HomeMy Public PortalAbout20130819 - Elementary School Building Committee - Meeting Minutes
8/19/13 Approved - Page 1 of 4
ELEMENTARY SCHOOL BUILDING COMMITTEE
Monday, August 19, 2013
7:00 PM – Hopkinton Fire Department Training Room
73 Main Street
MINUTES
Elementary School Building Committee Chair Joe Markey opened joint Elementary School Building
Committee and School Committee meeting at 7:05 PM with the following present:
Voting Members:
Mr. Joe Markey, Chair
Mr. Mike Shepard, Vice Chair
Mr. John Mosher, Member
Mr. Rob Nickerson, Secretary/Clerk
Mr. Jonathan Graziano, Member (School Committee Vice-Chair)
Ms. Pam Waxlax, Member
Mr. John Weaver, Member
Members:
Dr. Cathy MacLeod, Superintendent of Schools
Mr. Ralph Dumas, Director of Finance
Ms. Lauren Dubeau, Principal Center Elementary School
Mr. Scott Aghababian, Member (School Committee Member)
School Committee:
Ms. Nancy Alvarez Burdick, School Committee Chair
Ms. Jean Bertschmann, Member
Ms. Ellen Scordino, Member
Non-Members:
Donald G. Kennedy, Ed.D., NESDEC
Ms. Muriel Kramer
Mr. Perry Davis
I Community Input
None
II Approve Meeting Minutes
None
III In Depth NESDEC Enrollment Data Review
Dr. Kennedy presented a brief review the Demography and Enrollment Projections originally
presented to the School Committee on June 20, 2013. He indicated that two things will result in
updates to the information presented in the material. The first would occur around the week of
Labor Day at which time The Donahue Institute at the University of Massachusetts at Amherst
puts out projections which are done once every ten years. Information is taken from the 2010
8/19/13 Approved - Page 2 of 4
census which includes age level groups for every city and town in Massachusetts. This report
projects out in five year increments to 2025 providing a better sense of potential mothers who
could give birth to future kindergartners. The second update will occur when actual
enrollment data received October 1, 2013.
Dr. Kennedy explained that the information as presented is like a weather forecast. The data is
reasonably accurate up to about five years out. The further out the projection, the less accurate
the data may be. Present data indicates the number of births decreasing significantly based on
a reduction in the number of women living in town between the ages of 24 to 44 than in years
past. Approximately 88% of births result from women in this age group. Countering this data is
an assumption of 40 net move ins, where families settle in town with elementary school age
children.
Information is also derived from Hopkinton Housing which includes the numbers of building
permits issued, data from realtors, and proposed housing projects. All data appears to indicate
Hopkinton will be going into a banner decade potentially occupying 100 – 125 new units over
the next five to ten years.
Dr. Kennedy addressed questions submitted by Ms. Waxlax prior to the meeting. She asked how
the percentages shift downward at certain point where the totals of the age groups don’t
decrease. Dr. Kennedy explained that the there is no guarantee that a particular percentage will
be in the youngest or in the oldest grouping of children. Increases usually occur in the
elementary levels because families with children of this age group typically settle in an area and
try to remain for the duration of their children’s education until they have graduated. It is less
common for families to move in or out of an area with older school children.
Ms. Waxlax also asked if the DESE felt that the state would mandate full day Kindergarten and if
so what difference would that make. Dr. Kennedy‘s opinion was that it was unlikely at this time
given financial implications it would have on the state.
Ms. Waxlax also inquired about whether Hopkinton intended to have the same type of
preschool currently in place, or if it should be looking for something else. Dr. Kennedy shared
that the DESE reports that 4 year olds who go to preschool usually perform better and require
less, and less costly, remediation later on in their education. Incentives are likely to come for
state and federal levels to grow preschools. Hopkinton should consider what kind of space will
be needed in the future.
Mr. Markey asked about the changes in the age cohort from 35-44 to 45-54. The simple answer
from Dr. Kennedy was that people aged. Added to that is the echo effect of downsizing. When
houses are put on the market by older residents whose children have graduated and moved out,
the vacated 3-4 plus bedroom homes then tend to sell to families with younger children. Added
to this are the new projects such as Legacy Farms where units generally are built as fast as they
are sold.
Jon Graziano inquired about the birthrate correlation. Dr. Kennedy explained that though a
family may move in to town with two younger children, they may have additional children while
living here. NESDEC makes a gradual increase assumption for this in the projection. Once the
Donahue data is received it will provide a better sense of these numbers.
8/19/13 Approved - Page 3 of 4
Dr. Kennedy shared that NESDEC gets their birth number information directly from the State
Department of Public Health. Their data goes across state boundaries and outside of the
country. This information, though comprehensive, is about two years old at the time it is issued.
Also used is data from Town Clerks. The down side to this source is that Town Clerks only have
local data. NESDEC compares the two sources. Hopkinton on average is found to be unaware of
3 births a year. The Town Census, which is only allowed to be used by town officials, is factored
in if the School Department provides the information.
Ms. Bertschmann questioned if the proposed casino would have an effect on the school
population. Dr. Kennedy explained the casino, if passed, would primarily affect traffic, and
minimally affects the school population.
Ms. Burdick inquired about information gathered from Judy Barrett of Community Opportunities
Group, Elaine Lazarus of the Planning Board, Jeannine Gilmore of the Superintendent’s office, as
well as other resources. She wondered if all the right people and sources were consulted. Dr.
Kennedy said provisionally yes.
Mr. Mosher inquired how much flexibility could be built into the system to compensate for
variables. The School Committee and the Superintendent will need to come up with that
answer rather than NESDEC. Dr. MacLeod offered that there is an opportunity with this project
to plan some flexibility for a situation such as a hump in the enrollment numbers that will
someday affect another building. Adding to that line of thought Mr. Mosher questioned if it
would be more flexible to consider building another type of building. Dr. MacLeod added that
she is hearing from building principals that some locations are nearing capacity. Exploring all
options should be considered.
Mr. Markey asked a procedural question about the use of the NESCEC numbers during the
MSBA process. It was explained the last time around, the MSBS acknowledged the enrollment
projections but ultimately a number was negotiated to provide for some of the flexibility. Mr.
Shepard indicated the MSBA typically will only pay for certain parameters it deems necessary.
The town would then need to come up with funding for anything beyond that. His suggestion
was that the town focus on building a core facility with the ability to expand as needed. Dr.
MacLeod reminded the committee of the importance of considering the educational
implications. Often something may not be mandated, but is widely encouraged.
Mr. Dumas asked if the MSBA data was available for the committee to review. Ms. Burdick
explained the invitation to participate must come first. Mr. Dumas then inquired if NESDEC
compares the enrollment numbers to the MSBA’s numbers, and if so would the information be
available before a meeting took place with the MSBA. Dr. Kennedy provided the example of
Carlisle, where NESDEC felt the MSBA’s number was low. NESDEC made a case for Carlisle and
ultimately a higher number was agreed to by the MSBA.
Dr. Kennedy commented further on Dr. MacLeod‘s statement about the need to consider
educational implications. He stated the real challenge is to think ahead 50 years about what the
educational needs will be and to come up with a plan that allows for the flexibility to
accommodate those needs.
8/19/13 Approved - Page 4 of 4
IV Next Meeting:
Monday, September 23, 2013 7:00 PM, Fire Station Training Room
Mr. Graziano moved to adjourn, seconded by Ms. Waxlax. The motion passed favorably and the
meeting adjourned at 8:39 PM.