Monday, March 28, 2005
Wayland Town Building
School Committee Conference Room
Attendees
Wayland School Committee members: Jeff Dieffenbach, Bob Gordon, Fred Knight, Heather Pineault
HSBC members: Lea Anderson, Josh Bekenstein, Dianne Bladon, Steve Breit, Mary Lentz, Joe Lewin, Cindy Lombardo, Eric Sheffels, Steve Tise
Absent: Brian Chase, Jim Howard
Ex Officio members: Gary Burton, Joy Buhler, Fred Knight, Wayne Ogden
Call to order – WSC Vice-Chairman Heather Pineault called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m.
Discussion on research study plan and survey
HSBC member Dianne Bladon introduced the general approach proposed for conducting the research study:
1. Establish objectives of study
What actions should be taken in the next 12 months?
What proposal or proposals, if any, should be made to the Town at Special or Regular Town Meeting next year?
2. Determine study approach and scope
Anonymous or not?
Paper survey vs. phone survey?
Professional assistance?
3. Design and pilot study tools
Survey questions
4. Conduct the study
5. Analyze the results and formulate conclusions
Dianne reviewed the schedule, which calls for conducting a survey in May after Town Meeting and analyzing results in June.
Comments on conducting a paper survey:
- Why would we send a survey out to everyone? Do not do a computer-based survey because many people do not use computers.
- An anonymous survey to all registered voters will not have a high percentage yield. We might consider a random sample of identifiable voters who can be followed up by an objective party to encourage return of surveys.
- We are not looking to draw specific conclusions.
- Should we be concerned about skewing data?
- A combination of approaches, random sample and town wide mailing might be interesting.
- There must be a third party group to review the non-anonymous surveys.
- Do both approaches; try to get a read of the town from registered voters.
HSBC Chairman Lea Anderson asked the group for a show of hands on conducting both a random sample/non-anonymous paper survey and a town-wide paper survey of all registered voters. The consensus was to do both.
Phone Survey – Dianne commented that a phone survey does a better job of informing on what the community knows about the project.
Comments:
- We might want to do a phone survey and a paper survey of all registered voters.
- LetŐs start with paper survey.
- Phone survey requires a professional, non-biased resource.
- What about focus groups?
- Focus groups are good for testing out ideas. We might think about using focus groups in the fall to test tentative results of the survey.
- Find out what a survey will cost.
Dianne asked the group to think about what we really want to learn from the survey.
There was a concern expressed that the survey draft is too granular and nuanced. It assumes a level of understanding of the design project, separate from the construction project, something that most people not directly involved with the project do not distinguish. The consensus was to focus on the whole project and not try to separate the design project. The group discussed whether we would try to inform people with the survey. The point was expressed that a survey is not a good way to inform people on complicated issues. There was a consensus to shorten and simplify the survey.
Comments followed:
- The survey should find a way to get at the question of whether voters would support a project sized along the lines presented to voters in January if SBA reimbursement were guaranteed at a not less than 40% level as a precondition to spending any money on construction.
- Did people vote against the project as designed or was the uncertainty about state reimbursement the major issue?
- Should we ask a price point question? If you did not support the project, what is the price you would support?
- The question of price is asked in the tax impact question. Is this more meaningful to an individual than the total price?
- We will end up designing the proverbial camel by committee. LetŐs ask people what is important to them in determining a project scope. Is it benchmarking? Is it the educational program? It is too easy to say cut this, cut that.
- There is a lot of misinformation about the survey. Should we set up forums to get the information out? What more can you do to engage the public?
- We missed by a huge amount. Maybe we should look at the process by which we got there. If the public wants to reuse buildings.......we spent thousands of hours looking at this.
- LetŐs figure out how to get answers about what will be supported.
- The survey is too detailed and complicated. LetŐs just ask three questions: scope, SBA, and process.
- Maybe the process is to conduct full community charettes.
- The School Committee has to ask the question about the credibility of the HSBC.
- The School Committee heard less and less about the HSBC as the process moved forward. The question of multiple educational programs might be more important.
- We should get key critics on the committee.
- Perhaps we should expand the HSBC to be more like the HSSC model – many more people involved.
- Simplify the survey.
Next Steps: The survey will be revised based on feedback received at this meeting as well as many written suggestions. A revised survey will be sent to the HSBC for review.
Observers: Please see School Committee minutes.
Comments and questions from observers:
- A survey is a vehicle to show people that you care, to reach out; it is a good idea. A sub-survey to get a better response is useful. Offering people a chance for open-ended questions is good. DonŐt include so many details. Learn about the context that Wayland voters are putting this high school project into. Explore what other town projects there are. Wayland does want to go forward.
- I have respect for all the work, but I sense a lack of trust. From the start, there was an uneasy feeling about the formation of the HSBC, about the $40 - $50 million project estimate. I personally support the project. Put naysayers on the committee. People are not gamblers. They were uncomfortable about SBA. Get people to shift over.
- DonŐt let the survey cause confusion about the operating override. Wait until Town Meeting is over.
- Do the survey right or donŐt do it. Is it a statistically valid or a feel good survey? Two surveys will have conflicting results. There is a risk of getting answers you cannot explain. Find out how people feel about the process. People have to feel good about the committee. Communicate the process.
- The fewer questions the better. I have been to 2 meetings. You should have set priorities. Consultants canŐt ask the educators what they need, unless cost is no concern. State reimbursement is an issue. I would like to see us go ahead with a science/math building. We might not get reimbursement. Look at what is really necessary.
- Most people are not going to take the time to answer a survey. We have to know what the educational priority is. Ask people on committees other than the circles you travel in. We have no problem spending on academic educational needs. Talk to other people directly, not on the internet. Why spend on a survey?
- Committee is isolated. Bob (Gordon)Ős question is a good one.
- Meetings like this help.
- Set priorities. There was no budget to peg at first.
- Challenge is how to engage rest of the community. How do you communicate all the info?
- Survey leads to more confusion. People made suggestions on design. Committee didnŐt push back on consultants.
Adjournment – The HSBC members left the School Committee meeting at 9:10 p.m.