springfield

THS Band/Orchestra Trip Purpose

Honolulu, Hawaii April 24 – 28, 2007

a. By traveling to Hawaii, the Thurston students will get a chance to visit a

state that many would never get to in life and to experience an American culture different and more varied.

b. The music field affords the opportunity to travel more often than many

other career opportunities. Because the trip is in Hawaii, it will show the students the rewards for hard work and diligence to achieve a goal.

c. The trip does make good use of time and money. Because we can get

group rates on travel, hotel, and miscellaneous items, the costs will be lower while still ensuring quality.

d. The students will miss 4 days of school, but will have mandatory study

time during 2 of the days on the trip, monitored by myself and other chaperones. Students must be passing at least 5 of their classes in order to go on the trip.

e. We will be chartering from a reputable airline (Hawaiian Air) and a

licensed and


SPRINGFIELD HIGH SCHOOL VARSITY CHEERLEADERS

RELEVANT DATA: The objective of our trip to Anaheim, California is to compete in the U.S.A. National Cheerleading Championships. This trip will also give students the opportunity to compete at the national level. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended the Board approve Springfield High School Cheerleaders’ request to travel to Anaheim, California to compete in U.S.A. National Cheerleading Championship Competition. Dates of the trip will be, Thursday, March 22, 2007 through Tuesday, March 27, 2007. SUBMITTED BY: RECOMMENDED BY: Bruce Smolnisky Nancy L. Golden Director of Education Superintendent



School: SHS Person Initiating Request: Janet Fryback Date of Application: 1/1/2007 Purpose of Trip and Destination: The purpose of the trip is to compete at the 2007 U.S.A. National Cheerleading Championships in Anaheim, California Dates of Trip: (If more than two school days will be missed, please attach additional rationale to justify absences) Thursday, March 22, 2007 – Tuesday, March 27, 2007 Club/Organization Going on Trip:

SHS Varsity Cheerleaders

Number of Students:

5

Male

15

Female

Date and Time Departing: Thursday, March 22, 2007 Date and Time Returning: Tuesday, March 27, 2007 Total Number of Chaperones: Male: 1 Female: 7 Names of Chaperones:

Teaching Staff: Jamie Fryback

Administrators:

Parents/Others: Janet Fryback, Jenny Fryback 1 male parent, 4 female parents Total Cost: $25,000 Cost Per Student: $1250.00 Cost to District: None

(Includes substitute teacher cost.) Transportation - (Charter -Air/Bus, etc.) Air Travel & Bus

(Note: District vehicles are not available for out-of-state travel.) Attach a Description, in detail, of all transportation arrangements during the course of the trip.

Arrangements for food and lodging: We will be staying at the Grand Californian Hotel in Anaheim. Students will buy meals. Describe in detail the fund raising activities: OSAA ticket sales, Orange sales, Autzen catering, donations Special insurance, if applicable: (Company) N/A

Type of Coverage Cost per Person Applicable forms on file: (please check)

X Parent Permission Form X Medical Release Form X Student Fundraising Agreement

X Approved Denied Principal: Christopher A Reiersgaard Date: 1-15-07

X

Approved

Denied

Director of Education:

Bruce Smolnisky

Date:

1/15/07



School:

SHS


Janet Fryback

Date of Request:

1-1-07


SHS Varsity Cheerleaders

Number of Students:

20

Number of Faculty Chaperones: 3 Number of Parent/Other Chaperones: 4-5 Dates of Trip: (If more than two school days will be missed, please attach additional rationale to justify absences) March 22 – 27, 2007 Proposed method of travel Air Travel & Bus

(Note: District vehicles are not available for out-of-state travel) Estimated Total Cost:

$25,000


None

(Includes substitute teacher cost.) Planned Itinerary Options USA National Cheer Competition, Anaheim, California See Attached. Purpose of Trip: (Attach your answers to the following questions and return with this form.)

• What are the objectives of the trip and how are the experiences provided related to class or school program?

• How will the activities on the trip provide opportunities for students to obtain new skills, insights, knowledge, or appreciation? How will the trip provide opportunities for students to use those skills they have already acquired?

• How will the experience motivate students for further learning? • Does the trip make best use of available time and money? • What effect does the trip have on other classes or programs? • What arrangements for transportation and other factors pertaining to supervision of students have

been considered to ensure maximum safety? Approved:

X

Denied:

Principal:

Chris Reiersgaard Date:

1-2-07

Approved:

X

Denied:


Bruce Smolnisky

Date:

1-8/07

I M P O R T A N T N O T E

The Preliminary request form must be submitted and approved at least 90 days prior to date of proposed trip before any commitment can be made to parents, students, etc.

If sufficient space is not available on this form, attach supporting data.

Springfield High School Varsity Cheerleader’s

USA National Championships Anaheim, California

Thursday, March 22, 2007 Depart from Eugene Airport for Anaheim,

California Friday, March 23, 2007 Practice and shop Saturday, March 24, 2007 Compete in Preliminaries Sunday, March 25, 2007 Compete in Finals (we hope!) Monday, March 26, 2007 California Adventure and Disneyland!! Tuesday, March 27, 2007 Return to Eugene

SHS Varsity Cheerleaders’

U.S.A. National Cheerleading Championships Anaheim, California

PURPOSE OF TRIP A. The purpose of the trip is to go to Anaheim, California and compete in the

2007 U.S.A. National Cheerleading Championships. As cheerleaders, we feel that the experience will help us in many ways. We will develop better cheerleading techniques and leadership skills by seeing and competing against the very best teams in the nation.

B. By competing in this competition, we will gain new insight into what the

rest of the nation is doing in the world of Cheerleading. We learn a lot of new cheers, stunts, and routines being performed by cheerleaders from all over the nation. We feel that we have improved as a squad each year that the district has allowed us to compete at a national event. Our younger cheer members have also gained from the Varsity Cheerleaders’ experience at Nationals.

C. We will be traveling to California to experience the U.S.A. National

Cheerleading Championships held in Anaheim, California. Only one returning cheerleader has been to a national competition. Most will be going for the first time. We continue to be one of the strongest cheer programs in the state. We have won 13 State Championships. This trip is also our reward for working so hard all year.

D. We will leave on March 22, 2007; practice and play a little on the 23rd. We

will compete on the 24th. We hope to be in the finals on the 25th. We will see lots of Disneyland and California Adventure. Our major expense is our airfare.

E. We will miss only two days of school before Spring Break. All money will

be raised by the cheerleaders. There is not cost to the District. F. We travel to and from California by plane. When in California, we will

travel by shuttle bus. We have 7 chaperones traveling with us. The cheerleaders will be supervised at all times.

Thanks, Janet Fryback 554-4364


SPRINGFIELD HIGH SCHOOL BAND/ORCHESTRA PROGRAM

RELEVANT DATA: The objective of our trip to Anaheim, California is to perform at Disneyland. This trip will also give students the opportunity to perform at a professional level. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended the Board approve Springfield High School Band/Orchestra Program’s request to travel to Anaheim, California to perform at Disneyland. Dates of the trip will be, Thursday, May 24, 2007 through Monday, May 28, 2007. SUBMITTED BY: RECOMMENDED BY: Bruce Smolnisky Nancy L. Golden Director of Education Superintendent



School: SHS Person Initiating Request: Chris Holt/Dana Demant Date of Application: 1/9/2007 Purpose of Trip and Destination: The purpose of the trip is to perform at the Disneyland resort in Anaheim, CA. This trip will give our students invaluable personal and performance experiences that will carry over into many different areas of their lives. (See attached for more details) Dates of Trip: (If more than two school days will be missed, please attach additional rationale to justify absences) Thursday, May 24, 2007 – Monday, May 28, 2007 Club/Organization Going on Trip:

SHS Band/Orchestra

Number of Students:

65

Male

40

Female

Date and Time Departing: 5:00 pm, May 24, 2007 Date and Time Returning: 4:00 pm, May 28, 2007 Total Number of Chaperones: Male: 6 Female: 2 Names of Chaperones:

Teaching Staff: Dana Demant, Chris Holt, Jonathan Seigle

Administrators: Chris Reiersgaard, Ron Simmons

Parents/Others: Lauren Lindstrom, Diana Jordan & spouse Total Cost: $42,000 Cost Per Student: $400.00 Cost to District: $300.00

(Includes substitute teacher cost.) Transportation - (Charter -Air/Bus, etc.) Charter bus – Experience Oregon

(Note: District vehicles are not available for out-of-state travel.) Attach a Description, in detail, of all transportation arrangements during the course of the trip.

Arrangements for food and lodging: We will be staying at the Castle Inn in Anaheim. 2 meals (at Magic Mountain and at Medieval Times) will be provided. Students will need to buy all other meals. Describe in detail the fund raising activities: Candy Bar Sales, Fight Song fundraiser, Cookie Dough Sales, Catalogue Sale, Sponsorship letters, Pepsi Concessions Special insurance, if applicable: (Company) N/A

Type of Coverage Cost per Person Applicable forms on file: (please check)

X Parent Permission Form X Medical Release Form X Student Fundraising Agreement

X Approved Denied Principal: Christopher A Reiersgaard Date: 1-9-07

X

Approved

Denied

Director of Education:

Bruce Smolnisky Date:

1/9/07



School:

SHS


Christopher Holt Dana Demant

Date of Request:

11/29/06


SHS Band and Orchestra

Number of Students:

115

Number of Faculty Chaperones: 5 Number of Parent/Other Chaperones: 3 Dates of Trip: (If more than two school days will be missed, please attach additional rationale to justify absences) May 24th-28th Proposed method of travel Charter Bus (Experience Oregon)

(Note: District vehicles are not available for out-of-state travel) Estimated Total Cost:

$45,000


2 one day substitutes ($300)

(Includes substitute teacher cost.) Planned Itinerary Options See Attached Purpose of Trip: (Attach your answers to the following questions and return with this form.)

• What are the objectives of the trip and how are the experiences provided related to class or school program?

• How will the activities on the trip provide opportunities for students to obtain new skills, insights, knowledge, or appreciation? How will the trip provide opportunities for students to use those skills they have already acquired?

• How will the experience motivate students for further learning? • Does the trip make best use of available time and money? • What effect does the trip have on other classes or programs? • What arrangements for transportation and other factors pertaining to supervision of students have

been considered to ensure maximum safety? Approved:

X

Denied:

Principal:

Chris Reiersgaard Date:

11-29-06

Approved:

X

Denied:


Bruce Smolnisky Date:

1/15/07

I M P O R T A N T N O T E

The Preliminary request form must be submitted and approved at least 90 days prior to date of proposed trip before any commitment can be made to parents, students, etc.

If sufficient space is not available on this form, attach supporting data.

Itinerary

Springfield High School Band/Orchestra Disneyland Trip Thursday, May 24, 2007 5:00 PM Load Bus 5:45 PM Leave for Southern California Friday, May 25, 2007 9:30 AM Arrive Hurricane Harbor/Six Flags Magic Mountain 10:00 PM Leave Hurricane Harbor/Six Flags Magic Mountain 11:45 PM Check into Hotel: Bed check 20 minutes after we check in Saturday, May 26, 2007

PERFORMANCE DAY 8:30 A.M. Arrive at Disneyland Perform between 9:00 and 3:00 pm (Disneyland will not tell us our performance time until 2 weeks before the trip) 12:00 AM. Depart for hotel - park closes

Bed check!! 20 minutes after we arrive with the buses.

Sunday, May 27, 2007 9:00 A.M. Leave for Disneyland 4:30 PM Leave Disneyland for dinner 6:00 PM Dinner at Medieval Times 8:30 PM Leave for Springfield Monday, May 28, 2007 4:00 P.M. Arrive at Springfield High School

SHS Band/Orchestra Disneyland Performance Tour PURPOSE OF TRIP What are the objectives of the trip and how are the experiences provided related to class or school program? Students will learn self discipline, cooperation, responsibility and patience by spending four nights and five days with a large group of peers and chaperones. They will be responsible for getting themselves up and ready for the day, their performances, their meals, etc. They will also need to manage their money so that they have enough to pay for meals throughout the trip. They will need to work on cooperation and patience by living very closely with three other people in their hotel room and sitting next to someone on the bus. They will need to continue to follow directions given by directors and chaperones as well as bus, hotel and theme park representatives. Students will need to exhibit self-discipline by acting responsibly with good attitudes, correct language, and good hygiene. Self-discipline, cooperation, responsibility and patience are things that students are asked to work on in their classes as well. Learning these things is an ongoing process. By taking students out of their normal environment and entering another environment, students are challenged to put what they have learned at school with people skills as well as musical skills to the test. Activities on the trip will help students learn many different things. Being in close proximity to other students for an extended amount of time will provide students with the opportunity to learn a different type of cooperation and flexibility than they are used to. Performing at Disneyland will give students the opportunity to perform for a professional company and be treated as professionals. Disneyland has certain rules for performers that are to be followed. There are consequences if the rules aren’t followed. Students will have the opportunity to observe other performing groups and see how others view the importance of stage presence, literature and musicality. Most students will have a bank of skills to pull from in order to be successful on this trip. Others may need to work very hard. This trip will enable them to develop those skills.

Motivation Students will gain motivation for further learning by having a positive social , as well as working experience with a large group of peers. Also, motivation and inspiration may be gained by observing high quality performing groups as well as delivering a successful performance themselves. Time and Money The cost of the trip has been kept to a minimum by personally researching hotels, bus costs, etc. We chose to avoid using a travel company because the cost of the trip per person would be too high. Effect on others Band and orchestra classes will have substitute teachers on Friday, May 25th. Other than that, classes should experience little effect. Arrangement for safety At least one chaperone per 15 students will be provided to ensure maximum supervision. Chaperone’s room will be spread out between students rooms. Chaperones will be on each bus. Tour buses will transport students to and from parks and activities. Names of Chaperones: T.S. -Teaching Staff Ad. -Administration other -non faculty Dana Demant (T.S.) Lauren Lindstrom (other) Christopher Holt (T.S.) Chris Reiersgaard (Ad.) Jonathan Seigle (T.S.) Ron Simmons (Ad.) Diana Jordan and Spouse

BOARD REPORT JANUARY 22, 2007

2006-2007 REVENUE/EXPENDITURE REPORT

As of December 31, 2006 **Please see attached Report**

GENERAL FUND

Revenue • A majority of our Pproperty taxes have been received in the amount of $15.6 million. We are

estimated the District will collect approximately 1% additional property taxes than originally anticipated.

• The District’s most significant portion of revenue received at this time is our scheduled Basic

School Support payments. The current projections are based on the 2006-2007 estimates published by the Oregon Department of Education, which includes an assumption of funding for an additional 265 students above the cap for Special Education. The District is anticipating a reduction in the May 2007 payment of approximately $150,000 due to an overpayment during the

2005-2006 fiscal year. (This has been shown in the projections) • Approximately 50% of the Common School Fund has been received with an additional $392,000

anticipated to be received.

• The District has received approximately 75% of the County School Fund allocation to date. • Other funding sources such as Federal Forest Fees are anticipated to be received within the next

few months.

• Additionally, the District’s (audited) ending fund balance was $10,617,183, slightly lower than originally anticipated.

Expenditures • Salaries amounts are based upon actual staff allocations budgeted, with an assumption that the

approximately 98% of the budgeted allotment will be expended. • Benefit amounts are based upon actual staff allocations budgeted along with budgeted salaries.

Assumptions for PERS savings from the bonding program, the scheduled debt service payments and an assessment to the Voluntary Early Retirement Fund.

• The purchased services, supplies and capital outlay expenditure projections are based upon

budgeted expenditures and projected to be fully expended. This is consistent with the District’s experience in 2005-06.

• Other objects include the cost for property and liability insurance and is based upon premiums

negotiated after the 2005-06 budget was adopted. Note: For the 2006-2007 budget year current estimate of ending fund balance is $6,251,306. Included

in this number is the audited ending fund balance from the 2005-2006 fiscal year ($10,617,183). The estimated ending fund balance is based upon expenditure patterns similar to the 2005-2006 fiscal year, along with contingency (estimated at $900,000).

Brett Yancey will be present to address any questions that may arise.

Submitted by: Reviewed by:

Brett M. Yancey Nancy Golden Director of Budget & Finance Superintendent

SPRINGFIELD SCHOOL DISTRICT 192006-2007 REVENUE/EXPENDITURE FORECAST

as of

ESTIMATEDACTUAL from PROJECTEDthrough 12/31/06 PROJECTED as % of

BUDGET 12/31/06 to year end 05-06 BUDGET

REVENUES:Property taxes - current 17,083,838 15,577,753 1,677,055 17,254,808 101.00%Property taxes - prior years 450,000 207,987 242,013 450,000 100.00%Other local sources 812,200 517,563 694,637 1,212,200 149.25%County School Fund 100,000 74,872 25,128 100,000 100.00%State School Fund 55,478,304 32,520,940 23,315,310 55,836,250 100.65%Common School Fund 920,000 489,991 392,235 882,226 95.89%Federal forest fees 1,400,000 0 1,400,000 1,400,000 100.00%

Total revenues 76,244,342 49,389,107 27,746,377 77,135,484 101.17%

Beginning fund balance 11,110,693 0 10,617,183 10,617,183 95.56%

Total Beginning fund balance 11,110,693 0 10,617,183 10,617,183 95.56%

Total resources 87,355,035 49,389,107 38,363,560 87,752,667 100.46%

EXPENDITURES:Personal services 44,305,306 16,051,934 27,405,771 43,457,705 98.09%Employee benefits 25,451,890 9,151,941 16,136,949 25,288,891 99.36%Purchased services 6,353,246 1,955,968 4,353,305 6,309,273 99.31%Supplies & materials 2,923,107 1,425,654 1,497,453 2,923,107 100.00%Capital outlay 67,900 71,078 0 71,078 104.68%Other objects 666,252 447,569 185,881 633,450 95.08%Fund transfers 1,917,858 78,858 1,839,000 1,917,858 100.00%

Total expenditures 81,685,559 29,183,002 51,418,359 80,601,361 98.67%

Unappropriated 2,869,476 0Contingency 2,800,000 0 0.00%

Total appropriations 87,355,035 29,183,002 51,418,359 80,601,361 92.27%

Total resources 49,389,107 38,363,560 87,752,667Total appropriations 29,183,002 51,418,359 80,601,361

Ending fund balance 20,206,105 (13,054,799) 7,151,306Less: contingency (900,000) (900,000)

Net fund balance 20,206,105 (13,954,799) 6,251,306

12/31/06

1/17/07

RESOLUTION: #06-07.033 DATE: JANUARY 22, 2007

BOARD POLICIES FOR APPROVAL RELEVANT DATA: The district has contracted with Oregon School Boards Association to review all district policies. Policy revisions for Board Policy Sections C and D are presented to the Board for approval. These policies were reviewed by the Board at the January 8, 2007, meeting. The submitted policies are revised with new language in bold and language recommended for deletion denoted by strike through. Steve Barrett is available to answer questions RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the Board of Directors approve the following board policies:

• CB – Superintendent • CBA – Qualifications and duties of

the Superintendent • CBG – Evaluation of the

Superintendent • CCB – Line and Staff Relations • CCG – Licensed Evaluation –

Administrators • CFA – Site-Based Decision Making • CHCA – Approval of Handbooks

and Directives • CM – District Annual Report • CPA – Layoff/Recall –

Administrative Personnel • DA – Fiscal Management Goal • DBE – Budget Preparation • DBEA – Budget Committee • DBJ – Budget Implementation • DBK – Budget Transfer Authority • DC – Borrowing Funds • DD – Funding Proposals and

Applications

• DE/DEB/DEC – Revenues from Private, State and Federal Sources

• DFA – Investment of Funds • DFC – Grants from Private Sources • DFG – Income from Program-

Related Sales and Services • DG – Depository of Funds • DGA – Authorized Signatures • DH – Bonded Employees and

Officers • DI – Fiscal Accounting and

reporting • DIC – Financial Reports and

Statements • DID – Property Inventories • DJ – District Purchasing • DJB – Petty Cash Accounts • DJC – Bidding Requirements • DJCA – Personal Services Contracts • DJCB – Request for Proposal • DK – Payment Procedures • DLA – Payday Schedule • DLC – Expense Reimbursement

Submitted by: Approved by: Steve Barrett Nancy L. Golden Deputy Superintendent Superintendent

Springfield Public Schools 525 Mill Street Springfield, OR 97477 (541) 747-3331

BOARD POLICY: CB

SUPERINTENDENT The superintendent is the chief executive officer and, under the direction of the Board, is responsible for control and operation of the school system and for implementing the decisions and policies of the Board. The superintendent has the authority to formulate and delegate duties and responsibilities to subordinate administrative personnel. The delegation of such duties and responsibilities, however, will not relieve the superintendent of responsibility for the action taken under such delegation. END OF POLICY Legal References:

ORS 332.505 ORS 332.515 ORS 342.125 ORS 342.140 ORS 342.143 ORS 342.173 ORS 342.175 OAR 581-22-1720 102 TO -807 OAR 584-36-040

OAR 581-23-006 TO -050 OAR 584-36-051 TO -053 OAR 584-20-000 TO -045 OAR 584-46-005 TO -035 OAR 584-36-035 (1) OAR 584-48-085 TO -102 Other:

Adopted: 10-23-95 Amended: Replaces: 2100, 2110, 2130, 2140, 2150, 2160, 2170, 2180, 2120, 2200, 6250

Springfield Public Schools ⋅ 525 Mill Street ⋅ Springfield, OR 97477 ⋅ (541) 747-3331

BOARD POLICY: CBA

QUALIFICATIONS AND DUTIES OF THE SUPERINTENDENT General Qualifications: The Board requires the superintendent be a strong educational leader who has the following professional experience and training: 1. A current Oregon administrative license with a superintendent's endorsement; 2. A master's or doctorate degree in the field of education, preferably in educational administration; 3. Successful teaching experience at the elementary or secondary school level; 4. Service as a school superintendent or administrative experience in the central administration of a school system. The superintendent will have the following personal and professional qualities: 1. Sufficient health and vigor to perform bona fide requirements of the position; 2. Success in leadership roles with staff, community and professional peers; 3. Ability to communicate effectively, both orally and in writing; 4. Scholarship, intelligence and excellent ability to plan and organize; 5. Training, experience and success in personnel selection, evaluation and

development; 6. Knowledge of curriculum development, implementation and evaluation; 7. Knowledge of business and support service systems which facilitate planning,

control and accountability; 8. Experience in administering collective bargaining agreements; 9. Ability to motivate other administrators and significantly involve them in the

decision-making process; 10. Strong management skills and a desire and ability to motivate and innovate,

taking advantage of the District's strengths. 11. Ability to build good community relations.

2 of 5 Code: CBA


Specific Functions: The superintendent will have the duty and authority to perform the following specific functions: 1. Serve as an educational leader to the Board, staff and community; 2. Act as the Board's chief administrative officer; 3. Serve as clerk of the Board, performing such duties as required by law or by the

Board; 4. Schedule and publish meeting places, prepare an agenda and have minutes

recorded for all Board and other school meetings authorized by the Board; 5. Attend all regular and special meetings and executive sessions of the Board,

except when excused for the board to process his/her own salary and performance review;

6. Serve as executive officer of the budget committee and prepare an educational

plan that is the basis for formulating the District's annual budget; 7. Administer adopted Board policies; 8. Annually review adopted Board policies and make recommendations for needed changes; 7 9. Advise, inform and make recommendations to the Board on matters of policy

and other required action and inform the Board on all phases of District operation;

10. Provide an ongoing program of communication to and from the community,

staff and Board concerning the school program and District activities; 11. Assess trends and changing procedures in salary negotiations and assists the

Board in collective bargaining and salary consultation with District employee groups;

12. Serve as a member of the Board's salary consultation and negotiations teams and

make recommendations to the Board on all issues; 13. Direct the implementation and administration of all agreements resulting from

the consultation or negotiation process; 14. Develop and file a complete list of job descriptions for all classes of personnel,

review those descriptions and change those descriptions as needed or directed by the Board;

3 of 5 Code: CBA


15. Formulate and recommend for Board adoption such personnel policies as may be necessary for efficient functioning of the school staff. Policies approved by the Board will be included in the written rules and regulations of the District;

16. Make rules and reasonable regulations to govern routine matters and see that

such rules and regulations are communicated to employees concerned; 17. Resolve problems of operations and settle disputes referred through

administrative channels; 18. Work with staff organizations and committees in the development of sound,

personnel practices and procedures and provide for their implementation; 19. Is responsible for the development, maintenance and operation of a constructive

program of in-service, training and education for all school system employees. For this responsibility, the superintendent may employ lecturers, grant temporary leave from work, approve reimbursement for extension or college courses and develop professional library facilities as required, subject to approval by the Board;

20. Recommend to the Board the appointment, promotion, or dismissal of all District employees in accordance with state law and Board policy; 21. Assign, transfer or promote all District employees in accordance with state law

and Board policy. 22. Develop and distribute a line and staff chart to be made a part of District

procedure; 23. Evaluate the performance of all District administrative personnel in accordance

with state law and Board policy and make recommendations for those positions to the Board before July 1 of each year;

24. Evaluate the performance of licensed and classified personnel in accordance with

state law and Board policy; 25. Assign and control the promotion of students; 26. Keep a continuous inventory of all District property, furniture, material and

supplies; 27. Recommend plans for repairs to District property and for new construction and

see that all plans adopted by the Board are properly executed; 28. Establish procedures to involve teachers, principals, supervisory personnel and

representatives from student and community groups in the preparation and selection of courses of study and other instructional materials;

29. Recommend instructional materials, instructional supplies and school equipment

to be purchased by the District;

4 of 5 Code: CBA


30. Direct the preparation of the annual budget, prepare the annual budget message

for presentation to the budget committee, supervise the administration of all fiscal policies of the District and serve as custodian of all District funds;

31. Develop and recommend to the Board long-range plans for educational

programs, facilities and financial resources that are consistent with population trends, District goals and community needs;

32. Direct the District in its relationships with federal, state and local government

agencies; 33. Develop grant applications on behalf of the District. 34. Cooperate with universities and colleges in their student-teacher training

programs; 35. Attend local, state and national meetings, conferences and workshops as deemed beneficial to the interests of the District; 36. Visit all District schools as a regular part of his or her schedule and institute and

carry out such regulations as may be necessary to attain their efficient operation; 37. Direct the administrative staff in establishing and changing, as needed, school attendance area boundaries subject to Board approval; 38. In cases of matters not specifically covered by Board policies, take appropriate

action and report such action to the Board no later than the next regular Board meeting;

39. Exercise such other power and duties as may be approved by the Board, and as

may be necessary to fulfill the functions of the office of superintendent.

5 of 5 Code: CBA


END OF POLICY Legal References: ORS 327.133 ORS 332.515 ORS 342.125 ORS 342.140 ORS 342.143 ORS 342.173 ORS 342.175 ORS 342.200 OAR 581-022-0102 to -1940 OAR 581-023-0006 to -0050 OAR 584-020-0000 to -0045 OAR 584-036-0035(1) OAR 584-046-0005 to -0024 OAR 584-048-0085 to -0095 OAR 584-080-1151 OAR 584-080-0152 OAR 584-080-0161 OAR 584-36-040 OAR 584-36-051 TO -053 OAR 584-20-000 TO -045 OAR 584-46-005 TO -035 OAR 584-36-035 (1) OAR 584-48-085 TO -102

Other:

Adopted: 10-23-95 Amended: Replaces: 2100, 2110, 2130, 2140, 2150, 2160, 2170, 2180, 2120, 2200, 6250


BOARD POLICY: CBG

EVALUATION OF FOR THE SUPERINTENDENT The superintendent's job performance will be evaluated formally at least annually. The evaluation will be based on the administrative job description, any applicable standards of performance, Board policy and progress in attaining any goals for the year established by the superintendent and/or the Board. Additional criteria for the evaluation, if any, will be developed at the public Board meeting prior to conducting the evaluation. The superintendent will be notified of the additional criteria prior to the evaluation. The Board's discussion and conferences with and about the superintendent and his/her performance will be in executive session, unless the superintendent requests an open session. However, such an executive session will not include a general evaluation of any district goal, objective or operation. Results of the evaluation will be written and placed in the superintendent's personnel file. Any time the superintendent's performance is deemed to be unsatisfactory, the superintendent will be notified in writing of specific areas to be remedied and will be given an opportunity to correct the problem(s). If performance continues to be unsatisfactory, the Board may dismiss the superintendent pursuant to Board policy, the employment contract with the superintendent and state law and rules. END OF POLICY Legal References: ORS 192.6602), (8) (1) ORS 332.505 ORS 342.513 ORS 342.815 OAR 581-022-1720

Other: Adopted: 10-23-95 Amended: Replaces:


BOARD POLICY: CCB

LINE AND STAFF RELATIONS The Board expects the superintendent to establish a clear understanding of working relationships in the school system with all staff. Lines of direct authority will be those approved by the Board and shown on district organization charts. Staff will be expected to refer matters requiring administrative action to the administrator to whom they are responsible. That administrator will refer such matters to the next higher administrative authority, when necessary. Additionally, all staff are expected to keep the person to whom they are immediately responsible informed of their activities by whatever means the person in charge deems appropriate. Lines of authority should not restrict the cooperative working relationship of all staff members in developing the best possible district programs and services. The established lines of authority represent direction of authority and responsibility. When the staff is working together, the lines represent avenues for a two-way flow of ideas to improve the program and operations of the school system. END OF POLICY Legal References: ORS 332.505 OAR 581-022-1720 Anderson v. Central Point Sch. Dist., 746 F.2nd 505 (9th Cir. 1984). Connick v. Myers, 461, U.S. 138 (1983).

Other: Administrative Guidelines and Procedures on Supervision and Evaluation Adopted: 1-8-96 Amended: Replaces: 2180


BOARD POLICY: CCG

LICENSED EVALUATION - OF ADMINISTRATORS The Board adopted evaluation plan and the requirements of Oregon law shall be followed in the evaluations of administrators. Formal evaluations will be conducted according to the following guidelines: 1. Evaluative criteria for each position will be in written form and made available

to the administrator; 2. Evaluations will be made by the superintendent and/or designee; 3. Evaluations will be in writing and discussed with the administrator by the

person who makes the evaluation; 4. The administrator being evaluated will have the right to attach a memorandum

to the written evaluation and right of appeal through established grievance procedures, if applicable.

The evaluation of the administrator's performance shall be used as a basis for retention, promotion, demotion, transfer, or dismissal. END OF POLICY Legal References:

ORS 342.815-342.850 ORS 192.660(2), (8) ORS 332.505 ORS 342.513

OAR 581-022-1720 Hanson v. Culver Sch. Dist. (FDAB 1975)

Other: Administrative Guidelines and Procedures on Supervision and Evaluation

Adopted: 1-8-96 Amended: Replaces: 2180


BOARD POLICY: CFA

SITE-BASED DECISION-MAKING The District defines site-based decision-making as a method of empowering students, parents, teachers, principals and community members in a spirit of collegiality and collaboration with the authority and responsibility for decision-making at the local school level. It is an equitable participation of stakeholders. The rationale for implementing site-based decision-making should be to meet the curricular and instructional needs of students by mobilizing resources at the local level to improve learning. The superintendent will implement a procedure for site-based decision-making to include a delineation of which responsibilities will remain at the central office, which will remain with the principal and which will be made by a shared decision-making body at each site. This procedure should also include guidelines for monitoring and assessing the effectiveness of site-based decision-making in relation to meeting the curricular and instructional goals of the site. The responsibilities and accountability will be shared by the central office, principal and shared decision-making body. The administration of the District should provide leadership and training for implementing site-based decision-making. The District will define the program and each site will be given the flexibility to develop and implement structures that will meet the particular needs of its students and school community. The District administration will be responsible for educating students, teachers, administrators, parents and the community about the reasons for adopting site-based decision-making in the schools and the intended outcomes. END OF POLICY Legal References: ORS 332.505

Other: SPS Policy: IFCA 21st Century Schools Adopted: 7-10-95 Amended: 8-13-01 Replaces:


BOARD POLICY: CHCA

APPROVAL OF HANDBOOKS AND DIRECTIVES In order that pertinent board policies, regulations, school rules and procedures may be known by all staff members, patrons, students and parents affected, district administrators and principals are granted authority to issue staff and student/parent handbooks. It is essential that the contents of all handbooks conform with districtwide policies and regulations. It is also important that all handbooks bearing the name of the district or one of its schools be of a quality that reflects favorably on the district. The Board may review and approve district personnel handbooks in order that the contents may be accorded the legal status of board-approved policy and regulation. The superintendent will use his/her judgment as to whether other specific handbooks need board approval. All handbooks published are to be made available to the board for informational purposes. END OF POLICY Legal References:

ORS 332.107

Other: Adopted: Amended: Replaces:


BOARD POLICY: CM

DISTRICT ANNUAL REPORT REPORT TO COMMUNITY The Board will report to the community annually about by January 15 of each year the District's status in relation to the state standards, its programs and other activities. END OF POLICY Legal References:

ORS 327.133 ORS 329.095 OAR 581-022-1610 OAR 581-022-1660 OAR 581-022-1720

Other:

Adopted: 8-26-85 Amended: 3-13-95, 8-13-01 Replaces: 1230.8


BOARD POLICY: CPA

LAYOFF/RECALL – ADMINISTRATIVE PERSONNEL The Board retains the right to determine when a layoff is necessary. Layoffs shall be by position. The Board will consider license, qualifications, merit, competence, special training, additional educational attainments, performance and other factors deemed relevant by the Board. Length of service may be considered. The Board will retain, consistent with state law, the most capable and productive of the licensed and qualified employees needed to carry out the approved programs of the district’s schools. Administrative regulations shall be developed to implement this policy. END OF POLICY Legal References: ORS 332.107 ORS 342.934

Other: Adopted: Amended Replaces:


BOARD POLICY: DA

FISCAL MANAGEMENT GOAL The Board will review the needs of the district annually, considering instruction, capital outlay, building improvements and adjustments to accommodate any growth or decline of student enrollment or district area. The Board encourages the input of staff, parents and members of the community as a part of the review and recommendation process. After due consideration of recommendations, the Board will adopt fiscal goals for the school year. END OF POLICY Legal References: ORS 294.305-294.520 [Local Budget Law] ORS Chapter 30 ORS 332.107 ORS 332.105 OAR 581-24-225 (ESD only)

Other: Adopted: 10-13-75 Amended: 5-8-95 Replaces: 1230.6, 6100


BOARD POLICY: DBE

BUDGET PREPARATION MAKING PROCESS The Board regards the budget making process as the opportunity to review the levels of support and cost effectiveness of various aspects of district operations. Through the budget committee, consisting of the five Board members and five qualified electors and residents of the district, a review is made of the expenditures for current programs and anticipated needs for the coming year. Recommendations for deletions and additions may be made to the Board after discussion and consideration. The superintendent has the overall responsibility for budget development and procedures necessary to ensure that the proposed budget reflects all areas of district operation. The superintendent will establish budget priorities for the district and will make appropriate recommendations related to those priorities to the Board and budget committee. END OF POLICY Legal References:

ORS 294305 – 294.565 ORS 328.542 – 348.565 Or. Dept. of Educ, Program Budget and Accounting Manual (2004). Or. Dept. of Revenue, Local Budgeting Manual (2002). ORS 192.610-192.710 ORS 294.305-294.520

OAR 581-23-035

Other: Adopted: 7-24-95 Amended: Replaces: 1230.5


BOARD POLICY: DBEA

BUDGET COMMITTEE Organization, Membership and Terms of Office The District Budget Committee will consist of the five members of the Board and five electors appointed by the Board as required by law. Terms of the appointed members will be three years each with appointments made so that, as nearly as possible, the terms of one third of the members expire each year. Function of the Budget Committee It is the function of the budget committee to approve budget estimates for an educational plan previously determined by the Board. The budget committee will determine levels of spending, but will not determine programs nor personnel assignments. Final Action The budget committee will approve an estimated budget document for submission to the Board. Officers and Orientation of Budget Committee 1. Organization: The budget committee will hold its first regular meeting on a day

set by the Board. A chairman and secretary will be elected from among its members at this meeting.

2. Background Information: Budget committee members will be provided with data

for the ensuing year such as the District's educational plan and data from previous budgets.

Meetings of the Budget Committee Meetings of the budget committee are held on a schedule made necessary by the laws governing the preparation and publication of the annual budget for the ensuing fiscal year. END OF POLICY Legal References:

ORS 192.610-192.710 ORS 294.305-294.56520 ORS 174.130

Other: Adopted: 7-24-95 Amended: Replaces: 1660/2, 6110.2, 6120, 6140


BOARD POLICY: DBJ

BUDGET IMPLEMENTATION The budget, as adopted by the Board, becomes the financial plan of the District for the coming year. The superintendent and staff are authorized to make expenditures and commitments in accordance with the policies of the Board and the approved budget. The superintendent will make the Board aware of any substantial changes in expected revenues or unusual expenditures so the Board may adjust the budget, if necessary. END OF POLICY Legal References:

ORS 294.305-294.565520 ORS 294.565 ORS Chapter 310

Other:

Adopted: 7-24-95 Amended: Replaces:


BOARD POLICY: DBK

BUDGET TRANSFER AUTHORITY The adopted budget is a financial plan which may be subject to change as a result of circumstances or events occurring during the fiscal year. All appropriation transfers shall be made as follows: Fund Transfers Transfers between the levels of appropriation (i.e., functions 1000 - instruction, 2000 - support services, 3000 - community services, etc.) must be made by official resolution of the Board stating the need for the transfer, the purpose and the amount. The superintendent or designee has the authority to approve transfers between programs (i.e., elementary, middle school, high school) and/or object codes (i.e., 100 - salaries, 200- benefits, 300 - purchase services, 400 - supplies, etc.) within the same level of appropriation. Transfers from the general fund to any other fund are authorized when completed by official resolution of the Board stating the need, the purpose and the amount. Appropriations transfers from any special revenue fund to the general fund or any other special revenue fund are prohibited. END OF POLICY Legal References: ORS 294.450

Other: Adopted: 7-24-95 Amended: 11-05-01 Replaces:


BOARD POLICY: DC

BORROWING FUNDS The Board may authorize borrowing funds for the purpose of meeting current or future expenses and other legal expenditures when provision has been made for such expenditures in the adopted budget. END OF POLICY Legal References: ORS 294.443 ORS 328.565



BOARD POLICY: DD/DE/DEB/DEC/DFC

FUNDING PROPOSALS AND APPLICATIONS The Board has as its primary mission the education of District students according to adopted goals and objectives. To this end all legal and worthwhile financial resources will be pursued. The district may pursue government or private grants that will assist the district to met its goals. In general, proposals will be submitted to the superintendent and/or designee for evaluation and approval. The Board reserves the right to reject funds associated with any grant which has been approved. Grants-in-aid may become available from either the federal or state government. The Board authorizes the superintendent or designee to pursue those grants that will assist the District in meeting the adopted goals and objectives of the current curriculum or will create facilities, purchase equipment or otherwise assist in implementing such programs as the Board has previously considered/approved. The Board authorizes, acceptance and use of private, state or federal funds available to the District to carry out District educational programs. The Board directs the District to comply with all regulations and procedures required for receiving and using such funds. The Board directs that each request for outside funding be examined by the superintendent or designee to determine the obligations, expectations or encumbrances which will exist when the grant or other outside funding ceases. END OF POLICY Legal References:

ORS 294.305-294.565 ORS 332.075107 ORS 294.100



BOARD POLICY: DE/DEB/DEC

REVENUES FROM PRIVATE, STATE AND FEDERAL SOURCES Grants-in-aid may become available from either the federal or state government. The Board authorizes the superintendent or designee to pursue those grants that will assist the District in meeting the adopted goals and objectives of the current curriculum or will create facilities, purchase equipment or otherwise assist in implementing such programs as the Board has previously considered/approved. The Board authorizes, acceptance and use of private, state or federal funds available to the District to carry out District educational programs. The Board directs the District to comply with all regulations and procedures required for receiving and using such funds. END OF POLICY Legal References:

ORS 294.305-294.565 ORS 332.107



BOARD POLICY: DFA

INVESTMENTS INVESTMENT OF FUNDS This investment policy shall apply to all investment activities of Springfield School District for all funds that are accounted for in the annual budget. OBJECTIVES Preservation of capital is the primary objective in managing the District's excess funds. District investments shall be diversified with regard to type of security and institution to the greatest extent possible. Second to preservation of capital is to provide sufficient liquidity to meet the District's reasonably anticipated cash requirements. A third objective shall be to attain a market rate of return on the investment portfolio. DELEGATION OF AUTHORITY The finance director is designated as investment officer and is responsible for investment decisions and activities, under the direction of the superintendent. The finance director shall develop and maintain written administrative procedures for the operation of the investment program consistent with this policy. PRUDENCE: The standard of prudence to be used by the investment officer in the context of managing the overall portfolio shall be the prudent investor rule, which states, "Investments shall be made with judgment and care, under circumstances then prevailing, which persons of prudence, discretion and intelligence exercise in the management of their own affairs, not for speculation, but for investment, considering the probable safety of their capital as well as the probable income to be derived." The investment officer and staff, acting in accordance with written procedures and exercising due diligence, shall not be held personally responsible for a specific security's credit risk or market price changes, provided that these derivation are reported as soon as practical and that appropriate action is taken to control adverse developments. SAFEKEEPING AND COLLATERALIZATION All securities purchased from a financial institution shall be secured through dealer-bank safekeeping. The purchase or sale of securities shall be subject to the provisions of

2 of 2 Code: DFA


Oregon Law. Payment shall not be made for the purchase of securities until title is received and securities may not be delivered upon their sale prior to receipt of payment: However, the primary banking services provider may serve as intermediary while transactions are being processed. The investment officer will ensure that a Certificate of Participation has been issued by the institution to cover outstanding deposits exceeding FDIC coverage. The extent of collateralization must comply with Oregon Law. QUALIFIED INSTITUTIONS Investments made shall be placed with a "qualified financial institution", with an office located within Oregon. "Qualified Financial Institution", for the purposes of this policy, is defined as a financial institution that is located in the Sate of Oregon, is licensed to do a banking business, and not required to maintain a reserved deposit of collateral having a value not less than 110 percent of its public fund deposits. Investments made with the Investment Pool (LGIP) are allowed up to the maximum as provided in Oregon Law. END OF POLICY Legal References:

ORS 294.033145 (4,5) ORS 294.035 (7,11) ORS 294.135(1)(a) ORS 294.155 ORS Chapter 295 ORS 295.18 ORS 294.805 (5) ORS 294.810 (2) ORS 294.018

Other:

Adopted: 1-8-96 Amended: Replaces: 6630


BOARD POLICY: DFC

GRANTS FROM PRIVATE SOURCES The Board directs that each request for outside funding be examined by the superintendent or designee to determine the obligations, expectations or encumbrances which will exist when the grant or other outside funding ceases. END OF POLICY Legal References:

ORS 294.100 ORS 294.305 – 294.565

Other: Adopted: 1-8-96 Amended: Replaces: 6630


BOARD POLICY: DFG

INCOME FROM PROGRAM-RELATED SALES AND SERVICES Certain professional technical activities allow students to charge the public for goods and services. These activities are designed for educational purposes and not to compete with community businesses. Charge for work performed and goods sold through these activities will be kept current with costs for the service or item. Money collected will be deposited in the student body fund. END OF POLICY Legal References:

ORS 294.305 – 294.565



BOARD POLICY: DG

DEPOSITORY OF FUNDS The Board has authorized the Superintendent to deposit working funds at locations where they will expedite and increase the efficiency of District operations. END OF POLICY Legal References: ORS 294-805 – 294.895 ORS 328.441 ORS 328.445

ORS 328.441 ORS 328.445

Other: Adopted: 2-9-76 Amended: 6-12-95 Replaces: 6240, 6620


BOARD POLICY: DGA

AUTHORIZED SIGNATURES The Board will authorize specific staff to sign District checks and other documents on behalf of the District at its annual organizational meeting in July or at other times deemed necessary by the Board. The Board may authorize the use of facsimile signatures by those designated persons. END OF POLICY Legal References:

ORS 294.120 ORS 328.441 ORS 328.445



BOARD POLICY: DH

BONDED EMPLOYEES AND OFFICERS All school employees responsible for funds, fees, cash collections or inventory control will be bonded to protect the District against loss. In compliance with Oregon statutes and administrative rules, the superintendent or designee(s) will have individual fidelity bond coverage. The District will pay the cost of such bonds. END OF POLICY Legal References:

ORS 328.441 ORS 332.525

OAR 581-022-1720 715



BOARD POLICY: DI

FISCAL ACCOUNTING AND REPORTING The District's accounting and reporting system will operate in accordance with generally accepted accounting procedures and will conform with state laws and regulations. All fund accounts except bond redemption are classified as internal accounts because they are under the immediate control of the District and its officials. END OF POLICY Legal References:

ORS 294.305-294.565 20 [Local Budget Law] ORS 328.205-328.470

OAR 581-23-035 OAR 581-23-041

Or. Dept. of Educ., Program Budget and Accounting Manual (2004).



BOARD POLICY: DIC

FINANCIAL REPORTS AND STATEMENTS Upon the Board's request, appropriate staff member(s) will be available at any Board meeting, to respond to questions and to present current financial information. The superintendent will notify the Board at any time substantial deviations from anticipated income or expenditures are anticipated. The Board will receive financial reports that include estimates of expenditures for the major general fund accounts in comparison to budget appropriations, actual receipts in comparison to budget estimates, and the District's overall cash condition. Supplementary reports on other funds or accounts will be furnished upon request of the Board or superintendent. The Board will receive a pre-audit report recapping the year-end closure of financial statements prior to the annual audit by the District's authorized accountant. END OF POLICY Legal References:

ORS 294.155 ORS 294.311 ORS Chapter 297 ORS 328.465 ORS 332.105 OAR 162-010-0000 to -0330 OAR 162-040-000 to -0160

OAR 581-023-0037 Or. Dept. of Educ., Program Budget and Accounting Manual (2004).



BOARD POLICY: DID

PROPERTY INVENTORIES The District will maintain a complete property inventory that lists all school sites, buildings, equipment with a value greater than $5,000 and supplies with a value greater than $5,000. This inventory will be updated annually. The Board may authorize the employment of an appraisal company to assist with the inventory procedure. To update the inventory, the District will keep current records of equipment disposed of and purchased. END OF POLICY Legal References: ORS 332.155

Other: Adopted: 6-12-95 Amended: 5-8-00 Replaces:

BOARD POLICY: DJ

DISTRICT PURCHASING The function of District purchasing is to serve the educational program by providing the necessary supplies, equipment and services. The Board declares its intention to purchase competitively without prejudice and to seek maximum educational value for every dollar expended. Items commonly used in the various schools and their subdivisions will be standardized whenever consistent with educational goals and in the interest of efficiency or economy. The superintendent or designee is responsible for developing and administering the District's purchasing program. The Board will serve as the Local Public Contract Review Board for the District. The Board will use applicable Oregon administrative rules and statutes as guidelines when performing public contract review functions. The superintendent or designee will develop additional guidelines as necessary. No obligation may be incurred by any officer or employee of the Board unless that expenditure has been authorized in the budget or by Board action and/or Board policy. In all cases calling for the expenditure of District money, except payrolls, and authorized credit cards, the District requisition and purchase order system shall be used. All purchases, contracts or agreements obligating District funds in excess of statutory bidding limits will require Board approval. The superintendent or designee is authorized to issue all other purchase orders, contracts or agreements without prior approval of the Board where formal bidding procedures are not required by law and when current budget appropriations are adequate to cover such obligations. The superintendent or designee will review bills due and payable for the purchase of supplies and services to determine if they are within budget amounts. After appropriate administrative review, direct payment will be made for just claims against the District. The superintendent or designee is responsible for the accuracy of all bills and vouchers. No Board members, officers, employees or agents of this District shall use their official position to obtain financial loss or gain or avoid financial detriment for themselves or any member of their household in any contract entered into by the Board, including acceptance of any gratuities, financial or otherwise, from any supplier of materials or services. Legal references on page 2.

2 of 2 Code: DJ

END OF POLICY Legal References:

ORS 244.040 ORS 294.311 ORS 332.075 ORS Chapters 279, 279A, 279B, 279C ORS 328.441 - 328.470

OAR 125-025-0040 OAR 125-065-0000 OAR 125-310-0012

Other: Adopted: 7-24-95 Amended: 8-13-01 Replaces: DJ/DJA/DJF


BOARD POLICY: DJB

PETTY CASH ACCOUNTS The Board may authorize such petty cash accounts as are in accordance with state law or regulations and approved accounting procedures. Any petty cash fund established will not exceed $100 for each school building and for the central administrative office. Such funds will be used for the payment of properly itemized bills of nominal amounts and under conditions calling for immediate payment. Allowances, responsibility, security and accounting of petty cash funds will be in accordance with Board policy and requirements of law. END OF POLICY Legal References: ORS 294.311 05-294.520



BOARD POLICY: DJC

BIDDING REQUIREMENTS The Board is the Local Contract Review Board. All public contracts will be invited under the applicable competitive procurement provisions of Oregon law. The Board adopts the Oregon Attorney General’s Model Public Contract Rules in effect at the time this policy is adopted, as modified by the Board. New rules, as necessary, shall be adopted by the Board. Each time the Oregon Attorney General adopts a modification of the model rules, the district will review its rules to determine whether the Board will modify any of its public contracting rules. Bids or requests for proposals will be called for on all orders for equipment or supplies and on building additions or construction estimated to equal or exceed the amount set by law requiring public bidding or when public bidding may benefit the district. Exceptions include cases where the Board acts in an emergency and follows applicable laws and administrative rules. Bids may be called for or quotations requested for items or services involving lesser amounts if, in the judgment of the Board or the superintendent it is in the district's best interest. Generally the bid or proposal of the lowest responsible bidder or proposer will be accepted consistent with specifications on quality, service, delivery and other requirements. However the Board reserves the right to accept any bid or proposal or may divide or reject any or all bids or proposals. All responsible suppliers will be provided opportunity to do business with the district. The superintendent or designee will develop and maintain lists of potential bidders for various types of materials, equipment and supplies. Such lists will be used to develop a mailing list for distribution of specifications and invitations to bid. All solicitation documents for public contracts Requests for Proposals will be printed in the appropriate publications. Bidders or proposers may be required to pre-qualify before the competitive solicitation process begins bidding to determine their competency and financial ability. Records of bids and proposals and specifications will be kept in the district administration office and will conform with Oregon Revised Statutes and administrative rules. (Legal references on page 2.)


BOARD POLICY: DJCA

PERSONAL SERVICES CONTRACTS The District may enter into personal services contracts with qualified professionals as provided by ORS 279A.055. Personal services contracts, as used in this policy, means contracts for specialized skills, knowledge and resources in the application of highly technical or scientific expertise or the exercise of professional, artistic, or management discretion or judgment. The district may enter into a personal services contract with a current district employee only when the individual meets independent contractor status in accordance with state, Public Employees Retirement System (PERS) and Internal Revenue Service (IRS) requirements. Selection of a personal services contractor will be based primarily on qualifications and performance history, expertise, knowledge and creativity and the ability to exercise sound professional judgment. All personal services contracts shall be based on demonstrated qualifications and competence to perform the required services, encourage competition, discourage favoritism and obtain services at a fair and reasonable price. Contracts for personal services in excess of $150,000 shall require prior Board approval. The superintendent will develo0p administrative regulations as necessary to implement this policy. END OF POLICY Legal References: ORS Chapters 279, 279A, 279B and 279C ORS 332.107 ORS 670.600 OAR 459-010-0030

Internal Revenue Service, Publication 1779: Independent Contractor or Employee (2005).

Other:



BOARD POLICY: DJCB

REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL The District will use requests for proposals (RFP) as a means for soliciting competitive proposals or offers to be used as a basis for making an acquisition or entering into a contract when specification and price will not necessarily be the predominant award criteria. Requests for proposals shall minimally provide: 1. A clearly written document stating the contractual requirements; 2. An evaluation criteria which clearly outlines the procedure to be used in

determining the award to include, but not limited to, cost, quality, service, compatibility, product reliability, operating efficiency and expansion potential;

3. A clear statement regarding complaint procedures and available remedies; 4. A clear statement outlining the opportunity and procedure which allows

vendors to comment on any specifications they feel limit competition. The District's selection process will not inhibit competition or encourage favoritism. Requests for proposals will not be used where competitive bidding is required by Oregon Revised Statutes nor will the request for proposal process be used if such process would substantially diminish competition for public contracts. In all purchasing, the District will continually seek the most value for the funds expended. END OF POLICY Legal References: ORS Chapters 279, 279A, 279B and 279C ORS 332.107 OAR 459-010-0030 ORS 670.600

Internal Revenue Service, Publication 1779: Independent Contractor or Employee (2005).

ORS 279.015 ORS 279.051

OAR 125-300-001 OAR 125-310-025

Other:



BOARD POLICY: DK

PAYMENT PROCEDURES All claims for payment from District funds will be processed by the Finance Department. Payment will be authorized against invoices properly supported by approved purchase orders, with properly submitted receipts or vouchers, or in accordance with salaries and salary schedules approved by the Board. The Director of Finance will be responsible for assuring that budget allocations are observed and that total expenditures do not exceed the amount allocated in the budget. END OF POLICY Legal References:

ORS 294.305-294.565 [Local Budget Law] ORS 328.460 ORS 328.441

Other:



BOARD POLICY: DLA

PAYDAY SALARY PAYMENT SCHEDULE All District employees will be paid on a time schedule developed by the Director of Finance or as established under the collective bargaining agreement. END OF POLICY Legal References:

ORS 332.505 24 ORS 652.120(2)

Other: Adopted: 7-24-95 Amended: Replaces: 6510, 6520, 6530


BOARD POLICY: DLC

EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT The Board recognizes that certain expenses are incurred by district employees in carrying out authorized duties. The Board approves the reimbursement of such necessary and reasonable expenditures as outlined in administrative procedures. All approval and reimbursement procedures must be followed prior to reimbursement. END OF POLICY Legal References:

ORS 294.155 ORS 332.107 ORS 294.465

OAR 581-022-1660 I.R.C. § 162 (2006); Business Expenses, 26 C.F.R. 1.162-1 (2006). Internal Revenue Services Publication 463: Travel, Entertainment, Gift and Car Expenses (2005). Other:


RESOLUTION: #06-07.034 JANUARY 22, 2007

AUDITOR’S REPORT TO MANAGEMENT AND RESPONSE

RELEVANT DATA: Each year the school district requests that the auditing firm provide a written report on the management of the school district including recommendations to improve internal control procedures. A copy of this report has been provided for your review. We have also included the school district’s response to the report in which we outline the various processes that have either been implemented or will be implemented to address each of the areas of the report. At tonight’s meeting Brett Yancey, Director of Budget and Finance, will be available to answer any questions that the Board may have. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended the Board of Directors accept the attached response to the management letter issued by the District’s auditor for the 2005-06 fiscal year-end Submitted by: Brett M. Yancey Director of Budget & Finance

RESPONSE TO THE REPORT TO MANAGEMENT LETTER YEAR ENDING JUNE 30,2006

CURRENT YEAR COMMENTS

Accounts Payable

Condition: The accounts payable supervisor can create vendors, batch and enter the payables into the computer system, verify checks thru the banks positive pay system, and has access to check stock. The basic premise of segregation of duties is that no one employee should have access to both physical assets and the related accounting records or to all phases of the transaction. It is recommended that the District segregate some of the above mentioned duties. Update: The District continues to strive for appropriate segregation of duties within our current staffing, We have looked at splitting duties and will continue to do so. At this point we are continuing to work on adjustments that would meet the auditor’s requirements but have no firm plans in place. Payroll System

Condition: Payroll staff can create new employees within the general ledger system. To better segregate duties it is recommended that payroll staff not be able to create employees and that Human Resources create all new employees in the general ledger system. Update: This issue is one of the limitations within our current financial software system. The system does not allow for a level of segregated duties consistent with the auditing firm’s suggestions. Moving forward , the Linn Benton-Lincoln ESD is conducting a comprehensive search for a replacement system. We have officially been notified that they are discontinuing use of the current software system and have hopes that all clients would move to a replacement system by the end of the 2007-08 fiscal year. As a minimum requirement for a replacement system, our school district is requesting that the system be fully integrated between human resources and financial services. This should alleviate concerns expressed by the auditing firm.

RESOLUTION #06-07.035 DATE: JANUARY 22, 2007

CONTINGENCY TRANSFER

RELEVANT DATA: On January 11th, 2007 we were notified by Springfield Radio Communications that our current bus and handheld radio frequencies would no longer be supported effective January 31st, 2007. This, according to Springfield Radio, was the result of the FCC allocating the existing 800mhz frequencies to cellular telephone companies. It appears that the two-way radio industry is moving towards a 450mhz standard. To make this move, we will be required to replace all of our existing two-way radios with new equipment. We are exploring a number of options including moving to a different vendor who could initially support our 800mhz equipment while we transition to 450mhz equipment, using two-way cellular services, and replacing all of our existing radio equipment now with new 450mhz gear. As of 12:00pm Wednesday January 17th, we have not yet received all of the proposals from the radio vendors on which to base our decision. What is clear is that all of the alternative will require funding that is not allocated in the 2006-2007 budget. Based on our discussions with the various vendors, we are estimating that $25,000 will be required to cover the initial costs necessary to maintain radio communications within the District. Any additional funds required to complete the conversion can be allocated in the 2007-2008 budget. Tom Lindly will be prepared to share the details of the decision at the January 22nd Board meeting. This resolution is necessary to properly record expenditures in the 2006-2007 budget within the levels as required by Oregon Budget Law. Oregon Budget Law requires that expenditures are recorded within the proper account, and that expenditures not exceed the total amount budgeted by function level (1000 – Instruction, 2000 – Support Services, etc.). A formal resolution by the school board is required to transfer budget appropriations between function levels. RECOMMENDATION: BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED, that the Board of Directors for Springfield Public Schools transfers budget appropriations for the 2006-2007 fiscal year with the fund listed below: 100-6110 ($25,000) Contingency 100-2661 $ 7,500 Technology Services 100-2551 $ 17,500 Transportation Services SUBMITTED BY: RECOMMENDED BY: Brett M. Yancey Nancy Golden Director of Finance Superintendent

BOARD OF EDUCATION January 22, 2007 Administration Center ...board.sps.lane.edu/schedule_2006-07/2006_Packets/BrdPkt_012207.… · D. Board Communication & DeFranco E. Superintendent

Documents