How Often Should The School Committee Meet?

Continuing a process that began in February, the Melrose School Committe delved into a lengthy discussion at Tuesday night's meeting about how often the committee should meet, the makeup of its subcommittees and the structure of meeting agendas.

In February, the committee voted to undertake a trial run of a new meeting format and agenda structure that included the addition of a public comment section at the end of the meeting and a new agenda item, the "consent agenda," which includes several routines items that can be approved with a single vote of the committee, unless a committee member asks to remove an item from the consent agenda.

At Tuesday night's meeting, Chairwoman Margaret Driscoll asked for feedback from the committee so she could compile those comments, give each committee member a chance to review those comments and decide how the committee should proceed in future meetings.

Much of the more substantive discussion, which was generally respectful yet forceful at times, revolved around how often the committee should meet and the role of subcommittees — when they should meet and how many members should they have.

With regard to the committee's meeting schedule, committee member Carrie Kourkoumelis said that she believed the committee runs into problems with so much packed into its semimonthly meetings. She added that adding additional meetings could allow the committee to push its meeting start time back to 7:30 p.m., giving committee members more time to get to the meeting and, she added with a smile, "perhaps we could actually have dinner before a meeting," which could help members stay energetic and focused during longer meetings.

"I'm not sure we should go to weekly meetings," Kourkoumelis said, "but one possible scenario is during the academic year we meet weekly, with subcommittees alternating, and then we meet twice a month in the summer. Going back to a real subcommittee structure would allow us to delve more deeply into matters that come before us. We might be able to cover more bases more efficiently, quickly and not be so exhausted when we're trying to (meet late at night)."

Committee member Kristin Thorp said she was on the committee back when it did meet four times a month, with untelevised subcommittee meetings taking place in the superintendent's conference room in an informal setting. She said she believed that the work done in those subcommittee meetings is better done in a public, formal way, and televised.

"I think we are more focused when we have two meetings a month," she said. "I'd support two meetings. I like the 7 o'clock start time in particular because we do have two meetings a month. I think that extra half hour is important."

Mayor Rob Dolan offered that "there can be a happy medium." On one hand, Dolan said he didn't believe the committee needed to meet four times a month, noting that no other city board or commission meets four times a month. On the other hand, he said, the semimonthly meetings that regularly run late into the evening affect committee members' ability to stay focused and involved with the task at hand.

"I don't enjoy being at a committee meeting at 9 at night and have on the agenda MCAS discussion and Teen Risk Survey and we're here for 5 hours," Dolan said. "Anything discussed after 10 p.m. should be thrown out the window. You're not in the game as much."

Instead of regularly scheduled additional meetings, Dolan offered that the committee should hold special meetings throughout the year — such as Friday's meeting on the committee's communications plan — on more in-depth topics, such as MCAS scores, school improvement plans or health issues, which involve more community dialogue.

"It allows you to relax and get into the topic at hand, rather than looking at the agenda and thinking, 'My God, there's so much more on the agenda," he said. Committee members J.D. LaRock, who scheduled Friday's meeting on the communications plan, and Christine Casatelli both expressed support for holding additional special meetings throughout the year.

 How should subcommittees be structured?

Currently, the School Committee's subcommittees essentially include every member of the whole the committee. The chairman and vice-chairman of each subcommittee generally works on proposals outside of public meetings and then bring those proposals to a committee meeting for discussion.

In contrast, the 11-member Melrose Board of Aldermen's first full meeting of the month usually has little discussion unless an item is taken up for immediate consideration. Instead, items are sent to the aldermen's various subcommittees — which each consist of five aldermen, save for the Appropriations Committee, which is comprised of the full board — for discussion at meetings over the course of the next week and votes to either recommend or not recommend those items for passage, before they are sent back to the full board for a final vote from the full board.

Kourkoumelis said she'd prefer to see subcommittees consist of four members of the seven-member School Committee, leading Thorp to say to Kourkoumelis, "I struggle with this, I don't have an answer," but that the reason she envisions all members on each subcommittee is that the business "is everybody's." She added that if there are only four members on a subcommittee, only those four could take a initial vote on a proposal, then requiring a second vote of the full committee at a second meeting.

"I'm not sure what we're doing with this whole agenda structure and consideration piece," Kourkoumelis responded. "I was basing my recommendation of four on my preference for going back to the old structure, where we actually had subcommittee meetings. What I'm seeing instead is there are lot of meetings of two taking place outside of this room — two and usually the chair."

She added that these meetings outside of regularly scheduled meetings run into problems, in her view, because the members must avoid a quorum — a majority of members of the board — because the state's Open Meeting Law requires public notice of a meeting of a quorum 48 hours in advance of the meeting. Otherwise, that majority cannot meet to discuss business or it would be in violation of the law.

"That's structurally not correct," Kourkoumelis said in reference to members avoiding a quorum when meeting outside the Aldermanic Chamber at City Hall, adding that avoiding a quorum to comply with the law means that other School Committee members are excluded from discussions they would like to participate in. "We should not be avoiding quorum. The law says open it up. Subcommittee meetings are happening, but not technically called subcommittee meetings because it's two people."

Thorp said she understood Kourkoumelis' point, but "I see if a little differently and I don't know what (outside) meetings you're referring to." Kourkoumelis gave the example of her planning to meet with Casatelli to discuss the budget, but Driscoll and school business manager Greg Zammuto also attended — not a quorum and thus not in violation of the law, but effectively a subcommittee meeting where "real deliberation" was taking place.

LaRock added his own experience of wishing to attend a primer meeting on the budget, but because he would have been the fourth committee member — thus creating a quorum and requiring a 48-hour public notice — he was told he could not attend.

"That was really the wrong answer," he said. "I think if we truly are being focused on searching out better things for children, excluding people is more often than not the wrong way to go and not the right way to go."

Casatelli offered that the role of a subcommittee chairman is to work with the superintendent and school business manager to make sure materials presented to the full committee are "thorough and well-considered," adding that every committee member is welcome to meet with school administrators at any time in advance of a meeting. She also expressed, like Thorp, a distaste for the untelevised subcommittee meetings of old in the superintendent's conference room.

"It smacks of secrecy and I don't want to do that at all," she said. "I think what we need to do is have discussions here, in chamber, on camera, where we can all participate in the discussion ... right here in the chamber is where we need to have our meetings."

LaRock reiterated his concern that committee members who wish to be involved in discussions earlier in the process are excluded from that process.

"If we are on each others subcommittees, as a matter of professional courtesy and collegiality, if a member wants to participate in some meeting, they should have ability to do that," he said, adding that he wish he could be plugged into discussions earlier. "As opposed to feeling like I'm shut out from time to time, it's healthier and more professional."

Casatelli responded forcefully, but respectfully, "To say we don't act in a professional manner I think is unwarranted ... to come at the 11th hour and say the process  has been deficient I think is not helpful. There are different ways to say that: to involve yourself early, ask to be part of how it's done is just a better way to proceed. Next year, when budget process comes around, when we're considering it December, dive right in."

"You're really not hearing me Chris," LaRock responded, "because what you just told me to do is what I sought to do."