Randy Trent, AAPS executive director of physical properties. (Photos by the writer.)

The Ann Arbor Public Schools technology bond professional team asked that the board of trustees appropriate $54,540 to purchase 30 MacBook Pro laptop computers, in order to train and test on the new Mac operating system, Mountain Lion. The point of the testing is to check compatibility with the district’s current software applications as the district moves to replace all of its computers.

A $76,463 contract with Sentinel Technologies, Inc. for purchase and installation of computer network equipment was presented to the trustees. The new network equipment is supposed to make the district’s network and firewall more secure and reliable. The upgrade is also supposed to provide more internal and external bandwidth, and allow for increases in the future. The network equipment would be funded from the district’s technology bond.

Before hearing the briefings, the trustees were asked to consider them as special briefings, which meant they would be voted on at that same meeting. The change was driven by a decision the board made to alter its September meeting schedule.

The board also heard extensive public commentary at the start of the meeting on the issue of class sizes as the school year opened. Parents of Haisley Elementary School students asked the board for help in rectifying a situation they described as not viable – 32 students per class in 3rd and 4th grade classrooms.

Matters of Procedure: Agenda, Schedule

The agenda is typically approved at the beginning of meetings without many additions or changes. For this meeting, however, AAPS board president Deb Mexicotte asked for some changes to the upcoming meeting schedule, which had an impact on the agenda.

AAPS board president Deb Mexicotte, reflected in her laptop computer screen.

Mexicotte said it had been her intention that the next Committee of the Whole (COTW) meeting, then scheduled for Sept. 12, be focused on financial goals – an area identified at the board’s August retreat. However, several trustees had said they could not attend that COTW meeting. Because Mexicotte felt it was important that all trustees attend, she had worked with Amy Osinski, executive secretary to the board of education, to amend the board meeting schedule. Part of the mix was the fourth annual harvest dinner to benefit the AAPS Educational Foundation, which fell on Wednesday, Oct. 17, a scheduled meeting date.

With those factors in mind, Mexicotte requested that the Sept. 12 COTW be cancelled and that any regular board items that were to be addressed at that meeting be moved to the next scheduled meeting on Sept. 19. Part of the rationale  offered by Mexicotte for the move was that those items should actually not be handled at a COTW meeting in any case – because board business should be conducted only at board meetings.

So Mexicotte suggested changing the scheduled regular meeting on Oct. 3, 2012 to a COTW meeting, – at which the board could address financial goals. She also proposed that the COTW meeting previously scheduled  for Oct. 17 be cancelled. All other October meetings would remain as previously scheduled. [The AAPS maintains the board's updated meeting schedule on the district's website.]

After all trustees said they were amenable to the changes, Mexicotte asked district superintendent Patricia Green if the first briefing items on that night’s agenda could wait until the Sept. 19 regular meeting to be voted on [instead of being handled at the previously scheduled Sept. 12 COTW meeting. ] Green indicated that her preference would be that they be voted on at that night’s meeting. So she requested that the two items that were originally to be heard at the evening’s meeting as first briefing items be considered instead as special briefing items – which would mean they’d get a vote at that evening’s meeting.

Trustee Susan Baskett indicated she did not feel comfortable moving the infrastructure contract straight to a special briefing. Trustee Glenn Nelson said that while he expected to be comfortable considering both the infrastructure contract and the laptop purchase as special briefing items, he wanted to respect Baskett’s perspective. So Nelson suggested hearing the items initially as first briefings, then moving them to special briefing status at that point, if the trustees agreed.

Mexicotte offered another possibility if trustees weren’t comfortable moving forward with the items that evening. She suggested a short formal board meeting on Sept. 12 or another date soon enough to hear the items as second briefing items, at which time they would be voted on.

Ultimately, both items were moved to special briefing status after being heard as first briefing items. Special briefing items are voted on with the consent agenda at the meeting at which they are heard. At the request of Baskett, the network infrastructure proposal was removed from the consent agenda and changed to a board action item. So votes on both items were taken by the board on Sept. 5.

Tech Improvement

The board was briefed on, and ultimately voted on, two proposals to improve the district’s technological capabilities – a network infrastructure equipment upgrade and the purchase of 30 MacBook laptops to test the new Mac operating system.

Tech Improvement: Network Infrastructure

The trustees heard from Randy Trent, executive director of physical properties, about a $76,463 contract with Sentinel Technologies, Inc. for purchase and installation of computer network equipment. The purchase would be made through a state consortium bid with MiDEAL. MiDEAL allows Michigan local units of government to benefit from the State’s negotiating and purchasing power by permitting them to purchase the state’s contracts on the same terms, conditions, and prices as state government. The money for the contract would come from the technology bond, approved by voters in May 2012.

As the district has increased its usage of the Internet, its technology infrastructure has declined and is need of an upgrade to improve the security and reliability of the network and firewall, Trent said. The purchase was recommended in order to provide greater internal and external bandwidth and scalability for future needs. Trent compared the upgrade to expanding from a two-lane highway to a six or eight lane highway in terms of traffic on the network. Green indicated that the infrastructure improvement was the first in a series of opportunities to implement the  technology bond program.

Trent mentioned that over the summer, the district had borrowed pieces of equipment to maintain the security to provide better bandwidth. In the past, he said, it was easy for the network to be brought down. Because the borrowed equipment had solved that problem, they were looking to purchase it as soon as possible.

Baskett expressed concern over the bidding process for the contract. She wanted to know if the state goes through the same process for bidding that the district does. She expressed concern that Sentinel was based in Illinois and was not a local company. Trent assured her there was a local office for Sentinel Technologies and the district worked with Sentinel “every day.”

Baskett asked if the use of the state consortium bidding process was preventing local contractors from going  through the bidding process. She wanted to know more about proposed contractor. Trent acknowledged that purchasing and installing the equipment was of an “emergency nature,” and the state bidding process would be more expedient. He added that the district had been doing business with Sentinel for several years and their workers made very good wages and lived in southeastern Michigan.

Mexicotte said she would support the infrastructure improvement because there have been issues with broadband and multimedia in the schools. She said it would be a prudent move and would help to alleviate the issue in a short amount of time.

Outcome: The board approved the contract for purchase and installation of computer network equipment, after moving the item to the consent agenda, then changing it to a board action item. Susan Baskett’s was the sole dissenting vote.

Tech Improvement: Laptop Purchase

The Technology Bond Professional team requested to purchase 30 MacBook Pro 15-inch laptop computers for training and testing on Mountain Lion, the new Mac Operating System (OS), at a cost of $54,540. Information Technology Department (ITD) staff will use the computers to test the new OS with the district’s current software applications to ensure a smooth transition as computers are replaced district-wide.

In addition to the standard education pricing, Apple offered a 10.3% discount on the machines and a 7.8% discount on the three-year service agreement. Apple also will provide an 11-inch MacBook Air and a 21.5 inch iMac, free of charge, service included. Trent said that when the district makes larger purchases in the coming years, the discount will be more like 30-33%. He also mentioned that an on-site technician to address any issues with the hardware came with the purchase of the machines.

In justifying the purchase, Trent explained that a large portion of existing software the district uses would not run on the new OS. The purchase would allow ITD staff to train on the OS with updated computers, so they can work through all the software and hardware bugs while they’re getting the technology infrastructure improved for the fall of 2013. He said that the change in OS was so big and had such an impact on the software, they wanted to make sure they had everything worked out before introducing it to staff and students.

Several trustees acknowledged their appreciation of the thoughtfulness of the tech bond implementation stages. Nelson said he appreciated the sequential planning that was “designed to get the most out of [the bond] money.” Trustee Simone Lightfoot also recognized the preparation that had gone into the technology bond implementation.

Trustee Andy Thomas got clarification that the 30 laptops would be used by ITD over the next year, and then the following year, a significantly larger number would be purchased for teachers and students. Responding to a question from Thomas, Trent indicated that the original 30 machines would continue to be used by ITD. Thomas then offered his support, saying he wanted ITD to be as familiar as possible with the new machines and the new OS.

Citing a concern about obsoleteness, Lightfoot asked if the 30 laptops to be purchased would still be up to par a year from now. Trent replied that the district will be in a good position to make the large purchase of machines when they are priced a little lower, since they will have spent a year training on the machines. He also acknowledged that changes come weekly in the field of technology.

Trustee Christine Stead noted the balance between price and functionality when purchasing computers at “end of life,” a reference to buying computers right before a new model comes out. She said that while “end of life” is cheaper, it is not always the best, especially since newer applications require more memory and disk space.

Agreeing with Stead, Trent said new computers will be rolled out in the district every year over the next nine years. He said that not just computers, but wireless devices and projectors will be treated in the same way. He mentioned tablets as being important technology devices in the future. He said that as the district determines how tablets might be used in schools and if it makes sense,  those purchases will be made.

Stead also asked if the trustees could be given periodic reports on the technology bond implementation plan so they can monitor how the district was tracking with it. Green responded by saying staff will be presenting the tech plan in October. At that time, she said, the implementation phases will be outlined.

Mexicotte said she believed that this “modest purchase” of laptops would help to improve rollout down the road.

Outcome: The purchase was unanimously approved after being changed from a first briefing item to a consent agenda item.

Financial Housekeeping

The board was asked to approve the designation of the auditor Plante & Moran to conduct the district’s financial audit for the previous fiscal year – 2011-12. The district’s fiscal year runs from July 1 to June 30. Auditors would begin their work in September 2012 and conclude by mid-October 2012. The board would receive the auditor’s report in early November.

The audit will cost about $53,800 plus reasonable expenses. Last year, the base fee was $58,100. Nelson specifically emphasized the district will be looking to bid out the auditing work again after this year’s audit is complete.

The board also voted to approve a list of a dozen different financial institutions compliant with the district’s investment policies for fiscal year 2012-13.

Those institutions are Bank of America (Troy), Bank of Ann Arbor (Ann Arbor), Citizens Bank (Ann Arbor), Comerica Bank (Ann Arbor), Fifth Third Bank (Southfield), Flagstar Bank (Troy), JP Morgan Chase (Ann Arbor), MBIA of Ann Arbor (Ann Arbor), Michigan Commerce Bank (Ann Arbor), Michigan Liquid Asset Fund (Ronkonkoma, New York) TCF Bank (Ann Arbor) United Bank & Trust (Ann Arbor).

Outcome: The board approved the contract for Plante & Moran and the list of financial institutions as part of the consent agenda, without further discussion – having already discussed the items when they were first briefed at the Aug. 15, 2012 board meeting.

First Days of School

Several people addressed the board based on negative experiences from the first two days of school. One category of concern was scheduling problems, while the bulk the frustration was specifically with class sizes.

First Days of School: Scheduling

Jim Schueler introduced himself to the board of trustees by telling them that he had three children who attend school in the district – at Slauson Middle School, Community High School and Pioneer High School. He reported that he’d had a couple of rough days getting his 9th-grader scheduled. He felt confident, however, that his 9th-grader would make it to all of his classes the following day. He told the board that he felt that there has been a bit of pain with the schedule cuts. If we are going to keep cutting the schedule until someone says, “Ouch,” he told the board, then on his own behalf, and his family, other parents and their children: “Ouch!”

Maddie Hagan introduced herself as a junior at Skyline High School. She reported that her German 3 class had been cut. She had to choose between taking a German class online or taking a class at another school in the district – Pioneer High School. Her parents would either need to buy her a car so that she could drive herself to Pioneer to take that class, or pay $400 each semester to take the online class. She and her parents are very upset, she said, because her parents had spent a lot of money to send her to Germany for two months over the summer to help her learn the language. She did not want to have to give up the German 3 class.

Kirsten Tuck She told the board that she is also a student at Skyline High School. The first two days of school had been very chaotic, she reported. Most of the kids have their schedules “screwed up.” She was not certain what the cause for that is, but said that the counselors have not been able to fix everything. Many of her classes have around 36 kids, she said – which makes it hard for teachers to learn everyone’s name, and it makes it hard for her to hear what’s going on due to the distractions. The school feels very chaotic and rushed, she reported. A lot of her friends had left Skyline High School this year to go to different schools. She felt that reflects poorly on the staff and students at Skyline High School. She asked the board to help with overcrowding, cuts to classes, and overcrowding.

First Days of School: Class Size

Julie Christofferson told the board that she is the parent of a Haisley Elementary School 4th-grader. Her child’s class has 32 children – which she does not feel is very conducive to a positive learning environment. She asked for some consideration to fund additional staff for the school. Having 32 children in a classroom does not facilitate effective teaching, she said. She respects teachers and what they have to deal with everyday, she continued, and it’s hard for teachers address a wide variety of abilities in a classroom with 32 children. She also noted that there are multi-grade splits at Haisley, and those classes are large as well. She wondered how the achievement gap could be addressed with class sizes that large.

Marcy Marshall told the board that she is also the parent of a 4th-grade Haisley student. She also has two children who attend school at Skyline High School. When her two high schoolers were in elementary school they lived in a different district, so she was not familiar with the history of Haisley, she allowed. She felt the principal at Haisley elementary school is doing the best job she can – so that if the school receives additional students those students can be absorbed. Having two 3rd-grade classes and two classes split between 3rd and 4th grade, and one purely 4th-grade class is a little too chaotic, she felt. So she asked that one more teacher to be added, so that the classroom structure could be returned to regular 3rd-grade classes and 4th-grade classes.

John Courtright introduced himself as the parent of four children who attend school in the district – three of them at Haisley. Over the first two days of school, he’d sensed an overwhelming feeling that class sizes have “exploded a little bit” – beyond what the principal and teachers had been expecting for the 2012-13 calendar year. On a macro level, he urged the board to think of Ann Arbor in the terms that it has always been considered – a “beacon” for the entire state. It’s considered a beacon in large part because of the school system, he said. The area’s growth in jobs and housing, he said, is predicated on the idea that people want to come to Ann Arbor because of the school district. They still feel that way. He hopes that can continue, not just selfishly on behalf of his kids, but for everybody going forward.

On a micro level, at Haisley Elementary School, Courtright’s understanding is that the student population is exactly at the limit of the maximum before another full time teacher could be added. He realizes that the district is experiencing some fiscal uncertainty, but it’s not the kids and the teachers who deserved bear the burden of that, he said. He urged the board to do whatever is possible – within the realm of fiscal prudence – to try to assist kids in the district to give them the best opportunity to grow, like all the other kids who have come through the district. He noted that Haisley has become a “Focus School,” as designated by the Michigan Department of Education. [These are schools that are in the bottom 10% of schools statewide measured by the achievement gap, according to recent data released by the Michigan Department of Education.] Assigning 31 or 32 kids to one teacher is really, really difficult, he said. He suggested fiscal curtailment in other areas, so that teachers and students are not affected.

Jennifer Lukela introduced herself as the parent of two children at Haisley Elementary school. Her older son is in one of the 4th-grade classes with 32 children. She also has a 1st-grader who attends school there. She is philosophically committed to public education – and she lives in Ann Arbor in part because of the great school system. She has a lot of friends who this year pulled their kids out of the Ann Arbor public school system to go to places like Emerson School – specifically because of concerns about class size. It has been eye-opening to have her son in a classroom of 32 children, she said.

Lukela told the board she’s not a teacher, but rather a physician – but she volunteers in the classroom when she can. And based on her observations, even in a classroom of 23 or 24 children, if you have one or two children who require a lot of extra attention or who have behavioral issues, it can really disrupt the learning for everyone. She could only imagine how in a group of 32 a teacher could contend with a class that size – especially in a school that has been identified as one that has significant achievement gap. Haisley has a wide diversity of learners and she thinks the teachers at Haisley are wonderful and the principal has made the best of a bad situation.

Lukela and others were there to ask the board for help, because she did not feel the current situation is viable. She ventured that this was probably a wake-up call for a lot of parents – that they need to get more involved in terms of what is happening with the state legislature in Lansing. But in terms of what is going to happen tomorrow and next week for her kid: “I guess I’m here to beg for you to find some way to get us some more teachers.”

Jean Song told the board that she is also a parent of a child attends Haisley. She expressed the same concerns that other parents had already expressed. She told the board that she was conflicted about possibly pulling her child out of the Ann Arbor Public Schools district.

Kathy Noble had a middle school child who attended Haisley elementary school for six years. She also had a child who is currently a 4th-grader. As a classroom volunteer, she did not understand how the current situation was felt to be a viable solution.

First Days of School: AAPS Response

Responding to the public commentary, district superintendent Patricia Green noted that it was the second day of the school year. She said the administration is monitoring all the class sizes for all the elementary schools, middle schools and high schools across the district. The numbers have shifted on a daily basis, she reported. Dawn Linden, assistant superintendent for elementary education, is in conversation with the Haisley principal about the enrollment numbers, Green said, and Linden is taking a broad look, not just at Haisley, but across the entire district. Robyne Thompson, assistant superintendent for secondary education and career and technical education, has been in conversation with middle school and high school principals, Green said.

As part of her superintendent’s report, Green assessed the first few days of the new school year, noting the impact made by changes to transportation. The new high school routes provided by the Ann Arbor Transportation Authority (AATA) worked well, she said, because of “lots of planning and communication.” The combined Bryant/Pattengill routes were expected to improve as the school year continued.

Green stated the administration was looking holistically across the district at issues with class size, a concern brought up by a number of parents during public commentary. She also mentioned the success of the start of all-day kindergarten.

So before any adjustments will be made, the administration is looking not just a Haisley Elementary School and not just at Skyline High School, but across the entire district, Green said. She noted that the administration had not made a last-minute adjustment at Haisley – so she concluded that an enrollment shift had taken place there.

Responding to public commentary, Thomas told the parents that he felt their pain, and related his own experience – as his son has started attending Pioneer high school this year as a freshman. He described in some detail how his son had not been able to take an art class in which he had wanted to enroll. As a parent, this bothers him, Thomas said, but that is the financial reality that the district said. It’s a pinch on students and is restricting educational opportunities, but this is “kind to the way it is.”

Mexicotte summarized Thomas’ comments by venturing that the factual clarification he was making about the public commentary was: It’s a difficult financial time for the district.

First Days of School: “Focus Schools”

Trustee Christine Stead addressed the issue of “Focus Schools.” She pointed out that almost every school in the district is on the list – there may be two or three that are not. So there’s nothing unique about the appearance of Haisley on the list, she noted.

By way of background, “Focus Schools” are those in the bottom 10% of schools statewide, measured by the achievement gap between their highest- and lowest-performing students, according to recent data released by the Michigan Department of Education. The three AAPS schools not designated as “Focus Schools” are Scarlett Middle School, Skyline High School and Community High School. Community is designated as a “Reward School,” which means that it has met at least one of three criteria:

1. top 5% of schools on the Top-to-Bottom list
2. top 5% of schools making the greatest gains in achievement (improvement metric) or
3. “Beating the Odds.” Beating the Odds schools are those that are overcoming traditional barriers to student achievement and are outperforming schools with similar risk factors and demographic makeup.

Statewide, 358 schools were designated as “Focus Schools.” The “top-to-bottom” ranking of schools statewide is a weighted score, consisting of 50% achievement, 25% improvement and 25% achievement gap. So the Focus Schools show a full range of rankings on their top-to-bottom scores:

Distribution of Michigan Focus Schools on the Top-to-Bottom Ranking. (Chart by The Chronicle with data from Michigan Department of Education.)

First Days of School: More on  Focus Schools

Later in the meeting, Stead brought up her concern about the new Focus School designation given to all but three schools in the district.  [A Focus School is determined by the state to be a school with the largest achievement gaps, defined as the difference between the average scale score for the top 30% of students and the bottom 30% of students. Focus schools are in the bottom 10% of schools, based on the gap measure.]

Stead looked to the trustees for confirmation that the board would not take an approach to rectifying Focus School designations that reduces the achievement levels on the higher end. She wanted to make sure the district continues working for all students to achieve their best, and not to close the gap by bringing high achieving students down lower.

Simone Lightfoot

Saying she often heard her talk about that possibility, Lightfoot said she was concerned Stead continued to raise that issue. To her, the assertion was unfounded and they would never consider going down that path. Responding to Lightfoot, Stead contended she had heard that concern from families in the district, so she wanted to reassure people that they would never lower the achievement at the top to close the gap between the top and bottom percentage of students.

The public needs to understand, maintained Nelson, that the district will proudly raise the achievement of all students. The board is devoted to working on the achievement gap, which will mean the lower-achieving students will improve, but that will not come at the cost of the higher achieving students. Nelson concluded that because AAPS is a high performing district, as the schools work on pushing the top and the bottom, the numbers will work to widen the statewide achievement gap. He stated he did not believe it was a well thought-out policy.

Mexicotte emphasized the district would not change their focus – top achievement for all students. She said Ann Arbor’s engaged and intelligent community can fully understand how districts could gerrymander their achievement to make themselves look better in the “misguided” state reporting system, but not actually be better. “The integrity of the community, the board, and the administration will not let this happen,” she asserted, as she asked for [and received] verbal assent from the other trustees.

First Days of School: Cuts to Curriculum?

During “agenda planning” portion of the meeting,  Stead asked that the trustees be presented with a review of the breadth of the district’s curriculum. Acknowledging the concerns expressed during public commentary, Stead said that programs had been cut, but the board had worked to keep teachers’ jobs from being cut. She wanted to know how the curriculum offerings would have to change, as the district has had to make adjustments financially.

Mexicotte and Baskett both seconded the request, with Mexicotte asking for a summary of the changes made to curriculum and class offerings in the past 1-2 years.

Green said they were working to ascertain exactly why classes were cut – to determine if it was a function of enrollment or lack of interest. Demand tallies and staffing are done in the spring, and can differ from the number of students that actually show up in the fall, Green said. She said the administration will be investigating the issue further.

Communications and Comment

Board meetings include a number of agenda slots where trustees cans highlight issues they feel are important, including “items from the board” and “agenda planning.” Every meeting typically includes public commentary on subjects not necessarily on the formal agenda.

Comm/Comm: Dr. James Comer Visit

Green said she was pleased to note that Dr. James Comer, the founder of the Comer School Development Program, and the Maurice Falk Professor of Child Psychiatry at Yale University will be visiting the district in October. He has expressed interest in visiting because of the recent work towards eliminating both the achievement and the discipline gaps in the district. Green said she will be working with both Comer and UM on the gaps.

Comm/Comm: Report Bundling

During “agenda planning,” Stead asked that the trimester and semester structure in the high schools be examined at COTW meeting. Mexicotte said that would probably bundled and looked at with other high school issues.

When Lightfoot asked if suspension and truancy information would fall under high school issues, Green replied that the discipline report would be bundled with the student achievement report. That would be a good time to talk about those issues, Green asserted.

Comm/Comm: Police Presence

Baskett raised concern over the cuts to the police liaison positions. She noted that they had played roles in traffic control and counseling. So she wondered how those functions were being replaced. She wanted to know what schools have been doing to assure students’ safety, mentioning the limited police presence at the most recent Pioneer High School football game.

The police liaison positions had nothing to do with games after school hours, Green said. That was left up to schools individually. Money for a police presence at high school games has always been separate from the liaison positions. She also said that she and Robert Allen, deputy superintendent for operations, have been in meetings with city administrator Steve Powers and chief of police John Seto to discuss a community policing model. She said she can give a more detailed description of that model at another time.

Comm/Comm: Looking Through a Lens

Nelson saw the agenda planning taking place as an example of the concerns he had expressed at the retreat. To him, the highest priorities need to be: implementing the strategic plan; implementing the AGEP and the discipline gap elimination plan; and addressing the social and emotional learning of the students. The board periodically affirmed those were the top priorities, but often, in his opinion, drew away from the strategic plan. He was concerned that the board work hard to keep their focus on the central priorities of the mission.

Mexicotte responded that she saw it as a matter of triage – managing the flow of information to the trustees without full-blown presentations. She said it was good caution to think about the lens through which the trustees report on individual items. To her, the overarching lens should be student performance and meeting strategic goals.

Comm/Comm: Reasons to Celebrate

During “items from the board,” Thomas mentioned that AAPS had pulled off a “cultural coup,” as Pioneer High School was one of five schools selected by the Detroit Symphony Orchestra (DSO) to host a free DSO community concert this fall. The sold-out performance is to be held on Sunday, Sept. 23.

Nelson noted that, over the summer, the UM Depression Center celebrated their fifth year of partnership with AAPS. He wanted to emphasize how seriously the district took mental health issues for students.

Baskett, Lightfoot, and Mexicotte all spoke about the start of the new year. Mexicotte noted that she was able to attend the school year kick off and could feel the palpable energy. She thanked all who contribute to the success of students every year.

Mexicotte also commended the trustees on the second sub-five hour meeting since the retreat. This was important in light of the board’s recent goal set to shorten meetings. Mexicotte said that the meetings have been shorter because of the discipline shown by the trustees and urged them to keep up the good work.

Present: President Deb Mexicotte, vice president Christine Stead, secretary Andy Thomas, and trustees Susan Baskett, Simone Lightfoot, and Glenn Nelson.

Absent: Treasurer Irene Patalan

Next regular meeting: Wednesday, Sept. 19, 2012, at 7 p.m. at the fourth-floor boardroom of the Ann Arbor District Library’s downtown branch, 343 S. Fifth Ave.

Chronicle editor Dave Askins contributed to this report.

The Chronicle could not survive without regular voluntary subscriptions to support our coverage of public bodies like the Ann Arbor Public School Board. Click this link for details: Subscribe to The Chronicle. And if you’re already supporting us, please encourage your friends, neighbors and colleagues to help support The Chronicle, too!

David Erik Nelson

I spent the last two columns talking about what we should be teaching in our schools [1]. As we teeter on the brink of another school year, I want to take a second to talk about how to best teach these things. And, fair warning, my suggestion – as a former teacher and school administrator, not just a current chattering gadfly – is one you’ve already heard a thousand times: small class sizes.

But in the next twelve minutes I’m going to give you a way to argue for small class sizes in a patois that business folks can get behind.

As I’ve mentioned before, the vogue among conservative politicians – both at the state and national level – is to argue that their business acumen makes them uniquely well-suited to govern in our economically troubled times. I don’t reject this claim out of hand, because I agree that there are many business practices that adapt well to the public sector.

The problem, to my eye, is that the practices these erstwhile businessmen want to import to the public sector are largely from the management offices, rather than the sales floor.

Why Management Thinking Doesn’t Work in the Public Sector

As Nobel-prize winning economist Paul Krugman outlined brilliantly in a lil blog post at the beginning of this year, many of the techniques fundamental to making a business profitable make no sense when dealing in the public sector. Krugman’s post is short (certainly by Ann Arbor Chronicle standards; a pitiful 238 words!), but worth your read.

He highlights a tried-and-true technique for pumping up a flagging business: Concentrate profits while offloading costs. For example, fire half the workers at your candy factory, speed up the line, and keep pumping out roughly the same number of boxes (albeit at lower quality). As far as your balance sheet is concerned, profits have remained stable while costs have decreased; that’s good management! Of course, the workers bear the stress of the layoffs and the consumers bear the crappier quality, but those are “externalities”; they accrue off your books, and are “somebody else’s problem.” [2]

But governments – even at the local level – can’t really work this way, because all of a government’s customers are intimately entangled in its business. After all, a government’s customers make up the vast majority of its workers, as well as its bosses. If most of your customers are workers in your factory, then they know how badly quality has sunk, and they’re gonna want to stop buying. Meanwhile, if your bosses are stuck buying your crappy product and know it, they’re gonna fire your ass. Oops.

Boardrooms, Sales Floors, and Classrooms

That said, there are plenty of business lessons that are a perfect fit for our schools. What disappoints me is that when these CEO-politicians bring their “hard-won business smarts” to the schools, they bring everything but the things that actually made them successful businesspeople. They trot out “metrics” and “dashboards” and “maximized throughput” and “economies of scale” and “incentives” and “efficiency” – all the 50-cent biz-school jargon – without bringing the one piece of wisdom that every businessperson I’ve ever met knows in his or her heart:

Business is about relationships

Let’s talk about sales. I used to sell hiking boots. That was the last time anyone called me a “salesman” – but I’ve sold myself at every meeting, during every interview, with every handshake. I’m selling to you right now.

“Sales” is the word we use to dismiss “rhetoric” as beneath us, but rhetoric is the thing we – the magical talking chimps – use to Get Things Done.

Rhetoric – the brilliant, single-word slogan “Change” – got our first African-American president elected. We were sold on this man, and frankly, we’ve done okay [3]. Kennedy’s salesmanship put men on the moon. Jimmy Carter’s salesmanship has nearly eliminated the god-awful guinea worm. Sales built our railroads, sales bring down rates of teen pregnancy, sales of the M.A.D.D. and truth.org variety cratered dangerous teen drinking and smoking [4].

Sales hinge on relationships: We trust the salesperson, we believe he or she shares our interests and goals and dreams, and so we buy.

Always Be Closing

The most basic sell is “hand selling.” The salesperson and customer interact one-on-one, and the salesperson makes recommendations that are responsive to the customer’s needs. Any solvent shoe store owner can train just about any human of average social intelligence to hand sell. Think about asking someone on a date; that’s the hand sell at its foundation: “How are you doing today? Can I interest you in a handy me to have around your life?”

A step up is pitching to a group of, let’s say, a dozen or twenty folks. Not everyone is great at this, but almost everyone can learn to do it well enough. This is making a pitch to investors, arguing before a jury, playing an open mic night, giving a class presentation, reporting to a team of colleagues or board of directors.

The trick is that relationships really need to be formed person-by-person; this happens naturally when you’re speaking one-on-one, but is much more challenging when you’re talking one-to-many. That’s why we have all those chestnuts of public speaking: Make eye-contact with individuals, work the room, refer to audience members by name, touch people’s shoulders and elbows, etc. It’s tricky, but given thirty minutes, you can form a personal connection with twenty people as you make your pitch. It’s a learned skill, not a natural-born talent.

But once you cross that magical line from “small group” to “crowd,” there’s a major psychological shift. A “crowd,” after all, is just a single thrown beer bottle away from being a “mob.”

Not a lot of folks can wow a crowd. Realistically speaking, once you’ve got more than a small group – once you’re in the size of those big real estate and investment seminars – you can’t really sell anything, because you can’t form those personal relationships. The folks in those audiences aren’t being convinced to buy, they’re just being tipped over the edge, because they’d already sold themselves on the idea before they showed up.

You might notice these numbers I’ve picked out, and the sharp tacks already see where I’m going: Tutors and music teachers and coaches “hand sell.”

Teachers in normal schools basically need to be able to pitch a boardroom – traditionally, that is, when classes sizes were capped under two dozen.

Anything above that – like stadium-seating college lectures – requires either a pro-grade snake-oil salesman or substantial buy-in from the crowd before they even come through the door.

Kids in compulsory public schools often aren’t willing buyers; they need to be sold. And even Lee Iacocca couldn’t sell 40 reluctant buyers in a single group. That takes goddamn sales magic, and the only cats with that kind of voodoo are politicians and snake-oil gurus. And there isn’t a single such talent in this great nation who’s ever going to settle for $42,000 per year plus medical and a pension – not when his or her earning potential starts in the low six figures and only goes up, up, up.

The Problem With Our Schools

The problem with education in America – to the degree that there is a problem [5] – is that we’re putting fair-to-middlin’ sales staff into a nearly impossible sales situation. No shoe store owner in the world expects his or her staff to sell shoes forty pairs at a time; if there’s that many folks coming through the door, then they hire more sales staff. They don’t expect shoe buyers to sit in rows six deep and stare at the ceiling while someone yammers to them indiscriminately about chunky heels or high-performance cross-trainers, without regard for what kind of feet they have and what kinda walking they need to do.

My son’s kindergarten class had 23 students this year. That’s kind of a big room to work, but a competent public speaker can do it, and his teacher was just such a salesperson. Good for her. My wife’s high school classes in Redford are hovering in the mid-30s, with pressure to add more [6]. My wife is a brilliant human being with a masters in education and experience in tough schools with tough kids. She loves her subjects, expects a lot from her students, and takes no shit. But she isn’t Barack Obama or Steve Jobs or Oprah Winfrey, for chrissakes, and none of those folks ever dedicated their lives to a five-figure career with shrinking benefits.

So, that’s my pitch to you, Governor Snyder. Do you want to reform our schools with solid business practices? Then start by putting your frontline sales staff into sales situations where they can actually close deals instead of throwing them in front of a distractible mob and then acting shocked when they don’t make their numbers.

Of course, I’m a little loathe to put this notion in your head, sir, as I’m 90 percent sure that if you do read this, your only takeaway will be “Hey! Teachers are a lot like salesmen; we should make ‘em work on commission!”

Notes

[1] TL;DR: Compassion, mutual caretakership, lateral thinking, perseverance, humility.

[2] That might sound hollow, but bear in mind that in a world where you have to please banks – which is the world of all but the smallest businesses – looking good on paper is the entire game. Real world results have little bearing on decision making when those decisions must please the dark gods of corporate personhood served by the damned, scuttling minions inhabiting the cubicles of Comerica and Bank of America.

[3] Not super-awesome, but it’s a solid performance in terms of what we were promised. For what is clearly an apples-to-something-similar-to-but-clearly-not-an-apple comparison, check out the GOP Promise Meter. Incidentally, as a One Love kinda hippie, I consider most “compromises” to be solid wins. It’s a big tent, and I just want it to get bigger and bigger and bigger until we’re all mad-crazy group-hugging in the shade and singing “Give Peace a Chance.” Amen.

[4] On the dark side, a nation of freedom-minded Christians sold themselves the transatlantic slave trade. Nazi Germany sold Europe 11 million corpses, and sold them the ovens to go with them. Our last president sold us two futile wars.

[5] Americans have this “common sense” notion that our schools are terrible. That claim . . . I don’t even know where to start with that claim. Right on the face of it, the sentence “America’s schools are terrible” simply makes no sense.

First, there are no “American schools.” We don’t have a federal school system, we don’t even really have state-by-state schools; we have a school system of individual local districts of varying size, influence, resources, standards, practices, and goals. Aggregating data about those schools, looking at the final number, and saying “Christ, our school system is a wreck!” is tantamount to aggregating climatological data from across the country, looking at the final number, and concluding that it’s impossible to grow berries in the United States because, once you factor in the dearth of precipitation in Arizona and the overabundance of overcast days in Alaska, we’re just too dark and too dry for a strawberry to take hold here.

Beyond that, our school systems seek to do something that’s not quite unique, but nonetheless rare worldwide: We want to offer everyone a diverse, holistic education at the same level in a system that doesn’t break children off into vocational tracks and doesn’t throw anyone away.

Anyway, I’m not saying we don’t have problems; I’m saying that the answer to “Why aren’t our schools like Japan’s and Singapore’s?” is “Because we aren’t Japanese and this isn’t Singapore.”

[6] FYI, the maximum class-size advised by the United Nations is 35. Class sizes of up to 40 are far from unheard of in Detroit, even at the elementary level, and word on the street is that high schools might be looking at up to 61 students per class this fall. In other words, we’re steadily sliding toward the same place that rural India and Kenya are diligently working to climb out of. Hell, even Afghanistan – which has been besought by war (civil, holy, and otherwise) since 1979 – can keep their average down to 55 students per teacher. In other words, I’m not precisely sure we should call this latest round of “reforms” in Detroit Public Schools “progress.” For a nuanced perspective on class size, especially as it pertains to the developing world, give this 2007 report from USAID a read.

The Chronicle relies in part on regular voluntary subscriptions to support our publication of local columnists like David Erik Nelson. Click this link for details: Subscribe to The Chronicle. And if you’re already sold on The Chronicle, please encourage your friends, neighbors and colleagues to help support The Chronicle, too!

Ann Arbor Public Schools superintendent Patricia Green.

The board’s evaluation was uniformly positive, and counted among her successes the filling of vacant cabinet positions, dealing with funding cuts, helping to get the technology millage passed, and developing a strategy to address the “achievement gap.”

Green’s evaluation had included input from a set of roughly 70 community members suggested by board trustees. See previous coverage by The Chronicle on the evaluation’s structure and process: ”AAPS Begins Superintendent Evaluation.”

Green joined the district July 1, 2011, and is working under a five-year contract.

Also at their meeting, the board heard public commentary on two topics: second grade class sizes at Lawton elementary; and teacher release time used to support Skyline’s theatre program.

Superintendent Evaluation

When the board emerged from its closed session, board president Deb Mexicotte stated simply, “We have completed our work and we have a statement.” Board vice-president Christine Stead moved that the statement be accepted by the board, and read it aloud:

Dr. Patricia Green joined the Ann Arbor Public Schools (AAPS) as Superintendent at the start of the academic year 2011-2012. Upon Dr. Green’s arrival, there were several open positions in the Executive Cabinet and direct reports thereof; creating both a challenge and an opportunity for Dr. Green to bring in new talent and leadership as part of her first year with the AAPS. Dr. Green has demonstrated excellent judgment in her ability to attract and retain a very capable leadership team for the AAPS.

At the same time, Dr. Green was faced with the second year of the most drastic cuts in education funding that the AAPS has experienced. The funding crisis established by the state exacerbated an already difficult decade of declining funds for the AAPS. Dr. Green demonstrated an ability to make recommendations to the Board that allowed the AAPS to preserve our core educational mission while addressing significant funding issues. Dr. Green was also successful in breathing new life and accountability into our systems, policies and procedures; using our strategic plan as a guidepost.

Dr. Green was personally and significantly involved in the successful passage of the Technology Millage from early due diligence to providing advocacy to our community on the district’s behalf. Dr. Green reinvigorated efforts to address the AAPS achievement gap, including a substantive effort on the role that discipline and behavior play in addressing this issue. Dr. Green has engaged in significant change management activities throughout her first year; an area of great interest to the Board.

We appreciate Dr. Green’s extensive work with groups within the community in her first year, and we support and endorse her continued commitment to visible leadership throughout the district in the future. These accomplishments are highlights, among many, from her first year of service.

The Ann Arbor Public Schools Board of Education looks forward to continuing to work with Dr. Green in advancing the success of the AAPS for all students in the years to come and congratulates her on a very successful first year in the AAPS in a very challenging environment.

Trustee Irene Patalan seconded the statement, and it was approved unanimously by the board.

Trustee Glenn Nelson then added that that during its discussion, the board had also thanked Stead for her efforts to coordinate the evaluation, and for leading the board through the process. “Managing this process is not a simple thing, and she did it well,” Nelson said. [That process included surveying about 70 community members: .pdf of survey form contents]

Green then thanked the board for the “tremendous support” she felt from them throughout the school year, and said she looks forward to a “very close affiliation in the future.”

Public Commentary and Board Clarification

Under the Michigan Open Meetings Act, closed sessions must be conducted in the context of an open meeting, which must include an opportunity for members of the public to address the public body. Two topics were addressed at public commentary at the June 27 meeting:  second grade class sizes at Lawton elementary; and teacher release time used to support Skyline’s theatre program. The board chose to respond to constituents regarding both matters at this meeting, as described below.

Public Comment: Lawton’s Second Grade Class Size

Anne Ristich, a parent of two second graders at Lawton, addressed the board. She argued that the increase in class sizes at Lawton is undermining parents’ trust of the district, and threatening students’ success. “If a solitary second grade teacher is expected to maintain a class of 27-32 students on his/her own, the functional system once designed for these students to flourish is now damaged and only exists to be endured,” Ristich said. She shared quotes from a stack of letters written by Lawton parents that asserted the larger class sizes will make students less globally competitive, and prevent them from reaching their full potential as “their eagerness to learn will be replaced with an eagerness to escape the mob.”

Ristich acknowledged that the exact class size numbers for the fall have not yet been determined, but noted that as recently as two years ago,  first and second grade classrooms averaged only 21 to 23 students. She closed by asked the board to reflect on whether these children should be made to endure instead of flourish, and to share their rationale behind setting the class size targets they do. In addition to a set of letters from parents, Ristich gave the board an article from the Michigan Department of Education website supporting the effectiveness of smaller class sizes.

Timothy Wilhelm also addressed the board about the sizes of Lawton’s second grade classes. He said the trend of increasing class sizes is detrimental to children’s education, and noted that research has shown that smaller class sizes have a measurable effect on effective education. Wilhelm said that Lawton parents are asking the board to allocate resources for a third second-grade class to be put in place at Lawton in the fall. He said his numbers indicate there will be roughly 60 students attending second grade at Lawton next year, and that “we think 30 students in a class is too large, and that it is contrary to the district’s goals.”

Wilhelm pointed out that the incoming second graders at Lawton are unusual in that they are a slightly smaller group than the group of incoming third graders above them or the group of incoming first graders below them. He said he knows there are budget cuts, that the information parents have may not be complete or accurate, and that the actual number of teachers may not be allocated until the later in the summer. But, Wilhelm continued, parents are looking for transparency and reassurance that the quality of students’ education is placed first and foremost in decision-making, and said that if approaching the board was not the correct process to use to be heard, to please let him know.

During the clarification section following public comments, Green said the class size numbers are “very fluid” right now and that the “data is still in transit” from individual schools. She said that no decisions have been made yet about the situation, and said that AAPS director of elementary education Dawn Linden has been in touch with Lawton’s principal about the concerns. Green commended the small set of parents present for caring so much about their children. “We feel your pain, and it’s important that you know that,” she said. “We want to be transparent with you … I cannot give you an answer right now.”

Mexicotte added that the best point of contact for parents to follow up on this issue would be their building principal, saying that advocacy regarding class sizes is done through the principal to central administration. Wilhelm said he has questions about the scope of the principal’s authority in the situation, and Mexicotte suggested he direct his questions to Linden.

Stead added that class sizes always fluctuate over the summer, and that the district tries its best to anticipate expected attendance by class and grade level. She said that she has experienced the same questions noted by Lawton parents when her own two AAPS students have been in larger classes. Wilhelm said that as a group, Lawton parents have discussed the options available, such as getting a teacher’s aide or having a split class, and they would love to have that dialogue.

Mexicotte reiterated that such dialogue should be at the school level at this point, and that it was premature, given that numbers are not set yet for the fall.

Another Lawton parent said that she had not signed up to speak but wanted to add that class sizes having seemed to creep up every year, and that parents do not want this to go on every year until fifth grade. “That’s why we’re here,” she said.

Mexicotte responded that the board also feels class sizes should be low, and pointed out that no cuts to teaching positions were made as part of the 2012-13 budget. “We are trying to hold the line,” she said.

Public Comment: Teacher Release Time, Skyline Theatre

Skyline student Seth Bear spoke to the board about the release time of Ann Marie Roberts, Skyline’s performing arts teacher and theater director. Bear noted that he was speaking on behalf of a group of Skyline students who were attending the meeting, all wearing light blue “SAVE SKYLINE THEATRE” T-shirts.

Skyline High School student Seth Bear addressed the Ann Arbor Public Schools board of trustees at their June 27, 2012 meeting.

He explained that Roberts uses her two prep hours to work on various components for Skyline theater productions that take place after school. However, in this coming year the district does not want to allow Roberts to have the second prep, but instead will assign her to teach another class during that time. Bear argued that taking this second prep away from Roberts would jeopardize the theater program, and cause students to lose “the most important part of our lives.”

Bear then read a list of awards and accolades received by the Skyline theater program and some of its individual students, including high academic achievement. He also shared quotes from some of the students in the theater program who said that being in theater has: led to other good experiences; been their passion; helped them to grow as human beings; and shown them what it means to be part of something bigger than themselves.

During clarification on public comment, Green said she had been baffled when she had received e-mails about what Bear had just described, and said that she is still trying to get to the bottom of it. The best she can say right now, she said, is that there is a contract with the teachers’ union that covers release time and that the decisions about release time are made at the building level.

Green added that the teachers’ union contract gives school principals discretion about how to allocate 70 days of release time among all department chairs, and that Roberts is the department chair for arts, music, and theater. She told the students that Skyline principal Sulura Jackson was the person to whom they should address their concerns.

Bear said that it was his understanding that Jackson no longer had the authority to grant Roberts the second prep period. Green said she does not have all the details, and that Jackson and other Skyline administrators are all currently unreachable as they are away at a conference. Green also pointed out that a memorandum of understanding between the teachers’ union and the district states the release time granted in the past is being phased out, and replaced with the 70 days of time to be used at the principal’s discretion.

Baskett asked how much release time was given to all high schools this year, and Green said she did not know. Baskett asked the students if they had spoken to Roberts and Jackson, and they said they had. Then Baskett clarified with the students that they had come to the board because they were under the impression that Jackson is no longer in charge of the decision.

Bear thanked the board for taking the issue seriously, and said “We are not done fighting …We did not come here trying to attack anybody. We are just trying to defend what we love.” Mexicotte responded that both of her degrees are in theater, so she is very sympathetic, but that the outcome will depend on what the contract actually says.

Bear asked if the board could keep the students updated via e-mail about how the situation is resolved, and Mexicotte said she would. She asked Bear to send the board an e-mail with a person the board could use as a point of contact. Green added that a lot of people are going to be away on vacation for the next several weeks, so if the students don’t hear from the board right away, “don’t think we forgot about you.”

Present: President Deb Mexicotte, vice president Christine Stead, secretary Andy Thomas, treasurer Irene Patalan, and trustees Susan Baskett, Simone Lightfoot, and Glenn Nelson.

Next regular meeting: Wednesday, July 25, 2012, at 7:00 p.m. in fourth-floor conference room of the downtown branch of the Ann Arbor District Library, 343 S. Fifth Ave., Ann Arbor.

The Chronicle could not survive without regular voluntary subscriptions to support our coverage of public bodies like the Ann Arbor Public School Board. Click this link for details: Subscribe to The Chronicle. And if you’re already supporting us, please encourage your friends, neighbors and colleagues to help support The Chronicle, too!

The $183 million budget went through many iterations since originally proposed in April, before the board approved it on Wednesday evening on a 5-2 vote. Trustees Simone Lightfoot and Christine Stead dissented.

Details on the board deliberations that led to the split vote on the budget will be included in The Chronicle’s forthcoming meeting report, along with the other board business transacted that evening.

This brief highlights the key elements of the approved budget.

Instructional Staff Reductions and Associated Impacts

The new budget will decrease the number of teaching positions by 62.3, which will save the district $5.6 million, but cause an increase of class sizes of approximately two to three students per classroom across the district. Class size targets will be 23-25 students in grades K-2, 26-30 students in grades 3-5, and an average of 30 students in grades 6-12.

The original budget proposal brought to the board in April suggested cuts to 70 teaching positions, but at a study session on the budget held last week, administrators suggested adding back 7.7 full-time equivalent (FTE) positions. The rationale for adding those positions was primarily to address some “uncomfortably high” class sizes and multi-grade classes in early grades, according to Lee-Ann Dickinson-Kelley, AAPS interim deputy superintendent of instruction.

Assistant superintendent of secondary schools, Joyce Hunter, explained at Wednesday’s meeting that the reduction of approximately 48 secondary level FTEs will impact the number of course offerings.  For example, she said, classes with lower enrollment, such as higher-level world languages, will be offered at a single location instead of at each high school. Trustees suggested making use of distance learning technology, instead of shuttling, to ensure that all students are able to take advantage of these consolidated classes.

Dickinson-Kelley reminded the board that “staffing is an enormously complex process,” and that class enrollment can change dramatically over the summer.

Other cuts to instructional services included a reduction of seven administrative and central office FTEs, for additional savings of $600,000.

Transportation Service Reductions

The budget passed this week will significantly modify bus service offered by the district, for a total savings in transportation costs of $1.3 million.  The largest change will come in high school busing: Instead of being picked up at traditional bus stops, high school students will be picked up at a fewer number of centralized pick-up points throughout the district.

Most of these common pick-up sites will be elementary schools, which are concentrated primarily in the center of the AAPS district area.  A small number of common pick-up sites might be added in areas of the district where there are concentrated numbers of high school students who live too far out to walk to the nearest elementary school pick-up site.

Liz Margolis, AAPS director of communications, said Wednesday that routes would be set by the end of July, and that families will be notified of the transportation service changes as soon as possible.

The approved budget also eliminates 7th hour busing at the high schools, eliminates after-school shuttles at the middle schools, and requires consistent implementation of board policy on distances between bus stops.

Other cuts to operations include the elimination of 3.75 FTEs in information technology, human resources and support positions, and a reduction of maintenance costs, legal fees, and gas costs, for an additional savings of $660,000.

Changes in Revenue

District interim superintendent Robert Allen reported at Wednesday’s meeting that AAPS had attracted only 130 additional students through Schools of Choice (SOC) instead of the targeted number of 170. That lowered revenue by $300,000.  However, Allen noted that enrollment numbers could still increase, and pointed out that during the last two weeks of August last year, over 160 students joined the district.

Allen also pointed out that the budget had been adjusted to include a one-time disbursement of $2.4 million in aid from the state to the district to offset the state-mandated increase in employer retirement contributions.

Parking fees will also bring the district an additional $100,000 in revenue this coming year – fans choosing to park at Pioneer High School to attend University of Michigan football games will be charged $40 instead of $35.

Decreases in Wages and Benefits

Savings in wages and benefits totaling $2.6 million were part of the budget as originally proposed, and saw no amendments during the budget deliberation process on Wednesday.  Those savings include negotiated freezes in teacher pay, savings in health care costs, and reductions in supplemental pay for after-school activities.

District-Wide Reductions

All AAPS departments were instructed to cut 7% of their budgets without entirely eliminating any program, for a total savings of $500,000.

Two former students spoke during public commentary at Wednesday’s meeting to ask the board to maintain funding of  the district’s creative writing program, as well as to continue the support it offers to the literary arts programs of the Neutral Zone, a local teen center.

Allen confirmed at Wednesday’s meeting that while the district will continue to support a number of initiatives through the superintendent’s account or other discretionary budgets, the support will be at a lower level.

There was no discussion on other remaining district-wide savings measures totaling nearly $1.4 million, which include reducing noon-hour supervision and substitute costs, and lowering building and athletics budgets.

Fund Balance

Though board policy requires AAPS to maintain a fund balance equal to at least 15% of its operating budget, again next year the district is projecting a fund balance below that target .

The projected beginning balance of the district’s fund equity next year is $19.6 million.  The initial budget proposal called for using $1.73 million in fund equity during the next school year to supplement revenue.  However, the budget as eventually approved is projected to use only $810,000 in fund equity, keeping it just above $19 million, or 10.4% of the budget, at the end of the 2011-12 fiscal year.

Purely a plug: The Chronicle relies in part on regular voluntary subscriptions to support our coverage of publicly-funded entities like the Ann Arbor Public Schools. If you’re already supporting The Chronicle, please encourage your friends, neighbors and coworkers to do the same. Click this link for details: Subscribe to The Chronicle.

AAPS interim superintendent Robert Allen and board chair Deb Mexicotte. (Photo by the writer.)

School districts across Michigan are facing an ongoing structural deficit in state funding, along with significant anticipated cuts in reimbursement for special education services, and increases in mandated payments into the Michigan Public School Employees Retirement System (MPSERS).

Since the AAPS board last met on May 25, Michigan legislators passed a budget for the upcoming state fiscal year, which begins in October 2011 – though it still awaits Gov. Rick Snyder’s signature. The budget includes a one-time provision to offset the increase in school districts’ MPSERS payments, as well as one-time grants to districts that meet at least four out of five “best practice” guidelines, as defined by the state.

For AAPS, this means the district could receive as much as $4 million more in state funding than anticipated when its 2011-12 budget was proposed – a $2.4 million retirement offset, and a possible $1.6 million in best practice grant funding. In light of these changes, AAPS trustees met Friday, June 3 to review possible amendments to the budget proposal they will be considering Wednesday. No binding decisions were made at the study session, and there was no consensus among trustees about how much to defer to recommendations brought by the administration.

Changes to transportation services and class sizes generated the most discussion. The proposed budget includes a reduction of 70 teaching positions, which would raise class sizes at all grade levels by two or three students per classroom. Administration has proposed bringing back 7.7 of those 70 positions, though trustees discussed whether the district should add back even more.

The board also discussed the possibility of proposing additional local millages. Revenues could be used to refresh technology districtwide and build more classrooms, allowing AAPS to offer all-day kindergarten at all elementary schools. Ballot language for any proposed millages would need to be completed by the end of August to be voted on this fall.

Two four-year terms for board of education trustees will also be on the Nov. 8 ballot, for seats currently held by trustees Simone Lightfoot and Andy Thomas.

AAPS Fund Balance and Possible Future Budget Cuts

AAPS interim superintendent Robert Allen opened the June 3 discussion by reviewing the district’s fund equity needs, and suggesting that trustees should first determine how much they want to retain in fund equity before deciding how to allocate any remaining funds. He noted that board policy is to maintain a fund balance of 15% of the district’s operating expenditures, but that if the budget passes in its current form, the fund balance at the end of the 2011-12 school year will be $18 million, which is under 10% of the projected expenditures of $182 million.

Allen also noted that the district needs to maintain a fund balance of at least $17 million to maintain its cash flow during the eight weeks of summer when it does not receive money from the state. Otherwise, AAPS would need to borrow money to meet payroll during those weeks, incurring the additional interest costs.

Finally, Allen noted that he has requested clarification from the state regarding its intentions behind the best practice grant criteria as currently worded, and cautioned trustees against relying on that funding. He also reported that the district had filled only 130 of the 170 spaces it had offered through Schools of Choice (SOC), which translates into a loss of $300,000 in expected revenue.

Most trustees felt it imperative that the district maintain a fund balance above the minimal level required to meet summer cash flow requirements. Trustees made many references to the state budget as passed by the Michigan legislature, noting that it is a departure from precedents established by the passage of Proposal A in 1994, since money from the School Aid Fund (SAF) was moved out of that fund to pay for other things.

“Any projections related to the [SAF] are now moot,” trustee Christine Stead asserted. “We no longer know how school will be funded … This [budget] sets us up for two more years of crisis.”

Trustee Irene Patalan asserted that “the community appreciates that we don’t gamble … We need more reserves.” She reminded other board members that last year they had to spend $11 million of fund equity mid-year when the state suddenly decreased funding, and noted that the scenario could repeat.

Trustee Simone Lightfoot concurred – maintaining a high fund equity balance has kept AAPS from having to make even deeper cuts made by other districts in Michigan, she said. “I am feeling the most fiscally conservative I’ve ever felt. To even have money … I don’t want to spend a dime.”

Trustee Glenn Nelson agreed that future budget projections need to take the state’s general fund into account, along with the SAF, “since they are essentially merged.” However, he took a somewhat different position than the other trustees, arguing that the state has made large cuts in funding this year in order to protect itself from having to make cuts in FY 2012-13, which is an election year for state legislators.

Nelson invoked the Biblical story of Joseph’s “seven good years and seven bad years,” and argued that while “we celebrate the wisdom of setting aside during the good years, the bad years are not the time to add to the reserve.” Suggesting that the state could not be counted upon to resolve the funding crisis being experienced by public education, board president Deb Mexicotte quipped, “Joseph did have a guarantee from God.”

Possible Budget Amendments

The board’s discussion on budget amendments centered on six main possibilities: (1) increasing walk zones; (2) cutting noon-hour transportation; (3) creating common pick-up points; (4) eliminating high school busing; (5) lowering class sizes by hiring more instructional staff; and (6) decreasing noon-hour supervision costs.

Possible Budget Amendments: Walk Zones

There are two types of walk zones: “school walk zones,” which refer to a radius around schools, outside of which busing is offered; and “bus stop walk zones,” which refer to the distance that students need to walk to reach a bus stop. Trustees discussed the potential savings that could be gleaned from increasing each type of walk zone, as well as the effects that such changes would have on students and families.

The school walk zones are currently set at 1.5 miles for all AAPS schools – elementary, middle, and high school students are currently not offered bus service if they live within 1.5 miles of their home school. Interim superintendent Robert Allen suggested that increasing the school walk zone for all grades to 2 miles could save $800,000.

In addition, Allen said that enforcing existing board policy to be sure that bus stop walk zones are properly spaced could save another $500,000. Current policy states that no student should have to walk more than 0.5 miles to reach a bus stop, but it has not been enforced.

Board members were universally supportive of having their existing policy enforced regarding the spacing of bus stop walk zones. There was less consensus regarding the expansion of school walk zones.

Multiple trustees commented that they’ve received many e-mails suggesting that increasing the school walk zones would be a good way to aid in the fight against childhood obesity, as well as a good way to save money. Most people around the table noted that parents are quite supportive of increasing school walk zones until it is their first grader walking an hour, in the dark, in a snowsuit. Liz Margolis, AAPS director of communications, confirmed that increasing walk zones would disproportionately affect elementary students – 50% of those students would be affected.

Andy Thomas suggested possibly increasing walk zones for only middle and high school students.

Christine Stead said on the surface she liked the idea of increasing walk zones  very much, but suggested there might be safety issues with increasing some of the zones, such as problems caused by lack of sidewalks on busy roads. Allen explained that the policy makes exceptions for safety issues, such as being sure students do not have to cross busy roads.

The board made numerous requests that additional data regarding student use of AAPS bus service be brought to the next meeting, including the exact number and location of households with students who ride the bus. Administrative staff explained that it is a challenge to determine exactly which students are riding the buses, as ridership is very fluid, changing on a day-to-day basis as affected by weather, sports seasons, and numerous personal factors.

Possible Budget Amendments: Noon-Hour Transportation

Allen reported that AAPS could save $400,000 by not offering transportation home to morning kindergarteners. Some considerations, he noted, were that parents or caregivers needed to be available anyway to care for the child in the afternoon, and that parents have an option of having their children stay all day if there is no way to get them home.

Margolis added that most of the 228  kindergarten families (18% of all kindergarteners) that would be affected by the change would have other means of getting their children home, according to a recent survey undertaken by the district. She added as an example that one of the elementary schools has only one student who rides the bus home at mid-day, but that requires a whole bus.

Glenn Nelson expressed apprehension at possibly losing kindergarten students due to lack of busing, because once they are gone, they might not return to the district.

Possible Budget Amendments: Common Pick-Up Points

Another suggested amendment, Allen said, was to add high school busing back into the budget, but create common pick-up points for high schoolers at their neighborhood elementary schools. Using common pick-up points instead of traditional bus stops would save $600,000, he said, explaining that AAPS would have the flexibility to name the pick-up sites.

Margolis added that a few bus runs could be added to focal points along the outside ring of the district for students who live too far out to walk to elementary schools.

Most board members expressed a general interest in using common pick-up points, but again, the board requested that a visual aid – showing the possible locations of common pick-up points – be brought to the next meeting.

Possible Budget Amendments: High School Busing

The elimination of high school busing would save the district $1.3 million, and is currently a part of the proposed budget.

Many board members expressed that the appeal of changing service for high school students was that they had been with the district a while, and that families with high schoolers would be more motivated than those with younger students to find a way to stay in AAPS.

Mexicotte also explained that she had anticipated “backfilling” in areas where the community indicated there was a problem created by eliminating busing, such as places without AATA service. Margolis responded that AAPS could not backfill by offering bus service to only some high school students.

Mexicotte said she did not mean to backfill with buses, but that the district could use cabs or organize carpools. She also suggested that older students could drive younger ones in their neighborhoods.

Margolis clarified that state law prohibits AAPS from offering non-equitable services within grade levels. For example, the district could offer common pick-up sites to all high school students, but could not send buses only to a few neighborhoods.

There was some debate among trustees as to how much to defer to AAPS administration regarding the choice of suggested transportation budget reductions.

On one hand, Nelson and Patalan suggested greater deference to the administration would be appropriate. “I want you and your people to do your work,” Nelson said to Allen, “and tell me in your professional opinion what to do.” Patalan added that, though she likes to totally understand everything, she believes that central administration has put a ton of thought into the suggested cuts, and she is happy to defer to them. At one point, she asked, smiling, “What am I supposed to be doing here – you want my opinion?”

On the other hand, Thomas suggested that the administration had not provided the board with enough data to make a good decision. He argued that there was not time to implement major changes in transportation services in time for next fall. He noted that the board could not say exactly who would be affected by eliminating high school busing, and whether they would be able to find alternate transportation. Thomas asserted that the board should leave transportation services entirely in place for 2011-12 while they “take a year and figure out how to do it right.”

Trustee Susan Baskett agreed, saying, “I will not commit to anything until I see maps.”

Stead and Mexicotte expressed concern that not eliminating high school busing would be risky. “If we shoot for $1.2 million [in savings], we’ll get $1 million,” said Mexicotte. “I want to try to get the largest savings possible.” Stead argued that the board needed to be prepared for another mid-year funding reduction from the state, even with only the summer months to plan for a big shift in services.

Lightfoot and Stead questioned whether consolidating transportation services with the Washtenaw Intermediate School District (WISD) had saved the district the money it was promised to save. Stead also asked if WISD had any recommendations for AAPS. Allen answered that, other than enforcing the bus stop walk zones, the WISD was considering adding another garage site to cut down on “deadhead miles,” or miles that buses are driven without any students on them.

The only public commentary at the study session was offered on the issue of transportation by Martine Perreault, a representative from the Parent-Teacher-Organization Council (PTOC). She urged the board to consider that the district could lose students in higher numbers than it will gain money by cutting high school busing. She noted that there are numerous private and charter schools in the area, and that these students might choose to attend other schools “that are happy to run a bus to them.”

Possible Budget Amendments: Instructional Staff and Class Sizes

The proposed budget includes a reduction of 70 teaching positions, or FTEs (full-time equivalents), which would raise class sizes at all grade levels by two or three students per classroom. At the June 3 study session, interim deputy superintendent of instruction Lee Ann Dickinson-Kelley proposed adding back 7.7 positions: (1) 6.5 FTEs to address some “uncomfortable” class sizes and split classes at the elementary level created by the proposed reductions; (2) an 0.2 FTE to deliver Reading Apprenticeship (RA) programs in a common way across all middle schools; and (3) 1 FTE for a liaison position at Scarlett Middle School to work with the Mitchell Elementary-Scarlett-University of Michigan partnership.

Dickinson-Kelley acknowledged that adding staff positions is a longer-term commitment than making budget adjustments in transportation. But she argued that raising class sizes to the degree originally suggested in the proposal will make it hard to deliver the curriculum in some cases.

She also explained that some FTEs, such as math support positions in each of the middle schools, could be saved by selectively applying special education funding, and grants from the AAPS Educational Foundation.

Baskett, Lightfoot, and Patalan supported Dickinson-Kelley’s amendment to add 7.7 FTEs back into the budget, though some concern was expressed about funding the Scarlett liaison position. Dickinson-Kelley explained that she was only requesting such funding for one year, after which the duties of the position would be absorbed by other administrators.

Nelson argued that the board can add back in a significantly larger number of FTEs by using the new money expected from the state, as well as maintaining a lower fund equity balance. He suggested adding back at least 20 FTEs, spread over all grades, but being especially conscious of maintaining low class sizes in grades K-2. “The scale of the cuts is too large, in view of the harm we’re doing to students,” he said.

Thomas calculated the numbers differently, and suggested instead that AAPS could afford to hire closer to 12-14 additional teachers. Stead supported that idea, saying she’d rather lower class sizes and cut more in transportation.

Mexicotte noted that Nelson’s suggestion would amount to lessening the class size increase by roughly one student per classroom. She questioned whether the difference of one student per room was worth the cost, rather than saving the money in fund equity.

Thomas then suggested adding back additional FTEs in a more concentrated way rather than across the board, to keep a set of classes at significantly lower levels, such as K-2 or middle school classes.

Allen suggested adding teaching aides instead of teachers to help with the increase in class size.

Mexicotte supported Dickinson-Kelley’s original recommendation of adding back in 7.7 FTEs, but both she and Lightfoot said they would consider adding back more teaching staff if they would be used in a targeted way that would make a real difference, as suggested by Thomas.

There was some discussion of whether it would be fair to hire any new teachers at all, knowing they may all be laid off next year. Mexicotte summed up board sentiment by saying, “This is the ‘crossing that bridge when you come to it’ piece.”

Possible Budget Amendments: Noon-hour Supervision

Trustees questioned the wisdom of the proposed $200,000 of cuts to noon-hour supervision. Dickinson-Kelley explained that the cuts are not actual positions, but represent an accounting shift from district to building management of noon-hour supervision costs. Stead confirmed that the ratio of supervisors to students on the playground will remain 1 to 35.

Nelson expressed concern that principals not be given too much latitude in terms of managing their own budgets without oversight. Joyce Hunter, assistant superintendent for secondary education, said she has been monitoring building-level budgets, and that most of the building-level savings has come from consolidating high-level classes. For example, the highest level world language classes may only be offered at one location instead of in multiple high schools.

Patalan thanked the administrators for participating in the study session, and for being so conscientious in their decision-making and budget recommendations.

All-Day Kindergarten

Another piece of the state budget passed by the legislature was the state’s intention to phase out full funding for kindergarten students, so that beginning in FY 2012-13, districts would receive only half of the per-pupil foundation allowance for half-day kindergarten students.

At the June 3 study session, Mexicotte picked up on a reference made by Nelson at the previous board meeting, and suggested that the board should begin discussing what the district would need to do in order to be able to offer all-day kindergarten at all elementary schools.

Baskett asserted that offering all-day kindergarten was important, saying that “more hours with everyone has a better return,” and that she paid for it for her son when it had not been a standard option. Mexicotte suggested that the board should approach the question of whether or not to offer all-day kindergarten from a philosophical standpoint as well as being driven by a state mandate. It’s a “both/and” proposition, she said.

AAPS offers all-day kindergarten at a handful of elementary schools, and Dickinson-Kelley acknowledged that the district does not currently have the building capacity for all students to be in kindergarten for a full day.

Technology and Construction Millages

Mexicotte said the board should give more consideration to increasing revenue, and asked trustees to weigh in on whether or not AAPS should consider proposing a new millage to voters this November. She suggested that prospective thinking about all-day kindergarten, which would require construction of new classrooms at some buildings, could be bundled with a bond to fund an update of the district’s technology.

Mexicotte also recommended that AAPS consider working with the new superintendent of the Washtenaw Intermediate School District (WISD) on another enhancement millage to “backfill around our [decreasing] special education funding.” Though state law currently prohibits individual school districts from enacting a millage to cover operational expenses, ISDs are allowed to request such a levy from voters countywide, with funds then distributed proportionally to member districts. Individual districts are only allowed to request a tax increase from their residents to fund capital improvements.

Stead responded favorably to the idea of a construction and technology bond, but cautioned that the district should be very thoughtful about what it asks for so that any millage approved will last for as long as possible. Lightfoot agreed, saying the board should “ask for enough to get the job done,” and that if the community votes down the requested amounts, the board can ask again for less.

Nelson, too, asserted, “The excellence of this district is in jeopardy if we don’t look at revenue enhancement.” He noted that the state budget includes huge tax breaks, and provides for “amazingly lower public services in response.” All a millage would do, he said, is transfer a small fraction of the state tax breaks back into education.

Stead also asserted that the defunding of education in this state budget provides an opportunity to reinvigorate the push for legislative reform that has gained momentum this year. “We need to negotiate hard … We need local level authority [for operational expenses],” she said.

Thomas said he would support a technology bond, and that “people in this community understand the importance of technology.” He also reminded the board of a recent discussion they had while debating the purchase of a new assessment tool for the district in which the cost of the product license was dwarfed by the cost it would take to purchase the technology to use it. Thomas was less confident about the need for new construction to facilitate all-day kindergarten, asking, “What would we really need, and how much would it cost?”

Lightfoot and Baskett each also questioned whether construction and technology millages should be bundled. Baskett suggested that the technology was “a no-brainer,” but that she was not certain the community would support all-day kindergarten for everyone. She also noted that the incoming superintendent, Patricia Green, was going to be “hit with everything at once.”

Patalan said that, while she supports countywide consolidation efforts, she would be “delighted” to ask only AAPS voters (not the whole WISD district)  for something. “I think our neighbors, our friends, our colleagues are really friends of education. Our community would enjoy the conversation.”

Mexicotte said she would direct the board’s executive committee to look into scheduling further board discussion of possible millages.

Allen reminded the board that planning a budget is only making a “best guess,” and that the process requires continual adjustment throughout the year.

Present: President Deb Mexicotte, vice president Susan Baskett, secretary Andy Thomas, treasurer Irene Patalan, and trustees Simone Lightfoot, Christine Stead, and Glenn Nelson.

Next regular meeting: Wednesday, June 8, 2011, 7 p.m., at the fourth-floor conference room of the downtown Ann Arbor District Library, 343 S. Fifth Ave. [confirm date]