Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Administration topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Administrator outlines staff-survey takeaways, library remodel timeline and tax-bill impacts
Summary
District staff reported 91 survey respondents and identified communication, time and student-support as priority improvement areas; administrators also updated the board on the intermediate-school library remodel RFP and explained why local tax bills rose despite a small mill-rate drop.
The Merton Community School District’s administrative team presented results of a recent staff survey and gave updates on a planned intermediate-school library remodel during the board’s Dec. 15 meeting.
A staff member told the board the survey drew 91 responses, an improved participation rate compared with prior years. “So we had 91 respondents,” the staff member said, and staff prepared an executive summary with building-level breakouts for principals to act on.
The administrator summarized three focus areas staff identified for improvement: communication, time/working conditions and student support, particularly disciplinary practices. “The three areas that I see where we kind of gotta continue to improve on is communication to our staff, time, and student support,” the staff member said, adding building leadership will use detailed survey breakouts to develop targeted steps.
On the intermediate-school library remodel, the staff member said teams have walked four contractor candidates and four furniture vendors and have asked for proposals due Jan. 14 so staff can compare bids ‘‘apples to apples.’’ The presentation noted HVAC work likely will consolidate into a single main unit and that the district plans to keep existing insulation while adding to it.
The administrator also explained recent property-tax bills. Because the state provided no new offset last fiscal year, a roughly $325-per-student increase in state funding flowed to districts without statewide property-tax relief, placing the incremental burden on local taxpayers, the staff member said. The district’s mill rate, the staff member noted, declined by about 3¢, but individual taxpayer impacts vary with assessed value and municipality.
Board members asked how the district collects qualitative feedback; the staff member said comments are included in the survey package and building leaders will synthesize the responses. The board requested follow-up reports from building leaders and staff on specific recognition and communication practices.
The presentation closed with a reminder that contractors’ proposals are due Jan. 14 and that staff will return with comparative analyses and, where appropriate, contract recommendations.
