Reader Submitted: I would have simply liked to have heard, "I'm sorry". from the BOE

Below is a letter submitted to the Eye from reader Jane Majewski. Majewski spoke emotionally during the public session at the last Board of Education meeting Tuesday. Earlier in the year Majewski started a petition calling for the termination of three Special Education Administrators because of what she felt was the mismanagement of her special needs son's education. The petition is here. The photo is of the courtyard at Keigwin School where Majewski stated her son wandered into the pond area pictured after she was reassured that the doors to the courtyard we locked at all times.

Majewski's letter is below. The posting of her letter is a courtesy, and does not necessarily represent the views of all the Eye contributors. The burden of proof lies with the author, Jane Majewski.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Words That I finally heard for the first time from BOE member Shelia Daniels . The sound of those words almost made me to breakdown in tears. It was echoed again moments later by Cheryl McClellan. Words that I have been waiting for since the beginning of becoming vocal about the issues we faced in this school district. Words that had I heard sooner, from anyone, I would not have called for the terminations of our BOE administrators.

The apology came after I presented the BOE with photos and a plea.

I have consistently voiced my concerns about the closing of the DEAL program- on two levels. One, that it was being closed and two that that transition of those kids into icm status was done without parental input.

Had I been asked, I would have offered my time, my expertise, my physical help and financial resources to help ensure a safe transition of our children into the district schools. For free, I would have told administrators that preschool size furniture for fifth graders would be ineffective. For free, I would have pointed out that a timeout room should not include a circuit breaker box. For free, I would have suggested field trips to transition the kids. I would have created a simple brochure describing the general needs of our kids for the district schools. For free, I would have donated and hung a coat rack at Keigwin.

When I recently asked Ms. Slade; "why weren't the parents included in the decision to close DEAL and/or the transition of them into the community?" her response was, " we wouldn't include parents in facility decisions; that is an administration role".

Since that is the case; then I feel the administrators need to accept the responsibility of the failed transition.

I would have simply liked to have heard, "I'm sorry".

I AM SORRY

Thats's all.

I am not asking for anything more than a safe environment for my son and his staff. Which brings me to why I write this story.

When I first saw the quad pond garden at Keigwin, I panicked. I know my child enough to know he would find away into that area. I was assured he would not because the doors are securely locked.

Imagine my surprise to receive a phone call and incident report that my son opened an unlocked door from the art room and entered this very area! He was reportedly running around this cement, unleveled cement area with statues and a filthy pond containing dead fish.

The staff hired to work with my son are trained and responsible to restrain him if needed. To be compelled to restrain a child acting out in this area is inconcieveable!

The quad has three walls of windows on multiple levels; open for the school population to view the pond. How inclusive is it to him to be viewed acting inappropriate by peers? How does it effect their perceptions of children with autism?

I contacted Ms Slade and Ms Senges. Ms. Senges quickly investigated. She reported that a janitor allegedly knew the lock was broken for some time but failed to report it to the administration.

Why would he? Keigwin never had a population of "ICM" kids. Shouldn't have he been briefed on what our kids need for safety?

My son is not allowed to go to art until the lock is fixed. Now he is being restricted from learning.

The administrators put a child into a building that continues to restrict his learning and jeopardizes his safety in a serious way. The safety of the staff are also jeopardized! Where is their union leadership? If their union and administration can't keep them safe- no wonder a para recently quit her job instead of mandate reporting.

Ann Perzan and Laurie Slade;
I have to ask you,

Would you want to be a para responsible to restrain a child in this garden?

Would you want your child running around and climbing in it?

Will it take a serious accident for either of you to accept responsibility for not preparing the community to transition DEAL kids into ICM status?

What will it take for one of you to turn to us, our staff, and our son-
And say,

"I'm sorry" ?

Assistant Superintendent To Retire March 30, 2012

Assistant Superintendent Barbara Senges has announced her intention to retire as of March 30, 2012, citing a need to care for ailing parents as her motivation for leaving.

See the Patch's full article here.

Until her departure, Senges will stand in as acting Superintendent in the wake of Dr. Michael Frechette's departure yesterday.

The next regular Board of Education meeting is this Tuesday, March 13, at 7pm.

Reader Commentary: Children in a Divorce?

A reader commentary submitted by Eye reader Jane Majewski

CHILDREN IN A DIVORCE ?

Watching the leaders of our town debate the responsibility of the budget between the BOE and City feels akin to a child living in divorce proceedings. The two parents divorcing, the Board of Education Administration and the old city leadership have been publicly fighting and blaming the other side in ways that I believe are destructive to the core structure of our educational system in town. Two sides spending almost a million dollars of money that was earmarked for special education without communicating to each other has been described as a married couple not communicating how much each is spending from a bank account and drawing a negative balance.

I get this. I just don't get why. I don't get how leaders on both sides of this issue are able to disagree to a level of non communicating about a million dollars. I don't like showing up at BOE meetings to watch those sides attack each other personally. What ever happened to disagreeing with each other but respecting the other side?

The public sits and watches as two parents divorcing are yelling at each other about finances, about who is to blame for the breakdown of the "marriage". As children (and yes, they're adults but for the sake of the story I call them children) stand at the microphone and also attack people; they're rebuked by the same parents who are doing the same thing to each other.

The public, like children in a divorce, listens to both sides. Many have aligned themselves with the "parent" that they most agree with based on their relationships with each side. I watched the Union leader of the Administration read a heartfelt letter about the wonderful things our administration has done in spite of the bad press as of late. I agree. Our administration and teachers have done some amazing things. Then I watch parents stand and angrily scream out like children having been tossed to the side over issues that are painfully real to their experiences. I agree with them also.

I myself feel like I am tossed in a storm on the sea. Perhaps I would be called the middle child? I am a parent who feels she has unresolved issues with the administration regarding simple safety issues for a child with special needs. I am also a parent of a child who has flourished academically and socially at the hands of wonderful staff in her school. I can see both sides.

What I can't see is why is the divide this toxic? Why are the leaders of our educational system hanging onto "who is right" more than focusing on making the educational system a better one for all involved?

Did I mention that there is a new wife in this story? Yes, the Board of Ed has a new wife, the mayor (symbolically). The step mother and father have made a decision about how to resolve the million dollar problem while the first wife (the old BOE leaders) have not felt like they have a say in the matter.
Dad and his new wife have decided that the old wife was wrong in spending the money and will pay him and his new wife back.

The problem as I see it is this....the money wasn't Dad's, his wife or his ex-wives to spend. The money was given from outside the city and earmarked for special education. So, as the middle child, I have to ask...... "this child support if its for educating our children, why is Dad's new wife getting to spend it?"

Let me interpret. State money to reimburse special ed services came to the town. The town spent it. The BoE spent it. The new leadership has decided that the BOE should not have spent it and will now pay it back. Where will this money come from? Could it be reducing special education supports? Could that have been why DEAL was closed to begin with? Will they cut academic programs? teachers salaries? athletic programs? A million dollars is a lot to pay back even in a payment plan. The children and their teachers will pay the price.

I am thinking that both sides may need intervention much like divorcing parents are required to go through family relations. I think they need someone who is not politically aligned to help them work through their differences in a productive way. Me? I think I'll move to grandma's house until they all figure out what they're doing.........

Letter to the Editors: Concerned Parent still has unanswered questions regarding DEAL Program closure

The following letter was submitted to the Eye by Bielefield Elementary parent Jane Majewski, the mother who started the recent online petition concerning alleged mismanagement on the part of three administrators of the BOE administration overseeing Pupil Services and Special Education Services. It should be considered as an opinion piece; the verification of any facts & responsibility of claims made rests solely on the author. This letter, and others submitted by readers, are posted as a courtesy to readers,a and not necessarily the opinion of the team of regular bloggers or blog editors of the MiddletownEye.

Recently there has been much conversation about the closing of the DEAL program housed at Lawrence School and its possible impact on the current issues being faced at Farm Hill School.

At the last Board of Education meeting Dr. Frechette cited a report from the Connecticut State Department of Education, Bureau of Special Education, that covered a March 20 -24 monitoring site visit. As a result of that visit, Middletown was told that it "...needed to decrease the number of students in all disability categories who spend time in segregated settings as defined as students who are educated with their nondisabled peers." The report went on to say "This plan is to support the increase of students being appropriately educated in the district and within the general education environment that have otherwise been sent out of district or educated in separate classes due to behavioral needs or cognitive disabilities."

This is in direct contrast to the Cambridge report posted on the Lawrence School website. Within this report one sees a very different perspective to that of the BOE Administrators claim that they needed to disband the program. Allow me to highlight some of the statements on this report.

"In addition to its own regular student population the school provides education and support for 30 students in the Daily Experiences/Activities for Living Program (DEAL). These students would otherwise be placed out of district because of their significant learning and emotional needs. This is a district wide program that serves all 8 elementary schools in Middletown and which provides students with strategies to enable them to return to regular education, classrooms in their own schools."

"What the School Does Well.
The excellent behavior management strategies that are consistently demonstrated by staff ensure that the school is a calm and safe environment where students behave well, forge excellent relationships and learn the difference between right and wrong.

The school provides well for all students but particularly for those in the DEAL program to enable them to return to regular education, classrooms in their own schools. The learning difficulties experienced by students include autism, neurological impairments, emotional disturbance, intellectual disabilities and medical fragility".

At the recent Board of Education meeting Ted Radzka stated there was an increase in budget needs due to (amongst other things) an increase in cost to out of district placements and magnet school placements.

This is the reason why I became vocal about the issues facing Farm Hill. As a parent of a child in the DEAL program I was not told the DEAL program was being closed. It was just done. This is the lack of communication that parents are frustrated with. The conflict between the contradicting statements of the Cambridge report and the Administration is what leaves parents without a sense of trust.

Allow me to connect some dots. The DEAL program was closed. The children became ICM students at Farm Hill and Bielefield. The recommendations of Izzy Greenberg for redistricting (and closing of DEAL was under this) was not implemented. Farm Hill school did not have the staffing or resources to ensure a safe transition of this redistricting. Now, we have a divided confused community. As a direct result, children that would have been sent to DEAL are being sent out of town (farther away from our community) and the cost is increasing. More parents are applying to magnet schools for their mainstream children (myself included), cost is increasing.

No one is able to tell me where the ICM children's home schools would be. This is due to confidential laws that protect the children. The same administrators who fight to protect confidentiality of their clients have not fought to keep them safe and in an appropriate environment.

Why was DEAL really closed?
Why cant it be brought back?
If it worked (excellantly according to the cambridge report, staff and parents) why not keep it? It saves the taxpayers money and provides a nurturing and safe learning environment for all of our children

Jane Majewski

Large Crowd Disappointed at Board of Ed Meeting

It was standing room only at Tuesday night's regular Board of Education meeting. Much of the standing was done by the five media camera crews and a handful of print journalists who also attended the meeting. The mood in the room was rather tense, and the crowd was prone to several instances of loudly spoken comments in response to something said by one of the board members.

The Superintendent's inability to answer any of the specific questions posed to him regarding the use of "time out" rooms at Farm Hill Elementary School seriously disappointed and/or angered the parents in the audience. The agenda was re-arranged to allow the Superintendent to present his report on Farm Hill immediately following the adoption of the agenda (view the report here, look for the Talking Points, Farm Hill School link). Most of the Superintendent's report contained information that had been shared with parents at the Farm Hill PTA meeting on January 12th (coverage of that meeting can be found here). Upon the conclusion of the update, BOE Chairman Gene Nocera commented that due to on-going investigations, the board's discussion of what was happening at Farm Hill would be limited to the Superintendent's Report. Nocera did promise, however, that a full public discussion would follow the conclusion of all investigations. [Author's note: this statement was not well received by the audience.]

Board of Education Passes 2012-2013 Budget

At tonight's Board of Education meeting, the 2012-2013 proposed budget of $74, 161, 155 passed with only one dissenting vote. Board Member Ryan Kennedy voted against the budget, saying he had heard from many residents who simply cannot afford for taxes to go up in this budget cycle. Kennedy did say that he does support the new math curriculum proposed by the budget, but that he can't at this time support an increased budget overall.

Click here for a link to the proposed budget, then select the link that reads "Superintendent's Recommended Budget for FY 2012-2012. The proposed budget represents a 4.82% increase over last year's budget. However, Budget Chairman Ted Raczka called it a "roll-over budget," meaning that other than contractual increases, budget amounts remain at the same level as last year. Raczka was also quick to add that the budget is a work in progress, and that he hopes members of the public will follow the process and advocate for a budget that meets the needs of Middletown students. BOE Chairman Gene Nocera commented that this year and next would be a difficult budget cycle and that he hoped to navigate the next two years with great concern for preventing staff lay-offs: "That would disastrous for our district and our programs," Nocera added.

Recent events at Farm Hill Elementary School completely overshadowed this evening's budget vote. Fourteen different parents and/or concerned Middletown residents spoke to the board about behavioral issues at Farm Hill. Over and over parents commented about the lack of information about what was happening while expressing a combined frustration at the perceived lack of resources or ability to handle behavioral problems. Superintendent Michael Frechette presented a report to the BOE about what resources have been available to Farm Hill and what new resources are coming as part of an expanded plan on how to address the concerns raised. At Farm Hill's upcoming Thursday (1/12/12) PTA meeting, Dr. Frechette will be meeting with the PTA to explain what is happening. Frechette will hold a similar meeting with Farm Hill teachers and staff on Friday (1/13/12). This EYE reporter was also told that several BOE members plan to attend the PTA meeting as well.

Additional information will be available as this week progresses, so check back for an update on this topic.

Farm Hill Elementary School PTA President Raises Concerns Over Behavior Management Policies

The EYE obtained a copy of the following letter from Farm Hill Elementary School PTA President, Apryl Dudley, to Mayor Drew. The letter, dated January 6th, raises serious concerns about student behavior and how it has been addressed. Superintendent Michael Frechette's response, sent this morning to Board of Ed members and the Farm Hill Principal, follows. It does not appear that the Superintendent has any plans to share with the Board of Ed at tomorrow night's regular meeting at 7pm in the Common Council Chambers at City Hall.

January 6, 2012

To: Honorable Mayor, Dan Drew

CC: Michael J. Frechette, Ph.D., Superintendent of Schools; Barbara R. Senges, Associate Superintendent; Ann Perzan, Director of Pupil Services and Special Education; Gene P. Nocera, BOE Chair; Sheila C. Daniels, Vice-Chair; Ed McKeon, Secretary; William G. Grady, Ava M. Hart, Ryan Kennedy, Cheryl A. P. McClellan, Mitchell Wynn, Theodore V. Raczka, Patricia Girard Principle-Farm Hill and “The many concerned Farm Hill Parents”

Hello,

My name is Apryl Dudley and I have been involved in the Farm Hill PTA since my children started Kindergarten five years ago. I was PTA vice president from 2008-2010 and currently President from 2010-2012.

I am writing you with some concerns I have and concerns I have been hearing from other parents. I am a very involved parent at Farm Hill School. As the president of the PTA, I feel I am in a very difficult position. I have had many parents calling me telling me they are ready to call the media, police and DCF in an attempt to help our children. I would like to see corrective measures taken before our community is publicly humiliated by the media. I see and hear a lot of what is going on in our school.

My fear is that a child is going to get severely hurt and hope for a response and a resolution. In October, word got out about two rooms that were created for our "behavior students" who can't control their anger. Parents and students refer to them as "Scream Rooms". We were told they are alternative learning environments by administration. They are small rooms with concrete walls. When a child can't be controlled they are brought to this room. Staff members stand outside the door until the child cools down, then they are let out. Three parents called me after they witnessed two staff members holding a door shut from one of these rooms with a child on the other side as they kicked and screamed uncontrollably. There is something unsettling, knowing that a child is hitting their head against walls and urinating everywhere, then only to be let out and put back in classrooms with our children.

During these events, depending on which room the child is in, it becomes a disruption to all classrooms surrounding it. Some classrooms/grades are made to stop their lesson and either read or color to try to ignore the blood curdling screams and even take their books and pencils into a different location in the school. Many times both of these rooms are being used at the same time which leaves no option to find a quiet spot to learn. I myself have witnessed children being restrained both inside and outside of the school and carried into these "Rooms". My children come home weekly, “sometimes multiple times in a week”, discussing the incidents that occurred in school that day.

These outbursts are disrupting the entire school. Is Farm Hill the only school in the district with the ICM department? With CMT's coming up, how are other children going to be able to perform well, when they are pretty much guaranteed to hear these outbursts? Farm Hill failed last year, what is going to happen this year?

Many students, and I assume staff, are afraid of these children. The disrespect and language to our staff and students by these children is disgusting. I myself have been told these children can't help it. I find that VERY hard to believe and unacceptable. These students have negatively affected the learning enviourment and regularly intimidate other students. This must stop and it is the BOE’s obligation to take corrective measures ASAP to make this stop.

Good students are getting an "I don't care attitude". They see these behavioral students being rewarding if they have a good hour and the all the rest of the student body are expected to behave at all times.

An issue I have, and other parents have voiced to me as well, is the lack of communication and information to parents at our school. I understand privacy laws, but there is no reason why parents shouldn't be made aware of the issues that go on in our school. Why can’t parents be told that our school was selected to house the ICM children who have serious behavior issues. These children require restraining from trained staff and sometimes must be transported out by ambulance. Forwarding general information on to parents would save a lot of gossip and help answer questions.

Right now the families at Farm Hill are basically kept in the dark. Our children are coming home asking why the police were at school again today, or why were there stretchers in the hallway. What are we parents supposed to say? We, as parents can only assume. When we ask, we are told it can't be discussed. Still leaving the questions of what happened and are our children safe?

Currently, approximately 20-25 families have pulled their children out of our school since September because of these ongoing major issues and have sent them to private school. Many more families do not plan on returning next September. Do you as a Board of Ed really want to have all of our good families leave this school? Or worse yet, I have heard people wanting to move out of Middletown for a better learning environment. What kind of statement does this make to potential new residents/taxpayers?

I feel another reason our school is so out of control is because of a lack of resources. McDonough School for example, has more resources than all the elementary schools put together. They have funded programs that come in to help staff and students. Wesleyan students also come in and volunteer to run after school programs and many more. Why hasn't Farm Hill been given the proper resources we need? Is it a budget issue? Wesleyan students tutor for free. I know this for a fact because I have utilized them to assist my child for additional educational benefits.

This ongoing situation is not only affecting our children but surely must have a negative effect on our teachers. The moral at our school is at its worst. Our children are unhappy. It is also embarrassing to be at an event not involving school and hear people talk about how bad things are at Farm Hill School. I used to be proud to say I was a Farm Hill Parent and find myself now not admitting it. Please help our children in our school.

I have included these additional facts that have been brought to my attention as parental issues for student and staff safety concerns and questionable acceptance policies by the BOE.

1) The police department had to be called at least once, each week since school started

2) Desks are being flipped, chairs are being thrown and equipment is being damaged. - DESTRUCTION OF PROPERTY

3) Staff members are being injured by students. - ABUSE

4) An ICM student allegedly put a belt around her neck during class. - Attempted Suicide/Attention

5) The same student punched a fellow student in the face, giving her a black eye. - Assault

6) Children in their fit of rage, rip down fellow classmates work with no consequence.

I am available to discuss any and all issues within this letter. Many concern parents are waiting to hear from you and are already calling me as their President of the PTA for any resolution to these issues I have raised. I know of no misinformation provided above and can only hope the BOE shares enough concerns to move forward to immediate changes.

Sincerely,

________________________

Apryl Dudley

PTA President

Superintendent Michael Frechette's response to this letter (and incidently, it was not addressed to Apryl Dudley - she wasn't even on the initial email response):

Good Morning,

Thank you very much for your email with regard to concerns at Farm Hill. Central Office has been meeting with Pat throughout the fall to address issues as they have arisen.

Concurrently, we have been putting together a comprehensive plan to proactively address the issues at Farm Hill. Recently, we have formalized our action plan for Farm Hill which will be articulated to the faculty and staff on Friday, January 13th with Central Office in attendance.

Point of clarification -- many issues at Farm Hill are not the result of the Special Education population, rather, general education students, which is why the plan we have developed is comprehensive in order to address the entire population.

A significant part of this plan is a School-Parent Compact which will involve the PTA, State Department of Education, Central Office, and Farm Hill Staff.

Subsequent to the faculty and staff meeting on Friday, January 13th the plan will be shared with the PTA. However, to allay concerns recently expressed by parents, I have spoken with several parents and indicated that a plan will be forthcoming to address safety issues at Farm Hill.

Teachers and staff members have been meeting with Central Office to share their point-of-view of the issues at Farm Hill. Their input was used in the formulation of the final plan.

I will share this plan with the BOE in writing after the faculty, staff, and CO meet on Friday, January 13th and provide a report at the January 24th regular BOE meeting.

Michael

Michael J. Frechette, Ph.D.

Parents Baffled At Handling of Transportation Complaint

At last Tuesday night's Board of Education meeting, two parents and a grandparent asked the Board to consider their request for a change in bus stop location during both public sessions. This request led to a very distressing exchange between concerned BOE members and the Superintendent and his Business Manager.

Background:

The stop in question is at the intersection of Prout Hill Road and Crystal Lake Road. According to the joint complaint, the road is very narrow at that intersection and there are no sidewalks for the 6-8 children to stand on. Additionally, the homeowner at that intersection has requested that children not stand on her property while waiting for the bus (see here for that request to the BOE and Mayor) because she doesn't want to be responsible for any accident that might happen. The proposed parent solution is to move the stop to the intersection of Crystal Lake Rd. and Trailside Crossing: the street is wider and there are sidewalks for the kids to stand on.

The group request to the Superintendent's office, dated September 7th and signed by 9 different families, followed an August 31st certified letter from Board of Education Write-in Candidate Mark Loomis (grandparent to 5 children using the bus stop, 4 of which live with him). On September 9th, Business Manager Nancy Haynes wrote back to Loomis, thanking him for notifying the BOE of the concerns and telling him she would "review the bus stop against the Board of Education's transportation policy."

On Monday, September 21st, Sgt. Scott Aresco, the Traffic Unit Supervisor for the Middletown Police department, sent an email of his findings to Police Chief Patrick McMahon. The email reads as follows:

Chief,

The Traffic Unit has reviewed the bus stop at Prout Hill Road and Crystal Lake Road, and has the following concerns and recommendations.

• The current bus stop has no sidewalks where the children can wait for the school bus.
• Currently, the children stand in the front lawn of 182 Prout Hill Road; however, the resident has requested that the children not stand on her property waiting for the school bus. This is the only location at that corner where children can stand without being in the roadway. This becomes an issue especially in the winter with the snow/etc.

Our recommendation is that the bus stop be moved to the corner of Trailside Crossing and Crystal Lake Road. Children waiting for the bus will be off the roadway, as there are sidewalks on Trailside Crossing. Additionally, there is enough room in the cul-de-sac of Trailside Crossing for a bus to turn around.

Should you have any question and or concerns please feel free to contact me.

Sgt. Scott Aresco

On October 5th, Mark Loomis sent a second certified letter to the Superintendent, with the return receipt showing the letter was picked up on October 7th. This letter referenced the first request, cited Nancy Haynes' promise to look into the matter, and included the text of Sgt. Aresco's findings. Loomis received no reply to his letter. On Tuesday, October 11 (the same day as the BOE meeting), Mr. Loomis called the Board of Ed to see where his request was. He was told by Nancy Haynes that she was waiting for a road report that was being prepared by the safety department at DATTCO, and that she would contact him when the report was done.

According to his comments via email to this EYE reporter, Mr. Loomis couldn't understand what would take over a month for DATTCO to report on, so he called DATTCO to find out for himself:

I called them to ask; 1) when was the report requested, and 2) when could the Board expect to receive the report. At Dattco, I spoke to Ms. BillieJo Richardi of the Safety Dept. She told me that any request for a report such as described by Ms. Haynes would have to cross her desk, and that her department was not in receipt of any such request. She sounded a bit dismayed that she was just now hearing that there was a concern, and promised me that she would get back to me tomorrow, (Wednesday), it being almost the close of business on Tuesday.

Back to the BOE Meeting:

Mr. Loomis, Mr. Byrd and Mr. Latina all told the board various parts of this story during the first public session story, and all asked why there was no resolution to their case. BOE Chairman Ted Raczka responded that it wasn't a Q&A time and that the Board couldn't respond to direct questions. However, once the public session ended, BOE member Sheila Daniels asked where this case was and why it wasn't getting resolved. Here's where it got interesting...

Both the Superintendent and the Business Manager replied that they had received no written request for a transportation hearing to address this particular bus stop issue: "I haven't talked to anyone about this," said Michael Frechette. "No one has asked me for a hearing, " commented Nancy Haynes a moment later. BOE member Sheila Daniels then asked if any of the parents were even told that they needed to do such a thing, and there was no real answer to her question. BOE Member Corinne Gill added, "Protocol is that they're informed they have the right to submit a request for a hearing." BOE Member Ryan Kennedy commented that there was a transportation committee meeting the very next morning (Wednesday, October 13), but that he hadn't heard about this case. After several minutes of discussion about who didn't talk to whom, Chairman Ted Raczka said, "If an email request cc'ing the Chairman was sent, a hearing would be scheduled as soon as practical."

During the second public session, Parent Craig Byrd returned to the podium to tell the board that he had never, in all his interaction with the Superintendent's Office, been told he could submit a written request for a hearing.

After the meeting concluded, this EYE reporter asked Transportation Director Mike Milardo for additional information on this bus stop issue. Milardo commented that he had spoken to Mrs. Byrd and that she didn't like his initial decision about not changing the bus stop. Apparently, the proposed alternate stop (Trailside Crossing/Crystal Lake Rd) has not been approved for a bus turn (but it has been approved for fire truck access), so Milardo denied the change on that basis. Mrs. Byrd was not happy with that decision, so she was able to appeal to Milardo's supervisor, Business Manager Nancy Haynes, and Milardo then was no longer in the decision-making process.

Immediately following the interview with Mike Milardo, this reporter was able to interview Business Manager Nancy Haynes about her interactions with the multiple families involved in this bus stop dispute. Haynes said that since Mark Loomis was not a parent of children at the bus stop, he had no standing in the case, and so his efforts to get the bus stop changed were pointless. She also claimed that "someone" had talked to DATTCO that day about the safety report that was necessary before a decision could be made. When asked if Mrs. Byrd was ever told that she had to request a hearing specifically, Haynes replied, "She's an employee of this district and she should know what the procedure is." (Author's note - Mrs. Byrd works at Woodrow Wilson Middle School.)

One Week Later:

One week has passed since the "Bus Stop Saga" was brought to the attention of the Board of Education. This EYE Reporter had to fly to AZ over the weekend, and was unable to finish the story before now. On a whim this morning, I emailed Mark Loomis (the Grandparent without standing and BOE write-in candidate) to ask for an update before I published, and the only change in the storyline was a visit by the Superintendent, who had to wait for another car to turn off Crystal Lake Rd. before he could make his own turn in. Based on that experience, according to what Mark Loomis emailed back, the Superintendent said it's not safe for a bus to turn onto Crystal Lake Rd. (remember that kids stand at this intersection currently, and the proposed change is to have the bus turn on Crystal Lake to pick up at Trailside Crossing). Loomis then commented,

Now I ask you, what sense does that make? It's too unsafe for a bus to make the turn, so we'll solve that by having kids wait in the road there? Is this some kind of joke? Dr. Frechette has zero expertise that qualifies him to make this call. The board should show some respect for the judgement of the traffic supervisor -Sgt. Aresco.

Loomis did not say that a hearing has been scheduled, and I'm in possession of the email sent last Tuesday night, October 11th, to the BOE Chairman and others that requested a transportation hearing.

Author's Opinion:

When I initially started following this story a week ago, it sort of sounded like someone just didn't follow through someplace and this complaint got left behind. However, the more questions I ask, the more I don't like what I get in response. It either is or isn't policy to tell a parent what their options are if they want to challenge an administrative decision. It shouldn't matter who the parent it, and it certainly shouldn't matter if the primary caregiver happens to be a grandparent. I would also think that the arrival of more than one certified letter on a subject would finally trigger SOMEONE in the Superintendent's Office to ask if a hearing had been scheduled or if the parties involved even knew that was an option. Furthermore, Nancy Haynes asked for 116.75 hours of overtime for the business office for September (due to the payroll supervisor position not being filled), and that's an additional 20+ hours per week of extra work for someone or someones. That (supposedly) means people are there working, so it's kind of hard to understand how something could get dropped this bad for this long.

So, besides a conclusion of incompetence, which I'll hold off on for now, the only other possible choice has some connection to the fact that Mark Loomis is a candidate for the BOE. Surely this isn't the case, and surely this isn't what happens in Middletown...

State Embargoes School Scores until 8/31

The Middletown Eye learned today that the State has embargoed the results of Middletown's CMT scores as compared against federal benchmarks until next Wednesday, August 31st. Rumor has it that two Middletown schools failed to met AYP or Adequate Yearly Progress, but when asked, Superintendent Michael Frechette stated he couldn't talk about anything because the State told him he couldn't discuss it. "It's not my rules, but I can't talk about it, " Frechette said in a phone interview.

Frechette also couldn't comment on which Middletown school would have to offer parents "free choice" of any school in the district as a result of schools failing to meet AYP.

It should be noted that all Middletown schools passed State benchmarks, but the Federal benchmark is calculated differently and includes different information than the State's. I've been told this calculation is incredibly complex and impossible to explain, and I haven't found anyone who actually knows anything about the process.

That said, there should be more information available next week.

Middletown Meets State Benchmarks on 2011 CMTs

Middletown Superintendent Michael Frechette confirmed today that Middletown public school students exceeded all State benchmarks on the 2011 Connecticut Mastery Tests (CMTs). "These results show the focus and hard work of our teachers, students and administrators for the last six years," Frechette commented.

The Hartford Courant has an online searchable database that gives the testing proficiency by year, grade and subject. Click here to go to the database.

For No Child Left Behind purposes, Middletown won't know its status compared to federal benchmarks for a few more weeks. However, if Middletown reaches proficiency again this year (it did in 2010), there is a chance Middletown will be removed from the federal "Needs Improvement" list.

Superintendent Frechette stated that no matter what Middletown's federal status ends up being, "there's no turning back now," and that plans to continue to close Middletown's achievement gap will move forward.

Superintendent to Board of Ed: "Remember the Cliff? We're Here."

Much of Tuesday night's Board of Education meeting revolved around the 2011-2012 School Year Budget, but not because BOE members were talking specific details about how to cover the $2.4 million gap between the BOE's requested budget and Mayor Giuliano's proposed budget. Superintendent Michael Frechette told the board that he's make a zero budget work for two years, but that he can't do it for a third year. "We've done what we need to do to get this far, but it will be devastating next year with $2.4 million in cuts. Summer school will be gone because that's $200,000 right there. Class size is going to go up and programs are going away. Oh, and we're losing $700,000 in grant money too for next year."

BOE Chairman Ted Raczka commented: "This is a watershed year. It's important that we remember what we've done in the past. What got us through those tough, tough times was to make sure it was a community decision. Is Middletown going to support education? It's our duty [the Board of Education's] to make sure folks understand the significance of this budget." Raczka went on to say that he hopes passionately to avoid making the budget about a conflict in personalities: "This is a decision for us as a community to make about supporting education."

Several parents spoke during the public session about the impact on Macdonough if significant cuts are made to the summer program. Ed McKeon urged the BOE to be open with parents: "help us be your advocates to the Common Council." His plea was echoed by another parent: "We want to stand up for you at the Common Council meeting, and we want to make sure our schools get the resources they need. " PTA President Jennifer Alexander told the BOE that the $12,000 for 60 kids to attend a half day program for 5 weeks was a "very frugal way to give these kids a chance at stopping the summer slide" in academics. Alexander also asked the BOE to revisit the districting boundaries as the projected Kindergarten numbers might push Macdonough over its ideal student population number of about 240. "I would hope the board takes the opportunity to consider a more nuanced tool like some kind of parent choice option to manage this issue."

During Asst. Superintendent Barbara Senges' report on the District Data Team (this is the group that manages implementation of the District Improvement Plan as required by the State), it became very clear that from her perspective, Middletown will not be able to continue the progress it has made over the last three years if drastic budget cuts take place. "This work [the District Data Team's work] is critical to our future success....we are going to take a huge step backwards in this process if we can't continue."

Of the 18 districts required to implement District Improvement Plans because of CMT results that failed to meet Adequate Yearly Progress (APY), Middletown is considered the "poster child" for the progress it has made. The State has finished its official monitoring and, according to Senges, "feels we've accomplished what they wanted and they are confident the process will continue." While Middletown met APY this past year for the first time in several years, the benchmarks went up again for this next year, and it is likely that the district won't meet APY this year. Senges told the BOE that while she hopes Middletown is "off the list," her actual goal is "to make consistent progress in closing the achievement gap."

Budget Committee Chairman Jay Keiser asked Business Manager Nancy Haynes to gave an update on the 2010 audit and the current budget. Posted on the District's webpage, the 2010 audit had "no findings of anything" for both the state and federal audits.

On the current budget, the $400,000 shortfall that occurred because of the cost of snow removal from school roofs has been whittled down to about $257,000. If this shortfall can't be covered, it immediately impacts next year's budget by this amount. However, Haynes is currently holding back the 2nd payment the BOE owes the city for health insurance for classified salaries because the city won't give her a statement showing the official cost of the insurance. "I think the city is overcharging us because several other departments had reductions in the cost of this insurance but we haven't and they won't give me any kind of bill or documentation to show the actual amount owed. It's not good practice to pay a bill without seeing the bill, so I'm holding payment for now." Haynes speculated that the savings might be enough to cover the shortfall, but that she won't know until the attorneys work it out.

The vote to approve changes to when the public session is scheduled during the meeting and what can be talked about by the public at what time was tabled until the next meeting. Three BOE members were not present (two had significant family issues this past week), and BOE Member Bill Boyd asked to table the discussion/vote until these members were present: "I know that they [the missing BOE members] have significant opinions on this subject and we shouldn't decide without them." Corinne Gill commented that while she completely understood the reason for the absences, she didn't want it to become a BOE habit to put off discussion because someone with a significant opinion wasn't there. Jay Keiser commented that he would not be voting for the new policy: "I agree we have a number of people who come to be disruptive and not helpful, but does this mean it's OK to make legitimate people with legitimate concerns wait until the very end of the meeting? Is this fair?" William Grady then stated, "We have to remember that this is a board meeting held in public, not the public's meeting. Public comment should have to do with our agenda because we're not here to just sit and listen. We can't respond, we can't engage. It's not that we don't want to, but it's not the time to do it. We have to run our meeting and our agenda." [Author's note: the proposed policy would split the public comment session into two segments. The first segment, at the beginning of the meeting, would be only for comment on items specifically on the agenda for that meeting. The second segment at the very end of the meeting would be for comments on any subject pertaining to the board's purview.]

In other business, the MHS graduation date and closing of school is June 21st, but Woodrow Wilson graduates on June 22 because it lost an extra day due to electrical issues. The BOE meeting on June 21st was moved to June 28. The Vo-Ag program was authorized to begin the application process for a $50,000 equipment grant to replace its 18 passenger school bus. The vehicle is used to take students to off-campus locations for training and visits that can't been accomplished at MHS.

The BOE's next meeting with the Common Council is April 26th at 6:30pm. There will be a public hearing before the Common Council on April 28th at 7pm. All members of the public are encouraged to attend and to voice their opinion on what education in Middletown will look like for 2011-2012 and beyond.

BOE "Doing Everything We Can" To Stop Bullying

Much of Tuesday night's regular Board of Education meeting was dominated by the topic of bullying and the larger issue of school climate. I'll give a quick summary of the non-bullying items that were considered, and then I'll go back and cover the bullying issue.

The Board received a written report from the principals involved in the February 4th evacuations of Moody and Bielefield Elementary Schools. Moody was evacuated to Spencer and Bielefield was evacuated to Wesley. The four principals were on hand to answer questions from BOE members about the evacuations and the lessons learned. Moody Principal Yolande Eldridge commented, "We learned how well our practice pays off...it was a tremendous learning experience for our children...they learned to be patient and flexible." Bielefield Principal Renata Lantos told the board that one of her students accidentally activated the fire alarm once everyone had arrived at Wesley School, so those 600 combined students had the additional bonus of a fire drill on top of a whole-school evacuation. BOE members praised the principals and Transportation Mike Milardo for the quick evacuations and overall handling of events.

Director of Grant Services Elizabeth Nocera was asked about two grants: a Community Development Block Grant for Hall House and then an Interdistrict Cooperative Grant for the Youth Mathematics and Technology Academy. The CDB Grant will allow for repairs to be made to Hall House to expand its usage. The Youth Mathematics and Technology Academy is a six district program that promotes academic achievement in math and reduces isolation for the students involved. It was originally developed to respond to Sheff vs. O'Neill requirements, and this year the program ran for 10 Saturdays instead of 15 due to budget cuts. BOE Member Jay Keiser questioned the effectiveness of the program given the mixed academic results from participating students, but Nocera noted that the program did seem to help with CMT results for the involved students.

Budget Committee Chair Jay Keiser spoke to the Board on the financial impact of the Local 466 Contract should it be accepted. Keiser stated that the BOE will have to find an additional $131, 336 to cover wage increases and other costs if the contract is accepted. A breakdown of these costs is available in a memo to the Common Council and Board of Education from BOE Chairman Ted Raczka dated February 28, 2011. (Click on BOE Responses to Local 466 in the "Latest News" section of the District webpage. A similar memo from Superintendent Michael Frechette is also available.)

Policy Committee Chair Sally Boske explained proposed changes to Bylaw #9235 Meeting Conduct and Policy #9325.2 Order of Business. First, the Policy Committee recommends dividing the Public Session into two separate parts of the agenda: where the public normally now has three minutes to address the BOE, this initial Public Session would be used for the public to comment on agenda items only. A second Public Session for non-agenda items would be added to the very end of the agenda (yes, you would have to sit through the whole meeting before you can speak about anything not on the agenda). Boske justified the proposed policy change by saying, "We [the BOE] really need the time to get our work on the agenda done, but we do want to make sure that the public can talk to us about whatever it needs to." The second proposed change to the Order of Business is to add a place under the Report of the Superintendent section of the agenda for school personnel to update the Board as necessary. This was previously done during the Public Session, and the Policy Committee felt this wasn't the place to address these issues.

During the Public Session, five members of Monique McClain's family spoke to the BOE about her bullying case, and six other members of the public not related to Monique spoke on her behalf (author's disclosure: I was one of those six). Monique McClain was present and so was Channel 8 News. Her Grandmother, Alexa McClain, addressed the BOE for the 4th time, listing a series of numbers to remind BOE members of how long Monique has been seeking resolution of her bullying complaints: 180 days since the first written complaint was filed, 132 days since the first verbal request, 49 days since the family asked for an at-home tutor, 41 days since a meeting with Dr. Frechette, 29 days since Alycia McClain (the mother) submitted a written request to the BOE, 49 days at home without school instruction after suffering 133 days of unchecked bullying. Alexa McClain went on to say that her granddaughter was being "psychologically abused by the apathy of the board," and that she could not believe that a tutor could be found to administer the CMT test to Monique at home, but one couldn't be found to help Monique prep for the test or even receive basic school instruction.

Both of Monique's parents spoke to the Board, as did her boxing coach, Johnny Callas (The Lion's Den) and Pastor Mike Wynn. All of the comments (from family members or members of the public at large) urged the BOE to take visible action to resolve this bullying complaint, with Monique's uncle commenting, "If not you, who else is going to help her? We know what happens to children who are bullied....We have the know-how to stop this, so who's going to do it?"

The Board of Ed doesn't respond to public comments directly, but on the agenda for the evening was a presentation from Mindy Otis, the Supervisor of Special Education. Otis handed the BOE a 24 page (double-sided) report on the District's efforts to eliminate bullying in Middletown schools. This report and other materials on bullying are available here on the District's website (click on the Bullying and Harassment link). As a background warm-up, Otis told the BOE that "Research indicates that an improvement in school climate leads to a reduction of "mean" behaviors. Since 2005 the approach to reducing and eliminating bullying has appropriately shifted from specific targeted interventions to a more comprehensive approach aimed at improving school climate." Otis also told the board that while the term "bullying" is most often used, the focus should be on "mean behaviors" instead: "We're trying to teach students how to proactively resolve conflict in a positive manner."

Calling the 2010-2011 school year the "Year of School Climate," Otis highlighted the District Data Team's efforts to improve school climate (Otis is a member of the School Climate Subcommittee). Noting that the District Climate Subcommittee has developed goals that are part of the District Improvement Plan, Otis outlined the following high priority goals that have been selected for next year:

1. Bus time. Teachers, Principals and behavior reports indicate that the time spent on the bus is problematic for mean behaviors. Currently bus report data is being entered into an electronic system and will be analyzed by May 2011.

2. Setting District wide standards for behavior that will be codified into standards based report cards. District representatives will be attending upcoming professional development on National Standards.

3. Infusing Responsive Classroom and Developmental design into daily practice and extending it to high school level (after NEASC re-accreditation).

Otis also commented on recent media coverage: "While focusing on the issue in general is beneficial as it improves awareness, excessive media coverage of individual cases can have detrimental effects on students. Further complicating matters is the (appropriate) restriction of information due to the need for confidentiality. As a result, there is an appearance to the general public that the Middletown Public Schools are not making great efforts to combat bullying." She went on to say that the vast majority of reports of mean behavior are being resolved immediately by teachers with students, and that those students often go on to be best friends and great role models for their classmates. "Some cases might require a bit more attention, but most are taken care of quickly," Otis reported.

Her concluding statement reads:

"In summary, the Middletown Schools continue their efforts to improve school climate, increase prosocial behavior and decrease antisocial behavior. We have made great growth since the December 2005 report to the BOE. The 2010-2011 was dubbed the "Year of school climate" and has showcased renewed efforts in vigor. While bullying and mean behavior may be on the rise in our culture and in the world, the Middletown Public schools have been ever committed to fighting this rising tide. We need to do a better job of communicating to the public about these efforts."

BOE member Corinne Gill asked Otis several questions about how students or parents know what the process is to file a bullying complaint (in the student handbook and online), what response deadlines are specifically outlined (there aren't any), and who keeps track of the number of verified bullying reports in a given year. Otis reported that there were 5 cases in 2007-08, 1 in 2008-09, and 2 in 2009-10. Other BOE members commented positively on the new focus on "mean behaviors" and the effort to concentrate on school climate as a whole.

BOE Chairman Ted Raczka followed with several questions/comments of his own: "We start teaching anti-bullying in pre-K and all the way through high school, right? Is is fair to say that all of our students get this curriculum and all our teachers participate in it?" Otis replied yes, and Raczka continued, "Things are in fact improving?" Otis again replied yes. Raczka went on to say, "Could we do better? We probably could...we're trying to do better. But we live in a world where violence in the home is acceptable and that has a connection to this...I wish I had a magic wand to end this, but we're not going to do it in one day. We're doing as much if not more than other districts, and I just needed to speak so everyone knows that within the bounds of the law, we're doing everything we can."

BOE Member Sheila Daniels added, "We need to ask the community to help us, to impress on our young people that if you can't say something nice, don't speak." Finally, BOE Member Sally Boske asked Mindy Otis if the parent volunteer space on the Climate subcommittee was filled. Otis replied that it was not, and that she would love to see parents volunteer to help improve school climate (apparently the committee has great snacks at their meetings...).

This concluded the BOE's consideration of bullying in Middletown.

COMMENTARY

I had one quick minute to ask Chairman Raczka a few questions before the Board moved into Executive Session. Acknowledging that he could not give me specifics because of privacy issues, I asked him if he could confirm that everything is being done to resolve Monique McClain's case. He replied, "we are following our policies." I replied, "Well, that doesn't seem to be working out so well for her, does it? Raczka replied, "Well, it may not quite work out exactly the way people might want it to be resolved." I pressed further, "The girl's not even in school, so how can you say it's working out?" Raczka replied, "Well, I don't really know the details of the situation..." and then Superintendent Michael Frechette told him to stop talking and Raczka did.

I admit that I did not tape this conversation and that I may not have recalled it exactly as it happened. However, I am positive that I heard BOE Chairman Ted Raczka say that he did not know the details of Monique McClain's case, and I just cannot believe that could be true given the fact that a written appeal was made to the Board of Education on February 8th. Even if this isn't exactly what he said or even what he meant, the hovering presence of the Superintendent and his quick move to cut off what Raczka was trying to say left me with an overwhelming impression that something wasn't right. It seems like there's a firewall between the Superintendent and the BOE, and I can't imagine why that would be.

As frustrating as it seems, I understand the privacy issues and I get that bullying outside of school-sponsored events complicates things. I even understood what was meant by "it might not always get resolved the way some people want it to" (this refers to the victim wanting a resolution that may not be possible). It was lovely to hear the report on how much of our curriculum supports a positive school climate. However, THIS issue for THIS ONE CHILD is not yet resolved (the Superintendent told Channel 8 this himself on the 10 pm news), and we can't just pat ourselves on the back and say that overall, we're doing a great job. If even one child is bullied and the school system can't make it stop, can we really say our program is effective? There has to be a distinction between a general focus on a positive school climate and the specific focus of an individual case. If a wider focus on school climate makes us less effective at handling specific instances of severe bullying, how is that OK?

I will give Chairman Raczka credit for trying to highlight what the District has been doing in the general category of anti-bullying education, but he blew a perfect chance to reach out to the McClain family. I was left with the impression that the bullying presentation was designed to highlight what a great job the District has been doing, and no one had the guts to ask even one semi-difficult question about what happens if the bullying doesn't stop.

In my Public Session comments way at the beginning of the meeting and before the bullying presentation, I asked the Board to give us (the public) a "warm fuzzy" in the pits of our stomachs that they heard the McClain family's distress and that they were in fact doing everything they could. I acknowledged the privacy issue and accounted for a disparity between what the BOE could do and what they could talk about. I also reminded the BOE that they were elected officials and that they were accountable for doing the hard jobs we can't do. Sadly, I didn't walk away with what I was hoping for, and I'm not even the people who have to live with this every day. I am profoundly discouraged and disappointed, especially since Alycia McClain told me that one of Monique's friends was told that "she's next" since Monique isn't in school anymore. How can this be? How can this "mean behavior" continue for even one more minute? Why haven't these children been expelled according to the BOE's policy?

I'm actually not even sure what to say next because I don't know what else I could say that would be helpful. I'll just leave you with a comment offered to the BOE during the public session: "There's no reason you're not jumping out of your seat to protect this kid..."

Board of Ed Hears Redistricting Update and Facilities Report

The most "exciting" elements of Tuesday night's Regular Board of Education meeting have been covered in previous posts, so this update will just cover the more mundane topics that still deserve some attention.

During the discussion before the Board's vote to use April vacation to make up snow days, BOE Member Sally Boske asked if there was any flexibility in the scheduling of CMTs. Asst. Superintendent Barbara Senges replied that other than fixed date tests, all other tests have to be completed by March 31 (this includes make-ups). Normally, the elementary schedule begins the first week in March with the fixed date writing assessment on March 8. However, because of all the snow day schedule disruption, the CMT dates have been moved to later in the month. A letter to parents with these new details is coming home soon.

The administration is putting together a committee to look at the school calendars for 2011-12 and 2012-13. This group will consider the issues caused by this year's weather as it works on what the next two years will look like. Ultimately, the BOE has to approve the calendar, but there will be a deliberate discussion about ways to handle snow/make-up days, and if the current method is the best choice.

At the last BOE meeting, members asked for an update on redistricting, and Asst. Superintendent Barbara Senges gave a verbal update (a written one coming soon, didn't have it done in time due to time spent on analyzing substitute requirements if Feb. vacation was cancelled). The quick update is that some schools did a student and/or parent survey, and "everyone seems to be happy" with where they ended up. At Farm Hill, for example, of those surveyed:

• 96% felt welcome
• 96% felt the staff was supportive
• 94% said their children liked to come to school
• 96% said the school was meeting their expectations
• (the total number of surveys was not known)

There were no cases reported of anyone asking to go back to the school they came from. At Moody school, it was reported that parents are happy to have a computer room back, and they're happy about not having to attend two different assemblies (because of previous overcrowding limitations). Attendance at all school activities district wide is up, and Senges also commented that there is "high quality instruction and the climate is positive."

Macdonough Principal Jon Romeo was asked about how redistricting has affected his school and if the racial balance numbers are within compliance. Romeo replied that Macdonough had two separate challenges: first, that 50% of the student population was new to the school this year, and second, that he was merging five different populations of students into one new group (students were redistricted to Macdonough from five other elementary schools). Despite these significant challenges, though, Romeo said the school year was going well, and that Macdonough is well within the racial balance limits. Furthermore, the vast majority of students who had to leave Macdonough went to Spencer, and according to the reports he's received, these families "felt loved" by their new principal and school community.

The administration will continue the District Improvement Plan for a 4th year just because all pieces of the plan have not yet been implemented. Middletown had to develop this plan as a result of its identification as a district "needing improvement" according to CMT scores (but note that 2009-10 scores placed Middletown in the "adequate yearly progress category). Asst. Superintendent Barbara Senges was asked specifically about how "differentiation" is taking root in the district. Senges replied, "Everyone is in a different place regarding differentiation....By the end of this year, everyone will be technically proficient, but I don't think that will actually be the case....I would be overjoyed if that was the case, but I don't think so. We don't have enough professional development time or materials to get this done any faster." [Author's note: differentiation is teaching students at their level of understanding, not just a generic plan for the whole class. So, using the same subject, more advanced students are given different materials/assignments than students who are struggling with the material. All the student, though, are still in the same class together. Given the fact that the District is systemically eliminating leveling (that's classes grouped by ability) ) because teachers are supposed to be able to differentiate their instruction, hearing that "everyone is in a different place" isn't exactly confidence inspiring in the decision to eliminate leveling."]

The rest of the meeting was mostly devoted to Facilities Director Ken Jackson's status updates on snow clearing and structural integrity: "Our buildings are in fine condition....At no time was there any danger of structural failure or collapse in any structure in our schools." Here's a quick timeline of what's been happening:

• Prior to last week, snow clearing was done by in-house staff.
• On February 3rd, Michael J. Turner Enterprises, LLC was retained to clear snow from roofs. The company freed all of its crews to attend to snow removal and 40-60 men each days worked to clear snow.
• On Friday night (2/4), 2 structural engineers were retained to evaluate all buildings. The official report is available here.
• The intention of snow removal is to keep the amount of roof snow below the maximum load amount, not "to remove every snowflake." Every school roof is designed with a 20-30% safety cushion above what code requires, so as long as drains are clear and major drifts are removed, all snow doesn't have to be removed.
• Friday (2/4) was the worst day of stress on roofs, and the cracks noted in the drywall at Moody, Bielefield and Macdonough were a sign of the roofs flexing as they were designed to. The decision to evacuate Moody and Bielefield was made by each principal as a precaution for student safety. Jackson stated, "I ultimately think we could have been in school all day with no problems, but I won't criticize the decision each administrator made given their circumstances."
• On Monday, 2/7, at about 1:30pm, Laurence School was evacuated due to the smell of gas. The supply of gas to the school was turned off, and it was determined by the fire department that students could return to school and finish the day normally. The snow cover on the gas pipes on the roof had to be cleared to reveal a crack in one of the pipes, and once that was repaired, a system check was done and everything was restored to normal.
• Farm Hill School had minor flooding on Tuesday, 2/8. Superintendent Michael Frechette commented, "Our buildings are going to leak. They're old. If your house is leaking, we have a million square ft. of roof and it's probably going to leak."

Ken Jackson was asked about the National Guard and if Middletown would be getting any additional help: "That request has been made, but the National Guard isn't free. Towns have to reimburse the state for National Guard assistance." Jackson also thanked Middletown's Public Works Department for all the help it has provided in snow removal, noting that "the equipment we use for snow removal, well, it's tired folks....and we don't have the heavy machinery that Public Works does, so their big snow plows have really helped us out." Jackson plans to use this upcoming week of vacation to work on additional snow removal in parking lots (especially Farm Hill), and he thanked his workers for the amazing effort they've put in so far.

Business Manager Nancy Haynes told the BOE that without all the bills in yet, her estimated costs for snow removal, over-time for maintenance crews, and the structural engineers is roughly $250,000. She hopes that there may be some grant money eventually available since all school districts are facing similar unexpected costs, but she's not counting on it.

There was a discussion of the Honeywell Alert System and when and how that system gets activated. Jackson said he doesn't deal with putting the alert out, but that he's often the one providing the information that goes into the alert:

"We've had more crises in a month than in the entire year, and the first concern is for the students' safety. We are not thinking about talking to parents. We have to mobilize resources and assets and come up with a plan of action to deal with the situation. We think about parents last, and so a Honeywell Alert can't be in the first 1/2 hour of a crisis. I can't afford to give out the wrong information and then have to explain to parents how I got it wrong."

Superintendent Michael Frechette then commented, "We'd love to have a full time press position, but that ain't going to happen." BOE Member Corrine Gill expressed her concern over the communication process between the BOE and the Administration the public, and noted that perhaps the BOE should evaluate if there is a more efficient way to communicate what's happening: "There are so many kids with cell phones who are texting their parents in the middle of a crisis. We can't let 5th graders decide what's happening because this passes mis-information along. But, perhaps we can use the PTOs or something more effective."

Other BOE members asked about what kids did once they were evacuated to another school and why some schools with cracks were evacuated when others were not. BOE Chairman Ted Raczka commented, "It's been an unprecedented winter with unprecedented situations. We need to spend some time over the summer thinking about how to do this better in the future. I'd like to know what the kids did after they got to their evacuation point and if we need to think about that some more." Frechette replied that the four principals involved in Moody and Bielefield's evacuation have been asked to put together a report for the next meeting: "I think you'll be pleasantly surprised at all that went on." BOE Member Sheila Daniels asked why Macdonough wasn't evacuated if it also had cracks, and Ken Jackson replied that it was really the call of the principal based on the information he or she had at the time: "In retrospect, it probably wasn't necessary to evacuate, but those were individual calls and I won't criticize them."

The BOE has a workshop scheduled for February 22, 2011 to discuss its District Improvement plan and the Redistricting Committee.