Ruth Kraut

And then, come November and December, I realize that once again, I failed to spread out my giving – and I had better pull out my checkbook. Writing the bulk of these checks at the end of the year has a benefit, in that it allows me to look at all of my donations at once. But it also means that I’m in a rush and I don’t always take the time to reflect. So this is my opportunity.

Like many of you, we make donations to local, national, and international groups that focus on a wide range of issues. For us, those organizations do work related to health, the environment, politics, women’s issues, Jewish groups, social action, human services, and more.

Although I do give to some groups that, loosely speaking, fit the category of “education,” those entities do not make up a significant proportion of our donations. I confess to a certain ambivalence to giving to such groups – because, in many ways, I’m already a big contributor to public education. And it’s likely that you are, too.

In this column, I discuss the concept of donations – both voluntary (to charitable causes) and involuntary (through taxes). I talk about ways that most of us are already contributing, and provide some information that will help you give even more, if you’re so inclined.

When I sent an early draft of this piece to Steven Norton, an Ann Arbor resident and executive director of Michigan Parents for Schools, he shared this thought: “I’m not sure I agree that we are ‘donating’ to the schools, in the sense that this means an optional charitable contribution. I don’t feel like I’m donating when I help pay for police or fire services, or road maintenance.” He then referred to a quote by Oliver Wendell Holmes: “Taxes are the price we pay for a civilized society.”

His comments sent me straight to the dictionary – several dictionaries, in fact – looking for the distinction between donate and contribute. It wasn’t an easy search to find exactly what I was looking for.

For instance, the Merriam-Webster online dictionary defines donate as a verb that means “to give (money, food, clothes, etc.) in order to help a person or organization,” and “to make a gift of, especially: to contribute to a public or charitable cause.” That certainly implies a voluntary aspect. Yet a synonym for donate is contribute, “to give or supply in common with others.” In other words, contribute may or may not have a voluntary aspect.

Certainly, taxes are not voluntary, but they are contributions to a common cause. So in this column, when I use the term donor, donate or donation, I mean it in the sense of contributing to an important common good – public education.

The Property Tax Conundrum: I’m A Big Donor

I already give thousands of dollars to the vast educational enterprise that is Michigan’s public education system – as do many of you. Most of the sales tax I pay, a portion of my income tax, and the majority of my property taxes go to education. If you live in Ann Arbor, your tax bill includes line items for the State Education Tax, the Ann Arbor Public Schools, the Washtenaw Intermediate School District, and Washtenaw Community College.

More than 20 years ago – when I first became a homeowner – the taxes I paid for public schools actually went directly to the Ann Arbor Public Schools. In 1994, though, all of that changed with the passage of Proposal A.

The goal of that 1994 statewide ballot initiative was to create more equitable funding across all districts and to keep property taxes from escalating dramatically. But Proposal A took away most local control over school funding, though districts can still request voter approval to levy local millages for building construction, repairs, and maintenance – not, however, for operating expenses.

The state collects taxes directly from residential and non-residential property owners – 6 mills each, annually – and pools that money into the state’s School Aid Fund (SAF), which also includes revenues from sales and income taxes, state lottery revenue and other sources. Out of this fund, the state pays local school districts a per-pupil allotment – a variable amount set by the state legislature that can increase or decrease each year. In addition, state law controls the amount of taxes that school districts can levy directly – those that are not pooled into the SAF. Beyond the 6 mills that go into the SAF, for example, there’s an additional tax on non-residential property owners, but the state caps that tax at 18 mills.

Both the funding from non-SAF local property taxes and from the total School Aid Fund are factored into an amount called the per-pupil “foundation allowance.” This amount varies by district. Ann Arbor’s per-pupil funding for the current fiscal year, which began July 1, is $9,050 for each student. It accounts for most of the district’s revenues, with other revenues including the district’s share of a countywide special education millage and from federal grants. The per-pupil funding has been stagnant or falling for the last decade.

State per-pupil funding chart. (Source: Michigan Parents for Schools)

Because of Michigan’s complex system of funding public schools and the fact that Ann Arbor is a relatively affluent community, today Ann Arbor is – as AAPS board member Christine Stead is rightly fond of explaining – a “donor district.” That is, Ann Arbor taxpayers are paying more into the statewide system than the district receives back in state aid. Steve Norton of Michigan Parents for Schools told me that AAPS gets back from the state less than half – about 47% – of what local taxpayers actually pay to the state for education.

I find the “per-pupil” approach to funding to be particularly frustrating. It’s often an unfair way to allocate funding, because although incremental costs change with the addition or subtraction of kids to a school, many of the base costs don’t change. For instance, when Pfizer closed its large research operation in Ann Arbor several years ago, many families moved out of this community. The children in those families left AAPS schools – along with the per-pupil funding for those students. Although funding dropped because of those departures, the fixed costs for educating the thousands of remaining students didn’t decrease proportionately.

When it comes to per-pupil funding, my family has been an exceptionally big contributor. For the past 15-plus years, I’ve had 1, 2, or 3 kids enrolled in the public schools, and each of my kids has brought their per-pupil “foundation” allowance. So my family is a “donor” to public schools in two ways – as part of the larger property-taxed community, and as a family that has chosen to stay in the public school system.

In some ways, I don’t mind being a “donor” to the state’s public school system, which includes supporting districts that are much poorer than AAPS. For example, my taxes are supporting the Kalkaska schools [1] – and really, I don’t mind (too much) paying for that.

But I do mind that Ann Arbor taxpayers can no longer levy additional millages to pay for operating expenses for our own Ann Arbor Public Schools.

And as an aside, I also mind that my taxes are supporting the Education Achievement Authority, an entity that the state uses to take over schools that are designated as failing. For a longer and fairly neutral analysis of the EAA, I’d suggest reading this piece from the Michigan Policy Network. You’ll find a more critical view at the Inside the EAA website – which includes EAA documents obtained through the Michigan Freedom of Information Act by state legislators and others trying to counteract the authority’s secrecy.

The Parent Conundrum: I’m (Still) A Big Donor

But taxes aren’t the only way I contribute to local education. As a parent, I’m constantly being asked to donate to school-related activities. Certain expenses that I pay have directly or indirectly benefited my children. Those costs include paying $500 for my son to play high school basketball ($280 for the district’s registration fee and pay-to-play, plus other team-related costs), field trip expenses, and PTO dues.

I feel like I get milked dry by these costs – and it doesn’t make me want to jump up with donations for other activities. Over the past several years, I have spent thousands of dollars on school-related activities. Luckily, I can afford these expenses – and I understand that many families aren’t so fortunate.

Yes, I know. I signed up for having kids, and my kids are lucky to have these opportunities. So no, I’m not complaining. I’m just explaining why it is that when someone suggests I pay even more, I think: Wait a second – I’m already paying for the essentials, as a taxpayer, and as a parent who sends my kids to these schools. And I’m already paying for the extras – at least, those that involve my children. You want me to pay even more?

Must I Donate Again?

One way that we’re asked to pay even more is through donations to nonprofit foundations. Most of our local school districts, for example, have affiliated nonprofit educational foundations that solicit contributions. Historically, these foundations have been used for enrichment activities – not for core operating expenses.

Locally, that started to change in 2009 when a countywide operating millage – the only kind permitted under Proposal A – was defeated. (It passed in Ann Arbor, but failed in much of the rest of the county.) After that defeat, the Ann Arbor Public Schools Educational Foundation decided to try to take up the slack with its “A Million Reasons” campaign. The name came from the idea that if everyone who supported the millage just gave the foundation the same amount of money that they would have paid in new taxes, the district would be in good shape. But that didn’t happen – and the campaign fell short of its fundraising goal that was intended to help with the basics of public education.

“Oh no,” my friend Laurie said to me as we discussed this on my annual Thanksgiving trip to my hometown. Laurie is on the board of her local educational foundation. “That doesn’t make any sense. Taxes are meant to fund schools. Local school foundations should focus on the extras.”

Now in fairness to the AAPS Educational Foundation, Laurie lives in a state that funds schools more generously, and in a district that probably gets more than twice as much as Ann Arbor does, per pupil.

But I’ll admit to sharing Laurie’s squeamishness. And the idea of the foundation spending so much social capital to raise only one million dollars – when the Ann Arbor schools budget is around $180 million – was never persuasive to me.

On the other hand, when I shared this perspective with Steve Norton via email, he noted that “personal donations are a last resort when the normal course of public policy has failed completely to meet the needs of our communities.” While he agreed with my friend that education foundations should pay for the “extras,” he also pointed to California, where local education foundations often pay for basics like salaries of whole programs – such as gym, music and art. The cause for California’s situation is similar to Michigan, he noted: a state tax system that was changed to strangulate public services. (In the case of California, their crisis was prompted by Prop 13.) “I hope we never get to that point,” Norton wrote to me, “but we are certainly headed in that direction.”

To me, the idea of asking educational foundations to make up a shortfall in public funding is a tough sell. However, the ideal that schools should be publicly funded is being challenged – and that’s still my ideal, and my values. And charitable giving is all about reflecting your ideals and values.

Multiple Ways to Give Even More

None of this is meant to imply that you shouldn’t donate to public schools, or to the broader educational enterprise. It is possible to donate directly to your local school district, without an educational foundation as an intermediary. The Ann Arbor Public Schools system has a donation policy, and probably most other local school districts do as well.

Many music teachers, for instance, will happily provide a new home for a serviceable instrument. (We donated my husband’s cello, which he stopped playing many, many years ago. His mother had maintained it in meticulous condition, hoping against hope that a grandchild would pick it up. They didn’t.)

The basic rule of thumb is, if you are interested in donating an item to a school, check with the building administrator to make sure it would be useful. And, of course, the schools also will gladly accept direct financial support – last year, for example, the Argus Planetarium at Pioneer High was renovated using a direct donation.

Or if you want to donate to one of the local educational foundations, here are links to several in Washtenaw County: the Ann Arbor Public Schools Educational Foundation; the Chelsea Education Foundation; the Educational Foundation of Dexter; the Manchester Community Schools Foundation; the Foundation for Saline Area Schools; the Whitmore Lake Foundation for Educational Excellence; and the Ypsilanti Community Schools Foundation.

Nearly every school – maybe every school – has a parent-teacher organization (PTO), and generally they are also 501(c)3 nonprofits. So if you want to support your local school, you can give directly to the PTO. The PTO directs its funds to the programs or activities that the parents and teachers want to support. Some of the PTOs have very elaborate fundraising activities. The Burns Park Run, for example, raises money to support the Burns Park Elementary PTO programs, and Ann Arbor Open has turned Scrip into a high art form. Even if they don’t have organized fundraising efforts, all PTOs can use your support.

Perhaps you have a special place in your heart for the arts, or for environmental issues. Most of the schools have special funds (or a special nonprofit – yes, many of these are auxiliary groups with nonprofit status) to fund music, theater, athletics, and more. And the Ann Arbor Area Community Foundation has an environmental education fund that is meant to support the Ann Arbor schools.

Finally, there are many organizations that support kids and families, in ways both academically-related and in fighting poverty. For instance, groups like Peace Neighborhood Center, Avalon Housing, and Community Action Network support low-income families in particular neighborhoods with after-school tutoring. The Student Advocacy Center fights for kids at risk of, or threatened with, suspension and expulsion. And other organizations, like 826 Michigan, bring after-school tutoring to the masses. (A special shout-out to 826 Michigan for pairing up with the Ypsilanti cafe Beezy’s, which is open for breakfast and lunch, and then provides a space for 826 Michigan’s after-school tutoring.)

I don’t mean to give an exhaustive list, but rather to share some examples. Please do add to these ideas in the comments section.

Giving, Getting, and Governing

I’ve explained how I’m already a big contributor to the schools. But it’s not just that we give a lot. We get a lot, too – and so do residents who don’t have kids. I don’t mean that in a high-level, theoretical “we-want-good-schools” way. I mean that in an economic sense. That’s because perceptions of schools are major drivers of property values, and property values affect much more than schools.

So in the next few days, we will give to some school-related causes, and you might too. But remember – the bulk of school funding comes through the state, and that funding has been slashed over and over again in the past decade.

Perhaps the most effective donation you can make is your donation of time and effort to convince legislators to provide more funding to public schools. That’s how public schools get funding, and where reform will need to occur if we want the current situation to improve.

Keeping our public schools both public and nonprofit, at this point, requires a lot of advocacy. In my opinion, two excellent sources of information are Michigan Parents for Schools and the Tri-County Alliance for Public Education.

I’ve been writing about year-end donations, and when the year ends, a lot of people turn to New Year’s resolutions, too. While you are making your list of resolutions, I hope you’ll make room for one more thing: advocating for public, nonprofit schools. I hope you’ll advocate for schools that are for children, not for corporations or for-profit charter chains. And I hope you’ll advocate for adequate funding.

Whether you’re a donor, an advocate, or both, this I believe: together, we can make a difference.

Notes

[1] I’m not picking on the Kalkaska schools. Kalkaska became the poster child for school funding reform when it closed its doors early in the spring of 1993 after the latest of several attempts at passing an operating millage failed. [For more background, read this March 6, 1993 article in the Ludington Daily News.] Proposal A was the product of efforts to equalize school funding regardless of local tax base, coupled with then-Gov. John Engler’s promise to reduce property taxes.

Ruth Kraut is an Ann Arbor resident and parent of three children who have all attended the Ann Arbor Public Schools. She writes at Ann Arbor Schools Musings (a2schoolsmuse.blogspot.com) about education issues in Ann Arbor, Washtenaw County, and Michigan.

The Chronicle relies in part on regular voluntary subscriptions to support our local reporting and columnists. Check out 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!

Jeff Irwin, representative for District 53 of the Michigan state House of Representatives, met with constituents at Espresso Royale in downtown Ann Arbor last Saturday. (Photos by the writer.)

In each of the first two months of his term, Irwin has held meetings for constituents in local Ann Arbor coffee houses – Cafe Verde and Espresso Royale. On Saturday, Feb. 26, The Chronicle caught up with Irwin after his talk with constituents and spoke with him for about an hour. The conversation included a discussion of Gov. Rick Snyder’s proposed budget overview. [.pdf of budget overview]

In presenting the interview below, The Chronicle’s conversation with Irwin has been reorganized and edited in some places to achieve greater coherence and focus.

Last Saturday, Rep. Jeff Irwin (D-53rd District) entertained questions and concerns from constituents on a variety of topics, including local interest in the future use of the top of the underground parking structure, which is under construction on the city-owned Library Lot between Fifth and Division streets.

Three blocks east from Irwin’s conversation with constituents, a constant parade of concrete mixers on Division Street headed south across Liberty to the east edge of the Library Lot construction site. They dumped their loads into a pump, and through the course of the day, workers poured around 6,300 cubic yards of concrete. Coincidentally, in his subsequent conversation with The Chronicle, Irwin introduced images involving concrete and construction – he was drawing an analogy between teacher contracts and construction contracts.

We’ve chronicled this conversation in a Q&A format, divided into seven sections: (1) a budget bright spot in Medicaid; (2) education as an area of concern; (3) a lack of sufficient, specific goals associated with the budget; (4) labor relations in general; (5) labor relations in Washtenaw County; (6) Irwin’s relationship with former fellow county commissioner Mark Ouimet, a Republican who’s also now a state rep; and (7) a partisan imbalance in committee appointments.

Budget Bright Spot: Medicaid

AAC: In terms of sound, Espresso Royale is really poor for eavesdropping. I was just trying to hang out on the periphery [of your conversation with constituents], and I was basically just able to identify general topics.

But I did hear you say there is one bright spot in the governor’s budget. Which is?

Irwin: Oh, you didn’t hear what I said about that? Basically it’s related to Medicaid. There was a question that came up about Medicaid funding and what the direction was on that. And everything that I have seen in the governor’s budget so far is that he is not looking at hitting Medicaid – which is really good for a number of reasons.

It’s good obviously for the health care community. It’s good for the folks who are receiving the benefit, and it’s also good because every dollar we spend on Medicaid … usually Washington D.C. is sending you two or three dollars to match that. Conversely, every dollar that we cut out of Medicaid, means instead of losing one worker, we are losing three workers. …

Budget: Why Reduce Education Allocations?

Irwin: [The proposed budget] actually has more than a 15% cut [in higher education].

AAC: I thought it was 15%.

Irwin: I have heard an even bigger number recently, but the number I understand is actually 22%. The way they get to the 15% is that it’s a 15% flat cut to everybody, period. Then there is another 7% cut to add up to the total of a 22% cut. The other 7% cut is being put into a best practices thing – sort of like with the local government business. So if you do certain things at the university, you get access to that 7%.

AAC: And when you say the “local government business,” you are talking about taking the statutory state shared revenue, eliminating it, and replacing it with …

Irwin: … a competitive something that no one knows what the details are, yet. Right. And they’re doing the same thing in the university setting with that other 7%. So there is really a 22% cut. Now, the other day I heard a 26% number, but I don’t know where that comes from yet. But truth be told, I’m still trying to make sure that I understand these numbers and what they really mean, because …

AAC: … so it’s too soon to be trying to figure out, “All right, let’s not cut higher education and instead do something else”?

Irwin: Not necessarily. At the big level of talking about the concepts and not getting into the level of detail about this precise dollar, there has been some thinking put into that. … If you are going to bring in $1.5 billion in revenue – $1 billion in new taxes on pensions and another $330 million in new taxes on the working poor – then there is plenty of money to not cut education.

The reason why the governor’s budget has to cut so deeply in education, even with all that new tax increase, is because he also wants to give a huge tax increase to the corporate community.

So what I would say …  my initial counterproposal is: How will that we fix the Michigan Business Tax in a revenue-neutral way? How do we make it a simpler tax – that’s a good idea. But let’s do it in a way that is revenue neutral. That way we don’t have to pay for it with a $1.5 billion tax cut for the corporate community, and we can use that money to invest in what is really going to drive economic development and jobs in Michigan, which is education. … [Gov. Snyder] campaigned on the idea that we want to create a climate for economic growth, we want Michigan to be a more prosperous place …

AAC: … Michigan is  open for business …

Irwin: … right. We want to create this fertile environment for people to be prosperous, right? And then his first major proposal is to cut the heart out of what is the single most important element of prosperity and economic growth, which is a good education system!

Nobody wants to move to a place, and nobody wants to bring their company to a place, where they are not going to be able to attract talented workers, and where they are not going to have their kids be able to go to good schools and that sort of thing, right?

Now, that’s not true of every industry. There are some industries where a lower tax rate is the only thing. And there are some industries for whom recruiting top talent is the most important thing. Interestingly, I would say that we as a state, our strategy should be to go after as many of those business development and economic opportunities at the end of the scale where top talent is their priority. Because those are the best jobs, and the longest-lasting jobs, and jobs that really relate to the knowledge-based economy and all that kind of stuff, right?

Whereas some of these folks, who care only about what your tax rate is, those are the lowest paying jobs, with the least economic spinoff, without the health benefits – it’s like mining or something where they just want to be able to suck that rock out of the ground at the lowest possible rate, pay the lowest possible royalties, and the lowest possible taxes, and then head back to wherever Rio Tinto’s [a mining company] headquarters is.

AAC: At the Ann Arbor Downtown Development Authority’s economic development committee meeting last week on Wednesday, Jennifer Owens from Ann Arbor SPARK gave a presentation to the committee, giving them an overview of what SPARK does. And one of the things they do is they make recruiting visits to convince companies to expand their operations to Ann Arbor.

[Note: In 2010 four such trips were made, which resulted in four companies deciding to expand operations to the Ann Arbor area, which translates into 170 jobs, according to Owens. In addition to the four expansions due to recruitment trips, SPARK also counts an additional 10 expansions to the Ann Arbor area as a part of its recruitment program. ]

And someone asked her, “What is the thing that is the tipping point? What cinches the deal for Ann Arbor, when we manage to cinch a deal?” Her answer was: availability of talent.

But Ann Arbor is way different than the rest of Michigan. … I’m just trying to suggest that perhaps what is self-evidently a good public [education] policy for the Ann Arbor region may not be the best public policy for the entire state.

Irwin: I totally disagree, and here’s why. Because it’s not just about higher ed and universities, it’s also about K-12. People want to live somewhere where they know their kids are going to go to good schools. The decline of Detroit is all wrapped up in racial acrimony and other issues, industrial disinvestment and all that stuff – there’s a lot of things going on in the decline of the city of Detroit. But one of the big things is as you try to attract young professionals back into the city, it’s really hard, because if they want to ever have kids, they don’t want to send their kids to a school district that has the worst statistics in terms of achievement.

I don’t know if you’re familiar with the gentleman named Myron Orfield, who was a Minneapolis state senator …  he did some groundbreaking research about 20 years ago. He wrote this book called “Metro Politics” about the Minneapolis-St. Paul region, and he tried to make the argument – very successfully, I think –that schools drive economic development. I think that’s true for K-12, and K-12 is all over the state.

And the other thing is, we’re talking about macroeconomics right now, right? And the goal of the state on one level should be to try to create this macroeconomic climate for growth in Michigan and help everybody be more prosperous, maximize our gross state product – I mean, that is a macroeconomic statement.

But there’s also the microeconomic side of it, right? The state is supposed to be working for the people of the state of Michigan, all of the people of the state of Michigan, and if we provide the people of the state of Michigan individually with education that gives them the training and the skills and knowledge to be successful individually in their lives – both in the job environment and in the home environment, and in every other environment in which they may seek to operate – that’s a benefit to those people individually. … So that’s my argument.

Better Budget Metrics

Irwin: What I think [Snyder] should have done as governor would be to say: “I’ve analyzed the situation in the state of Michigan, and here are our goals, here’s what we’re trying to accomplish, here’s what we think success looks like for the state of Michigan. So as we measure all these metrics that I like to talk about, here’s what’s that is all supposed to add up to.”

He didn’t do that. And I think that if he had done that, he would have been forced to reckon with the value of education in driving prosperity and the value of things like arts and culture.

ACC: When you say “goals,” what are some examples of the kind of goals you mean?

Irwin: … We want to graduate X-percent of our people from high school, we’d like to graduate this percent from college and we would like them when they graduate from high school to have this level of proficiency in these basic areas.

AAC: Hasn’t he done that with this budget proposal? Every section has metrics and scores, right?

[Irwin pulls out the budget proposal document. Leafing through it, AAC and Irwin identify the kind of pages mentioned by AAC. Irwin clarifies that 1,2,3 in the lefthand column are not scores, but rather keys to the types of measures: 1 = effectiveness measure; 2 = efficiency measure; 3 = quality measure. The trend arrows indicate a measure that is stable (horizontal, double-ended arrow), going the opposite of the desired direction (downward arrow), or improving (upward arrow).]

Example of metrics included in Gov. Snyder's 2012-13 budget proposal overview. (Image links to .pdf page of Dept. of Corrections metric detail.)

So for each of these items … for the things that are headed in the right direction, I think that implicit in this proposal is that we want to keep those things headed in the same direction. For anything that has performance stable, the goal is to make it better, and for those areas where performance is going down, the goal is to reverse that trend, like this – average cost per prisoner per year, $34,600 …

… so didn’t he already do what you are saying he should have done?

Irwin: What’s missing here is the number of people who are incarcerated. What’s missing here is the number of violent crimes going down. I feel that [Gov. Snyder] picked just a few things for these gigantic issue areas. There could be 200 metrics on this page, easily.

Of course he’s got to pick less than that, because that’s just insane, so he cherry-picked ones that he thinks are going to be easy to demonstrate progress with, rather than picking the important ones. Are these really the most important metrics for prison operations? I don’t think so. Cost is going to be one of the top ones … that’s one of the core ones. But … we’re talking about .07 escapes per 1,000 prisoners? This is not one of the top-line metrics for state government, in my opinion.

[reading aloud] “Prisoners past their earliest release dates who are on waiting lists for assaultive or sex offender therapy programs.” I guess that’s a fine metric, but is that the only quality measure that we’re going to look at?

Maybe they picked this one, because it’s a negative trend and they think they can turn it around by focusing on sex offender therapy programs, which is a tiny part of the budget. We should be talking about reducing recidivism. Reducing recidivism – I mean, that is the game in corrections. The reason why our corrections costs are insane, blowing the budget, is because we have two big problems – it’s not that there’s more crime, it’s not that there’s more violent crime, it’s not that there’s more people entering the criminal justice system. It’s that people stay in the system longer – average length of stay is way up – and the recidivism rate is way up.

So we have the same people revolving through and through for longer and longer. That is the core problem, and it’s not even recognized on his metrics – that’s what I’m talking about. And I think the same thing is true in a number of other areas.

… The metrics that, to me, are the most important in terms of effectiveness in education should be about student achievement, student graduation, class sizes, quality of teachers – if there’s a good way to measure that. Those are the kinds of things we need to measure.

And when you look at his proposal, I don’t see any result – given the money that’s being appropriated to K-12 – other than larger class sizes, and less attention being given to individual students. It’s been proven in study after study that the most important input to student achievement that the government has influence over is the quality of the teachers.

And the Republicans are in open warfare on teachers, across the board.

So this budget proposal is just one manifestation of that. I think that’s backwards. I think the state should be trying to work with teachers, lock arms with them and say, “How can we work together on making our kids be more educated and more successful people as they grow up?”

From Teachers to Labor in General …

AAC: When you say “open warfare on teachers,” what do you mean specifically?

Irwin: There are a number of things. One is gigantic cuts to education, which is going to mean more teachers will lose their jobs.

Two, the emergency financial manager bill, which has the effect of allowing the state to take over a school district, cancel all the union contracts, carte blanche.

Item number three is they’re trying to obviate the collective bargaining agreements, by legislatively requiring public employees in certain areas, including schools, to make certain contributions to their health care or their pension.

For instance, here’s a scenario for you. You and I are teachers. We have negotiated with the Ann Arbor Public Schools district for a certain rate, total compensation that includes benefits, wages, and all the fringes, work conditions, etc. And say it’s on a five-year contract. And then one year into the contract, the state legislature comes along and says, “Sorry, Dave and Jeff, we’ve determined outside of the collective bargaining agreement – that you just hammered out with your local school district – that you’re going to make an additional 20% contribution to your health care costs, because we think your health care costs are too high.”

That’s not a conversation that should be taking place in that way. It’s pulling the rug out from underneath collective bargaining agreements.

The analog to that would be to say if the state had a construction contract with Clark Construction to build a new building and they were submitting receipts to us, right? They build this building for us, and they finish, and they’ve got $1 million in outstanding receipts. And we say, “We don’t really think that concrete was worth $1 million. We think that concrete was worth $800,000, so that’s what we’re paying you, because we just passed a law after you built the building.”

AAC: That would save us a lot of money. [laugh]

Irwin: Wouldn’t it! But no one would ever think of doing that. Because breaking a contract in a private industry kind of relationship, that’s unthinkable.

AAC: … but as I understand the proposal, it’s to go into a collective bargaining contract and say, Okay from this point forward now, you’ll be paying more.

Irwin: Okay, the rest of your contract is void, we’ve replaced it, so a better analogy is …

AAC: … you go in and you say to Clark Construction, “Oh, the concrete you’ve already poured for $100 per yard, you will get paid for that. But for future yards of concrete that you pour, you get $80 a yard.” And Clark could say, “You know what? Screw that. I don’t want to be in this business anymore, or I’ll go pour my concrete someplace else in some other state.”

Irwin: We’ve already promised to pay them the same rate for the rest of the concrete, and we change the deal in the middle of the work?

AAC: Right. So that’s a better analogy than the one you sketched out. It’s one I think I can imagine people at least maybe arguing about, whereas the one you sketched out, you really just can’t argue about.

Irwin: Well, your analogy is better, so let’s use yours. We have a contract with Clark and it’s to pay them $100 per yard of concrete … I still think that there’s a strong analogy there. If we have a contract for $1 million to pour concrete, and they pour half the concrete, and then for the second half we say, “We’re only going to pay you $400,000 for that. You can stop in the middle if you want??”

AAC: Well, that’s not the way contract law works, as I understand it.

Irwin: No, of course not. But that’s what the Republicans are doing.

… and to Labor Relations in Washtenaw County

AAC: Okay, maybe that’s a knuckleheaded way of approaching it. But in the final analysis, the unions do need to make concessions, not just for the health of their unions, but for the health of the communities where they work.

Irwin: And they agree. And they do. Time and time again. That happened at [Washtenaw County when I was a commissioner]. And part of the reason that happened was that we had a respectful management-labor relationship and we said, “Look, the money situation has changed, so we need you to come to the table and renegotiate.” And you know what the unions do? They come to the table and they renegotiate. But when you tell them …

AAC: … in the county, perhaps they do. But in the city of Ann Arbor, I don’t know if you’re familiar with what they’re doing.

What the city is calling it – and I think it’s a fair label to put on their strategy – is to “align the budget strategy with the labor strategy.” They’ve said, “Here’s what we need. We need our open contracts to settle with no wage increases and with an additional contribution to the benefit plan, the same benefit plan that our non-union workers are on – and the same plan that some of our other unions have actually adopted. So we’re not asking you firefighters and police to adopt anything that others haven’t already accepted at the city. … So on that scenario, we still have a 2.5% reduction target.” So every department, their first task is to identify 2.5% in reductions. For departments that have workers not on the new city plan – which has increased contributions from workers to their health care – those departments are given an extra task, possibly up to a 4.0% reduction target. So police and fire … their reduction target is effectively 4.0%.

So that’s where it sits. And if I had to guess, those contracts would not be settled and signed before the city completes its budget process this year, and it’ll be settled by Act 312 arbitration.

Irwin: Probably.

AAC: What’s the difference between the city and the county? Did [recently retired county administrator] Bob Guenzel have a magic wand? And if so, did he hand it off to Verna McDaniel [the current county administrator]?

Irwin: Time will tell on that second question. Did he have a magic wand? No, but I mean, you probably know that before he was county administrator, he was corporation counsel and the lead person on labor negotiations. And before that he was a private attorney who was hired to do labor negotiations for various entities. So Bob came into the role of administrator keenly aware of the benefits of a positive labor-management relationship. And he worked very hard at that for 15 years in maintaining it.

Now will Verna be able to have the relationship with the union leaders? I think there’s a high likelihood of that. That was one of the biggest pluses that she brought to the table – that she had been human resources director, before she was deputy administrator, and she had a lot of experience with the labor-management piece and the human resources piece of the organization. And Washtenaw County, I think, has always had – at least the whole time I was there – a strong ethic of we’re-all-in-this-together, management and labor all work together to serve the people, and transparency and mutual respect.

When you maintain that transparency and mutual respect, when it’s real and not just stated, it makes a difference. Then when you go to a union and you say, “Our revenues are way down, we’re in a tough spot. There’s only so many answers – here’s what we think are the answers. Do you have any other potential answers you’d like to add to the list of answers? Because we’re eventually going to have to pick one of these, and neither of us really love any of these. So let’s work together.” … And after several months of doing that, sometimes you actually get to an amicable solution.

How Do You Have a Conversation?

AAC: So back to the budget, you’ve got 109 other [representatives in the state House] that you’ve got to have a conversation with, if you can. One of those is somebody you served on the Washtenaw County board of commissioners with. How many years were you and Mark Ouimet on the same board?

Irwin: Six.

AAC: So six out of the 12 years you were on the board?

Irwin: I was there for 11, actually. I came in on an odd year, in ’99. And Mark came along, I believe, in 2004.

AAC: So you have six years of experience working with him.

Irwin: And he’s right next door to me, too.

AAC: When you say “next door,” you mean …?

Irwin: Our offices in the House office building. They start out one, two, three all the way up to 110. So…

AAC: … so it goes 52 [Ouimet's district number], 53 [Irwin's district number] …

Irwin: … so we are right next to each other, yeah.

AAC: So if you need to talk to a Republican, there is one right next door, who will actually answer the door when you knock.

Irwin: Yes, he’s willing to have a conversation with me, usually.

AAC: Usually? [laugh]

Irwin: Well, yeah, I mean, sometimes people are busy!

AAC: So Mark is obviously not like an inside man for you in the Republican Party, but  he is somebody who is a Republican. And if there are bridges to be built or foundations to be built on, he would be a logical choice, yes?

Irwin: Yes, of course. Mark is a friend and he is willing to talk with me about these issues and that is valuable. That relationship has value to me.

AAC: Have you seen any ways in which that relationship has benefited citizens of Michigan already?

Irwin: That relationship? I’m not entirely sure, because it’s hard to evaluate, particularly this early. But there have definitely been some issues that we have talked about, where I have expressed some concerns about maybe the process, where I’ve expressed concerns about the details of certain bills that have been going through.

Did that alter his thinking about them? I’m not entirely sure – it’s hard for me to know exactly. But it certainly may have. And I think that one of the things that Mark brings to the table regardless of how he votes on issues and everything is sort of a culture of civility and decency to the loyal opposition. I don’t know for a fact, but I think that internal to his caucus, he’s probably saying, “Well, you know, we want to vanquish our enemies, but we do not need to burn down their villages and take their women.”

AAC: So on the Washtenaw County board of commissioners, he was the loyal opposition. [When Ouimet and Irwin served, Ouimet was one of two Republicans on the 11-member board.]

Irwin: I think that is maybe part of it too, that he knows what it’s like to be in the minority. And he knows that sometimes when you’re in the minority, but you have valid points to make, and when the majority actually listens to you and maybe takes some of those valid points, then maybe it’s good for the world, it’s good for public policy. Mark told me that when I was chair of the [Washtenaw County] board, he felt welcomed into the conversation and I certainly worked hard to welcome him into the conversation. Because I think that’s what a good leader does.

Do we still have that relationship? Yeah. Is the shoe on the other foot now? Yeah. Could the goodwill and a good relationship that I have built up with him be somehow helpful on a public policy concern? I certainly hope so. Has it already? I’m not sure that it has. But we have talked about some things.

AAC: Have any of those things been about the budget?

Irwin: No, we haven’t talked about the budget. That budget bomb dropped a week ago now. You know, the numbers themselves didn’t come out until midweek this week … I have not talked to Mark about it at all. I may have talked to him about it in passing, you know, “Holy Cow, the governor is really taking it out on education isn’t he?!” Maybe like the kind of passing shot like that, but no real conversation about that yet.

Stacking the Appropriations Committee

AAC: What is the breakdown of Democrats and Republicans on the Appropriations Committee?

Irwin: This is one of the dirty little secrets hasn’t really been talked about statewide…

AAC: … you can talk about it right now.

Irwin: That’s what I’m going to do! When the Republican Speaker [James "Jase" Bolger] assumed the power to populate the committees structure in this latest session …

AAC: … but, to be clear, this is an ordinary power, right? He’s not grabbing power, when he came into this role – it’s the power that anybody as Speaker has …

Irwin: … precisely. This is the normal role of the Speaker, to choose how many Democrats and Republicans are on each committee. And what the Speaker did was he pushed the envelope – further than I have ever seen it, at least, and further than the last Democratic speaker – pushed it in terms of what the balance of Democrats versus Republicans is going to be on all these committees.

So even though there are 47 Democrats and 63 Republicans in the House of Representatives – meaning that the ratio is not even 1.5:1 – the ratio of Republicans to Democrats on the committees across the board is much greater than that – they are often 2:1. So he pushed the partisan makeup of the committees, both in appropriations and elsewhere, to be even more heavily Republican than the actual body itself is.

AAC: But he could appoint only Republicans if he wanted to.

Irwin: I think he could. But I think that would look so bad that they wouldn’t do that. There may be something in the House rules that says you have to have at least one member – I mean, I have read the rules but I don’t remember all the details.

AAC: What is the breakdown [of Democrats to Republicans] for appropriations?

Irwin: The breakdown for the appropriations committee – I don’t know the total breakdown, we would have to look that up. I don’t know off the top of my head. [Note: For the 27-member appropriations committee, the breakdown is 17 Republicans to 10 Democrats. By way of another example,  the agriculture committee consists of 10 Republicans and six Democrats. .pdf of all standing committee assignments]

But on some of the subcommittees, the ones that are smaller, there will be only one Democrat, and usually three Republicans on some of the subcommittees. Now on some of the bigger subcommittees – like school aid, for instance – I think there’s probably like five Republicans and two Democrats, or like six and three, maybe.

But for the most part, Speaker Bolger pushed the envelope on partisanship with respect to committee assignments, and did almost a 2:1 partisan majority for Republicans on the policy committees and the appropriations committee – when really it should’ve been close to 1.5:1. It’s a huge difference, really.

And the other thing that they are saying very publicly: “If you Democrats want to make amendments, you’ve got to do it in committee. We’re not interested in hearing amendments on the floor – that’s too late. Introduce or amend in committees, that’s the way this process is supposed to work – where we have even a greater part of the majority and we can squelch your amendments even more easily!”

AAC: So the budget is essentially chopped apart at the subcommittee level in appropriations, which in a lot of ways makes it bite-sized chunks…

Irwin: … if your mouth really big…. They are still huge. The school aid budget is $14 billion or something like that.

AAC: But it’s a way of dividing things so that people can focus on, say, one or two or three issues as opposed to 12.

Irwin: Precisely.

AAPS board member Christine Stead at the May 26 board meeting. (Photo by the writer.)

Concerns about state school aid funding emerged throughout the budget discussion, as well as during the rest of the meeting.

In its business for the evening, superintendent Todd Roberts sought input from the board on granting 32 retirement extensions. Four sinking fund projects were approved as part of an extensive consent agenda. A new textbook was suggested for AP biology.

And multiple awards were presented to both AAPS staff and students.

2010-11 Budget and Millage Renewal

Robert Allen, deputy superintendent of operations for AAPS, presented a summarized version of the 1/2-inch thick, line-item budget available for public review at the board office. He described it as very similar to what had been presented in draft form to the board in March, with only slight adjustments based on board input and shifts in accounting regarding American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) funds.

In a review of the March presentation, Allen discussed how AAPS is funded, stressing how frustrating it is to work with such uncertainty in the state budget. “Our next fiscal year begins July 1,” he said, “and today, May 26th, we still don’t have funding set for this year that’s almost over.”

The budget as reviewed on Wednesday included both Part 1, which reduces staff by 82.2 FTEs, and Part 2, which reduces it by an 42 additional FTEs. Together, the two parts of the proposed budget will save the district over $20 million.

Allen noted that Part 2 will only come into play if AAPS is unable to get specific concessions from the teacher’s union, or if the anticipated foundation allowance from the state changes. He held the state specifically accountable for the budget cuts, pointing out the “simple math” that expenditures continue to rise at 5-6% per year, while school funding from the state has grown only 1.3% per year on average since 1994.

2011-11 Budget: Public Commentary

There was one public comment on the budget, which came during general comment time, not during the public hearing on the budget. Priya Menon, a Skyline High School student, expressed concern about the possibility of inconsistent counseling being offered to Skyline students if the pink-slipped counselors there are not called back. She argued that getting all new counselors next year would put this year’s sophomores at a disadvantage when applying for colleges, because the new counselors would not know the students well enough to aid them in finding their “best fit” colleges. Menon asked the board to take that into consideration.

Questions and discussion among board members on the budget centered on two themes – the three-year budget projections that were part of Allen’s report, and budgeting as part of the strategic planning process.

2011-11 Budget: Three-Year Budget Projections

The proposed budget as presented by Allen contained a slide enumerating the three-year projected budget for AAPS. The most notable line was the rapidly diminishing fund equity balance, closing at $20 million in 2010-11, $9 million in 2011-12, and showing a deficit of $4.8 million in 2012-13. Allen noted that these numbers are “very rough.”

Andy Thomas acknowledged that though the numbers were only an estimate, they were “very disturbing.” Saying that in a year, the board would be back in this same room, looking at another $12-15 million budget deficit, he argued, “… we have to look out farther than a year.” Allen concurred, quoting teachers’ union president Brit Satchwell: “You can’t cut your way out of a structural deficit.”

Christine Stead noted that a recent report highlighted the potential for the U.S. to experience a “double dip” recession, which would impact Michigan. Noting that the board could have even bigger challenges ahead, with fund equity becoming  even more important, Stead concluded, “We need to plan for the worst.” She also mentioned that Michigan spends more on prisons than on education. Spending 50% less on education since 1994 cannot ensure sustainability, she said. She suggested that education funding in Michigan needs to shift from supporting manufacturing to supporting a wider knowledge base.

2011-11 Budget: Part of Strategic Planning Process

The board engaged in a somewhat spirited discussion about the ideal timing of the district’s strategic planning process. Trustees Thomas and Susan Baskett were in favor of reconvening the strategic planning teams as soon as possible, but Stead, Irene Patalan, and Glenn Nelson argued that it should not start until fall.

Superintendent Todd Roberts began the discussion by saying the strategic planning process would be reconvened in late August or early September, when “people are back and ready to be engaged.” Baskett suggested that some planning teams start earlier, noting that not everyone goes away for the summer. Thomas added, “How are we going to handle the 2011-12 deficit? … I don’t see how you can separate the strategic plan from the budget plan.”

Baskett also pointed out that the fall is a very busy time for families with school starting, and then soon after that it’s the holiday season. She noted that she thought the strategic planning teams were supposed to reconvene in May, so she was a little surprised by the delay. She agreed with Thomas that the strategic plan and budget plan cannot be “divorced” from each other.

In addition to noting that “July is not a good month in all of our experience,” Roberts based his objection to starting sooner in the practical concerns regarding the extensive workload he and his administrators face this summer regarding staffing. “We have so much to do in June,” he said, “that I don’t think we have the resources to have an effective process.”

Thomas pressed on: “I recognize that this will be a stressful summer. I’m just suggesting that the more of a head start we have, the better.” Roberts eventually assented, saying he would look into the feasibility of starting in July, but that it might not be possible.

Stead mentioned that strategic planning was what led her to join the board, and said she believed there were important reasons to defer to Roberts’ judgment about the available level of staff leadership and engagement. With the large amount of change occurring, Stead argued, she would prefer the administration devote its full attention to staffing over the summer. In addition, she said, by fall, not only will staffing be set, but there will be fewer unknowns coming from the state.

Patalan concurred with Stead, saying, “The community expects the administration to do a good job getting the school year up and running.” Nelson added that he also respected Roberts’ judgment, and that opening the schools in the fall successfully was important to setting the tone for the year.

2011-11 Budget: Public Hearing

Before opening the floor to public comments, a few board members made closing comments on the budget. Patalan commended Roberts and Allen for the work they did on the budget, and noted that the AAPS student count has remained relatively consistent compared to the rest of Michigan.

Thomas also complimented Roberts and Allen, but noted that the budget did contain some “aggressive assumptions,” such as anticipating filling all the School of Choice slots for next year. He suggested maintaining fund equity as high as possible to deal with possible unmet enrollment targets.

Deb Mexicotte and Nelson commented on elements of the budget beyond AAPS control. Mexicotte called the mandated increases in retirement contributions – 3% more by employees, and 2.47% more by employers – costs that were “passed along to districts and state employees.” Nelson mentioned that the state is actively considering moving the community college budget into the K-12 school aid budget. He called this strategy “taking from the right hand and giving to the left.” He urged the public to contact their legislators to tell them not to move other expenses into the school aid fund.

Mexicotte then asked Amy Osinski, the board secretary, to open the public hearing, and she did. But no one from the community was there to speak. After closing the hearing, Mexicotte added that public input was welcome in any other format, and that a public hearing, even if it is required by law, is not always the best venue for the community to offer its voice.

2011-11 Budget: Millage Renewal

There are four active millages currently being levied on AAPS school district residents. Each year, the millage rates are set based on taxable value of homesteads, as well as truth-in-budgeting legislation. They need to be approved by the AAPS board before they can be submitted to the Washtenaw County Board of Commissioners. Allen requested that the board approve the following 2010 tax millages for AAPS: Homestead, 4.5344 mills; Non-Homestead, 18 mills; Debt Service (from the Bond projects), 2.1226 mills; and Sinking Fund, 0.5 mills.

There were no questions from the board on the millage renewal.

The 2010-11 budget, as well as the millage renewal, were first briefing items, and will come back to the board for a vote at a regular meeting in June.

State Retirement Reform and Extensions

During the budget report, Robert Allen noted that the state retirement reform signed into law May 19 could still have a significant impact on the 2010-11 budget if numerous employees choose to sign up before the June 11 incentive deadline. Employees of the Michigan Public Schools Employees Retirement System (MPSERS) who are eligible and choose to retire before June 11 will receive a significant increase in their monthly pension due to an increase in part of the formula from 1.5% to 1.6%. Another major element of the legislation raises non-retiring employees’ contributions to MPSERS by 3%.

Superintendent Todd Roberts explained in an information item to the board that AAPS has been given 32 extensions by the state, which the district can grant if it chooses to do so. These extensions would allow an employee to commit to retiring, but be able to work for one additional year before doing so. Having received no guidance from the state about how these extensions should be granted, Roberts said, he had requested information from neighboring districts.

The exact process for how the extensions would be selected is still being developed, Roberts said, but the district has decided to allow extensions only for positions which would be difficult to fill if left open at the end of this year. The other restriction will be that no extensions will be granted for positions for which current employees have been given lay-off notices.

Roberts asked if the board had any concerns about moving forward with that plan, since the district would need to get a memo out to employees soon regarding the process. It is being suggested, he said, that teachers would need to express an interest in the extension by June 4, with the district selecting who will be granted a retirement extension by June 7, so that employees would be able to file retirement paperwork by June 11. Roberts noted that the suggested timeline would allow employees to know whether or not they would be granted an extension before they commit to retiring.

Lastly, Roberts noted that knowing these retirements are coming ahead of time would be helpful with next year’s planning and the 2011-12 budgeting process.

Many board members gave statements in support of the AAPS plan regarding the extensions. Irene Patalan called the extensions “our insurance policy,” and appreciated being able to slow the transition of too many employees retiring at once. Glenn Nelson reiterated his concerns about the fiscal year 2012 budget, saying he supports the philosophy of preserving any possible flexibility one year from now. Christine Stead called the plan very fiscally responsible and Simone Lightfoot concurred.

Andy Thomas approved of the fairly restricted use of the retirement extension option, and said that he did not want to give extensions out as a “perk.” Deb Mexicotte confirmed for Roberts that the board seemed to offer “general assent in the direction you’re heading.”

Roberts confirmed that the language in the memo makes clear that the offer is contingent on the restrictions he outlined above.

Lightfoot asked how the retirement legislation has affected the number of retirement applicants in the district, and if this will cause any changes in the number of teachers laid off. Roberts answered that the number of retirements is slowly rising, and that the board will have a good idea by the end of next week how many there will be. He noted that these retirements may help reduce the number of layoffs necessary, but added that not all of the retirees will be teachers, and that if AAPS has many principals retire, it could be problematic to fill those positions quickly.

Thurston Paving Project and Other Second Briefing Items

During public commentary, Kathy Griswold argued that proper process was not followed in terms of including public input in planning for the upgrades to the Thurston Elementary School parking lot. She mentioned how a similar driveway set-up proposed to the community near King Elementary was rejected, and asked why a driveway plan that’s not good enough for King school was good enough for Thurston.

As part of a second briefing on proposed facilities projects, trustee Susan Baskett asked Randy Trent, the district’s executive director of physical properties, how he would address the concerns brought by Griswold during public commentary. Trent reported that a certified traffic engineer had approved the design, and asserted that the design had been reviewed with the public at least four times. Baskett confirmed again, “So, these [designs] were reviewed and supported by the Thurston community?” Trent answered, “Yes.”

Christine Stead added that when the planning committee was briefed on the paving projects, Thurston’s public involvement came across as an asset. Irene Patalan concurred, saying she appreciated how Trent always includes the local community in the projects he leads. Trent added that having a certified traffic engineer approve the plans protects the district, and that he hopes to continue working with each community.

None of the other second briefing items were discussed by the board at this meeting. They included three facilities improvements, in addition to the paving project, to be funded from the 2010 sinking fund: roof replacements, ADA site improvements, and an energy conservation program. Additional second briefing items included: the third quarter financial report, the WISD budget, and updates to board policy, all of which were presented at the last regular board meeting on May 12.

Consent Agenda Approved

In the only vote of the night, trustees approved a lengthy consent agenda. It contained all the second briefing items mentioned above, as well as gift offers, and approvals of minutes. The consent agenda was moved by Stead, and seconded by Patalan.

Outcome: The consent agenda was unanimously approved by trustees Nelson, Mexicotte, Lightfoot, Patalan, Stead, Baskett, and Thomas.

New AP Biology Textbook Sought

Joyce Hunter, administrator for middle and high school education, presented a proposal to purchase new textbooks for high school advanced placement (AP) biology classes, a college course taught in 12th grade. Citing the rationale that the College Board requires textbooks not to be more than eight years old, and noting that the books currently used will be eight years old next year, Hunter recommended purchasing 175 books (and accompanying teacher materials) at a total cost of $23,094. This will be enough, she said, to cover a third AP biology class when materials are redistributed to Skyline High School as 12th grade is added there.

Hunter also explained the process used to select a new textbook, including review and rating of books under consideration by a committee of teachers. In response to a question from Glenn Nelson regarding the necessity of updating materials, Hunter introduced Dolores Kingston, a zoologist who teaches AP biology at Pioneer.

Nelson had asked for comment on whether AAPS would have wanted to purchase a new book for this class soon anyway, even if it was not required by the College Board. Kingston responded, “It’s absolutely necessary that we keep up.” She cited recent advances in molecular biology as having a big impact on that section of the revised book, and noted that, “When the AP Board makes its test, it makes it on current data.” Saying he felt reassured, Nelson said he felt good about spending money on the textbooks.

Christine Stead supported the new book, mentioning that she holds a degree in cellular and molecular biology from the University of Michigan, and can attest to how quickly knowledge changes in that field.

Irene Patalan noted that the recommended textbook is a 2008 edition, and asked when the 2009 edition was expected to come out. Susan Baskett also questioned whether AAPS is required to use a textbook, as opposed to web sites and other resources. Kingston responded that the 2009 edition will not be out until the middle of next school year at the earliest. On a blog she follows written by AP biology teachers, she reported that some of them have tried teaching without textbooks and it has not gone well. Kingston pointed to the stellar illustrations as a large asset of the recommended textbook.

Deb Mexicotte requested that Hunter have a copy of the textbook available for public review at the Balas administration building, 2555 S. State St., if requested. The board will vote on  approving the new AP biology textbook in June.

Transportation: Public Commentary

The district is still in negotiations with the AAPS transportation workers’ union, as well as in discussion with the Washtenaw Intermediate School District (WISD) regarding possible countywide consolidation of transportation services. Two bus drivers spoke out against the WISD consolidation plan during the meeting’s public commentary.

Richard Miller pointed out that consolidation is only possible because workers’ salaries decrease while their health insurance costs increase. He noted that if AAPS joins the WISD plan, workers would be fired and could reapply without regard to seniority. Calling the WISD plan “illogical,” and “a clumsy and doomed design,” Miller concluded: “What a mess we have in store.”

Chai Montgomery echoed Miller’s concerns and argued that consolidation works a lot like privatization, and that drivers and aides have not been included in the consolidation planning. He noted that the drastic reduction in wages, hours, and overall jobs could result in high turnover and unsafe driving. Montgomery also pointed out that it’s not clear if WISD could outsource if they “won the bid.”

He requested that if the board does choose to go through with consolidation, that it be done as a transfer of workers, not a re-hire, and that seniority and accumulated sick time be preserved. Lastly, Montgomery pointed out that if workers are fired and rehired, the recently passed changes to the state retirement system would cause them to be reclassified into a different, and lesser, retirement plan.

Kathy Griswold also addressed the board regarding transportation issues from the perspective of the Transportation Safety Committee (TSC), on which she serves. The TSC is made up of representatives from AAPS, the city of Ann Arbor, nearby townships, and the Washtenaw County Road Commission. In addition to raising questions about the Thurston paving project, discussed above, Griswold advocated for moving the crosswalk in front of King Elementary School from its mid-block location to a four-way stop. She noted that there was broad support for the move from the King community. She posed two specific requests to the board: 1) that the board and superintendent send a letter to the city of Ann Arbor requesting the crosswalk be moved, and 2) that a comprehensive, outside analysis be done of the districts’ school walk zones.

Association Reports

For the first time this calendar year, the board received a report from the Black Parents Student Support Group (BPSSG). It also heard from the Youth Senate, the Ann Arbor Parent Advisory Committee on Special Education (AAPAC), and the Ann Arbor Education Association (AAEA). The Parent-Teacher-Organization Council (PTOC), and the Ann Arbor Administrators Association (AAAA) did not report at this meeting.

BPSSG Report

Chairperson Sylvia Nesmith reported to the board on the activities of the Black Parents’ Student Support Group (BPSSG). After a brief review of the group’s activities from earlier in the year, Nesmith commented on the recent issues at Dicken Elementary leading to the disbanding of its African-American Lunch Bunch program. She said the BPSSG appreciated the supportive statements that came from the board and the administration, but that everyone needs to take the dignity of children into account when discussing the situation. Nesmith registered BPSSG’s concern at the quality of African-American curricular enhancements, and noted that local Black history was not included in the Ann Arbor local history curriculum used in the district.

Nesmith reported that the BPSSG is also concerned that the cost-sharing of athletic fees (part of the 2010-11 budget proposal) will lead to “elistist” athletics. She told the board that some parents were struggling, even though they do not qualify for free and reduced lunch. Nesmith cited the transportation requirement, which requires families to transport students to and from athletic events instead of using district transportation, as a hardship for many parents.

Lastly, Nesmith said that the problem resolution and group dynamics pieces of the middle school planning centers, as they were originally intended, were very important. The planning centers are set to be cut completely out of next year’s budget, but Nesmith suggested phasing out the centers while instituting the positive behavior support approach. The BPSSG, she said, would be submitting some suggestions on the planning center phase-out, as well as the reconfiguration of the program at Dicken and similar student support groups. Nesmith closed by thanking Susan Baskett and Todd Roberts for their support.

Youth Senate Report

Nikila Lakshmanan gave the district update from the Youth Senate, which ended its year of work on May 16. The Senate thanked everyone who supported its recent walkathon and picnic to raise money for its Fight Poverty in Africa initiative. Following Lakshmanan’s report, two senior youth senators made statements to the board.

Abraham Liddell spoke with gratitude of the Achievement Solutions Team (AST), a project of the Youth Senate sponsored by the Youth Empowerment Project. Saying he could rely on them whenever there was a need, Liddell later became a peer coach for the AST. Though he comes from a family with only a handful of college graduates, Liddell said, he will attend the University of Michigan in the fall.

Keo Robin credited the senate’s opportunities and support with getting him through high school, thanking two teachers in particular – Millicent Fisher, who taught him in third grade, and Susan Washabaugh, who taught his AP chemistry class. However he said, the system isn’t perfect, and argued that, “We do not necessarily lack the academic support resources needed for widespread student success in this district; but rather, we need to work on the methods of implementation we use to make these resources available.” Robin suggested that the board look at research from other schools on closing the achievement gap, as well as seeking solutions through the Youth Senate’s “Leap the Gap” research and pilot of ASTs.

AAPAC Report

Kathy Grijalva reported for the Ann Arbor Parent Advisory Committee on Special Education. She spoke of the services that were offered to her special needs son, including a positive experience with the bus drivers who transported her son for learning in a self-contained classroom. She expressed concern about the consolidation of some self-contained special needs classrooms, but recognized the benefits to the district of moving forward with such plans.

Lastly, Grijalva expressed regret at the retirement of Larry Simpson, administrator for student intervention and support services, noting that there have been five administrators of special education in 13 years, with Larry Simpson’s four-year tenure being the longest. She credited Simpson with establishing the elementary community classrooms, and the core behavior support team, as well as developing the Teaching and Learning Camp for Extended School Year services, a summer program for special needs students. Grijalva thanked Simpson for taking to heart and genuinely championing the interests of students receiving special education services and wished him the best in his retirement.

One public commenter also spoke about inclusion of special needs students. Joanne Darr, of the Washtenaw Association for Community Advocacy, addressed the board about inclusion. She told the board she has a hard time understanding why inclusion of special education students in regular classrooms is not more prevalent in the district. She pointed out that often, at mediations or Individualized Education Plan (IEP) meetings regarding the placement of special education students, inclusion is often not suggested, and placing students in self-contained classrooms seems to be preferred.

Darr asked her son, Alex, a special needs student in the district, to speak to the board about what he had learned during his school’s “Reality Day.” Alex spoke briefly about the duties of law enforcement officials when performing body searches, and Darr used his comments to illustrate how much more she feels her son is getting out of his education by being mainstreamed instead of taught separately in a self-contained classroom. She closed by saying that she hopes the board looks more thoroughly into “universal design.”

Ann Arbor Education Association Report

Brit Satchwell, president of the teachers’ union, began his report by characterizing anything the district does in terms of budget cuts as nothing more than “coping mechanisms.” He reviewed the speakers who had attended the Michigan Education Association rally earlier that week, and thanked the district for allowing the AAEA to hold the meeting at the Skyline High stadium, as well as Skyline’s administration for its support. Satchwell urged all members of the AAPS community to continue to find “common cause,” and rallied, “If we don’t look to the source of the problem and try to solve it, shame on us.”

Satchwell also encouraged everyone “to have a landslide victory of the millage vote in your own house,” by donating to the AAPS Education Foundation whatever amount they would have been levied had last fall’s millage passed. “You don’t have to take that ‘no’ for an answer,” he challenged. “You have your own ‘yes’ in your pocket – in your wallet.”

Lastly, Satchwell noted that the teaching staff will step up to shoulder the burden, but maintained his goal of rescinding all 191 lay-off notices. Satchwell encouraged everyone to hold out hope, as the teachers’ union and AAPS bargaining teams continue to work out a contract.

Awards and Accolades

The board devotes time at each meeting to reflect on positive accomplishments in the district, and honor those people who go above and beyond their calls of duty.

Pioneer Omega Yearbook Award

The Pioneer High School yearbook, entitled the Omega, won a National Gallery of Excellence award from the Walsworth Publishing Company. Walsworth’s Michigan representative, Nora Guiney, was on hand to present the award to yearbook staff, and described the Omega as representative of the best yearbooks in the country.

Susan Baskett expressed pride that the publishing company recognized the students’ work. “As a former editor-in-chief of the Omega,” she said, “the lessons I learned … are still with me.” Todd Roberts recalled his four years as yearbook advisor while an English teacher in North Carolina, noting, “We never won any awards.” Then, he leaned over and said something to Deb Mexicotte, who reported, “Dr. Roberts just told me that being superintendent is not as hard as being yearbook advisor.”

Glenn Nelson added that he knew right where his yearbook was on his shelf, and commended the Omega staff: “What you are creating … really is something very lasting and meaningful.”

Envision Michigan Scholarships

State Rep. Rebekah Warren presented three students each with a $500 scholarship from her Envision Michigan fund. Warren spoke to the board and public, saying she has maintained her commitment to the strong public education system since taking office in 2006. Students who received awards were: David Shapiro and Sarah Juster from Pioneer Community, and Ramona Mladin from Huron. In the fall, Shapiro will attend UM, Juster will attend Yale, and Mladin will attend Wayne State University.

Celebration of Excellence Awards

The last two Celebration of Excellence awards of the school year were given at this meeting – the first to Sandra Maconochie, a music teacher at Tappan, and the second to Pat Butler, a custodian at Northside.

Andy Thomas presented Maconochie with her award, noting that she started one of the first middle school jazz bands in the district, among many accomplishments during her more than 26 years with the district. Thomas read comments from a parent who touted her child’s experience in Maconochie’s jazz band as “the highlight of [his] school experience.” A former student said that playing in Maconochie’s programs “absolutely laid the foundation for my future as a professional musician.”

Maconochie came to the podium, and accepted the award on behalf of not only herself, but also shared it with AAPS students, families, district music staff, and Tappan music staff. Saying she was grateful for the opportunity to have worked with students and shared her love of music with them, Maconochie said, “I have had the best gig in town!”

After Machonochie received her award, Martine Perreault, co-chair of the PTOC, announced that a scholarship fund had been established in her name through the AAPS Educational Foundation. All are welcome to contribute.

Then, Pat Butler was presented with her award, read by Irene Patalan. Patalan noted that Northside staff commended Butler for having “one of the best work ethics of anyone we know.” She was honored for her positive attitude, cheerfulness, and friendliness. A Northside teacher said of Butler’s work, “She treats it as if it’s a personal mission, and … I don’t think I have ever seen her without a smile.”

Butler spoke briefly after accepting her award, making a “shout out to the 500 wing, and the pretty lady – she rocks!”

Superintendent’s Report

Among many notable accomplishments, Todd Roberts thanked all retirees for their years of service to the district. He also noted many scholarships and individual awards received by AAPS students this year, including the receipt of Kiwanis scholarship money by Stone School for the first time. In addition, he said, 21 Stone students received scholarships to attend Washtenaw Community College. Roberts congratulated the Pioneer Regatta winners, and the Pioneer concert band and director for winning awards.

Clague Orchestra Special Presentation

A subset of the strings orchestra of Clague Middle School performed two pieces at the start of the meeting, under the direction of Abby Alwin. Board members were very supportive and thanked the students for their hard work and stellar performance.

Items from the Board

Christine Stead acknowledged having attended the May 24 MEA-sponsored rally for education funding, and noted that it was good to see the common awareness of the need for securing stable school funding from the state.

Andy Thomas invited everyone to attend the naming ceremony for the Tappan gym for Rob Lillie, to be held on Sunday, June 6 from 2-4 p.m.

Glenn Nelson reflected on attending the Neutral Zone’s Breakin’ Curfew, the Pioneer Grammy concert, and the district’s retirement dinner. He also reiterated that there is still time to attend the district art shows at the Work and Slusser galleries, and commented positively on the scholarships and mentoring Stone School students received from the Rotary Club. Stone School, Nelson said, “literally changes the lives of students.”

Simone Lightfoot invited the public to the follow-up to the College and Career Ready Review, which was held recently at Mitchell Elementary.

Susan Baskett noted that the Senior and Academic Recognition at Roberto Clemente Student Development Center was powerful, and thanked Joyce Hunter for maintaining the homebuilding program. She also expressed thanks on behalf of the grandmothers of Jasmine Thomas, a Pioneer student who died on May 19, for the support they received from the AAPS community at her memorial service on Tuesday. And, lastly, Baskett congratulated this year’s graduates and urged them to celebrate safely.

Irene Patalan commented also on the Pioneer Grammy award ceremony, saying it was just wonderful. Also regarding the rally at Skyline High School earlier in the week, she agreed that “putting vision on securing funding is absolutely worthwhile.” Patalan also expressed satisfaction at having filled the vacant board seat: “It’s nice to be sitting here with seven people on the board.”

Finally, Deb Mexicotte offered her general comments. First, she remarked that it was a honor to be invited to Scarlett Middle School’s Portfolio Day, in which professionals from the community connect with students on a personal level by conducting mock interviews with them for jobs in their respective fields. Mexicotte also thanked Rebekah Warren for coming to the meeting earlier, and commended her support for AAPS students, and for education in general.

Mexicotte continued, noting that though the state has just decided to award $65 per pupil back to the district, it’s only one-sixth of the $398 per pupil that was cut this year. As much as she wants to be happy about the slight funding increase, Mexicotte said, with a $297 cut to per-pupil funding anticipated next year, all representatives need to support education. She noted that, “It is an election year, and politics does play a role into how these funding decisions are made.”

Committee Reports and Agenda Planning

Neither the performance nor the planning committees had reports for this meeting. In planning future board agendas, Deb Mexicotte pointed out that superintendent Todd Roberts will be evaluated in June, and that Irene Patalan and Amy Osinski will be setting up that evaluation. She also repeated her request that board members turn in their summer schedules to the board secretary as soon as possible so that the board retreat can be scheduled, possibly for sometime in July.

Present: President Deb Mexicotte, vice president Irene Patalan, secretary Glenn Nelson, treasurer Christine Stead, and trustees Susan Baskett, Simone Lightfoot, and Andy Thomas. Also present as a non-voting member was Todd Roberts, superintendent of AAPS.

Next Regular Meeting: Friday, June 4, 2010, 5 p.m., at the Balas Administration Building, 2555 S. State St. [confirm date]