The Collaborative School Committee
The Collaborative School Committee (CSC) is an elected advisory board at GW. Presently we have 15 active members: four students, four parents, four teachers, one classified staff member, one community representative, and the principal.
The primary focus of the CSC is the development and implementation of the Unified Improvement Plan (UIP). To this end we help guide the school budget, staffing allocations, and school design, always with the goal of furthering the UIP.
The members of the CSC for the 2015-2016 school year are:
|Jose Martinez||Acting Principal||June firstname.lastname@example.org|
|Scott Lessard||Incoming Principalemail@example.com|
|Stephen Arichea||Teacher||June firstname.lastname@example.org|
|Angela Danley||Teacher||June email@example.com|
|Paul Knickerbocker||Teacher||June firstname.lastname@example.org|
|Kevin Vicente||Teacher||June email@example.com|
|Renelle Weightman||Classified||June firstname.lastname@example.org|
|Jake Fisher||Student||June email@example.com|
|Hezekiah Hall||Student||June firstname.lastname@example.org|
|Bryn Learned||Student||June email@example.com|
|Kathryn Swan||Student||June firstname.lastname@example.org|
|Ronda Belen||Parent||June email@example.com|
|Barbara Chin||Parent||June firstname.lastname@example.org|
|Jay Clapper||Parent||June email@example.com|
|Leslie Cordova||Parent||June firstname.lastname@example.org|
|Kittie Hook||Parent||June email@example.com|
|Mary Jo Minogue||Parent||June firstname.lastname@example.org|
|David Wollins||Community Member||June email@example.com|
Angela Danley, Shahad Mohieldan, Jake Fisher, Kevin Vicente, Jennifer Harkness-Quintana, Scott Lessard, Bryn Learned, Kathryn Swan, Steven Arichea, Mary Jo Minogue, Ron Sherman, Pedro Camacho, Kitty Hook, Adam Haynes, and Isabelle Maestas.
CALLED TO ORDER
Total budget allocation of $7,094,382
Currently our budget overspends by about $278,304 – tonight we are going to try and balance that and Mr. Lessard also has a meeting tomorrow with the members from the district to approve that with them and further this conversation.
1. Was the fall enrollment adjustment based on October count?
- Our enrollment at the end of the count was 1282.
- Our new projection for next year is 1231. Probably won’t have a great idea of the accuracy of this number until late March or early April when first round choice starts to come in.
2. Where does the alternative school subsidy come from?
- Students that have left George and have gone to alternative schools, we then have to pay money back to the district in order to account for these students.
3. Where does the money for tutoring go?
- Schools that have much higher at-risk populations have historically received this. This money has to be given to at-risk students in math through the Math Fellows program. We will likely change this to a math tutor that will work with teachers to enforce the lesson plans taught by teachers. We have to use the bulk of it for math, but whatever is left can roll into the rest of the budget.
4. What happens if our enrollment changes?
- If we get to April and Mr. Lessard feels as though we are going to have a increase/decrease in our projected enrollment then we will come back together in order to reevaluate this.
5. Where can we cut money from?
- We don’t anticipate much of a carry-forward.
- This year we were at about $400 per student operating budget, which is about $50 less per student than what the district recommends.
6. Are they taking into account the building that is occurring in areas such as Lowry and the potential that it might bring more students?
- It is possible that they are taking this into account, but they never really do an accurate job at projecting a change in trends.
7. The Mill Levy said that we were going to spend more on mental health, but if we already meet that requirement then will they not give us anymore to support this area?
- They use the supplement not supplant theory. The money is only meant to supplement, but not replace where that money is coming out of the budget.
8. Things Mr. Lessard would like to see:
- Would like to make the 0.6 social worker to a full social worker.
- To gain a full time restorative justice person.
- We have left in the dean, but this is going to be a retirement position. Hopefully we can have more social and emotional support in order to not need the discipline as much. The restorative justice person could essentially serve as a less expensive dean, which would be beneficial.
9. Our major improvement strategies are:
- College and Career Readiness
- Build stronger instruction (teacher leaders)
- Culturally Responsive
10. What does Mr. Lessard suggest?
- Remove one dean of discipline, but replace this with a restorative justice person.
- Remove one teacher from science.
11. Is there anything from the non-salary budget that we can take off?
- Not really because right now we are at around $450 and they really won’t let you go much lower than $400.
12. Is it possible to cut a secretary?
- All of the secretaries stay very busy and it would be difficult for the other secretaries to pick up the work of the other secretary that was cut. But it all comes down to what we want to prioritize.
13. Should we request budget assistance?
- Mr. Lessard will request budget assistance for things such as 9th grade academy and 9th grade seminar.
14. Could Mr. Lessard do his job with one less administrator?
- The quality of the instruction in this building is improved by having Catherine Greeley as an administrator. However, this role could potentially be filled by 5 Senior Team Leads (STL) in order to fill that gap with the teachers.
15. Numbers when we cut certain positions:
- Reducing one dean- $210,000 left to cut.
- Reducing one administrator- $101,320 left to cut.
16. Strategy for reduction in staff during Mr. Lessard’s meeting tomorrow-
- 1 dean
- 1 Administrator
- 1 math teacher
- 1 social studies teacher
- 1 english teacher
- 1 science teacher
- The restorative justice position