Great Barrington   Stockbridge   West Stockbridge



August 20, 2015


School Committee:   S. Bannon, R. Bradway, F. Clark, R. Dohoney, W. Fields, A. Potter, J. St. Peter

Administration:        P. Dillon, S. Harrison


 School Committee:   K. Piasecki, C. Shelton, D. Weston

 List of Distributed Documents:

August 20, 2015 School Committee Meeting Agenda; Draft BHRSD Farm to School Action Plan 081215; Meal Price Memo to SC; Berkshire County Education Task Force Formal Agenda August 2015 Minutes; Task Force White Paper with 7-18-2015 and 8-8-2015 amendments; Rethinking Berkshire Hills June 20th; August 20, 2015 Personnel Report

Any additions, deletions and/or corrections to these minutes can be found at the beginning of the next School Committee Meeting minutes.


Chairman Steve Bannon called the meeting to order at 7:03PM.

The listing of agenda items are those reasonably anticipated by the chair, which may be discussed at the meeting.  Not all items listed may in fact be discussed, and other items not listed may be brought up for discussion to the extent permitted by law.  This meeting is being recorded by CTSB and will be broadcast at a later date.  Minutes will be transcribed and made public, as well as added to our website, once approved.

Members of the audience may also be recording. 


MINUTES –   None



  1. Good News Item(s)

Mr. Dillon stated he would like to thank Debbie Brazie, School Committee Recorder/Transcriptionist, who has been attending and providing minutes for the district for 18 years.  It is really remarkable.  Meetings sometimes go late at night, and the language is sometimes complex and convoluted.  The fact she has been able to do this for 18 years is a huge thing and has really helped out the district.

Mr. Bannon stated Deb is actually retiring.  Congratulations!

  1. 21st Century Grant

Mr. Dillon stated an email has been circulated about the district’s 21st Century Grant award.  It is remarkable news.

Mr. Briggs stated the district has received an exemplary grant.  BHRSD is now an Exemplary Site.  When the district initially received the grant it was received off cycle, to the financial gain of the district.  It is typically a three-year grant, but for us it will be about 3 ½ years.  In January we will receive January – August $149,600, and from that point forward the district will receive three years of funding of $224,000 per year, for a total of $824,000.  What is remarkable was the feedback from the State of the things they were really impressed by, which are a real testament to the things that have been done the past three years.  One of the things they really appreciated was the district owned up to mistakes that were made early in the process, some administrative challenges and the fact that we learned from those mistakes and were willing to grow.  BHRSD was acknowledged as continuous learners.  That is one of the things they would like us to share with other districts.  Another area that impressed them was our collaborative nature.  We have our administrative team really working with the grant, along with our Principals who are right in there with it.  Our teachers and our Union work together.  Last year three of the Specialists at the elementary school shifted their schedule so they began work a bit later in the day so they could be Project Connection instructors as part of their regular contract.  The State recognized that this was clearly something we had worked together on as a district.  It was a remarkable testament to all the work everyone has done.  We were told some things off the record that cannot be shared publicly, but Mr. Briggs stated he can share that BHRSD scored extremely well as a district.

Mr. Clark inquired what it means to be an exemplary district.  He believes it is an amazing grant.  The results and the extra-curricular opportunities are amazing.  One thing that is also amazing are the community partners the district is working with.

Mr. Briggs stated the State was also very impressed with the community partners.  The district does not treat them as “service providers”, but as teammates.  Our partnerships have been built deeply.  The district looks for partners who share the same values and mission as the district.  We seek out partners that we can also assist in accomplishing their missions, like Botanical Gardens, Green Agers, the Berkshire Museum, Berkshire South, Multi-Cultural Bridge, and Railroad Street, among many others.  The district also receives funding from Berkshire United Way for the program.  The district is trying to build a circle of community support around these students.  The partnerships that are forged through Project Connection are not just staying in Project Connection.  Flying Cloud is also doing incredible work with the 1st, 2nd and 3rd grades throughout the entire year.  The benefits of the community partnerships are shifting into the school day as well.

What it means to be an exemplary site is we will be used as a model for other sites.  Part of what we will be doing is acting as a mentor for other districts.  Tom and the administrators will be participating in webinars, doing site visits, sharing materials that we have used, etc.

The Exemplary Grant Program is 15% less then what the fully funded was.  Currently we are a Demonstration Site.  The district will be given another opportunity to apply for funds, and if that grant is received, the district will also receive the designation of a Promising Site.  There is potentially another 6 years of funding, and each time it scales down about 10%.  We are funded at about 85% right now.  We are starting now to look into setting ourselves up financially so when it drops to 75% we are able to do that.  The district is looking at and planning on how to make this financially sustainable as the funding reduces.  We have been able to show we are taking steps to make this a sustainable program, by seeking funding from the United Way, and having staff adjust their contracted working hours.

  1. Farm to School Update

Mr. Dillon stated this is also a grant that was discussed last spring.  Ben and a group of community partners attended a seminar in VT.

Mr. Doren stated one of the programs that was done during the summer through Project Connection and Camp Exploration was 7th and 8th graders working on an integrative project for the entire 5-week program, which really speaks to what we want to do in Farm to School.  There has been a lot of great work done in the district around building gardens and building farms.  There is a wild flower garden that was built over a septic area on the middle school campus.  There have been efforts over the years to use our campus in a way for student learning and involvement.  Recently, in the past many years is the idea that the Berkshires is a food culture.  People who live in this community understood what it meant to eat food and where food came from, the economics of it and such.  That has obviously changed over the years with the industrial food service.  The idea of food sustainability is what needs to be worked on in 21st century learning.  One way is teaching children about their community and about food.  The USDA is very much excited about this in working with farmers, and also the Farm to School Program.

The district has made some great efforts around this at the high school, and the elementary school has their garden where they grow food.  At the middle school we have had much development in our after-school program and have worked with many of our partners.  We realized we were getting strands of programs, and felt we needed to “programmatize” this.  The Botanical Gardens Director mentioned there was a Farm to School Grant the district could apply for, so we did.  With the help of Joshua Briggs the district received the grant.  The grant allowed us to attend a Farm to School Institute, which Mr. Doren spoke about at a previous meeting.  The grant also allows for a mentor.

The Farm to School Institute is Vermont Feed and the Northeast Organic Farm Association.  Bringing students out into the local landscape and bringing food from the local landscape into schools.  Students learn about agriculture and gain “agriculture literacy”.  Participating districts were from New York, Massachusetts, Connecticut, Vermont and Maine.  Mr. Doren stated it has been one of the most amazing professional learning experiences he has ever had.  Participants were taught how to incorporate curriculum, how to grow the outdoor learning space, how to connect to farmers in the community and how to make the school cafeteria part of the learning environment.  Students are involved in growing food, rendering food and bringing it into the schools, preparing it for each other, sharing food and making food and eating food together.

Mr. Doren stated much of this was going to see other districts who have been able to navigate this and connect it all together.  Sharing stories of how this can be done.  One mentor is assigned to each district.  This is a great opportunity.  Because of all the efforts that have been going on at the high school and the elementary school over the years, it is a great opportunity for the district to collaborate.  Mr. Doren stated this will be a district initiative.  The work that the Wellness Project has done over the years really planted the seeds for this type of work.  There will also be collaboration with the Food Service Director.

Mr. Doren stated he hopes the Committee was able to read the action plan.  It speaks to some of the aspirations the Principals and administration have for this project.

Mr. Doren presented a short slide show to the Committee.

Student Speaker – Mindcraft can be very educational, but also can be very isolating at the same time.  Kids are in these worlds by themselves creating and they really don’t have to talk or work with anybody else if they don’t want to.  How could this game be used to get kids to care about their environment, which is necessary for Farm to School, specifically in this age range?  To start working with each other and learning about different resources and people right hear that can teach them.  The first week was architectural design, learning how to give critiques, learning how to use a T-square, triangle, etc.  The overall goal is to learn different pieces to build the chicken coop.  So each week they played an active role in determining what each person’s needs were for a chicken coop.  This lead into design work.  We visited farms to learn how a chicken coop should look, what they should be thinking about.  Resources week they learned how trees are chopped down and how wood is milled.  They researched recipes to give to families.  Not every student was interested in building.  The chicken coops were 98% kid made.  There was very little that was done by adults.  We are excited about this year and how this will develop.

Mr. Doren stated this program would not be just about getting kids to eat local cucumbers or getting kids to cook kale for lunch. It also means integrating our curriculum and working with partners.

Mr. Doren also stated Project Connection is a program for some of the kids with the highest needs, so this is something that can be done with everybody.

Mr. Fields stated the target population is the faculty.  He is looking at the action objectives, assessing programs and developing curriculum design.  Having been a teacher for a long time, he worries about overload.  There are so many things we are asking teachers to do.  There are state mandates.  There are all sorts of requirements.  There are people asking for new requirements.  Mr. Fields stated he sees this as a great program, but he hopes we are not overloading the faculty.

Mr. Doren stated he completely agrees with Mr. Field’s concern.  One way this can be done is, for example, there is a group of 7th grade teachers this summer working on a curriculum project that is common core aligned, reading and writing, math social studies, and they are excited because it is Berkshire History.  They are replacing, not adding a unit.  In that way, they can use some of these things.  We have some faculty who are not familiar with Farm to School and others who are very well informed.  Mr. Doren sees this as a 5-year vision.  This will take a long time, but it does start to stitch together.  This is work that has already been happening in the district for years, but now getting everyone to collaborate and bringing everything together.

Mr. Clark stated for as long as he has been on the Committee, there has been discussion on various parts of this.  The words “stitching it together” is very real.  Take many of these initiatives we have already been doing, it talks about the nutrition, the community initiative, it gives a thread so we can knit programs together.  Mr. Doren also stated there are celebrations of work that is already being done.

Mr. St. Peter stated he believes one goal would be to build in a clear communication plan.  Too often the great stuff gets lost in all the “noise” that goes on.

  1. Food Service Meal Pricing

Mr. Dillon stated at the last meeting there was interest in looking at meal pricing.  Mrs. Harrison has put together a memo to share with the Committee.

Mr. Clark stated he is still confused as to what the current pricing is.  Mrs. Harrison stated $2.25 at the elementary school and $2.50 at the middle school and high school.  Staff pay $3.25 per meal.  A lunch costs about $5.00 to prepare.  The last increase for student meals was made in FY09.  The increase was .25 per meal, with a projected a $25,000 increase, and we did meet that projection.  This discussion has come up in the last few budget presentations.  We recognize that it has been quite a while since an increase, but are hesitant to increase the cost to students because we do believe there are many families that are on the edge with the economic recovery, and raising meal costs could be a burden for them.

In the memo the USDA and Food Research and Action Center state that this is a national trend.  As the price of meals goes up, participation falls.  On the other hand, it is Mrs. Harrison’s fiduciary responsibility to bring this information to the Committee, as the district is underwriting the cost and an increase would help to bring more revenue in.  With the current participation rate, and with the amount of free and reduced meals, the increase would raise approximately $13,181.  If the district were to go up slightly more additional revenue would be $13,589.  It will not compensate for the $96,000 additional that is getting moved from the Food Service budget to the operating budget.  On the other hand there is this Paid Lunch Equity from the USDA that requires all school districts to make comparison of the paid lunches to the difference between the reimbursement for a free lunch and the reimbursement on a paid lunch to see if the USDA reimbursement is subsidizing paid lunch.  This district does not have that issue because there is an exemption, if a district does subsidize the program, which we do.

Mrs. Harrison stated she is on the fence in regard to raising meal prices.  She understands the importance of additional revenue, but is also concerned about those families who are just barely affording the program right now.

Mr. Potter agrees there are many people who are on that margin, but is there any data documenting this?  Mrs. Harrison stated that would be census data, and there is no new data over the last three years.  The district does receive several families that do apply who are right on the edge.

Mr. Dohoney stated he believes this to be informational at this point, and believes it is too late this year to make a decision for this school year.  He agrees with discussion and a lot of outreach around possibly raising meal prices for next school year.  Mr. Potter stated it is another one of those points where the school district has an impact on the community, and that story is not out there.  There is a value that certainly enters into the education process and where these kids are going, but there is also a larger societal value as to what we are doing as an investment in the community.  Mr. Potter would not want to vote to raise meal prices at this point.  Having a communication plan and getting that word out would be preferable.  Mr. Dohoney stated the Committee does vote on this every year.  Pricing should always be reviewed.  It is addressed every year in that the Committee votes to subsidize the meal program.  Mr. St. Peter inquired how much reimbursement is from the government for free lunch.  Mrs. Harrison stated the district receives reimbursement of $3.03 for each free lunch.  Basically, $2.00 per meal is unfunded.  Mr. Bannon stated part of that was a conscious decision by the Committee by not using government commodities.  There is a way to reduce meal cost, but at what risk?  Part of that risk is participation falling due to food quality and actually losing more money per meal.  That could be changed, but that was a decision made by the committee many years ago.  Mrs. Harrison stated these figures came from a quick run of the last month.  Some figures may be a bit lower if the figures were run for the entire year.  That will be presented at the September 17th meeting when their will be a deeper presentation of the costs, revenue and specifics of that.  The Food Service Director’s salary and health benefits are carried in the operating budget, and all of that will be broken down in that meeting.  Mr. Bannon stated that was another decision that was made by the Committee many years ago because the district was consistently running in deficit.  Mr. Clark stated the deficit has gotten larger, also.  When the Director’s salary and health benefits were moved into the operating budget initially, the deficit incurred was much smaller.  It has, again, begun to creep up into larger numbers.  Sharon Harrison stated salary costs over the last 5 years have gone up about 17% in order to keep up with the market, and food costs on average have gone up about 7% per year.  Reimbursement has only gone up .30, and meal prices to students have not been raised at all.  One of the conversations from years ago was the district will sell more meals.  Mr. Bradway stated if participation could be increased that would help the bottom line.  Mrs. Harrison stated it would help it slightly because you would spread your fixed costs across more meals.  The district would never be able to come into the black because the meals per labor hour…. If you serve more meals you would need to increase your staffing to keep an appropriate ration of staff to meals prepared.  A meal per labor hour at a restaurant is 1.5, in a jail it is 6.5, and in a fast food restaurant it is 9.5.  Those are the national averages.  At a school, depending on the number, you are at 13 to 15 per labor hour, or 15 to 18.  When you add Farm to School, try to use more local and more fresh foods, it costs more in staffing.  The district is trying to balance that, along with serving the kind of food we want to offer, along with how much subsidizing we want to do.  Mr. Bannon stated he believes it would make sense if this topic was discussed regularly during the budget presentation.  That way it will always be on the radar.  The Committee may not choose to do anything about meal pricing, but it would be on the table every year.  Mr. Bannon stated he is not hearing a call to vote on raising meal prices at this meeting.

  1. Massachusetts Association of Regional Schools (MARS) – Regional Agreement Amendment Process

Mr. Dillon stated a Request for Services was put together around what organization would assist the district and towns with the Regional Agreement amendment process.  Mr. Dillon has spoken with three organizations.  Two have shown interest in working in ancillary ways, but were not interested in doing the work, nor did they feel fully qualified to do it.  One organization has agreed to do the work, which is MARS, Massachusetts Association of Regional Schools.  Mr. Dillon stated he would like to enter into a contractual agreement with MARS to perform those services, and have them attend a future School Committee meeting to speak about the process.  One of the first steps would be for the School Committee to appoint people to the regional amendment process.  Mr. Dillon stated their bid is $14,850, representing 155 hours at $90.00 per hour.  Incidental costs, such as travel, up to $4,000.  Total possible cost would be $18,850.  The $90.00 an hour rate is highly competitive.  Mr. Bannon stated he would like to see this done as soon as possible.  It is expected to take about a full year for the entire process.  If the Committee would like to take any recommendations to the next annual town meetings this process would need to start now.

Mr. Dohoney asked for an explanation why a consultant is necessary for this project, and also why the district is the entity hiring the consultant?  Mr. Dillon responded he believes the process is complex, and because the process will impact the future of the district he does not believe it is a good idea for the district to be managing the meetings.  Mr. Bannon stated these people have the process down and have a very good format.  He is pleased MARS will be the consultant.  As far as the towns, he believes there could be an argument that the towns are paying for it.  With so much on the plates of the district and administration Mr. Bannon does not believe the district could facilitate this process on their own.  Mr. Dohoney stated he would like to see agreements of the last ten school districts who have amended their agreements, that MARS has been a part of putting together.

Mr. Dillon stated he will send around the Power Point presentation that was given previously, a review of the process and who can be involved, etc.  What is important is they will address the technical side of the process, along with the common sense side of the process.

Mr. Fields stated the impetus for this, besides the district’s own need to look at the agreement, was never really brought to the Committee until one member town pushed it forward.  He is wondering if that particular member town, along with the two other member towns who are now involved in this, would be willing to go to their Finance Committees and inquire whether the towns would pay the district in honorarium.  The impetus to open this agreement to amendment has not come from this Committee, but from the towns.  Mr. Bannon stated the district has been told the district agreement is sorely outdated and needs to be changed.  If those simple changes are all that are done, it still needs to be done.  That is the district’s own housekeeping.  The towns will not agree to do that.  Mr. Clark inquired what other costs may be associated with this process?  Will there be legal fees to have district counsel review the final product?  Mr. Dillon stated yes, the district lawyer would review it, as well as the MARS legal team.  Mr. Clark stated he understands the district needs to be open-ended as far as the goals for this process, but he also believes the district needs to be a little more specific on what outcomes are expected, what success would be, and how to measure those outcomes.  Mr. Bannon stated that is one of the things about this process that is a bit confusing.  For years the Committee believes this process would be up to the towns to initiate and facilitate.  MARS has explained it is the district that drives this process, but outcomes are determined by the task force that participates in the process.  What the district wants as an outcome may be unattainable.  Mr. Clark stated by outcome he does not mean the contents of a revised regional agreement, but what we are expecting this vendor to do.  The district wrote a proposal outlining the need and the job, but at the end of the day the district needs to have something that moves it from Point A to Point B.  Mr. Bannon stated his understanding is MARS will follow the process from the beginning and formation of the Task Force to town meeting.  Mr. Dillon offered to share the MARS proposal, which includes fine detail, along with a list of other school districts they have worked with.  Mr. Potter inquired whether managing communication to the public is also included in the proposal.  Mr. Dillon stated yes, although phrased in a different fashion.

  1. Berkshire County Education Task Force Update

Mr. Dillon stated the Berkshire County Education Task Force has had two meetings.  Those meeting are held in Dalton on Saturday mornings.  Mr. Bannon attended the first meeting and both Mr. Dillon and Mr. Bannon attended the second meeting.  There is wide representation from South, Central and North county school districts.  At the last meeting the group broke up into three subcommittees that are currently working on separate action plans.  Tasks include focus on communication, capital inventory of all the districts and fiscal factors.  Those meetings will be ongoing, and Mr. Bannon and Mr. Dillon will report as things progress.

Mr. Bannon stated the task force has established goals and objectives.  One of which is affecting next year’s budget.  Ultimately this will end up as three subcommittees, such as a south, central and north.  This is helpful to put together, and there is good support from government, but ultimately Williamstown and Southern Berkshire discussing regionalization is a waste of time, but discussing within our own geographical areas makes more sense.  Southern Berkshire, 12 South County towns, is far ahead of the rest of the county because Smitty Pignatelli has met with their Chair’s and also Superintendent’s, and is working on a grant.  Overall we will see where this goes.  The group is well represented, and all documents distributed will be forwarded to the School Committee.

Changing tape side

Mr. Clark inquired when a survey may be taken as what may be good for the district.  Mr. Bannon stated the task force is not at that point yet.  Mr. Clark believes it would be great if a list could be devised of 10 to 15 items that the BHRSD School Committee believes are important goals that should be accomplished.  Mr. Bannon stated right now the group is taking inventory of what the County has and how we can manage costs and improve and not have education go backward.  The task force is moving at a very slow pace.  Mr. Clark inquired whether the focus of the group is primarily financial or educational quality/enhancement.  Mr. Dillon stated he believes it to be both.  Mr. Bannon stated he would be pleased if increases could be managed to a smaller amount.  Presently, Pittsfield is not part of the task force.  Mr. Dillon stated this district had a set of legislative priorities and other priorities that could be used in multiple context that would be beneficial.  Mr. Clark stated for instance, vocational education in South Berkshire, which means something very different to people in this district then it does in Lee/Lenox or in Southern Berkshire district.  Mr. Clark would like the conversation to include vocational education.   Mr. Bannon stated this will be part of the discussion.

Mr. Dohoney stated he believes too much focus is put on this task force.  He doesn’t believe the kind of necessary radical change that is necessary will be made.  It feels it is wonderful conversations are happening.  He does not want to see this task force distract the district from the work they are already doing.  Mr. Dillon and Mr. Bannon stated it will not.

Mr. Clark would like to see a Southern Berkshire Regional Vocational Task Force.  Take an inventory of existing Southern Berkshire vocational programs and we take an interest in programs that we need to run and we talk about how to do that.  Every other part of Massachusetts has access to vocational programming for their students.  He does not believe Monument’s comprehensive model is sustainable any more.

Mr. Field’s stated going to Boston seems to be part of the problem in they are not pulling their fair share.  He would like to see this task force address the unbelievable amount of state mandates that are being forced on districts the size of BHRSD, and the enormous amount of work.  The Pioneer Valley has created a group, and their main emphasis is to push back against the State.  He would like to see this task force join the Western Massachusetts Educational Coalition.  He believes it would help send a message to the State.  It is time to push back.  He believes it is time for BHRSD to say as a district enough is enough.  Mr. Dillon stated he believes an effective way to raise the issue would be to work hard in coming up with an alternative.  To simply say what is going on is not good only gets you so far.  To be able to say what is going on is not good, and here is what we are doing that is different, and we would like support to do this different thing, would get us all farther.  Mr. Dillon stated potentially there could be opportunity for this task force to do this.  Mr. Dohoney does not believe the task force should be the recipient of any grant money.  Mr. Bannon stated they are looking for grant money and are sponsored by MASC.  He does not believe this district should stop in their tracks believing the task force will accomplish everything.  He believes the district should continue to move forward.   Mr. Dohoney stated he believes the next step should be joint School Committee meetings.  Mr. Bannon stated he will propose that to every town and district in the next month.

  1. June 20th Task Force

Mr. Dillon has shared the minutes of the June 20th Task Force meeting.  Now there are multiple task forces meeting.  At that one meeting attendees broke up into three groups, around vision, facilities and one about budget and funding.  Mr. Dillon has an informal list of people who have stated they would have liked to attend the meeting, but were unable to.  Mr. Dillon would like to send an email to each of the groups and ask them to come up with a time they would like to meet, and then many of those people may end up being appointed by you to participate on the Regional Agreement Amendment Committee.  At some point you may decide how many simultaneous task forces are enough.


  1. Policy Committee

Mr. Clark – No report.  A meeting date will be scheduled soon.

  1. Buildings & Grounds Subcommittee

Mr. Bradway – Nothing to report.  A meeting has been scheduled for September 2, 2015 at 6:00.  Meeting place TBD.

  1. Superintendent’s Evaluation Subcommittee

Mr. Bannon – Nothing to report

  1. Technology Subcommittee

Mr. Bradway – A meeting was held to discuss the technology that has been worked on this summer.  It has been a mad scramble, but many great things are happening.  We should see the fruits of their labor make themselves apparent very soon.  The subcommittee will be ready to present a programmatic overview at the next School Committee meeting, September 3, 2015.  Mr. Dillon stated the packet will contain much background information on technology in the district.

  1. Finance Subcommittee

Mr. Dohoney reported a meeting was held and a very preliminary model, using all the same assumptions as last year, for what a budget will look like next year was presented.  There is a lot of work to do.  The next meeting of the subcommittee will be a joint meeting with Buildings and Grounds to discuss capital issues.  There will also be a meeting with administrators to identify what potential opportunities or threats could come in next year’s budget.  Much of the discussion during last year’s budget that the district is on a multi-year track are looking to be correct at this point, unfortunately.


Mr. Bannon presented the Personnel Report to the Committee for review.








Certified Appointments

Guerrero, Shannon



Grade 3 Teacher – Muddy Brook






MA Step 12 ($61,383)

(replaces Ruth Bloom)

Park, Julian


7th Grade Social Studies Teacher – Monument Valley




MA Step 3 ($44,984)

(replaces Deb Rice)

Naughton, RyanAnne


Biology Teacher – MMRHS




MA Step 1 ($41,132)

(replaces Dan Gray)

Scecina, Andrew


Physics Teacher – MMRHS




MA +60 Step 18 ($80,686)

(replaces Russell DiGrigoli)

Kluka, Stephanie


Special Education Teacher – Muddy Brook




MA +30 Step 8 ($58,168)

(replaces Kathy Giulian)

Warner, Maegan


Grade 3 Teacher – Muddy Brook




MA Step 5 ($48,628)

(replaces vacant 3rd grade due to internal
movement  of E. Candee to .5 Comp. Inst.)


Hoyt, Tina



Speech Language Pathologist





Extra-Curricular Appointments:

(all 2015 – 2016  unless otherwise noted)

Rates/stipends listed below are based on the FY15 Exhibit B Chart.  These will be adjusted once negotiations are finalized.



Muddy Brook Regional Elementary School

DelGrande, RobertaEarly Morning Drop-Off1/2 hr. per day – current hourly rate
Finkle, CathyStudent Leadership TeamStipend:  $1,852
Kelly, ChristineWebmasterStipend:  $1,025
Wool, SuzanneRecess Coordinator – Muddy BrookStipend:  $1,852


Monument Mountain Regional High School

Collins, EdwardBoys’ Cross Country CoachStipend:  $3,798
Collins, EdwardGirls’ Track CoachStipend:  $3,798
Hankey, ThomasVarsity Boys’ Baseball CoachStipend:  $3,798
Henry, KyleVarsity Volleyball CoachStipend:  $3,798
Jones, SimonVarsity Wrestling CoachStipend:  $3,798
Iemolini, RickGolf CoachStipend:  $2,372
Mead, SarahGirls’ Assistant Soccer CoachStipend:  $2,372
Naventi, MatthewVarsity Boys’ Soccer  CoachStipend:  $3,798
Platt, JessicaGirls’ Varsity Soccer CoachStipend:  $3,798
Storti, PaulBoys’ Assistant Soccer CoachStipend:  $2,372
Unsworth, ChrisGirls’ Cross Country CoachStipend  $3798
Tracy, CaitlinGirls’ JV Soccer CoachStipend:  $2,372

Project Leaders – MMRHS

Barrett, EdwardProject Leader – DataStipend:  $2,081
Campbell, MichelleProject Leader – Physical EducationStipend:  $2,081
Collins, EdwardProject Leader – Social StudiesStipend:  $2,081
Knox, MariaProject Leader – MathStipend:  $2,081
Powell, MichaelProject Leader – GuidanceStipend:  $2,081
Roy, KathleenProject Leader – CVTEStipend:  $2,081
Roy, ThomasShared Leadership – Communication/OutreachStipend:  $2,081
Stevens, JeffreyProject Leader – MusicStipend:  $2,081
Webber, NeelProject Leader – ArtStipend:  $2,081
Zantay, ValerieProject Leader- World LanguageStipend:  $2,081
Baldwin, LisaClass of 2018 AdvisorStipend:  $948
Baldwin, LisaStudent Government Co-AdvisorStipend:  $1,185.50
Barrett, EdwardWISEStipend:  $3,075
Bickford, JulieSpartones AdvisorStipend:  $2,371
Boudreau, MathieuProject Sprout AdvisorStipend:  $3,075
Campetti, RebeccaYearbook – Business AdvisorStipend:  $2,371
Clark, TracyClass of 2016 AdvisorStipend:  $1,139
Clark, TracySchool Store ManagerStipend:  $1,329
D’Aniello, AnneKey Club AdvisorStipend:  $1,044
Gibbons, PaulDirector of AthleticsStipend:  $10,000
Gibbons, PaulStudent Accounts ManagerStipend:  $2,661
Graham, NancyPATHways Co-AdvisorStipend:  $1,185.50
Kakley, Paul

Miller Jennifer

MMTV/Media Production Advisor

MCAS Academic Support Grant Coordinator



Stipend:  $3798.

Stipend:  $1,000 (grantfunded)

Roy, KathleenPATHways Co-AdvisorStipend:  $1,185.50
Roy, ThomasWebMasterStipend:  $1,025
Stevens, JeffreyBand DirectorStipend:  $3,798
Unruh, JolynSummer Curriculum Project:  EnglishStipend:  $500
Webber, NeelYearbook – Literary AdvisorStipend:  $2,371
Zantay, ValerieSummer Curriculum Project:  Foreign LanguageStipend:  $500

Summer Special Education Program:

Muddy Brook Regional Elementary School

Bilodeau, SusanTeacher/Tutorsped – operating (2310) $40/hr – 15 hours total – final TBD
Miller, JenniferTeacher/Tutorsped – operating (2310) $40/hr – 30 hours total
Drury, JodiTeacher/Tutorsped – operating (2310) $40/hr – 30 hours total

Camp Russell

MacDonald, Alexandria  Paraprofessional – 07/06/2015 – 08/21/2015  Mon – Fri                          sped – operating (2111) $14/hr.

Monument Valley Regional Middle SchoolTitle II (25215)
Park, Julian                    7th Grade Berkshire County History(25215)Stipend: $500


Congdon, Richard         Golf Coach 


  1. Appoint District Treasurer

Mrs. Harrison recommended the Committee re-appoint Richard Jetty as the District Treasurer for FY16.

Mr. St. Peter made a motion, seconded by Mr. Clark to appoint Richard Jetty as BHRSD District Treasurer for FY16.

6 members approved.

Mr. Dohoney abstained.

  1. Approval of Anticipated Borrowing

Mrs. Harrison stated every year the district needs to borrow money due to the timing of payments for assessments from the member towns.

Mr. Dohoney made the following motion, seconded by Mr. Fields:

 The District Treasurer is hereby authorized under the provisions of General Law, Chapter 71, Section 16 (g), as amended by Chapter 134 of the Acts of 1972, to borrow money from time to time in anticipation of revenue and to issue a note or notes, effective July 1, 2015 through June 30, 2016.

 Unanimous approval.






Mr. Potter made a motion, seconded by Mr. Fields to adjourn the public meeting at 8:45PM and enter Executive Session, Chapter 30A, Sections 21, 2 and 3, negotiations.  To have this discussion in public would be detrimental to negotiations.  Public session did not reconvene.

Unanimous approval via roll call vote.



Debra E. Brazie, Recorder