High School Building Committee (HSBC) Meeting #34 Minutes

Thursday, May 19, 2005

Wayland Town Building

School Committee Conference Room

 

Attendees

HSBC members:  Lea Anderson, Dianne Bladon, Brian Chase, Jim Howard, Eric Sheffels, Steve Tise

Absent:  Josh Bekenstein, Steve Breit, Mary Lentz, Joe Lewin, Cindy Lombardo

Ex Officio members: Bob Gordon, Fred Knight

 

Call to order – HSBC chairman Lea Anderson called the meeting to order at 7:40 p.m.

 

Discussion on survey – Lea updated the group on the survey progress since the last HSBC meeting in March.  Feedback received at that meeting and subsequently from committee members, market researchers, and several community members was the following:

            - The survey should be brief, simple, and direct.

- The survey may not be Òstatistically validÓ, but will help the HSBC focus on general areas of concern.

- Other methods of gathering information can be used later.  Based on the results of this initial survey, the HSBC can follow up with telephone surveys, focus groups, public forums, or informal gatherings.

 

Cost of mailed survey – Lea reported that she and HSBC member Dianne Bladon had received a range of estimates for conducting the survey.  The estimates are as follows:

 

            1.  Lowest cost option                                                  $300

            Includes duplicating (2,000 copies), placing around town in library, schools, senior center,

            setting up web version

           

            2.  Medium cost option                                                            $4,050

            Includes duplicating and mailing out to 8,000 registered voters, setting up web version,

            return postage for 400 surveys

 

            3.  Highest cost option                                                 $10,000

Includes professional services of formatting, printing, postage for 8,000 pieces going out and 400 coming in, coding, verbatims, data entry, cleaning/tabulations, Internet survey set-up and project management

 

Dianne explained that there is a $0.97 charge per piece for surveys coming back by mail under the bulk mail permit.  She agreed that we would encourage people to put a stamp on the returned survey.  These estimates are based on 400 surveys being returned by mail.  If many more are returned without a stamp, the estimates for options 2 and 3 could be understated.  She reported that most people responding to a math curriculum mailed survey conducted by the School Department used the Internet response option.  We will clearly state that method of response on our survey.

 

Dianne reported that there are volunteers in town willing to key the data and analyze the survey.  If there is a need for professional help in analyzing the data (under option 1 or 2), the estimated additional cost is $1,500.

 

 

 

Comments from the group were:

- We could do a combination of options 1 and 2, that is, put copies of the survey around town and mail it to registered voters.

- Would there be an issue regarding trust if we did the analysis ourselves?

- The survey should be due back 2 or 3 weeks after it goes out, no more.

- This version of the survey is much better than the 4-pager reviewed in March.

 

The group came to the consensus that mailing 8,000 surveys to registered voters was preferable to placing the survey around town.  It would reach a much wider range of citizens, not just parents of school aged children or library users.

 

Dianne reported that a group of volunteers is piloting the survey to about 20 people in town to get one last round of feedback on the clarity of the questions.

 

Revisions to the survey – Several revisions were suggested to further clarify the survey questions.  There was consensus to specifically state dollar amounts in asking the question about the importance of state reimbursement in voterÕs decisions last January.  Dianne will incorporate the suggested changes to be part of the pilot.

 

Motion – A motion was made by Dianne Bladon and seconded by Eric Sheffels to approve the minutes of HSBC meeting #33 held on Monday, March 28, 2005.

Vote – The motion was approved unanimously (6 in favor, 0 opposed).

 

Motion – A motion was made by Jim Howard and seconded by Eric Sheffles to authorize the expenditure of up to an estimated (due the uncertainty of the number of surveys returned) $5,000 to conduct the survey.

Vote - The motion was approved unanimously (6 in favor, 0 opposed).

 

Next Steps: The pilot of the latest version of the survey will be conducted over the next week.  The survey will go out in early June.

 

Observers:  Pat Abramson, Gary Schlep, Michael Short

 

Comments and questions from observers:

- A copy of the recent Globe article on funding of school building projects was handed to the committee.  The article explained the increase in the estimated cost of funding the current list of approved projects from the original estimate of $5 billion to $6.5 billion.

- The HSBC should mail 8,000 surveys, but not leave any around town to control the risk of people filling out more than one survey.

- People could turn survey in at Special Town Meeting in the fall.

- Require people to put a stamp on the survey in order to return it.

- Try to reduce feelings of distrust.  For example, the HSBC should have published the full cost of the project including interest payments.

- HSBC needs to be prepared for answers they get from survey respondents.

 

 

Adjournment – The HSBC adjourned at 8:45 p.m.