Meeting Notes: August 11, 2025

Memorial pool update, five-year plan discussion, and behavior policy (for trustees)

Good afternoon everyone! I had some spare time on my flight out to Phoenix so I thought I’d write this summary myself, without using AI. Phoenix was fun, but if I hear “it’s a dry heat” one more time…

Attendance: All trustees present

Public comment: None. Note, public comment for on-agenda items is now combined with open public comment into one public comment section at beginning of all future meetings.

Good News (Hilton)

Hilton states that there’s been a lot of buzz about this year’s school semester, but did not elaborate on why. Summers remain busy for the district even though school is not in session. Hilton points to multiple building projects that have been going on over the summer. He then lists all the new employees at each TPS schools, including a new music teacher at TMS.

Curriculum Committee (Davis)

Davis states that this is a “math curriculum year”. Discussed high school business course, looking at career and business exploration. In a prior meeting with Jackson college, they asked what we needed as far as collaboration. We said we needed a Spanish teacher, and now our students can get 2nd year Spanish through Jackson college. “We discussed how we can be proactive about teaching social/emotional skills”. Davis admitted she is a “data geek” and wants data to see where district can be more effective.

Memorial Pool Update (Mattison)

The pool update consisted of a robust discussion with recent inspections revealing more damning news. One particular update was that the ventilation system in the original pool facility was found to be incorrect (underpowered design). Local reporter Anthony Alaniz covered this aspect in his article DOOMED TO FAIL? TPS POOL’S HVAC SYSTEM ‘NOT DESIGNED’ TO MEET SPACE REQUIREMENTS

Mattison begins by saying there may be additional section loss in wall columns, noticing a 10-25% section loss. Summary of conditions suggests a risk of failure, and recommends not reopening the pool without further detailed structural assessments. It was suggested that we drain the pool and perform selective demolition of ceilings and duct-work allowing for hands-on testing of structures. Data collected will be used by Magnus and will be passed to Whiteman to draft bid packages moving forward (assuming for additional work performed).

The next phase of this project is estimated to cost $130k with a timeline of 13 weeks. This would use sinking fund dollars. Brooks asks “When do we get our first payment from sinking fund?”, which Ms Glenn answers late September / early October. McGee asks if we have the tax anticipation note now, to which Hilton responds in the affirmative, noting that this is a pay-as-you-go mechanism. He estimates that we will only have about $1.5m per year available.

In light of this information, Miller asks how we’re doing so far on funds. Mattison answers that the pool was always the first priority, and that we are proceeding along the pre-approved list of projects.

Simpson asks if we can save money by testing existing areas further without opening new areas for testing. The engineer (who did not identify himself, but it is assumed he is a representative of Whiteman) compared the issue to an onion, stating that we need to keep peeling the layers. Simpson then suggests that we can assume if one section is bad, further sections inspected will also be bad, and in the same way. The Whiteman rep responded cleverly by reminding Simpson that the district is essentially paying Whiteman for the ability to not have to make assumptions.

McGee asks if we are verifying the external portions as well. Mattison confirms. McGee then asks about the outside brick, and inquires about foundational damage, which Mattison seems to dismiss, saying foundations typically last forever. Miller then asks about the process of pulling out side beams. Whiteman rep states that if a side beam is determined “bad”, the entire wall must be removed. McGee then asks if the pool is considered part of the entire school building, which Mattison responds to saying the pool is actually considered an adjoined, but separate building.

Brooks asks about the lift expectancy of new beams. Whiteman rep says 50+ years if everything is working properly, and this is where we find that the original system was never working properly from the start due to an improper design.

Discussion Items

Superintendent Goal-setting (Hilton)

The August 25 meeting will have new goals for strategic plan. He (Hilton) then opens the floor to discuss goals for Himself over the next 6-12 months. He noted that we are 10% of the way through the year and have no budget numbers from the state of Michigan. We’ve gone from passing the sinking fund to showing the community what we’ve done with their dollars. He wants to show achievement patterns and highlight our strengths.

Lewis asks board for goals.

Davis: Goals should be directed from the strategic plan. Now that we have a portrait of a graduate, how do you (Hilton) get us ready to do another strategic plan. The sinking fund was a large election issue, so there should be a goal around the pool/study/funding, important enough to be recognized in goals.

Brooks: Hilton has been doing a great job with marketing, telling the story, wants to see that continue.

McGee: Expand on five year plan, maybe take a step back to bigger picture. U of M has 2050 plan, we should look further down the line, then narrow it down to the next five years. Adrian has built theirs around the arts and athletics, receive lots of PR. We’re good at offering most things that most students want, but maybe we can latch on to something bigger. We need action items, more financial rigor, making the reporting easier and more digestible.

Hilton: Kelli and I have started those conversations, it’s difficult to do with finances.

Miller: Community input. We need to understand how the community feels. Need an ad hoc committee. Just went through several principals, we need a succession plan. More visibility on what Matt does within the schools.

Davis: Feedback cycle as the strategic plan is going. Feedback loop was built under Rick’s tenure, but how does Hilton want it done?

Brooks: In that process, you tend to see leaders emerge.

Hilton: Those folks could become that ad hoc committee

Brooks: I would not make a formal committee

Martinez: We talk about community involvement, we’re well positioned to serve adults too. We need opportunities for learning for adults, to come to a free class. It makes adults stakeholders in our process.

Simpson: We used to have adult night classes. Simpson took a new computer class “back in the day”. Saline has it too. Lewis agrees and shares his own story. McGee adds that ClayItForward was also an opportunity.

Cell Tower

Payments to the district for the proposed 5g cell tower will be $1k/mo with a 1% annual escalator. Ten, five-year rolling terms for total of 50 years. We’re 15 months out from project completion. Simpson wants to ensure the company is bonded. Hilton reminds the board that lease payments do not commence until construction is complete.

Action Items

TVA handbook approved

Truancy policy updates approved

Consent agenda approved

Establishing School Board Norms

Hilton summarizes normals from other district as: we treat each other with respect, project positive image, and once we vote, we speak with one voice. He said most themes fall into a few brackets, including communication / interaction, meeting management, and governance / leadership.

Davis suggests using MASB to administer surveys for board members to detect where further establishment of board norms are needed. Brooks rejected the need for surveys, stating current norms are sufficient. Simpson agrees. Davis reminds the board that prior norms were established under prior superintendent Hilderly, and need to be updated according to Hilton’s direction. McGee asks if we would have to pay for an additional survey, which Davis confirms. Brooks then states another survey is pointless. Lewis states that the board has done much better working with one another.

Miller notes that a directive of the school board is to “come prepared”, and yet board members never have information packets readily available before meetings to be prepared with. Brooks quickly notes that this is “not a Veronica thing”, states “Terry could never make it happen”, and that the historical perspective is that they’ve been fighting for info packets for six years but could never get it done. Lewis states that he would like more information sooner. Hilton then admits he is partly to blame as he prepares his presentations over the weekend when he has peace and quiet.

Board member comment and discussion

Davis: recognizes heather McGee for her support of band boosters / band camp. Davis chaperoned choir camp with Suboswki (the boss).

McGee: Band camp was extraordinary. Thanked Josh for fixing the ice machine. Cleaning crew has been phenomenal.

Lewis: The reason we didn’t test the pool earlier is because we didn’t have the money. Likes Mike Duggan (I) because he proposes that if congress doesn’t pass a budget, they won’t get paid.

*Adjourned*

Final Thoughts

Board Norms

Becky Brooks and Tim Simpson, the two members that think the current norms are sufficient, are the same two members known for violating their own norms. Instances have been well-reported over the last decade by everyone from MLive to yours truly.

Is attacking people on social media covered in these norms?

Is it within our norms to accuse neighboring school districts of poaching our students out of jealousy?

Are we expected to believe Mr. “Make Tecumseh Great Again” is really acting in a bipartisan manner?

How about repeatedly groaning and making side comments while your fellow trustee is speaking? Where does that fit into “norms”?

The current norms / policy could very well be sufficient, but I agree with Davis that a new administration deserves a new look at policy. I also agree with Lewis that things seem to be getting better (though I attribute this to better leadership). If nothing else, perhaps the discussion alone could do some good.

Succession Plans

A succession plan for educators and administrators, suggested by Miller, would be most welcome. I’ve heard feedback from many at THS in particular that reward/punitive criteria is vague and often subject to the whim of one particular administrator. A more formalized, transparent process is likely needed. If one is already in place, why aren’t many educators aware of it? It’s a fair question to ask.

Information Packet Discussion

I also appreciate Miller for bringing up board packets. I can only assume Brook’s “not a Veronica thing” comment was directed at my prior article, suggesting the district secretary was partly to blame given her reputation for stalling. The explanations were fair, I’m not buying the “we already tried this” excuse anymore. Especially after that excuse was used concerning live-streaming. With a little pressure, we got it done. As someone who has spent a career giving high-level briefings (the reason I’m currently in Phoenix) with info I received only a few hours prior, I would remind this administration that every additional hour in advance helps.

And, if we may be so bold as to inquire… could y’all share some of that info with us?

Thanks for reading!