Board of Education Meeting Minutes

August 1, 2006

ATTENDANCE: Thomas Vetter, Chairman; Rob Polley; Jody Bishop-Pullan; Bruce Kimmel; Richard Fuller; Rosa Murray; Gregory Burnett; Susan Hamilton.

STAFF: Dr. Salvatore Corda, Superintendent of Schools.

OTHERS: Peter Thor, Dir. Of Policy & Planning, Council 4, AFSCME; Virginia Mislinski; Jim Castelot; Kay Tortorella.

I. CALL TO ORDER

Mr. Vetter called the meeting to order at 6:32 p.m.

Board members in attendance were Thomas Vetter, Chairman; Rob Polley; Jody Bishop- Pullan;Bruce Kimmel; Richard Fuller; Rosa Murray; Gregory Burnett; Susan Hamilton. Dr. Salvatore Corda was also in attendance.

II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE

Mr. Vetter led the Board in the Pledge of Allegiance.

III. A. FOOD SERVICE MANAGEMENT SERVICES B. DISCUSSION OF PERSONNEL MATTERS C. NEGOTIATIONS WITH TECHNICAL GROUP (Executive Session anticipated) ** MS. BISHOP-PULLAN MOTIONED THAT THE BOARD GO INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION TO DISCUSS ITEMS A, B AND C. ** MS. MURRAY SECONDED. ** MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.

The Board went into Executive Session at 6:33 p.m.

Public session was resumed at 8:00 p.m.

Mr. Vetter called the Board to order at 8:05 p.m. In attendance were Thomas Vetter, Chairman; Rob Polley; Jody Bishop-Pullan; Bruce Kimmel; Richard Fuller; Rosa Murray; Gregory Burnett; Susan Hamilton; and Dr. Salvatore Corda.

PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE

Mr. Vetter led the Board in the Pledge of Allegiance.

IV. SUPERINTENDENT’S REPORT

A. Review of Athletic Eligibility Pilot Program

Dr. Corda said that although on the agenda the Superintendent’s Report is described as the review of the athletic eligibility pilot program, he was going to forego that this evening to provide an opportunity for the Board to hear a presentation by the management company that is under consideration for the management of Norwalk’s food service operation. He said in way of introduction he wanted to present an overview of how this was approached and how the presentation came to be.

Dr. Corda stated a variety of proposals were solicited for the management of the food service operation. He said he wanted to be very clear that this does not impact the number of food service employees; this was only for management service. The request for proposals were advertised in the newspaper and a number of proposals received. A meeting was held to orient companies that were interested in submitting proposals, and there were five vendors that submitted proposals.

A committee was formed that consisted of eight individuals and included Mr. Opdahl, the Chief Operations Officer; John Seegan (sp), the budget coordinator; George Delitti (sp), who served as consultant; Jerry Cross (sp), the secretary/bookkeeper at Central Kitchen; James Alezzi (sp), the chef/manager; and Fred Cogsworth (sp), head chef/manager and president of Local 1748. Their responsibility was to assess the proposals and to provide advice in terms of the proposals as what they believed to be the best for Norwalk Public Schools. Dr. Corda said the presentation tonight is from a company that they believe to be the company to best provide services to the district. This is a decision that the Board of Education will make, but the decision will not be made tonight. The Board needs to hear the proposal; they need the opportunity to give it serious consideration; and then to make a determination whether or not this is the best way to go.

Mr. Opdahl introduced the representatives of Whitsons.

The representative stated that Whitson’s is a company that uses the school market a little differently than the average company. What they try to do is identify with what students know in the school market and identify serving concepts based on serving stations. They don’t mimic in terms of menu items, but add to them in degree of nutrition. For example, they serve a turkey burger on a whole-wheat bun, or pasta with brown rice, not white rice or pasta. The programs are designed around children of an appropriate age where their likes and dislikes are somewhat limited; then they increase the offerings in the middle schools, and then by high school it is a full-blown concept.

At the elementary level the focus is on nutrition because it is the best time to influence the eating patterns of children. They have a nutrition program designed for the K-3 level called “Nutrition Supporting,” which is identified by supplying and representing different food groups with nutritional messages out in the cafeteria. In addition, there are posters that have a theme between activity and eating correctly to reinforce the message. There are Disney-like characters that come into the cafeteria once or twice a year to bring the process to life for the children and to influence the eating habits that develop.

The middle school level program is called “Smart Choices,” and comes with literature and posters that identify nutritious fare for the students. There is every manner of fare available to the children, including grilled chicken, vegetarian burgers, Southwestern fare made to order such as tacos, burritos, tostadas. There are a series of stations to finish the foods at each station, with grills that can create such fare as Philly Cheese Steak sandwiches and so on. The stations are not cook-to-order, but are finishing stations, and give the children the sights and smells of food cooking. When the kids see the food sizzling on the grill and in the production line, they get the impression that the food is being entirely made there.

The representative said that part of the process was visiting the schools. They took the opportunity to visit each elementary school on the original bid tour. He said this is an opportunity for the team members and the district. Whitsons wants to work with the district in building a nutrition program in the younger level and give the kids an option to not only have a hot meal during the day, but a vegetarian option and a learning experience as well. It is a partnership with the Board, the district, the committees, each principal, and everyone is a big part of the partnership.

As a large company, Whitsons has a lot of purchasing power, and they can bring that to the food service. Menu structure is very important to them. They can bring menus to the committee and work on them months ahead of time. At the elementary level, they want to train the children, and at the higher levels, it’s about making healthy choices with fresh vegetables and fruits and other things.

The representative said that not only is the focus on the food that children eat every day, but the focus is on the team members as well. They will work with the district to figure out what works and what doesn’t. They will work with the people already in the district to create a food service that is the best it can possibly be. They want children to also participate in the program, and are projecting an additional $400,000 towards this end. The representative said they have done these programs in other school districts in similar size and scope, and they feel very secure that they can bring the same type of programs to Norwalk successfully.

V. PUBLIC COMMENT

Mr. Peter Thor, Director of Policy & Planning, Council 4 AFSCME said that he was concerned about the proposal notification being in the paper. He said his organization received no prior notification. Mr. Thor felt that this eviscerated the existing agreement. He said he appreciated the fact that the Board was not making a decision tonight and stated that it may be premature to be considering bringing in an outside company. Ms. Virginia Mislinski of Norwalk asked the Board when the decision on the management of the food service operation will be made. Mr. Vetter stated that there was no set timeframe yet but agreed that a decision needs to be made by the time school starts.

Mr. Jim Castelot stated he was Chief Negotiator for this bargaining unit and stated that there has been no bargaining involved. He said this creates a problem, and reminded the Board that the collective bargaining agreement remains in effect throughout this process.

Ms. Kay Tortorella, Norwalk High School, asked if changing the management company for the school system’s food service would interfere in any way with the renaming of the Central Kitchen building for Mr. Frank A. Harris.

VI. ACTIONS

A. Approve authorizing the Superintendent of Schools, Dr. Salvatore J. Corda, and/or his designee, the COO, Stuart A. Opdahl to execute any and all documents relating to the procurement related to electricity and natural gas from the lowest qualified supplier for an initial term not to exceed three (3) years. SourceOne is acting as the Consulting Agent relative to said procurement.

** MS. HAMILTON MOTIONED TO APPROVE AUTHORIZING THE SUPERINTENDENT OF SCHOOLS, DR. SALVATORE J. CORDA AND/OR HIS DESIGNEE, THE COO, STUART A. OPDAHL TO EXECUTE ANY AND ALL DOCUMENTS RELATING TO THE PROCUREMENT RELATED TO ELECTRICITY AND NATURAL GAS FROM THE LOWEST QUALIFIED SUPPLIER FOR AN INITIAL TERM NOT TO EXCEED THREE (3) YEARS. ** MS. MURRAY SECONDED. ** MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.

B. Approve authorizing the Superintendent of Schools to notify the Mayor and Facilities Commission to transfer $1,300,000 of unallocated funds within the $70,000,000 Building Allocation to the Norwalk High School appropriation. ** MR. KIMMEL MOTIONED TO APPROVE AUTHORIZING THE SUPERINTENDENT OF SCHOOLS TO NOTIFY THE MAYOR AND FACILITIES COMMISSION TO TRANSFER $1,300,000 OF UNALLOCATED FUNDS TO THE NORWALK HIGH SCHOOL APPROPRIATION. ** MR. FULLER SECONDED. ** MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.

VII. INFORMATION & REPORTS

A. Teacher Evaluation Plan

B. Administrator Evaluation Plan

Dr. Corda stated that the teacher evaluation plan and the administrators evaluation plan are reviewed annually to see whether or not there ought to be revisions made, and they come bevore the Board after the Committee has met and gone through their deliberations about any changes that are being proposed. The teacher evaluation plan has some minor changes, which are mostly editorial and provide some clarification, but there is no change to the form and substance of the teacher evaluation plan. However, they are obligated to bring it before the Board.

Dr. Corda said the administrator evaluation plan is different, because the model has been reformatted because, as they have implemented the administrators evaluation plan, using basically the same model as they had done for the teachers, which was a Rubric-based model, what became clear was not the most effective way to assess the performance of administrators. In contrast to the teachers evaluation plan, they are building administrators in to act with teachers on a daily basis, observe classrooms, and use the classroom performance of teachers and their daily observation in the formulation of the teachers’ assessment.

Dr. Corda said the evaluation of building administrators by central office staff takes on a different scope and a different way of thinking about it, because the administrators are not in the building every day. The rubric they had used really did not fit the bill. The change in the administrators evaluation plan is best described as what is being assessed, and the focus and emphasis in this plan is in the following categories: student performance: what change took place in terms of student learning; what capacity was generated, supported and built by administration with the student performance, for staff, for students, and for community. To what extent has the building administrator been involved in the nurture and development of the learning community; that is, one that is guided by a vision and culture that represents what the desired state. To what extent has the administration effectively managed the building in terms of its day-to-day operations, such as discipline, management of schedules, and so on. To what extent has the administrator provided effective supervision and management to teachers. In terms of the administrator’s own professional growth, what efforts and what took place so that the administrator is on a continual path to improving his or her own performance.

Dr. Corda said the same is true, conceptually, for the assessment of central office staff; that is, instructional specialists, directors, etc. The primary vehicle, which is emphasized more in this document in comparison to the other, is the integration and implementation of the school growth plan in the assessment and evaluation of administrators. It keeps the focus much more clearly centered on what we believe is most important, and that is the improvement of student achievement.

The revision that took place is the result of a committee that included administrators who are also representatives of the bargaining group, both the president and the vice president; as well as central office staff and building staff.

An attendee of the meeting, Mr. Harding Dies, interrupted the proceedings to ask when the athletic eligibility program will be discussed. Mr. Vetter said it would not be discussed tonight. Mr. Dies said that if it is not discussed before the start of the school year, he is going to be very upset.

VIII. ADJOURNMENT

** MS. BISHOP-PULLAN MOTIONED TO ADJOURN. ** MS. HAMILTON SECONDED. ** MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.

The meeting was adjourned at 9:10 p.m.

Respectfully submitted,

Linda J. Hayes Telesco Secretarial Services

Category: Minutes