Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 09-29-2015 APPROVED 11/5/2015 MINUTES ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS CHAPEL HILL-CARRBORO BOARD OF EDUCATION ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF EDUCATION JOINT MEETING September 29, 2015 The Orange County Board of Commissioners met for a joint session with the Chapel Hill—Carrboro Board of Education and the Orange County Board of Education on Tuesday, September 29, 2015 at 7:00 p.m. at the Whitted Building in Hillsborough, N.C. COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Chair Earl McKee and Commissioners Mia Burroughs, Mark Dorosin, Barry Jacobs, Bernadette Pelissier, Renee Price and Penny Rich COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: COUNTY ATTORNEYS PRESENT: John Roberts COUNTY STAFF PRESENT: County Manager Bonnie Hammersley, Deputy Clerk Travis Myren and Clerk to the Board Donna S. Baker (All other staff members will be identified appropriately below) ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF EDUCATION MEMBERS PRESENT: Chair Debbie Piscitelli, and Board Members Tom Carr, Lawrence Sanders, Tony McKnight, Steve Halkiotis, Brenda Stephens, Donna Coffey and Superintendent Todd Wirt and Interim Superintendent Pam Jones were also present. ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF EDUCATION MEMBERS ABSENT: CHAPEL HILL-CARRBORO CITY SCHOOL BOARD OF EDUCATION MEMBERS PRESENT: Chair Mike Kelly and Board Members Andrew Davidson, Jamezetta Bedford, James Barrett, David Saussy, Annetta Streater, and Superintendent Tom Forcella and Assistant Superintendent Todd LoFrese were also present. CHAPEL HILL-CARRBORO CITY SCHOOL BOARD OF EDUCATION MEMBERS ABSENT: Michelle Brownstein Chair McKee called the meeting to order at 7:06 p.m. 1. Welcome and Opening Remarks - Chair Kelley, Chair Piscitelli and Chair McKee Chair McKee welcomed everyone, and applauded the effort to work collaboratively towards the best education possible for the children of Orange County. Chair Kelly echoed Chair McKee's sentiments. Chair Piscitelli said this meeting provides a dedicated time to have these discussions. She said both the philosophical and financial support from the Board of County Commissioners is appreciated. 2. School Capital Needs Prioritization Chapel Hill-Carrboro City Schools (CHCCS) — Presentation of Capital Needs Orange County Schools (OCS) — Presentation of Capital Needs Paul Laughton, Orange County Interim Finance and Administrative Services Director, said the abstract contains attachments from the two school systems. He reviewed the scope of work for these assessments, and he said that this evening would be a joint presentation between the two schools. Todd LoFrese showed a short video, which gave an overview of the needs from both of the school districts. Todd LoFrese said there are significant school needs throughout the County, which he and Pam Jones would be presenting. Pam Jones and Todd LoFrese presented the following PowerPoint slides: Facilities Needs Presentation September 29, 2015 Pam Jones and Todd LoFrese Todd LoFrese presented this slide: Our Goal • Two Districts • Two Similar, but Different Set of Needs • Two Different Approaches • One Goal — To Provide: Safe, Secure, and Healthy Facilities to Support Student Learning and Achievement Pam Jones presented the following slides: Thorough, Detailed, Responsible • Process started in 2011 • Professional Architectural and Engineering Evaluation • Comprehensive recommendations, linked to Orange County School Construction Standards • Scaled back: — CHCCS original $200 million, now$160 million — OCS original $161 million, now $65 million* (Board of Education Prioritized $50- $70 million only) OCS Facilities Summary • Focus on projects not fundable through current Capital Investment Plan (CIP) allocations in these areas: — Safety — Replacement of antiquated mechanical equipment — Cedar Ridge classroom wing — Replacement of Transportation facilities — Upgrade/Replace food service facilities/equipment Areas of Work • Estimated total: $15.9 million • Major Mechanical System Replacement — A.L. Stanback Middle — Cameron Park Elementary — Central Elementary — Efland Cheeks Elementary — Grady Brown Elementary — Hillsborough Elementary — Orange High School Areas of Work • Estimated total: $28.5 million • Major Infrastructure Projects – A.L. Stanback Middle – Cameron Park Elementary – Central Elementary – Efland Cheeks Elementary – Grady Brown Elementary – Hillsborough Elementary – Orange High School Areas of Work—All Schools • Food Service: $ 1.4 million • Safety: $2.7 million Area of Work—Additions Cedar Ridge High School: $14.7 million • Occupied 2002 • Design included 500 student addition • Capacity: 1000 • Current enrollment: 1149 • SAPFO projects high school capacity at 110.2% in 2022-2023 Todd LoFrese presented the following slides: CHCCS Older Facilities Summary • Older schools need significant investments • Recommendations – Fix aging infrastructure issues – Bring older schools to OC standard – Address safety and security – Increase capacity and delay new schools – Eliminate mobile classrooms – Delays operational increases CHCCS Facilities Assessment: 6 slides (charts) Pam Jones continued the PowerPoint presentation: Collaboration Opportunity • Based on $125 million Bond distributed roughly by ADM, both districts would like to jointly fund a centralized transportation maintenance center. – Efficiency – Effectiveness – Safety – Appropriate Working Conditions Todd LoFrese concluded the PowerPoint presentation: Long Term • Current Annual Pay as you Go, '/4 Cent, and Lottery — CHCCS $1.988 million for computers, $1.988 million for facilities — OCS $1.1 million for computers, $1.4 million for facilities • Consider the Math — CHCCS Facilities $1.988 million/20 Schools = $99,400 per school — CHCCS Combined Insured Value = $388 million. Current annual capital spending is .5% (.005) of total value — OCS Facilities $1.4 million/13 Schools = $107,000 per school — OCS Combined Insured Value = $232 million current annual capital spending is less than .6% (.006) of total value • A bond will help us begin to catch up. • Additional ongoing maintenance funding will be needed for older and newer facilities moving forward. • Continued community support Commissioner Dorosin asked if all pre-k classrooms would be moved to the Lincoln Center. Todd LoFrese said not the dual language pre-k classrooms, but about 22 others would move. Commissioner Rich asked if the option of rebuilding Chapel Hill High School from scratch has been considered. Todd LoFrese said this option had been considered, but to build a new school that size would cost at least about $75 million. He said CHCCS is seeking to be good stewards of the available resources. Commissioner Rich said Carrboro High cost $45 million, and asked if there is a reason that Chapel Hill High School would cost so much. Todd LoFrese said Carrboro High was bid over 10 years ago, and there are now higher construction costs. He said Carrboro High also has fewer students. He said tearing down Chapel Hill High School safely would also add considerable cost to the project, whereas Carrboro High School just needed to be built. Commissioner Price said she noticed that OCS has no new construction or total rehab, but rather repairs here and there. She asked if there is any plan for newer construction farther down the line. Pam Jones said total rehab was considered in the facilities assessment, and it was determined to not be worth the cost. She said capacity is currently manageable, but as Hillsborough develops the statistics may change. She said one option that was considered in the assessment was to expand Efland-Cheeks Elementary School. She said the district's buildings are deteriorating to the point that, if drastic action is not taken soon, the buildings will fall down. Commissioner Price said that is her concern. She said the current condition of the buildings seem beyond repair. She said she was not thinking about the capacity, but looking at this long term. Pam Jones said Cameron Park, Central and Hillsborough Elementary Schools are on the list for mechanical and infrastructure repairs. She said Central is in better shape than the others, due to repairs about five years ago. She said the repairs would go a long way to address many needs of the buildings. Commissioner Price asked CHCCS if the plans in the Board's packet are based on consultant's recommendations for safety. Todd LoFrese said CHCCS used the same consultants as OCS, and one of CHCCS's recommendations is to address safety concerns at the older schools. Chair McKee asked if the proposed $9 million is the total cost for the centralized transportation center. Pam Jones said yes. She said the assessment estimated $7 to $8 million, but a bit more has been added to take site acquisition into consideration. Commissioner Burroughs thanked the school districts for their collaboration on this presentation. Chair Piscitelli said she attended the last Board of County Commissioners' meetings, about what may be on the bond and the meeting where the public was able to make comments. She said hearing the word "neglected", in reference to the older schools, bothered her. She said the Board should remember that the schools always try to be good stewards of all funds, and that needs have simply outpaced annual capital dollars. Chair Piscitelli said technology is now an integral device to provide instruction to all students (ESL, visual learners, etc.). She said this is the reason why both districts are committed to funding technology, as well as facility and maintenance costs. She said another issue is the students with disabilities and accommodating them due to older schools' infrastructure. She said school shootings have increased throughout the nation, and $2.7 million is needed to address safety. Tom Forcella said an important piece is the time and effort that has gone into the assessments and prioritizations of the schools. He said great time and care has been taken to address the needs effectively and most appropriately, for both districts. Commissioner Jacobs said one other factor that has affected funding has been the State's reduction in school construction funding over the years. He said the recent growth in Orange County is also a factor, causing the schools to depend more on local funding. Chair McKee responded to Chair Piscitelli's comments about the word "neglect", saying it is benign neglect, not intentional. He said it is the result of trying to do the best with the available resources. He echoed Tom Forcella's comments about the amount of effort and time put into the assessment process. Commissioner Dorosin asked if CHCCS has a timetable for Phases 2 and 3. Todd LoFrese said in the information previously provided to the Board of County Commissioners, there is have a 10-year construction plan for these phases. He said the first 4 years would be for Chapel Hill High School, and 2 years for Lincoln Center. He said at that point, finances would be assessed and hopefully more renovations could continue. Commissioner Dorosin asked if Phase 1 would take 10 years. Todd LoFrese said the CHCCS plan lays out projects that are both funded and not funded. He said CHCCS is requesting for planned funding to be used to address current needs. Commissioner Dorosin said the feedback he is hearing is not an issue of"neglect", but rather criticism of the long range planning. He said it would be important to maximize existing land. Todd LoFrese said the schools adequate public facilities ordinance (SAPFO) process is already in place, and similarly both districts review the CIP process each year. Andrew Davidson referred to page 4 of the document and said Phases 1 and 2 are where priority is placed on capacity. He said in Phase 3, there is less focus on capacity increase. James Barrett said the standard was to take all elementary schools to hold 585 students. He asked if Commissioner Dorosin wants this number revisited, due to potential population increases. Commissioner Dorosin said that possibility should be on the table, and he anticipates in five years that there will be need for a new elementary school. He said if continued growth can be anticipated, capital plans could be re-visited to see if some school plans can be tweaked to increase capacity. He said there must be flexibility. He said finding land to build new schools would be a challenge, especially in Chapel Hill. Discussion ensued. Commissioner Rich asked if there is a plan for the relocation of students, while parts of Chapel Hill High School are being torn down. Todd LoFrese said this will be a challenge. He said as the design process proceeds, there will be a better idea of how to address this issue. Commissioner Rich asked if Todd LoFrese could give a rough estimate of the number of students to be displaced. Todd LoFrese said this is unknown at this time. Commissioner Jacobs referred to Commissioner Dorosin and James Barrett's conversation. He said built into this process are assumptions. He said it might be helpful to look at some of these built in assumptions as the process goes forward. James Barrett said he agreed. Tom Forcella said utilizing space more effectively and efficiently is an important area that should be focused on. Commissioner Price referred to OCS, and said she is looking at the quality of education provided, and the need to upgrade the science rooms. She said it might be preferable to build a wing rather than do renovations. She said many schools might not have room to expand. She said she is also concerned about the unfunded media center at Hillsborough Elementary. She asked if there is an idea as to what is on the horizon. Pam Jones said as the assessment was put together, the core of the buildings was considered and it is imperative to take care of what already exists. She said roof work, infrastructure, and HVAC work needs to be upgraded as soon as possible, and thus are a priority. Commissioner Price said she is talking about long-term issues. Steve Halkiotis said there has never been enough money to maintain schools' infrastructure, HVAC and roofs. He said everything has been added on over the years, and these issues have been around for a long time. He reiterated that there is over$600 million value in the schools, but only $200,000 to take care of them all. CHCCS Key Elements of Older Facility Recommendations (included in the 2015-25 CIP Recommendation) • The recommendations are for a comprehensive program that focuses on the district's ten oldest schools that accommodate almost 50% of district students. • Facility recommendations include: • Correction of building code violations; • Improved safety by consolidating operations and controlling entry; • Indoor air quality deficiencies and health concerns addressed; • Replacement of malfunctioning mechanical equipment; • Relief of traffic congestion problems; • Deconstruction of some inefficient buildings; • Extending the life of the schools. • Implementation of the recommendations eliminate mobile classrooms (also in need of renovations) while providing additional student capacity. • Elementary school capacity increase = 555. • High school capacity increase = 230 +/- • Increased student capacity would result in deferment of new elementary school and high school additions well beyond the ten-year CIP window. • Board requesting the redirection of$57.6 million in projected capital expenditures for new schools towards "Phase 2" older facility recommendations. • Delays significant operational increases with opening a new school. • Bond funds and future capital funds directed to the ten oldest schools will make available CIP (Pay-as-you-go) revenue for needed maintenance at district's other "newer" schools that are 20-30 years of age. OCS Facility Recommendations • 2013 Facilities Assessment reflected needed repairs/replacements/additions in excess of$160million as of the date of the assessment. • OCS receives approximately $2.6 million for capital funding annually. • Of the $160 million overall needs, OCS Board of Education prioritized projects to funding levels of$50, $60 and $70 million, with projects in the following areas given highest priority: o Safety; o Replacement of antiquated and failing mechanical equipment that would exceed normal CIP funding capabilities; o Cedar Ridge High School classroom wing addition; o Replacement of Transportation facilities; o Upgrade and replacement of food service facilities and equipment. • Phase 1 projects per the attached sheet would be completed assuming a $50 million allocation of the potential 2016 bond. • Unfunded projects would be addressed if higher allocation from potential 2016 bond were allocated and/or through future CIPs. • Based on approved CAP Certificates to date, OCS has adequate elementary and middle school capacity for the current 10-year CIP period. The Cedar Ridge classroom addition will address the needed high school capacity, which is projected to reach SAPFO capacity by 2022. A planning/constructing/opening period of approximately three years is anticipated. • Replacement and consolidation of Transportation facilities is included in the OCS Phase 1 request, but is envisioned as a joint project with CHCCS. OCS is the recognized LEA for Transportation for both OCS and CHCCS (State only recognizes one per County). The 1950's vintage Transportation facilities for both CHCCS and OCS are woefully inadequate. Some buses will not fit and still close the bay doors, for example. • Potential bond funds will allow OCS to divert future pay-as-you-go CIP funds to other critical projects addressed in the Facilities Assessment, but not included in Phase 1 3. Discussion of Potential Comparative Analysis of School Capital Needs • Third Party Professional to Rank and Rate Needs based on Determined Criteria Commissioner Jacobs said the proposals do not coincide with the presentations, and it is difficult for the Board of County Commissioners to decide priorities without objective criteria. He said security is a key component. He suggested asking a third party to review and rank each project, based on the following criteria: • Security • Health and safety • Structural integrity • Capacity He added that the value of improvement versus replacement could be another criteria. Commissioner Jacobs said the third party could review all projects, without knowing which district they belong to, and then present findings to the Board of County Commissioners who could take the highest ranked projects to the voters by way of a bond. He said he knows there are other variables that may be factored in, such as the average daily membership (ADM) and the political components. He said it could be a more emotionless process if a third party was used. Commissioner Pelissier said she thought Commissioner Jacobs' suggestion was an idea to pursue, since the State recently decided to use empirical ratings with the transit issues in order to take out the political ramifications. She added that this could be a better way to convince the public with a bond. Commissioner Price asked if this suggestion would be a duplication of what CHCCS has already done. Chair McKee said no, but rather this would take projects presented to the Board tonight by both districts, and let a third party objectively review and rank the projects based on the five criteria. Commissioner Price said the districts had already worked with consultants. Chair McKee said this is open for discussion. James Barrett said a criterion he felt was missing was logistics. He said there are some projects that are logistically simpler than others, and may therefore take priority. Commissioner Jacobs said it was not in his criteria, but that does not mean that it cannot be added. He said agreed upon criteria would be needed that apply to both districts across the board. Donna Coffey asked if hiring a consultant would do the same thing as a capital needs advisory task force, which has been used in past bond referendums. Chair McKee said their Board of County Commissioners has not had this discussion yet, but from his standpoint this could be an alternative to such a committee. He said the consultant would be unaffiliated with either district or the Board of County Commissioners. He said another question is whether bond funds are allocated based on ADM or on a project basis. He said Commissioner Jacobs' suggestion might lead to funding being distributed more on a projects basis. He said the discussion is about getting feedback on this suggestion. Commissioner Burroughs said she is interested in this suggestion, but she served with CHCCS when this process started. She said the issue of phasing has been part of the process from the beginning, whereas the OCS's projects are smaller projects; so she is uncomfortable comparing apples and oranges. She said these are elected school boards, and she is uncomfortable with encroaching on their processes. Steve Halkiotis said he would like to hear more about this suggestion, and he has been through several bond processes. He said on past capital needs committees, there have always been advocates for a variety of needs. He said he does not have a dog in this fight, but is only interested in the students in both districts. He said if there is not a united front going forward, this bond may fail. He said the more attractive the bond package is, the more people will come out to support it. Steve Halkiotis said he appreciated the suggestion, but asked if there is good reason to bring in a third party when there has been success in the past with a collaborative effort, by using committees for the bond process. Chair McKee said the projects that have been presented cannot be accomplished with $125 million, and this suggestion is a way to prioritize projects. He said he hoped to generate discussion, not to start a fight. Commissioner Jacobs responded to Donna Coffey's question, saying the Board of County Commissioners has not always agreed with the bond process, but this is the process. He said both school systems have presented a more detailed assessment than has ever be done previously. Commissioner Jacobs said he made the third party suggestion, as he wants to know which facility is the most vulnerable to be entered by an unauthorized person. He said he wanted to know this type of information as a whole, prior to talking to the voters about supporting a bond. He said there must be some basis to take to the voters. Chair Kelly asked if the five criteria are security, health and safety, structural integrity, capacity, and improvement versus replacement as well as possibly adding logistics. Commissioner Jacobs said yes, and that it may be wise to further the discussion to see if more criteria should be included. Chair Kelly said this proposal is logical, but the issues start to break down when deciding to whose opinion one should listen. He said being objective is very difficult and that people have been working on this for a while. He said some decisions are simply educational, and should be made by an elected school board versus an outsider. He expressed concern about the timeline when adding another variable into the process. He said the school districts have been on this "train" for four years. He expressed concern for the cost of such an analysis, as well as what would happen when the school board disagreed with the consultant or the BOCC, and how disagreements would be resolved. He said $125 million is only a down payment on what the schools need. Chair Kelly said if this process is going to be applied to the bond funds, then similar criteria should also apply to the Board of County Commissioners and the CIP. He said it is valuable to have the best information possible, but no information is perfect. Jamezetta Bedford echoed the comments of Steve Halkiotis and Chair Kelly. She said capacity is a big issue for CHCCS, but not with OCS, and that is one problem with the proposed ratings. She said this suggestion is a usurping of elected school boards by the Board of County Commissioners. She said the architect being used by the CHCCS is the same one being used by the County for the jail, and as such the County should have some level of confidence in the architect. She said the architect has evaluated the older buildings objectively, and the resulting assessments should be trusted. Jamezetta Bedford said there is no value in this proposal, and asked what would happen if the independent third party gave all the funds to only one school district. She said there must be allocations to both school districts if there is any hope of gathering public support. She said the suggestion makes no political sense. Jamezetta Bedford said deciding how to allocate the proposed bond funds is important. She said this suggestion is a very bad idea and not a positive step. Annetta Streater said she believed that the public has confidence in the two school districts, and their boards, to be responsible to the students, their families, and to the taxpayers. She asked for the Board of County Commissioners to have the same confidence in the school boards to make the best recommendations for the school districts. She said all involved have thought through the variables and needs very carefully, with great dedication. Commissioner Dorosin said in support of Commissioner Jacobs that the Board of County Commissioners is the one body that is charged to look out for all the students through the Board's funding capacity. He said if these are urgent needs that will be addressed through a bond, the funding must be candidly explained to the public. He said being frank and straightforward about the process is imperative. Steve Halkiotis said the last time the County went out for a bond in 2001, specific projects had to be listed. He said it is now his understanding that the bond counsel has said that a lump sum can be approved on a bond without a listing of projects. Chair McKee said the Board has not had this discussion. Commissioner Rich said she echoed the comments of Steve Halkiotis. She said she also agreed with Commissioner Dorosin that there was not a chance to discuss a lot of this as part of the bond process. She said it is important to be as honest as possible with the voters. Chair Piscitelli said she appreciated this discussion. She said it is always valuable to look at a situation with fresh eyes and consider a variety of ideas. Commissioner Jacobs said in 2001 the public was told which projects would be done with the bond funds. He said there was not enough funding to do everything then either. He said the BOCC varied slightly from the recommendations given at that time and funded both school districts. He said his suggestion of a third party review is in no way meant to be disrespectful to the school systems, boards or consultants. He said the BOCC might just have a different way of organizing things. Commissioner Burroughs said the easiest answer to the voters is that the funds would be split by ADM. She said she is confident that each district will stretch this money, as it falls so short of meeting all the needs. She said it is critical that the projects be as defined as possible, as the process of educating the public moves forward. Andrew Davidson said by the time November 2016 comes around, the voters would be feeling bond fatigue as both the Town of Chapel Hill and the State are proposing bonds as well. He said the more divisive this bond is, the more difficult it will be to pass. James Barrett said the best way to move forward on this bond is as a unified front. He said Commissioner Jacob's third party review suggestion is the antithesis of this, as it shows a strong sense of mistrust of those in the schools and their dedication to working for the best interest of the students. Donna Coffey agreed with everything that has been said and emphasized the importance of having a strong educational component that is seen by the voters as a collaborative effort by all three boards. She said it is also important to let the public know that the bond will not address all of the needs. Commissioner Pelissier said this has been a good discussion, and she did support exploring this proposal. She said this discussion has brought a lot more clarity on the process. She said she now believes that this proposal would not be right for this process. Commissioner Pelissier said once the bond funds are allocated, the question that must be answered is what are the next steps to address the needs that are not going to be funded by the bond. She said the public must know that there is a long-term plan for all the schools' needs. James Barret said he has told his community that the process must start somewhere to move on to address further needs. He said without support for Phase 1, there would be no Phase 2. Chair McKee said this open discussion was extremely valuable. He said it was vital for the schools to be heard before the BOCC has its own discussions. He said it will be difficult to work out the priorities, and how to present them to the public. He said these types of discussions should happen in an ongoing manner, allowing all parties to work collaboratively to provide safe, secure and healthy environments for the County's children. 4. Impacts of State Approved Budget • Chapel Hill-Carrboro City Schools Todd LoFrese said the State budget leaves a $300,000 gap in funding for teaching assistants, and this is of great concern to the schools. Commissioner Dorosin said he would like updates, as it relates to the State legislature and Charter Schools, when it is available. He said he understands that a portion of any grant monies will have to go to Charter Schools. He said this would make it difficult to receive grants. Todd LoFrese said it is an additional $250,000 that CHCCS would share with Charter Schools. He said it is of concern, and he is interested to see what the general assembly will do. Commissioner Dorosin asked if it is known how many CHCCS students go to charter schools, and it was answered about 200, and 475 for OCS. • Orange County Schools Dr. Wirt said the OCS memo is also in the agenda packets. He said the State did fund step increases but restructured the steps in the past. He said this left the school district having to cover some teachers that fell on the top end of those tiers and are moving up in a step increase. He said it is important to note that 59 percent of OCS teachers received no pay increase of any kind this year. 5. Discussion of School Related Topics Chair McKee said Commissioner Dorosin suggested discussing the following items: • Collaborative Opportunities between Districts • Expanding Innovations (e.g. Magnet Schools, Year Round Schools) • Programs/Plans to Address Achievement Gap Commissioner Dorosin asked if student reassignment is being considered to address the concentration of low-well students at certain schools. He said the achievement gap is still too wide in both districts. Commissioner Dorosin said the issue of segregation in schools is still a real problem. He asked if the schools have ever examined the enrollment of students in Advanced Placement, or gifted classes, by race or socio-economic level. He said this is a significant issue that Wake County has attempted to address. He would like to see the schools in Orange County follow suit. Commissioner Dorosin said there is only one year round school in Orange County, and asked if this is something that may be increased in the future. Commissioner Dorosin said CHCCS has two dual-language schools, which are a strategy for achieving more diversity. He asked if there are plans to explore and expand these schools. Tom Forcella said the CHCCS long-range plan to address achievement gaps is one of the district's priorities, and he elaborated on some of the CHCCS programs. He said year round schooling makes a lot of sense to him, as long as it is not done simply for facility reasons. Tom Forcella said the two districts are working to find more areas of collaboration. Chair McKee suggested that any detailed information could be forwarded to the Board at a later date. Commissioner Dorosin said County Commissioners need to be better appraised as to what is going on with the districts, and he is just reflecting back questions he has been asked from the community. Tom Forcella said the schools could come and share with the Board of County Commissioners at future work sessions or regular meetings to keep the Board informed and updated. Commissioner Dorosin said he would welcome this. Dr. Wirt said the issue of achievement gap in OCS is being addressed in an ongoing manner. He said an equity audit was conducted looking at classes offered, how talent is nurtured at early ages, and how gifted students are identified. He said OCS is seeking to offer professional development in these areas. He said he is very new to the district, but OCS is looking internally at policies, procedures and practices around choice within the district. He said options for choice are supported. He said it might be unfair to look at a high performing year- round school and solely attribute its success to the fact that it is year-round. He said he is open to year-round schools, but wants to make sure they are a good answer. He said choice programs are being considered where there are open seats in the schools. He said programming that will improve performance for all students is important, and not just programming that will attract choice students. He said this type of work is important, and he has lots of ideas. He said OCS is in the midst of asking a lot of questions and working out the best options with which to proceed. Commissioner Burroughs asked if the school boards would send their meeting agendas to Clerk to the Board, then Commissioners could attend if there is a topic of interest listed. Commissioner Burroughs said this is CHCCS Chair Kelly and Jamezetta Bedford's last joint meeting, because they will be "retiring". She acknowledged their service. Chair McKee encouraged the school boards to send any other questions or comments to the BOCC. He reiterated the Board's appreciation of the conversation. A motion was made by Commissioner Price, seconded by Commissioner Rich to adjourn the meeting at 9:48 p.m. VOTE: UNANIMOUS Earl McKee, Chair Donna Baker, Clerk to the Board