Saturday, May 26, 2018 - Next School Day is Cycle Day 4
York Suburban School District educates, challenges, and prepares students to shape the future.
  School Board    School Board Minutes    2012-13 Minutes Archive    Minutes 2013-02-25
Main Content Pane
FEBRUARY 25, 2013- 7:30 PM

(Approved April 8, 2013)
  1. General Business 
    1. Call to Order - Ms. Leopold-Sharp 
      1. Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag  

        Ms. Leopold-Sharp called the meeting to order with the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag.
      2. Roll Call

        Members Present - Emily Bates, Jennifer Clancy, John DeHaas, William Kirk, Lynne Leopold-Sharp, Roger Miller, Lois Ann Schroeder, Joel Sears, Cathy Shaffer, Bradley Clark (Student Representative) 
      3. Public Comment 

        An opportunity was provided for public comment.  There was none at this time.
      4. Discussion and Action on Board Minutes - Approval of the Minutes of the Regular Board Meeting of January 28, 2013 and the Minutes of the Planning Committee Meeting of February 11, 2013.  [Approve as submitted/corrected] 

        Ms. Leopold-Sharp reported the minutes will be approved as submitted.
  2. Treasurer's Report - Mr. Miller  [Consent Agenda:  Would any board member like any of these items considered separately or are there any questions on any of these items?  If not, a motion to approve the below-mentioned items; second; and roll call vote]     

    Motion, Miller, Second, Kirk, and unanimously approved 9-0; Approval of the Treasurer's Report.
    1. Approval of Treasurer's Report as of January 31, 2013 [File for audit]  The Treasurer's Report, Summary Report  and Check Summary are provided.  
    2. Fund Account Reports showing balance as of January 31, 2013
      1. General Fund-2012-13 - $21,620,127.81
      2. Food Service Fund - $110,320.84
      3. Capital Reserve Fund - $123,517.18 
      4. Capital Projects Fund-Bond Series of 2006 & 2007 - $253,564.41 
    3. Payment of Bills
      1. General Fund-2012-13 - $1,439,070.80
      2. Food Service Fund - $90,347.61 
      3. Capital Reserve Fund - $0 
      4. Capital Projects Fund-Bond Series of 2006 & 2007 - $218,597.07 
  3. Board President's Report - Ms. Leopold-Sharp
    1. The Board met in Executive Session following the January 28, 2013 Regular Monthly Board Meeting and prior to the February 11, 2013 Planning Committee Meeting for the purpose of discussing personnel and/or legal issues.  

      Ms. Leopold-Sharp reported above information. 

      Ms. Leopold-Sharp reminded board members to complete the LIU General Operating Committee Ballot this evening.

      Ms. Leopold-Sharp reported two weeks ago, room utilization data was discussed and terms of utilizing that data were inconsistent.  An additional discussion took place at the Facilities Committee meeting with direction given to administration.

      Mr. DeHaas reported an idea at the Facilities Committee meeting was we were going to present something to the board out of committee that would lead to further discussion and exploration of the subject.  But, after listening to other committee members, it was decided not to proceed due to different ideas.

      Ms. Leopold-Sharp asked the board for ways to use the room utilization study data to frame different possibilities as we move forward.

      Dr. Orban reported that she heard in the discussions in the committee meeting having the possibility of three scenarios; if student population remains the same, if student population declines, the unknown happening in the York City School District.  The administration should present an overview of the educational programs especially with any specific classroom needs, ie., autistic classrooms and special education classrooms.  The feasibility study would give us costs and estimates on the physical condition of all the buildings and it was the administration's responsibility to look at room needs to fulfill our programs.  I also heard that the administration should provide a comprehensive analysis of the impact on the elementary philosophies, specifically we have an intermediate and primary philosophy now and other philosophies include neighborhood schools, K-5 schools and there are other options.  This would affect staffing, grade alignment, redistricting and transportation costs.  These are items related to a room utilization study and the timeline was late summer because of not wanting to wait until the fall PELLs Study update.

      Mr. Kirk confirmed the information Dr. Orban shared is accurate.  The room utilization study provides information how each room is utilized, some all day and some portions of the day.  I would suggest that the study look at all the schools we currently operate and determine how we can effectively utilize all of the rooms in the most efficient way that will leave as many full-time classrooms as possible.  Whether we have to decide where to put students from York City School District, decide possibly to close one of the schools, those students would need to be put in full-time classrooms.  The study boils down to how can we maximize the efficiency of our space to yield as many classrooms as possible for full-time education.  The transportation data comes secondary.  If we can't eliminate a school, then the transportation issue becomes moot. 

      Mr. Sears added one of our challenges as we move on from this year to the next is to find ways to structurely reduce the the spending in the district, repetitive cost savings.  We cannot survive financially by looking at a single year at a time.  Facility analysis starts to look at things that bring structural differences in the district.  For example, if we did have to close a facility, those savings would occur year after year, not a one time savings.  It is important to look at those parameters as soon as possible.  It doesn't mean we act, it means we have information upon which we can act.  What role do board members have in this study and I stated previously we as board members can help with hands on.  This would be sort of a change in the philosophy that board and administration interact within this one area so we get as much out of it with the talent available in the shortest possible time.

      Mr. DeHaas reported the Board of Directors establishes direction and doesn't do the work of the administration.  It is hard for me to understand how a board member understands how classrooms can be utilized on a day to day basis.  It would be necessary for me to be educated and spend a great amount of time learning as opposed to participating.  The board hires people to this type of work and the board sets direction and strategy.

      Mrs. Schroeder added that she agrees with what Mr. DeHaas stated and the district has educators to determine what needs the district has and those needs that are more congruent with our philosophies.  The over-riding thing that we as a board need to talk about is the philosophy behind the concept of the grave step of closing one of our buildings.  That is in direct opposition with philosophy and policies that we as a district have.  Something financial does have to change.  We need to have the philosophical discussion, are we really prepared to have west end students transported to East York Elementary School or are we prepared to redo Valley View that was just renovated and built for younger age students to be able to accomodate 5th grade students?  This philosophical discussion must be first.

      Mr. Kirk responded to Mr. DeHaas' point and I do understand the governance aspect of the board verses the hands-on/doing approach.  I like to get involved in the detail.  The district has a group of well-intentioned and highly educated people with a whole group of skill sets that would add a lot of value in the analysis.  The board cannot do the analysis without the administration. The exclusion of the board does not have the possibility of providing information.  The more people involved provides opportunity for many ideas.  If board members want to participate, I am not sure why you would want to exclude them just because you want only administration involved in analysis.  Ultimately you are going to have to make the decision and why not be involved in the process.

      Mrs. Shaffer added that she thought the board ended up deciding on a series of meetings and board members would attend if they could, discuss along with the administration a specific building and talk about the room utilization study as well as have administrators bring their specific information to meetings such as scheduling, teacher A having to be at multiple buildings, etc.  I am hearing deviations from that.  I thought it was board and administration reviewing the report and the board asking questions to the administration.

      Ms. Bates added that she did not come out of the last board discussion hearing the full board talking about hands-on participation.  I don't bring any expertise looking at the data.  How can you separate room utilization from curricula, scheduling and other areas that we don't get into because we have staff that does.  I expected administration to take the direction from the board as stated by Dr. Orban earlier in this discussion and then on a building by building review, once the administration took time to look at the room utilization report, scheduling, curriculum, etc.  The board will look at the information but not during the analysis phase.

      Mrs. Clancy stated agreement with Mr. DeHaas and continued it is not our role as board members to be doing the fine tooth analysis. Generally speaking, the board authorizes a study be done and then the administration looks at the study and makes recommendation and we in conjunction with the administration review and make decisions with regard to buildings.  I agree with Mrs. Schroeder that we are not anywhere near to having to make a decision to close a building at this time.  I am prepared to equip this board and administration with information such as room utilization study and feasibility study.  Studying information from these studies and making a good decision with the limited financial resources is what we do have to do.  These are very important discussions and they should take place in a full board setting, not committee setting or by individual board members.

      Mr. Miller provided information from last meeting minutes - the whole board would work with administration in a series of meetings.

      Mr. DeHaas agreed that was part of the discussion and part of our question is working with the administration is where we have some philosophical personal differences at what that means.  Taking building by building in physical feasibility study is all well and good but in a room utilization study review, it will impact some or all of the other buildings.  Many good points are being made.  There is no wrong answer.  When you involve the whole board, it will be hard to get anything done because there are nine individual approaches to this very difficult situation.  I do not disagree with the minutes but working with the administration remains a question.

      Mr. Miller agreed the more people involved, it will get difficult.  I am not willing to be a part of the analytical part of the process.

      Mrs. Shaffer added the ripple effect of building by building came from time constraint and potential time issue.  I do like what I am hearing from everyone.  Working with the administration to me means the administration will gather information on scheduling, curriculum along with room utilization study and coming to the board stating this is what the district is doing and why and having the board question the administration and discuss other avenues.

      Ms. Bates reported that her idea was different and thought the administration would do the work and the board would review the information.  There is currently no life in the room utilization study, no people, and administration will have to breathe the life in the spreadsheets, make it come to life along with the feasibility study results.  Then, the board's position is to make decisions.

      Mr. Kirk added that obviously my thoughts are in the minority of board.  Some people like to look at numbers and analysis does not have to be done with full board.  Ultimately, it will come to the full board.  What we are ultimately going to do, if we allow the administration to do the analysis without people on the board and their ideas and interjections, is having the analysis come to the full board and those same people will have questions and then the administration will go back for additional study.  This would extend the process of analysis.  I do not understand why excluding people that may have valuable input would be a better process than including people in the process.

      Ms. Leopold-Sharp reported there is absolute concensus that the discussion of analysis will happen with the full board.  The conversation of when we do this, planning committee, stand alone meeting, may have to wait to be decided.  I love numbers and minute analysis and I chose to do this early in my board career and it ended up being a poor choice as a board member from my perspective.  It is not our responsiblity as board members.  Lengthening the process would be a waste of time.  Would it be possible for board members to provide what we want included in the analysis as options prior to the administration doing their work?  My opinion is there are other components than the room utilization study to be considered.  As a group of the whole, do we prefer the administration do the analysis or do it in working meetings with the administration?  If we want to direct the administration to do the work, what is the best means of our gathering a sense of what we want them to look at?

      Mrs. Schroeder asked if we are looking at objectives and what we want to get out of the analysis?  Each of us is not on the same page about what we want to get out of the study analysis.  Some feel strongly and getting those ideas would be advised.  I have confidence in administration that we are on the right track and don't see drastic changes coming down the pike.  Do we need goal objectives to come out of this?  I believe we need a philosophical discussion if not tonight then at another meeting.  This is a very real discussion.  There are rumors in the community that our goal is to close a building and we need to squelch that rumor.  The Feasibility Study and Room Utilization Study seem to play into that rumor.  We need to decide goals for the study analysis.

      Mr. Miller believes we as a board need to give administration what we want to see analyzed.  Unfortunately, when working with numbers, if you have a pre-disposed place or direction where you want to go, the numbers can be skewed in that direction.  If the board puts out the things we want the administration to look at and analyze, then their job would be to analyze without any emotion and just look at the numbers without any pre-disposed ideas/direction.  Whereas, if we as a board or several board members have a pre-disposed idea that could influence the direction, it could end up getting emotional, unfortunately influencing the numbers and not getting a clear analysis.  

      Dr. Orban reported that  Mr. Younkin and she have started to put together a room utilization study document from the board and committee dicussions.  Would it make sense if I came to the Planning Committee meeting and have the board review the document and inform the administration what is missing?  The feasibility study will take care of the physical side.

      Ms. Leopold-Sharp asked the board if that is a good idea?  Board members can also email information to the administration for things to include.

      Ms. Leopold-Sharp concluded the discussion stating the administration will provide this report at the Planning Committee meeting on March 4. 
  4. Superintendent's Report - Dr. Orban
    1. Foreign Exchange Student 2013-14.  The administration requests approval for Valentin Oettinger from Germany through Amicas International Student Exchange as a foreign exchange student in 2013-14.  [Motion and Vote]

      Motion, Bates, Second, Schroeder, and unanimously approved 9-0; Approval for Valentin Oettinger from Germany through Amicas International Student Exchange as a foreign exchange student in 2013-14.
    2. Student Enrollment Report 

      Dr. Orban highlighted above information.  Some of the decline in enrollment is due to residential issues.
    3. The administration recommends Board approval of the Administrative Disciplinary Hearing Agreement for Student No. 13089, following a hearing conducted by board appointed hearing officer, Michele Merkle.  The Agreement sets forth the details of the recommendation in response to the violation of the discipline policy.  The student will be expelled from school for a period of four days, February 19-22, 2013, and upon return adhere to the determinations set forth in the agreement. [Motion and Roll Call Vote]

      Motion, Bates, Second, DeHaas; Approval of the Administrative Disciplinary Hearing Agreement for Student No. 13089, following a hearing conducted by board appointed hearing officer, Michele Merkle.  The Agreement sets forth the details of the recommendation in response to the violation of the discipline policy.  The student will be expelled from school for a period of four days, February 19-22, 2013, and upon return adhere to the determinations set forth in the agreement.  Roll Call Vote, all present, yes.  Motion carried 9-0.
  5. Student Board Representative Report - Mr. Clark

    Mr. Clark commended the York Suburban students for raising over $2000 to benefit The Leukemia & Lymphoma Society in a pennies war held at the high school.  In winter sports, 18 or 19 swimmers are moving on in post season competition and one wrestler won district competition.  The middle school musical went very well last weekend and the high school musical takes place this weekend.
    Mr. Clark left the meeting to go to musical practice.
  6. Academic Standards and Curriculum Committee Report - Mrs. Clancy  

    Mrs. Clancy reported the annual Academic Standards and Curriculum meeting presentations were very well done and thanked Dr. Maloney and the presenters for the excellent information.  
  7. Communications Committee Report - Mrs. Schroeder
    1. The Communications Report and Activities Report are provided. 

      Mrs. Schroeder highlighted the above information.
    2. The next Communications Committee meeting is scheduled March  4 at 6:30 PM. 

      Mrs. Schroeder reported above information.
  8. Facilities Committee Report - Mr. DeHaas 
    1. Scope of Facilities Feasibility Study Discussion and Vote.  [Motion and Roll Call Vote] 

      Mr. Younkin highlighted above information and reported this is one of the drafts that the district used for a feasibility study previously.  Depending if the committee will screen or a formal interview is requested, recommendation should be available in April.  Anticipated timeframe after the consultant is selected is eight weeks for completion of study.

      Motion, DeHaas, Second, Bates; Approval of the Scope of Faciltities Feasibility Study.  Roll Call Vote, all present, yes.  Motion carried 9-0.
    2. Bid Award for Replacement of Door Fronts and Window Units at the High School.  The administration recomends ECI Construction be awarded the Replacement of Door Fronts and Window Units project for a lump sum fee of $231,710.  Total bid amount includes the base bid and one (1) alternate bid.  [Motion and Roll Call Vote] 

      Mr. Tim Debes highlighted above information and added the alternate is the old bus depot canopy being removed and a pedestrian wall that is waist height to be installed for protection to individuals and the building.

      Motion, DeHaas, Second, Clancy; Approval of ECI Construction being awarded the replacement of door fronts and window units project for a lump sum fee of $231,710. The total bid amount includes the base bid and one alternate bid.

      A discussion continued.  Points of the discussion - these items were removed from the high school project on the Johnson Controls project; the board had previously approved the demolition of the old bus canopy.

      Roll Call Vote, all present, yes.  Motion carried 9-0.
    3. The next Facilities Committee meeting is scheduled on March 27 at 5:30 PM.  

      Mr. DeHaas reported above information. 
  9. Finance Committee Report - Mr. Miller
    1. The next Finance Committee meeting is scheduled on February 27 at 5:00 PM.   

      Mr. Miller reported above information.
  10. Personnel Committee Report - Mrs. Shaffer
    1. Consent Agenda:  You have before you the Personnel Report which includes retirement, resignations, employment, volunteer coaches for spring 2012-13 and additional substitute teachers for 2012-13 Would any board member like any of these items considered separately or are there any questions on any of these items?  If not, the chair moves approval of the below-mentioned items; second; roll call vote.  

      Motion, Shaffer, Second, Bates; Approval of the consent agenda of the Personnel Committee Report.  Roll Call Vote, all present, yes.  Motion carried 9-0.

      Mrs. Shaffer announced that  Mrs. Wandress will be missed with her many years of service to the district and her children thought she was a real cool teacher because she drove a Corvettte.
      1. Retirement 
        1. Recommend Board approval of the retirement of Wanda Wandress, 2nd Grade Teacher at Valley View Elementary, effective at the end of the 2012-2013 school year. Mrs. Wandress is retiring after having served 37 years in education and 23 with York Suburban School District.
      2. Resignation
        1. Recommend Board approval of the resignation of Brian Freed as Head Football Coach effective January 29, 2013.
        2. Recommend Board approval of the resignation of Susan L. Grove as a Health Room Assistant effective February 20, 2013.
      3. Employment
        1. Recommend the employment of Christopher Berube as Assistant Boys Lacrosse Coach at the salary of $1,941 which represents Step 1 of the Extracurricular Salary Schedule, pending clearances.
        2. Recommend the employment of Mark Guyer as Assistant Junior High Volleyball Coach at the salary of $2,502 which represents Step 4 of the Extracurricular Salary Schedule.
        3. Recommend the employment of Patricia Feriano as a long term substitute librarian for Michelle Dean at Yorkshire Elementary and East York Elementary starting on or about April 16, 2013 through approximately May 28, 2013, at the daily rate of $105.
      4. Volunteer Coaches for Spring 2012-13 
        Anastasia Evans
        JH Track and Field
        Oliver Good
        Boys Volleyball
        John P. Shaffer
        Track and Field
        Eric Shenberger
        Track and Field
        Mark Sindicich
        Boys Lacrosse
      5. Additional Substitute Teachers for 2012-13
        Lynnea Bobb
        Patricia Feriano
        Towanda Lemon-McKie
        Andrew Schmehl
        Katelyn Schmittle
        Arianna Shaffer
        Matthew Shields
  11. Planning Committee Report - Mr. Kirk
    1. The next Planning Committee meeting is scheduled March 4 at 7:30 PM. 

      Mr. Kirk reported  above information.
  12. Policy Review Committee Report - Ms. Bates
    1. Revised Policy No. 117 - Homebound Instruction.  The committee recommends adoption of the revised Policy No. 117-Homebound Instruction.  [Motion and Vote]  

      Motion, Bates, Second, Clancy, and unanimously passed 9-0; Approval of the revised Policy No. 117-Homebound Instruction.
    2. The next Policy Review Committee meeting is scheduled February 26 at 3:45 PM. 

      Ms. Bates reported above information.
  13. York Area Tax Bureau Report - Mr. Kirk  

    No report
  14. York County School of Technology - Mrs. Schroeder
    1. The YCST Joint Operating Committee Mini-Board Report of January 24 is provided. 

      Mrs. Schroeder reported above information.
    2. 2013-14 Preliminary Budget.  The administration recommends adoption of the Resolution for the YCST 2013-14 Preliminary Budget.  [Motion and Roll Call] 

      Motion, Schroeder, Second, Kirk; Adoption of the Resolution for the YCST 2013-14 Preliminary Budget.  Roll Call Vote, all present, yes.  Motion carried 9-0.
  15. York Adams Academy Report - Mr. DeHaas  

    No report
  16. Lincoln Intermediate Unit Board Report - Mr. Sears 
    1. " Dawn's Early Light" outlining the highlights of the February 5 LIU Board Meeting is provided. 

      Mr. Sears highlighted above information.
    2. 2013-14 Preliminary General Operating Budget.  The administration recommends adoption of the Resolution for the LIU 2013-14 Preliminary General Operating Budget.  [Motion and Roll Call]  

      Motion, Sears, Second, DeHaas; Adoption of the Resolution for the LIU 2013-14 Preliminary General Operating Budget.  Roll Call Vote, all present, yes.  Motion carried 9-0.
  17. Legislative Policy Committee Report - Mrs. Clancy 

    Mrs. Clancy reported the York County Legislative Meeting is scheduled March 5 at Central York High School and RSVPs are due tomorrow.  Mrs. Clancy and Mrs. Shaffer plan to attend the meeting. 
  18. Business Office Report - Mr. Younkin   

    No report
  19. Recognition of Visitors 

    An opportunity was provided for public comment.  There was none at this time. 
  20. Adjournment  

    Meeting adjourned at 8:30 PM.

    An Executive Session will be held following the meeting. 

The York Suburban School District is an Equal Opportunity Education Institution and does not discriminate on the basis of race, color, national origin, religious creed, ancestry, sex, age, marital status or handicap, in accordance with Title VI of the Civil Rights Action of 1964, Title IX of the Education Act Amendments of 1972, Section 504 of the Rehabilitation of the Handicapped Act of 1973, and the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, in its activities, educational and vocational programs and in its recruitment and employment practices. Inquiries concerning the application of Title VI, Title IX, Section 504, the ADA and the implementing regulations may be referred to the Superintendent, 1800 Hollywood Drive, York, PA 17403, telephone (717) 885-1210.