November 25, 2003 Regular Board Meeting Minutes

1 of 21 – Regular Board Meeting 11/25/03

These minutes were typed from the Meeting tapes. Charlotte, North Carolina Minutes were transcribed by Nancy Daughtridge, McKinney Personnel, Inc. November 25, 2003

REGULAR MEETING OF THE

CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBURG BOARD OF EDUCATION The Charlotte-Mecklenburg Board of Education held a Regular Board Meeting on November 25, 2003 at 4:30 p.m. in the Board Room of the Education Center.

Present: Wilhelmenia I. Rembert, Chairperson; Louise Woods, Vice Chairperson;

Arthur Griffin, Jr., Member At Large; John Lassiter, Member At Large; and

B. Lee Kindberg (District 6)

Absent: Larry Gauvreau (District 1); Vilma D. Leake (District 2); George Dunlap, (District 3); and Molly Griffin (District 5)

Also present at the request of the Board were James L. Pughsley, Superintendent; Maurice Green, General Counsel to the Board; and Nancy Daughtridge, serving as Clerk to the Board. Upon motion by Ms. Woods, and seconded by Dr. Kindberg, the Board voted unanimously of those present to go into Closed Session for the following purposes:

• To establish and instruct the Board’s staff and negotiating agents concerning the position to be taken by or on behalf of the Board in negotiating the price and other material terms of contracts or proposed contracts for the acquisition of real estate property by purchase, option or exchange, pursuant to Section 143-318.11(a)(5) of the North Carolina General Statutes.

• To hear and discuss a personnel matter, pursuant to Sections 143-318.11(a)(5) and (a)(6) of the North Carolina General Statutes.

• To consult with its attorneys regarding a matter in which it is necessary to preserve the attorney-client privilege between the Board of Education and its attorneys. This motion is made pursuant to Section 143-318.11(a)(3) of the North Carolina General Statutes.

Dr. Rembert reconvened the Regular Board Meeting at 6:00 p.m. in the Board Room of the Education Center. CMS TV Channel 3 televised the meeting.

Present: Wilhelmenia I. Rembert, Chairperson; Louise Woods, Vice Chairperson;

Arthur Griffin, Jr., Member At Large; John W. Lassiter, Member At Large;

Larry Gauvreau (District 1); George Dunlap (District 3); Molly Griffin (District 5); and B. Lee Kindberg (District 6)


Absent: Vilma D. Leake (District 2)

Also present at the request of the Board were James L. Pughsley, Superintendent; Frances Haithcock, Associate Superintendent for Education Services; Greg Clemmer, Deputy Superintendent for Operations; other members of the Executive and Senior Staffs; Maurice Green, General Counsel to the Board; and Nancy Daughtridge, serving as Clerk to the Board. C ALL TO ORDER Chairperson Rembert called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. Dr. Rembert introduced Milaun Brown who led those present and the viewing audience in the Pledge of Allegiance. Miss Brown is seven years old and a second grader at Oaklawn/Bruns Elementary School. She is a member of Dr. Rembert’s church and a star student who has received awards for perfect attendance kindergarten through second grade, Citizenship Award, Reading Award, Award for passing three accelerated math tests, and she is a Brownie Scout. Following the pledge Ms. Brown recited the poem “Honey, I Love” by Eloise Greenfield. After overwhelming the audience with her performance Miss Brown was invited to meet the Board members. Dr. Rembert asked for a motion to amend the agenda as follows: Move item IV. D. Report on Partnership with Bright Beginnings and Pearson Education to I. E. Add two (2) new items under Action Items: II. D. Recommend approval of various real estate transactions II. E. Recommend approval of changes to the General Counsel’s employment and compensation

contracts. Upon motion by Ms. Griffin, seconded by Ms. Woods, the Board voted unanimously of those present to amend the agenda. RECOGNITION / INFORMATION Recognition of CMS Schools of Excellence and Distinction Dr. Rembert called upon Mr. Griffin for the presentation. Mr. Griffin stated the Board was honored to recognize the Charlotte-Mecklenburg Schools of Excellence, Schools of Distinction, Schools receiving High Growth in State and Local Standards, and Schools who met the Federal Adequate Yearly Progress Standards. In 1996, the State Board of Education adopted the ABCs of Public Education. The goals of North Carolina’s primary school program are to provide strong local school accountability, an emphasis on the mastery of basic subjects, and as much local control as possible. CMS posted its strongest gains ever in the demanding ABCs program with 66 schools earning either the prestigious School of Excellence or School of Distinction designation. In addition, 100 schools were recognized as achieving High Growth. Also recognized were 51 schools that met the Federal Adequate Yearly Progress and 79 schools that achieved High Growth in the Local Accountability Program. CMS was proud to have no low-performing schools for the third year in a row, which points to the District’s emphasis on the core business which is student achievement. The school representatives were invited to meet the Board members and presented their banners of recognition. Mr. Griffin asked Dr. Frances Haithcock, Associate Superintendent for Education Services, to announce each school.


The following schools achieved the distinguished School of Excellence designation, met High Growth in State or Local Standards or both, and met the Federal Adequate Yearly Progress Standard: Bain Elementary School, Joye Slade, Principal Clear Creek Elementary School, Dale Ritchie, Principal Collinswood Elementary School, Deborah McCarthy, Teacher Davidson Elementary School, Angela Baucom, Principal Elizabeth Lane Elementary School, Diane Burnham, Principal Elizabeth Traditional Elementary School, Kendra March, Principal Hawk Ridge Elementary School, Rosemary Sheppard, Principal Highland Mill Montessori, Diana Zellner, Assistant Principal Huntersville Elementary School, Stephanie Ennis, Assistant Principal Jay M. Robinson Middle School, Maureen Furr, Principal Lake Wylie Elementary School, Joyce Woodard, Assistant Principal Matthews Elementary School, Constance Shotts, Principal McKee Road Elementary School, Sharon Damare, Principal Mountain Island Elementary School, Carol Owen, Principal Providence Spring Elementary School, Dot Branson, Assistant Principal Selwyn Elementary School, Nancy Beasley, Principal South Charlotte Middle School, Christine Waggoner, Principal Villa Heights Elementary School, James Aiken, Principal The following schools achieved the distinguished School of Excellence designation and met High Growth in State and Local Standards: Beverly Woods Elementary School, Nancy Hicks, Principal Cornelius Elementary School, Linda Morris, Principal Crown Point Elementary School, Mark Anderson, Principal McAlpine Elementary School, Rachel McKenzie, Assistant Principal Olde Providence Elementary School, Martha Carpenter, Principal The following school achieved the distinguished School of Excellence designation: Crestdale Middle School, Edward Ellis, Principal The following schools achieved the distinguished School of Distinction designation, met High Growth in State or Local Standards or both, and met the Federal Adequate Yearly Progress Standard: Blythe Elementary School, Jo Karney, Principal Dilworth Elementary School, Cynthia King, Principal Huntingtowne Farms Elementary School, Terry Bilotta, Literacy Facilitator J. H. Gunn Elementary School, David Prybylo, Assistant Principal Lansdowne Elementary School, Joyce Gresham, Assistant Principal Lebanon Road Elementary School, Gladys Stafford, Lebanon Road Teacher of the Year, and

Anise Glover, Teacher Mallard Creek Elementary School, Billie Gentry, Principal; Harriet Ford, Student Services Specialist; Jeri Vandyne, Literacy Facilitator Morehead Elementary School, Diane Evans, Assistant Principal Myers Park Traditional Elementary School, Lois Lee, Principal Nations Ford Elementary School, Suzanne Shouse, Principal Northeast Middle School, Jocelyn Cook, Principal


Oakhurst/Grier Elementary School, Cheryl Turner, Principal Paw Creek Elementary School, Priscilla Graham, Assistant Principal Pineville Elementary School, Brian Doerer, Principal Piney Grove Elementary School, Victoria Kiziah, Teacher Sharon Elementary School, Kandace Williams, Principal Statesville Road Elementary School, Carolyn Turner, Principal Tuckaseegee Elementary School, Marilyn Osborne, Principal Winding Springs Elementary School, Myrna Meehan, Principal The following schools achieved the distinguished School of Distinction designation, met High Growth in State or Local Standards or both: Albemarle Road Elementary School, Janet McCaskill, Principal Alexander Graham Middle School, Valerie Williams, Assistant Principal Alexander Middle School, Joseph Burch, Principal Carmel Middle School, Ray Lee, Assistant Principal David Cox Road Elementary School, Robert Carter, Assistant Principal Eastover Elementary School, Linda Mintz, Assistant Principal, and Brian Bambauer, Principal

Intern First Ward Elementary School, Ted Miracle, Assistant Principal Greenway Park Elementary School, Valerie Gray, Principal Idlewild Elementary School, Samantha Sipes, Principal Nathaniel Alexander Elementary School, Dee Saltrick, Principal Piedmont Open Middle School, Tom Spivey, Principal Pinewood Elementary School, Nancy Guzman, Principal Randolph Middle School, Shelly Hinton, Assistant Principal Reedy Creek Elementary School, Jane Lambert, Principal Smithfield Elementary School, Lawrance Mayes, Principal Steele Creek Elementary School, Judy Fahl, Assistant Principal University Meadows Elementary School, Patricia Riska, Principal The following schools achieved the distinguished School of Distinction designation and met the Federal Adequate Yearly Progress Standard: Bradley Middle School, Ronald Dixon, Principal Smith Language Academy, Ynez Olshausen, Principal The following schools achieved the distinguished School of Distinction designation: Barringer Elementary School, Mark Robertson, Principal Long Creek Elementary School, Phyllis Baldwin, Principal Park Road Montessori, Linda Kiser, Principal Providence High School, Mike Matthews, Principal The following schools met the Federal Adequate Yearly Progress Standard and achieved High Growth in State or Local Standards or both: Lincoln Heights Elementary School, Shirley Tillman, Principal Merry Oaks Elementary School, Stanley Frazier, Principal Oakdale Elementary School, Selestine Crowder, Assistant Principal Pawtuckett Elementary School, Steve Hall, Principal Rama Road Elementary School, Hugh Talbert, Principal


Sedgefield Elementary School, Lenora Shipp, Principal Thomasboro Elementary School, Mildred Wright, Principal, and Jackie Caldwell, Literacy

Facilitator The following schools achieved High Growth in State or Local Standards or both: Allenbrook Elementary School, Patricia Wynn, Principal Ashley Park Elementary School, Melissa Dunlap, Principal Berryhill Elementary School, Martha Brenner, Assistant Principal Briarwood Elementary School, Olivia Givens, Principal Chantilly/Billingsville Elementary School, Byron Campbell, Principal Cotswold Elementary School, Denise Hearne, Principal Devonshire Elementary School, Eric Marshall, Principal Druid Hills Elementary School, Joan Dunn, Principal Eastway Middle School, Terry Barbee, Senior Administrative Secretary Garinger High School, Jo Ella Ferrell, Principal Hickory Grove Elementary School, Michael Alcala, Principal Hidden Valley Elementary School, Anne Brinkley, Principal Highland Renaissance Academy, Jenell Bovis, Principal Hornets Nest Elementary School, Brenn Williams, Assistant Principal Irwin Avenue Open Elementary School, Mark Martin, Principal J. T. Williams Middle School, Patricia Hartsell, Assistant Principal Marie G. Davis Middle School, Terry Cline, Principal McClintock Middle School, Joanne Pughsley, Principal Midwood High School, Sue Johnson, Principal Montclaire Elementary School, Mary Sturge, Principal Newell Elementary School, Kathy Cochrane, Principal Northridge Middle School, Tom Bridges, Principal Oaklawn/Bruns Elementary School, Pamela Brown, Principal Ranson Middle School, Jerry Winklejohn, Principal Reid Park Elementary/Amay James, Janice Lewis, Principal Shamrock Gardens Elementary School, Leslie McCarley, Principal Spaugh Middle School, Jerry Brown, Principal Sterling Elementary School, June Smith, Principal University Park Elementary School, Rosalind Lackey, Principal, and Patty Russell, Assistant

Principal Walter G. Byers Elementary School, Christine Vandiver-Tate, Principal West Charlotte High School, Laura Johnson, Assistant Principal Westerly Hills Elementary School, Betty Cooper, Principal Windsor Park Elementary School, Mary Burnett, Principal Winterfield Elementary School, Alicianna Smith-Ward, Assistant Principal The following schools met the Federal Adequate Yearly Progress Standard: Butler High School, Joel Ritchie, Principal Davidson IB Middle, Louise Jones, Principal North Mecklenburg High School, Jimmy Poole, Principal Northwest School of the Arts, Charles LaBorde, Principal Recognition of recipients of the Quality Excellence Award Dr. Rembert called upon Ms. Griffin for the presentation. Ms. Griffin said the Board was pleased to recognize four outstanding departments within CMS who had submitted applications for the Quality


Excellence Award. This award is presented bi-annually and recognizes those departments for excellent performance and quality achievement. The Quality Excellence Award recognizes cross-departmental teams that have worked very diligently to significantly improve a major district process. The focus of the award is on customer satisfaction, timeliness, quality of service, cost and consistency. The teams that were recognized were Office of Strategic Partnerships, Rapid Support Team, Custodial Services and Maintenance Team, and Instructional Accountability Team. The first place winner was the Instructional Accountability Team. Ms. Griffin invited Dr. Eric Becoats, Assistant Superintendent for Planning and Development, to introduce each department. Dr. Becoats stated this was the first time that CMS has actually recognized a department for doing quality work. Dr. Becoats introduced each office and asked them to stand and be recognized by the Board. He stated under the leadership of Rick Rozelle, the Quality Management Department worked closely with Wachovia, North Carolina Partners for Excellence and the Principals’ Leadership Advisory Team (PLAT) in developing this awards program. Dr. Becoats invited Dr. Haithcock (in the absence of Dr. Susan Agruso, Assistant Superintendent for Instructional Accountability) to speak on behalf of the Instructional Accountability Department. Dr. Haithcock stated this was very exciting for her division. The Instructional Accountability Department is a true representation of a team effort. They are a customer friendly department and that is necessary in driving student achievement. She thanked Dr. Agruso for her leadership in making this division one of the strongest nationally. Recognition of report on Comprehensive Annual Financial Report for FY Ended June 30, 2003 Dr. Rembert called upon Dr. Pughsley who invited Shelia Shirley, Finance Officer, to make comments and introductions. Ms. Shirley stated Deloitte & Touche had completed the District’s audit. She introduced Rich Bovard, Director from Deloitte & Touche, who was in charge of the audit. Mr. Bovard shared information on the Comprehensive Annual Financial Report. It showed CMS with $1.4 billion in assets and close to $1 billion in revenues. He said this represents a clean report and is accurate. Mr. Dunlap thanked Mr. Bovard for his attendance at some of the Finance, Capital, & Facilities Committee meetings. His participation was informative in making decisions and he hoped this could happen every year. Dr. Rembert thanked Mr. Bovard for the report and she hoped the newly constituted Board would benefit from the continued relationship with Deloitte & Touche. Report on Partnership with Bright Beginnings and Pearson Education Dr. Rembert called upon Dr. Pughsley. Dr. Pughsley stated that CMS was in the process of forming a very profitable partnership with Pearson Education as it relates to the Bright Beginnings Program. This partnership will give CMS an opportunity to revise the Bright Beginnings Program, market it, and share an outstanding curriculum with others who have Pre-k programs. CMS has been seeking ways of developing alternative funding and this is an example of a revenue opportunity. Dr. Pughsley invited Dr. Haithcock to make comments and to introduce her department. Dr. Haithcock stated this was a celebration. She introduced and recognized the important people who had been involved since the initial beginning. They were Tony Bucci, Ellen Edmonds, Barb Pellin, Muffet Garber, Carolyn Hubbard, Connie McGinnis, Kevin Bringewatt, and Maurice Green. Dr. Haithcock talked about the history of Bright Beginnings. This program began in the fall of 1996 after an assessment of academic achievement showed some students entering kindergarten without the necessary prerequisite skills; third graders were reading below grade level; there was little research about what to do for those early ages; and remediation was expensive and less successful than if the problem was fixed in the beginning. The program’s goal was it would be a child-centered, literacy rich curriculum (state of the art) and learning environment. Key components are an educational curriculum with a strong language development and literacy; family involvement and partnership; saturated professional development; community support and collaboration; and ongoing research and evaluation. A team of teachers, principals, and central office staff with CMS


developed this program and they are the founders of establishing what is known now as a Bright Beginning’s curriculum. An external review of our curriculum was done by Dorothy Strickland and David Dickinson. Student achievement results in May 2002 showed that this program was working with many promising improvements. Recent research about early childhood has been much improved and better defined. The results of another external review in June of 2002 showed this was an excellent foundation with excellent components and needed only minor review. Pearson Education approached CMS in October 2002 and said this was an excellent program and they would like to discuss a business proposition. Dr. Haithcock introduced Kathy Costello, President of Pearson Education, Early Learning Group, who has been in education for 30 years with an emphasis on Urban Education and Reading. Ms. Costello stated she was pleased to come before CMS representing Pearson Education, which is the largest educational publisher in the world representing such brands as Scott Foresman, Prentice Hall, and Addison Weekly. She was given a challenge by Pearson Education to develop a new business aspect that addressed the needs of children birth through age 5, and their development through age 8. She became aware of the Bright Beginnings Program at CMS and realized that this was a new market for educational publishers. She was very impressed with how well the program was organized. She agreed there was a need for assessment of young children to spot the learning and developmental needs of them before entering the school district. Ms. Costello covered statistical data of the 3.9 million children born annually in the US, the particular birth facts and parentage for the children born in the year 2000, and reasons for them not succeeding in school. She stated she admires Charlotte-Mecklenburg for all the hard work they have done at the Pre-k level, and considered CMS a leader in the nation. She said literacy is new in this emerging field and many states are just now developing state standards. Many child educators feel this is the time for children to be getting social and emotional development, working together, and understanding what it means to be with other children. As the CMS Program demonstrates, children can be serviced and still have a strong literacy background in the program. A recent report came out looking at literacy and mathematics for State Pre-k Standards. They were judged on the following criteria: skill-focus, researched-based, clearly written, comprehensive and manageable covering all the domains of learning, and applicable to diverse settings in which children are cared for. Our new program includes these standards. There are only 20 states with State-funded Pre-k Programs. One of the reasons publishers want to get involved is the No Child Left Behind legislation. The Early Reading First requirement exposed the fact that there was not much research in Pre-k and there was not enough data. This group has instituted $75 million per year to study Pre-k Programs and CMS is one of the recipients of this. Aspects of early literacy have been reviewed and will be included in the revision and the new program. They are working extensively with CMS’s staff; two well-known researchers, Dr. David Dickinson and Dr. Judith Schickedanz; and other consultants. The new exemplary Pre-kindergarten Program will include such qualities as qualified teachers; curriculum responsive to all domains of learning; research-based instructional materials; parental involvement; screening and assessment; ongoing professional development; alignment to kindergarten goals; and attention to medical, emotional, and nutritional needs. This program is going to remain very simple and the curriculum will be based on 48 classical children’s books. Ms. Costello discussed components and covered a daily plan of the program. She talked about the benefits of the joint partnership to CMS. The curriculum will be updated based on the most current research available on child development and literacy. CMS will be able to share the benefits nationally and if successful, this will be a revenue stream. CMS will receive 182 free kits the first year, and a new professional development program will be developed. Ms. Costello said Pearson Education was happy to partner with a school district to develop this brand new curriculum. The benefits to Pearson Education included the opportunity to work with an urban school district with a solid Pre-k Program and access to data that demonstrates students’ growth and school success. CMS teachers are trained to teach an integrated curriculum with a strong literacy background, and they will be used to help train teachers nationwide.


Comments by the Board members followed. Dr. Kindberg thanked Dr. Pughsley, the Bright Beginnings Team, and legal team of CMS and Pearson Education for this innovative new approach of both sharing a CMS developed program and offering a revenue stream based on CMS’ intellectual properties. Mr. Griffin said he is often asked, “Just how good is the CMS School District?” He said peers from around the country have felt that CMS does things on a daily basis to demonstrate excellence in equity. This is evidenced by our teachers and staff. We take pride in the fact that educators throughout the nation have highlighted our district. The Secretary of Education has talked about visiting Charlotte to look at the Bright Beginnings Program and Assistant Secretaries have talked about coming to Charlotte. Since this is a business community, it is a pleasure to see the corporate sector recognize the excellence and efforts of our students. He thanked Pearson for the opportunity for CMS schools, Dr. Pughsley for his leadership, and the CMS staff for their excellent work. Mr. Lassiter said he takes a personal pleasure in this kind of business arrangement. He said so often the efforts made for a school system are just shown in the performance of students but here we have some research and development, and are now going to gain some true return-on-investment. Numbers were not discussed but it shows a return of about $200,000. Should this be successful for Pearson it would create a trail of dollars that might help CMS to fund other things. He encouraged CMS to seek other revenue generating opportunities. This would not have happened without the expertise of CMS’ staff. He thanked Pearson for the partnership. He said as a taxpayer he appreciates the interest in trying to find ways for CMS to meet the needs of our students. Ms. Woods gave special notice to Barbara Pellin as she was the heart and soul of Bright Beginnings. She thanked Dr. Eric Smith as he was the initiator of this program, and Dr. Pughsley for his support and leadership in this exciting venture. She gave a special thank you and recognition to the teachers who were instrumental in writing this curriculum as they were the ones who helped create the quality of this program. Mr. Gauvreau said he was the “nay sayer.” He appreciated the partnership but it was overvalued. This program serves some children but it has been oversubscribed in Mecklenburg County. We should be narrowing our focus on Pre-K not just from a cost standpoint but because it is the right thing to do. He stated our own data shows that the gain we have seen in students who have gone through Bright Beginnings and those who have not is almost immeasurable. He is in favor of a Bright Beginnings Program but is concerned about this agreement as it is similar to a book deal. The smarter thing to do is to recognize that the data may not show what we are presenting to the public. Pearson is a very reputable enterprise and can make their own decisions and this will help them sell books. Mr. Gauvreau is not sure this is helping CMS. Sixty million dollars was spent last year and there was no difference. This year we are close to $70 million because we spend about $17 million a year on this program and the gap continues and the gains are weak. He urged caution for other programs like this and feels this is being oversold. Ms. Woods responded to Mr. Gauvreau’s comments. She stated the data shows very clearly the large number of students that, if not in the Bright Beginnings Program, would not have made it to third grade. Bright Beginnings has helped pre-school students and raised the bar on all students. Mr. Griffin stated to Ms. Costello there is a difference of opinion. Research has indicated that there has been significant statistical improvement. There is an abundance of research both nationally and locally that support quality preschool programs in the country of which CMS is one.


Dr. Rembert thanked Ms. Costello, Dr. Haithcock, the CMS staff, and Dr. Pughsley for negotiating this alternative revenue stream for supporting education. Dr. Rembert stated she works in the area of early childcare and education, and she recognizes the value in having a research-based literacy curriculum to help prepare young children for school readiness. She encouraged Pearson Education and CMS to continue to do research and update the curriculum for the classrooms. AC TI ON I TEM S Recommend approval of Administrative Personnel There were no administrative personnel appointments. Recommend Approval of Proclamation for National Inclusive Schools Week Dr. Rembert called upon Mr. Gauvreau for the presentation. Mr. Gauvreau stated the Board of Education was pleased to recognize the week of December 1-5, 2003, as the 3rd Annual National Inclusive Schools Week to be celebrated in the classrooms, schools, and community to highlight the Nation’s progress in providing a quality education to an increasingly diverse student population and particularly to those who have disabilities. CMS recognizes that each child learns differently and learns better if teaching is tailored to his or her abilities and interests. The Board of Education encourages schools across the District to sponsor appropriate learning environments and community-building activities in the classroom. The Proclamation read as follows: Whereas, The National Institute for Urban School Improvement has designated the week of

December 1-5, 2003, as National Inclusive Schools Week; and Whereas, The Charlotte-Mecklenburg School District is committed to providing the students of

Charlotte-Mecklenburg an education in schools and classrooms that is welcoming and capable of educating all the District’s children; and

Whereas, The educators of the Charlotte-Mecklenburg School District recognize that each child is unique, learns differently, and therefore learns better if teaching is tailored to his/her abilities and interests; and

Whereas, The educators and families of the Charlotte-Mecklenburg School District have been working hard to ensure that our classrooms and schools are characterized as being high performing and inclusive; and

Whereas, By their efforts to make our schools and classrooms high performing and inclusive, the educators and families of the Charlotte-Mecklenburg School District have contributed significantly to building a stronger and more inclusive Charlotte-Mecklenburg community; and

Whereas, The educators and families of the Charlotte-Mecklenburg School District deserve to celebrate their success and wish to reflect on how they might even further improve;

Therefore, be it resolved, That the Charlotte-Mecklenburg School District join with the National Institute for Urban School Improvement in declaring the week of December 1-5, 2003, as National Inclusive Schools Week in the Charlotte-Mecklenburg Schools and encourages schools and classrooms across the District to sponsor appropriate learning and community-building activities in its recognition.

Mr. Gauvreau introduced Dr. Jane Rhyne, Assistant Superintendent for Exceptional Children, for comments. Dr. Rhyne said thank you for the Proclamation. This includes all students in the District’s plans. By being inclusive, this is increasing the achievement levels of all students. Upon motion by Mr. Gauvreau, and seconded by Ms. Griffin, the Board voted unanimously of those present to approve the Proclamation for National Inclusive Schools Week. Dr. Leake was absent.


Recommend approval of components of the 2004-2005 Student Assignment Plan and Priorities Dr. Rembert called upon Dr. Pughsley. Dr. Pughsley stated at the last Board meeting action had been taken on a number of student assignment items and these were the ones remaining or needing review. At the November 11th Board meeting, recommendations were made regarding new boundaries to include Piedmont Courts; however, the recommendation lacked certain boundaries needed for this neighborhood. Dr. Pughsley asked the Board to provide action on these items and the Priorities tonight. Dr. Rembert asked Dr. Kindberg, Chair of the Policy Committee, to speak to this item. She stated she would address the First Ward issue first and than the Priorities. Upon motion by Dr. Kindberg, seconded by Ms. Woods, to adopt the modified recommendation of the Superintendent on the First Ward boundaries to include South Brevard Street, Northeast to East Brookshire Freeway, Southward to Seigle Avenue (to include McRae Street and Willis Street), Southwest to East 10th Street, Eastward to Seaboard Coastline Railroad, Southward to E. Independence Boulevard, Northwest to East John Belk Freeway, West and North to South Brevard Street, the Board voted unanimously of those present to approve the motion. Dr. Leake was absent. Mr. Gauvreau asked the Board to reconsider and revote on the alignment of the Meredith and Old Salem neighborhoods. The Superintendent’s recommendation was voted down last Board meeting. He asked that this be reopened and voted on tonight. Mr. Dunlap stated Robert’s Rules of Order stated to bring this issue back up you would have to have voted in the majority on the winning side. Mr. Gauvreau stated that he was not present at the November 11th meeting when the vote on this issue was taken, and he would like the Board to reconsider the item tonight. Mr. Dunlap stated that if he was not present at the time he was not a part of the vote and this needed to be researched by legal counsel. Dr. Rembert asked General Counsel for guidance. Mr. Green, General Counsel, said he would take a moment to research this. Mr. Gauvreau stated he could rephrase the motion, and he would prefer to vote on this tonight rather than put it before the new Board. Dr. Rembert asked Mr. Gauvreau if he had a motion. A motion was made by Mr. Gauvreau to approve the Superintendent’s proposed change from the November 11th Board meeting to change the home school for Old Salem/Meredith neighborhoods to Sharon Elementary School. Complete details are available in the Superintendent’s recommendations as presented at the November 11, 2003 BOE meeting. Dr. Rembert asked General Counsel if this was proper. Mr. Green stated, as he understands it, Mr. Gauvreau is attempting to amend something that was previously adopted at a different meeting. This can be done at this time because no action has been taken by the administrative staff with regards to implementing that particular motion. Dr. Rembert asked for a second. This was seconded by Ms. Griffin. A discussion followed. Mr. Dunlap said there is still question about the legality of the motion. He stated this motion was brought before this Board previously and was duly voted upon. It is now being brought up again and there is a question whether this is proper by a person who did not vote on either side or did not vote in the majority. Dr. Rembert asked for clarification from Mr. Green. Mr. Green recited the Robert’s Rule of Order pertaining to this and stated there was no time limit and the motion could be made by any member regardless how he voted on the original question. Dr. Rembert stated she would accept the Rule from General Counsel. Upon no further discussion, the Board voted 4 to 4 on Mr. Gauvreau’s motion and the motion failed. Mr. Dunlap, Ms. Woods, Mr. Griffin, and Dr. Rembert voted against the motion. Dr. Leake was absent.


Dr. Rembert called on Dr. Kindberg for the Priority aspects of the student assignment. Dr. Rembert stated at the last Board meeting the Board discussed the Guarantees in the Student Assignment Plan and tonight the Board will vote on the Priorities. The Policy Committee proposed the Priorities for consideration. Dr. Kindberg referred to documents the Board members had and stated the November 11th Priorities now included a Sibling Guarantee for non-magnet students. She talked about a comparison document that showed the Superintendent’s Proposal to an Alternative Proposal that would be voted on tonight. There were two Alternative Proposals, one for magnet schools and one for non-magnet schools. Also provided for the Board’s review was a list of 2002/03 elementary and middle schools with percent of students reading on or above grade level, ranked highest to lowest, that would be needed with the proposals. Because CMS has experienced improved reading levels, numbers that were adopted two years ago were no longer appropriate. Dr. Kindberg stated this was a fine-tuning of the current Choice Plan. This is the third year of three for the implementation of the Plan. The concept is to keep the Guarantees and keep the Priorities for the magnet proximity zone, keep the Priorities for the high mobility students, and to keep many of the things that were working for students. These priorities do not impact the guarantees (home school, sibling, or feeder patterns). They are used only where more students request a school than there are seats available at that school. In that case, these priorities will define the order of choice: who chooses first, second, third, and so forth. Our schools and children have three challenges: academic, resource, and overcrowding in our facilities. These are the three major categories that the Board has tried to address in the past with the Choice Priorities. In the past, resources were first, and than academics. In the Superintendent’s recommendation that was provided one month ago, he suggested that our core business is academics and, therefore, academics should be the highest priority in terms of Choice. We agreed with that. The second priority is resources since research shows that the resources available in a school and to a family do affect academic achievement. Per the Superintendent’s recommendation, overcrowding was added as some of our facilities are very crowded. He suggested we add a priority that would meet the District’s goal of trying to balance the overutilized and underutilized facilities through Choice. Decisions need to be made tonight on ‘trigger points.’ Dr. Kindberg referred to the comparison chart and stated this was the Administration’s Proposal compared to the Alternative Proposal. There are only small changes. Keep in mind that everything we do will have a clearer format that the Superintendent and staff developed to make things clearer to families. This has been simplified so that there will be no question on interpretation. Families will know if it is a Guarantee or a Priority. In the Alternative Proposal, a limitation is being proposed that for all the Proposed Priorities the number of students assigned, based on a particular Priority, may not exceed 25% of the available seats in a school. This is to achieve balance within that school. The Home School and Sibling Guarantees are maintained. Priority #1 is students reading below grade level in a school below the District’s on-grade level reading, these children will have a priority to move into another school where the reading level is 5% above grade level or at or above grade level. She informed the Board in her motion she would select some numbers for the purpose of discussion. Priority #2 was not recommended by the Superintendent. It refers to the students that are at or above grade level in this same group of schools. It is the rest of the students not in Priority #1 on the same list of schools. No restrictions on the receiving schools refers to no restrictions on reading level or free and reduced lunch levels. The Superintendent and staff had given the Policy Committee two priorities that dealt with the resource challenge. The Committee felt this could be consolidated into one approach. In previous versions this had been called the Enhancement Approach, where students not on free and reduced lunch had a priority to go to high free and reduced lunch schools, and students who are on free and reduced lunch had a priority to go to low free and reduced lunch schools, to move those schools closer to the system average. Numbers have been selected such that the receiving school could not exceed 40% at the elementary or middle school level or 30% at the high school level on free and reduced lunch level. Priority #4 is the overcrowding Priority. It had been recommended to choose a number of 100% utilization, but when looking at the numbers and formulas that would be a large number of schools and which formula was being used would cause confusion. The Committee


suggested, in this case, it be tied to those home schools that are on our list of overcrowded schools. This is under Policy JFAC. We currently have about fifteen schools that are on the list that are closed to transfer due to overcrowding. In this case, these students would have priority to choose into a school that was at 95% or less of capacity. This voluntarily helps deal with balance issues of overutilization/underutilization. Priority #5 remained the same. All elementary and middle school students who live in the Choice zone will be admitted in order of lottery number. Priority #6 also does not have any change. All elementary and middle school students who live outside the Choice zone will be admitted in order of lottery number. Priority #7 also does not have any change. High school students may choose any school in the District remembering that they only get transportation if it is within the Choice zone of their home school district. Some of these last minute changes were not voted upon or adopted by the Policy Committee but they have been discussed and analyzed. It is hoped that these meet many of the needs and concerns that have been expressed. Upon motion by Dr. Kindberg, and seconded by Mr. Dunlap, to approve the Alternative Proposal with the selection of the home school in Priority #1 being at 15% and the receiving school at 0%, a discussion followed. Ms. Woods thanked Dr. Kindberg and Sarah Crowder, Policy Administrator, for their many hours working on the Alternative Proposal. Ms. Woods stated since the trigger points had not been decided upon as a Committee she had completed an analysis that would suggest it would be better to use different trigger points and gave her reasons. She liked Dr. Kindberg’s suggestion of using 10% (which was the Superintendent’s original recommendation) for only children who are not on grade level and then 15% and 20%. Based on her analysis she feels 10% should be used as the cut off point for the schools and explained her reasoning. She felt the more information the Board had the better decisions could be made. Upon motion to amend by Ms. Woods to approve trigger point for Priority #3 be 10% rather than 15%, a discussion followed. There was discussion whether Ms. Woods is talking about Priority #3 or Priority #1. Dr. Kindberg clarified that Priority #1 for the non-magnet would be identical to Priority #3 for the magnet. Dr. Kindberg stated that in her motion she neglected to mention it would apply to both Priority #1 and Priority #2 for the children in that one list of schools. In the motion by Dr. Kindberg there would be one list of schools for the children reading below grade level and they would have the highest priority. The rest of the children would have the next lower priority. Ms. Woods stated her motion was only related to Priority #1 and #3, as there could be a difference of opinion of the Board as to where the trigger points should be for the two. Ms. Griffin stated for clarification, “Don’t you mean 20% instead of 10%.” Ms. Woods agreed it was 20%. The motion was seconded by Dr. Rembert. A discussion followed. Dr. Kindberg stated there had already been several discussions and a great deal of analysis done on the trigger points. The Superintendent’s original recommendation was 10%, than there was one at 15%, and one at 20%. It was felt in discussions today with a few members of the Board that 15% was a reasonable compromise since this was a new approach to what we are doing. It did keep the number of schools smaller. At 10% you are looking at roughly eighteen schools, at 15% ten schools or just under 10% of our elementary schools, and at 20% you are looking at four schools. Ms. Griffin stated she would not support the amendment of Ms. Woods because limiting it to four schools gave it little significance. The good news is we are doing better with our reading levels. There are an additional group of schools that are struggling and this Choice Plan needs to be opened up to a larger group. She would support the Superintendent’s recommendation of 10% but feels 15% is a good compromise. Mr. Lassiter asked if this was the plan or are we going through it Priority by Priority as opposed to viewing them as a group? Dr. Rembert stated the idea was to take it as a group but Ms. Woods wanted to amend this particular Priority. Dr. Kindberg stated her motion was to adopt these two Priorities with selected trigger points. Mr. Lassiter asked if the triggers in Priority #1 and Priority #2 would be 15, 0, and 15. Dr. Kindberg stated that is correct. Mr. Lassiter asked should the amended motion result in a 4 to 4 vote, do we then revert back for purposes of this next calendar


year to the current Policy. Mr. Green stated if it is a 4 to 4 tie the Board could put another motion on the table with a different set of Priorities and that might gain the majority of the Board. If, after all that, no majority were gained with any motion the current policy would remain in place. Mr. Lassiter stated he preferred simplicity ahead of complexity. He was confused with the documents but understands them better now. He was sorry but he was confused by the research as stated by Ms. Woods. He would be more inclined to use trigger points recommended by the Superintendent based upon his analysis and that are also consistent with his viewpoint that more choice is better than less choice, and having freedom for students to move creates more opportunity for parents to buy into a particular school. Should there be a school that is not selected then the Superintendent should identify that school and focus on the reconstitution of that school. Dr. Pughsley stated he had discussed these plans, made analysis, and consulted with staff. Both proposals have what he wants primarily which were academics, free and reduced lunch or resources, and capacity. He stated in the Alternative Proposal the percentages have been changed slightly and Priority #2 added. His preference would be the Administration’s Proposal but he noted the changes are not significant. He stated a decision needed to be made tonight so that the Administration can move forward. Mr. Griffin stated he understood the motion was to vote on the Alternative Proposal as a package. He stated he had a concern about the Priority with the ‘opting out’ piece that the Administration originally proposed. He said it was important CMS did not go down this “slippery slope.” CMS has recognized there are some problems with the concentration of kids in these schools. One reason for his reservation is this is supposed to be a family choice plan and that is not what is in place at this point. All kids do not have meaningful choices. To ignore this and suggest that students can ‘opt out’ and go to different schools is going to come back at some point. He referred to an article in Teacher Magazine that talked about Northern Ireland where the issue is not race (black or white); it is about Protestant versus Catholic. The article talked about reconcilable differences and the strategy to deal with this was to integrate their schools with their children to deal with the violence of the adults. Mr. Griffin stated he does understand the Choice Plan but we are moving in the wrong direction because we have not fixed our original promise of having meaningful choices for all children. Mr. Gauvreau showed a map with the zones. He stated we are picking apart what has been a rigged set of Choice zones. He stated this map shows all the balances and the percentages of all the students by free and reduced lunch and race. He said no one understands it. There are options on here that have nothing to do with student assignment and we continue to pick it apart. He will vote no because this is a scheme. Mr. Dunlap thanked Ms. Woods for her diligent work. He felt this was a compromise. It gets to the heart of what we are trying to do. Mr. Dunlap’s version was much more simple than what is here. He felt kids who were on free and reduced lunch and who are not performing well should have the first option to move after the guarantees are used. Once the guarantees are taken care of, and if there are seats available, who moves first. For simplicity, they would move first. Second, those not performing well, no matter where they are, there is some reason they are not performing well. If they want an option to move they should have it. Then there are those free and reduced lunch children who are doing well for whatever reason, teacher, environment, or school, and there are those kids who are in schools that are low performing but who are still doing well who still want to ‘opt out.’ If you put them all in the same category and give them the same option to be in the lottery to move, it is simplified. Beyond that there is not going to be a lot of movement. This is a compromise. The only debate here is what triggers the movement. Dr. Pughsley recommended one percent than there was another percent offered, 15% is a compromise. We are evaluating Dr. Pughsley based on a certain set of criteria. We ask him to do certain things and we should give him the tools to accomplish those tasks. We should be accepting the Superintendent’s recommendation and move forward and end this debate. Mr. Griffin was concerned about the ‘opting out’ piece in Priority #2. He stated he could go along with some of the numbers but could not go along with the ‘opting out.’ Could the question be divided with exception of that part? General Counsel asked for clarification because he was not sure this question could be divided. Mr. Griffin stated in Priority #2 Alternative Proposal, students not on free and reduced lunch do not have an option of ‘opting out.’ Mr. Griffin asked if he could make an


amendment to an amendment. Mr. Green stated he could but dividing the question would not be appropriate for this type of question. Upon amended motion by Mr. Griffin, and seconded by Dr. Rembert, to adopt the Alternative Proposal as presented by the Policy Committee with the exception of Priority #2 (the no corresponding priority), a discussion followed. Mr. Lassiter said this is a “slippery slope.” What we now have is a compromise and the components of the compromise are being stripped out. There was a compromise at one point of 15%, then a 10%, now the inclusion “opt out” is being deleted. This piece is pivotal to him and he will vote no. He has agreed to several of these terms conditional upon the “opt out’’ provision and the home school guarantee. If the “opt out” is removed, we have taken away a promise from several communities who have waited for this provision to be available to them. This destroys the element of compromise. Ms. Griffin agreed with Mr. Lassiter. Priority #2 is an important part of the compromise that has been reached. This is a compromise that was not perfect but did keep the basic philosophy of the original Priorities in place. This piece is necessary for her vote. Dr. Kindberg reminded everyone that CMS is in the third year of a three-year implementation. The key piece that came into play in the third year is the academic piece. For two years we have been publishing that effective with the 2004 - 2005 school year the following children will have choice. Priority #1 and Priority #2 deliver on that promise. This is living up to that promise that was made in the original Choice Plan and we have stayed true to that commitment. Ms. Woods stated this has been difficult. We had two years of data before the second part kicked in and she felt that Priority would kick in next year. The issue is the percentage point where we cut off that priority. She could go with 15% on #1 & #3 but she needs 10% on #2 & #4 because she does not think it is honest to say that we have given Priority to “opt out” these many students when there are no seats for them. It is not fair to schools to say your children that are achieving well get priority out next year. She wants to amend Mr. Griffin’s motion to say we will keep the “opt out” Priority in #2 & #4. Dr. Rembert stated she could not amend again. Ms. Woods stated she wanted to withdraw her amendment on #1 & #3 and put that instead on #2 & #4, the 10% priority. Ms. Woods stated she wanted to make a substitute motion to amend Mr. Griffin’s motion. Dr. Rembert stated no more amendments could be made and the Board needed to take action on the current amendments. Ms. Woods stated she was trying to give an alternative to Board members should they chose to vote for #2 & #4 with a 10% limit. Dr. Rembert stated she would make comments and then call the question on Mr. Griffin’s motion. Dr. Rembert stated she had concerns about the overall Choice Plan. There are issues that have been struggled with and she hears colleagues stating they must have certain items to be able to support the Plan. There has been compromise on the Guarantees. She met with community advocates yesterday and they expressed their concern for the resegregation of our schools. They stated their own interest in reversing the guarantee. She stated that this had been dealt with at the last meeting and she would not bring it up again. That decision has been made with all consideration to the outcomes and consequences. That should have been addressed earlier but the support from the community was not there for that. Our communities must live with the outcomes in our schools not just this nine member Board, not just the new nine member Board, but our community now has to deal with the way our schools look. Our community has to make sure that every child in every school, no matter where he/she is, is guaranteed a quality education. Dr. Rembert is not sure how this will happen but this is a community responsibility. She will not accept full responsibility for this nor should the Board. But the community must accept responsibility to ensure that every child has a quality education in this District. There is growing concern regarding how the schools will be populated. Dr. Pughsley has indicated his need to have a decision from the Board. This has been deliberated on for a long time. Hopefully, the community will support the decision to make it work as best as possible for the children in this District. Mr. Griffin restated his motion to adopt the Alternative Proposal as presented by the Policy Committee with the exception of Priority #2. The Board voted 2 to 6 and the motion failed.


Ms. Woods, Mr. Lassiter, Mr. Gauvreau, Mr. Dunlap, Ms. Griffin, and Dr. Kindberg voted against the motion. Dr. Leake was absent. Dr. Rembert stated the remaining motion was Ms. Wood’s motion to change the triggers in Priority #1 and #2 to 20%. Dr. Rembert asked Ms. Woods if she was opting to rescind her amendment. Ms. Woods rescinded her previous motion and made a new motion. Upon motion by Ms. Woods to approve a trigger point of 10% for Priority #2 and #4, Ms. Woods gave some clarification. She stated #2 & #4 were the ones Mr. Griffin wanted to eliminate and they were the ones that the Superintendent did not have in his proposal at all. The compromise at 15% was related to the one the Superintendent had. The 10% is a reasonable compromise for the one the Superintendent did not want. Mr. Green asked Ms. Woods for further clarification. Ms. Woods stated the “opt out” Priority that Mr. Griffin just spoke to is the one where there was no comparable priority from the Superintendent. Ms. Woods questioned if it was Priority #3 or Priority #2 she was referring to. Dr. Kindberg, for clarification, stated Ms. Woods was trying to change the trigger points for Priority #2 that on the magnet list would appear as Priority #4. Dr. Rembert asked Ms. Woods what she was changing. Ms. Woods stated from 15% to 10%. Fellow Board members feel it is already at 10%. Mr. Dunlap clarified that the proposal has options, 10%, 15%, or 20%. Dr. Kindberg stated she moved 15% for the trigger but her motion clearly called for one single list of schools for the two Priorities, whereas Ms. Wood’s motion would have two separate lists if this is modified. Priority #1 would have one list and Priority #2 a different list of schools if Ms. Woods’ suggestion were implemented. There is question whether or not Ms. Woods has a motion on the floor. Mr. Green stated she has not received a second yet. There was no second. Dr. Kindberg restated her motion of the Alternative Proposal with the 15% and 0% respectively in Priority #1 and 15% in Priority #2. The Board voted 5 to 3 in favor of the motion. Dr. Rembert, Mr. Griffin, and Mr. Gauvreau voted against the motion. Dr. Leake was absent. Recommend approval of various real estate acquisitions 1. New West Elementary School Landbank Site; Winget Park Site. Upon motion by Mr. Dunlap, seconded by Dr. Kindberg, the Board voted unanimously of those present to approve acquisition of approximately 20 acres adjoining Winget Park as presented in Closed Session for a purchase price of $20,500 per acre. Dr. Leake was absent. 2. New North Elementary School Landbank Site; Westmoreland Road Site.

Upon motion by Mr. Lassiter, and seconded Mr. Griffin, the Board voted unanimously of those present to approve (i) acquisition of approximately 20 acres, located on Westmoreland Road, various tax parcel numbers as presented in Closed Session, for a purchase price of $997,804 with $120,000 of the purchase price to be paid by the Town of Cornelius and (ii) a joint use agreement with the Town of Cornelius for use of fields/recreation facilities. Dr. Leake was absent.


3. New North Middle School; Bailey Road Site.

Upon motion by Ms. Woods, and seconded by Dr. Kindberg, the Board voted unanimously of those present to approve (i) acquisition of approximately 25 acres, located on Bailey Road, a portion of Bailey Road Park as presented in Closed Session, for a purchase price of $0.00 and (ii) a joint use agreement with the Town of Cornelius for use of fields/recreation facilities. Dr. Leake was absent. Recommend approval of changes to the General Counsel’s Employment Contract and Compensation Contract Dr. Rembert called upon Mr. Lassiter. Mr. Lassiter stated he would make two motions to accommodate individual Board member’s request. Upon motion by Mr. Lassiter, and seconded by Mr. Griffin, the Board voted unanimously of those present to extend the employment contract of Maurice Green, General Counsel, by one year until June 30, 2007. Dr. Leake was absent. Mr. Lassiter stated in recognition of Mr. Green’s above standard performance and service to Charlotte-Mecklenburg Schools he would make the following motion. Upon motion by Mr. Lassiter, and seconded by Ms. Griffin, the motion was made to increase Mr. Green’s annual compensation by 1.89% which is commensurate with the amounts for administrative personnel in the District to $152,563.97 for the 2003-2004 contract effective July 1, 2003 and to authorize a bonus to be paid in the amount of 7% of his annual compensation the previous year or $10,481.38, and to authorize the Board Chair to execute a written agreement to the General Counsel’s employment contract. The Board voted 7 to 1 in favor of the motion. Mr. Gauvreau voted against the motion. Dr. Leake was absent. CONSENT AG ENDA A. Recommend approval of minutes

• August 12, 2003 Regular Board Meeting B. Construction Items

1. Recommend approval of contract for construction of a new facility at new Ranson Road Elementary School

C. Recommend approval of requests for student assignment and release of students to other school districts

D. Recommend approval of supplementary funding request from the Knight Foundation for Continuation of Impact II in Charlotte-Mecklenburg Schools

E. Recommend approval of employment of a relative of a member of Senior Staff in accordance with Policy GBEA

F. Recommend approval of Budget Amendments for October 2003 G. Recommend approval of Capital Project Ordinances for October 2003 H. Recommend approval of Financial Statements for October 2003 Mr. Griffin moved, and seconded by Dr. Kindberg, to approve Consent Items A.-H. Dr. Rembert recognized Dr. Pughsley. Dr. Pughsley stated he had a correction to make. Item III.G. refers to Highland Renaissance Academy but it should be Highland Mill Montessori. Mr. Gauvreau asked for clarification on III. G items A.1. and B.1. Dr. Pughsley stated this was an exchange of the 97 Bonds and the 2000 county bonds. The Eastway Middle School and Ranson Road Elementary


School projects were well ahead of the Cotswold Elementary School, Northeast Middle School, Quail Hollow Middle School, Randolph Middle School, and Sharon Elementary School. There is a stipulation whereby the bonds must be expended in a certain time period. By making this exchange we can meet that requirement. This also relates to part B. The same amount of money is being put back into the accounts for the schools from which the money was transferred. It is a one-for-one swap and it allows CMS to meet the 1997 requirement as it relates to expenditure funds within the designated period. Mr. Gauvreau stated he viewed this as a bad cash flow. Dr. Pughsley called upon Mr. Guy Chamberlain, Assistant Superintendent for Building Services, for further clarification. Mr. Chamberlain stated the 1997 Bonds included about $415 million with a statue that required that bonds be sold within five-years of their approval. The remaining bonds, about $58 million, will be sold this year. Most of this will be applied to the Phase V Projects, which we deferred execution of so that we can couple it with bonds from the 2002 Referendum so that full equity projects could be made. This is good fiscal management to put the 1997 dollars on projects that are under way or are going to be under way shortly. The 2000 dollars do not need to be spent until 2007 and the 2002 don’t have to be spent until 2009. So there is time for that. We have money that will expire but not for another three years but to ensure we don’t lose any of those funds we want to go ahead and apply it to projects that are under way so we can get those funds expended. Mr. Gauvreau thanked Mr. Chamberlain for his clarification. The Board voted unanimously of those present to approve the Consent Items A.-H. REPO RTS / INFORM ATI O N I TEMS Report /information on proposed 2004-2005 Calendars Dr. Rembert called upon Dr. Pughsley. Dr. Pughsley called upon Betsy Williamson, Chair of the Calendar Committee, who provided information on the process and the particulars of the draft calendars. Ms. Williamson stated she was presenting for the Board’s review two draft calendars for the 2004 - 2005 school year. She discussed considerations the Committee used in preparing the calendars that included guidelines from the Policy and Regulations on religious holidays. Ms. Williamson said the two calendars would be shared with CMS staff members and schools, and they would have an opportunity to vote on the calendars. A recommendation will be made to the Board at the December 9th Board meeting for a vote. Both calendars start the 2004 – 2005 school year on August 16, 2004. A discussion followed. Mr. Lassiter noted that CMS was doing a better job in recognizing the religious diversity in our student population and teaching staff. He stated more consideration has been given in scheduling events on the major calendar but he has a concern about teachers scheduling tests on religious events and feels more steps should to be taken to take this into consideration. He has heard concerns from the Jewish community about the number of tests scheduled on Yom Kippur. He also has a concern for students being absent during religious holidays and being coded incorrectly. More steps should be taken to prevent this for all religions in the community. Dr. Pughsley stated he had also met with Jewish community representatives and understands their needs. The Administration will do a better job, he stated. Report on Academic Excellence Charter for all Charlotte-Mecklenburg Elementary School Students Ms. Woods, Vice Chairperson, called upon Dr. Pughsley. Dr. Pughsley called upon Dr. Frances Haithcock, Associate Superintendent for Education Services, for the report. Dr. Haithcock stated this was the last of a trio of Charters. She said the elementary team would present to the Board where we have been and where we are going. This is the Service Integration Team (SIT) and these


are the people who meet on a regular basis to ensure academic focus for the elementary schools. Carolyn Hubbard, Assistant Superintendent for Curriculum and Instruction and Project Manager, said she was excited to present this Charter. The theme of the Charter is Teaming for Excellence, working together to make elementary schools successful, and Achieving the Vision. She introduced the elementary team members. They were Katie Dula, Elementary Literacy Specialist, Process Manager; Muffet Garber, Regional Superintendent for Elementary Schools and Project Manager; Dr. Elva Cooper, Regional Superintendent for Elementary Schools, East; Dan Witt, Regional Superintendent for Elementary Schools, North; and Dr. Jane Rhyne, Assistant Superintendent for Exceptional Children. Ms. Katie Dula provided information about the Charter. She said the team had worked hard to reach the CMS vision of ensuring that our schools are places in which students acquire the knowledge, skills, and values necessary for rich and full lives. This Charter focuses on three core areas of reading, writing, and math. It is aligned to the Balanced Score Card objectives of performing on or above grade level in reading, writing, and math skills. Success of students requiring EC services, and disparity based on race, gender, and socio-economic status, will be eliminated. Ms. Dula recognized the Service Integration Team (SIT). She stated this team is made up of point persons from all departments of Education Services. This group has worked together to ensure that the deliverables outlined in the Elementary Charter are delivered in an effective and timely manner. Dr. Cooper stated teaming paid off in 2002 – 2003. She recognized the dedicated, hard-working, and professional principals who had come to support the presentation of the Elementary Academic Charter. Dr. Cooper talked about the elementary school successes. There were 21 that qualified as Schools of Excellence, 33 as Schools of Distinction, and 29 as Schools of Progress. She talked about the academic gains in reading and math for 2002 – 2003. She stated results showed deliverables contributed to these gains and they will be continued in the 2003 – 2004 Charter. There were 41 elementary schools that met overall Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) for No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Legislation, but with over half of the elementary schools that did not make overall Adequate Yearly Progress there is still work to be done. Carolyn Hubbard said the teaming would continue for 2003 – 2004. The project organization includes Act, Plan/Do, and Check. In the Act section of the Charter the use of data is reflected. This is where data is analyzed from programs and initiatives that were in place for the 2002 – 2003 school year. Based on these results, instructional decisions are made for priority schools, priority areas, and appropriate professional development and/or programs and material. Based on the analysis of data, the priority areas were Exceptional Children, English as a Second Language Program, the reading and math gap, and the need for revision of the K-2 Assessment. The Plan/Do section outlines the plan of action. She talked about the new 2003 – 2004 deliverables to address priority areas for reading, math, and writing. The Check section allows them to monitor the effectiveness of the plan. Dr. Jane Rhyne talked about the teaming effort and the importance of collaboration across departments in looking at instructional areas that needed attention. These efforts resulted in instructional improvements and learned new skills by teachers. Ms. Dula talked about collaboration with community and schools. A video was shown and several speakers talked about examples of the kinds of collaboration that happen with community-based organizations, students, parents, teachers, and principals. Ms. Dula said elementary schools were achieving excellence and their challenge would remain to achieve beyond. Board members expressed their appreciation for the presentation. Report on Sponsorship of CMS TV Channel 3 Dr. Rembert called upon Dr. Pughsley. Dr. Pughsley asked Ms. Jerri Haigler, Executive Director for Public Information, to present this item. Dr. Pughsley stated this was one of the alternative funding streams that CMS had been pursuing. Ms. Haigler said there were exciting things going on at CMS’ own cable station. She introduced Russ Gill, CMS-TV Station Manager, who talked about local programming and other programming available as well as the idea of sponsorships for CMS-TV3 to do more local programming. Mr. Gill gave an overview of the channel and talked about the


successes the channel had experienced recently. The channel change from 21 to 3 resulted in more viewer exposure. Viewer feedback from the Public Information Survey shows families are watching and enjoying the programs. This channel helps keep families and the community informed about school news and success stories. It also provides shows from national program producers on subjects like character education, math, science, history, reading, literacy, the arts and learning Spanish. CMS-TV3 has been a success story because they program good, informative, educational, and quality shows that families can watch together. Parents are giving very positive feedback on the shows. Not only are the children getting additional education, the parents know they are watching good television. CMS-TV3 produces local shows that instruct, engage, and inform the public about District information and school successes. These shows include News Updates, Diversity Matters hosted by Rahman Khan of Student, Family & Community Services, SportsBeat, CMS Magazine, Math Extra, School Board Meetings, and special programming. Mr. Gill informed the Board that in December they would be working with Dr. Pughsley in putting together a Superintendent show that will be hosted by Moira Quinn. This show will discuss key issues and will be very informative to parents. Mr. Gill talked about the future of CMS-TV3. CMS would like to produce and air more local shows that inform parents, employees, and the community but alternative funding streams are needed to produce these new program initiatives. Mr. Gill talked about on-air sponsorship as a means of support. Very important to this is setting guidelines in terms of sponsorship and this is being researched. Board members expressed their views. Mr. Griffin noted the CMS TV station had been getting state and national attention and he hoped it was something the Board would support. He encouraged the Board to look at public policy posture for the future, 10 to 15 years from now, and make investments today. He felt it was very important to align sponsorship corporate value with school values. Mr. Dunlap commented on the success of the station. He realized the value of what we do to get our message out. He has viewed several shows including Diversity Matters and SportsBeat and enjoyed it very much. Mr. Gauvreau stated he would like to be on Diversity Matters. Mr. Gauvreau views this sponsorship as a “slippery slope.” Thinking in terms of revenue is good but this is a school district and this could go too far. He has concerns about the potential sponsors and that CMS will lose focus on what we are supposed to be doing. We need more teachers and less TV personalities. Ms. Griffin thought this was a great idea that should be explored with full energy and CMS should look into available sponsorships. She said this was a great way to get more support to have higher quality programs and this will also give responsible advertisers a high quality outlet. She is in favor of this initiative but encouraged a screen on sponsorships. Ms. Woods spoke about reasons why she supports this but encouraged the importance of having a strong Board Policy. Mr. Lassiter commended Mr. Gill and staff on the improved quality of programming compared to the beginning stages. He thinks what is happening in broadcast media is great. The coverage of an opening of a new school or awards ceremony is really special and creates a sense of community. Finding corporate sponsors will be a “win-win” opportunity. Dr. Rembert thanked everyone for the presentation. She stated this was a wonderful opportunity for the school District to make available public education to our community. REPO RT FROM SUPERI NTENDENT Dr. Pughsley reported on recent awards by CMS employees. Ynez Olshausen, Principal of Smith Language Academy, is the Wachovia Principal of the Year. She started with the district in 1995 and has won numerous awards and honors including the International Scholar Award from Phi Beta Delta Honor Society for International Education. Also competing for Wachovia Principal of the Year were principals Nancy Beasley of Selwyn Elementary School, Jerry Brown of Spaugh Middle School, Curtis Carroll of Harding High School, Terry Cline of Marie G. Davis Middle School, Maureen Furr of Jay M. Robinson Middle School, Mike Matthews of Providence High School, Cheryl Merritt of Double Oaks Pre-k, Maria Petrea of Collinswood Language Academy, and Samantha


Sipes of Idlewild Elementary School. He stated the 2003 TIAA-CREF Leaders in Learning and Liberty Awards winners were announced on November 17th. Each of these winners received a $2,000 cash stipend and a $1,000 cash stipend for the CMS school of their choice. Winners were Fleta Windell, teacher at Providence Spring Elementary; Julia Caldwell, teacher at North Mecklenburg; Darlene Heater of Public Information; Huy Ngo, a 12th grade student at Olympic High School; Jenell Bovis, Principal at Highland Renaissance Academy; Rosebud Turner, Department of Instructional Excellence; and Blanca Vazquez-Sanchez, a parent of a student at Idlewild Elementary School. Dr. Pughsley said these outstanding individuals represent CMS on a daily basis in a very positive way. On November 17th the new student enrollment began. This process is for the 2004 – 2005 school year. It is for those who will be starting in kindergarten next year or new to the district. A new enrollment form must be filled out so they can be part of the application or lottery process. The forms are available at our schools and the Family Application Center. Enrollment information will be on-line starting December 1st thru 23rd. The Family Application Center will be open on Saturday, December 6th from 10:00 a.m. to 2:00 p. m. to accept forms and answer questions in order to get prepared for next year. REPO RTS FROM BO ARD MEM BERS Mr. Lassiter informed the Board that he had calculated Mr. Green’s compensation wrong. Upon motion by Mr. Lassiter, and seconded by Ms. Griffin, Mr. Lassiter moved to amend the compensation of General Counsel from 1.89% to 1.86% for a new compensation of $152,519.05. The Board voted seven to one in favor of the motion. Mr. Gauvreau voted against the motion. Dr. Leake was absent. Ms. Woods stated she attended an event sponsored by AKA in which Dr. Rembert and Dr. Pughsley were both recognized for their leadership in the community and the school District. Ms. Griffin and she had attended a North Carolina School Boards Association meeting. Ms. Woods said she had also attended several school events including a ribbon cutting at Oakhurst Elementary School, the Starlight Village and Café event at East Mecklenburg High School, a book walk at the Albemarle Road Elementary School, and at Merry Oaks Elementary School she attended an after school program for students and parents. Mr. Griffin said CMS continues to get recognized nationally for its staff and school District. He noted recently he attended the annual conference of the National Alliance of Black School Educators (NABSE) and our Superintendent, Dr. James Pughsley, received the 2003 Superintendent of the Year Award. Mr. Griffin stated we are pleased to have him in a leadership position and thanked him for receiving this recognition. Dr. Kindberg congratulated Dr. Pughsley on his award. She stated there have been several e-mails on the grandfathering and transportation needs on the addition and phase-in of our Second Language Emersion Magnet and the impact on some of the families that are currently at Collingswood Elementary School. She would like some better understanding from staff on this issue. Dr. Pughsley stated he would provide this information. Dr. Rembert congratulated Dr. Pughsley on his award. She recognized that Dr. James Hammond and Ms. Daisy Walker were instrumental in helping to establish a local chapter of the NABSE in Charlotte. Dr. Rembert shared a comment from the President of the National Chapter of NABSE. “After looking across the country and reviewing numerous nominations we were struck by the leadership and professionalism of James Pughsley, Superintendent of Charlotte-Mecklenburg Schools. The Hall of Fame is the vehicle for which our organization recognizes African Americans who have made a lasting impact on students and who are committed to ensuring that no child was


left behind. James Pughsley exemplifies the qualities of a true leader and has worked to ensure that every child in Charlotte-Mecklenburg received a quality education.” She thanked Dr. Pughsley for his leadership. Dr. Rembert stated that she had received a letter of resignation from John Lassiter effective December 1, 2003 due his recent election to City Council. Dr. Rembert announced the next Board meeting, December 9th, would be the last meeting for the three current At Large Board members and at that time the new At Large Board members would be sworn in. The current Board members will have an opportunity to make their final comments and the new Board members will assume their new duties. Dr. Rembert noted new Board members Joe White and Kaye McGarry were in the audience. Dr. Rembert announced that the Installation Ceremony would begin at 5:00 p.m. on December 9th in the Board Room. ADJ O URNMENT Upon motion by Ms. Griffin, and seconded by Dr. Kindberg, the Board voted unanimously of those present to adjourn the meeting. Dr. Leake was absent. The Regular School Board Meeting adjourned at 10:10 p.m.

______________________________

Chairperson ______________________________ Clerk to the Board Approved by The Charlotte-Mecklenburg Board of Education January 13, 2004 Regular Board Meeting

November 25, 2003 Regular Board Meeting Minutes

Documents

Transcript of November 25, 2003 Regular Board Meeting Minutes