Sean Nuyda called the meeting to order at 6:40 p.m.

Present:                      Father Ron Gramza, Joseph Dulka, Chuck Frey, Leslie Henry, Dennis Irwin, Noreen M. Klopp, Jerry Kromraj, Rich Lussier, Sean Nuyda, and Tom Wisniewski

Excused/Absent: Father Bob Betz (Vacation), Carol Anger (Excused), Ken D’Alessandro (Absent), Dan Lentz (Excused), Don Slomski (Absent), and Dave Spitzenberger (Excused) 

Guests:                       Alice Berezinski, Christine Frymark, Judy Kalinowski, and Mike Roubik

Opening Prayer: Noreen Klopp presented the opening prayer.

Welcome/Review Agenda: 

Sean welcomed everyone to the meeting.  Because the various parish committees had not been meeting during the summer, Sean said it was Father Ron’s suggestion that the committees’ reports be eliminated at this meeting unless there was something of importance from any of them.

Introduce Guests/Open Forum:

            The above named guests were welcomed to the meeting and each introduced him/herself to the Council.  During the open forum, Alice Berezinski questioned why so many other functions were scheduled for this particular evening; the response was that the council meeting was scheduled prior to other functions, i.e., the town hall meeting at 16^th Avenue and the South Milwaukee Night Out.

Approval of Minutes of Meeting of July 15, 2004: 

           There being no additions or corrections to the previously prepared minutes, upon motion duly made and seconded, the minutes of the meeting of July 15, 2004 were approved.

OLD BUSINESS:

            School Hot Lunch Program.   Sean recapped the discussions from the July meeting regarding the lunch options and the school board’s suggestion that a cook be hired for the hot lunch program to begin at the start of the 2004 school year; that many questions including some relating to costs, cafeteria improvements, and the reconfiguration of the schools were raised at the meeting; and that it was the consensus of the Council that it would not be wise to implement the program at that time.  At that July meeting Mike Roubik was advised to seek answers to certain questions posed by the Council.  Following the meeting, many additional questions were submitted to and answered by Mike via e-mail and then forwarded by Sean to all council members.   The Council still could not make any definite decision, and this information was relayed to Mike and Chris Frymark.

           Chris Frymark then stated that a survey had been conducted some time ago, and 85% of the parents at both school sites supported the hot lunch program -- 75% indicated support of four to five times a week and the remaining parents at least two or three times a week.  As result of a school board directive, the committee members considered three options: 1) a caterer to bring in the food, however, not one was interested because of the small number of students; 2) a self-funded program to be run at each site with a separate cook; and 3) piggy-backing from another school.  Interviews were conducted and inspections of both facilities were completed.  The group from Greendale was considered the best choice for piggy-backing because of the foods prepared and nutrition values.  Some of the people interviewed suggested that it would be more beneficial to start our own program.  Judy Kalinowski would have no problem supervising a cook.  In a piggy-backing program, food is received in large quantities and then it must be apportioned as appropriate for the different ages of students.  A self-funded program cannot be started mid-year – it must be implemented in August; a piggy-backing program could be started in January.  In a self-funded program, the cost of staff would be included in the expenses; plastic trays and floor mats would have to be purchased, as well as a separate cabinet to store canned goods, etc. 

           In answer to questions from council members, Chris indicated that if we piggy-back through Greendale, we would have to either hire staff and do our own paperwork for the government, or Greendale would bring its staff, but then the cost would be higher to us.  The cost per meal in piggy-backing from Greendale is unknown at this time, but the cost of each meal in a self-funded program would be about $2.00.  The topic of substitute staff and volunteers to work for both of these programs also was discussed.  Also noted was the fact that the cook previously employed by Immaculate Conception School and who was interested in the same type of position at our school has accepted employment elsewhere. 

            It was suggested to Chris that she obtain prices, per meal, for the piggy-backing program, and also get prices, per meal, for a self-funded program.  Costs for staffing for the programs should also be obtained.  All of these costs can be obtained by calling other schools or school districts.  Proposals for piggy-backing as well as proposals from different vendors should be obtained, and they should include, but not necessarily be limited to, numbers of meals to be served, prices for each, snow days, and costs for each staff member.  After all the figures are received, calculations of the total costs, intended charges per meal, and any profit should be presented to the Council.  Without these types of figures at hand, no decisions can effectively be made.  It was also mentioned that any proposed contracts received would have to be reviewed before signing.  More than one council member stated that a piggy-backing program should probably be the first to be implemented to determine how well a hot lunch program would be received, though the response would probably be different for every academic year.  Chris indicated she would try to obtain all the requested information by the September 16^th meeting.

           Though the hot lunch program cannot be implemented by the beginning of this school year, the school board is striving to begin it in January of 2005.  Prior to initiating either of the outlined programs, the fact remains that both facilities must be brought up to code.

NEW BUSINESS:

Long Term Planning Survey: 

Comments on the Survey:  Tom Wisniewski wanted the record to state that the proposed survey, a copy of which was received by all council members prior to the meeting, was prepared after many lengthy discussions by Dennis Irwin, Dave Malek and other members of the Long Term Planning Committee, and the committee now requested approval of this final draft.  There was particular discussion pertaining to Question No. 12 regarding the current support of 61% of the day school’s budget.  One person was of the opinion that because the Council already has decided that the tuition should be split 50-50 between the parish and the parents, Question No. 12 should not be included.  It was explained that the purpose to include it, as well as Question No. 10 relating to possibly having one worship site within five years, was to receive the parishioners’ opinions for long term planning.  A consensus of the council members was to accept the survey for distribution as prepared.

Distribution of Survey:  Father Ron read the article he inserted in the bulletin for the weekend of August 21-22 advising the parishioners of the survey to be received by mail and its purpose.  The Council agreed that the survey along with a return envelope would be mailed on August 31, 2004.  An announcement by the lectors at all Masses the weekends of August 28-29 and September 4-5 will be made informing parishioners that council members will be located in the lobbies of all sites the weekend of September 4-5 to answer any questions or concerns regarding the survey.  Additional copies will be available in the lobbies in the event individuals from the same family wish to complete a second copy with different opinions, or for those who may not have received the survey in the mail.  Sean will forward an e-mail requesting council members to sign up for their attendance at specific Masses for September 4-5.  Results of the survey will be tallied and distributed by the October Council Meeting.

Nominating Committee for Council:

Dennis advised that he and Rich Lussier had reviewed Chapter 10 of the manual for parish councils which lists the discernment process for council members. The idea is to copy the suggested information from the manual onto the parish stationery, and get nominations from the parish committees.  Because there is no rotation schedule to this time, and because there is no intent to insult any current member by requesting him/her to resign from the Council, a suggestion was made that individuals might want to volunteer to step down from the Council, whether it be because he/she has served for a considerable length of time, or for whatever other reason.  A question came up as to whether the total number of council members would be scaled down to nine; no decision was made.  The committee will continue its work on this issue.

           Other Announcements:  

           Sean reminded everyone that the various parish committees would resume their monthly meetings on September 2, 2004 at 6:30 p.m. at the College Avenue site and that the Council’s liaisons for their respective committees would be expected to attend them.  The next regular Council Meeting is scheduled for Thursday, September 16, 2004 at 6:30 p.m. at Divine Mercy Office Building.

           Father Ron informed the Council that a standard three-year lease was entered into with the Sisters of St. Francis of Assisi for the rental of the former St. Sylvester’s rectory with the initial rent being $1,000 per month.

Closing Prayer:  The closing prayer was presented by Father Ron.   

Adjournment:  The meeting adjourned at 8:55 p.m.

                                                                        Respectfully submitted,

                                                                        Marcy Gramza, Recording Secretary

                                                                        August 30, 2004