Members Present:

Richard Kowalski, President; Dawn Klida, Vice-President; Terrence O’Hare, Treasurer; Barbara Skowronski, Secretary; John Loop, Trustee; Patrick Shaffer, Trustee; Scott Sturm, Trustee

Members Absent:

None.

expressions/communi-

cations from the public

Mr. Andress read a thank-you letter from Sue Hohman.

recommendation for student discipline

consent agenda

other items for discussion

Mr. Wetters reviewed the incident involving a John Glenn student.  His recommendation to the Board was for expulsion for the remainder of the 2004/05 school year.  Mr. Kowalski asked if the district would make sure that the student received counseling during the expulsion period.  Mr. Wetters explained the location of the student at this time.  He did not think the student would be coming back to Bangor.

A motion was made by Barbara Skowronski, supported by Dawn Klida, to approve the recommendation.  Motion carried unanimously.

A motion was made by Dawn Klida, supported by Barbara Skowronski, to approve the Consent Agenda as follows:

Approval of Minutes:  March 16, 2005 (special meeting) and March 17, 2005, (work session)

Motion carried unanimously.

Questions were raised about the motion that was made at the March 21 meeting regarding Transportation budget reductions of 10%.  Mrs. Klida asked that this be clarified and what items were included in the $100,000 reduction.  Mr. Kowalski felt that the mechanic position and one bus run had already been approved and would not be included in the 10% cut.  Mr. Andress stated that the mechanic position was part of another association.  He said that he had intended to include the $26,000 in the $100,000, but not the bus mechanic because that was a different union.

Further questions were raised about what was included in the 10% reduction in the Transportation budget.  Mr. Kowalski did not believe that negotiated items could be included as a part of the reduction.  Mrs. Klida asked what budget the mechanic’s position came out of.  Mr. Andress informed her that it came out of the Transportation budget.

Mr. Kowalski said that when the original motion was made on March 21, the 10% did not include one bus run and the .5 bus mechanic.  A total of $48,000 in additional cuts should bring the total cuts in Transportation to approximately $100,000 or 10%.  Mrs. Klida felt that this would be more than 10% out of their budget.

Mr. Andress stated that he would look at where the Board was with the total cuts and put together all of the numbers.  If they needed to make a motion to correct the reduction, they could. 

Mr. Loop stated that it was not to the exclusion, however, of anything that happens in negotiations.  Mr. Kowalski said that however it happened, whatever they get in negotiations, the Board can re-evaluate the situation with the possibility of bringing some things back.  Mr. Loop said that they might find they can’t meet the $100,000.

Mr. Andress said that in discussions with the association, they are not looking fondly at a split position.  What they may end up having to do is lay off one of the mechanics.  That person would then bump into a utility position.  The district would then have to hire a half time mechanic with no benefits. 

Mr. Kowalski said that if Essexville takes all of their busing to Bay City, then Bangor would not be taking care of all their buses.  Mr. Andress said that Essexville has not yet signed to do this with Bay City.  Mr. Kowalski asked what revenue is generated from Essexville for these duties.  Mr. Andress said that he would have this information in Friday’s packet.  Mr. Kowalski discussed the possibility of raising the lease cost for the Bay-Arenac EI classroom at Bangor Central.  He suggested putting in a 3%, or inflation, increase each year.

Mrs. Klida stated that she had been told today that there was a change in the teacher situation at the middle school.  Mr. Andress said that he was not comfortable with evidence and proof presented on the teacher in question.  Mrs. Klida felt that the original budget savings approved for that teacher would not be seen.  Mr. Andress said that they will have to lay off a teacher at that level.  Mrs. Klida said that her opinion about the performance of that individual indicated strong evidence to dismiss the person at this time.  Mr. Andress said that the person had some problems earlier in the year.  Improvement was seen and Mr. Andress did not feel what was presented was enough evidence for dismissal.

Mr. Kowalski asked if administrators had enough training in this area.  Mr. Andress said that a full day of training had taken place with Mr. Allsopp.  He tries to do this every other year for administrators.  Administrators do not like to appear like they are carrying a big stick.  They do need to tell employees that if they do not improve they will not be renewed.

Mrs. Klida said that at a public meeting Mr. Andress indicated that there was one teacher going from both (middle and high) schools, and they were both having difficulties.  Now there is one at the middle school who will be laid off who was not involved.  It will appear that this person was the one having difficulty.  Mrs. Klida questioned the procedure if the documentation was in place.  Mr. Andress said that people were prepared for lay offs.  He did not believe this would be interpreted otherwise.  Mrs. Klida felt that it was terribly unfair to the person being laid off.

Mr. Andress said that, due to the manner in which seniority was figured, an excellent teacher would be laid off.  Mr. Kowalski said that if he had someone who was bad he would be coaching them and do whatever he could to save or get rid of that person.

Mr. Andress said that he reviewed the documentation and asked the administrators if they felt that the person should not be let go. He was told the person was having difficulty.

Mr. Shaffer said that, going back to the beginning of the 2003/04 school year, there was a teacher taking a leave of absence.  During that absence the district hired a substitute full time.  Not long after the person took the leave it was discovered that they had taken a full-time position in Pinconning.  The person who filled that position was not offered a position and finished the year as a substitute.  The substitute was then offered a position sometime in April or June of 2004.  Now the contract language says that the social security number establishes seniority, not by when you are offered a contract.  This person is now finishing up their second year and is at the bottom of the seniority list.  There is no question, if you asked people in that building, that she is the cream of the crop.  The Board now has concerns about another individual and this person is getting the axe.

Mr. Loop felt that the Board should have the paperwork on the person who is not performing.  Mrs. Skowronski felt that the language in the contract should be revised.  Mr. Loop said that the Board had no control over that.  He said that if someone had been marked as having trouble, there should be a plan.

Mrs. Skowronski stated that a growth plan should be in place with weekly meetings taking place.  Mr. Andress said that administrators have been following that procedure and the person has improved.  Regarding the substitute teacher, Mr. Andress said that the union had not said anything and was fine with it.  He also felt that the Board should not review the documentation as they may be involved in an appeal process at sometime in the future should this person continue to perform unsatisfactorily.

Mrs. Klida questioned whether the Board should have the documentation reviewed.  Mr. Andress said that he believed he had discussed this with Mr. Allsopp.  Mrs. Klida felt that Mr. Allsopp should look at the documentation.

adjournment

At 6:02 p.m. a motion was made by Barbara Skowronski, supported by Terrence O’Hare, to adjourn the meeting.