Ruth Kraut

Next week, the board of the Ann Arbor Public Schools will need to cut about 5% from the district’s budget. That’s a reduction of about $8.6 million. Teachers have already taken a 3% pay cut.

Per-pupil funding for next year ($9,025) will be less than the per-pupil funding of 12 years ago in 2001-2002 ($9,034). So it’s no surprise that we’re at the point where cuts are painful. Cutting teachers, cutting programs – none of it is happy news. There will be consequences. The question is, what kind of consequences?

In the civil rights world, a “disparate impact” occurs when a policy is non-discriminatory in its intent but affects a “protected class” of people in a disproportionate way. In Michigan’s Elliott-Larsen Civil Rights Act, for example, these protected classes include race, religion, color, national origin, age, sex, height, weight, and marital status.

AAPS is a district with a large achievement gap – between white students and African American and Hispanic/Latino students. And this gap has persisted for many years. Although in state civil rights law, income is not a protected status, income is highly correlated with race, age, and marital status. District-wide, there is also an achievement gap that is related to income: Poor kids are more likely to do poorly in school.

So it’s important to consider the AAPS budget from a perspective of potential disparate impacts. On the surface, the proposed budget cuts treat all students equally. But if we look deeper, would we find that certain budget cuts worsen – or perhaps improve – the achievement gap?

Three proposed budget cuts have raised a significant amount of opposition this year: (1) eliminating high school transportation; (2) cutting reading intervention teachers; and (3) cutting seventh hour or making it a tuition-only option. Together, these three account for just under $1.5 million of the $8.6 million in cuts. Do these cuts, in particular, have a disparate impact on any groups?

High School Transportation

One of the still-pending proposals is to cut all transportation for high school students, unless it’s related to special education. That would affect all students outside of the walk zones, including students who take school buses and those who ride Ann Arbor Transportation Authority buses using school-provided bus passes. In this year’s one-day spring “ride count,” just 29% of the students who could take school buses did take them. But remember, not all kids take the bus every day. If the counting were done over the course of a couple of weeks, the number might be closer to 40%.

AAPS districts for its three comprehensive high schools.

Whatever the exact percentage, it doesn’t appear that ridership is distributed evenly across the grades. My own daughter’s experience is probably not unusual. In ninth and tenth grades, she took the school bus to Skyline nearly every day. In eleventh grade, she didn’t have a first hour class, so she generally took the AATA bus (which frequently ran late, to her great consternation). In twelfth grade, though she didn’t have a car, a couple of her friends did – and she got rides to school almost every day.

The district doesn’t collect data on or analyze the school bus riders based on income. But it’s plausible that a higher proportion of students on the free and reduced price lunch program take school buses compared to students from families with higher incomes, who are much more likely to have an extra car.

So cutting high school transportation will affect younger students more than older students. The transportation cut will affect people employed with less flexible jobs more than it will impact people who have more flexible jobs. Families with no car or one car will be impacted more than two- or three-car families. For those students who can ride an AATA bus (or two, or three, after transfers), it will cost them money – because the district will not be able to provide any bus passes if it cuts general transportation. That’s $1.50/day x $180/year, or $270 per student.

AAPS is a very large district! Think about the student who lives at the low/moderate-income Arrowwood Hills Housing Cooperative, off Pontiac Trail. Students there are districted for Skyline High School. It’s possible to arrive at school on an AATA bus. The #1 bus leaves Arrowwood at 6:26 a.m., and after a transfer downtown to the #18, that student would arrive at Skyline at 7:06 a.m. (a little early for a scheduled school start of 7:30). So for less than $300 per year per student, an Arrowwood Hills resident can get transportation to Skyline.

Transfers required to get from Arrowwood to Skyline High School, if a student takes AATA buses. Some students, however, live in areas that don’t get AATA service, making it even more difficult if the school system eliminates transportation to high schools.

But what if that same low/moderate-income student lives in a manufactured home community out on Jackson or South Wagner roads? No AATA routes serve that area. Directions on Google Maps suggest that you first drive to the nearest bus stop! What if your parent has to be at work at 7 a.m. and there are no “extra” cars? What if you are too young to drive? What if you live on a busy street without a sidewalk or shoulder, three miles from school? As a parent, do you want your teenager walking on that street in the dark?

I live in a two-parent, two-car household, and we both have some flexibility with our schedules. And as my son was looking at high schools this winter, we were very intrigued by the Washtenaw International High School. Yet I was worried about the question, “How would I get him there, and back?” (WiHi is located at the former East Middle School in Ypsilanti.) I knew it would be much easier for me if he could walk, bike, or take the bus to an in-district school.

But what if transportation is cut? I can tell you that if I lived in a corner of the district (say, a rural area near South Lyon, or Dexter, or Saline), and I was going to have to drive my child either way, I would think differently about WiHi, or about the South Lyon Schools. In that case, I wouldn’t be comparing a school with transportation to a school without transportation. I would be comparing two schools without transportation – and the second school might be more convenient.

Unfortunately, this is an all-or-nothing decision. The district can’t choose a few areas (say, those with low-income housing) and only provide transportation there. The district stands to save $466,000 by cutting transportation. However, every student who doesn’t show up on count day, or who attends a different school, costs the district around $9,000 in the state’s per-pupil funding allowance. So if even 50 students were lost because of a decision to cut transportation, the district would lose all of the projected savings.

But I digress.

The crucial point is that cutting high school transportation will have a disparate impact on younger high school students. And because of the ways that income and race are so closely intertwined in today’s America, cutting transportation will certainly have a disparate impact on students of color and on poor students. Assessed in relation to the achievement gap, it is clear: If students can’t, or don’t, arrive at school, they are going to fall further behind.

Reading Intervention

Today, the district employs the equivalent of 10 reading intervention (RI) teachers in the Ann Arbor elementary schools – a half position at each elementary school. The current proposal is to cut that in half. RI teachers would be retained in just the schools “with the highest need.” This year, 460 students qualified for RI services.

Who were these students? Were they low-income? Were they students of color? The best indicator available to the district for a student’s household income is the qualification for free and reduced price lunch. I asked Liz Margolis, director of communications for AAPS, if the district identified students in the RI program by income or race. The answer is no. The district says it can’t share information about students in the Free and Reduced Price Lunch program – because it’s considered private. And the district doesn’t keep track of students in the RI program by race/ethnicity. If the district did track that information and share those aggregated numbers, it might yield a revelation that makes everyone uncomfortable.

It’s possible at least to make an educated guess. In 2007-2008, nearly half of the students who were identified as cognitively impaired were African-American – even though at the time just 16% of Ann Arbor students were African American. One of the key identifying statistics of the achievement gap is MEAP test scores, and if there is one thing that the MEAP is good at testing, it’s reading. On the 2010-2011 MEAP tests, for instance, 96% of the district’s white third graders achieved “proficient” status while 80% of African-American third graders, 84% of the Hispanic/Latino students, and 76% of “economically disadvantaged students” achieved “proficient” status. (You can find more data on the AAPS website.)

So we can be fairly confident – even though the district doesn’t officially track it – that cutting the Reading Intervention program, which serves the too-young-for-MEAP population of K-2 students, would have a disparate impact on students of color and low-income students. Of course, that prompts the question: Does the RI program work? If it doesn’t work, then it’s not helping to reduce the achievement gap, even if there are disparities in enrollment. But if it does work, then eliminating RI could diminish the district’s ability to address the achievement gap. Per student, RI is the most expensive program proposed for elimination (approximately $2,175/student). But, if the elimination of the program causes students to fall even further behind in reading, they could wind up qualifying for mandated special education services. And those costs would be far greater.

Seventh Hour

Another possible cut would affect seventh hour – the opportunity to take a seventh class during a semester, rather than the more standard six classes. One possibility is to cut the seventh hour option altogether. Another possibility is to convert seventh hour to a tuition-only option.

Cutting seventh hour completely would have different impacts at the district’s three comprehensive high schools. If seventh hour is completely cut at Pioneer and Huron high schools, then students could only take six credits (12 courses) a year. That has a couple of implications.

Currently, Skyline High School uses a trimester system, and there are five hours/trimester (5 x 3 = 15 classes or 7.5 credit hours), compared to seven hours/semester at the other schools (7 x 2 = 14 classes or 7.0 credit hours). They are not exactly comparable, because some classes that are taught in two semesters at Pioneer and Huron are taught in three trimesters at Skyline – for example, advanced placement (AP) classes and some math classes. And in practice, lots of students at Pioneer and Huron only take six classes, while most students at Skyline take five classes every term. But if seventh hour is cut, and Skyline stays with the trimester system, to maintain parity, should only four classes be offered per trimester (because 6 x 2 = 12 and 4 x 3 = 12)? Now that would affect a lot of people.

How many students take seventh hour? At any given time, it’s less than a quarter of the enrolled student body. But many students take a seventh hour only every second or third semester, so the impact would affect closer to half of the district’s students. Students who are most likely to take a seventh hour include: students who take orchestra, band, or choir; students who take a lot of AP classes; students who need to make up classes (credit recovery); and students in career/technical education. The Pioneer music department, for instance, estimates that 43% of the students in the music department take a seventh hour at least some of the time in order to get their necessary (non-music) credits.

I don’t have any idea how many students in the music program are African American or Hispanic/Latino. I don’t have any idea what percentage of students in the music program qualify for free and reduced price lunch. (The percentage of high school students who qualify for free/reduced price lunch in Ann Arbor is around 15%, much lower than in the middle and elementary schools. Families have to submit a separate application for each student, and in many cases the ones for older students are not submitted.) I don’t have any idea how many students would have difficulty actually earning enough credit hours in four years without seventh hour (and still be able to take music, or technical education). I don’t have any idea how many students are just barely above the free and reduced price lunch cutoff, but whose parents don’t have the disposable income to pay for a seventh hour. But the district probably does know, or could know.

I do know that if Skyline keeps a trimester system, then cutting the fifth hour would affect more students than cutting the seventh hour at Pioneer or Huron.

Cutting seventh hour compared to conversion to tuition could turn out to have quite different impacts, depending on how it’s handled. If seventh hour becomes a tuition-only option, should the fifth hour at Skyline be made tuition only? And if the district makes a seventh hour available with tuition only, would students who qualify for free and reduced price lunch have the fees waived? How would that affect the cost savings? Who would do the billing? What happens if parents say they’ll pay, but then don’t?

So is there a disparate impact to the proposals affecting seventh hour? Probably, but I can’t quantify it. What is interesting to me is that, if used correctly, seventh hour could potentially be a tool for reducing the achievement gap. I have talked to African-American parents and immigrant parents who have told me they believe that by keeping their children enrolled in music programs, their children have an opportunity to do better overall in school. That’s in part because being in orchestra or band affects your other scheduling options. And it makes it more likely that you will be scheduled with more serious students.

Conclusion

In the end, we do have budget cuts to make. It seems to me that high school transportation affects the largest number of students. It also has the greatest potential to create a disparate impact and undermine efforts to reduce the achievement gap.

If these are the wrong cuts, then we need to find other items to cut – at least until we can convince the state legislature to improve school funding. To my mind, avoiding any or all of these cuts might involve increasing district-wide class sizes just slightly by reducing general teaching numbers. I admit, that is a tough pill to swallow, but to me it is a better alternative than cutting high school transportation.

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!

The board is expected to vote on the FY 2012-13 budget at its June 13 meeting.

In addition to the budget discussion, trustees moved quickly through a number of other items of business at the May 23 meeting: (1) directing administration to create a transportation committee; (2) approving the sale of tech bonds; (3) supporting the Washtenaw Intermediate School District budget with some suggested reporting improvements; (4) the approval of two property easements with the city of Ann Arbor; and (5) the approval of a number of policies, including an anti-bullying policy as newly mandated by state law.

Trustees also heard from 20 people, most of them speaking during general public commentary in support of the Roberto Clemente Student Development Center, which had originally been proposed to be closed or restructured as part of the budget. Many thanked the board for taking Clemente “off the chopping block” for this coming year, but expressed concerns about the board’s process, the district-wide achievement gap faced by African-American students, and the board’s “lack of respect” for Clemente students.  

2012-13 Budget

AAPS superintendent Patricia Green introduced the first formal briefing on the AAPS proposed 2012-13 budget by asserting, “The district is hemorrhaging… The pain is real.” She reiterated the position shared at earlier meetings, saying that her administration does not want to make any of these cuts at all, and that what has been in the budget is valued and has made the district great.

The budget elements of the May 23 meeting are reported below. First, there was a presentation by AAPS deputy superintendent of operations Robert Allen on the background and assumptions informing the proposed budget; a review by Allen of the suggested budget reductions; board discussion on the proposed budget; and a public hearing on the proposed budget. Public commentary, as well as this meeting’s student report, are described following these items, as they were each primarily related to the proposed budget reductions.

2012-13 Budget: Background and Assumptions

Robert Allen said that his PowerPoint presentation was “pretty much the same” as the board had already seen multiple times. He reviewed it again briefly, stressing how rising pension costs are not under the control of local districts.

Trustee Christine Stead asked what the foundation allowance would be if adjusted for inflation, and Allen said he did not know, but as far as he had heard, there was no plan to increase the $9,020 per pupil allowance. Board president Deb Mexicotte said that the figure she had seen before, if the foundation allowance had risen only by the rate of inflation, was near $11,000, and Allen said that sounded right.

Allen said the projected deficit for 2012-13 was $17.8 million, which includes the shift to providing all-day kindergarten. He also said that he feels fairly confident that the projected deficit can be lowered $1 million due to health care cost savings, but that he has not yet incorporated that into the plan.

Allen described the health care cost savings in more detail, explaining that the benefits of offering a self-funded health care plan to employees is starting to pay off, but that he is still being conservative in estimating the savings to the district. As more employees move to the self-funded plan, those savings continue to increase, Allen said. He noted that a health care consultant paid for by the health care corporations had advised him regarding making a $1.7 million budget adjustment to the base expenditures. Trustee Glenn Nelson, who had asked about the shift in base expenditure numbers at the last meeting, said he appreciated the way Allen keeps the board well-informed.

Allen then put up a slide with three-year projections, which shows that if the district does nothing to reduce expenditures, the fund balance will be depleted within two years. Stead expressed concern that with the special education reimbursement rate decreasing, the mandated retirement contribution rate increasing, and less guarantee of state offsets and incentives, the cuts that AAPS will need to make for 2013-14 will be even higher than this year.

Trustee Andy Thomas disagreed, saying that the state offsets are likely to continue, and that the board isn’t going to “sit on our hands and do nothing.” He noted that the $4 million in reductions the board is planning to pass will be put into the base expenditures for 2013-14 and for subsequent years. He suggested that the future projections are not representative of what is likely to occur.

2012-13 Budget: Proposed Budget Reduction Plan

At the May 23 meeting, Allen reviewed the proposed budget reductions by category. See The Chronicle’s coverage of the board’s May 16 committee of the whole meeting for more discussion of the proposed reductions.

2012-13 Budget: Proposed Budget Reduction Plan – Instructional Services

Allen reviewed that the consolidation of the Clemente summer school into the district-wide Pioneer High program would save $80,000, but Green said Clemente has asked the board to reconsider this piece. She said that much of what Clemente is doing is more like orientation than credit recovery, and that they feel the structure is important to their entire program.

Stead said she could argue against every single one of these cuts, and asked where the $80,000 would come from if the Clemente summer school program were to stay intact. Green said her administration is still looking into it, and that for now, the reduction is still on the list.

Allen also noted that the site-based budgets, which fund individual building’s school improvement plans, will be eliminated for $250,750, and that a reduction of four FTEs (full-time equivalents) in counseling positions will save $400,000.

2012-13 Budget: Proposed Budget Reduction Plan – Operations

Allen reiterated the list of transportation cuts included in the plan, and commented on them:

• Changing the Skyline High start time by 15 minutes, which would entail a memorandum of agreement with the teachers’ union ($266,400);
• Eliminating midday shuttles at Community High ($230,184);
• Reducing costs for transportation to Ann Arbor Open by using middle school common stops ($98,800);
• Eliminating the 4 p.m. middle school bus, which significantly impacts after-school programs ($85,284);
• Combining the bus routes of Bryant-Pattengill elementary schools($16,560).

Regarding the 4 p.m. middle school bus, Allen said the district is looking at other ways to be able to fund that.

Regarding the combining of bus routes to Bryant and Pattengill, Allen noted that it could impact start times at those schools, which would lead to another memorandum of agreement with the teachers’ union. He said the idea of combining these routes has been discussed for a couple of years, and that Pattengill’s start time might have to shift by 15 minutes because there will be fewer stops. Allen said the consolidation could allow for the elimination of up to two of the nine busses that are dedicated to those schools’ routes. The worst case scenario, he said, would be the addition of 10 minutes to the length of some students’ bus rides.

Andy Thomas clarified that a student going to Bryant would not experience any additional time in the morning, but would in the afternoon because the driving time from Bryant to Pattengill in the morning or from Pattengill to Bryant in the afternoon would add 10 minutes. Allen said yes, 10 minutes would be the maximum addition.

Allen listed three additional reductions in operations: ITD (information technology department) restructuring ($200,000); the elimination of the early notification incentive ($40,000); and energy savings ($500,000 in 2012-13, and $700,000 in the future).

2012-13 Budget: Proposed Budget Reduction Plan – District-wide Reductions

Allen reviewed the following district-wide reductions that are proposed:

• Moving the Rec & Ed director and support staff positions to the Rec & Ed budget ($205,000);
• Reducing districtwide departmental budgets by 10% ($500,000);
• Reducing healthcare costs ($100,000);
• Eliminating police liaisons ($350,000);
• Outsourcing noon-hour supervisors ($75,000);
• Eliminating the district contribution to music camps ($60,000);
• Reducing the budget for substitute teachers by placing the management of substitute budgets in the schools ($200,000);
• Reducing middle school athletics ($37,500);
• Eliminating funding for athletic entry fees ($58,000);
• Moving lacrosse to a club sport ($93,000);
• Replacing 32 FTEs of instructional staff (retirements) with less expensive staff ($900,000).

Regarding the police liaisons, Allen said he had talked with the Ann Arbor Police Department and confirmed that reducing the liaisons would not mean a loss of employment for any of the officers. The biggest thing AAPS will lose, Allen said, is the relationships it has with these particular officers. Christine Stead asked how they could be absorbed by the city if there was no budget for them, and Allen said there are retirements that would allow the shifts to occur. Allen also noted that AAPS will still contract with the AAPD for extra-curricular events such as football games.

Andy Thomas asked for clarification on what the $60,000 of music camp funding represents. Allen explained that it is entirely supplemental teacher pay, including fringes. The district will adjust its supplemental pay amount by $60,000, and that is a hard number, Allen said, even though the exact amount spent on this pay may be higher or lower in a given year. He also noted that there is an option to fundraise the $60,000 outside of the district budget, and that the band directors are working with the central office on this issue.

The Ann Arbor Education Association (AAEA) – the teachers’ union –has asked for two weeks to look at the entire middle school budget, Allen said, to see if there is a way to keep the middle school athletic directors but still reduce the overall middle school athletics budget by $37,500. He said there have been conversations about how Rec & Ed provides the same functions, and that perhaps middle school athletics could be done more efficiently.

Stead asked how confident Allen was about the savings anticipated by hiring less expensive teachers, and asked him to walk through the logic one more time. Allen said the district is currently expecting 24 retirements, and that retiring teachers are more than likely at the top of the pay scale. If you bring in new teachers to replace the retiring ones, he said, there is about a $25,000 to $30,000 differential in pay. Allen pointed out that there is a risk the savings will be lower if the district does not have additional retirements. Thomas said that if there are only 24 retirements, the savings will be $720,000 instead of $900,000.

2012-13 Budget: Proposed Budget Reduction Plan – Revenue Enhancement

Allen reviewed the four sources of revenue enhancement that are part of this budget: (1) School of Choice students ($1 million); (2) Medicaid reimbursement ($500,000); (3) best practices funding ($2.6 million); and (4) MPSERS offset ($1.8 million). MPSERS is the Michigan Public School Employees Retirement System.

Allen noted that there are currently state Senate and House bills being entertained on MPSERS reform, and that it is not known at this time how the outcome of those discussions will affect the MPSERS offset in the future. Stead asked if the projected 31.2% employer contribution rate would increase if there were substantial layoffs across the state for FY 2012-13. Allen said he did not think AAPS would be adversely affected by the MPSERS reform bills.

2012-13 Budget: Proposed Budget Reduction Plan – Fund Equity

Allen then summarized that AAPS needs $10.7 million of reductions after the revenue enhancements are applied, but that at this point, the district will need to use $ 7 million of fund equity to reach that target. He added that the $7 million figure does not include the additional $1 million adjustment in health care savings he reported that night, so it’s really more like using $6 million of fund equity.

Stead asked if Allen anticipated an additional deficit in the fourth quarter, and Allen said very conservatively, he would estimate an additional deficit of $500,000, depending on what happens with additional retirements. Nelson said he usually thinks of increased retirements as saving money, and asked, “Why would something that accelerates retirements hurt the budget?” Allen answered that some retirees qualify for a payout bonus based on their number of years of service. AAPS, he explained, keeps those payouts held in the balance sheet, and the expense of distributing them has to be recognized in the year during which they are actually paid out.

2012-13 Budget: Board Discussion

Board discussion on the proposed budget is grouped here into the following categories: administrative process, Roberto Clemente, busing, police liaisons, other cuts, fund equity, and revenue enhancement. The budget was brought to the May 23 meeting as a first briefing item. The final 2012-13 budget will be approved at the next regular board meeting on June 13.

2012-13 Budget: Board Discussion – Administrative Process

Trustee Glenn Nelson complimented the administration and board president Deb Mexicotte for guiding the board through the budget process over the last few months, saying he “appreciated the spirit” with which the board whittled down an $18 million deficit to what he called “a budget which I can live with – it’s painful, but it’s a rational kind of thing.”

Trustee Simone Lightfoot said she liked that the middle school administration was weighing in on how to best cut middle school athletics, and asked “How much of that do we do?” Robert Allen replied that there are always ways to improve the process, and that input from all stakeholders is a good thing. “We do present these proposed reductions to our administration, and each year we ask for suggestions when we start the process,” he said, pointing out that some of the district-wide cuts proposed this year came from building administrators’ suggestions.

2012-13 Budget: Board Discussion – Roberto Clemente

Lightfoot asked how many students attend Roberto Clemente’s summer school program, and noted that she has received many e-mails about the hardships those students will face if the summer school program is merged with the district-wide summer school held at Pioneer. Allen said the Clemente summer school program could be as many as 80 or 90 students, and Thomas pointed out that absorbing the Clemente students into the main summer school program will increase summer school class sizes.

Trustee Irene Patalan asked how many students who begin the school year at Clemente are still there at the end of the year. Jane Landefeld, AAPS director of student accounting, answered that 15 students left between October and February this school year. Nelson asked if the 15 who left Clemente returned to other AAPS schools. Landefeld said some left AAPS to attend other schools out of the district, some transferred to other AAPS schools, and some dropped out of school entirely.

Thomas asked where exactly the projected $80,000 in savings from consolidating Clemente’s summer school program would come from. Mostly from staffing costs, Allen replied. Trustee Susan Baskett suggested breaking out the cost of the transition/orientation part of the Clemente summer school program from the classes part.

Mexicotte said she wants the academic focus to be the driver of summer school programming, and that summer school has always been about closing gaps and academic recovery. She argued that the orientation pieces need to be accomplished during the regular school year – individually or in cohorts.

2012-13 Budget: Board Discussion – Busing

Lightfoot asked if there was any concern about the mixing of ages of students on the Bryant and Pattengill buses, if they are consolidated. No, Allen said – all of the other elementary school buses mixed children from grades K-5.

Trustee Irene Patalan noted that there are a group of students who primarily attend classes at the comprehensive high schools but who come to Community High for part of the day – for those students, eliminating the mid-day shuttles will hurt. These students do not have organized advocacy, she said, but they do believe that coming to Community each day keeps their day intact as they are given support, self-esteem, or other help there.

Nelson said he would like reassurance at the second briefing that funding for the 4 p.m. middle school bus will be replaced, as it adds enough to the educational experience for enough students to be worth it. If at the second briefing on the budget on June 13, the board cannot be assured the money will be coming from elsewhere, Nelson said, he would like to explore not cutting the 4 p.m. middle school bus.

Stead requested data on high school bus ridership, particularly if there were changes to ridership this year.

2012-13 Budget: Board Discussion – Other Cuts

Lightfoot asked if, in light of the cuts to police liaisons, there was a way to have some sort of arrangement with the city so that the city could be sensitive to the idea of sending AAPS officers who are already familiar with the district. Allen said he could have that discussion with the acting chief [John Seto], who has been very responsive. Lightfoot also asked what the cost is for AAPD coverage at individual, separate events, and Allen said that in the past it has been treated as overtime pay for the three dedicated officers. If those positions are no longer funded by AAPS, the AAPD would be paid an hourly rate for event coverage, said Allen. Baskett said, “AAPD are a good police force, but they are not cheap.” She asked Allen to look for other ways of providing security at events, or work to negotiate a lower rate with AAPD.

Mexicotte noted that cutting 4 FTEs from counseling staff concerns her because of the effect it could have on the district’s work closing the achievement and discipline gaps. “While it is an attractive cut because it’s large, and because it’s based on attrition, this is an area of particular distress for me,” she said. Mexicotte also noted that she had been sitting next to AAPS deputy superintendent of operations Alesia Flye at the May 16 committee meeting, and that she wanted to acknowledge Flye’s distress at the reduction in departmental budgets. “[Flye] said, very professionally under her breath,” Mexicotte reported, ” ‘Ouch – that’s really going to hurt our professional development.’”

2012-13 Budget: Board Discussion – Fund Equity

Nelson said he was concerned about losing teachers in 2013-14 if the district digs too deep into fund equity this year to cover projected expenditures. He suggested bringing the idea of moving Clemente this year back to the table for discussion. “As we talk about the expenses related to [Clemente], and the performance as we know it, … I am not completely sure that investment is worth it,” Nelson argued.

Nelson said that for every teacher cut, roughly 300 students are affected by larger class sizes. By this logic, he explained, the $200,000 that would be saved by moving Clemente this year would save three teachers in 2013-14, affecting 900 students directly. “I am hoping we look really hard at this program because I think we need to,” Nelson said.

Stead responded that shifting academic programs warrants more planning time, and that she sees looking at effective program supports and results as the work of next year. “This is not about a move – this is about a thorough review from a program perspective,” she argued. She also pointed out that the achievement gap and discipline gap are not just Clemente problems, but district-wide issues, and that the program review needs to be comprehensive.

Stead explained her fear that without deeper cuts this year, AAPS could face the situation of not having enough fund equity to make payroll next summer, when the state aid payments are suspended. She noted that her concerns are based on the fact that the district ended up using $2.3 million out of fund equity this year to cover unanticipated spending, and that the MPSERS offset and best practices funding are not guaranteed to continue.

Stead said she is very concerned that using $8 million of fund equity this year does not position the district for financial sustainability next year, and suggested again that the board consider cutting all transportation out of the 2012-13 budget for a savings of $3.5 million. She argued that cutting transportation will require a “concerted effort from the entire community, city, carpools, everything you can think of,” but that so far, efforts at working on transportation have been “piecemeal.”

Thomas disagreed, pointing out that for the last three years, AAPS has been spending down fund equity at the rate of only $1.7 million a year, and that using $7 million this year is a reasonable and conservative way to address the current deficit. He said he had been present at the last AAPS Educational Foundation (AAPSEF) meeting, and that there was some discussion there of how the AAPSEF could offset some of the cuts. He also noted that the PTO thrift shop might be willing to make some kind of contribution, and that University Bank has come forward with $5,000 to help with the music camps. “What this illustrates,” Thomas said, “is that there is some willingness in the community to use private funding to help offset some of these cuts.”

Thomas said he would like to be able to sit down in October (2012), not April (2013) and hear the administration’s plan to eliminate another $14 to $18 million in 2013-14. He said he’d like to hear the plan in detail, similar to what was presented at this first formal budget briefing. It’s important to start the conversation in October [of 2012, for planning the 2013-14 budget], he said, because “we don’t have very many bullets left in our gun. What we are left with for next year is transportation as a whole, our contracts with bargaining units, reducing teachers by a truly drastic number, closing schools, and redistricting. And, closing schools has a ripple effect on transportation. These will all require a great deal of thought.”

Mexicotte asked Allen how much the district needed to keep in fund equity to be able to make payroll over the summer, and Allen said $9 million. “Then that’s the magical number – $9 million,” Mexicotte said. “It is the number after which we give money to the state to lend us money they should be giving us in the first place.” She argued that the difference between leaving $9 million, $10 million, or $11 million in fund equity “hardly makes a difference” because the district is facing $14 million more in cuts next year.

Mexicotte said that one of the visions she has kept in her mind all these years as a trustee is to keep AAPS above the line of solvency, and that she is comfortable spending $6-$7 million from fund equity this year.

Lightfoot agreed that she is comfortable with spending $6 million from fund equity if “we do nothing next year but plan, plan, plan.”

Patalan said that over the past six years, AAPS has made approximately $70 million in reductions – that’s just huge. “Of course, we’re all feeling fairly depressed,” she said. She added it also frightens her to allow fund equity to get so low, and that doing so was “truly a gamble. … You almost feel naked without something [to protect] against the future, and what the future could be.” The district’s ending fund equity balance for the current fiscal year is projected to be $18.73 million.

2012-13 Budget: Board Discussion – Revenue Enhancement

Nelson said the community does have other options – one is to keep pushing for legislative change at the state level, and another is to try again to pass a countywide schools enhancement millage. Passing such a millage, Nelson said, will require a very strong effort by citizens who care about education, “but one doesn’t get it done without starting. I urge the citizens out there who feel that education of the children in Washtenaw County is being threatened to not be as excellent as they deserve and need for the world they are going to live in, that we start talking about the enhancement millage.” [A countywide enhancement millage was on the November 2009 ballot and defeated, with 57.4% of voters voting against it, though it was supported by a majority of Ann Arbor voters.]

Stead said passing a revenue enhancement millage at the county level would be difficult, and that while she would support such efforts, AAPS also needs to keep working for a statewide solution. “There is a real structural issue,” she said. “Education should not be so subject to partisan politics that we compromise our entire future as a result… I would hope people would work with us… to focus on revoking Proposal A.” [Passed in 1994, Proposal A was a ballot initiative that aimed to create more equitable funding across all districts and to keep property taxes from escalating dramatically. Proposal A took away, to a significant degree, local control over school funding, though districts can still request voter approval to levy local millages for building construction, repairs, and maintenance.]

This was the first briefing on the 2012-13 budget. The budget will come before the board again for a second briefing and vote at the next regular board meeting on June 13.

2012-13 Budget: Public Hearing

Deb Mexicotte noted that the proposed budget has been posted on the district’s website, and invited anyone in the room to speak on the budget.

A parent in the Georgetown neighborhood spoke about the suggested consolidation of bus runs to Bryant and Pattengill schools. She pointed out that while adding 10 minutes to a bus route does not seem that long, it makes the run 40 minutes long at the end of the day for a 6-year-old. She also noted that the buses currently serving the students in her neighborhood are really full, and that it might not be realistic to think about eliminating a bus when you factor in fifth grade instruments needing space too.

A Clemente parent offered some perspective on the Clemente summer school program. She said that when Clemente first started in 1974, it was a 12-month program, and that the Clemente philosophy addresses the belief that students lose a lot over the summer. Students do take academic classes, and Clemente does offer Read 180 and credit recovery, she said, but it also orients students to the way classes will be conducted in the fall. Incoming 9th graders are offered an “intro to biology” class to prepare them to take biology in the fall and be successful. Also, students are given help with basic math, she said, to prepare them for the concepts they will be learning in the regular school year.

2012-13 Budget: Public Commentary

Eighteen people addressed the board during the regular public commentary period at the beginning of the meeting. Sixteen discussed Roberto Clemente Student Development Center, which had originally been proposed to be closed or restructured as part of the budget. Two other speakers discussed transportation services, which are slated for further reduction under the proposed budget as well.

2012-13 Budget: Public Commentary – Roberto Clemente

Members of the Clemente community thanked the board for taking Clemente “off the chopping block” for this coming year, but expressed concerns about board process, the district-wide achievement gap faced by African-American students, and the board’s “lack of respect” for Clemente students. Many students gave testimonials about how Clemente had changed their lives, and how it was stressful to live with the fear that their school would be taken away in the future.

Kathleen Ardon said she has not felt the board was listening during public commentary. She cited sidebar conversations, superintendent Patricia Green getting up to talk to another administrator, and the limited speaking time allowed. She suggested to trustees that they “try limiting your comments to 90 seconds each, as we have been made to do.” Lexanna Marie Lyons echoed Ardon, noting that at the May 9 board meeting, “a young white girl got to speak about her experiences at A2 Tech and read a letter.” Lyons noted that while that girl got to speak as long as she wanted, Clemente students were limited to a minute and a half each, and “they did not receive the praise this white girl received.”

Lyons said that as an African-American female, she has experienced many forms of racism and that she feels racism right now. Student Corey McDonald added, “Why set a time limit for speech when you stay here for…I don’t know how [long], but… a very long time.”

Student Mackenzie Caddell said she was “terribly embarrassed” and “mortified” when she saw the Clemente achievement data shared at the May 16 board committee meeting. However, Caddell continued, after reviewing data on African-American achievement district-wide, she “concluded that AAPS is only exceptional for students that are not of color…It isn’t black students’ failure – it’s a shared failure.” She noted that the positive impact that Clemente has had on students’ attitudes and behavior “cannot be seen on paper.”

Clemente teacher Mike Smith also addressed the achievement data discussed on May 16, and presented comparable data for African-American students at the three comprehensive high schools. Saying that he agreed that Clemente’s test scores were “abominable” and “damnable,” he noted that the achievement data for African-Americans students are very concerning across the district. Smith noted that only 53% of African-American 11th graders at the comprehensive high schools scored proficient in reading on the Michigan Merit Exam (MME), compared to 88% of their Caucasian counterparts. In math, the MME proficiency numbers are similar – Caucasian 86%, African-American 43%, Smith said.

Cierra Reese asserted that the achievement gap starts in elementary school, and Charlae Davis added that closing the achievement gap requires looking at “the big picture,” including the study of qualitative data, such as the information presented by students and their families.

Regarding a perceived lack of respect, parent Tara Cole referenced how a board member said she had felt threatened at the last meeting and that there had been a lack of respect shown for the board. Cole said the Clemente community feels the same way. Cassandra Parks said she is not convinced the board is concerned about these students, and reminded the students gathered, “You have to exercise our right and make sure the people in power really care about us.” After finishing her own comments, Parks also interrupted public commentary later in the meeting to call out teachers’ union president Brit Satchwell for distracting the board by typing loudly while people were speaking. Mexicotte asked Parks to be seated. Satchwell apologized for the perceived disrespect and closed his laptop.

Student Tyler Sheldon said students “feel that we have been kicked aside as lower-income minorities, so unfortunately, it makes us wonder, if we came from upper middle class two-parent households, would this have been considered?”

Public commentary on Clemente at the May 23 meeting also offered many examples of the qualitative data noted by Davis. Tia Jones and Alexandra Botello argued that the cost of educating Clemente students should not be relevant. Jones said she is finally getting the education she deserves and has been wanting her whole life, and Botello noted that the bullying and assault she faced in other AAPS schools was not present at Clemente.

Harmony Redding, Jermia Castion, and Caleb LeHuray noted the positive effect that Clemente has on students who have struggled elsewhere. “Roberto Clemente has been a gateway to education for many students,” LeHuray asserted. “You need to leave it alone as it is so the future students can see the value of their education and be successful later on.”

David Bullard and Corey McDonald warned that closing or consolidating Clemente will cause many students to drop out or return to their old bad habits. McDonald also pointed out that Clemente students will be looked at as “lower class” by students at other schools if the program is consolidated.

2012-13 Budget: Public Commentary – Busing

Jill Zimmerman thanked the board for allowing modified busing to continue to Ann Arbor Open, and said it will “make a huge difference in the lives of many families.” She also noted that it seems like eliminating busing district-wide is a “very real possibility” in the coming year. She encouraged the board to continue discussion with the community as this is considered. Zimmerman said the budget process in general should start sooner in order to realize the most savings with the least negative impact on families.

Patty Kracht urged the board to keep building administrators involved in the budget planning as it affects individual schools. She noted that when she heard about the consolidation of Bryant and Pattengill busing routes, she called the principal of her child’s school to ask if start times would be staggered. The principal did not know the answer and had not been included in the re-routing planning. “Please,” Kracht said, “if you’re not going to involve parents, at least involve administration.”

2012-13 Budget: Clarification on Public Commentary

Trustee Christine Stead spoke about the board process and structure surrounding public input. She noted that 45 minutes of public commentary is allotted at every meeting, and that the time is divided among all those who sign up to speak. [Each speaker is allotted 4 minutes. In the event that more than 11 people sign up to speak, the 45 minutes is divided equally among all speakers.] Stead also noted that student reports, given on a rotational basis by representatives from each of the high schools, are intended to be more in-depth reports, and that Clemente was on the schedule for the May 23 meeting. “Tonight, that person can take as much time as they would like,” she said, stressing that the trustees “absolutely want to hear students’ voices.”

Board president Deb Mexicotte offered clarification on the building of Skyline High School. She said the $92 million that paid for Skyline was part of a $240 million bond allocated by taxpayers to provide improvements to every building in the district, as well as to build the new school. Mexicotte explained that bond funds cannot be used for operating expenses. She said the district would love to be able to raise operating dollars from its taxpayers, but is legally prohibited from doing so.

Regarding disproportionality in discipline referrals, superintendent Patricia Green said she agrees there are disparities that parallel national trends, but said that it is being addressed. She noted that AAPS has instituted a multi-year plan to eliminate both the achievement and discipline gaps across the district.

2012-13 Budget: Roberto Clemente Student Report

Tia Jones volunteered to give the student report for Clemente, and started by simply saying, “We have said all we have had to say,” and reminding trustees that they are all invited to come see the school. Deb Mexicotte noted the concern expressed during public commentary that Clemente students have not had unlimited time to address the board, and explained that the student report is untimed. Jones asked if other students would also be given a turn to speak, and was told no.

Jones then shared some of her own story, saying that before Clemente, she had attended Dicken for all of elementary, then Slauson, Scarlett, and Eastern Washtenaw Multicultural Academy (a local charter school) for middle school, and finally Huron for 9th grade. “I remember teachers telling me never to try, that I would never be anyone,” Jones said. She said that in 6th grade, she did not know the Pledge of Allegiance, and that she felt out of place during her 8th grade year at EWMA, since the majority of students were of Middle Eastern descent. Finally, Jones recounted, “At Huron, I felt really bad due to an issue outside of school. Counselors did not know what to do with me.”

When she got to Clemente, Jones said, “Dr. E [Clemente principal Ben Edmondson] did not allow [me] to fail.” She told trustees that when the cuts to Clemente were proposed, it got to her because she knows what the school has offered her and her peers. “It shelters us, nurtures us. We spend most of our time at school.”

Board President’s Report

Deb Mexicotte reported on the board’s May 16 committee of the whole. In addition to going through a facilitated discussion to direct administration about board priorities during this trying time, she said, other topics discussed at the meeting were: how personalized learning is approached in AAPS; the possible creation of a transportation working group; and the superintendent evaluation timeline.

For full coverage of the non-budget May 16 committee of the whole agenda items, see Chronicle coverage: ”AAPS Begins Superintendent Evaluation.”

Transportation Study Committee

At the May 16 committee of the whole meeting, trustee Simone Lightfoot had suggested that the board convene a working group to study transportation sustainability in the district. After some discussion, trustees agreed to direct administration to convene such a group, and Deb Mexicotte said she would write up a request to do so, since the board does not take official action during committee meetings.

Transportation Study Committee: Formal Request to Administration

During the information section of the May 23 meeting, Mexicotte read a draft of the administrative request that she had written based on her notes from the May 16 committee meeting. Trustees subsequently approved the creation of an administrative working group “for the purpose of studying and reporting on the sustainability of school bus transportation for AAPS students.”

Mexicotte read the entire formal request into the record of the meeting. In summary, it outlined the board’s reasons for wanting to charge administration with convening such a group, saying it seems “prudent” to study the “short-term and long-term funding, support, partnerships, and solutions for school transportation” in order to understand AAPS’ role in the system, now and in the future.

In the request, the board charged the committee with examining three questions:

(1) Can we create a district-wide plan which includes short-term and long-term strategies, and that maintains district-funded transportation for students in AAPS? If so, under what circumstances (time, partnerships, delivery models, targeted student populations, funding strategies)?

(2) If not, what are the alternatives that might be considered or implemented (partial or complete elimination, privatization, partnerships, needs-based grants or services)? and

(3) What are the general and specific impacts on changing, reducing, or eliminating district-funded transportation as it relates to our strategic and educational outcomes and goals?

The request also asked the superintendent to be sure to include a diverse group of stakeholders on the committee, including administrators, representatives of other public and governmental entities, parents, students, and board members. It also said specifically that the working group could be made up entirely of members from an already existing committee, such as the Transportation Safety Committee or the City/Schools committee, or could be a newly created group, at the superintendent’s discretion.

Finally, it was requested that the board hear progress updates from the group on a regular basis, and that the process of completing the study and offering recommendations come back to the board by January 2013, in time to inform the FY 2013-14 AAPS budget.

Transportation Study Committee: Board Discussion

All of the trustees except for Christine Stead were immediately supportive of the creation of such a committee as outlined by Mexicotte. Stead suggested instead that perhaps a long-term financial planning group be assembled, and said that regarding transportation, she would rather have the district leverage the structure already in place rather than make a new committee. She also questioned the utility of having the committee vet the sustainability of school bus transportation without complete funding information, and asked, “Where does this tie into our strategic plan?”

Andy Thomas said there are specific issues regarding transportation that the board and the district need to address, which would make such a committee useful. He named the following as examples: “What is the impact of any reduction or the complete elimination of transportation to the district – which population will be affected? What is the impact on neighborhoods where schools are located? Will there be a huge increase in auto traffic? What are the environmental safety ramifications of this? What are the ramifications on specific programs; for example, what good does it do to keep Clemente open if there is not transportation to get to that location?”

Irene Patalan said the timeline piece was important to her, so that the committee can offer the board recommendations for the next budget cycle. Simone Lightfoot said it was important to her that the committee includes more than the “same people as usual,” and Susan Baskett added that committee members should feel free to bring their thoughts, comments, and questions without reservation. To Stead, Baskett answered that forming a transportation committee falls under strategic goal number six of the district’s strategic plan, which has to do with earning the public’s trust.

Multiple trustees and superintendent Patricia Green commended Mexicotte for the wording of her request, which noted the flexibility of the committee to define “sustainability” and other metrics. Green said, since she would be leading this effort, that she would “like to go at this not with a road map, but with a compass… All the stakeholders will develop the road map, while the compass sets the direction and keeps [the work] going in that direction.”

Mexicotte wondered whether the questions raised by Thomas would be addressed by the committee within the three study questions she had listed (see above) to define its work. Thomas said he did not think the request needed to be amended, but that it’s important not to lose sight of the interrelationship between transportation and other issues. For example, he said, “If we find that we find it necessary to close one or more buildings, students will be expected to travel longer distances to get to their schools. Are we going to still cut transportation? It’s hard to look at one piece of this without looking at the whole blob.”

Stead said she would like to see this group convene very quickly and meet a couple of times this summer, with the community, city, and police involved. Green said she would also like to move this very quickly, and is planning to dovetail with meetings that AAPS already has on the calendar with the city and Ann Arbor Transportation Authority because “once school ends, the momentum is lost.”

Mexicotte asked the board if it was amenable to placing the creation of this administrative transportation study committee on the consent agenda, and the board agreed. Mexicotte said she appreciated Green’s enthusiasm to move forward quickly, and also that she liked the template she created for making a nice, clear request to administration. “I like how it clarified my thinking when I wrote this up, and if we can do this in the future, that would be great,” she said.

Outcome: The creation of an administrative transportation study committee was approved unanimously by the board as a special briefing item on the May 23 consent agenda.

Sale of Technology Bonds

Superintendent Patricia Green thanked the public again for the passage of the tech bond millage and said the district is now moving on directly to the sale of the bonds.

By way of background, voters approved the millage at a May 8, 2012 election. The technology bond proposal is for AAPS to issue a total of $45,855,000 general obligation bonds to pay for acquiring and installing instructional technology and technology infrastructure. The estimated tax rate that would be required to service the debt on the bonds is 0.48 mill (or $0.48 per $1,000 of a property’s taxable value.) The estimated annual average millage rate required to retire the bonds of this issue is 0.51 mills.

Robert Allen, AAPS deputy superintendent of operations, said that the administration recommends using the same bond counsel, financial advisor, and underwriters as used for the recent 2012 bond refinancing, and noted that the tech bonds need to be sold before July 1. He said the district would like to get started this summer on the work approved by voters with the passage of the bond, and asked the board to consider approving the resolution for the sale of the bonds as a special briefing item.

Trustee Andy Thomas asked what the maturity date was for the first group of bonds. Allen replied that it varied among the $27 million in bonds in the first phase. Thomas also asked if Allen knew what the interest rate would be, and Allen said he did not know, but that market conditions are still good and he expects a favorable rate.

Christine Stead thanked Allen and his team for getting this put together so quickly and having this prepared for the board.

Outcome: The sale of the technology bonds was approved unanimously as a special briefing item as part of the May 23 consent agenda.

Anti-Bullying Policy

Dave Comsa, AAPS deputy superintendent of human resources and general counsel, responded to questions the board had asked during the May 9 first briefing of the district’s new anti-bullying policy.

Regarding the assurance of confidentiality in the bullying investigation, Comsa pointed to regulation 4.4, which indicates that confidentiality will be maintained to the highest degree possible. He noted also that retaliation against a “whistleblower” is explicitly prohibited by the policy, and is also addressed in regulations 4.2 to 4.22.

Regarding training for staff, Comsa noted that regulation 2.2 states there will be such training. He also said the policy would be published beyond the Rights and Responsibilities handbook, as requested by the board.

Comsa reported that in response to a request for a timeline for investigations, regulation 5.4.1 states that the goal will be to complete all bullying investigations within five school days of receiving a complaint.

He noted that cyber-bullying is covered by this policy too, as the definition of bullying it uses includes the phrase “any electronic communication.” And finally, Comsa said that the policy applies to everyone listed under “organizational units affected,” and that it does include parents.

Andy Thomas said he was not completely satisfied that a question he asked at the last meeting had been sufficiently addressed – how far does the policy go when the bullying is off school property? Comsa said that the key point to consider is whether there is a nexus in the school. He noted that “our control only extends so far,” but if the incident substantially impacts or interferes with the operation of the school, it would be covered by the policy. Deb Mexicotte added that if a fight between students outside of school causes intimidation in school, it would fall under the anti-bullying policy.

Thomas confirmed, “So there does have to be some kind of connection with the school?” And Comsa replied, “Yes, we are not a policing force for the entire community.”

Mexicotte opened up a public hearing on the anti-bullying policy but no one spoke to the board on this issue.

Outcome: Policy 5800, Anti-Bullying was approved unanimously as part of the May 23 consent agenda.

Washtenaw Intermediate School District Budget

Christine Stead reported that she had asked the board’s questions from the first briefing on the Washtenaw Intermediate School District budget, and WISD officials had sent a reply. Items included: a list of what is contained in “central services;” the AAPS portion of the transportation budget, totaling $6.9 million; a line-by-line breakdown of all budgets; a 3-year rolling budget table, noting the shift next year from a 67% to a 56% reimbursement rate for special education services; a list of local school improvement expenses; and a copy of their 2009-10 annual services report, which reviews the services they provide by region.

Deb Mexicotte referred to a binder that had been provided to each trustee, and pointed out that Tab 6 lists the teaching and learning initiatives of the WISD and indicates whether AAPS is involved in each one.

Glenn Nelson said that regarding the future, he would like to see the WISD budget provide more detail, particularly as it affects AAPS, and that the board members would like to be informed constituents of the WISD. In the resolution supporting the WISD budget, Nelson suggested adding an amendment to be sure his suggestions were addressed. He noted that the one-time provision of information since the first briefing on May 9 had mostly addressed his concerns for this time, but that he would like to see such information provided regularly in the future as well.

Nelson’s amendment was included in the final resolution, and Mexicotte asked board secretary Amy Osinski to include the amended language in a color other than black and to make the WISD aware of the amendment.

Simone Lightfoot lauded the WISD for providing a detailed breakdown of transportation costs, and Christine Stead added that getting this amount of data together in a week was appreciated.

Outcome: The WISD budget was supported by a resolution included on the May 23 consent agenda.

Consent Agenda

In addition to the items noted above as being contained in the consent agenda (transportation committee formation, sale of tech bonds, anti-bullying policy, and WISD budget), the consent agenda also contained a set of policies, and requests from the city of Ann Arbor for two property easements for the replacement, maintenance, and repair of water mains.

There was virtually no discussion on the easements, or on policies 5160 (Student Classification and Retention), 5170 (Elementary Reclassification and Acceleration), 6120/6100 (Pilot Projects/Curriculum Development), 7800/5200 (Parental Involvement/Progress Reporting), 7810 (Parental Involvement Title I), 5300 (field trips), and 7400 (donations).

Deb Mexicotte thanked superintendent Patricia Green and her administration for looking hard at the policies and said she appreciated in particular the “reinvention” of the Pilot Projects policy in the manner presented. Simone Lightfoot said she had raised concerns about student transportation in the field trip policy, and deputy superintendent Robert Allen said that was addressed in the policy’s regulations.

Outcome: The May 23 consent agenda, including the above-noted items, along with minutes approval, passed unanimously.

First Briefing: Millage Resolution and 3rd Quarter Financial Report

AAPS director of finance Nancy Hoover presented the millage resolution that will allow the district to levy taxes on the AAPS district area property owners. She noted that for the third year in a row, there was no Headlee rollback, so the millage rates will be as follows: homestead – 4.7084 mills; non-homestead – 18 mills; debt service – 2.45 mills; and sinking fund – 1 mill.

Andy Thomas asked how the refinancing of the district’s debt instruments affected the debt service millage. Hoover answered that the district’s debt service millage was $15.8 million before the refinancing, decreased to $15.3 million after refinancing, and then increased to $18.2 million after the recent passage of the tech bond. She stressed that the tech bond affects only the debt service millage, not the other three millages.

Hoover then continued, presenting the board with the third quarter financial report, which showed an overall decrease in expected revenues of $280,000 due primarily to changes in special education reimbursement. Allen added that the staffing and expenditure summaries were similar to last year at this time, and said the revenue adjustment would be made through the use of fund equity. Therefore, the district’s ending fund equity balance for the current fiscal year is projected to be $18.45 million.

Outcome: These items were brought to the board at first briefing, and will be voted on during the next regular meeting on June 13.

Association and Student Reports

Five associations are invited to make regular reports to the school board: the Black Parents Student Support Group (BPSSG), the Ann Arbor Parent Advisory Committee for Special Education (AAPAC), the Parent Teacher Organization Council (PTOC), the Ann Arbor Administrators Association (AAAA), and the Ann Arbor Education Association (AAEA). The Youth Senate is also invited to speak once a month, as are representatives from each of the high schools.

At this meeting, the board heard from a student representative from Roberto Clemente Student Development Center (see budget section above), as well as the AAPAC, PTOC, and AAAA.

Association and Student Reports: AAPAC

Scott White reported for the Ann Arbor Parent Advisory Committee for Special Education (AAPAC). As the district looks into staffing for next year, he asked that it considers hiring additional Board Certified Behavior Analysts (BCBAs) to provide support for students with autism and other behavioral issues. He argued that behavioral expertise is integral to implementing Positive Behavioral Intervention and Supports (PBIS) for students with autism. White also noted that with the passage of autism insurance coverage in Michigan, AAPS might be able to seek reimbursement for the BCBA services.

Association and Student Reports: PTOC

Amy Pachera reported that the Parent Teacher Organization Council held its last meeting of the year, and had a great celebration. She noted that a larger number of schools have attended PTOC meetings this year, and said the new slate of executive board members reflects a wider representation as well. Pachera also gave “kudos” to all citizens who voted yes on the recent tech bond millage.

Association and Student Reports: AAAA

Haisley Elementary School principal Kathy Scarnecchia reported for the Ann Arbor Administrators Association. She said that as a unit, AAAA members rely significantly on the police liaisons, who support the administrators in many different roles. The liaisons visit homes; talk with younger students about behavior and safety; help at athletic events; and watch over parking lots, among other things, Scarnecchia said. To make up the budget difference of retaining the police liaison positions, Scarnecchia suggested considering refiguring the truant officer, homeless liaison or other community service positions.

Superintendent’s Report

Patricia Green’s report highlighted a documentary she had recently seen: ”Black and Blue: The Story of Gerald Ford, Willis Ward, and the 1934 Michigan-Georgia Tech Football Game.” She said it was “timely and poignant” and that she would like each AAPS high school to show it to students before the end of the year. Green said the film depicts the story of a football game between Georgia Tech and the University of Michigan in 1934 when star UM player Willis Ward was benched, and his best friend and then-future president Gerald Ford took a stand against that decision. Green said the movie was a very powerful demonstration of what character is, and of the longstanding impact people can have on society.

For the remainder of Green’s report, she offered numerous commendations of students, staff, and schools across the district, noting that “our students really distinguish themselves.” She noted the dedication of the Pioneer track to two longtime staff members – Don Sleeman and Bryan Westfield – and thanked the supporters who came to honor these educators, noting that “people came from generations.”

Agenda Planning

Andy Thomas suggested that the budget reduction plan for the 2013-14 school year should be brought forward to the board in October of 2012, with as much detail as is possible at that time. Christine Stead also suggested shifting to a longer-term approach to budgeting, and Deb Mexicotte said perhaps the board should discuss it at a committee of the whole. The board’s next committee of the whole meeting is scheduled for July 18.

Susan Baskett said she would like to hear about how possibly redistricting would impact transportation. She also reported hearing concerns about the new graduation requirements disproportionately impacting certain subsets of the AAPS population, especially special education students, and asked how that is being addressed. Mexicotte noted that the possibility of crafting a personal curriculum exists, but Baskett said her concern was that children are not coming out with a diploma at all.

Items from the Board

Simone Lightfoot said she was late to the meeting due to attending her daughter’s spring concert at Skyline High, and she thanked the orchestra director there for a job well done. She also thanked Scarlett Middle School principal Gerald Vasquez for inviting her to participate in Portfolio Day at Scarlett, saying it was nice to interview young people and to “have the opportunity to work with them on firm handshakes and lowering their hemlines.” She also noted that Scarlett had done a good job of calling on retired staff to participate in Portfolio Day, and she urged the district to look into “ways to tap into our retirees.”

Glenn Nelson said he also attended and very much enjoyed Scarlett’s portfolio day. He also noted the AAPS student art exhibit at the University of Michigan Slusser art gallery, and the Ann Arbor/Ypsilanti Regional Chamber of Commerce’s honoring of two AAPS teachers. Finally, Nelson lauded the homebuilding program, which just purchased 12 new lots for the next 12 houses to be built. He noted that the program’s 2012 house has already sold, and thanked the staff and advisory board who support this program.

Susan Baskett said she can’t believe it’s graduation time – she congratulated all the graduates, especially those at Skyline High, who will graduate its first class this year. “Have fun, but be safe,” Baskett said.

Andy Thomas called attention to the upcoming Ann Arbor Marathon on June 17, as well as to Mainstreet Ventures’ “marathon meal” offer: For $26 from now through race day, you can purchase a marathon meal at Real Seafood, Gratzi, Palio, and a number of other restaurants and $5 of the price of that meal is contributed to the AAPS Educational Foundation.

Deb Mexicotte said graduation season was a “thrilling and joyous” time and that she was looking forward to seeing her fellow trustees at the five graduation ceremonies this year. She also said she had the pleasure of accepting an award on behalf of Baskett from the Michigan Association of School Boards (MASB), certifying Baskett as “a master board member in the state of Michigan for continuing to educate herself around boardsmanship.”

Present: President Deb Mexicotte, vice president Christine Stead, secretary Andy Thomas, treasurer Irene Patalan, and trustees Susan Baskett, Simone Lightfoot (arrived at 8 p.m.), and Glenn Nelson.

Next regular meeting: Wednesday, June 13, 2012, at 7 p.m. in the fourth-floor conference room of the downtown 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 Schools board of trustees. 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!

AAPS superintendent Patricia Green at a fall 2011 meeting. (Photo by the writer.)

The board is beginning its first evaluation of the one employee for whom it is directly responsible – superintendent Patricia Green. Green joined the district on July 1, 2011, and will undergo her first formal evaluation by the board during an executive session scheduled for June 20, 2102.

At the May 16 board meeting, trustees agreed to a process for soliciting input on Green from members of the AAPS community, including parents, principals, staff, board associations, bargaining groups, and specific people invited by trustees to participate.

The board also tentatively agreed to direct the AAPS administration to form a committee representing a wide range of stakeholders to study the sustainability of transportation services in the district. And board members affirmed the “differentiated instruction” approach to teaching used throughout the district, in lieu of maintaining a separate “gifted and talented” program.

This report covers the non-budget portions of the May 16 school board committee of the whole meeting. The budget discussion during this meeting was covered in an earlier report.

Superintendent Evaluation Process

As vice president of the board, trustee Christine Stead is charged with coordinating the annual evaluation of the superintendent. At the May 16 meeting, Stead presented the board with an evaluation rubric for their consideration, and led trustees through a discussion about including other members of the AAPS community in the evaluation process via a survey instrument.

Superintendent Evaluation: Survey Instrument

The rubric Stead presented was developed by the Michigan Association of School Boards (MASB), and contains suggestions for rating superintendents as ineffective, minimally effective, effective, or highly effective in 11 categories: relationship with the board; community relations; staff relationships; business and finance; educational leadership; personal qualities; evaluation; progress toward the school improvement plan; student attendance; student/parent/teacher feedback; and student growth and achievement.

Stead pointed out that the MASB tool is incomplete, because the state has not yet determined metrics it will require for measuring student growth and achievement. She suggested that the board should use the MASB tool to think about which categories are most important, and how the board wants to measure them as the state clarifies its requirements. For now, however, Stead suggested that the board should use the same tool it has used for superintendent evaluations in the past. She requested that board secretary Amy Osinski send a copy of the old tool to trustees, and that trustees return it to Osinski with any suggested modifications within seven days.

Superintendent Evaluation: Community Feedback

Stead asked her board colleagues if they would like to include an element of community feedback in Green’s evaluation, and they expressed general agreement that they would. Stead explained that the methodology used in the past invited a selected group of AAPS community members to complete the same survey instrument used by the board.

Trustee Susan Baskett pointed out that not many districts are doing “360-degree evaluations,” but said that the AAPS has always valued input from the community. [This type of evaluation involves a broader range of feedback, rather than just input from an employee's supervisors. For example, it can include input from people who are managed by the person being evaluated.] Trustee Glenn Nelson said that people write to the board all the time asking for that evaluation instrument.

Board president Deb Mexicotte reviewed how the collection of community feedback has been done in the past. First, board members, including the superintendent, make a list of people they would like to survey, which is intended to reflect a broad range of people in the district. Surveys are then sent to those people confidentially, along with representatives from a set of “standard stakeholders,” Mexicotte said, including bargaining units, principals, staff members, board associations, and parents. All the input that comes in is then aggregated by the board secretary and presented to the board during a closed session. “We struck a compromise between something information-seeking, but not ‘FOIA-able,’” Mexicotte said, referring to disclosure under the state’s Freedom of Information Act.

Trustee Simone Lightfoot said the process seems “secretive and not inclusive,” and suggested that the board seek broader input, such as a survey of all parents. However, several trustees weighed in against this approach.

Andy Thomas said that opening up the survey very broadly would produce negatively-skewed responses, because those responding would not necessarily be representative. Lightfoot argued that the current approach of selecting who gets to fill out a survey is skewed as well. Baskett pointed out that opening the survey up to everyone could mean that the board would get opinions from people who have never met Green, and that would not be fair. Lightfoot asked, “Will it be a requirement that [survey respondents] have met Green?”

Irene Patalan said she was very interested in the opinions of people who have had “professional encounters” with Green, such as meetings, interactions, planning, or other discussions. Lightfoot said she is also interested in hearing from the “not so well-placed and those that are moderately to minimally knowledgeable.” Mexicotte said, “If there are people you want heard, you can put them on the list.” Lightfoot replied that she did not have a list of people in mind, but would like instead to make the process available to everyone.

There are some people in the community who might not have had the opportunity to work with Green, Baskett said, but the board should hear from them, too. She suggested, “The broader community will know that we are doing this evaluation and will have the opportunity to reach out to us as public servants, and we can decide if we want to take their input or not.”

Stead stated that if you have not met a person, you cannot give feedback on that person. She said it would not be constructive to solicit input from everyone in the district, and that seeking “favorability ratings” would not be a good use of public funds. “I’m very interested in [the opinions of] people who have met with and worked with our superintendent enough,” Stead said. “I am less interested in [the opinions of] people who have only read articles in annarbor.com.”

Mexicotte, Thomas, and Nelson each spoke about the fact that evaluating the superintendent is a primary task of the board itself, and that while the board can certainly choose to solicit public comments – and indeed will very likely get e-mails related to this – trustees ultimately have to make the decisions themselves.

Lightfoot argued that the board owes it to people to solicit broader input, and that the board should be less concerned with controlling what people say and more concerned with evaluating their comments. “We want all the taxpayers to give us $45 million [a reference to the technology millage that voters approved on May 8], but we only want those who have met the superintendent to weigh in,” she said.

“If we are getting complaints that people do not have access to the superintendent, then it’s a double-edged sword to say we cannot allow input if they haven’t met her,” Lightfoot added.  “…I want the public to write me.”

Superintendent Evaluation: Next Steps

Baskett suggested that it has always bothered her that the board secretary has been the person to aggregate the public comments while keeping them all confidential. She recommended getting someone from outside of the current administration to do that task. She noted that her suggestion was “nothing personal” against board secretary Amy Osinski, “who we know and love.” Baskett suggested that former deputy superintendent of instruction Lee Ann Dickinson-Kelley – or someone else nearby, retired, and familiar with the district – could objectively collect the data.

Stead asked if the board wanted to do a favorability poll, and trustees indicated they did not. She then asked if the trustees wanted to create a list of people to survey, consistent with past practice, and they indicated that they did. Stead asked for suggestions about how many people each trustee could add to the list. Mexicotte suggested five to seven, but added that there should be no official limit.

Osinski said the board has usually sent out about 70 surveys, and 50-60 are typically returned.

Stead then charged Mexicotte with identifying people who could be the collection point for community feedback. Mexicotte said she would identify someone within 48 hours. Patalan said that if there was not time to find an alternate person, Osinski could perform the task this year and that would be fine.

Mexicotte asked Green if she would like to say anything, and Green replied that she had enjoyed listening to the discussion.

Stead concluded that within seven days, a data collection person will have been identified, and the board will have provided feedback on the survey tool and lists of community members to survey. Then, she said, the tool can be sent out to the community members, who will have 1-2 weeks to respond. The board will then meet in executive session on June 20 to conduct the superintendent evaluation.

Transportation Committee

Deb Mexicotte invited Simone Lightfoot to speak about a subcommittee that Lightfoot has been interested in setting up. Lightfoot introduced the idea of creating a board subcommittee to look at sustainable solutions to the transportation issues facing the district, and suggested the group could include Ann Arbor city councilmembers, the mayor, students who ride the bus and their parents, and transportation experts from the University of Michigan. She added that the board should “hold harmless” transportation services while the committee worked on a sustainable plan.

Mexicotte said it is not required that the board both set up a committee to study this and hold transportation harmless – that is, not make cuts to the transportation budget – until the study is complete.

Andy Thomas questioned whether a board committee with community representatives and members of other organizations is really a “subcommittee” of the board. Mexicotte, Susan Baskett and Glenn Nelson cited examples of other committees that have included participation by outside organizations or community members. Mexicotte pointed out that the committee that was created to redraw attendance boundaries after Skyline High School was built was an administrative committee, not a board committee, and that it worked well because it had a specific task.

Baskett asked for clarification on the difference between an administrative committee and a board committee.

Mexicotte answered that the difference is who is charging the committee, and directing its work and reporting cycle. The advantage of creating a board committee on transportation is that the board would have complete control over the process, she said. The disadvantages of forming a board committee rather than an administrative one, she said, are that board members might not be the experts needed to do the work, and it’s more work for board members as “citizen-volunteers.” She suggested that the board could task a group with creating the best plan possible to transport students if high school busing is completely eliminated in 2013-14.

Christine Stead suggested that rather than form a new committee at all, the board could ask the existing transportation safety committee (TSC) to look into this. Mexicotte suggested also considering the city-schools committee.

Lightfoot said it’s not fair to talk about eliminating transportation until the impact is discussed. “It seems like we are going to vote on the budget and then look at all the detail. How can I reconcile that black, brown, and economically disadvantaged students will take the brunt of these cuts?” she asked. Responding to the suggestion to use the TSC, Lightfoot added, “I am not for reinventing wheels. I am for inventing wheels that need to be invented, though.” She said she liked the idea of cross-governmental units, like the city-schools committee, working together.

Baskett pointed out that in the past, she has known people to feel “used” on administrative committees that are “top-heavy,” and said she wants to be sure the board affords community residents a real voice. Mexicotte said that challenge would be the same whether the committee formed is led by the board or by the administration.

Nelson suggested that it would be appropriate to create an administrative committee to take up this issue, and Irene Patalan agreed. Lightfoot said she would be amenable to that. But Lightfoot wondered what would make the process any different than what is already in place. Mexicotte answered, “The reason it’s different than people sending us things is that there is a structure, an agenda, milestones, and an expectation of an outcome. That’s what different – even though at the beginning you have a million ideas on a table, there is a process to work through them.”

Stead and Thomas each pointed out that it’s not realistic to think about transportation as sustainable. Thomas said there are two points of view in this debate – one that views maintaining lower class sizes as the most important goal, and another that views offering transportation services as an issue of social equity – that is, that transportation must be preserved, even if it means lowering the quality of education for all.

Baskett said she would support the formation of an administrative committee on transportation as a way to engage the community in future planning, and pointed out that people might suggest options that the board has not considered. She added that members of both the city-schools and TSC committees could be invited to join the new committee.

Mexicotte indicated that she was of two minds. On the one hand, she said, the administration has already vetted this budget, and she questioned pulling out one topic for extra consideration. But on the other hand, she said she was open to forming a committee, if the board thinks it requires a different level of scrutiny.

Baskett said she does not feel assured that the administration has sufficiently studied every issue. She said she has felt uninformed of the administration’s work in determining the impacts of their budget recommendations. Responding to Baskett, Nelson noted the budget proposal did have a column that listed impacts.

Nelson then said that from his perspective, what differentiates transportation somewhat is that it’s inter-governmental. He said an internal transportation committee would not be as effective as one with representation from the schools, the city, and the Ann Arbor Transportation Authority (AATA). Mexicotte said she found Nelson’s argument compelling.

Patalan called on district parents to help get kids to school. She said she is very interested in working with different governmental entities with the expertise of different communities and different PTOs (parent-teacher organizations). Patalan also said she believes that when the administration makes suggestions, it means they have done their best.

Stead said she would also support an administrative committee on this issue, regardless of the budget. She noted that the district could use work on placing crossing guards, and working with the city on not ticketing parents for idling their cars during pick-up and drop-off if driving to school increases due to transportation cuts. [The city of Ann Arbor does not currently have an anti-idling ordinance, although the issue has been discussed.]

Mexicotte asked for agreement from the board would like to put together a framework for charging the administration to engage in a comprehensive assessment of the sustainability of transportation in this district, with a wide range of stakeholders. The group would report back to the board by December of 2012 or January of 2013 at the latest.

Stead responded by saying  she had a different view on the milestones of the committee, adding that if transportation is fully eliminated, “we want that group to be working hard over the summer.”

Mexicotte said the board could discuss the specific charge to the committee at the next regular board meeting on May 23.

Gifted and Talented Programming

In response to a request from Christine Stead, the AAPS administration brought a report to the board explaining why the district does not have a discrete gifted and talented program, but instead focuses on employing “differentiated instruction” in all classrooms. Superintendent Patricia Green said their report would give some background on how differentiation works in AAPS. Alesia Flye, AAPS deputy superintendent of instruction, added that she will also describe “differentiated instruction” and speak to how it is used to meet the needs of higher-achieving students, and how it relates to the district’s strategic plan.

Gifted and Talented Programming: Administrative Presentation

Differentiated instruction, Flye explained, is teaching in a way that meets the instructional needs and learning styles of all students in a classroom. It is instruction that is inquiry-based, open-ended, multi-faceted, concept-centered, interdisciplinary, interest-based, and student-selected. Flexible skill-grouping is also a major component of differentiated instruction.

Flye note that differentiated instruction is well-suited to meeting the needs of both gifted students and high achievers, and that AAPS will be providing professional development to strengthen the use of differentiated instruction throughout the district.

Flye then highlighted elements of differentiated instruction used in AAPS by core subject area, and noted that overall there is a “no ceiling” policy, meaning students can always achieve higher levels of learning. In English language arts, Flye said, elementary students receive small group instruction; middle school students use My Access software to reach writing instruction far above grade level; and high school students have access to accelerated and advanced placement (AP) classes. Glenn Nelson added that AAPS students also take courses at the University of Michigan and Washtenaw Community College.

Susan Baskett asked how small group instruction is implemented in elementary classrooms. Dawn Linden, AAPS assistant superintendent of elementary education, said that literacy class would begin with whole group instruction, and then students work in leveled reading groups, with the teacher rotating from group to group. In math, Linden said, the district is piloting a guided math program that is similar. Green added that this model very significantly does not create fixed groups of students, but flexible ones. “Without flexibility,” she said, “you are tracking students – this is not that.”

Science classes at the elementary level, Flye said, are taught with an inquiry-based approach and the program supports cross-curricular tie-ins. In middle and high schools, AP courses are offered, along with magnet programs, career and tech ed internships, and a variety of extracurricular options for enrichment, such as robotics and the Science Olympiad.

In social studies, Flye noted, secondary options include AP classes, an accelerated American studies course, humanities, magnet programs, community resource classes, and integrated/blended classes.

Linden connected differentiated learning to personalized learning plans, which are a key part of the district’s strategic plan. She explained that the Northwest Evaluation Association (NWEA) test, parent conferences, and detailed report cards offer teachers tools to identify realistic goals for every student on a quarterly basis.

Flye said that AAPS has not been consistent about providing uninterrupted blocks of time for literacy and math instruction at the elementary level, but that her team is working closely with all the buildings to achieve this. Green noted that “what has traditionally been done is those master schedules are set around the specials [art, music, physical education, library, and humanities] and those become the drivers, but this will totally reverse that.” She said that standardizing instruction blocks will make better use of district resources, and be a step forward instructionally.

At the secondary level, Linden said, personalized learning plans bring in career development and contain both short and long-term goals.

Flye closed the presentation by summarizing the gifted and talented programming in two comparable districts – in Utica, Mich., and in Waterloo, Iowa. In Utica, she said, students are identified at the end of third grade and participate in enrichment activities led by teachers or parents outside of the school day, such as social studies olympiad, science olympiad, Lego robotics, and chess club. In Waterloo, Flye explained, the district pays for a special teacher who provides direct support to academically gifted and talented students in the classroom and offers them some extended activities.

In both cases, Flye said, formal identification of academically gifted and talented students leads to a program serving roughly 3% of the district’s students.

Gifted and Talented Programming: Board Discussion

The board expressed appreciation for the presentation, and support for the idea of focusing on differentiated instruction over creating a separate program for academically gifted and talented students. Their primary questions related to the testing necessary to support a differentiated instruction model.

Simone Lightfoot argued that the amount of testing is a concern, and asked if any more tests would be added. Flye said that no more tests would be added and that the district is “data rich.” Flye added the challenge is teaching teachers to use data to plan instructionally for each student, and noted that the NWEA test is a tool that provides immediate information – it really helps cater instruction to individual students.

Lightfoot asked whether any of the other tests being used can be replaced with the NWEA, and Flye said the district is looking into that. Green added that in both of the previous states where she had worked, districts she was in had done just that. “We cut back on testing that we did not feel was value-added.”

Deb Mexicotte said she agreed entirely that AAPS should be looking at its testing schedule, and ask whether “some tests that we know teachers are comfortable with are meeting our needs anymore.” She expressed skepticism that the redesigned state assessment would be rolled out on time and that it would be a good tool. She suggested that AAPS might be able to pursue a waiver if the NWEA test meets the state testing requirements. “I would rather we did the one that served our students best,” she said. Flye said a waiver might be an option.

Andy Thomas said he would like the district to continue doing differentiated learning in lieu of having a gifted and talented program. Flye agreed, and said that AAPS has not yet maximized its potential in terms of differentiated instruction. “We can get more out of our staff in terms of instructional delivery,” she said.

Christine Stead said she is worried about the effectiveness of differentiated learning in the district, and also about the awareness of differentiated instruction in the wider community. Saying that she worries about charter schools using the lure of a gifted and talented program to pull students away, Stead suggested that AAPS needs to figure out how to compete effectively by articulating how its top students are continuing to progress. She said she thinks the NWEA test will help show that, but that the story of how differentiated learning is happening needs to be captured and communicated.

Stead also suggested that tenure reform could allow the district to offer incentives to teachers to ensure that all students are progressing and not “capping out.” She said she would like to see that AAPS is able to reward teachers who can respond to differentiated groups.

Linden observed that consistency is the district’s biggest problem. Master teachers are differentiating on a daily basis, and AAPS needs to highlight what is being done. She also noted that some teachers are still uncomfortable with the NWEA tool.

Stead said that the NWEA should serve as the foundation for personalized learning plans at the elementary level, and that perhaps there should be additional parent conferences held midway through the school year. “We need to spend more time and energy packaging these things, showing the data,” she asserted.

Nelson said he likes the “no ceilings” approach, and does not like labeling kids. In addition to aggregate scores, he suggested that individual stories could illustrate the differentiated approach, such as a 10th grader taking a calculus class at the University of Michigan.

Baskett wanted more information about the opportunities to take college courses, and information about related costs. She said there are equity issues in terms of how such information is communicated in the district. Mexicotte asked the administration to send out those numbers to the board.

Flye said the district is creating a curriculum pathways document that will illustrate the complete path for elementary, middle school, and high school – all the AP classes, dual enrollment options, and all the routes through programs. Green said she is also trying to work differently with community centers and the NAACP to see if information can be disseminated through those organizations. Lightfoot urged the district to be sure the pathways document is simple to understand and not convoluted.

Irene Patalan said this approach really resonated with her as a parent and as a former teacher.

Mexicotte said it would be nice to have a phone number of someone who has complete understanding of the curriculum pathway, and that it opens doors to be able to have a conversation. She also said she really likes the idea of stories, and noted that as a special needs parent, differentiated instruction is “the word.”

Along with “no ceilings,” Mexicotte said she wants to ensure that there are “no floors and no doors, either.” For example, she said, placement testing is so rigid that it practically prevents students from being able to do it. Saying she appreciates differentiated instruction and wants the district to make it stronger and better, Mexicotte added that she also likes it because there is no gatekeeper. She also suggested that the district look into allowing accelerated students to take more than seven classes by expanding online learning options. Flye said that she was supportive of online options.

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, May 23, 2012, at 7 p.m. in fourth-floor conference room of the downtown branch of the Ann Arbor District Library, 343 S. Fifth Ave., Ann Arbor.

Trustee Christine Stead directs a question to superintendent Patricia Green while trustee Glenn Nelson looks on. (Photos by the writer.)

The proposals ranged from digital billboards on district property to enrolling international students into the district. Board reaction to the proposals was mixed.

Trustee Christine Stead described the proposals as creative, but requested the opportunity to see “both sides of the ledger” – both revenue enhancements and cuts. Trustee Andy Thomas said he was “underwhelmed” by the revenue projections.

After a special briefing on a resolution to re-fund the 2004 Building and Sites Bond, the board unanimously approved the resolution. The re-fund, or “refinance,” of the bond would mean a slightly reduced millage rate for taxpayers. The re-funding will only go through if market conditions remain favorable.

Revenue Enhancement Proposal

In advance of the budget discussions scheduled to take place in April, the board heard a presentation on a revenue enhancement proposal from top AAPS administrators – deputy superintendent for operations Robert Allen, deputy superintendent of human resources and general counsel Dave Comsa, deputy superintendent for instructional services Alesia Flye, and director of communications Liz Margolis.

In her introduction, superintendent Patricia Green said that while other districts were looking at consolidation because of budgets, AAPS is looking at all ways of enhancing the revenue streams. The board did not vote on the potential revenue enhancements. The presentation was considered informational, to be used during the future budget talks.

Board reaction to the proposals was mixed. All the trustees thanked the presenters for their hard work and their efforts in trying to find money “in all directions,” as trustee Irene Patalan put it. Trustee Christine Stead said the proposals were creative, but requested the opportunity to see “both sides of the ledger” – both revenue enhancements and cuts. Board president Deb Mexicotte appreciated the “piling up [of money] that can occur when you dig deep.”

Trustee Andy Thomas, on the other hand, said he was “underwhelmed” by the revenue projections. While he acknowledged revenue generated was money that could be spent on teacher salaries, he also said these plans were really “a drop in the bucket.”

Trustee Glenn Nelson warned that by pursuing some of the proposals such as billboard advertising, there was the possibility of losing something in “our community engagement that would come back to haunt us in the big multi-million dollar things.” Compared to bonds passed by the public, he said the “scale is completely different. We need to remember that.”

Revenue Enhancements: Billboards

Margolis introduced the possibility of billboard space working with Adams Outdoor Advertising. The proposed digital billboards would be located on three properties: Huron High School, Pioneer High School, and Wines Elementary School. She assured the board that, when pressed, Adams came back with a proposal that would guarantee an annual $100,000 return. She also highlighted the fact that the billboards could be used for emergency purposes and to promote AAPS events.

Thomas spoke strongly against the billboard proposal, declaring that “putting a billboard at [the Huron High] location is repulsive,” because the school is in a scenic part of town. He also expressed his discontent with the Pioneer location.

Mexicotte echoed the sentiment of Thomas, saying she initially had the same “horrific” reaction to the billboard proposal. She amended her statement by saying she was “willing to consider it as a way to partner more closely with our local business community.”

Stead took a different approach to the billboards, questioning the safety of a lit billboard in a relatively unlit stretch of highway if it were placed in the highway ring of M-14 behind Wines. She took less issue with the Huron and Pioneer locations since both schools already had lit message boards. She also said they would not be the biggest billboards around, referring to the University of Michigan football stadium scoreboards.

Trustee Susan Baskett said she was neutral on the issue of billboards and could be persuaded one way or the other. She said she was pleased that Margolis pushed for more revenue from the deal, and that Margolis returned with more.

Trustee Simone Lightfoot also registered a neutral reaction to the billboards. She did question the length of a 20-year contract, saying she also still took issue with the length of the cell tower contracts on district property.

Revenue Enhancements: Website

Margolis also pitched the board the idea of allowing advertising on the AAPS website. She said AAPS has been monitoring Alternative Revenue Development (ARD), a group of former Detroit advertising people committed to helping public schools, and has seen them focusing on banner advertising on district websites as a revenue stream. The district would get a percentage back from ARD. Margolis offered a quarterly estimate of $37,000 in revenue that could be earned.

Patalan had a word of caution about website advertising bought by businesses outside of Ann Arbor. “Anything that looks like it’s pulling support from our local businesses,” she said, would be of concern. She noted how supportive local Ann Arbor businesses are of the school district.

Nelson noted these “advertising schemes” have an impact on local citizens’ views of the district. He cautioned against venturing into something that gives the district a direct infusion of money, but that ultimately has a negative impact on people’s opinions of the district. He expressed uneasiness at the idea that visitors to the district website would see commerce as the first thing.

Mexicotte also conveyed her struggle with the idea of advertising on the district website. She again mentioned she could be open to it, if it involved partnering with local businesses.

Because people are accustomed to seeing advertising on websites, Thomas said that proposal was fine for him. Baskett urged caution with any kind of advertising scheme.

Revenue Enhancements: Increasing Enrollment – Schools of Choice

Allen explained to the board that the district would again offer the Schools of Choice (SOC) program, which the district has offered for the past two years. For the 2012-2013 school year, 170 spaces will be made available in kindergarten through 6th grade, with an approximate $1.1 million increase in revenue. The increased revenue comes from the per-pupil allocation that students generate from the state.

Green mentioned the administration is evaluating in-district transfers at the secondary level to see if SOC could be opened up to middle and high schools as well. She said the district would be “remiss” if they didn’t take a look at what they’re doing.

Trustee Glenn Nelson at the March 21, 2012 meeting.

Nelson appreciated Green’s introduction, but noted that attracting more of the students in the district to stay with AAPS would result in getting $2,000 more per pupil, because of Ann Arbor’s greater foundation allowance. He emphasized not losing sight of “being the school of choice for students in the Ann Arbor district area.”

Mexicotte noted the district has been doing things to bring in local [in-district] students. She cited the Early College Alliance, the Options Magnet program, and Ann Arbor Tech as being part of that effort.

Stead expressed concern that bringing in 170 additional students for the 2012-13 year was “ambitious,” given that since the inception of SOC, the district has brought in a total of 170 students. Lightfoot also voiced a similar concern. Jane Landefeld, AAPS director of student accounting and research services, stated that enrollment from SOC has grown each year.

Baskett brought up the marketing campaign to increase SOC enrollment, saying it had “fizzled away.” She asked what would be done differently this time to increase the numbers.

Allen acknowledged that the administration is evaluating the data to maintain potential students who have expressed interest. Margolis said AAPS is working to attract students who live in the district. She also said that moving to an all-day kindergarten program would attract families who previously went elsewhere for an all-day program.

Nelson said attracting students to AAPS is going to depend on “our performance as a district.” He asserted it was crucial “we in Ann Arbor maintain a greater portion of excellence” than other districts.

Lightfoot wanted to make sure the impact on personnel is considered. She noted she had a difficult time explaining to the public how the district was hiring at Balas [the administration building] and laying off teachers.

Revenue Enhancements: Increasing Enrollment – I-20 Students

Another suggestion presented by Allen is to allow I-20 international students into the district. The I-20 forms allow for schools to enroll non-immigrant students with either F (academic) or M (vocational) visa classification. Schools are allowed to charge tuition to I-20 students, as well as receive the state’s per pupil foundation allowance. With the AAPS $9,000 foundation allowance, each I-20 student could generate up to $20,000, depending on the cost of tuition.

Thomas asked if the I-20 students would be enrolled at the high school level only. Allen told Thomas that nothing stopped them from being enrolled at the lower levels, but the program is focused on high school.

Trustee Andy Thomas enjoys a lighthearted moment before the break.

Thomas registered his skepticism of the long-term viability for “double-dipping” – receiving both the foundation allowance and tuition. He wondered how long it would take the state to “plug that loophole.”

Baskett said the question of allowing in-district transfers and SOC for high school students needed to be resolved before adding in I-20 students. She stated she was “concerned about the fairness and equity element.” She also expressed concern over capacity.

Nelson was “intrigued” by the possibility of bringing in I-20 students. He saw it as a way of becoming more internationally aware and astute by getting feedback from international students. He said he would love to have some students from Finland or Canada, two countries at the “top of the system,” to give some real data, not just PISA (Programme for International Student Assessment) scores.

Lightfoot had concerns about the I-20 program, wondering if the district’s resources might be hamstrung. She stressed the “great deal” of responsibility placed on the district for tracking and monitoring the I-20 students.

Mexicotte said she believed the I-20 program was a good one to explore, citing diversity and cultural exchanges. And, she said it would be a good thing for revenue.

Revenue Enhancements: Professional Development, HR and Finance Contracts

Flye emphasized the importance of professional development (PD) for implementing the Achievement Gap Elimination Plan (AGEP) and the discipline gap. [The AGEP had been discussed in detail at a March 14, 2012 committee-of-the-whole meeting.] She noted the instructional services team is looking to develop PD to be used and presented in a variety of formats at the regional level. She stated that such professional development workshops could garner $10,000 per event.

Comsa observed that the Washtenaw Intermediate School District (WISD) is reviewing eight requests for proposals for human resources (HR)/finance software, which could result in a common software for those departments countywide. If that were the case, it would open the door for AAPS to contract out its HR and legal services staff to other districts as those districts cut staff. The estimated revenue was $10,000 to $100,000.

Allen reported the finance department had been investigating the possibilities of providing business services to other districts within the county. That same common software Comsa referred to could allow for contracting out AAPS staff for payroll and accounts payable. The estimated revenue was $20,000 to $100,000 per district.

Lightfoot said the proposal was a big revenue opportunity, but she expressed concern about potential increases in staffing costs. She also noted that whatever services AAPS marketed – PD or otherwise – they needed to be exceptional.

Baskett said she recognized that the administration was talking about bringing in business, but she also saw the need potentially to reduce costs.

Nelson asked if there were any unanticipated costs for the implementation of any new software. Allen responded that while there would be implementation costs, there would be greater efficiency. He gave the example of greater efficiency in reconciling full-time equivalent staff positions (FTEs) and budget.

Revenue Enhancements: Other Items

Margolis discussed the licensing of high school logos, which she described as in its “infancy.” The district had recently undertaken a licensing program with Advantage Sports on a pilot basis. The district’s licensing agreement has been invoked with retailers who were selling unauthorized products, which has allowed the district to gain from those sales. She assured the board that the licensing agreement had not been invoked with small mom-and-pop stores, just big retailers. The result of this activity yielded $660 for the district over the course of six months.

Baskett said $660 seemed “pitiful” and asked if it were legal to choose when the licensing agreement is enforced.

Thomas said the district should get a piece of whatever money is made on logos, so it made sense to contract out services to do so.

Margolis also acknowledged AAPS had a current policy for naming rights for facilities. The current gift guidelines suggest 25% of construction costs. She said that while the district doesn’t currently have donors in that category, there is “always hope” it can attract some.

Both Thomas and Patalan took issue with selling naming rights. Thomas said it felt like they were “selling their souls.” Patalan equated it to the naming of Comerica Park, saying advertising in some places “doesn’t feel okay.” Lightfoot said she felt the same way, but she “understood the need for revenue generation.” Mexicotte noted a policy was already in place and has been primarily used for honoring in-district educators.

Stead commented on four pieces of legislation currently going through the state legislature that might affect the district’s ability to use naming rights to generate revenue.

Margolis also introduced the idea of acquiring scoreboard and timing equipment for the district’s three comprehensive high schools at no cost to the district – through an advertising contract with an Ohio company, Side Effects. The cost of the equipment would be covered with advertising on the devices. The district would begin making money after the items were paid for.

Both Baskett and Lightfoot questioned the need to replace any equipment at the recently-built Skyline High School. Later, during items from the board, Mexicotte explained that a rudimentary scoreboard had been installed at Skyline, with the idea that athletic boosters would help with upgrading the equipment in the future. She suggested thinking of it as an “upgrade,” not a replacement.

Lightfoot expressed surprise that once the equipment was paid off, the district would not receive 100% of the advertising revenue, though the district would immediately own the liability and maintenance of the equipment.

Thomas expressed a view parallel to his thoughts on website advertising. He indicated that people expect to see a certain amount of advertising on scoreboards, so the proposal was acceptable to him.

Allen also noted that building fees, newly monitored Medicaid reimbursements, and the University of Michigan parking project program were also sources of revenue. He mentioned his team was looking to update the building rental fees to make sure the costs were covered for opening the buildings. Administration is also currently evaluating fees for parking at Pioneer High School in connection with UM football games. Collected Medicaid reimbursements from WISD for the previous two years have netted $1.4 million. FY 2009-10 and FY 2010-11 audits were expected back from WISD in the next couple of weeks.

Nelson expressed his interest in the analysis for building rental fees. He said he wouldn’t assume that the revenue for building rental would go up, just because the price went up.

Stead stated the parking program resulted in about $1 million in revenue per year. She asked if the district would continue seeing about $700,000 in Medicaid reimbursement per year, and Allen confirmed that it would.

Outcome: The board did not vote on the proposed revenue enhancements. The presentation was purely informational.

Bond Re-funding Resolution

In a special briefing, the board was introduced to a bond re-funding resolution. Superintendent Patricia Green prefaced Robert Allen’s presentation by saying the current market conditions were favorable for the re-funding of the 2004 Building and Site Bond, issued for the Comprehensive School Improvement Program (CSIP). She equated the re-funding to a refinancing of a home mortgage.

Allen presented the bulk of the material to the board, accompanied by the bond underwriter and the district’s financial planner to answer any questions the board might have. Allen said the bonds in question were issued in 2004 for $123 million. With current market conditions, the district would have the opportunity to save taxpayers money over the life of the bonds.

Allen did note that since the proposal was put together on March 16, bond rates have increased, decreasing the projected net savings from $8.7 million to $7.3 million. With bond rates standing as they are, he projected the savings to be .05-.07 mills for taxpayers. [1 mill is a tax rate equal to $1 for every $1,000 of a property's taxable value.]

After clarifying with trustee Andy Thomas that the proposal is to re-fund the bonds at the earliest date possible, Allen noted the bonds were callable up to May 2014. The district’s financial planner, Paul Stauder, explained that the bonds were issued in 2004 with a 10-year call option, meaning the district must pay the current 5% interest rates for the remaining two years through the escrow arrangement. After the full 10 years elapse, the district would pay the lower interest rates.

When asked by Thomas, Stauder said the board had authorized a similar transaction back in 2007, but due to the passage of time, the authorization was “stale.” He said that if savings remained “strong and robust,” the district would execute the transaction. Board president Deb Mexicotte recalled that decision back in 2007, noting the actual re-funding did not happen because the markets changed.

Thomas mentioned this kind of re-funding is not an actual “refund” but would result in a downward adjustment of the millage for taxpayers. Stauder said it was called a re-fund according to Michigan statutes, but it was a refinancing. Trustee Glenn Nelson allowed that if the re-funding does go through, the millage rate would stand at 2.1, with a conservative estimate of .05 mills savings.

Trustee Christine Stead mentioned five bills in the state legislature, citing SB 770 and SB 771, that would impact activity such as refinancing bond or debt. She indicated she would put together a resolution to consider as a board. She expressed a desire to look at the implications of refinancing looking ahead. Stauder said the bills should not have a direct impact on AAPS, but might on surrounding districts, tying it to districts’ financial and economic health.

Outcome: The bond re-funding resolution was approved unanimously as part of the consent agenda. The consent agenda also included the second quarter financial report, minutes, and gift offers. The trustees had no discussion on the financial report, as it was fully discussed and clarified at the March 7, 2012 meeting.

Energy Savings

Randy Trent, AAPS executive director of physical properties, presented phase five of the Energy Savings Capital Improvement Performance Services project. Before he began, superintendent Patricia Green wished him a happy birthday.

Giving a little background to the energy improvements made, Trent said when he was hired in 1984, everything ran 24 hours a day. Since then, there have been four phases of improvement, and this was phase five. He stated while there was an initial cost of putting in new, more efficient equipment, the cost would be recovered in utilities savings. His department was looking to spend $7.8 million, with savings near $700,000, which shows about a 9% return. He noted there would be a likely rebate from DTE Energy of $400,000. With these improvements, the physical properties budget would drop from $5.4 million to $4.7 million per year.

Some of the improvements Trent noted were LED lighting in parking lots, classroom and hallway lighting upgrades, carbon dioxide controls, pneumatic and digital controls, and liquid pool covers. He highlighted not just the money savings but the positive environmental impact the more efficient equipment would have.

Trustee Andy Thomas clarified the capital outlay of $7.8 million would come from two sinking funds, and that the savings of $699,000 would continue every year. Trent stated his budget would be cut by roughly $700,000, ensuring the new equipment would pay for itself within 10 years. Trent also said most of the equipment had life spans well beyond 10 years.

Trustee Glenn Nelson acknowledged the sinking funds that the money would come from existed because taxpayers voted for them. He tied that to the technology bond, saying that if the technology bond passed [on May 8, 2012], general fund money would not have to be spent on technology and could be focused on teachers and supplies.

Trustee Susan Baskett asked why Trent was not proposing to go with the $5.6 million lower bid from Huron Valley Electrical. He replied the other bids received were for lighting only and were not a direct comparison.

Several of the trustees mentioned the liquid pool cover. Irene Patalan said she was going to “Google it” to learn more about it. [A liquid pool cover consists of isopropyl alcohol and other ingredients that help prevent heat loss and evaporation.] Nelson asked if the cover needed to be continually replaced. Trent responded that it was added in the same way chlorine was added. Baskett asked about the safety of the cover. Trent assured her it had been in use in other southeastern Michigan schools for the past three or four years.

Outcome: This issue will return for a second briefing at the next regular meeting.

Spring Grant Awards

Linda Doernte – AAPS director of purchasing, grants, and business support services – presented two FY 2011-12 spring grants for approval totaling $82,160.

The first grant was a new one from the AAPS Educational Foundation to fund physics equipment and hourly wages. The largest expenditure of $52,662 from the grant is for AirTracks Physics equipment, which Doernte said was the technology “expected for people in Advanced Placement (AP) courses.” Funds for hourly wages were for the Music Together program ($8,000), which engages students in core developmental areas through music and movement, and the Bridge Support for Homeless Students Liaison ($20,000), who works with unaccompanied minors and all students who meet the federal requirements for homelessness.

The second grant Doernte presented was for $1,498 from the Grant Programs Fund of the Michigan Association for Computer Users in Learning (MACUL), a local nonprofit organization. The grant would fund a 36-week project to establish computer access for a 7th grade student who is wheelchair bound, cognitively impaired, and has ataxic cerebral palsy. The goal of the project, Doernte said, would be to establish communication with a student who does not use auditory speech, using an Apple iPad 2.

Doernte stated that both grants exemplified how important technology is over a wide spectrum – from helping a student with auditory communication to AP students.

Outcome: This was a first briefing item. It will return to the board for a second briefing and vote at the next regular meeting.

Public Commentary: NWEA MAP testing

During public commentary, two people addressed the board on the topic of the Northwest Evaluation Association (NWEA) Measures of Academic Progress (MAP) test.

Parent and local blogger Ruth Kraut expressed her concerns about the NWEA MAP, which include: administering the test to early elementary students during the first weeks of school; overlap in areas evaluated – between MAP and other tests that are currently administered; showing scores to students immediately after taking the test; and the eventual use of the test to evaluate teachers.

Kraut appreciated that the board wanted to get ahead of state-mandated teacher evaluation requirements, but remained unconvinced the MAP was the way to do that. She asked that the board invite Deborah Ball, dean of the UM School of Education and head of the state’s teacher evaluation committee, to discuss the issue.

Parent Julie Roth came to the board with a compilation of concerns from parents of elementary school students regarding the NWEA MAP, some of which were similar to those expressed by Kraut. Roth’s concerns included the following: that the upcoming technology millage will be used to upgrade equipment for the primary purpose of supporting the testing; that the MAP would be used for teacher evaluation, something it was not designed to do; the frequency of testing leads to teaching to the test, and that students receive the test score immediately, which runs contrary to the district’s choice to not use grades at the elementary level.

Roth asked that the board put the test on hold to allow for greater evaluation of the test’s unintended consequences. If it weren’t put on hold, she asked that the test be administered twice instead of three times yearly, and not at all to K-2 grade students. She asked that scores not be visible to students, and that one or more overlapping tests be discontinued. She also urged that an anonymous feedback survey be circulated to teachers, principals, parents, and students.

During clarification on public commentary, superintendent Patricia Green asserted the NWEA was recommended for the purpose of benchmarking student progress three times a year. She said she will take a look at some of the issues of concern, and noted that the district’s strategic plan emphasizes personalized learning. She also referred to plans at the state level that will require all assessments to be done online. She said that is “one of the reasons why we are trying to shore up our technology with the technology bond.”

AlesiaFlye, AAPS deputy superintendent of instruction, also clarified that a committee has been reviewing the process and has been receiving feedback through the year from all levels of the organization. She maintained the primary purpose of the MAP was to give the district another tool to target instruction for students at all ends of the learning spectrum. She said she would follow up with both parents who spoke, so she had a “clear understanding of [their] concerns.”

Student Reinstatement Action

Before adjourning, the board recessed to continue their executive session, started before the regular meeting began, regarding a student discipline matter. The continued executive session lasted an additional three hours. At the end, the board approved the expulsion of Student A.

President’s Report

AAPS board meeting agendas include a report from the board president, which is an office currently held by Deb Mexicotte.

President’s Report: Intro to COTW Reports

Mexicotte began her president’s report by saying she realized there is currently no formal committee reporting out since the board consolidated the planning committee and the performance committee into one. As the chair of the committee-of-the-whole (COTW), she will report out what occurs at the COTW meetings. At the March 20 committee meeting, the board heard two presentations: the Achievement Gap Elimination Plan (AGEP) and a review of the student intervention and support services (SISS) department.

President’s Report: AGEP

Mexicotte said the AGEP report was well received by the board. [See Chronicle coverage: "Board Applauds AAPS Achievement Gap Plan"] She thanked the staff under the leadership of AAPS deputy superintendent of instruction Alesia Flye and superintendent Patricia Green. She also acknowledged the district’s equity leadership team (DELT) and DELT-A (the executive cabinet, plus seven additional administrators), saying she was impressed with the use of data. Mexicotte said the plan was made available to all building administrators. She extended the offer to anyone who wants to know more about the plan to contact the central office. The plan is also available on the Academics page of the AAPS website.

Trustee Andy Thomas also extended his thanks to the people who worked on the plan. He said it was the “first truly integrated approach” the district has taken to solving the achievement gap problem. He also acknowledged there were ways in which it could be improved but said it was the best opportunity the district had for addressing the problem.

Trustee Simone Lightfoot echoed the thanks offered by Thomas, and singled out Green. She noted the achievement gap issue had been a long struggle for her personally, but the report was worth “every tear.” She said she was ready to implement the plan, although it was “by no means perfect.” She expressed the desire to enlist students to help improve on the plan.

Trustee Irene Patalan recognized the ongoing desire the district has had to help students achieve. She said the Ann Arbor community is one that is willing to have conversations. She also expressed her appreciation for the work that went into “this living document” that will help meet the challenge of closing the achievement gap.

In her superintendent’s report, Green acknowledged Flye and Elaine Brown – AAPS assistant superintendent of Student Intervention and Support Services – for their leadership, saying, “It takes leadership to bring a vision to light the way you have.” She also thanked Michael Madison – president of the Ann Arbor Administrators Association – for his remarks and endorsement of the AGEP initiative. She indicated the next step is to develop a comprehensive implementation plan of the AGEP. She mentioned professional development plans were already in the works.

President’s Report: SISS Update

Mexicotte explained the SISS update report, presented by AAPS assistant superintendent of Student Intervention and Support Services Elaine Brown and her staff [at the COTW meeting on March 14, 2012], went “far beyond” reports received before in highlighting the achievement of bringing the district into compliance. She mentioned that SISS staff have been looking at how the district’s assistive technology can be improved, and that the technology bond would be instrumental in improving it. She also said SISS is undergoing a regular program review. Lightfoot expressed her excitement at the improvement in compliance undertaken by the department.

Association Reports

Five associations are invited to make regular reports to the school board: the Black Parents Student Support Group (BPSSG), the Ann Arbor Parent Advisory Committee for Special Education (AAPAC), the Parent Teacher Organization Council (PTOC), the Ann Arbor Administrators Association (AAAA), and the Ann Arbor Education Association (AAEA). The Youth Senate (YS) is also invited to speak once a month. The YS, BPSSG, AAPAC, PTOC, and AAAA addressed the board at the March 21 meeting.

Association Reports: Youth Senate

Pioneer High School senior Aoxue Tang reported for the Youth Senate. She thanked the board for continuing to support and invest in arts education, saying that research has shown the positive effects of music on academic skills. She also noted the cost of having the AAPS technology millage vote run as a singular voting event, causing AAPS to bear the entire burden of the $60,000 cost. The Youth Senate supports the millage, but has concern that the cost of running the election will take away from student group funding, she said.

Association Reports: Black Parents Student Support Group

Leslie McGraw reported for the BPSSG. She noted the BPSSG dedicated its March meeting to coming up with an action plan to address the district’s Achievement Gap Elimination Plan (AGEP). She thanked trustee Susan Baskett for attending the meeting. McGraw also mentioned they will be hosting a forum the morning of April 28 at Peace Neighborhood Center to show parents how to be more proactive in advocating for their children. She invited all board members and administrators to attend.

McGraw noted the work being done by the southeast area PTOC, made up of Bryant, Pattengill, Allen, Mitchell, Pittsfield, and Carpenter elementary schools. They are determining if their students are receiving the appropriate level of resources from the district. She also mentioned the BPSSG will be partnering with the Neutral Zone to engage more students of color.

Association Report: Ann Arbor Parent Advisory Committee for Special Education

Rick Altschuler reported for the AAPAC. He spoke of the Disability Awareness workshops presented in the elementary schools. He thanked trustee Christine Stead and superintendent Patricia Green for attending the Wines workshop, extending the invitation for other board members and SISS staff to attend future workshops. AAPAC volunteers have raised money for the past five to six years to purchase their own trailer and set of equipment for the workshops, which had previously been rented from Oakland County schools. He applauded the initiative of Clague Middle School staff for developing a program for incoming sixth graders. He also mentioned AAPAC’s efforts to fund a workshop coordinator position.

Association Report: Parent Teacher Organization Council

Amy Pachera reported for the PTOC. She mentioned one of the roles of the PTOC was to add resources and tools to the PTO toolbox, for all PTOs in the district. They had the Dispute Resolution Center present at the March PTOC meeting to add to their conflict resolution toolbox. The PTOC voted unanimously to support the technology millage.

Association Report: Ann Arbor Administrators Association

Dicken Elementary principal Michael Madison reported for the AAAA. He was joined by many of his colleagues so “the board and public could put a face with a name.” He recognized Brit Satchwell, the outgoing president of the Ann Arbor Education Association (AAEA) – the teachers union – saying Satchwell has been very supportive as a partner with AAAA. Madison commended the AGEP, saying the plan not only talks about eliminating the gap, but actually does it. With 13 weeks left in the school year, he encouraged the trustees to see what is going on at the district schools.

Awards and Accolades

Board president Deb Mexicotte noted the AAPS website was awarded a Sunny Award by the nonprofit Sunshine Review. The Sunny Awards recognize the most transparent government websites in America. AAPS was one of 214 out of more than 6,000 websites to earn the award.

Parents of the Wines Elementary 5th grade choir record their children's performance.

She also praised the Wines Elementary 5th grade choir, who sang two songs for the board under the direction of Beth McNally. She said she was “glad to see the wonderful work that is being done at the music program at Wines.”

Trustee Simone Lightfoot was selected as one of 40 women to be honored as a Woman of Excellence by the Michigan Chronicle on March 30 in Detroit.

Also in the superintendent’s report, Patricia Green acknowledged the synchronized swimming teams of both Pioneer and Huron high schools. She also noted the success of many AAPS students at the South Eastern Michigan Science Fair. She mentioned the Community High’s Mock Trial Team advancement to the state championship.

Green called out Pioneer’s DECA chapter’s showing at the state conference. In addition, she mentioned the involvement of Slauson and Tappan middle schools and Pioneer High School in the University of Michigan’s German Day competition. Green was joined by trustees Glenn Nelson and Irene Patalan in celebrating the quality and success of the Art Walk on March 18, showcasing student artwork. Nelson cited the “liveliness” of downtown, and Patalan said the students “take her breath away.”

Agenda Planning

Agenda planning is an item on every AAPS board of trustees agenda.

Agenda Planning: Policy

Christine Stead suggested adding a review of policies set to expire this year. She also indicated a need to revisit student discipline policies, as well as sexual misconduct policies. She said she was working on a peer mentoring policy, as previously suggested by Deb Mexicotte.

Mexicotte and superintendent Patricia Green both indicated Green was reviewing the policies surrounding hearings, notifications, and rights and responsibilities “writ large.”

Simone Lightfoot asked for a policy review for hate crimes and speech, citing a recent incident at Burns Park.

Agenda Planning: Date Change

In an unusual move for the board, Mexicotte announced that the April 11 meeting was canceled. She said the work that needed to be done at that meeting could be done at a special regular meeting held immediately preceding the April 18 committee-of-the-whole meeting, which will be held at Clague Middle School.

Agenda Planning: Other Items

Irene Patalan urged an informal meeting this year with the Ann Arbor Administrators Association (AAAA). She would like to have it take place some time this calendar year.

Mexicotte mentioned that Logan Elementary School principal Terra Webster said her staff would be happy to meet with the board regarding culturally relevant teaching. She suggested they could start with written material in the board’s packets, then go from there. Webster had asked if the board would be interested in receiving more information. Glenn Nelson responded by saying he would like to see that information come from Green’s office and not from potentially every school administrator.

Stead voiced her desire to change the term “gifted and talented” to something broader. She suggested “innovation” versus any kind of tracking program. Mexicotte requested that if a term such as “innovation” is used, it should be defined.

Stead reiterated her request for “both sides of the ledger” on proposed revenue enhancements. She asserted a need to move the timeline up for discussion of budget cuts in order to be able to enlist the community’s help. Mexicotte told her it was “on our agenda to get it on our agenda.” She mentioned that the board would be discussing the budget at next month’s committee-of-the-whole meeting and the regular meeting on April 25.

Items from the Board

Andy Thomas acknowledged the number of “very fine” music presentations over the past few weeks, including the Choral Cavalcade at Huron High School and the US Navy Band performance at Pioneer High School, where members of the high school band were invited to play. He complimented director of choirs at Tappan Middle School Bonnie Kidd and the Tappan Choir for their achievement at Choral Festival. He also highlighted two of the AAPS Educational Foundation Great Idea Grants he had recently delivered. One was to Logan Elementary, a grant to purchase culturally relevant literature. The other was to Bryant Elementary, a grant to help replenish materials in the parent lending library.

Glenn Nelson acknowledged the work being done by the Karen Thomas Memorial Fund. He also complimented the leadership of the Willow Run and Ypsilanti school districts as they initiate talks about consolidation.

Simone Lightfoot agreed with Nelson about the proactive work being done by Willow Run and Ypsilanti. She also reported she went to a Rising Scholars meeting at Pioneer High School. She highlighted the work being done at Pioneer, not only with their Rising Scholars program but also with their 2.0 And Below program, which works to help students who are struggling. She mentioned the days she spent at schools around the district.

Irene Patalan said she had received positive feedback to the welcome AAPS is extending to future kindergarten families at Kindergarten Round-Ups.

Christine Stead acknowledged the importance of the Disability Awareness Workshops and expressed her desire that a recent drug awareness workshop conducted could be done at more schools to raise community awareness. She also mentioned the proactive work being done by the Willow Run and Ypsilanti leadership. Lastly, she acknowledged what an anchor role the Dexter school district had played in the community after the March 15 tornado. She also congratulated Huron High School’s girls basketball team for reaching the Final Four.

Deb Mexicotte also expressed the board’s support and concern for the Dexter community. She mentioned the district’s role in the 40th Annual Dance for Mother Earth Powwow that was held at Pioneer High School. She acknowledged the role Patricia Green and Randy Trent played in helping the Native American Student Association secure a location closer to the University of Michigan campus.

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

Next meeting: Wednesday, April 18, 2012, 5:30 p.m., at the Clague Middle School Media Center, 2616 Nixon Rd. [confirm date]

Monet Tiedemann is a free-lance writer who will be covering the AAPS board of trustees on a regular basis starting at the end of July, when Jennifer Coffman returns to her teaching position in a neighboring district. The Chronicle relies in part on regular voluntary subscriptions to support our coverage of public bodies like the Ann Arbor Public Schools board of education. 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.

Patricia Green is the new superintendent of the Ann Arbor Public Schools, a job she started this summer. (Photos by the writer.)

To develop additional background understanding of the board, she attended a recent forum for candidates in the Nov. 8 school board elections. The forum was hosted by AAPS staff. Other media reports from that forum raised questions about what was actually said at that meeting. So The Chronicle asked Coffman to write up her notes from that forum. 

Four of the six candidates running for AAPS school board met with top AAPS administrators for an informal question-and-answer session held at the Balas administration building on Aug. 23, 2011.

After brief introductions, Patrick Leonard, Larry Murphy, Ahmar Iqbal, and Albert Howard asked administrators for more information about a variety of topics.

Those topics ranged from busing, to the district’s role in school board elections, to prayer in public schools. The two incumbents in the race – board secretary Andy Thomas and trustee Simone Lightfoot – did not attend the forum.

Introductions

AAPS director of communications Liz Margolis welcomed everyone to the meeting, and attendees briefly introduced themselves. Each of the seven administrators in attendance also gave a brief overview of the scope of his or her department within the district.

At left is Dave Comsa, assistant superintendent for human resources and legal services. To the right is Nancy Hoover, director of finance.

In addition to Margolis, AAPS was represented by: Sara Aeschbach, director of community education and recreation; Elaine Brown, assistant superintendent for student intervention and support services; Dave Comsa, assistant superintendent for human resources and legal services; Nancy Hoover, director of finance [sitting in for Robert Allen, deputy superintendent of operations]; Joyce Hunter, assistant superintendent of secondary schools; and superintendent Patricia Green.

Also present was AAPS elections coordinator, Teri Williams. Williams said it was great to see so many people running for the board, and she urged all candidates to be sure to follow all the campaign rules and regulations, and to be sure that their supporters are also aware of the rules. When campaigns get exciting, she cautioned, it’s easy to make mistakes regarding finance or other areas.

Busing Service Changes

By way of background, for the 2011-12 school year, AAPS has begun enforcing a 1.5-mile walk zone for all students, has eliminated 7th hour busing at the middle schools, and limited high school bus service to common sites, most of which are at elementary schools. The cuts to bus service are projected to save the district $1.3 million this school year.

Albert Howard opened a discussion on the new busing system that was unveiled by district officials in mid-August. He asked whether the administration had resolved concerns expressed by families at the Arrowwood Hills housing cooperative about busing changes, and suggested that AAPS officials had not followed through on setting up a promised meeting with Arrowwood representatives.

Liz Margolis responded that bus schedules are always released at this time of year, and that there was a meeting scheduled at Arrowwood two days from then, on Thursday, Aug. 25 at 6 p.m. Patricia Green added that representatives from the Washtenaw Intermediate School District (WISD), with whom AAPS currently contracts for bus service, would attend the meeting as well.

Patrick Leonard commented that there seems to be a “disconnect” between AAPS and the community, and asked about how the district had communicated the busing changes to parents.

Patrick Leonard, candidate for the AAPS board.

Margolis noted that a complete back-to-school guide, including bus schedules, was available on the district’s website. She has been holding community meetings and using phone calls and e-mails via School Messenger software to communicate with parents as well, she said.

Green added that AAPS did not want to cut these services, and that in a perfect world, the district would not have had to cut them. She said the district was trying to be responsive to community concerns. But she wanted to open the school year and give the transportation professionals a chance to see how this will “flow or not flow.”

[At the Arrowwood meeting on Aug 25, Margolis echoed this sentiment, saying that no changes would be made to the new transportation plan until after school had started and officials had a chance to evaluate the stops as they were originally planned.]

Green explained that the district wanted to use a medical model and identify the root cause of any problems, rather than offer “splintered-off” solutions in only some neighborhoods.

Larry Murphy asked why the district could not simply use a single bus to collect all students, K-12, from one neighborhood. Margolis explained that many parents are not comfortable with elementary students riding with middle and high school students. She also said the district is looking into moving from the current three-tiered system to a two-tiered one in which middle and high school students would share buses.

Ahmar Iqbal, candidate for AAPS board.

Ahmar Iqbal asked if the Ann Arbor Transportation Authority (AATA) could be part of the solution, and Margolis indicated the district has been in regular discussion with AATA. She noted, however, that the AATA is similarly financially constrained, and is also not legally allowed to dedicate service exclusively to AAPS riders.

Leonard asked if there was an emergency plan in place, in case problems arose quickly.

Green asserted that she wants to provide a strategic viewpoint for the community. She said she had driven around the Arrowwood, Northside, Carrot Way, and Foxfire neighborhoods to “get a visual feel for what is out there,” and that the district would do the very best it could to support the opening of school. Green also said that the WISD transportation supervisors were “on notice” in case adjustments needed to be made, but confirmed there would be no changes “until the buses roll … [Otherwise,] everyone will say, ‘I want a bus. I want it the way we had it last year.’”

In a phone conversation with Margolis on Sept. 11, The Chronicle confirmed that one elementary bus stop was added during the first week of school at the corner of Birchwood and Dhu Varren. The stop is for the two families in the Foxfire subdivision who, upon re-measuring, were deemed to be just outside the 1.5-mile walk zone to Logan Elementary School.

In addition, Margolis said, three new bus stops will begin Monday, Sept. 12 for high school students heading to Skyline – one at the corner of Dhu Varren and Omlessad, a second one at Carrot Way apartments, and a third at Arrowwood Hills housing cooperative. Margolis also noted that 10 other stops, in addition to those three, have been added throughout the district. More stops may be added during the week of Sept. 12, as safety concerns and ridership levels continue to be evaluated.

Tenure, Evaluation, and Collective Bargaining Changes

By way of background, in July 2011, the Michigan legislature passed, and Gov. Rick Snyder signed into law, a set of four tie-barred bills (PA 100-104) affecting teacher tenure, collective bargaining, discipline, layoff and recall, and evaluation, among other items.

Iqbal asked what the immediate impact of the bills has been on AAPS, and how the district will plan to accommodate the new requirements.

Comsa responded that the bulk of the changes brought about by the new laws affected teacher evaluation systems, and certain items that are now off limits during collective bargaining discussions. Comsa said that AAPS has been at the forefront of designing a new teacher evaluation system that will comply with the new law, and that the district’s evaluation system will have the requisite rigor and accountability built into it.

Green noted that the evaluation system, which she said uses the nationally-respected “Danielson Model,” has been crafted collaboratively with AAPS teachers and principals.

Iqbal asked about the cost of the new evaluation system, and Comsa said the cost is negligible, since training can be done in-house.

Iqbal then suggested that the district should advocate to get its evaluation model recognized by the state’s blue ribbon commission as the state template. He said the evaluation model as developed by AAPS should be usable to benchmark against other districts.

Campaign Process

Iqbal suggested that the district hold forums for candidates to meet parents, but Margolis said the district does not handle organization of candidate campaigns. Iqbal then appealed to Green directly, suggesting that she could start a “new tradition” to allow candidates to hold rotating discussions with voters in different schools each week, because “going door-to-door has its challenges.”

Green said that would be not appropriate, and explained, “There is a line across which we cannot step in terms of our time being paid by taxpayer dollars.”

Williams noted that historically, when the school board election calendar called for June elections, it was common for candidates to attend the ice cream socials held in the spring at the elementary schools. Now, Williams said she was not sure which district events would be open to candidates.

Margolis offered to provide candidates with school and district-wide calendars. She also suggested campaigning at football games, or asking Brit Satchwell, president of the teachers union, if the union would be interested in hosting a forum.

Williams also suggested that the Ann Arbor Area League of Women Voters (LWV) often holds a candidate forum for contested races. Murphy said he thought the LWV would hold one for school board candidates. [As of Sept. 11, the LWV website lists a candidate forum for board of education candidates to be held on Monday, Oct. 3 at the Community Television Network studio at 2805 S. Industrial Highway in Ann Arbor. The forums are typically broadcast live on CTN Channel 19.]

Iqbal then suggested perhaps that Sweetwaters coffee shop, as a local entity, might want to host a forum. Iqbal said he would welcome a way to make it easier for people to meet the candidates, and help candidates to be more transparent with the community. If there were more forums, Iqbal said, a better-informed voting public could emerge. Leonard and Murphy expressed support for a forum. Howard did not comment.

Legislative Advocacy

Iqbal commented that, as the fourth-largest district in Michigan, AAPS should be playing a leadership role in advocating for taxpayers to “have a choice about how to fund schools.” He asked how AAPS works with the state board of education and state superintendent of schools.

Margolis noted there are a large number of parent advocacy groups working for changes to school funding. She also pointed to the work of the local group Michigan Parents for Schools.

Green said she was comfortable advocating for more local control, and that she had joined the Michigan Association of School Administrators, and was working with other superintendents in the district to advocate as a group.

Board/Administration Relationship

Iqbal asked how open Green was to having different views than the board. She answered that she acts on behalf of the board, but not individual board members. Once the board acts or takes a stand, she said, that’s where the administration is guided.

By way of illustrating the beginning of a good working relationship, Green related feeling honored that board president Deb Mexicotte asked Green to attend and participate in a conference with her in mid-August. “It is very important that the board and the administration are a team,” she said.

Food Service

Howard asked what the food was like at AAPS schools and whether there might be a connection between the flavored milk being offered and the number of students with diabetes.

Albert Howard, AAPS school board candidate.

Aeschbach, in her role as district facilitator for school wellness, invited Howard to visit a school cafeteria, and said that the quality of the food has improved substantially.

She noted that AAPS has doubled or perhaps tripled its consumption of produce in school cafeterias, and has fresher food cooked on the spot as part of its “Environments” program. She did acknowledge that the offerings are not perfect, saying, “There are items that are questionable to serve in a school cafeteria.”

Howard commented that he and his family try to have a vegan lifestyle, but that he does drink Gatorade. He argued that there are different eating patterns among the 16,500 AAPS students and that he hoped the district could “tighten up” the foods offered in the school cafeterias.

Budgeting Process

Murphy asked Hoover if the district was already at work on next year’s (2012-13) budget, and Hoover responded that no, currently her department is working on the year-end audit.

Larry Murphy, candidate for the AAPS board.

Murphy suggested that the district should get the budget out to the public earlier, noting that some of the athletics cuts happened quickly. “If we had gotten started earlier,” he argued, “we could make some better decisions.”

Green said she and Allen had discussed beginning the 2012-13 budgeting process as early as October so information can be shared with the public even earlier.

Hoover noted that this was the first year the district had known in advance what the funding would be, because Gov. Rick Snyder passed a budget before the district’s fiscal year began on July 1.

Title IX

Leonard asked Comsa whether the new cuts to athletics had left AAPS compliant with Title IX requirements, and Comsa acknowledged that there had been some inquiry into that. But Comsa said he viewed the district as compliant. All sports don’t have to be equally funded, he said — it’s based on opportunity.

Status of Collective Bargaining Agreements

Iqbal asked Comsa to summarize the status of the district’s collective bargaining agreements. Comsa replied that AAPS has contracts with all but one of its eight bargaining units. The paraprofessionals union, Comsa said, has had a change in leadership which has delayed negotiations.

Iqbal asked how contract negotiations can be re-opened. Comsa replied that the current teachers’ contract has a revenue-sharing formula built into it, but that normally it’s date-driven, with each contract having deadlines built into it before its term ends.

Health Care Dependent Audit

Iqbal asked if the district had made an effort to recover the large sum of ambiguous health care dependent claims that an audit had recently uncovered.

Comsa answered that he was looking into that process, as was outside counsel. Comsa said he could not speculate how much it might bring the district.

The Bible and Prayer in Public Schools

Howard asked Comsa if he would be willing to allow the use of the Bible in AAPS as a historical book. Comsa answered that the use of the Bible in public schools in the context of history is allowed, but not mandated, under both the Michigan and U.S. constitutions. Comsa also explained that the establishment of the curriculum is under the purview of the board.

Howard then asked Green, “What is your stance on prayer in the public schools,” to which Green answered that she does not have a stance, but that AAPS follows the law.

Next regular meeting: The next regular meeting of the Ann Arbor Public Schools board of education will be held Wednesday, Sept. 14, 2011 at the Ann Arbor District Library fourth floor board room, 343 S. Fifth Ave., at 7 p.m. [confirm date]

This map shows the relationship between locations of students' homes and the district's elementary and high schools. It was the focus of much of the board's discussion on June 8, 2011 when trustees approved the 2011-12 budget.

The original budget proposal brought to the board in April suggested cuts to 70 teaching positions, eliminated high school busing entirely, and used $1.73 million of fund equity. In the interim, the state offered school districts one-time payments to offset increases in retirement costs, as well as possible one-time grants for use of “best practices” as defined by the state. Those funding changes prompted board members to hold a study session earlier this month to offer AAPS administrators direction in how the temporary funding should be applied to the budget.

Based on that feedback, AAPS interim superintendent Robert Allen presented an amended budget at the June 8 board of education meeting. That amended budget slightly decreased the rise in class sizes, added back high school bus service by offering common pick-up points instead of traditional bus stops, and used less of the district’s fund equity.

During the budget discussion, trustees disagreed about multiple details of the budget, but the area of greatest contention was the proper amount to maintain in the district’s fund balance. Ultimately, the budget as presented passed with one major amendment, which moved $300,000 back out of fund equity and put it into the high school transportation budget, in order to allow for more common pick-up sites if needed.

In this meeting report, The Chronicle charts the board deliberations through the entire discussion. For a previously published nuts-and-bolts description of the approved budget, see “AAPS Board Sets 2011-12 Budget.”

Also at this meeting, updates to the district’s strategic plan and a set of board policies were approved. More policy updates, along with the district’s food service contract, were reviewed as first briefing items.

Negotiating Budget Priorities

The meeting included a more open debate among trustees than usual. The central theme in their deliberations was the question of how much money to retain in fund equity, especially given that AAPS had anticipated a greater cut in state funding than what was approved as part of the state budget at the end of May.

Interim superintendent Robert Allen noted at the June 3 budget study session that at least $17 million in fund equity is required to manage cash flow, because the district is required to make payroll, but does not receive funding for a window of 8 weeks during the summer months. In addition, multiple trustees referred to the district’s emergency use of nearly $11 million of fund equity during the 2009-10 school year by way of highlighting the unreliability of state funding. [In December of 2009, the state decreased the per-pupil foundation allowance mid-year, and AAPS chose to use fund equity to maintain continuity of services rather than make drastic cuts, such as laying off a large number of teachers mid-year, as some other districts were forced to do.]

Budget: Revenue Enhancement

Though all trustees agreed that the district’s budgetary woes are being caused by an ongoing structural deficit in state funding mechanisms, their thoughts diverged on where AAPS should target its efforts to bring in more money: (1) upping efforts to attract more students through Schools of Choice (SOC); (2) facilitating increased grant funding; (3) advocating for tax changes at the state level; or (4) trying again to pass a countywide millage to enhance operating funds.

Allen noted that the district did not reach its goal of attracting 170 additional students through SOC. Only 130 students had been added to the district through SOC. Trustee Susan Baskett asked why AAPS did not reach its SOC target for the second year in a row. Allen answered that there is more demand for high school slots, and suggested opening AAPS high schools to SOC students in the future.

Trustee Andy Thomas expressed his belief that using SOC to increase enrollment is a “zero-sum game,” since other local districts are simultaneously pursuing students who live in the AAPS district area. Saying he’s always been skeptical of trying to balance the budget with SOC, he asserted, “it’s hypothetical at best that we can squeeze this [option] any harder.”

AAPS trustee Andy Thomas at the June 8, 2011 board meeting.

Noting that SOC students will be bringing nearly $1 million to the district next year [as their foundation allowance will follow them to AAPS], board president Deb Mexicotte disagreed. She said that while she agrees SOC can not be a cornerstone of the district’s budget plan, “it’s more than shuffling the deck chairs on the Titanic.” Trustee Glenn Nelson agreed with Mexicotte, saying that AAPS is merely neutralizing the flow of students out of the district, and not exploiting surrounding districts.

Trustee Simone Lightfoot suggested the district should look at additional grant funding as a means of enhancing revenue. Trustee Christine Stead agreed, noting that the lack of a district-incorporated 501(c)(3) business might have compromised the district’s ability to secure grants, since some grants require the ability to earmark funding. She argued that the mission of the AAPS Educational Foundation, which supplements AAPS funding with grants, limits the kind of funding that AAPS can receive, and that setting up a separate entity should be seriously considered.

Allen noted that grants are “soft money,” and therefore difficult to use in sustainable ways. Thomas, too, argued that grants are often only seed money for new programs, and often ultimately require the district to spend more. “I support the [district's] grant writer,” he said, “but it will not get us out of the $10-$14 million-a-year structural deficit.”

Trustee Irene Patalan argued that the structural deficit at the state level could be solved by raising taxes, including adding a tax on services. “For [Michigan] not to have a service tax is horrible and outrageous. You mention taxes and people run the other way, but it’s time for us to start paying our fair share … Honestly, people of Michigan, you get what you pay for.”

Nelson countered Patalan, saying that while he is in favor of structural change happening at the state level, local tax levies are more helpful to the district. He argued that it was disadvantageous for Washtenaw County, as the second-wealthiest county in the state, to participate in statewide funding distribution pools. “When we do a Washtenaw County millage, every dime stays in Washtenaw County,” he said. “Local [millages are] a better deal than state [millages].”

Mexicotte suggested advocacy could occur on multiple fronts simultaneously, and the most effective approach to revenue enhancement would be multi-faceted.

Budget: Board Review of Departmental Budgets

One item of the budget reduction plan was that every department across the district was required to cut its budget by 7%, without eliminating any entire program.

Two recent AAPS graduates, Alison Kennedy and Carlena Dwong, spoke during public commentary at the meeting in support of continued funding of AAPS creative writing classes, as well as the district’s supplementary support of literary arts programs at the Neutral Zone, a local teen center. Some Neutral Zone programs are supported in part by funding from the superintendent’s discretionary account.

Kennedy said that discovering her love for writing has changed her, and that creative writing and poetry inspire empathy and self-reflection in high school students. Dwong stressed that the literary arts programming at the Neutral Zone, including a youth-driven independent printing press, is unique in the nation. Both implored the board not to cut funding for these programs.

Board members seemed taken off guard by the public commentary, and questioned Allen about the literary arts funding. Allen responded that the administration is planning to continue to support Neutral Zone programming, but not at the same level. Patalan stated she was pleased that all programs were being maintained, because it allows for the funding to increase again in the future more easily than if programs were eliminated completely.

Stead said it would helpful for the board to be aware of community concerns such as those raised by Kennedy and Dwong, and asked when the board would be receiving a list of the programs impacted by the 7% departmental cuts. Allen responded that the board does not usually review departmental budgets at that level of detail, but that he could provide a list of impacted programs within a few weeks. Stead said she would appreciate such as list, noting “these details are really meaningful for people.”

Mexicotte suggested that cuts should be “put to a test against our strategic plan.” Nelson agreed that board review of such budget detail was very important, calling for a “district-wide assessment of whether these cuts are appropriate.”

Budget: “Best Practices” Funding

Nelson asked Allen about the probability that AAPS would qualify to receive the additional “best practices” funding being offered by the state. To qualify for this funding, a district must demonstrate use of at least four of five “best practices” as defined by the state, which include outsourcing, consolidating services, and limited health care expenditures. Allen said there was a “good chance” that the district would meet the “best practices” requirements, leading to the receipt of an additional $100 per student – $1.6 million – in one-time funding.

Nelson noted that, because the $1.6 million is not currently reflected in the budget, that sum would be added to the fund balance if it’s received. Instead of using that strategy, he suggested that the board should anticipate that AAPS will receive that $1.6 million, and direct the administration to use it to hire 10 more teachers and lower some class sizes.

“We could put off larger sections one year,” he said. “Why cut in 2012 what we could wait and cut in 2013?… Let’s keep the system as excellent as we can for as long as we can.” Nelson admitted hiring additional teachers would be “taking more risk financially to place less risk someplace else,” but asked his fellow trustees to heed his suggestion: “A few [class] sections next year with real, live kids in them are larger than they have to be.”

Several trustees disagreed with Nelson’s proposal. Patalan asserted that the district can save money and still deliver excellent services. Stead suggested that instead of hiring additional teachers now, the district could hire them in the fall if class sizes as increased by this budget proved to be too unwieldy. Nelson countered that adjusting classes once the year had started would be unfeasible, and “very disruptive.”

Thomas said he would feel good about hiring 10 teachers for $1 million or even 20 teachers for $2 million, until he looks ahead to the projected deficit for 2012-13. From that perspective, he said, “It really does not seem worth adding to our one-year-out problem.”

Budget: High School Busing Reorganization

The elimination of high school busing was suggested in the original budget proposal, but at the study session held June 3, trustees directed the administration to look at other options to reduce transportation costs. At the June 8 meeting, Allen brought forth an amended budget that included funding for a modified version of high school bus service.

Allen explained that the district is required to provide equitable services to all students at the same grade level, and therefore could not eliminate high school busing but then add back in only a few stops just for students who had no alternate transportation available (which was an idea suggested at the study session). However, the new system as proposed now, he said, allows the district legally to place bus stops only in areas where needed, since those stops will be accessible to all bus riders.

Instead of being picked up at traditional bus stops, high school bus riders will be picked up at a fewer number of common pick-up sites 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.

Using common pick-up sites instead of providing traditional bus service to high school riders will save the district $600,000. Eliminating high school busing entirely would have saved $1.3 million.

Liz Margolis, AAPS director of communications, set up an easel at the front of the board table and presented a large map of the district to answer some of the questions posed by trustees at the previous study session, and to aid in explaining the new proposal. The map plotted the location of the homes of all AAPS 8-12th grade students, elementary schools (in green), and high schools (in red), and included an overlay of 3 sets of concentric circles showing 1.5-mile and 2-mile walk zones around each of the high schools.

Trustees asked about the distances students will need to walk to the common pick-up sites.  Margolis told them that has not been determined, but routes should be set by the end of July. She assured the board that the plan and routes would be well-communicated to all AAPS families with bus riders.

Lightfoot strongly opposed the proposed reduction in high school bus service, pleading with her colleagues: “I cajole you, I beg you, to put off this decision to reduce busing. There are too many questions to vote on this tonight.”

Margolis asserted, “This is not a half-baked idea. We have been talking about common stops for a long time.” After reading a lengthy list of questions about the plan put forth by constituents, Lightfoot responded, “I don’t think the idea is half-baked, but I do think it’s three-fourths of the way baked … It’s not worth $600,000 [in savings]. We need to do a better job to get this cake fully baked.”

As an alternative to using common stops, Nelson suggested providing traditional bus service to high school riders, but increasing high school walk zones from 1.5 miles to 2 miles. Mexicotte pointed out that would mean that a group of students (those living more than 1.5 but less than 2 miles from their high schools) would lose bus service entirely, instead of all high school students receiving a modified service. Stead also disagreed with the idea, saying that it’s not reasonable to ask high school students to walk farther when it’s 20 degrees or colder outside.

Trustee Glenn Nelson uses the map to illustrate the rationale for his proposed amendment on busing, which eventually was narrowly approved.

Nelson then approached the map, and expressed his concern that any savings gleaned from this proposal would be outweighed by the loss of students on the periphery of the district. Gesturing to dots on the map, he argued that these students might choose to leave the district rather than have to travel far to get to a common pick-up site. He suggested that the board cut the target reduction in high school busing costs to allow transportation staff to create more common sites. Saying AAPS could not afford not to have pick-up sites near the edges of the district, Nelson asserted, “Having more stops is worth keeping students in the system.”

Lightfoot appreciated Nelson’s suggestion, as did Baskett, who said students on the outskirts of town should not have to walk farther to catch a bus.

Baskett expressed disappointment that the board did not have “harder numbers” to consider, since the map as presented showed all students in grades 8-12, when the group affected by the proposal would be only bus riders in grades 8-11. She also noted that she would have liked to see Ann Arbor Transportation Authority routes worked in to the mix.

Patalan asked Allen’s opinion on increasing the number of common sites, and Allen said he would be in support of more stops to reach as many high school students as possible. He also reminded the board that more work would need to be done to determine exactly which dots on the map represent students who ride the bus. Pointing to a group of dots in one corner of the map as an example, Allen said, “maybe none of those students need transportation.”

Mexicotte suggested that the board could move by assent to direct the administration to use a more liberal approach when setting common pick-up sites, and could lower the savings target by perhaps as much as $300,000. Stead responded, “It’s one thing if this directive costs $10,000, but if it’s $300,000, I’m not comfortable.”

Nelson removed the budget from the consent agenda, and formally proposed an amendment to lower the targeted savings in high school bus service from $600,000 to $300,000 by spending more from fund equity. He argued that lowering the targeted savings amount would give the district’s transportation staff more latitude in setting locations of the common pick-up sites, and would therefore reduce the risk of students leaving the district because of lack of transportation. He also revisited his earlier argument that AAPS should be optimistic that it will qualify to receive the one-time “best practices” funding being offered by the state, and that $1.6 million would more than offset the increase in fund equity use caused by his amendment.

Margolis, via a note read by Mexicotte, pointed out that the SOC windows for surrounding districts have already closed for the next school year, and that while local charter schools might have space, they do not typically provide transportation.

Stead argued against the amendment, questioning how Nelson came to the $300,000 incremental cost figure. She noted that the district may not reach its targeted savings in other budget reduction areas as well, and it’s irresponsible to use fund equity to fund Nelson’s amendment.

Patalan also did not support Nelson’s amendment, saying it felt to her like “second-guessing” administrative recommendations.

Referring to the map, Thomas expressed concern that without adding back some funding, high school busing might not be able to reach what he saw as four clusters of students who did not live close to any elementary schools.

Outcome: A vote on Nelson’s amendment to lower the targeted savings in high school busing from $600,000 to $300,000 to allow for the placement of more common pick-up sites around the periphery of the district passed 4-3. Trustees Susan Baskett, Simone Lightfoot, Glenn Nelson, and Andy Thomas voted in favor of the amendment; trustees Deb Mexicotte, Irene Patalan, and Christine Stead voted against it.

Saying the district was putting itself “at inordinate risk for next year,” Stead tried to propose an amendment to return the targeted savings in high school transportation to $600,000. However, Mexicotte did not allow it, explaining that only trustees who voted in favor of Nelson’s amendment could move to reconsider it.

At that point, Baskett called the question to a vote, and everyone but Stead voted to end discussion on the budget.

Outcome: In a roll call vote, the AAPS FY 2011-12 budget passed 5-2. Trustees Simone Lightfoot and Christine Stead dissented.

Strategic Plan Updates

A series of updates to the strategic plan were reviewed in detail at the previous board meeting, and were brought as second briefing items to this meeting. Patalan spoke warmly of the plan, and Nelson noted his “strong support” of the revisions as proposed, especially the additional emphasis on “engaging” instead of “informing.”

Outcome: Updates to the strategic plan were approved as part of the consent agenda.

Second Briefing: Policy Updates

At the previous board meeting, Nelson had presented a set of policy updates recommended by the performance committee. Regarding the policies as now amended, he noted that the committee’s revisions since the last meeting were meant only to reflect the comments and suggestions offered at first briefing.

Thomas offered a brief re-cap of the first briefing to Stead, who had been absent during the previous meeting.

Outcome: These policies were approved as part of the consent agenda, which also included an approval of draft minutes, and gift offers.

First Briefing: More Policy Updates

Both committees have been engaged in a review of those policies that are due to expire at the end of the school year. The administration has also recently conducted an extensive review and overhaul of the district’s policy on the use of AAPS facilities, Policy 7250.

At the June 8 board meeting, Stead briefed the board on recommended updates to two policies reviewed by the planning committee: Rights and Responsibilities (Policy 5000); and Graduation Requirements (Policy 5050).

Nelson briefed the board on recommended updates to six policies reviewed by the performance committee: Achievement Outcome Reporting (Policy 6110); Equity in Achievement and Access (Policy 6130); Technology Integration (Policy 6150); Accreditation (Policy 6200); Achievement for All Students (Policy 6300); and Special Education (Policy 6350).

Allen introduced Randy Trent, AAPS executive director of physical properties, and Sara Aeschbach, director of community education and recreation, to review an extensive update to Policy 7250, Use of Facilities.

Policy: Rights and Responsibilities (5000)

Stead noted minor wording changes as suggested by her committee. Mexicotte questioned the inclusion of a list of constituents to be included on reviews of the district handbook, and Stead said that the revision was meant to ensure greater involvement on the part of parents.

Trustees also noted how the handbook is board policy, and parts are required by law to be updated.

Policy: Graduation Requirements (5050)

Stead reviewed significant changes made by the planning committee to this policy, mostly surrounding the addition of a “personal curriculum” option, which allows some flexibility in students’ requirements to obtain a diploma.

Mexicotte asked why “dropping out” was replaced with “not graduating,” and Stead answered that “dropping out” seemed negative to the committee, whereas “not graduating” was more inclusive language.

Mexicotte suggested including a list of the allowable reasons a student could create a personal curriculum, as well as a warning that using a personal curriculum could have post-secondary implications, such as ramifications for students wanting to participate in the NCAA.

The board also had some discussion on how GED requirements are not included anywhere in the board policies, as they are set by the state. Saying that AAPS policies affirm the things the board values, and make sure the administration pays attention to those things, Nelson argued that the GED should be referenced.

Stead questioned where such a reference would fit, and Mexicotte suggested combining GED requirements in a section of the policy with other programs such as Head Start, over which the board does not have policy control, but is making a commitment to offer in the district. Mexicotte also suggested including a directive for counselors to advise students on the tradeoffs between pursuing a personal curriculum or a GED.

Thomas also pointed out that the AAPS world language requirement was not listed, and needs to be inserted.

Policy: Achievement Outcome Reporting (6110)

Nelson noted two small wording changes, and Lightfoot added that district interim deputy superintendent of instruction, Lee Ann Dickinson-Kelley, spoke to the committee about the need to reconcile reports annually at the school level.

Policy: Equity in Achievement and Access (6130)

Nelson introduced this policy as “very important policy in its substance,” and said his committee had found little to amend in it. Mexicotte suggested defining “increased” in terms of the frequency of monitoring wanted, and Nelson accepted her critique.

Policy: Technology Integration (6150)

This policy was brought for review with only minor wording changes to make explicit references to network and server capacity.

Policy: Accreditation (6200)

No changes were suggested to policy 6200.

Policy: Achievement for All Students (6300)

Nelson said his committee had changed some of the language in this policy to be consistent with current programming. Stead questioned whether a reference to the district’s “achievement gap elimination plan” should be a reference to the “school improvement plan” instead?

Lightfoot responded, noting that she has been pushing AAPS to enumerate its efforts at closing the achievement gap in a single document since being appointed to the board, and saying that she has been told the plan is close to complete.

Mexicotte recommended that the policy language stay as recommended, since the achievement gap elimination plan should be in place soon. If something changes, she said, the board can review the policy again next year.

The board will be holding a study session on Wednesday, June 15 at 5:30 dedicated to discussing student achievement.

Policy: Special Education (6350)

Nelson reported that no major language changes were made in this policy, but Mexicotte strongly disagreed, arguing that including “behavior” in the definition of students qualifying for a 504 plan was not correct.

Mexicotte, who is herself a parent of a special needs child, noted that 504 plans are allowable under of the Office of Civil Rights, not the Individuals with Disabilities Act (IDEA), and serve a very different purpose. She explained that the purpose of a 504 plan is to address temporary problems occurring in a student’s life, such as parental divorce, a broken leg, or cancer treatment. “By adding ‘learning and behavior’ as a life activity you have started to blur those pathways and made it more like IEP-light,” she said. An IEP, or Individualized Education Plan, is created for students with ongoing special needs, she noted, and said she is wary of sliding in that direction when the 504 language is under separate offices.

Nelson said the performance committee would discuss Mexicotte’s concerns with the SISS administrators.

Policy: Use of Facilities (7250)

Trent began by noting that Strategy 7 of the district’s strategic plan highlighted use of the district’s facilities as supporting its mission, and that the facilities use policy had not been updated in over 20 years.

The lowest rental rates in the proposed policy, Trent explained, would be for basic classroom rental. The highest rates would be for AAPS stadiums, pools, and athletic fields. He explained that other district’s rates were reviewed as a means of comparison, in order to ensure that AAPS was offering competitive rates.

Saying that he didn’t want listeners to think taxpayer-supported facilities are not accessible, Nelson requested that Trent give a sense of the priorities in how facility use is allowed.

Aeschbach responded that the majority of users, such as non-profits and community organizations, are not required to pay fees to use the facilities. She gave the example of the Girl Scouts as a group that pays a small rental fee.

As far as priority and scheduling, Aeschbach said, schools have first priority for scheduling their own facilities, followed by school-related groups such as Community Education and Recreation, PTOs, and bargaining units. The next group of users in terms of priority are non-profit and informal community groups, followed at the end of the list by private parties.

Mexicotte suggested that the administration find a way to structure the costs for Skyline High School so that the cafeteria and annex charges could be separated.

For the second briefing, the board also asked for more clarity in language on the solicitation of funds in district facilities.

Outcome: This was the first briefing on all these policy updates; they will return to the board for a vote at the next regular meeting.

Food Service Contract Renewal

AAPS holds a contract with Chartwells to provide food service to the district, which is set to expire in 2013, but requires annual renewals by the board.

Chartwell’s district general manager, Jody Taratuta, and the firm’s director of dining service, David Lahey, were on hand at the June 8 meeting to review what they called their “Nutrition Accomplishments and Initiatives,” and to request that the district renew its contract with the company.

Lahey outlined the scope of food service delivery in AAPS, describing that 75% of meals are purchased at full price, while 22.5% are given away free, and 2.5% are purchased at reduced cost to qualifying students. He confirmed that breakfast is offered at all schools, and that participation in both breakfast and lunch has been increasing. Allen added that next year, all three comprehensive high schools will be near 1,600 students, which will allow for much more manageable lunch hours. Before Skyline was built, Pioneer had 3,000 students.

Lahey said the number of students who receive free or reduced lunch has increased by 700 students over the past two years. In part, he credited principals with being aggressive at getting applications to families who need them. Taratuta also acknowledged that new application and certification procedures at the state have helped streamline the inclusion of new students to the program. Mexicotte thanked Taratuta for “finding something nice to say about the state.”

Taratuta reviewed new lunch program standards put forth by the USDA, and trustees questioned what proportion of AAPS students were purchasing a complete lunch (the content of which is set by the USDA) versus a la carte options (the content of which are set by the district’s wellness policy). Lahey answered that roughly 20% of Chartwell’s income comes from a la carte sales.

Thomas asked what controls are in place to ensure that students make nutritionally-sound choices from the a la carte offerings. Lahey said that the requirements set by the AAPS wellness plan exceed USDA requirements. AAPS does not serve fried foods, candy bars, whole milk, pickles, or poptarts, but does offer many fruits and vegetables.

Mexicotte also noted that parents can track their students’ choices online, and encourage their children to make healthy choices. Allen walked board members through how to sign on to MealPayPlus, the online tracking program, adding that he checks the purchases of his four children daily.

Nelson asked if there are stores in the schools not under Chartwells control, where students could purchase food with no tracking. Mexicotte responded that there are some booster-run concession stands open during limited hours that are not well-monitored.

The board briefly discussed the fact that the state of Michigan has approved an increase in the cost of meals, but that the increased cost would not be passed on to AAPS families. Taratuta noted that the increased cost is typically absorbed by Chartwells, because the district controls the pricing. AAPS director of purchasing and business support services Linda Doernte added that the district will still have a $0.5 million balance, even with the increases in per-meal costs.

Allen remarked that when AAPS started using Chartwells, the district had an accumulated deficit in food service costs. After costs were controlled by outsourcing the service, the district has been able to use some of the savings to pay for noon-hour supervision.

Patalan expressed appreciation that the district had been able to increase participation in the meal program. “We’ve made money, and reduced the deficit,” she said, “and, it’s a challenge to do those things while providing children with healthy choices.”

Mexicotte suggested that the board hold a study session sometime before the end of the year in order to review how meal reimbursements work, as it is a very complicated system.

Outcome: This was the first briefing on this item. The board will vote on Chartwell’s contract renewal  at the next regular meeting.

Board Action Items

The board unanimously voted to reinstate remaining board policies that are due to expire at the end of the school year. Twelve of these policies will be reviewed by the planning committee, and two by the performance committee.

Unanimous votes with no discussion also took place to renew the membership of the district’s comprehensive high schools in the Michigan High School Athletic Association, and to hold an executive session for the informal evaluation of interim superintendent Allen.

Finally, the board approved its schedule of meetings through the end of the calendar year, and a tentative slate of meetings for the remainder of the 2011-12 school year.

Mexicotte explained that the first meeting of January, 2012 would be an organizational meeting at which the board would select its officers following the November 2011 election. Two seats will be opening up, as the terms of office are expiring for both Simone Lightfoot and Andy Thomas. The two new seats will each be for four-year terms, and will begin January 1, 2012. AAPS is holding an information session for prospective candidates on June 30.

Public Commentary on Pioneer Suspensions

Tom Durham addressed trustees, saying that in the 26 days since his son was suspended – along with 20 other Pioneer seniors involved in an end-of-the-year prank – no one from AAPS administration has been able to sit down with him to address his concerns. He acknowledged that a meeting has finally been scheduled, but not yet occurred. Noting that one administrator told him that the district wanted to set an example by suspending the students, Durham argued that the process has been poorly executed at best, and that the students involved were not treated justly.

Later in the meeting, Baskett said she would appreciate an update from administration on its meeting with Durham.

Pioneer Booster Club Gifts

Betsy Petosky and Mike Madison presented a set of gifts from the Pioneer Booster Club to the district valued at over $87,000. Gifts included training room equipment, concession stands, white boards, a public address (PA) system, wrestling mats, a baseball shed, a batting cage, a pole vault pit, and reconditioned volleyball poles.

Petosky reported that the booster club’s goal was to emphasize projects that were capital improvements, and asserted that the benefits of athletics cannot be overstated.

Trustees thanked the boosters for their generosity and leadership.

Outcome: Pioneer booster club gift offers were approved as part of the consent agenda.

Board Committee Reports

The school board has two standing committees. The planning committee consists of: Christine Stead (chair), Susan Baskett, and Irene Patalan; the performance committee consists of: Glenn Nelson (chair), Simone Lightfoot, and Andy Thomas. Board president Deb Mexicotte sits on neither committee.

Performance Committee

Nelson reported that his committee had heard from Tom Durham regarding Durham’s son’s suspension, and that they had discussed that issue.

He then asked Lightfoot to give an update on the district school improvement team, on which she serves. Lightfoot highlighted the SIT’s efforts to pull together an event at beginning of year that focused on families that AAPS has not yet successfully included. She described the event as a “sort-of back-to-school, giveaway, food, festive rally,” that would include expert panels on topics such as: discipline and attendance, early oral language development, the Rising Scholars program, algebra strand initiatives, high school graduation, cyber-bullying, and kindergarten readiness.

Nelson noted that the performance committee was in full support of such an event. He also said his committee discussed concerns about Mitchell Elementary School’s achievement scores, and engaged in extensive policy review as described above.

Finally, Nelson noted that his committee was hoping to have a transition meeting with Allen and new superintendent Patricia Green during the first half of July.

Planning Committee

Stead reported that her committee also spent significant time on policy review, as well on the food service contract renewal. She noted though some food service costs have increased, there is no incremental cost to AAPS families.

Stead also noted that her committee discussed the possibility of crafting new millages – one to add classrooms to provide all-day kindergarten, and one for technology upgrades. She noted that in the future, the state is planning to withhold some funding from school districts that do not provide all-day kindergarten.

Staed also reported that this year public education has sustained the largest cuts ever in state funding, and that AAPS may want to consider working with districts county-wide on another enhancement millage.

Finally, Stead said her committee had also discussed the budget. They focused on how the board is not currently following its own policy of maintaining 15% of the budget in fund equity.

The planning committee will meet next on July 13, which will be the first meeting of the committee with incoming superintendent Patricia Green.

Association Reports

At each meeting, the board invites reports from six associations: the Youth Senate, the Ann Arbor Parent Advisory Committee on Special Education (AAPAC), the Parent-Teacher-Organization Council (PTOC), the Black Parents Student Support Group (BPSSG), the Ann Arbor Administrators Association (AAAA), and the Ann Arbor Education Association (AAEA). At the May 11 meeting, the board heard reports from the Youth Senate, the AAPAC, the PTOC, and the AAEA.

Association Reports: Youth Senate

Aoxue Tang reported for the Youth Senate. She suggested that peer coaching could help students maintain accountability for their work as class sizes increase. She argued that every classroom needs to set up a system to support students who need it.

Tang also spoke in support of higher academic standards, saying that AAPS students will need to be able to succeed in a competitive world.

Finally, Tang reminded everyone of the Youth Senate’s upcoming dodge ball tournament, slated to take place on June 17 at Burns Park. She encouraged the board to send a team, and Mexicotte said she might suggest to trustees that they participate as a team-building exercise.

Association Reports: AAPAC

Scott Zeleznik reported for the AAPAC. He expressed appreciation for the peer mentoring, adaptive physical education, and young adult programs that are taking shape within AAPS.

Zeleznik also thanked assistant superintendent of student intervention and support services (SISS) Elaine Brown for her use of ARRA funding to enhance the district’s use of assistive technology, and for her commitment to turning parent concerns into action. He also thanked the administration, teachers, and paraprofessionals who work with special education children on a daily basis, the Center for Independent Living, and the trustees for including AAPAC’s input in the superintendent search.

In the future, Zeleznik reported, the AAPAC will continue to push for a more rigorous curriculum for special education students, more extensive use of positive behavior support, the continuation and expansion of the disability awareness workshops, and better transition planning. AAPAC, he said, will prioritize building collaborative relationships with new superintendent Patricia Green, and the new SISS administrator, and the district’s new teachers and principals.

Association Reports: PTOC

Amy Pachera reported that elementary schools will be enjoying their ice cream socials and field days in the next couple of weeks. She reminded PTO leadership to send their newly elected officer list to the PTOC. She also congratulated all AAPS graduates.

Pachera then thanked everyone who helped to make this year successful, and asked trustees to work to ensure that equity is achieved in the budget, and not to hit hardest on the most vulnerable students.

Association Reports: AAEA

Brit Satchwell, teachers’ union president, offered a congratulatory message to graduates as well, and then reviewed ways that citizens can take action against actions taken by the state government. Satchwell urged everyone to work toward the repeal of PA4, which allows the governor to remove elected officials from their posts and take over financial management of school districts and municipalities. Satchwell said the AAEA is working on collecting signatures on a petition to allow voters to repeal PA4 in November. He invited everyone to get more information by following the AAEA on Twitter, or by visiting MichiganForward.org.

Urging everyone to take political action, Satchwell also reported that a petition to recall governor Snyder will be at the farmer’s market in Ann Arbor, as well as available at AAEA offices at 4141 Jackson Road.

Awards and Accolades

The June 8 meeting honored staff and students through two presentations.

Logan Choir

Misty Noble conducted a volunteer fifth-grade choir in three pieces for the board’s pleasure. The board expressed great appreciation at the quality of the singing, and the preparation of the students.

Superintendent’s Report

Allen congratulated all graduates from 2011. He thanked AAPS staff and parents for supporting their students, and community members for supporting the school district, saying he felt fortunate to live in a community that placed high value on public education.

Allen then listed many accomplishments of district staff, students, and sports teams.

Items from the Board

Nelson noted that he was appreciative of the state board of education holding a hearing in Ann Arbor. He also reported that the Grammy award presentation was exceptional, that the African-American downtown festival was impressive in its support of education, and that he was looking forward to the upcoming Science Olympiad.

Mexicotte thanked her fellow trustees for a “passionate and informed debate” on the budget. Noting that in three weeks, the board would have “another voice at the table” when Patricia Green begins her tenure as AAPS superintendent, Mexicotte said she was looking forward to Green’s input about where to spend any extra funding. She also noted that she did not support Nelson’s budget amendment because she felt it “tied the hands of the administration a little bit.”

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

Next regular meeting: June 29, 2011, 7 p.m., at the fourth-floor conference room of the downtown Ann Arbor District Library, 343 S. Fifth Ave. [confirm date]

The Chronicle relies in part on regular voluntary subscriptions to support our coverage of public bodies like the Ann Arbor Public Schools board of trustees. 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]

A handful of residents addressed the board during a public hearing on the proposed 2011-12 AAPS budget. The board will hold an additional study session on the budget on Fri., June 3 at 3:30 p.m. in the main conference room of the Balas administration building, and the public is invited.

The session will focus on prioritizing objectives, in case the finalization of the state budget leads to greater revenue for the district than initially expected. If revenue projections increase, the board may choose to restore high school busing, decrease class sizes, or make other amendments to the currently proposed budget. A final vote on the budget is scheduled for June 8.

Public commentary on the Haisley Elementary School parking lot continued. Although many of the speakers requested additional changes to the design, the board approved the proposal as it had been presented at the board’s first briefing, along with a host of other facilities improvement projects. Trustees also approved the purchase of a new standardized assessment tool, the Northwest Evaluation Association Assessment (NWEA), primarily for use in grades K-5.

Late in the meeting, which lasted over seven hours, the board engaged in a frank discussion regarding the Washtenaw Intermediate School District’s (WISD’s) budget as it relates to state reimbursement of special education services as well as local tax levies. Though trustees eventually passed a proposal in support of the budget, some board members registered strong concerns.

Finally, the board heard first briefings on a number of other items, including the 2011 millage resolution that will accompany the final budget vote, and updates on both the AAPS strategic plan and a set of board policies.

2011-12 District Budget

The school board is required to approve the 2011-12 district budget by the end of June. At last Wednesday’s meeting, interim superintendent Robert Allen provided an overview of the proposed general fund budget, noting that the district also maintains a number of more restrictive funds such as the grant fund, debt service, bond service, and the sinking fund.

Budget: Projected Revenue and Expenditures

Allen reviewed the basics of the foundation allowance – the amount AAPS receives per pupil. The allowance is currently $9,490. Of that total, $3,432 comes from business taxes, $1,234 from homeowner taxes, and $4,824 from the state. He also noted the state portion of the foundation allowance is projected to decrease by $470 next year. This will make the 2011-12 foundation allowance less than the 2001-02 allowance of $9,034, even though expenditures have increased substantially in real dollars since that time.

Interim superintendent Robert Allen, at the podium, updates the Ann Arbor Public Schools board on the budget.

In addition, Allen explained that the state retirement contribution rate will increase. This is the amount AAPS must contribute to the Michigan Public Schools Employees Retirement System (MPSERS), and is determined by the state. It will increase from its current rate of 20.66% of total wages paid to 24.46% when the state fiscal year begins in October. Allen noted that the retirement rate is currently projected to increase to over 28% by fiscal year 2013-14.

Allen noted that after the board voted to remove principal-sharing as a budget reduction option at its last meeting, AAPS administration went back to find other places in the budget to cut. Allen reported that staff believes substitute teacher costs can be reduced by $600,000, but that still leaves a deficit of $1.73 million, which he recommends taking from fund equity, leaving a beginning fund balance for next year of $17.87 million.

Budget: No Teacher Layoffs

Allen highlighted the fact that the proposed budget does not include any teacher layoffs, because all but seven of the 70 full-time teaching positions will be reduced due to attrition. Allen explained that because of the contract requirements related to seniority, the district would need to lay off 195 teachers to then call back all but seven of them. He suggested this would be unnecessary since there was a high probability that these seven positions would be absorbed with additional retirements and separations occurring between now and the start of the next school year. Historically, Allen said, from 10-15 positions are lost through attrition over the summer months.

Budget: Study Session on Possible State Funding Increases

Gov. Rick Snyder has promised a signed state budget by the end of May, Allen said. Depending on how the state budget is finalized, Allen noted that a possibility exists for up to an additional $4 million of funding for AAPS. That $4 million total consists of a possible $2.4 million addition to the foundation allowance, and a possible $1.6 million in one-time-only incentive funding for the implementation of “best practices.” Allen noted that the district needs to get more clarification from the state to determine whether AAPS meets the “best practices” standards required for that funding.

Given this uncertainty, and the board’s goal of approving a budget at its next meeting, Allen recommended that the board hold a study session to determine its specific budget priorities once the state budget is finalized. Noting that the community has expressed concerns regarding class sizes and transportation, among other issues, Allen suggested that the study session could provide direction to administration on how to proceed in preparing the appropriate budget amendments for the second briefing scheduled for June 8.

The board agreed later in the meeting to hold a study session on Friday, June 3.

Budget: Board Questions and Responses

Trustee Andy Thomas confirmed with Allen that the projected $1.73 million deficit came from the combination of third quarter budget adjustments, additional savings in substitute teaching costs, and adding back in the effect of not sharing principals.

Trustee Glenn Nelson asked whether the district had reached its goal of bringing 170 new students to AAPS via schools of choice (SOC), since the SOC application window has closed. The proposed budget as it now stands is dependent on this 170-student increase, which would raise the total number of students to 16,739. Allen answered that he is not sure that goal will be reached, but that he would know by the time the study session takes place.

Nelson also expressed concern regarding a conference report from the state legislature that funding for half-day kindergarten students may be reduced to half the regular foundation allowance in 2012-13, making the per-pupil funding for kindergarten students proportional to the number of hours they are in school. Nelson requested that the board give some thought to what AAPS should do if that occurs – either continue to offer half-day kindergarten while receiving less money, or implement full-day kindergarten across the board and receive the full foundation allowance for each student while incurring added expenses for teaching staff.

Regarding teacher layoffs, both Nelson and Mexicotte expressed comfort with the administration’s recommendation to take no action. “When we have carried staff before to wait out an attrition cycle, we have used them for other things,” Mexicotte said. Allen agreed that these employees would be used as substitutes or in central administration depending on their skill sets.

Nelson expressed concern that building-level decisions might not be in the best interest of the district as a whole. “As we allow decentralized systems to make some of the decisions,” he argued, “we have the duty to keep to the principles of the strategic plan.” He requested that information on the degree to which decision-making is delegated to the buildings be brought to the budget study session.

Thomas questioned whether the district could consider busing students to school but not home, suggesting, “Students are going to be a lot more motivated to figure out how to get home than they will be to get to school.”

Allen responded, “I will have to check on the legality of that, but I understand that logic. We can calculate what that impact would be if we can legally do that.”

Trustee Susan Baskett cautioned, “I think it’s kind of crazy. I think we have an obligation to get them back to their homes.” But Nelson said he had followed a similar system with his own children when they were young. “As a parent,” he said, “I took my children to school and they had to walk home.”

Mexicotte asked how substitute teaching costs were reduced, and Allen explained that the solution was to assign some responsibility to administrators of individual school buildings. He suggested principals could better coordinate professional development to require fewer substitutes during instructional time, or offer it after school.

Trustee Irene Patalan closed the budget discussion with what she termed a “public service announcement,” urging community members to contact the state regarding the projected increase in retirement costs. “This is a large amount of money we have to pay that we have no say in,” she said.

Budget: Public Hearing

Four members of the public addressed the board during the public hearing on the proposed 2011-12 budget. All of the speakers were parents of current AAPS students.

Tina Richmond expressed concern about the proposed increases in class size. She reported that she does market research for a living, and that she had conducted a one-question survey to assess parents’ opinions on how to reduce expenses. The results of her survey, Richmond said, show that the majority of district parents think the money could be found in administration costs rather than teachers’ compensation.

Larry Murphy noted that the four-to-one ratio of 806 teachers to 205 support employees seems high. Regarding reductions in full-time positions, Murphy noted the proposed budget contains a reduction of 77 teaching positions but only 4 support staff positions, which is hugely disproportionate to the four-to-one ratio. He urged the board to prioritize keeping as many teachers in the classroom as possible.

Paula Brown and Scott Sproat offered comments on transportation. Brown said that the savings gained by eliminating high school busing would be equivalent to the foundation allowance of 89 students, and suggested, “I think you need to think about that.” To save on fuel costs, Sproat suggested equipping smaller, half-sized buses to serve the needs of special education students rather than full-sized buses.

Baskett encouraged additional public comment, reminding the public that the entire budget is on the district website, and available in hard copy at the Balas administration building. Mexicotte again invited the public to the study session on June 3.

2011 Summer Projects

The 2011 summer projects were fully briefed by AAPS executive director of physical properties, Randy Trent, at the board’s May 11 meeting. Of the summer projects on the extensive list, the most contentious has been the renovation of the parking lot at Haisley Elementary School. Five people spoke on that issue during time set aside for public commentary – four opposed to the redesign, and one in favor.

The only change suggested by Trent at the second briefing was to amend a typographical error on one of the bid spreadsheets, which would lead to the low bidder being Best instead of Cadillac Asphalt. Trent noted that Best will have two crews – one for the Haisley parking lot, and one for the other paving projects.

Summer Projects: Public Commentary – Haisley Parking Lot

Scott Sproat reiterated that the number one goal of the project is safety, and asked the board to consider the elimination of two islands from the design. Sproat expressed concern that the islands would “tempt” students to take shortcuts through the parking lot that would not be as safe.

Tam Perry, Kathy Greening, and Matthew Hull concurred with Sproat, arguing that removing the islands would be cheaper, safer, and would preserve more green space.

David Haig then spoke in support of the proposal. “Many people have come with opinions about safety,” he said, “but I feel like the professionals that designed this might have been competent.” Haig also expressed frustration with the concerns brought about preserving green space. “This is grass,” he said. “Not a forest. Not a wetland. The safety of the kids is more important than grass.”

Summer Projects: Board Discussion – Haisley Parking Lot

Thomas asked if there was still time in the schedule to consider the suggestions raised during public commentary.

Trent responded that the projects are currently on schedule. In response to the idea of eliminating islands in the Haisley parking lot design, Trent reported, “Our traffic engineer is adamant that removing islands would make it much less safe.”

Thomas and Mexicotte each confirmed that the traffic engineer had re-reviewed the design regarding the possible elimination of the islands, and concluded it would be better to leave them in the design. Baskett added, “The islands are there for safety. I feel safer as an able-bodied person to have islands. I can’t imagine not having them.”

Thomas noted that the board had heard from many people regarding the Haisley parking lot issue, and that while he acknowledged a difference of opinions among members of the Haisley community, he would vote according to the recommendations of the professionals.

Baskett thanked the parents who spoke up, and stated, “Just because I will vote in favor [of this proposal], does not mean I didn’t hear you … As one parent said, this is grass versus safety.”

Summer Projects: Board Discussion – Prevailing Wages

Baskett then expressed concern regarding the lack of prevailing wages in the American with Disabilities Act (ADA) improvements bid. She argued that not using prevailing wages allows a company to bring in workers who undercut the local workers’ pay and potential jobs. Outside workers don’t support the local community, she said, but “take their paychecks home and spend them there.” She concluded that not using market wages disrespects local workers, and asserted, “We are stepping backward by not doing prevailing wage.”

Mexicotte suggested that if trustees feel strongly about restricting bids from allowing the use of non-prevailing wages, the issue should be revisited through policy revisions in the future. She suggested that one or both of the board committees could examine this issue overall from a financial standpoint, rather than on a case-by-case basis.

Trustee Simone Lightfoot noted that she supports both Baskett and Mexicotte, and would like the board to take the issue of prevailing wages up in committee, so that there is consistency.

Thomas offered that his understanding of the primary role of board is to provide the best possible public school system given limited resources, and argued that the fiscal responsibility of trustees trumps any social missions they might have.

The summer projects, with the exception of the ADA improvements (SF10-010), were approved as part of the consent agenda. Baskett requested that the ADA improvements be removed from the consent agenda. They were then approved 4-2 in a separate vote, with Lightfoot and Baskett dissenting.

WISD Budget Review

Nelson reviewed the proposed 2011-12 budget of the Washtenaw Intermediate School District (WISD), and explained that the WISD is required to ask for input from its member districts, and member districts are required to respond. WISD is not required to act on any of the member districts’ recommendations.

He briefly reviewed the functions of the WISD, and noted that AAPS uses their facilities at no cost.

Nelson then noted that the WISD itself enrolls very few students (233, compared to 16,569 students in AAPS). Of the $87.9 million WISD budget, Nelson said, $66 million of it is transferred to its constituent districts, and approximately $22 million is spent on WISD programs.

Nelson then pointed out the use of $12 million in reserves in the proposed WISD budget. He explained that special education revenue is decreasing due to changes in federal funding, and that this is causing the rate of reimbursement by WISD to its member districts for special education services to decrease.

The current reimbursement rate for special education services is 77%, and the projected rate in 2011-12 is 73%. However, Nelson pointed out that the reimbursement rate is expected to drop dramatically in 2012-13 to 56% because the WISD’s fund equity will be nearly depleted.

Allen confirmed that the decision by the WISD to use $12 million of its reserves to maintain a higher reimbursement rate was made in order to try to “cushion the blow” to member districts as they deal with the state funding deficit. He added that as the reimbursement rate falls in coming years, districts’ obligations and expenditures related to special education will not decline. At end of the day, Allen warned, the impact will be on general fund.

Thomas asserted that there has been a “systematic de-funding of special education at the state and federal level.” He pointed out that the net reduction of funds to the WISD in 2011-12 will be $16 million, or 17% of its budget. Noting that AAPS has been frustrated with its 5% reduction in state funds, he reiterated that the reduction in the WISD’s funding “is more than 3 times what [AAPS is] suffering.”

Nelson pointed out that this is the lowest special education reimbursement rate since he’s been on the board, and suggested, “We do have tools at the local level … We have not exhausted opportunities to levy… to get this reimbursement rate up to a level consistent with history.”

Nelson summarized the WISD budget resolution as saying, “We support the budget, but we want the WISD to continue to streamline it. We also support lowering costs through sharing and cooperation, and we’d like to talk to you WISD board members, and get to know you better.”

Mexicotte pulled the WISD budget from the consent agenda for further discussion, and requested that Nelson read the entire resolution, which he did. She then expressed that she felt uncomfortable supporting WISD spending down its reserve when they chose to attempt (and succeeded at securing) a millage renewal of .985 mills instead of asking voters to support a new millage at a higher rate.

“I struggle with how they took one step, but not the best step,” Mexicotte said. “This was a missed opportunity … Many people say I’m incorrect, that we would have not gotten support if we went out for 1.5 mills, which would have been the same money, but not the same millage [rate]. We should have made the case that it was dollar for dollar, not mill for mill [As housing values have declined, assessing property owners at the same millage rate yields less in real dollars.] …I am filled with regret that we now have to fill a gap of millions of dollars in funding because we somehow couldn’t have the conversation with our community that made sense for this millage. I would like to think that in the future, that conversation could be a little more open and a little braver.”

Nelson empathized with the WISD, saying that it was “terribly hard to feel confident given the outcome of the [failed 2009] enhancement millage … A lot of us were really seared by that campaign … We got slaughtered.”

Thomas added that though he is concerned about the special education budget shortfall, he does not believe that the decision to attempt a special education millage renewal (as opposed to a new millage with a higher rate) was wrong. “There are times when half a loaf is better than none,” he asserted, especially given the “devastating consequences” that would have resulted if the millage had not passed.

Patalan added that she was glad this was being discussed, and that she was sure AAPS and its voters will do the best for its kids, as was demonstrated by strong support by AAPS district voters in both the 2009 enhancement millage and the 2011 special education millage renewal.

Nelson asserted, “Indeed, we need to be courageous and say there are tax options for revenue enhancement, and we should be open with the community at the district level. In 2004, we funded technology with the bond. Should we have a technology bond back on the ballot? Should we be going back to the community to talk about another special education millage? We should talk about it as if it’s a real, live option, rather than an eggshells option.”

The WISD budget resolution was removed from the consent agenda, and approved 5-1 in a separate vote, with Mexicotte dissenting.

Northwest Evaluation Association Assessment

AAPS interim deputy superintendent of instruction, Lee Ann Dickinson-Kelley, was on hand to answer questions during the second briefing on the proposed purchase of the Northwest Evaluation Association (NWEA) assessment by AAPS.

Thomas began the discussion by asking a number of clarifying questions to address public concerns regarding the assessment, and Dickinson-Kelley answered them. He asked how long it would take for students in grades K-2 to complete (20-30 min); whether the test is age-appropriate (Yes); and, whether it replaces the MEAP (No). He also questioned how results will be used, and whether or not they will be useful for assessing teachers.

Dickinson-Kelley added that testing with the NWEA tool would take place three times a year – in the fall, early winter, and late spring. She also explained that, since the test is not state-mandated, districts have some latitude to input answers for students who are not tech-savvy.

Regarding its uses, Dickinson-Kelley said the NWEA test would be used to assess students, not teachers. She reported that guidance would be offered to teacher-leaders and principals about how to adjust instructional practice to test results.

Nelson confirmed with Dickinson-Kelley that it would take a major investment of new technology to fully implement the NWEA tool at the secondary level. He reminded everyone that the technology AAPS was able to buy with 2004 bond is now becoming inadequate and argued that the district needs to think about how to remedy that.

Lightfoot asked if there was room for rewording test items. Dickinson-Kelley noted that the test adjusts up or down in difficulty as necessary, or pulls in a different bank of questions to get at the same objective. It would not allow a teacher or test administrator to substitute a word, but the test would adjust and customize itself if a student was having difficulty.

Baskett said she was very excited about this new assessment tool, but that she wanted to be sure that in assisting students during test administration, the results are not invalidated. Dickinson-Kelley agreed. She also confirmed that the NWEA test is more timely, with teachers getting results within 24 hours.

Baskett then asked about the connection between the NWEA assessment and the Michigan Educational Assessment Program (MEAP). Dickinson-Kelley said that the district’s use of the NWEA tool will prepare AAPS for the replacement of the MEAP with a national assessment by 2013 or 2014, since NWEA uses national instead of state standards.

Outcome: The purchase of the NWEA assessment tool for use with all students in grades K-5, and Scarlett students in grades 6-8 was approved as part of the consent agenda. The approved consent agenda also contained an approval of minutes and gift offers.

WISD Elections

The board is required to designate a representative to vote on Washtenaw Intermediate School District (WISD) board members, and to provide its representative with voting directives.

This year, the WISD board has two seats opening up, and only two incumbents running to fill them – Gregory A. Peoples, and Dayle K. Wright. The election is scheduled to be held at 7 p.m. on June 6, which conflicts directly with the Stone school graduation.

Mexicotte asked for the board’s thoughts on this, and the board entertained some discussion on the matter. It was eventually moved that Patalan be appointed as the AAPS representative if she determines that her presence will be necessary for the WISD to achieve quorum on the vote. Patalan also noted that she may request that the WISD change the time of the vote to 6 p.m. so that she can be on time to the Stone school graduation.

The board then directed Patalan to vote for the incumbents.

The board chose Patalan as its representative in the WISD elections, and directed her to vote for the incumbents, Peoples and Wright.

AAAA Contract Approval

Mexicotte began by saying that the board had been briefed on the tentative agreement reached in executive session with the Ann Arbor Administrators Association, the union that primarily represents AAPS principals and vice-principals. Baskett requested that Allen summarize the main points of the contract for public record.

Allen reviewed that that AAAA contract as proposed would freeze administrators’ base pay through 2013, while allowing them to move up on the salary step schedule. It would also include greater contributions to their health care costs.

Baskett noted that the district’s negotiation with the AAAA has been lengthy, and that while she supports the district negotiation team’s effort at reaching a tentative agreement, she does not believe this bargaining unit is taking an equal share of the burden. “We have heard from the community that everyone should share the pain – everyone else is sacrificing …[I] wish they had supported a reduction in their base pay.”

Thomas shared Baskett’s concern, but noted that he would support the contract, given the lengthy negotiations process.

The AAAA contract for 2009-10 through 2012-13 was approved by the board.

Third Quarter Financial Report and Millage Resolution

AAPS director of finance, Nancy Hoover, gave the board an update on the district’s third quarter financials.

Hoover also requested that the board approve the following 2011 tax millages: Homestead, 4.6912 mills; Non-Homestead, 18 mills; Debt Service, 2.1497mills; and Sinking Fund, 1 mill.

The board had no questions for Hoover regarding these proposals.

Nelson thanked Hoover for handling extra responsibilities well when Allen moved into the interim superintendent position for this year from his regular job as deputy superintendent of operations.

Outcome: This was a first briefing on these two items, both of which will return to the board for a vote at the next regular meeting.

Achievement Gap among ESL Students

During public commentary, two parents spoke, and a handful more stood in support, regarding the decreasing MEAP scores at Mitchell Elementary School as the issue relates to the school’s ESL (English as a Second Language) population. Richard Smith, a Mitchell parent, began by offering appreciation for the Mitchell staff members, who he said have a passion for excellence. But he requested that the board direct changes in the ways Title 1 funds are used to support Mitchell students. Given the increasing number of ESL students at Mitchell, which he said are now nearly 1/3 of the student population, Smith suggested offering an ESL program. He also noted that though the district provides interpreter services, the interpreter currently comes in for only two hours twice a week, which is not enough time. Finally, Smith requested the Title 1 funds be used to provide additional teacher assistants and tutors.

Jesus Martinez, also a Mitchell parent, addressed the board in Spanish, and another parent translated his remarks. Martinez noted that ESL learners at Mitchell have consistently lower test scores on the MEAP, and argued that it was the district’s responsibility to provide ESL instruction and bi-lingual help to these students. He also expressed frustration at the district’s lack of inclusion of parents who don’t speak English, saying they feel unwelcome and that their input is not valued. To illustrate this, Martinez pointed out that the parent survey concerning the lab school was administered only in English, and that translators are not present at curriculum night or parent-teacher conferences. He closed, like Smith, by requesting that some of Mitchell’s Title 1 funds be put put towards offering additional aid to ESL students and their families.

Later in the meeting, Baskett thanked the Mitchell families for coming, and said she wanted to acknowledge the effort it took for some of them to get there. Most of their concerns, she said, could be addressed during a June 15 study session that the board has scheduled specifically to address achievement issues.

Strategic Plan Updates

AAPS is the in the process of updating its strategic plan. At this meeting, the district’s director of communications, Liz Margolis, led a review of the suggested changes drafted by the strategic planning team over the past few months. Overall, she said, the team is proposing changes to three of the plan’s eight main strategies, as well as to its mission statement, objectives, beliefs, and parameters.

Changes to the mission statement focused on making it more concise and memorizable. Allen noted that he hoped these changes would help all employees to know what the mission statement is. The current statement contains a list of bullet points, but the revised version, if approved by the board, will be: “The mission of the Ann Arbor Public Schools is to ensure each student realizes his or her aspirations while advancing the common good, by creating a world-class system of innovative teaching and learning.”

In her review of proposed changes to the objectives, Margolis admitted that expecting “100% of Ann Arbor Public School students[to] exceed international standards in achievement” was “not realistic,” and said that the team suggested changing that objective to reflect that aggregate performance by AAPS students would exceed international achievement standards. She also pointed out the removal of a reference to students being “accomplished in their lifelong pursuits,” since the district does not have any mechanism in place to follow-up on students’ success once they leave the district.

Regarding the district’s beliefs, Margolis noted that most of them were left unchanged, but highlighted some clarifying language. For example, the belief currently listed as “Racism is destructive.” will become “Racism is destructive to everyone.” Finally, she pointed out the addition of new parameters to reflect the district’s commitment to fiscal responsibility, as well as the intention to align school improvement plans with the overall district strategic plan.

Margolis then introduced the leaders of the groups who had met to update three of eight main strategies of the plan – Strategies 1, 5, and 6.

Two AAPS elementary school principals, Joan Fitzgibbon and Michael Madison, introduced proposed changes to Strategy 1, which focuses on personalized learning. Fitzgibbon said, after conducting extensive research, their group was unable to define “international standards,” and suggested removal of that reference in the wording of the strategy.

Regarding implementation of strategy 1, Fitzgibbon and Madison outlined four key recommendations woven throughout their suggested action steps: (1) Ensure the high quality of teachers by refining the hiring process and incorporating parent feedback into evaluations during a teacher’s first three years in the profession; (2) Continue investigating how the International Baccalaureate could be delivered to more students; (3) Amend the structure and delivery of the curriculum to offer more options and make better use of available technology; and (4) Allow dual enrollment in AAPS and college, vocational, or distance learning programs.

Board members questioned which means of comparison the group had used to assess international standards, and Fitzgibbon assured trustees that their review had been extensive. Trustees also suggested clarifying the use of the terms “preK-14″ and “preK-12″ as referenced in the strategy in order to standardize the language used throughout the strategic plan. The term “preK-14″ alludes to the district’s responsibility to students outside of the traditional ages served by AAPS.

Next, Chuck Hatt, AAPS coordinator for literacy and social studies instruction, addressed the board regarding proposed updates to Strategy 5, which primarily deals with professional development (PD).

Hatt reviewed his group’s suggestions, including extensive revision of the wording of the strategy to clarify its meaning. He then introduced two themes that tied together most of the recommended changes in Strategy 5′s action steps: (1) PD should be functional and well-coordinated; and (2) An explicit link should be made between teacher performance and student performance.

Hatt highlighted some of the proposed recommendations, such as enhancing teacher-to-teacher mentoring, and offering opportunities for PD based on teacher suggestions. He also recommended that the district should formally evaluate its PD system.

In response to board feedback, Hatt described multiple outside resources that AAPS should consider using, such as those created by Adaptive Schools , and Critical Friends. He also suggested that AAPS should put together a graphic such as the award-winning one created by Chapel Hill-Carborro City schools which links PD activities to district goals. Baskett requested a copy of the graphic, which Hatt said he would provide to the board.

Finally, the board heard from Sara Aeschbach, AAPS director of community education and recreation, who reviewed a multitude of changes and additions to Strategy 6, which primarily addresses communication between groups within AAPS and engagement with the wider community.

Aeschbach reviewed the many accomplishments of the district under this strategy since implementation of the strategic plan in 2007, including establishment of the Village Fund, UMS and Google AdWords community partnerships, and the implementation of PowerSchool and SchoolMessenger software to enhance communication with parents. However, she said, her group found many ways that communication and community engagement could be improved more. The overall goal of the group’s revisions to Strategy 6, Aeschbach said, was the support two-way communication as much as possible.

Aeschbach suggested that the district enable additional features of PowerSchool, and be consistent in how it communicates important messages. She also recommended ZingTrain customer service training, and more effective involvement of parent groups and volunteers throughout the district.

Margolis then wrapped up the overall presentation on strategic plan updates and opened up the floor for board feedback. Patalan remarked on how exciting it is that the plan has truly been used to guide the district, but in addition to her praise Baskett expressed concern about accountability. “Thank you for the good work,” she said, but added that she’d like to see action steps in the plan assigned to specific staff members for completion. “To the public,” Baskett said, “without the assignment, it’s just talk.”

Margolis responded that after the board approves the proposed updates to the plan, it will fall to incoming superintendent Patricia Green to assign each line of the plan to an administrator.

Mexicotte expressed pleasure at both the accomplishments of the plan to date, as well at the prospective nature of the remaining and newly-proposed objectives. In response to Baskett’s concerns about accountability, she suggested the creation of an executive summary of accomplishments to complement the line item assignments.

Nelson noted that he was gratified that top level administrators were able to complete such a comprehensive and useful review of the strategic plan this year under the direction of Allen as an interim superintendent.

Lightfoot suggested that the strategic planning process could be a model for how to create a detailed achievement plan that could be as “proudly touted” as the strategic plan, saying “I look forward to actually putting the document in place to match the words we continue to profess.”

Outcome: These updates to the strategic plan were brought the board as a first briefing item, and will be voted on at the next regular meeting on June 8.

Policy Updates

The board reviewed suggested updates from the performance committee to five of its policies – 6000 (Core curriculum), 6140 (Homework), 6190 (Controversial issues), 6500 (Non-K12 Education), and 7350 (Volunteers).

Core Curriculum Policy

A minor revision to the curriculum policy (6000) was suggested to ensure that all teachers – not only new teachers – are monitored regarding implementation of the curriculum.

Homework Policy

The homework policy (6140) was amended to suggest that “homework can be made more relevant when connected to students real life experiences.” Baskett noted that the policy refers to research from the year 2000, and asked whether the recommendations of this research are still relevant or outdated.

Dickinson-Kelley acknowledged that some current research calls into question whether homework is a value-added experience for students, but that in general, research on homework validates this policy as it’s currently written.

Mexicotte added that a new literature review might change the policy, and Baskett suggested that such a review might be useful. She noted that the district is often out of compliance with this policy, in that many students are given homework in excess of the time guidelines spelled out in the policy (i.e., a total of 10 minutes times a student’s grade level per weeknight is suggested as an appropriate amount for middle school students).  Dickinson-Kelley stressed that the policy only suggests guidelines, not minimum or maximum quotas.

Baskett then suggested adding an element to the policy that ensures parents are given tools, such as training currently offered in Everyday Math, to assist their children in completing homework. Mexicotte countered that it is not appropriate to include such elements in the policy, as the board “is not the boss of parents.”

Controversial Issues Policy

Thomas reported that after discussing this policy at length, the performance committee decided it is good as it currently stands. The committee’s discussion focused on parent suggestions that they be allowed to opt their children out of certain classes if they particularly object to a topic being taught, such as sexual education. Thomas reported that AAPS administration had advised the committee that opt-out options would be very problematic, and so the committee decided against including such provisions.

Baskett questioned the utility of including a section on definitions (section 3) if no definitions are included under the header. Thomas said the committee had tried to define “controversial issues” but could not. “Our thinking was that it is too difficult to define this in such a way that the definition would really have any meaning,” he said. Baskett then recommended striking the “Definitions” section heading.

Non-K12 Education Policy

Recommendations to the board policy on Non-K12 education included language changes to bring it up to date with current federal regulations, and clarification that oversight of the policy falls under the district-level deputy superintendent of instructional services.

Baskett suggested striking “by the office of PD and growth” in section 7.1 since that office no longer exists in AAPS.

Volunteer Policy

The board wordsmithed the volunteer policy to bring it into line with current practice regarding who is required to obtain background checks before working with students. Thomas explained that the policy distinguishes between regular contact and incidental contact, and currently requires anyone having even incidental contact with students to have a background check performed. The performance committee recommended a revision to the policy which would change “at any time” to “as part of the activity” in order to clarify the type of incidental contact which would require a background check.

The board also clarified that only those volunteers having direct contact with students – not all volunteers – need to be placed under direct supervision of a teacher or administrator.

Outcome: These policy updates will be voted on after a second briefing at the next regular meeting.

Board Committee Reports

The school board has two standing committees. The planning committee consists of: Christine Stead (chair), Susan Baskett, and Irene Patalan; the performance committee consists of: Glenn Nelson (chair), Simone Lightfoot, and Andy Thomas. Board president Deb Mexicotte sits on neither committee.

There was no report from the planning committee at this meeting, as they have not met since the last board meeting. Nelson offered a brief report from the performance committee, saying that they had spent their last meeting on the policy review described above. He also mentioned that a student had attended the last performance committee meeting, and that that they had enjoyed the student’s input into the discussion.

Association Reports

At each meeting, the board invites reports from six associations: the Youth Senate, the Ann Arbor Parent Advisory Committee on Special Education (AAPAC), the Parent-Teacher-Organization Council (PTOC), the Black Parents Student Support Group (BPSSG), the Ann Arbor Administrators Association (AAAA), and the Ann Arbor Education Association (AAEA). At the May 25 meeting, the board heard reports from the Youth Senate, the AAPAC, the AAAA, and the PTOC.

Association Reports: Youth Senate

Aoxue Tang, a junior from Pioneer gave the Youth Senate report. Regarding proposed budget cuts, she argued that students should be invited into more discussions surrounding the budget. She also announced that the Youth Senate would match parent donations to AAPS if such donations totaled $1,000 or more.

Tang then announced “Dodging Poverty,” a Dodge Ball tournament to be held in June to help homeless and impoverished youth in Washtenaw county. Lastly, she noted that Community Volunteer Teams would be enacted again this summer to place students at non-profits over the summer.

Association Reports: AAPAC

Barb Byers addressed the board on behalf of the AAPAC. She thanked deputy superintendent of student intervention and support services Elaine Brown for coordinating an assistive technology (AT) open house, noting that AT plays a crucial role in bringing the general education curriculum to differently-abled students. She also thanked AAPS administration for listening to concerns about using a personalized curriculum to meet graduation requirements, and requested that information on creating a personalized curriculum be given to all parents.

Byers then expressed support for Randy Trent and the Haisley principal regarding the creation of the new parking lot plan, which she said addresses the extra safety considerations of special needs students.

As school year draws to a close, Byers noted, thoughtfully planned transitions play a crucial role in getting special education students set up for success the next year. Transition planning allows parents to know how to support children from the first day of school, and includes meeting new teachers, and trying out new technology.

Finally, Byers congratulated special education staffer Sandy Bromley on her retirement, and thanked her for her many years of service. She also thanked special education staffer Bill Harris for his service as he moves on to his new position as principal of Eberwhite Elementary School, and wished all new principals well at their new positions.

Association Reports: AAAA

Michael Madison spoke for the administrators’ union. “Our focus remains improved student achievement for all students,” he said. He then said that AAPS is lucky to have such a dedicated board, and encouraged board members to attend the many end-of-the-year community events, graduations, and ice cream socials: “Check in so that we can publicly acknowledge your presence.”

Association Reports: PTOC

Martine Perreault reported the PTOC’s election results, highlighting that Donna Lasinski will be the group’s chairperson. She noted that May 2-6 is teacher appreciation week, and recognized the efforts of AAPS PTOs who thanked their teachers and staff.

Perreault reported that 89% of AAPS school PTOs participated in the PTOC this year, and welcomed them all back next. She also thanked the board for contributing so much to the district during trying times.

Finally, Perreault invited the public to follow state of Michigan actions on a daily basis via Twitter @PTOCouncil and @PTOChair, and Mexicotte encouraged the public to communicate with the Michigan department of education as well as their legislative representatives on the issues of state funding of education.

Awards and Accolades

The May 25 meeting included a number of special presentations honoring staff and students.

Celebration of Excellence Awards

Mike Derhammer, a fifth/sixth-grade teacher at Ann Arbor Open, and Christy Garrett, a business teacher at Huron each received a Celebration of Excellence award at this meeting. Derhammer was honored for his impact on kids’ “learning, self-confidence, their understanding of their place in the world, and their responsibility to give back.” Many of his students surrounded him as he accepted his award, holding a hand-drawn banner reading “Congratulations!!! Mike Rocks.”

Mike Derhammer's students congratulated him on his Celebration of Excellence award.

Garrett was commended for her excellence in teaching as well as for her “zest in preparing students to compete and win consistently at local, state and national levels.” Upon accepting her award, Garrett remarked that she was raised by a single mom who modeled the importance of learning every day, and that she wished her mom could be here to see her receiving this honor. She also thanked AAPS’ elementary teachers for preparing students to succeed in higher level classes later in their school years.

Superintendent’s Report

Allen reported that Pioneer has won the 2011 national Grammy award, along with $15,000, and that this is the only time that a school has won it twice in Grammy history. He also noted that many high school seniors were awarded scholarships ranging from $1,000 to $2,500, and that 14 of the 16 graduating seniors from Roberto Clemente have been accepted to college.

Allen commended the efforts of students at Scarlett’s portfolio day, as well as Pioneer’s drafting and architecture students, and Community’s mock trial team. He encouraged the public to view the art of AAPS art teachers now on exhibit at the UM Work gallery on State St, and wished all district retirees the best of times in their retirement.

Public Commentary on Class Offerings

Merla Steltmann, an exchange student from Germany currently studying at Huron, addressed the board during public commentary, acknowledging and offering her appreciation for the many opportunities to take classes here that are not available elsewhere.

Agenda Planning

The board held a substantial discussion on whether or not they should hold an exit interview for Robert Allen as he transitions from the interim superintendency back into his regular role as deputy superintendent of operations.

Though there was immediately general support for the suggestion of holding such a meeting, there was some debate over its format and content. Some trustees suggested that the point of such a review would be to provide Allen with a formal review of his work as superintendent for use in future job searches. Others suggested the goal should be to receive feedback from Allen on how to work best with the incoming superintendent.

In the end, Mexicotte suggested that an informal evaluation of Allen be done so that the discussion could be contained under the rubric of an executive session. Allen’s feedback to the board could be done as part of that discussion. The executive session could be scheduled sometime during June. She also noted that the board always has the option of releasing a public statement of appreciation for an employee’s work with the district, and that they could choose to release a summary of the fine work that Allen has performed in his role this year.

The board also agreed to add a study session on June 3 to discuss the budget. This session will begin at 3:30 p.m., and will be held at the Balas administration building at 2555 S. State St. The public is invited.

Finally, Mexicotte suggested the board needs to set aside time to discuss how the district can best position itself to receive the one-time “best practice” funding being offered by the state, as well as how to address the upcoming changes to the foundation allowance for half-day kindergarten students. She assigned the executive committee to review whether these discussions could be bundled with the budget study session on June 3, or whether they should be part of a separate, additional study session later in the month.

Items from the Board

Simone Lightfoot reported having visited a middle college in Flint, which she encouraged AAPS administrators to visit, particularly to debunk the idea that parental involvement is required to ensure secondary student success.

Nelson reported having joyfully attended a smattering of community events including a breakfast at the Ann Arbor Center for Independent Living, The Neutral Zone’s Breakin’ Curfew talent show, the AAPS retirees’ reception, the student and teacher art shows, Scarlett’s portfolio day, and the AAPS homebuilding program banquet.

Baskett requested that the administration provide the following data to the board: the complete number of staff requirements; current number of staff by race and gender; and the number of suspensions from this year. She also suggested that the board might want to review guidelines for school visits, noting that some are easier to visit than others. Finally, she encouraged the public to press members of the state board of education to share their stance on the current budget proposal being considered by the state legislature. “I want to know,” Baskett questioned, “if the state board can’t stand for us and our children, why are they there?”

Baskett closed by urging graduating seniors to “be careful, be safe, have fun, so when you look back on this [time], it can be memorable and not tragic.”

Thomas reported that Scarlett’s portfolio day was amazing, and that students were very polished and well-prepared. “Of the five students I interviewed,” he said, “I would have hired any one of them.” He also expressed pride at the percentage of Roberto Clemente graduating seniors who are going on to college (87.5%) and thanked everyone at Roberto Clemente for their hard work.

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

Absent: Trustee Christine Stead

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

Study session on the budget: June 3, 2011, 3:30 p.m. in the main conference room of the Balas administration building, 2555 S. State. [confirm date]

Purely a plug: The Chronicle relies in part on regular voluntary subscriptions to support our coverage of publicly-funded organizations like the Ann Arbor Public School system, which is overseen by the AAPS board. Click this link for details: Subscribe to The Chronicle.

Public commentary was also rich with concerns regarding a proposed expansion of the parking lot at Haisley Elementary, which was discussed by the board at length as a first briefing item. It will come up for a vote at the May 25 meeting.

At the May 11 meeting, which lasted past 1:30 a.m., the board also approved upgrades to the district’s PowerSchool communication system, SISS assistive technology, and the elementary math curriculum. They also heard a first briefing on a proposal to purchase a new standardized assessment tool to complement the Michigan Educational Assessment Program (MEAP), and were updated on the progress of the Widening Advancement for Youth (WAY) Washtenaw program.

Update on Budget Planning

The school board is required to pass the 2011-12 district budget by the end of June. AAPS administration unveiled its proposed budget at the April 20 board meeting and at two community forums held during the last week of April.

At the May 11 meeting, interim superintendent Robert Allen reported that of the 150 to 200 people who attended the forums, as well as those who have e-mailed or otherwise commented on the proposed budget, the main concerns expressed were the sharing of principals by four of the district’s elementary schools, the elimination of high school busing, and the increase in class sizes due to teacher layoffs. Allen noted that a complete list of suggestions from the community would be available on the district’s website, but he stood by his budget recommendations as originally presented, and opened the discussion up to the board.

Public Commentary: Principal Sharing Plan

In the budget plan as originally proposed, Angell and Pittsfield elementary schools would share Gary Court as principal, and David De Young would be the principal for both Wines and Abbot. Allen noted that the goal of having schools share principals was to prevent closing a school, as well as to maintain flexibility in the context of uncertain state funding.

At the May 11 meeting, seven people spoke against the plan to share principals between schools. They argued that Abbot and Pittsfield in particular each deserve a full-time principal, based on the fact that a large number of their students come from impoverished families, and that many students at these schools have greater needs than those at other schools. Scott Elsworth offered trustees a petition signed by nearly 90% of parents at Abbot in opposition to the plan.

Alicia Nalepa noted that Abbot has a larger special education population than other schools, requiring a supportive principal to be present at Individualized Education Plan (IEP) meetings and to set a school climate that supports special education students. Terrisca DesJardin commented that Abbot has had seven principals in eight years. She argued that current principal Pam Sica is finally the leader Abbot needs, and that disrupting her leadership would be damaging to Abbot students’ current and future lives.

Other points mentioned included: (1) sharing principals disrupts the classrooms of the “lead teachers” who are pulled from their regular duties to fill in when the principal is out of the building; (2) the shared principal approach could diminish students’ safety; and (3) shared principal arrangements might cause families to pull students out of AAPS.

Stefanie Iwashnya noted that the cost savings of sharing principals (roughly $200,000) is a “drop in the bucket” compared to the $15 million that needs to be cut out of the district budget, and pointed out that if only 15 students left AAPS for private or charter schools, the savings would be gone.

Principal Sharing Plan Eliminated as Budget Option

Trustee Andy Thomas expressed his agreement with some of the parents who had spoken, and suggested that the board reconsider the option of sharing elementary school principals. He argued that the proposal would disproportionally impact two of the neediest schools in the district, and noted that sharing principals would save only 1.3% of the funds needed.

Trustees Glenn Nelson, Susan Baskett, and Simone Lightfoot agreed with Thomas that the issue should be reconsidered. Nelson argued that the district should use money out of its savings to fund principals for each school, as well as to ensure that no layoffs are made. Baskett and Lightfoot added that taking the proposal off the table for the 2011-12 school year would not mean that the district could not consider it in the future.

Trustee Christine Stead countered that until the state funding level has been set, it would be irresponsible to take the principal sharing option off the table as part of the district’s proposed budget. Saying that any action taken at this meeting would be “reactionary,” she noted that the state budget should be approved by the end of the month, and argued that the board should wait until then to finalize its plans. Stead also noted that if she were to suggest taking something off the table, it would be the reduction of 70 teaching positions with the associated increases in class size.

Trustees Irene Patalan and Deb Mexicotte supported Stead’s position. Patalan reiterated that closing a school would be much more disruptive to the community than principal sharing, and stated that she was comfortable with the mindfulness the administration had put into the budget proposal. Mexicotte agreed that it was “premature” to alter the proposed budget until the state decides how much money schools will receive. “I’d like to not take something off the table tonight, only to have to put it back on the table in a couple of weeks,” she said.

There was some discussion surrounding the administrative timetable for hiring principals for the next school year. Allen noted that there will be five elementary principals retiring at the end of this school year, and that under the current budget proposal, the administration would plan to hire only three replacements, with some other principals in the district being shifted to new schools. He then explained that the hiring process would begin this week in order to ensure that the new principals would have an opportunity to transition with the current principals.

During public commentary, Jada Kavanaugh, the PTO president at Haisley Elementary, commented that the Haisley principal is one of the retiring principals, and that the Haisley community has felt shut out of the selection process. After first being told they would be involved in the hiring, Kavanugh reported that AAPS administration told the PTO there would be no committee created to choose the new principal, but that one would simply be placed. “We need not to be lied to or bullied,” she asserted. “Our parents deserve better.”

Nelson said he was troubled by the disruption that would be caused to the hiring process, including the placement of principals, by waiting until the state finalizes its budget in order to decide whether or not to eliminate the principal sharing option. When questioned again, Allen allowed that hiring two principals after the first three would have some negative impact – “you lose time, though it’s not insurmountable. We … can make it work either way.”

Nelson then moved that the board give guidance to AAPS administration to hire five principals to fill the five openings, and that the associated adjustment be reflected as a withdrawal from fund equity in the budget to be presented at the next board meeting on May 25.  Thomas added a friendly amendment to clarify that the administration is not to pursue the option of sharing elementary school principals for the 2011-12 school year.

Stead and Patalan again spoke against the motion. Thomas countered their concerns by reminding them that this particular proposal has the lowest benefit in terms of cost savings as any of the items being presented as budget options, but was of largest concern to the board’s constituents as expressed in the public forums, making it deserving of “special treatment.”

Outcome: Nelson’s motion to eliminate principal sharing from the budget, hire five new elementary principals, and use the district’s fund equity to cover two of their salaries passed 5-2, with Stead and Patalan dissenting. The board also voted to hold a public hearing on the 2011-12 budget, and the property tax millage rate to be levied to support it, as part of the next regular board meeting on May 25.

2011 Summer Projects

AAPS executive director of physical properties, Randy Trent, briefed the board on several summer projects being planned. If approved by the board, all of the projects will be funded out of the remaining money in the 2010 sinking fund, which is state funding earmarked for capital improvements. Sinking fund dollars cannot be used to fund salaries or other operating expenses, and are on the ballot for approval by voters in the AAPS district every five years.

The AAPS board listens to a first briefing on summer projects from Randy Trent, the district's executive director of physical properties.

This year’s proposed projects include: ceiling work inside Huron High; landscaping at the elementary buildings; asphalt paving at Abbot, Ann Arbor Open @ Mack, Bryant, Burns Park, Community, Huron, Haisley, Lawton, Pioneer and Thurston; roof repairs at Allen, Angell, Burns Park, Pittsfield, Stone and Tappan; exterior door and frame replacement at Scarlett and Clague; and ADA site improvement work at Abbot, Angell, Bach Clague, Dicken, Eberwhite, Forsythe, King, Lakewood, Mitchell, Northside, Pattengill, Scarlett, Slauson, and Tappan. In addition, Trent requested funding for a general contractor to serve the district as needed over the coming year.

In response to questions from the board, Trent offered more detail about some of the projects. He explained that the landscaping upgrades were intended to enhance the “first impression” someone has upon entering the elementary schools, and that custodians would be trained in the upkeep of these gardens. He also noted that the American with Disabilities Act (ADA) improvements would be focused on enhancing access to outdoor play structures.

Of the bids for all 2011 summer projects, Trent said, about 31% of them will be awarded to historically-underutilized businesses (HUBs). Increasing the percentage of district business given to HUBs has been a goal of the board that’s recently been given more attention. AAPS held a mixer to introduce smaller, local businesses to larger contractors.

Susan Baskett asked why the bids allowed for non-prevailing wages, and Trent said that the district was just testing what the difference would be in bids if they opened up the allowable wage structure. Robert Allen added, “We have a duty to see what we’re losing by using the prevailing wage. There is no better or worse time – it just came from seeing how we could stretch our dollars.”

2011 Summer Projects: Haisley Parking Lot

Though most of the recommended projects are standard replacements, Trent said, the work being proposed at Haisley would be extensive and has elicited “many opinions” from the Haisley community. Glenn Nelson requested that the board be briefed more thoroughly on the Haisley project.

Calling the situation “energizing,” Trent said that the process had begun when the Haisley community requested that the district look at ways to improve parking lot safety for all students. This prompted plans to redesign the Haisley parking lot, which was constructed in the 1950s, in order to align its layout to its current usage patterns.

Trent gave a basic outline of Haisley’s parking lot needs – there are 11 buses that use the lot daily, in contrast to an average of five buses at the other elementary schools in the district. Student enrollment (424 vs. 362) as well as the number of staff (78 vs. 50) are also higher at Haisley than the district average. In addition, Haisley houses a centralized program for physically-impaired students, which adds additional ADA requirements to the parking lot.

The proposed redesign for Haisley’s lot, according to Trent, has a large bus loop closest to the building, with one entrance and one exit. Other safety features include: separating bus traffic from other traffic, and the parent drop-off area from pedestrian walkways; widening the drop-off lanes for use as a fire route; and providing safe pedestrian travel routes, including curb-to-curb crossing tables.

Other features of the proposed design, Trent continued, include: increasing the number of accessible parking spaces; adding parking for teachers and parents; reducing stormwater run-off; replacing trees lost during construction; relocating soil on school grounds to create additional playspace; and creating an efficient lot for the district to maintain.

Board members questioned the process that had been followed to settle on the final design. Trent explained how AAPS worked with the countywide transportation safety committee, which includes representation from the district, the city of Ann Arbor, local police departments, and road commission engineers. In addition, AAPS held three community meetings this year, and incorporated design modifications suggested by the public. Trent said that public input led to more green space, more bike racks, the adding of a speed bump, improved ADA spaces with their own walkway, and the relocation and visual shielding of dumpsters.

Andy Thomas thanked Trent for handling this issue in a calm and professional manner, and acknowledged that this is a very divisive issue for Haisley. He confirmed that the Haisley community was first advised of this project at the end of last school year, and that alternatives suggested by community members were given serious consideration by AAPS. Thomas also noted that this meeting represents the first year of his tenure as a board member, and that he would not have anticipated that the most contentious issue he would confront is the paving of a parking lot.

Deb Mexicotte asserted that the parking lot plan includes many improvements based on the engagement of community members in the issue. “This is a real synthesis, and a compromise,” she said. “I appreciate the work [Trent] has done on this, as well as the community.”

2011 Summer Projects: Public Commentary on Haisley Parking Lot

Nine people addressed the board regarding the Haisley parking lot proposal – six opposed to the project, and three in support of it.

Anne Cox expressed concern about the process. “Presenting one plan,” she argued, “does not lend much credence to the notion that alternatives were being considered.” She also asked to board to consider downsizing the number of parking spaces in order to save green space in front of Haisley. On a similar note, George Bennett cited the AAPS strategic plan, reminding the board that “environmental stewardship is our moral obligation.” He suggested that the parking lot issues could be resolved with behavior changes rather than spending this money.

Rich Cooper noted the cost as his main concern, and asked the board to select the lowest cost option, even if the funds are not fully fungible. Susan Tomilo noted that this plan was created around how to spend funds instead of by assessing needs, and urged the board to consider that “the priorities we choose send a message … Do not just spend money because you can.”

Lisa Jacobs said she appreciated the rearrangement of dumpsters, more bike racks, and the saving of some green space in the newest plan. However, both she and Haisley parent Norm Cox expressed concerns about the safety of the design. Jacobs noted that unescorted children, including those with disabilities, need to make their way across two lines of waiting traffic. Cox argued that the plan was “fundamentally flawed … and the outcome of fundamentally flawed process.” He asserted that this plan makes walking less safe, puts parent convenience above student safety, and is going backward from encouraging the use of more “green routes” to school.

Haisley PTO president Jada Kavanagh expressed support for Randy Trent and for the current proposal. Haisley teacher Nancy Shafer also noted that the staff supports these improvements, and said the parking lot is dangerous as it is currently set up. She acknowledged that a parking lot upgrade hardly seems important in light of the large number of staff layoffs and other financial cost-cutting the district is facing, but implored, “Since the sinking fund cannot be used for the staffing of principals, and can only be used for building improvement, please use this money for this.”

David Hay commented that he has a daughter with cerebral palsy, and that he worries about her, as well as all children, navigating cars and buses at drop off. “For me,” he said, “the fact that the principal and teachers want this improvement is enough for me … The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few.”

Outcome: The summer projects were a first briefing item at this board meeting and will be up for approval at the next regular board meeting on May 25.

Upgrades: PowerSchool, Math, SISS Assistive Technology

The May 11 meeting contained two special briefings, time-sensitive proposals that AAPS administration requests the board act on after only their initial briefing: upgrades to PowerSchool and to the elementary math curriculum. There was also one second briefing item regarding the purchase of new assistive technology by the Student Intervention and Support Services (SISS) department.

PowerSchool Upgrade

Allen described the new version of PowerSchool and accompanying hardware as “an emergency purchase” resulting from the sale of PowerSchool by Apple to Pearson, and Pearson’s subsequent replacement of the software’s underlying operating system. As explained by John VanRiper, AAPS director of information technology, in a memo to Allen, “Since the original hardware specifications were predicated on the operating system present at that time, … we are now in a position in which there is increased demand on the existing system’s ability to reliably and consistently deliver services … [T]he main database server needs to be reset on a daily basis, [and] there is some concern as to the integrity of preserved data.”

VanRiper’s memo also makes it clear that the current hardware is not able to support an upgrade of PowerSchool to its newest version, v7.0, which contains a number of “[m]odule changes/additions addressing identified [d]istrict needs.” The PowerSchool upgrade, including hardware, costs $81,000.

Both Andy Thomas and Deb Mexicotte spoke in favor of the proposed upgrade, noting that many district parents rely on PowerSchool for tracking their children’s assignments and progress, as well as for getting communication updates from AAPS on a variety of district-wide matters.

“Do the Math” Mathematics Intervention Program

AAPS math specialist Michelle Madden introduced a proposal to purchase “Do the Math,” a math intervention program that could be used to supplement the Everyday Math (EDM) program the district is currently using in its elementary schools. Madden said EDM has been used by AAPS for 13 years, and has been successful at increasing scores, but that the recent research into the necessary prerequisites for early success in algebra have led the district to begin looking for supportive backup to EDM.

Madden reported that Do the Math is a versatile program that could be used by Title 1, special education, or general education students. It’s not software, she explained, but “this program has children manipulating material to visualize mathematical relationships and patterns.” Madden also noted that, if approved, AAPS would use Do the Math as part of its summer school program.

The program would cost $33,087, and would be funded with American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) stimulus funds via the AAPS Student Intervention and Support Services (SISS) department.

Glenn Nelson spoke in support of the program, saying the elementary curriculum is intense, and that many students could benefit from this program as a supplement to EDM.

SISS Assistive Technology Purchases

The district’s Student Intervention and Support Services (SISS) department had made a presentation at the last board meeting proposing the purchase of assistive technology to ensure that the curriculum is accessible to special education students. At the May 11 meeting, interim superintendent Robert Allen noted that the original proposal had been amended to request the purchase of SMART Boards instead of Promethean Boards. The SMART Boards, along with the requested Tap-It Mobility technology, and Kurzweil software and programs total $178,996, and will be paid for with a federal grant from the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA).

Outcome: All three items described above – the PowerSchool upgrade, the Do the Math program, and the SISS assistive technology purchases – along with approval of draft minutes from the last regular meeting, were approved unanimously as part of the consent agenda.

Northwest Evaluation Association Assessment

Lee Ann Dickinson-Kelley, interim deputy superintendent of instruction, reviewed a recommendation to purchase an evaluation tool offered by the Northwest Evaluation Association (NWEA).

She explained that with the passage of federal Race to the Top legislation, all districts are expected to demonstrate the following accomplishments no later than Sept. 1: annual teacher and principal evaluations; embedding of clear measures of student growth in the evaluation process; employment of multiple measures of student growth, including measures that gauge student growth over time (at least two reference points per year); and use of data points to make informed decisions on continued employment.

To comply, Dickinson-Kelley continued, AAPS had to identify an assessment process that is compatible with its current technology infrastructure, and the district has identified the NWEA assessment tool as ideal. Dickinson-Kelley noted that the administration’s recommendation comes after talking with other districts, attending conferences, and ensuring that it would fit with Michigan Dept. of Education initiatives.

The NWEA assessment would “fill the gaps” in assessment that AAPS is currently facing, she said. Because the test is calibrated against state and national norms, employing this tool now will help students do well on a national assessment if it comes, which Dickinson-Kelley said she would expect to happen as early as 2013.

Dickinson-Kelley described the assessment tool, noting that it is administered online, and takes about 20 minutes for K-2 students and 40 minutes for students in grades 3-5. In many ways, she said, the tool allows for a personalized assessment and learning, which is a goal of the district’s strategic plan. The assessment is dynamic in that students doing well at the beginning of the test will be given harder questions as the test continues.

Another plus, Dickinson-Kelley said, is that teachers get their students’ results within 24 hours, along with a profile of specific skills/objectives that each student needs to work on. Therefore, feedback can be immediately translated into both help for struggling students as well as suggestions for extending learning for those who are above average.

The cost of the product varies depending on how extensively the district employs it, but Dickinson-Kelley’s recommendation was to spend just over $100,000 from the general fund in order to purchase licensing that would allow use of the NWEA assessment with all students in grades K-5. In addition, Dickinson-Kelley requested an additional $7,749 to extend the availability of the tool to students at Scarlett Middle School. She explained the assessment would be particularly useful at Mitchell and Scarlett schools because of the need to determine whether the Mitchell-Scarlett-University of Michigan partnership is having a positive impact on student achievement. [For details of that partnership, see Chronicle coverage from the board's Dec. 8, 2010 meeting, when trustees got an update on that project.]

Finally, Dickinson-Kelley reported that she has requested a grant from the AAPS Educational Foundation to offset just under half of the total cost of the NWEA assessment tool. She hopes to know if the funding has been granted before the second briefing and vote on the proposal at the next board meeting. In her final pitch the board, Dickinson-Kelley argued that no single assessment gives a complete picture of student achievement, that a responsible district would use multiple measures, and that this tool would be a perfect fit for the district.

Andy Thomas argued in favor of the NWEA assessment, reviewing its benefits as a “real time” assessment that can be used as early as kindergarten to give teachers timely and relevant data about student learning. He contrasted the NWEA assessment to the MEAP, which can only be given once a year, and does not return scores until months after the test. With the NWEA, Thomas said, “Teachers can give the test on Monday and get the results on Tuesday … It would be an outstanding tool for the district.”

Susan Baskett asked when the NWEA could be expanded to other middle schools, and Robert Allen answered that it would be part of a technology refresh in future years. Since the NWEA assessment is done online, it requires the use of many computers at one time. Currently, all the middle school computer classrooms are in use throughout the school day, without a block of time available to administer the test. The money that was requested to fund the administration of the NWEA tool at Scarlett would be used to purchase a new set of computers, which would be prioritized for use with this assessment.

Deb Mexicotte added that it would be helpful if sinking fund legislation was amended to allow those capital improvement dollars to fund technology infrastructure, which is not currently allowed.

Outcome: This was the first briefing on this item. A vote on the purchase the NWEA assessment tool will come during the next regular board meeting.

WAY Program Update

Joyce Hunter, AAPS assistant superintendent of secondary education, introduced Sarena Shivers, an interim assistant superintendent at the Washtenaw Intermediate School District, Monique Uzelac from the AAPS, and Debra Destefani, a student in the AAPS Widening Advancement for Youth (WAY) program.

WAY Washtenaw student Debra Destefani (right) addresses the AAPS board. At left is Sarena Shivers, interim assistant superintendent at the Washtenaw Intermediate School District.

WAY is one of several countywide programs to reach students who have dropped out, or are at risk of not completing school. Shivers reported that the WAY program provides a way for those students to have a year-round experience, and provides a lot of opportunities for success.

Uzelac then reviewed the WAY program structure. Students complete independent projects, which are evaluated against the Michigan high school content expectations (HSCEs) by certified teachers. She noted that the transparency of the teaching and learning is unique to this program.

Shivers noted that almost 650 students in Washtenaw County drop out of school annually and several hundred more are in jeopardy of not graduating. Many WAY students are homeless, are parents, and/or have had a major crisis in their lives. The goals of the program are to reconnect students to the public schools, and gain credits.

The WAY model was designed to be a pilot this year, Shivers continued, but at the urging of the superintendents, it went “full-fledge” this year. The initial recruitment was handled by word of mouth, and the program already has a wait list of 270 students.

WAY is currently serving 210 students – who are called”researchers” – throughout Washtenaw county. The average age of WAY students is 17 years, and 38 of the 210 are already parents.

Engagement is measured differently than in traditional academic programs; it’s on a continuum. The first goal is to help students to connect on a personal level with adult mentors in the program, and then to help students to earn high school credits, Shivers said.

Shivers then introduced Debra Destefani, a WAY student from Ann Arbor, who has earned almost five credits in the program. She reported that she tries to submit a project a day, and appreciates the online aspect of the program, since she works full-time. Destefani then fielded questions from the board.

Andy Thomas asked her to give examples of the projects that she works on in this program. Destefani listed math worksheets as one example, but noted, “I could do a project on anything I wanted to.”

Destefani argued that the WAY program is great for students who just want to get school done, but said that if they are not serious about it, the program is not for them.

Susan Baskett asked if the program provided the necessary hardware to Destefani, and she answered that, yes, the program provides her with a nice computer. Baskett also asked about the effect of the WAY program on her family relationships, which Destefani said have improved since she went back to school. Destefani also noted the incredible support from everyone at the program, in contrast to the adults in a traditional school setting, who were just “putting pressure on us.” About her mentor, Destefani said, “I don’t see her, but it’s nice to know someone’s e-mailing me every day.”

Shivers than closed the presentation by saying that a program evaluation was ongoing, and that the goal is to maintain the program at a cost less than the sum of the foundation allowances brought by its students from their home districts. She noted that there are WAY success stories already – students who will graduate this year, and others eager to enroll in college in the fall.

Baskett questioned the quality of the work done independently, and Shivers reiterated the openness of the assessment. “You can actually see the connection between projects and HSCEs,” she said. “When the experts assess a project, they see the level of proficiency that was achieved. People within the WAY environment can see it, and all involved can see it.”

Thomas asked how to refer a student to the program, and how long students would currently be on the wait list. Shivers told Thomas he could have the student call her at the WISD, and that the next group of students will be inducted into WAY in August.

Board Committee Reports

The school board has two standing committees. The planning committee consists of: Christine Stead (chair), Susan Baskett, and Irene Patalan; the performance committee consists of: Glenn Nelson (chair), Simone Lightfoot, and Andy Thomas. Board president Deb Mexicotte sits on neither committee.

Planning Committee

Patalan reported for the planning committee. She noted that they had discussed the Haisley parking lot, as well as an update to the district’s strategic plan, which she called “our guiding light.”

Patalan also said the planning committee had reviewed the district budget to prepare for a roundtable with state legislators hosted by AAPS. The committee also looked at the emergency purchase of the hardware and software upgrades, which the board approved as part of its consent agenda.

Performance Committee

Nelson reported that the performance committee has met twice since the last board meeting, and that they had dealt with policy updates, as well as the Do the Math program. Lightfoot then reported that the Rising Scholars program was discussed at length, and thanked the parents who had met with the committee. She stated that it will be the recommendation of the committee to maintain the Rising Scholars program at each of the district’s three comprehensive high schools.

Association Reports

At each meeting, the board invites reports from six associations: the Youth Senate, the Ann Arbor Parent Advisory Committee on Special Education (AAPAC), the Parent-Teacher-Organization Council (PTOC), the Black Parents Student Support Group (BPSSG), the Ann Arbor Administrators Association (AAAA), and the Ann Arbor Education Association (AAEA). At the May 11 meeting, the board heard reports from all six associations.

Association Reports: Youth Senate

Zaid Khatib, Noshin Hussain, and Bianca Vladic reported for the Youth Senate. They reported that the Pioneer Youth Senate Action Team had developed a presentation on ways to address local poverty and shared it with over 1,000 elementary students this spring. Huron’s Senate Action Team is administering a survey to students to determine students’ perceptions of barriers to academic achievement. The senators also introduced the Youth Empowerment Project’s upcoming year-long program, “2011-2012 Women in Leadership: What’s Next?”

Association Reports: Black Parents Student Support Group

Sylvia Nesmith reported that the Black Parents Student Support Group was working on a vision for racial equity in the context of the current budget cuts faced by the district. The BPSSG, she reported, believes that the proposal to eliminate high school busing will primarily impact minorities and economically disadvantaged students. Long bus rides have been shown to cause stress, exhaustion, and reduce these students’ abilities to participate in after-school activities, Nesmith said.

She added that BPSSG parents questioned how feasible AATA transportation would be in the long term, whether AATA drivers would be trained to deal with large groups of students, how the potential loss of students leaving the district due to lack of busing was factored into the calculations, whether there is enough parking space available for extra cars, and whether parking lot fees could be sent to a fund to deal with transportation.

As alternatives, the BPSSG suggested that: AAPS survey students during the summer in order to closely adjust routes accordingly; use middle schools as drop-off points and correlate high school routes; try to find grants or endowments to fund transportation; and/or organize a competitive fundraiser to generate revenue.

The BPSSG also suggested reducing administrative expenses instead of laying-off teachers, as the resulting larger class sizes will be detrimental to student learning.

Nesmith also noted that principal sharing has been tried in the past and “was a catastrophe.”

Finally, she reported that the BPSSG is trying to create a better sense of community among parents, teachers, and administrators. BPSSG is discussing strategies to become more effective, and raising funds to send students to camp.

Association Reports: AAPAC

Scott White reported for the Ann Arbor Parent Advisory Committee on Special Education. His daughter has been served especially well at Clague Middle School, he said, but he encouraged the development of a more extensive peer mentoring program.

White noted that the AAPAC is pleased that the special education millage passed. He thanked interim superintendent Robert Allen and preschool principal Michelle Pogliano for their involvement with the PAC.

Finally, White said the AAPAC successfully put on 18 disability awareness workshops (DAWs) this year, and noted that this was Steve Swartz’ last year speaking at the DAWs.

Association Reports: AAAA

Michael Madison of the Ann Arbor Administrators Association asserted that the 53 building-level administrators are the backbone of the district, along with the teachers – they bring the vision of the board to the students, and they do it with a smile, he said. Madison serves as principal of Dicken Elementary.

Association Reports: PTOC

Amy Pachera of the Parent-Teacher-Organization Council appreciated all the parents, PTO leaders, board of education trustees, and administrators who voted for the special education millage that was recently passed, as well as legislators who endorsed it. She also thanked Steve Norton for providing legislative Tweets, and reiterated the four key legislative foci of the PTOC’s advocacy committee.

Association Reports: AAEA

Brit Satchwell – president of the Ann Arbor Education Association, the  teachers’ union – began by thanking the board for hosting the recent legislative roundtable, and to the PTOC for its work helping to pass the special education millage.

Teachers' union president Brit Satchwell discusses state funding for education.

The Michigan legislature intentionally underfunds K-12 education, Satchwell asserted, and she poke angrily about the representatives who attended the legislative roundtable recently sponsored by the board. He argued that the state budget as it’s currently proposed is “anti-education … immoral, [and] breaks solemn promises.” Satchwell went on to point out aspects of the budget that were ideological in nature, such as cutting the clothing allowance for foster children, and cutting higher education funding for schools that offer partner benefits.

Satchell continued by saying that citizens are being misled and patronized. Of the legislature, he said, “Their plan was a fairy tale to put the gullible to sleep … The money from those who have the least trickles up to those who have the most … We are witnessing the privatization of profit and the socialization of risk and burden.” He encouraged the public to follow the AAEA Twitter account for legislative updates.

Awards and Accolades

The May 11 meeting also contained a number of special presentations and awards honoring staff and students.

Celebration of Excellence Awards

Jennifer Kleber, a teacher assistant at Carpenter Elementary, and Jason Treece, an art teacher at Huron High School, each received a Celebration of Excellence award at the meeting. Kleber received a standing ovation from the board for the intensive care she provides at school for an elementary student with extensive medical needs. Treece was honored for his open-door policy with students, and for his extra effort in volunteering to be an academic coach to a struggling student. Both award recipients graciously received their awards while saying that they were just doing their jobs.

Gold Star Awards

Mary Fishwick, Angell Elementary secretary, Gary Court, Angell principal, and the entire special education teams at Slauson Middle School and Stone High School received Gold Star awards for excellent service.

E3 Award

Representatives from the Ann Arbor-Ypsilanti Regional Chamber of Commerce were on hand to administer an E3 award to Scarlett Middle School for its portfolio day. E3 awards celebrate “exemplary educational endeavors” taking place in local schools. In its history, Scarlett’s portfolio day program has put over 3,000 students in touch with local business professionals for career exploration and guidance.

Tappan Orchestra

Joe DeMarsh conducted the Tappan Middle School orchestra in its performance of two pieces at the start of the meeting, which was appreciated by the board.

AAPS board members were treated to a performance by the Tappan Middle School orchestra.

Andy Thomas expressed gratitude for the high quality orchestral training students receive at Tappan, and noted that these students are then able to feed into the highly acclaimed music program at Pioneer High School.

Superintendent’s Report

Robert Allen reported on numerous academic and successful athletic competitions undertaken by AAPS students. He also noted multiple donations made by AAPS students to local service organizations, as well as to overseas relief organizations. Allen then praised a number of AAPS teachers who have been recognized by various professional organizations. He also thanked local representatives for participating in the legislative roundtable, and local citizens for voting in favor of the special education millage.

Agenda Planning

Because the May 11 meeting had lasted past 1:30 a.m. without getting through the entire agenda, the board agreed to postpone the following items: an informational update on School Wellness initiatives; a review of the Washtenaw Intermediate School District budget; and a set of policy update recommendations from the performance committee.

Susan Baskett requested that the board be updated on the functioning of Huron and Pioneer high schools, as new students are being moved to Skyline. Deb Mexicotte suggested that such an update should go through the performance committee on the way to the board.

Items from the Board

Glenn Nelson offered a “thank you” to the community for passing the countywide special education millage. He pointed out that 77% of Washtenaw County, and 86% of AAPS district voters supported the millage, and he encouraged the public to consider donating to the AAPS Educational Foundation, which is currently running a fundraising campaign. Nelson also noted that he had recently taken part in an Understanding Race program, a Head Start breakfast, a Riot Youth meeting, and a technology open house sponsored by SISS.

Deb Mexicotte noted briefly that though the board moved quickly through the summer projects funding requests, they had a full understanding of each of the projects.

Present: President Deb Mexicotte, vice president Susan Baskett, secretary Andy Thomas, treasurer Irene Patalan, and trustees Simone Lightfoot, and Glenn Nelson. Trustee Christine Stead joined the last half of the meeting by speakerphone.

Next regular meeting: May 25, 2011, 7 p.m., at the fourth-floor conference room of the downtown Ann Arbor District Library, 343 S. Fifth Ave. [confirm date]

Chronicle intern Eric Anderson contributed to the reporting in this article.