Ann Arbor & Saline: Vote on Tuesday!

If you're like me, the first reminder that there is an election on Tuesday came in a school email that reminded me that there is no school (at least in Ann Arbor) on Tuesday. Many
of the schools are also voting sites.

I think I'd be remiss if I didn't point out that there are some school-related items to vote on (plus some other items, including, in Ann Arbor, city council...)

Taken from wikipedia.org

Saline: Non-homestead Millage Renewal. Find out more here (Saline Schools), and here (Saline Post). If this is not renewed there will be a nearly 16% cut in school funds.

Ann Arbor: Sinking Fund. Find out more here (Ann Arbor schools), and here (Ann Arbor News).

Sinking Fund Discussion

Sinking fund monies pay for infrastructure. I asked Liz Margolis for a complete list of what the sinking fund monies were spent on in the past few years, and was told it would be posted on the schools web site last week, but I don't see it.

The arguments that I have heard for the sinking fund:

• Schools need every penny they can get. Money keeps getting cut from schools.
• Sinking fund monies get spent on things that need to happen anyway (for example, replacing a roof or a furnace) and if the sinking fund isn't supported by the voters then that money will have to come out of operating funds--which is the area that has been hit hardest by state cuts. So by supporting the sinking fund you effectively allow more money for expenses like teachers and you protect the classroom.

The arguments that I have heard against renewing the sinking fund: 

• People are tired of funding "things" around the school (e.g., technology, furnaces). One would prefer to fund personnel, photocopies, etc.
• The school board is going to use the money for things people don't agree with--an example being spending current sinking fund monies on video monitors at school doors.

On the "con" side, as far as the first point goes, let's just be clear--the school board is not allowed to put forward a millage for us to vote on that would support general operating costs, such as personnel. If they could, they would. (Why? Proposal A. Look for a post about that sometime soon. Maybe even this week.)

As far as the second point goes, I personally feel this is a valid point. It is the same issue, by the way, that came up last year with the technology bond. In thinking about the technology bond, here was the issue: Yes, teachers and kids needed new computers; the schools needed updated technology infrastructure; and in an ideal world it would be paid for from operating costs (as ongoing expenses) but as far as school finance goes, we are living in a much less than ideal world. 

On the other hand, by providing those new computers we were making it easier for the district to administer standardized tests which I personally don't support. So even though I did end up voting for the tech bond, I am sometimes sorry that I did.

I wish I had the list of things that the sinking fund has been used for in the past, but I think it's safe to say that for the sinking fund, the majority of expenditures will be a) legitimate; b) necessary; and c) things that most of us would approve of doing. 

Some expenditures, however, will likely be on items about which we disagree. The proposed security measures are one example of this. 

And in a related blog post, you can both read about the added Haisley playground accessibility features (funded by the sinking fund) and--in the comments--some discussion of one person's negative perspective on the sinking fund. I think that essentially shows both sides of the story. 

If you own a house--which I do--and actually, you probably know this even if you live in a leased dwelling--you know that houses and buildings need "refreshing" periodically to run well. But whether a family "refreshes" by making do with some patched-up fix-it job, or getting the low-budget minimum-necessary item, or choosing the high-end marble finish, depends on a mixture of budget and perspective. In the schools, that perspective includes how much heavy use something will get (will kids be jumping on it every day?) and how long you want that something to last. (As an example, we have some very old boilers in the school district, and some of them are still working, and working well. But every time they break, then there are some decisions that need to be made.)

So in the end, I think, it comes down to whether you trust the school board and the administration. Because ultimately they are going to be the ones deciding on the expenditures that will be paid for out of the sinking fund. If you trust them, you will probably want to support the sinking fund. And if you don't, then you might not. But if you don't, then maybe we've got bigger problems.

Patricia Green "Declines to Comment"

Check out this morning's article in annarbor.com by Danielle Arndt about class sizes and difficulty enrolling in full classes. And what does our Superintendent Pat Green have to say about this?

"Superintendent Patricia Green declined to comment last week on what solutions the district is considering. She stated the administration will work these issues out with parents."

Check out last week's article in annarbor.com by Danielle Arndt about the search for a permanent Pioneer principal. What does Superintendent Pat Green have to say about this?

"Following Wednesday’s school board meeting, Green declined to provide a status update and would not confirm how close the administration is to hiring a new principal. She said the position is “still in process” and when a decision has been finalized, it will be communicated to Pioneer parents."

 What about the decision that information from the school district needs to be FOIA'd even when it is readily available? (Look for a specific example of this on the blog later this week.)

Back in May, annarbor.com reported that:

"Later in the meeting, Trustee Simon Lightfoot asked Superintendent Patricia Green about the process community members should employ to obtain information such as how much busing to AAO costs. Green said parents should use the Freedom of Information Act for these requests.

 Trustee Susan Baskett said FOIAs cost money and are 'not equitable to all.'"

Sense a pattern here? I do. And I don't like it. Superintendent Green, your responsibility is not just to the parents, but to the entire community. We are all taxpayers. We all understand there are budget issues. But--if you think that by failing to disclose a timeline for hiring a permanent Pioneer principal, or failing to explain how you will address overly full classes, that you will alleviate parent anxiety, you are completely wrong. What alleviates parent (and taxpayer) anxiety is open communication. Right now, we don't have that.

I find it completely ironic that the school board identified as its number one issue at the board retreat "trust and relationship building" within the board, while Pat Green appears to be completely unaware of how her actions affect "trust and relationship building" within the broader schools community.

Andy Thomas, school board member, has had a great idea of having monthly coffee hours. The first one is tomorrow, September 11th, 9:30-10:30 9:00-10:00 a.m. at the downtown Sweetwaters. (I will try to post upcoming ones in the top right section of my blog.) I hope you will go, and I hope you'll talk to him about the importance of open communications. It's even more important when budget cutting is on the horizon.

Policy Perspective: Share the Data

A2Politico (Pat Lesko's blog) has an article up, AAPS Documents Reveal Middle and High School Classes Have 40+ Students. (Right now it's not behind a paywall, but it probably will be soon.)

Lesko writes,   "[AAPS] Class size targets for 2011 were 23-25 students in grades K-2, 26-30 students in grades 3-5, and an average of 30 students in grades 6-12."

I don't think it's a surprise to anybody with students in the district that some of the classes are smaller, and some of them are larger, than the targets. A few years ago, my son (who was at Community at the time) had a physics class with 38 or 39 kids--and my main concern was that there weren't quite enough seats in the room. On the other hand, my kids have also had classes that were much, much smaller. That's how it is with averages--some classes are bigger, some are smaller. I understand the idea of a class size "target" to be an average. After all, if your average goal for a Spanish class is 30 students, at what point do you decide this class should be split in two? When you enroll 34 kids? 38 kids?

I don't want to downplay anybody's concerns with large class sizes. For instance, Lesko highlights the size of the Clague band classes. Indeed, at a recent all-city band event (I can't remember what it was called--Battle of the Bands?) I was astonished at the size of the Clague band compared to the other middle school bands. Where the other middle schools that day had an "Advanced" (grade 7/8) Band, Clague had a Grade 8 band. Yet it was still larger than the other schools' Advanced Bands. So should class sizes for those bands be examined? Probably.

And yet, of far greater to concern for me was the lengths to which Lesko had to go to learn the details about class sizes in the district. It's obvious that individual class sizes are something the district has to track. Class sizes are regulated by the teacher contract. And yet at first, Lesko was told that the district didn't have these numbers. It was only after she FOIA'd emails between administrators about parent complaints regarding class size, that she got proof that the district did have these numbers and forced the district to release them.

That, in my opinion, is the real story. Everybody is aware that class sizes have increased, and if we can't shake more money out of Lansing, or end Proposal A, that is not likely to change. On the other hand, can we expect that the district should share this information? Yes.

One more thing: Many states have laws limiting class sizes for general education classrooms. Michigan is not one of them. But I have heard from someone who wants to make class size limits the law in Michigan as well. What do you think?

There Are Things I Will Never Understand

One of those things is people stealing from schools--especially school districts already under stress with kids full of poverty. And the worst part is that those criminals just give all the other hard-working people in the district a black eye, and they make it harder to muster support for all schools.

They are predators.

Witness today's report from the Detroit News: Ex-Pontiac school official indicted in corruption probe.

As the FBI Special Agent in Charge Andrew Arena says in the article,
"This type of public corruption not only violates the trust of the community but also robs children of opportunity."

I'm told this is the tip of the iceberg. . . that there is more scandal to come.

And there is a local connection as well.

A couple of years ago a well-loved principal left Ypsilanti High School. He ended up as a principal in Pontiac, and--eventually--as interim superintendent. Jon Brown was terminated from the Pontiac schools this fall, and now he has filed a whistleblower lawsuit, alleging his termination was related to his efforts to uncover fraud in the district.

Assuming that is true, I believe there will be more indictments.

According to a February 18, 2012 article in the Oakland Press,

Brown alleges that while he was superintendent, he uncovered substantial amounts of fraud and misuse of district funds, including unauthorized payments to staff, suspected misappropriation and overspending of grant funds, execution of vendor contracts without appropriate approvals and misuse of district credit cards.
The district was operating with a $25 million deficit at the time, he said.
“This is a classic whistleblower’s case where a conscientious employee reported violations and got punished,” said Carol Laughbaum, an attorney with Gordon’s firm.
“This is an outrageous abuse of the public trust. The whole thing is beyond troubling.”