BOE CHAIRMAN HANSON ABUSIVE OF FELLOW BOARD MEMBER

You don't lead by hitting people over the head - that's assault, not leadership.
Dwight D. Eisenhower 


A dismal display of a lack of leadership and abuse was experienced by Dr. Siebert as Kim Hanson, Chairman of the BOE makes a motion to adjourn the meeting as Dr. Siebert is in the middle of a explanation and discussion on school building options.  This is a example why nothing gets accomplished on the boards and commissions in New Fairfield and why there are many open seats.

ENROLLMENT PROJECTIONS ... MHHS & HS

Here is a comparison of the various enrollment projections for our schools (MHHS and HS).

 

1) The first was done by Peter Prowda when he was still with the state. He was the state's official enrollment projector until he left and the state eliminated the position. It is the oldest projection being done before the '07 school year. I believe he used a ratio cohort method. I don't know how long a time he averaged the data over, but in the past he used either 3, 5 or 7 years. I suspect his estimates used one of the shorter averaging periods.

 

2) In early ’08, John Boccuzzi used a modified additive cohort method, averaging the last 10 years. As the school population is decreasing, this uses the high years of the past to project the future. He averages rather than doing a trend, and adds rather than ratioing. Both these effects lead to overestimation. I sent him e-mails showing the overestimation.

 

3) The first NESDEC estimate (NESDEC1 ~4/08) used a human to select ratios that looked "reasonable”. In my opinion they also used inflated birth rates.* It also violates the states auditing directions from the Portland case. This is now the official data the NFBOE adopted.

 

4) As a result of my criticisms, NESDEC then did a standard 3-yr cohort survival method (which they claim is widely accepted as the best averaging time) also about 4/08. This is NESDEC2

 

(Average. This is the average of the above four estimates. It was used for comparison with NESDEC3, done a year later, with prior estimates.)

 

5) NESDEC3 is their latest estimate done after the 2008 enrollment data was available (11/08). This apparently uses the same methodology of NESDEC1.

 

The actual enrollment in (October 1) 2007, 2008 was 700, 668 for MHHS and 939, 975 for the HS. The state requires 8 years of projection beyond the submission date.

 

MHHS grades 3-5

Year	2007	2008	2009	2010	2011	2012	2013	2014	2015	2016
Prowda	698	651	620	610	586	577	527	515	479	484
Boccuzzi	704	702	657	631	630	642	616	600	556	546
NESDEC1		662	636	621	592	583	530	524	488	517
NESDEC2		660	633	617	579	560	501	497	464	490
Above Av.	701	668¾	636½	619¾	596¾	590½	543½	534	496¾	509¼
NESDEC3	700a	668a	643	621	614	604	557	517	492	510

                      Estimated from children born                    assumed births

HS grades 9-12

Year	2007	2008	2009	2010	2011	2012	2013	2014	2015	2016
Prowda	944	950	978	926	921	910	880	857	819	793
Boccuzzi	948	964	1003	963	963	959	933	914	877	858
NESDEC1		952	987	947	939	929	897	871	844	817
NESDEC2		950	983	943	935	926	893	867	836	806
Above Av.	946	954	987¾	944¾	939½	931	900¾	877¼	844	818½
NESDEC3	939a	975a	1019	983	980	963	930	903	875	838

 

* Actual births in 2005,6 were 126 and 128. NRSDRC estimated 147 for 2007. I called the state and the 2007 actual was 125!

 

Note. Since state reimbursement is dependent on the enrollment, there is an incentive to overestimate.

 

About 2 years ago, you had data showing every undeveloped plot in New Fairfield. From that data I estimated we were 90% developed. Do you have any more recent data? It would be interesting to know how much developable land is left.