North Penn School District Alternative Revenue Committee Educational Services Center 7 pm March 14, 2012 Members Present: Josephine Charnock, Howard Reid, Don Franks, Don Hill, Bill Patchell Staff and Board Members Present: Bob Schoch, Dr. Curt Dietrich, Frank O’Donnell, Steve Hladik, Suzan Leonard, Bob Gillmer Audience: Tina Stoll, Paul Edelman, Dr. W. David Bowman, Paul F. Meehan 1. The meeting was called to order at 7 pm by Ms. Charnock, followed by the Pledge of Allegiance. 2. Approval of the 2.8.12 ARC Meeting A motion was made by Mr. Hill to approve the 2.8.12 Alternative Revenue Committee meeting; the motion was seconded by Mr. Patchell; the minutes were approved. 3. Introduction to the ARC  Mr. Hill thanked Mr. Hladik for the financial information he provided.  Dr. Dietrich provided an update on the information gathered from the March 12, 2012, Community Forum.  Mr. Hill asked Dr. Dietrich if he believed that the community realizes the financial difficulty that North Penn is facing. Dr. Dietrich believes people are beginning to understand the magnitude of the problem, but the nuances are difficult to understand. He was extremely pleased to see the number of people who attended the Community Forum.  Ms. Leonard believes the tide is turning and the community is beginning to understand the issues and is very willing to do what they can to help. People do not want to see cuts and see animosity between staff, administration and the School Board. She was pleased to see people engaged.  Mr. Franks said people are beginning to realize the issue because it is finally touching them and their children. He would like to see community members engage fully in the alternative revenue process to find out what we all can do to help and support the district and our programs. We need to pull people together; not polarize.  Ms. Charnock commented that her impression was that people were hearing these issues for the first time and that people need time to absorb these concepts.  Mr. Franks commented that the majority of the people at the Community Forum were strong supporters of the Arts. 4. Current Categories of Interest  Dr. Dietrich mentioned that it was helpful that there was a big turnout at the Forum but he hopes people came away with the fact that these will be structural issues for years to come and how we can do the programs we want in this environment. A development position, corporate sponsorships, earmark giving and advertising were all brought up in the Forum and people were talking about it.  Mr. Franks heard about the potential conflict between club and district fundraising. Some groups are concerned about district limitations and their ability to fund‐raise. An example is the baseball fields: Are these the teams’ fields for fundraising or the district’s? These issues need to be resolved.  Dr. Dietrich heard a scrip program presentation from a student and his father from the Music Aides. These organizations count on these fundraising efforts and there is a real concern that the district could override these.  Mr. Franks noted that the Catholic schools also use the scrip program.  Mr. Patchell stated that we need to consider that as more and more people retire and there will be a loss of income tax, and retirees won’t sell their homes because they can’t get value for their homes. He 
doesn’t see how this will correct this structural issue. Mr. Franks commented that this is a national problem. Mr. Patchell noted that the Catholic schools are seeing a decrease in enrollment. Mr. Franks asked about the impact of the Catholic schools closing on North Penn School District. Dr. Dietrich noted there have been some tours but not a lot of questions. Ms. Charnock read the mission statement, re‐enforcing the revenues available and communicating with the community at large. 5. Current Focus  Mr. Reid talked about donations and advertising. He recently reached out to Penn State about how they do their planned giving/alumni organization/grant development. 6. Dr. Bowman and Mr. Meehan – Pennsbury School District  Dr. Bowman talked about what they were doing with School Media at Pennsbury School District. Ms. Charnock distributed pictures of the advertising they were using. Mr. Meehan, Principal of William Penn Middle School, attended the meeting with Dr. Bowman. They mentioned that they pride themselves on communication as North Penn does. They looked at various firms. Before selection, the community was given monthly updates at board meetings on the status of the advertising effort. They felt it was important to have a solid communication plan to present to the community. Dr. Bowman read off the talking points they gave to each principal so that they could adequately answer questions from parents and community members. They didn’t want the community finding out about the ads at Back‐to‐School Nights.  Specific parent feedback to the advertisements was very positive. Students enjoyed seeing the ads. The ads are subtle and the picture is the focal point. The ads were tasteful, visually attractive and look impressive. Kids say, “Awesome.” Parents were pleasantly surprised at the quality of the ads. They actually brightened up some drab hallways. Parents were fine with more ads as long as the quality remained the same. The ads were educational and tasteful.  Mr. O’Donnell asked about the “carrot ad.” If the State is pushing nutritional requirements, will School Media come out with ads from the State that push what the State is requiring? Is the selection of ads there to push the menu items on our menu?  Dr. Bowman said that he made suggestions to School Media; example, promoting concussion ads from Dick’s Sporting Goods. He asked if it was possible to go to colleges if they were using interesting advertisements. School Media was receptive of the suggestions from Pennsbury. A parent questioned if Dick’s is allowed to have advertising in the district, what about other sporting chains? Does everyone have the same opportunity? School Media said, “Yes.”  Ms. Leonard asked about the content of the advertising. Carrots are easy; Dick’s Sportings Goods is a little more complicated since it is a direct business. Does Dick’s Sporting Goods get more for advertising than a PSA? Dr. Bowman didn’t know how much each company is required to pay. The revenue is based upon 20% square footage of schools. He gave an example of an ad (specific tutoring center) and worried about a bidding war between vendors. He worried about whether or not certain companies would be perceived as an endorsement from the school district. They look very intently at the companies’ websites. They have disapproved several ads so far.  (At this point, two more community members entered the room.)  Mr. Meehan spoke about ads at William Penn Middle School. He was one of the biggest naysayers to the proposal. He didn’t want the ads to deface his new building. He didn’t even like it when it was in another building. Building staff and community members need to have a say where the advertisements are located. There needs to be a lot of dialogue with principals, staff and students. He is now very satisfied with the three areas where he has ads: Cafeteria, gym and lockers. It made the hallway with the lockers come alive. There are 20 locations earmarked. It seems like a lot but not in a building with 1,000 students. He doesn’t know if 20 would be enough to spice things up in the hallway. The logos are subtle.  Mr. Franks asked if principals have the discretion to say “no” to any ads. If the principal does have discretion, does that school get any of those funds? Mr. Meehan said he didn’t have any leeway in saying that it would not happen. He was really against it, but is now for it. School Media allowed the principal to move and adjust ads where he wanted them. School Media was told that no artwork or culture of the building will be moved or altered. All installers have all the background checks done. If more than one ad 7.
8.
gets damaged, the district has to pay for the replacement. School Media will replace one ad. The principal needs to reinforce that these ads should not be defaced, damaged, etc. Mr. Meehan has had no problems.  One ad period is three months. The installers are perfectionists. They guaranteed that it will not damage the walls. The same process is used as with airplane decals.  Mr. Patchell asked if this comes under prevailing wage for the installers. Are the installers receiving a prevailing wage? He’s worried about litigation from unions since the district did not use prevailing wage for the installers. Dr. Dietrich said that he would checked that. Mr. Franks said that the district didn’t pay any wages. Dr. Bowman said the district paid nothing; their solicitor was very thorough.  Mr. Franks asked what the timeframe would be before ads went into place. The contract was signed last March; the ads began in August.  Mr. Reid asked if Pennsbury has a development office. Dr. Bowman said, “No; just their Foundation.” The superintendent manages the ads. Mr. Franks mentioned that initially it makes sense to go through Ms. Liberaski or Mr. Schoch to manage this, but, as our efforts grow, we need someone to do it. Dr. Bowman mentioned that he manages all of the advertisements, yet he spends most of his time doing education work, not ad work. He works closely with the school/community services director.  The school calendar features an alumnus each month. Before each board meeting, they project and discuss the alumnus of the month.  Mr. Hill asked where we stand on moving ahead on this advertising. Dr. Dietrich said we are ready to go out to RFP. Mr. Franks said that we should move forward and end the discussion since everyone seems in agreement that we go forward. Ms. Leonard asked if the committee or the Board has the power to move this forward. Dr. Dietrich said the committee can only recommend. Mr. Hill asked what happens when we receive the RFP. Mr. Schoch said we would show the School Board the RFP documents for feedback. Proposals would come back to ARC for review, and, based on the discussion, would be forwarded to the Board. Mr. Franks asked that within the month, we should have an RFP, and Mr. Schoch agreed. Mr. Schoch then talked about the content of the RFP. Mr. Patchell wanted to know when we would know the impact of the revenue so that we could tell the community we wouldn’t need to make the cuts that are on the table, so that people would know we are doing this to save those programs.  Mr. Franks asked about the inside of buses. School fields are not in the School Media agreement. He also said for initial cash flow, we should focus on the inside ads and expand to what Mr. Schoch has in the RFP later. He feels it is so diverse that it would cause more complications that would hold this up. Mr. Hill agreed that the only thing that should be in an RFP is the Pennsbury model. Take small steps ‐‐ to get this off the ground, we need to keep focused. Mr. Schoch said that the RFP will be modified to indicate that this is for inside advertising only and then ask what the capabilities are for these groups to grow to outside, stadium, naming, web, etc. He felt as though inside advertising was due to be more difficult than outside advertising.  At this point, Dr. Dietrich asked if we needed anything else from the Pennsbury representatives. They were thanked and left the meeting. Market Street Sports Group Discussion and Review of Website  Mr. Schoch mentioned the website for Market Street Sports. They’ve been in business since 2006. They will be here at the next meeting. They showcased some of the school districts they have dealt with such as Hempfield. Market Street Sports identifies assets which can be sold at games, halftime shows, cafeteria, school store, band trailer, etc.  Mr. Franks commented that the indoor ads were way more innocuous than the outdoor ads. Comments and Questions  Mr. Hill and Mr. Franks discussed an alumni association. Mr. Gillmer will be putting together a list of the chairs from all of our pages for reunions.  Ms. Charnock ended the meeting and mentioned that the next meeting is scheduled for Wednesday, April 11, 2012.