FAQ
Forming a Regional Education District [RED]

December 19, 2011
Note: These questions were generated from a survey of staff.  They will be updated as information becomes available.  If you have an additional question, please submit it using the contact button on this site.

General

1. What are the benefits/drawbacks of forming a RED?  Specifically for students?
   The charge of the RED Committee is to identify the benefits and drawbacks of forming a RED, specifically in the areas of impact on student learning and operational efficiencies.  Using the information learned, the committee will make a recommendation either to take the formation of a RED to the voters for decision, or to recommend to the State Board of Education that no RED be formed.
   
2. What is the timeline for this change?
   The committee has set a timeline that would allow for a potential vote on Election Day November 6, 2012.  To meet this timeline, the committee will complete its report and submit it to the State Board in early fall 2012.
   
3. How definite is this change?
   The formation of a RED can only happen if all three communities separately vote to form it. 
   
4. How would the effects change if other towns decide to join the RED?
   The committee considered including other towns in the formation of the RED.  It sent letters to the boards of all surrounding districts to determine level of interest.  Several boards inquired about the process, but none officially asked to join the RED study.  Only the towns of Braintree, Brookfield and Randolph are included in this RED study.
   
5. Have previous attempts been made to consolidate?
   The Boards of Braintree, Brookfield, Randolph and RUHS have been working together for nearly a decade to operate as a k-12 system to better serve our students.  As a result, we have consolidated many areas of operations.  The RED Study is examining whether it now makes sense to consolidate our governance structure (i.e. school boards) as well. This has not been attempted before.
   
6. How have other districts consolidated their boards?
   The laws have long allowed for the formation of union districts, such as RUHS, joint contract districts, and unified union districts and all of these types of districts operate in Vermont today. Recently, the legislature created incentives for districts to voluntarily combine into unified union districts called Regional Education Districts or REDS. As of this writing, there have been three groups of communities that have asked their voters to consider forming a RED.   None of the REDs were formed by the voters.
7. Will it affect how we are currently doing things in the OSSU?
   When the Braintree, Brookfield and Randolph Boards voted to form the RED Study Committee, it was with the idea that the voluntary merger of our districts would further the work of the OSSU in working together in order to maximize our resources to better serve our students and communities.  The RED Committee is studying this issue and will make a recommendation in the fall of 2012 on whether they believe it makes sense to pursue.
   
8. How much money does this save the OSSU?
   One of the responsibilities of the committee is to identify potential costs savings if a RED is formed. It will be included in the committee’s report. 
   
9. Is the concept curriculum based or for financial purposes? 
   The primary purpose of exploring the formation of a RED is to see if it can improve, expand, or allow us to sustain learning opportunities and outcomes for our students.  This is the essential question for the committee. The study will also explore whether the formation of a RED will allow us to operate more cost effectively over the long-term.
   



Community

1. How will parents be involved?
   Parents will continue to be important partners in ensuring our schools meet the needs of all learners.  On a day to day basis, the formation of a RED will not change how anything works at the local school level.
   
2. How will the unique needs of each community be met?
   Each school has developed their own culture and traditions which are valued by their local communities and their boards.    The formation of a RED does not preclude the involvement of the community to shape their local elementary school, nor does it change the role of the principal and teachers to create a unique school culture.  The relationship between community member and school remains the same.
   
3. Do we totally lose local community decision making? How will decisions be made?
   Day to day decisions will remain in the hands of the teachers, the principals, and the superintendent.  Policy will be developed by a united board comprised of members from each town.  The RED Committee is still studying the best size and configuration of a board to represent our combined population.  Decisions requiring a vote will include voters from all three communities.



Schools

1. What would the effect be on individual schools?
   There would be no changes to individual schools.  The formation of a RED is a change in governance not a change in educational delivery or operations.
   
2. How will the whole education system continue to flow without interruption?
   There will be a transition period of about a year to provide for a changeover of governance. There will be no changes in curriculum or operations, therefore the disruption to the current system will be minimal.
   
3. Will the smaller schools be overlooked?
   The RED Board will become the stewards of all of our students and all of our schools.  It will be their responsibility, in partnership with the communities, administration and staff, to ensure that all of our students are well prepared for success in a manner that maximizes our investment and strengthens our system.
   
4. Is this just the first step to consolidate the three elementary schools?
   No.  Our communities and boards value their local schools.  The experiences of the last decade of working together have demonstrated to the boards that we increase the sustainability of our schools by working as a system.  Forming a single governing board in a RED is being considered to determine if a RED can safeguard our mutual collaboration and allow our small schools to remain viable despite declining enrollments, increased educational expectations and rising fiscal pressures. This is the motivating factor behind the formation of the RED Study Committee.



Board

1. How will the RED Board be structured? How many Board Members will be from each town?
   There are several legal options for the formation and composition of a RED board which comply with the US Constitution provision of proportional representation. The committee is exploring those options and will make a determination as a part of their report.  Information on the options is available on the RED website.  http://www.orangesouthwest.org/red
   
2. Will the high school get more representation since we serve all communities?
   The Board members will come from the towns of Braintree, Brookfield and Randolph.
   
3. How will it be determined who will stay and who will go from current school boards?
   Once the three towns vote to form a RED, an election will be held to determine who will serve on the new board. All seats will be open and anyone interested in serving can run for election.  Our communities will determine who is elected to the Board. After this initial election, seats will become open on a staggered scheduled similar to what happens now, so that a few seats are up for re-election every year.
   Our current boards will continue to meet during the transition until the RED becomes operational, most likely within a year of the vote of the communities.
4. It would seem that managing the RED would take more time for Board Members than for a single school.  What areas of responsibility will be eliminated/ lessened for the Board?
   School Boards are elected by their communities to govern the district to ensure students leave our schools ready for success and that the district operates appropriately.  Our boards have chosen to do this work collaboratively over the past half dozen years, realizing that we all have an interest in ensuring our schools are successful and well run.  Based on community values, the boards jointly set the outcomes for students that they expect, and the operational parameters and policies the system must operate within.  The boards delegate to the superintendent and his team of principals the specifics of how to make this happen.  The boards monitor closely to ensure compliance and continual progress.  This allows flexibility and creativity at the local school level while the boards maintain control over governance. Since our boards leave the operational decisions to those closest to the decision, it does not take more time to govern multiple schools.
   
5. How will someone in Braintree or Brookfield be invested enough to find out/care about the unique school of Randolph and vice versa?
   The RED Board will function similarly to the RUHS Board now: Board Members from all three towns elected to jointly govern the district based upon the values of the three communities. RED Board members will continue to be elected by the three communities to be stewards of and to serve all of our students and therefore all of our schools. 
   
6. What are the benefits of one board? 
   Moving from 5 governing bodies with overlapping duties and lack of clear lines of authority to one governing body with direct accountability between the board and superintendent streamlines decision-making, reduces complexity and eliminates redundancy.

Staff

1. How will this impact teachers?  What options would be available under RED to structure teacher/staff agreements?
   The schools in the OSSU have operated under a single contract for decades, both for professional and support staff.  All salaries, wages, benefits and working conditions apply equally across districts and schools. The RED would assume all contracts and obligations of the districts and then continue to negotiate future contracts with the union.
   
2. Will a RED mean that teachers are no longer employed by our town school district, but rather by a district wide entity?
   That is correct.
   
3. Seniority will be merged within the teacher’s agreement/contract, what does this actually look like?
   Seniority is determined by date of hire according to the terms of the negotiated contract. What would change is that there will be one seniority list maintained by the RED rather than multiple lists maintained by each district.  One implication of this is that there is only one person with the least seniority in the RED rather than multiple people, each with the least seniority in their district. 
   
4. Will seniority be maintained if a teacher switches from one school to another?
   Yes.  Currently if a staff moves from one school to another within the OSSU, they are changing their employer and starting again in regards to seniority.  In the RED this would no longer be true and seniority would be maintained.
   
5. Could each town/school keep its staff under its own "jurisdiction"?
   No.  The staff would be employed by the RED and would be assigned responsibilities to best serve the educational needs of the entire system. It is currently the responsibility of the superintendent in conjunction with the building principal to make this determination. That would continue under the RED, with all building principals working with the superintendent to develop a staffing system to best meet the needs of all students across schools.
   
6. What will that mean for our portability (the ability of the RED to move teachers between schools)? Currently staff are hired by individual schools.  They cannot move between schools without going through the hiring process and losing seniority.  Under the RED staff would be able to move between schools without losing seniority, in accordance with the process put in place by the superintendent and all building principals.  It is similar to those staff currently employed by the OSSU that serve all of our schools.
   
7. In the case of a RIF, will the teacher RIFed be the person who has the least seniority within the RED qualified to teach the RIFed position?
   Correct. If there needs to be a reduction at one school and the least senior person in the RED qualified to teach the position is currently in another school, that least senior person in the RED is the one to be RIFed. 
   
8. Are there other contractual issues to be settled?  If so, what?
   The RED will assume all contractual obligations of the individual districts, as required by law. The RED Committee will examine any other issues that need to be settled as a part of their work. Staff are welcome to attend all committee meetings and provide input as this process unfolds.

 

Transportation

1. How will transportation change in a RED?
   No significant changes to the transportation system are anticipated or needed under a RED.  However, the system could be simplified and may allow for more flexibility and creativity with regard to routes and use of buses. 

 

Buildings

• Can all elementary students fit at RES?
  Randolph Elementary School can accommodate 525 students, which is more than the current number of k-6 students at all three schools.  However, the committee has no interest in changing the number of schools serving our communities.  In fact, the law requires that no school stop operating within the RED for at least 4 years without a vote of the town in which the school resides. 
  
• Who handles the upkeep of buildings if no students are there?
  Whoever owns the buildings is responsible for their upkeep.
  
• Who will own the buildings?
  This will be addressed in the report of the committee.

Orange Southwest Supervisory Union

Charge to Regional Education District Planning Committee
May 2011

1. In accordance with Title 16 § 706b and Act 153 study the benefits and challenges of forming a RED district comprising the towns of Braintree, Brookfield and Randolph as necessary districts.
   
2. Include up to three members of the Randolph Union High School Board as ex-officio members of the committee with full participation rights.
   
3. Contract with outside person(s) to support the work of the committee within the $20,000 budget established.  This may include but is not limited to: process facilitation,
   facilitation of committee discussions, legal counsel and community forum support.
   
4. Consider if there is a benefit to our communities to invite other districts as advisable members of the committee. As outlined in Title 16 § 706b (2) the committee has the final determination of what districts, if any, are deemed advisable.
   
5. Engage the communities with at least one public forum held in each of the participating necessary towns to hear community hopes and concerns prior to commencing the study..
   
6. Make a determination as to whether the formation of a RED is advisable and should be taken to the voters.
   
7. Prepare a report for the State Board of Education including all elements required by Title 16 § 706b and Act 153 in the formation of a RED. The report should be submitted in a timely fashion to allow for a community vote, if held, to occur Election Day November 6, 2012.
   
8. The Articles of Agreement required in Title 16 § 706b should be written to provide maximum flexibility for the newly created RED Board to govern the district to best represent the community and serve educational needs of the students into the future.
   
9. Keep the OSSU Board regularly apprised of the committee’s progress.

OSSU RED Committee Members:

OSSU RED Committee Meeting Schedule

All Meetings will begin at 6:30 PM and end by 9 PM

Protocols

• All meetings will be properly warned
• Committee meetings will commence and end on the scheduled time
• Minutes and documents generated from these meetings are public documents and will be posted on the OSSU website
• Committee members will keep an open mind throughout the process
• Meetings are a safe place to express opinions openly
• Everyone has equal voice and deserves the opportunity for voice during discussions
• Acceptance/passage of “Articles of Agreement” will be obtained through consensus whenever possible
• The committee chairperson shall serve as the spokesperson for the committee and be in charge of presenting the final report to the OSSU school board members and the State Board of Education
• All inquiries by the press shall be directed to the chair
• Communications and publications will be reviewed  by the committee prior to release
• Members of the public in attendance at meetings shall have the same opportunity to speak as at a regular board meeting
• The facilitator shall be responsible for minutes of meetings (minutes should be available within 5 days following the meeting)
• The facilitator will be responsible for facilitating committee meetings and drafting Articles of Agreement for committee member consideration
• Regular meeting attendance is important.  In case of absence:
  • email chair/ facilitator
  • review minutes
  • call chair/ facilitator/ other committee member for catch up
• Meeting schedule will be as scheduled with the location alternating between Braintree, Brookfield and Randolph Schools

Dear Commissioner Vilaseca,

The Orange Southwest Supervisory Union committee charged with exploring possible merger of school districts in accordance with Act 153 and Title 16, Section 706b met for the first time on June 2, 2011.  The study committee is made up of 10 voting members and 3 ex-officio members.  The proportion of membership is in compliance with Title 16, Section 706b.  Members of the committee are:

• Ann Howard - Braintree Board Member
• Kristin Husher - Brookfield Board Member
• Anne Kaplan - Randolph board member
• Sarah Murawski - Randolph Board Member
• Jen Messier - Randolph Board Member
• Eric Best - Braintree community member
• Robin Junker - Brookfield community Member
• Al Floyd - Randolph community Member
• Vickie Palmer - Randolph community Member
• Ramsey Papp - Randolph community Member
• Angelo Odato - Randolph Union High School Board Member, ex-officio
• Scott Lewins - Randolph Union High School Board Member, ex-officio
• Laura Rochat - Randolph Union High School Board Member, ex-officio

I wish to inform you that I was elected chairperson for the committee.  I will forward the committee’s budget once we establish it.

I look forward to any assistance that we may receive from the Vermont Department of Education and anticipate that we will be ready to submit the final report to you in the fall of 2012 in anticipation of a potential vote on November 6, 2012. Thank you.

Sincerely,

Kristin Husher

July 12, 2011

Dear [Board]

The member boards of the Orange Southwest Supervisory Union recently formed a Regional Educational District (RED) Committee to investigate the potential benefits of merging our three towns and five boards into a single governing board under Act 153.

Over the coming year, the RED Committee will be soliciting both community and professional input in order to identify the advantages and disadvantages, both educationally and economically, of moving to such a governance structure.

One of the charges of the committee is to identify any “advisory school districts” of the RED.  As part of our investigation process, the Committee is inviting neighboring boards to consider whether there might be opportunities and/or incentives to be had in becoming part of the Orange Southwest Regional Educational District as an advisory district.  If you believe there could be advantages in your board joining our RED; we invite you to contact us to discuss those advantages further.

Specifically, we would be interested in hearing your thoughts on how such an expanded RED could benefit the students and taxpayers of all the parties involved. Please be aware that it is our intent to continue to provide for grades 7-12 within the RED, which would impact communities that currently tuition students at this level.

In order to keep pace with our time frame we need to hear from you on or before September 20th.

We appreciate any time and consideration you may give to this matter, and we encourage you to contact us with questions or comments you may have as we (all) work towards balancing the educational needs of our students with the financial realities faced by our communities.

Best Regards,

Kristin Husher

Chair, OSSU RED Committee

FAQ About
Braintree, Brookfield and Randolph
RED Committee Process

Download Community Discussion PDF

What is a RED?
RED stands for Regional Education District, a single school district serving students k-12 with one governing board.  In 2010 the legislature passed Act 153 which requires boards to have conversations to consider voluntarily forming a RED. Act 153 also provides incentives to communities who voluntary form a RED by 2017.

What is the RED committee and what is it doing?
The Braintree, Brookfield and Randolph boards each voted to establish a joint committee to explore the benefits and challenges of dissolving the three districts and the union high school and creating a RED governed by a single board.  The committee must file a report with the State Board of Education upon completion of their work and determine whether or not to ask the citizens of each town to vote on the formation of a RED.

What is the composition of the committee?
As required by law, the committee has voting representation from all three towns.  There is one board member and one community member from Braintree.  There is one board member and one community member from Brookfield.  Randolph has three board members and three community members.  In addition the high school board has appointed three nonvoting board members to the committee.  A list of individuals is available online or by contacting any school.

When do they meet?  Are these public meetings?
The committee plans to meet the third Wednesday of the month from 6:30- 9 pm. These meetings will rotate between the three towns.  All meetings are open to the public. The complete meeting schedule, agendas and minutes are available online or by contacting any school.

When will they finish their work?
The committee met for the first time in June of 2011 and expects to complete their work by the fall of 2012.

How will the committee decide if the RED proposal will go to the voters?
The committee will study this issue carefully.  They will seek the input of the community and will hear from professionals within the system to determine if the formation of a RED can improve learning opportunities and outcomes for students as well as allow the schools to function more efficiently over time.

Who gets to decide if a RED is formed?
A RED can only be formed by a positive vote of each community.  Voters in all three towns have to separately approve the idea in order for a RED to be formed.

Will this mean schools will close?
No.  The formation of a RED means our five current school boards will dissolve and voters will elect one unified board to oversee the new RED and all of its schools.  There is no desire by the current boards, administration or members of the committee to close any of our schools.

Can other towns join the RED?
It is possible to expand the RED to include other communities.  The committee invited the boards of surrounding towns to express their interest by late September 2011 if they believed their inclusion would benefit students and communities of all parties involved. It is up to the committee to determine who to include in the process as “Advisory Districts.”  If the towns of Braintree, Brookfield and Randolph each vote to form a RED, any other communities to vote in the affirmative would join the new RED.

How can I find out more?
The OSSU and school websites have a section dedicated to the RED study and information will be added to this site as the work progresses.  In addition there is a red binder of documents located in each school, Kimball and the Brookfield Library. The committee will hold forums in each community in the fall of 2011 and submit press releases as there is information to report.

View Options Configuration RED Board PDF

Download PRF of Initial Report of Forum Findings

Wes,

Thank you for meeting with our RED Committee which is investigating the benefits and challenges of merging into a single k-12 school system with one governing board, which would be called a Regional Education District or a RED. The law requires the committee to formulate a report to the State Board of Education with a recommendation as to whether to ask our communities to vote on the formation of a RED.  If the committee recommends the vote, the law stipulates their report speak to a variety of governing and operational issues and how they would function in the new RED.  Transportation is one of the areas the committee must address.

The timeframe is 30 minutes, including at least 10 minutes for questions from the committee. If possible a written handout to leave with the committee would be helpful. In each area we want your honest appraisal including benefits and challenges.  If there is something that is not working well now or might be lost in a RED it is important for the committee to understand.

Here are the questions the committee needs answered:

What is the current status of your department?

How is this different from how things operated when you started working?

How would you expect your department to change if we were to form a RED? 

Some specific areas of interest are:

How are the smaller schools impacted under each of the three systems- the current, the past and the proposed RED?

Do you see the RED structure increasing or decreasing the ability to adapt to changing circumstances in the future?

Do you see the RED structure increasing or decreasing the ability to sustain our level of service at a reasonable cost?

Under the current governance structure, if one school system decided to no longer operate as a coordinated system, what impact would that have on your department?

What will be Legally Different under a RED?

• Boards
  • One Board
  • Options on size of Board
  • Option on composition of Board
  • Option to have school advisory councils
    
• Direct link from Board to superintendent
• One Annual School District Meeting
• Voting within the RED comingled, typically by Australian ballot
• Budget
  • One budget voted on by the community
    • No more SU budget, which is not currently subject to voter approval
  • Comingled budget votes
  • One cost per pupil
  • One tax rate, however Common Level of Appraisals remain separate
    
• Staff
  • Staff work for RED not individual schools
  • Seniority merged
• Finances
  • One financial system

Status of Services within OSSU

The following services are not fully coordinated by the Central Office as of September 2011:

• Purchasing
  • Joint system is under development and will be fully operational within the next several years
• Special Education
  • Hybrid system currently.  Act 153 requires this to come under the purview of the Central Office by 2013 unless a waiver is received.
• Transportation
  • Hybrid system currently
• Human Resources
  • Hybrid system currently
• Governance
  • Requires separate boards, financial systems, audits
  • Can only be changed by the voters

Mark

Thank you for meeting with our RED Committee on Sept 21st at 6:30 at RES.  The committee is investigating the benefits and challenges of merging into a single k-12 school system with one governing board, which would be called a Regional Education District or a RED. The law requires the committee to formulate a report to the State Board of Education with a recommendation as to whether to ask our communities to vote on the formation of a RED.  If the committee recommends the vote, the law stipulates their report speak to a variety of governing and operational issues and how they would function in the new RED.  Your area of expertise is one of the areas the committee must address.

The timeframe is 30 minutes, including at least 10 minutes for questions from the committee. If possible a written handout to leave with the committee would be helpful. In each area we want your honest appraisal including benefits and challenges.  If there is something that is not working well now or might be lost in a RED it is important for the committee to understand.

Here are the questions the committee need answered: 

Do any of our school buildings require repairs beyond the scope of routine maintenance?  If so please provide specifics, including estimated costs.  Are there any funds reserved to pay for these repairs in whole or in part?

What is the maximum capacity for each building in regards to student enrollment?

How is your department structured now?

How is this different from how things operated 10 years ago?

How would you expect your department to change if we were to form a RED? 

Some specific areas of interest are:

How are the smaller schools impacted under each of the three systems- the current, the past and the proposed RED?

Do you see the RED structure increasing or decreasing the ability to adapt to changing circumstances in the future?

Do you see the RED structure increasing or decreasing the ability to sustain our level of service at a reasonable cost?

Under the current governance structure, if one school system decided to no longer operate as a coordinated system, what impact would that have on your department?

Process for the Closing of Schools

• Title 16 Chapter 21 Sections 821 and 822 specify that voters determine the grades served by schools within the district
  • May vote to tuition students to another school(s) rather than operate a school
• The Board determines how many schools are operated within the district to serve the grades established by the voters.
• When a town and school district share the same boundaries and that district operates only one school, the voters become the default determiners of whether that school continues to operate or is closed and students are tuitioned out.
•  When a town joins with other towns to form a union school district such as a RED, the voters of the school district together determine what grades are served within the district.
• The Board of a RED then determines how many schools are necessary to serve all the students within those grades.
• Act 153 provides that voters of individual towns continue to determine the operation of a school within their town boundaries for at least 4 years after the formation of a RED.
• The RED Committee has options on determining who has authority to close schools after the 4 year minimum.  This process will be outlined in the Committee’s report to the State Board and voters will need to approve the Articles of Agreement created by the Committee in the report for these recommendations to take effect.

Orange Southwest Boards To Consider Governance Re-Structuring

The member boards of the Orange Southwest Supervisory Union have formed a Regional Educational District (RED) Study Committee comprised of board and community members from Randolph, Braintree, and Brookfield to investigate the potential benefits and challenges of merging the Union’s three towns and five boards into a single governing board under Act 153.

If approved by voters in all three towns, a single elected school board comprised of members from each town would make all of the governing and educational policy decisions for grades k – 12 in all schools. The Randolph, Braintree, and Brookfield elementary school boards; the Randolph Union High School board; and the Orange Southwest Supervisory Union board would all be dissolved and a new Orange Southwest Regional Educational District would be formed. Within the new district, the high school, Tech Center, and all three elementary schools would remain open.

The OSSU is one of eleven supervisory unions in Vermont to establish a study committee to consider voluntarily merging its boards in order to achieve what Vermont Department of Education Chief Armando Vilaseca and others believe are educational and economic benefits for both students and taxpayers.  Vilaseca has been a vocal proponent of consolidation, and he sees Act 153 as a way of allowing Vermont’s numerous school districts to voluntarily decide how to best govern themselves. To that end, towns are being offered numerous incentives to consolidate their school boards under Act 153, including a four-year reduction in education-related property taxes.

Like Vilaseca, supporters of board consolidation believe that converting to a single governing board will equalize per-pupil spending and student learning opportunities; reduce repetitive meetings and administrative functions; and lower spending, resulting in a stronger, fairer, and more fiscally responsible educational system.

Opponents of Act 153, however, believe converting to a single board structure will erode local control – especially in the State’s less populated towns – since towns with larger populations would have greater representation on a consolidated board. To help mitigate that concern, as well as protect the culture and individualized learning opportunities that often exist in smaller schools, the law has a provision designed to put off any school closures for at least four (or more) years. Towns could still vote to close a school; the Regional Educational Board could not.

According to Supt. Brent Kay, all of the elementary schools in the OSSU are viable and working well, and there are no plans to close any of them.

Over the coming year, the OSSU RED Study Committee will be looking at all sides of the issue, from the proponents’ and opponent’s points of view. It will be soliciting both community and professional input in order to identify the advantages and disadvantages moving to a one-board governing structure. And it will hold three public forums, one in each town, to explain the concept in detail and to hear any concerns voters may want to express about the potential change. 

The primary objective of the community forums will be to ensure that voters have complete and accurate information about what a RED is (and is not) before taking a side on the issue; to ensure that the Study Committee has complete and accurate information about what each community values in its schools; and that the Committee understands the outcomes each community expects from its schools in order to successfully prepare its students for the next stage(s) of their lives. According the members of study committee, the second and third objectives are important regardless of whether a RED is formed or not.

According to RUHS board member and Study Committee facilitator Laura Soares, all of the Committee’s meetings and discussions will be open to the public. "The committee is working on behalf of our communities to proactively consider the best approach to serve our students and families now and in the future. Interested members of the public are always welcome to attend and listen as this exploration unfolds. In addition, all meeting minutes, documents, and other resources will be posted on the OSSE web site (www.orangesw.k12.vt.us).

The Committee has also written a letter to neighboring school boards to determine their interest in joining a potential Orange Southwest RED. While not required under the Act, it is possible that other districts may see opportunities and synergies in becoming part of a larger Regional Educational District. Boards that choose to respond to the letter have been asked to explain why and how they believe an expanded RED would benefit the students and taxpayers in all the towns involved.

The OSSU RED Committee has held three meetings since its formation in May. At its June 2 meeting in Randolph, Brookfield board member Kristin Husher was elected Chairperson. At its June 27 meeting inBrookfield, the Committee agreed to ask Laura Soares to serve as facilitator. The next meeting is scheduled for September 21 at the Randolph Elementary School at 6:30 p.m.  Subsequent meetings will rotate among the elementary schools on the third Wednesday of each month at 6:30 p.m. (The December meeting may be moved to an earlier date. Check the web site for details).

"At the end of the day," Husher said, "the Study Committee’s goal is to decide whether a RED (as opposed to our current 5-board structure) would create equity in learning opportunities throughout all of our schools, eliminate redundancy and its associated costs, help retain strong community participation, and ensure that staffing and other decisions are based on student needs. We also need to look closely at whether this kind of self-directed planning will allow us to chart our own future in advance of potential state-mandated consolidation down the road."

The public is invited and encouraged to attend any and all RED Committee meetings.

Download the RED Committee History PDF

Download the Enrollment Estimates Braintree Elementary School PDF

Download the Enrollment Estimates Brookfield Elementary School PDF

Download the Enrollment Estimates Randolph Elementary SchoolPDF

Download the Enrollment Estimates Randolph Union High School PDF

Download the Enrollment Estimates OSSU PDF

Act 153 Highlights

Overview Act 153 Incentives

Title 16 Section 706

Articles of Agreement

Additional Components of Report

RED Study Committee
Agenda
6:30- 9:00 PM February 15, 2012
Braintree Elementary School

1. Approve Minutes January 18, 2012
2. Discuss impressions from January session on student learning. Review Draft Article.
3. Is there consensus for the committee to continue its work?
4. Finalize Informational Flyer and prep Town Meeting
5. Are we ready to make decisions on Articles 6-10?
6. Other Business
7. Next Meeting

Parking Lot Items:

• Board Composition
• Assets, Debts and Property
• RED Name

RED Study Committee
Agenda
6:30- 9:00 PM January 18, 2012
BrookfieldElementary School

1. Approve Minutes December 13, 2011
2. Fish Bowl Discussion with Cabinet on potential impact of RED on student learning
3. Debrief and next steps
4. Review Informational Flyer Town Meeting
5. Other Business
6. Next Meeting

Parking Lot Items:

• Board Composition
• Assets, Debts and Property
• Town Meeting Input and Education Opportunity
• RED Name

RED Study Committee
Agenda
6:30- 9:00 PM December 13, 2011
Randolph Elementary School

1. Approve Minutes November 16, 2011
2. Meeting with Business Manager Robin Pembroke
   1. Options debts, assets, property and reserve funds
   2. Discussion on implications for Business Office/ Finances
3. Staff Survey Input/ Draft Response to Staff Questions
4. Discuss Options for Board Composition
5. Review Draft Articles to Date
6. Town Meeting Opportunity
7. Are we on track?
8. Other Business

Parking Lot Items:

• Town Meeting Input and Education Opportunity
• RED Name

RED Study Committee
Agenda
6:30- 9:00 PM November 16, 2011
Braintree Elementary School

1. Approve Minutes September 21, 2011
2. Meeting with Attorney Chris Leopold
   1. Options composition RED Board
   2. Options enrollment plan
   3. Options process for closing schools
3. Staff Survey Input
4. Consider student members on Committee
5. Information Requested
   1. Fundraising and equity
   2. Seniority SU versus district
   3. Current school choice
6. Review Decisions on Articles to Date
7. Other Business

Parking Lot Items:

• Town Meeting Input and Education Opportunity
• RED Name

RED Study Committee
Agenda
6:30- 9:00 PM October 19, 2011
Brookfield Elementary School

1. Approve Minutes September 21, 27, October 12 and 17, 2011
2. Transportation Discussion with Wes Gibbs
3. Discuss Forum Input
4. Other Business

Parking Lot Items:

• RED Name

RED Study Committee
Agenda
6:30- 9:00 PM September 21, 2011
Randolph Elementary School

1. Approve Minutes August 17, 2011
2. Finalize FAQ about Process
   1. Clarification about process of closing schools
      
3. Finalize forum plans
   1. Attendance of committee
   2. Information Presentation Husher/Soares
   3. Publicity and invitation work
   4. Facilitation
   5. ORCA Media
4. Facilities Discussion with Mark McKinstry at 7:15
5. Advisory Districts Responses and Next Steps
6. Finalize December Meeting Date
7. Discuss Committee Membership
8. Update Website and Information Distribution
9. Name of Potential RED

Parking Lot Items:

• Advisory Districts decision
• RED Name

RED Study Committee
Agenda
6:30- 9:00 PM August 17, 2011
Braintree Elementary School

1. Approve Minutes June 27, 2011
   
   
2. Community Communication on Work and Timeline of Committee
   1. Finalize letter/ article for distribution to the community
      Does this communicate the message we want?
   2. Finalize distribution method(s)
      What is the best way to proceed?
      
3. Community Forum Plan
   1. Review the draft plan for forum
       Does the plan reflect the desired outcomes?
   2. Select facilitator for forums
      Who can best meet our needs?
   3. Select forum dates
   4. Assign responsibilities for forum invitations and publicity
4. Other
   1. Enrollment Estimates

Parking Lot Items:

• Advisory Districts decision

RED Study Committee
Agenda
6:30- 9:00 PM June 27, 2011
Brookfield Elementary School

1. Approve Minutes June 2, 2011 [Soares]
2. Finalize Protocols         [Soares 10 minutes]
   1. Are there any questions or revisions?
      
3. Historical Perspective of OSSU [Superintendent Kay 30 minutes]
   1. Are there any clarifying questions?
4. What is Governance? [Odato/ Soares 20 minutes]
   1. What is the role of an effective board?
      
5. Advisory Districts Discussion [Soares 10 minutes]
   1. Might there be a benefit to expanding the RED to include other towns?
   2. What are the implications of expanding the RED?
   3. What else does the committee need to make a determination?
6. Discuss Committee Support and Budget            [Husher 20 minutes] [Soares will NOT be present]
   1. What supports will the committee need?
   2. Who will facilitate the work?
   3. What is the best use of the committee budget?
      
7. Discuss Community Engagement     [ Soares 30 minutes]
   1. What are the goals of community engagement at this time?
   2. How can we best accomplish the goals?
   3. Who can help us?
   4. What are the next steps?
8. Discuss Information Dissemination [Husher 20 minutes]
   1. Meeting with Administrative Cabinet Retreat last week [Husher]
   2. Letter to Community about process and engagement [Husher/ Merrill]
9. Other [Soares 10 minutes]
   1. What information would be beneficial to the committee?
   2. What questions have arisen that need to be captured for future consideration?
10. Set regular meeting schedule and next meeting date [Husher/ Soare]

Orange Southwest Supervisory Union [OSSU]
Regional Education District (RED)
Study Committee Meeting
June 2, 2011 6:00 to 9:00 P.M.
Randolph Elementary School Cafeteria

Goals for Meeting

• To enable committee members get to know one another.
• To insure that everyone understands their charge and scope of work to be accomplished.
• To establish protocols for meetings.
• To establish a time line for the work and meeting schedule.
• To share understanding of the current school district mission.
• To determine which districts will be invited to express interest in being advisable in this study.
• To understand options for garnering community input early in the process.
• Other:

Agenda

1. Welcome and Introductions
2. Charge to RED Committee
3. Brief Overview of Act 153
4. Brief Overview of Title 16, Section 706(b)
5. Scope of the Work to be Accomplished, Timeline and Meeting Dates
6. Protocols for Guiding the Work
7. Selection of RED Committee Chairperson
8. Discussion of advisable districts
9. Review Mission
10. General Discussion and questions
11. 7:30 Paul Costello, VT Council on Rural Development on Community Engagement
12. Next Meeting Date and Agenda
13. Tasks and Activities Between Meeting 1 and Meeting 2

OSSU RED Study Committee Minutes
6:30 PM February 15, 2012
Braintree Elementary School

The meeting was called to order at 6:30 PM by facilitator Laura Soares.

1. The Minutes of January 18thwere accepted as written. A summary of the Fish Bowl discussion was attached to the minutes.
2. The committee discussed their impressions from the January meeting. There was consensus that the perspectives of the administrators offer a compelling rationale for the formation of a RED to sustain our model of collaboration and strengthen the ability of our schools to focus on student learning.
3. The committee agreed to complete its work in June 2012. A community forum was set for April 18th Community Forum to be held at RUHS at 7 pm
4. Revisions were made to the informational flyer for Town meeting. It will be sent electronically for one more review prior to printing
   
   

   At each Town Meeting a member of the committee will provide an overview of the work of the committee [L. Soares will provide suggested script], distribute the flyer and invite the community to the April Forum.

5. The committee discussed the draft Articles of Agreement, made revisions, but made no final decisions.
6. There was no other business

The committee adjourned at 8:40 pm.

Respectfully Submitted,
Laura Soares
Recording Secretary

OSSU RED Study Committee Minutes
6:30 PM January 18, 2012
Brookfield Elementary School

The meeting was called to order at 6:30 PM by facilitator Laura Soares.

1. The Minutes of December 18thwere accepted as written.
2. The administrators joined four committee members in a "fishbowl discussion" while all others present formed a circle to ‘listen in.’ Administrators were asked to share how a RED might influence their work: ensuring our students leave our schools prepared for success. Committee members in the fishbowl asked questions of the administrators to further explore the potential impact of a RED on what happens in our individual schools and therefore effects learning.
3. The fishbowl participants joined the larger circle and each member of the community present was provided the opportunity to comment or ask a question about what they heard. Administrators and committee members provided responses. Laura will summarize the conversations and send to committee members to inform their work.
4. The committee discussed the draft flyer for Town Meeting. A second draft will be distributed electronically, to be finalized at the February meeting.
5. There was no other business

The committee adjourned at 9:10 pm

Respectfully Submitted,
Laura Soares
Recording Secretary

Summary of January 18, 2012 RED Committee
Fish Bowl Discussion with Administrators/ Impact Student Learning
Submitted by L. Soares

R. Junker, A. Odato, K. Husher and S. Murawski joined the administrators in a circle while all others present formed the audience on the outside.  D. Barnett and N. Frenette made opening comments of their experience as administrators in the district and how the evolution of collaboration has impacted their work.  An open dialogue ensued with the entire circle, discussing the impact of our current k-12 collaborative model on student learning and the sustainability of that model.  Committee members asked questions and all administrators had the opportunity to respond.

Comments included:

"The purpose of our schools is to educate your children.  The structure we have now allows us as principals to focus on the education of your children as our number one priority.  We are working on the things you hired us to work on.  It is exciting to work here."

"My To Do list is about kids and teaching. This is a really good place to be an administrator."

"I see myself doing what I do best because we pool our resources and collaborate. My school could not come close to providing this on our own."

The ability to share our resources to use collaboratively to support the needs of the learners in every school is beneficial.

Stable leadership is key to accomplishing the work of the schools to educate our students.

A single pool of staffing requires cabinet to make staffing decisions collaboratively.  That is very exciting, however it will increase the complexity.  When hiring potentially impacts all schools, all principals want a voice in that process.  It will be a challenge to do this work and get all the other work done- what will that look like?

Not having to cut staff, because we have saved money through collaboration of services.  It is about protecting what we have.

Structures in and of themselves can only slow down or speed up the rise and fall of systems- the people in those structures need to be the right people.  Structures can attract or repel the right people.

Having clear and positive roles for all levels is key.  Having a board that governs and leads and allows school decisions to be made by the professionals within the school is powerful- regardless of the governance structure.

This is a chance to be proactive and change on our own terms.

Increased equity- a level playing field for all students

Isolation is a huge issue for rural schools- the opportunity to work with colleagues and collaborate is huge.

If the board continues in its current governing role, nothing in the structure of a RED would prevent local cultures from continuing- because the board would not dictate local choices.

It is important to keep local culture, local voice, local participation in our schools. It is something we all value and want to protect.

We have been able to accomplish all this without a RED!

Sustainability of our current model is our greatest challenge. The RED is seen as a way to 'institutionalize' our current efforts and therefore sustain them into the future.

We don’t know what the future brings, but we are stronger together to face whatever comes.

Following the Fish Bowl discussion, the group joined the audience.  Audience members were each invited to ask one question or make one comment.  Questions were addressed to the degree possible by administrators, committee members and/or board members present. People with additional questions or comments were encouraged to submit them to the facilitator or any member of the committee.

Questions and comments included:

Would a RED increase ability to address declining enrollment and class sizes? [Yes]

Would a RED create barriers between community and use of their school? [If this is a value we want to retain, the system needs to be designed to protect it]

How do we prevent schools from closing? [Communities prevent schools from closing. Boards represent and are responsive to the community. Collaborating has made our schools stronger and more viable.  The reason for considering a RED is to ensure collaboration and the viability of all our schools into the future.]

How would the board be configured? [Not yet determined, based on US Census, committee wants at least 2 members from each community and a reasonable size board. Considering having all board members elected at large so everyone has a voice in every position, even though the seats are town specific.]

How do we maintain the integrity of the voices of each town on a merged board? [Keeping decisions at the local school level, structuring the board thoughtfully, electing and hiring people who share the values we all hold dear]

Where would budget decisions be made? [At the local school level as now]

What are the drawbacks you see?

• Fear of the local voice lost when community is a minority of the board
• Complexities of hiring as a team. 
• Risk of the unknown- no one has formed a RED- have no models to go from

And a request: Please explicitly identify the benefits and consequences for students as a RED if you recommend the formation of one.

OSSU RED Study Committee Minutes
6:30 PM December 13, 2011
Randolph Elementary School

The meeting was called to order at 6:30 PM by facilitator Laura Soares.

1. The Minutes of November 16thwere accepted as written.
2. Business Manager Robin Pembroke shared with the committee information on the debts and assets of each school district.  The only debt is construction bonds in both Braintree and Randolph.  The insurance values of buildings, contents and vehicles were provided. Buildings will be reappraised by insurance within the next few years.
   
   Regarding the impact of a RED on the business office, Robin made the following observations:
   1. Act 153 requires transportation and special education to come under the control of the Central Office by 2013.
   2. Redundancy would be eliminated and operations streamlined in a RED. There are many reporting requirements of outside regulators and this creates complexity. The office deals with 6 boards and 4 treasurers. Currently many tasks are completed six times. She estimates 10 hours a month can be saved in payroll.
   3. She does not anticipate the reduction
   4. She would still track costs by building.
   5. Collaboration has allowed a greater control over financial operations.
   6. Robin also spoke to the idea that a RED would allow the current level of collaboration to be maintained over time despite changes in personnel.
   The committee discussed with Robin how the budget process would change under a RED. Because of the collaborative approach to budgeting in partnership with the schools and central office, she did not foresee much change. Each school principle would work with the superintendent to prepare individual school budgets. However, all school budgets would be combined for board and voter approval.
3. The committee reviewed the FAQ list generated by the staff survey. Some changes were made to the responses. These will be posted on the website Dec 19th. Any further edits need to be complete by Friday at 5 pm. The document is in the Dropbox for committee members to edit using track changes. This document will continue to evolve as new questions arise and answers become available
4. The committee discussed options for the RED Board configuration. Two principles emerged: to have at least 2 members from each town on the board and keep the board size reasonable. The committee looked at between 8-11 member boards.
5. Laura handed out a draft of the Articles of Agreement for review. Also included was a background sheet explaining the rationale for each article. This documents needs to be further developed. Committee members are encouraged to edit the document which is in the Dropbox folder.
6. Ben Merrill presented the idea of providing a brief update to our communities at Town Meeting and inviting them to a joint forum in the spring. The committee supported the idea and Ben will draft a flyer for committee review.
7. We are 6 months into the process. January’s meeting with focus on the impact of a RED on student learning. Cabinet will be asked to join this discussion, and staff and community are invited to attend. After this discussion and prior to Town Meeting, the committee will reflect on all they have learned to date and make a determination on how to proceed.
8. There was no other business

The committee adjourned at 9:00 pm.

Respectfully Submitted,
Laura Soares
Recording Secretary

OSSU RED Study Committee Minutes
6:30 PM November 16, 2011
Braintree Elementary School

The meeting was called to order at 6:30 PM by facilitator Laura Soares.

1. The Minutes of October 19th [note the agenda indicated Minutes of Sept 21st.] were accepted with a correction in the title of Wes Gibbs to Director of Transportation.
2. Attorney Chris Leopold provided the committee with a handout outlining options for configuration of a RED board.
   1. The Department of Education will need to approve the option the committee wishes to recommend
   2. There is no requirement of boards having an odd number of members
   3. The DOE is embracing simple
   4. If decide to use a less frequent option, should find case law to support
   5. There is not much case law in Vermont
   6. Option A requires the percentages be as close as reasonably possible to the census percentages. Can make a case that it is reasonable to continue a 1/1/3 on a 5 member board as with RUHS, as it maintains a familiar structure, maintains an odd number of members and is most likely to be approved by the communities.
      
      Angelo volunteered to create a chart showing the various configurations and percentages.
   7. Option B impacts quorums
   8. Option C1 does not require as close an alignment with the census since the vote is at large.
   9. Possible hybrid [C3] where each community gets 1 designated board member seat they vote on individually and the rest of the seats are open and at large.

   Chris Leopold also shared the following:

   • The Articles of Agreement are binding on the RED. Articles can be modified in the future by one of two methods.
     • Those articles that appear on the warning and ballot can only be changed by a vote of the electorate of the RED. Title 706 indicates that there are 4 issues that are required for the warning [towns involved, grades served, configuration of the board and dealing with assets and debts]. No other articles can be included on the warning.
     • Those articles that do not appear on the warning are within the purview of the RED board to change at a publicly warned meeting.
   • He recommends that the committee create Articles that are general rather than specific to allow the future board as much flexibility as possible to address the educational needs of the students as well as external changes. The more specific the Articles the more cumbersome for the future Board to be responsive.
   • In creating an enrollment plan, there is a potential to create a third party right of parents that does not currently exist. Potential enrollment plan language might be "In the first year of the RED students shall attend the school of their town of residence. Thereafter enrollment shall be according to the policies of the RED board."
   • The committee may extend the number of years that require a vote by the town prior to closing a particular school. This would not appear on the warning, therefore is within the purview of the RED board to alter.
   • The committee may put in a provision that if a school closes the building is turned over to the town where it is located.
   • Maintaining operation as a school does not imply continuing the exact grade configuration as currently. It does imply that a regular education program will be maintained at the location.
3. The committee reviewed the input received from staff via the online survey. It was decided to extend the survey until the December meeting of the committee. In addition, Laura will develop a list of FAQ and answers based on the staff input. A draft will be reviewed at the December meeting to be posted on the web soon after.
4. IV. After discussion the committee decided not to change the membership of the committee to include student non-voting members, but to be sure to gather input from students as the work progresses.
5. Laura provided the requested information on high school choice. Laura also clarified that teachers currently have seniority based upon their years of service in the district. Their contract lists years of teaching experience, as that is used to determine placement on the salary schedule, but does not impact seniority. This would continue to be true in the RED. Consultation with the DOE confirmed that moving to a RED would not prevent local school fundraising or local school traditions.
6. Laura passed out a first draft of Articles 1-3 and a portion of 5.
7. There was no other business.

The committee adjourned at 8:30 pm.

Respectfully Submitted,
Laura Soares
Recording Secretary

OSSU RED Study Committee Minutes
6:30 PM October 19, 2011
Brookfield School

The meeting was called to order at 6:35 PM by facilitator Laura Soares.

1. The Minutes of September 21st and 27th, October 12 and 17th, 2011 were accepted with a correction to the attendance on October 12th.
2. Wes Gibbs Director of Transportation, spoke with the committee about transportation. He indicated he currently operates in a manner that is most beneficial to students and efficient for all districts. When buses, drivers, parts and maintenance services are shared it does require more detailed record keeping and billing processes for him, the building principals and the central office staff. His greatest worry in the current system is one of the local boards ending their support of the sharing of resources. At this time he does not see any negative impact on his department from the formation of a RED. Besides simplification of the system, he believes it would allow for more flexibility and creativity with regards to routes and use of buses. This would “open up avenues” to reduce bus rides and increase transportation options.
3. The committee discussed the community forum input and reviewed the report by consultant John Everitt. One strong theme reflected at the forums and by the members of the committee is the desire to keep the unique cultures and offerings at each school. In a RED, there would need to be equitable offerings between the three elementary schools. L. Soares will get some clarification from the DOE on this issue.
   
   The committee agreed to spend time at the next two meetings learning about the legal options for composition of a RED board and the issue of assets/debts and property.
4. Rick Hauser was appointed to the vacant Randolph Community Member seat by the RES board. Laura Soares will contact him and get him information ahead of the next meeting.
5. The committee agreed to send an email to all staff to invite them to share their current questions, hope and worries of a RED as well as how they think the formation of a RED might impact student learning. L. Soares will draft an email for committee review.

The committee also discussed the need to prepare presentations for Town Meeting and use the opportunity to solicit input from the community.

The committee adjourned at 9:15 pm.

Respectfully Submitted,
Laura Soares
Recording Secretary

OSSU RED Study Committee Forum Minutes
7:00 PM October 17, 2011
Braintree School

Kristin Husher introduced members of the committee.  Husher and Soares provided an overview of the RED committee process. Questions raised by the community were answered.

John Everitt convened a discussion with the community members asking them to reflect on and share what they value about their schools and what they believe is important to ensure students are successful when they leave school.  Committee members listened to the community input to inform their upcoming work.

No other business was conducted.

Respectfully Submitted,

Laura Soares

Recording Secretary

OSSU RED Study Committee Forum Minutes
7:00 PM October 12, 2011
Braintree School

Kristin Husher introduced members of the committee. Husher and Soares provided an overview of the RED committee process, which was partially filmed for broadcast on Comcast channel 16 and will be available as a web stream at ORCA Media. Questions raised by the community were answered.

John Everitt convened a discussion with the community members asking them to reflect on and share what they value about their schools and what they believe is important to ensure students are successful when they leave school. Committee members listened to the community input to inform their upcoming work.

No other business was conducted.

Respectfully Submitted,

Laura Soares

Recording Secretary

OSSU RED Study Committee Forum Minutes
7:00 PM September 27, 2011
Randolph Union High School

Kristin Husher introduced members of the committee. Husher and Soares provided an overview of the RED committee process, which was filmed for broadcast on Comcast channel 16 and will be available as a web stream at ORCA Media.

Community members were encouraged to share their questions and input with members of the committee throughout the process.

No other business was conducted.

Respectfully Submitted,

Laura Soares

Recording Secretary

OSSU RED Study Committee Meeting Minutes
6:30 PM September 21, 2011
Randolph Elementary School

The meeting was called to order at 6:30 PM by facilitator Laura Soares.

1. The Minutes of August 17, 2011 were accepted with a correction to the location of the first forum.
2. The committee finalized the FAQ about the RED Process.  They also discussed the legal process for closing of schools now and options within a RED. They reviewed other areas that would be legally different under a RED.  There are options in many areas and the committee will be gathering information over the course of its study to make determinations. 
3. Final plans were made for the upcoming forums.  The information presentation by Husher and Soares was reviewed and revised.
4. Mark McKinstry, Director of Operations, spoke with the committee about each of the buildings as well as how his department has evolved over the past decade.  He reported all three elementary schools are in excellent shape and due to preventive maintenance and building maintenance reserve funds, they will remain so.  The high school and central office buildings require some improvements, which are scheduled.  These buildings are already owned and shared by all three towns.  All of our schools have capacity to serve a greater number of students than at present. Based on fire safety egress and ventilation codes, Braintree can hold 212 people, Brookfield 170 people, and Randolph Elementary at least 550 people.
5. The committee had sent letters to surrounding districts to determine interest in potentially joining the RED study as advisory districts.  No towns responded in writing with a request to join. Washington South SU and Orange North SU sent letters declining the invitation.  Geo Honigford of the South Royalton Board told the committee his board is currently open to exploring many options for better serving the needs of their students. 
After a discussion, the committee determined that at this time they will not include any advisory districts in the proposed RED, but proceed only with the three towns. 
6. The December meeting date was set for December 13th.
7. The committee agreed that in the case of a vacant seat or inactive committee member, it is up to the corresponding board to determine whether or how to fill that seat.
8. The website www.orangesouthwest.org/red is up and information will be added as appropriate.  There are binders at each school and public library with hard copies of the materials as well.
9. If a RED is formed it will require a name.  Names of schools will NOT change, but the district itself needs a name.  The committee was asked to consider a potential process for determining the name if they decide to recommend a vote to form a RED.

The committee adjourned at 8:45 pm.

Respectfully Submitted,

Laura Soares
Recording Secretary

OSSU RED Study Committee Meeting Minutes
6:30 PM August 17, 2011
Braintree School

The meeting was called to order at 6:30 PM by facilitator Laura Soares. 

1. The Minutes of June 27, 2011 were accepted as presented.
2. The committee discussed and made revisions to the article for publication.  B. Merrill will get a revised copy to the committee by the end of the week and distribute as discussed.
   
   The committee brainstormed methods to keep the community informed.  B. Merrill and L. Soares will get information on the website as soon as possible, be sure information is available in each of the schools, and get multiple pieces submitted to the Herald and other media.
3. The plan for the community forums was finalized.  L. Soares and K. Husher will together make the information presentation at the forums. They will send out any documents ahead for review.
   Forum dates were tentatively set for:
   1. September 27th 7- 8:30 pm at RUHS
   2. October 12th 7-8:30 pm at Braintree
   3. October 17th 7-8:30 pm at Brookfield
      

      These dates will be confirmed with the facilitator and then finalized with the committee.
      
      The committee reviewed the three proposals for facilitation of community input at the forums.  After discussion the committee requested the chair contact their first facilitator of choice to see if he is available the dates selected and arrange a meeting with K. Husher, L. Soares and the facilitator to finalize the forums.  Committee members will be informed of the date of this meeting and are welcome to attend. 
      
      Televising the forums was discussed, as well as how to best maximize attendance.

4. Enrollment estimates were distributed and discussed.
   
   The committee received letters from the Chelsea and Washington Boards indicating an interest in responding by the September meeting. The committee agreed to accept letters if interest from Orange North Boards past the 9/20 deadline in their letter as long as it was received in time for the Sept 21st meeting. L. Soares will inform the ONSU Superintendent.
   

The committee adjourned at 8:50 pm.

Respectfully Submitted,

Laura Soares
Recording Secretary

OSSU RED Study Committee Meeting Minutes
6:30 PM June 27, 2011
Brookfield School

The meeting was called to order at 6:30 PM by facilitator Laura Soares. 

1. The Minutes of June 2, 2011 were accepted as presented.
   
2. The revised Protocols were accepted as presented.
   
3. Superintendent Kay provided an historical overview of the SU since 2002, highlighting system collaboration initiatives and answered committee member questions.
   
4. Soares and Odato reviewed the role of an effective governing board, distributed Policy 4.2 outlining the board job description and answered questions.
   
5. Soares informed the committee that a discussion with DOE legal counsel indicated that they do not need to determine Advisory Districts at this time, but can do so anytime before finalizing their report to the State Board.
   
   After discussion the committee agreed to send letters to all boards in the Green Mountain Forest Collaborative to inform them of the committee’s formation and timeline.  In addition the letter will indicate that if any board believes it would be mutually beneficial to be considered as an advisory district, they are welcome to make such a request with their rationale to the committee in writing by September.  Husher, Soares and Merrill will draft a letter and send it to the committee prior to distribution.  Committee members agreed to respond within three days of receipt if they have any changes to suggest, otherwise the letters will be sent.
   
6. Soares left the room and Husher led the committee in a discussion about the supports they needed to accomplish their work and how they would allocate their budget.  The committee agreed to continue with Soares as facilitator and Merrill as communications support.  An outside facilitator will be hired to lead the community forums, with a budget of $2,500.  $5,000 is allocated for legal counsel. $2,500 is allocated for communications.  The remainder of funds will be used as needed.
   
7.  Community Engagement discussion was postponed to the August meeting.
   
8. Husher informed the committee of her meeting with the Administrative Cabinet, along with Soares, last week. The committee will continue to keep administration and staff informed of their work as it evolves.
   
   The committee requested Merrill draft a letter/article to distribute widely in late summer concerning the committee’s work and timeline. A draft will be sent ahead of the August meeting, to be finalized at the August meeting by the committee.
   
9. The committee started to brainstorm information that will help inform their work.
   
10. The committee will meet from 6:30 to 9 pm the third Wednesday each month starting August 17th.  Soares will distribute a schedule including locations.

The committee adjourned at 9 :15 pm.

Respectfully Submitted,

Laura Soares
Recording Secretary

OSSU RED Study Committee Meeting
6:00 PM June 2, 2011
RES Cafeteria
Minutes

The Charge from the OSSU Board including an initial discussion of the nature of necessary and advisory districts.  The committee was told of the interest of the Roxbury Board in being considered advisory.

Title 16 §706 and Act 153 which contain the statutory steps that the committee must follow to meet the goal of submitting a final report to the Vermont State Board of Education.

Draft Protocols for guiding the work. These were discussed with suggested modifications and will be finalized at the next meeting.
Current OSSU Mission

Election of Chair: After discussion and nominations, the committee elected Kristin Husher as chair by consensus.
Community Engagement Discussion: Paul Costello spoke with the committee, sharing the mission of his organization and their work in Addison Northwest Supervisory Union in engaging their community in a unification proposal. 

Next Meeting L. Soares will send out possible dates in June for a second meeting of the committee.  Before the next meeting members will consider:
What supports are needed to do the work, including outside facilitation

Protocol revisions

How the committee will engage the community

What districts the committee may want to consider as advisory

What questions members have at this point

What information members think would be helpful

Respectfully Submitted,

Laura Soares
Recording Secretary